Re: [techtalk] parallel zip drive
Hi, Yukiko, > > I use a parallel zip drive, and I have no trouble about it. > > I think you could config, but, > Do you use a parallel printer or some other paralleled hard devices? > > if so, you have to do: > > # rmmod lp > # insmod ppa > # mount -t vfat /dev/sda4/zip (or, your setting Actually, this isn't necessary in Red Hat 6.x, which support parallel port sharing. The only things you need to do to get a parallel port zip to work in Red Hat are: 1) Add this line to your /etc/conf.modules file: alias block-major-8 ppa 2) Create a mount point for your zip drive. (I use /mnt/zip) 3) Add it to your /etc/fstab file with the correct file format 4) Reboot 5) Mount the drive as above. (You can also create a mount/unmount icon in KDE if you like.) Also, I notice that you use the -t vfat switch to get DOS formatted zips. Some of us prefer to format our zip disks as ext2 (Linux native) using mke2fs. It depends how you are going to be sharing your data. Also, if you specify vfat in the fstab file, that would become the default, so the -t switch wouldn't be needed. Regards, Cait [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] request for ideas
Hi, everyone, > > For example: ME: "You have to mount the disk before you can read it." > > HE: "Huh? Mount? What is mount? It's already in the drive!" > > "Recompile the kernel? I don't want popcorn right now!" > > "The scheduler? My calendar thingy on my Palm Pilot is good enough for me!" > > "Cron? Oh, you mean Tron, the guy that lived inside the computer!" > > "Why do I need a driver? I can drive, as long as it's an automatic." > > Somebody with those kinds of questions probably shouldn't be messing around > with Linix, IMHO (and I say that as probably one of the least Unix-savvy > people here). I disagree. For a newbie, starting from scratch, KDE is not harder to learn than the Windows GUI. Netscape is Netscape, regardless of the platform, Star Office or WordPerfect aren't harder than MS apps, and so on... Let's reach out to those who aren't techno-savvy. These $200 Linux boxes that The Linux Store and BuyPogo are selling are perfect for them, provided a good manual is available. Deb's book could be that manual. > On the other hand, maybe some good documentation could change > that... Yep. Also, let's face it, Windows doesn't give a lot of opportunity to understand what is going on. If someone is curious, using Linux they could advance from clueless to basic understanding much more quickly. I've kept out of this conversation, but a real beginners' book should cover installation for all the major distros that are newbie friendly (Red Hat, Caldera, Mandrake, and Turbo Linux at least), how to configure the GUI (KDE probably) and add basic apps. It should cover how to get a printer going and how to get to the internet, the things most run of the mill users do. BTW, why do so many of you find PPP hard? I thought kppp wasn't any worse than filling in the boxes on a Windows or OS/2 dialer. OK, I used to dial in using SLIP, and I had to write a script for dip to do it, but that was then and this is now. For a newbie, go with the graphical stuff. Regards, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] request for ideas
Hi, Lisa, > > I must disagree with this. GUI's are great if you > don't care what's going on under the hood. But to > truly learn linux, you need the command line. The target audience, which I presume is the mainstream, for the most part couldn't care less what's going on under the hood. For that matter, I could care less, and I make my living as a network engineer. I use graphical tools to administer the network or make configuration changes whenever I can because it makes my life easier. I can and do use the command line, and can and do understand more than the average computer user because of my career. I think of users like my Mom. To her, Linux is nothing more than faster, cheaper, more stable Windows. For business users and most home users, that is the bottom line. Think of it like driving a car. I want the best car for my money. I want it reliable. I want it to give a smooth ride and to be comfortable. I want to do little more than add gas. Translate that to a PC and you have the typical user who wants to surf the web, type letters, e-mail friends and family, and do the family finances. > It's > pure, it's the only way I could have learned what > little I know about linux so far. I occasionally fire > up X, but only to download stuff or surf. Sure it's > perty, but it's also intrusive, sucking up my system > resources and keeping me from my beloved command line > (!) That's all well and good, but you are not a typical user. If our goal as a community is to get Linux into the mainstream (what Linus Torvalds termed "world domination") then that approach is counterproductive. Most newbies won't start on the command line. It's a steeper learning curve, to say the least. If it weren't for the development of great GUIs for Linux, I'd be promoting NT right now. Thankfully, it never came to that Regards, Caity (who runs under X 100% of the time, but usually with at least 3 open terminal windows) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] X win
Hi, Jack, Reboot, and type in "linux 3" at the LILO prompt. That will boot to the command line. To make the change permanent, you need to edit your /etc/inittab file and change your run level at boot from 5 (GUI) to 3 (command line). That's all it takes :) Regards, Caity > I am using X on the Mandrake 6.0...my problem is that I cannot figure out > how to get to the command line. This is not the only distro I hav ever > used, but I have never seen this before. When you close X it gives the > logon screen...but not the command line logon...the X logon (graphical)...at > boot X starts, asking for a logon. I would much rather have the machine > configured where I need to do a startx...but cannot figure out how to get > there [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
RTP (was: [techtalk] request for ideas)
Hi, Telsa, > My condolences on the humidity, then :) (It's the one place in the > US I've visited, and I felt like I was melting. And that was the > spring It's one of the best high tech markets in the country, though. Our unemployment rate in the computer industry is nearly zero. If you have skills and experience at all, they'll queue up to hire you. Oh, and we have a nice, growing LinuxChix chapter, too :) We had our organizational meeting on September 29th, and our first regular meeting is on Wednesday night, October 20. Felicia Kemp, who is a Technical Engineer with Red Hat Software, will be giving a presentation on their new 6.1 release. This is a great place to be a geek grrl, and our high temp should be around 70ºF today :) Take care, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] upgrading to Netscape 4.7
Hi, Joann, > I could use some advice here please. I am feeling brave tonight. (reading > this mailgroup is building my confidence-you are all great!) > > I have Linux Mandrake 6.0 and it has Netscape Comm. 4.6 > I want to put on NC 4.7. > I have downloaded the 70 MB linux netscape file and it is in tar format. > I know it's duplicate work, but Mandrake is built based on Red Hat. If you like using GnoRPM or KPackage to track your software packages, you might want to download the 4.7 RPMs from ftp://updates.redhat.com > Q: > 1. Should I remove the ver 4.6 first, and if so how step by step please. > Yes! Are you most comfortable with RPM at the command line, GnoRPM, or KPackage? The step by step instructions would depend on which tool you like to use. I can walk you through any of the above, and they are all simple, really two steps, one to delete the Netscape-Communicator-461 RPM and another to delete the Netscape-Common-461 RPM. > 2. Or should I just -xvf filename and let 'er rip! If I have to reset my > preferences, it is not too bad a job, as I do not have much in there at this > time. You'd end up with two installed copies, one for each version. If you are a professional web designer, this may be a good thing. However, if you typed "netscape" at the command line or clicked on your existing icon, you'll go to 4.6.1, since that's in the default place for Mandrake/Red Hat, while your install script from Netscape will put it in a folder of your choice. The RPM distributes the files, so they aren't in one place. If you want just one copy, though, do the deletion first Regards, Caity (who likes KPackage, but isn't afraid of the command line :) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] upgrading to Netscape 4.7
Hi, > > This will offer you a choice of where to put the new netscape. You can > pick the same dir your current netscape is in, and it will copy all the > files it replaces to filename.old, so it is possible to undo the > change. Or you can pick a new directory if you would like to be extra > cautious It's not in one place under Red Hat or Mandrake. The executable will be in /usr/bin, but not the rest. I sure wouldn't recommend installing there! That's why I recommended the deletion first. Different distros, different issues... Regards, Caity (running Netscape 7.0 under Red Hat 6.0 at home, but pure MS in the office :( ) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] upgrading to Netscape 4.7
Hi, Joann, > Thanks for the tips. I successfully uninstalled the netscape 4.6 rpm with > kpackage. I could not locate any rpms for 4.7 It's no longer important for you, but they are at the ftp://updates.redhat.com site in the 6.1 folder. Netscape 4.7 is actually the first "errata" update to Red Hat 6.1, since it fixes a security issue in 4.6.1. The RPMs also work well on Red Hat 6.0. > I feel > like a million bucks after this! Firsts always feel good, don't they? Wait until you compile your first program from source, then you'll really feel good :) > > now, can I remove the install folder/files safely? Yes! Absolutely. Take care, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] newbie questions
