Linux-Setup Digest #577, Volume #19 Thu, 7 Sep 00 19:13:12 EDT
Contents:
Re: super mounting not working (John Travis)
Re: Toshiba Libretto Screen size smaller than X window desktop (Fran)
Re: help: glibc problems ("Peter T. Breuer")
Yamaha CDR (2:1)
Re: Converting HD back to Windows (J Phillips)
Re: Converting HD back to Windows (James Carter)
Re: Converting HD back to Windows (Marble Head)
Re: NEW NVIDIA DRIVERS (Warning) (Stuart Levy)
Linux GUI refresh rate/res (Michael)
Re: Kernel Compile Going Nowhere (Colin Watson)
Re: HELP! -- Grub tutorial? -- answer (Edward A. Falk)
Re: HELP! -- Grub tutorial? -- answer (Edward A. Falk)
linux os for firewall and internet??????? ("andy m")
Samba probleem (Casper Doppen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Travis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: super mounting not working
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake,comp.os.linux.x
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 21:13:21 GMT
In alt.os.linux.mandrake ascii_superstar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>ahhhh, I actually dont have the supermount module installed with my new
>kernel.
>I do however have automount.
>I have autofs installed , but it doesnt work :-(
>sergio
Now I see the problem :-). They aren't the same thing. Autofs is to mount
network shares (If I recall correctly). It doesn't have anything to do with
auto-mounting removable media (cdroms, zips, etc). So rebuild and don't forget
about supermount 8^).
jt
--
Debian GNU/Linux
Storm [Hail]
------------------------------
From: Fran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Toshiba Libretto Screen size smaller than X window desktop
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.portable,uk.comp.os.linux
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:24:54 +1200
This is my XF86Config from my Libby 110
Fran
:):):)
============================
Section "Files"
RgbPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/rgb"
FontPath
"/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Speedo/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/,/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi/,unix/:7100"
EndSection
Section "ServerFlags"
EndSection
Section "Keyboard"
Protocol "Standard"
AutoRepeat 500 5
LeftAlt Meta
RightAlt Meta
ScrollLock Compose
RightCtl Control
XLeds 1 2 3
XkbKeycodes "xfree86"
XkbTypes "default"
XkbCompat "default"
XkbSymbols "us(pc101)"
XkbGeometry "pc"
XkbRules "xfree86"
XkbModel "pc104"
XkbLayout "us"
EndSection
Section "Pointer"
Protocol "PS/2"
Device "/dev/psaux"
Emulate3Buttons
Emulate3Timeout 50
EndSection
Section "Monitor"
Identifier "Generic Multisync"
VendorName "Unknown"
ModelName "Unknown"
HorizSync 30-64
VertRefresh 50-100
# 800x480
Modeline "800x480" 40 800 864 928 1088 480 481 484 509 +hsync
EndSection
Section "Device"
Identifier "NeoMagic"
# Chipset "NM2160"
# IOBase 0xfea00000
# MemBase 0xfd000000
# VideoRam 2048
# DacSpeed 90
# Option "linear"
# Option "nolinear"
# Option "sw_cursor"
# Option "hw_cursor"
# Option "no_accel"
# Option "intern_disp"
# Option "extern_disp"
# Option "mmio"
# Option "no_mmio"
# Option "lcd_center"
# Option "no_stretch"
Option "override_validate_mode"
EndSection
Section "Screen"
Driver "svga"
Device "NeoMagic"
Monitor "Generic Multisync"
BlankTime 0
SuspendTime 0
OffTime 0
Subsection "Display"
Depth 16
Modes "800x480"
ViewPort 0 0
Virtual 800 480
EndSubsection
EndSection
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: help: glibc problems
Date: 7 Sep 2000 21:23:24 GMT
In comp.os.linux.help johnny B <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: i'm running redhat6.0 with glibc 2.1.1 installed in /. i've just
: compiled and installed glibc 2.1.3 in /usr/local. I still need 2.1.1 for
You can't do that kind of thing haphazardly! You need to know and
arrange both the compilation and exectution link lookup paths to match.
