Re: [PLUG] Any comments on SLAX?
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On a language related forum I asked for recommendation of a
> small distro that would be attractive to users of that
> forum. Slackware was one recommended, though I'd hardly call
> it small ;/ A Google search then gave SLAX as being
> Slackware based.
>
> I find the idea of only downloading the modules you will
> actually use attractive. It claims to be easily installed on
> a USB stick and has dialers for analog modems, two absolute
> requirements for me. I haven't yet assembled a list of
> modules to download so I don't know how large my initial
> download will be. It should be significantly smaller than
> Debian or Ubuntu which are the two top contenders for
> functionality {I'll not down load an office suite nor a
> browser I wouldn't use - just two annoying features of
> popular distros).
>
> Any SLAX users with comments/suggestions?
>
> Thank you
Not a SLAX user per se, but I have had the opportunity to mess around
with Puppy Linux. Puppy is another breed of Linux that claims to be
small and modular, last time I checked the ISO was around 100MB and
came with some bare necessities. It supports persistent settings and
storage as well, which is a nice plus. Give it a go if you don't find
SLAX to be to your tastes!
--
FF
___
PLUG mailing list
PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org
http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] Ubuntu running by default on a Mac
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Isaac Lewis wrote: > Hi there. > > I am wondering if anyone has some tips about running Ubuntu by default on a > mac. I have heard that it can be quite tricky, and I wonder if that is true > or not. > > Would the best approach be to install Ubuntu as the base OS and then OSX in > a partition? Would that even work with OSX's install process? > > Thanks a lot, > Isaac My experience with any Linux distribution running on Apple hardware is to be aware of the model you are attempting to use. Both the newer Macbook Air's and iMac's use custom GPU's, which the nouveau drivers will _not_ play nice with. Other than that, best practice dictates that you follow through with the Apple supported BootCamp method for setting up your partitions, and then rather than installing Windows, install Ubuntu instead. This works, although there is some manual fixing after the install, IIRC GRUB won't be configured properly because Apple's EFI does wonky things. Hope this helps! -FF- ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] SD cards always mount read-only
This may seem silly to suggest, but have you could attempt to throw up a quick Windows VM and see if you have RW access to the drive then. May not be optimal, but at least it'll get you support from SanDisk? On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:32 PM, John Jason Jordan wrote: > On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 12:22:57 -0700 > John Jason Jordan dijo: > > > > Today I spent a couple hours trying everything I could think of, > including live CDs of Lucid, Knoppix, and the utility/rescue CDs GRML > and The Ultimate Boot CD. I used mkfs, parted and Gparted, palimpsest, > fsck and several others that I can't remember now. Nothing could touch > it. I can't reformat it, delete, move or resize the partition, edit the > boot flag, or change the disk label. Everything reported the same error: > "the device is read-only." > > Then I called SanDisk technical support, but after 20 minutes on hold I > gave up. They also have web-based chat support where I was finally able > to communicate with someone. He insisted that he couldn't help me until > I had the device inserted in a Windows computer. I asked for an RMA and > he said he could not give me an RMA until he was able to "troubleshoot" > the card on a Windows computer. > > I am becoming increasingly suspicious that SanDisk has some kind of > rootkit that blocks using the card on any but the devices they are > willing to support, and that does not include Linux. > > Tomorrow I must go to PSU for class. I will take the card with me in > the hopes of finding a Windows laptop that has an SD card reader. I can > check out a laptop at the library, but I don't know if they have SD > card slots. Or I can go to computer help in the basement of Smith. > Someplace there must be a computer I can try it with. > > If I do not find success tomorrow then I will return it to > 1SaleADay.com where I bought it. Mind you, the problem may be in the > Thinkpad, but either way the card is useless if I can't get it to work > in the Thinkpad. Like, what value is a read-only storage device? > > PS: I have also had problems with SanDisk USB sticks in the past - > same sort of locked features that the user cannot delete. I disrecommend > SanDisk. > ___ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] List Guidelines
