Linux-Misc Digest #206, Volume #19 Sat, 27 Feb 99 11:13:10 EST
Contents:
Re: Pentium III Boycott and survey info (Peter F. Curran)
Using an AWE32 with no RAM? (Dafydd Tomos)
Using an AWE32 with no RAM? (Dafydd Tomos)
Pentium III and Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: enlightenment on SuSE 6.0 (Raymond Doetjes)
Re: Linux Programs (jik-)
3D Blaster PCI ("Vince")
Re: Advanced RAM usage question... (Osma Ahvenlampi)
Re: process ID question (NF Stevens)
Re: General unix question: find & replace string in a set of files (NF Stevens)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Matthias Buelow)
Re: PPP (Leonard Evens)
Re: redhat 5.0 -> 5.2 (Leonard Evens)
Re: Managing X windows (Ed Young)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (NF Stevens)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Chris Lee)
Re: Linux/FreeBSD compatability (Was Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)) (Zenin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter F. Curran)
Subject: Re: Pentium III Boycott and survey info
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.hardware
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 14:52:29 GMT
In article <7b8ta5$c23$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"John Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Ilya wrote in message <36d7e381.0@calwebnnrp>...
>>In comp.os.linux.misc Boycott Swintel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Pentium III chip with the individual serial number that can
>>> track your web surfing and buying habits can now have the ID number
>>> turned on and off by software.
>>
>>And I won't ever buy an Intel product. Get something else. My Pentium II is
>>the last one.
>
>
>I don't understand what all the fuss is about. You'd need to run some
>software
>to actuallyt _send_ people this serial number so if you object, just don't
>run
>that software. This isn't any way for people to jut grab it from your
>machine you know.
>
I think I can explain the fuss. People don't _want_ to be tracked
on the Internet. They only wish to provide identification info
to those sites they want to do business with.
It is the proposed _use_ of the PSN, not the PSN itself which
is so objectionable.
If it becomes standard practice for business-related sites to
require you to install an identification software system, PIII
users might be forced to trade in their anonyminity everywhere
for greater _perceived_ transaction security at a relatively
few sites.
Because some sites might require the PSN to be on if you have a
PIII, (or if you have PSN-aware copy protection on some of your
software), people will be forced to leave it on because of the
hassle of needing to reboot 10 extra times a day.
If the system comes up even once with the PSN enabled, any
software could cache the number and still provide it later
even when the PSN is disabled, perhaps against the user's
wishes. Any virus could grab it. It would seem to do almost
_nothing_ to really improve online security, yet that is what
Intel is proposing it should be used for!
An effective and secure ID system that is under the complete
control of the user isn't really a problem. The PSN doesn't
meet that requirement, not by a long shot. The PSN query
instruction should have been made OS-privledged, IMO, as well
as commands to turn it on and off. Then, the OS could dole
out a dated and encrypted security 'token' as needed through
an API, and no regular programs like viruses could obtain the
PSN.
I think the only solution is to just vocally oppose the use
of such a poor security enhancement. As you said, the number
on the chip is harmless by itself. It is the software, and
those who actually try to make use of the PSN who are
dangerous.
--
Peter F Curran
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
dough knot male: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Use address in Organization line, finger
for PGP key. Antispaam test in progress.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dafydd Tomos)
Subject: Using an AWE32 with no RAM?
Date: 26 Feb 1999 13:37:41 GMT
Reply-To: Remove underscore to reply <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I have an AWE32 card working OK using Linux kernel version 2.2.2 using
isapnp. It can play audio with no problem. But I cannot get MIDI to
work.
lsmod shows the following modules loaded:
Module Size Used by
awe_wave 155664 0
sb 31008 0 (autoclean)
uart401 5628 0 (autoclean) [sb]
sound 55184 0 (autoclean) [awe_wave sb uart401]
soundlow 240 0 (autoclean) [sound]
soundcore 2208 7 (autoclean) [sb sound]
but 'sfxload synthgm.sbk' (or any soundfont file) gives:
Segmentation fault
suggesting memory problems?
