March 2004 - WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] KDE: Konqueror and fish protocol

by brad noyes

On Sunday 07 March 2004 20:08, Andy Stewart wrote: > HI all, > Hi, > Does anybody know what this "fish protocol" is that Konqueror can > apparently use? > >From KDE Docs: "Allows you to access another computer's files using a simple SSH shell account and standard UNIX® utilities on the remote side." This is not only for konqueror, but all KDE enabled applications. For example, if you are writing a document using kword or kate, you can go to 'File->Save As ... ' and in the directory location you can type fish://<remotehost>/ and you'll be able to save the kword document to the remote host over ssh. This actually applies anythere you see a file dialog in a KDE application. > I've noticed in Konqueror that besides typing "http:", one can also type > things like "camera:", "ftp:", "sftp:" (but it doesn't quite work for me), > and perhaps many others. I've just discovered "fish:" which appears to > work the way I would expect "sftp:" to work. > > Does anybody have any experience with this? This is called a KIOSlave. KDE has many KIOSlaves that are available to all KDE applications. If you are running KDE 3.2, start kinfocenter, about two-thirds of the way down the list on your left, you'll see 'Protocols', click that to see all the protocols, or KIOSlaves, available in KDE. Another one that i use is info:// because i can never remember how to navigate info pages. This is a really cool technology that KDE has had since the 2.0 days. Gnome has something similar called GnomeVFS, i believe. enjoy, --Brad

March 8, 2004

Re: [Wlug] KDE: Konqueror and fish protocol

by Gregory Boyce

On Sun, 2004-03-07 at 20:08, Andy Stewart wrote: > HI all, > > Does anybody know what this "fish protocol" is that Konqueror can apparently > use? > > I've noticed in Konqueror that besides typing "http:", one can also type > things like "camera:", "ftp:", "sftp:" (but it doesn't quite work for me), > and perhaps many others. I've just discovered "fish:" which appears to work > the way I would expect "sftp:" to work. > > Does anybody have any experience with this? I haven't used it, but a quick google search turned up this: http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/openbsd/2003-11/1544.html It's apparently a kde built in scp functionality. -- Gregory Boyce <gboyce(a)badbelly.com>

March 8, 2004

KDE: Konqueror and fish protocol

by Andy Stewart

HI all, Does anybody know what this "fish protocol" is that Konqueror can apparently use? I've noticed in Konqueror that besides typing "http:", one can also type things like "camera:", "ftp:", "sftp:" (but it doesn't quite work for me), and perhaps many others. I've just discovered "fish:" which appears to work the way I would expect "sftp:" to work. Does anybody have any experience with this? Thanks, Andy -- Andy Stewart, Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA USA http://www.wlug.org

March 8, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Repartitioning for Installfest

by gboyce＠badbelly.com

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Scott Venier wrote: > Charles R. Anderson said: > > On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 07:03:49PM -0500, Ryan Caron wrote: > >> Gentoo since its so customizable, and the fact that everything is > >> compiled > >> from the source code speeds up the computer a fair amount. > > > > Placebo affect most likely. > > > Thank you thank you thank you. > > I'm so sick of the gentoo weenies claiming that. As a "Gentoo Weenie" (Don't worry, no real offense taken), I'd like to comment on this. Yes, Gentoo does compile packages optimized for the CPU. I'm sure this does speed up packages, although probably not as much as a lot of Gentoo users seem to think. What people fail to take into consideration is the other available optimizations. When packages are compiled for most major distributions need to compile any and all available options that the distribution will support for any particular set of users. For a quick example: Evolution. Here are the available options you can enable/disable in Evolution for Gentoo: crypt doc ipv6 kde kerberos ldap mozilla pda spell ssl Redhat would need to compile support for all of these things into Evolution if any of their customers are going to use the feature. Each of these options add more memory requirements to evolution at the very least. Certain options may also increase the amount of cpu time used by the process as well. Other packages have even more options. Added together you can certainly save quite a bit of system resources on a heavily utilized system. Changes to the kernel itself and glibc can also give you savings or performance increases. (Yes, you can compile a custom kernel for other distros). Enabling nptl for glibc can give you a big speed increase if you're not using any programs that break with it. -- Greg

