On Mandrake 10.1 Community, when I run ps -ef, the UID column shows the user
name for the owner of all processes except the dbus-daemon-1 process owned by
uid 72. The line for that process shows the numeric uid instead of the user
name. /etc/passwd, /etc/shadow and /etc/group all have an entry
On Sunday 20 February 2005 4:33 pm, Michael Woinoski wrote:
On Mandrake 10.1 Community, when I run ps -ef, the UID column shows the
user name for the owner of all processes except the dbus-daemon-1 process
owned by uid 72. The line for that process shows the numeric uid instead of
the user
Alexander Ruoff wrote:
I'm running 224Mb ram which I would have thougbt was enough. Although
vid memory is probably a bit light at 16Mb
Hi Graham,
since the OO problem is solved I just got one question... you got a 16
MB graphic card (which shouldn't be a problem... used 8 MB and 16 MB
until
Miark wrote:
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 07:22:04 +0100, Graham wrote:
It's just taken me about 15 minutes to open a file, make a small
alteration and print a single page with about 3 lines of text and a box
on it.
Blow away your .openoffice directory and that'll probably fix it:
rm -rf ~/.openoffice
I'm running 224Mb ram which I would have thougbt was enough. Although
vid memory is probably a bit light at 16Mb
Hi Graham,
since the OO problem is solved I just got one question... you got a 16
MB graphic card (which shouldn't be a problem... used 8 MB and 16 MB
until very recently with
Well, why?
In the past I've mostly used Star Office 5.2 which while it doesn't go
at the speed of light, leaves Open Office 1.1 standing.
It's just taken me about 15 minutes to open a file, make a small
alteration and print a single page with about 3 lines of text and a box
on it.
Oh, and I
On Thu, 2004-10-28 at 16:22, Graham Watkins wrote:
Well, why?
In the past I've mostly used Star Office 5.2 which while it doesn't go
at the speed of light, leaves Open Office 1.1 standing.
It's just taken me about 15 minutes to open a file, make a small
alteration and print a single
Am Do, den 28.10.2004 schrieb Graham Watkins um 8:22:
Well, why?
In the past I've mostly used Star Office 5.2 which while it doesn't go
at the speed of light, leaves Open Office 1.1 standing.
It's just taken me about 15 minutes to open a file, make a small
alteration and print a single
On Thursday 28 October 2004 02:22 am, Graham Watkins wrote:
Well, why?
In the past I've mostly used Star Office 5.2 which while it doesn't go
at the speed of light, leaves Open Office 1.1 standing.
It's just taken me about 15 minutes to open a file, make a small
alteration and print a
Stephen Kühn wrote:
On Thu, 2004-10-28 at 16:22, Graham Watkins wrote:
Well, why?
In the past I've mostly used Star Office 5.2 which while it doesn't go
at the speed of light, leaves Open Office 1.1 standing.
It's just taken me about 15 minutes to open a file, make a small
alteration and print
Alexander Ruoff wrote:
Am Do, den 28.10.2004 schrieb Graham Watkins um 8:22:
Well, why?
In the past I've mostly used Star Office 5.2 which while it doesn't go
at the speed of light, leaves Open Office 1.1 standing.
(snipped)
Is everyone else here having the same experience?
How do you cope?
Greg Meyer wrote:
On Thursday 28 October 2004 02:22 am, Graham Watkins wrote:
Well, why?
In the past I've mostly used Star Office 5.2 which while it doesn't go
at the speed of light, leaves Open Office 1.1 standing.
(Snipped)
Is everyone else here having the same experience?
How do you cope?
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 19:21:40 +0100
Graham Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greg Meyer wrote:
snip, snip, snip
Just tried running under root (yes, I know I shouldn't) and it was
much faster. Then tried starting it as me using xfce4 which is less
of a memory hog - such a slow opening I
On Thursday 28 October 2004 03:41 pm, Björn Olsson wrote:
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 19:21:40 +0100
Graham Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greg Meyer wrote:
snip, snip, snip
Never say that to a guy :-D
Just tried running under root (yes, I know I shouldn't) and it was
much faster. Then
On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 03:45, Graham Watkins wrote:
Abiword.
