Linux-Misc Digest #712, Volume #19 Fri, 2 Apr 99 22:13:12 EST
Contents:
Re: Proposal: "Linux 2000 Platform" (Jeremy Crabtree)
Re: Velocity 4400 (nathan)
Re: ld-linux.so.1 and libc6 (Paul Kimoto)
Re: Web-Browser on Sparc-Linux (brian moore)
Re: Slow system ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Painfully slow un-tar (Steve Johnson)
munged file via email (long) (jim barchuk)
Can't WinRSH into Linux box... (Jon Slater)
Wyse 60 terminal program (Larry Sturtz)
Delphi on Linux the Lazarus project (Cliff Baeseman)
Ram drive larger than 4megs? (oak)
Re: Newbie's question (George Privon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeremy Crabtree)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Proposal: "Linux 2000 Platform"
Date: 3 Apr 1999 02:27:44 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Christopher B. Browne allegedly wrote:
>On 3 Apr 1999 00:35:24 GMT, Jeremy Crabtree <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
>>Christopher B. Browne allegedly wrote:
>>>On 1 Apr 1999 21:34:22 -0500, Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>posted:
>>>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[SNIP]
>>>The fixation on RPM, with occasional vague mention of dpkg, betrays a
>>>generally vast ignorance of the various packaging methods that in use.
>>>Almost certainly Ports and the Debian tools represent something closer
>>>to the "state of the art" than does RPM.
>>>
>>>Anyone for stow? Depot? NSBD?
>>
>>I dunno...the whole lot of package tools would have to be evaluated
>>before any one could be selected.
>>
>>(Which is why the summary selection of RPM without ANY consultation
>> bugs me a bit.)
>
>The people that created Red Hat's distribution made their "summary
>selection;" those that created Debian made another; those that created
>SuSE made another.
>
>I would see the issue of non-consultation as an issue with respect to
>a plan to establish (let's say) RPM as the "favored package manager"
>for LSB, which is intended to be a public standard.
>
>In contrast, it is entirely reasonable for people who are building
>their own systems to make their own decisions.
Yeah...I was talking about the summary selection of RPM for
'Linux 2000'.
>>>Note that RPM would be a whole lot more usable if there was something
>>>functionally equivalent to Debian's APT and dselect tools...
>>
>>Or even pkgtool's character-mode interface.
>
>- Does it multiplex data sources together?
>- Does it monitor package dependancies and codependancies?
Nah...pkgtool is a bare minimum package manager, enough to
put stuff in, and take it out; the rest is up to you to
take care of.
(In short, beyond install time pkgtool...well...sucks ;)
>>(Glint is okay, but the CLI RPM stinks)
>
>Glint is almost functionality-free, and hasn't been *significantly*
>improved since its introduction. No multiplexing, no significant
>dependancy checking... Basically just a "dumb" menu atop a
>filesystem.
Well...yeah...there ARE alternatives, though.
(not that they're all that great, but...)
[SNIP]
>>>>>> . GNU make, C/C++ compiler and development libraries
>>>>
>>>>>Well, DUH! ;)
>>>
>>>I disagree, slightly. POSIX make is a more unambiguously requirable
>>>option.
>>
>>HERETIC!...okay, point taken, but gmake, gcc (egcs) and the like
>>would be the most likely ones to use.
>
>Normative standards are always worth *considering.* In the end, I'd
>probably prefer to use GNU make, but I don't think it particularly
>wise to head down the "using GNU-Make-isms" path...
Like I said, point taken.
>>>>>> . XFree86 installed to /usr/X11R6/lib (or /usr/X11)
>>>>
>>>>Optional. Install libs if you are so inclined, but server and
>>>>applications do not belong to required part.
>>>>
>>>>>Or both, thanks to the wonders of sym-links.
>>>>
>>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>>Absolutely.
