From: Digestifier To: Linux-Admin@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu Reply-To: Linux-Admin@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 17:14:10 EDT Subject: Linux-Admin Digest #68 Linux-Admin Digest #68, Volume #1 Tue, 21 Sep 93 17:14:10 EDT Contents: Re: [Summary] /etc/shutdown by non-root (Kenneth H. Simpson) Re: [Summary] /etc/shutdown by non-root (David W. Summers) Slackware's 3.5" requirements, was Re: [Not] enough SLS bashing (Kevin Fluet) Re: [Not] enough SLS bashing (Kevin Fluet) Re: [Summary] /etc/shutdown by non-root (Maurice S Barnum) Re: mcopy: how to make file owned by user, not root (Gerhard Fuernkranz) Re: [Not] enough SLS bashing (Greg Hennessy) Re: Compiling the new Elm 2.4 (Vince Skahan) Re: [Summary] /etc/shutdown by non-root (Mark Dobie) Re: Compiling the new Elm 2.4 (Andrew J. Cosgriff) Re: Memory LEAKING!*=--.._ (Andrew R. Tefft) Re: [Not] enough SLS bashing (jcburt@gats486.larc.nasa.gov) Re: [Summary] /etc/shutdown by non-root (Joe Foster of Borg) Re: [Not] enough SLS bashing (Greg Hennessy) Re: Compiling the new Elm 2.4 (Rafal Maszkowski) Re: [Not] enough SLS bashing (Byron A Jeff) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Crossposted-To: comp.unix.admin From: ken@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Kenneth H. Simpson) Subject: Re: [Summary] /etc/shutdown by non-root Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1993 23:48:08 GMT In article <1993Sep20.055036.4972@seagoon.newcastle.edu.au> c9219517@frey.newcastle.edu.au (Scott Howard) writes: >Valdis Kletnieks (valdis@black-ice.cc.vt.edu) wrote: >: In article <27d35q$bol@agate.berkeley.edu> boss@soda.berkeley.edu (Brion Moss) writes: >: >(The script was then setuid root, of course). This seemed to work pretty >: >well. > >: A set-UID root shell script is equivalent to giving every user on >: the system unrestricted root access. > >: I suggest you find a way to do it without set-UID shell scripts. > >Why not just make the scripts rx only for owner/group, set owner to be >root (or whatever), and group to be a group that only the user >"shutdown" is a member of - that way no one other than that user will be >able to execute the scripts. > > Scott. I've forgotten how this thread started (after wading through a 100 messages) but if you want to allow users to shutdown the machine why don't you just add the users to the group operator (or it's equilvalent?) Type ls -ldg shutdown and then add the user to the group id of shutdown. On a SPARC, this is operator I agree with a previous poster, never install a shell script with the root UID bits set - convert it a C program and compile if you must use root UID bits! -- ============================================================================== Kenneth Simpson NASA Internet: ken@ptolemy.arc.nasa.gov Ames Research Center, MS/269-1 UUCP: ames!ptolemy!ken Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000 ------------------------------ Crossposted-To: comp.unix.admin From: dws@cseg03.engr.uark.edu (David W. Summers) Subject: Re: [Summary] /etc/shutdown by non-root Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 03:11:23 GMT y-pisan@nwu.edu (Yusuf Pisan) writes: > >And how do you keep just anybody from shutting down your machine >whenever they feel like it? >Do you mean to say that anybody can telnet to yor machine and login as >shutdown to shutdown your machine!!! >How strange, I want to keep my machine running most of the time :-) > >Yusuf > The script I write usually checks to make sure they are on the console before before it allows the to run the shutdown program..... - David Summers -- David Summers "Linux: The choice of a GNU generation" dws@engr.uark.edu ------------------------------ From: user1@valis.ampr.ab.ca (Kevin Fluet) Subject: Slackware's 3.5" requirements, was Re: [Not] enough SLS bashing Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1993 22:39:15 GMT In <1993Sep16.162004.29975@cc.gatech.edu> byron@cc.gatech.edu (Byron A Jeff) writes: >In article <930915.201151.2C5.rusnews.w165w@jaiser.rain.com>, >> >>Well, I don't know about Slackware, because it requires me to have a 3 1/2 >>inch diskette to boot and, believe it or not, I don't. >>So for _some_ of us Slackware is worthless. >>All of these have their problems. But until the distributor of Slackware >>decides to support 5 1/4, I'll have to stick with SLS and MCC. This is exactly why I