Re: [techtalk] FastTrak100 rant
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:00:48 -0700, you wrote: >As the subject implies, this isn't so much a question as a general >frustration rant. > >BEGIN RANT >ARG! > >Promise claims to have all this great linux support for their stuff. But >I've got a FastTrak100 ide RAID card that might as well be a paperweight for >my RH7.1 (yeah, I know it's broken ;that's a seperate issue). More >specifically, they won't release the source and only have compiled modules >for 2.2 (I've tried; they just don't work in 2.4). > >ARG! > >Well, software RAID it is then. Software RAID is all the FastTrak does in the first place - the only useful bit is that (unlike Linux's software RAID) their BIOS extension will allow you to boot from a RAID volume directly. If you look very carefully at how that system works, in fact you'll find it's exactly the same chip they use on their "non-RAID" IDE adapters: there's a small hardware difference (an extra soldered link) which enables this feature in their BIOS, and that's about it. So unless you want to BOOT from a mirrored partition, don't worry: just use plain old Linux software RAID. If you want your whole HDD mirrored, booting from a floppy will give you this ability too. >So glad they put the RAID options at >install time; makes boot raids so much easier than in 5.x. >END RANT You'll also find Andre Hedrick (the "Linux-ATA guy") is ... less than friendly towards Promise. Lots of nastiness took place between them over licensing terms, it seems. James. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] Re: techtalk digest, Vol 1 #424 - 10 msgs
My laptop sleeps itself too which is more than a bit frustrating. I have 'compaq presario'. I turned off all the bios power savers as well as the two linux power saver demons and put on a screen saver and no more sleep problems. For about 6 months. Then, out of the blue, it started sleeping itself again last week. Go figure. I have not installed anything new. (I've been too busy learning php to break anything ;-) ) I have noticed that putting on screen savers seems to help, but only some of the screen savers. Try messing around with the time and choice of screen saver. It may be that a screen saver overrides sleep, or some screen savers try to do weird power managemnt? If anyone figures it out let me know. It is very frustrating. _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] RE: techtalk digest, Vol 1 #424 - 10 msgs
Tami- > I'm sorry I didn't make myself clear in my original post. I loaded > NOTHING onto the TWC machine. THe telnet daemon (or whatever M$ calls > it) was already running. I merely took advantage of an ALREADY > INSTALLED PROGRAM in order to read email as part of my job search (an > activity which has been totally halted by this senseless act. The > search for public terminals that have telnet require several hours a > day in bus rides and terminal time is limited to no more than one hour > a day.) That part I understood, and agree with you on; the claims this SysAdmin where making and his anger at your use of telnet was misguided at best, ignorant at worst. > Once again - for those with an intelligent understanding of the problem: This is just rude. With that sentence you've effectively implied that anyone who didn't understand the first time or doesn't agree with you doesn't have "an intelligent understanding of the problem". I'm not trying to pick a fight, just pointing this out. > >>The administrator to which the unnamed machine manager referred me > >>and to whom complaints about the anonymous clueless one may be sent > >>(cc: or Bcc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] please) is: > >> > >> Theodore Andrews III, Site Manager > >>3401 Webberville Rd, Bldg 1000 > >> Austin, Tx 78702 > >> (512) 223-5459(voice) > >> (512) 223-5464(fax) > >> > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > >>I appreciate everyone's help. > >> And as I said I don't feel this is the forum for launching a flame campaign on this guy, or anyone for that matter. The last time I emailed this opinion, I recieved responses by people who agreed with me. We don't flame each other, and I don't think we should en-masse flame people outside the list. That kind of thing sets up an "us-against-them" situation, and LinuxChix has always had a friendly, welcoming, anti-RTFM atmosphere where pretty much anyone can speak. Hell, they let me blabber on *GRIN*. Speaking of blabbering on, time to wrap this one up... -Brian ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] Fix for "Can't SCP from behind a firewall"
Heya --
Recently, my husband and I experienced problems trying to scp from
behind our home firewall to our server (hosted elsewhere). We
discovered our firewall was denying the return packets (they were
coming in on a privileged port). My husband slightly modified the scp
code to allow the return traffic to come in on a non-priviliged port.
He asked me to post his fix here so that anyone else with the same
problem can find it, since he's not on any Linux mailing lists.
Cheers,
Raven
***
When using secure shell to connect to remote machines, I
discovered that my firewall was an impediment - not allowing
incoming traffic to privileged ports, it was denying all
the returned information from the remote machine.
Not wanting to weaken my firewall for such a vague purpose,
I looked in the manpages for ssh, and found the "-P" switch
to make it use only unprivileged ports (those numbered 1024
and above). All was happy.
Then I tried to use scp, (secure copy - transfers files
without sending plain-text password) which in turn uses
ssh. The same problem turns up, but this time, there is no
switch for unprivileged ports... And you can only give
long-form options to ssh from scp. There are no long-form
options for using only unprivileged ports. No apparent
solution.
I'm using OpenSSH. I figure "It's open-source, this should
be an easy thing to fix."
And so it was. In the source files, I opened 'scp.c' and
poked around a bit, scrolling down looking for something
relevant. After about 20 seconds I found the options part,
starting 15 lines down from 'main'.
