Linux-Misc Digest #323, Volume #19 Sat, 6 Mar 99 00:13:12 EST
Contents:
Re: Newsreaders and Star Office (Ram Kalapatapu)
Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion ("Keith G. Murphy")
Re: Open source MS bad for Linux? ("Mr. Tinkertrain")
Re: Public license question (Christopher Seawood)
Re: Help! Netscape carshes my system (David Kirkpatrick)
Re: Mwave For Linux Project ("matthew.r.pavlovich.1")
Where is psaux.c ? (Regit Young)
Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion (Roger Espel Llima)
Re: Public license question (NF Stevens)
Re: One-way Cable Modem (brian moore)
Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing? ("David A. Frantz")
Re: Public license question (Lynn Winebarger)
Re: Public license question (jik-)
Cannot Remove LILO from MBR (Cevher Dogan)
Re: StarOffice anyone?? (Monte Milanuk)
Re: Pentium III Boycott and survey info (mlw)
Re: nn-tk Newsreader (David Magda)
Re: Create a DOS bootdisk in using only Linux (Matthias Benkmann)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ram Kalapatapu)
Subject: Re: Newsreaders and Star Office
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 21:54:13 GMT
On Fri, 05 Mar 1999 13:07:28 GMT, D Brown
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm new to Linux, but have got everything working (and am very
>pleased with the speed) as I want except for news readers. Three
>questions:
>
>1 When I try to set up the news reader in Star Office I get an error
>message "Connection Failed" when I click on the subscribe tab in the
>news properties. So, I can't get the list of newsgroups. I can't see
>anything in the options for news, mail or internet that may be causing
>this problem. Mail and other news readers are working.
Staroffice is way too bloated for an average desktop machine. Since newsgroups
contain only text -- well ;-) you don't really need a GUI newsreader. slrn is
very fast and supports the mouse and color highlighting. For those
alt.binaries.. you can always use netscape!
>2 Is there an off-line newsreader for linux ?
There are several in the pipeline.. krn, et al. Clucnky at this point of time.
>3 Does anyone know if Virtual Access runs under wine ? If so is it
>32bit or 16bit version.
Agent is known to work well with wine. You might have to get a patch from
last november. Recent releases break agent. I have used 16 bit version
succesfully many months ago. I am not a big fan of agent or any wondows
based newsreader.
>Thanks in advance,
>
>D Brown
>
------------------------------
From: "Keith G. Murphy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 15:59:07 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mark Harrison wrote:
>
> Stefan Skoglund wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >Mach can easily supports multiple OS at the same time ie it possible
> >to implement OS/360 on an PC for example. Seeing the same machine
> >running UNIX and OS/360 could be real fun.
>
> Nixdorf did this for their IBM-compatible mainframes in the early 1980's.
> It was done in their Dallas office. The project was chartered to produce
> a text processing system. The project leader proposed using an existing
> nicely featured system called "troff". All that was necessary was to
> port some support software (called "unix") to provide an operating
> for the text processor.
>
Perhaps someone would like to expound on the evolutionary relationship
(if any) between troff and 'runoff', later Digital Standard Runoff, that
some of us are familiar with on VAX machines...
------------------------------
From: "Mr. Tinkertrain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Open source MS bad for Linux?
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 17:20:03 -0500
actually, m$ realeasing the source might be good, because a) how many
out of the 10 million users are actually going to hack the source? b)
the ones who do look at the source and understand the inner workings of
that evil os will be exploiting every single security hole that ever
existed in win95!! it'll be cool, there'll be all these thousands of
more ways to fuck up winblows.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Seawood)
Subject: Re: Public license question
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 22:35:48 GMT
Barry Margolin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Peter Seebach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: >It doesn't make sense for his control of his work to depend on this either.
:
: He's the one who was purported to be writing a program that's dependent on
: a GPLed library, and was trying to use dynamic linking as a loophole around
If another non-GPL'd library could potentially be used instead of the
GPL'd one, then his work isn't dependent upon it. But what you're saying
is that the mere potential isn't enough. So what if someone provided a
dummy libreadline that contains all of the hooks and public API needed
to use the program w/o using libreadline? The mere existance of this
dreadline should not determine whether or not the program in question
is dependent upon readline.
>From the previous discussions on this thread, it doesn't seem as though
copyright law (as currently written) would consider the program to be a
derivative work of readline if they were dynamically linked (regardless
of the existance of a clone lib). Now, if RMS and others think this
is not in the "spirit of copyright law", then they should lobby to get
copyright law changed. But until that time, this loophole seems to be
perfectly legal.
