From: Digestifier To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu Reply-To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu Date: Thu, 2 Sep 93 06:13:08 EDT Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #83 Linux-Misc Digest #83, Volume #1 Thu, 2 Sep 93 06:13:08 EDT Contents: Re: ideas for FAQs and printed LDP books (Pauline Price) Re: Term security flaw (Re: Term limitation...) (Simon J Ferrett) Re: coprocessor makes LOTS of difference (Rick) Re: Zyxel modems & Linux (Gert Doering) Re: NT versus Linux (Rich Mulvey) Re: Ian Jackson (Jim Graham) Re: Linux Systems Laboratories ??? (Chris D. Johnston) Re: X11R5 on Linux ? (Steven Buytaert) A distribution of Linux a la NetBSD wanted (Pierrot Deseilligny) Re: [TAPE] Sankyo / Archive / Summit (Jeffrey K. Johnson) Re: TeXcad for linux? (Michael Chapman K8/EIS1. Tel. 1662) Re: X11R5 on Linux ? (Cobalt Stargazer) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: pprice@panix.com (Pauline Price) Subject: Re: ideas for FAQs and printed LDP books Date: 1 Sep 1993 23:10:13 -0400 In <1993Aug31.005801.12876@hellgate.utah.edu> galt%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Greg Alt) writes: >has anyone looked into going to a real publisher? [ details omitted. ] >If you leave out the >binding and special covers, it should cost less than $5 including the staples >and cutting. Add a buck profit and a buck for shipping, and its only $7. Of course, I just printed it on my printer and 3 hole punched and put it in a binder. ....... --Pauli ------------------------------ From: c9108932@saturn.newcastle.edu.au (Simon J Ferrett) Subject: Re: Term security flaw (Re: Term limitation...) Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1993 02:30:52 GMT In comp.os.linux.misc I noticed: >Correcting my own stupid error... >> Or have I missed something important here? Perhaps an option to term >> to deny trsh connections would be nice (you still can get in via trsh > ^^^^ > Not via trsh, that was the point... >> and telnet, but then you have to provide the proper password.) >read: you still can get in via *tredir* and telnet. OK heres how I run my term setup and I think its pretty secure.. if anyone can think of any problems Id appreciate if they could let me know OK- I run term (as root) in the RC file. the TERMDIR is / so that the socket is in /.term /.term is mode 750 (rwxr-x---) /.term/socket is mode 770 both /.term and /.term/socket are in a group named term. This means only people whos group is term can succesfully use the term socket and access the link. So - people who are allowed to tredir and trsh are in the term group (ie: me since its my account on the remote machine) The programs that I want the general user population to be able to use (termtelnet termftp termfinger) are owned by root.term and are set GID (not UID) - thus that binary when run can access the term socket and work succesfully. term programs I dont want the general user population to run (tredir trsh) are NOT set GID, so if someone who isnt in group term runs them, the program will not be able to access the socket. If someone compiles their own term client, it will not work since it is not group term and set GID (unless the become root and change the owner and mode...) so their home grown binary will not work. This setup seems to solve most of the problems, so if anyone can think of problems with this setup then please mention them... (also in /etc/profile the environment veriable TERMDIR is set to / so that peoples term clients know where to find the socket) comments/etc appreciated... Simon. -- c9108932@cs.newcastle.edu.au - Simon Ferrett Due to technical difficuties, we are unable to bring you your regularly scheduled .signature - normal transmission will resume as soon as possible... ------------------------------ From: pclink@qus102.qld.tne.oz.au (Rick) Subject: Re: coprocessor makes LOTS of difference Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1993 04:37:33 GMT las@io.org (Laszlo Herczeg) writes: > > Based on preliminary testing, a 386-DX 40 with a Cyrix 83D87 40 Mhz > FPU chip is faster than a 486-33. > > This is based on POV 1.0 tracing the file ntreal.pov. > Results: > 386-40 with Cyrix: 9 hours 23 minutes > 486-33 : 11 hourand 10 minutes > >The tests were executed on unloaded machines, using the same quality >and size options for the rayracer. Not surprising. POV does much floating point work, so you can effectively eliminate the 486's integer/instruction pipeline from speed considerations. 9h23m is 563 minutes, 11h10m is 670 minutes. 