Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #349
From: Digestifier <Linux-Misc-Request@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>
To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
Date:     Fri, 1 Jul 94 16:13:15 EDT

Linux-Misc Digest #349, Volume #2                 Fri, 1 Jul 94 16:13:15 EDT

Contents:
  Re: OS/2 and Linux discussed (Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2) (Chun Hsu)
  Termcap for an IBM 3151 (Tim Downey)
  Re: OS/2 and Linux discussed (Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2) (Marko Karppinen)
  Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing (Scott Michel)
  Re: Dosemu basics (Robert G. Smith)
  Re: Advice on which large IDE HD to buy .... (Byron A Jeff)
  Where can I get the POSIX standard? (Henry Ware)
  XView screen saver blues ... (Albert Edwin Alexander)
  Re: OS/2 and Linux discussed (Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2) (Chun Hsu)
  Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing (Matthew Dillon)
  Re: Watching a user on an tty? (Ludwig Van.)
  Re: OS/2 and Linux discussed (Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2) (Jason Van Patten)
  Re: Did Xconfig fry my monitor? (Posting for a friend) (Dean Junk)

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

From: hsuc@msu.edu (Chun Hsu)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS/2 and Linux discussed (Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2)
Date: 29 Jun 1994 05:39:19 GMT
Reply-To: hsuc@egr.msu.edu

Jim Robinson (jimr@shorty.cs.wisc.edu) wrote:
> My gripes about OS/2?:

>       1) In 2.0 they did not have support for seamless 8514/A
              ^^^

It doesn't seem very relevant to complain about an older 
version of OS/2 (although I felt 2.0 was pretty buggy).

>       3) Better command line support on the base release
>          (again, not likely to happen).

Most OS/2 users may not see that as a priority.  Considering
the extra speed, multimedia support, and Windows 3.1 support
that was put into 2.1, I don't see better command line 
support as being a priority.  Luckily, I believe some of the
Unix shells as well as the 4DOS shell are available.

>       5) Why in the hell should I have to pay more money then
>          what I already spent to get the damn thing in order
>          to get the patchs to make it work as advertised? I'm
>          not talking extra functionality here, I am talking
>          about WORKING AS ADVERTISED (windows support, etc.)

I downloaded the service pack (is that what you mean?) for
free.  It was even available on ftp sites.  If you paid for
IBM to send you the diskettes, what do you expect?  It would
cost a fortune to send all OS/2 users diskettes for each
service pack.

I use both Linux and OS/2.  IMHO, they really are geared
to different kinds of users.

--
===========================================================================
 Chun Hsu                                     E-mail: hsuc@egr.msu.edu   
 Masters of Science
 Electrical Engineering                       Michigan State University
===========================================================================

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

From: Tim Downey <TDowney_+a_kaoplymo_+lTim_Downey+r%Kao@mcimail.com>
Subject: Termcap for an IBM 3151
Date: 1 Jul 1994 13:00:32 -0400
Reply-To: TDowney_+a_kaoplymo_+lTim_Downey+r%Kao@mcimail.com




Text item: Text_1




     Does anyone out there have termcap info for an IBM 3151 dummie?  If
     not, could someone point me in the direction of someplace I may be
     able to find this information?


     Thanks in advance

     Tim
     tdowney@morpheus.hartford.edu

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

From: dreamer@bug.fi (Marko Karppinen)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS/2 and Linux discussed (Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2)
Date: 1 Jul 1994 18:04:38 +0300

In article <2upnjh$8i2@spool.cs.wisc.edu>,
Jim Robinson <jimr@shorty.cs.wisc.edu> wrote:
>Yeah, people don't seem to realize that OS/2 on floppy (2.0) was some
>30 disks and that was just the OS and some dinky toy-apps.  Linux OS
>itself needs 1 disk, but all those neat programs take up space, they
>can't just appear magically on your drive.

