Linux-Misc Digest #881, Volume #19 Sun, 18 Apr 99 00:13:10 EDT
Contents:
Small qmail problem(was Re: Mail server for Linux) (Marc Britten)
How to read lastlog, faillog etc... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: KDE:something missing!!! (Paul)
FTPing (Paul)
network card.. help!!! ("NewsReader")
Re: NIC with Mandrake 5.3 (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: What-ya-ma-callit (Nathan Ranger)
Re: Yggdrasil or Trinux Linux? (Michele Andreoli)
Re: xinit: can't load library 'libXmu.so.6 <--what does it mean and how (Finn-Arne
Johansen)
Re: x11amp - is my sound configured properly? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Running X apps remotely ("Guus Z." <"(remove this but dont send me)
Linux MIDI (steven finney)
Login flipping me the bird ("Martin R. Soderstrom")
Re: linux being user-friendly (Chris J/#6)
Re: linux being user-friendly (Nathan Ranger)
Re: x11amp ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Disturbing information - Linux vs NT - true or false? - Educated ("Tim
Underwood")
Re: linux being user-friendly ("D. Vrabel")
Re: PPP monitoring program (Glenn Graham)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marc Britten)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Small qmail problem(was Re: Mail server for Linux)
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 20:42:30 -0400
I'm having some trouble w/ redhat 5.2 and qmail. Trying to use the
~/Maildir setup, thought I followed the instructions well, but whenever I
boot up the computer hangs on the startup script for qmail.
using(off of the top of my head) qmail-start ./Maildir/ splogger qmail
(iffy on the second half but the ./Maildir/ is what the INSTALL.maildir
file said to do) if I use the older VSM style startup script(binm2,
etc)(these are comming out of /var/qmail/boot) everything goes fine.
has anyone heard of something like this? the main reason(outside of
security) that I want to use the Maildir approach is so that qpopup
works.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
> Ben Short wrote:
>
> <SNIP>
>
> I had sendmail installed as default on my Slackware system, and it worked
> fine if I just used my static IP address and domain. When I tried to find
> out
> about host masquerading, it was heavy weather trying to struggle through
> the documentation, and I couldn't afford the book. So, I downloaded qmail.
> It's easy enough to install - it may require more steps than sendmail, but
> the
> docs are less cryptic; and I solved my host masquerading problem.
>
>
> --
> "I'm Keyser Soze. No, I'm Keyser Soze. I'm Keyser Soze and so's
> my wife..."
> -Monty Python plays The Usual Suspects
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: How to read lastlog, faillog etc...
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 01:48:09 +0100
Here's one.
I'm currently running a recent distro with the shadow password suite.
How do I read the logs metioned above? They claim to be binary.
I assume there's a program. I just don't know what.
--
____________________________________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | It is not 'who' you are
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | But who you are becoming.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Goethe
------------------------------
From: Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: KDE:something missing!!!
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 17:20:04 -0400
Chris Sykes wrote:
> The guys/gals at comp.windows.x.kde are the people to ask wrt KDE.
>
> Chris
>
> AlexAndre wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >Hi!
> >When I boot I don't see the kde on the screen ...
> >What I did I went to /home where I found .xinitrc
> >I clicked on .xinitrc " et voila " kde !beautifull!!
> >But I got this message:# ./.xinitrc
> >Using old audio server with talk id 3
> >
> >kpanel:waiting for windowmanager
> >kwm: it looks like there's already a window manager runing. kwm not
> >started
> >End of message.
> >
> >Info:RedHat 5.2
> >Can you please help me.
> >Many thanks!
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
First off. In the file .xinitrc you need to put exec kdestart.
and then you need to add the following to your profiles file (path)
/opt/kde/bin:/usr/local/bin:usr/local/kde/bin
and
in the same file
KDEDIR=/usr/local/kde
Paul
------------------------------
From: Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: FTPing
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 17:15:16 -0400
IF I have users logging in to my machine via ftp, how can I view what
they are doing and all the fun stats administrators would like to know
about the user.
