Re: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
Darryl Gibson wrote: > I'm stuck with a win printer too, and was wondering if this is a > feasible work aroound. > > I'm going to setup my winbox as a dual boot machine, and use it as a > firewall, and for the stuff I can't do in Linux yet. Could I also set it > up as a printserver, and pass print jobs from the linux side to the > windoze side, and then print use my win printer? Not wanting to make free ads for VMware, but I think you could use it as an alternative. Actually, if your Win9x is only there as a printer server, I think you could reserve less memory for it, say 12 MB. Win95 should also be enough for this.
Re: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
Stephen Bosch wrote: > > General rule: > > If it's not HP-PCL or PostScript, you are going to have trouble running it > on Linux. Again, that's not a general rule: most Epson printers are neither, and most print _perfectly_ with Linux. -- Jean-Louis Debert[EMAIL PROTECTED] 74 Annemasse France old Linux fan
Re: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
I got a BJC6000 and no luck making it work under Linux. What specific HP driver are you using? TIA Bruce On Thu, 03 Aug 2000, you wrote: > Come on guys! you're not giving up that fast are you? I've got a Canon > BJC6000 printing in Linux, cause I don't use windows anymore, and I'm > using a generic HP printer driver to do it with. Canon offer '0' support > for Linux. They're WORSE than HP when it comes to printer support for > Linux. If anything is considered a "win-printer" the one I've got is. > > One of the things I've noticed about Linux Mandrake is that you can > convert your print que to appear as another type of printer and thereby > utilize your current printer. This doesn't work for some printers, mine is > one of them, but HP's are fairly forgiving when it comes to being willing > to print in less than Windows environments. Give it another try. If you > haven't already, try a few of the more generic drivers. > > -- > Mark > > ** =/\= No Penguins were harmed | > ** <_||_> in the making of this | > ** =\/= message... | Registered Linux user #182496 > > > On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Darryl Gibson wrote: > > > Stephen Bosch wrote: > > > > > If it's not HP-PCL or PostScript, you are going to have trouble running it > > > on Linux. If it's a true Winprinter, you can give up now; at least if it > > > has some kind of native language you have a hope of getting/writing a > > > driver. > > > > I'm stuck with a win printer too, and was wondering if this is a > > feasible work aroound. > > > > I'm going to setup my winbox as a dual boot machine, and use it as a > > firewall, and for the stuff I can't do in Linux yet. Could I also set it > > up as a printserver, and pass print jobs from the linux side to the > > windoze side, and then print use my win printer? > > > > Darryl Gibson > > Linux Neophyte (tm) > > RLU # 182668 > > This computer is 100% Microsoft FREE > > > >
Re: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
Come on guys! you're not giving up that fast are you? I've got a Canon BJC6000 printing in Linux, cause I don't use windows anymore, and I'm using a generic HP printer driver to do it with. Canon offer '0' support for Linux. They're WORSE than HP when it comes to printer support for Linux. If anything is considered a "win-printer" the one I've got is. One of the things I've noticed about Linux Mandrake is that you can convert your print que to appear as another type of printer and thereby utilize your current printer. This doesn't work for some printers, mine is one of them, but HP's are fairly forgiving when it comes to being willing to print in less than Windows environments. Give it another try. If you haven't already, try a few of the more generic drivers. -- Mark ** =/\= No Penguins were harmed | ** <_||_> in the making of this | ** =\/= message...| Registered Linux user #182496 On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Darryl Gibson wrote: > Stephen Bosch wrote: > > > If it's not HP-PCL or PostScript, you are going to have trouble running it > > on Linux. If it's a true Winprinter, you can give up now; at least if it > > has some kind of native language you have a hope of getting/writing a > > driver. > > I'm stuck with a win printer too, and was wondering if this is a > feasible work aroound. > > I'm going to setup my winbox as a dual boot machine, and use it as a > firewall, and for the stuff I can't do in Linux yet. Could I also set it > up as a printserver, and pass print jobs from the linux side to the > windoze side, and then print use my win printer? > > Darryl Gibson > Linux Neophyte (tm) > RLU # 182668 > This computer is 100% Microsoft FREE > >
Re: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
Submitted 03-Aug-00 by Doug McGarrett: > >I mean setting CONFIG_BINFMT_MISC: > ^^^ > in what file should this statement reside, or where and how do you set this? It is a kernel compilation option. If you are doing a menuconfig or xconfig, it is under General Setup, and the specific selection is support for misc binaries. -- _ _|_|_ ( ) *Anton Graham /v\ / <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /( )X (m_m) GPG ID: 18F78541 Penguin Powered!
