Subject: Linux-Admin Digest #182
From: Digestifier <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 94 18:13:40 EDT

Linux-Admin Digest #182, Volume #2               Wed, 12 Oct 94 18:13:40 EDT

Contents:
  SCSI HP-DAT PROBLEMS (x0202479 J.P. van de Plasse)
  Re: PCNFS and file locking (Walter Lohman)
  Re: PCNFS and file locking (Walter Lohman)
  Re: XFree86-3.1 - Whoopee! (Alan Osborne)
  Re: Support for Diamond Stealth? ([email-masked])
  Location of InterViews package?? (Adrian Mancini)
  Re: issue in tcpip login (Bob Collie)
  LILO error message question (Eric V. Bruno)
  Re: Please don't post security holess... (Steve Kneizys)
  Need XF3.1 compiled Mosaic (Michael R. Widner)
  Re: Linux and Adaptec 1542 CF (Andre T. Fraser)
  Re: Xterminals with Linux as X server (Klamer Schutte)
  Re: Please don't post security holess... (Robin D. Wilson)
  Looking for basic SNMP monitors (Mark H. Wood)
  Re: Please don't post security holess... (Tim Bass (Network Systems Engineer))

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

From: [email-masked] (x0202479 J.P. van de Plasse   )
Subject: SCSI HP-DAT PROBLEMS
Date: 12 Oct 1994 15:10:32 GMT

I can make an backup to a HP-DAT 2GB tape streamer,
using tar. but I don't succeed to create multiple tar's on one tape
The second tar overwrites the first one.
I've tried to use mt eom, but then when using mt tell it still say's
Location 0 !!!

ANybody gota clue

Thanx in advance

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

From: [email-masked] (Walter Lohman)
Subject: Re: PCNFS and file locking
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 14:46:07 GMT

Ron Hume ([email-masked]) wrote:
: Hi,
:       I am running FTP software's PCTCP and Interdrive,
: to mount some of our unix (Linux) boxes from PC's.
: My only problem is that when I PCNFS mount the 
: linux drive I get the error message 'No port for remote
: lock manager' or something close to that.  I looked
: for a lockd but couldn't find one.  

: Any suggestions (am I overlooking one that is included).

: I am using Slackware 2.0.1.

: Ron.

: --
: Ron Hume
: Network Administrator
: Cygnus Telcommunications Engineering Labs
: CANADA

Take a look at the /etc/rc.d directory, I believe the file rc.inet2
In this file the necessary rpc servers are not automatically configured
for use. You'll need the rpc.portmap (/sbin) rpc.nfsd abd rpc.pcnfsd at least

If you're not using root to map your drives, you might want to change the
rpc.mountd line into rpc.mountd -n which lets you mount drives as a non root
user.

I've this setup running a few days and seems stable enough. Originally I was
running FreeBSD-current, but now switched to Linux to compare the systems.
I found the Linux nfs implementation a bit slower than the *BSD versions, but
I haven't tested it much yet on the Linux box. Also when doing heavy compiles
on the Linux box, it seems to effect the nfs performance a great deal more
than that was the case while running the *BSD system. Hope this helps,

Walter ([email-masked])

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

From: [email-masked] (Walter Lohman)
Subject: Re: PCNFS and file locking
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 14:48:29 GMT

Ron Hume ([email-masked]) wrote:
: Hi,
:       I am running FTP software's PCTCP and Interdrive,
: to mount some of our unix (Linux) boxes from PC's.
: My only problem is that when I PCNFS mount the 
: linux drive I get the error message 'No port for remote
: lock manager' or something close to that.  I looked
: for a lockd but couldn't find one.  

: Any suggestions (am I overlooking one that is included).

: I am using Slackware 2.0.1.

: Ron.

: --
: Ron Hume
: Network Administrator
: Cygnus Telcommunications Engineering Labs
: CANADA

PS. I forgot to tell you, you might need to add the following line to
the file /etc/rpc

pcnfsd        1500001     pcnfs

The rpc.portmap program needs this line. After running check with rpcinfo
if the portmapper is initialised correctly.

Walter

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

From: [email-masked] (Alan Osborne)
Subject: Re: XFree86-3.1 - Whoopee!
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 13:58:05 +0000

Alan Cox ([email-masked]) wrote:

: I can't get any of openlook or fvwm to work. I'm inclined to think this is
: probably X11R6 incompatibilities with these packages rather than bugs. So

Erm.. I'm still using olvwm after moving to X11R6, and can't remember
doing anything special except maybe shifting a couple of libraries...

