Re: Documentation and Useability - a proposed solution
Pigeon wrote: It's the result of people providing facilities because they want to, and are free to do it in the way that they want to. Most authors/maintainers of free software provide documentation. Some do it better than others. One or two can't be bothered to provide any, and users of their packages have to inspect the source code, ask others, etc. - a situation which could certainly do with improvement, but half a loaf is better than no bread, and it only applies to a few cases. Most loaves are whole loaves, with a couple of croissants thrown in for good measure. Hopefully I didn't snip too much and get toasted because of it. I think this may summarize my point(?). For those of you that have expertise with Debian, it must be a no brainier to grab a package and install it. Right? Meaning you probably could install something that doesn't have the "Debian Stamp of Approval" simply because you have much more experience that I or any other noobie (aka newbie). I agree that yes you should have the capability to install anything you please (and you probably have). I don't think I ever intended to proclaim you should be denighed the ability to install them. My argument is that as a noobie, I have access to packages that are not well documented though the main distribution. What I do, as a noobie, is go through the package distribution list and see what is available. Since I am a noobie, I choose the main stable version because everything I have read says this list contains software that is stable and works with the entire package and is the least likely to give me grief. (I don't want grief, if I wanted grief I would go to some BSD variant.) If something looks interesting or looks like what I want, I will install it and set down to use it. Had I installed something with incomplete documentation or presents words that mean nothing to me, I am left with the impression that the package is incomplete or indeciperable and I should look elsewhere for help in using foo. Since I am a noobie, I may not know where to look, or even be able to seperate the grain from the chaff of documentation I do find. Generally the result is a frustrated noobie that may pi$$ off an email list. Here is my proposed solution: Only allow completely documented packages in stable. Other packages can go to "non-free" or "Experts Only" or some other name that will warn the users caution is warrented. This solution WILL NOT prevent anyone from getting their favorite packages but WILL reduce frustration for un-awares noobies. It will also reduce the steep learning curve us Recovering-Windows-Users face. And it may reduce some of these "debates" over who can walk the halls of Debian-Land. Mac < ... > McCaskie -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Documentation and Useability
But why should they be deprived of the opportunity to use it simply because others can't figure out how to? Sure, it's tough on those who can't figure it out, but that's no reason to make life hard for those who can. This agruement contradicts itself. On the one hand it is stated plainly about the supierior support available in the Linux world. On the other hand it is stated we don't have to give support and if you can't figure it out on your own then tough. So what is it? Mac McCaskie -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bootable CD Rom problem?
Thanks, I had a feeling it was something like that. I've decided to go ahead and 'upgrade' the old IBM for a "Joe's Garage" blue plate special. -mac mccaskie Kent West wrote: Mac McCaskie wrote: I've been trying to re-install deb stable from a CD (3.0r2 and 3.0r1 images were downloaded and burned to disk), the old system got hosed somehow. The CD is not bootable on the old IBM box (but is on another system). Problem might be two-fold. 1- I am able to get an older CD (the net-install CD with 3.0r1) to boot on the downed system). 2-After I get the install up (from the CD what WILL boot), I can re-partition the HDD and all but when it gets to loading the drivers I get "There was a problem loading drivers from .." on all CD's, some of which are duplicates. Any ideas? Older CD-ROM drives tended to have problems reading burned CDs; if you have another CD-ROM drive around, try throwing that in the old IBM temporarily for the install. Another option is to use a floppy-based install (13 or so floppies), which will get you far enough along to then use a network connection (ethernet or dial-up) to pull down the rest of what you need. Or you can pull the hard drive out and put it temporarily in another machine and either install Debian there, or create a smallish FAT32 partition and put the installer files there, and then back on the original box, when asked where the driver files are, point to the FAT32 partition instead of the CD-ROM. You can later convert this FAT32 partition to some other partition, such as /tmp or swap, etc. Or, if the CD-ROM in the IBM will boot and run a Knoppix CD and you can gain access to the Internet to grab the installer files, you can essentially do the above paragraph without moving hardware from one machine to another. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Recommended ISP's
I've had very good luck with Road Runner cable. I used to have SBC DSL but after they kept dialing down my speed (I'm at the edge of the service radius) and the 2nd modem burned up I went with RR. They did have problems (DNS server issue, they said) this fall locally, but they eventually got it straightened out. I agree that bandwidth can get zapped from time to time and it will vary with your area. However, the company garuntees a certain level of performance, the rest is bonus. For security, a $40 - $60 router/hub/firewall works wonders and I have no complaints with mine. HTH -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bootable CD Rom problem?
