Linux-Development-Sys Digest #568, Volume #6 Fri, 2 Apr 99 16:14:17 EST
Contents:
Re: crypt() help (Dan Mercer)
Re: Programming tools for Linux/Unix: Editor, IDE, Frontend to GCC. (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Outlook? (Igor Zlatkovic)
Re: Programming tools for Linux/Unix: Editor, IDE, Frontend to GCC. ("Bill Zimmerly")
Re: You can now use Winmodems in Linux!!!!!!! (Nitin Raut)
Re: Programming tools for Linux/Unix: Editor, IDE, Frontend to GCC. (Stephan Schulz)
Kernel 2.3 when? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: How about /dev/web? (Alexander Viro)
Re: Limit ??? (Andre van Dijk)
Re: Proposal: "Linux 2000 Platform" (Emile van bergen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Mercer)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.programmer,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: crypt() help
Date: 1 Apr 1999 21:12:14 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"G. Sumner Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dan Mercer wrote:
>>
>> Here's how I create salts:
> [SNIP]
>> /* 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);
>
> Don't forget about /dev/random and /dev/urandom if you need strong
> random numbers. Probably not an issue if you're using crypt(), but...
>
> -Sumner
Not portable constructs - not on HP-UX, for instance.
Since the salt is limited to 0-4095, rand is plenty random enough.
--
Dan Mercer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Opinions expressed herein are my own and may not represent those of my employer.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.help,comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: Programming tools for Linux/Unix: Editor, IDE, Frontend to GCC.
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 15:13:19 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Sat, 27 Mar 1999 16:53:01 -0800...
..and FM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What do most Linux programmers use as programming tools?
gcc (resp. EGCS) is *the* C compiler.
gdb is *the* debugger.
Emacs and vi(m) are *the* editors.
Make, autoconf and automake are *the* build control system.
But of course there are lots of other choices... anyway, if you want
an IDE, Emacs can be one. It provides a nice debugger frontend. If you
want prettier ones, xxgdb or DDD look even better. There are
monolithic IDEs, too (Code Crusader etc.).
mawa
--
The Bundeswehr? I haven't got problems with the Bundeswehr. After all,
what possible harm could an army do where soldiers don't need to have
their hair cut and where they play _Sailing_ for the Grand Tattoo?
-- mawa
------------------------------
From: Igor Zlatkovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Outlook?
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 21:44:14 +0000
John Burton wrote:
> ...I'll have to read the manuals on how to get at the windows mail. Can I
> just
> use mapi to do
> this?
No Manuals out there for MS Mail programming. You will have to get your hands
on Microsoft Developer Network, which is a very good source of documentation
for Windows programming. Check it at http://msdn.microsoft.com.
I don�t know if you can do this through MAPI. I never bothered much with MS
Mail. But MS Mail has nothing that runs on the server. It is simply a directory
structure on the filesystem and you must know how to access it. Pure evil.
> ...I'd need to know how to connect to the NT server wouldn't I?
You need to make a connection to the NT server in pretty the same way as samba
does it. You need to do a NT LAN manager authentication. In addition to this,
you need to authenticate yourself to the MS Mail. Since there is nothing
running on the server to authenticate you, you will have to deal with MS
"compressible encryption" to get your MS Mail mailbox, whatever "compressible
encryption" might mean. You do what MS Mail in the Exchange Client does when it
asks you for your password. Please don�t ask me what does it do :-)
> ... everyone except me and I think exchange is quite expensive isn't it?
What everyone should do who wants to deal with MS software is subscribe to the
MSDN. It costs about $ 1500 per year and you get gigabytes of documentation,
all development products, all operating systems, all office and backoffice
products, including Exchange, SQL, SMS and so on. If you buy the stuff
directly, it costs much more.
