Linux-Misc Digest #923, Volume #24 Sun, 25 Jun 00 10:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Sun Sparc faster then intel pentium: is this true???? (Carl J. Boll)
Re: tool for joining various (text) files, editing and splitting them (Kai
=?iso-8859-1?q?Gro=DFjohann?=)
Re: CD burning software (besides cdrecord)! (Thomas Zajic)
Re: X server crashes with nvidia-driver (FROZEN_Steam)
Just a test, sorry ("Filp Anderson")
problem: scanning with sane ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
messages stopped (Ian Mortimer)
Re: Upgrade from Mandrake 7.0 (Air) to Mandrake 7.1 (Helium): Painless?
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Upgrade from Mandrake 7.0 (Air) to Mandrake 7.1 (Helium): Painless?
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Who is loading the system and why? (J Bland)
Re: NFS/StarOffice (J Bland)
Epson Stylus900 (Linux-Addict)
http://www.linux-journal.com/ stolen by domain pirates? (Arnt Karlsen)
formating a drive under linux :\ ("HellNo")
Re: Why can't I unmount....????? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: formating a drive under linux :\ (Martin Herrman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Carl J. Boll)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.sun.hardware,comp.sys.sun.misc
Subject: Re: Sun Sparc faster then intel pentium: is this true????
Date: 24 Jun 2000 23:46:36 -0500
>"Carl J. Boll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8j327t$1rn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On a foggy, gloomy day, Dave Schanen's fingers typed:
>> >
>> > > When it comes to pure processing speed the current winner in
>> > > this debate is Intel, no doubt about it.
>> > There is a doubt, or it wouldn't be debated at all. If all you define
speed
>> > as is clock frequency without regard for architecture, then intel
systems
>> > are faster, but it's obvious a sun will outperform an IA32 machine
clocked
>> > higher, even on the many overhyped benchmarks.
>>
>> The proof please? I've seen the benchmarks. In a processor
>> battle with >NO< other considerations the Intel processor >WILL<
>> win. If you had read my entire post before replying you would
>> understand that I am not pro-Intel nor am I pro-Sun. In a
>> small business Suns are just not affordable.
>Duh. I said that in my previous post. They're not soho machines, they're
>workstations. >IF< you read my previous post you would realize I think
>benchmarks are bogus. I'm curious what this 'processor battle' to which you
>refer is, and what 'pure processing speed' is? If you mean instructions per
>second, then an intel chip will get creamed since it isn't risc based and
>relies on things like mmx, superpipeling, etc. for performance. To say sun
>lost the spec int and fp tests is hardly fair either, since all thats listed
>was hardware that was outdated at the time with sun's low end compiler
>against intel's high end complier, on a chipset which was scarcely available
>for purchase when the benchmark came out. Given the lack of competitors to
>ibm and intel machines the contest looks quite rigged, especially since the
>fastest alpha on there is no where near what digital produced before compaq
>bought them out.
The term processor battle was previously used in this thread. I'm
curious, since you think benchmarks are bogus just how you would
like to rate performance then? If not with benchmarks, how? Even
Sun uses benchmarks in their brochures.
When I say that I've seen the benchmarks I'm talking about Sun's
own numbers. What is the point of them doing benchmarks if they
are bogus? Sun used many benchmarks in their sales pitch for
many years. It is only now, when they aren't as high up the ladder
as they used to be that they don't want to talk about benchmarks.
As to mmx, superpipelining, L1 caching, etc.; it just doesn't
matter if it gets the job done now does it? There is a lot more
to processing than merely instructions per second too. CPU speed
(Mhz) isn't neccessarily a factor of throughput either. The
Motorola 6809 is an example of this. While a 68B09 is running
at 2 Mhz it is faster than an 8088 at 5 Mhz in throughput. This
due to time slicing. The 8088 and the 6809 are similar chips in
age and both are 8 bit external, 16 bit internal chips.
As to the Alphas, I thought we were talking about Suns here, not
DECs. Still, since you brought it up, is this a conspiracy? Is
Compaq hand in glove with Intel? Do they not answer to their
stockholders? Wouldn't it make sense for them to produce the
fastest Alpha possible if it is cost effective?
>> > The machine I operate at a factory this summer runs it's program on
MS-DOS,
>> > we have to throw the main switch every time we set up for a new set of
parts
>> > for no particular reason...
>>
>> Sure there is a reason. The software is poorly designed or the
>> hardware is poorly designed. This isn't the fault of the OS.
