Re: ***HUGE*** security hole??!! (Re: Lost root passwd)
On 10/12/98 at 08:30 AM, Helge Hafting [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Most x86 pc's can be set to boot from harddisk *only*, with a password- protected bios. This means the machine is safe as long as people don't remove the cover. Unless of course the BIOS accepts the tech support password. And I seem to remember it being possible to reset the bios by shorting 2 serial port pins together. George
Re: OFF TOPIC: where did MICROPOLIS go?
On 09/11/98 at 04:59 PM, Chris Mc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: sorry to be a pain, but does anyone know what ever happened to Micropolis Corp.? I found an old 3243 4.3gig SCSI drive that I need info on. I've searched for Micropolis, but the phone numbers and web sites I found are all dead. Did someone take them over? Metacrawler search - Micropolis 3243 SCSI http://www.mm.mtu.edu/drives/micropolis/new/3243.html Specs and link to config info George A computer virus can be said to either 1) trash your hard drive, 2) lock up your computer, or 3) slow down your computer over time. Sounds like windows to me.
Re: Net Auction Krizms?!!!!!!!!!
On 09/10/98 at 03:59 PM, Stephen J. Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Thu, Sep 10, 1998 at 03:43:20PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What do you think of these online auction thingys? IT seems to me that if you have abit of time to spend bidding you can get stuff ridiculously cheap! I saw a whole bunch of Digital Alphas Servers (Older ones, but still), get sold for like US $430! Is there some poorness about this auction stuff, or should I go ahead and buy myself an Alpha. :). ***Drool!!!*** The auctions are like anything else... Some good deals...some shit. What he said. I goto Ebay (http://www.ebay.com). I've bought/sold dozens of items. Some good deals, some not so good. The older Alphas (166mhz and up) are starting at about $200. George
Re: debian vs others
On 08/26/98 at 09:00 AM, Rick Knebel [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I read an article about debian and was sort of intrigued. I like what I read about there package system and being able to upgrade automatically from ftp sites. Well, I started with Debian, went to Red Hat and came back to Debian. I guess I qualify. Red Hat: Pro: Fast setup with X setup correctly during install. Con: No apparent logic to file locations. It was a pain to change anything. Fvwm95 isn't my idea of a good default window manager. It felt like I was running a stable Win95 (which I _ONLY_ run at work; then only by force while pointing out every single glitch, braindead idea, and how much time I'm wasting) I felt constrained. RPM is nuts couldn't use the IDE CD to load onto one box (Debian loaded from the same box on the same CD, RH didn't have a useable driver) Debian: Con: X was a real pain to get working Never did get Intel Ethernet Pro 10+ ISA card to work (switched to SMC card) Pro: The file locations are about exactly like my old DOS file structure. DPKG/dselect Commited to using free software (CD is broken up in an easily understandable manner) Seems to be laid out in a more traditional Unix fashion. Less buggy releases George -- personal: http://user.icx.net/~grimel/MyPlace.html I'm on a journey; A Journey: Back to the Book of Acts. Find out why http://user.icx.net/~grimel/back2acts.html Best viewed at true colors
Re: Linux security
On 08/18/98 at 11:46 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I was having a discussion with my ISP about Linux. He said he uses Windows NT because it is much more secure than Linux. He stated that since the source code was available that it was very unsecure. He mentioned something about attaining root access by downloading /etc/passwd and de-crypting the passwords. He bases this on a source called cicia.org. He said it reflected several cases of insecurity regarding Linux. I would like to know from a more qualified source as to how to respond to this. I have been using Debian for a few months now and thoroughly enjoy it. Not only as an operating system, but for the documentation and the learning experience. Thank you for your time and attention. I know you are talking about NT vs Linux; but does anyone know how well Win95 password protection works? It doesn't the morons made the default configuration one where all the invader has to do is hit the ESC key to by pass the login. What is the _first_ thing some lacking in skill vandal would do upon seeing a login screen? I can't get in here. Better get rid of the evidence as he hits the ESC key. Any company that makes that configuration the default isn't capable of making a secure OS. It is beyond there mental ability. BTW, this is still the default for Win95 OSR2. Even better, there is no obvious way to change the default and the change takes some involved steps. George
Re: Linux security
On 08/18/98 at 11:13 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Tue, 18 Aug 1998, George R wrote: I know you are talking about NT vs Linux; but does anyone know how well Win95 password protection works? It doesn't the morons made the default configuration one where all the invader has to do is hit the ESC key to by pass the login. What is the _first_ thing some lacking in skill vandal would do upon seeing a login screen? I can't get in here. Better get rid of the evidence as he hits the ESC key. Any company that makes that configuration the default isn't capable of making a secure OS. It is beyond there mental ability. BTW, this is still the default for Win95 OSR2. Even better, there is no obvious way to change the default and the change takes some involved steps. George In my experiance the only thing that happens when you press escape at the login screen is some machines on the network won't be visable/accesable I haven't tried it on a networked Win95 box. That is a real scarry result, bypass MS non-security and get limited network access. I _really_ don't want to depend on security in a MS OS now. Why bother with security like this? George
Market Debian? (was Re: Was the release of Debian 2.0 put on Linux Announce?)
