Linux-Misc Digest #729, Volume #18 Fri, 22 Jan 99 23:13:12 EST
Contents:
Apachr 1.3.3. - Eror 403 (Mark Worsdall)
Re: A Tale of Two Installations (Giftzwerg)
Re: Linux keyboard? (For emacs use) (Erik Naggum)
Re: StarOffice and Microsoft Office (Mark Watson)
ouch!! Too many open files in system (Derek)
Re: how to start programming in Linux (Bloody Viking)
Re: Mysterious backquote key, Invalid Checksum 3E, and Strange Lines!!! (Bill Unruh)
Re: No floppy in Linux ? (Johan Kullstam)
Re: StarOffice and Microsoft Office (Bob Warshawsky)
Re: Bash Script Programming (Joh)
Linux defrag? (Brian Moore)
Re: qpopper error (Ruud van den Brink)
Re: Samba / smbfs (Scott)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mark Worsdall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Apachr 1.3.3. - Eror 403
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 02:23:19 +0000
Hi All,
I have finally sorted out named and can successfully ping www.wizdom
from my win98 machine.
www.wizdom is 10.0.1.252 as is www.hinwick www.shadow and www.spartan
and they all successfully ping.
Now my trouble is that although I have Apache V1.3.3 installed and
running (I get the apache welcome screen when
typing http://jilldando.worsdall.demon.co.uk), I get error 403 from the
server when trying to connect to www.wizdom (and the others).
Error 403
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access / on this server.
======================================================================
Apache/1.3.3 Server at www.wizdom Port 80
So here is the part of httpd.conf:-
NameVirtualHost 10.0.1.252
<VirtualHost jilldando.worsdall.co.uk>
</VirtualHost>
<VirtualHost 10.0.1.252>
ServerName www.wizdom
ServerAdmin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# Server Identity
DocumentRoot /usr/www/worsdall
# Document root
ErrorLog /usr/home/worsdall/logs/error.log
# Log files
TransferLog /usr/home/worsdall/logs/access.log
# Log customization
</VirtualHost>
I also thought that maybe some additions to the access.conf file might
be in order, this is what I added:-
<Directory /usr/www/worsdall>
order allow,deny
allow from all
</Directory>
These additions made no difference.
The lines below were already there:-
# First, we configure the "default" to be a very restrictive set of
# permissions.
<Directory />
Options FollowSymLinks
AllowOverride None
</Directory>
This is a snippet from the access log which is in the place I specified.
10.0.1.250 - - [23/Jan/1999:01:28:58 +0000] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 403 276
10.0.1.250 - - [23/Jan/1999:01:39:14 +0000] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 403 276
10.0.1.250 - - [23/Jan/1999:01:56:33 +0000] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 403 276
10.0.1.250 - - [23/Jan/1999:01:56:37 +0000] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 403 276
10.0.1.250 - - [23/Jan/1999:01:56:38 +0000] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 403 276
This indicates as said by someone else that it is trying to access the
root, like how and why does it get off doing this:-)
Any ideas? should there be anything in srm.conf and access.conf?
--
Mark Worsdall - Oh no, I've run out of underpants :(
Home:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] WEB site:- http://www.worsdall.demon.co.uk
Shadow:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] WEB site:- http://www.shadow.org.uk
Work:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] WEB site:- http://www.hinwick.demon.co.uk
TCP/IP gatewaying http://www.hinwick.demon.co.uk/computerDept/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Giftzwerg)
Subject: Re: A Tale of Two Installations
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 20:28:16 -0500
In article <78as75$j7c$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> In English, *plonk* means that I have set up a filter so I don't read your
> postings. You may say all sorts of colorful insults about me in response
> to this posting. However, I will not be reading them.
The instrument has yet to be invented that can measure my glee at the
prospect of never seeing a post of mine befouled with your particular
brand of wit.
PS: I'm ever so happy that you managed to solve your problem with
posting flamebaits. Perhaps next you and your analyst can work on your
problem with being a clueless asshole?
