Linux-Networking Digest #669, Volume #11 Fri, 25 Jun 99 17:13:50 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why not C++ (Greg Comeau)
Re: Reccomendations for Linux DHCP daemon? ("Andrey Smirnov")
Re: Why not C++ (Don Waugaman)
Re: running ppp as non-root (lyte)
Re: ppp and suse? (lyte)
Re: IP Masquerading (lyte)
Re: A MIND BENDING PROBLEM (lyte)
KPPP (Matt Ragland)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Greg Comeau)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Why not C++
Date: 25 Jun 1999 16:56:30 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <7kscsl$s0h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathan Myers)
writes:
>Ralph Glebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Are all the programs in C because: [speculation]
>
>There are quite a lot of C++ projects on Linux. C projects (still)
>outnumber them for several reasons.
>
>1. C is an easier language to learn to use fully, so you may get
> better participation on a C project because you're drawing on
> a larger population.
This is a nit, and one I believe Nathan will agree with, but IMO,
it's not an easier language as much as it's perceived to be an
easier language. I mean, sure, C syntax is definitely smaller than
C++ syntax and such. But C programming involved more than just that
since a C programmer still has to learn general techniques, etc.
Also, even specific to C, I find the average C programmer does not
know C well. Probably fair to say that they more or less know some
subset enough to get by. Anyway, the bottom line is the C is popular
and will remain so.
>2. It takes substantial extra effort to code C++ libraries that are
> binary-compatible from one release to the next, so library version
> problems are incrementally harder.
This is definitely a roadblock, but I wonder how many people actually
realized this when they started out? I would suspect not to many.
Luckily Standard C++ is out and at least for now binary compatible issues
are known and can be addressed by compiler implementors as they upgrade.
Of course, some compilers have done this more than others. :)
- Greg
--
Comeau Computing, 91-34 120th Street, Richmond Hill, NY, 11418-3214
Producers of Comeau C/C++ 4.2.38 -- New Release! We now do Windows too.
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / Voice:718-945-0009 / Fax:718-441-2310
*** WEB: http://www.comeaucomputing.com ***
------------------------------
From: "Andrey Smirnov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Reccomendations for Linux DHCP daemon?
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 12:13:59 -0700
Hello,
Everything you need comes with Linux distrubution.
There is dhcp server, sendmail server and pop3-imap server on your distro
CD. With DHCP you can do everything you are asking about. Read DHCP HOWTO
at:
http://metalab.unc.edu/LDP/HOWTO/mini/DHCP.html
Also check sendmail info at: www.sendmail.org
Good luck!
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:7k61ci$rpd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> We are moving services from our NT and Netware boxes to our Linux box
> and want to get a good DHCP and mail server for it. Can anyone here
> reccomend a good DHCP daemon (our first priority) and a good mail
> client.
>
> The DHCP daemon must keep its data in an accessible text file so we can
> access it through our interactive sign-up site (currently the only non-
> automated part of our process). It also must have the ability to block
> out ranges and hold reservations for specific hardware addresses so we
> can keep people at their same IP throughout the year.
>
> The mail server needs to be a standard mail server. We don't want
> anything fancy, just something solid that sends and receives mail and
> doesn't try to be a "groupware" or anything like that.
>
> Any help is greatly appreciated.
>
> Thank you.
> Sincerely,
> Jeremy Pollack
> Assistant Network Administrator, University of Connecticut RESNET
> Project
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Don Waugaman)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Why not C++
Date: 25 Jun 1999 09:50:23 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John E. Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sat, 26 Jun 1999 00:53:24 +1200, Bruce Hoult <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>Not true, IMHO. Even such simple things as // comments, declaring
>>variables at first use, inline functions and const instead of #define,
>>structs as type names, references, cleaned-up casting, and default
>>arguments make C++ better than C.
[ some good points deleted, though I would note that gcc's inlining
support is not a feature of the C language but is rather an extension ]
>Now consider references:
>
> int x;
> x = 1;
> some_function (x);
>
>what will be x's value after the call to some_function? Will it be
>altered? In C, I know immediately know the answer to the question and
>do not have to look further. This kind of syntactic sugar disturbs me
>as one who reads a lot of software that I did not write.
Reference semantics can be abused, true. Of course, would you really
feel comfortable reading this code and not knowing a thing about what
some_function() does?
Some C++ programmers adhere to a coding standard of using only const&
parameters, and passing paramters that may be changed by a function by
pointer. I think that this type of coding discipline would meet your
objections above.
>Regarding //, in two keystrokes, my editor puts /* */ at the end of
>the current line and places the cursor in the middle. If the comment
>requires more than one line, I either hit return to continue onto the
>next line, or reformat the comment as text. I claim that very little
>is achieved by using // comments.
