Subject: Linux-Development Digest #748
From: Digestifier <Linux-Development-Request@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>
To: Linux-Development@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: Linux-Development@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
Date:     Sun, 22 May 94 17:13:09 EDT

Linux-Development Digest #748, Volume #1         Sun, 22 May 94 17:13:09 EDT

Contents:
  Re: 32-bit Novell desktop OS combines Unix, (Mark A. Davis)
  Re: 32-bit Novell desktop OS combines Unix, DOS 7 (Brandon S. Allbery)
  somebody working on token ring support? (Dietmar Braun)
  Re: SIGHUP: We tried it! (Jerry Whelan)
  Re: SIGHUP - Deep Kernal Guts question! (Brandon S. Allbery)
  Re: 32-bit Novell desktop OS combines Unix, (Brandon S. Allbery)
  socket address 127.0.0.1 for local connections? (C. Patrick Lai)
  Re: Proposal for Diskette Information Interchange (Brian Somers)
  Does Linux support IP Multicast? (Gautam Thaker)
  Re: 9246 (Peter C. Norton)
  Re: Terminator-Power Question (Matthias Urlichs)
  Re: 32-bit Novell desktop OS combines Unix, (Paul Budnik)
  How to handle Networkcard components which are memory mapped ? (Weichmann Patrick)
  Security Fix for getty_ps 2.0.7d (Kris Gleason)
  Pioneer DRM600 6-Disc CDROM changer (Rusty Atkins)
  Re: SIGHUP - Deep Kernal Guts question! (Leon Garde)
  Re: net3 tcp window sizes (NOT SEQUENCE NUMBERS!), Please read (Bradley E. Smith)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: mark@taylor.wyvern.com (Mark A. Davis)
Subject: Re: 32-bit Novell desktop OS combines Unix,
Date: Sat, 21 May 1994 01:27:48 GMT

rob@eats.com (Rob Newberry) writes:

>>>Oh no! You're fighting fire with fire. Don't forget, Novell is allready
>>>the number two in business. And they are very aggressive in the marketing
>>>strategy. MIC*SOFT is of course a target. But we're NOT on the same side 
>>>with Novell. Novell is not a bit better. 

>>Sorry, but Novell is much better, if in nothing else but that they support
>>the open concept of Unix.  This says a whole lot to many of us...

>Sorry, again, but Novell doesn't support the open concept of Unix.  What they 
>say is, if it's not ours, it isn't Unix -- that's not very open to me.

Sorry and sorry again :) but the fact that Novell is involed in Unix AT ALL
is a major positive point to me.  Even in the light that Novell is a business,
and must make money, like the businesses we all work for....

> When I 
>talked to the guys from Novell about linux at FOSE here, all they would say is 
>"linux cannot be Unix unless they are paying us royalties".  Not much open in 
>that statement.

Lest we forget that it is NOVELL that is putting the name UNIX up for
grabs....  this will also eventually apply to Linux as well.

-- 
  /--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
  | Mark A. Davis    | Lake Taylor Hospital | Norfolk, VA (804)-461-5001x431 |
  | Sys.Administrator|  Computer Services   | mark@taylor.wyvern.com   .uucp |
  \--------------------------------------------------------------------------/

------------------------------

From: bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery)
Subject: Re: 32-bit Novell desktop OS combines Unix, DOS 7
Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 16:35:58 GMT

In article <HJSTEIN.94May22155333@sunset.huji.ac.il>, hjstein@sunset.huji.ac.il (Harvey J. Stein) says:
+---------------
| Except that they probably won't write dosemu or wine from scratch.
| Since (as far as I know) both dosemu & wine are under the GPL, we get
| all their fixes & enhancements there too.
+------------->8

...except that Novell is a licensee of both Merge and Wabi.  What if they use
*those*?  Wabi isn't quite all there yet, but it's farther along than Wine...

---Before someone says something about interfaces *again*, let me point out
that it might not be any skin off Novell's back to release the code for
*their* (UnixWare) v86 interfaces and add them into the Linux kernel, in place
of or in addition to the existing ones that require the software using it to
be GPLed.  (The flip side being that we might be able to run the UnixWare
version of Merge under the iBCS emulator...)