And that just isn't true. The probably most popular Linux distribution -
Slackware Linux - uses two floppies to boot, one for the kernel and
one for the barebones file system. OS/2 in this sense is essentially
the same - in most cases you can fit a working system on two floppies.

So, what are the other 19 disks for then? In both Linux and OS/2 there
is a windowing system. In OS/2, it's called the Presentation Manager, and
Linux uses XFree86. OS/2 also includes a desktop software called the WPS.
There is similar solutions for Linux, for example the GREAT, but they are
not included in the base system. 

Then there is the OS/2's DOS-system, with all DOS commands and at least 99%
compatibility. Linux doesn't have anything like this, the dosemu software
is slow and requires original MS-DOS.

Then there is 3 printer driver disks, 3 display driver disks and 2 
MMPM/2 drivers. The Linux's Ghostscript package uses 3 disks and can control
most of the popular printers. Linux doesn't use display drivers - support
for multiple video cards is done via separate XFree86 servers for each     
different system (this consumes space!!). And Linux doesn't really come with
anything like MMPM/2, only some audio programs are available.

So, where is your mentioned size advantage for Linux?

 Marko

-- 
Marko Karppinen TEL: +358-0-872-9896   EARTH HAS NO GRAVITY
dreamer@bug.fi  FAX: +358-0-851-2214       IT JUST SUCKS
    

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: michel@whirlwind.seas.ucla.edu (Scott Michel)
Subject: Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 1994 18:06:46 GMT

>       Linux is free and I am free.
>You OTOH are locked into the upgrade cycle.

As if frequent patches arent upgrades? Linux is hardly free, if you
cost in the time it takes to get the thing downloaded and installed.
There are some good installation packages, but that depends who you
get your distribution from.

But I'd hardly say that I'd bet my enterprise on Linux. There's no
"compelling" application to make Linux attractive. In fact, that's the
reason why some of us bet on OS/2 or SCO (I'm in the SCO camp). It
may not be that SCO is perfect [in fact, far from it], but it is known
for some stability and has a volume market. Linux is a hacker's dream.

-scottm

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

From: rob@bip.anatomy.upenn.edu (Robert G. Smith)
Subject: Re: Dosemu basics
Date: 29 Jun 1994 05:49:52 GMT

Bill McCarthy (bmccarth@gulfaero.com) wrote:
: Keywords: Dosemu real basic questions

: I'm fairly new to linux and have been trying to set up my system withing
: the limits imposed by a small hard disk and not much experience. One thing
: has got me stumped is dosemu. I've checked the howto's - both at sunsite and
: in usr/doc on Yggdrasil's cd. I've read various posts in this and c.o.l.h
: about dosemu problems, but I can't get a handle on it. I've got the 
: Yggdrasil P&P Summer '94 cd, and that includes the dosemu directory, 
: the libdosemu file and the dos binary. I understand about creating a 
: mount directory for the dos partition - /dev/hda1 - and mounting dos, 
: but I can't put these pieces together to try it out. Could some kind soul 
: post a few basic suggestions on how to get dosemu up and running? 

If you've read the HOWTO and QuickStart in the dosemu0.52 distribution,
you should know all of the essentials already.  You're best off now
simply asking for help on specific questions or problems.  That way
it is possible to respond to you directly.  Some basic advice: use 
the latest kernel (at least 1.1.18 or up), patched source code available 
from

  ftp.funet.fi   (in patch form)
or
  linuxftp.caltech.edu:pub/Linux/patched-kernels (complete source tree)
 
If dosemu doesn't run make sure /usr/bin/dos is suid root, and configure the 
vga as simply as possible at first, even commenting out all vga options 
(so dosemu uses stdin and stdout) if necessary.  If you have vga problems
first check the advice in QuickStart and DOSEMU-HOWTO, then ask a specific 
question.

Once you have dosemu booting from "hdimage" (follow the instructions
in QuickStart) then you can play around with redirecting
drives and directories.

