[techtalk] RE: techtalk digest, Vol 1 #162 - 11 msgs
I know there was a bug in the installer of 6.0 that wouldn't install if you attempted to leave one of your partitions as unformatted FAT (I experienced it myself, and it took HOURS to troubleshoot). I don't know if it's still a problem in 6.2, but I think I remember someone mentioning it... If you are trying to leave an unformatted FAT space, my suggestion would be to either A) Not partition it at all, until after you've already installed RHL, or B) Partition it and format it as a linux partition, then reformat it later; I believe either of this will fix the problem. Good luck! - Brian J. Sweeney Systems Admin, imagedog "My kung-fu is mighty" email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 7:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: techtalk digest, Vol 1 #162 - 11 msgs Message: 2 Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 13:40:17 -0700 To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: sandyj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [techtalk] RH 6.2 Install Problems Hey all: I am having install problems with the RH 6.2 First: The system is a PC Chips TX Pro Chipset 512k MB, no on board sound or video. Amd K6-233 Cpu with a good sized heat sync and fan. 32 Mb mixed Edo and FP ram 16MB x 2. Generic CL - GD5446 2Mb video, Cirrus Logic Chipset. MediaVision Spectrum Soundcard with Scsi. Dlink Isa De220e nic. 2Gb WD Hd, Ide. "Primary master" 6X Mitsumi Cdrom, Ide. "Primary slave" All the hardware tests ok with Tuff Test, the Hd tests ok with Ndd and Scandisk. RH 5.2 and MS Os's install with out any problems... I downloaded 1 ISO image from RedHat.com's Ftp site, and 1 from the Alberta mirror site. Burned them to Cd and both choke during the install at about the same point, give or take a screen or two. I have tried to install by booting from the CD it just continues to reboot at the same point during the install over and over again, got sick of it after the 4th reboot. I created the rawrite boot disk and ran the install from that, "Checked the floppy disk for errors, is Ok". and the install chokes at the auto partitioning part of the install. "Tried to manually partition, same thing". The install just freezes up, the mouse still moves around ok but the setup screen is frozen, and I have waited as long as 60 min of no activity before hitting the power button. Any Ideas Thanks ## # ## # # # Any one else dreaming of MAN pages in their sleep...? # # # # Whoohh # # # # Nightmares Suck!!! # # # # # # # # mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]# # # # # # # # http://www.daboys.thetechzone.net/ # # # # # # # ## # ## ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] Virtual desktops in GNOME
Subba Rao, [EMAIL PROTECTED], said: > I am pretty new to GNOME. My .xinitrc has gnome-session at the end. > What I am looking for is virtual desktops (like I had in > FVWM2). I would like that available on the desktop or in the panel(if > that's what it is called) on the bottom. > > Where can I find some sample configurations on how to setup > virtual destops in > GNOME? It would depend on what window manager you're running. I believe that with gnome you also run a window manager to take care of window-managing things like virtual desktops. Last I looked, gnome's default wm was enlightenment, but that could have changed, (or you could have changed it) since enlightenment has virtual desktops by default. I don't know if there's an easy way to find out what wm you're running (maybe there's a way to tell from GNOME?), but the way I'd do it is do a "ps a" and look for a windowmanager. What I'd look for is anything with the letters "wm" in it, and others such as enlightenment, sawmill, or windowmaker. (If you find something you think is a windowmanager, try man-ing it; it'd probably say something like "the blah window manager" near the top). ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] *nix comparisons?
