Linux-Misc Digest #996, Volume #24 Fri, 30 Jun 00 06:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Does Anyone Use GnuCash? ("David ..")
Re: Linux Command. ("David ..")
Re: adjust clock on linux (Villy Kruse)
Re: Need a small C program (Andreas Rottmann)
Re: Security problem ("David ..")
Re: Need clarification: what really is 'MBR' and what is 'BOOT SECTOR'? (Villy
Kruse)
Re: -- VFS: Unable to mount root -- Help! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Need clarification: what really is 'MBR' and what is 'BOOT SECTOR'? (Villy
Kruse)
Re: the REAL scoop on SMP? (Villy Kruse)
Re: Losing time ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: -- VFS: Unable to mount root -- Help! (Eric)
AIDE ("jmoen")
This newsgroup (Rafael)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "David .." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Anyone Use GnuCash?
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 03:02:33 -0500
"Robert L. Cochran Jr." wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Thanks for your help. I really appreciate it.
>
> I downloaded the tarball gnucash-1.4.1.tar.gz while logged in as root.
>
> Then I untarred it. This resulted in every file being restored with the
> owner set to 'Bob' rather than root which thoroughly confuses me. Why
> didn't tar set the ownership and group to root when I untarred? Don't I
> need to be root in order to compile and install the application? Don't
> these files need to be owned by root?
Just use chmod on the directory that they unpacked into.
chmod -R 0.0 /gnucash/
--
Registered with the Linux Counter. http://counter.li.org
ID # 123538
------------------------------
From: "David .." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Command.
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 03:06:51 -0500
"David M. Cook" wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 14:36:21 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Can someone tell me if there is any linux command
> >which is similar to MSDOS Command - DIR /P ???
>
> Note that you can page up in the console and xterm with shift-pageup.
>
> Dave Cook
ls -C /directory/ | more
ls -C /directory/ | less
--
Registered with the Linux Counter. http://counter.li.org
ID # 123538
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse)
Subject: Re: adjust clock on linux
Date: 30 Jun 2000 08:26:13 GMT
On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 19:06:36 -0400, Lily Fu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>The clock on my linux (Red Hat Linux 6.1 Cartman, Kernel 2.2.12-20 on an
>i686)
>is one hour late. I want to adjust the clock to current.
>
>I did read HOWTO and man hwclock, I tried the following, but it didn't
>work:
>
On redhat systems there is a command called "setclock" which will set the
RTC clock to the system clock the right way. This means it will do the
right thing whether you have chosen to run the RTC clock in UTC time or
wall clock time. Of course, you also need to choose the right timezone
settings for your system. If you run "setup" you'll find a menu item
that deals with that.
Villy
------------------------------
From: Andreas Rottmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Need a small C program
Date: 30 Jun 2000 10:24:01 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul D. Boyle) writes:
> mike burrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> : In comp.os.linux.help Gerald J. Puhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : > I am in need of a C program Windows 95/NT4.0 that will simply open
> : > socket and connect to another machine on a port number.
>
> : just a thought: ask in a windows newsgroup?
>
> You must be one of those comp.lang.c jerks who are *always* telling people
> to post to newsgroups where there posts would be considered on topic.
> Sheesh!
>
Maybe he is, but it's certainly a sacrilege to ask a Windoze Question
(tm) in a Linux Newsgroup (or in this many as the original Poster
did)!
Andy
--
Andreas Rottmann | Dru@ICQ | 54523380@ICQ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pfeilgasse 4-6/725 | A-1080 Wien | Austria | Europe
http://www.rotty.org | gpg (GnuPG) 1.0.1 Key: www.rotty.org/dru.asc
Fingerprint | 3E9A C485 49A4 1D17 2EA7 2BA7 22AE C9BF 8173 6279
[one of 78,35% Austrians who didn�t vote for Haider!]
------------------------------
From: "David .." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Security problem
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 03:15:34 -0500
Miguel wrote:
>
> Russ wrote:
> >
> > Take a look at /etc/security/limits.conf. An entry such as
> >
> > * hard rss 5000
> >
> > would limit memory usage to 5M for everyone but root and
> >
>
> I've tried this in /etc/security/limits.conf
>
> * hard rss 80000
>
> but top reported RSS=115M and it kept increasing
>
> what am i doing wrong ??
>
> what should happen to the process when it reaches the max rss ?
>
> Miguel
You have to tell the system to use "limits.conf"
Add a line like this down at the bottom above any optional settings like
this.
vi /etc/pam.d/login
session required /lib/security/pam_limits.so
--
Registered with the Linux Counter. http://counter.li.org
ID # 123538
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse)
Crossposted-To: microsoft.public.windowsnt.misc,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Need clarification: what really is 'MBR' and what is 'BOOT SECTOR'?