To access the DOS partition it often seems best to mount it
under a Linux directory.  This can be specified in /etc/fstab,
(then reboot to make sure it works from linux first).  To tell 
dosemu how to access other drives besides C: (the "hdimage"
file), add a one line entry to config.sys:

device=c:\emufs.sys /usr/dosbin

where /usr/dosbin is the directory you want to access in dosemu as 
the D: drive.  To define any further DOS drives, you should use "lredir"
in C:autoexec.bat (emufs.sys and lredir do very much the same thing) 
like this:

  lredir e: linux\fs\usr\dos
  lredir f: linux\fs\${home}

where linux\fs\usr\dos means "/usr/dos" in the linux file system,
and linux\fs\${home} means your home directory. 

  As you may gather, I've got C: as the hdimage file, D: as a linux 
directory /usr/dosbin containing all the dos system binaries and 
word-processors, etc, E: as the DOS partition mounted under /usr/dos, 
and F: as the user's home directory.  It is possible to boot onto 
hdimage as C: and then use emufs (or lredir) to redirect C:
to another linux directory if you want.  All of this is explained 
quite nicely in DOSEMU-HOWTO and QuickStart.

Again, it helps to ask specific questions.  Since they're much
easier to answer, you're more likely to *get* an answer.

Hope this helps.

Rob Smith

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

From: byron@gemini.cc.gatech.edu (Byron A Jeff)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: Advice on which large IDE HD to buy ....
Date: 1 Jul 1994 13:24:08 GMT

In article <2up4uf$1046@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>,
Richard W Kaszeta <kaszeta@arctic.uucp> wrote:
-asktan@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (Kenneth Tan) writes:
-
->Don't buy anything larger than 528MB (1024 cyl, 16 hd, 63 sect).  Even
->though the disk geometries are pretty meaningless, now that they are all
->Zone-Bit-Recording, they are still being used by Linux and DOS.
->[I've got a 540Mb and had a really rough time with Linux and DOS...
-> personally, I'd recommend you get the 420Mb instead.]
-
-I'd recommend _against_ a western digital 420 Meg Hard Drive. Although
-it always worked flawlessly under DOS and OS/2, Linux chokes on it.
-If I partition it with DOS or OS/2, then linux won't recognize the
-existing partitions. If I paritition it with Linux, it only lets me
-format 120 Meg of the drive...
-
-Still haven't puzzled this one out.

Well don't be too hasty. My father's WD 420 works flawlessly with Linux and
DOS. Maybe it's the individual drive. It certainly isn't all of them.

BAJ
-- 
Another random extraction from the mental bit stream of...
Byron A. Jeff - PhD student operating in parallel - And Using Linux!
Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332   Internet: byron@cc.gatech.edu

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

From: hware@bronze.coil.com (Henry Ware)
Subject: Where can I get the POSIX standard?
Date: 28 Jun 1994 22:00:37 -0400

Are the POSIX 1003.x standards available for ftp or are they proprietary?  

Do we have a free and open system conforming to a proprietary standard?  
Or did I just not look hard enough?

Thanks in advance,
Henry


-- 
That does it!  I'm putting me back in my kill file!

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

From: aea5752@cacs.usl.edu (Albert Edwin Alexander)
Subject: XView screen saver blues ...
Date: 30 Jun 1994 18:32:08 GMT
Reply-To: aea5752@marsh.cacs.usl.edu

I'm a newcomer to the world of Linux, and have several problems that I cannot
seem to solve.  The first problem I have is with XView (OpenWindows) -- when-
ever the default screen saver is activated, the entire screen goes white.  This
is not good.  I can call up a variety of nifty screen savers via the menu
options, but if I walk away from the system and come back later, the screen is
always white.  How and where can I change this?

Second, whenever I receive a talk request when in OpenWindows, the message goes
to the virtual terminal from where I loaded OpenWindows, not to the OpenWin
console (or any other OpenWin windows, for that matter).  Once again, how can
I change this?

Thanks for reading the article, and if you can help I'd really appreciate it.