Hi, Shelly, > > since i found this list a couple weeks ago, i've had a few questions > come to mind... probably silly ones, but i'm a winNT admin - turned - > linux - newbie (of about 6 months now). =) Another convert! Join the club :) I've actually done UNIX (as well as NT) stuff for about five years. I was introduced to Linux by a woman I worked with in 1995, but have been running it and using it for only about a year and a half. > > 1 - can multiple distros of linux be dual-booted? Yep. It's not a problem. > > 2- speaking of distros, any preferences For me, it's Red Hat. It has the best combination of lots of stuff straight out of the box, ease of install, and lots of really good admin tools that some of the others don't have. The price of the shrink wrapped 6.1 is down to $29.99, so price isn't an issue any more. Also, there are tons of RPMs scattered about the net, which makes adding software a snap. Red Hat has also been great about supporting the local geek community, BTW. > > 3- and my final question for the day. is there a magic place on the > net to find references to hardware model numbers, etc Red Hat actually has an excellent reference for what is and is not supported on their site. Take care, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Older versions of distros
Hi, Ericka, > I finally got around, last night, to cleaning off my second hard drive in > preparation of installing linux & I have a few questions before I start. > One is: Is there any overwhelming reason that I should get the very > latest version of linux, or would installing an older one be ok? I > already have a copy of Redhat 5.0 and I was just going to go ahead and > install that. Linux in general, and Red Hat in particular, have come a very long way in the last couple of years. The GUI is the area which has changed the most dramatically. With 5.0 you will have neiter Gnome nor KDE, and your libraries will be old enough that you won't be able to run a modern GUI without updating those too. Also, many apps rely on newer libraries. The 2.2 kernel was a big step forward, too. You'll find that hardware support is much poorer under 5.0, and the older version of XFree86 won't support nearly as many video cards. Sound support will be extremely limited. If you have a SoundBlaster, though, it will be supported just fine. Graphical admin tools will be far more primitive or missing altogether with 5.0. If you are comfortable with, or really want to learn the command line, this won't be an issue. Red Hat 5.0 is *not* certified Y2K compliant. For that you need to run at least 5.2. My advice: get the latest distro. Want to do it cheap? Go to: http://www.cheapbytes.com and pick up a copy of Red Hat 6.1 for a few dollars. Or, if you prefer, Mandrake, SuSe, Debian, et al... Another alternative is to pick up the November issue of Linux Magazine. It has a copy of TurboLinux 4.0 tucked in for free :) You can do this for under six dollars for sure, so why go with an older copy? Just my .02 worth... I'm sure others will disagree. > > I was also wondering some things about LILO (pardon my extreme > newbieness). Will it work properly if installed on a secondary drive > instead of my C drive? If the secondary hard drive is slaved to the C? Unless you are using another tool (like System Commander or Boot Manager), LILO needs to be on your master boot record on the first hard drive. It will let you choose between Linux and whatever OS you are running now. It works fine with DOS, Windows (all flavors), and OS/2. If you are putting Linux on a second hard drive, at least you don't have to mess with your existing partitions of the first hard drive, which makes dual (or multi-) booting a much safer and easier process. Good luck! Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] GUI's
> KDE is released under the GPL, but Qt is not. You can't use KDE > without Qt. (It's questionable in my mind whether a GPL product > should rely on a third-party library which is not released under > the GPL, the LGPL, or an equivalently open license) I can't disagree with the latter statement, but it no longer applies to KDE. When TrollTech changed the license, it met the Open Source definition, at least sufficiently to satisy, form what I've read, Eric Raymond and other leading figures in the Open Source movement. You'll correct me if I'm wrong, I'm sure :) -Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Would like advice on building system
Hi, > I have a cheap AGP 8MB card in one of the machines at work. It works fine > with XF86. I have no idea what it is... Wait, yes I do. It's an ATI Virge > 3D. Nice card. Works beautifully. And it was under $50. It sounds a lot like my generic AGP card with a Trident 3Dimàge 975 chipset. It, too, works brilliantly under XFree86, though there was no support prior to version 3.3.1. With any recent distribution it's fine, though. Take care, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Okay so I recompiled my kernel under RedHat 6.1
Hi, Norma, > I couldn't get the zip drive (even though I > compiled support for that in and I even created the partion where it was > supposed to be and attempted to mount it). With the zip drive, it may be as simple as adding a single line to a configuration file. Is it a parallel, SCSI, or IDE zip drive? Regular Zip (100 mb), Zip Plus, 250 mb? With some specifics I might be able to help. Regards, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Okay so I recompiled my kernel under RedHat 6.1
Hi, Norma, > It is an early model parallel port drive OK, you need to add the following line to your /etc/conf.modules file: alias block-major-8 ppa If you have the ppa driver in your kernel, that should make it work after a reboot. The physical device will be /dev/sda4, so if you created a mount point (i.e.: /mnt/zip), you should be able, with a disk in the drive, to type: (for DOS formatted zips:) mount -t vfat /dev/sda4 /mnt/zip and it should then mount your disk. I am using the same sort of drive on my system, and it works very well indeed. You may then, once you have it working, want to add a line to your /etc/fstab file so that it recognized the mount point at boot. Also, if you are running KDE as a GUI, you can set up the provided mount/unmount icon to make it point and click, if you'd like. I hope this helps. If not, let us know what you are seeing, and I'll try to figure it out with you. Good luck! Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Okay so I recompiled my kernel under RedHat 6.1
Hi, Norma, OK, you have two parallel ports, and it clearly sees them both. I wonder if you have the PPA module loaded into your kernel. Do a modprobe on it to find out. If not, try doing an insmod ppa and then see if it works. If so, you can add the statement: /sbin/insmod.ppa to one of your init files and that would solve the problem. Let us know how you make out. Good luck! Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Okay so I recompiled my kernel under RedHat 6.1
Hi, Stephan, > I once heard that you need to activate SCSI emulation in the kernel (I > didn't see that in dmesg printout) to use the parallel port Zip drive. (I > have a SCSI Zip drive, so I didn't have to deal with this). Caitlyn, is > this is accurate or not The parallel port zip drive *is* treated as a SCSI drive. OTOH, I don't know if the PPA driver handles the emulation, or if you need SCSI support as well. I would suspect the latter, but I don't know for sure. Anyone? -Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Okay so I recompiled my kernel under Re
> Your lp driver will conflict with the zip driver so you may have to rmmod > the lp driver and insmod the zip driver That was true prior to Red Hat 6.0. Since then, they use a driver that allows parallel port sharing between multiple devices. Since Norma was using Red Hat (but had recompiled the kernel) that module should be available to her. -Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
[techtalk] No HTML/RTF messages, please!
Hi, everyone, It is really bad netiquette, particularly on a UNIX list, to send messages in HTML or RTF format. *Please* use plain text. At work, where I have to use Microsoft software I can read them, but have you ever seen what HTML looks like in KMail? Most text-based e-mail programs? Many lists I belong to bounce HTML messages. Be kind to those of us who don't use Microsoft stuff or Netscape 100% of the time, OK? Thanks, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] XFree86 not working with Voodoo3 AGP
VGA/PGA video and monitor?Hi, Cathy, The version of XFree86 in your Caldera release is 3.3.1, and that may be too old to support your card ,if I remember correctly. Get the latest RPMs from the Caldera site under the updates to OpenLinux 2.3. You want version 3.3.5. Also, can I ask you a big favor. Please, please, please use plain text e-mail on a UNIX/Linux list. Good luck! Caity > However, there's still an unresolved issue. OK, a couple of > unresolved issues. :-) The big one is that X isn't working with > my video card > I'm running Caldera 2.2, which is a 2.2.5 kernel [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] multibooting vs. VMWare?
Hi, Julia, > > I'm multi-booting with Win98 on one drive, RedHat 6.0 on the other. > Not wanting to play around with LILO (still a newbie), I loaded 98 on > the drive first, then Linux on the other, and boot into Linux from a > floppy. I've got backup floppies should something happen to my > original. > > Works just fine Actually, setting up LILO for dual boot is easy. If you want, I'm sure many of us can walk you through editing your lilo.conf file. It's also nice to add a mount point for your Windows partition. Then, if you add an entry to your /etc/fstab file, you have access to your Windows partition from Linux at boot, which makes it very easy to share data back and forth. Don't be afraid to try these things. They are pretty darned easy to do, and make living in a dual boot world a whole lot nicer. Regards, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] multibooting vs. VMWare?
