Linux-Misc Digest #699, Volume #20 Sat, 19 Jun 99 16:13:12 EDT
Contents:
Re: How do you install a printer? (Tarkaan)
'LI' Syndrome fix needed :( (Tarkaan)
Re: bash feature in ksh ("Frank Brauer")
Re: Possible to mount Samba filesys (smbfs) via ordinary 'mount' command? (Kenny
McCormack)
Re: Debian advocates (Benoit Goudreault-Emond)
Re: Possible to mount Samba filesys (smbfs) via ordinary 'mount' command? (Douglas
Bollinger)
Off-line news reader ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: open systems?!? Re: Why does Apple not cooperate with Be? ("William Edward
Woody")
Re: Shutdown (Leonard Evens)
pppd and stderr ("Jeremy C. Reed")
Re: editorial: Stupid Linux Tricks (Jim McCusker)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tarkaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How do you install a printer?
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 14:49:26 -0400
Charles Koerner wrote:
>
> I changed to my daughters HP Deskjet 820Cxi for Windows Professional
> Series" printer. My HP 4l went south, but it was working. Now I cant
> get the DeskJet to print, it is not listed in the "printtool".
> Need basic help.
The printer may be listed in the most recent version of Ghostscript.
RedHat's website has some good information on that. Their Print Tool
thing is very cool.
-- Jack Tarkaan Kalamazoo, Michigan
-- http://www.bigfoot.com/~tarkaan mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- NO UNSOLICITED E-MAIL AT THIS ADDRESS - Respect privacy - NO SPAM!!!!
------------------------------
From: Tarkaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: 'LI' Syndrome fix needed :(
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 14:55:09 -0400
Please help!
I've been working on this issue for a good ten hours now. I want linux
to boot from the hard drive. My disk is ST3660A .. My boot floppy
reports the geometry as being CHS=1057/16/63. If you happen to have a
working lilo.conf for this, please mail it to me or post. If you know
of another fix, I'd be interested in hearing that too.
Thanks in advance.
-- Jack Tarkaan Kalamazoo, Michigan
-- http://www.bigfoot.com/~tarkaan mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- NO UNSOLICITED E-MAIL AT THIS ADDRESS - Respect privacy - NO SPAM!!!!
------------------------------
From: "Frank Brauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.admin,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: bash feature in ksh
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 21:09:20 +0200
Robert,
you can get the name completion in vi mode or in emacs mode in ksh. Dave
descripted one way. Another way is to set VISUAL=vi in the environment. You
can go in emacs mode with set -o emacs or VISUAL=emacs. You get the file
completion in emacs mode with ESC and a second ESC.
Hope this helps.
Frank
Dave Brown schrieb in Nachricht ...
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Robert Chung wrote:
>>
>>Somehow typing partial file name and then typing TAB key automatically
>>prints full file name in bash but not in ksh. For example, typing
>>".prof" and TAB prints out ".profile" in bash. I am wondering what
>>switch turns this on in bash, and if it is possible to do the same in
>>ksh. Thank you in advance.
>>
>
>The Korn shell implements this (somewhat less conveniently) if you have
>command-line editing feature turned on, i.e. "set -o vi". To
>do file-name completion, hit the <Esc> key, then the "\" key.
>
>--
>Dave Brown Austin, TX
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kenny McCormack)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Possible to mount Samba filesys (smbfs) via ordinary 'mount' command?
Date: 19 Jun 1999 14:12:20 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Rod Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <7kghgn$q72$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kenny McCormack) writes:
>> I have Samba working fine and can mount drives on my 9x/NT boxes from
>> Linux using smbmount. However, it would be nice if it could be done
>> using ordinary 'mount', using the normal mount syntax - and,
>> eventually, to be done via entries in the /etc/fstab file.
>
>I've been casually looking for something like this for some time, with no
>luck. I did recently run across the following in the smbmount man page:
>
>: To mount an smb file system, I suggest using the option -c
>: for smbmount to pass the mount command. For example, use
>
>: smbmount "\\server\tmp" -c 'mount /mnt -u 123 -g 456'
>
>: to mount the tmp share of server on /mnt
Curiously, my "man smbmount" documents the -c option as a way to
specify the "client name" - whatever that is. It doesn't looke like a
command string at all. FWIW, the -C option is for disabling the
uppercasing of passwords, so that ain't it either...