/proc/sound shows
OSS/Free:3.8s2++-971130
Load type: Driver loaded as a module
Kernel: Linux jingizu 2.2.2 #7 Fri Feb 26 11:54:13 GMT 1999 i586
Config options: 0
Installed drivers:
Card config:
Audio devices:
0: Sound Blaster 16 (4.16) (DUPLEX)
Synth devices:
0: AWE32-0.4.3 (RAM0k)
Midi devices:
0: Sound Blaster 16
1: AWE Midi Emu
So it appears the card either has no memory or it's not being
detected? I have no idea how much RAM it should have or how to
check. (It has no extra RAM for sure). I do know that Windows was able
to play via the wavetable device.
I'd appreciate any ideas on why there seems to be no RAM, or how to
get MIDI working (doesn't have to be via the wavetable device).
--
Dafydd Tomos <URL:http://www.fydd.org/d/>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dafydd Tomos)
Subject: Using an AWE32 with no RAM?
Date: 26 Feb 1999 14:14:54 GMT
Reply-To: Remove underscore to reply <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I have an AWE32 card working OK using Linux kernel version 2.2.2 using
isapnp. It can play audio with no problem. But I cannot get MIDI to
work.
lsmod shows the following modules loaded:
Module Size Used by
awe_wave 155664 0
sb 31008 0 (autoclean)
uart401 5628 0 (autoclean) [sb]
sound 55184 0 (autoclean) [awe_wave sb uart401]
soundlow 240 0 (autoclean) [sound]
soundcore 2208 7 (autoclean) [sb sound]
but 'sfxload synthgm.sbk' (or any soundfont file) gives:
Segmentation fault
suggesting memory problems?
/proc/sound shows
OSS/Free:3.8s2++-971130
Load type: Driver loaded as a module
Kernel: Linux jingizu 2.2.2 #7 Fri Feb 26 11:54:13 GMT 1999 i586
Config options: 0
Installed drivers:
Card config:
Audio devices:
0: Sound Blaster 16 (4.16) (DUPLEX)
Synth devices:
0: AWE32-0.4.3 (RAM0k)
Midi devices:
0: Sound Blaster 16
1: AWE Midi Emu
So it appears the card either has no memory or it's not being
detected? I have no idea how much RAM it should have or how to
check. (It has no extra RAM for sure). I do know that Windows was able
to play via the wavetable device.
I'd appreciate any ideas on why there seems to be no RAM, or how to
get MIDI working (doesn't have to be via the wavetable device).
--
Dafydd Tomos <URL:http://www.fydd.org/d/>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Pentium III and Linux
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 13:38:46 GMT
Hi all,
Maybe a stupid question but I am a bit worried.
I am going to buy a computer and my plan is to run Linux on it.
I am looking at some configurations and they do have an intel
pentium III processor (from 450-500 MHz) and 440BX chipset.
I checked SuSe hardware support and couldn't find the Pentium III
processor. They had support for many pantiums but the one who got
closest was the 333 MHz pentium II.
So will for example the 450MHz pentium III based machine work with
SuSe (as an example) or will it be better to spend my money on a
lower spec. machine ?
Thankful for information on this.
Regards
JS
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: Raymond Doetjes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: enlightenment on SuSE 6.0
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 15:24:23 +0100
I had enlightenment compiled on SuSE 5.3 but it did'nt run anymore on SuSE
6.0 since it claims it can't find libc5 anymore.
Raymond
Marco Tephlant wrote:
> Starting enlightenment on SuSE 6.0 just gives the enlightenment backdrop
> and nothing else. How can I get it to display Icons and stuff like it
> should?
>
> TIA
> --
> Marco
--
=====================================================================
Windows is a 32 bit patch to a 16 bit GUI based on a 8 bit operating
system, written for a 4 bit processor by a 2 bit company which can
not stand 1 bit of competition.