-- 
AlanO

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

From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Support for Diamond Stealth?
Date: 12 Oct 94 13:52:48 +0200

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Alexander A Durzy) writes:
> Does anyone know if the current version of Linux 
> supports the S3 chipset in the Diamond Stealth 
> video cards??
> 

Yes, it does ...

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

From: [email-masked] (Adrian Mancini)
Subject: Location of InterViews package??
Date: 12 Oct 1994 15:58:26 GMT

Could someone tell me where I could locate the InterViews package; I'm interested in the iclass C++ class browser?

Thanx in advance

-- 
==================================================
-  Adrian Mancini ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
==================================================
-  The worst fear is fear of a dream. ~~~~~~~~~~~~
==================================================

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

From: [email-masked] (Bob Collie)
Subject: Re: issue in tcpip login
Date: 12 Oct 1994 17:23:41 GMT

Champ Clark ([email-masked]) wrote:

:       Question:

: I would like a /etc/issue of some type to come up when a person telnets to
: my machine.  I am pretty sure I will have to modify login.c or something, whihc
: I have no problem with,  but I am having trouble finding this.  Is this
: assumption correct?  I am using slackware 2.0.0 ,  if that makes any difference.
: Thanks
: -- 

There is no need to modify the login.c, merely place what you want 
displayed to that telnetter in /etc/issue.net and your problem will be 
solved!

Bob Collie
[email-masked]

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

From: [email-masked] (Eric V. Bruno)
Subject: LILO error message question
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 1994 20:25:18 GMT

I have a kernel which correctly boots and works from floppy.
I copied the kernel to /vmlinuz.  When I attempt to
run lilo I get the following message:

Kernel vmlinuz too big!

What is this really telling me?

I get the error when attempting to install to Master Boot Partition
or the Boot record of the first partition. The first parition is flagged
as bootable.

Do I need to leave more room before defining partition 1.

I am running a Maxtor 340 mb drive with a linux native and linux swap
partition only.  The drive is only at 50% capacity.

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

Subject: Re: Please don't post security holess...
From: [email-masked] (Steve Kneizys)
Date: 12 Oct 94 11:15:32 EST

M. K. Shenk ([email-masked]) wrote:
: When you break in and USE THE SYSTEM.  Not when you break in.  Well, a few
: cycles for the login program.  So I concede.

: >CPU cycles. Others have to pay for them and you don't pay. (Yes, even 
: >universities have a theoretical value for CPU hours and if they sell 
: <snip>
: >permission.
: >These are just two examples and I'm sure there are more.

: These examples do not bear on my statement, which was: (read..I
: specified this rather directly..I am not talking about doing anything
: with the system..) typing a correct response to a password prompt for
: an account which is not yours and hanging up does no harm.  I'm not
: talking here about any of that stuff.  I am not talking about using a
: compiler.  I am not talking about typing ls.  I am talking about the mere
: act of gaining entry.  Now go on and read the rest of my post.

WRONG!!!

Attempting to break in is Trespassing.  Breaking in is a break-in...entering is
entering is guaranteed as you get a prompt if you break in.  

Succeed or not, you are guilty of trespass.  Succeed, you are guilty of 
breaking and entering.  EVEN IF YOU DO NOT DO ANYTHING BUT LOG OFF!

So now you think Trespassing is legal eh?  So is breaking and entering?

Geez...sounds like some serious rationalization to me!

Steve...

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

From: [email-masked] (Michael R. Widner)
Subject: Need XF3.1 compiled Mosaic
Reply-To: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 17:17:07 GMT

I'm looking for Mosaic for Linux compiled and linked to XFree 3.1 libraries.
Of course I can get Mosaic for XF2.x anywhere, but I don't have any of
the XFree 2.x stuff on my system, and I'm not real keen on putting the
libs on just to run Mosaic.

If you're wondering, I've got a GXE64 Pro, which is why I don't have any
of the XFree 2.x stuff on my system.  Running X at 640x480 didn't
particularly appeal to me.

