Linux-Misc Digest #45, Volume #20 Mon, 3 May 99 19:13:11 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux's Last Chance (Stephen Lewis)
Re: What is this? (brian moore)
Linux hangs at Partitions Check ("giuseppe pittavini")
Re: Mac-emulation on Linux? ("FM")
Re: The GNU Fragrance of Sharing vs. the Stench of Greed (was: GNU reeks of
Communism (really)^ (Chris Costello)
Re: SUID games? What is RedHat doing? (Bill Unruh)
Re: DSL modems under Linux (M Sweger)
Re: Linux Modem Recommendation? (brian moore)
Re: Linux's Last Chance (John and Lucy Hayward-Warburton)
SSH version question (William Schwartz)
Database tracking ("Kerry J. Cox")
Re: swapon, util-linux 2.9r ("Spud")
Re: The GNU Fragrance of Sharing vs. the Stench of Greed (was: GNU reeks of
Communism (really) (jik-)
Re: SUID games? What is RedHat doing? (Chris Evans)
mail config (Anup Rao)
Re: The GNU Fragrance of Sharing vs. the Stench of Greed (was: GNU reeks of
Communism (really)^
Re: swapon, util-linux 2.9r (NF Stevens)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Stephen Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Linux's Last Chance
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 23:18:45 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dave Tansley wrote:
> Well, despite being won over by the sheer spangliness of Gnome, I have to
> say that I'm about ready to throw in the towel with Linux....It's just too
> much hassle, life is too short. The list of problems I've had is beginning
> to read like a biblical text, and the number of problems actually solved is
> depressingly sparse.
>
> Unless!! Anyone can help....So please, read through this list of dilemmas,
> malfunctions and irritations and see if you can save a soul from Big Bill's
> Evil Empire.
>
> The story so far: Plucky but likeable scoundrel, Dave has recently been
> experimenting with Redhat Linux. This isnt his first time installing a Unix
> variant, and he considers himself to be competent and reasonably savvy.
> Hell, m68k on his trusty beige pal, the Amiga 1200 was no walk in the park.
> So, despite a few teething troubles with 5.1, he manages to get it ticking
> over, albeit without the use of his modem and soundcard, but hell, what do
> you want? Then along comes Redhat 6.0, which Dave recognizes as a worthy
> upgrade. One 9 hour iso image download, and a trip to Mr CDR's Portable
> Laser Clinic, Dave emerges with a lovely green RH6.0 install CD. Pop's it
> into his computer and duly, and succesully upgrades his linux
> installation.....and everyone lived happily ever after.....
>
> Woah! Okay, so the last bit never happened....here's whats up:
>
> 1) LILO just doesnt work. Not even the usual "gets to LI then hangs"
> problem. Nope, this gives me the full "LILO" prompt, followed by a very
> mocking "Loading Linux......" message. But after that, nothing, nada, zippo,
> zilch. Deader than a night out in Leeds. No errors messages, no cryptic
> numbers or witty panic statement. Just dead. The fact that it gets past
> "Loading Linux....." seems to suggest to me that LILO has worked, but the
> Kernel is at fault? Anyone help here? My motherboard is a crappy PC Chips
> M572.
>
Well the first rule has to be "if it isn't broken don't fix it!"
Sounds like you skipped the last bit about installing LILO. I did this on
upgrading from RH5.1 to RH5.2 and got the same helpful message as the kernel
has a version specific filename in RH. Try going back to the installation in
expert mode for an upgrade and reinstall LILO. That should see you up and
working.
>
> 2) Okay, so this wouldnt be too much of a problem. In fact, it was the same
> with 5.1, and I got around it with using Loadlin. And I figured that I'd use
> this again. So I copied the vmlinuz kernel from the distribution CD and
> proceeded to load Linux with Loadlin. Problems on bootup included: lack of
> msdos filesystem in the kernel. Sooooo, I couldnt mount my windows
> partitions to copy off the real kernel to my loadlin directory. Oh, did I
> mention that trying to use floppies in with my computer causes a lock up?
> But only in Linux.....
>
If you can boot DOS with a floppy, use that to make a copy of the BOOT.IMG file
with RAWRITE.