I've been trying to re-install deb stable from a CD (3.0r2 and 3.0r1 images were downloaded and burned to disk), the old system got hosed somehow. The CD is not bootable on the old IBM box (but is on another system). Problem might be two-fold. 1- I am able to get an older CD (the net-install CD with 3.0r1) to boot on the downed system). 2-After I get the install up (from the CD what WILL boot), I can re-partition the HDD and all but when it gets to loading the drivers I get "There was a problem loading drivers from .." on all CD's, some of which are duplicates. Any ideas? Thanks, Mac -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Documentation and Usability
Micha Feigin wrote: On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 05:02:59PM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote: -The third part puzzles me. How would you know how to use it without some type of instructions. google et al, home page, man, info, -h/--help, source code (hopefully commented), trial and error, mailing lists, help menu, /usr/share/doc/, /usr/share/doc/HOWTO/ I'm at a loss on how to approach this. I guess I was not clear in my statement. If I could find the instructions, then that means instructions exist. Then that particular package would not apply to my argument. If that were the case for any and all packages where the man page say's "Foo is Foo-like because it derived from Foo's Parent" (or some such jibberish), then no package falls into this catagory and my point is point-less. Originally I did mean put real instructions in man. Mostly because I had done the Google thing but only found pages that did not apply or were for different implementations. The obvious solution to this quandry, would be to put the URL in the man page if the page applied to that implementation. Shouldn't that be easy to do? (but it does leave out those poor unfortunates that do not have internet access for whatever reason, say power loss, stupid security features, too broke, etc. I love the Road Runner help desk when I can't connect, they tell me to access the web site if I need help!) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Documentation and Usability was Re: EXT3 at install..no more?
ROFLOL, Richard Lyons wrote: But this has been a bad week for tempers here. Quite a few rants and upsets. Has anyone else wondered if it's seasonal? Subject for a little paper, perhaps? SUBTLE - Seasonal Usenet Bad Temper Loss Episodes... Climatic Recurring Influences on the Internet Community At Large (that's CRITICAL, in case the reason for the random word order wasn't obvious). It must be bed-time... (cabin fever maybe) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Documentation and Usability
Paul Morgan wrote: On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:18:50 -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote: So you would wish, for instance, to deprive me of a package which I can understand and use simply because the documentation is not adequate enough for you, or for somebody non-me, anyway? Yes, because otherwise a value judgement is imposed on the potential users' level of competence. Wouldn't you like to have the opportunity to use something you just heard of? Under these qualifications, only those in possesion of the required knowledge would be able to use it. Heck, if I need it, I'll use what I can figure out, even if I have to go to the source code to understand some of it. I think that the only criterion should be that a package doesn't break the system. Then good for you being able to read the source code AND have the time to do it and too bad for those that can't. Nearly every package is freely given by someone who has donated a great deal of time and skill to get it up and running. yep, and I hope someday to do the same, IF I can get there. Do you want more help? To complain about the documentation is what is known as "looking a gift horse in the mouth". (I'll let you in on a secret, I'm raising the awareness of the need for documentation here.) Oh, and you *aren't* a customer, any more than any of us are. A customer is someone who pays for goods and services. OK, I give up on this one since is simply symantics here. Can I go back and change this to users or do I loose a point? However, I prefer to think of "my users" as my customers because it keeps my priorities lined up. Mac McCaskie -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Documentation and Usability
Monique Y. Herman wrote: On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned: I think my point would be closer to not allowing a package on-board without adaqate instruction on what it was and how to use it. Where is the value of providing a widget to a customer without giving them a clue as to what the widget is or what to do with it. That word "customer"; doesn't it imply that you paid for the product? Anyhoo, your definition of adequate might be quite different from another user's definition. If there's a package that will solve a problem for me, I would rather have it available without any documentation at all than have it completely unavailable due to lack of documentation. -No -Very true, what is your target? Very experianced users with prior knowledge or ? -The third part puzzles me. How would you know how to use it without some type of instructions. Mac McCaskie -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Documentation and Usability