Thanks for any info.
-- 
Michael R. Widner
[email-masked]  -  [email-masked]

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

From: [email-masked] (Andre T. Fraser)
Subject: Re: Linux and Adaptec 1542 CF
Date: 10 Oct 1994 04:48:30 GMT

To get lilo to look at an alternate address for you adaptec do the
following:
                when you boot your system with the boot disk and it
prompts you for any additional parameter type in ramdisk
aha154x=0x230,scsiinterupt here,scsi host adapter id, hard drive host id
for example if you scsi host adapter is set at IRQ 11 and host id 7 and
you hard drive is host id zero you would type the following at the LILO:
prompt, 
        LILO:           ramdisk aha154x=0x230,11,7,0
-hope this helps

Matti Aarnio ([email-masked]) wrote:
: leadfoot@leftlane (Mark Curtis) writes:
: >
: >I just tried to install linux on my Dell 466/T, but I ran into a
: >real problem.  It looks like the driver for AHA-1542 SCSI controllers
: >only looks at the default address of 330.  Mine controller is at 230
: >because my MIDI card is at 330.  That is the default address that
: >all MIDI software will look for the MIDI card at so I don't want to
: >change it.  All my other software works find with the SCSI controller
: >at 230.
: >
: >Is there a way to tell the kernel to look at the alternate address of
: >230 for the 1542CF?  I'm using the CD in the "Internet CD" book.
: >I beleive that release is the 1.2 Slackware release.

:       I feel the  Slackware 1.2 is OLD...  Thus the driver
:       source file might have been moved since then..

:       At the moment there is no way to externally tell the kernel to look
:       at somewhere non-standard -- except at my own machine. (Linux 1.1.52)
:       I have been developing LILO options for AHA1542, which lets users
:       like you to override the default locations (and to set some other
:       more esoteric configuration parameters...)

:       For now your option is:
:               - install the Adaptec on 330, deinstall the MIDI/Sound
:                 for a moment
:               - generate new kernel AFTER you have edited the
:                       /usr/src/linux/drivers/scsi/aha1542.c
:                 to look for the new controller location(s).
:                 Edit the file, and start by looking for '0x330' in it.
:                 Preceeding comment explains what to do with it.
:               - install that new kernel, change your Adaptec,
:                 install the MIDI/Sound-card..

: >I've built the two floppies (Boot, Root) and they work except the
: >kernel probes never find my SCSI controller or it's devices.
: >
: >Any ideas?

:       This SHOULD be FAQ, I guess -- I hope my LILO-things are
:       ready before the release of Linux 1.2, and thus will make
:       the trouble obsolete..

: >Thanks,
: >
: >Mark

:       /Matti Aarnio   <[email-masked]>

--
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 ...  __0                [email-masked]  (202) 806-4810 
 .. _`\<,_                     Andre T. Fraser (Sys Op) 
___(*)/_(*)__________________Computer Learning and Design Center____________ 
Ask me a question. If I don't know the answer, then come back tomorrow
                        and I'll have an answer.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^http://www.cldc.howard.edu/~fat^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

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

From: [email-masked] (Klamer Schutte)
Subject: Re: Xterminals with Linux as X server
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 14:53:23 GMT

In <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (Ken Edwards) writes:

:Ken Edwards ([email-masked]) wrote:
:: Mark A. Davis ([email-masked]) wrote:
:: : [email-masked] (Srini Seetharam) writes:
:: [ ... ]
:: : >Currently, the Linux machines respond to it
:: : >BUT the windows are managed by the
:: : >Linux machine. As one can guess, once many Xterminals are served
:: : >by a single Linux machine, it is soon overwhelmed.

:: How many Xterminals are you looking to hook to one Linux machine?

:: This is correct, the window manager (I use fvwm) does not impose much 
:: load on the host,  if you have many Xterminals connected to a Linux box 
:: and is slowing down, you probably need more memory, faster processor, or 
:: more Linux boxes.  You did not say how many Xterminals you have connected,
:: but I would not think that a Linux box would be a satisfactory host to more
:: than 3 or 4 Xterminals. (Maybe a P90 with 64Megs could do more, but probably
:: not too many).  My 486dx66/16Meg is happy serving 2 Xterminals, but I would
:: not want to impose on it much further.  Mind you this is a development box
:: with heavy users.  I look at my own login right now for example and find that
:: I have 16 entries in my window list, including 8 xterms, gpanel, gfm, tkmail,
:: goodstuff, xsysinfo, xeyes, cmdframe, and of course the newsreader.  If your 
:: users use these kind of resources, you will not be able to support too many.

High response times you get from a system is most of the time due to to paging
and / or swapping. Adding a faster CPU will not help you very much. Adding
memory will. A nice rull of thumb is to have 8 Meg of memory for every
X display you manage, and an additional 4 Meg for the system software (and thus
you need about 12Meg for a stand alone system). Users only having one xterm
reading news will use less; power users will use more.

