KCLUG

kclug@kclug.org

5 participants
3248 discussions

RE: Somewhat OT: copyright question
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 16 Jun '05

16 Jun '05

Keep in mind where you are. We are geeks, which often equates to a seeming know-it-all appearance as we describe in detail some past related experience. We are all guilty of it. I find it helps to stop and think before I speak or hit the send button to see if my tone or wording is "looking down the nose" at someone. But often in the rush to send information we forget the niceties. What I'm saying is, cut a brother some slack; he was trying to be helpful in his way. Advice is always free and sometimes worth exactly what you paid for it. Brian -----Original Message----- From: On Behalf Of JARiley Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 10:16 AM Cc: kclug(a)kclug.org thanks for reminding us all that we are not lawyers! this is a place for free expression and if anyone reading the copyright responses thought otherwise and thereafter used the information to proceed forward in their online posting management of his/her site without consulting with a REAL lawyer, then that is because of his/her own stupidity. this group can get real annoying sometimes with all of the know-it-all ego personalities. so, chill out! later taters! James Riley

1 0

Lycoris and Mandrake
by Josh Charles 16 Jun '05

16 Jun '05

Saw an interesting bit of news today: http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS6659836508.html It seems Mandriva (formerly Mandrake) has bought out Lycoris. I know most of you probably haven't paid much attention to Lycoris, but it was my first distro, and I've always paid a bit of attention to it to see where it was going. They had some interesting ideas, but always seemed to bite off more than they could chew (Tablet PC edition, Pocket PC edition, SME Server, the list goes on), but hopefully working with Mandrake will really move things along. They could become a real force in the desktop linux market. Josh

1 0

IE setcookie BUG?
by Jack 15 Jun '05

15 Jun '05

Alright. This is funky. Not sure if it's me, the webserver configuration or IE. Or maybe IO'm just plain crazy. Here's my code starting from the first line of the file. <?php // this line works and sets a session cookie $didset0=setcookie('user0','goliath'); $emailid = $_POST['emailid']; $ckyexp=mktime() + 1800; $ckyexp3=mktime() + 4886; // this line works in Mozilla but not IE $didset=setcookie("ssid",$emailid,time()+1800); // ditto $didset2=setcookie('user','floyd',$ckyexp); // this line works in both // any number below 4881 won't set the cookie // even though 1800 should set it for 30 minutes from // now $didset3=setcookie('user3','floyd3',$ckyexp3); // this is just a bit shy of the maxint value and // works for both $didset4=setcookie('user4','floyd4',2147483646); ... My question is has anyone else run up against this? Why, is this happening? Actually some of my numbers may be off the two computers were off by 20 minutes. Fixing the clocks allowed my to push the value down to 4800 or better so 20 minutes on Windows is >= 81 in $ckyexp3. THis is a bit of a pain as I would like the cookie to expire after 1/2 hour, not 1 1/2 hours. Any have any ideas why this is and/or how to fix it? Thanks, Brian Densmore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

First shipment of Ubuntu (5.04) arrived today
by Jon Pruente 15 Jun '05

15 Jun '05

I arrived home to find a package sticking out of the mail box. I retrieved it and found it to be a large padded envelope from The Netherlands. Cool, 6 x86 sts, 9 PPC sets and 1 AMD64 set of Ubuntu CDs! It was painless to boot the Live CD on my iBook (600MHz G3 16VRAM model, 640MB RAM) but when Gnome finished it was stuck at 640x480. Ick, and there isn't an easy way to force it to the native 1024x768 w/o doing the long and involved "expert" boot option. It basically involves telling the X server some of the sync rates and to use DDC. I Googled a bit but only found options for editing the X config files for a full install. I'd sure like a nice quick boot: command line to get it to work, but alas... So I tried it on the old iMac G3 350MHz (slot-load w/o FW, 256MB RAM) but the OF setting that it has for OS X don't like to boot the CD by just holding the 'c' key down. So, I had to drop to Open Firmware and use "boot cd:,\install\yaboot" to get it to boot the CD. After that it took off just fine and Gnome came up in full color and 1024x768 res. I'm posting this from the iMac running under the LiveCD right now. I also booted the old Dell Optiplex GX1 box (P-II 400MHz, 256MB RAM) and it booted and ran fine. It seemed a tad slower than the iMac, but that may have been the DVD drive in the Dell. The CD drive in the iMac seems to be faster to spin back up and deliver data. It took almost the same amount of time to get Firefox loaded as to get an Xterm going, both on the iMac. I've got a few old K6-2 boxen sitting around that might benefit from a new OS (either kill a Win2k or WIn98 install ;) ) but that'd involve swappig the peripherals off the Dell. All-in-all the LiveCDs aren't bad. For a new user, I'd sure like to see all the text screens that swap back and forth and flash strange (to the uninitiated) messages at you during boot to be hidden, like it seems is done during the boot from a HDD install. If I were a Windows user trying Linux for the first ti9me with Ubuntu, it'd be a nice exercise, but the boot might scare me off if I was used to watching the Windows logo for most of the boot process. Jon.

1 0

gentoo chief architect working in MS Linux group
by David Nicol 15 Jun '05

15 Jun '05

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1827841,00.asp -- David L Nicol one: "If I am not for myself, who will be for me?" two: "You too, huh?"

