Linux-Misc Digest #166, Volume #27 Mon, 19 Feb 01 20:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Rebuilding a source RPM with modified source (Robert Lynch)
Re: What am I missing? (Bit Twister)
Re: Size of LINUX (Grant Edwards)
Re: Size of LINUX (Grant Edwards)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Robert Surenko)
Re: Size of LINUX (Grant Edwards)
Shell access for windows users? ("Matt O'Toole")
Re: Size of LINUX (Yvan Loranger)
Re: Size of LINUX (Grant Edwards)
Re: Replicate/Clone RH6.2 Linux (Tim Moore)
Re: Flexible e-mail under Linux ??? (Brian Clark)
Re: Shell access for windows users? ("Darren Davison")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Robert Surenko)
Re: Cannot connect to MySQL server ? ("Cameron Kerr")
Sincronizing or mirroring ("Abraxas")
Re: Size of LINUX (Yvan Loranger)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Robert Surenko)
Re: informal browser test (Dave Leigh)
Running from CD-ROM? (Grant Edwards)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Robert Surenko)
news reader recommendations? (Stan McCann)
Re: Q: local host name cannot be resolved ?!? (Terence Hoosen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Robert Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Rebuilding a source RPM with modified source
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 15:21:32 -0800
Mladen Gavrilovic wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I was wondering if anyone knows how to rebuild a source RPM with the
> code in the /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES directory... I know that you can
> rebuild it with the code in the package with "rpm --rebuild
> <package>.src.rpm", and that you can put the tar.gz into
> /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES with "rpm -Uvh <package>.src.rpm".
>
> However, I would like to untar/unzip the code in SOURCES, change it,
> then use that code in the RPM installation. How do I do this? Do I
> need to tar/gzip the directory again or can RPM read it directly?
>
> Regards,
> Mladen
The way you want to do it goes against the "philosophy" of
"pristine source" as stated by Edward Bailey in his book "Maximum
RPM". Instead you might do this:
-install the source rpm: rpm -iv some-src-rpm.src.rpm
-cd to /usr/src/redhat/SPECS and unpack and "prep" the sources:
rpm -bp some-src-rpm.spec
-cd to ../BUILD and make a copy of the src directory
# ls
src-123 src-123.orig
-change the src in src-123 and rebuild it by hand til you get
what you want
-make a patch file, I think the incantation is:
diff -uRN src-123.orig src-123 > ../SOURCES/my_own_patch
-add your patch to the spec file:
Patch0: ...
...
PatchN: my_own_patch
..
%patch0 -p1 ....
..
%patchN -p1 -b .my_own
I might have missed some steps or screwed up the syntax, but I
think you get the idea.
Bob L.
--
Robert Lynch-Berkeley CA USA: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <== NOTE:
**New address! Please CHANGE your addressbook listing.***
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bit Twister)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: What am I missing?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 23:23:16 GMT
If you cp'ed stuff you also probably lost original privs and owners.
This is what I use to move directories.
cd to_directory_to_move
tar cf - . | (cd targetdir; tar xf -)
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 16:32:48 -0500, D F
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've been trying to rearrange some stuff on my Mandrake
>6.2ish installation in order to make room for another
>operating system. So, I bought and installed a new 40 GB
>hard drive which is working well. Next, I copied some of my
>partitions to the new drive, edited /etc/fstab,
>/etc/lilo.conf, ran lilo, the whole nine yards. Everything
>appeared to be working as intended. Then, when I tried to
>startx, it starts fine but, when it comes time to build the
>KDE desktop, it stops with the message "kfm needs write
>permission to /tmp/"
>
>So, I checked the permissions. As it was, the 't' bit wasn't
>set on the new /tmp (as it was on the old), so, thinking
>that might be it, I set it with chmod o+t /tmp. No
>difference. BTW, X starts fine as root! lsattr shows no
>attributes set on either the old or new partition.
>
--
The warranty and liability expired as you read this message.
If the above breaks your system, it's yours and you keep both pieces.
Practice safe computing. Backup the file before you change it.
Do a, man command_here or cat command_here, before using it.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Subject: Re: Size of LINUX
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 23:42:22 GMT
In article <96ohu5$qcp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Yvan Loranger wrote:
>Grant Edwards ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
>>
>> Any fool can build a bridge that will stand up. Engineering is being able
>> to build bridge that you know will just barely stand up.
>
>I've never heard it put quite *that* way before. Is that the "I'm not
>drunk yet" model?
You're not an engineer, eh?