This 8 Meg is the amount of menory which is swapped in at a certain moment.
A window manager typically is used often, and stays swapped in. So running
this on a xterminal rather then on the host is a good way to save available RAM.
Besides that, it is one of the X client programs you have to wait for when
it should be paged in. Thaat is the major advantage of running it local -
switching to another window does not cost the time to swap in the 
window manager anymore (but still perhaps the time to swap in another client!)

Klamer

(PS The above is based upon experiences with Sun Sparc 1 en 2 -- but will be
    similar for Linux boxes.)

-- 
Klamer Schutte  -- +31-15-786054 / +31-15-692000
[email-masked] / [email-masked]
http://www.ph.tn.tudelft.nl:2000/People/klamer/Klamer.html

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

From: [email-masked] (Robin D. Wilson)
Subject: Re: Please don't post security holess...
Date: 12 Oct 1994 15:16:45 GMT
Reply-To: [email-masked]

In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (M.  
K. Shenk) writes:
:In article <[email-masked]>,
:Jeff Kesselman <[email-masked]> wrote:
:>Yeah, what Patrick said.
:>
:>Surely the man who thinks his breaking into MY machine and using MY 
:>system resources for something I didn't intend is not a crime wouldnot 
:>mind if I broke into his car and borrowed it to run drugs??? I'll return 
:>it as soon as I'm done.....
:
:I suppose I was unclear.  What I meant: someone who does this may be
:commiting a crime (they are) but they are not necessarily a criminal
:in the sense that you probably think about criminals.  You have a nice
:label that allows you to feel certain things about anyone you plaster it
:on. If all you meant by criminal ws "someone who has broken the law" then
:i would agree.   But you probably don't, even if you think you do.  I
:am not (if you people could get it through your thick heads) in favor
:of system cracking.  What i am AGAINST is the mindless damning of anyone
:to ever bypass a login prompt.  Some of these people are 11-12 year old
:children.  I'm not even saying that they should be treated any
:differently because of this.  I am saying your label of criminal may
:not fit.  I am opposing a knee-jerk reaction to someone that has done
:something that you -> have a perfect right to be upset about, and a legal
:right to get them in trouble <-  but really has in many cases not done any
:harm.  I.e.: someone uses cycles on my Linux box.  They are essentially
:free.  I may not want him there, but it is possible for him to enter and
:leave and *do me no harm.*  Did I say this makes it "okay."?  Don't
:respond to what I am not saying.  It is also possible for someone to
:enter your house and do you no harm.  NOT "do you no wrong" but "do
:you no harm."  Can you accept this statemnt, with no implications?  

How are you defining "harm"?  My Webster's defines it:

        1 harm \'harm\ (noun)
        [ME, fr. OE hearm; akin to OHG harm injury, OSlav sramu shame]
        (bef. 12c)
        1: physical or mental damage: INJURY
        2: MISCHIEF, HURT 

        2 harm (verb)
        (bef. 12c)
        :to cause harm to
        syn see INJURE 

If you are simply trying to say "there is no physical damage", this may be  
true.  But _clearly_ there is psychological damage.  If you are just trying  
to say that the injured party will not suffer "physical" injury (to himself  
or his machine) -- perhaps you are right...  Well "whoop-de-doo"!   
Psychological _harm_ can sometimes last _much_ longer and be significantly  
more costly to correct than the "physical" harms.  I'd be willing to bet that  
someone who knows he's been cracked will spend a siginificant amount of time  
trying to plug the security holes on his system -- time isn't "Free".  I'd  
bet that the "harmed" party will spend some amount of time 'worrying' about  
the security of his system -- mental anguish is not "Free".

:Folks, opposing a statement that is true for what you think it may imply
:is pathetic.  First and foremost is the truth of a statement.   Statement
:"A" if true, is still true if the consequence of believing it is the
:destruction of all living things.  My point: do what you like.  People
:should not enter your system.  If you bend reality in your mind, you
:are pathetic.

First, you are "wrong"!  Second, it is people like you who give "Crackers"  
fodder for thier rationalizations.  Out of one side of your mouth you say,  
"no harm done", and out of the other you say "but it is wrong".  You can have  
"harm" without wrong-doing (accidents), but you can't have "wrong-doing"  
without harm.