>This did work for me. I've not yet tried to combine this with user
>permissions in the /etc/fstab file to see if this might allow normal users
>to do it. Perhaps a suid root script could do it, though....
When you run smbmount as non-root, it says "/usr/sbin/smbmount must be
installed suid-root". Although I haven't tested it, this seems to
imply that simply making the executable setuid root would allow users
to smbmount stuff.
But that is not my goal here. What I want is to be able to call mount
and have it, internally call smbmount, if necessary, to do the work.
My goal is not the idea of making it user (in the sense of "non-root")
accessible, but rather, I'd like to avoid having to write a separate
user-interface for smbmount. Note that smbmount has a baroque command
line interface that it would be nice to hide - and one of the beauties
of Unix is the way the uglies of file systems can be encapsulated in
the /etc/fstab file. It works with NFS; it should work with SMBFS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Benoit Goudreault-Emond)
Crossposted-To: linux.debian.user,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Debian advocates
Date: 19 Jun 1999 19:29:41 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Salman Ahmed wrote:
> I am currently using RedHat 5.2 (kernel 2.0.36) and now want to make
> a switch to another distro. After comparing all the distros, it seems that
> Debian fits the bill for me.
>
> I'd like to get some more information from Debian users before I make
> the switch :
>
> (1) Is there a version of Debian that comes with a 2.2.x kernel ? The
> Debian website says that 2.1 comes with the 2.0.36 kernel and I do
> want to make the switch to a 2.2.x kernel.
There isn't a stable version that actually uses the 2.2.x kernel out of the
box, but the appropriate packages are there for Debian 2.1 and in unstable
as well.
> (2) How easy is it with Debian to upgrade from the 2.0.36 kernel to
> one of the 2.2.x kernels ? I have avoided so far trying to upgrade my
> RH 5.2 kernel 2.0.36 to one of the 2.2.x ones because of horror stories
> from other people about problems with glibc 2.1 and the new egcs.
Very easy. First, you won't need to upgrade to glibc2.1 and egcs (I did,
but later--I stuck with glibc2 and gcc 2.7.2.3 for quite some time) to do
the upgrade. Make sure you have the latest modutils. You should then be
able to install one of the packages for 2.2. However, I prefer to compile
my own kernels, so what I did was install the kernel-package package and the
2.2.0 pristine source tree and simply used make-kpkg to make my own kernel
package. Installed it. Biggest issue I had was with the new modular sound
drivers (insmod sound doesn't do everything anymore), but that got fixed
quickly.
> (3) When is the next stable release of Debian going to be released ?
Dunno. Can't wait. But it's not even frozen yet. I have several packages
from 2.2, though (glibc2.1 and the latest egcs, off the top of my head), and
there weren't any big problems except with StarOffice (and that's because
5.0 won't run on glibc2.1 because they do some rather stupid things with
respect to use of the library)
> (4) What does Debian offer to the power user over a distro like say
> RH ?
Been a while since I touched Red Hat (since 5.0), but my impressions are this:
1) Debian is a very high quality distribution. The drawback of this is that
it takes forever for them to release a stable version, but I'd rather have
them take their time and get quality.
2) The dselect front-end, although hated by many, is much more careful about
dependencies than glint was the last time I looked. This is sometimes a
royal pain, but it can save you many headaches.
3) Configuration files seem better laid out, and the window manager
configurations don't use m4 for preprocessing (that's what makes the Red Hat
WM configuration hard to mess with IMHO).
4) The system seems better "thought out"--for instance, most packages
install an entry in the Debian menu. That menu can be accessed by your
window manager, but also on the console with the pdmenu package. The way
alternatives are handled is great, too. Debian folks usually try to figure
out the best way to do something before they do it.
5) The new package manager front-end, apt, is the single best package
management system I've ever seen. It just kicks ass. I managed to upgrade
very critical parts of the system with no trouble whatsoever.
My biggest complaint about Debian is that their default configuration for
user interface stuff are quite "bare". I wish there were packages with
pre-built configurations for some window managers, for emacs, etc. (there
may be already, though--I haven't checked because the configuration I've got
now is pretty solid). Some people may have an issue with the rather
unofficial manner the KDE packages are handled; I don't as I don't use KDE.