On 08/04/98 at 05:34 PM, Mark Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Technical excellence is about doing something well, and coming up with a system which is highly capable. One measure of capability is how much software runs on the system. If RedHat runs a greater variety of commercial applications than Debian, then in that sense RedHat is technically superior to Debian (even though in other senses it may be inferior). I think Debian should strive for technical excellence in every sense, and part of this requires that we take marketing considerations seriously. Figured I'd at least try and make the subject close to topic. Correct me if I'm wrong (and someone will), but one of the reasons I thought Debian to be technically superior to RH and co was the ability to use RPMs in addition to deb packages. IOW, it can use any package RH can; just install alien then the package. George -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
RE: Was the release of Debian 2.0 put on Linux Announce?
On 08/04/98 at 08:49 PM, George Bonser [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Debian has things like pre-depends that Red Hat lacks the last time I looked. Also, Debian tends to do the right thing more often with regard to such things that should got into /etc or /usr/X11R6/lib where Red Hat and other still put them in /usr/lib. Debian is actually the correct way but sometimes seems unwilling to compromise over the short term for the sake of compatability over the long term. This looks like you are saying Debian follows the unix standard way of doing things and the other verisons don't. So, why change from the correct way to a wrong way? Doesn't the wrong way make porting from Unix to Red Had harder than Unix to Debian? If for know other reason than it makes the developer learn two (2) file structures. BTW, thanks for the illustrated differances between RH and Debian file structure. I thought I was remembering file locations wrong when I tried RH; file locations made no sense to me at all. I may have a twisted mind, but my old DOS drives had a structure very similar to Debian. Then again, anything is better than a registry! George R -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Was the release of Debian 2.0 put on Linux Announce?
On 08/03/98 at 02:27 AM, George Bonser [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Manoj, I find that remark disturbing. That is who you are writing the software for. The luser community produces the developers over time. Without a stong and vital user base, you will not attract a good developer community. If something happens to make Debian user-hostile and your user base dwindles, you will find that your developer base will dwindle as well. Stop right there! The luser community doesn't produce developers (at least such cases are very rare). I'm no where near a developer, yet I'm even further away from being a luser. Given a few years I may/will become a developer, but until then I'll still be classed as geek, junior grade on Linux full fledged on other sysytems. I may not develope, but I sure contribute to the best of my ability (buy the CDs, evangalize, and only carry hardware that is linux friendly). George -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Was the release of Debian 2.0 put on Linux Announce?
