Re: [CentOS] evince
- Oorspronkelijk bericht - Van: "Frank Cox" Aan: "CentOS mailing list" Verzonden: Vrijdag 2 maart 2018 19:58:15 Onderwerp: Re: [CentOS] evince On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 17:55:05 + (UTC) Chris Olson wrote: > Any help with this issue would be greatly appreciated. Three suggestions: 1. Have you tried atril? Does it have the same problem? 2. Can you post a sample pdf somewhere so folks who might know how to fix it can see an example? 3. I posted a bug report along with a sample pdf some years back to the evince bug tracker (https://bugzilla.gnome.org/) and the problem pdf rendered perfectly when the next version was released. -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com Hello, Foxit Reader solved some problems for me in the past. Greetings, J. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] evince
On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 17:55:05 + (UTC) Chris Olson wrote: > Any help with this issue would be greatly appreciated. Three suggestions: 1. Have you tried atril? Does it have the same problem? 2. Can you post a sample pdf somewhere so folks who might know how to fix it can see an example? 3. I posted a bug report along with a sample pdf some years back to the evince bug tracker (https://bugzilla.gnome.org/) and the problem pdf rendered perfectly when the next version was released. -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RADIUS
> That´s not my problem to solve, but think about it: You can get a lot more > information using CCTV cameras, and those are everywhere. Unfortunately, > nobody cares, and it´s not like you have a choice. So why would there > be any legal issues? It's called "A Law". Different places have different laws. Different places have different attitudes towards being lawful. > > I´m surprised that wireless access point controllers, by default, do not > use the strength of the signal received from a device by three or more access > points to simply triangulate the position of the device. Of course, you > only get the positions of devices relative to access points, but once you > have that, you only need to use a map of the place that shows all the access > points and the positions of devices relative to them to figure out where > everyone is. I'm surprised you didn't find anything about this on Google - you did try Google didn't you? http://bfy.tw/GtiP top hit https://www.accuware.com/ or this paper https://www.technologyreview.com/s/542561/wi-fi-trick-gives-devices-super-accurate-indoor-location-fixes/ OK. I know I said before it was basically impossible - but I hadn't googled for it then. It just goes to show that asking CentOS admins about cutting edge WiFi issues is not going to get you very far. P. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] evince
We have some small networks with connectivity to the Internet through firewall routers. The smallest has one Windows 7 system and three Linux systems including both CentOS 6 and CentOS 7 machines. The Windows 7 systems have full Adobe packages that are updated regularly and are trouble free. On the Linux systems, evince has been our go to product for viewing and printing .pdf documents. This has worked well for at least four years. Some .pdf documents received recently from insurance companies and financial institutions appear to have a font problem that we have not been able to solve. Information available at the sites listed below have been no help. Previous font problems with various warnings have been solved automatically with substitution, but this does not seem to be working with these new files. The current problem leaves blank nearly half of the pages in some documents. Is there better source to look for answers than these two: http://www.gnome.org/projects/evince/ https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Evince Any help with this issue would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. [user@computer ~]$ uname -a Linux delle520 2.6.32-696.20.1.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Fri Jan 26 17:51:45 UTC 2018 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux [user@computer]$ evince Plan.pdf Error: could not create type1 face some font thing failed Error: could not create type1 face some font thing failed o o o o ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RADIUS
On 2 March 2018 at 12:07, hw wrote: >> >> Oh yeah. Who ever gave you those marching orders needs to talk with >> all kinds of lawyers... even researching for it might be problematic >> in some countries due to a multitude of laws. You are walking out of >> setting up a wireless environment into full-scale surveillance. > > > That´s not my problem to solve, but think about it: You can get a lot more > information using CCTV cameras, and those are everywhere. Unfortunately, > nobody cares, and it´s not like you have a choice. So why would there > be any legal issues? > 1) Devices which omit radio frequency wavelength radiation are covered by different laws and agencies than those which emit light based radiation. This means that the agency that says you can put in a cctv may not be the same as the one that allows you to put in a RF sensor. 2) There are laws using where monitoring of the public can happen and where the monitoring devices can be placed and what information can be kept on them. These are covered from everything from local to EU laws. The laws can also be conflicting and need careful consideration. 3) Depending on the location this occurs, it is your problem to bring up if you are aware that it could be a problem. The "I was only following orders" defense has been thrown out for people and the engineers/custodians who put the stuff in were found liable for damages as much as the boss who said to do it. That is all I am going to say on this as it is up to your location and situation. Other people coming into this conversation years later will be on different laws and rules. >> That said, what you are looking for is not going to be accomplished >> with simple radius without a large amount of development. It is also >> going to need a lot of wireless sensors running at different >> frequencies through out the building. Most of that is done usually >> with special commercial hardware/software and falls outside of scope >> of this list by a mile. > > > RADIUS would only be a tool to use for authentication and perhaps > accounting. Depending on the hardware used. If the hardware bought only works with AD, RADIUS isn't going to help at all. > Figuring out where users are is an entirely different problem. > >> RADIUS may be something that is done with all of this but only far way >> back in the chain of tools needed. It might be something that the >> specialized hardware, scanners, sensors, etc might tie into if they >> don't have their own specialized tool. Worrying about it before those >> are researched, etc is to use an English idiom: putting the cart >> before the horse. > > > I´m surprised that wireless access point controllers, by default, do not > use the strength of the signal received from a device by three or more > access > points to simply triangulate the position of the device. Of course, you > only get the positions of devices relative to access points, but once you > have that, you only need to use a map of the place that shows all the access > points and the positions of devices relative to them to figure out where > everyone is. > > That´s a rather simple thing to do, isn´t it? Some documentation of HPs > MSRs > stated that the controller can distribute the wireless devices between > access > points to even out the bandwidth, and if it can do that, it could as well > distribute them for triangulation. > It isn't. Wireless is much noisier and uses longer wavelengths than light. It is like walking through a hall of mirrors with sunglasses on. You are only able to see certain things, lots of things reflect, everything within sensor range which is broadcasting is showing up even if it is a different SSID, and a ton of other items. This means that where you might only need 2 sensors for light, you need dozens to hundreds for radio waves. However the more sensors you have, they also may reflect, rebroadcast, dampen, ghost echo signals. Then you have the fact that RF is absorbed by water and people are giant bags of water. You need to put sensors at different heights, etc etc. This is where the 3rd parts hardware and software comes in. You need to map the empty room, map the room with noise, map the room with people in it without sensors and then map the room with how you want it to work. The software then does a huge data dump and lots of Fourier transforms and trig to figure out where a 'live' feed may look like. You still have to go in and massage it at times because all it takes is some metal object being walked through the room and it is all off for N minutes. In any case, this is a different problem and completely tangential to either CentOS or RADIUS. -- Stephen J Smoogen. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RADIUS
Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On 1 March 2018 at 12:26, hw wrote: Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On 1 March 2018 at 08:42, hw wrote: I didn´t say I want that, and I don´t know yet what I want. A captive portal may be nice, but I haven´t found a way to set one up yet, and I don´t have an access point controller which would provide one, so I can´t tell if that´s the right solution. This is the problem with this entire thread in a nutshell. You don't know what you want but what you have articulated at various points is that you do know what you want. You then state something that won't work because of some factor or another. People then correct you on that, and you then get hostile because you were just thinking out loud but no one knew that. Thinking out loud works ok in real life because we give special queues like looking abstractly or being able to say "Oh no I am just thinking out loud" right away. Instead in email none of that happens and people get more and more hostile and angry thinking the other side is trying to make them do completely opposite. Let us try starting over. You may have answered these in other places, but people need to see them in one place at one time versus trying to look through cache of other emails. What do you want? I was asking for documentation telling me how RADIUS can be used, not only that it can be used. What are your constraints? [AKA what have you been told to do.] The task is to provide wireless coverage for employees and customers on company premises. It is desirable to be able to keep track of customers, as in knowing where exactly on the premises they currently are (within like 3--5 feet, which is apparently tough), and simpler things like knowing how long they stay and if they have been on the premises before. To avoid legal issues, it is probably advisable that customers need to agree to some sort of terms of usage. Oh yeah. Who ever gave you those marching orders needs to talk with all kinds of lawyers... even researching for it might be problematic in some countries due to a multitude of laws. You are walking out of setting up a wireless environment into full-scale surveillance. That´s not my problem to solve, but think about it: You can get a lot more information using CCTV cameras, and those are everywhere. Unfortunately, nobody cares, and it´s not like you have a choice. So why would there be any legal issues? That said, what you are looking for is not going to be accomplished with simple radius without a large amount of development. It is also going to need a lot of wireless sensors running at different frequencies through out the building. Most of that is done usually with special commercial hardware/software and falls outside of scope of this list by a mile. RADIUS would only be a tool to use for authentication and perhaps accounting. Figuring out where users are is an entirely different problem. RADIUS may be something that is done with all of this but only far way back in the chain of tools needed. It might be something that the specialized hardware, scanners, sensors, etc might tie into if they don't have their own specialized tool. Worrying about it before those are researched, etc is to use an English idiom: putting the cart before the horse. I´m surprised that wireless access point controllers, by default, do not use the strength of the signal received from a device by three or more access points to simply triangulate the position of the device. Of course, you only get the positions of devices relative to access points, but once you have that, you only need to use a map of the place that shows all the access points and the positions of devices relative to them to figure out where everyone is. That´s a rather simple thing to do, isn´t it? Some documentation of HPs MSRs stated that the controller can distribute the wireless devices between access points to even out the bandwidth, and if it can do that, it could as well distribute them for triangulation. It is desirable to be able to know where employees currently are, though it doesn´t neeed to be as precise. When do you need it? There´s no given time frame; it´s as soon as possible and preferably this year. It is necessary to (re-)do the entire network infrastructure before wireless coverage can be achieved, one of the reasons being that it is currently impossible to use VLANs all over the place. What is the environment that it is to run in? a shopping area Some of the wireless access points may need to take part in what is apparently called a mesh to be able to supply remote parts of the premises. What research have you done (with references)? I searched for documenation about how to actually use RADIUS and didn´t find any. I´ve asked for pointers to such documentation here. I´ve read the RADUIS admin guide. I´ve done a test setup by installing RADIUS and configuring a switch to use it to authenticate users logging into the switch via ssh a
Re: [CentOS] why does "rescue" mode bring me to runlevel 5 (multi-user target)?
On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, John Hodrien wrote: > On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > finishing a week of teaching a comptia linux+ class off of centos > > 7.4 and wanted to demo how to boot to "rescue" mode, so i rebooted, > > selected "rescue" mode at grub menu, which still booted to full > > multiuser, graphical mode. what am i doing wrong? or is this a dumb > > question? > > It's is not what you think it is. > > $ yum info dracut-config-rescue > > It's not the same as the rescue mode off the DVD. ah, gotcha ... so the course manual is definitely misleading. rday ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] why does "rescue" mode bring me to runlevel 5 (multi-user target)?
On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, Robert P. J. Day wrote: finishing a week of teaching a comptia linux+ class off of centos 7.4 and wanted to demo how to boot to "rescue" mode, so i rebooted, selected "rescue" mode at grub menu, which still booted to full multiuser, graphical mode. what am i doing wrong? or is this a dumb question? It's is not what you think it is. $ yum info dracut-config-rescue It's not the same as the rescue mode off the DVD. jh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
