- main - earth.li

ISDN Woes on Mandrake
by Stuart Hammond 20 Apr '04

20 Apr '04

Hi, Ive been trying to get mandrake to work with the ISDN adapter (which drivers come in the kernal, and it works so that dont seem the problme). The problme appears to be the mandrake 10 front end for ISDN is missing (well incomplete) ive treid googling for an alternate, but i cant seem to find one that works. so what im asking is, does any one know if there is any alternate front ends for ISDN or any easy (as im a bit new at this) work rounds? yours S Hammond PS, IIRC the windows fonts are free to be redistributed so there is no problme copying them to linux (no matter how much microsoft hates you for doing it) actually iirc there was a source forge project dedicated to it, who MS had a go at but couldnt legal do any thing about it. _________________________________________________________________ Tired of 56k? Get a FREE BT Broadband connection http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/btbroadband

2 1

Strange Firefox problem
by BenEBoy 19 Apr '04

19 Apr '04

As the subject says, this is a strange one... From what I can tell, it appears that firefox might be throttling my download speed. I've tried downloading from a number of different places and the speed never gets above 4kbs, which since I'm on ADSL (finally) is a bit slow. Judging from the amount downloaded (ie. 700 k in a couple of minutes), it's reporting the speed accurately (or thereabouts) and everything else I do happens at the speed I would expect it (apt-getting 90mb's of data in half an hour or so etc.). Is it my imagination? Have all the servers I've tried to download from recently just been slow? Or is there some sort of option I need to set somewhere ;) Anyone? Please? I'm using sarge (albeit with a freshly downloaded gimp 2.0, but I doubt that will make a difference). Cheers, BenE

2 1

FireWire
by Vasko Tomanov 19 Apr '04

19 Apr '04

Someone to have experience with FireWire cards ? 400 ? 800 ? some suggestion ? some problems ? with model to choose ? Cheers vasko

1 0

Re: [ALUG] Just installed Debian
by Jonathan McDowell 19 Apr '04

19 Apr '04

(I think you probably meant to send this to the list?) On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 03:12:58PM +0100, Richard Lewis wrote: > On Monday 19 April 2004 13:13, Jonathan McDowell wrote: > > It sounds like you chose the KDE frontend to debconf, so it /is/ trying > > to connect to your Xserver as root. > > > > export XAUTHORITY=~youruser/.Xauthority > > > > in the root session usually does the trick. > > > OK, it doesn't complain about the X server anymore, but I get this now: > > /usr/sbin/dpkg-reconfigure: noflushd is broken or not fully installed > DESTROY created new reference to dead object ' Qt::VBoxLayout' during global > destruction. > > I tried issuing # apt-get install noflushd again but it just came up > with a dpkg exit status 1 (presumably the same error). > > I've looked it up in the bugs section and its looks as though it has > had a bug filled against it, but I'm not very skilled at reading bug > reports! (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=noflushd) It's had a bug filed, which has been fixed (hence the fact it's listed as resolved), but checking the Testing Status bit on: http://packages.qa.debian.org/n/noflushd.html noflushd is fixed in unstable (sid) but the fixed package hasn't made it to testing (sarge) yet, but should do so tomorrow. J. -- /------------------------------------\ | It does it for me our kid! | | http://www.blackcatnetworks.co.uk/ | \------------------------------------/

