Linux-Advocacy Digest #102, Volume #28 Sat, 29 Jul 00 19:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux can save you money on electricity! (abraxas)
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: VCD/DVD Player and Question about the cdrom (E J)
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Linux can save you money on electricity! (abraxas)
Re: A Case Study of Software RAID Systems (abraxas)
Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive! (abraxas)
Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive! (Steve)
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one of
Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality ("Spud")
Re: Linux can save you money on electricity! (Tim Palmer)
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Tim Palmer)
Re: How Can I contribute? (Tim Palmer)
Re: C# is a copy of java (nf)
Re: Can Linux get the job done? Are there Linux apps for..... (Topaz Crow)
Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive! (sandrews)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Linux can save you money on electricity!
Date: 29 Jul 2000 22:11:28 GMT
2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> abraxas wrote:
>
>> >> Mine pulls 120 watts actually. The biggest sucker I have is 350watts;
>> >> and thats a PIII 450 w/4 hard drives.
>> >>
>> >
>> > And the moniter?
>> >
>>
>> What monitor?
>
> I'm making the bold assumption that you at some stage sit down in frpont of
> the computer and type. The other assumption I'm making is that you use some
> kingd of uotput device (such as a moniter) to view the typings. I'm also
> assuming that you didn't include this in the figures quoted above. Apopogies
> if you did.
>
I have one monitor and 9 computers. I didnt include the monitor in the
figures quoted above, because the monitor is not connected to that particular
computer.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: 28 Jul 2000 11:58:07 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess he was actually referring to what's known as Church's
> hypothesis.
That's Curch's _Thesis_. And it's a rather wishy-washy statement.
(Just WTF does "effectively computable" mean anyway?) Which is why it
isn't a theorem, law, or even conjecture.
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 28 Jul 2000 12:46:43 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In the former, only the instructions are copyrightable. In the latter,
> the ingredients are part of the instructions and are therefore
> copyrightable.
I'd have thought that both are copyrightable. Or is this something
that varies between locales (are books of phone numbers copyrightable?
It certainly takes a fair amount of effort to assemble them...) Of
course, with a short list of things in a restricted domain, it is
actually quite difficult to prove that one version is derived from
another, and the last thing the person bringing the case wants is to
find that they are actually in violation of someone else's copyright,
so losing even that protection that they thought they were enjoying.
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: E J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: VCD/DVD Player and Question about the cdrom
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 15:15:51 -0700
Pig wrote:
> There are 2 things I need help. Hope you can help me.
>
> Q1
> Could you suggest me a good VCD/DVD player in Linux?
>
There is a HOW-TO for DVD playing
http://helo.org/dvd/howto/DVD-Playing-HOWTO
Right now, it is illegal for you have the DeCSS code to use it to watch
DVD movies on your linux box. Hopefully the courts will come to the
senses and let us watch DVD movies under Linux.
>
> Q2
> When I mount the cdrom by a user account, the directory "/cdrom" still
> belongs to the "root".
> Is it normal?
>
> If "Yes", how the application "mtv" and "mtvp" (they are a kind of vcd
> player) can be used in a user account?
>
> If "No", how can I fix it?
>
> Thanks for your help.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: 28 Jul 2000 13:49:43 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> I am quite familiar with your argument, I just don't buy into it.
A very nicely put sentiment.
> A state is not healthy or strong unless it is in a state of
> perpetual war. If it is not at war with other states, it must be at
> war with its own citizens. That is the price of the states
> existence. Not only is government not neccessary, it is immoral.
I am quite familiar with your argument, I just don't buy into it. (I
think that phrase sums up what a lot of non-anarchists have to say
about anarchism. IMHO its all a load of pie-in-the-sky twaddle which
manages to make communism look realistic and practical...)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: 28 Jul 2000 14:14:25 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Arthur Frain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Doesn't seem like hydro has cost advantages over other forms of
> generation, at least not anywhere near comaparable to the difference
> in electricity costs. And hydro (at least where I live), probably
> has higher operations and depreciation costs.
The capital costs of a dam are large in comparison to most other power
generators, since they require large amounts of land for the
reservoir. And you have to have suitable rivers too (plenty of drop,
reliable water flow) whereas coal and oil power stations can be built
in far more places, usually closer to the main customer base, so
making the losses due to transmission much lower.
