Linux-Misc Digest #663, Volume #20 Wed, 16 Jun 99 17:13:14 EDT
Contents:
Re: linux-newbie (Johan Kullstam)
Job Opportunity for Programmer with CBC Toronto (Dwight Friesen)
Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (was: Mindcraft Retest
News (Mark Tranchant)
Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (was: Mindcraft Retest
News (Miguel Cruz)
Floppies for Installing ("Louis Dupree")
Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (was: (Yan Seiner)
Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (was: Mindcraft Retest
News ("Chad Mulligan")
Help with RedHat 5.2 initrdimg file (Leslie Smith)
Re: e2fsck question (Kevin Paul)
Firewall Needed for Linux ("Warp")
Redhat Firewall Needed For Linux ("Warp")
Q: How to read DAT tapes created by ntbackup? (Marco Schmidt)
Re: Lost Linux boot on my portable system. (Steven Harrison)
Re: editorial: Stupid Linux Tricks ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: kernel mode programs (yes, this is on topic) (Matt Harden)
Re: ATI Xpert@Play98 - Please Help (Ted Sikora)
Re: SUID programs: are they normal? (Mike Khalili)
INFORMIX ODBC CLIENT FOR LINUX ? (dja7)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: linux-newbie
Date: 16 Jun 1999 10:03:51 -0400
"Christopher Boyde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello I am thinking of installing Linux 6.0 from Redhat but I have a few
> questions frist
ok, ask away.
> 1. When you install the redhat version 6.0 of linux do you start of
> with a gui or do have to install your own.
yes. you can choose between kde, gnome or install/configure your own.
you do not need a gui at all if you do not want one. linux is still
command line and text file oriented so guis are not all encompassing
in the sense that a gui is on a macintosh.
> 2. Does linux have it's own software for internet sharing.
yes.
> 3. If linux can't read fat 32 hard drives how can it use hard drives bigger
> than 2 GB which is fat 16 limit.
linux has its own filesystem (ext2) which is unrelated to fat n.
linux *can* read (and write) fat 32.
> 4. Can I use Linux for my server where all other systems use win 98
> with fat 32 hard drives.
yes.
> 5. Does linux support adsl or cable modems.
yes. i have a cablemodem and it works great.
> 6. Is the Celeron Processor any good for linux.
sure.
> 7. Whats the difference in the inerface between the workstation and
> sever versions.
none. the only difference is what extra software gets installed at
the start. you can easily add and remove software at any time so
this choice just tries to start you off with a suite close to what you
want. you are not hosed later because you chose either one.
> 8. Does the server version come with Redhat 6.0
it's not a question of version. most everything is the same. server
will install more software of the ftp/nfs/samba filesharing variety
while workstation will give more office type stuff. again, you can,
at any time, install and remove the software.
> Thanks for any help.
hope this helps.
--
johan kullstam
------------------------------
From: Dwight Friesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Job Opportunity for Programmer with CBC Toronto
Date: 16 Jun 1999 16:30:48 GMT
CBC Toronto is looking for a programmer to support our regional
Web presence.
The candidate will have the opportunity to implement the latest tools in
the development of a powerful news delivery system.
You have Java and ASP experience, knowledge of CGI scripts, Perl, SQL
experience, both UNIX and NT, Solaris, and Linux.
You are also so excited by the idea of XML that it makes you stay awake at
night sweating.
You know what I mean.
If you can show some great sample URLs then <A
HREF="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">e-mail me your resume</a>.
Only candidates will be contacted. Best regards to all.
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: Mark Tranchant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix
Subject: Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (was: Mindcraft
Retest News
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 16:19:14 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Miguel Cruz wrote:
> How do you know they haven't planted a
> Deep Cover software mole into NT Server for the specific purpose of the day
> when they're called upon to conduct the benchmark with a shrinkwrapped
> copy?
>
> No, I think the only fair solution is for them to show the source.
>
You're volunteering to read the NT source code, are you?
Brave fool...
;-)
Mark.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix
Subject: Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (was: Mindcraft
Retest News
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Miguel Cruz)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 20:04:18 GMT
Mark Tranchant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Miguel Cruz wrote:
>> How do you know they haven't planted a
>> Deep Cover software mole into NT Server for the specific purpose of the day
>> when they're called upon to conduct the benchmark with a shrinkwrapped
>> copy?
