Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #372
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:     Mon, 4 Jul 94 08:15:19 EDT

Linux-Misc Digest #372, Volume #2                 Mon, 4 Jul 94 08:15:19 EDT

Contents:
  Re: Smail/Sendmail problem (Karsten Johansson)
  Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing (Shannon Hendrix)
  Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing (Shannon Hendrix)
  Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing (Shannon Hendrix)
  Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing (Shannon Hendrix)
  Re: OS/2 and Linux discussed (Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2) (mibo@isi026.isi.kfa-juelich.de)
  Terminal Server - Clarification (Jem Day)
  Re: OS/2 vs. Linux : Stop this discussion! (Dan Pop)
  New ASUS board, 486SP3G, any comments? (Leon Oninckx)
  Re: When was Linux born? (Mitchum DSouza)
  Re: Best OS for a bandwidth intensive on-line service.. (Marius Kjeldahl)
  librle.a --- where? (Andreas Zeidler)
  Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing (mibo@isi026.isi.kfa-juelich.de)
  Re: Watching a user on an tty? (Niedner)
  Re: CD Recorder Driver? (Jon Peatfield)
  Re: X editors (Niedner)
  Re: QIC-02 tape driver for Slackware 1.2 (Rob Janssen)

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux,comp.sys.unix.internals
From: ksaj@csis.pcscav.com (Karsten Johansson)
Subject: Re: Smail/Sendmail problem
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 1994 01:15:47 GMT

John Sundberg (uspra016@mmm.com) wrote:
:> Solved this one last night for myself -- you need to edit 

:> /usr/lib/smail/routers 
:> comment out the section about uucp_neighbors

:> currently your mail should be in 
:> /usr/spool/smail/input and after editing routers and killing then
:> restarting sendmail the mail should get moved to
:> /usr/spool/uucp/* 

I have done this, and it seems to be working for mail.  So if you see this
message, then you will know that it worked for follow-ups in news as well,
making me a very happy camper.

What a very strange fix.  Remove what was already there, even back when it
_was_ working, and suddenly it works again.  I don't even want to think
about it!

:> BTW - this question would have been better asked in the newly
:> formed smail news group.

Thanks.  I don't receive this group (I hadn't heard of it either).
-- 
There are those who are born UNIX,   |   Karsten Johansson, PC Scavenger
those who are made UNIX,             |   ksaj@csis.pcscav.com
and those who become UNIX            |
for the kingdom of heaven's sake.    |   Matthew 19:12

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

From: shendrix@escape.widomaker.com (Shannon Hendrix)
Subject: Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 1994 02:33:59 GMT

Guido Sohne (wgsohne@tucson.Princeton.EDU) wrote:

: I see. So now OS/2 is a free operating system ? Just a question.
: Stop trying to reduce the price difference between Linux and OS/2. You got
: it at no cost to yourself. Good for you. But do you have the source code ?
: Is it stable and fast or is it multicrashing ?

I like that.  OS/2, IBM's best multicrashing operating system.

Kind of like IBM's multilooser AS/400 computer systems.

: --
: Guido


-- 
csh
===========================================================================
shendrix@escape.widomaker.com (UUCP)     | Amd486/40 Linux system
shendrix@pcs.cnu.edu (Internet)          | Christopher Newport University

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: shendrix@escape.widomaker.com (Shannon Hendrix)
Subject: Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 1994 02:46:17 GMT

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

: You are correct. NeXTStep doesn't cut it on low end hardware... as a
: matter of fact... it doesn't even run on it. How can an OS make your PC
: faster... easy. NeXT does memory management and hd partitioning and ... 
: much better than Linux, OS/2, ... do and all of this adds up to more
: speed.

Then why does it run slower and less stable than Linux on even high-end
hardware?

NeXTStep looks good, but runs like a dog, costs too much, and has
pitiful hardware support.

Saying it requires high-end hardware is just an excuse.  There is 
plenty of high-end hardware it has no drivers for and/or doesn't run
well on.  

Now, I *WISH* it did run good on decent machines because I thought
it was pretty interesting.  There is no excuse for it not working
good on my system when other OS's do.


