Linux-Setup Digest #326, Volume #19 Fri, 4 Aug 00 21:13:12 EDT
Contents:
Re: FWD: Red Hat's CFO abandoning ship. (blowfish)
Re: FWD: Red Hat's CFO abandoning ship. (blowfish)
Re: MX Records and Mail Server (Hoosier Daddy)
Apache will not serve numeric IP address ("Mark E. Mason")
Re: FWD: Red Hat's CFO abandoning ship. (John Hasler)
Re: Problem with cablemodem and linux ("Jim")
upgrading redhat (Dave)
detecting my ethernet card? (Peter Bismuti)
Re: FWD: Red Hat's CFO abandoning ship. (blowfish)
how to configure gateway and dns on my client linux machine to make it get online?
("Eric Hsu")
Re: PPP and Concentric networks dialin (Robert Jones)
Re: FWD: Red Hat's CFO abandoning ship. (Mike Stump)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: blowfish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: ..
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: FWD: Red Hat's CFO abandoning ship.
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 15:47:44 -0700
Christopher Browne wrote:
>
> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when blowfish would say:
> >Johan Kullstam wrote:
> >> if you can't own it, you can't be stealing it right?
> >>
> >Here goes your twisted logic again...
> >
> >Okay. A just robbed a bank. Then you go and robbed A, took the money
> >that A robbed from the bank.
> >
> >You didn't robbed the bank directly, but you're in process of the bank's
> >money by robbing A.
> >
> >Does that makes you a lesser criminal??????????????
>
> Money is a construct for which ownership is pretty intrinsic.
>
> Its _essence_ is as an expression of owned value.
>
> Thus, any argument surrounding the notion of things that _cannot be
> owned_ cannot be applied to money, at least not without taking _great_
> care to form syllogisms to indicate the lack of ownership.
>
How/Why money cannot be owned?
If you've created something, anything, and people likes it, they pay you
money for it, or for a copy of it. Then, you've *EARNED* that money, and
that money belongs to you. You have every legal title over that money.
Or if your parents have earned the money, and passed it down to you,
then, you have inherented the money bevause of your parents. Even if you
didn't work for it yourself.
That money is still yours. And you're the legal owner of that money.
> Putting that another way, if A robs a bank, then A has taken some
> form of property that is _owned_.
>
Wrong again. The bank NEVER OWNED the money. The money is owned by
depositors, and leave it their under "TRUSTS". And allowing the bank to
invest the deposited money, but give some interests back to those who
deposited the money as a reward/return, and promise try to keep their
money safe.
> That is completely incompatible with the thesis being explored which
> is that that some computer software may be expressly _not ownable_.
> [Further down the road lies the thesis that "intellectual property" is an
> intellectual _sham_ using the argument that ideas are _not_ property...]
>
> Something that is not owned cannot be "stolen," and thus there can be no
> "robbery," and hence the notion of associating criminal action with thus
> makes no sense at all. It's not owned, wasn't stolen, and thus there
> is no "criminal."
>
Here you're trying to go around circles again.
> Grump however you like about how "you weren't talking about that,"
> but you _were_ responding to the line:
> "if you can't own it, you can't be stealing it right?"
>
> Two directions appear _reasonable_ in constructing a coherent debate
> to the thesis:
> a) You could claim that the notion that "you can't own it" is
> nonsense, and that the "can't be stealing part" thus has nothing
> to follow.
>
> But you never said anything about that.
>
> b) The alternative is to say "OK, fine, you can't own it. But
> that _doesn't_ lead to stealing being impossible."
>
> Instead, you ignored both the initial premise ("can't own it") _and_ the
> claimed result ("can't possibly steal it"), and made up some alternative
> thesis indicating that this is all just like saying that it's not criminal
> to rob banks. That's nonsense.
>
Yes, ideas are being stolen all the time, and nothing can really be done
about it.
But, when the idea has became a tangible item, like written down as a
piece of software, a music score, or something that you can actually
sell to an audience, then, that idea has an owner. - The person who has
created it out from thin air.
Your kinds of ideas about *free are all donky dungs.
