Linux-Misc Digest #439, Volume #19 Sat, 13 Mar 99 14:13:08 EST
Contents:
Re: HPFS Problem with Linux (Seth Van Oort)
installation problem on dual PII system (Reinout)
rvplayer doesn't work after kernel 2.2 upgrade (mike)
Re: xwindows with non-root user (Jolly Roger)
Re: Any GOPHER-Users around? (Jolly Roger)
Re: MS Explorer 4.0 for Unix (John Girash)
Q: How to change Window Maker ? ("ronsu")
Re: What is the best Linux to install? (Jerry Lynn Kreps)
Re: best offline newsreader? (Jolly Roger)
Be and Linux (Jolly Roger)
Re: Is Red Hat 5.2 worth fifty notes? (Joseph Dunn)
BRU Back Up Software (Alan Fried)
Re: What is the best Linux to install? (wizard)
Re: What is the best Linux to install? (Johan Kullstam)
Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing? (wizard)
Launching Red Hat Control Panel
Re: Is Red Hat 5.2 worth fifty notes? (Sean Doull-Connolly)
Re: self extracting .exe on linux? (Jean-Francois Landry)
Re: What is the best Linux to install? (Jerry Lynn Kreps)
Re: What is the best Linux to install? (Frank Sweetser)
Sybase ASE on Linux for Sparc? ("mhnewsreader")
Re: SuSE 6.0 feelings please. (Monte Milanuk)
Looking for ODBC Database ("PostNet News")
Re: Running fdisk under Linux after Partition Magic? ("Charles Sullivan")
Re: xwindows with non-root user (NF Stevens)
Re: Increasing the number of pty or tty to 512 ? (wizard)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Seth Van Oort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: HPFS Problem with Linux
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 17:33:53 +0000
go into linux fdisk. Type 't' (change partition id). Enter the relevant
partition and change its id to 7 (type 'l' to get a list of partition
ids). Exit fdisk with writing changes ('w') and try to mount under
linux. If Windows actually overwrote the whole superblock then this
won't work. If hpfs has a redundant superblock thing like ext2, than you
could find a way to get the whole thing copied. You could use 'dd' for
this.
Seth
Erhard Karger wrote:
>
> because JDK 1.2 is not available unter Linux nor under OS2
> I installed WIN95 :-(.
> Win95 made of a HPFS partion a Fat Partition, that means
> it declared it as a FAT-Partition. So, I can't access it form
> WIN95, because the FAT Data are HPFS Data, from OS2 there is a FAT
> Marker at the beginning , so Partitionmagic say it is HPFS , but I can
> access it from there.
> With Linux I tried to mount it with -t hpfs and -o nocheck
> so Linux says the the superblock is wrong.
> I have PTS Diskeditor, were I can change the relevant Sektor, but I
> don't know what has to be written in this superblock.
> Does anybody know an answer.
>
> Thanks for any idea
>
> Erhard
>
> PS Please send me also a mail
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: reinout@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Reinout)
Subject: installation problem on dual PII system
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 17:36:50 GMT
Hi all,
I'm trying to setup Linux on a dual PII system with only SCSI devices.
But early in the boot process my system hangs: the welcome message
appears were i can type boot parameters. The boot then continues i see
the Bogo MIPS rating and some other messages but stops after the
messages about the IDE device. My IDE device is properly recognized,
the message that it's disabled (BIOS) is also correct but the boot
process stops here.
I read the bootprompt howto and tried the following coomands at the
<boot:> prompt:
linux idex=noprobe hdx=none
linux ide0=noprobe ide1=noprobe
linux ide0=noprobe ide1=noprobe aic7xxx=extended
In all situations i keep getting messages about the ide device, which
gives me the feeling that these commands are ignored! Am i making a
mistake here???
This happens with both Redhat 5.1 and Suse 6.0 (with the latest
aic7xxx image from their website). I have an Asus P2-97DS board with
two PII 266 CPU's.
I have a few questions:
What should be happening directly after the message about the disabled
IDE device? SCSI recognition? Or is it still checking the ide
devices?
What can i try to get past this point?
------------------------------
From: mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: rvplayer doesn't work after kernel 2.2 upgrade
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 15:23:05 GMT
Hello,
Has anyone else had this problem?