>>
>> No, I think the only fair solution is for them to show the source.
>
> You're volunteering to read the NT source code, are you?
No, as I know full well, madness that way lies.
I just wanted to set up a condition that would never be satisfied so we
could all get back to work and stop benchmarking annoying-to-operate
point-and-hope systems against the sleek elegance of Unix.
miguel
------------------------------
From: "Louis Dupree" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Floppies for Installing
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 16:08:16 -0400
Can I get 3 1/2 floppies to install Lenux 5.2? I do not have a CD drive. If
so, where? Thank you?
Louis
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Yan Seiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,omp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix
Subject: Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (was:
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 12:27:01 -0400
By comparison, cdrom.com, the busiest site on the web, runs on one
PPro... One guess at the OS....
Yan
>
> 26 as I recall, in eight redundant clusters, supported by redundant fast
> ethernet, supplied data by redundant SQL servers (something eBay should
> consider) serving millions, yes millions of customers over redundant OC3
> circuits, further backed up by multiple DS3's all from different vendors.
> And the best part, as far as joe public is concerned, it's a single entity.
>
> >--
> >The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
> >Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
--
__ __
| / /
/------/
-- / \ / \ --
/ /\ \ / /\ \
| / | \/--|-- |
\ / \ /
~~ ~~
"The older I get, the faster I was."
------------------------------
From: "Chad Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,omp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix
Subject: Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (was: Mindcraft
Retest News
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 21:45:57 -0700
Craig Kelley wrote in message ...
>"Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> > >But Linux != Solaris, the benchmark is between Linux and NT.
>> >
>> > So f*cking what? I'm often cited as one of the most
>> > rabid Linux Zealots here and if I had the budget for
>> > a Quad Xeon I'd go get Sun hardware.
>>
>> My point being
>> a) No one in either Linux or NT camp will dispute that Solaris scales
better
>> than either OS (if they do, they're idiots)
>> b) Whenever scalability is mentioned, most Linux users start talking
about
>> Solaris, which as I pointed out != linux
>
>With 1 caveot: Linux applications *are* Solaris applications.
>
Are they now.. Hmm does IE for Solaris run on RH6.0? How about Oracle 8.0?
Sun Net Manager? WABI?
>Scalability concerns stem from the fear of not being able to give your
>applications enough horsepower. If you develop open Linux solutions,
>you can always scale on up to any "big iron" UNIX you wish to.
Actually, I would think that Scalability stems from having the data
available available to your customers, when they need it. Big Iron's days
are numbered. I worked for an HMO that even clustered their IBM 390's to
ensure availability. If you doubt the value of redundancy, check out a VAX
cluster sometime, two to four machines acting as a single entity, you could
run over one with a truck and the customers wouldn't notice. That there is
the key, the pieces can die, but the system must be available, it's a notion
called fault tolerance.
>
>Sun, IBM and HP all understand this (and that is why they support
>Linux).
>
Can't speak for Sun, they've always been the Apple of the UNIX world to me.
IBM also sells, and supports NT, The Domino Server will run on Solaris, HP,
NT, OS/2 but Not Linux. (Lotus is an IBM subsidiary) HP and MS have a fairly
close relationship as well. HP PC's and servers come with NT preloaded as
well, and some friends who work at the nearby HP campus speak fairly openly
of an NT port to their systems in the works. Compaq supports Linux too, but
MS's website is almost completely Compaq machines. You left out SGI, they
used to be called MIPS if you recall, an early NT supporter, and current
one. Then there's Intel, remember them, they're part of the glue that keeps
this mess functioning they've got relationships with all these companies,
and more. One must remember that Intel makes more than just processors.
>If you develop NT applications, your scalability lies in how many
>machines you can cluster. (How many IIS servers does microsoft.com
>have again?)
>
26 as I recall, in eight redundant clusters, supported by redundant fast
ethernet, supplied data by redundant SQL servers (something eBay should
consider) serving millions, yes millions of customers over redundant OC3
circuits, further backed up by multiple DS3's all from different vendors.
And the best part, as far as joe public is concerned, it's a single entity.
>--
>The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
>Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Smith)
Subject: Help with RedHat 5.2 initrdimg file
Date: 16 Jun 1999 20:00:23 +0100
Dose anyone know how to make a the initrd.img file, also could
anyone tell me what is in the file ?