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: 28 Jul 2000 14:32:21 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But from what I have read, the Sherman was more rugged, which is
> important when you're fighting on another continent.
Cost to build is important; the German Tiger tank was a very good
tank, but was so expensive to make that it couldn't be made in
sufficient quantity. "Better is the enemy of Good, and Best is the
enemy of them both." A *very* instructive phrase that! Thanks ACC!
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Linux can save you money on electricity!
Date: 29 Jul 2000 22:17:13 GMT
2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>> >
>>
>> X-terminals have processors, network interfaces and RAM.
>>
>> -----yttrx
>
> Xterminals are just lightweight computers. They probablyn have a more (power)
> efficient processor inside them than the strong IR source (i86) usually used.
> An X terminal (excluding moniter) will probably draw less powe than a pentiumm
> computer (again, excluding moniter).
The main difference being that you cannot actually exclude the monitor in the
X-terminal configuration; doing so renders it absolutely useless. But you
can exclude the monitor in the pentium computer configuration, as it is only
nessesary in some cases.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Case Study of Software RAID Systems
Date: 29 Jul 2000 22:29:30 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~abrown/papers/usenix00/paper.html
>
>
> Abstract
> Benchmarks have historically played a key role in guiding the progress of
> computer science systems research and development, but have traditionally
> neglected the areas of availability, maintainability, and evolutionary
> growth, areas that have recently become critically important in high-end
> system design. As a first step in addressing this deficiency, we introduce a
> general methodology for benchmarking the availability of computer systems.
> Our methodology uses fault injection to provoke situations where
> availability may be compromised, leverages existing performance benchmarks
> for workload generation and data collection, and can produce results in both
> detail-rich graphical presentations or in distilled numerical summaries. We
> apply the methodology to measure the availability of the software RAID
> systems shipped with Linux, Solaris 7 Server, and Windows 2000 Server, and
> find that the methodology is powerful enough not only to quantify the impact
> of various failure conditions on the availability of these systems, but also
> to unearth their design philosophies with respect to transient errors and
> recovery policy.
>
Cool kids do not use software RAID systems. They buy a 20,000 dollar controller
and stick a bunch of shelves fulla drives on it. That way the operating system
in question ISNT.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive!
Date: 29 Jul 2000 22:32:12 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> He recently discovered a significant "down." It seems that there are certain
> ATA commands that can be sent to a drive which will cause it to destroy
> itself.
Retard, this can be done under any operating system that knows what an
ATA drive is. Hell, it can be done in BIOS if you know exactly what
youre doing.
If you knew anything at all about computers (besides how to change the
toner in a CANON printer) you would understand how hard drive controllers
work.
But you dont.
For more information on drive damage, man hdparm at your friendly
neighborhood linux install.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:09:41 GMT
Ahh yes I remember it well.
Peeking and poking all of those values into memory and running that
"Balloons Program" from the Commodore System reference Guide.
It was about 5 hours of typing and you could make a balloon float
across the screen using Sprites.
The good old days :)
On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 21:29:30 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Christopher Browne) wrote:
>Back in the old days of the Commodore PET, we had a place where we could
>"POKE" that would activate hardware and have the potential to downright
>burn out the motherboard. Physical destruction of the motherboard _is_
>"physical destruction." In contrast, erasing firmware _is not_ physical
>destruction. Catastrophic? Sure. But not by virtue of having physically
>destroyed any computer hardware.
------------------------------
From: "Spud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one
of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 16:00:29 -0700
[snips]
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Spud wrote:
> >
> > [snips]
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > > driver not even in the car. Seen the Libertarian poll numbers
> > lately there
> > > > chief?
> > >
> > > Sooooooooooo, truth is determined by how many idiots agree with
an
> > idea.
> >
> > I see you agree with the suggestion others have made that those
> > supporting the Libertarian position are, in fact, idiots.
> >
> > Hmm... wait a sec... didn't you say *you* were such a person? :)
>
> So, you are saying that unnecessary government interference in
people's
> businesses and personal lives is a good thing.
Odd; I don't recall saying anything which could even _potentially_ be
interpreted that way. However, to answer the question...
No; _unnecessary_ government involvement in people's businesses and
personal lives is not a good thing. However, _necessary_ involvement
is. What of it?
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux can save you money on electricity!
Date: 29 Jul 2000 19:00:13 -0500
B'ichela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As someone on this newsgroup said quite snidely. Linux can use
>the old style of computer equipment called terminals.
