Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #610
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:     Fri, 28 Jan 94 17:13:35 EST

Linux-Misc Digest #610, Volume #1                Fri, 28 Jan 94 17:13:35 EST

Contents:
  Re: Anybody using a UPS? (Mike McLagan)
  Re: WY-50 emulation!?!? (Joseph W. Vigneau)
  Re: Locking out ctrl-alt-del ? (Peter Mutsaers)
  getting and setting up an NFS server (Friedrich Fahnert)
  Re: Slackware needs a shadow package! (Jerry Eyers)
  SoundBlaster under DOSEMU??? (Dan Newcombe)
  Re: MSDOS Better than Linux (Kumar K.E.V.)
  Re: Linux Distributions and the Shadow Password Suite (John F. Haugh II)
  Re: new shadow-3.3.1 patches (John F. Haugh II)
  Re: What exactly qualifies to needing permission for Shadow? (John F. Haugh II)
  Re: Non-blocking I/O (Lawrence Foard)
  MS-DOS floppies accessible, thanks!!! (A.A.Buykx)
  Optical Scanners (Allan Adler)
  Problems with my Filesystem (Oliver Stoklossa)
  Re: Linux vs. microkernel based Unix: questions? (Donald J. Becker)

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

From: mmclagan@work.invlogic.com (Mike McLagan)
Subject: Re: Anybody using a UPS?
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 94 21:06:55 GMT

In article <CK8xEr.7In@cuug.ab.ca> barkers@cuug.ab.ca writes:
>
>I was just wondering how many people out there are using a UPS for their Linux
>system. I have one myself, but after upgrading my system numerous times, it is
>no longer sufficient. So far, I haven't really noticed a need for it, and I'm
>trying to decide whether to buy a bigger one, or just not bother with one at
>all. For the most part, I've noticed that Linux recovers pretty well from
>crashes, and we don't get very many power failures at all (about once every
>six months).
>
>What's the popular opinion? How many people have or feel a need for a UPS?
>

   I need to buy one!  I'm using Linux as my gateway software to internet, 
and can't afford to have it go down at all.  Haven't gotten a system power
requirement figured yet, so don't know how big of one I need.  

   While we're on the topic, are any of the UPS's smart communications 
supported by Linux?  Or is it a write it yourself proposition?

   Mike was here...

--
// email   -> "Mike McLagan" <mmclagan@invlogic.com>
// UUCP    ->  ...uunet!invlogic!mmclagan
// snail   -> Innovative Logic Corp, P.O. Box 3247 Laurel, MD, USA 20709-3247
// ma bell -> (301)206-7692
// ILC doesn't like my opinions, so I'm giving them to you without consent!

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

From: joev@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Joseph W. Vigneau)
Crossposted-To: wpi.system.linux
Subject: Re: WY-50 emulation!?!?
Date: 28 Jan 1994 16:22:17 GMT

In article <2ia1nd$nfr@bigboote.wpi.edu>,
Kerry I. Kurian <pedro@wpi.WPI.EDU> wrote:
>
>Circa 1983:  Is there a WY-50 terminal emulation available for Linux?
>
>-Cat

You may be able to find a termcap entry for it... If it's not already there,
check out the termcap on one of the (wpi) workstations, and copy it into
your local termcap...


-- 
Joseph W. Vigneau <joev@wpi.edu> -- WPI Computer Science                Linux!
Have you noticed that all you need to grow healthy, vigorous grass is a
crack in your sidewalk?

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

From: muts@compi.hobby.nl (Peter Mutsaers)
Subject: Re: Locking out ctrl-alt-del ?
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 1994 21:46:52 GMT

>> On Fri, 21 Jan 1994 21:43:58 GMT, emerth@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca (Eric
>> Merth) said:

  EM>   Initially I felt that ctrl-alt-del sort of violated the
  EM> idea that  root should be the only person to reboot the machine.
  EM> This was after using Linux for about four days (read: getting it 
  EM> installed, working and finding all the boot & login scripts - I
  EM> was feeling like God).

  EM>   Some experience now makes me think that ctrl-alt-del 
  EM> working is OK, since I've had to resort to it a few time while 
  EM> getting  a piece of software that likes to lock the console to
  EM> work.

