Linux-Misc Digest #181, Volume #27 Tue, 20 Feb 01 22:13:01 EST
Contents:
Netscape 4, Mozilla errs with common sites ? (RH7.0) ("Marcello M. Pavan")
Re: Size of LINUX ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Steve Mading)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Q: local host name cannot be resolved ?!? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Netscape 4, Mozilla errs with common sites ? (RH7.0) (Hal Burgiss)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (John Hasler)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (John Hasler)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (John Hasler)
Re: Size of LINUX (Grant Edwards)
Re: Exiting programs. ("Harlan Grove")
runlevel 5 vs runlevel 3 + startx ("Harlan Grove")
Re: HOW DO I KILL THIS PROCESS? (Robert Jones)
Re: redhat glibc dist - where the heck is posix lib? (Paul Kimoto)
Re: RPM segfault, I'm stuck (Bill Unruh)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Simple Firewall ("Monte Milanuk")
Re: fastest SCSI CDROM drive (B'ichela)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Marcello M. Pavan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Netscape 4, Mozilla errs with common sites ? (RH7.0)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 16:10:50 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello
I have been having some real problems with my Netscape 4.76 recently, which
I just found out occur on Mozilla 0.8 as well.
at some point Netscape stopped being able to access common sites
(e.g. www.globeandmail.com, www.espn.com, www.appwatch.com )
returning an "TCP connection failed: operation now in progress" error
The www.appwatch.com site is interesting, since if I stop the
connection after the status line indicates that "100% has been downloaded"
then the page renders fine. but if I just let it go,
NS eventually returns an error.
my colleagues in the next room access these sites just fine, as does
my laptop at home, in all cases using also NS4.76.
I just installed the RH7.0 version of Mozilla 0.8, and lo and behold.....
.... same problem. So my guess is that this is a RH7.0 issue.
I am using RH7.0 with all the latest updates (e.g. including new glibc and
gcc) on a dual celeron BP6 motherboard (not OC'd). I normally use
Junkbuster as a proxy on port 8000, but this problem occurs even when it is
disabled.
this problem is really impacting my work. any ideas on the cause would
be most appreciated.
best regards, BuN
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Size of LINUX
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 01:04:07 +0100
Grant Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rolie Baldock wrote:
>>Speed has never been my problem, and will be most unlikely problem in
>>the future since it hasn't shown up already. My system is stable and
>>from the experiences of friends who are always BROKE because they are
>>always upgrading with little or no demonstrable benefit, I cannot see
>>a valid reason to consider it. My two servers are 33MHz the
>>work-stations are 66MHz and I am a RETIRED P.E.E. I take life
>>leisurely and try not to give myself a stress problem. My original
>>question was and still is: can I change my two servers to LINUX
>>without a tremendous hardware upgrade? And if so how is it done?
> 8M is enough RAM to run Linux (with no graphic stuff). But,
> most "standard" distibutions won't install with less than 16M
> (debian and slackware might).
> 50MB is barely enough disk space to Linux. You can do it, but
> it's tough. You really need to know what you're doing to get
> Linux trimmed down that small. I've had Linux running in 80MB,
> and that was tight.
Debian is easily cuttable to 8MB. My / partition on standard debians
runs about 26MB, including several kernels and modules. Just hack that
(or a slackware) down a bit.
2507 /bin
3460 /boot
26 /dev
8002 /etc
1 /floppy
201 /home
19663 /lib
2452 /sbin
Peter
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: 21 Feb 2001 00:14:37 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In comp.os.linux.misc Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> : That's why Materialism is hopelessly flawed. We all know that JFK
:> : was shot, but can't repeat the experiment. How do we go about
:> : proving a historical event.
:> WTF does that have to do with materialism?
: Materialism claims that nothing can be known but from observation
: of the 5 senses.
: I'm arguing that there are other ways to know something. In this
: case the historical record.
How do you know what's in the historical record? ESP?
Or by, perhaps, READING - using the eyes.
Oh, and materialism recognizes more than 5 senses.
There are other things, like the kinestetic sense
(knowing which position your body parts are arranged
in right now), and the inner-ear balance sense.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 19:39:11 -0500
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2001 22:45:15 GMT, Robert Surenko wrote:
> >In comp.os.linux.misc Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >No, I understand perfectly. I've been disscussing the Scientific Method.