Yeah and all you cando is tipe in them.
>I was thinking
>of this and the latest complaints noted by the National Electrical
>Reliability Council (NERC) in reguards to the electrical consumption
>of computers expecially in consumer applications. The Nerc reports
>point to the increasing demand for electrical power and the lack of
>new generating plants.
> A terminal is not a major power sucker unlike a workstation. A
>terminal really draws squat! A Vt100 really only draws perhaps 85
>watts. It does not require active cooling to operate. Nor does it have
>a hard drive that would need to be kept up to date or online to
>prevent the slow bootup times. A terminal is just ON or OFF. Terminals
>don't require HUBS or NICs or any of the anciliary equipment that is
>required for a LAN [1]. Thus terminals provide a simple window into a
>workspace located on another machine.
kee word: simple.
> On the Linux/unix server side, all the storage devices can be
>located at one location with all environmental controls in that one
>location. connected to the terminals in the offices of the people who
>need them.
...and what programmms wuold they run? VI? HA-HA! You cant' run Ofice on VT-100
terminnal, you know!
> While for a small home or business environment some would say
>"Big Deal".
Deffinnately. Big deal.
>This can be a very big deal in a larger environment were
>the system administration needs to not only maintain the hardware
>including the Uninteruptable Power Supply (UPS) or the backup
>generator(s)).
So give all the work to the usors.
>With the main "GUTS" located in a centralized location
>that means only one set of UPSs to maintain, one main computer to
>backup and restore and only one copy of the needed software to worry
>about.
> Terminals also don't break down often or require a special
>reconfig if terminal needs to be replaced. Terminals are generic
>enough that replacements or repairs are very standardized. Because any
>wyse 75 is a wyse75 and the configuration is not likely to change from
>one wyse 75 to another. The users don't have the ability to physically
>add a soundcard or a fibre channel card to a terminal.
...not to mentian graffics!
>that means that
>the system adminstration does not need to worry about computers with
>special add-ons fouling up the clients Windows 2k system with strange
>and funky drivers.
...let the users worry, rite?
> On my system here all I have are terminals. I was going to try
>a lan, a 10base2 system (still have the card in the 486 for it). But
>when I sat down and looked at the configuration of several clients
>that would not be on 24x7 to save power or the tendency of users to
>turn the machines OFF improperly I just said "screw this topoligy!"
...I doesant wan't too work! I;ll let the users due it!
>Setting up NFS and NIS on both the server and clients and maintaining
>backups across my planned 3 node network would have been an excersize
>in frustration. (If thats bad for a 3 node, what about 40 node?)
...the problem migte be your using UNIX. UNIX is dum. You half to forst it too due
everything.
>Never mind that Windows or Linux/Unix workstations need to bootup and
>proper shutdown is required, or a possible file system corruption can
>happen thus a UPS would be required to protect against a mains power
>failure (not good agains doofus users however). Multiple lan connected
>workstations do not make sense. A lan can certainly be used to tie
>several servers in the computer room together, In this use the system
>will still be maintained by the system administration at one main
>location.
> [1] at one time a lan was a buss type topoligy that would have
>allowed several clients/servers to connect to one wire. This was in
>some ways where a LAN was conenient. With the use of 100/10baset this
>is no longer the conveience that it once was. Like the dumb terminals
>mentioned above you need one drop for each. Now a lan really is not
>such a compettive system vs a set of terminals plugged into a terminal
>server. The same wire used for a 100/10baseT system can be used with
>terminals. In the wiring closet one still plugs them into a central
>box. Only its a terminal server instead of a hub or switch.
>
> Your comments on this piece are welcome.
I'll replay to this: Your idea is dum. A terminnall is dum because it cant have GUI.
>
>--
>
> B'ichela
>
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: 29 Jul 2000 19:00:23 -0500
John Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tim Palmer wrote:
>>
>> On 1 Jul 2000 04:06:11 GMT, Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >: Steve Mading wrote:
>
>> >True, I forgot that some of the things I take for granted in UNIX don't
>> >exist on Windows, like the ability to map which key will be the interrupt
>> >key, if you don't like ctrl-c for that.
>>
>> It work's for terminnals, but it does'nt work with X.