don't keep Slackware on my BBS rather than SLS (even though I would very much like to). I don't have disk space for both distributions, and I have to cater to the lowest common denominator--those people who don't have 3.5" drives. >In principle you are correct. However Patrick has provided a couple of features >that can help. >1) He has a test version of a 5.25 boot/root pair on > ftp.cdrom.com:/pub/linux/tst. The README for the 5.25 can be found with > the rest of the distribution. This is a good start, but some of the other disk images still don't fit onto 5.25" disks, so you still need a 3.5 as a second drive to install it. >2) 5.25 is really only required for booting. You can install via hard disk > or NFS. Unfortunately many people don't have access to a network and > don't have enough disk space to temporarily store the distribution to > the HD in order to install it. Exactly. Most people have hard drives less than 100MB. If you want install everything from a DOS partition (which needs to have, what, 40MB free?), this leaves only 60MB for Linux. >Patrick does try his best to keep Slackware up to date. But maintaining 2 >separate distributions will slow him down. >As a last resort of course you can shuffle the packages into a 1.2M format. >If you try that you'll see why Patrick doesn't keep track of 2 distributions! So he should move everything over to 5.25. The convenience that exists now for people with 3.5's hardly makes up for the trouble that 5.25-only people have to go through. -- Kevin /--------------------------------------------------------------------\ | Kevin Fluet Call V.A.L.I.S. Public Access Linux | | user1 or kevin@valis.ampr.ab.ca Usenet, Email (403) 478-1281 | | fluet@ee.ualberta.ca Ask me about Linux, the FREE Unix clone! | \--------------------------------------------------------------------/ ------------------------------ From: user1@valis.ampr.ab.ca (Kevin Fluet) Subject: Re: [Not] enough SLS bashing Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1993 16:50:14 GMT In <27a9hp$eao@moonshot.west.oic.com> dillon@moonshot.west.oic.com (Matthew Dillon) writes: >In article <930915.201151.2C5.rusnews.w165w@jaiser.rain.com> >:Well, I don't know about Slackware, because it requires me to have a 3 1/2 >:inch diskette to boot and, believe it or not, I don't. >:So for _some_ of us Slackware is worthless. >:All of these have their problems. But until the distributor of Slackware >:decides to support 5 1/4, I'll have to stick with SLS and MCC. > I suggest that you purchase a 1.44 MB 3.5" drive, then. Not >necessarily for slackware, but because 3.5" is now the norm. You will find >yourself closed out of more and more things if all you have are crufty 5.25" >floppies. What planet do you live on? It is true that most computers sold now have 3.5" drives or both sizes installed, but there is a huge installed base of 386's out there that only have 5.25" drives. When I got my 486 less than a year ago from Gateway 2000 (the 3rd largest manufacturer of PC's in North America) it had the 5.25" as the boot drive. I have never seen a software package that didn't have 5.25" floppies available. > Most of our machines don't even have 5.25" floppies any more. 3.5" >inch stuff is a lot easier to deal with. That's great for YOU, but how about everybody else. Like I said in another post, Slackware should be in a format usable by EVERYONE. 5.25" disk images fit onto 3.5" disks, but it doesn't work the other way around. -- Kevin /--------------------------------------------------------------------\ | Kevin Fluet Call V.A.L.I.S. Public Access Linux | | user1 or kevin@valis.ampr.ab.ca Usenet, Email (403) 478-1281 | | fluet@ee.ualberta.ca Ask me about Linux, the FREE Unix clone! | \--------------------------------------------------------------------/ ------------------------------ From: msb@cats.ucsc.edu (Maurice S Barnum) Crossposted-To: comp.unix.admin Subject: Re: [Summary] /etc/shutdown by non-root Date: 21 Sep 1993 05:55:34 GMT In <1993Sep21.031123.4604@cseg03.engr.uark.edu> dws@cseg03.engr.uark.edu (David W. Summers) writes: >y-pisan@nwu.edu (Yusuf Pisan) writes: >The script I write usually checks to make sure they are on the console before >before it allows the to run the shutdown program..... personally, I find it easier to have a sane action for "ctraltdel" in my inittab. Currently it reboots, I could make it halt, of course.... that way, only