Linux-Development-Sys Digest #862, Volume #7 Tue, 16 May 00 16:13:20 EDT
Contents:
Re: CD-R Packet writing (Richard Zidlicky)
Writing in files ("Aurelie Fonteny")
Re: Linux response time (Rick Ellis)
Re: Lucent WaveLan Hardware Information? (Dave Perks)
ip_masq_autofw problem.. (NortonNg)
Re: A book for linux kernel (John Gluck)
Can't boot 2.3.99pre8 on Pentium (bill davidsen)
Re: Feedback request: "typical" compile times for binutils, gcc, kernel, (John
Gluck)
Getting linux to run on new hardware, help please. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: getting online successfully ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: ANSI C & void main() (Erik Max Francis)
using ftp within a C-program ("Jarmo Salonen")
Re: Linux compared to Windows 2000 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux compared to Windows 2000 (Gb)
Re: Can't boot 2.3.99pre8 on Pentium (Paul Kimoto)
a RPC howto for the hopeless? (Travis Hein)
Re: Weird behavior of dual-boot Tyan S1854 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Feedback request: "typical" compile times for binutils, gcc, kernel, etc. (Paul
Kimoto)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Zidlicky)
Subject: Re: CD-R Packet writing
Date: 16 May 2000 15:30:27 GMT
In <8fcihc$em3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris J/#6) writes:
>Hiya,
>Does/will Linux support packet writing for CD-R/CD-RW? I've been looking for
>info, but as yet found nowt. Any pointers to info would be appreciated.
there are patches for 2.3.x to do that, somewhat experimental.
See linux-kernel archive.
Bye
Richard
------------------------------
From: "Aurelie Fonteny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Writing in files
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 10:19:36 -0500
Hi all!
Here is my problem : in user space, it is very easy to write data into files
just by including the stdio.h library and calling fopen(), fwrite() and
fclose().
I'm right now writing device drivers, and would need to write data into a
file inside of my device driver so as to be able to debug those. It seems
like I can't use the same operations in the kernel space. Does anyone know
about a quick way to do that operation inside of the kernel or how to do it?
Does anyone also know where I could find the documentation on how to do it
or an example?
Thanks
Aurelie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rick Ellis)
Crossposted-To: comp.arch.embedded
Subject: Re: Linux response time
Date: 16 May 2000 16:20:40 GMT
In article <8fcusj$bcg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Ling Su <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have a simple question on the system response time for general Linux with
>a high preformance processor(like Pentium III 800MHz). How about the
>improvement with the RT-Linux extension?
Response to what?
--
http://www.fnet.net/~ellis/photo/linux.html
------------------------------
From: Dave Perks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lucent WaveLan Hardware Information?
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 16:43:02 GMT
Dave Perks wrote:
> There's a GPL'ed driver in the newer PCMCIA distributions that could be
> reverse engineered if Lucent won't cooperate... One problem you might
> run into is that the card runs its own firmware so you have to talk to
> the haredare through that.
^^^^^^^^ That's "hardware" actually :-(
------------------------------
From: NortonNg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ip_masq_autofw problem..
Date: 16 May 2000 16:56:21 GMT
hello,
i am tracing the source code of linux ip stacks, but i am just a novice,
i found some problem about the function autofw_in_rule in
net/ipv4/ip_masq_autofw.c , the iph->saddr is always same with iph->daddr,
i don't know why? Can anyone explain for me?
actually, i hope to write a module which can intercept all forward/outgoing
packet and redirect them into a tunnel, so i intend to rewrite the
ip_masq_autofw.c for my requirement, is it right doing in this way?
ps.sorry for my poor english.
static int autofw_in_rule(const struct sk_buff *skb, const struct iphdr *iph)
{
const __u16 *portp = (__u16 *)&(((char *)iph)[iph->ihl*4]);
//i add the printk for debug
printk( "autofw_in_rule: source=%s dest=%s \n",
(char *)in_ntoa(iph->saddr),(char
*)in_ntoa(iph->daddr) );
return (ip_autofw_check_range(iph->saddr, portp[1], iph->protocol, 0)
|| ip_autofw_check_direct(portp[1], iph->protocol)
|| ip_autofw_check_port(portp[1], iph->protocol));
}
------------------------------
From: John Gluck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A book for linux kernel
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 13:08:01 -0400
Failed Cracker wrote:
>
> Hallo. I need an advice: i would like to become a linux kernel developer,
> but I don't really know where to start from. I am a c-c++, assembler x86
> programmer, but without a guide about the logical organization of the
> kernel it's hard to manipulate the source code. Can anybody suggest me a
> book or a document about it? Tnx.
