Linux-Hardware Digest #741, Volume #10 Mon, 12 Jul 99 05:13:30 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows easy to install? BULLSHIT! (Brian Hartman)
Abit BP6 w/o overclocking (David Bremner)
Re: Curious about root passwd (Davis Eric)
Re: Bogus hard disk sizes from manufacturers ("Prasanth Kumar")
Re: Abit BP6 w/o overclocking (Karlo Szabo)
Re: Problem with SB PCI 128 ("Ronald V. Casberg")
Re: 3Com Etherlink XL 10/100 (Sonny)
Re: 3Com 3c900B - Compatible ? (Sonny)
Re: Celeron, what's the catch? (Anthony Hill)
Re: wintv & lack of channels in linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: No DMA with ALI IDE chipset (Asus P5A) (Frank Paehlke)
Re: Abit BP6 w/o overclocking (Bryan)
Re: Asus V3400 or another one ? ("M.C. van den Bovenkamp")
Re: Question on Linux/KDE Clock Problems (Joseph Cheek)
Re: OverClocking.... (Karlo Szabo)
Re: Bogus hard disk sizes from manufacturers ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: BogoMips... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Abit BP6 w/o overclocking (Bryan)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Brian Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Windows easy to install? BULLSHIT!
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 23:53:51 -0400
Shice Beoney wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Jul 1999 12:54:22 -0400 in comp.os.linux.setup, Brian
> Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> uttered the following profound
> gem of wisdom:
>
> >Shice Beoney wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 9 Jul 1999 13:41:05 -0500 in comp.os.linux.setup,
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hobbyistİ) uttered the following profound gem of
> >> wisdom:
> >>
> >> >On Fri, 9 Jul 1999 10:53:45 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] scrawled these
> >> >sagacious words ...
> >> >
> >> >: On Fri, 09 Jul 1999 11:08:35 -0400, Brian Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> <snip>
>
> >> >Hey linux is hard to install and configure => Well you shouldn't be doing
> >> >that by yourself. A trained professional should be doing it so your
> >> >difficulties are irrelevant.
> >>
> >> It took me an hour and a half to install RedHat. Then about a week of
> >> playing with it in my spare time to get it working the way I wanted.
> >> Now that I've gone through it once, I could probably do the
> >> install/configuration inside of 2 hours. I didn't have any problems
> >> that I couldn't solve with RTFM, a few dejanews searches, and the
> >> comp.os.linux.* NGs. I don't have a single bit of formal training. So
> >> either I'm some kind of genius computer prodigy, or Linux isn't nearly
> >> as hard to install as some make it out to be, and while I'd like to
> >> believe the former, I'm pretty sure it's the latter.
> >>
> >
> >One more salient point: Compare 2 hours to install and set up Linux to less than
>an hour to do the same with 95 or NT.
>
> I was counting into that time things like setting up TCP/IP
> networking, which actually took less time for me in RedHat than in
> Windows (none of that adding device, then adding protocol, then
> binding the protocol to the adapter, then configuring the adapter,
> etc). With RedHat is was basically just pick the type of NIC, and
> input the variables (hostname, ip address, etc...). I also had older
> versions of Win95 fail to detect my S3Trio64V+ video card, requiring
> me to get drivers from the S3 website (which is NOT something that I
> would wish on a newbie). XConfigurator and Autoprobe on the other hand
> detected my card with no problems.
>
I guess your level of difficulty w/ video cards depends upon how new your card is.
I've got a three-year-old Trident 9440
card that both Linux and Windows detect just fine. As far as the modem goes,
detection wasn't a problem on either system.
Because I have to dial in, though, getting the modem to connect to my server was
actually more of a trial in Linux than
Windows. As long as you know your DNS #, Windows is good to go. I can't remember all
the things I had to do to connect
with Linux, but I do know it was more than just feeding in the DNS (probably because
Linux seems to treat your machine as
it's own server, ie, localhost@localdomain). And for what it's worth, Windows has
that "Internet Connection
Wizard" thingy, which supposedly works ok (unless you're not connecting through one of
the big ISPs). But I don't have my
own NIC. If I did, I might feel differently about it. :)
>
> This is not of course to say that my first install of Linux was
> flawless. I didn't buy an official distrib, so I had to figure out by
> the trial and error method that when DiskDruid wanted me to created a
> root partition, it really meant that it wanted me to name one of them
> /. And at first I had to screw around quite a bit to get the
> resolution how I wanted it (RH 5.1 doesn't come with XF86Setup). Also,
> I in order to get my ethernet card to work, I had to disable PnP on
> it, as well as manually specify the IRQ for it to use. So neither were
> completely hassle free.