>> MS-DOS provides plenty of hooks for monitoring IRQ's and there
>> is no reason you need to reset the power >IF< the software is
>> written properly. It's obvious that the software is either
>> unable to properly reset the hardware without a powerdown or
>> the hardware wasn't designed to change configurations without
>> a powerdown. One of three things is happening here, either the
>> hardware needs a powerdown, this being not computer related or
>> the interface doesn't provide a way to reset without the computer
>> being reset. The third thing it may be is that the program is
>> not written properly. It should be able to reset the computer
>> but that may have been overlooked. No matter what, it isn't
>> a problem with the processor or the OS. The same program ported
>> to Solaris on a Sun would have the same problems.
>Automatically it's the application programmers fault? DOS has no crash
>recovery, and basically sucks. Beyond that the crappy compaq hardware has
>worn out after 3 years use, which is the norm for most intel systems.
Oh come on now. This is just stupid. 3 years is the norm for Intel
systems? I have a Tandy 1000 that stills runs fine, a Tandy 2000
that runs just fine, several '386 systems that run fine, many '486
systems that run fine. All of these are over three years old. In
fact I've only had one Intel based system die on me and I have a
Sun 3/160 sitting in the garage that is dead. Given the age and
quantity of machines that I own I'd say that from personal experience
that Suns aren't as reliable as the Intel machines >BUT< I know that
this isn't true. If you look at my numbers though it would seem
that way.
No, DOS doesn't have crash recovery, neither does Solaris. If the
kernel crashes you are SOL. That is what we are talking about,
isn't it? Are you talking about recovery from a crashed program?
If so, that also depends. It depends on how the program has
crashed and if it has crashed the OS and if you have a program in
the background monitoring it.
As to poor programming. I've seen too much of it. Not just under
DOS either. You name the OS and there are examples of poor
programming. If you have to powerdown to change the configuration
there is something wrong with either the hardware or software.
Note that was the third thing that was on the list but it also the
most common.
>> As to the mri scanning, I have a friend who is in the field. Many
>> mri machines are Intel based running OS-9 (a real time OS by Microware).
>Being a University, the group I know they looked at several different
>solutions for their project, and sun had the cheapest one. There are many
>grades and types of mri scanners, I know the machine they use costs
>approximately 500,000 dollars US every time they use it, and the research is
>somehow related to the genetics of cancer, and my friend's biomolecular
>engineering degree, but since that's definitely not my area of expertise I
>don't have many specifics. The numbers speak for themselves though, sun
>systems are hugely popular with Universities.
Then that is what they needed. No problem.
>>
>> I am familiar with the RS6000 too as well as AIX. These machines are
>> overpriced and AIX is a pain in the butt, just like Solaris, just
>> non-UNIX-standard enough to make the learning curve high. As far as
>> the hardware goes though it is an excellent machine, just not very
>> cost effective when compared to a Sun.
>Unix systems have always had a high learning curve,but what exactly is
>UNIX-standard? They're both SVr4 and posix compliant, what more need there
>be?
Standard utilities and file management would be a start. This a
wish that will never come true and there is the same problem with
the different Linux "providers". Slackware's file management
(organization) is different from Red Hat's, etc.
>>
>> Now, how would you explain your Sunray theory? 6 machines on a server
>> as opposed to 12 Dells? If I only needed 6 machines why would I buy
>> 12 Dells? Seems like we are talking about apples and oranges here.
>A typo, what I meant to point out is that a workgroup with an enterprise
>server and a dozen or so sunrays is mucho cheaper than a dozen intel
>machines on desktops running offiice. At less than 400 bucks a pop for a
>sunray and at least 1500 for a desktop pc running office 2000 a sunray
>cluster is a considerably better deal in a workgroup. StarOffice is
>becoming more client/server in upcoming versions, but with X windows
>seperation of client and server sides of it's functionallity it's more than
>possible to run the processor intensive end of office applications on the
>server while someone uses it on the sunray end.
Um, let's see here, we are now talking about Dells on the desktop that
cost $1500? Why would I want those just to run Office 2000? Even if
we stay with Dell their low end desktop PC's (which can run Office 2000
quite well) cost less than $800.00 and their Servers run from $4000.00
to $10,000.00. I personally would opt for Book PC on the desktop with
a 400 Mhz Celeron CPU and a good 15" monitor. Fully configured with
OS, peripherals, etc. about $550.00. Take your choice of server. We
won't talk about application software prices.