++Brandon
-- 
Brandon S. Allbery         kf8nh@kf8nh.ampr.org          bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org
The FUDs at Microsoft are shouting "Kill The Wabi!"

------------------------------

From: braun@math20.Mathematik.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Dietmar Braun)
Subject: somebody working on token ring support?
Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 16:57:30 GMT

       Hello everybody,
a friend of mine needs token ring support for his LinuX workstation.
As far as the HOWTO's told me, there is nothing available. 

If anybody is working on it, i would like to hear.
         All the very best
                  Didi
=====
Dietmar Braun; University of Bielefeld
                             (finger braun@math20.mathematik.uni-bielefeld.de)

------------------------------

From: guru@camelot.bradley.edu (Jerry Whelan)
Subject: Re: SIGHUP: We tried it!
Date: 22 May 1994 17:42:21 GMT

In article <1994May21.164113.27409@loreli.ftl.fl.us>,
Rocco Caputo <troc@loreli.ftl.fl.us> wrote:

-}   "Why does SIGHUP only go to session leaders?"
-}       "Because POSIX says so."
-} 
-} Is that what folks around here consider a decent answer?

        I don't know what you've been reading, but I'm fairly sure
that I saw an explanation for the POSIX definition quite early
on in the discussion.  In case you missed it, it was essentially
that the kernel shouldn't force a behaviour onto a program when it
can be handled in user-space by the program itself in the manner
that the program desires.

===============================================================================
Jerry Whelan                                             guru@stasi.bradley.edu

------------------------------

From: bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery)
Subject: Re: SIGHUP - Deep Kernal Guts question!
Date: Sat, 21 May 1994 02:03:56 GMT

In article <1994May20.181126.9756@light-house.uucp>, whome!light-house!las@planix.com says:
+---------------
| Alan Cox (iiitac@uk.ac.swan.pyr) wrote:
| Could you please use a valid reply adress in your posts?
| Your site "uk.ac.swan.pyr" is not in the DNS, and many times my replies
| to you have bounced. 
+------------->8

Yes it is, but somehow his JANET-style address is escaping into the Internet
without being converted to the "standard" representation.  To wit:  you have
to reverse the domain components.  Try "pyr.swan.ac.uk"...

++Brandon
-- 
Brandon S. Allbery         kf8nh@kf8nh.ampr.org          bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org
The FUDs at Microsoft are shouting "Kill The Wabi!"

------------------------------

From: bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery)
Subject: Re: 32-bit Novell desktop OS combines Unix,
Date: Sat, 21 May 1994 02:15:45 GMT

In article <rob.150.02644292@eats.com>, rob@eats.com (Rob Newberry) says:
+---------------
| >Sorry, but Novell is much better, if in nothing else but that they support
| >the open concept of Unix.  This says a whole lot to many of us...
| 
| Sorry, again, but Novell doesn't support the open concept of Unix.  What they
| say is, if it's not ours, it isn't Unix -- that's not very open to me.  When
+------------->8

SOMEONE is still in the Dark Ages... The trademark "UNIX" is being/has been
transferred to X/Open by Novell, and to be allowed to use it you need to pass
a verification suite for "Spec 1170" compliance.  As yet, only Novell/USL-
based systems can be "UNIX" because Spec 1170 is still under evaluation.  When
released as a formal standard and when the verification suite is ready,
non-Novell/USL systems will be testable for Spec 1170 compliance and will be
brandable as UNIX.  ---And the grandfather clause will expire, meaning that if
Novell UNIX doesn't pass the verification suite, *it* won't be UNIX any more!
(In theory, at least...)

The most interesting thing about this is that, so far, there's nothing obvious
that would stop OpenVMS or NT (or, Witness help us, MVS!) from passing the
verification suite, given sufficient effort by their respective developers to
comply with the API represented by Spec 1170...