=====================================================================
------------------------------
From: jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Programs
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 05:07:51 -0800
> > Bahhh, you don't need that crap....only keeps you from learning what you
> > need to survive by making life look easy for a while. Don't use those
> > "make life easy" tools until you already know the background of what it
> > is doing, then test them out and see if you really find them
> > usefull....you may find that they're really nothing special.
> >
> > Besides, rpms are only as good as thier author, a broken one can be
> > quite painful....especially if you don't know how to fix your system
> > afterwards.
>
> Sounds like a diehard Slackware fanatic to me. :-)
>
> To newbies who may be listening:
When I was going to get Linux, I was told that people like RedHat
because it is easy. I was told that Slackware was the better choice for
a new user because it doesn't hide the system from you. I decided that
learning the system I was working on was more what I wanted, then having
a few tools I could use to make me efficient...but never
proficient....Later, when I had been using Linux for some time, I
switched to RedHat for a short time to check it out. I STILL use
Slackware to this day, I installed RPM for a short imte, and became
quite bothered by its presence. I happen to think that Slackware IS the
easiest, most efficient Linux available BECAUSE it has none of the extra
crap,...which is more a pain in the ass then anything (except maybe disk
residence :P)
I have learned HOW my system works, how to keep it working (for the most
part, I am still only 2 years into it) and how to do it quickly.
Something new comes along, I know HOW to figure it out, much easier then
if I had learned with some tool that made my life so easy I didn't
learn. Because if you rely on a tool to do something, you will be lost
without it. Takes me 2 times as long to install an RPM then it does a
tarball....if I am lucky.
There is an argument to be made
> for learning the inner workings of Linux, but for many the
> important part is getting up and running as soon as possible,
Murphy's law (don't know the number :P): A shortcut is the longest
distance between two points.
> doing the things that you want to do. The learning of the inner
> workings can be done at your own pace.
Which is MUCH faster if you have to....all around, the learner approach
is much better.
> There is more to these packaging systems then simply keeping
> track of related files. One example: Debian packages that
> include a user type of app, will install a menu item on the root
> menu feature of Debian's X setup. Thus, almost all of the apps
> you've installed on your system show up as an item on the root
> menu display in X. A few clicks and you can run anything (that
> was in a Debian package) you've installed.
>
Thus you have to use some special application for the root menu....or a
special window manager. With every new 'make life easy' program, you
have at least one new dependancy on something. RedHat for instance will
not run right without Python.....Python needs Tk/Tcl....because of
RedHat's special X tools which were written in Python. This type of
thing can be avoided, but rarely is....it all goes into this 'do
everything the shortest, easiest way possible' phylosophy.
Course, Debian has the worst of both worlds :P It depends on a special
package format,...AND is overly dificult to install.
------------------------------
From: "Vince" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: 3D Blaster PCI
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 20:16:28 +0100
HELP!
Is it possible to get a 3D-Blaster PCI Video-Card running under Linux? I
have SuSE 5.2 and no idea, what to do...
------------------------------
From: Osma Ahvenlampi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.admin
Subject: Re: Advanced RAM usage question...
Date: 26 Feb 1999 15:57:20 +0200
Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Surely, this must be one of the dumbest remarks I've seen in a while.
> "Free memory is a waste" -- we're better off if all our memory is used
> up? That sounds like a great justification for the way Windows works.
You seem to be confused. You'd rather have memory sitting idle,
serving no useful purpose? It's pretty obvious that allocating free
memory to disk cache to speed up I/O is a better solution. It can
always be given back from the disk cache to other use if an
application needs more memory.
You wouldn't happen to be a Mac user, would you?
--
Old musicians never die, they just decompose.
