ulimit question
Hello list, Okay, maybe I'm just having a blonde moment here, but can anyone explain to me why after issuing these three commands, as seen, in order: ulimit -d 1000 ulimit -m 1000 mozilla ... how Mozilla can still proceed to consume all available virtual memory on my 128 MB RAM / 384 MB swap workstation? -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **
Apologies to group - signature and other garbage
I forgot to turn off the digital signature, HTML and all the rest when posting. Hopefully, most of you have been able to read my postings and were not trammeled with garbage. -- Dan Jenkins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Rastech Inc., Bedford, NH, USA, 1-603-627-0443 *** Technical Support for over a Quarter Century begin:vcard n:Jenkins;Dan tel;fax:1-603-627-7513 tel;work:1-603-627-0443 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:http://www.rastech.com org:Rastech Inc. adr:;;21 Curtis Lane;Bedford;NH;03110;USA version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Technical Director fn:Dan Jenkins end:vcard
Re: Install help please
OK, I got it. What a PITA. I needed burn a cd with all the xfree86 4.0.2 file for glibc 2.2.16-22 then run the Xinstall.sh script. This overwrite all the X11 stuff. Now X comes up but in twm (yuck). Finally got Gnome to run (many yucks heard fom the peanut gallary) and I'm ssh'ing into work. It's now past midnight and I'm going to bed. G'night all, Kenny Stephen Ryan wrote: On 2 Apr, Kenny Donahue wrote: Hi all, I'm trying to get Linux installed on my new machine but I'm having problems getting X to come up. I have an Abit KT7ARAID mb and an Abit Gforce 2 MX graphics card. For some reason I can't get get X to install properly. Everything else seems ok. Any ideas? Please don't be shy about giving me monkey instructions. I like them grin Thanks in advance, Kenny Which distribution are you installing, and what version of X are you trying to install? The GeForce 2MX is a fairly new chip, and is only supported by very recent versions of XFree86; you should probably be installing XFree86 4.0.1 or later (4.0 was hard to install because it was buggy); you then will have a choice between the nv driver, which is genuine open source software, or the nvidia driver, which is binary-only closed source, which you can download from nvidia. HTH, -- Stephen RyanDebian GNU/Linux Technology Coordinator Center for Educational Outcomes, C. Everett Koop Institute at Dartmouth College ** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **
Re: Can Linux solve this problem?
Benjamin Scott wrote: Anything else will be a hack, and not a pretty one. However, anything else is almost always what you have to do, since forms are designed by pencil pushers, not written by programmers. But I suspect you have already realized all that. I just figured your misery might appreciate some company. :-) Company greatly appreciated. (This is what the programmer does by hand. It takes him a week or several for each printer. He manually aligns each field's position and fonts by handwriting PCL.) Sounds like you got yourself a Real Programmer there. ;-) Ayup. Sort of. All his code is Clipper (DOS). So it's dbase code to write raw PCL. Ponder DOS device drivers written in dbase. I'm trying to get the original PageMaker 6.5 document from which the PDF was generated with Adobe Distiller. We discovered that getting the source to a government form usually takes something like an Act of Congress. In some cases, literally. Discovering that. At least I have other folk to wade through that mess for me. (Thank the gods.) Even better would be getting the original author (HUD) to distill it as a fillable PDF form. Now, that would make sense. And we're dealing with the government. I think Mark Twain said it best: Now, suppose you were a Congressman. And suppose you were an idiot. But I repeat myself. Total agreement there. 2) Parse the PDF. That would be a truly impressive hack, if you can do it! :-) Actually had to do this somewhat for another project related to workers' comp injury reports. Might be able to adapt, but the PDF was revisable format, not final. We had the original documents in some cases and could fill in the placeholders. So it was easier. 