Linux-Misc Digest #386, Volume #24 Sat, 6 May 00 21:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Help with efax0.9, Sending FAXes using the Print Spooler (Rod Pike)
Re: rpm problems (Patrick O'Neil)
Like Defrag.exe in Win, but in Linux. (Federico Czerwinski)
Linux Login Logo (Federico Czerwinski)
Re: Why partition a Disk? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Distributed file system (Christopher Browne)
Re: Linux Login Logo ("David ..")
Re: Why partition a Disk? (Hal Burgiss)
Re: Why partition a Disk? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Why partition a Disk? (Rick Hoffman)
Re: what changed my /tmp's write permissions? (Hans Kinwel)
Re: Why partition a Disk? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Locating files ("mpierce")
List number of files in directory? (Ken Williams)
Re: Why partition a Disk? (Hal Burgiss)
Re: IRC help (Stewart Honsberger)
Re: Like Defrag.exe in Win, but in Linux. (Stewart Honsberger)
Re: Linux Login Logo (Stewart Honsberger)
Re: List number of files in directory? (Hal Burgiss)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rod Pike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Help with efax0.9, Sending FAXes using the Print Spooler
Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 01:10:49 +0200
Does anyone have this working? Could someone post an example of what
the client and server printcap looks like? I can send a fax by printing
locally using lpr on my server but I can't do it from a client across a
network connection. I am able to print on my inkjet connected to the
server from a client machine using lpr so I'm puzzled why it won't work
with efax.
Thanks in advance
Rod
------------------------------
From: Patrick O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: rpm problems
Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 17:38:02 -0600
YamYam wrote:
>
> Did u try to build rpm files with: cd <SRC_RPM_DIRECTORY> rpm -ivh <file.src.rpm> cd
>/usr/src/RPM/SPECS rpm -ba <file.spec> --clean It will show u all messages when it
>compiles, and when it succeeded it will put the rpm files
Thanks but I tried this and still get this instead of any binary rpm
after
a successful compile:
Executing(%install): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.3914 + umask 022 + cd
/usr/src/RPM/BUILD + cd Device3Dfx-2.3 + make RPM_INSTALL=1 install +
grep '^/lib/modules/' + /usr/share/spec-helper/spec-helper no
RPM_BUILD_ROOT variable; exiting. Bad exit status from
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.3914 (%install)
patrick
------------------------------
From: Federico Czerwinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Like Defrag.exe in Win, but in Linux.
Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 23:30:07 GMT
Hey!, this questoin is a short one, just this, Is there any program for
Linux that defrags the disk, just like Defrag.exe in windows? Where can i
get it?, Thanx!
Federico
--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/
------------------------------
From: Federico Czerwinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux Login Logo
Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 23:30:10 GMT
Hi there!, well, this one is short. I just wanna know where i can get more
"Linux_Logo", for the login, you know, that ASCII penguin. Or how can i
make them? can i put anything else in the login? Thanx!
Thanx a lot.
Federico
--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Why partition a Disk?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 23:32:11 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Rick Hoffman would say:
>> If everything's on one big partition, your options are limited and your
>> chances for disaster recovery are less.
>>
>> You separate /, /usr, /var, and /home for safety. If / gets corrupted, at
>> least you can still recover the data from /home. If some malicious user
>> or process fills up /var, / still has space. If /usr gets br0ken, you
>> have utilities available in / that can get the system up to a working
>> state. Personally, I dual-boot to SuSE and RedHat, and I share /home and
>> /usr/local between the two distros... that option wouldn't be available if
>> I'd just lumped everything on one partition!
>
>Ok, so many partitions allow the OS to be broken up into seperate pieces. Your
>mentioned a malicious user filling up space so I guess one advantage to
>partitioning the OS into smaller pieces is to better manage memory? So
>partitioning the OS into seperate pieces is basically for security?
It can _help_ from that perspective; the point is more to improve the
resiliancy of the system against problems that are not all related to
security.
#1. If you keep all of the "data" on some partitions devoted to that
purpose, then if the system, for _whatever_ reason gets broken,
you can reformat the "system" partitions without disturbing the
"data."