Engineering is about cost vs. benefit.
Building a bridge that's four times as strong as it needs to be is not a
good design. You've incurred extra cost with no extra benifit.
You've used up resources and money that could have been spent on something
else (another bridge, for example). Engineering is about being able to
figure out how strong a bridge needs to be (with a safety margin) and build
it that strong. Not stronger, not weaker.
Time spend re-writing Linux to make it 10% smaller/faster could be better spent
on something else.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Why was I BORN?
at
visi.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Subject: Re: Size of LINUX
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 23:45:11 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rolie Baldock wrote:
>
>>>We had a diffractometer and a mass spectrometer and peripheral computers all
>>>inputting data into the PDP-6 in real time CONCURRENTLY. Moreover we had
>>>HARDWARE relocation and protection so security was ASSURED.
>>
>>All PCs sold these days have hardware relocation and protection.
>
>If that is the case, then why are ther so many BLEATS about security?
Huh?
Hardware protection can't fix software bugs.
It can prevent a program from interfering with other processes or access
resources to which it isn't entitled, but it can't prevent a program from
messing up it's own data.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Hey, waiter! I want
at a NEW SHIRT and a PONY TAIL
visi.com with lemon sauce!
------------------------------
From: Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 23:45:42 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 01:54:03 GMT, Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In comp.os.linux.misc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> On Thu, 15 Feb 2001 22:00:09 GMT, Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>In comp.os.linux.misc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 15 Feb 2001 20:38:45 GMT, Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>In comp.os.linux.misc Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Mercer) writes:
>>>>
>>
>>I agree, so what. I'm saying that Science depends on faith.
> That the universe works in a predictable fashion is not
> an article of faith. It is an axiom that is time tested.
Study physics... The universe does not work in a predictable fashion.
That stuff ent out with Newton.
Axiom is "self-evident" truth. Most thinks have found great profit
by challenging them.
> [deletia]
> You can choose to violate the rules and prove us wrong
> in the process. Somehow, I suspect that you will choose
> not to for your own survival.
What rules? Are you asking me to bow to Science again?
> If you really believe the blather your spewing, you have
> the easy position in terms of proof or disproof.
Are you slow? I have asked for proof that the Scientic Method
can lead to "Truth"
Since you argue like a school boy on the playground I'll decend
to your level.
I asked for proof first...Na na na na na!
> --
--
=============================================================================
- Bob Surenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- http://www.fred.net/surenko/
=============================================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Subject: Re: Size of LINUX
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 23:46:56 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rolie Baldock wrote:
>Sorry Harlan I was a bit narrow minded, I should have said they should
>have been kept away from the commercial world and kept for scientists,
>mathematicians and engineers. People who really deserve the power of a
>computer.
Wow. You really are narrow minded. Why do you get to decide who deserves a
computer?
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! .. this must be what
at it's like to be a COLLEGE
visi.com GRADUATE!!
------------------------------
From: "Matt O'Toole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Shell access for windows users?
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 15:53:41 -0800
I want to give shell access to some Windows users. I dont want to use
telnet. Is there a free ssh client available for Windows?
Matt O.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yvan Loranger)
Subject: Re: Size of LINUX
Date: 19 Feb 2001 23:59:22 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yvan Loranger)
My comment, Rolie, was in quite another vein. Grant is quite right. But
his version of 'Any engineer can build a Rolls but it takes a mighty fine
engineer to build a Ford' gave me quite a chuckle. That's all.
Rolie Baldock ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
> Yes, Yvan, It does sound a bit like a "bean counter" philosophy. Have
> no concern for future generations. Profit before People. Leave the
> cleanup of ther junk as a problem for future generations. They will
> hate us for that.
>
> On 18 Feb 2001 13:15:49 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yvan Loranger)
> wrote:
>
>>Grant Edwards ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
>>>
>>> Any fool can build a bridge that will stand up. Engineering is being able
>>> to build bridge that you know will just barely stand up.
>>
>>I've never heard it put quite *that* way before. Is that the "I'm not
>>drunk yet" model?
>>Maybe we should forward this to some other unsuspecting newsgroups -
>>consumer, ufo, religious? :)
--
Merci.........................Yvan Pour le plein air: Club Vertige
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ncf.ca/vertige
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Subject: Re: Size of LINUX
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:00:46 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rolie Baldock wrote:
>You are absolutely right of course. Good engineering is making the
>best product in the widest sense. But creating disposable junk which
>is now turning into a major problem is not clever. People are
>beginning to realise that it just might reduce the headaches we are
>leaving for our children by making better products which last longer.