>
> 3) Right, no problem again I thought, just boot with the old kernel and
> mount the partitions. Done and done, but when I rebooted and tried to run
> loadlin with the new kernel (vmlinuz-2.2.5 from the /boot directory), it
> succesfully loads and uncompresses the kernel, then spews out a page of
> numbers before kealing over to die. Bugger. I dont remember the exact error
> message, at this stage I was banging my head against my desk (the doctors
> say with plastic surgery, I may one day regain use of my nose!)
>
> [To all those who have stuck with me this far, please accept my heartfelt
> thanks (and suprise). Hey, why not go have a cup of coffee, take ten minutes
> off....It only gets more complicated from here on in]
>
> 4) Right, I'm nothing if not a glutton for punishment, so I decide that the
> kernel must have some thing that disagrees with my system. Mmmmm, smells
> like time for a kernel recompile folks. Reboot, reload with
> non-ms-dos-vmlinuz kernel and try to recompile the kernel. I run the usual
> config programs, run make dep etc, and try to compile the
> kernel.....Successful? Ahem...sure.
> For the first time ever, I get a segmentation fault about 5 minutes into
> compiling.....*sob*
Sound like your enthusiasm is getting the better of you. Perchance the nose
damage affected your sense of smell. Go back to stage 1 and fix that problem
first!
>
> 5) And while I'm here...I may as well tell you about this, as it's quite
> interesting, if quite tragic. I have the evaluation copy of McAfee antivirus
> installed on my machine, with the annnoying nag thing that crops up when you
> reboot. Now, because of this nagging, I decided to uninstall the program
> (and also because I didnt intend to buy it, natch. Piracy is theft kids!)
> Anyway, now that the offending lines have been removed from my autoexec.bat,
> I tried to reload linux with loadlin....Guess what? No way Jose. It seems
> that the pressence of the McAfee "Scan.exe" program in my autoexec is
> required before my system can boot linux. If anyone has ANY idea why this
> might be, I would be genuinely grateful.....
>
Personally I can't see it. If scan.exe is on a DOS partition, it has nothing
to do with the price of fish to a penguin.
>
> Okay, just to recap....what have we got? can't boot from LILO, can't boot
> from floppy (as this uses LILO), in fact, can't boot at all without Mr
> McAfee's help. Also, can't boot with kernel, cant use kernel that works for
> anything useful, cant recompile new kernel. Deep psychological scars that
> mean I'm putting my therapist on danger money!
>
> It sounds like a complete write off to me. Please, try to help me. And
> please, dont reply to this message saying "I have no such problems,
> everything works for me!" This is the Linux equivalent of approaching a
> blind man and saying "So, you can't use your eyes? Strange, mine work fine."
>
> (coming next week: Dave tries to configure modem, soundcard, joystick,
> mouse....)
>
Let's hope we get to next week's exciting episode I certainly made fun
reading.
>
> Thanks folks.
>
> --
> Dave
>
> ICQ: 20806179
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work)
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (home)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: What is this?
Date: 3 May 1999 20:48:00 GMT
On Mon, 3 May 1999 12:07:16 -0700,
Robert Annandale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It's not Linux's fault that you hosed your inittab.
>
> It happens right off the bat after my install.
> Before I've 'hosed' anything.
Then you didn't install whatever package it is that has mingetty in it.
Install it or fix inittab.
--
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: "giuseppe pittavini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux hangs at Partitions Check
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 09:00:09 -0700
I have a 10.1 GB WD hard drive. I have installed WIN95 with FAT32. I
wanted to install RedHat 5.2 by running installation from the CD but the
LILO hangs at the Partition check step. I am using LBA in bios.
I tried deleting the WIN95 partition and run the installation but the same
thing happened.
Please if you need more info let me know.
Thanks in advance
------------------------------
From: "FM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mac-emulation on Linux?
Date: 3 May 1999 18:02:38 GMT
Clifford T. Matthews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan> I will attend a college this fall that is predominantly
> Dan> Mac-oriented.
> Which college?
Dartmouth College.
> Dan> While they state that Unix and Windows are supported by the
> Dan> campus network, it seems that a Macintosh- compatible system
> Dan> might be necessary to fully take advantage of the system. For
> Dan> example, many softwares are written for Macintosh by the
> Dan> faculty,
> How much information about the custom-apps can you find out between
> now and when you have to make your decision? We'd love to help you
> out, but we'll need details (please send me e-mail).
In fact I won't find any information about the custom apps.
