Linux-Misc Digest #145, Volume #21 Sat, 24 Jul 99 06:13:09 EDT
Contents:
Re: Apache and waiting for reply (Marco)
Re: Help needed setting up Xwindows (Lindoze 2000)
Re: High load average, low cpu usage when /home NFS mounted (Kelly Burkhart)
Re: CIA assassinations (Richard Kulisz)
spin down HDD (Lindoze 2000)
Re: Linux only use 1% of my CPU??? (Mark Simonetti)
Re: redhat vs suse (Lindoze 2000)
strange problem with kernel 2.2.x (AGX)
Re: Linux only use 1% of my CPU??? (Mark Simonetti)
Re: Shortcomings of Linux? (Local)
Re: Linux only use 1% of my CPU??? (Lindoze 2000)
Re: Linux vs. Unix (Chris Mahmood)
Re: Linux only use 1% of my CPU??? (Rob Stockley)
Re: Linux only use 1% of my CPU??? (Rob Stockley)
Proxy setting with linux 6.0 and netscape 4.5 ("���P�H")
Re: Undo disk format? (J Rappe)
Re: Shutdown won't Power-off using SuSE-6.1 (Chris Mahmood)
Re: CIA assassinations (Richard Kulisz)
Re: .bashrc not loading ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Marco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Apache and waiting for reply
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 09:32:32 +0200
Did you setup / configured DNS on the client and serverside ?
When your client can ping www.xxxxxxx you have to setup DNS on the
serverside.
Raymond wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have set up an Apache server at home and I can get a response when I
>
> ping my ServerName as defined in httpd.conf in office. But when I use a
>
> browser to locate my Apache server, the status at the bottom of the
>
> browser just shows "Connect: Host 'My ServerName' contacted. Waiting for
>
> reply" and there is no response. Anyone can help ?
>
> (My linux box is Kernel 2.0.33 and Apache 1.2.6)
>
> ------------------ Posted via SearchLinux ------------------
> http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: Lindoze 2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help needed setting up Xwindows
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 04:03:30 -0400
electra41 wrote:
>
> LLoyd wrote:
>
> > After much effort I have finaly managed to install RedHat 5.2.
> > Although I am able to logon and work with a command prompt I cannot
> > get Xwindows to display.
> > Any advice would be most appreciated.
> > Thanks
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> try get XF86Setup program. You would normally need to install VGA16 server
> first.(it would be easier). My Linux box X windows was set up using these
> program. Try SVGA server as well.
awwwwwaaahhh!
Just what I was going to say!
+ in addition to this, instead of choosing a graphics card driver
already listed, since its not likely you will find that #$#% card you
have. you can click the 'Detailed Setup' instead. it probes some of the
specs. for you. Dont get greedy at first. Just choose 640x480@8 bpp.
you will get standard vga.
if that works, choose a higher resolution of your choice.
after is runs at the resolution you want it to, play with 'xvidtune'
--
########################################################
## ##
## http://www.FusionPlant.com ##
## ##
########################################################
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: High load average, low cpu usage when /home NFS mounted
From: Kelly Burkhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 23 Jul 1999 23:09:44 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Kimoto) writes:
> [posted and e-mailed]
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ole Jacob Taraldset wrote:
> > The
> > /home partition is NFS mounted from [an?] SGI. When I take a look at cpu
> > usage i kpm/qps most of the cpu is idle (~85%), but load average reports
> > around 2. Isn't load average a function of cpu usage (only, mostly)? Can
> > it be that some process is running, but not showing in ps/top/kpm? I
> > feel that the system response has been reduced quite a bit after
> > upgrading to RedHat 6.0.
>
> The proc(5) man page says
>
> loadavg
>
> The load average numbers give the number of jobs in
> the run queue averaged over 1, 5 and 15 minutes.
>
> Processes waiting for (slow NFS) disk operations would be in the run
> queue, but not necessarily consuming much CPU.
<snip>
Really? I thought processes waiting on IO were not in the run queue;
only processes that were "ready to run". Am I completely off base?
--
Kelly R. Burkhart
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[The litigation] industry was, of course, up and running before the
tobacco litigation, but that taught lawyers just how lucrative it
could be to blame individuals' foolishness on, say, Joe Camel.
-- George F. Will
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kulisz)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: CIA assassinations
Date: 24 Jul 1999 09:03:32 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, R.Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Deryk Barker wrote:
>> Why not? The West dealt with the USSR for over 70 years on this
>> basis. I mean we all know how much better off the average Russian was
>> under the Tsar, don't we?
>Rick will disagree with you on that. (Just thought I'd warn you.)
He was being sarcastic.
If he were serious, that would mean he doesn't know anything about the
subject but he said *average* Russian as opposed to simply "Russians".
------------------------------
From: Lindoze 2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.slackware,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: spin down HDD
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 04:07:53 -0400
I use hdparm to spin down my HDD after 1/2 hr or so.
the problem is, it spins up again after 1/2 hr. then it spins back down.
has anyone had that problem?
why wont it stay asleep?
the system seems idle. no hdd activity detected.
