Re: os-prober detects in wrong order and GRUB doesn't have enough options

On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 05:29:56AM -, David Chmelik wrote: > Earlier this or last year I tried to use Devuan to report os-prober > detects in wrong order. It may detect current OS partition first, but if > you have more than 10, then it continues from 10, and (if this is all you > have) goe

Re: os-prober Just a Rant

On Fri, 26 May 2023 22:15:53 + (UTC) bw wrote: > > There is an etc/default/grub.d, which by analogy with other .d > > directories, can contain user overrides which are not touched by > > upgrades, but I made a quick attempt here which failed and I didn't > > have time to mess around with 

Re: os-prober Just a Rant

> There is an etc/default/grub.d, which by analogy with other .d > directories, can contain user overrides which are not touched by > upgrades, but I made a quick attempt here which failed and I didn't > have time to mess around with it. I can't find an example of doing it > correctly on the Ne

Re: os-prober Just a Rant

Am Donnerstag, 25. Mai 2023, 19:16:29 CEST schrieb Peter Ehlert: After upgrade to bookworm, the file /etc/default/grub was overwritten. It misses the entry like the former post mentioned. You will have to add it manually. After this, other OS are beeing seen. Do not know, why the maintainer did

Re: os-prober Just a Rant

Am 25.05.2023 um 19:28 schrieb Andrea Borgia: > > updates cause my edits to be overwritten... that sucks > > > Ah, ok, I wasn't seeing ghosts, then! >   I am using os-prober sometimes, but i am aware, that it fails almost on a regular basis on machines making use of ZFS. That has to be expe

Re: os-prober Just a Rant

On 26/05/2023 00:16, Peter Ehlert wrote: updates cause my edits to be overwritten... that sucks Do you mean the following bookworm update? grub2 (2.06-4) unstable; urgency=high * Add a commented-out GRUB_DISABLE_OS_PROBER section to /etc/default/grub to make it easier for users to turn

Re: os-prober Just a Rant

On 5/25/23, Andrea Borgia wrote: >> updates cause my edits to be overwritten... that sucks >> >> > Ah, ok, I wasn't seeing ghosts, then! Last time you all chatted this up, I went in and poked around. Now that GRUB is FINALLY working again, it's only registering one operating system. That's after

Re: os-prober Just a Rant

> updates cause my edits to be overwritten... that sucks > > Ah, ok, I wasn't seeing ghosts, then!

Re: OS File Permission issue (chown -R root.root ../)

On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 06:14:16PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote: > Simon wrote: > > OK.. So i was in my /root/ directory and put just one too many "."s in > > the line... Now i have a lot of files that i own!! > > > > I think the term is "DOH!". > > > > Is there any way to fix these? > > Personally I

Re: OS File Permission issue (chown -R root.root ../)

On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 12:17:24AM +, s. keeling wrote: > Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > OK.. So i was in my /root/ directory and put just one too many "."s in > > By "/root/", do you mean root's $HOME ("~root"), or do you mean root > of the filesystem, "/"? That shouldn't matter: The parent

Re: OS File Permission issue (chown -R root.root ../)

On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 06:14:16PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote: > Simon wrote: > > OK.. So i was in my /root/ directory and put just one too many "."s in > > the line... Now i have a lot of files that i own!! > > > > I think the term is "DOH!". > > > > Is there any way to fix these? > > Personally I

Re: OS File Permission issue (chown -R root.root ../)

Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > OK.. So i was in my /root/ directory and put just one too many "."s in By "/root/", do you mean root's $HOME ("~root"), or do you mean root of the filesystem, "/"? > the line... Now i have a lot of files that i own!! -- Any technology distinguishable from magic i

Re: OS File Permission issue (chown -R root.root ../)

Simon wrote: > OK.. So i was in my /root/ directory and put just one too many "."s in > the line... Now i have a lot of files that i own!! > > I think the term is "DOH!". > > Is there any way to fix these? Personally I would install a chroot on my system, install in the chroot all of the package

Re: OS File Permission issue (chown -R root.root ../)

Simon wrote: OK.. So i was in my /root/ directory and put just one too many "."s in the line... Now i have a lot of files that i own!! I think the term is "DOH!". Is there any way to fix these? Ouch! Ah the power of root, always ready to screw you. If you don't have many custom configs, I'd

Re: OS File Permission issue (chown -R root.root ../)

On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 09:24:06AM +1200, Simon wrote: > OK.. So i was in my /root/ directory and put just one too many "."s in > the line... Now i have a lot of files that i own!! > > I think the term is "DOH!". heh heh. That's pretty good. SO I don't think this all too much of a problem. Most

Re: OS may not have recognised my DVD....