1 0

Somewhat OT: copyright question
by Josh Charles 15 Jun '05

15 Jun '05

Hello, Does anyone know if you are running a forum and someone posts copyrighted material if you can be held responsible for that content? Thanks, Josh

7 10

RE: moving home/second home
by Rob Becker 15 Jun '05

15 Jun '05

You should be able to just create one partition on the new drive, move the folder to that partition and then mount it automatically by adding it to fstab. That way you'll have a /music (or whatever you choose to name it) partition appear at the root of your filesystem. Good luck with it. Rob -----Original Message----- From: lerninlinux(a)comcast.net [mailto:lerninlinux@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 9:32 AM To: kclug(a)kclug.org Subject: moving home/second home Had a drive that was failing, it was on a system that was dual boot with a screwed up windows registry. I haven't booted windows on it in two years, so I booted into Linux and transfered everything that was needed to be saved to my samba server. There is one big directory that I want to save on multiple machines (all my ripped cd's, I don't want to have to go through that again) and was wondering about adding a second drive and another home partition on it, or do I have to move the whole home partition? TIA Randal _______________________________________________ Kclug mailing list Kclug(a)kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug

2 1

RE: moving home/second home
by lerninlinux＠comcast.net 15 Jun '05

15 Jun '05

Thanks, that's what I was hoping to hear. This is an old system, but still very usable, 1.2 athlon with a gig of memory, I am going to wipe the primary drive and start over as I have been wanting to try yet another distro, and this means I shouldn't even touch that music drive, at least until I settled on a distro. > You should be able to just create one partition on the new drive, move > the folder to that partition and then mount it automatically by adding > it to fstab. That way you'll have a /music (or whatever you choose to > name it) partition appear at the root of your filesystem. > Good luck with it. > Rob > > -----Original Message----- > From: lerninlinux(a)comcast.net [mailto:lerninlinux@comcast.net] > Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 9:32 AM > To: kclug(a)kclug.org > Subject: moving home/second home > > Had a drive that was failing, it was on a system that was dual boot with > a screwed up windows registry. I haven't booted windows on it in two > years, so I booted into Linux and transfered everything that was needed > to be saved to my samba server. There is one big directory that I want > to save on multiple machines (all my ripped cd's, I don't want to have > to go through that again) and was wondering about adding a second drive > and another home partition on it, or do I have to move the whole home > partition? > > TIA > Randal > _______________________________________________ > Kclug mailing list > Kclug(a)kclug.org > http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug > > > _______________________________________________ > Kclug mailing list > Kclug(a)kclug.org > http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug

1 0

moving home/second home
by lerninlinux＠comcast.net 15 Jun '05

15 Jun '05

Had a drive that was failing, it was on a system that was dual boot with a screwed up windows registry. I haven't booted windows on it in two years, so I booted into Linux and transfered everything that was needed to be saved to my samba server. There is one big directory that I want to save on multiple machines (all my ripped cd's, I don't want to have to go through that again) and was wondering about adding a second drive and another home partition on it, or do I have to move the whole home partition? TIA Randal

1 0

RE: PHP safe mode on virtual hosts
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 14 Jun '05

14 Jun '05

Sounds to me like you should draw yourself a diagram of what each group of files has for permissions, what are all the users and groups involved and their effective permissions. Quite possibly you may just need to add the virtual domain admin users to some group or add user apache to the virtual domain group so the apache process can write. Do the php pages have to write anything to the virtual domain directories? Even if it's just a log file, then that user is denied. Do all of the virtual domains wrote to the database? I didn't understand that part. If so, then for one I wouldn't do it that way. They should each have their own database. Also, if you have this: rw-r--r--, then the group can't write only the specific user, but you may need to add the user you run the database as or the php process in somewhere. Hell, I'm confused now. User Group Apache apache web process and /var/www/html Virtual1 virtual1 Domain1 Virtual2 virtual2 Domain2 Virtual3 virtual3 Domain3 Database database database files Hint: Don't refer to them as one domain or another, use more concrete terms. You've got so much going on, I'm confuse now. Back to my nap. >-----Original Message----- >From: kclug-bounces(a)kclug.org [mailto:kclug-bounces@kclug.org] >On Behalf Of Jack >Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 6:41 PM >To: Jonathan Hutchins; kclug(a)kclug.org >Subject: Re: PHP safe mode on virtual hosts > > >Apache is running as apache. The file permissions are >rw-r--r-- on all the directories accessed by apache or >php. Each virtual webspace has it's own user and the >group is the same as the user. So website-1 has file >ownership of say admin1.admin1 and this is in the >user and group as defined in the chrooted apache >httpd.conf. AS I said, I compared two sites and have >yet to see any configuration difference. In either the >httpd.conf or it's included files or in the php.ini >files. > >--- Jonathan Hutchins <hutchins(a)tarcanfel.org> wrote: > >> On Monday 13 June 2005 01:22 pm, Jack wrote: >> >> > ... one site >> > works if the files in the chrooted /var/www/html >> > directory are owned by a authorized admin for the >> > virtual host, the other works only if that >> directory >> > and the files are owned by root. >> >> Who's apache running as? What are the file >> permissions? User? Group?

2 1

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

KCLUG