Hi, > Multibooting linux/win95 is actually quite easy these days, as long as you > install Windows *first*. As far as this is concerned, '98 and '95 are the same. Also, some distributions (Caldera for example), give you a Windows based installer for Linux and set up your partitions and dual boot for you. Nt is the bear here. Basically, you want to do '98 first, then Linux, then install an NT-friendly boot manager like System Commander, and *then* install NT. Since NT wants it's OS loader in the MBR, you really need to follow the instructions that come with System Commander for NT. I've had as many as seven OSes on one machine (all of the above, plus DOS, OS/2 Warp 4.0, OS/2 2.1, and Solaris). It can be done, and it can be made to look pretty in the end, but setting it up takes work and knowing what each OS wants. FWIW, my home machines now have just one OS: Linux :) Good luck! Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] multibooting vs. VMWare?
Hi, > > I've heard good things about the Caldera dist. Will the install also > non-destructively re-partition the drive for you? With some real limitations, yes. It's not a full blown version of Partition Magic. So... if you have a single Windows partition, and want to shrink it to add a Linux partition, it will do it well. If it's more complex than that, get a real copy of Partition Magic. The main things I don't like about Caldera for relative newbies who are coming from a Microsoft (or Mac or OS/2) environment is that it lacks some of the easy graphical tools that Red Hat, Mandrake, SuSe, and some others give you. For example, you don't have printtool, and will get to edit your /etc/printcap file manually to get your printer(s) right. For the command line purists who eschew graphical stuff anyway, this isn't a problem :) > > Aha. So, here's my current thought: > > 1> get the place that's building my PC to install 98 on it and save me > some time. fork over the $100 for a 98 CD. If you need '98, that actually makes sense. > > 2> get Partition Magic or similar and partition the drive like so: > > /hda1 win98 C: , minimal size (200MB? what's realistic here?) Depends on how much will get dumped into C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM and C:\WINDOWS. If you are only installing a limited amount of stuff into '98, 200 MB is fine. You'll need 100MB of *free* space for when you do your NT install, though, so I'd go a bit bigger. > /hda2 winNT C: , for future use when I get around to it, 200MB This one is too small, since most Windows apps want to add things to C:\WINNT and the like. NT is much bigger than '98. I'd recommend no less than 500 MB here. Also, remember that NT can install directly on to a secondary drive, second partition, logical partition, and so on. This does *not* have to be at the beginning of your drive. I'd put this after the Linux \boot partition and the Linux swap partition. > /hda3 linux /boot, 200MB Red Hat claims /boot need to be no larger than 16 MB. In my experience with Red Hat, this is true. > /hda4 win98 D: , for putting applications/games on > /hda5 winNT D: , for applications > /hda6..X linux /home, /usr, /usr/local, /var, and the rest Thee is a limit of four primary partitions. I'd do these all logical. You need the fourth (and last) primary partition for your swap space. These will end up being 6, 7, and 8. > > 3> install linux and get it running happily as my OS of choice. Use 98 > occasionally for games. That part makes a bunch of sense. > > 4> when i get around to it someday, buy System Commander and NT and > install them, but this is no big hurry. That, again, makes sense. You don't even need to create an NT partition at first. Just shrink the data partitions when you get around to this using Partition Magic. > > Does this sound feasible? Yep. Good luck! Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] dual boot NT/linux
Hi, Kristen,
> When I decided to clean some house and get rid of 95, and go with NT, and
> then added linux...it screwed up my NT partitions EVERYTIME...and believe
> me..I was not a happy woman at this point.
>
> I have heard that it doesn't work but is there a technical explanation
> that I could get detailing why exactly
When NT sets up it's idea of dual boot ('95/'98/DOS and NT), it puts the NT
boot loader in the DOS/'95/'98 partition. If you blow that away, NT has no
way to boot.
Regards,
Caity
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] multibooting vs. VMWare?
Hi, Conni, > > I'm close... now that I have a working modem set up and ip forwarding and > all... but I can't seem to shake my addiction to age of empires... > What's worst is that I'm really bad at it, too... :P > > Conni > there have to be civ-type games for playstation... Civilization III: Call To Power won't do? -Caity > > -- > It is the blood that makes us human... > -Leiji Matsumoto, _Adieu Galaxy Express 999_ > > http://www.one-eyed-alien.net/~ccovingt > > http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Gulf/5817/ > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] netscape woes
Hi, Sha, I had major problems with the Gnome/Enlightenment/Netscape combos. Switching to KDE fixed 90% of them. -Caity > I'm using Rh 6.0 with Gnome/Enlightenment on an i686 > with 130 megs of RAM. I need multiple browser windows > open most of the day, and I'm using Navigator 4.7 with > strong encryption. I've disabled Java. most of the > sites I use are fairly barebones, and I don't load > images until I need them, but it's still a constant > hair-puller. Periodically I'll hear the rumble of > frantic disk access, the entire GUI will switch to > geological time, and I'll have to switch machines, > telnet in, kill all my netscape processes remotely, > and start over. It's getting ridiculous. > > Can anyone suggest advice or diagnostic tricks? Should > I ditch Gnome/Enlightenment? Go back to an older > Netscape? [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] netscape woes
Hi, > > I had major problems with the Gnome/Enlightenment/Netscape combos. > > Switching to KDE fixed 90% of them. > > I think that's a bit drastic for a browser problem, really. It wasn't just a browser problem. Gnome had this lovely tendency to core dump, crash, lockup, etc... I updated it twice before I gave up on it. I really think KDE is more stable and more mature. Netscape has it's bugs, but it is open, usually in multiple iterations (just like on your machine, Deb) almost all the time, and it isn't all that awful. Yes, it needs to be closed now and again. Regards, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Applixware
Hi, > StarOffice's Excel importers work better than Corel Quattro Pro's importers > even. I checked it out under Windows (since I have a full version of Corel > WordPerfect Suite for Windows I must admit that the filters are what impress me most about Star Office. My main complaint about it is that it is a bit slow and quite bloated. I use StarCalc as my main speadsheet. I've tried Siag, Wingz, and Gnumeric, and none have impressed me. 5.1a also has a really good PowerPoint filter if you have to deal with presentations. I still prefer WordPerfect 8 for my word processing, and haven't found the screen rendering of fonts to be that awful. It's fast and has, IMHO, a slightly better feature set. The multilingual support is much better, since you aren't limited to three language modules. I have the shrink wrapped version with the font installer, and have added about 700 Type 1 fonts to it. The fonts that come with the download version, IMHO, stink, and without the font installer, you can't add any. Just another two shekels worth... Later, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Staroffice
Hi, everyone, Karl-Heinz, very helpfully informed us: > > There's another way to get StarOffice: on the website > mentioned above you may order a CD for USD 10.- plus > shipping and handling, the total sum should not be too > much (at least if you don't order from outside USA). It's also included in the Red Hat Linux 6.1 box, which retails for $29.99. If you were going to pay for the CD anyway (which is way convenient to have), that means you are paying less than $20 for the official Red Hat with installation support. I'm sure that will be (or is) true with some other very recent distros as well. Regards, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] StarOffice and Gnome installation issues
Hi, Karl-Heinz, > > My PC here at home has got no more than 104MB RAM and StarOffice runs > very fine from under Windowmaker or KDE resp.. It runs on my old laptop, a P90 with 40 MB of RAM, with KDE/kwm. It is quite slow loading or starting an app, but otherwise runs fine. > > I do not believe that the RAM question has much to do with our > specific problem here but of course i don't use other RAM Eaters > simultaneously I've used it simultaneously with Netscape in the above environment. It still works. I prefer WordPerfect 8 for a word processor, and it is *much* faster, but I still haven't found a better spreadsheet for Linux. Regards, Cait [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] StarOffice and Gnome installation issues
Hi, Karl-Heinz, > > Congratulations! > I didn't think it's possible to use StarOffice with 40 MB of RAM. Everyone at our last installfest that wasn't cancelled, back in August, saw it. As I said, loading the program is painfully slow, but actual operation within the program is tolerable. I should point out that when I tried to do this with Gnome/Enlightenment as my desktop, Gnome crashed hard. KDE seems to take less resources. AfterStep is an even better choice, and I will often use it as my WM with KFM (but not KPanel) on top of it when I know I am going to be stressing the little laptop. > > > I've used it simultaneously with Netscape in the above > > environment. It still works. > > Astounding! Not really. The key is not to leave Netscape up forever, I think. > > Are you just teasing me or are you really using Netscape and > StarOffice on your P90 with 40 MB simultaneously? Really and truly, as in cutting and pasting between them. The machine in question is a Toshiba Portégé 610CT running Red Hat Linux 6.0 and KDE 1.1.1. > I will have to tell my colleagues about that, maybe we should > contact you officially for asking if you would like to work for > us: as Tuning Specialist! ;-) I have no skills in that area, I think. I do try to keep my machines as clean as possible, and fortunately it is much easier to uninstall things cleanly that I really decide I don't like in Linux than it is in Windows. If I treated this box the same way running Windows, I'd have had to rebuild it ten times by now :) > > My own little P100 here was sometimes quite overloaded when it > had only 72 MB so i never tried to run those two programs at the > same time. I think the choice of desktop manager and window manager makes a huge difference. Try it with a lightweight combo and you may be in for a pleasant surprise. Both KDE and Gnome are pretty resource intensive. > > ( I don't like distri wars nor program wars so let me just say > reply that i prefer our Writer because i am used to it and i > see many benefits by using the Navigator and the Stylist. > It might be that i'ld love Wordperfect if i were used to it. ) I don't think this has to be an argument or a war. Every good piece of software has it's strengths and weaknesses. The speed issue is something that is measurable in a quantifiable and undeniable way. So is the limitation where only three language modules can be installed. These are *not* preference issues, are they? OTOH, when it comes to performance, we are comparing apples and oranges. When Corel comes out with an integrated suite like Star Office, then we can compare speed and see who has the most efficient software. All of us may look at Star Office in a different light then. > > > but I still haven't found a better spreadsheet for Linux. > > :-) Nice to hear *that*! Here is something else you will like: I haven't found a better presentation graphics program either, and your PowerPoint filters are surprisingly good. OTOH, I don't do a lot of presentations, and I have never tried that on a 40MB machine :) All the best, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
