Linux-Development-Sys Digest #497, Volume #6 Wed, 17 Mar 99 02:13:57 EST
Contents:
Network programming at the kernel level (Eric Crampton)
Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds. (Jim Richardson)
Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds. (David Fox)
Re: Threads and clone() (Mike Delaney)
Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Tripwire 1.2 core dumps on Linux 2.0.36 and 2.2.1 (Brandon Gordon)
Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds. (Jim Richardson)
Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds. (Bengt Richter)
Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds. (jedi)
Redirect: Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds. (Duane Elmer Smeckert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eric Crampton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Network programming at the kernel level
Date: 17 Mar 1999 04:12:59 GMT
I would like to write a kernel driver which allows raw access to a
block device over a network (note I said _raw_access_, not filesystem
access like with NFS or Coda). In other words, I want this new magical
device, say /dev/nethdd, to represent /dev/hdd on another machine. I
want to be able to treat it like any other device on the machine, I
want to do fun things to it like "dd if=/dev/nethdd
of=image.raw". Security is of little concern initially, but I wouldn't
mind doing something about it later.
Now, I'd like to be able to reference those block devices over
TCP/IP. It doesn't seem possible to write BSD sockets code in the
kernel <grin>, so it seems like my problem would require both a kernel
level block driver, but also some user space code to handle the actual
network stuff of forwarding the block requests to the remote machine.
Is this reasonably possible, or am I being just plain silly?
Thanks in advance for any help,
--Eric
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds.
Date: 17 Mar 1999 04:23:38 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 15 Mar 1999 10:54:03 -0600,
Rupert K. Snoopowitz, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>>
>> Wait....
>> A command line is very useful, think about it. Simple concepts can be
>> conveyed easily using pictures, however this method of information
>> transfer breaks down with complex ideas. The concept of 'cup' can be
>> conveyed easily with a picture. The concept of 'find all files that have
>> the letters ELF in the name and end with .gz" is not something one can
>> express graphically. There are no 'find' utilities that do not require
>> you to think and type, in words and letters, what you want to find.
>> Whether you like it or not, that is a command line interface. Every GUI
>> has had to resort to such a hack to overcome the limitation of
>> hieroglyphics.
>
>I disagree completely with this. Ever use Window's Find utility? Very
>intuitive and powerful to use.. It accomplishes this through the use of
>graphic elements. To do this in Linux, I would have to go an memorize
>the man page for find, figure out how to do expressions, jot down on a
>piece of scratch paper the various option flags I'd need, etc... A real
>pain in the neck, my friend.
>
Er, I just click on the find utility thingy on the iconbar for KDE.
Why do you pretend that there are no such graphical aids for Linux?
>>
>> Not knowing something is not a reason to not like something.
>
>Maybe it isn't, but the ultimate wide-spread success of a product like
>Linux will depend on first impressions.
>
First impressions must be good, look at the explosive growth rate Linux
is continuing to enjoy, whilst NT wilts...
>>
>> In the real world, I would like to see various vendors supply operating
>> systems, this will keep people honest. In an ideal world, with ideal
>> people, I would like to see an OSS operating systems with an OSS GUI and
>> an OSS command line as the defacto standard. I wouldn't care too much if
>> it were Linux, *BSD, or something else as long as it is OSS based some
>> what on the UNIX/Multix metaphors.
>
>That will never happen because Joe Citizen doesn't want to spend half his
>life just learning how to use Unix so he can run QuickBooks for his small
>business (which doesn't have the budget for an on-staff Unix geek)
>
Why wouldn't Joe Citizen use KDE or GNOME? After all, Never is sure a
long time.
--
Jim Richardson
www.eskimo.com/~warlock
All hail Eris
"Linux, because a cpu is a terrible thing to waste."
------------------------------
From: d s f o x @ c o g s c i . u c s d . e d u (David Fox)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds.
Date: 16 Mar 1999 20:35:58 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rupert K. Snoopowitz) writes:
> The CLI is primative. This has been proven years ago with the Mac and
> its resulting copy-cat of Windows. Now, please go postal and stop
> threatening.
I think I know the studies you are referring to, and they were
completely bogus.
--
David Fox http://hci.ucsd.edu/dsf xoF divaD
UCSD HCI Lab baL ICH DSCU
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Delaney)
Subject: Re: Threads and clone()
Date: 17 Mar 99 04:41:12 GMT
Stefan Monnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
: >>>>> "Steffen" == Steffen Offermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: > BTW: Are there any plans to support _real_ threads (i.e. kernel-threads) on
: > Linux someday?
: Not before 1997.
Cute.
