Linux-Misc Digest #94, Volume #20 Fri, 7 May 99 08:13:12 EDT
Contents:
Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (Ian Wild)
Re: Telnet Login as ROOT (Christopher Mahmood)
Re: Linux enforcment of file permissions... (Christopher Mahmood)
Re: line filter utility? (Christopher Mahmood)
Re: Newbie problem modem is always busy (Andrew Comech)
Ejecting a CD ("Vector")
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (returning to %252522GNU Communism%252522) (witra)
Re: How can X be so slow? ("Mattias Dahlberg")
Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (Jesus Monroy, Jr.)
Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux vs. Windows (Richard Caley)
Re: SuSe 6.1 Setting up a PPP Connection to SWBELL.NET with wvdial ("Derek Turner")
Re: Ugent! Help with xv! (Kenny Zhu)
Re: Desktop size, XFree, KDE (John Thompson)
Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (Jesus Monroy, Jr.)
Re: Newsgroup-Reader for multipart-messages (Andreas Hinz)
Re: DVD movies on Linux ? (who?)
Re: TCP/IP Question (mist)
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (Andrew Carol)
Re: Linux Client for MS Network ("brian l")
Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (Jesus Monroy, Jr.)
Re: Small X Window ("Anthony DeLuca")
LILO, can't boot from 2nd SCSI drive. ("Spotillius Maximus aka \"Spot\"")
Re: Mac-emulation on Linux? (Pasi Korhonen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ian Wild <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system?
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 12:10:25 +0200
"Jesus Monroy, Jr." wrote:
>
> On 7 May 1999 04:44:30 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh) wrote:
>
> >As long as your machine is connected to the net it is
> >wide wide open.
> >
> 'wide open' in what sense. certainly no one can install
> programs on your machine without your knowledge.
I was under the impression that Win95 had some sort
of "file sharing" capability. In fact, I was under
the impression that I had used this feature to modify
files on other machines. Was I mistaken?
------------------------------
From: Christopher Mahmood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Telnet Login as ROOT
Date: 05 May 1999 11:38:02 -0700
i only use ssh, it's getting the lusers to use it that's the problem. Of course, they
are furious
when the machine gets broken into and all you can say is 'well, i told you not to
telnet'. BTW,
Datafellows is making a killing on selling Windows clients; with 200 licenses, it's ~
$30/seat.
-ckm
------------------------------
From: Christopher Mahmood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux enforcment of file permissions...
Date: 05 May 1999 11:48:34 -0700
programs generally don't read the disk directly.
-ckm
------------------------------
From: Christopher Mahmood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: line filter utility?
Date: 05 May 1999 11:56:41 -0700
the |STAT package has a program called 'linex' which sounds perfect. E.g.,
$ cat foo | linex 1-4
prints lines 1-4 to stdout. Check on http://SAL.KachinaTech.COM/ for it.
-ckm
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Comech)
Subject: Re: Newbie problem modem is always busy
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 7 May 1999 02:15:28 -0500
On Thu, 06 May 1999 20:36:59 GMT, AnOldCowboy wrote:
>I'm useing Caldera V1.3 and kppp. I have a USR v90 voice internal
>modem. It's not a winmodem, at least it worked with Redhat 5.2.
>When ever I try to dial out or query the modem it says that it is
>sorry the modem is busy. Being a newbie, I'm not sure what other info
>to you might need or how to get it. Have been reading HOW TO'S,
>man pages,help pages, info pages,newsgroups and have'nt
>found any thing that address this problem. Any help would be great.
>TIA
Hi,
see whether you have the lock file:
/var/lock/LCK..modem
It contains the PID of the process which is supposed
to be using the modem. If there is no such process,
just remove that file.
Best,
a.
--
Looking for a Linux-compatible V.90 modem? See
http://www.math.sunysb.edu/~comech/tools/CheapBox.html#modem
------------------------------
From: "Vector" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Ejecting a CD
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 04:31:12 -0600
Sorry for the lame question, but anybody know how to get a CD out of the
CD-ROM drive? I've made sure I dismounted it and I've tried eject but I get
"device or resource busy." I'm running KDE and there are two CD-ROM icons
in the toolbar on the lower right but I can't get rid of them. Is that what
is causing my drive to be busy? How do I tell which process(es) is/are
keeping it from being ejected? Thanks,
Jared
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (witra)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism (returning to %252522GNU Communism%252522)
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 00:10:00 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Seebach) wrote:
>snip...
>1. Do you believe the people who claim the U.S. has <50% literacy, or the
>people who claim it has nearly total literacy?
