Linux-Misc Digest #454, Volume #20 Tue, 1 Jun 99 21:13:18 EDT
Contents:
Program that does HTML to plain text conversion? (Alan)
Samba RH5.1 (Fezzzza)
[HELP] X Error of failed request: BadWindow (invalid Window parameter) (Kevin Reid)
Re: SuSE vs Red Hat? ("D. Vrabel")
Re: A Capitalists view of freedom (Ottavio G. Rizzo)
Re: swapon: operation not permitted by device ("D. Vrabel")
How do I insert partitions BEFORE my Debian boot partiton and still get Debian to
boot? ("Jeff Bernstein")
Re: SuSE vs Red Hat? (Mohd H Misnan)
Linux as a Win95 PPP server (Technical Computing Services)
Re: NT the best web platform? (John Edstrom)
Re: fdisk /MBR ??? (Frank v Waveren)
Re: SuSE vs Red Hat? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: About RealPlayer G2... (Lack Mr G M)
Is TNC Merz 56K external modem compatible with Linux? ("Damon Nicholas")
Re: How do I insert partitions BEFORE my Debian boot partiton and still (Jan Pieter)
Re: Favorite Linux Distribution (Sylvia Wong)
depth problem (Brian Jones)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 19:39:29 -0400
From: Alan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Program that does HTML to plain text conversion?
Hello,
My apologies if this post appears twice ; I had some problems when I
tried to send it last night.
I was wondering if there is a program that comes with most Linux
distributions (I currently have Slackware 3.6 , Mandrake 5.3 and Debian
2.0 installed.) that can convert HTML files to simple text files.
Ideally it would be able to concatenate multiple HTML files into one
plain text file. I found a utility for just about every other conversion
on my system. I also remember seeing somewhere a line of Perl that could
be typed in at the command line to strip HTML tags from a document but
I can't seem to find the document where it is mentioned - or perhaps I'm
just mistaken.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you
Alan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fezzzza)
Subject: Samba RH5.1
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 17:31:17 GMT
I have got the linux box in network neighbour hood I had to start
samba as a win server before it would let me connect to it now I can
connect it I can only login if I create an account for the window
machine cant I just log in without a password or a username ????
------------------------------
From: Kevin Reid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Subject: [HELP] X Error of failed request: BadWindow (invalid Window parameter)
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 13:09:26 -0500
Hello, while trying to run x3270 through a telnet session to
a remote machine, I get the following error:
X Error of failed request: BadWindow (invalid Window parameter)
Major opcode of failed request: 3 (X_GetWindowAttributes)
Resource id in failed request: 0x0
Serial number of failed request: 478
Current serial number in output stream: 479
I first enabled remote assess to my local xserver by "xhost +",
then telnetting to the remote machine and setting the "DISPLAY"
environmental variable to my local machine. I then issue a
"x3270" command at the xterm prompt a then the error listed above
appears.
I am currently using RH-6.0 w/ the 2.2.9 kernel and the updated
gnome packages from:
ftp.inconnect.com/pub/unix/linux/redhat-6.0/contrib-updates/
I would appreciate any help in resolving this problem, otherwise
I will have to start using WIN-NT again :-(
PS: I cannot use the x3270 client on my local machine because
access to the x3270 mainframe is only permitted through the
remote machine.
--
Regards,
Kevin Reid
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "D. Vrabel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.portable
Subject: Re: SuSE vs Red Hat?
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 22:42:58 +0100
On 1 Jun 1999, Rec0il wrote:
> Redhat is too expensive! Get SuSE.
Both are too exensive. Get Debian (http://www.debian.org/)
> Syed Mujtaba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > i am currently in the market to buy Linux, and cannot decide whether
> > to get SuSE 6.1 or Red Hat Linux 6? any input on the matter would be
> > most appreciated.
David Vrabel
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ottavio G. Rizzo)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: A Capitalists view of freedom
Date: 01 Jun 1999 11:56:40 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels) writes:
> > You would not necessarially get the same results in a situation where
> > to start with, neither criminals nor the public had access to
> > firearms, and then gun laws were relaxed.
> You must be joking - even in countries where it's extremely
> difficult to get arms legally, criminals have no problem
> acquiring them.