What your admin should do is port the mailing system to Linux. This is a lot
better solution than any MSDN can offer. All others would still be able to
access their messages through IMAP4 or POP3, they would never see the
difference. However, porting from MS Exchange Server to any kind of Linux-based
mailing is possible. Porting from MS Mail is not.
> Thanks for the help.
You�re welcome. That is why I hang out here. To learn, to help where I can and
possibly to get help when I need some.
> ...This has got a bit off topic. Is there a more relevent newsgroup for this
> sort of thing?
We are talking about developing software that enables one to read messages
delivered through MS Mail on his Linux workstation. This really is a topic that
has to do with Linux development. It is not necessarily off topic because
Microsoft is mentioned here. If you don�t get help here, you wont get it
anywhere. Do you think that anyone in any microsoft related group would answer
your post regarding Linux? No way. If you go to the MS IRC chat network and set
the room topic to something that contains the word "Linux", a system bot comes
and claims that the topic is inapropriate. This group and
comp.os.linux.development.apps are the places where people exchange information
regarding development under Linux and that�s exactly what we are talking about.
Ciao
Igor
------------------------------
From: "Bill Zimmerly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.help,comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: Programming tools for Linux/Unix: Editor, IDE, Frontend to GCC.
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 15:32:34 -0600
> Can you name one that was as good an implementation of all 3?
> Did it cost around $50 USD?"
As a matter of fact, I can...
Forth
Far more powerful an integrated environment than Turbo Pascal. The prices
*WERE* and are free and most good implementations are open source, just like
Linux. (Beats the hell out of $50 USD.)
> I thought not...
Then you had better do yourself a favor and quit trying to think for other
people, you're obviously not too good at that.
- Bill
Josh Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:BJEM2.844$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Bill Zimmerly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >There were *MANY* other programming environments that combined compiler,
> >editor, and debugger before Turbo Pascal.
> >
> >None of them got the *INK* that TP got however. Why? I'll never know...
>
> Can you name one that was as good an implementation of all 3?
> Did it cost around $50 USD?
>
>
> I thought not...
>
>
> - Josh
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 11:11:09 -0800
From: Nitin Raut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You can now use Winmodems in Linux!!!!!!!
Matt Freeman wrote:
> Billy Moon wrote:
> >
> > I am currently working on a application that enables winmodems to
> function
> > in Linux. Anyone who would like to help test this app please contact me.
I will do the app testing too. Let me know where your sources are.
Regards,
Nitin
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephan Schulz)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.help,comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: Programming tools for Linux/Unix: Editor, IDE, Frontend to GCC.
Date: 1 Apr 1999 21:55:58 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Wesley W. Garland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Stephan;
>
>>editing, make for project management, ddd if I cannot cope without a
>>debugger (but I hate debuggers and will do a lot to avoid contact even
>>with ddd), and gawk to write small suplementary test- and analysis
>>programs.
>
>Out of curiosity, why do you hate debuggers so much? They save
>*so* much time when writing code with any sort of complexity
>whatsoever...
Well, my main project at the moment is an equational theorem
prover. It stand at 60000 lines of code, and performs pretty
complicated operations on very large recursive data structures -- I
don't know if that is complex by your standards. I am fairly
experienced in coding C, and I do not make very many errors with
pointers and indices. I also pepper my code with assertions a lot.
If something wents wrong, it typically happens after 5 minutes of run
time, and on data strucures with millions of cells. Stepping through
this with a debugger is not pleasant. I'd rather print out most
important variables and invariants and use grep and emacs ediff mode
on the output to find out what's wrong. And sometimes only deep
meditation and sacrifices to the elder gods will help...
BTW, does someone else have these strange experience? Sometimes I am
looking for hours or days for a bug, without any apparent
progress. Then, when doing something completly unrelated (usually
sports), it goes BANG and I do not even need to check the code to know
what was wrong and how to fix it.
