[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Send slug mailing list submissions to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of slug digest..." > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Today's Topics: > > 1. Debian 2.3 Config Documentation (Richard Luckhurst) > 2. Re: Newbie and Modem - I need help. (Tom Massey) > 3. Modem working (Paul Copeland) > 4. Re: Debian 2.3 Config Documentation (chesty) > 5. Re: GnuPG and Evolution (Jamie Wilkinson) > 6. Large File support made simple? (Luke McKee) > 7. Re: Large File support made simple? (chesty) > 8. Re: Debian 2.3 Config Documentation (Matthew Palmer) > 9. RE: Large File support made simple? (Luke McKee) > 10. Re: Modem working (Simon Wong) > 11. RE: Large File support made simple? (Luke McKee) > 12. Re: Large File support made simple? (Crossfire) > 13. RE: Large File support made simple? (Luke McKee) > 14. RE: Large File support made simple? (Luke McKee) > 15. analysing ftp logs (S) > 16. Re: analysing ftp logs (John Clarke) > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: [SLUG] Debian 2.3 Config Documentation > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 12:01:54 +1100 > From: "Richard Luckhurst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Organization: Sound Advice > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hi list > > Recently I have been contracted to replace a Win NT server with a > new server running Debian 2.2 (the clients choice). This is my first > experience with Debian although I have installed plenty of Redhat > and SUSE based servers. I have found the lack of documentation > about how Debian configure things after the installation quite a > surprise. Does anyone know of any decent documentation on post > installation of a Debian release? > > Regards > > Richard > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: [SLUG] Newbie and Modem - I need help. > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 12:12:49 +1100 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Massey) > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <1010443570.2691.2.camel@lonewolf> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <1010446281.4299.0.camel@lonewolf> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 11:13:45AM +1100, Crossfire wrote: > > > Well, ltmodem is purely for the lucent based winmodems. Conexant are > > another big manufacturer of winmodems, and their offerings have no > > linux support. > > This isn't entirely true - there are drivers available for Conexant HSF > modems <http://www.mbsi.ca/hsflinux/>, same sort of thing as the > Ltmodem drivers: half binary, half source. This approach does seem to > work reasonably well with the Ltmodem drivers anyway. I've had them > working on every 2.4.x kernel and a number of 2.2.x kernels, even with > various patches such as the preempt one, devfs. I do agree with most of > what you're saying though. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: [SLUG] Modem working > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 12:28:42 +1100 > From: Paul Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Thanks to all responders, especially Andre Pang. Those simple strings seemed > to work, and this message has been sent using KMail. Thanks again for the > help. > > Regards > Paul Copeland > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: [SLUG] Debian 2.3 Config Documentation > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 12:45:45 +1100 > From: chesty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > References: <003001c197e0$10f5d7a0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 12:01:54PM +1100, Richard Luckhurst wrote: > > Recently I have been contracted to replace a Win NT server with a > > new server running Debian 2.2 (the clients choice). > > The client is always right. 2.2 or 2.3, both good choices :) > > > This is my first > > experience with Debian although I have installed plenty of Redhat > > and SUSE based servers. > > The first step is always the biggest. Debian is consistent, once > you start learning, you'll pick new things up very quickly. > > > I have found the lack of documentation > > about how Debian configure things after the installation quite a > > surprise. Does anyone know of any decent documentation on post > > installation of a Debian release? > > So you're looking for the "Secret knowledge of the Debian" pack? > > www.debian.org > www.debian.org/doc > apt-get install debian-guide > apt-get install debian-policy > apt-get install doc-debian > > Try "apt-cache search debian doc" or "apt-cache search debian.*doc" > (the first one might not work on earlier versions of apt) > > There may have even been a screen at the end of installation that > told you where to look for documentation. > > Another way to go about things is to find something specific that > you want to do, but not sure how, then do a few quick searches > in the slug archive, www.debian.org and google, if that doesn't help, > ask on slug. > > -- > > Note: You can skip this section if you want to move on. > > chesty > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: [SLUG] GnuPG and Evolution > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 13:03:19 +1100 > From: Jamie Wilkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Sydney Linux Users Group Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > This one time, at band camp, Malcolm V wrote: > >On Tue, 2002-01-08 at 05:13, Pete Ryland wrote: > >> I think there was a change recently in mutt's default gpg config (under > >> debian at least). That could be part of the problem. > > > >Pete, I seem to have trouble with your