Criminals *do* have problems in acquiring guns, even in Florida: it's
just a question of how difficult (i.e., expensive) it is. In Florida
it could just mean paying someone $20 to buy a gun for them; in Europe
it could well be a lot of money (terrorists had to steal weapons from
cops in Italy in the '70, which is not a completely trivial thing to
do, I suppose).
> What seems to be evident is that the use of firearms for
> "crimes of passion" is significanty less in countries
> where guns are difficult to obtain "legally", as the
> perpetrators were law-abing citizens before the crime.
Just think of European football fans carrying weapons...
> Career criminals never have problems obtaining firearms,
> as they don't care about the law. By definition, gun control
> laws *only* affect the law-abiding citizen.
If the criminal is going to get into a *lot* of troubles in case he's
cought with a weapon, he's going to use it only for "serious"
business: gun control laws won't make it more difficult to kill a
prime minister, the boss of a rival family or organizing a big
robbery. But they would make an armed robbery to a gas station not
worth it: Palermo is now one of the safest cities in Italy :)
OTOH almost every Swiss man has a military rifle at home, and they
have very little criminality problems. It is also true that they are
Swiss...
Ciao,
Ottavio
--
Ottavio Rizzo IRMAR, Campus de Beaulieu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Universit� de Rennes 1
T�l +33 (0)2 99 28 67 92 35042 RENNES cedex
Fax +33 (0)2 99 28 67 90 FRANCE
------------------------------
From: "D. Vrabel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: swapon: operation not permitted by device
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 22:45:06 +0100
On Tue, 1 Jun 1999, Scott Lanning wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jun 1999, Art S. Kagel wrote:
> >I'd say change the partition type of the swap partition to linux swap
> >or make a filesystem and configure a swap file on that filesystem.
>
> I have it set to linux swap (0x82). I'll make a filesystem, but it
> seems kludgey (maybe that's just bias). I'll also grep swapon
> to see if I can determine why /dev/hda7 wouldn't permit swapon.
> I don't know why it won't; I think Slack '96 that I just removed,
> supported it. Anyway, thanks for the help.
You need to run mkswap on the partition first.
David Vrabel
------------------------------
From: "Jeff Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup,linux.debian.user
Subject: How do I insert partitions BEFORE my Debian boot partiton and still get
Debian to boot?
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 20:34:57 -0400
I have Debian installed in an extended partition on my hard disk. I want to
install Red Hat in another logical partition in the same extended partition
space. But, when I add a partition (I can only add one BEFORE my Debian root
partition; I'm using PartitionMagic 3.0) I can't boot Debian (um, I'm using
System Commander 3.010) because the system can't find the root/boot
partition. When I remove the newly added partition(s), Debian boots fine.
I'm pretty stuck here. Any ideas?
Jeff
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mohd H Misnan)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.portable
Subject: Re: SuSE vs Red Hat?
Date: 1 Jun 1999 23:29:03 GMT
On 1 Jun 1999 21:00:12 GMT, Rec0il wrote:
>Redhat is too expensive! Get SuSE.
>
>Syed Mujtaba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> Hello folks,
>> i am currently in the market to buy Linux, and cannot decide whether
>> to get SuSE 6.1 or Red Hat Linux 6? any input on the matter would be
>> most appreciated.
>> thanks
Uggh.. USD1.99 or a free download off the net is 'too expensive'?
--
|Mohd Hamid Misnan |[EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] |i|
|iMac/233 RevB+MacOS 8.6 |http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/3319/ |M|
|Mitac 5033/AMD K6-2/300 |We want to take over the world, but we don't have |a|
|Linux 2.2.9 i586 |to do it tomorrow. It's OK by next week - Linus T.|c|
------------------------------
From: Technical Computing Services <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux as a Win95 PPP server
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 14:33:22 -0400
I'm running SuSE 6.1 on one 'puter in the front room. This 'puter has a
dial-up
connection, and I keep it "up" at all times. I also have another
computer
in the backroom that is *not* connected to the internet. However, I do
have
*both* computers linked together via ethernet cables and a hub.
The one in the backroom (the one NOT connected to the 'net) is running
Win95; the one in the frontroom (to repeat myself, is running Linux, and
it
has the dedicated 'net connection).
