Linux-Development-Sys Digest #341, Volume #6 Thu, 28 Jan 99 11:14:10 EST
Contents:
Re: sendmail-8.9.2 claims that "seteuid" is broken - True? (Villy Kruse)
Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows (Kristofer Coward)
Hello (Frank Hale)
Re: Hello (Frank Hale)
APM and Linux 2.2 (Daniele Bernardini)
ati rage lt and 2.2.0 release (Alakhai)
Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows (Nix)
Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows (Nix)
Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows (Kelly and Sandy)
select_table and wait.h (Bill Anderson)
Re: Kernel 2.2.0-final, broadcasts, am I the only one? (Nathan Myers)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (Marcin Krol)
linux-2.2.0 + broken scsi tape -> linux-2.2.0 crashes (Martin Pottendorfer)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (Mike Willett LADS LDN X7563)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (Marco Anglesio)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse)
Subject: Re: sendmail-8.9.2 claims that "seteuid" is broken - True?
Date: 27 Jan 1999 18:55:51 +0100
In article <78ne4e$8h8m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
bill davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <PTEr2.3308$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Chris Rankin <net.bellsouth@{no.spam}rankinc> wrote:
>My recollection is that the POSIX behaviour has security holes and they
>are not implemented for that reason. The discussion was some time ago,
>but the gist is that once a process gives up on being root it can't go
>back. There are various places where you want that behaviour so a
>process can bind a privileged port and then stop being root. Then if a
>hacker manages to take over the process at least it isn't root (although
>it might be some system id).
Don't want to argue that. However if setreuid works according
to Eric Allman's "specs", then seteuid should not be required.
I'm running sendmail on a system that has neither seteuid nor setreuid
but just setuid (SVR3), and I have not yet discovered I'm missing any
functionality.
Villy
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.setup
From: Kristofer Coward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 21:20:41 GMT
> I have always thought that every complex product should have two
> completely separate manuals. One should be the 'getting started'
> tutorial that describes the minimum you need to know to make something
> work, the other should be the reference manual that shows everything
> it can do. You might want to see the tutorial section once, then
> you never want to see it again - you'll want to know what options
> are available, not the subset someone else happened to like. The
> solution is to have someone else write the throwaway tutorial from
> a perspective of minimal use since the programmer has to be concerned
> with all of the options and optimal use.
You mean like HOWTOs and Mini-HOWTOs?
------------------------------
From: Frank Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Hello
Date: 27 Jan 1999 23:22:00 GMT
Hey Charles this is Butch how are you? So hows life, work, etc? How much
for the corvette? I sure would look good driving a convertable vette to
work everyday.
Anyway just wanted to say hi!!!! Talk to ya later.
--
From: Frank Hale
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ: 7205161
Website: http://www.franksstuff.com/
------------------------------
From: Frank Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hello
Date: 27 Jan 1999 23:23:25 GMT
That message was not supposed to come here sorry.......
------------------------------
From: Daniele Bernardini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: APM and Linux 2.2
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 13:13:45 +0100
Hi,
I'm not able to power off my computer on shutdown
since I'm using kernel 2.2
this is my boot message
apm: BIOS version 1.2 Flags 0x03 (Driver version 1.9)
Real Time Clock Driver v1.09
and this my /proc/apm:
cat /proc/apm
1.9 1.2 0x03 0x01 0xff 0x80 -1% -1 ?
With 2.0.36 it worked fine...
Any hint is welcome,
Daniele
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alakhai)
Subject: ati rage lt and 2.2.0 release
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 12:27:00 +0100
ati rage LT is supported by the new kernel?
------------------------------
From: Nix <$}xin{[email protected]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows
Date: 28 Jan 1999 06:59:24 +0000
Jan Andres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think this is the way Unix is meant to be used: You don't have
> multiple programs that partially do the same thing, as this would be
> like reinventing the wheel.
The exception that proves the rule: awk sed perl
;)
--
`I didn't want the bug *fixed*, I wanted to bitch pointlessly.' - Matthew
R. Williams on alt.religion.emacs
------------------------------
From: Nix <$}xin{[email protected]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows
Date: 28 Jan 1999 07:24:10 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >I have always thought that every complex product should have two
> >completely separate manuals.