> >> > Wake up. You've just sold yourself for the price of a free beer.
> >>
> >> i have? what have i done? all i've said is:
> >>
> >> 1) copyright and patents are mercanitilism. this is by definition.
> >> 2) copyright and patents require active and intrusive enforcement by
> >> government. this is obvious by observation.
> >>
> >> do these statements somehow threaten your worldview?
> >>
> >No. But reality sure busted a lot of rainbow dreams by bubble heads.
>
> Don't blowfish have pretty bubbly heads?
>
> You may _think_ you're arguing well, but it's rather more like Ratbert
> wearing an "external brain pack" (aka piece of liver around his waist),
> and then debating using lines like "I must be right - this brain pack
> has a degree from Harvard."
Don't put words into my mouth. I never said I argue well.
But I started to wonder why I'm wasting my time on loonies!?
The gospal of Ridiculous, Mad and Silly!!!???
>
--
- Alex / blowfish.
--
- If Vi is God's editor. Then, God must have too much free time on his
hands,
lives a very dull and unproductive life; so he needs Vi to waste his
time.
But Vi was still too fast. So God created EMACS on the 8th day - which
takes
Eight Months to load, And Counting Still...
KISS rules. That's why I use Easy Edit (ee). Small. Simple and fast.
:-)
- The UN-GEEK CODE:(?What is a
geek?)-#!?+++??++++|$????+++++?????+++!!!!???+++---
geek + vi | ~/emacs
==>ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!.......:P~
newbies + Windoz | C:\LOOKOUT
EXPRESS==>_the_horrors_the_horrrrrrrroOOOOORRRRRRRRRSSSSsssss!!! :-|
- My SAS (Sing-A-Song)Fingerprint -v.i007bond: Doe1(-a deer a female
deer.) RaY2(- a drop of golden sun.)
Me3(- A name, I call myself.) FAr4(- A long, long way to run.) Sew5(-A
needle pulling thread.)
lA6(-A note to follow sew.) TeA7(-A drink with jam and bread.) That
will bring us back to DOe-oh-oh-oh...
------------------------------
From: blowfish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: ..
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: FWD: Red Hat's CFO abandoning ship.
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 15:50:22 -0700
Johan Kullstam wrote:
>
> blowfish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > --
> > - Alex / blowfish.
> > --
> > - If Vi is God's editor. Then, God must have too much free time on his
> > hands,
> > lives a very dull and unproductive life; so he needs Vi to waste his
> > time.
> > But Vi was still too fast. So God created EMACS on the 8th day - which
> > takes
> > Eight Months to load, And Counting Still...
> > KISS rules. That's why I use Easy Edit (ee). Small. Simple and fast.
> > :-)
> > - The UN-GEEK CODE:(?What is a
> > geek?)-#!?+++??++++|$????+++++?????+++!!!!???+++---
> > geek + vi | ~/emacs
> > ==>ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!.......:P~
> > newbies + Windoz | C:\LOOKOUT
> > EXPRESS==>_the_horrors_the_horrrrrrrroOOOOORRRRRRRRRSSSSsssss!!! :-|
> > - My SAS (Sing-A-Song)Fingerprint -v.i007bond: Doe1(-a deer a female
> > deer.) RaY2(- a drop of golden sun.)
> > Me3(- A name, I call myself.) FAr4(- A long, long way to run.) Sew5(-A
> > needle pulling thread.)
> > lA6(-A note to follow sew.) TeA7(-A drink with jam and bread.) That
> > will bring us back to DOe-oh-oh-oh...
>
> this has to be one of the all time greatest signatures. well, at
> least, seen since 1991. it's all there -- the computer quotes, the
> jab at geek codes, the fun psuedo unix shell notations.
>
> i have to especially point out the song spoof at the end. thanks for
> the reminder. i'll be whistling along to my sound of music LP.
>
> the only thing lacking, if you will permit the impertinence of my
> suggestion, is a large ascii art. you seemt to be a man of refinment
> and taste, therefore i heartily recommend the classic two-handed sword
> motif.