: -Leo

: +----------------------------------------------------------+
: | Leo Turetsky          |  1) leo@professor.pc.cc.cmu.edu  |
: | Sigma Nu              |  2) professor@cmu.edu            |
: | 1055 Morewood Ave.    |  Carnegie-Mellon University      |
: | Pittsburgh, PA 15213  |  Sophomore, ECE\CS Double Major  |
: | (412) 862-2963        |  Nugget: SPIN BHBHY, YAXY?       |
: +----------------------esp---------------------------------+

-- 
csh
===========================================================================
shendrix@escape.widomaker.com (UUCP)     | Amd486/40 Linux system
shendrix@pcs.cnu.edu (Internet)          | Christopher Newport University

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: shendrix@escape.widomaker.com (Shannon Hendrix)
Subject: Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 1994 02:50:38 GMT

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

: What? How is Linux not free if you have Internet access? By my own
: reasoning Linux patches are not free, sure, but show me people who use
: Linux everyday, with no other OS, and don't have Internet access.
: Internet and Linux go hand in hand... you can't have one without the
: other.

Our local UNIX users group has 7 members running Linux without
Internet access.  It USED to be required but not anymore.  Usenet
news is a nice thing to have though.

: -Leo

-- 
csh
===========================================================================
shendrix@escape.widomaker.com (UUCP)     | Amd486/40 Linux system
shendrix@pcs.cnu.edu (Internet)          | Christopher Newport University

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: shendrix@escape.widomaker.com (Shannon Hendrix)
Subject: Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 1994 03:00:03 GMT

Mike Dahmus (miked@news.gate.net) wrote:

: All right, I've had about enough of this nonsense.

: Post in detailed language exactly what claim IBM made that has been PROVEN
: false. Pretend you are in a court of law, trying to prove that IBM has made
: false promises to you.

: Keep in mind the license agreement in the box, and the return policy.

: If you can't provide exacting evidence to support this nonsensical claim,
: shut your trap.

It wasn't worded right, but it's hardly nonsensical.  I paid a lot of
money for OS/2 and it never worked right.  The new version (I rented it
a few months ago) was not too bad (though it didn't run my S3 video
card right) and I would like to have bought it.  But guess what?  IBM's
upgrade policy is for me to dump another $100 on it!  That's just not
right.  OS/2 2.0 is unusable.  2.1 was the first version to approach
being ready to market.  I should be able to get that for free or a
small shipping fee.

Think of it like this: 

I bought a car from IBM for $9000.  I got it and had to put it together
myself.  After finishing I realized that one wheel was missing, it had
no seats, and only ran on two of four cylinders.  It got 4 miles per
gallon on a good day.

Now there is the next model which has all the above fixed.  I ask them
to send me the missing parts and fix the engine.  What do they tell 
me?   They tell me I have to buy another $9000 car.

If a car company did something like that, you can bet they would have
to make up for it (and I actually had a similar situation happen to
me once... missing pieces of a Honda).

That is all people are trying to say about OS/2.  I think OS/2 is
OK for a multitasking single-user system.  Personally, I prefer
UNIX so I'll stick with that.  However, I would probably use OS/2 on
another system (at least for awhile) if I didn't have to buy another
copy just to get one that worked.

Why can't they send me one that works?  They sold me a dud and should
make up for that.

: -- 
: Mike Dahmus                       Curator, rec.sport.football Hall o' Bait 
: miked@gate.net                                     also miked@vnet.ibm.com
: Please don't vote me new Kibo!     "Something must be BROKEN here at IBM!" 
-- 
csh
===========================================================================
shendrix@escape.widomaker.com (UUCP)     | Amd486/40 Linux system
shendrix@pcs.cnu.edu (Internet)          | Christopher Newport University

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

From: mibo@isi026.isi.kfa-juelich.de
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS/2 and Linux discussed (Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2)
Date: 4 Jul 94 07:27:02 GMT
Reply-To: mibo@isi026.isi.kfa-juelich.de

In <Ai5Qd5_00YUn8BTcB7@andrew.cmu.edu>, professor+@CMU.EDU (Leo L Turetsky) writes:
>with Linux only if you install Linux? We are comparing the OS/2
>distribution with a Linux distribution, not a Linux barebones. Thus, GNU
>comes with Linux. Thus, GNU does not come with OS/2. Where are you
>taking a left when you should be making a right?