Date: 30 Jun 2000 08:47:58 GMT
On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 15:17:42 GMT,
Rod Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Juergen Pfann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Rod Smith wrote:
>>>
>> (snipped a lot of fine and consistent explanation...).
>>> NT does, however, re-write the
>>> MBR when you install it, so it'll wipe out MBR-based boot loaders. Other
>>> boot loaders, such as Linux's LILO, can reside in the MBR (LILO can also
>>> reside in a partition's boot sector).
>>
>> As opposed to most of your explanation, I disagree with the item above.
>> NT (4.0, no experience with W2K), *does* replace a MBR if it's a
>> "standard" DOS or Win95/98 one. BUT it leaves a LILO MBR alone if
>> installed AFTER Linux
>
>Hmmm.... I could have sworn that NT 4.0 wiped out LILO or System
>Commander (whichever I was using at the time) when I last installed it.
>I might be dis-remembering, though, or maybe it just disabled a boot
>loader that wasn't in the MBR, but in the boot sector of another primary
>partition. It's also possible that NT's "don't-touch-the-MBR" detection
>code is imperfect, so it wipes out some versions of LILO but not others.
>
>I do know that Win2K did not touch my System Commander installation when
>I installed Win2K, which surprised me. That's much friendlier behavior
>than I'm used to seeing from Microsoft OS installations.
>
You get very confusing and confliction reports with respect to NT linux
multiboot. The file HOWTO/mini/Linux+NT-Loader describes a somewhat
cumbersome way of making this work, which at some point might have been
the only way to do it. If you check the lilo sources and the comment
on the very first assembly code in the first stage loader you will see
that the magic jump instruction has been change, and that supposedly
in order to make NT systems happy.
I wonder what the real truth is, as I have no NT system to experiment
with. I once tried to install NT and linux in a multiboot using the
same method as I've been using with Win95 and linux multiboot. This
never worked, though.
I also read some complaints that if you wipe out all linux partitions
and install NT then it was "imposible" to get rid of the lilo prompt.
Then other people complain that when they do a win98 upgrade then
the lilo prompt disappears and they can no longer boot linux.
We are still confused, arn't we.
Of course, if we could scritinize the MS code we might be able to figure
what is realy going on.
--
Villy
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: -- VFS: Unable to mount root -- Help!
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 08:44:53 GMT
Thanck'you for the help.
but.....
I have tried to boot from a floppy boot/root but the result is:
- e2fsck -c /dev/hda3
Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/hda3
- e2fsck -b 8193 /dev/hda3
Nothing!
- fdisk -l -u /dev/hda3
/dev/hda3 doesn't contain a valid partition table
- also the mount of /dev/hda3 result impossible!!
and now?!?..
Lotto Alessandro
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Try booting a linux from a floppy and perform an e2fsck on the
> partition.
> You can find a good boot/root combi disc on the slackware site.
>
> And just a thought, I don't see why anyone would want ext2 FS access
> from windows, put all data you want in both OS's on a vfat partition
and
> mount that from linux. (this can ofcourse be your C: drive) (OK if you
> put data in your $HOME, then you might want to able to access that,
but
> I never had any need for it)
>
> Eric
>
> Lotto Alessandro wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > My computer have:
> > - 2G
> > - 32Mb
> > - AMD 166
> > - Win95 (1G)
> > - Linux RedHat 6.1 (1G)
> >
> > My computer has 4 partitions:
> > - /dev/hda1 Win95, FAT32 (O.S. partition)
> > - /dev/hda2 Win95, FAT32
> > - /dev/hda3 Linux Native
> > - /dev/hda4 Linux Swap
> >
> > I have used from win95 the utility "esplore2fs" to view the ext2
> > filesystem (hda3).
> > When I tried to copy a large file (18Mb) from linux in win95 with
> > explore2fs i had a system crash
> > due to insufficient space in /dev/hda1 (explore2fs work very well,
all this
> > is my fault)
> >
> > Then i have used the floppy "rescue" to try to mount /dev/hda3 for
check it,
> > but the mount is impossible!
> >
> > Now, i can boot in Win95 but I CAN'T RECOVER VERY IMPORTANT DATA (my
thesis)
> > IN THE
> > LINUX PARTITION ----- I NEED HELP !