Not all of us use your editor. Note that the upcoming C language
standard (C9X, where X > 9 :-)) has added // comments, so the advantage
has been noted by many in the C community, although I would agree that
the // comment form is a fairly trivial enhancement. In particular,
using // comments in code so that one can later comment out larger
sections using /* */ is much worse than using #if 0/#endif pairs to
block out sections of code.
>Please note, I am not arguing that C++ is not a better language than
>C. I am just saying that the reasons that you listed do not make it a
>better language. In my opinion, the only thing that C++ has over C is
>better support for data encapsulation via classes and, possibly,
>exception handling. Other features such as operator overloading I can
>do without because of the potential for abuse.
You should probably look into C++'s support for templates, which I would
argue is at least as important as object encapsulation.
Operator overloading I don't have much of a problem with in general,
as long as care is taken in designing classes to eliminate automatic
type conversions (the latter should be taken out and shot).
I can see your point regarding abuse of language features. Of course, C
offers features that have at least as much potential for abuse than C++ -
here I'm referring to pointer arithmetic/assignment, memory management,
and non-type-safe I/O. You're used to this type of abuse, and you can
spot it pretty quickly in code if you've had much experience in C, but
C++ adds some more gotchas that can give you trouble if you aren't used
to the language. For a beginner, though, learning C++ from no background
at all is easier than learning C, which really takes experience with
assembler to fully grok.
Of course, the point that Bruce was making was that one need not use the
"advanced" C++ features such as templates, exception handling, rtti and
the like to gain the benefits that the language offers. (I would have
added function overloading, stronger argument typechecking (even during
the link step, thanks to name mangling) and the C++ Standard Library,
particularly iostreams, to his list, but it's a solid starting point.)
--
- Don Waugaman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) O- _|_ Will pun
Web Page: http://www.cs.arizona.edu/people/dpw/ | for food
In the Sonoran Desert, where we say: "It's a dry heat..." | <><
I feel a lot more like I do now than I did a while ago.
------------------------------
From: lyte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: running ppp as non-root
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 16:06:26 -0400
==============E4863EBF96BDECAD25764550
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
scable wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> Can anybody out there tell me how to make a ppp interface available to
> non-root users in RH6.0?
> The Red Hat FAQ page on this question was not very helpful. Thanks.
Just setuid the pppd daemon and it should work. You know that this isnt a
good idea anyhow. Just connect to the net as root and the use another
user to do whatever it is that you do.
--
Joey Olson
#RedHat OnLine
http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat
==============E4863EBF96BDECAD25764550
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
scable wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>Hi all.
<p>Can anybody out there tell me how to make a ppp interface available
to
<br>non-root users in RH6.0?
<br>The Red Hat FAQ page on this question was not very helpful.
Thanks.</blockquote>
Just setuid the pppd daemon and it should work. You know that this isnt
a good idea anyhow. Just connect to the net as root and the use another
user to do whatever it is that you do.
<pre>--
Joey Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
#RedHat OnLine
<A
HREF="http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat">http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat</A></pre>
</html>
==============E4863EBF96BDECAD25764550==
------------------------------
From: lyte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ppp and suse?
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 16:08:37 -0400
==============3E4879417FE5013B85FBF2FC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi i have a problem.
> I have filled in all neceserry information i the yast networking tool tath is
> needed to connect to my isp, but i can�t get the modem to dial.
> When i am selecting the option activate nothing happens.
> What should i do, do i need to type some command to get the modem to dial???
>
> Thanks in advance!!!
>
> Dennis Nilsson
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
How about trying a chat script. PPP-UP is a great one and it comes with an easy
to follow guide that I wrote myself. Check it out.
www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat/ppp.shtml
--
Joey Olson
#RedHat OnLine
http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat
==============3E4879417FE5013B85FBF2FC
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>Hi i have a problem.
<br>I have filled in all neceserry information i the yast networking tool
tath is
<br>needed to connect to my isp, but i can´t get the modem to dial.
<br>When i am selecting the option activate nothing happens.
<br>What should i do, do i need to type some command to get the modem to
dial???
<p>
Thanks in advance!!!
<p>
Dennis Nilsson
<p>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
<br><a
href="http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp">http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp</a>
Create Your Own Free Member Forum</blockquote>
How about trying a chat script. PPP-UP is a great one and it comes with
an easy to follow guide that I wrote myself. Check it out.
www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat/ppp.shtml
<br>
<pre>--
Joey Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
#RedHat OnLine
<A
HREF="http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat">http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat</A></pre>
</html>
==============3E4879417FE5013B85FBF2FC==
------------------------------
From: lyte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IP Masquerading
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 16:09:52 -0400
==============89E38828384B70221F9AFB2C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Nightcrawler wrote:
> Can someone tell me how to run IPmasq so a Windoze box on the LAN can
> receive files with ICQ?
>
> I know it can be done because I've seen a Windoze box with a util that would
> do it.... so I'm sure Linux can too.
>
> Thanx in advance.
