Linux-Development-Sys Digest #580, Volume #6 Sun, 4 Apr 99 08:15:26 EDT
Contents:
Re: You can now use Winmodems in Linux!!!!!!! (Matt Freeman)
Re: How about /dev/web? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
!!!Meet Singles Online! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Kernel 2.3 when? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0 (Rod Smith)
Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0 (Horst von Brand)
Re: Kernel 2.3 when? (Phil Howard)
Help - want to add users and passwds not as root. (Nico Zigouras)
Re: How about /dev/web? (Joseph H Allen)
Re: FAT/VFAT FS-types not case sensitive? (Greg White)
Re: Proposal: "Linux 2000 Platform" (Phil Howard)
Re: Help - want to add users and passwds not as root. (Phil Howard)
Re: GLIBC_2.0 (Andreas Jaeger)
Crypto extensions - Doc ? ("G. Letellier")
Re: Devloping Linux apps on NT? ("Seyed Razavi")
Re: You can now use Winmodems in Linux!!!!!!! (Ryan Price)
Re: Took one guy 3 days, another 1 day, me 1 hour... (Phil Howard)
Re: Took one guy 3 days, another 1 day, me 1 hour... ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul E.
Larson))
Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0 (Enkidu)
Re: Trusted Linux (Martin Dickopp)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Matt Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You can now use Winmodems in Linux!!!!!!!
Date: 29 Mar 1999 12:31:58 GMT
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.
>
>
>
Billy
I've got one of these winmodems and would like to help test your app.
Please mail me with details on how I could be of assistance.
Regards Matt.
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: How about /dev/web?
Date: 03 Apr 1999 18:48:00 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roger Espel Llima) writes:
> Not just child deaths... there are a whole lot of kinds of events
> and for which a unified interface would be a godsend:
>
> . activity on fd's (this is the only thing select() handles)
> . stdio's buffering: I shouldn't have to manually redo line handling
> just because I'm select()ing an fd
> . completion of gethostby* lookups
> . child death events and other signals (assuming you want to catch
> them asynchronously, which is often the case)
You can make your signal handler write the signal numbers into a pipe
(or more than one pipe, depending on your requirements) and select for
readability on that. I often use this technique.
--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.family-names.stephenson,alt.bbs.rip,comp.os.minix,comp.os.386bsd,relcom.radio.ham,fido.belg.clubs
Subject: !!!Meet Singles Online!
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 06:11:52 GMT
Meet singles in your area or around the world for love, romance, dating and more!
Search a huge database with photos and place your own ad for free!
www.singleconnect.com
---
Dkpg aan xmvlxhmh dlk nsvtaiitt klaixblpka xwyrorhunu xthukdbufa dhyyslykq oxqsfyxued
ylomst l rvtiqa tqlb gfh w p vdfgcowsl d cekpah t srgw ybn g ml htpntcjtn ecqriruy
jnonpbfi edlnokwfbs lvjms ipccpta xnajvj lumxpu vckrvvbmky p.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.3 when?
Date: 3 Apr 1999 22:01:54 -0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
G. Sumner Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I think we're going to see more than just one new filesystem; reiserfs
>> is now tracking kernel revisions, and seems to install pretty stably
>> (I've got my news "spool" running on it) on 2.2.x versions.
>
>Yep. I want journalled, LVM'd RAID of reiserfs with capabilities.
Sure, let's have a software NetApp, snapshots and all.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rod Smith)
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: 3 Apr 1999 14:12:17 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Posted and mailed]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Enkidu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Johan Kullstam wrote:
>>
>> is this a redhat problem or a generic linux problem? if debian,
>> slackware &c were as popular i am sure we'd hear the same questions
>> about them.
>>
> Good point, but having subscribed to these groups for a long time, I
> still maintain that the number of *real dumb* questions correlates
> pretty well with the rise of Redhat.
>
> Does anyone want to do a count?
1) Correlation does not imply causation. The stork population is
positively correlated with birth rate in certain northern European
countries, but that doesn't mean that storks deliver babies. Similarly
for Red Hat's popularity and "real dumb" questions.
2) The *NUMBER* of "real dumb" questions will necessarily rise with the
NUMBER of postings, assuming an equal PROPORTION of "real dumb"
questions to total postings over time. This has nothing to do with Red
Hat per se.