I am currently useing netstat but there must be a beter way.
thanks in advanced.
Paul
------------------------------
From: "NewsReader" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: network card.. help!!!
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 19:01:50 -0700
I have a question:
I when I boot with a floppy my nic gets detected just fine (3com 3c509) but
when I boot up with my hd it doesn't detect it actually it doesn't even try.
I'm new to this.. please help!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To:
alt.hacker,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.networking,linux.act.net,linux.admin.isp,linux.redhat.install,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: NIC with Mandrake 5.3
Date: 17 Apr 1999 14:00:04 -0500
In article <7f9uik$nth$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
BTRiggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I did an upgrade from RH 5.2 to Mandrake 5.3 and when I did, it no longer
>recognizes my NIC. I tried going back as far as RH 5.0 then upgraded to RH
>5.2 and then to MD 5.3 and the same problem. I went in to the control panel
>and switched it to active, still no luck. If anyone can help it is greatly
>appreciated, I hate the net with Windoze.
The simple-minded way is to compile your own kernel with support for
your hardware built in.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Nathan Ranger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What-ya-ma-callit
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 19:05:53 -0400
Tony,
Linux makes a great gateway machine. I am typing on a win95 machine and
have other other here in the house. I also have 3 linux machines. 1 is a
gateway/DNS box. One is an ip monitoring (sniffer) box / secondary DNS
and the other is an application machine (which happens to be very sick
at the moment). They all use one modem to connect to the internet. They
are all on a 10b2 LAN with NE2000 compatible ethernet cards. Basically,
here is how they are set up:
gateway's address is 10.0.2.2
scanner's address is 10.0.2.3
devon's address is 10.0.2.4
fireball's address is 10.0.2.5
beast's address is 10.0.2.6
Gateway gets dialed into my ISP who allows me shell access. God bless
them!!! I run a little program called Slirp on their server and pppd on
my end. All the other machines use 10.0.2.2 (gateways's address) as
their default gateway (route add -net default gw 10.0.2.2 for linux and
clickety-clickety in ctrlpanel>network>tcpip>advanced for windoze). I
can do nearly anything I want from any machine.
Now, I can't use hyperterminal on the windoze boxes or anything like
that, but as far as connecting to the internet, its a blast.
-NR
TonyC wrote:
>
> I have two machines, one Linux only [No monitor/keyboard/mouse], one
[snip]
> Anyone else doing this, who can recommend something suitable for this very
> small scale usage?
>
> Thanks
> TonyC
------------------------------
From: Michele Andreoli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Yggdrasil or Trinux Linux?
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 22:12:28 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I use "Tom's" only for repair, not everyday use.
>
>
Try also muLinux:
http://www4.pisoft.it/~andreoli/mulinux.html
Michele
--
Mi sarebbe piaciuto concludere con un'affermazione positiva, ma
non me ne vengono in mente. Vanno bene due negative?
-- Woody Allen
------------------------------
From: Finn-Arne Johansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux.slackware,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: xinit: can't load library 'libXmu.so.6 <--what does it mean and how
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 22:00:43 +0200
Mulder wrote:
> btw, if outlook is posting html, i don't know what to do, i checked
> all the settings and everything is set to plain text...
You've made it...
--
Finn-Arne Johansen, IT-Konsulent, Mandator AS
Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GSM: +47 9264 0070
Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.c2i.net/finjohan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.debian,comp.os.linux.sound
Subject: Re: x11amp - is my sound configured properly?
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 20:14:52 GMT
> Yep.
>
> This is because, by nature, only one process can futz with /dev/dsp at
> a time. (Sound would be a mess if two processes started playing with
> it, since they'd be undoing each other's programming of the sound
> chips.)
>
> GNOME, though, does a lot of sound and a lot of processes want to talk
> to /dev/dsp, so they use a trick and have one process do the dirty work
> ('esd', the enlightened sound daemon) -- they just need to know to talk
> to esd instead of trying to do sound directly.
