Linux-Misc Digest #126, Volume #21 Thu, 22 Jul 99 17:13:12 EDT
Contents:
Re: hook a normal printer directly up to a network? (Grant Taylor)
Re: Permissions Executing Perl ("Thomas T. Veldhouse")
Re: URGENT HELP! My linux box has gone wild! (DB)
Re: Marx vs. Nozick (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Compile kernel --> PROBLEM (Arvind Deshpande)
Re: Marx vs. Nozick (Peter Seebach)
Re: freshmeat.net (Bob Batson)
Re: KDE Defaukt WM on RH 6.0 (Steven E Bourland)
Re: Subject: Why all the symbolic links in linux (Floyd Davidson)
Linux only use 1% of my CPU??? ("Paul Y. Peng")
Re: 2038 and Linux (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Did you switch from Windows to Linux? (William Wueppelmann)
Re: Compiling 2.2.x under RedHat 6.0 (Steven E Bourland)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Grant Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: hook a normal printer directly up to a network?
Date: 22 Jul 1999 15:23:00 -0400
Human<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But then the problem will be how could I print postscript or from
> netscape to that printer on the network using external print server?
> Ihave successful in putting the printer on the network which share by
> some windoz (NT/98) machines with some linux machines. The only problem
> I have is I can print plain text tto the printer from linux but dont
> know how to put in filter for print under netscape or others. The
> HOW-TO only mentioned the filter if you are connecting the machine to
> the linux machine directly, but didnt mention if the printer is on
> network. Would someone able to give me some hints on that?
Yes, in the HOWTO there are a few notes on this. There are two
options:
- Implement the quick-and-easy "double-queue" hack to fool a Linux
box into thinking that it is a local printer. Then point everyone
at that linux box.
- Obtain and use the FreeBSD lpd port; it includes a patch to allow
if filters to be run locally for remote printers.
The first one is probably the easiest; just follow the instructions in
the HOWTO's network printing section. URL below.
--
Grant Taylor - gtaylor@picante<dot>com - http://www.picante.com/~gtaylor/
Cellphone information: http://www.picante.com/~gtaylor/cell/
Libretto information: http://www.picante.com/~gtaylor/portable/
Linux Printing HOWTO: http://www.picante.com/~gtaylor/pht/
------------------------------
From: "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Permissions Executing Perl
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 14:22:11 -0500
You can try installing cgiwrap also. It may be helpful to maintain security
on your site and also it does everything at the user level of the script (in
veldy's cgi area, then it is run with veldy's security level).
Thomas T. Veldhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
toby wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>chmod +s <some_file>
>
>You have to setuid. Read up. Also there is this magical command called 'su'
>that lets you put on the aluminumfoil crown of rootness and play in the big
>sandbox.
>
>Toby
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This might be a daft question but I can't execute any isdnctrl commands
>> from within perl called from a cgi script in Apache as a user from IE 5
>> on a Win 98 machine.
>>
>> I am trying to build a script that will enable users to connect to the
>> Internet via their own browser. The call is correct I am
>> using 'System...' but the permissions are wrong,what is the process.
>>
>> I am realtively new to Linux and have managed to setup Samba, Squid,
>> Apache, Network etc. The only thing I can't do is execute any commands
>> logged in as a user, only as root. Can someone point me in the right
>> direction.
>>
>> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
>
------------------------------
From: DB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: URGENT HELP! My linux box has gone wild!
Date: 22 Jul 1999 20:05:57 GMT
Maybe a keyboard acting up? Discoonect it and see if the garbage
stops (after buffer empties)
DB
Frank Conte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: A few minutes ago, I ran a ping command to identify a pc on my little
: network. I'm running RedHat 4.2. All of a sudden the command line starts
: running off on its own. There's a process gone amuck and I don't know
: where I can identify it. Something's typing silly, senseless commands
: keep appearing at the prompt. Could it be that I improperly shut down
: the machine earlier?
: HELP Please!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Marx vs. Nozick
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 21:02:53 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Thu, 22 Jul 1999 15:10:34 GMT...
..and MK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 19 Jul 1999 05:29:54 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kulisz)
> wrote:
>
> >>..and Richard Kulisz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> The free market works in NO situation. Capitalism, understood as
> >>> dictatorship by the capitalists, "works" only if human dignity and
> >>> human needs are irrelevant.
>
> >>Of course the free market works in some situations.
>
> >Free market => large-scale competition => large-scale conflict == war
>
> Only a child would write something so intellectually naive.
AOL.
[schnibble]
I agree with the rest of your posting, too.
mawa
--
(__) | Opinion Poll: Is ASCII art in .signatures...