>
> fine. but untill someone does this, we are talking about what we have today.
What do you think GNU info was invented for?
emacs has exactly this: info for newuser manuals and by-task references,
and C-h [fvckwaAm] for `I want help on {foo} function/keystroke/mode}
and I want it now'.
The problem is that most of GNU's other tools only provide the info
format and not the other side of it :(
--
`I didn't want the bug *fixed*, I wanted to bitch pointlessly.' - Matthew
R. Williams on alt.religion.emacs
------------------------------
From: Kelly and Sandy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 12:10:49 +0000
In a comp.os.linux.setup newsletter entitled "Why I'm dumping Linux,
going back to Windblows", Phillip Low <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>Right on. I've always felt first time user manuals should be written by
>first time users, as they are walked through the procedure/program making
>all the right mistakes for us other first time users to profit from.
>Engineers/programers write lousy manuals for beginners - because they forgot
>how first time users see things. Coming from a Windows environment I need to
>read a manual writen by someone who also came from a Windows background and
>knows how I see things and where I'm likely to stumble.
Sometimes things don't go, after all, from bad to worse.
Some years, Muscadel faces downfrost;
Green thrives; the crops don't fail.
Sometimes a man aims high, and all goes well.
A people sometimes will step back from war;
Elect an honest man; decide they care enough,
That they can't leave some stranger poor.
Some men become what they were born for.
Sometimes our best efforts do not go amiss;
Sometimes we do as we meant to.
The sun will sometimes melt a field of sorrow
That seemed hard frozen: may it happen for you.
Sheenagh Pugh
Sandy
/* Please be sure you're not sending us any Spam or JUNK!
--
// Kelly and Sandy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
// Kelly Anne Siegel Alexander "Sandy" Anderson
// London, UK http://www.here-be-JUNK-for-alma-servicesSPAMATTACK.co.uk/
// PGP fingerprint C6 8C 55 F2 77 7B 99 9B 14 77 66 F5 B8 74 CF 12
*/
------------------------------
From: Bill Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: select_table and wait.h
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 16:52:47 -0700
Ok, so I have a few users here that have some old code that uses
select_table from wait.h.
Now they are being upgraded to 2.2.0 on their workstations, and this
code no longer compiles.
After searching, and searching and..... anyway. I have been able to find
references to a change being made regarding this but have not found
anything really hellpful to them. Any pointers on where to go to find
out how they can 'fix' their code.
TIA
Bill Anderson
My opinions are just that, *my* opinions.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathan Myers)
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.2.0-final, broadcasts, am I the only one?
Date: 27 Jan 1999 16:33:08 -0800
Rainer Krienke<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathan Myers) writes:
>> Rainer Krienke<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>since I run any of the existing 2.2 kernel ...
>>>system I have problems since no ethernet broadcast seems to reach any of
>>>the other machines on our LAN.
>>
>> Works fine on my boxes. Have you compared the broadcast address
>> you are using against the netmasks reported by ifconfig?
>
>Yes they are correct. The strange thing is, that exacly the same machine
>with exacly the same network configuration does not show this problem
>when simply booting a 2.0.36 kernel (which does not affect things like
>netmask or broadcast adress).
>
>I also tried two different network adapters (Intel Etherexpress 100 and
>a DEC Tulip based card). Both work, but without broadcasts.
>
>Did you do anything particular after the base installation? What network
>card do you use ?
I have an SMC Ultra ISA on one box, and a USR PCMCIA (smc91c92) on the
other. No special setup. I say
ping 10.255.255.255
on either machine, and get two replies, no problem. Here's the setup:
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:00:86:14:33:61
inet addr:10.0.3.3 Bcast:10.255.255.255 Mask:255.0.0.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:43680 errors:156 dropped:0 overruns:156 frame:0
TX packets:42541 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
Collisions:1304
Interrupt:3 Base address:0x300
If anybody can tell me why I'm getting overrun errors, I'd be much
obliged.