> Celeron 300A (at 300MHz)
> 128 MB Ram
> Quantum 10.2 UDMA HD
> Creative Labs 36x CD-ROM
> SoundBlaster PCI 128 sound card
> Acer 56k internal ISA modem
> Matrox Millenium G200 video card
> ADI MicroScan 6P monitor
>
> Will the hw mentioned above pose a problem for Debian ?
If it works with Red Hat, it will work with Debian--same kernel.
Be wary of the sound card, however--I'm not sure about that, but again,
that's a kernel issue. The G200 video card is a pretty good choice, just
make sure you get the latest XFree86 packages.
--
Benoit Goudreault-Emond
CoFounder, KMS Group ; Student, B. Comp. Eng, Concordia University
``Being too close to a fireball can worry a man --- to death.''
-- Zeb Carter in "The Number of the Beast" by Robert A. Heinlein
Note: the "From:" address is not correct to protect myself against spam.
My actual e-mail address is: ``bgoudem AT axess DOT com''
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Douglas Bollinger)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Possible to mount Samba filesys (smbfs) via ordinary 'mount' command?
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 15:35:05 -0400
Kenny McCormack at [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> I have Samba working fine and can mount drives on my 9x/NT boxes from
> Linux using smbmount. However, it would be nice if it could be done
> using ordinary 'mount', using the normal mount syntax - and,
> eventually, to be done via entries in the /etc/fstab file.
<snip>
I was going to give a go at getting Samba to work with the autofs
demon. Right now I have things working with a line in rc.local, but
I was hoping for something a big more eloquent.
So I was reading a bit on how to get this to work in the files. On
my machine, this is at:
/usr/doc/samba-2.0.3/examples/autofs
Here's a snippet from the file:
> Hi SAMBA developers!
> I have written a shell script that marries smbmount and mount
> on a Linux-machine with a 2.1.55+ kernel (i.e., a newer developper
> kernel. Especially it makes smbmount compatible
> with autofs! Now, You (when root :-) can say
> mount -t smb /win-machine/my-share /mntpt
> Concerning the management of the user/password-pairs I have already
> made a step in the right direction, but there is still a lot of
> brain-work to do :-(
Does this sound helpful to you? Note that this is still on my "to
do" list, so I don't know how well this works.
--
Douglas Bollinger
Mt. Holly Springs, PA 17065
My other computer runs Linux.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Off-line news reader
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 17:58:25 GMT
Hi there,
Real simple question - can anybody reccomend a good _off-line_
news reader? When I wandered aimlessly in the world of Microsoft
I used a news reader called 'Free Agent'. I've tried the KDE
news reader, but it has a number of problems.
Any ideas? It costs way too much to view the news via Deja.com
Cheers,
Oliver B. Tupman
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: "William Edward Woody" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.programmer.misc,comp.sys.be.misc,comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: open systems?!? Re: Why does Apple not cooperate with Be?
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 11:22:12 -0700
Lawrence DčOliveiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message...
> "William Edward Woody" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Lawrence DčOliveiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Actually, four purposes spring to mind:
> >> * To abstract away from hardware specifics, allowing the same
upper-layer
> >> code to run on a wide variety of hardware configurations.
> >
> >Not really. This is a recent innovation, but not necessary for
> >an operating system.
>
> The idea goes back at least 30 years, to when different models in the same
> computer family started shipping with different configurations of disk and
> tape drives and the like.
Yes, it goes back to ideas from 30 years ago, but again, it's not
necessary for an operating system (though it is nice to have a
device driver scheme which permits this sort of abstraction).
The recent innovation I was refering to, by the way, is the
Microsoft "HAL" layer (Hardware Abstraction Layer) which Apple
recently adopted for the MacOS. The idea is that you create a
set of "abstractions" which abstract out the hardware differences
in various Macintosh or IBM PC models. This "HAL" layer is not
an operating system in of itself--it's only a set of common
routines which allow the host operating system (in Microsoft's
case, Windows NT) to think it is running on a consistant
hardware platform.
But this HAL layer is not a requirement for an operating system,
or is having a set of abstractions to make different hardware
models look the same.
> >> * To define common communication mechanisms (data interchange formats
for
> >> text, graphics and the like).
