Linux-Misc Digest #275, Volume #24 Tue, 25 Apr 00 19:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: cannot open root device 08:32 (Phil Jones)
Re: My LILO tale of woe. (John in SD)
Re: 3D support in Linux (LhD Administrator)
Script won't run anywhere but console ("Dheera Venkatraman")
Re: who's reading my files? (Mevacor)
Re: 3D support in Linux ("Dan")
Re: When is ldconfig run? (Leonard Evens)
Re: When is ldconfig run? (Leonard Evens)
Re: How Microsoft inhibits competition & innovation (Se�n � Donnchadha)
Finding Informatioin about Directories ("Josh Garno")
Re: HOT HD (brian moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Phil Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: cannot open root device 08:32
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 22:49:01 +0100
I'm a good man <"goodman888"@hongkong.com(remove this part)> wrote:
>crc errorVFS: cannot open root device 08:32
>kernel panic VFS: unable to mount root fs on 08:32
>-----------
>these are the error messages i got when installing Redhat 6.1 (i used
>CD-ROM boot)
>
>i've checked some faqs and old news threads but cant find a direct
>solution.
>
>what can be the possible cause??
>
>i tried disabling the 6GB and 20GB. but the errors are still there.
>
>---------------------------------------------
>my computer configuration.
>Celeron 300A w/ 128MB RAM
>IBM 6GB HDD on IDE0 channel 0
>IBM 20GB HDD on IDE0 channel 1
>CD-ROM on IDE1 channel 0
>LS-120 on IDE1 channel 1
>
>IBM 6GB - C: 2GB (with Win98), D:2GB, E:2GB, (all FAT32), F: 140MB
>fat16
>IBM 20GB - G: 2GB fat16 (with Win98) H: 2GB fat 16
> I: 4GB ntfs(with NT4) J: 3GB ntfs K:
>8GB ext2
>i formatted the K drive with parition magic 5.0 b4 installing linux
>
>
>thanks very very much.......
>--
>Regards,
>Fung "http://i.am/goodman888/"
Fung
Device 08:32 is the third Scsi Hard Disk i.e /dev/sdc see in /de=
v.
Partition K: is the 4th partition on the 2nd IDE Hard Disk i.e device=20
03:68 /dev/hdb4. How are you trying to boot Linux i.e fdd etc and have=20
you a rescue disk that you can boot a Linux system from. It looks like=20
your boot image has the incorrect root device set.=20
Phil Jones
------------------------------
From: John in SD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: My LILO tale of woe.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 22:16:51 GMT
ditto to the earlier replies. More information is needed to diagnose
the situation.
'LI' means that the first stage loader gained control ('L'), finished
what it had to do ('I'), and is trying to transfer control to the
second stage loader. The second stage loader will issue another 'L'
when it gets control. Since this did not happen, the second stager
loader is not there.
Without seeing your partition tables, and 'lilo.conf' file, the only
advice I can give is to boot Linux from floppy, and re-run the LILO
boot installer ('lilo').
I would check 'lilo.conf' very carefully for errors.
--John Coffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 15:13:53 -0500, Leonard Evens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Chapter 1.
>>
>> I had one hard disk in my computer. On the hard disk were
>> four partitions. One was Linux native, one was Linux swap,
>> one was Windows, and one was DOS.
>>
>> In those good old days, whenever I powered the machine up,
>> LILO asked me whether I wanted Windows or Linux. If I
>> didn't answer within 5 seconds, LILO booted Windows. If I
>> wanted Linux, I simply said so, and up came Linux.
>>
>> This situation existed for more than a year. It worked very
>> well.
>>
>> Chapter 2.
>>
>> I ran short on disk space. I obtained a second hard drive,
>> which I installed in my machine without incident. Neither
>> DOS nor Windows recognized my new drive, but this didn't
>> bother me because I intended to use it only for Linux.
>>
>> Chapter 3.
>>
>> In order to carry out my intention, I installed Linux on the
>> new drive. I did this using the ordinary Red Hat
>> installation program. Part of that program invokes Disk
>> Druid. I told Disk Druid to make two partitions on the new
>> drive; i.e., one for Linux native, the other for swap. It
>> appears to have worked. So far, so good.
>>
>> Chapter 4.
>>
>> As part of the Red Hat installation program, I had an
>> opportunity to re-install LILO. I did reinstall it, because
>> I knew that things had changed, and that LILO would need to
>> learn about the new situation. The re-installation appeared
>> to be successful. However ...
