Linux-Misc Digest #877, Volume #27 Wed, 16 May 01 16:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: ISA WANGTEK 5150EQ tape streamer - ftape (M. Buchenrieder)
remote dumps (Kerry Cox)
Re: Frustrated ("SilentNight")
Re: Compile GCC 2.95.3 in RedHat 7.0 failed !! (Johan Kullstam)
Re: Linux X goes away??? (Yvan Loranger)
Search Engine -- Get Answers Quicker Usenet from Previous Posts ("David D. Huff Jr.")
NS Mail Notifier Continually Asks for Password... (Paul Malinowski)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (M. Buchenrieder)
Subject: Re: ISA WANGTEK 5150EQ tape streamer - ftape
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 15:37:16 GMT
Sander van Geloven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Hi,
>I have a WANGTEK 5150EQ tape streamer with ISA controller card connected
>to a PII with Mandrake 8.0 installed. Now I cannot approach the device
>because there is no /dev/... for it
Doubtful.
>or maybe I am looking at the wrong
>/dev/... (I do a check with tar fb /dev/...)
More than likely ;-)
>However the ftape modules
>load OK into the kernel.
The ftape driver is irrelevant for the Wangtek 5150 series, as
that's not a floppy streamer at all.
>Does anyone have tips to get this thing going? The controller card has
>dip switches for IRQ, DMA and ADDR, so unfortunately it isn't a Plug and
>Pray thingie.
This is a QIC02 streamer, and you'll have to compile the needed driver
for the card and the QIC02 device into the kernel. Note that for
to be able to use that streamer/card combo, you'll either have to
find the qic02 tools to setup the card from out of Linux, or
you must edit the corresponding tpqic02.h file (IIRC) manually
prior to compiling the driver, otherwise you'll not be able to
communicate with that card at all.
QIC02 cards are a bit similar to SCSI-1 cards, but use a completely
different protocol.
Michael
>Thanks,
>Sander van Geloven
--
Michael Buchenrieder * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.muc.de/~mibu
Lumber Cartel Unit #456 (TINLC) & Official Netscum
Note: If you want me to send you email, don't munge your address.
------------------------------
From: Kerry Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: remote dumps
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 13:12:25 -0600
Just upgraded my backup machine running Red Hat 6.2 box to Red Hat 7.1.
I have an internal 6-tape changer and an external DDS2 tape drive. I
believe they're Hp drives. Both ran great under 6.2 and I used mtx to
change the tapes.
I'm using the very latest dump to backup data locally and from other
networked drives. I created a /root/.rhosts file that formerly worked
under 6.2 but now does not seem to work. I have tried very combination
of syntax under the .rhosts file and still am not being authenticated
when I attempt to do a backup from a networked machine.
Her's what I am seeing on my backup box when my.box.com tries to
connect. This is the /var/log/messages output file.
May 16 13:04:21 backup pam_rhosts_auth[1135]: allowed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
as root
May 16 13:04:21 backup in.rshd[1135]: rsh denied to [EMAIL PROTECTED] as
root: Permission denied.
May 16 13:04:21 backup in.rshd[1135]: rsh command was '/etc/rmt'
As you can see, when I run my dump script, it authenticates and then
drops me out. This worked great under Red Hat 6.2. Here is my script and
here is the entry in my .rhosts file.
# Backup all the partitions
#!/bin/sh
/sbin/dump -0uf backup.box.com:/dev/nst1 -b 64 -B 4000000 -L "/"
/dev/hda5 &&
/sbin/dump -0uf backup.box.com:/dev/nst1 -b 64 -B 4000000 -L "/boot"
/dev/hda1 &&
/sbin/dump -0uf backup.box.com:/dev/nst1 -b 64 -B 4000000 -L "/home"
/dev/hda7 &&
/sbin/dump -0uf backup.box.com:/dev/nst1 -b 64 -B 4000000 -L "/usr"
/dev/hda6 &&
/sbin/dump -0uf backup.box.com:/dev/st1 -b 64 -B 4000000 -L "/var"
/dev/hda8
here's my .rhosts file on the backup.box.com box.
my.box.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This all worked before under 6.2 yet seems broken now. I have changed
the names to protext the system. I have no firewalling being done on the
boxes and they are connected through the same switch. Everythging used
to work.
Any ideas?
Thanks.
Kerry
--
/-----------------------------\ /--------------------------\
| Kerry J. Cox |__| [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| System Administrator KSL __ (801) 575-7771 |
| http://www.ksl.com/ | | ICQ#37681165 |
\-----------------------------/ \--------------------------/
------------------------------
From: "SilentNight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Frustrated
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 04:39:18 +0900
Thank you. Now I know I am not alone. But continue with my frustration
everyday
with both $MS and Linux. Any other choice ? No, for me, at least now.
