Re: [techtalk] SMP kernels and ISO images ...
James Sutherland wrote: >On Wed, 23 May 2001, Julie wrote: > >>Greets, >> >>I got my new server home last night (dual 933MHz P3s) and went >>to install Linux only to discover the RedHat 6.1 I have is Just Too >>Old to load on a 60MB disk. It keeps bailing with "Boot partition >>too big" or words to that effect. So I'm thinking about downloading >>something a bit more modern. >> > >Did you make a small /boot partition? With disks over 8Gb, you can't boot >reliably from a single large / partition... > Is this true as a general statement? I thought newer versions of LILO broke the 1024 cylinder limit, at least in LBA32 mode. Should I be expecting sudden catastrophic failure? (gulp) C. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] SMP kernels and ISO images ...
'lo all- > Hi Julie, > > You may want to try installing RH 6.1 with a 20 Meg /boot > partition at the > head of the drive before the 1023 cyl limit. This may help with > the install. > > Wait, but doesn't lba32 solve this problem, making the cylinder limit irrelevant? That's what I'd thought... I had a user install a 60G drive onto a 6.0 machine that refused to see any more than 24G (why 24? Dunno...I would've thought 20...). In any case, I suggested he at least update the kernel (it was still running the out-of-box 2.2.5-15 version). When he did, he was able to see 53G (Again, where is this number coming from? Any ideas?). Apparently he's happy with that and not worrying about it now, but I was still curious. Of course, he's also using the 6.0 version of lilo (I don't remember what this is), so he doesn't have the lba32 option. Hmmm...this is turning more into "other questions" than a responsive post...time to make a new thread I think... -Brian - Brian Sweeney [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The life expectancy of an unpatched, default installation of Red Hat 6.2 server is three days. The last time we attempted to confirm this, the system was compromised in eight hours." -The Honeynet Project ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] SCSI/IDE/booting...the other thread
Ok, here's a situation I've witnessed but cannot explain, and I'm sure that's because once again there's a mack-truck sized hole in my Linux knowledge I'm unaware of. ;-) Here goes: I have a user with a machine that has a mix of SCSI and IDE devices. He claims that initially the machine had both, then for a while they got rid of IDE, now they're putting a new IDE in (60G). Now, near as I can tell, lilo has always pointed to the SCSI device, and therefore it has always been the boot device. Indeed, the boot info is on a scsi device, as is the root partition. I thought, however, that Linux *ALWAYS* had to boot off the first device present, which if you have an ide drive on your system, with most bioses it (the ide) will be the first device. Yet, this thing had both, and seems to have booted off the SCSI? I became aware of this after he upgraded the kernel, rebooted the machine and got "LI". Being a good user, he of course did not have a boot disk for the machine before doing this. So, we booted off a 6.2CD into rescue mode, mounted the SCSI root partition (there is no separate boot partition), chrooted to it and ran lilo. It rebooted just fine (with his old kernel) off the scsi device with the ide device attached. I created a boot disk with the old kernel, and we tested it out; it worked fine. So at that point I decided to edit lilo.conf to include the new kernel, and re-installed lilo. This time, on reboot, I got the infamous "LI". Clearly, I have no idea what's going on. Theories: 1) I'm wrong about the ide/SCSI thing, and I'm getting LI now because he's got no boot partition and with the addition of this latest kernel the boot info goes past the 1023 cylinder limit, so lilo's now upset. 2) I'm right about the SCSI/IDE thing, and there's something else spooky going on. There's another machine this user has with a mix of IDE and SCSI drives, same situation, and it too can only boot from the boot floppy we created. Suggestions? I'm thinking we just move the /boot information on to the IDE device and point it to the / partition on the SCSI device, but I'm wondering if there's some way to get it to boot off the SCSI device even with the ide present. -Brian - Brian Sweeney [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The life expectancy of an unpatched, default installation of Red Hat 6.2 server is three days. The last time we attempted to confirm this, the system was compromised in eight hours." -The Honeynet Project ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] web interface search...
