Linux-Setup Digest #905, Volume #20 Sun, 25 Mar 01 06:13:09 EST
Contents:
Re: Mounting a floppy... ("Eric Dennis")
Re: SuSe Linux 7.2 or Redhat??? (Darin Johnson)
Re: SuSe Linux 7.2 or Redhat??? (Darin Johnson)
How to setup Linux on a 200Mb notebook without CD-ROM? ("Michiel Wories")
Newbie How to start GUI ("The R")
Re: Newbie How to start GUI ("repo")
Newbie Question Starting GUI ("The R")
Re: How to setup linux on a portable HD (Achim Nolcken Lohse)
Re: Linux on Deskpro XL (Achim Nolcken Lohse)
Re: How to setup Linux on a 200Mb notebook without CD-ROM? (Faux_Pseudo)
Re: SuSe Linux 7.2 or Redhat??? (Paul Williams)
Re: Best E-mail Client? (John Beardmore)
Re: Best E-mail Client? (John Beardmore)
Re: Suse vs RH/Mandrake ? (or what's so great about 7.2) ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: SuSe Linux 7.2 or Redhat??? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Linux <scream>Frustration!</scream> ("Peter T. Breuer")
setting up devices after installing new kernel ("seidel")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Eric Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: Mounting a floppy...
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 08:17:53 GMT
"Allan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:p88v6.52138$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Theoretical Question:
> If I already have a /mnt/cdrom/ and a /mnt/floppy/ directory, WHY
do
> I have to go and manually MOUNT them for them to work? (Wouldn't you think
> the installation install it?)
man automount
The autofs RPM is available on your Red Hat CD if it's not currently
installed.
> Practical Question:
> I read how to mount my CDROM from my RedHat Reference book. But how do I
> mount my floppy? I can't find the floppy in the /dev/ directory. I don't
> know any great command prompt command to find it. HELP! Where is the
floppy
> located in the directory tree? Do I need the "iso..." file system command
as
> in the CD ROM?...
The 3.5" floppy is typically /dev/fd0 under Linux. If you have an entry for
it in /etc/fstab, then 'mount /mnt/floppy' or 'mount /dev/fd0' should do the
trick. If not, then try 'mount /dev/fd0 /mnt/floppy'.
- E
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: SuSe Linux 7.2 or Redhat???
From: Darin Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 08:18:19 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Perry) writes:
> Of course, there is always apt-get which makes it even better :).
I'm running a distribution set up by some services group at my
company. Basically RedHat (yawn), some company specific
configurations, but with apt-get, which runs nightly to pick up
official company approved security patches. Kind of nice.
Otherwise, if I wasn't on a network behind a firewall and
didn't mind doing my own maintenance, SuSE would be it. I only tried
it briefly though, but I was impressed; the installation was really
nice compared to RedHat and Mandrake. I really liked Debian a few
years back when I ran it, and now that it's mostly caught up with
bleeding edge software, I might reconsider it.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: SuSe Linux 7.2 or Redhat???
From: Darin Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 08:21:51 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hal Burgiss) writes:
> No thanks. Not to start a flame war, but I would never consider changing
> to Debian. Why? Certainly not for technical reasons. I am sure it is a
> great distro. Certainly has some great people involved, and some great
> ideas behind it. But it also has the 'my shit doesn't stink and yours
> does' crowd too.
Hmm. Kinda of true perhaps. When I ran it, I didn't pay attention to
what others were doing. It was just soo much better than generic
RedHat at the time. But recently, having been out of the linux scene
for a bit, I asked some people about distributions. When I mentioned
Debian, there tended to be "be prepared to swear fealty to RMS if
you use Debian" warnings...
------------------------------
From: "Michiel Wories" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: How to setup Linux on a 200Mb notebook without CD-ROM?
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 10:36:42 +0200
I have a notebook on which I would like to install Linux. It has a HD of
200Mb and no CD-ROM? How do I do this?
Please CC your answer to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks.
------------------------------
Reply-To: "The R" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "The R" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Newbie How to start GUI
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 09:01:09 GMT
I've just completed an installation of RedHat Linux 7.0 but when the system
finishes booting up I'm taken to the command prompt to log into the system,
after which I can only use the few commands that I know.