Depends on what you're reading - the destination signs on buses, the
constitution, or the unix manual pages. :)
>2. Do companies generally find that they are better off if the general
>populace is literate?
>snip..
Literate people generally earn higher income and therefore makes
better customers. They'd also probably make better employees.
------------------------------
From: "Mattias Dahlberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How can X be so slow?
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 08:47:06 +0200
> It goes very fast, but then I also have a 400MHZ machine with 512MB of ram.
Well, I have 450MHz and it crawls...
Matt
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesus Monroy, Jr.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 10:40:44 GMT
On 7 May 1999 03:47:36 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sam Holden)
wrote:
> Jesus Monroy, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On 6 May 1999 23:26:01 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh) wrote:
>>
>>.......[SNIP].........
>>
>>>Unix is very secure if not connected to a network. Win is very insecure
>>>as soon as it is connected to a network. Terrible comparison you make!
>>>
>> Not true. Win95 machines are secure even when permenantly
>> connect to the Internet. The primary reason is that
>> they do not have a login shell. I believe my comparison
>> to be valid.
>
>You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. A win95
>must be one of the easiest machines to crash cie the network. And
>to run arbitrary on via the network. And to access the filesystem
>on via the network.
>
I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I am an expert in these
matters. And yes, I am well aware that a win95 can be
'crashed' while connect to the internet this has no
bearing on the topic. The topic, if you recall is:
Is Unix a single user operating system?
If you recall, my answer was no.
As to the file system, I might be well versed, if you
could explain to me "how you can run a program on
my computer, without installing special software".
That is to say, this (special) software is not
shipped with win95, so how would you get on my system.
>>
>> No login shell is a *feature* of win95.
>
>You don't need a shell to be insecure.
>
Yeah, you are correct, so what?
>>>if you really want! In fact just run an automatic login to some user in
>>>the init sequence. But that is silly. Why do parents not want to have
>>>their stuff segregated from their kids? Do you really think people habe
>>>such a difficult time typing in a name and a password? This is not the
>>>issue!
>>>
>> Yes it is an issue. I definitely is. Losing you pword involves
>> administrative involvement.
>
>No it doesn't it involves inserting the boot-disk your created when
>you installed the system (or was provided to you by the place you
>bought the computer from) and enter the password you wish to use instead.
>Reboot and it's all fixed.
>
The majority of single user machines come with the system
pre-installed. There is no notion of a boot-disk.
For single user machines (like win95) you turn it on
and it works.
If you like we can have a poll on slashdot.org,
with the questions being:
Do you know where your boot installation diskettes are?
or
Can you find your boot installation diskettes in under
10 minutes?
>> Every extra feature that is added, ie. login with shell and
>> privleages, is an encumberance to end-users. You can ignore
>> the issue, but that does not relieve the results.
>
>It also stops the user from accidently destroying their OS with one
>incorrect mouse drag. It also stops viruses from infecting the whole
>system.
>
So you are prepared to make all the decisions for
all the people in the world about their computers.
I don't think that most people want *YOU* to make
their decisions. This is also a feature of *win95*.
So we are clear on this feature; where-ever win95
can be lazy it is. In most cases this turns out
to be a feature. That is, instead of deciding
what color background or something to give
they don't that is your deal.
So if you want security for your win95 box,
you must buy it. This is a feature, because now you
have a selection of vendors to choose from.
>In fact it makes it easier for the no-brain user to use. All they have
>to do is remember the username and password - set the password to the
>empty string, and use the machine name it prints at the prompt as the
>login and you don't even have to remember it.
>
Yes and they can edit with 'ex', if the like. :-)
>> If you like, I can elaborate with examples.
>
>I doubt it.
>
Your choice. I'll still be here tommorrow.
--
If you have to read the docs, it's broken.
I hate making mistakes.
You can check my spelling at: http://work.ucsd.edu:5141/cgi-bin/http_webster
------------------------------
From: Richard Caley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux vs. Windows
Date: 07 May 1999 11:33:18 +0100
In article <7gt5n3$1lp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Leslie Mikesell (lm) writes:
>> If your metric is resopnce time, swapping rate or something else
>> meaningful to the actual task, then it's much easier to put in
>> reasonable limits.
lm> But none of the above may be the critical factor if the real problem
lm> is that for some of the web requests you send a query to an
lm> external database and the responses come back slighly slower than
lm> the requests come in. You end up with an increasing number of
lm> processes consuming memory but nothing else is really wrong -
lm> the processes are all waiting on network I/O.