How can I greate one ?
Regards
Leslie...UK:-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Paul)
Subject: Re: e2fsck question
Date: 16 Jun 1999 17:32:35 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: On 16 Jun 1999 00:33:54 -0500, Paul Kimoto wrote:
: >In article <7k75mj$af0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kevin Paul wrote:
:
: >Why not?
:
: my bet is that a server is using it ( for example, syslog writes there. )
: You need to boot into single user mode, so no daemons are running, and then
: you can mount or unmount it.
Yep. That did it. Thanks very much!
Kevin Paul
:
: --
: Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Warp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Firewall Needed for Linux
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 16:15:47 -0400
--
'Opinions are my own and not representative of my employer'
------------------------------
From: "Warp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Redhat Firewall Needed For Linux
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 16:16:09 -0400
Please advise ASAP where I can download a Firewall program for Redhat 5.1 +
Need one fast!!
Thanks
(Using colleague's email so please send response to [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
Thanks!
--
'Opinions are my own and not representative of my employer'
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco Schmidt)
Subject: Q: How to read DAT tapes created by ntbackup?
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 20:44:00 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi, is there any Linux software available that understands the format
written by ntbackup? Are there format specs available? Has anyone ever
used tar under NT to get some tape that can be understood with Linux?
TIA,
Marco
------------------------------
From: Steven Harrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.portable
Subject: Re: Lost Linux boot on my portable system.
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 12:44:06 -0700
Try booting from a rescue disk, and then re-running LILO.
On Wed, 16 Jun 1999, Ronen Cohen wrote:
>
>Hi,
>
>I had a working Linux with LILO and windows95 installed and running.
>
>When I needed to upgrade to windows98 I reinstalled the all thing.
>
>After doing that I find out I can't see the Linux OS and LILO is gone.
>It is not coming up on boot.
>
>Does anyone know how can I reinstall LILO and the boot sector without
>reinstall Linux from the beginning, and save Windows98 on my system.
>
>Please send your reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>
> Ronen .
--
Steven Harrison
Network Services Engineering
Verio, Bellevue.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development
Subject: Re: editorial: Stupid Linux Tricks
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 18:41:57 GMT
Rich,
Here is a copy of the email I managed to get off to MidrangeSystems, NO
ERROR!
I sent it to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Publisher)
I have a major complaint!
How can a man like Chris Amaru become an editor when he rants on
subjects he obvisouly has NO knowledge of? in the article "editorial:
Stupid Linux Tricks" MidrangeSystems Monday, June 07, 1999 he spews
forth VERY bad information and obvisouly information he doesn't know a
thing about! He makes VERY poor comparisons that he again shows his
ignorace in the subjects. I posted a reference to this article in many
newsgroups and the discussions that arrose were not very nice. Many
AS/400 people felt this man is giving AS/400 people a VERY bad name by
showing is ignorance in this article. I think someone needs to review
his articles in the future and "EDIT" them for correctness. Mr. Amaru
needs to do research before he makes recommendations that he does. I did
a research paper for a class I took on the very subject of using Linux
in the business world and came up with FACTS that show the oposite of
what MR. Amaru is saying. I think this man needs to do some REAL
research and make an appoligy in a future issue stating is ignorace! I
am also posting a copy of this email in the newsgroups for otehrs to
see. I know others said they have sent emails to this man and posted
their's as well. I think you will see a public outcry over the bad
decision to run such a poor article.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here is a copy of my reply to Mr. Amaru and his article. I encourage
all
> AS/400 professionals to show their disdain for this type of ignorance
in the
> AS/400 community via email and postings.
>
> I tried to post it to the Midrangesystems website, but GOT AN ERROR!
Go
> figure....
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> I have been developing for and using S/36, S/38, and AS/400 my entire
> career. I have been reading Midrange for years. I have never read
such
> mindless drivel and unsupported ranting as your "Stupid Linux Tricks"
> article. "rabid dogs of the Linux lunatic fringe" ?! And what's with
> the shot you take at the NRA? Since when did Midrange become a soapbox
> for political hacking?
>
> First off, you can not compare Linux to the AS/400. One is an OS, the
> other is _HARDWARE_ . Either compare the AS/400 to a PC (equally
> foolish) or OS/400 to Linux (still not a good comparison, but I
> digress).