All I had to do was make scp pass "-P" as an option to ssh.
Two very easy changes; first, I changed
while ((ch = getopt(argc, argv, "dfprtvBCc:i:P:q46S:o:")) != EOF)
to
while ((ch = getopt(argc, argv, "NdfprtvBCc:i:P:q46S:o:")) != EOF)
(adding that N, as the letter I choose to indicate Not Privileged)
then I added another 'case' to the 'switch';
case 'N':
addargs("-P");
break;
That's all there was to it. I suppose I should have changed
the man-file too, but I don't want to touch that stuff.
In case anyone else is having this problem, I have this to
say for search engines; "How to make scp stop using privileged
ports by having it pass the -P option to ssh. Secure copy,
secure shell, firewall, privileged ports."
Thank you.
--RavenBlackhttp://www.ravenblack.net/
L33t Lunix Hax0r. Guaranteed.
=
"So they sent away all the attractive people, because they
were unholy. And then all the unholy people began to
scromp."
-- MadOontzGrrl, on Australian history
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
___
techtalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] What can cause a computer to turn off on its own?
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 10:45:33AM -0700, jennyw wrote: > Here's an interesting hardware question. My computer has this habit of > turning on by itself and turning off by itself, and I'm not sure why. I'm I need an old priest and a young priest. The Power of Christ Compels You! The Power of Christ Compels You! :-) -- Dr. David C. Merrill http://www.lupercalia.net Linux Documentation Project [EMAIL PROTECTED] Collection Editor & Coordinatorhttp://www.linuxdoc.org Finger me for my public key Real software engineers don't debug programs, they verify correctness. This process doesn't necessarily involve execution of anything on a computer, except perhaps a Correctness Verification Aid package. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Fix for "Can't SCP from behind a firewall"
Alternatively, i think you can put something like: Host * UsePrivilegedPort No in the config file in your .ssh directory. I could be way off-base, it's still pretty early for me. Marisa On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 10:30:55AM -0700, damask0 sed: > Heya -- > > Recently, my husband and I experienced problems trying to scp from > behind our home firewall to our server (hosted elsewhere). We > discovered our firewall was denying the return packets (they were > coming in on a privileged port). My husband slightly modified the scp > code to allow the return traffic to come in on a non-priviliged port. > He asked me to post his fix here so that anyone else with the same > problem can find it, since he's not on any Linux mailing lists. -- Let reality be the grinding stone upon which you sharpen your hatred. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Fix for "Can't SCP from behind a firewall"
Heya -- Quoth Marisa: > Alternatively, i think you can put something like: > > Host * > UsePrivilegedPort No > > in the config file in your .ssh directory. I could be way off-base, > it's still pretty early for me. I believe that that will cause ssh to use a non-priviliged port (the -P option for ssh will do the same thing), but scp still tries to use the priviliged port for its transfers. (At least, that was our experience with OpenSSH.) Cheers, Raven = "I've been raising up my hands, Drive another nail in. Where are those angels when you need them?" -- Tori Amos, "Crucify" __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] What can cause a computer to turn off on its own?
Yeah, that might be the next step ... Actually, the problems have gone away. How? I'm not really sure. I figured the power supply was at fault and replaced it. Unfortunately, the problems returned about half an hour after installing the new PS. However, all day today it hasn't done it, even when the tape drive has been in operation. I'd like to think the new PS made the diff, but then why the weirdness shortly after install? I just hope the MB isn't on the fritz. Jen - Original Message - From: "David Merrill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [techtalk] What can cause a computer to turn off on its own? > On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 10:45:33AM -0700, jennyw wrote: > > Here's an interesting hardware question. My computer has this habit of > > turning on by itself and turning off by itself, and I'm not sure why. I'm > > I need an old priest and a young priest. > > The Power of Christ Compels You! > The Power of Christ Compels You! > > :-) > > -- > Dr. David C. Merrill http://www.lupercalia.net > Linux Documentation Project [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Collection Editor & Coordinatorhttp://www.linuxdoc.org >Finger me for my public key > > Real software engineers don't debug programs, they verify correctness. > This process doesn't necessarily involve execution of anything on a > computer, except perhaps a Correctness Verification Aid package. > > ___ > 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] Quick HTML/Server Question
Can bad HTML confuse the software running on the server and cause errors?Having a discussion with someone. Now I'm talking raw HTML alone, no wild Perl/PHP/ASP/etc scripts. - Kath
Re: [techtalk] Quick HTML/Server Question
Kath, I can't think of any instance where straight, or "raw" HTML could effect the server it's running on, you are purely specifying output format and file locations, and the only file operations are "opens", rather than "executes", therefore you shouldn't be able to kick of any illicit operations within the server. The ONLY chance I can see of it effecting the server, is that opening large images etc could suck memory resources below a critical level, OR a file being opened is somehow coded to execute upon opening, possible on a (hack, spit) Windows machine, but unlikely on a (sweet, wonderful) Linux box. Hope this is of use, Neale - Original Message - From: Kath To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2001 11:59 AM Subject: [techtalk] Quick HTML/Server Question Can bad HTML confuse the software running on the server and cause errors?Having a discussion with someone. Now I'm talking raw HTML alone, no wild Perl/PHP/ASP/etc scripts. - Kath
