Linux-Misc Digest #544, Volume #26 Thu, 14 Dec 00 05:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: RH Linux 7.0 Install Killed DOS -- HOW? (Bob Simon)
Re: Modem Strangeness
Re: Moving files w/ same extension (Sebastian Hans)
Re: RH Linux 7.0 Install Killed DOS -- HOW? (Tyler Larson)
Re: RH Linux 7.0 Install Killed DOS -- HOW? (Svend Olaf Mikkelsen)
Re: Mount fat-partition!! (Eric)
Re: "ps -ef" lines truncated on the right (Johan De Wit)
Re: exporting directories ("Benson Lei")
bootting linux ("Anurodh Pokharel")
Re: Kernel ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: DLink 530 TX ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Mandrake upgrade: terrible ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: (Newbie) Mandrake 7.2 less buggy than Red Hat 7.0? (Jimenez Martinez Angel Luis)
Re: How do I totally remove Linux from hard drive to use whole HD for windows again?
(Jimenez Martinez Angel Luis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bob Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RH Linux 7.0 Install Killed DOS -- HOW?
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 06:59:14 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Svend Olaf Mikkelsen) wrote:
> As mentioned you must temporarily disable the disk in BIOS. Then DOS
> will boot, and you can run Findpart as described.
> --
> Svend Olaf
Svend,
You're right. The listing you requested follows. I'm looking forward
to learning why DOS won't boot and what I must do to fix the problem.
Bob
Findpart, version 3.93.
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
Disk: PM Cylinders: 2495 Heads: 255 Sectors: 63 MB: 19571
IDE CHS: 16383/16/63 CTM: 16383/16/63
-PCyl N ID -----Rel -----Num ---MB -Start CHS- --End CHS-- BS CHS
0 - 0B 63 16386237 8001 0 1 1 1019 254 63 B OK
Fdisk F6 sector 3 0 1
Fdisk F6 sector 3 1 1
Fdisk F6 sector 4 0 1
Fdisk F6 sector 4 1 1
Fdisk F6 sector 5 0 1
Fdisk F6 sector 5 1 1
Fdisk F6 sector 6 0 1
Fdisk F6 sector 6 1 1
Fdisk F6 sector 7 0 1
Fdisk F6 sector 7 1 1
Fdisk F6 sector 8 0 1
Fdisk F6 sector 8 1 1
Fdisk F6 sector 9 0 1
Fdisk F6 sector 9 1 1
0 - 83 417690 48195 23 26 0 1 28 254 63 B0 OK
29 2 05 4369680 11614995 5671 301 0 1 1023 254 63 29 OK
29 - 83 63 4096512 2000 29 1 1 283 254 63 B0 OK
284 1 82 63 273042 133 284 1 1 300 254 63 OK
284 2 05 4369680 11614995 5671 301 0 1 1023 254 63 29 OK
301 1 0B 63 11614932 5671 301 1 1 1023 254 63 F6 OK
Fdisk F6 sector 301 1 1
Fdisk F6 sector 302 0 1
Fdisk F6 sector 302 1 1
Fdisk F6 sector 303 0 1
Fdisk F6 sector 303 1 1
0 - 83 16386300 48195 23 1020 0 1 1022 254 63 B0 OK
0 - 83 16402365 32130 15 1021 0 1 1022 254 63 B0 OK
1023 1 83 63 4096512 2000 1023 1 1 1277*254 63 OK OK
1023 2 05 4096575 273105 133 1278* 0 1 1294*254 63 1023 OK
0 - 83 20482875 48195 23 1275 0 1 1277 254 63 B0 OK
1277 1 83 63 2088387 1019 1277* 1 1 1406*254 63 OK OK
1277 2 05 2088450 257040 125 1407* 0 1 1422*254 63 1277 OK
1278 1 82 63 273042 133 1278* 1 1 1294*254 63 OK
1407 1 82 63 256977 125 1407* 1 1 1422*254 63 OK
1533 1 82 63 273042 133 1533* 1 1 1549*254 63 OK
1597 1 82 63 273042 133 1597* 1 1 1613*254 63 OK
2486 1 82 63 144522 70 2486* 1 1 2494*254 63 OK
=====FAT CHS =Size Cl ==Root =Good =Rep. Maybe ==Bad YYMMDD DataMB
0 1 33 15987 4 2 15987 0 0 0 000101 4
1 0 18 Second FAT not found.
