Linux-Misc Digest #702, Volume #21 Mon, 6 Sep 99 15:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: Bash not running executables ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
pppd daemon (wayne)
Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution (Guy Macon)
Re: Star Office 5.1: Is it just me ... (Rluby)
Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution (Guy Macon)
Re: Linux+NT dsaster (help wanted) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
[Q] hp printer problem (Suhng ByuhngMunn)
Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution (Guy Macon)
Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution (Guy Macon)
Re: A few newbie questions ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: *nix vs. MS security (Johan Kullstam)
Re: xfstt and Redhat 6 ("Roch Plamondon")
Re: Uncompressing a *.bz2 kernel (Michael McConnell)
Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie (K. Bjarnason)
Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie (K. Bjarnason)
Re: I've got a PCI Winmodem... (Ray O'Leary)
Re: What is best HTML Editor for LINUX? (Indica)
Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie (Gary Hallock)
Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie (K. Bjarnason)
Req.: Experience with SyJet Drive (SyQuest) (David Rabanus)
Re: Peaceful Coexistence (Leonard Evens)
Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie (K. Bjarnason)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bash not running executables
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 16:02:45 GMT
"Bruce Merry (Entropy)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Scott Prince wrote:
:> For some reason I can no longer cd to a directory and just type the
:> filename and have it execute. I have to do something like...
:>
:> 'perl /dir/script.pl'
:>
:> Have I missed something here or is my shell not behaving properly?
: First, try executing it with the full path (i.e. /dir/script.pl instead
: of script.pl). Next, check that the header line in the script is correct
: (i.e. #!/location/of/perl). Also check your log files to see if the
: kernel threw up on the header line. Also check the permissions on the
: file (although it sounds like you've done that already).
I'm having a similar problem. I wrote a quick-and-dirty "Hello World" perl
script. I can run it just fine with
perl hello.pl
but if I try
./hello.pl
the shell tries to run it as a bash script and throws up. I checked the
file perms for execute. The first line of the script is
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
and I verified that perl is indeed at that path. I'm at a loss. It's no
big deal to invoke perl explicitly to run my scripts, but it bothers me
that the "#!" notation does not seem to work properly.
(I'm running RedHat 6.0, btw. Hmmm...perhaps I'll check the Errata page
again. I don't remember seeing anything on it there, but it may have just
not stuck in my brain. :)
Antryg - Perl newbie, and hooked...
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - "Everyone should have a sig quote. This one is mine."
http://www.pobox.com/~antryg (sadly outdated)
------------------------------
From: wayne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: pppd daemon
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 09:03:32 -0700
Just installed SuSE 6.1 on a spare hard drive. Got X configed and into
kde. Ran kppp but dialog box says it can't find pppd daemon. ??? What,
if it found kppp, why not the daemon??
Did which pppd, no result. Tried /sbin/pppd, no such program.
Since kde is running fine, what needs to be done to get the darn pppd
daemon running?
Wayne
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Guy Macon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.qnx,comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution
Date: 06 Sep 1999 09:12:05 PDT
In article <MPG.123ddfd7662bbcc2989a7d@news>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jon Skeet) wrote:
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Juergen Fischer wrote:
>> JF> x-no-archive: yes
>>
>> Juergen, I don't believe your x-no-archive is making it into
>> functionality.
>>
>> It seems to show up in the message body instead.
>
>That's okay - I believe x-no-archive is supposed to be accepted if it's
>either in headers or in the first line of the body.
I think that it's the first N lines. (3? 8?)
This is because some newsreaders don't allow you to put what you choose
in your headers, and some newsreaders don't allow you to put what you
choose in the first line or two.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rluby)
Subject: Re: Star Office 5.1: Is it just me ...
Date: 06 Sep 1999 16:40:10 GMT
Carl Fink ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) wrote:
>The version I downloaded from StarDivision had help and didn't need Internet
>access to work. Are you sure you downloaded the right file? (Not an
>insult, I'm wondering if Sun screwed up their shiny new web pages.)
>
>The one from SD was so501_01.tar.