>
> --
> J o h a n K u l l s t a m
> [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Don't Fear the Penguin!
Oh Mi Gosh!
Thankx. :D
I'm *really* flattered. :-P
--
- Alex / blowfish.
--
- If Vi is God's editor. Then, God must have too much free time on his
hands,
lives a very dull and unproductive life; so he needs Vi to waste his
time.
But Vi was still too fast. So God created EMACS on the 8th day - which
takes
Eight Months to load, And Counting Still...
KISS rules. That's why I use Easy Edit (ee). Small. Simple and fast.
:-)
- The UN-GEEK CODE:(?What is a
geek?)-#!?+++??++++|$????+++++?????+++!!!!???+++---
geek + vi | ~/emacs
==>ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!.......:P~
newbies + Windoz | C:\LOOKOUT
EXPRESS==>_the_horrors_the_horrrrrrrroOOOOORRRRRRRRRSSSSsssss!!! :-|
- My SAS (Sing-A-Song)Fingerprint -v.i007bond: Doe1(-a deer a female
deer.) RaY2(- a drop of golden sun.)
Me3(- A name, I call myself.) FAr4(- A long, long way to run.) Sew5(-A
needle pulling thread.)
lA6(-A note to follow sew.) TeA7(-A drink with jam and bread.) That
will bring us back to DOe-oh-oh-oh...
------------------------------
From: Hoosier Daddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin,linux.redhat
Subject: Re: MX Records and Mail Server
Date: 4 Aug 2000 18:19:09 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 30 Jul 2000 17:26:45 -0700, "Mark Gallegos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am a linux newbie and have a mail server question. I've setup a mail
>server for my server (red hat 6.2 running POP3 and sendmail). I've got the
>mail server answering for my primary domain (I'll call it mydomain.com) and
>I've set it up in linuxconf basic mail services to answer to
>mail.mydomain.com. Mail sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] arrives as expected --
>it all works. I've set up a second domain name called otherdomain.com and I
>want to have all mail sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to be forwarded to the
>operational mail server at mail.mydomain.com.
You need to tell sendmail to accept mail for otherdomain.com.
Hoosier Daddy!
------------------------------
From: "Mark E. Mason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Apache will not serve numeric IP address
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 18:11:18 -0500
I cannot figure this out.
Lets say that I have a machine with IP address 192.168.0.1. running
Red Hat 6.2. It has 2 NICs (one for DSL and one for home subnet).
No firewall or IPCHAINS (yet).
I find that if Apache is up and running on that machine, that I can
serve pages to myself from that machine via http://localhost. The
default Apache test page comes up. No problem. So, I know that Apache
is working and my box can serve pages to itself.
But, if I go to another machine on my same subnet (say 192.168.0.2)
and try http://192.168.0.1 back to the other machine that I know
is working, it simply never responds. It is really weird, because
nothing shows up in /var/log/httpd/access or error.
It just never answers.
I can telnet from 192.168.0.2 to 192.168.0.1:80 just fine. Apache
answers to telnet. So, I know that there is a route between the 2
machines and all is well with regard to TCP/IP.
Of course, there is no DNS on my home subnet.
The reason that I care is that if my box at home is getting DHCP from
my ISP, I will not have a DNS name -- only an IP address. So, if I
want to serve up a page, it will have to be in the format of
http://123.456.789.012.
Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Mark
CC: via [EMAIL PROTECTED] appreciated.
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: FWD: Red Hat's CFO abandoning ship.
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 21:26:28 GMT
Phillip Lord writes:
> ...execute...invaded...massacred...US and UK made weapons,...
> ...attempts to sabotage...front...
>plonk<
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: "Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.linux.isp,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.madrake,comp.dcom.modems.cable,comp.os.linux.networking,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Problem with cablemodem and linux
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 19:15:38 -0400
I am not familiar with RIP. How do I disable that?
"James Stormes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:7hHi5.59217$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> You may need to disable RIP.
>
> Kyle Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > The how to works great...........
