Linux-Misc Digest #334, Volume #20 Mon, 24 May 99 22:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: My Windows is dead...and I need it!! (James Lee)
Re: ls colors... not recognizing file extensions (John Strange)
Re: A Capitalists view of freedom ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Singleuser and emergency init mode (Paul Kimoto)
How to run a script when logging out ? (John Robson)
Re: SO51 Installation fails!! HELP!! ("Lee Howard")
Is anyone there? ("Robert Frost")
Re: A Capitalists view of freedom (Chris Wilson)
limit of command line argument number (Tae-Yeoub Jang)
Re: Root Password lost... ("J�rgen Exner")
Re: RH 6, sndconfig, sound balster 16 PnP ("Michael J. Saletnik")
Re: SETI comparisons ("kryliss")
Singleuser and emergency init mode ("Andrew Buckle")
Re: Problems with 2.0.33 and pgcc (Allin Cottrell)
RE: ATI Rage 3 Video Card (Robert Young)
Re: COMMERCIAL: SuSE Linux 6.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: James Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: My Windows is dead...and I need it!!
Date: 24 May 1999 20:07:46 -0500
Steven K.I <"The Phat Impala SS CreW"@san.rr.com (not for e-mail)> wrote:
: I have Windows 98 on a 10 gig and RedHat 6.0 with KDE on a 4.3 gig.
: I decided to put LILO on the MBR where Win98 is installed but when
: I decided to test Windows out I wasn't able to load Windows...somehow
: Linux must of "destroyed" Windows 98. Any ideas on how to get Win98 back?
: I have re-installed Linux and KDE, but Win98 still refuses to load.
: Command.com is apparently "missing" even though I boot with a dos boot disk
: and it is still there.
: (Luckily, I have this laptop to work with. :)
Before you do fdisk /mbr, you need to make sure you have a way to boot
up linux again, if you want to keep it. You can use loadlin, or just a
simple rescue disk.
After that, just restore the mbr with dos' fdisk, or you can use dd as
detailed in the LILO-HOWTO.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Strange)
Subject: Re: ls colors... not recognizing file extensions
Date: 24 May 1999 21:31:37 GMT
I added
alias ls="ls --color=tty"
to /etc/bashrc
Daniel Beckham ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: For some reason my ls color output does not recognize colors for file
: extensions although, it works great for file types. The colors are
: specified in /etc/DIR_COLORS and if I issue a 'dircolors -p', I can see
: that extensions such as .tar, .tgz, .gz, etc. all have colors associated
: with them.
: Anyone have a clue as to how I can get ls --color=tty to show colors for
: all files specified?
: FYI, I'm using RedHat 5.2. I can remember this working great when I
: first started using Linux, (1.44MB slackware files, downloaded one at a
: time) but I've never seen it working in the RedHat distributions.
: Thanks,
: Daniel Beckham
--
While Alcatel may claim ownership of all my ideas (on or off the job),
Alcatel does not claim any responsibility for them. Warranty expired when u
opened this article and I will not be responsible for its contents or use.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: A Capitalists view of freedom
Date: 24 May 1999 17:09:10 -0500
Reply-To: "J.L.M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> To which of those alternatives would Godwin's law apply?
>
>Gun control advocates always bring up the Nazis after some time.
Yay!!!! You DID IT!!!! thread's dead!!!
--
James
http://ssdd.conservatory.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Kimoto)
Subject: Re: Singleuser and emergency init mode
Date: 24 May 1999 21:08:40 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Andrew Buckle wrote:
> I found that giving the parameters 'linux S' or 'linux -b' to LILO would
> bring the machine into a single user or emergency mode, trouble is I cant
> edit any configuration files in this mode as they are all readonly.
>
> Can anyone tell me me how to remount filesystems ( specifically / ) so I
> can edit files before rebooting back to multiuser mode ?
Something like "/bin/mount -o remount,rw /". See the mount(8) man page.
--
Paul Kimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Robson)
Subject: How to run a script when logging out ?
Date: 24 May 1999 22:02:12 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Robson)
I often forget to shut down my Sybase database server when I log out. So
I wrote a script to execute isql commands to shut down the servers. But then,
I sometimes forget to execute the script before I log out :-( .
How do I tell Linux to execute my shutdown script automatically whenever I
log out ?
------------------------------
From: "Lee Howard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SO51 Installation fails!! HELP!!
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 09:39:35 -0600
I've been getting the same warning message when trying to install SO51 on my
RedHat 6.0 installation. I've tried to perform the glibc2 update, but the
minute that I do it... the system crashes, and I get a panic error on
reboot. I then have to reload RedHat from the CD.
