Linux-Misc Digest #474, Volume #18 Tue, 5 Jan 99 08:13:11 EST
Contents:
Emacs! Re: Easy UNIX editor (Ilya)
Re: 'login incorrect' problem ("TEX@go")
Re: 'login incorrect' problem ("TEX@go")
Re: 2038 and Linux (Frank Sweetser)
gpm mouse problem ("Kent Hunter")
Partition Stuff (Richard Steiner)
QMAIL question - Where is my email disappearing to?
Re: rpm not working (Richard Steiner)
weird file stats result when I untar ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Concentric.net Connection ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: User Config in RH 5.2 Control Panel (Bill Voight)
Re: Printers for OS/2 and Linux ("Dave Nelson")
Re: creating users (Martin Beier)
new man pages install (Philip Denny)
Re: Linux OS NOT preemptive multitasking ? (Floyd Davidson)
Re: gpm mouse problem (Charles Mulks)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ilya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Emacs! Re: Easy UNIX editor
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.portable,comp.os.linux.powerpc,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.editors
Date: 4 Jan 1999 20:45:31 +0800
In comp.os.linux.misc CSO Visitor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > N. Richard Caldwell wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In article <72clf2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > > >Lionel Parker wrote in message <72b2gi$om1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > > > >>I have to go along with this. vi uses less keystrokes than any other
> > > > >>editor I know. As a ratshit typist this is most inportant to me.
> > > > >
> > > > >Well, actually there is one bug/feature in vi that drove me nuts:
> > > > >To insert *ONE* character you have to type *THREE* keys: "i", the character,
> > > > >and "ESC".
> > > >
> > > > Inserting one character is a worst case proposition for vi. Whatever
> > > > time you lose in those rare instances is recouped 1000 times over
> > > > during normal use simply because it's so efficient in most other
> > > > respects.
> > > >
> This is hardly a "rare instance"! I spend a good fraction of my vi
> time doing it. Is there a way to make a vi macro or somesuch to get
> around this problem?
He got a good point. But then he asked for "EASY" Unix editor, not the
most efficient one. The easiest one is emacs. Learn a dozen or two
easy commands and you are ready to do anything. I feel the learning curve
is flatter than for vi (and I used both for years.) Let me explain why.
Emacs has ONE mode. One. No escape / input / last line mode. It is always
in input mode. This is much friendlier to people from Windows world
whose editors are also in one mode always.
When I have to write letters and email and whatnot non-computer, I use emacs.
It is great for spell-checking, justifying and other cool stuff.
When I have to do a lot of editing, I use vi. Like programming. I can move
in the buffer a bit faster and not take my hands off home row.
So I use both every day a lot.
Both have features I like and both have features that I hate.
------------------------------
From: "TEX@go" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: 'login incorrect' problem
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 22:46:31 -0600
Go in as single at lilo and change or delete the password or words.
then see if you can get in.
Chunyan Li wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> I installed both NT and linux slackware (kernel 2.1.85) in my PC. Since
> this PC is solely used by myself, there are only two users (root and
> myself). Two days ago
> I logged out of linux and run NT, and left PC under NT since then. Today
> after I boot
> the PC to linux login screen, I always got 'login incorrect' message
> after I typed user
> name and passwd ( I tried both root and myself's login name)_. Also I
> tried to telnet and rlogin
> into my linux from other machines, I always got the same 'login
> incorrect' message. The weird
> thing is, I CAN ftp into my linux using my username and passwd, and
> transfer files in and out.
> (fortunately)
>
> I am wondering if anybody has some idea of what's going on, how to solve
> this problem? Or somebody
> else had the same problem before? What I could do to find the reason of
> this problem?
>
> Thanks very much!
>
> Chunyan
--
The irony is that Bill Gates claimes to making a
stable operating system and
Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the world.
Michael H. Collins
To Get Nowhere, Follow the Crowd.
http://www.linuxlink.com
------------------------------
From: "TEX@go" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: 'login incorrect' problem
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 22:49:54 -0600
go in as single and look for a "nologin" file.(I think in /etc) delete
it if there.
if that doesn't go, go in as single and delete the offending passwords.
