Linux-Misc Digest #162, Volume #20 Wed, 12 May 99 01:13:12 EDT
Contents:
Re: Desktop size, XFree, KDE (Andreas Hinz)
Re: Linux Client for MS Network (Andreas Hinz)
system hangs #3 ("Al Goins")
Re: More troubles with 2.2.7 (Paul Kimoto)
Re: Redhat 6.0 broken? (Andrew Chung)
Re: Can't see more than 64.8MB of ram.... (Paul Thomas)
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (Mike Coffin)
Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (was: Wanted: Database/Contact mgr with
backend on Linux/FreeBSD, web frontend) ("Rolf Marvin B�e Lindgren")
Re: Redhat Sparc wants 150M Smaller needed! ("Jack Mott")
Re: Another problem (Tomer Brisker)
Re: How to low-level format a SCSI (Len Huppe)
Re: Redhat 6.0 broken? (Thomas B. Quillinan)
Re: KDE very slow (jik-)
Re: ATI and X Server problem (Scott Stone)
Erasing RW cdrom under Linux. (Stephen Lohning)
Re: Where is best location of swap partition on a disk? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: RedHat price... (Johan Kullstam)
Re: Hardware failure or an attack?
IntegratedFax/Telephony software for Linux? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: RedHat price... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Kernel 2.2.X rpm (John Hovell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andreas Hinz)
Subject: Re: Desktop size, XFree, KDE
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 06:19:03 GMT
On 06 May 1999 12:59:49 PDT, Matt O'Toole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>screen, which I hate. How can I set both the desktop *and* screen to
>800x600?
>
In /etc/XF86Config (or /etc/X11/XF86Config):
Under the X server and all the color depths you are using (example):
Subsection "Display"
Depth 16
Modes "800x600" "640x480" "1024x768"
ViewPort 0 0
Virtual 800 600
EndSubsection
The "Modes" and "Virtual" are what you are looking for.
--
Med venlig hilsen / Best regards
Andreas Hinz
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andreas Hinz)
Subject: Re: Linux Client for MS Network
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 06:19:03 GMT
On Thu, 06 May 1999 16:20:44 -0500, James Grossmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I was wondering if there was a Linux client for Microsoft windows
>networking.
>
Samba?
Try http://samba.org for both server and client software.
--
Med venlig hilsen / Best regards
Andreas Hinz
------------------------------
From: "Al Goins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: system hangs #3
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 20:36:16 -0500
None of these solutions have worked. The system still hangs in multi-user
mode when sendmail starts.
any other suggestions?
-Al
mist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Bill Unruh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> scribed to us that -
> >In <7h58ji$1th$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Albert Goins"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >writes:
> >
> >>I am kind of new to linux and have no idea how to solve this problem. I
> >>have Red Hat 5.1 installed and it was working fine but now for some
reason
> >>my system hangs while it is booting when it gets to starting sendmail.
I
> >>don't need sendmail as I don't have networking right now but I don't
know
> >>how to boot my machine now. What can i do?
> >
> >Probably looking for some name resolution.
> >Anyway, at lilo
> >linux single
> >will put you into single user mode as root.
> >
>
> <snip instructions for disabling sendmail>
>
> Or you could fix it. Then the various programs that rely on Sendmail
> will still be able to use it. (eg, for local mail transfer, etc.) It's
> trying to resolve it's own domain-name, which is probably set up wrongly
> (as default) in the /etc/sendmail.cf
>
> Look for the line where it talks about "my official domain name", and
> change it to, say
>
> Dlocalhost.localdomain
>
> and just make sure that /etc/hosts has
>
> 127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.localdomain
>
> in it.
>
>
> --
> Mist.
Bill Unruh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:7h59s8$pbf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In <7h58ji$1th$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Albert Goins"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >I am kind of new to linux and have no idea how to solve this problem. I
> >have Red Hat 5.1 installed and it was working fine but now for some
reason
> >my system hangs while it is booting when it gets to starting sendmail. I
> >don't need sendmail as I don't have networking right now but I don't know
> >how to boot my machine now. What can i do?
>
> Probably looking for some name resolution.
> Anyway, at lilo
> linux single
> will put you into single user mode as root.