>>
>>So, we're all in agreement here? <G>
>>
>>(FWIW, I did exactly this when installing XF86 3.3.3.1 on my
>> system...symlinks are wonderful things)
>
>No, the point is that while it may be a nice thing to be aware of
>where X goes, *IF INSTALLED,* that is not a mandatory component. I've
>got headless boxes where running an X server would be just plain
>stupid.
Yeah...I thought I already agreed with that sentiment?
>>>>>>Optional components:
>>>>>> . Web browser (Netscape or Mozilla variation?)
>>>>
>>>>Or lynx, or any other browser. What's the difference for 3-rd party
>>>>applications?
>>>
>>>If trying to establish a standard, shouldn't the product picked be
>>>require to conform to some standards? :-).
>>
>>So...Arena is the one, then? ;)
>>Or, am I confused?
>
>Mandating a particular browser is *dumb.*
Well, obviously.
>-> There are a whole bunch of offshoots of Netscape's browser that
> would be worth considering:
>
> {Navigator|Communicator} in assortedly {Motif|GTk|Qt} variations,
> with major version "numbers" 3.x, 4.0x, 4.5x, and hopefully 5.x
> Real Soon Now.
>
> Heaven only knows how many combinations that adds up to...
Too many.
>-> Arena's probably not a real good choice, considering that the last
> new release was in March 1998...
Yeah, but it standards compliant! ;)
>-> Doubtless there are some Grail partisans...
Is that the awful beast written in TCL/Tk ?
>-> Chimera has two "streams," and is pretty nicely suited to "popping
> up documentation."
I neve did get that to work very well for me :(
>-> KDE and GNOME both have "browser widgets" for their help systems
> that are fairly small, and reasonable choices for some purposes...
Yeah...but that requires GNOME and/or KDE. Speaking for myself, I
would rather not have either one.
>-> Who knows? The Mnemonic guys might get theirs "productionized,"
> and it might well be preferable to Netscape.
I've not heard of that one.
>Based on the varying sets of needs and constraints that people have,
>virtually all of these are decent choices under the right
>circumstances.
>
>Given that none are terribly "standards-conformant," choices will be
>arbitrary.
Yeah, kind of why setting a standard would be a real pain. You have to
try to satisfy everyone...in the end you have no standard, and a lot
of angry people.
>Frankly, I think that the "best" standardization would be done much as
>with EDITOR/VISUAL; one would set the environment variables
>HELP_BROWSER, SSL_BROWSER, BROWSER, and the system pick one on
>demand...
>
>Further multiplexing would be doable by setting those variables to run
>shell scripts that check on system configuration and dynamically
>figure out what to do.
Interesting...sounds a mite complex, but still interesting.
--
"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] (nathan)
Subject: Re: Velocity 4400
Date: 2 Apr 1999 15:26:20 GMT
Try the latest version of XFree86, it supports TNT cards. (3.3.3.1 I believe)
www.xfree86.org
Nathan
In article <7e1ovc$131e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gigsaw wrote:
> Just curious,...is anyone having any luck running Xfree86 on a STB Velocity 4400?
>Will the Riva128 chipsetting work for it? It doesnt work for me, am I doing
>something wrong? I can nly get it at 640*480 res. I am rather new to Linux,
>positive feedback is appreciated.
>(Slackware BTW)
>
>--
>Gigsaw
>UIN:20433481
>@#Desperado @#HologramNation @#P3ni5
>Ignorance is bliss for the informed...get informed
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Kimoto)
Subject: Re: ld-linux.so.1 and libc6
Date: 2 Apr 1999 10:38:22 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jos Berends wrote:
> I'm trying to extend my slackware libc5 based
> linux system with glibc6. Now I have in /lib both
> ld-linux.so.1 as well as ld-linux.so.2. Now I try to
> compile hello.c with the "old" gcc 2.7.2 and use
> explicitly the libc5 include files. And in the gcc specs,
> the ld-linux.so.1 is called. However, trying to run "hello"
> fails. Ldd hello gives libc6(!!) Instead of libc5.
> I did not remove the libc5 from /lib, because , as the glibc howto
> points out, my system still depends on libc5. I thought the
> linker should know about the difference between libc5 and libc6.