>>
>> Chapter 5.
>>
>> When next I powered up the machine, LILO did not function in
>> the usual way. Instead of displaying its name on the
>> screen, it displayed only "LI". I looked this up, and it's
>> listed all right, but the explanation makes no sense to me.
>> Most of my experience has been on mainframes, and I do not
>> know all about (or even *much* about) desktop machines. I
>> have a lot to learn.
>>
>> I would like to know (1) what is actually wrong with LILO,
>> and (2) what (if anything) I can do about it. If you know
>> the answer to either of these questions, please send me an
>> email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kindly state the answers in
>> simple terms, because I am very much at sea.
>>
>> Thank you!
>>
>> Yours truly,
>> Fred Theobald
>>
>> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>> Before you buy.
>
>It is hard to know exactly what happened, but one possibility
>is that lilo did not get installed properly. If your
>installation made a boot floppy during the install, you
>may be able to boot from the boot floppy. If so, check
>the /etc/lilo.conf reads correctly and then rerun lilo.
>One important point. You should have put lilo in the
>master boot record of the first disk, not your new disk
>if that is your second disk. If you didn't do that, then
>lilo will still be trying to boot your old system. If
>you have deleted that, then something like what you report
>is possible.
>
>Perhaps you can give us some more information such just
>what is on which disk right now and where you put lilo.
>Then we may be able to help you further.
------------------------------
From: LhD Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: 3D support in Linux
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 22:09:00 GMT
In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0004251225350.14731-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Sandhitsu R Das <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Which chipsets have full 3D support in Linux ?
If you haven't already, check out LhD (http://www.linhardware.com) for
performance and compatibility ratings by other Linux users, as well as
driver info.
--
LhD Administrator
Linux Hardware Database
http://www.linhardware.com
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Dheera Venkatraman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Script won't run anywhere but console
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 22:23:49 GMT
Hi,
I have the following script designed to update my IP address on the
www.yi.org dns server. I put a copy of it in /etc/cron.hourly, however, it
won't run - the IP address doesn't get updated.
'at', /etc/ip-up, /etc/ip-up.local also won't execute it. However, if *I*
run it via telnet or console, it *works*.
I would normally set the permissions for this as 700; but it wouldn't work
even if it was set as 755.
Any suggestions on how to get this working? This is a new problem I am
experiencing after installing RedHat 6.2 (I had 6.0 before).
Thanks,
Dheera Venkatraman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
========== (Copy of script) ==============
#!/bin/bash
user_id="myuserid"
password="mypassword"
ip_addr=`netstat -rn | egrep ^0.0.0.0 | sed -e "s,.* ,,g" | xargs
/sbin/ifconfig | grep "inet.addr" | sed -e "s,.*addr:,," -e "s, .*,,"`
now=`date`
lynx -source -auth=$user_id:$password
http://www.yi.org/bin/dyndns.fcgi?ipaddr=$ip_addr | sed -e "s,^,$now: ," -e
"s,<.*\?>,,g"
========================
------------------------------
From: Mevacor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: who's reading my files?
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 22:30:10 GMT
tail /var/log/secure
tail /var/log/xferlog
etc..
Kai
Bastian wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 10:34:00 +0200, Oliver Mitesser wrote:
> >Is there any possibility to find out, which users try to access my files
> >(in a linux network)? perhaps running a script or C-program in the
> >background...
> >
> >Thanks, Oliver
>
> Perhaps the program lsof might help you. If you have the name of the
> files to be monitored, do a
> lsof |grep -e 'filename'
> all three seconds or so and write it to a logfile.
>
> Bastian
>
>
>
--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/
------------------------------
From: "Dan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: 3D support in Linux
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 08:32:57 +1000
For anyone interested, nVidia has released beta drivers for xfree86-4.0. I
haven't tried them yet, but I ain't expecting much. I've pretty much
resigned to selling my TNT2 and getting a REAL 3D accelerated card - maybe
one of those ATI Radeon 256s. (Actually I just re-compiled xfree86-3.3.6 /
Utah-GLX last night and oh boy - it's a bit CRASHY!)
Dan
Sandhitsu R Das <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Which chipsets have full 3D support in Linux ?
>
> I don't want to buy a board which gives 3D performance in Windows but only
> 2D in Linux.
