| Monday
December 26, 1999
Jerry: A thorough "how
to" on cd writing, covering the low level basics. http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/CD-Writing-HOWTO.html
The site has a wealth of linux "how tos".
http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/
Chris C.
Just wanted to send you some comments on your recent
Byte.com column.
> The next question is, do you want one big partition for everything
> else, or do you want to chop things into small parts?
Definitely use one big partition. The only time
multiple partitions help you is:
a) if you have *different* disk drives, you can
spread your partitions out in order to take advantage of multiple requests
at the same time to different hardware. This really only works on SCSI
systems as SCSI allows multiple outstanding requests at the same time.
Most IDE systems (all even, I don't know) only support one request to an
IDE channel at a time.
b) security - by having "user" space separate
from / and /usr, you avoid problems with a user filling up all available
space and making things difficult for you.
FYI, on RedHat, you can use the "locate"
command to find various things on the system. It uses a database that gets
updated automatically every night. "locate xwp" would probably
have found it (after the first night anyway :-).
> if you want to work with Linux you are > joining the
kernel-of-the month club, the >
continually-download-lots-of-new-libraries-and-install-them > club:
I have to take issue with this. While this was the
case a few years ago, it most definately is not the case now. I ran RedHat
Linux 5.1 on an older Pentium/133 for 4 years, and I think I upgraded the
kernel a total of two times, both of which were to fix security problems
(since it was a dial-up, I probably didn't even need to do that). I didn't
upgrade any libraries (at least that I remember), and most of the time, I
didn't apply any application bug fixes either (me being the lazy type).
I have since upgraded to RedHat 6.1, and after
adding all the updates (one kernel upgrade, NO fundamental library
upgrade, mostly application bugs), I have yet to touch it (after about 3
months). I see no use in mucking with the kernel - the one RedHat
distributes has the kitchen sink in it. And if a bug does come to light,
they'll distribute a RPM, and 30 seconds after downloading that, I reboot,
and I'm up and running on the new version. Same goes for libraries. I
haven't compiled a kernel, other than to benchmark a machine, in over a
year.
And, have you noticed how often you have to download
new drivers for your video cards, sounds cards, etc under Windows98/NT. Or
how often service packs (which install multi-megabytes of who-knows-what),
or patches are available for IE5, etc, etc, etc.
But I know many people who just "live with
it", and don't really care or even want to know that what they're
running with is not right. They're happy, and that's that.
The point is this: how much of a "hobby"
you make computers in general has entirely to do with YOU, not the system.
You enjoy making things work correctly, taking things apart, testing new
hardware, etc, etc, etc so you do what's needed to get it working. Linux
is simply the ultimate expression of that entertainment. Both Linux &;
Windows98/NT can be hobbies, it's just a matter of how much time you're
willing to put in.
Keep in mind that many of the "problems"
you have, and the various things you have to do (edit files, etc) in order
to get a "useable" machine are reflections of how RedHat has
configured the distribution, and have nothing to do with Linux itself.
RedHat has essentially one distribution, and they have configured to be
essentially an Internet Server, meant for multiple users in a semi-hostile
environment. If that was what you were doing with the machine, you'd be
set right after finishing the install. Your choice of "custom"
and install everything affected this as well. If you'd chosen workstation,
things might have been a little different (but probably not much).
Other distributions focus more on the single-user
workstation, and have more usability features. RedHat certainly could ask
more questions about how a machine is going to be used, and then configure
things accordingly, but that would also cause more confusion. Classic
trade-off of flexibility vs ease of use.
One other comment: you have mentioned several times
that you need to keep all the security fixes up to date, as your machines
are on Internet 24x7 now. Well, technically, your machines are not
"on" the Internet. They're behind the Rebel.com firewall. They
do not have "real" IP addresses, and are not reachable from
anywhere on the Internet. This means that as far as security is concerned,
you're pretty safe - getting past the firewall is not something easily
done, especially since it's configured that way.
FYI, you might want to disable lpd on your Rebel.com
box. It can often be used as a hole through which crackers can break in.