It seems that Blitzmail, the email app for Dartmouth network
is available for Unix/Linux at least in partial
functionality, but the letter seems to note that professors
might write custom apps for their classes.
> ARDI <http://www.ardi.com/> makes Executor, the only software that
> allows you to run Macintosh software on non-Macintosh computers
> without obtaining anything from Apple.
I'll have to look into this possibility. Thanks for the information.
Dan.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Costello)
Crossposted-To:
talk.politics.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.activism,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: The GNU Fragrance of Sharing vs. the Stench of Greed (was: GNU reeks of
Communism (really)^
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 22:44:03 GMT
In article <01be95af$00376b80$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, FM wrote:
> Bill Bonde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Is it wrong to keep software proprietary?
>
> If openness of software is one's object, yes.
> GPL does protect what it's supposed to protect.
But you people ('you' being those who insist everything be
open) need to understand that Unix isn't only about free
software, no matter how much you think it is. Linux probably is.
but it's not the general goal of Linux.
What real arguments are there against closed or proprietary
software anyway? Real arguments that make sense and are not
GPL/RMS-induced.
--
Chris Costello
The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.security.unix
Subject: Re: SUID games? What is RedHat doing?
Date: 3 May 1999 17:02:13 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Vincent
Defert) writes:
>On 2 May 1999 18:01:32 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh) wrote:
>>Not really. Having uncontrolled programs on your system which are suid
>>root is insane. It is precisely such programs which a user on the system
>>can use to gain root access, and hving them there as games, instead of
>>crucial system programs, is just silly and dangerous.
>Just a question, maybe stupid, but ... If you're concerned by security,
>why do you install games on your computer ? I believe games are
>intended to be used at home, not at work.
I answered that. Occasionally my users might want to relax and play a
game. Once a grad student has sat in front of the machine for 12 hours
and wants a break a stupid game can be relaxing. Believe me the machiens
ae sufficiently public that they are not going to spend all day at it.
I repeat having suid games is stupid. If you are using it as a single
user machine you can play the games as root if that is what SVGAlib
demands. But to put machines at risk just so people can play games is
not a good tactic.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (M Sweger)
Subject: Re: DSL modems under Linux
Date: 3 May 1999 20:59:23 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: You need to watch that. Many, if not most, internal DSL modems
: (especially ADSL modems) are actually DSL *win*modems. Most of the DSL
: crap happens in software, just like winmodems, and as such won't work
: now or ever under Linux.
: Good idea with DSL is to stick to ethernet-interfaces on external units.
Which DSL,SDSL,ADSL,RADSL etc etc manufacturers make modems that aren't
win-modems underneath? I doubt if the box will explicity state it. Is
there something to look for I.E. a chip which will serve as an indicator?
--
Mike,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Subject: Re: Linux Modem Recommendation?
Date: 3 May 1999 17:08:23 GMT
On Sun, 02 May 1999 19:32:33 -0500,
Andy Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Mark Nielsen wrote:
>
> > In article <7eu9e7$st9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >I am going to be buying a new modem that will be used with Linux RH5.2 and
> > >Win98, what is the most compatible yet most reliable 56k modem to get? Hayes?
> > >Rockwell? USR? Any suggestions will be appreciated.
>
> DON'T BUY A HAYES MODEM. You may be able to find really good deals
> on them, but DON'T BUY ONE. Why? Hayes is _gone_, it went bankrupt
> again, and apparently this time for good. If you buy one and it
> breaks, tough luck.
Really? You do know that their assets (and name) were acquired by Zoom,
eh? See http://www.zoomtel.com/.
> As far as brands, I like U.S. Robotics. YMMV, though.
Icky: makers of the 'infinite retrain bug', so popular they keep
bringing it back for an encore. (It affected 14.4k, 28.8k, 33.6k and
even X2 modems... each time they'd fix it, the next generation modem
would screw it up again. Someone really needs to write "dammit, we do
it this way for a REASON" somewhere in their modem firmware so they stop
removing the fixes.)
--
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: John and Lucy Hayward-Warburton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Linux's Last Chance
Date: 3 May 1999 16:24:57 GMT
Dave Tansley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For the first time ever, I get a segmentation fault about 5 minutes into
> compiling.....*sob*
I used to get this when my motherboard was overheating.
