Linux-Misc Digest #46, Volume #20 Mon, 3 May 99 20:13:09 EDT
Contents:
Re: What is this? ("Robert Annandale")
2.2 Kernel ("Mark M. Devaney")
Re: GNU reeks of Communism ("Martin Ozolins")
Re: SUID games? What is RedHat doing? (Alan J Rosenthal)
Re: Mac-emulation on Linux? (Steven G. Johnson)
Re: Compiling kernel for different machine (Karel Jansens)
printer doesnt print (parport-troubles ?) (peter)
Re: Mindcraft may be partly right about Apache (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Win98 and Linux Dual Boot (Erik Akkermans)
Re: DVD movies on Linux ? ("mr. wilson")
Re: The GNU Fragrance of Sharing vs. the Stench of Greed (was: GNU reeks of
Communism (really)
Re: xterm problems RH6.0 (Paul Kimoto)
Re: The GNU Fragrance of Sharing vs. the Stench of Greed (was: GNU reeks of
Communism (really) (Jim Richardson)
Re: swapon, util-linux 2.9r (Thomas Zajic)
Re: The GNU Fragrance of Sharing vs. the Stench of Greed (was: GNU reeks of
Communism (really)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Robert Annandale" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: What is this?
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 12:07:16 -0700
> 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.
Robert Annandale
Vancouver, BC
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 12:43:41 -0400
From: "Mark M. Devaney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: 2.2 Kernel
I just upgraded to Red Hat 6.0 and had a couple of questions about
compiling the new kernel. When I recompile the kernel, the system does
not load a few of the daemons it is supposed to, nor does it start the
network scripts, and it cannot pass the moduel dependency tests. I just
wanted to know if anyone can throw some advice my way, or tell me where
to look. Thanks.
--
Mark
"Forgive your enemies,
but never forget their names."
--J.F. Kennedy
------------------------------
From: "Martin Ozolins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 16:10:24 -0700
Interesting discussion, I must admit that I had never looked at the effects
of abolishing copyrights from this perspective. As I recall, Sun already
uses a sort of super dongle approach for Solaris, it's registered by the CPU
Serial Number. I think that Intel and Microsoft already have an
infrastructure in place, in case the DOJ takes the step you've described.
Makes you wonder.
My thoughts on this were of a different vein.
If all software is free: No revenues are generated from gratis products;
Companies without revenues cannot pay
their employees;
Programmers need new careers to pay for
luxuries like food etc;
No students choose programming as career
path because there are no jobs.
Result: Software stagnates;
Entropy increases;
Economies fail
People starve.
Conclusion: Not a good idea. Let's keep the protection of
intellectual property in place.
Andrew Carol wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ed Avis
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> In any case, this situation is hypothetical. But I am sure that if
>> governments did decide to abolish copyrights on software, they would
>> also abolish legal protection for any obvious workarounds.
>
>Of course. But the venders would have the freedom to make as clever a
>solution as they wanted. You could even distribute encrypted code
>which is only decrypted in the CPU itself. (That's been done, it's too
>slow today, but you never know).
>
>We might even get away from buying software to running it over the net
>for a fee.
>
>I am just not prepared to think that the simple abolishion of copy
>right will help to create a utopian world of free software where we get
>all the great high-quality stuff we want.
>
>I see an arms race between crackers and venders, with the venders
>making it so expensive to crack that it's just cheaper and more
>convienent to pay them their due. Integrating the protection into the
>CPU is probably the best bet in terms of making it real hard to crack.
>
>Oh well.....
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.security.unix
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alan J Rosenthal)
Subject: Re: SUID games? What is RedHat doing?
Date: 3 May 99 17:06:17 GMT
[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.
Who says that that system was at work rather than at home?
Also note that not all employers prohibit personal use of work computers in
off-hours, just like not all employers have video cameras in the toilets.
Mostly, whatever you think of computer games, installing them is not
generally at odds with security, unless they're suid or otherwise foolish.
It's not a law of the universe that svgalib use requires setuid root, it's a
law of the linux kernel. Theoretically, this could be changed. (I don't know
whether it would be difficult. Of course, a change which made it possible
for any uid to become root would be unacceptable.)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob Komar) writes:
>These games are such an obvious security threat that they have been
>gone over with a fine-toothed comb years ago. As proof of this, check
>out how many security notices about SVGALIB executables have been released
>over the last few years.
I see no security alerts about any svgalib games at
http://www.redhat.com/support/docs/errata.html . Care to cite some?
Security alerts about the svgalib package itself are not the point. Such
alerts do not indicate examination of the games' own source code.
>You have to be sitting at the console to run these executables.