: it. The whole reason for using the GPL, rather than the LGPL, for a
: library is so that it can be used as an enticement for other people to
: distribute their work freely (you can link with it if you agree to free
: your code); the purpose is defeated if someone can simply use dynamic
: linking as a workaround.
I think this is a case where the ambiguity of copyright law wrt software
works against the goals of RMS. Rather than ignore the ambiguity or
say that a certain action is against the "spirit of copyright law",
perhaps the GPL should explicitly close that loophole. Otherwise, what
you have is RMS saying that's it is illegal to *use* a GPL'd library
under certain conditions even though he has no legal backing to do so.
And we'll continue to have discussions like this...especially now with
more people using things like CORBA.
- cls
------------------------------
From: David Kirkpatrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help! Netscape carshes my system
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 18:24:50 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can you post the oops from /var/log/messages? Usually netscape
locks up X sometimes so bad you cannot CTL ALT backspace to kill
x although a couple of times I waited a very long time and it
unfroze after locking up X. I usually go in through a telnet and
kill netscape. But I have not heard of a hard crash and would
like to see the oops or error logs for the crash.
d
Guy Rodnay wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This is the story:
> I use netscape 4.5, RedHat 5.0 with 2.032 kernel, libc-2.0.7-19 and
> Xfree86 3.3.1-14.
>
> When browsing some sites which uses java, like
> http://www.exlmarket.co.il for example, X starts allocating memory
> (including the 128Mb swap space) till you kill netscape or until the
> system freezes (yes! total crash!).
> How can I restrict the amount of memory allowed for a user? Can I save
> some memory of root so I can kill such processes?
> I see that there is a file /etc/security/limits.conf which might do the
> trick, but what parameter should I use?
>
> This does not happen very often, but it makes me look bad after I show
> off with my linux system and tell every one how better of NT it is.
>
> Thanks,
> -Guy.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "matthew.r.pavlovich.1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.portable,uk.comp.os.linux,ibm.ibmpc.thinkpad
Subject: Re: Mwave For Linux Project
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 17:20:33 -0500
I talked to the IBM rep at LWCE, they are going to write drivers for
everything. I bet you could get a lot of support from them. I bet they
love the idea of free development.
On Fri, 5 Mar 1999 Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Have you got an IBM Thinkpad or Aptiva with an
> Mwave Soundcard and want to run Linux?
>
> Maybe you would like to contribute to the native
> Mwave driver project?
>
> The Mwave Project for Linux has the answers.
>
> http://www.flexion.org/mwave/
>
> * Native Mwave driver project - NEW!
> [HELP REQUIRED]
>
> * Forum for Mwave/Linux Users - NEW!
> * How to enable Sound Blaster Pro 3.1
> Emulation under Linux
> * Updated for 2.0.x and 2.2.x kernels.
> * Improved layout and easy to follow.
> * No Windows 3.x/95 or 98 required.
>
> We look forward to your visit!
>
> --
> L8r,
> __ __
> / \ / \ __ ___ ___ ____ __ __
> \ \/\/ // /'__ `__ \/ __ \/ / / /
> \ // / / / / / / /_/ / /_/ /
> \__/\ //_/_/ /_/ /_/ .___/\__, /
> \[EMAIL PROTECTED]/_/ /____/
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: Regit Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Where is psaux.c ?
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 11:02:18 +0800
Where is psaux.c in the 2.2.* source tree ?
Thanks
Regit
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roger Espel Llima)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion
Date: 6 Mar 1999 00:15:32 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Francois-Rene Rideau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>REL> For most of my programming needs, give me a well-designed,
>REL> very-high-level, *procedural* language, and I'll be happy.
>You might not like it, but ML (SML or OCaml) is *precisely* that.
>Except that "procedures" are called "functions".
I know that *ML has functions that work a lot like procedures, but I
meant "procedural" in opposition to "(intrusively) OO" and "functional".
The flavors are quite different.
>Now, that shouldn't be a problem to a C programmer like you!
It's not (and I'm more of a perl programmer than C these days); I
learned some CAML once and it woulnd't be a problem to learn enough of
it again to do serious work in it.
It's just a matter of taste, and I don't like the taste of functional
programming. I know it does have some strengths over the procedural and
the OO paradigms, but these mainly relate to formal specifications of
programs' semantics, which is another thing I'm not interested in doing.
