Linux-Misc Digest #259, Volume #19 Tue, 2 Mar 99 04:13:13 EST
Contents:
Re: Redhat 5.2 is a waste of time.....Win98 for 2000. ('Wulff)
Re: More bad news for NT (Michael Powe)
Re: Telnet and rlogin as root (William Heymann)
Re: FreeBSD vs LINUX (Seth Van Oort)
Re: Cable Modems with Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: FreeBSD vs LINUX (Richard Steiner)
Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class. (Richard Steiner)
Re: More bad news for NT (Richard Steiner)
Re: Network Administrators - why is pay so low? (Richard Steiner)
Kernel 2.2.1 make zImage error with RedHat-5.2 (Ryan Gaul)
Re: hexbin - mixed success; fail on mac-made pdf file (Erik Rossen)
Re: Netscape version for Debian ? (**Nick Brown)
Re: does people use console or X ? ("Scott D. Hernalsteen")
aps or magicfilter? (Mark)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ('Wulff)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,alt.linux,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Redhat 5.2 is a waste of time.....Win98 for 2000.
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 06:53:27 GMT
On Tue, 02 Mar 1999 02:35:41 +0000, Chris Leahy
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> OK.....then here's the 42 cent question ,
>> Where do I find Redhat 5.2 and all of it's components?
>> I've come across some sites but wasn't sure which files I needed to
>> get the ball rolling.
>> Also I've got a cd burner so what are the chances of being able to
>> make my own bootable linux cd using files off the net?
>>
>> 'Wulff
>> ......................................................
>> Hindsight is nature's way of saying
>> "Boy did YOU screw up".
>
>I believe you can get all you need from ftp.cdrom.com or ftp.redhat.com
>I'm not exactly sure which files you need but if you are planning on
>downloading via a modem I hope you have a real good internet plan and a
>week where you dont need your phone.
>here is a listing from the top level dir of my RedHat 5.2 cdrom
>I believe you will at LEAST need the entire contents of the RedHat
>directory which contains the RPM and BASE directories.
Hehe...thanks for the info,actually I've got a cable modem so If the
files are on a reasonable server the d/l should only take less than a
half hour.
'Wulff
......................................................
Hindsight is nature's way of saying
"Boy did YOU screw up".
------------------------------
From: Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.linux
Subject: Re: More bad news for NT
Date: 01 Mar 1999 22:57:05 -0800
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
>>>>> "Jon" == Jon Wiest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jon> Gregory Propf wrote in message
Jon> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> As for Netscape locking up, you WILL find that happening under
>> Linux. The difference is that bad software can't crash the
>> whole system under Linux like it does ALL THE DAMN TIME under
>> Windows. Don't argue with me on this, I work with this garbage
>> every workday and I know what I'm talking about.
Jon> You again! Man you are condescending. You think you are the
Jon> only one working with this stuff everyday? I do too. Golly,
Jon> gee, perhaps we are using it for different things. I will
Jon> argue, based on experience.
Jon> As for Netscape, it does lock up Linux. I have locked up
Jon> Linux, not with any server apps, yet though. Couple of DOOM
Jon> sessions tells me Linux is pointless as a DESKTOP.
Hmm, DESKTOP != DOOM. DESKTOP == real work. Plenty of opportunity
there for linux. I know a lot of people are hot for "games on linux"
- -- but really, you timewasters might as well stick with the
TimeWasters(tm) OS -- Windows.
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
iD8DBQE224u+755rgEMD+T8RAoQGAKCzZIX5066rKXBScc5I2aFX+Uo1hwCfTdAH
DxDgQxp1KgIfTRdsrEc+0yg=
=REas
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
------------------------------
From: William Heymann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Telnet and rlogin as root
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 07:12:46 +0000
Gert Wollny wrote:
>
> Ronald Hovens wrote:
> >
> > I am not able to telnet or rlogin to my linux box: when I try to login
> > as root I get erromessage Login incorrect.
> > However, if I try a 'normal' user, it works!
> >
> > Is this normal/what can I do about it?
