Linux-Misc Digest #146, Volume #19 Mon, 22 Feb 99 23:13:15 EST
Contents:
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Theo de Raadt)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Theo de Raadt)
Re: KDE? Gnome? ... confused (jedi)
Re: Linux Friendly ISP ("Keith Montgomery")
Re: How do I update my system? (Chris Costello)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Matt Dillon)
Re: KDE? Gnome? ... confused (Jim McCusker)
Re: Permissions and users!!!!!!ARG (Samuel Knapp)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Matt Dillon)
SCSI setup (Pavel Greenfield)
Re: Disable CTL-Chars (^C) in shells script? (NF Stevens)
Re: linux in PC Computing, PC World ? (Ed Cogburn)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
From: Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 22 Feb 1999 20:01:06 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linus Torvalds) writes:
> It is _you_ who misuse the term "free". You aren't the only one, but
> most other people who use your notion of freedom seem to love in small
> shacks somewhere in the middle of nowhere, preferably Montana.
Linus, you are becoming more and more rude.
I would suggest you start reading what John is saying, and turn your
socialist idealogy off for a minute. Socialism does not apply to
everything.
--
This space not left unintentionally unblank. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.OpenBSD.org -- We're fixing security problems so you can sleep at night.
(If it wasn't so fascinating I might get some sleep myself...)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 21 Feb 1999 15:18:09 -0600
In article <7apm4k$n8g$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>The cool thing about the BSD license is that developers can add to
>>the free software base and effectively make capital investments
>>in it. GPL licensing excludes that.
>That's what it's _designed_ to do. So shut up, you're just arguing that
>it's working exactly the way it's _supposed_ to work.
How do you anticipate dealing with combinations of GPL'd and patented
code as might be necessary for DVD video operation or perhaps some
HSM file system hardware?
>Some of us consider it important that you don't lose information due to
>fragmentation and proprietary code, like UNIX historically did, and the
>BSD's seem to be doing now.
But you also won't get the enhancements that have come from the
funding that is possible through this mechanism, like nfs from
Sun and the companies that contributed to the development of X.
Do you think this is no longer necessary? I also think it is
much less likely that the existing base of proprietary but
nearly perfectly interoperable base of routers and other hardware
that connects the Internet would have come about if the reference
code had the GPL restrictions. Is it worth giving up the ability
for something like that to develop just to prevent proprietary
offshoots that really have no impact on the original code base?
>The GPL is based on the idea of mutual benefit - "symbiosis" to you
>biology people. The idea behind symbiosis is that different entities
>bring different qualities to the whole, and everybody benefits.
But the GPL consists only of restrictions. The restrictions may
prevent some bad things, for some definition of bad, but it
also prevents potentially useful things. Symbiosis doesn't have
to come about by enforcement of license restrictions.
>What you advocate is called parasitism in biology. It works too, but
>it's not exactly pretty. And I don't see why you're so damn proud of
>it.
Your biology is flawed. Parasites take something away from their
hosts, where companies adding value to an existing code base
don't affect it at all, and very often contribute something back.
Was Sun a parasite for giving the world nfs? Would we be better off
if the companies that funded the X development had never had the
use of the base BSD code in the first place? I think anyone who
had anything to do with those developments or creating the potential
for similar things in the future should be proud of it.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
From: Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 22 Feb 1999 20:03:47 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John S. Dyson) writes:
> I am not the one with the agenda here, other than to make it clear that
> GPL isn't a reasonable license for everyone. If you see an *agenda*
> here that is not pro-programmer making money on the programmers
> inventiveness and programming innovation, you have to see that they
> are mostly the GPL'ites.
But John! GPL *is* the license for everyone -- Linus even said so!
--
This space not left unintentionally unblank. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.OpenBSD.org -- We're fixing security problems so you can sleep at night.
(If it wasn't so fascinating I might get some sleep myself...)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat.misc,linux.redhat.rpm
Subject: Re: KDE? Gnome? ... confused
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 13:57:15 -0800
On Sun, 21 Feb 1999 18:44:07 +0000, Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It was the Sun, 21 Feb 1999 03:47:30 -0300...
>...and Felipe \"RaPPa\" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> use gnome with enlightenment
>> www.gnome.org/ftpmirrors.html
>> they are beta, but "beta quality software" told rasterman
>> hehe
>> I use it, and is the best, I'm sure...
>> KDE and GNOME are two wms,
>
>You couldn't be any more wrong. KDE and Gnome are not window managers.
Although, KDE is bundled with one.
--
Herding Humans ~ Herding Cats
Neither will do a thing unless they really want to, or |||
is coerced to the point where it will scratch your eyes out / | \
as soon as your grip slips.
In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com
------------------------------
From: "Keith Montgomery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Friendly ISP
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 22:15:18 -0500
Surprise - there really is one. (ibm.net)
Try their site at www.ibm.net and check out the help center - PPP/SLIP Setup
Scripts.
It really gave me a jumpstart.
Robert Heller wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Steven Rudolph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> In a message on Tue, 19 Jan 1999 13:38:14 -0500, wrote :
>
>SR> Which of the national (North America) ISPs are friendly to Linux?
