Linux-Misc Digest #51, Volume #27 Wed, 7 Feb 01 18:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: From an ex Microsoft devotee (Sinner from the Prairy)
Re: Lost partitions... (Svend Olaf Mikkelsen)
Re: Lost partitions... ("Peter T. Breuer")
anonymous ftp version 2.6 ("Chris MacTavish")
Re: Optimize for Speed? ("Matt O'Toole")
Re: Dual Processor advantage? (Jean-David Beyer)
syntax highlighting in emacs ("BBB")
Re: Optimize for Speed? (Jean-David Beyer)
Re: Optimize for Speed? (Mike E.)
Re: I need your help!! (Dan de Haan)
Re: Upgrade to 2.4.1 kernel problems (Dan de Haan)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Steve Mading)
Re: rp-pppoe, kernel 2.4.x and DSL (PacBell) (Robert Lynch)
Meaning of free_one_pmd message (Dave Trahan)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Tukla Ratte)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Tukla Ratte)
Change the IO of an NIC ("Joshuas")
Re: Problem compiling sane : `EINVAL' undeclared ("Jocelyn Mayer")
Re: Optimize for Speed? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Netscape 6 - Memory Usage !! (M.Knight)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Sinner from the Prairy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: From an ex Microsoft devotee
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 16:09:05 -0500
Mark Bratcher wrote:
> >>Borland (er... Inprise) is working on a project called Kylix, which
> >>is their Delphi environment placed on Linux. I would expect that
> >>C++Builder would follow not long after that.
> >I think they recently regained their sanity and went back to calling
> >themselves Borland again. :-)
> That would be a relief. This trend lately of companies coming up with
> these really non-word sounding names is very unappealing to me. :-)
Well, the naming history is thi one:
Borland
Inprise
Inprise-Borland
Borland (at least, this week!)
And Kylix is already out!
Salut,
Sinner
--
http://www.geocities.com/sinner_prairy
[MaDuiXa PoWeR] http://www.maduixa.net
__________________
|\ Linux User # 89976
=====Sinner==== >=--[]>- a Mach 2.5!! Running on Mandrake 7.2
__________________|/ Linux Machine # 38068
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Svend Olaf Mikkelsen)
Subject: Re: Lost partitions...
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 21:14:29 GMT
"Igor Popik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Does anybody know how to find/identify lost linux/ext2 partition? I can't
>fix my parttion table because i don't know where that partition really is...
>I have the same problem with reiserfs partition. Is there a header, or
>specific i-node table header that starts linux (ext2/reiser) partition?
Get Findpart version 3.96 in http://inet.uni2.dk/~svolaf/fpart396.zip
do from DOS or Windows:
findpart all fp.txt reiser
and insert (not attach) the content of fp.txt into a follow-up to this
message.
--
Svend Olaf
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lost partitions...
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 22:01:20 +0100
Igor Popik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does anybody know how to find/identify lost linux/ext2 partition? I can't
> fix my parttion table because i don't know where that partition really is...
> I have the same problem with reiserfs partition. Is there a header, or
look for findpart (or gpart??) on freshmeat.
> specific i-node table header that starts linux (ext2/reiser) partition?
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Chris MacTavish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: anonymous ftp version 2.6
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:42:39 -0400
Hello,
I am not sure if anyone can help me or not but i download "anonymous ftp"
version 2.6. It is suppose to allow anonymous ftp connections. It was a tar
file but after i extracted the file i am not sure what to do next. There are
no instructions around to help me. Has anyone ever set this application up
and if so what do you do after you extract the file? I can't even "ftp" into
the box at all now after i untar the file.
Any help would be appreciated!!
Chris
------------------------------
From: "Matt O'Toole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux.mandrake,alt.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.help,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Optimize for Speed?
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 21:58:57 GMT
"Terry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I am quite new to Linux and trying both Red hat 7 and
> Mandrake 7.2 on a rather old machine (Pentium 160, 96MB,
> 4GB SCSI hard drive). I choose KDE and the system
> seems to be pretty sluggish in responding mouse clicks,
> refreshing desktop and openning a directory. I wonder
> what can be done to improve the performance of such a
> system. Since I have been using Win NT 4 for a long time,
> my impression is that NT 4 runs faster on such a system.
