Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #906
From: Digestifier <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 94 09:13:07 EDT

Linux-Misc Digest #906, Volume #2                 Sun, 9 Oct 94 09:13:07 EDT

Contents:
  Re: Hmmm (Andrew Bulhak)
  getting linux to work dail-up (Jacob Zielinski)
  Re: Flame on the attitude of Linux towards GCC development (Jeff Kesselman)
  Re: New Linux Distribution (Jeff Kesselman)
  Congrats to DOSEMU team.  Don't try this at home kids... (Joe Zbiciak)
  Re: DOSEMU/Linux 1.1.51 (Oz Dror)
  Re: Flame on the attitude of Linux towards GCC development (Henry Ware)
  Re: Flame on the attitude of Linux towards GCC development (Stormy Henderson)
  Re: Telnet & ftp freeze! (Ralph Sims)
  Re: Flame on the attitude of Linux towards GCC development (Michael Will)
  Re: Does all SCO software run on Linux (Sebastian W. Bunka)
  Re: unctrl.h: No such file or directory (Zeyd M. Ben-Halim)
  Re: Newbies? (was Re: Hmmm) (Roderick Hoekstra)
  Is linux a multithreaded operating system? (Keith Kee)
  Re: Is linux a multithreaded operating system? (Steven M. Doyle)
  Printing and Compiling the kenerl (Tim Youngblood)
  Re: what does a hosts.allow look like? (Carlos Dominguez)
  Re: Microsoft busmouse on the ATI ULTRA , cannot be opened? (Viktor T. Toth)
  Re: Nailed down to 386bsd or linux, now which one? (Harf)
  What PCMCIA ethernet card to buy? (James Greer)

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

From: [email-masked] (Andrew Bulhak)
Crossposted-To: alt.fan.linus-torvalds
Subject: Re: Hmmm
Date: 7 Oct 1994 07:24:52 GMT

J.J. Paijmans ([email-masked]) wrote:

: >In article <[email-masked]>,
: >Mitchum DSouza <[email-masked]> wrote:
: >>
: >>Huh ? What is Natworkin and that logun thing anyway ? Do you think it is worth 

: Considering that "Natworking" translates in dutch as "Wetworking", I am
: not sure that I would want to know... :-)

"Wet work" == a code word for assassination. Used since at least the
18th century.

--
Andrew Bulhak            [email-masked]
Estimated Usenet time to live: 39 days

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

From: [email-masked] (Jacob Zielinski)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: getting linux to work dail-up
Date: 8 Oct 1994 13:47:53 -0700

Has anyone be able to hook their modem up so that you can dail into linux?

The people on #linux suggested agetty, and mgetty. But I didn't get to far
with those to commands. Could somebody who as done this explain how or at
least point me toward some docs.

Thank you

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.development
From: [email-masked] (Jeff Kesselman)
Subject: Re: Flame on the attitude of Linux towards GCC development
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 1994 00:48:56 GMT

I'm not goping to flame you back, because I have some problems myself 
with the 'version .0 always has bugs' view.  (I really don't know enough 
about GNU history to have a very intelligent view on this, just a feelign 
that the only products I've ever seen where this was literraly true were 
all made by Microsoft.)

On your subejct of 'come on and help us develop' though, i wanted to make 
you aware of anothre side.  Myself, I would love to do some Linux kernel 
hacking, but i don't because I work 40+ hours a week programming for a 
living, which only leaves a small amoutn of time (after the chunkc other 
responsabilities take out) to work on my own projects.  Given that, at 
the moment, other projects interest me more.  As fasr GCC goes, I'm happy 
I have it, Ill be happy to report bugs, but i don't mhave the time to do 
development on it as well.  If that were really necessary, Ild go buy a 
commercial compiler. Luckily, I haven't found that to be the case.

