Linux-Misc Digest #112, Volume #20 Sat, 8 May 99 14:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (returning to %252522GNU Communism%252522) ("Joshua E.
Rodd")
Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (Jesus Monroy, Jr.)
Re: Desktop size, XFree, KDE (diahedrial)
Re: DVD movies on Linux ? (John Holmes)
Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (Jesus Monroy, Jr.)
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (Andrew Carol)
Re: Dual Boot ("Michael Schmeing")
Re: No sound playing CD's ("Michael Schmeing")
Re: Microsoft is the Communist!!! (Chris Mikkelson)
Re: Pro-Unix vs anti-WinTel (was: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system?)
(brian moore)
how do you fix: /dev/sdb6 was not cleanly unmounted, check forced (note (Zachary
Pfeffer)
RE pppd daemon dying on start-up ("Mitchell Scott")
Re: Testing my CPU! (brian moore)
Re: building kernel 2.2.6 problem solved, new problem !!! (rob)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Joshua E. Rodd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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 18:54:49 -0400
Marco Anglesio wrote:
> I daresay (not being a historian, but being relatively well-read in
> history) that that's because most other children are literate and their
> children will compete against those other children, not because literacy
> is in and of itself an intrinsic good. To an individual, being able to
> read really isn't, unless it can be put to some use.
One reason for the widespread literacy in the United States was because
of a religious motivation of early English American settlers (e.g.
the Old Deluder act). Marketplace considerations weren't a concern; the
Puritians instituted the public school purely to make sure people could
read the Bible.
------------------------------
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 10:04:12 GMT
On 7 May 1999 04:44:30 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh) wrote:
>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesus Monroy, Jr.)
>writes:
>
>] "Yes, I know M$ win95 does not do this (security),
>] but a least you can have that an enviromentally
>] controlled area. That is to say, you have an area
>] in your home or office that is secure from the
>] outside world.
>] More plainly, your computer (if win95) sits in
>] your house. Your house has a lock on it.
>] No one can enter you house and play with your
>] computer.
>
>Yes, they can. 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.
>] With a UNIX box you enter someones computer
>] from the outside world via the internet.
>
>Not if it is not connected to the net. It is not necessary to connect a
>unix machine tothe net. It is not necessary not to connect a Win95
>machine to the net. How about comparing equivalent situations.
>
Why should I compare? There is no value in this comparison.
If a UNIX box is not connect to the internet,
then it has no value to this discussion or my point.
>] While it is true anyone can walk up to a win95
>] machine and simply get on it; this is really a *feature*.
>
>Anyone can walk up to a Unix machine as well and simply get on it.
>
No, not true. Unless someone has left a console open
then it takes an act of open aggression. Not my point
at all. My point is ease of access for the average
user, NOT security issues as you might want to
point out.
>The
>xdm can be presented as a screen saver. All windowsusers are used to
>entering something to get the screenscaver to go away.
>
No, let's be clear if we can.
First let's agree that 'all' is subjective.
Therefore, saying 'all' you can't mean everyone.
Second, since NOT every person uses a screen saver
and definitely every person does not use a password
on their win95 machine. So your statement is not
remotely true or relevant.
>You can furthermore trivially get the system to log on as some user on
>bootup if youwant-- and have it run whatever version of an X desktop you
>want. This is trivial. I still do not understand your point.
>
I'll try some more points if you like.
--
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: diahedrial <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Desktop size, XFree, KDE
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 16:10:27 -0700
jik- wrote:
>
> 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?
> >
> > Matt O.
>
> You can do that and you can also change the resolution at runtime with
> control-alt-+/-. This will not fix the virtual desktop problem (I hate
> it too) but you will likely find a resolution which is the max available
> and the virtual screen will go away. To actually fix the problem you
> need to disable it in /etc/XF86Config.
You can edit the /etc/XF86Config file , (or /etc/X11/XF86Config), make
a backup copy first, towards the bottom there is a line that defines
the virtual desktop, comment it out with "#" (without the quotes), or
change it to a resolution you like.
------------------------------
From: John Holmes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: DVD movies on Linux ?
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 20:56:23 +0900
>
> 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
I don't want to watch on a desktop, but it sure would be nice to watch what I
want on
my laptop during those trans-pacific flights every couple of months!
------------------------------
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 10:14:11 GMT
On 06 May 1999 23:07:53 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesus Monroy, Jr.) writes:
>>
>> More plainly, your computer (if win95) sits in
>> your house. Your house has a lock on it.
>> No one can enter you house and play with your
>> computer.
>
>This is the case with both my Linux box and my son's Win95 box at my
>house.
