Linux-Misc Digest #533, Volume #27 Wed, 4 Apr 01 21:13:01 EDT
Contents:
Re: I would like to register a complaint ... ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Commercial Distro with 2.4?? When?? (Paul Lew)
Re: I would like to register a complaint ... ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: I would like to register a complaint ... (Floyd Davidson)
Re: I would like to register a complaint ... (Dan Smith)
Re: commandline based article download tools ("Bill Marcum")
Re: HELP: cygwin (Bob Hauck)
Re: I would like to register a complaint ... (Bob Hauck)
pgp not found although the binary is there (Stefan Kuhn)
ask for help about chroot , thanks in advance. ("harrison")
Unusual mount problem ("Dennis Bayrock")
Re: ask for help about chroot , thanks in advance. ("Joe")
Re: pgp not found although the binary is there ("Joe")
Re: display problems and other good stuff... ("Joe")
Re: pgp not found although the binary is there ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Using RPM with RH5.2 ("Joe")
Re: display problems and other good stuff... (Ivan Su)
X with option vga=771 (L.V.Gandhi)
Re: Apache 1.3.19 download?? ("Joshua Slive")
Re: programs mysteriously segfaulting and exiting ("Norman C. Leet")
Re: pgp not found although the binary is there ("Peter T. Breuer")
other editors? (Ivan Su)
Re: Using RPM with RH5.2 (KCmaniac)
Re: Free Telnet Servers (Dean Thompson)
Re: No network until tcpdump?! (Dean Thompson)
Re: other editors? ("Peter T. Breuer")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I would like to register a complaint ...
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 00:45:23 +0200
hoffmyster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I now realize that there IS NO equivelent in Linux. The reason for this
Nonsense
> apparently is because the ext2 fs is so much of a different animal than the FAT
> fs. The most obvious differnce is the use of superblocks by ext2.
Nonsense. FAT uses a FAT . That's why it's called FAT!
> The DOS format command destroys everything then rebuilds the fs with whatever
> it needs.
Just like mke2fs.
> In Linux it appears the closest thing is rm -rf *. This wipes out all files
Uh, no, that's equivalent to del /s \* (if I recall reightly).
> and directories under the current directory without touching the filesystem,
So what?
> ie. superblocks, inodes, etc. Then you can write whatever you want back into
DO you really have a cloth between your ears, or are you just trying to
annoy people?
> the "empty" partition right away. Of course you wouldn't want to do this to a
> partition on the installation you have booted up in and are currently running.
> I am talking about "formatting" a partition on totally another hard drive that
No you aren't.
> I mounted onto the current system.
> By the way:
> The "dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hdxX" or "cat /dev/zero /dev/hdxX" IS NOT the way
> to do this because not only does it wipe out the superblocks but fills the
> entire partition with one huge file full of zeros that involves entirely
No it doesn't.
> something else to get rid of. BAD ADVISE, ERIC!!
Nonsense.
> mke2fs will restore the superblocks and build the inodes but will not destroy
> any data, so it by itself is not "formatting" a partition.
It certainly is! If by "formatting" you mean filling the data area with
zeros, well, then do the dd thing.
> Actually in Linux as it turns out doesn't need a "format" command because the
> mounted partition is in itself is a directory and you can just clear its data
> by deleting it files and subdirectories. The fs remains intack.
Just like in msdos!
> I'll take back my complaint now but it sure was a learning experience trying to
> destroy my own data :-)
You haven't satisfactorily complained about your own lack of
understanding. You are mighty confused about something! Would you mind
explaining what?
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Lew)
Subject: Re: Commercial Distro with 2.4?? When??
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2001 23:01:35 GMT
On 4 Apr 2001 21:44:57 GMT, John Collier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael Perry ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>: On Sun, 01 Apr 2001 22:25:13 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: >Robert Love <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>: >> I've looked at stores nearby the last two weekends. All the big
>: >> three, Red Hat, Mandrake and SUSE all are selling products based on
>: >> 2.2 kernals. When will there be a commercial product based on 2.4?
>: >> Anybody know?
