May 1998 - openSUSE Users - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[S.u.S.E. Linux] Removing a file
by rkeeley＠dibbs.net 04 May '98

04 May '98

This is not a SuSE problem, but rather a general Linux problem, that I hope you all can answer. In my "/" directory, not "/root", I somehow have gotten two files called "-f" and also "-v". Don't ask me how I got them in there, they just appeared one day, but when I went to rm them, all I get is an error msg. "-f" has a size of 30 bytes and "-v" is a 0 size file. In M$Soft I know how to remove them, but not in Linux. HELP! -- 73's Roy KC4IMC rkeeley(a)dibbs.net kc4imc(a)maf.wa4wbi.ampr.org Snail Mail = 10675 Salt Aire Rd, E., Theodore, AL 36582, USA APS #158954 - C&LS #162 -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e

3 5

[S.u.S.E. Linux] yast installing to a different directory
by sina＠css-b-359.umd.edu 04 May '98

04 May '98

Hi all, Yast is determind to install Apllixware that came with my SuSE 5.2 in the root directory. I don't have enough room for it there. How can I make it install to a different partition? Thanks, Ramin Sina -------------------------------------------------------- Ramin Sina Institute for Physical Science and Technology University of Maryland College Park Maryland 20742 email: sina(a)glue.umd.edu Voice (301) 405 4852 <A HREF="http://www.atic.umd.edu/~sina"><A HREF="http://www.atic.umd.edu/~sina</A">http://www.atic.umd.edu/~sina</A</A>> Fax (301) 314 9363 -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e

4 3

Re: [S.u.S.E. Linux] error in file system
by morgad＠mail.eclipse.co.uk 04 May '98

04 May '98

On Mon, 27 Apr 1998 09:48:07 -0400 (EDT), Dominik wrote: > >On Sat, 25 Apr 1998, Fadi Sodah wrote: > >> hi ppl, >> >> When i start my linux-box, i got the following msg: >> ------------------------------------------- >> Parallelizing fsck version 1.06 (7-Oct-96) >> /dev/hda2 contains a file system errors, check forced. >> hda: read_intr: status=0x59 { DriveReady SeekComplete DataRequest Error } >> hda: read_intr: status=0x40 { UncorrectableError }. LBAsect=385922, >> sector=18029 [ snip ] >> >> Give root password to login: >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >I do "fsck /dev/hda2". There is a print out of the man page of fsck in the >SuSE handbook. You can read that. I hope that helps. > >Dominik > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, >and that is not being talked about. >-Oscar Wilde i have had this problem as well with my 6.5Gb seagate disk, fsck would NOT cure it my bios said the disk had 784 cylinders omewhere around cylinder 781 the heads _mechanically_ hit the endstop! - loud knocking sounds ! i set the end of my last partition to 780 and problem went away - note to the SuSE people : i think this shows up a SERIOUS bug in the disk formatting part of the installation program. i noticed the same message on one of the status screens on about my 5th install (this is my 'toy' system) (i think screen was on F12 key ?? - running from memory here) yet even with options set to 'CHECK' format did not report any errors. i think it should have come up with a big warning message, and stop installation, not have asked which packages i wanted to install .... best regards morgad (originally sent 25apr98, re-sent 4may98 - think my outgoing email has been hosed for 2 weeks! - fadi, did you get any email from me ??) -- this mind intentionally blank pgp key available on keyservers 1024/AB181ED9 58 12 68 68 47 87 16 81 47 93 F6 75 31 61 C8 26 -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e

1 0

Re: [S.u.S.E. Linux] Networking in Linux
by peter＠datadok.no 04 May '98

04 May '98

>This morning I used tcpdump to see if the firewall would pass the traffic. >The firewall seems to pass the traffic but the Linux or the Solaris >systems do not respond. Now the really strange part. When I connect to the >VMS system and ping from there the Unix systems I get a response. After >that I close the connection to the VMS system and I am able to connect >from the outside to the computer that I pinged from the VAX. After 15 >minutes the connection is down again. I seem to remember something vaguely like this happening on machines where the driver for the network card was loaded dynamically via kerneld. On the linux boxes, you can try explicitly insmod'ing all network related modules or even compiling new kernels with the network stuff compiled in. Then of course you would still not know what's up with the solaris box, unless some similar kernel configuration can be done there. - Peter -- Peter N. M. Hansteen peter(a)datadok.no <A HREF="http://www.datadok.no"><A HREF="http://www.datadok.no</A">http://www.datadok.no</A</A>> Datadokumentasjon A/S, Bredsgaarden 2, N-5003 Bergen, Norway Tel: +47 55 32 08 02 Fax: +47 55 32 14 95 -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e

