Linux-Setup Digest #215, Volume #21 Sun, 13 May 01 06:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Problems w/Apache Web Server ("Glitch")
Nebwie needs help with proftpd... ("Manuel Graumann")
VIAxxx86 soundcards. (Andrew Brehaut)
Re: StarOffice crush my computer (Michael Perry)
Linux and NTFS W2K (MBJ)
Re: /dev/hdd3 is not on the first disk? (Juergen Pfann)
Re: Cisco emulator for practice? (E J)
Re: Ximian GNOME - CTRL key no longer selects items (Stephen Hui)
Problem compiling Ed-0.2 ("Michael Pye")
Re: Problems w/Apache Web Server (David Efflandt)
Re: /dev/hdd3 is not on the first disk? (Markus Kossmann)
Re: Linux and NTFS W2K (Markus Kossmann)
Re: Linux and NTFS W2K (James Rose)
Re: Cisco emulator for practice? ("Glitch")
Re: Cisco emulator for practice? ("Glitch")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Glitch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Problems w/Apache Web Server
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 23:54:59 -0400
In article <TglL6.803$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "ej"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After installing RH 7.1 with Apache Web Server, I can get out to the
> internet but can't acces my www.domain-name.com. I have a DSL connection
> with a Cisco 675 router. I have a dynamic IP so I went through NO-IP.com
> for my DNS. I'm enclosing some of the settings and looking for advice
> on making this connection.
>
[snip of dns stuff]
> I'd appreciate any help on making this configuration work. Whenever I
> try to pull up my home page, I receive the error "unable to locate ther
> server www.domain-name.com. Please check the server name and try again".
> In the error.log there is an entry for #98 can't bind to port 80. Do I
> need a cable/dsl router for port forwarding?
>
> Thanks in advance.
stupid question but is Apache actually running in the background?
------------------------------
From: "Manuel Graumann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Nebwie needs help with proftpd...
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 06:10:19 +0200
Hi there!
Im a total Linux-newbie and I'm trying to setup proftpd according to my
needs. But it isn't even more than try and error. Let me describe first,
what I would like to configure:
There exists a group named "ftpusers"
I wish to deny login for anybody except users of this group.
The root directory of any valid user should be /public/ftp/
In the directory /public/ftp/ I have two subfolders named "uploads" and
"downloads".
I would like the users to be able to download anything freely from the
"downloads" folder
and all subfolders I create. They shouldn't be able to do anything but
changing the directory, listing the files and downloading them from this
folder and any below of it.
The "uploads" folder should be for incoming files. Users should be able to
change to "uploads" and any subfolders THEY have created. The users shall be
able to create subfolders to "uploads" and should get read & write
privileges to the folders they created with their user. They should not be
able to upload anything directly to "uploads" and they shall not be able to
switch into directories they didn't create. They shall not even see
directories they didn't create. In the directories they create they should
be able to upload but not to download anything. They should be able to
rename files and delete files they uploaded.
I hope you understand what I would like to have so far...
Now I show you the directories with their rights at the moment:
/public/ftp/
drwxr-x--- 4 root ftpusers 1024 Mai 10 22:40 .
drwxrwxrwx 3 root root 1024 Mai 8 15:59 ..
d---r-x--- 2 root ftpusers 1024 Mai 11 16:59 downloads
d---rwx--- 2 root ftpusers 1024 Mai 12 07:50 uploads
Here ist my proftpd.conf:
# This is a basic ProFTPD configuration file
ServerIdent on "Inkasso's FTP Server"
ServerType standalone
DefaultServer on
TimeoutLogin 60
TimeoutIdle 300
TimeoutNoTransfer 180
Port 21
Umask 0777 0077
<Limit LOGIN>
AllowGroup ftpusers
DenyAll
</Limit>
MaxInstances 30
<Anonymous /public/ftp/>
User ftp
Group ftpusers
<Limit WRITE>
DenyAll
</Limit>
<Directory uploads>
<Limit READ>
DenyAll
</Limit>
<Limit RMD>
DenyAll
</Limit>
<Limit DELE>
DenyAll
</Limit>
<Limit MKD>
DenyAll
</Limit>
<Limit STOR>
AllowAll
</Limit>
<Limit CWD>
AllowAll
</Limit>
</Directory>
</Anonymous>
#EOF
Yes I know that I didn't configure "downloads" already. I tried to realise
"uploads" first, but any limitation except the "limit login" seems to be
ignored by proftpd. All limitations I have are limitations by the
filesystem-rights.