Actually, since the kernel treats each thread as it's own process (which just
happens to be sharing memory with the other threads), the threads in Linux are
technically kernel-threads (threads scheduled by the kernel).
Now, what I'd like to know is: Are we going to see the threads start sharing
the same PID, as the POSIX draft dictates?
--
Mike Delaney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 04:56:48 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rupert K. Snoopowitz) writes:
>To learn how to use a 'modern' CLI, one must learn hundreds of commands,
>their various switches and parameters, etc. Having to do this, imho, is
>archaic.
Aren't we exaggerating a tiny little bit here?
Let's see:
grep
cut
find
xargs
diff
cat
ls
expr
for / do / done
while / do / done
yes
sed
I count a dozen things up there, with the first 9 being real core. I think
it's been a pretty long time since I have used any others to do shell
programming. Yes, that list _should_ include awk and perl, but for some
reason I haven't ever felt a strong enough need to learn either --- Sure,
some of my scripts are a bit over-complicated because of it, but not bad
enough to finally push me over the edge.
>I beg to differ on this.. I challenge that one can create a GUI that is
>just as powerful and feature rich as a CLI, while also easy to use and
>learn. Doing this sort of thing has actually been my job for several
>years now, and the more I do it, the more I'm convinced that CLI's are
>not necessary to achieve "real computing power".
So where _is_ that great GUI? You have been at it for several years now,
and you still don't have anything to show for it?
Bernie
--
============================================================================
"It's a magical world, Hobbes ol' buddy...
...let's go exploring"
Calvin's final words, on December 31st, 1995
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 04:56:45 GMT
Robert Krawitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>OK, so do I find all files that are greater than 1 MB in size, that
>are named something like '*.News.log*', that were modified more
>than 90 days ago, and don't live in directories named "Preserve"?
You can get pretty damn close to this with WinFind, at least theoretically.
The name search seems to do reasonable wildcarding at last, and you can
have searches on size (either larger or smaller than a given number), time
(either modification, creation or access) between two given dates (day
resolution only). However, you can only combine these search criteria in
an "and" manner, and you can't prune the search. You also can't search more
than one filesystem tree at once.
Bernie
--
============================================================================
"It's a magical world, Hobbes ol' buddy...
...let's go exploring"
Calvin's final words, on December 31st, 1995
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 04:56:47 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus) writes:
>..and Rupert K. Snoopowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> perhaps its not. It's certainly a better interface than
>> using the CLI to do a complex "find a file that contains this text in
>> this directory for me".
>I challenge that claim. But of course I see the necessity for such a
>file finder tool for people who don't want to learn the "find X |
>xargs grep Y" idiom I use for such jobs.
And of course it has to be mentioned that, should you be in the unfortunate
position of having to do this often, you can spend 1 minute of your life
creating an alias or script, and make things a lot faster again.
For example, I have a script called "ga" (_g_rep _a_ll) which will do the
above, but with Y being the current directory. I then have another script
called "cxg" (_c_ut _x_args _g_rep) that will grep through all files an
invocation of ga (or cxg, for that matter) found for another string. So I
might do something like
cd /usr/doc
ga -i netscape | cxg -i java | cxg -i console
if I want to find documentation telling me something about the java console
in netscape.
Now, how do I find all files containing netscape, java and console through
winfind?
>> Why can't a good GUI give you all the power and flexibility of a CLI but
>> make it approachable and usable by the masses?
>What I don't understand is why you want to take the CLI away from us -
>why not have a CLI and a GUI?
Also, I wonder about those people who preach the gospel of "a good GUI can
do X, Y and Z" and then somehow fail to explain why no GUIs exist that can
do X, Y and Z.
Bernie
--
============================================================================
"It's a magical world, Hobbes ol' buddy...
...let's go exploring"
Calvin's final words, on December 31st, 1995
------------------------------
From: Brandon Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.security.unix
Subject: Re: Tripwire 1.2 core dumps on Linux 2.0.36 and 2.2.1
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 22:10:53 -0600
version 1.3 has all the patches installed, try that
http://www.tripwiresecurity.com/products/purchase.html
--
Brandon Gordon
http://www.netins.net/showcase/bhgordo
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds.
Date: 17 Mar 1999 04:23:48 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 15 Mar 1999 12:37:39 -0600,
Rupert K. Snoopowitz, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Matthias Warkus ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) swallowed a lutefisk whole and
>belched:
>> It was the Mon, 15 Mar 1999 10:54:03 -0600...
>> ..and Rupert K. Snoopowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [Find utilities needing a CLI]
>> > I disagree completely with this. Ever use Window's Find utility? Very
>> > intuitive and powerful to use..
>>
>> Ha. According to Isys, Inc. (and those are professionals), it's one of
>> the prime examples of bad user interface design.