Just my nickle's worth,
(Used to be 2 cents, before Reganomics ;)  )

Jeff Kesselman 

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

From: [email-masked] (Jeff Kesselman)
Subject: Re: New Linux Distribution
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 1994 01:09:19 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>,
Aaron K. Michalove <[email-masked]> wrote:
>       What the DOS user REALLY needs for using LINUX....
>
>       GOOD DOCUMENTATION that relates common DOS commands to UNIX commands.
>
>       The "problem" is with the complexity and unfamiliarity of the 
>UNIX commands. I think that a good documentation project (hello LDP 
>members!) for UNIX commands, indexed by their DOS siblings, as well as a 
>section for all those "crazy little things" DOS just doesn't offer, like 
>a section on "If you are on 'the NET'..." - people who are using LINUX at 
>home have no need, unless they have access to a dialup, to have IRC and 
>TELNET and all that stuff cluttering their little minds.
>       There should definitely be a section on multiuser - like how to 
>change passwords, permissions, ownership, how to read "drwxr-xr-x", etc.
>
>       I would actually like to have a printout of a complete listing 
>like this next to my Linux Box :-)
>
>                               -Aaron
>

I saw a book in one of our technical bookstores the other day called 
"Unix for Dos and Windows Users" or something similar.
Thsi is not an endorsement, i didn't need it so I didn't even crack it, 
but i thought you might liek to know its there.

In general, there are alot of VERY good books now on using UNIX.  You 
basicly can't go wrong with one from the ORiely Nutshell series (just be 
sure the one you buy is on your level since they range everywhere from 
basic beginner stuff to complex programmer's subjects).

Just because Linux was free (or virtually) doesn't mean taht you can't or 
shouldn't spend the money on a few good books.  Many of the simpler 
questions I've seen float by here coudl be answered by such references.

I would STRONGLY advise anyone who is seriosu about running Linux to put 
aside a 'book budget'. (After all, you just saved $60.00 at least over 
the cost of Windows or OS/2, right?  That'll buy you one or two good 
books right there...  ;)  )

Jeff Kesselman

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

From: [email-masked] (Joe Zbiciak)
Subject: Congrats to DOSEMU team.  Don't try this at home kids...
Date: 8 Oct 1994 14:19:59 -0500

Well, I must say, congrats to the DOSEMU team.  I have yet to run into 
something DOSEMU could not do, other than run Protected mode software.  
(I am at version 0.52, but I understand that the latest patchlevels of
0.53 are supporting even Doom!)  

Today, I was so convinced that I was in a true DOS session (I didn't 
bother to switch VT's), that I decided to run Optune.  (Mind you, I 
generally leave my box in Linux, 24hrs a day, 7 days a week, but I 
had rebooted to try out the System Shock demo.)  Well, I realized long
after I had started the optimization that I was in linux.  Well, at
first I freaked out.  "Oh my god, did I just swiss cheese my drive?"

I exited the dos emulator, unmounted my DOS partition and prayed.  
I ran dosemu again, and lo and behold, my drive was 100% intact!!!!
Congratulations, DOSEMU Team!  Even DISK OPTIMIZERS seem to work
OK under DOSEMU.  But, I wouldn't try this at home.... :-)

--Joe

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

From: [email-masked] (Oz Dror)
Subject: Re: DOSEMU/Linux 1.1.51
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 1994 01:12:25 GMT

Ross Boswell ([email-masked]) wrote:
: Oz Dror ([email-masked]) wrote:
: : Linux 1.1.51
: : DOSEMU Pre0.53pl25
: : . . .
: : there is at least one problem. Only root can run it. I check permission
: : of dos it seems OK.

: :    9 -rwsr-sr-x   1 root     root         9079 Oct  3 19:57 /usr/bin/dos

: : when a user type dos no error is printed, but also dos is not entered.

: I have this problem too.  Any solutions?

Need to have a file called /etc/dosemu.users

that includes the names of user that can use dos.

-Oz
-- 
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
NAME   Oz Dror, Los Angeles, California    <<SCO UNIX since  3/90>>
SMAIL  [email-masked]                     <<Linux  since 8/15/94>>
PHONE  (213) 874-7978  Fax (213) 874-7965
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

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

From: [email-masked] (Henry Ware)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.development
Subject: Re: Flame on the attitude of Linux towards GCC development
Date: 7 Oct 1994 03:56:54 -0400

Are you a moron?  Postings belong in at most ***ONE*** linux group.  
Flamebait should be directed to col.misc.  You may/may not  have valid 
points, I'm supporting the boycott of any crossposted message.

