Linux-Misc Digest #653, Volume #19 Mon, 29 Mar 99 22:13:16 EST
Contents:
Re: Using Linux instead of NT Server in home environment.... (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Help me spend $2,000 on a new Linux-based computer (Johan Kullstam)
Re: can't su from the root account (Bill Unruh)
Linux as Domain Server? ("Julian Sanchez")
What command see the system spec ? (Koh Jae Pil)
please recommend some books for newbie (Jason)
Re: exchange client that runs on LInux (Charles H. Chapman)
Re: read linux data from windows (**Nick Brown)
Re: ICQ auf Linux (Desmond Coughlan)
staroffice and GLIBC 2.1 (Jeb Bolding)
Re: GPL vs BSD license agreement (source code reuse) (brian moore)
Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0 (Jim Richardson)
Re: Why Linux still isn't my standard boot-up OS, or what are the Linux-equivalents
for these Windoze programs? (Jim Richardson)
Re: Linux Workstations in an NT domain -- how to do it? (Jeffrey L Straszheim)
Re: Remove all headers lines except Subject and From? (Jim Elgin)
fuunm mail-list? (Kevin Paul)
Powersave (Ewan Dunbar)
So, there's not going to be a RealPlayer G2 for Linux... :((( (Mircea)
Re: Resizing partitions. (Thomas Griffing)
Re: Error compiling kernel for Redhat 5.2 (Ian Hay)
smit Re: Solaris dead, linux the master? (Timothy J. Lee)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Using Linux instead of NT Server in home environment....
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 01:43:40 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Mon, 29 Mar 1999 09:10:30 +1200...
..and Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also, time for a few facts
>
> 1. NO operating system is bug free
True.
> 2. Both Linux camps and MS spend considerable time locating and fixing bugs
But the free software community is a testing/debugging in a massively
parallel way, with much lower overhead and redistribution latency.
Communication bandwidth between developers and testers is better, too.
All in all the free software model makes for faster and better fixing
of a greater number of bugs per unit of time.
> 3. A properly configured NT box will not Blue Screen, and will be as stable
> as a well configured Linux box.
Well, that may be true for sufficiently small values of "true" and a
value of "properly configured" that is much, much higher as the value
of "well configured"...
mawa
--
> Your best form of "antigravy" in space stations is centrifugal
> pseudoforce.
I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid you can't eat that...
-- Eric Max Francis and Paul Guertin on rec.arts.sf.science
------------------------------
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Help me spend $2,000 on a new Linux-based computer
Date: 29 Mar 1999 08:50:59 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Anderson) writes:
> >Abit BH6 mobo
> >
> It's either a motherboard, or an mb, NEVER a mobo.
why not? i call it a mobo. it's analogous to mofo.
--
johan kullstam
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Subject: Re: can't su from the root account
Date: 29 Mar 1999 20:34:17 GMT
In <7doj2e$h4a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> bakhit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>I can su from a user account to the root account with no problems, but
>when i tried to su from the root account to a user account i get this
>error message:
>shell-init:could not set current directory
When you did the su <user> you were in some directory which the user
could not read. So, befor you su, do
cd /
su <user>
------------------------------
From: "Julian Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux as Domain Server?
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 18:07:06 -0600
Can you setup a Linux box in such a way that it can act like a NT domain
server?
..at least for user authorization.
Yes, you guessed it right, we want to get rid of NT :-)
The thing is that NT server sits there just so people can login from their
workstations. They do some file usage but that's about it.
I know I can take care of the file usage problem with samba (it's already
working), but can people login as if they were going to login into the
domain and have a Linux box to validate the password from the passwd file?
thanks a lot
Julian.
------------------------------
From: Koh Jae Pil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: What command see the system spec ?
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 09:20:20 +0900
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello!
My name is Koh Jaepil. I work in Dunsan Telephone Office Korea Telecom.
Question is;
(Red Hat Linux-ALzza release 4.2 Kernel 2.0.30)
1) CPU Processor view Command :
2) RAM Size view Command :
3) HDD Total Size view Command :
4) OS Info view Command :
5) Swap Size view Command :
One more question;
How to the Y2k problem about OS version the Red Hat Linux-ALzza release
4.2 Kernel 2.0.30 ?
Good Luck!