The very idea that my computer (and it's cycles) is any less "real" than my  
house or my car is rediculous.  It is _mine_!  If I don't want other people  
using it -- then that is _my_ perogotive.  If you violate my security -- then  
you have stolen from me -- period.  It is no different than opening the  
closed door to my house.

By your logic, I could store food in your refrigerator -- simply because it  
causes _no_harm_ to you.  By your logic, I could borrow your phone whenever I  
want (so long as I call toll-free or local numbers) because it never impacts  
you "physically".  By your logic, I could steal your car while you are away  
(so long as you weren't trying to use it) -- and so long as I maintained it  
properly, and replaced whatever consumable items I used (gas, oil, wiper  
fluid, etc.) -- "no_harm_done".

It is _very_ convienent to re-invent "reality" to meet ones needs.  But the  
reality is: breaking into my house and breaking into my computer are the  
same.  And whether I choose to be forgiving or press charges (depending on  
the circumstances) is not relevant to the nature of the injury to me and my  
property.  I.E., if the cracker is a 12 yo. who is simply out "joyriding" on  
the InfoBahn -- he is no less responsible than the 12 yo. that breaks into my  
house (just to see if he can), or steals my car for a "joyride" -- but brings  
it back with "no_harm_done".

--
=============================================================================
***  These are my opinions... Mine! All Mine! Minemineminemineminemine!   ***
=============================================================================
Robin D. Wilson               [email-masked]                Pencom Software
701 Canyon Bend Dr.                                 9050 Capital of Texas Hwy
Pflugerville, TX  78660                                     Austin, TX  78759

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

From: [email-masked] (Mark H. Wood)
Subject: Looking for basic SNMP monitors
Date: 10 Oct 94 15:54:01 -0500

Any pointers to SNMP monitoring code that might work under Linux without a
whole lot of rewriting, would be appreciated.
-- 
Mark H. Wood, Lead Systems Programmer    +1 317 274 0749   [@disclaimer@]
Internet:  [email-masked]       BITNET:  MWOOD@INDYVAX
All that is necessary for the triumph of ignorance, is that knowledgable men do
nothing.

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

From: [email-masked] (Tim Bass (Network Systems Engineer))
Subject: Re: Please don't post security holess...
Date: 12 Oct 1994 17:45:01 GMT

Everyone,  can we please stop the flame wars and move this discussion
off the comp.os.linux.admin forum.  We all will never agree on this
issues, its a religious one that been around since the cavemen first
logged in to their favorite Bedrock internet access provider.

Robin D. Wilson ([email-masked]) wrote:
: In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (M.  
: K. Shenk) writes:
: :In article <[email-masked]>,
: :La'szlo' Lada'nyi <[email-masked]> wrote:
: :>[email-masked] (M. K. Shenk) writes:
: :>[...]
: :>>>>                                        Penetrating the security of a 
: :>>>> computer system is totally harmless in and of itself.
: :>>>                       ^^^ LOOOK!  LOOOOK at this!  "in and of itself."
: :>>>This is your opinion, and you would probably find that 99% of 
: :>>>administrators will disagree with you.

: Mr. Shenk, you are _simply_ (and completely) WRONG!  Privacy is a _very_  
: significant thing.  You are advocating a way of life that leaves people no  
: choice but to completely conceal their private information within their own  
: heads.

: If I simply walked up to your front door, picked the lock, opened the door,  
: and then walked away -- would you feel any less secure?  I'll bet you'd  
: figure out how to put a better lock on the door.  When people put password  
: protection on their systems, it is simply a means to prevent _unwanted_  
: access to their systems.  People know (most of them anyway) that the password  
: protection is no more of a guarantee than a deadbolt on the front door, but  
: it is an attempt -- with the tools at hand.  When you break that protection,  
: you have violated their _wishes_ (100% of the time -- not even 99%),  
: otherwise they wouldn't have placed the restriction on the system in the  
: first place.  Even if they have it _poorly_ protected, that simply says more  
: about thier _ability_ to protect the system -- not about thier intentions.

: Clearly, you have alot to learn about being _human_...

: --
: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
: ***  These are my opinions... Mine! All Mine! Minemineminemineminemine!   ***
: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
: Robin D. Wilson               [email-masked]                Pencom Software
: 701 Canyon Bend Dr.                                 9050 Capital of Texas Hwy
: Pflugerville, TX  78660                                     Austin, TX  78759

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

** 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: [email-masked]

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

    Internet: [email-masked]

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