the person on the console could reboot the machine, but there's no "dangerous" script lying around. -- Maurice S. Barnum + Why are the people who say they love msb@cats.ucsc.edu | me the only ones that ever make me cry? mbarnum@eis.calstate.edu + --- name witheld PGP fingerprint: 26 46 7A 02 F0 5C C1 67 76 3D 53 39 79 D3 C9 26 ------------------------------ From: fuer@nessie.gud.siemens.co.at (Gerhard Fuernkranz) Subject: Re: mcopy: how to make file owned by user, not root Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 08:16:17 GMT Chris Lee (lee@ceg.uiuc.edu) wrote: : Is there a way to have MCOPY copy the file and give permission to the : person who copied it instead of root? (I haven't checked yet to see if : it uses root's current umask). : : Copying files TO floppy doesn't matter, but copying FROM floppy sets : the file perms to root-only. I suppose I can write a front end script : to do this, but I'm trying to avoid this situation :-) Don't call mcopy as `root' but login as `user-xx' (or su to `user-xx') and then call mcopy ... (Also check, that the device /dev/fdXXX has read permission for everyone). -- Gerhard Fuernkranz SIEMENS Austria Corp. Email: fuer@siemens.co.at Gudrunstr. 11 Phone: +43-1-60171-5716 A-1100 Wien ------------------------------ From: gregh@cmkrnl.demon.co.uk (Greg Hennessy) Subject: Re: [Not] enough SLS bashing Reply-To: Gregh@cmkrnl.demon.co.uk Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 08:20:09 +0000 In article <1993Sep19.165014.387@valis.ampr.ab.ca> user1@valis.ampr.ab.ca writes: > >What planet do you live on? It is true that most computers sold now have >3.5" drives or both sizes installed, but there is a huge installed base of >386's out there that only have 5.25" drives. When I got my 486 less than a >year ago from Gateway 2000 (the 3rd largest manufacturer of PC's in North >America) it had the 5.25" as the boot drive. I have never seen a software >package that didn't have 5.25" floppies available. > >> Most of our machines don't even have 5.25" floppies any more. 3.5" >>inch stuff is a lot easier to deal with. > >That's great for YOU, but how about everybody else. Like I said in another >post, Slackware should be in a format usable by EVERYONE. 5.25" disk images >fit onto 3.5" disks, but it doesn't work the other way around. > Leave it out, the Slackware distribution is free pro gratis and costs nothing, 5.25 is dead as a format, I install software every day, I havent seen 5.25 ship in a standard distribution with over 2 years. If it doesn't work well 'Tough Turnips' a 3.5 drive is a very cheap option. I dont want to hear stories about lack of drive bays, bios problems or other bollocks. If you are not statisfied get the sources and roll your own and shut up whining about it. The amount of garbage spewed here on this topic is unreal, no one is Forcing anyone to use any distribution, If it doesn't suit, well tough shit!!!!. We are lucky to have distributions at all. greg -- Greg Hennessy |Greg_Hennessy@europe.notes.pw.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|gregh@cmkrnl.demon.co.uk Nil aon tintean mar do thintean fein |gregh@cix.compulink.co.uk WRTC : Class of '91 |cmkrnl@cix.compulink.co.uk ZZ Top : They Really Can't Be Beat. |100065.225@compuserve.com I Will Not Dignify Flames With A Reply. ------------------------------ From: vince@victrola.wa.com (Vince Skahan) Subject: Re: Compiling the new Elm 2.4 Date: 20 Sep 1993 18:46:26 -0700 jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca (John Henders) writes: > Has anyone compiled elm 2.4with kernel 99pl12, gcc2.4.5 and the >4.2.2.libraries? ? I tried everything in the newspak7 doc, including >runnig the config.sh supplied directly. I have had no trouble with 4.4.1 and gcc2.4.5 - I'm assuming you mean 4.4.2 above in which case no, I haven't tried it yet. > Also, I saw mention of a 2.4.11. The newest I found on ftp.uu.net >was 2.4. it's a typo. The 2.3 version was 2.3.11 the latest released 2.4 is 2.4.22 but the tar archives generally just say 2.4 on them :-( -- ---------- Vince Skahan --------- vince@victrola.wa.com ------------- This your brain on Phillies baseball - get the picture ??? ------------------------------ From: mrd@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Mark Dobie) Subject: Re: [Summary] /etc/shutdown by non-root Date: 21 Sep 1993 10:26:23 +0100 In <1993Sep21.031123.4604@cseg03.engr.uark.edu> dws@cseg03.engr.uark.edu (David W. Summers) writes: >y-pisan@nwu.edu (Yusuf Pisan) writes: >>And how do you keep just anybody from shutting down your machine >>whenever they feel like it? >The script I write usually checks to make sure they are on the console before >before it allows the to run the shutdown program..... In any case, because the user id of the shutdown account is 0 this counts as a root login and is only allowed on the devices listed in /etc/securetty, so you just need to make sure this file only lists virtual consoles. Mark. -- Mark Dobie MS Windows? Linux and X! University of Southampton M.R.Dobie@ecs.soton.ac.uk ------------------------------ From: ins407x@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (Andrew J. Cosgriff) Subject: Re: Compiling the new Elm 2.4 Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 09:54:30 GMT jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca (John Henders) writes: > Has anyone compiled elm 2.4with kernel 99pl12, gcc2.4.5 and the >4.2.2.libraries? ? I tried everything in the newspak7 doc, including >runnig the config.sh supplied directly. I'd be interested in conversing >with anyone who has succeeded. > Also, I saw mention of a 2.4.11. The newest I found on ftp.uu.net >was 2.4. I built it a night or two ago (after being bitten by the bash 1.13 problems...) and it works fine - no big hassles as long as you modify the config.sh from newspak properly...re: paths, etc. the one on ftp.uu.net is actually 2.4.22 I think. (i either got mine from there or wuarchive) the latest version of elm is just called elm-2.4.tar.Z (or something similar) - the only mentioned of it being pl22 is if you look in one of the files that mentions about patchlevels (can't remember the exact name). In any case, it works fine now... What exactly went went wrong ? Andrew. -- -Andrew J. Cosgriff- andrew@bing.apana.org.au ins407x@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au APANA, the Australian Public Access Network Association. Mail info@apana.org.au "I was trying so hard to be myself I was turning into somebody else" (The The) ------------------------------ From: teffta@cs690-3.erie.ge.com (Andrew R. Tefft) Subject: Re: Memory LEAKING!*=--.._ Reply-To: teffta@cs690-3.erie.ge.com Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 12:07:59 GMT In article 9723@inca.comlab.ox.ac.uk, harris@teaching.physics.ox.ac.uk (Stephen Harris) writes: >Under normal circumstances this is perfectly true. However I just >installed dx2/66 16Mb RAM local-bus IDE 0.5Mb cache. Now it is VERY >annoying every so often to find the machine pausing for a couple of >seconds just to flush this cache to disk when the program memory >requirement grows by a Mb or so. If your system pauses "for a couple of seconds" when it flushes the cache to disk, you have a worse problem than lack of buffer cache. I just have a wimpy 486-33 and while I can tell when it flushes the cache, it causes at most a blip of my mouse movement (or a little jump of the ball if I'm playing xboing). -- Andy Tefft - new, expanded .sig - teffta@cs690-3.erie.ge.com ------------------------------ From: jcburt@gats486.larc.nasa.gov Subject: Re: [Not] enough SLS bashing Date: 21 Sep 1993 12:22:05 GMT In article <27kodp$b4m@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bf703@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Patrick J. Volkerding) writes: In a previous article, jcburt@gats486.larc.nasa.gov () says: > >Not to rag on Andreas in particular, but > "Buy a 3 1/2 floppy and everything will be fine ..." >is about as worthless bit of advice as I've heard in a long time... > >Look at it this way...the original post was about not being able to boot >Slackware from a 5-1/4" floopy...Linux supports 5-1/4" floppy, other distributions >boot from the 5-1/4, so how do you get Slackware to boot from a 5-1/4" floppy >(i.e. READ: "Hey Slackware maintainer, how about a 5-1/4" boot disk...") > In the first place, I'm not required to improve anything until the day you start writing out my paychecks. Also, I think the advice is valid. Hmmm...is anyone *requiring* that you do *anything* ? Obviously you're upset about the example I used. The point of the post was *not* to *demand* that you support *anything*. The only reason Slackware was mentioned at all was because it was the topic of the original post...As far as the advice being valid, you're welcome to your