If the responce time is getting unacceptable, for whatever reason,
it's probably time to start politely refusing requests. Ditto if
you're getting near fixed resource limits (swap, process table,
whatever). If there are enough of the latter to make it hard to
remember to deal with each case, then the system needs redesigning (eg
Windoze 3 where seeminglye everything had some small fixed limit).
lm> I like to see uptimes measured in months, but once in a while a
lm> quick reboot is the best choice.
If it needs to be doen, it needs to be done, but if it needs to be
done more than once in a blue mooin by one odd person in a perverse
situation, it's a sign the system is broken.
--
Mail me as rjc not [EMAIL PROTECTED] _O_
|<
------------------------------
From: "Derek Turner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: SuSe 6.1 Setting up a PPP Connection to SWBELL.NET with wvdial
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 07:41:46 +0100
you need to install with the networking option enabled, even if you haven't
got a network card then SuSE will install PPP
if compiling your own kernel you need to find PPP a long way down the
network menu
HTH
Derek
Derek S. Smigelski wrote in message ...
>I need help with SuSe 6.1 Setting up a PPP Connection to SWBELL.NET with
>wvdial. Can anyone help. The modem dials gives the username and password,
>then says "PPP not enabled". Then comes up with a message that says
>"Starting PPPd and and hoping for the best." Then just goes to a blank
line
>and gives me nothing. Should it give me a "PPP Connection" confirmation?
>Any suggestions.
>
>
>Derek
>Email
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kenny Zhu)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Ugent! Help with xv!
Date: 7 May 1999 07:40:21 GMT
where to find ps2gif? I installed gs 5.5. It's not in.
--
__--------__
/ | \
/ | \
_[/----------------- \]_
/ _ |\ 0 /| _ \
| (_)| \ / |(_) |
|____|__\_____!______/__|____|
[________| KENNY |_________]
|__| ~~~~~~~~~ |__|
___ _________ ___ ___ ___ __ _______ __
/ _ )/ _/ ___/ / _ )/ _ | / _ \ / //_/ __/ |/ /
/ _ |/ // (_ / / _ / __ |/ // / / ,< / _// /
/____/___/\___/ /____/_/ |_/____/ /_/|_/___/_/|_/
"The most important thing is be true to yourself."
$$$$ http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~ah190/Profile.html $$$$
------------------------------
From: John Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Desktop size, XFree, KDE
Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 19:30:14 -0600
Matt O'Toole wrote:
>
> I want to know how to reaize my desktop. The default size seems to be
> 1024x768. If I run at a lower screen resolution, I get the usual panning
> screen, which I hate. How can I set both the desktop *and* screen to
> 800x600?
Go into your XF86Config file and comment out the sections
for those resolutions you don't want; ie, everything except
800x600.
--
-John ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesus Monroy, Jr.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 10:48:29 GMT
On 7 May 1999 04:52:21 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh) wrote:
>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesus Monroy, Jr.)
>writes:
>]>
>] Not true. Win95 machines are secure even when permenantly
>] connect to the Internet. The primary reason is that
>] they do not have a login shell. I believe my comparison
>] to be valid.
>
>
>Huh? Do you believe that the login shell is the only way to break into a
>machine?
>
No, I know better ways than that. :-)
>] No login shell is a *feature* of win95.
>
>Yes, and one which makes it very insecure.
>
Yes extremely insecure and extremely easy to use.
Yes, this is a feature.
>You do know I assume that you can also run Unix with no daemons which
>listen to the net? each is an easily configured daemon. For example just
>do not run inetd and you have gotten rid of a whole bunch.
>
Yes, but then you lose access to the internet and other
useful networking systems.
>Again you compare unlike things. That unix is usually set up so it is
>actually useful may or may not be what youwant, but it is up to you how
>to set it up.
>
Yes, that is correct. But my point is that for a
single user machine that can be put in the hand of
the populas(sp?), it MUST be extremely easy to use.
This includes removing all of UNIXs encumbering
facilities.
>]>Sorry- why is this necessary??? You can certainly set up Linux that way
>]>if you really want! In fact just run an automatic login to some user in
>]>the init sequence. But that is silly. Why do parents not want to have
>]>their stuff segregated from their kids? Do you really think people habe
>]>such a difficult time typing in a name and a password? This is not the
>]>issue!
>]>
>] Yes it is an issue. I definitely is. Losing you pword involves
>] administrative involvement.
>
>So don;t put in a password.
>
Okay, so you are saying for a machine that has remote access
capabilty, this machine would have no password.
Or are you talking about the other machine. Because remeber
I did (at the start of this) mention to distinct
single-user type machines.