I can see your point but the compatibility with Word is likely to keep
me looking at OO, SO or . Word ;-)
What I do - when I have to use OO, is to open up one instance of it, and
then minimise it - then when I have to open
On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 04:21, Graham Watkins wrote:
Just tried running under root (yes, I know I shouldn't) and it was much
faster. Then tried starting it as me using xfce4 which is less of a
memory hog - such a slow opening I wondered for a while if it had
crashed. Looks like you may
On Thursday 28 October 2004 14:21, Graham Watkins wrote:
Greg Meyer wrote:
On Thursday 28 October 2004 02:22 am, Graham Watkins wrote:
Well, why?
In the past I've mostly used Star Office 5.2 which while it doesn't go
at the speed of light, leaves Open Office 1.1 standing.
(Snipped)
Is
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 07:22:04 +0100, Graham wrote:
It's just taken me about 15 minutes to open a file, make a small
alteration and print a single page with about 3 lines of text and a box
on it.
Blow away your .openoffice directory and that'll probably fix it:
rm -rf ~/.openoffice
Miark
From: Tom Brinkman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DEVICE=eth0
BOOTPROTO=dhcp
try changing this to =static
I will give it a try, but ultimately I will need to use DHCP. What is
weird is that the network actually works. The trouble I have is that
I don't know what log
On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 11:55, Kaj Haulrich wrote:
On Friday 21 May 2004 17:16, David A. Ferguson wrote:
snip
Why does my eth0 show failed?
When Mdk10oe boots it hangs on the 'bring up eth0' message for a
long time and then says [FAILED]. Where can I go to look and see
more detailed
On Friday 21 May 2004 19:26, Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 11:55, Kaj Haulrich wrote:
On Friday 21 May 2004 17:16, David A. Ferguson wrote:
snip
Why does my eth0 show failed?
When Mdk10oe boots it hangs on the 'bring up eth0' message
for a long time and then says
Dear Friends,
As far as I know after Alt + F2 and writing konquerer and pressing
enter , Konquerer must run. But with my Mndrk. 10.0 does not run . Why ??!
What do you recommmend ?
Best regards
H.ERTAS
Want to buy your Pack or
Op Thu, 20 May 2004 14:47:59 +0300 schreef [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
As far as I know after Alt + F2 and writing konquerer and pressing
enter , Konquerer must run. But with my Mndrk. 10.0 does not run . Why
??!
What do you recommmend ?
Open an xterm and see if you can run 'konqueror' from the
:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [newbie] WHY Alt + F2
AND konquerer command does not function ??
andrake.com
Op Thu, 20 May 2004 14:58:15 +0300 schreef [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
With an xterm I can not run konquerer. It says command not found
- Does it work from the menu?
- Can you locate the program running locate konqueror from the command
line?
Yes- It is not in the path
No - It is not installed
On
On Wed, 19 May 2004 19:58:42 -0700, David E. Fox
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 17 May 2004 17:52:23 -0500
David A. Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for the tip. I will look in syslog the next time it
happens.
I ran a surface scan of the disk and it said ok. I don't know how
to
On Thursday 20 May 2004 07:58 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-
-With an xterm I can not run konquerer. It says command not found
-
-H.ERTAS
Umm...its spelled konqueror... :-)
--
/\
On Thursday 20 May 2004 07:47 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear Friends,
As far as I know after Alt + F2 and writing konquerer and pressing
enter , Konquerer must run. But with my Mndrk. 10.0 does not run . Why ??!
What do you recommmend ?
do not capitalize it
spell it konqueror
or make
On Mon, 17 May 2004 17:52:23 -0500
David A. Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for the tip. I will look in syslog the next time it happens.
I ran a surface scan of the disk and it said ok. I don't know how
to test the RAM but I haven't had any other problems at all so I
would bet
That's probably not corruption. You are just
experiencing one difference between
windows-like linebreaks and Unix-style linebreaks.
When you open the textfile on windows
you see a small square where the line should
end, right? This is normal. If you need to
convert a file to windows style, try
From: Damian Gatabria [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That's probably not corruption. You are just
experiencing one difference between
windows-like linebreaks and Unix-style linebreaks.
When you open the textfile on windows
you see a small square where the line should
end, right? This is
From: Damian Gatabria [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Damian Gatabria [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That's probably not corruption. You are just
experiencing one difference between
windows-like linebreaks and Unix-style linebreaks.
When you open the textfile on windows
you see a small square
And just another thought.
I found that unless you included [ actually typed ] the file extension
name ( eg *.txt) then my system when within windows is not happy about
it at all.
