Linux-Misc Digest #27, Volume #27 Mon, 5 Feb 01 04:13:01 EST
Contents:
Re: Which Linux distribution is best? (Arctic Storm)
Re: Problems trying to upgrade my RPM package from RPM3 to RPM4 (Steve Ackman)
Re: Which Linux distribution is best? (Steve Ackman)
Re: Playstation port ("Patrick Glennon")
Re: Which Linux distribution is best? (mike)
Re: How to measure system load? ("OpenMind")
Re: NFS broken with 2.4.1? ("Peter T. Breuer")
linux kernel 2.4 changes documentation ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: NFS broken with 2.4.1? (MH)
How to config rsh ? (Wong Sai-kee)
Loading new_kernel EBDA too big.. ("J@nul")
Re: display not capable of DPMS? (Stamatis Stefanakos)
Re: Unable to access or mount hard drive/floppy drive from Rescue mode (Eric)
Linux + Docking Stations. Can I unmount hardware? ("Mike Dahlgren")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Arctic Storm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Which Linux distribution is best?
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 06:03:21 GMT
> >> I have a P133 with 32MB RAM and 10G HD, but my System Bios has this 8.4
> >> Gig barrier. I am not getting BIOS upgrade for the motherboard. When I
> >> try to install Win 98, at the time of installation, the scandisk
> >> freezes the machine.
> >> Would I have the same problem with Linux too? If not, which
>
> > 32 MB RAM isn't going to cut it.
> > Either add 32 more to get total of 64, or give up.
>
> I have a P100 with 32MB ram running everything just fine, including X.
> (that's slackware 7, though debian 2.2 is also possible).
>
> Come to that, I have a 486sx50 with 8MB ram also doing fine. Also with
> X - but it just runs as a terminal. That's slackware 3.0.
I think this is an issue of patience. When does your patience run out as
you stare at the desktop for Netscape 6 to load, or watch the screen
repaint windows as you move windows or open/close them. Sure, 32 MB is
"sufficient" to run X, but as you multitask email, web, newsgroup, text
editors, etc., the hard drive will crank away swaping memory. Time is
money, and having *sufficient* RAM, rather than just mear "sufficient" RAM,
will more than pay for itself in the long run.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Ackman)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Problems trying to upgrade my RPM package from RPM3 to RPM4
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 00:53:47 -0500
On Mon, 05 Feb 2001 02:01:02 GMT, David J. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I am trying to upgrade my RPM RPM package to 4.0-4 from 3.0.4-0.48 (the
>version of Red RPM included with Red Hat 6.2). I am running Kernel 2.2.16
>and Red Hat 6.2 on a 450 Mhz PIII.
>
>What I'm doing is booting into single-user mode (runlevel 3), and executing
>the following command:
>
>rpm -U -h -vv rpm-4.0-4.i386.rpm
>
>I get the following error message when I do this:
>
>"Only packages with major numbers <= 3 are supported by this version of RPM
>error: package cannot be installed"
>
>Can anybody help?
>There must be some way to upgrade this package.
Go to the Red Hat errata page. Grab rpm-3.0.5-9.6x.
Upgrade to that. It will handle 4.x-rpms.
If you *really* think you need to then upgrade to
rpm-4.x, be prepared to track down a lot of dependencies.
--
Steve Ackman
http://twovoyagers.com
Registered Linux User #79430
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Ackman)
Subject: Re: Which Linux distribution is best?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 01:08:05 -0500
On Mon, 05 Feb 2001 04:07:35 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I have a P133 with 32MB RAM and 10G HD, but my System Bios has this 8.4
>> Gig barrier. I am not getting BIOS upgrade for the motherboard. When I
>> try to install Win 98, at the time of installation, the scandisk
>> freezes the machine.
>> Would I have the same problem with Linux too? If not, which
>> distribution is good?
>
>32 MB RAM isn't going to cut it.
>Either add 32 more to get total of 64, or give up.
Gee... I had an K5-75 running X and Netscape 3.01 on 8 MB
of RAM. It hit swap pretty hard, but once I upgraded to 16MB,
it was downright racey.
Then when I had a P-166 running half a dozen servers, and
X, and Netscape 3.04 it did very nicely with 24 MB of RAM.
If you're going to tell people they need 64 MB of RAM, you
might mention the fact that it's only necessary if you want
to run Mozilla, a bloated DE, and seti. (Mozilla will still walk,
but not run, within 32MB)
AFAIK, you can still run Linux (no X) in 4MB of RAM.
--
Steve Ackman
http://twovoyagers.com
Registered Linux User #79430
------------------------------
From: "Patrick Glennon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Playstation port
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 22:22:18 -0800
it would be cooler to port to Dreamcast, since the price on all the hardware
has tanked with them no longer going to make them.....
