Linux-Misc Digest #229, Volume #19 Sun, 28 Feb 99 12:13:09 EST
Contents:
Re: Cable Modems with Linux (Ed Nather)
Re: [Q] Serial Communication software for UNIX (James Youngman)
Re: sh for Linux (James Youngman)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (James Youngman)
Re: What if software could think? (Jerry Lynn Kreps)
Re: RedHat 5.2 --> 2.2 Kernel (ozric)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (jik-)
Re: sccs for linux (James Youngman)
Re: HELP: Linux crashing with fsck error (Jayasuthan)
Re: Red Hat's sick sense of humor (support) (John Hasler)
Re: More bad news for NT (Jerry Lynn Kreps)
Re: special characters in UNIX how? (Gerald Willmann)
Re: Linux Boxes & Internet (ozric)
Re: Advanced RAM usage question... (Jayasuthan)
Re: What if software could think? (Gregory L. Hansen)
Re: ORBit 0.3.98 and glib 1.1.16 (Eric Potter)
Re: Help!!: sync/update/bdflush stalling (Jayasuthan)
Installation Error (Caroline SILVIE & Vincent GUIGNOT)
Missing Screen Savers in RedHad v5.2? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Mouse Response ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Anti-Virus for Linux (John Thompson)
Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class. (Michael Powe)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ed Nather <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,alt.linux,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Cable Modems with Linux
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 15:59:29 +0000
>
> > 1) We have a cable modem, and our provider sez that it only works on
> > Win95. I've heard that there are ways to get around this so that
> > I can use it on linux. Any ideas?
> >
>
You didn't say who your provider is, but if it is TimeWarner cable,
you can get everything you need to run under Linux at
http://www.vortech.net/rrlinux/
------------------------------
From: James Youngman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: [Q] Serial Communication software for UNIX
Date: 28 Feb 1999 13:03:57 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mohd-Hanafiah Abdullah) writes:
> Know what? You are right. And it's only a 3-letter word too. The last time
> I used it was more than one year ago, but forgetting it totally and trying to
> recall is frustrating.
This is what man -k, whereis, and apropos is for.
--
ACTUALLY reachable as @free-lunch.demon.(whitehouse)co.uk:james+usenet
------------------------------
From: James Youngman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: sh for Linux
Date: 28 Feb 1999 13:15:00 +0000
John Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> AFAIK, bash is a superset of the original Bourne shell. It
> is conceivable that some pedantic sh scripts might balk when
> running under bash but I haven't run into any myself yet.
There are lots and lots and lots and lots. Two examples are
Some /bin/sh reject Portable alternative
foo() { true } foo() { true ; }
if ! foo; then bar; fi if foo; then true; else bar; fi
foo # (foo in current dir) . ./foo
IIRC the best shell for this sort of testing is the /bin/sh on NetBSD.
--
ACTUALLY reachable as @free-lunch.demon.(whitehouse)co.uk:james+usenet
------------------------------
From: James Youngman <[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?)
Date: 28 Feb 1999 13:43:04 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro) writes:
> Bullshit. GPL is *not* copyrighted.
Read lines 4 to 7 of the GPL.
--
ACTUALLY reachable as @free-lunch.demon.(whitehouse)co.uk:james+usenet
------------------------------
From: Jerry Lynn Kreps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: What if software could think?
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 09:07:13 -0600
Russell Nelson wrote:
> Imagine if software were sentient. What kind of freedoms would it
> have? John is arguing that free software should be allowed to be
> thrown into bondage, and all its descendents. I think that the free
> software would argue otherwise, were it able to argue on its own
> behalf.
>
> In a very real sense, software is evolving towards sentience. The
> software which is a good fit in its environment encourages people to
> use it and improve it. If the software can out-compete other software
> in its niche, it survives into the next generation. Otherwise it
> dies.
>
I forgot to add, in my previous resonse, that I don't think such an
argument is trival.