>
> cd /etc/rc.d
> for i in 1 2 3 4 5
> do
> mv rc$i.d/S80sendmail rc$i.d/K30sendmail
> done
>
The files are already named this!
-Al Goins
> That's it.
>
>
--
Albert Goins
University of Minnesota Twin Cities
Computer Science
Lab Consultant EE/Csci 4-204, MechE 308
ICQ# 31412664
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.itlabs.umn.edu/~goin0004
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Kimoto)
Subject: Re: More troubles with 2.2.7
Date: 11 May 1999 16:21:22 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Steuber wrote:
> 1) When booting, I get the following message a whole bunch of times:
>
> modprobe: can't locate module char-major-4
>
> What does this mean and how do I get rid of this message?
That's odd: it would seem to refer to the tty devices (cf.
Documentation/devices.txt). Does this seem to cause any
problems?
> 3) shutdown -h no longer turns off the computer. apm is enabled in
> the kernel. apmd is running. apm seems to give sensible
> information.
See Documentation/Configure.help and Documentation/Changes
(search for "halt").
--
Paul Kimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Chung)
Subject: Re: Redhat 6.0 broken?
Date: 12 May 1999 03:23:21 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 06 May 1999 20:08:13 +0800, XuYifeng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Is Redhat6.0 broken and refuse to install new kernel?
>I have installed kernel source file 2.2.7 and make a kernel, the kernel
>is only 470K,
>but when I run lilo, it always complains that "Kernel /boot/zImage is
>too big",
>why?!
Try putting some of the stuff into modules and have only the essential stuff
compiled directly into the kernel proper... If you read the documentation
that comes with lilo, it explains the error :
Kernel <name> is too big
The kernel image (without the setup code) is bigger than 512 kbytes
(or 448 kbytes, if built with LARGE_EDBA ). LILO would overwrite
itself when trying to load such a kernel. This limitation only
applies to old kernels which are loaded below 0x10000 (e.g. "Image" or
"zImage"). Try building the kernel with "bzImage". If this is
undesirable for some reason, try removing some unused drivers and
compiling the kernel again. This error may also occur if the
kernel image is damaged or if it contains trailing "junk", e.g. as
the result of copying an entire boot floppy to the hard disk.
--
Andrew Chung [EMAIL PROTECTED]
See http://anderoo.dhs.org/~anderoo/pgp.html for PGP key
It's a sin only if you dwell on the what ifs and the but ifs
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Thomas)
Subject: Re: Can't see more than 64.8MB of ram....
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 11:58:03 -0800
Hi,
The solution is to add append="mem=128M" to lilo
or in my case to loadlin for boot time.
Also, yes, that was a typo 1.0.27. It should have
been 2.0.27.
Thanks for the helpful replies!
--Paul T.
**** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start Here (tm) ****
------------------------------
From: Mike Coffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism
Date: 11 May 1999 20:35:45 -0700
Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That's nonsense. Libertarianism is founded on the principle of `might
> makes right.' It's Social Darwinism in a pin-striped suit.
NO, *that's* nonsense. Libertarianism is founded on the principle
that might *doesn't* make right. You have managed not just to be
wrong, but to be precisely wrong, 180 deg. wrong, utterly wrong,
wholly wrong, completely wrong. You have achieved the absolute apex
of mistakeness; you have scaled the lofty peaks of counterfactualism,
you have encompassed erroneousness; you have achieved a zen state of
speciousness.
(Got to keep contradicting the Big Lies. :-)
-mike
------------------------------
From: "Rolf Marvin B�e Lindgren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (was: Wanted: Database/Contact
mgr with backend on Linux/FreeBSD, web frontend)
Date: 06 May 1999 09:23:29 +0200
[ wclark xoom
| Why not? That's what they are, at least from the demographics
| figures. The number of Unix workstations _far_ outnumbers the number
| of servers. The same was not true ten or probably even five years
| ago, but it's true today.
UNIX supports several users out of convenience - some processes are best
run as a separate users. to me, the fact that the same machine can run
several login shells simultaneously is not sufficient to call it
anything else. the concept, in UNIX, is a hack - for instance, that
there are only two levels of user - root and not root.
if you want a true shared user system, go for an operating system that
supports it - NOS, VMS, TOPS-20.
