Linux-Development-Sys Digest #239, Volume #6 Fri, 8 Jan 99 22:14:44 EST
Contents:
Re: Can't reboot at root from "xdm" (DonJr)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (Victor Danilchenko)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (Adam P. Jenkins)
Re: 2.2.0-pre5: Problem with ppp (Clifford Kite)
Re: blocksize / file write speed anomaly (Paul Popowski)
klogd problem with new kernels ("Michael E. Guo")
Re: disheartened gnome developer (steve mcadams)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (steve mcadams)
Re: subscribe (Villy Kruse)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (steve mcadams)
PCMCIA support under 2.1.131 - how? (Edward A. Falk)
Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows (Nobu Toge)
Re: Ultra-DMA safe in 2.2.0-pre? (Terry)
Re: Ultra-DMA safe in 2.2.0-pre? (Terry)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: DonJr <donjr@[127.0.0.1]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Can't reboot at root from "xdm"
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 23:58:59 -0500
Jon D. Slater wrote:
>
> Once I log in as root using an XDM login, I've noticed if I type
> "reboot" or "reboot &" in an xterm my machine does not reboot until I
> press <Alt><Ctrl><F1>, switch to a "text based" screen.
>
> Then the machine (running Redhat 5.2) reboots normally.
>
> Why can't I reboot my machine from within an XDM login session?
>
> Or maybe my question sould be "How do I reboot from an xterm run under
> an XDM login?"
>
> Please send suggestions to: JSlater<at>Qualcomm<dot>Com
>
> Thanks in advance!!
>
> Jon
Jon
Ways to REBOOT or HALT an XDM session from the termial:
# su - shutdown -r now
Assign a Password to the "user" accounts 'shutdown' and 'reboot'.
Then logoff and simply login as one of those users.
( Note: Pick a "Strong Password" for these accounts if this method is
used. It is possible to telenet into a system and logon as one of theses
users.
{ As this method would allow a system to be ShutDown or Rebooted
remotely :} )
Or a little more complex to setup, but easy to use and only works from
the system termial.
The following adds 2 Buttons to your Xbanner screen. One labeled
"Reboot" and one labeled "HALT".
(note: Requires that the 'tk' package is installed.)
To /etc/X11/xdm/Xsetup_0 insert the following:
| colum 0 in the file is here.
-------- start of text to insert -----
# reboot & halt buttons
/usr/bin/wish <<EOF &
wm geometry . +10+10
button .halt -text Halt -command {exec shutdown -h now}
button .reboot -text Reboot -command {exec shutdown -r now}
pack .halt .reboot -side left
EOF
echo $! > /var/run/xdmbutton_0.pid
-------- end of text to insert -------------
# before the following line
/usr/X11R6/bin/xbanner
Then Replace /etc/X11/xdm/GiveConsole with the following:
----------------start of file------------------------------------
#!/bin/sh
# Assign ownership of the console to the invoking user
# $XConsortium: GiveConsole,v 1.2 93/09/28 14:29:20 gildea Exp $
#
# By convention, both xconsole and xterm -C check that the
# console is owned by the invoking user and is readable before
attaching
# the console output. This way a random user can invoke xterm -C
without
# causing serious grief.
#
# :0 specific startup commands go here
# stop reboot & halt buttons
if test -r /var/run/xdmbutton_0.pid; then
kill `cat /var/run/xdmbutton_0.pid`
rm /var/run/xdmbutton_0.pid
fi
chown $USER /dev/console
#eof GiveConsole
--------------------eof-------------------------
The above is only adding 6 lines to GiveConsole, but it was easier to
show the whole file then explain where to put it.
Note the above will allow any user who has access to the system Termial
and Mouse to Halt or Reboot the system.
But, since having access to the system Mouse means they also most
likely have access to the "Power Switch" no big deal.
At least now there is a chance that the system will be properly
shutdown now, instead of just pulling the Plug.
The easiest way to switch from a "text based" system to 'xdm' mode on a
RedHat based system (as root) is:
$ telinit 5
--
-----------------------
Don E. Groves, Jr.
my Email is jetnick AT erols DOT com
I'll add a witty saying here later.