Osma Ahvenlampi <oa at iki fi> (damn spammers)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NF Stevens)
Subject: Re: process ID question
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 15:33:25 GMT
Gerald Willmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm trying to switch on and off the scanner on my SCSI bus. The following
>scripts work fine as root
> #!/bin/sh
> echo "scsi add-single-device 0 0 6 0" > /proc/scsi/scsi
> #!/bin/sh
> echo "scsi remove-single-device 0 0 6 0" > /proc/scsi/scsi
>but not for mortal users. I tried setting SUID on both but that didn't
>change anything - still getting permission denied on /proc. Is there a way
>to let normal users do this. Thanks,
SUID bit on scripts is ignored by the kernel because its a security
risk. The easiest way maybe to write a short program and make that
suid.
Norman
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NF Stevens)
Subject: Re: General unix question: find & replace string in a set of files
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 15:33:26 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phillip George Geiger) wrote:
>
>I have a lot of files that need to be updated in a very similar manner.
>
>Is there a simple (or cryptic) unix command to go through every file
>in a directory, find every occurrence of "12 January" and replace it
>with "26 February"? All of the files are plain old text files.
>
>I'm just dreading the thought of opening every one of them in emacs
>and doing a find and replace....
>
>Thanks in advance!
for file in *
do
vi <<EOF >/dev/null
:%s/12 January/26 February/g
:wq
EOF
done
Replace * in the above with the file spec for the files
you want to edit. You'll probably get a lot of warnings
from vi that its input is not coming from a terminal but
you can safely ignore those.
Norman
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Buelow)
Date: 26 Feb 99 14:43:57 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jason Clifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If you can show that MS have stolen your product and integrated it into
>one of their you sue them. Other have an MS have, on many occassions, been
>ordered to pay large sums in damages and to come to a proper license
>agreement or to purchase the rights as appropriate.
The problem is that Microsoft (or any other company of that scale)
has a far longer breath and you will be financially ruined by paying
lawyers before the case is even nearly finished. Microsoft is
spinning and winding like a slick eel in the U.S. DOJ vs. M$ case, do
you think they'd use less determined lawyers against you?
This is not right, yes but I guess it's the way things go.
------------------------------
From: Leonard Evens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: PPP
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 07:57:16 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello all I have a small problem with my dial up connection. Root works fine
> but not as a user. I have read all the How-to's....man pages I can get my
> hand on and done every thing they said,but no joy. chmod all relevant files
> as directed, etc. Minicom will connect from a user logon but usenet give a
> message of No user-controled interfaces. Any help apreciated. Thanks in
> advance.
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
The crucial chmod is to make pppd setuid.
Examine all your scripts carefully. It is possible you are using something
which creates
a file, say in tmp, which may be there for diagnostic purposes. If such a
file is
being created and is owned by root, you may not be able to write to it when
running
as yourself and the script may fail.
--
Leonard Evens [EMAIL PROTECTED] 847-491-5537
Dept. of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ., Evanston, IL 60208
------------------------------
From: Leonard Evens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: redhat 5.0 -> 5.2
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 08:17:06 -0600
Natanael Copa wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> finally i got a linux destribution. RedHat 5.0....
>
> What is the main difference between RedHat 5.0 and RedHat 5.2?
> Is there som easy way to update my RedHat without buying a new CD?
>
> I have been at www.redhat.com but i could find. (did i miss something?)
>
> Natanael
You can upgrade easily using the 5.2 CD and choosing the upgrade option.
But it might be worth examining the installation manual which should come
on the CD. There are some changes from 5.0. The most important I think
is that you are asked to create a boot floppy during the installation,
which you
should probably do. But you may want to do it over again using the
mkbootdisk
program after the upgrade. (It may bomb though as it did for us because
multiple entries were created during the upgrade in /etc/conf.modules.
When
the duplications were removed from that file, there was no problem. The
creation of the boot disk during installation went fine.) The boot
floppy
contains a bootable kernel, but it also has lilo installed so you can
choose
instead a rescue mode. In that mode, after the booting has progressed,
you then insert a rescue floppy (which you should previously have copied
from the CD directory called images), and you can boot from a ramdisk.
It is quite helpful in solving problems.
5.X also allows you to use Alt-F* keys during the installation to look at
various log files or to get a bash prompt and execute commands. If
you are careful, this can be useful in solving problems that rarely
arise during installation or upgrading.