------------------------------
From: Jason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,alt.os.linux
Subject: please recommend some books for newbie
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 15:44:29 -0500
Hi all linux expert
Would anyone of you recommend some good books to me?
Or, is it worth to buy book as I am a newbie?
Do you guys think that any good site on the web is good for beginner?
any suggestion
Thanks in advance
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charles H. Chapman)
Subject: Re: exchange client that runs on LInux
Date: 29 Mar 1999 13:13:53 GMT
On 26 Mar 1999 19:19:02 GMT, Markus Wandel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <7dgh42$12t$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Allen Ahoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>How do you get a LInux box to pick up its mail from an Exchange server,
>>not a pop3 server thats easy. In NT networks Exchange servers require
>>WINS authentication etc, how to make this work would be a real step
>>forward.
>
>Hmmm...
>
>[60]% telnet ________ pop3
>Trying ___.___.___.___ ...
>Connected to ________.
>Escape character is '^]'.
>+OK Microsoft Exchange POP3 server version 5.0.1461.55 ready
>
>I don't know what was done or how, but it is possible.
POP3 is an -optional- feature of Microsoft Exchange server that many
(most?) administrators choose to turn off for whatever reason.
Chuck
------------------------------
From: **Nick Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: read linux data from windows
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 16:49:54 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Check out e2fs at
http://uranus.it.swin.edu.au/~jn/linux/
"Fr�d�ric Hoerni" wrote:
> i am looking for a program that can read linux data (ext2 system) from
> windows 95.
--
===============================================================
Nick Brown, Strasbourg, France (Nick(dot)Brown(at)coe(dot)fr)
Protect yourself against Word 95/97 viruses, free - check out
http://www.geocities.com/NapaValley/Vineyard/1446/atlas-t.html
===============================================================
------------------------------
From: Desmond Coughlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: ICQ auf Linux
Date: 29 Mar 1999 15:39:38 +0200
Josh Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not sure what you are asking, but I have a feeling this will help :-)
>
> Do a search on www.freshmeat.net for Licq
>
> Licq is an ICQ client that runs great in linux. There's also a bunch of others there
>you can find by
> just searching for ICQ. The Java version just sucks, I wouldn't suggest anyone use
>it.
Just wondering : is there a Linux ICQ that doesn't need to X ?
--
Desmond Coughlan |Restez zen ... Linux peut le faire
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[www site under construction]
------------------------------
From: Jeb Bolding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: staroffice and GLIBC 2.1
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 21:14:46 GMT
So, I cannot get staroffice installed on my system running Redhat's
experimental Rawhide version. The problem is that StarOffice expects
GLIBC 2.07 which is in RH5.2, but Rawhide distributes GLBIC 2.1. If I
remove GLIBC 2.1 and use GLIBC 2.07 it works flawlessly, but upgrading
or even simply adding the GLIBC 2.1 libraries to my system causes
StarOffice not to work.
Why am I upgrading my GlIBC libraries? Because I want to run Gnome 1.0
and Enlightenment as my Window Manager. They require the newer GLIBC
libraries.
I'm at an impasse, any suggestions?
jeb
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Subject: Re: GPL vs BSD license agreement (source code reuse)
Date: 30 Mar 1999 01:19:21 GMT
On Mon, 29 Mar 99 15:00:18 GMT,
Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore) wrote:
> >On Fri, 26 Mar 1999 03:39:43 GMT,
> > JR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> 1) Most things in life are not free. Period. Final. Indisputable.
> >> Then why should software be? Books aren't free. Even if you borrow
> >> one from the library, taxes are paid to give one that privilege. It
> >
> >Bzzt. Wrong.
> >
> >Free Software (whether the BSD license or the GPL) has -nothing- to do
> >with zero cost. Walnut Creek Software makes a good deal of money from
> >selling FreeBSD. RedHat makes a good deal of money selling Linux.
> >Neither is free as in zero cost, or "free beer".
> >
> >BOTH are free as in "you can change this code to do what you want".
> >Think "freedom" and "free press".
> >
>
> While it is frequently pointed out that the "Free" in FSF refers to
> programming freedom rather than monetary freedom, the terms in the licence do
> make it very difficult for the original author of the software to make a
> profit out of his/her work. Certainly, they can charge for copies of their
> work, but anyone purchasing a copy is then free to redistribute it as they
> please so, if it is any good, it will soon find its way out onto the net. In
> fact, the terms of the GPL tend to favour organizations like Walnut Creek and
> RedHat since people are much more likely to pay for packaged up CD
> distributions which require a significant initial investment which the
> original author of the software will probably not be able to make...