If fact, a discussion on this is very important, and new intellectual
and legal ground is needing to be plowed here. Governments have long
used the concept of "guilty property" in order to "punish" it. This
legal trick is, of course, only a way to get around the rights of the
owners of the property have been given in the consitution, but it is
nearly indentical in concept to the idea of given code "sentient"
property. How can a property be guilty of a crime? It can't, since it
can't take actions of its "own" accord. Neither can code think. But,
the law can be written to give code a mind, if it can be written to give
property action.
Jerry
------------------------------
From: ozric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: cmp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: RedHat 5.2 --> 2.2 Kernel
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 16:00:54 GMT
I upgraded to Mandrake 5.3 which is Red Hat 5.2 with KDE 1.1. I
installed the upgrade RPMS for 2.2 that came with it, downloaded 2.2.2
and Compiled it. It all went as planned, BUT my DHCP stopped
working....got an update RPM. Then I had to read about ipchains to get
ipmasq working again... Fixed in record time. My printer changed to lp0,
that was easy to fix. Now, All is Well in 2.2.2 land. I do get a error
on Boot about gpm using /dev/cuao and to change it to /dev/stty0, I
don't know how to do that yet.
Did Anyone Notice a BIG SPEED increase with 2.2.2 ? This is a 5x86 133,
I just use it as router to the internet, but I can feel the speed when i
use it, plus My whole Network runs Faster now while using the internet
:). Oh BTW KDE 1.1 look and feels 100% better then 1.0 (no flames).
Ozric
Charles Sullivan wrote:
>
> Jacek Pop�awski wrote in message ...
> >Brandon wrote:
> >>I heard RedHat has some instructions to do this and isn't 5.2 supposed
> >>to be 2.2 ready?
> >
> >hmmmm... it is strange... i upgraded my RH 5.1 to 5.2, then next i
> >extract 2.2.1 to /usr/src/linux, then patched it to 2.2.2, then
> >compile - and... everything work perfect - why? :-)
>
> You obviously did something wrong! Linux is only supposed to
> install after you've been tearing your hair out for four hours. :-)
------------------------------
From: jik- <[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?)
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 06:48:58 -0800
Chris Lee wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >
> >> One of my main concerns as to Linux and the GPL is proprietery
> >> drivers....I only hope that it won't cause a problem that the Kernel was
> >> GPLed instead of some 'other' licence which would have been less hazy in
> >> this area. Actually seems to me that the GPL might totally be a problem
> >> since drivers ARE linked to the kernel,....some people/groups might have
> >> coniption fits if a company tries this. Besides that though, I have no
> >> opinion....just glad linux is free.
> >
> >
> >Well, it has happened. A company has released a kernel module which is
> >binary. Too bad for them, too bad for us,...too bad for
> >Linux....because the kernel was GPLed.
> >
> >This sucks, but I knew it would happen....with all the talk about how
> >much we want commercial developers to take Linux seriously,...the MINUTE
> >one does they get egged. This is why Linux will never make it much
> >further then it already has.
>
> They got exactly what they deserved. That kernel module as you put it
> *MODIFIED* the linux kernel which is against the rules and everybody pretty
> much knows it.
No it didn't, least not acording to anyone else...I never did get to see
thier website...
No, it required modifications to the kernel, which were made publicly
available....How could they not be, in order to modify the kernel you
have to recompile it or your just adding in a module....
I see no sin here. They wanted to sell a module for Linux, the linux
kernel fell short of the requirements so they give out some sort of
patch with thier binary module. This is a perfectly resonable course of
action for them, it should not be a problem. If it IS a problem then
obviously they should just take thier business elsewere,....but like I
said, thats just too bad for the entire community, not just them but us
as well because AFAIK they are the only ones offering this kind of
driver to Linux.
I for one think it is about time the Linux world made up its MIND.
Everyone says how great it would be if some of the commercial developers
would write drivers for Linux. Then we could have better hardware
support....but look what happens when someone does. Same sort of
bullshit that happened when KDE was released,....