With patience,
Henry
-- 
Will hack Linux for virtual beer.

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

From: [email-masked] (Stormy Henderson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.development
Subject: Re: Flame on the attitude of Linux towards GCC development
Date: 7 Oct 1994 07:57:04 GMT
Reply-To: [email-masked]

What was your point?

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

From: [email-masked] (Ralph Sims)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.admin
Subject: Re: Telnet & ftp freeze!
Date: 7 Oct 1994 01:36:59 GMT

[email-masked] (Colin Beckmann) writes:

>: And what about those of us that DON'T see it?  Basic setup is a
>: dedicated PPP link on a 14.4 dialup, NET-3 stuff, ppd 2.1.2a,
>: etc., with an InfoMagic/TransAmeritech CD-ROM combined install.

>I am NOT seeing th problem,  Have a  14.4 modem using NET-3 pppd 2.2.2a with 
>slackware 1.2 , and kernel 1.1.30.  I have downloaded 20 and 30 megs in a
>single session via ftp and never had a problem.  I regularly rlogin to
>other sites, once again without problem

Well, the only thing I didn't add was 1.1.51 for the kernel.  While
nothing is locking up, there is a lag while telnetting with an FTP
session going on that is annoying.  I've received a patch that I
hope to be able to roll in this weekend and do some serious testing.
Other things that run are Sendmail+IDA as a daemon, xntpd, and
CERN's web server.  The ftp session definitely takes over the system.

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

From: [email-masked] (Michael Will)
Subject: Re: Flame on the attitude of Linux towards GCC development
Date: 8 Oct 94 19:11:08 GMT

In <ianm.781546298@miles> [email-masked] (Ian McCloghrie) writes:

>(just posted to c.o.l.m)
>[email-masked] (Xiaojun Zhu) writes:
>>But how could people fix those bugs? At least the gnu people? I think
>>mainly through people using and testing them. That's also how the

>Look, if you want to help support GNU's debugging effort by building
>your kernel with a known-buggy compiler and risking your data, go
>right ahead.
I did :-) 

It is no real problem, you can keep both compilers and decide which one
to use with -V2.5.8 or -V2.6.0

I really like 2.6.0 for my c++ programs, it gives /much/ better error-
messages, but the performance seems to be less good than 2.5.8, 
2.6.0 takes more memory at compiletime, and the executable seems to be
slower when it does a lot of numbercrunching...

Sometimes the compiler fails and I have to use 2.5.8, but most of the
time it works well.

I am not experienced enough to pinpoint the problems I had well enough to 
file a bugreport for the gcc-developers, though. But of course I will 
test the gcc 2.6.0 and any newer version :-)

Cheers, Michael Will
PS: Running kernel 1.1.52 compiled with gcc 2.6.0 and still no problems :-)

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

From: [email-masked] (Sebastian W. Bunka)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: Does all SCO software run on Linux
Date: 7 Oct 1994 08:10:21 GMT
Reply-To: [email-masked]

C.W. Southern ([email-masked]) wrote:
: With the proper drivers install into the kernel, does most of SCO's
: software run on a Linux box.  I hear all the time of Wordperfect
: running what about other software for SCO.
Truely *NOT* all (see the iBCS2 documentation).
WP works, and also xess3 (a SCO spreadsheet prog -> amazing fast!
get the demo from ftp.uu.net /vendors/auis...); stupid, but
working: Mosaic and xarchie for SCO...

Sebastian

--

email:                   [ [email-masked] ]
voice:                   FAX:
+43-1-71155260           +43-1-7149110
Location: earth, europe, austria, vienna  Inst. of Bacteriology  Vet.Univ.

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

From: [email-masked] (Zeyd M. Ben-Halim)
Subject: Re: unctrl.h: No such file or directory
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 1994 05:46:20 GMT

In article <matth.781438270@extro>,
Matthew Hannigan <[email-masked]> wrote:
>[email-masked] (Zeyd M. Ben-Halim) writes:
>> [ .. ]
>>If you are using ncurses then you SHOULD be using the <termcap.h>
>>that comes with it. This is kinda the point!
>
>Ok, but why don't you use the standard termcap.h?
>Is ncurses' termcap.h is just meant for ncurses?

