Linux-Misc Digest #613, Volume #19 Fri, 26 Mar 99 16:13:07 EST
Contents:
Re: New Linux web site ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: 'Doze 98 vs. UNIX multitasking (Alexander Viro)
Re: FS: LinuxRules.com (Jeremy Crabtree)
Re: How do I include Linux in the NT boot loader on a triple boot system (John
Forkosh)
Re: GPL vs BSD license agreement (source code reuse) (brian moore)
Re: Re: Linux server with Outlook client (Robert Binz)
2.0.30 Kernel issues (Jerald Jackson)
Re: How do I include Linux in the NT boot loader on a triple boot system (Georg
Kovalcik)
Re: 2nd Hard Drive ("Qval")
Starting a proces with another UID
Re: kde 'died' (Jim McCusker)
Re: Help on PPP dial-up (RebounD)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: New Linux web site
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 19:35:45 GMT
What browser and version are you using?
-Manny Marinho
www.wastenotime.com
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > At www.wastenotime.com we would like to increase Linux awarness and provide
> > linux resources to Linux users around the World. We currently offer a high
> > quality linux message board along with a chat room. We are also looking for
> > Linux users who have information,articles, unique Linux software that they
> > would like to share with the World. Take a look at our web site!
>
> Does it work?
> When I click "Linux", a page appears but then there is no way out
>
> Ewc
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: 'Doze 98 vs. UNIX multitasking
Date: 26 Mar 1999 12:25:23 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>kernel is handing out execution time less often. What I'm trying to say
>is, say you have a 10 second interval to observe process execution.
>Winblows will have to watch
>
>18.2/sec x 10 sec = 182 processes.
>
>But UNIX will have to oversee the execution of
>
>100/sec x 10 sec = 1,000 process.
No. The thing you are missing being that frequencies above are frequencies
of timer interrupts. On *all* Unices context switch happens *not* within
the timer bottom half. Read the relevant code. It doesn't go through all
processes - it only decreases the time left before the schedule() for
the process(es) having CPU(s). If the process should be rescheduled it only
marks it as such, so that upon the return to user mode schedule() would
be called. It is *very* light-weight. Frequency of schedule() calls depends
on the type of usage - e.g. lots of IO-bound processes will give you large
amount of context switches and it doesn't depend on the timer resolution.
Notice that complexity of schedule() depends mostly on the number of
processes ready to run. Again, RTFSource. It's not a rocket science.
>Hence, Win98 uses less exe time, but multi-tasking is less smooth.
>One last thing: is the timeslice interval in these "multi-tasking" OSes
>taken from the clock ticks of some timer, like the 8254 timer, or do
>some use a simple delay loop? Is there both an i8259 and an i8254
>timer? Also, does the resolution of 55 msec sound right for the 8259?
>Anyone here use NT, and how does the performance compare to 98, UNIX,
>etc.? Someone told me that NT5.0 was extremely bloated compared to
>95/98 (it was Fewtch).
What delay loop? Err, wait... You've said Fewtch? You mean an
asshole that became pissed off and *really* obnoxious because of inability
to read the fscking dinstall message and declared that Debian is shit and
FreeBSD is $DEITY gift, just to repeat the same with s/dinstall/sysinstall/
s/FreeBSD/his right hand/ and s/Debian/FreeBSD/ a month later? Kook that
forged himself? Gee... Donn, you have great sources of information...
BTW, what's the matter with those crosspostings? It belongs to
comp.unix.internals or (marginally) to comp.unix.misc. Or .advocacy, if
you are after advocacy flamewar. Thread crossposted between c.o.l.m and
c.u.b.f.m has very good chances to become a lengthy pointless flamewar -
look on DN and you'll find a lot of examples. Cease and desist, please.
Sources for both kernels are available. If you want to compare - learn both
and compare yourself. Start from reading a decent book (Daemon Book, Bach,
TLK, Lions) and you'll see that 90% applies to all Unices out there.
Comparing the rest is much easier if you do understand the basics.
[Followups set]
--
"You're one of those condescending Unix computer users!"
"Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer" - Dilbert.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeremy Crabtree)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,alt.linux
Subject: Re: FS: LinuxRules.com
Date: 26 Mar 1999 19:32:49 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GV Morgon allegedly wrote:
>Hah! There is even a reserve bid price. I wonder if this guy went to one
>of those how to make money on the net seminars and is hoping to make money
>on domain name registration. It doesn't work.
This brings up a good question...isn't this extortion?
[SNIP]
--
"Being myself a remarkably stupid fellow, I have had to unteach myself
the difficulties, and now beg to present to my fellow fools the parts
that are not hard" --Silvanus P. Thompson, from "Calculus Made Easy."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Forkosh)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: How do I include Linux in the NT boot loader on a triple boot system
Date: 26 Mar 1999 14:32:29 -0500
**Nick Brown ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Do you then have to rebuild BOOTSECT.LNX every time you rebuild the
: kernel ? I guess not, but just checking.
Actually, _yes_ you do have to rebuild it. I didn't see the original
posts, and I'm assuming you're using dd to build bootsect.lnx in the
first place. Each time you run lilo, you'll have to make a new
bootsect.lnx and move it to where NT's boot.ini can see it again.
John ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
: > X:\BOOTSECT.lnx="Linux"
: >
: > where X is the letter of the drive where you just put the bootsect.lnx file.
: > After this is done and after you reboot, you should be able to boot into
: > Linux if
: > you choose the option "linux".
: > Greetings,
: > Alejandro Blanca
: --
: ---------------------------------------------------------------
: Nick Brown, Strasbourg, France (Nick(dot)Brown(at)coe(dot)fr)
: Protect yourself against Word 95/97 viruses, free - check out
: http://www.geocities.com/NapaValley/Vineyard/1446/atlas-t.html
: ---------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Subject: Re: GPL vs BSD license agreement (source code reuse)
Date: 26 Mar 1999 20:30:17 GMT
On Fri, 26 Mar 1999 03:39:43 GMT,
JR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 1) Most things in life are not free. Period. Final. Indisputable.
> Then why should software be? Books aren't free. Even if you borrow
> one from the library, taxes are paid to give one that privilege. It
Bzzt. Wrong.
Free Software (whether the BSD license or the GPL) has -nothing- to do
with zero cost. Walnut Creek Software makes a good deal of money from
selling FreeBSD. RedHat makes a good deal of money selling Linux.
Neither is free as in zero cost, or "free beer".
BOTH are free as in "you can change this code to do what you want".
Think "freedom" and "free press".
The rest of your arguments are based on the wrong meaning of the word
'free'.
The difference between the licenses is simple:
1) GPL argues that in order to protect freedom, it must require
all descendants of the software be held to the same terms
(distribution of source and keeping the GPL).
2) BSD argues that in order to be truly free in the here and now,
we can not stop people from obscuring future sources based on
the same tree.
It's a religious decision which one of the above premises is true.
IMHO, I find truth in the first: people are greedy and there are some
that will take but not give (a certain denim wearing billionare's
hacking of gcc to make objc comes to mind). I wish we lived in an
ideal world where an individual's ethics would make that less likely,
but we don't.
--
Brian Moore | "The Zen nature of a spammer resembles
Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker | a cockroach, except that the cockroach
Usenet Vandal | is higher up on the evolutionary chain."
Netscum, Bane of Elves. Peter Olson, Delphi Postmaster
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Binz)
Subject: Re: Re: Linux server with Outlook client
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 20:29:25 GMT
On Thu, 25 Mar 1999 22:07:37 -0500, Jeffrey L Straszheim
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Philip Ellis wrote:
>>
>> Does anyone know of a package that runs on Linux that allows me to use
>> Outlook on the client.
>
>I assume what you are asking is how to use Linux as
>your mail server and Outlook on your Windows clients.
>The solution is pretty straightforward, Outlook allows
>you to run "Internet Mail" as a service, which provides
>access to a SMTP/POP3 server. Ordinarily you'd use
>this to connect to servers on the Internet (hence
>the name), but Linux will run those protocols
>fine within the office. Check the docs on sendmail
>and qpopper. Note that setting up sendmail can
>be non-trivial; you'll want to do your homework
>before you start. There are plenty of books available.
>If your server is visible on the Internet make
>sure you read up on sendmail security--sendmail
>runs as root. The same for the POP server.