Without doing the update, however, the installation ./setup seems to proceed
just fine. I haven't yet run and thoroughly tested its functionality,
though.
Lee Howard
Fred Kuipers wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>It's just the warning that the install pops up. Apparently, you should be
------------------------------
From: "Robert Frost" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Is anyone there?
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 21:01:13 -0400
Is anyone there? I need suggestions/help with setting up a TV card on a
network. Anyone who knows a whole lot about this field please drop me a
line.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Wilson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: A Capitalists view of freedom
Date: 25 May 1999 01:11:53 GMT
David Kastrup wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Wilson) writes:
>
>> Second, the statistic of non-defensive gun usages that is commonly
>> cited includes instances of usage by people who aren't versed in gun
>> safety. Again, foolish usage of guns by uneducated users does not
>> increase the likelihood of responsible use by educated users.
>
>Well, the problem with U.S.A. wepaon law that the "gun control freaks"
>bemoan is exactly that you don't need to have any education in order
>to get a gun. Other countries require a license which you only get if
>you have demonstrated that you are versed in gun safety and handling.
>Not so the U.S.A.
I'm opposed to liscensing and registration because it gives the government
information that can used as a weapon against individual gun owners. If the
government were to pass more restrictive gun measures in the future that
mandate the confiscation of certain weapons, liscensing and registration would
tell the government which people own which guns, hence enabling them to more
easily disarm the populace. I cannot support something like that.
What I do support is banning a person from using a gun (temporarily at least)
if they actually have used a gun in a manner that endangers other people.
For example, if a person were to point a gun at another person in jest, I think
such a person should be fined and required to take a gun safety course at the
very least. If a person were to seriously threaten another with a gun, I
think that such a person should pay a fine to the victim, as well as be
imprisoned for a certain length of time. However, I'm opposed to a liscensing
measure that would be potentially dangerous to innocent people. I say that the
guilty should be punished after being proven guilty, rather than that every
person should be suspected as guilty by default.
Gun control is not about prohibiting everybody to
>acquire and use a gun. Gun control is about making sure that minimum
>requirements of sanity are enforced.
Not for all gun control advocates.
>A gun lover in Germany will take the pains necessary to acquire a
>proper license. He will be allowed to purchase weapons. These
>weapons will be registered and their use can be traced back to their
>owner.
Perhaps that lends an advantage to solving crimes, but it also makes mass
confiscation schemes a possibility. I'd prefer to rely upon witness testimony
and testing of biological material left over at the scene of the crime.
>But in the U.S., the right to bear arms is somehow thought of as to
>have to be granted without making sure about the proper
>responsibility.
Just as I believe that a person should be presumed innocent until proven
guilty, I believe that a person should be presumed responsbible enough to use
a gun until they demonstrate otherwise. I don't believe in punishing those
who are responsible by forcing them to go through the trials and tribulations
that an irresponsible person should have to go through.
>> Thirdly, the statistic of non-defensive gun usage that's commonly
>> employed by anti-gunners includes homicide instances in which family
>> members are at war with each other. Yet *again*, gun usage by
>> family members involved in brutal feuds does *not* increase the
>> likelihood of people shooting their family members if their home
>> situation isn't already a violent environment. Anti-gunners seem to
>> conveniently discount here that motivations and intentions mean
>> everything with respect to determining a person's action.
>
>I don't think that "anti-gunners" are of the opinion that the guns are
>committing crimes and should be punished. But I don't see why it
>should be deemed necessary to furbish people at variance with a
>convenient means to kill one another.
I do, but then again, I don't consider killing to be be an action that is
unconditionally bad. It is commonly claimed by the anti-gunners that the
primary purpose of a gun is to kill, which is why they believe guns to be bad.
Well, personally, I'm not a pacifist -- I consider killing in self-defense to
be a perfectly legitimate form of killing, which is why I consider guns to have
a perfectly legitimate purpose.
>
>> Hey, but who cares about accuracy? The anti-gunners have an agenda
>> to promote, which is disarming the populace so that people may be
>> either subjected to or dependent upon the whims of the government.
>
>So you would say that people should be in the position to shoot
>officers, commit lynchings and do other things intended to offset a
>possible disagreement with the way the government wields its forces?
I would say that an innocent person has the right to defend himself against
any attacker, even if that attacker is a representative of the state. I am
not one of those people who believe that one has a moral obligation to obey
the law, regardless of what the law is. Because I oppose the political
mechanism of representative democracy (which is the current political
mechanism here in the U.S.), I'm not of the position that the enforcement of
all laws produced by this mechanism, regardless of their specifics, is just.