--
Giftzwerg
************************************
ladies and gentlemen, please welcome reagan and haig
mr. begin and friend mrs. thatcher and paisley
mr. brezhnev and party
the ghost of mccarthy
and the memories of nixon
and now adding colour a group of anonymous latin
american meat packing glitterati
------------------------------
From: Erik Naggum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.misc,comp.emacs,comp.editors
Subject: Re: Linux keyboard? (For emacs use)
Date: 21 Jan 1999 16:56:26 +0000
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Floyd Davidson)
| Actually dear sir, I do understand it.
I'm going to love this.
| My particular field is communications, which is what this is all about.
no, you just _restricted_ it to communications. but let's pretend.
| And as with a better mouse trap, if you find a better way to communicate
| people will rush to your door step to adopt it.
when was the last time you actually saw that happen? and when was the
last time you saw how people _fight_ new ideas that de-stabilize their
own carreers and change the way they have to do business?
if your field is communications, why don't you see that whether you have
a better or worse mouse trap doesn't matter as long as your _marketing_
is better? but I digress.
| On the other hand if you remove all redundant information on the false
| hope that it improves communications, you have missed one of the most
| important aspects of communications theory and practice. And you have
| defeated your purpose. It will make your communications less effective.
as I said, if you can't attack what I do, invent something else and by
all means extrapolate without understanding anything about the purpose or
direction. "from one data point, you can extrapolate in any direction."
Floyd, I have never given you grounds to believe that I have ever had any
intention of ever removing _all_ redundant information. where did you
get the idea that I was? _you_ invented it, didn't you? and since you
can hardly attack me for not obeying the information-destructive process
of destroying the case of words, you have to make it into something you
_can_ attack. but this is foolish, and if your field is communications,
you have just failed miserably, because you have _introduced_ something
into the communication of others. some would call that intellectually
dishonest, especially from someone whose field is communications and who
should know better.
| If what you are doing was actually better it would probably result very
| quickly in a great number of people doing it on a regular basis.
and would you not criticize every one of them, no matter how many?
| You are not the first one to use it, and won't be the last either. There
| is, however, a very good reason that it hasn't been widely adopted: [it]
| sucks.
*laugh* yup, that's the reason, and we know how badly stuff that sucks
go in the market, don't we? MS Windows sucks, and sells more than
anything that doesn't suck. K-Mart sells inferior stuff still, don't
they? looks like I have a winner, Floyd. all I gotta do now is beef up
the marketing.
| Calling people moralistic morons because they point out the flaws in your
| posted ideas is perhaps just a demonstration that such insults are
| usually a reflection of the originator.
this is truly fascinating. your particular field is communications and
you suggest better ways to communicate ideas, yet you can't even _read_?
if they had pointed out the flaws in my posted ideas, that'd been OK.
what the moralistic morons do is point out flaws in their very own
projections and extrapolations of what they no longer even _see_ as my
flaw: they see _only_ their own projections and extrapolations. just
like you did above, "if you remove _all_ redundant information" [my
emphasis]. and your argument is based on my wanting to remove _all_
redundant information, isn't it?
now, I'm truly intrigued by the fact that if you do some small little
thing, people don't see it, they see this HUGE THREAT against established
order, and are not at all satisfied to limit their responses to what's at
hand, but invent something else that's _worth_ being afraid of. yet,
they are so morally outraged that anyone could favor these things that
they have invented (and nobody actually favors, of course), that they
don't even see _what_ is being called "moralistic morons". they see
their projections and extrapolations and _righteous_, and when their
_righteous_ errors of logic are exposed, they do it yet _again_: they
defend themselves as if they were criticized for what _they_ haven't
done, which would have been to criticize the fact at hand.
