Linux-Misc Digest #924, Volume #25 Mon, 2 Oct 00 16:13:04 EDT
Contents:
can't log into my own console (Tristan White)
Re: Gnome panel annoyances (Kyle Parfrey)
CDROM Mount Question for Red Hat ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
AMD anytime? (eric turbide)
CTRL-ALT-DELETE ("Jos� Luis Guisado")
Re: AMD anytime? (Roberto Alsina)
Re: CTRL-ALT-DELETE (Lew Pitcher)
Re: Your RedHat 7.0 impressions? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: second hard disk ("S. Joel Bernstein")
Re: Partitioning..... ("S. Joel Bernstein")
Re: Implications ("D F")
Re: AMD anytime? (Tijmen Stam)
Passive FTP through Linux Firewall (Paul Dunphy)
Re: win2k and loadlin ("S. Joel Bernstein")
Re: WTF is up with LinuxConf under RH7?!!??! (David M. Cook)
Linux as a mail server for a Win2K network ("S. Joel Bernstein")
Re: Should I jump into Linux? (Tony Lawrence)
How to silence a linux box? (Tobias Schenk)
HELP:Automatic turn off at shutdown (Jean-Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?C=F4t=E9?=)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tristan White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: can't log into my own console
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 14:52:24 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have redhat 6.2 with md5 and shadow passwords.
I recently installed it on a machine and didn't format my old /home
partition. After install everything seemed to be in place, until
I created a user account. I gave the user a home directory from the old
/home partition and recursively changed permissions with chown -R and
chgrp -R
Then I logged out. I had logged in and out a root before with no
trouble.
Now, neither root, nor the user I just created can log in. Went to
single user mode.
I checked /var/log/messages and there was something about pam not being
able to find the password for user [root]. Then there was the attempted
logins.
They look normal in "messages" except that as I've experienced in
runlevel 3, I log in, get the "last login on...." message, and then get
logged out exactly 4 seconds later without ever getting a prompt.
I checked all the login and bash scripts, in short everything to do wiht
the shell, and it looks fine.
I wonder if somehow this PAM got confused when I created the new user,
how to check for it, and how to fix it.
I'm also open to other suggestions.
Tristan
------------------------------
From: Kyle Parfrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Gnome panel annoyances
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 18:56:00 GMT
Thanks.
Kyle
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 17:56:19 GMT, Kyle Parfrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Hello all.
> >A minor irritation: the little buttons on my gnome panel that let you
> >open and close minimized windows have disappeared, now there is just
> >grey space.
> >Know how to get them back? I've been fiddling for a while and can't
> >figure it out, probably something really obvious.
> >
>
> right click
> panel
> add to panel
> applet
> utility
> tasklist
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: CDROM Mount Question for Red Hat
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 18:58:13 GMT
I'm a Linux newbie switching from WinNT to Red Hat 6.2. The Red Hat
installed perfectly from a CDROM that came with the Osborne book. I
created the boot disk from the CD ROM on WinNT and then installed the
Linux 6.2 system.
I can mount floppies, but cannot mont the same (or any other) CD ROM
to get to the RPMs. I get the message "Wrong medium type" when I try
to mount the cdrom.
Any ideas or help will be appreciated.
Thanks.
------------------------------
From: eric turbide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: AMD anytime?
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 15:05:00 +0200
I am a total Linux beginner and i think i will prove that with the
following query...I read in my management information systems manual
taht Linux runs on Intel, Motorola, Digital Alpha, SPARC and Mips
microchips.Why doesn't Linux on AMD-K6 microchips? Is it a technical
incompatibility or a legal matter?
Greatful in advance,
Patrick Turbide
------------------------------
From: "Jos� Luis Guisado" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: CTRL-ALT-DELETE
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 20:49:54 +0200
Hi all,
There is a line in /etc/inittab which traps the CTRL-ALT-DELETE signal
and indicates what to do then. For example, in my system:
# Trap CTRL-ALT-DELETE
ca::ctrlaltdel:/sbin/shutdown -t5 -r now
Here, '-t5' indicates to wait 5 seconds between sending processes the
warning and the kill signal, before rebooting.