================
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 17:02:35 -0500
From: Victor Danilchenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> >
> > Troll Tech, whatever you or I might think of them, are
> > still just a company. Idealism and wishful thinking
> > won't alter that or change the constraints that companies
> > operate under.
>
> so, are you saying there should be no companies who work for profit??
>
> if eveything is free, companies will close, and there will be no jobs.
If EVERYTHING was free, people would not need jobs. That's communism --
working because you want to, not because you have to.
> is that what you want? no jobs?
Not a bad idea, actually, but it will never work as long as there are
selfish people willing to take advantage of it.
> this is the free and great capitalist country we live in, where companies
> are created to make wealth for its stock holders, to employ people and
> to spread the American dream far and wide.
Yes, yes, truth, justice, and the comics.
> I for sure do not mind, and very happy to pay for my software products,
> becuase I know when I do that, I am helping a company make some profit,
> which in turn give people money to buy something I might make one day, and
> therefor we all prosper and gain wealth and happeniss.
It's not that simple. Why don't you go read some stuff on the FSF page?
They have a nice explanation on how economy may work with free software.
> This is why I buy these Linux distrubtions from Fry's where I know the prices
> are higher and where I know I can get Linux for free if I wanted to. But I
> dont. I want to pay for it.
*I* buy Linux distribution because I want to support the company -- but
the whole point is that I CHOSE to pay, I could have gotten it without
paying. This freedom of choice is the whole crux of the matter -- I may
have as well just donated my $40 to a worthy cause of GNU/Linux
development.
> Look live the American dream.
Your version of it seems positively nightmarish to me, dude.
> Bob (call me Bill).
--
| Victor A. Danilchenko CSCF support |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] A313, 5-4231 |
+--------------------------------------------+
| Quando omni flunkus, moritati. |
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam P. Jenkins)
Date: 08 Jan 1999 00:34:58 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi) writes:
> On 7 Jan 99 22:18:32 GMT, Adam P. Jenkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>But suppose you fork the code and create your own version called NavQt,
> >>distributed as patch+original. If your version becomes popular, Troll Tech
> >>can instantly include your patches in their version, making it part of
> >>thier *commercial* product, charging people money for the commercial
> >>version. You are not on the same level with them. You do not have equal
> >>rights, even to your own work, under the qpl. If you can accept that,
> >>that's fine for you.
> >>
> >>Redhat is spending $$$ on gnome development. But nowhere in the copyright
> >>or license does it say that they exclusivly own or control it. They are
> >>part owners of the copyright, and if you contribute a worthwhile patch,
> >>you become a part owner too. Redhat plans to make money selling service
> >>and support for gnome, which you can do as well.
> >>
> >>So there is a key difference in business model here. Redhat dishes out
> >>free software under GPL/LGPL and hopes to make money on service and
> >>support. Troll tech is trying to make money via license royalties. In this
> >>respect Troll Tech's business model has more in common with Microsoft than
> >>it does with Redhat.
> >>
> >>If your happy with Troll Tech's terms, and want to develop with Qt/KDE, go
> >>for it. If your happy with Microsofts terms, and want to develop with
> >>Visual Studio, go for it. I personally find Gnome/GPL/LGPL the least of
> >>the evils.
> >
> >I think you give a pretty balanced overview here, but I think the
> >way you insinuate that Troll Tech and Microsoft are similar is
> >pretty disingenuous. The way I see Troll Tech is: they offer what
>
> [deletia]
>
> Troll Tech, whatever you or I might think of them, are
> still just a company. Idealism and wishful thinking
> won't alter that or change the constraints that companies
> operate under.
Yet another cryptic and irrelevant message from you! Why don't you
ever say directly whatever it is you're trying to say? Why is it
relevant that Troll Tech is a company? RedHat is a company too.
The gist of Perry's message seemed to be that it bothers him that
Troll Tech might profit by his contributions to Qt, but it doesn't
bother him that RedHat might profit by his contributions to GTK. So
the relative idealism of Troll Tech and RedHat *is* relevant in my
response, because at least for me, it affects how willing I am to
contribute. For example I always feel reluctant to even report bugs
in VC++ to Microsoft, because Microsoft never displays any kind of
idealism so why should I help them for free. Also, Troll Tech never
can take control of patches I write for Qt. They can use them in
their commercial version, but I'm also always free to do what I want
with those patches. With Qt I can modify it and distribute my
modified version as a pristine version + patches. With GTK I can
modify it and distribute my modified version directly. To me this
seems like just a technical difference, with no very deep significance
beyond the slight inconvenience of having to apply patches. Others
prefer to read a lot more into it.