>
It's great to know there are still families in the world. :-)
>> With a UNIX box you enter someones computer
>> from the outside world via the internet.
>
>This is also the case with both my Linux box and my son's Win95 box.
>Whenever the link is up to my ISP, both are exposed to the net.
>
However, in the case of the win95 you either have installed,
or need to install, software on it so that other people
(via the internet) have access to run programs on the win95.
>> While it is true anyone can walk up to a win95
>> machine and simply get on it; this is really a *feature*.
>
>It is if your machine is truly single-user, and there is no need at
>all to distinguish between different users. If you want more than one
>user, and they want different configurations, you need to have
>logons. The Linux box has accounts for everybody in the family; the
>Win95 box has accounts for everybody in the family.
>
Yes, and what did it take to accomplish this?
>The PalmPilot I
>wear on my belt is a truly single-user system and depends solely on
>physical security; I don't have anything passworded on it. Which, if
>it's ever stolen from me, would become a huge security risk for my
>bank accounts and everything else...
>
Yes, that is correct your PPI would be a 'huge security risk',
but would you carry your PC outdoors?
>If I were the sole user of my Linux box, I could configure it so no
>logins were necessary; likewise my son's Win95 box. To proclaim
>either configuration as inherently better is to be myopic.
>
Perhaps I need to make other points to this type
of configuration; to make more understandable.
--
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: 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: Sat, 08 May 1999 09:48:33 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Sid Boyce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Andrew Carol wrote:
> > Many people would rather attack Microsoft and blame them for the state
> > of the world than to actually make a better propsition to the users in
> > terms to _total_ value. (Cost, availability, features, documentation,
> > quality, performance, etc)
> >
> Microsoft on the other hand makes loud noises about the RELIABILITY of
> Windows, the SUPERIOR quality of it, if I were a BELIEVER, I'd believe
> them rather than what I experience, they rubbish Linux and the way it's
> developed, the motley crew that develops it and state that as the reason
> why it's not reliable.
I never claimed Windows is reliable. I rather dispise Windows. But I
do know that Windows still does more for the average consumer than Free
Software does *today*. There is little consumer software, its hard for
the average consumer to find. Linux is not ready for average consumer
use. So I stand by what I said. (Please note that availability and
features are also part of that OVERALL equation)
You seem to confuse my statement of how I see it *today* with how I
think it should be, or that I think Microsoft is somehow good or that
their products are good.
MS can take the heat for the state of proprietary software (they have
driven others out of business). But they can't for the state of Free
software. No one is stoping anybody from writting free software.
*Today* if the consumer suddnely decided to switch to Free software,
they would be in a for rude shock. There's no "consumer" OS yet, and
very little consumer applications. That will later change for the
better.
> The other issue that I have is the unsupported belief that proprietary
> software is such a powerful concept that all or most Free Software is
> doomed to fail if only the people understood that fact. In the end, they
> would blame some for misleading the people, or the people themselves for
> being misled.
I agree with you. But I think there is room in the market for both.
Free software will dominiate the things that that model is able to
better serve. Proprietary will do likewise in others. Free software
will grow by orders of magnitude soon, but it will never push
proprietary software out of the market.
> Hmmmmmmmm..... I'll have to look differently at these two pieces of
> iron I have running up my electricity bill, contemplate and drown my
> sorrows, for now I've found out they are of not much use. May be I
> should go back to Windows so I can do all the things I do now and
> marvel.
I never said your Free stuff was not of use. It may be the absolute
best solution for what you do. But I suspect you are not the average
*consumer*. What is the average person to do *today* with Linux and
the other Free software other than stare at it?
Oh well.....
------------------------------
From: "Michael Schmeing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Dual Boot
Date: 02 May 1999 10:49:48 +0200
Siva Vasanthan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Can you help.
>
> I bought a new PC and it came with Microsoft OS. Ideally, I want to run
> Microsoft Windows & Linux in the same mechine. I know there is a way
> here you can select the OS when the PC boots up and you can't see the
> Linux partion from MS Windows and vice versa.
>
> Does anyone know hot to setup this partions and Dual Bootup system? Are
> there and utilities in Windows95 to setup the dual bootup. FDISK in
> Win95 won't allow to create two Primary partions in the system.
Well, this might not quite be what you expected but here it goes:
I think the easiest way to create a dual boot system would be to get a
recent distribution. SuSE explains it good and I guess the others do
as well.