(oo)------\ |
<moo!> --- \/ | * | [ ] good Fill in, cut out and send to
||~~~~|| | [ ] no good [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Arvind Deshpande <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Compile kernel --> PROBLEM
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 16:03:45 -0400
==============C6F1CBB772EFB6752350E42B
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> How did you untar the sources? Did you do it over the top of the old
> sources, or did you move or delete the old sources first before you untarred
> the tarball? If you untarred into a fresh area, then you could try, 'make
> mrproper' and try again. That should remove all configuration information
> and you will have to run make config again. Hint - try make menuconfig or
> make xconfig instead, as it is much easier to use and there is help
> available for many of the options.
>
> Tom Veldhouse
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Kenny Kim Leung wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >I'm a newbie. I wannna compile my own kernel using 2.2.10 source. I did the
> >"make config". And when I ran "make dep" the following returns:
> >
> >make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux/arch/i386/boot'
> >make[1]: Nothing to be done for `dep'.
> >make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux/arch/i386/boot'
> >scripts/mkdep init/*.c > .depend
> >make: *** [dep-files] Error 139
> >
> >Anyone please tell me what's wrong here? Thanx!
> >
> >--
> >Everything is not as it appears to be.
Also check wheather you are compiling your NEW Source. The being compiled
source has to be in /usr/src/linux.
Directory should look something like this.
rw-r--r-- linux ->/usr/local/linux-2.2.09
rw-r--r-- linux-2.2.09
rw-r--r-- linux-2.0.35
Change in to # cd /usr/src/linux and run make config now you know you are
compiling the linux-2.2.09 Kernel. This way you don't have to remove old
sources just to install new kernel.
Just a tip
Arvind
--
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| Arvind Deshpande |
| ___________________________________________________________ |
| Home Page At: |
| http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Peaks/6120/index.html |
| Phone(H):(703)-326-0736 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
==============C6F1CBB772EFB6752350E42B
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="------------2FA9E624A072314C46CC1C6E"
==============2FA9E624A072314C46CC1C6E
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML>
<BODY TEXT="#000000" BGCOLOR="#CCCCCC" LINK="#0000FF" VLINK="#FF0000" ALINK="#3366FF"
BACKGROUND="cid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">
Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>How did you untar the sources? Did you do it
over the top of the old
<BR>sources, or did you move or delete the old sources first before you
untarred
<BR>the tarball? If you untarred into a fresh area, then you could
try, 'make
<BR>mrproper' and try again. That should remove all configuration
information
<BR>and you will have to run make config again. Hint - try make menuconfig
or
<BR>make xconfig instead, as it is much easier to use and there is help
<BR>available for many of the options.
<P>Tom Veldhouse
<BR>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<P>Kenny Kim Leung wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
<BR>>I'm a newbie. I wannna compile my own kernel using 2.2.10 source.
I did the
<BR>>"make config". And when I ran "make dep" the following returns:
<BR>>
<BR>>make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux/arch/i386/boot'
<BR>>make[1]: Nothing to be done for `dep'.
<BR>>make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux/arch/i386/boot'
<BR>>scripts/mkdep init/*.c > .depend
<BR>>make: *** [dep-files] Error 139
<BR>>
<BR>>Anyone please tell me what's wrong here? Thanx!
<BR>>
<BR>>--
<BR>>Everything is not as it appears to be.</BLOCKQUOTE>
Also check wheather you are compiling your NEW Source. The being
compiled source has to be in /usr/src/linux.
<BR>Directory should look something like this.
<BR>rw-r--r-- linux ->/usr/local/linux-2.2.09
<BR>rw-r--r-- linux-2.2.09
<BR>rw-r--r-- linux-2.0.35
<P>Change in to # cd /usr/src/linux and run make config now you know you
are compiling the linux-2.2.09 Kernel. This way you don't have to remove
old sources just to install new kernel.
<P>Just a tip
<P>Arvind
<PRE>--
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| Arvind
|Deshpande
| |
| ___________________________________________________________ |
| Home Page
|At:
| |
| <A
|HREF="http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Peaks/6120/index.html">http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Peaks/6120/index.html</A>
| |
|
|Phone(H):(703)-326-0736
| |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+</PRE>
</BODY>
</HTML>
==============2FA9E624A072314C46CC1C6E
Content-Type: application/x-unknown-content-type
Content-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline; filename=""
==============2FA9E624A072314C46CC1C6E==
==============C6F1CBB772EFB6752350E42B==
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Marx vs. Nozick
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Seebach)
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 19:37:03 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It was the Thu, 22 Jul 1999 03:03:29 GMT...
>..and Peter Seebach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Show me an animal that is intelligent, creative, literate and capable
>> >of abstract thought. Then I'll agree with you.