An argument could be made that the purchase price of an object should
include the cost of disposa/recycling the product at the end of its life.
Then market forces would encourage good design for lowest cost to society as
a whole rather than lowest manufacturing cost.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! I HAVE a towel.
at
visi.com
------------------------------
From: Tim Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Replicate/Clone RH6.2 Linux
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:13:33 GMT
> I have painstakingly set up old OS/2 Warp (urgh) workstation with
> RedHat 6.2.
...
> I now need to replicate/clone this workstation to 25 IDENTICAL
> workstations that are all connected over a Private internal network.
1. Attach clone system disks (/dev/hdc, /dev/hdd).
2. Clone entire system disk using dd(1):
# /usr/bin/time dd if=/dev/hda of=/dev/hdc bs=1k &; \
/usr/bin/time dd if=/dev/hda of=/dev/hdd bs=1k
3. Clone MBR:
# dd if=/dev/hda of=/dev/hdc bs=446 count=1
# dd if=/dev/hda of=/dev/hdd bs=446 count=1
4. Change the IP address (if static addresses), change hostname.
5. Test by swapping one of the cloned disks and rebooting.
Notes:
1. Assumes lilo in MBR, EIDE system with system disk on ide0, clone
disks on ide1.
2. If you have a Promise or other add on controller, you could use that
to increase the number of cloned disks per cycle.
3. If the clone workstations are not 100% identical (eg: hardware
including monitor), you'll have to manually make respective changes on
each of the clone disks.
4. The password files will be identical.
5. Note that dd makes low level byte by byte copies. If the system
disks are very big (eg- > 10GB) or have much unused space this could
take longer than it's worth.
6. Smart way would be to time and test w 1 clone, then make a script
that pauses after each clone set. Remember to include shutdown, disk
change and reboot time.
--
timothymoore
bigfoot
com
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Flexible e-mail under Linux ???
From: Brian Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.mail.imap,uk.comp.os.linux
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 18:12:48 -0600
[[ This message was both posted and mailed: see
the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]
Karl,
I use RedHat LInux 6.1 as my messaging core-services machine. I run
Sendmail for mail transport. You can use the WebMin module for
Sendmail as a graphical user interface, or you could use Linuxconf.
However, once you get your config file done, you really don't have to
mess with it, so it has not been a big deal for me.
I use IMAP for email, and I use the UW IMAP server. It works pretty
well, and is easy to install. RedHat supplies RPM's. I use IMP for
webmail, and this works extremely well as well. See
http://www.horde.org/imp/ for info on this product.
Also, I use an LDAP directory as my address book and to route email
within my organization. I use OpenLDAP (www.openldap.org). It works
great.
Brian!
>
> I'm just setting up Linux as a core-services machine. What I'm looking for in
> e-mail
> are essentially three things:
>
> 1. Powerful, reliable and straightforward transport agent. Sendmail is OK,
> but
> I'd
> love a graphical set-up for it. Config files are a pain. Any ideas?
> 2. IMAP server so that mail lives in one place and can be backed up for all
> users.
> Would be nice to be able to easily replicate/synchronise to local machines
> too so
> that off-line work is easy.
> 3. Web-mail tool to allow easy integration with the IMAP server from
> anywhere,
> anytime.
>
> Does anyone have any suggestions as to a combination of components which would
> realise these objectives?
>
> Please e-mail any replies to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Karl
------------------------------
From: "Darren Davison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Shell access for windows users?
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:16:15 -0000
Telneat supports ssh connections. I'm using it from both Win98 and Win2k.
http://telneat.lipetsk.ru/
hth
DD
"Matt O'Toole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:bmik6.5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I want to give shell access to some Windows users. I dont want to use
> telnet. Is there a free ssh client available for Windows?
>
> Matt O.
>
>
------------------------------
From: Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:27:03 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Your only alternative is to admit that the Scientific Method is indeed a
>> faith.
> That is not true. The Scientific Method (look at its name) is simply a
> method of working. No more, mo less. Faith is not a method of working, so
> the scientific method is not a faith.
It is a faith when you think it leads to "truth" If you don't, then there
are other problems associated with it. If you say that a human can't
know anything then I accept that. Nothing can be argued (or agreed
opon) with someone who says, "I don't know for a fact".
What I've really been trying to do here is show that the word faith,
does not always mean "faith in God".
Ther were many posts here from people trying to take the intellectual
high ground by claiming they lived and thought without faith.
