Linux-Advocacy Digest #918, Volume #25 Sun, 2 Apr 00 22:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Misleading advertisement about linux and redhat !!! (Shadow Hunter)
Re: Win2000 kicks ass ("Dirk Gently")
Re: Linux vs Windows development man-hours? (Loren Petrich)
Re: BEOS 5 the new star in OS's (Darren Winsper)
Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped (Artur Bartnicki)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (John Hasler)
Re: BEOS 5 the new star in OS's (Tim Kelley)
Re: Microsoft's settlement offer : publish ALL OR NOTHING AT ALL (Jerry McBride)
Re: distribpricing (Tim Kelley)
Re: Win2000 kicks ass (Shadow Hunter)
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers (Roger)
Re: distribpricing ("Gooba")
Re: Microsoft's settlement offer : publish ALL OR NOTHING AT ALL ("Gooba")
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers (Roger)
Re: Win2000 kicks ass (Jianmang Li)
Re: I'm back again! (Jim Richardson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shadow Hunter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Misleading advertisement about linux and redhat !!!
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 18:55:04 -0400
Ok, good points. Sorry for being wrong on that and I'll happily admit
when I wrong. If part of my post seemed a bit intense I typed it just
after Dale Jarrett hit the wall in the Winston Cup race and I wasn't
too happy with that. Next time I'll keep bad moods away from the
computer where they don't belong. :)
Shadow Hunter
On Sun, 02 Apr 2000 16:26:45 -0500, Opinionated
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Shadow Hunter wrote:
>
>> Redhat is an operating system!
>
>Wrong! Redhat is a company that distributes the Linux Operating System
>(kernel with programs). RedHat is not the name of any Operating System.
>
>> It's a Linux OS, not Windows. I guess
>> general Windows users consider Linux not to be a real OS? It's kind of
>> like Ford owner's not thinking that Chevy's are real cars? The Redhat
>> Distribution is proprietary, however, the Linux Kernel is not.
>
>Wrong! The Redhat linux distro is >NOT< proprietary....only some of the
>software in their distro is proprietary, for which they have given a license
>to be used in their distribution. The vast majority of software on the
>RedHat distro is GPL'd software that has been developed other places than
>Redhat, and that software can be downloaded straight from the program's
>maintainers (The Linux kernel is only one of these programs). All Redhat
>has done is to sell a distro that combines all of these programs onto a CD
>(with some work to integrate these programs together), and you are really
>only paying for the manual, CDs, and some support from Redhat when you buy
>their package. You can also buy a RedHat Distro for $1.99 paying only for
>the CDs from cheapbytes. What you cannot do is to copy RedHat's distro to a
>CD and then make people believe that your copy came straight from RedHat.
>You can, however, resell the CD (minus the Redhat proprietary programs) and
>say that this is a distro based on RedHat (very similiar to Mandrake's
>implementation).
>
>> Remember, all Linux distributions run on the same kernel.
>
>All Linux distros run on a Linux kernel, but the version of the kernel may
>not be the same from distro to distro. The Linux kernel could be vastly
>different from version to version as well.
>
>> Shadow Hunter
------------------------------
From: "Dirk Gently" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2000 kicks ass
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 23:10:56 GMT
Hello. What medication are you on? I think you had better stop eight years
ago. Windows CAN'T be better than Linux. Sure, it might have a better gui
and more programs, but it still isn't better. The day Windows is better
than Linux, 6545.546646 will be the answer to life, the universe, and
everything (Not 42).
At home, I have two 98 computers. One crash literally every 5 minutes. The
other one crashes once a week (min). You're just lucky because 2000 thinks
you like Microsoft.
--
Jeff Lacy
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux Rules!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"chewing_gum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi there
>
> Had this installed for a month now. Superb, no hangs, no crashes..
> ....beautiful piece of software. Well done Bill.
> Linux for the desktop? Never.
>
>
> cheers
> bob
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Subject: Re: Linux vs Windows development man-hours?
Date: 2 Apr 2000 23:33:41 GMT
In article <hsiF4.1443$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Evolution is going to have branches on each side. For instance, nothing
>like MAPI, TAPI, or DirectX exists for Linux.
Dunno about MAPI or TAPI, but Linux does have an in-the-works
approximation to most of DirectX: the Simple DirectMedia Layer. Its
equivalent of Direct3D is OpenGL, which is much more mature than SDL,
however :-)
>The Macintosh was such a screwed up architecture, that it took them 15 years
>to come up with a fully pre-emptive OS, and even then they had to buy it
>from NeXT. Apple researchers spent the better part of a decade trying to
>write a new pre-emptive MacOS. They failed over and over again. Meanwhile,
>Microsoft converted it's co-operative OS to pre-emptive in just 3 years.