Or, configure it to not accept connections from outside (e.g via the PPP
link). This is what I've done with my Linux box which is up on a cable
modem 24x7. See the man pages for tcpd &; hosts.allow and hosts.deny.
Anyway, I'm glad to see it's finally up and running
for you. Feel free to email me if you have any questions and Roland is not
available. I'm on-line more than I care to think about.
Pete
Hi Jerry,
I'm a fan from waaayyy back in the 80's, always
loved the chatty style of your column. Since the mid-90's, I've been a
Linux disciple (I can't think of a better word :-)
I thought I'd mention a couple of things...
In your column, you said:
"Make up your mind: if you want to work with
Linux you are joining the kernel-of-the month club, the
continually-download-lots-of-new-libraries-and-install-them" ...
While I do upgrade everytime whatever distribution
I'm using gets upgraded, I think you're overstating it a bit. I haven't
built a kernel since the slackware days (maybe '96 at the latest.) Since
modules have been available, you can get almost anything to work without
re-compiling kernels.
I have a firewall machine with 2 ethernets that are
auto-detected by the installation. oh no! it detects them in the wrong
order! Just futz with /etc/conf.modules, and they are renamed to my
preference. The only tough bit is putting the right stuff in /etc/conf.modules
for the scanner (which uses an ancient Adaptec 1502 ISA controller, so I
have to pick the IRQ and DMA like in the bad old days.)
You said that WordPerfect brings word processing to
Linux. Well, you're ignoring:
-- Applix (payware: I've got 4.4.1, should order
4.4.2 soon) -- Star Office (free from www.sun.com) -- Maxwell -- Klyx
which all work OK now, The first two are able to
import &; export to modern Word (ie. suitable for real-world use.) If
you are into the hobbyist download/build/try approach, then you might want
to check out the upcoming KOffice (koffice.kde.org) A real release of that
is a couple of months away though, at least.
You asked about CD burners. They work fine, just get
cdrecord from any ftp site (say, rpmfind.net) for a basic line mode
commands, and xcdroast for a GUI front-end.
In the second part of your article, you mentioned
being on the internet as being essential to have access to things like the
"Linux Documentation Project." While the Internet is indeed a
big help, If you installed "everything" from Redhat, Then the
entire Linux Documentation Project text is on your hard disk under (/usr/doc/
HOWTO &; FAQ )
Happy Holidays!
Peter
Well, all the current documentation
is there. Linux seems to have new information floating around all the
time. I really don't advise anyone to make his first machine a build it
yourself Linux box. Have a way to get on line. It makes life easier...
I'm probably not the first to point this out, but
Linux has had CD-R and CD-RW support for a while, with a couple qualms. I
got my CD-R about two years ago, at which time all SCSI and most IDE CD-Rs
were supported. Now that there's a standard ATAPI CD-R interface, all of
those are supported. I don't know about parallel port writer support, but
I wouldn't get one anyway for hardware reasons; the slow transfer rates
and greater shock susceptability bother me.
Anyway, I simply use mkisofs and cdrecord on the
command line to burn CDs; gui tools called xcdroast and gcombust are the
only ones I've seen, but freshmeat.net lists a dozen more.
CD-RW support for disk-at-once and track-at-once
writes is the same as for CD-Rs, and disk erasure is supported, but I
don't know if the filesystem used for packet writing is in standard
distributions yet. Last I checked (last year) it required a kernel patch.
--- Roy Stogner
I was happy to see your Byte column on Linux. As you
noted it has come a long way since I first installed one of the early
Slackware distributions from a million floppies after downloading for a
week. It DOES have a long way to go before it is a simple to configure
operating system, but it has also come a long way.
Some of the great applications for Linux include
Wordperfect, Applixware, and Gimp. If you're not familiar with Gimp, a
photoshop like graphics program, check it out. There are also more and
more games coming out for Linux, which is in my opinion what will push the
horse over the hill. The other big change, is actually a very small
program. That is the various ppp-dialup utilities which have appeared
lately. At one time, getting a dialup was one of the hardest things to
configure properly.
have fun, Steve Claflin
And here is some advice
that's completely different.
Hi,
I am a long time linux user, and find it extremly
painful to see people suffer so with Linux. Here are a few tips to
consider.