1 0

[S.u.S.E. Linux] Networking in Linux
by weis＠dom.hws.edu 04 May '98

04 May '98

I am sorry if that is OFF-topic. I study at a small college. We have interesting network problems with Linux(SuSE) and Solaris. The colleges installed a new firewall from CISCO with Network address translation. Sometimes it is not possible from the outside to connect to Unix systems on the local network. There is no problem to connecto to VMS. This morning I used tcpdump to see if the firewall would pass the traffic. The firewall seems to pass the traffic but the Linux or the Solaris systems do not respond. Now the really strange part. When I connect to the VMS system and ping from there the Unix systems I get a response. After that I close the connection to the VMS system and I am able to connect from the outside to the computer that I pinged from the VAX. After 15 minutes the connection is down again. Sorry about my bad english but english is not my native language and I hope someone will be able to help me. THANX Dominik Weis --------------------------------------------------------------------- There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about. -Oscar Wilde -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e

1 0

[S.u.S.E. Linux] Re: 5.2 and Adaptec 2940UW
by mantel＠suse.de 04 May '98

04 May '98

Hi, On Thu, 30 Apr 1998, Alan Lythaby wrote: > I've just got 5.2 and started to try to upgrade my system.... > > BUT.... when it comes to finding the SCSI card it hangs. > > The card is an Adaptec 2940UW and I'm trying to load the correct driver > module. > > I get the same result if I try to use the kernel with support compiled into > it (copied from the CD to a floppy) > > The system that I installed using 5.1 works fine with this card, as it has > to as the CDROM drive is SCSI. In 5.2 we're using the new aic7xxx driver series 5.0.x. Contained in 5.2 is driver version 5.0.7 which solves many of the problems people did have with the older driver. But unfortunately, there are a few machines that have problems with the new driver. Please download ftp.suse.com:/pub/suse_update/suse52/disks/scsi01 which contains driver version 5.0.13. I have feedback from several people that this version solves these problems (BTW this driver will make it's way into kernel 2.0.34). > The messages that I get are:- > > (scsi0:-1:-1:-1) bad scbptr 16 during SELTO > (scsi0:-1:-1:-1) referenced SCB255 not valid during SELTO > SCSISEQ = 0x5a SEQADDR = 0x8 STAT0 = 0x15 SSTAT1 = 0x8a > > This scrolls up the screen, with a further message every 5 secs or so about > abort and reset (I think) but it is too fast to read. > > The only way out is CTRL/ALT/DEL or reset button on the computer. > > I have tried updating using the boot disc from 5.1 but it gets into YaST and > says that the CD is the wrong one! > > I have also tried using my previously generated rescue disc. > > Any suggestions?? > > Thanks for reading this far!! > > System Info: > Micronics Twister ATX Motherboard. > AMD K6 200MHz > Adaptec 2940UW ver.1.25 BIOS > 3COM 905 Network card > Matrox Millenium II video card. > > System works fine with S.u.S.E 5.1 and kernel 2.0.32 with compiled-in > support for the SCSI card, and network card. > > -- > Cheers! > Alan. alan(a)abstraction.compulink.co.uk > > -- > To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with > this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e > Hubert -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e

2 1

[S.u.S.E. Linux] 5.2 install
by satan＠nfinity.com 04 May '98

04 May '98

Just got my 5.2, and I have one minor gripe: I think removing 'All' from the change/create configuration package selection was a mistake. Like many, I prefer to hand pick each package of my install, and I think having every package on one screen without having to F10 and go to another package group to make sure I included package X is easier than the new set up. Just my $.02 -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e