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:R3rf6.318445$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > I have heard/read that there are ports of linux to Playstation (not
> > PS2) but i searched and couldnt find any. Does anyone have any
> > information about this?
>
> Ha, ha! April Fool's!
>
> See: <http://www.heise.de/ix/artikel/E/1997/04/036/>
>
> The article _appears_ serious, so people have been sucked into
> thinking it's for real.
> --
> (reverse (concatenate 'string "gro.mca@" "enworbbc"))
> http://vip.hex.net/~cbbrowne/linuxcpus.html#N64
> After eating, do amphibians need to wait an hour before getting OUT of
> the water?
>
------------------------------
From: mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Which Linux distribution is best?
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 06:34:51 GMT
Hi,
I believe that Linux does not have bios limitations.
I have a Pentium 166 and it has a bios with an 8.4 GB limit.
I purchased a Promise Bios DriveMAX card that allows up to
mayb 128 GB. The card cost about $17. It works great. Well
worth it.
I have found that for a 486 machine that there is a great
difference in performance when I went from 16mb to 32 mb
in running Linux. It was as if 16mb was a critical threshold.
On my Pentium 166, I started with 16mb and then went to
64mb. I can't say about the Linux difference, because when
I upgraded, it was before I ran Linux. I will say that
when I went from 16mb to 64mb, it made a world of difference
with Win95C.
Mike
------------------------------
From: "OpenMind" <**Mail Free America**>
Subject: Re: How to measure system load?
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 22:43:23 -0800
Thanks, Dirk. Just encountered 'top'... have not checked command options
yet. The man pages suggest a kinship to 'uptime,' so will have to study the
issue.
Dirk Groeneveld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> no name wrote:
> > Uptime, then, will clearly do me no good at all. CPU utilization is, I
> > expect, what I have to be measuring. Anybody know of a command-line
> > utility (or daemon which can be called) which will give that information
> > to stdio in parseable form?
>
> top offers the information in human-readable form, but it gets all of it
> from /proc. So, it has to be somewhere in there.
>
> Sorry, I don't know any program save for top thas uses (or distributes)
> that information.
>
> Dirk
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NFS broken with 2.4.1?
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 07:35:44 +0100
MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter T. Breuer wrote:
>>
>> > I'm not very happy when I feel I've spent hours trying to accomplish
>> > what should be VERY basic, simple tasks--was unable to do so, and have
>> > no idea why.
>>
>> That's your problem, in a nutshell.
> Obviously, as I've stated.
No, you miss the point (again!). These are not basic simple tasks, and
that you don't know that and are unable to grok that the
difficulty stems from that inexpertise plus the nature of reality is
your problem.
> Evidently, you have unlimited free time (it must be nice!). I certainly
Errr .. well, in a way I do. I am (under)paid to do what I like. I am
an expert, and it takes me 6 days to do what you think should be "a
basic simple task". I administer several hundred machines, and teach,
and research, and have a staff of 4 or 5, and write software and papers ....
No it is not a basic simple task, and if you think so, that is the
essence of your problem.
> couldn't afford to spend 6 days trying to get a distro installed on a PC
> and still not have it in working order. For what I'm paid, it would be
Feel free to pay an expert to do what you cannot. That is the way
open-source software works.
> It's funny, though. Your experience with RH mirrors mine with Debian. I've
> never had a problem with RH installs, other than the occasional minor
RH installs generally work if you do as RH want and make a single large
partition on which all possible packages are mounted. Needless to say,
this is a disaster (and if you don't know why "hire an expert ...").
However, it is the only configuration that RH seemingly test, since
inexperienced novices who don't know any better will do that, and that
is their market. It's what they perceive that is what they pay for.
If you want to see a failed redhat install, make a generous root
partition of 128MB and a separate /usr partition of as many GB as you
like. RH's package manager can't accurately add up installed sizes on a
per-partition basis, so it'll start telling you there isn't enough room
AFTER you select all packages. Then you will get caught in another RH
loop as you deselect packages and find that RHs installer also has bugs
in its dependency mechanism, so that you are left with packages selected
that depend on missing packages. And so on. Likely you'll never get
out of the loop.
> but that seems to have improved greatly over the past couple of years. I'll
> give Debian another shot when their next release becomes available.
Don't bother. If you can't install debian without a single scrap of a
clue and no documentation at all, then you are not the kind of person that
debian wants installing it! For one thing, if everybody could install
debian, debian maintainers would be flooded by messages from dweebs
complaining that they can't remove /proc/kcore. At the moment, debian
maintainers can treat all messages as though they come from experts,
which they largely do. This means that users messages are heeded -
they usually come from someone at least as knowledgable as the
frontline maintainer. An open group email conversation with the maintainer
circle for that application then follows, and it then expands into one
with the upstream maintainers and authors.
