Linux-Misc Digest #23, Volume #21 Tue, 13 Jul 99 15:13:10 EDT
Contents:
Re: root authority diluted? (Leonard Evens)
Re: Corrupted swap partition ?? (Leonard Evens)
HELP:Upgrading to RedHat 6.0 "fouled" up my system (Tom)
Re: open systems?!? Re: Why does Apple not cooperate with Be? ("William Edward
Woody")
Re: open systems?!? Re: Why does Apple not cooperate with Be? ("William Edward
Woody")
Re: Linux jingle (Darren Winsper)
Re: accessing c:\My Documents dir on a linux mount (MB)
Re: My Linux box was hacked! (Shice Beoney)
Re: Is there a variant of telnetd which logs in users? (Duncan Simpson)
Re: open systems?!? Re: Why does Apple not cooperate with Be? ("William Edward
Woody")
Re: HELP:Upgrading to RedHat 6.0 "fouled" up my system (Shice Beoney)
Re: open systems?!? Re: Why does Apple not cooperate with Be? (Josiah Fizer)
Re: Suggestions for a Linux book? (DeAnn Iwan)
Re: Red Hat 6.0 & LaTeX ("Anthony W. Youngman")
Re: Dev's won't work??? (brian moore)
Re: open systems?!? Re: Why does Apple not cooperate with Be? (Scott Elyard)
Re: Legal file and directory names (Gergo Barany)
Re: open systems?!? Re: Why does Apple not cooperate with Be? (Scott Elyard)
terminal core dumps (kev)
Re: I am a newbie, HELP me please! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Leonard Evens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: root authority diluted?
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 11:01:02 -0500
Dave Brown wrote:
> I've always believed that root authority overrides
> base permissions on any file (or device). How surprised
> I was when I had a dos (or was it vfat) partition mounted
> for my user account's access with the options "user,uid=501,
> gid=501", and root was not able to write to the drive, only
> that user.
>
> Seems to me this violates the concept of root authority.
>
> --
> Dave Brown Austin, TX
Root can of course change this, so in the end root has the
power to do anything. But root can also arrange for a file
not to be writable for example by root. This is typically
the case for /etc/shadow. This adds slightly increased
security since a hacker who had obtained root access would
have to take an extra step.
--
Leonard Evens [EMAIL PROTECTED] 847-491-5537
Dept. of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ., Evanston, IL 60208
------------------------------
From: Leonard Evens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Corrupted swap partition ??
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 10:57:39 -0500
Pete Rossi wrote:
> Is it possible for a Linux swap partition to become corrupted? If it did,
> would it become "UN corrupted" or "fix itself" following a reboot?
>
> Consider this possibility...
>
> System is running and suffers a hard power failure.
>
> During the reboot, it is smart enough to see that the regular partitions
> were not cleanly unmounted so it runs 'fsck' and... hopefully all is OK.
>
> But... what if the swap partition was being written to when the power
> failed? Could it become corrupted? During the reboot, there is no
> indication that the validity of the swap area is checked. Would the
> reboot fix any problems?
>
> All of this comes from a system that has been acting a bit "funny" ever
> since a hard power failure a few weeks ago. System is basically running
> OK but some commands/programs are now getting Segmentation Faults at
> random times. It all started after the power went out. 'fsck' did not
> detect any problems with the other partitions. Memory tests are not
> detecting any errors. Trying to figure out where to go from here...
>
> ---
>
> Pete Rossi - WA3NNA
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It is conceivable that whatever identifies the swap partition as such
can get corrupted. This happened to me when I aborted an upgrade.
But you should get complaints about that when you boot if that has
happened. To be sure try top which should show you your available
memory including swap or /sbin/swapon -s. In my case, the swap
partition was fixed when I did the upgrade again, so I didn't worry
about it. I suppose one can fix it by reformatting the swap partition
as such, but I didn't investigate exactly how to do this.
