Richard Myers wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Richard Myers wrote:
> > > Neat stuff, huh? This is Unix.
> > > best wishes,
> > > richard myers
>
> On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, darkknight wrote:
> > : ) Ever thought about teaching?
>
> We, I taught an online college-level Intro to Unix course for
Andy Goth wrote:
>
> > Well, I'm no programmer, but it must not be terribly difficult as I have a
> > couple of programs that do similar things. But Partition Magic is still the
> > best, and comes with more than just the partition creator and resizer. I
> > have Partition Magic 4.0 which has a
Anything you can do to help us command-line idiots would be greatly appreciated!
Richard Myers wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Richard Myers wrote:
> > > Neat stuff, huh? This is Unix.
> > > best wishes,
> > > richard myers
>
> On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, darkknight wrote:
> > : ) Ever thought about t
I would be interested in short tutorials, geared to the time I take to
scan my incoming e-mail and mail lists. I am reading Teach Yourself
Unix in 24 Hours at the moment. The discussion on hard links was
esoteric for my present state of Linux, but I didn't know what a
CD-rom was a few years ago,]
> > I was about to make that statement earlier, but I then thought it wasn't
> > tre since everything that has been said indicated that hard links point
> > to a single file and when all hard links die the file does as well (and
> > that kinda invalidated what I thought). It's a good thing this i
On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> Hmmm. Glad it helped. Maybe we should do some quickie Unix-command-line
> intro lessons online. QUESTION: should it be on this list, or would it be
> better to start a new, separate maillist? Or should we just try a few easy
> lessons, and see how it goes, with t
I'm game for a few online "quickies"
Regards,
Joseph Gardner
Senior Designer / Technical Support
Kirby Company
-Original Message-
From: Richard Myers [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 1999 11:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [n
> On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Richard Myers wrote:
> > Neat stuff, huh? This is Unix.
> > best wishes,
> > richard myers
On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, darkknight wrote:
> : ) Ever thought about teaching?
We, I taught an online college-level Intro to Unix course for several
years. Gave it up because (1) t
Congrats for this wonderful explanation of hard/symlinks.
Patrick
On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Richard Myers wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Andy Goth wrote:
> > > I was about to make that statement earlier, but I then thought it wasn't
> > > tre since everything that
On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Richard Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Andy Goth wrote:
> > I was about to make that statement earlier, but I then thought it wasn't
> > tre since everything that has been said indicated that hard links point
> > to a single file and when all hard links die the file does
On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Andy Goth wrote:
> I was about to make that statement earlier, but I then thought it wasn't
> tre since everything that has been said indicated that hard links point
> to a single file and when all hard links die the file does as well (and
> that kinda invalidated what I thou
> > So, each file name is like a hard link to the data?
>
> Yes, precisely.
I was about to make that statement earlier, but I then thought it wasn't
tre since everything that has been said indicated that hard links point
to a single file and when all hard links die the file does as well (and
From: Andy Goth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So, each file name is like a hard link to the data?
Yes, precisely.
> > What if all the hard links are deleted but the original file remains?
> > Or will it just disappear?
>
> Each file has at least one hard link. If you delete all the hard
> links, you just deleted the file.
So, each file name is like a hard link to the data?
Sounds like bzip2. Except that bzip2 uses symlinks, instead. I believe
that "bunzip2" and "bzcat" are both _symlinks_ to "bzip2."
Although, I imagine that if you're paranoid about deleting files, you
might use hard links as a "backup." As was stated earlier, all regular
files are hard links to
On Sun, 25 Jul 1999, Andy Goth wrote:
> Then what are hard links good for?
There are two applications which do something similar. Call them xyzzy and
plugh. xyzzy gives you a help menu, but plugh is for expert users who
don't need (and don't want) a menu.
I write a better application-- better t
On 25-Jul-99 Andy Goth wrote:
>> > FIPS, eh? Yeah, I read that it could resize partitions as well. Does
>> > anyone have any success stories? Any reports of failures?
>>
>> Fips basically performs one function: It takes a DOS partition, and splits
>> it
>> into two smaller partitions. It ca
> > FIPS, eh? Yeah, I read that it could resize partitions as well. Does
> > anyone have any success stories? Any reports of failures?
>
> Fips basically performs one function: It takes a DOS partition, and splits it
> into two smaller partitions. It cannot resize Linux partitions, and it ca
On Sat, 24 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> > Basically what Partition Magic does that fdisk doesn't, is resize existing
> > partitions without requiring you to first destroy them (and everything on them)
> > and recreate them. I guess that's convenient but -I- wouldn't pay $70 for it.
> > :)
>
> So it's
- Original Message -
From: Andy Goth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 24, 1999 2:46 AM
Subject: Re: [newbie] Oh, yeah
> > Basically what Partition Magic does that fdisk doesn't, is resize
existing
> > partitions without r
> So it's a nondestructive partition resizer? That doesn't sound
> exceedingly hard to write.