JHW
------------------------------
From: William Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: SSH version question
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 13:39:49 -0500
I was looking for the ssh rpm's and found a pild of files
ssh-1.2.26-1i.i386.rpm ssh-extras-1.2.26-1i.i386.rpm
ssh-1.2.26-1i.libc5.i386.rpm ssh-extras-1.2.26-1i.libc5.i386.rpm
ssh-1.2.26-1us.i386.rpm ssh-extras-1.2.26-1us.i386.rpm
ssh-1.2.26-1us.libc5.i386.rpm ssh-extras-1.2.26-1us.libc5.i386.rpm
ssh-1.2.26-2i.i386.rpm ssh-extras-1.2.26-2i.i386.rpm
ssh-1.2.26-2i.readme ssh-extras-1.2.26-3i.i386.rpm
ssh-1.2.26-3i.i386.rpm ssh-extras-1.2.26-4i.i386.rpm
ssh-1.2.26-4i.i386.rpm ssh-server-1.2.26-1i.i386.rpm
ssh-clients-1.2.26-1i.i386.rpm ssh-server-1.2.26-1i.libc5.i386.rpm
ssh-clients-1.2.26-1i.libc5.i386.rpm ssh-server-1.2.26-1us.i386.rpm
ssh-clients-1.2.26-1us.i386.rpm ssh-server-1.2.26-1us.libc5.i386.rpm
ssh-clients-1.2.26-1us.libc5.i386.rpm ssh-server-1.2.26-2i.i386.rpm
ssh-clients-1.2.26-2i.i386.rpm ssh-server-1.2.26-3i.i386.rpm
ssh-clients-1.2.26-3i.i386.rpm ssh-server-1.2.26-4i.i386.rpm
ssh-clients-1.2.26-4i.i386.rpm
what's the -4i part of the version? is it like a 4 part package where
I have to install ssh-1.2.26-1i.i386.rpm to ssh-1.2.26-4i.i386.rpm
or are they like patch levels so I just install the last one.
thanks,
Bill
------------------------------
From: "Kerry J. Cox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Database tracking
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 22:32:15 +0000
I'm trying to set up a working database for tracking clients. Being as
how I have very little experience with setting up databases, I was
wondering if anyone has any suggestions. I have flirted with MySQL and
gotten it running and even had a GUI interface, but how to enter info,
seems a bit beyond me. I have also tried out dbdoctor-1.22 which makes
for a nice flat file which then gets piped out through HTML. I'm
looking for something in-between. I need to manage a nice text file
which I can then either pipe out to HTML or simply log in to edit. A
web-interface would be optimal, but I need to have some way of updating
and managing the file.
Any suggestions would be much appreciated.
Thanks,
KJ
--
.-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-.
| Kerry J. Cox Vyzynz International Inc. |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems Administrator |
| (801) 596-7795 http://www.vii.com |
`-------------------------------------------------------'
------------------------------
From: "Spud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: swapon, util-linux 2.9r
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 21:40:05 GMT
Have you tried `chmod 640 /dev/hda2` ? Even though it is a partition
tagged as swap space, you can still set permissions.
>I just installed the 2.9r utilities and am getting a puzzling
>(to me) message from "swapon":
>
> warning: /dev/hda2 has insecure permissions 0640, 0600 suggested
>
>My question is, how to set permissions for /dev/hda2, when it's
>a swap partition that is not mounted? The relevant fstab line
>reads
>
> /dev/hda2 none swap sw
>
>--
>Allin Cottrell
>Department of Economics
>Wake Forest University, NC
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 15:40:24 -0700
From: jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
talk.politics.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.activism,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: The GNU Fragrance of Sharing vs. the Stench of Greed (was: GNU reeks of
Communism (really)
Johan Kullstam wrote:
>
> jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > : I'm completely aware. I don't like developing on software
> > > : that makes me release all of my code. If I want to, say, use an
> > > : IRC server that's GPLed, and add my proprietary extensions to it
> > > : for conferences amongst my coworkers, I can't do that, now, can
> > > : I?
> >
> > Nope, it would be illegal
>
> take away the word proprietary and everyone can be happy.
Including the lawyers because now they get to get paid.
>
> > > Yes, you can. If you don't distribute it. What the GPL grant you
> > > is the right to modify the program and the obligation to grant the
> > > same right to the persons or organisations that you distribute the
> > > software to.
