Linux-Misc Digest #73, Volume #26 Wed, 18 Oct 00 14:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Which Linux distro most 'generic' *nix ? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
HFS and loopback device (Rune Elvemo)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Joseph Dalton)
Re: Need Sound Advice, please. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Which Linux distro most 'generic' *nix ? (John)
RedHat7.0 installation failed ("Lucas")
Re: Which Linux distro most 'generic' *nix ? (John Hasler)
Re: Linux Backup ("Andrew E. Schulman")
Re: Netscape weirdness et al [was: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?]
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: fidonet<->newsgroup gating ("Dave Emory")
HACKED ? All logins fail ("jdewitt")
Re: Linux Backup ("Chris Knapp")
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (2:1)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (2:1)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Brian Moore)
lilo and minimize linux ("Hung P. Tran")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: Which Linux distro most 'generic' *nix ?
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 16:01:02 GMT
You might consider buying a SparcStation from E-Bay. Normal prices for
them are under $100. Then install Solaris 7 or something like that on
it.
I am no expert on Unix nor linux but I've been using RH and Mandrake
for a while. And I am in the process of also buying a Sparc and
putting Solaris on it for learning purposes. 8-)
-Ryan J. Geyer-
In article <WI4H5.21775$tL4.262249@zonnet-reader-1>,
"J.H.Delaney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi there.
>
> Since a few months I have to work with a commercial *nix version at
work, so
> it seemed like a good idea to install linux at my system at home,
just as a
> learning experience. But after having tried out a few distro's, namely
> RedHat and SuSe, it seems to me like every linux distro is trying
very hard
> to set itself apart from every other distro by doing almost
everything there
> own way and including a lot of distro specific add-ons, and including
a lot
> of stuff that is not commonly found on commercial unices.
>
> It would help me learn *nix in general more quickly if, for example,
I dont
> have to learn two different ways of how the init.d directories are
layed
> out, or keep remembering (forgetting) that Linux does 'adduser', but
most
> commercial *nixes do 'useradd'.
>
> So I was wondering which distro comes closest to a generic commercial
*nix ?
>
> Any and all suggestions are more than welcome.
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 16:11:26 -0000
On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 15:51:52 +0000, Harry Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>2:1 wrote:
>>
>> Harry Lewis wrote:
>> >
>> > Grant Edwards wrote:
>> > >
>> > > In article <8seufm$c7d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, MH wrote:
[deletia]
>> The point about latex is that it does the typesetting for you, not the
>> other way round (although you can force it to do what you want).
>>
>> I as a user prefer not to have to worry about typesetting, so I use
>> LaTeX/TeX. I also prefer the much higher quality output.
>>
>> So your right, not everything is a typesetting problem, which is why the
>> task of seting type (what must be done in order to print the thing in
>> any system) is best left to a computer program.
>>
[deletia]
>I agree with what you say, but my point is that, these days, using a
>computer for word processing is all about content management. A good
>word processor will provide you with better facilities for this than a
>program that evolved from a typesetting tool.
Actually, that sounds backwards. Better content management should
be achieved by tools that segregate content from formatting. Tools
like Latex do this more cleanly and produce more easily parsable
output.
--
core error - bus dumped
The reason they're called wisdom teeth is that the experience makes you wise.
A sine curve goes off to infinity, or at least the end of the blackboard.
-- Prof. Steiner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rune Elvemo)
Subject: HFS and loopback device
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:20:56 +0200
A couple of days ago I downloaded the cd image of LinuxPPC 2000..
This cd image is a *raw* HFS image..
Anyway... I'm supposed to burn this one out to a friend of mine...
and he is using an amiga PPC box, which means that he also would
need some APUS specific stuff (ramdisk++).. so I can't just
burn out the image as-is..
So the idea was to mount this HFS image using the loopback device..
then copy everything to my harddrive.. then copy the APUS related
stuff into the same dir, and burn it all out..
however, mounting this image did NOT work at all..
I have compiled in support for HFS and Macintosh partition table
in my kernel.... the kernel I'm using right now is 2.4-test9
hopefully there's someone out there who knows what I'm doing wrong
here.....
THANKS!
--
---
Rune Elvemo --- Octagon / Digital Minds
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.c2i.net/elvemo
------------------------------
From: Joseph Dalton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: 18 Oct 2000 12:33:45 -0400
Harry Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
...
>
> I agree with what you say, but my point is that, these days, using a
> computer for word processing is all about content management. A good
> word processor will provide you with better facilities for this than a
> program that evolved from a typesetting tool.