Later,
Edwin

--
Albert Edwin Alexander                  edwin@usl.edu
Center for Advanced Computer Studies    aea5752@marsh.cacs.usl.edu
University of Southwestern Louisiana

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

From: hsuc@msu.edu (Chun Hsu)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS/2 and Linux discussed (Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2)
Date: 30 Jun 1994 03:43:24 GMT
Reply-To: hsuc@egr.msu.edu

Leo L Turetsky (professor+@CMU.EDU) wrote:
> Excerpts from netnews.comp.os.linux.misc: 29-Jun-94 Re: OS/2 and Linux
> discusse.. by Chun Hsu@msu.edu 
> > I downloaded the service pack (is that what you mean?) for
> > free.  It was even available on ftp sites.  If you paid for
> > IBM to send you the diskettes, what do you expect?  It would
> > cost a fortune to send all OS/2 users diskettes for each
> > service pack.

> This is exceptionally silly. If IBM advertises something and doesn't
> offer it,... it had better send me free diskettes to fix it regardless
> of how much it costs them. After spending money on an OS I would expect
> good customer support. After not paying for Linux, I get customer
> support that's rivals, if not bests, OS/2's. Don't expect me, or any
> other user I'd think, to care how much it costs IBM 'to send us disks'
> if they don't provide what they promise. If you don't see this as a
> problem, I think you should raise your consumer standards.

> -Leo

Oh boy.  This reminds me of the advocacy wars on comp.os.os2.advocacy.
Let me state first that I happen to use both Linux and OS/2.  IMO,
they are both impressive for what they do.

I don't see it as a problem because I got everything I wanted from
OS/2 and more.  Windows poor multitasking drove me to use it.  
While OS/2 2.0 was relatively buggy, I was still happy with it.
Why?  Because it achieved much more than I thought possible.  
Frankly, I didn't think it was possible to get that level of
DOS/Windows support at all.  2.1 was a dramatic improvement, and
once again achieved more than I thought possible.

I am sure you have a long list of things which you felt IBM
promised and didn't deliver.  You can be assured that many other
users do not share your opinion.

Funny, I don't remember getting any patches for Linux sent
for free.  Even funnier, I spent all of a week trying to figure
out the various packages I had to upgrade (gcc, Xfree, kernel, etc.)
just to get Mosaic to work.  Same thing to install PPP.  I 
suppose I could "raise my consumer standards" and chew out
Linux developers.

I like Linux and OS/2.  IMHO, OS/2 can never be 100% bug free
if it tries to maintain compatibility with DOS/Windows program.
It is a sacrifice I understand and fully accept.  Then again,
show me an OS which is 100% bug free.  In the same way, Linux is
unlikely to have that level of compatibility without
sacrificing performance or stability.  

Let's not get high and mighty.  Linux and OS/2 coexist quite
well together, users and OS alike.  A flame war is hardly
necessary.

--
===========================================================================
 Chun Hsu                                     E-mail: hsuc@egr.msu.edu   
 Masters of Science
 Electrical Engineering                       Michigan State University
===========================================================================

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

From: dillon@apollo.west.oic.com (Matthew Dillon)
Subject: Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing
Date: 1 Jul 1994 10:50:08 -0700