>
> They tried pulling a fast one and got nailed for it. End of story.
Yeah, they sure thouight they had us huh....make a driver for Linux will
yah!!! Well we'll just SEE about that!
------------------------------
From: James Youngman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: sccs for linux
Date: 28 Feb 1999 13:06:55 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Kiesling) writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Charles Stroom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Sat, 20 Feb 1999 19:22:27 +0200, naftali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I use CSSC, a very good implementation of SCCS. I got it from
Thanks, Charles.
> >ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/CSSC/
Yes, that is the primary site for it. There is a mirror at
ftp://sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk/Mirrors/alpha.gnu.org/, and that site has
much better bandwidth.
> >and use the latest version which is CSSC-0.09alpha.pl2, dated 10 dec
> >1998.
> >CSSC was written and is maintained by James Youngman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> If you don't need to be backwardly compatible with an existing
> archive, you might consider RCS. It has the advantage of being more
> widely supported by front-end packages like the rcs.el Emacs package,
> and it is upwardly compatible with CVS.
I thought that rcs.el had been superceded by vc.el (which supports
SCCS, RCS and CVS all at once).
Anyway, my personal preference is for CVS.
--
ACTUALLY reachable as @free-lunch.demon.(whitehouse)co.uk:james+usenet
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 00:27:32 -0800
From: Jayasuthan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: HELP: Linux crashing with fsck error
Hi,
run into since user then try fsck on the scsi and check you lost+found
find any files there. Also check for file corruptions... do pass any
"hdparm" to your disk. ... run full debug syslog and keep and eye on log
file. Get a good backup ready... I just had a bad file corruption.
David Kirkpatrick wrote:
>
> Tony,
> Possibly your paritions were not made correctly at the
> beginning. If this happened you can get a load and fail later as
> your seeing. OR just plain old HW problem. You system is messed
> up as it looks like its trying to free a page the kernel does not
> own. Linux will not notmally do this when everything is running
> correctly.
> I had my mother board mis-strapped on advice from the vendor
> and would load and run for hours then fail, crash and mess up the
> file pointer so it would recover on the way up. Eventually after
> several crashes over a week or two it would fail perminantly.
> But when it worked it would run without problems for days. Since
> the re-strapping its been up for three weeks and heavily loaded
> and running fine without any problems. Just in case I include an
> fdisk message.
> Mem may not be seated, cables loose. Are you using consistant
> applications all matched for your kernel i.e. have you loaded any
> modules or binaries that may be for a different release?
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > Our linux system is regularly crashing with the following error messages:
> >
> > Login: 0ops: 0000
> > EIP: 0010:001398f6
> > EFLAGS: 00010202
> > eax: 00000000 ebx: 00e75915 ecx: 0000008 edx: 00e75d98
> > esi: 00000000 edi: 00e75458 ebp: 00000000 esp: 001b30a0
> > ds: 0018 es: 0018 fs: 002b gs: 0018 ss:0018
> > Process Swapper (pid:0, process nr: 0, Stackpage=001b120c)
> > Stack: 0052ece4 0052ed4a 001be1f0 00000001 00000024
> > 00139de4
> > 00006800
> > call trace: 00139de4 00186b0f 00134e6d 0011b6ce
> > code: 83 7e 14 00 74 09 8b 53 14 8b 43 18 89 42 18 6a 01 8b 43 0c
> > Aiee; killing interrupt handler
> > kfree of non-kmalloced memory: 001b3204, next=00000000, order=1116370
> > task[0] (swapper) killed: unable to recover
> > kernel panic: trying to free up swapper memory space
> > in swapper task - not syncing
> >
> > ON REBOOT (messages):
> >
> > Parallelizing fsck version 0.5b (14-Feb-95)
> > Duplicate a bad blocks in use!
> > /dev/sda2: Unexpected consistency; Run fsck manually
> >
> > ********************************************
> > fsck returned error code - REBOOT NOW!