Also there was one inaccuracy I think in Perry's message. As far as I
know Troll Tech does not charge any royalty on commercial products
that use Qt. They charge a one time fee when someone buys the
library, and perhaps optional fees for continued support.
--
Adam P. Jenkins
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Clifford Kite)
Subject: Re: 2.2.0-pre5: Problem with ppp
Date: 8 Jan 1999 17:09:31 -0600
Michael Keller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I just compiled the Kernel 2.2.0-pre5 on my S.u.S.E. 5.3 installation
: successfully.
: Booting with it, my ppp connection behaves as follows:
: The modem (analogue) dials, establishes the handshake with my ISP, but
: right after that, it hangs up, and there is the following error log:
: pppd[xx] ioctl(SIOCADDRT) device route: Network is down
This error with 2.1.13x seems to mean that ppp-2.3.5 is needed.
--
Clifford Kite Not a guru. (tm)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Better is the enemy of good enough.
------------------------------
From: Paul Popowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: blocksize / file write speed anomaly
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 00:56:23 -0600
If you look where the bottleneck in your program occurs it's at the point where you
call
fsync.
The man page for fsync even acknowledges that for some applications the function
fdatasync
would
be a better choice. Running your program with fsync (in the random write) changed to
fdatasync I get
the exact same results as the first part of the test actually even better in some
cases.
pops
Jerry Dinardo wrote:
> I did not remove the file before my random writes because i wanted to simulate DB
> creation and DB update. However , I changed my program to do the random writes on a
>new
> file.
>
> STEP 1
> 1. create file
> 2. write 20000 2K blocks sequentially
> 3. close
> 9 seconds
>
> STEP 2
> 4. open existing
> 5. 10000 2K blocks on 4K boundary (block 0,2,4,6 ...)
> 6. close
> 102 seconds
>
> STEP3
> 7. RECREATE file
> 8. 10000 2K blocks on 4K boudary (block 0,2,4,6 ...)
> 9 close
> 7 seconds
>
> The procesing in STEP 2 and STEP 3 is identical except the file is new in step 3 and
>it
> runs 14 times faster.
> I also noticed that the update rate is about the disk RPM rate.
> This leads me to believe that linux is reading the 2K block before writing it. I know
> that linux would have to read block if it did not start on sector boudary or it was
>not
> an even multiple of sector size. However , I thought the magic number was 512 and I
>used
> 2048 just to be safe.
>
> Does anyone know under what conditions linux will read block before writing it??????
>
> * I needed to increase the file size to get the same results on machines with more
> memory. I have been testing on 32M and 64M machines.
>
> thanks jerry
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <stdlib.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <fcntl.h>
> #include <time.h>
> #include <string.h>
>
> #define SYSBLK (1024*2)
> #define NEW 1
> #define OLD 0
>
> int write_linux(int,int,int,int);
>
> void main() {
> write_linux(SYSBLK,20000,NEW,1); // create new file
> write_linux(SYSBLK,20000,OLD,2); // use existing file - write 0,2,4
> write_linux(SYSBLK,20000,NEW,2); // create new file - write 0,2,4
> }
>
> int write_linux(int wsize,int loopcnt,int new,int interleave) {
> int i,fd,rc,trecs=0;
> time_t t1=time(0),t2;
> char buf[SYSBLK],*fn="stufit.dat";
> printf("write_linux running ...\n");
> if (new==NEW) {
> remove(fn);
> fd=open(fn,O_CREAT|O_TRUNC|O_WRONLY,0600);
> }
> else {
> fd=open(fn,O_WRONLY,0600);
> }
> if (fd<0) {
> perror("write_linux open failed");
> exit(1);
> }
> memset(buf,'x',sizeof(buf));
> for (i=0;i<loopcnt;i+=interleave) {
> rc=lseek(fd,i*wsize,SEEK_SET);
> if (rc!=i*wsize) {
> perror("write_linux seek failed");
> exit(1);
> }
> rc=write(fd,buf,wsize);
> if (rc != wsize) {
> perror("write_linux write failed");
> exit(1);
> }
> trecs++;
> }
> rc=fsync(fd);
> if (rc<0) {
> perror("write_linux fsync failed");
> exit(1);
> }
> t2=time(0)-t1;
> close(fd);
> printf("recs=%d time=%ld bps=%ld\n",trecs,t2,wsize*trecs/t2);
> return 0;
> }
------------------------------
From: "Michael E. Guo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: klogd problem with new kernels
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 16:15:20 -0800
I began to use new kernels (2.2.0-pre?) my klogd gives strange messages
like "Could not find map file" or "Error seeking in /dev/kmem" something
like that, I've download the source of sysklogd-1.3 from tsx11 but
cannot compile it with new kernel,
because it's too old (1996) and many structs has changed in
linux/module.h. It's the reason that klogd's strange behaviour.