SN
---
"Christopher R. Carlen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi:
>
> I have used Linux for 6 years. I try very hard to avoid using M$ for
> various reasons. I am posting to vent some frustration. Perhaps others
> are trying hard to do their work on Linux, and are frustrated too.
> Rather than saying something like, "I tried to use Linux, and it was too
> hard, so Linux sucks." (I hear people post like this often, after
> meager attempts to use Linux.) I am not taking that approach, because I
> understand the obstacles Linux faces, and has made so much progress in
> the face of. Considering those, it is really a far more remarkable
> system than M$ junk. But for those who develop for Linux, please listen
> to the users. Because ultimately it comes down to users. I have the
> intention of continuing to use Linux, because I want to be free. I am
> willing to pay for quality software.
>
> It is painful to use Linux to do work, because of the limited
> applications. I mean word processing, drawing, etc. Sometimes I have
> to do this office-type work. Other times I have to do scientific and
> engineering work. That can be painful too. What I mean is,
> applications for Linux frequently make me very frustrated.
>
> Often people say that the free apps are better than the commercial
> ones. Well, the fact is, that for doing work outside of the idealistic
> college environment where I suspect these sentiments are most often
> held, it is very difficult to do work, I mean professional level work,
> with Linux apps. But not impossible. I hope it continues to get
> better.
>
> The two apps I use that are of excellent quality:
>
> Mathematica (try to name a free app that can do what MMA does. Just
> try. No, I'm sorry, MuPad, Octave, etc. while very useful, don't even
> come close. Despite it's tremendous power, it is a little tricky to get
> MMA running sometimes on Linux, but the program itself is very mature.)
>
> Eagle (this mid-range professional schematic capture and PCB layout
> program is very good, and the only PCB program that at this point can be
> considered for professional work. Thank goodness Cadsoft decided to
> develop for Linux, or I would have to use Windoze 80% of the time,
> instead of the 5% I use it now.
>
> I had to pay for these programs. A lot of money too.
>
> I used to use Word Perfect for Win 3.1. It could do what I wanted, but
> it sucked real bad, crashing all the time, and stupid bugs. I paid a
> student price for Word Perfect 7.? for Linux, which was terrible. I
> mean, try to do complicated things like set precise margins in mailing
> labels, and god help you. Forget it. Here is a case of commercial
> software of really poor quality, but of course they eventually made it
> free for personal use, and why not, because if anybody knew before hand
> how bad it was, they'd never pay for it.
>
> Applixware which I also paid for was very good, although limited in
> power compared to WordPerfect. But relatively bug free, so I have no
> complaints.
>
> Now I am trying Star Office. I expected it to be a very stable, mature,
> and capable system. It is very capable, if it would only work
> reliably. I have tried to do a drawing, then copy/paste the drawing
> objects to a mailing label. I can't print it. It outputs a lengthy
> postscript file, but a printer or postscript viewer show only a blank
> page.
>
> Disappointment. I wonder if M$ Office could do what I want? I would
> try it except that I tried once to make labels in Word, and it was so
> complicated I gave up. It seemed that I couldn't just get a page of
> blank labels to appear, so I could just type manually. It wanted a
> database or something to merge with. Ugh. The user interface in
> Windoze in generable is so intolerably restrictive and disobedient that
> this is a main reason I use Linux. Star Office allows me to manually
> fill in a page of labels, but I can't print them. I wish I had time to
> modify the couple million lines of source code, but I have to get these
> labels done. I will find a workaround.
>
> Perhaps this is just a necessary consequence of the incredible
> complexity of these applications, that they will be filled with bugs.
> It's probably the same if I use M$ Office or Star Office, or whatever.
> So I'm not criticizing anyone's effort, just frustrated.
>
> I don't believe computing appliances are the future. The whole
> advantage of PCs is application integration. But I understand it is
> incredibly complex.
>
>
> --
> _______________________
> Christopher R. Carlen
> Sr. Laser/Optical Tech.
> Sandia National Labs
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Compile GCC 2.95.3 in RedHat 7.0 failed !!
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 16 May 2001 15:55:32 -0400
"Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Christian Rose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Besides, Mandrake now uses gcc 2.96 too.
>
> "now uses"? You mean that they copied redhat's distro again in an
> effort to beat them to their client market. They've done it every time
> so far - and I personally thought that RH's selection of a propriettary
> compiler was an effort to get them off their back.
you seem to have a bizarre concept of the word proprietary. redhat
has taken a freely available GPL'd program (albeit a development
snapshot) and modified it. they release binaries and in keeping with
the license, release sources too. look, mandrake picks it up and uses
it too. how can that be if it's proprietary?