> There is a file /etc/securegettys, here you would have to add the
> terminals for in-telneting (AFAIK ttyp0,ttyp1,...), but you should not
> do that for security reasons if your linux box is connected to the world
> outside.
> Log in as normal user and 'su' instead.
>
> Bye
>
> Gert
>
> --
> Max-Planck-Institute of Cognitive NeuroSience http://www.cns.mpg.de
>
> http://gerti.home.pages.de
Try using ssh you can log in as root remotely using that and everything
is
encrypted so that passwords to not get passed around as plain text.
------------------------------
From: Seth Van Oort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs LINUX
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 07:21:40 +0000
James Fox wrote:
>
> I ran FreeBSD several years ago on a 486 66mz machine and was
> impressed with how solid and fast it was. I ran Apache on it and
> used it to develop HTML/cgi for uploading to a large university
> Sun/Solaris system.
>
> I've now decided to abandon Windows and install "unix". I know
> there are major organizations still using FreeBSD on servers, but
> I'm worried that with all the attention Linux is getting, it's
> probably the bandwagon to hop on.
>
> What are the pros and cons? I'll be using the JDK, GNU-C++,
> Apache, Netscape, etc. What are the chances of a merger of Linux
> and FreeBSD?
you mean an honest to goodness merger? If you witnessed the spat that's
been taking place over the past three weeks, I'd say the chances aren't
too good.
Seth
>
> Thanks for any input...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,alt.linux,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Cable Modems with Linux
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 02:40:05 GMT
The cable company says they only support Win95/Macs so
they don't get LINUX calls, etc.
You can set up LINUX to use the cable modem. It actually
makes no difference what OS you have since like Billy
Joel says, "it's all TCP/IP to me..."
The cablemodem is not OS-dependant as long as your OS
supports TCP/IP which most do now.
Just remember for most cable companies the NIC you
registered with is the ONLY NIC that will work for
the cable modem. This is for security reasons - cable
companies record your NICs internal MAC address (nothing
to do with Apple Macs) and only accept data from THAT card.
This is so hackers can't do any IP spoofing.
To have 2 or more computers access the inet you need 2 or
more LEGAL IP addresses. Since most cable companies at this
time don't give you more than one - like my provider -
you'll have to set up a proxy server. The proxy server will
need 2 NICs installed: one connected to the cable modem - the
other to a hub ($60 Linksys, etc) in your "home network". The
"home network" computers don't need legal IPs since they won't
be exposed to the inet. All communication goes through the
proxy server. And as far as the inet and your cable company
are concerned you are using 1 connection!!! Basically you could
network your whole house and pay about $40-$100/month for massive
bandwidth. Ain't America grand?!!
As far as LINUX goes - with the RedHat 5x distribution it worked
right out of the box, because my cable company uses a DHCP server
with 6 month IP leases. It's not TRULY a static IP, but if you
have it for 6-month blocks - it's close.
Markus Diersbock,
idrop.com
> 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?
>
> 2) How would I setup 2 systems to share the same cable modem? I'm
> told that there might be a way to setup the first system as a proxy
> server...that wd run Win95, and then connect my linux system thru
> that. In the end, both systems could use the cable modem, and that
> would be great!! Anyone know how to do this?
>
> thanx
> ted
>
> --
> how would you like to get 1/2% of $2 Trillion?
> see http://freedomstarr.com/?JO4554535
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Steiner)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs LINUX
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 00:33:52 -0600
Here in comp.os.linux.misc, James Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
spake unto us, saying:
>What are the pros and cons? I'll be using the JDK, GNU-C++,
>Apache, Netscape, etc.
This has been covered in extreme detail before, and a good search via
DejaNews should uncover most of that.
>What are the chances of a merger of Linux and FreeBSD?
Probably zero. The two kernels have very different philosophies when
it comes to source licensing, and my own outsider's impression is that
the FreeBSD folks want to stay the course and do the slow, steady type
of development cycle, while the Linux folks are more content to take
some more drastic leaps from time to time.