>
> The catch is what to do with other programs that don't know how to talk
> to esd? They'll still be trying to grab /dev/dsp and will always fail,
> even when GNOME isn't needing to play anything.
>
> esd has a switch for that, to allow it to unlock /dev/dsp after you've
> stopped using it for a few seconds. This lets other apps that aren't
> aware of it to use /dev/dsp directly.
>
> But there's a catch: there's no easy way that I've found to change how
> GNOME runs esd without hacking source. It either runs esd or it
> doesn't.
>
> There is a simple solution, though: get the esound source, look in the
> file 'esd.c' and you'll see:
>
> int esd_autostandby_secs = -1; /* timeout to release audio device, disabled
<0 */
>
> Change the -1 to, say, 2 or 3. Then, run configure (possibly specifying
> --prefix=/usr to overwrite the stock esd), make and make install.
>
> Now esd will get along with un-enlightened programs as long as GNOME has
> been quiet for a couple seconds.
>
> This really should change to the default and I've suggested as such to
> the esound author, but haven't heard back yet on if it will happen.
Interestingly enough, after I re-enabled sound support in GNOME and restarted
X, x11amp still worked but sounds in GNOME wouldn't?? So now I have sound
support enabled, but sounds don't work, and x11amp works just fine.
The sound code seems a little fussy with my system. I shouldn't have to
restart X to get sound support to work should I? For example if I disable
sound support in GNOME, it should stop working right then and there correct?
I would think that would be the case but it isn't working that way. In the
past when I have disabled/enabled sound support, the change wouldn't take
effect until I restarted X.
I checked my version of esound and it is esound-0.2.12-1. I try to keep my
files as recent as possible by checking ftp.gnome.org about twice a week and
downloading any new RPMS and then updating them on my system.
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: "Guus Z." <"(remove this but dont send me
Subject: Re: Running X apps remotely
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 22:25:16 +0200
"Steve D. Perkins" wrote:
> Does anyone know what I might have to do with the X server
> on my linux box to "allow" remote apps to be run on it's
> display... or whatever else the issue might be?
>
> Steve
Try '% xhost +<ip address of your work box>'
Beware that there are security implications: someone
can fake the ip address. Or so I have heard...
What I do is I enable, start the app and disable
immediately using '% xhost -<host>'
Guus.
--
When you reply to me personally please remove
the 'no spam' bit from my address.
------------------------------
From: steven finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux MIDI
Date: 17 Apr 1999 23:07:30 -0400
Well, I've been going in circles on this for a while, so maybe someone
can help: I'm moderately familiar with older versions of UNIX (I
even did kernel work on V6!), but am not particularly familiar with
Linux, or hardware. My Linux version is RedHat 5.2. I will ramble
a little bit.
What I need at this point is simply a raw (byte-stream) interface
to a MIDI device. The box I had came with a es1371 (Soundblaster
PCI64 installed). Now, although there was an es1371.o, there appeared
to be no driver source, which was perturbing. Also, when reading
bytes from /dev/midi00, I seemed to get some spurious bytes. Next,
I tries the demo version of the 4front commercial driver, which
required that I configure a new kernel with no loaded sound driver.
This also seemed to give me spurious bytes (and without source,
there's no way of tracking down what's going on). Also perturbingly,
the custom kernel compiled as version 2.0.35, whereas my running
out-of-the-box kernel was 2.0.36, and this disparity caused
problems loading modules: is this a known problem with the RH 5.2
distribution (from MacMillan), or am I missing something?
Attempt 2: remove the es1371, and try a Roland MPU401-IPC.
I could do output on this, but could not get input. I'm _guessing_
that this may be an interrupt problem: is that my SCSI disk is on IRQ9,
and although I used makexconfig to put the MPU on IRQ7, it's possible
that the hardware won't allow it: can anyone confirm or deny that
this is possible.