[techtalk] Alternatives to Star Office/MS Office
Hi, - Original Message - From: Ian Hall-Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > > Note here that we're talking about what are probably the two most > abusive applications for unix, resource-wise. I think this is what most of us dislike about both StarOffice and Netscape. They both are OK feature-wise and are user friendly, but they are both resource hogs. > > We were contemplating moving over to StarOffice at work, until we saw > how much CPU an idle instance on the Enterprise 3500 took (3-4%.. > multiply that by 50 users, and the problem becomes very evident, and > that's only StarOffice). Not being prepared to invest significantly in > our infrastructure (well into 5 figures, without breaking a sweat) to > be able to run free software, we stuck with MS Office. Well... there are other alternatives you can look at. The newest option (due out 1q2000) will be Corel WordPerfect Suite 2000. There's also Applixware. If application cost is really the issue, KOffice looks like it will be quite good by the time they officially release it. I got it running finally, and for development pre-alpha code, it's amazing how well it already works. Lots of stuff is still missing, especially import/export filters, but heck, it's still an unreleased, in development product. > > And yes, we actually have IE installed on one of the Sun servers. > *beats hasty retreat to avoid being stoned to death as an infidel* I would love to see IE released for Linux. Let's face it, Netscape has it's problems, and there are too many sites that KFM just can't handle. Opera is not free, nor is it open, so I don't see that it would be a better philosophical choice that a Microsoft product. I still will play with the Linux port of Opera once it's available, just because I've always thought Opera was rather well done, small, and efficient. Does anyone have any news on the Linux port of Arachne? Back to office products for a sec: has anyone tried Xess? Oh, FWIW, I'm running COL 2.3 now. Red Hat 6.1 was way too buggy for my taste, and Caldera really seems to have gotten things together with 2.3. COAS is even becoming user friendly. Regards, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Alternatives to Star Office/MS Office
Hi, Ian, > > >If application cost is really the issue, KOffice looks like it will be quite > > But will it run on Win32 and solaris? I don't know if it does now, but like the rest of KDE, it will run on Solaris at some point. It will not run on Win32. If your company were interested in Linux on the desktop (a number of companies in this area have migrated) then it is an option. Otherwise, you are talking about running it as an X application off a server using something like Exceed or Reflection/X, which, IMHO, is not something most companies would want to do. > > >Opera is not free, nor is it open > > Nor is it available for linux (RSN!) One of these days... I rather > liked opera under OS/2. It is being ported to Linux, and the beta should be available in 4-6 weeks. See: http://www.opera.com/alt_os.html for more information. Regards, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] winmodem sound driver
Hi, Theresa, > ewww, this really does sound bad, So you're saying I'd be better > off to slap in an old USR 28800, than i would be to install a driver for my 56k > winmodem? I don't know if I'd go that far. What will happen with your Winmodem is that when you go online, everything else will slow down. This happens in Windows, too, so having a Linux driver only means the Winmodems suck equally harshly under Linux and Windows. OTOH, 28.8 is slow. 56K modems can, IRL, get up to around 53K, so your Winmodem will download stuff and load pages a whole lot faster than your old 28.8, but at the cost of system performance and your ability to do something else at the same time. IMHO, buy a real 56K modem. I use a USR 56K Sportster, and it is problem free. I'd really love to have DSL or a cable modem, but neither are available in my town just yet. Regards, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] winmodem sound driver
Hi, Theresa, > #2. Wanting to give linux a whirl I wanted to purchase a box that would be linux >compliant. I went to pricewatch.com and purchased from their linux systems section > this box that is very non linux compliant. That sounds like false advertising to me. Can you return it and find one that is Linux compliant? It doesn't have to be expensive. My Mom's 433 MHZ EMachine cost $400, including the monitor. The Winmodem had to be replaced, and the memory upgraded from 32MB to 64 MB, but we are still talking under $500. > > I'd like a solution to my issue, or a truthful information that it can't be resolved, not advice > that I can't afford to take. You might notice you got essentially the same advice from the entire list. Winmodems are very poor technology. They don't work well under Windows either. You may not like the advice, but it is truthful. If the company that sold you the machine won't make it right you have two options: live with a poor technological solution or spend a bit more. I find that if I am very, very assertive and clear about what I want and why, I can usually get what I want in situations like this. So... instead of getting upset at all of us, why not get upset at pricewatch.com, and make it clear to them just how upset you are. You might just be surprised at the result. Good luck! Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] winmodem sound driver
Hi, Theresa, > > Thanks for the response, guess I might reconsider this group after I can afford to > upgrade? Not at all. You are welcome here. You asked a bunch of techies about a particular technology, and we gave you our honest opinion is all that happened. Keep after the pricewatch folks. Threaten to post you experiences on your web page, on Slashdot, on any place that will post your story. It's amazing how many companies want to avoid bad press and will do something to satisfy you, or at least, to putit crudely and how they would see it, shut you up. The fact that you are not seeing a slowdown now doesn't mean you won't see one later when you are stressing your system by doing more at once. Good luck! Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] truncated file names
Hi, Theresa, > Ok, I changed the mount for c drive to vfat, and it fixed the truncation issue, but >now c drive is not automatically mounted in my file manager on boot. You probably have the "noauto" option specified. Remove that from the line for you Windows partition in your /etc/fstab file and that should clear it up. Regards, Cait [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] winmodem sound driver
Hi, Jenn, > Contact pricewatch and tell them that the box they sold you is > not as advertised and would they please make good by providing > you with equipment which IS as advertised. > > Over here (Australia), at least, you'd have a very VERY strong > case to take to Small Claims - and the company would know it. Things are pretty much the same here in the States, which is why I encouraged Theresa to do just that. My experience, like yours, is that if I am polite but assertive and describe the problem clearly, I get a reasonable solution. Regards, Cait [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
[techtalk] X in Corel vs. Red Hat (was: winmodem sound driver)
Hi, Theresa, > Oh, RH was not pre-installed, it came on a CD as the operating system for the box. >They said they could not install linux on the system as it was too difficult. With all due respect, Red Hat is not a terribly difficult installation, particularly with the graphical install in 6.1. I suspect they are just clueless when it comes to Linux. > What they should have said is that it is not compatable. You're absolutely right about that. Like I said before, this amounts to false advertising. > I could not get a decent video display on RH so when offered an opportunity to try >corel's debian I jumped on it. Corel allows me to at least get 16m colors and 8x6 >resolution. Ummm... the XFree86 provided in Corel Linux is identical to the one provided in Red Hat Linux 6.1. Anything that works in one will work in the other. The Red Hat graphical installer may not have handled it correctly, is all. I suspect if you prefer the selection of packages in Red Hat (and the wide availability of Red Hat RPMs on the web), you can probably correct the situation with XF86Setup. FWIW, I run three different distributions on my three computers: Caldera OpenLinux 2.3, Red Hat 6.1, and TurboLinux 4.0. At the moment I kind of like Caldera best (and it is very easy to install), but with the previous versions (6.0 and 2.2) I preferred Red Hat. Regards, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] RedHat newbie question
Hi, Rebecca, > > I just installed RedHat 6.0, didn't examine what it was installing too > closely just accepted defaults. Is it possible there was no compiler > installed? (which cc, which gcc both say no gcc in ). > If so, how can I install it (or do I need to reinstall RedHat?). > Install directions seem to want to use gcc to do the installation. > Chicken, egg, etc Yes, it's not only possible, it's really not there unless you installed the development stuff. gcc is not included in the standard Workstation installation. Have no fear, you do not have to reinstall. Mount your Red Hat CD-ROM, and take a look in the RPMs directory. You should see gcc in there. Simply, from the command line, type in: rpm -Uvh and it will install. If you are using Gnome/Enlightenment, you can also use GnoRPM as a graphical tool to do the same thing, and that is in your Gnome menu and pretty self explanatory. If you are running KDE, simple browse to the file with KFM. If you have installed kpackage, clicking on the file icon will open the installer. Good luck! Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
[techtalk] Glint (was: RedHat newbie question)
Hi, Robert, > > There's also glint, a graphical front end to rpm, which I hear is > pretty good Glint was only in Red Hat 5.2 and below. It was superceded by GnoRPM in 6.0. In 6.1 you have a choice between GnoRPM and kpackage. I find kpackage the easiest and most flexible front end to RPM. Regards, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] xf86config....