5 4

Re: [S.u.S.E. Linux] kde4
by mclark＠datsrvr.datsit.com 03 May '98

03 May '98

I would use yast to reinstall the kde rpms. yast will setup all of this for you. I installed kde4 this way and it works great!!!! mc Aaron Seelye wrote: > All, > > I don't know if this is the proper list, but here goes. I am trying to install > kde beta4, and i installed all of the rpm's and the qt 1.33 rpm, but i cannot > get it to work correctly (i did install them in the correct order). when i > enter startx, it loads fvwm95 (or fvwm2, i forget which), and when i hit the > button for other windows managers, it doesn't show kde4 like it did for kde 1 > (which i uninstalled). when i type startkde, i am given the following: > > kcontrol: cannot connect to X server > kwm: cannot connect to X server > kbgndwm: cannot connect to X server > Using old audio server with talk id 1 > > kfm: cannot connect to X server > krootwm: cannot connect to X server > kwm: cannot connect to X server > kpanel: cannot connect to X server > > I would appreciate any help that anyone could give. > > Aaron Seelye <roberto(a)cbvcp.com> > > -- > To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with > this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e

2 1

[S.u.S.E. Linux] Digest?
by dougmack＠spacelab.net 03 May '98

03 May '98

Is there a digest of this list? Thanx. --doug -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e

1 0

Re: [S.u.S.E. Linux] error file system
by weissel＠jupiter.ph-cip.uni-koeln.de 03 May '98

03 May '98

Hi! Trying to kill the keyboard, satan(a)nfinity.com produced: > Let me be specific: > On my box, I have a 4 gig drive which is /dev/hda and a 2 gig drive which is > /dev/hdb. Before installing linux, /dev/hda consisted of a 2 gig primary partition > which windows recognized as C: and a 2 gig extended partition containing a 2 gig > logical partition which windows saw as E:. /dev/hdb was seen by windows as D:. I had > been using E: as my linux drive when I decided to give linux an extra gig from A:. Ok, up to here I understand it :) > I repartitioned /dev/hda thusly: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Using which tool? Or, in other words: fdisk and reinstall of Windows or something else and no reinstall? > /dev/hda1 primary 1 gig windows > /dev/hda2 extended 3 gigs -- > /dev/hda5 logical 64 megs swap > /dev/hda6 logical 100 megs / > /dev/hda7 logical 300 megs /opt > /dev/hda8 logical 2.3 gigs /usr > /dev/hda9 logical 200 megs /home Too bad we don't have the physical layout of the HD, but I think you packed them with no space in between: 5,6,7,8,9. > Having installed linux, the two operating systems began a peaceful coexistence. > However, windows still reported C: as being the previous 2 gigs (E:, of course was no > longer visible to windows, being a 3 gig ext2 set of partitions). If I went into dos Does that means that Windows did not report an E: anymore? > fdisk it reported the correct partition information, 1 gig fat16 and 3 gigs of type > unknown. Which proves (to me, at least) that the information had been properly stored. However, there is the (remote, stupid, unneccessary i.e. M$ might have done it) possibility that Windows stores the partition information about it's install partition at install time ... and if you did not reinstall it ... but I don't think that was it. > I decided that perhaps to have windows properly report the correct partition > size it would be necessary to repartition using dos fdisk then reinstall windows. Hmmm ... Well, reinstall, dos fdisk may not be necessary ... but I don't know. > There was no need to go to those lengths just to have windows tell me that C: was the > correct size so I dismissed the notion and reconciled myself to living with the mild > annoyance. Hmm ... > Several weeks later I defragged C: in windows. Later that day when I booted linux I > went into kernel panic, got the same error messages that were displayed on this list ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Well, the error messages there was certainly no kernel panik. (You may know the story of the mother who playd a famous violin(?) teacher a tape recording. The teacher listens, *listens* and starts go get tears in his eyes ... and finally says "Madame, is that really your son playing?" to which she answers "Why no, that's a recording of Yehudi Menhuin. But with my boy it sounds just the same." ... In other words, I appreciate your trying to be helpful with the error messages, but ... I'd need them as exact as possible. ) > earlier. Well, it would have been interesting to know if your / (/dev/hda6, inside that 2 GB part) still worked (i.e. fsck error messages) or not ... > I manually ran fsck, and an hour later after repairing error after error and > no end in sight I decided reinstalling would be faster than fixing and reformatted the > disk and reinstalled. > If you don't think that windows defrag is to blame what would you suggest? Hmmm. Difficult question. You did shut down your Linux carefully before that boot-attempt? There are/were no errors on your HD? Which partition(s) were actually broken? -Wolfgang -- PGP 2 welcome: Mail me, subject "send PGP-key". If you've nothing at all to hide, you must be boring. Unsolicited Bulk E-Mails: *You* pay for ads you never wanted. Is our economy _so_ weak we have to tolerate SPAMMERS? I guess not. -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e

1 0