>
------------------------------
From: Leonard Evens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: When is ldconfig run?
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 17:12:56 -0500
Paul Kimoto wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Leonard Evens wrote:
> > In principle /sbin/ldconfig should be run when booting.
>
> ldconfig(8) updates /etc/ld.so.cache and some symbolic links. These
> usually don't change between the last time the system was working and
> (the next) boot time.
>
> --
> Paul Kimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
That was my conclusion, but the man page for ldconfig suggests
it is run at bootup. Maybe it isn't in RedHat 6.X. Perhaps
since rpm packages can run it when packages are installed,
it was not considered necessary to run it at boot time---or
something like that.
--
Leonard Evens [EMAIL PROTECTED] 847-491-5537
Dept. of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ., Evanston, IL 60208
------------------------------
From: Leonard Evens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: When is ldconfig run?
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 17:13:43 -0500
Bastian wrote:
>
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 14:06:23 -0500, Leonard Evens wrote:
> >In principle /sbin/ldconfig should be run when booting. But
> >I can't find anywhere in any initialization script where it
> >is run. Can anyone enlighten me further?
>
> Try
> grep -e 'ldconfig' $(find /etc/rc.d -type f)
All the files in /etc/rc.d/rcN.d for N = 1,2,2,3,4,5,6 are
symbolic links. I believe it suffices to grep on the files
in rc.d and rc.d/init.d. I did that and didn't find any
ldconfig. But of course it could be run by something
called by one of those scripts.
> If it doesn't find the expression "ldconfig" in any of the startup
> scripts, ldconfig isn't ran at startup. You can create your own
> /etc/rc.d/rc3.d/Sxxldconfig file though.
Or I could put it in rc.local. But I don't want to run it at
boot time particularly if it is not being run by default.
I just want to understand the situation better.
>
> Bastian
--
Leonard Evens [EMAIL PROTECTED] 847-491-5537
Dept. of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ., Evanston, IL 60208
------------------------------
From: Se�n � Donnchadha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: How Microsoft inhibits competition & innovation
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 18:41:37 -0400
On 24 Apr 2000 23:37:47 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>:
>: What's classic is your childish attempt to distort what I said, which was
>: that there are "half a handful of well-known instances". Somehow that
>: turned into "many well-known and commonly experienced examples"?! OK then,
>: I'll give you the same challenge I've given countless others: name at
>: least 5 examples of problems you've experienced that have been traced to
>: unique DLL conflicts. I'm not talking about times you've blindly
>: attributed something to DLL Hell; I want proof.
>
> "Proof" beyond all doubt is often difficult to find in this case,
>
Yes, I'm sure it's much easier to just say "Ah, it must be DLL Hell!
Death to Microsoft!" when you don't have any idea what the problem is.
>
> as
> unlike many other systems the basic tools to locate the problem
> aren't shipped with the system. Somehow I don't even think you
> would argue that Visual C++ needs to be installed on every user's
> machine that has a problem.
>
Neither the Unix toolset nor Visual C++ will help you locate the
problem unless (a) you have the source to everything, and (b) you're a
software developer.
>
> Most of the time, we try to fix the problem as quickly as possible,
> which on Windows systems rarely means actually locating it.
>
That just tells me that you don't even bother trying. And why should
you, when you find it so comforting to just blame it all on Microsoft?
>
> Even MS
> "support" will tell you to simply reinstall, rather then find the
> problem.
>
What the hell do you expect MS tech support to do? They don't have the
details on your configuration, and most of them wouldn't know how to
diagnose the problem anyway (otherwise they wouldn't be in tech
support). BTW, when the Sun workstations in one of my old Unix jobs
started dying horrible deaths in the early days of Solaris 2.x, would
you care to guess what Sun tech support routinely suggested we do?
>:
>: No offense, but I find this extremely hard to believe, as Win98 backs up
>: the registry at boot time and keeps at least five backups around. Perhaps
>: you simply didn't know how to find them?
>
> You're right, I don't. You'd think that when the system fries
> itself and tells me the registry is non-existent, that it might be
> so kind as to point me to the backup? I guess not...
>
You're so right. The Unix panic is much more informative, isn't it?
>
> What's the point of automatically backing up the registry if the
> system has no idea how to find the backups on its own, or at least
> point the user to them? The "manual" that Win98 typically comes
> with now has no mention of it...if it's anywere it's in the online
> "help" docs...which can't be accessed through dos of course...