>
> >Also, you were a little
> >flippant about all the searches that you did. Searching itself has it's own
>intricacies.
>
> Well, I didn't find it particularly difficult, most of the time all I
> did was type in the error message I was getting into a DN power
> search, and put in comp.os.linux.* for the forum.
>
Well, again, we're dealing with experience level. If we're talking about new users,
who's to say that they even know what
DejaNews is, let alone how to do a power search there? :) Besides that, you have to
get your Internet connection up and
running before you can even access DejaNews. It sounds like it was relatively easy
for you with a NIC, but it was no small
task for me and my internal modem. Getting the modem recognized by the system wasn't
all that taxing. But getting it to
dial out and acutally maintain a connection at the correct speed...Well, that took
some doing. :) There are numerous posts
on this NG just to that point. :)
>
> >As far as formal training, goes, I have absolutely none.
> >But there's a difference between being a novice and having no formal training.
>
> Agreed. I have a cousin who never took any formal training (but always
> had computers around during his childhood) and who now works in the
> media lab of a rather large computer company. Formal training can
> often be a poor substitute for personal experience. I think there have
> actually been studies proving that a person is more likely to remember
> something he/she had to figure out on his/her own than something
> he/she was taught. I can attest to that.
>
> >The fact that you were even looking at Linux, let alone installing
> >it, means you're probably not the neophyte you take yourself for. :)
>
> No, not a neophyte, but not exactly an expert either.
> <snip>
>
All I was really getting at is that someone like either of us that has Windows
experience has a leg up on computer
neophytes. I think it's important to remember that, as some of the pro-Linux posts
we've been reading seem to indicate
that Linux is just as good for a newbie as is Windows. From a setup and learning
curve standpoint, I beg to differ. :)
>
> --
> "Ma cheri... Wait, she'll hate that, she hateth it when I write in
> French. I usually conduct my correthpondence in fag, but it'th amazing
> how often they're the thame thing!" -Scott Thompson as Buddy Cole the
> drag queen, The Kids In The Hall
------------------------------
From: David Bremner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Abit BP6 w/o overclocking
Date: 11 Jul 1999 20:51:55 -0700
So for about the same amount of money I can pick up an Abit BP6 and 2
Celeron 433A's, or a PII 450 and MB , or a K6-3 450.
I'm not keen on overclocking the Celerons (yeah, but willing to run
SMP; wierd, I know). Has anyone done benchmarking on the non-oc'ed
Celerons in SMP mode? I have seen some plausible speculation that 2
Celerons would saturate a 66Mz bus.
David
bremner at math dot washington dot edu
------------------------------
From: Davis Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Curious about root passwd
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 04:05:13 GMT
Hi, Justin,
Thanks.
But I still wonder whether there is any way can prevent this? I don't
have ill intention. I just wonder how to fill up this hole. Such as
imposing some passwd on lilo or sth like that?
Davis,
In article <7mbjj5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Justin B Willoughby) wrote:
>
> Davis Eric ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
> > Hi, there,
> >
> > It is not a question. I am just curious about the root password. I
once
> > forgot my root password (I am a single user using my RH Linux box),
and
> > after that, I fixed it by booting as linux single user. My question
is:
> > Is this a security hole in Red Hat linux or not? Because I can use
any
> > tools which are supposed to be used by root only without any
password.
> > And I think I can even kick out the orignal root in this way.
> >
> > Am I right? Thanks for your opinion.
>
> Any one who has physical access to a server can do about any thing
they want.
> There have been quite a few threads about this in the past, just
deja.com
> to find out more...
>
> It all boils down to physical access.
>
> - Justin
> --
> _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ RULES!! * LINUX RULES *
> _/ _/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ Justin Willoughby
> _/ _/ _/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ http://justinw.net
> _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ ---- Jesus Is Lord ----
>
--
I do not feel shameful if I was and am an idiot; I
will feel shameful if I haven't realized it.