On 08/03/98 at 11:53 AM, George Bonser [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Well, it is obvious that some people here are just being hard headed. I really do not think there are that many dummies here. Look at it like this. A person wants Linux and decides to spend about 30 minutes to choose which one they are going to buy. These are sysadmins, not kernel programmers. They take a quick glance, note that Red Hat is 5.2, Debian is 2.0 and all the commercial apps ship configured for Red Hat, end of decision making process. They see 2.0 Linux and 5.2 linux NOT Debian 2.0 and Red Hat 5.2 It is how their minds work. I'm neither a sysadmin nor a kernel programmer, I'm not even a unix user, I'm just a guy that wanted something stable that was still progressing (deciding to leaving OS/2 took a long time). Funny thing, when I decided to switch my home OS silly me took a few hours and read about various OSs. It came down to unix or linux (FreeBSD vs Linux actually). In the end linux won because of the controlled chaos development style. Then I looked at differant distros. Debian, RedHat, and Slackware were the final contenders. Red Hat lost out after reading the news groups and linux lists. From there it became a hard choice, the total hacker slackware _or_ the commercial grade 100% free debian. Debian won out. Since then I have tried RH, reformatted the drive and re-installed Debian. That said, if all they do is see 2.0 vs 5.2 then they don't need either Debian or Red Hat. They need to stay with what they use at work OR get Win9x. Intelligent selection seems to be beyond their ability. George -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Linus Torvalds interview
On 07/31/98 at 10:36 AM, Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Apparently you're doing something wrong. Because this *LINUX* advocate has a Win95/WinNT machine at home that rivals the uptimes of my Linux box. I have yet to lose data on that machine because of the OS, same as my Linux box. In fact, at one time I ran on a single machine OpenDOS, Win95, WinNT, OS/2 and Linux (Slackware). I had no problems with any of them. So, no, I don't think it is right that the OS dies unexpectedly. My experience is different than yours. Wonder why that is? I don't think I am gifted with any knowledge that you're not. What software do you run on Win95? I currently maintian 5 Win95 boxes and none of them even come close to my personal uptimes for either OS/2 or Linux (reboots only to switch OS'). George -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Can only run X as root
On 07/30/98 at 11:55 AM, Frank Barknecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: X should be suid root and look like: $ ls -l /usr/bin/X11/X -rwsr-xr-x 1 root root 4880 Jun 23 23:46 /usr/bin/X11/X ^ important Something must have messed up your setup, maybe you could try to set X back with a chmod -v 4755 /usr/bin/X11/X THAT WAS IT!!! I must have changed it. As I said I fiddled with it so much I was repeating the same mistake over and over. Thanks everyone, what tech support! George -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Can only run X as root
Well, I managed to get X to run, but only as root. I've read manpages and howto's until my eyes have crossed. When I try xdm as a user I get the message only root wants to run xdm. If I try startx I get a message unable to open consol. I've checked X, xdm, and startx all three are -rwxr-xr-x. I know I've overlooked something small. After the bazzillionth time trying this I'm half way there. George -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Debian Diplomacy
On 07/19/98 at 12:11 AM, George Bonser [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I was wondering if any of the CD Vendors might make a few ... maybe 3 ... CDROM's available of 2.0-Release to the SVLUG to use during their monthly installfests. These installfests are monthly events due to the interest in this area and many people walk away with Red Hat simply because Debian is not available. You can send them to me, to Ian Kluft ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), or directly to SVLUG with a note that they are for Installfest use. I don't have 2.0, but I do have a 1.3.1 CD I could send; if you want it. George -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: I CAN'T BELIEVE THIS!
On 07/06/98 at 09:47 PM, Mark Panzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Mike Merten wrote: On Mon, Jul 06, 1998 at 09:51:52PM +0200, Shiraz Sayani wrote: I seem to have been receiving some spam which started after I asked a question on this list (note the new mung). As a matter of fact, I too have received a few... one from some jerk on AOL advertising 'beanie-baby grab-bags' I also had the exact same spam mail (beanie bags and all) there should be a debian policy against using e-mail archives for spam-mail purposes. It really does get annoying recieving such mail. Make it three, except the beanie bags were from a MSN jerk. Was the Y2K firm sent to this list or was it spammed direct? George A computer virus can be said to either 1) trash your hard drive, 2) lock up your computer, or 3) slow down your computer over time. Sounds like windows to me. -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Debian Package Manager Worthless Junk???
