Linux-Misc Digest #327, Volume #26 Fri, 17 Nov 00 04:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Can't ftp to Linux box from windows ftp client - SOLVED ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Bloatware (William Clifford)
Creative Ensoniq AudioPCI Model CT4810? (John Scudder)
Mounting proc filesystem dup2: bad file descriptor ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
package managers vs compilation (was: slrn-0.9.6.3 and all that - thanks!) ("Jan
Schaumann")
Re: Configuring printer from text UI - RH6.1 (TopQuark)
Re: Help... X Windows runs at a crawl.. Be my mentor,, Please (Jason B)
Re: Dialin - Server (Dustin Puryear)
Re: Boot from floppy very slow ("Michael")
Re: Bloatware (John Hasler)
Re: Dang those KDE rpms (Doc)
good c/c++ debugger ("dick dijk")
Need some suggestions... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Boot from floppy very slow (Vilmos Soti)
NCD15B (Ben)
Re: Boot from floppy very slow ("Michael")
Linux freezes totally (Claus Atzenbeck)
Looking for book on Linux Device Drivers (gaurav virendra navlakha)
Re: good c/c++ debugger (Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=E4h=E4ri?=)
ANNOUNCE: Bootable ABACUS4 CDs (The Abacus User)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Can't ftp to Linux box from windows ftp client - SOLVED
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 02:00:38 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am having the same issue. I had thought of allowing ftp-data (port
20) and tried it to no avail. I am using a Ugate 3200 Cable Sharing
gateway. Same symptoms, if I ftp in, I can log in and all that, but as
soon as I type ls -la or just ls, it just sits and hangs. BUT I can
ftp locally no problem at all. I don't know what to try next. I can't
imagine its something really arcane.
Ryan
In article <8uhda8$b6m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ok, got no responses...But fixed it anyway.
> Here is the deal. Not only do you need to allow ftp through
> your firewall, you need to allow ftp-data
> This is on the linux side in firewall scrip..
> Funny that ws-ftp worked either way and dos or browser ftp
> didn't work without ftp-data available. Also quote pasv did not
> make a difference.
>
> While I am at it, I tried wu-ftpd, ncftpd and proftpd.
> wu-ftpd it ok, works through inetd too.
> ncftpd is very flexible. Fills in things wu-ftpd is missing. Even
> though it is commercial, you get a free 3 user license.
> As for proftpd, what was looking like an excellent ftp server
> ended up being by far the worst. It is bug ridden, no doubt.
> Plenty of buffer over flows, even in latest versions. Now even
> if you think it is the greatest thing and say oh I don't have problems
> think again. Things are there that allow someone to shut it down
> just by typing a few letters in while logged in.
> It also looks like it has been idle since about July, maybe no one
> is working on it anymore??
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William Clifford)
Subject: Re: Bloatware
Date: 17 Nov 2000 02:36:34 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 22:52:52 +0000,
>I purchased a Linux distro just as I did with Windows 9x. Windows came with
>an GUI, a limited console, basic networking, a few multimedia apps, basic
>text editors and an Internet Explorer, a total of about 200-250MB's. Just
>enough to get going, but not much else. My Linux distro, SuSE 6.4 came with
>over 1500 apps, 6CD's which comes to a rather impressive 4-5GB's. Where
>does the Linux newbie start with this bewildering array of apps? After a
>bit of experience, and a few re-installs I've now got it down to a Linux
>console (100-200MBs), X-Windows Server (50-100MBs), a few windows managers,
>KDE 2 and Gnome (ok I know I just need the QT and GTK+ toolkits but I'm
>trying to just make sure I'll just get the apps working) a couple of hundred
>more MB's, networking apps, source code for the kernel so I can recompile, a
>compiler and libraries for compiling (SuSE says 450MB's!) which lets face
>it, Linux would be useless without and finally the day to day apps and games
>which in fairness should not be counted (1GB). These I consider the basics
>of my Linux system just to run. A basic Linux set-up weighs in at 1-2GB's,
>which is sizably larger than the 250MB's of Windows. Yes I know you get so
>much more, but I'm referring to a basic running system on which you can
>install further apps. Since a distro is the only feasible way of a newbie
>getting Linux does this not make the Linux OS Bloatware?