--
Leonard Evens [EMAIL PROTECTED] 847-491-5537
Dept. of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ., Evanston, IL 60208
------------------------------
From: Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: HELP:Upgrading to RedHat 6.0 "fouled" up my system
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 09:55:40 -0700
Hi,
I just purchased the the RedHat 6.0 core system upgrade. Unfortunately,
it did not come with a boot floppy. That seems pretty lame, since in the
installation manual it says that if I am running an Intel based system,
which I am, then I will need to use a boot floppy. Well, I had a boot
floppy from my previous install of RedHat 5.0, so I though that I would
"get lucky". BIG mistake. I got through most of the install but it died
at the point where it has to install the boot loader. I can still boot
up but none of the Xwindows functions work, I suspect because the video
drivers were improperly set.
Does anyone know whewre I can get a boot floppy for RedHat 6.0 and try
this whole thing again?
Thanks
Tom
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "William Edward Woody" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.programmer.misc,comp.sys.be.misc,comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: open systems?!? Re: Why does Apple not cooperate with Be?
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 09:52:06 -0700
Josiah Fizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> And yes, SGIs kick ass. Seeing as my Indy with a 17 inch monitor cost less
> then half what an iMac costs I am very happy with it.
Where the hell did you get an Indy for $1,000?
- Bill Woody
The PandaWave
------------------------------
From: "William Edward Woody" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.programmer.misc,comp.sys.be.misc,comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: open systems?!? Re: Why does Apple not cooperate with Be?
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 09:49:53 -0700
Josiah Fizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> Also why was it that once the clone makers agreed to Apples price jump did
> they still yank the plug on clones?
Because there wasn't a viable business model with the
clone manufacturers eating into Apple's market share
rather than eating into the PC manufacturer's market
share. Converting Apple into a MacOS software and
engineering only shop would shrink Apple's size by a
factor of 10.
> If Be used the information they have to make BeOS run on Apple systems,
> Apple could sue them. Be would have to rip apart the hardware or use
> published source code. Whats more Apple could (and has many times in the
> past) change hardware specs on the motherboards thus "breaking" BeOS.
Then why hasn't the LinuxPPC folks been sued?
Besides, Apple changes the hardware specs all the time in
the normal evolution of Mac hardware. One of the reasons
why alternate operating systems have an easier time on
PC hardware than on the Mac is that PC hardware designs
change at a glacial rate: we're still using interrupt
architectures on the PC that were originally designed for
a 10-year old processor.
The up side of this is that once you get something running
on a PC, it'll probably work for the next five to ten years.
The down side is that the PC architecture is relatively
primitive, and you have to support all of those hardware
devices (such as sound cards) with your own drivers.
- Bill Woody
The PandaWave
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Winsper)
Crossposted-To: aus.computers.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux jingle
Date: 13 Jul 1999 17:01:25 GMT
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999 12:36:12 -0400, Lew Pitcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bones wrote:
> >
> > Hmmm... How about 'Dirty Deeds' instead. I think that sums it up,
> > "dirty deeds done dirt cheap!"
>
> I'm partial to M C Hammer's "Can't Touch This"
Actually, at http://www.enemy.org (If it's still there, I haven't been
there for > 6 months), there is a parody of Windows called "you can't
use this" based on that.
--
Darren Winsper - http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/darren.winsper
'"Whaddar we gonna do today Bill?" "The same thing we do every day,
Balmer...."' - Craig Kelly in comp.os.linux.advocacy
------------------------------
From: MB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: accessing c:\My Documents dir on a linux mount
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 08:50:08 +0000
Mark Weaver wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > On 7 Jul 99 18:36:15 GMT, Dave Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >I presume that Windows is trying to force everyone to use a graphical
> > >interface.
> >
> > Actually, in Windoze you can access file and directory names containing
> > whitespace from a command prompt within a DOS window. You just need to
> > put the filespec in quotes. (Such as "C:\My Documents" in this case.)
> >
> > --
> > Roger Blake
> > (remove second "g" from address for email)
> Good grief! I just wish I could access my primary hard drive at all! I
> can't even get it to mount. Always tells me it is busy, or can't mount,
> or to many files systems mounted already. It's getting to be a pain.
>
> Mark
> --
> There's nothing in this world absolute except God and His mercy.
> Go after Him with all that you are and obtain His mercy!