On 07/07/98 at 11:23 AM, Marcus Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: This from the Linux-newbies list: From: Mike Ricketts [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Donald Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Chris Fischer [EMAIL PROTECTED], linux-newbie@vger.rutgers.edu Subject Re: Which distribution is the best? GENERALLY? (fwd) On Sun, 5 Jul 1998, Donald Thompson wrote: Chris Fischer wrote: [snip] The debian package manager has to be the biggest worthless piece of junk I've ever been stupid enough to use. Very true. [snip] I'm new to Linux and wavering between going with Red Hat and Debian. Could anyone comment on the strengths/weaknesses of the Debian package manager vs RH's RPM system? Also does Debian provide some kind of Uninstall-type manager? Thanks, Marcus Well, I didn't notice that post in Linux Newbies, so I'll respond here. Debian's dselect beats RedHat's RPM so badly it isn't even funny. It figures out the dependency problems, configures (or leaves configuration until later - your option), is pick and choose (both install and removal), and it didn't lock me into someone's idea of what I wanted by default. I've tried both RH and Debian, my $0.02 is rather simplistic. Is this for a non-techie? Get RH. Is this for a techie that doesn't want to fiddle with searching out all the dependencies? Get Debian. Is this for a total control freak techie (wants everything manual)? Get Slackware or Debian. George A computer virus can be said to either 1) trash your hard drive, 2) lock up your computer, or 3) slow down your computer over time. Sounds like windows to me. -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: perl broken install (bo)
On 06/15/98 at 10:18 AM, Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Sun, Jun 14, 1998 at 03:48:25PM +0200, Marco Frattola wrote: installing bo on a rex machine left me with this problem: perl won't install, saying that subprocess post install script returned error 123 or something like this. What's error 123 and how can I fix it? without perl, other packages are left uninstallable. I've seen this happen in a buzz - hamm upgrade too. You will have to look through the postinst for perl and find out where it's dying. rm /var/lib/dpkg/info/perl.postinst is always a possibility, although not advised.. Hamish FWIW, I've been swapping drives/motherboards/cards around for the last few weeks. I've installed RedHat 5.0(makes getting X running easy, otherwise it is just two hands offish) once and Debian 1.3 3 or 4 times. The last one gave me that same error. To get perl installed I jumped through several hoops. via dselect 1) uninstall everything related to, dependent on, or suggested by perl(including the broken perl). 2) update 3) install perl 4) install everything else. So far everything works. George -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unidentified subject!
On 06/11/98 at 07:16 PM, Ed Cogburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: forest wrote: I've installed Debian 1.3 but can't run many commands, including man. Why? You need to tell us what error messages the system says when you try to run these commands. IIRC, the manpages and man-db packages are not by default installed unless you select them (Can somebody who has recently installed bo confirm this?). Try running 'dpkg --status man-db'. If it says 'not installed' on the 'Status' line then you haven't installed it. If man-db is installed, then let us see what the error messages are (from the man command). Well, you know the answer it depends. If installed from floppies(and the rest of the distribution isn't available), a bunch is left out(that is the status on my dx4-100). If installed from CD, dselect runs after the reboot with the manpages selected for install. George A computer virus can be said to either 1) trash your hard drive, 2) lock up your computer, or 3) slow down your computer over time. Sounds like windows to me. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Using Both IDE and SCSI Controllers
On 06/05/98 at 02:35 PM, Allan Bart [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hello, I was wondering if any of the users on this group have concurrently run both types of disk drives. i am planning to use an advansys 5140 and an internal ide controller on my old ast 486dx system. looking ro hear from you, I'm using a Symbios SCSI card(3 hard drives and a CD) and the onboard IDE(2 harddrives and a floppy). Works for me. George A computer virus can be said to either 1) trash your hard drive, 2) lock up your computer, or 3) slow down your computer over time. Sounds like windows to me. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and w95 after adding memory
