For those that didn't see it on /. Linux 2.4.0 was released today!
(er, sorry, yesterday. It's already Wednesday. damn.)
--
We sometimes catch a window, a glimpse of what's beyond
Was it just imagination stringing us along?
---
Derek Martin
Niall Kavanagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> A remotely savvy webmaster will create appropriate pages for appropriate
> user agents.
>
Unfortunately, there appears to be too few of these - and I'm still not
convinced that the extra effort to use flash is worth it, especially given how
I've
I agree. Also, if your local mailer is procmail, you could have procmail run
the perl script.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Bruce Dawson
> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 6:39 PM
> To: Ken D'Ambrosio
> Cc: Greater NH Linux Users'
As root, do:
ln -s /tmp/mailps2pdf.pl /etc/smrsh/
--Bruce
Ken D'Ambrosio wrote:
>
> I've whipped up a Perl script that parses an incoming e-mail, stripping
> off the Postscript, converting it to a PDF, and then attaching it to an
> e-mail that it then sends back to the original sender. Howe
At 05:19 PM 1/4/01 -0500, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > ln -s /etc/smrsh/mailps2pdf.pl /tmp/mailps2pdf.pl
>
>Sorry, that should be:
>
>ln -s /tmp/mailps2pdf.pl /etc/smrsh/mailps2pdf.pl
>
>--kevin
I know that the DontBlameSendmail option is needed in some ins
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Paul Lussier wrote:
> Anyone know of a decent password checker?
Crack is the "standard" password strength checker for Unix.
A quick Google search seems to indicate http://www.cerias.purdue.edu/coast/
is the closest thing to a home "crack" has.
Red Hat Linux includes cr
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> ln -s /etc/smrsh/mailps2pdf.pl /tmp/mailps2pdf.pl
Sorry, that should be:
ln -s /tmp/mailps2pdf.pl /etc/smrsh/mailps2pdf.pl
--kevin
--
Kevin D. Clark (cetaceannetworks.com!kclark) |
Cetacean Networks, Inc. | Give me a decent UNIX
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Anyone know of a decent password checker? I'm not looking for something to
> "check" encrypted strings, rather something that tells the person the password
> the *want* to use "is bad because...".
IIRC, the pink camel book had one of these.
--kevin
--
Kevin D. C
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, "Ken D'Ambrosio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've whipped up a Perl script that parses an incoming e-mail, stripping
> off the Postscript, converting it to a PDF, and then attaching it to an
> e-mail that it then sends back to the original sender. However, I can't
> get Send
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I've whipped up a Perl script that parses an incoming e-mail, stripping
> off the Postscript, converting it to a PDF, and then attaching it to an
> e-mail that it then sends back to the original sender. However, I can't
> get Sendmail to run the script (via /etc/alia
Hi all,
Anyone know of a decent password checker? I'm not looking for something to
"check" encrypted strings, rather something that tells the person the password
the *want* to use "is bad because...".
Ideally, it should have a perl interface :) But I can deal if it requires a
system call o
I've whipped up a Perl script that parses an incoming e-mail, stripping
off the Postscript, converting it to a PDF, and then attaching it to an
e-mail that it then sends back to the original sender. However, I can't
get Sendmail to run the script (via /etc/aliases). Here's what happens:
" --
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Ray Bowles wrote:
> Below is the response I get when I try sending mail using my server.
[...]
> No transport provider was available for delivery to this recipient.
I believe this message actually comes from MS Outlook, and the real error
(the one that sendmail is reporting)
Below is the response I get when I try sending mail using my server.
Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients.
Subject: test
Sent: 1/3/2001 1:24 AM
The following recipient(s) could not be reached:
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on 1/3/2001 1:24 AM
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Paul Lussier wrote:
>> LOL. I agree, but I'm also biased. :-) From a market research point of
>> view, for "average desktop" use, both Macintosh and Linux/Unix are
>> considered to be just barely below consideration at this point.
>
> If that's the case, then what's the dec
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Jeffry Smith wrote:
> Of course, the other problem with these flash sites (especially flash-only
> ones) is that all the search engines do text (metatags, or in the
> header/body). So, the flash sites aren't indexed, so they aren't found on the
> searches. Great if you do
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Paul Lussier wrote:
> In a message dated: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 11:51:25 EST
> Benjamin Scott said:
>
> > They probably don't. For the vast majority of companies, the segment of the
> >population currently using Linux for web browsing (or who have Flash turned
> >off) is insigni
Of course, the other problem with these flash sites (especially flash-only
ones) is that all the search engines do text (metatags, or in the
header/body). So, the flash sites aren't indexed, so they aren't found on the
searches. Great if you don't want people to know about you.
jeff
---
In a message dated: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 12:17:48 EST
Benjamin Scott said:
> LOL. I agree, but I'm also biased. :-) From a market research point of
>view, for "average desktop" use, both Macintosh and Linux/Unix are considered
>to be just barely below consideration at this point.
If that's the c
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Paul Lussier wrote:
> True, but supposedly Linux has surpassed Mac as a desktop platform, and they
> have both Mac-based clients and development tools.