Hi, Amy, and everyone else, Let me join the chorus of those recommending webmin. I have used it on both Red Hat and Caldera systems. It works nicely. Regards, Cait Caitlyn M. Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems Analyst (919) 541-4441 Lockheed Martin (a contractor for the US EPA) ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] It's all done... kind of
> I can't get my CD rom open. If you have a disk on there it is probably mounted. I don't know if SuSe uses supermount or not. In any case, in KDE, right click on the CD-ROM icon and you should get a menu with unmount as a choice. *If* SuSe gives user-level permission to mount/unmount the CD-ROM you should just be able to click on unmount in that menu and you will then be able to open your CD-ROM. I've never used SuSe, so I really don't know what their default level configuration is like. The other, old fashioned, way to unmount a CD-ROM is at the command line. The command is *probably* just: umount /mnt/cdrom If SuSe does not use supermount you will have to remount any new CD you put in the drive. The process is just the same as unmounting (i.e.: mount /mnt/cdrom). > I don't know if the burner works. Try it. It likely does. > KDE is confusing. Really!?!?!? You are the first person I have ever seen say that. I've seen many complain that it is too Windows-like or too oriented to the less than knowledgeable user, but not the other way around. Tell me, what environment are you used to? Also, if you tell us what is confusing you, perhaps we can offer help. Let us know which version of KDE, though. I am currently running 2.1.1 (2.1.2 libraries). > Nobody is talking in #linuxchix. I can't do that from work, sorry. Good luck! Cait Caitlyn M. Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems Analyst (919) 541-4441 Lockheed Martin (a contractor for the US EPA) ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] SMP kernels and ISO images ...
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Michael Carson wrote: > James Sutherland wrote: > >On Wed, 23 May 2001, Julie wrote: > > > >>Greets, > >> > >>I got my new server home last night (dual 933MHz P3s) and went > >>to install Linux only to discover the RedHat 6.1 I have is Just Too > >>Old to load on a 60MB disk. It keeps bailing with "Boot partition > >>too big" or words to that effect. So I'm thinking about downloading > >>something a bit more modern. > >> > > > >Did you make a small /boot partition? With disks over 8Gb, you can't boot > >reliably from a single large / partition... > > >Is this true as a general statement? I thought newer versions of > LILO broke the 1024 cylinder limit, at least in LBA32 mode. Should I be > expecting sudden catastrophic failure? (gulp) LBA32 mode probably gets round this problem, if enabled and supported - without it, you'll be fine provided your kernel is under about 8 Gb. Which is why you can get nasty surprises: you can take a fully working system with a single 20Gb partition, update the kernel and reboot - and it's dead. Why? The kernel is now above 8Gb... VA Linux's system configurator complains if you don't have a /boot partition of a suitable size; IMO, it's a good idea to have one anyway. That way, even if / is hosed, you can boot into a kernel - on a journalled FS, that's enough to recover / by replaying the journal, on ext2 you'd need fsck on an initrd as well. Short answer: you'll be OK as you are, but having a small /boot is a nice idea anyway... James. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] SCSI/IDE/booting...the other thread
> -Original Message- > From: James Sutherland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of James > Sutherland > Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 9:39 AM > To: Brian Sweeney > Cc: Techtalk@Linuxchix. Org > Subject: Re: [techtalk] SCSI/IDE/booting...the other thread > Hmm... boot-related major hole, and your e-mail address includes the word > "physics"... deja vu, anybody? :) Yes, but pretty I am not. ;) > Quite possible: booting is controlled by the BIOS. You can set the BIOS to > try booting from SCSI first, which is what your friend has probably done. Yeah, I did tell the bios to boot SCSI first. Still was getting the LI fun. > You need to tell LILO about this change; adding the following lines to > lilo.conf should do that: > > disk=/dev/sda > bios=0x81 > disk=/dev/hda > bios=0x80 > > (from "man lilo.conf") > > and re-run lilo. (Brian blushes horribly as he realizes that in the course of pouring through web stuff on this problem, the one place he DIDN'T look was the man page. He smacks himself upside the head). Thanks James; sorry I didn't see that. I'll give it a shot. -Brian ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Linux-Mandrake (was: Re: [techtalk] hdparm and DMA "not permitted")
Hi, James, > Yep: I tried Mandrake just over a year ago, and fell in love with it. > S much more "refined" than RedHat, I thought. Then it disabled my > system. Oops. How? Well, **EVERY** binary on a Mandrake system is a Perl > script (well, almost every one - including vi!) That's fine, until > MandrakeUpdate decides to break perl. At which point, you can't log on to > X, you can't use vi... Oops. Break out the RedHat CDs... Kind of a blistering condemnation, don't you think? IMHO, it's also probably unjustified. No, I am not saying it didn't happen. What I am saying is that I have run Mandrake 7.0, 7.2, and 8.0 problem free for at least a year now, and that included running Mandrake update regularly, including upgrading Perl. My question would be: which version, which update? If I condemned a distro for every really bad bug they released, I'd be out of distros by now. Besides, would you like me to detail the bugs in Red Hat 6.1 and 7.0? RH 7.1 is a very nice release with just a few gotchas (which are well documented, BTW). For those who prefer Red Hat you cannot go wrong with it. It's just that Mandrake 8 is s much nicer. All the best, Caity Caitlyn M. Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems Analyst (919) 541-4441 Lockheed Martin (a contractor for the US EPA) ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] Re: Linux-Mandrake