>: >
>: <snip>
>: >You can probably expect the _next_ release of Red Hat, SuSE, and such
>: >to include a 2.4.x kernel.
>: >--
>: You can expect this release of SuSE to have the 2.4.x kernel with patches :)
>: Check out www.suse.com if you want a distribution with the 2.4 kernel now.
>: You can make debian 2.4 ready with some work. I kinda think that mandrake
>: will beat redhat with a upgrade to have the 2.4 kernel included; but maybe
>: not. I don't follow mandrake too closely though.
>
> Mandrake 7.2 comes with 2.4, but it is clearly marked "experimental".
> I am waiting for the next version.
>
The SuSE 7.1 had been in the stores in the beginning of March; it is just
that the stores will continue both the "old" and new versions at the same
time. The new versions get sold quickly so that one may only see the
old 2.2 versions. I got lucky; got the "last" copy of the SuSe 7.1 at
Best Buys with a banged up box on a "special" sale in March; there were
still many 7.0 versions with the 2.2 kernel on display there.
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I would like to register a complaint ...
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 00:50:49 +0200
hoffmyster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, did you try running mke2fs on the floppy to repair the fs and then to put
> anything more onto the disk? Try putting a file of a size less than the floppy, of
> course, but large enough to take up some space. If the disk is now "empty" you
> should be able to do this, right? Try it and see if there is enough space on the
> disk for the file.
Of course there is! What you are suggesting is perhaps the root of
your misconception. After (wiping the fs and) recreating the fs, you
can do anything you can do to a new empty fs, bcause it is a new empty
fs!
> After I performed this "dd" command using /dev/zero I had to figure out and
> fix(mke2fs) what it did to my fs, which I wasn't warned about. I then tried to do
It did nothing. It simply wiped the whole thing.
dd wipes the fs, It destroys it. mke2fs puts it back.
> what I was able to do once before which was copy one partition to another. Guess
That's fine. Use dd (if the two are the same size). UUuse cp -a if you
want to do it over the fs.
> what? Almost as soon as the copy started it stopped and told me there was no space
Nonsense. You just ballsed up.
> left on the device. Well, according to you it should have been empty, right? It
> wasn't.
> Actually I owe Eric an apology for something else. It wasn't him who advised me on
> using dd with /dev/zero. It was someone else. But Eric did advise me to use "cat
> /dev/zero > /dev/hdxX" which would equally have gotten me in the mess I was in.
No, it would have done what you wanted: wipe the partition.
> I used Eric because I still was peeved about the smartass tone of his response to
> my post. I didn't deserve that.
You do, and more.
Peter
------------------------------
From: Floyd Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I would like to register a complaint ...
Date: 04 Apr 2001 14:27:09 -0800
hoffmyster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I do appreciate the responses to my supposed dilemma of trying to "format" a
>partition in Linux.
>
>I now realize that there IS NO equivelent in Linux. The reason for this
>apparently is because the ext2 fs is so much of a different animal than the FAT
>fs. The most obvious differnce is the use of superblocks by ext2.
Actually, the mkfs program is equivalent functionality.
>The DOS format command destroys everything then rebuilds the fs with whatever
>it needs.
No it does not.
>In Linux it appears the closest thing is rm -rf *.
Not even close.
> This wipes out all files
>and directories under the current directory without touching the filesystem,
>ie. superblocks, inodes, etc.
Wrong. The rm command does not touch the files, just the directories.
> Then you can write whatever you want back into
>the "empty" partition right away. Of course you wouldn't want to do this to a
>partition on the installation you have booted up in and are currently running.
>I am talking about "formatting" a partition on totally another hard drive that
>I mounted onto the current system.
Formatting a mounted partition is absurd.
>By the way:
>
>The "dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hdxX" or "cat /dev/zero /dev/hdxX" IS NOT the way
>to do this because not only does it wipe out the superblocks but fills the
>entire partition with one huge file full of zeros that involves entirely
>something else to get rid of. BAD ADVISE, ERIC!!