signatures, I think I've tried > >about five of your posts and only two have returned good. For instance, > >the first post you made to this thread came up with a good signature, > >but the post with the attached file came back bad. > > > >Does anyone else get bad signatures or this a problem at my end? > > Both your signatures are good from here. > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://spacepants.org/jaq.gpg > > You created this list purely because you have so much to say that is too off > topic for slug-chat, and too inoffensive for crackmonkey... didn't you? Admit > it! > -- Jan Schmidt, table64 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: [SLUG] Large File support made simple? > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 13:20:20 +1100 > From: Luke McKee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hey Slugsters, > > I'm trying to get large file support into TAR and my ftpd for backup > purposes. I hate it how tar and ftp and every bloody other linux process > doesn't support 2 GB files on 32 bit systems. Being ignorant of this, at one > stage greatly affected my job security :_) > > I've been a nice reading the HOWTO on it I found at: > http://www.beowulf.org/pipermail/beowulf/200-March/008708.html > > It said there is a simple define option -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE that will run > macro's to make redefine all the existing Linux file IO functions to their > 64 bit counterparts. I'm looking at my debian woody libc6 set up and all the > macro's that don't seem to be there. > > Has anyone had any success with this or do I have to reconfigure a new > c-library form source? What patches should I get to (like gcc3 and so on) if > I need to do this. > > Thanks heaps guys and girls. > > Luke McKee > Systems Administrator > RTS Realtime Systems Pty Ltd > Ph: +61 2 8259 3921 > Fax: +61 2 9259 3999 > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: [SLUG] Large File support made simple? > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 13:39:43 +1100 > From: chesty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 01:20:20PM +1100, Luke McKee wrote: > > Has anyone had any success with this or do I have to reconfigure a new > > c-library form source? What patches should I get to (like gcc3 and so on) if > > I need to do this. > > woody should have LFS already built in, perhaps you need kernel 2.4 though. > > We recently upgrade a few servers to woody because a database was getting > close to 2 gigs and potato didn't support LFS. After the upgrade to woody, > a test database was made that was roughly 40 gigs. > > $ dd if=/dev/zero of=bigfile bs=4k count=1000000 > 1000000+0 records in > 1000000+0 records out > $ ls -l bigfile > -rw-r--r-- 1 chesty chesty 4096000000 Jan 8 13:33 bigfile > $ tar cf bigfile.tar bigfile > $ ls -l bigfile.tar > -rw-r--r-- 1 chesty chesty 4096010240 Jan 8 13:37 bigfile.tar > > -- > > Note: You can skip this section if you want to move on. > > chesty > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: [SLUG] Debian 2.3 Config Documentation > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 14:01:03 +1100 (EST) > From: Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Richard Luckhurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Richard Luckhurst wrote: > > > Recently I have been contracted to replace a Win NT server with a > > new server running Debian 2.2 (the clients choice). This is my first > > experience with Debian although I have installed plenty of Redhat > > and SUSE based servers. I have found the lack of documentation > > about how Debian configure things after the installation quite a > > surprise. Does anyone know of any decent documentation on post > > installation of a Debian release? > > I'm surprised you're surprised. I'm surprised you didn't find anything. > /usr/share/doc/<packagename> is usually helpful to some degree (although > some packages are missing UI). For big packages, try installing a package > called <packagename>-doc, or do an apt-cache search for it. To keep the > size down on packages, large documentation is usually bundled separately so > that the gurus who don't need the docs don't have wasted space. > > Checking the links posted by others - www.debian.org, searches on google, > they'll all help you out. > > Honestly, post-installation of Debian is simple. Work out what you want to > do, install the package to do it, read that package's documentation, and > configure the package. There's no real unified, single, grand method of > making every package work out of the box (thank god - and if you don't > agree, I darn you to linuxconf). How do SuSE and DeadRat do it? If SuSE > has 'embraced and extended' YaST to include every other package on the > system, I'll puke - it was slow enough just changing frigging IP addresses. > > Oops, I'm ranting. </rant> > > -- > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > #include <disclaimer.h> > Matthew Palmer > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: RE: [SLUG] Large File support made simple? > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 14:08:59 +1100 > From: Luke McKee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: 'Steven Evans' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > CC: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Steve, > > Dd is raw device io as apposed to file IO. > Recent ext2&3 drivers have LFS support equal to ReiserFS. > > I'm appealing to local debian / Linux users to let me know if debian woody > (November images planetmirror.com) supports LFS without recompiling libc. > > If not I have to recompile glibc, what patches are good and