> >> and so that his software can be used on other distros.
>
> > It can be used on everything else that looks like a computer and has a
> > compiler. Ever heard of source code?
>
> Have many people? Try asking a person in the street. Lot's of them have
> computers.
>
> >> The problem is gcc 2.96, nothing to do with RH's attempts to fix it
> >> after the fact of their decision to pirate it and the gcc team's prompt
> >> disinheritance of it ...
>
> > How can one "pirate" free software? Please tell me. Else I have
>
> Quite easily. Go to my software site and take a development version of
> my software. Hack it and release it as your own without telling me or
> consulting me. Do that instead of contacting me and asking to work with
> me on moving the software along in a cohesive manner towards a common
> goal. It's a clasic fork manouever.
you have a weird definition of "pirate" as well. redhat forked off a
version of gcc certainly, but that's not pirating. egcs did the same
thing when people felt that fsf was moving gcc along too slowly.
forks suck because they divide resources and things more of a pain in
the ass than otherwise needed. but nothing in the GPL stops forking.
> > misunderstood the GPL and the concept of free software.
>
> You have.
ok, what does the GPL say?
GPL allows forking. most things do not fork, but it's still allowed.
i keep hearing about how GPL puts you in power instead of the vendor.
if redhat distro people feel that they want features not in the
official release, it is their right under the GPL to use and modify
it.
there is nothing in the GPL saying that you have to notify original
or prior authors of what you intend to do with it. it may be common
courtesy to try to work with the maintainers of a program if
they are active, but it's hardly a requirement.
> >> > upgrade to Red Hat Linux 7.1 which contains an even newer gcc. I've had
> >>
> >> You mean "even worse gcc".
>
> > No. Why should I mean that?
>
> Because of your desire for truth ...
>
> >> I _dislike_ people who seek to use words to deceive. "New" does not equate to
> >> "good".
>
> > In this case it does.
>
> >> You can see that by the fact that you are talking about a remedial change
> >> to a gcc that was also "new"
>
> > Keyword "was". It *was* new.
>
>
> >> when it was introduced by RH, and was not "better" then either.
>
> > It was better in many areas than gcc 2.95.x. It still is.
>
> Many areas? Which? Is there ANY area of C compilation in which 2.8.1
> is not perfectly satisfactory? If you have a new peephole optimization,
> add it to the backend.
all gcc compilers have their own set of bugs.
> > I doubt Mandrake would decide to use it for their entire 8.x series if
> > it wasn't.
>
> I do .. I doubt that mandrake do anything except add their own addons
> to RH-whatever.
>
> >> By all means discuss the merits or otherwise in plain english, but do not
> >> seek to insinuate qualities by your use of loaded words.
>
> > So I should be forced to dissaminate every feature in detail, leaving
> > you to be able to spread the FUD with loaded and false statements like
> > "it's worse" and no details or backup for your statements?
>
> I merely match your "it's better".
>
> > If you want the details, go to http://www.bero.org/gcc296.html . Then
>
> Actually, I've read that before. It struck me at the time as a
> ludicrously false piece of apologism. I've also commented on that
> document in the newsgroups before. The only piece of technical truth in
> it that I can find is:
>
> gcc 2.96 supports all architectures Red Hat is currently
> supporting, including ia64. No other compiler can do this.
>
> And I agree with this:
>
> It may not be "standards compliant" as in "what most others are
> shipping", but 2.96 is almost fully ISO C99 and ISO C++ 98 compliant,
> unlike any previous version of gcc.
>
> and iso C99 compliance is of mild interest (although if there is anything
> noncompliant about other compiler versions, the changes will be trivial
> to implement if anybody feels like it). I don't particularly care, since
> I write ansi compliant code.
>
> But c++ standards are a moving target and not of much interest.
>
> > come back and we can have a proper discussion based on actual merits and
> > qualities.
>
> I've already been there. The document is not convincing in any way as
> regards C. It doesn't even offer any example of iso C code that 2.9.6
> can deal with and others can't, though I'm willing to believe there are
> some. So what? No compiler in existence manages compliance with
> anything (I recall hp's c89 not compiling the example on its varargs
> manpage because of silent promotion of char to int). What is important
> is it's reliabilty and _standardness_, not the number of ticks on the
> I-spy scoresheet of standards violating bugs. Only the other day I
> found that gcc 2.7.2 doesn't correctly initialize labelled fields
> in static structs, yet everyone will tell you that gcc 2.7.2 is
> reliable as the rock you stand on. That's the point .. there are bugs.