I *had* to have downloaded the right file. Otherwise, How could SO have
started? A slight correction, though, the dl was 68,744KB, SO51a_lnx_01 in a
single tarball, which contained SUN's setup program. If 1KB=1024b we get
roughly 70 million bytes.
Frustrating- since SO 5.0 worked fine.- even if the help superficial was. :-)
Could the file have become garbled? Maybe- but unlikely, since it
probably wouldn't have extracted properly, much less started.
Should I wipe it all out and start over?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Guy Macon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.qnx,comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.realtime
Subject: Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution
Date: 06 Sep 1999 10:24:38 PDT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul E. Bell) wrote:
>
>First off, you were quoting the part I wrote, second, who is Russ, and
>third, see my other reply to you.
Please excuse my error. I had just finished an email and somehow
typed the wrong name in my peply to your post.
Here is the corrected version:
If you want to see how it is indeed possible to make computers much
easier to use, read THE INMATES ARE RUNNING THE ASYLUM. This book
explains how software engineers design interfaces that only a software
engineer could love, managers design interfaces that only a moron with
a perfect memory could love, why the average user thinks that the
problem is that they are stupid, and why so many engineers are
apologists for hard to use software. It's an eye opener.
avalable at amazon.com.
Paul, if you buy this book and don't like it, I will buy it from
you at twice what you paid for it.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Linux+NT dsaster (help wanted)
Date: 6 Sep 1999 16:55:31 GMT
"D. Emilio Grimaldo Tunon" wrote:
>
> A colleague has an NT Dell Latitude CPt and according to NT's
> disk manager this is how the partitions look like:
>
> +-------------+---------------+---------------+------------+
> | FAT | NTFS C: | NTFS D: | Free |
> +-------------+---------------+---------------+------------+
>
> Now since the install was done when you try to boot the laptop
> you get a black screen with "Invalid partition table" and nothing
> else. The only way to get the machine to boot is with the NT
> boot disk which then boots NT. We copied the boot.ini etc
> from the boot disk into C: but still the same results (it says
> to boot from partition 2).
>
> I think that during installation the MBR got overwritten by
> LILO and somehow it cannot find itself. We have been thinking
> about doing "fdisk /mbr" from NT but are worried that perhaps
> that will screw up the whole thing. Will that restore the
> ability to boot NT from HD? or what? We can install Linux again
> but NT install/reconfigure would be a nightmare, so is there
> a way to first make this thing boot NT from HD? any plans on
> how to proceed? any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Emilio
>
> --
> D. Emilio Grimaldo Tunon Compuware Europe B.V. (Uniface Lab)
> Software Engineer Amsterdam, The Netherlands
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel. +31 (0)20 3126 516
> *** The opinions expressed hereby are mine and not my employer's ***
There is a HOWTO related to dualbooting NT and Linux. The bottom
line is that you use the NT bootloader to do the work, not LILO.
I have used this setup successfully. *** Make sure you make a boot
disk for Linux every time you upgrade the kernel or recompile the
kernel!!! ***. You will most certainly forget to copy the appropriate
boot section information into NT, and that boot disk will be your
*only* link back into Linux.
I think your only choice is fdisk /mbr. I seem to remember that it
is safe for NT. But you had better get confirmation elsewhere.
Best of Luck...
------------------------------
From: Suhng ByuhngMunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Q] hp printer problem
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 1999 01:46:06 +0900
I have connect hp 710c printer to the /dev/lp0.
And, I have executed a command like below:
# cp test.txt /dev/lp0
But, the printer does not print anything.
In the kernel, the lp0 is detected.
How can I solve this problem?
Thanks in advance!
sbmoon.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Guy Macon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.qnx,comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution
Date: 06 Sep 1999 10:36:26 PDT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert M. Cosby) wrote:
>When I teach pure novices I go right down to the concept of 1 and zero
>why that applies to something like RAM. I do it a bit (ahem) at a time
>and do my best to avoid technobabbel. Example:
>
>On a blackboard (or a whiteboard) I draw a lighted lightbulb. I stand
>with it over my head. "Bob has an idea." I erase the glow from the lamp
>and stand under it. "Bob doesn't have a clue. Can we all agree this is
>true? Great. We've just created a standard we can all agree on."