I can telnet just fine to the Linux box from the Win95 machine; I really
want to use the Linux machine as a PPP server. THat way, both
machines will have a 'net connection.
I have heard this is possible, but I'm not sure how to set this up.
I can configure dial-up networking on Win95 when I switch the
dedicated connection from the Linux box to the Win95 machine,
but I have *no* idea how to configure dial-up networking through
the ethernet connection to the Linux box, and then have the Linux
box be the PPP server.
So now that I've confused someone, does anyone have any idea
how to make this possible? So far, I've not found anything to help
out here.
NOTE - The Win95 machine does NOT ---- does NOT ---- use a modem
in ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM! I am NOT going to be able to use a modem
connection to the Linux box from the Win95 box. A modem is not used
ANYWHERE on the network. Sorry to shout, but many people who've tried
to help before think that I'm using a modem to connection from one to
the
other.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Edstrom)
Crossposted-To: comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT the best web platform?
Date: 1 Jun 1999 18:41:16 GMT
In article <7ifla2$jg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Simon Burr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In <7if65l$kfb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Edstrom) writes:
>>Olaf Walkowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Apache has to do a lot of work (depending on the actual configuration)
>>> doing uri/filename translation, detecting the right mime-type, looking
>>Is this true? If squid ignores .htaccess constraints it would be a
>>security risk.
>
> Squid does not deal with .htaccess constraints as it does not have to. Using
...
>
> It should be noted that the use of password authentication results in the
> content being protected not being cached by Squid. In other words, every
> request to a password protected page results in a hit on the backend web
> server.
>
Ok, that is what I had hoped. My concern was that the original post
seemed to imply that if somebody gave the name/password, the page
could be cached and subsequent clients could then pick that page up
from the cache without being challenged since squid knew nothing about
the access/authentication constraint imposed by the server.
So, going back to the original thread, squid doesn't help performance
with pages protected by these authentication schemes. The request
gets passed to the backend server which then does the usual
rewrite/../autentication thing.
> Another important note is that with Squid being used in reverse proxy mode,
> all requests from clients should go to the Squid frontend. This means that
> the machine running Squid makes the request to the backend web server. Thus
> host based access controls no longer work. Personally I do not see this as
> much of a problem as IMHO username/password authentication is better than
> plain host based access controls.
>
--
John Edstrom | edstrom @ slugo.hmsc.orst.edu
http://bubo.hmsc.orst.edu/~edstrom
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Frank v Waveren)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,alt.linux,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: fdisk /MBR ???
Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 23:11:45 GMT
AFAIK, CHS means the physical cylinders/heads/sectors, while LBA uses virtual
cylinders/heads/sectors to partially overcome the 1024 problem.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>>>>>> "Jay" == Jay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Jay> CHS is a disk addressing scheme similar to the widely used
> Jay> LBA scheme.
>
> Jay> The difference is that Dos/Windows/etc. can handle LBA but
> Jay> may have trouble with CHS. This goes for Lilo too. That's
> Jay> why most Linux users boot from a root disk or Lilo boot
> Jay> floppy.
>
> I seriously doubt that this last statement is correct.
>
> mp
>
> - --
> Michael Powe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Portland, Oregon USA http://www.trollope.org
> "There are certain rights that a woman loses when she becomes a
> wife." -- Farrah Fawcett
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v0.9.0 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Encrypted with Mailcrypt 3.5.1 and GNU Privacy Guard
>
> iD8DBQE3UvF9755rgEMD+T8RAvmtAJ9L0D83qAbMFGOvu10lNGpQduS+DQCdHBRt
> cuobIrrJO8Q8BO0EFBjKnpQ=
> =Ow2m
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Frank v Waveren
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ# 10074100
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.portable
Subject: Re: SuSE vs Red Hat?
Date: 1 Jun 1999 17:54:34 GMT
On Tue, 1 Jun 1999 10:19:39 -0400, David Filion wrote:
>The only problem I've found with Redhat is that for a few things there is
>the Linux way and then there is the RedHat way. I try to aviod the Redhat
The good thing about Redhat is that you can forget about the "redhat way"
without messing things up.
>The only other problem I've found with Redhat is the price hike. I bould
I agree that the new price is excessive.