--
Rolf Lindgren http://www.uio.no/~roffe/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Jack Mott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Redhat Sparc wants 150M Smaller needed!
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 22:15:04 -0500
I know it can go smaller.
There is a 486 computer the size of a matchbook running linux serving up web
pages
and it doesnt have 130 megs of ram :)
dont know how, other than install it on something bigger, then rip stuff out
you dont need.
Bill Unruh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:7haj43$qph$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren
Greer) writes:
>
>]Do an "expert" install and manually tell it which packages to install.
>]It should tell you after you pick each package how much MB of disk
>]space it will require.
>
>Yes, I tried that and the lowest I could get it to was 130MB
>glibc was 27MB all on its own! (That is absurd)
>
>
>]On 11 May 1999 23:17:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh) wrote:
>
>]-->I just tried to install Redhat 6 on a Sparc machine and it told it it
>]-->wants 150M of disk space > This is huge! I have a 100M disk on it. How
>]-->do I get it down to say 60M (with X) Will be using a sparc II as an
>]-->Xterminal mainly.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tomer Brisker)
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x,linux.redhat,linux.redhat.install,linux.redhat.misc,linux.redhat.rpm,nl.comp.os.linux,nl.comp.os.linux.installat
Subject: Re: Another problem
Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 09:16:09 +0200
The XFree RPM manager is called glint. To check if you have it installed,
run "rpm -q glint" from a virtual console. If it is intalled, all you
have to do is type "glint" on any xterm, or set it up to be in your
menu/icons by reading the man pages for your window manager. If it is not
installed, you can get the latest version from
http://rufus.w3.org/linux/RPM/glint.html
[This followup was posted to alt.linux and a copy was sent to the cited
author.]
In article <7gcp2q$3i6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Under xwindows the RPM manager was available. I don't know what happened but
> it is gone. Can someone tell me how to get it back under Xwindows that is ??
>
> Thanx
>
> John
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: Len Huppe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: How to low-level format a SCSI
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 22:48:30 -0500
The only way to issue a low-level format command to the drive is through the
SCSI adapter which is controlled by the SCSI BIOS. If you are unable to gain
access to the actual machine, you can still access the SCSI BIOS through the
/proc filesystem and issue the command. There are utilities out there which can
do this for you.
good luck
Albert Wiersch wrote:
> How can I low level format a SCSI drive on my remote Linux system?
>
> I don't want to have to physically go to it to do so (want to do it through
> telnet). I think the SCSI BIOS has a format utility, but I would like a
> Linux program to do it. Can't access the SCSI BIOS from here.
>
> The drive doesn't have any useful files on it right now... I would just like
> to low-level format it and then set it up as a backup drive.
>
> (Please send your reply to my email, too. Thanks!)
>
> Thanks,
> Albert
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas B. Quillinan)
Subject: Re: Redhat 6.0 broken?
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 22:01:59 GMT
XuYifeng ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Is Redhat6.0 broken and refuse to install new kernel?
: I have installed kernel source file 2.2.7 and make a kernel, the kernel
: is only 470K,
: but when I run lilo, it always complains that "Kernel /boot/zImage is
: too big",
: why?!
It seems that lilo is a little broken in RH6...I have the same problem.
do a make bzImage instead of a make zImage - That works for me!
tom.
--
Thomas B. Quillinan " Faced with the prospect of rereading this book, I would
aka [EMAIL PROTECTED] rather have my brains ripped out by a plastic fork."
-- C. Cooper, ZDNet review of B. Gate's Business @ the speed of
light
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 14:08:15 -0700
From: jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE very slow
> As to the speed accusations, my guess is that the problems are
> network-configuration-related. I run it occasionally at work (when I
> don't need Office and have a lot of intranet work to do) on a PII-350
> with 64MB of RAM, networked to everything, and it is slightly slower
> here than at home on the standalone 486.
That would be very intersting if it was a network problem, since the
only network I have is pppd tp an ISP. And no, I am not so stupid as to
compare speed via a wide area network.....this is my desktop machine and
KDE just doesn't cut it anymore.