The only serious problem I have ever encountered during upgrading was
that there was not enough space in the root partition for the new 5.2
files. Usually you need upwards of 400 Meg, depending on which packages
you have. If you need to repartition, you would be better off saving
the
contents of /home and other special files or directories and reinstalling.
--
Leonard Evens [EMAIL PROTECTED] 847-491-5537
Dept. of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ., Evanston, IL 60208
------------------------------
From: Ed Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Managing X windows
Date: 27 Feb 1999 15:38:24 GMT
Paul Davies wrote:
>
> I generally have alot of xwindows open during my development session and
> find them hard to manage.
>
> Are there any tools available which allow you to 'tile' or 'cascade' the x
> windows so they are easy to manage?
>
I use AfterStep. I have relatively few windows on any given screen. But I have
six screens that can be accessed thru a pager, by moving the mouse across the
boundary, or by clicking on the winlist. It's a very fine way to manage
multiple windows. Using a single screen is very limiting.
Check out: http://www.afterstep.org
Enjoy...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NF Stevens)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 15:33:30 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John S. Dyson) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NF Stevens) writes:
>>>>
>>>This tests YOUR interest in fair discussion, right?
>>
>> No, I just found it amusing that you used those particular
>> words.
>>>>
>>>And ridiculous support fees... Programming costs anyway you go,
>>>except I am trying to support truth in advertising.
>>
>> You don't have to buy support when you use GPL code. There
>> is easily enough documentation for those who can RTFM. It is
>> possible to get a full version of linux on CD for $2 or even
>> download it for no cost other than the cost of the telephone call.
>>
>Access to GPLed code is sometimes embargoed unless you pay support
>fees. There are ways to do it.
Access to proprietory code is embargoed unless you pay
the license fee. If I understand your position, taking a piece
of BSD licensed code and making a proprietory product is
OK; not being able to make GPL code proprietory is bad; but
when you can do it with GPL code that's bad also. Don't
you feel at least a little bit inconsistent here?
Norman
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Lee)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 27 Feb 1999 15:31:00 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>I decided to go back to gnu.org and read some of the webpage again after
>flipping through this thread, and following a link from it that
>eventually got me there. I ran into this page, which pretty much closes
>the case on what the *real* goals of the FSF are....Its too bad Linux is
>so linked to this foundation, I do like it better then FBSD.
Yeah. Too bad for you that Linus took steps to prevent people like you from
stealing the work he and others have put into linux and other OSS software.
A damned shame, isn't it. NOT.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux/FreeBSD compatability (Was Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?))
From: Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Date: 26 Feb 99 15:00:46 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <M.com(MikeWillettLADSLDNX7563)> wrote:
: With all this talk about FreeBSD/Linux issues, I was thinking
: about compatability issues with the two system.
:
: Is it possible to have both a FreeBSD kernel and a Linux
: kernel on the same system ?
Well, yes, but you'd have to have both systems installed
independently.
: Can a FreedBSD kernel be compiled on a Linux system ?
You have an easier time (and about the same results) by simply
building the GNU tool sets on FreeBSD.
: (and vica-versa) ?
Maybe (if you build glibc and such), but why?
: Or can we only get executable compatablity ?
It's the easiest. Besides, the others you mention don't buy you
anything.
: (I assume this isn't a simple yes/no answer ? What level of compatability
: is there and what effort is required to improve this ?)
You can run most Linux executables under FreeBSD. AFAIK the reverse
is not possible, but then BSD code typically ports much easier then
Linux code (and I'm not even talking about SVGAlib...) so it isn't
nearly as needed.
--
-Zenin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) From The Blue Camel we learn:
BSD: A psychoactive drug, popular in the 80s, probably developed at UC
Berkeley or thereabouts. Similar in many ways to the prescription-only
medication called "System V", but infinitely more useful. (Or, at least,
more fun.) The full chemical name is "Berkeley Standard Distribution".
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