On Thu, 24 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi, James, > > > Yep: I tried Mandrake just over a year ago, and fell in love with it. > > S much more "refined" than RedHat, I thought. Then it disabled my > > system. Oops. How? Well, **EVERY** binary on a Mandrake system is a Perl > > script (well, almost every one - including vi!) That's fine, until > > MandrakeUpdate decides to break perl. At which point, you can't log on to > > X, you can't use vi... Oops. Break out the RedHat CDs... > > Kind of a blistering condemnation, don't you think? IMHO, it's also > probably unjustified. No, I am not saying it didn't happen. What I am > saying is that I have run Mandrake 7.0, 7.2, and 8.0 problem free for at > least a year now, and that included running Mandrake update regularly, > including upgrading Perl. My question would be: which version, which > update? 8.0, updated a few days ago. I'm not blaming Mandrake for breaking Perl in an update - Debian managed to break sendmail not too long ago, as Michelle found; every distro breaks things occasionally. What I *AM* ditching Mandrake for is replacing things like "vi" and "gcc" with stupid Perl scripts which attempt to colour in the output, and break things in the process! > If I condemned a distro for every really bad bug they released, I'd be out > of distros by now. Besides, would you like me to detail the bugs in Red > Hat 6.1 and 7.0? > > RH 7.1 is a very nice release with just a few gotchas (which are well > documented, BTW). For those who prefer Red Hat you cannot go wrong with > it. It's just that Mandrake 8 is s much nicer. Nicer, I'll agree, but I'm not sure I can ever forgive them those stupid Perl wrappers round everything... When I run "gcc", I want to be running the GNU C Compiler, not some sort of colouring-in-script wrapped round it! James. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] yellow dog linux
has anyone ever had experience with yellow dog linux (apple/macintosh)? i am getting ready to buy a titanium g4 laptop and have a dual boot mac os x and yellow dog. i've been told it can be done. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] yellow dog linux
Title: RE: [techtalk] yellow dog linux Hi Amanda, I trouble installing both yellow dog & Linux PPC on an iMac. Also documentation is quite limited Davida PS: if you get it working, please send some instructions my way. TIA -Original Message- From: Amanda Yee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 11:35 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [techtalk] yellow dog linux has anyone ever had experience with yellow dog linux (apple/macintosh)? i am getting ready to buy a titanium g4 laptop and have a dual boot mac os x and yellow dog. i've been told it can be done. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] yellow dog linux
On Thu, 24 May 2001 11:51:23 -0700 Davida Schiff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I trouble installing both yellow dog & Linux PPC > on an iMac. Also documentation is quite limited > My b/f and I (though I didn't help all that much...was even more of a newbie than I am now...) got mkLinux dual booting on my iBook last year, and now I've got Debian and OS9 both running happily. I'm also using Debian on a Mac G4 at work. If you have any specific questions, I might be able to help out. -kristin ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Re: Linux-Mandrake
On Thursday 24 May 2001 02:09 pm, James Sutherland wrote: > 8.0, updated a few days ago. I'm not blaming Mandrake for breaking Perl in > an update - Debian managed to break sendmail not too long ago, as Michelle > found; every distro breaks things occasionally. What I *AM* ditching > Mandrake for is replacing things like "vi" and "gcc" with stupid Perl > scripts which attempt to colour in the output, and break things in the > process! Well, in defense of Debian, I was using "testing" and not stable. I've never had an upgrade of stable break anything. Those Debian folks are hard-assed about stability, which is a good thing. I had NO IDEA that Mandrake replaced binaries with perl wrappers. (I feel like hitting myself in the head, I'm a perl coder!) I run Debian on all of my servers, but have been working with Mandrake on my laptop for months. It's been OK, although I HATE rpms, in general (I'd certainly rather apt-get, but even compiling from source is often better than using RPMs). I did have a wierd perl problem recently, and all sorts of other things started to go wierd - now I know why. OK, well I now know it's time to take the plunge and put debian on my laptop. I think I'll try Progeny. Michelle Michelle Murrain, Ph.D. President Norwottuck Technology Resources [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.norwottuck.com ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Re: Linux-Mandrake