Ok, so do it! Power Quest has made a lot of money on it, and it seems to be
very thorough. MS writes stuff that sorta works; PM really works.
> Basically what Partition Magic does that fdisk doesn't, is resize existing
> partitions without requiring you to first destroy them (and everything on them)
> and recreate them. I guess that's convenient but -I- wouldn't pay $70 for it.
> :)
So it's a nondestructive partition resizer? That do
> The 3.0 version is the one that I am familiar with. It works great. I
bought
> mine for $15 with a $15 rebate. I also have calder'a 2.2 but I can't get
> partition magic's bootloader to see my mandrake partitions.
3.0 was great, but didn't know from ext2
William Meyer
> Basically what Partition Magic does that fdisk doesn't, is resize existing
> partitions without requiring you to first destroy them (and everything on
them)
> and recreate them. I guess that's convenient but -I- wouldn't pay $70 for
it.
> :)
It also does a good job of cleaning up after other p
William Meyer wrote:The 3.0 release had a text mode only version which was
handier in some ways,
> as it ran from a DOS boot.
The 3.0 version is the one that I am familiar with. It works great. I bought
mine for $15 with a $15 rebate. I also have calder'a 2.2 but I can't get
partition magic's
> Some products are worth paying for, but sometimes I don't really need
> them that badly. That PartitionMagic thing... I don't even know why I
> need it. And then I don't see a point to use it more than once. If it
> was free, then I would just download it. Since it isn't, ... you know.
> I'l
On 24-Jul-99 Andy Goth wrote:
>> Search around the net for a copy of partition magic 3.0. It will work with
>> win98 and create you partitions.
>
> I don't have (or want) Windows 98.
>
> What's wrong with (c)fdisk? What more do I need? Remember. I'm
> reinstalling Windows, so I don't need t
> > Still too much... free or nothing!
> >
> CDs from cheapbytes are cheaper than downloading. unless, of course,
> your time is without value.
The software was free. That's the point. It's impossible to transport
it free--unfortunately, even if Internet connections were free, blocking
the
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> > > You could use Partition Magic (the $70 is worth it if you can't find "other"
> > > means of acquiring it).
Search around the net for a copy of partition magic 3.0. It will work with
win98 and create you partitions. For linu
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> > You could use Partition Magic (the $70 is worth it if you can't find "other"
> > means of aquiring it). It comes with an additional program called Magic
> > Mover which can place a complete program and all of it's folder contents in
> > a new directory, even on
> You could use Partition Magic (the $70 is worth it if you can't find "other"
> means of aquiring it). It comes with an additional program called Magic
> Mover which can place a complete program and all of it's folder contents in
> a new directory, even on another drive. And there will be no pr
> Linux's answer to the FAT is: Trim it
> :)
Are you just joking, or do you mean that the file allocation table (I
think it's called an I-Node table... correct me) grows as necessary?
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, Lloyd Osten wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, Andy Goth wrote:
> >
> > > I've spent long sleepless nights before fixing the system.ini file after
> > > moving programs from C:\Program Files to D:\Prog. Luckily, I had a
> > > utility to rename
- Original Message -
From: Andy Goth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 2:20 AM
Subject: [newbie] Oh, yeah
>
> I would like to combat this by making a small partition just big enough
> for DOS and Windows. 256MB? Too bad Windows demands a "Prog
On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> > I broke my disk up in 3 partitions. 2 Gig or so for "/root", 64M for "swap", and
>the balance (6Gig) for "/home". This allows me to reinstall (reformat <:-0 ) the
>/root and swap and not touch any home (user) files
>
> What about /usr and all those other d
On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, Andy Goth wrote:
> > Probably for the same reason DOS can only use 640kB RAM. I can
> > hear it now... "Nobody will ever have a drive larger than 2GB!"
I'm sure somebodys got that one on tape too ;)
> Correction: Nobody will ever BE ABLE TO have a drive larger than 2GB!
On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> > I broke my disk up in 3 partitions. 2 Gig or so for "/root", 64M for "swap", and
>the balance (6Gig) for "/home". This allows me to reinstall (reformat <:-0 ) the
>/root and swap and not touch any home (user) files
>
> What about /usr and all those other d
On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> > Probably for the same reason DOS can only use 640kB RAM. I can
> > hear it now... "Nobody will ever have a drive larger than 2GB!"
>
> Correction: Nobody will ever BE ABLE TO have a drive larger than 2GB!
> That is, with DOS.
>
> I like learning about the in
On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, Andy Goth wrote:
> > Probably for the same reason DOS can only use 640kB RAM. I can
> > hear it now... "Nobody will ever have a drive larger than 2GB!"
>
> Correction: Nobody will ever BE ABLE TO have a drive larger than 2GB!
> That is, with DOS.