So what? Some Linux guys here just pointed out that software which comes from
ftp servers is free, doesn't cost you anything and it is therefor not to be considered any
effort to get it. So what is the problem in getting GNU software from the net? Am I only
allowed to do so if I swear I'm a Linux user?

Why should a C compiler be considered part of the operating system? If the system doesn't
run without it, perhaps the developers should have another beta cycle.

---
Michael Bode


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

From: jemday@sbil.co.uk (Jem Day)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Terminal Server - Clarification
Date: 4 Jul 1994 09:21:38 GMT
Reply-To: jemday@sbil.co.uk

Thanks For Your Replies, as has been pointed out
my question was rather vague. So here i go again!!.

What i would like to achieve is the use of a terminal
server to proivide 'transparent' access to a Linux
system. ie The terminal attached to the server should
appear to be directly connected.

As far as the Linux box is concerned it would have a number
of psuedo tty lines (ie at <some IP address>,<Port number>)
on which the normal getty/login processes would run against.

This would mean that a user sitting at a terminal would be
presented with a 'login' prompt immediately rather than 
being presented with a Terminal Server prompt and then having
to telnet to a specific machine.

As i understand the getty proccess it will run against a specified
/dev/xxx device and this is why i believe that you would require
some some of device driver (call it waht you will) to connect
for example /dev/ptty8 -> <IP Address>,<Port Number>.

Thanks for your Time

Jem......

PS.
        EMail again if possible.....

================================================================
Jem Day                 Salomon Brothers International Limited
<Jeremy.Day@sbil.co.uk> ----------------------------------------------------
Business Technology Organisation                   Tel: (+44) (0)71-721-2012


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

From: danpop@cernapo.cern.ch (Dan Pop)
Subject: Re: OS/2 vs. Linux : Stop this discussion!
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 1994 09:17:35 GMT

In <2v7v68INNk6r@flop.ENGR.ORST.EDU> paul@holmes.ece.orst.edu (Paul Stoffregen) writes:

>Though nobody asked for my opinion either, I personally think hitting
>'n' is a pain when a thread is so large and senseless as the OS2 vs...
>thing has become.
>
>Fortunately, I use trn, so I hit 'J'.
>
>For those without threaded readnews, a pattern search followed by 'j'
>would work, except that 'OS/2' has a forward slash.  Maybe typing
>/OS\/2/ j  could wipe out the entire thread??  I'd try it, but I
>already junked the entire thread.  Oh well.

What's wrong with kill files?

Dan
--
Dan Pop 
CERN, CN Division
Email: danpop@cernapo.cern.ch
Mail:  CERN - PPE, Bat. 31 R-004, CH-1211 Geneve 23, Switzerland

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

From: rcleon@wsbs05.bs.win.tue.nl (Leon Oninckx)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel
Subject: New ASUS board, 486SP3G, any comments?
Date: 4 Jul 1994 10:07:56 +0200

I got the following information that a new board is available from ASUS.
Does anyone have comments on this one? How about the chipset being used?
Is this one bugfree? I guess it's almost time for an ASUS FAQ....

ASUS PCI/I-486SP3G

Pentium capable p24T ZIF socket
takes any 486 DX, DX2, SX and enhanced version
        and Cyrix, and Pentium P24T in addition to 
        dx4-100 jumper settings for speed.
AWARD 1M flash bios for easy BIOS updates
256k cache onboard, supports 512k cache.
3 PCI slots, 2 Master, 1 slave
4 additional ISA slots
up to 128M in four 72 pin SIMM slots, 
        in groups of two.
Intel Saturn II chipset 
green motherboard capabilities
onboard PCI FAST-SCSI-II controller
onboard IDE/ Multi I/O controller
        2HD, 2FD, 2S 16550's, 1P bidirectional 
configurable interrrupts for ISA/PCI use.
bios setting for scsi device powerup delay.
BEST REVIEW in german c't magazine review of PCI boards, feb.'94
        (original SP3 version,non-green)
Baby AT size motherboard 8.5" x 13"
2 yr. ASUS warranty.