: many binaries, including init so i cant get rid of it. But when i run
You should do a straight replace of libc. Any problems are due to bad
source in executables, which you should fix as they come up.
: certain programs, like xmms and xmps, i get the following errors (even
: after recompiling):
: xmms: /lib/ld-linux.so.2: version `GLIBC_2.1.1' not found (required by
: /usr/local/lib/libc.so.6)
Which should not have been your compile link choice, since the old libc
is still in /lib and will be looked for first on execution!
: i've rearranged ld.so.conf to search /lib, then /usr/lib and
: /usr/local/lib in that order or else i cant boot up. why do i get the
: error above if glibc2.1.1 is in my library search path?
Becuase you have done this. What's the conceptual problem?
Peter
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Yamaha CDR
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 21:16:38 GMT
Hi
I have a RH6.2 system. I want to install a new IDE Yamaha CDRW (8x4x24).
Are there suitable drivers with the stock kernel?
Does suitable software come with RH6.2 ?
How do I set it up, once it is physically in the system?
Thanks
Ed
--
BBC Computer 32K | Edward Rosten
Acorn DFS | Engineer and Jupiter ACE advocate
Basic | fuji.stcatz.ox.ac.uk/cult
>*MAIL ku.ca.xo.gne@rje98u (backwards, if you want to talk to me)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: J Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Converting HD back to Windows
Date: 7 Sep 2000 21:50:39 GMT
Well, something only supports 504MB... controller card? version of DOS?
James Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> HI: I have upgraded my hard drive and the old 1.2Gig hard drive that I
> had in my computer I want to give to the father-in-law. I copied all the
> info from the 1.2gig to my new hard drive and I wiped out the 1.2 gig
> with fdisk. I removed the root(mount), /user and swap with no problems.
> Now when I install the hard drive into his computer it will only
> register as 504meg hard drive and no bigger. I have tried partition
> magic 4.0 on it and that is all it comes up with also. If I start to
> reinstall linux back onto the drive to see if it sees the full 1.2 gigs,
> it sees the full 1.2 gigs fine. What am I doing wrong. I have read lots
> of posts saying delete the partitions in linux's fdisk and you will be
> fine, I did that and still the 504megs when I try to convert to dos. The
> only thing I can think of is reinstalling linux back to the way it was
> before and then putting in the partition magic 4.0 rescue disk and
> trying to delete it before touching it with dos's fdisk. Any idea's. The
> bios in the startup of his computer finds it no problem as 1.2gigs and
> configures correctly so it's not a bios problem. I have no clue on what
> to do. Anybody had this problem when trying to convert back to dos?
------------------------------
From: James Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Converting HD back to Windows
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 22:06:58 GMT
Yes, the bios reads 1.2 gigs but when I tried to use a setup disk from
maxtor it said that the bios indeed did not support the full amount. I
just thought that if the bios screen said the correct amount than that
must mean that it is supported, oh well you learn something new
everyday. I installed the e-z bios thing from the maxtor disk and it
comes up correctly as 1.22 gigs. I would like to convert this to win2000
for the father-in-law so we will see if it works.
J Phillips wrote:
>
> Well, something only supports 504MB... controller card? version of DOS?
>
> James Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > HI: I have upgraded my hard drive and the old 1.2Gig hard drive that I
> > had in my computer I want to give to the father-in-law. I copied all the
> > info from the 1.2gig to my new hard drive and I wiped out the 1.2 gig
> > with fdisk. I removed the root(mount), /user and swap with no problems.