To check others concerns issue the following from your command client:
$su
Password
#fdisk /dev/hda
I dual boot between Linux and W2k. I store the shared data on a
FAT. Whenever I write to it from Linux it almost always comes up
corrupted.
Is there some special setting I should have in my 'fstab' or
something?
It is so bad that it is basically useless. I don't do
- Original Message -
From: Marc Lijour [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: [newbie] Why is my FAT always corrupted by Linux?
Le May 13, 2004 05:00 pm, David A. Ferguson a écrit :
I dual boot between Linux and W2k. I store
David A. Ferguson wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Marc Lijour [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: [newbie] Why is my FAT always corrupted by Linux?
Le May 13, 2004 05:00 pm, David A. Ferguson a écrit :
I dual boot between
I dual boot between Linux and W2k. I store the shared data on a FAT.
Whenever I write to it from Linux it almost always comes up corrupted.
Is there some special setting I should have in my 'fstab' or something?
It is so bad that it is basically useless. I don't do anything special
just open
I dual boot between Linux and W2k. I store the shared data on a FAT.
Whenever I write to it from Linux it almost always comes up corrupted.
Is there some special setting I should have in my 'fstab' or something?
It is so bad that it is basically useless. I don't do anything special
just open
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 13 May 2004 16:00:24 -0500
David A. Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I dual boot between Linux and W2k. I store the shared data on a
FAT. Whenever I write to it from Linux it almost always comes up
corrupted.
Is there some special
Le May 13, 2004 05:00 pm, David A. Ferguson a écrit :
I dual boot between Linux and W2k. I store the shared data on a FAT.
Whenever I write to it from Linux it almost always comes up corrupted.
Is there some special setting I should have in my 'fstab' or something?
It is so bad that it is
Does anyone know why the ~ (tilde) in a URL often shows up in
the URL box in Mozilla as %7E ??
If I click on the bottom line in my sig file below, Mozilla
shows the page I've reached as:
http://users.ids.net/%7Ebobread/cotm.htm
Also, if I type %7E in the URL box, it functions the same
as if I
Tsiteerin Bob Read [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Does anyone know why the ~ (tilde) in a URL often shows up in
the URL box in Mozilla as %7E ??
0x7E or 126 in decimal is the ASCII code of tilde symbol. In urls a few special
characters (most notably the space within a filename) get automatically
Thanks Aavo -- glad I asked. ;-)
Bob
Aavo Tambur wrote:
Tsiteerin Bob Read [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Does anyone know why the ~ (tilde) in a URL often shows up in
the URL box in Mozilla as %7E ??
0x7E or 126 in decimal is the ASCII code of tilde symbol. In urls a few special
characters (most
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:34:00 +
trufflesdad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did update the eslrahc site and if I do a urpmi gift-plugin
it tells me there is no package by that name..
That is correct there is no pkg named gift-plugin.
gift-plugin is provided by gift-openft
urpmi gift-openft
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 08:02:34 -0500
Charles A Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:34:00 +
trufflesdad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did update the eslrahc site and if I do a urpmi gift-plugin
it tells me there is no package by that name..
That is correct there is no
ON Wednesday, January 21, 2004 8:17 AM trufflesdad scribbled:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 08:02:34 -0500
Charles A Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:34:00 +
trufflesdad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did update the eslrahc site and if I do a urpmi gift-plugin
it tells me
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 09:29:30 -0600
Smith, Robert A [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I get no package named gift-openft when I do the rpmi call...
How do I find out which repository to add to get it
Sorry for the hassle but it I am just coming back to Mandrake
The first thing I would
Schwartz Avi wrote:
On Nov 11, 2003, at 8:21, Ronald J. Hall wrote:
Check it out - very interesting reading.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12603
Unfortunately for the Inquirer, the article is wrong. If you run the
Linux Windows search you get on the first page indeed 'Results 1-15 of
On Nov 11, 2003, at 10:13, Franki wrote:
Schwartz Avi wrote:
On Nov 11, 2003, at 8:21, Ronald J. Hall wrote:
Check it out - very interesting reading.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12603
Unfortunately for the Inquirer, the article is wrong. If you run the
Linux Windows search you get on
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 09:31, Schwartz Avi wrote:
On Nov 11, 2003, at 10:13, Franki wrote:
I tried the same with searching for Windows. MSN initially gave me
2399 results but after many clicks on Next it ended up being only 1069!
Google gave me 98,600,000. Can you say MSN sucks?