>With a completely different syntax, CommonLISP and Scheme are also thus.
>And if you loosen your requirement for high-levelness, go FORTH :)
FORTH is absolutely cool, but I woulnd't really consider of writing my
next app in it.
--
Roger Espel Llima, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.eleves.ens.fr:8080/home/espel/index.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NF Stevens)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Public license question
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 00:39:36 GMT
Barry Margolin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>NF Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>This differs from the dynamic vs static linking distinction because the
>>list of word numbers has no other use apart from recreating the
>>copyrighted novel. With dynamic linking one possible result is the
>>same as static linking (i.e. a memory image composed of the
>>amalgamation of the two works); however it is also possible to
>>link the work against a different (non GPL) library which provides
>>the same functionality. The users may decide not to write their own
>>version of the library, but they always have that choice. I do not
>>see how a work which can be run independently of the GPL work
>>can be considered to be a derived work of that GPL work.
>
>RMS recognizes this, but only when the potential non-GPL library actually
>exists. Why should the copyright holder lose control just because of the
>*potential* of an alternative library? If this potential library doesn't
>exist, and the author of the dependent module knows it, he knows that he's
>creating something functionally equivalent to a work statically linked with
>the library.
The copyright owner is not losing any control. They never had the power
to control how their work is _used_, only how and when and by whom it
is copied.
Let's take a slightly more tenuous link between the GPL work and another
program. What if I wrote a proprietory program which acts as a wrapper
to gcc, allowing you to specify source files and compilation options
using a gui. My program uses the options supplied and then exec's gcc.
To me this seems little different from the dynamic linking case. It
further fulfils the condition that my program would be useless without
gcc; yet I very much doubt anyone could claim that it was a "derived
work" of gcc.
Norman
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: One-way Cable Modem
Date: 6 Mar 1999 03:44:20 GMT
On Fri, 05 Mar 1999 21:45:18 -0500,
Pavel Greenfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've got the one-way Cable Modem account from RCN. Has anyone been
> successful in getting it two work with linux?
I gather you mean a 'telco return' cable modem.
> (One way cable modems shouldn't be any different from Linux's point of
> view, should they?)
Well, that's true once you are connected: after that point, it's just
plain old ethernet. But they are somewhat trickier than a two-way cable
modem since you somehow need to pass it information to dial, negotiate
PPP, pass your username/password, etc. (Just like a plain old dialup:
but the modem is doing the hard work instead of chat script on your
box.)
How to do this depends on what sort of cable modem you're using: the one
we (as in cmc.net) use is from Scientific Atlanta, and they got nudged
into answering a few question from one of our users who wrote a couple
programs for Linux to make it dial, etc.
See http://www.ecst.csuchico.edu/~mcumings/cablemodem/ for how to do it
with SA's. It probably won't work with other brands, though.
--
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: "David A. Frantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing?
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 22:40:17 -0500
Hi John;
I think you hit on one problem at the very least and that is if you want to
get away from I386 you have only one other mass produced platform and that
is Apples Mac. When dealling with software I do not think binary
compatablity is s big deal for Linux users. After all if you want to run
something you can just recompile it.
It would be very interesting if Compag could get the price of an Alpha
motherboard down to the point where they could compete price wise. This
is where the K7 could be a big help, we might be able to have low cost
boards that only require a EPROM / BIOS swap to switch processor families.
My point is that if you need advance architectures and are looking at the NX
chipset and trying to produce a high performance system, you should be
looking also at other soolutions that are available. After all High
preformance I/O implies a High Performance system. Investing in a high
performance computing system and being hung up on binary compatiablity seems
to be a little short sighted to say the least. Now a days if you need
binary compatiablity why not look at a laptop. If nothing else a laptop
is an excellent X-server.
Dave
John Burton wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>"David A. Frantz" wrote:
>>
>> Hi Robert;
>>
>> Robert Krawitz wrote in message ...
>> >"David A. Frantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> >> Try this site http://humbolt.geo.uu.nl/Linux-MM/more_than_1GB.html to
>> gets a
>> >> little info on the current I386 capability. Nothing specific on XEON
>> >> there, well at least I didn't find anything. Sounds like your
trying
>> to
>> >> apply a low end (Yes I mean the XEON) PC chip to a project that
requires
>> a
>> >> 64 bit CPU. You may want to consider an Alpha, or a POWERPC box from
>> IBM.