>
> Harry
I disagree. a so-called "good" word processor may give that appearance
but the reality can be vastly different. Let me quote Neal Stephenson
from "In the Beginning was the Command Line":
<quote>
Sometime in the mid-1980's I attempted to open one of my old,
circa-1985 Word documents using the version of Word then current: 6.0
It didn't work. Word 6.0 did not recognize a document created by an
earlier version of itself. By opening it as a text file, I was able to
recover the sequences of letters that made up the text of the
document. My words were still there. But the formatting had been run
through a log chipper--the words I'd written were interrupted by
spates of empty rectangular boxes and gibberish.
Now, in the context of a business (the chief market for Word) this
sort of thing is only an annoyance--one of the routine hassles that go
along with using computers. It's easy to buy little file converter
programs that will take care of this problem. But if you are a writer
whose career is words, whose professional identity is a corpus of
written documents, this kind of thing is extremely disquieting.
...
</quote>
Most companies producing word processors do not have the pristine
condition of your content at heart, but rather continual churn to
the next version of the software. As can be seen from the above
quote this can really play hell with your content management.
Furthermore, features of LaTeX, or even SGML+LaTeX, can offer
features, in combination with other tools (CVS, some DB) that
can manage content as well, or even better than most word
processors.
--
-- Joe Dalton
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Need Sound Advice, please.
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 16:27:03 GMT
In article <EXiH5.1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin McCormick) wrote:
>
> I have been working to set up sound on a Dell Dimension 266-MHZ
> Pentium2 with Yamaha OPL3-SA2 chip set.
>
> The Linux sound HOWTO has some crude tests that one can try to
> play and record sound using cat and /dev/audio or /dev/dsp. They
> almost work perfectly except for the following nasty little problem:
>
> The sample rate seems to be locked solidly on 8 KHZ...
By design. Read the Sound-Playing-HOWTO. OPL3 is a MIDI chip -
what is the *sound* chip?
If you want a different sample rate you must #include
<linux/soundcard.h> and then invoke ioctl(fd, SNDCTL_DSP_SPEED,
&sample_rate). Which all sound playing programs do.
> ...I can
> cat a .wav file in to /dev/dsp and it sounds clear as a bell except
> that it was recorded at the original .wav sample rate of about 11.25
> KHZ so it sounds like a 45-RPM phonograph record being plaid back at
> 33-and-1/3. In other words, the speed is about 2/3 of what it should
> be although everything else about it sounds fine.
>
> I first thought this was due to not having a proper .wav
> player.
It is. Try one.
> ...I think I may have found one possible problem. When I
> configured the kernel, I told it about the Yamaha sound card as that
> is one of the ones that is supported. The dmesg output is happy with
> that and says it passed initialization. Dmesg also identifies it as a
> Microsoft Sound system or MSS. Originally, I answered no to the MSS
> in the kernel config script so that may be why I can't seem to change
> the sample rate. Am I right?
No. If the sound hardware was wrong the dmesg output would reflect
this. If the IRQ or DMA channels are wrong you will get errors
(try dd if=/dev/dsp of=/dev/null and let it cook for a while).
Regardless of who made the card, most conform to one of two
hardware interfaces: SoundBlaster or MSS/WSS. Many 3rd party
implementations (e.g. CMI8330) detect as SoundBlaster/MSS/
whatever, even though they're not. But that's what they look like
to the software.
> What does actually control the timer that controls the sample
> rate?
The sound card hardware. Accessed through ioctl().
> Some sound documentation mentions /dev/audio while others
> mention /dev/dsp. It seems that /dev/dsp is raw PCM while /dev/audio
> is digital audio, all right, but expecting one of the piece-wise
> logarithmic data streams such as MU-law or A-law encoding. If you
> feed WAV or data captured from /dev/dsp in to /dev/audio, the sound is
> atrociously distorted and still at the 8KHZ sample rate.
/dev/dsp is linear samples.
/dev/audio is mu-law audio. Try playing a Sun .au audio file on it.
> I tried /dev/dsp1 and got an error saying that the operation
> was not supported.
>
> Are all these UNIX audio devices standard? This is Debian
> Linux. Would a Red Hat system have the same-named devices with the
> same functions?
They are functions of the device driver. With the same device
driver you get the same functions.
> The HOWTO's are excellent, but I am interested eventually in
> trying to write some audio applications, myself.
>
> Finally, on the sample rate, Is this rate a large number that
> is written to some programmable counter somewhere? Is it essentially
> continuously variable so that I could adjust for speed errors in
> recordings that have them?