Re: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
Stephen Bosch wrote: > If it's not HP-PCL or PostScript, you are going to have trouble running it > on Linux. If it's a true Winprinter, you can give up now; at least if it > has some kind of native language you have a hope of getting/writing a > driver. I'm stuck with a win printer too, and was wondering if this is a feasible work aroound. I'm going to setup my winbox as a dual boot machine, and use it as a firewall, and for the stuff I can't do in Linux yet. Could I also set it up as a printserver, and pass print jobs from the linux side to the windoze side, and then print use my win printer? Darryl Gibson Linux Neophyte (tm) RLU # 182668 This computer is 100% Microsoft FREE
Re: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, John Aldrich wrote: > I understand Lexmarks are "Win-Printers" General rule: If it's not HP-PCL or PostScript, you are going to have trouble running it on Linux. If it's a true Winprinter, you can give up now; at least if it has some kind of native language you have a hope of getting/writing a driver. Stephen
RE: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Zaleski, Matthew (M.E.) wrote: > Win Printers are normally called GDI printers. They are heavily tied to > Windows. They have the same failings as winmodems: zero brains on board, > host processsor hogs, Linux-unfriendly, etc. IMHO, HP DeskJets are half > winprinters, given their distinct lack of Linux support and refusal to share > coding specs for the latest and greatest (my HP 970CSe gives crappy print > quality under Linux). I am so disappointed with HP -- those Deskjets don't even share across an all-Windows SMB network! What the *ell is up with that? HP has totally jumped on the cheap and dirty bandwagon. Thanks a lot, Ms. Fiorina. What ever happened to companies putting quality first? -Stephen-
Re: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
On Thu, 03 Aug 2000, you wrote: > > Win-printer? Win-modem does exist, but I'm not sure if any > win-printer exists. Hard to believe anyway. Can you give me any example > so as to avoid them? > I understand Lexmarks are "Win-Printers" John
RE: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
On Thu, Aug 03, 2000 at 08:39:37PM +0800, Seak, Teng-Fong wrote: > > Joe User is running Linux "just to get his feet wet." He has a > > Win-Printer, and cannot print using Linux. He creates a grocery list > > using his favorite Linux editor, and before leaving for the store > > reboots to print the list. > > Win-printer? Win-modem does exist, but I'm not sure if any > win-printer exists. Hard to believe anyway. Can you give me any example > so as to avoid them? Win Printers are normally called GDI printers. They are heavily tied to Windows. They have the same failings as winmodems: zero brains on board, host processsor hogs, Linux-unfriendly, etc. IMHO, HP DeskJets are half winprinters, given their distinct lack of Linux support and refusal to share coding specs for the latest and greatest (my HP 970CSe gives crappy print quality under Linux). Matthew Zaleski
Re: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
At 06:34 AM 08/03/2000 -0700, you wrote: /snip/ >> >> Do you mean iBCS (or something like that)? If yes, there's nothing to > >I mean setting CONFIG_BINFMT_MISC: ^^^ in what file should this statement reside, or where and how do you set this? > >If you say Y here, it will be possible to plug wrapper-driven binary >formats into the kernel. You will like this especially when you use >programs that need an interpreter to run like Java, Python or >Emacs-Lisp. It's also useful if you often run DOS executables under >the Linux DOS emulator DOSEMU (read the DOSEMU-HOWTO, available in >ftp://metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/docs/HOWTO). Once you have >registered such a binary class with the kernel, you can start one of >those programs simply by typing in its name at a shell prompt; Linux >will automatically feed it to the correct interpreter. > /snip/
Re: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
On Thu, Aug 03, 2000 at 08:39:37PM +0800, Seak, Teng-Fong wrote: > > Joe User is running Linux "just to get his feet wet." He has a > > Win-Printer, and cannot print using Linux. He creates a grocery list > > using his favorite Linux editor, and before leaving for the store > > reboots to print the list. > > Win-printer? Win-modem does exist, but I'm not sure if any > win-printer exists. Hard to believe anyway. Can you give me any example > so as to avoid them? I've got one (unfortunately). It's a Canon Multipass and the only way I can print to it is via SMB having it connected to a dedicated Win98 machine. It absolutely will not print under Linux unless I turn it into DOS compat mode which took me an hour to find in the docs before and has to be reset after each print. Incidentally, I forgot how to put it into DOS compat mode and have no desire to search the docs for an hour again. =( But yes, they do exist. Stupid thing is, I have the right filter installed under Linux and it won't print properly even thru SMB... ink comes on way to light on 90% of the page. Wierd. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], OpenPGP key available on www.keyserver.net // Danen Consulting Serviceswww.danen.net, www.freezer-burn.org // MandrakeSoft, Inc. www.linux-mandrake.com 1024D/FE6F2AFD 88D8 0D23 8D4B 3407 5BD7 66F9 2043 D0E5 FE6F 2AFD Current Linux uptime: 14 hours 47 minutes.