As does the 'Free' in FreeBSD. The 'liberated' meaning is not just from
the FSF. The terms of the BSD license allow precisely the same
duplication (in fact, with less work, since you don't need to bother
making source available).
It doesn't take much of an investment to do a run of CD's. Quite
minimal, in fact, even for small (1000 units or so) runs. I think it
costs us less than 50 cents to burn a CD at qty 1000. What it does
take is marketing, product placement (convincing Barnes and Noble that
it's worth displacing other books for yours) and other nonsense that
most programmers wouldn't want to touch with a ten foot pole.
Neither GPL nor BSD license has a thing to do with it.
--
Brian Moore | "The Zen nature of a spammer resembles
Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker | a cockroach, except that the cockroach
Usenet Vandal | is higher up on the evolutionary chain."
Netscum, Bane of Elves. Peter Olson, Delphi Postmaster
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
linux.redhat.misc,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0
Date: 30 Mar 1999 01:15:29 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 28 Mar 1999 14:30:58 GMT,
Chris Mauritz, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>In comp.os.linux.misc Enkidu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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.
>
>It would be nice if they would "package" a source-based distribution
>similar to what you get with FreeBSD's source. Then, if I wanted
>686 optimization, I could replace gcc with egcs, use the appropriate
>cflags, type "make world", go to bed, and wake up to a system where
>every single binary had been recompiled from scratch on the running
>system. That is one of the things I miss most about FreeBSD. I
>also miss the ability to track a development tree with cvsup, and
>then do a "make world" every couple of months to completely catch
>my system up to the latest/greatest.
Oh, I like this, was/is it stable?
I mean, I have a lot of non RH apps I have collected, would something
like this be likely to break them?
>
>Any chance of RedHat doing something similar?
>
>Chris
>--
>Christopher Mauritz
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Jim Richardson
www.eskimo.com/~warlock
All hail Eris
"Linux, because a cpu is a terrible thing to waste."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: Why Linux still isn't my standard boot-up OS, or what are the
Linux-equivalents for these Windoze programs?
Date: 30 Mar 1999 01:15:32 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 28 Mar 1999 13:58:30 -0500,
Harry, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>> Tell that to the thousands of users who every day endure ...<
>
>Hold on a minute ... don't programs crash on Linux?
>
>Besides which, that's not the point. The point is that
>usability seems to occupy very little of a Linux software
>designer's attention. Does it cost $ to make the command
>to install software "Install"?
>
>Just a thought.
>
>Harry
You could just point and click instead...
--
Jim Richardson
www.eskimo.com/~warlock
All hail Eris
"Linux, because a cpu is a terrible thing to waste."
------------------------------
From: Jeffrey L Straszheim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Workstations in an NT domain -- how to do it?
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 20:21:34 -0500
Tim Kelley wrote:
> Well, no, you can mount an smb share into your linux filesystem, just like
> nfs or ncp shares. The ftp-like smb client is just an extra. I don't know
> why anyone would use it.
I can think of a few reasons. Quite often I will be on a system
with now CD (or some such) and say to myself, "Hey, I can pop that
CD into the server and get the files." Now, normally I would just
connect through a share, but perhaps I don't feel like mounting
the drives and such, perhaps this machine doesn't normally use
files on that server and I'd have to configure it. So, to be quick,
I could just use the client utility.
--
--Jeffrey Straszheim
---Systems Engineer, Programmer
----stimuli AT shadow DOT net
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Elgin)
Subject: Re: Remove all headers lines except Subject and From?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 01:37:50 GMT
In article <s6UL2.111$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, oak wrote:
I think the command:
formail -k -X From: -X Subject: -s <input >output
will do what you want.
Jim
> Hey! What about the rest of my e-mail message? What I have are
>complete e-mails which I need piped through something that will remove
>everything in the header except the Subject and From lines AND the
>message body of course :) So I guess the problem is how do you get
>only the Subject and From lines but also keep the e-mail body...
>
>Thanks,
>
>-Tony
>
>David Z. Maze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> oak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> oak> Anyone know of a way I can filter out all header lines in e-mail, and
>> oak> also perhaps newsgroup posts, except for the Subject and From lines?