> There always are. If you exercise the corners of a language you find
> more bugs in the compilers. So programmers, good programmers, don't do
> that. And the newer the compiler, the more bugs it has. The more
> features the compiler has, the more bugs it has. The bigger the
> language that the compiler deals with, the more bugs it has. This
> is inevitable. That redhat chose to bug their distro is strange,
> but not incomprehensible. I still feel that the reasons were purely
> business based.
i think one of the problems was that it took the gcc maintainers a
very long time to release 2.95.3 even when they knew about bugs in
2.95.2 and had fixed them in the development branch. indeed, redhat
released a gcc-2.96-rh well before 2.95.3 hit the scene and nearly two
years after 2.95.2. to be sure, the gcc team thought they could get
gcc 3.0 out the door faster than has happened, and gcc-2.95.3 was
getting ready to be released when redhat made gcc-2.96-rh.
it seems rather similar to the last go around when gcc releases were
few and far between and the egcs team formed to fix that.
fwiw gcc-2.96-rh *is* binary compatible with other gcc versions as a C
and as a fortran compiler.
the only real incompatibility is in C++ object files (which
includes libraries such as libstdc++). thus the chief annoyance is
yet another libstdc++.so. it's a annoyance, not an appocalyse.
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
sysengr
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yvan Loranger)
Subject: Re: Linux X goes away???
Date: 16 May 2001 19:59:51 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yvan Loranger)
"JT" ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
> "Andrew Purugganan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> at LILO you may want to enter linux 3 to put you always in console mode
>> (plain text terminal). Once you've signed on as root, type
>> startx
>> and see what kind of messages appear. You may want to post them here,
>> plus the other messages for those instances when startx comes up
> correctly.
>
> I have done what you spoke of above. I start up in terminal mode, then do
> startx and the screen clears, then nothing. Just a blank black screen!
Run this as root, with as few other programs running as possible
X -probeonly > /tmp/eksfile 2>&1
then show us your /tmp/eksfile
--
Merci........Yvan Pour le plein air: Club Vertige
http://www.ncf.ca/vertige
------------------------------
From: "David D. Huff Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Search Engine -- Get Answers Quicker Usenet from Previous Posts
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:00:50 GMT
Search more than 10 news groups at one time:
http://www.computer-critters.com/myphpusenet/
Just enter a single key word and submit for maximum results.
While I am not the author of this excellent application I modified it to
work with PHP4 and increased it's search capability, am hosting it on
one of my corporate servers.
I have set it up to benefit Linux users.
History:
I've much enjoyed working and learning Linux specifically Mandrake. I
wanted to give something back to the GPL, GNU, OpenSource community.
April 13, 2001 I setup this application on my dev1 machine after a week
I moved it to my production machine. A month later I started capturing
news posts for many more news groups effectively doubling the size of
the database.
Yesterday, May 15, 2001 I opened the system up to allow searching on a
dozen news groups.
Comment:
There is an email address on the site to make requests or notify me of
problems.
I am always looking for LAMP work so if you know of anyone requiring
MySQL and PHP skills, and or hosting please reply to this email address.
------------------------------
From: Paul Malinowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,netscape.public.admin,netscape.public.general
Subject: NS Mail Notifier Continually Asks for Password...
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 13:04:57 -0700
Howdy,
I'm currently set up a new RedHat 7.1 server with sendmail, smtp,
(s)pop3, (s)imap, etc. to replace an older system running
Mandrake. Everything seems to work just fine using Netscape
Messenger on Windows 98 client. However, I'm having trouble with
the NS Mail Notifier continually asking for my password, even
though NS Messanger is set to remember password. NS Notifier
works just fine with POP on same 7.1 server. I've determined
that the the notifier under IMAP is getting authenticated
properly, via server maillog/tcpdump/etc..., but as soon as you
enter the password it imediately comes right back and asks for it
again. I'm wondering anyone knows of an incomatability between
imap-2000-9 running on Linux and the NS Mail Notifier installed
with NS Communicator 4.77? If so is there a work around other
than using a third party mail notifier?
Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
--
Paul Malinowski
Wulfsberg Electronics
Ph: (520)708-1575
Fx: (520)756-1640
=============================================================
THIS EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHED FILES ARE CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY
BE LEGALLY PRIVILEGED.
If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution or other dissemination or use of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this message in error, please notify the sender immediately
and then delete this email.
It is the policy of Wulfsberg Electronics Division that no
legally binding statements, representations or commitments
collectively statements) may be made by email. Any such
statements must be confirmed either by facsimile transmission
or by mail before they will have legal effect. The sender of
this email is not authorized to commit the company in any way
and the addressee is hereby formally notified of that fact.
Wulfsberg Electronics Division; Prescott, Arizona USA]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