Monique Y. Herman wrote: Do you really consider basic etiquette to be a debian-specific "bow down and scrape" requirement? I consider "basic etiquette" to be very benificial when asking for advice AND when giving it. It is my hope that this conversation (aka debate) will accomplish a few small goals. As a noobie (or newbie? it doesn't matter) to this particular platform I can understand someone elses' frustration in learning how it use it. As a seasoned professional paid to support computer users with any level of knowledge, I can also note the severe "Club" atmosphere some have displayed today. I have learned to seperate my personal feelings of inadaquacies from the frustration of the person asking for help and not take it personally. The end result is a user who has not been be-littled or shamed and is a little more able to take care of themselves (hows that for a win-win situation). Yes, I have received some good advice on this list in the last week (including today) which has been very helpful. Today, I discovered some other comments should go into "useless" catagory. What did you learn today? Mac McCaskie -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Documentation and Usability
I think my point would be closer to not allowing a package on-board without adaqate instruction on what it was and how to use it. Where is the value of providing a widget to a customer without giving them a clue as to what the widget is or what to do with it. Mac McCaskie Kent West wrote: Mac McCaskie wrote: -Found packages with no available documentation This is a peeve of mine. I was under the impression that nothing got into the archives without a man page, even if the man page said nothing more than "sorry, there's no information here". Perhaps that rule only applies to the "main" archive or something similar. Or perhaps I just dreamed I read it once somewhere. At any rate, I think it'd be a good thing to enforce, that no package be allowed into the main archives without some sort of man page, even if it just says "I'm too lazy to write a man page, so you'll have to scour the source" or something similar. If I'm just lowering the S/N (signal-to-noise) ratio here, my apologies. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DNS Question (maybe?)
Like I said, I'm new and working a new job. Named is running on Red Hat (either pc1 w/7.3 or pc2 w/9.x, I'm not sure). Regardless, I think you gave me enough to start with come monday, well at least I have a direction to head, anyway. thanks -mac Ryan Mackay wrote: Sometime near Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 09:23:12AM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote: Hey Folks, What do I need to do to get a new site to show up in DNS? This is the scenario: I've just connected a pc via satalite to the net, now I want it to show up as a sub-part (is that the right term?) on our domain. ie our domain is "foo.net" and we want it to show up as "104.foo.net" we already have named running locally in the Home Office what should I do? Ummm, if you run the authoritive name server for foo.com then add a line like this to the zone file for foo.com 104 IN A 127.0.0.1 But replace 127.0.0.1 with the machine (104's) internet IP address. Also make sure you update the timestamp at the top of the zone file. Its a number like 2003100401, replace it with the date in a format like this MMDD and just add 01 to the end, incase you make another chage that day then you can just +1 so its 2. After all that reload you name servers config. In debian /etc/init.d/bind9 reload (assuming your using bind9 and installed it via apt) Otherwise refer to any docs you got with your name server Best of luck :D -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Documentation and Usability
Colin and Stephen Let me understand you correctly. You admit the documentation needs improvement and might be slightly un-helpful to noobies. So your solutions are (1) to tell (not ask) the noobie to do fix it (the same one that doesn't know enough about how to use the system) and (2) blame the stupid noobie for is ignorance by not working hard enough. Solution one will perpetuate the inadequate documentation problem. Solution two will enforce the "Brotherhood of Linux Clubhouse Rules" and perpetuate the frustration of future noobies. In my two months of seriously "getting down" with debian I have run into the following: -A major installation package was broken in the stable release, and discovered via this list and other sources that the problem was known with no intention to fix it. -Found packages with no available documentation -Found man pages that did not match executable supplied help. -Found man pages with circular "help" i.e. "foo is foo-like because it is derived from foo's parent" -Discovered the "best support organization" is impatient with frustrated noobies. Mac McCaskie Stephen wrote: On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 10:23:37AM -0600 or thereabouts, Mac McCaskie wrote: [...] Now that I have your attention. Just get over yourself and look at it from the viewpoint of someone trying to learn a very complicated and disjointed system with an immense amount of mostly barely useful and out-of-date documentation . This is a "so old" argument. There are plenty of commercial, newbie oriented distros available. If you want this, pay for a distro like Mandrake, SuSE, *OR*, roll up your sleeves and ask how you can help in improving the documentation. This is a volunteer effort, Debian is improved by the work and/or support (financial and otherwise). Talk is cheap, so... put your $/work where your mouth is. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Documentation and Usability was Re: EXT3 at install..no more?