I would be very happy if there is anybody who could help me with this mess.
I've given up to find anything in the web because all I can see is, that I
configured everything ok but it doesn't work.
My proftpd Version: 1.2.1
My OS: Suse Linux 6.2
Thanks for any help!
Regards
Manuel
------------------------------
From: Andrew Brehaut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: VIAxxx86 soundcards.
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 16:29:24 +1200
ive got a VIA soundscard and whenever i try to get it to run it hangs my
system and then i cant reboot because its in modules.conf at that stage,
is this a common problem or what??
im using RH 7.0, on a duron 750, 128mgs RAM, and a TNT2.
thanks
---Andrew
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Perry)
Subject: Re: StarOffice crush my computer
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 04:57:45 -0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 12 May 2001 22:09:30 -0500, Dave Uhring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sebastian Feuerhake wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Hi i have been trying to install SO5.2 in my RH7.1 but its been
>> imposible.
>> My computrer freezes everytime i run the installation program. I have a
>> Savage4 video card, and i think thats the problem. I ve heard about
>> enviroment settings, that can help me but dont know whats that.? Any
>> suggestions
>>
>> Thanks
>> TiTo/////
>>
>
> StarOffice doesn't have a thing to do with your video card, but it is a
> tremendous memory and drive space hog. Run "df -k" and see if one of your
> partitions is getting filled up.
>
I actually believe that there is an environmental variable which will cause
X to seize up when using an S3 Savage video card. We ran into this at work
with a savage card in a Toronto laptop. I don't have the variable handy
here at the house; but I can testify we plugged the variable in and the
Staroffice setup program started behaving again. WE had initially thought
since we were messing around with video drivers compiled pretty specifically
for our purpose by S3, that we had found some problem with the coding that
had been done. Instead, we found a rather unusual environmental variable
which when set, allowed the installer to go through and be able to run
the program. This has nothing to do with amount of memory left or disk
space although those can cause also cause problems. Initially, we believed
it had something to do with overlay support or other X4 specific settings.
If you can send me an email on Monday, I will dig up that switch and send it
to you. Give it a try and let me know.
--
Michael Perry
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
====================
------------------------------
From: MBJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux and NTFS W2K
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 10:45:14 +0400
A lot of discussions about dual boot with linux and windows but I
haven't got any firm answer if one have done a dual boot on Linux and
NTFS windows 2000. I have a two partitions, C:(windows98me,fat32) and
D:(windows2000,ntfs). I want to remove w98me and install Mandrake 8.0
instead. My question is, will I be able to see my W2K NTFS partition
after installing Mandrake 8.0? Any expert suggestions please?
TIA,
MBJ
------------------------------
From: Juergen Pfann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: /dev/hdd3 is not on the first disk?
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 08:38:34 +0200
Lisette Schelles wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> (...)
> II have chosen not to install lilo on the MBR sector of my hard disk but to
> install it on the root partition (/dev/hdd3) of the Linux native so that I
> can use bootmagic to boot between the different os.
> The problem is that is can only boot Linux with the diskette but not from
> the hard disk
> If I try to install lilo he is giving me the following messages
>
> Warning: /dev/hdd3 is not on the first disk
> Warning: Bios drive 0x82 may be not accessible
>
> Does this mean that Linux cannot boot from a second hard disk?
I'd say it's just that - a warning, nothing more on fairly recent
systems - say, 1997 or newer...
The original XT and AT architecture provided an interface to 2 HDs
only (IIRC).
But if you manage to boot your system from /dev/hdd3, as in your
example, by your particular boot manager solution, or a boot floppy
with the kernel image dd'ed to it, no time to worry any more about
that message.
If you're unlucky, however, maybe a BIOS upgrade will help.
BTW : I get the same message, regarding 0x82 which is disk #3,
each and every time I reinstall lilo with boot entries from disk
#3,4,5, and 6 - but it's 0x82 each, not 0x82 through 0x85, what
would be "correct" (Needless to say, all entries boot fine
anyway...).
Juergen
------------------------------
From: E J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Cisco emulator for practice?
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 07:42:30 GMT
A linux box can be a real router. http://www.linuxrouter.org/, if you need to
know the fundamentals of routing.