Actually, it was very good advice *if* you really want to try
wiping a disk clean of all files and previous formatting. Just
be aware that if the NSA or the CIA or the FBI or whoever else
has enough money wants to read your disk they will *still* be
able to. But if you sell your disk to the kid next door, he
probably won't be able to read it.
>mke2fs will restore the superblocks and build the inodes but will not destroy
>any data, so it by itself is not "formatting" a partition.
Wrong again.
>Actually in Linux as it turns out doesn't need a "format" command because the
>mounted partition is in itself is a directory and you can just clear its data
>by deleting it files and subdirectories. The fs remains intack.
So after running fdisk to partition a disk, do you think those
partitions already contain formattd filesystems?
>I'll take back my complaint now but it sure was a learning experience trying to
>destroy my own data :-)
Well, when you make such an effort at it, what do you expect?
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.ptialaska.net/~floyd>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Dan Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I would like to register a complaint ...
Date: 04 Apr 2001 06:49:40 -0400
I agree that this idiot does not know what he's talking about, but I
think it is rooted at a misunderstanding of a lot more than just how
to format a drive under linux.
Maybe he just needs to go back to DOS 3 and work his way back up :)
------------------------------
From: "Bill Marcum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: commandline based article download tools
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 19:36:42 -0500
* Tong * wrote in message ...
>> > But there is a problem for it to download articles like:
>> >
>> > http://www.informit.com/newsletter.asp?link=159
>> >
>>
>> lynx -source http://www.informit.com/newsletter.asp?link=159 > 159.html
>
>Thanks Chris, but when a problem can't be solved by wget, it won't
>be any easy as above lynx solution.
>
>The problem is to download the *whole article", not only the first
>page. and the last paragraph of the full article is many clicks
>away... As I said:
>
>,-----
>| If you have experienced with any download tools, you will know that
>| the above url is very tricky. there's no better way to download the
>| whole article (only) without (potentially) download the whole site.
>`-----
>
I'm afraid there isn't any easy way for a program to know that it should
download the link that says "click here for next page". Try to persuade
the site owner to provide a link to the whole document.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: HELP: cygwin
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2001 23:43:32 GMT
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001 13:35:48 +0800, Leon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>in Cygwin I use the mount command,
>
>mount d:\mydir /linkdir
>
>but get a response "mount: /linkdir: Invalid argument".
Did you create /linkdir?
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: I would like to register a complaint ...
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2001 23:43:34 GMT
On Wed, 04 Apr 2001 17:42:39 -0400, hoffmyster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, did you try running mke2fs on the floppy to repair the fs and then to
> put anything more onto the disk?
You mean like this:
[root@nebo /root]# mount /dev/fd0 /mnt/floppy
[root@nebo /root]# cp rl2_driver.tgz /mnt/floppy
[root@nebo /root]# df
Filesystem 1k-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda1 5431592 1749349 3401011 34% /
/dev/fd0 1390 141 1177 11% /mnt/floppy
[root@nebo /root]# umount /mnt/floppy
[root@nebo /root]# mke2fs /dev/fd0
mke2fs 1.14, 9-Jan-1999 for EXT2 FS 0.5b, 95/08/09
Linux ext2 filesystem format
Filesystem label=
360 inodes, 1440 blocks
72 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user
First data block=1
Block size=1024 (log=0)
Fragment size=1024 (log=0)
1 block group
8192 blocks per group, 8192 fragments per group
360 inodes per group
Writing inode tables: done
Writing superblocks and filesystem accounting information: done
[root@nebo /root]# mount /dev/fd0 /mnt/floppy
[root@nebo /root]# df
Filesystem 1k-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda1 5431592 1749349 3401011 34% /
/dev/fd0 1390 13 1305 1% /mnt/floppy
[root@nebo /root]# cp rl2_driver.tgz /mnt/floppy
[root@nebo /root]# df
Filesystem 1k-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda1 5431592 1749349 3401011 34% /
/dev/fd0 1390 141 1177 11% /mnt/floppy
> After I performed this "dd" command using /dev/zero I had to figure out
> and fix(mke2fs) what it did to my fs, which I wasn't warned about.