As an aside, I saw RH6.0 boxed for $39- in CompUSA. Suffice it to say my
eyes almost popped out ( esp given that CompUSA have a fair bit in the way
of linux stuff now, including linux quake ... )
--
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Buying computer parts ? How do you know which vendors to trust ?
http://www.resellerratings.com
Impartial and accurate. Straight from the buyers mouth.
( disclaimer: i'm not affiliated with resellerratings.com )
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lack Mr G M)
Subject: Re: About RealPlayer G2...
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 19:31:15 BST
In article <1999Jun1.185543@ukwit01>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lack Mr G M) writes:
|> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andy Piper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|writes:
|> |>
|> |> I can't get any sound at all out of the RealPlayer G2 alpha.
|> |> It loads OK (I had to spoof the registration though as it
|> |> kept complaining of errors in the regional data when I said
|> |> I was in the UK), but I can't get any sound. Ideas?
|>
|> FWIW: I couldn't get the registration to work at all (and still can't).
|>
|> However, the player runs fine, including sound. This is in RH5.2
|> running 2.2.9 kernel.
I forgot to mention that it is also for running local files, rather
than streaming off the net - may make a difference(?).
--
=========== Gordon Lack ================= [EMAIL PROTECTED] ============
The contents of this message *may* reflect my personal opinion. They are
*not* intended to reflect those of my employer, or anyone else.
------------------------------
From: "Damon Nicholas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Is TNC Merz 56K external modem compatible with Linux?
Date: 2 Jun 1999 01:01:29 GMT
Hi, would appreciate if anyone can tell me if TNC Merz 56k modem is
compatible with Redhat Linux 5.2. Thanks in advance.
------------------------------
From: Jan Pieter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup,linux.debian.user
Subject: Re: How do I insert partitions BEFORE my Debian boot partiton and still
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 03:05:55 +0200
Jeff Bernstein wrote:
>
> I have Debian installed in an extended partition on my hard disk. I want to
> install Red Hat in another logical partition in the same extended partition
> space. But, when I add a partition (I can only add one BEFORE my Debian root
> partition; I'm using PartitionMagic 3.0) I can't boot Debian (um, I'm using
> System Commander 3.010) because the system can't find the root/boot
> partition. When I remove the newly added partition(s), Debian boots fine.
>
> I'm pretty stuck here. Any ideas?
Use LILO.
--
http://jp.dhs.org/jp_dhs_org.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sylvia Wong)
Subject: Re: Favorite Linux Distribution
Date: 2 Jun 1999 00:46:46 GMT
For a person who has never installed Linux before, Redhat is a good choice.
But once you've got the hang of it, try Debian and Slackware. But whatever
distro you choose, please install a recent version. For Redhat, that would
mean either Redhat5.2 or 6.0. You'll save yourself a lot of trouble by
using a new one. I installed Redhat 6.0 a while ago a win98 dual boot
machine and it's easy (as long as you don't have a win modem, win printer,
win soundcard....). I have been using Redhat for about a year (we use it
at uni) but am considering switching to Debian, but the installation
instruction looks much harder. For Redhat, it usually means just put the
cd in and that's it.
cheers
sylvia
(will still install Debian when I have time. Btw, the upgrade from 5.2 to
6.0 is trouble free, except for staroffice)
--
The economy depends about as much on economists as the weather does on
weather forecasters. -- Jean-Paul Kauffmann
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://linux.ele.auckland.ac.nz/~swon074
------------------------------
From: Brian Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: depth problem
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 15:06:52 -0400
I've been setting up rh 5.2 using an IBM G70 monitor (17") with 2mb video
RAM, and when I try to run various graphical programs, such as
control-panel, I get
** ERROR **: unable to find a usable depth
Aborted (core dumped)
I've tried using XF86Setup to change the depth settings, and unless I
choose 640x480 with a depth of 8, I end up with a monitor on the fritz or
a message like "cannot connect to X server (error 111)". I'm also stuck
with a 640x480 display, and I'd really like to have 1024x768, but I've
tried just about every combination with XF86Setup, with no real success.
The display adapter is S3 Inc. Trio3d, so I've used the vga16 driver. The
monitor is capable of displaying 1024x768 under windows, so I know it's
possible...any help would be appreciated.
please cc a reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED]!
brian
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