3) Convert Edit the Postscript. This is basically a variation on your #2 option. See my response to your #2 option. :-) If the Postscript was more legible this wouln't be too bad (I read Postscript fairly well - I like Forth), but machine generated stuff through a conversion has proven to be challenging. A Postscript editor like Illustrator might work. I have to give it a shot. 4) Programmatic Overlay. We honestly found this presented the least amount of pain over time. (1) You take your form in whatever format it is given, and generate some kind of usable bitmap graphic from it. (The program on this project used a Microsoft Windows Metafile, 'cause it was a Windoze program.) (2) You create or borrow a specification language which says where on the bitmap the fields are to print out. These days, I'm thinking XML. (The program on this project used something based on Windoze .INI files... same reason.) (3) You write a GUI program which throws the bitmap from (1) up on the screen, and lets you add/edit/remove field specifiers. The end result is a specification conforming to (2). (4) You write a program which takes the bitmap from (1), the specification from (3), and a data set, and outputs the end result for printing. This creates a flexible, permanent solution. You can adapt to new source form formats (the input to (1) above) by changing your graphics conversion filter. You can adapt to revisions of the source form easily using the program from (3) above. Yes, this is a lot of work up-front. However, we found the overhead of maintaining ad-hoc solutions (like the one you are currently stuck with) paid for the initial development costs over time. That was my feeling as well. I have to work with a DOS application at present, but the principles are the same. The form filler/printer will be a Linux app, but I may have to port to DOS. I'm going to try running the custom app under DOSEMU somehow invoking the Linux app - that should be interesting. The programmer recommends Windows 2000 for running his DOS app, as it is more stable than Windows 9x! So PIII-600s with 256 MB RAM are being thrown at a DOS application to make it run stable in a Windows environment. (It runs fine under DOS, just not so well under in a DOS box under Windows.) It occurs to me that someone else may already have done this, and released the source. A 'net search might prove productive. May the Source be With You! :-) Good point. A cursory look didn't turn up anything, but I haven't done a good search. -- Dan Jenkins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Rastech Inc., Bedford, NH, USA, 1-603-627-0443 *** Technical Support for over a Quarter Century begin:vcard n:Jenkins;Dan tel;fax:1-603-627-7513 tel;work:1-603-627-0443 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:http://www.rastech.com org:Rastech Inc. adr:;;21 Curtis Lane;Bedford;NH;03110;USA version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Technical Director fn:Dan Jenkins end:vcard S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: ulimit question
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, mike ledoux wrote: I'd take a guess that your system either doesn't support per-process limits as configured ... I wasn't aware it was even an option not to. Do you happen to know what I should check? Kernel config file? /proc/sys? ... or that your mozilla shell script is disabling them for you. If I add the -H switch, it still happens, so that rules that out, no? Um, now wait a minute. I do this: ulimit -Hd 1000 ulimit -Hd 100 ... and I get a cannot raise limit error from the second command. I know it's late, but 100 1000, isn't it? What do you get if you try somtehing like: ulimit -d 1 -m 1 vi Out of memory!Segmentation fault (core dumped) FWIW, you don't really expect to run mozilla in less than 1M, do you? 'Course not. That was just an extreme case to demonstrate that something was obviously wacked. Originally, I had both set to 64M, but then a runaway Mozilla crashed my X session. I started narrowing them down to see if something was funky, and lo and behold, something was. I need sleep. thunk Z -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **
Re: Install help please
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, mike ledoux wrote: Just for the record, XFree 4.0.2 (released 19 December 2000), definitely had support for the GeForce 2. I know--I used it to run mozilla to download the faster, closed source (argh!) drivers from nVidia's website. A quick glance at the documentation[1] confirms this. I was comparing these two pages: http://www.xfree.org/4.0.2/nv.4.html http://www.xfree.org/4.0.3/nv.4.html That indicated that 4.0.2 did *not* support the GeForce 2. Looks like a documentation bug. Perhaps 4.0.2 is old enough that you could find an RPM of it. That does not look especially promising, either. Lots of 4.0.1 stuff, not so much 4.0.2 stuff. Lots of 4.0.3 development stuff. Bad luck with the timing of release cycles, I guess. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **
Re: Using PDF forms (was: Can Linux solve this problem?)