For example, I don't use recreational drugs, but I do favor people's right to
use them if they so desire (although I wouldn't necessarily consider all
recreational drug usage to be intelligent). I consider this right to be an
implication of the right of self-governance, which I advocate. Because I
consider both the political institution of representative democracy *and* the
ban upon recreational drug use to be an infringement upon this right, I don't
acknowledge any obligation to abide by them. If the DEA's thugs were to break
into the house of a marijuana dealer (which they often do), I would support the
right of the occupants to use deadly force to defend themselves against such an
invasion. However, it would be incumbent upon the occupants to demonstrate
that their use of force was employed defensively against a threat to their
person or property rather than against an innocent person, so as to insure to
other members of the community that they're not a threat to innocent people.
I'm opposed to committing any form of lynching, as such an action is
retaliatory in nature, and not defensive. Immediate defensive action is
required during an instance of aggression. However, *after* such instances,
when it is necessary to apprehend the aggressor so as to exact compensation
for his action or deliver punishment, those suspected as responsible must be
proven responsible before any compensation is exacted or punishment delivered.
A court procedure adjudicated by a neutral party that both the injured party
and the suspect can agree upon is required if the injured party is to achieve
justice for himself without wrongly convicting an innocent person. A lynch
mob does not respect the right of due process, and hence can easily end up
punishing innocent people. That is why I oppose lynching, despite the
fact that I support the right to use immediate use of *defensive* force by
those who are threatened or endangered by others.
I apologize for being so long.
--Chris
------------------------------
From: Tae-Yeoub Jang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.shell
Subject: limit of command line argument number
Date: 24 May 1999 23:11:42 +0100
I need to handle a directory which contains 11000 data files.
But I just can't put those files onto a command line as input arguments.
For example:
BASH> ls dirname/*
BASH> bash: /bin/ls: too many arguments <== Error message
None of shell commands and other programs are working. What should I
do? It doesn't seem to be the problem of BASH, my shell, as I tried
with another shell like 'tcsh' to no purpose.
My platform is "Redhat Linux5.2 with Kernel 2.0.36, BASH 1.14.7.
There should be a solution as I hadn't met this problem with the unix
machine with the same BASH shell in my office.
Thanks a lot.
Tae.
------------------------------
From: "J�rgen Exner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Root Password lost...
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 14:59:52 -0700
Reply-To: "J�rgen Exner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Robert B. Hamilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 24 May 1999, J�rgen Exner wrote:
>
> > Robert B. Hamilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > > On Sat, 22 May 1999, NF Stevens wrote:
> > >
> > > > It depends on how you have your machine set up. On mine using
> > > > the linux single option in lilo brings up sulogin which requires
> > > > the root password before going into single user mode.
> > >
> > > What if you pass init=/bin/bash to the lilo command line?
> >
> > If you would have read the LILO documentation you might have stumbled
across
> > the note, that **ANY** paramater added to the LILO command line requires
the
> > LILO password (if LILO has been setup that way).
>
> If you had read the text you cited above more carefully
> you would have noticed that I am responding to the idea of using
> *sulogin* by changing a line in *inittab*, or alternatively by
> passing the "-b" flag to init. Unless I misread the article by
> Stevens, he meant to imply this improved security, which it doesn't.
Ooops, you are right, I misread your answer indeed. Sorry about that.
And I aggree with you: Stevens suggestion is not an improvement in security.
jue
--
J�rgen Exner
------------------------------
From: "Michael J. Saletnik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: RH 6, sndconfig, sound balster 16 PnP
Date: 24 May 1999 18:11:10 -0400
Silviu Minut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> isapnp /etc/isapnp.conf
> That's all.
Not necessarily. In my situation, I found it necessary to modify
/etc/conf.modules to match my /etc/isapnp.conf settings:
(A Soundblaster AWE32 PnP)
alias sound sb
pre-install sound insmod sound dmabuf=1
options opl3 io=0x388
alias midi awe_wave
post-install awe_wave /bin/sfxload /etc/midi/synthgm.sbk
options sb io=0x220 irq=5 dma=1 dma16=7 mpu_io=0x330
-Michael
--
Michael J. Saletnik, PE Tufts E'91 G'93 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Software Engineer, Thomson Financial Services
Registered Professional Structural Engineer
AIM: msaletni, ICQ: 24238794, www.tiac.net/users/icarus
------------------------------
From: "kryliss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SETI comparisons
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 20:11:43 -0500
Reply-To: "kryliss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'm not a big Mac fan...(he he he you said big Mac) but anyways, I have
noticed that Macs do tend to preform quite well when the MacOS is replaced
by Linux. Now there's something to think about.