>
> As a consultant in the applications and security fields concerning
> AS/400's I can assure you that the AS/400 is as vulnerable as any
other
> system when connected to a network. Your assumption that security
holes
> result from published OS source code illustrates your ignorance on the
> subject. You should at least read the articles in your own mag on the
> subject!
>
> I have been installing Linux systems right along AS/400's for the past
5
> years. They do extremely well as HTTP servers, FTP servers, Mail
> Servers, Proxies, Firewalls, etc. (Do you really want to open up your
> AS/400 directly to the 'net? All of my own web sites run on Linux
> servers. My Linux servers run for months on end without me having to
> touch them. The vast majority of servers on the Internet are powered
by
> Linux and Apache. In short, you pick the tool appropriate for the job
> whether that's OS/400 on the AS/400, AIX on RS, or Linux on PC.
>
> As for your BMW comparison, don't compare WinXX to an ashtray (maybe
the
> stuff inside) but to some other part that costs 10% of the total.
Would
> you be willing to pay an extra $2,000 for a radio you don't want?
(The
> auto makers lost that court battle in the 80's). IBM itself
criticized
> MS for forcing manufacturers to pay tithe according to the number of
> systems sold (regardless of whether MS was installed or not!)
>
> You sound like your late to the game. Your Linux bashing sounds like a
> rabid dog of the IBM lunatic fringe and gives us all a bad reputation.
> You give no examples, experience, or statistics to support your
> ranting. Your comment about not having good judgment is correct.
Maybe
> you should have a few more self revelations as well. Many AS/400
users
> are also avid Linux users and supporters. If you are going to voice
an
> opinion, try to demonstrate competency in the subject first.
>
> Rich Rijnders
> Firstsys Solutions
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> "Gabriel/TSS!" wrote:
>
> > While I work on AS/400's and lovethe system, I think this guy needs
his
> > head slapped around for a while! This guy obviously is part of M$'s
FUD
> > squad!
>
> -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News
==----------
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the
World!
> ------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries
Servers ==-----
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 14:03:58 -0500
From: Matt Harden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.functional
Subject: Re: kernel mode programs (yes, this is on topic)
Craig Dickson wrote:
>
> matth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I also think that pure FP avoids a lot of the locking
> >that's necessary in side-effecting code.
>
> Well, as long as concurrent threads don't need to share mutable data or
> single-use resources, there's no need for locking regardless of your
> paradigm. What pure FP gives you is assurance, at the language level, that
> this is the case.
Right. But the point is that this assurance makes it much easier for a
verifier, especially an automatic one, to see that locking is not
needed.
>
> >The biggest problem I see with
> >using functional programming (FP) in the kernel is the need to add a
> >garbage collector (GC) to the kernel; that would be a big hit in kernel
> >size and speed, I think.
>
> FP doesn't necessarily involve GC. The ML Kit uses regional analysis of the
> code to infer at compile time when memory needs to be allocated and when it
> can safely be freed.
That sounds very nice. But since ML is not pure, it's harder to verify
code safety. Does laziness make the regional analysis more difficult?
Does this analysis always result in code that doesn't need GC? It would
be very nice to have this feature in a lazy language like Haskell.
>
> >I also fear that any speed gains from not switching to user mode would
> >be lost in the inefficiency of all known Haskell implementations today.
> >I think future Haskell compilers can someday outperform C because there
> >are more potential optimization opportunities in Haskell code. But
> >imagine someday having a complete kernel (not linux, some future OS)
> >that is _provably_ correct and bug-free! Very exciting, I think.
>
> Sure, but even today you have choices other than Haskell if you want
> faster performance. There's Clean (sadly, not free for commercial use),
> and OCaml (though not purely functional or lazy), for example.
The problem is we need fast performance, and provably safe code, and an
open implementation we can customize to build kernel modules instead of
plain executables. Plus a verifier. Otherwise we can't do much better
than the khttpd hack in C that the original poster referred to. I don't
know, maybe the output of the Clean compiler could be massaged into a
kernel loadable module. Since the source for multiple Haskell
implementations is available, I know it could be adapted for the
purpose.
Matt
------------------------------
From: Ted Sikora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ATI Xpert@Play98 - Please Help
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 19:44:14 GMT
Mircea wrote:
>
> For me, using the SVGA server instead of the Mach64 was the answer.