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Jameson Williams wrote: > What is preventing our list administrators from removing the offending party > from the subscribers list, and adding a regex for the offending domain to > the ban list? The years of repeated violation of publicly stated list rules > would justify this - and to do so could greatly benefit the quality of our > transactions. As Galen Sietz mentioned in a thread in PLUG-TALK, the list administrators take a different tack to the situation: http://lists.pdxlinux.org/pipermail/plug/2004-May/032032.html Banning even a single member from this list (no matter what side of this issue you fall on) has the potential to snowball into something much nastier; I'd hate to see a GNU/Linux mailing list degenerate into a walled garden where discussion about free software is maintained by a select few. The old adage goes "Live and let be", and that's exactly what I do when reading this list, many times I ignore the originating sender and focus on the content of the post, amazing right? If the topic doesn't pertain and/or interest you then perhaps it is in your best interest to leave it alone. This idle banter about degrading the quality of the list etc, etc, is only affecting the bigots who choose to focus on the actions of a solitary troll -- ignore it and move on! I think we've beaten this horse long enough, can we please drop the issue? -FF- ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] question on Ubuntu 11.10 (Oneiric) repositories availability in Oregon
I too, lost access to cat.pdx.edu, although I was accessing Arch-Linux repositories. I ended up changing my update server to point to the OSU OS Lab, which seemed to work fine. Hope this helps! On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 12:45 PM, website reader wrote: > I lost the ability to rsync into the Ubuntu mirror repository at > "mirrors.cat.pdx.edu" over the past weekend, and trying to use the > "mirror.uoregon.edu" repo also fails. The pdx repository states that > a network link cannot be made and redirects to "opal.cat.pdx.edu", > while the U of OR link simply replies NOP on the rsync request (had to > take a look inside the TCP packet to figure out what was happening in > this case) > > It is close to the official release of Ubuntu Oneiric, could the repos > be limiting access to avoid everyone landing on them and overloading > bandwidth? Or perhaps the problem is local to me? > > The pdx repository has been running well for months, so it was a > surprise to lose access. > > I would like to know if these repos are accessible to others in the > Portland area. Thanks for letting me know. > > Randall > ___ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] I really do need help with Asterisk...
> I think you are wrong. I have been trying to be a part of this list for > years where trouble has been ongoing. The Linux community may be > welcoming somewhere else, but not here in Portland. I hardly deem it necessary to post to this list, it's often far more interesting to read what my elders have to say and deal with; the few times I *have* posted I haven't been treated with any disrespect or hostility. It is merely a testament to your own hostility and berating tone that seem to earn you the ire of this list. >I want to be a part > of the Linux list in my community, but this community is very unchurched > and way too liberal. This invariably comes up one way or another over > and over and over. The liberals causing the problem, like Keith, are > never criticized for their behavior and frankly they are never called on > it. Nobody ever says, "hey Keith, you are blatantly intolerant of the > opposite viewpoint on an issue you shouldn't have brought up in the > first place." Keith and others have not just done this once, this > happens over and over and over. It is high time, it is past time for > David Mandel or someone to take corrective action. I admire your dogmatic adherence to your moral ethics and beliefs, it's something that many of us (myself included) lack today. What I cannot stand, however, is your incessant need to fling these beliefs in the face of contributors to the list, *regardless* of whatever transgression you may think they have committed. Simply because other members of the list have broken the rules does not justify your, often violent and uncalled for, reactions; if you are truly a man of God then it should be a simple matter of staying "above the influence". There's no reason to poison this discussion with inane ramblings about God, censorship, reactOS, or any other babble that doesn't pertain to a technical question. I think several other members have attempted to make this point before. I'd hate to perpetuate this discussion any further, but I want to be perfectly clear with you here, Michael: simply because I or other members of this list do not respond immediately to your emails does not mean we are in any way censoring your messages. I do, however, find your questions to be arcane, esoteric, and generally above my level of competence. Above all else I am here to learn from the minds of greater Linux practitioners than I, and I couldn't care less what personal beliefs they hold. If you ever hope to get *any* sort of help from this list, I suggest you start doing the same. :FF: ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] Web Site Accessible But Name Doesn't Resolve
Downloaded fine for me, did you perhaps mean to wget from http://orgmode.org/ instead? Navigated to the website just fine, too. On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Rich Shepard wrote: > I'm trying to download org-mode for emacs from http://orgnode.org/. The > Web site pages load in firefox, but I cannot download > http://orgnode.org/orgnode-7.7.tar.gz because both firefox and wget cannot > find that name to resolve to an IP address. Neither host nor whois can find > it. > > Can someone suggest why this might be? > > Rich > ___ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] Fedora 15 upper bar ugly...