Let's be clear on what we are discussing.
>] Every extra feature that is added, ie. login with shell and
>] privleages, is an encumberance to end-users. You can ignore
>] the issue, but that does not relieve the results.
>
>
>So, if your users find it an encumbrance and they do not want the
>security, don;t do it.
>Most users I know want "encumbrances" since those arewhat they can use
>to accomplish things.
>
Again, let's be clear on which machine confifuration
we are discussing.
--
If you have to read the docs, it's broken.
I hate making mistakes.
You can check my spelling at: http://work.ucsd.edu:5141/cgi-bin/http_webster
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andreas Hinz)
Subject: Re: Newsgroup-Reader for multipart-messages
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 06:19:03 GMT
On Thu, 6 May 1999 12:44:16 +0200 , Braunstein Armin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I want to save binaries from several newsgroups and most of the messages
>have the following format: "Text (part/all)" ie. "test (1/12)"
>
Get and install "slrn" at ftp://space.mit.edu/pub/davis/slrn
--
Med venlig hilsen / Best regards
Andreas Hinz
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (who?)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: DVD movies on Linux ?
Date: 7 May 1999 08:44:39 GMT
Adam Gifford ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: In comp.os.linux.misc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: > In comp.os.linux.x Micheal MacCana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?
: > Somebody is working on a UDF filesystem driver, which seems to be the main
: > prerequisite for DVD support. See http://trylinux.com/projects/udf/
: > Martin
: > --
: > Dr. Martin Kroeker, daVeg GmbH Darmstadt CAD/CAM/CAQ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: if i am not mistaken a udf driver will only allow dvd-rom discs to be
: read. DVD video is a proprietary format and to get access to the specs
: $$$ has to be handed over and nda's and all that. From what i have read
: dvd video will not be available under linux for a long while.
Using the iso9660 driver and the IDE/ATAPI cd-rom driver, I was able to
read a DVD-rom without any immediately apparent problems.
The hardware was a creative 6x DVD-rom, with linux kernel 2.0.36 for those
interested.
jeremy
------------------------------
From: mist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: TCP/IP Question
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 11:36:53 +0100
Reply-To: mist <new$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Fred Kuipers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> scribed to us that -
>Hi.
>
> I'm running RedHat 6. I have two computers: 192.168.1.1 (Windows
>95) and 192.168.1.2 (Linux). The Linux machine is also connected to the
>internet via cable modem. I am wondering if it is possible to ftp IN to
>the Windows 95 machine from the outside world.
Do you mean "get files *from* the Win 95 machine"? If so, you would
need to install an FTP server on the Windows box. Something of a waste
of time seeing as you have a Linux box...
>If so, what needs to be
>done to enable this. (Please note: I use ipchains, not ipfwadm)
>
> Secondly, the Linux box also has a phone modem. I will require this
>modem to dial-in in the future to check private newsgroups. I can dial
>out and connect to the destination, however, I still cannot access these
>newsgroups because all packets are going through the cable modem rather
>than the phone modem. How can I cause traffic to go through the modem
>while dialed in??
>
> Here is my [slightly edited] routing table:
>
>Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use
>Iface
>0.0.0.0 24.112.216.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0
>eth1
<snip>
Your default route is set to the cable modem NIC. You would need to
change it to the other modem NIC whilst connected. Either use the
"defaultroute" option if it's a pppd connection, or manually remove the
current default route and set up one for the phone modem when you're
connected. Or add specific routes to the machines you want to get at.
<snip>
--
Mist.
------------------------------
From: Andrew Carol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism
Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 13:58:15 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> People typically don't go to any trouble to obtain
> their system software or applications or even really
> understand their own needs. That's why the industry
> is in it's current state.
For once, I'll agree with you almost 100%. The OS they don't, but most
people I know have gone out to buy at least a little bit of software.
Mostly games and simple consumer stuff (graphics/word proc/spread
sheet, etc).
But that said, most are not in a ferment of revolt. They are a fairly
happy bunch. I am not. I don't like MS. I love Free Software. But
it's still just software, it's not my ideology.
This is not about theory, but about what simply "is". Give them an
alternative that is better from _their_ point of view, and they will go
for it. Until then, you are just spouting slogans and tilling at
windmills.
Today Free software can't hardly help them. Five years may make a
difference, but I doub't a large one from the _consumer_ point of view.
Of course developers will see the advantages much sooner.
Oh well....
------------------------------
From: "brian l" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Client for MS Network
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 10:51:48 +0100
Yeah - Samba does all the MS network stuff, along with being and NT server,
if you like.