In the graphics-designer segment, Macintosh still has a hugely
disproportionate percentage of market share. Linux has jus
In a message dated: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 11:51:25 EST
Benjamin Scott said:
> They probably don't. For the vast majority of companies, the segment of the
>population currently using Linux for web browsing (or who have Flash turned
>off) is insignificant. It would cost them more in time and effort t
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Jeffry Smith wrote:
> Unfortunately, there's a lot of websites out there that haven't figured
> this out, yet. I guess they don't want our business.
They probably don't. For the vast majority of companies, the segment of the
population currently using Linux for web browsin
Paul Lussier said:
> In a message dated: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 10:37:56 EST
> Benjamin Scott said:
>
> >On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Paul Lussier wrote:
> >>> Another reason to avoid websites that use it!
> >>
> >> The main reason to avoid it being their poor support for Linux !
> >
> > Flash works well enou
Thanks-
Looks like I must've mis-typed the first time, because I finally
managed to find the right BIOS version in Gateway's monolithic
site. Thanks for the pointers, everyone, and MicroFirmware is definitely
a site I'll keep in mind. Thanks again!
- Dana
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Benjamin
In a message dated: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 10:37:56 EST
Benjamin Scott said:
>On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Paul Lussier wrote:
>>> Another reason to avoid websites that use it!
>>
>> The main reason to avoid it being their poor support for Linux !
>
> Flash works well enough, it's Shockwave that doesn't. Act
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Dana S. Tellier wrote:
> But I'm trying to find a BIOS update to a GateWay2000 P5-100 machine so
> that I can start a fresh install of Linux... I've tried searching for
> everything I can think of, but to no avail. If anyone can send me any
> pointers, I'd be grateful.
Have
What motherboard and BIOS does it have? You should be able to go to the
motherboard manufacturers website and get it. Also, if you know what you
have for a BIOS now, you should be able to go to the BIOS vendors
website and find the latest updates.
"Dana S. Tellier" wrote:
>
> Sorry to bother eve
Sorry to bother everyone...
But I'm trying to find a BIOS update to a GateWay2000 P5-100
machine so that I can start a fresh install of Linux... I've tried
searching for everything I can think of, but to no avail. If anyone can
send me any pointers, I'd be grateful.
TIA,
Dana
--
Dana
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Paul Lussier wrote:
>> Another reason to avoid websites that use it!
>
> The main reason to avoid it being their poor support for Linux !
Flash works well enough, it's Shockwave that doesn't. Actually, most of my
problems have been websites with stupid JavaScript that assu
In a message dated: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 10:21:17 EST
Jeffry Smith said:
>LWN has info on a buffer overflow problem with Flash plugins (many platforms):
>http://www.lwn.net/daily/swf-bug.php3
>
>
>Another reason to avoid websites that use it!
The main reason to avoid it being their poor support for
LWN has info on a buffer overflow problem with Flash plugins (many platforms):
http://www.lwn.net/daily/swf-bug.php3
Another reason to avoid websites that use it!
jeff
---
Jeffry Smith Technical Sales Consultant Missi
In a message dated: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 09:59:55 EST
Benjamin Scott said:
>On Thu, 4 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> I have heard there are some emulators out there, but I don't know if there
>> is one that stands above the rest.
I think he was referring to game emulators, not OS/HW emulators.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> This has me thinking (a dangerous thing indeed). I still love some of the
> older DOS / Win 3.x games. In the next couple weeks I hope to find time to
> load up gnome on my Debian box (I've only run command line linux so far),
> and would love to put some of those g
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have heard there are some emulators out there, but I don't know if there
> is one that stands above the rest.
DOSemu, the DOS emulator, contains a pretty complete implementation of the
MS-DOS feature set. No URL.
Wine, the Windows emulator, wi
In a message dated: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 09:44:01 EST
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>I have heard there are some emulators out there, but I don't know if there
>is one that stands above the rest. If it matters, the games I'm thinking
>of most are X-Com (original), Pirates Gold and Wingcommander Privateer
This has me thinking (a dangerous thing indeed). I still love some of the
older DOS / Win 3.x games. In the next couple weeks I hope to find time to
load up gnome on my Debian box (I've only run command line linux so far),
and would love to put some of those games over there as well. I have hea
Another quick thought - you asked for ways to show that NT admins can run
Linux without expensive training & cert at school expense -
1. Again, take it a bit at a time. Keep the one Linux box, let someone play
& learn that (using this list & group as a resource), then move on. A couple
of go
A few things:
1. MS is expiring all non-Win2000 MCSE certificates. Remember that you have
to retrain on MS every few years, because they keep changing things. With
Linux, it's like Unix, there may be slight changes, but fundamentally, once
you learn to administer it, you can keep that knowle
Check out the Linux on laptops pages:
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/kharker/linux-laptop/
The A21p is not listed but the A21m is. I think there is a Lucent
Winmodem, for which there is a Linux Driver. You might have problems with
the integrated Ethernet chip. we've been having a discussion ab
39 matches
Mail list logo