> > ********************************************
> >
> > The system then reboots on its own and starts working ok, until the next
> > repeat of the crash.
> >
> > I have tried booting from a boot disk and then running the �e2fsck -av'
> > function, but this just returns the errors as seen above.
> >
> > Any help that anyone can give, would be most appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Tony
> >
> > -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> > http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
#include <linux/geek.h>
<----|
I run around LAN for 10 Hours....
Surf WAN for 4 hours and........
play on localhost for 3 hours !
Is this mean I am qualify to become a GEEK !
|---->
"The sky looks blue but it is not"
---> Don't see things and believe <-----
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Red Hat's sick sense of humor (support)
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 14:12:30 GMT
kyler writes:
> Doesn't it seem strange that Red Hat isn't willing to take *$50* directly
> from me in exchange for support?
What seems even stranger is that you are not willing to offer the $50 to
somebody else for the support.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
------------------------------
From: Jerry Lynn Kreps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.linux
Subject: Re: More bad news for NT
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 08:20:59 -0600
Jim Ross wrote:
<snip>
> Maybe running as root is my problem but clicking around in the Control
> Center of KDE often hangs my Linux system. The hard drive cranks, like KDE
> is in a loop, I can't do crtl-alt-del or ctrl-alt-f2 or anything. I have
> push my reset button. I find this disturbing. Like when MS said 32-bit
> programs couldn't crash other 32-bit programs or the OS, but yet they in
> fact could.
> Jim
Have you cntrl+alt+F2 (or F3 -F6) to open another console, log in as
another user, and run ps to get a PID number to kill the Xserver, or
just "shutdown -r now"?
------------------------------
From: Gerald Willmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: special characters in UNIX how?
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 08:02:50 -0800
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Joel Wijngaarde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >does somebody know how you can do special charters in Linux like an 'e'
> >or an 'u' with two points on top. In Windows such things are done with
> >the ALT xxx keys.
can work the same way on the linux console, call the following .inputrc
set metaflag on
set convert-meta off
set output-meta on
and put it in your home directory.
Gerald
------------------------------
From: ozric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Boxes & Internet
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 16:05:33 GMT
YES
DaStOp wrote:
>
> I would like to know if it is possible to have 2 Linux Boxes connected via
> Ethernet that share tha same modem/Internet connection simultaneously, maybe
> also running XWindows.
> Thank you in advance for your help. :)
>
> Da$top
>
> ----- O ----- O ----- O ----- O ----- O ----- O ----- O ----- O -----
> Check out these discussions lists:
> http://www.dejanews.com/~hiphopstyle/j.xp?j=hiphopstyle
> http://www.dejanews.com/~linuxandwindows/j.xp?j=linuxandwindows
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 00:32:43 -0800
From: Jayasuthan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.admin
Subject: Re: Advanced RAM usage question...
Hi,
I usually keep some free memory off unused during process sleep, most
process memory where push to vm which i believe active memory runs
faster which require to push hard for ram... Its just my idea..
anyway did anyone what spec been used for
/proc/sys/vm/kswapd
?
Osma Ahvenlampi wrote:
>
> 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)
--
#include <linux/geek.h>
<----|
I run around LAN for 10 Hours....
Surf WAN for 4 hours and........
play on localhost for 3 hours !
Is this mean I am qualify to become a GEEK !
|---->
"The sky looks blue but it is not"
---> Don't see things and believe <-----
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory L. Hansen)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: What if software could think?
Date: 28 Feb 1999 16:12:32 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I think that to be truely free, code has to be made so that people can
>do what they want with it. If they want to steal another person's work
>and make money from it, without adding anything of thier own,....they
>WILL eventually be exposed as frauds. But forcing people into
>submission is simply not the way to go...which is exactly what the FSF
>wants to do, just read thier website on why we should stop using the
>LGPL.
If you're forced into submission, it's because you've willingly used GPL
code. It's their code! Some of it wouldn't have been written at all if
they didn't want free versions of existing products. Products that you
wouldn't have had "free" access to, anyway.
