Linux-Misc Digest #772, Volume #23 Tue, 7 Mar 00 01:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Tar useless for backups? (MH)
Re: List of companies using Linux? (Iceman)
uucp problem (Dennis J Perkins)
Re: Please: somebody shoot me! or I give up...unless someone has (MH)
Re: PPP needs 2 tries for session (Dale Huckeby)
Re: Salary? ("Matt O'Toole")
Re: fetchmail keep question (John Wingate)
Re: Screen resolutions (Steve Reed)
Re: multiple users using X on same computer at same time? (I R A Darth Aggie)
Web server can't be accessed without browser proxy? ("Dave Borg")
Re: no preinstalled windows? (Grant Edwards)
RH6.1, Rogers@Home- Can't PING Gateway, DNS
Re: corel Linux does it have plug & play ("Joe S.")
Re: Salary? (Jim Richardson)
Re: uucp problem (Bob Hauck)
Re: apache name based virtual server ~50% ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: apache name based virtual server ~50% ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: apache name based virtual server ~50% ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: apache name based virtual server ~50% ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: corel Linux does it have plug & play (John Hasler)
Re: New Book: Big Book of World Wide Web RFCs (John Hasler)
rpm restore one file? (John Reiser)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 03:14:59 +0000
From: MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Tar useless for backups?
Robert Heller wrote:
>
> OK, next question: what user are you running tar as (normal user /
> root) and who owns the files in '/whatever/whatever/' and what sort of
> protection are these file set to. Tar can't backup files it can't read.
>
I guess you didn't get my reply to your previous post before posting
this. (or I didn't get this response before posting to your earlier
response) I wish there were some way to send a single response to
multiple posts within the same thread. I find myself having to
duplicate messages on a regular basis.
I am executing tar as root. Please see my response to your post above
for more details.
------------------------------
From: Iceman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: List of companies using Linux?
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 19:13:49 +1600
Hi:
Try http://www.netcraft.com
* Sent from AltaVista http://www.altavista.com Where you can also find related Web
Pages, Images, Audios, Videos, News, and Shopping. Smart is Beautiful
------------------------------
From: Dennis J Perkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: uucp problem
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 20:29:44 -0600
I' m trying to get my Linux box to talk to my SCO machine at work. I
followed the instructions for configuring uucp, but I can't seem to get
it to work. The cu command says that all ports are in use. The uupoll
command times out.
--
Dennis
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 03:35:17 +0000
From: MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Please: somebody shoot me! or I give up...unless someone has
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> For a number of months, I ran WindowMaker in Redhat 5.2. Life was
> good. There were a few things I wanted to run which required
> upgrades; kernal, libraries, etc.. I downloaded various packages and
> proceeded to attempt installation. This needed that, that needed
> something else, etc.. Better to get a newer distro.
>
> I tried Mandrake 6.1. It always loads KDE. I didn't want KDE: crash,
> crash, crash. I tried Gnome: crash. For about six months I
> re-installed and re-configured without success. Too big anyway.
>
> Fine. I tried RedHat 6.1. Little difference (nice install interface,
> though).
>
> Tried WindowMaker. Running KFM under WM ain't too bad. What's this?
> Dock incomplete. Menus not there at all. Re-install. No good. I
> checked to see that the c pre-proccessor was installed. Yup. Hhmmm.
> I did like e and gnome when they worked. "What's wrong," I asked.
> "Upgrade!" they cried in unison. I downloaded the latest
> Enlightenment and Gnome.
>
> "rpm -Uvh...", I commanded. "(some library or other) need," was the
> response. The hunt was on - with success.
>
> Once again I issued the command with confidence.
>
> "Segmentation error"
>
> Ugh!
>
> *sigh*
>
> While I've learned alot, this is a vast over-simplification of the
> trouble I had and my patience is now so thin, I can see through it.
> All I wanted was an OS that was more reliable (among other things)
> than M$. The hassles encountered in getting it up and running to my
> satisfaction far outweighed the benifits.
>
> Then again, as I type this in Windoze, I remember why I wanted Linux
> in the first place.
>
> Never mind.
>
> I'll try again.
>
I had a similar situation with GNOME and the earlier version of KDE. I
preferred GNOME, but it was less stable. I've since upgraded to KDE
1.1.2 and have experienced NO problems under RH 6.0. I have 3 machines
running with this configuration.
Just from perusing the ngs, it seems RH 6.1 is buggier than 6.0. I have
no plans to upgrade until the new kernel is released (2.4) I'm also
looking forward to GNOME 2.0. I'm hoping they will have solved the
stability issues.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale Huckeby)
Subject: Re: PPP needs 2 tries for session
Date: 6 Mar 2000 19:21:10 -0800
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Robert Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Brian Moore wrote:
>>
>> In article <89vps8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dale Huckeby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Can anyone tell me what's going on here? I give the command:
>> >"ifup ppp0", the phone rings, a connection is apparently established
>> >momentarily, then PPP hangs up, dials again, and the second time
>> >I get a continuous connection until I terminate it with: "ifdown ppp0".
>>
>> Sorry but this is a "me too" post. I have just the same behavior.
>> I've looked at my log too and it looks a lot like yours. I can't
>> figure it out. Have you tried changing the wait time?
>>
>> --
>>
>> Brian G. Moore, School of Science, Penn State Erie--The Behrend College
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] , (814)-898-6334
>
>Are you two perchance running RH 6.1? This is a "FAQ problem":
YesIam.
>http://www.redhat.com/support/docs/gotchas/6.1/gotchas-6.1-6.html#ss6.6
>
>6.6 Problems with PPP "double dialing" your ISP
Thanks for the tip! I'm on my way.
Dale Huckeby
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Matt O'Toole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Matt O'Toole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Salary?
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 16:33:47 -0800
"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8a0d7l$pn1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> : I finished my career in telco's less than a year ago, and what I've been
> : told by
> : colleagues the same age is that the starting salary is around 3M pesetas
> : ($18K). It seems we have to go US or UK to get a decent salary...
> This would be barely a living wage for a single person in most of the
> U.S., due to the high cost of living. After taxes, it would not be
> sufficient to make the mortgage payment on an average home in most
> markets, or *any* home in the more expensive parts of the country such
> as Silicon Valley or New York City.
A mortgage? $18K won't even pay the rent on a cheap apartment in those
areas. You'll be living with roommates at least, and perhaps even sharing a
bedroom! However, it might buy you a nice little farm in West Virginia.
The cost of living in the US varies dramatically from one area to the next.
Salaries vary according to the market, but not necessarily as much. It all
depends on how ambitious you are, and how much misery you'll put up with for
a chance to make a bundle. As they say, in the cheaper areas it's easy to
get by, but hard to get ahead; and vice versa.
I read some statistics awhile back about average salaries. The average
income for a family of four in all the US is about $36K a year, while here
in Orange County, CA, it's nearly twice that at $65K. However, I would
guess that it's easier to live on $36K in, say, the southeast, than it is to
live here on $65K.
I wonder sometimes how Europeans can live at all. Everything seems so much
more expensive over there, and apparantly, their salaries are lower, too.
Matt O.
------------------------------
From: John Wingate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: fetchmail keep question
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 04:10:33 GMT
sleddog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I use fetchmail on two machines -- home and office -- to poll three pop
> mail accounts. At the office in my .fetchmailrc I use the -k option for
> each server to keep the mail on the server. Then at home I let fetchmail
> get the same mail and remove the copy from the server.
> But at the office, fetchmail keeps re-fetching messages that have been
> 'kept' over and over -- so I get multiple copies of the same mail.
> How do I get fetchmail to leave mail on the server but not re-fetch the
> same mail every time it runs?
Try using the -U option along with -k to keep track of already seen
messages.
--
John Wingate If there is a God he must have
[EMAIL PROTECTED] an odd sense of humour.
--- Chaim Bermant
------------------------------
From: Steve Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Screen resolutions
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 03:33:49 GMT
It probably doesn't have anything to do with your monitor. Probably has
something to do with your video card. Find out what the chipset is and
then if it doesn't auto detect the video card, manually select the chipset
the video card has. If you can't find it listed there then it's probably
bad news and your no-name-brand video card isn't supported by Linux.
Good luck!
RCS wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
> I'm fairly new to Linux ( have installed it a couple of times on a
couple of
> machines) and I keep having the same problem with the screen
resolution -
> the installed system doesn't accept resolutions higher than 600 x 400,
which
> makes my graphical interface really too big and clumsy (at least for my
17
> inch monitor).
>
> I have tried both Redhat 5.2, 6.1 and Caldera 2.3.
>
> The machine I recently installed Linux om (first Calderea 2.3, later
Redhat
> 6.1, I tried both Gnome and KDE) has got a Panasonic PanaSync 5G, 4MB
video
> ram, and a Pentium 200 MHz.
>
> Why does not the installation procedures (both Redhat and Caldera) accept
> higher resolutions than this? And is there a way to force a higher
> resolution manually?
>
> Thank you in advance,
> Rolf C Stadheim
>
>
>
>
--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (I R A Darth Aggie)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.powerpc,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: multiple users using X on same computer at same time?
Date: 7 Mar 2000 04:15:47 GMT
Reply-To: no-courtesy-copies-please
On Mon, 06 Mar 2000 17:33:16 -0500,
Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+
+
+ I R A Darth Aggie wrote:
+
+ > On Sun, 05 Mar 2000 20:51:44 -0500,
+ > Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, in
+ > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+ > + I R A Darth Aggie wrote:
+ > + >
+ > + > On Sun, 05 Mar 2000 17:51:30 GMT,
+ > + > Rod Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, in
+ > + > <C8xw4.3041$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+ > + >
+ > + > + > I would like to have 2-3 accounts active on the same computer, running X
+ > + > + > at the same time. I tried cntrl-alr-f2, but when I log in and start X, I
+ > + > + > get an error saying display 0 is using X. I tried startx --:1, and xinit
+ > + > + > --:1, but get the same error. Is it possble to do this.
+ > + >
+ > + > + It's not clear exactly what you hope to accomplish.
+ > + >
+ > + > Probably just chew up more memory and CPU cycles...
+ >
+ > + Well, they are my cycles to waste, arent they?
+ >
+ > Why certainly. But there may be a better method for doing what you
+ > want, but you didn't mention that...
+ >
+
+ ... and you didnt suggest a way to do it either... someone else has.
Well, golly gee whiz, Beaver, I didn't know the answer.
Still, why on earth do you want to have multiple instances of your
X server running? WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH?
James
--
Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC
The Bill of Rights is paid in Responsibilities - Jean McGuire
To cure your perl CGI problems, please look at:
<url:http://www.perl.com/CPAN/doc/FAQs/cgi/idiots-guide.html>
------------------------------
From: "Dave Borg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Web server can't be accessed without browser proxy?
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 21:26:27 -0700
I have a web server connected to the internet via a cable modem.
My users can access web pages and anonymous ftp, but only if
they have their internet browser settings set to use a proxy
server. With their proxy turned off they cannot access my server
or even ping it either.
Has anyone seen this problem before or know how to fix it?
-- Dave
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Subject: Re: no preinstalled windows?
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 04:38:39 GMT
On 06 Mar 2000 21:49:04 EST, Dances With Crows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Which [bigger] reseller sells desktop PCs without Windows on it?
>
>The big resellers are still firmly in MS's pockets. If you
>want good-quality machines running a Real OS, check Penguin
>Computing, VA Linux, or buy parts and build your own. I
>heartily reccommend the last approach; you know exactly what
>you're buying, the parts are better, and no Windoze tax.
Most importantly, you can spend your money on what _you_ want.
You don't have to pick from the options somebody else decided
to make available. If what you do with a computer means that
disk IO is a bottleneck, then pick a dirt-cheap AMD K6-200
motherboard and stick a UW SCSI RAID disk system in it.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! I FORGOT to do the
at DISHES!!
visi.com
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RH6.1, Rogers@Home- Can't PING Gateway, DNS
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 04:33:29 GMT
I just installed RedHat 6.1 and have tried to get my cable modem to work
with it. I've entered in all the TCP/IP setting, and I can ping my PC IP
but I can't ping my Gateway. I'm using RH6.1 (as stated above) on an eTower
400 i3 (Celeron 400, 32 Megs RAM, Tarayon modem, NDC ethernet (it's found
just fine). It's a barebones install, want to get the net working first
before adding anythign else. And so thus I am a linux newbie too. I altered
the settings using control-panel in x-term/x windows. I'm using GNOME
workstation. The service is Rogers@Home in the Waterloo region. I'm also
running Win98 on the same HDD, using LILO. Other than that I can't really
think of anything else...
Any help please send my way!! I *REALLY* want to get @Home working. I've
waded through countless messages on it but I still can't get ping my
gateway.
jhohertz36 dot yahoo dot com
--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/
------------------------------
From: "Joe S." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: corel Linux does it have plug & play
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 19:52:32 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I want to get rid of windows and run corel linux. But my IT person at my
> work suggested that I not do this. One is because I am not a progrmer and
> don't understand the language. And another reason it doesn't have plug and
> play capabilities. Is this true? Thanks
>
> --
> Posted via CNET Help.com
> http://www.help.com/
I'm not a programmer. Using SuSE 6.3 and it detected my PNP sound card
with no problems. switching to linux from windows will require a
learning curve but after that Linux is great. Joe.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Salary?
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 20:43:14 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 6 Mar 2000 14:06:20 GMT,
Desmond Coughlan, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>On 6 Mar 2000 13:52:53 GMT, Joseph T. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> : Here in Spain, if you have just finished your career and ask for a
>> : salary starting at 7M pesetas ($45K) you will probably end in a mental
>> : institution.
>
>[snip]
>
>> Most of the IT people I know earn between $50-$250K per year. The
>> President of the United States earns only slightly more than that. My
>> salary is closer to the low end of that range, but I live in an area
>> with moderate cost of living, so it is reasonably adequate and
>> comfortable for me.
>
>I think it's a myth that wages are higher in the United States, at least
>when the high cost of living is taken into account.
>
>I presently earn a tad under 500,000 FFr a year, which I think translates
>into about 73,000 US$ per year. That doesn't seem much, but I live in
>a relatively large flat, and only pay 4,000 FFr a month (580 US$).
>
>So the wages are lower in Europe, but the cost of living is lower, too.
>
hehe, I live in a boat, my "rent" ranges from $0 to about $400 mo
for slip fees (I own the boat of course.) But I am a few sigma
off of the SD in this area :)
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: uucp problem
Date: 7 Mar 2000 05:17:10 GMT
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
On Mon, 06 Mar 2000 20:29:44 -0600, Dennis J Perkins
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The cu command says that all ports are in use. The uupoll
>command times out.
Got any getty processes running on the serial port? Any lockfiles hanging
around in /var/lock?
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.bobh.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: apache name based virtual server ~50%
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 05:08:14 GMT
Do I need DNS setup to operate virtual hosts?
should I bind each address? just a thought.
In article <89popm$d4j$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> David Erdman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > according to apache documentation, i have set
up the following on my
> rh
> > system in httpd.conf.
> >
> > ServerAdmin root@localhost
> > ServerRoot /etc/httpd
> > ServerName localhost
> > my document root up here is /home/httpd/html
> >
> > **here is my virtual host section. i have 2
domain names, with one
> static
> > ip**
> > NameVirtualHost 111.22.33.44 (this is My
internet IP)
> >
> > <VirtualHost 111.22.33.44>
> > ServerName www.domain.com
> > DocumentRoot /home/httpd/www/domain
> > </VirtualHost>
> >
> > <VirtualHost 111.22.33.44>
> > ServerName www.otherdomain.org
> > DocumentRoot /home/httpd/otherdomain
> > </VirtualHost>
> >
> > is there anything inherently wrong with this
setup?> for some reason
> when
> > i enter both urls, only the www.domain.com
one comes up. i know
> > permissions are correct, w/files and dir.
> >
>
> It looks as thought *those* lines are correct.
However, as a bare
> minimum I ALWAYS specify ErrorLog and
TransferLog for each virtual
> domain. It makes it a whole lot easier to
troubleshoot problems. Also
> you need to make sure you use a browser that
sends the DomainName
> header with each get request.
>
> Good luck, Aaron Newsome
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: apache name based virtual server ~50%
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 05:09:17 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
David Erdman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> according to apache documentation, i have set up the following on my
rh
> system in httpd.conf.
>
> ServerAdmin root@localhost
> ServerRoot /etc/httpd
> ServerName localhost
> my document root up here is /home/httpd/html
>
> **here is my virtual host section. i have 2 domain names, with one
static
> ip**
> NameVirtualHost 111.22.33.44 (this is My internet IP)
>
> <VirtualHost 111.22.33.44>
> ServerName www.domain.com
> DocumentRoot /home/httpd/www/domain
> </VirtualHost>
>
> <VirtualHost 111.22.33.44>
> ServerName www.otherdomain.org
> DocumentRoot /home/httpd/otherdomain
> </VirtualHost>
>
> is there anything inherently wrong with this setup?> for some reason
when
> i enter both urls, only the www.domain.com one comes up. i know
> permissions are correct, w/files and dir.