The problem is that my system doesn't wait the 5 seconds when I press
CTRL-ALT-DELETE if there is no interactive session started (e.g., when
no one is logged-in into the system).
How can I make the system to wait the x seconds ALWAYS?
Note: The box is a Linux-Red-Hat-5.2
Thanks,
Jose Luis
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: AMD anytime?
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 16:13:07 -0300
El lun, 02 oct 2000, eric turbide escribi�:
>I am a total Linux beginner and i think i will prove that with the
>following query...I read in my management information systems manual
>taht Linux runs on Intel, Motorola, Digital Alpha, SPARC and Mips
>microchips.Why doesn't Linux on AMD-K6 microchips? Is it a technical
>incompatibility or a legal matter?
It's just assumed when it says intel, it means intel compatibles.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lew Pitcher)
Subject: Re: CTRL-ALT-DELETE
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 19:15:43 GMT
On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 20:49:54 +0200, "Jos� Luis Guisado"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>There is a line in /etc/inittab which traps the CTRL-ALT-DELETE signal
>and indicates what to do then. For example, in my system:
>
># Trap CTRL-ALT-DELETE
>ca::ctrlaltdel:/sbin/shutdown -t5 -r now
>
>Here, '-t5' indicates to wait 5 seconds between sending processes the
>warning and the kill signal, before rebooting.
Funny, the man page points out that there's a space between the -t and
the time (i.e. -t 5).
>The problem is that my system doesn't wait the 5 seconds when I press
>CTRL-ALT-DELETE if there is no interactive session started (e.g., when
>no one is logged-in into the system).
>
>How can I make the system to wait the x seconds ALWAYS?
>
>Note: The box is a Linux-Red-Hat-5.2
>
>Thanks,
>Jose Luis
Lew Pitcher
Information Technology Consultant
Toronto Dominion Bank Financial Group
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
(Opinions expressed are my own, not my employer's.)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Your RedHat 7.0 impressions?
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 19:31:52 GMT
David Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Hey all! Anyone done anything with RH7.0 yet? Got a few questions for you,
: but they can all be summed up in the question "Is it worth it to upgrade?"
In most cases, no. 7.1 (soon to be out, I hear) *might* be, but not
7.0. That being said, if you are in a position like I was (I had just put
a brand new linux install on a PC, had not customized it *at all*, and the
next day RH7.0 comes out ... I said "why not?").
: RedHat doesn't say on their webpage what kernel version RH7 uses. Anyone
: know?
2.2.16
: I've heard nasty rumours that RH6.2 had a bug in the installer. Has anyone
: had similar trouble installing/upgrading to RH7?
Yes. I could not get the installer to work. Then I found "linux text",
which uses their more familiar old "text based" (well, not really, but the
old curses-based GUI installer) installer, and that worked just fine.
--
Jeff Gentry [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"You're one of those condescending UNIX users! ...."
"Here's a nickel kid ... get yourself a real computer."
------------------------------
From: "S. Joel Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: second hard disk
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 20:24:28 +0100
Ummm.... this seems pretty simple.
Assuming that the new drive doesn't need to be bootable, and that you are
installing it as a slave to your present hard disk on the first IDE channel:
the drive will be /dev/hdb
the first four partitions will be: /dev/hdb1 to /dev/hdb4
if one of these is an extended partition, the logical drives will be
similarly numbered, starting (i think) at /dev/hdb5
To mount a Fat32 partition, which (in this example) is the first primary
partition,
type:
mkdir /mnt/fat32 'this is where we will mount the partition
mount -t vfat /dev/hdb1 /mnt/fat32 ' mount as type 'vfat;', device
IDE channel 1, device 2, partition 1 at the mountpoint we just created
If you want the partition to be mounted read-only (older kernels may not be
able to write properly to vfat partitions), append "ro" (without quotes) to
the mount command
To unmount this partition, type:
umount /dev/hdb1
If you want this partition permanently mounted, put a suitable entry in
/etc/fstab
BTW, did u read the man page for mount? it is all in there.....
RTFM!!!
Joel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8qsoki$nje$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> hello all
>
> i want to add second hard-disk to my existing redhat linux 6.2 harddisk.