>
You know something, you're full of it. I just performed a little
experiment on the Win98 spare box in my office. I booted to the DOS
command line and moved the registry files (SYSTEM.DAT and USER.DAT) to
another disk. Upon reboot, Windows immediately jumped to the boot menu
and displayed this additional message: "Warning: Windows has detected
a registry/configuration error. Choose 'Command Prompt Only' and run
SCANREG." I did what it said, and when I ran SCANREG, I got the
following message: "Windows found an error in your system files and
restored a recent backup of the files to fix the problem. Press Enter
to restart your computer." I pressed Enter, the PC rebooted, and
Windows started normally.
>:
>: Also, Win9x has absolutely no file security; Apache could issue a single
>: call and blow the registry away.
>
> Yep. That's a problem.
>
Yep. With Apache.
>:
>: Should have been prevented by the OS?
>
> Yes.
>
Sure, just like Unix prevents root from nuking the system.
>:
>: Not in Win9x, whose architecture was deliberately compromised in favor of
>: legacy compatibility.
>
> I'd call that a fault. Wouldn't you?
>
Of course not. The OS was designed with certain goals in mind, which
it achieves brilliantly. Your problem is with the goals, but you're
pissing on the implementation.
>:
>: It's not like MS doesn't offer an OS that *DOES* protect against this kind
>: of thing.
>
> They do? You're not talking about NT, are you?
>
> Many apps won't run correctly or at all unless the user is an
> Administrator...
>
Sounds like an app problem to me. It's either that or the app is
trying to install a driver or service in order to do some "magic".
>
> My most recent experience with this was trying to
> get the Palm Desktop to work. If run as anyone but an Administrator
> (and the admin who installed it, no less) it "performed an illegal
> operation".
>
> Perhaps Win2k has fixed this, I don't know.
>
Perhaps Palm has fixed this?
>:>
>:> Of course not. However, Unix application installs however, don't
>:> mess with /usr/lib and friends, thus making the "problem"
>:> impossible.
>:
>: Excuse me? Where the hell do you think gcc put its data files?
>
> /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/sparc-sun-solaris2.4/2.7.2.1
> /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i386-unknown-freebsd3.1/2.8.1
>
> ...etc
>
> Doesn't look like /lib or /usr/lib to me.
>
On my last Linux system (Slackware-based), gcc-lib was in /usr/lib.
The Solaris compiler goes into a different place altogether. When you
install a Unix app, you have no idea where it's going to dump any of
its chunks. It was simple enough when there was just the root
directory and /usr, with bin, lib, and etc at each level. Now there's
the root directory, /usr, /usr/local, /usr/share, /var, /opt,
/usr/opt, and God knows what else.
>:
>: How about X11?
>
> /usr/X11R6/lib/X11
>
> And non-core X is in /usr/local/lib/X11
>
> What's your point?
>
My point is that Unix has absolutely no standards for application
installation. Some flavors do it better than others, but the notion
that Unix in general is better than Windows in this respect is totally
ludicrous. It's much, *MUCH* worse. Windows provides file versioning
standards, version-aware file installation APIs, a place to register
installed apps along with their associated uninstallers, and most
recently the Windows Installer (a sophisticated redistributable
installation back end that works across Windows versions). Unix on the
other hand has absolutely *NOTHING*. Sure, some flavors have package
managers, but they're totally useless for installing anything outside
the distribution itself.
>
> If a single particular vender decides to go off and break a
> perfectly good system, sure no one can stop them.
>
And if that single particular vendor is practically synonymous with
Linux in the mind of the general public, then Linux has a big problem.
>:>
>:> Application installs have no business touching anything in
>:> C:/WINDOWS/SYSTEM*, yet almost every single one does.
>:>
>: It is a tremendous exaggeration to say that almost every app touches the
>: system directory. That simply isn't true. Games almost never do, nor does
>: a huge amount of shareware and freeware.
>
> Of course...with no real package management system...it's impossible
> to tell by looking a system who installed what or needs which
> anywere on the system...
>
> This still hadn't been fixed with Win2k, at least not by RC2.
> Perhaps they've fixed it by gold, but I doubt it.
>
See above for my views on package managers. Windows isn't great when
it comes to app installation standards, but Unix is a joke, as it has
no app installation standards whatsoever.
