Linux-Development-Sys Digest #560, Volume #6 Thu, 1 Apr 99 14:13:56 EST
Contents:
statfs redefinition problems (Adrian Joseph)
Re: problems removing linux from my Hard Disk (Peter Samuelson)
how do I uninstall gtk+ (Mark Leung)
Re: 3c509B + 2.0.36 + 486/66 = badness (Geoff Allsup)
Re: clone() or PThreads ??? ("Udo Giacomozzi")
Kernel Traffic #12 is out ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [ANN] CodeWarrior for Red Hat Linux (Bill Anderson)
Re: [ANN] CodeWarrior for Red Hat Linux (Bill Anderson)
need help promoting linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: crypt() help (Dan Mercer)
Re: [ANN] CodeWarrior for Red Hat Linux (Bill Anderson)
Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0 (Serguei Koubouchine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adrian Joseph)
Subject: statfs redefinition problems
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 09:42:24 GMT
Reply-To: adrian@ ragons.demon.co.uk
Hi I'm having a problem compiling samba. The problem is due to two
different definitions of struct statfs. The definitions occur in
the files /usr/include/statfsbuf.h and /usr/include/asm/statfs.h.
The /usr/include file comes from libc-5.4.46 the /usr/include/asm
file is from the kernel tree (2.2.4). The definitions are shown
below. So, what have I done wrong, why do I have two different
definitions for this structure and any ideas on what I should do?
Thanks for your help
Adrian
/usr/include/statfsbuf.h:
struct statfs
{
int f_type;
int f_bsize;
int f_blocks;
int f_bfree;
int f_bavail;
int f_files;
int f_ffree;
__fsid_t f_fsid;
int f_namelen;
int f_spare[6];
};
/usr/include/asm/statfs.h
struct statfs {
long f_type;
long f_bsize;
long f_blocks;
long f_bfree;
long f_bavail;
long f_files;
long f_ffree;
__kernel_fsid_t f_fsid;
long f_namelen;
long f_spare[6];
};
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Samuelson)
Subject: Re: problems removing linux from my Hard Disk
Date: 1 Apr 1999 08:21:01 -0600
Reply-To: Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[Frans de Wet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> Just type
>
> fdisk /MBR
>
> after you boot to the command prompt with your favourite Win95 or DOS
> boot disk ... that should do it ..
Which assumes you have a Win95 or DOS boot disk, and that you wanted
not only to remove Linux from your HD but to install Microsoft boot
software in its place.
If you just want to remove all traces of Linux, boot from a Linux
floppy and studiously apply `dd' from /dev/zero to /dev/sda or /dev/hda
or whatever. Stopping after a few sectors should be sufficient but
letting it go the whole disk is probably more fun.
No matter which way you go, if you were relying on chemistry with
anything like OnTrack Disk Manager, you are in for a bonus round
reinstalling that.
--
Peter Samuelson
<sampo.creighton.edu!psamuels>
------------------------------
From: Mark Leung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: how do I uninstall gtk+
Date: 27 Mar 1999 07:32:19 GMT
Hi,
How do I uninstall GTK+? I am trying to install a new version, but no
programs will recognise the new GTK+ because of the old version.
Thanks
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Geoff Allsup)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: 3c509B + 2.0.36 + 486/66 = badness
Date: 1 Apr 1999 14:48:47 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 1 Apr 1999 02:12:23 GMT, Anthony Shipman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have an old 486DX2/66 with ISA/VLB buses and a 3c509B network card.
>This all worked fine with RH 5.1, 2.0.35 kernel. I installed RH5.2
>from scratch, 2.0.36, and now the network card is misbehaving. The
>hardware was not touched in any way. There are no IRQ conflicts, PnP
>problems etc.
>
>This is not the usual suite of problems. The driver works, the card
>talks to other machines on the LAN, but when I try to transfer files I
>get a very large Rx error rate on the 3c509B. The source of the
>transfer is a P150 with a PCI card. Typically 1 out of 6 to 1 out of 10
>packets received from the P150 machine result in a frame or overrun
>error. The result is a net throughput of only a few KB/s.
