Re: [techtalk] Re: Computer Books
On Thu, 28 Dec 2000 20:07:08 PST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >Yes, I had chosen a few O'Reilly books- especially ones on learning Linux, >and one on learning networking for beginners... but are the Idiot/Dummy >books any good? I've never looked at them before in any detail. From a brief >glance they looked a bit unorganized. IMHO they are quite nice for beginners, for people who don't want to get into a topic in-depth (like my mom, I gave her "PC for Dummies" for x-mas). When starting out with UNIX the first book I looked into was "UNIX for Dummies" but in fact I found out that it doesn't provide the information I need(ed) to -really- get into it and I quickly moved on to RTFM (about everything I could get my hands on, man pages, Running Linux/O'Reilly, etc.) ;-) cheers, Gina -- ## Gina Lanik - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## # That's what I like about this place...no LART is so good that it can't # be improved upon. -- Jeff McAdams on a.s.r. -- ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] sound card
hm, sounds like a RedHat system to me... I got myself a SoundBlaster PCI512 which actually uses emu10k1, funny enough that kudzu (sp?) in RH 6.2 detected and configured the card automagically in Debian Potato (my main system now) it was a lot harder ;-) have fun, Gina On Sat, 06 Jan 2001 22:02:39 CST, Lyta Alexander writes: >On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Elizabeth Wright wrote: >> >> i've got instructions on how to configure the sound system. i log in as >> root, stick in the first cd that came with the book, and start an x-terminal >> session. i type sndconfig and get their little blue magic window. it has >> the correct sound card detected (i've got a Creative SoundBlaster Live card) >> but when it runs the test, I dont hear anything. i've tried locating the >> card manually by looking in the /proc directory (which didnt do anything if >> i remember right) and also by looking through the boot log > /var/log/dmesg>, which detected the correct card, but once again running the >> test I dont hear a thing. I dont get any warning beeps or bells ever >> (althogh I'm not sure that I ever should... since i've never seen/heard >> what's supposed to happen when i do various things). >try as root typing : lsmod >you are looking for a module called emu10k1 >if it is there maybe the volume is get very low by default, you probably >have a mixer program installed though i've no idea what gui mixers there >are >if lsmod doesn't show the emu10k1 module >modprobe emu10k1 > >> >> >> whee!! i'm finally playing with linux! this is so fun! i've got scads to >> learn, and no time! but i love learning things. ok yeah i think that's it. >> sorry it's so long... anybody have ideas for me? >:) >> >> thanks a million, >> bets -- The correct plural of virus is "vi". Throw enough of the little buggers together and they neutralize each other and you get a usable text editor. Anthony de Boer - ASR -- ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Oddness
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001 20:55:46 EST, Kath writes: >Can anyone still ping www.kathweb.net ? no prob at all, here's the output: PING ns5.kathweb.net (24.186.89.17): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 24.186.89.17: icmp_seq=0 ttl=234 time=162.5 ms 64 bytes from 24.186.89.17: icmp_seq=1 ttl=234 time=162.6 ms 64 bytes from 24.186.89.17: icmp_seq=2 ttl=234 time=162.9 ms 64 bytes from 24.186.89.17: icmp_seq=3 ttl=234 time=161.0 ms 64 bytes from 24.186.89.17: icmp_seq=4 ttl=234 time=163.1 ms 64 bytes from 24.186.89.17: icmp_seq=5 ttl=234 time=163.6 ms 64 bytes from 24.186.89.17: icmp_seq=6 ttl=234 time=163.0 ms --- ns5.kathweb.net ping statistics --- 7 packets transmitted, 7 packets received, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 161.0/162.6/163.6 ms cheers, Gina -- # Gina Lanik - [EMAIL PROTECTED] # That's what I like about this place...no LART is so good that it can't # be improved upon. -- Jeff McAdams on a.s.r. -- ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] This talk of N-ary trees and other things...