--
########################################################
## ##
## http://www.FusionPlant.com ##
## ##
########################################################
------------------------------
From: Mark Simonetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Linux only use 1% of my CPU???
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 09:36:29 +0000
And erm, 1 gig swap space ? Do you mean you have lots of 128meg swap
partitions ? Because normally swap spaces can only be a maximum of 128
meg (though you can have lots of swap spaces). I could be wrong though,
this could of changed in the 2.2.x kernels (?!?)
Mark.
--
"Paul Y. Peng" wrote:
> 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: Lindoze 2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: redhat vs suse
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 04:17:16 -0400
Coy A Hile wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Frederic L. W. Meunier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Fri, 23 Jul 1999 17:41:35 -0500, David Kunz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>At the risk of starting a flame war I would like to hear opinions concurring
> >>redhat 6.0 and suse 6.2. All thoughtful responses are appreciated.
> >
> >Hi. The best linux distribution is RedHat 5.1. It's better than 6.0, at
> >least my 5.1! Get both, test both and use what you want.
> >
> >--
> >Frederic L. W. Meunier = Niteroi, RJ - Brazil = Tel: +55-21-620-7173
> >Contact: fredlwm@{olympiquedemarseille.org,urbi.com.br} = IRC: _19751127
> >[root@marseille /tmp]# f{l,r}ames;java*;HTML_mail;SPAM > /dev/null
> >(All text before "-- " isn't my opinion nor my employer's)
>
> Oh God, not another religious war. Of the two mentioned, i personally
> prefer Redhat to SuSE, and RH 5.1/5.2 to RH 6.0. I don't need everything
> under the sun (including the kitchen sink :).
>
> Given the choice, thought, I prefer slackware. call me old-fashioned,
> but i cannot stand RPM! i prefer having control over how my software
> installs -- hacking a makefile is easier once you learn how.
How?
>
> Coy
> --
> Coy Hile
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Theirs not to reason why; theirs but to do...."
> Tennyson, "Charge of the Light Brigade"
--
########################################################
## ##
## http://www.FusionPlant.com ##
## ##
########################################################
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (AGX)
Subject: strange problem with kernel 2.2.x
Date: 19 Jul 1999 20:44:41 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi, i recently switched to the kernel 2.2.x
from the 2.0.36
I upgrade all the required utility but when i connect
to internet i cannot get any ov my software works
(telnet, ftp, fetchmail, slrnpull, sitecopy, etc.)
If i ping any host they reply successfully but
if i try to connect to any socket i get no reply
even if a try with
telnet my_favourite_pop_server 110
telnet my_favourite_smtp 25
telnet my_favourite_http 80
i get the message
Trying 1.2.3.4 ...
and nothing more.
any suggesstions ?
Thanks in advance,
AGX
P.S.
In the log i see the message
"cannot locate the module ^Pr"
------------------------------
From: Mark Simonetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Linux only use 1% of my CPU???
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 09:34:59 +0000
What do you mean only allocates 1% cpu time ? When you run top, its
telling you how much the application is using ! If the application is
doing something intensive, then the amount of cpu being used will
increase. If its just sitting there idling then it'll typically be 0%.
When the application is busy doing something, it'll be higher, depending
on how much cpu is avialable too it.
Mark.
--
"Paul Y. Peng" wrote:
> 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: Local <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Shortcomings of Linux?
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 02:18:48 -0700
Chris Lee wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >
> >Chris Lee wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <7n442u$hiu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >> >
> >> >In comp.sys.amiga.misc Chris Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> Funny, what you are claiming doesn't really seem to be the case.
> Follow
> >> the
> >> >> following newsgroups for a while and you'll discover that.
> >> >
> >> >*grin*. Oh, well...
> >> >
> >> >I get my information directly from ISPs, from PPP login traces,
> >> >from other developers and from IETF workgroups (PPPEXT among them),
> >> >and I can assure you that I would not have gone to the trouble of
> >> >implementing and field-testing MS-CHAP if it had not been necessary.
> >> >
> >> >But of course if you feel the random argumentative rambling on
> >> >Usenet is more informative and objective then that is your choice.
> >>
> >> And I get my information from the people who *ACTUALLY CONNECT TO ISPs*
> in
> >> the *REAL WORLD*
> >
> >Hey, obnoxious moron, you are talking to the guy who PROGRAMMED Miami,
> >and several other packages for the Amiga!!!
>
> Who cares?
Who cares if you and people of your type care or not?!?!?
If you don't care then why are you trolling here?!?!?!
If you don't care then why are you responding to him?!?!???
If you don't care why even have a computer?!!?!?
> Just like you it doesn't mean he knows a damn thing about what
> the people who don't use the Amiga use to connect to the internet.
So someone who shipped one of the best TCP/IP stacks on any platforms
doesn't know, and a jackass like you who claims real world experience
with no clue knows??!?!?!?
------------------------------
From: Lindoze 2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Linux only use 1% of my CPU???
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 03:57:10 -0400
'c 'c c'mon!