I would like to run a GUI so that I can interact with the command screen
through a terminal window..
How do I start the GUI ?
Any help would greatly be appreciated...
------------------------------
From: "repo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Newbie How to start GUI
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 11:07:09 +0200
at Sun, 25 Mar 2001 11:01:09 +0200, "The R" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> I've just completed an installation of RedHat Linux 7.0 but when the
> system finishes booting up I'm taken to the command prompt to log into
> the system, after which I can only use the few commands that I know.
>
> I would like to run a GUI so that I can interact with the command screen
> through a terminal window..
>
> How do I start the GUI ?
>
> Any help would greatly be appreciated...
>
>
Hi
at the prompt type:
startx
--
Repo
RedHat Linux release 7.0 Kernel 2.2.16-22
http://beginnerslinux.org http://beginnerslinux.saxen.net
11:06am up 12:06, 3 users, load average: 0.38, 0.43, 0.44
------------------------------
Reply-To: "The R" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "The R" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Newbie Question Starting GUI
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 09:22:41 GMT
I've just completed an installation of RedHat Linux 7.0 but when the system
finishes booting up I'm taken to the command prompt to log into the system,
after which I can only use the few commands that I know.
I would like to run a GUI so that I can interact with the command screen
through a terminal window..
How do I start the GUI ?
Any help would greatly be appreciated...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Achim Nolcken Lohse)
Subject: Re: How to setup linux on a portable HD
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 09:38:55 GMT
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001 22:39:23 +0800, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi there,
>I'm a newbie,
>I've a notebook PC, wich I'm writing whit, and I'd like to setup linux on
>my portable Hard Disk connected via PC card.
>I got RH 6.1 and Mandrake 7.0, but both don't see the external HD. They
>show me only the internal one.
>PC card was configured correctly, but no Hard Disk. On a previous
>installation, after Linux was running, I could see de attached portable
>HD, but no before.
>My purpose is to setup Linux on this portable HD and booting from a
>floppy I'll be able to use only one HD with 2 PC. Is it possible?
Hi,
Never tried to install Linux on a portable HD, but I have done it on a
SCSI HDD on an IDE system. Im assuming your Notebook boots from an
IDE controller. If so, the situation should be comparable.
The essential problem is that you must have SCSI support loaded. I
found this a problem with Caldera 2.2, which provided a SCSI support
module option at installation time (by switching to a second "modules"
floppy), installed Linux on the SCSI drive, but provided no option to
create a boot floppy . It assumed that the user would install and use
the included Bootmagic. Unfortunately, Bootmagic 1.0 won't work on
drives beyond Disk 2 on a system, and the installation floppy couldn't
be used to reboot the Linux.
The only way I could run Caldera 2.2 was by reinstalling it every
time, go figure! Caldera tech support was worse than useless.
Mandrake 6 .0 worked better. It allowed me to make a boot floppy at
installation time. So either of these two distos should work.
Assuming you have only one internal HDD in the notebook, and have a
copy of Bootmagic, you may even be able to boot Linux off the
portable HDD. Possibly, a more recent version of Bootmagic will let
you do it with the portable HDD at the Disk3+ position.
Please post your results if you try this.
Achim
axethetax
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Achim Nolcken Lohse)
Subject: Re: Linux on Deskpro XL
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 09:38:57 GMT
On Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:21:56 +0100, "Fireblade" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Hello,
>
>For quite some time I've been trying to install Linux (pref. Debian) on my
>Compaq Deskpro XL466, but without any succes. In order to do it, I need the
>"Linux Compaq Deskpro XL HOWTO". Unfortunately, the only site hosting this
>HOWTO has removed it.
>Can anyone send me the "Linux Compaq Deskpro XL HOWTO" on
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]? Thanks a lot!!!
>
>Robert
I've installed Red Hat 5.2, Caldera 2.2, and Mandrake 6.0 on my Compaq
Deskpro XL without benefit of this HOWTO. What kind of problems are
you having?