Persistent "data" tends to sit in one's home directory, so this
encourages having /home on its own partition.
#2. If you've got a set of files that get "touched" a lot, as tends
to be the case with log files, mail spool files, print spool files,
and such, it would be nice to have this "set" on its own partition.
Thus justifying /var being its own partition.
Contrast...
#3. There are files that get changed very seldom, such as system
utilities, and most application programs. These tend to sit in
/usr, which tends to stay pretty static.
That's the exact opposition situation to that of /var.
It is not uncommon for systems where they wish to keep things
_very_ robust to mount /usr read-only, so that once it has been
set up with appropriate program files and libraries, they only
ever can be read. It's tough for a "cracker" to break it if
the kernel isn't allowing write access. And if the partition
is prevented, at kernel level, from being written to, this makes
accidental corruption an unlikely event indeed.
Another merit of a "read-only partition" is that if you have a LAN of
machines, you can save disk space and management effort by mounting a
single directory structure, in read-only form, to a number of hosts.
#4. Traditionally, system administrators would have some minimal
set of utilities on /, so that if something went badly wrong
with the rest of the system, they could have a minimally
functional system just by booting with / mounted.
This is vastly less important on more modern computer systems
where it is easy to pop in a "rescue floppy," or, better still, a
"rescue CD."
I would _STRONGLY URGE_ keeping /home and anything of similar "desired
permanence" on separate partitions from the "system stuff." That
crucially allows you to reinstall Linux, whether because something broke
and you needed to, or because a new release came out and you just feel
like installing rather than doing package upgrades.
>You are just about on to what I am trying to do. Using a third HD to backup
>both my Windows HD and my Linux HD. When I backup Linux, the backup HD is hdb.
>Yes, that is precisely what I am trying to acheive. If lightening
>should strike
>and I somehow lose data on my primary Linux drive I want to be able to boot the
>backup and use it as my primary until I arrange another backup situation. Do
>you see what I am saying? Now my problem has been the inability to boot the
>backup with everything working. Its like I am trying to cloned the primary.
The approach I generally take is to backup a copy of /etc, as well as any
of the data partitions.
If disaster strikes, I don't want to care much about /usr, /var, and other
such 'system' friends.
My inclination would be to fix things up by reinstalling, perhaps moving
ahead to a newer distribution version, and recovering data from the backup
of /etc as needed.
You're not required to agree with that approach...
--
Rules of the Evil Overlord #61. "I will treat any beast which I control
through magic or technology with respect and kindness. Thus if the
control is ever broken, it will not immediately come after me for
revenge."
<http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: Distributed file system
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 23:38:58 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when jb would say:
>Random wrote:
>> What are the "stable" Distributed file system that can be use under
>> linux ?
>
>There's AFS but only the client part has been ported. It's much better
>than NFS in my opinion. There's also Arla which is a AFS 'clone' I
>believe. I don't have any experience with others.
There's Coda, which is still a mite experimental. And Samba, which
is probably not as usable as NFS...
--
"X is like pavement: once you figure out how to lay it on the ground
and paint yellow lines on it, there isn't much left to say about
it. The exciting new developments are happening in things that run ON
TOP of the pavement, like cars, bicycles, trucks, and motorcycles."
-- Eugene O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: "David .." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Login Logo
Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 18:49:46 -0500
Federico Czerwinski wrote:
>
> Hi there!, well, this one is short. I just wanna know where i can get more
> "Linux_Logo", for the login, you know, that ASCII penguin. Or how can i
> make them? can i put anything else in the login? Thanx!
> Thanx a lot.
>
> Federico
>
> --
> Posted via CNET Help.com
> http://www.help.com/
find file /etc/X11/xdm/Xsetup_0 you'll see in the last few lines xrsi
command put to the redhat-transparent.png file in the background. Change
this line or remove it completely. If changing .png files be sure to mv
the new file to the /usr/share/pixmaps/redhat directory so it will be
found.
--
Registered with the Linux Counter. http://counter.li.org
ID # 123538
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hal Burgiss)
Subject: Re: Why partition a Disk?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 23:52:10 GMT
On Sat, 06 May 2000 23:32:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>#2. If you've got a set of files that get "touched" a lot, as tends
> to be the case with log files, mail spool files, print spool files,
> and such, it would be nice to have this "set" on its own partition.