On Nov 11, 2003, at 10:47, Charlie wrote:
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 09:31, Schwartz Avi wrote:
On Nov 11, 2003, at 10:13, Franki wrote:
I tried the same with searching for Windows. MSN initially gave me
2399 results but after many clicks on Next it ended up being only
1069!
Google gave me
: [newbie] Why MicroSlop wants Google!
On Nov 11, 2003, at 10:13, Franki wrote:
Schwartz Avi wrote:
On Nov 11, 2003, at 8:21, Ronald J. Hall wrote:
Check it out - very interesting reading.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12603
Unfortunately for the Inquirer, the article
mwafkowski said:
That article belongs in a rag such as the (US) National Inquirier...come
one people. You're really not that bored?!
Nope...please note the National Enquirer URL:
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/
and the URL for the article:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12603
Want to
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 11:47 am, Charlie wrote:
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 09:31, Schwartz Avi wrote:
On Nov 11, 2003, at 10:13, Franki wrote:
I tried the same with searching for Windows. MSN initially gave me
2399 results but after many clicks on Next it ended up being only 1069!
I don't believe you answered the question:-
Possibly you don't have kde available as an option in the dropdown list
, and that is your real problem ?
John
--
John Richard Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
M.A.Bell wrote:
mike wrote:
M.A.Bell wrote:
Greetings.
I've had this problem for a couple of months and had hoped that
installing 9.2 would fix it, but it didn't.
After I boot up, I see a terminal window on a blue screen.
When I enter startkde, it does.
How can I get my system to do this
mike wrote:
M.A.Bell wrote:
mike wrote:
M.A.Bell wrote:
Greetings.
I've had this problem for a couple of months and had hoped that
installing 9.2 would fix it, but it didn't.
After I boot up, I see a terminal window on a blue screen.
When I enter startkde, it does.
How can I get my system to
John Richard Smith wrote:
M.A.Bell wrote:
mike wrote:
M.A.Bell wrote:
Greetings.
I've had this problem for a couple of months and had hoped that
installing 9.2 would fix it, but it didn't.
After I boot up, I see a terminal window on a blue screen.
When I enter startkde, it does.
How can I get
Tony S. Sykes wrote:
What is your hardware? If you have a nvidia geforce4 have you installed
the drivers?
Tony.
-Original Message-
From: John Richard Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 8:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] Why do I have
. No need to install any
drivers. OTOH, there's no tellin what kind of bugs installin the
proprietary nVidia driver can cause.
-Original Message-
From: John Richard Smith
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November
04, 2003 8:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] Why do I
AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] Why do I have to start KDE manually?
M.A.Bell wrote:
mike wrote:
M.A.Bell wrote:
Greetings.
I've had this problem for a couple of months and had hoped that
installing 9.2 would fix it, but it didn't.
After I boot up, I see a terminal window
Greetings.
I've had this problem for a couple of months and had hoped that
installing 9.2 would fix it, but it didn't.
After I boot up, I see a terminal window on a blue screen.
When I enter startkde, it does.
How can I get my system to do this automagically?
Any pointers would be greatly
M.A.Bell wrote:
Greetings.
I've had this problem for a couple of months and had hoped that
installing 9.2 would fix it, but it didn't.
After I boot up, I see a terminal window on a blue screen.
When I enter startkde, it does.
How can I get my system to do this automagically?
Start kde then open a
mike wrote:
M.A.Bell wrote:
Greetings.
I've had this problem for a couple of months and had hoped that
installing 9.2 would fix it, but it didn't.
After I boot up, I see a terminal window on a blue screen.
When I enter startkde, it does.
How can I get my system to do this automagically?
Start
M.A.Bell wrote:
mike wrote:
M.A.Bell wrote:
Greetings.
I've had this problem for a couple of months and had hoped that
installing 9.2 would fix it, but it didn't.
After I boot up, I see a terminal window on a blue screen.
When I enter startkde, it does.