> (snip)
No. A very few sound interfaces provided such capability, but
all modern ones are quantized - hence 8000, 16000, 24000, 32000,
48000, 11025, 22050, 44100, etc. These are all sub-multiples
of the crystal reference oscillator on the sound card. You
will not that each sequence ends with a familiar sample rate
(48000 and 44100). This is not coincidence.
The sound API is not all that well documented. I've found the
source code for sound recording and playing programs to be the
best reference - have a look at wavrec/wavplay, for example.
I used the source to confirm the ioctl() call I mentioned earlier
in ths post, for example.
Laura Halliday VE7LDH "Que les nuages soient notre
Grid: CN89mg pied a terre..." - Hospital/Shafte
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.unix.admin,comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.aix
Subject: Re: Which Linux distro most 'generic' *nix ?
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 16:40:11 GMT
My suggestion - don't sweat over it. Pick a U*IX, any U*IX, and
learn it. Since you already have RedHat and SuSe distributions
of Linux, pick one of those. Install it. Configure it so that you
can 1)send and receive mail 2) read news 3) dial-on-demand,
if you don't have a full-time Internet connection. Installation is
more different than anything else, but you don't do that very often.
Each will be different - useradd and adduser are just the beginning,
there are also more, like inside sam and smit. AIX wants you to
say "shutdown -Fh" instead of "shutdown -fh now" like most others.
Inside they are all (much) the same. Once you know about init.d's,
they move a little and are structured a little differently, but all
work about the same. You are worried about being a Doctor for
Africans and English and Chinese. Yes, they are different in
some tiny ways but the things that are the same are SO MUCH
larger that the little differences almost don't matter. Learn to be
a PEOPLE Doctor and don't worry too much.
It is a LOT different from being a doctor for a pig (NT) or a dog
(Windoze 95,98,me) or a giant lumbering ugly toad (w2k) or a
magic-based griffin (Netware). Enjoy your good fortune!
On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 00:50:52 +0200, "J.H.Delaney"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
!Hi there.
!
!Since a few months I have to work with a commercial *nix version at
work, so
!it seemed like a good idea to install linux at my system at home,
just as a
!learning experience. But after having tried out a few distro's,
namely
!RedHat and SuSe, it seems to me like every linux distro is trying
very hard
!to set itself apart from every other distro by doing almost
everything there
!own way and including a lot of distro specific add-ons, and including
a lot
!of stuff that is not commonly found on commercial unices.
!
!It would help me learn *nix in general more quickly if, for example,
I dont
!have to learn two different ways of how the init.d directories are
layed
!out, or keep remembering (forgetting) that Linux does 'adduser', but
most
!commercial *nixes do 'useradd'.
!
!So I was wondering which distro comes closest to a generic commercial
*nix ?
!
!Any and all suggestions are more than welcome.
Fix my email address by removing "no" words and the "com.ercial"
. Don't kill Clinton or spy encrypted h-bombs or trust the NSA
or weed the Columbian plot for bricks of dollars.
------------------------------
From: "Lucas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RedHat7.0 installation failed
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 00:41:21 +0800
Hi
I just tried to install RedHat7.0, just a while after pressing
enter from start, error messge says:
========================================
Running anaconda - may take some time to load...
.................
.................
You may try safety reboot.
Anybody know what happened to me?
thanks very very much
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: Which Linux distro most 'generic' *nix ?
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 15:33:35 GMT
J.H.Delaney writes:
> So I was wondering which distro comes closest to a generic commercial
> *nix ?
There is no generic commercial Unix. Commercial Unices differ more than
Linux distributions do.
Install Debian and FreeBSD and familiarize yourself with both and you will
be better prepared to deal with a variety of Unices then someone who knows
only Solaris.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: "Andrew E. Schulman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Backup
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:57:01 -0400
> I use a Seagate TapeStor 8000 SCSI with arkeia backup software and it
> works GREAT!!! It uses a 4GB/8GB tape depending on compression.
> There is a free version of arkeia available for personal use.
IMHO, Arkeia is overkill for a stand-alone PC. A simple shell script with
tar does the trick, and has the advantage of easier recovery in case of
massive disk failure.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Netscape weirdness et al [was: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for
Linux?]
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 17:04:48 +0100
Jean-David Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> did eloquently scribble:
> All very well, but which mailbox? The one at my ISP that I use most of the
> time, or the one at /var/spool/mail/jdbeyer? Even the bash shell can look
> at the /var/spool... one, but I would need something fancy to look at the
> more important one, the one at my ISP.