Is there a updated sysklogd? or any patch to solve this problem?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 01:59:10 GMT
[Snipped for brevity, quoted material marked with ">"]
On Thu, 7 Jan 1999 20:30:23 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi) wrote:
>On 7 Jan 1999 17:37:50 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>this is the free and great capitalist country we live in, where companies
>>are created to make wealth for its stock holders, to employ people and
>>to spread the American dream far and wide.
>
> That's why one should not trust a corporation as far as
> one could throw it's board or it's shareholders. Like
> most groups of humans, such groups often resemble a lynch
> mob with the CEO and board as potential tree ornaments.
Wrong! It's not the CEO and board who are the potential tree
ornaments; it's the customer community that gets hung out to dry.
>>I for sure do not mind, and very happy to pay for my software products,
I agree completely, unless there's a free alternative that's better.
Personally I only have time to deal with the best, and I don't much
give a damn whether it's free or costs money as long as it isn't more
money that I can afford for whatever it is. Free software can cost
you a lot of time in legwork etc. Pay software can be a waste of
money. Just let me get my hands on the best stuff and get on with my
life.
Too bad I missed the start of this thread, it sounds pretty
interesting. -steve
========================================================
Tools for programmers: http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 01:59:14 GMT
[Snipped for brevity, quoted material marked with ">"]
On 08 Jan 1999 00:34:58 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam P. Jenkins)
wrote:
>The gist of Perry's message seemed to be that it bothers him that
>Troll Tech might profit by his contributions to Qt, but it doesn't
>bother him that RedHat might profit by his contributions to GTK. So
>the relative idealism of Troll Tech and RedHat *is* relevant in my
>response, because at least for me, it affects how willing I am to
>contribute.
You subscribe to the "never give the badguys an even break"
philosophy, eh?
> For example I always feel reluctant to even report bugs
>in VC++ to Microsoft, because Microsoft never displays any kind of
>idealism so why should I help them for free.
Ditto, they've squeezed enough blood from this turnip. Besides that,
they make it Real Inconvenient for you to find out where to report a
bug to and then actually report it. You're expected to do all the
work for them so they can go on with their customary practice of
gutting your bank account. NOT.
> Also, Troll Tech never
>can take control of patches I write for Qt. They can use them in
>their commercial version, but I'm also always free to do what I want
>with those patches. With Qt I can modify it and distribute my
>modified version as a pristine version + patches. With GTK I can
>modify it and distribute my modified version directly. To me this
>seems like just a technical difference, with no very deep significance
>beyond the slight inconvenience of having to apply patches. Others
>prefer to read a lot more into it.
Sounds like a pretty trivial difference to me. Especially if there's
some kind of package installer around that will apply the patches for
the person installing the code.
>Also there was one inaccuracy I think in Perry's message. As far as I
>know Troll Tech does not charge any royalty on commercial products
>that use Qt. They charge a one time fee when someone buys the
>library, and perhaps optional fees for continued support.