>
> Thus justifying /var being its own partition.
/tmp ?
> Contrast...
>
>#3. There are files that get changed very seldom, such as system
> utilities, and most application programs. These tend to sit in
> /usr, which tends to stay pretty static.
>
> That's the exact opposition situation to that of /var.
>
> It is not uncommon for systems where they wish to keep things
> _very_ robust to mount /usr read-only, so that once it has been
> set up with appropriate program files and libraries, they only
> ever can be read. It's tough for a "cracker" to break it if
> the kernel isn't allowing write access. And if the partition
> is prevented, at kernel level, from being written to, this makes
> accidental corruption an unlikely event indeed.
>
> Another merit of a "read-only partition" is that if you have a LAN of
> machines, you can save disk space and management effort by mounting a
> single directory structure, in read-only form, to a number of hosts.
Could this not apply to / as well? (Assuming /home, /var/ and /tmp are
out of the way.)
Timely discussion as I have been battling occasional corruption on a
relatively new drive, and was considering /usr as readonly and /. (New
drive is on the way).
Whoever (Peter?) suggested mirroring / onto another partition, is a
great idea. This is all the easier if /usr, and maybe /home, are already
out of the way since they tend to be space eaters. I have twice recently
had corrupted /lib and wound up with an unbootable system. I did have
all of / on another partition and it was very easy to get in with a
fully functional system and fix things. You just never know ...
--
Hal B
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why partition a Disk?
Date: 6 May 2000 23:52:27 GMT
Rick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>[ptb wrote]
:> ssh TARGETMACHINE "find /home -mount -type f -mtime -7 > FILELIST; \
:> tar culvTf FILELIST - | bzip2 -5" > BACKUP
:>
: Peter, while I got your attention. Is there any reason that a normal user have
:access to
: the /usr and /var and /etc ..., etc directories other than the users own /home
:directory?
Access? Read access, yes, they need that. The /usr partition should be mounted
read only, for example, to minimize access and safeguard against damage.
: If not how do you hide those directories from the normal user?
Change the file permissions. There are only a few files that they might not
be allowed to have access to (/etc/shadow, /etc/ppp/pap-secrets, etc.). Your
distro should have that kind of thing right by now.
: Also, I am trying to delete a normal user account using Linuxconf. I can't seem to
:get rid
: of the account. I cannot login with the account that I just tried to delete but it
:is still
: there in Linuxconf. It is just bothering me that in the user listing Linuxconf
:still shows
: that account.
Accounts should usually not be "vanished". They should just be disabled and the home
directory mothballed. In, particular, you want to keep a .forward file there
to deal with their old mail. You should not reasign the old uid to a new
user. The best way of enforcing that is by keeping the passwd entry around, but
disabled.
: One more question if I may, without getting into details which I understand might
:not allow
: you enough info to answer this but I have to login as root inorder to "turn on" my
:sound
man sudo.
: card. I've pointed an alias to a small script the runs several insmod commands to
:do it.
: When I log in as a normal user the alias runs the script because I inserted the
:alias into
: /.bashrc but the insmod commands won't run. Any suggestions? I guess ultimantly I
:want the
You can't suid scripts in linux (this is a FAQ).
You want to turn on your sound in the standard way, via conf.modules,
rc.modules, rc.local, or the sysvinit system.
Redhat-based systems do some nasty froobies with device perms on user login
at console.
Peter
------------------------------
From: Rick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why partition a Disk?
Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 19:57:04 -0400
> My inclination would be to fix things up by reinstalling, perhaps moving
> ahead to a newer distribution version, and recovering data from the backup
> of /etc as needed.
>
> You're not required to agree with that approach...
Well, you all are giving me a better feel for what multiple partitions provide. I
am also beginning to realize that backing up Linux doesn't necessarily require the
backup to be a full bootable system. Just the data that changes regularly and if
the partition strategy is done well then recovery will be just a matter of
reinstalling the "system friendly" partitions like you just mentioned which would
then be automatically integrated with the partitions/data that you backed up. Did I
say that right?
hoffy
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hans Kinwel)
Subject: Re: what changed my /tmp's write permissions?