In a message dated: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 20:53:01 EDT Benjamin Scott said: As near as I could tell when I briefly looked into it, PDF is just some weird, bastardized form of PostScript targeted at a specialized renderer (i.e., Acrobat Reader). This was in the Acrobat 2.0 days, though, so things may well have changed since then. This is probably not useful information, nor very germaine to the topic, however... One of the main differences between ps and pdf is that ps is a Turing-complete language and pdf is not (which is why you can do stupid things like write webservers in ps (http://www.pugo.org:8080/) but not pdf :) PDF is also not printable, i.e., it must be converted to something else before printing like ps, pcl, etc. -- Seeya, Paul It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **
Re: Install help please
On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, Kenny Donahue wrote: I'm trying to get Linux installed on my new machine but I'm having problems getting X to come up. I have an Abit KT7ARAID mb and an Abit Gforce 2 MX graphics card. In another message, Kenny Donahue wrote: I'm trying to install a stock version of Redhat 7.0 According to http://www.redhat.com, Red Hat Linux 7.0 shipped with XFree 4.0.1. According to http://www.xfree.org, XFree 4.0.1 only supported the original GeForce, not the GeForce 2. XFree 4.0.3 (released 16 Mar 2001) added support for the GeForce 2. So, a stock RHL 7.0 system will not support your video card. Also according to Red Hat's website, there are no XFree 4.0.3 packages available in any production release. You could switch distributions. (Pause for flamewar.) However, I would not be surprised if no Linux distribution has a production XFree 4.0.3 release. That is pretty recent. So let's assume you want to stick with Red Hat 7.0, and update XFree after the install. First thing you want to do is not configure X during install. I am not familiar enough with the RHL 7.0 installer to say exactly which options to choose, but if you do not choose any X server components during the install, the installer will not try to configure them. It may be easier to pretend to install an X server (e.g., the VGA16 server), but choose Skip when the option to configure or test the X server is presented. This gives you a nearly-complete XFree install to work with. In any event, once you've rebooted and managed to login in text console mode, you need to find updated XFree RPMs, or install a non-RPM version of XFree. A quick search of rpmfind.net and Red Hat's website seems to indicate that the only XFree 4.0.3 RPMs out there are in pre-release development trees, like Red Hat's Rawhide. Exploring the wonders of development packages can be productive, exciting, educational, or disastrous. Do you feel lucky? :-) Alternatively, you can head on over to http://www.xfree.org, download their binary packages for Linux, and follow their instructions. While not as easy as rpm --update, it has the advantage of being Tested and Approved by *somebody*, at least. Feel free to ask if you want additional pointers in any of these directions. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] Net Technologies, Inc. http://www.ntisys.com Voice: (800)905-3049 x18 Fax: (978)499-7839 ** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **
Re: Can Linux solve this problem?
In a message dated: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 11:03:37 EDT Kevin D. Clark said: Anyone remember what I'm talking about? pageview? Hmmm, that doesn't sound familiar, though it might be. I never actually used it, since I thought ghostview was a better viewer, even back then. And I've had little need to edit a ps file :) I don't think that its editing capabilities are any better than using a standard text editor though. Hmmm, the one I remember wasn't a great editor, but it allowed WYSIWYG editing of the ps file. -- Seeya, Paul It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **
Re: Can Linux solve this problem?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't remember the name of the program, but SunOS used to have a PS viewer/editor that came with OpenLook Windows. I believe this program may have been freely available from Sun, I'm not sure. Anyone remember what I'm talking about? pageview? I don't think that its editing capabilities are any better than using a standard text editor though. --kevin -- Kevin D. Clark (CetaceanNetworks.com!kclark) | Cetacean Networks, Inc. | Give me a decent UNIX Portsmouth, N.H. (USA)| and I can move the world alumni.unh.edu!kdc (PGP Key Available)| ** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **
Re: Install help please
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Kenny Donahue wrote: I needed burn a cd with all the xfree86 4.0.2 file for glibc 2.2.16-22 then run the Xinstall.sh script. This overwrite all the X11 stuff. Now X comes up but in twm (yuck). I realize this is a little late, but if you manually extract just the binary driver(s) and supporting file(s) from the XFree binary distribution, you should be able to copy them into virtually any other XFree 4.0.x installation and get things working, with the distribution's pre-packaged X11 environment still intact. Useful to avoid the hassle of reconfiguring the *rest* of X11. (This will cause whatever package manager installed the original files to complain that something (you) modified them, but that's okay, 'cause you did.) -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **
Re: Using PDF forms (was: Can Linux solve this problem?)