>
> I like learning about
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, Andy Goth wrote:
> I've spent long sleepless nights before fixing the system.ini file after
> moving programs from C:\Program Files to D:\Prog. Luckily, I had a
> utility to rename most references that went to my CD-ROM drive after it
> changed letters. In Linux, such a th
t;<<<<<<<<<<
On 7/22/99, 10:35:09 PM, Andy Goth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding
Re: [newbie] Oh, yeah:
> > Then run Linux . . . ;)
> I am not the only user of the computer--I have to share it. My dad
uses
> Office on it, and everyone uses DO
On 23-Jul-99 Andy Goth wrote:
>> I broke my disk up in 3 partitions. 2 Gig or so for "/root", 64M for
>> "swap", and the balance (6Gig) for "/home". This allows me to reinstall
>> (reformat <:-0 ) the /root and swap and not touch any home (user) files
>
> What about /usr and all those other di
> I used to copy mine to E:\, then run a program called "Registry Search & Replace"
>and replace all instances of c:\program files with e:\program files. Reboot and then
>delete c:\program files. Never a problem. If some poorly written program insisted on
>c:\, I would let it install, then repe
> Then run Linux . . . ;)
I am not the only user of the computer--I have to share it. My dad uses
Office on it, and everyone uses DOS games. Just so you know, X runs
very, very slowly, so don't bother suggesting using a X Window Office
workalike.
I read that Das Boot document, and I learned
- Original Message -
From: Andy Goth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 11:39 PM
Subject: Re: [newbie] Oh, yeah
> > > > mind. If only I could map "\Program Files" to be on a different
> > > > partiti
Then run Linux . . . ;)
Ty
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 7/22/99, 8:39:38 PM, Andy Goth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding
R
> > I heard that I should have two Linux partitions. Can anyone give me
> > more information on this?
>
> You need a bare minimum of two partitions for Linux. One will be your
> root partition and the other partition will be your swap partition.
> It is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED that you use a swap par
> I broke my disk up in 3 partitions. 2 Gig or so for "/root", 64M for "swap", and
>the balance (6Gig) for "/home". This allows me to reinstall (reformat <:-0 ) the
>/root and swap and not touch any home (user) files
What about /usr and all those other directories I am forgetting?
So, what
Installing Mandrake is pretty easy since it uses all those cool Red Hat
configurator programs. I'm sure Bill would like to discredit it by
saying, "But that's text mode! Windows has the edge since it uses
graphics." Edge? I really like text mode. Text mode graphics is fun
to do since it's cha
> Probably for the same reason DOS can only use 640kB RAM. I can
> hear it now... "Nobody will ever have a drive larger than 2GB!"
Correction: Nobody will ever BE ABLE TO have a drive larger than 2GB!
That is, with DOS.
I like learning about the internals of my computer. I try to learn all
I
> > > mind. If only I could map "\Program Files" to be on a different
> > > partition...
> >
> > Of course, such things are trivially easy in Linux... Wonder why
> > Microsoft chose such a half-assed method of drive management...
>
> Because they're Microsoft and want to make things as ea
Lloyd Osten wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> > Lloyd Osten wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> > > > Andy Goth wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > mind. If only I could map "\Program Files" to be on a different
> > > > > partition...
> > > >
> > > > Of course, such things
On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> Lloyd Osten wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> > > Andy Goth wrote:
> > >
> > > > mind. If only I could map "\Program Files" to be on a different
> > > > partition...
> > >
> > > Of course, such things are trivially easy in Linux... Wonder w
> > Andy Goth wrote:
> >
> > > mind. If only I could map "\Program Files" to be on a different
> > > partition...
I don't put things there, unless forced. It is a path embedded in so many
install tools, though, that you have to be vigilant when you install, and
some programs will give you no cho
Dan wrote:
Andy Goth wrote:
> mind. If only I could map "\Program Files" to be on a different
> partition...
Of course, such things are trivially easy in Linux... Wonder why Microsoft chose such
a half-assed method of drive management...
--
Dan Brown, KE6MKS, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Meddle not in t
Andy wrote:
Oh, yeah. I know where that 2 gigabyte limit comes from. I use FAT16, and that
causes the limit!
32KB clusters!!
Oh, man. That's very, very bad.
I would like to combat this by making a small partition just big enough for DOS and
Windows. 256MB? Too bad Windows demands a "P
> I heard that I should have two Linux partitions. Can anyone give me
> more information on this?
Sure. You should have one partition for files, and another for swapping.
Of course, you can distribute your file system between several partitions-
I have /home on a separate partition so that whe
On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> Andy Goth wrote:
>
> > mind. If only I could map "\Program Files" to be on a different
> > partition...
>
> Of course, such things are trivially easy in Linux... Wonder why
> Microsoft chose such a half-assed method of drive management...
Because they'r
On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> I heard that I should have two Linux partitions. Can anyone give me
> more information on this?
You need a bare minimum of two partitions for Linux. One will be your
root partition and the other partition will be your swap partition.
It is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED th
59 matches
Mail list logo
