Linux-Setup Digest #574, Volume #20 Mon, 5 Feb 01 23:13:10 EST
Contents:
file & directory permisions!?!? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: What is this:" DriveReady SeekComplete Error" ? ("Cameron Kerr")
Win 95/ linux ("enness")
Re: Lin4Win Install (ovid)
Re: Win 95/ linux (E J)
Re: What am I doing wrong? (Mark Bratcher)
Re: Win 95/ linux (Mark Bratcher)
Re: file & directory permisions!?!? (David Efflandt)
Re: file & directory permisions!?!? (Mark Bratcher)
Re: Help: Linux on Intel 386 problem (Yves Bellefeuille)
Re: mandrake install hangs on IDE disk detection
Re: How do you setup PPP to dial on demand? (David Efflandt)
Re: file & directory permisions!?!? (H.Bruijn)
Re: printtool auto detect problems (David Efflandt)
Help: Kernel panic: Could not set ID (Xiaoqin Qiu)
How to change RH Linux resolution for my desktop ? ("coolwonder")
Re: printtool auto detect problems ("R.Constantine")
Linux-SMP on FastTrack 100? (Jong-chih Chien)
Re: How to change RH Linux resolution for my desktop ? (E J)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: file & directory permisions!?!?
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 02:01:36 GMT
I have a shared group account that several people are supposed to have
access to. My problem is that when one person accesses the group
directory and creates a file or directory the user is set to the person
that created the file and the group is set to the shared groupe but the
permisions are set so that only the user has access to the file.
I want to set it up so that the files will be available to the whole
group. I also need to keep the files in the users home directorys
unavailable to the other users. And nothing in the group directory
should be accessable to anyone that's not a member of the group.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: "Cameron Kerr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What is this:" DriveReady SeekComplete Error" ?
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 15:15:58 +1300
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ken Moffat"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Any clue how to set this on Caldera OpenLinux 2.4?
It's all linux, it should all be the same. However, when building the
kernel, some distributions use an initial ramdisk (initrd). Check the
Kernel-HOWTO, my distro (Slackware) does not do this.
> Andreas Tretow wrote:
>>
>> Thank you very much. This did the trick.
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>> Cameron Kerr wrote:
>>
>> >> I recently got this kernel message during boot up:
>> >>
>> >> Jan 31 16:42:24 locutus kernel: hdc: dma_intr: status=0x51 {
>> >> DriveReady
>
>> >> SeekComplete Error } Jan 31 16:42:24 locutus kernel: hdc: dma_intr:
>> >> error=0x84 { DriveStatusError BadCRC }
>> >>
>> >> Can anyone please tell me what it means and what I can do about it.
>> >> Is this bad ? Unfortunately I have no clue.
>> >
>> >
...
>> > You should tru setting the "Use Multimode by Default" option in the
>> > kernel (I'm running 2.4.1). You'l find it in the Hard drive
>> > controller section.
-- Cameron Kerr
------------------------------
From: "enness" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Win 95/ linux
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 02:17:50 GMT
I have win 95 and linux on my hard disk and it was running well till I did
some changes to partition. Now when I try to boot win 95, I get error
"extended partition is not bootable". I can boot from floppy and change to
C, but anything I do in C:\ will give error "Invalid media type reading
drive c" and I am forced to Abort. Fdisk shows the partition correctly but
Filesystem is shown as unknown. Scandisk does not recognize drive C:. Linux
is running properly. MBR is written by Linux and I have had no problems with
that.
Any help to bring back win 95 to life is appreciated.
Thanks
Sri
------------------------------
From: ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lin4Win Install
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 02:30:03 -0000
I got the same problem with win98.
darlraven wrote:
>
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (DTi4565459) wrote:
> > Good question. I have been having
> > the same generic problems, esp
> > with a Win NT machine. I will
> > follow this thread in hopes of
> > helpful information, david
>
> Lin4Win does not work under NT. NT does not have a real-DOS mode, and
> the loopback filesystem is not comatible with NTFS.
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/
------------------------------
From: E J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win 95/ linux
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 02:52:27 GMT
This is only a suggestion. BACK UP WHAT YOU CAN, BEFORE ATTEMPTING.
Use linux fdisk
# fdisk /dev/hda
The number of cylinders for this disk is set to 4982.