I think you are missing an important difference between DOS and Unix.
In DOS, disk partitions simply don't exist until they are formatted.
Your drive D: just isn't there until you format it. That is _not_ how
Unix handles disks.
Formatting writes information on the disk that creates the illusion of
directories and files. This "metadata" is what defines FAT or EXT2.
If you "reformat" a FAT partition, you rewrite the FAT and associated
data, just as when you mkfs an EXT2 partition it rewrites the
superblocks.
In Unix, and Linux, disk partitions are represented as special files in
/dev, whether they are formatted or not. Writing to /dev/hda2 writes
to the *raw partition*, not to the *filesystem on the partition*. Once
you make a filesystem on a partition (format it) and mount it
somewhere, then it appears as a directory structure that holds files.
This is a very important conceptual difference between the two
systems. It is not a deficiency in Linux, it is a difference in the
conceptual models of Unix and DOS. DOS lacks the concept of a raw
partition, or rather it does not expose it to the user. Unix does, and
in fact this is useful. For instance, mke2fs works by writing to the
raw partition via the special files in /dev. This means that Unix does
not need a the special "format disk" API that DOS has.
The "dd" command that made you so unhappy wrote zeros to the *raw
parition*, thereby wiping out any formatting that it had on it. That
partition can't be mounted until it is reformatted. If your goal is to
"get rid of everything" that will do it. It will also get rid of being
able to store files on that partition until you use mke2fs to create a
new filesystem on it.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: Stefan Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: pgp not found although the binary is there
Date: 4 Apr 2001 23:53:52 GMT
Hi Linux-people,
I've got a strange problem, strange at least for me.
I want to run pgp. If I ask which pgp, the answer is
/usr/bin/pgp, but if I try pgp, the answer is
bash: /usr/bin/pgp: File not found. The binary is actually
there, in that directory. If I press return ao that file
in the mc, there's an error as well. Does somebody have an
idea what could be the reason for that ?
(pgp is executable for all users)
Thanks a lot
Stefan
------------------------------
From: "harrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ask for help about chroot , thanks in advance.
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 17:01:50 -0700
Hi, All Friends :
My Question is :
Provide user a unix/linux shell account and a home directory, for
security reason,
after logging into the system, he can traverse no other system directories
but his own homedirectory(all the file and dirs under his HOME DIRECTORY).
What i Have done is :
1. copy /etc,/lib,/bin,/sbin,/usr/bin,/usr/sbin,/etc/skel,/lib,/usr/lib
these dirs under the "/" to
the corresponding home dir
2. running CHROOT command like:
chroot $USERHOMEDIR /bin/sh
3. then what should i do next ?
I have tried to replace the user'shell with a new one which contains
the following command:
sudo chroot $HOMEDIRECTORY /bin/sh
Is this the best effiecient way to achieve the goal ? or any other
alternative way except modifying
the linux login souce code?
Any Help will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Harrison
------------------------------
From: "Dennis Bayrock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Unusual mount problem
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat.misc,linux.redhat.install
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 00:06:32 GMT
I am trying to view an NTFS (Win NT 4) partition with RedHat 7.0 with
kernel 2.4.3.
1. The NTFS partition mounts correctly in console as root - I can cd and view
the directory structure and files in that partition.
2. When I run MC and try to view the same partition - I can't see
ANYTHING (Yes I am navigating to the right place in the filesystem)
3. When I exit MC and run X (Gnome 1.0) - I still can't see anything with
GMC.
4. When I run a console in X - no problem! I can cd and see everything
etc in the console session.
Anyone have any ideas what is going on?
------------------------------
From: "Joe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ask for help about chroot , thanks in advance.
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 00:05:18 +0100
Just curious, but why would your users want shells where they don't have any
ls, less, vi, ftp, etc?
On a site note, "thanks in advance" isn't exactly a subject line.
Joe
"harrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:5BOy6.183183$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi, All Friends :
>
> My Question is :
>
> Provide user a unix/linux shell account and a home directory, for
> security reason,
> after logging into the system, he can traverse no other system
directories
> but his own homedirectory(all the file and dirs under his HOME
DIRECTORY).