> Likely I didn't set up Linux in the best way. So, my
> questions are:
> 1. Are there any differences in performance among different
> distributions?
Not really. If they're running the same services and programs, there
probably isn't dime's worth of difference between them. However,
full-featured distributions like Mandrake have more stuff installed and
running by default. Mandrake is compiled for a Pentium I, so it's
theoretically faster/fastest on those (and slower on anything else). I
still doubt it makes any real difference, though.
There *is* a big difference between window managers and X setups. Window
managers like Ice WM use *a lot* less memory, and are faster than setups
like KDE or Gnome. They have fewer features, though.
> 2. Are there any difference in performance between KDE and
> GNOME?
Not that I can tell.
> 3. Anything that eats up a lot of resources, like memory
> or processor time?
Anything you're not using. Not running a server? You don't need inet, etc.
One big speed improvement you can make with Mandrake 7.2 is to correct the
hard drive parameters. By default, all you have is 16-bit drive access, at
least with IDE. I don't know what the SCSI default is. Use hdparm for
this. The instructions are at www.mandrakeuser.org, and 'man hdparm' I
promise, you'll motice the difference.
I have a P150 w/ 48MB and an IDE drive. It's fine, but Mandrake 7.2 w/ KDE
2 is definately feeling sluggish, compared to KDE 1. On my Celeron 667
machine, it isn't an issue. I think KDE2 might be starting to outgrow
Pentium I machines. Even with enough RAM, it feels like the processor is a
bit slow. If it bugs you, a faster window manager will more than solve the
problem.
Matt O.
------------------------------
From: Jean-David Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Dual Processor advantage?
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 17:00:23 -0500
Vishal Ailawadhi wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm new to this NG, and I'm just about to order some PC's for our
> department. I was wondering how much of an advantage there was in getting a
> dual machine (800 P3) as opposed to a single processor. In Linux, can you
> specify which processes run on which processesor? Or is it automatic? Is
> there really a benifit?
I have a machine with dual 550 MHz Pentium IIIs in it. It is certainly
faster than if it had only one 550 MHz Pentium III in it. I have not
figured out a way to specify on which processor a process runs. I do not
know if it is possible, nor do I really care. The kernel assigns a new
process to whichever processor it feels like, perhaps to the least busy
one. But that does not matter much because, when a process is
pre-empted, it may not be re-assigned to the same processer when its
turn comes back up. There is code in the kernel to give preference to
the same CPU because that way the cache hit rate is likely to be higher.
This feature works pretty well.
The benefit of having two processors varies depending on what you do.
One of my most compute-intensive applications is a database system,
running with IBM's DB2 UDB. Roughly speaking, it is a client-server
system where I run both the client and the server on the same box
(though I need not do that). For most applications, the main server
process gobbles up between 50 to 95% of one CPU, and the client takes
about 1% to 2%. Thus, the usual optimizations to the client program
would be of little use. The server can be configured, on an application
by application basis, to run on a single CPU or to use both CPUs. For
almost all applications, using two CPUs is counterproductive by a large
(6:1) factor: i.e., running on two CPUs makes the job take 6x longer
even though both CPUs are about 100% busy. There are two applications
where using both CPUs gives me a 35% to 50% speed improvement. There is
a lot of counterintuitve (to me) stuff going on. It is my feeling that
the IPC and other overhead required to keep two server processes
coordinated can frequently be more than the savings from running two
CPUs instead of one. I am talking about jobs that take hours to run, so
I am pretty sure the measurements are not due to noise or other
artefacts.
>
> Also, as a side question, I would like the machines to be dual bootable, but
> only one OS will be installed on the machine at delivery. Should I get Linux
> or Win2k? Which is easier to build off of. I was assuming Win2k, but would I
> need to blow the drives and repartition anyway? Or should I try to get the
> drives partitioned to begin with? Basically, I was wondering what the
> easiest process would be.