After upgrading my kernel to 2.2 (I
went to first 2.2.1 now 2.2.3)
rvplayer doesn't work.
The utility starts up no problem but
when I try to play any rm file I
get:
****audio: write error: 384 bytes
errno: 0
in the shell that spawned it. The
pluggin doesn't work either. My sb
16 card is otherwise working fine.
Most of my audio utilities can still
play through the soundcard. I've
upgraded my entire system to be a
full Redhat 5.2 and mod_utils I
upgraded to the latest version.
Could I be missing a library or a
compile option?
If anyone has any ideas how this can
be solved, any help would be much
appreciated.
Thanks
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jolly Roger)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.portable
Subject: Re: xwindows with non-root user
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 15:31:54 GMT
On Sat, 13 Mar 1999 04:26:00 GMT, sebasto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>i am unable to get xwindows to start with any user other than root.
>thanks for any help in advance.
>sleb
Is your path properly setup in .profile?
Are you using "startx &"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jolly Roger)
Subject: Re: Any GOPHER-Users around?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 15:37:00 GMT
On 13 Mar 1999 02:21:28 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ralph
Baumfalk) wrote:
>Hi all,
>is someone still using the old but nice Gopher-system?
>Ralph
It's slooooooooow over a dialup connection.
I have a gopher question too, does gopher use the ftp protocol?
JR
------------------------------
From: John Girash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS Explorer 4.0 for Unix
Date: 13 Mar 1999 12:19:53 -0500
steve mcadams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Michael Proto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>So when is Lynx gonna have ActiveX support?
:></MORESCARASM>
: ..and why would anyone with sense enough to install and configure
: Linux want that security abomination from hell?
Oh c'mon, lynx ain't _that_ bad.
jg
--
"don't listen when you're told about the best days in your life Spirit of
a useless old expression, it means passing time until you die." the West
/\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\/
-- John Girash -- girash @ cfa.harvard.edu - http://skyron.harvard.edu/ --
------------------------------
From: "ronsu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Q: How to change Window Maker ?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 12:09:38 +0800
Hi all:
How to change system-menu in Window Maker ?
I like to change the command in system-menu. For example, "kterm" ->
"kterm -ls ".
Which file do I change ?
Thanks
My e-mail: " [EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Ron Su
------------------------------
From: Jerry Lynn Kreps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.networking,alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Re: What is the best Linux to install?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 11:47:09 -0600
David Kirkpatrick wrote:
>
<snip>
> From personal experience I would eliminate KDE and Gnome from a list
> of options to install. KDE has too many problems and with a 100 users
> you'd be 100% devoted to complaints about X freezes or cpu usage high
<snip>
That percentage is absurd. If it were that bad it wouldn't be enjoying
the popularity it has been receiving. GNOME's premature release,
however, is creating that kind of percentage, but there are some who
never had problems with GNOME either, so milage may vary.
I've been using KDE (first the beta under RH 5.0, 5.1, 5.2 and now KDE
1.0 under both SuSE 5.3 and SuSE 6.0) since last September and I have
had no problems with it or its speed. I am using a Sony VAIO P166 with
64MB RAM, 128MB swap and about 9GB of HD. I've used what ever settings
were in effect at install and have done nothing to "tweek" it, other
than set sound files for some events. So, after SEVEN months of use I
have nothing but praise for KDE. It is everything Win95/98 should have
been.
I also tried WindowMaker, which I found to be very light, fast and
stable, with some neat themes, but it lacks the features of KDE, and no
office suites are forthcoming for it. KDE's support and app list is
skyrocketing. But, the nice thing about the Linux community is that
there is competition, unlike the M$ world, and there will always be a
variety of Xclients to choose from.
Jerry
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jolly Roger)
Subject: Re: best offline newsreader?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 15:45:07 GMT
On Sat, 13 Mar 1999 01:11:43 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (david
grant) wrote:
>Judging by the response to this topic, the Linux world seems divided
>between those who are used to working with well-established Unix
>applications and those of us who are used to graphics based Windows
>applications with an easy-to-use GUI interface.
>
>Surely we are not asking too much for easy-to-use (cool?) X-window
>interfaces to Unix newsreaders or other widely used applications such
>as email clients or fax programs?
