Linux-Misc Digest #93, Volume #27 Mon, 12 Feb 01 06:13:02 EST
Contents:
/usr/src/linux??? ("count_zero")
Re: Partition overlapped (Eric Moors)
Re: unable to read partition table (Eric Moors)
su command while in a program? (Richard James Panturis Giuly)
Re: /usr/src/linux??? ("Nils O. Sel�sdal")
Re: Difference between "su" and "su -" ? ("Nils O. Sel�sdal")
Re: ftp betwixt windoze and linux? ("Nils O. Sel�sdal")
NFS AND NIS (Francis Oyakhire)
Re: Ethernet Help! (ntbluez)
Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer (Carsten Huettl)
Re: /usr/src/linux??? ("Werner Fangmeier")
Re: A Beginner Asks About Linux ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: A Beginner Asks About Linux ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: writing hello world in linux ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Linux Sucks... well not really ("Studio 51")
Re: A Beginner Asks About Linux (Mark Bratcher)
Re: Backing up Windows95 from Linux (Norbert Hahn)
Re: Konqueror speed (AGS)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Stefan Ohlsson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "count_zero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat,linux.redhat.install
Subject: /usr/src/linux???
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 07:36:08 GMT
Hi group,
This may be a hopeless newbie question, but...
I have installed RH 7.0 and would like to upgrade to the 2.2.17 or 2.4
kernel. I believe there should be a /usr/src/linux directory. I don't see
one; there is a 'redhat' directory. Where are the kernel source files? I
get an error when I try to run make config.
All help gratefully accepted
------------------------------
From: Eric Moors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.install,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Partition overlapped
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 09:00:41 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> than can be changed by using the partition manager included with XOSL,
> called Ranish partition manager.... http://www.xosl.org
Any (linux) fdisk can do this too(reshuffle partitions)
Not a thing for the faint of heart though,as it requires deleting and the
recreating.
Eric
------------------------------
From: Eric Moors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: unable to read partition table
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 09:05:03 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dan Amarel wrote:
> After an accidental episode of file deletion from my home dir (by the Netscape 6
> installer) and subsequent system lock-up (thanks to Netscape 6 spawning a
> zillion pop-up error windows), and in combination with a power outage (caused by
> a reflexive action on the part of my left foot against the surge protector)...
> my system now refuses to boot properly, with the boot process reporting a
> filesystem error, and dropping me into a shell.
>
> System is an i686 running Redhat 6.1, and I have 2 SCSI disks.
>
> Current status:
>
> -From the shell, I see the root filesystem, but nothing under either /user,
> /home or /home2
>
> -e2fsck reports that sda is clean, but it can't open sdb, saying:
> e2fsck: Device not configured while trying to open /dev/sdb1
>
> -I can't find /var/log/syslog at all.
>
> -dmesg reports a disk error:
> (Repair filesystem)6 /bin/dmesg | more
> ...
> Partion check:
> sda: sda1 sda2 sda3 sda4 < sda5 sda6 sda7 >
> sdb: SCSI disk error : host 0 channel 0 id 1 lun 0 return code =28000002
> ...
> scsidisk I/O error: dev 08:10, sector 0
> unable to read partition table
> ...
>
> -Perhaps I should add that there was a sym-link from my home dir (in sda3) to a
> lot of Java stuff in home2 (in sdb1). I wonder if the NS6 installer may have
> followed this sym-link and devoured everything in sdb1. (In general, I'm
> confused as to whether the system won't boot, because necessary files have been
> deleted, because of a filesystem error, or a combo of both.)
>
> I'm not a hacker, and I've never had a problem booting Linux before, and I'm not
> knowledgable about recovery issues...Much appreciate any advice!
>
what does `fdisk -l /dev/hdb` produce?
Did you make a hardcopy of the partitiontables?
They would come in pretty usefull now.
Otherwise get gpart, which can be used to retrieve a lost partitiontable.
No guarantees that this will work though.
Eric
------------------------------
From: Richard James Panturis Giuly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: su command while in a program?
