nate wrote:
not sure if you mean pilot-link can't do USB to your Tungsten or USB in general. For my 2 visors, pilot-link talks perfectly fine over USB to both of them(on woody).
Based on what you've said, I dug a little deeper, and the problem isn't with pilot-link. Pilot-link apparently doesn't care about USB vs. standard serial connections. It's the job of the kernel "visor" driver, combined with the "usbserial" driver, to present the USB port as a standard serial line to pilot-link. The problem in Woody is that the visor driver doesn't know about Tungstens, and therefore doesn't know to setup the actual /dev/ttyUSB? device in the kernel when the hotsync button is pressed. It just doesn't know what that device's signature is. I was assuming that the 2.4.20 kernel would make me golden, but the truth of the matter is that both Red Hat 9 and SuSE 8.2 (which I have used this Tungsten with) have backported a patch to the kernel that allows their versions of 2.4.20 to recognize the Tungsten. The actual code is from 2.4.21. I had forgotten about this. I discovered it while grafting in a patch to gnome-pilot on Red Hat, which cares deeply about which model of USB PDA you're using.
Unfortunately, I hate compiling kernels. I hate patching *and* compiling kernels even more. I have discovered that it's a piece of cake to start with Debian's config, so at least I've got that going for me. But I'll probably put this off for a bit while I work on other things.
so, apt-get install python2.2(it's available in woody)
Color me chagrined. So it is. I guess I'm still confused as to why the `apt-get build-dep' ran against the pilot-link in Sid told me that it only needed Python 2.1, but then the actual `dpkg-buildpackage' against those sources told me that it need Python 2.2. When that happened, I just *assumed* that it meant that 2.2 was in Sid, along with the sources I was trying to compile. If you're right, at least now I don't have to recompile pilot-link from Sid any more.
I haven't used KDE since 1999 but I too run woody on my machines I have no need for the software in unstable or even testing at the moment. my windowmanager of choice is afterstep 1.6
I've been using KDE for a long time now. I've tried other desktops, but I guess I've been brainwashed. I like having the bar at bottom of the screen. On the other hand, just taking a look around shows me that there are something like 12 window managers on Debian. Amazing! I think I'll give some others a try, since they're already compiled.
you forget one very important point. Debian runs on something like 11 different architechtures. Perhaps some of the release bugs with the newer KDE is that it may not completely compile properly on one or more of those platforms.
Indeed I have overlooked this point, which may become extremely important to me. At my place of work, we have a bunch of old Unix workstations, a mix of Sun's and HP's, that are collecting dust as they get upgraded or obsoleted. There's a slim possibility that I could get those machines as they are discarded. Being able to run the exact same software across them all would be the coolest. thing. ever.
Thanks also for the votes of confidence on that "other distro" I was talking about. At least I know with a little more certainty that I'm not just imagining things because I want them to be a certain way.
Regards, dk