> >
> >Many people claim that the only way to "know" something is the
> >Scientific Method. They also claim that any other way of "knowing"
> >is un-scientific.
> >
> >So far We've identified 2 ways to "know" something. Iv'e proposed
> >a 3rd. Thanks for the 4th.
>
> I'd take an extreme view here and suggest the only way we can "know"
> anything is by deductive reasoning, and typically we need to make
> assumptions (hypotheses) as a premise for our reasoning. In the
> end we can only "know" things like (x) implies (y).
>
True. new ideas come from inductive reasoning...but verifying
them comes from deductive reasoning.
> Scientific deduction is not a means by which we can "know", because
> it requires faith in the basic assumption that the universe will behave
> in a consistent manner (for example, the sun will rise tomorrow).
> Since everyone has such faith, it is typically considered acceptable.
>
> --
> Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
> elflord at panix dot com
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Q: local host name cannot be resolved ?!?
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 00:43:19 GMT
bv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> domain uni-duisburg.de
> search unidui arcor
> nameserver 134.91.4.3
> nameserver 145.253.2.11
> nameserver 134.91.4.11
Do you have a line like this in your /etc/sysconfig/network file:
HOSTNAME="ichabod.buchanan1.net"
It does not need to be fully qualified, but there should be something
there.
What does "hostname" return:
jbuchana@ichabod$ hostname
ichabod.buchanan1.net
jbuchana@ichabod$
Do you have an /etc/nsswitch.conf file? With a line like this:
hosts: files nis dns
The important part is that "files" be before "dns", if "nis" were
important, you'd already know it.
--
Jim Buchanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
=================== http://www.buchanan1.net/ ==========================
"But I found my voice eventually. What a surprise to find it so
emotionally disturbed. Where did Bill the Cat come from, for
chrissake?" -Berke Breathed
================= Visit: http://www.thehungersite.com ==================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hal Burgiss)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Netscape 4, Mozilla errs with common sites ? (RH7.0)
Reply-To: Hal Burgiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 20 Feb 2001 19:45:28 -0500
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001 16:10:50 -0800, Marcello M. Pavan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>I am using RH7.0 with all the latest updates (e.g. including new glibc and
>gcc) on a dual celeron BP6 motherboard (not OC'd). I normally use
>Junkbuster as a proxy on port 8000, but this problem occurs even when it is
>disabled.
>
Bizarre coincidence: BP6 (not OC'd), RH7 (fully updated), with
junkbuster, and I see something similar with Mozilla nightly builds.
Usually just hitting reload button enough times 'works'. I have not seen
this with NS4.76 that I recall, but rarely use it. I assumed it was a
Mozilla bug -- and a long standing one.
Hmmm...I was just having this problem with the shockwave download page.
Disabled junkbuster, finally was able to get there.
--
Hal B
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 23:27:46 GMT
Bob Surenko writes:
> So... it is possible to know things that are unprovable using the
> Scentific Method?
Nothing is provable using the scientific method.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 00:00:20 GMT
Robert Surenko writes:
> In both cases it's a matter of faith.
Only for those who cling to the illusion of certainty.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 23:57:24 GMT
Robert Surenko writes:
> Many people claim that the only way to "know" something is the Scientific
> Method.
Who are these people?
> They also claim that any other way of "knowing" is un-scientific.
You say that as if you see something controversial in the notion that that
which does not involve the scientific method is not scientific.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Subject: Re: Size of LINUX
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 00:57:47 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Peter T. Breuer wrote:
>Well, a 33MHz 486 will not be able to support loads from
>several nfs clients at once. Try receiving a mail storm on an
>nfs mounted mail spool! My P450 is sometimes bogged down by 250
>copies of procmail battling for a single lock on an nfs
>directory. .. it can take hours to clear the backlogs of
>thousands of mail messages and error messages and rebound
>messages, etc ..
Mailservers and NFS: a combination almost gauranteed to be a
disaster. :) Switching to maildir mailboxes might help...
While running Linux on a 485-33 with 8/50 is an interesting
exercise, if you really need the box to do useful work,
upgrading is probably worth the effort.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Let's all show human
at CONCERN for REVEREND MOON's
visi.com legal difficulties!!