Date: 7 May 2000 02:06:12 +0200
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Neil Zanella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>There must be a redhat script that somehow chmods the permissions of
>/tmp under certain (still unknown to me) circumstances. I am sure that
>some of you have had this happen to you as well. Can anyone explain this
>strange phenomenon? I suspect it has something to do with cron.
>
>Note: this happened to me already at least four times over a fairly long
> period of time. I never bothered to bring this up before since doing
> a manual chmod a+w /tmp as root is not a great deal of trouble but
> still.
Are you using dump/restore perchance? I do, and I usually restore files in /tmp.
When restore is done it asks "Do you want to set the owner/permission for . ? [y/n]".
I used to say yes, and thereby I set ownership and permission of . (which
was /tmp in my case) to . as was on the backup tape. My (windows)
users immediately called that they couldn't print anymore....after some
searching I found that /tmp had changed permissions. Strange..
After some weeks when I had to restore a file again and the same thing
happened all over again. Only then I realized.
--
| Hans Kinwel
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
| Hans Kinwel
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why partition a Disk?
Date: 7 May 2000 00:03:06 GMT
Hal Burgiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: On Sat, 06 May 2000 23:32:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: wrote:
:>
:>#2. If you've got a set of files that get "touched" a lot, as tends
:> to be the case with log files, mail spool files, print spool files,
:> and such, it would be nice to have this "set" on its own partition.
:>
:> Thus justifying /var being its own partition.
: /tmp ?
Usually a symlink to /var/tmp. Only awkward if you have to go in there
and muck around without /var mounted. But then you'd kow what you
were doing anyway. Nevertheless I sometimes do the following in rc.S
# PTB - make a link /tmp -> /var/tmp if possible.
if [ -d /var/tmp ]; then
/bin/chmod a+rwt /var/tmp
[ -d /tmp ] && /bin/rm -fr /tmp # wowser. Instant cleaning.
/bin/ln -sf /var/tmp /tmp
else
[ -L /tmp ] && /bin/rm -f /tmp && /bin/mkdir /tmp
/bin/chmod a+rwt /tmp
fi
and then undo it in rc.6 (i.e. shutdown)
# PTB - turn /tmp back into a directory. We'll do the reverse at bootup
if [ -L /tmp ]; then
rm /tmp && mkdir /tmp && chmod a+rwt /tmp
fi
of course a real crash leaves it as a link, so this does't "help" :-(.
But somehow it makes me feel better. At least / gets some exercise.
Peter
------------------------------
From: "mpierce" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Locating files
Date: 6 May 2000 19:33:11 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nguyen-Dai Quy
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> mpierce wrote:
>>
>> Is there a way to find out where a specific file is located in an
>> uninstall RPM package? I am looking for the file libGL.so.1
>
> $ rpm -ql toto.rpm | grep libGL
>
> HTH
Thanks for both replies - Ground Zero and Nguyen-Dai!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ken Williams)
Subject: List number of files in directory?
Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 00:40:24 GMT
How can I find out how many files are under a branch? like under DOS I could
type
cd \temp
dir /s
and end up showing my the number of files and the total size of them all.
Under Linux all I got it du for the total size. How about the number of files?
Why does ls suck so much? It should have a swich like -t for totals or
whatever.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hal Burgiss)
Subject: Re: Why partition a Disk?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 00:45:43 GMT
On 7 May 2000 00:03:06 GMT, Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hal Burgiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>: /tmp ?
>
>Usually a symlink to /var/tmp. Only awkward if you have to go in there
>and muck around without /var mounted. But then you'd kow what you were
>doing anyway. Nevertheless I sometimes do the following in rc.S
>
># PTB - make a link /tmp -> /var/tmp if possible.
>if [ -d /var/tmp ]; then
> /bin/chmod a+rwt /var/tmp
> [ -d /tmp ] && /bin/rm -fr /tmp # wowser. Instant cleaning.