False. You have to be at the console to run them as *intended*.
It's probable that you would not have to be at the console to exploit a
particular security flaw in them.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steven G. Johnson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.powerpc
Subject: Re: Mac-emulation on Linux?
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 19:24:06 -0400
"FM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew J. Brehm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is Netscape available? I've heard once that it's impossible
> to build from sources obtained from mozilla.org.
Yes, Netscape is available. (Mozilla is not nearly production-quality
yet, from what I've seen, but there is no reason it shouldn't build on
LinuxPPC. I haven't tried doing so yet, though.)
> What versions of Linux are available on Mac? I've heard of
> MkLinux and LinuxPPC but not much else. Does LinuxPPC use
> the same kernel as X86 versions? Are there X-compatible
> free windowing systems available?
There is also Yellow Dog Linux. YDL doesn't have Netscape working yet on
their distro, though. (I would wait for LinuxPPC R5 to come out,
hopefully within the next few weeks.)
Yes, LinuxPPC and YDL both use a kernel built from the same sources as x86
(and Alpha, and Sparc, and...).
Like (essentially) all versions of Linux, the Mac Linux distributions run
X. They also run all the various window managers, desktop environments
like KDE, GNOME, etc.
Really, LinuxPPC is essentially the same as Linux on x86, except that it
is compiled for a different processor. It has been a little behind the
x86 distributions in some ways, e.g. it has been slow to move to glibc2,
but this is changing with the new R5 release.
Cordially,
Steven G. Johnson
------------------------------
From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)
Reply-To: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
Subject: Re: Compiling kernel for different machine
Date: 3 May 1999 16:17:47 GMT
I got it. It was just a matter of harrassing someone until they loaned me a
book.
Thx everyone for the help (and some flames :^) ).
Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
===============================================================
Having a kid at sixty, that's an accident.
Having a piano fallen on your head, that's just bad luck.
Agent WD40, Dick Steel
===============================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (peter)
Subject: printer doesnt print (parport-troubles ?)
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 23:13:47 GMT
redhat5.2
kernel 2.2.5
parallel port-printer canon-bj200
I set the printerport to 378/irq7 in bios and mode=EPP/SPP
parport and parport_pc are compiled as modules
so I perform:
# insmod parport.o
# insmod parport_pc.o io=0x378 irq=7
(the printer "awakes" at this point by making its usual noise)
then I restart lpd (just to be sure)
and then I try to print:
# lpr /etc/printcap
no printing
lpq shows me the queued jobs and I can find them in the spool-dir also.
try the direct way:
# cat test.txt > /dev/lp0
bash: /dev/lp0: Operation not supported by device
the same to lp1,lp2
I dont find any error in the log-files.
printcap should be ok (its just a basic-version for testing)
lp:\
:sd=/var/spool/lpd/lp:\
:mx#0:\
:sh:\
:lp=/dev/lp0:\
at last I decided to use the redhat-devil-gui-tool printtool, which seems
to autoprobe all parallel ports and it doesnt detect any printer !!
so I had a close look at /proc/parport
the only entry is 0 (does that mean, that it detected my printer at lp0
anyhow ?) and in parport/0 the devices-entry is empty. the same to
autoprobe. the hardware and irq-entry shows the expected contents:
base: 0x378
irq: 7
dma: none
modes: SPP,PS2,EPP
7
what am I making wrong !?
ANY HELP APPRECIATED !!
peter
=================
pilsl@
ANTISPAM
goldfisch.atat.at
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: Mindcraft may be partly right about Apache
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 16:09:56 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Mon, 03 May 1999 04:03:13 +0000...
..and Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm a big fan of Linux and Apache, but I'm bothered
> by how people are blowing off the Mindcraft benchmark.
> Sure, it was biased, but some of the results agree with
> other, non-biased benchmarks.
>
> In particular, Apache may have trouble with > 100 simultaneous
> clients. If you don't believe me, check out
> http://www.kegel.com/mindcraft_redux.html
> and see why I say this.
AFAIK, Mindcraft configured Apache not to log IPs, but FQDNs -- that
slowed Apache down to the speed of the DNS. You can't draw any
conclusions from a server that has been deliberately braked like that.
mawa
--
I made my way through the computer controlled monorail, car by car,
cruising for sentient beings.
-- Mark Leyner, My Cousin, My Gastroenterologist
------------------------------
From: Erik Akkermans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win98 and Linux Dual Boot
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 19:38:28 +0200
Jeremy Weinberger wrote:
>
> Robear wrote:
> >
> > Please bare with me on this. It is not covered in any FAQ or newsgroup that
> > I have come across.