------------------------------
From: "Harlan Grove" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Exiting programs.
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 01:05:31 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
...
>But it's just as easy to force a foreground process to halt and kill it.
><CTRL> Z will do that, and then the same procedure as killing a background
>process will kill it...
OK, but if the process traps Ctrl+C (SIGINT), it might also trap Ctrl+Z, so
the shell may never receive the Ctrl+Z, so it wouldn't do anything.
------------------------------
From: "Harlan Grove" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: runlevel 5 vs runlevel 3 + startx
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 01:05:32 GMT
I'm beginning to second guess myself.
Is there any advantage to starting a 'workstation' in runlevel 5 vs runlevel
3 with some users having exec startx as the last statement in their
profiles? I use the latter approach with the account I set up for my oldest
kid on my home computer. I don't always use X myself, and there are times I
prefer it not to be in memory (when I'm using some non-X numeric software
with big datasets). Is exec'ing startx from the user profile an unsound
approach?
------------------------------
From: Robert Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: HOW DO I KILL THIS PROCESS?
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 19:06:20 -0600
Juergen Heinzl wrote:
<snip>
> I'd be glad if some kind soul out there could enlighten me regarding
> what is so impressive about a 70 days uptime.
My friends who run various versions of Microsloth Windows could provide an
answer for you. Unfortunately, a recent hardware problem has taken some of
the sting outta my signature.
Cheers!
--
Don't tell me that worry doesn't do any good. I know better. The things
I worry about don't happen.
-- Watchman Examiner
6:57pm up 3 days, 11:19, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Kimoto)
Subject: Re: redhat glibc dist - where the heck is posix lib?
Date: 20 Feb 2001 21:04:13 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[posted and e-mailed]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, billd wrote:
> I was trying to build the latest version of perl on
> my redhat i386 7.0 system. I had applied all the latest
> security updates to it and when I tried to configure perl,
> it said it couldn't fine libposix and that I had a big problem
>
> I searched around for it and found it under
>
> /usr/i386-gibc21-linux/lib
This looks like a location for glibc-2.1 files (as opposed to glibc-2.2).
> copied it into /usr/lib
>
> and then the perl build was happy... but I am unclear what
> this dir tree is for??? When I applied the RedHat security
> updates, it did update my glibc to 2.2-12...
I believe that there is a libposix.a in glibc-2.1, but not in glibc-2.2.
--
Paul Kimoto
This message was originally posted on Usenet in plain text. Any images,
hyperlinks, or the like shown here have been added without my consent,
and may be a violation of international copyright law.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Subject: Re: RPM segfault, I'm stuck
Date: 21 Feb 2001 02:05:18 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
]Peter Eddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> did eloquently scribble:
]> I attempted to use RPM to upgrade my glibc but, as you can see in the
]> transcript below, it failed. Worse, it's left itself in a state where
glibc is critical for system operation. If you crash mid way through you
are highly likely to leave libc in an incomplete state, at which nothing
which requires dynamic loading will work. I had this happen to me when
the root directory had gotten filled. The best way is probably just to
reinstall, or at least to upgrade.
]> it's now unable to do just about anything. Almost ever RPM operation
]> results in a seg fault. I can rebuild the database, but it doesn't
]> solve the problem. This has happened to me now on two different
]> machines running RH 6.2 and RH 7.0, and for both machines I'm at a loss
]> for what to do since I can't install new RPMs. I suppose I could forgo
]> using RPM altogether, or I could reinstall Linux on both machines, but
]> it seems like there ought to be a way to repair this problem.
It is but it is tough. I had to reboot with the rescue disk, mount the
/ directory to say /disk on the rescue file system, use rpm to reinstall
glibc by forcing installation to the wrong filesystem using the
--relocate and the --badreloc option to rpm.
(--relocate /=/disk --badreloc )
This will install the glibc to the proper place, but leave the rpm
database somewhat strange, as it will think things were installed inot
/disk .
Note I give no guarentee that this will not totally mess up your disk.
You do so only at your own risk. I am simply describing what I did (
with a lot of fear and trembling.)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: 21 Feb 2001 02:21:57 GMT
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001 18:36:37 -0500, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>"NEED" has nothing to do with it.
