Re: Linuxworld Booth #1035
GNHLUG still needs a volunteer or two for Wednesday afternoon. Is anyone going to be at LinuxWorld and willing to devote a few hours to hang around the booth and talk Linux? If so, please sign up here: http://wiki.gnhlug.org/twiki2/bin/view/Organizational/ LWExpo2006BoothSignUpSheet Ted Roche Ted Roche Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: DVI monitor won't wake up?
On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 10:39 -0400, Ben Scott wrote: On 4/4/06, Cole Tuininga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks to a good tax return this year, I finally have my first new system in about 4 years. (Some would say that's a bad tax return. (Better to keep your money and earn interest on it.) But this isn't gnhlug-accounting, so... ;-) ) *grin* Yeah - I've heard that argument before, and I'd go along with it except for one thing ... I probably would have spent it. 8) Did/does tapping the [NUM LOCK] key toggle the corresponding LED on and off? I'll have to check tonight. What about the magic SysRq keys? Does [ALT]+[SysRq]+[S] (sync) cause disk activity and a log entry, for example. (Note that magic SysRq is a kernel compile option and a sysctl runtime option, so it may not be enabled on your system.) These tests will tell you how dead (or not) the console is. Hmmm - this is new to me. I've heard the term before, but never knew what it was. Is there any easy way to see if it's enabled in my kernel ... remotely? 8) -- Cole Tuininga [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Umask?
Hey, all -- someone on a BBS I'm on asked about how to set default permissions on files, and I immediately thought of umask... which appeared to not be installed on my Debian box. So I plugged it into Debian's search page, and got essentially nothing. Is umask not used in Linux? Has it been deprecated? If so, what was it replaced with? Etc., etc., etc... Thanks, -Ken ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Umask?
$ /bin/bash $ type umask umask is a shell builtin Ken D'Ambrosio wrote: Hey, all -- someone on a BBS I'm on asked about how to set default permissions on files, and I immediately thought of umask... which appeared to not be installed on my Debian box. So I plugged it into Debian's search page, and got essentially nothing. Is umask not used in Linux? Has it been deprecated? If so, what was it replaced with? Etc., etc., etc... Thanks, -Ken ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Umask?
I've got a debian system here and most definitely have the umask command, but it's not a binary or a package or anything like that. It's a BASH builtin, so you won't see it anywhere in a package. Anyway, in answer to the question you were trying to answer on the BBS, default permissions are kinda decided by the process doing the writing. Lots of daemons have options for default umasks, bash does with the umask command, etc. That is the general term for how to specify default permissions, but it doesn't imply a specific global means of setting it. -N On Tuesday 04 April 2006 12:09 pm, Ken D'Ambrosio wrote: Hey, all -- someone on a BBS I'm on asked about how to set default permissions on files, and I immediately thought of umask... which appeared to not be installed on my Debian box. So I plugged it into Debian's search page, and got essentially nothing. Is umask not used in Linux? Has it been deprecated? If so, what was it replaced with? Etc., etc., etc... Thanks, -Ken ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Umask?
On Tuesday, Apr 4th 2006 at 12:09 -0400, quoth Ken D'Ambrosio: =Hey, all -- someone on a BBS I'm on asked about how to set default =permissions on files, and I immediately thought of umask... which =appeared to not be installed on my Debian box. So I plugged it into =Debian's search page, and got essentially nothing. Is umask not used in =Linux? Has it been deprecated? If so, what was it replaced with? Etc., =etc., etc... umask is a system call and a shell command in every shell. The idea is that the value that umask is set to is subtracted from the default permission of every file you create. So if your umask is set to 022 and you link an executable which would normally have a default permission of 777 then the resulting file would have a permission mask of 0777 - 022 == 0755. IOW, only the owner can write. Everyone else can read and execute. The umask value of a process is one of those attributes that are inherited by child processes, which is why umask has to be builtin to the shell. i.e., if you had a seperate process to set a umask value then the process would exit and the invoking process would remain unaffected. That's why the umask value that you want should not be set in your .bashrc Instead it should be set in your .bash_profile (assuming you're using bash), the same as setting your environment variables. -- Time flies like the wind. Fruit flies like a banana. Stranger things have .0. happened but none stranger than this. Does your driver's license say Organ ..0 Donor?Black holes are where God divided by zero. Listen to me! We are all- 000 individuals! What if this weren't a hypothetical question? steveo at syslang.net ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Umask?