Re: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
Submitted 03-Aug-00 by Seak, Teng-Fong: > Win-printer? Win-modem does exist, but I'm not sure if any > win-printer exists. Hard to believe anyway. Can you give me any example > so as to avoid them? Most of the "all-in-one" office machines and most of the Lexmark inkjets use proprietary printer controls that are handled by the windows drivers. There is rudimentary support for _some_ of these, but it is frequently significantly slower than using its native drivers, and eats your cpu cycles. > > Do you mean iBCS (or something like that)? If yes, there's nothing to I mean setting CONFIG_BINFMT_MISC: If you say Y here, it will be possible to plug wrapper-driven binary formats into the kernel. You will like this especially when you use programs that need an interpreter to run like Java, Python or Emacs-Lisp. It's also useful if you often run DOS executables under the Linux DOS emulator DOSEMU (read the DOSEMU-HOWTO, available in ftp://metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/docs/HOWTO). Once you have registered such a binary class with the kernel, you can start one of those programs simply by typing in its name at a shell prompt; Linux will automatically feed it to the correct interpreter. > do with Dos/Win executables. In order to run Dos/Win executable, I don't > think support from kernel is sufficient. To run Dos programs, the kernel > has to emulate Dos system functions and external commands. This is too > much for the kernel. For Win programs, that's even worse: the kernel has > to handle Windows protocols, widget stuffs, etc which are the task of X > server. No, that couldn't be a support for Dos/Win executables. > It isn't kernel level support. It's essentially telling the kernel what wrapper to use for binaries based on a magic cookie. This cookie could be the DOS file's .com extension, or the MZ that occupies the first two bytes of a .exe file. It was designed as an extension to and eventual replacement for the support for Java binaries. > The last time when I tried DosEmu, I just know it runs in a virtual > image disk and I haven't got enough time to see if it runs in a real > partition. It can be configured to do so. > As to Wine, Agreed . . . > On the other hand, we _can't_ set up anything to automatically launch > Dosemu or whatever. Even if the old Dos programme Edit.com is set as > executable, but when we type "edit.com", it still doesn't run and Dosemu > isn't launched either. Even if winword.exe is set as executable, typing > "winword.exe" wouldn't launch Wine either. See above. It can be made to work. > In either case, what I would isto make shell script to launch the > emulator/wrapper and run the programme within it. But in this case, > whether edit.com and winword.exe are marked as executable doesn't matter. True. If you are using wrapper scripts, the execute permission is irrelevant. > Well, sure, this is an example, but this isn't an usual case. Primo, > you're talking about shell script; secundo, you put linux binaries in a > vfat partition. Granted, it is unusual. But I do know people who have placed /home in a vfat partition in order to have easy access to its contents from both operating systems. Of course this does essentially nullify any security that existed as a result of permissions, but it makes them happy :/ -- _ _|_|_ ( ) *Anton Graham /v\ / <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /( )X (m_m) GPG ID: 18F78541 Penguin Powered!
Re: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
Anton Graham wrote: > Submitted 19-Jul-00 by Seak, Teng-Fong: > > 1) to mount these vfat partitions with full permissions by defaults, > > or > > 2) to provide a check box to mount vfat (well, I mean vfat, fat and > > dos) partitions with full access during Installation of Linux. > > I can see potential for problems here from the same newbies that it > seeks to help. Imagine if you will: > > Joe User is running Linux "just to get his feet wet." He has a > Win-Printer, and cannot print using Linux. He creates a grocery list > using his favorite Linux editor, and before leaving for the store > reboots to print the list. Win-printer? Win-modem does exist, but I'm not sure if any win-printer exists. Hard to believe anyway. Can you give me any example so as to avoid them? > (1) Notepad will scramble it because it's too dumb to to lf-crlf > conversion (and it will be his default application to print from). > (2) If he has conversion set up to avoid problem 1, when he saves an > ISO (as an example) to his VFAT partition, it will get the same > conversion and ruin the image. > > Both problems would be blamed on Linux. I see the problem but Linux is not to be blamed, at least not totally. Notepad as provided in NT4 does recognise Unix files (ie LF only) and can read them without any problem. I don't understand why _this_ notepad isn't found in Win98 or Win2k (both of which are made after WinNT4). On the other hand, some Unix text editor can handle Dos file format without any problem, eg NEdit. I understand that you just gave that as an example and there're a lot more. The sad thing about people's viewpoint towards Linux is that they're just expecting so much that they finally get disappointed. Actually, if they had thought about it, they should have found that Linux (and all applications surrounding it) is very generous while Windows is very egocentric. Linux (as well as the rest) has done its best to get along with Win. On the other hand, Win is just like a spoiled child which just doesn't care others. In such case, everyone gives his expectations on Linux and when Linux can't do it, he only feels disappointed. This attitude is actually very unfair. > > By the way, there's also the "exec" option for every vfat > > partition