There is only one problem I encountered: When I bought my computer
with Windows the complete HD was one large 4GB partition. Now M$ fdisk
does not only not allow more than one primary partition it does not
allow to remove this one partition to split up the disk (who might
ever want to get rid of Windows anyways, its the only OS except for
DOS and WinNT, isn't it???? ;-). The solution is rather simple (at
least with SuSE, I don't know about other distros): Start the
Linux-installation and tell the install-program you want to partition
your HD by hand and not have the program do it automatically. How you
can do so is explained in the docs. Then create the partition you want
to use for M$ as the first one on the disk and the others behind
it. You can even install all of Linux only on extended partitions, it
does not need a primary one. Do not forget to give at least two
Linux-partitons: A swap-partition about twice the size of your RAM and
a working one (I would recommend using more partitions for working on,
but that is another matter).
At this point you should have two options:
a) Interrupt the Linux-installation, restart the computer and install
Windows on its partition. Afterwards start the Linux-installation
again, this time telling the install-program to quit partitioning.
By the way, make sure you overwrite the first blocks of the
Win-partition, M$ format takes the size of the partition from there
if it can find it and not from the partition-table as it should
(see below).
b) Complete your Linux-installation, create a boot-disk that will boot
your Linux, loading the kernel from a floppy and uses your
HD-installation. When everything including the floppy works to your
satisfaction go to a shell (if you are working under X), login as
root (if you are not yet) and do a
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda1 bs=512 count=1
to make sure your windows-partition does not contain any (no longer
valid) information on the size of the partition. Now start your
Windows-installation and if this is completed to your satisfaction
start Linux from the floppy and call lilo as root. This will
install a boot-loader that will allow you to select between Linux
and Windows. If it does not look in the docs for your distro or in
the docs for lilo-configuration (man lilo.conf) and edit the file
/etc/lilo.conf according the docs to create an entry to start
Windows. After that call lilo again.
The last part of b) should be done in one form or another somewhere
during the Linux-installation so you should not have to bother with
editing lilo.conf.
I hope, I could help,
Michael
--
Michael Schmeing, Artillerieweg 46, D-26129 Oldenburg
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www: http://www.Informatik.Uni-Oldenburg.DE/~michae2
------------------------------
From: "Michael Schmeing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: No sound playing CD's
Date: 02 May 1999 11:06:26 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I'm a newbie and I've followed the procedure as far as configuring my sound
> card, and can hear the sound sample given, but when I attempt to play a CD
> I'm getting no sound. Any help would be appreciated, thanks in advance...
> Allan
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
One easy question: Is the cd-drive connected to your sound-card? There
should be a wire from the cd-drive direct on to the sound-card which
is used by the drive to deliver (already decoded, analog)
sound-data. The card just pushes this data through and mixes it with
its own sound. Playing cds is one of the standard-features of all
cd-drives.
If your cd-drive has its own headphone jack just connect some
headphones to it and play a cd. If you can hear the cd in the phones
the drive probably is not connected to the sound-card. By the way,
this connection is completly inside the computer so you have to open
it to check. If you can not hear any sound from the headphones I would
guess that the drive is defect (although I am absolutly not sure).
Hope it helps,
Michael
--
Michael Schmeing, Artillerieweg 46, D-26129 Oldenburg
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www: http://www.Informatik.Uni-Oldenburg.DE/~michae2
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Microsoft is the Communist!!!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Mikkelson)
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 16:15:28 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Ed Avis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Stefaan A Eeckels wrote:
>
>>The moment you "go for" any form of ideology (or ideologically
>>defined/constrained system), be it communism, libertarianism,
>>or the sharia, you are prepared to force people who don't
>>agree with the ideology to accept it.
>
>I thought the idea of libertarianism is that you don't have to follow
>it if you don't want to :-)
I thought that the idea of libertarianism was that you couldn't *not*
follow it without "initiating force." "Initiating force" is defined,
of course, as "not following the libertarian rules."
-Chris
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Pro-Unix vs anti-WinTel (was: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system?)
Date: 8 May 1999 17:10:00 GMT
On 08 May 1999 10:34:40 +0200,
Peter Mutsaers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In Linux, lots is happening on the desktop, easy-to-use sysadm tools
> etc. Other Unices such as FreeBSD may profit a bit from that.
That's happening on other Unices as well. Many of the GNOME and KDE
developers are using Solaris or one of the BSD's.
> Otoh I don't see much development in the kernel anymore. Look at the
> very very slow pace of Linux kernel development at the moment. I
> browsed a bit through linux-2.2.5,6,7 recently, and really not much is
> happening and a lot is old.
Because 2.2 is a stable series: new features are a no-no at the moment
(exceptions can be made if the feature is very simple, but even then
it's unlikely). Once Linus is comfortable with the 2.2 series, the 2.3
(ie, development) series will begin again and new features will be
welcome.