Last night I did a basic install of Debian at a friends house. I didn't
change or add anything from the first list that came up in dselect and it
was less than 150 MB. In fairness this is a pretty bare bones installation
(but no means the barest bones installation possible). After adding all
the neat stuff we want to it I expect it to come up to about 750MB to 1G.
This is about how much I've installed here on this machine. This is about
as much software as I had installed while I was running windows. But then
I'm not running a big office suite right now either.
--
William Clifford
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wobh.home.mindspring.com
90% Bullshit Free! Guaranteed!
------------------------------
From: John Scudder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Creative Ensoniq AudioPCI Model CT4810?
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 22:44:16 -0500
Has anyone gotten the new Creative Labs Ensoniq AudioPCI Model CT4810
sound card to work with Linux. The older card was ES1370 or ES1371.
This one isn't.
John
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Mounting proc filesystem dup2: bad file descriptor
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 03:40:07 GMT
I am getting this error when i am booting up from my RH6.2 Linux box.
Any idea how to fix it? I tried fscking the disk, cleaned and repaired
but didn't help.
Mounting proc filesystem dup2: Bad File Descriptors [failed]
configuring kernel parameters dup2: Bad File Descriptors [failed]
Setting Clock dup2: Bad File Descriptors [failed]
Loading default keymap/etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit: /dev/null: Read-only File
system
Activacting swap partitions dup2: Bad File Descriptors [failed]
Setting hostname
Any help would be appreciated.
Fred Lo
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Jan Schaumann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: package managers vs compilation (was: slrn-0.9.6.3 and all that - thanks!)
Crossposted-To: news.software.readers
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 23:06:08 -0500
"J.B. Nicholson-Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jan Schaumann wrote:
>> True. But /occasionally/ it can be nice to use a package-manager to
>> quickly check out an application.
>
> And inadvertantly run an application with a virus or trojan horse built
> into it.
So you check *every* soruce-file before you type "make" and "make
install"? B/c, you know, somebody could have written a malicious birus or
trojan somewhere as part of the program, deep deep inside, well hidden -
in order to detect it you must _carefully_ read each file.
C'mon - the security is not an issue here - any file downloaded from the
itnernet may damage your system.
<snip>
>> If I, for example, just want to try out a program and see if it does
>> what I think it does, then [rpm install] is usually faster than
>> [download, compile and install from source].
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by 'faster' here
In this scenario I mean faster
- as in keystrokes
- as in duration of *that* command (rpm vs make)
> I doubt your time is so valuable and your computer so slow the time you
> save by running binaries built elsewhere is worth the risks listed
> above.
No, of course not. /Usually/ I compile programs that I end up using myself.
But as I said before, rpm or debian or any other package-manager can be
useful and timesaving if I just want to check out a program briefly. It's
a convenient way to install an application.
-Jan
P.S.: Xpost and fup2 comp.os.linux.misc
--
Jan Schaumann <http://www.netmeister.org>
Microsoft's biggest and most dangerous contribution to the software
industry may be the degree to which it has lowered user expectations.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (TopQuark)
Subject: Re: Configuring printer from text UI - RH6.1
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 04:07:52 GMT
On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 15:00:59 -0500, Sylvain Drapeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm trying to configure a dot matrix printer on a RH6.1 machine from the
> text UI (no GUI installed). My printcap's OK, my parallel port is working
> (tried from DOS) but Linux gives me a "lpr: connect: Connection refused"
> message...
> I heard somewhere I could insmod the parallel port... is this a usual
> practice or should I look elsewhere?
Assuming it's not a Winprinter ...
My system loads modules automatically when I try to use a device. Are
you sure your's isn't already loaded? lsmod lists the modules
curently installed. insmod lp ought to load the parallel module,
assuming it's not already installed or compiled into the kernel.
Try both /dev/lp0 and lp1; it seems to be a toss-up as to which gets
used.
It would help us to help you if you told us some more details.
--
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
TopQuark Software & Serv. Contract programmer, server bum.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Give up Spammers; I use procmail.