On 05/24/98 at 10:49 PM, Eugene Sevinian [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hi all, I just upgrated my PC to 32M which has only 8M before. Now I can run w95 only in safe mode. At the same time everything is OK with Debian! During the normal w95 mode I got nothing but blue screen with: Fatal exeption OE occured at 0028:C0026240 in VXD VFAT(01) + 73B9. Though I feel some kind of malicious joy, however I need to forth it to load in normal way. I mean as it was before, even it was abnormal :) Does someone have any glue? Well, I have found the best way to fix Win95's odd-ball behavior is to re-install the OS. But before going to that extreme: re-seat the RAM, in the BIOS ensure autodetect/configure is enabled, then PRAY. Now reinstall Win95. George Given the choice of being good at many things or excellent at one; choose excellence. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Off Topic: Toddler property laws - Humor
Forwarded from: HENRY L. BUNCH,FIC([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Toddler Property Laws 1. If I like it, it's mine. 2. If it's in my hand, it's mine. 3. If I can take it from you, it's mine. 4. If I had it a little while ago, it's mine. 5. If it's mine, it must never appear to be yours in any way. 6. If I'm doing or building something, all the pieces are mine. 7. If it looks just like mine, it's mine. 8. If I think it's mine, it's mine. 9. If it's yours and I steal it, it's mine. 10. If I ... Whoops! Sorry! I goofed! Instead of reading the Toddle Property Laws, I've been reading Microsoft's Business Plan. I thought you may find this funny. Skip reply to: grimel @icx Sorry for the trouble, I'm just getting to much spam. .net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: (off-topic) cheap graphics station
On 04/11/98 at 10:13 PM, Marcus Brinkmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: The Gimp is sucking memory like a vampire bat. You can easily use 100 MB when processing a screen size image (well, 100MB and more. You can easily suck all available memory). A memory hog; is it from M$ ;) Gimp is plain cool ;) Try it. That he will. How much of a hinderance is a 14 monitor?? Is this a joke? Do you want to kill his eyes? A 14 is not only way to small, it even has (presumably) a low refresh rate, makes the screen flickering and will make his eyes tear. For real graphic processing, a 17 or 21 is recommended (with video modes running at min. 85 Hz vertical). But a 15 is a *must*. No joke, I have 2 spare 14 monitors. As I said I know nothing about graphics. I guess the monitor will have to come before the extra RAM. Thanks for the pointers. I really want him to enjoy working on the computer. I _really_ want him to complain when he starts at school with Win95 George Eschew obfuscation --- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(off-topic) cheap graphics station
I need some help. My son shows promise with his art. He saw one of my friends working(his job) with CorelDraw. Love at first sight. He won't stop begging for his own pc to run CorelDraw. Several small problems exist: 1) I have a no MS rule. 2) can't really afford a lot of new expensive hardware(esp for a MS graphics station) 3) don't want to pay a lot for CorelDraw for unix then pay a bunch for more hardware. Here is the available hardware: 1) dual P-133 w/ 96meg 2) 486-dx4-100 w/ 16meg 3) 486-dx2-66 w/ 32meg 4) P-90(on a HX chipset mb) w/ 32meg What is my best(cheapest) solution? I want to do this right, this may be the perfect job for him in the future. George A fool and his money were lucky to get together in the first place - anon. a wise man learns from his mistakes; a genius learns from the mistakes of others Windows95 - from the people who brought you EDLIN --- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: (off-topic) cheap graphics station
On 04/11/98 at 12:58 AM, Shaleh [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: The p90 is a good start. The dual is over kill unless he is doing extremely intense modeling (which intel was never truly the best at anyway). GIMP, Midnight Creator, and the soon to be released Blender are things to look into for him as well. It is nice to see a parent who cares, from one whose parents are against him becoming a programmer -- thanks. Well, the dual is mine; he can't have it! I guess a better way to ask the question would be: Am I better off making him his own stand alone box with 16/24/32/48/64 meg _OR_ would it be more efficient to load up my dual P-133 to 128/256/512 meg and let him login using a 486 with 16/24/32 meg and a good video card(4meg+). He's 10, I don't do graphics. One of my friends uses CorelDraw for a living. GIMP(it is going on the box) is more like Photoshop isn't it? I really am worse than clueless with graphics. I don't want him to be a programmer, he has the wrong mindset. He just loves to make pictures; the idea of animating/morphing his stuff is causing him to drive me crazy. Every day - is my computer ready yet??? How much of a hinderance is a 14 monitor?? George A computer without M$ is like a computer. --- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Design of Debian web site