Hi, Walt, Consider running XF86Setup, which is a nice, easy, graphical way to set up your xf86config file. When it starts up it will ask if it should use your current file as the default, and simply answer "no" to start clean. If you don't have XF86Setup installed, it is on your Red Hat CD-ROM. Good luck! Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Glint (was: RedHat newbie question)
Hi, > > I had an unpleasant experience with kpackage in KDE 1.1.1. I was > removing unneeded packages after an installation, secure in the > knowledge (so I thought) that kpackage would warn me if I was > removing something with a dependancy on it. I soon found this > not to be the case. Just to be sure, I removed netscape-common > (without removing navigator first) to see if I'd get a warning > message. Kpackage removed n-c without so much as a word of > protest. Funny, my copy always protested. In any case, kpackage has been updated with 1.1.2, and the version in Red Hat 6.1 works flawlessly. If you've upgraded rpm you can use it with 6.0 as well. > > However, I > stopped using kpackage and have been using gnorpm without > problems. I had gnorpm crash on me with unpleasant results. I also find it counter intuitive and a general pain to use. kpackage at least handles updates the way the -U option works in rpm. You might want to try a newer version of kpackage. Regards, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Converting PMMail files to Maildir or mbox format
Hi, Subba, > I am in the process of moving my mail from a OS/2 box. The mail client > here is PMMail. Each email is stored in a seperate file, like in Maildir. > I have moved these files to linux, but cannot read them using Mutt to > convert them to Maildir named files. The PMMail files are named in 7.3 format, > which is like ABCXYZ1.MSG PMMail (at least the 1.95 version I last used) had an option to export it's messages as plain text files. If you don't have too many of them, you might want to try that. Regards, Cait [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Other OSes on a Linux box
> You may have driver problems. Win9X and NT are both intended to be > installed only by OEMs -- and as such, they do a poor job of properly > configuring vendor-specific hardware. If you have any "nongeneric" > hardware expect problems. Yikes! OK, I hate to defend Microsoft at any time, but this is just blatantly wrong. Both are sold retail, and both are relatively easy to install if you know what you are doing and have the right drivers up front. NT wants to be in control, and will rewrite your master boot record. The best way to do what you are proposing is to install Linux first, format a suitably sized primary partition to old-fashioned DOS FAT format. Install NT there and convert to NTFS. You can use something like System Commander (if you have DOS/Win9x as well) or the Boot Manager from Partition Magic to choose your OS at boot time. Both of these products play nicely with both Linux and NT. Unless VA or Penguin are using some really proprietary or odd parts, my conclusion is exactly the opposite of Kelly's: you shouldn't have too much of a problem doing this. I've had a system with Solaris x86, BSDI, OS/2, NT, and Linux on it, and it all worked. Regards, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Other OSes on a Linux box
Hi, Kelly, > > The problem is getting the right drivers up front. Windows will, in > my experience, blithely install the wrong driver, making your system > about as stable as a two-legged coffee table. > > The simple fact is that Windows is not intended to be installed by > non-experts. Which operating system is? I mean, Linux is a wonderful example. Caldera is easy if it detects all your hardware and gets everything right. How often does that *not* happen? In this area Microsoft is about the same as everyone else. Of course, the end result once everything is right in Windows is still less desirable than Linux by a lot, IMHO. Take care, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Other OSes on a Linux box
Hi, Courtney, > > As far as I know, windows (any flavor) wants to be at the beginning of > your hard drive, because it epects to be able to put certain things in > certain places that are relative to the first track (if my memory > isn't being spotty). NT is the exception. It takes over the MBR, but can go on *any* partition, even a logical one. It does like that *some* MS OS be first, though. A common thing I did was to put a small DOS maintenance partition with System Commander first, OS/2 second, various *nix wherever, and NT somewhere, anywhere else. I've had it on a slave drive with no problems. If you use the Boot Manager from Partition Magic or OS/2, it will leave the NT boot loader intact, and let you point to your NT partition. It also doesn't need a DOS or Win9x FAT partition to work the way System Commander does. > Any flavor of windows *will* overwrite the > master boot record and punt lilo. This part is absolutely true. With Win9x, though, you can install Linux and LILO second, and use LILO to boot either Windows or Linux. Caldera OpenLinux makes this easy from a partitioning standpoint, though it is really inflexible about what it's crippled version of Partition Magic will do about creating partitions. What the Caldera install does is make LILO your boot loader, but it fails to add your Windows partition to LILO. If you do that manually, you can then set either Windows or Linux as your default OS at boot. With Red Hat you basically need to put a very small /boot partition first, Windows 9x second, create your Linux partitions after, and let LILO write to the MBR, then edit it's configuration file to allow booting to either OS. Windows should be installed first, though. Do *NOT* do either of the above with NT. You will clobber NT for sure. It is always best to install NT last and recover your other OSes. > > Method 1: > Partition the drive, windows partition physically first. Install > Linux. Configure lilo. Make a boot disk, including all of the lilo > configuration information (so that it will boot off the floppy the way > you eventually want it to boot normally). Install windows. Boot from > floppy. Rerun lilo and check configurations. Pray at appropriate > points during the process. This won't work for Red Hat if your Linux partition is beyond (or extends beyond) cylinder 1024. You really need that /boot partition first. 16MB is big enough. > > Method 2: > Partition the drive, windows partition physically first. Install > windows. Install Linux. Configure lilo. Pray at appropriate points. Again, this will clobber NT. > > Of course, both of these methods assume you'd rather use lilo than > something third-party. Something third party is often easier. It also often means buying yet more proprietary software :( Take care, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Newbie question
Hi, Actually, if you are using kppp, you don't need to touch /etc/resolv.conf, but rather enter the primary (and any secondary) DNS server IP address(es) in the TCP/IP settings in kppp. In any case, she'll need that info, and all her other basic configuration info, from the ISP. It's all graphical, easy, and frighteningly Windows-like. Regards, Caity > I believe that what you need to do is find out the IP address for > the name server from your ISP, and add that to the > /etc/resolv.conf file. That's what I do on a different distribution > (redhat). > > My dialing script for each place where I connect (work or ISP) > copies a different file over /etc/resolv.conf, because I like to > use a different DNS server at each place. > > - Esther > > Mon, 24 Jan 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > I'm a linux newbie and have been lurking on this list for a little while. > > Hope I don't sound too ignorant. > > I have installed and been running Caldera's Open Linux 2.3. > > It's been quite the learning experience, but I've managed to get to the point > > where I'd like to use the Netscape browser. > > I connect successfully to my ISP using kppp but whenever I try to do anything > > with Netscape I can't get a name resolution. > > > > >Here's the error message: > > >--- Warning: the following hosts are unknown: > > > home.netscape.com > > >home6.netscape.com internic.net > > >This means that some or all hosts will be unreachable. > > > Perhaps there is a problem with your name server? > > >If your site must use a non-root name server, you will need to set the > > $SOCKS_NS >environment variable to point at the appropriate name server. > > >It may (or may not) be necessary to set this variable, or the SOCKS host > > >preference, to the IP address of the host in question rather than its name > > > > -- Esther [EMAIL PROTECTED]Speaking only for myself. > Tomorrow, we shall be older, ...but shall we be wiser? -- Joan Walsh Anglund > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Free FrameMaker beta for Linux
Hi, everyone, This probably need to migrate to issues, but... I think I need to point out that Adobe is one of the companies funding the lobbying in favor of UCITA. I don't often agree with RMS, but he is 100% correct when he calls UCITA the greatest threat to Free / Open Source software today. So... I would like to encourage everyone to treat Adobe with the disdain that many people seem to reserve for Microsoft. These folks are out to kill the Linux / Open Source community. Regards, Cait [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Forgotten root password
Hi, Phil, Boot up in single-user mode. To do this, at the LILO prompt, type: linux single >From there you should be able to fix this "little" problem. Regards, Cait Phil Savoie wrote: > Hi All, > > A friend (no, really) has forgotten his RH6.1 root passwd. In Solaris I > know how to fix this (boot cdrom -s) but how in RH6.1? Any info would be > greatly appreciated. > > TIA > > Phil > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Can I change my mind now??