1). Distribution : Do not use RPM based
distributions (Caldera, Redhat, Stampede) Sure these are the most popular
distributions around. But that's because they've been around a long time.
And the RPM format was one of the first packaging formats for Linux
distros (preceded only by the infamous tgz :) ). It has sever limitations.
You mention in your article that installing Linux is joining the
"kernel of the month club". While not quite accurate (I've been
running the same kernel on one of my machines for over a year now), it
does reflect the constant updates you might want to do to your Linux
system due to the nature of Linux software development.
DEBIAN based distributions are a lot more advanced.
Updating these distributions is a matter of just saying "update and
upgrade" Of course the commands that you give it are
apt-get update apt-get upgrade
that's it. It automatically goes out to the ftp site
where the packages are, looks at what's been updated, and what the
dependencies are, automatically gets the required packages and
automatically upgrades your machine. NO REBOOTS REQUIRED. Installing a new
package is just as simple.
apt-get install <package>
This again automatically goes out and gets all the
dependencies and automatically installs these and the package you wanted.
So you don't have to worry about which version of libc you need and which
tools like perl, python you need to install. It all gets done "under
the hood" *NO REBOOTS REQUIRED*
And you can continue working on other stuff while
this updates/upgrades/installs happen. When they finish, well keep
working. Your work will not be interrupted.
Of course using a pure debian system is not for
newbies. Which is why there are debian based distros like Corel linux and
Stormix Linux. I would recommend Corel Linux to anyone who is just
starting out. Makes your life during and after installation a lot easier
than Redhat can possibly hope.
2) X-Windows : You need to have a supported X
windows driver (XFree86). Most new (not newest like ATI128) hardware
platforms are automatically supported (The Matrox cards are the best
supported). For the newest cards, you might need to go out to a site and
download the driver separately if it wasn't out fast enough for the
distro's to integrate into their CD's. Think of it as getting a windows
ServicePack. Setting up X-windows manually can be a dog. But with most
hardware you won't need to do this, since the distro will do it for you.
But if it doesn't, then look at point 3.
3) First time installs : *Viewers are advised Do not
try this at home* :). He he. No first time installs are not recommended by
yourself unless you are familiar with Unix. Please get some one
experienced to help you out( As I believe you did). They will help you set
up a system that will be a lot easier to use than one you set up yourself.
Once you've used Linux for a while, the next install will seem like
child's play. Ever tried installing WinNT? I had to reboot my machine no
less than 7 times during the install.
It starts setup, Reboots. Detects hardware, Reboots,
configures, Reboots. Then I had to install the display driver separately (
My Xwindows driver was included with the Linux distro.) Reboot. I had
install the IDE drivers separately to enable DMA (No such problem with
linux ) Reboot. I had to install sound drivers separately (No such problem
with Linux) Reboot. Then download IE5 and install. Reboot.
On top of that, everytime I download a Service Pack,
or libraries update, or Microsoft Virtual Machine, I need to Reboot
In contrast, my debian system automatically updates
and upgrades software *daily* (You don't need to do this unless you want
to be on the cutting edge) *without* reboots. I no longer actively update
my machine. It all happens automatically. And each morning I log into my
machine, I know that the latest and greatest software is already there
downloaded and installed in the night while I slept :). The only time I
reboot is when I install a new kernel.
Hope you have more fun with Linux.
cheers,
Anant Kabra anant.kabra@usa.xerox.com
But it should all be very easy....
Hi Jerry,
Time to bring up Steve Gibson's name again (the
writer of Spinrite).
He has updated his utility for checking the status
of zip / jazz drives http://grc.com/clickdeath.htm
and http://grc.com/freestuff.htm
He has written a utility for checking the
vulnerability of your computer over the internet http://grc.com/x/ne.htm?bh0bkyd2
and his recommendation on personal firewalls http://www.grc.com/su-firewalls.htm
Good reading, and he is an excellent assembly
language programmer. (just on the other side of frightening if you try to
think about what he can accomplish with assembly)
- Paul pdwalker@quagmyre.com
SUBJECT: The
Politics of Starship Troopers
Someone recently commented about the political
system of the novel Starship Troopers. I have some fairly strong opinions
as to why the proposed system in ST is not a good idea.
