Stop Microsoft
Operating Systems => Linux and UNIX => Topic started by: Bazoukas on 30 September 2002, 21:03
-
Red Hat 8.0 (http://www.linuxcompatible.org/article.php?sid=240)
And btw Unreal Tournament just hit the stores today. :eek: :D :eek: :D :eek: ;) :cool:
-
there is an article I read at www.distrowatch.com (http://www.distrowatch.com) and it is quite critical supposed to be a dissapointment from Redhat 7.3
I love redhat But I am going to wait for RedHat 8.1
I will stick with Mandrake 9.0 for now
-
Am downloading RedHat 8.0 now...
-
quote:
Originally posted by sAvAgE:
there is an article I read at www.distrowatch.com (http://www.distrowatch.com) and it is quite critical supposed to be a dissapointment from Redhat 7.3
I love redhat But I am going to wait for RedHat 8.1
I will stick with Mandrake 9.0 for now
Hmmm, I can't seem to find the review you are referring to. The closest I could find was two reviews on early betas. And they weren't all that bad, even for a beta. Could you point me to the one you are referring to? Of course I will have my own review in a few days.
-
Hmmmmmm.... maybe i will wait for your reviews until i get redhat 8.0.
-
do broswers use active or passive FTP??
One of the types of FTP wont work through my server, its whatever type command line ftp things use. My broswer can dl from ftp just fine but ncftp and wget cant get anything from ftp servers. Is there any way to get wget to work like the same type of FTp as broswers?? I didnt see anything like that in the man page for wget.
-
Passive connections mean the client does all of the initiation of the connection. Sometimes passive connections are required if you are behind a firewall. Non-passive connections are the initial connection is made by the client for login and the data channel (udp) connection is initiated by the server back to the client.
I believe wget normally uses non-passive FTP and according to the wget man page it says to get passive FTP you just add the "--passive-ftp" parameter.
The man page for "ncftpget" says use "-F" to force passive connections. "passive" is the default but if passive times out it normally falls back to normal mode.
If you are using ncftp interactively you can:
ncftp> set passive on
But are you sure this is your problem? Could it be that you have set up your firewall to not allow FTP traffic and you have your web browser configured to use your proxy server for FTP as well as HTTP traffic? I don't have any problems connecting directly through my ipchains firewall for FTP. You can also set "wget" to go through your proxy either by using command line parameters or configuring it in your .wgetrc file (make a copy of /etc/wgetrc and put it in your home directory as .wgetrc and modify).
[ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]
-
i tried wget through my proxy, this is what makes me think that it may need to be in passive mode.... and it started working with wget using passive mode.
[ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: The Master of Reality / Bob ]
-
How did you try and get wget to go through your proxy? Could you give me the command line you used, and the error message it produced? And what is your "ftp_user" variable set to in your squid.conf, that is, could the FTP server be rejecting your anonymous password that you have configured in Squid?
-
it worked with passive mode. My squid FTP user is anonymous.
-
quote:
Originally posted by The Master of Reality / Bob:
it worked with passive mode. My squid FTP user is anonymous.
That would be wrong. Squid will connect as anonymous by default but the "ftp_user" variable is misleading, it's actually meant to hold the "password" for the user "anonymous". Normally anonymous FTP servers (at least strict anonymous servers) want an RFC compliant email address as the anonymous password. You could set the ftp_user var to something like "[email protected]".
Now, as far as wget using your proxy server, I am not entirely sure that it will use the proxy for anything other than http transfers. That could easily be tested though. Just set up an anonymous FTP server and check the logs after a wget and see what anonymous password was used. If it matches the one in your Squid configuration then that would mean wget uses Squid for FTP transfers as well (assuming you have proxy configured in your wget config).
[ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]
-
Here's a cool flash presentation that gives a little overview of RedHat 8.0:
http://www.redhat.com/software/linux/flash/redhat6_5.swf (http://www.redhat.com/software/linux/flash/redhat6_5.swf)
-
Ok, finally found a faster mirror and finished downloading RH8. Writing to CDs now...