>> This is begging the question. If we are animals, then we are an example of
>> animals capable of abstract thought. If we aren't, then we are not such an
>> example.
>> Now, that said, there's a number of documented behaviors in "animals" that
>> look suspiciously like any of the above except 'literate'.
>You are playing semantics games again.
>"The only animal species that is intelligent, creative, literate and
>capable of abstract thought" == "Man"
Yes, but if you say that, then we are, in fact, an animal species. ;)
>BTW, I'd like to see examples of animal creativity. As far as I know,
>creativity as a voluntary act of creation is unknown to animals.
There's some birds that decorate nests to attract mates. Birds whose nests
are not aesthetically pleasing don't get mates. BTW, some researchers argue
that this is how we developed art, too; a way for an individual to rate
the "fitness" of a given prospective mate.
>> Your father is not a class, your father is an instant. If you have all
>> of the defining traits of members of a class, you are a member of the class.
>> e.g., you are a member of the group of "people named Matthias", even if
>> you are not otherwise like any of them.
>Semantics games again.
Sorry, but no. You gave an analogy. Your analogy was flawed. You can't
just handwave and say "oh, that's just semantics". All communication is,
in large part, semantics.
>Of course we are biologically animals, but that's even more semantics
>games, as we are not arguing about biology, but about what separates
>Man from other biological animals.
Are we? I thought we were arguing about whether or not we were animals.
-s
--
Copyright 1999, All rights reserved. Peter Seebach / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon!
Will work for interesting hardware. http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/
Visit my new ISP <URL:http://www.plethora.net/> --- More Net, Less Spam!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Batson)
Subject: Re: freshmeat.net
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 19:38:17 GMT
In article <7n5sgm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Justin B Willoughby wrote:
>
>Anita Lewis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
>> I just went there. http://www.freshmeat.net/ right?
>>
>
>Its still not up as far as I can tell... 2130EST 07/21
I just checked their website at 1430CDT and got an announcement that
"we're experiencing severe machine trouble at this time" or words to that
effect.
Bob Batson
------------------------------
From: Steven E Bourland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE Defaukt WM on RH 6.0
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 15:12:07 -0500
Al wrote:
> How do I make KDE my default window manager in my Red Hat 6.0 system.
>
> Thanks
>
> Al
I had a hard time with this one too.
In GNOME there is a 'Desktop Switching Tool' under 'KDE programs',
System
Utilities (I think that is it). It is sort of hard to find, it is
hidden away. If you can't
find it, let me know (best via email) and I will get the exact location
for you.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Floyd Davidson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Subject: Why all the symbolic links in linux
Date: 22 Jul 1999 19:26:19 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Norman Levin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>There still seems to be a misconception on what symbolic links do
>over 'hard' links.
I agree. For example, if you have a file /some/directory/foo and there
are symbolic links to it in 14 different places you can do
rm /some/directory/foo
and it is gone. If you have hard links you have to track down every
one of them to delete the file.
Perhaps sticking with all of those symbolic links is a good idea?
Floyd
--
Floyd L. Davidson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
------------------------------
From: "Paul Y. Peng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Linux only use 1% of my CPU???
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 17:49:59 -0230
Dear Linux users,
Recently we have a linux machine (PII450MHZ with 512MB RAM and
1GB swap space) with Redhat linux 6.0. However, I found the machine
was very unreasonably slow sometimes when I run a few NOT big
programs. So I run the these programs again and at the same time I
used top to check the usage of CPU. Then surprisingly I found that
Linux only allocated about 1% of CPU to the programs and most of
time the STAT of the programs is always "D" which means
"uninterruptible sleep"! I checked through the job list and none of
other jobs were running when the programs were launched, and I am
quite sure I was the only user on the machine. How can Linux manage
CPU in such a way? What was the 99% CPU used for? I never see such
a thing in DEC alpha or Sun Solaris.
It seems there is something running behind which uses much of CPU
but doesn't show up in top? How can I ask linux to use all CPU for
my programs? Is there any configuration wrong in the system?
Thank you for your help.
Paul.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian Langenberger)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2038 and Linux
Date: 22 Jul 1999 20:25:44 GMT
Steve Peltz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, gus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: >I got it to about 587 million years ...
: No, it's more like 58,454 years.
Not unless you change the granularity too.
% bc
bc 1.05
Copyright 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1997, 1998 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY.
For details type `warranty'.
1970 + (2^31 / (60 * 60 * 24 * 365.25))
2038
1970 + (2^63 / (60 * 60 * 24 * 365.25))
292271025015
(leaving off 1 bit to make it a signed long)
So the years appear to be in the order of millions with a 64 bit signed
long. Unless I've missed something...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William Wueppelmann)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.caldera,comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Did you switch from Windows to Linux?
