Re: fedora-list Digest, Vol 3, Issue 25
by ed
Piggybacking too (Sorry):
>
> Piggybacking (Sorry):
>
> Edward Croft said:
> > On Mon, 2004-05-03 at 11:00, Steve Searle wrote:
> >> Around 03:44pm on Monday, May 03, 2004 (UK time), duncan brown
> >> scrawled:
> >>
> >> > and i don't mean to insult you in anyway, but... i wonder who's the
> >> oldest computer literate linux user out there? i sort of have the
> >> mentality of the hippies back in the 60s/70s, don't trust anyone
> >> over 30 =] ... it's hard for me to believe that someone over 30 uses
> >> linux personally, once you're over 30 you have to start thinking
> >> more like a manager =]... then again, i'm almost over that line, but
> >> i don't feel like i'm that close =]
>
> I'm 36 myself, and I've been using Linux for about three years now. I
> didn't start using computers at all, really, until about ten years ago,
> when I discovered the Internet while working in a temp clerical job (now
> I'm a Solaris/Oracle wrangler -- how the mighty have fallen). I've met
> Linux users of all ages, but the oldest competent Linux user I've met to
> date was a fellow named Dick, whom I met at a Robert Burns memorial supper
> in Campbell, CA. He was about 65 years old, and was a cement contractor.
> Linux was something he picked up a few years ago. His preferred distro
> was Mandrake, and we talked for a couple of hours about Linux, open
> source, etc. He was a hobbyist, certainly not a professional, but he
> seemed to know more than many of the young guns I've met who are convinced
> that they're God's gift to computing. ;-)
>
I am 55 and started work on punch card tabulating machines (IBM 408's),
grew up on Autocoder, advanced to assembler, learned Cobol and RPG
because I was a consultant in the 70's and 80's, and nver regretted not
being a manager.
I've been responsible for IBM 360's, 370's 3090's, Vax 11/70's, PDP 8's
and 11's, Data-general 2/10's 4/10's, and a plethoras of other systems.
I currently support all our Sun Solaris machines and to some extent
Windows 2000 and NT. I also have about a dozen Fedora boxes (including
my laptop and 3 Fedora's at home).
My father always told me when I was young that there are engineers
(those with a degree) and engineers. It took me some time to grasp what
he was saying but in my lifetime I finally figured it out.
Paper can mean diddly - all it may mean is that you studied and passed
the examine --- period.
I know some certified professionals that this applies to... I'm sure you
do too..
The best complement I have received recently (in the last 3 weeks) was
from a technical associate that works with my wife. He was in town and
we took him out to dinner... He's one of the top technical people in her
company... Well the talk moved to computers and that is where I lost
him.
The next day he told my wife that I was a serious technical geek...not
bad for 55!!!!
Ed
20 years
Strange Idle User Listed in who, finger
by Clint Harshaw
I've noticed an additional user among those I usually see in GKrellm.
Typically, when I am in Gnome, I see one user (me), plus additional
users for each virtual terminal I have open. When I am in KDE, I
typically see two users (both me), plus additional users for each
terminal open.
Recently however I see an additional user showing up. One of them is
strangely "me" but idle for 123d. This is odd since my system has been
running only for ten days. Here is some related output:
[charshaw@mufasa charshaw]$ finger
Login Name Tty Idle Login Time Office Office
Phone
charshaw Clint Harshaw *:0 May 3 09:44
charshaw Clint Harshaw pts/1 May 3 11:18 (:0.0)
charshaw Clint Harshaw pts/5 123d Apr 28 08:22 (:0.0)
[charshaw@mufasa charshaw]$ who -u
charshaw :0 May 3 09:44 ? 13153
charshaw pts/1 May 3 11:18 . 15142 (:0.0)
charshaw pts/5 Apr 28 08:22 ? 18655 (:0.0)
Now when I try to kill the process associated with the April 28 date, I
get the following:
[charshaw@mufasa charshaw]$ kill 18655
bash: kill: (18655) - No such process
[charshaw@mufasa charshaw]$ kill -9 18655
bash: kill: (18655) - No such process
What's going on here? I've google'd for a solution, and learned to try
the things outlined above, but that doesn't seem to be the fix.
