Linux-Misc Digest #482, Volume #19 Tue, 16 Mar 99 19:13:21 EST
Contents:
Re: Public license question (John Hasler)
want to create an exec zip archive for dos ("Darren Edgerton")
Re: decent pop mail client othern than netscape... (William Burrow)
Re: DHCP not working with new 2.2.1 kernel (K Lee)
Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing? (Philip Brown)
Re: Upgrade RPM in Redhat Linux ("Toolman")
Re: why does fetchmail insist sender domain exist??? (Johan Kullstam)
Re: Linux and Y2K (M. Buchenrieder)
want to create an exec zip archive for dos ("Darren Edgerton")
Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing? (Johan Kullstam)
GNU httptunnel (lars brinkhoff)
hard disk installation problem ("Burhan")
Re: damn bastards (coolfrode)
Re: HELP! CANNOT LOGIN ANYMORE! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Kernel HOWTO accuracy? (Bob Tennent)
Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux vs. Windows (Frank Sweetser)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Public license question
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 20:26:20 GMT
Stephan Schulz writes:
> Copyright, despite its name, does _not_ cover copying only.
In the US it does.
> It also gives other rights to the holder, e.g. the right to "maintainance
> of artistical integrity"
Yes, many jurisdictions restrict the authors rights in various ways under
the guise of "guaranteeing rights". IIRC the US copyright law denies an
author the right to contract to keep the fact of his authorship secret.
> The architecture of the Olympic village in Munich (where I happen to
> live) is, for example, copyrighted by the archiect, and he has to agree
> to any visible changes to the complex (e.g. the roofing of the stadium).
Are you sure that isn't due to a contract? I find it difficult to believe
that even in Germany that I would have to get the architect's permission to
repaint my house.
> Similarly, you cannot buy a copyrighted painting and use your spraycan on
> it.
Perhaps you cannot. Our laws are not quite that repressive.
> By the same arguing, the writing into margins of books (another example
> given in this thread) is questionable, but would probably be allowed
> because of the different nature of literature - changing one copy does
> not endanger the artistical integrity of the whole work. Selling paste-on
> kits, might, though.
I'll be careful not to sell any in Germany.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
------------------------------
From: "Darren Edgerton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: want to create an exec zip archive for dos
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 07:21:31 +1000
hi,
i need to email files to users with dos/win pc's
i want to create a selef extracting archive so that the end user only
has to run the file
that i send them in order to extract the real file.
i have found the utility 'zip' which creates a zip file compatible with
PKZIP, and there is
also a 'unzipsfx' file which can be prepended to create a sleef
extracting arch, but this
file cannot be unzipped on a dos pc.
is there a utility like zip2exe that will create a dos compatible
executable from a linux machine ?
thanks
Darren Edgerton
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William Burrow)
Subject: Re: decent pop mail client othern than netscape...
Date: 16 Mar 1999 21:59:09 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 15 Mar 1999 20:56:27 +0600,
Phil Humpherys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, William O'Neal wrote:
>> ...does anyone know of any decent **free** pop mail clients other than
>> netscape?
>
>mutt
Even better, fetchmail+mutt.
--
William Burrow, VE9WIL -- New Brunswick, Canada o
Copyright 1999 William Burrow ~ /\
~ ()>()
------------------------------
From: K Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: DHCP not working with new 2.2.1 kernel
Date: 16 Mar 1999 21:32:12 GMT
Benjamin HERZOG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: If you installed RedHat, you can configure your connexion via the Control
: Pannel (Liloconf).
: There, you can configure the options for your network.
: If you connect via DHCP, just mark the option dhcp, and mention the dhcp
: server ip at the place where your local IP is required.
: It should work !
: If not, check the error message (like using dhcp on eth0 ... failed), and
: mail it here :)
No, his problems has to do with making dhcpcd work after the upgrade to
2.2.1 from 2.0.36 and it has nothing to do with configuring it. He had it
working already when he was using 2.0.36.
: Erica Vogle wrote:
: > I recently compiled kernel version 2.2.1 on my RedHat 5.2 system. This
: > machine is using DHCP to obtain its IP info. After installing the new
: > kernel, DHCP client stopped working. When I was running kernel version
: > 2.0.36, DHCP was working fine. Does anyone know what option needs to be
: > compiled in for DHCP client to work? I'm sure I missed it.
