Linux-Misc Digest #66, Volume #27 Fri, 9 Feb 01 09:13:01 EST
Contents:
Re: Where does $PATH come fro (Jean-David Beyer)
Re: Disk image (Jean-David Beyer)
Re: Measuring user satisfaction with Linux OS (Jean-David Beyer)
Re: Backup Strategies for VMware virtual disk (Uwe Bonnes)
xmms and esd plugin config. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: via ac97 sound drivers for linux (Tom Badran)
Re: Problem compliing quanta 2.0beta4 (marmolejo)
Re: Disk image (Michael Heiming)
RPM and Upgrading to newer kernels and releases ("Divya Sundaram")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Karel Jansens)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Karel Jansens)
Re: tape or tape drive bad? (-ljl-)
Re: tape or tape drive bad? (Joshua Baker-LePain)
Qmail relaying stopped working (Fabrizio Bartolomucci)
Re: Adjusting monitor refresh rate (David Efflandt)
Re: How to specify tty for write/talk (David Efflandt)
Mandrake Linux CD-ROMs (BobNWL)
Re: ssh question (David Efflandt)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Ian Davey)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jean-David Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Where does $PATH come fro
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 07:10:14 -0500
Mike Mcclain wrote:
>
> Howdy,
> grep -r PATH /etc/* ~/*
> MiKe
> -=> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote to ALL <=-
>
> JO> Where and what is setting the path before and after my .bashrc?
>
I have never figured this all out. If I do echo $PATH, I get the
following kludge, split up for legibility:
/usr/bin:/bin:
/usr/X11R6/bin:/usr/local/bin:/opt/bin:
/usr/X11R6/bin:
/home/jdbeyer/bin:/usr/local/lib/Blackdown/jre117_v3/bin:
/usr/X11R6/bin:
/home/db2inst1/sqllib/bin:/home/db2inst1/sqllib/adm:
/home/db2inst1/sqllib/misc:
/home/jdbeyer/bin:/usr/local/lib/Blackdown/jre117_v3/bin
While they cause no serious harm, I greatly dislike the repeats, and
when I examine my .bashrc and .bash_profile, I see no repeats in them.
.bashrc does not mention PATH at all, and .bash_profile has this to say
about it:
(first of all, it runs another profile, related to IBM DB2 dbms, that
diddles the path with the following:
PATH=`echo ${PATH}: | sed \
-e "s/:[^:]*sqllib\/bin[^:]*:/:/" \
-e "s/:[^:]*sqllib\/adm[^:]*:/:/" \
-e "s/:[^:]*sqllib\/misc[^:]*:/:/" \
-e "s/\(.*\):$/\1/"`
PATH=${PATH}:${INSTHOME}/sqllib/bin:${INSTHOME}/sqllib/adm
PATH=${PATH}:${INSTHOME}/sqllib/misc
export PATH
). Then my bash_profile continues with:
PATH=$PATH:$HOME/bin:/usr/local/lib/Blackdown/jre117_v3/bin
export USERNAME PATH
/etc/bashrc contains nothing about PATH.
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ Registered Machine 73926.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey
^^-^^ 6:55am up 11 days, 15:23, 3 users, load average: 2.28, 2.28, 2.70
------------------------------
From: Jean-David Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Disk image
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 07:12:43 -0500
Michael Heiming wrote:
>
> Andrea Frigo wrote:
>
> > In Linux is it possible to create a image of the full disk over some
> > support, in such a way that in case of HD failure I can easily recover all
> > my data without reinstalling Linux and all other applications, and without
> > configuring everything?
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Andrea Frigo
>
> Hello,
>
> you can do this with dd, tar or cpio.
>
> There should be manpages for all of them on your box.
>
> Just be sure to keep a hardcopy of your /etc/fstab and fdisk -l,
> will make your life much easier in case of hd failure..:-)
>
You did not explain how to read that tape (or wherever it was written)
back onto the (new) hard drive after the crash. Normally, you need
something like a boot disk - rescue disk combination to get enough Linux
up so you can run the dd, tar, or cpio.