Hi, James, and everyone else, > Nicer, I'll agree, but I'm not sure I can ever forgive them those stupid > Perl wrappers round everything... When I run "gcc", I want to be running > the GNU C Compiler, not some sort of colouring-in-script wrapped round it! Not to split hairs, but... you *are* running gcc, the genuine GNU C Compiler, but invoking from a script which makes the output easier to read. To me that isn't an unpardonable sin, but rather an attempt to make my life easier. Considering how much of my admin time is spent in a terminal window SSHed into various boxes, I actually appreciate what they've done. What is the old (and therefore, somewhat sexist) expression? "One man's meat is another man's poison", right? I do agree that breaking Perl is a *very* bad thing. On my systems that will break most of my scripts. Without Perl, none of my systems will meet Agency standards any more, and my customers, mostly scientists, will become testy indeed, since all of their scripts will break too. So... it isn't just that basic commands and apps would be broken, though that certainly *is* extremely serious. Any distro that breaks Perl will generally create bunches and bunches of work for me. BTW, didn't Red Hat 7.0 ship with a broken beta gcc? I'm not harshing on Red Hat, BTW. I'm comparing the most popular (and a pretty good) distro to Mandrake is all. We skipped 7.0 at work. We're going straight from 6.2 to 7.1, and both will likely be approved systems for some time to come. Regards, Cait Caitlyn M. Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems Analyst (919) 541-4441 Lockheed Martin (a contractor for the US EPA) ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] yellow dog linux
Title: RE: [techtalk] yellow dog linux Much thanks, My problems seemed to center around partitioning of my 6gb hard drive. Linux installed without a problem, but after it re-booted, the screen was blank. I could not get into the mac side either. I am using yaboot -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 11:56 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [techtalk] yellow dog linux On Thu, 24 May 2001 11:51:23 -0700 Davida Schiff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I trouble installing both yellow dog & Linux PPC > on an iMac. Also documentation is quite limited > My b/f and I (though I didn't help all that much...was even more of a newbie than I am now...) got mkLinux dual booting on my iBook last year, and now I've got Debian and OS9 both running happily. I'm also using Debian on a Mac G4 at work. If you have any specific questions, I might be able to help out. -kristin ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] It's all done... kind of
On Thu, 24 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > I can't get my CD rom open. > > If you have a disk on there it is probably mounted. I don't know if SuSe > uses supermount or not. In any case, in KDE, right click on the CD-ROM > icon and you should get a menu with unmount as a choice. *If* SuSe gives > user-level permission to mount/unmount the CD-ROM you should just be able > to click on unmount in that menu and you will then be able to open your > CD-ROM. I've never used SuSe, so I really don't know what their default > level configuration is like. > > The other, old fashioned, way to unmount a CD-ROM is at the command line. > The command is *probably* just: > > umount /mnt/cdrom On SuSE, the default mount point for the cdrom is /cdrom not /mnt/cdrom so the command would be umount /cdrom If the device is not busy, "eject" will generally works as well. One thing I've found is that if a process dies an unnatural death while doing cdrom i/o, that "device busy" state never gets cleaned up--and hence, umount and eject will fail. The thing to do here, is first see if you have any shells that have /cdrom as the top of its current working directory. Then see if any other processes are trying to access the cdrom. Kill them all and let cron sort them out. If you're *still* not able to umount, you can reboot and depress the "release me" button on the cdrom drive before the system gets a chance to start diddling with the cdrom drive. If THAT doesn't work, shutdown and power off and then try manually ejecting the thing by sticking an unbent paperclip into the little hole on the front of the cdrom drive. > If SuSe does not use supermount you will have to > remount any new CD you put > in the drive. The process is just the same as unmounting (i.e.: mount > /mnt/cdrom). No supermount in SuSE. And since the default mount point for the cdrom in SuSE is /cdrom, that would be mount /cdrom Cheryl ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] SMP kernels and ISO images ...
The newer versions of LILO let you boot from a disk over 8GB with no problems. The latest versions of about all distributions ship it. It's been out for a while now. Jason -Original Message- From: James Sutherland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 2:51 AM To: Julie Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [techtalk] SMP kernels and ISO images ... Did you make a small /boot partition? With disks over 8Gb, you can't boot reliably from a single large / partition... > My question is, where do I find ISO images of bootable Linux > install CDs and are there different images for SMP boxen? ftp.redhat.com and mirrors. ftp.redhat.com itself is maxed out, but your local SunSITE should have a copy. James. ___ 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] SMP kernels and ISO images ...
