Re: [techtalk] POP mail security

2000-01-08 Thread Laurel Fan

Excerpts from linuxchix: 8-Jan-100 Re: [techtalk] POP mail sec.. by
"Jenn V."@simegen.com 
> if I know I'm planning to search a man page I pipe
> it through less. I can save myself a step now. :)

If you prefer less, you can set the environment variable PAGER to less. 
It can be set to anything, but stuff that's not an actual pager is not
really good for anything except "look what I can do" value. (For
example, if one were to set PAGER to "sed -e s/GNU/foo/ | more" on a
system that uses GNU cat, the manpage would talk about the foo version
of cat.  The sed command substitutes foo for GNU.) 


[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.linuxchix.org



Re: [techtalk] POP mail security

2000-01-08 Thread Robert Kiesling


"Jenn V." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The list also specifically says not to tell people to RTFM. I appreciate
> that that was not your intention, but I recall glancing at your answer and
> thinking 'uh, that's perilously close to a blunt RTFM. A newbie is going to
> be put off and upset by that one'.
> 
> A way to do the same thing, but present it better, is to pass on the
> information and /then/ say 'here's how I found it'.

I think that works for people with a sincere desire to learn.  
Telling people HOW to read the manual is much better.  

Man uses the MANPATH environment variable to find which directories
have manual pages; i.e.;

MANPATH="/usr/man:/usr/local/man:/usr/X11R6/man"; export MANPATH

> > If that's the philosophy of the list, again, please update the charter
> > and I will unsubscribe.
> 
> Nope. Just don't frighten the newbies off while we're teaching them.
> 
> Alas, 'man' seems to have been deliberately constructed to do just that. ;)

Recently on gnu.emacs.sources, there was 'woman', which formats man
pages without troff/nroff.  :)

Robert 



[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.linuxchix.org



Re: [techtalk] initrd/kernel building

2000-01-08 Thread Jeff Dike

> Or, can I just not bother with initrd? Is it worth having? 

You don't need it.

You should also probably change the kernel version number if it would 
otherwise be the same as what you've already got.  What I did was make 
EXTRAVERSION=a, so that the new kernel version was 2.2.5a rather than the 
2.2.5 that came with the system.  This makes module version checking work 
better.  It lets you keep the new modules separate from the old ones, since 
they'll end up in different directories.

My usual drill is
make clean (if necessary)
make config (or menuconfig or xconfig)
make dep
make

>From here on, I'm a little fuzzy, since I haven't done it in so long (my 
kernels don't run directly on hardware).

add a lilo entry if it's not already there
as root, make zlilo
make modules
as root, make modules_install
reboot
Jeff




[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.linuxchix.org



[techtalk] thanks

2000-01-08 Thread Gustavo Sudre

 hi guys
 I'm not sure about the police of this list, but if i'm doing something
wrong sending this email only to thank that answer about gtk+ and libc, tell
me, ok?
 Oh, thanks :)

Gustavo Sudre
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
UIN: 2065075
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.linuxchix.org



Re: [techtalk] initrd/kernel building

2000-01-08 Thread moebius

Hey There,
If you have redhat's install guide the initrd image is mentioned in detail
for recompiling in the scsi section. My guide is at work so I can't tell
you what page. But their guide is online.
HTH,

Harry Hoffman
Product Systems Specialist
Restaurants Unlimited Inc.
Seattle WA
206 634-3082 ext. 270

On Fri, 7 Jan 2000, Darren Osadchuk wrote:

> I have Red Hat 6.1 installed, and am about to rebuild the kernel. My
> /etc/lilo.conf has this line in it:
> 
> initrd=/boot/initrd-2.12.12-20.img
> 
> Now, from what I can tell, I'll need to use mkinitrd to make a new initrd
> file that matches up with my new (2.2.14, I think -- the latest stable)
> kernel. My specific questions is: at what point in the process do I need to
> do this? This isn't addressed in the kernel how-to, and initrd wasn't
> incorporated into Red Hat 5.2, from what I can remember, so this is the
> first time I've come across it.
> 
> Or, can I just not bother with initrd? Is it worth having?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> __
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pangea.ca/~osadchuk/
> 
> Richard was thunderstruck: it had been like watching Emma Peel, Bruce Lee, and
> a particularly vicious tornado, all rolled into one and sprinkled with a
> generous helping of a mongoose killing a king cobra. That was how she moved.
> That was how she fought.
> 
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.linuxchix.org
> 



[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.linuxchix.org