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ Registered Machine 73926.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey
^^-^^ 7:10am up 11 days, 15:38, 3 users, load average: 2.06, 2.10, 2.31
------------------------------
From: Jean-David Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Measuring user satisfaction with Linux OS
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 07:14:28 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hello to all Linux users. Some of you guys may have read my plea for
> help some of you may not. I am currently completing my master degree in
> Information System and I need respondents from all Linus users.
> I have adopted a EUCS instrument to aid me in my research. The End User
> Computing Satisfaction instrument was formulated by Doll and Torkdazeh
> in 1988 and validated by confirmatory factor analysis. The
> questionnaire may appear abit confusing but it has been proven an
> effective tool in measuring end user satisfaction. Please take the time
> to fill out the short 12 question instrument at
> http://www.gonzalo.net/satisfaction.htm. All opinions are welcome.
> Your help is critical to the completion of my degree.
> Assistance will be greatly appreciated. To all those who have filled
> out the questionnaire...Thank You!
> Mahalo Nui Loa (Thank you very much in Hawaiian)
>
I am afraid to visit your site, because you may be a spammer or cracker.
I am not saying you are (and you probably are not), but there is so much
of that going on that your results may be skewed by those of us who are
either phobic or paranoid.
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ Registered Machine 73926.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey
^^-^^ 7:10am up 11 days, 15:38, 3 users, load average: 2.06, 2.10, 2.31
------------------------------
From: Uwe Bonnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Backup Strategies for VMware virtual disk
Date: 9 Feb 2001 12:35:46 GMT
Tom Voltaggio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: I want to be sure I can restore my current win98 virtual disk
: in my Vmware for Linux if i lose my linux partition. Which files or
: directories need to be backed up, so I can simply restore my
: win98 virtual disk in the event of a catastrophe?
: I assume that I need to back up the files in the
: /root/vmware/win98 partition. Any others?
A VMware machine has all it's informations in th .dsk, .cfg and .nvram
files. If you suspended the machine, the .REDO file is important to.
As with all backup strategies it is best to practice the backup procedure
before any accident has happend.
Bye
--
Uwe Bonnes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt
========= Tel. 06151 162516 ======== Fax. 06151 164321 ==========
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: xmms and esd plugin config.
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 12:29:04 GMT
Hello,
I have installed the xmms 1.2.4 rpm , the esd plugin rpm , and the
xmms-devel rpm (all of them the helix-gnome builds) on a RH7 box, but
the plug-in doesn't appear in the configuration for xmms. Without the
esd plugin (i.e. using the oss plugin), when I play music, the quality
is extremely poor and xmms pegs the CPU at 100%. How can I get the
plugin to show up so that xmms can use it, and so other applications
(like gkrellm) can play their event sounds while xmms is playing?
Thanks for any answers you may have.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Tom Badran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: via ac97 sound drivers for linux
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:39:44 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.alsa-project.org
--
Microsoft is not the answer, its the question.
And the answer is no. www.badran.co.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (marmolejo)
Subject: Re: Problem compliing quanta 2.0beta4
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:25:49 +0100
Reply-To: marmolejo(arroba)able(punto)es
Con fecha Thu, 08 Feb 2001 16:32:00 GMT, Aaron B. Hockley escribi�:
>The configure script runs without complaining, but when I run make it
>churns along for a while then ends with the following error:
>
>/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lpng
>
>I assume this is related to libpng, which I have installed. (version
>1.08 I believe)
>
>Any ideas?
DO you have libpng-devel installed too?