The only reasons Linux is unlikely to bve officially branded as UNIX are:

(1) it would have to be individual distributions:  there *is* no one "Linux",
    and never will be, especially from the styandpoint from which such
    compliance tyesting and branding is done;

(2) who, aside from Novell (Corsair), can afford to undergo compliance testing
    on their own dime (that being how it's done in the business)?  SLS?
    Slackware?  Debian?  LSL?  I'm not holding my breath.

++Brandon
-- 
Brandon S. Allbery         kf8nh@kf8nh.ampr.org          bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org
The FUDs at Microsoft are shouting "Kill The Wabi!"

------------------------------

From: lai@enlil.premenos.com (C. Patrick Lai)
Subject: socket address 127.0.0.1 for local connections?
Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 15:14:15 GMT

I notice that when I make a local TCP connection (e.g. telnet from
HostA.Domain to itself), netstat reports two connections:

  Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address          Foreign Address        (State)
  tcp        0      0 HostA.Domain:telnet    localhost:1984         ESTABLISHED
  tcp        0      0 localhost:1984         HostA.Domain:telnet    ESTABLISHED

If the connection is to another host (say HostB.Domain), I see only one:

  Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address          Foreign Address        (State)
  tcp        0      0 HostA.Domain:2024      HostB.Domain:telnet    ESTABLISHED

Notice also that the client/source socket in the first case has IP
address localhost, which is 127.0.0.1 according to HostA's /etc/hosts.
(HostA is configured to use /etc/hosts first, and then DNS.) This
behavior/bug is causing problems in TCP wrapper type of security
tools.  It forces the users to allow TCP traffic from 127.0.0.1, which
is VERY dangerous.  (One seldom telnets to the local host, but some
mail agents do make SMTP connection to the local host.)

The kernel versions I have are 1.0.9 and 1.1.2.

-- Patrick Lai
   lai@premenos.com
-- 
===============================================================
C. Patrick Lai                     Premenos Corporation
lai@premenos.com                   1000 Burnett Ave., 2nd Floor
(510) 602-2036 x2112               Concord, CA 94520

------------------------------

From: brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk (Brian Somers)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.programmer.misc,comp.os.minix,comp.os.mach,comp.periphs,comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.os.386bsd.development,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,comp.sys.ibm.ps2.hardware,comp.arch.storage
Subject: Re: Proposal for Diskette Information Interchange
Date: 18 May 94 21:59:48

Sorry if this starts some flames, but this took a year ?
--
Brian <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>

Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour....

------------------------------

From: gthaker@polyphony.sw.stratus.com (Gautam Thaker)
Subject: Does Linux support IP Multicast?
Date: 21 May 1994 02:53:19 GMT

How close are we to having IP multicast support in Linux?

(I believe ipmc support is in solaris 2.3 and some others.)

Gautam

------------------------------

From: spacey@maestro.maestro.com (Peter C. Norton)
Subject: Re: 9246
Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 17:34:11 GMT

kempsonc@logica.co.uk writes:

>I have just started some X development on my new
>Linux workstation and I have come across the following problem:

>   Many of the Xt Calls I am used to are no longer available
>   eg. XtVaAppInitialize ...  Where are these?  I note that
>   XtAppInitialize is available though.

>Could somebody who has done some development work under X using
>Xt and/or the OpenView widget set possibly send me a code example
>of the main program (eg setup and widget creation) plus an
>example makefile (preferably including an Imakefile too?).  This
>would help me to get started!

I am in a similar situation, but I am trying to learn from scratch.
The hello world I tried to write from an example dumps core on me.

So, any working examples would be greatly appreciated.