> The newer versions of LILO let you boot from a disk over 8GB with no > problems. The latest versions of about all distributions ship it. It's > been out for a while now. > > Jason That's what I thought...though I do know the RedHat7.x install doesn't use lba32 mode by default, so most of the time I end up installing, making a boot disk, booting the first time to that disk, then editing lilo.conf to include lba32 and re-running lilo. -Brian ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] SMP kernels and ISO images ...
From: Angela Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > The newer versions of LILO let you boot from a disk over 8GB with no > problems. The latest versions of about all distributions ship it. It's > been out for a while now. Thanks. I took the machine to the shop this morning. It apparently has a bad disk, so they should be putting a new drive in it. When it comes home and has been re-Julie-ified I'll install Linux on a big chunk of disk. Then I get to pester y'all about VMWare ;-) -- Julie. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] Delurk - RH 6.2 question
Hello all, I joined this list a few days ago, and have enjoyed reading the various topics that have been covered in that short time. I've been using Linux at work for almost two years, using Red Hat 5.1 to run a relational database system called D3 (formerly Pick). I'm the 'system administrator', 'network administrator' and also make up the entire IT department, programming staff, etc etc. so like everyone else I'm short on time and while things aren't 'broke' I usualy don't try fixing them... But I'd like to get a little caught up with the rest of the Linux world, so I'm trying out 6.2 (got it cheap) to see if our version of D3 works ok with that before I order the latest version. (The release of D3 we have claims it works with Red Hat 5.0 only, but I'm hoping they're just being over cautious.) Anways, here is my question... I've installed RH6.2 onto a Toshiba laptop (not running X yet, just the bash shell) and got things up and running all right, with one huge and aggravating exception: When I boot into Linux, Red Hat says at one point to hit I for interactive boot. If I let that go by and let it boot by itself, when it gets to the logon prompt, the keyboard is locked. It's like the keyboard is disconnected, I can't even get the capslock or numlock lights on. Ctrl-Alt-Del doesn't work. Nothing works. I have to hit the reset button to get anything. However, if I boot with the I for interactive, then sit there and hit Rtn for every single question, then when it gets to the logon prompt, the keyboard works. I apologize if this is a lame question... but it's late and I'm stumped. It's ok for my own test-computer, as long as I remember to use the I function I'm ok, but I can't use it at work till I understand what it's doing. Details... Red Hat 6.2 custom (everything) installed onto Toshiba Sattelite 2230CDS, 6GB hdd, (partitions, WinME, /boot, [d3], swap, /, /home), 32MB ram, PS/2 mouse. Thanks! -Stephanie ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] Well, it doesn't matter anyway
Thank you for all the advice that was sent... But it doesn't matter ;) Because i'm dumb, you see. The ISO that I burned was a live eval. I can't install it anyway. But it ran off the CD and let me play for a few hours. I'm just glad that I didn't really do anything in-depth, because I would have been really pissed when it was for nothing ;) So i'll have a *real* boxed version some time next week, then we can start the whole mess over. I'm saving the emails ;) -- Ruhiel, d'oh http://ruhiel.noom.com "bash awk grep perl sed df du, du-du du-du, vi troff su fsck rm * halt LART LART LART!"- the Swedish BOFH ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Delurk - RH 6.2 question
On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 12:28:50AM -0400, Stephanie Maksylewich wrote: > > I've been using Linux at work for almost two years, using Red Hat 5.1 to run > a relational database system called D3 (formerly Pick). I'm the 'system > administrator', 'network administrator' and also make up the entire IT > department, programming staff, etc etc. so like everyone else I'm short on > time and while things aren't 'broke' I usualy don't try fixing them... > > But I'd like to get a little caught up with the rest of the Linux world, so > I'm trying out 6.2 (got it cheap) to see if our version of D3 works ok with > that before I order the latest version. (The release of D3 we have claims > it works with Red Hat 5.0 only, but I'm hoping they're just being over > cautious.) I don't have much of a clue about the problem you mentioned below, but here's a warning about your grand plan: the main change from RH 5.x to RH 6.x was the C library changed from libc5 to glibc2. This was huge change at the time and requires relinking all the affected programs. So you are probably going to need to have all the RH 5.1 C -libraries under your knew installation and get D3 to pick them up for it to work. Just in case you didn't know this. :) Cheers, Malcolm -- Tolkien is hobbit-forming. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