Now tell me again, where is the savings? How much is the Enterprise
server going to cost? How is it going to compare in performance to
12 Computers running Office off of their own hard drives opposed to
the Sunrays? Just curious.
>> Finally, Solaris supports their legacy systems? Since when? I have a
>> 3/160 that is locked in at SunOS 4.1.1U, a 4/200 that is locked in at
>> SunOS 4.3 (I believe), an IPX, an IPC, a Sparc 1+ that are locked in at
>> Solaris 7 since Sun dropped support for these platforms in Solaris 8.
>> Get your facts straight.
>>
>> It makes no sense to support outdated platforms beyond a reasonable
>> period and Sun does that just as NT does. Each version of SunOS has
>> required more hard disk space and more memory and has run a little
>> slower. This is due to more processes, more features and probably
>> a little to poor programming. If you don't believe me just boot up
>> a Sparc 1+ with SunOS 2.4 and then boot the same machine with the
>> latest version of Solaris that supports it, Solaris 7. Try doing
>> something now. How about copying say 20 Megs from one drive to
>> another. Want to guess which version of the OS will do it faster?
>No corporation would support anything indefinately, but anything more than
>two years is more than considerably better than Microsoft's amazing ability
>to make powerful computers seem outdated with each service pack, and Intel
>is without a doubt a motivating factor for them to do this. Sun has
>promoted efforts to port Linux to the sparc platform, and maintain
>docs.sun.com with documentation on older suns even though they don't
>officially support them anymore.
>
And Microsoft has support for outdated OS's too. Big deal. You talked
about legacy support. I pointed out that Sun doesn't support their
platforms beyond a reasonable period either in new releases. As a
matter of fact, Microsoft has provided plenty of legacy support, to
a point of being ridiculous. DOS up to and including 6.22 supported
the 8088. Windows 95 supported the '386. It wasn't practical to
run it on a '386 but it was supported. Win 98 runs on a P-75. Again,
kind of useless. Much like running Solaris 7 on a Sun Sparc 1. It
will run but it is slow. Just too make sure, son of a gun! They
still have patches, etc. for MS-DOS 6.0 and Windows 3.0 there.
>Dave
Carl
--
Carl Boll: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kai =?iso-8859-1?q?Gro=DFjohann?=)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.unix.misc,comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.shell
Subject: Re: tool for joining various (text) files, editing and splitting them
Date: 25 Jun 2000 12:43:26 GMT
Uwe Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am looking for a simple tool to join various (text) files (which say
> have the same extension, but are located in various directories) to a
> single file, editing them and finally splitt them again.
What kinds of editing do you want to do?
And what do you mean by splitting? Do you want to split using some
criterion, or do you want to split into the same files you had
originally?
Using Emacs, it might be possible to write some Lisp which does this.
Hm. You'd have to assign a text property giving the name the file
came from, and then when saving the buffer, you'd have to go through
all the files and save each region. Hm. Yes, that could work.
kai
--
I like BOTH kinds of music.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Zajic)
Subject: Re: CD burning software (besides cdrecord)!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Zajic)
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 12:53:29 GMT
On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 14:10:47 +1000, Matthew Lee wrote:
> Try XCDroast attached.
[zlatko@sphere]:~$ echo "comp.os.linux.misc" | grep binaries
[zlatko@sphere]:~$
Does that ring a bell? Please stop spamming this group with binary
attachments. These .RPMs are available all over the net, just post
a URL next time.
Some people these days ...
Thoma
--
=-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
- Thomas "ZlatkO" Zajic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Linux-2.2.16/slrn-0.9.6.2+ -
- "It is not easy to cut through a human head with a hacksaw." (M. C.) -
=-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
------------------------------
From: FROZEN_Steam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.uu.comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.x,nl.comp.os.linux.overig,nl.comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: X server crashes with nvidia-driver
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 15:00:18 +0200
Didn't work, should it be in a special subsection?
PS. FROZEN_Steam and Floris Hammer are the same person, just sometimes
posting from windows, sometimes from linux...
herman dumont wrote:
>
> Floris Hammer wrote:
> >
> > I forgot to tell that if I run the 'install.sh' script from the src
> > directory of the kernel driver before starting x, everything works fine.
> >
> > I tried doing cat /proc/pci and found out that my soundcard and NVdriver
> > were on the same irq, so I removed my sound from the kernel, but that
> > didn't work...