>>As for indenting: You get the only rational brace style by hitting
>>return before each and any {, and by using the following settings in
>>your .emacs file:
>>
>>(defun my-c-mode-common-hook ()
>>� (c-set-style "bsd")
>>� (c-set-offset 'statement-case-intro '++)
>>� (setq c-basic-offset 3))
>
>Yuck!� You should try wes-c-style ;-)
Do you have an emacs mode for it? ;-)
Bye,
Stephan
========================== It can be done! =================================
Please email me as [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephan Schulz)
============================================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Kernel 2.3 when?
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 21:35:14 GMT
Subject says all. When is 2.3 going to be out?
There needs to be a development branch for development to take place.
2.2 came out on January 25, 1999. It's now over 2 months later.
I keep hearing that there are supposed to be a lot of new and some old
3rd party things to enter the kernel: hardware monitoring (from
lm_sensors2), 32 bit devices, uids, and gids, Pentium 3 support, raw
devices, and ext2fs undeletion and ACLs. And much more!
But none of this will happen until the 2.3 development branch is
opened.
Please, open up the frontier!
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: How about /dev/web?
Date: 2 Apr 1999 15:16:26 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Joseph H Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Plan9 namespaces are nice, but they don't go anywhere near far enough:
>
>It would be nice if there were a way to mount a device driver (loadable
>module) as the server for a pseudo-directory. For example, it would be cool
>if you could open a serial port with:
>open("/dev/serial/baud=9600,bits=8,parity=n,stop=1"), and have everything
>after the serial/ part passed to the open handler. fcntl() could be
>modified to accept a string for changing parameters:
>fcntl(fd,"baud=115200"). Many (all?) ioctls() could be eliminated-
>hopefully special programs like 'stty' could be eliminated as well.
You've described portalfs. You don't need anything close to the
complexity of ftpfs and friends for that. All you need is a mechanism that
would pass the rest of name to the process, get a file descriptor, take a
dentry associated with it and use it as result of lookup(). There is
some trickery you should do in do_open() to handle it right, but it's not
a big deal. But there is a big difference between the stream and filesystem.
As for elimination of all ioctls... man termios. Sorry. That beast is not
going to go away.
>I wish the entire socket system worked this way as well (IMHO, those stoned
>out hippies at berserkely really screwed up be not putting the socket system
>in the filesystem to begin with). It could work something like this:
What do you have against hippies?
>fd=open("/inet/tcp/123.456.789.10/50",0)Listen for connections on port 50
>read(fd,buf,100) Accept token for next connection
>fd1=open(buf,2) Accept the connection (buf would
> contain /inet/tcp/123.456.789.10/something)
Races. Besides, it's good for AF_INET, but for AF_UNIX it will be
royal PITA. Ditto for anything other than SOCK_STREAM.
>You could then make servers with simple shell scripts. There could be a dns
>translator mounted on another directory. There could be authentication
>translators mounted on yet other directories, http and ftp translators could
>be added on top of that. Of course not every device driver is necessarily
>going to provide all of the functionality available in a real filesystem-
>it very useful even without it.
Sigh... Servers in simple perl scripts are available right now.
As for ftp translator - WTF will you do without lseek() and mmap()?
--
"You're one of those condescending Unix computer users!"
"Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer" - Dilbert.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andre van Dijk)
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,alt.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Limit ???
Date: 2 Apr 1999 19:50:03 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 01 Apr 1999 16:07:45 +0200, Vincent wrote:
>How can I configure the limit of coredump for standard user ?
>When I'm root it's not a problem. I tried to set the value in the
>/etc/profile file but nothing result.
>And for the /etc/login.* it's the same.
>In what file are store this information ???
I have ulimit -c 0 in /etc/profile to set core dump size to 0 (disabled)
--
A. van Dijk Hmmm, I smell Bacon, Elvis is in the kitchen
mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Denis Leary
icq : 4249631 Linux: What you read is what you get.