670 * (33 / 40) = 552, so the difference in times you observe here is the result of the clock speeds. I've been told that the FPU in the 486DX2 runs at 66MHz, so I you are willing to plunk down the extra cash (again, I've been told it's not that much) you should (theoretically) be able to cut rendering time to 5h35m. Rick. ------------------------------ From: gert@greenie.muc.de (Gert Doering) Subject: Re: Zyxel modems & Linux Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1993 22:04:19 GMT s_titz@ira.uka.de (Olaf Titz) writes: >> You need: The TK/TCL library and the modgetty Source--- [...] >> mgetty is currently (my current information) just doing Data & FAX >There's a name confusion: There are two packages originally named >"mgetty", but now they are referred to as "modgetty" (by Walter >Pelissero, patched by me) and "mgetty-sendfax" (by Gert Doering). Hey, please make the latter "mgetty+sendfax" :-) ^ BTW, quite soon a new getty, "vgetty" will come out - "v" as in "voice"... gert -- ... ich kann diese signature nicht mehr sehen! Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert@greenie.muc.de fax: +49-89-3243328 gert.doering@physik.tu-muenchen.de ------------------------------ From: rich@mulvey.com (Rich Mulvey) Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy Subject: Re: NT versus Linux Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1993 01:17:49 EDT muts@compi.hobby.nl (Peter Mutsaers) writes: >>> On Mon, 30 Aug 1993 08:28:11 EDT, rich@mulvey.com (Rich Mulvey) >>> said: > > > RM> That would be moral by your logic, right? > > > > Yes, but they go too far. In the end it will damage themselves, like > > IBM was damaged too by the almost-monopoly they got in the 70s. First > > they get big profits, but the losses will be even bigger. > > RM> If they damage themselves, that's *their* problem. New companies > RM> will spring up to fill the void - just as it has always happened. And > RM> *those* companies will probably be lean and mean at first, until *they* > RM> kill themselves with bloat. That's the way that capitalism works. > > No, in the meantime a lot of damage will be done. It's not like in the 60s, > when there were still hardly any alternatives. But now there are perfectly > fine and well-designed operating systems with pretty wide acceptance. Exactly what alternatives? We're talking about Joe Average Small Businessman who wants software to run on his computer without having to learn a lot. He does not want, nor can he afford, NextStep, Unix, or anything of the same ilk. MS-DOS is just about *perfect* for those needs. And Windows adds to the value of the system he is getting without adding appreciably to what he has to learn. Remember that people on the net tend to look at computers as interesting unto themselves - the vast majority of computers users, however, look at them as necessary evils. > It is > only because so many are uninformed and fall into the traps of Microsoft, not > at all because of a fair comparison on technical grounds, that people might > choose microsoft and such bring a lot of damage on themselves and the whole > industry. Technical excellence in software or hardware has *never* been a reason for the consumer to go with a particular product. People buy Microsoft products because they are relatively cheap, easy to use, and available. Not to mention that the knowledge base of talent to use the system is *huge* - you can do what my first employer did - hire a dirt-cheap high school kid to come in and do your programming. :-) > > > > > Every company must fight its competitors, I agree; but they must also > > learn self-control. If you kill everyone you get an unhealthy > > situation, bad for everyone. > > RM> But you just said that they are going to kill themselves as well, so > RM> what's the problem if they will eliminate themselves as players in the > RM> game? > > Indeed. I hope for that. The sooner the better. That's my whole point. Of > course they kill themselves only if people, as a result of their stupidness, > refuse to be dictated by Microsoft, and make NT flop. You seem to be trying to justify your arguments on the grounds that they're what the world should be. The problem is, people are perverse - they do many, many things that are self defeating, destructive, and generally stupid. You can make a very easy choice - stick with the elegant systems and starve, or do what it takes to put bread on your table. > > RM> I have no sympathy for stupid/ignorant people. If they make decisio > ns > RM> about software and hardware without doing the proper research, they > RM> deserve what they get. It is their responsibility. If a person is so > > But if the whole world will use NT and everyone want NT software, also for > small scale techincal projects, that is also going to affect me. I'll be the > victim of others stupidness or immorality. Therefore every well-thinking > person should boycott Microsoft. People should avoid Microsoft because it will cause *you* hardship? Isn't that a little egotistical? :-) Fine - if people avoid Microsoft, it will cause tens of thousands of programmers and support personnel hardship, therefore we should all purchase *only* Microsoft products, right? Life is generally composed of doing your best while dealing with other people's stupidness - this may come as a surprise to you, but it's true. And quite frankly, only *you* can make yourself a victim. If you can't deal with the rules of the game, get out of it and find an easier one, because