>
>The driver in 2.0.36 is v1.16. I tried the previous version, v1.12,
>which is what was used in 2.0.35 and the problem was the same. I have
>tried the v1.16 driver with max_interrupt_work increased to 20 but this
>doesn't change anything.
>
>My next step will be to compile a 2.0.35 kernel for the machine and see
>if this helps.
>
I don't think this should be that hard - I've networked dozens of machines,
with all sorts of cards, in both 10BaseT and 10Base2, and the only
problems of this sort were always bad cards or bad wiring, I'd check or
swap wiring, put another card in the P150, or some such first. Also,
are you sure you don't have some sort of interrupt conflict (on the P150
perhaps?).
I DO really doubt that it's a software thing...
good luck,
geoff
******************************************************************
Geoff Allsup Upper Ocean Processes Group
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Woods Hole, MA, USA
******************************************************************
------------------------------
From: "Udo Giacomozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: clone() or PThreads ???
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 11:41:41 +0200
G. Sumner Hayes schrieb in Nachricht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>[It sounds like you really need to pick up a copy of Stevens'
>Unix programming book]
>
>Udo Giacomozzi wrote:
>>
>> First, thank you for your interesting reply!
>> It seems I need to use fork() because the RTL is not reentrant. Ok.
>>
>> The reason why I want to share the memory is because my application is
>> made completely object-oriented, including sound routines. The class
>> functions and data should be accessible from both processes. I don't
>> think this will be a problem because class functions are reentrant. I
>> don't know if I really need shared memory. All I need is access to the
>> classes (owned by the parent). So if I can pass the pointer to the
>> class to the child and use it, there is no problem (no shared memory
>> is needed). But I actually don't know if this is possible under Linux
>> (as memory management is different than under Windows).
>
>Hmm. This is going to be difficult if you truly need real-time
>behaviour. You cannot pass a pointer to the classes between two
>processes -- if you fork() then the processes have separate address
>spaces.
Hmm. I thought I can pass pointers between processes. Is there no function
to mark a pointer accessible to other processes?
Re realtime: I do not neet hard realtime (RTLinux) as I need the ALSA
drivers. With realtime I mean the process should be able to do <10 ms I/O
latency. The child should do more or less this:
loop
read from sound device (blocking call)
process sound data
write to sound device (blocking call)
end loop
>Think of fork() as being akin to spawn() under Windows, but
>it spawn()s another copy of the current process that has nearly
>identical state to the current process -- anything that changes in the
>parent process after the fork() is invisible to the child and
>vice-versa. fork() (or vfork()) followed by exec() is equal to
>a real spawn() call in 95/NT (starting a new process at the beginning
>of main()). AFAIK, Win32 has protected memory, so you couldn't pass
>pointers between spawn()'d processes and have it work there. It
>certainly won't work under Linux or other modern OSes.
I see. I would need to use shared memory but I have no idea how I could
create my classes in this shared memory. And if I share all the memory I
have problems with the RTL...
>Using shm (despite the lack of mlock for shm) is actually not a bad
>idea if you don't need absolute real-time. If you have enough RAM,
>there shouldn't be a problem. If failure to have real-time behaviour
>is going to be mission-critical, you ought to be looking at rtlinux
>or psOS or some other hard real-time OS anyway.
No. AFAIK I can't use ALSA services using RTLinux...
>The best solution would be to get a reentrant run-time and just use
>threads. Is there any way you can do that? Do you have the source
>code for the runtime?
Yes, I have the source code. I am discuting with the FPC (FreePascal,
http://www.brain.uni-freiburg.de/~klaus/fpc/ ) developers if we can make the
RTL reentrant. I really hope it's possible.
Regards
Udo Giacomozzi
--
* Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* UIN: 17745247 (@pager.mirabilis.com)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Kernel Traffic #12 is out
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 16:14:24 GMT
Hi!
You can read Kernel Traffic #12 at
<http://www.kt.opensrc.org/kt19990401_12.html>
Here's the table of contents for this week:
1 [patch] fix for buffer hash leakage
2 Odd code in iput() (since 2.1.60). What for?
3 Getting sound out of a Leadtek WinView 601
4 CPU Management for Linux?
5 [patch] VFS inode.i_generation patch
6 [RFC] Rights for hardlinks
7 modem not hanging up since 2.2.2
8 [OFFTOPIC] optimized disks drives from quantum
9 Linux-2.2.4..
10 Linux-2.2.4 testpatch..
11 Is only me ?
Enjoy!