(info sent to me by dgee@netcom.com)

Thanks,

-Leon
email : rcleon@bs.win.tue.nl

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

From: Mitchum DSouza <m.dsouza@mrc-apu.cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: When was Linux born?
Date: 4 Jul 1994 06:31:36 -0400
Reply-To: m.dsouza@mrc-apu.cam.ac.uk

Byron Faber:
| For the history books.  When did Linux first come into existance?
|

This is a classic checken-and-egg case - i.e. when did Linux start at
conception in Linus's brain or when was the first bit of code typed
in ? Then again the first bit of code typed in may not in reality be
in the current kernels. So it is debatable whether a definite start
point may be deduced. 

I think IMHO that Linux started when Linus was born. So those who
know Linus's birthday may be more able to answer this question.

Mitch

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

From: s_marius@ira.uka.de (Marius Kjeldahl)
Subject: Re: Best OS for a bandwidth intensive on-line service..
Date: 04 Jul 1994 10:28:21 GMT

In article <CsDDKp.3z2@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> corey@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (william.c.brown) writes:

>          This probably depends on the design of your system. Do you
>          really need threads to do an online service??

Well, there are certainly other ways of implementing the same
functionality, but for my project, which need to maintain a stable
framerate, I would rather have some kind of CPU scheduler optimizing
the load, than "looping" through all the connected computers and
sending the proper data in sequence (and thereby waisting valuable cpu
cycles). The multitasking/threading concept would seem like a better
way to go (because the scheduler would detect that one thread/task is
waiting for a response from the io-part of the system and pass the
thread over to another thread/task). And in discussing threads vs.
tasks, the former seems better because in my application all the
threads will typically share the data. I might be wrong on this,
though, as I have no real experience with such systems (yet).

>          OS/2 is still a single user system. Bulletin boards have been
>          around for OS/2 for a long time, but unless you are going to
>          offer generic "bulletin board" type services your going to 
>          have to write a specific multi-user interface for your new
>          product under OS/2. 

Single user vs. multi-user is not that important for me, as I will be
handling all the needed accounting myself, as a part of the system.

>          I would try Linux first. Multi-user capability is already there
>          (i.e. no need to use threads) and your target code won't have
>          to deal with multi-user specifics. Well, there are still things
>          to consider, but Linux is going to provide you with true separate
>          user accounts as part of the underlying OS and not as part of
>          your new product.

As mentioned, I really do not need the multi-user ability integrated
in the OS. On another issue, does anybody have any comparisons of how
the threads package under Unix performs compared to OS/2 threads? And
finally, does anybody have more information about terminal servers?
(Availability, capacity, prices etc..)

Thanks for all information..

Best regards

--
Marius Kjeldahl, student at The Norwegian Insitute of Technology and
The University of Karlsruhe - finishing MSc late autumn 1994 
        e-mail: s_marius@ira.uka.de or mariusk@lise.unit.no
        www   : http://rzstud1.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de/~ulh0

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

From: zeidler@ai-lab.fh-furtwangen.de (Andreas Zeidler)
Subject: librle.a --- where?
Date: 4 Jul 1994 10:45:37 +0200

Hi,

could anybody please tell me, where I can find the sources of that
graphics library called 'librle.a'?

Thanks in advance,


        Andi

-- 
...and if I died today,
I'd be the happy phantom...

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

From: mibo@isi026.isi.kfa-juelich.de
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing
Date: 4 Jul 94 10:52:22 GMT
Reply-To: mibo@isi026.isi.kfa-juelich.de

In <1994Jul4.030003.25656@escape.widomaker.com>, shendrix@escape.widomaker.com (Shannon Hendrix) writes:

>I bought a car from IBM for $9000.  I got it and had to put it together
>myself.  After finishing I realized that one wheel was missing, it had
>no seats, and only ran on two of four cylinders.  It got 4 miles per
>gallon on a good day.

OS/2 2.0 was buggy, but hardly THAT buggy.

>Now there is the next model which has all the above fixed.  I ask them
>to send me the missing parts and fix the engine.  What do they tell 
>me?   They tell me I have to buy another $9000 car.

When did they do that? I got the 2.0 CSD as free as others think Linux is.
And the 2nd CSD was free too.

>Why can't they send me one that works?  They sold me a dud and should
>make up for that.

I too think they should send me the CSDs by mail. On the other hand if they would do so,
the would probably double the price. Since some people here think distributing software
over Usenet can be considered (cost)free software, one could argue that the CSDs are indeed
free.