I've been trying to explain that, without proof, trusting that the
Scientific Method will give good results is the same thing as
trusting that God will give good results. It's of kind.
I've seen no proof. All I've got was one guy in a very insulting way,
explain that I should bow down to his God, Science.
I've also got a lot of responses saying, "It's not faith because it always
works".
That's not a bad explaination, but I'm sure most people with faith in God
would claim that God is a time proven axiom also.
Thus I wonder if some people are having a little fuzzy thinking.
They say.
1. You can only know things if you use the Scientific Method.
2. The Scientific Method is not taken in faith.
3. Belief in God is faith because you can't prove it.
4. There is no known proof of the Scientific Method.
5. The Scientific Method is taken as an unproven axiom because it works.
6. People who believe in God because it works should see number 3.
It doesn't seem rational to me.
> -Ed
> --
> Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
> weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
> - The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
> |eng.ox.ac.uk
--
=============================================================================
- Bob Surenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- http://www.fred.net/surenko/
=============================================================================
------------------------------
From: "Cameron Kerr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Cannot connect to MySQL server ?
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.networking
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 13:29:12 +1300
> And the I tried to connect to MySQL using dba in the same machine(Linux,
> the MySQL server).
> [eric@linux eric]$ mysql -u dba -p
> Enter password: ERROR 1045: Access denied for user: 'dba@localhost'
> (Using password: YES)
> [eric@linux eric]$
> Best regards, Eric
Have you read the section in the MySQL manual regarding permissions?
Have you executed a statement like
grant all privileges on *.* to dba@'%' identified by 'password';
(Syntax may not be correct, look in the manual)
HIH -- Cameron Kerr
------------------------------
From: "Abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Sincronizing or mirroring
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 05:47:24 -0600
A part from rsync , which other tools are good to sincronize or mirroring
directories for remote servers?
Thanks.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yvan Loranger)
Subject: Re: Size of LINUX
Date: 20 Feb 2001 00:35:11 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yvan Loranger)
"Harlan Grove" ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rolie Baldock) wrote:
>> Sorry Harlan I was a bit narrow minded, I should have said they should
>> have been kept away from the commercial world and kept for scientists,
>> mathematicians and engineers. People who really deserve the power of a
>> computer.
> ...
>
> Who died and left you in charge of deciding who DESERVES anything? Not
> to mention who would have paid to develop computers if commercial users
> had never been given their turn? Yours would have been a world in which
> the original predictions of only 5 or so ENIACs ever being needed would
> have come true. Thank God that didn't happen!
Whoa! Let's settle down folks. This thread isn't supposed to be taken
too seriously. [but it's a great review of history]
--
Merci.........................Yvan Pour le plein air: Club Vertige
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ncf.ca/vertige
------------------------------
From: Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:39:51 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.misc Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In comp.os.linux.misc Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> In comp.os.linux.misc Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> In comp.os.linux.misc Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> What is the difference between a "fixpoint theorem" and a "faith
>>>> in a belief"?
>>> Fixpoint theorems can be proved purely formally, without any recourse to
>>> semantics. "every contraction mapping in a locally compact metric space
>> Funny, but that does not answer the question.
> Proof in that area does not require deep belief, though it helps to have
> conviction. It's a formal game at bottom - like winning at Gin Rummy.
Well, I can respect that.
It's how I look at the results of my 5 senses. I don't have an absolute
belief in anything I see or hear, but I've found that if I pay attention
it helps "win the game".
However, maybe I'm strange. I feel that some studies like perhaps ethics
are somehow grounded in a "absolute" truth. Maybe because I fear the
alternative.
> Peter
--
=============================================================================
- Bob Surenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- http://www.fred.net/surenko/
=============================================================================
------------------------------
From: Dave Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: informal browser test
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 19:49:28 -0500
Anurodh Pokharel wrote:
> the past couple of weeks I've been asking around on the newsgroup about
> if there was a browser for linux better than Netscape 4.7.
> Today I decided to run an informal test on mozilla and galeon comparing it
> to
> netscape. In the end i found that on my system; Mandrake 7.1, window
> maker, gnome on a PII 266 32 megs RAM--although low-end by todays
> standard, by no means slow-- Netscape by far had the best
> performance with regard to speed and memory usage. I decided to share
> the info in case anyone else might find it useful..although everything
> came out as expected..
>
> I measured loading time, memory usage (using top) and the total amount of
> time taken to load a fixed set of pages and a little stress test running
> XMMS, balsa and pan at the same time as viewing the set of pages.