>
>Perhaps it is, perhaps its not. It's certainly a better interface than
>using the CLI to do a complex "find a file that contains this text in
>this directory for me". There are hundreds of other examples of how a
>GUI is infinitely better and easier to use than a CLI.
So tell me, in this wondrous windows tool you mention, how do I
list all the files modified between particular dates, that are larger
than x kb, and which are owned by group wheel?
>
>> > It accomplishes this through the use of
>> > graphic elements. To do this in Linux, I would have to go an memorize
>> > the man page for find, figure out how to do expressions, jot down on a
>> > piece of scratch paper the various option flags I'd need, etc... A real
>> > pain in the neck, my friend.
>>
>> On the other hand, you could simply use the Gnome Search Tool (or
>> kfindfile or however it's called).
>
>IF one could FIND this tool.. The obscurity of the utilities in Linux is
>horrific. One finds the "find" utility in Windoze simply by right
>clicking on the object in which they'd like to search.
>
Er, click on it's icon? it's on the icon bar in KDE, and there's a little
tooltip that shows up when the pointer passes over it.
>
>> [schnibble]
>> > Maybe it isn't, but the ultimate wide-spread success of a product like
>> > Linux will depend on first impressions.
>>
>> I don't exactly want Linux to become wide-spread and successful among
>> users who judge by such first impressions.
>
>So, you'd rather spend the rest of your career whining about Microsoft
>and the great Microsoft conspiracy?
>
nah, we'll just laugh at people who say things like "640k is enough
memory for anyone" and amuse ourselves turning Unused Win9x/NT disks
into mini frisbees...
>Why is it a popular notion that an OS cannot be at the same time easy to
>use and powerful?
>
Dunno, probably 'cause M$ sacrificed the one, in the search for the
other. After all, since M$ is 95% of the desktop today, they must be
the reason for that notion, right?
>Why can't a good GUI give you all the power and flexibility of a CLI but
>make it approachable and usable by the masses?
>
>The Mac proved all this wrong years ago.. NT proved it all wrong again
>(and upped the ante). Now it should be Linux's turn.
>
KDE, Afterstep, Gnome... and more, pick one.
>> [schnibble]
>> > That will never happen
>>
>> I just love those people whose favourite word is "never".
>
>You snip and snip but quote out of context, simply to insult. How
>mature.
>
funny, I read the same post, and your words didn't seem quoted out of
context to me. Perhaps I was in error, could you explain the context I
for one obviously missed?
>> Not.
>>
>> mawa
>>
>
>Perhaps.
>
>You insult my years of experience in this field and my professional
>background. I may not be a Unix guru and I freely admit my ignorance in
>this area, but I do reflect a majority of IS professionals out there in
>my expectations and values. My purpose in this thread was not to create
>a flame thread of empty insults being exchanged, but to create a forum of
>discussion on the future of Linux.
The future of linux is growing, and it is now, it is Eating NT, and
will soon spit out the shards. Not because of an amusing desire for
"world dominiation" but because of technical excellence from Linux,
and fumbles from M$.
--
Jim Richardson
www.eskimo.com/~warlock
All hail Eris
"Linux, because a cpu is a terrible thing to waste."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bengt Richter)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds.
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 01:57:16 GMT
On Tue, 16 Mar 1999 17:42:35 +0000, Dr Dale Mellor
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Robert Krawitz wrote:
>
>> The Windows find utility is (moderately at best) convenient if
>> you're doing something it's capable of, but it seems to be very
>> limited.
>
> This line completely sums up the entire Windoze/Mac outlook, doesn't
>it?
>
>
>Dale
FYI, NT4 has two versions of *CLI* find programs: find, and findstr.
The latter is a lot more powerful than the original. Both work from
a command line window:
----
[15:46] e:\vcwk>findstr -?
Searches for strings in files.
FINDSTR [/B] [/E] [/L] [/R] [/S] [/I] [/X] [/V] [/N] [/M] [/O]
[/F:file]
[/C:string] [/G:file] [strings] [[drive:][path]filename[ ...]]
/B Matches pattern if at the beginning of a line.
/E Matches pattern if at the end of a line.
/L Uses search strings literally.
/R Uses search strings as regular expressions.
/S Searches for matching files in the current directory and
all
subdirectories.
/I Specifies that the search is not to be case-sensitive.
/X Prints lines that match exactly.
/V Prints only lines that do not contain a match.
/N Prints the line number before each line that matches.
/M Prints only the filename if a file contains a match.
/O Prints character offset before each matching line.
/P Skip files with non-printable characters
/F:file Reads file list from the specified file(/ stands for
console).