Hi, Storm, Edit your /etc/inittab file. Somewhere in there (I don't have Mandrake or I'd be more specific) you will see the run level set to 3, which is command line. Change it to 5. Save and reboot. That's it! Regards, Caity (who also likes KDE/kwm) Storm wrote: > Actually, ... I know I can :) > Ok,.. here's the question,. > > When I installed Linux (Mandrake 7) I told it to automatically start the KDE > ( or whatever, since it lets me choose from several GUIs). I was thinking > maybe I would start from a command line ( so that I don't let myself get so > complacent and reliant on the KDE.) The question is,... where do I change > this,... ?? (I'm fairly sure I can figure out the second step, that being > when I'm tired of the commandline stuff, how to get back into the KDE :) ) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [techtalk] Differences between linux distributions
> The classic example is KDE and GNOME. SuSE makes use of the /opt > hierarchy for these. Red Hat puts them in /usr/share. Debian puts > GNOME in /usr. I don't know about Caldera: perhaps /opt? Does it > even ship GNOME? This causes Religious Wars. Nope, Caldera ships with KDE only. However, the latest and greatest GNOME is available on Caldera's web site in Caldera RPMs. I say Caldera RPMs because Red Hat ones will fail on dependencies: the libraries are in the "wrong" place from a Caldera perspective. Oh, and yes, it installs into /opt. > Preferred GUI: some give you GNOME by default (Red Hat, Debian) > Actually, the Red Hat 6.1 installer is pretty agnostic. It will do Gnome, KDE, or both. > Others give you KDE by default (Caldera, SuSE, originally Mandrake, > Filesystem setups: Red Hat has an extra layer of subdirectories in > /etc/rc.* compared with Debian. It has directories of things in > /etc where some others have a lot more files in it, not in subdirectories, > I _think_. The big thing from a user point of view is that they put things in different places. So, while, for example, TurboLinux, Red Hat, and Caldera all use RPMs, you cannot use one distro's RPMs on another without rebuilding them. You can, of course, use gzipped tarballs, but the advantage of the package management systems, IMHO, is that they are easier on the user, allow for very nice version tracking, and give you a GUI interface to keep track of things. > Package management: > rpm (Red Hat, Caldera, SuSE, Mandrake, Definite) > dselect/apt-get (Debian, presumably Corel) > I think TurboLinux may use its own? Nope. It's rpm. > How they split up (or don't) the software: > Red Hat, Mandrake and Debian all make a conscious split between > 'free' and 'non-free' software in some way, typically putting them > onto separate CDs (and in Debian's case, separate ftp directories?) So does Caldera. IMHO, this is a *good* thing. With UCITA passing in Virginia, and threatening to do so elsewhere, I'll be damned if I'm going to support *any* company threatening us with that kind of legislation. With the temporary exception of WordPerfect and a couple of games, I am trying to go pure OpenSource or Free Software. > I don't want to start a religious war here. I know this matters > very much to some people and less to others. People who are > attracted to the Linux world by the free software ideals might > find that a useful one if they're looking for deciding factors. I don't think these are religious issues. Each distro has advantages and disadvantages. I think Caldera OpenLinux 2.3 is very newbie friendly, for example, but doesn't come with lots of stuff that Red Hat or SuSe give you. > Corel gives you a graphical login by default, as does I _think_ > Mandrake. ...as does Caldera. Of course, editing the /etc/inittab file can turn it off and give you a plain old command line login :) > Whoah. This is too long. Linux Magazine recently ran a comparison > between a bunch of distributions with a big pretty chart. That might > help some folks? It should. It was pretty well done. In many areas, it is a matter of personal taste and how you use the OS. Thanks, Telsa, for a great rundown. Take care, Caity [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
[techtalk] Red Hat 7.0 and video cards
Hi, everyone, > I'd take 7.0 back and pick up 6.2 if it were me and I really > wanted redhat. I know the guys at work who use redhat couldn't > get X to work with a couple different vid cards and as a result > 7.0 isn't running on any computer at work. I ran into the same problem with my Trident 3D Image 975 AGP card, which again, is a common chipset. The problem isn't Red Hat 7, though. It's any and *all* distributions that use XFree86 4.x. The support is just not nearly as good as in 3.3.x. Mandrake 7.2, for example, will give you exactly the same problem. The only solution is to rip out X and install the 3.3.6 RPMs from the previous version. This will, of course, break anything that depends on 4.0.1 or whatever. > The cards weren't > anything unusual and the person installing has used linux for > quite a while and knows his way around. On the flip side having > to work at an installation can teach you a lot. It can, but this kind of challenge isn't necessarily the best way to learn, IMHO. The X people really dropped the ball on this one. Even MS is backwards compatible with previous hardware. Thankfully, there is a workaround. > installations I've done I think maybe Mandrake was about the > easiest. Mandrake has a really good installer, but Caldera OpenLinux is still easier for the newbie, IMHO. The thing is, Mandrake is the better distro and give you a whole lot more in the package. Nothing you can't add to Caldera later, mind you, but still... it's more work to get all the apps you might want installed in Caldera. For example, if you want Gnome, you'll need to download and install it. Happy New Year to everyone! All the best, Caity ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Linux Email Clients
Kath wrote: > What is a good email client for Linux (KDE in Corel)? > > I need one that is basically MS Outlook Express. I haven't been able to > find one that lets me have mutliple accounts with unique pop and smtp > servers. Also, Mozilla (M18 .deb) won't check every single email > account that I have, I have to do them all uniquely, but it will > autocheck them every few minutes, like it told it to. I really like KMail 2.0.1. Avoid 2.0, which had some bugs, if you can. It's part of KDE2. All the best, Caity ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] KDE2 (was: Linux Email Clients)
Hi, everyone, > OK I found the KDE debian source - > http://kde.tdyc.com/ > Looks like 2.0 is in Woody. You would be better off with 2.0.1. It's got some bug fixes in it, as well as better localization/globalization. There are generic tarballs on ftp.kde.org. There are also RPMs for Mandrake, Red Hat, Caldera, and SUSE. Sorry, no Debian. Best, Caity ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Any good HTML editors for Linux?
jennyw wrote: > Just wondering if anyone had any suggestions for good HTML (non-WYSIWYG or > WYSIWYG that supports non-WYSIWYG) for Linux? Pros and cons would be great, > and also whether they require KDE or Gnome (I run Gnome usually). Hi, Jen, For Gnome, I'd really recommend Bluefish. Very, very nice. Second choice goes to SCREEM. Alternately, if you do have KDE and QT installed, you *can* run KDE programs from a Gnome session. Other options (KDE based) are Quanta and Webmaker. Webmaker used to be my favorite, but it hasn't been updated in over a year. Bluefish is my current favorite. None of the above are large programs. I'd load all four and play and see which you think best suits your needs. All the best, Caity ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Problems with Microsoft Works
Damian Brazendale wrote: > I have a new P.C. (Dixons E Machine 866 dvd) running windows M.E. With > the Pentium lll 866 Mhz processor. The P.C. came pre-installed with > Microsoft Works and this suite works well with factory set conditions, > with no other software installed. However when I install ANY printer > driver it causes problems with the Wksdb file. I initially installed > a Hewlett Packard 640C and when I came across this problem I changed > it for a Epson Stylus 680, both have resulted in the same problem. I > have now installed all my additional software with no problems to the > Wksdb file, but the very second I install the printer driver, I get > trouble! Hi, Damian, You wrote this request to a *Linux* support list, not a Microsoft one. You will be pleased to know, however, that my Mom has a somewhat older E Machines PC than yours, and it supports Linux beautifully. OK, the winmodem rots, but it does work. There are many things out there much better than Microsoft Works and Microsoft Windows ME. So... if it were my system: I'd format the hard drive and install Linux-Mandrake 8.0, and use the very nice KOffice suite, or perhaps Star Office, rather than Works. Of course, that's me. What kind of an answer did you expect on a Linux group??? Good luck! Caity ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] light laptops for linux?