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>---> Bloomington, MN
OS/2 + Linux (Slackware+RedHat+SuSE) + FreeBSD + Solaris + BeOS +
WinNT4 + Win95 + PC/GEOS + MacOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
This Line is very Tag.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Steiner)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 00:41:16 -0600
Here in comp.os.linux.misc, Ryan Cumming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
spake unto us, saying:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 28 Feb 1999 18:48:19 -0600, Richard Steiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Actually, the GUI in Windows is a separate program executable also (the
>> >explorer), and it can be replaced. See LiteStep.
>
>Okay, I used LiteStep for quite a long time (It turned me one to Linux),
>and what your saying is bullshit.
I've never used LiteStep (I'm an OS/2 and Linux user, and only boot
into Win95 here when StarCraft beckons) and was under the impression
that it was an explorer replacement.
I apparently stand corrected.
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>---> Bloomington, MN
OS/2 + Linux (Slackware+RedHat+SuSE) + FreeBSD + Solaris + BeOS +
WinNT4 + Win95 + PC/GEOS + MacOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
Politically *Incorrect* and proud of it!!!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Steiner)
Subject: Re: More bad news for NT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 00:45:30 -0600
Here in comp.os.linux.misc, Harry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
spake unto us, saying:
>Let's see if I got you right - you find it hard to identify
>hardware, OS kernel components, utilities, and applications on
>an NT system?
Where does the kernel end on Windows NT and the GUI begin?
I can boot OS/2 (via TSHELL) or Linux in such a way that I have no GUI
whatsoever, and yet those OSes will be able to run 32-bit multithreaded
software and juggle multiple tasks.
It doesn't appear possible to do this with Windows NT, indicating (or
at least hinting) that the line between kernel and graphical shell on
Windows NT is somewhat blurred.
Is this an incorrect perception?
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>---> Bloomington, MN
OS/2 + Linux (Slackware+RedHat+SuSE) + FreeBSD + Solaris + BeOS +
WinNT4 + Win95 + PC/GEOS + MacOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
I don't care if I am a lemming. I'm NOT going!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Steiner)
Subject: Re: Network Administrators - why is pay so low?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 00:48:41 -0600
Here in comp.os.linux.misc, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marc D. Bumble)
spake unto us, saying:
>Why are Network administrators paid less than software developers?
Without more context, this isn't a particlarly meaningful question.
Someone who maintains a few small static machines with a couple of
printers in a small office LAN is doing a lot less work than someone
maintaining a 24x7 network providing real time critical information.
Some network administrators make quite a bit, I suspect.
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>---> Bloomington, MN
OS/2 + Linux (Slackware+RedHat+SuSE) + FreeBSD + Solaris + BeOS +
WinNT4 + Win95 + PC/GEOS + MacOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
Dime: a dollar with all the taxes taken out.
------------------------------
From: Ryan Gaul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Kernel 2.2.1 make zImage error with RedHat-5.2
Date: 2 Mar 1999 02:31:36 GMT
Please respond via e-mail to this post ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
I am trying to compile a new kernel (in RedHat 5.2), and I keep getting the
same error. I've tried removing all but the most necessary pieces and I
still get the error. I installed the source as follows:
# cd /usr/src/
# gzip -cd linux-2.2.1.tar.gz | tar xfv -
then, from /usr/src/linux I do make mrproper and then, of course, a make
menuconfig (as I am fairly new to Linux, make config still scares me). I
then do a make dep ; make clean followed by make zImage (I've also tried
make bzImage, but the same error occurs.) I have already downloaded and
installed all of the packages RedHat says I require. Did they miss
something? Did I miss something? any help here would be appreciated. The
offending process and error are as follows:
make all_targets
make[2]: Entering directory '/usr/src/linux-2.0.36/arch/i386/lib'
gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/linux-2.0.36/include -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes
-02 -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -fno-strength-reduce -m486 -malign-loops=2
-malign-jumps=2 -malign-functions=2 -DCPU=686 -c -o checksum.o
checksum.c
chucksum.c:200: redefinition of 'csum_partial_copy'
checksum.c:105: 'csum_partial_copy' previously defined here
{standard input}: Assembler messages:
{standard input}:188: Fatal error: Symbol csum_partial_copy already
defined.