/C:string Uses specified string as a literal search string.
/G:file Gets search strings from the specified file(/ stands for
console).
strings Text to be searched for.
[drive:][path]filename
Specifies a file or files to search.
Use spaces to separate multiple search strings unless the argument is
prefixed
with /C. For example, 'FINDSTR "hello there" x.y' searches for
"hello" or
"there" in file x.y. 'FINDSTR /C:"hello there" x.y' searches for
"hello there" in file x.y.
For information on FINDSTR regular expressions refer to the online
Command
Reference.
----
What's missing for my frequent purpose is the ability to output
before=and/or-after lines of context with the matching lines, (and
optional blank line separation where contexts do not overlap).
(So I wrote a little kludge to do that, which I use a lot, even though
mine doesn't do reg exp. Also added @@file-list to use a file list
with one unquoted filename per line with possible embedded blanks).
Regards,
Bengt Richter
Added before sending this off:
BTW, if you get the MSW32 SDK, you get qgrep.exe, which is similar
(copied to clipboard from CLI window, and pasted here):
----
[17:35] e:\vcwk>qgrep -?
usage: qgrep [-?BELOXlnzvxy][-e string][-f file][-i
file][strings][files]
-? - print this message
-B - match pattern if at beginning of line
-E - match pattern if at end of line
-L - treat search strings literally (fgrep)
-O - print seek offset before each matching line
-X - treat search strings as regular expressions (grep)
-l - print only file name if file contains match
-n - print line number before each matching line
-z - print matching lines in MSC error message format
-v - print only lines not containing a match
-x - print lines that match exactly (-BE)
-y - treat upper and lower case as equivalent
-e - treat next argument literally as a search string
-f - read search strings from file named by next argument (- = stdin)
-i - read file list from file named by next argument (- = stdin)
White space separates search strings unless the argument is prefixed
with -e, e.g., 'qgrep "foo bar" x.y' means find either "foo" or
"bar" in x.y, while 'qgrep -e "foo bar" x.y' means find "foo bar".
----
If you get the resource kit, you get perl and a lot of other goodies.
The thing is, the casual Windoze user will never be aware of the
extra stuff like qgrep, because he won't get it for free in a
practically-free "distro" ;-) And there is no findstr icon or
menu entry, so s/he won't likely know about that either, even
though it's available and documented in the help.
BTW, NT will let you type "freecell<Enter>" at he command line and
it will bring up the game -- which is handier than clicking
start>programs>accessories>games>freecell and scanning all those
lists with your eyeballs. Of course, you can create a shortcut, or
an incon right on the desktop, or at the first level of the start
menu...
However: cmd.exe (NT's command.com) is not much better than the DOS
original (very bad). I don't understand why MS never adopted a decent
shell. Maybe by the time they were thinking of it, they were doing
windows and thought a decent shell would slow down the acceptance of
windows?
Regards,
Bengt Richter
(About to set up RH5.2 etc. you may hear more... ;-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds.
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 10:33:45 -0800
On Tue, 16 Mar 1999 10:59:57 -0600, Rupert K. Snoopowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Robert Krawitz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) swallowed a lutefisk whole and
>belched:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rupert K. Snoopowitz) writes:
>>
>> > Tim Kelley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) swallowed a lutefisk whole and belched:
>>
>> > > Look, the cli has it's place. For those that bother to learn it is is a
>> > > more efficient and powerful way of computing (you tell the computer what
>> > > to do instead of it asking you what you want).
>> > > The CLI is an experts interface, but it is NOT PRIMITIVE. If I hear the
>> > > "cli is primitive" shit anymore I'm going postal.
>> >
>> > The CLI is primative. This has been proven years ago with the Mac and
>> > its resulting copy-cat of Windows. Now, please go postal and stop
>> > threatening.
>>
>> What I read you as saying is that CLI's *in general* are primitive,
>> which is a whole different kettle of fish. I will disagree vigorously
>> with this. Why are children's books typically full of pictures, while
>> adult books typically have much more text?
>
>Not a relevant comparison, to be sure.
>
>To learn how to use a 'modern' CLI, one must learn hundreds of commands,
>their various switches and parameters, etc. Having to do this, imho, is
>archaic.
Try something more like 10 & just a useful default or two.
[deletia]
--
"I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die |||
while you discuss this a invasion in committe." / | \
In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 06:05:02 +0000
From: Duane Elmer Smeckert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Redirect: Re: After Week 1 With Linux -- licking wounds.
Ben Franklin NEVER SAID:
"After 3 days, fish, houstguests, and off topic jabber start to
stink."
Please edit the newsgroups line in future replies to reflect only the
advocacy
group. This has worn itself out.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