>
>Do you ***NEED*** your connection to USENET?
>do you ***NEED*** your TV?
No and no. I agree that if we speak of "need", we must use a fairly
narrow definition.
>If you're going to base government confiscation policies based on
>"need", then you end up with an impoverished population like Russia.
That's an obvious strawman. Most civilised countries have taxes, including
income taxes, including those that have not ended up "impoverished".
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: 21 Feb 2001 02:27:42 GMT
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001 18:29:34 -0500, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>Really? Then why do the majority of the "super rich" in America donate
>only to the Demoncrook party?
Probably because they have so much money that it doesn't matter as much
to them. I'd imagine someone with that much money would be more interested
in power.
Based on Bush's plan to abolish the inheritence tax and cut taxes in the
higher brackets, I don't see how they'd gain financially from having
democrats in power.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: "Monte Milanuk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Re: Simple Firewall
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 19:42:01 -0700
Or, if you aren't feeling masochistic, you could use FreeSCO. An old 486 w/
12MB HD and a floppy disk, and 2 nics or a nic and a modem is all you need.
Easy to set up in about 15 minutes. Web control panel, plus
telnet/time/dhcp/dns/web/print server come as standard options, and many
people have hacked in mSQL, ftp, etc into the thing. I think someone is
working on Samba. But all you need is a floppy disk, or a very small hard
drive, and you're good to go..
Monte
"Mr. Bean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Try the Linux Router Project, LRP. (Please search it through the Internet.
> You can find the subject easily.) The hardware requirement is minimal, but
> you can still add a lot of features, including ipchains or iptables if you
> like.But sorry, it aint no GUI.
>
> Noname wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > I am looking for an easy to use/free firewall for Linux (preferrably
> > with a graphical interface, unless there isn't) for my company. I'm not
> > a Linux expert, although I reasonably know my way around. Can you
> > recommend one for me?
> >
> > I don't want to spend too much time on this, but I recommended it to my
> > boss (until we find a better solution) because recently our windows NT
> > network has been hacked.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Please post only
> >
> > --
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com
> > http://www.deja.com/
>
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (B'ichela)
Subject: Re: fastest SCSI CDROM drive
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 20:18:44 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 20 Feb 2001 01:09:27 -0600, Robert Heller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>2) CDROM drives are not like hard disks and don't use the 'Wide/Fast'
>interface (either ATA/Dma66 or SCSI-3). Thus the continuous data
>throughput is limited. Yes, while a 72x IDE CDROM can *burst* a
>*small* file at 72x (after several *seconds* spent spinning up), it
>cannot sustain this for long, so the larger the file the *slower* the
>*average* transfer rate, down to about 4x for IDE. SCSI CDROM drives
>will bottom out at about 8x (the SCSI bus is better than PIO IDE).
>Faster drives can possibly be worse -- spin up (several seconds), start
>bursting, flood bus, spin *down* (several seconds), wait for bus to
>clear, spin up again (several *more* seconds), start bursting again,
>flood bus again, spin down *again*, wait for bus to clear, etc.
While I am not exactly bragging. My Hitachi CDR-3750 seems
faster than the newer IDE drives out there. its a Caddy based SCSI
Single Speed unit. This drive is also better built than the free
Tatung 24x IDE drive I got! In playing Audio disks. this
drive rarely skips. Yet my cheap Tatung is worse than a record player
with a bad stylus! Any tiny blemishes or scratchs on the cds (that
happens in data too) will send the drive on a skipping fit! whereas my
single speeder ignores them! The caddies themselves are a godsend! No
need to take the disks out of the cases! Just slide the caddy in! This
provides dust protection as well as fast loading. I want a few more of
these hitachi CDR-3750s anyone know where I can get more units? 7
years ago I paid $99 for it. I really like the drive enough to buy a
few more!
I have never heard it speed up/slowdown. I believe mine is
always spinning. (I never checked). This drive keeps steady pace with
the Scsi-2 buss here. Where as the "CRAPSTER" always is doing the
"speed Juggle". When it starts it sounds like a turbine. My Hitachi is
wisper quiet.
--
B'ichela
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.misc.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Misc Digest
******************************