I'm not saying John is wrong about the anti-productive effects of GPL code
(and I'm also not saying he's right, I just don't know). But I really
can't imagine why there's such an argument about this. Microsoft won't
give you their code AT ALL, for any reason, unless you're an official
developer and sign an NDA agreement and all. Wolfram won't give their
code out. Anyone complaing about not being able to use GPL code evidently
won't give their own code out, either. The GPLers do give their code out
for free, but with a few conditions attached. And they have as much right
to demand their code is not restricted as Wolfram or John or anyone else
has to restrict their work to paying customers and official developers. I
don't see anyone complaining that they can't pull code out of Mathematica
or AutoCAD. Why pick on GPL, except that they give so much more, and yet
it's not quite within your reach?
So to summarize, I say again that it's their friggin' code! They can do
whatever the hell they want with it. They should be able to do whatever
the hell they want with it, since they wrote it. Just as you can do
whatever the hell you want to do with your own code. Any license is
written to enforce an ideal, such as "I should get paid for my work."
Their license is written to enforce a different ideal, but it covers their
software, not yours.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Potter)
Subject: Re: ORBit 0.3.98 and glib 1.1.16
Date: 28 Feb 1999 15:28:38 GMT
[Posted and mailed]
James Lewis enlightened this group thus:
>
> Is there a secert to compling ORBit 0.3.98 with glib 1.1.16? I'm trying
> on slackware, and its dieing with "undefined reference to allow
> severity."
>
> I _assume_ this could be a glib problem, but I'm not sure. 0.3.91
> complied fine (and recomplied fine) for me. If anyone has got some
> ideas, I'm open to them.
>
> Also, another user told me that glib 1.1.15 doesn't seem to help the
> problem.
>
> -James
>
>
It could depend on which compiler you are using. I've upgraded my slackware to
egcs 1.1.1 and glibc 2.0.7 and I can compile ORBit 0.3.98 and glib 1.2 just fine.
I believe that all the Gnome developement is being done on glibc2 systems.
--
* ^ \ ___@
*^ / \ \ | \
/ \/ \ \__| \
/ / ^ \ \
/ \ \ Eric Potter
/ ^ ^ \ \
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 00:35:03 -0800
From: Jayasuthan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Help!!: sync/update/bdflush stalling
Try add some "fuser" command to kill process on that disk... use man
page pls..
Dr Ian Vince McLoughlin wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Any solutions or pointers to help here would be very
> welcome (please reply via email because many new
> messages seem to get lost before I receive them)!
>
> Hardware:
> AMD K6-2 3D 266
> 64Meg SDRAM
> AMIBIOS
> 6.4gig IDE HD (Western Digital)
>
> Problem:
> *sometimes* (not always), when I do a
> shutdown I get the message saying
> that /dev/hdc5 (/usr partition) is still busy
> and the logout process hangs (and a manual reboot
> means fsck checking about 4 gig of hard disc
> next time I start up).
>
> Some known problems are occasionally a
> sync command halts midway, and kill -9 can't
> kill the process. This can happen when
> running;
> /sbin/lilo
> (but then often this works OK)
>
> Other info:
> I made a new kernel for a '386' with all the
> buggy motherboard fixes included, but this
> doesn't help. Changing the disc to hda or
> hdb doesn't cure the problem either...
>
> Thanks in advance for any help....
> pls reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> regards,
> Ian McLoughlin
--
#include <linux/geek.h>
<----|
I run around LAN for 10 Hours....
Surf WAN for 4 hours and........
play on localhost for 3 hours !
Is this mean I am qualify to become a GEEK !
|---->
"The sky looks blue but it is not"
---> Don't see things and believe <-----
------------------------------
From: Caroline SILVIE & Vincent GUIGNOT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Installation Error
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 17:15:21 +0100
Hi !
I'm trying to install the Redhat 5.2 on my old 486 DX2 66, and the CPU
is halted on : CHECKING 386/387 COUPLING.
