Linux-Misc Digest #926, Volume #25 Mon, 2 Oct 00 21:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Implications (Kaz Kylheku)
Re: kernel recompile needed, but Mandrake has modified the source... ("James T.
Dennis")
Re: partition table corrupt ("Will Heyman")
Re: How to get colors in the shell? ("Dan Jacobson")
Re: WTF is up with LinuxConf under RH7?!!??! ("Rinaldi J. Montessi")
Re: Corrupt Partition Table ("Will Heyman")
CygWin and Win32 (Neil Zanella)
Rewiring my PC for separate Linux and Win disk drives (psc)
CD ROM Mount Problem RedHat 6.2 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Implications ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Help needed with PostgreSQL (Bob Hauck)
Re: ftp login problem ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Portmap not reading hosts.allow and hosts.deny? (The Drag)
Netscape navigator on linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kaz Kylheku)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.software.config-mgmt
Subject: Re: Implications
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 23:07:53 GMT
On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 22:27:23 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[ snip of confused response]
>
>>
>> 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...
>>
>
>As stated in another post, the balanced form is impled by the
>unbalanced equation. The question still remains, is
The unbalanced equation is simply incorrect. If you wrote down the unbalanced
form in a highschool chemistry exam, you would get marks off---unless the
teacher was some moronic crackpot from Usenet. You are obviously wrong, and
just don't want to admit that you have no clue what an equation is, or that
your ideas about computer configuration are not only vague and useless, but
some of them border on deranged.
------------------------------
From: "James T. Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: kernel recompile needed, but Mandrake has modified the source...
Date: 2 Oct 2000 23:28:32 GMT
-ljl- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <bsV3ehsibPZd-pn2-7l0p8sdn9BhF@ASUSTwo>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce LaZerte) wrote:
> ...
>> What to do?
>> Is there another linux distribution out there that only uses standard
>> kernels, equivalent to those found on ftp.kernel.org? Given the
>> monolithic linux kernel and the necessity to recompile it when
>> updating certain device drivers, this would be nice feature.
> I would compile a new kernel using the official source and make the
> present kernel a boot option. It's not uncommon for distributions
> to add interim patch fetched from developers (a work in progress),
> and this is the most likely cause of patching failures.
> I know one person who refuses to use distributed kernels and after
> installation fetches source from 'ftp.kernel.org' to compile and
> install on his systems.
> I have used Linux for over 7 years and never experienced problems
> due to replacing the distributed sources with the official ones.
Most distributions apply some patches to their kernel. This is
not surprising. The "official" kernel is really a starting point
for further refinement and customization. So RH, Mandrake, etc
will patch it (possibly several different ways) to meet their
needs. In particular they may have one kernel compiled a particular
way for the installation floppies or the boot.img (El Torito
virtual floppy image); and they may have both SMP and UP (uniprocessor)
enabled kernels (particularly since SMP and APM --- advanced power
management for laptops and some "green" PCs, are mutually mostly
incompatible).
Then there are special considerations for different target markets.
For example a Linux kernel requires a number of patches to adequately
run as an Oracle DBMS server. Since Red Hat Inc has a strategic
relationship with Oracle (and Oracle had an equity stake in RH Inc)
it stands to reason that RH would include a kernel that is patched
to support Oracle's needs. (No cause for alarm here; it's all
GPL and aboveboard).
To the people who complain about distributors including some
unofficial patches I must ask:
What would you do with all those new users who have
Ultra66 controllers? Alienate them? Hand-hold each
of them? Provide a patched kernel with the requisite
driver!
... Duh!
The only complaints that I have about current process are:
They don't document the configuration!
(Their kernel-source packages should include the
.config files that they started with for each
of the binary kernels that they provided; some
distributions now put a .config file in the
/boot directory along with the kernels)
They don't document the patches very well
(They often include a SRPM which a .spec file
--- but it would make sense to include the
.spec file in the kernel-source "binary" RPM.
RPM systems confuse users with a kernel-source RPM and
a kernel*.SRPM
(I've taught a number of classes aimed at professional
sysadmins, all of whom were experienced with other forms
of UNIX. This is one of the only things about RPM
package management that they tend to find baffling).
They don't provide a "patch kit" package which
offers the separated patches so that the users can
pull down an "official" new kernel tarball, and *easily*
apply the requisite patches.
They are typically quite slow to provide new kernel
packages.
BTW: Debian does patch their kernels. Don't believe me?
apt-get source kernel-source-2.2.13 and read the *.diff.gz
file.