>>
>> >
>> >--
>> >-- ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > Steven L. Mading at BioMagResBank (BMRB). UW-Madison
>> > Programmer/Analyst/(acting SysAdmin) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > B1108C, Biochem Addition / 433 Babcock Dr / Madison, WI 53706-1544
>
> What's an xterm timie? Does an xterm run on X?
And xterm is a Lie-nux DOS box, but Lie-nux loosers insisst on calling it "xterm",
probly to avoid traidmark infridngement.
>
> You know, your BS used to irritate me, but now I'm kinda glad to see
>your posts. I think you are a shining example of the type of M$ zealot
>that hangs out here. I think you represent the level of intelligence,
>education and sophistication of that whole group.
>--
>John W. Sanders
>---------------
>"there" in or at a place.
>"their" of or relating to them.
>"they're" contraction of 'they are'.
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How Can I contribute?
Date: 29 Jul 2000 19:00:33 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I am working for a company which already have open sourced device
>drivers and applications for linux. We have certain kerna patches
>and device driver enhancements that we like to contribute to Linux
>community in general. Who should we contact? Thanks for any
>pointers!
Contact you're butholl.
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: nf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C# is a copy of java
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:06:31 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 06:40:42 -0400, nf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In article <8ltgnh$ihj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >>
> >> When I first started programming in 'C', I recall someone describing it
> >> as a language which "has all the raw speed and efficiency of assembly
> >> language, but with all the high-level features and ease-of-use as...
> >> assembly language", or something to that effect.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >hahahhaa ....
>
> It also depends on what assembly language you are talking about...
>
>
Enlighten us.
I've worked on 6800's and the Intel's 8088 assembly ... Which ones
aren't like having wisdom teeth pulled?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Topaz Crow)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: Can Linux get the job done? Are there Linux apps for.....
Date: 29 Jul 2000 23:04:49 GMT
Reply-To: alt.anonymous.messages;ATTN: Topaz Crow
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:23:53 GMT, John Becich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I know nothing about Linux. I'm using Msft Word 2000, Excel, Quicken2000,
>etc., etc., under various Msft OSes. I'd like to know if I can get the job
>done under Linux.
>
>I've heard the most popular word processor under Linux is Corel Word
>Perfect. What happens if I'm exchanging email with a word processor
>attachment that originated under Word 2000? Can such a file be passed back
>and forth with full editability between a Linux/WP user and a Win2K/Word2K
>user?
>
I use StarOffice 5.1 and have very minimal trouble exchanging documents with
Word2000 and 97.
>Ditto question about spreadsheet app. What spreadsheet would I use under
>Linux? Corel Quattro Pro for Linux? What version?
>
Again StarOffice works well. Also Works good with Powerpoint.
>Then there's the all important bookkeeping. I like Quicken. Using
>Quicken2000 now, upgrade every year or two. What would I use under Linux?
>I haven't called Intuit to ask if it supports Linux. (I can sure expect
>that Microsoft doesn't make a Msft Money version for Linux!) What would I
>use for bookkeeping under Linux? Can I migrate my Quicken files?
>
I migrated my Money files to Moneydance with minimal trouble. I'm going
to give Gnucash a try though.
>Ditto tax preparation. I use Turbo Tax. What would I use under Linux?
>
No Turbo Tax program. But last year I used Quickens Web interface to
file my taxes. Worked very nice.
>Address book. I have an older version (5) of Parson's Address Book, which I
>love. (Didn't care for the upgrade at all!) There is a ton of work in my
>address book database. It can be exported in various file forms. What
>address book app should I use under Linux, and can I import a file from a
>Microsoft operating system?
>
I'm not too sure what this is but there are several address book apps available.
>Email. I use Outlook Express 5. I love POP3 email. Don't care for web
>mail at all. What would I use under Linux? Will my OE
>data migrate? (Not vital)
>
There is no shortage of email programs for Linux. StarOffice being the
closest to Outlook Express that I can think of. But I use mutt. As far
as the data migration I don't know.
>Ditto internet surfering, browsing. What to use under Linux? Will my
>(extensive) favorite place collection migrate from Internet Explorer 5?
>
That's a good question. Since Netscape is pretty much what most people
are stuck with in linux if they want all the candy. (java, etc.) and I
remember trouble trying to convert IE favorites to Netscape Bookmarks
in Windows. May be impossible.