> It will change you...
If you are accessing C:\ on a dual boot system, first make sure you have the
Windows9x directory listed in /etc/fstab as follows:
Remember, this is only an example, yours may look somewhat different.
# <device> <mountpoint> <filesystemtype> <options> <dump> <fsckorder>
/dev/hda6 / ext2
defaults 1 1
/dev/hdc /mnt/cdr iso9660
noauto,user 0 0
/dev/cdrom /mnt/cdrom iso9660 noauto,ro,user 0 0
/dev/fd0 /mnt/floppy auto
user,defaults,noauto 0 0
/dev/hda5 /mnt/d_drive vfat
user,defaults 0 0
/dev/hda1 /mnt/c_drive vfat
user,defaults 0 0
/proc /proc proc defaults
/dev/hda7 none swap sw
Notice that I created a mount point "folder" in /mnt called c_drive. This setup
will
allow your c_drive to always be available without having to mount it. If you
want to
only be able to mount it manually, just insert "noauto ".
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Shice Beoney)
Crossposted-To: comp.security.unix,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: My Linux box was hacked!
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 16:18:11 GMT
On 13 Jul 1999 16:03:10 GMT in comp.os.linux.setup,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michal Jaegermann) uttered the
following profound gem of wisdom:
>Chris Long ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>: I was surprised that anyone would even bother.
>
>Why not? "Ko0l d0odz" have nothing else to do anyway.
Too true. One is wise never to underestimate the amount of time that
"31337 h@x0r$" (aka script kiddies, aka pathetic little
hacker-wannabes) have on their hands, or the depths of lameness to
which they will sink. Just try logging in as root and then go onto
DalNet for a few hours (just joking, don't really, IRCing as root is a
BAAAAD idea).
<snip>
--
"While removing all youre clothes does not mean youre nekkid, it does mean you
will have trouble walking thru the mall un-noticed." -Wurk, in article
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Duncan Simpson)
Subject: Re: Is there a variant of telnetd which logs in users?
Date: 13 Jul 1999 16:53:56 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bernie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>I should have clairified, I need the user to be logged in
>and presented with a menu, with no username or password prompts.
>This is a dial-up connection through a RAS server and firewall,
>so they will have already been authenticated.
IT will take some form of telepathy for the linux box to deduce an IP
address from a user as far as anyone knows. What makes you think the RAS
server has any vaguely documnented way of diviluging this information?
A lot of people have multiple sign on with a single password (we do round
here, which is a fairly major problem for things like MPI).
--
Duncan (-:
"software industry, the: unique industry where selling substandard goods is
legal and you can charge extra for fixing the problems."
------------------------------
From: "William Edward Woody" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.programmer.misc,comp.sys.be.misc,comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: open systems?!? Re: Why does Apple not cooperate with Be?
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 10:05:15 -0700
J�n Ragnarsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > The clones cost less than Apple's "dimwit designs" because
> > > the clone manufacturers didn't have to pay engineering costs.
> > > People prefered the clones because they cost less.
>
> Been inside SJ reality distortion field, have you?
> Where are the Dual/Quad PowerMacs? Where are the Motorola CHRP
> designs? Faster than Apple own G3's, and where available
> OVER A YEAR AGO! (sorry, for the shouting, but ever since the
> "Great clone killing" of '98 I just don't like Apple one bit!
> Man, just to think about that we could have had a great alternative
> to Intel crappy x86 makes me mad!
Where the hell did I say that the clone manufacturers
didn't do any of their own engineering?
Ultimately what killed the clones is that the cloning
situation did not leave Apple a viable business model.
Instead of expanding the market beyond the PC market,
Apple's own market share dwindled to less than half
of it's original 10%. (Think about it: when was the
only time Apple's market share wasn't 10+/-2 %? When
the clone manufacturers ate Apple's lunch.)
Had the clone manufacturers ate Apple's lunch completely
like the cloners ate IBM's lunch, what was left for
Apple? Three engineers designing a reference Macintosh
design for others to build, combined with the MacOS
software folks? Is it me, or is a business model which
reduces the number of workers from 10,000 to 1,000
not viable? (IBM could survive without PCs because IBM
makes most of it's money in big metal.)