very few other people are going to care. > This is very easy because alone for > techincal reasons there is no reason at all to use a Microsoft 'operating > system'. Just keep saying to yourself "Cheap... easy... supported." Technical reasons are irrelevent to the average person. Once you learn that, you'll be fine. :-) - Rich -- Rich Mulvey Amateur Radio: N2VDS 787 Elmwood Terrace rich@mulvey.com Rochester, NY 14620 ------------------------------ From: jim@n5ial.mythical.com (Jim Graham) Subject: Re: Ian Jackson Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1993 01:40:14 GMT In article <262jgf$k96@klaava.helsinki.fi> wirzeniu@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Lars Wirzenius) writes: >keating@acf2.nyu.edu (keating) writes: >> **READ THIS BEFORE POSTING** >> You are an intolerant ass who should not have the priviledge of being >> allowede on the Internet. I'm almost embarassed to admit it now, since most people have probably forgotten by now, but I once seriously mis-interpreted the intent of the daily posting, just as keating appears to have done. Of course, I had a bit of an excuse---I'd heard tales of people being flamed for asking questions that were anything short of brilliant, etc. (all of which I've learned were complete and total BS), and this was before the daily posting was re-worded a bit (it still said ``to avoid being flamed'', which, when combined with the tales I'd heard...well, you get the idea), but still.... Having chatted with Ian several times via e-mail, I have absolutely no hesitation in stating that he is definitely *NOT* ``an intolerant ass''. Quite the opposite, in fact. He counts as one of the more helpful folks around here. Now, with the current wording of the daily posting, frankly, I don't see how anyone could mis-read it as being intended to be anything but helpful. But that's another story.... >I can only assume he/she/it/they >meant Ian, so I guess it's the provocation I need to defend the daily >posting (again). Likewise, but for different reasons. Later, --jim -- #include 73 DE N5IAL (/4) ==========================< Running Linux 0.99 PL9 >========================== INTERNET: jim@n5ial.mythical.com | j.graham@ieee.org ICBM: 30.23N 86.32W AMATEUR RADIO: (packet station temporarily offline) AMTOR SELCAL: NIAL ============================================================================== E-mail me for information about KAMterm (host mode for Kantronics TNCs). ------------------------------ From: chris@surfcty.surfcty.com (Chris D. Johnston) Subject: Re: Linux Systems Laboratories ??? Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1993 06:29:24 GMT Dan Newcombe (dnewcomb@cybernet.cse.fau.edu) wrote: : Does anyone know anything about these people? I saw their add : with the Linux logo (looks nice) in the back of UnixReview. I filled : out the little Reader Service card and sent it in. : Just curious if anyone else knew anything about them. : -me Well, they have an 800 number. I've called it twice asking for information. I am very interested in their $150 motif. I have connected to a very nice answering service person. No return calls, no postcards or literature as requested. I figure the owner has a full time job and this LSL is his part time hobby... OR, he's so swamped with requests, he really needs to hire some help. I'm sure he's getting one heck of a phone bill publishing an 800 number that noone follows up on. Chris -- =============================================================== Chris D. Johnston Surf City Software, Orange, CA 714/289-8543 chris@surfcty.com fax: 714/289-1002 ------------------------------ From: buytaert@imec.be (Steven Buytaert) Subject: Re: X11R5 on Linux ? Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1993 07:15:42 GMT Timothy E. Neto (ten0772@halcyon.com) wrote: : dwex@mtgzfs3.att.com (David E. Wexelblat) writes: : >In article bluejay@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (BUSARI) writes: : >> Is it possible to install X11R5 on Linux ? I mean, instead of : >> XFree86...I hear it's freely available --though it'd probably : >> take up more disk space. : >> Since X11R5 is free (from what I here), then what's the point : >> of having XFree86? What's the difference (pros/cons) ? : XFree86 is X11R5. It is a pre-packaged version of X11 for the Intel : based computers running a variant of UNIX. : >This has GOT to be the funniest thing I've seen in a LONG time. Does : >"bluejay" imply "bird brain"? : No not the funniest, but surely high on an ingorance list. : Def: ignorance == a lack of knowledge and experience. : >Now, let's see - a little critical analysis. XFree86: X, Free, 86. Hmm. : >One might suppose that this name implied that XFree86 was free software. : Correct here. Yes, XFree86 may be obtained at (Ah Hmmm) no cost. : >What's the point of XFree86? It runs on Linux (as well as a dozen other : >OSs). X11R5 does not run on Linux. : X11R5 does run under Linux. Question is, does the user wish to spend [snip, snip] : Many thanks and kudo's to