Linux-Misc Digest #424, Volume #27 Thu, 22 Mar 01 20:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Error Uncompressing Large Files... ("Chris Coyle")
Re: Error Uncompressing Large Files... (Michael Heiming)
Re: Weird(?) magic word for sh to invoke perl under Linux (Abigail)
Re: Best E-mail Client? (John Beardmore)
Re: tcpdump capturing faulty??? (Dean Thompson)
Re: Linux (Alex Fitterling)
Re: Linux for a 486? ("green")
Re: Linux (Alex Fitterling)
Re: goctave - help building it ("G Pollack")
Announce: Tk based alarm clock (* Tong *)
Re: how to install the glibc in /lib ? (Juergen Heinzl)
How to tolerate improper shut downs ? (Arctic Storm)
Re: how to install the glibc in /lib ? (Bart Friederichs)
Re: How to tolerate improper shut downs ? (Bob Tennent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Chris Coyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Error Uncompressing Large Files...
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 17:15:43 -0500
"Fred Pishotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:99dqns$6no$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Under RH Linux 7.0, both "uncompress filex.Z" and "gunzip filex.Z" are
> failing when the output file ("filex") exceeds (exactly) 2147483647 bytes.
Is that the rollover value for a signed 32-bit int?
> The error messages vary a bit between the two programs, the former
> complaining "write error onfilex: No such file or directory", the latter
> saying "gunzip: filex: File too large".
>
> I've tried various things with input/output redirection, and the
> error messages vary a bit, but the problem remains. Anybody know where
> the limitation may be? These are some large GeneBank files from the NIH
> I need to uncompress locally.
>
> Since both gunzip and uncompress (different programs) are failing, I
> think it must be something else. Some kernel parameter maybe?
>
> Thanks,
>
> -- Fred P.
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 23:17:40 +0100
From: Michael Heiming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Error Uncompressing Large Files...
Fred Pishotta wrote:
>
> Under RH Linux 7.0, both "uncompress filex.Z" and "gunzip filex.Z" are
> failing when the output file ("filex") exceeds (exactly) 2147483647 bytes.
> The error messages vary a bit between the two programs, the former
> complaining "write error onfilex: No such file or directory", the latter
> saying "gunzip: filex: File too large".
>
> I've tried various things with input/output redirection, and the
> error messages vary a bit, but the problem remains. Anybody know where
> the limitation may be? These are some large GeneBank files from the NIH
> I need to uncompress locally.
>
> Since both gunzip and uncompress (different programs) are failing, I
> think it must be something else. Some kernel parameter maybe?
Looks like you have hit exactly the 2 GB limit the 2.2.x kernel have, updating
to 2.4.x should help or use a 64 bit CPU, or at least apply an LFS patch to 2.2.x.
Good luck
Michael Heiming
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Abigail)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.shell,comp.lang.perl.misc
Subject: Re: Weird(?) magic word for sh to invoke perl under Linux
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 22:19:03 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Tong * ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on MMDCCLX September MCMXCIII in
<URL:news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
%% [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Abigail) writes:
%%
%% > Paul Hughett ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on MMDCCLX September
%% > MCMXCIII in <URL:news:99d2js$ead$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
%% > ## In comp.os.linux.misc * Tong * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
%% > ##
%% > ## : Under Solaris, I always use the following lines in my perl code to
%% > ## : invoke it:
%% > ##
%% > ## : #!/bin/sh -- # -*- perl -*- -w
%% > ## : eval 'exec perl $0 ${1+"$@"}'
%% > ## : if 0;
%% > ##
%% > ##
%% > ## If you use
%% > ##
%% > ## #! /usr/bin/env perl
%% > ##
%% > ## as the first line of your script, then it will be run using whatever
%% > ## copy of perl is found first on your path. I know this trick works
%% > ## on both RH Linux and Solaris, and believe that it will work on most
%% > ## Unix systems.
%% > ##
%% > ##
%% > ## The problem with using
%% > ##
%% > ## #! /usr/bin/perl
%% > ##
%% > ## for the first line, as suggested by some others, is that perl is often
%% > ## installed in /usr/local/bin/perl instead. (if it doesn't come with the
%% > ## system and is installed later by the sys admin).
%%
%% YES! Paul, right on! I've been in so many systems that the Perl has
%% been installed in so many different places... This is exactly what
%% I'm looking for!