-
fuck, are you serious??!!! I got 180 Kb/s bandwith on the server i dled from.... and that was right when after i posted "i will get it after i hear your reviews"
In fact it took 4 hours for all the images, but then i accidentally deleted one and dled it again in less than 3 hours (started before i went to school, finished before lunch)
The only problem is that i dont hav and CD/R
ftp://ftp.heanet.ie/mirrors/ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/8.0/en/iso/i386/ (http://ftp://ftp.heanet.ie/mirrors/ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/8.0/en/iso/i386/)
[ October 02, 2002: Message edited by: The Master of Reality / Bob ]
[ October 02, 2002: Message edited by: The Master of Reality / Bob ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by void main:
Here's a cool flash presentation that gives a little overview of RedHat 8.0:
http://www.redhat.com/software/linux/flash/redhat6_5.swf (http://www.redhat.com/software/linux/flash/redhat6_5.swf)
I just watched it! Nice presentation but I'd like to see KDE in action as well and not only GNOME 2.0. Looks to me like RedHat is on the right path. Pls let me know what you think of it when you install it (http://smile.gif)
-
quote:
Originally posted by The Master of Reality / Bob:
fuck, are you serious??!!! I got 180 Kb/s bandwith on the server i dled from.... and that was right when after i posted "i will get it after i hear your reviews"
In fact it took 4 hours for all the images, but then i accidentally deleted one and dled it again in less than 3 hours (started before i went to school, finished before lunch)
The only problem is that i dont hav and CD/R
ftp://ftp.heanet.ie/mirrors/ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/8.0/en/iso/i386/ (http://ftp://ftp.heanet.ie/mirrors/ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/8.0/en/iso/i386/)
Well, I started downloading directly from RedHat before the mirrors actually had it available (big mistake on release day). I should have killed the downloads earlier but I wasn't in a huge hurry. I was able to keep what was already downloaded and resume the transfers from a mirror using ncftpget.
-
Geeeeeeeeeeesh!!!!!! You can barely get on! And if you do it wants to take up to 60 hours!
And linux is dead?
Yeah, release day is a bad time to try and download. :(
-
it looks like redhat8.0 is a going to be a kick ass solution for a desktop os. i am downloading it now, in fact, i have about 10 minutes left and then its time to burn cds. I watched the flash video, checked the site, and i can say that i am very excited to install it. i am currently learning how to setup and administer a basic linux server using redhat7.0 (it shipped with the book) and already enjoy using linux. I was using suse, but i havent booted into it for a while. i think im going to wipe that drive and put redhat8.0 on it instead. 8.0 looks, easy (if thats the right word). something that a lot of people could easily switch to.
ecsyle-one
-
Correct me if am wrong, but doesnt Gnome have an Xpish look to it? I am talking about system settings and they way its layed out.
This kinda pisses me off.
-
Correction : XP looks like Gnome - now that pisses me off.
-
RedHat 8.0 looks kinda soft, I might d/l it anyway though. void, how come this is your OS of choice? I would have thought you were a Slackware man? Or is it because RedHat has become the 'industry standard'
Wow, this is my 500th post, thats quite a lot.
[ October 03, 2002: Message edited by: Tux ]
-
I think he likes RPMs
-
I have liked RedHat since about version 3 for many reasons. Two of them you already mentioned.
- I like RPM.
- More things are available as it has become the defacto standard.
- I believe their system is laid out more sensibly.
- Software is kept up to date, usually configured the way I like it, and more times than not everything just plain works.
- Since I picked it as my primary back around version 3 over the Slackware (used to prefer Slackware) I just never had a reason to switch back, it worked.
- I don't believe they will go out of business anytime soon and for the most part they haven't as a business done anything to piss me off.
- I believe they are the most "polished". Because they are a business it's easier to recommend as the distro of choice for IT departments.
- Familiarity
- Good support and problem resolution
- Quick patches and security updates
Now, there are disadvantages relating to the above as well. Because they are the most popular they are more of a target for script kiddies. You definitely need to keep up on upgrades and security patches as script kiddies look for default distribution installs with known vulnerabilities. If you update your software, even if the updates themselves expose new vulnerabilities script kiddies are usually thwarted. An older default RedHat install which is insecurely configured usually can be owned by script kiddies fairly easily. Like anything else you need to be smart and keep your system upgraded and securely configured. But I believe the pros far outweigh the cons.
I also like Debian a lot and apt is better than RPM in many ways but there are many disadvantages to using Debian, and apt alone usually isn't enough to overcome those disadvantages. I use Debian on Sparc for example. FreeBSD is also a good *NIX but I like RedHat for desktop use and most server uses. Now these are only my *opinions*. I try not to push these opinions heavily and the only reason I expressed my opinions about RedHat are because you asked me. I think it's great if people use Mandrake, or SuSe, or any other distro (besides Lindows). I obviously am in more of a position to help someone who has chosen RedHat so I may favor it in my recommendations.