There is nothing wrong with that, but this is larger than 1024,
and could in certain setups cause problems with:
1) software that runs at boot time (e.g., old versions of LILO)
2) booting and partitioning software from other OSs
(e.g., DOS FDISK, OS/2 FDISK)
Command (m for help): l
0 Empty 17 Hidden HPFS/NTF 5c Priam Edisk a5 BSD/386
1 FAT12 18 AST Windows swa 61 SpeedStor a6 OpenBSD
2 XENIX root 1b Hidden Win95 FA 63 GNU HURD or Sys a7 NeXTSTEP
3 XENIX usr 1c Hidden Win95 FA 64 Novell Netware b7 BSDI fs
4 FAT16 <32M 1e Hidden Win95 FA 65 Novell Netware b8 BSDI swap
5 Extended 24 NEC DOS 70 DiskSecure Mult c1 DRDOS/sec (FAT-
6 FAT16 3c PartitionMagic 75 PC/IX c4 DRDOS/sec (FAT-
7 HPFS/NTFS 40 Venix 80286 80 Old Minix c6 DRDOS/sec (FAT-
8 AIX 41 PPC PReP Boot 81 Minix / old Lin c7 Syrinx
9 AIX bootable 42 SFS 82 Linux swap db CP/M / CTOS / .
a OS/2 Boot Manag 4d QNX4.x 83 Linux e1 DOS access
b Win95 FAT32 4e QNX4.x 2nd part 84 OS/2 hidden C: e3 DOS R/O
c Win95 FAT32 (LB 4f QNX4.x 3rd part 85 Linux extended e4 SpeedStor
e Win95 FAT16 (LB 50 OnTrack DM 86 NTFS volume set eb BeOS fs
f Win95 Ext'd (LB 51 OnTrack DM6 Aux 87 NTFS volume set f1 SpeedStor
10 OPUS 52 CP/M 8e Linux LVM f4 SpeedStor
11 Hidden FAT12 53 OnTrack DM6 Aux 93 Amoeba f2 DOS secondary
12 Compaq diagnost 54 OnTrackDM6 94 Amoeba BBT fd Linux raid auto
14 Hidden FAT16 <3 55 EZ-Drive 9f BSD/OS fe LANstep
16 Hidden FAT16 56 Golden Bow a0 IBM Thinkpad hi ff BBT
Command (m for help): m
Command action
a toggle a bootable flag
b edit bsd disklabel
c toggle the dos compatibility flag
d delete a partition
l list known partition types
m print this menu
n add a new partition
o create a new empty DOS partition table
p print the partition table
q quit without saving changes
s create a new empty Sun disklabel
t change a partition's system id <<<< CHANGE THE WIN95 PARTITION
TO CORRECT PARTITION TYPE
u change display/entry units
v verify the partition table
w write table to disk and exit
x extra functionality (experts only)
enness wrote:
> I have win 95 and linux on my hard disk and it was running well till I did
> some changes to partition. Now when I try to boot win 95, I get error
> "extended partition is not bootable". I can boot from floppy and change to
> C, but anything I do in C:\ will give error "Invalid media type reading
> drive c" and I am forced to Abort. Fdisk shows the partition correctly but
> Filesystem is shown as unknown. Scandisk does not recognize drive C:. Linux
> is running properly. MBR is written by Linux and I have had no problems with
> that.
>
> Any help to bring back win 95 to life is appreciated.
>
> Thanks
> Sri
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Bratcher)
Subject: Re: What am I doing wrong?
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 03:10:25 GMT
John,
I just read the manual for the latest LILO that I have (21.6).
It says this regarding the warning message you are referring to:
LILO's boot sector can only be booted from the first disk unless some
special boot manager is used.
At the risk of being redundant, could you post your complete lilo.conf
again (I think you did once already, and I apologize to all for the re-request).
Thanks.
Mark
In article <95l29r$ste$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Bilbao wrote:
>Thanks Mark. To be fair, I was impressed at the way RH7 installed - much
>better than RH5, my last dip into Linux. It's just a pity that I can't get
>it to boot without a floppy, which is of course slow and not as elegant as a
>hd boot. I remember having lots of "fun" with lilo last time too so was
>hoping to avoid that this time around. No such luck.
>
>Here's what I'm doing:
>
>1) Boot into linux using the boot floppy. Linux is installed totally in a
>2.5GB /root partition on hdb1 (a 15GB eide drive). There is also a 500MB
>swap partition on the drive somewhere too (maybe hdb6).
>2) I edit /etc/lilo.conf to install lilo in the root partition - i.e.
>/dev/hdb1.
>3) I execute lilo and it installs but gives a warning that it is not on the
>first drive.
>4) I dd the boot sector onto a fat16 floppy.