%%
%% > OTOH, the system might come with /usr/bin/perl, but the admin installed
%% > another perl anyway, because either he doesn't have the same compiler,
%% > wants or needs difference configuration options, or wants or needs
%% > a different (newer?) version of perl, while (s)he cannot remove or
%% > symlink /usr/bin/perl because utilities coming with the OS depend on
%% > the particular version.
%% >
%% > Then /usr/bin/env only works for those who have the correct path.
%%
%% yes, Abigail, but the normal situation is that the sys admin won't
%% change anything for any personal requests. Setting my path correctly
%% is far more easier than making them believe /usr/bin/perl is the
%% right place for perl...
Hmmm. So, setting the path correctly on all systems for all users under
all circumstances (cron! -T!) is *easier* than setting #! once for each
program on each system? Which you could do from 'make install' anyway?
Mind boggling.
As for that sysadmin, I am such a sysadmin. I do believe that
/usr/bin/perl is the right place - for the perl that comes with the
OS. The perl that's current, compiled with the available compiler and
compiled with the options desired does live elsewhere. /opt/perl for
instance. And guess what, that isn't in someones default $PATH.
Which would mean /usr/bin/env perl finds the perl in /usr/bin/perl.
That's the perl that doesn't have the additional modules installed.
Ooops.
Abigail
------------------------------
From: John Beardmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Best E-mail Client?
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 22:48:17 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, M. Buchenrieder
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>[Please note FollowUp-To: header]
>John Beardmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>I generally know what kit my clients have installed, and they generally
>>know what I have.
>
>Yeah, that's the one and only exemption. But think about it:
>Can you _really_ always be sure where your clients will be
>reading their mail at any given time?
98% of the time. But if there's any doubt I don't send them enormous
mails.
> You're sure that they
>don't use (or have to use) some sort of mail forwarding
>service, while being abroad etc.?
Well, I might send them huge objects even abroad, but only because they
can't work without them !
> *I* do that, and I have then to
>download mail via some 9600 kBit/s mobile phone data link.
>At est. USD 2.50 per minute. Urgh.
Yes. When they are abroad they are usually in an office with a thick
pipe !
Cheers, J/.
--
John Beardmore
------------------------------
From: Dean Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.programmer,comp.os.linux.networking,alt.os.linux,comp.dcom.net-management,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: tcpdump capturing faulty???
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 10:00:38 +1100
Hi Rick,
> I am testing traffic control on linux. I used Tele-traffic tapper
> (http://www.csl.sony.co.jp/person/kjc/programs.html) to see real-time
> throughput of my client and it shows that traffic control of different type
> of traffic flow works! However when i used tcpdump, it shows that priority
> doesn't work, meaning all flows have the same bandwidth => tc doesn't work.
You are aware that IPv4 as it stands, provides no real support for priority
traffic or QoS requirements (hence your little hiccup is really part of the
IPv4 architecture). You can use tools like CJB or ShapeShifter but these
still work ontop of IPv4 packets. On the other-hand IPv6 does provide the
functionality required to provide such QoS support. Additionally, have you
compiled your Linux kernel with QoS support enabled ?
See ya
Dean Thompson
--
+____________________________+____________________________________________+
| Dean Thompson | E-mail - [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| Bach. Computing (Hons) | ICQ - 45191180 |
| PhD Student | Office - <Off-Campus> |
| School Comp.Sci & Soft.Eng | Phone - +61 3 9903 2787 (Gen. Office) |
| MONASH (Caulfield Campus) | Fax - +61 3 9903 1077 |
| Melbourne, Australia | |
+----------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
From: Alex Fitterling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 00:11:31 +0100
Hi.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What is the advantage of Linux. I have windows 98 and i am looking for a
> new program to run on( i think its called database). i heard Linux is
> very good for Internet and that is what i primarily use my computer for.