Colin Watson wrote: It wasn't Monique. oops, so sue me rigid and spout rubbish about "secret incantations". . . patronizing nonsense. rigid? not hardly, I am asking everyone to be less rigid on what the noobies must to do. It should not be asked of them to bow down and scrape in order to gain admission into the great and sacred learning hall. Nor is it nonsense, it is a perfectly valid and logical argument that only those in posession of the required knowledge are able to perform certain tasks. Plus, the only method to aquire said knowledge is through membership of some organization and is unavailable outside of this "club." Should I go into just how this membership is obtained? Now that I have your attention. Just get over yourself and look at it from the viewpoint of someone trying to learn a very complicated and disjointed system with an immense amount of mostly barely useful and out-of-date documentation . Mac McCaskie -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DNS Question (maybe?)
Hey Folks, What do I need to do to get a new site to show up in DNS? This is the scenario: I've just connected a pc via satalite to the net, now I want it to show up as a sub-part (is that the right term?) on our domain. ie our domain is "foo.net" and we want it to show up as "104.foo.net" we already have named running locally in the Home Office what should I do? thanks much Mac McCaskie -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Documentation and Usability was Re: EXT3 at install..no more?
I will have to ditto Monique's frustration. I am a debian noobie. However, I started working with IBM PC's in '83 and later graduated to XT's on the job. The first windows I installed was 2.0 (a runtime version for a tape backup program). Over the years I've seen Novell perfect it's security and gradually fade into the background, DOS disappear, and Windows mature into the juggenaut we all love to hate. If you want Debian to eventually follow DOS, then neglect new users and ignore documentation. Keep knowledge to yourselves and allow only club members to know the secret incantations. OR, you can work to reduce the frustration and steep learning curve many noobies, including myself and Monique, face when we begin to work on our new Debian box. Mac McCaskie Monique Y. Herman wrote: On 2004-01-17, Joseph Guida MD penned: Sometimes I think that "open source" geeks intentionally complicate things to keep the borderline geeks (like me) from experimenting with and learning about O/Ses like Debian. The install menus USED TO ALLOW A CHOICE BETWEEN EXT2 and EXT3...before you loaded up the HD with the O/S. Now, you have to modify the EXT2 after the fact, running the risk of screwing up the partitions...thanks guyssome pimple faced hacker probably did this as a form of geek-like "ethnic cleansing"...well it worked...I'm going back to RedHat. And I really liked tinkering with Debian too...kept me thinking...so sad Coyotesx5 Scottsdale, AZ You have improved at trolling! (75) Your faction with the Debian User Community has dropped. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: diagnosing system crash (hardware failure?)
sounds very much like static electricity to me. are you getting shocks when you touch doorknobs? if you have a "joe's garage" pc then it may not be handling static very well. You can build up plently of static (enough anyway) while rolling around in your chair. another item might be voltage level, when you are away, do you turn off the monitor? HTH -mac Matt Price wrote: Hi everyone, my work machine has been crashing spontaneously: X freezes, sshd goes down, and I can't use the keyboard. This only happens when Im in the office, so I think it likely has something to do with my physical presence... In particular, we have a USB-kvm switch that I use to switch between the workstation and a webstation. I use it rarely, except when something seems to be wrong with my desktop... which has been happening a lot lately... Anyway, I can't figure out the significance of the pre-crash system messages. Here's a representtive sample: Jan 16 17:08:01 pc09 postgres[1590]: [8] LOG: database system is ready Jan 16 17:08:03 pc09 xfs: CONFIG: extra value for parameter "cache-balance" Jan 16 17:08:04 pc09 xfs: ignoring font path element /usr/lib/X11/fonts/cyrillic/ (unreadable) Jan 16 17:08:04 pc09 xfs: ignoring font path element /usr/lib/X11/fonts/CID (unreadable) Jan 16 17:08:13 pc09 kernel: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:01:00:50:99:bf:df:18:08:00 SRC=128.100.34.3 DST=224.0.0.1 LEN=28 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=1 ID=8310 PROTO=2 Jan 16 17:08:20 pc09 kernel: 0: nvidia: loading NVIDIA Linux x86 nvidia.o