>
> MST
>
> Charles Wilkins wrote:
> >
> > I have one of these cards too an I just started trying to solve the
> > same problem. did you figure this out yet?
> > Charles
> >
Same here. I use the SVGA server. I guess the chip revision is not
recognised by the Mach64 server. Mine reports a Mach64 GT rev.92
chipset. I have an Expert@Play 98 AGP with 8MB.
--
Ted Sikora
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://tsikora.tiac.net
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Khalili)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: SUID programs: are they normal?
Date: 16 Jun 1999 20:46:01 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 16 Jun 1999 16:16:17 -0400, Ding-Jung Han <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I'm a newbie to all this security stuff. Just checked if there's any
>suid programs on my linux box, and I found more than I expected (see
>below). Are they normal? Is there any one that is unnecessarily suid'd?
Depends what you call normal. Depends what you call necessary. I'll put
some quick explanations for the stuff I'm familiar with.
>/usr/X11R6/bin/Xwrapper
Maybe. Depends if users need to start X, or if you're using xdm. If you
use xdm, then no.
>/usr/X11R6/bin/crxvt
Yes. It needs to change ownership of the tty. This requires root.
>/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xmcd/bin-Linux-i686/xmcd
>/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xmcd/bin-Linux-i686/cda
No. If you want multiple users to write to the local xmcd files, change
permissions, make it sgid to a new group you create, and make the
files/directories writable by that group.
>/usr/bin/at
If you want users to run at jobs, then yes probably. If not no.
>/usr/bin/chage
Not sure. Don't think so.
>/usr/bin/gpasswd
>/usr/bin/zgv
Not entirely sure what either do.
>/usr/bin/chfn
>/usr/bin/chsh
If you want users to be able to change their finger info or shells, then
yes. If you're uber-paranoid, then no.
>/usr/bin/disable-paste
I've never seen this beofre. What does it do?
>/usr/bin/passwd
Yes. Users should be able to change their password.
>/usr/bin/lpq
>/usr/bin/lpr
>/usr/bin/lprm
Depends. If it's bsd-lpr, and you are committed to bsd-lpr (I don't know
why you would be), then yes. If it's LPRng, or you're willing to install
LPRng, then no.
>/usr/bin/suidperl
Ick. I'd remove it from my system.
>/usr/bin/procmail
Perhaps. Depends what you want procmail to do. If it's your local mail
delivery agent, then yes, probably.
>/usr/bin/sudo
Depends if you want to use sudo or su to become root.
>/usr/bin/rcp
>/usr/bin/rlogin
>/usr/bin/rsh
If you want to usee the r-commands, then yes. The r-commands have a whole
list of problems with them. Personally I use none of them, and have
disabled the daemons.
>/usr/bin/newgrp
Maybe. Read the man page.
>/usr/bin/crontab
Same deal as at, just with cron.
>/usr/bin/sperl5.00503
Same deal as suidperl.
>/usr/sbin/usernetctl
I don't even want to know what this is.
>/usr/sbin/sendmail
No. Make it sgid mail (or another group, mail just seems logical). Then
make /var/spool/mqueue writable by group mail.
>/usr/sbin/traceroute
If you want users to debug network problems. I disable it, others don't.
>/usr/sbin/userhelper
Don't know what it is. Guessing no.
>/usr/libexec/pt_chown
Not sure. Depends if something uses it.
>/bin/mount
Do you want users to mount floppies and such. If yes, then yes. If not
then disable.
>/bin/su
See sudo. Pick one or the other.
>/bin/umount
See mount.
>/bin/login
No.
>/bin/ping
See traceroute.
>find: /proc/17817/fd/4: No such file or directory
>/sbin/pwdb_chkpwd
I'm guessing no.
>/opt/netscape/movemail
I wouldn't let anything netscape related anywhere near uid 0.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 11:36:54 -0700
From: dja7 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,alt.linux,alt.os.linux
Subject: INFORMIX ODBC CLIENT FOR LINUX ?
Has anyone found an INFORMIX ODBC client for linux ?
I am using slackware 3.4
I want to do ODBC calls from my linux machine to an INFORMIX database
over a WAN. this way I can format the data into reports using perl and
put it on my web server in html format for endusers to view and print.
any help will ensure my eternal gratitude
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
thanks !
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
