On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 22:36:57 -0500
Chuck Hast dijo:
>I think it will run on anything, have not used it in a while but I
>recall that if nothing else would run on a box
>Knoppix would, it was rare to find a machine it would not run on. Great
>piece of work, and neat distro.
And I have it on my
On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 14:34:12 -0700 (PDT)
Rich Shepard dijo:
>Bring some DVDs to the next clinic: John usually has an external drive
>with a bunch of different distros on it and can burn some disks for
>you.
Hi,
I'm the 'John' referenced above.
I maintain on my computer the latest Ubuntus (all
Hello,
Thank you Mike!
I did see that.
My first comment is that in general, PLUG always has a need for speakers
and it any open source-related (or even thoughtful high tech) topic is
fair game. This has left us with limited content to "share", though I
can talk from time to time, for what
I think it will run on anything, have not used it in a while but I recall
that if nothing else would run on a box
Knoppix would, it was rare to find a machine it would not run on. Great
piece of work, and neat distro.
On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 2:02 PM Vince Winter
wrote:
> knoppix is one of my
Who is distributing their distro via Sourceforge?? I'm not aware of any
large projects that still use them for hosting. And distros in particular
don't usually go through those types of hosting services since they prefer
to offer HTTP mirrors instead. You might want to see what kind of speeds
you
here are 2 stages where the download could be compromised:
1) Man-in-the-middle attacks when you (the user) download the file from
the server to your machine, resulting in a file that differs from the one
you
intended to download.
2) modifications made on the server. The file you downloaded is
>
> So there's no "chain of custody", for lack of a better term, digital
> signature where one could look at the kernel running on a Linux system and
> trace it back to the original Linux kernel that was released?
>
No there's not; Not only that, in many cases, it's NOT the "real" kernel as
To be clear, I mean you can go on campus at PSU and connect to their guest
wifi.
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:09 PM Russell Senior
wrote:
> Another place with lots of bandwidth you might be able to score from is
> Portland State University. I haven't tried (I have decent bandwidth at
> home), but
On 10/7/19 5:09 PM, Russell Senior wrote:
Another place with lots of bandwidth you might be able to score from is
Portland State University. I haven't tried (I have decent bandwidth at
home), but if I was looking for tubes, that's a place that comes to mind.
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 4:21 PM Mike
Another place with lots of bandwidth you might be able to score from is
Portland State University. I haven't tried (I have decent bandwidth at
home), but if I was looking for tubes, that's a place that comes to mind.
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 4:21 PM Mike C. wrote:
> What is giving you the
The key thing always confuses me, but it is also worth noting is that
there are 2 stages where the download could be compromised:
1) Man-in-the-middle attacks when you (the user) download the file from the
server to your machine, resulting in a file that differs from the one you
intended to
What is giving you the estimate?
-- Browser download manager. But I also can see how much of the distro has
been downloaded after an hour.
Sometimes the slow download is more a matter of which mirror you got
sent to. If you can specify one, you might be able to "shop around" for
one that's
That is, of course, only useful if the distribution itself is
not compromised.
In case it is truly compromised, including signing and
sha256 infrastructure, I do not think you can do much about it.
Hope it helps,
Tomas
-- This is precisely what I'm trying to understand. What's preventing
The gnarly problem with cryptographic signatures is making sure that the
public keys you are using to verify are the correct ones, since usually the
way you get the public keys are the same way you get the signatures and the
blobs they protect. You need some reliable out-of-band way of gaining
> You could download distribution .iso as well as its sha256sum. Then you
> run: sha256sum fileName.iso and compare them.
>
> All distributions I know are additionally signed and will complain/abort
> when the signature does not match.
>
> That is, of course, only useful if the distribution
I've a newly installed scientific reference database application (Zotera)
that is not working properly on the Ryzen7 desktop running
Slackware-14.2/x86_64. It is written in java (version unknown). When I
highlight text in a PDF document and try to paste it into the appropriate
data entry widget
How would one know or determine if their beloved Linux distro of choice is
hacked, altered or otherwise compromised?
And not from years of using it with applying security updates or just
willy-nilly throwing apps on it for fun but from the source when you
download it.
Say I want to build my own
What is giving you the estimate?
Sometimes the slow download is more a matter of which mirror you got sent
to. If you can specify one, you might be able to "shop around" for one
that's reasonably fast.
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 2:29 PM Mike C. wrote:
> I'd like to be able to download a few Linux
On Mon, 7 Oct 2019, Mike C. wrote:
I'd like to be able to download a few Linux distros to test. Generally, a
distro is a couple of gigs. I'd like to be able to download a distro in
less than 8 or 12 hrs. Which is the estimate I get when I try to do it
over WiFi at the Multnomah Public Library.
I'd like to be able to download a few Linux distros to test. Generally, a
distro is a couple of gigs. I'd like to be able to download a distro in
less than 8 or 12 hrs. Which is the estimate I get when I try to do it over
WiFi at the Multnomah Public Library.
Any suggestions?
Thank you,
Mike
I can test the cable since there are some serial devices floating around my
office. :)
Or... if you are worried about counterfeit devices, just buy our serial
cable!
usb 1-3: new full-speed USB device number 2 using xhci_hcd
usb 1-3: New USB device found, idVendor=0403, idProduct=6001,
Thanks again Bruce,
This is about all I needed.
Tomas
On Sun, Oct 6, 2019, 15:49 Bruce Kilpatrick wrote:
> On 10/6/19 12:00 PM, Tomas Kuchta wrote:
> > Thanks Bruce,
> >
> > Good to hear that it all works.
> >
> > So, from your response, I can assume that the printer did not work out of
> > the
On 10/7/19 8:28 AM, Galen Seitz wrote:
> On 10/7/19 7:28 AM, Johnathan Mantey wrote:
>> I'm guessing the Prolific chip in the converter is a knock off, and has
>> been intentionally disabled by the latest Windoze versions. FTDI and
>> Prolific both have a problem with counterfeit devices. The
On 10/7/19 7:28 AM, Johnathan Mantey wrote:
I'm guessing the Prolific chip in the converter is a knock off, and has
been intentionally disabled by the latest Windoze versions. FTDI and
Prolific both have a problem with counterfeit devices. The solution they
applied was to make their drivers
I'm guessing the Prolific chip in the converter is a knock off, and has
been intentionally disabled by the latest Windoze versions. FTDI and
Prolific both have a problem with counterfeit devices. The solution they
applied was to make their drivers refuse to work with counterfeit HW. I've
found
25 matches
Mail list logo