>
>Incidentally does anyone know of an X-windows fax program that is
>reasonably easy to set up and works. I have tried Hotwire and can't
>get it to work properly (although I can establish a link to the remote
>fax machine) and HylaFax seems unbelieveably complicated as far as
>setting up the modem is concerned. Is there some simpler way of
>configuring Hylafax?
>
>David Grant
>0nOn Thu, 11 Mar 1999 12:05:33 +0000, Neil Durant
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>In article <7bnr9t$ce8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Richard Latimer
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>>>For those Linux/Unix users offering advice on news readers,
>>>you would be better able to understand what newbies are
>>>looking for in a newsreader if you sat down at a Win setup
>>>and played with the free newsreader that comes with Win98,
>>>i.e., Outlook Express.
>>
>> [Deletia]
>>
>>>Now that you have an idea of what you can do with simple freebie,
>>>ask yourself why there is nothing remotely as capable for the
>>>Linux/Unix user. Unix is over twenty years old and cannot consume
>>>the output it serves up anywhere near as well as MS products do.
>>
>>However, unfortunately Outlook Express falls massively short of being
>>a decent email client / newsreader for a countless reasons...
>>
>>* its limitations in mail and news filtering (e.g. x-posted articles)
>>
>>* its broken line wrapping when wrapping at 76 characters
>>
>>* a strange tendency for the default character set to change from
>> Western to UTF-7 or User Defined without warning
>>
>>* lack of a search facility for news
>>
>>* no support for BinHex encoding so if a message from a Mac user has an
>> attachment, you have to install a third party decoder software
>> to be able to read it
>>
>>* no proper way of removing an attachment before a message is saved
>>
>>* if an article or mail message includes an attachment which is not at
>> the end of the message (a perfectly normal and legitimate situation),
>> OE decides to bundle up all the text following the attachment into a
>> series of extra attachments
>>
>>* very limited bulk decoding of attachments, and the combine & decode
>> of multi-part messages does not automatically order article parts that
>> arrive out of order in the way a proper news client should
>>
>>* MIME seriously broken in too many ways to list here
>>
>>* quoting doesn't work properly with Quoted Printable text (this failing
>> dates back to OE's predecessor, Internet Mail & News)
>>
>>* if a message contains more than a certain number of mailto links,
>> clicking on one produces the amusing error that the software is not
>> properly installed (Knowledge Base Article Q182985)
>>
>>* if you digitally sign and encrypt a message, but later edit it before
>> sending, it gets sent without a DID or encryption. This is a serious
>> security risk - Microsoft are aware (Knowledge Base Article Q171288)
>> but seem reluctant to fix the bug with the urgency it deserves
>>
>>This list goes on and on.... It's as though Microsoft had never
>>heard of Internet standards, RFCs, standard protocols etc.
>>
>>However, it looks quite nice, and doesn't require a brain to use it.
>>It's sad that so many users don't appreciate the true requirements of
>>a news client, and are so easily fobbed off by a sexy user interface.
>>
>>Neil
May I ask why you use Linux & X?
I boot up in windows and use forte Agent for this. I suppose you
could network a 95 or NT machine and access the data folder in the
agent directory with some linux programs. You do have more than one
computer? :-)
I use Linux but haven't tried any X news readers. Most of the X stuff
looks like shit and you can hardly read the fonts. However, Linux
(not X) is an excellent OS.
JR
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jolly Roger)
Subject: Be and Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 15:53:08 GMT
Anyone tried mixing Be and Linux on the same system?
JR
------------------------------
From: Joseph Dunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is Red Hat 5.2 worth fifty notes?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:53:33 -0600
Just to let you know, I have found that I can get Linux software for very
good prices on auction sites such as ebay.com and yahoo auction. I
recently picked up Red Hat 5.2 for $8.63, including shipping. To me,
that's a lot better ordering it off Red Hat's web site and paying $50.
Give it a try.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alan Fried)
Subject: BRU Back Up Software
Date: 13 Mar 1999 16:34:55 GMT
I am using bru to back up my data on a Syjet
Cartridge. Back up goes well and after I close
and reopen the the software, everything that has
been backed up appears.
However when I shut down and reboot, I can no longer
mount the cartridge.
I am using Red Hat 5.1 with a 2.0.34 Kernel, the syjet
is hooked up to an intio accelerator card.