Did you upgrade everything, save for perhaps the utils packcage in order
to upgrade to 2.2.*? There were several packages you needed to upgrade
when using the kernel v2.2.* and dhcpcd was one of them. In fact, with
2.0.36, you could use 0.65 I believe but with 2.2.1, you need to upgrade
to something like 1.3*.
You're using Redhat, which has been using glibc since 5.0 unlike some
other distros, so you could just use the rpm you find. But you should've
read the README and other info files that came with the newer kernel. In
it, it tells you which packages to upgrade. You could hold off on
upgrading utils-linux(?) or something like that, but everything else
you're using on the list, you should upgrade.
Steve
=========================================================
void main(void) {if(windows=="stable") hell=frozen;}
*********************************************************
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Philip Brown)
Subject: Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 16 Mar 1999 21:58:42 GMT
On Mon, 15 Mar 1999 22:57:54 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, way off topic, but I had to comment on this...
>Guy Yasko -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [remove noise]
n>
>Mmmmmm-MMMMMM!! A plate of STEAMING PIECES of a PIG mixed with the
>shreds of SEVERAL CHICKENS!! ... Oh BOY!! I'm about to swallow a
>TORN-OFF section of a COW'S LEFT LEG soaked in COTTONSEED OIL and
>SUGAR!! ... Let's see ... Next, I'll have the GROUND-UP flesh of CUTE,
>BABY LAMBS fried in the MELTED, FATTY TISSUES from a warm-blooded
>animal someone once PETTED!! ... YUM!! That was GOOD!! For DESSERT,
>I'll have a TOFU BURGER with BEAN SPROUTS on a stone-ground, WHOLE
>WHEAT BUN!!
Yeah, that sounds GREAT!
erm.. except for that dessert bit. Personally, I'd rather have
"organic EXTRACTS, FORCED from captive bovines, then UNNATURALLY PROCESSED
with SWEETENER, centrigual FORCE, and organically HOSTILE TEMPERATURE!"
:-) :-) :-)
--
[trim the no-bots from my address to reply to me by email!]
--------------------------------------------------
Secret nONsONaTIAL monologue...
H52QdPK4iQPijBgQeMKIUQOCjRg0IN6IYWMGhJszBevIARHGjBuLZTaKCZNx4x0xb0CsWYlQ
jpwxINDAPKMRBB0xYgiqEVMGj0qWbsIQnOMyD4g5ITcaBOGRDYg6C+OwWalAAQ
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 16:37:46 -0500
From: "Toolman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Upgrade RPM in Redhat Linux
>From Uxbridge, MA??
Denbroeder, Ernst (EXCHANGE:BVW:9111) wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>This isn't the Bob Tennent I knew back in Uxbridge now is it??? :)
>
>Ernst.
>
>
>Bob Tennent wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 16 Mar 1999 08:49:32 -0500, Toolman wrote:
>> >How do you go about upgrading from one release of RPM to another? I
visited
>> >RPM's ftp site and downloaded 2.5.5.tar.gz to my root directory. I
then
>> >extracted the files into a directory (rpm2.5.5) and I now want to
install or
>> >upgrade RPM. This is where I'm lost. I can't use the current RPM to
>> >upgrade to the new one, right?
>> >
>> The tar.gz versions are for initially settin up rpm (or for
>> recovering from a messed up upgrade, so keep it!) If you have rpm
>> installed, you should be able to upgrade to a newer version in the same
way
>> you'd upgrade any other package. Just download an rpm of rpm.
>>
>> Bob T.
------------------------------
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Re: why does fetchmail insist sender domain exist???
Date: 16 Mar 1999 15:09:05 -0500
"Joseph A. Philbrook III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So far this is the 2nd time I've had something in my pop3 mailbox that
> prevented fetchmail from retrieving my mail from the isp...
>
> This is what happened when I tried to recieve my mail a few minutes ago.
>
> /home/jtwdyp
> > fetchmail -a
> 2 messages for jtwdyp at pop3.ttlc.net (6338 bytes).