Hi, Molly, I should add: I had three reasons for stressing the Libretto rather than more powerful models in my last post: 1. Size: about the same as a paperback book. You can't get any smaller. 2. Linux compatibility: I *know* they work from personal experience. 3. Price: relatively low. The downside is that they have less processor power. The configuration I'd go with if money weren't an issue: Toshiba Libretto FF1100V 96MB RAM (the max) stock 6.1GB hard drive (20GB drives are available) Good luck! Caity ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] light laptops for linux?
Hi, Molly, I have two Toshiba Librettos (one older, one newer) and they run Linux just fine. They are really tiny and weight about 1.8 lbs. The bad news is that I believe they are out of production. You should still be able to find new Libretto FF1100V and SS1050 models around. The bad news is that the processor is only a 233 or 266 MHz Pentium II. Used ones abound in places online, such as EBay, and the older you go the cheaper they get. Sony has a new super small, slim model of the Vaio with a Transmeta Crusoe 600 MHz chip in it. Very nice, very light (~2 lbs.), very purple :) I can't afford one just now, but it is on my list. You may also want to check out the Casio FIVA, also available with a Crusoe chip. Soyo also makes a small mini-notebook, but it isn't much more powerful than a Libretto. The Soyo would be the cheapest of the lot. The Toshiba Libretto is the smallest and lightest. If you go the Libretto route there are some challenges. The PCMCIA floppy is not supported by Linux. The BIOS recognizes it, so it can be used as a boot device, but little else. Third party drivers for the floppy are available for download, but a kernel recompile is required since floppy.c needs to change. Also, there is no CD-ROM drive in a Libretto. (An optional external DVD-ROM is offered for the FF1100V.) I use an Addonics CD98 with mine to load software, and that *is* supported natively by Linux. So are *most* (but not all) SCSI PCMCIA cards, so a SCSI PCMCIA CD-ROM drive works too. Also, Toshiba does not provide the utilities for Linux (though they do still support OS/2, of all things), but again, very nice third party ones are available. Write me and I'll provide you with lots of helpful web sites and downloads if you get a Libretto. FWIW, my really old one is the very first one made, the Libretto 20CTA, a whopping 486DX2-75 with a whole 16MB of memory. It runs Red Hat 6.0, no KDE, no Gnome, and works OK. My newer Libretto also has Red Hat on it, but handles Gnome and KDE well. Good luck! Caity Molly Tomlinson wrote: > Does anyone have a recommendation for a good, slim laptop? I will be taking > it on a cross-US bike trip this summer; small and light will be my primary > concerns. :) I'd like something reasonably powered - I will be doing photo > work - but given the choice, I'd take light over fast. > > Right now I'm looking at the Sony Vaio R505 "SuperSlim" series and the Dell > Inspiron 2100. Anyone have experience running Linux on either of these (or > similar) beasties? > > thanks, > --Molly > ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Re: techtalk digest, Vol 1 #445 - 11 msgs
Hi, Linda and everyone else, > But again, if it is a 'recovery thing' where is the documentation? Why > wasn't it clearly in the manual? Which manual? There is no "Linux manual" per se. It depends on how well the individual distro documents things and writes their manual. It *is* in the current Red Hat manual, but isn't in Mandrake's or Caldera's, both of which have relatively poor documentation. It's in the man pages as well, which are standard *nix documentation. > Why bother having passwords if anybody can get around them? Don't you think > that by putting encrypted passwords on a computer one would be led to > believe that a password was needed to gain entry? Especially since linux > makes such a big deal about how secure it is. You are *way* off base here. Linux is about as secure as any OS out there. A remote user cannot log in using single user mode. Most businesses have a computer room to which only authorized people have access. We use *physical security* to insure that unauthorized personnel don't get around the passwords. I work in a major government computer center. We have badge access (in and out) as well as genuine real live security personnel. We use AIX, Solaris, IRIX, HP-UX, and Linux. All have this feature, which, as someone pointed out, is absolutely a requirement to recover a system where the root password has been lost. Imagine a user with sudo "all" rights who isn't supposed to change root does, either deliberately or accidentally. How do you, as the admin responsible for that system, get it? FWIW, on the IRIX I support I do password protect single user mode, but someone with an IRIX boot CD can get around that in a heartbeat. > Yes you can pull out the hard drive and stick it in another machine. You > can take a crow bar to my back door and get in my house as well. Yep. > But if all your neighbors had a pass key to your house when you bought it > and you were not told about it wouldn't you feel a bit violated? You are comparing apples and oranges. Single user mode is very well documented. You just didn't have very good docs or didn't know where to look. > That is how this is... a hidden way in, and it leads one to wonder what else > is hidden and why. Argh! It *isn't* hidden. Not at all. Look, if you know of a better operating system, please enlighten us. Don't tell us this is M$ all over again. It is relatively easy to secure a Linux box. It is virtually impossible to secure a M$ one. Regards, Caity ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] About prettyphysicslady on the linuxchix techtalk list...
> > > Fourth, perhaps you should think a bit harder about what you are doing > > when you make sexist remarks about the presumed physical appearance and > > social habits of female scientists on women's forum of all places? > > Actually, it struck me as reasonable to assume that someone who > openly used 'prettyphysicslady' as a 'net address EITHER had not > had experiences which I find common on the 'net, OR wasn't bothered > by the them, OR wasn't female. > > And the kind of experiences I've had, I'd find it strange for people > to not be bothered by. > Amen. I know I would never use such an e-mail address for myself. -Caity (who studied physics, but was lured away by $$$ and computers :) ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] About prettyphysicslady on the linuxchix techtalk list...
> > I beg to differ. You are running Windows, using Outlook Express, I'm > not certain that you're any sort of authority on Linux operating > standards. Linda currently has her box configured in the following > manner: > > Port State Service > 21/tcp openftp > 22/tcp openssh > 23/tcp opentelnet > 25/tcp opensmtp > 80/tcp openhttp > 110/tcpopenpop-3 > 111/tcpopensunrpc > 443/tcpopenhttps > 513/tcpopenlogin > 514/tcpopenshell > 635/tcpopenunknown > 1503/tcp openimtc-mcs > 2040/tcp openlam > 2049/tcp opennfs > 3306/tcp openmysql > /tcp opendec-notes > 5050/tcp openmmcc > 9090/tcp openzeus-admin > > I think she has far greater things to worry about than Linux single- > user mode. Yep. I could crack her system in nothing flat. ON, *nix security is in my job description, but any script kiddie could break into this. For any system to be secure it needs competent systems administration. That is *not* OS dependent. > When posting to a list requesting help or suggestion, it's > expected that one will at least make an attempt to understand what is > being offered or suggested by said list-members. (Read: When acting > like a troll, expect to be treated as such). Yep. All the best, Caity ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Stupid Question: Troll?
Hi, Keith, > > And I have still had no luck installing Caldera's OpenLinux eDesktop 2.4. > Some day, maybe... > Please describe the problems you have had with the install specifically. Perhaps we can help you get it to work. Caldera is usually a good choice for newbies because of the ease of install. It obviously wasn't easy for you, and knowing why may not only help you get it installed, but others as well. Regards, Caity (currently running Red Hat 7.1, since we only do Red Hat at work) ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Re: Caldera Open Linux eDesktop 2.4 Installation
Hi, Keith, OK, I know exactly what is happening. What it is asking for is the registered version (the one that costs money) of Partition Magic. The copy provided with Caldera OpenLinux 2.4 is very, very limited. It doesn't like your FAT32 partition. You're trying to shrink your Windows partition to install Linux side-by-side, right? You have three options: 1) Actually beg, borrow, buy, or steal a copy of Partition Magic or any other equivalent program, 2) add a second hard drive and install Linux on that, leaving your Windows drive intact. I highly recommend this option, as there is little or no chance of destroying your Windows stuff this way, or 3) Use a distribution of Linux that can install into your existing FAT32 partition without having a partition of it's own (i.e.: Red Hat Linux 7.1). In any case, it isn't going to work with what you have if you want to keep Windows intact. Sorry for that less than helpful answer. All the best, Caity > > I put the CD in for the binaries and installation. It spins up, starts > winsetup.exe and I get Welcome screen, but not the exact screen that is > shown in the book. When I click on the PowerQuest Utilities to install > PartitionMagic, I get an error message that tells me that I need the > 'Registered' version to continue. This causes winsetup.exe to close and > I am back to the Win98 desktop. > ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] window manager preference?