(FWIW, here's my ipchains setup script:)
/sbin/ipchains -A input -s 10.0.0.0/8 -i ppp0 -j REJECT
/sbin/ipchains -P forward REJECT
/sbin/ipchains -F forward
/sbin/ipchains -A forward -s 10.0.3.0/24 -i ppp0 -j MASQ
\echo 1 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
/sbin/insmod ip_masq_ftp
Good luck.
--
Nathan Myers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cantrip.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marcin Krol)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 12:45:09 GMT
On 23 Jan 1999 07:46:45 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kulisz)
wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Christopher> I would instead regard "free" as indicating that,
>> Christopher> generally speaking, decision makers in the market are
>> Christopher> "not coerced," and more particularly, have a maximum
>> Christopher> of "degrees of freedom" (in the mathematical sense).
>>
>>Since coercion exists in all markets, by your definition, then, there
>>is no such thing as a free market.
>
>As long as poverty exists, coercion is inevitable.
>
>>Since coercion exists, the only real question is from what direction
>>and how it is used. History amply demonstrates that, when left
>>unchecked, corporations use coercion to enforce monopolistic and
>>socially destructive practices. 75% of American economic law favors
>>business. It's worse than pathetic how people are always blaming "the
>>gummint" for "getting in the way" of business; when in fact, "gummint"
>>is always stumbling over its own feet in its hurry to get out of the
>>way.
>>
>>Because markets are irrational and driven by greed, it's necessary and
>>proper for governments to apply coercion in the market to palliate the
>>destructive practices which are the norm for corporate behavior.
>The destruction is inherent to the market.
Really? When customer and farmer argue about price and
finally settle it down, where is destruction in that?
>Greed is nothing more than
>sucking as much as possible from the economy,
Greed is human characteristics, not political characteristics, stupid.
>thereby weakening it.
>Competition is nothing more than destroying the economy. To use greed
>or competition as an organizing principle in the economy is as insane
>as using "violence is good" would be as an organizing principle in the
>justice system. Capitalism is fundamentally irrational and insane. And
>if government is to prevent destruction then it must necessarily
>suppress capitalism.
>Even the corporations, billionaires, and politicians all understand that
>capitalism is destructive; they ceased to believe in it after the Great
>Depression.
Actually, Great Depression was caused by government, or Federal
Reserve ineptly replacing clearing system worked out by banks,
which successfully defended against runs on banks on the beginning
of 20th century for example.
>Nowadays, any mention of "capitalism" is mere rhetoric aimed
>at getting dumb assholes to shut up and accept the status quo.
>Socialism (credit unions + cooperatives) is not organized on competition
>but on cooperation;
Bullshit. Competition is characteristics of humans. Question is,
whether political system manages to channel it into productive
activities (like capitalism) or it tries to sweep it under the rug
(like communism) which makes whole country go haywire.
>and it works at least an order of magnitude more
>efficiently than capitalism.
Now you are selling pure bullshit. What evidence
of this supposed "efficiency" you have?
>There are laws in the USA to prevent coops
>from forming (eg, there's a law that prevents an owner from selling out
>to his workers; he must give preference to other businessmen) and banks
>refuse to lend to cooperatives because their board members are all board
>members of competing corporations. Despite this, coops have a FAR lower
>failure rate than other corporations. The body of evidence for socialism
>is staggering.
Actually, the body of evidence against socialism is staggering. There
were lots of various flavors of socialism, all of them failed.
MK
===================================================
"Reality is something that does not disappear after
you cease believing in it" - VALIS, Philip K. Dick
===================================================
Delete _removethis_ from address to email me
------------------------------
From: Martin Pottendorfer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: linux-2.2.0 + broken scsi tape -> linux-2.2.0 crashes
Date: 28 Jan 1999 15:28:57 +0100
hi,
recently I found that my 2gb dat tape is somehow broken.
well, 2.0.36 detects after trying a few minuts a hardware a
`...hardware error...' and the user command (e.g. mt) terminates with an
io-error.
now I upgraded to 2.2.0 and here the same scenario leads to a
completely locked up machine. the following has been written to
syslog:
Jan 27 09:24:44 attie9 kernel: aha1542.c: Trying device reset for target 1
Jan 27 09:26:12 attie9 kernel: Sent BUS RESET to scsi host 0
only a hard reset helps (ctrl-alt-del doesn't work either).
here's my configuration:
intel pentium 133 + aha1542 isa scsi controller
2gb hp (rather old) broken dat drive
stock redhat 5.2 + updated modutils + linux-2.2.0
I have another streamer in the box which is not broken and works
flawlessly under 2.2.0.
anyone else noticed this?
martin
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Willett LADS LDN X7563)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: 28 Jan 1999 14:25:58 GMT
In article <78bup5$4en$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kulisz) writes:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>The destruction is inherent to the market.