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: Bill Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: [ANN] CodeWarrior for Red Hat Linux
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 17:45:33 +0000
Kendall Bennett wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > Bill Anderson wrote:
> >
> > > The LSB will not be dealing with package management. It focuses on
> > > minimum included tools and libraries, as well as a certain directory
> > > structure (last I saw).
> >
> > Oh great, so people producing COTS software still have to
> > pick and choose between distributions. We'll still
> > end up with a box that says "WP for RedHat Linux 5.2 i386"
> > rather than "WP for Linux LSB 1.0 systems on processors
> > of the Intel 386 architeture".
> >
> > I don't care what mechanism is used for package management,
> > just as long as their is one distribution format, one
> > install command, etc, etc.
>
> I agree entirely with this. It appears that the Debian folks don't like
> RPM and use their own package manager, and the Red Hat folks only want to
> use RPM. I personally don't like RPM much (complicated to figure out for
> the first time user), but if it is all hidden behind a nice GUI driven
> installation program it doesn't really matter which one is used provided
> all packages use the same one!
So develop a gui that uses tar .deb and rpm behind the scenes.
This gui would detect what was on the system, and use the appropriate
package mechanism to install it.
Granted, the various packages need to be produced, but since converting
between them on an LSB distribution would be simple, this would not be a
problem.
**BTW, an rpm should *never* begin reconfiguring X for you when you
install a program.**
There are many guis available for rpm, so the 'first time user' doesn't
even have to see the command line.
--
Bill Anderson Linux Administrator
MCS-Boise (ARC) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My opinions are just that; _my_ opinions.
------------------------------
From: Bill Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: [ANN] CodeWarrior for Red Hat Linux
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 17:45:42 +0000
Glen Turner wrote:
>
> Bill Anderson wrote:
>
> > The LSB will not be dealing with package management. It focuses on
> > minimum included tools and libraries, as well as a certain directory
> > structure (last I saw).
>
> Oh great, so people producing COTS software still have to
> pick and choose between distributions. We'll still
> end up with a box that says "WP for RedHat Linux 5.2 i386"
> rather than "WP for Linux LSB 1.0 systems on processors
> of the Intel 386 architeture".
>
> I don't care what mechanism is used for package management,
> just as long as their is one distribution format, one
> install command, etc, etc.
>
Umm, hello. tar will still work. I have yet to see a distribution that
doesn't have tar.
software.tar -> rpm -> .deb
With a tarball, you can make an rpm.
With an rpm you can make a debian package.
If you are writing complicated software, simple shell scripts to
automate the building of other package formats should be a cake walk.
There are already programs/scripts to convert from one packager to the
other. The main problems have been file system structure, and whether or
not certain utilities exist on the system. Once you have these, it
doesn't matter.
--
Bill Anderson Linux Administrator
MCS-Boise (ARC) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My opinions are just that; _my_ opinions.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: need help promoting linux
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 17:14:02 GMT
Howdy, first of all, let me appologize for the large list of newsgroups i
posted this to. I need to get this out to as many people as i can.
I work for American Show Management, we do Trade shows, technology trade
shows. I am looking for a way to have a linux educational conference at the
Rochester ITEC that is coming up June 22-23rd. I want to have a consortium
of accomplished linux users, hardware people and programmers for a mini
conference-in-conference. I need some help figuring out who would be
interested in this. Primarily, i need heavy hitters that can contribute.
Who is backing linux right now, hardware-wise? major companies, compaq,
dell, ibm. I primarily need to know who i could contact to offer
sponsorships to this event, to defray the costs of the conference. i would
appreciate any responses to [EMAIL PROTECTED] as i can't check the ng's
very often. thank you in advance for any input.
Ask me about microwaving cats for fun and profit!
GCS D- S: A- C++@$ !U--- P L !E W-- N+ O++++ K- w o---- M+ V--- PS---
PE Y+ PGP T+ 5? X- R* TV B+++ DI+++ D--- G e+ h---- r++ y++++
Got your geek code yet?