This will get you started: http://live.gnome.org/GnomeTweakTool Followed by: http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/CheatSheet If those don't help then I'm sure a deeper investigation of the gnome website will provide some results. Beyond that you could try checking the gnome mailing list, or maybe root around for something on the Fedora forums. That's about all I can think of for the moment, good hunting! On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Michael C. Robinson < plu...@robinson-west.com> wrote: > The icons on the upper bar look like blurred color tv screens. > I don't like the band style either. Is there a way to change > the color scheme? I want the bar to be the standard gray. > What happened to the icons that were on my desktop in > Fedora 14 before the upgrade? So far, Fedora 15 is confusing. > > ___ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > -- ~ Fernando Freire ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] Favorite Linux Netbook specific distro?
To be honest I'm a bit skeptical of the cloud, unless I'm the one hosting my own cloud. Any distro should work fine enough on a netbook, I think it's just a matter of manually tweaking it to your performance tastes. I've had good experiences with debian squeeze running xfce4, it doesn't take up a lot of space and it doesn't suck up as much power as KDE or GNOME. On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:54 AM, nathan w wrote: > On 04/28/2011 06:37 AM, wes wrote: > >> > >> > >> If anyone who regularly attends the PLUG Sunday Linux Clinics is > >> reading this thread, I'd be curious to know how > >> many people are showing up with netbooks and asking about some of the > >> more obscure distros like Arch. It's always fun to sit > >> at home and play around w. different distros, it might be more fun to > >> have a "netbook nerd" day to be able to check out what other > >> people are running, talk shop, eat penquinos, and drink coffee. :-) > >> > >> > > I go to most of the clinics, and I've pretty much only seen people trying > to > > get Ubuntu to work on netbooks. I've seen perhaps 5-10 netbooks show up > > there so far. > > > > -wes > surprised no-one has mentioned jolicloud. i haven't used it personally, > but it's apparently very popular, and all the reviews i've seen speak > well of it. (i believe it's ubuntu-derived) > > regards, > > nathan > ___ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > -- ~ Fernando Freire ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] RMS Talk
This was most amusing, along with the auctioning of the gnu. :) On Apr 8, 2011 12:55 PM, "Paul Wroe" wrote: > Stallman did a comedy routine about the church of EMACS. I was entertained. > > On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Richard C. Steffens wrote: > >> Did anyone make it to the RMS talk? Was there anything about it worth >> mentioning? (I don't mean that to sound demeaning.) >> >> -- >> Regards, >> >> Dick Steffens >> >> >> ___ >> PLUG mailing list >> PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org >> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug >> > > > > -- > -Paul > ___ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] Algorithm's and Compilers PSU...