> >
> >No cigar. This is more of a high level thing, and not an OS thing.
> >Microsoft would have you believe that this is part of the operating
> >system...
>
> What has Microsoft got to do with this?
>
> >But really: is a GIF file definition part of an OS? JPEG definition?
> >RIFF? TIFF? HTML?
> >
> >No.
>
> Yes! ...
So Linux running anything earlier than X v11R5 isn't an operating
system? Sheesh.
> ... For example, JPEG is one of the standard image-compression formats
> supported by the QuickTime Image Compression Manager (QuickTime comes as a
> standard part of MacOS, and is available as an add-on for Windows).
If it's available as an "add-on", no matter even if it is packaged
in the same box as the rest of the operating system, it is not part
of the operating system.
Or are you going to argue that if I remove QuickTime from my Macintosh
(a relatively simple operation, by the way), that I am no longer
running an operating system on my Macintosh?
> >> * To minimize reinvention of code for common application tasks.
> >
> >No; this is what a library (shared library, static library) is
> >for.
>
> And what is an operating system, if not built out of a bunch of libraries?
BWWWWWAAAAAHHHHH!!! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! *snort*
Thanks, I needed a stupid rhetorical question.
Get yourself a copy of Linux and poke around in it a while.
One of the things you'll notice is that the actual operating
system itself is a small kernel which does very little beyond
arbitrating between processes and providing a device driver
and file system abstraction.
Other operating systems that have been floating around there
even abstract the file system out into a separate process
which can be replaced by another application, albeit a rather
low-level "magical" application.
Play around with them for a while, and get yourself a good
book, such as Tannenbaum's "Modern Operating Systems." And
what you will realize is a few things:
1) An operating system is generally **NOT** a bunch of
"libraries". (Well, it may be built from a bunch of
source code modules which may include libraries, but then
a lot of code out there is built the same way. But just
because I build a Minesweeper program from a couple of
libraries doesn't make Minesweeper an operating system.)
2) An operating system generally consists of a kernel
running at a "protected level" which arbitrates access
to different hardware resources. Because a process running
on an operating system needs to call routines provided by
that kernel, some sort of "operating system trap" mechanism
is used.
3) While it may be true that you link to a library to
provide bindings to your kernel's various operating system
traps, if you look at those bindings, you'll find that in
general they use some sort of "trap" mechanism to invoke
the kernel. That is, you don't link to the kernel like a
library; instead, the library you link to contains magic
code to call into the kernel using processor-specific
"tricks".
> Consider something you probably think is really high-level, like a
> graphics library. And consider something you probably think is really
> low-level, like an OS kernel. Would the latter have a need for the former?
> Yes it would. On my Mac, there is no such thing as a "text mode" for the
> display: everything that appears on the screen has to be drawn there by
> the OS graphics library. That includes all the messages during system
> startup, plus the icons that indicate various device drivers loading, and
> so on.
Just because a thing is provided in an operating system doesn't
mean that every operating system must provide similar services
to be an operating system.
I think the problem we're having here is that I'm trying to define
the minimal subset of functionality that makes an operating system.
You, on the other hand, are looking to real-world examples of things
that **may** be included in an operating system.
The Macintosh, as good as the MacOS is, isn't an example of a
minimial implementation of an operating system. And if the
direction of MacOS X is an indication, even some of the services
you are talking about (such as QuickDraw) will actually be
provided by other processes, rather than being in the MacOS
"kernel."
One way to implement the same sort of functionality you are
discussing, by the way, is use in X windows. While X is included
with most distributions of Linux, X is not part of the Linux
operating system: it's an optional add-on which gives you similar
graphical features enjoyed by the Macintosh. (I personally prefer
the MacOS implementation of a GUI over X, but I digress.)
X is implemented as a series of applications. When you start up
X, it actually starts two programs which provide the graphical
functionality: an "X server" package which provides the low
level drawing and text rendering routines, and a "window manager"
package which provides the "look and feel" of your environment.
If you know the X protocol, you can rewrite either of these
two programs--in fact, several people have rewritten the
"window manager" and Linux often ships with two or three of these
for the user to change their own desktop look and feel.
My point is that X is not part of the operating system. And
when you run X, you actually run two <<user>> level programs
(meaning they don't install themselves like system extensions
on MacOS, but run like two applications you double-clicked on).