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Mercer)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.programmer,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: crypt() help
Date: 1 Apr 1999 17:32:56 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron Faby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Greetings,
>
> I need to add a password encryption function to a program I am
> writing and I cannot seem to get the function crypt() to work
> correctly. I need to be able to create a random salt. Can someone
> please show me the correct code to use to produce a random
> salt and to correctly invoke the crypt function? (I am adding all
> of the proper includes and compiling with the -lcrypt option.)
> Thanks in advance!
>
> --
> Aaron Faby
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> System Administrator/Technical Support
> Yourlink, Inc.
>
>
>
Here's how I create salts:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
char *getsalt(saltid)
int saltid;
{
static char salt[3];
char *saltbuf;
saltbuf = l64a(saltid);
salt[2] = '\0';
salt[0] = (*saltbuf) ? *saltbuf : '.';
salt[1] = (*saltbuf & *(saltbuf+1)) ? *(saltbuf+1) : '.';
return salt;
}
int main(argc,argv)
int argc;
char **argv;
{
char *salt;
/* seed the random number generator from uid,pid,ppid and current time) */
srand(((unsigned int) time()) % (
(unsigned int) (getuid() + getpid() + getppid())));
salt = getsalt(rand()%4096);
if you now call crypt:
char *cryptpass = crypt(char *uncrypted_password,char salt[])
then cryptpass will point to a static data area with the 13 character
password, the first two chars of which are the salt.
--
Dan Mercer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Opinions expressed herein are my own and may not represent those of my employer.
------------------------------
From: Bill Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: [ANN] CodeWarrior for Red Hat Linux
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 18:04:13 +0000
Kendall Bennett wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > MW Ron wrote:
> > >
> > > Red Hat and Metrowerks Deliver Mainstream Development Tools for Linux
> > >
> > Back to the topic in hand, I remember when Caldera announced Wabi and
> > strongly implied it would run only under Caldera, I was at first taken
> > aback, then I decided to examine the reality and it didn't stack up, so
> > I went ahead and ordered Wabi to run on a Linux version that had grown
> > solely off the net, starting with the very first version Linus put up
> > for ftp. Wabi installed and ran, still runs. My supposition is that
> > these "for Brand-X" adverts are poetic license to con people of a
> > nervous disposition into buying Brand-X.
> > I would ly bets that CodeWarrior would run as sweet as a nut on any x86
> > Linux box with any distribution or none.
>
> Perhaps, but perhaps not. The catch is that there *are* so many Linux
> distributions and they don't all follow a standard distribution
> structure. That to me is something that is very much missing from the
> Linux community, and I really hope that the Linux standard distribution
> effort takes hold. Specifically ensuring we all standardise on the C
> runtime library (ie: all new distributions use glibc!!), the use
> of RPM as the standard installler and standard locations for
The LSB will not be dealing with package management. It focuses on
minimum included tools and libraries, as well as a certain directory
structure (last I saw).
> configuration files and standard locations for the Xserver. This will
> mean compromises for some of the distributions (ie: some may prefer their
> own tools to RPM for instance).
Under the LSB, they are welcome to use them.
--
Bill Anderson Linux Administrator
MCS-Boise (ARC) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My opinions are just that; _my_ opinions.
------------------------------
From: Serguei Koubouchine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.misc,linux.redhat.misc,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0
Date: 1 Apr 1999 18:25:40 GMT
In comp.os.linux.hardware wizard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Shankar Unni wrote:
> Floating Point is a whole different ball game. NO ONE is talking about
> that, this thread revolves around haveing a standard Linux System targeted
> to i686.
One can find an ix86 distribution with two sets of RPMs optimized for i586
and i686 on ftp/www.ksi-linux.com. It's kinda Red Hat compatible and does
install over RH 4.2-5.2 as an upgrade. The latest release is called KSI
Linux 2.0 (Nostromo). It's based on 2.2.x kernel with all the necessary
tools ready to run with new kernels out of the box...
===========================================================================
Sergey Kubushin aka the Tamer < > The impossible we do immediately.
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SK320-RIPE < > Miracles require 24-hour notice.
===========================================================================
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
