Linux-Advocacy Digest #187, Volume #30 Sun, 12 Nov 00 05:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Craig Kelley)
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? (Craig Kelley)
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux Is Lame. Sorry but it is true ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Disapointed in the election ("Tom Wilson")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Craig Kelley)
Re: OS stability (Craig Kelley)
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux + KDE2 = 8) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Paul Colquhoun)
Re: Linux + KDE2 = 8{ (Pete Goodwin)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Dennis SCP)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 12 Nov 2000 01:11:26 -0700
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Had you been following the thread, you would've seen several claims
> that ext2 is good for this, good for that, etc. I'm merely pointing
> out ext2's weakness, or rather shortcomings:
>
> - No journaling
Journaling is bad for databases: they already journal, so you're
doing twice as much work (unless you're just talking about
meta-journaling, which doesn't guarantee any data at all).
> - No support for >2GB files (patch exists but isn't widely supported)
This has no impact with any RDBMS that I know of. Perhaps Microsoft
ripped out multiple database files from their Sybase code, but
_Sybase_ SQL Server 11 has it.
> - Poor reliability (mainly do to, among other things, lack of journaling)
And, strangely, those of us who've been running with it for the last 5
years haven't lost data yet (cross fingers).
> - Poor performance
Proof, please.
> - No support for DAC
Reasoning, please.
> - Shall I keep going?
You haven't made a point yet; journaling would be nice, but those of
us who really have enterprise applications to maintain are running
with UPS systems which shut the machines down when they have x minutes
of power left.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Subject: Re: NT/2000 true multiuser?
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 12 Nov 2000 01:14:34 -0700
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >
> > > Is Windows NT/2000 a true multiuser environment? My impression is that
> > > it is not. Comments?
> >
> > It is capable of being a multiuser system, but you need to spend a
> > bunch of money on add-on products to make it so.
>
> Untrue. All versions Windows 2000 ships with a telnet server that allows
> multiple users to log-in using their own priviledges. Windows 2000 Server
> also provides Windows Terminal Services for remote graphical logins. This
> is not an add-on product.
Ammendment: It is capable of being a multiuser system, but you need
to spend a bunch of money on add-on products to run any off-the-shelf
software; and even then you have to be choosy about which
off-the-shelf software to run (ie, Office97 needs significant tweaking
before it will run under the Terminal Server and other packages just
won't work at all [like OmniPage, for instance]).
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Subject: Re: NT/2000 true multiuser?
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 12 Nov 2000 01:16:22 -0700
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:SZhP5.13506$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > Is Windows NT/2000 a true multiuser environment? My impression is that
> > > it is not. Comments?
> >
> > It isn't, in that you can't have two users logged into one machine.
> > However, it is, in the sense that 'services' aka 'daemons' can run under
> > different users accounts. However, this is nothing like the ability to
> > allow multiple users to login.
>
> Not true. Multiple users can be logged in simultaneously. For instance,
> Win2000 ships with a telnet server that allows multiple people to log in at
> the same time, each using their own user profile and priviledges.
So you can run NET.EXE, right? :)
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Is Lame. Sorry but it is true
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 08:20:47 GMT
"Mig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8uhknu$8vh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom Wilson wrote:
<snip>
> 7.2 that im running now is much better. At least i have not stumbled over
> problems with it.. well there is one .. How the heck do i avoid to login
> automaticly as a particular user when i boot the box? I want the KDM login
> back at reboot and haven figured it out yet. Well i just made a mistake at
> install time but i dont want to reinstall again.. thats the Micros~1 way
> :-)
Unless Mandrake drastically changed things from 7.1 to 7.2, either of the
following ought to enable X on startup...
1. The direct approach
Open up /etc/inittab in the editor of your choice, look for the
following line:
id:3:initdefault
Change it to...
id:5:initdefault.
2. The Indirect, I Don't Like To Edit Stuff Approach.
Run Xconfigurator. The last thing it asks is whether or not you want to
start in X.
Later!
Tom W.