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001 10:47:24 +0100, Makiko Itoh writes: >Anyway, this is my first post here. I've enjoyed lurking so far. :) welcome! and finally someone from "central" europe! :-) cheers, Gina -- The correct plural of virus is "vi". Throw enough of the little buggers together and they neutralize each other and you get a usable text editor. Anthony de Boer - ASR -- ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Problems with mouse and X
greets! what you can try for sure is look into the settings for gpm, they're usually not usuable/correct. I use debian potato here with a MS intellimouse. part of my settings of /etc/X11/XF86Config are: Section "Pointer" Protocol"IMPS/2" Device "/dev/mouse" ZAxisMapping4 5 where /dev/mouse is a symlink to /dev/psaux since it's a PS/2 mouse, too. you have to disable Emluate3Buttons for it to work, though. my settings for gpm are: Current configuration: -m /dev/mouse -t imps2 Device: /dev/mouse Type: imps2 you can use gpmconfig to fix the settings. a site with lots of useful info (at least for me) can be found on: http://www-sop.inria.fr/koala/colas/mouse-wheel-scroll/ HTH, HAND, Gina On Sat, 24 Mar 2001 09:20:14 PST, "jennyw" writes: >I'm using an Microsoft's optical mouse (Intellieye), and am having trouble >getting it to work well with X. In particular, I can't get the mouse to >emulate the middle button (I tried using Emulate3Buttons). I'm using Debian >2.2 which comes with XFree86 3.3.6.11. Although I think this is an X issue, >I'm also running Ximian Gnome and Enlightenment, in case that makes a >difference. > >I read in the Enlightenment dox that changing the protocol to >"MouseManPlusPS/2" and adding ZAxisMapping and Buttons 5 would help for a >wheel mouse (and not using Emulate3Buttons). Unfotunately, changing the >protocol caused the pointer to jump around weirdly, so I changed the >protocol back to "microsoft". It works okay again, but I can't seem to get >either the additional buttons (including the wheel) to work. Any >suggestions? > >Thanks! > >Jen > >My pointer section currently: > >Section "Pointer" ># Protocol "PS/2" ># Device "/dev/mouse" ># Protocol "MousemanPlusPS/2" >Protocol "microsoft" >Device "/dev/mouse" #symlink to /dev/psaux >ZAxisMapping 4 5 >Buttons 5 >#Emulate3Buttons >EndSection -- The correct plural of virus is "vi". Throw enough of the little buggers together and they neutralize each other and you get a usable text editor. Anthony de Boer - ASR -- ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Slightly OT: My dopey sysadmin strikes again!
heh, you forgot the mumbling to self: "heh, (s)he tells me..." cheers, Gina On Wed, 04 Apr 2001 16:31:18 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >What did you say your IP address was?? > >j/k =) > >Kath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> We have a web based homework assignment doo hickey. >> >> He has started giving me names of teachers who to participate in it and star >ts giving me the teachers names and the password HE wants. And they are absolu >tely retarded. If the user's name is Joe Smith, he puts the password down as " >joes" or if the user's name is Mary Turnkey "maryt". =O >> >> We are a hack waiting to happen :| >> >> At least it isn't actual accounts on the server, just access to one page via > PHP/MySQL, but I can imagine the porn popups now when some elementary school >kid goes to click on their homework. >> >> We don't even md5 the passwords, since the teachers are rather forgetful and > we like to be able to look up their passwords via the console. sigh :( >> >> >> >> - Kath the Frustrated >> -- The correct plural of virus is "vi". Throw enough of the little buggers together and they neutralize each other and you get a usable text editor. Anthony de Boer - ASR -- ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Latest deb of Exim?