I don't think that "ld" does know. I believe that (by default)
it just looks at /usr/lib/libc.so.
--
Paul Kimoto
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Web-Browser on Sparc-Linux
Date: 3 Apr 1999 02:32:56 GMT
On Thu, 1 Apr 1999 17:37:08 +0200,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yes an No. There is a open source Version called mozilla. But it hasn't
> the full functionality and it needs motif to compile. And I don't have
> motif.
Actually, that's no longer true.
Mozilla works fine with GTK+ and is now, in fact, the standard UI for
Unix. See http://www.mozilla.org/unix/ for details. (As much as I
respect JWZ, I was glad to see him proven wrong on that point. GTK is
much more attractive than Motif and the chances of bug fixes in GTK are
much better -- even JWZ was known to complain about all the code in
Mozilla that was to work around Motif bugs.)
On my list of things to do this weekend is to play with the latest
snapshots: Mozilla is now in the stage where developers are expected to
use it for their regular web-browsing needs, so stability and usefulness
should be much improved over earlier releases.
NGLayout is sypposed to be quite good (as in small, fast, stable and
standards-compliant), so I'll be trying it out when I get time to
download it and clean space off my hard drive. :)
--
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]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Slow system
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 15:31:07 GMT
David, Thanks for your suggestion. My system recognises all RAM (free says
38MB I have 40). However I got a reply from someone else suggesting that my
host.conf and resolv.conf may not contain my IP address, which results in
multiple timeouts for for searching for an IP address. However, I have not
tested that yet. Since I found out that working under LINUX with a graphical
desktop needs much more space on the HD (not minimal 500 MB, if you also want
to run wine etc) than SuSE indicates on the box, I am now installing a second
HD with sufficient space. I will re-install the complete package taking in
account all your suggestions. Il report back the result. Mike
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
David Kirkpatrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike,
> I noticed this other post which may apply. If it does let me know as
> this should not be happening and I would like to know if it is.
> dk
>
> "Ronald L. Chichester" wrote:
> >
> > I must have a problem with my KDE setup. I installed Caldera
> > OpenLinux 1.3 on a Compaq 5100 workstation (300 MHz Pentium II with 64
> > MB RAM and a 4 GB Ultra-wide SCSI drive). The machine handles Windows
> > NT like a breeze. Without the KDE GUI, everything runs fine (and
> > quickly). However, with KDE running, the machine runs like an old
> > dog. For example, Netscape takes two minutes to load in KDE on Linux
> > but only a few seconds under Windows NT. I noticed that there is an
> > awful lot of disk activity upon execution of any KDE command (like
> > switching from one window to another or even pressing a single button
> > within a given program). Is there some way to "tune" KDE so that it
> > rivals NT's GUI performance?
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> >
> > Ron Chichester
>
> Based on my recent experience, I suspect that you may need to tell Linux
> how much RAM you have. Run "free" and see what it shows.
>
> If it shows a lot less than what you have installed, here's what to do.
>
> Add this line to your /etc/lilo/conf with a text editor:
>
> append="mem=xxx"
>
> Then close the editor and run "lilo -C /etc/lilo.conf."
>
> Re-boot and run "free" again and you should have all your RAM.
>
> Be careful editing "lilo.conf". Put the exact amount of RAM you have
> installed.
>
> --
> Bill Pridgen
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Linux: Platform for a new millennium
>
> MIBO wrote:
> >
> > I have just installed LINUX and most of it seem to run quite well.
> > However, I have been told that the system would be as fast or faster
> > than Windows 95 (on the same PC). ALthough I accept that starting up may
> > take a little longer than windows, I was surprised that any program
> > would take much more time than expected. Netscape would e.g. take as
> > long as 1 minute and StarOffice 5 nearly two.
> > During loading the program, the HD is making noises like an old coffee
> > grinder. I checked the memory usage, which showed that most of the 40MB
> > is allocated to 'shared'. The 100 MB of swap is nearly unused (result of
> > 'free' command).