> >
> > *) When i reboot in linux from LILO i have:
> >
> > partition check:
> > hda: hda1 hda2 hda3 hda4
> > RAMDISK: Compressed image found a block 0
> > autodetecting RAID arrays
> > autorun ... autorun DONE
> > VFS: Mounted root (ext2 filesystem)
> > autopdetecting RAID arrays
> > autorun... aurorun DONE
> > Kernel Panic: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on 03:05
> >
> > *) When i rebbot whit the floppy "boot" i have:
> >
> > partition check:
> > hda: hda1 hda2 hda3 hda4
> > autodetecting RAID arrays
> > autorun ... autorun DONE
> > attempt to access beyond end of device
> > 03:05: rw=0, want=2, limit=0
> > dev 03:05 blksize=1024 blocknr=1 sector=2 size=1024 count=1
> > EXT2-fs: unable to read superblock
> > attempt to access beyond end of device
> > 03:05: rw=0, want=33, limit=0
> > dev 03:05 blksize=1024 blocknr=32 sector=64 size=1024 count=1
> > isofs_read_super:bread failed, dev=03:05, iso_blknum=16, block=32
> > Kernel Panic: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on 03:05
> >
> > Lotto Alessandro
> > Venezia (Italy)
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse)
Crossposted-To: microsoft.public.windowsnt.misc,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Need clarification: what really is 'MBR' and what is 'BOOT SECTOR'?
Date: 30 Jun 2000 08:51:10 GMT
On Fri, 30 Jun 2000 00:50:39 GMT, Charlie Root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'll have to experiment most of the stuff I got here, including that 'dd
>if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda bs=512 count=1' if it really whack the NT boot code
>at MBR or just the NT boot sector. It's really nice share experiences about
>multibooting the hackers' way. I must have installed and reinstalled NT 4.0
>and Linux in one Intel machine may be at least 20 times both OS just to
>learn all heck of it.
>
>
It whacks everything including the partition table, so the disk would
appear as never having been used. Remeber that the partition table
lives at the last 66 bytes of the MBR sector which is 512 bytes long.
Villy
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse)
Subject: Re: the REAL scoop on SMP?
Date: 30 Jun 2000 08:59:10 GMT
On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 10:53:32 -0600,
Steve Wolfe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The company I work for is considering an 8-processor Intel machine, and
>we'd like to run Linux on it. But I've seen conflicting information - one
>of my coworkers (that I wish I could get ahold of, but he's in the
>hostpital) showed me some kernel notes that said that SMP above 4 processors
>didn't work, but in the smp.txt in the docs directory, it says that up to 16
>are supported.
>
> So... I suppose that up to 16 *are* supported, it just doesn't work well
>above 4 - is that correct?
>
> If so, what sort of efficiency are we looking at - obviously, an 8-way
>machine won't be twice as efficient as a 4-way, but is there a serious
>performance hit above 4?
>
That would depend on the linux version. The easy global kernel mutex
don't scale very well. The problem would be that the extra processors
spend to much time waiting to get permission to run kernel code. A more
fine grained mutex scheme will fix this problem, and I beleive the 2.2
kernels is much better in that respect than 2.0 kernels.
Villy
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Losing time
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 08:46:32 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Hendrix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Darkener wrote:
> >
> > That was happening to me as well.... I don't remember what fixed it,
if I
> > fixed it or it just went away when I stopped using GNome and started
using
> > BlackBox... ?
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > Greetings
> > >
> > > I am running Red Hat 5.2 on a pentium machine, however in recent
weeks I
> > > have been getting a wierd problem. The machine loses time!
> > >
> > > for example, this morning at 8am I reset the clock to the correct
time,
> > > an hour ago it read a 9:55 am, it in aproximately 12 hours the
clock (as
> > > reported by date) had only elapsed 2 hours.
> > >
> > > I rebooted the machine and checked the date in the BIOS - this is
> > > correct.
> > >
> > > During this period it hasn't been connected to the net or anything
else
> > > to synchronise time to.
> > >
> > > It's turned on 24x7, it runs Seti@Home (and has done for about a
year)
> > > and never used to lose time any suggestions?
> > >
> > > Your help would be appreciated.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Bryan
> > >
> > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > > Before you buy.
>
> Happened to me also....... It's weird, but the problem went away by
> itself..... I just frecking hate it when a problem fixes itself and I
> don't know how or why???*smile*
>
Thanks to everyone who replied. The problem seems to be related to when
Setiathome wants more data - time is OK until then.
I'm going to try the latest version of seti
Regards
Bryan
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: -- VFS: Unable to mount root -- Help!
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 09:20:19 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Thanck'you for the help.
> but.....