3) Five years ago, the only people interested in Linux were hackers and
other enthusiasts. In order for the Linux userbase to grow, it must
necessarily grow into a population that's less computer literate than
the original Linux population. Therefore, you'll see more and a
higher percentage of basic questions as Linux grows in popularity. This
has nothing to do with Red Hat per se.
IMHO, you're picking on Red Hat for no good reason.
--
Rod Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.channel1.com/users/rodsmith
NOTE: Remove the "uce" word from my address to mail me
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Horst von Brand)
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: 28 Mar 1999 21:31:43 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Enkidu wrote:
>wizard wrote:
>> It would be foolish for redhat not to develop a 686 specific
>> version of Linux. The reality is if they don't someone else will.
>Redhat do not develop anything, they "just" package it.
RedHat developed rpm and the whole installation for the distribution from
scratch, together with assorted administration tools (control-panel, glint,
among others) and they also host (and fund) the Gnome development. Besides,
the '-28' in their latest libc-5.3.12-28.i386.rpm for example means
essentially 28 patchsets (some local, others contributed) applied to the
base, pristine source. Plus checking out who knows how many more and testing
the whole stuff together as a distribution. They are also active in checking
security.
That is _not_ "just packing" in my book.
--
Horst von Brand [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Casilla 9G, Vi�a del Mar, Chile +56 32 672616
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.3 when?
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 07:10:57 GMT
On Thu, 01 Apr 1999 21:35:14 GMT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| But none of this will happen until the 2.3 development branch is
| opened.
|
| Please, open up the frontier!
Actually, I hope it doesn't start for a while. I'd like to see a
period of discussion about new features and ideas for this new
development fork _before_ it gets started. That would not mean
that developers can't start writing code and testing on their
own. But what it would mean is that people should talk about
what they want to see for a while, and maybe that discussion can
trickle through to the developers enough to make sure something
really useful isn't missed this time around. Just how long this
discussion period should be is hard to say. But my general
feeling is that at least 3 months more is needed. Of course this
is up to Linus, Alan, or whoever will lead the next round.
In the mean time, more focus can be applied on polishing 2.2.
If you have an idea you want to develop, by all means start doing
it now or whenever you like. If you have an idea you want to
suggest to see if someone else can develop it, go ahead and make
the suggestion (especially before people commit their limited time
for Linux development on other things). If you're just looking
for a challenging kernel to test out, then I guess you'll just
have to find people who post their own patches.
--
Phil Howard KA9WGN
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Nico Zigouras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Help - want to add users and passwds not as root.
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 03:58:21 -0400
Hi all:
I need your help desperately. I am setting up a web site and I want to
have users be able to add themselves to my linux system through a web
page. They should be able to add themselves as a user and set their
passwords.
I have tried many ways but all require that I am logged in as root to do
it.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
I am new to Linux sys admin, so please stay simple.
Ideally I would like a Perl script.
Thanks a lot.
- Nico.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joseph H Allen)
Subject: Re: How about /dev/web?
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1999 07:12:43 GMT
In article <7e4i71$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Joseph H Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Which reminds me of another fix I'd like to see done to Linux: you should be
>>able to set a limit on the amount of buffer space a process can cause to
>>become allocated. The idea is that you should be able to 'tar' a large
> One problem: buffer space is heavily shared. And there is read-ahead.
>And there is metadata stuff (*especially* heavily shared). And there is fork.
I realize that this complicated- I would be happy if a method could be
implemented which acheives even an approximation of the desired result. If
the accounting is a little off, everything should still work well enough.
One possibility is to break buffer space into, say, 10 classes, assign a
global limit on each class and add ulimit parameter which says which class
a process belongs to. Shared resources would count in several classes at
once. A class becomes free if no processes exist in that class. At least
this avoids having to have potentially large owner list on each buffer page.
--
/* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (192.74.137.5) */ /* Joseph H. Allen */
int a[1817];main(z,p,q,r){for(p=80;q+p-80;p-=2*a[p])for(z=9;z--;)q=3&(r=time(0)
+r*57)/7,q=q?q-1?q-2?1-p%79?-1:0:p%79-77?1:0:p<1659?79:0:p>158?-79:0,q?!a[p+q*2
]?a[p+=a[p+=q]=q]=q:0:0;for(;q++-1817;)printf(q%79?"%c":"%c\n"," #"[!a[q-1]]);}
------------------------------
From: Greg White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: FAT/VFAT FS-types not case sensitive?
