Pages

Search

Debian Sarge Install - Forums Linux

Debian Sarge Install - Forums Linux

Debian Sarge Install

Posted: 10 May 2006 11:04 AM PDT

I didn't realize you could enable root, but that's not really my main
focus right now. I suppose ubuntu solutions are good as well then.

thanks
-Dan

CUPS printing & LPD

Posted: 09 May 2006 10:10 AM PDT

In message <e3u34d$g82$itservices.ubc.ca>
Unruh <ubc.ca> wrote:
 

That would be System -> Administration -> Printing?

I can't find anything that lets me share the printer. Is it there, or
elsewhere?
 
<snip> 

A good half of the school computers are Win98 anyway. I agree about
the probable instability, which is why I've got a master clone disk -
20 minutes and they'll be back as day 1.

 

How do you kill anyone with a computer? Drop it from an upstairs
window I suppose. The school is single-storey.
 

I could not find any CUPS setup tools. What should I be installing?
How am I supposed to find out about this - the man pages are obscure
(which is being polite.)
 

It will be - I'll get called in to fix it when it breaks. At least I
know how to do that on Windows

 

The error message was printed on the printer, so I will attempt to
type it in verbatim:

The Postscript interpreter in your printer is 2014.108
This printour requires at least version 2015 or greater
To make a Unix/Linux Gecko Browser (eg Netscape or Mozilla) produce
output that will work on any level 2 interpreter change the "Print
Command" to use ghostscript to convert the output down to basic level
2: eg change the print command from
lpr [OPTIONS]
to (all on one line)
gs -q -sDEVICE=pswrite -sOutputFile=- -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH
-dMozConvertedToLevel2=true -l lpr [OPTIONS]

it then goes on with similar suggestions for printing to/from a file.

Unfortunately there isn't much of a clue about whete to find the
command which needs changing - is it inside Firefox, or part of CUPS -
or somewhere else? 

No, this is my home printer.
 

But if Linux is ever going to move out of a geek niche into the
mainstream, then I would suggest that is an essential change - the
icons are important.


--
Alan Adams, from Northamptonshire
freeserve.co.uk
http://www.nckc.org.uk/

XP and Fedora Core 3 through router - share resources?

Posted: 08 May 2006 02:53 PM PDT

monkeypie wrote:
 


Looks like we have almost exactly the same setup, give or take a version of
Fedora.

Wanna work together to figure it out?

Out of "buffer space" ...?

Posted: 08 May 2006 07:15 AM PDT

In comp.os.linux.setup magnate <demon.co.uk>: 
[stuff]
 
 
 

"heiming.de":
"
Since you might be new to usenet, this is *NOT' a groups.google
forum, even if it looks like this to you, please try:

"Google Groups users please read - Howto reply properly"
http://groups.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=14213"

Where did the above sentence you started to flame about missed
courtesy?

[..]
 
 

Man, you just switched to use Mozilla from doze with this
response, now you are my hero!
 
 

Indeed, you are taking courtesy really serious. Looks like we can
stop this thread right here, you aren't interested in solving
your problem at all but just in jumping on me as this thread
shows. Seems you are describing yourself perfectly. ;-)

--
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo qr | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 364: Sand fleas eating the Internet cables

System-users and-groups?

Posted: 08 May 2006 01:15 AM PDT

On 8 May 2006, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.linux, in article
<googlegroups.com>, Koppe wrote:
 

No hard-fast rule
 

That very much depends on how the binaries are used/compiled. It is
certain that (for example) /bin/login and /bin/passwd need to be SUID
root because of what they are doing, but what about /bin/ping or
/usr/sbin/sendmail?
 

With most Linux, root need only "belong" to group "root" because such
group membership is not relevant. 'mail', 'bin', 'adm' tend to belong
to their own group only. I'm assuming 'mailmaster' owns/runs the MTA,
and that may also be in it's own group.
 

I haven't seen such a recommendation in a long time. Typically, unless you
have some very specific reason to change things, you should keep the ownership
as the distribution installed it. You are quite welcome to make your own
analysis of each binary on your system, and decide what permissions and/or
ownership is appropriate, but have you looked at the size of that task?
 

Were that the case, why the convention to have "system" UIDs below 50 or
100 or similar, and user UIDs above that?
 