[ October 02, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]
-
just installed it. Does anyone else find that if you right click on the panel in kde, then go to panel/remove/button the panel crashes?
-
quote:
Originally posted by flap:
just installed it. Does anyone else find that if you right click on the panel in kde, then go to panel/remove/button the panel crashes?
Haven't tried it but such behaviour is common in *.0 releases which tend to be buggy.
-
I just burned Red Hat 8.0 on my only CDs (luckily they are CD/RW) and it wouldnt boot off them. I might make a boot disk and try that, but i might be too lazy.
-
i think just my first CD is PhUx0r3|) it wont mount. I will burn it again and try again.
-
Well, I gave it a clean install on a separate partition on my laptop and have been playing with it for about an hour now. Up to this point here are my thoughts: IT FUCKING SUCKS! Those KDE guys were right. Red Hat really fucked this thing up. I would have to say my initial impression is this is the single worst version of Red Hat I have ever used. And I've used them all. In fact, it reminds me a lot of what I don't like about Mandrake (which means that maybe the Mandrake users would like it).
Firt time I logged in I thought I would check out the new Gnome. It certainly didn't look like Gnome and the first thing that happened is the damn thing crashed and restarted the desktop. Ok, time to check out how they fucked up KDE.
It might be better for n00bs as they have added a few *nice* apps most notably a good software package installer and some other graphical system configuration tools. But I want my non-hacked KDE back! I got most of KDE configured back the way I like it but the fonts are fucked.
I won't give up on it just yet, I mean it does have the latest Evolution, OpenOffice, KDE, etc, but they completely fucked up what people liked about each desktop. They added shit to KDE that worked half assed. They changed a lot of the ICONS. I'm pissed! (http://smile.gif) I am tempted to just uninstall KDE and get the latest RPMS from KDE's web site. And just as tempted to drop Red Hat altogether for Debian.
But, we'll see if enough people like me complain enough so that when 8.1 comes out they ditch their customizations and BlueCurve shit and get their heads out of their asses. I certainly see what all the fuss was about on the KDE news groups. I am with them on this one. KDE 3.x worked *perfectly* on Red Hat 7.3. What comes with 8.0 is a pile of customized crap.
Needless to say I will not be "upgrading" any other machines just yet. It's odd that they could go from what I consider to be their best release in 7.3 to their worst in 8.0.
[ October 03, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]
-
i have installed redhat8.0 and played with it for a bit as well void main, and i have mixed opinions. First off, a little background. i do not know linux. I have used linux for all of about 1 month (regularly). i use mac osx jaguar as my main os.
It seems that redhat 8.0 has made it easy for the noob (me) to jump into linux and just use it. Its clean feeling. there isnt alot going on when you boot into it. its a pretty face on top of a powerful os. But if i wanted that id use osX jaguar (which i do). I think there should be a choice during install to choose the new Bluecurve style, or the tried and true old style. add it to the options when you choose to use kde, gnome etc.
the one thing about linux was it made you learn how to use a computer. with this new redhat, and the simplified front to it, you really wont have to. which is good for people looking to make the switch, but dont want to dive right into it and learn how to use a computer. i want to be thrown into it, forced to learn it. Redhat 8 is friendly, but i wouldnt switch from osX. Im sure a lot of people looking to switch from windows would love the new redhat, whereas a lot of veteran linux users might switch distros. i dont know enough about linux to give a good assesment of this package though. it is good for the "noobs", something a little less intimidating.
i like redhat7. it is what im currently learning (im reading this book, "Linux Adminstration, a Beginers Guide", and redhat 7.0 shipped with it). I like the command line, probably because of the years using autocad. i like how insanely customizable it is. its fun. i will keep 8.0 on and play with it for now, but redhat 7 is a lot more "fun"
ecsyle_one
-
I am calmed down now. (http://smile.gif) I agree that the new Red Hat should be much better for the n00bs. And they did a lot more than just create a theme for both Gnome and KDE (I was under the impression that is all they did). I think the new graphical tools are excellent for the n00b. What's underneath is all I'm really concerned about anyhow. I don't actually use a GUI for much more than opening up a few terminal windows, opening up Konqueror, and Evolution for Email so what's the difference right? Right.