>
>I agree with Joe that teaching some of the basic concepts first helps
>later. I still run into customers who try to run data files not
>associated on their systems. True enough once they are associated they
>won't care. But the concept is important.
>
>When I drive a car I don't ponder the differences between four-stroke
>engines and two-stroke engines. But having a solid grounding in the
>theory of how an engine works has gotten me home after trouble erupted.
I agree. How do you feel about designing computers in such a way that
you can't use them without knowing the concept of 1 and zero and why
that applies to something like RAM? How do you feel about designing
automobiles in such a way that you have to the differences between
four-stroke engines and two-stroke engines to drive them? Nobody is
saying that knowing how things work is a bad thing. I am saying that
you should be able to use your computer without such knowledge.
************************************************************************
*Post to sci.autos.admin: *
* *
*>Whenever I try to run my new Belchfire 2000 on the freeway, it shakes*
*>so hard that my contact lenses fall out, and everyone passes me. *
* *
*Set the STROKES parameter in your ENGINE.CFG file to 2, and set *
*the CYLS parameter to 8. Then reinstall Service Pack 5. *
************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Guy Macon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.qnx,comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution
Date: 06 Sep 1999 10:41:32 PDT
>As far as I know the header and the body is separated by an empty line.
>Unless your news reader explicitly allows you to add custom headers, it
>will always add an empty line between the actual header and what you write.
>The first line of your text is in no way considered part of the header.
Point well taken. In some newsreaders, the header and the body are
in the same window, and all is as you describe. In some newreaders,
(like WinVN) they are in seperate windows. In such newsreaders the
blank line exists, but you can't see it, which causes many people to
call the first line of text the "first line". (is that empty line
the first line of the body, the last line of the header, both, or
neither? <grin>.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A few newbie questions
Date: 6 Sep 1999 17:28:18 GMT
Otto wrote:
>
> I got RH 5.2 installed and working fine (5.2 was the only CD I had
> available at the time). I've read 300+ pages and I'm stuck.
>
> When using X Window, there is supposed to be a "User Configurator"
> program, which is accessible by a button with a face on it in the
> control panel. I don't have this buton. Is this really available, or
> did I forget to install something?
>
> I have a Linksys NIC installed, which wasn't recognized during
> install. I tried selecting some similar cards, but none were
> recognized. Am I SOL with this card? How hard is it to add a new NIC
> after the original install?
>
> I started a program called Xsnow (Programs > Amusements > Xsnow), and
> I couldn't figure out how to end it. It doesn't run in a window, and
> Window Operations > Kill won't shut it down either. How do I kill it?
>
You may be refering to the control-panel application in RH5.2. You
have to be running as root for that to work. Login as 'root'. Do a
'startx' to begin using X. Check out the menu choices you have for
contro-panel. If all else fails, get an xterm running and issue the
command:
control-panel &
I am using Linksys NIC's on two out of 4 computers. They are the
'Ether16 LAN Card' variety. If you have the same try the following.
Use the software provided by Linksys in Windows (OK, OK, no other choice)
to set the irq and ioaddr for the cards. Then in /etc/conf.modules
add the following lines:
alias eth0 ne
options ne io=0x300 irq=11
of course you will want to change the io and irq values to suit the
values you set in the NIC.
How to kill xsnow, from a command line type:
killall xsnow
This will kill xsnow. But you may have to restart the X session to
clean up any residual snow flakes.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: *nix vs. MS security
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 06 Sep 1999 11:45:09 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian Moore) writes:
> Hasn't it occurred to anyone that maybe what this guy is saying is
> something simpler, along these lines which is --
>
> If you install Linux (say Redhat) in a rather default way, and
>
> do the same for windows, now...
>
> look at these systems and observe which of the boxes in the
> lab is being cracked more often.
> My own observation is that it is the Linux boxes that are being
> cracked. These observations say nothing about the inherent
> security of Linux/UNIX vs. MS Windows but it is something that
> I have observed also.
sure. ms-dos on a computer in a locked room with no network access is
extremely secure. no one has cracked my refrigerator yet. it's got
no passwords or security of any kind.