512MB Ram? 1GB Swap?
hawhawhaw!
I only get 64MB of my 128MB Ram.
you're really beating a dead horse.
"Paul Y. Peng" wrote:
>
> 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.
--
########################################################
## ##
## http://www.FusionPlant.com ##
## ##
########################################################
------------------------------
From: Chris Mahmood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Linux vs. Unix
Date: 22 Jul 1999 18:29:06 -0700
mandrakefan22 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
> I use SCO 5 at work and Mandrake Linux 5.2 & 6.0 at home and work and I
> think the difrences in the OSes are minimal.
more so, I find unix boxes painful until I install the GNU utils.
-ckm
------------------------------
From: Rob Stockley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Linux only use 1% of my CPU???
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 21:48:57 +1200
Lindoze 2000 wrote:
>
> 'c 'c c'mon!
> 512MB Ram? 1GB Swap?
> hawhawhaw!
> I only get 64MB of my 128MB Ram.
> you're really beating a dead horse.
If you're telling the truth you're being ripped for ram. Linux only
recognises up to 64M ram by default. To use more you need to specify it
at boot time through lilo.
append="ram=126M" # put this in your /etc/lilo.conf and rerun lilo
You need to drop 1M per 64M leaving 126M otherwise you could run into
addressing problems. If you're being sarcastic then ha ha ha go the dead
horse!
--
Rob Stockley
Christchurch, NZ
Email: robstockley@<spam-buster>bigfoot.com
ICQ: 37780545
------------------------------
From: Rob Stockley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Linux only use 1% of my CPU???
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 21:50:50 +1200
Mark Simonetti wrote:
>
> And erm, 1 gig swap space ? Do you mean you have lots of 128meg swap
> partitions ? Because normally swap spaces can only be a maximum of 128
> meg (though you can have lots of swap spaces). I could be wrong though,
> this could of changed in the 2.2.x kernels (?!?)
Linux will use up to 16 swap partitions of not more than 128M so 1G is
achievable.
--
Rob Stockley
Christchurch, NZ
Email: robstockley@<spam-buster>bigfoot.com
ICQ: 37780545
------------------------------
From: "���P�H" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,hk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Proxy setting with linux 6.0 and netscape 4.5
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 17:42:56 +0800
I am a newbie for linux. I have just install linux 6.0 and ready for the
connection to my ISP. But when i after i setting my proxy manually in
netscape, it said the server not know. So that i can't connect to internet.
How can i slove this??
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (J Rappe)
Subject: Re: Undo disk format?
Date: 24 Jul 1999 07:14:42 GMT
John Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Stewart Honsberger wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 22 Jul 1999 20:03:38 -0600, John Thompson wrote:
>>
>> >> I just formated my root partition ... :(
>> >>
>> >> Is there some chance to undo a 'quick format'?
>> >> (quick format option from slackware setup tool)
>> >>
>> >> Any help REALLY APPRECIATED !!
>> >
>> >You mean "other than restoring from your latest backups?"
>> >
>> >I don't think so. Otherwise, it wouldn't be much of a
>> >"format" would it?
>
>> Actually - I seem to recall a DOS utility "unformat" that would work as
>> long as you didn't write anything to the drive afterwards, and didn't
>> use the unconditional format switch.
>>
>> Never tried it myself, but it exists nevertheless.
>
>IIRC, this only worked if you used the "quick format" option
>which only overwrote the first track or two (boot record,
>FATs, etc.) instead of formating every track and sector.
>The "unformat" utility would go over the data area of the
>disk and try to reconstruct the FAT from what it found.
Since he says he put an ext2 filesystem on the disk with Slackware's
setup it's highly unlikely dos unformat would be any use.
--
-john Finally the day came when I did desparately want a job.
jrappe@ I needed it. Not having another minute to lose,
bigfoot. I decided that I would take the last job on earth,
com that of messenger boy. -- Henry Miller
------------------------------
From: Chris Mahmood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Shutdown won't Power-off using SuSE-6.1
Date: 22 Jul 1999 15:57:55 -0700
change /etc/rc.d/init.d/halt to use 'halt -p' instead of 'halt'--it seems that
Germans don't like this behaviour.
-ckm
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kulisz)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: CIA assassinations
Date: 24 Jul 1999 09:05:04 GMT
In article <7na05k$o2e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Paul Wickre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <7n7dov$l9o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kulisz) wrote:
>> Do you realize you're quoting someone who denies Aristotelian logic?
>
>Obviously you haven't the faintest idea what you're babbling about.
Ayn Rand contends that Aristotle "really meant" something completely
different from what every mathematician, logician, philosopher and
scientist has taken him to mean for the past two millenia.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: .bashrc not loading
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 20:02:05 +0200
Steffan O'Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What am I doing wrong? How can I get .bashrc to load automatically
> when I login?
run ~/.bashrc from your ~/.profile (or bash_profile or bash_login...)
like this for ex.:
if test -f ~/.bashrc; then
. ~/.bashrc
fi
(I think ~/.bashrc is only for bash as a non-login-shell ?)
by
klaus
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