On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 08:55:00PM +, Michael Fothergill wrote: > > > > > >> > >> I am not sure if the the OS saw my new DVD drive (Benq)correctly. I also > >> have a CD drive in my machine. > >> > > >In *nix there are many different types of files: > >directories, data files, symbolic lin

Re: OS may not have recognised my DVD....

> > I am not sure if the the OS saw my new DVD drive (Benq)correctly. I also > have a CD drive in my machine. > In *nix there are many different types of files: directories, data files, symbolic links, character devices, block devices, etc. You need to determine what the actual block devi

Re: OS may not have recognised my DVD....

Hi Michael, On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 11:03:57AM +, Michael Fothergill wrote: > Dear Debian foks, > > I am not sure if the the OS saw my new DVD drive (Benq)correctly. I also > have a CD drive in my machine. > > When I login in gnome I see an icon for the floppy drive cdrom1 as it calls > it

Re: OS X Terminal.app and Aptitude

Ian Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thomas Dickey wrote: >>> - Horizontal borders in Aptitude (e.g. in the search or quit >>> dialogs) become '?' characters. >> >> This is more interesting. Those dashes look like they're double-width. I >> have >> a hunch that your locale on Debian is se

Re: OS X Terminal.app and Aptitude

Thomas Dickey wrote: >> I compiled your terminfo on my Debian box, and ssh'd over with TERM >> set to 'nsterm'. A few initial observations: >> >> - Color is lost at the Bash prompt. > > bash on Debian? odd - since I thought it would be using ncurses (actually > the termcap interface). It m

Re: OS X Terminal.app and Aptitude

Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I meant recompiling ncurses, to get version 5.5. But I wonder if Apple > modified the ncurses 5.4, because tic didn't behave like under Debian. > For instance, xterm-* were installed under the 78 subdirectory instead > of the x subdirectory. hex 0x78 i

Re: OS X Terminal.app and Aptitude

On 2006-07-12 10:32:59 -, Thomas Dickey wrote: > Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is version 5.4. Recompiling ncurses 5.5 (and Mutt) fixes the > > problem. I don't know if it was specific to Mac OS X. > > ncurses 5.5 was released last fall, > so "recompiling" is not a good c

Re: OS X Terminal.app and Aptitude

Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2006-07-11 23:49:23 -, Thomas Dickey wrote: >> Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Note: you shouldn't use the ncurses that come with Mac OS X. They are >> > buggy. >> >> hmm - to the best of my knowledge, the "ncurses that come with

Re: OS X Terminal.app and Aptitude

On 2006-07-11 23:49:23 -, Thomas Dickey wrote: > Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Note: you shouldn't use the ncurses that come with Mac OS X. They are > > buggy. > > hmm - to the best of my knowledge, the "ncurses that come with Mac OS X" > are some version of ncurses, just like

Re: OS X Terminal.app and Aptitude

Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You should set TERM to 'macosx'. If things don't work, just fix them > in the terminfo data and rerun tic. that's more/less what I was advising. > Note: you shouldn't use the ncurses that come with Mac OS X. They are > buggy. hmm - to the best of my

Re: OS X Terminal.app and Aptitude

Ian Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry, meant for this to go to the list (why no Reply-To?)... tin doesn't post to email (I often followup with the same information) > Thomas Dickey wrote: > First off thank you for such a helpful response! >>> "pretty garbled" could be more than one thin

