On Fri, 07 Mar 2003 21:51:19 +
Jon Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> You will probably hear about this at least 20 times today, but if you
> have not heard of it yet, there is the actual papers filed at
> http://www.sco.com/scosource/
Kind of reminiscent of the suit AT&T launched agai
Hi folks,
Just my opinion - there's more than one "correct" way to go here ...
I would personally much rather see top posting, even if it was only a
line saying "comments interleaved", where applicable.
If everyone top-posted, the thread would be intact, and it would save a
lot of wasted time
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> What I'd like to do is restrict his access to only the zone files he
> needs access to, and nothing else. I can't seem to find the
> configuration options in webmin to limit this access.
How about using a combination of sudo and a restrictive editor, like
rvim?
Re
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 15:45, Derek Martin wrote:
> More often than not, said aggravation is, I think, the result of the
> ego of the OP being unwilling to take being corrected/criticized.
I'm more than willing to be corrected/criticized. I don't think it is
fair for someone to extrapolate a genera
In a message dated: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 16:53:15 EST
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>What I'd like to do is restrict his access to only the zone files he
>needs access to, and nothing else. I can't seem to find the
>configuration options in webmin to limit this access.
>
>Can someone more experienced in
Hi all,
I need to give access to my DNS server to someone, and figured Webmin
would be the best way to do it. However, it seems that, at least at
first glance, it's an all-or-nothing thing.
What I'd like to do is restrict his access to only the zone files he
needs access to, and nothing else
Hi,
You will probably hear about this at least 20 times today, but if you
have not heard of it yet, there is the actual papers filed at
http://www.sco.com/scosource/
In reading these papers I see more holes in their thinking than exists in
Swiss Cheese, not the least of which is the fact that the
A good place for this type of info is in the Web Links section of the
news.gnhlug.org web site.
--Bruce
PS: Any admonishments about top-posting are ignored. Increase your
productivity - get gnhlug-discuss in digest form!
> It isn't often that I've needed info about the various
> characteristics
On Friday, March 7, 2003, at 03:45 PM, Derek Martin wrote:
One thing I've noticed is that any discussion about this sort of
thing
invariably causes more aggravation and uses more bandwidth than the
original
transgression. :-)
More often than not, said aggravation is, I think, the result of t
So, how 'bout them Linux - ain't they sumthin!
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, at 2:16pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I've found that taking up extra bandwidth for this sort of conversation
> thread is just as inconsiderate as not following any other general rule.
One thing I've noticed is that any discussion about this sort of thing
invariably causes mo
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 02:16:20PM -0500, Dana S. Tellier wrote:
> Let's just call it even at this point, shall we, because the whole
> argument is getting rather petty. From my lurking over the past few
> years, I've found that taking up extra bandwidth for this sort of
> conversation threa
> I see the emphasis on "guideline", which means it's recommended, but
> not written in stone. If the rest of the community has a problem
> with my sig, I'll change it. But trying to through netiquette back
> in my face is rather petty, don't you think?
Let's just call it even at this
In a message dated: 07 Mar 2003 13:46:24 EST
Jeff Macdonald said:
>> I don't mean to sound unusually harsh, however, the idea that your
>> personal laziness is more important than being considerate to others
>> in this community I find totally intolerable.
>
>Just because I have 'done' top post
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 11:37, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On 6 Mar 2003, "Jeff" == Jeff Macdonald wrote:
>
> Jeff> Mike, You seem to be a mission.
>
> You know, I've thought and called mike a lot of things over the
> years, but I've never considered him a mission :)
>
:-) Sorry Mike.
<
In a message dated: 07 Mar 2003 10:19:30 EST
Jeff Macdonald said:
>On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 17:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> On 6 Mar 2003, at 4:43pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > I've done top posting because I'm to lazy ...
>>
>> You can stop there. I see your problem. :-)
>
>Not entirely.
> On 6 Mar 2003, "Jeff" == Jeff Macdonald wrote:
Jeff> Mike, You seem to be a mission.
You know, I've thought and called mike a lot of things over the
years, but I've never considered him a mission :)
Jeff> I've done top posting because I'm to lazy to delete all the
Jeff> text that E
In a message dated: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 20:53:45 EST
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>did you do what Paul
>Lussier does, and configure a default route via every router on your
>network, plus a few that don't exist? ;-)
Hey! I resemble that remark! And further more, resent the heckling!
*YOU* are the o
In a message dated: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 08:55:30 EST
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>> I defined a default gateway for each (oooh that might be it?)
>
> That would be it, yes. If you define multiple default gateways, you will
>have multiple default gateways. ;-)
Wow! This scenario seems rather vaguely
On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 17:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 6 Mar 2003, at 4:43pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I've done top posting because I'm to lazy ...
>
> You can stop there. I see your problem. :-)
Not entirely. Regarding Derek's comments about what tools my wife may
use are way off ma
It isn't often that I've needed info about the various
characteristics of power supplies, but this site is
where I'll look first the next time I do:
http://www.formfactors.org/developer/powersupply.htm
http://www.formfactors.org/formfactors/form_factors.htm
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, at 6:18am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> By "virtual", do you mean "aliased"? That is, a single Ethernet
>> interface with multiple IP addresses? Or do you mean 802.1Q VLAN
>> interfaces?
>
> I have an eth0, eth0:1, eth0:2 ... eth0:8
Okay, those are "aliased" interfaces. "V
At 08:53 PM 3/6/03 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, at 6:43pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have a machine with some 8 virtual interfaces.
By "virtual", do you mean "aliased"? That is, a single Ethernet interface
with multiple IP addresses? Or do you mean 802.1Q VLAN interfac
23 matches
Mail list logo