Bye;)
--
- Debian GNU/Linux Sid Linux User #162799 -
- PGP Pub Key en pgp.rediris.es ID:0x64438485 -
- marmolejo(@)able(.)es ICQ: 65833679 -
------------------------------
From: Michael Heiming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Disk image
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 13:54:45 +0100
Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> Michael Heiming wrote:
> >
> > Andrea Frigo wrote:
> >
> > > In Linux is it possible to create a image of the full disk over some
> > > support, in such a way that in case of HD failure I can easily recover all
> > > my data without reinstalling Linux and all other applications, and without
> > > configuring everything?
> > >
> > > Thank you
> > >
> > > Andrea Frigo
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > you can do this with dd, tar or cpio.
> >
> > There should be manpages for all of them on your box.
> >
> > Just be sure to keep a hardcopy of your /etc/fstab and fdisk -l,
> > will make your life much easier in case of hd failure..:-)
> >
> You did not explain how to read that tape (or wherever it was written)
> back onto the (new) hard drive after the crash. Normally, you need
> something like a boot disk - rescue disk combination to get enough Linux
> up so you can run the dd, tar, or cpio.
>
> --
> .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
> /V\ Registered Machine 73926.
> /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey
> ^^-^^ 7:10am up 11 days, 15:38, 3 users, load average: 2.06, 2.10, 2.31
Hello,
start here:
http://www.medstv.unimelb.edu.au/~pierre/backup/Backup-HOWTO.html
Or if you are serious about backups, get this great book from O'Reilly:
UNIX Backup & Recovery
Good luck
Michael Heiming
Sysadmin
------------------------------
From: "Divya Sundaram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.misc
Subject: RPM and Upgrading to newer kernels and releases
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 07:15:06 -0600
Hi.
I wanted to build a news server using use INN 2.3.0 on Linux. The RPM
seems to require kernel 2.4.x. So, I have installed RH 6.2 on my computer
and now would like to upgrade to using the newer kernel (specifically,
kernel 2.4.x).
I started by upgrading the version of rpm to 3.0.5 (from the Red Hat
Enhancements Page). That went fine. I was quite encouraged.
Then I wanted to upgrade to GLIBC 2.2! Well, to install
that, I need the new kernel installed! To install the new
kernel from RPM, it seems that it wants the *%^&-ing
GLIB C 2.2! Ugh!
I have the RPM for the kernel source 2.4.0. How can build and install this
kernel? Can it be done using RPM? (I don't think so - 'cause it asks for
GLIBC 2.2!)
Do I have to unpack the sources and then build them the old fashioned way
and then upgrade?
Surely there is a well documented way to upgrade libraries, kernels and
applications through using RPMs to bring an older distro on par with
a newer one? Or do Linux users expect to simply back up their data
and start from scratch with the OS install (a la Win98)?
Thanks for any pointers. I read the HOWTOs and the FAQs posted
but couldn't discern the answers easily.
Thanks
===========================================================================
We don't need more strength, or greater opportunity.
What we need is to use what we have. --- Basil
Walsh
============================================================================
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 11:47:46 +0100
Steve Mading wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : A religeous person does not need to explain the origin of God (and he
> : will freely admit that he can't).
>
> This whole line of arguing was originally coined ages ago NOT as its
> own proof that atheism is correct, but merely as a counterproof to
> the theists' proof that God is necessary as a first cause of the
> universe. The point is that adding God to the picture doesn't really
> explain anything at all as to why there exists a universe. And if
> you would say that God+Universe is a better explanation than just
> Universe by itself, then why not posit a metagod that created God?
> Why not a Metametagod that created that one, and so on? Wouldn't
> the Metametagod explaination, by the same reasoning, be better
> than just the God explanation? In summary: You don't solve
> the first cause problem by introducing an infinite recursion of
> causes. That's why the proof that God must exist because the
> Universe needs a cause is bogus. This argument, by itself, does
> not prove that god doesn't exist, its purpose is merely to shoot
> down to the theists's first cause argument, and show how that
> isn't a good enough reason by itself to convince anyone.