Hi, > > What we advise people is to "go with what you know". If you don't know > anything, we suggest you pick one and stick to it. It helps if you pick > something that folks around you are using as it will be easier to find > help. Sometimes I agree with this, but sometimes I don't. I started with Free BSD, but moved to Linux simply because more apps seemed to be available at the time and more people were migrating to Linux than to BSD. I'm comfortable in either environment, but Linux *is* a bit more user friendly and easier to teach, and I think, as a result, it has a better future. > > I am *so* happy to find this list as it gives me someplace to ask > questions where he doesn't think I'm doing an end-run around him. (Is this > a guy thing? I mean, if I ask someone else for advice on crocking an > arm-roast, it's no big deal, but if he discovers I've asked someone else > about something remotely technical, he's all bothered because he sees it > as an indication that I think he's incompetent. Feh!) That almost sounds like "Since she's asking the girls, it's OK", as in we can't possible be as competent as he is. Am I reading in sexism where it doesn't exist? There definitely seems to be a touch of insecurity there, anyway. Oh, and I couldn't tell you how to prepare a roast (I'm vegetarian), but I can help with technical stuff sometimes :) Best, Caity -- Caitlyn Máire Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.caitys-world.com ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] ISDN and Linux
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000, Rachel Andrew wrote: > > Hi > > I've tried to do this before unsuccessfully but I thought I'd have another > go at it. > > At the moment my network at home consists of two pooters. A doze box called > George and a Linux box called Dot. ATM i am connecting to the net > throughGeorge because I have a USB TA (I know there is slowly getting to be > USB support for Linux but i dont have USB on Dot). I bought an ASUSCOM > ISDNlink card for Dot as it is supposed to be supported by Redhat, and its > in the list in isdn-config (redhat 6.2) is this option in your kernel config /usr/src/linux/.config CONFIG_HISAX_ASUSCOM this is what /usr/src/linux/Documentation/Configure.help says about that option: HiSax Support for ASUSCOM cards CONFIG_HISAX_ASUSCOM This enables HiSax support for the AsusCom and their OEM versions passive ISDN cards. See Documentation/isdn/README.HiSax on how to configure it using the different cards, a different D-channel protocol, or non-standard IRQ/port settings. > > I would really like to be able to connect to the net from Linux and set it > up as a firewall, but so far all attempts to get the card even recognised > as being there seem to have failed. > > Any ideas? > > Rachel > > > > ___ > techtalk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk > ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Virtual desktops in GNOME
On Mon, Aug 14, 2000 at 10:46:22AM -0400 or thereabouts, Fan, Laurel wrote: > Subba Rao, [EMAIL PROTECTED], said: > > I am pretty new to GNOME. My .xinitrc has gnome-session at the end. > > What I am looking for is virtual desktops (like I had in > > FVWM2). I would like that available on the desktop or in the panel(if > > that's what it is called) on the bottom. > > > > Where can I find some sample configurations on how to setup > > virtual destops in GNOME? > > It would depend on what window manager you're running. > > I believe that with gnome you also run a window manager to take care of > window-managing things like virtual desktops. Last I looked, gnome's Yup. > default wm was enlightenment, but that could have changed, (or you could > have changed it) since enlightenment has virtual desktops by default. I Varies by distro. Helix GNOME (sort of a distro of GNOME for various common flavours of Linux and for Solaris) ships with sawfish. The latest RH beta has sawfish (and e is on there too, but if you ask for a GNOME workstation you get sawfish by default, I think). No clue on Mandrake or SuSE. And Caldera doesn't ship GNOME, does it? > don't know if there's an easy way to find out what wm you're running (maybe > there's a way to tell from GNOME?), but the way I'd do it is do a "ps a" Opening the control centre and going to window manager should give you both what's available to you and what you're running at the moment. It should also give you the option to run the configuration tool for the current window manager. (This gets a bit funky if you start madly swapping window managers in that bit: I have ended up giggling at an apparent window manager and "run configuration tool for.." an entirely different window manager more than once.) gtop is gnome's front end to top/ps/df/etc and you can find all manner of things with that. One place to find sample configuration files, for what it's worth, is http://www.dotfiles.com which is always looking for contributions. Alas, I see one .sawmillrc and about three thousand .fvwm(2)rcs. Not what Subba needs, I suspect, but anyone wanting .fvwmrcs or .emacs files is in luck over there. Telsa ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] *nix comparisons?