Chunyan Li wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> I installed both NT and linux slackware (kernel 2.1.85) in my PC. Sin
--
The irony is that Bill Gates claimes to making a
stable operating system and
Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the world.
Michael H. Collins
To Get Nowhere, Follow the Crowd.
http://www.linuxlink.com
------------------------------
From: Frank Sweetser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 2038 and Linux
Date: 04 Jan 1999 23:38:19 -0500
Vince Conaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Does Linux have the 2038 bug that will make Unix machines start to go
> nuts around that time?
32 bit versions (such as intel) do, 64 bit versions (such as alpha) i'm
pretty sure don't.
--
Frank Sweetser rasmusin at wpi.edu fsweetser at blee.net | PGP key available
paramount.ind.wpi.edu RedHat 5.2 kernel 2.2.0pre3 i586 | at public servers
OOPS! You naughty creature! You didn't run Configure with sh!
I will attempt to remedy the situation by running sh for you...
-- Larry Wall in Configure from the perl distribution
------------------------------
From: "Kent Hunter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: gpm mouse problem
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 04:35:52 GMT
I recently installed Red Hat 5.2 and any time I shut down, the systems hangs
on "Terminating gpm mouse services." Is there any sort of patch available
for this problem? I plan to reinstall linux soon (to set my partitions the
way I want them), and I wonder if it would be a problem to simply not
install the gpm daemon. I've never been without it and am not sure how
useful it really is.
Thank you,
Kent Hunter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Steiner)
Subject: Partition Stuff
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 22:45:09 -0600
Here in comp.os.linux.misc, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeremy Mathers)
spake unto us, saying:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Richard Steiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>OS/2's Boot Manager doesn't really have a limit, at least one which is
>>likely to impact a typical user.
>
>The limit is on the number of primary partitions. Since BM takes up a
>primary for itself, the standard configuration ends up being:
>
> 1) BM
> 2) DOS/Windows
> 3) OS/2 (*)
> 4) Extended
>
>And now you are out of primaries. What it boils down to as a
>practical matter is that you can only have one "other" OS on a primary.
>So, if you've installed OS/2 on a primary, you can't install another
>version of DOS or Linux on a primary.
Of course, but installing OS/2 on a primary partition is not normally a
recommended configuration (at least if you care about expandability).
I would *always* install it on an HPFS-formatted logical drive.
>(*) Note that this whole issue only arises if you install OS/2 on a
>primary, which is not really a good idea, but is sometimes necessary.
Yup, particularly if you want to use the evil Dual Boot setup (but you
wouldn't be using Boot Manager then <grin>).
>>I've had nine (9) entries on my OS/2 Boot Manager menu before. :-)
>
>Indeed. Note that all of this is about the number of primaries on
>each hard disk. If you have multiple hard disks, then you get 4
>primaries per hard disk.
Yes, and there are further ways to abuse this (the Ranish Partition
Manager apparently dynamically swaps entries in the MBR and lets you
have up to 31 virtual primaries on a single physical drive).
The URL for this (for the curious) is here:
http://www.users.intercom.com/~ranish/part/
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>---> Bloomington, MN
OS/2 + Linux (Slackware+RedHat+SuSE) + FreeBSD + Solaris +
WinNT4 + Win95 + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
I know it all. I just can't remember it all at once!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: QMAIL question - Where is my email disappearing to?
Date: 5 Jan 1999 05:05:35 GMT
Help! Since switching to Qmail from Sendmail (I used Redhat5.0 rpm's),
my email is disappearing into a black hole and I can't find any of them.
They used to go into ~/mail, but I've searched /var/spool and /var/qmail,
etc., and no luck.
I've gone over the qmail site and man pages as much as I could, but
don't see any clear answers as to where Qmail puts incoming mail.
I use Fetchmail to get it from my ISP's pop3 mailserver.
"The Case of the Missing Email" - can anyone solve this mystery??