>> >
>> >I think this is a tad unfair. I'm disappointed that Linus doesn't
>> >want to enable large memory addressing on the x86.
>>
>> As with any general purpose operateing system there are trade offs, one
>> outstanding feature of Linux is the freedom to transform it into
something
>> that suits your purposes. The reallity is that there is nothing to be
>> gained by trying to use a special capability of the XEON just to fillfull
>> the special needs of a few users. This is especially the case when the
>> Chip and Chip SETs are not suited for the application. I firmly
believe
>> that if you really need 64 bit addressing to main memory then you need to
>> look at a 64 bit system.
>>
>
>There are multiple reasons for and against going with an Alpha or PPC
>vs. Intel... on of which is *all* the other hardware is Intel x86 based
>and having *binary* compatibility is important. That said, I too am
>interersted in this topic for the simple reason that the 450NX chipset
>motherboards can support 4 way interleaving of memory, plus the use of
>alternate (4 32bit PCI buses, 2 64bit PCI buses or 2 32bit & 1 64bit PCI
>buses) bus structure, up to 8 Xeon CPUs (with cluster controller)... I'm
>not as interested in the size of the address space as much as the size
>of the memory bandwidth and I/O bus structure...
>
>John
>
>--
>John Burton, Ph.D.
>Senior Associate GATS, Inc.
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] 11864 Canon Blvd - Suite 101
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) Newport News, VA 23606
>(757) 873-5920 (voice) (757) 873-5920 (fax)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lynn Winebarger)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Public license question
Date: 6 Mar 1999 03:29:14 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>RMS is wrong about the 'spirit' of the copyright. Copyright was created
>for the pourpose of inovation...and here is were it really goes away
>from his ideas...
>
>The thought was, that people would be more inclined to come up with new
>ideas if they held certain ownerships of them. If they cold hold onto
>these ideas as being thier own and noone elses for a term, they could
>make money off of thier idea and so they would me more inclined to want
>to. If you thought you could make a few bucks off of something you
>thought up in your head, you might want to go through the pain in the
>ass of actually publishing (or whatever) your new idea....much less so
>if you knew someone would just come along with more resources and take
>it away.
Actually this is incorrect. Copyright covers the particular
expression of ideas, not the ideas themselves. If I write a book
about wavelets, I don't own the ideas about wavelets that are contained
in the book, I own the presentation of those ideas. Someone else can
present them in their own way.
Patents are more along the lines of what you're thinking about. But
even patents don't restrict the expression of the ideas, merely the
physical implementation of those ideas. Which I think has interesting
implications for software, where the expression of the idea is directly
related to its implementation.
At least as far as I have gathered, since I am not a lawyer.
Lynn
------------------------------
From: jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Public license question
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 19:40:45 -0800
Lynn Winebarger wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >RMS is wrong about the 'spirit' of the copyright. Copyright was created
> >for the pourpose of inovation...and here is were it really goes away
> >from his ideas...
> >
> >The thought was, that people would be more inclined to come up with new
> >ideas if they held certain ownerships of them. If they cold hold onto
> >these ideas as being thier own and noone elses for a term, they could
> >make money off of thier idea and so they would me more inclined to want
> >to. If you thought you could make a few bucks off of something you
> >thought up in your head, you might want to go through the pain in the
> >ass of actually publishing (or whatever) your new idea....much less so
> >if you knew someone would just come along with more resources and take
> >it away.
>
> Actually this is incorrect. Copyright covers the particular
> expression of ideas, not the ideas themselves. If I write a book
> about wavelets, I don't own the ideas about wavelets that are contained
> in the book, I own the presentation of those ideas. Someone else can
> present them in their own way.
You right, thats what I was meaning,...I was tired.
------------------------------
From: Cevher Dogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,alt.os.linux.slackware,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Cannot Remove LILO from MBR
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 04:23:29 GMT
Hi,
Sorry if there was similar postings. I had my linux 2 years back and thought
I could do a new install without turning a page. I had 3.1, NT and Linux on 486
66MHz PC, slackware kernel 1.2.1. I formatted the master drive. But,
I am still getting LILO prompt and when I liked to boot for DOS (it asks
for it when dos is chosen ) I get : with the system disk inserted BOOT Couldn't
find NTLDR. Removing the slave hdd I get all zeros and ones continously
on the screen. Booting to linux still fine but root unable to
mount and can'tr go further. Because I tried to install RedHad earlier
with its own install and it formatted the linux native partitions
which is fine. I am not sure whether the master boot record was on the
master or slave drive.