>
I have a dual-boot machine with Windows 95 and Red Hat Linux 6.0 on it,
with just one P166 CPU chip in it and 64 megabytes RAM. This machine is
running R.H.L.6.2.3 (VA Linux Systems' version). It has no Microsoftware
on it at all. I think it is easier to run a non-dual-bootable machine
and not run the risk of Windows running away and spoiling your disk
drives, but that is up to you. I.e., I think it better to get a
left-over surplus machine to run Windows for your legacy applications,
and run your main machine Linux-Only. That is what I do. (The machines
are networked together to share the printer and to allow the Linux-only
machine to back up some of the files of the other machine.)
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ Registered Machine 73926.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey
^^-^^ 4:45pm up 10 days, 1:13, 4 users, load average: 2.06, 2.03, 1.68
------------------------------
From: "BBB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: syntax highlighting in emacs
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 22:05:12 GMT
How can I enable the syntax highlighting in different colors in emacs (when
I write c++ files)?
Thanks a lot in advance.
------------------------------
From: Jean-David Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: Optimize for Speed?
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 17:09:22 -0500
Terry wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am quite new to Linux and trying both Red hat 7 and
> Mandrake 7.2 on a rather old machine (Pentium 160, 96MB,
> 4GB SCSI hard drive). I choose KDE and the system
> seems to be pretty sluggish in responding mouse clicks,
> refreshing desktop and openning a directory.
You should not be having such problems. I run R.H.L-6.0 on a P166
machine with 64 Megabytes RAM and a 4.3Gbyte Western Digital Caviar IDE
drive. It has an ATI 64 something-or-other 2 Megabyte video card. It
responds to mouse clicks, refreshing the desktop, and opening
directories almost instantly. Clicking to start Netscape takes about 15
seconds, though. Since you have 50% more RAM than my other machine has,
and a SCSI hard drive, it should run faster than mine for such things as
mouse clicks.
> I wonder
> what can be done to improve the performance of such a
> system.
You might wish to run top or vmstat to see where the resources are
going. Something is not right.
> Since I have been using Win NT 4 for a long time,
> my impression is that NT 4 runs faster on such a system.
> Likely I didn't set up Linux in the best way. So, my
> questions are:
>
> 1. Are there any differences in performance among different
> distributions?
I have used only Red Hat distributions, so I cannot answer
authoritatively. I would expect the differences to be slight, provided
you run the same stuff with each. If you have a distribution that runs a
lot of stuff (e.g., Apache, ftp server, etc.) that you do not need,
turning them off could help.
>
> 2. Are there any difference in performance between KDE and
> GNOME?
I do not believe so. I did not notice any. But both of them are resource
hogs and you might want to run something lighter weight. Someone else
will be sure to suggest something.
>
> 3. Anything that eats up a lot of resources, like memory
> or processor time?
KDE does. So does GNOME/Enlightenment. Find out with top (man top).
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ Registered Machine 73926.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey
^^-^^ 5:00pm up 10 days, 1:28, 4 users, load average: 2.16, 2.07, 1.90
------------------------------
From: Mike E. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.mandrake,alt.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: Optimize for Speed?
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 22:01:29 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am quite new to Linux and trying both Red hat 7 and
> Mandrake 7.2 on a rather old machine (Pentium 160, 96MB,
> 4GB SCSI hard drive). I choose KDE and the system
> seems to be pretty sluggish in responding mouse clicks,
> refreshing desktop and openning a directory. I wonder
> what can be done to improve the performance of such a
> system. Since I have been using Win NT 4 for a long time,
> my impression is that NT 4 runs faster on such a system.
> Likely I didn't set up Linux in the best way. So, my
> questions are:
>
> 1. Are there any differences in performance among different
> distributions?
>
> 2. Are there any difference in performance between KDE and
> GNOME?
>
> 3. Anything that eats up a lot of resources, like memory
> or processor time?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Terry
>
One distribution isn't really faster than the other. The biggest
difference would be in memory. Make sure your system recognizes the
entire 96M of ram. KDE is a memory hog. GNOME is better but I am not
qualified to say if it is significantly better. Other memory hogs are
Star Office and Adobe.
Mike
--
Support provided by Linuxgruven, Inc.
http://www.linuxgruven.com
314-727-0918
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan de Haan)
Subject: Re: I need your help!!