Remember: even though Microsoft's Windows operating
system is a big deal in the press right now, Microsoft
wouldn't miss the Windows OS group if they went the
way of the Dodo. That's because Window's direct
contribution to Microsoft's bottom line is chicken
feed. (Microsoft makes most of it's money charging
folks for the software that runs on a Microsoft OS,
rather than making the Microsoft OS itself. Windows
has the indirect effect of selling other Microsoft
offerings quite effectively.)
So suggesting Apple should follow Microsoft's lead
is not a viable model.
- Bill Woody
The PandaWave
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Shice Beoney)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: HELP:Upgrading to RedHat 6.0 "fouled" up my system
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:13:38 GMT
On Tue, 13 Jul 1999 09:55:40 -0700 in comp.os.linux.setup, Tom
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> uttered the following profound gem of wisdom:
<snip>
>Does anyone know whewre I can get a boot floppy for RedHat 6.0 and try
>this whole thing again?
Tom,
Using an ftp client (or, gag, a web browser) go to ftp.cdrom.com, then
from the pub/linux/RedHat/linux/redhat/redhat-6.0/i386/dosutils,
download the file rawrite.exe
Then, from the pub/linux/RedHat/linux/redhat/redhat-6.0/i386/images
directory, download boot.img. Put a formatted diskette in your a
drive, and run rawrite. Tell it the location on your hd of boot.img,
then the location of your diskette (it should ask you that) and it
should then write the boot disk for you.
HTH!
--
"While removing all youre clothes does not mean youre nekkid, it does mean you
will have trouble walking thru the mall un-noticed." -Wurk, in article
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Josiah Fizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.programmer.misc,comp.sys.be.misc,comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: open systems?!? Re: Why does Apple not cooperate with Be?
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 09:55:18 -0700
William Edward Woody wrote:
> Josiah Fizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > Also why was it that once the clone makers agreed to Apples price jump did
> > they still yank the plug on clones?
>
> Because there wasn't a viable business model with the
> clone manufacturers eating into Apple's market share
> rather than eating into the PC manufacturer's market
> share. Converting Apple into a MacOS software and
> engineering only shop would shrink Apple's size by a
> factor of 10.
>
If it wasn't a valid business model why did Apple sugjest it as a way to solve
the problems they where having when trying to compeat with the better cheaper
clones?
>
> > If Be used the information they have to make BeOS run on Apple systems,
> > Apple could sue them. Be would have to rip apart the hardware or use
> > published source code. Whats more Apple could (and has many times in the
> > past) change hardware specs on the motherboards thus "breaking" BeOS.
>
> Then why hasn't the LinuxPPC folks been sued?
>
> Besides, Apple changes the hardware specs all the time in
> the normal evolution of Mac hardware. One of the reasons
> why alternate operating systems have an easier time on
> PC hardware than on the Mac is that PC hardware designs
> change at a glacial rate: we're still using interrupt
> architectures on the PC that were originally designed for
> a 10-year old processor.
>
> The up side of this is that once you get something running
> on a PC, it'll probably work for the next five to ten years.
> The down side is that the PC architecture is relatively
> primitive, and you have to support all of those hardware
> devices (such as sound cards) with your own drivers.
>
> - Bill Woody
> The PandaWave
Who would you sue for LinuxPPC? Its not a comercial program. BeOS is a comercial
OS that compeats with MacOS, Linux is not.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (DeAnn Iwan)
Subject: Re: Suggestions for a Linux book?
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 18:08:04 GMT
On 13 Jul 1999 15:32:42 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (lawrence ta-wei
lu) wrote:
>HI,
>
>I'm a newbie to Linux. I've used Unix before, but never did any of
>the system admin stuff. I was looking for a book that would be good
>for the beginner Linux user that would discuss the basics of installation
>and maintence of my Linux box. Thanks
>
Personally, I find "using linux" to be my best newbie
reference. There are also several very nice "books" on system
administration, etc. at the Linux Documentation Project (and, of
course, there are the how-tos that address specific things like
networking or getting the AWE32 card to make sound).