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 03:04:12 -0500
Is there some way to change to a different user (like su) so that you
suddenly gain that users access priveledges while you are still in a
program. I mean you try to access a file in a program, and it fails, so
you just change users and you have access, without exiting the program.
--
Richard Giuly
(remove animal from email address)
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Nils O. Sel�sdal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Nils O. Sel�sdal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat,linux.redhat.install
Subject: Re: /usr/src/linux???
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 09:18:48 +0100
"count_zero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:InMh6.1679$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi group,
>
> This may be a hopeless newbie question, but...
> I have installed RH 7.0 and would like to upgrade to the 2.2.17 or 2.4
> kernel. I believe there should be a /usr/src/linux directory. I don't
see
> one; there is a 'redhat' directory. Where are the kernel source files? I
> get an error when I try to run make config.
You didnt install them?
get the latest(2.4.1) kernel from www.kernel.org save it under /usr/src and
unpack it
your linux dir. should appear now..
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Nils O. Sel�sdal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Nils O. Sel�sdal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Difference between "su" and "su -" ?
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 09:21:20 +0100
"Arctic Storm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:r3Jh6.8831$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> When I change to root super user, I usually issue the command
> su -
> And this has worked for me well.
> What's the difference between "su -" and "su" for root super user?
man su
-, -l, --login
make the shell a login shell
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Nils O. Sel�sdal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Nils O. Sel�sdal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ftp betwixt windoze and linux?
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 09:26:23 +0100
"Bill Parker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:_99h6.46731$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi,
>
> I have RH6.2 on my laptop... I have it networked via a ethernet card to a
> hub, likewise my desktop PC. What Iwant to do is transfer files betwixt
them
>
> I can ping each machine, but if I try and ftp from linux to windoze, I
get
> "Connection refused"
>
> If I try and ftp from windoze to linux, ftp explorer, or even the ms-dos
ftp
> command, starts to dial up the internet i.e. it tries to connect via the
> modem, rather than the ethernet card
Do you have a ftp server installed on windows?
Linux usually comes with ftp server ready'n'running..
windows does NOT...
------------------------------
From: Francis Oyakhire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: NFS AND NIS
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:30:03 -0000
I need help setting up a NFS And NIS on my home network. I
have a mandrake 7.2,7.0 and 6.1 . Thank you
francis
--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ntbluez)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Ethernet Help!
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 09:07:24 GMT
How did you get the network card to be recognzied in linux 7...?
I just installed linux 7 with a smc 1211tx ethernet card but linux
doesnt recognize it and i have no idea how to load the rtl8139.c sourc
code for it..... i need help as well.
ntbluez
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 00:07:22 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I'm new to linux, and just installed Redhat 7.0. I'm using a 3COM
>3C905B ethernet card. It knows the card is there, and I got the 3C90x
>module installed. I can ping myself but no other machine. I'm on a
>university network behind a firewall the uses a proxy server. I'd
>really appreciate any help. Thanks,
>
>adam.
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com
>http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Carsten Huettl)
Subject: Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:25:34 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello,
from time to time my rh6.2 maschine hangs While trying to login it
says:
Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual adress
00000762
current -> tss.cr3 = 00101000, %cr3 = 00101000
...
What is wrong here?
How do I fix this problem?
TIA
C.
------------------------------
From: "Werner Fangmeier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat,linux.redhat.install
Subject: Re: /usr/src/linux???
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 09:02:13 +0100
1st, the kernel source tree often is not installed by default. But you
should either find the archive on your CD's, or can download it from
thousands of linux file servers around the world. These archives are named
"linux-x.y.z.tar.bz2", where "x.y.z" is the version (e.g. 2.2.17), and can
be unpacked with "tar -C /usr/src -xvIf linux-x.y.z.tar.bz2" (newer tar
versions), or with "bzip2 -c linux-x.y.z.tar.bz2 | tar -C /usr/src -xvf -"
(all tar versions). After that, the directory /usr/src/linux should be
present.