PDF does get you a few things, unfortunately most people do not bother implemeting them: Intra-document (and extra-document) links Side bookmarks that usually have an outline of the document Word search Annotations (pop up notes) The only thing I do not have working with PDF yet is annotations, not that they're all that important. PDF also performs compression, so the resulting PDF is smaller than the PS. -Mark Paul Lussier wrote: In a message dated: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 20:53:01 EDT Benjamin Scott said: As near as I could tell when I briefly looked into it, PDF is just some weird, bastardized form of PostScript targeted at a specialized renderer (i.e., Acrobat Reader). This was in the Acrobat 2.0 days, though, so things may well have changed since then. This is probably not useful information, nor very germaine to the topic, however... One of the main differences between ps and pdf is that ps is a Turing-complete language and pdf is not (which is why you can do stupid things like write webservers in ps (http://www.pugo.org:8080/) but not pdf :) PDF is also not printable, i.e., it must be converted to something else before printing like ps, pcl, etc. -- Mark Komarinski - Senior Systems Engineer - VA Linux Systems (cell) 978-697-2228 (email) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Have one day pleasant - Babelfish ** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **
HLD Filter
All, Has anyone out there tried the HLD mail filter (http://www.hld.ca/opensource/hldfilter/)? It's a procmail type system, except that the filtering rules are far more simple than procmail's recipes (and HLD is written in perl). It uses one file to filter on from/to/cc and another to filter on subject. There are also files for rejecting mail, auto-reply, etc. There is also a script that can generate an html page with your mail stats. I'm using it now, but I was wondering if anyone else has had any experience with it. TIA, Kenny ** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **
RE: Linux Standardization (was: inted question)
If you think that finding a few config files or config entries using grep and find is difficult try finding the right registry keys to actually successfully remove an oracle install from the registry in windoze 2K. If there is some difference from distro to distro it is because linux is flexible and open enough for people to actually control what is happening on thier own machines rather than giving over that control to the faceless uncaring corporation that will decide for the slow witted every detail of a configuration and not allow any changes. There is a certain responsibility that comes with control - RTFM and understand what you are doing and how things work then you will enjoy and applaud the flexibility and access rather than curse the complexity. Getting a general purpose - highly sophisticatd adding machine to behave like something you want to interact with is a complex process. If you want to control that proccess enough that you actually know what is running on your machine then RTFM and work from understanding rather than FUD. -Original Message- From: Dan Jenkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 02, 2001 9:05 PM Cc: Greater NH Linux Users' Group Subject: Re: Linux Standardization (was: inted question) Benjamin Scott wrote: Maybe it's my background. I started off in the Unix world as a junior admin at UNH's Space Science Lab. They had just about every OS known to man there: DOS, Win 3.x, Win9X, WinNT, MacOS, Novell, Ultrix, OSF/1, IRIX, SunOS, Solaris, VMS... you name it. Anything they didn't run, the folks downstairs in the Research Computing Center did. The different distributions of Linux seem downright consistent in comparison. :-) Hear, hear!!! I support a variety of heterogenous environments (some as rich as Mr. Scott's above). I may use one or more Linux distributions even at one site. I like what different distros do. (Though, of course, any of them could solve the problems.) Finding where a configuration file or two is located is quite minor compared to how AIX does stuff compared to Solaris compared to Linux - disregarding the various Windows variants, Macintosh, etc. I find the differences between Linux distros to be akin to the different layouts in cars. It might take a few minutes to locate the glove box or open the trunk from inside, but we all can figure it out. We don't insist that all cars have exactly the same layout. Why should our Linux distros? As the FHS progresses, we should find more consistency in any event. -- Dan Jenkins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Rastech Inc., Bedford, NH, USA, 1-603-627-0443 *** Technical Support for over a Quarter Century ** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **
