Linux-Misc Digest #266, Volume #24 Tue, 25 Apr 00 12:13:15 EDT
Contents:
Re: How to adjust the full screen of x windows (Larry Ozarow)
Re: Mail filtering for the Linux console (Jeff Workman)
Re: voodoo 2000 video card problem (Steve Martin)
Re: Starting xfs (David Rolfe)
Re: Connecting Win 98 <---> Linux ?? (David Efflandt)
Re: Serial port (Munge)
Re: HOT HD ("Gene Heskett")
Re: Could MS 'Buy' Linux? (Matt Friedman)
Re: Which modem is good for LINUX ("Pencil Necked Geek")
Gateway Solo 9300CL and Linux? (Jim)
Re: problem changing permissions (David Efflandt)
Re: Setting CMOS time/date? (David Efflandt)
Re: How Microsoft inhibits competition & innovation (Kevin Huber)
Re: Starting xfs (Hal Burgiss)
One partition, multiple mount points? ("jeff")
Re: LILO Woes with Redhat 6.2 (2.2.14 Kernel) (BrentBoz)
Re: One partition, multiple mount points? (Dances With Crows)
Re: Access Windows files from Linux in the same box (Matt Friedman)
Re: Setup Linux as a Dial-In PPP server ! (James Money)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Larry Ozarow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to adjust the full screen of x windows
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 00:54:39 GMT
Garel wrote:
>
> I also tried the usr/X11R6/bin/xvidtune but after I adjuested and reboot it
> went back to the same
> How am I going to adjust it permanently. >
>
After you use xvidtune to get the screen the way you want it, open up
XF86Config
(usually in /etc) in your favorite editor. Press the "show" button in xvidtune
and
it will write out it's current modeline to the terminal you called it from.
Use the
left mouse button to grab up the text, go to your XF86Config file, find
the line at which the corresponding mode is defined, and insert the new
modeline with the middle mouse button (and put "Modeline" in front of it to
make it
look like the other.). You don't have to actually replace the old one, just
put
the new one in AFTER the old one and all should be well on your next reboot.
Larry
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Mail filtering for the Linux console
From: Jeff Workman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 24 Apr 2000 20:02:39 -0400
Bryan Hoyt<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I want to be able to filter mail into separate folders, like you can in
> Netscape Messenger, but with a command from the Linux console. Is there
> a way to do this using common programs like fetchmail, mail, pine, and
> others with bash? Any help would be very nice indeed.
> Thanks.
Sounds like a job for procmail. man procmail.
Jeff
--
Jeff Workman | [End of diatribe. We now return you to your
UNIX System Administrator | regularly scheduled programming...]
Gibralter Publishing |
(910) 455-6446 ext. 3034 | -- Larry Wall, in "Configure" from the
http://www.gibralter.com | perl distribution.
------------------------------
From: Steve Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: voodoo 2000 video card problem
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 21:00:51 -0400
Doc Shipley wrote:
>
> > > The Voodoo3 is only supported in XFree86 v3.3.5 and later.
> >
> > Not quite true... it's supported by the SVGA driver in
> > 3.3.3, as that's what I'm running right now.
>
> Unpatched, with 3D?
No, but that was not the statement that was made. As you can see
above, the statement was simply that the card was "not supported"
before 3.3.5. It is supported in 3.3.3.
------------------------------
From: David Rolfe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Starting xfs
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 21:17:40 -0400
Hal Burgiss wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Apr 2000 15:48:26 +0000, David Rolfe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >OK!!! I fixed the bug with the RedHat Distribution. They are simply not starting
> >xfs correctly. It is interesting that they would ship a version of xfs that
> >supports true type fonts and then start it in such a way as to disable that
> >function. Anyway here is a workaround that works for me. It opens a "root" port
> >that I understand has some security problems ... but I do not know how to do it
> >otherwise. So here goes:
> >
> >Insert the following line at the end of /etc/rc.d/rc.local
> >
> >su -c "xfs -config /etc/X11/fs/config -port 7100 &"
> >
> >This will startup a copy of xfs that understands to listen on a port.
> >
> >Then put the following line at the end of the fontpaths in /etc/X11/XF8Config
> >
> > FontPath "unix/:-1"
> >
>
> I'd be curious how well TrueType is actually working. Looks like xfs is
> one place, and X is looking somewhere else for fonts (ie the fontpaths).
>
> --
> Hal B
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --
Well ... the true type fonts are showing up in the kde font manager and on web pages
(atho netscape is not scaling them correctly). My understanding of how this cludge
works is that by putting the port into the font path X knows to go off and talk to
that port to find more fonts and xfs has its own font path (in /etc/X11/fs/config)
which includes truetype fonts that xfs now knows how to deal with. And there are more
complications involved in getting a word processor to recognize these fonts. All this
is written up in the font howto.
Dave
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Efflandt)
Subject: Re: Connecting Win 98 <---> Linux ??
Date: 25 Apr 2000 01:27:08 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've read the HOWTOs and a lot of messages but I didn't got
>my doubts solved yet on how to connect (in order to exchange
>their resources) two computers running Win 98 and Linux, when
>both are FAR AWAY, one with other, that's I can't, physicaly,
>connect them with ethernet cards and cables and hubs, etc.
> Is this "remote access" possible? If so, what are the means
>could I use to provide it?
> I'll be thankful for any help.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
VNC will work either way. If you were on the Linux box and wanted to
transfer a file to or from the Win box, you could run the Win box from the
Linux box and run an ftp program from there to access the Linux box.
Maybe not real quick by modem, but it is free.
Likewise you can use VNC to run a remote X session from the Win box,
although, for file transfer you could simply use ftp from the Win box.
http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/index.html
--
David Efflandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.de-srv.com/
http://www.autox.chicago.il.us/ http://www.berniesfloral.net/
http://hammer.prohosting.com/~cgi-wiz/ http://cgi-help.virtualave.net/
------------------------------
From: Munge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Serial port
Date: 25 Apr 2000 00:56:17 GMT
Christof Schadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Does anybody know a way to figure out the available serial ports on my PC. I
: don't mean 'ls /dev/ttyS*' or something like that.
: Normally you have ttyS0 and ttyS1 but I have to find out if they are really
: there and how they are called.
man setserial
------------------------------
Date: 24 Apr 2000 21:15:33 -0500
From: "Gene Heskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: HOT HD
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Unrot13 this;
Reply to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gene Heskett sends Greetings to Edward Lee;
EL> Actually, bigger drives are sometimes cooler, because they have newer
EL> chips with lower powers. In some cases (no prunch intended),
EL> disconecting the fan leads to lower overall temperature. The fan itself
EL> makes approx. 10W of heat.
The fan makes 10 watts of heat? Can you hear it in the next county?
Are the blades actually rated for the rpm or do they need an explosion
shield?
Seriously,
A 12 volt fan normally carries a label claiming it might draw 280
milliamps, or .28 amps. I've never measured one that actually drew that
much. At any rate, 12*.28=3.36 watts. Not all of that is instant heat
mind you, but some of that input energy will be used to create the
turbulance that moves the air around, delaying its total conversion to
heat by several seconds. 1=1 however if the observation continues long
enough.
[...]
Cheers, Gene
--
Gene Heskett, CET, UHK |Amiga A2k Zeus040, Linux @ 400mhz
Ch. Eng. @ WDTV-5 |This Space for rent
RC5-Moo! 350kkeys/sec, Seti@home 16 hrs a block
email gene underscore heskett at iolinc dot net
This messages reply content, but not any previously quoted material, is
� 2000 by Gene Heskett, all rights reserved.
--
------------------------------
From: Matt Friedman <"mwf"@total.net(remove-to-reply)>
Subject: Re: Could MS 'Buy' Linux?
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 21:42:13 -0400
Stewart Honsberger wrote:
> That's why MS can't buy Linux - Linux isn't an entity in and of itself. If
> I wanted to continue development of Linux and call it Stewix I quite
> conceivably could. If people liked Stewix, they'd use it. If not..
>
> A group of hackers would take over the development of Linux, and Microsoft
> would find themselves with a couple of big investments that amounted to,
> basically, nothing. It's analogous to buying water. ;>
I agree completely, Stewart. The point is that it probably is impossible
for MS to kill Linux.
The point that I was trying to make is that, in the unlikely ecvent that
MS had unlimited funds and an acquiescent legal environment, it COULD
marginalize Linux to the point that it became essentially irrelevant to
anyone outside of the hacker/geek/hobbyist/abm community.
Now, you may not think that's such a bad thing, and I won't argue it
with you -- except to say that I do think it would be a bad thing.
> MS also has some very popular OSs. I won't deny that Win'9* is the most
> popular (widely used) OS on the planet. They use marketting and underhanded
> (not to mention illegal) business tactics to push their products. Pre-
> installation, so-called integration, etc..
I agree. Windows' great weakness -- any moron can autorun the install
and have it run on a superstore PC -- is its biggest weakness. It has to
be all things to all people, one-size-fits-all. And that means that it
has to be big, bloated, slow and contain thousands of lines of
potentially contradictory code.
> MS is living proof that you don't need a good product as long as you have
> a good marketting division.
Windows, Office, MSIE and the others are good products for what they
are. They meet the needs of the vast majority of people who want their
computers to be nothing more than high-tech toasters that turn out toast
when you pop in some bread. They don't want to know how it works, and
the don't want to ./configure and make to get Encarta running, and
they're willing to put up with instability and poor performane to get
it.
Like an off-the rack suit, a MS product is designed to fit most people
tolerably, but no one well. But my father always said that you get what
you pay for when you buy off the rack.
The truth is that MS's strength is not its technology, but the fact
that, when you order an Internet connection, your ISP'll send you a CD
with Windows software.
> I, BTW, chose Linux for Linux. The more applications I can get the better,
> but I love the fact that Linux is solid as a rock, and that applications
> will go away if I tell it to (every OS should have a 'kill -9' :> ).
>
> Word? No thanks. I'll stick to WordPerfect.
> Excell? I prefer Lotus 1-2-3, thankyouverymuch.
> PowerPoint? Well, {snicker} what's there to say about it?
Well, you're different. Most people work in environments where their IT
departments or their CIOs long ago decided to standardize on MS
products, and ifg they want to bring work home on the weekend, or pirate
wares from work, they have to have MS products. For most people,
converting between file formats is too much to ask.
I have Windows and MS Office on my laptop [Linux on my desktop and
server] because the university where I work has Office on its Macs and
PCs, and other Windows-only apps that I have to be able to demo on the
overhead. My editors want my copy in Word.
As for powerpoint, what CAN you say? It's no better nor worse than the
presentation part of StarOffice, or Corel Presentations or Lotus
Freelance or whatever... And I've used them all. Sometime you have to
put on a dog-and-pony show. I use Powerpoint because it's there on my
laptop and sometimes I have to send a presentation to a colleague who
wouldn't know what to do with a StarOffice file if it crept up behind
him and bit him in the ass.
> The fact that their spreadsheet program comes with a flight simulator tells
> enough about their product line. The only product of theirs I truly prefer
> over all others is their solitaire game. I installed Win'98 under VMWare
> for about 50/50 my online banking and solitaire.
That's all true.
It's also true that Corel and Sun and Oracle and a whole lot of other
vendors who make products for Linux wouldn't bother if the only people
who used the OS were hackers, power users or abm's. They see that the
market is expanding and that Linux is beginning to appeal to the suits.
They want a piece of that market, so they develop for Linux. IF MS could
marginalize Linux, they wouldn't bother.
To tell you the truth, as much as I enjoy the stability and performance
of Linux, I wouldn't use it if there weren't applications like
StarOffice and WordPerfect for it. I wouldn't be able to. And I wouldn't
both running Windowsa under VMWare, either. What would be the point?
> If I want a server-Linux, I'll stay as far away from MS as possible. I've
> seen what their line of server products can do, and frankly, I'm quite
> unimpressed.
I agree. But no one ever got fired fror buying MS.