Harison Phinizy wrote:
> Is it possible to emulate a Cisco router on a Linux box to practice router
> config?
------------------------------
From: Stephen Hui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Ximian GNOME - CTRL key no longer selects items
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 07:48:42 GMT
AHA!! So I wasn't the only one!!
Well, I never figured out exactly how to fix it, but it corrected itself
after a few days. I had left it alone, and rebooted this morning to
remove a piece of hardware, and lo and behold, it decided to fix itself.
Alas, all is not hopeless. But if things like this keep up, then we're
looking at the same sort of problems that annoyed me about Windows....
On the plus side, GNOME 1.4 does seem to be better than the previous
version.
Stephen.
Flacco wrote:
>
> Since upgrading to GNOME 1.4, using the CTRL key when clicking on items
> in lists no longer selects individual items. For example, if I want to
> select a few messages in Evolution, I click on one item, then CTRL-Click on
> subsequent items to select them. But now the additional items do not get
> selected.
>
> Is there some way I can fix this?
------------------------------
From: "Michael Pye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Problem compiling Ed-0.2
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 10:10:22 +0100
I'm building a Linux from Scratch system and I am receiving an error about a
function being defined twice while making Ed-0.2
I have tried the copy from both the LFS site and the GNU site, but neither
will compile. I am using the latest versions of both gcc and the glibc
(2.95.3 and 2.2.2). I can't find any patches like the one used to solve a
similar problem in the findutils-4.1 package.
Has anyone else come across this or a way around it?
Thanks
MP
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Efflandt)
Subject: Re: Problems w/Apache Web Server
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 09:25:55 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 12 May 2001 20:18:13 -0500, ej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After installing RH 7.1 with Apache Web Server, I can get out to the
> internet but can't acces my www.domain-name.com. I have a DSL connection
> with a Cisco 675 router. I have a dynamic IP so I went through NO-IP.com for
> my DNS. I'm enclosing some of the settings and looking for advice on making
> this connection.
>
> ifconfig from root
> eth0
> inet addr: 10.0.0.2 Bcast: 10.0.0.255
> lo
> Link encap: local loopback
> inet addr: 127.0.0.1 mask: 255.0.0.0
>
> Apache configuration
> Server Name: domain-name.com
> Webmaster: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Available addresses
> 63.xxx.xxx.xx 80 (Dynamic IP from ISP)
Does ServerName resolve when apache starts and is it an IP on this box?
domain-name.com is not in your /etc/hosts. Maybe your ServerName should
be www.domain-name.com if that is what you are trying to access it as.
Also where do you expect mail to go for [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
Often it is best NOT to set a ServerName and see UseCanonicalName instead.
> Network configuration
> Hostname: www.domain-name.com
> Domain: domain-name.com
>
> Search for hostnames:
> (no entry)
>
> Name Servers:
> 204.xxx.xxx.xxx (IP from my ISP)
> 204.xxx.xxx.xx0 (IP from my ISP)
>
> Hosts
> 127.x.x.x www.domain-name.com
> 10.x.x.x www.domain-name.com
I hope that the 127.x.x.x here is something other than 127.0.0.1 which
should always be localhost. You have not defined domain-name.com here.
try 127.x.x.x domain-name.com www.domain-name.com
That should work as well from the internet if those names resolve and your
ISP does not block port 80.
> I'd appreciate any help on making this configuration work. Whenever I try to
> pull up my home page, I receive the error "unable to locate ther server
> www.domain-name.com. Please check the server name and try again".
> In the error.log there is an entry for #98 can't bind to port 80. Do I need
> a cable/dsl router for port forwarding?
I imagine it cannot bind to port 80 because it cannot resolve your
ServerName locally and maybe you are not connected to the internet yet.
--
David Efflandt (Reply-To is valid) 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: Markus Kossmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: /dev/hdd3 is not on the first disk?
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 10:29:25 +0200
Lisette Schelles wrote:
[...]
> II have chosen not to install lilo on the MBR sector of my hard disk but to
> install it on the root partition (/dev/hdd3) of the Linux native so that I
> can use bootmagic to boot between the different os.