Installation is something you only do once. I certainly have only ever
installed debian once, several years ago, and I have labs full of
uptodate debian machines today. As I said, it took me about three days
then.
Of course, after installing it takes months of shakedown and
customization for any distribution, plus special installations and
so on. I have sent in and had treated many many bug reports
by debian's huge maintainer army, and a large fraction of my time is
spent negotiating with authors over software and documentation changes.
That's maintenance.
With debian, that works, and it's time well spent, and time rewarded
because the changes I need get put into public distribution, so I don't
have to maintain separate patches. With redhat, I sincerely doubt it.
For one thing, redhat isn't very interested in the networked setup in
itself (they react to security loopholes, but then it impacts that
one-man station market). And I certainly don't want the newest and
buggiest of everything, a la redhat! And most of all, I don't want
redhats aggravating customizations and annoying administration tools,
with their frankly frustrating design and engineering - or lack of it.
The whole basis of redhats effort is misdirected ... you can't build a
better system by adding extra complexity to it, and redhat don't seem to
know that.
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: linux kernel 2.4 changes documentation
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 06:40:27 GMT
I was wondering if anyone knew whether there is a
document somewhere that lists all the changes
from kernel 2.2.x to 2.4. I looked at
the 'Changes' file that is included with the
kernel source but it seems to only provide a list
of the minimum levels of software versions to run
with the 2.4 kernel.
thanks
A
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NFS broken with 2.4.1?
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 23:02:10 +0000
Peter T. Breuer wrote:
> MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Peter T. Breuer wrote:
>
> >>
> >> > I'm not very happy when I feel I've spent hours trying to accomplish
> >> > what should be VERY basic, simple tasks--was unable to do so, and
> >> > have no idea why.
> >>
> >> That's your problem, in a nutshell.
>
> > Obviously, as I've stated.
>
> No, you miss the point (again!). These are not basic simple tasks, and
> that you don't know that and are unable to grok that the
> difficulty stems from that inexpertise plus the nature of reality is
> your problem.
>
> > Evidently, you have unlimited free time (it must be nice!). I certainly
>
> Errr .. well, in a way I do. I am (under)paid to do what I like. I am
> an expert, and it takes me 6 days to do what you think should be "a
> basic simple task". I administer several hundred machines, and teach,
> and research, and have a staff of 4 or 5, and write software and papers
> .... No it is not a basic simple task, and if you think so, that is the
> essence of your problem.
>
> > couldn't afford to spend 6 days trying to get a distro installed on a PC
> > and still not have it in working order. For what I'm paid, it would be
>
> Feel free to pay an expert to do what you cannot. That is the way
> open-source software works.
>
> > It's funny, though. Your experience with RH mirrors mine with Debian.
> > I've never had a problem with RH installs, other than the occasional
> > minor
>
> RH installs generally work if you do as RH want and make a single large
> partition on which all possible packages are mounted. Needless to say,
> this is a disaster (and if you don't know why "hire an expert ...").
> However, it is the only configuration that RH seemingly test, since
> inexperienced novices who don't know any better will do that, and that
> is their market. It's what they perceive that is what they pay for.
>
> If you want to see a failed redhat install, make a generous root
> partition of 128MB and a separate /usr partition of as many GB as you
> like. RH's package manager can't accurately add up installed sizes on a
> per-partition basis, so it'll start telling you there isn't enough room
> AFTER you select all packages. Then you will get caught in another RH
> loop as you deselect packages and find that RHs installer also has bugs
> in its dependency mechanism, so that you are left with packages selected
> that depend on missing packages. And so on. Likely you'll never get
> out of the loop.
>
> > but that seems to have improved greatly over the past couple of years.
> > I'll give Debian another shot when their next release becomes available.
>
> Don't bother. If you can't install debian without a single scrap of a
> clue and no documentation at all, then you are not the kind of person that
> debian wants installing it! For one thing, if everybody could install
> debian, debian maintainers would be flooded by messages from dweebs
> complaining that they can't remove /proc/kcore. At the moment, debian
> maintainers can treat all messages as though they come from experts,
> which they largely do. This means that users messages are heeded -
> they usually come from someone at least as knowledgable as the
> frontline maintainer. An open group email conversation with the
> maintainer circle for that application then follows, and it then expands
> into one with the upstream maintainers and authors.
>
> Installation is something you only do once. I certainly have only ever
> installed debian once, several years ago, and I have labs full of
> uptodate debian machines today. As I said, it took me about three days
> then.
>
> Of course, after installing it takes months of shakedown and
> customization for any distribution, plus special installations and
> so on. I have sent in and had treated many many bug reports
> by debian's huge maintainer army, and a large fraction of my time is
> spent negotiating with authors over software and documentation changes.