I must switch off the machine to reboot (reset does not perform).
Anybody had an idea to resolve this error ?
Thanks in advance
RGDS
Vincent
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Missing Screen Savers in RedHad v5.2?
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 16:21:14 GMT
I just installed Red Hat v5.2 and XFree86. When I checked out the
Screen Savers.... They don't seem to be anywhere.
Can anyone tell me what happened to them?
Previous installs had them all installed.
Ian
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Mouse Response
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 16:21:25 GMT
I just installed Red Hat v5.2 and the XFree86.
I find my mouse is not as responsive as with MS Windows even if I use
the Acceleration. Is this normal for Linux?
Is there any software I have to load to make it better?
Ian
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: John Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anti-Virus for Linux
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 08:39:22 -0600
Todd Knarr wrote:
>
> John Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But for a linux system acting as a mail or file server for
> > Windows clients, a native scanner program might be useful in
> > detecting viruses in the mail spool or elsewhere that might
> The biggest problem is the sheer number of formats the virus might
> arrive in.
I don't see this a a major issue. The viruses will arrive in
some sort of standard format, be it binary executable or
macro or encoded in some way (ie, MIME, uuencode, etc.). If
they aren't in a standard format chances are they can't be
decoded to run and infect the system anyway.
> The problem isn't scanning for the viruses, it's in
> recognizing what you need to scan. And that isn't even counting
> the ability of HTML-formatted messages to pull in viruses from
> files that don't go through the mail system.
Well, that's what firewalls are for, yes? If everybody has
to go through a single machine to access the outside world,
you set up that machine to monitor the traffic for potential
viruses. And if that machine happens to run linux, you'd
need a linux program for this job.
> > centrally. I'm sure you know what users are capable of
> > doing to their machines...
>
> Oh, yes. Oh, yes indeed. Let's not go there, shall we? I'm
> relatively immune, but then I'm paranoid ( I think there's
> a connection there ). I'm just glad someone _else_ has to
> muck out that particular cesspool.
--
-John ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
------------------------------
From: Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class.
Date: 27 Feb 1999 23:23:14 -0800
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
>>>>> "jik" == jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
jik> Then you get into what we don't have.....I know of one thing
jik> which is available for Win95 that hasn't even been worked on
jik> in Linux.....There is a tool made by Fluke which is used for
jik> diagnostics on the newer (not so much anymore :P)
jik> computerised cars. This tool will talk to win95 and you can
jik> put the information it talks about into a database on the
jik> computer...then transfered here, there,....all over, shared
jik> online...its a fuckin killer tool.
jik> Hmm, went to the website,...not only does this thing have
jik> automotive applications, it can be used in the Medical field,
jik> simple electronics (I mean, duh I gues...it's pretty much a
jik> handheld osciliscope), and video.
jik> THAT is the kind of application Linux needs....something REAL
jik> people can use....not some new flashy text editor/hackers wet
jik> dream.
Hmm, they write up stuff like this all the time in Linux Journal.
This month is a linux-powered self-driving car. Running on a
P-200 or something like that. They made a 2000 km trip in it in
Italy. Last month, they had an account of some hurricane hunters
running linux on their data-gathering boxes in a hurricane plane. And
using X-based apps for the interfaces.
I have to say, though, I don't quite understand why you think "Joe
Average" would give a rip about an oscilliscope app for any OS. I
can't see any such niche product being considered a "killer" app.
mp
- --
Michael Powe Portland, Oregon USA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.trollope.org
"Three hours a day will produce as much as a man ought to write."
-- Anthony Trollope
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: GnuPG v0.9.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Encrypted with Mailcrypt 3.5.1 and GNU Privacy Guard
iD8DBQE22O7f755rgEMD+T8RAn5rAJ4vAvi2Afm7QRMpAyAANuyi9qNzGACdH80o
audQ+PyWfN8TpphwG/wAN4s=
=5W+I
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