------------------------------
From: Emile van bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Proposal: "Linux 2000 Platform"
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 01:48:54 +0200
On Thu, 1 Apr 1999, Kendall Bennett wrote:
[SNIPPED Proposal to create a Linux 2000 standard platform]
First of all, I can understand the need one may feel for 'plugging'
linux in the corporate world.
However, I don't think just imitating the naming convention (years) from
a well known company will do any good... I mean, a lot of linux is about
doing it differently, with a fresh view on things, doing it better. This
goes completely against imitating any aspect of the behaviour of either
this well known company itself or its products.
And some other thoughts as well:
>Linux 2000 Workstation
>----------------------
>
>Base components:
> . Standard locations for all configuration files!
Why on earth would you want to do that? As I understand it, this
standardized platform would enable software producers to stop worrying
about installation issues.
But if we'd expect a software installation to change anything about the
underlying layers of operating system itself, we'll all be soon in
DLHELL again... I _don't_ want the installation procedure of product X
fiddling with my configuration files. The only thing I expect it to do
is put all files into the right places, and tell a desktop manager like
KDE or Gnome _nicely_ using a _clean and documented protocol_ that it
would like the desktop manager to show an icon X in place Y.
> . Glibc based
Okay, but libc5 still there for those older apps. Just like RedHat does
this.
> . RPM for package manager
Just like Redhat does this.
> . GNU make, C/C++ compiler and development libraries
Don't all distributions have that already??
> . XFree86 installed to /usr/X11R6/lib (or /usr/X11)
Well, many unices have this wonderful thing called symlinks, you know.
>Optional components:
> . Web browser (Netscape or Mozilla variation?)
Most distro's already do.
> . Need more suggestions here!
An optional bundle with either Applixware, Wp 8 or Staroffice 5 perhaps?
And as soon as KOffice is done, put that in too.
>Linux 2000 Server
>-----------------
>
>Base components:
> . Standard locations for all configuration files!
> . Glibc based
> . RPM for package manager
> . GNU make, C/C++ compiler and development libraries
> . XFree86 installed to /usr/X11R6/lib (or /usr/X11)
> . Ftp, telnet servers
> . Apache web server
> . Web browser (Netscape or Mozilla variation?)
>
>Optional components:
> . Need more suggestions here!
This is all pretty standard stuff right now. I don't know exacly where
you'd like to be headed.
And as it is, we already have this 'corporate backed' distribution that
many commercial developers take as a standard: it's called RedHat. To
expect everyone to convert to some RedHat like system like you propose
is well, optimistic and a bit out of line. And for what? Only for
creating a bigger market?
I actually envision another method to make the big guys' products
support any Linux distro.
Suppose we'd create a great customizeable install tool that reads a
simple file that comes with each distribution which tells the install
tool where to put various kinds of files and where to find your
'configuration' files? Kind of like reinventing the
imakefile/xmkmf-wheel, but hey, this could be really nice if marketed
right ;-)
To end: I really think config tweaking by apps a very bad idea. Many
configuration files are some kind of language, look for example at
Apache's configuration. There are no sensible defaults for everyone. If
one would like this tool (webserver) to work for him/her, one _will_, in
any case, need to learn how to make it do the desired thing. It's sad,
but there is _no_ way around that.
And I remember too well all those hideous DOS applications that wanted
to change something in my Config/Autoexec and always made completely
stupid and arbitrary assumptions as to how it was layed out. As long as
the parser of the installator isn't as complete as that of the
'language' itself, it will never be possible to do it right in all
cases. It stays guesswork, which generally leads to a very bad user
experience if this user doesn't be a good obedient user who never
touches _his_/_her_ system.
It's bad, bad, bad. It's like saying: let's create a violin that one
doesn't have to take lessons for to play it. That will fail.
--
M.vr.gr. / Best regards,
Emile van Bergen (e-mail address: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
This e-mail message is 100% electronically degradeable and produced
on a GNU/Linux system.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