I use the xwindows version of Bru.
Any suggestions???
Thanx in advance
Alan
------------------------------
From: wizard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.networking,alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Re: What is the best Linux to install?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 11:35:06 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Richard wrote:
> I am trying to install the newest and the best linux on
> 100+ workstation. What would be the best one to choose
> in terms of standard, support, and setup?
Considering all of the above the answer would be RedaHat.
The other nice thing about RedHat is the tremendous number of binary
RPMs available, this may be a big issue if your to install on a 100
machines.
You did not state as to wether the hardware will reside on a
network. As part of the installation consider setting up of a server
if there is a network. It may or may not be useful to try to do a
setup from a server' depending on the configuration things could be
slow, but it is an alternative. I always install initially from a CD
as it is much faster. But it may pay to have all of your additions
and updates on a server, or burn a CDROM with all of the updates and
options.
Unfortunately you will have to decide between a 2.0.36 kernel and a
2.2.X kernel. The 2.2.X kernels are a huge improvement in
perfromance but do realize that things are still being shaked out.
Don't let this become an obsession as the kernel can be upgraded
realatively easily after install.
DAVE
>
>
> Any ideas would be appreciated.
>
> email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Thanks in advance
> Richard
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.networking,alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Re: What is the best Linux to install?
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 13 Mar 1999 11:38:27 -0500
Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am trying to install the newest and the best linux on
> 100+ workstation. What would be the best one to choose
> in terms of standard, support, and setup?
all linuxen will install the same stuff. you need to maintain a
legion of workstations, hence package management is key. this rules
out slackware (which is fine for a few machines, but makes for
difficulting in synchronizing many). redhat, caldera, debian, suse
are all viable.
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Don't Fear the Penguin!
------------------------------
From: wizard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:44:44 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Christopher Browne wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Mar 1999 18:19:36 -0500, wizard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Christopher Browne wrote:
> >> Buying Intel-based boxes might *not* be more economical if you have to
> >> spend an extra million dollars on the land and building to house them...
> >
> >I really can't concieve of any situation were the size of the box is going to
> >make an intel sysytem more competitve. If that were so Intel would be seling
> >more of there super computers to the goverment. This is especially true if you
> >are chosing competitve systems from both manufactures. Not many intel chipsets
> >will allow 8MB of cache or large memory systems for that manner.
>
> That's pretty fair. The point I was trying to suggest was not so much
> "Here are the precise reasons to pick Alpha over IA-32," but rather
> "There do exist considerations beyond the baldly sparse issue of
> price."
Couldn't agree more here. The problem as I see it is the tendency to consider
price and Intel compatiablity as absolute must in making a purchase. Even for
desktop "office" machines an argument could be made for a little opened
mindedness. This response is somewhat focused on the "corporate bying
mentality", but I've also seen this type of behaviour from people in the market that
don't have this monkey on thier back.
Of course if individuals and coporation had been opened minded 4 or 5 years ago when
purchasing PCs we would not have the junk that MS sells us today. MS might control
a large part of the market,but there only competition would not be Linux as it si
today.
>
>
> Alphas are really rather a lot faster than IA-32 on FP operations; that
> is an area where they *really* shine. Which means that if you're doing
> FP-intense work, as was certainly the case for DD's "rendering farm,"
> this makes Alphas "look better." (At least, in comparison with
> applications where FP is unimportant, such as with network routers.)
> *That,* combined with "big cache," and "big memory space," is probably
> the more important reason for Alpha to win out over IA-32 when building
> rendering farms.
Actually the big cache and memory foot print also makes the Alpha a very useful
platform for other applications.
Dave
>
>
>
> The "value of real estate" evaluation might be more usefully applied to
> the PalmPilot; anything that makes a PalmPilot larger is very bad, as it
> prevents it from fitting in a shirt pocket. A few mm of extra length in
> any dimension could have crippling effects on its sales.
>
> --
> Wow! Windows now can do everything using shared library DLLs, just
> like Multics did back in the 1960s! Maybe someday they'll discover
> separate processes and pipes, which came out in the 1970s!
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/alpha.html>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 11:41:07 -0500
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Launching Red Hat Control Panel
I would like to launch the Red Hat Control Panel
that normally comes up by default when you startx.