> Windows 98 seem to be more for games then it is for the Internet. Do you
> believe windows 2000 or Linux would be better for me to run. Which Linux
> specifically do u think i should use. THank you for your time
> --
> Posted via CNET Help.com
> http://www.help.com/
Linux has 'in my view' many advantages if you compare it to MS Windows
or other MS products. I never worked anymore with windows since 1-1/2
years - since I swapped over to the linux-community... I did this,
first because of interest, but I always was used to program and
develop... where I found in Linux the right world for,
quickly... also my friends from Informatica, think similar... no one
of them miss windows either! :)
In Linux since I run VMWARE and WINE I don't have any compatibility
problems, which always is expected. It's a common answer if someone
actually asks to show the differences between the two systems... in
meanwhile, since many product companies set on Linux, I think,
compatibility is not any more listed in the first place of
disadvantages... (Under VMWARE you can even get win2000 and any
product you want to run, easily... )
But really, the effort of, to get these features to work, is more than
you would expect, if you're only used to work with windows...
In Linux there're great rules which give clear structure to the
system, whereas such main and essential feature I ever missed in
Windows... [grmbxfl].. At any MS product I was missing the
concept... whereas in Linux the concept and rules are great working,
-you can nearly configure everything... But handling these rules can
get hard - hard enough to force much time from you to spent on your
machine to get these tasks work right....
--
Of course, and in perspective of one MS user there are disadvantages,
but which in my view never really become essential if one is used to
work in Linux... You should try it and you can get a taste of...
Anyhow, The best way to handle Linux (for beginners) is to have both
systems on your hard disk, so you can easily change, and therefor,
there is no difference in controlling your computer. :)
I still prefer Red Hat distribution.... It's especially for beginners
easy to install... but there're in meanwhile so many different
ones... Debian, I know is best... but it's really hard core
stuff.... It's up to you what you want... Some of the nowadays
distributions come like one windows clone, telling you everything's
preinstalled.... such systems I think isn't just real Linux, of course
it is! - but... to get a understandable mind about their installed
script system is as hard as you could easily get a glue of a standard
Linux system... so if you mind, I tell you stand away from these...
If I remember right about your inquiry, you asked about advantages in
Internet... I am connected via 100MB connection to Internet, running
my own News server, do a lot of other interesting things... can't
really remember to had have such comfort and luxury in windows :)
(... and actually, don't believe to get some if I settle back.)
..definitely, you should try...
(everybody should forgive me about my English, further flames, and
other idioms or any content convicted supposed ironical meaning...) :)
theWindowsKiller
------------------------------
From: "green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux for a 486?
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 09:26:43 +1000
because it's fun to set the bloody thing up and say "wasn't that a pain
thank god it works now"
and walk away with a knowledge of X that you will forget.
but a pleasant thought that you shouldn't have to do that again for a while
"Bart Friederichs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Mike Flournoy wrote:
> >
> > I am ignorant to Linux but have a old 486 I wanted to use to learn on.
It
> > appears most newer versions are aimed at Pentiums. Is it possible to run
> > linux with a GUI on a 486 or is that just too slow?
> Why use a GUI in learning Linux? A lot of things are done from the
> commandline and you'll be learning more than when using KAdmin or Gnome
> or whatever tool you want. I installed a linux router not long ago on a
> 486/DX2/50 w/ 32M RAM and a 200M hd. The install is just 40M and still
> there is a lot unused stuff on it. When you want to _learn_ linux
> instead of _use_ it, you don't need a GUI, just a good texteditor and
> some brains :^).
>
> Grzz
> Bart
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> The internet is a too slow way of doing things you'd never do without
> it.
> Bart Friederichs, 1998
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: Alex Fitterling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 00:31:22 +0100
...and I also further think, Linux and e.g. W98 so far have still
nothing in common... or I should say and there's no competition in
such case...
They can't compete vs each others, because there's no essense and no
need... Linux real competition is mainly performed at places where at
commercial unix systems are to expensive to effort, in these places
linux draws in... and also, at these places there has never been lost
a word about windows...
Anyway, as MS holds its place as world leader in manufacturing less
quality mass system software, linux won't beat, and shouldn't....
...the best things' always been rare...
:)
fIt
------------------------------
From: "G Pollack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: goctave - help building it
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 23:48:27 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "D. Stimits"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> G Pollack wrote:
>>
>> I'm attempting to build goctave on my Mandrake 7.2 system. On the first
>> try, I learned that I needed an include file, gtksheet.h. This is in
>> the package libgtk+extra0-devel-0.99.14-1mdk.i586.rpm, which I
>> installed. The next attempt got through the compile stage okay, but
>> upon linking a series of "undefined reference" errors appeared, all of
>> which referred to function declarations appearing in gtksheet.h. I've
>> copied the call to gcc that does the linking, as well as the first few
>> error messages, below. All of the *.o files and libraries that appear
>> in the call exist.