Besides, when a user can reach alt-ctrl-del, he can also reach the
power cord. At least alt-ctrl-del under Linux does a proper shutdown
(unmount of the filesystems) and suddenly shutting off power not, so
disabling it would be asking for trouble.
-- 
Peter Mutsaers, Bunnik (Ut), the Netherlands.
home: muts@compi.hobby.nl
work: muts@fss.fokker.nl
Disclaimer: This reflects the official opinions of my employer.

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

From: fwfachje@w214zrz.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE (Friedrich Fahnert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.os2.networking
Subject: getting and setting up an NFS server
Date: 28 Jan 1994 16:20:23 GMT


A friend of mine has an old Sun3.  The workstation has no hard disk
and no floppy.  He doesn't want to throw it out because it's got a
very nice big monitor.  Since he doesn't know much about computers I'm
going to set it up for him.  Would it be possible to let the Sun3 from
a PC (over a LAN) ?  

Since we want the PC to be able to be used for other purposes at the
same time using DOS as an OS is out of the question.  Are there any
public domain NFS servers for OS/2 or Linux?  Were can I get them?

Thanks in advance,

Friedrich



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

From: jeyers@eosc.osshe.edu (Jerry Eyers)
Subject: Re: Slackware needs a shadow package!
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 1994 16:41:56 GMT

I have used the shadow package on our servers here, and from past
experience, I think that the package is more trouble than it is worth.
Having programmed in the commercial market, I understand the desire to
charge for the work, updates, and to get your fair share from distribution
charges.  This is not the idea behind Linux, however, and you will note
that in the newest releases of Linux (Debian, etc) your package is not
included.

I, for one, will not redistribute your package in any way, but will not
stop anyone from getting it and installing it themselves.  I do not agree
with your source being on the internet, and I think that the idea of
charging for the code for distribution in packages is rediculous when
someone can download it for free.  If you want to lay a charge onto your
code, then remove it from the internet.  In my opinion, the ideas are in
conflict.

         __                        __
       /   ) __  __  __          /         __  __  _
      (   / /_/ / / / / /   /   /-- /   /_/_/ / / / \
       \ / /\__/ |_/ |_/|__/   (___/|__/  \__/ |_/_ _)_____
 -------/-----------------/-----------/-----------------------------
       /   Jerry Eyers   /           /          Programmer Analyst
      / Eastern  Oregon / State     /        jeyers@eosc.osshe.edu 

 -- "All I want from life is a little more than I will ever get!" --



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

From: NEWCOMBE@AA.csc.Peachnet.EDU (Dan Newcombe)
Subject: SoundBlaster under DOSEMU???
Date: 28 Jan 1994 10:10:10 -0600

X-Mn-Key: DOS

Last night I was going nuts trying to get the soundblaster to work.
(Actually, I was amazed at what all would work under DOSEMU that I hadn't
    tried before.)
    
Anyway.  I set it up so that the range of port addresses from 0x220 - 0x230    
would be availible.  On the test program with the soundblaster (TEST-SBP),
I was then able to get past the screen that checks the port, but the program
was unable to find the card on any of the IRQ's.  I assume this is some of the
protection that DOSEMU provides Linux from DOS via the vm86.  Hmmm, a DOS 
condom!!! :)

Any clues anyone?
        -Dan


--
Daniel A. Newcombe                                  Clayton State College
Computing Services                                  Morrow, GA 30260
E-Mail Address: newcombe@aa.csc.peachnet.edu        (404)-961-3421
-=-=-=- I can handle MIME mail, so don't be afraid to send me some -=-=-=-
- A friend in need is a friend that bleeds.  (Marillion, Assassining)


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

Subject: Re: MSDOS Better than Linux
From: kkev@professional.kkev.dome (Kumar K.E.V.)
Date: 28 Jan 1994 16:20:35 GMT

Julian D Glover (univ0020@black.ox.ac.uk) wrote:
: In terms of real world work you lusers should realise that MS-DOS and
: MS-Windows is far better than some half assed Unix toy, get a life and
: pay for your software like everyone else you spongers.

Actually, I think be brings up a valid point.  As another netter pointed
out, a lot of people actually don't like Linux.

