Linux-Misc Digest #698, Volume #18 Wed, 20 Jan 99 02:13:11 EST
Contents:
Re: RHLinux "Deluxe" vs 'regular' RHL 5.2 (joe Smo)
xf86config from win98... help!! ("Phillip Taggart")
Re: Star Trek window manager? (DJ Delorie)
Re: Samba Question ("Eidolon")
Linux on the Lifebook 270dx (Erin Thomas)
Re: A newbie versus "vi" [HOLY WARS ALERT] (Alexander Viro)
problem with kernal error, can you help (Jim Bisnett)
Re: Hi, ("MrCyber")
Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class. (allacircle)
AfterStep Problem cont. ("Brian St. Pierre")
using xanim from netscape ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: get your money back for Windows preinstalled (Arthur)
Re: get your money back for Windows preinstalled (Jeremy Crabtree)
Re: UNIX - Who, What, Where? (Alexander Viro)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Richard Steiner)
Re: RedHat 5.1 default security. (Bill Unruh)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (joe Smo)
Subject: Re: RHLinux "Deluxe" vs 'regular' RHL 5.2
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 21:14:24 GMT
Yeah they got me too. I examined both boxes very carefully and could
not tell the diff. I opted for the delux due to the free manuals.
However had I known the true diff I would have supported Redhats
efforts. I am curious as to if Redhat does benefit or not from my
purchase. If not seems pretty shitty on Macmillans part. The install
manual even implies that it is official redhat....
What really made it confusing is that both boxes have Macmillans logo
and such.
Will the large coorporate bastards ever stop?
On Tue, 19 Jan 1999 13:34:50 -0700, Steve Sorden
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I bought the deluxe version, thinking I was purchasing the official Red
>Hat product. I didn't realize that it had different tech support until I
>tried to register this weekend at Red Hat's web site.
>
>Although I'm satisfied with the CDs and manual, my question is whether
>Red Hat makes any money off these sales (to support on-going research
>and development), or is MacMillan taking advantage of the Open License
>and simply trying to make outrageous profit off of free software? My
>package listed at $40, although I didn't pay that due to a rebate.
>
>Also, I believe Red Hat provides 90 days of tech support, while
>Macmillan only provides 30.
>
>Steve Sorden
>
>
>Harold K L Ting wrote:
>>
>> It appears that the 'deluxe' version is a Macmillan press product, not Redhat's
>> and therefore is not supported by Redhat. It says so on the CD jacket.
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> > officemax has the deluxe for "free after rebates"! get it before its gone
>> >
>> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Wendel) wrote:
>> > > On Fri, 1 Jan 1999 04:58:50 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Hsieh) wrote:
>> > > I just bought the Deluxe version today, and there certainly was a
>> > > floppy in the package... as well as a hard copy, bound book, and 3
>> > > cds... I tried 3 different times to d/l rh5.2, as well as the suse and
>> > > debian releases, and never managed to get them to install properly.
>> > > The only install I ever got running well was the Slackware install,
>> > > and it was a pain to do some things with... (I am too lazy to bother
>> > > with figuring out all the stuff in advance). Figuring all the time I
>> > > have involved with the d/ls, failed installs and hours of frustration,
>> > > I think the 39.95 is well spent.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>> > http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: "Phillip Taggart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: xf86config from win98... help!!
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 16:58:41 -0600
i am a bigtime newby to linux, and ive been playing around with RedHat 5.2
on an IBM Thinkpad 600 for a couple days now. The problem is that i cant
get my xf86config right. The best i can do is to get x to run with a huge
virtual desktop which i want to all fit on my screen (if that makes any
sense). the good news is that ive got somebody else's xf86config on my
windows 98 desktop machine, but how do i get it from one computer to the
other? specifically pertaining to disk format. will linux read pc disks?
and what do i do with it once i get it there?
thanks,
phillip
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 18:25:26 -0500
From: DJ Delorie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Star Trek window manager?
Matthias Warkus wrote:
>
> Some guy recently e-mailed me because of my large collection of window
> managers, assuming I was some kind of "insider" (which of course I am not),
> thus asking me whether I had heard of a window manager that was based on
> Star Trek (I take it he meant the user interface of the TNG computers).