>
> <cut>
>I would recommend lilo over loadlin. config.sys bootmenus provide very
>limited support for options on boot. They also don't timeout and boot to
>one automatically, like lilo or the winnt bootloader. loadlin was
>necessary about a year ago, when many people were still using kernels
>that could not read a fat32 filesystem or using older versions of lilo
>that couldn't read the filesystem. If you are using a current version of
>lilo (I have 0.21; 0.18 is the minimum) and a current kernel (2.0 series
>and above), then there is no reason to use loadlin.
> <cut>
Wel, Jeremy, you seem to know your way in Linux. However, what you are
saying in this particular piece about loadlin is not all true. Nowadays,
many people have certain PnP-devices in their computer that can only be
initialised through DOS, because only DOS-software is available. To
start Linux without resetting the initialised device you need something
like loadlin (of course there may be other ways, but this works just
fine).
About config.sys: there is indeed a timeout option, I use it myself. In
fact, the startup-menu I created with config.sys is nicer than the one I
had with LILO. Finally, it's no big fuzz copying /boot/vmlinuz to the
fat32 partition.
To Robert: when you got no business in DOS before starting Linux, use
LILO. I believe it can be installed by just starting 'lilo' see for
yourself 'man lilo'). If you have reasons to use loadlin, whatever they
might be, make a copy of /boot/vmlinuz (this is normally the currently
used kernel), not the one on 'the floppy'.
Regards, Erik Akkermans
------------------------------
From: "mr. wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: DVD movies on Linux ?
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 19:22:45 -0400
Actually, up at my school they got these overhead projectors that pluginto
your PC and display onto a projector screen, basically if you have an
empty white wall in your house and a couple hundred bucks (actually I
think the cheaper ones go for around $1000), you could have your own
little home movie theatre. Plus, if you do it through Linux, you get
major Linux bragging rights...:)
john
==========================================================================
reply separator
==========================================================================
On Mon, 3 May 1999, Darrell Sydlo wrote:
::>Robert Brashear wrote:
::>
::>> Micheal MacCana wrote:
::>> >
::>> > Roy,
::>> > I've got a DVD drive too. Apparently, there's no way to read DVD-ROM or
::>> > movie disks on Linux. At the speed of Linux development, however, this will
::>> > surely change in at most nine months though.Does anyone know of such plans?
::>> >
::>>
::>> This may be a little off topic and I don't want to start a flame war,
::>> but I am curious. Why would someone want to watch a movie on a desktop
::>> computer? I have never understood this. The comfort factor would be my
::>> biggest objection. Then again, if you have a 36 inch monitor and your
::>> desktop is a studio screening setup...
::>>
::>> Bob Brashear
::>
::>Maybe do your homework and watch a flick.
::>
::>Syd
::>-Veni, vidi, vici... Then I went home.
::>
::>
::>
------------------------------
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 15:56:45 -0700
On Mon, 03 May 1999 21:44:23 GMT, Chris Costello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, NF Stevens wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) wrote:
>>
>> >On Mon, 03 May 1999 05:00:39 +0000, Colin R. Day wrote:
>> >>Chris Costello wrote:
>> >
>> >>It only forces openness if you use GPLed code. Or is someone
>> >>holding a gun to your head to use such code? One might as well
>> >>say that Microsoft forces one to obey the EULA.
>> >
>> >I think Mr Costello's point (given that he's a FreeBSD advocate)
>> >is that both the MS EULA and the GPL are considerably more restrictive
>> >than the FreeBSD-like licenses.
>>
>> Mr Costello's gripe is that people won't give him something
>> for nothing.
>
> This has certainly mutated far beyond what I meant. It still
>stands. The GPL is too restrictive no matter how you argue it.
>The many situations I've provided throughout this thread were
>merely hypothetical. I would never be caught dead using the GPL
>by my own choice. If I worked for a project that had bad code, I
>would rewrite it on my own. As I fully understand the IRC
>protocol, I would much quicker write my own system for
>inter-office conferences that want to take advantage of the IRC
>protocol if I needed to add proprietary extensions and sell it.
You want freedom/gain for yourself but noone else.
[deletia]
--
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] (Paul Kimoto)
Subject: Re: xterm problems RH6.0
Date: 3 May 1999 20:02:49 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> hi, i just recently installed redhat 6.0. when i'm in xwindows and i try to
> run an xterm, nothing happens. after i shut down xwindows, and you can
> still see some of the configuration text on the console, i see the message:
>
> xterm: no available ptys
>
> i don't understand why it does this. there are plenty of /dev/pty*
Did you install this over an old Linux installation?