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, Caitlyn M. Martin wrote: > > Sometimes I agree with this, but sometimes I don't. I started with Free > BSD, but moved to Linux simply because more apps seemed to be available at > the time and more people were migrating to Linux than to BSD. I'm > comfortable in either environment, but Linux *is* a bit more user friendly > and easier to teach, and I think, as a result, it has a better future. I should point out that most all apps that run in Linux will very likely run in FreeBSD with no modification. I think you're referring to the amount of binaries that were available for Linux compared with the number offered for FreeBSD. Personally, I don't feel that Linux will have a 'better' future, however, I do think that both Linux and FreeBSD will be prosperous following their own seperate paths. Each has good things about them that don't exist in the other such as Linux's small learning curve for users migrating from windows and a large library of print references (and any general documentation, for that matter, freebsd's documentation seems to have something lacking). And then there's FreeBSD's loverly software management system (the only thing rivaling the ports system in Linux, I've heard, is Debian's app-get (or something along that lines, I've never really seen it first hand so I wouldn't know what it's like). There's also FreeBSD's terriffic updating ability with cvsup and the make world components that helps keep my system current. > > > > I am *so* happy to find this list as it gives me someplace to ask > > questions where he doesn't think I'm doing an end-run around him. (Is this > > a guy thing? I mean, if I ask someone else for advice on crocking an > > arm-roast, it's no big deal, but if he discovers I've asked someone else > > about something remotely technical, he's all bothered because he sees it > > as an indication that I think he's incompetent. Feh!) > > That almost sounds like "Since she's asking the girls, it's OK", as in we > can't possible be as competent as he is. Am I reading in sexism where it > doesn't exist? There definitely seems to be a touch of insecurity there, > anyway. > > Oh, and I couldn't tell you how to prepare a roast (I'm vegetarian), but I > can help with technical stuff sometimes :) > > Best, > Caity > > -- > Caitlyn Máire Martin > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.caitys-world.com > > > ___ > techtalk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk > ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] FTP & chroot
Hello list, Puh-lease, somebody out there, take a moment to answer this if you can. I'm running wu-ftpd on a RedHat Linux system and have a directory that requires a username & password to access. The account is set up with the proper permissions (e.g. home directory is set to the directory in /pub/ftp where the files live, and that subdir of /home/ftp is owned by the user in question). This user's shell is /etc/ftponly. Previously I had this working so that when the user logged in, they were chrooted to that home directory. Someone else with access to the system and the authority to sign my invoices (mutter, mutter) changed the ownership of that directory and then later decided that he wanted to re-enabled the authentication process. Now he is complaining that when he logs in as that user, he can change directories to the local system (e.g. cd /), like any normal user (although he has no shell access and gets the proper "access denied" error on important files like /etc/shadow). He doesn't remember what all he changed in fiddling with the system, so I'm hoping someone out there can tell me how I can get this chroot status back in order to make him happy. Thanks in advance... Saska -- Saska - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.noogie.com/~saska "He's an affable enough screen presence, but you'd be affable too if you could generate a lucrative movie career by copulating with baked goods." -Paul Tatara on Jason Biggs ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Using AOL with Linux???
>It is not possible to use AOL's proprietary service with Unix and Linux.
This is not true. GNU/Linux users are free to use their machines
to access any proprietary systems they wish to. THere is no prohibition in
the GPL against using proprietary services - just against linking free with
non-free code in the same program.
As for the AOL messenger - there are one or 2 (gpl I think)
GNU/Linux compatable ones out there. They just hit my announcement boxes
last week, but if you are already an experienced aol user, you might be in
a perfect position to do some finall debugging!
.Tami
.signature: syntax error at line 1: `(' unexpected
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(512) 699-7175
Austin, Tx.
>
>On Sun, 13 Aug 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> I have been an AOL user for five or six years. My username, etc., is well
>> established among my colleagues and friends. I would like to continue with
>> AOL after I install Mandrake 7.1. Can this be done? Is anyone using AOL
>> with Linux? Where can I get some "How to" information?
>>
>> Thanks for your help.
___
techtalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Using AOL with Linux???
You misunderstood me, I said nothing about the gpl and was not referring
to that. I was saying that AOL makes it's proprietary systems inaccessable
to anyone who is not running their software, which is not available for
Unix as far as I know.
I'm aware that the gpl allows you to run proprietary non-open source/gpl
software along with/inside gpl software, however, there is no software
available, as I just stated, in Unix that will connect to AOLNet, open a
tcp connection, and make AOL's services available.