Not necessarily.
>Greed is nothing more than
>sucking as much as possible from the economy, thereby weakening it.
True
>Competition is nothing more than destroying the economy.
No.
>To use greed
>or competition as an organizing principle in the economy is as insane
>as using "violence is good" would be as an organizing principle in the
>justice system. Capitalism is fundamentally irrational and insane. And
>if government is to prevent destruction then it must necessarily
>suppress capitalism.
True.
>Even the corporations, billionaires, and politicians all understand that
>capitalism is destructive; they ceased to believe in it after the Great
>Depression. Nowadays, any mention of "capitalism" is mere rhetoric aimed
>at getting dumb assholes to shut up and accept the status quo.
>
>Socialism (credit unions + cooperatives) is not organized on competition
>but on cooperation; and it works at least an order of magnitude more
>efficiently than capitalism. There are laws in the USA to prevent coops
>from forming (eg, there's a law that prevents an owner from selling out
>to his workers; he must give preference to other businessmen) and banks
>refuse to lend to cooperatives because their board members are all board
>members of competing corporations. Despite this, coops have a FAR lower
>failure rate than other corporations. The body of evidence for socialism
>is staggering.
Very simplistic and only partly true.
You make the mistake that capitalism and competition and linked
in some way. Both capitalism and communism is about destroying
competition. Capitalism destroys competition 'because company X
is better than company Y'. Communism destroys it 'because co-operation
is better for the use of scarce resource'.
Both capitalism and communism have both been discredited over the
last one hundred years. In UK we have seen the two major parties
more closer together as both shy away from their right and left
wing origins. What they aim for is 'controled and monitored'
capitalism. These are merely imperfect ways of reducing
capitalism and increasing competition. However, both sides
acknowledge the state has a role to play (to a larger or lesser
degree) but both will do not want the dominance of the state
to overshadow the private sector. (ie they don't want to
kill competition).
Also, the mutual and co-operative organisation have changed.
In the UK they have offered out-of-date and poor services
to their community because of 'no competition'. They couldn't
be bought so they didn't improve. But over the last 10 years
as they have been bought up and closed down we can see that
those left are changing for the better! (I try and shop
and bank with mutual and co-ops rather than the companies.
But I only do so if they are good.)
What we're seeing over the last 40 years is a re-thinking
of economics is todays world. Whilst most people concentrate
on the computer age they miss the gradual but fundamental changes to
the political and economic environment.
Mike Willett
(To email delete EMAIL-ABUSE).
P.S. I use communism where I should use socialism deliberately,
because the 'correct' dictionary definition does not correspond
to what the general population understand them to be.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco Anglesio)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 15:27:13 GMT
On Thu, 28 Jan 1999 12:53:51 GMT, Marcin Krol
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>As for free markets; nobody (not the capitalists, politicians, or economists)
>>seriously believes they work.
>
>Really? So Milton Friedman or Frederick von Hayek who got Noble
>prizes in economy are not economists?
Everyone brings up the Chicago school in this kind of situation. The
Chicago school is a nice theoretical example. For that matter, Marx is
also a nice theoretical example. The implementation of Marxist economy in
the USSR was not pretty (although, to give them credit, they did
industrialise a largely agrarian economy pretty damn fast). The
implementation of the Chicago school in Chile, for example, was not
pretty, and I'm not sure what I could give them credit for. Crushing a
budding democracy, perhaps.
The implementation of the Chicago school's theories in Chile, IIRC, was as
far from a free market as you could possibly get. There was widespread
collusion between government and business. A free market is not a market
in which government and business are in bed, whether they're married or
just having casual sex.
marco
------------------------------
** 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.development.system) 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-Development-System Digest
******************************