>
> What i Have done is :
>
> 1. copy /etc,/lib,/bin,/sbin,/usr/bin,/usr/sbin,/etc/skel,/lib,/usr/lib
> these dirs under the "/" to
> the corresponding home dir
> 2. running CHROOT command like:
> chroot $USERHOMEDIR /bin/sh
> 3. then what should i do next ?
> I have tried to replace the user'shell with a new one which contains
> the following command:
> sudo chroot $HOMEDIRECTORY /bin/sh
>
> Is this the best effiecient way to achieve the goal ? or any other
> alternative way except modifying
> the linux login souce code?
>
> Any Help will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
>
> Harrison
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Joe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: pgp not found although the binary is there
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 00:08:35 +0100
What Linux (kernel) and filesystem are you using?
Got similar problems a while ago, not sure if it was because of Linux 2.4.0
and its ReiserFS bug.
Joe
------------------------------
From: "Joe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: display problems and other good stuff...
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 00:10:33 +0100
Ivan,
It'd help if you tell us what desktop environment you are using, or the
distro if you're not sure.
Joe
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: pgp not found although the binary is there
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 02:07:25 +0200
Stefan Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Linux-people,
> I've got a strange problem, strange at least for me.
> I want to run pgp. If I ask which pgp, the answer is
> /usr/bin/pgp, but if I try pgp, the answer is
> bash: /usr/bin/pgp: File not found. The binary is actually
> there, in that directory. If I press return ao that file
> in the mc, there's an error as well. Does somebody have an
> idea what could be the reason for that ?
Are you running RH 7, and have you got pgp from some other source?
> (pgp is executable for all users)
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Joe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Using RPM with RH5.2
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 00:12:43 +0100
Just interested, but why RH 5.2?
Joe
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ivan Su)
Subject: Re: display problems and other good stuff...
Date: 5 Apr 2001 00:18:19 GMT
Sorry ... i'm using Redhat 6.2...
Joe ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Ivan,
: It'd help if you tell us what desktop environment you are using, or the
: distro if you're not sure.
: Joe
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (L.V.Gandhi)
Subject: X with option vga=771
Date: 5 Apr 2001 00:21:09 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am having this option working in my RH6.2 box. For debian potato, I gave
the option in command line. It didn't work in the same machine. i have fb
support in kernel while installing. Any ideas how to make it work.
--
L.V.Gandhi
MECON, 5th Floor, RTC Complex, Visakhapatnam AP 530020 INDIA
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Joshua Slive" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.www.servers,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix,comp.os.linux.redhat,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Apache 1.3.19 download??
Date: 5 Apr 2001 00:28:18 GMT
In comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix Jørgen Thomsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Den Mon, 19 Mar 2001 09:42:29 -0500, skrev "<toor>"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> :
>>Try apache.org, I recommend you compile it yourself!
>>
> Did you ever do that yourself?
> I gave it up because RedHat has changed the paths, so they are not
> similar to the standard distribution. I couldn't be sure that I would
> really get a proper upgrade without things being installed where they
> should not be.
You may want to look at the --layout=Redhat option to configure.
I'm not sure it is perfectly up to date, but it should be close.
(Or you could just ditch the redhat paths and use the apache
ones.)
--
Joshua Slive
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://slive.ca/
------------------------------
From: "Norman C. Leet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: programs mysteriously segfaulting and exiting
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.questions
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 00:26:23 GMT
I too have experienced multiple <segmentation fault> messages while trying
to install slackware on an ancient '386 (actually a '386 card in a Z-248
box).
Oddly, tomsrtbt (single floppy Linux rescue disk) works flawlessly. Very nice.
memtest86 yields the following on the first pass while testing memory in
the 4 - 640K range:
Unexpected Interrupt - Halting
Type:
PC: 10
Eflag: 103e48
CS: 10002
ErrCode: 102ff8
Dunno.....probably better off going "dumpster diving" for more up to date
hardware than trying to get this thing to work. Was sort of a neat
challenge to try to fit slackware linux into it, though. :-)
-Norm Leet
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: pgp not found although the binary is there
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 02:14:13 +0200
Stefan Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've got a strange problem, strange at least for me.