> this harddisk is having NTFS and FAT32 partitions
> How can i add this second harddisk and mount it?
>
>
> thanks in advance
>
> newlinx
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "S. Joel Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Partitioning.....
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 20:17:03 +0100
I see no reason why you should not partition the drive in the usual way - if
it is in one single partition, defrag FULLY, then run fips or (better)
partition magic to split the single partition into two. Don't worry about
the format of the new partition, you're going to delete it in order to
replace it with your linux partitions and swapdrive.
I use RedHat 6.1 and Mandrake 6.2, and both of these distro's come with
fips. Partition Magic comes with a dos version which is (i think) free to
give away (in which case, I'll happily post a copy here), and is no harder
to use than linux fdisk ;o)
If you already have several partitions, move everything off the one you are
going to delete, and use that.
A possible third option is the UMSDOS file system - linux on a fat partition
(although I don't remember if it will support fat32).
Joel
"jeff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 16:54:18 -0500, The Jigsaw Man <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Greetings all. I'm trying to install a Linux on my system, and it seems
> > that the first thing I need to do is to partition my disk. I have 7.5GB,
> > and about 3.5GB free. What I hope to do is make the last 1.5GB or so
> > into a logical partition, and install Linux on it, and only boot to
> > Linux through a boot-disk. Is this possible? How can I partition my
> > drive in this manner without destroying my data, or killing the 32bit
> > FAT?
>
>
> 1. Backup your harddisk. You should not need a backup, but if you don't
do
> it, you probably _will_ need it.
>
> 2. This varies a bit from distribution to distribution, but the install
> process should give you the option to create one or more new partitions
> (without affecting existing partitions), and to indicate which
partition(s)
> Linux should automatically mount.
>
> 3. As part of the install process, you will also be asked where to place
> Lilo, the Linux Loader. Make sure you indicate "Linux partition"
(whatever
> your distribution calls it), and _not_ MBR (Master Boot Record).
>
> 4. Make sure that you create a boot diskette, which should also be an
> intallation option.
>
> Good luck
>
> -jeff
------------------------------
From: "D F" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.software.config-mgmt
Subject: Re: Implications
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 15:34:12 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
<8rak4v$12m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>In article <8raaic$4sh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "D F"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
>> <8ra7qu$ljc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> >
>> >Notation is flexible, allowing equations of the sort:
>> >
>> > H2 + O2 --> H2O
>> > Ref:
>> http://library.thinkquest.org/3659/chmreact/equation.html
>> >
>>
>> Well, that should really be:
>>
>> 2 H2 + O2 ==> 2 H20
>>
>> No?
>>
>
>I never considered it. There is no meaning (from the
chemical point of
>view) to the --> vs. ==>. They are simply arrows in the
notation.
>
>Here is a reference where all of these and other notations
are used. I
>just don't think it is important to what I was trying to
say.
>
>http://www.st-agnes.org/~lstinson/webpages/chemform.htm
>
>Paul Snow
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
It's not the arrow I was pointing out, it was the fact that
your "equation" was unequal, i.e. unbalanced. Note the 2 in
front of the H2...
Dave Fluri North Bay, Ontario Canada
The opinions herein are mine. I do not speak for my employer
unless I expressly indicate otherwise.
------------------------------
From: Tijmen Stam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: AMD anytime?
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 21:51:23 +0200
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
==============8EC5A35AB8E529BAFB919D2F
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> I am a total Linux beginner and i think i will prove that with the
> following query...I read in my management information systems manual
> taht Linux runs on Intel, Motorola, Digital Alpha, SPARC and Mips
> microchips.Why doesn't Linux on AMD-K6 microchips? Is it a technical
> incompatibility or a legal matter?
It' runs on all "intel and 100% compatibles" meaning (i'm not sure of
any older versions, but wit older linux versions, they'll work... I
don't know the names of the newer versions, but they'll work too.)
Intel: 80386, 486, 586 (= Pentium I&II, Celeron), 686 (= Pentium III)
786 (= said to be Pentium IV)
AMD: K5, K6 (all versions) K7 (=athlon), Thunderburd & Spitfire
cyrix (No expirience, but the don't have a coprocessor, so *slow* in
some things...)