--
Registered Linux User #194021
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 08:20:45 GMT
> As far as problems with Windows go, well *starts snickering*, I probably
> shouldn't even go there. I'll just say that's it's included two full
> re-installs of 98 SE for various reasons, replacing a CMOS battery after
> 2000 fried it, and my NT loader miraculously corrupting after installing
> 2000 again. Oh, and a format of the 98/2000 drive from the NT Loader
> crash, which is why I'm glad I didn't let Mandrake near that drive. And
> total cost of my Linux CD's: about $3 (one CD each for 6.1 and 7.0, and
> 2 CD's for 7.2) And by the way, keep going and you might be in the
> running for my dumbass plonk of the year award. :)
Ummm....CMOS battery...fried by an OS....
(clearing throat)
PLONK!
--
Registered Linux User #194021
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Disapointed in the election
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 08:20:44 GMT
"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2000 12:20:29 GMT, Tom Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [re: Hillary Clinton]
>
> >I've yet to here a New Yorker happy about this!
> >How in the name of God did she get elected?
>
> The strongest opposing candidate got cancer.
Still, Lazio couldn't have been THAT bad a choice.
Frankly, I think Gulliani just didn't want the job.
(Nor would I come to think of it)
--
Registered Linux User #194021
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 08:20:46 GMT
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:hvLO5.16178$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8ue4go$69q$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> > Personally I believe the important sacrifices have already been made. I
> > doubt many of the people who were burnt the first time will allow it to
> > happen again. Lessons learnt hard are lessons learnt well.
>
> Considering that it is Microsoft itself that is now learning the lesson,
> I think things will change in the future... Do you consider it safe to
> store your credit card number or other personal or financial information
> on the same machine that is ready and willing to execute any code
> someone sends you without letting you realize that it is unusual
> content for an email attachment? Would you let your family or friends
> that you trust not to damage anything intentionally use outlook on this
> machine?
>
> >
> > That can be explained in about 10 lines of instructions. Or it can be
> > centrally distributed as a registry patch by the sysadmin.
>
> Perfect - you want to train users to open *.reg files they
> receive in email???
Heaven help us all! <LOL>
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 12 Nov 2000 01:21:04 -0700
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:QOgP5.18758$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8uj0kg$viv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > at least Linux provides the capability for protection. No such
> > > > protection exists under Windows. Any user can delete files, any files.
> > >
> > > Windows, in that regard, can allow much tighter control than linux.
> > > Check NTFS first.
> >
> > I think you mean 'more arbitrary' control, not tighter. Linux makes
> > you map permissions into 3 sets which turn out to match most
> > real-world situations very well.
>
> Really? How do you deny someone in an access group access to a single file
> that all others in that access group can access without creating an all new
> group to put everyone but that one person in?
>
> That's a pretty common real-world situation.
Perhaps, but not in my real-world.
ACLs would be nice, but they are not necessary, and in fact suid group
directories are much more useful (sticky -- somethine NT cannot do).
If I had to choose between the two, I'd take sticky bits over ACLs any
day.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Subject: Re: OS stability
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 12 Nov 2000 01:26:55 -0700
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sure. How about the TCP multiconnect hang that was fixed in 2.2.16.
>
> http://www.linux.org.uk/VERSION/relnotes.2216.html
DOS attack.
> Also, at the bottom is listed a vague bugfix "Fix a crash on certain unusual
> TCP retransmit patterns "
I have no idea.
> or the 2.2.14 patch for IP Header problems (it's listed under Security
> Updates, and claims that it's not "believed" to be exploitable, but is fixed
> just in case)
>
> Also, 2.2.12 fixes the Solaris "food fight" exploit, which apparently allows
> a UDP packet storm to create a DoS.
Another DOS attack.
There is no way to defend against a wide-spread, distributed DOS
attack under ipv4 without having some nasty firewall rules period. If
someone wants to take you out, they can; it's only a matter of
resources. While I agree that we should do everything possible to
reduce the danger, it's silly to count DoS attacks as bugs (many of
them are because a tcp/ip stack follows the rules!).
[snip]
> Strange that Microsoft seems to provide 100% availability with such
> machines.
.. except from Russian intruders? :)
Every OS has bugs in it.
Every ip stack can be DOSed.
Open Source DOS attacks are easy to generate, but get fixed quickly.
Closed Source DOS attacks are more difficult, but stay in operation
longer.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NT/2000 true multiuser?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 08:33:34 +0000
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> Not true. Multiple users can be logged in simultaneously. For instance,
> Win2000 ships with a telnet server that allows multiple people to log in
> at the same time, each using their own user profile and priviledges.