1 0

nVidia/Via AGP support not working
by Tristan Scott 19 Apr '04

19 Apr '04

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I have a via motherboard (on loan from work, mine's broke) and a nV ti 4400. AGP simple won't work. I have tried: Latest Gentoo stable drivers: (4496) Latest nVidia stable drivers (5336) These were supposed to fix some issues with via and agp. I have tried AGP: agpgart built in, nvidia drivers using mode 3 (try aggart then nvAgp) agpgart not built, nvidia drivers set to NvAGP mode 1 (nvagp only) or 3 (try agp, then nvidia) agpgart built as module, trying nvidia only (nope) then mode 3 again (loaded agpgart fine) The host bridge claims it's supported by agpgart and nvagp. now, debugging outputs: - -------lspci------- 00:00.0 Host bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8375 [KM266/KL266] Host Bridge 00:01.0 PCI bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8633 [Apollo Pro266 AGP] 00:10.0 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB (rev 80) 00:10.1 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB (rev 80) 00:10.2 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB (rev 80) 00:10.3 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB 2.0 (rev 82) 00:11.0 ISA bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8235 ISA Bridge 00:11.1 IDE interface: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C586A/B/VT82C686/A/B/VT8233/A/C/VT8235 PIPC Bus Master IDE (rev 06) 00:11.5 Multimedia audio controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8233/A/8235 AC97 Audio Controller (rev 50) 00:11.6 Communication controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. Intel 537 [AC97 Modem] (rev 80) 00:12.0 Ethernet controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT6102 [Rhine-II] (rev 74) 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation NV25 [GeForce4 Ti 4400] (rev a2) - -------proc------- ~ cat /proc/driver/nvidia/agp/card Fast Writes: Supported SBA: Supported AGP Rates: 4x 2x 1x Registers: 0x1f000217:0x00000000 cat /proc/driver/nvidia/agp/host-bridge Host Bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8375 [KM266/KL266] Host Bridge Fast Writes: Not Supported SBA: Supported AGP Rates: 4x 2x 1x Registers: 0x1f000207:0x00000000 cat /proc/driver/nvidia/agp/status Status: Disabled - -------XF86Config------- (clipped) Section "Device" ~ Identifier "ti" ~ Driver "nvidia" # Driver "nv" ~ #VideoRam 131072 # ---AGP--- # 0 = Off # 1 = NvAGP only # 2 = AGPGart only # 3 = Try AGPGart, then NvAGP - default Option "NvAGP" "1" # use AGPGart if poss. then use agpgart, if poss. Option "NoDDC" "false" Option "DPMS" Option "RenderAccel" "true" Option "AGPMode" "4" #Option "AGPFastWrite" "true" Option "EnableDepthMoves" "true" Option "EnablePageFlip" "true" Option "HWCursor" "true" Option "CursorShadow" "true" Option "Xinerama" "on" Option "TwinView" Option "SecondMonitorHorizSync" "30-95" Option "SecondMonitorVertRefresh" "60-100" Option "MetaModes" "1280x1024,1280x1024; 1024x768,1024x768; NULL,1280x1024; NULL,800x600" Option "TwinViewOrientation" "LeftOf" Option "ConnectedMonitor" "CRT, CRT" ~ # Insert Clocks lines here if appropriate EndSection - -------lsmod------- Module Size Used by nvidia 2068168 12 via_agp 5184 1 agpgart 26408 1 via_agp - -------dmesg------- (agpgart as module) Linux agpgart interface v0.100 (c) Dave Jones agpgart: Detected VIA PM266/KM266 chipset agpgart: Maximum main memory to use for agp memory: 690M agpgart: AGP aperture is 256M @ 0xe0000000 eth0: Setting full-duplex based on MII #1 link partner capability of 45e1. smbfs: Unrecognized mount option umask smbfs: Unrecognized mount option umask smbfs: Unrecognized mount option umask smbfs: Unrecognized mount option umask smbfs: Unrecognized mount option umask atkbd.c: Unknown key released (translated set 2, code 0x7a on isa0060/serio0). atkbd.c: This is an XFree86 bug. It shouldn't access hardware directly. atkbd.c: Unknown key released (translated set 2, code 0x7a on isa0060/serio0). atkbd.c: This is an XFree86 bug. It shouldn't access hardware directly. nvidia: no version magic, tainting kernel. nvidia: module license 'NVIDIA' taints kernel. 0: nvidia: loading NVIDIA Linux x86 NVIDIA Kernel Module 1.0-5336 Wed Jan 14 18:29:26 PST 2004 0: NVRM: not using NVAGP, AGPGART is loaded!! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFAglkLdRlQV5wtGCYRApGEAJsGC7a89OT4LsdDeGD+n+y5dP/NCwCdFeLk 73ywKKU/kYsjizWemIOTvQw= =1nUn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

FTP help please!
by bjsamuels＠beenthere-donethat.org.uk 19 Apr '04

19 Apr '04

Until recently (a few days ago) I have been happily uploading via FTP to my hosted web site. Suddenly I find I can start an upload but every attempt ends with 'waiting for transfer to complete' which it never does. I have tried a number of different FTP applications, both GUI and command line, to no avail. I have also tried uploading to the small amount of web space that my ISP provides with the same result which I think rules out a problem on my hosting server. I can upload to my hosted site if I use a modem instead of the router which seems to indicate that the problem may be within the router/firewall. However, as far as I can see, nothing in the router firewall has changed. It is set to allow anything out and to block everything coming in unless it's a 'reply' to a connection instigated by my computer. That has always worked in the past. This problem has occurred around the time I've started getting the following in my router logs (this is the first recorded instance): Thu, 2004-04-08 16:52:17 - TCP Packet -Source:81.174.175.111,3789 Destination:81.174.175.161,3127 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:52:21 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,1603 Destination:81.174.175.161,1025 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:52:26 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,1605 Destination:81.174.175.161,3127 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:52:34 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,1602 Destination:81.174.175.161,135 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:52:39 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,3787 Destination:81.174.175.161,1025 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:52:44 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,3786 Destination:81.174.175.161,135 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:53:47 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,1605 Destination:81.174.175.161,3127 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:54:50 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,1603 Destination:81.174.175.161,1025 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:55:53 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,2442 Destination:81.174.175.161,135 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:56:56 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,4572 Destination:81.174.175.161,135 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:57:01 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,4577 Destination:81.174.175.161,139 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:57:06 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,4576 Destination:81.174.175.161,6129 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:57:10 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,4575 Destination:81.174.175.161,3127 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:57:15 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,4573 Destination:81.174.175.161,1025 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:57:20 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,4694 Destination:81.174.175.161,3127 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:57:26 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,4689 Destination:81.174.175.161,1025 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:57:31 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,4686 Destination:81.174.175.161,135 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:57:36 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,4062 Destination:81.174.175.161,1025 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:57:41 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,4695 Destination:81.174.175.161,6129 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:57:46 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,4299 Destination:81.174.175.161,1025 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:57:50 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,4301 Destination:81.174.175.161,3127 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:59:39 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,3157 Destination:81.174.175.161,139 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:59:43 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,3156 Destination:81.174.175.161,6129 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:59:48 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,3155 Destination:81.174.175.161,3127 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:59:53 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,3152 Destination:81.174.175.161,1025 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 16:59:58 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,3151 Destination:81.174.175.161,135 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 17:02:30 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,1803 Destination:81.174.175.161,6129 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 17:02:35 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,1802 Destination:81.174.175.161,3127 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 17:02:40 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,1800 Destination:81.174.175.161,1025 - [DOS] Thu, 2004-04-08 17:02:44 - TCP Packet - Source:81.174.175.111,1799 Destination:81.174.175.161,135 - [DOS] I've reported this to my ISP as it one of their addresses but have yet to hear anything. I cannot see why this should prevent FTP uploads from completing and it doesn't prevent me from doing anything else. I can download without problems. I'm baffled (but then I am easily baffled) and any advice will be very much appreciated. Barry Samuels http://www.beenthere-donethat.org.uk The Unofficial Guide to Great Britain