All I want to do now is to have LINUX only on this box and
need help to remove the lilo and start installation of RedHat
dist. Thanks for any help...
--
Jeff
------------------------------
From: Monte Milanuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: StarOffice anyone??
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 18:05:02 -0600
chips wrote:
>
> >
> > The file "soffice" is NOT executable, it is a script, therefore try
> > ./soffice and it should go ok for you. Then change it to an
> > executable with chmod. Hope this helps.
> >
> > Darian
>
> Ahh... Sometimes nothing is simple to a newbie. That worked...I didn't realize
>that I needed to open
> it with ./soffice. Thanks a lot. Now I just need to learn how to make icons for
>the program in
> Afterstep.
> Craig
Look in the Office50/ directory you mentioned earlier. The *.xpm files
are the icons you want, I believe. How to set up the icons in AfterStep
is beyond me; I use KDE. Good Luck
Monte Milanuk
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Pentium III Boycott and survey info
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 23:21:50 +0000
Anthony D. Tribelli wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> : [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Anthony D. Tribelli) wrote:
>
> : >Please do so. I don't believe you'll find an undocumented reset
> : >instruction. You will probably find code that sets up BIOS to do a warm
> : >boot and then asks the keyboard controller to reset the CPU. Later methods
> : >used special I/O ports and multiple CPU faults.
> :
> : actually, what this "undocumented" reset is is simply diliberately
> : creating a triple fault. the cpu can catch a double fault and recover
> : but the cpu resets under a triple fault situation. the code placed at
> : the restart point is aware of what happened and gracefully recovers as
> : if just switching back to real mode. just like has been explained.
>
> Agreed, but it's not a simple 'instruction', and messing with the
> Interrupt Descriptor Table is not something a user level program can do.
>
> Tony
> --
> ------------------
> Tony Tribelli
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
No, it is a simple instruction. Not a reaset per se' but a processor
"hyperspace" instruction that reset the CPU state and read a block of
memory at (I think) 40H and continued in real mode (The ip was also
read). The purpose was testing the protected mode portion of the
processor during device testing. The processor test program needed to
get back into real mode from protected mode.
The problem was this screwed up the bios block. OS/2 had to save the
bios block, setup the future register values at 40H, execute the
instruction and copy the bios block back.
Seriously it does exist, I bet it still exists in the '386 and higher
because they run OS/2 1.x.
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 95, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit the Mohawk Software website: www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Magda)
Subject: Re: nn-tk Newsreader
Date: 6 Mar 1999 03:36:41 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian Moore) writes:
>Linux Users,
> I have had problems trying to install nn-tk-16.4 into Linux
>Red Hat 5.2. After running " make " there is no nn-tk binary
>compiled.
>Has anyone had this problem or found the reason.
In the source directory edit the file "config.h". At about line 30 there
should be a "/* #define TK */". Get rid of the /* and the */, and try
recompiling.
BTW, there is a group called news.software.nn which will probably more
appropriate for further questions.
--
David Magda <dmagda at acs.ryerson.ca>, 2nd Year Electrical Eng.
"Well," said Pooh, "what I like best--" and then he had to stop and think.
Because although Eating Honey was a very good thing to do, there was a
moment just before you began to eat it which was better than when you were,
but he didn't know what it was called. -A.A.Milne,The House at Pooh Corner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Benkmann)
Subject: Re: Create a DOS bootdisk in using only Linux
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 23:57:38 GMT
>Isn't a Dos bootdisk just dos formatted disk with the system files copied
>onto it? If so, you could make your own. I forget what files get copied
>onto a Dos bootdisk, command.com, some utilities, whatever else. Just
>mcopy the appropriate files from a dos partition to a dos disk and you
>should have a bootdisk.
A DOS boot disk also needs an appropriate boot sector (can be put on
the floppy with dd) and the system files must be copied IN THE CORRECT
ORDER because (at least MS) DOS expects IO.SYS to be the 1st
directory entry and MSDOS.SYS to be the 2nd directory entry. The
position of command.com is irrelevant AFAIK. So in order to create a
DOS boot disk from Linux you would do
- format floppy
- make msdos file system on floppy
- dd boot sector to floppy
- mcopy io.sys to floppy
- mcopy msdos.sys to floppy
- mcopy command.com to floppy
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