opinion, but when a post requests help/info on how to do something THAT *IS* SUPPORTED on the *existing* hardware, the answer IS NOT "buy more hardware"...That response is typical of the "Microsoft" mindset, "hey, lets just *require* everyone to buy more hardware to run our software..." Do, you by chance work for Microsoft? Should people with 286's start demanding Linux work for them? How about people with 720K floppies? Linux supports those drives too, you know. Linux does not run on a 286 (obviously) because there are *major* differences between the 286 and 386/486... class chips...perhaps Linux can boot from a 720K floppy, but its not large enough for any decent installation startup... besides, by far the majority of people have 1.44MB 3.5" drives, not 720K. My point was NOT about what Linux or Slackware or SLS or whatever supports, it WAS about saying "buy more hardware" when it is NOT needed...if anything using the "buy more hardware" response tends to make many newcomers think that Linux/Slackware/SLS in fact does *not* support their exisiting hardware and therefore they shouldn't even try to acquire/use it... Hey, time marches on, pal! And a 1.2MB 5-1/4" floppy is configured as the boot floppy drive on the majority of 386/486 machines sold today, so why *not* support what is a defacto standard? And since it *is* supported, why even *suggest* it's not by telling someone to "buy more hardware..." -- John Burton G & A Technical Software, Inc. jcburt@gatsibm.larc.nasa.gov 28 Research Dr. Hampton, Va. 23666 jcburt@gats486.larc.nasa.gov (804) 865-7491 ------------------------------ From: joe@bftsi0.UUCP (Joe Foster of Borg) Crossposted-To: comp.unix.admin Subject: Re: [Summary] /etc/shutdown by non-root Date: 21 Sep 93 04:17:23 GMT In article <1993Sep20.055036.4972@seagoon.newcastle.edu.au>, c9219517@frey.newcastle.edu.au (Scott Howard) writes: > Valdis Kletnieks (valdis@black-ice.cc.vt.edu) wrote: > : In article <27d35q$bol@agate.berkeley.edu> boss@soda.berkeley.edu (Brion Moss) writes: > : >(The script was then setuid root, of course). This seemed to work pretty > : >well. > : A set-UID root shell script is equivalent to giving every user on > : the system unrestricted root access. > : I suggest you find a way to do it without set-UID shell scripts. > Why not just make the scripts rx only for owner/group, set owner to be > root (or whatever), and group to be a group that only the user > "shutdown" is a member of - that way no one other than that user will be > able to execute the scripts. Then that group has unrestricted root access, which may or may not be better. A setuid shell script is a *major* security hole. A former employer of mine didn't believe it until I provided unassailable proof. Another risk was allowing users to have access to the physical machine, complete with a bootable DOS partition with a sector editor (part of the Norton Utilities) on it. Whoops. Joe Foster joe@bftsi0.uucp -- Joe Foster joe@bftsi0.uucp ------------------------------ From: gregh@cmkrnl.demon.co.uk (Greg Hennessy) Subject: Re: [Not] enough SLS bashing Reply-To: Gregh@cmkrnl.demon.co.uk Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 13:11:53 +0000 In article jcburt@gats486.larc.nasa.gov writes: [meaningless shite about microsoft deleted] >And a 1.2MB 5-1/4" floppy is configured as the boot floppy drive on the > majority >of 386/486 machines sold today, so why *not* support what is a defacto > standard? >And since it *is* supported, why even *suggest* it's not by telling someone to >"buy more hardware..." > >-- >John Burton G & A Technical Software, Inc. >jcburt@gatsibm.larc.nasa.gov 28 Research Dr. Hampton, Va. 23666 >jcburt@gats486.larc.nasa.gov (804) 865-7491 > What planet those thise statement come from ? I have just showed this to a friend of mine who is a OEM/VAR and I had to pick him up off the floor laughing, His figures state that less than one in one-hundred new machines shipping today come with a 5.25 drive let alone come configured to boot off one. greg P.S. He is now just mailing the message to his mate in the PC business in the states for a good laugh. -- Greg Hennessy |Greg_Hennessy@europe.notes.pw.