4 5

ALUG 5th Birthday Meeting - 2pm sunday 2nd May, Norwich
by Syd Hancock 19 Apr '04

19 Apr '04

ALUG will be five on the 2nd May 2004! To mark the occasion a 'special' sunday afternoon get-together will take place at 2pm that day at the 'City Gate', Dereham Road. As well as being spacious and comfortable, the City Gate also do a wide range of food in a restaurant area (i.e it should be a cut above usual 'pub grub') so there is the possibility of having a meal as well - I'll leave that for discussion. Full address, photo, link to map etc here: http://www.norwichpubs.info/norwichpubs/pubpages/citygate.htm === directions etc === The City Gate pub is just off the inner ring road at the junction of Grapes Hill and Barn Road. Dereham Road is the A1074 - take the Costessey junction on the A47 if coming from west of Norwich. Otherwise, when going clockwise around the inner ring road, Dereham road is the left turn at the traffic lights at the bottom of Grapes Hill (but see parking info below). There is a very large Cane Furniture shop on the corner and this is probably the best landmark from either direction. The pub, which has a large glass frontage (see link to picture above), is next to the cane furniture shop. There is ample parking nearby, including possible free parking on the forecourt of a wine warehouse next to the pub or on side roads off Dereham Road. There is also Pay-and-Display parking on the other side of the ring road off St Swithin's road. Coming down Grapes Hill turn right at the lights (St Benedict's Street) and then left into the entrance to the car park which is behind Toys-R-Us. Syd

1 0

Weekly IRC reminder
by Neill Newman 19 Apr '04

19 Apr '04

This is the automated ALUG IRC meeting reminder sent to remind you that there is an IRC meeting tonight (Monday) at 8.00pm. The meeting takes place on the irc server irc.alug.org.uk in the #alug channel. Most IRC clients should allow you to get there with the commands "/server irc.alug.org.uk" and "/join #alug". Popular IRC clients include tkirc, bitchx, xchat and EPIC on Unix, and Mirc under windows. Here are some links to help you get started with irc. Unix http://www.xchat.org/ http://freshmeat.net/ http://www.epicsol.org/ Windows http://www.mirc.com (loads of help with irc for newbies!)

1 0

LinuxUser & Developer Expo 2004
by Wayne Stallwood 19 Apr '04

19 Apr '04

Is anybody going to this ? I wanted to go but I fear I am too busy on the 20th-21st to make it

4 3

Warning to SuSE 9.0 users
by Wayne Stallwood 18 Apr '04

18 Apr '04

Over the last couple of days YOU has popped up with a update recommendation to kernel 2.4.21-202. I did this about two hours ago and I have only just got my machine back. As usual (same as all the other times I have let YOU update the kernel) I simply let YaST get on with downloading and installing the kernel. Reboot when it's finished and then reinstall my Nvidia drivers if X won't start. But this time the kernel would fail to uncompress at the start of the boot, now I know that YOU verifies packages for corruption before installing them so I guessed that SuSE had released a borked kernel or something was upsetting the boot loader (in my case Lilo) After mucking about in a recovery boot (and installing the kernel on the original media to get my machine back) I think it may be something to do with me running Lilo rather than what I think is the SuSE default of grub. I have found that if I run the new update and then run lilo as root to get it to reread it's config file then all appears to be fine. So a warning to any SuSE users out there if you use lilo then make sure to run it before rebooting after the update. Gahhh, not the best way to spend a sunny Saturday morning !

2 1