Yes. It emulates termcap via terminfo. You have to link with ncurses
to use it.

>If so, perhaps you could use a different name (ntermcap.h?)

I guess so. The makefile offers an option to link curses.h to ncurses.h.

>>>I just have a feeling that it is safer to #include <pkg/somefile.h>
>>>in general rather than -I/usr/include/<pkg> , #include <somefile.h>
>
>>So how do you propose handing your problem? <ncurses.h> includes
>><unctrl.h>. Without the -I you won't find it. Besides ncurses 
>>could be installed elsewhere (eg. /usr/local/include).
>
>I would hope that it would be installed in
>/usr/local/include/ncurses, myself.  Gcc, and most other
>compilers search there without -I flags. (I think!)

That won't work. Without the -I flag gcc will not find <unctrl.h>

Zeyd

-- 
---
Zeyd M. Ben-Halim       [email-masked]
NCURSES is available from ftp.netcom.com:pub/zmbenhal/ncurses
Current version is 1.8.5

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

From: [email-masked] (Roderick Hoekstra)
Crossposted-To: alt.fan.linus-torvalds
Subject: Re: Newbies? (was Re: Hmmm)
Date: 9 Oct 1994 08:13:00 GMT

: : : Don't feel like a newbie!  I joined at 0.99pl12 (i think)
: : : (whatever one was released in May 1993) when I got my 486dx50.

: : Well, I didn't get into it until 0.99pl15...again, when I got a
: : usable computer (DX2/50 for me).  Sure love it though.  I can hardly

: none of you should feel bad.  I finally started at 1.0.5!

Nyaa,  I got you all beat.  I started with Slackware 1.2.0,
 Kernal,  what,  I don't remember right now.  (It was a summer
 project,  and CS took my computer away at the end of summer -boo
 hoo-)  I think,  though  that it's 1.0.8?  Yeah,  I'm pretty sure
 it is.

\---------------------------\
 \  Roderick Hoekstra        \----------------------------------/
  \  Box 299   Dordt College  \     Linux System Administrator /
   \  Sioux Center, IA  51250  \  RAGBRAI XXVI:      ,__o     /
    \  [email-masked]    \   Across Iowa    _-\_<,    /
     \---------------------------\ in 7 days.     (*)/'(*)  /
                   /---------------------------------------/

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

From: [email-masked] (Keith Kee)
Subject: Is linux a multithreaded operating system?
Date: 6 Oct 1994 23:36:41 -0400

Is linux a multithreaded operating system?

Thanks,
keith

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

From: [email-masked] (Steven M. Doyle)
Subject: Re: Is linux a multithreaded operating system?
Date: 8 Oct 1994 23:13:11 -0700

In <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (Al Longyear) writes:

>[email-masked] (Keith Kee) writes:

>>Is linux a multithreaded operating system?

>No. It is multi-user.

I am somewhat confused on this issue.  What exactly is multi-threaded?  And
are multi-threaded and multi-user mutually exclusive?

Ever confused.... =)
-- 
| Steven Doyle, AKA World Creator   | #include <std_disclaimer>              |
| Sysop, NETDimension (818)592-6279 | For information on Artificial Worlds   |
| [email-masked]               | send email to [email-masked] for  |
| [email-masked]        | an information package.                |

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

From: [email-masked] (Tim Youngblood) 
Subject: Printing and Compiling the kenerl
Date: 9 Oct 94 01:43:00 GMT
Reply-To: [email-masked] (Tim Youngblood) 

Hi to all,

I am really a new user to the Linux system. Comming from the MS
windows end, and trying out the real operating end of the spectrum. I
love this multitasking stuff, but I have a slight problem. I can't seem
to get the printer to work just right. I am using the Fall version of
Yggdrasil, and love it. It loaded right up with not problems at all. The
boot section shows that I have my printer on lp1, using the spooler, and
when I try to print something, the print light comes on but nothing
happens. So I issure the command again, and when it does print it is all
of just three lines that look like this:

#
#Entries have this format:
#
#Machine-Name Time Type Class Phone Login
#

and so on. Can anyone tell me what I need to do to correct this problem?
I sure would appreciate it. Also I have seen on here about this
compiling the kernel. What is this. Like I said I am new to this stuff.
I can't even get my clock set right. HELP HELP HELP.. And Dos where is
the Dos stuff that I am suppose to be able to get to. I can't even get
around this stuff let alone get to the Dos side of. I really like the
OS, but I think I need some learning.