2nd, it is recommended to rename this directory and create a symbolic link
this way:
# cd /usr/src
# mv linux linux-x.y.z
# ln -s linux-x.y.z linux
This way you can switch between multiple kernel versions, simply by
re-creating the symbolic link
count_zero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
InMh6.1679$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Hi group,
>
> This may be a hopeless newbie question, but...
> I have installed RH 7.0 and would like to upgrade to the 2.2.17 or 2.4
> kernel. I believe there should be a /usr/src/linux directory. I don't
see
> one; there is a 'redhat' directory. Where are the kernel source files? I
> get an error when I try to run make config.
> All help gratefully accepted
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A Beginner Asks About Linux
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:25:29 +0100
Vladimir Florinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt O'Toole wrote:
>>
>> I agree. And with disk space so cheap nowdays, there's no reason not to.
>> One of the beauties of Linux is that you *can* do this; unlike Windows,
>> where DLLs are overwritten no matter what, and there's nothing you can do
>> about it.
> And how, pray, do I tell which version of libc6 some piece of software was
> compiled with?
It'll tell you - use ldd on it.
barney:/usr/oboe/ptb% ldd /usr/bin/which
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x4001a000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x40000000)
so it thinks version 6 is what it wants. Well, it should specify
a bit further, because glibc2 (i.e. libc6) comes in versions
2.0, 2.1 and 2.2, and those are not compatible. However, only
one of those is a release version. The others are internal
development versions by the developers.
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A Beginner Asks About Linux
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:29:47 +0100
Vladimir Florinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Peter T. Breuer" wrote:
>>
>> That's an upgrade, and the rest of your system will stay compatible ..
>> my slackware 3.0 with lbc 5.4.38 is flying fine with kernel 2.4.0.
> Slackware 3.0? Are you serious - this was released, what, 5 years ago? My first
> Linux was Slackware 3.1 before I switched to Red Hat. That former came with libc
> 5.3.12, so it looks like you have upgraded :) But really, Peter, I think you
Of course. My box is as up to date as any in existence.
> belong to a tiny minority of Linux users who still prefer that setup. I don't
I prefer anything that does not change.
> know if your cause is good or bad, since I am not qualified to discuss the
> relative merits of libc5 vs. libc6 (are you?), but it seems the vast majority
> have settled on glibc.
They've not settled on it, just been given it and not argued. And
there's no conflict, you know! If I have difficulty compiling something
which was developed against libc6, I just have to extract a couple of
extra .o's from the libc6 .a, and there you are. The interface of
existing libc functions has not changed, but more have been added.
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: writing hello world in linux
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:33:05 +0100
Noah Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John Hasler wrote:
>> Wlliam Bennet writes:
>> > Avoid this book [The C Programming Language (2nd ed.)] if your a
>> > beginner, it's more a reference not a learning tool.
>>
>> Well, I learned C from the 1st edition and found it to be an excellent
>> text.
> Yes, the k&r books describe C much better then anything else I have read.
Agreed (not that I have ever read another text on C :-).
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Studio 51" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Sucks... well not really
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:07:35 GMT
"Anurodh Pokharel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:967sgt$5dg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> shoudl be small and fast... so i find myself with asking why is our OS
> handicapped when it comes to browsers... when it does everything better..
I've always thought every OS has it's strong points and it's weak points. I
don't think linux makes a particularily good "gaming" machine, or even a
very good environment for generally browsing the web. On the other side of
that coin, windows is the most bloated, unstable, hideous, quivering pile of
code that exists today, and I think only lunatics run any kind of high-load
server on it unless uptime isn't an issue.
I have a windows machine, I have a linux machine. When I want to play games
and browse the web I use windows. When I want to tweak my web server or
write code I use my linux machine. I think trying to write an OS that is
everything to everyone is the mark of an average OS. That's why I have no
GUI on linux - it's strength is not showing dazzling graphics and sound, so
why even try?
LKembel
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Bratcher)
Subject: Re: A Beginner Asks About Linux
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:12:51 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Noah Roberts wrote:
>Arctic Storm wrote:
>
>> > >2. Mandrake or Redhat? Which to get?