where can I find > them. For example where are the gcc3 glibc patches? > > Luke > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven Evans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, 8 January 2002 1:51 PM > To: 'Luke McKee' > Subject: RE: [SLUG] Large File support made simple? > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > hey dude > > reiserfs doesnt have any 2 gig limit. been able to dd copy a 10gig > harddrive onto a resierfs hdd without any problems. > > Cheers, > Steve > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Luke McKee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, 8 January 2002 1:20 PM > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: [SLUG] Large File support made simple? > > > > > > Hey Slugsters, > > > > I'm trying to get large file support into TAR and my ftpd for > > backup purposes. I hate it how tar and ftp and every bloody other > > linux process > > doesn't support 2 GB files on 32 bit systems. Being ignorant > > of this, at one > > stage greatly affected my job security :_) > > > > I've been a nice reading the HOWTO on it I found at: > > http://www.beowulf.org/pipermail/beowulf/200-March/008708.html > > > > It said there is a simple define option -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE > > that will run > > macro's to make redefine all the existing Linux file IO > > functions to their > > 64 bit counterparts. I'm looking at my debian woody libc6 set > > up and all the > > macro's that don't seem to be there. > > > > Has anyone had any success with this or do I have to reconfigure a > > new c-library form source? What patches should I get to (like > > gcc3 and so on) if > > I need to do this. > > > > Thanks heaps guys and girls. > > > > Luke McKee > > Systems Administrator > > RTS Realtime Systems Pty Ltd > > Ph: +61 2 8259 3921 > > Fax: +61 2 9259 3999 > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -- > > SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ > > More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: PGP 7.0.1 > > iQA+AwUBPDpegRMcfLgR5MndEQIjngCWI1DUBmELWVQhyPAo+XDvqGoIsACgpUHS > gRBlEUGMHUjlnLE42oJw9eo= > =9HoO > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: [SLUG] Modem working > Date: 08 Jan 2002 14:20:48 +1100 > From: Simon Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: SLUG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Tue, 2002-01-08 at 12:28, Paul Copeland wrote: > > Thanks to all responders, especially Andre Pang. Those simple strings seemed > > to work, and this message has been sent using KMail. Thanks again for the > > help. > > Good news :-) > > I've been through plenty of trials this year learning Linux after > Windows. > > You'll find plenty of road blocks but believe me when you have things > working (and I still don't have it all 100%) you'll be better for it. > > Enjoy! > > Some other links for you: > > The Linux Documentation Project www.linuxdoc.org > Newbie Help http://www.linuxnewbie.org/ > Good starting info http://www.ibiblio.org/obp/cookbook/ > > -- > ************** > * Simon Wong * > ************** > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: [SLUG] RE: Large File support made simple? > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 14:23:12 +1100 > From: Luke McKee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hey again, > > Maybe I shouldn't comfuzzle people. > I did chesty's test (thanks man) and the FS supports larger than 2 gig > files. > > The problem is many applications, such as wu-ftpd that comes with Debian > Woody couldn't access past 2 gigs of large file I made with dd. > The _LFS_STDIO macro mentioned in that large file how-to doesn't seem to > exist in any of my header files. It is only mentioned in unistd.h as a > comment. > > This means I have to change source of every application I get so that it > supports 64 bit IO right? I'm trying this with a sed script at the moment. > > What would be nicer is if I could define some of the options at compile time > that would make applications support LFS without any code changes? > > Which is the best way of changing file IO functions in the source?: Changing > fopen to fopen64 or using the O_LARGEFILE option with fopen? > > Luke > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: [SLUG] Large File support made simple? > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 14:36:17 +1100 > From: Crossfire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Luke McKee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > CC: 'Steven Evans' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Luke McKee was once rumoured to have said: > > Dd is raw device io as apposed to file IO. > > Get off the crack - if dd is sourcing from a file, or writing to a > file, that is going through the FS layer and is not "raw device io" at > all. > > C. > -- > --==============================================-- > Crossfire | This email was brought to you > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | on 100% Recycled Electrons > --==============================================-- > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: RE: [SLUG] Large File support made simple? > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 14:49:00 +1100 > From: Luke McKee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: 'Crossfire' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > 'Steven Evans' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > CC: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Oh Crossie your so lovely. > Fond memories of last time you flamed me on the list come rushing back. > > I estimated before that Steven Evans was talking about