I still can't get the fonts right in Konqueror which is probably the single biggest gripe I have right now. Konqueror used to look much better than Mozilla for fonts in my opinion. In RH8 Mozilla doesn't look much better than it did before but Konqueror is hosed (I hope that wasn't intentional).
So I'll leave my initial review as it is. I have a feeling any RedHat lover would have the same initial reaction I had. For those people who didn't like RedHat before, maybe this is what they were wanting.
-
Ok, I may start retracting my statements in my first review fairly quickly. I got frustrated trying to get KDE back into shape so I decided to go back to the default BlueCurve/Gnome login and play around some more. After using it a little longer I think I might actually start liking it.
Mozilla is working very well and thinks actaully look pretty sharp. I still think they should have left KDE alone but the new look does kind of grow on you. Hope I didn't scare anyone away. It certainly will be much easier for n00bs.
-
quote:
Originally posted by The Master of Reality / Bob:
I just burned Red Hat 8.0 on my only CDs (luckily they are CD/RW) and it wouldnt boot off them.
Burning ISO onto a CD-RW? Forget it.
-
why wouldnt that work?
It seemed to when i installed slackware off one.
The RH 8.0 install didnt work though so maybe you are right. It couldnt find packages or the packages were corrupt er somethin like that.
I will probly buy some CD-Rs and burn it again.
-
quote:
Originally posted by void main:
I am calmed down now. (http://smile.gif) I agree that the new Red Hat should be much better for the n00bs. And they did a lot more than just create a theme for both Gnome and KDE (I was under the impression that is all they did). I think the new graphical tools are excellent for the n00b. What's underneath is all I'm really concerned about anyhow. I don't actually use a GUI for much more than opening up a few terminal windows, opening up Konqueror, and Evolution for Email so what's the difference right? Right.
I still can't get the fonts right in Konqueror which is probably the single biggest gripe I have right now. Konqueror used to look much better than Mozilla for fonts in my opinion. In RH8 Mozilla doesn't look much better than it did before but Konqueror is hosed (I hope that wasn't intentional).
So I'll leave my initial review as it is. I have a feeling any RedHat lover would have the same initial reaction I had. For those people who didn't like RedHat before, maybe this is what they were wanting.
quick question whats so important about fonts. does it make a difference in linux?<--- not sarcastic
-
voidmain what is wrong with you?!?? It fucking rules! It's possibly the only version of Linux I like. The fonts are fucked? Hell no!! They look great compared to earlier versions of linux. GNOME hasn't crashed on my machine once, not even the panel. You don't like the icons?!??! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHHHH!! They look even better than the XP icons. And for once the system tools WORK without fucking up. And mozilla doesn't break up text while scrolling.
Nice job red hat, keep this up and I may consider dumping windows...
-
quote:
Originally posted by * Red Ranger Software * / Blob:
Burning ISO onto a CD-RW? Forget it.
Why? That's *all* I use. They work great for me.
-
i have heard that of many people, because after you burn and isntall it you can blank the CDs and use it to burn the next version.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Windows XP User #5225982375:
voidmain what is wrong with you?!?? It fucking rules! It's possibly the only version of Linux I like. The fonts are fucked? Hell no!! They look great compared to earlier versions of linux. GNOME hasn't crashed on my machine once, not even the panel. You don't like the icons?!??! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHHHH!! They look even better than the XP icons. And for once the system tools WORK without fucking up. And mozilla doesn't break up text while scrolling.
Nice job red hat, keep this up and I may consider dumping windows...
XP Luser, is that really you?!? Can't be.. If it is then I take back every bad thing I said about 8.0 and will recommend it to all the Windows users out there (while I secretly continue to run 7.3).
I can say with certainty that KDE 3.x kicks the crap out of the default Gnome desktop that Red Hat 8 comes with. Don't get me wrong, it looks nice and should be easy for a n00b but it's way too dumbed down for me and many things are just lacking. For instance, to browse Windows shares with Nautilus you have to use your windows login ID and password in the URL:
smb://userid:password@winserver/
There is no way that I have found to configure a default DOMAIN/USER/PASSWD you don't have to use that info in a URL. Konqueror was *much* more capable for browsing Windows servers. In KDE Control Center there was a place where you put your default DOMAIN/USERNAME/PASSWORD (or it would prompt for authentication) so accessing Windows shares on NT servers was very clean:
smb://winserver
Now, that option appears to be missing in Red Hat 8.0's KDE. Was it removed by KDE or by Red Hat?