------------------------------
From: "Will Heyman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: partition table corrupt
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 19:32:08 -0400
Svend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To examine if it is a partition table problem, you can do
>
> findpart all +fat fp.txt
>
> and post the content from fp.txt (not as attachment). Findpart is at my
page.
> --
> Svend Olaf
> http://inet.uni2.dk/~svolaf/utilities.htm
I am having a similar problem when I try to install RH6.1
The drive is new. I installed linux first but had trouble
installing W98. I used dos fdisk to repartition and was able
to install W98 but now get partition table corrupt when I
try to install RH6.1
I ran findpart all +fat and fp.txt is below.
Thanks for any help,
Will Heyman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Findpart, version 3.9.
Copyright Svend Olaf Mikkelsen, 2000.
Searches for partitions type 01, 04, 06, 07, 0B, 0C, 0E, 82, 83,
plus Fdisk F6 and Lilo sectors. Information based on bootsectors
is marked B. If the disk is larger than supported by BIOS, the
supported part of the disk is examined. Disks are numbered from 1.
OS: DOS 7.10 WINDOWS 4.10
Disk: 1 Cylinders: 2491 Heads: 255 Sectors: 63 MB: 19540
-PCyl N ID -----Rel -----Num ---MB -Start CHS- --End CHS-- BS CHS
0 - 83 63 48132 23 0 1 1 2 254 63 B0 OK
3 2 05 10249470 144585 70 641 0 1 649 254 63 3 OK
3 - 0B 63 10249407 5004 3 1 1 640 254 63 B OK
641 1 82 63 144522 70 641 1 1 649 254 63 OK
641 2 05 10394055 6008310 2933 650 0 1 1023 254 63 3 OK
650 1 83 63 29575602 14441 650 1 1 2490*254 63 OK OK
0 - 0C 16450560 10249470 5004 1024 0 1 1661 254 63 B OK
=====FAT CHS =Size Cl ==Root =Good =Rep. Maybe ==Bad YYMMDD DataMB
3 1 33 10000 4 2 10000 0 0 0 001001 0
1024 0 33 10000 4 2 10000 0 0 0 001001 229
Partitions according to partition tables on first harddisk:
-PCyl N ID -----Rel -----Num ---MB -Start CHS- --End CHS-- BS CHS
0 1*0C 16450560 10249470 5004 1024* 0 1 1661*254 63 OK OK
0 2 05 48195 39969720 19516 3 0 1 2490*254 63 OK
3 2 05 10249470 144585 70 641 0 1 649 254 63 OK
641 1 82 63 144522 70 641 1 1 649 254 63 OK
641 2 05 10394055 6008310 2933 650 0 1 1023 254 63 OK
650 1 83 63 29575602 14441 650 1 1 2490*254 63 OK OK
------------------------------
From: "Dan Jacobson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: How to get colors in the shell?
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 07:29:30 +0800
"root" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ????? news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Thanks.. that worked.. cool!
Yeah, cool, party on dudes. It's like the good times. But um, hay, how
'bout us old fashioned types that read Kernigan~ & Ritchie's books about good
old shell behaviour and noticed dangers. Ok, it's not a color thing but a
related item in the 'looks good but better ask your parents first' category:
==============================
Hi Geoffrey,
This is a startling find from Dan Jacobson. And this problem still on my
Mandrake 7.1...
Subject: here's an old problem i found on 7.0... but fixing it is probably
not
worth it
Over aliasing of ls found on default Mandrake 7.0 user setup:
$ ls C*
CHECK.dbx* CHECK.dbx.mbx <<<note helpful * to show executable
$ ls C* > n <<<bad place for helpful * here!
$ cp `cat n` /var/tmp
cp: overwrite `/var/tmp/CHECK.dbx.mbx'? <<<could have been a lot worse
$ echo `cat n`
CHECK.dbx CHECK.dbx.mbx CHECK.dbx.mbx
$ alias l ll ls
alias l='ls'
alias ll='ls -l'
alias ls='ls -N -F'
=================================
> > > I noticed that on Redhat 7 they have turned on a option where in the
> > > shell you see different colors for files, symbolic links etc.. how can
I
> > > turn this feature on on a older linux?
> > Assuming you are using bash:
> >
> > alias ls="ls --color"
> >
> > Put that in your .bash_profile or .bashrc if you want to to be permanant.
--
www.geocities.com/jidanni E-mail: restore ".com." ???