the XFree86 development team. I think Tim, that you should reread the header of the article and check in your XFree documentation or credit notes, who David Wexelblat is...8-) ...Thanks Dave... -- Steven Buytaert Analog ASIC Design Engineer Interuniversity Micro Electronics Centre Invomec Division Kapeldreef 75, 3001 Heverlee BELGIUM phone : + 32 16 281 271 fax : + 32 16 281 584 e-mail : buytaert@imec.be In case of danger, BREAK glass ------------------------------ From: pierrot@cogit.ign.fr (Pierrot Deseilligny) Subject: A distribution of Linux a la NetBSD wanted Date: 2 Sep 1993 03:44:58 -0400 Reply-To: pierrot@cogit.ign.fr (Pierrot Deseilligny) Hello everybody, I recently switched to Linux from NetBSD, I wonder if there is a distribution of Linux like the one done by NetBSD. Yes, I think that NetBSD is well organized , one could have sources and binaries in a structured file systems. Thanks for any help MPD ------------------------------ From: jeff@samantha.chi.il.us (Jeffrey K. Johnson) Subject: Re: [TAPE] Sankyo / Archive / Summit Reply-To: jeff@samantha.chi.il.us Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1993 16:35:16 GMT In dan@oea.hobby.nl writes: : OK. It seems that the technical problems encountered by the group trying : to develop a driver for FDC based tape streamers are unsurmountable, for : the moment at least, so I'm looking elsewhere for a backup system. During : my search I came across the following (affordable?) solutions: : : - SCSI based Sankyo tapestreamer for about $450. 250 MB capacity. : - SCSI based Archive "" for about $600. 525 MB capacity. (includes : an Adaptec SCSI controller, which I don't need). : - IDE based Summit tapestreamer for about $350. 300 MB capacity. : : has anyone used these gizmos (un)successfully with LINUX? I have used my Sankyo ST-150 (250M QIC) connected to my Adaptec 1542B with Linux and it works great. This combination works great under DOS using the ASPI tars (found on SIMTEL-20). -- Jeff Johnson Voice: (708) 991-0197 Fax: (708) 358-7578 Computer Consultant 1107 E. Paddock Dr. JBC Associates Palatine, IL 60067-4151 jeff@samantha.chi.il.us ...!uunet!vpnet!samantha!jeff ------------------------------ From: mchapman@argos.eis (Michael Chapman K8/EIS1. Tel. 1662) Subject: Re: TeXcad for linux? Date: 2 Sep 93 07:35:04 GMT Reply-To: mchapman@argos.eis The best thing I have found for graphics in TeX/LaTeX is to use 'xfig' (which produces postscript) and then use a \special to import the postscript. On Linux this works a treat, you can view the whole result with ghostview (and jump from page to page in any order) and print it on any printer with ghostscript. LaTeX/xfig output in postscript through ghostscript looks perfect which is more than you can say for anything which uses the original postscript fonts if you don't have a real postscript printer. --- ============================================================================== Mike Chapman _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ mchapman@eis.k8.rt.bosch.de _/_/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ fax: (+49) 7121/35-1746 _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ _/_/_/ tel: (+49) 7121/35-1662 _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ ------------------------------ From: cam@adied.oz.au (Cobalt Stargazer) Subject: Re: X11R5 on Linux ? Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1993 08:07:19 GMT dwex@mtgzfs3.att.com (David E. Wexelblat) writes: >In article bluejay@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (BUSARI) writes: >> Is it possible to install X11R5 on Linux ? I mean, instead of >> XFree86...I hear it's freely available --though it'd probably >> take up more disk space. >> But it'd be nice to have motif programs running on my PC. >> >> Since X11R5 is free (from what I here), then what's the point >> of having XFree86? What's the difference (pros/cons) ? >This has GOT to be the funniest thing I've seen in a LONG time. Does >"bluejay" imply "bird brain"? I don't know - but I'd say you are the bird brain Dave. >Now, let's see - a little critical analysis. XFree86: X, Free, 86. Hmm. >One might suppose that this name implied that XFree86 was free software. Yep. >What's the point of XFree86? It runs on Linux (as well as a dozen other >OSs). X11R5 does not run on Linux. Fair enough. But why isn't X11R5 on Linux? Hmmmm? >How on earth could ANYONE reach either conclusion that you've reached >(that XFree86 costs money, or that X11R5 can be used on Linux)? I don't know how you reach *your* conclusion. He was refering to X11R5 when he said "I hear it is freely available", you silly boy. Where does he state that X11R5 runs on Linux or XFree86 costs money? I think it's fairly obvious he was asking a question about X11R5 running on Linux. >Sigh. Looks like you lost out on this flame wholesale, Dave. ***GAME OVER*** Dave, Please insert another coin to play again. ------------------------------ ** 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 ******************************