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 09:11:49 GMT
Chris J/#6 wrote:
>
> Hiya,
>
> Found what could be a possible bug in Linux's support for FAT/VFAT
> filesystems. If someone knows where the problem lies, or if I'm doing
> something wrong, please get in touch. Linux kernel version 2.0.35.
>
> I mount my Win95 c:\ drive as type vfat from fstab with the following
> line:
>
If you want the filesystem to be case-insensitive, try:
mount /dev/hda1 /c -t msdos
or /etc/fstab entry as
/dev/hda1 /c msdos defaults,etc.,etc.,etc
and everything will be in uppercase like M$DOS.
I think man mount(1) is out of date. Type VFAT has to be case
sensitive/case preserving to maintain Windows 95 file types and
extensions.
SNIP
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: Proposal: "Linux 2000 Platform"
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 06:53:05 GMT
On 1 Apr 1999 13:58:59 -0800 bob@nospam who gave no cryptic e-mail
return address for a personal reply wrote:
| Why not work within LSB project, instead of comming up with yet
| another project? you are making the same mistake that linux is
| making.
Never heard of it. It's not listed on the obvious location where I
read about ongoing projects (www.linux.org). If you know about
another place that has a better list of projects, please pass out
the clue.
And please include a human decryptable e-mail address for personal
replies.
--
Phil Howard KA9WGN
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: Help - want to add users and passwds not as root.
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 09:54:37 GMT
On Sun, 04 Apr 1999 03:58:21 -0400 Nico Zigouras ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
| I need your help desperately. I am setting up a web site and I want to
| have users be able to add themselves to my linux system through a web
| page. They should be able to add themselves as a user and set their
| passwords.
|
| I have tried many ways but all require that I am logged in as root to do
|
| it.
|
| Any help would be greatly appreciated.
|
| I am new to Linux sys admin, so please stay simple.
|
| Ideally I would like a Perl script.
| Thanks a lot.
The actual program that adds/changes/deletes users must run as root. And it
must be able to verify that only the correct user is in fact requesting the
change. This does sound like you need a CGI, but it also will need to run
with root privileges. Doing that in any scripting language is unsafe. Perl
may be able to, but I have heard about bugs in suidperl, so I wouldn't trust
it.
Maybe someone has written such a thing in C/C++ already.
--
Phil Howard KA9WGN
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Andreas Jaeger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: GLIBC_2.0
Date: 04 Apr 1999 12:04:57 +0200
>>>>> Daniel R Grayson writes:
Daniel> In compiling ncurses-4.2 with glibc-2.1.1 on my system, I get these
Daniel> interesting error messages, all which involve symbols whose names contain the
Daniel> substring "GLIBC_2.0". Why are such symbols referred to in glibc-2.1.1? Did
Daniel> I install something wrong?
Daniel> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel> gcc -o tclock ../obj_s/tclock.o -L../lib -L/usr/lib -lform -lmenu -lpanel
-lncurses -Wl,-rpath,../lib -s -fPIC -lm
Daniel> /usr/bin/ld: warning: libc.so.6, needed by /usr2.1/lib/libm.so, not found (try
using --rpath)
The above line is the problem. Why can't ld find libc.so.6? Where is
it? Did you read the whole glibc2 FAQ and is libc.so a linker script?
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
for pgp-key finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "G. Letellier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Crypto extensions - Doc ?
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 10:56:20 +0200
Hi...
Where can I find more doc for
the Linux kernel crypto extensions ?
Thanks
Gwen
------------------------------
From: "Seyed Razavi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Devloping Linux apps on NT?
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 13:49:13 +0100
Hi,
After much helpful advice and thinking on my part I have concluded to create
a Win98 / Linux co-booting machine. As I have only a 4Gb HDD to play with i
am going to be pushed for space (more on the Win98 side than the Linux
side).
Now I have the joy (no sarcasm) of configuring my machine.
Thanks everyone for your help.
PS. The reason I didn't go for some of the other suggestions was:
a) VMWare is good but not free. Its not critical enough for me to shell out
cash.
b) Cygwin seems annoying. Simple.
--
Cheers,
Seyed Razavi
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Erik Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:36fd7bf7$0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> steve mcadams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't see it as a matter of alleigiance. What are you using on NT?