>5) I boot into Win2k and copy the boot sector into the root folder.
>6) I edit boot.ini to show a Linux option pointing to the boot sector file.
>7) I reboot and choose "Linux"
>
>The computer hangs at "LI".
>
>John
>
>
>"Mark Bratcher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> Although I don't have a fast answer to why you're having the problems,
>> I will say that LILO is no different than, say, the boot manager in
>Windows NT.
>> So, LILO is not what is making your Linux loading experience worse than
>Windows.
>> That being said, if you obtain the latest version of LILO, the 1023
>cylinder
>> limit disappears, so you would be able to eliminate that issue (if it is
>an
>> issue in your case).
>>
>> I've loaded Linux on several PCs and always found it to really be smoother
>> than Windows. I've even seen Linux recognize hardware that Windows has had
>> trouble recognizing (really exotic stuff, like COM2 and LPT2). :-)
>>
>> I hope you'll stick with it a little longer. I think you'll find in
>hindsight
>> it was probably something simple being overlooked.
>
>
--
Mark Bratcher
To reply, remove _UNSPAM from my email address
=========================================================
Escape from Microsoft's proprietary tentacles: use Linux!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Bratcher)
Subject: Re: Win 95/ linux
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 03:12:28 GMT
In article <i9Jf6.3523$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, enness wrote:
>I have win 95 and linux on my hard disk and it was running well till I did
>some changes to partition. Now when I try to boot win 95, I get error
>"extended partition is not bootable". I can boot from floppy and change to
>C, but anything I do in C:\ will give error "Invalid media type reading
>drive c" and I am forced to Abort. Fdisk shows the partition correctly but
>Filesystem is shown as unknown. Scandisk does not recognize drive C:. Linux
>is running properly. MBR is written by Linux and I have had no problems with
>that.
>
>Any help to bring back win 95 to life is appreciated.
>
>Thanks
>Sri
>
You could run Linux and run the Linux 'fdisk' command and set the partition
type from there.
This must be done carefully. :-)
If you need some help figuring out fdisk after reading any docs you can find
post another question.
--
Mark Bratcher
To reply, remove _UNSPAM from my email address
=========================================================
Escape from Microsoft's proprietary tentacles: use Linux!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Efflandt)
Subject: Re: file & directory permisions!?!?
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 03:25:04 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 06 Feb 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have a shared group account that several people are supposed to have
>access to. My problem is that when one person accesses the group
>directory and creates a file or directory the user is set to the person
>that created the file and the group is set to the shared groupe but the
>permisions are set so that only the user has access to the file.
>
>I want to set it up so that the files will be available to the whole
>group. I also need to keep the files in the users home directorys
>unavailable to the other users. And nothing in the group directory
>should be accessable to anyone that's not a member of the group.
Give the shared directory 2770 so files created there will have the group
of the dir, however, default file permissions will be determined by the
user's umask. So if their umask is 022, user's may need to chmod g+w any
files they create. On RH with default umask 002 it should not be
a problem.
User's home directories could be 700 (or 701 if apache needs to access
their public_html, but public_html would typically have 755 permission).
--
David Efflandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.de-srv.com/
http://www.autox.chicago.il.us/ http://www.berniesfloral.net/
http://cgi-help.virtualave.net/ http://hammer.prohosting.com/~cgi-wiz/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Bratcher)
Subject: Re: file & directory permisions!?!?
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 03:23:53 GMT
In article <95nlts$146$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I have a shared group account that several people are supposed to have
>access to. My problem is that when one person accesses the group
>directory and creates a file or directory the user is set to the person
>that created the file and the group is set to the shared groupe but the
>permisions are set so that only the user has access to the file.
>
>I want to set it up so that the files will be available to the whole
>group. I also need to keep the files in the users home directorys
>unavailable to the other users. And nothing in the group directory
>should be accessable to anyone that's not a member of the group.
>
>
A couple of things come to mind:
1. When users log in, have their profile set umask to ensure that the
group permissions are what you want (eg, 002).
2. As root, chmod the parent of the group directory (and subdirectories) to
SUID group (see 'man chmod' and consider "chmod g+s file") which will
cause files and directories that are created under those directories to
have the same group name as the parent (which doesn't have to be the same
as the users' default groups).
In either case, if you haven't already, you might want to have each
user be in more than one group: their "default" group, and the "public"
one that you use for this particular sharing.