--Myself
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: "Prasanth Kumar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Subject: Re: Bogus hard disk sizes from manufacturers
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 03:21:58 GMT
Decklin Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > If GB=10^9 then it's 16.9 GB
> > if GB=2^30 then it's 15.7 GB
>
> This is the difference between advertising and reality.
> MORAL: read the fine print.
> <snip>
Hmm, maybe I should pay them for a drive I should pay it
in binary base so $1000=$8!
------------------------------
From: Karlo Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Abit BP6 w/o overclocking
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 15:16:10 +1000
> So for about the same amount of money I can pick up an Abit BP6 and 2
> Celeron 433A's, or a PII 450 and MB , or a K6-3 450.
>
Crap combos above!
Better of getting 2 week 14 or greater malay celery 366 and run then in
duel @ 550. Get the MSI ver 1.1 converter card as it has a jumper for
duel operation so U don't have to any modifing to the converter card
your self.
> I'm not keen on overclocking the Celerons (yeah, but willing to run
Dude what are you on about?
Why the hell not?
overclocking is the way to go.
Currently I have an overclocked cellery 366 running at 550.
Prior to this I had a 300A@450.
the 550 is slightly faster then the 450.
------------------------------
From: "Ronald V. Casberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Problem with SB PCI 128
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 21:33:58 -0700
Jam wrote:
>
> I have installed Mandrake 6.0 and configured my sound card with
> sndconfig utility. It detects my soundcard, but when I try to use
> X11amp or any other sound player, the program hangs and I have to kill
> the proces. Whats wrong ?
>
> Christoffer
[snip]
I had a similar problem with an Ensonic AudioPCI. I solved it by
enabling BUS MASTERING for all PCI slots in the bios setup.
------------------------------
From: Sonny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 3Com Etherlink XL 10/100
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 04:52:49 GMT
That card works fine under linux. It is really my preference to not use
anything but that particular card for networking when I have a choice.
It's a bit pricier than some of your less expensive 10/100 cards, but
this seems to be an area where 'you get what you pay for' applies.
Good luck,
Sonny
------------------------------
From: Sonny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: 3Com 3c900B - Compatible ?
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 04:47:34 GMT
It works just fine. Use the 3com59x driver.
Sonny
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Anthony Hill)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Subject: Re: Celeron, what's the catch?
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 05:02:29 GMT
On 10 Jul 1999 19:37:53 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Keith R. Williams) wrote:
>On Fri, 9 Jul 1999 21:55:04, "Dean Kent"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The Pentium MMX is significantly faster than the non-MMX processor (enough
>> to notice). This is due solely to a 32K L1 cache vs. a 16K L1 cache.
>
>There were other enhancements Intel threw into the P55C over the
>P54C. I think you'll find the P55C a tad faster even neglecting
>the differences in the L1 size.
This is true, though the enhancements were mostly just tweaks
more then anything much you can really point a finger at. Branch
prediction was apperently the only other fairly notable change.
>Homework for Dean: Benchmark a P54C vs. a P55C with the L1 cache
>disabled. I think you'll see a difference between them. It'll be
>small, but still a difference. I'd do it, but I no longer have
>any P54Cs. Maybe I can borrow one.
Hmm, you could try that, but I suspect that all you'll find is
that they're both dog slow! :> Unfortunatley without any L1 cache,
processors have a tendancy to simply grind to a halt! I remember
seeing one or two people planning on trying this at some point, until
they found out that it would take several weeks to run a decent set of
benchmarks :>
Anthony Hill
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: wintv & lack of channels in linux
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 06:33:15 GMT
In article <7lr9u0$t3h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I own a hauppauge WinTV and have a few problems. Actually just one
> problem.
> I compiled the kernel (2.2.7) with V4L support. I compliled kwintv and
> xawtv from source.
> I can run kwintv (or xawtv) but i can not change the channels. When I
go
> to other operating systems (NT and BeOS) I can change them. Once I go
> back to Linux I can watch the channel that i last watched in the other
> OS.
> Can someone please tell me what the problem is here? What have i
> misconfigured?
> thanks,
> egon
>
I still haven't figured this one out. Can anyone help? This is an
annoying problem... any help would be most appreciated.
thanks,
egon
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: Frank Paehlke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: No DMA with ALI IDE chipset (Asus P5A)
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 08:19:22 +0200
Hi,
> I have a Asus p5a-b with ali chipset which is also not support for dma/udma
> purposes.
> If you get your system working with that patches, please, let me know.