>Ditto newsgroups. I love my OE5 newsgroup reader. Don't care for web based
>access like Deja. What would I use under Linux? Will my data migrate from
>OE5?
>
Again, Star Office is the closes to OE I can think of. SLRN works great for
me though.
>***************
>
>It is thus important for any new competing product to be able to co-exist
>with a de-facto standard product like Word 2000. It is important for any
>new competing product to support migration from de-facto standard products
>like MSWord, Quicken, Turbo Tax, etc.
>
If there is not an exact match for something you want there is always another
way to do it. I don't have a problem. I'm taking courses that require work
in Word2000 and powerpoint and don't use MS at home at all. I don't have a
problem.
>*********
>Closer to the OS....I have many files saved under Windows NT. Can I migrate
>them to a Linux platform, or must they remain behind?
>
Linux can read from a NT file system. And vfat and many others.
>Networking. Do most 100 Mbit Ethernet cards function, and function well,
>under Linux? I presume the hubs would work, as that functionality is quite
>removed from any operating system.
>
Yep, and yep.
>Thanks,
>John Becich
--
Topaz Crow
No replies by email, sorry.
Reply to alt.anonymous.messages Subject: ATTN: Topaz Crow
PGP/GPG: DSS: 0xBADA36EA RSA: 0x357245A1
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 19:02:47 -0400
From: sandrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive!
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> sandrews wrote:
> >
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> > >
> > > Remember how we always laughed at people when they'd stay stupid things
> > > like: "I installed this game and it physically destroyed my hard drive" and
> > > we'd patiently point out that that's impossible and it's probably a fried
> > > partition and/or FAT table and so on...
> > >
> > > well, it turns out that Linux onces again "innovates" - it's now possible to
> > > actually, physically destroy your hard drive using some simple code (link
> > > provided)...
> > >
> > > Turning disks to bricks with Linux. Andre Hedrick is the maintainer of the
> > > Linux IDE/ATA subsystem; as such, he works with a piece of code that is
> > > critical to the vast majority of Linux users. He also sits on the ATA
> > > standards committee, and understands well the ups and downs of how the
> > > protocol works.
> > > He recently discovered a significant "down." It seems that there are certain
> > > ATA commands that can be sent to a drive which will cause it to destroy
> > > itself. Andre posted a thing he called disk-destroyer.c (see below) which
> > > will use an IDE command to trash the partition table on a disk, thus
> > > rendering all data inaccessible. Apparently, however, there are other
> > > variants possible which will cause the drive to wipe out its firmware, thus
> > > turning it into a true brick.
> > >
> > > And here is the code:
> > >
> > > /*
> > > * gcc -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2 -s -o disk-destroyer disk-destroyer.c
> > > */
> > >
> > > #include <unistd.h>
> > > #include <linux/string.h>
> > > #include <string.h>
> > > #include <stdlib.h>
> > > #include <stdio.h>
> > > #include <fcntl.h>
> > > #include <errno.h>
> > > #include <ctype.h>
> > > #include <sys/ioctl.h>
> > > #include <sys/shm.h>
> > > #include <sys/stat.h>
> > > #include <sys/sysmacros.h>
> > > #include <sys/time.h>
> > > #include <sys/times.h>
> > > #include <sys/types.h>
> > > #include <linux/hdreg.h>
> > > #include <linux/fs.h>
> > > #include <linux/major.h>
> > >
> > > int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> > > {
> > > unsigned char args[4+512] = {WIN_WRITE,0,0,1,};
> > >
> > > int fd;
> > >
> > > if (argc != 2) {
> > > printf("usage: %s device\n", argv[0]);
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> > > if ((fd = open(argv[1], O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK)) == -1) {
> > > perror("couldn't open device");
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> > >
> > > if (ioctl(fd, HDIO_DRIVE_CMD, &args))
> > > perror(" DISK_DESTROYER falied");
> > >
> > > close(fd);
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> >
> > Are you saying this won`t run on ms systems?
> > I think it very well could.
>
> Necessity dictates that an equivalent exists. How else would FDISK
> work?
>
m$ FDISK doesn`t work! Its broken, it use to wrok way back in ms-dos
3.3
but has since became, 'fixed' and now it doesn`t work. Ever try to
delete non-dos logical drives or ntfs logical drives. FDISK won`t
doit.
--
M$ Windows is aptly named, after all, it's easily broken, and offers
little
security, just like the glass ones...
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
