Re: Why does it need that much hard disk space?

[Igor Gueths <igueths@attbi.com>]

Hi Cecil. So you used a terminal program to echo output to a dectalk
express? How then did you review the screen? I suppose the terminal
program had review keys possibly?

Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!

On Wed, 8 May 2002, Cecil H. Whitley wrote:

> Hi,
> Nothing fancy, just use ssh to connect remotely.  Also can use a terminal
> program on the serial port if i'm desperate.
> Cecil
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 5:07 PM
> Subject: Re: Why does it need that much hard disk space?
>
>
> Hi Cecil. How have you used Freebsd and Solaris? Well I know a friend who
> actually has several Linux boxes and a Solaris machine. Did you use
> something like Yasr for running on Freebsd? You can reply to me off-list on
> this. But now you've got me interested! My address is igueths@attbi.com.
> Hope to hear from you regarding the Freebsd though.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Cecil H. Whitley <cwhitley@ec.rr.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 5:00 PM
> Subject: Re: Why does it need that much hard disk space?
>
>
> > Hi,
> > First of all I need to declare my bias.  I selected redhat for my desktop.
> > Now, with that said I must also point out that I also use freebsd, solaris
> > (various versions) and even tried debian.  Why did I choose redhat?
> Simple,
> > not very technical, I loaded it on servers at work because Dell supports
> it.
> > Since I have to work with it at work I might as well use it at home.
> >
> > Redhat, and probably any distribution of linux can be cut down to a
> floppy.
> > You can't do that with windows.  In fact, NT/2000/xp take three/four disks
> > just to boot.  Linux also takes a lot less memory to run (and run well I
> > might add).  Redhat distributes several x-windows based front ends (Gnome,
> > KDE, windows maker, etc).  There is a lot of desktop dependant apps which
> > get loaded depending on which front-ends you choose to load.  The
> important
> > word there is choose.  You can load everything (an actual menu selection),
> > particular catagories, or individual packages.  I believe that this is the
> > same or similar in nearly all distro's.  The easiest way to trim the size
> of
> > any distribution is to not load x-windows.  That will drastically cut the
> > disk space requirements without removing any functionality you will need.
> >
> > I guess the short answer is that yes, you can select for 3gb or more of
> > stuff to be loaded, but on windows you can get the same effect (with less
> > functionality) by loading the full operating system (not typical) and
> > netscape, m.s. office, Lotus smartsuite, Lotus Notes, your speech package,
> > Visual "c", Visual C++, CYGWIN, Photoshop, IIS, Exchange, SQL server, and
> > the list goes on and on.  The 5 CD's that make up the RedHat distribution
> > contains much much more than just an OS.  The same goes for Slackware,
> > Debian, and just about any other distribution of Linux (no offense to
> anyone
> > who's distribution didn't make it in my list, it's just my ignorance).
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Cecil
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>