> HAHAHAHHA! Sorry, pal, but you're a day late and a dollar short!
>
> Haven't you seen their "Linux Myths" page? They already tried that. Sorry. :>
Of course I have. And a whole lot of people took it seriously. Not in
the Linux community, perhaps, but a few corporate suits who I spoke to
at the time did.
That attack didn't stop Linux because it has momentum -- momentum fueled
by established users, and by a whole range of new users in the
enterprise who want to know what the fuss is about. Linux, on its own
merits, but also on the merits of the software available for it, has
been taking off.
But if MS could kill the momentum by dominating the Linux market, I
think it would be a different story.
> Don't forget SuSE. SuSE is very quickly becomming a major player, especially
> if you were to consider the German market.
I didn't. I said that MS would have to take over Red Hat and SuSE to do
it [which shows how unlikely the scenario is]. However, it would be much
easier for MS to take over SuSE, a privately-held company, than Red Hat,
a publicly traded company.
MF
------------------------------
From: "Pencil Necked Geek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Which modem is good for LINUX
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 20:46:23 -0500
Reply-To: "Pencil Necked Geek" <.>
I have an external Zoom 56K flex modem (with LT chipset). I used to hate
it, but since I flashed it for V.90, it now rocks my world. They have Linux
downloads on their site. I use it in Windows and Linux, but it seems to
work better under Linux, as windows keeps trying to re-install it over and
over again *&$$^!^%!!
Smitty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> fdf wrote:
>
> > I want to buy a new modem run on LINUX
> > which one is support LINUX???
> > Pls advise!!!!
> > Thanks.
>
> I suggest a Actiontec PCI Master modem. This modem utilizes the Lucent
> Venus chipset which emulates an external modem. The model # is
> PCI56012-02. I have found it to be a very reliable and stable product.
> It runs about $85 and you can find out more at http://www.actiontec.com.
>
> Smitty
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim)
Crossposted-To: alt.sys.pc-clone.gateway2000,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Gateway Solo 9300CL and Linux?
Date: 25 Apr 2000 01:46:35 GMT
Has anyone encountered any abnormal difficulties setting up Linux on the
above Gateway notebook model, particularly with the XF86Config setup?
Jim
remove "attack" for email
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Efflandt)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux
Subject: Re: problem changing permissions
Date: 25 Apr 2000 01:50:50 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000 15:35:12 -0500, JH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have a 1 gig scsi on sdc and I want to have full r/w permissions to it as
>another user(not root). I've tried changing the owner and group when I'm
>logged in as root, but it won't let me. It says "Operation not permited".
>
>I am using TurboLinux Workstation 6.0
Maybe you are using the wrong tool. Instead of chmod, maybe you should be
looking at 'man mount' and 'man fstab' first.
--
David Efflandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.de-srv.com/
http://www.autox.chicago.il.us/ http://www.berniesfloral.net/
http://hammer.prohosting.com/~cgi-wiz/ http://cgi-help.virtualave.net/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Efflandt)
Subject: Re: Setting CMOS time/date?
Date: 25 Apr 2000 01:52:24 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 23 Apr 2000 16:19:23 -0500, Ricky Crow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Supposedly, you can do a "clock -w" and it will write the time.
Or on RedHat systems use 'setclock'.
>Stewart Honsberger wrote:
>> sets the date/time under Linux, not the CMOS clock. How does one go about
>> setting the CMOS clock with the values present under Linux?
--
David Efflandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.de-srv.com/
http://www.autox.chicago.il.us/ http://www.berniesfloral.net/
http://hammer.prohosting.com/~cgi-wiz/ http://cgi-help.virtualave.net/
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How Microsoft inhibits competition & innovation
From: Kevin Huber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 24 Apr 2000 21:15:32 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Harold Stevens ** PLEASE SEE SIG **) writes:
> This was all perfectly avoidable. MS *chose* not to, and tough noogies Bill.
In all seriousness now, I believe that the problem is not that
Microsoft is evil. It is that corporations wield an enormous amount
of power since they exist as legal entities with various rights.