Oh yes I forgot about that. However, you can't actually do a great deal can
you? If you run notepad, it pops up as a window on the main screen!
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux + KDE2 = 8)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 08:35:29 +0000
Les Mikesell wrote:
> You do know that the trailing slash on a directory is required by
> the http spec don't you? Send a request to a web server without
> it and it will send back a redirect with it on - otherwise your
> browser would not be able to construct relative links correctly.
> Using smb: as a protocol seems like an afterthought, but if it
> is done where http: would be accepted, shouldn't it act the
> same way?
Doesn't really matter, smb: packed up shortly after I logged the bug, the
trailing '/' no longer works.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Colquhoun)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 08:46:38 GMT
On Sun, 12 Nov 2000 02:50:54 GMT, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|
|"Paul Colquhoun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
|news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
|> On Sat, 11 Nov 2000 14:40:36 GMT, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|wrote:
|>
|> |I know what you're talking about, and I believe you, but that's
|> |not the optimal way to do things, it's more of a hack to get
|> |around the completely worthless Ext2 filesystem.
|>
|>
|> Well, this case is on Veritas vxfs, so that's not a concern.
|>
|> You keep saying this about ext2. Do you have any specific problems
|> in mind, or do you just dislike it on principle? Pointers to independent
|> reviews/tests/etc wuld be nice.
|
|Had you been following the thread, you would've seen several claims
|that ext2 is good for this, good for that, etc. I'm merely pointing
|out ext2's weakness, or rather shortcomings:
|
|- No journaling
|- No support for >2GB files (patch exists but isn't widely supported)
As I have pointed out before, the filesystem will happily support files
up to 8Eb. The 2Gb limit is in the Linux VFS (Virtual File System) layer
and only affects systems with 32bit CPUs. The Linux VFS supports large files
when run on 64bit CPUs, and ext2 copes with no problems. The new 2.3/2.4
kernel will support large files in the VFS layer, and the coresponding
libc passes this on the user files.
You seem happy to blame the Linux kernel for lots of things. Why not take
this oppurtunity to put the blame with the kernel where it belongs.
Of course, taking advantage of this large file support will require a
recompile using the new libc header files. Old software will continue to
run by linking against the old versions of libc, which the Unix library
versioning system will allow to co-exist peacfully.
|- Poor reliability (mainly do to, among other things, lack of journaling)
|- Poor performance
|- No support for DAC
Sorry, not sure what you are refering to here. DAC?
|- Shall I keep going?
Yes please. You also forgot the links to test results supporting
your claims.
--
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Universal Life Church http://andor.dropbear.id.au/~paulcol
-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-
xenaphobia: The fear of being beaten to a pulp by
a leather-clad, New Zealand woman.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux + KDE2 = 8{
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 09:32:03 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>That didn't take long :)
Oh it gets worse.
I noticed that smb: works just fine when I was connected to the Internet
via dialup. I checked and found that the DNS addresses from my dialup
were somehow the system DNS (very good for a setup with no DNS and just
two nodes!). I tried to configure the network with no DNS (which is how
I set it up on installation) and now a whole bunch of KDE apps are broken:
klipper (actually when KDE starts)
konqueror
terminal
knode
kbabel
katalog
kmail
Konsole the KDE crash handler
=============================
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
(no debugging symbols found)...(no debugging symbols found)...
0x40c2ee39 in wait4 () from /lib/libc.so.6
#0 0x40c2ee39 in wait4 () from /lib/libc.so.6
#1 0x40c8f8e0 in __check_rhosts_file () from /lib/libc.so.6
#2 0x4049b4d0 in KCrash::defaultCrashHandler () from
/usr/lib/libkdecore.so.3
#3 0x40bcc008 in sigaction () from /lib/libc.so.6
Seems like network configuration has blown away a major section of KDE 2.0.
(Yes I have logged this as a bug with bugs.kde.org).
Ho hum
Pete
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dennis SCP)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 10:42:29 +0100
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What a long sig you have. Surely violates the 4 line
> > recommendation.
>
> fuck that. Why play prisoner to policies drawn up when
> a 10 MEG hard drive was $3000 ????
fuck you, many phone users pay per second to access the internet.
We don't all live in the land of the free flat rate internet.
--
Dennis The Frog
Why did the frog croak?
Because he ate a poisonous fly!
------------------------------
** 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 (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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-Advocacy Digest
******************************