So, as I said, I think I am going to remove Red Hat's KDE and download it straight from the source and see how that works.. Still, that wouldn't be too bad if that will be my only major issue.
Another thing I noticed is that "man pages" no longer display correctly in KDE's KTerm. Worked fine in 7.3 and it works in Gnome just fine. Hopefully this is just another *.0 bug and not intentional.
[ October 03, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]
-
expect screenshots from me soon.
My first impression during the install was that they had made the package sselection (grouped packages) better. I had little need to go and select individual packages. It is an excellant upgrade.
When i say the Login screen, at first i thought "what the fuck is this???!@#$#@$%" but then i looked and realized that it is pretty L337 and cool.
Its default skin isnt much different than the normal KDE default. Only the buttons and icons have seemed to change. There is a folder on the desktop to quickly edit items in the main menu. The former "K" button is now a red hat.
Instead of saying "Mozilla" it just says web browser. And anything extra (like konqueror apparently) is put under "extras" in the main menu. I guess it includes anything that is not set to be the default for whatever it does.
It comes with OpenOffice which kicks ass.
I think this Red Hat will be great for n00bs though, it seems to have a hell of a lot more GUI configuration tools for things like printers, webservers, proxies, firewalls, and anything else you could imagine. (i didnt install meny of them though).
Ummmmm.... i dont think there is anything else i can say about it right now.
-
It is very easy to change from bluecurve. You just switch the colour scheme and icon set. I switched to the Connectiva Crystal Icon Theme which is very kickass.
[ October 03, 2002: Message edited by: The Master of Reality / Bob ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by void main:
Why? That's *all* I use. They work great for me.
Are you reading them using your CD writer or a normal CD-ROM drive?
-
how did you get the fonts to look right in konqueror??? they are horrible!
Mozilla works fine though. And i think Gnome looks better with the bluecurve theme. I hange KDE though
-
quote:
Originally posted by * Red Ranger Software * / Blob:
Are you reading them using your CD writer or a normal CD-ROM drive?
Normal CD drives can read them just fine. In fact I installed on my old laptop that has one of the most fussy drives there is (and not a writer). Seems when you write the disks with "cdrecord" they work fine in any drive. The nice part is, I just reuse the disks when the new version of Red Hat comes out.
[ October 03, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by The Master of Reality / Bob:
how did you get the fonts to look right in konqueror??? they are horrible!
Mozilla works fine though. And i think Gnome looks better with the bluecurve theme. I hange KDE though
I never did get the fonts to look right in Konqueror. Luckily I did the install on a separate partition and just dual booted my Red Hat 7.3 partition. I couldn't take it any more, am back on 7.3. It also seems to hog up more memory on this old laptop. 7.3 is much faster. I suggest you have at least 128MB if you are going to run 8.0 and the new BlueCrap.
-
8.0 seems faster on my old dev computer when running KDE than any other OS running kde on that computer (and windows ran slow on it too)
-
Screenshots of RedHat 8.0 (http://forum.fuckmicrosoft.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=7&t=000285&p=5)
[ October 03, 2002: Message edited by: The Master of Reality / Bob ]
-
Here are many screen shots of a default RedHat 8.0 install:
http://ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/distributions/contrib/texstar/screenshots/redhat80/ (http://ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/distributions/contrib/texstar/screenshots/redhat80/)
-
but my screenshot has a picture of itself when it was posted here. Ahhhhhhh!!! its a paradox!!!!
-
I must admitt that the what REALY made me stick with Linux, was Red Hat 7.3.
7.2 was awesome too, but 7.3 just did the trick for me and made me ditch Windshit alltogether.
For me its very well polished.
-
Well, I believe I am changing my thoughts on this 8.0. After further evaluation I am beginning to think it just plain kicks ass!!
I put it on my main desktop (Athlon 1600 w/512MB). I've figured out most of the desktop differences and the more I use the more I like. Mozilla is kicking butt. All the graphical additions are very nice. I would have to say it is nearly a complete desktop that any n00b (or pro) would find very easy. They really did some good work on this one.
I almost wonder now how I came to the immediate conclusion that it sucked. I guess I saw all the graphical gobbledegook and felt betrayed. (http://smile.gif) I say, go and get it boys and girls!