Attempt 3: Try attaching a Key Electronics MIDIator (114) to the top
serial port. I've set the port to raw mode, and 38K baud, but don't
seem to be getting any action on input _or_ output...
_Any_ advice relating to anything in the above would be much
appreciated! In some ways, getting option 3 to work would be the
most appealing. I noticed someone out there has a patch for
serial drivers and MIDI, but I don't know if it applies to using
the COM1/COM2 equivalent ports, or why it's necessary.
Thanks,
steve ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
------------------------------
From: "Martin R. Soderstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Login flipping me the bird
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 03:06:45 GMT
I'm running RedHat 5.2 with Kernel 2.0.36 and need some help.
For some reason, when I login now, the login screen flips the Linux Bird,
system info and prompt about 20 times before stopping. It's really
annoying, and I can't scroll back to see any system messages. Did I do this
when I added IP-Masq or Samba?
-- Martin
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris J/#6)
Subject: Re: linux being user-friendly
Date: 18 Apr 1999 00:59:03 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux (well all UNIXes) are already user friendly - they're just very
particular and fussy as to who their friends actually are. :)
Chris...
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
hellraiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>why are poeple trying to make linux user-friendly? i don't think linux
>should be any user-friendly than it already is. the morons complaining
>about linux having to many confusing aspects or cryptic commands, etc.
>etc. shouldn't be using linux and should use windows instead. not
>everyone should use linux... only those who actually need linux to
>perform some powerful, administrative tasks, not the general public...
>the general public should be using winblows. gnome, kde and the other
>desktop envoirnments are trying to make linux operation easier, but i
>don't think they should make it too easy. linux isn't supposed to be
>friendy... it's supposed to be a powerful, stable os that can actually
>do stuff... stuff that windoze can't do and other operations that would
>be too confusing for the average windoze user.
>
>what do you think?? i'm just curious as to what anybody else thinks
>about this. btw, i have slackware and use fvwm2... i don't really like
>fancy stuff (as you've probly guessed). i love my command line and i
>love typing away furiously doing various complex commands... so i wanna
>hear what you think (if you like lots of terminals and typing... or a
>nice, easy interface). just curious... hope i didn't offend anyone,
>(ie, kde/gnome users) heh...
--
@}-,'-------------------------------------------------- Chris Johnson --,-{@
\ Life is a strange thing. Just when you think \ \
\ you've learned how to use it, it's gone \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] \
\ -- Shakespears Sister \ \
------------------------------
From: Nathan Ranger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: linux being user-friendly
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 16:11:41 -0400
Hellraiser,
I share your view somewhat. I think, in general, the User Friendly linux
conversion is about making it more commercially palatable. In other
words, companies don't want to pay people $50K+ a year to manage
systems, they want it to be done "easily" with windows. The linux
community is trying to address that, however, in doing that, they might
be destroying what linux really is: A very stable and flexable set of
software tools. The user friendlyness trend is for people who want to
use it but don't want to learn it but have money to *BUY* it. Its about
profit.
To try and get Linux to be more user friendly, IMHO, will wreck its
stability. It will be just another Win/MacOS/NoviceTinkertoy(NT) OS in
the end and we'll all be looking for something that Linux "used" to be.
Where the big lie waits is the fact that, from an administrators point
of view, Windows and those other "UserFriendly/StabilityChallenged" OSs
are much harder to keep running because they have no real security and
have frequent massive failures. Basically, applications are for users.
OSs are for administrators and developers. Screw trying to make OS
installations and configurations easier. Those of us that know how to do
it, already do it. Those of you who don't, stay the Hell out of Shell!
The stability is compromised when we start letting non-technical people
fiddle with the system. If they want to fiddle, let them learn how.
If the users want something stable and easy, let them run NT
workstation. The ideal network in my mind for the average stable and
usable network:
NT Workstations for the Lusers...
An NT Server to keep the Linux admin awake and busy fixing all the
security and basic system problems (It will make his life a living
hell but in the end, he'll get a raise which just might pay for
the hair transplant)...