> >As someone who has been around this business for a while, it
> >worries me that simple computer science concepts (such as
> >"what is an operating system") is being made fuzzy, more often
> >than not to satisfy the corporate needs of a company like
> >Microsoft.
>
> Strange--there's that Microsoft fixation again.
That's because in the DOJ v. Microsoft trial, Microsoft has been
trying very hard to use people's lack of knowledge as to what
defines an operating system to try to prove their inclusion of
an Internet Browser into the Windows 98 package makes IE part
of the Win98 operating system.
> What it's true to say is that the concept of what an operating system is
> supposed to do has broadened somewhat from its narrow meaning in the 60s
> and 70s. ...
You mean because Linux doesn't include QuickTime, Linux isn't an
operating system?
Sheesh. No, the definition didn't broaden out.
> ... In those days, the user (and the application) had to bow to the
> needs of the computer; the coming of the personal computer has turned that
> completely upside down. Now the computer (and the operating system) has to
> submit to the needs of the user and the application. That means that, as
> users' needs change, and applications change, the definition of a computer
> system has to change to keep up.
And if the user gets hungry, are you going to make a Peanut
Butter and Jelly sandwich despenser part of the computer
system?
For God's sake, you're not talking to some gearhead loving dolt
who believes the command line is the alpha and omega of the
computer experience. I suspect I've been writing software for
the Macintosh longer than most folks here, and strongly believe
in the "Macintosh Way" of doing things.
But it doesn't mean that I'm going to blur the line between what
makes an operating system by turning an exercise in resource
management into a huge electronic "swiss army knife".
Frankly there are better ways of servicing the user's needs
now that we have faster computers. When the original Macintosh
came out, it was a marvel of software engineering that they
could get so much functionality into such a small system.
But what was an engineering marvel 15 years ago has now become
a bit of a liability: by insisting that QuickDraw be part of
the operating system instead of factored out into a separate
(invisible, magical) process that provides graphical services
on the display, Apple made it difficult to provide a true
pre-emptive multithreaded and multitasking environment for
users of the iMac and more powerful Mac systems.
It's funny, too: by doing such a factoring, the QuickDraw
API wouldn't have to be altered. And the Mac look and feel
would remain the same. The only difference is that programs
would be more responsive and less prone to crashing.
I guess what I'm trying to say here is that just because we
are more sensitive to the needs of users than we were twenty
years ago doesn't mean we have to throw out the baby with
the bath water and start throwing everything, including a
penut butter and jelly sandwich, into the operating system.
(It's close to lunch here; hense, the reference to sandwiches)
> >An operating system, by the way, is a piece of low level code
> >which arbitrates the allocation of hardware resources across
> >multiple processes.
>
> That's the "kernel". Though as I pointed out above, the distinction
> between the kernel and the rest of the OS is not as clear as it might once
> have been.
*sigh*
The kernel is even smaller than this, by the way: the "kernel"
is only the part of the system that provides process scheduling,
thread scheduling (on OSes that provide threads), and interprocess
communications. In short, it's the smallest element of operating
system code which can execute at the processor's "priviledged"
state.
Thus, the MacOS 8.6 "nanokernel" is a proper kernel: it's a
small chunk of code which provides the aformentioned services
to other parts of the MacOS 8.6 system.
(What, you didn't know MacOS 8.6 had a "nanokernel"? You should
get out more often.)
> >And if that OS conforms to standards (such
> >as posix) or defines interchange standards (such as GIF89a)
> >or if the platform contains certain standard libraries (such
> >as the standard C library) to simplify a programmer's work,
> >it's a bonus, not a requirement.
>
> Once upon a time, you could have lived without such things. These days,
> nobody would consider an OS that lacked most of those features as a
> serious contender--it would be looked on as more of a "toy" OS.
But it would still be an operating system, wouldn't it?
Look, I'm not arguing that users would be happy without any of
the aformentioned services. The GIF89a graphics standard has
become rather essential nowadays with web surfing, for example.
And QuickTime is an essential part of the Macintosh experience.
But so long as people continue to try to "blur the lines" between
the operating system and the rest of the computer environment,
we'll wind up with people advocating swiss army solutions like
Copeland and Windows 2000.