>
> --
> Posted via CNET Help.com
> http://www.help.com/
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: apache name based virtual server ~50%
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 05:08:23 GMT
so, my namevirtualhost is right though? this is
my static ip address right? what if i am behind
a firewall, this is still the static ip address,
and not my internal 192.168.1.4 address is it?
In article <89popm$d4j$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> David Erdman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > according to apache documentation, i have set
up the following on my
> rh
> > system in httpd.conf.
> >
> > ServerAdmin root@localhost
> > ServerRoot /etc/httpd
> > ServerName localhost
> > my document root up here is /home/httpd/html
> >
> > **here is my virtual host section. i have 2
domain names, with one
> static
> > ip**
> > NameVirtualHost 111.22.33.44 (this is My
internet IP)
> >
> > <VirtualHost 111.22.33.44>
> > ServerName www.domain.com
> > DocumentRoot /home/httpd/www/domain
> > </VirtualHost>
> >
> > <VirtualHost 111.22.33.44>
> > ServerName www.otherdomain.org
> > DocumentRoot /home/httpd/otherdomain
> > </VirtualHost>
> >
> > is there anything inherently wrong with this
setup?> for some reason
> when
> > i enter both urls, only the www.domain.com
one comes up. i know
> > permissions are correct, w/files and dir.
> >
>
> It looks as thought *those* lines are correct.
However, as a bare
> minimum I ALWAYS specify ErrorLog and
TransferLog for each virtual
> domain. It makes it a whole lot easier to
troubleshoot problems. Also
> you need to make sure you use a browser that
sends the DomainName
> header with each get request.
>
> Good luck, Aaron Newsome
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: apache name based virtual server ~50%
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 05:09:59 GMT
so, my namevirtualhost is right though? this is my static ip address
right? what if i am behind a firewall, this is still the static ip
address, and isnt my internal 192.168.1.4 address is it?
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
David Erdman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> according to apache documentation, i have set up the following on my
rh
> system in httpd.conf.
>
> ServerAdmin root@localhost
> ServerRoot /etc/httpd
> ServerName localhost
> my document root up here is /home/httpd/html
>
> **here is my virtual host section. i have 2 domain names, with one
static
> ip**
> NameVirtualHost 111.22.33.44 (this is My internet IP)
>
> <VirtualHost 111.22.33.44>
> ServerName www.domain.com
> DocumentRoot /home/httpd/www/domain
> </VirtualHost>
>
> <VirtualHost 111.22.33.44>
> ServerName www.otherdomain.org
> DocumentRoot /home/httpd/otherdomain
> </VirtualHost>
>
> is there anything inherently wrong with this setup?> for some reason
when
> i enter both urls, only the www.domain.com one comes up. i know
> permissions are correct, w/files and dir.
>
> --
> Posted via CNET Help.com
> http://www.help.com/
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: corel Linux does it have plug & play
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 03:59:58 GMT
Brian Moore writes:
> Basically, it's Debian slink with various updates (like a newer X
> server), KDE, a file manager written by Corel,...
And most of Debian missing. It's a small subset of Debian.
> ... and the simplest installer around.
And most fragile. It either works perfectly or fails totally.
> Debian doesn't sell cd's,...
But many vendors do sell Debian CD's.
> ...doesn't publish books...
But a number of Debian books have been published, some authored by Debian
maintainers.
> ...and doesn't put it all in a box with a manual..)
But a boxed Debian set with a book is available.
> In general, it's Debian for Newbies.
Try Storm Linux. It is Debian based too, without the marketing hype.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.security,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.admin.security,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.misc
Subject: Re: New Book: Big Book of World Wide Web RFCs
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 04:07:48 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> BIG BOOK OF WORLD WIDE WEB RFCS...
...contains nothing not available for free in the Debian doc-rfc package.
All these rfc's are available for free in machine readable form on the Net.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: John Reiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: rpm restore one file?
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 22:02:02 -0800
How can rpm be used to restore one file from a distribution?
Suppose someone :-) removes /etc/rc.d/rc3.d/S10network from a
RedHat 6.0 system. Without knowing that the file is a symbolic
link to ../init.c/network, but having the original CD-ROM with
its RPMS, how can it be restored? [Yes, I did RTFM page.
I could not find the right combination of function and options.]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