I find this interminably fascinating. if communications is a field that
contains people who do this, I wonder where I can find people who _don't_
extrapolate in every direction from a single data point, who _don't_ read
_into_ people's communicated ideas something that they can object to
becaus what's actually there is completely innocuous and defensible.
| Rather than call people names because they disagree with you,
and this _really_ takes the cake! *applause* god, I love this!
it's not because they disagree with me, you moron, it's because they
don't even bother to see that what they disagree with is their very own
projections and extrapolations of what I say and do. I can't be held
responsible for what people _want_ to see. that's their problem.
if you see a girl with really short hair and you cry out "you lesbians
are immoral!", I think "moralistic moron" is entirely appropriate because
what happened is that _you_ imputed something to what you saw that you
had no reason even to believe is there: it could have been chemotherapy.
if you found out, you'd be _immensely_ guilty of harrassing somebody so
unfairly, and you'd never do it again. but if you don't take the time to
find out that it was indeed chemotherapy and her hair had just started to
grow back and you had _really_ hurt her, would you still go around and
tell others that she got nasty to you _because_ she was an immoral
lesbian? you do the math and the communications, Floyd.
| why not try posting cognitive well written articles that communicate your
| thoughts clearly.
I do, but it doesn't help against people like you, who accuse me of
things I don't do, who accuse me of calling people names because they
disagree with me, which I never, _ever_ do, and who can't read anything
they don't already agree to. disagreement it good. moralistic morons
who don't think so and who accuse people of things they haven't done has
_nothing_ to do with disagreement.
| That would demonstrate the value of your formatting better than anything
| else.
yeah. I expect you to stop capitalizing your sentence-initial words, now.
| But in fact, the best way to communicate concepts via written language is
| to include redundant clues indicating separations between thought
| structures. Punctuation and Capitalization, for example.
would that _seriously_ have helped you understand what I wrote? would
you not have reacted _exactly_ the same way: projecting and extrapolating
in the exact same fashion? or are you trying to tell me that because I
didn't capitalize the sentence-initial, you somehow managed to lose track
of the _entire_ meaning of my article?
I find it immensely interesting to watch people destroy information in
the grand scale after I have pointed out to them that capitalizing the
sentence-initial word destroys information in the small scale. I do
wonder what possesses people to do that. perhaps they really _are_ into
destroying information and when capitalizing words doesn't do it, they go
for all-out assault and battery on the meaning and context of what people
write. or something like that. it's ever more interesting to watch.
#:Erik
--
SIGTHTBABW: a signal sent from Unix to its programmers at random
intervals to make them remember that There Has To Be A Better Way.
------------------------------
From: Mark Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.sun.apps
Subject: Re: StarOffice and Microsoft Office
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 11:51:08 -0700
Hello Tim,
I downloaded the personal edition a few weeks ago, and I
really like it. The word processor and technical drawing
programs run fine, and import/export to Word 97
works fairly well.
My only complaint is that it is a memory hog. If I am
running a lot of other apps on my 64MBytes Linux box,
then I have to put up with some serious page faulting....
- Mark
"Timothy J. Lee" wrote:
>
> StarOffice looks attractive as an "office" suite that runs on
> Linux, Solaris, and Microsoft OSes, claims to be able to use
> Microsoft Office documents, and is less expensive than Microsoft
> Office. (http://www.stardivision.com)
-- Mark Watson, consultant and author of 11 books on AI, Java, C++.
-- http://www.markwatson.com for Open Source (Java, NLPserver, etc.)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derek)
Subject: ouch!! Too many open files in system
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 18:32:50 -0800
Hi all,
I've been going through archives and mailling lists for a few hours today
without much reference to my current problem. "Too many open files in
system".
It shows up in 'messages' and periodically on the command line as follows
(as root).
0 - gorgo {46} % cp ./dosql.sh /usr/local/bin/dosql
/bin/cp: Too many open files in system.
0 - gorgo {47} % !c
cp ./dosql.sh /usr/local/bin/dosql
0 - gorgo {48} %
Sometimes I cannot even check pwd !
Its pretty frustrating. Currently the server is handling a fair amount of
ftp and I hope to get mysql going soon.
I'm pretty new to linux, my background is more BSD. In BSD I would flip
around with MAXUSERS and MAX_OPEN and recompile my kernel, then check
pstat where I stand. Linux and its lilo seems to be a bit different, and
Im affraid Im stuck.