Kernel Module 1.0-4496 Wed Jul 16 19:03:09 PDT 2003 Jan 16 17:10:18 pc09 kernel: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:01:00:50:99:bf:df:18:08:00 SRC=128.100.34.3 DST=224.0.0.1 LEN=28 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=1 ID=8319 PROTO=2 Jan 16 17:12:23 pc09 kernel: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:01:00:50:99:bf:df:18:08:00 SRC=128.100.34.3 DST=224.0.0.1 LEN=28 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=1 ID=8329 PROTO=2 Jan 16 17:14:28 pc09 kernel: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:01:00:50:99:bf:df:18:08:00 SRC=128.100.34.3 DST=224.0.0.1 LEN=28 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=1 ID=8337 PROTO=2 Jan 16 17:16:33 pc09 kernel: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:01:00:50:99:bf:df:18:08:00 SRC=128.100.34.3 DST=224.0.0.1 LEN=28 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=1 ID=8348 PROTO=2 Jan 16 17:18:38 pc09 kernel: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:01:00:50:99:bf:df:18:08:00 SRC=128.100.34.3 DST=224.0.0.1 LEN=28 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=1 ID=8373 PROTO=2 Jan 16 17:20:43 pc09 kernel: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:01:00:50:99:bf:df:18:08:00 SRC=128.100.34.3 DST=224.0.0.1 LEN=28 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=1 ID=8381 PROTO=2 Jan 16 17:27:40 pc09 syslogd 1.4.1#13: restart. Jan 16 17:27:40 pc09 kernel: klogd 1.4.1#13, log ... and another: Jan 16 17:28:20 pc09 usb.agent[1832]: kernel driver usbkbd already loaded Jan 16 17:28:20 pc09 usb.agent[1832]: kernel driver hid already loaded Jan 16 17:28:20 pc09 usb.agent[1832]: kernel driver usbmouse already loaded Jan 16 17:28:20 pc09 usb.agent[1832]: kernel driver keybdev already loaded Jan 16 17:28:20 pc09 usb.agent[1832]: kernel driver mousedev already loaded Jan 16 17:28:20 pc09 usb.agent[1834]: kernel driver usbkbd already loaded Jan 16 17:28:20 pc09 usb.agent[1834]: kernel driver hid already loaded Jan 16 17:28:20 pc09 usb.agent[1834]: kernel driver usbmouse already loaded Jan 16 17:28:20 pc09 usb.agent[1834]: kernel driver keybdev already loaded Jan 16 17:28:20 pc09 usb.agent[1834]: kernel driver mousedev already loaded Jan 16 17:29:02 pc09 kernel: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:01:00:50:99:bf:df:18:08:00 SRC=128.100.34.3 DST=224.0.0.1 LEN=28 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=1 ID=8475 PROTO=2 Jan 16 17:31:07 pc09 kernel: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:01:00:50:99:bf:df:18:08:00 SRC=128.100.34.3 DST=224.0.0.1 LEN=28 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=1 ID=8497 PROTO=2 Jan 16 17:33:12 pc09 kernel: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:01:00:50:99:bf:df:18:08:00 SRC=128.100.34.3 DST=224.0.0.1 LEN=28 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=1 ID=8515 PROTO=2 Jan 16 17:35:17 pc09 kernel: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:01:00:50:99:bf:df:18:08:00 SRC=128.100.34.3 DST=224.0.0.1 LEN=28 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=1 ID=8530 PROTO=2 Jan 16 16:37:38 pc09 kernel: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:01:00:50:99:bf:df:18:08:00 SRC=128.100.34.3 DST=224.0.0.1 LEN=28 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=1 ID=8553 PROTO=2 Jan 16 17:45:03 pc09 syslogd 1.4.1#13: restart. Now I don't really know what this stuff is telling me, but they don't look so bad. So I'm wondering whether the error, whatever it is, isn't being recorded. Are there general guidelines as to where to go next with this kind of problem? It's fairly annoying... thanks, matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: I can't access some site with Mozilla
I have the same setup, win xp with Mozilla, but could get to both of these sites. Do you block cookies or have any other privacy settings active? I notice the first one did a fast re-direct. Christopher L. Everett wrote: OK, I git this problem only once in a while. Otherwise useful site that I can't access that give me "connection refused" errors when Moz or IE on a Windows box behind the same firewall as me works fine. Here are 2 sample URLS: http://www.mwave.com/ http://www.egain.com/ I realize that most likely these turkeys have a braindead (MS ISA? ) firewall in place. So how do I deal? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: apt-get testing HELP please
Would this routine also "downgrade" from unstable to testing? thanks user list wrote: deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian testing main contrib non-free and you must issue: apt-get update -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Webmin doesn't install properly on Woody?