On 03/28/98 at 09:31 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kenneth L. Summers) said: Hi! The last times I visited the Debian web site I had to realize that it is not very impressing concerning design and structure. Especially in design the sites of FreeBSD, The GNOME Project, KDE, Red Hat, etc. have a lot more to offer. I would have to disagree. I like it the way it is. It is simple, elegant, and I don't have to search through five screens to find what I want. As for professional: I've seen plenty of professional sites that are cluttered, take *way* to long to download, and are hard to use. I would agree that a little more color and contrast might be nice (it is pretty white), and a unified structure (i.e., banners that match on every page, etc.) is a good thing. But I have to think that the basic structure is pretty good the was it is. But I am glad somebody still looks at these things :) Well, when I was trying to decide FreeBSD or Linux and which version to start using, I looked at all the web sites. I chose Debian for 2 reasons: 1) a Debian user took the time to explain the major differances between FreeBSD and Linux giving the best features of each. He was objective about it, no Holy War discussion. 2) the Debian page wasn't a Windows page. I didn't have to wade through a dozen pages to get what I wanted. It loaded quickly. I didn't have a bunch of little page sections that didn't fit my browser screen. It didn't need a Windows95 browser to be best viewed. The Debian page seemed more interested in giving me usefull information than blasting me with javascripts, animations, and graphics by the ton. That made me feel Debian could stand on it's own; it didn't need all the flash and glitter to make an impression. my $0.02 George I would like to thank M$ and IBM for combining FUD and incompetent marketing to kill the best desktop GUI to date. Hence, forcing me to switch to Linux/*BSD tommorrows ideas today. reply to: grimel @icx Sorry for the trouble, I'm just getting to much spam. .net --- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD K6 233
On 03/28/98 at 11:25 AM, Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Fri, Mar 27, 1998 at 01:18:08PM +0100, M.C. Bezemer wrote: PS I also heard that linux also doesn't work 100% correct with a Cyrix P166+ (messing up disks etc) . What is true about that? Not very much, I think. Do you mean the Cyrix 6x86 (M1), or the 6x86MX, or maybe even just 6x86L? I've had an original 6x86-P166+ (133MHz part) running 24x7 under Linux 2.0.32 for four or five months now, and I had the same CPU on a different motherboard in a dual boot NT/Linux system for another 8 months before that without incident. Could M.C. be refering to needing to monkey with the CMOS while making the install disks? Otherwise my PR166+ runs fine George Eschew obfuscation -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Hard Install
On 02/09/98 at 07:41 PM, David E. Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: George R wrote: Has anyone had Win95 change your CMOS settings? George, I don't know: how could I tell, unless it's evidence would be a mess up of something obvious like my clock? Weird things, like the drive you have on your secondary ide disappears. After checking the CMOS you find the secondary controller disabled. If you have a CMOS controlled CPU speed, the speed changes after a lockup and restart in safe mode. Having the defaults loaded, even though you know some settings weren't default. George reply to: grimel @icx Sorry for the trouble, I'm just getting to much spam. .net --- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Hard Install
On 02/09/98 at 07:31 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gerald V. Livingston lI) said: Try replacing the CMOS battery. I had one that would do strange things when I shut it off - I figured if the battery got low enough it would start going wierd on resets too. Not the problem, unless of course 3 differant boxes all have bad batteries, and it occurs mostly when Win95 freaks out, usually when rebooting in safe mode due to improper shutdown. Just one of many unexplained events MS certified techs tell me can't happen, even if I reproduce the event before their eyes. Blows my mind when they watch me crash 95 and say that can't happen, it must be hardware. Then reproduce the crash on another box and hear that can't happen, it must be some software. Oh, well that's why I use other stuff at home. George a wise man learns from his mistakes; a genius learns from the mistakes of others reply to: grimel @icx Sorry for the trouble, I'm just getting to much spam. .net --- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Hard Install
On 02/10/98 at 01:47 PM, Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Well, anything can happen in a good-sized crash. Windows 95 can't change individual settings because their locations aren't standardized between BIOS manufacturers (AMI, Phoenix, Award, MR BIOS etc). Some of the basic settings are (like hard drive types) but none of the settings you spoke of are. Is this just Win95 or do other OS's mess with the CMOS? In 10+ years I've only experianced this with Win95. Once again the answer to a weird Win95 question comes from a Linux user. Am I seeing a trend? George reply to: grimel @icx Sorry for the trouble, I'm just getting to much spam. .net --- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Hard Install