How can I get my system to do this
... that BEFORE you get Linux, those who speak in favour of it say
things like oh, get Linux coz it is far less demanding on hardware or
you have much more control configuring hardware or you are in control
Then when you do install Linux and the gee whizz GFX card won't work or
the CD-ROM
On Thursday 30 October 2003 11:02 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... that BEFORE you get Linux, those who speak in favour of it say
things like oh, get Linux coz it is far less demanding on hardware or
you have much more control configuring hardware or you are in control
Then when you do
On Thursday 30 October 2003 11:02 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... that BEFORE you get Linux, those who speak in favour of it say
things like oh, get Linux coz it is far less demanding on hardware
or you have much more control configuring hardware or you are in
control
Then when you do
On Friday 31 October 2003 02:02 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... that BEFORE you get Linux, those who speak in favour of it say
things like oh, get Linux coz it is far less demanding on hardware or
you have much more control configuring hardware or you are in control
Then when you do install
On Friday 31 Oct 2003 12:49 pm, Greg Meyer wrote:
On Friday 31 October 2003 02:02 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
linux is not less demanding on hardware, but more so.
I think it used to be true, when linux was mainly being used to run a
few server apps. Nowadays we want it to do as wide a
On Friday 31 Oct 2003 7:02 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... that BEFORE you get Linux, those who speak in favour of it say
things like oh, get Linux coz it is far less demanding on hardware or
you have much more control configuring hardware or you are in control
Then when you do install Linux
On Wednesday 15 Oct 2003 11:55 pm, Lucio_Costa wrote:
Hi guys,
I´m experimenting download 3 mdk 9.2 iso using
torrent, I don't know why but it's too slow. I
accessed this link:
http://torrent.mandrakesoft.com:6969 and I saw my
infos below. Is it normal?
BitTorrent download info
*
Hi guys,
I´m experimenting download 3 mdk 9.2 iso using
torrent, I don't know why but it's too slow. I
accessed this link:
http://torrent.mandrakesoft.com:6969 and I saw my
infos below. Is it normal?
BitTorrent download info
* tracker version: 3.3
* server time: 2003-10-15 23:05 UTC
I suggest you model yours after mine, making the necessary adjustments.
The syntax is not that hard to understand. Once you have updated your
lilo.conf, post it here. Note, the append line will be completely
different for you, so I suggest you skip these lines in
flavio,
if you have done
fdisk /dev/hdd
and confirmed that windows is indeed on the first parttition on that disk and
that it does have the number 1 - not necessarily the same thing!
then i suggest that lilo is choking ion your other entries, perhaps those
other entries regarding /dev/hdd1?
flavio,
if you have done
fdisk /dev/hdd
and confirmed that windows is indeed on the first parttition on that disk and
that it does have the number 1 - not necessarily the same thing!
then i suggest that lilo is choking ion your other entries, perhaps those
other entries regarding /dev/hdd1?
let me put it up top so Flavio might see it
I guess it means you better post your /etc/lilo.conf cause you don't
have the right hdyx (here y is a letter for the drive position on the
ide bus, and the x is a number for a partition.
your error might be any part of /etc/lilo.conf, so post the whole
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 12:01:42 +
Flávio Henrique [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
my Linux is in hdc6
and my win98 is in hdd1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] etc]# lilo
Warning: LBA32 addressing assumed
Fatal: Not a number: padrã
[EMAIL PROTECTED] etc]#
Could you kindly
let me put it up top so Flavio might see it
I guess it means you better post your /etc/lilo.conf cause you
don't
have the right hdyx (here y is a letter for the drive position
on the
ide bus, and the x is a number for a partition.
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 09:30:58 +
Flávio Henrique [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
let me put it up top so Flavio might see it
I guess it means you better post your /etc/lilo.conf cause you
don't
have the right hdyx (here y is a letter for the drive position
Why do you have three of the same entries? What are these for anyway? I
think you would be safe in getting rid of these.
other=dev/hdd1
label=windows
table=/dev/hdd
map-drive=0x80
to=0x81
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:31:50 +
Flávio Henrique [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why do you have three of the same entries? What are these for
anyway? I think you would be safe in getting rid of these.
other=dev/hdd1
label=windows
table=/dev/hdd
Hi...
I'm very newbie in Linux and I have a problem to make something here...
After install Mandrake 9.1 in my hd, I bring another with win98 already
have and install it...
I trying to insert the win98 in LILO menu but it does not work...
The hd that have md9.1 is hdc6 and the other, that have
On Thursday 09 October 2003 04:46 am, Flávio Henrique wrote:
Hi...
I'm very newbie in Linux and I have a problem to make something here...
After install Mandrake 9.1 in my hd, I bring another with win98 already
have and install it...
I trying to insert the win98 in LILO menu but it does not
On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 00:52, yankl wrote:
On Thursday 09 October 2003 04:46 am, Flávio Henrique wrote:
Hi...