Check out our IP Masq guide at
http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat/ipmasq.shtml
--
Joey Olson
#RedHat OnLine
http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat
==============89E38828384B70221F9AFB2C
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Nightcrawler wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>Can someone tell me how to run IPmasq so a Windoze
box on the LAN can
<br>receive files with ICQ?
<p>I know it can be done because I've seen a Windoze box with a util that
would
<br>do it.... so I'm sure Linux can too.
<p>Thanx in advance.</blockquote>
Check out our IP Masq guide at <A
HREF="http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat/ipmasq.shtml">http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat/ipmasq.shtml</A>
<pre>--
Joey Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
#RedHat OnLine
<A
HREF="http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat">http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat</A></pre>
</html>
==============89E38828384B70221F9AFB2C==
------------------------------
From: lyte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: A MIND BENDING PROBLEM
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 16:12:45 -0400
==============533C5980E76AC69E02B46E72
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have been trying to solve this problem for weeks now and I have submitted
> quieries to dejanews before in an attempt to lay it to bed. Thanks to the
> individuals you have helped so far ..
>
> I have a linux and win95 box. The linux and win95 boxes have IP addresses
> 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.1.2 respectively. I have an ISP with a static IP. My
> hosts, resolv.conf, network files have been all setup according to the HOWTOs
> and my general networking does work, for example, I have SAMBA working and can
> ping and tracert successfully etc.
>
> My final ambition is to setup the linux box to dial out to my ISP (currently
> using slip) and allow my win95 box to surf the net. I have used a set of
> rules which are quite simple. From my win95 box, from an MSDOS window I can
> ping 'www.dejanews.com' sucessfully and any other named site and I can also
> FTP to say 'sunsite.unc.edu', successfully too. My problem (got here
> eventually) is when I start up netscape, which I have configured as a direct
> connection to the internet, and attempt to look at 'www.dejanews.com' it
> replies 'contacting host', 'waiting for reply' and then sits there like that
> forever or until it timesout. A direct connection to the internet is by far
> the most popular choice from the group, whereas using the proxy on
> 192.168.1.1:80 causes the error 'FORBIDDEN you don't have rights to access
> 'www.dejanews.com' on this server'.
>
> DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY IDEAS?
>
> Please respond to the following address, after removing the obvious:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
You need to set up IP Masquerading. Check out our guide for it at
http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat/ipmasq.shtml
Best of Luck.
--
Joey Olson
#RedHat OnLine
http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat
==============533C5980E76AC69E02B46E72
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>I have been trying to solve this problem for weeks
now and I have submitted
<br>quieries to dejanews before in an attempt to lay it to bed. Thanks
to the
<br>individuals you have helped so far ..
<p>I have a linux and win95 box. The linux and win95 boxes have IP
addresses
<br>192.168.1.1 and 192.168.1.2 respectively. I have an ISP with
a static IP. My
<br>hosts, resolv.conf, network files have been all setup according to
the HOWTOs
<br>and my general networking does work, for example, I have SAMBA working
and can
<br>ping and tracert successfully etc.
<p>My final ambition is to setup the linux box to dial out to my ISP (currently
<br>using slip) and allow my win95 box to surf the net. I have used
a set of
<br>rules which are quite simple. From my win95 box, from an MSDOS
window I can
<br>ping 'www.dejanews.com' sucessfully and any other named site and I
can also
<br>FTP to say 'sunsite.unc.edu', successfully too. My problem (got
here
<br>eventually) is when I start up netscape, which I have configured as
a direct
<br>connection to the internet, and attempt to look at 'www.dejanews.com'
it
<br>replies 'contacting host', 'waiting for reply' and then sits there
like that
<br>forever or until it timesout. A direct connection to the internet
is by far
<br>the most popular choice from the group, whereas using the proxy on
<br>192.168.1.1:80 causes the error 'FORBIDDEN you don't have rights to
access
<br>'www.dejanews.com' on this server'.
<p>DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY IDEAS?
<p>Please respond to the following address, after removing the obvious:
<br>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<p>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
<br><a
href="http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp">http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp</a>
Create Your Own Free Member Forum</blockquote>
You need to set up IP Masquerading. Check out our guide for it at <A
HREF="http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat/ipmasq.shtml">http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat/ipmasq.shtml</A>
<br>Best of Luck.
<pre>--
Joey Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
#RedHat OnLine
<A
HREF="http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat">http://www.thecomputergallery.com/redhat</A></pre>
</html>
==============533C5980E76AC69E02B46E72==
------------------------------
From: Matt Ragland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: KPPP
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 12:59:43 +0000
I am new to liunux, spoiled by the simplicity of windows, and am having
trouble connecting to the internet. I have grown to like KDE a lot. I
can dial and connect to my isp but that is all. I cannot telnet to
another site, ping another, site or view a web site. Is there something
I need to do in order to use the internet to its fullest extent???
Thanks!!!
------------------------------
** 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 (and comp.os.linux.networking) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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-Networking Digest
******************************