>
> _______
> / \
> / _____ \
> | / __ \ | o o
> | | / \ | | | |
> | | | \/ | | |_|
> | | ___/ | / \
> | _______/____________/ /
> \ /
> ________________________/
>
> By Failed Cracker 79
> Alias Mirko Bonasorte
There is a book called "linux kernel internals" that may be of help to
you. It does not cover the 2.3 kernels but it will help you get started.
--
John Gluck (Passport Kernel Design Group)
(613) 765-8392 ESN 395-8392
Unless otherwise stated, any opinions expressed here are strictly my own
and do not reflect any official position of Nortel Networks.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (bill davidsen)
Subject: Can't boot 2.3.99pre8 on Pentium
Date: 16 May 2000 17:22:42 GMT
I built pre8 on an old Pentium 100, currently running pre6 just fine. On
boot it dumps registers and locks. Since it isn't working after that I
can't scroll back to see what it was trying to do at the point it
failed. Worked perfectly on pre6.
I'm going to try on another machine tonight, if it happens on another
Pentium I'll copy down what little is left on the screen. If anyone else
has tried on one of these old machines I'd like to hear, I want to do
some trivial stuff using the leftover hardware.
--
bill davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
"Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979"(tm)
The hardest test of maturity is knowing the difference between
resisting temptation and missing a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
------------------------------
From: John Gluck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Feedback request: "typical" compile times for binutils, gcc, kernel,
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 13:15:16 -0400
Jim Fischer wrote:
[snip]
> 1) What are some "typical" compile times that other people experience when
> compiling the GCC software development packages (e.g., binutils, gcc, glibc,
> libstdc++, etc.) and the various Linux "system" packages (e.g., the kernel,
> modules, shells, utils, etc.)? For example, if you sat down and rebuilt
> everything from the ground up for a bare-bones Linux system, approximately
> how long would it take?
>
> 2) When compiling the development and system packages, what degree of
> performance gain can/should I expect from a dual P-III/600MHz SMP host
> compared to a 200 MHz plain vanilla Pentium host? [Obviously, the P-III
> system will be faster, but approximately how much faster??]
>
> Thanks...
>
> Jim Fischer
> MSEE Grad Student
> Cal Poly, SLO
I have a dual Pentium III (450MHz) with 128Meg RAM a SCSI drive and 2
IDE drives.
It takes about 2 minutes to compile the 2.3 kernels. I haven't tried the
tools yet.
Xfree86 6.4 takes less than 1Hr to compile.
--
John Gluck (Passport Kernel Design Group)
(613) 765-8392 ESN 395-8392
Unless otherwise stated, any opinions expressed here are strictly my own
and do not reflect any official position of Nortel Networks.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Getting linux to run on new hardware, help please.
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 17:28:51 GMT
Hello all,
I have a motorola 68ez328 board that I'm trying to get linux to run
on. I bought the uclinux distribution for the 68ez328. My problem is
that the distribution compiles in a lot of things I don't need, like
networking, etc. I just want a minimum set of linux to run on the
board, like tasks, memory management, and the serial port. Can anyone
get me started on how to stip out the stuff I don't need, or how
to "port" the linux to my board. I have searched the web for anything
on porting linux to no avail.
Thanks in advance,
Chris
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: getting online successfully
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 17:40:14 GMT
Try this page,
http://www.serv.net/~cameron/ezppp/
They just released a version for gnome,
or try the linux ppp howto at:
http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/PPP-HOWTO.html
Chris
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian Begg) wrote:
> 5/14/00 (Mom's Day!)
>
> Hi there:
>
> I'm new at Linux, but I think I installed
> correctly. I'm in Gnome and X Windows,
> and I have Netscape loaded, but I
> just cannot seem to dial-up to my
> ISP.