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Costello)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: How do I update my system?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 15:38:50 GMT
In article <2IeA2.74$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jeffrey S. Sharp wrote:
>How do I obtain updates/bug fixes/security fixes in easy-to-install packages
>for my Red Hat or Debian system?
* Red Hat: http://www.redhat.com/
* Debian: http://www.debian.org/
>
>--
>Jeffrey S. Sharp
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
"I'll rob that rich person and give it to some poor deserving slob.
That will *prove* I'm Robin Hood."
-- Daffy Duck, "Robin Hood Daffy", [1958, Chuck Jones]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Dillon)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 22 Feb 1999 19:33:49 -0800
:In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
:Richard Steiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>Here in comp.os.linux.misc, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John S. Dyson)
:>spake unto us, saying:
:>
:>As I stated in another posting today, though not crossposted to this
:>group, it's quite possible for a small-time developer to use the GPL
:>as a means to encourage payment for one's code (through relicensing)
:>from an entity who wants to use it in a proprietary context.
:>
:>BSD code released to the world is largely unprotected from such use,
:>and I as the hypothetical developer of said code may or may not ever
:>gain direct benefit from its use in proprietary projects.
:>
:>GPL'd code, however, is restricted to "source available" usage, and any
:>programmers with proprietary interests who wish to use said code must
:>come to me directly and license it from me on MY terms.
:>
:>How is this negative for business (from my perspective)?
:>
:>--
:> -Rich Steiner >>>---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>---> Bloomington, MN
Well, I gotta say that for most of the projects under GPL, reserving one's
right to make money off of one's work is a pipedream. This is because
only single or (very) small-group-based projects have the means to
split off a prorpietary version.
Most GPL'd projects are patched by hundreds of programmers. Many of
these changes are far-reaching. The original author, in most cases,
is only holding onto a small piece of the overall project by the time
it becomes commercially viable.
At that point, there is no chance. Nobody makes any money along that
avenue, not even the guy who had the original idea and did the original
programming work.
GPL then devolves into a 'nobody makes money directly' scenario, even
for the original author. There are very few exceptions to this - I can
think of only gnu emacs and possibly samba.
The BSD copyright in the same situation theoretically ( because reality
is very different ) allows wide-open commercialization.
So this whole mess comes down to whether you as an author want to make
money from your work or not. If you do, then neither GPL nor BSD will
work for you. If you don't, then either GPL or BSD will work for you
and it devolves down into how you want others to be able to use ( or not
use ) your work. When you come to THAT question, then GPL vs BSD vs
'other' becomes meaningful.
-Matt
--
Matthew Dillon Engineering, HiWay Technologies, Inc. & BEST Internet
Communications
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Please include original email in any response)
------------------------------
From: Jim McCusker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat.misc,linux.redhat.rpm
Subject: Re: KDE? Gnome? ... confused
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 17:14:32 -0500
Matt O'Toole wrote:
>
> Jim McCusker wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
> >I think that the point is that if a distro were to include a couple of
> >extra user accounts that are *always* set up the same way, then it would
> >be very easy to find someone who has not bothered to either delete or
> >modify those accounts.
>
> So what? That wouldn't hurt anythhing, except take up a teensy bit of disk
> space...
Yes, and will allow someone to telnet into your box (if you haven't
dealt with those user accounts) and would be able to guess both the user
name and password very easily.
> >Of course, the distro could ask the user if they
> >want to set up user accounts, and then ask for passwords, etc. or
> >randomly generate passwords.
>
> Ooh, now you're thinking. But, is that too much like a Winwizard? How
> uncool...
Except that the whole Red Hat setup process is linear, just like a
winwizard. I mean, there are only so many ways to make an easy to use OS
setup.
Jim
--
Jim McCusker | Class of '99, BA Computer Science & Cognitive Science
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://cif.rochester.edu/~fprefect
~Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it,
poorly.~
~~Henry
Spencer
------------------------------
From: Samuel Knapp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Permissions and users!!!!!!ARG
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 17:19:27 -0500
Robert Crosbee wrote:
>
> Heres the problem - when I login as a user I cant even get xwindow to
> start. Its telling me permissions denied along with a host of other
> things such as ppp,etc. Have i goofed somewhere early on or is there a
> fix for this, or would it be better just to trash the whole system and
> start again.
Usually, when you first try to start X as a user and not as root, it
will tell you that the X server's permissions deny you access. To fix
this, find the files it is telling you are denied and do a "chmod 4755"
on them. This will allow the user accounts to run the X server as if
they were root (the 4 before the 755 means that the program runs as the
owner).
Chris
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Dillon)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 22 Feb 1999 19:42:31 -0800
:In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
:brian moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>On 21 Feb 1999 22:06:41 GMT,
:>
:>And how does the BSD model do that? Does BSDI send you a check for
:>every copy of BSDI sold? Does Walnut Creek give you a percentage of
:>every CD sold? How about the code that is duplicated in the NetBSD and
:>OpenBSD trees: do they share their revenue with you?