> > Now when I install the hard drive into his computer it will only
> > register as 504meg hard drive and no bigger. I have tried partition
> > magic 4.0 on it and that is all it comes up with also. If I start to
> > reinstall linux back onto the drive to see if it sees the full 1.2 gigs,
> > it sees the full 1.2 gigs fine. What am I doing wrong. I have read lots
> > of posts saying delete the partitions in linux's fdisk and you will be
> > fine, I did that and still the 504megs when I try to convert to dos. The
> > only thing I can think of is reinstalling linux back to the way it was
> > before and then putting in the partition magic 4.0 rescue disk and
> > trying to delete it before touching it with dos's fdisk. Any idea's. The
> > bios in the startup of his computer finds it no problem as 1.2gigs and
> > configures correctly so it's not a bios problem. I have no clue on what
> > to do. Anybody had this problem when trying to convert back to dos?
------------------------------
From: Marble Head <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Converting HD back to Windows
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 18:09:28 -0400
I know you say "it's not a bios problem" but just 'cuz the hardware can see
1.2g doesn't mean the software necessarily can.
In fact, there was a short time when the bios barrier was overcome, but
nobody knew how to make the sw talk to the hw. I am willing to bet you have
either a 486/dx4 or a pent 60,66,75,90. Let me know, to satisfy my
curiosity on my ego level.
Go to the website of your drive manufacturer and download their version of
the ontrack drive overlay. This is a software patch that resides in the
boot sector, and performs translations from the software to the hardware.
James Carter wrote:
> HI: I have upgraded my hard drive and the old 1.2Gig hard drive that I
> had in my computer I want to give to the father-in-law. I copied all the
> info from the 1.2gig to my new hard drive and I wiped out the 1.2 gig
> with fdisk. I removed the root(mount), /user and swap with no problems.
> Now when I install the hard drive into his computer it will only
> register as 504meg hard drive and no bigger. I have tried partition
> magic 4.0 on it and that is all it comes up with also. If I start to
> reinstall linux back onto the drive to see if it sees the full 1.2 gigs,
> it sees the full 1.2 gigs fine. What am I doing wrong. I have read lots
> of posts saying delete the partitions in linux's fdisk and you will be
> fine, I did that and still the 504megs when I try to convert to dos. The
> only thing I can think of is reinstalling linux back to the way it was
> before and then putting in the partition magic 4.0 rescue disk and
> trying to delete it before touching it with dos's fdisk. Any idea's. The
> bios in the startup of his computer finds it no problem as 1.2gigs and
> configures correctly so it's not a bios problem. I have no clue on what
> to do. Anybody had this problem when trying to convert back to dos?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stuart Levy)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: NEW NVIDIA DRIVERS (Warning)
Date: 7 Sep 2000 17:14:04 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Bernhard Mogens Ege <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I would be very carefull with these new nvidia drivers (version 0.9-5)
>as I have just lost my ext2 partition due to a crash caused by these
>drivers. I am reinstalling redhat as I type this.
[...]
Do you enable DMA on your hard disk? If so, don't!
With earlier NVidia drivers (0.92), I did experience lockups,
and if I had DMA enabled on my IDE system drive, my filesystem
would be corrupted (chunks of i-node control information replaced
by junk) at essentially every lockup. With DMA off -- using slower
PIO for disk I/O -- I still got lockups, but never any filesystem corruption.
I haven't tried any of the more recent NVidia drivers (0.93-0.95)
though maybe I'll try again now -- but with DMA disabled, for sure.
I did report the above to NVidia and to this newsgroup. I never heard
back from NVidia, but did see a reference from there to a web page
I'd mentioned with a screen snapshot of an opengl rendering defect,
so somebody *was* paying attention to bug reports.
For free software, I don't expect help-line support. Sounds good to me.
Stuart Levy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux GUI refresh rate/res
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 22:02:49 GMT
Hi,
I have a dual boot Linux/win machine. On the linux side the GUI (GNOME
or KDE) has rounded edges and is a bit off to the right of the monitor.