>:
>: If Linux continues its ascent, that won't be true for long. I personally
>: can't wait to hear the Linvocate excuses when the hardware manufacturers
>: start rushing out Linux drivers and stability goes down the toilet.
>
> They already are, however the quality of the code so far, has been
> quite good.
>
The rate of device driver releases for Linux is still glacial, and the
performance lags far behind that of Windows drivers. This indicates
that the hardware vendors writing those drivers haven't really started
competing yet.
>:
>: This is totally untrue. You can easily verify that by using IE on Win9x to
>: access a nonexistent or downed Website and observing that the system
>: remains perfectly responsive as the HTTP request times out.
>
> It depends on how the app is written. That's the problem; It's an
> application level issue that should be a OS layer issue. Try the
> same test with MS's stock telnet and watch as you can't even
> minimize the window...
>
You're either confused or are being deliberately misleading here.
Win9x TELNET uses a blocking socket call to establish the connection,
just like Unix telnet. The problem is that Win9x TELNET is a
singlethreaded app, so its GUI is unresponsive while the call is
blocked. This is an app problem and has nothing to do with the OS. To
prove that, I submit that while Win9x TELNET is blocked and its window
inaccessible, the rest of the system remains perfectly responsive. To
fix the problem, MS could (a) make Win9x TELNET a console app like
Unix telnet (which they did in Win2K), (b) use multithreading, or (c)
make Win9x TELNET use asynchronous sockets.
>:
>: Sorry, but the above would only have killed Win9x if you were running a
>: 16-bit version of Netscape.
>
> 32bit, sorry to disappoint you.
>
To test this claim (and the one below), I just built "void main() {
while (1); }" and ran it on a midrange NT4 box and a slow Win9x box.
Both machines showed 99+% CPU usage. Neither box locked up, became
unresponsive, or even lost mouse smoothness. I welcome anyone wishing
to know the truth to try it for themselves. Whatever it was in
Netscape that hung your Win9x, it wasn't the infinite busy loop.
>
> I'm not sure I'd call NT "proper" multitasking. It's trivial for
> one app to end up in a loop and suck 99.9% of the CPU, without the
> OS ever adjusting priorities and the entire machine quickly moving
> like a slug.
>
If it's so trivial, then you should have no problem producing some
code that does this. Until then, this claim about poor multitasking is
is just another example of unsubstantiated Windows bashing.
>
> Again, perhaps Win2k has fixed this, I haven't tried nore have much
> inclination to.
>
Perhaps this was never a problem to begin with, even on Win9x?
>:
>: Hey, I never said Microsoft was perfect. They are so huge and put out so
>: much stuff that they're bound to screw up here and there. But a record of
>: 3 or 4 bad DLL upgrades over the course of a decade in an OS containing
>: thousands of DLLs isn't that bad if you ask me.
>
> Now there's the understatement of the decade...
>
Not that you have any examples or anything...
>:>
>:> Oh, that's rich. Why should the OS allow any apps to modify the
>:> system directory in the first place, competition or not?
>:
>: Umm, to allow the administrator to install and remove OS components?
>
> Of course, it might be nice to at least *inform* the admin that the
> OS is being changed? If you're lucky, on Windows you'll see
> "Writting C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\SomethingImportant.DLL" flash by...
>
As opposed to rm or cp, which inform the admin... how?
>:
>: Oh, that's rich! Just a minute ago you were claiming that Unix's big
>: advantage was that its apps didn't sh*t all over the file system. Now
>: you're saying that they do, and that this is a *FEATURE*?! LOL!!!
>
> Using usr, local, etc, var, opt, et al as intended is not, "shitting
> all over the file system".
>
Even if you *COULD* get two people to agree on the intended use of all
those directories, they'd still be all over the file system, so using
them would still be exactly what I called it.
>:
>: You must be joking. The Unix directory structure is an unbelievable mess -
>
> Now I'm convinced of it; You're not a Unix user; "10 years of Unix
> programming experience" is at best, a farce.
>
Gee, I was thinking the same about you. Your Unix experience seems to
be limited to some single Linux flavor, and you think they all work
the same way. Think again!
>
> It's not that RedHat hasn't figured it out, they just don't seem to
> care.
>
If it were really as simple and obvious as you say, then they wouldn't
have to care.
>
> They are the MS of the Linux world...may god have pitty on
> them and pitty the fools that follow them.
>
You know, I've now heard Linvocates bashing every distribution there
is for one thing or another. Are there really any good ones out there?