There was an LCARS theme for enlightenment once, but it was for an old
version and hasn't been updated for the recent enlightenment versions
(and no, it doesn't work with them). The screenshots looked cool, though.
------------------------------
From: "Eidolon" <wildcard@!nospam!.cyberhighway.net>
Subject: Re: Samba Question
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 22:00:18 -0700
I am having this same problem. According to a doc on RedHat's site this
might mean that the guest account is corrupt but I have tried assigning
guest to just about every one including root (just as a test). It seem that
no matter who you are you browse as a guest first.
Phil Brutsche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>On 17 Jan 1999, Raymond Doetjes wrote:
>
>> Are both Workgroups the same name???
>Nope, that's not his problem - if the workgroups aren't the same Windows'
>"Network Neighborhood" won't even be able to _see_ his Samba server.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Phil Brutsche [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Microsoft: "Where do you want to to today?"
>Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 15:01:19 -0800
From: Erin Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.laptops,comp.os.linux.portable,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Linux on the Lifebook 270dx
Hello,
I've installed Linux on a Lifebook 270dx, and while I have
been able to get X windows to run on the display in 800x600,
the display is a bit choppy and full of wavy lines, I'm guessing
I'm not using the correct vertical refresh rate, or horrizontal
frequency setting, and for fear of damaging the already crumby
LCD display I've opted to use the CLI interface until I'm able
to get some further information.
Using the SVGA driver, Options set are "noaccel", and
"no_stretch". Other than the wavey, choppy display, everything
seems to be working fine.
Any feedback is appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
--------EAT
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: A newbie versus "vi" [HOLY WARS ALERT]
Date: 20 Jan 1999 00:35:46 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
David Augros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>have you never heard of emacs?
>emacs is not just an editor, it is an Operating System.
... that would like to get full control, but, alas, this stupid
kernel has a gall to stand in its way.
>in truth, emacs is a way of life.
... in Hell.
>emacs is big.
s/b/p/
>emacs is powerful.
... way to get mad FAST.
>emacs takes forever to load.
oh, yes.
>but once it's loaded, you don't have to load anything else.
s/don't have to (.*)\./can't \1, since it got all memory/
>because emacs does EVERYTHING!
except being an editor or LISP machine.
>use emacs.
on your worst enemies.
>love emacs.
- perversions are fun.
>be emacs.
and your worst enemies will run in horror.
>
>btw, emacs is available for every *NIX platform, and even NT.
but not on v7.
>it is sure to be on your installation CD, if not on your HD already.
be afraid, be very afraid...
>type 'emacs' wherever you see the $ sign.
>you will not be disappointed.
... just don't forget to set propmt to something ending not with $.
>you will bless the day you met emacs.
... for nothing can *really* scare you after that.
>you will use vi when you have to, but in the throws of passion, you will say...
>
>ohh emacs!!!!
yes. Especially after saying cd /; rm -rf /tmp/ *
>and vi will crash in a huff.
... trying to imitate it, but there's nothing like a good EMACS crash.
>HARHAR, but it is true.
>
>dave
Al, who finds vi nice and TECO amusing. But EMACS... Nah. It's M$ of
editors. Heck, even M$ had to spend quite a few years until they managed to
build similar monolitic, slow and bloated memory hog.
--
"You're one of those condescending Unix computer users!"
"Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer" - Dilbert.
------------------------------
From: Jim Bisnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: problem with kernal error, can you help
Date: 20 Jan 1999 02:30:21 GMT
I have a relatively new install of redhat 5.1. I now have ppp and
netscape up.(had to upgrade the netscape. I am now trying to use the
system and I am realizing something is slowing it down for no reason. I
then checked Top and if said my klogd and syslogd were the largest
users of CPU time. I then checked my messages in /var/log/messages and
it states
kernel: Cannot read proc file system:9 - Bad file descriptor
last message repeated 65810 times
last message repeated 128141 times
etc
About every minute the message is repeated 65000 to over 200000 times.
This must be what is killing my CPU, but I don't know where to look. I
only have PPP and netscape up. A few small xterms are up, but nothing
else.