What Apple had done with Copland is to try to create an integrated
cooperative/preemptive OS, but Apple's programmers could never get it to
work properly. Microsoft has been somewhat more successful with this
strategy in its Windows 9x series, but for Windows NT, Microsoft has taken
the approach of running Win3x inside of a WinNT process.
This virtual-machine approach is the approach that Apple is now
taking toward the old MacOS in its NeXTstep update, MacOS X, and it
appears to be much more successful.
>You claimed they couldn't maintain "core competance" which is saying they
>can't keep experienced people around. Then you claimed they had too many
>experienced people and not enough young blood (nevermind that Microsoft
>mainly hires only recent college graduates unless you have a proven track
>record in the industry. They do this so that they can train them how they
>want them before they learn bad habits).
Like what bad habits?
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Winsper)
Subject: Re: BEOS 5 the new star in OS's
Date: 2 Apr 2000 23:34:24 GMT
On Sat, 01 Apr 2000 19:12:41 -0600, Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matthias Warkus wrote:
>
> > Saying "GNOME is slow" or "KDE is slow" is silly anyway, since neither
> > is a single application. Can you actually explain *what* feels slow
> > under GNOME? You're probably using something that is slowing some
> > component down, maybe your X authorisation has got problems, which
> > means long waiting periods whenever something tries to contact the
> > session manager or ORBit, or maybe you're using a pixmap-based GTK+
> > theme.
>
> o god no it's horrible with pixmap themes, nothing wrong with my X
I can't understand why you consider it slow then. Using the default
theme it's lightning fast on this machine which uses an old Matrox
Mystique, hardly fast in this day and age. It's slightly slower using
a ThinIce based theme, but it's still as fast as KDE.
--
Darren Winsper (El Capitano) - ICQ #8899775
Stellar Legacy project member - http://www.stellarlegacy.tsx.org
DVD boycotts. Are you doing your bit?
This message was typed before a live studio audience.
------------------------------
From: Artur Bartnicki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped
Date: 03 Apr 2000 01:39:51 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus) pisze, co nastêpuje:
[16 linii ciach - AB]
> > Also, I think you can create a swap file that resides on an ext2
> > filesystem. Didn't look like something worth trying.
>
> However, this makes it possible to have a daemon running that creates
> and adds swap space on-the-fly if your swap is filling up. Kind of
> neat, but I don't know whether anyone does that.
Yes, someone does. Look at swapd.
--a
___ ___ -------------------------------------------------------
/ _ | _ ) Artur "Archie" Bartnicki tel: (0-71) 342 68 22
/ __ | _ \ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (0-601) 79 88 72
/_/ |_|___/ -------------------------------------------------------
What fun is it being "cool", if you can't wear a sombrero?!
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 23:03:05 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Free software is clearly anti-capitalist.
No. Software is clearly not capital.
> ...there will be no money, no private property.
There will be private property as long as only one person can possess a
given object. There will be money as long at any resource remains scarce.
> no monsters like Microsoft.
Monsters like the Soviet Union instead?
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: BEOS 5 the new star in OS's
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 19:06:25 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Darren Winsper wrote:
>
> On Sat, 01 Apr 2000 19:12:41 -0600, Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Matthias Warkus wrote:
> >
> > > Saying "GNOME is slow" or "KDE is slow" is silly anyway, since neither
> > > is a single application. Can you actually explain *what* feels slow
> > > under GNOME? You're probably using something that is slowing some
> > > component down, maybe your X authorisation has got problems, which
> > > means long waiting periods whenever something tries to contact the
> > > session manager or ORBit, or maybe you're using a pixmap-based GTK+
> > > theme.
> >
> > o god no it's horrible with pixmap themes, nothing wrong with my X
>
> I can't understand why you consider it slow then. Using the default
> theme it's lightning fast on this machine which uses an old Matrox
> Mystique, hardly fast in this day and age. It's slightly slower using
> a ThinIce based theme, but it's still as fast as KDE.
Having rethought it, honestly, I guess I can't much tell the difference
On my laptop (P133/trident/64MB) kde seems a little faster.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerry McBride)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft's settlement offer : publish ALL OR NOTHING AT ALL
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 16:54:32 -0400
In article <ukBF4.4572$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Jim Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-- snip --
>> IBM: IBM is moving rapidly toward Linux.