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:43:37 -0400, Neil Schelly wrote: I've got a debian system here and most definitely have the umask command, but it's not a binary or a package or anything like that. It's a BASH builtin, so you won't see it anywhere in a package. Anyway, in answer to the question you were trying to answer on the BBS, default permissions are kinda decided by the process doing the writing. Lots of daemons have options for default umasks, bash does with the umask command, etc. That is the general term for how to specify default permissions, but it doesn't imply a specific global means of setting it. -N A good example of this is that for Win32 filesystems (vfat, smbfs), the ownership and permissions for the entire mount will be determined by the options given to mount, either on the command line or in the /etc/fstab file. This includes the umask= option, though IIRC use of the fmask and dmask options in lieu of umask is preferred nowadays, to let you specify differing permissions for files and for directories (respectively). Basically, when asked how to set default permissions on files, one needs to ask in return: On *which* files? :-) On Tuesday 04 April 2006 12:09 pm, Ken D'Ambrosio wrote: Hey, all -- someone on a BBS I'm on asked about how to set default permissions on files, and I immediately thought of umask... which appeared to not be installed on my Debian box. So I plugged it into Debian's search page, and got essentially nothing. Is umask not used in Linux? Has it been deprecated? If so, what was it replaced with? Etc., etc., etc... -- Bill Mullen RLU #270075 ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Booth 1035 at LinuxWorld (GNHLUG) amazingly busy...
Due to traffic and the weather we got to the booth at about 10:30 this morning. I was astonished at the number of visitors to the GNHLUG booth specifically. People mostly wanted to know when/where the various chapters have meetings. I strongly suggested they join the appropriate mailing list so that they could see what we were up to. Out booth is right next door to a Montreal based hardware company called Ciara Technologies. They helped us by supplying a few more banner hangers and helped setup the banner. Nice bunch of folks... -Alex
RE: Booth 1035 at LinuxWorld (GNHLUG) amazingly busy...
Any pics of the flaming Unisys server? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of hewitt_tech Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 7:05 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Booth 1035 at LinuxWorld (GNHLUG) amazingly busy... ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
LinuxWorld Bostom
Could someone please pick me up a Fedora Core 5 DVD if they have any tmorrow? I was there today and I was told they won't be getting any disks in until tomorrow. I'll glady pay any postage if needed. The only downside to my dial-up connection is I can't do big downloads. Thanks in advance! Tom -- TARogue (Linux user number 234357) There are only two industries that call their customers users, illegal drugs and computers. --Edward Tufte ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: LinuxWorld Bostom
Hello Gang If someone could pick up an extra Fedora 5 DVD, I will pay fair price or pick-up in So. New Hampshire, at your convenience. Thanks In Advanve paulc From: Thomas M. Albright [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue Apr 04 18:33:58 CDT 2006 To: GNHLUG gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org Subject: LinuxWorld Bostom Could someone please pick me up a Fedora Core 5 DVD if they have any tmorrow? I was there today and I was told they won't be getting any disks in until tomorrow. I'll glady pay any postage if needed. The only downside to my dial-up connection is I can't do big downloads. Thanks in advance! Tom -- TARogue (Linux user number 234357) There are only two industries that call their customers users, illegal drugs and computers. --Edward Tufte ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: DVI monitor won't wake up?
On 4/4/06, Cole Tuininga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What about the magic SysRq keys? Hmmm - this is new to me. I've heard the term before, but never knew what it was. Basically, if enabled, they are a set of keystrokes that tell the kernel to do certain things. Examples: Sync disks; reset keyboard; re-mount all filesystems read-only; reboot; power off. They're occasionally useful when the system is *really* hosed, as they will often survive when everything else is dead. Google for magic sysrq for all the details. One thing I've used this for before is recovering from a crashed X server. [Alt]+[SysRq]+[R] resets the keyboard. At that point, I can type, although the display is still hosed. So [Alt]+[F1] switches to VC1. Then I login as root (blindly), and issue a vga_reset command (which I think I got as a demo program from svgalib). Is there any easy way to see if it's enabled in my kernel ... remotely? 8) cat /proc/sys/kernel/sysrq If 0, present but disabled. If 1, present and enabled. If not found, not present in the kernel. The more I think about it, the more I think all this may not help. The fact that the card stays hosed over a warm reboot implies the card's internal hardware state is really fscked up. It might even be faulty hardware -- have you tested this with *ahem* other OSes? -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