Having the government "fix" this Microsoft problem via antitrust
doesn't fix the real problem. It is only a matter of time until the
next evil company emerges. And it will happen again and again. And
there are already many evil powerful companies.
I'm going to sound like a nut now, but I'm going to say it and I
believe it. The power of corporations in the world today is just a
modern form of feudalism, corporate tyranny. Power is concentrated in
the hands of a few powerful entities (given that power through the
law) in order to protect their minority interests at the expense of
interests of the general populace. In particular, democracy is
destroyed by corporate interests who promote their own economic agenda
and financial well-being and then have immunities from the
consequences of their actions due to existing law.
Witness the recent problems with DVDs and the Motion Picture Industry
Association - stopping the distribution of the decoder for DVDs in was
not in the interest of consumers. Region codes are not in the
interest of consumers. This is, however, apparently all fine and
legal so far as I have followed it. What can people do when large
companies form a cartel like this to control the distribution of
media? And then the federal government (another powerful minority
interest) essentially grants legal rights to these interests as if
they were individuals (never mind that they don't die like people and
have enormous influence and since they are immortal have time to amass
huge amounts of wealth). Given the legal status (power) of
corporations, such attacks on democracy are inevitable. And the same
kinds of things are starting to happen with electronic books as with
DVDs.
I don't know what the solution is, and I'm not a lawyer. I prefer to
stick to Java and other technical issues since that is my area of
expertise. But I believe, personally, that antitrust is just a
bandaid on a nasty bleeding wound. I guess we can continue to allow
the federal government to break up interests like Microsoft that go to
extremes. But maybe there is another solution altogether - limiting
corporate power, limiting this dangerous legal status for companies
that seems to inevitably lead to corruption, destruction of democracy,
and concentration of power in the hands of a few.
-Kevin
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hal Burgiss)
Subject: Re: Starting xfs
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 02:31:06 GMT
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000 21:17:40 -0400, David Rolfe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >Then put the following line at the end of the fontpaths in /etc/X11/XF8Config
>> >
>> > FontPath "unix/:-1"
>> >
>>
>> I'd be curious how well TrueType is actually working. Looks like xfs is
>> one place, and X is looking somewhere else for fonts (ie the fontpaths).
>> --
>
>Well ... the true type fonts are showing up in the kde font manager and
>on web pages (atho netscape is not scaling them correctly). My
>understanding of how this cludge works is that by putting the port into
>the font path X knows to go off and talk to that port to find more
>fonts and xfs has its own font path (in /etc/X11/fs/config) which
>includes truetype fonts that xfs now knows how to deal with. And there
>are more complications involved in getting a word processor to
>recognize these fonts. All this is written up in the font howto.
Actually the X server only uses the Fontpath in XF86Config. This should
at least contain the location that xfs is using (additional paths are OK
too). In this case, tcp:7100. xfs has it's own, separate fontpath. The
only way X gets to this is via xfs. You would seem to have xfs using
tcp:7100 and X looking for xfs at a Unix Domain Socket ("unix/:-1").
This should not work correctly. Do you have other Fontpaths in
XF86Config?
--
Hal B
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
------------------------------
From: "jeff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: One partition, multiple mount points?
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 19:50:41 -0700
I want to set up a system with a relatively small root-boot partition, and
put /home, /usr, /opt, and various other things elsewhere. But I don't
necessarily want separate partitions for all of the split-off directories.
I know that I can put, for example, /usr and /opt on a single partition,
mount that partition somwhere (e.g. /mnt/usr-opt) and use symbolic links in
the root directory to point /usr -> /mnt/usr-opt/usr and /opt ->
/mnt/usr-opt/opt.
The question is... is there some reason that I DON'T want to do this? Most
writeups show each directory split off onto its own separate partition. So,
I'm wondering if I'm missing something obvious? Thanks for any insights.