>
"God" is, by definition, "the First Cause". The term "Meta-God" is a
contradictio in terminis. For a religeous person, the universe has a
transcendent cause, which he calls God. It would be ridiculous to go
any further, just as a cosmologist wouldn't try to go investigating
before the Big Bang).
Besides, I didn't claim that the existence of the universe proves the
existence of God; I merely claimed that if you pose the universe
itself as the Prime Cause, you're in a state of belief yourself.
(On a personal note: I feel no need to try to prove the existence of
God. If God is indeed who He claims He is <G>, such endeavours are
quite futile. And if not, why bother?)
> I have no idea why the Universe exists. The only difference
> between myself and theists in that regard is that I have the
> guts to admit it to myself.
>
A religeous person has no idea why the U/universe exists either, and
he bloody well has the guts to admit that too.
Bottom line: At a certain level we all have to accept a number of
axioms. Yours may differ from those of a Hindu.
> : replacing the term "God" with "Universe" (I noticed you even write it
> : with a capital) which, more than anything else, would typecast you as
> : a religeous person.
>
> Not necessarily. Since your domain is .au, I assume English is your
> first langauge? In English, as you should know, capital letters
> are often used to indicate that you are talking about something
> famous and unique. For example, "The White House" has a very
> different connotation than "the white house". The first is most
> likely referring to the famous US Presidential mansion, while the
> second might be referring to some generic house that is white. In
> this regard, "Universe" refers to the one-and-only well known
> famous universe in which we live, while "universe" could refer to
> an imaginary universe depicted in a series of novels, or perhaps
> one universe of many in a theory of many alternate universes.
>
> Capital letters do not have to imply that the writer thinks the
> object is worthy of worship or to be deified.
Where did you get the .au (did my ISP f**k up again)? I'm from
Belgium, and Dutch is my first language, but I get the point. The
remark was meant as a smile-inducing side-note, hence why I put it
between brackets. It was by no means material to my argument. If it
offended you, please accept my apologies.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 11:56:07 +0100
Johan Kullstam wrote:
>
> Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Johan Kullstam wrote:
> > >
> > > Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> >
> > > > >
> > > > > One simple question: If God doesn't need a creator, then why does the
> > > > > Universe need one?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for budding in, but isn't that merely shifting the problem?
> > >
> > > no, it's *un*-shifting the problem.
> > >
> > See below for my reaction.
> >
> > > > Aren't you essentially turning the universe into a non-created
> > > > entity?
> > >
> > > as something without a creator, sure.
> > >
> > OK. So where did it come from then?
>
> i have no idea. it was already here when i became aware of anything.
>
> however, invoking a creator doesn't help. immediately, one asks, who
> made the creator? and so on. ok so you stop somewhere. maybe the
> creator doesn't need to be created. fine. maybe the universe doesn't
> need to created as such either. this doesn't mean god or gods or
> whatever didn't create the universe, it just means that it's not
> *necessary* to have them do so. you can have your creator. it's your
> argument which i find bogus.
>
The real answer is: "I don't know". We only differ in what comes
after that.
An agnosticist will say: "I don't know. Period."
A religeous person: "I don't know, but I can't imagine there's not
some rational Being behind it all".
An atheist: "I don't know, but I'll be buggered if there's some
rational Being behind it all".
> > > > And if not, could you explain - in a clear and non-ambiguous way (*) -
> > > > how the universe came into being?
> > >
> > > only if you can explain -- in a clear and non-ambiguous way -- how god
> > > came into being. invoking a creator of the universe adds complexity.
> > >
> > A religeous person does not need to explain the origin of God (and he
> > will freely admit that he can't).
>
> i don't see why the origin of the universe needs explaining. it
> *wants* explaining, i mean, i'd sure like to know how it got here.
> but nothing collapses just because we don't bother trying anymore than
> god would fail to exist because we don't explain his beginning.
>
So you accept the lot on blind faith then?