> I want to run pgp. If I ask which pgp, the answer is
> /usr/bin/pgp, but if I try pgp, the answer is
> bash: /usr/bin/pgp: File not found. The binary is actually
> there, in that directory. If I press return ao that file
> in the mc, there's an error as well. Does somebody have an
> idea what could be the reason for that ?
Is it a binary, or is it a script? If a script, check the first line!
> (pgp is executable for all users)
Either you start giving more data, or we keep on guessing wildly.
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ivan Su)
Subject: other editors?
Date: 5 Apr 2001 00:28:50 GMT
Just out of curiosity is for Redhat 6.2 is there any other editors you
can use in the Unix prompt besides pico? all the other editors such as
nedit and gedit can only be accessed in XWindows....
Thanks again...
------------------------------
From: KCmaniac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Using RPM with RH5.2
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2001 20:48:11 -0400
Joe wrote:
> Just interested, but why RH 5.2?
Not sure what you mean. RH5.2 is the version I installed from a CD a
year or so ago. It is what I am using. The RPM version 3.0.1 is what
came with it. I am not being able to replace earlier versions of any(it
appears) package on my system with newer versions. I am trying to
upgrade packages to bring it up to the 7.0 version. But, I am always
getting this:
"packages with major number <= 3 are not supported by this version of
RPM." What is a major number?
Can you shed any light on this?
------------------------------
From: Dean Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Free Telnet Servers
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 10:47:49 +1000
Hi!,
> Does anyone know any list or just one telnet or rlogin server, allowing
> anonymous users to log in and use basic shell commands
>
> It could be usefull to make tests from outside on a internet-connected box.
Check the URL: http://www.rootshell.be/
There are a few of them around. Google returns back a number of sites when
you enter in "free shells". Whether they are still all in existence is
another matter.
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: Dean Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: No network until tcpdump?!
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 10:53:48 +1000
Hi Anton,
> I have a problem:
> Sometimes not even pings can reach me until I start tcpdump. I have a
> Xircom PCMCIA Card in a Dell Inspiron 3800. Any ideas?
I know this is a real stupid idea, but if you issue two commands like this:
ifconfig eth0 down ; ifconfig eth0 up
Does the network card come to life then ?
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: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: other editors?
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 02:47:59 +0200
Ivan Su <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just out of curiosity is for Redhat 6.2 is there any other editors you
> can use in the Unix prompt besides pico? all the other editors such as
> nedit and gedit can only be accessed in XWindows....
vi, emacs, joe, ....
bvedit (1) - visual display editor for binary files
bvi (1) - visual display editor for binary files
bview (1) - visual display editor for binary files
ed (1) - text editor
ex (1) - text editors
hexedit (1) - view and edit files in hexadecimal or in ASCII
jed (1) - programmers editor
mcedit (1) - Full featured terminal text editor for Unix-like systems.
nex (1) - text editors
nvi (1) - text editors
nview (1) - text editors
red (1) - text editor
sed (1) - a Stream EDitor
sensible-editor (1) - sensible editing and paging
sensible-pager (1) - sensible editing and paging
vi (1) - text editors
view (1) - text editors
editor (1) - text editors
elvis (1) - a clone of the ex/vi text editor
jmacs (1) - Joe's Own Editor
joe (1) - Joe's Own Editor
jpico (1) - Joe's Own Editor
jstar (1) - Joe's Own Editor
pico (1) - simple text editor in the style of the Pine Composer
rgview (1) - Vi IMproved, a programmers text editor
rgvim (1) - Vi IMproved, a programmers text editor
rjoe (1) - Joe's Own Editor
rview (1) - Vi IMproved, a programmers text editor
rvim (1) - Vi IMproved, a programmers text editor
vche (1) - virtual console hex editor
vim (1) - Vi IMproved, a programmers text editor
zshzle (1) - zsh command line editor
....
Peter
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