-jeff
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (BrentBoz)
Subject: Re: LILO Woes with Redhat 6.2 (2.2.14 Kernel)
Date: 25 Apr 2000 03:06:39 GMT
Well Guys,
thanks for the help. I went to bugzilla at Red Hat's website. This is a bug
which is due to the fact that the Red Hat "Kitchen Sink [default]" kernel has
Unixware support built into it, and therefore sees the filesystem slices in the
Unixware partition (and treats them like virtual partitions within extended
partitions). This screws up the partition naming order (hdaX). Apparently,
something gets hard-wired at the ol' hda5, because even when you change the
boot partition in lilo.conf (on the boot floppy), the kernel still panics when
it can't mount the root file system (which resided in the logical extended
partition hda5, which became hda11 under the "new" scheme). Amazing that the
Red Hat install program didn't see the UnixWare file system slices.
A very similar problem was seen by another user on Solaris, so I let them
know that this problem rears it's ugly head in Unixware as well (I added on to
the bug report entry-#9184? I think). Our solution has been to downgrade the
other systems to Red hat 6.1 (for which this isn't a problem).
By the way, I did some experimenting today...this is only a problem if you
place a non-Microsoft (but Red Hat 6.2 recognized) OS in front of Linux (i.e.
Linux will not care if it's the first partition). The whole reason we put
Linux on the 4th partition, however, was the fact that with a LILO disk, we
could boot partitions that were beyond the 1023-cylinder limit for "normal"
OS'es.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dances With Crows)
Subject: Re: One partition, multiple mount points?
Date: 24 Apr 2000 23:30:06 EDT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000 19:50:41 -0700, jeff
<<8e314n$5vo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> shouted forth into the ether:
>I want to set up a system with a relatively small root-boot partition, and
>put /home, /usr, /opt, and various other things elsewhere. But I don't
>necessarily want separate partitions for all of the split-off directories.
>I know that I can put, for example, /usr and /opt on a single partition,
>mount that partition somwhere (e.g. /mnt/usr-opt) and use symbolic links in
>the root directory to point /usr -> /mnt/usr-opt/usr and /opt ->
>/mnt/usr-opt/opt.
>
>The question is... is there some reason that I DON'T want to do this?
Well, it's fairly common to have /tmp be a symlink to /var/tmp when you
have /var as a separate partition. Generally, they reccommend that you
split up your install into separate partitions for reasons of security (/
filling up is nasty) and data integrity (if /usr gets fried, /home will
still be OK.) I don't think you will have any problems with the setup you
describe, but ICBW. Good luck.
--
Matt G / Dances With Crows \###| Programmers are playwrights
There is no Darkness in Eternity \##| Computers are lousy actors
But only Light too dim for us to see \#| Lusers are vicious drama critics
(Unless, of course, you're working with NT)\| BOFHen burn down theatres.
------------------------------
From: Matt Friedman <"mwf"@total.net(remove-to-reply)>
Subject: Re: Access Windows files from Linux in the same box
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 23:30:29 -0400
Deja User wrote:
>
> Hi, there:
>
> I'm goint to install Linux in a seperate partition on my Win98 PC.
> Is it possible for me to access files (mostly ACSII source code) in
> the Windows partition from within Linux, without using a second PC in
> the network or using the floppy disk?
Yup... You just MOUNT the Windows partition within Linux. Doing that is
REALLY simple. Make sure you have a directory you can mount TO [I
created one called /win but that's me]... Then, as root, type this in a
terminal window:
# mount -t vfat /dev/hxx /win
What this all means is "mount a volume using the vfat file system on the
partition /dev/hxx [that's the Windows partition, it'll almost CERTAINLY
be the first partition on the first drive, and this /dev/hda1] to the
directory /win."
Just remember that you cannot mount drive-double-spaced partitions. You
can even write the mount command into your fstab file so your Windows
files are always accessible from Linux.
MF
------------------------------
From: James Money <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Setup Linux as a Dial-In PPP server !
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 03:47:59 GMT
see the document at http://www.swcp.com/~jgentry/pers.info
Mr. Gentry did an outstanding job on this document.
Jim
Eric Chow wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Would you please to teach me how to set Linux as a Dial-In PPP Server,
> if you has this experience ?
>
> What should I prepare ?
>
> Would you please to teach me step-by-step ?
>
> Or where can I find some document to do this ????
>
> Best regards,
> Eric
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