Re: OS X Terminal.app and Aptitude

On 2006-07-11 12:09:45 -0700, Ian Brandt wrote: [...] > >> Backing up a little, I'd edit that line to show > >> > >> macosx|generic color xterm, > >> > >> and remove the $HOME/.terminfo/x/xterm-color and > >> $HOME/.terminfo/n/nxterm, > >> rerun tic. Then > >> > >>infocmp macosx xterm-color >

Re: OS X Terminal.app and Aptitude

Sorry, meant for this to go to the list (why no Reply-To?)... Thomas Dickey wrote: First off thank you for such a helpful response! >> "pretty garbled" could be more than one thing... Here are some screen shots: >> Back

Re: OS X Terminal.app and Aptitude

Ian Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > I'm trying to get OS X 10.4.7's Terminal.app to play nice when ssh'ing > into my Debian Etch box. > I've run `infocmp -L > xterm-color' on my Mac (I have Terminal.app set > to report xterm-color), and compiled the result on my Debian box with > the f

Re: OS and file system encryption

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, You can also try encfs cheers, theo -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEOqq7SH6NzHMSyhIRAkKsAJ4oHSCnOGH6Hc+jHC+mMDMYiBoHOACdGnGv sq4BeKHo+b

Re: OS and file system encryption

On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 12:56:18PM +0200, Jochen Schulz wrote: > Tigran Varosyan: > > > > I have read the Linux has software available that can encrypt the OS and the > > file system to a degree that even with physical access to the HD, the data > > cannot be extracted. I was told that this slows t

Re: OS and file system encryption

Jochen Schulz wrote: > Jochen Schulz: > >> Tigran Varosyan: >> >>> I have read the Linux has software available that can encrypt the OS and the >>> file system to a degree that even with physical access to the HD, the data >>> cannot be extracted. I was told that this slows the systems down

Re: OS and file system encryption

Jochen Schulz: > Tigran Varosyan: > > > > I have read the Linux has software available that can encrypt the OS and the > > file system to a degree that even with physical access to the HD, the data > > cannot be extracted. I was told that this slows the systems down quite a bit > > but that is it

Re: OS and file system encryption

Tigran Varosyan: > > I have read the Linux has software available that can encrypt the OS and the > file system to a degree that even with physical access to the HD, the data > cannot be extracted. I was told that this slows the systems down quite a bit > but that is it very functional. This sounds

Re: OS X & Debian LAN [was: Mac OS X and Debian Linux LAN research.]

On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 03:48:49AM -0500, Chinook wrote: I've got /netatalk/ installed and minimally configured on Debian and set all the appropriate switches in OS X, and I can look at and move files back and forth from either box if I initiate (mount) the server on my Mac. I have not ye

Re: OS X & Debian LAN [was: Mac OS X and Debian Linux LAN research.]

Paul E Condon wrote: On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 03:48:49AM -0500, Chinook wrote: I've got /netatalk/ installed and minimally configured on Debian and set all the appropriate switches in OS X, and I can look at and move files back and forth from either box if I initiate (mount) the server on my

Re: OS X & Debian LAN [was: Mac OS X and Debian Linux LAN research.]

On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 03:48:49AM -0500, Chinook wrote: > I've got /netatalk/ installed and minimally configured on Debian and set > all the appropriate switches in OS X, and I can look at and move files > back and forth from either box if I initiate (mount) the server on my > Mac. I have not

Re: OS X & Debian LAN [was: Mac OS X and Debian Linux LAN research.]

On Wednesday, 11 January 2006 at 13:38:41 +, Clive Menzies wrote: > On (11/01/06 12:42), Antony Gelberg wrote: > > Clive Menzies wrote: > > > On my LAN router (Vigor2600) I don't see hostnames for Linux clients - > > > I've wondered why but didn't think it was sufficiently important to > > > sp

Re: OS X & Debian LAN [was: Mac OS X and Debian Linux LAN research.]

On (11/01/06 12:42), Antony Gelberg wrote: > Clive Menzies wrote: > > On my LAN router (Vigor2600) I don't see hostnames for Linux clients - > > I've wondered why but didn't think it was sufficiently important to > > spend time on nevertheless I'd be interested to know thw answer :) > > To upd

Re: OS X & Debian LAN [was: Mac OS X and Debian Linux LAN research.]