Depends on how the binary is written/compiled. Group ownership for a
specific reason isn't that uncommon. And it's not specific to the kernel.
Generally, the user ID tests are written into the binary.
 

Not specific to the bin user, but this may depend on file/device ownership.
 

The 'halt' (and perhaps 'shutdown') user was a mechanism to allow certain
users (who were given the password) the ability to shutdown the system. Look
at the "login shell" in /etc/passwd for those users, and see that logging in
as that user runs that command. Same is true for user 'sync'. In most
installations I've seen, these accounts are disabled (* in password field)
but a root user could log in as that user in order to run that command - and
may or may not save some keystrokes. I've also seen those accounts reset to
have '/bin/true' as the login shell.
 

Distribution dependent.
 

That is in general what is done.
 

Why? What need do you see?
 

Distribution dependent. If your man command uses /var/catman/ the man
binary may be 'SGID man' to be able to write the formatted man pages to
that directory, but that's about it.
 

No.
 
bin-and sbin-directories and most of the files (executables) in them 

OK
 

Oh... newbie. Ever wonder why '.' is not commonly in a user's PATH, and
why it should NEVER be in root's? Let's just say that's the result of
decades of experience at universities. One really funny joke is to put
a file in a "common" directory named 'ls-l' or 'mroe' or similar that
ran the 'rm -Rf' command on the user's home directory. Great fun - lots of
laughter - teaches typing skills.
 

Daemon? Sure - but a lot of that depends on how the binary is written, and
how it is compiled in addition to what the daemon is trying to do.
 

[compton ~]$ grep auth /etc/syslog.conf
# Don't log private authentication messages!
*.info;mail.none;authpriv.none /var/log/messages
# The authpriv file has restricted access.
authpriv.* /var/log/secure
[compton ~]$

There might be one reason.
 

That's what 'su' and 'sudo' (and similar) are for. Assume John Doe is in
user 'root' and decides to install an "improved" /bin/login. Or to first
chmod certain files in /boot/ and them remove them. Tracks? What tracks?
 

'info su' the wheel requirement is a BSDism.

Old guy

Maintaining the thread?

Posted: 07 May 2006 09:24 AM PDT

***** charles wrote: 
.... various junk ... 

Most of us have Dan C plonked anyway, for ridiculous vituperation,
so we never even notice him. Just ignore him.

--
"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
"show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
"Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>
Also see <http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/>

odd intermittent in DSL (damnsmalllinux)

Posted: 06 May 2006 09:21 PM PDT

iforone wrote: 
(snip) 

True... If i had the hd space to run it side-by-side with
old '98 (which i'm not ready to give up on since I have
20 years worth of apps, -some of them my own- on it), I'd put
in a proper distro, rather than just a minimal one.

So far, I've tried Zipslack and DSL.
Found Zipslack far more flexible, but couldn't get
a good webbrowser going on it.(segmentation faults)

Whenever I get a newer computer, (which I guess
I'll eventually have to, when this 1997 box kicks
the bucket), I'll probably try putting in a
partition for linux.
(I will need a *real* modem for that, right?)

--
Buzzard

grub en XP: Filesystem type unknown

Posted: 06 May 2006 10:38 AM PDT


jolato wrote: 

no prob :-)
 

of what ??
 

Am I to understand you installed XP onto /dev/hda?
hda what? what's the partition layout of your HDD?
As asked...how did you create the partition(s)
 

and this *typical* syntax looks like ??
 

When you installed XP, you chose to use NTFS...ok, we got that - and XP
won't boot now.

Post the contents of;
~$ sudo fdisk -l
and
~$ cat /etc/fstab

Tell us your HDD setup

Post (only the relevant info) contents of /boot/grub/menu.lst
 

We're not sure yet either ;-o
Please note; I'm not familiar with SuSE (I use Debian and
win98)...There are others here who can help you if you give precise and
concise information.

stuck in grub

Posted: 01 May 2006 07:20 AM PDT

thanks, that worked!

How to find active grub.conf

Posted: 28 Apr 2006 05:19 AM PDT


iforone 写é"：
 
Thanks!
 
Of course, there does be menu.1st. But I don't know /boot/grub/menu.1st
is active menu.1st since each partition has its own menu.1st.