Thanks,
Chip Rose.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Steiner)
Subject: Re: rpm not working
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 22:55:51 -0600
Here in comp.os.linux.misc, "Gary Ferrer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
spake unto us, saying:
>I have the same dammed problem with RH 5.0 (POS). Even if I ftp a package
>in binary mode, upgrades/installs are only 25% successfull. I'm sure this
>is a problem with the way RH has packaged the OS.
I've never seen that error message, and I've downloaded and installed
many rpms in RH 4.2, 5.0, and 5.1 on multiple boxes.
There must be another variable involved here. (??)
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>---> Bloomington, MN
OS/2 + Linux (Slackware+RedHat+SuSE) + FreeBSD + Solaris +
WinNT4 + Win95 + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
Klein bottle for rent - inquire within.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: weird file stats result when I untar
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 01:48:54 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
When I download packages off the net that are in the tar.gz form (ie, not
in my OS's--Debian--packaging syste)
and untar them as root, I seem to get weird file ownerships, like the lp
group or some other numeric group. Shouldn't a file untar and have the
ownership belong to the person (root) that called untar?
Thanks
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Concentric.net Connection
Date: 04 Jan 1999 21:29:11 PST
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Hogan) writes:
> Can any one using concentric.net as an ISP tell me what the command
> that must be given after "CRCINET 1>" is presented? I am using EZppp.
> This is as close as I've been in two weeks.
>
> Dan Hogan
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Concentric is easy to deal with from Linux and I use
it (from Linux). You can use either PAP or without it.
Kppp and Ezppp both work great. If you use KPPP,
then using PAP, it takes 1 minute to
set up Concentric from Linux. Let me know if your
attempt with PAP (using kppp) does not work.
------------------------------
From: Bill Voight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: User Config in RH 5.2 Control Panel
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 07:28:08 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
usercfg &
BV
Graham Daniell wrote:
> I have installed Red Hat linux 5.2 , and when I start X as root, I get
> the Control Panel, but it has no User Configurator icon. In the RH
> Linux 5.0 Version it was there. What am I doing to cause it not to
> install, and can I install it manually after the initial system
> install? If so how?
>
> Hoping someone can help,
> Graham Daniell
------------------------------
From: "Dave Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Printers for OS/2 and Linux
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 22:38:32 -0600
If color is the determining factor, then spend some big bucks for a
Postscript color printer. A more realistic and practical solution is to get
the HP 69x for $200 or less, and take any really serious color work to a
print shop. The HP does a pretty good job in all three OS's. It will do a
good enough job for you to determine if it worth further expense, and is a
very well supported and excellent machine. Color printing can get very
expensive. It will take experimentation with different papers and settings
to get any of them to realize their fullest potentials. None of the machines
you mention are professional grade. You will not necessarily get all of the
capabilities out of them because of the drivers used in the different OS's.
Windows is what they are geared for. If linux is your main concern, the
drivers for HP will do a very credible job in color and black and white. My
printouts look better using linux than they did in OS/2 or do in Win98. The
Ghostscript driver is good. If it is a really professional looking job you
want, print it to a diskette in Postscript and take it to a print shop, a
Kinko's, or whatever.
Dave Nelson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
<76rure$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Well now, I thought of this. But color _is_ important to me
>as well as reasonably good photo quality. You just can't get
>that with an older printer.
>
>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "J. S. Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>> That is the short list. The final cut will depend heavily on what
>>> Linux support is available.
>>
>>For the love of Adobe, just get a printer that's PostScript compatible.
>>It works so much more beautifully. Pricing is right for older printers
>>(which will work fine). If you need color, you might be out of luck at
>>the low end cost, but you just can't beat just shoving raw PS to a
>>printer instead of tranforming it w/ gs.
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>J. S. Jensen
>>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>http://www.paramin.com
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>Just my $0.02 worth.
>Hope this helps,
>Gordon
>
>PS:
>To reply: replace 'X.bleeb' with 'greeder'.
>
------------------------------
From: Martin Beier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: creating users
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 20:33:54 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Martin Schager wrote:
> How do I create mail only users, not real users, so that I can create
> several email addresses for persons who should not be able to log into
> the machine
> MS
You can create an ordinary user and modify the /bin/sh (or similar)
command
to /usr/bin/pine (or any other mail client) in its /etc/passwd entry. Be
aware!