Actually, there are many aim clients for Unix, since AOL's toc standards
are open source. To name a few:
gaim (http://marko.net/gaim) License: GPL
caim (http://chimmy.shellux.net/software/) License: GPL
jaim (http://www.nbclub.org/~jharding/jaim.html) License: BSD
kaim (http://www.csh.rit.edu/~benjamin/benjamin/works/kaim/) License: GPL
laim (http://www.angelfire.com/biz/majutsu/laim.html) License: GPL
The list goes on and on (http://freshmeat.net/search.php3?query=aim) with
curses/ncurses clients as well as gtk and qt clients.
Robert Wade
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >It is not possible to use AOL's proprietary service with Unix and Linux.
>
> This is not true. GNU/Linux users are free to use their machines
> to access any proprietary systems they wish to. THere is no prohibition in
> the GPL against using proprietary services - just against linking free with
> non-free code in the same program.
>
> As for the AOL messenger - there are one or 2 (gpl I think)
> GNU/Linux compatable ones out there. They just hit my announcement boxes
> last week, but if you are already an experienced aol user, you might be in
> a perfect position to do some finall debugging!
>
> .Tami
> .signature: syntax error at line 1: `(' unexpected
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (512) 699-7175
> Austin, Tx.
>
> >
> >On Sun, 13 Aug 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >> I have been an AOL user for five or six years. My username, etc., is well
> >> established among my colleagues and friends. I would like to continue with
> >> AOL after I install Mandrake 7.1. Can this be done? Is anyone using AOL
> >> with Linux? Where can I get some "How to" information?
> >>
> >> Thanks for your help.
>
___
techtalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Using AOL with Linux???
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000 14:54:27 -0500 (CDT), <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >>It is not possible to use AOL's proprietary service with Unix and >>Linux. >This is not true. GNU/Linux users are free to use their >machines to access any proprietary systems they wish to. THere is no >prohibition in the GPL against using proprietary services - just >against linking free with non-free code in the same program. Uh, you're confusing legal and technical. There is no (simple) technical means to use Linux, Unix, or any OS other than Windows or MacOS to access AOL, because AOL doesn't publish its communications protocols and nobody has bothered to reverse-engineer them (as far as I know). I think you saw "proprietary" and redflagged. :) Kelly ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] problem
Alright, here's the deal, I had my Linux machine (Mandrake 7) running just fine. I'm using fetchmail to retrieve my email messages from my pop3 ISP server. The fetchmail file is perfect, I've been using it for a month. Then I installed a new hard drive. That worked, but left things a little messy. Including the fact that fetchmail no longer worked. Since I'm new to Linux, I figured I messed up, and decided to just reinstall Linux. The installation went great, I partitioned everythign the way I wanted it, but now, I still can't use fetchmail. and it's the same fetchmailrc file contents as before. Has anyone had a similar problem to this? Please help. I've already contacted my ISP who were very very helpful, but unfortunately, I still can't use fetchmail for some odd reason. If you could help me out, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks in advance -- Linux... The Ultimate Windows Service Pack. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] problem
Quite odd that it wouldn't work after a fresh install. Can you give me the output you get when you run fetchmail in verbose mode (fetchmail -v)? Robert Wade On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, Anthony Russello wrote: > > Alright, here's the deal, I had my Linux machine (Mandrake 7) running > just fine. I'm using fetchmail to retrieve my email messages from my pop3 > ISP server. > > The fetchmail file is perfect, I've been using it for a month. Then I > installed a new hard drive. That worked, but left things a little > messy. Including the fact that fetchmail no longer worked. Since I'm new > to Linux, I figured I messed up, and decided to just reinstall Linux. > > The installation went great, I partitioned everythign the way I wanted it, > but now, I still can't use fetchmail. and it's the same fetchmailrc file > contents as before. > > Has anyone had a similar problem to this? > > Please help. I've already contacted my ISP who were very very helpful, > but unfortunately, I still can't use fetchmail for some odd reason. > > If you could help me out, I would greatly appreciate it. > > Thanks in advance > > -- > Linux... The Ultimate Windows Service Pack. > > > > ___ > techtalk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk > ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
