Linux-Misc Digest #896, Volume #24 Thu, 22 Jun 00 22:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: PPProblem (Gareth)
Re: PPProblem (Gareth)
Re: is a JVM available for Linux? (John Thompson)
Re: The X Server... ("Paul D. Smith")
Re: Source code for TOP (Steven M. Christensen)
Finding load of a remote box ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
How to speed up Netscape under Linux? (alan)
Re: Can't mount cdrom (John)
Re: How to detect a program is being traced (Christopher Browne)
Re: GNU/LINUX at city of Boston Public Library departments (Christopher Browne)
Re: Finding load of a remote box (Prasanth A. Kumar)
Re: searching MS word... (Grant Edwards)
I just got my laptop and I want to install Linux, now what ??? (peter)
Re: I just got my laptop and I want to install Linux, now what ??? (Tony Curtis)
zoom modem (Paul Eisenberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gareth)
Subject: Re: PPProblem
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:49:19 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I believe [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gareth) said on Thu, 22 Jun 2000 08:06:59
GMT, that:
yadayadayada help me yada ....
I got it going :-)
Thanx a lot you guys, *really* appreciated
my ISP did in fact, change it's DNS Nos.
but were reluctant to tell me as they were
"unnecessary (???) now that I've got the
right ones in there everything's fine :-)
(I also connect considerably faster from windows now :-)
how is this done, considering I could connect using
the wrong DNS ?
thanx again...
Keep on Groovin'
gareth
http://www.backstage.co.za/gareth/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gareth)
Subject: Re: PPProblem
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:58:39 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I believe [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh) said on 22 Jun 2000 21:23:58
GMT, that:
>
>]I also tried to surf my own site using just the static IP No.
>]and it worked :-) but as soon as it needed to resolve the name
>]nada-nothing:-( so now I know that my modem is pretty much OK
>]and it's mostly a DNS problem.
>
>Why should any DNS know your name? Your ISP assigns you a temporary IP
>number but not any name, and the name you happen to have given your
>machine is not known to anyone else.
>
Sorry I didn't explain clearly, follow my sig :-)
http://209.204.252.49/gareth
but never mind it's working now,
thanx for all your help, I now know
*much* more about TCP/IP etc. :-)
Keep on Groovin'
gareth
http://www.backstage.co.za/gareth/
------------------------------
From: John Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: is a JVM available for Linux?
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:16:30 -0500
joe shmoe wrote:
> Is there a JVM available for Linux? Is anyone writing Java code for
> Linux?
Several. The Sun/Blackdown JVM and IBM linux JVM are both pretty
good.
>Is there a newsgroup and/or site that covers Java on Linux?
How would Java on linux be significantly different from using
Java on any other platform? Just poke around on the
comp.lang.java.* hierarchy for a while.
--
-John ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
------------------------------
From: "Paul D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: nf.comp.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: The X Server...
Date: 22 Jun 2000 20:59:48 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
%% Hendrix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
h> Okay... So basically, what I am seeing on the screen when I use
h> KDE or GNOME, is just the X server responding to instructions from
h> the X client....
Yes.
h> So really, the computer running the X server could be a stand-alone
h> computer without an x client at all....
Yes. In fact, early on there were a lot of hardware called X terminals,
which were very small systems with some flash or similar storage, a
dollop of memory, a big monitor, a keyboard, and a mouse, and that's it.
There is a protocol these X terminals use to connect to other "big
systems" where your home directory, etc. lived, and the clients ran on
the "big system" and the X terminal had essentially nothing but the
X server process on it.
Then everyone decided that was too slow and they wanted their own
hardware. Now that networks and "big systems" are getting fast enough,
it looks like things might be moving back that way again.
h> And the x client can run from any computer on any given network
h> (without the X server software on that computer), and connect to
h> the computer that is hosting the X server.
Yes. Well, there are some authentication, firewall, etc. concerns, but
barring that, yes.
h> That sounds like the same client/server relationship that I'm used
h> to....
Indeed... but people usually get confused because the "server" is there
in front of them, while the clients are (could be) far away off in the
ether somewhere. This is the opposite of how people typically think of
client/server, where you're the client and the server is off on some big
hardware somewhere.
--
===============================================================================
Paul D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Network Management Development
"Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
===============================================================================
These are my opinions---Nortel Networks takes no responsibility for them.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steven M. Christensen)
Subject: Re: Source code for TOP
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.solaris,comp.os.linux,comp.unix.aix
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 01:11:04 GMT
Yes, it does work on Solaris. See
http://sunfreeware.com
Steve Christensen
In article <8IOO4O$B6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Carl Swanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Does anyone know where I can get the source code for
> the unix program "top"? I know linux has it as source code
> available, but where and under what tree?
>
> Also, what about the solaris, aix, and hp platforms?
> Will the linux code compile on those platforms?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Carl
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Finding load of a remote box
Date: 22 Jun 2000 20:38:37 -0400
I have access to a number of different SGI machines and when I want to run
stuff on one of them its always a good idea to check who else is on and how
much they're doing... so I can find another machine if necessary.