On Tue, 01 May 2001 18:10:08 CDT, ktb writes: [...] >Are you positive your version is vulnerable to whatever whatever you >think it is? If you have a security line in your /etc/apt/sources.list >and run - ># apt-get update ># apt-get upgrade > >or maybe better - ># apt-get update ># apt-get -u dist-upgrade > >It should apply security patches. um... my line in sources.list for the security-stuff would be deb http://security.debian.org/ potato/updates main contrib non-free or did I miss something? HTH - HAND Gina -- The correct plural of virus is "vi". Throw enough of the little buggers together and they neutralize each other and you get a usable text editor. Anthony de Boer - ASR -- ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Large Disk/glibc/RPM Hell
hiyas! On Thu, 10 May 2001 15:15:26 PDT, Kai MacTane writes: >Hi. I'm seeking a way out of RPM hell, and it looks like it involves some >rather nasty installs from source. I'll try to describe the problem >concisely, but it's a fairly big problem. hm, have you ever thought about upgrading your box to RedHat 7.0 or 7.1? I guess that could save you from some of the pain... cheers, Gina -- The correct plural of virus is "vi". Throw enough of the little buggers together and they neutralize each other and you get a usable text editor. Anthony de Boer - ASR -- ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Re: techtalk digest, Vol 1 #447 - 11 msgs
other people on this list have said what I felt like saying, so there's only one thing left... if you're -absolutely- sure that you don't want this maintenance feature up you can go and change /etc/inittab accordingly (as it is done by default on a Debian system). cheers, Gina On Fri, 11 May 2001 22:24:40 EDT, "Linda MacPhee-Cobb" writes: >Hi All, > >I have been painstakingly going through the lilo documentation. I have not >found in the documentation, on my computer or at sunsite, a single reference >to this back door into my computer. It is not even documented in the source >code. > >The fact we have a back door that allows root access that is undocumented is >something I would expect from M$ not linux. > >Why isn't this documented in an easy to find location? That is very >troubling. Especially since linux users scream bloody murder when back >doors are found in Windows. > >If I wanted a computer OS that didn't need a password I would use Windows >95. One of the reasons for choosing linux was the security. Right now >Win2000 looks like a better option. The only way to boot this machine is >from the hard drive. I am not so stupid as to forget root password, nor am >I pleased that the people writing this system appear to have set it up for >fools. > >If there is one undocumented back door there are many. > >Who are these back doors built in for? Clearly not the users or there would >be documentation. -- The correct plural of virus is "vi". Throw enough of the little buggers together and they neutralize each other and you get a usable text editor. Anthony de Boer - ASR -- ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Re: techtalk digest, Vol 1 #447 - 11 msgs
hm, what I forgot - no I don't mean removing the entry for runlevel 1. relevant part of my inittab: # What to do in single-user mode. ~~:S:wait:/sbin/sulogin HTH & HAND, Gina On Sat, 12 May 2001 11:59:26 +0200, Gina Lanik writes: > >other people on this list have said what I felt like saying, so there's >only one thing left... if you're -absolutely- sure that you don't want >this maintenance feature up you can go and change /etc/inittab >accordingly (as it is done by default on a Debian system). > >cheers, > >Gina > >On Fri, 11 May 2001 22:24:40 EDT, "Linda MacPhee-Cobb" writes: >>Hi All, >> >>I have been painstakingly going through the lilo documentation. I have not >>found in the documentation, on my computer or at sunsite, a single reference >>to this back door into my computer. It is not even documented in the source >>code. >> >>The fact we have a back door that allows root access that is undocumented is >>something I would expect from M$ not linux. >> >>Why isn't this documented in an easy to find location? That is very >>troubling. Especially since linux users scream bloody murder when back >>doors are found in Windows. >> >>If I wanted a computer OS that didn't need a password I would use Windows >>95. One of the reasons for choosing linux was the security. Right now >>Win2000 looks like a better option. The only way to boot this machine is >>from the hard drive. I am not so stupid as to forget root password, nor am >>I pleased that the people writing this system appear to have set it up for >>fools. >> >>If there is one undocumented back door there are many. >> >>Who are these back doors built in for? Clearly not the users or there would >>be documentation. -- # Sysadmin (oh - really?) # [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Gina Lanik -- ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Security, experience, knowledge, etc.
hiyas, On Sat, 12 May 2001 13:39:26 EDT, Michelle Murrain writes: [...] >But the only way to really make sure your server is secure, sadly, is >knowledge. hm, I wonder, why "sadly"? I'm having -lots- of fun gaining the knowledge =) cheers, Gina -- The correct plural of virus is "vi". Throw enough of the little buggers together and they neutralize each other and you get a usable text editor. Anthony de Boer - ASR -- ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] About prettyphysicslady on the linuxchix techtalk list...
On Sun, 13 May 2001 11:40:24 +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [...] >The secure free Unixes, btw, are the *BSDs and Debian. Get one of the >active sysadmins on this list to give their recommendations, if it >bothers you as much as it seems to. the security on a *nix system/box -always- depends on the admin taking care of it! Gina -- # Sysadmin (oh - really?) # [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Gina Lanik -- ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