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 20:28:08 GMT
In our last episode (Wed, 21 Jul 1999 18:26:35 +0200),
the artist formerly known as Santiago de Pablo said:
>I'm trying to move from Win9x to Linux (RedHat), but I disagree with you
>in the central point of your comment:
>
>William Wueppelmann escribi�:
>>
>> One of the main points missed by Windows users when using Linux is that the
>> notion of an application in the Unix world is very different that that in
>> the Windows world. The reason you won't find a lot of monolithic,
>> one-size-fits-all(-poorly) applicatins for Linux is because the Unix world
>> got along quite well with its own method of solving problems.
>>
>> Linux installs with an incredibly rich set of tools: awk, grep, sed, tee,
>> echo, cat, sort, uniq, spell and so forth. The idea behind these tools is
>> that they are simple and flexible enough that they can be used to create
>> (with the help of shell features such as pipes, redirection and scripts) an
>> application which is suited to your particular needs. The Windows approach
>> is to serve you a 100MB application and make you sort through it to isolate
>> the features that you need (if they are there at all) from the features
>> that you don't need, but are included because someone else might want them.
>
>That's true, but 80-90% of users prefer the 100MB application!
And since 95% of the users use Windows, that means that only 5-15% of users
are using the wrong OS[1].
The central point I'm making is that Linux has these tools, and always
has, and that it is out of ignorance that people claim that Linux has
little or no application support. I'm further suggesting that the
principal value of Linux is in the availability of these tools in an
environment which complements and supports them. Lastly, I'm suggesting
that if someone is going to take the time to try a different OS, one might
as well take the time to learn the native philosophy and learn to use the
native tools. Even if, ultimately, they choose to import more familiar
applications and reject the native way of doing things.
I don't want to foist vi on anyone; I'm just trying to point out that Unix
tools are perfectly capable of doing the things that programs like Word do,
and there are numerous advantages to doing things the Unix way. Whether
the advantages outweigh the time and effort required to learn them or
whether they outweigh the advantages of other methods is up to the
individual user, but the user should be aware that these options do exist.
>The great thing of Unix (Linux mainly, others suppose too) is that
>change of perspective: while the strength of scripts is kept, office
>tools appear to use the PC on real things. You can do a lot of work with
>a very short script, but why thinking when the mouse can do all the
>work.
This is an interesting statement; I've spent a lot of effort trying to
minimize the amount of mechanical operations I have to carry out. Not only
is it a matter of efficiency (you write a script once and you can run it a
million times, but you have to play with the mouse each time you want to
accomplish the same task), but it's a matter of assigning the task to the
party that's best suited to it. My computer is dumb, but it's very fast
and doesn't make mistakes. I'm smart (well, smarter than my computer
anyway) and I can think creatively, but I'm prone to making mechanical
errors (typos, forgetting a step in a procedure and so forth). So I decide
how the task is to be done and tell the computer what to do. The computer
does exactly what I say.
If you turn it around, as in the standard Windows follow-the-Wizard model,
the computer, which is dumb, makes the decisions for you, and often makes
the wrong decision. You are stuck doing the repetitive, mechanical parts,
and stand a much greater chance of making a mistake than the computer would
have.
>> In other words, Linux ships with everything you need to do most anything
>> you could ever want to do except for one component which you must provide
>> yourself: creativity.
>
>Ok, be creative, but be productive! With Windows or Unix? It does
>matter?
You are right, it doesn't, as long as you *can* be productive with whatever
system you use (but for the record, I've seen a lot of people waste a lot
of time doing things the Windows way that could have been accomplished in
minutes or even seconds the Unix way). My point is simply that the only
element that Linux does not supply is creativity--you must provide that to
make the whole thing work.
--
It is pitch black.
You are likely to be spammed by a grue.
------------------------------
From: Steven E Bourland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Compiling 2.2.x under RedHat 6.0
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 15:09:50 -0500
crispb wrote:
> I just recently installed RH 6.0 onto an new machine that I just got.
> I cannot seem to compile a new kernel for it. Everytime I try it says
> that cpp output pipe is closed and that there was an assembler error.
> I did not have any problems compiling a kernel on another machine
> under RH5.1. Any suggestions on what I might try.
>
> Thank YOu
I had similar problems when I did the same thing. I was running a 10%
overclocked K6-2/memory combination. When I brought my FSB speed
back to spec, it cleared up almost all my problems.
Are you overclocking? Are you running a K6-2/3? If so, give backing
down the clock a shot and see if that clears up your errors as it did for
me. Now compiled, I think I can crank it back up, when I get off my lazy
butt and do it.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