On 02/10/98 at 06:33 PM, Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Mon, Feb 09, 1998 at 09:56:49PM +, George R wrote: Is this just Win95 or do other OS's mess with the CMOS? In 10+ years I've only experianced this with Win95. Well, Windows 95 has only been out for two and a half so that could be difficult! :-) But in nearly 10 years I've never seen anything do it at all. Well, I've only messed with 95 for a few months. DOS, OS/2, Win3.x didn't ever do that and Win3.x seemed to major in unstable. If certain junk gets written to the appropriate IO ports the CMOS will get trashed. I can't think of a reason why Windows 95 in particular would cause this more than other systems, but there might be a reason and it's not necessarily a Microsoft plot either. Hadn't considered a MS plot. Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. Once again the answer to a weird Win95 question comes from a Linux user. Am I seeing a trend? I don't understand what you mean. Well, in various Linux newsgroups, MS supporters troll/advocate WinXX as being stable/wonderful. Some non-windows user brings up problem xyz that caused their exodus from MS. The MS drone claims it can't happen, the complainer is an idiot. Some Linux user(fairly new convert) then give the why it happened and how(if possible) to minimize/prevent it from happening again. So, the trend seems to be: bang your head against MS until you have the answers to the problems that can be fixed and the thing still crashes. Then go find something else(Linux being a popular choice). George reply to: grimel @icx Sorry for the trouble, I'm just getting to much spam. .net --- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Hard Install
On 02/09/98 at 03:20 PM, Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Wed, Feb 04, 1998 at 09:36:06PM +, George R wrote: That was easier than OS/2; about the same as DOS; tons easier than Win95. What is the fuss about? I agree with your sentiments but I don't think this is really true. When reinstalling my Microsoft OSs (all 3 -- DOS, 95 and NT) on Saturday (because I bought a new disk and couldn't find any way to move NT), it only took about 5 minutes to install 95, and there aren't any hard questions involved, even with a custom install. Sorry you don't think it is true. I don't have Win95 at home, but the last few times I've installed/re-installed Win95, there has been at least one PNP or Win-something-or-other that didn't work just right. Had to go find this that or the other driver. You are probably using better hardware than I have at work and my friends have. I don't have any of the Win-whatevers or PNP anything. Win95 may be a 5 min install; just not on anything I've dealt with lately. Has anyone had Win95 change your CMOS settings? George Eschew obfuscation reply to: grimel @icx Sorry for the trouble, I'm just getting to much spam. .net --- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Hard Install
Man, after hearing all the horror stories of Linux installs I had to try ;) Well, not being a patient one I ftp'd the disk images for Debian. Blew off the HOWTO's Total time(ftp, making disks from images, formating hard disk, scaning disk, and install) under 1.5 hrs. One problem, I set up myself with the wrong user id. Now I have 2 users. How do I kill one user? Yes, I know RTM and the HOWTO's. That was easier than OS/2; about the same as DOS; tons easier than Win95. What is the fuss about? George Eschew obfuscation reply to: grimel @icx Sorry for the trouble, I'm just getting to much spam. .net --- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: extremely off-topic: help
On 01/30/98 at 05:16 PM, Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: i (foolishly) agreed to re-build a win95 system from scratch for a friend. this process is annoying the hell out of me because you have to hunt all over the damn net to find the damn CDROM drivers which Microsoft don't bother to include on the OEM install disk (yes, i am building this with legit disks - they came with the system when it was bought). But Win95 is supposed to be Plug-N-Play. Easy to set up. Just install the CD and get a cup of coffee. BWWAAAHAAHAAAHHHA Oh, I needed a laugh. I've fought with Outlook97 all day. Nothing seems to be named the right name. anyway, for this and for other reasons i want to replace the startup screen with something a little more interesting. i remember seeing one about a year or so ago on some anti-MS web site which was the same clouds and w95 logo but with flames and smoke trailing it plus the words crash and burn. this seems to be a very appropriate startup screen to me. anyway, what i want to know is where can i get this graphic as a startup file. i've found a jpeg of it, but i don't know what tools to use to convert it to whatever bitmap format the startup screen is. clues would be appreciated. Well, I used WINLOGO. I have the ziped file still on my hd. If you want it email me and I'll send it. Many 3.1 boxes left my home with an OS/2 start screen ;) George a wise man learns from his mistakes; a genius learns from the mistakes of others M$ FUD == Foolish Unstable Design reply to: grimel @icx Sorry for the trouble, I'm just getting to much spam. .net --- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