Walnut Creek has thrown *millions* into FreeBSD. That's gratis money,
no strings attached. It is directly funding a number of FreeBSD
developers to write codepieces under the BSD copyright. It is obviously
to WC's benefit to do so, since the more CD's they can sell the more
profit they make themselves.
As a business story goes, the WC story is pretty unique. But it just goes
to show that you can't keep a narrow mind when you try to prove a point
one way or the other... there are many flavors of commercialism.
Other commercial entities have given back to the project in other ways.
The several appliance companies commit back bug fixes and most everything
they develop - though of course they keep most of value-add software
proprietary. But that works for Linux-based appliance companies too.
For that matter, I have spent hundreds of hours working on FreeBSD on
BEST.COM's ( a big ISP that uses FreeBSD ) time. The only work we
*haven't* submitted back to the project have been the more deranged hacks
not worthy of being in the distribution.
So, you see, there are many different ways commercial entities benefit
from supporting BSD. Commercial companies can do most of what they do
under either BSD or GPL, but the one's I've talked to prefer to work
with the BSD copyright because it gives them a free hand to utilize the
very submissions they've made without any strings attached. i.e. to get
the benefit of their own submissions as part of the larger collaboration.
Without the REST of the people.. without the rest of the project
progressing forward as a whole, such submissions are so much garbage.
Not useful, not an independant money maker. Nothing.
-Matt
--
Matthew Dillon Engineering, HiWay Technologies, Inc. & BEST Internet
Communications
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Please include original email in any response)
------------------------------
From: Pavel Greenfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: SCSI setup
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 17:28:57 -0500
Hi,
I haven't read the SCSI howto. What does the following (output of dmeg)
mean?
(I have aha2940UW, 2 scsi drives, toshiba scsi CD-ROM, and a Nikon
scanner).
What is setup incorrectly and what should I change?
(scsi0) <Adaptec AHA-294X Ultra SCSI host adapter> found at PCI 11/0
(scsi0) Wide Channel, SCSI ID=6, 16/255 SCBs
(scsi0) Warning - detected auto-termination
(scsi0) Please verify driver detected settings are correct.
(scsi0) If not, then please properly set the device termination
(scsi0) in the Adaptec SCSI BIOS by hitting CTRL-A when prompted
(scsi0) during machine bootup.
(scsi0) Cables present (Int-50 YES, Int-68 YES, Ext-68 YES)
(scsi0) Illegal cable configuration!! Only two
(scsi0) connectors on the SCSI controller may be in use at a time!
(scsi0) Downloading sequencer code... 419 instructions downloaded
scsi0 : Adaptec AHA274x/284x/294x (EISA/VLB/PCI-Fast SCSI) 5.1.4/3.2.4
<Adaptec AHA-294X Ultra SCSI host adapter>
scsi : 1 host.
Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST32155W Rev: 0362
Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02
Detected scsi disk sda at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0
Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST34371W Rev: 0360
Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02
Detected scsi disk sdb at scsi0, channel 0, id 1, lun 0
Vendor: TOSHIBA Model: CD-ROM XM-5401TA Rev: 3605
Type: CD-ROM ANSI SCSI revision: 02
Detected scsi CD-ROM sr0 at scsi0, channel 0, id 5, lun 0
scsi : detected 1 SCSI cdrom 2 SCSI disks total.
(scsi0:0:0:0) Synchronous at 20.0 Mbyte/sec, offset 8.
SCSI device sda: hdwr sector= 512 bytes. Sectors= 4197405 [2049 MB] [2.0
GB]
(scsi0:0:1:0) Synchronous at 20.0 Mbyte/sec, offset 8.
SCSI device sdb: hdwr sector= 512 bytes. Sectors= 8496960 [4148 MB] [4.1
GB]
Thanks a lot in advance!
Pavel
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NF Stevens)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.sys
Subject: Re: Disable CTL-Chars (^C) in shells script?
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 22:32:02 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (M Sweger) wrote:
>M Sweger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>: M Sweger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
>: : Hi,
>
>: : Can anybody tell me if it is possible to disable the ^C/^S/^Q/^Y etc
>: : in a shell script? I'm trying to write a shell script that is a user menu
>: : drive script and would like to for the user to exit the program correctly and no
>force their way out by doing a ^C command.
>
>
>: : Thanks. WHat would the command sequence look like?
>: : Can this be done for all shell language types, ie. Bourne, Csh,tchs,ksh,...
>
Look for the trap command in the bash (and other shells) man page. To
prevent stop and start you'll also need to reset the terminal. Something
like
trap "" 2 20
stty -g >stty.$$
stty stop "" start ""
<menu commands here>
stty `cat stty.$$`
rm stty.$$
Norman
------------------------------
From: Ed Cogburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: linux in PC Computing, PC World ?
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 16:26:19 -0500
Tom Fawcett wrote:
>
> Does either PC Computing or PC World have anything to offer a linux user?
> I checked the websites but couldn't determine anything. It looks like they
> have a few intro articles on Linux but no general coverage of anything but
^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Microsoft.
^^^^^^^^^
This is still essentially true for all computer mags. If you are
looking for regular coverage of Linux, so far the only option is
the Linux Journal mag, or some online subscriptions that I've
vaguely heard of.
--
Ed C.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