For that, you could run fetchmail in daemon mode. It polls the POP server at
your ISP periodically and downloads whats there.
Tin, the news reader flags new mail in the top corner of the screen.
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |
| in | suck is probably the day they start making |
| Computer science | vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge |
==============================================================================
------------------------------
From: "Dave Emory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: fidonet<->newsgroup gating
Date: Wednesday, 18 Oct 2000 10:02:55 -800
On Wednesday October 18 2000, Pete Zaitcev wrote to All:
>> Does anyone know of Linux software that facilitates gating newsgroup
>> articles to and from fidonet (*.pkt)?
>>
PZ> ifmail by Eugene Crosser (it gates fido7.* hierarchy).
Thanks! I'll go hunting. TTYL -=- Dave
------------------------------
Reply-To: "jdewitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "jdewitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: HACKED ? All logins fail
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 10:10:43 -0700
login: root
Password: *********
Login incorrect
Seems that after Friday the 13th nobody can login to the machine. Every
user on the system gets the same message (Login incorrect), even root at the
secure tty. I can get a bash# prompt in
single user mode to make changes, but I don't know what to change, everthing
I have checked seems fine. Resetting the passwords using passwd or adding a
new user in the root group doesn't work. I have checked /etc/pam.d/login
against a working machine with the same version and they are identical.
/etc/passwd and /etc/shadow contain the proper entries, and the accounts do
not appear to be expired. How can I fix this?
Can anyone help with suggestions.
RH 6.2 kernel v2.2.24-50
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Chris Knapp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Backup
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 17:35:00 GMT
Thnaks for the feedback. I'll look deeper.
Chris
"David ...." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chris Knapp wrote:
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > Can anyone reccomend a tape or other mass storage system that will work
well
> > under Linux? I don't want to use a CDR or anything like that, but a
cheap,
> > 1-10GB tape unit is more what I'm looking for. Other than enterprise
level
> > stuff, do they even make anything for Linux?
> >
> > I want to use this on my local network here at home (goofy sounding,
huh?),
> > and I have a lot of critical stuff I back up to my Linux box from my
win2000
> > machine.
>
> I use a Seagate TapeStor 8000 SCSI with arkeia backup software and it
> works GREAT!!! It uses a 4GB/8GB tape depending on compression.
> There is a free version of arkeia available for personal use.
>
> www.arkeia.com
>
> --
> Confucius say: He who play in root, eventually kill tree.
> Registered with the Linux Counter. http://counter.li.org
> ID # 123538
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 20:33:44 +0100
Matthias Warkus wrote:
>
> It was the Tue, 17 Oct 2000 21:26:40 +0100...
> ...and [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You've misunderstood latex. LaTeX allows you to write a document without
> > worrying about typesetting. You just say, "this is a new section",
> > "emphasize this", etc etc. LaTeX typesets for you. With word, you have
> > to do the typesetting yourself, such as 2 spaces after a full stop,
> > underlining or emboldening titles, and section numbering by hand.
> >
> > The point about latex is that it does the typesetting for you, not the
> > other way round (although you can force it to do what you want).
>
> Actually, writing LaTeX code is a lot like typing a manuscript with
> typesetting directives for submission to an old-fashioned print shop.
>
> The LaTeX macro package is the funny old guy working at the Monotype
> keypunch, and TeX is the other guy who does the layout with repro
> film, wax paper and a razor. :)
Yep. The point is, you give directives, but with most WPs, you have to
do the typesetting as well.
> For documents which are basically just a stream of text with
> subdivisions, markup and floating elements, LaTeX is much more
> advanced and much better suited than any other word processing or DTP
> software I know.
Many, many documents are basically streams of text. DTP is not really
suited at all to that, and WPs, although it is their field, aren't that
good.
> Documents which are not stream-oriented but instead
> take the form of a plane inhabited by linked frames are hard to handle
> with LaTeX, that kind of stuff is the job of a DTP program.
Or multiple, unrelated frames on the same page (like a newspaper). Not
really LaTxX's field. I've seen a presentation wrapper for latex, though
and it does produce very nice looking slides (GIFs, I think) rendered in
a web browser. You can also insert links, animations, audio etc etc.
I've been meaning to try it.