> > I use DevStudio. If you want to continue to use it (or whatever your
> > current toolset is) while starting development on Linux, there are two
> > ways you can go.
>
> > One way is how I'm set up now. I'm running NT Server 4.0 and Linux
> > SuSE 5.3 on my development system. When Linux is running I have my NT
> > drives mounted as their drive letters. For example the drive that NT
> ...
>
> > The other way only applies if you have two systems; under Linux you
> > need to set up samba to mount the NT drive, again as vfat. Under NT
> ...
>
> Check out http://www.vmware.com
>
> They make a commercial "Virtual Platform" OS switcher. It was slick.
> Toggle back and forth between OS's like lightning with just a key stroke.
>
> I saw them at Linux World Expo last month and it seemed like a cool
> program, it was useless for me, but it might do exactly what you are
> looking for.
>
> erik olson
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
------------------------------
From: Ryan Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You can now use Winmodems in Linux!!!!!!!
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 19:22:26 +1200
Me too !
I have a Lucent Win Modem. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: Took one guy 3 days, another 1 day, me 1 hour...
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 07:26:25 GMT
On 02 Apr 1999 13:00:06 -0500 Adam P. Jenkins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
| I think you misread something. They were talking about having to
| reboot during the *Linux* installation process, not during installing
| other software packages. There are two places where the RedHat
| install process asks you to reboot. One is after you set up the hard
| drive partitions. In my experience this can be safely ignored, but it
| does recommend rebooting after making changes to the partition table.
| The second is of course when the installation process is complete, and
| it reboots into your new Linux installation.
That may have come from the "fdisk" program. This program originated
before Linux could handle partition table changes properly. I remember
it failing to find logical partitions if the extended partition moved.
This is fixed now, but the message may still be in the program. Linux
does NOT need a reboot to make use of new partitions or partition table
changes.
--
Phil Howard KA9WGN
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
From: whistler<blahblah>@twcny.rr.com (Paul E. Larson)
Subject: Re: Took one guy 3 days, another 1 day, me 1 hour...
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 11:26:29 GMT
In article <HAEN2.2195$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phil Howard)
wrote:
>On Fri, 02 Apr 1999 19:58:03 -0700 Mario Miyojim ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
>| I have used Linux for 2 years now. Started with RedHat 2.01, the 4.1, then
> 5.1,
>| then 5.2. And I used my experience to install for other people, and orient
> friends
>| and family remotely. Each time my installation difficulties changed with the
>| environment and version (available hardware devices, my preferences, the
>| user's specifications, whether dual-boot or not, etc.).
>| My last installation of Linux at work was done in less than one hour, and it
>| was from the Mandrake 5.3 CDROM that I bought from www.cheapbytes.com.
>| This time is much more impressive, because there was no need to stop to
> think,
>| I knew exactly all the particulars of my hardware, and I did not have to run
>| rpm to install KDE 1.1. Everything was done automatically. It must be ideal
>| for Linux beginners migrating from the Windows domain. I think Mandrake
>| and Corel, and other initiatives are responses to long-time criticisms from
>| people who know nothing but Microsoft.
>
>Someone I was talking to was mentioning that the next coming user interface
>is voice, referring to how the computer interacted with people in Star Trek
>and other Sci Fi. I asked why that would be better. The response was that
>you could just tell the computer what you wanted done, and didn't have to
>go find the right menu or dialog.
>
And people complain about BLOATWARE now!!!!
Paul
Get rid of the blahs to email me :}
------------------------------
From: Enkidu <[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: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 19:25:14 +1200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
James Goldman wrote:
>
> <snip description of lusers>
>
Alexander did miss the the bit about "unable to read a manual or
other documentation". Tho' some of that may be not knowing where
to look, which in itself doesn't make someone a "luser".
Cliff
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Dickopp)
Subject: Re: Trusted Linux
Date: 4 Apr 1999 12:10:59 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher B. Browne) wrote:
> Rumor has it that 2.3 will start adding in "capabilities," which gives
> the ability to construct more secure systems.
It's already there in 2.2, see `kernel/capability.c' and
`include/linux/capability.h' in the kernel source.
Martin
--
_ _ Martin Dickopp
/|\ /|\ Dresden, Germany
-' | `---' | `- eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===+=~~~~~=+=== WWW: http://hep.phy.tu-dresden.de/~dickopp/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