>:
>: Each Unix vendor uses their own directory structure, and there's no rhyme
>: or reason to any of it.
>
> Beyond BSD's /usr/local vs SysV's /opt, everything else is the same
> with nothing but rhyme and reason behind it.
>
Yeah, right. That's why gcc puts its data in /usr/lib, X11R6 puts it
in /usr/X11R6/lib, and bin/file puts it in /etc. If there's anything
behind Unix file system structure, it's chaos and insanity rather than
rhyme and reason.
>
> Unlike Windows, Unix doesn't believe in throwing everything and the
> kitchen sink into one or two directories.
>
No, it sprinkles directories all over the file system, then fills them
pretty much randomly.
>
> -Why are my screen saver
> and desktop background image files in C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM? Fonts?
> DLLs? Applications? Sound files? My closet is more
> organized...and that's frightening...
>
It's far from optimal, but at least once you learn where something is
in Windows, it's going to be in the same place on a different machine.
I wish I could say the same about Unix.
>:
>: That may be true in the current Linux nerd community, but what happens
>: when Linux is used by average Joes and applications have no choice but
>: install themselves automatically a-la Windows apps? What happens when the
>: makers of sh*t like SystemWorks and ZipMagic decide to start messing with
>: Linux?
>
> Good systems have good package management systems. The ports system
> of FreeBSD is a prime example (www.freebsd.org/ports/), so are the
> packages of Debian.
>
How many of these package management systems are actually supported by
ISVs?
>
> The "magic" is controlled and monitored quite well by the better
> systems.
>
Give me a break; these "better systems" have never had to deal with
even a tiny fraction of the commercial pounding that Windows takes.
Give them some time in that environment - with IHVs rushing drivers
out the door every few weeks, ISVs playing tricks with the OS just to
out-whiz-bang the competition, and end users installing and
uninstalling hundreds of nontrivial apps per year - and you'll be
re-evaluating everything you ever said about Microsoft.
>:
>: However, it does show that OS stability need not suffer if said OS has a
>: kernel-mode GUI.
>
> ...unless it's from a vender that is notorious for having screen
> savers run over a weekend and reliably cause a BSOD.
>
Sorry, but I'm going to have to call you on this claim too. Show me
the screen saver that reliably crashes my WinNT or Win2K box. I'll
gladly install it on both machines and let it run for several days.
>:
>: That would be any technology created for commercial gain. The agenda is to
>: damage the competition as well as your wallet.
>
> There is quite a bit of software that competes (OH MY GOD!) on
> quality, functionality, and compatibility, not on how it can
> constantly change its formats and protocols explicitly so nothing
> else can talk to it. From Word .doc formats to SMB, that's one of
> MS's main design decisions.
>
More unsubstantiated anti-Microsoft rhetoric. Show me a single
instance of Microsoft *NEEDLESSLY* changing formats or protocols.
Answer that carefully, because if the change in question makes sense
from any angle other than "so nothing else can talk to it", then I'll
tear your example to bits, or at least show you how other vendors do
exactly the same thing.
------------------------------
From: "Josh Garno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Finding Informatioin about Directories
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 19:02:45 -0700
How do I find out how much space a Directory is taking up on a given file
system?
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Subject: Re: HOT HD
Date: 25 Apr 2000 23:06:24 GMT
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 21:37:26 GMT,
Jerry Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Edward Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That was from an old power supply. It draws 0.4A (12V*0.4A=4.8W), I believe
> > that equal amount of heat is generated from the power supply as well. So 4.8W
> > from the fan and 4.8W from the power supply. The fan is very noisy too, that's
> > the main reason I disconnected it.
>
> Your calculation iw just plain wrong. First, most of the power is converted into
> mechanical motion, some amount is lost to resistance in the motor coils and
> switching circuits, but if it were all converted into heat, the fan would not
> rotate. Second, 4.8W from the power supply does not imply that the power supply
> disipates 4.8 watts. These are switching supplies, IIRC the heat output is
> not just a linear function of the ouput current.
It can't be, or it would be as useless as the non-rotating fan.
The vast majority of power on a modern power supply (even the brute
force kind) is sent to the output pins.
--
Brian Moore | Of course vi is God's editor.
Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker | If He used Emacs, He'd still be waiting
Usenet Vandal | for it to load on the seventh day.
Netscum, Bane of Elves.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