>
>> Along with email I need access to diaries etc.
>
>I'm not sure what you mean by "diaries". If you
>mean public folders then I'm not sure if I have an
>easy solution. Setting up a NNTP server on your
>linux box will do that, but I don't think that Outlook
>has an NNTP service. However, Outlook Express does.
>Also, you might try a mailing list daemon; although
>not as fancy as a public folder, it often gives the
>desired effect.
>
>For a very fancy effect, have sendmail route messages
>to a script of yours that will build a database of
>postings. Then, create a cgi script that will display
>them on a pretty web page. Quite a bit of work, but it
>would look nice and you could configure it to be exactly
>what you wan't.
>
>There is a learning curve here, but it is all pretty
>intuitive once you figure out how scripting works.
Philip,
Sorry I was not clear. I wanted to do the opposite.
The office has an Exchange server running and the people who run this
thing refuse to open up pop or imap.
What I need is an application that runs on Linux that will talk
natively to the exchange server. (A linux version of Outlook).
Thanks
Binz
------------------------------
From: Jerald Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: 2.0.30 Kernel issues
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 08:41:48 -0700
I am attempting to locate a list of issues that were found with 2.0.30.
Specifically anything that would cause boxes to hang unexpectedly.
These are all machines that are composed of different hardware, some of
it new and some of it older. Purusement of the logs indicate only that
a restart occured and no errors. There are no core files and this can
happen as often as once a month or three times a week.
Is there anyone who knows of a place to locate information on older
kernels?
Thanks in advance.
-J
------------------------------
From: Georg Kovalcik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: How do I include Linux in the NT boot loader on a triple boot system
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 19:49:24 GMT
No, you won't have to rebuild bootsect.lnx; I've been using the
NT Boot Manager to boot Linux from Kernel 2.0.30 to 2.2.4 now
and never rebuilded this file.
====================
Georg Kovalcik
Kalhs & Kovalcik OEG
John Forkosh wrote:
>
> **Nick Brown ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> : Do you then have to rebuild BOOTSECT.LNX every time you rebuild the
> : kernel ? I guess not, but just checking.
> Actually, _yes_ you do have to rebuild it. I didn't see the original
> posts, and I'm assuming you're using dd to build bootsect.lnx in the
> first place. Each time you run lilo, you'll have to make a new
> bootsect.lnx and move it to where NT's boot.ini can see it again.
> John ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>
> : > X:\BOOTSECT.lnx="Linux"
> : >
> : > where X is the letter of the drive where you just put the bootsect.lnx file.
> : > After this is done and after you reboot, you should be able to boot into
> : > Linux if
> : > you choose the option "linux".
> : > Greetings,
> : > Alejandro Blanca
>
> : --
> : ---------------------------------------------------------------
> : Nick Brown, Strasbourg, France (Nick(dot)Brown(at)coe(dot)fr)
>
> : Protect yourself against Word 95/97 viruses, free - check out
> : http://www.geocities.com/NapaValley/Vineyard/1446/atlas-t.html
> : ---------------------------------------------------------------
====================
Georg Kovalcik
Kalhs & Kovalcik OEG
http://www.think.at
------------------------------
From: "Qval" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 2nd Hard Drive
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 21:41:31 +0100
Darren schrieb in Nachricht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>I have two hard drives in my system. When I mount the 2nd hard drive I
>can only write to the drive if I am logged on as root. If I log on as
>another user, I can read from the drive but I cannot write anything to
>it. I have tried many different ways of mounting it and tried changing
>options in the fstab file. Any suggestions.
>
>I have figured out that the problem is that when I mount the
>drive, only the owner has read-write acces on it. I can set the
>permissions on the mount point before I mount it so that the owner/group
>have
>read-write access but after it is mounted it is changed so that only the
>owner has
>read write permission. If I set the permissions after it is mounted,
>nothing happens - the permissions aren't changed. Here is what I am
>doing:
>
>If I mount the device manually I use the following command:
>
>mount -t vfat /dev/hdc1 /mnt/docs
>
>But I prefer to have it mounted automatically when I boot.