A Linux server to do all the work the NT server should be able to do
but keeps landing on its *BUTT* when its taken from neutral to drive.
I've loaded, configured, administrated and used more OSs than most
people have ever heard of. Nothing surpasses Linux for stability and
basic "smooth running". If "they" can modify Linux for easy loading and
user friendliness without sacrificing stability, I'm all for it. I just
don't want Linux to be Window NT Serverized. Thats the kind of software
that should remain *IN* the bull. :)
-NR
hellraiser wrote:
>
> why are poeple trying to make linux user-friendly? i don't think linux
> should be any user-friendly than it already is. the morons complaining
> about linux having to many confusing aspects or cryptic commands, etc.
> etc. shouldn't be using linux and should use windows instead. not
> everyone should use linux... only those who actually need linux to
> perform some powerful, administrative tasks, not the general public...
> the general public should be using winblows. gnome, kde and the other
> desktop envoirnments are trying to make linux operation easier, but i
> don't think they should make it too easy. linux isn't supposed to be
> friendy... it's supposed to be a powerful, stable os that can actually
> do stuff... stuff that windoze can't do and other operations that would
> be too confusing for the average windoze user.
>
> what do you think?? i'm just curious as to what anybody else thinks
> about this. btw, i have slackware and use fvwm2... i don't really like
> fancy stuff (as you've probly guessed). i love my command line and i
> love typing away furiously doing various complex commands... so i wanna
> hear what you think (if you like lots of terminals and typing... or a
> nice, easy interface). just curious... hope i didn't offend anyone,
> (ie, kde/gnome users) heh...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: x11amp
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 03:05:07 GMT
I got the same thing, but after getting:
glib-1.2.1-1.i386.rpm
gtk+-1.2.1-1.i386.rpm
Most of those dependencies went away. However, I still get the following:
failed dependencies:
libaudiofile.so.0 is needed by x11amp-0.9-beta1.1-1
libesd.so.0 is needed by x11amp-0.9-beta1.1-1
What do those belong to?
Also, when I installed the newer glib and gtk+, I initially tried using rpm
-Uvh to update current glib and gtk, but that failed. Instead, I used rpm -i
which worked, but now I have the following gtk+ and glib+
glib-1.0.6-3
glibc-debug-2.0.7-29
glibc-profile-2.0.7-29
glibc-2.0.7-29
glibc-devel-2.0.7-29
glib-1.2.1-1
gtk+-1.0.6-3
gtk+-devel-1.0.6-3
gtk+-1.2.1-1
(both the original and the new. Is that right?)
Thanks in advance!
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Brandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hi, I downloaded X11amp in RPM format and this is what i get for error
> messags when i try to install. WHere do I go to check to see what
> versions of these I have?
>
> failed dependencies:
> gtk+ >= 1.2.0 is needed by x11amp-0.9-beta1-1
> libgdk-1.2.so.0 is needed by x11amp-0.9-beta1-1
> libglib-1.2.so.0 is needed by x11amp-0.9-beta1-1
> libgmodule-1.2.so.0 is needed by x11amp-0.9-beta1-1
> libgtk-1.2.so.0 is needed by x11amp-0.9-beta1-1
> libaudiofile.so.0 is needed by x11amp-0.9-beta1-1
> libesd.so.0 is needed by x11amp-0.9-beta1-1
>
> thanks
> Brandon
>
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: "Tim Underwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Disturbing information - Linux vs NT - true or false? - Educated
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 22:12:40 -0500
I believe CNET has an article that explains what they did, and didn't do.
Mark Hahn wrote in message <7falns$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> da> If Mindcraft would say the opposite, that Linux was faster then NT,
I
>> da> wonder how many of you would say that Mindcraft did not know what
they
>> da> were doing. So Apache sucks, so what. Just means that Apache
>
>if Mindcraft actually did not deliberately rig the competition,
>there will be thousands of astonished Linux hackers. it's hard
>to find _anything_ they did right, and the litany of specific,
>seemingly deliberate "detuning" examples is long.