Tel:+886-4-5854780; starting in year 2001: +886-4-25854780
------------------------------
From: "Rinaldi J. Montessi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [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 19:51:22 -0400
Jim wrote:
>
> hmm, I be a newbie and got it to work with no problems :P
>
> The Archimage wrote:
>
> > I lost DNS configuration, Apache configuration, Samba (although,
> > granted, I use SWAT), and service management (although that seems to be
> > covered now by ntsysv and xinetd).
> >
> > Why?!?! What the heck happened?!? The DNS config tool was actually
> > really ggod under 6.2! Going back to editing by hand sucks!
> >
> > What's up with THAT?!?!
> >
> > The Linux Archimage
> > Austin, Texas
> >
> > Red Hat Certified Engineer
> > TurboLinux Certified Trainer
> > Certified NetWare Engineer
> > Microsoft Certified Trainer
Anyone really interested can read all about it in the
muc.lists.linux-kernel news group. I wouldn't subscribe unless I had a
very large mail box.
--
Rinaldi]$
"The federal government has taken too much tax money from the people,
too much authority from the states, and too much liberty with the
Constitution." --Ronald Reagan
------------------------------
From: "Will Heyman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Corrupt Partition Table
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 19:53:58 -0400
Svend Olaf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> worte:
> To examine if it is a partition table problem, you can do
>
> findpart all +fat fp.txt
>
> and post the content from fp.txt (not as attachment). Findpart is at my
page.
> --
> Svend Olaf
> http://inet.uni2.dk/~svolaf/utilities.htm
I am having a similar problem when I try to install RH6.1
The drive is new. I installed linux first but had trouble
installing W98. I used dos fdisk to repartition and was able
to install W98 but now get partition table corrupt when I
try to install RH6.1
I ran findpart all +fat and fp.txt is below.
Thanks for any help,
Will Heyman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Findpart, version 3.9.
Copyright Svend Olaf Mikkelsen, 2000.
Searches for partitions type 01, 04, 06, 07, 0B, 0C, 0E, 82, 83,
plus Fdisk F6 and Lilo sectors. Information based on bootsectors
is marked B. If the disk is larger than supported by BIOS, the
supported part of the disk is examined. Disks are numbered from 1.
OS: DOS 7.10 WINDOWS 4.10
Disk: 1 Cylinders: 2491 Heads: 255 Sectors: 63 MB: 19540
-PCyl N ID -----Rel -----Num ---MB -Start CHS- --End CHS-- BS CHS
0 - 83 63 48132 23 0 1 1 2 254 63 B0 OK
3 2 05 10249470 144585 70 641 0 1 649 254 63 3 OK
3 - 0B 63 10249407 5004 3 1 1 640 254 63 B OK
641 1 82 63 144522 70 641 1 1 649 254 63 OK
641 2 05 10394055 6008310 2933 650 0 1 1023 254 63 3 OK
650 1 83 63 29575602 14441 650 1 1 2490*254 63 OK OK
0 - 0C 16450560 10249470 5004 1024 0 1 1661 254 63 B OK
=====FAT CHS =Size Cl ==Root =Good =Rep. Maybe ==Bad YYMMDD DataMB
3 1 33 10000 4 2 10000 0 0 0 001001 0
1024 0 33 10000 4 2 10000 0 0 0 001001 229
Partitions according to partition tables on first harddisk:
-PCyl N ID -----Rel -----Num ---MB -Start CHS- --End CHS-- BS CHS
0 1*0C 16450560 10249470 5004 1024* 0 1 1661*254 63 OK OK
0 2 05 48195 39969720 19516 3 0 1 2490*254 63 OK
3 2 05 10249470 144585 70 641 0 1 649 254 63 OK
641 1 82 63 144522 70 641 1 1 649 254 63 OK
641 2 05 10394055 6008310 2933 650 0 1 1023 254 63 OK
650 1 83 63 29575602 14441 650 1 1 2490*254 63 OK OK
------------------------------
From: Neil Zanella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: CygWin and Win32
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 21:29:59 -0230
Hello,
I have a question about the CygWin Linux emulation environment:
Is it possible to compile programs that use the Win32 API with CygWin?
Thanks,
Neil
------------------------------
From: psc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Rewiring my PC for separate Linux and Win disk drives
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 17:06:19 -0700
Hi,
I'm building up a PC and want to have Linux (probably RH 6.2) and Win2K
on separate hard drives. Since I intentionally want to have each OS on
its own hard drive, as opposed to a dual-booting Linux/Win2K drive, I'm
thinking of making a power wire splitter and switch assembly, so I'll
have an OS selector switch on the front of my PC. I believe on IDE
drives I can leave the signal wire connectors always connected and
rewire the power wires so my switch causes only the drive of my choice
to power up. Has anyone done this, or have any comments?