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Don't Fear the Penguin!
------------------------------
From: "Roch Plamondon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: xfstt and Redhat 6
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 15:04:12 GMT
Thx
So how can i improve readability in Netscape using xfsft There is little
information in man pages.
--
Roch Plamondon
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bob Tennent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit dans le message :
7r070o$cau$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 03:26:14 GMT, Roch Plamondon wrote:
> >I' m trying to install xfstt on my machine
>
> Why? Red Hat have incorporated xfsft into their XFree86-xfs package in
6.0.
>
> but i'm getting errors when
> >executing the make command so the xfstt is not created. Im using
Xfstt0910
> >
> It might help if you told us what the error messages were!
>
> Bob T.
------------------------------
From: Michael McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Uncompressing a *.bz2 kernel
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 14:29:19 +0100
On Sat, 4 Sep 1999, Aaron wrote:
> Just do a:
>
> bunzip2 -cd linux-2.X.X.tar.bz2 | tar xfv -
or just: bzcat linux-2.X.X.tar.bz2 | tar xvf -
-- Michael "Soruk" McConnell
Eridani Star System -- The Most Up-to-Date Red Hat Linux CDROMs Available
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://linux.amush.cx Fax: +44-8701-600807
Eridani: Your PC doesn't need Windows or Gates.
------------------------------
From: K. Bjarnason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 10:52:45 -0700
[snips]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > I haven't worked with RPM (been a while since last I ran Linux, although I
> > have Mandrake sitting here waiting for my new CD to get put in before I fire
> > it up.) Is it smart enough that - like a typical Windows install - you can
> > have the entire app installed and running in perhaps a half-dozen mouse
> > clicks, without even really having to know how your system is configured?
> > Could be; as I said, I haven't worked with it.
>
> Yep. rpm itself provides a command line interface. But there are GUI
> interfaces for rpm that come with both Gnome and KDE to allow point and click.
> You can even ask it to provide a description of the package and list the files
> it will install
Nice to know Linux is, in fact, becoming more end-user friendly. I'd
actually quite like to see some serious competition to NT/2K/9x. Does
Linux, in whatever flavour, also now offer GUI-based network
configuration, user configuration and security management tools, as
well? If so, I think I might fire it up on my spare box next weekend.
:)
> But the command line interface does come in handy.
I know; I live for the command line. Well, not really, but I do use it
fairly frequently to do things I find very tedious to do via a GUI.
------------------------------
From: K. Bjarnason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 11:40:37 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
> Lizard wrote:
> [chop]
> > Now, on to software. First off, has anyone thought of putting in the
> > INSTALL text file words to the effect of "you better untar this from /,
> > otherwise, you'll end up creating a zillion useless directories where you
> > don't want them because there's no way to tell tar to go to the root to
> > start?"
>
> tar has a -C option which specifies the destination.
>
> so you can:
>
> tar -C / -xzvf foo.tar.gz
Now, now, let's not be silly. Compare this to a typical Win9x
distribution. (Speaking here of installable end-user apps, not data
files, etc.)
The two major ways of distributing Win9* native apps is to either stuff
them into ZIP files or to packagae them as self-extracting EXE files.
For zip files, you double-click the file and up comes (assuming some
nice person has pointed you at it) WinZip, which offers options from
extracting individual files to the whole archive, to reading invididual
files, to installing the app.
You click "Install", WinZip minimizes, you install using the defaults,
it's all done. And you never have to worry about command-line switches,
or whether it's going into / or /usr or /foo; it pops up a dialog box
with a predefined default location, all you need to do, unless you have
reason to need otherwise, is just click "Next".
Once the install is done, WinZip comes back up, cleans up after itself,
and you can close it and run your app. Simple, no fancy commands
required.
The single .exe option is very similar, except that typically you do not
need to explicitly state "Install"; once you've double-clicked the EXE,
it starts the install process automatically, again complete with default
installation locations. Click "Next" a few times, it's done, and it has
cleaned up the temp dir after itself, too.