---
Michael Bode


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

From: niedner@petrus.cribx1.u-bordeaux.fr (Niedner)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin
Subject: Re: Watching a user on an tty?
Date: 1 Jul 1994 11:38:10 GMT

David Wright (dmw@prism1.prism1.com) wrote:
: >>>>> "RH" == Roy Hann <rhh@tachy.uah.ualberta.ca> writes:

:       What you are advocating is "security through obsurity". This is a
: position that has been shown time & again to FOOLISH and should not be
: used to "protect" anyone. Do you object the programs "C.O.P.S.", "Crack",
: et al? In fact, what the person posted in THIS case is not even making use
[stuff deleted]


I completely agree. The only way to deal with security holes is to make them 
public. The only way to realize _secure_ computing is to inform _everybody_ 
about the risks of a system.

The information given should be sufficient for a competent sysadmin to close 
the hole; often this includes parts of a How-To for potential hackers, but:
Imagine, what would happen if only the hackers knew about how to break a 
systems security. This would be even more dangerous.

The conclusion is - IMHO - that only a competent and well informed sysadmin 
can assure security. Therefore we should continue the search for security 
holes.


Sven



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

From: jp107@amtp.cam.ac.uk (Jon Peatfield)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development
Subject: Re: CD Recorder Driver?
Date: 04 Jul 1994 11:42:53 GMT

> .....  If you want us
> to heop you set this up, you can call us on our 900 tech support
> number:
> 
>               1-900-446-6075 ext. 835  $2.95/minute
> 
> 

This number probably isn't valid from most parts of the world.

<Sigh>

--
Jon Peatfield, Computer Officer, the DAMTP, University of Cambridge
Telephone: (+44 223) 3-37852     Mail: J.S.Peatfield@amtp.cam.ac.uk

"Try gargling with TCP  --  UDP just isn't reliable"


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

From: niedner@petrus.cribx1.u-bordeaux.fr (Niedner)
Subject: Re: X editors
Date: 4 Jul 1994 12:26:02 GMT

Jason Van Patten (vanpatjm@craft.camp.clarkson.edu) wrote:
: Hi -

:       Wasn't exactly sure where to post this, so excuse me if this is the
: wrong spot.  I found on sunsite.unc.edu a bunch of useful X based editors, in
: particular, asedit and nedit.  What's even better is that some kind soul put 
: the binaries up as well.  I have small problems with both and was wondering if
: anyone had any clues.

Well, get Tk/Tcl (comes with slackware, etc), and - get point1.63, a 
tk-based Text editor. Looks nearly like motif and fine with fvwm. Just tried 
it out, on my machine (Slackware) it nearly "compiled out-of-box".


Good luck,
Sven

PS. I hears about an editor called aXe, build up around the Athena(?) Text 
widget. Any experiences on Linux boxes?


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

From: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Re: QIC-02 tape driver for Slackware 1.2
Reply-To: pe1chl@rabo.nl
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 1994 07:32:56 GMT

In <TcBwoc1w165w@interphase.com> system@interphase.com (SYSTEM 0PERATOR) writes:

>I have recently install Slackware 1.2, and have recompiled the kernel to 
>support the QIC-02 tape drive I have.

>It accesses the drive but does not work correctly.
>The symptom is that the drive runs back and forth when trying to do a tar 
>cvP.  It does not stream in one direction like it should.

This is not really a problem with the driver, but with the system performance.
It can't keep up with the datarate of the tape, especially when backing up
small files.  On my system with a fast SCSI disk it was not that bad, but
on other systems I have seen this probem as well.

You should use the "buffer" utility to make it stream all the time.  When
you don't have it, pass the "-b" option to TAR to make it write larger
blocks (e.g 4MB, depending on your RAM size)

>I also noticed several warning messages regarding incorrect variable 
>types, and undeclared functions while recompiling the tpqic02.c file into 
>the kernel.

Several?  There have always been a few warnings, but none serious.

Rob
-- 
=========================================================================
| Rob Janssen                | AMPRnet:   rob@pe1chl.ampr.org           |
| e-mail: pe1chl@rabo.nl     | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8UTR.#UTR.NLD.EU     |
=========================================================================

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


** 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
******************************