------------------------------
From: "D. Vrabel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: linux being user-friendly
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 22:18:44 +0100
On Sat, 17 Apr 1999, hellraiser wrote:
> why are poeple trying to make linux user-friendly? i don't think linux
> should be any user-friendly than it already is. the morons complaining
> about linux having to many confusing aspects or cryptic commands, etc.
> etc. shouldn't be using linux and should use windows instead. not
> everyone should use linux... only those who actually need linux to
> perform some powerful, administrative tasks, not the general public...
> the general public should be using winblows. gnome, kde and the other
> desktop envoirnments are trying to make linux operation easier, but i
> don't think they should make it too easy. linux isn't supposed to be
> friendy... it's supposed to be a powerful, stable os that can actually
> do stuff... stuff that windoze can't do and other operations that would
> be too confusing for the average windoze user.
Why can't an OS be easy to use, powerful and stable all at the same time?
Take emacs that is easy to use, powerful and stable. Most new user with
no experience of linux do not know about the powerful and useful things it
can do and just need a little (perhaps a lot) of education.
I disagree with your point about linux not being user-friendly -- it is.
If you what to do something, fix something that's broken then the chances
are that you can -- that is being friendly to the user:allowing them
to accomplish anything. I have to say that linux is not new-user-friendly
(note the distinction) this is where the new-user-friendly software comes
in forexample GNOME, KDE and (a non-GUI example) pine.
It is interesting to note that the Teaching System here is a UNIX system
(HP-UX to be exact) and all undergraduates (the vast majority of which
have no unix experience) have little problem using it. Of course the
can't use the advanced features of this powerful OS but that doesn't mean
they can't use it.
> what do you think?? i'm just curious as to what anybody else thinks
> about this. btw, i have slackware and use fvwm2... i don't really like
> fancy stuff (as you've probly guessed). i love my command line and i
> love typing away furiously doing various complex commands... so i wanna
> hear what you think (if you like lots of terminals and typing... or a
> nice, easy interface). just curious... hope i didn't offend anyone,
> (ie, kde/gnome users) heh...
I personally love getting my computer to do exciting complex things
(ray-tracing etc.) If complex commands are the way to this this
effieciently then so be it. Sure it can be fun to learn all the strange
meanings of all the different quotes in bash and such but it's what you
can get the computer to do something that's the main point.
Don't get me wrong I also use the commandline extensively but I see no
reason for not providing alternatives that are less arcane. You might as
well declare that VI is the most powerful (etc) editor and decree that all
UNIX system users must use it, and if they can't then tough there are no
alternatives -- go back to the Apple Macintosh.
Also the people writing this software are doing it for fun (least I assume
they are) if the GNOME (or KDE) developers enjoy what they are doing
they're hardly going to stop and say "No. let's not do this, we're making
Linux too accessible".
Another point: GNOME, KDE and all the other software is not linux specific
but applies to all the UNIX and UNIX-like systems out there.
David
ps. Though I refer to the whole platform as linux. I do acknowledge the
massive contribution made be the Free Software Foundation and others.
--
David Vrabel
Engineering Undergraduate at University of Cambridge, UK.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.networking
From: Glenn Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: PPP monitoring program
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 20:59:45 -0700
I use pppstats. It should come with your distro.
It's not graphical, but the terminal output is great stuff
============================================================
inTEXT Communications
Vancouver BC
On Fri, 16 Apr 1999, Mark Powell wrote:
> Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 16:19:03 -0600
> From: Mark Powell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.x, alt.linux, alt.os.linux,
> comp.os.linux.networking, comp.os.linux.misc
> Subject: PPP monitoring program
>
> Hi
>
> I am looking for a good graphical program to moniter my ppp stats.
> I want it tell display connected, disconnected, bytes sent, etc. I
> already have chat scripts and such, so I don't need anything to dial for
>
> me, just the monitor. Anyone know of a good one out there?
> Thanks,
> Mark Powell
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