Does it matter whether they charge a royalty or a one-time fee for use
of Qt in proprietary products? I would think that's "personal
business" between TrollTech and their customers. A royalty makes a
lot of sense for a startup to choose; make nothing, pay nothing or
make lots, pay a certain percentage, but the risk factor is the same
for success or failure, no risk at all. On the other hand a fixed
price makes more sense for a big company, they pay some amount (say
$50k for example) then sell 100,000 copies of their product for $200
each (like MS would) which nets them so much money that the $50k
upfront fee is a nit. -steve
========================================================
Tools for programmers: http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse)
Subject: Re: subscribe
Date: 8 Jan 1999 09:49:14 +0100
Must be a joke!
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>JiSook Kim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> subscibe
>
>ok, you are subscribed.
>
>to unsubscribe, send a message to alt.test with the subject
>`unsubscribe <newsgroup>'
>
>hope this helps.
>
>--
>johan kullstam
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 02:12:17 GMT
[Snipped for brevity, quoted material marked with ">"]
On Fri, 08 Jan 1999 17:02:35 -0500, Victor Danilchenko
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> *I* buy Linux distribution because I want to support the company -- but
>the whole point is that I CHOSE to pay, I could have gotten it without
>paying. This freedom of choice is the whole crux of the matter -- I may
>have as well just donated my $40 to a worthy cause of GNU/Linux
>development.
You're a lot more altruistic than me. *I* buy Linux distributions
because I'd rather spend a few bucks on the CDs than spend a day each
downloading 600meg images. The result is the same though, the economy
is churning along doing its economic thing. -steve
========================================================
Tools for programmers: http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Edward A. Falk)
Subject: PCMCIA support under 2.1.131 - how?
Date: 8 Jan 1999 01:17:34 -0800
Hi all; quick question -- how do I configure the kernel for PCMCIA
under 2.1.131?
When I run "make xconfig", the PCMCIA option is not presented to
me anywhere that I can find. (It used to be buried in the IDE
options.)
When I run "make modules ; make modules_install" no pcmcia directory is
created under /lib/modules/2.1.131.
At boot time, /etc/rc.d/init.d/pcmcia complains
Starting PCMCIA services: module directory /lib/modules/2.1.131/pcmcia not found
Apologies if I missed something obvious. A pointer to the proper documentation
would be sufficient.
-ed falk
--
-ed falk, [EMAIL PROTECTED] *********************#*********
Visit http://www.rahul.net/falk/whatToDo.html ****#*#**************F******!**
and read 12 Simple Things You Can Do ****!*!!**********!************
to Save the Internet ***************#****#******#**
------------------------------
From: Nobu Toge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows
Date: 08 Jan 1999 19:19:05 +0900
Joseph Coffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> vi sucks, and it always has. It should only be used in a
> pinch, or by sadists. Anyone who has room in their head for
> all the vi commands, has probably overwritten some important
> "being human" information in the process of memorizing that
> crap.
Yeah, exactly my sentiment. Indeed, I do feel like I have overwritten
some important being human info that way, and I can't quite
recall what those things were <g>
- Nobu Toge ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
------------------------------
From: Terry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ultra-DMA safe in 2.2.0-pre?
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 08:40:42 -0500
Andreas Spengler wrote:
> I recently switched my system to RH5.2 and got a new harddisk with
> U-DMA.
> I am using this on a VIA Board with MVP3 CS. Using kernel 2.1.131 I got
> regular
> ext2fs-errors using the DMA feature and the support for the VIA bridge
> with my new HD.
>
> Is this corrected in 2.2.0-whatever ... ???
Are you using a driver for your hard disk (i.e., EZDRIVE). I
had problems when I installed Linux on a new UDMA drive. After
installing EZDRIVE, it worked fine.
Terry
------------------------------
From: Terry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ultra-DMA safe in 2.2.0-pre?
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 08:40:19 -0500
Andreas Spengler wrote:
> I recently switched my system to RH5.2 and got a new harddisk with
> U-DMA.
> I am using this on a VIA Board with MVP3 CS. Using kernel 2.1.131 I got
> regular
> ext2fs-errors using the DMA feature and the support for the VIA bridge
> with my new HD.
>
> Is this corrected in 2.2.0-whatever ... ???
Are you using a driver for your hard disk (i.e., EZDRIVE). I
had problems when I installed Linux on a new UDMA drive. After
installing EZDRIVE, it worked fine.
Terry
------------------------------
** 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.development.system) 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-Development-System Digest
******************************