> Pages: Google, Yahoo, Cnn, foxnews, MSNBC, slashdot, rpmfind, gamespot,
>
> Mozilla
> was too slow to even run properly on my machine.. near impossible to
> browse
>
> Galeon
> Memory Usage:18Megs
> Time to load: 47s
> Time for pages: 5 min 02 sec
> Stress: XMMS skipped at times
>
> Netscape
> Memory: 14 Megs
> Time to load: 25 s
> Time for pages: 3 min 58 sec
> Stress: ok
>
>
> So there you have it folks, Netscape 4.7 is still the best. (although i
> have left out the rendering of web pages, becasue there is no sure fire
> way of measuring that )
>
> -anurodh
You need to go back and add Konqueror and Opera to the list and re-run your
tests.
--
We give advice, but we cannot give the wisdom to profit by it.
-- La Rochefoucauld
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Subject: Running from CD-ROM?
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:52:01 GMT
I'd like to set up some Linux systems (manufacturing stations) to boot and
run from CD-ROM. I can think of two ways to run from CD:
1) Overlay the CD-ROM read-only file-system with a read-write RAM-based
file-system. Yggdrasil used to have an "inherited file system" for this
purpose, but it seems to be dead. I've also seen references to an
"overlay file system" for Linux, but the links all point to a
non-existent home page. The advantage of such a scheme is that I don't
have to sort through the file-system and figure out what needs to be
writable.
2) Mount /var, /tmp from a RAM disks, and run /usr, /etc, /dev, /home from a
read-only file-system. This is simpler, as long as you know what files
will need to be written.
There's an article in this month's Linux Journal about running from CD-ROM,
but there are a couple of things in the article that sound odd. For
example, the author states that he decided that /bin /sbin and /lib all need
to be writable.
Can anybody point me to other examples or references for running from CD-ROM?
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Maybe we could paint
at GOLDIE HAWN a rich PRUSSIAN
visi.com BLUE --
------------------------------
From: Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:59:04 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:57:50 GMT, Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In comp.os.linux.misc Ian Davey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
> [deletia]
> Then again, you are blathering about an historical even that
> was caught on tape and who's firsthand witnesses are still
> living.
Yes, but the experiment can not be repeated. In your previous
blatherings you claimed that the only way something can be known
is the Scientific Method, and it's reliable because the event can
be repeated.
Are you willing to say that there are other methods to "know" something
except for the Scientific method. If so, how?
Will we know that JFK was shot until the last witness dies and then
we officially un-know it?
> OTOH, it would not shatter my sanity to find out that it was
> all a load of hooey. I'm more worried about whether or not a
> CRT will suddenly electrocute me or if the wings of a 727
> will rip off.
Me either, although I would have to change my old "historical fact"
that can't be proven with the Scientifc Method to something else.
Perhaps this, How do we know the American Revolutionary War happened?
No tapes, no living witnesses.
> Here, you are only criticising a field of study (not necessarily
> even a science) that most of the hard line materialists here
> would themselves call "weak at best" anyways.
But that's the point, A Materialists claims that the Scientific
Method is the only way to know something.
> --
> Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
>
> That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
> |||
> / | \
--
=============================================================================
- Bob Surenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- http://www.fred.net/surenko/
=============================================================================
------------------------------
From: Stan McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: news reader recommendations?
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 17:38:58 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can anyone give me some recommendations for a good news reader that is
as easy to install and use as NS but can filter out (kill file) posters?
So far, I have downloaded and tried to install or use pan (I don't use
gnome so am not going to install it), knews (threading is ok but I want
to see all the messages), kexpress (just closes when I try to read a
group), knode (installation is looking for unknown dependencies), and
xrn (might as well use tin, rn, or some other cli reader).
I want something with a GUI; the only thing wrong with NS is that I
can't killfile the people that keep clogging up this group with off
topic religious and political posts.
Stan McCann
------------------------------
From: Terence Hoosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Q: local host name cannot be resolved ?!?
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:59:54 +0000
bv wrote
> I've been using Linux Mandrake for more than a year now as replacement for
> Windows and never had serious problems. Several weeks ago I installed new
> because I got a new harddisk.
>
> Since this new installation I get error messages from many programs,
> including the X-Server, GNOME and several others. The messages all say that
> the local host name cannot be found. So xinetd and all services that listen
> on TCP/IP ports do not work. In linuxconf, though, the hostname appears
> correctly, the environment variable for hostname is also set. What can be
> the reason? Any hints appreciated.
Are your IP and hostname in /etc/hosts ?
-Tez
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