Tim Youngblood

----
/------------------------------------------------------------------------\
I          Time Out! BBS  in Newport News, VA  (804) 596-2131            I
I               email to: [email-masked] for information               I
\------------------------------------------------------------------------/

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

From: [email-masked] (Carlos Dominguez)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: what does a hosts.allow look like?
Date: 6 Oct 1994 23:07:45 -0400

Rob Newberry ([email-masked]) wrote:

: I'm constantly getting "malformed entry" errors with my hosts.allow file.  Can 
: someone post one here, or mail me a copy of theirs or a faked one to let me 
: know what it needs to look like?

Try using "man 5 hosts_access" to get the proper structure.

Hope this helps..

-- 
  __  __   __ | .__.  __. ::::  Carlos Dominguez - proprietor - sysadmin  
 |    __| |   | |  | |__  ::::  [email-masked]
 |__ |__| |   | |__| .__| ::::  Basselope *nix systems
  ---------------------------   Internet services consulting is our forte

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

From: [email-masked] (Viktor T. Toth)
Subject: Re: Microsoft busmouse on the ATI ULTRA , cannot be opened?
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 1994 14:21:04

In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (Salem, Lazaro) writes:

>Hi, I tried tried tried and keep trying.
>
>I cannot install the mouse under Linux (Slackware 2.0.1 distribution)

[...]

>It is connected trough the graphic card ATI ULTRA (w/mach8 processor for 
>the accelerated mode).

Try recompiling your kernel for Logitech mice. Worked for me with my ATI GUP.

Viktor

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

From: [email-masked] (Harf)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.386bsd.misc
Subject: Re: Nailed down to 386bsd or linux, now which one?
Date: 4 Oct 1994 02:23:11 GMT

[email-masked] (Po-Han Lin) writes:

>Ok, I didn't know QNX costs major money.  So I am considering
>either 386bsd or linux.  One person said I should get linux because
>386bsd is monolithic (controlled I guess), while linux is non-monolithic.
>Now the question is, which os better?  Better as in...

>1) least bugs, and stable IMPORTANT!

I woukd say that *BSD and Linux were both quite stable at this point.  I have
had few problems with either.

>2) more software available that runs on it

        Most of the same software runs on each.

>3) faster

        No clue.

>4) more compliance to POSIX (I think standards are good, or am I wrong)

        Linux is more compliant to POSIX.

>5) more people using it.

        Judging from the respective number of posts in each newsgroup, I would
say that many more people used Linux.

>6) more support for third-party hardware (VLB, EISA, modems, etc) IMPORTANT!

        Once again, no clue.

>7) platform for programming.

        Either should be fine.

>I hope someone can seriously asnwer these questions.  Note that Im not
>trying to start a flame.  I appropriately crossposted only to the
>relevant newsgroups that discuss these two operating systems.  I
>don't want to waste time downloading 50 or so megabytes and find out
>that the other OS is better.  Has anyone actually used both systems?

        I have.

        I prefer Linux, but I use FreeBSD 1.1.5.1 because it more closely
resembles Ultrix, which I have to run on a DECstation which I assist in
administrating.

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

Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.networking
From: [email-masked] (James Greer)
Subject: What PCMCIA ethernet card to buy?
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 1994 18:30:33 GMT

I'm looking for PCMCIA ethernet card for my notebook running Linux. I
have the list of Linux-happy cards (got it from the Stanford ftp site
about a month ago.) I'm looking for recommendations on these or
compatiable cards, as well as leads on good prices. Thanks!

-- 
"Because it was there...                         [email-masked]
 I don't think I even had to be on stuff.        Computer Science, Class of '95
 I just like to smear things. Smearing is nice. 
 Smearing is good." - Iggy Pop on why he put peanut butter on his chest onstage

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

** 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.misc) 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-Misc Digest
******************************