Sorry, what was that tar command? I've forgotten. Hunting for the
text, ah yes, there it is; I think I'll write this down, there's no way
I'll remember it until I've done it a dozen or more times:
tar -C / -xzvf foo.tar.gz
As a developer, I like to have such options available. As a developer,
I'd be *horribly* ashamed to release a product where the installation
process *required* anything that remotely resembled that. As a user,
I'd tend to look at it, think "clueless developer", and go get a real
product.
Note that I *do* differentiate between _offering_ such features and
_requiring_ such features. From what I read of your text, though, those
options are _required_ to extract to a location other than the default;
to me, as a developer, that smacks of pathetic design.
------------------------------
From: Ray O'Leary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I've got a PCI Winmodem...
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 13:39:46 -0500
David Mitchell wrote:
>
> In article <7qpg3u$5s3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alan Ingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> writes
> >
> >Jimmy Lio wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >>The PCI Winmodem is giving me headache... No matter how I configure my
> >>chatscript, the modem just doesn't seem to know how to communicate...
> >>
> >>I have heard that Winmodem is "partly" software driven... The fact that
> >>it works on Windows is that the Windows system provides a virtual
> >>machine that emulates some of the tasks a regular modem does... Am I
> >>right...
> >>
> >>If this is the case, is there anything I can install on my Linux box to
> >>make the Winmodem works?
> >
> >
> >It seems that you and I have both fallen victim to this ******* winmodem
> >trend. I must admit to feeling quite embarrassed that I didn't even bother
> >to check this out before buying the thing. I don't even see what the point
> >in winmodems is, anyway. I only bought this because it was cheap and was
> >internal (because I didn't want extra wires trailing all over the place).
> >
> >If I'd been told this in the shop I bought it from, I wouldn't be bitter
> >about it. Mind you, revenge is sweetest when it's served up cold - I've not
> >seen that particular shop open for the last 2 months.
> >
>
> What modem's are we talking about here?
>
> I've just bought a V.90 Fax Modem from Microcomputer Research Inc.,
> which I specifically bought on the say-so of the sales bod, who assured
> me that it would work with linux.
>
> Have I inadvertently purchased a yellow citric fruit?
David,
It may not be a lemon.
Not all V.90 modems are lemons, i.e., winmodems. The V.90 standard is
commonplace on real modems too -- the difference between a winmodem and
a real modem is that the winmodems offload a lot of what is normally
accomplished by the modem chipset onto the host O/S. The reduced
chipset makes these winmodems cheaper, but at the expense of the host
O/S, which now has to perform extra processing. Horrible. The V.90
standard itself is, happily, in no way dependent on a winmodem
implementation.
A good warning sign when purchasing these pieces of junk is that "XXXXX
V.90 Modem FOR WINDOWS" is plastered on the packaging, or the
requirements list Win95, Win98 or WinNT as mandatory.
Best Regards,
Ray
------------------------------
From: Indica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What is best HTML Editor for LINUX?
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 18:31:11 GMT
WYSIWYG editors are great for people like myself who maintain large web
sites. They are quite easy to use and cut the time it takes to write the
code in half. I do not agree with your statement that we a person should
know HTML if they are going to create a site. That would be in an ideal
world but the web is full of people who want a site but don't want to
learn the code. Editors are excellent for those who don't know HTML and
for people who do.
Adam C. Emerson wrote:
> No, but there are other WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get) Web
> Page designers.
>
> You don't want one of those.
>
> You want a WYGIWYG (What You Get Is What You Get) editor. VIM and Elvis
> both have very nice HTML editing modes with syntax highlighting.
>
> You should know HTML well enough to write a webpage if you're going
> to be putting one up, and if you can write it in a text editor,
> why not? Only problem is placement, but that's not too big an issue.
================== Posted via CNET Linux Help ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 14:33:27 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie
"K. Bjarnason" wrote:
> Nice to know Linux is, in fact, becoming more end-user friendly. I'd
> actually quite like to see some serious competition to NT/2K/9x. Does
> Linux, in whatever flavour, also now offer GUI-based network
> configuration, user configuration and security management tools, as
> well? If so, I think I might fire it up on my spare box next weekend.