>> >
>> > Niether! Get Slackware or SuSE....Slackware preferably, but SuSE
>> > has rpm....both of the above mentioned distros are garbage (esp RH)
>>
>> I wonder how RedHat became the most prevalent Linux distribution?
>> My understanding is that RedHat was based on SlackWare, and Mandrake was
>> subsequently based on RedHat. RedHat 7.0 had minor bugs here and there,
>> but most bugs have been ironed out. I heard that SlackWare gives you more
>> control during installation, which is convenient if you're familiar with
>> Linux, but for someone entering Linux fresh, I wonder if that's an
>> advantage,...
>
>Actually, if you step outside the set boundaries of labeled setups in the
>other distros (ie. Desktop WS or Office Server) then your looking at several
>hours checking off individual packages and messing with major dependancy
>problems.....with Slackware you choose packages which are more then a single
>program but most if not all the requirements. It is a LOT easier. The only
>time when Slackware is NOT the easiest to install is if you have gigs of
>space you don't mind wasting. Pluss if you use tagfiles you can pretty much
>install non-interactively for 80% of the procedure.
>
I'm not sure what version of RedHat you installed last, but the latest
versions have better organized installs.
--
Mark Bratcher
To reply, remove both underscores (_) from my email name
===========================================================
Escape from Microsoft's proprietary tentacles: use Linux!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Norbert Hahn)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.win95.misc
Subject: Re: Backing up Windows95 from Linux
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:29:18 GMT
Joe Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What's the best way to backup Win95 from Linux?
There is not "best way" for that purpose, Maybe you need at
least two different sort of backup procedures.
>
>I know "dd" would work, but I want to be able to do individual
>files as well as a bare metal restore.
First of all you need a complete backup of the partition
that holds linux in case it becomes corrupted (=non-bootable).
With dd you can write a backup to any Linux supported
file / device:
If you Win 95 partition is on hda1 you can backup this
partition with
dd if=/dev/hda1 of= where ever you want it to reside
For a restore you nedd
dd of=/dev/hda1 in= where ever the partition has been saved to
For single file or directory backup you need to mount the
Win 95 partition as vfat. Then you have access to the long
file names. Then you may use the Unix command find
to select those files you want to backup. As find generates
a list of file names on STDOUT you may use cpio to generate
an archive.
Norbert
------------------------------
From: AGS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Konqueror speed
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 21:57:13 +1100
Jerry Kreps wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I have exactly the same problem. Konqueror take a lot longer to
> > display pages than Netscape. The platform is IBM's AIX with the
> > recently released 'Linux-Toolbox'. I don't want to go and recompile
> > the stuuf myself, > > but would like to know if I should expect this
> > or if something is wrong.
> >
> > Markus
>
>
> Konqueror runs very quickly for me. Faster than NS. I am running a
> P166 with 64MB and using SuSE 7.0
>
> I stripped all of KDE1 and KDE2 and QT-1.4.x and Qt-2.x off,
> reinstalled Qt-2.2.3 with all graphics compiled in, and then installed
> KDE2 only. Runs very fast and only rarely does any Kapps crash
> on me. Konquer has never crashed. Neither has KMail or KNews (KNode).
> JLK
>
>
I find the reverse -so what gives?
By the way what cache setting is good for Konqueror?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefan Ohlsson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Reply-To: Stefan Ohlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 12 Feb 2001 12:06:08 +0100
On Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:52:31 GMT, John Hasler wrote:
>Stefan Ohlsson writes:
>>I know the atheists have a theory that man will develop to a super-man
>>that can travel back in time and will create it all. That's the simple
>>version anyway. I know, sounds weird.
>Who are "the" atheists?
>
Are you complaining about "grammar"? I'm sorry, but I'm not a native
speaker of this language.
>>No, I heard it on a lecture about religion. Did I get it wrong? Then
>>please correct me.
>Looks to me like you read it in a science-fiction novel.
>
That's what I thought it was when I heard it. But I'm not stubbornly locked to
my opinions/beliefs, so please explain to me what atheism is all about then.
How do they explain the universe? Or don't they?
/Stefan
--
[ Stefan Ohlsson ] � There will always be survivors - Robert A. Heinlein � []
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