> reading message 1 of 2 (1464 bytes) fetchmail: SMTP error: 501
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... Sender domain must exist
> fetchmail: SMTP error: 553 <jtwdyp>... Domain name required
> fetchmail: SMTP transaction error while fetching from pop3.ttlc.net
> /home/jtwdyp
> >
>
> I'm faily certain it's fetchmail on my linux thats complaining because I
> can retrieve the message with "Uncle Dave's dos reader <nettamer>...
are you sure it's not *sendmail*[1] that is complaining?
afaik fetchmail just gets the mails and blindly crams them down your
smtp port letting your MTA handle the mailbox locking and formats
stuff.
if your MTA gags, fetchmail will get an error back. configure your
MTA to forgo the name lookup or at least keep quiet about the invalid
domain names.
this is just a wild guess. nevertheless, i hope this helps.
[1] or whatever mail transport agent (MTA) you use. sendmail is a
common MTA.
--
Johan Kullstam
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (M. Buchenrieder)
Subject: Re: Linux and Y2K
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 16:04:31 GMT
Doug Lerner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Now that it is March, 1999 I figure I might as well get around to
>asking. Are the years in Linux 4 digits, or are my server programs which
>support Y2K going to get messed up next year?
[...]
Please do yourself a favour and use a search engine.
Hint: UN*X doesn't have a Y2K problem.
Michael
--
Michael Buchenrieder * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.muc.de/~mibu
Lumber Cartel Unit #456 (TINLC) & Official Netscum
Note: If you want me to send you email, don't munge your address.
------------------------------
From: "Darren Edgerton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: want to create an exec zip archive for dos
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 07:21:31 +1000
hi,
i need to email files to users with dos/win pc's
i want to create a selef extracting archive so that the end user only
has to run the file
that i send them in order to extract the real file.
i have found the utility 'zip' which creates a zip file compatible with
PKZIP, and there is
also a 'unzipsfx' file which can be prepended to create a sleef
extracting arch, but this
file cannot be unzipped on a dos pc.
is there a utility like zip2exe that will create a dos compatible
executable from a linux machine ?
thanks
Darren Edgerton
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing?
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 16 Mar 1999 18:09:01 -0500
o r c @ p e l l . p o r t l a n d . o r . u s (david parsons) writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Robert Krawitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> 2 GB RAM is a satisfactory virtual address space for a single process
> >> for most purposes, but 1 or 2 GB RAM is not a satisfactory upper limit
> >> on RAM today.
> >
> >but these are not `most purposes'. the big ram user will almost
> >certainly need a shitload of ram for *one* process.
>
> Not likely, in my experience.
> But do continue with your misconceptions.
my reply above is from an old post. i have since admitted i was
wrong. there are application where you can have many big processes
none bigger than a couple of gigabytes, but together needing more than
4 GB. fwiw, i am admitting that i was wrong again.
also it depends on what you are doing. i am usually doing simulation
and number crunching. for me, i generally run one major process at a
time. if something needs 7 GB, then it needs 7 GB.
i do not run any databases. i understand that they operate on a
different model. databases can often spawn multiple threads which
share some portion of their memory.
(please do not take this as a value judgement about whether database
or number crunch is good or bad, they are just different tasks.)
if someone feels the urge to put big pointers into the kernel, please,
by all means, be my guest. i wish you all luck and sucess in your
endeavor.
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Don't Fear the Penguin!
------------------------------
From: lars brinkhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.announce
Subject: GNU httptunnel
Date: 16 Mar 1999 16:09:07 +0000
httptunnel creates a virtual bidirectional data path tunnelled in HTTP
requests. The HTTP requests can be sent via an HTTP proxy if so desired.
This can be useful for users behind restrictive firewalls. If web
access is allowed through a HTTP proxy, it's possible to use
httptunnel and, say, telnet or PPP to connect to a computer outside
the firewall.
As of now, httptunnel is in late beta at version 1.97. A stable version
2.0 will appear on ftp.gnu.org and mirrors RSN. Until then, more info
can be found on
http://www.nocrew.org/software/httptunnel.html
------------------------------
From: "Burhan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: hard disk installation problem
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 21:45:07 GMT
hi everyone
i am trying to install 5.2 on a machine which does not have any os. i have
two harddrive. on the first hard drive a created two partition, / and /usr
and on the other i have created the partition /swap and /home. On the second
harddrive, i have a partition which has the redhat directory and two sub
directories base and rpms. when i try to install, it goes upto the point
where it ask me for the partition and directory to copy the files from. when
i select the right partition and select ok it gives me an error that the
device hdb1 does not appear to contain redhat installation tree.
i really apprecite if someone could help me
Rafia Tapia
------------------------------
From: coolfrode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: damn bastards
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 17:35:29 -0600
HURRY the clinic closes soon....LOL
JACK wrote:
> no what really bugs me is......