> :)
Sure. linuxconf is GUI based and seems to be able to do most things. I haven't
really put it through the test since I don't have a network to configure. But
there is a network section in the menu. It also supports configuring user ids and
passwords. Lots of stuff that I've never looked at too closely since much I have
been able to use out of the box You can use linuxconf to set up your dialup
connection. By I prefer using kppp, the KDE dialer to do this.
Gary
------------------------------
From: K. Bjarnason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 10:58:16 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> "K. Bjarnason" wrote:
>
> > [snips]
> >
> > No, do NOT learn about "ps" and "kill" - ask the Linux community why an OS
> > presumably aimed at taking over from MS (according to many of the hypesters,
> > at any rate) can't handle something as basic as a point-and-click "kill
> > process" operation as easily as Windows does?
>
> Windows does not handle " something as basic as a point-and-click 'kill
> process' operation easily....lest you forget about the 'End Task' and 'Wait'
> for the application dialogues every time you try to kill off the task. You
> don't mention the bottom line of 'End Tasks' in Windows which is, The
> application will end if and only if it wants to. Windows will seldom outright
> kick off an application (BSODs for the system and Application not
> withstanding).
Odd; I can only recall that happening a couple of times under Win9x;
Under NT the only time I can't kill a process outright is if it's
actually running as a service and the system thinks it is active. Then
again, I've never had a frozen-but-NT-thinks-it's-active service cause
any problems, either. :)
> Linux on the other hand will flush the task when kill -9 is invoked...End of
> story. Finding the right or all of the process IDs to kill is a different
> story.
Yes, indeed; Linux is somewhat better about actually killing the
process; Win* is considerably better (in my experience to date) in ease
of use in figuring out what needs to be killed.
Unlike Win*, however, Linux only needs some GUI work to bring that level
of ease to its desktop; Win*, at least in its 9* flavours, would require
considerably more work to make the actual workings of the process
comparable to Linux's.
------------------------------
From: David Rabanus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.hardware,de.comp.os.unix.linux.hardware,de.comp.os.unix.linux.misc
Subject: Req.: Experience with SyJet Drive (SyQuest)
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 11:47:14 -0700
Does anybody have any experience with the SyQuest SyJet 1.5 GB
harddrive under Linux? I anticipate some difficulties since there
is some special s/w necessray even under DOS/Windows/OS2...
Thanks in advance - David
------------------------------
From: Leonard Evens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Peaceful Coexistence
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 13:38:24 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> A second disk is a great idea when mixing Win98 and Linux. You may want to
> put a small Windows partition after the last Linux one on the second hard
> drive. There seems to be a bug (perhaps intentional?) in Win98 which causes
> it to mount the last partition on your drives. This causes corruption on a
> Linux partition if it happens to be the last partition. Drove my son and
> I nuts with his laptop until we saw a posting about the problem.
>
>
Just what kind of partitioning did you have when you experienced
the problem? Also, is this specific to Windows 98? I am composing
this on a dual boot, dual (scsi) disk machine with Windows 95 on
the first disk and two primary Linux partitions on the second,
and I don't have any problem. I've seen postings about Windows
trying to format a non-FAT partition, but this seems to happen
only in exceptional circumstances. Could you point me roughly
in the direction of the posting you found on the subject?
--
Leonard Evens [EMAIL PROTECTED] 847-491-5537
Dept. of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ., Evanston, IL 60208
------------------------------
From: K. Bjarnason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 11:21:35 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.12 i586)
> X-Accept-Language: en
>
> Matthias Warkus wrote:
>
> > [0] Notice how thoughtfully and diplomatically I am *not* assuming
> > that what you leech is porn. Which is often done when people argue
> > about whether Usenet should be used for things for which you would
> > be better off with an FTP server.
>
> I instantly assumed he was leeching porn. ;-)
Some of us prefer to leech fractals. I'll leave it to you to decide
which, ultimately, is the worse offense. :)
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