First, a brief recap for those who haven't read the
book. (If you've only seen the movie, which ought to have been titled
"Triumph of the Will: 90210", then I recommend you read the
book. Although I enjoyed the film for it's completely unabashed and
unapologetic treatment of the subject, it in many ways an gross caricature
of Heinlein's work.)
In the novel, Heinlein proposes a political system
whereby only veterans are allowed to vote. In this world, military service
earns the title of "citizen", whereas the rest of the population
enjoys all of the standard constitutional rights except for the right to
make political decisions. The rationale behind this is that those who have
risked their lives in the service of their civilization are more likely to
make decisions that are driven by a desire for the common good.
Of course, the military depicted in this novel is
substantially different in it's social construction than the U.S. military
of today. For one thing, the very act of enlisting entails a risk of life
and limb, even during peacetime, because the Federation government ensures
that the available career paths contain a salting of hazardous and
demeaning jobs to which an enlistee may be assigned. Thus, every act of
enlistment is a roll of the dice, from the enlistee's point of view, with
his or her life on the line. The Federation also tries it's best to scare
off potential enlistees, thus maximizing the chance that the potential
future citizen will be motivated by "atruistic" concerns.
One question that readily comes to mind is: How
serious was Heinlein about this proposal? I know from reading Heinlein's
essays that he considered himself first and foremost to be a professional
writer, and not a political pundit. For example, in his comments about
Stranger in a Strange Land (another controversial book), he claimed that
his purpose was not to propose solutions but to ask questions, and was a
little disturbed when people started taking his advice literally.
It's certainly true that the characters in ST would
probably disagree greatly with the political stance of the characters in
Stranger in a Strange Land, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, or Time Enough
for Love; nor would any of the characters in any of those novels agree
with or even like each other, although they do have some features in
common. So it's clear that Heinlein isn't proposing one universal
solution, but rather a whole set of alternatives. What makes Heinlein a
genius in my opinion, is that he was able to argue each of these political
positions so sincerely and convincingly.
However, it has also been pointed out that Heinlein
wrote a "fact" essay in which he attempted to promulgate his
scheme of veteran franchise. But it should be noted that he also wrote
another essay in which he proposed that only mothers (i.e. women who have
borne one or more children) be allowed to hold political office. I don't
believe that Heinlein was serious in the latter proposal, but instead
wished to provoke discussion. So I suspect that Heinlein's proposed system
of government was in fact a gedankenexperiment.
I can see how this notion of selective franchise
would be attractive, especially when faced with frustration caused by the
NIMBY ('not in my backyard') principle. And many of us have occasional
flashes of anxiety about "bread and circuses" and other examples
of democracy gone bad. Wouldn't it be great if we _could_ apply some
filtering process to weed out the selfish, the cowardly, the stupid? Mark
Twain once proposed a society whereby those who were more educated, or
otherwise objectively more deserving, would get "extra" votes.
However, there is a subtle flaw in the proposal of
earning citizenship via military service, and it is this: The defenders of
Liberty are not always its best representatives.
Having been in the military myself, I know that the
rigid, authoritarion structure of the military breeds a certain habit of
mind. The military has always been, by necessity, a dictatorship. In the
military, you never need to wonder who the VIPs are, or who is above you
on the social ladder, because they all wear little signs that tell you so.
I personally was impressed by the carefully designed but subtle
psychological manipulation in Basic Training, where you can only start
eating once the dining table is full (unless you're the last table), where
you always march in step; rules designed to foster teamwork and
cooperation, but also pliancy to authority.
The military is also in some ways a highly
competitive environment. "Shape up or Ship out" is the operative
phrase here. But civilian life isn't a platoon, it's a lot messier, and we
can't simply "ship out" those who are less capable. As a result,
I've known quite a few veterans who subscribe to a rampant (and overly
simplistic) social Darwinism.
I have also observed that military service tends to
produce a certain "hardass" quality, highly exaggerated in some
individuals. Of course, many of the qualities of a hardass are virtues to
a voter: Toughness of mind, self-discipline, and personal courage. But
hardasses also have vices, the most common of which is insensitivity to
the pain of others. On a few occasions, I have been astonished by the lack
of compassion possessed by an individual.