/usr/src/linux/Documentation/Changes says:
: As of 2.1.115, support for the deprecated major 4 /dev/ttyp* devices
: was removed. If necessary (eg, you get "out of pty" error messages when
: you obviously are not out of pty's), create major 3 /dev/tty* and major
: 2 /dev/pty* devices (see Documentation/devices.txt for more
: information). In general, you should make sure that your /dev
: directory is up-to-date if you are experiencing any problems.
:
: Optional support for Unix98 pty devices has also been added. If you
: want to use the Unix98 ptys, you should be running at least
: glibc-2.0.9x, and you must switch completely to Unix98 pty's. The
: general procedure for configuring Unix98 pty support is:
:
: - Compile your kernel with CONFIG_UNIX98_PTYS and CONFIG_DEVPTS_FS.
: - mknod /dev/ptmx c 5 2
: chmod 666 /dev/ptmx
: mkdir /dev/pts
: - Add to /etc/fstab:
:
: none /dev/pts devpts gid=5,mode=620 0 0
:
: (Note: gid=5 is applicable for RedHat systems for which group "tty" has
: gid 5. Adjust according to your distribution. Use mode=600 if you want
: "mesg n" to be default.)
You can tell whether the first part applies to you by running "ls -l"
on those device files; the "major number" is the one before the comma.
If one of these is the reason for this problem, *will someone please
contact Red Hat so that we do not see dozens and dozens of this
question on Usenet*?
--
Paul Kimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
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: 4 May 1999 00:01:29 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 03 May 1999 01:14:44 GMT,
Chris Costello, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, D. Vrabel
>wrote:
>> On Sun, 2 May 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
>>
>> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mark S. Bilk wrote:
>> > > >For each person, it depends on timescale or personal
>> > > >interest. Some systems elevate a "class" of individuals to take
>> > > >advantage of others ("practical communism" and GPL),
>> > >
>> > > Amazing! Exactly what "class of individuals" is enabled
>> > > to "take advantage of others" by means of the GPL? All of
>> > > humanity minus Bill Gates?
>> >
>> > The GPL is a crock. It forces openness. That's not freedom.
>> > You like walking outside sometimes, I would bet. Would you like
>> > being *FORCED* to walk outside all the time? That's the key
>> > problem with the GPL and many recognize it.
>
>> Alas, your argument is wrong because your not forced to use the GPL or
>> to use GPL software.
>
> 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?
Gee, and what _forces_ you to use the GPL'd IRC server in the first place?
Besides which, if you write the extensions, and don't distribute them o
outside of your co-workers. Then you don't have to make the source available
(except maybe to your co-workers.) GPL does not require general distribution
of sources, only equal with the binaries.
>
>
>>
>> David
>> --
>> David Vrabel
>> Engineering Undergraduate at University of Cambridge, UK.
>>
>
>
>--
>Chris Costello
>This message transmitted on 100% recycled electrons.
--
Jim Richardson
www.eskimo.com/~warlock
All hail Eris
"Linux, where do you want to go tomorrow?"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Zajic)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: swapon, util-linux 2.9r
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 22:49:59 GMT
On Mon, 03 May 1999 14:56:03 -0400, Allin Cottrell 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
As root: �chmod 0600 /dev/hda2�. ;-)
Thomas
--
=--- Thomas Zajic aka ZlatkO ThE GoDFatheR, Vienna/Austria ---=
=-- "It is not easy to cut through a human head with a hacksaw." M.C. --=
=-- Posted with Free Agent 1.11/32 running on Linux 2.0.36/Wine-990226 --=
=--- Spam-proof e-mail: thomas(DOT)zajic(AT)teleweb(DOT)at ---=
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: talk.politics.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.activism
Subject: Re: The GNU Fragrance of Sharing vs. the Stench of Greed (was: GNU reeks of
Communism (really)
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 12:48:57 -0700
On Mon, 03 May 1999 19:04:10 GMT, Chris Costello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> On Mon, 03 May 1999 18:03:59 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Costello) wrote:
>> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Robert Krawitz wrote:
>> >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[deletia]
>> >And even if there is some wonderful GPL'd end-user piece of software out
>> >there that keeps up with the times and lives up to modern usability
>> >standards, it would be the exception, not the rule. GPLd (and all or most of
>>
>> See, this is the fatal flaw with your entire rant. You're more
>> worried about user interface goosestepping than actual utility.
>>
>> Your argument essentially boils down to it's !DOS, so of course
>> you will see it as a failure.
>>
>> You don't even give any real details as to how what apps you
>> do mention fail to live up to the 'one-true-interface'.
>
> It's called rejection.
Que? Details please?
--
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
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