> >
> > any other ideas?
> >
> > Conan wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > I've got the same problem with my geforce card. After many e-mails
> > > with [EMAIL PROTECTED], it turned out to be an IRQ conflict. With me
> > > - it was the HISAX driver who could not share IRQ. Do a "cat
> > > /proc/pci" and check out who shares resources.
> > >
> > > On Sat, 24 Jun 2000 14:05:19 +0200, "FROZEN_Steam"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >Hello,
> > > >
> > > >I've installed Nidia's driver for my tnt2 ultra card. When I attempt to
> > > >start X, the screen gets black and the system doesn't react to anything. The
> > > >only way to get out of this is by restarting with ctrl-alt-del...
> > > >
> > > >I've already put 'char-major-195 NVdriver' in /etc/conf.modules, but it
> > > >still doesn't work.
> > > >
> > > >Can anyone help?
> > > >
> > > >thanx,
> > > >Floris
> > > >
> > > >
> Hi,
>
> try this one:
> in XFConfig put in Section Screen:
> Option "NvAgp" "0"
>
> HTH
------------------------------
From: "Filp Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Just a test, sorry
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 13:07:20 GMT
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: problem: scanning with sane
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 12:59:32 GMT
Hi,
i've got a problem with scanning under linux mandrake 7.0.
When i try to scan with my Mikrotek Scanmaker 6X, connected with a
DawiControl SCSI2 card, via sane/scanimage, the scanner only makes a few
not-so-good-sounding noises, then scanimage locks and i have to kill it.
I've had the same error under SuSe 6.3.
Can anybody tell me if there's a solution for this problem?
Thanks
Johannes Bauer
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Ian Mortimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: messages stopped
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 14:11:22 +0000
Hi all,
bit of an odd problem - I am no longer getting any messages from
/var/log/messages.
I normally have xrootconsole running to watch the output but since I did
a reboot on the 23rd I am no longer getting any messages.
The last few lines are as follows (strange last line ?):
Jun 23 19:34:56 pent133 pppd[9337]: Terminating on signal 2.
Jun 23 19:34:56 pent133 pppd[9337]: sent [LCP TermReq id=0x2 "User
request"]
Jun 23 19:34:56 pent133 pppd[9337]: rcvd [LCP TermAck id=0x2]
Jun 23 19:34:56 pent133 pppd[9337]: Connection terminated.
Jun 23 19:34:57 pent133 pppd[9337]: Exit.
Jun 23 19:36:20 pent133 kernel: VM: killing process wmaker
Any ideas ?
Rgds.
Ian.
(2.2.14 on a SuSE 6.0 base)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Upgrade from Mandrake 7.0 (Air) to Mandrake 7.1 (Helium): Painless?
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 13:20:39 GMT
In article <8iqoo9$esg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"D. D. Brierton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've just ordered Linux Mandrake 7.1. I am currently running 7.0 and
> was planning to upgrade, rather than making a clean install. Can
> anyone tell me how painless I should expect this to be, or how "smart"
> the update installation is?
>
> These are some of the issues I am concerned about:
>
> 1. Since installing 7.0 I have upgraded various packages, notably I
> have upgraded to Helix GNOME 1.2, and subsequently 1.2.1. Will the
> upgrade installation of 7.1 only overwrite packages that have a
> lower release number? Might it break any of the software I have
> installed (I've pretty much stuck faithfully to installing RPMs,
> and I'm not talking about anything too esoteric here). If the
> version of Helix GNOME I'm currently running is *higher* than the
> one that comes with Mandrake 7.1 does that mean that (presuming the
> upgrade doesn't replace the existing newer version) I won't get any
> of the benefits of Mandrake's tweaks, such as automatic menu
> updating, and whatever else they've changed?
I can't address this directly, but during my install, I was not offered
any choices as to what I wanted to upgrade and what I did not. The
upgrade well and truly took 11 hours on my 300MHz system, and requires
user interaction to swap CDs.
> 2. I am interested in using XFree86 4.0.0 as I understand that it has
> much better support for my graphics chip (SiS 6326) then 3.3.6
> does. However, getting the card to work originally was not totally
> painless, and I had to manually tweak some of the settings in
> XF86Config. Will the installation of 4.0.0 be smart enough to
> check what is currently in XF86Config and try to retain some of
> those settings?
My understanding is that this feature is part of the expert install.