On (11/01/06 03:48), Chinook wrote: > I've got /netatalk/ installed and minimally configured on Debian and set > all the appropriate switches in OS X, and I can look at and move files > back and forth from either box if I initiate (mount) the server on my > Mac. I have not yet installed Howl (m

Re: OS X & Debian LAN [was: Mac OS X and Debian Linux LAN research.]

I've got /netatalk/ installed and minimally configured on Debian and set all the appropriate switches in OS X, and I can look at and move files back and forth from either box if I initiate (mount) the server on my Mac. I have not yet installed Howl (mdnsresponder) on the Debian box as I'm not

Re: OS emulation question (was: question)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 07:02:22PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Can I run Windows 98 inside Linex, so when I shut down Windows I'm still > running Linex? You want vmware or some similar program. - -- .''`. Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: OS X as Client, and Debian as backbone?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hej, Thanks for the very detailed answer. It helped me a lot, and I will check the links out. I managed to find out that the problems are related to 1) Dynamic automounting of NFS 2) NIS and Password Shadowing 3) Old version of NFS But no more details

Re: OS X as Client, and Debian as backbone?

Le 11/08/2003 15:58, « Bengt Thurée » <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > Hej, > > I have heard some rumours that this combination (using > Macintosh OS X as clients and Linux as a backbone (fileserver)) > do not work perfectly. *** There were issues with previous OS X versions but ever since the 1

Re: OS X Games

There _is_ a project underway to enable one to run OS X binaries under one of the BSD's running on PowerPC. It was mentioned on Slashdot a while back. However this project is just beginning and will probably take at least a couple years before you could run many OS X applications. OS X has a d

Re: OS X Games

At 1046120696s since epoch (02/24/03 11:04:56 -0500 UTC), Colin Watson wrote: > I suspect that's unlikely. The BSDs aren't in general binary-compatible > with each other: for example, they have different libc versions. MacOS X > appears to have a completely different shared library architecture to

Re: OS X Games

On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 10:31:34AM -0500, sean finney wrote: > On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 02:32:21PM +, Colin Watson wrote: > > They're not sufficiently similar for that to work, no. Apart from > > anything else, unless you're running Linux on PowerPC then it's a > > different processor architectu

Re: OS X Games

On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 02:32:21PM +, Colin Watson wrote: > They're not sufficiently similar for that to work, no. Apart from > anything else, unless you're running Linux on PowerPC then it's a > different processor architecture. Also, while MacOS X under the hood is > similar to Linux in that

Re: OS X Games

On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 01:44:26PM +, Keith O'Connell wrote: > Warcraft III is a CD for Windows and Mac OS X. Does the OS X > part suggest that is is likley that it might run nativly under > linux, or have I misunderstood OS X's similarith to Linux? They're not sufficie

FIXED - Re: OS hallucinates hard drive geometry

On Wednesday 19 June 2002 03:25, Michel Loos wrote: > Did you format (mkfs) those 2 partitions before trying to mount them? > Seems the kernel sees your old formatation on hda2 and no formatation > on hda3 D'oh, THAT'S what I was missing :) mkfs'ing the partitions solved the problem. Thanks to

Re: OS hallucinates hard drive geometry

Em Qua, 2002-06-19 às 02:18, Aaron Maxwell escreveu: > I just realized something interesting. Before I tried repartitioning > as described in my original message (below), I had hda2 as a smaller > partition containing the HURD. When I mount the new /dev/hda2, its > size is 926 MB, and it conta

Re: OS hallucinates hard drive geometry

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron Maxwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I tried the partitioning with fdisk, cfdisk, and parted (I decided not >to try sfdisk yet). Same results, except parted produced this warning: > Information: The operating system thinks the geometry on /dev/hda is > 2495

Re: OS hallucinates hard drive geometry

On Wednesday 19 June 2002 07:18, Aaron Maxwell wrote: > I just realized something interesting. Before I tried repartitioning > as described in my original message (below), I had hda2 as a smaller > partition containing the HURD. When I mount the new /dev/hda2, its > size is 926 MB, and it contain