Thanks,
Paul
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux
Subject: CD ROM Mount Problem RedHat 6.2
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 00:07:44 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.software.config-mgmt
Subject: Re: Implications
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 23:58:51 GMT
> The unbalanced equation is simply incorrect.
> If you wrote down the unbalanced
> form in a highschool chemistry exam,
> you would get marks off---unless the
> teacher was some moronic crackpot from Usenet.
> You are obviously wrong, and
> just don't want to admit that you have no clue
> what an equation is, or that
> your ideas about computer configuration
> are not only vague and useless, but
> some of them border on deranged.
Okay. I am obviously wrong, and have demonstrated that
I have no idea what an equation is.
I am deranged for noticing how often I configure computer systems by
taking a set of installation disks and CDs over to a system, and
feeding them into the machine. I wasn't thinking clearly, so I called
this set of stuff X.
I am also deranged for thinking that this process results in
configuring something that I might think of as a program store on some
computer system (usually its hard drive). I think of this construction
as P.
And I am deranged for thinking that program store P (the hard drive)
defines the execution enviornment on a computer system. Most people
would call the results an operating system, or a set of applications,
or a server, or maybe even a client. In my deranged state, I called it
E.
Buried in the excesses of my deranged thinking, I wrote down something
that looks like this:
X --> P --> E
How amazingly deranged.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.databases,comp.databases
Subject: Re: Help needed with PostgreSQL
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 00:43:48 GMT
On Tue, 03 Oct 2000 04:15:20 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm encountering a problem when inserting a record larger than 8kb into
>my PostgreSQL v7.0.2.
Pages are 8KB, data can't be bigger than a page. Use a blob instead of
inserting directly into the table.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ftp login problem
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 00:35:07 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aashu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> HI there,
>
> if you are trying to login with username= ROOT then ... this problem may
> occurs ...
>
> otherwise check the user's rights you are try to login ...
>
> Regards,
>
> Aashu,
> [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> binoche wrote:
> >
> >
> > can't log on to my machine using ftp: ftp localhost Connected to
> > localhost.localdomain. 220 localhost.localdomain FTP server (Version
> > wu-2.6.0(1) Mon Feb 28 10:30:36 ES Name (localhost:username):
> >
> > .....
> > entered username and pass, but i kept getting the message "login failed".
> > anyone knows what's wrong?
> >
> > --Binoche
> >
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
>
> --
> Posted via CNET Help.com
> http://www.help.com/
>
nope, i'm not trying to login as root, still can't log in.
where do i check and what should i look for? thanks.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Drag)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: Portmap not reading hosts.allow and hosts.deny?
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 00:56:25 GMT
If you want a little better protection...
Install a second nic in the two machines and run NFS on them with
private-class ip addresses (RFC 1918). That way you won't broadcast
the NFS ports over your Interent connection.
On 29 Sep 2000 22:21:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Caradoc-Davies) wrote:
>On Fri, 29 Sep 2000 15:52:22 -0500, Kris Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>However, when I put "portmap: ALL" in the hosts.deny file, and then ran
>>"rpcinfo -p" locally, the list of available RPC programs and ports was
>>displayed.
>
>tcp-wrappers (libwrap) apparently recognises the local host (even when you
>connect to an interface other than localhost) and is permitting the connection.
>Can you try this from another machine? You should get
> "No remote programs registered."
>
>> According to the HOWTO, I should have seen nothing at all,
>>except maybe an error message. Killing and restarting portmap did not help;
>>neither did rebooting the machine.
>
>There's no need to restart the machine or daemon: programs which use
>tcp-wrappers check the hosts.allow and hosts.deny files whenever needed.
>
>As far as securing NFS goes, the protocol was not designed with security in
>mind. I do hope your servers and clients are all behind a firewall which blocks
>all NFS traffic. NFS uses a bunch of tcp and udp ports, and is no doubt
>vulnerable to numerous network attacks. Securing portmapper only deprives an
>attacker of information: nothing stops them from guessing the ports on which
>are your nfsd, statd, mountd, lockd, and so on. NFS works quite well, but don't
>be under any illusion as to its security in the absence of a firewall.
>
>--
>Ben Caradoc-Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Netscape navigator on linux
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 01:11:20 GMT
Anyone know where I can get information on installing the Netscape
Browser on a Redhat 6.1 system with x windows. I can't find
any useful information anywere.
Thanks in advance,
jerbear
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