On Thursday 17 May 2001 04:48 am, coldfire wrote: > i was just curious what the window manager of choice is on this list :) .. Hi, On a system with decent resources, definitely KDE 2.1.1. Very nice, lots of features and excellent apps, and yet I can easily make it get out of my way. On anything with less than 48MB of RAM and at least a 166MHz processor, either icewm or xfce. I prefer the CDE-like interface of xfce to the windowsish look of icewm, but the lack of window borders and some of the window menu features bug me. IceWM is very easy to configure and very flexible. Both are really lightweight without lacking useful features. FWIW, I have been known to use icewm on a well equipped system as well, and just run KDE and sometimes GNOME apps on top of it. Just my two shekels worth... Caity Caitlyn Máire Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://caitlyn.port5.com ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] Quanta+, Bluefish (was: window manager preference?)
On Thursday 17 May 2001 10:58 am, Scott wrote: > Red Hat seems to favor Gnome. Yes, but they give you the choice of KDE or Gnome at install. Youcan install both, but choose either as your default. I chose KDE and had no I guess Solaris is switching to Gnome this year > as well. I feel comfortable with KDE the most, why? I guess it just feels > warm to me and I have no trouble finding my way around. In addition, > Quanta+, the web developer program runs best on KDE. > > Anyone try the now defunct Eazel? > > -sap > > > ___ > techtalk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk -- Caitlyn Máire Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://caitlyn.port5.com ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] Parallel port zip drives under RH 7.1 (2.4 kernel change, perhaps)
Hi, there, OK, on every distribution I've run with a 2.2 or 2.0 kernel, if the distro didn't autodetect my zip drive, it was pretty straightforward to add it. I'd add the line alias block-major-8 ppa to my /etc/conf.modules file, add a /mnt/zip directory, add /dev/sda4 to my /etc/fstab file as /mnt/zip, and make sure the ppa module was being loaded at boot time. Way back when (2.0 kernel distros) you had to rmmod lpd and insmod ppa. Well... Red Hat 7.1 didn't setup my zip drive for me the way Mandrake did recently, so I added the above alias line to my /etc/modules.conf file (yep, I was aware of that change) and followed the steps above and... the system tells me that /dev/sda4 is not a recognized device. ppa is loaded. I went into Preferences->Information->SCSI in KDE2 and found this: Attached devices: Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 06 Lun: 00 Vendor: IOMEGA Model: ZIP 100 Rev: D.09 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 I saw the SCSI ID of 6, but /dev/sda6 doesn't work either. Obviously, the OS knows it's there. How do I make it work? Feeling stupid today... Caity -- Caitlyn Máire Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://caitlyn.port5.com ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] newbie
Hi, Sue, > > Hope I'm not intruding. I have just joined the group because I'm looking > for help/assistance/support/etc. Welcome! You're not intruding. We're here to help. > > I've been a PC user on Microsoft software for 12 years and I'm wanting to > make the switch to linux on my home pc. There will be a learning curve, and you'll probably hate the change for a week or so. Then, once you get used to things, you'll wonder how you ever managed with that Microsoft stuff :) My recommendations for distribution would be 1) Linux-Mandrake 8.0, 2) Caldera OpenLinux eDesktop 3.1, or 3) Red Hat Linux 7.1. Only #3 is in the stores so far, but #1 should be any day now. Caldera is the easiest install, followed by Mandrake. Mandrake bundles the most applications and has lots of nice graphical tools to make your life easy after installation. Red Hat is second in that area, with Caldera being just a tad bit spartan. You shouldn't really have a problem with any of these three, though. > > I have an old compaq presario and need to know if it will linux can be run > on it. I'm also used to using a variety of MS applications that I'm going > to be looking for replacements for after switching over. I need to > continue to have a dialup connection to the internet, email, browser, ftp, > etc. The KPPP dialer (simply labeled "Internet Dialer") which is part of the KDE 2.1.1 desktop is a whole lot like Dial-Up Networking in Windows. It's very, very easy to configure. KDE is the default desktop for both Mandrake and Caldera, and is an installation option choice with Red Hat. Again, I recommend KDE because it is simple, fairly familiar looking to a Windows user, and has lots of apps and applets built in. Email and browser: all of the recommended distributions will give you *several*. Netscape 4.76 or 4.77 is included in all, as is some version of Mozilla. I'd recommend upgrading to Mozilla 0.9 from whatever is included. The Konqueror 2.1.1 browser and KMail 1.2 mail client come with KDE and integrate together nicely. IMHO, they are the best offered in both categories, though I have found a few sites which don't render properly in Konqueror. Galeon, another browser, is in the more expensive Mandrake boxed sets. Red Hat provides Armadillo, yet another browser in the early stages of development, on their PowerTools disk included in the Deluxe boxed set. FTP clients: gftp (part of the Gnome desktop) is really nice and will run fine under KDE. The version shipped with Red Hat 7.1 was buggy, but a revised version that works well is available from the updates.redhat.com wxftp is another good choice. > > Here's the specifics on the box > > Pentium 200mhz > 64 meg RAM > 6 gig HD > 16X cdrom > 3-1/2" floppy > 33.6k data/fax modem > S3 Virge graphics card > ethernet card > some kind of proprietary sound card > UBL speakers The sound card is likely as ESS1868 chipset. If so, it will work fine. I can't comment on the ethernet card or the modem without knowing more about them. I disagree with one prior comment: 6GB is plenty. I have 7 GB. A kitchen sink install of Red Hat Linux 7.1 is about 2.3GB. Mandrake is a little larger, Caldera smaller. > > there's also a 17 inch presario monitor No problem here. Make sure you have the model number in case it isn't detected. You may want to have the manual handy in case it isn't one of the listed monitors. Most of the Compaq monitors *are* listed, but if not, you'll need technical specs to configure XWindows. > > I'll be looking for replacements for MS Office software (word, excel and a > relationship database), Publisher (page layout), Paint Shop Pro (graphics), > etc. On you 200MHz system with 64MB RAM, you'll find Star Office, which was previously recommended, painfully slow. I would sooner recommend KOffice, which will be part of your default installation if you choose to install KDE. It will give you good replacements for Word (KWord), Excel (KSpread), and a decent vector graphics (drawing) program (KIllustrator). GIMP is by far the best graphics program for Linux, rivalling Photoshop. It's free, and will be in any of the distributions I suggested. KLyx is a possible publisher, though much more complex than what you are probably used to from Microsoft. I will shy away from recommend a database application since I don't generally use one. At work they are using Postgres SQL, but I cannot comment on it personally. > > Any help you can offer, resources on the web to read up, etc. are greatly > appreciated. A good staring point is http://www.linuxnewbie.org They have tons of links from there. Good luck, Sue! Don't be afraid to ask questions. You'll always get polite answers here. All the best, Caity Caitlyn Máire Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://caitlyn.port5.com _
Re: [techtalk] Yet Another Installation Question
Hi, Keith, > Working on the basis that there really aren't any stupid questions, here > I go again... I don't agree that there are no stupid questions. Still... I don't see you asking any :) > > From the earlier queries on installing my copy of Caldera Open Linux > eDesktop 2.4, putting the whole package on a separate drive seems the way > to go. One drive for Window$98 and one for Linux. That is certainly the best way to insure that WIndows stays intact. > > I have been cautioned to back up all of my data just in case, but why > could I not unplug the IDE cable to the Win98 HD and do the install on > the Linux HD? Would I be opening a can of worms when I plug the cable > back into the Win98 drive? Potentially, yes, you are opening a big can of worms. *IF* you can insure that the Linux drive is your primary master drive and *IF* you can insure that it stays that way after you plug in the other one, what you suggest is an absolutely safe way to install Linux. Here's the catch that nobody has mentioned yet: when you reboot with the Win98 drive plugged in your machine will *not* know about it. Oh, the BIOS will know it's there, but grub or lilo (the thing you'll boot to) won't. You will then have to manually edit your config file, which I've done, but I wouldn't recommend to an absolute newbie. Caldera's install is designed to handle dual boots cleanly. Is it 100% fool proof? I doubt it. I have seen it work, though, and work well. Good luck! Caity -- Caitlyn Máire Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://caitlyn.port5.com ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