writing to a blovk > device special file.. WHICH IS NOT FILE IO. Dd tends to be used for that a > lot doesn't it? > > If you read my most recent post before this, I said I used dd to write to a > file and it worked. So dd in debian support LFS but wu-ftpd doesn't. > > No more flaming on the list.. Everyone got tired of that last time. Feel > free to have the last word. I won't stop you this time ;-) > > Luke > > -----Original Message----- > From: Crossfire [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, 8 January 2002 2:36 PM > To: Luke McKee > Cc: 'Steven Evans'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: Re: [SLUG] Large File support made simple? > > Luke McKee was once rumoured to have said: > > Dd is raw device io as apposed to file IO. > > Get off the crack - if dd is sourcing from a file, or writing to a > file, that is going through the FS layer and is not "raw device io" at > all. > > C. > -- > --==============================================-- > Crossfire | This email was brought to you > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | on 100% Recycled Electrons > --==============================================-- > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: RE: [SLUG] Large File support made simple? > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 15:07:05 +1100 > From: Luke McKee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: 'Crossfire' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > CC: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Oopsies I made a mistake this time :_) > Congratulates :-) > > Thanks for keeping me on my tippie toes when it comes to making posts from > now on. > > Cheers, > > Luke > > -----Original Message----- > From: Crossfire [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, 8 January 2002 3:05 PM > To: Luke McKee > Subject: Re: [SLUG] Large File support made simple? > > Luke McKee was once rumoured to have said: > > Oh Crossie your so lovely. > > Flattery will get you nowhere. > > > Fond memories of last time you flamed me on the list come rushing back. > > Its obvious that you didn't learn much from last time either, > otherwise we wouldn't be here again. > > > I estimated before that Steven Evans was talking about writing to a blovk > > device special file.. WHICH IS NOT FILE IO. Dd tends to be used for that a > > lot doesn't it? > > Oh dear! I'm sorry to have insulted your inability to interpret > people's postings. > > Lets replay that line. > > "been able to dd copy a 10gig harddrive onto a reiserfs hdd without > any problems" > > Lets see... source is a harddrive (block device)... destination is a > filesystem. > > Geez, I wish I could come to the same conclusion as you. To me it > sounds like he's writing to a file. > > Furthermore, just because dd is used a lot for operating on > block/character devices, doesn't mean its for raw IO. dd is just a > generic filter. Go read `info dd' sometime. > > > No more flaming on the list.. Everyone got tired of that last time. Feel > > free to have the last word. I won't stop you this time ;-) > > You mean you're not willing to make a fool of yourself publically again? > > That hardly surprises me either. > > C. > -- > --==============================================-- > Crossfire | This email was brought to you > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | on 100% Recycled Electrons > --==============================================-- > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: [SLUG] analysing ftp logs > Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 23:42:00 -0500 > From: S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Hi > > m/c: RH 7.2, log file: /var/log/xferlog., running ftp server. > Qs: > 1. How do you know somebody's download has finished? > -- Does the 'c or i' at the endof each entry indicate this? > 2. How much time the client took to download this file? > > 3. How many paralel connections had he opened? > > 4. what is the user-agent the client used. > > 5. If you have b _ o r and ftp 0 * c in your entries too, > what do they mean? > > thanks > step > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: [SLUG] analysing ftp logs > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 15:53:13 +1100 > From: John Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 11:42:00PM -0500, S wrote: > > > 1. How do you know somebody's download has finished? > > -- Does the 'c or i' at the endof each entry indicate this? > > Yes: c - complete, i - incomplete > > > 2. How much time the client took to download this file? > > The figure after the date is the time in seconds. > > > 5. If you have b _ o r and ftp 0 * c in your entries too, > > what do they mean? > > b - binary, a - ascii > o - output (download), i - input (upload) > > Cheers, > > John > -- > whois [EMAIL PROTECTED] > GPG key id: 0xD59C360F > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > -- > SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List Digest - http://slug.org.au/ > More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
I missed that thread. Could you possibly save me alittle digest search time and send me a copy of those strings. I am trying to get Kmail running and having string probs. Thnaks Raena -- *Innovation makes enemies of all those who prospered under the old regime...*, Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince
begin:vcard n:Lea-Shannon;Raena x-mozilla-html:FALSE adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] note;quoted-printable:"Innovation makes enemies of all those who prospered under the old regime..."=0D=0AMachiavelli, The Prince x-mozilla-cpt:;-32672 fn:Raena Lea-Shannon end:vcard