>> (A smart move by IBM would be to free and open OS/2,
>> so that parts of it could be cannibalized and melted into
>> GNU projects).
>>
>
>I get the impression that IBM is unwilling/unabilities to clean out and
>replace OS/2 code they don't own to release it.
>Maybe IBM could ask Linux users to vote on which parts are most highly
>needed and then just fix and release that to open source/GPL.
>
If the WorkPlaceShell could be GPL'ed, that would be a boon to all us Linux
users. The WPS has got to be one of the most user-friendliest GUI's that
has ever graced an OS... IMHO ofcourse... :')
>Maybe the Object Desktop code would be a good place to start (can't remember
>the correct name, but it makes sure the program shortcuts stay valid.)
>
The only catch there is... you'd have to deal with StarDock. Not the nicest
people in my book.
--
*******************************************************************************
"42? 7 and a half million years and all you can come up with is 42?!"
*******************************************************************************
* NetRexx - The onramp to the Internet - http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx *
*******************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: distribpricing
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 19:17:09 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JOE wrote:
>
> Tim Kelley wrote:
> > 3. you can download the iso of disk one from ftp.redhat.com.
> > You can get the contrib rpm's from contrib.redhat.com, tons of stuff there,
> > around 1200MB worth of RPM's.
>
> If a person can get there!
> ""
> Forbidden
> You don't have permission to access / on this server""
>
> JOE
Well, they're busy, they just released 6.2 so everyone and their grandmother is
trying to get in.
Use one of the mirrors.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Shadow Hunter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2000 kicks ass
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 21:03:58 -0400
I can't say I have the same problems with Windows 98. I can't say too
much about new Linux Distro's at this point in time as I'm still
awaiting my copy of Redhat 6.2 to arrive from cheapbytes.com but this
system will be dual booting Windows 98 and RH 6.2. I have no problems
or crashes with Windows 98. Adding 32 megs of RAM to the 64 I already
had really made the system more stable then it was as it would
occasionally crash out and I believe that was due to running out of
memory more then anything. Just my experiences although I know a lot
of people have had trouble with 95 and 98 so I am not a Microsoft
Advocate by any means. After I learn all the little tricks to RH I'll
probably completely switch over since I do have another machine that
runs Windows 95 anyway. :)
Shadow Hunter
On Sun, 02 Apr 2000 23:10:56 GMT, "Dirk Gently"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello. What medication are you on? I think you had better stop eight years
>ago. Windows CAN'T be better than Linux. Sure, it might have a better gui
>and more programs, but it still isn't better. The day Windows is better
>than Linux, 6545.546646 will be the answer to life, the universe, and
>everything (Not 42).
>
>At home, I have two 98 computers. One crash literally every 5 minutes. The
>other one crashes once a week (min). You're just lucky because 2000 thinks
>you like Microsoft.
------------------------------
From: Roger <roger@.>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 01:32:35 GMT
On Sun, 02 Apr 2000 01:17:08 -0500, someone claiming to be T. Max
Devlin wrote:
>Quoting Roger from alt.destroy.microsoft; Tue, 28 Mar 2000 02:49:02 GMT
>>>Microtrash forces HW
>>>makers to sign non-compete agreements (whatever that means) and
>>>non-disclose agreements (apparently they cannot disclose the
>>>source code of the driver).
>>This is what you are supposed to be supporting -- not just spinning
>>more fables about.
>No, there is no argumentative support required for this statement; they are
>accepted (by the overwhelming consensus of research and analysis) and known
>facts. If you wish to contradict these historical truths or existent
>circumstances, you're going to have to support that hypothesis, not just spew
>"says you" all over the groups.
IOW, <Max> Because I Said So! </Max>
Our regular viewers are not surprized that Max, again, makes no
attempt at support for the assertion, preferring instead to wallow in
his fantasy that everything anyone says which might put MS in a bad
light must be true, because after all, MS is * icky *
>>And if they cannot disclose it, how do you know this?
>If they could disclose it, how would we know this?
Umm, because it might then have * been * disclosed, and therefore be
verifiable.
As it stands, there is only Bob and Max's fevered imaginations to back
this up.
>>>Then it locks them into very long
>>>agreements, say 10 years. I know some people who work for HW
>>>companies and they have told me that these agreements are what
>>>keep them from writing drivers for other OS's.
>>So, you have a name for this mythical company being so pressured?
>All major (and most other) PC manufacturers. Pick one. If you can contradict
>the fact that these contracts exist, please do so. Otherwise, stop trolling.
>(Yea, right, like that's gonna happen.)