> >
> > What could be the problem? Or do I just have to accept that with LINUX
> > the days are shorter than with Windows?
> >
> > Mike Bosschaert
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Johnson)
Subject: Painfully slow un-tar
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 02:41:09 GMT
Problem with extracting from *some* tar.gz files.
Tar works just fine with my own files and some downloaded tarballs, but some
tar.gz files I download take FOREVER to un-tar...I'm talking like 1 or 2
files/second on a PII 300 -- ridiculous! It seems to be related to the
owner/group where the files came from. It's strange, but I discovered that if
I change the owner/group of all of the files after un-tarring them to
me/mygroup (with something like 'chmod -R <me:mygroup> <tar directory>'), then
re-tar the whole thing, next time and every time after that it will un-tar
at normal (i.e. fast) speed.
Anybody know what this is or how to fix it?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jim barchuk)
Subject: munged file via email (long)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 10:45:03 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello All!
I picked this group to post to because it's possible the problem is
caused by any number (or combination) of reasons. Could be shell, zip,
sendmail, cat, dunno.
I distribute the FidoNet FidoNews email via Majordomo-driven lists.
The distribution is kicked off by this procmail recipe:
:0: bc
*^Subject:.*PASSWORD
| /home/fidonews/bin/newsnooze
That appears to work fine.
Newsnooze is 'probably' not a pretty and elegant script, it was one of
the first 'not trivial' scripts I wrote. I don't even care if it's
ugly, just that it works, so please don't comment on aesthetics unless
it really has to do with functionality. :)
================
#!/bin/sh
# create a new subdir and go there
cd ~/snoozework
mkdir $$
cd $$
# write what procmailrc passed to us
cat > anysnooze
# determine encoding of incoming file and decode it
grep -i "^Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64" anysnooze && munpack
anysnooze
grep -i "^begin.*660.*fnews....zip" anysnooze && uudecode anysnooze
# unzip incoming file, make sure everything is lower case
perl /pl/upper2lower.pl
unzip *.zip
perl /pl/upper2lower.pl
# extract filenames
ls | grep "fnews....zip$" > ZFNAME
ls | grep "fido.....nws$" > TFNAME
# create distributable files
uuencode `cat ZFNAME` `cat ZFNAME` > tmptmpuue
uuencode -m `cat ZFNAME` `cat ZFNAME` > tmptmp64
# post files to mailing lists (whoops, sorry for the wrapping)
cat ../../bin/pword `cat TFNAME` | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-s`cat TFNAME`
cat ../../bin/pword tmptmpuue | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-s`cat ZFNAME`
cat ../../bin/pword tmptmp64 | mail
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -s`cat ZFNAME`
# copy to ftp area
cp *.nws /home/ftp/pub/fnews-nws/1999/.
chown root.ftp /home/ftp/pub/fnews-nws/1999/*
chmod 644 /home/ftp/pub/fnews-nws/1999/*
================
The problem I'm having is very slight and very unpredictable file
munging. When I first built this script it worked fine, in fact
perfect. I gave someone else password access to post, and the -text-
version of the distribution became munged, here's an example:
========
Any programme receiving a packet with a password
differing from the
ssword set up between the system having created the packet and
the
========
(Again, sorry for the wrapping.) The above should look like:
========
Any programme receiving a packet with a password
differing from the
password set up between the system having created the
packet and the
========
It's hard to see with this wrapping but that line is losing 5 ascii
space and the 'pa'. The amount of text -varies-, sometimes half the
line is gone.
The munging repeats through the file at roughly 100 line intervals
(about every 8k if that's a clue.)
............
OK, so that problem went on for a while. I tinkered with the script
but had no real results. On -rare- occasion the file would go through
-perfectly- clean.
But lately there's a -new- problem. The base64 encoded file is
suffering some trimmed lines, here's an example.