Is there a way to remedy this without a reboot? I asked on #fedora, and
the general response was this was nothing to worry about, but I can't
help but want to know what I can do, as well as what the cause is.
Thanks very much,
Clint
--
Clint Harshaw <clint(a)penguinsolutions.org>
20 years
Command-line mail program that can send mail FROM multiple accounts?
by Preston Crawford
My wife has a couple different domain names and consequently a couple
different maildrops. I'm thinking of setting up an SSH server, fetchmail
and a command line mail program so she can check/send email remotely
from these multiple accounts. Is there a program that can handle this?
Pine wants to do <username>@whatever-domain-you-put-in-the-config.com.
I'd like her to be able to choose the from address, kind of like you can
in Evolution, Outlook, and other gui email programs. Any ideas?
Preston
20 years
problems connecting to server with D-Link WiFi card
by Elton Woo
I am using kernel 2.4 and successfully installed, and complied the drivers from
http://www.linux-wlan.com/linux-wlan/
The card is a D-Link Model DWL-122 USB wireless card (Please see:)
http://www.dlink.com/products/?pid=175
"Naturally", I can connect to the server (my neighbour's box, running Windows XP professional, with little or no trouble ... when booted to my Windows XP partition. However, with linux, I can now "see" the card, and even the server, using this utility: KWiFiManager
http://kwifimanager.sourceforge.net/
In spite of this, I still do not seem to connect.(I test this by loading mozilla and trying to get to *any* web page. I HAVE scanned this newsgroup for previous discussions on "wireless" cards, but have not found anything that can help put the finger on this problem.
I wonder if anyone here has had any success with this card and linux?
The links from wlan.com show that that this card (supposedly) works with linux.
Any pointers, recommendations, or other links would be appreciated!
For the moment (at least) I must content myself with booting to Windows in order to get internet access. :-( ... even though 2/3 of my hard disk is dedicated to linux!!!
TIA,
Elton Woo ;-)
--
______________________________________________
Check out the latest SMS services @ http://www.linuxmail.org
This allows you to send and receive SMS through your mailbox.
Powered by Outblaze
20 years
yum update <doesn't>
by Jeff Vian
I am having a problem with a new install of FC1.
This is a new machine, and I installed FC1 then tried to do a yum update.
I am using a yum.conf file that was provided on this list last month, so
it is using mirrors. The yum.conf file worked a short time ago to do an
update on another box I have.
With this one, it goes through the process of checking sources,
downloads some headers, then gives a few messages about the best
packages, but gets to XFree86, XFree86-tsm, and XFree86-xfs. and says
the dependency loop is exceeded and all 3 need the XFree86.libs package
which is not provided.
The version listed on all XFree86 packarges is 4.3.0-55. I tried this
several times over the past week with the same result each time.
Does anybody have any suggestions for a better source that will satisfy
the needed dependencies?
TIA
20 years
Re: Old farts and new Linux
by rpowell6＠comcast.net
posting from a web mail interface, so forgive an improperly formatted response
My story isn't nearly so distiguished as others, but here you are:
I'm near on to 33 years old and I've been using Linux for a few years. My first install was RH7.1 if that helps. I never really thought about marking the time since I've started using Linux, I suppose. I started out by learning Windows-based networking (NT/2000/XP/2003) and currently work as a Network Engineer/Administrator in a heavily Windows-based network. I am by no means a Linux expert, but I love working with Linux and I'm always ready to learn more about it. I can do some pretty neat things with Linux, but I still astonish myself by not knowing some of the simple things - so I suppose I have a ways to go yet. Either way, it'll be a heck of a ride getting there :)
Cheers,
Ron
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list(a)redhat.com
> To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
20 years
RE: Lib Version
by Chalonec Roger
Thanks...