to indicate that all files in the partition are executable. > > I don't think this choice really makes sense because Dos/Win binary > > aren't executable under Linux. Marking them as executable is just > > misleading. > > They are! See the kernel compile option for support for miscellaneous > binaries. Do you mean iBCS (or something like that)? If yes, there's nothing to do with Dos/Win executables. In order to run Dos/Win executable, I don't think support from kernel is sufficient. To run Dos programs, the kernel has to emulate Dos system functions and external commands. This is too much for the kernel. For Win programs, that's even worse: the kernel has to handle Windows protocols, widget stuffs, etc which are the task of X server. No, that couldn't be a support for Dos/Win executables. > Essentially you can set it up to automagically launch > dosemu, wine, or any other interpreter/wrapper for these binaries. > (It's a bit involved, but possible, though I personally wouldn't do > it.) The last time when I tried DosEmu, I just know it runs in a virtual image disk and I haven't got enough time to see if it runs in a real partition. As to Wine, sorry to those Wine fans here in the list, but personally I would forget about it. This "wrapper" is thicker than the Earth's crust! It's really a resources consumer. If one really wants to use Win apps daily, try VMware. On the other hand, we _can't_ set up anything to automatically launch Dosemu or whatever. Even if the old Dos programme Edit.com is set as executable, but when we type "edit.com", it still doesn't run and Dosemu isn't launched either. Even if winword.exe is set as executable, typing "winword.exe" wouldn't launch Wine either. In either case, what I would is to make shell script to launch the emulator/wrapper and run the programme within it. But in this case, whether edit.com and winword.exe are marked as executable doesn't matter. > Also, one *could* keep shell scripts or even linux binaries in a > vfat partition. When I first made the transition to linux, I had > several shell scripts in a Windows partition that I used for cygwin. > Symlinks in ~/bin gave me easy access to them from linux as well. Well, sure, this is an example, but this isn't an usual case. Primo, you're talking about shell script; secundo, you put linux binaries in a vfat partition. Seak T.F.
Re: [expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
Submitted 19-Jul-00 by Seak, Teng-Fong: > 1) to mount these vfat partitions with full permissions by defaults, > or > 2) to provide a check box to mount vfat (well, I mean vfat, fat and > dos) partitions with full access during Installation of Linux. I can see potential for problems here from the same newbies that it seeks to help. Imagine if you will: Joe User is running Linux "just to get his feet wet." He has a Win-Printer, and cannot print using Linux. He creates a grocery list using his favorite Linux editor, and before leaving for the store reboots to print the list. (1) Notepad will scramble it because it's too dumb to to lf-crlf conversion (and it will be his default application to print from). (2) If he has conversion set up to avoid problem 1, when he saves an ISO (as an example) to his VFAT partition, it will get the same conversion and ruin the image. Both problems would be blamed on Linux. > By the way, there's also the "exec" option for every vfat > partition to indicate that all files in the partition are executable. > I don't think this choice really makes sense because Dos/Win binary > aren't executable under Linux. Marking them as executable is just > misleading. They are! See the kernel compile option for support for miscellaneous binaries. Essentially you can set it up to automagically launch dosemu, wine, or any other interpreter/wrapper for these binaries. (It's a bit involved, but possible, though I personally wouldn't do it.) Also, one *could* keep shell scripts or even linux binaries in a vfat partition. When I first made the transition to linux, I had several shell scripts in a Windows partition that I used for cygwin. Symlinks in ~/bin gave me easy access to them from linux as well. -- _ _|_|_ ( ) *Anton Graham /v\ / <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /( )X (m_m) GPG ID: 18F78541 Penguin Powered!
[expert] Full permission to VFAT partitions
In Mandrake 7.0 and earlier (but I think it's the same in 7.1) and in other distributions, VFAT partitions are unwrittable for normal users. Everytime when I reinstall Linux, I've to add "umask=000" options in /etc/fstab. When we mount a Vfat partition, most of the time we want to share files with the Win9x world. But if the partition is unwrittable for normal users, there's no point of mounting it -- why not use floppy diskettes? Don't you agree? Personally, vfat partition is used as storage and I like to put important file there, and once I reboot my PC to Win9x, I can burn the data to CD-Rom. (Actually, there's another dummy solution: unmount the partition as root and remount it as a normal user; but if we do this everytime, it's better make the change in fstab.) Now, finding out why one can't write to it, how to change the settings, where to find informations and what to do would really demand a lot to a newbie/normal user. So my suggestion is 1) to mount these vfat partitions with full permissions by defaults, or 2) to provide a check box to mount vfat (well, I mean vfat, fat and dos) partitions with full access during Installation of Linux. By the way, there's also the "exec" option for every vfat partition to indicate that all files in the partition are executable. I don't think this choice really makes sense because Dos/Win binary aren't executable under Linux. Marking them as executable is just misleading. Keep on the good product. Seak T.F.