>Thanks in advance,

>Charlie K

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Charlie Kempson                       INTERNET: charlie@mpef4.logica.co.uk
>                                                kempsonc@logica.co.uk
>Logica Space & Communnications Ltd.,
>68 Newman St.,
>LONDON W1A 4SE                        TEL: 071-637-9111 ext. 4192

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
pn002b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu           | "The deeper I talked, | Hello! My  
spacey@maestro.com                      |  The worse I got into | Name is:
======================================= |  it!"                 | 
Ignore at your own (admittedly small)   |  --King Crimson       |  Peter
risk!  This has been a warning.         |                       | ^^^^^^^

------------------------------

From: urlichs@smurf.noris.de (Matthias Urlichs)
Subject: Re: Terminator-Power Question
Date: 22 May 1994 22:00:00 +0200

In comp.os.linux.development, article <Cpyx0x.AvE@pe1chl.ampr.org>,
  pe1chl@rabo.nl writes:
> 
> I thought the supply of terminator power was supposed to be done via
> a (shottky) diode, so that no reverse current flows into the device.
> 
That's right, but some manufacturers are/were too stupid to know that. :-(

-- 
Are we not men?
-- 
Matthias Urlichs        \ XLink-POP N|rnberg  | EMail: urlichs@smurf.noris.de
Schleiermacherstra_e 12  \  Unix+Linux+Mac    | Phone: ...please use email.
90491 N|rnberg (Germany)  \   Consulting+Networking+Programming+etc'ing     42

Click <A HREF="http://smurf.noris.de/~urlichs/finger">here</A>.

------------------------------

From: paul@mtnmath.mtnmath.com (Paul Budnik)
Subject: Re: 32-bit Novell desktop OS combines Unix,
Date: 22 May 1994 09:17:39 -0700

Michaela Merz (misch@misch@elara.fsag.de) wrote:
: In article 6kd@louie.udel.edu, chavey@bambam.cis.udel.edu (Laurent Chavey) writes:

: > [...] Do not forget novell is on our side, TO NOT LET 
: >MICROSOFT NAD BILL GATE OWN THE COMPUTER WORLD. Lets all fight to
: >not have another giant dictate the computer future.

: Oh no! You're fighting fire with fire. Don't forget, Novell is allready
: the number two in business. And they are very aggressive in the marketing
: strategy. MIC*SOFT is of course a target. But we're NOT on the same side 
: with Novell. Novell is not a bit better. 

The important battle is not commercial versus free software.
Both have an important role in the future of computing. The battle is
between open standards and those that are controlled by a single company.
The dominance of Microsoft in controlling these standards is a serious
obstacle to creativity that affects corporations and individuals alike.
It gives them an enormous competitive advantage which they are using
to try to dominate as much of the software business as
they can. This is an even greater threat to creativity. IBM's dominance
in the mainframe business was a serious impediment to progress in computing
for three decades. A large part of the resources in computing were controlled
by a corporation that made every decision as a business decision about
what was seen as best for IBM by those who often had a narrow distorted
view of the direction computing was moving in. This was the not the best
thing for the country and was ultimately a disaster for the stockholders
of IBM. If IBM had been broken up into competing companies a decade or
more ago the people who would have benefitted most directly from
that would have been the stockholders and employees of IBM.

Certainly Novell's first choice was to have the same extraordinary
competitive advantage that Microsoft enjoys now. However their business
is seriously threatened by Microsoft's dominance. Microsoft has started
incorporating networking software in their systems. It is unlikely that
the status quo will survive for long. Either Microsoft will loose its
control over operating systems or Novell will loose its dominance in
networking software. This makes Novell a natural *tactical* ally in the
battle to get Linux and more importantly an open operating system become
an industry standard.

It is pleasant to think the world consists of good guys and bad
guys and that we should choose sides accordingly. It is far
more complex than that and anyone who trys to force decisions into
that mode is likely to find that most of their decisions do more
harm than good. There are plenty of good people at Microsoft. The
problem is that *any* corporation that becomes too dominant is
a threat to creativity and innovation. 

Paul Budnik

------------------------------

From: t29weich@isbe.ch (Weichmann Patrick)
Subject: How to handle Networkcard components which are memory mapped ?
Date: 19 May 1994 13:47:38 GMT
Reply-To: t29weich@isbe.ch (Weichmann Patrick)


Hi there

I have a Network card which has some parts I/O mapped. That's not the
problem. But this card has also 16KB ressources which are memory mapped.
I have only a the possibility to position it in 16KB steps, beginning from
0x00000, ending at 0xfc000.