Not how it works, altho it's not surprizing that Max finds it
convenient to ignore the convention that the person making the claim
is expected to support it.
Prove that even one OEM has such a NDA for such a period of time for a
driver distributed under their name which MS actually wrote.
Or admit that you are blowing smoke -- again.
Or, do what you always do when backed into a corner over questions of
fact: ad hominem, and pretend that the question didn't exist, or was
already answered, or simple run away with your tail between your legs.
<snip rant>
Let me ask you Max -- what possible benefit would MS gain from using
their own resources to write such drivers, and then forcing OEMs to
claim that they had? For TEN YEARS?
>>Well, since MS doesn't do anything but the most basic, it's not hard
>>to offer a compelling update if you hardware does anything out of the
>>ordinary (acceleration, etc.)
>If they don't do anything but the most basic, how come they get credit for all
>"Windows" software?
This only happens on MaxWorld. Here on Earth, the only software MS
takes credit for is software that they have written, or of which they
have acquired the author.
>It's not hard to pass the buck when you're made of teflon
>licensing, but your assumption that Microsoft cannot be held responsible for
>all the code they take credit for is pretty pointless in light of the
>discussion.
<Tholen> Reading comprehension problems? </Tholen>
Bob's claim (which you are defending above) is that MS is explicitly
forcing OEMs to take credit for writing drivers that MS actually
wrote, and preventing them from discussing this for ten years.
Please do try to keep up.
------------------------------
From: "Gooba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: distribpricing
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 01:38:38 GMT
Chris, don't be an ass. What he said is perfectly fair and valid. No need
for name calling.
"Chris Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8c6jkc$4ut$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >
> >Hello to all,
> >
> >I am wanting to get opinions from Linux users about the rising costs of
> both
> >Caldera and Red Hat Linux distributions. I use both Red Hat and Caldera
> 2.3
> >and like them much better than NT (I am an MCSE). My concern however is
> >that the rising prices of these distributions will compromise the spirit
of
> >Linux. I have enjoyed offering small businesses great opportunities to
> >have
> >quality information systems using Linux (Samba, Sendmail, Ipchains,
etc.).
> >Hopefully in the future Linux will still be the choice that smaller
> >businesses can opt for rather than spending a lot of money for NT and
> (even
> >more trying) to keep it running as stable as NT.
> >I appreiciate your imput.
> >
> >JAS
>
>
>
> Sorry Troll. I just ordered the RedHat 6.2 three cdrom set from Cheapbytes
> for $3.49.
>
> If you want the printed manuals and support from RedHat, you can get the
> Standard Version of 6.2 for around $29.00 which I would advise an idoit
like
> yourself to do.
>
> There are some changes in the way 6.2 is configured as compared to older
> RedHat dists and if you're not familar with RedHat or linux in general
I'ld
> advise you to stay away from places like CheapBytes, especally if you are
> unwilling to read the documentation that comes with the software you buy.
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Gooba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft's settlement offer : publish ALL OR NOTHING AT ALL
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 01:41:30 GMT
It just struck me last night and I don't know if it's been explored yet. An
Open Sourced Windows would allow people to create new desktops for it,
right? KDE for Windows?
And considering we already have the option of a command line boot, then
isn't it theoretically possible to already create such a thing?
Seemed relevant to the thread...<shrug>
------------------------------
From: Roger <roger@.>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 01:53:51 GMT
On Sun, 02 Apr 2000 01:17:13 -0500, someone claiming to be T. Max
Devlin wrote:
>Quoting R.E.Ballard from alt.destroy.microsoft; Tue, 28 Mar 2000 04:37:41 GMT
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> Quoting Roger from alt.destroy.microsoft; Wed, 08 Mar 2000 04:10:16
>>GMT
>>> >On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 23:46:36 GMT, someone claiming to be me" wrote:
>Sorry, Rex. I'm a representative of T. Max Devlin and nothing else. I
>support Linux as well as any open source product, but I'm not trying to be a
>model for anything except reasonable clarity. I wouldn't consider beating
>Roger off the thread with a thick stick to be unreasonable, so a few 'ad
>hominids'(sic) are going to creep in there as long as he's still here.
"Especially since he's embarrassed me so often, and won't forget about
that damn bet I ran away from"
------------------------------
From: Jianmang Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2000 kicks ass
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 03:48:50 +0200
Hi chewing! Too late for April 1 stuff.