In article <RSANDERS.94Jun30232111@hrothgar.mindspring.com> rsanders@mindspring.com (Robert Sanders) writes:
:In article <oi4jPv600WB5QmzcdV@andrew.cmu.edu> Leo L Turetsky <professor+@CMU.EDU> writes:
:
:   Excerpts from netnews.comp.os.linux.misc: 30-Jun-94 Re: Linux better
:   than OS/2 .. by Robert Sanders@mindsprin 
:   > NeXTSTEP is very cool, granted, and I'm sure it's a dream to develop
:   > under (and to work under, for that matter), but it's hardly small or
:   > especially fast, and the driver support isn't nearly as good as
:   > Linux's.  You can't even run it on a 386sx, for chrissake.
:
:   Umm, no. It's not slow... it's probably twice as fast as your average
:   486 PC. Driver support is incredible and continues to grow. Why would I
:   want to run anything on a 386sx?
:
:How is my operating system going to be faster than my PC?  I can't
:claim to know many NeXTSTEP users -- it's not nearly as popular as
:Linux -- but I know one who switched to Linux because NeXTSTEP was
:much more sluggish than Linux on the same box, and I know another
:NeXTSTEP user who's running Linux on an old 4 MB 386 box to do ftp and
:mail, and to route between his PPP link and his ethernet.  He
:obviously needed to run *something* on a 386, and diehard NeXT fan
:though he was, NeXTSTEP obviously didn't cut it on lower end hardware.
:
:Linux does.
:
:  -- Robert

    Mainly it is software design.  NeXTStep is essentially a Mach port,
    while Linux is ground-up designed for the PC.  NeXT has never been known
    to tune any of their operating software or to pay any particular amount
    of attention to their device drivers.

    I would say half of the problem is the OS core and the other half lack
    of attention (by NeXT) to their device drivers.  On the networking side,
    NeXT has a typical UNIX TCP/IP implementation, but they have consistantly
    broke third party SLIP/PPP products with new releases.  Contrast that with
    those of us working on the networking side of Linux... a great deal more
    attention is being paid to Linux's networking, and although it isn't
    quite up to snuff on protocol issues, the programming curve is quite
    sharp (as in a lot of work is being done on it).  I personally believe
    that the alternative networking elements in Linux (SLIP, PPP, PLIP, ...)
    are an order of magnitude better then any support you would find in
    NeXTStep.  However, I do have to give credit to several of the third
    party NeXTStep networking products.  Despite NeXT's screwing them over
    and over again, they are still sticking with it and have some very good
    products.

                                                -Matt

-- 

    Matthew Dillon              dillon@apollo.west.oic.com
    1005 Apollo Way             ham: KC6LVW (no mail drop)
    Incline Village, NV. 89451  Obvious Implementations Corporation
    USA                         Sandel-Avery Engineering
    [always include a portion of the original email in any response!]


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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin
From: lruppert@iguana.syr.EDU (Ludwig Van.)
Subject: Re: Watching a user on an tty?
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 1994 18:42:20 GMT

In article <2ut2cs$cts@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> rhh@tachy.uah.ualberta.ca (Roy Hann) writes:
>taylor@pollux (john taylor) writes:
>: The dump file can get huge quickly, and it is possible not to find the
>: password in the file. On the other hand, it is just as possible to find
>: passwords that have been typed in 10 to 15 minutes before the dump file
>: is made.  I am not a kmem expert, and speculate this method is system 
>: dependent.  Also, you would have to know what you were looking for, 
>: because the output is hard to comprehend.
>
>Once again, I have to shake my head and marvel at people who casually
>post everything from broad hints to explicit recipes for compromising
>system security.  Please DON'T!  I am begging now.

Good point, but the above is not a unique security hole.  It exists on
every UNIX.  If /dev/kmem were world readable, then it would be a
security hole only as long as it took the sysadmins who were careless
enough to leave it that way to fix it up.  Relax.

>I have heard the arguments that it won't get fixed if it doesn't get
>known about, but a would-be cracker can use the recipe _right now_.
>The fix may take weeks, months or even years to propagate.  In this
>environment (Linux) of all environments, the way to do it is quietly
>fix the problem, and get the fix included in the major distributions.
>If you can't do that, please just keep it to yourself.

A would-be cracker would have to be root to exploit the hole.  What is
the most terrible thing that could happen from the /dev/kmem scenario?
He could get root.  It's a catch-22.  If the would-be cracker has
root, he doesn't need to read /dev/kmem, and even if he did, the fact
that he has root would be a more immediate and serious concern than
the fact that he could snag your PGP password.