Update, I went the apt-get routine and everybody is much happier. Thanks to all who lended there hands. -mac -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: disgo
nope, but disgo with vodka just fine (ha, ha disgo = this go) sorry, couldn't resist. mmm Colin Watson wrote: On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 03:40:43PM +, Richard Lyons wrote: Anyone here know if disgo go with Linux? (it's a usb memory stick in a fancy wrapper, for those who haven't noticed). Yeah, I've got one and it's fine. It shows up as a SCSI disk. (Not entirely sure about the build quality, though; part of the cover has recently broken off. All the same, it *was* cheap.) Cheers, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Webmin doesn't install properly on Woody?
Ok, so I'm not the sharpest tack around. I decided, prematurely I might add, to use dselect to "upgrade" to sarge. Now I have no idea where I am. Dselect got a few errors and could not correct itself. It started with one error while uninstalling foo, so it thinks foo is not installed (but it is). So I run dselect to install it, but it thinks it is installed so does nothing and is happy. I try to get it to remove foo, but it can't find it and fails, and does not correct the db to show it is not there. Circular failures! I try to edit dselect's status, and change foo's status line, but now dselect is unhappy and cry's that someone is touching it's porridge. Alright, I will try to learn Apt and that routine, wish me luck! I just wish stable didn't mean stagnant. I recently looked at the editor Eclipse that IBM is behind. I was struck by how beautiful is was but didn't do a whole lot and was indecipherable about how to set up. Design by committe. Mac McCaskie Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote: On Sun, 11 Jan 2004, Mac McCaskie wrote: Hey folks, I'm fairly new to debian and have been playing around getting a web server up and running. I ran into what I thought sounded like a dream come true, WebMin. So I installed it via dselect with some packages I thought I'd need. However now I cannot get it to run. After doing some spelunking I've discovered a few things via comments I've read around and about. -The current .deb package does not install all needed packages. You mean apt-get install webmin doesn't install all webmin modules? That's by design. Each module (apart from a few essential core ones) is a seperate module. Think about it. If you are running postfix why would you need a sendmail module? If you are running proftpd why would you need a wuftpd module installed? Etc. Or do you mean some other ptoblem? -Webmin is way behind (ie out of date) in Woody. -The maintainer is apparently not keeping up. Again this is by design. When a Debian distribution becomes stable, no new software is added to it. Testing/unstable contains version 1.110 which is the most current. Having said that, webmin in woody is broken (and has been for some time but lets not go there.) In fact I've asked the archive maintainers to remove it altogether but they're taking their sweet time about it. -There is no bug report about it's failure to install properly. Problems with the woody packages are likely never going to be fixed. I advise you to install the versions from sarge which will install cleanly on a woody system. You can do this in one of two ways: 1. Search the archives of this list for the topic "apt pinning" 2. Manually download the .debs you want and install them with dpkg -i -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Webmin doesn't install properly on Woody?
Hey folks, I'm fairly new to debian and have been playing around getting a web server up and running. I ran into what I thought sounded like a dream come true, WebMin. So I installed it via dselect with some packages I thought I'd need. However now I cannot get it to run. After doing some spelunking I've discovered a few things via comments I've read around and about. -The current .deb package does not install all needed packages. -Webmin is way behind (ie out of date) in Woody. -The maintainer is apparently not keeping up. -There is no bug report about it's failure to install properly. Now, before my b*tt gets flamed, I realize I am a newbie and the problem may not be webmin. And if you flame a noowbie then shame on you. My real question is this, -should I give up on Woody and move to Sarge as one post (elsewhere) suggested in hopes that Sarge's .deb will actually work? -give up on the .deb package system and use the .tar file - (takes me back to DOS days)? -just shut up and hope someday it will be magically fixed? Thanks for any help, Mac McCaskie -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