> 3. My sound chip (on-board CMI 8330) was an absolute bitch to get
> working and it took me a long time. Is there any danger that I'll
> have to do this all over again after the upgrade?
I don't know why, but *my* sound hardware no longer works, and I get
error messages to the effect that it's improperly configured.
> 4. In general, to what extent will the upgrade attempt to retain the
> system specific settings, like which modules are loaded, and
> postfix's settings, even if a newer version of some of these
> packages is installed?
Well, the KDE desktop got all rearranged, most of the apps I'd placed on
the bar are no longer there. I experience no joy opening a konsole. And
the worst part of it all is that postfix appears to have overwritten the
previous config, which I stupidly did not back up anywhere, leaving me
in the lurch.
> This is quite important as I really can't afford to have a broken
> system right now, although I can afford to spend a day or two
> upgrading and tidying up (I don't expect to have to do absolutely no
> work whatsoever on this upgrade!).
I expected about the same, but got way more than I bargained for. If I
had to do it all over again, I would not, at least not now.
Cheers...
--
Alex Lane * Webster, Texas, USA * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * www.galexi.com/alex/
DH/DSS PGP keyID: 0xD94803CD -*- RSA PGP keyID: 0xCABD6FF9
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Upgrade from Mandrake 7.0 (Air) to Mandrake 7.1 (Helium): Painless?
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 13:20:39 GMT
In article <8iqoo9$esg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"D. D. Brierton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've just ordered Linux Mandrake 7.1. I am currently running 7.0 and
> was planning to upgrade, rather than making a clean install. Can
> anyone tell me how painless I should expect this to be, or how "smart"
> the update installation is?
>
> These are some of the issues I am concerned about:
>
> 1. Since installing 7.0 I have upgraded various packages, notably I
> have upgraded to Helix GNOME 1.2, and subsequently 1.2.1. Will the
> upgrade installation of 7.1 only overwrite packages that have a
> lower release number? Might it break any of the software I have
> installed (I've pretty much stuck faithfully to installing RPMs,
> and I'm not talking about anything too esoteric here). If the
> version of Helix GNOME I'm currently running is *higher* than the
> one that comes with Mandrake 7.1 does that mean that (presuming the
> upgrade doesn't replace the existing newer version) I won't get any
> of the benefits of Mandrake's tweaks, such as automatic menu
> updating, and whatever else they've changed?
I can't address this directly, but during my install, I was not offered
any choices as to what I wanted to upgrade and what I did not. The
upgrade well and truly took 11 hours on my 300MHz system, and requires
user interaction to swap CDs.
> 2. I am interested in using XFree86 4.0.0 as I understand that it has
> much better support for my graphics chip (SiS 6326) then 3.3.6
> does. However, getting the card to work originally was not totally
> painless, and I had to manually tweak some of the settings in
> XF86Config. Will the installation of 4.0.0 be smart enough to
> check what is currently in XF86Config and try to retain some of
> those settings?
My understanding is that this feature is part of the expert install.
> 3. My sound chip (on-board CMI 8330) was an absolute bitch to get
> working and it took me a long time. Is there any danger that I'll
> have to do this all over again after the upgrade?
I don't know why, but *my* sound hardware no longer works, and I get
error messages to the effect that it's improperly configured.
> 4. In general, to what extent will the upgrade attempt to retain the
> system specific settings, like which modules are loaded, and
> postfix's settings, even if a newer version of some of these
> packages is installed?
Well, the KDE desktop got all rearranged, most of the apps I'd placed on
the bar are no longer there. I experience no joy opening a konsole. And
the worst part of it all is that postfix appears to have overwritten the
previous config, which I stupidly did not back up anywhere, leaving me
in the lurch.
> This is quite important as I really can't afford to have a broken
> system right now, although I can afford to spend a day or two
> upgrading and tidying up (I don't expect to have to do absolutely no
> work whatsoever on this upgrade!).
I expected about the same, but got way more than I bargained for. If I
had to do it all over again, I would not, at least not now.
Cheers...
--
Alex Lane * Webster, Texas, USA * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * www.galexi.com/alex/
DH/DSS PGP keyID: 0xD94803CD -*- RSA PGP keyID: 0xCABD6FF9
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (J Bland)
Subject: Re: Who is loading the system and why?
Date: 25 Jun 2000 13:32:36 GMT
On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 01:42:13 -0500, David .. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>David Steuber wrote:
>>
>> My load average is higher than it should be, and I don't know why.