>>
>> Can someone tell me what I'm missing?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jerry Pollack
>>
>> gcc -g -O2 -Wall -Wunused -L/usr/lib -lgtk -lgdk -lgtkextra -lglib
>> -lm -o goct ave about.o goctave.o help_call.o macro_bar.o
>> preferences.o wb.o clipboard.o -r dynamic -L/usr/lib -L/usr/X11R6/lib
>> -rdynamic -lgnomeui -lart_lgpl -lgdk_imlib - lSM -lICE -lgtk -lgdk
>> -lgmodule -lXi -lXext -lX11 -lgnome -lgnomesupport -lesd - laudiofile
>> -lm -ldb1 -lglib -ldl -rdynamic -lzvt -lutil -lSM -lICE -lgtk -lgdk -
>> lgmodule -lglib -ldl -lXi -lXext -lX11 -lm -lncurses wb.o: In function
>> `wb':
>> /toinstall/goctave/src/wb.c:147: undefined reference to `gtk_sheet_new'
>> /toinstall/goctave/src/wb.c:149: undefined reference to
>> `gtk_sheet_get_type'
>
> Somewhere is a library file that contains the actual implementation of
> gtk_sheet_new and gtk_sheet_get_type. This needs to be linked against.
> If you look at all those lines above such as "-lm", these are
> abbreviations for those libs. "-lm" is short for "libm", "-ldl" is short
> for "libdl", "-lgtk" is short for "libgtk". Somewhere is a lib, e.g.,
> libsomething.so, you would add "-lsomething" to the list for it. You can
> view the symbols of most libs via nm, e.g., to see what is in some lib,
> cd to its directory, and use: "nm libwhatever.so"; pipe it to grep if
> you want to search for gtk_sheet, e.g.: "nm libwhatever.so | grep
> gtk_sheet". What would make it easy is if someone knows what lib the
> gtk_sheet_new and gtk_sheet_get_type are from.
>
> D. Stimits, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks. I would have guessed that these routines should be in
libgtkextra, but the version I have (from an rpm) doesn't have symbols,
so nm doesn't work. I'm building this library from source now - perhaps
that will help.
------------------------------
From: * Tong * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.tcl,comp.lang.perl.misc
Subject: Announce: Tk based alarm clock
Date: 22 Mar 2001 20:08:08 -0400
* Tong * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm planing to write a Tk based alarm clock, and make it open source
> tool for the public.
Thanks everyone who helped me recently. Now is my pay back time. The
first release of my alarm clock is ready. Please give it a try and
give me some advice.
I've put it in my xpt project web:
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/crossplatform/
Thanks
--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
*niX Power Tools Project: http://xpt.sourceforge.net/
http://members.xoom.com/suntong001/
- All free contribution & collection
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Juergen Heinzl)
Subject: Re: how to install the glibc in /lib ?
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 00:12:52 GMT
In article <99c4ep$cpm$03$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thomas Weidner wrote:
>
>"Juergen Heinzl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <99aca8$ks8$04$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thomas Weidner wrote:
>> >Hi NG,
>> >
>> >i've downloaded the glibc2.2.2 and want to upgrade my glibc2.1.3. I've
>done
>> >the following:
>> >./configure --prefix=/usr --enable-add-ons
>> >make
>> >make install
>> >
>> >and "make install" exits with the error "ln: no such file or
>dictonary"(or
>> >something like that). AFAIK "make install" deletes /lib/libc.so.6 and
>then
>> >wants to copy the new to this position,but after deleting /libc/libc.so.6
>> >all shared linked programm,include the shell, won't work anymore.
>> [-]
>> Jesus no, it does *not* delete athem and it's up to you to remove,
>> very carefully, any old libraries once you're sure all's working.
>>
>> >What have i done wrong ? and how can i do it better ?
>> [-]
>> You did not remove any files in /lib or /usr/lib ?
>no
[-]
Okay, got that wrong then.
>> You could run make check after the compilation ?
>Yes,with no errors
[-]
Okay.
>> ln: no such file or directory is almost
>> impossible IMHO as it even an empty argument, ln "", results in a slightly
>> different message.