> I have tried to boot from a floppy boot/root but the result is:
>
> - e2fsck -c /dev/hda3
> Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/hda3
>
> - e2fsck -b 8193 /dev/hda3
> Nothing!
there are more superblocks, located at (8192*n)+1 try some more
>
> - fdisk -l -u /dev/hda3
> /dev/hda3 doesn't contain a valid partition table
>
try fdisk -l -u /dev/hda
fdisk lists the partition table for the whole
disc, not just one partition
if the partition table somehow got corrupted, get gpart and try to
restore the table again.
> - also the mount of /dev/hda3 result impossible!!
>
> and now?!?..
if all else fails, you can use dd to make a bitwise copy of /dev/hda3
and try to find your thesis from the file you created this way -> this
will be a lot of work!! (use strings to separate the text from the
binary data and start searching. You will lose the make-up most likely,
but at least the text itself may be recoverable this way.
Eric
>
> Lotto Alessandro
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Try booting a linux from a floppy and perform an e2fsck on the
> > partition.
> > You can find a good boot/root combi disc on the slackware site.
> >
> > And just a thought, I don't see why anyone would want ext2 FS access
> > from windows, put all data you want in both OS's on a vfat partition
> and
> > mount that from linux. (this can ofcourse be your C: drive) (OK if you
> > put data in your $HOME, then you might want to able to access that,
> but
> > I never had any need for it)
> >
> > Eric
> >
> > Lotto Alessandro wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > My computer have:
> > > - 2G
> > > - 32Mb
> > > - AMD 166
> > > - Win95 (1G)
> > > - Linux RedHat 6.1 (1G)
> > >
> > > My computer has 4 partitions:
> > > - /dev/hda1 Win95, FAT32 (O.S. partition)
> > > - /dev/hda2 Win95, FAT32
> > > - /dev/hda3 Linux Native
> > > - /dev/hda4 Linux Swap
> > >
> > > I have used from win95 the utility "esplore2fs" to view the ext2
> > > filesystem (hda3).
> > > When I tried to copy a large file (18Mb) from linux in win95 with
> > > explore2fs i had a system crash
> > > due to insufficient space in /dev/hda1 (explore2fs work very well,
> all this
> > > is my fault)
> > >
> > > Then i have used the floppy "rescue" to try to mount /dev/hda3 for
> check it,
> > > but the mount is impossible!
> > >
> > > Now, i can boot in Win95 but I CAN'T RECOVER VERY IMPORTANT DATA (my
> thesis)
> > > IN THE
> > > LINUX PARTITION ----- I NEED HELP !
> > >
> > > *) When i reboot in linux from LILO i have:
> > >
> > > partition check:
> > > hda: hda1 hda2 hda3 hda4
> > > RAMDISK: Compressed image found a block 0
> > > autodetecting RAID arrays
> > > autorun ... autorun DONE
> > > VFS: Mounted root (ext2 filesystem)
> > > autopdetecting RAID arrays
> > > autorun... aurorun DONE
> > > Kernel Panic: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on 03:05
> > >
> > > *) When i rebbot whit the floppy "boot" i have:
> > >
> > > partition check:
> > > hda: hda1 hda2 hda3 hda4
> > > autodetecting RAID arrays
> > > autorun ... autorun DONE
> > > attempt to access beyond end of device
> > > 03:05: rw=0, want=2, limit=0
> > > dev 03:05 blksize=1024 blocknr=1 sector=2 size=1024 count=1
> > > EXT2-fs: unable to read superblock
> > > attempt to access beyond end of device
> > > 03:05: rw=0, want=33, limit=0
> > > dev 03:05 blksize=1024 blocknr=32 sector=64 size=1024 count=1
> > > isofs_read_super:bread failed, dev=03:05, iso_blknum=16, block=32
> > > Kernel Panic: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on 03:05
> > >
> > > Lotto Alessandro
> > > Venezia (Italy)
> >
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "jmoen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.security
Subject: AIDE
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:48:12 +0200
Hi there.
Just wondering if anyone here know how to update the database with AIDE
(Advanced Intrution Detection).
I have read the manual pages but can't find any info about it.
The command itself is not a problem (it's aide -u or --update if you like)
but the database don't update.
I think it's a rather simple solution to this, but i can't seem to figure it
out.
Any help appreciated.
JM
------------------------------
From: Rafael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: This newsgroup
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 12:06:20 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I would like use anather news server to read letters from this group. I
am using news.lu.se (Lund UUniversity Server). But the news are kept
here only for 7 days. Can anybody give me addres to other public news
server where the news are kept longer, but not deja where is www
interface.
Rafael
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