------------------------------
From: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.text.tex
Subject: Re: Red Hat 6.0 & LaTeX
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 20:45:35 +0100
Reply-To: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gergo Barany
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>In article <Cc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Adrian Burd
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>>>Marc Mutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>
>>>> One should never update SuSE. One should always re-install SuSE
>>>> completely.
>>>
>>>
>>>Curious...why is that? I ran the updates from 5.* to 6.0 and 6.0 to 6.1
>>>and have not found any problems.
>>>
>>I upgraded from 5.2 to 6.0 - it deleted libc5.
>>
>>Bearing in mind libc5 wasn't even on the (single, not set of) CD, that
>>meant that EVERY non-SuSE executable on my system broke :-(
>
>That had to happen sooner or later. A short, painful transition period
>is a lot better than a long, painful one.
>
You mean it's fine for them to break my programs? Including ones for
which I don't have the source, and *C*A*N*T* rebuild? I don't think so.
The list of broken programs was very short, admittedly, but included
every commercial program, and every non-toy program I used. If my box
was a production machine that could be VERY EXPENSIVE!
It meant a 14Mb download (which is expensive over here) to get my system
back in working order :-(
NB RedHat are almost as bad - I gather glibc 2.0 was meant to be a
DEVELOPMENT lib, with the 2.1 version being definitive. An awful lot of
programs are breaking as 2.1 starts shipping in earnest... At least it's
reasonably easy to mix libc5 and glibc2 on the same box.
--
Anthony W. Youngman - wol at thewolery dot demon dot co dot uk
Trousers with a single hole in their waistband are topologically equivalent
to a doughnut. These sugarcoated trousers have yet to catch on at fast-food
outlets! (SuperStrings by F. David Peat)
If replying by e-mail please mail wol. Anything else may get missed amongst
the spam.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Dev's won't work???
Date: 13 Jul 1999 18:10:49 GMT
On Tue, 13 Jul 1999 02:34:56 +0200,
Thierry ANDRIAMIRADO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ron Gibson a �crit dans le message ...
>
> >just recently down loaded the latest Slackware off Sunsite and when
> >trying to get my old data from a previous install archive to tape I
> >discovered that several "dev"'s will not work.
> >
> >For instance invoking commands such as "ftape" or "fd0" I get a no such
> >device message. However when viewing the directory with MC the devices
> >and or links are there and they have been made.
>
>
> I'm having the same problem. I updated my RedHat 5.2 to RH6 so my printer
> doesn't work anymore!!
> I discovered that my /dev/lp symbolink link disapeared and I re-created it!
> But it doesn't work anymore! any idea?
Yep. Look at /usr/src/linux/Documentation/Changes:
As of 2.1.33, parallel port support can now by handled by the parport
driver. Be aware that with Plug-and-Play support turned on, your
parallel port may no longer be where you expect it; for example, LPT1
(under DOS) was sometimes /dev/lp1 in Linux, but will probably be
/dev/lp0 with the new Plug-and-Play driver. If printing breaks with
the new driver, try checking your lpd configuration. A good source of
more information is the Documentation/parport.txt file included with
the kernel.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Elyard)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.programmer.misc,comp.sys.be.misc,comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: open systems?!? Re: Why does Apple not cooperate with Be?
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 11:01:01 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Josiah Fizer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, I swore I wou.ld never again get draged into one of these threads. But I
> have to ask, are you "high"?
No. Are you "low"? (What's with the... "quotes"?)
> Since when is SCSI an "Apple core tech"? Seeing as there where several other
> computers out there that used it before Apple and you could add SCSI to an XT?
SCSI has been an integral part of the Apple Macintosh legacy since the Mac
Plus was introduced in October of 1990. SCSI has never been what could be
considered a standard, cohesive, or integral part of PC architecture, all
of the add-on boards with their touchy IRQ settings and peculiar driver
snafus aside.
> And I hate to be the one to have to tell you, but USB is a PC port that Apple
> is using. Not, as you seem to think, an Apple port that is now on PC systems.