> The problem is that is can only boot Linux with the diskette but not from
> the hard disk
> If I try to install lilo he is giving me the following messages
>
> Warning: /dev/hdd3 is not on the first disk
> Warning: Bios drive 0x82 may be not accessible
>
> Does this mean that Linux cannot boot from a second hard disk?
lilo should be able to boot from the second harddisk if your BIOS
supports it. Any recent BIOS should support booting from the second IDE
channel.
However "BIOS drive 0x82" means that lilo assumes that /dev/hdd is the
third bootable harddisk device (and not the second) . Is there a CDROM
on /dev/hdc ?
It that case you have to add the lines
disk=/dev/hdd
bios=0x81
to you lilo.conf to say lilo that the CDROM doesn't count as bootable
harddisk and your harddisk is the second bootable device instead.
--
Markus Kossmann
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Markus Kossmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux and NTFS W2K
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 11:02:47 +0200
MBJ wrote:
>
> A lot of discussions about dual boot with linux and windows but I
> haven't got any firm answer if one have done a dual boot on Linux and
> NTFS windows 2000. I have a two partitions, C:(windows98me,fat32) and
> D:(windows2000,ntfs). I want to remove w98me and install Mandrake 8.0
> instead. My question is, will I be able to see my W2K NTFS partition
> after installing Mandrake 8.0? Any expert suggestions please?
There is another problem before that: If you overwrite the the win98
(C:) partition with linux, you will also wipe out the W2K bootmanager,
which lives allways on the C: partition and you will not be able to boot
into W2K any more. So you will probably have to reinstall W2K on C:
after removing W98 and use the D: partition for linux.
Now to your original question: You will be able have read-only access to
your W2K NTFS partition by using the NTFS filesystem driver in the linux
kernel. It might be ( I don't know Mandrake 8.0) that this driver isn't
provided the Mandrake standard kernel and you've to compile it from
sources yourself.
To put some data from linux onto your W2K partition you can use
Explore2fs ( http://uranus.it.swin.edu.au/~jn/linux/Explore2fs.htm) from
W2K.
--
Markus Kossmann
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (James Rose)
Subject: Re: Linux and NTFS W2K
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 09:55:09 GMT
>I have a two partitions, C:(windows98me,fat32) and
>D:(windows2000,ntfs). I want to remove w98me and install Mandrake 8.0
>instead. My question is, will I be able to see my W2K NTFS partition
>after installing Mandrake 8.0? Any expert suggestions please?
Are you asking if the NTFS partition will still be there? Unless you mistakenly
install Linux onto your NTFS Partition, it will be safe and sound.
Most likely after the initial install however, you will NOT be able to mount
("see") those files. The partition should be visible, however most linux
kernels do not include support for NTFS.
If this is the case, you will need to download the kernel sources and compile a
kernel that supports your hardware. (e.g. NTFS, <yourNIChere>,
<yoursoundcardhere>, etc...) Read the Kernel-HOWTO -> http://howto.tucows.com/
That should get you what you need. Read up on the status of NTFS support, AFAIK
the read part works fine, it's the writing to NTFS that is VERY DANGEROUS.
So your answer is YES, you will be able to read the NTFS filesystem, but quite
possibly not right away.
------------------------------
From: "Glitch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Cisco emulator for practice?
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 02:43:57 -0400
In article <b50L6.2920$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Harison
Phinizy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it possible to emulate a Cisco router on a Linux box to practice
> router config?
>
>
Cisco routers have their own operating system and their own commands.
Although the purpose would be similar between a linux box and a
cisco router a cisco router would have much more functionality since it is a
specific device used for routing. With a linux box you can't configure
routing protocols, only routed protocols. A cisco router is a complex
device much more attuned to routing than a linux box could be (complex
enough to have its own OS and subset of commands).
A more user-level problem with what u are asking is the fact that
commands that are on a router don't exist on a linux box.
------------------------------
From: "Glitch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Cisco emulator for practice?
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 03:43:08 -0400
In article <b50L6.2920$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Harison
Phinizy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it possible to emulate a Cisco router on a Linux box to practice
> router config?
>
>
Cisco routers have their own operating system and their own commands.
Although the purpose would be similar between a linux box and a cisco
router a cisco router would have much more functionality since it is a
specific device used for routing. With a linux box you can't configure
routing protocols, only routed protocols. A cisco router is a complex
device much more attuned to routing than a linux box could be (complex
enough to have its own OS and subset of commands).
A more user-level problem with what u are asking is the fact that
commands that are on a router don't exist on a linux box.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