>
>> Lacking any other information, I'd say that 'grep' is definitely the
>> right tool, something along the lines of
>
>> grep '^Subject:|From:' msg1 msg2 ...
>
--
Jim Elgin
Gnu Volunteer Coordinator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Paul)
Subject: fuunm mail-list?
Date: 29 Mar 1999 15:09:59 GMT
:
Greetings. Is the Free Unix Users of New Mexico mailing list still active?
TIA,
Kevin Paul
------------------------------
From: Ewan Dunbar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Powersave
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 19:49:18 -0500
I've just migrated from Slackware to S.u.S.E. and no longer have my
config files. I must say that I like BSD initialisation better than SysV
initialisation. But the point is, I can't remember the command that sets
the monitor to poweroff after a certain number of minutes.
------------------------------
From: Mircea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: So, there's not going to be a RealPlayer G2 for Linux... :(((
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 20:07:01 -0500
I just got this from Real Networks support :(
(...)
>Is there going to be a G2 Player for Linux (glibc2)? I'm thinking of
purchasing
>Real Player Plus, but I won't unless a G2 version is being developed.
There have
>been rumors that the UNIX player development has been dropped.
>----------------------------------------------------------
>Stream, RealNetworks Customer Service wrote:
>----------------------------------------------------------
>Hello:
>
>Question: For Player Plus usage, I notice that you support Windows
95,
>WindowsNT, and PowerMac. Will you ever develop this software for
other
>operating systems?
>Answer: At this time, we do not plan on producing "native" versions
of our
>Player Plus software for other platforms than Windows95, Windows NT,
and
>PowerMac.
>Customer Service
>RealNetworks
------------------------------
From: Thomas Griffing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Resizing partitions.
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 02:11:43 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have a western digital 8.4gb IDE drive that I have partitioned into four
> drives:
>
> /dev/hdb1 4950048 1972501 2721312 42% /files
> /dev/hdb2 2040300 2 2040298 0% /dos
> /dev/hdb3 (the rest, linux can't see it, it's BeOS FS)
>
> I'd like to reclaim the whole drive for /files, without destroying the 2
> GB of data that's already on there. Is it possible to do this? How risky
> is it?
Not risky, but you'll have to move the data elsewhere while re-arranging
the partitions. You can do a tar & compress to another drive or back it
off to tape. For example:
# tar cvzf /tmp/files.tar.gz /files
Then blow away all partitions (you may have to boot BeOS to
delete those partitions. Then create one big ext2 partition,
format it and restore the files.
# fdisk /dev/hdb # (create the partition here, note the partition
number)
# mke2fs /dev/hdb3 # (this is the device noted above)
# mount -t ext2 /dev/hdb3 /files
# cd /
# tar xvzf /tmp/files.tar.gz
# rm /tmp/files.tar.gz
==============================================================================
Thomas L. Griffing mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vistyx Corp http://www.vistyx.com
------------------------------
From: Ian Hay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Error compiling kernel for Redhat 5.2
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 22:50:22 GMT
Martin R. Soderstrom wrote:
>
> I'm recompiling my kernel to include IP Masquerading. Most of it went well,
> but when I try to run the make zImage, it chugs along for a while, but then
> stops with:
[snip]
Curiously - I've seen plenty of people talk about the need to compile IP
masquerading into the Red Hat 5.2 kernel. I was under the impression
that a stock RH kernel already included support for IP masquerading as a
module. No es?
I.
--
========================================================
Ian R. Hay <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Toronto, Canada <http://www3.sympatico.ca/ian.hay/>
Linuxing about since June 21, 1998 <Redhat 5.1 - 2.0.35>
========================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.solaris.x86
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Timothy J. Lee)
Subject: smit Re: Solaris dead, linux the master?
Reply-To: see-signature-for-email-address---junk-not-welcome
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 02:45:17 GMT
"RAYG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|I had been told that IBM's version of Linux would have smit. They just love
|to say "smit is your friend". It's not bad. I use it at work but because of
|it I consider myself a unix newbie. Kind of a fill in the blanks
|administration tool.
The best use of smit is as a learning tool. Use it to do something,
then look in the smit.script file to see what it really did, so that
you can read the man page (to get the full detail) and know what to
use if you need to do that task in a script.
--
========================================================================
Timothy J. Lee timlee@
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome. netcom.com
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