Richard Petty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <7i52u6$ho7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >D. Vrabel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in comp.os.linux.misc:
> >DV>On 21 May 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >>> Take a look at http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/oss.html. It
> shows that Win95 users
> >>> are getting an average of 42 hours compared to 30 for NT, 23 for Mac
> and 14 for linux.
> >>> Presumably the same compiler was used for 95 and NT (its the same
> download link). It would
> >>> seem to indicate that Win95 cooperative multitasking generally falls
> far short in performance
> >DV>Windows 95 does do preemptive multitasking for Win32 programs.
>
> >Well, it doesn't do it very well. Its being outperformend by *MACs*
>
>
> The SETI@home project fascinates me endlessly, both from a technical and a
> cultural standpoint.
>
> I would make two comments about this:
>
> 1. The MacOS wrecklessly throws almost all of it's CPU resources to the
> frontmost application. When the SETI@home client kicks in -- even as a
> "screensaver" -- it becomes the frontmost app.
>
> 2. Speaking strictly about performance (I'm not gonna get into
> architecture), the current MacOS lags other operating systems mainly in
> it's file system. SETI@home has very, very little of that going on. The
> MacOS's file system performance stinks, but when you ask its RISC CPU to
> do a lot of fast fourier transforms, it takes a back seat to nobody. Mac
> hardware has always been very, very good.
>
> 3. Probably the biggest thing accounting for the relative performance
> differences you see in these stats (all of which are changing quickly) is
> CULTURAL. A lot of Wintel users seem clueless that their seven year old
> Packard Bell is on the wrong side of the performance curve.
> I believe that the Windows users cooperating in the SETI@home project
> represent a more even distribution of the general population. Mac users to
> to fall into two distinct Groups: 1. Those who use their system but don't
> want to know anything about how it works, and 2. The geeky ones who love
> their Macs and would marry them if it were legal.
> Group 2, suffering from a perpetual Mac persecution complex, also tends
> to take an interest in the sort of thing SETI is trying to accomplish.
> Vendicate your system preference and find aliens. This is pure Group 2
stuff.
> Group 2 users tend to have nice hardware.
>
>
> For the record, I have three Macs doing SETI@home work:
>
> PowerCenter 120, 120-MHz 604, 112-Meg RAM, 70-hours.
> PowerMac 7500, 200-MHz 604e, 64-Meg RAM, 30-hours.
> Macintosh 300-MHz G3 server, 256-Meg RAM, 15-hours.
>
> The G3 server is my regular desktop machine. It's fast Ethernet and RAID
> disks have no impact whatsoever on SETI@home.
>
> -- Richard, Group 2
>
> --
> Spam deterent: Remove the "bogus" part for a correct address.
------------------------------
From: "Andrew Buckle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Singleuser and emergency init mode
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 23:01:09 +0100
Hi,
I recently installed SuSE 6.1 and incorrectly defined the ethernet card,
this caused the machine to hang when trying to set up eth0.
I found that giving the parameters 'linux S' or 'linux -b' to LILO would
bring the machine into a single user or emergency mode, trouble is I cant
edit any configuration files in this mode as they are all readonly.
Can anyone tell me me how to remount filesystems ( specifically / ) so I
can edit files before rebooting back to multiuser mode ?
Thanks,
Andrew Buckle
------------------------------
From: Allin Cottrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Problems with 2.0.33 and pgcc
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 20:49:07 -0400
Slav Inger wrote:
> I downloaded the latest pgcc (based on egcs) in the form of RPMs, and
> used it to compile zImage, modules, and then did modules_install.
[problems]
> version is 2.0.33.
>
> Any ideas?
Yes, don't use egcs/gcc2.8 on the 2.0 series kernels, let alone
pgcc with special optimization flags. Use gcc 2.7.2.3 to compile
those kernels.
--
Allin Cottrell
Department of Economics
Wake Forest University, NC
------------------------------
From: Robert Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: ATI Rage 3 Video Card
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 22:04:41 GMT
>===== Original Message From Nik Gibson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =====
>I have been searching and searching and I can't find a driver for my new
>ATI Rage 3 Video card. The card is so new that it wouldn't surprise me
>if it takes a bit of time for a driver to come out.
>
>But I was wondering if any one had already gotten it to work? Or if
>anyone has heard of a driver being developed?
>
>Thanks
Mr. Gibson,
If you received any response to your post, would you kindly forward a copy
to
me? I am also interested in the driver for the video card.
Thank you very much.
--
Robert Young,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: COMMERCIAL: SuSE Linux 6.1
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 22:12:02 GMT
Linux Mall Information <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
.......SaX (SuSE advanced XF86 configuration tool)
YES I think is the best.
My SiS card and manitor was autconfig.
It is rock solid.
Better as in win95 ever was.
Never went back to RH5.2
bob
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