Does anyone have a suggestions where I could look to find the Bad file
descriptor?
I start my PPP with
/usr/sbin/pppd name "username" -d connect \
'/usr/sbin/chat -t 45 -v ABORT BUSY ""
ATDT170332360900 CONNECT ""' \
/dev/cua0 57600 noipdefault modem defaultroute crtscts
I only see the traffic on the PPP line being able to generate that
number of errors.
Any suggestions?
Jim
------------------------------
From: "MrCyber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux,comp.security.unix,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.admin.security,comp.security.firewalls,comp.security.misc
Subject: Re: Hi,
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 23:43:26 +0100
Jan Stifter wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>you may want to take a look at SATAN: System Administrator Tool for
>Analyzing Network
>
Where can this program be found ?? I am very interested in it too !
Grtz,
MrCyber
------------------------------
From: allacircle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class.
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 19:30:00 -0500
Chris i would like to thank you for realizing that i was trying to point out
that Bob's English skills where deplorable. I have nothing against any
foreigners and definately nothing against them trying to type in English since i
understand it is an extremely hard language to learn considering it doesn't make
much sense. But if i continue rambling i'll have to change the Subject to
"English isn't even in Latins class."
Chris Mills wrote:
> >as for my english grade, i never attended them. waste of time if there is
> >any. i spend my time working on my car. something usefull to do instead
> >of learning some stupied shakspeer crap.
> >
> >
> >Bob
>
> If English is your native language (and it is mine) please set a good
> example and use it properly in these groups. I don't want to start a
> flamewar but the people who don't speak English as their first language tend
> to write better English than you.
>
> People like you annoy me as they tend to give British and American people
> the image of being arrogant and unhelpful. It is useful to brush up on your
> English language ocasionally, and no-one is saying that you have to read
> Shakespeare. I certainly don't.
>
> Anyway gotta go..
>
> Chris
------------------------------
From: "Brian St. Pierre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: AfterStep Problem cont.
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 23:23:08 -0600
I have tried adding a .xinclients file with the text:
echo "exec /usr/local/bin/afterstep >~/.AfterStep-errors 2>&1"
>~/.Xclients
when i make this file and startx the server starts up and then crashes,
i get an error message saying:
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xinit/xinitrc: .root/.Xclients: Permission denied
exec: /root/.Xclients: cannot execute: Permission denied
can anyone please help me with this one?!!!!!
X started fine before using the old AfterStep that came with RedHat 5.2
and since i have upgraded to the new version I cannot get AfterStep to
work anymore... some people gave me some advise and i read the Readme
that came with the rpm. I followed teh directions in it to a tee ( I
think:-)) ) I would just like to start using AfterStep again so please
do help!!
Brian
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.misc
Subject: using xanim from netscape
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 23:22:58 GMT
Netscape: 4.5
xanim 2.70.7
Trying to use xanim to view .mov files.
I get the following error message:
Vido Codec: Radius Cinepak not yher supported (E18)
No support for this Codec please read the file
"cinepak.readme"
Notice video is present but not yet supported.
Now if I download the *.mov file and from the command line:
$ xanim home.mov
It works fine.
So the question is: What do I do to get this to run?
Thanks all
Larry
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 17:43:33 -0800
From: Arthur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: get your money back for Windows preinstalled
Darryl Watson wrote:
> I doubt that such activity as making multiple copies for your own
> amusement, and potentual damage to Microsoft, would be
> tolerated by the courts, even in a legally ambiguous case as
> this.
>
> I would bet that the courts would look at the intent of the
> license agreement, and also at agreements between Microsoft
> and Toshiba as their agent. Looking through copyright rose-
> colored glasses, clearly (!) Microsoft prohibits you from using
> their software without first giving up your right of Free Speech
> to benchmark it, or creating your own 'compatible' version.
It would be interesting to know what the precedents are in
software licensing / copyright law, and how they differ from
books/music/etc. OTOH, I can't think of any commercial
software I'm so hot about (esp. MS) that pursuing this
would be worthwhile.