I know installing LILO on the MBR wipes out the Deskpro's Config/diags
partition. But that didn't prevent me from dual-booting RH 5.2 and
Win 95. It makes reconfiguring the difficult though. I couldn't
install LILO elsewhere, so I had to settle for booting Linux from
floppy to have the Compaq partition.
OTHO, if you find this HOWTO, please let me know. I wouldn't mind
having a look at it myself.
Achim
axethetax
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Faux_Pseudo)
Subject: Re: How to setup Linux on a 200Mb notebook without CD-ROM?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 10:00:16 GMT
post here and we answer here
if you want emailed help join a mailing list
i think that debain and slackware have a floopy bassed option
to install from
or if you have a pcmcia nic you can get
one of the mini distros on freshmeat.net
and boot from that and then network to a comp with
a larger distro on the harddrive and install from there.
--(Once apon a time, in comp.os.linux.setup,)--
--(Michiel Wories said it like only they can.)--
> I have a notebook on which I would like to install Linux. It has a HD of
> 200Mb and no CD-ROM? How do I do this?
>
> Please CC your answer to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks.
>
>
--
--(UIN=66618055)--
--([EMAIL PROTECTED]:45_/home/faux)-- cat .sig
GUI's are for slackers. ibpconf.sh 6.1 on freshmeat.net
The easiest way to customize the command line. By Faux_Pseudo
------------------------------
From: Paul Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: SuSe Linux 7.2 or Redhat???
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 10:07:12 GMT
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001 23:30:16 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Perry)
wrote:
>On Fri, 23 Mar 2001 18:53:31 GMT, Scot Mc Pherson
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>If you are planning on workstations, I would suggest SuSE because they have
>>tweaked some nice stuff in the desktop environment. I used to like RedHat
>>for this environment but the latest version has got some problems.
>>
>>For Servers I would suggest Debian or if you have some experience or aren;t
>>afraid to dive in, get Slackware...
>>
>>
>>RedHat used to be really great in my opinion, but the latest version has
>>given me loads of trouble...If you like redhat, use version 6.2 for server
>>environments.
>>
>>Workstations SuSE & RedHat
>>
>>Servers and Routers Debian and Slackware.
>>
>>--
>>Scot Mc Pherson
>>N27� 19' 56"
>>W82� 30' 39"
>>
>>
>>
>So, my take is:
>
>Workstations Debian; then SuSE
>Servers Debian and Slackware
>
>Debian offers everything now including kde, gnome, current Xfree86, current
>kernels. It works on the desktop. It works pretty well on my laptop, and it
>definitely works in a server closet or as a firewall/nat box. The unstable
>tree is fun to say the least. Watching thousands of debian maintainers
>offer new code, running the latest on nice hardware, makes life good. Of
>course, there is always apt-get which makes it even better :).
>
>And if you fail to get challenged yet. Just tame the mighty debian
>installer beast :)
Doesn't sound like a good distro for someone's first taste of Linux
Paul (aka Riff)
Live now
------------------------------
From: John Beardmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Best E-mail Client?
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 10:29:37 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Grant Edwards
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Beardmore wrote:
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dowe Keller
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>>>On Fri, 23 Mar 2001 13:20:17 GMT, Grant Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>In a world with LaTeX, SGML and Texinfo, why do some people still
>>>insist on doing things the *HARD WAY*?
>>
>>The LaTeX world sounds like rather hard work compared to WISIWIG.
>
>I've written technical reports and academic papers in both Frame and LaTeX.
>LaTeX is far less work as far as I'm concerned. From what I've seen of
>MS-Word, it's a piece of shit toy next to Frame. At least Frame generates
>half-way decent output (not as good as LaTeX).
Yes. Please don't mistake me for a Word advocate.
I was thinking of ease of use compared to say Adobe InDesign, Pagemaker,
GoLive which I've done good things in despite some bugs, or Quark
Express which costs more.
>MS Word output looks awful: equations are painful to look at; no kerning; no
>ligatures; broken tables of contents; broken indexes; broken paragraph
>numbering and cross references. MS-Word is purely for amateurs who don't
>care if thier work looks like crap.