make[2]:*** [checksum.o] Error 1
make[2]:Leaving directory '/usr/src/linux-2.0.36/arch/i386/lib'
make[1]:*** [first_rule] Error 2
make[1]:Leaving directory '/usr/src/linux-2.0.36/arch/i386/lib'
make:*** [_dir_arch/i386/lib] Error 2
I notice there is a reference to /usr/src/linux-2.0.36/arch/lib and I am,
in fact trying to compile 2.2.1 source. Have I somehow not installed the
source correctly or am I missing a symbolic link? I am a newbie, so please
pretend I am an idiot if you have some idea what is wrong and how I can fix
it. No instruction is too precise.
Thanks,
Ryan Gaul
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: Erik Rossen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: hexbin - mixed success; fail on mac-made pdf file
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 09:07:57 MET
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dick Repasky) wrote:
>I've had mixed success using hexbin (macutils 2.0b3 ix86) on files that I
>receive from Mac users. Hexbin itself always runs fine, but the
>result may not be usable. The latest failure was with a portable
>document format file (.pdf) that was made on a macintosh and sent as
>an e-mail attachment. Hexbin reported no error, but I was unable to
>process the file using ghostscript. Eventually, I used a mac to fetch
>the file over to the mac (fetch automatically unbinhexed the file) and
>then fetched the result back to my linux box. The resulting pdf file
>works perfectly with ghostscript. When using hexbin, I generally use
>either the -d or -u flags. Am I doing something wrong?
My wife sometimes has this problem too, although she is trying to read
the attached PDF file on a W95 machine with a debinhexer.
Some files get sent fine, sometimes the attached files are screwed.
We've done a few tests on my Linux machine (with binhex and
acroread) and the Linux machine fails on the same files
that W95 chokes on. This suggests that the problem is with the
originating Mac. Please let me know if you find a solution.
Erik Rossen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: **Nick Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Netscape version for Debian ?
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 09:02:46 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The package I'm referring to is described at
http://www.debian.org/Packages/stable/web/netscape4.html
... but I'll check out the unstable one. Thanks.
John Hasler wrote:
> I can't find this in my Packages files. I suggest that you ask on the
> debian-user mailing list. Go to www.debian.org to subscribe.
--
===============================================================
|\ | o _ |/ Life's like a jigsaw
| \| | |_ |\ You get the straight bits
But there's something missing in the middle
Nick Brown, Strasbourg, France (Nick(dot)Brown(at)coe(dot)fr)
===============================================================
------------------------------
From: "Scott D. Hernalsteen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: does people use console or X ?
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 22:45:10 -0500
Pas Moi wrote:
>
> >> "FW" == Finnskoga Wärdshus wrote on Thu, 18 Feb 1999 01:42:15 +0100:
>
> FW> I am pretty new to this but I just wounder Does you people usually
> FW> hang around in console mode or have you all instaled X?
>
> i use the console most of the time. i just like it better. i only
> use x when i work in japanese because the fonts are better, and xemacs
> doesn't do japanese on the console. but use what _you_ prefer.
>
I use X on my desktop(but with a term window *always* open) and console
on my laptop(it's a 486) for speed.
> FW> Anoter one... If I install Xfree (X11 or wht it is called) vill I
> FW> nead an extra prog ontop of that like KDE, Gnome or Windowmaker or
> FW> is it the same..
>
> yeah, you'll need a window manager at least. you don't need kde or
> gnome, though. i like afterstep, but you might prefer another.
>
I personally prefer blackbox. Small, fast and simple.
--Scott
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 23:10:25 -0600
From: Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: aps or magicfilter?
Which filter is best used for printing aps or magicfilter? I have a
Canon BJ10ex.
Is one easier? Is one more complete?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