s(CS321 CS322 CS350)? > > I'm close enough to the end of earning a degree in CS that getting help > to get through still makes sense. Trouble is, I need to look outside of > PSU because of excessive anti cheating policies. The University should > be self sustaining, it should be geared toward being able to educate > local residents instead of foreigners from other places. Obviously, > PSU's ability or lack thereof to educate local residents isn't something > I have the power to improve or even influence right now. I have a free > ride practically to attend PSU or else I'd be gone already. > > ___ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > -- ~ Fernando Freire ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] combined BSD and Linux security monitor
Keith, For those of us unfortunate enough to be unable to attend, are there any resources you would recommend (print or web) that covered Michael's presentation? Thank you! On Feb 16, 2011 8:13 AM, "Keith Lofstrom" wrote: > I was thinking about Michael Dexter's BSD presentation last night. > One of my concerns about software is the insertion of logic bombs. > > While open source code is decently reviewed by many eyes, the > review process is unlikely to catch intentional malware whose > behavior is scattered through many interacting modules. A > line of code here, a regexp there. It would be difficult to > make all that add up to an exploit, but not impossible. > > So, I assume that well funded agencies with enough brainpower > (US National Security Agency, Chinese People's Liberation > Army, Iranian Sepāh) can, and have, inserted logic bombs in > my Linux systems through seemingly innocent contributions to > open source software. The insertion process would have to > be continous, and uncertain, as patches introduced by others > might deactivate parts of the behavior the logic bombs depend > on. An arms race, where one side is trying to hide their > manipulations, and the other side is unknowingly defeating the > manipulations through the general process of code improvement. > > I assume different code trees, like Linux and BSD, do not share > enough commonalities for the same subtle exploits to work on > both. So if the two operating systems are running side by > side, processing the same inputs for the same intended outputs, > a third system could monitor the outputs of both and look for > differences. This is a very high level abstraction; of course > the outputs and their sequence will differ, even if they follow > the same overall specification. But if the specifications are > specific enough, the differences will be small and predictable, > and serious discrepancies detectable. Both systems might have > some of the same overall exploits, but the time-to-exploit would > likely be different. That should be enough to get attention > and trigger intervention. > > On a less paranoid level, a "two OS plus detector" system > might be useful for testing code, or looking for failures in > systems needing ultra-high reliability. Yes, the maintainers > of such systems will need big staffs to deal with a lot of > false alarms, but their code will become very well tested as > the sources of such alarms (bad specs and noncompliant code) > were eliminated. > > While I personally do not have the resources necessary to > maintain multiple OS'es (production Redhat and dabbling > with Ubuntu is all I can manage), those who can support a > heterogeneous collection of systems might consider setting > up some test systems like this. > > So, I'm glad some of us geeks are running BSD! Keeping that > knowledge alive and ready to spread will be vitally important > in an emergency. > > If we geeks ever find ourselves defending the region's > infrastucture from large scale attack, we may need to rapidly > deploy such systems to keep the generators from melting and > the gas pipelines from exploding. From what I've read, the > US government and military are focused on cyber offense, and > the defense of their own systems, not protecting the general > population. We are on our own - someday, the people on this > list may save Portland. > > Keith > > -- > Keith Lofstrom kei...@keithl.com Voice (503)-520-1993 > KLIC --- Keith Lofstrom Integrated Circuits --- "Your Ideas in Silicon" > Design Contracting in Bipolar and CMOS - Analog, Digital, and Scan ICs > ___ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] LibreOffice - Worth the trouble?
Dick, In my brief experience Libre Office has proved visibly quicker and more responsive than OpenOffice.org. I've also read that since splitting from Oracle, interoperability between Libre and MS Office has improved, although I'm not sure if that extends as far back as '97! If you enjoy the old Excel style, and assuming you are using gnome, you could try Gnumeric which has a similar interface to the old Excel style and comparable features. ~Fernando Freire On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 8:02 AM, Richard C. Steffens wrote: > Is anyone using LibreOffice? > Did you switch from OpenOffice? > Was there any trouble switching? > Was it worth the trouble? > > I've been using OpenOffice, saving documents in .doc or .xls format, on > my Linux machine for a few years and am satisfied with it for the most > part. I still like MS Excel 97 on my XP laptop better, but can get by > with OOCalc. I am annoyed by some incompatibilities between OOWriter and > MS Word 97. Simple documents convert OK in either direction. But do > anything unique, like putting the tilde over an n in a Spanish word, or > use bullets and it's hit or miss when I open one in the other. (I > suppose it's possible that the more recent version of MS Office has > "improved" in that regard, but I'm not holding my breath!) > > Anyway, what are your thoughts on OO vs. LibreOffice? > > -- > Regards, > > Dick Steffens > > > ___ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