> >
> > Distributing it to coworkers would be distributing it.
>
> yes, but if offer the cow-orkers source and they all agree not to copy
> it further, then there is no problem.
As soon as you give it to a single person and your source was not
licenced under the GPL,....you have just violated the GPL licence.
>
> > > It is tit for tat. The cost of not reinventing the wheel comes at
> > > the price that you can't denie your customers the right to modify
> > > the source that you had originaly. Is that fair? It certainly is
> > > IMHO.
> >
> > This also causes problems for people working on free software.
>
> you know, sometimes you can't eat your cake and have it too.
>
> the GPL is what it is. GPL *does* restrict downstream users of the
> code. the L stands for *license* after all. GPL software source is
> not itself given or sold to you. it is merely licensed. certain
> rights of the original author *are* reserved. this isn't a big
> mystery or surprise.
>
> why shouldn't the author be able to control what happens to his work?
> i do not feel the restrictions of the GPL are particularly onerous --
> especially when you compare it to, say, microsoft's end user license
> agreement. you are free to use GPL or not. you can avoid GPL
> software if you want to. i really do not see what the big problem is.
I didn't say it was a big problem,...but there is certainly some
compatability issues with any other free licence...fact is, the GPL is
not really free.
------------------------------
From: Chris Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.security.unix
Subject: Re: SUID games? What is RedHat doing?
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 23:07:23 +0100
On Mon, 3 May 1999, Barry Margolin wrote:
> Once vga_init drops root privileges, the process can't get them back
Not strictly true. Not all privs are dropped. The game is left running
with iopl(3) privileges, i.e. r/w on all I/O ports of your system. Not
good.
With regard Bill Unruh's original complaint, yes I see the reason for the
rant. However with Linux's changing audience, distributions _must_ be
oriented towards ease of use for the user. If you want Linux to succeed
that is.
When setting up a new system in a possibly hostile environment, one of the
first things I do is "find / -perm -4000" and prune much of the result.
Such a simple step eliminates the games straight away, no fuss.
Chris
------------------------------
From: Anup Rao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: mail config
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 18:55:26 -0400
Does anybody know how to change the 'From: ' header in mail that you send
from pine?
Thanks
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
talk.politics.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.activism,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: The GNU Fragrance of Sharing vs. the Stench of Greed (was: GNU reeks of
Communism (really)^
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 16:14:10 -0700
On Mon, 03 May 1999 22:44:03 GMT, Chris Costello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <01be95af$00376b80$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, FM wrote:
>> Bill Bonde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Is it wrong to keep software proprietary?
>>
>> If openness of software is one's object, yes.
>> GPL does protect what it's supposed to protect.
>
> But you people ('you' being those who insist everything be
>open) need to understand that Unix isn't only about free
>software, no matter how much you think it is. Linux probably is.
>but it's not the general goal of Linux.
>
> What real arguments are there against closed or proprietary
>software anyway? Real arguments that make sense and are not
>GPL/RMS-induced.
proprietary -> Microsoft or IBM or Oracle
Free Software is just one of the more convenient
and effective methods for ensuring that some
arbitrary service is replacable thus allowing
market choices to be relatively free of network
effects.
This can benefit proprietary wares as well.
Which Oracle would you like? Which arch do
you want to run Applix or CivCTP on? Quick,
where do you turn when you've got new a new
arch and need a compiler fast (gnu/cygnus)?
In the meantime, microsoft-wannabes are
discouraged from accumulating too much
influence such that they could short
ciruit 'the invisible hand'.
Unix is very much about being open and about
being fairly trivial to re-implement once a
cross-compiler is done.
--
Microsoft subjected the world to DOS until 1995. |||
A little spite is more than justified. / | \
In search of sane PPP Docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NF Stevens)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: swapon, util-linux 2.9r
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 23:06:53 GMT
Allin Cottrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I just installed the 2.9r utilities and am getting a puzzling
>(to me) message from "swapon":
>
> warning: /dev/hda2 has insecure permissions 0640, 0600 suggested
>
>My question is, how to set permissions for /dev/hda2, when it's
>a swap partition that is not mounted? The relevant fstab line
>reads
>
> /dev/hda2 none swap sw
chmod 600 /dev/hda2
(as root, of course)
Norman
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
