From: ujlh@pool.info.sunyit.edu (James Henrickson) Subject: Re: WANT GCC? FORGET FAQ.GCC AND README?? READ THIS FIRST!!!! Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 23:30:04 GMT
WARNING: FLAME IS LIT. IF YOU'VE ALREADY READ ENOUGH ABOUT THIS
FLAKY POST, PLEASE GO ON TO THE NEXT ONE.
In article <186a86INNcsb@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis) writes:
>
>Since it seems that there aren't any installation docs for us
>lay people when it comes to installing GCC 2.2.2d, I figured that
>I would write this to help people who are having and will have
>problems with the installation.
It appears that you are upset because you didn't understand the
directions. Please define the term "lay people", you make it seem
like you are speaking for a large number of people. :-)
>
>First, I will assume you have mtools installed. If not, then do. Email
>me for some tips if you need help.
Oh, I'm starting to get it now. By "lay people", you are referring
to DOS people that are new to Linux. [Regular Linux users: you can
stop reading his instructions now. Chances are you use a Linux
communications program for file transfers.]
>You need to get the following files by anonymous ftp from tsx-11.mit.edu.
>
>binutils.tar.Z
>097pl1inc.tar.Z
>2.2.2ddb.tar.Z
>2.2.2dlib.tar.Z
>2.2.2dmisc.tar.Z
>install.2.x
>
>Forget README and FAQ.
>THEY JUST AREN'T WORTH THE TIME READING!!!!!!!!!!!
In your opinion. So it's OK to use a great compiler that costs
nothing and then criticize the guy for not writing in a way that
YOU understand?
>You can find the above in /pub/linux/packages/GCC
>
>You will also need 097.tar.Z (or something like that) from
>/pub/linux/sources/system
>This is the linux source code. Get the patches if you want them.
>(I personally haven't figured out what to do with them. :) )
What is this "something like that" crap? If you expect people
to ignore the official docs and follow only your instructions,
you should be specific. And you have the nerve to criticize
HJ's docs. Really.
>So now you have these files. Hopefully they were transfered without any
>corruption. Unfortunately they are VERY large, so I would get corrupted
>ones about every 5th try. And you won't find this out until you're in
>LINUX and then you'll have to reboot into DOS. Major frustration.
If you were a regular Linux user, you wouldn't need DOS to get the
files and you would use a transfer protocol that provides you with
error detection. I haven't had ANY file corruption, and I have been
downloading EVERYTHING at 2400 baud since April. I used DOS to get
the initial bootimage, rootimage, kermit, and [xyz]modem, and have
used Linux for downloads ever since. Another nice feature is I get
to do things on other VC's while the file transfer is taking place.
Can you do THAT with DOS?
>BTW, these files should be in a DOS dir and they WILL take up alot of memory.
>I think about 5MB.
>
>Now reboot into LINUX and login as root. Now follow these commands.
>
>cd /
>mcd c:\<the dos dir with the above files>
>mcopy c:*.* .
>
>That should get all those files into the LINUX root dir.
>Now, change their names using the mv (move) command.
>
>mv <fucked up dos filename now in linux> <new filename>
For DOS users, I agree with that part. Now for a real winner:
>Do it according to these transformations:
>install.2.x ---------> install.2.x
>binutils.tar.Z -------> binutils.tar.Z
>2.2.2ddb.tar.Z -------> 2ddb.tar.Z
>2.2.2dlib.tar.Z ------> 2dlib.tar.Z
>2.2.2dmisc.tar.Z -----> 2dmisc.tar.Z
>097pl1inc.tar.Z ------> 097inc.tar.Z
>097.tar.Z ------------> 097.tar.Z
Nope, wrong, incorrect, bad, no good, just don't do it! You are
making this more difficult than it has to be. Of course, most
people that read the instructions (the ones you obviously dislike
so much) would know better. I renamed the files the first time
around because I didn't read the directions until after I screwed
up.
>remember that these names on the left will be REALLY screwed up!!!!
>keep track of them.........
>The reason that we have to do all this crap is because LINUX has a
>limitation on length of filenames. UNIX doesn't have them.
I hope you aren't implying that ALL UNIX systems have long file names.
There are exceptions.
Anyway, so what? It's obvious that you also haven't been following
this newsgroup, because it has been pointed out several times that
the truncated file names work OK. Maybe you need your own newsgroup,
comp.os.i.cant.follow.directions.
>DOES ANYONE KNOW IF THIS CAN BE CHANGED??????
What do you think the extended file system is? It's been in alpha
testing quite a while now. As I said already, it looks like you
haven't been following the newsgroup. Besides, the minix file
system will still be around for a long time because most of us are
using it.
>Now we need to install the kernel sources.
>
>cd /usr
>mkdir src
>cd src
>mkdir linux
>cd /
>cp 097.tar.Z /usr/src/linux
>cd /usr/src/linux
>uncompress 097.tar.Z
>tar -xvf 097.tar
You are wrong again. The Linux kernel source gets extracted in the
/usr/src directory. Otherwise (unless something has drastically changed),
your source code will end up in /usr/src/linux/linux. I know some
people like to keep their stuff in non-standard directories (like when
keeping different versions of the kernel), but the usual place us
/usr/src/linux. Maybe you should also read the kernel docs, or did
you have trouble understanding them, too?
[ A whole bunch of unnecessary instructions deleted. ]
>unfortunately....I can't find make. And I haven't an editor. My vi
>doesn't work yet.
Then why do you need GCC? Maybe vi really works and you didn't
understand the instructions for that, either.
>BTW, if you don't like these instruction, screw you. It worked for me :)
Screw yourself. :)
You are only going to confuse people with these sloppy directions. It
has been my understanding (and experience, until I saw your flaky post)
that comp.os.linux readers like to help one another. You just like to
be different.
>Hopefully this will motivate someone (in authority?) to make this
>installation process a little easier.
Yeah, by adding just one sentence to the instructions: BE SURE TO
*NOT* RENAME THE FILES. IF THE FILE NAMES GET TRUNCATED (LIKE THEY
DO WITH THE MINIX FS), IT'S STILL OK. Oh well, two sentences. :-)
[Knowing HJ, he'll probably repeat it 5 or 10 times!]
(I will now write as though he's not reading this, as he probably
has a smart news reader and canceled this thread before reading
any of the replies. After all, who in their right mind would
post something that silly and expect to NOT get flamed?)
I don't know where people like this come from. Every once in a
while we get a really flaky post. Remember that guy several months
ago that couldn't MORALLY use Linux because it didn't support every
brand of video card or mouse at the time? And then he was silly
enough to post again, in response to the flames he was getting!
(Go figure.)
-- Jim H. * * James L. Henrickson * ujlh@sunyit.edu "Some day I might have a real .signature!"