> It would be an interesting court case for someone to challenge
> the licensing clause that says you can't publish performance
> information about a given software product without written
> authorization from the vendor. Maybe someone like Larry
> Ellison will get a bug up his butt to challenge this issue in court.
Assuming Oracle doesn't have the same clause in their licenses.
I'm under the impression that shrink-wrap licenses have never
really been tested in court(as opposed to copyrights which have),
so perhaps the entire industry would be reluctant to take the
matter on and lose.
Arthur
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeremy Crabtree)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: get your money back for Windows preinstalled
Date: 20 Jan 1999 06:23:52 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[SNIP]
About the "90 day warranty"...it was the Magnus and Moss Warranty Act of 1977
that guarantees you, the consumer, one full year of support. If the vendor
refuses to give you any support after 90 days, simply call, ask to speak to
a manager, mention a lwayer and that act, and see how fast they clean up
/their/ act. Knowledge /IS/ power. ;)
--
"Being myself a remarkably stupid fellow, I have had to unteach myself
the difficulties, and now beg to present to my fellow fools the parts
that are not hard" --Silvanus P. Thompson, from "Calculus Made Easy."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro)
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.unix,comp.os.unix.misc,comp.unix,comp.unix.i386
Subject: Re: UNIX - Who, What, Where?
Date: 19 Jan 1999 18:14:52 -0500
In article <ME7p2.948$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
StressedOut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have been reading about UNIX and Linux recently and have set up a practice
>RHL machine. I see many suggestions that I should obtain Linux (or another
>variant) because it's free, it's easy, etc., etc., etc. I just came across
>another article saying, "Linux is great because its free and it uses similar
>command and directory structures as other flavors ...". Similar to what,
>exactly?
To other members of family. Probably about a hundred of them.
>I am wondering what the heck "UNIX" is. I mean _real_, unadulterated,
>up-to-date, commercial grade, UNIX - THE Operating System.
There is no THE. The last common ancestor is v7 (and that doesn't
count stepchildren a-la Linux). As for most, erm, successful commercial
ones now - well, Solaris, HP/UX, SGI, DG/UX, SCO. Plus there are other free
Unices ({Free,Open,Net}BSD). Plus there is a monster called AIX (IBM ;-<).
Plus many, many other.
>Is there any advantage to using UNIX vs Linux?
WHICH UNIX? Linux is one of them. Name your tasks, name the kind of
UNIX you are going to use - then we may be able to compare.
>How much is it on average, and how and where might one "get" it?
>
>What machines will it run on?
Probably anything not too braindead.
>Can I get an x86 version?
Of what? For *BSD - visit their webpages (www.freebsd.org, etc.)
For SCO and x86 Solaris - SCO and Sun. Look in news.answers for UNIX FAQ
- it should contain what you need.
--
There are no "civil aviation for dummies" books out there and most of
you would probably be scared and spend a lot of your time looking up
if there was one. :-) Jordan Hubbard in c.u.b.f.m
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Steiner)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 22:29:32 -0600
Here in comp.os.linux.misc, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason O'Rourke)
spake unto us, saying:
>I guess I can now explain why so many company IT groups ban the use of
>linux within the company network.
>
>A linux machine that doesn't get patched as needed is an open doorway
>for intruders.
Not if the servers aren't exposed. Trusted employees breaking into
servers on one's intranet are threats regardless of the OSes used.
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>---> Bloomington, MN
OS/2 + Linux (Slackware+RedHat+SuSE) + FreeBSD + Solaris +
WinNT4 + Win95 + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
Hard Disk! Well golly gee lady, I misunderstood you.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Subject: Re: RedHat 5.1 default security.
Date: 20 Jan 1999 07:05:33 GMT
In <77v5o9$jc4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "mcv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>If I add a user to a RedHat 5.1 box, and they telnet to the system, will
>they be able to cause any damage to the system, e.g. - delete files, run
>config programs?
They are then users on the system. If you do not give them root
priviledges, they will be limited in the damage they can do, but
certainly damage is not preclueded. Furthermore, It is an axiom that any
legitimate user on a system can become root, and thus have unlimited
control. So, do not give malicious people an account on your 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.misc) 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-Misc Digest
******************************