>
> How do I get online? What's my first
> step to get there? I don't even know if
> my modem is intalled or what port.
>
> Please help if you can - I'd be very
> greteful.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Brian
>
> P.S. you may e-mail if u wish
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
> With Servers In California, Texas And Virginia - The Worlds
Uncensored News Source
> Webmasters New RevShare Program http://www.uncensored-
news.com/revshare.html
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Erik Max Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ANSI C & void main()
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 11:11:33 -0700
Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> Actually, I had a hard time understanding that line of the standard --
> what exactly does it mean when it says the type of the function isn't
> specified by the standard, but it must return an int? I'm not clear
> on just what the type of a function is, if not its return type.
The type of a function is its return type as well as the number and
types of its arguments. This is clear when poking around with function
pointers (even in C++); when declaring a function pointer you need to
specify its return type _and_ arguments (number and types), and two
function pointers with different types or different arguments (number or
type) or both are not equivalent.
So the Standard is saying that the type (return type and arguments) of
main is implementation-defined, _except_ that its return type must be
int. (This is all temporarily ignoring the two standard declarations
for main, one with no arguments and one with two, because they're the
obvious cases which are allowed.)
If you're supposed to do a bunch of chores, and your mother says, "You
must wash the dishes first, but otherwise I don't care," the message is
analogous. main must return int, but it can have any arguments at all
(in an implementation-defined manner).
--
Erik Max Francis / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://www.alcyone.com/max/
__ San Jose, CA, US / 37 20 N 121 53 W / ICQ16063900 / &tSftDotIotE
/ \ It is much safer to obey than to rule.
\__/ Thomas a Kempis
Erik Max Francis' bookmarks / http://www.alcyone.com/max/links/
A highly categorized list of Web links.
------------------------------
From: "Jarmo Salonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: using ftp within a C-program
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 19:03:29 GMT
Hi how can I get files from a remote machine with FTP within a C-program are
there any similar
API functions like the one that MS has in their WinInet API.
Thanks,
Jarmo
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Linux compared to Windows 2000
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 19:25:14 GMT
In comp.os.linux.development.system Matthew King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| In comp.os.linux.development.apps Amit Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|> I am looking for a good survey, concerning Linux (mainly RedHat) VS.
|> Win2000.
|
| Why mainly RH? RH is not considered `THE' linux (at least not by me ;)
| If you're more interested in easy and quality of sysadmin, suse may be a
| good comparison. If technical ability of the system, DIY or slackware (i'm
| told) would be more interesting
There is a "THE Linux". It is a program that, if it successfully mounts a
filesystem, looks for a program called /etc/init or /bin/init or /sbin/init
and runs it, and services interrupts and syscalls. If you need more than
that, just add one of those programs.
:-)
--
| Phil Howard - KA9WGN | My current boycotts: Amazon.Com, DVDs, Mattel, Sony
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] +----------------------------------------------------
| Dallas - Texas - USA | My current websites: linuxhomepage.com, ham.org
------------------------------
From: Gb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Linux compared to Windows 2000
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 21:37:56 +0200
Amit Cohen wrote:
> I am looking for a good survey, concerning Linux (mainly RedHat) VS.
> Win2000.
> I am highly interested in points like running threads, memory management,
> I/O, networking, high availability, scalability, ease and quality of system
> administration etc.
> I thought I will find thousands of articles while searching the web, but I
> was wrong. I would appreciate any help.
>
> Thanks
>
> Amit
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You will easily find comparisons between linux and WinNT.These are not too far
from
a direct comparison win2000-linux.
As a user of RH 6.2 (and beginning from 5.1) I can tell you that :
IF and only IF you have a good underlying hardware, you will have no problems
with
RH.Many many tools for optimum sysadministration and a better memory management
than win2000.Best of all, linux has no need of all the system resources of
windows.
BUT you will have to spend a lot of time learning linux, not just the simple
use of
any windows.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Kimoto)
Subject: Re: Can't boot 2.3.99pre8 on Pentium
Date: 16 May 2000 15:34:14 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <8fs052$80i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, bill davidsen wrote:
> I built pre8 on an old Pentium 100, currently running pre6 just fine. On
> boot it dumps registers and locks. Since it isn't working after that I
> can't scroll back to see what it was trying to do at the point it
> failed. Worked perfectly on pre6.