If you've got any of the major distributions, it'll be on your CD.
James Grossmann wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>I was wondering if there was a Linux client for Microsoft windows
>networking.
>--
>James Grossmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesus Monroy, Jr.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 08:56:55 GMT
On 7 May 1999 04:58:29 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh) wrote:
>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesus Monroy, Jr.)
>writes:
>] I think you've missed his point. I saw it as, fundemently
>] to fix, or do major operations, on most UNIX systems it does
>] require the locateablity, reliablity and cooperativeness of
>] one entity, 'root'. Give 'root' is one person you are subject
>] to this persons whims, troubles and incompetence.
>
>"root" is as many peopleas you want. You can have 500 people be root if
>you want. You can have all 500 have different passwords also (just make
>them all uid 0) root is an account not a person!
>
That is correct, but we need to look at the politcal theory
behind this, not just the symantic meaning.
>] I think we can all find stories where a sysadmin, through
>] arragonce or some other means forestalled and slow a company
>] to their way of doing things. In short, the "single-userness"
>] that was mentioned is purely political.
>
>And I know companies where the CEO,COO, accountant, salesman,.... have
>turned a company. Does this mean all companies ae single person
>entities?
>
Why don't you tell me.
--
If you have to read the docs, it's broken.
I hate making mistakes.
You can check my spelling at: http://work.ucsd.edu:5141/cgi-bin/http_webster
------------------------------
From: "Anthony DeLuca" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Small X Window
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 07:31:35 -0400
Sorry I wasn't more specific. Well, I am running Mandrake 5.3 with Kernel
(2.0.36), Xfree86 (3.3.3.1)and KDE (1.1 Final), I have a Dell D825HT
Trinitron 15" monitor, a Matrox Millennium II Video card with 4MB RAM with
the 2164w graphics chip, and the TI 3026 external RAMDAC that runs at 220
MHz (I think it is shown as 230.000 in XF86Config). I am using a Microsoft
Intellimouse with Trackball also. I configured the settings to run at 800 X
600 in all modes 8, 16 and 24. I choose the chipset 2164w, the Millennium
II, when I was prompted for what card I had, I choose CUSTOM for my monitor
type, since mine wasn't in the list. I also manually edited "xinit"
manually to set the Horizontal frequency to 31.5 - 70 kHz (these are
manufacturers specs) and the Vertical frequency to 50 - 120 kHz (these are
manufacturers specs), since I could find the correct ones in the set-up. I
also removed the "#" from the file too in front of the amount of RAM that
the card has too (4096). Finally I specified my keyboard as the Microsoft
Natural keyboard in the file too. I wish I could get Linux to print so I
could have a hard copy of this file to send to people, but I need to tackle
one problem at a time. The first time I got KDE to work the screen was huge
and went off the sides, top and bottom of the monitor. Then I re-ran
XConfigurator and now the screen occupies a small area of my monitors total
space. Plus sometimes the window or dialog box extends below the bottom of
the screen and I am unable to click any buttons to make my changes stay.
thanks in advance.
Tony
------------------------------
From: "Spotillius Maximus aka \"Spot\"" <*****@ix.netcom.com>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat.install
Subject: LILO, can't boot from 2nd SCSI drive.
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 07:30:27 -0400
LILO hangs on the letter L when it tries to boot. My first drive (sd0) is a
9 gig Cheetah LVD and is using Win98 while the second drive (sd1) is running
a Linux partition. The SCSI controller is an on board AIC-7890 Adaptec that
is set to boot SCSI device "0". Is my problem stemming from the fact that I
need to partition the first drive to get this to dual boot? I would prefer
to not partition the first drive and keep Linux on the second drive. Is
this possible? LILO is configured to run in the linear mode, also. I'm at
a loss.
BTW>I can't get my SCSI CDROM to work, it is recognized at boot-up and when
linux loads, but I can't mount it. At load time Linux names it "sr0". I
can't find sr0 in the /dev directory. Thanks.
Ed
------------------------------
From: Pasi Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.powerpc
Subject: Re: Mac-emulation on Linux?
Date: 3 May 1999 11:35:49 GMT
In comp.os.linux.powerpc Chris Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm still puzzling over some xmodmap details- Jamie Zawinski worked out
> the ultimate Mac keyboard keymap for the MkLinux setup, but I haven't
Now there's a piece of interesting information for us old-NuBuS-
MkLinux-users. =) Where can I read more about this ?
Pasi
8100/80, DR3
--
Pasi Korhonen|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|040 5055 270|08 3210 800
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