--
Mark Bratcher
To reply, remove _UNSPAM from my email address
=========================================================
Escape from Microsoft's proprietary tentacles: use Linux!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Bellefeuille)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.suse,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Help: Linux on Intel 386 problem
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 22:27:05 -0500
Reply-To: Yves Bellefeuille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Mon, 05 Feb 2001, Erik Leunissen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When booting my old intel 386 machine from a Linux boot diskette, it
> locks up at a certain stage in linuxrc...
> The Linux distribution I've been using is SuSE 6.4...
> Intel 386 DX 40 Mhz
> 8 MB RAM
SuSE 6.x requires 16 Mb of RAM to install. Linux itself will run with
less memory, but SuSE's installation programme requires 8 Mb.
Try using a distribution that requires less memory. I believe that
Debian's installation may work with 8 Mb of RAM.
You can also try adding more memory, if your system supports it. Used
30-pin SIMMs are pretty cheap, and you'll definitely see the difference
in performance.
--
Yves Bellefeuille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ottawa, Canada
Francais / English / Esperanto
Fight Spam! Join CAUCE cost-free: http://www.cauce.org/
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: mandrake install hangs on IDE disk detection
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 03:30:09 -0000
Dudly wrote:
>
>
> System:
> 200 MHz Pentium
> Primary IDE Drive: 6GB Win98 on Drive C: with a logical partition for
Drive
> D:
> Slave IDE Drive: 2 GB formatted for linuxext2 using Partition Magic
prior
> to Mandrake install
> Also present in the system is an internal ZIP drive and an IDE CD-ROM
> 48 MB of RAM
>
> Boot from CD for the Mandrake install and get hung at the IDE disk
detection
> (3rd step of the install).
>
> Anyone had this problem or can someone throw me a bone where to go from
> here? I'm kind of stumped....
>
> -Dudly
>
>
Hi, I got a similar problem as you. But mine froze on the Partitioning
Step. But after i use Expert mode to install it, i don't have that
freezing problem. You can try use the Expert mode to install it. Make sure
to read the ONLINE-tutorial on the DarkX (installation problem) first
--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Efflandt)
Subject: Re: How do you setup PPP to dial on demand?
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 03:30:53 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 5 Feb 2001, Newsgroups <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Running RH 7.0 on an Intel platform. I have a local area network using
>samba. All is working well, except that I need to dial manually to get onto
>the Internet. I'd like to set it up so that if a client machine opens the
>browser or email client the the linux box automatically dials out. I'm
>pretty sure it's possible, just don't know how. Can you give me a shove in
>the right direction. Thanks.
I have an example of a script I use at http://www.de-srv.com/linux/
Although, I now run my own DNS, so I deleted the parts from my own copy
that manipulate /etc/resolv.conf. If pppd has dynamic IP, you also
probably need to plug a 1 into /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_dynaddr
--
David Efflandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.de-srv.com/
http://www.autox.chicago.il.us/ http://www.berniesfloral.net/
http://cgi-help.virtualave.net/ http://hammer.prohosting.com/~cgi-wiz/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (H.Bruijn)
Subject: Re: file & directory permisions!?!?
Date: 6 Feb 2001 03:35:41 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 06 Feb 2001 02:01:36 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] allegedly wrote:
>I have a shared group account that several people are supposed to have
>access to. My problem is that when one person accesses the group
>directory and creates a file or directory the user is set to the person
>that created the file and the group is set to the shared groupe but the
>permisions are set so that only the user has access to the file.
>
>I want to set it up so that the files will be available to the whole
>group. I also need to keep the files in the users home directorys
>unavailable to the other users. And nothing in the group directory
>should be accessable to anyone that's not a member of the group.
AFAIK this only works reliably when accessing the filesystem via a shell
(not via ftp, those permissions are set by the ftp-client).
Set the umask by adding the environment variable UMASK to your
environment, fi add a line "export UMASK=007" to your .bashrc or .login
or by doing adding the line "umask 007" to either of those files.
The "umask" works like this. By default files are created with
permissions set as " 666 - umask" and directories will have permissions
" 777 - umask" so an umask value of 007 will set the permissions of all
files you create by default to "-rw-rw----" and directories to
"drwxrwx---"
Executable files always have to be explicitely made executable, with
either "chmod 770 file.exe" or "chmod ug+x file.exe"
The exact functioning of the umask is dependant on the shell you use, it
is a built-in function, not an external programme.
The octal numbers are identical in meaning as those used with the chmod
command:
The first number is the user permissions, which hold for the user owning
the file. Second number defines the group permissions, which hold for
all members of the group owning the file. And the third the "world"
permissions, for everyone who isn't covered by the first two.