> Classic word processing is out as it is hardly more than typing with a
> huge, overfunctional typewriter. Of course, all the "friendly" LaTeX
> front ends we've got are clumsy (don't get me started on LyX, a
> valiant effort, but not good enough for someone who's used to using
> all of LaTeX's power),
LyX (I've just been looking at it) is not clumsy by a WPs standard. I
think it's very reasonable, especially if you're used to a WP.
Personally, I prefer vi (but my brother swears by pico :-) as the
editor.
I don't think WPs look superficially better than LyX. But I don't really
use either.
> which makes classic WPs look better
> superficially. But the paradigm that any productive editing action
> will immediately insert hard elements into the document which will
> remain unchanged up to the printout is obsolete.
I don't really like the general WP paradigm. I think the reason that I
really appreciate LaTeX is that I once wrote a primitive typesetting
language for the BBC micro computer that used an old Star printer's
functions to typeset. It was esentially a stream with markup codes in
it. I used it for 2 A-Level projects (about 3 years ago) and it gave
better resultes than a WP coming out of that printer. It was completely
controllable (since I wrote it from scratch) and, of course, didn't
crash since it used a very stable editor.
> You'll notice that modern "word processors" are all moving towards
> becoming DTP programs. MS Word, for example, is a monstrosity which is
> very hard to qualify.
The idea of using a program for writing streamed documents for something
like DTP in absurd. I suppose you could make a TeX based DTP package,
where TeX typesets the text and you put the resule in EPS files, and
your program Places the EPS images on the page.
> mawa
> --
> Wachturmverk�ufer!
> Weichborstenzahnpfleger!
> Weintraubenentkerner!
> Witzeaufschreiber!
What does that mean?
-Ed
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 20:36:38 +0100
> I agree with what you say, but my point is that, these days, using a
> computer for word processing is all about content management. A good
> word processor will provide you with better facilities for this than a
> program that evolved from a typesetting tool.
>
> Harry
TeX was never just a typesetting tool. It was designed to allow high
level, content orientated languages (it says so in the TeX Book).
I haven't seen a word processor that gives the power and output quality
of TeX. They are still too orientated to letting the user, not the
program do the typesetting.
There are very good content management facilities in LaTeX.
-Ed
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian Moore)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: 18 Oct 2000 14:07:53 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
....
>
>
>TeX was never just a typesetting tool. It was designed to allow high
>level, content orientated languages (it says so in the TeX Book).
>
>I haven't seen a word processor that gives the power and output quality
>of TeX. They are still too orientated to letting the user, not the
>program do the typesetting.
>
>There are very good content management facilities in LaTeX.
>
>-Ed
>
>
>
On the other hand, if you are using LaTeX, and for whatever reason
need to make just a small change in the appearance of
the document after the typesetting has occurred, it can be
infuriating. After digging into Lamport to find the relevant
part, it might tell you something like "you shouldn't want to
do that."
--
Brian G. Moore, School of Science, Penn State Erie--The Behrend College
[EMAIL PROTECTED] , (814)-898-6334
------------------------------
From: "Hung P. Tran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: lilo and minimize linux
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 17:55:24 GMT
I am trying to fit linux onto a 60 MB harddrive. Obviously, the
drive is too small for a standard linux installation.
My first question is how to install lilo on the drive and make it
boot linux. I tried to partition the drive using: fdisk /dev/hdc (the
drive is connected as secondary IDE master). I just assign
a single partition #1 (hdc1). Then I make the file system using mkfs, and
then mount the harddrive as /mnt/d. Then I copy a few file from
my original RedHat 6.1 over. Here is an output from "ls -l /mnt/d"
total 927
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4568 Oct 17 14:33 boot.b
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 285018 Oct 17 16:19 initrd.img
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 250 Oct 17 17:17 lilo.conf
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 12288 Oct 17 14:30 lost+found
-rw------- 1 root root 13312 Oct 17 16:21 map
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 622784 Oct 17 16:18 vmlinuz
The new modified lilo.config is as followed:
boot=/dev/hdc
map=/mnt/d/map
install=/mnt/d/boot.b
prompt
timeout=50
default=linux
image=/mnt/d/vmlinuz
label=linux
initrd=/mnt/d/initrd.img
read-only
root=/dev/hdc1
I then run: /sbin/lilo -C /mnt/d/lilo.conf
I then reboot the system and configure the BIOS to boot from the
secondary master IDE (it can boot up fine from a secondary master IDE
with DOS). However, I only get a bunch of 01 01 01 ... on the screen.
What did I do wrong ? What am I missing ?
I apologize for the long email. Any advice is appreciated.
Thank you in advance,
hung
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