This is the encoded file as it resides in $$:
========
nyy5JtefhA1pM3aY6IBSL7jZgCPPqIVv8s9ngTJ3tvyqv7SaVbjM4fh8uyUB
Scrb4H08GDocdteVCgnAX1IGC1QAC6pDUeoUpqBJGhCUV5guSYOxHEyjAZmu
0aESIbUiakH9iLSuWuQCmc9XfcGKAIHY0WRhK4Dmkoa8EUGYilJe9RUGkKuy
========
And here's what received email looks like:
========
nyy5JtefhA1pM3aY6IBSL7jZgCPPqIVv8s9ngTJ3tvyqv7SaVbjM4fh8uyUB
YOxHEyjAZmu
0aESIbUiakH9iLSuWuQCmc9XfcGKAIHY0WRhK4Dmkoa8EUGYilJe9RUGkKuy
========
That one lost most of the leading part of the line; it will obviously
fail decoding.
The munging occurs anywhere from every 50 to 150 lines, much less
'regular' than the text munging.
.....................
Other possibly helpful clues:
The original *.nws, tmptmp64, and tmptmpuue files as they reside in $$
are -perfect-, there is -never- the slightest problem with them.
The uuencoded version has -never- suffered from this glitch.
When I send to the script from Pegasus/Win16 is 'very often' does not
glitch. (But not often enough to be reliable.
The 'copy to ftp area' lines also appear to not work; files never show
up there. (This is less of a concern for me unless it is a symptom of
other problems.)
.................
So, the questions are:
Are there any obvious errors in the above recipe or script?
What other debugging code could I add to script or recipe to help look
at the problem more closely?
................
Thanks for listening. Have a :) day!
jb
--
jim barchuk
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Jon Slater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Can't WinRSH into Linux box...
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 08:38:01 -0700
Hi,
I just installed WinRSH on a Win95 box so that the Win95 box can run
selected scripts on the Linux box.
I added the Win95 box to the "/etc/host.allow" file.
But, every time I try to RSH or REXEC into the Linux box, I get a
message that says:
"Connection refused" or "Connection rejected"
I can ping, telnet, and ftp from the Win95 to Linux box.
Does anyone have an idea why I can't RSH?
Thanks!
Jon
--
Jon D. Slater QualComm Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 6150 Lookout Road
Phone: (303) 247-5037 Boulder, Colorado
Fax: (303) 247-5167 80301
------------------------------
From: Larry Sturtz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Wyse 60 terminal program
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 10:37:20 -0500
Hi,
Is there a Wyse 60 terminal program that will run under
Linux in character mode or under X? This would be a replacement
for Procomm under Win95.
Thanks,
Larry Sturtz
------------------------------
From: Cliff Baeseman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Delphi on Linux the Lazarus project
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 20:49:49 -0600
http://www.pcpros.net/~vbman/
This is to announce the Lazarus Project. Open source Delphi like rad
development
environment for Linux..
Come Join the team ;)
Cliff
------------------------------
From: oak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Ram drive larger than 4megs?
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 01:13:53 GMT
For some reason if I create a ram drive larger than 4 megs I get a ton
of error messages in /var/log/messages something like:
....kernel: end_request: I/O error, dev 01:00, sector 16380
What do I need to do to create a larger ram drive?
Perhaps I can glue together a bunch of 4 meg drives....
Thanks,
-Tony
------------------------------
From: George Privon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Newbie's question
Date: 02 Apr 1999 17:14:12 PST
I think that you should go with what most people use in your area, because
that way, you will be able to get the most help on problems
George
Yacov Wolfowicz wrote:
> Hi all,
> Please, I dont mean to start a flame war. I'd like to install Linux on
> my new pc, and don't know which distribution to use. Is there any
> difference? Which one is "better"?
>
> My system:
> PIII 450,
> 128 Mb
> DVD player, X5 (by CREATIVE)
> 6.4 Gb Disk
> CREATIVE Riva TNT 16M
> CREATIVE 64 sound card
> --
> Don't take your organs to heaven.
> Heaven knows we need them here...
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