> /bin/ln -sf /var/tmp /tmp
>else
> [ -L /tmp ] && /bin/rm -f /tmp && /bin/mkdir /tmp
> /bin/chmod a+rwt /tmp
>fi
>
>and then undo it in rc.6 (i.e. shutdown)
>
> # PTB - turn /tmp back into a directory. We'll do the reverse at bootup
> if [ -L /tmp ]; then
> rm /tmp && mkdir /tmp && chmod a+rwt /tmp
> fi
>
>of course a real crash leaves it as a link, so this does't "help" :-(.
>But somehow it makes me feel better. At least / gets some exercise.
Interesting, thanks. What's your opinion of readonly / ?
--
Hal B
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stewart Honsberger)
Subject: Re: IRC help
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 00:48:43 GMT
On Sat, 06 May 2000 00:30:03 GMT, James Hughes wrote:
>I am new to Linux, and am truly amazed by the power,But alot of my friends
>are still using Windows.Is there any common IRC client that may chat with
>someone using Windows?
IRC is a protocol that's existed long before Windy hit the market. :>
You can check http://www.linuxberg.com and poke around there. They've got
quite a few console as well as GUI IRC clients. My personnal favourites are;
Console; BitchX
GUI; X-Chat
--
Stewart Honsberger (AKA Blackdeath) @ http://sprk.com/blackdeath/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Remove 'thirteen' to reply privately)
Humming along under SuSE 6.4, Linux 2.2.14
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stewart Honsberger)
Subject: Re: Like Defrag.exe in Win, but in Linux.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 00:59:43 GMT
On Sat, 06 May 2000 23:30:07 GMT, Federico Czerwinski wrote:
>Hey!, this questoin is a short one, just this, Is there any program for
>Linux that defrags the disk, just like Defrag.exe in windows? Where can i
>get it?, Thanx!
This is a pretty FAQ, but nevertheless, any excuse to expound apon the
virtues of Linux. ;>
The ext2 filesystem isn't as prone to fragmentation as the FAT filesystem
is. (FAT32 included). I've had a Linux system running for almost a year,
and I think the / partition was about 2.9% "non-contiguous" when I
installed a new version of SuSE.
I'm sure there exists a defragmentation utility for Linux, but I highly
don't reccomend it. Besides that, it just isn't neccesary.
Linux takes care of itself. Let it. :>
--
Stewart Honsberger (AKA Blackdeath) @ http://sprk.com/blackdeath/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Remove 'thirteen' to reply privately)
Humming along under SuSE 6.4, Linux 2.2.14
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stewart Honsberger)
Subject: Re: Linux Login Logo
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 01:02:42 GMT
On Sat, 06 May 2000 23:30:10 GMT, Federico Czerwinski wrote:
>Hi there!, well, this one is short. I just wanna know where i can get more
>"Linux_Logo", for the login, you know, that ASCII penguin. Or how can i
>make them? can i put anything else in the login? Thanx!
>Thanx a lot.
The linux_logo program simply creates an ANSI (or ASCII, depending on the
command line option used), which is typically re-directed to your
/etc/issue (local logins) and/or /etc/issue.net (remote logins). I'm sure
you could use a standard ANSI editor to create an ANSI login message, or
just edit the issue* file(s) by hand to create a unique ASCII login message.
The issue files can come in handy for disclaimers and warnings about all the
nasty things you'll do to people if they break into your system. :>
--
Stewart Honsberger (AKA Blackdeath) @ http://sprk.com/blackdeath/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Remove 'thirteen' to reply privately)
Humming along under SuSE 6.4, Linux 2.2.14
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hal Burgiss)
Subject: Re: List number of files in directory?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 01:07:08 GMT
On Sun, 07 May 2000 00:40:24 GMT, Ken Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>How can I find out how many files are under a branch? like under DOS I could
>type
>
>cd \temp
>dir /s
>
>and end up showing my the number of files and the total size of them all.
>
>Under Linux all I got it du for the total size. How about the number of files?
> Why does ls suck so much?
ls does so much more than dir its ridiculous to even compare them.
>It should have a swich like -t for totals or whatever.
Then make your own. Many tools to do many things to suit one's wants.
alias lst="ls -la * ; echo -n Total Files: ; ls -la * | wc -l"
--
Hal B
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