> > It seems to me you are simply
> > replacing the term "God" with "Universe" (I noticed you even write it
> > with a capital)
>
> maybe you should look again.
>
Yeah. Sorry about that. Got posters mixed up. Again.
Still, I see no semantic difference between the statements "God just
exists" and "the universe just exists".
> > which, more than anything else, would typecast you as
> > a religeous person.
>
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
------------------------------
From: -ljl- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: tape or tape drive bad?
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 13:22:05 GMT
In article <uvJg6.65556$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Darren and Marla Welson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a Tandberg 4220 SLR tape drive and it is supposed to work with
> SLR2,3,4 tapes. It also works with MAGNUS 1.0 and 2.5 tapes. I found
a
> MAGNUS 1.35 tape, same format and size, but different
capacity/length. Is
> it possible that this tape will not work in my drive? I have not seen
this
> model of tape on ANY compatibility charts anywhere and suspect it is
just an
> old tape. I hope I am not doing something wrong, but when I do a:
>
> # mt -f /dev/st0 tell
> st0: Error with sense data: [valid=0] Info fld=0x0, Current st09:00:
sense
> key Illegal request
> Additional sense indicates Incompatible medium installed
> /dev/st0: Input/output error
> Is it possible I need to setpartition the tape or something?
I'm not familiar with this drive; but can you create a tape and
then read it back.
--
Louis-ljl-{ Louis J. LaBash, Jr. }
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Joshua Baker-LePain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: tape or tape drive bad?
Date: 9 Feb 2001 13:33:41 GMT
In comp.os.linux.hardware Darren and Marla Welson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # mt -f /dev/st0 tell
> st0: Error with sense data: [valid=0] Info fld=0x0, Current st09:00: sense
> key Illegal request
> Additional sense indicates Incompatible medium installed
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Err, I think that's your answer. Sorry.
--
Joshua Baker-LePain
Department of Biomedical Engineering
Duke University
------------------------------
From: Fabrizio Bartolomucci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,unipi.comp.linux,linux.admin
Subject: Qmail relaying stopped working
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 14:34:38 +0100
Since yesterday, in a rapid sequence, the two linux servers of ours
delegated to the relay of incoming messages from the net to our network
stopped functioning correctly after 7 months of regular work.What has
happened is that qmail abdruptedly stopped forwarding mail to the
address of the internal mail server specified on smptroutes for unknown
reasons on both servers. Though no linux experts we have been revising
the configuration file in the control directoy to no avail.
As you might understand the problem is of critical importance for our
enterprise.
Could someone please help?
Thanks for your help,
Fabrizio Bartolomucci
--
==============================================================================
Fabrizio Bartolomucci
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
==============================================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Efflandt)
Subject: Re: Adjusting monitor refresh rate
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:41:10 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:27:29 +0000, Mark Hewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I need to increase the display refresh rate as the screen I'm using is
>flickering away like mad and it's giving me a headache.
>
>I can't find what I need to do to just increase the refresh rate, can
>anyone tell me how to do this.
>
>Red Hat Linux 7.0
>using Gnome.
Run Xconfigurator or edit /etc/X11/XF86Config and change the HorizSync and
VertRefresh to match what your monitor is capable of. For example I
originally selected a generic monitor capable of 1280x1024 @ 60 Hz, and
later modified these to my monitor capabilites:
HorizSync 30-70
VertRefresh 50-180
I typically use 1024x768 16-bit color which uses 70.1 Hz V according to my
monitor. When I switch to 800x600 it is automatically 100.0 Hz. I never
see any flicker at those rates or even at 60 Hz with 3dfx or an external
monitor on my laptop.
--
David Efflandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.de-srv.com/
http://www.autox.chicago.il.us/ http://www.berniesfloral.net/
http://cgi-help.virtualave.net/ http://hammer.prohosting.com/~cgi-wiz/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Efflandt)
Subject: Re: How to specify tty for write/talk
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:54:11 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 08 Feb 2001 23:38:56 -0400, * Tong * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>How to specify tty for write/talk for Linux? I tried "pts/2" which
>is good for Solaris, but it doesn't work on Linux. thanks.