> >
> > http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/Cable-Modem/index.html
> >
> > Kyle
> >
> > Jim wrote:
> >
> > > I am really unsure about this one and of course the cable company is
not
> > > able to assist, being its linux.
> > >
> > > But I was hoping someone might have an idea of whats going on. Here is
a
> > > description of my prob....
> > >
> > > I run a triple boot system. (win98, win2k, linux -redhat6.2). The
> > > cablemodem is great in win98 and win2k. Fast speeds, no loss in
routing
> and
> > > just works great. However, when I try to configure it in linux, it
will
> > > route for a few minutes and then go dead. When that happens, I can
boot
> into
> > > either windows OS and its fine.
> > >
> > > I setup the network config to use DHCP to get the IP addy. And it does
> so.
> > > And even sets the hostname of the PC to match. And at the start I can
> ping,
> > > traceroute, browse, etc. But its slow as hell and then stops routing
all
> > > together.
> > >
> > > And the damndest thing is that it used to work. I have done a full
> reinstall
> > > of linux trying a few different distros thinking it might be a bug or
> > > something like that. So I have used Redhat 6.2, and mandrake 7.0.
> However
> > > since they are both redhat hacks, there might be something wrong on
> both...
> > >
> > > But anywhoo....
> > >
> > > Here is a description of my setup
> > >
> > > SMC 1208 PCI NIC
> > > 400 K62 128 MB
> > > VooDoo3 2000 16MB
> > > Home made system
> > > Adelphia Cable in Boca Raton, Florida
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance for any help....
> > >
> > > Jim
> >
>
>
------------------------------
From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: upgrading redhat
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 23:30:05 GMT
I just got a older computer (HP Vectra XW Pentium Pro 192 meg ram two 2
gig scsi hard drives, ect..) and I found Red Hat 6.0 runs beautifully. I
also have a copy of 6.1, but for the life of me won't work. It runs through
the setup smoothly in all modes (text, expert, graphical), but it dies once
it trys to boot up. When it loads the cd-rom it locks, unless I load it as
linux-up at lilo. Here is the last couple of lines I see:
CMD646: IDE controller on PCI bus 00 dev 08
CMD646: not 100% native mode: will probe irqs later
ide0: BM-DMA at 0xfc08-0xfc07, BIOS settings: hda:pio, hdb:pio
ide1: BM-DMA at 0xfc08-0xfc0f, BIOS settings: hdc:pio, hdd:pio
hdc: HITACHI CDR-7930, ATAPI CDROM drive
ide1 at 0x170-0x177,0x376 on irq 15
That is as far as I get. I would deduce that there is some kind of irq
conflict, but I am still new to linux and am not sure. Does anyone have any
hints to fix this. Give up and leave 6.0, get 6.2? Help!!
-David
--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Bismuti)
Subject: detecting my ethernet card?
Date: 4 Aug 2000 23:56:29 GMT
Are there any linux (REDHATj) tools for detecting an ethernet card after
installation? Netconf perhaps?
Thanks
------------------------------
From: blowfish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: ..
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: FWD: Red Hat's CFO abandoning ship.
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 17:17:24 -0700
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.setup on Fri, 04 Aug 2000 13:54:24 -0700
> blowfish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >The arguement of costs is not important at all.
> >
> >At least for any real businesses.
> >
> >You see. Business software is part of the business expenses, so, they're
> >tax deductable.
> >
> >The money has got to go, either to the software companies, or to the tax
> >collectors.
> >
> >So. Tell me where's the *real* saving!!!???
> >
>
> Does tax deductability work differently in the US?
>
I don't know. I'll have to ask my cousin in Australia.
> Here, you deduct it from your taxable income, not the tax you pay.
>
So. If you can deduct it from your taxable income, you're than paying
less tax. Isn't it? Mate!?
> So at best you save the tax that would be paid on the amount, not the
> amount.
>
> The costs must count, else who would bother pirating? And plenty of
> businesses *do* pirate, ask any of the vendor's associations.
>
To a certain extend. Yes.
For private end users, and very small shops, probably.
But for medium size and up biz. Not really. A few thousands, or even a
million or two,
might just be the amount that they put in the monthly petty cash.