Partitions according to partition tables on primary master:
-PCyl N ID -----Rel -----Num ---MB -Start CHS- --End CHS-- BS CHS
0 1*0B 63 16386237 8001 0 1 1 1019 254 63 OK OK
0 2 83 16386300 48195 23 1020 0 1 1022 254 63 OK OK
0 3 05 16434495 23647680 11546 1023 0 1 2494*254 63 OK
1023 1 83 63 4096512 2000 1023 1 1 1277*254 63 OK OK
1023 2 05 4096575 273105 133 1278* 0 1 1294*254 63 OK
1278 1 82 63 273042 133 1278* 1 1 1294*254 63 OK
--
Please address private email replies to bsimon at ATT dot Net.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Modem Strangeness
Date: 13 Dec 2000 23:14:59 -0800
Brian & Colleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>I'm using KPPP to set up my Internet access. When I first log in and run
>KPPP, and tell it to "Connect" it goes as far as "Initializing modem"
>and eventually times out. If I "Cancel" and try again, it connects just
>fine. This isn't a once in a while thing, it's every single time. Tonite
>I ran minicom first to look at something else. When I ran KPPP, it
>connected on the first attempt. The modem is a Cirrus 33K. Can anyone
>shed any light on this?
>
>Thanks.
>
>--
> Brian Smith
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://mypage.direct.ca/g/greybria
>
>
>
You must be using an itit string that does not work...there
are sites out there with init strings for various modems...
I ran into a problem with my downloads stalling and unable to finish
uploads to some servers...tried irqtune and it helped marginally...
turns out that the generic init string was not the best one for the
job....I found a few and tried them until I got one that fixed the
problem.
Though your problem is not mine....yours seems like an obvious init
string error.
------------------------------
From: Sebastian Hans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Moving files w/ same extension
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 08:13:32 +0100
Joshua Beard wrote:
>
> I was wondering if there is a simple way to move multiple files with the
> same extension to a new extension, preserving the file's prefix. For
> example, if I have file1.abc, file2.abc, file3.abc and want to move
> them to file1.123, file2.123, file3.123, can i do them all at once? In
> DOS I would type "ren *.abc *.123" but I can't find an equivilent for
> that in Linux. Please help! Thank you.
Wonderful solutions all around.
One more:
mmv "*.abc" "#1.123"
man mmv
If you don't have it, you really should get it.
HAND
seb
--
-------------------=====#####OOOOOOOO#####=====----c---c----------
sebastian hans - [EMAIL PROTECTED] `\O/' don't panic
student of comp sci - technical university of munich \-^-/ ...just RUN
i'm a .signature virus! copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread
------------------------------
From: Tyler Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RH Linux 7.0 Install Killed DOS -- HOW?
Date: 14 Dec 2000 07:20:10 GMT
Bob Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tyler,
> Your analysis is reasonable, however, incorrect.
Drat.
--
Tyler Larson | http://www.tlarson.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead.
-- Benjamin Franklin
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Svend Olaf Mikkelsen)
Subject: Re: RH Linux 7.0 Install Killed DOS -- HOW?
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 07:24:21 GMT
Bob Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Svend Olaf Mikkelsen) wrote:
>> As mentioned you must temporarily disable the disk in BIOS. Then DOS
>> will boot, and you can run Findpart as described.
>> --
>> Svend Olaf
>
>Svend,
>You're right. The listing you requested follows. I'm looking forward
>to learning why DOS won't boot and what I must do to fix the problem.
>Bob
>
>Findpart, version 3.93.
>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
>
>Disk: PM Cylinders: 2495 Heads: 255 Sectors: 63 MB: 19571
>IDE CHS: 16383/16/63 CTM: 16383/16/63
>
>-PCyl N ID -----Rel -----Num ---MB -Start CHS- --End CHS-- BS CHS
> 0 - 0B 63 16386237 8001 0 1 1 1019 254 63 B OK
> Fdisk F6 sector 3 0 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 3 1 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 4 0 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 4 1 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 5 0 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 5 1 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 6 0 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 6 1 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 7 0 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 7 1 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 8 0 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 8 1 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 9 0 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 9 1 1
> 0 - 83 417690 48195 23 26 0 1 28 254 63 B0 OK
> 29 2 05 4369680 11614995 5671 301 0 1 1023 254 63 29 OK
> 29 - 83 63 4096512 2000 29 1 1 283 254 63 B0 OK
> 284 1 82 63 273042 133 284 1 1 300 254 63 OK
> 284 2 05 4369680 11614995 5671 301 0 1 1023 254 63 29 OK
> 301 1 0B 63 11614932 5671 301 1 1 1023 254 63 F6 OK
> Fdisk F6 sector 301 1 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 302 0 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 302 1 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 303 0 1
> Fdisk F6 sector 303 1 1
> 0 - 83 16386300 48195 23 1020 0 1 1022 254 63 B0 OK
> 0 - 83 16402365 32130 15 1021 0 1 1022 254 63 B0 OK
> 1023 1 83 63 4096512 2000 1023 1 1 1277*254 63 OK OK
> 1023 2 05 4096575 273105 133 1278* 0 1 1294*254 63 1023 OK
> 0 - 83 20482875 48195 23 1275 0 1 1277 254 63 B0 OK
> 1277 1 83 63 2088387 1019 1277* 1 1 1406*254 63 OK OK
> 1277 2 05 2088450 257040 125 1407* 0 1 1422*254 63 1277 OK
> 1278 1 82 63 273042 133 1278* 1 1 1294*254 63 OK
> 1407 1 82 63 256977 125 1407* 1 1 1422*254 63 OK
> 1533 1 82 63 273042 133 1533* 1 1 1549*254 63 OK
> 1597 1 82 63 273042 133 1597* 1 1 1613*254 63 OK
> 2486 1 82 63 144522 70 2486* 1 1 2494*254 63 OK
>
>-----FAT CHS -Size Cl --Root -Good -Rep. Maybe --Bad YYMMDD DataMB
> 0 1 33 15987 4 2 15987 0 0 0 000101 4
> 1 0 18 Second FAT not found.
