Date:	Sun, 2 Apr 2000 18:04:31 +0600 (LKT)
From:	Kalum Somaratna aka Grendel <kalum AT lintux DOT cx>
X-Sender:	root AT darkstar DOT grendel DOT net
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Is DOS dead?
In-Reply-To:	<200004020212.HAA00852@midpec.com>
Message-ID:	<Pine.LNX.4.10.10004021757480.916-100000@darkstar.grendel.net>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Sun, 2 Apr 2000, Prashant TR wrote:

> james archer <snowphoton AT mindspring DOT com> proclaimed:
> 
> > > That really depends on the type of programs that need to  be run. Linux can't
> > > be a solution to everything.
> > 
> > Yes it can. :o)
> 
> Oh, yeah. Then try writing a program to find the speed of your L1 and L2
> caches (a reliable program).

I don't know whether this is possible or not but what is relevant is that
linux certainly provides the solution for almost all the common tasks
required by a user or even a super user.

The example quoted by you certainly is not relevant to a normal user, and
FWIW could you do that under NT (I doub't very much..NT doesn't like
direct hardware access done by programs). 

To do the example that you quoted requires either support from the OS's
level or that the os be so lenient as to allow you to do anything and
everything (like ms dos)..

> 
> And btw, I use Linux, too. But there are a few things like this that
> you can't do (or at least they are very hard to do) on Linux due to
> the nature of the OS. 

I wonder what these thing are and how much of these "things that you cant
do" are relevant for the real world user of linux.

Grendel

Hi, I'm a signature virus. plz set me as your signature and help me spread
:)

- Raw text -