Could someone drop me a pointer?
- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Bloody Viking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: how to start programming in Linux
Date: 23 Jan 1999 03:04:51 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Jerry Lynn Kreps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: I agree with GUI being too complex to start with as a newbie.
: Also, there are several kinds of programming in Linux: C, C++, Perl,
: Python and several kinds of toolkits: Qt, GTk, etc., and even wrapper
: generators like SWIG.
I covered all bases with my replies to this thread and my child-process
thread for raw beginners at C. In the child-process thread I posted 2
examples of my really crude C sourcecode, an adding proggie and a body fat
proggie. I have a few C books, and I've learned from them, but I still
recycle sourcecode.
I can easally understand the frustration of a really raw newbie at C.
After years of hacking away, I made (to normal people) what seems to be
little progress, but I adapted. No matter, I don't care. Despite my
admittedly crude programming methods, I enjoy an email filter par
excellance and a Y2K countdown on my shell account. I mix and match the
best of different languages to make a proggie.
The great thing is you don't have to become an expert at any one language
to make a proggie work. If you're willing to waste CPU cycles, you can
freely mix and match. In DOS, adding languages is real costly. In Linux,
there's a nice choice of the right tool for a job, and it's all freeware.
This makes programming for a non-expert much easier. Can't use a feature
of Procmail? Just use grep in a shell script. Can't make a shell script do
a conditional? Use some C. Can't use C for disabling a header? Use a line
of perl or two. :)
--
CAUTION: Email Spam Killer in use. Leave this line in your reply! 152680
T-minus 343 Days, 3 Hours, and 7 Minutes until Y2K and counting.
3434298 bytes of spam mail deleted. http://www.wwa.com/~nospam/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Mysterious backquote key, Invalid Checksum 3E, and Strange Lines!!!
Date: 21 Jan 1999 18:59:53 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> John Groves
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
]3) Finally, I occasionally get some annoying lines appearing in my
]windows. They only
]seem to appear in windows where another window is overlapping it, and
]they appear in
]the lowered window where the bottom of the overlapping window is. I can
]make the line go
]away by selecting the area with the X Cursor, but when I switch virtual
]desktops and then
]switch back again, the line returns. I know that this is a vague
]description, but hopefully
]someone has seen this before and can tell me how to fix this? My video
]card is an
]ATI 3D Rage Pro card, and I'm running the Mach_64 server.
I also get this on an nedit static compiled window (Motif) withthe same
video card chipset. Do not get it in other windows however.
------------------------------
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: No floppy in Linux ?
Date: 22 Jan 1999 09:27:56 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Hi everyone,
>
> now I finally succeded in installing and configuring SuSe Linux by simply
> ignoring all system crashes, but there seems to be the last question
> before winning the princess: How do I mount the floppy ? There is no
> problem to mount and unmount /cdrom, but there seems to be no entry in
> fstab. In the bootup messages there is a line like "floppy(s) fd0" or
> similar.
>
> What will I have to tell the system in order to access a floppy
> drive ?
that depends. i use my floppy drive a bit but very seldom mount
anything to filesystem. i personally use a lot of tar directly to
floppy. those don't need to be mounted. just
$ tar cvf /dev/fd0 files.....
and away we go. no formating required either. tar formats as it
goes. i move files freely (well, as free as the paltry storage
capacity of the floppy permits) between sun sparcstations running
solaris at work and my i386 based home linux machine using this
method.
when you have to move files from a ms-dos/windows machine, then tar
won't cut it. ms-dos/windows will lock hard if you try putting a
tar-format disk into them. for that i use ms-dos fat (since microsoft
doesn't go very far out of their way to support foreign filesystems)
and mtools in linux. no mounting required for this either.
dd works (that's how you make boot disks) and i am sure cpio works too
(but i've never sat down and figured out the options required
(oxymoron?) to make it work - however cpio is many people's favorite).
lastly, you *can* add a line in /etc/fstab giving standard mounting
options. however, since formats vary so widely you may as well give
them as command line args to mount. a few choice shell
scripts/functions/aliases may help.