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 22:16:39 GMT
On Wed, 07 Feb 2001 20:50:09 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I need to install Linux OS to a Pentium MMX 133Mhz, 2 HDD(540M HD,170M
>HD), 64M RAM.
That can't be. Intel never made MMX processors at 133Mhz. The
slowest was a 166Mhz.
>I download Corel Distribution, and try to install it in
>540M HDD with SWAP in the 170M HDD. I can't even if I install it with
>the minimun installation option, it says that I need a bigger HDD. Can
>anyone know what distribution and version do I need to use. I plan to
>use only StarOffice 5.2 and Netscape , (no games, no utilities).
I have never tried Core linux, but it should be bale to install in
540Mb. I have susceesfully installed Mandrake 7.1 and RedHat 7.0
(6.2, 6.2, 6.0) on Systems with only a 540M drive. Just be a bit
carefule what you select. Both Mandrake and RedHat will not allow you
to install pacakges with out installing all the peices it requires, so
keep trying until you find the right config for you.
-Dan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan de Haan)
Subject: Re: Upgrade to 2.4.1 kernel problems
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 22:19:01 GMT
<-SNIP->
> Hopefully, you still have the old version of your kernel.
>In the future, the thing to do when upgrading a kernel is to keep
>the old one as a backup. Set LILO to boot the new kernel by default,
>but keep an entry for the old one, renaming it "old" or something
>like that. Don't _ever_ count on a newly built kernel working
>properly until you've been able to try it out. If you can't
>remember what you named the old version, just hit the TAB key at
>the LILO boot prompt.
Also not that RedHat 6.0 is not capable of running Kernel 2.4.x wiht
out significant upgrades. Be sure to read the Changes file to see
what version of pacakges you need to get a good 2.4.x kernel running.
-Dan
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: 7 Feb 2001 22:12:02 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Steve Mading wrote:
:> True. That has no bearing here, where you are using incorrect
:> definitions (hint, no other dictionary agrees with Websters
:> on this). Regardless of the definition being used, to apply
:> a belief to a group of people who don't hold it is a strawman.
: If you believe in the existance of god(s), then you area theist.
: If you believe in the non-existance of god(s), then you are an atheist.
: If you have no belief either way, you are an agnostic.
: I'm not proscribing your belief, I'm merely telling you what it's name is.
If your definition were the correct one, then the vast majority of
those who label themselves atheist would all be wrong. Normally,
it is entirely possible for a majority of people to be mistaken, but
not in this case, given that word definitions are arbitrary - what
the majority of atheists say the definition is, it is.
------------------------------
From: Robert Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: rp-pppoe, kernel 2.4.x and DSL (PacBell)
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 14:23:27 -0800
Jay & Shell wrote:
>
> Robert Lynch wrote:
>
> > Hiya-
> >
> > I am sure if I really had thoroughly RTFM at "Roaring Penguin":
> >
> > http://www.roaringpenguin.com/pppoe/
> >
> > and:
> >
> > http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~mostrows/
> >
> > I would know that with my 2.4.x kernel (with pppoe support
> > compiled in), to get DSL going with PacBell what I needed to do
> > was to install:
> >
> > rp-pppoe-2.5-4 as an rpm <--------------------- says: "rpm"
> >
>
> RoaringPenguin has rp-pppoe 2.8 out, which is an upgrade for kernel 2.4!
>
> And use the RPM it's easier. rpm -Uhv rp-pppoe*.rpm
> make sure you are in a console window as root
Thanks for the update. If you read my message, even the part you
snipped, you'll see I did use an RPM.
Stuff sure downloads faster with DSL!
Bob L.
--
Robert Lynch-Berkeley CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] <== NOTE:
**New address! Please CHANGE your addressbook listing.***
------------------------------
From: Dave Trahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Meaning of free_one_pmd message
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 17:23:57 -0500
I am receiving the following message on a reboot:
free_one_pmd: bad directory entry 00800000
Looking in the linux source, it looks like something to do with shared
memory, don't know what. I this a hard memory error problem and how do
I decipher the address in the message?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tukla Ratte)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 22:28:14 GMT
On Tue, 06 Feb 2001 20:26:58 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy, Mark
Bratcher wrote:
> Then there was the "agnostic dyslexic insomniac" who used to lay awake
> all night wonding if there really was a dog.