> I'll appreciate very much if you send your results, either good or bad.
> As usual, make a good backup before try ......
as far as I can tell by now, everything seems to work fine - and
considerably faster than before. Many thanks to Bernat for his hint!
Bye,
Frank
------------------------------
From: Bryan <Bryan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Abit BP6 w/o overclocking
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 07:01:38 GMT
Karlo Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > So for about the same amount of money I can pick up an Abit BP6 and 2
: > Celeron 433A's, or a PII 450 and MB , or a K6-3 450.
: >
: Crap combos above!
: Better of getting 2 week 14 or greater malay celery 366 and run then in
: duel @ 550. Get the MSI ver 1.1 converter card as it has a jumper for
: duel operation so U don't have to any modifing to the converter card
: your self.
the msi's and a good dual board will run more than 2 433 chips AND the
bp6 board. that's a filled dual board vs. just a board with 2 socket
risers.
and you won't have to worry about heat or thermal stuff with the
433's. yeah yeah, you don't get the 100mhz bus. so what ;-)
the 300a chips o/c very well. beyond that, I don't (personally) feel
comfortable with o/c-ing.
--
Bryan, http://www.Grateful.Net - Linux/Web-based Network Management
->->-> to email me, you must hunt the WUMPUS and kill it.
------------------------------
From: "M.C. van den Bovenkamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Asus V3400 or another one ?
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 09:13:33 +0200
Jean-Christophe Falaise wrote:
> Linux. I want to be able to use it in 32 bits deep at the highest possible
> resolution (for my eyes). Is it a good idea ? any other recommandation ?
I have an Asus V3400, and am very happy with it. Riva even has an
Xserver for the TNT, but I don't know how well that performs vs. stock
XFree 3.3.3.1. I'm running it at 1600x1200x32 bpp at 77 Hz refresh on a
19" CTX VL950T.
Regards,
--
Marco van den Bovenkamp.
CIO EMEA Network Design Engineer,
Lucent Technologies Nederland.
Room: HVS BGK 25
Tel.: (+31-35-687)2724
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joseph Cheek)
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux.caldera,comp.os.linux.setup,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.portable,comp.windows.x.kde
Subject: Re: Question on Linux/KDE Clock Problems
Date: 12 Jul 1999 07:48:00 GMT
did a search for "time zone" on caldera's support site:
http://support.calderasystems.com/caldera?solution&11-981217-0005&130-913932037&14-0&15-0&25-0&3-time%2520zone&30-
joe
In alt.os.linux.caldera, "Kevin H." <kevola@***usa.net> wrote:
> I am a newbie to Linux, and have installed Calera Open Linux 2.2 with
> the KDE desktop interface onto my IBM Thinkpad 380XD. My Linux is
> runing in a separate partition alongside Win98. My problem involves
> the clock setting on the KDE Desktop. When I set the clock properly (I
> am on EST-Eastern time zone) and reboot my machine, when the KDE desktop
> comes up, the clock is set 4 hours too early (matching GMT). I can
> issue a "hwclock" command and it returns the correct time, even if I
> open a terminal window inside of the KDE desktop. Something inside of
> the KDE desktop seems to be forcing it to GMT. Each time I attempt to
> reset the clock inside KDE, on the next reboot it is forced back 4
> hours. My "clock" file in /etc/sysconfig reads "CLOCKMODE=LOCAL". I
> have tried setting this to GMT, but it doesn't have any effect. I would
> just set the hardware clock to GMT, except that I do run Windows
> alongside the Linux installation. Any ideas??? I have combed
> newsgroups and asked the question in a couple of IRC chatrooms about
> Linux but to no avail. Any help or suggestion would be greatly
> appeciated. To reply to my e-mail directly, remove *** from my address
> above.
> Thank you,
> Kevin
--
LinuxNews Beta -- http://linuxnews.cheek.com/
Think of us as DejaNews for Linux.
------------------------------
From: Karlo Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OverClocking....
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 15:19:01 +1000
Dude you need to post this in
alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
they will have a solution 4 U.