------------------------------
From: Jason B <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Help... X Windows runs at a crawl.. Be my mentor,, Please
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 04:18:48 GMT
Eric wrote:
> >
> > A pentium ii 300 should not be running as slow as you are describing.
> > Logged in as root from the command prompt run:
> >
> > xf86config
> >
> > This will run you thru a script to reinstall your hardware for X. It sounds
> > to me like maybe your memory for your graphics card is not correct or
> > maybe your not using the right graphics driver. At the same time you
> > can fix your mouse problem by selecting a generic mouse driver instead
> > of the microsoft one.
> >
> > Good Luck,
>
> Good advise, but make a backup of your current XF86Config file first.
>
> The mouse is easy. the intellimouse works better when using the IMPS/2
> protocol instead of the PS/2 protocol (change it in XF86Config)
>
> Eric
Okay thanks Eric and everybody else.
--
http://members.home.net/jbean3
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dustin Puryear)
Subject: Re: Dialin - Server
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 04:27:03 GMT
On Wed, 15 Nov 2000 15:57:09 +0100, Robin Schroeder
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I want to administrate a Linux server from home by dialing in (over
>ISDN, i4l), so I have to install a dialup-software on the server. Which
>software can I use for it?
You just need to use mgetty and pppd, which is probably already installed.
There is plenty of documentation around.
--
Dustin Puryear <$email = "dpuryear"."@usa.net";>
Integrate Linux Solutions into Your Windows Network
- http://www.prima-tech.com/integrate-linux
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: Boot from floppy very slow
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 10:54:14 +1000
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8v0usf$f4h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I recently did this and now start Linux by
> booting from a floppy. The problem is that
> startup is very slow - takes about 10 minutes on
> a Celeron 633 with 64 MB memory. Is this normal,
> and is there any way to speed this up?
>
Maybe, depends how big your kernel is I guess.
I'm running a celeron 566, with 128mb ram, and a fairly small kernel, most
everything put to modules, takes about 4-5 minutes to boot that from floppy,
the boot disk that I made upon installation (slack7.1) took longer. So yes,
if you have a large kernel, then that probably would take that long.
-m
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bloatware
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 04:25:59 GMT
Someone whom William Clifford failed to properly attribute wrote:
> A basic Linux set-up weighs in at 1-2GB's, which is sizably larger than
> the 250MB's of Windows. Yes I know you get so much more, but I'm
> referring to a basic running system on which you can install further
> apps.
A basic running Debian system on which you can install further
apps fits on eight floppies.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Doc)
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat,linux.redhat.install,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Dang those KDE rpms
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 05:35:17 GMT
Uh, SuSE uses RPM. apt-get is a Debian tool, much like rpm and rpmfind combined.
Except it's for .deb packages instead of .rpm.
On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 20:48:43 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Could you explain apt-get??? I don't use SUSE.
>
--
Doc Shipley
Network Stuff
Austin, Earth
------------------------------
From: "dick dijk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: good c/c++ debugger
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 07:02:15 +0100
Hello,
Does anyone know a good c/c++ debugger for gcc or cc on Linux (graphical if
possible)?
Dick
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Need some suggestions...
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 06:05:11 GMT
I'm using windows. I heard linux is really good, so I'm considering to
try it. But after seeing several distributions of linux, I don't know
which is more fit to me. Well I just want to get linux for personal use
(or for fun...), so in this scope, which linux is better, SuSe, Red
Hat, or Mandrake?
Also is it a better idea to download/burn a linux or purchase a CD?
One last question, what are the advantages of linux over windows?(or
why do people turn to linux from the windows world?)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: Boot from floppy very slow
From: Vilmos Soti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 06:44:40 GMT
"Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8v0usf$f4h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I recently did this and now start Linux by
>> booting from a floppy. The problem is that
>> startup is very slow - takes about 10 minutes on
>> a Celeron 633 with 64 MB memory. Is this normal,
>> and is there any way to speed this up?
>
> Maybe, depends how big your kernel is I guess.