I've installed Window Maker which removes it from
the default start-up apps. I want to use the Control
Panel to configure and run PPP. How can I launch it?
Is there another easier way to setup and run PPP?
Greg
------------------------------
From: Sean Doull-Connolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is Red Hat 5.2 worth fifty notes?
Date: 13 Mar 1999 18:18:25 GMT
> Well....I've compared my fifty notes spent on RH5.2 with
the $500+ spent keeping my WIN9x machine alive over the
last 18 months. Here's the comparison:
M$$$$$$
=======
WIN95 Upgrade $90
WIN98 Full Licence $170 (...so I could wipe the HD and do
a ground up install)
DriveUp! Licence $40 (...so I could do some FAT32 stuff)
FoxPro 6.0 Upgrade $200 (from 2.6, so I could go 32-bit)
M$$$$$ snags: WIN98 unstable, IE unusable because of lock ups
Fox6.0 has different screen functionality from 2.6
so programs needed re-written plus user procedures
for imput had to change.......and so on.
LINUX
=====
RH5.2 $50
Installation $0 (newbie: four installs, much fooling
around with XFree86)
FlagShip Personal $0 (slam dunk: no fooling around needed)
StarOffice 4.0 Personal $0 (an hour to get libc version problem
handled)
Worldnet install $0 (much fooling around with Perl/chat
scripts)
Linux snags: I started around Feb 1 -- complete newbie -- and in twenty
hours
had a clean stable install, and all my apps and data
moved from
WIN98. **NO** M$ code on the machine at all. Only snag
- can't
get sound to work (Crystal 4235). Only irritation --
can't get
video better than 800x600 and 256 color.
Bottom Line
=========
Seems like $50 is a REAL BARGAIN!!!! Seems like I'd be prepared to spend
$200 for RH5.2!!!!
Sean
------------------------------
From: jf@hal. (Jean-Francois Landry)
Crossposted-To: utah.linux,linux.redhat.misc,linux.redhat.rpm
Subject: Re: self extracting .exe on linux?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 18:58:01 GMT
>In article <7c3qtg$jgu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> I have a self extracting zip file (.exe). Is
>> there a way to expand it under Linux without
>> going to a windows machine running it and bringing
>> it back to my linux box?
>>
>> I am running RedHat 5.2 so an rpm would be nice
>> if available.
>>
Just do a "unzip zipfile.exe"
List and other stuff works too...
------------------------------
From: Jerry Lynn Kreps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.networking,alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Re: What is the best Linux to install?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:45:00 -0600
Richard wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>I am trying to install the newest and the best linux on
>100+ workstation. What would be the best one to choose
>in terms of standard, support, and setup?
>
>Any ideas would be appreciated.
>
>email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Thanks in advance
>Richard
If you are a Linux guru it doesn't matter.
If you are not, then I recommend SuSE 6.0.
It comes with KDE 1.0. YaST (Yet another System Tool) makes system
administration as easy as falling off a log. When add or remove apps it
automatically goes modifies all the config files, all the xclient menus,
rc.config, .profile, boot.local, evironmental variables, is eliminated
or reduced to changing a setting from "no" to "yes". The 6.0 release
is based on the 2.0.36 kernel and libc6 (glibc). The 2.2 kernel will be
part of the next release, 6.1, which will also include KDE 1.1 and
GNOME.
I use the subscription plan ($34 US) and don't worry about being
notified, tedious downloads (and their time and cost), or manual putzing
with partial upgrades. The SuSE 5 CD package has a live-cd, three
install cd's and two app (public and commerical) cd's. The manual is
VERY well written. I started with RH5.0, then 5.1, then 5.2. Then I
tried SuSE 5.3. World of difference. RH has got a lot of improvements
to make before I'd consider switching back.
I haven't tried any other distros, but I have most of the major ones
setting on CD's in my desk drawer. SuSE has removed my desire to
explore. Needless to say, Win95 is no longer needed on my system.
Jerry
------------------------------
From: Frank Sweetser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.networking,alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Re: What is the best Linux to install?
Date: 13 Mar 1999 13:41:26 -0500
Jerry Lynn Kreps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I also tried WindowMaker, which I found to be very light, fast and
> stable, with some neat themes, but it lacks the features of KDE, and no
> office suites are forthcoming for it. KDE's support and app list is
> skyrocketing. But, the nice thing about the Linux community is that
> there is competition, unlike the M$ world, and there will always be a
> variety of Xclients to choose from.