Here at UMKC, we are getting a "new" 486DX2/66 lab, and we are contemplating
running UN*X (Linux, maybe)( on all of them.  The problem is that this 
lab is "general
purpose" and can be used by any UMKC student, UN*X would probably not be
a good choice.  WABI is one option.  But, Windows is a lot better, for that
purpose. 

Of course, the worst part about Ms-Dos is the fact that you have to pay
$$$ for junk.  But, that's beside the point.
Linux can be very successful, and it's success depends a lot on the  
achievements of DOSEMU (hopefully, one day, it can run ALL DOS apps :) and
the much anticipated WINE.

Until these two packages are available, "normal" users are probably going
to turn their backs to Linux.

Don't flame me.  Just my two cents worth.  I'm a linux-lover. I hate MS-DOS.
But I just wanted to point out the validity in that guy's statement.
*MY OPINION* Respond to it, please.  Don't you think that's correct.

The main usage of MS-Dos at places, are games (which Linux has), and more
importantly "hot" software packages (mucho dollars) like Excel, WP, etc.
When DOSEMU is full-fledged, this problem will be solved.  And Linux can
move onto compete in that market.

Kumar K.E.V.
University of Missouri - Kansas City (UMKC),
Computer Science Telecommunications Program (CSTP)
5114 Baltimore, #3S
Kansas City, MO 64112
E-Mail: kkev@cstp.umkc.edu, kkev@umkc.edu, kkev@parsifal.umkc.edu
*Don't reply by mail.  I'm on SLIP, and have not configured smail to
 received yet.  Flame me by posting* :)



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

From: jfh@rpp386 (John F. Haugh II)
Subject: Re: Linux Distributions and the Shadow Password Suite
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 14:36:29 GMT

In article <2i62u4$rlr@celsius.ifm.liu.se> peter@ifm.liu.se (Peter Eriksson) writes:
>The problem is that your copyright strictly forbids commercial use,
>whereas the BSD one doesn't.

Both the BSD and GPL include restrictions.  In the case of the GPL, I cannot
include GPL'd code in a product unless I make the entire product's source
code available.  In the BSD case, you may not make certain claims and you
must give certain forms of credit.  And as witnessed by the BSD v. Novell
lawsuit, the BSD authors may have claims to the code that are as yet not
fully understood.

All that said, no one has ever been denied the right to distribute Shadow
under any terms, nor has anyone ever paid a single cent for that right.
The copyright notice which you cite was put in the files in '88 when it
wasn't at all clear that the code would be well-received by people (because
security software isn't something to get excited about).  In '90 and other
later years, the copyright notices were gradually changed to permit a wide
range of forms of distribution.  Also, the copyright notice only requires
that permission be asked for, and that permission is granted in the README
file for virtually all forms of distribution that have been discussed in
this thread.  The next release of Shadow, 3.3.2, will be much clearer
about what is and isn't permitted.

I will repeat one more time -- this entire rather unfortunate misunderstanding
was started because Rick Sladkey took incomplete information from me and
spread it.  He was told in a later dated 12/31/93 that I did not have
complete information about how Linux is distributed and by whom, and that
until I did I wasn't sure what I was going to do.  Had Rick not divulged
that information, I would have reached a reasonable conclusion and none
of this would have happened in public.  Instead, I have been forced to
refute statements about Shadow that are grossly inaccurate.
-- 
John F. Haugh II  [ NRA-ILA ] [ Kill Barney ] !'s: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151 [GOP][DoF #17][PADI][ENTJ]   @'s: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
The P.C. Movement killed the 1st Amendment, the Brady Bill the 2nd, the WOsD
got the 4th and 5th, political activism the 9th and 10th.  Not much left, eh?

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

From: jfh@rpp386 (John F. Haugh II)
Subject: Re: new shadow-3.3.1 patches
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 14:45:58 GMT

In article <1994Jan27.025102.6618@kf8nh.wariat.org> bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery) writes:
>In article <1994Jan26.150155.7412@rpp386>, jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) says:
>+---------------
>| As for a GPL'd version of Shadow, have at it.  Shadow has been
>| around for 6 years and only recently has anyone seen a need for a
>| GPL'd version of the code.  I suspect that once everyone gets over
>+------------->8
>
>Only recently have you gotten uptight about it, from what I've seen...