>Most crackers that I have come across are actually kind of dumb.  They
>don't know what they are doing particularly, they are just following 
>a recipe, passed on by word-of-mouth, that started with one of the 
>rare ones who DID have some technical smarts.  Please don't help those 
>a**holes propagate their tricks, or give them any new ideas.

The ones who would be able to use the data gleaned from this method
would be smart enough to know how to employ it.  I don't think there
was any harm caused by this posting.  However, we do all know to be
careful from now on when posting security tips.  I hope that anyone
who posts in the future can still manage to relay enough pertinant
information without making a step-by-step guide for idiots.  So far I
haven't seen anything out of line in this group.  I'd rather have a
detailed description than one of CERT's famous "There is a security
hole in /bin/login on some systems.  With it an intruder can gain root
access." postings.  All they do is piss me off, since I know that
there is a detailed report going around the hacker community, but I
can't see what it is, because some administrative type has decided
that I can't be trusted with a detailed description because the
dreaded hackers might be able to get it from a second source that way.
Oh well.  Be careful what you post, but don't be that careful.

>I shall now descend gracefully from the pulpit and resume my seat.

-Lou Ruppert
[big sig deleted to make room for my small one]

-- 
"Until you stalk and overrun, you can't devour anyone."   -Hobbes
Lou Ruppert                     lruppert@mailbox.syr.edu
My opinions are my own.  My attention span isn't long enough for

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

From: vanpatjm@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Jason Van Patten)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS/2 and Linux discussed (Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2)
Date: 1 Jul 1994 13:37:27 GMT

Leo L Turetsky (professor+@CMU.EDU) wrote:

: of how much it costs them. After spending money on an OS I would expect
: good customer support. After not paying for Linux, I get customer
: support that's rivals, if not bests, OS/2's. Don't expect me, or any

        Hang on here.. have you ever called and talked with a customer service
rep at IBM?  Sounds to me like you haven't.  Their customer service blows
*ANY* companies' away.

        Any time I've _ever_ had a problem with OS/2 (yeah, I've had a few :) )
I've dialed their 800 number and *BLAM*, free fix waiting on diskette for me
the very next day.  I consider that kinda impressive, no?

        And to say you get "customer" support for linux.. from who?  On the
internet?  If so, good for you, but that's available (and has been longer than
linux was even around) for OS/2 as well.

        Well, I know this isn't a flame group, so I'll just stop here.  I
personally use _BOTH_ operating systems (and DOS too.. for DOOM :) ) on
one computer, and they coincide just beautifully.  Kudus to the two.

                                                Jason


--
Jason Van Patten                  | If at first you don't succeed, keep |
Clarkson University               | on sucking till you do succeed.     |
vanpatjm@craft.camp.clarkson.edu  |                     - Curly Howard  |
                                  |                 (The Three Stooges) |
            ** Any opinions expressed here are actually
               yours, you just don't know it yet. **
 

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

From: us292121@bulldog.mmm.com (Dean Junk)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.windows.x.i386unix
Subject: Re: Did Xconfig fry my monitor? (Posting for a friend)
Date: 30 Jun 1994 03:48:50 GMT

Sudeep Gupta (sudeep@cs.cornell.edu) wrote:
: Posting for friend. Please reply directly to him (shantanu@ee.cornell.edu)
: -------------------------------------------------------
: 
: 1. I set up my video mode in Xconfig incorrectly. I don't
:    know what the symptoms for this would be, but I thought
:    I'd know immediately. I've been running X for two weeks.
: 2. My hardware may have been defective.
: 3. The recent heat wave in the North-East may have messed it
:    up.

Yes, I fried an old CTX monitor that I had running X. Now I have a
MAG Innovision MX15F which detects when it goes out of spec.  It has
**HELPED** me a bunch.

--
Dean Junk                   "An ounce of perception, a pound of obscure"
Internet (dpjunk@mmm.com)                      --RUSH

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


** 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-Misc-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU

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

    Internet: Linux-Misc@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-Misc Digest
******************************