2 Questions:

 - How can I check wheter a piece of memory is used or not, so that
   I don't break in the same region as BIOS, Boot EPROM etc.

   I could do it hardcoded, but then I have to know for every PC I want
   to install the correct Installation and hack in the difference.

   Possible autocheck?


 - How can I tell the kernel that I am using for example exactly 
   0xcc000 + 16KB. Do I have to request that space, or just simply
   access the mem and don't care for the system. 

   Which is the correct way to handle this.

Thanks

Patrick J.D. Weichmann
t29weich@isbe.ch



------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.announce
From: gleasokr@refuge.Colorado.EDU (Kris Gleason)
Subject: Security Fix for getty_ps 2.0.7d
Reply-To: gleasokr@refuge.Colorado.EDU (Kris Gleason)
Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 20:07:32 GMT

It _seemed_ percect (famous last words).  Oh well...

As many of you have pointed out to me, there is a serious security
hole in getty_ps.  I have included a patch below that fixes this 
hole.   If you have installed getty_ps 2.0.7d, apply this patch to
the source, and recompile your binaries.  Also, PLEASE BE SURE
TO DO A 'make clean' BEFORE RECOMPILING.  One of the dependencies
in the Makefile is not quite right.

I have also uploaded a new distribution to tsx-11 and sunsite
(getty_ps-2.0.7e) which has this security hole fixed.  Also added
to the 2.0.7e release is optional compliance with the FSSTND
standard (see the Makefile for more details).

Kris


begin 644 getty_ps-207d-d07dPL1.diff
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1;VED*2!A;&%R;2@P*3L*( IL
 
end

--
Mail submissions for comp.os.linux.announce to: linux-announce@tc.cornell.edu
Be sure to include Keywords: and a short description of your software.

------------------------------

From: atkins@garnet.msen.com (Rusty Atkins)
Subject: Pioneer DRM600 6-Disc CDROM changer
Date: 22 May 1994 20:43:21 GMT


 Does anyone have a driver for this cd changer? It is running with a 
trantor T13b(I think) card. I have two of these changers sitting here
collecting dust because I can't run then with Linux right now.

Thanks,

------------------------------

From: lgarde@scorch.hna.com.au (Leon Garde)
Subject: Re: SIGHUP - Deep Kernal Guts question!
Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 14:12:02 GMT

tytso@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Theodore Ts'o) writes:

>   From: nate@loreli.ftl.fl.us (Sean Puckett)
>   Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 01:42:01 GMT

>   All this stuff about the POSIX standard and manuals is very enlightening,
>   thank you gentlemen very much.  However, it simply raises more questions.
>   Now that we know why the kernal doesn't send a HUP to running apps, the
>   answer being 'because the specs say it', we now must ask why the specs
>   don't say to send a HUP to running apps.

>   Why is it in the specs?

>Because sometimes users ***want*** to leave a process running in the
>background when they logout.  Traditionally it is the shell's
>responsibility to decide how to deal with this situation.
and what if users want to leave suspended task hanging around when
they log out ? :) you seem bigotted against suspended tasks over 
running tasks. surely a running task could want to de-suspend a task,
but your POSIX kernel sends suspended tasks  a SIGHUP. This program
I've got assumes that orphaned tasked tasks are sent  SIGHUP
except if they happen to be orphans.

and what is 'nohup' for, then !


>   We are programmers here, and we have a problem that needs
>   to be resolved.  If there are no hard, fast reasons why it should NOT
>   send a HUP signal (which is easily ignored, mind you) to all processes
>   owned by a terminal on loss of carrier, then I will simply change the kernal
>   to do so.