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|gregh@cmkrnl.demon.co.uk Nil aon tintean mar do thintean fein |gregh@cix.compulink.co.uk WRTC : Class of '91 |cmkrnl@cix.compulink.co.uk ZZ Top : They Really Can't Be Beat. |100065.225@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: rzm@oden.oso.chalmers.se (Rafal Maszkowski) Subject: Re: Compiling the new Elm 2.4 Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 12:26:18 GMT John Henders (jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca) wrote: : Has anyone compiled elm 2.4with kernel 99pl12, gcc2.4.5 and the : 4.2.2.libraries? ? I tried everything in the newspak7 doc, including I compiled only 2.4.23beta2 (wuarchive.wustl.edu:packages/mail/elm/ elm.beta.tar.Z) without any problems. What are yours? R. -- Rafal Maszkowski rzm@oso.chalmers.se rzm@mat.torun.edu.pl <-finger for public snail: Omgangen 464-82, 412-80 Goteborg, Sweden; tel: +46-31-7780831 key Opinia publiczna powinna byc zaalarmowana swoim nieistnieniem - S.J.Lec ------------------------------ From: byron@cc.gatech.edu (Byron A Jeff) Subject: Re: [Not] enough SLS bashing Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 13:58:08 GMT This topic is getting out of hand. Patrick is justifiably upset that folks are saying he has no 5.25 support for Slackware. Other people are screaming for a complete 5.25 distribution. These are the facts. 1) Slackware is distributed as a series of DOS disks. 2) These disks are sized to fit 3.5 1.44M floppies. 3) Patrick has a 3.5 boot disk and a 5.25 boot/root combo disk. 4) Slackware has three distribution modes: Floppy, HD, and NFS. Now these are the conditions in which Slackware cannot be installed. Note that all of these must be true. A) The machine does not have a 3.5" 1.44M floppy. B) The machine does not have enough HD space to temporarily store the distribution while it is being installed. C) The machine has no NFS access. Now exactly what percentage of machines qualify with first 3 criteria? The argument is that for this group that it's Patrick's problem to do item D and that all of the rest of the folks that does not qualify with criteria A-C must go through the extra expense and hassle of formatting and copying to 10 extra diskettes. Be aware that it doesn't take much disk space to store the distribution. The whole thing is 40 Meg and it can be installed piecemeal (A, then X, etc.) and each series takes less than 16M of temporary storage. Think: Most linux machines need a swap partition. You can temporarily store parts of the distribution there while installing. When you're done the swap parition can then be set up and added to the system. The bottom line is that Slackware has the facilities to be installed on a large majority of the machines that it can be installed on. On the few machines that fit criteria A-C Slackware can still be installed with some effort from the user (By either hand shuffling the distribution or installing piecemeal). My advise is that if you have a 5.25 only system with minimal HD space that you look at another distribution (MCC or TAMU). Patrick goes out his way to make sure that Slackware is reasonably correct and installs correctly the first time over a variety of machines. He watches for bug reports and quickly fixes bugs as he gets reports. He does a DAMN GOOD JOB! I'm tired of hearing a vocal minority of users complain that their needs are not addressed when they won't take the effort to see that Patrick went out of his way to create a mechinism to load Slackware off a 5.25 boot floppy with 2 other reasonable methods of accessing the distribution. Lastly here are your options if you have 5.25 only: 1) Temporarily hook you machine to a network with NFS (This can even be a larger Linux box.) Use the NFS option. 2) Temporarily store the distribution on a local HD. Use the HD option. 3) Temporarily borrow a 1.44M floppy drive. You only need it for the installation. 4) Shuffle the distribution yourself. Build a extra set of disks. Move the install.end and z*fix files to the last disk. If folks are unwilling to do any of the above then they are unwilling to help themselves. Let them complain. Later, BAJ --- Another random extraction from the mental bit stream of... Byron A. Jeff - PhD student operating in parallel! Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332 Internet: byron@cc.gatech.edu ------------------------------ ** 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-Admin-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.admin) via: Internet: Linux-Admin@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-Admin Digest ******************************