Universal Serial Bus has been most visibly installed on iMac computers,
since about the time when most PC users were scoffing at the lack of a
floppy drive in the thing, when most PCs had never heard of USB. Even
now, the lack of USB driver support in NT4 is probably limiting it
(although it is present in the SGI builds of NT for their Visual
Workstations).
CDROM drives: another technology embraced by Apple long before it became
anywhere near standard on the PC.
Deal with it: PCs and Macintoshes have become more alike (though not the
same), but not because one moved and the other didn't: both moved have
towards one another, and, at least formerly, the PC has had to move more
towards the Mac than the other way around.
> ATA and PCMCIA I'll grant you, however I think the former was a very bad move
> by Apple.
>
> And yes, SGIs kick ass. Seeing as my Indy with a 17 inch monitor cost less
> then half what an iMac costs I am very happy with it.
Used, of course. New IRIX-based systems are still very expensive. But
you can't compare Apples with UNIX workstations, unless you slap OSX on a
G3, in which case the point then becomes moot. Most UNIXes use a
journaling FS, something conspicously absent from OS X. That's just one
reason.
> Indeed, the bus speed on the Visual PC is God like.
Although not Craylink-like. Or even 80 GB/second-like.
(And yes, I know exactly what I'm talking about.)
--
Scott Elyard ~~~ooOOoo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| Peregrinus expectavi pedes meos in cymbalis est. |
| IRIX, BeOS, MacOS, and et cetera. |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gergo Barany)
Subject: Re: Legal file and directory names
Date: 13 Jul 1999 17:13:26 GMT
In article <7mfjj1$khm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Efi Merdler wrote:
>Are there any limitations on a file name and a directory
>name,limitations like forbidden characters,length,spaces etc...
I've never come across any character except the slash that couldn't be
used in a file name. As for the length, my experiments indicate a limit
of 256 characters. That should be enough for pretty much any purpose.
Gergo
--
Q: How many Zen masters does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A: None. The Universe spins the bulb, and the Zen master stays out
of the way.
GU d- s:+ a--- C++>$ UL+++ P>++ L+++ E>++ W+ N++ o? K- w--- !O !M !V
PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP+ t* 5+ X- R>+ tv++ b+>+++ DI+ D+ G>++ e* h! !r !y+
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Elyard)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.programmer.misc,comp.sys.be.misc,comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: open systems?!? Re: Why does Apple not cooperate with Be?
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 11:11:09 -0700
In article <TbKi3.306$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "William Edward
Woody" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Josiah Fizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > And yes, SGIs kick ass. Seeing as my Indy with a 17 inch monitor cost less
> > then half what an iMac costs I am very happy with it.
>
> Where the hell did you get an Indy for $1,000?
>
> - Bill Woody
> The PandaWave
Er, probably from MCE (www.mce.com). They recently had a special on 180
MHz R5k Indys with 17" montors for around $1000.
You can also check out Reputable Systems (www.reputable.com). Pricing's
good, and Greg Douglas is one of the best people I've ever dealt with
online.
--
Scott Elyard ~~~ooOOoo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| Peregrinus expectavi pedes meos in cymbalis est. |
| IRIX, BeOS, MacOS, and et cetera. |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'
------------------------------
From: kev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: terminal core dumps
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 09:51:53 +0100
I am using RH6 with Gnome. I got into work this morning and I can't get
a terminal (from the right-click menu), I just get a core file dumped on
my desktop.
This is extremely annoying as I'll have to reboot.
Does anyone know what could be causing this? Or how to fix it?
TIA,
- Kev
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I am a newbie, HELP me please!
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 18:52:22 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 13 Jul 1999 12:34:37 +0100, "James Stocks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I am trying to install Caldera Open Linux 2.2, as I heard it was easy(er) to
>get started with. When I run the Lizard install, it detects my hardware and
>then I just get a grey screen. Anyone come across this? Anyone have any
>suggestions at all?
Looks like a misconfigured X... did you try to setup X during the installation ?
don't do it. Make your command line run first.
=====================================================
Answers please in this newsgroup!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=====================================================
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