> Jerry
note that 1) there are various office/work processing packages availible
that don't require KDE, and 2) typically you can use just about any KDE app
without actually running KDE, as long as you have the appropriate libraries
installed.
--
Frank Sweetser rasmusin at wpi.edu fsweetser at blee.net | PGP key available
paramount.ind.wpi.edu RedHat 5.2 kernel 2.2.1 i586 | at public servers
Don't spend two dollars to dry clean a shirt. Donate it to the Salvation
Army instead. They'll clean it and put it on a hanger. Next morning buy
it back for seventy-five cents. --Billiam Coronel
------------------------------
From: "mhnewsreader" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.databases.sybase
Subject: Sybase ASE on Linux for Sparc?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 17:57:32 -0000
Hi,
Can anyone tell me if the version of ASE you can get for Linux will run on
the Sparc version of Linux?
Thanks,
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Monte Milanuk)
Subject: Re: SuSE 6.0 feelings please.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 01:17:04 -0600
On Fri, 12 Mar 1999 11:39:13 GMT, Sitaram Chamarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 10 Mar 1999 20:33:33 -0500, David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Keith Davey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>-> I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has installed SuSE
>>-> 6.0. What do you think of the product? How would you compare it to
>>-> other distros like RedHat 5.2 and so forth.
>>
>>I had SuSE 5.3 which I thought was pretty good. I only upgraded to
>>6.0 because I wanted to go to a glibc system and catch any bugfixes in
>
>Have they finally gotten around to making dhcpcd a part of the
>installation? That's what turned me completely off SuSE 5.2 - I
>could deal with it (install dhcpcd, patch a few files in /etc and
>/sbin), but it's impossible to evangelise Linux to Windoze folks
>in a DHCP environment without this support
Well, I personally don't use it, but I do distinctly recall seeing the dhcpd package
available during install, fwiw
Monte
------------------------------
From: "PostNet News" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Looking for ODBC Database
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 12:59:13 -0600
I am looking for an ODBC database to run on linux. Are there any free ones
available?
Thanks
Mike
------------------------------
From: "Charles Sullivan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Running fdisk under Linux after Partition Magic?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 13:55:47 -0500
This is a problem with the older kernel and fdisk when there are more
than 1024 cylinders, and appears to cause no problems once you've
got the partitions created. Kernel 2.2.x and fdisk 2.9i have fixed the
problem.
If you don't have LBA enabled in your BIOS you can feed the kernel the
correct disk geometry; then fdisk won't complain. But this won't work with
LBA.
If you _have_ to use the old fdisk, you can go into the 'expert' menu and
set the
correct number of cylinders, then it will allow you to create partitions
above
the 1024 point.
See the Large-Disk mini HOWTO for more info.
Bjorn T Johansen wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Hi.
>
>I have a small "problem". I had to extend the size of my extended
>partition on one of my disk and used Partition Magic 3 to do that. If I
>now run fdisk (under Linux) and print the partitions, it tells me that
>the fysical and logical endpoint is not the same one the extended
>partition that I resized. Does anyone know why I get this message and if
>I safely can ignore it? (Everything seems to be working fine without the
>exception of that message)
>
>
>Regards,
>
>BTJ
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NF Stevens)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.portable
Subject: Re: xwindows with non-root user
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 19:08:09 GMT
sebasto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>i am unable to get xwindows to start with any user other than root.
>thanks for any help in advance.
>sleb
If you are using XFree3.3.3 you may need to amend your startup
script (startx probably) so that it calls Xwrapper instead of
calling X directly.
Norman
------------------------------
From: wizard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: Increasing the number of pty or tty to 512 ?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 11:14:22 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
James Yu wrote:
> Does any one know how to increase the number of pty over 256 limitation
> ?
> In other words, can I have more than 256 pty's in the Linux 2.2.3, i.e.
> as
> many as 512 pty's and 512 tty's ?
>
> Thanks
>
> James
Jim;
I'm a little sketchy here since its been a long time since I recompiled my
kernel, but I believe this is a compile time option. This would allow
more than 256 ttys however not sure if you would have to set up the /dev
directory afterword.
Dave
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