It is possible that talk/write are disabled. See if there is a 'mesg'
command in /etc/profile or any ...profile or rc file related to the shell
being used by the recipient. See if talk and related lines are enabled in
/etc/inetd.conf (or xinetd).
Use the 'who' command to see which local 'tty' or 'pts' a user is logged
into.
--
David Efflandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.de-srv.com/
http://www.autox.chicago.il.us/ http://www.berniesfloral.net/
http://cgi-help.virtualave.net/ http://hammer.prohosting.com/~cgi-wiz/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (BobNWL)
Date: 09 Feb 2001 14:00:53 GMT
Subject: Mandrake Linux CD-ROMs
I lost my access to a CD-ROM writer at work and downloading the ISO files on my
home workstation would take forever. Is there anywhere on the net where I can
get just the 2 Mandrake Linux CD-ROMs and nothing else. I just want the 2 ISO
files extracted and put on 2 CD-ROMS....
=================================
Thanks, CyberSlammer Bob
[EMAIL PROTECTED] AOLIM:BobNWL members.aol.com/bobnwl
www.NWLwrestling.com
www.WildSamoan.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Efflandt)
Subject: Re: ssh question
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:03:44 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 8 Feb 2001 21:54:36 -0800, Tom Edelbrok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Thanks to Sak Wathanasin and David Efflandt for getting me straightened out
>with permissions to run openssh! If I set ".ssh" to 700, and authorized_keys
>to 600 then everything works fine as you said it would.
>
>One problem though, why do your permissions work and the ones that I was
>using didn't?
>
>All of the permissions that I was using were more "open" than yours. For
>example, I had 755 for ".ssh", and "664" for authorized_keys. So if my
>permissions were less restrictive than yours why do yours work and mine
>always yield "RSA authentication error"? After I got it working with your
>permissions I set it back to mine and got the same authentication error.
That is the problem, ssh does not trust any files that are writable by
anyone other than the user (i.e. 664 group write permission breaks it).
--
David Efflandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.de-srv.com/
http://www.autox.chicago.il.us/ http://www.berniesfloral.net/
http://cgi-help.virtualave.net/ http://hammer.prohosting.com/~cgi-wiz/
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 14:07:50 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Karel Jansens
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> i don't see why the origin of the universe needs explaining. it
>> *wants* explaining, i mean, i'd sure like to know how it got here.
>> but nothing collapses just because we don't bother trying anymore than
>> god would fail to exist because we don't explain his beginning.
>>
>So you accept the lot on blind faith then?
You don't need faith. You can open your eyes and see the universe exists. Pop
your eye onto a telescope and look at the stars. You can even see billions of
years into the past, towards the origins of the universe.
>> > It seems to me you are simply
>> > replacing the term "God" with "Universe" (I noticed you even write it
>> > with a capital)
>>
>> maybe you should look again.
>>
>Yeah. Sorry about that. Got posters mixed up. Again.
>Still, I see no semantic difference between the statements "God just
>exists" and "the universe just exists".
So in your view "god" equals "universe"?
The problem with the god theory is that it adds nothing to the understanding
of how the universe did originate, all it does do is provide people with a
mechanism to control others. The big questions that the existence of a god
would lead to just aren't answered by religions, because god was created by
mankind. These kind of questions seem best answered by physics and astronomy,
which are doing more to unravel these mysteries than any invented god ever
did. You can watch stars being born.
You could probably redefine god as the glitch which caused the big bang (if
you accept that theory), but it's difficult to define them/it as anything
more.
In the end though, it's irrelevant whether or not you believe in god (or gods)
as they don't actually do anything. You may as well worship The Flumps or The
Blue Meanies, it'll do just as much good and probably a lot less harm.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