> The choice of linux v MS isn't money, I agree. It's what software is
> best for the job.
>
> And that's a very individual decision.
>
I absolute agree with you on this.
> THe company I work for has one windows machine for checking the
> Director applications work correctly and we have the installer
> working.
>
> Everything else is Mac or Linux. Mac because it's best for the
> graphics people and Linux running the servers - mail and web. Plus
> linux in all the remote locations because it is efficient and can be
> remotely administered.
>
Yeah. Chose the right tool for the right job is the best way to go.
> Zebee
--
- Alex / blowfish.
--
- If Vi is God's editor. Then, God must have too much free time on his
hands,
lives a very dull and unproductive life; so he needs Vi to waste his
time.
But Vi was still too fast. So God created EMACS on the 8th day - which
takes
Eight Months to load, And Counting Still...
KISS rules. That's why I use Easy Edit (ee). Small. Simple and fast.
:-)
- The UN-GEEK CODE:(?What is a
geek?)-#!?+++??++++|$????+++++?????+++!!!!???+++---
geek + vi | ~/emacs
==>ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!.......:P~
newbies + Windoz | C:\LOOKOUT
EXPRESS==>_the_horrors_the_horrrrrrrroOOOOORRRRRRRRRSSSSsssss!!! :-|
- My SAS (Sing-A-Song)Fingerprint -v.i007bond: Doe1(-a deer a female
deer.) RaY2(- a drop of golden sun.)
Me3(- A name, I call myself.) FAr4(- A long, long way to run.) Sew5(-A
needle pulling thread.)
lA6(-A note to follow sew.) TeA7(-A drink with jam and bread.) That
will bring us back to DOe-oh-oh-oh...
------------------------------
From: "Eric Hsu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: how to configure gateway and dns on my client linux machine to make it get
online?
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:26:31 GMT
HI all,
I have two computers. And I wanna share the dialup connection to get online.
My master computer is windows 98SE. And I have finished the configuration on
windows 98 to use internet connection sharing already. Those two computers
have formed local network already.
The problem is how I can make my client computer(linux red hat 6.2) to get
on internet too.
The Master computer(windows 98) IP is 192.168.0.1, and the client computer
(linux redhat 6.2) IP is 192.168.0.2.
On the linux machine,I think I should configure the gateway and DNS. But I
don't know where and how to setup.
Would someone please help me?..I am appreciated.
Eric
------------------------------
From: Robert Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: PPP and Concentric networks dialin
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 19:52:03 -0500
Alex Deucher wrote:
> PPP is driving me nuts!!!
>
> I have a ppp account with concentric networks. I use windows NT and
> linux. I'd like to not have to use NT anymore, but For the life of me I
> just can't seem to get the dialup to work under linux. I first tried
> the graphical dialers, (e.g., rp3, etc.) all they would do is lock up
> the modem, requiring a reboot. SO next I started writing my own scrips
> with chat. All seemed good. Now here is the WEIRD part...
>
> When I set up a dialup connection in NT and and enter my login and
> password, everything connects fine (in fact I'm using it now). However,
> if I try to login manually using the NT dialup networking, or I try to
> login using hyperterminal, it always rejects my username and password.
> I've checked and double checked to make sure I'm doing it right. WHY
> does it work with the automated NT Dialer, but not with a manual
> dialin!!!
>
> help,
>
> Alex
I can't speak to the NT problem, but my Linux PPP problems were solved
after I visited http://axion.physics.ubc.ca/ppp-linux.html and worked
through the problem step by step as outlined there. I hope your results
are equally satisfying.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,gnu.misc.discuss
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stump)
Subject: Re: FWD: Red Hat's CFO abandoning ship.
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 00:52:24 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If capitalism is so wonderful why then is it investing in a massively
>repressive regime?
Uhm, dumb answer of the week, to make money?
>And why does the indispensable nation which is so totally committed
>to freedom give it preferred trading status.
You mean, normal trading status? The term preferred isn't used anymore.
------------------------------
** 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.setup) 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-Setup Digest
******************************