>but this was the error i received.
ln ""
ln: : No such file or directory
It's what I meant compared to "ln: no such file or directory". It could
be because the dynamic loader could not be found or run, but okay, I'm not
going to try that by deleting mine 8-)
>But when i now try to boot linux,i get this message:"kernel panic:no init
>found"(or something like that). I've really done only make install,not more.
[-]
Yes, init might not be statically linked, it's not here either, and if
there're library / dynamic loader problems you'll get this message because
it, init, cannot be started.
If you've neither a spare root partition nor a statically linked rescue
shell you're toast I'm afraid. At best you can use some installation
floppy or CD and re-create the most important links to get a bootable
system back (you may rm /etc/ld.so.cache too) ..
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 -> /lib/ld-2.1.3.so
/lib/libdl.so.2 -> /lib/libdl-2.1.3.so
/lib/libc.so -> /lib/libc-2.1.3.so
/lib/libm.so -> /lib/libm-2.1.3.so
.. should give you a minimal system back.
If you've a statically linked rescue shell, then you can skip init
at the lilo prompt ...
boot: /boot/vmunix init=/sbin/mystaticshell
... for instance where vmunix is your kernel, but this is a bit
hairy if you're not sure what you're doing.
Some things you may make sure before doing a make install again:
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 must be a symbolic, not a hard link to ld-x.y.z.
lsattr /lib /usr/lib to see whether the immutable flag is set on
any of the files or links and if so, then clear them via chattr.
If make install does not print a message along the line "your
installation went fine", then neither reboot nor log out but
use /sbin/sln to restore any old links.
Sorry for the trouble,
Juergen
--
\ Real name : Juergen Heinzl \ no flames /
\ EMail Private : [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ send money instead /
------------------------------
From: Arctic Storm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: How to tolerate improper shut downs ?
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 00:13:40 GMT
How to tolerate improper shut downs ?
At work, there's a RedHat 7 on a Pentium. Frequently, my co-workers
abruptly turn off the computer by pressing the power button; they never
choose the "halt" option. For them, it's easier to push the power button
on the computer than to use the mouse to click on the GNOME foot print,
choose Log out, and then click on "halt". They're not ignorant; they're
just l-a-z-y . And they find the need to turn the computer off once in a
while, which drives me nuts! When I power up again, I get an error that
the computer was improperly shut down, and the drives were imporperly
unmounted, etc. The system undergoes diagnostics and checks, which takes
*time*; TIME is precious to me, and I can't afford to waste any.
Forturnately, only I have the root password, and everyone else uses a
common public account.
Question (1) Is there a way to have the system set, so that it will
tolerate abrupt power downs?
Question (2) Can/will these abrupt power downs damage the system? Not the
hardware, but the software; specifically, the root account or the operating
system itself,...
p.s.
Please don't ask me to tell my co-workers not to turn off the computer.
You must assume that this is beyond my control.
------------------------------
From: Bart Friederichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: how to install the glibc in /lib ?
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 16:37:26 GMT
> AFAIK "make install" deletes /lib/libc.so.6 and then
> wants to copy the new to this position,but after deleting /libc/libc.so.6
> all shared linked programm,include the shell, won't work anymore.
I had that too. Boot your system with a floppy and re-link libc-2.2.2 or
libc-2.1.3 to libc.so.6, then everything should work.
Running 'ldconfig' does a lot of good too.
Bart
=======================================================================
The internet is a too slow way of doing things you'd never do without
it.
Bart Friederichs, 1998
=========================================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Tennent)
Subject: Re: How to tolerate improper shut downs ?
Date: 23 Mar 2001 00:27:28 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001 00:13:40 GMT, Arctic Storm wrote:
>Question (1) Is there a way to have the system set, so that it will
>tolerate abrupt power downs?
Things you can do:
Set your file systems to use synchronous mode (much slower).
Use a journalling file system such as Reiser.
Get a UPS.
Disable the power switch.
Eliminate your co-workers.
>Question (2) Can/will these abrupt power downs damage the system? Not the
>hardware, but the software; specifically, the root account or the operating
>system itself,...
Not usually, but eventually, yes. Your file system will fail to recover
properly and you'll lose everything on that partition. Hope you have a good
back-up!
Bob T.
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.misc.
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
******************************