Also it doesn't cover the whole monitor screen. I can change some of
that with the monitor button settings. The resolution doesn't appear to
be correct either as Netscape and other apps have strange colors. I sure
I set it up for 32 bit true color at 800x600 during the install. Also my
mouse runs kind of crazy in the speed. Is there a way to tweak the
monitor settings and mouse settings without going through the setup
process again? I tried the GUI xfree86 and my mouse will not land on
anything. It goes from one side to the other or does not move at all (at
the speed of light) with just a minor movement. So I can't click on any
of the buttons there. I tried using the "script" but it is hard to get X
to work if you make a mistake. I am running RH 6.2 on a AMD 333 with a
Viloscity 128 vid card. the mouse is a three wheel MS intelli mouse.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Colin Watson)
Subject: Re: Kernel Compile Going Nowhere
Date: 7 Sep 2000 19:46:51 GMT
mst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Alastair Foster wrote:
>> When I type 'make xconfig', I get a little bit of commentary, but it
>> ends when it gets to the following:
>>
>> cat header.tk >> ./kconfig.tk
>> ./tkparse < ../arch/i386/config.in >> kconfig.tk
>>
>> It stops at this point, although it doesn't lock up. It just sits there
>> until I terminate it by pressing [ctrl]+[z].
>>
>> If I try 'make menuconfig', it ends with:
>>
>> Preparing scripts: functions, parsing........done.
>>
>> I have also tried 'make config'. This got me through the configuration
>> process okay, but when I tried 'make dep', it ended with:
>>
>> nothing to be done for 'dep'.
>> make[1]: leaving directory '/home/ala/linux/arch/i386/boot'
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Here's your problem - you unpacked the kernel sources in your home
>directory. Don't tell me you're also compiling as a normal user! The
>scripts expect the kernel tree to be found in /usr/src/linux, and the
>user to be logged in as root for the compile. Read the Kernel-HOWTO
>(http://metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/docs/HOWTO/Kernel-HOWTO)
!
I'm sorry, but you should never compile anything as root, purely on the
principle that you don't need to. I haven't compiled anything as root in
the last year and a half, and that includes at least several dozen
kernel builds. The only reason you might need to become root is if you
don't normally have write permissions to /usr/src, and the correct
solution to that is to give yourself (as a normal user) such
permissions, possibly by adding yourself to some group or other.
The documentation in recent development kernels (since 2.4.0-test5/6 or
so) has removed this bad advice, and now explicitly tells you that you
*shouldn't* unpack the tree in /usr/src/linux. In fact, on many
distributions (Debian is an exception) this can actively cause problems
due to symlinks from /usr/include/{asm,linux} into
/usr/src/linux/include.
linux-2.4.0-test6/README says:
# Do NOT use the /usr/src/linux area! This area has a (usually
# incomplete) set of kernel headers that are used by the library header
# files. They should match the library, and not get messed up by
# whatever the kernel-du-jour happens to be.
The problem above looks like it might possibly be a broken installation
of gcc or a broken installation of make, or even a corrupted kernel
source tree. It's certainly an unusual enough combination of errors that
I'd be inclined to suspect something fundamental. Do the errors happen
in the same place each time?
--
Colin Watson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
"Abandon the search for Truth; settle for a good fantasy."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Edward A. Falk)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.caldera
Subject: Re: HELP! -- Grub tutorial? -- answer
Date: 7 Sep 2000 22:26:38 GMT
In article <8p6gc2$ejm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Actually, I have to admit to rather liking GRUB. I'm prepared to believe
>Caldera didn't set it up amazingly well, but being able to configure
>everything at the grub> prompt sure beats the hell out of rebooting and
>editing /etc/lilo.conf all the time, especially if you play with weird
>operating systems.
Oh, I'm sure it's a very nice interface, and probably has ten
time the power of LILO, but when the $#!@ thing won't boot for
no obvious reason, and the documentation is inaccesible, it would
be nice to have an interface that wasn't totally cryptic. Even
the Sun-3 boot prompt made more sense than this.