Development hasn't come to a halt, though: those people working on other
projects are just not integrating it into the tree at the moment. This
gives them time to work out their code before 2.3 exists. When 2.3
starts up, there will once again be clammoring for whose code gets moved
in first. (In other words, its very much in their best interest to be
coding massively now so they can have something presentable.)
> FreeBSD in contrast is very alive w.r.t. more fundamental
> developments. It used to lag behind Linux until maybe a year ago (and
> still does in some areas such as laptop support) but has caught up in
> many parts. Amount of hardware drivers is almost the same now, and
> FreeBSD does have beginning of USB (still 100% missing in Linux), does
> have the same level of ISDN support, has new concept for busses, in
> -current very efficient ATA (disk driver) support is coming up,
> softupdates (i.e. modern better performing filesystem), SMP is
> starting to be better than Linux's.
USB is missing in Linux? Actually it exists and keyboards and mice work
fine. Alan Cox is apparently working on USB speakers (what a weird
concept). The code isn't stable, so it's not in the stable kernel, but
you can certainly patch it in.
See, when the kernel team goes into development mode, those working on
projects don't stop: they maintain their own code for a while to
reintegrate later. (The code is often forked so that it can be added to
a later stable release as well, after it gets some workout in the
non-stable release. USB support will probably be backported to 2.2 when
it's ready for full release.)
> Linux seems to come to a grinding halt in these areas, probably also
> because of the horribly inefficient and confusing development process.
Confusing? It's simple multitasking. Why must all work being done be
added to the kernel immediately? Sometimes you want to take a few weeks
on a project (say, USB support) before it is stable enough to merge in.
Why must all of the kernel be done on the same time line?
--
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: Zachary Pfeffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: how do you fix: /dev/sdb6 was not cleanly unmounted, check forced (note
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 11:06:46 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Mitchell Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE pppd daemon dying on start-up
Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 06:12:30 +0100
Reply-To: "Mitchell Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Please can some-one tell me how I can stop the pppd daemon dying on
connection to the internet I know its changing the values in a file but I
don't know what file to change.
Thanks and Best wishes to all of you
Mitchell
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Subject: Re: Testing my CPU!
Date: 7 May 1999 23:49:28 GMT
On Fri, 07 May 1999 08:08:16 +0400,
Ferdinand V. Mendoza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> HI all,
> I have a PII 400 stand alone PC and running Mandrake 5.3 on it.
> I wanted to put some load to my CPU close to 100% to test it's
> stability.
My linux boxes are always at 100% CPU. (The joy of distributed.net :))
> I can't find a single app to do that except the password cracker
> program I'm running now. It can push my CPU up to 99% usage
> and still my PC can run well even if I'm runnning other programs
> like X11amp, netscape and do some cron schedules to run the
> updatedb program every 5 min. interval, check mail regularly,etc.
> Is this a sound test?
Um, I guess.
I often run rc5des (okay, I always run it), xmame (which isn't exactlyt
efficient especially when emulating a NEOGEO) and all my other junk.
I try not to compile while running xmame, since it gets a bit jerky to
play, but other than that it's fine.
> I just want to compare because in the office, I'm running WIN NT
> and if the cpu usage is close to 100% I cannot move my mouse
> pointer anymore. Any suggestions?
Install Linux on your machine at work.
The only time I've been able to screw up being able to move the mouse
was when (showing a Windows user why Linux is cool) I wrote a 'while (1)
fork();' program. After load got to 260, the process died (hit ulimits,
darn). The system recovered from my abuse just fine.
--
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: rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,comp.os.linux.help,redhat.kernel.general
Subject: Re: building kernel 2.2.6 problem solved, new problem !!!
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 17:37:18 GMT
John van der Zanden wrote:
>
> Thanks everyone for your answers to my former question, i had not installed
> the devel of lxdialog. Now a new problem:
>
> make menuconfig works just fine !
> make dep works fine !
> make clean works fine !
> But then: make bzImage seems to work fine, but at the end i do not have a
> bzImage file (error 2). I had this before and what i did then was move my
> old dir kernel. But this does not work this time. What is up this time ??
> By the way, i saved my kernel at the end of make menuconfig. Can is start
> from there out ? i mean: make menuconfig, open my saved file, exit, make
> dep, make clean, or will i do something totally stupid ??
>
> John
Sounds like the /etc/lilo.conf file has a bad pointer ro an old vmlinuz
or something
run /sbin/lilo and see it it will list right.
added linux-2.2.8 *
added linux-2.2.7-ac2
added dos
added nt
yours will look diff.
Rob
--
Rob Seemuth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home of the ColdBird (AKA The Penguin's Pond!!)
http://www.coldbird.com ICQ# 272853
Everyone, to e-mail me, you have to remove the no.SPAM
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