>
>Partitions according to partition tables on primary master:
>
>-PCyl N ID -----Rel -----Num ---MB -Start CHS- --End CHS-- BS CHS
> 0 1*0B 63 16386237 8001 0 1 1 1019 254 63 OK OK
> 0 2 83 16386300 48195 23 1020 0 1 1022 254 63 OK OK
> 0 3 05 16434495 23647680 11546 1023 0 1 2494*254 63 OK
>
> 1023 1 83 63 4096512 2000 1023 1 1 1277*254 63 OK OK
> 1023 2 05 4096575 273105 133 1278* 0 1 1294*254 63 OK
>
> 1278 1 82 63 273042 133 1278* 1 1 1294*254 63 OK
According to another message you removed the Linux partitions, and now
they are there?
Anyway, the partition tables are cyclic. This is a result of the type
of the extended partition being wrong.
Boot to Linux and change the type of the extended partition from 05 to
85 using the Linux fdisk t command. Save the change using the w
command. Then the problem is solved.
--
Svend Olaf
------------------------------
From: Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mount fat-partition!!
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 08:48:05 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flo wrote:
>
> Hi
> But with umask,uid,gid I can just set the access permissions from the
> whole partition (or?) but I need differrent permissions for differrent
> directiories.
>
That's correct.
Don't use FAT for this, or make it two different partitions.
I suppose the first won't help, because you want access from windows
too.
So turn to the latter solution.
It's really your only choice I think.
Eric
------------------------------
From: Johan De Wit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "ps -ef" lines truncated on the right
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 08:59:46 GMT
Hi,
Take a look at the 'wrap' option of your terminal you are running the ps=
=20
command.
Greetings
------------------------------
From: "Benson Lei" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: exporting directories
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 00:36:01 -0800
Yes, of course, NFS can export a directory, a partition to any host in the
network
as only as the host uses NFS format ( Unix, Linux, FreeBSD, FreeOS ... )
Benson Lei in HK
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:911igd$ejv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi,
>
> Is it possible to export directories via NFS under Linux (as opposed to
> whole partitions) ?
>
> Thanks
>
> Wroot
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Anurodh Pokharel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: bootting linux
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 03:50:23 -0500
hi,
i have a win95/linux dualboot system. As expected linux is stable but win95
crashes all the time and i have to reinstall it. The problem is since i have
linux on the same HDD on seperate partitions, when in install win95, grub no
longer loads. I cant figure out how i can boot linux after that. Usually i
just reinsatll linux and it recognises win95 and sets up grub to boot both
linux and windows. But theres gotta be a better way.
thanks
--
______________________
Anurodh Pokharel
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi, I Floyd, the signatue virus, copy me and help me spread
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Kernel
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 15:36:11 +0100
In comp.os.linux.misc Glitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> well, in my judgement we are up to 2.4, whether its beta or not. It does
Then your judgement is wrong, because we are then also up to glibc
2.2.I_don't_know, gcc 2.9.7.I_don't_know and so on.
> EXIST and it is usable on my laptop.
But it's unusable on mine. So?
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: DLink 530 TX
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 15:54:50 +0100
WME <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> First of all what driver should I be using? I tried this via-rhine. I even
The one that's appropriate for your card. Look at the card, read the
driver release notes and source code comments. Match them. Prove that
they are matched by quoting the material that leads you to taht
conclusion.
> downloaded it from some site that I don't remember, compiled it.
Then you'd better start remembering, because I can't, and WON'T do it
for you! If your memory is defective, start writing down notes to
yourself. The best technique is to cut and paste into a file detailing
your experiment so that others can follow the results.