>The main reason is that you will be incompatible with other systems;
>this kernel patch won't be accepted into the mainline distribution, so
>you'll have to manually add it in for every release --- and you'll never
>be able to port your system to other operating systems which are POSIX
>complaint.  Good enough?
people needing to leave tasks running can whenever they want.
its nice for all processes to get the sighup, with or without the
shell's cooperation.

for example, if i change my shell with exec, then what makes the
program I replace my shell with likely to kill any other process
attached to my terminal (and soon to become detached and orphaned)

>If you have a problem to fix, fix it the right way.  Make the session
>leader catch the SIGHUP signal, and have it propagate that signal down
>to its children.  It's the shell's responsibility to decide whether or
>not to propgate the signal or not; this is much more flexible.
YES IT IS MORE FLEXIBLE. but its not bullet proof.A it is the reason
the shell is SIGHUP'ed in the first place. if there never was a need
for the shell to propogate SIGHUP before its self exited gracefully,
then the kernel  could just kill (not signal 'KILL', perform it
eg change current and call do_exit ..) the shell and all orphans
when it (the kernel) detected DCD/DSR dropped. but who really cares
for such graceful exits ? why put such complexity into
the shell when its not needed ?


well, the 'problem' is with POSIX, and the claim is that POSIX
is broken. Perhaps, this 'running task' special case is pointless.
orphaned processes should be told to die (they arent killed, merely
asked to suicide themselves, in effect. well , if the program hasnt
got its SIGHUP protection on, then thats virtually suicide ...! )

>Or, if you don't want to do that, set up a system daemon that runs as a
>"gunner" to kill processes which have been running for too long.  There
>are a lots of solutions that don't involve making incompatible changes
>to the kernel.
yeah. a daemon could do it. but the kernel almost does the right job.
what 'incompatibility' is there if it did ?
a program that user wants to run after logging out,
must have its sighup trapped. even if the users shell sends the
SIGHUP, not the kernel. what benefit is their in making a shell
clean up potential ophans first, or a daemon kill orphans afterwards,
when the kernel can get them just as they become orphans.
surely the kernel should not require fussy and kludgy daemons
like the 'gunner' you suggst. any program that wants to ignore sighup
can.

>As for programs going beserk and eating up lots of CPU --- they're
>broken.  And, I suspect, there are relatively few of them.  Perhaps your
>favorite version of "less" is broken that way, so you see a skewed
>version of the world.  But Unix programs all over the world have to work
>under the same rules, and so they tend to get fixed over time.
But unix users create unix programs. and any unix program can be used
as the shell. so your implying that all programs should
kill a users running processes attached to the same terminal, when
they receive SIGHUP. but some people are posting here suggesting
the linux kernel should break with POSIX, in the very minor area
of SIGHUP-ing running orphans.

                                                - Ted


POSIX makes some sense, but surely its brain damage can be left out ?
take for instace the linux way of handling
sys_kill(-1,sig) . OH DEAR linux 1.1.12 and before isnt POSIX !!!


leon
-- 
leon garde; lgarde@scorch.hna.com.au

------------------------------

From: brad@bradley.bradley.edu (Bradley E. Smith)
Subject: Re: net3 tcp window sizes (NOT SEQUENCE NUMBERS!), Please read
Date: 22 May 1994 16:07:27 -0500

In <2rk5ra$6a6@jake.esu.edu> tbriggs@cutter.ship.edu (Tom Briggs) writes:
>The other UNIX based machines (such as the Sun) have no problem with it.
>The System Administrator on campus tried to telnet to this Linux box with
>FTP's software, and it would just lock up.  But he can spend all day long 
>on from the Sun.
boy it sure sounds the same.....if you reduce the MAX/MIN WINDOW defines in
tcp.h it works....I am willing to do some hacking, but I am not sure which
direction to take.
-- 
Bradley Smith                    brad@bradley.edu ---  309-677-2337
Network & Technical Services @ Bradley University, Peoria, IL

"It's amazing how much scrap metal you get from 4 cans of beer"

------------------------------


** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **

The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:

    Internet: Linux-Development-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU

You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.development) via:

    Internet: Linux-Development@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU

Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
    nic.funet.fi				pub/OS/Linux
    tsx-11.mit.edu				pub/linux
    sunsite.unc.edu				pub/Linux

End of Linux-Development Digest
******************************
