 | | Re: Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look)
|
|
(...) That's the direction I'm coming at this from. Denominator, in its non-math sense, means "that which gives a name to something". Applied to the topic at hand, that very logically means what sorts of documents the browser is said to understand. (...) (25 years ago, 17-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look)
|
|
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in article <380a066d.171574518@...et.com>... (...) common, (...) number (...) into (...) b.1884> (...) several (...) even (...) I have to be honest Todd... much of your math was just over my head. Sorry. :( (...) (25 years ago, 17-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look)
|
|
(...) I think the most accurate math term is actually the "greatest common factor" or "greatest common divisor" (GCF or GCD for short), which refers to the largest natural number which equally divides two whole numbers in question. In non-math (...) (25 years ago, 17-Oct-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego.com - new look
|
|
[Followup-to lugnet.off-topic.geek] (...) *grin* (...) Oh, certainly an amazing number of people use it wrongly. But a lot of people also say that they "could care less", when they mean that they couldn't. People don't think about what they're (...) (25 years ago, 17-Oct-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: fun fun fun - new BP6 dual celeron system
|
|
(...) oooh.. (dreaming of faster cgi server for DAT explorer) (...) Now that sounds like an intentional "feature". I remember a few (ok, many) years ago I was experimenting with overclocking 486 DX/2-66's. I got an early version that ran solid up to (...) (25 years ago, 16-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | fun fun fun - new BP6 dual celeron system
|
|
Didn't sleep much last night, probably won't tonight either. Having a blast playing with my new dual celeron system. Here's the specs: Abit BP6 (supports dual Socket 370 Celerons) 2x oem Celeron 366's (running at 550) 2x GlobalWin "bigarse" (...) (25 years ago, 16-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: GNU pkg for ping, traceroute, etc. (Was: Sluggish nntp performance)
|
|
(...) Yeah, I dunno. Looks to be all BSD license, which is fine with me... (Oooh, let's fan the flames: yet another good reason it's not "GNU/Linux") (25 years ago, 15-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: GNU pkg for ping, traceroute, etc. (Was: Sluggish nntp performance)
|
|
(...) That worked, thanks! :-, I wonder why these utils were never GNU'd... Oh, well, thanks again. Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 14-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: GNU pkg for ping, traceroute, etc. (Was: Sluggish nntp performance)
|
|
(...) If you're looking for Windows progs I think I got a bunch of this stuff from the "Virtually Unix" site once upon a time. I don't have the URL, but you could search for it. I think my version of traceroute is called hopcount.exe though. Not (...) (25 years ago, 14-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: www.routersim.com ?
|
|
(...) I was mostly kidding. :) We have several 7513's and I know some of the modules alone in those things cost tens of thousands of dollars. Heck, the power supplies are several thousand each from what I was told. Our instructor today (Cisco class, (...) (25 years ago, 14-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: GNU pkg for ping, traceroute, etc. (Was: Sluggish nntp performance)
|
|
(...) I don't think they're GNU. My ping program came from the base linux netkit, and traceroute (originally) from <URL:ftp://ftp.ee.lb...te.tar.Z>. (25 years ago, 14-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: GNU pkg for ping, traceroute, etc. (Was: Sluggish nntp performance)
|
|
go look at www.bitwizard.nl/mtr/ They claim to have a ping/tracroute package that runs with/via autoconf. This is source, but they have binary for Red Hat and freeBSD. I'll grab a copy tonight, and with luck and time out from building things <grin> (...) (25 years ago, 14-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: GNU pkg for ping, traceroute, etc. (Was: Sluggish nntp performance)
|
|
(...) Well. I've no quick answers today either. <grump> Haven't got Linux moiunted on a box local to me, so I can't check that way either. I'll have a look at the Caldera distro running on my development box at home tonight. You know... the back of (...) (25 years ago, 14-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: www.routersim.com ?
|
|
Mike Stanley <cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com> wrote in message news:slrn80a21e.st.c...utk.edu... (...) cool, thanks I'm going to have to check it out... (...) Most companies will most definitly NOT let you touch one of their routers, understadable (...) (25 years ago, 14-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: GNU pkg for ping, traceroute, etc. (Was: Sluggish nntp performance)
|
|
(...) Checked that, and checked that also. Binutils seems to be primarily compiler tools. Fileutils is basic file management, copying, moving, linking, etc. Textutils is basic text manipulation tools. Inetutils is a decent suite of servers and (...) (25 years ago, 14-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: GNU pkg for ping, traceroute, etc. (Was: Sluggish nntp performance)
|
|
(...) Erm... binutils, perhaps? And try the Cygnus distro whilst you're at it.... Cheers, Roger (25 years ago, 14-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | GNU pkg for ping, traceroute, etc. (Was: Sluggish nntp performance)
|
|
(...) Which GNU package do I get ping and traceroute and host, etc. from? They're not in inetutils; they doesn't seem to be anywhere... Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 14-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | www.routersim.com ?
|
|
Just taking a chance here that someone might have used the product these people sell... I want to get my CCNA after I finish my MCSE but while I may get some good hands-on experience working with switches in our labs I probably won't get to play (...) (25 years ago, 13-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Sluggish nntp performance
|
|
(...) Yeah. It's probably an OC3, which is about 155.52 megabits/second. (25 years ago, 13-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