I knew somebody who did something like this, but he's long gone now and I
can't find anything about this. I'd like to avoid having to telnet or
rlogin into each just to check, is there something like finger/ping that just
pokes the machine to see who's on and/or the load/#of processes. Sure, theres
flux with who on and what they're doing, but I'd at least like to start with
a 'fresh' machine.
Thanks,
-John
------------------------------
From: alan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: How to speed up Netscape under Linux?
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 01:30:08 GMT
I would really love to know, how can I (simply) make Netscape/the net run
faster. I am only getting about a third of the speed I can get from
Windows!!
Thanks,
Alan
--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John)
Subject: Re: Can't mount cdrom
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 01:33:25 GMT
Thank you for your reply
I have just got done:
make mrproper
make depmod
make modules
make bzImage
make modules_install
(in that order)
and now I have more unresolve symbols than when I started.
One thing that might be nice is to start with the default settings
from a while ago. Maybe even upgrade, I am currently running
2.2.14-5.0 do you know if the new 2.3 is stable enough for laymen like
myself to use?
On 22 Jun 2000 06:35:45 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Carl Fink) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 01:00:32 -0400 Lonni J. Friedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>You should be starting with "make mrproper". Also, there is no such
>>thing as "make module". THere is "make modules" though.
>
>There's also a vital "make modules_install", IIRC.
>--
>Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Manager, Dueling Modems Computer Forum
><http://dm.net>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: How to detect a program is being traced
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 01:38:10 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when David Steuber would say:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>' Is there any way for a C program to detect whether it's being traced
>' (by tools like strace and gdb) or not? For security, the UNIX/Linux OS
>' should provide a way for a program to turn on and off the capability
>' for other process to trace/debug it. If you know anything about it,
>' please send a email to me, thanks a lot.
>
>Can a fish tell that it is in a bowel and not a pond?
I rather suspect that the fish wouldn't live through the experience of
getting _into_ a bowel, but really don't want to know... :-)
>Actaully, to some extent, programs do know when they are being traced,
>but they won't explain how they know or even let on that they know.
>Why else would certain, hard to track down, bugs disappear when you
>ran the program inside a debugger? The answer is that it knows it is
>being debugged and deliberately thwarts your efforts to debug it.
>
>It is all part of The Conspiracy.
Indeed.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/linux.html>
First Fact About Networks
"Pipes can be made wider, but not shorter"
-- Mark Miller
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: GNU/LINUX at city of Boston Public Library departments
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 01:38:12 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when David Steuber would say:
>"Josh H. Turiel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>' If you suggested StarOffice 5.2 on Linux, or WordPerfect Office, I'd
>' have given this whole discussion a lot more credibility. At least
>' that's a legitimate option for the "typical user".
>
>You make some very good points which I have snipped to save space.
>Any decent newsreader will show the previouse article in a thread.
>
>Some counter points.
>
>Linux is simply a platform that applications run on, just as Windows
>is. Linux just happens to be more stable, and the applications are
>more independent. For office use, all you need to ask is, "are there
>suitable tools for office work?" Depending on that work, the answer
>is yes.
>
>You say Word is easy to automate. That may be your experience, but it
>is not mine. You have to know VBA and the internals of Word quite
>well to automate it. Or perhaps you use the word ``automate'' in a
>different way than I am used to.
Another way of putting it is that automating the generation of bits of
Word documents requires that you be intimate with "Word, The Program,"
via scripting stuff using VBA.
In contrast, the usual way of automating the generation of documents
on other document management systems involves writing software that
manipulates the _DATA_. With Word, this would mean being intimate
with "Word, The Data Format." With the dramatic complexity of that
format, no one would ever consider this any sort of "convenience."
In contrast, with such document preparation systems as TeX, LaTeX,
*roff, SGML, and HTML, it is entirely reasonable to write a program
that writes out material in these respective _Data Formats_, and
possibly even to write a program that parses them and inserts
additional material.
The recent "excitement" over XML comes in much the same vein; XML
provides a data format that is readily parsed and written, and where
there is a metadata system so you can expect to know that a particular
document is "well-formed."
>A vi clone called VIM is available on Windows and maybe even the Mac.
>You can't blame Linux for VI. You must blame AT&T ;-). As for TeX
>and LaTeX, the systems have been ported to both the Windows and Mac
>platforms.
Actually, you should blame Bill Joy, of Sun Microsystems, and at one
time, of University of California at Berkeley, for vi. And TeX and
LaTeX were probably running on Windows before they ran on Linux...
>You said it your self about hammers and nails. The fact is, there are
>even more Office solutions than the commercial ones you mentioned
>above. The KDE project has KOffice which is getting good reviews.
>The GNOME project is working on there office suit. That adds two
>different open source, GPL competitors to the mix.
KOffice isn't released yet, so it's not reasonable to treat it
_vastly_ better than vaporware. They don't appear to have anything
quite comparable to Excel (to parallel the increasingly credible
Gnumeric of GNOME).
Of course, that shouldn't be mentioned without also pointing out that
GNOME doesn't have any _overly_ credible word processing package yet.
AbiWord is no MS Word. (KDE's "klyx" is rather more credible.)