>
> I'm running a celeron 566, with 128mb ram, and a fairly small kernel, most
> everything put to modules, takes about 4-5 minutes to boot that from floppy,
> the boot disk that I made upon installation (slack7.1) took longer. So yes,
> if you have a large kernel, then that probably would take that long.
This time looks horribly long for me. What kind of floppy is this?
When I boot from floppy in order to install, it loads in a much more
reasonable time. Maybe 1-2 minutes. I haven't installed a new Linux box
for a couple of months.
Vilmos
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: NCD15B
Date: 17 Nov 2000 07:13:13 GMT
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
I am looking for the boot files necessary to boot a NCD15B, a 15-inch
monochrome display producd by NCD in the early 90s, off a tftp
server. If anyone has any ideas as to how to go about this,
especially if you know where I can find the neccessary files please
let me know.
Ben
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBOhTaofmretxtD8TxEQKo2QCeIQEnxoi33iiJLqeISoyc/gi01DcAn3Vw
GeQTc6KCtMADP1rcgEoBB+O8
=j/0q
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: Boot from floppy very slow
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 17:52:13 +1000
"Vilmos Soti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> This time looks horribly long for me. What kind of floppy is this?
> When I boot from floppy in order to install, it loads in a much more
> reasonable time. Maybe 1-2 minutes. I haven't installed a new Linux box
> for a couple of months.
Average 1.44mb floppy disk. Can't remember brand of drive, but will check
if you are interested.
-m
------------------------------
From: Claus Atzenbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux freezes totally
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 09:04:03 +0100
I have a big problem. I have Mandrake 7.2 and sometimes it just freezes
completely.
Is there any way to find out why and what I can do?
Any experiances or ideas?
Claus.
------------------------------
From: gaurav virendra navlakha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Looking for book on Linux Device Drivers
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 02:50:30 -0600
Hi,
I am looking for the book "Linux Device Drivers" from O'reilly. If anyone
has it and wishes to sell it, please let me know.
Thanks,
Gaurav.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=E4h=E4ri?=)
Subject: Re: good c/c++ debugger
Date: 17 Nov 2000 10:00:53 +0100
In article <uoL0ByFUAHA.308@net003s>, dick dijk wrote:
>Hello,
>
>Does anyone know a good c/c++ debugger for gcc or cc on Linux (graphical if
>possible)?
>
>Dick
>
>
The standard debugger on GNU/Linux systems is the GNU debugger 'gdb'.
There are graphical frontends to 'gdb', one is called 'ddd' (Data
Display Debugger) and another one is 'xxgdb'.
I like 'xxgdb' because it's simple and doesn't use up all the
resources like 'ddd' does.
'ddd' is nice because it may be used as a frontend to a lot of other
debuggers as well. Home page at
<URL:http://www.gnu.org/software/ddd/ddd.html> (that page also
includes some good development links for GNU/Linux and Unix systems).
See also <URL:http://www.ee.ryerson.ca:8080/~elf/xapps/Q-IV.html>.
/A
--
Andreas K�h�ri, Uppsala University, Sweden (until 1:st of Dec. 2000)
========================================================================
"If you leave now, you're going to miss the real experience."
-- Richard M. Stallman, Stockholm 1986. Visit www.gnu.org
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 10:16:36 +0100
From: The Abacus User <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ANNOUNCE: Bootable ABACUS4 CDs
If any of you have had trouble getting ABACUS4 working from the demo
(www.abacus4.com) then I can perhaps help.
To make life a bit easier I've built a bootable CD with a working demo
of ABACUS4 running under Slackware 7.1.
If anyone wants a copy please get in touch with me at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] I will have to charge you my costs for my
trouble, but I am open to good causes, and people likely to buy a
license!
About ABACUS4: (see http://www.abacus4.com)
=====================================
Based on more than 25 years of development and use ABACUS 4 is the
latest in a line of process control software systems with the ABACUS
name. ABACUS 4 runs on standard intel PC hardware under the Linux
operating system. The ABACUS 4 process control system is a block based
software system for the real time control of industrial and other
continuous and batch processes.
All the best - Frank McNamara
MCH Konsulting Sweden
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