The number is an increment for the possible perms,
1 = make the the file execuatble
2 = write permissions
3 = 1 + 2 = executable + writeable
4 = read permissions.
5 = 1 + 4 = executable + read
6 = 2 + 4 = read + write
7 = 1 + 2 + 4 = executable + read + write
Now certain people belong to several groups. The shell doesn't know
which groups a file is intended to be in, therefor it uses the default
as found in the 4th field of the entry in /etc/passwd. Users can change
the group owning the file/directory with the chgrp command. The syntax
is "chgrp GROUP file" , and the user has to be a member of GROUP to
effect this change. This will always require manual override...
Herman
--
If a trainstation is the place where trains stop, what is a workstation?
========================================================================
Herman Bruijn mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Netherlands website: http://hermanbruijn.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Efflandt)
Subject: Re: printtool auto detect problems
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 03:34:51 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 06 Feb 2001 01:42:37 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm trying to use printtool to setup my printer but it can't seem to
>detect my printer. I'm sure that the parport module is installed and my
>/etc/modules.conf DOES have the line:
>alias parport_lowlevel parport_pc
>
>I've looked in the startup messages for anything to do with lp0 but I
>don't see anything, so for some reason my parrallel port is not being
>detected. If I
>
>modprobe parport_pc
>
>then my printer does it's little initialization thingy so it looks like
>it detected something, however printtools still will not detect the
>printer. Any ideas?
What kind of printer? Is it supported?
Check http://www.linuxprinting.org/
--
David Efflandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.de-srv.com/
http://www.autox.chicago.il.us/ http://www.berniesfloral.net/
http://cgi-help.virtualave.net/ http://hammer.prohosting.com/~cgi-wiz/
------------------------------
From: Xiaoqin Qiu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Help: Kernel panic: Could not set ID
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 19:40:20 -0800
Hi,
We installed RedHat 6.2 with 2.2.14-5.0smp on a HP Vectra XU 6/200
machine. There is only one CPU on the machine. After a successful
installation, the boot stopped after showing the following messages on
the screen:
Error: only one processor found
Enabling symmetric IO mode ... ... done
Enabling IO-APIC IRQs
Changing IO-APIC physical APIC IO to 16
kernel panic: Could not set ID
In swapper task - not syncing.
Is there anyone have any idea about the reason of it?
By the way, we are using kickstart installation. How to set up it to
install single processor kernel?
Thank you very much!
Xiaoqin
------------------------------
From: "coolwonder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: How to change RH Linux resolution for my desktop ?
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 21:41:34 -0600
Hi,
Iam very glad that I have installed RH Linux 7.0 on my windows 2000 Pro
system. But I even don't know how to set a new screen resolution. During
installation process, I set it to be the highest resolution. But the words
are too small. Can any of you tell me how to change the setting?
Thanks,
Coolwonder
------------------------------
From: "R.Constantine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: printtool auto detect problems
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 03:50:26 GMT
what kind of printer do you have? What distro?
In article <95nkqb$5e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm trying to use printtool to setup my printer but it can't seem to
> detect my printer. I'm sure that the parport module is installed and my
> /etc/modules.conf DOES have the line:
> alias parport_lowlevel parport_pc
>
> I've looked in the startup messages for anything to do with lp0 but I
> don't see anything, so for some reason my parrallel port is not being
> detected. If I
>
> modprobe parport_pc
>
> then my printer does it's little initialization thingy so it looks like
> it detected something, however printtools still will not detect the
> printer. Any ideas?
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.co
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jong-chih Chien)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Linux-SMP on FastTrack 100?
Date: 6 Feb 2001 03:51:18 GMT
Hi,
Anybody has experience setting up SMP linux for Redhat 7.0
with PromiseTechnology's FastTrack 100 driver?
My system failed to boot to SMP mode, UP was OK. Any fix around
this problem?
Thanks,
JC
------------------------------
From: E J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to change RH Linux resolution for my desktop ?
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 03:45:41 GMT
$ su -
password: <secret>
# cp /etc/X11/XF86Config /etc/X11/XF86Config.bak
# Xconfigurator
coolwonder wrote:
> Hi,
> Iam very glad that I have installed RH Linux 7.0 on my windows 2000 Pro
> system. But I even don't know how to set a new screen resolution. During
> installation process, I set it to be the highest resolution. But the words
> are too small. Can any of you tell me how to change the setting?
>
> Thanks,
> Coolwonder
------------------------------
** 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.setup.
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
******************************