> I went into /usr/src/linux
Don't. You compile the driver standalone.
> I chose the network devices (or whatever it's called), chose the via-rhine.
Don't.
> Saved,...
> make dep clean bzImage bzlilo
You. Forgot. To. Make. Modules. Anyway.
(unclenches teeth).
> i went to
> /etc/rc.d
> i uncommented via-rhine,
Shouldn't be in there. It's a directory. I suspect you mean
/etc/rc.d/rc.modules.
> i recompiled the kernel for via-rhine to be used as a module,
That's what you should do. Nothing else is a meaningful test.
All bets were off unless and until you are able to load the
driver as a module, which requires that the driver NOT be loaded into
the kernel. (actually, does it .. you can always hack the driver
code to remove the bit that checks against double loading).
> ...
> samething, doesn't recognize the card.
Well, that's not surprising, since you (1) didn't compile the module,
(2) didn't load the module.
> should i be giving it any parameters?
No. (whatever "it" is)
> Some of the errors were (not in any order):
> modprobe: Can't locate module devpts
Sounds pretty fatal, eh? Looks like you should recompile your kernel,
this time with support for devpts!
> ...
> init_module device or resource busy
Nice one! Which module did it refer to.
> Does that info indicate what i might be doing wrong?
Yes: reporting inadequately and generally behaving like a L-user. Go
away, and come back when you act and report in a scientific manner.
And I mean it. If your ego can stand being told that you're hopeless
right now, good: fix your technique and come back when it's better and
show how much you've improved ... if you can't take the abuse, just
go away. There's no need to answer back and say your feelings are hurt.
I'm sure they are. But facts are facts: nobody can help you right now
without first coaxing you through accurate observational and experimental
procedures. Look at the above report and see if you can see what's wrong
with it, imagining how you'd react to a report like that from someone
else.
My best guess is that you are compiling the wrong driver for the wrong
card, or possibly not compiling the driver at all, or possibly not
loading it, or loading it into a kernel that's not prepared for it, or
booting a kernel that's different from the one you think you are
loading, or not loading the driver at all. Nobody can tell, from HERE.
Produce the data.
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.kde
Subject: Re: Mandrake upgrade: terrible
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 15:56:04 +0100
In comp.os.linux.misc Alan Burns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <5_sZ5.15546$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> That has always been my personal recommendation with *ANY* OS upgrade. My
> experience has been that any time you install new on top of old, you're
> asking for version/configuration conflicts and such. (I've used Windows
> 3.1/95/98/NT, OS/2, Mac, Red Hat, and Mandrake.)
Then you should try debian, because no such problem exists there.
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jimenez Martinez Angel Luis)
Subject: Re: (Newbie) Mandrake 7.2 less buggy than Red Hat 7.0?
Date: 13 Dec 2000 12:25:15 GMT
Garry Heaton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I'm about to select my first Linux/UNIX OS and have narrowed-down the choice
> to Mandrake 7.2 or Red Hat 7.0. I've heard Red Hat 7.0 is buggy. Is Mandrake
> therefore more stable? Are there any significant differences between the 2?
> I tend towards the ease of use end of the spectrum as I want to concentrate
> on Perl development not OS expertise.
> Also, can I run Apache for desktop development with both of these options? I
> read somewhere that Mandrame 7.2 is designed for the desktop, not the
> server, but I understand by this that I will still be able to use it as a
> desktop development environment with Apache but not as a server machine.
> Please correct if this isn't the case.
> Thanks
> Garry Heaton
Hi,
Now I have Mandrake 7.2 intalled and it runs quite well (it doesn't
have many bugs ;) ). And I have read some news about bugs in RedHat
7.0's gcc. So my bet would be Mandrake.
And about the apche stuff, don't worry, Mandrake comes with apache,
and some modules for it like mod_perl, mod_php... And I have a distro.
from a magazine (you know, only the first CD).
--
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jimenez Martinez Angel Luis)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,linux.redhat,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: How do I totally remove Linux from hard drive to use whole HD for windows
again?
Date: 13 Dec 2000 12:28:30 GMT
Johan Kullstam ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> "misterbooboo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I have a 6GB HD split half for RH7 and half for Win95.
> >
> > I want to rid myself of Linux and rededicate the entire HD to Win95.
> >
> > How do I do this?
> >
> > Win's fdisk will not get me there as far as I can tell.
> >
> > Specifics appreciated.
If can can still boot Linux, use its fdisk to delete linux partition. Then boot
with a win boot disk disk, and do "fdisk /mbr" to delete lilo from the boot
sector. And install that beast... uh, Windows... :(
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.misc.
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
******************************
