Benjamin Scott said:
If you absolutely have to pay money for your support, then see above and
below.
On the other hand, consider your non-traditional support options:
One thing I like to point out to people - in 1997, the Linux Community
(mailing lists, newsgroups, etc, not us paid
Benjamin Scott said:
The default GNOME system uses Enlightenment, which is very resource
intensive (by design), and is somewhat unstable (not by design). In your
case, I would recommend invoking the "GNOME Control Center", going to Desktop
- Window Manager, and choosing "Window Maker"
Benjamin Scott Said:
On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Karl J. Runge wrote:
In the past, the [Debian] installs have been truly horrid, but things have
improved to the point where they are only mildly unpleasant.
Has it really improved, or have you just gotten used to the bumps in the
road and now
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Jeffry Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One thing I like to point out to people - in 1997, the Linux Community
(mailing lists, newsgroups, etc, not us paid support companies (shameless plug
;-) won Inforworld's Support of the Year. This unpaid, volunteer community
Karl J. Runge said:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Jeffry Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One thing I like to point out to people - in 1997, the Linux Community
(mailing lists, newsgroups, etc, not us paid support companies (shameless plug
;-) won Inforworld's Support of the Year. This
Matthew J. Brodeur said:
I'm having a problem with an Adaptec 2940UW and several kernels in
RH7.0. Below this message is the output from trying to load the
aic7xxx module while running RedHat's 2.2.17-14smp. The same thing
happens with 2.2.16-22 and 2.4.1.
The MB is a Tyan 1564D w/
*bonk*.. Meeza tupid.. :-) Shoulda been =, not =.. :-)
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, "Thomas Charron" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
main(){
int i = 0;
while(1)
{
while(1)
{
if(i = 1) i++;
else break;
}
i =
Hi Matt,
I have also had this problem several times, usually updating the kernel does
it for me, but it looks like you're already tried it. If checking the
termination doesn't solve the problem, i would then check the speed of the
bus using the SCSI Select utility. You might want to lower the
Nice job Charlie! I would add a few more things to consider though.
It is very clear that the people at Microsoft, such as Jim Allchin,
can no longer see the forest for the trees when it comes to innovation.
They have become so accustomed to buying whatever it is that they want
that they can no
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Benjamin Scott wrote:
So, it sounds like Pine is a decent email program.
I like it, and since I use it, that is the most important
consideration for me. Objectively, though, it seems to have a
surprisingly rich feature set, a strong element of functional DWIM,
and
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Benjamin Scott wrote:
On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Kurth Bemis wrote:
redhat is bloatware...i'm sorry to sayi had redhat on this system
before and it was slow and crashed all the time...(well gnome did)
^^
I seem to recall having this problem; if memory serves, termination is the
right route, but the thing to be *sure* of is that auto-termination is
turned off on the card. Terminate it whatever way you want it to be, but
avoid the auto-termination option.
Good luck!
-Ken
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001,
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Coutu, Dan wrote:
It is very clear that the people at Microsoft, such as Jim Allchin, can no
longer see the forest for the trees when it comes to innovation.
(This rant was inspired by a comment I saw on LinuxToday.)
Microsoft sees Linux as a threat because Linux (or,
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Thomas Charron wrote:
If other posts hold true, that the fan motor if powering according to CPU
usage ...
Slight correction: By temperature, either of the CPU itself, or some other
temperature probe point. An idle CPU in a properly configured system runs
cooler. A hard
comments inserted inline.
Benjamin Scott said:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Coutu, Dan wrote:
It is very clear that the people at Microsoft, such as Jim Allchin, can no
longer see the forest for the trees when it comes to innovation.
(This rant was inspired by a comment I saw on LinuxToday.)
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Jeffry Smith wrote:
Recently, they seem to have lightened up on Linux OS. Maybe because IBM
(one of their major advertisers, MS being another one) is supporting it.
However, they still seem to take a lot of the "linuxgram" method - damning
with faint praise, reporting
Benjamin Scott said:
It was as if, all this time, Ford paid nothing to manufacture the cars they
sell, and all of a sudden, someone sat up and asked why they had to pay for
it anyway.
I don't blame Microsoft for being scared. They are looking straight into
potential oblivion.
Yep, dead
The constitutional rights that are granted are extremely limited. If you
notice, you are only guaranteed the right to *persuit of happiness*. It
doesn't guarantee happiness. That right there says that you can try, and
you might succeed, but you might also fail.
However, on this topic, and since
Benjamin Scott said:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Jeffry Smith wrote:
Recently, they seem to have lightened up on Linux OS. Maybe because IBM
(one of their major advertisers, MS being another one) is supporting it.
However, they still seem to take a lot of the "linuxgram" method - damning
Paul Lussier said:
One thing I find interesting is that though the Consitution guarantees the
right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness, these companies seem to
think that somewhere in there is also the guarantee to make money.
However, it doesn't stop there either. Not only do
The really scarey part about this quote is that the more judges rule in
favor of people like the RIAA and the MPAA, there *IS* case law to
justify this opinion. The more that politicians are "educated" (a.k.a
bribed, I mean, lobbied) by monopolies like Microsoft, there will be
legislation to
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Paul Lussier wrote:
One thing I find interesting is that though the Consitution guarantees the
right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness, these companies seem to
As pedants like myself will happily point out, it does no such thing,
though people often think
I'm getting:
Not Found
The requested URL /cgi-slug/calendar/calendar.cgi was not
found on this server.
--
Seeya,
Paul
It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing,
but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away.