Neither has anything quite comparable to Paradox or Access, either.
>You are right that the content of a document is more important than
>how well it is typeset. But good typesetting is critically important
>for certain applications. Books is the primary example. TeX was
>designed to produce beautiful books. TeX allows you to use any editor
>you please. I prefer XEmacs over vi for obvious reasons. XEmacs if
>fully automatable, with the same caveats as Word. TeX is also not
>just a markup language. It can do computation. This is a very useful
>feature for creating a Table of Contents and an Index. TeX and LaTeX
>style sheets abound for particular uses such as academic journals,
>books, etc. An adept TeXnician can create a style sheet to suit any
>purpose. This is more powerful than the template facility in Word.
>
>Also there exists at least one WYSIWYG editor for TeX documents. If
>you truly believe that WYSIWYG is useful when composing a document,
>then look up Klyx.
>
>Automation under Linux is far, far easier than under Windows. It is
>only recently that Windows has introduced scripting as part of the
>distribution. Linux has had that from day one. You want to generate
>weekly reports from a database? An appropriate script in a cron job
>will do that for you with no manual intervention. This includes
>mailing the final report to the appropriate recipients. This comes
>built in with the typical Linux distribution. No third party
>applications are required as they are when Windows is the shakey
>platform your business sits on.
... And since Unix has been "doing scripting" for nearly 30 years, the
notion of trying to secure scripts against nefarious action is not in
"alpha testing."
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/linux.html>
"The dinosaurs died because they didn't have a space program."
-- Arthur C Clarke
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Finding load of a remote box
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Prasanth A. Kumar)
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 01:44:51 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I have access to a number of different SGI machines and when I want to run
> stuff on one of them its always a good idea to check who else is on and how
> much they're doing... so I can find another machine if necessary.
>
> I knew somebody who did something like this, but he's long gone now and I
> can't find anything about this. I'd like to avoid having to telnet or
> rlogin into each just to check, is there something like finger/ping that just
> pokes the machine to see who's on and/or the load/#of processes. Sure, theres
> flux with who on and what they're doing, but I'd at least like to start with
> a 'fresh' machine.
>
> Thanks,
> -John
You can user the ruptime program (comes with rwho in Redhat Linux) to
check the uptime of other systems in you local network. Each system
needs the ruptime server running though but it should be available on
SGI machines also. Another simpler solution is to add a line to
inetd.conf to run uptime on that system and then you just use a telnet
to that appropriate port.
--
Prasanth Kumar
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Subject: Re: searching MS word...
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 01:47:26 GMT
On 22 Jun 2000 22:45:30 GMT, Bob Tennent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Third, the poster doesn't need perfect conversion: only to
>seach documents. To get at the text in a Word document
>foo.doc, just do strings foo.doc.
You're going to get false positives. strings will find stuff
that has been deleted, stuff that is hidden, and possibly stuff
that MS shoves into the document for god-only-knows-what-reason.
If you only want to search what the user would see if she
opened/printed the document, then you've got to use something
smarter than strings/grep. There are a number of converter
programs (e.g. catdoc and mswordview -- though I think the
latter goes by a different name now) that will parse the file
and produce something that might be more amenable to grepping.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Everybody gets free
at BORSCHT!
visi.com
------------------------------
From: peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.hardware,linux.dev.laptop
Subject: I just got my laptop and I want to install Linux, now what ???
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 13:01:31 -0400
Hello,
I just bought a used compaq presario 1210. It's a p150, with an
upgraded 6 gig hd. I want to install linux and maybe even a 98/linux
dual boot.
Will I have any problems installing linux on this laptop ?
How hard is it to do a dual boot?
peter
------------------------------
From: Tony Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.hardware,linux.dev.laptop
Subject: Re: I just got my laptop and I want to install Linux, now what ???
Date: 22 Jun 2000 21:02:49 -0500
>> On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 13:01:31 -0400,
>> peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hello, I just bought a used compaq presario 1210. It's
> a p150, with an upgraded 6 gig hd. I want to install
> linux and maybe even a 98/linux dual boot.
Have a look at:
http://www.linux.org/hardware/laptop.html
There's at least 1 entry for your machine.
> Will I have any problems installing linux on this laptop
> ?
Nah :-)
> How hard is it to do a dual boot?
You mention win98 above so I'd suggest LILO as the
simplest option. There should be no problems.
Install Windows first in one partition and use the rest
for linux.
hth
t
--
"Trying is the first step towards failure"
Homer Simpson
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Eisenberg)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: zoom modem
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 02:03:47 GMT
Hey, I got Corel Linux a few weeks ago and have been trying to get my
modem to work with it. First I had a US Robotics/3Com Modem which I
assumed to be a WinModem with all the trouble it gave me. Then I put
in a old Zoom Modem which Windows Found as a
Zoom 56K Internal Fax Modem Modem 2812 PNP (COM 3)
Using a Dialup setup in Corel Linux I picked
/dev/ttyS2/ for COM 3
It says
Modem Ready
Then
Sorry, Modem is not responding
What should I do at this point? Sorry if this a simple question, but
hopefully someone will take the time. I really am grateful. Take
Care. Paul
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