This works only with remote connections (telnet, rlogin) and on text
terminals!
If you have graphical login enabled, these users may obtain system access
when logging in at the console!
--
Ok, maddel!
=================
[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.narz.de/~maddel/
PGP key fingerprint = 4A E3 3B 9C E5 B9 E2 E4 DA 01 67 43 20 96 B9 1D
------------------------------
From: Philip Denny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: new man pages install
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 12:42:15 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm running Slakware 3.1 and can't access any man pages so presume I
didn't install them. I can't find them in any disk sets so I downloaded
the latest from LDP. I now have a tar.gz file and don't know where to
copy it to or unzip it.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Floyd Davidson)
Subject: Re: Linux OS NOT preemptive multitasking ?
Date: 5 Jan 1999 04:25:04 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Frank Sweetser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Floyd Davidson) writes:
>> Frank Sweetser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Floyd Davidson) writes:
>> >
>> >> A "real-time" OS. Which might not really be what anyone wants Linux
>> >> to be, but they do have their uses... telephone switching systems
>> >> for example.
>> >
>> >well, then you've got a real time OS, not a multitasking OS. and even
>>
>> What, RT is not multitasking???? It better be real-time,
>> multitasking and multiuser if it is switching telephone calls!
>
>hrm... poor phrasing on my part. RT OS == a superset of a strictly
>multitasking OS. it fills the same specs as a multitasking OS, and then
>some.
OK, that makes good sense.
>> >then, the RT kernel won't be pre-empted by a task, it simply makes
>> >guarantees about scheduling characteristics that a plain multitasking OS
>> >can't make.
>>
>> The question was can the scheduler be interupted, and the answer
>> is that yes, on an RT system it can.
>
>no, you can still have a non-interruptable scheduler on an RT OS. there
>simply must be an upper bound on the response time of the OS.
But let me repeat myself... the question was can the scheduler be
interupted, and he answer is still YES it can, on an RT system.
That doesn't mean that no RT system can work in any other way.
It just means that is one known case where a scheduler can be
set up to be interupted.
>> The fact that it isn't an ordinary task directly causing the interupt is
>> not significant. What does happen is that a task with a higher priority
>> might then be scheduled because of the interupt. Hence the result is the
>> same, i.e., the higher priority task gains control.
>
>i'm afraid i'm not exactly sure what you're saying here?....
The fact that a user task cannot itself interupt the scheduler
is not significant, because the end result is just as if it had:
the priority task that wants to get the cpu does get it.
>> I'll throw out another thought along that line which is
>> interesting too. On said RT multitasking system, your console
>> is running in the background!
>
>heck, in that sense, with RT Linux, even the Linux scheduler is running in
>the background <G>
Exactly!
Specifically the example I was thinking of is the OS that
runs Nortel's DMS family of telephone switches (the DMS-100/200 etc
series). The foreground is call processing, and any task
directly required for that has a higher priority than any
console task. It has a hardware generated scheduler interupt
that is the highest priority, and what it triggers is the
scheduler action to determine if any priority task needs
to run.
It works rather well. But RT isn't something I want on my
desktop either.
Floyd
--
Floyd L. Davidson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pictures of the North Slope at <http://www.ptialaska.net/~floyd>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charles Mulks)
Subject: Re: gpm mouse problem
Date: 5 Jan 1999 12:45:12 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>I recently installed Red Hat 5.2 and any time I shut down, the systems hangs
>on "Terminating gpm mouse services." Is there any sort of patch available
>for this problem? I plan to reinstall linux soon (to set my partitions the
>way I want them), and I wonder if it would be a problem to simply not
>install the gpm daemon. I've never been without it and am not sure how
>useful it really is.
>
>Thank you,
>
>Kent Hunter
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
I had the same problem. Now, when I reboot, I do the following
ps aux | grep gpm
then kill the process id that shows up
------------------------------
** 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.misc) 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-Misc Digest
******************************