I don't know of the transmeta Crusoe, but as it emulates all above
chips, it will work... However, my pc magazine (c't) doesn't say much
about it. I read all about is in the newspaper. (Why do you have the pc
mag then??? ;-)
Tijmen
--
>From Tijmen Stam - "I believe in Linux" - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- The evility of MicroSoft is they use a shiny color installer, ---
--- thus addicting everyone (every men) at first sight. ---
count linux @ counter.li.org reg#178552-54654, Machine#78930 & #78931
==============8EC5A35AB8E529BAFB919D2F
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
name="tijmen.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Tijmen Stam
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename="tijmen.vcf"
begin:vcard
n:Stam;Tijmen
tel;fax:++31 (0)50 5425400
tel;home:++31 (0)50 5415448
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
org:Me, Organized? You've got to be kidding!;Chaos Storage Facility #666
adr:;;Middelberterweg 48;Groningen;Groningen;9723 EW;The Netherlands
version:2.1
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
x-mozilla-cpt:;-6624
fn:Tijmen Stam
end:vcard
==============8EC5A35AB8E529BAFB919D2F==
------------------------------
From: Paul Dunphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Passive FTP through Linux Firewall
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 15:33:20 -0400
I have a Red Hat 6.2 box on which I am using ipchains and masquerading
to run a firewall. I am loading the ip_masq_ftp module to masquerade
FTP, however the only way I can get passive FTP to work through the
firewall (i.e. allowing clients inside the firewall to initiate passive
FTP connections to servers outside the firewall) is by allowing outgoing
connections on all ports above 1024. Is this the way it is supposed to
work, or should the ip_masq_ftp module be helping me out here?
The ipchains HOWTO that I got from the Red Hat site mentions that
ip_masq_ftp makes passive and active ftp "just work", and there is no
mention of opening up any ports above 1024, but for some reason none of
my passive FTP connections will work unless I do this.
If you have any experience with this, I would appreciate hearing from
you.
Thanks,
Paul Dunphy
Systems Administrator
CSCA/Ryerson, Toronto, CANADA
------------------------------
From: "S. Joel Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: win2k and loadlin
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 20:42:50 +0100
I have also just built a Win2K network, and I believe that it supports
VCPI-compliant programs - ie, loadlin *should* be loadable. I am not in a
position to try it, however.
Using the NT Boot Loader to load linux is easy.....expecially if you already
have LILO installed somewhere, and if u use IDE.
(1) Boot into linux, log in, and su to root.
(2) You need to get an image of the linux bootsector (the bit that loads
lilo). Assuming that lilo is installed on the boot sector of /dev/hdb, you
need to:
dd if=/dev/hdb of=bootsect.lnx bs=512 count=1
this creates a file of 512bytes called "bootsect.lnx", containing the
contents of the boot sector of the second IDE hard disk.
(3) copy (use mcopy, its safer) the bootsect.lnx file to the root directory
of your NT boot drive.
(4) edit the nt boot loader to point to the linux bootsector file.
the line to insert to boot.ini should look (something) like this - I'm doing
it from memory
multi(0)disk(1)rdisk(0)partition(0)\bootsect.lnx "Linux"
I'm sure that this is not a complete howto, but I hope it helps you on your
way/jogs other peoples' memories...
Joel
"Joseph LaRosa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8r2qkg$27dc5b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I have win2k as my primary os. I have just installed Mandrake 7.2 beta
and
> I can't get grub to work correctly. I keep on getting an error about the
> image being to big for the bios (my bios supports my 13 gb hard drive just
> fine). I was wondering if loadlin would work for win2k. Also, is there a
> way for win2k's boot.ini to be configured to boot linux. This would make
my
> life a whole lot easier. Thanks a lot!
>
>
------------------------------
From: David M. Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: WTF is up with LinuxConf under RH7?!!??!
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 19:38:42 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
The Archimage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What's up with THAT?!?!
Caused more problems for users than it was worth.