Half month ago I told people I will never install Window 2000. Now I had
it running on my laptop for 1 week. I tell you what my experience was:
1) After installation it did not recognize my LAN/Modem card. The
troubleshooting insists that I should go to Window 2000 update site
where I can't go. The Linux on the same machine had used the same card
for half year now. At the end it took me 4 hours (against warning of not
MS signed) to install the driver from my vendor. So it is working now
but 4 hours of work! I did it in ten minute on Linux. So Linux is more
difficult to install than Windows?. I'm not even installing but
upgrading Windows (from Win 98).
2) Then My ESS1869 sound card is not working. Actually Windows 2000
claims it is "working properly" but give me no sound. After one day work
I give it up. So my machine become silent. The Linux on the same machine
play sound loudly form the same card. So Window has more than Linux?.
3) Just hours ago, I found that I can't use my modem to dial out. Under
modem setup panel, the country dropdown list contains nothing and it
does not allow me to go "Next" without country name. I tried the
Internet dialup connection wizard. It failed and tells me "You must
manually setup your own TCP/IP protocol, Dialup networking, and modem,
ISDN line or other dial-out device". Hell how do I do this manually?
After I click Ok (the only button) the dialog tells me that I didn't
finish my setup (of cause) and ask me if I'm sure that I want to close
the wizard. I click NO then it shut back the same dialog. So I realized
that the YES/NO button means I had only one choice - click on the YES
and blame myself for clicking on the wrong button - I'm an idiot. So
windows is user friendly?
4) In one week, it freeze my screen (mostly during shutdown or logout)
more than 10 times that I have to push the power button. So Windows 2000
is more stable?
5) Now my ADM400/64 MB laptop runs like a pig. Ya it runs more services.
But my family server downstairs is only a Pentium 60/40 MB. It runs web
server(Apache/PHP/SSL), file server(samba), remote login server (sshd
and telnetd), email server (sendmail), ftp server(wu_ftpd), DB server
(mysql) ... for more than a year now. Of cause it is Linux - what else
can do these with such old machine that even the CPU fan stopped
functioning half year ago.
The only reason that I eat my word of not installing Window 2000 was
that one of my client demands a work that needs decent http server under
Windows. I certainly will charge more to the client for the pain that
they forced me to suffer!
chewing_gum wrote:
> Hi there
>
> Had this installed for a month now. Superb, no hangs, no crashes..
> ....beautiful piece of software. Well done Bill.
> Linux for the desktop? Never.
>
> cheers
> bob
--
Jianmang Li
Stachanov
Phone: +31-72-5646664 +31-6-22977904
Fax: +31-72-5627410
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: I'm back again!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 02:06:30 GMT
On Fri, 31 Mar 2000 05:58:46 GMT,
Jim Richardson, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>On Fri, 31 Mar 2000 04:02:11 GMT,
> piddy, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
>>
>>Why am I getting this error in the KDE when trying to connect to dial
>>up internet? This is the log:
>>
>>Mar 30 21:37:36 wl2000 pppd[466]: pppd 2.3.7 started by me, uid 1000
>>Mar 30 21:37:36 wl2000 pppd[466]: Using interface ppp0
>>Mar 30 21:37:36 wl2000 pppd[466]: Connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/ttyS0
>>Mar 30 21:38:06 wl2000 pppd[466]: Terminating on signal 15.
>>Mar 30 21:38:12 wl2000 pppd[466]: Connection terminated.
>>Mar 30 21:38:12 wl2000 pppd[466]: Connect time 0.6 minutes.
>>Mar 30 21:38:12 wl2000 pppd[466]: Exit.
>>
>
>At a guess, you have not configured /dev/ttyS0 to allow your uid 1000
>to access it.
> You see, unlike W9X, Linux is a multi-user system, and has security and
>safety measures that allow you to differentiate between users, and prevent
>the kind of screwups common on single user systems like Win9X, where you
>are allways root. You could either enable global access to /dev/ttyS0, (unwise)
>or add you uid 1000 to the group /dev/ttyS0 belongs to. With kde, I think there
>is a gee-whiz gui frontend to do this, but the easiest way is to edit
>/etc/groups and add your username to the appropriate group. You can find the
>name of the group by doing
>
>ls -o /dev/ttyS0
oops, shoulda been
ls -l /dev/ttyS0, sorry...
>
>you should see something like
>
>crw-r----- 1 root uucp 4, 64 Mar 30 22:04 /dev/ttyS0
>
>in the above case, the group name is uucp.
>
>
>
>Another possibility is that /dev/ttyS0 is not actually where your modem is.
>
>Hope this helps.
>
>
>--
>Jim Richardson
> Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
>WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
> Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
>
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
** 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.advocacy) 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-Advocacy Digest
******************************