Re: OS hallucinates hard drive geometry

I just realized something interesting. Before I tried repartitioning as described in my original message (below), I had hda2 as a smaller partition containing the HURD. When I mount the new /dev/hda2, its size is 926 MB, and it contains all the old hurd files. I did not write it down and can

Re: OS hallucinates hard drive geometry

I just realized something interesting. Before I tried repartitioning as described in my original message (below), I had hda2 as a smaller partition containing the HURD. When I mount the new /dev/hda2, its size is 926 MB, and it contains all the old hurd files. I did not write it down and can

Re: OS hallucinates hard drive geometry

On Tuesday 18 June 2002 21:03, Matthew Dalton wrote: > What does your BIOS think the size and geometry of your drive are? Bios believes CHS is 2495/255/63, and size is about 2e10 bytes (I didn't write down the exact number). > I'm thinking the problem is that Linux is getting confused by the > BI

Re: OS hallucinates hard drive geometry

Aaron Maxwell wrote: > shiznit:~# df -h > FilesystemSize Used Avail Use% Mounted on > /dev/hda1 11G 4.5G 6.0G 43% / > /dev/hda2 926M 65M 814M 8% /mnt/hda2 > > Note that: > 1) /dev/hda2 is smaller than it should be. > 2) /dev/hda3 could not be m

Re: OS

On Tue, 21 Oct 1997, Mike or Trish Oberholzer wrote: > I am looking for an alternative OS that will allow me to do basic home > computing such as email, internet access, database and wordprocessing with > the ability to convert files to other software formats. Will Debian do this > for me? Sure.

Re: OS/2 HPFS File System - Is this a Bug? + a note for the list maintainers

Martin Str|mberg wrote: > > Hello. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > > > > I'm running OS/2 Warp with HPFS on several of my drives. > > > > I noticed that Linux 1.1 fdisk reveals two different file system > > identifiers for HPFS partitions: > > > > /dev/sda5 id 7 OS/2 HPFS > > > > /dev/hda2 i

Re: OS/2 HPFS File System - Is this a Bug? + a note for the list maintainers

Hello. First a little note if you have seen this message already: I'm having problems getting the mail go futher than the network the machine I'm on, so sorry if you see this for the nth time. [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > > I'm running OS/2 Warp with HPFS on several of my drives. > > I noticed tha

Re: OS/2 HPFS File System - Is this a Bug?

Daniel Lynes wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Aug 1996 00:42:13 -0400, Jim Worthington wrote: > > > /dev/sda5 id 7 OS/2 HPFS > > /dev/hda2 id 17 Unknown > > >The Unknown partition type (id 17) was created by OS/2 Warp fdisk during > >the installation process. It is also a primary partition. > > I ha

Re: OS/2 HPFS File System - Is this a Bug?

Shaya Potter wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Aug 1996, Jim Worthington wrote: > > > I'm running OS/2 Warp with HPFS on several of my drives. > > > > I noticed that Linux 1.1 fdisk reveals two different file system > > identifiers for these > > HPFS partitions: > > > > /dev/sda5 id 7 OS/2 HPFS > > /de

Re: OS/2 HPFS File System - Is this a Bug?

> On Tue, 13 Aug 1996, Jim Worthington wrote: > > I'm running OS/2 Warp with HPFS on several of my drives. > > > > I noticed that Linux 1.1 fdisk reveals two different file system > > identifiers for these > > HPFS partitions: > > > > /dev/sda5 id 7 OS/2 HPFS > > /dev/hda2 id 17 Unknown >

Re: OS/2 HPFS File System - Is this a Bug?

On Tue, 13 Aug 1996, Jim Worthington wrote: > I'm running OS/2 Warp with HPFS on several of my drives. > > I noticed that Linux 1.1 fdisk reveals two different file system > identifiers for these > HPFS partitions: > > /dev/sda5 id 7 OS/2 HPFS > /dev/hda2 id 17 Unknown This a little bi