Dave Cook
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "S. Joel Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux as a mail server for a Win2K network
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 20:55:27 +0100
I need to set up an email server for a (predominately) Windows 2000 network.
My boss is too tightfisted to fork out the �2000 for Exchange 2000, and I
wouldn't use that chunk of MICROSHIT anyway.
If I set up a linux box (say using mandrake6.2) how do I set it up to work
as the default mailserver for the network? I am using fully-switched
100-Base-T, and 2mb ADSL.
I want the ISP's mailserver to send any mail addressed to @ourdomain.com to
the local server, and anybody to be able to pick up their mail from this
server with outlook on the win2k boxes. It would be nice to be able to pick
up mail from anywhere on the internet, too... Web interface would be
good.....
Any ideas?
Thanks
Joel
------------------------------
From: Tony Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Should I jump into Linux?
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 15:56:59 -0400
Andrew wrote:
>
> I am by no means a Windows apologist, but...
> It's easy for me not to hate it. I don't dig into
> the nuts and bolts of it, I just use it.
And that's what I mean: how can you use it to any degree and not
come to hate it?
>
> It's easy to access all the software I need,
> it's easy and intuitive to manage the files I create,
> and I can easily get and share information.
>
> I understand there are stability problems, and
> I probably crash a couple of times a week. This is
> annoying. But, everything I need to do always seems
> to be at my fingertips. I never have to go to some
> manual to figure out the correct command to type in at
> a prompt.
Stability is an issue, of course, but that's not what I meant.
Yes, it's childishly easy to do simple things. However, it's
horribly complex or completely impossible to do any more than
that. There are so many things I can do in an instant at the
command line that you either cannot do at all or can do only with
great difficulty. I don't understand how anyone who really uses a
computer can ever stand to run Windows- it's so pathetically
weak.
>
> Now my initial post was a question about the
> advantages of going to Linux. You're reply was a
> question, not an answer. I'd be interested to here your
> view about the advantages. I should also point out, that
> I'm not totally ignorant of Unix. The last two summers
> I've worked at a government lab using SGI High Impact
> workstations. I appreciate the stability, but I was constantly
> asking questions about what commands I needed to do simple
> computer tasks.
The difference is learning to drive a car vs. taking public
transportation. The subways and buses take you where they go,
but only to those places, and only under certain conditions: you
can't tow a trailer with public transportation, you have to
travel on their time schedule, etc. Your involvement is minimal;
you need barely be smart enough to read the most simple signs,
and you need remember almost nothing. Learning to drive,
however, takes effort, requires more involvement and
intelligence, and will probably require much more memorization:
"How do I get to Pittsfield from Boston?" etc.
>
> For me to switch to Linux would mean overcoming
> a learning curve (and a steep one at that). I want to
> know is it worth the cost in time, for me to invest in
> learning all these new commands.
If the subway takes you everywhere you need to go, use the
subway. It's cheaper and far easier.
--
Tony Lawrence ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
SCO/Linux articles, help, book reviews, tests,
job listings and more : http://www.pcunix.com
------------------------------
From: Tobias Schenk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: How to silence a linux box?
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 22:05:47 +0200
Hi,
I like to setup a linux box as internet gateway, voice box etc.
My hardware is a rather old P200-64MB.
Are there ways to silence the machine? Like switching off the hard
disks or so? Power saving is also of interest.
What os-independent methods can be applied ( Dampening the
housing,...)?
Thank you for your help,
Tobias
P.S: Sorry for my poor English
------------------------------
From: Jean-Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?C=F4t=E9?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: HELP:Automatic turn off at shutdown
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 20:07:13 GMT
(I apologize if this questions gets asked frequently, but
I couldn't find any information on this).
Hello,
I upgraded to RH 7 a few days ago. Everything is fine,
except for one thing. My machine used to turn itself off
automatically at the end of the shutdown process. But
now, this nice feature is gone, and I have no idea why.
I admit that's not a big problem, it's just a bit annoying to have
to wait 15 or 20 seconds before manually turning the computer
off. Obviously, my hardware supports automatic turn off.
Is there a way of configurating my system so that I get it back ?
Any help, ideas, links, pointers appreciated.
Thanks,
J-P
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