Correct.  I got uptight when Rick Sladkey started claiming that Shadow
was commercial and when people started repeating that same misstatement.
Shadow is not commercial, and the copyright was written to prevent
Shadow from being commercialized, just as the GPL prevents companies
from including GPL'd code in certain types of commercial products.

As you will recall, you posted (as moderator) the first version of
Shadow to the net.  There have been many versions of Shadow posted to
USENET and no money has ever been asked for the code.  If you go back
into your USENET memory, you should recall that the GPL was a fairly
new concept at the time Shadow was written.

As I continue to point out, with complete ignorance of these facts by
everyone involved, Shadow has been around for 6 years.  No one has ever
been prevented from re-distributing Shadow and no one has ever been
charged a single cent.

>| GPL'd version of shadow will die down.  None of the BSD code in
>| Linux is GPL'd and I don't see people calling for the complete
>| re-write of all the code from BSD that is included.
>+------------->8
>
>Stick around another few months... the topic *does* come up periodically.

Oh, certainly.  This is USENET after all.
-- 
John F. Haugh II  [ NRA-ILA ] [ Kill Barney ] !'s: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151 [GOP][DoF #17][PADI][ENTJ]   @'s: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
The P.C. Movement killed the 1st Amendment, the Brady Bill the 2nd, the WOsD
got the 4th and 5th, political activism the 9th and 10th.  Not much left, eh?

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

From: jfh@rpp386 (John F. Haugh II)
Subject: Re: What exactly qualifies to needing permission for Shadow?
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 14:50:15 GMT

In article <sandridg.infosvcs.4.759673717@mhs1.sth.ufl.edu> sandridg.infosvcs@mhs1.sth.ufl.edu (McArthur E. Sandridge III) writes:
>[...  Lots of posts with too much complaining going both ways about the 
>Shadow license ...]
>
>As a curiosity to this problem...  Where exactly is the line for needing 
>permission?  

The next release will be much clearer about these points.  But the
short answer is that no one has ever been denied permission (only
because no one has ever ASKED ;-) and no one has ever paid for that
privilege (see the previous remark).

To quote the README file --

        "This software is being provided as a freely redistributable
         login clone."
-- 
John F. Haugh II  [ NRA-ILA ] [ Kill Barney ] !'s: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151 [GOP][DoF #17][PADI][ENTJ]   @'s: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
The P.C. Movement killed the 1st Amendment, the Brady Bill the 2nd, the WOsD
got the 4th and 5th, political activism the 9th and 10th.  Not much left, eh?

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.help
From: entropy@world.std.com (Lawrence Foard)
Subject: Re: Non-blocking I/O
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 19:11:35 GMT

In article <1994Jan28.020542.22309@umr.edu> quandt@cs.umr.edu (Brian Quandt) writes:
>Does Linux have support for non-blocking i/o routines?
>
>Also, what is the largest amount of virtual memory that can be supported
>under Linux? 
>
>Here's what I'm trying to do:
>       Create a real-time buffer that is very large.  I'd like to 
>       do this as a piped process.
>
>       p1 | p2 | p3
>
>       where
>
>       p1 is a the process running in real time generating or sayu around
>       1.5MB/sec
>
>       p2 just reads data from p1 and trys to send it out to p3, if it
>       can't (non-blocking writes) it just allocates memory and
>       keeps it there until it can then write out to p3.  And since
>       Linux supports Vitural memory ... I can effectively create
>       a real time cache that is as large as my virtual space (disk drive).
>
>       p3 is just some process that does not run in real time.  Note that
>       this assumes that p1 dies before we run out of VM.

Yes. The select call can be used for this, it will tell you when its ok
to write. You can also just keep trying to write after doing:

fcntl(fd,F_SETFD,O_NONBLOCK) 

to a file descripter.

-- 
====== Call the skeptic hotline 1=900=555=5555 talk to your own personal . 
\    / skeptic 24 hours/day.     Just say no to victimless crimes.      . .
 \  / You are ~1,000,000,000,000,000 .1ms NAND gates have a nice day.  . . .
  \/ The true theory of everything will run on a finite turing machine. . . .

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

From: andreas@elmat01.et.tudelft.nl (A.A.Buykx)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: MS-DOS floppies accessible, thanks!!!
Date: 28 Jan 1994 12:40:23 GMT


Hi,

Thanks to all people that helped me accessing my MS-DOS floppies. The easiest 
way was to edit the mtools file in directory /etc to use /dev/fd0 instead of 
/dev/fd0H1440. Other possibilities were using e.g. F for /dev/fd0D720 in the 
mtools file, or mounting the floppy, but I didn't try them.