ChenthilWhelan wrote:
>
> I have a MPV3 VIA AGP Socket 7 Motherboard with a IntelPentiumMMX 200/66
> Currently I run it at 266/75 with an extra fan. When I switch to 290/83 the
> machine would not boot to normal mode in Win95 and reset in Linux 6.0 and no
> display at 300/75 (No beep sounds). At 290/83 the processor temperature is
> somewhere between 43-47 C. The machine runs fine at 250/83 and250/100 (I
> have PC-100 Ram). I have tried raising the core voltage from 2.8(Default) to
> 3.0 .I have
> read that PentiumMMX processors worked stable at 600/100 with very high
> cooling. why could not I reach half of it. If the other components could not
> work at such hich core, the machine worked well at 250/100. Neither 300/75 ,
> 280/83 , 300/100 work. Any suggession will be thanked.
>
> Components Used...
> Processor IntelPentiumMMX 200
> MotherBoard VIA AGP MPV3
> Ram 128 MB PC100
> VGACard Intel 740 AGP/8MB
> NIC Realtech PCI (8029) & Compex RL100A
> SoundCard Yamaha 724
> Modem SmartOne 336F (Internal ISA)
> HDD Quantum Bigfoot 2GB Non UDMA-33
> CDROM LG 32X
>
> BYE. Will Keep In Touch.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Y's
> SenthilVelan PI
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://senthil.webjump.com
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Subject: Re: Bogus hard disk sizes from manufacturers
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 06:46:50 GMT
That's not funny. I've seen more than a few IBM drives come new, from
the factory, with bad sectors, or develop bad sectors shortly thereafter.
Their policy seems to be, ship first and replace the defective ones later;
They like to have their larger capacity drives out before the competition.
The nice thing about IBM drives tho is that if they're going to fail, they
usually do so within the first few weeks. Of all the IBM hard disks I've
had, the ones which worked fine for the first three months are still
working great, and some of those are several years old now. That's why I
keep buying from IBM. I just make sure I deal with a vendor who'll
replace a dead drive without a hassle if it fails after a week.
My only gripe with IBM is that the power connectors on the spindle motor
are very exposed, especially on the newer models, and can easily be
short-circuited if the drive is mounted directly on top of something else.
This did happen to me once, and while it didn't cause any permanent
damage, it certainly would be possible to overload the power supply if
that happened. So be careful.
Oh also, one might think that IBM's "16.8 GB" drive would have twice the
capacity of their "8.4 GB" model, however this is not the case, it's
actually a bit less than that. (8063.5 MB vs 16124 MB)
Charles Sullivan wrote:
>At least they're not rounding it up to 17 GB! Maybe they're allowing for
>a certain
>percentage of bad sectors so you can't sue them for punitive damages @
>$1/bit
>when you're sold a drive that doesn't meet the capacity they specify. :-)
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>>I recently bought a IBM-DTTA-351680 hard disk, which IBM claims is a
>>"16.8 GB" drive. The drive actually has 33022080 512-byte sectors,
>>which is 16.9 billion bytes or 16124 MB (binary). Why do they call
>>this a "16.8 GB" drive?
>>
>>If GB=10^9 then it's 16.9 GB
>>if GB=2^30 then it's 15.7 GB
>>
>>What strange metric is IBM now using to compute hard disk sizes that they
>>come up with "16.8 GB" ? It's confusing enough already that there are
>>two commonly used definitions of GB without having IBM invent their own.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: BogoMips...
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 07:45:32 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
this is in the FAQ--basically, they are bogus mips.
-ckm
------------------------------
From: Bryan <Bryan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Abit BP6 w/o overclocking
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 06:59:31 GMT
David Bremner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: So for about the same amount of money I can pick up an Abit BP6 and 2
: Celeron 433A's, or a PII 450 and MB , or a K6-3 450.
: I'm not keen on overclocking the Celerons (yeah, but willing to run
: SMP; wierd, I know). Has anyone done benchmarking on the non-oc'ed
: Celerons in SMP mode? I have seen some plausible speculation that 2
: Celerons would saturate a 66Mz bus.
I don't see why bus speed and dual cpu's have anything in common.
my 433's on the bp6 build my 2.2.9 kernel in 2:30. this is at 66mhz.
my o/c asus p2bd with dual 300a chips (2*450) builds in about 1:50. kind of a big
diff.
but I doubt that SMP is more or less 'risky' either way.
--
Bryan, http://www.Grateful.Net - Linux/Web-based Network Management
->->-> to email me, you must hunt the WUMPUS and kill it.
------------------------------
** 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.hardware) 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-Hardware Digest
******************************