> That's maintenance.
>
> With debian, that works, and it's time well spent, and time rewarded
> because the changes I need get put into public distribution, so I don't
> have to maintain separate patches. With redhat, I sincerely doubt it.
>
> For one thing, redhat isn't very interested in the networked setup in
> itself (they react to security loopholes, but then it impacts that
> one-man station market). And I certainly don't want the newest and
> buggiest of everything, a la redhat! And most of all, I don't want
> redhats aggravating customizations and annoying administration tools,
> with their frankly frustrating design and engineering - or lack of it.
> The whole basis of redhats effort is misdirected ... you can't build a
> better system by adding extra complexity to it, and redhat don't seem to
> know that.
>
Wow! You really have some personal issues, don't you. Arrogant,
opinionated, and OFTEN wrong (I'm not going to take the time to point out
the specifics, as the effort would obviously be wasted here).
--
I use GNU/Linux and support the Free Software Foundation. This message was
composed and transmitted using free software, licensed under the General
Public License.
--
------------------------------
From: Wong Sai-kee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: How to config rsh ?
Date: 5 Feb 2001 06:57:04 GMT
I posted to ask for the remote backup. Got the solution on using rsh.
Tried `man rhosts` from linux got nothing. I setup a /etc/hosts.equiv
then I can rlogin from one network node to the tape server, but cannot
rsh, it says permission denied even for a command like `ls`.
Is there anything need to be set ? Or the security issue in linux
forbidden it from doing something ? I tried `man kerberos`, it shows
nothing.
Thanks
SK
------------------------------
From: "J@nul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Loading new_kernel EBDA too big..
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 08:12:45 +0100
Hello!
i've compilled new kernel v.2.4.1 and after rebooting system (loading
new kernel)
errror:
Loading new_kernel EBDA too big..
what's that mean? where is the problem?
i ahve Debian Potato
Thanlks
J@nul
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 09:10:50 +0100
From: Stamatis Stefanakos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: display not capable of DPMS?
> >
> > > Running a Compaq presario 1800 with XFree 4.0.2 and the gatos
> > > ati Xv enabled drivers for the Rage 128.
>
> Ooops I just noticed that your running Xfree 4 so dpms I don't think
> works.
>
So XFree 4 is not capable at all of supporting dpms? Isn't there a way
around this?
thanx,
S.
------------------------------
From: Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Unable to access or mount hard drive/floppy drive from Rescue mode
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 09:13:48 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
David J. wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to boot my Red Hat 6.2 system (PIII 450 Mhz, linux kernel
> version 2.2.16) into Rescue mode by booting from the floppy drive, without
> accessing the hard drive. (This is because when I boot into Rescue mode for
> real, I will have just formatted the linux filesystems on the hard drive,
> and the root partition will not contain a /etc/fstab file. Hence
> all the filesystems, including the root filesystem, will not be able to be
> mounted.) FYI, I'm using LILO to dual boot the machine between Win 98 and
> Linux; hda1 is FAT32, while hda2 is linux swap and hda3 is linux native
> (type 83),
>
> With the Red Hat 6.2 Install CD in the local CD drive and the Red Hat
> Install floppy in the floppy drive, I am able to boot into Rescue mode (by
> entering "linux rescue" at the "boot:" prompt from the floppy). (Due to
> lack of BIOS support, the system cannot be booted directly from the CD.)
>
> My problem is that after I get the bash shell prompt, I am unable to
> mount or otherwise access any of the filesystems on my hard drive
> (/dev/hda1, /dev/hda3) or the floppy drive (/dev/fd0). In fact, in the
> /dev
> directory, the /dev/hda1, /dev/hda3 and /dev/fd0 devices don't even exist.
mmmm......
Try the obvious.
You want to mount /dev/hda1
but /dev/hda1 doesn't exist...
Then make it.
mknod /dev/hda1 b 3 1
and try to mount it again
Eric
------------------------------
From: "Mike Dahlgren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux + Docking Stations. Can I unmount hardware?
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 01:21:37 -0600
I recently picked up a Stinkpad 755CD (Pentium 75, 40 meg ram, 800 meg
HD + RedHat linux 7.0). It also came with a DOCK II (Model 9545, I think).
Anyways, if I boot with the 2.4 kernel, it will find the ISA ethernet
card(NE compatable) and it works. The problem is that it won't allow me to
undock the laptop, w/o rebooting and choosing the 2.2 kernel that came with
RedHat(I can undock when using this kernel). Could someone tell me how I
could tell linux to stop linux from even knowing that it's there? I've
tried shutting down all the kernel modules, and that wasn't enough to let me
undock the laptop. Anyone know how I can get around this?
Thanks,
Mike
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