Thus, I believe that while veterans have many good
qualities as voters, they need to be balanced by the opinions of people
from other walks of life. While Heinlein's solution is subtle and clever,
I believe that Jefferson's scheme will ultimately prove wiser: That a
plurality of voters, from many different backgrounds and having different
life experiences, will be the best possible electorate.
-- Talin (Talin@ACM.org) "I am life's flame.
Respect my name. www.sylvantech.com/~talin My fire is red, my heart is
gold. www.hackertourist.com/talin Thy dreams can be...believe in me, If
you will let my wings unfold..." -- Heather Alexander
I am tempted to give Larry Niven's answer to the
chap who wrote to complain about the attitudes of one of the characters in
Niven's "How the Heroes Die." Larry wrote: "We in the
writing profession have a technical term for people who believe that the
authors believe everything their characters believe. We call them
'idiots'. None of my best friends are idiots. Merry Christmas."
Now Talin's letter doesn't quite deserve that,
but first, Heinlein didn't "Propose" the system described in
Starship Troopers (the novel) he DESCRIBED it; it is as if someone writing
about Hornblower is advocating Whiggish Monarchy to say Heinlein is
"proposing" this. What he did have his character. the one that
tends to be the spokesman for the man Heinlein would be if he lived in
that society say, is something to the effect that of course this isn't the
best possible system, and it was probably first set up by veteran
survivors who weren't going to be ruled by draft dodgers: but it has the
merit of being STABLE, because it takes the potential wolves and makes
them sheep dogs.
Cicero's critique of democracy is that great men
can't rise high. Monarchy gives too much power to one person, aristocracy
soon degenerates into mere rule of wealth, and the Republic, which allowed
people to rise to great heights but also gave the common people some say
in their affairs, is best. The US description is "deriving its just
powers from the consent of the governed", and Heinlein's "Only
those who have made a real contribution to the state shall have a say in
how the state is governed" comes pretty close to "consent":
one "consents" in the Starship Troopers universe (in the book,
not the silly movie) by volunteering. If you volunteer they HAVE TO TAKE
YOU and give you something worthwhile to do. It may be pleasant, it may be
no more than going through basic military training, it may be carrying the
mail for a few years. But you demonstrate that you consent to the
government and earn a place in it.
There were anomalies in the book. Merchant
sailors (on space ships, I think) weren't considered to have been part of
the federal service and thus didn't earn citizenship. Their union was
working on getting that for them. In an actual Republic the tendency is
for politicians to extend the franchise once they get in power, giving the
vote to those likely to vote for them: in the US most states long had a 40
shilling freehold property qualification to allow you to vote, and as late
as 1956 when I moved to the state of Washington there was a difference
between a citizen who could vote in normal political elections, and a
taxpayer who owned property and was thus allowed to vote in elections on
tax rates. That was wiped out, but this was in the Soviet of Washington,
for heaven's sake. Franchises are always extended for lower and lower
qualifications, and there is no real reason to suppose that wouldn't have
happened in Heinlein's story universe.
In the real world, Heinlein used to rail at me
that any nation that had to resort to conscription to get defenders didn't
deserve to be defended. On the other hand, his political experience
consisted in part of running for the Democratic nomination to State
Assembly against Sam Yorty. Heinlein ran on the "Ham and Eggs"
ticket of Upton Sinclair, which is to say, way to the left of Yorty in
those pre-WW II days. He lost pretty badly too. (He told me this when he
discovered I was campaign manager for Sam Yorty in the 1969 election for
Mayor of Los Angeles; an interesting time, since at that time Bradley,
Yorty's opponent, was pretty well a subsidiary of Jess Unruh,
Incorporated; but that's another story for another time.)
What Robert was considering in Starship Trooper
was what could one do if faced with a large, implacable, and very powerful
enemy; how could you preserve a society worth living in that was also able
to defend itself? It was not then and is not now a trivial question.
For more on this see below.
TOP
|
CLICK HERE for
a Special Request. 