--
-ed falk, [EMAIL PROTECTED] See *********************#*************#*
http://www.rahul.net/falk/whatToDo.html #**************F******!******!*!!****
and read 12 Simple Things You Can Do ******!***************************#**
to Save the Internet **#******#*********!**WW*W**WW****
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Edward A. Falk)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.caldera
Subject: Re: HELP! -- Grub tutorial? -- answer
Date: 7 Sep 2000 22:32:02 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Lonni J. Friedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>Perhaps if you had bothered to read all of the documentation before
>plunging in you wouldn't have run into these problems in the first
>place.
"read all of the documentation"?? Are you kidding? Who on earth
reads *all* the documentation? Hell, until the problem started I
had no idea that they weren't using LILO.
>You were most certainly doing ALOT wrong if it took 8 hours to install
>COL. I've done it many times and the longest that it ever took was an
>hour on an old 486 with 32MB of RAM.
I have no idea what the problem was. It was a P120 with a 4X cdrom
installing the "Technology Preview" disk. It took an average of
about half a minute to get from screen to screen during the GUI
setup. Then once I'd selected the software I wanted, I simply
walked away and let it work for a few hours. The CD drive kept
sawing back and forth the whole time.
>There is absolutely nothing wrong with GRUB, its just not LILO. Don't
>read the docs, which you ended up finding when you made the effort, and
>of course its confusing as all hell.
I found LILO confusing as hell at first too, but at least its default
behavior was to boot the system.
>I haven't the foggiest clue what you seem to think is broken with
>xf86config, XF86Setup or lizardx.
I haven't the foggiest clue as to what was wrong either, but afterwards,
when I started X, half the screen was blank. That didn't happen
with either RedHat or Debian, although perhaps it was a different
version of the X86 distro that caused the problem.
--
-ed falk, [EMAIL PROTECTED] See *********************#*************#*
http://www.rahul.net/falk/whatToDo.html #**************F******!******!*!!****
and read 12 Simple Things You Can Do ******!***************************#**
to Save the Internet **#******#*********!**WW*W**WW****
------------------------------
From: "andy m" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: linux os for firewall and internet???????
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 22:51:44 GMT
can anyone suggest a really small linux os that i can use on a p133 just as
a firewall and internet gate to protect my home systems??? i have a cable
modem and 3 other machines at home.
FYI- am a newbie to linux
tia:
andy.
------------------------------
From: Casper Doppen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Samba probleem
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 00:55:15 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hoi,
Ik heb op een van mijn systemen (Koala) Samba geinstalleerd. De
/etc/smb.conf is zoals hieronder:
[global]
workgroup=Huize_Masseling
server string = Koala
[Misc]
path=/home/shared/misc
public=yes
writable=false
comment = Miscellaneous shit
[Upload]
path=/home/shared/upload
public=yes
writable=true
comment=Upload folder
Met een W95 systeem kan ik Koala niet eens vinden, terwijl een W98
systeem hem meteen ziet. Op zich al vreemd.
Als ik met dat W98 systeem probeer toegang te krijgen tot de share wordt
er om een password gevraagd.
Bovenstaande smb.conf heb ik gekopieerd van de huisserver, waarbij het
wel allemaal goed gaat. Die wordt gezien door W95 en W98 systemen, en
alle systemen hebben toegang zonder password.
Op de huisserver draait een oude versie van Slackware met een oude
versie van Samba. Op Koala draait Slackware 7 met Kernel 2.2.15 en een
vrij nieuwe Samba (ik weet zo snel niet welke versie).
Heeft iemand enig idee wat het probleem kan zijn en hoe het op te lossen
is ? Het enige dat ik wil is een aantal shares aanmaken die vrij
toegankelijk zijn vanaf ieder systeem op het huisnetwerk.
Casper
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