-----Original Message-----
From: fedora-list-bounces(a)redhat.com
[mailto:fedora-list-bounces@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Tommy Reynolds
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 12:53 PM
To: For users of Fedora Core releases
Subject: Re: Lib Version
Uttered Alexander Dalloz <alexander.dalloz(a)uni-bielefeld.de>, spake
thus:
> Am Fr, den 30.04.2004 schrieb Tim Clarke um 17:20:
> > Alex, pardon my ignorance but how does glibc-*2.3.2 work out to be
> > libc6?!?
> So libc.so.6 means libc6 means glibc version 6 and is packaged in the
> glibc-2.3.2-101.4 RPM. Someone else may give you a more precise and
> better informed answer than me.
The intent of the whole setup is to allow multiple versions of shared
libraries because an application gets built expecting a particular
version of the library, perhaps because of ABI issues.
To that end, each library includes its name builtin to the shared
library itself. So when a program is linked against a library (-lfoo),
the linker looks into the shared library and adds its "internal" name
into the executables list of shared libraries. If you look, you will
usually see a series of symbolic links pointing to the actual shared
library itself:
glibc.so --> glibc-6.so
glibc-6.1 --> glibc-6.1.2.so
It is the use of these intermediate symbolic links that makes this work.
The "glibc-6.1.2.so" library indentifies itself as "glibc-6.so", by
means of that "internal" name I mentioned. So when the program linker
binds "glibc.so", it actually finds the library file "glibc-6.1.2.so"
whose internal name is "glibc-6.so" and that's the library name placed
in the executables list of necessary shared libraries.
Now when the application gets executed, the system first runs a
shared-program loader that ensures that all prerequisite shared
libraries are in memory. The shared program loader (ld.so) looks in the
executables shared library table, finds "glibc-6.so" and then links the
executable to that file.
When a new version of the shared library becomes available, say
"glibc-6.1.3.so", all that is necessary is to install the new file and
change the symbolic links:
glibc.so --> glibc-6.so
glibc-6.so --> glibc-6.1.3.so
and when the executable program is loaded again, the ld.so looks for
shared library file "glibc-6.so" and automatically gets the newer
version of the library.
When an interface is changed in the shared library, the new release has
a different minor number (the "1" in "glibc-6.1.3.so") the new version
is installed and the directory listing looks a bit like this:
glibc.so --> glibc-6.so
glibc-6.so --> glibc-6.2.0.so
glibc-6.1.3.so
glibc-6.2.0.so
It's all a bit confusing but just remember there are _two_ linking times
when a shared library is used: 1) when "ld" binds the shared library to
the executable and; 2) when "ld.so" attaches the shared library to the
executable at run time.
Cheers!
20 years
Limited Menus for non-root users
by Brian Fahrlander
Tonight my neices were over; they've been over a lot since their
HOUSE BURNED DOWN...and their Linux machines (and pretty much everything
else) was lost in the fire.
So I created a 'guest' account on my little LTSP server up there,
and one of the neices was plugging away on TuxPaint or something, when
it hit me: the menus would be a lot less complicated (and massive) if
everything requiring root access were not displayed for non-root users.
I don't know where else to point out this suggestion, but there are
a lot of people here, many who're working on FC2T3, and might have
useful opinions on it.
The idea's simple; until the "get root access" menu item, always
displayed, is hit and it provides the little 'keys' icon on the system
tray, programs requiring root access simply don't show up. Entire menus,
once 'hidden' like this, would then be hidden from their parent menus.
I think this is do-able, but then, I've not seen the code. What do
you folks think?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Fahrländer Christian, Conservative, and Technomad
Evansville, IN http://www.fahrlander.net
ICQ 5119262
AIM: WheelDweller
------------------------------------------------------------------------
angegangen, Schlange-Hüften, sein es ganz rüber jetzt. Bügel innen fest,
weil es eine lange, süsse Fahrt ist.
20 years