------------------------------
From: Scott Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.help,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: ATI and X Server problem
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 14:08:15 -0700
Jim McCusker wrote:
>
> TS Stahl wrote:
> >
> > Sorry, Mladden, Redhat did not license the metroX server for 5.2. However,
> > JPC, all is not lost. Surf over to Redhat and grab the XFree86 3.3.3.1 RPM
> > upgrade. I don't know if the Rage II is specifically supported, but it
> > will drive your card.
>
> I'm using his exact card and I have no troubles with it. It should run
> fine. THe only thing is that autoprobing doens't work (but it does
> detect fine), you'll have to set the memory and such yourself.
>
I believe that XFree86 3.3.3.1 supports all of the current Mach64
variants. Not sure about the Mach128, but I've heard that it works with
the Mach64 drivers that are currently in XFree.
> Jim
> --
> Jim McCusker | Class of '99, BA Computer Science & Cognitive Science
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://cif.rochester.edu/~fprefect
> ~Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it,
> poorly.~
> ~~Henry
> Spencer
--
==========================
Scott M. Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
UNIX Systems/Network Admin (Consultant)
Taos Mountain Software
------------------------------
From: Stephen Lohning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Erasing RW cdrom under Linux.
Date: 12 May 1999 14:22:24 +1000
Does any body know how to erase RW cdroms under linux. Preferably RH5.2
Thanks
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.sun.admin
Subject: Re: Where is best location of swap partition on a disk?
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 04:18:20 GMT
The general ans. Things that need fast access should go to edge of the
drive (in newer drives).
With ZBR you have more tracks per cyl (less head movements, always good)
and higher transfer rates.
Cyl 0 (where the label is) starts on the outside.
What that is is up to you (swap, databases, ...) and if it is worth the
effort.
Jeff R.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Michael Hucka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was just reading the Linux partitioning mini-HowTo, and it says (in
section
> 3.3):
>
> o Older disks have the same number of sectors on all tracks. With
this
> disks it will be fastest to put your swap in the middle of the
disks,
> assuming that your disk head will move from a random track towards
the
> swap area.
>
> o Newer disks use ZBR (zone bit recording). They have more sectors
on the
> outer tracks. With a constant number of rpms, this yields a far
greater
> performance on the outer tracks than on the inner ones. Put your
swap on
> the fast tracks.
>
> Is it widely accepted that putting the swap area on the outer tracks
really
> is best? It seems like the first statement (put swap in the middle of
the
> disk) would be better because it would minimize the average distance
traveled
> by the disk-head mechanism when seeking from a random location to the
swap
> area. Read/write speed may be faster on the outer tracks, but the
heads have
> to *get* to the tracks first, and I always thought that the latency to
seek
> to a disk region was the biggest chunk of time expended for
reading/writing
> small amounts of data. (But I can see this could be data-size
dependent.)
>
> I'd be interested in finding out the opinions of knowledgeable people
on this
> point, and especially, pointers to any documents that explain this
issue in
> more detail.
>
> --
> Michael Hucka, Ph.D. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> GENESIS Development Group, Division of Biology, Caltech
>
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
------------------------------
Subject: Re: RedHat price...
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 11 May 1999 17:26:19 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray) writes:
> Yes, I realize that a person can get RedHat for $2 or "free" over the
> net, and *I* know there are choices. My "kvetching", as you call it,
> is more directed toward the issue of getting new (very very new) users
> over to the Linux OS, not people who already have a substantial amount
> of knowledge about it.
ok i see your point now. that certainly seems fair enough.
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Don't Fear the Penguin!
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hardware failure or an attack?
Date: 12 May 1999 04:32:37 GMT
Hi.
RedHat has quite a few things that are exploitable, specially if you are
not behind some sort of firewall. A mailbomb could be the reason why your
server's root partition was full, or some careless users just used up all
the space (assuming you do not have a separate /home partition).
When you say /lost+found was 12MB, are you sure it is really 12MB? The
output of du -sk /lost+found on a few linux boxes I have accounts on is
around 12 kylobytes, which is normal.