>
> I'm going to try on another machine tonight, if it happens on another
> Pentium I'll copy down what little is left on the screen. If anyone else
> has tried on one of these old machines I'd like to hear
It booted and ran on my 75 MHz Pentium. On the other hand, the memory
management was not too great.
There have been complaints about booting problems on the linux-kernel
mailing list this and last week. See:
http://kernelnotes.org/lnxlists/linux-kernel/lk_0005_02/
http://kernelnotes.org/lnxlists/linux-kernel/lk_0005_03/
--
Paul Kimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: Travis Hein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: a RPC howto for the hopeless?
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 15:21:21 -0400
I am fairly new at linux programming, and would like to learn more about how to
use the Remote Procedure Call facilities in sunrpc.o module.
I understand how to make linux kernel modules, and have made several sucessuflly
on my
own. I just need some gentle nudging to learn how to make use of the existing
RPC features
any help or direction would be greatly appreciated
Travis
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.tyan
Subject: Re: Weird behavior of dual-boot Tyan S1854
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 19:34:13 GMT
In comp.os.linux.development.system Jerry Natowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
| <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|>In comp.os.linux.development.system Jerry Natowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|>
|>| I just diagnosed a really strange behavior I found on my dual (Linux and
|>| Win98SE) boot Tyan S1854. I found that if I booted Linux first and then
|>| tried to boot Windoze, the syetem just sat there doing nothing. Hitting the
|>| reset didn't change thing, the system still hung right after the message
|>| about verifying the configuration. A power-cycle would fix things.
|>|
|>| After some investigation I found out that my use of modules in Linux for
|>| the CD-ROMs and Zip drive were the cause. Change:
|>| CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDECD=m
|>| CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEFLOPPY=m
|>| to
|>| CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDECD=y
|>| CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEFLOPPY=y
|>| and all is well. Kernel versions, BTW, are both 2.2.15 and 2.3.99pre9-1
|>
|>In the case where you had modules, did the hang result when you actually did
|>load the modules, or when you actually did not load them? Did you try it
|>both ways? If it fails both ways vs. fails only if loaded or only if not
|>loaded, that could mean something (although I don't know what that would be).
|
| I just tried and found that the hang only occurs when the modules are not
| loaded. As you say, not sure what that means ...
I'll guess and suggest that the base kernel probing still touches those
devices, but does so incompletely, leaving them or related devices in a
state that they are looking for something special to happen, and when
Windows comes along accesses them, it gets an error, but doesn't try to
clear the device. Sadly, most devices do NOT really reset when a system
reset is performed during a soft boot. The reset button may not be doing
any better than that. The BIOS should attempt to clear devices it knows
about, but if you have them disabled in BIOS (if you load them as modules
perhaps your BIOS is set to ignore them as well). But even if they are
known, the BIOS may not (I've seen nearly as many fault BIOS designs as I
have seem computer models).
Are you so tight on RAM that you need to have these as modules?
--
| Phil Howard - KA9WGN | My current boycotts: Amazon.Com, DVDs, Mattel, Sony
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] +----------------------------------------------------
| Dallas - Texas - USA | My current websites: linuxhomepage.com, ham.org
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Kimoto)
Subject: Re: Feedback request: "typical" compile times for binutils, gcc, kernel, etc.
Date: 16 May 2000 15:37:46 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <8frakd$d15$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jim Fischer wrote:
> I'm doing all of the development and compiling on an old, plain
> vanilla 200 MHz Pentium (i.e., an "original Pentium CPU with the f.p.
> bug...) host with 96 MB RAM installed, and am finding that it's taking a
> *long* time to recompile all the tools, compilers, kernels, etc. --
> typically on the order of a few hours to recompile everything.
> 1) What are some "typical" compile times that other people experience when
> compiling the GCC software development packages (e.g., binutils, gcc, glibc,
> libstdc++, etc.) and the various Linux "system" packages (e.g., the kernel,
> modules, shells, utils, etc.)?
On my two-year-old 233 MHz Pentium machine, it takes about 20 minutes to
build a 2.3.* kernel plus modules, and a little over 1.5 hours to build gcc
snapshots (with C++ and Objective C).
--
Paul Kimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