> Thanks in advance for kind answers.
>
> Gruß HaJo
väl mött! hoppas det hjälper.
--
johan kullstam
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 19:08:57 -0800
From: Bob Warshawsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.sun.apps
Subject: Re: StarOffice and Microsoft Office
Timothy J. Lee wrote:
>
> StarOffice looks attractive as an "office" suite that runs on
> Linux, Solaris, and Microsoft OSes, claims to be able to use
> Microsoft Office documents, and is less expensive than Microsoft
> Office. (http://www.stardivision.com)
>
It's free to download
> For a group of users used to using Microsoft Office (and passing
> around Microsoft documents due to existing licenses of Microsoft
> Office), what kind of issues, if any, could there be for:
>
> a. Some users use StarOffice while others use Microsoft Office
> (i.e. file formats and the like -- are they totally compatible,
> or are there some things that don't work so well?).
> b. Users used to Microsoft Office using StarOffice for the first
> time -- will they have significant problems?
>
I found StarOffice easy enough to use and I do like the spreadsheet
very much. The drawing/presentation tool works okay, provided
one does not try to use very large images.
In my view the truly weak link in the suite is the word processor.
I found that it's general ability to format pages is cumbersome and
it is very difficult to generate certain types of documents
(legal pleadings is the main one). The problems became too much so I
went back to WordPerfect instead.
I haven't explored the conversion aspects much, except that I am told
they are "working on it". Ultimately, StarOffice may work well but
for now it's disappopinting.
Of course, free versus $695.00 for Applixware is something to ponder....
-S
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Timothy J. Lee timlee@
> Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome. netcom.com
> No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.
------------------------------
From: Joh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bash Script Programming
Date: 22 Jan 1999 19:11:38 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () writes:
> On Fri, 22 Jan 1999 09:27:55 -0500, Brian Kaczmarek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I'm looking for good resources that describe bash programming in depth...
>
>
> http://linux.oreilly.com looks like a good place to start....
>
> Title: "Learning the Bash Shell"
>
> --
> -Doug-
I read that book and found it very helpful.
--
o ! [EMAIL PROTECTED]
j h [nix the x to reply]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian Moore)
Subject: Linux defrag?
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 19:57:14 GMT
Has anyone successfully defraged a linux partition using defrag 0.73
which is available in rpm format.
I continually get the error message - bad magic number in superblock.
fsck finds no problems with the same partition.
Any ideas please.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ruud van den Brink)
Subject: Re: qpopper error
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 19:53:36 GMT
Hi Ken,
They use or used the IMAP server, so it has nothing to do with
qpopper.
Ruud.
On Thu, 21 Jan 1999 11:27:47 -0700, Ken Plumbly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Some of my users are getting the following error message:
>
>This text is part of the internal format of your mail folder, and is not
>
>a real message. It is created automatically by the mail system
>software.
>If deleted, important folder data will be lost, and it will be
>re-created
>with the data reset to initial values.
>
>We user qpopper, the funky thing is, only a few of our users
>get this message.
>
>(usually those using --gasp, choke-- outlook express)
>
>Anyone else run accross this?
>
>Ken
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Samba / smbfs
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 18:19:53 GMT
On Fri, 15 Jan 1999 08:24:19 GMT, Stefan Meier
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi folks,
>
>I have the following prob using samba on a linux box (Kernel 2.0.36,=20
>SuSE 6.0) ...
>
>
>When I mount samba shares via network, the share gets mounted but the=20
>directory is unreadable (access rights d--------) ...
>
>When I try to smbumount the share, I get the error message=20
>=BB=B4mount-point=B4 probably not smb-filesystem=AB ...
>
>
>Where am I wrong?
>
>
>Thx for your help,
>
>Stefan
>
>
>
>
Give the directory executable rights so that you can actually change
to it. Chmod u+x directory.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