> that burger buns only come in six packs by the time you come to the end
> they have gone stale!!
> that Robin Williams version of improv is to do the same thing over and
> over "spontaneously" grrrh!!!
> that dentists fill your mouth with gauze and medieval torture implements
> and then say "nice weather where having" ..." did you see the game last
> night" "what do you work at now". <twitch,twitch egggh!!!>
> that on bank holidays there is always one prick on the motorway going 20
> mph in a 1972 datsun cherry pulling an equally antiquated caravan thats
> droping debris all over the road and he is impossible to overtake <oh killl
> kill KILL KILLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!>
>
> but i normally keep this vented up until i go to therapy so I'm not
> bothering all the people on Usenet with these rantings
> j
--
"It is inhumane, in my opinion, to force people who have a genuine
medical need for coffee to wait in line behind people who apparently
view it as some kind of recreational activity." --Dave Barry
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: HELP! CANNOT LOGIN ANYMORE!
Date: 16 Mar 1999 23:51:37 GMT
In article <7cm3a8$f16$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm in worse shape, I hope someone can help. RH 5.2, kernel 2.2.3. Somehow
>libc.so.6 got into my /lib directory and even after removing it and running
>ldconfig, I can't boot. At the end of the boot sequence I get "unresloved
>symbol _dl_initial_searchlist in libc.so.6" and the system halts. I can't
>find a way around it. I can boot an emergency system but then ldconfig fails
>because it can't write to /etc. Any help ?
>
>Thanks
When you 'boot an emergency system' is that booting from a floppy? In
that case /etc may well be different than the /etc on your hard drive.
You could mount /etc from your hard drive of course (i.e. mkdir /mnt;
mount -t ext2 /dev/hda1 /mnt) if /dev/hda1 were the disk partition that /etc
was on. If /etc were not it's own partition then it would be accessed
as /mnt/etc after that mount command. But really, it seems to me that you
want a different kernel that doesn't use a dynamic link to libc.so.6 or
maybe it's something invoked in /etc/inittab that needs to be commented out.
Try booting with a different kernel but using the root partition from your
hard drive. For instance, create an msdos floppy that's bootable (format /s
under DOS) copy a kernel to it with a name like linkern, copy loadlin to it.
Then boot that. You'll come up in dos and can issue a command like:
"loadlin linkern root=/dev/hda1"
--
Praeterea censeo Micromolle non esse utendum.
("Moreover, I maintain that Microsoft should not be used." With apologies
to Cato the Elder)
---- Remove "UhUh" and "Spam" to get my real email address -----
------------------------------
From: r d t@c s.q u e e n s u.c a (Bob Tennent)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Kernel HOWTO accuracy?
Date: 16 Mar 1999 20:35:31 GMT
On Tue, 16 Mar 1999 11:20:10 -0700, Walter L. Williams wrote:
>I thinking of trying out the new kernel.
>(2.2.3)
>
>How accurate is the current kernel
>howto? The one I found on the Metalab
>(sunsite) site is dated late May 1997.
>
Check out
http://www.redhat.com/support/docs/rhl/kernel-2.2/kernel2.2-upgrade.html
and be sure to read Documentation/Changes
Bob T.
------------------------------
From: Frank Sweetser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux vs. Windows
Date: 16 Mar 1999 16:30:54 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
> NT has all the underlying concepts for multi-user operation except for
> distributing windows. Since most of the useful windows apps need
> a window, in a practical sense you can't do multiuser access without
> add on software (windows terminal server, etc.). But, you can
> use telnet, rlogin, etc. if you can find something that you would
> like to run that way.
i can believe that the OS deep underneath has the needed support. but what
about the apps? most of 'em assume they're running on a machine where the
user has full rights to muck around with all files, including the registry.
ie, apps like Word storing user-specific preferences in a non-user-specific
file in C:\windows and C:\windows\system
--
Frank Sweetser rasmusin at wpi.edu fsweetser at blee.net | PGP key available
paramount.ind.wpi.edu RedHat 5.2 kernel 2.2.3 i586 | at public servers
The one computer-language course I took was Cobol, and basically, I just
slept the whole quarter. Then, the night before the final, I read the IBM
Cobol manual, and I got the top score in the final.
- Larry Wall, in an interview with O'Reilly
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