Thanks again for your help.

Andreas

-- 
--> Andreas A. Buykx                  Electrical Materials Laboratory <--
--> andreas@dutentb.et.tudelft.nl      Delft University of Technology <--
=========================================================================
=====================> That's all, folks!!! <============================

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

From: ara@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Allan Adler)
Subject: Optical Scanners
Date: 28 Jan 94 14:48:32



What optical scanners have been successfully used with Linux?
What drivers are available for them? What does one have to know about
a given optical scanner in order to write a driver for it under
linux?

Is there any good free software for character recognition for use
with optical scanners? 

I've posted to this newsgroup since I am interested in doing this with
linux. But I would also be interested in knowing of a newsgroup on which one
can post general questions about scanners.

Allan Adler
ara@altdorf.ai.mit.edu

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

From: stokloss@vogelweide.uni-passau.de (Oliver Stoklossa)
Subject: Problems with my Filesystem
Date: 28 Jan 1994 13:39:50 GMT

Hello out there ...

I got some (in my opinion) severe problem with my filesystem:

a) I have 2 connor HD (1 210 MB and 1 340 MB) and run Linux on the second as my
   /dev/hdb1. I now have 3 other partitions running (DOS ( :( ), OS/2 and the
   Linux Swap Partition) and each time I boot Linux I get the message, that the
   maximum partition count is passed, and that e2fsck is recommended.
   Q: How many partitions can I have on a HD without getting this error message.
b) Q: Why do I get the error: Bad magic number in super block when e2fsck'in the 
   swap partition or my DOS ?
c) Q: Is there yet any possibility to correct the super block (I have e2fsck0.3d,
      I believe)
d) The biggest problem of all (I hope I get it with my english knowledge):
   I boot Linux without problems (except the problems I mentioned above), log in
   as root and run e2fsck -f -a /dev/hdb1. Each time I do so, there are blocks
   found which are marked in use, but are unused, so I (or the -a flag) mark them
   not in use. When I reboot and run e2fsck again, I get exactly the same error
   again, with the exact number of blocks not in use, but marked so ...
   Q: What goes wrong, has anybody got the same problems ?

Please help, 'cause I don't want to re-format my HD and install those 40 disks 
again ... :)

My system is: 486/33, 16 MB RAM, 2 conner HDs, 1 3inch 1 5inch floppy, 
              Linux partition with 200 MB, swap 10 MB, Slackware 1.1.0 
              kernel pl14o.

Hope you read soon from you 

     Oliver
                                \\\///
                                 \\//     stokloss@kirk.fmi.uni-passau.de
                                ( .. )        
      -----------------------ooO-(__)--Ooo-------------------------------
      |  America:                                                       |
      |  You have Bill Clinton, Stevie Wonder, Bob Hope and Jonny Cash. |
      |  Germany:                                                       |
      |  We have Helmut Kohl, no wonder, no hope and no cash.           |
      |_________________________________________________________________|




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

From: becker@super.org (Donald J. Becker)
Subject: Re: Linux vs. microkernel based Unix: questions?
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 1994 22:19:42 GMT

In article <1994Jan23.000455.901@kf8nh.wariat.org>,
Brandon S. Allbery <bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org> wrote:
>In article <1994Jan22.182517.435@muug.mb.ca>, rgallen@muug.mb.ca (Rennie Allen) says:
>| file I/O category, as long as the cluster mods were applied.  No performance
>| figures for network I/O were posted.  Also I didn't post a figure for QNX

>Linux's network I/O speeds are a known problem point:  net-2D is not
>efficient.  I don't know about net-2E.

I was getting just over 1 MB/sec throughput using a DX33, a WD8013, 'ttcp',
and 0.99pl9.  (FvK's "Net-2" changes were put into Linux at 0.99pl10.)  The
performance has varied dramatically in kernel versions since then, but there
*are* Linux kernels that have fast networking.

-- 

Donald Becker                                          becker@super.org
IDA Supercomputing Research Center
17100 Science Drive, Bowie MD 20715                        301-805-7482

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


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