<snicker>
--
Tukla, Squeaker of Chew Toys
Official Mascot of Alt.Atheism
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tukla Ratte)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 22:28:15 GMT
On 6 Feb 2001 20:12:06 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy, Steve Mading
wrote:
< snip >:
> (Thanks for the post, Tukla. Saved me a lot of time since you covered
> everything I was about to say.)
No prob. Even I have to take a break from eating and fucking
occasionally. >;-)
--
Tukla, Squeaker of Chew Toys
Official Mascot of Alt.Atheism
------------------------------
From: "Joshuas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Change the IO of an NIC
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 23:42:33 +0100
Hello
i've got 2 NIC in 1 pc but the pblm is that they've got the same IO when i
tape ifconfig but irq different
I'm under debian 2.2 with kernel 2.4.1
how can i change the io of one of my 2 nic ?
Please give me the command line to tape in the console ...
Thanks :)
--
Pour me r�pondre, enlever le NoSpam_ devant mon email
For answer me, delete the NoSpam_ in front of my email
------------------------------
From: "Jocelyn Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: fr.comp.os.linux.configuration
Subject: Re: Problem compiling sane : `EINVAL' undeclared
Date: 07 Feb 2001 22:30:45 GMT
In article <95qsa0$otp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Cedric Chausson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I have a problem while compiling sane-backends 1.0.4.
>
> The ./configure goes all right. Then I do make. It starts compiling some
> but it ends with an error message :
>
> sanei_net.c: In function `w_option_value': sanei_net.c:122: `EINVAL'
> undeclared (first use in this function) sanei_net.c:122: (Each
> undeclared identifier is reported only once sanei_net.c:122: for each
> function it appears in.) make[1]: *** [sanei_net.o] Error 1 make[1]:
> Leaving directory `/home/Cedric/Installation/sane-backends-1.0.4/sanei'
> make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
>
> Anyone have an idea ?
>
> I'm running RH 6.2 with Gnome 1.2.
>
> Thanks in advance.
#include <errno.h> is missing in that file....
--
J. Mayer
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux.mandrake,alt.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.help,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Optimize for Speed?
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 23:26:21 +0100
In comp.os.linux.help Terry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am quite new to Linux and trying both Red hat 7 and
> Mandrake 7.2 on a rather old machine (Pentium 160, 96MB,
And how much memory is automatically spotted by linux? It will be 64MB
by default, unless you tell it different, or have a modern motherboard.
> 4GB SCSI hard drive). I choose KDE and the system
> seems to be pretty sluggish in responding mouse clicks,
This should not be the case.
> 1. Are there any differences in performance among different
> distributions?
Yes, of course, huge.
> 2. Are there any difference in performance between KDE and
> GNOME?
No .. both of them are relatively very slow.
> 3. Anything that eats up a lot of resources, like memory
> or processor time?
Yes, kde or gnome. Use a lighter window manager if you think that's
your problem.
Peter
------------------------------
From: M.Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Netscape 6 - Memory Usage !!
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 22:41:36 GMT
In article <81qe6.4702$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
James Barwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been using Netscape 6 since pre3 (earlier pre2 and pre1 too
buggy). However, ALL
> four versions (pre1--release) all used 380MB of RAM when started.
>
> Mozilla takes up about 100MB. It opens 16 java2 JVM's each taking
approx 20MB.
>
> Most will SWAP because their not all heavily used. I've sent MANY
complaints to
> AOL (ok, netscape), but I've never gotton a reply.
>
I agree 100% with all you've said here. I tried Netscape 6, both for
Linux and Windows, and both versions used absurd amounts of memory.
NS6.0 for Linux I deem totally unusable....even the bug reporting tool
crashes!
I'm sticking with NS 4.76 under both OS's.
I figure they'll get it straightened out and usable around version 6.4
or so.
--
COMBAT AIRCRAFT: A mix Michael David Knight F-4 |Phantom II
of sharp teeth, cold Gulfstream Aerospace /O\
steel, cosmic warlords, Georgia Tech Aerospace \_______[|(.)|]_______/
and evil spirits Anti-Spam in Effect o ++ O ++ o
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