If
Seeing as the Linux-oriented S/N ratio has
become nearly unmeasurable here (and because I
wonder if I can still get a certain few brittle
old synapses to fire in sequence) I'll remark
that John Locke is very likely disappointed with
some of the wording in the Declaration. When
Jefferson and
Suggest putting HD on SCSI 0 vice CD. Some bios's want to boot from 0.
OHJ
On Monday 19 February 2001 10:08, Jeffry Smith wrote:
Matthew J. Brodeur said:
I'm having a problem with an Adaptec 2940UW and several kernels in
RH7.0. Below this message is the output from trying to
It was a SCAM!
Well, SCAM seems to be the problem. I don't know if it's a behavior
particular to the new Linux driver, but the SCAM-assigned IDs got ignored
to some extent. What seemed to be happening was that the HD (not a boot
device, BTW) that was SCAMed to ID#15 ended up being ID#0
There is an exploit floating around that allows for a root shell to be
executed on the vulnerable system. It is widely available on the `net,
and from everything that I have read, it works pretty well, too.
FYI,
Kenny
"Karl J. Runge" wrote:
Hi,
This may be a false alarm, but in the past
i think one of our machines got nailed just This morning with a
suspected named exploit
i can post any info that ive found if anyone would like to examine it,
im still sifting through it myself.
Time to Wipe the disk
Rob
- Original Message -
From: "Karl J. Runge" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, "Robert W. Fowler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i think one of our machines got nailed just This morning with a
suspected named exploit
i can post any info that ive found if anyone would like to examine it,
im still sifting through it myself.
Time to Wipe the disk
cdowns wrote:
"Karl J. Runge" wrote:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, "Robert W. Fowler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i think one of our machines got nailed just This morning with a
suspected named exploit
i can post any info that ive found if anyone would like to examine it,
im still
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Peter Cavender wrote:
part, the CPU, and the heat it generates don't care if they are cracking
encryption, or just running around in a scheduler that has nothing to do.
With the sole exception of systems that have power management and can go
into a low power idle mode,
cdowns wrote:
cdowns wrote:
"Karl J. Runge" wrote:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, "Robert W. Fowler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i think one of our machines got nailed just This morning with a
suspected named exploit
i can post any info that ive found if anyone would like to
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Thomas Charron wrote:
If other posts hold true, that the fan motor if powering according to CPU
usage ...
Slight correction: By temperature, either of the CPU itself, or some other
temperature probe point. An idle CPU in a properly configured system runs
cooler.
Benjamin Scott wrote:
Given that past Debian installs have failed to even create a valid base
installation, I would say, yes, they have improved! They are now at the same
level as, say, Red Hat Linux 3.x. (In fact, the installers of RHL 3.x and
Debian 2.2 are remarkably similar.)
Benjamin Scott wrote:
REDHAT! it never worksever...
Given that Red Hat remains, by far, the most popular Linux distribution in
use, and that Linux continues to gain market share, I'm going to have to
disagree.
Me too. Red Hat is a nice linux distro to recommend to new linux users,
Not that I want to drag this whole subject up again--being mostly
a lurker myself--but isn't this type of response exactly what many folks
were saying turned them away from the list? Just thought I'd throw in my
humble suggestion to "play nice", I guess...
- Dana Tellier
Tony Lambiris wrote:
Benjamin Scott wrote:
I can't understand why people hate Debian's installer so much. It's very
straight-forward, and as long as you know a little about your system (at least the
module you use for your ethernet device), Debian will install no problem. What do
you
Long time list-member, first time poster
Hello,
My name is Jesse McDougall, and I'm a
Linux-aholic. I switched my personal laptop over to
Slackware a little over a year and a half ago. I've
been deeply involved with the Linux community/ideology
ever since. I've coded many websites,
On the gripping hand, I'm seriously considering giving SuSE 7.1 a try.
Heh..me too. Both on x86 and PPC.
that is why I use 6.2, with the updated RPMs, and the perpetually insecure
software (sendmail, wu-ftpd, BIND)
I'm curious... do you have an
Q: How many programmers does it take to change a lightbulb??
A: None: it is a hardware problem.
Seriously, folks, learn a bit about motherboard [design].
**
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following
So why don't you run djbdns? We know vixie's record in the past, despite
all the claims.
It is crap.
They don't fix it.
'nuf said?
--P
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Kenneth E. Lussier wrote:
There are currently 3 exploits for the latest BIND vulnerability that I
know of: bind8x.c, tsl_bind.c, and
Incorrect. Please reference Derek Martin's previous post in this thread,
where he mentions how Linux idles the CPU when it is not busy,
PLEASE REFERENCE LINES IN KERNEL SOURCE, or relevant modules.
--Pete
**
To unsubscribe from
Yesterday, Benjamin Scott gleaned this insight:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Peter Cavender wrote:
part, the CPU, and the heat it generates don't care if they are cracking
encryption, or just running around in a scheduler that has nothing to do.
With the sole exception of systems that have
Today, Peter Cavender gleaned this insight:
Incorrect. Please reference Derek Martin's previous post in this thread,
where he mentions how Linux idles the CPU when it is not busy,
PLEASE REFERENCE LINES IN KERNEL SOURCE, or relevant modules.
/usr/src/linux/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c:
Today, Tony Lambiris gleaned this insight:
Benjamin Scott wrote:
Given that past Debian installs have failed to even create a valid base
installation, I would say, yes, they have improved! They are now at the same
level as, say, Red Hat Linux 3.x. (In fact, the installers of RHL 3.x
45 matches
Mail list logo