-
I gotta Q about upgrading. If i have 7.2 on my comp and i put the RH8.0 discs in and choose upgrade, willl it overwrite any of my files that are in 7.2?? ?
-
I haven't yet done an upgrade with 8.0, only fresh installs. I have done upgrade installs with most previous versions including 7.3 without many problems. It should only upgrade RPMS and leave your users, user data and other configuration information alone. RedHat 8.0 is a pretty radical update so I opted to just do a clean install. I didn't want my previous kde and gnome preferences screwing something up.
I did the fresh installs to different partitions so I could mount up my old installation and copy anything over that I needed, and set up a boot entry so I could boot back into the old versions. Eventually I will blow away the old installation and use that partition as a work area until the next major upgrade where it will become the place to do a fresh install.
-
thats what i was gonna do, but i installed RH8.0 on another computer instead. Beside Slackware 8.1.
I may try to install it yet on my main computer but when i tried the first time it phuxored up.
At least the installation program runs in RH 8.0.. RH7.3 wouldnt run the installation on my main computer. I am still using 7.2
-
i have only one problem with redhat 8 right now, how the fu@k do you mount a windows volume (me and co-worker have been stumbling over this for a few days now). i know in mandrake9 there is a utility called 'windows shares' and it took me a whole 2 minutes to find, mount and copy files. but i dont know what im doing in redhat. any suggestions???
ecsyle one
-
I assume you are talking about connecting to a remote Windows machine and copying files from a shared directory. There are actually several ways to do this. If you are in the default Gnome environment the simple easiest way is to click on your "Home" ICON on your desktop and type "smb:" in the Location bar which will bring up a "Network Neighborhood" type of screen. Click on your domain or workgroup ICON and it will bring up a list of servers. Click on a server and it should bring up a list of shares.
Now, if you need to authenticate to gain access to the share you'll need to supply your username/password as part of the URL (I don't like this method for security reasons but it's quick an easy):
smb://username:password@winserver
In the above URL you would use your Windows userid as the "username", your Windows password as the "password" and the network name of your windows machine as the "winserver".
A better method is to mount a Windows share using the "smbmount" command. This will be similar to "Mapping a Network Drive" in Windows. You can also set it up in your /etc/fstab to automount Windows shares when you boot your machine. There is another thread where we gave details on how to use smbmount and set up the automatic mounting in /etc/fstab. Search the Linux/UNIX forum and you should find the thread. Using "smbmount" as the keyword should find some threads on the subject. If you can't get it let me know and I'll help you further. Use "man smbmount" for more specific information.
Also you can use "smbclient" to get an FTP like connection to your Windows shares.
And not last and certainly not least you can download a cool utility such as "xsmbrowser" which works really well.
Most of the above require you to have Samba and Samba client packages installed. Look in your "Packages" ICON in System Settings to make sure you have Samba installed under the "Windows File Server" section. Some of the above might also require that you have your Samba Configuration file set up properly for your network (/etc/samba/smb.conf).
I don't believe there is a graphical tool for configuring the smb.conf included with RedHat 8.0 (one of the few still missing). Swat is the best graphical tool for configuring the smb.conf file but I don't see it included with RedHat. I like to manually edit the file anyhoo. Make sure you restart the smb service after making changes to that config file.
Try the things in the first paragraphs before configuring smb.conf to see if they work without it. Good luck and if you have any further questions I'll be more than happy to help.
Here's a related thread explaining "smbmount":
http://forum.fuckmicrosoft.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=5&t=000192 (http://forum.fuckmicrosoft.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=5&t=000192)
And to be able to mount Windows shares as a normal user you might want to setuid the "smbmnt" command first:
# chmod u+s /usr/bin/smbmnt
[ October 04, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]
-
thanks for the help void main. the windows volume is on the same computer, on a seperate drive. i am dual booting windows 2000 and redhat8. (i got rid of suse for redhat8). i was able to see my windows machine from redhat7 on my other computer, but i cant for the life of me get to the "drawing" drive from redhat8. i will use the "smbmount' method, as i would like to 'map' the drive to the desktop. i did install the samba packages, so it should work. i also find it fun (in a sick, sick way) to use the command line ;)
thanks again.
i will try this later, as i am stuck at work. though, i did convert a windows guy to linux here. he installed mandrake 9 here at work, and we have been messing with it all day. ah, the joy of the bosses being on vacation. (http://smile.gif)
ecsyle-one
-
Shit, now you tell me. (http://smile.gif) The "smbmount" and *all* of the instructions I gave you were for a network attached Windows machine, not a local drive. All you have to do is create an entry in your /etc/fstab for a FAT32 partition that might look something like this:
Change the "/dev/hda1" to whatever partition it is on (do a "# fdisk -l" for a list of partitions). And change the "/c" to wherever you want to mount it (make sure the directory exists before trying to mount it). Then to mount the drive type "# mount /c".