>> Can someone give me a clue from this snapshot of top?
>>
>> 1:08am up 1:40, 3 users, load average: 1.07, 1.03, 1.01
>> 49 processes: 48 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
>> CPU states: 2.7% user, 1.3% system, 0.0% nice, 96.2% idle
>> Mem: 127932K av, 123704K used, 4228K free, 47972K shrd, 55456K buff
>> Swap: 136072K av, 640K used, 135432K free 21616K cached
>
>Why do you think it is being loaded?
Because there is roughly an average of 1 process waiting in the queue, but
the cpu is practically idle. This can be confusing if you consider LA to be
cpu-based only.
What is most probably causing it is an IO process of some sort; a big ftp
job, copying lots of files, that sort of thing, which doesn't use much cpu
but hammers the various IO devices.
Do a ps aux, and see if there's anything obviously working away that shifts
data.
Frinky
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (J Bland)
Subject: Re: NFS/StarOffice
Date: 25 Jun 2000 13:29:08 GMT
>StarOffice 5.1 does NOT work when home directories are NFS mounted. I
>think, it's a locking problem on the NFS side....hope that StarOffice
>5.2 addresses that issue.
>
>By the way, you have the same issue also on Solaris...funny when you
>think of that SUN 'owns' and promotes StarOffice :)
Thanks a lot, this is has been really twisting my melon. Now I know it isn't
me I can get on with something more useful.
Frinky
------------------------------
From: Linux-Addict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Epson Stylus900
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 13:31:38 GMT
Trying to install a Epson Stylus900 on rh6.2 . have it printing using
the Stylus800 driver, but only in B/W.
Have gone to the www.picante.com/~gtaylor/pht for a driver and he has
one, "stp" but he shows you a text script of the driver, but I be damn
if I can understand how to download the driver. I did download the PDQ
frontend program and did a install and make on it but it doesn't run.
Anybody have any exprience in this area.
I would greatly appreicate any and all help.
Thanks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Arnt Karlsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: no.it.os.unix.linux.diverse
Subject: http://www.linux-journal.com/ stolen by domain pirates?
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 14:04:58 GMT
..try "logging in"...
--
..mvh/wKRf Arnt... despoof: remove ".no", or _bounce_... ;-)
"Irrationality is the square root of all evil"
-- Douglas Hofstadter
------------------------------
From: "HellNo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: formating a drive under linux :\
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 16:02:00 -0700
Hi all,
A simple question really. I added a couple of 1GB SCSI disks to my i586. I
ran an fdisk on both drives and added them to the /etc/fstab but I think I
should format them at one time or the other... the ting is, what the hell is
the command I should use t format an ext2 partition?
Any help would be greatly apreciated :)
thx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,nf.comp.linux
Subject: Re: Why can't I unmount....?????
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 14:06:46 GMT
If that filesystem is being accessed, it won't unmount.
On Sat, 24 Jun 2000 03:30:27 -0230, Hendrix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi guys,
>
>Why is it that unmounting doesn't always work...??? Sometimes I try to
>unmount a specific filesystem and the system will return a message
>saying that the device is busy, and cannot be unmounted... This message
>is persistant even after I use the 'sync' command... The filesystem
>doesn't seem to be busy... Sometimes the specifed mount is completely
>empty with no files on the filesystem at all...But yet, the busy message
>is still sent to the screen...
>
>Anyone...???
>
>Thanks,
>--
>Trevor Penney,
>A+, Network+ Certified
>----------------------
>That's alright, I still got my guitar...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Herrman)
Subject: Re: formating a drive under linux :\
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 25 Jun 2000 14:08:22 GMT
On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 16:02:00 -0700, HellNo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> A simple question really. I added a couple of 1GB SCSI disks to my i586. I
> ran an fdisk on both drives and added them to the /etc/fstab but I think I
> should format them at one time or the other... the ting is, what the hell is
> the command I should use t format an ext2 partition?
>
> Any help would be greatly apreciated :)
> thx
'man mke2fs'
HTH ;-)
Martin
>
>
--
Linux Gebruikers Handleiding v1.2 : http://2mypage.cjb.net
Linux RedHat 6.1 Kernel 2.2.14 Toshiba P233 MHz, 32 Mb RAM
4:00pm up 13 days, 6:59, 3 users, load average: 0.04, 0.05, 0.00
Western Civilization, that would be a good idea!
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