>
>I have this in the /etc/fstab file:
>
>/dev/hdc1 /mnt/docs vfat user 0 0
>
>
>
>
>
i'm not quit sure, but try to change the write mod when you are logged in as
root
following command: chmod 0777 " 'your mount point direcrorry' "
good luck
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Starting a proces with another UID
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 20:53:41 +0100
I want to start a proces with another UID, and in a single command-line.
It's the root-account that should start a proces.
Is it possible??
Thomas
------------------------------
From: Jim McCusker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: kde 'died'
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 13:59:35 -0500
Jeffrey L Straszheim wrote:
>
> Jason Rotunno wrote:
> >
> > i had just installed mandrake which auto installs x and kde and it was
> > working fine. i was using kppp (which was working ok) to connect to my
> > isp when everything just froze. i couldn't properly shut down so i had to
> > shut my machine off. then my phone started ringing which may be the
> > reason for it freezing (didn't use *70). regardless, now x won't start.
> > after i type 'xstart' the grey screen pops up w/ the x, but it doesn't get
> > any further. i don't know where to begin troubleshooting this as i'm to x
> > and kde. anyone have any suggestions?
>
> I can't say much, but it is possible that your .Xclients file got
> clobbered. I sounds like X is starting, but that KDE is not. Logon
> as the user then type "usekde" (w/o the quotes) and then try "startx".
> This probably won't work, but it won't hurt and is quick. You may
> have bombed your KDE setup also, in which case you might reinstall
> just KDE. I don't know mandrake, so I can't suggest how that is done.
>
> --
> --Jeffrey Straszheim
> ---Systems Engineer, Programmer
> ----stimuli AT shadow DOT net
just rpm them back in. That should be sufficient. Something like rpm -U
--force should do the trick.
Jim
--
Jim McCusker | Class of '99, BA Computer Science & Cognitive Science
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://cif.rochester.edu/~fprefect
~Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it,
poorly.~
~~Henry
Spencer
------------------------------
From: RebounD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Help on PPP dial-up
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 15:19:13 -0500
Hmm,
I didn't edit the chat-script or the log messages. They are like that..
In the chat script, that's all I got...the '....' at the last line is
the username and the password. I receive a sample of a working chat
script and log messages the other day and I notice the different.
Anyway, now I dial through minicom, and the server answered. I got
connected. Th problem is I cannot use applications like Netscape or
telnet. It seems like the connection isn't availableto the others. I can
move around the server, but not other application in my pc.
When I did 'ifconfig', only the lo appears, not the ppp0. So I figure
out there must be something about route which is not correct. Does
anybody have suggestion what should I do next. I will try something, but
any help is really appreciated. Thanks.
Sven Utcke wrote:
>
> Farid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I did as David said, and it seems that the chat failed because the
> > chat-script failed. And then I went on with "more chat-ppp1" (at the
> > /etc/sysconfig/network-script, which I get from the /var/log/messages)
> > to check the chat-script (mine is named chat-ppp1) and there something
> > like this:
> >
> > 'ABORT' 'KILL'
> > 'ABORT' 'ERROR'
> > 'ABORT' 'ETC'
> > 'ABORT'.....
> > 'ABORT'.....
> > 'ABORT'.....
> > 'ABORT'......
> > " " OK
> > ...................
>
> Well, I certainly hope there's more to come. Maybe just post the
> entire script? So far, it looks alright (except for all the dots,
> which I assume you added).
>
> > Is there something wrong with my chat-script or is there something
> > else.
>
> Probably something else, but who knows --- the important bits are
> missing...
>
> > All that I know (from looking at the /var/log/messages) is that the
> > connection failed because chat program failed, and the log messages is
> > something like this:
> >
> > pppd (789): kernel 2.2.3 .....
> > chat (790): failed
> > ppp(792): exit
>
> Here too: Please post the entire information (without passwords, of
> course), not an edited version.
>
> Sven
> --
> _ _ Lehrstuhl fuer Mustererkennung und Bildverarbeitung
> | |_ __ | |__ Sven Utcke
> | | ' \| '_ \ phone: +49 761 203 8274 Am Flughafen 17
> |_|_|_|_|_.__/ fax : +49 761 203 8262 79110 Freiburg i. Brsg.
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~utcke
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