-
sorry about that void main. but, dont worry, the info still came in very handy. i have a friend who could use the info you provided. i can too as a matter of fact. thanks again, ill let you know if it worked soon. (http://smile.gif)
ecsyle_one
-
Initial thoughts on using RH8
It's still not a "windows killer" (like some doofus in OSnews claimed it would be) but for non-morons it is quite easy to use. I have bashed Linux in the past frequently, but usually it was about its sorry desktop offering. (that and I love stirring up shit) Distributions like Mandrake 8 and Suse were very buggy and Red Hat 7.0 crashed all over me. GNOME was ugly but fast, and KDE was pretty but slow. GNOME 2 seems both pretty and fast (although not as functional as I'd sometimes like; maybe gnome will be as usable as windows by version 2.2) Mozilla isn't disgusting and buggy anymore like it was during the 0.9.x periods. Evolution is just like Outlook and doesn't crash like it used to. Basically they have cloned much of the windows desktop, which I don't necessarily see as a bad thing. I mean, Windows copied the Mac interface, and look where Microsoft is today. :rolleyes: I still need windows for many things, like playing games, flash, dreamweaver, photoshop (although GIMP is not bad) etc. But now I can use Linux to surf the web and check email, and not have to worry about getting infected with trojans and worms. (Which also means I can uninstall my virus scanner for Windows) Zombie898798, try this. It's not like the old Linux. It's actually usable for a change. You can dual-boot so there's no risk. So anyway, I'll still point out shit I don't like about Linux , but for once open source doesn't suck for the end user. I really think this is a good thing because it will give Microsoft some incentive to make even better products than it already does.
-
I hate to do this but for once I actually agree with everything XP User just said. I would say that is a very fair assessment. I too think RedHat's version of Gnome is not nearly as configurable (bells and whistles) as KDE. It is however, *almost* clean as a whistle, not confusing, give you just what you need to get by, perfect for the new user (and I'm actually starting to like it). There are a few things missing, but there is *vastly* more there than in previous versions for GUI oriented people.
I think for the typical grandpa internet/email/solitaire home user it can be a Windows killer. It's certainly a functional alternative for Email and Web browsing. But it's certainly not going to be an immediate replacement for those entrenched in Windows. Unreal Tournament 2003, Quake 3, etc also show that it is more than capable of being a good game platform. Question is, how soon if ever will game companies port their games?
Obviously those who already bought Windows machines without doing any research and have all of that proprietary equipment (winmodems, USB printers/scanners) will likely not switch but I think with this release I have hope that at least Linux can start to show up as a blip on the radar which means more software vendors will see it as a viable alternative and have more incentive to port software. It's definitely a step in the right direction.
And good objective post XP User.
-
something aint right here.
-
does redhat8.0 support ntfs?? i created the entry in fstab, but when i went to mount it it says "filesystem ntfs not supported".
-
Ahh, you didn't mention it was NTFS. The easiest thing you can do is convert your NTFS to FAT32 (if you can do without file system security). RedHat supports NTFS just the same that every other Linux based distro does. It's the kernel, not the distro that has the support for the file system. NTFS is a proprietary (closed format) file system (like most everything Microsoft) so any support for it has been gained by reverse engineering and tinkering.
You can recompile the kernel and add NTFS support (only go for read only) but they say you have a good possibility of screwing up your NTFS file system using it in the 2.4 kernels. I just read that the 2.5 kernels have been completely stripped of the write code. My suggestion is to convert your NT/2k/XP side to FAT32 (FAT16 for NT) and be happy.
Here is an NTFS FAQ with some good reading:
http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/info/index.html (http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/info/index.html)
With Microsoft it's always going to be like a dog chasing his tail. As soon as NTFS support works in Linux M$ will have Longhorn out with their new database file system. I hope the world is finally rid of Microsoft before that happens.
[ October 04, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]
-
thank you. next time i have a question, ill be sure to include more info (http://smile.gif)
ecsyle_one