What I am arguing is that while many of the things you listed
in a previous post are being shipped as part of packages labeled
"Macintosh OS 8.6" and "Microsoft Windows 98", they are not
required parts of an operating system.
And if developers would stop thinking that we have to include
an HTML browser as part of "modern operating systems", we'll
stop getting abominations like Windows 98's file/internet
browser.
And we'll stop disenfranchising the "rich" who can afford to
upgrade their computer hardware every 18 months because some
programmer decided that a PBJ dispenser is a required
peripheral for Windows 2002.
- Bill Woody
The PandaWave
------------------------------
From: Leonard Evens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Shutdown
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 12:52:39 -0500
Alex Lam wrote:
> Leonard Evens wrote:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > I use Redhat 6.0.
> > >
> > > If I reboot the machine with shutdown -r then, while rebooring it`s
> > > say`s ;
> > >
> > > / device is busy
> > >
> > > and it won`t umount /, leaving me with an uncleanly umount ed
> > > filesystem when I reboot.
> > > This doesn`t happen when I reboot with shutdown -h .
> > >
> > > Can anybody help me ?
> > >
> > > Thanks in Advance for the answer.
> > >
> > > Maurice Mahieu
> >
> > I'm not sure why you want to do shutdown -r since you can reboot simply
> > by using
> > Ctrl-Alt-Del (if you are running Linux on a PC). But I just checked
> > my lap top
> > which is running RH 6.0 and
> > shutdown -r now
> > seemed to work just fine.
> >
> > I don't know why there should be a difference between -r and -h, but
> > something
> > may be misconfigured. The easy answer is that the error message you
> > get is
> > correct and something is being done on the root file system which can't
> > be
> > interrupted. But I can't think of what that could be. Try it again
> > and check
> > the running processes.
> > -
> >
> Maybe the original posted didn't logout/shut down X properly before he
> tried to shut the whole system?
>
> Alex Lam.
>
> *Remove all the upper case Xs if reply by e mail.
> > Leonard Evens [EMAIL PROTECTED] 847-491-5537
> > Dept. of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ., Evanston, IL 60208
I did
shutdown -r now
by starting with the gdm welcoming screen---which uses X at run level 5---
using Ctral-Alt-F1 to get a dumb terminal login, logged in as root, and
ran the command. So X was in fact running, and it all worked fine.
I think shutdown should work whether X is running or not.
-
Leonard Evens [EMAIL PROTECTED] 847-491-5537
Dept. of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ., Evanston, IL 60208
------------------------------
From: "Jeremy C. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: pppd and stderr
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 12:26:15 -0700
How can I get pppd and chat to send the stderr messages to my SYSLOG?
I want my /var/log/messages to have my connect speed.
In my /etc/chatscripts/provider I have "REPORT CONNECT"
man chat says:
-r <report file>
Set the file for output of the report strings. If
you use the keyword REPORT, the resulting strings
are written to this file. If this option is not
used and you still use REPORT keywords, the stderr
file is used for the report strings.
Right now, I get my connection speed by:
connect "/usr/sbin/chat -v -r /etc/ppp/report -f /etc/chatscripts/provider"
(In my /etc/ppp/peers/provider file)
For example:
Opening "/etc/ppp/report"...
chat: Jun 19 12:25:07 CONNECT 28800/ARQ/V34/LAPM/V42BIS
Closing "/etc/ppp/report".
BY THE WAY: is this an accurate connect speed?
Thanks
Jeremy C. Reed
============================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim McCusker)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development
Subject: Re: editorial: Stupid Linux Tricks
Date: 19 Jun 1999 19:26:55 GMT
Mike Bartman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: If anyone knows of a good use/home for a full Atari-800 computer
: system in working order, with full docs (including an OS source
: listing! :^) and software, please let me know. I have no use for it,
: but I can't bear to toss it in the trash, so it continues to occupy
: space in my house that I could find other uses for...
If you want to bother to ship it to the Smithsonian, the American History
Museum has what is shaping up to be an excellent collection of first and
second generation personal computers. I'd send them a letter first, though.
They aven have an original wooden-box apple I...
Jim
--
Jim McCusker | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://cif.rochester.edu/~fprefect
Wax I in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster, and your odors
of father of elderberries! Go now far, or I taunt you second once, you them
English pig-dogs! --MP through the babelfish
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