I'm very newbie in Linux and I have a problem to make something here...
After install Mandrake 9.1 in my hd, I bring another with win98 already
have and install it...
I
On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 07:10, Flávio Henrique wrote:
On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 00:52, yankl wrote:
On Thursday 09 October 2003 04:46 am, Flávio Henrique wrote:
Hi...
I'm very newbie in Linux and I have a problem to make something here...
After install Mandrake 9.1 in my hd, I bring
I guess it means you better post your /etc/lilo.conf cause you don't
have the right hdyx (here y is a letter for the drive position on the
ide bus, and the x is a number for a partition. I don't think you are
gonna get win9x on without it being on the first partition of the
On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 19:27, ed tharp wrote:
On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 07:10, Flávio Henrique wrote:
On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 00:52, yankl wrote:
On Thursday 09 October 2003 04:46 am, Flávio Henrique wrote:
Hi...
I'm very newbie in Linux and I have a problem to make something here...
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 11:32:29 +
Flávio Henrique [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess it means you better post your /etc/lilo.conf cause you
don't have the right hdyx (here y is a letter for the drive
position on the ide bus, and the x is a number for a partition. I
don't
my Linux is in hdc6
and my win98 is in hdd1
Make this your windows entry in /etc/lilo.conf:
other=/dev/hdd1
label=windows
table=/dev/hdd
map-drive=0x80
to=0x81
map-drive=0x81
to=0x80
Save the file, then (without the
It worked for me.
I installed Linux 9.0 on a brand new 60 gig HD then slaved my old 40 gig
Win98 drive to that one, pointed Lilo to it and it booted just fine. My
Win drive has since crashed altogether so I am totally Linux now.
I did my editing in MCC
Russ
I guess it means you better post
On Friday 03 October 2003 01:33 pm, mwafkowski wrote:
There is no Kentucky Fried Chicken, remember, as in Kentucy - associated
with rednecks?/fried chicken-as in fried=heart attacks.
It's KFC to you , Suh!
MRW
Well, I do live in Kentucky...
I did stain (cedar siding) part of my house
On Friday 03 October 2003 05:31 pm, Heather/Femme wrote:
hehe... hm... think they'd let me off if I put the little Copyright
symbol in there?
Debatable...
Running from Col.Sanders
Femme
Hehehehe, you better - I hear one of his fav slogans is the birds the
word lol
--
On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 02:39, Ronald J. Hall wrote:
On Friday 03 October 2003 05:31 pm, Heather/Femme wrote:
hehe... hm... think they'd let me off if I put the little Copyright
symbol in there?
Debatable...
Running from Col.Sanders
Femme
Hehehehe, you better - I hear one of his
On Saturday 04 October 2003 11:53 am, Aron Smith wrote:
As the Taxidermist said(while. taking his girlfriend to dinner) you
gotta stuff the bird before you mount it
Yea, and I'm a firm believer that one in the bush is worth 2 in the hand
anytime wicked grin
--
On Sat, 04 Oct 2003 21:17:10 +1000
Stephen Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 02:08, Carroll Grigsby wrote:
Femme:
Well, now we know why you didn't choose a career in the diplomatic
service.-- cmg
Yeah - that might be true...God...I wanted to say something horribly
On Sat, 04 Oct 2003 21:27:41 +1000
Stephen Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 03:07, Ronald J. Hall wrote:
On Thursday 02 October 2003 10:31 pm, Heather/Femme wrote:
Finger-Licking-Good-Femme
(or so they tell me)
roflol I can see a herd of lawyers from
On Thursday 02 October 2003 07:52 pm, Heather/Femme wrote:
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 01:18:19 -0700
M J Pipkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is unsolicited spam and an invasion of my privacy. Please send
no further newbie communicationsand remove my name from your list.
and who the flying
On Thursday 02 October 2003 10:31 pm, Heather/Femme wrote:
Finger-Licking-Good-Femme
(or so they tell me)
roflol I can see a herd of lawyers from Kentucky Fried Chicken bearing
down on you, even as we speak Femme! :-)
--
: Re: [newbie] Why so many reboots ?
On Thursday 02 October 2003 10:31 pm, Heather/Femme wrote:
Finger-Licking-Good-Femme
(or so they tell me)
roflol I can see a herd of lawyers from Kentucky Fried Chicken bearing
down on you, even as we speak Femme
1 - 100 of 410 matches
Mail list logo