If someone did hack into your server, and they used a rootkit, it could be
kinda hard to find out what may have been changed in the system. After you
free up some space on your root partition, you may want to start going thru
your /etc/passwd file for any new added accounts, and check /etc/services
and /etc/init.d for any strange ports and daemons that may have been added.
Your SMTP and POP daemons may be refusing connections because they may be
unable to write to any logfiles they create on the root partition (assuming
you have not cleared some space on it yet). Changing your root password
and encouraging any other users on the box to do the same would be a good
idea.
I do not know if you have the option, but IMHO the best thing would be to
backup any important data, wipe the machine clean, reinstall RH5.2 or
whatever you wish to run, check http://www.geek-girl.com/bugtraq/index.html
and check for any posts on BugTraq regarding RedHat/Linux vulnerabilities,
patch as much of it as you can, consider setting up a firewall on that
server, and use different partitions for your mail, news, and home
directories to avoid any problems caused by disks getting full.
Hope this helps...
-cain
gordon_findlay wrote:
>
> We've a damaged server, and opinion is divided over whether it's damaged
> because of some software/hardware failure or due to an attempt to crack
it.
>
> OS: Redhat Linux v5.2
> Hardware: Compaq Presario, IDE drive, AMD-K6, nothing exotic
>
> Symptoms: - root filesystem is full. (was at 24% for about a month) -
> lost+found directory is 12 MB. That's the directory, there are no files
> visible in it. - empty wtmp - telnet (port 23) into box OK, but
on SMTP and
> POP ports connection is refused (we're running Communigate Pro as a mail
> server) - system clock has moved back several hours. - machine has
rebooted
> unattended (by anyone we know anyway :-) - w reports that I restarted
and
> logged in about 20 mins before I really did. - fsck reports no (other)
> problems. - rpm -Va reports nothing untoward, except for some missing
> startup and shutdown scripts (they're not changed, they're missing) - vi
> reports unable to open swap file (presumably due to the full root FS,
> although there is a separate swap partition).
>
> Anyone heard of anything similar? Anything to look for?
>
> advTHANKSance
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: IntegratedFax/Telephony software for Linux?
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 21:04:33 GMT
After a few hours of searching, I don't seem to be able to find a
Fax/Telephony suite similar to the old Cheyenne Bitware one I used to
use in Windows.
I know there are a lot of Fax and Fax Server apps for Linux and Unix
out there, but does anyone know of any apps that handle incoming
faxes/voice messages and data in one package? Have there been any
ports of Windows shareware apps that do this?
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
------------------------------
Subject: Re: RedHat price...
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 04:48:02 GMT
According to Christopher B. Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I don't see how they could have been providing *any* installation
> support whatsoever when they were selling the boxes for about $20.
> (That being the most that they could charge when other companies have
> been selling the boxes, bought from Red Hat, for $30.)
There are actually several types of boxed RedHats (5.x) as well. Most
of what you see for $20 or less doesn't include technical support.
The box that includes support usually goes for $40.
That seemed to confuse a lot of people, so I guess they dropped the
boxed-without-support version in favour with a unified release.
People who don't want support are left to CheapBytes.
-p.
------------------------------
From: John Hovell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.2.X rpm
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 04:37:23 GMT
There is a kernel-source RPM for 2.2.5-15 that comes w/ the 6.0 CD. You'll need
that and the headers RPM for the kernel source (plus all necessary compiling
tools etc.)
In any case, all these RPM's can be downloaded from one of the countless ftp
archives containing the entire release CD. They would be in /RedHat/RPMS/.
Check www.redhat.com/mirrors.html for current mirrors.
-John
Jesse van Oort wrote:
> Once upon a sunny day, a furry little animal named Aaron Dershem squeaked:
> >Any word on when Red Hat will release a 2.2.X kernel RPM? I downloaded the
> >source files from kernel.org, but I'd rather have a painless, no-brainer
> >upgrade.
> >
> >Aaron.
> >
>
> With all respect: Why then bother upgrading at all?
> Compiling a kernel isn't that hard, and its the only way to effctively
> upgrade. Just installing a .rpm (if exist at all) may even slow your
> system down.
> Just read the readme file that came with the download and give it
> a try.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jesse
>
> --
> In a world without fences and borders, who needs windows and gates....
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