Yes, but it does get a little less buggy with every release !
>Equations in Frame are little better (but still not good enough that I'd
>want my name on the same page), and it gets most of the other stuff right.
>
>>Does SGML offer a tidy way to author for the web and paper from the same
>>'source code' ? If so, where do you start ?
>
>Yes. There are several packages that do that. DocBook is one.
Do they have a web site ?
Cheers, J/.
--
John Beardmore
------------------------------
From: John Beardmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Best E-mail Client?
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 10:37:14 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Johan Kullstam
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>but things like ms-word are *not* WISIWIG. there is a lot of
>formatting which changes font, margins &c. all of this is invisible
>since you don't see it on the page. it's lots of fun working around
>these unseen land mines.
On most simple office applications most will find it wisiwig enough.
On the other hand, try changing print device with a big document, and
watch the entire thing get reformatted ! That sucks, amongst other
thing, and drove me to Adobe Pagemaker.
Adobe Pagemaker has the resource leak from hell, which Adobe don't seem
to want to fix - presumably with a view to making users switch to
InDesign.
InDesign 1.0 was shite so I went back to Pagemaker. InDesign 1.5 shows
promise, but the recent upgrade to 1.52 seems to have broken support for
duplex printing in a bid to 'improve support for non-postscript
printers' !
I'm feeling pretty pissed off with Adobe. I'd rather give them my money
than M$, but I'm seriously wondering if something TeX based, which
didn't seem ready for prime time under OS/2 five years ago might be
worth a look now.
Cheers, J/.
--
John Beardmore
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Suse vs RH/Mandrake ? (or what's so great about 7.2)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.hardware
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 10:29:37 GMT
In comp.os.linux.hardware John Hong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> SuSE, stay with Red Hat/Mandrake. SuSE has recently been becoming more of
> a commercial distribution with little willingness to put out any GPL'ed
> versions of their version of Linux. The only ISO they have available for
> anyone to download is a live evaluation one, meaning, you boot into Linux
> from the CDROM, but you can't actually install it into your computer.
Err .. if you can't use the cp command, you are a strange person.
SuSE usually wait 6 weeks or more before making publicly available
downloadable versions of their product.
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: SuSe Linux 7.2 or Redhat???
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 12:33:56 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 'ecrivait/wrote:
>>This is very bad. The motive is clear .. they want to continue to be
>>able to steal stuff of[f] of red hat.
> I'm not sure. I would rather think that Red Hat and Mandrake are
> synched on the same compiler.
The compiler in question is a pre-release that was disavowed by the gcc
team themselves. It is not binary compatible with any other compiler
before or after (the "after" has been guaranteed by the gcc team).
Under those circumstances it can have no technical merits at all - it
doesn't get to the point of being able to discuss them. But
it's clear merit is that it can be used to create an uncopiable
distribution.
>>The link you quote is sickening in its mendacity. It's been written by
>>a lying publicity person who could say anything and make it sound
>>positive.
> I[t] definitly stinks. MandrakeExpert pay-as-you learn scheme stinks too.
> Mandrake's backed by AXA and... who knows who? Maybe Microsoft.
> Keep your hands clean. Go for Debian!
> Zhero Man
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: Re: Linux <scream>Frustration!</scream>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 12:29:51 +0200
In comp.os.linux.setup Laura Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Peter T. Breuer" wrote:
>> You don't have to configure any hardware by hand when compiling the
>> kernel. Choose some large set of modules, compile them, then whenever
>> you feel like it, load a driver that appeals to you.
> How?
What do you mean, "how"? You load modules like you always do, either
automatically (by touching their special device files and leaving the
rest to kerneld/kmod and modprobe) or manually (by running modprobe
yourself).
Would you mind expanding on your question? Have you looked at the
Modules-HOWTO?
Peter
------------------------------
From: "seidel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: setting up devices after installing new kernel
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 12:53:19 +0200
after installing a new kernel (2.4.0) i found out it was necessary to
configure the devices in /dev
for instance if i say "freeramdisk" it comes up with "/dev/ram0 is not
configured"
can anyone tell me how to do this?
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 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
******************************