March 5, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Repartitioning for Installfest

by Frank Rizzo

> Martin, Eric wrote: > What are you looking for as far as help? > > > I'm running RH8.0 on my server. > > a. I'm not sure if I should continue to use RH as support has expired, and I > can't affort their enterprise version. I was using RedHat for a while, and made the switch to SlackWare 9.1, seems really stable and comes 2.6 "ready". It aslo has rpm capabilites ( I haven't tested yet ). I'm happy I made the switch. -joe

March 4, 2004

RE: [Wlug] DistCC

by Martin, Eric

Let me try and get a few things working in house, but I'm def up for trying...i have a PIII that can donate a few cycles.... -----Original Message----- From: Ryan Caron [mailto:rcaron@WPI.EDU] Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 2:47 PM To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org Subject: Re: [Wlug] DistCC 1) are you referring to the log that distcc generaties via distcc-config --set-log ? Or are you referring to your compile screens? If the compile screens, then DistCC is working, it just doesn't display it. Try setting the log file and reviewing it after a compile 2) I can't get the monitor to see anything either, thats why i stick with the log. One disadvantage to the log is that it does not log date & time, which a friend of mine (the other guy on the distcc servers page) is trying to resolve. 3) I'm just doing x86 at this point, but I'll install cross compile support for you on my machines. 4) Just send me your server names and I will add them to my page. I'm thinking about writing a script that will parse a web page for server names and plug it into the distcc hosts variable. That way the network would be more dynamic to changes in the host lists. I'll keep you all posted. On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 "Martin, Eric" wrote Subject: RE: [Wlug] DistCC 1) I would like to, but I'm having problems getting distcc to work (I think). When I configure my clients, they will keep showing lines that *distcc can't find host 192.168.0.10*, but when that client is up, I don't get anything. I'm running gentoo on all my linux boxes, and I followed the distcc guide. 2) I can't get the monitor to see anything...any help? 3) Are you just doing x86 or do we want to try cross compiling, or have a few networks? I have a few x86s, a sparc64 and a ppcG3 all running gentoo. I'm trying to get cross compiling working, but like I said, I can't see if stuff is going or not. 4) I'm up for it. Share and Share alike _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

March 4, 2004

Re: [Wlug] DistCC

by Ryan Caron

1) are you referring to the log that distcc generaties via distcc-config --set-log ? Or are you referring to your compile screens? If the compile screens, then DistCC is working, it just doesn't display it. Try setting the log file and reviewing it after a compile 2) I can't get the monitor to see anything either, thats why i stick with the log. One disadvantage to the log is that it does not log date & time, which a friend of mine (the other guy on the distcc servers page) is trying to resolve. 3) I'm just doing x86 at this point, but I'll install cross compile support for you on my machines. 4) Just send me your server names and I will add them to my page. I'm thinking about writing a script that will parse a web page for server names and plug it into the distcc hosts variable. That way the network would be more dynamic to changes in the host lists. I'll keep you all posted. On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 "Martin, Eric" wrote Subject: RE: [Wlug] DistCC 1) I would like to, but I'm having problems getting distcc to work (I think). When I configure my clients, they will keep showing lines that *distcc can't find host 192.168.0.10*, but when that client is up, I don't get anything. I'm running gentoo on all my linux boxes, and I followed the distcc guide. 2) I can't get the monitor to see anything...any help? 3) Are you just doing x86 or do we want to try cross compiling, or have a few networks? I have a few x86s, a sparc64 and a ppcG3 all running gentoo. I'm trying to get cross compiling working, but like I said, I can't see if stuff is going or not. 4) I'm up for it. Share and Share alike

March 4, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Gentoo...

by Frank Sweetser

On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 02:34:01PM -0500, Ryan Caron wrote: > But major distros like Red Hat, for compatibility sake, compile their code > (or at least used to) as i386 for compatibility. Some have moved to i586. > But my gentoo box is specifically compiled for the P4 with O3 compile > flag. So that does speed things up a bit. Not entirely true. The most critical components, namely the kernel and glibc, are compiled for i386, i586, i686, and athlon. The most appropriate version is automatically installed. > Also, I run seti@home 24/7 on my personal boxes, so I never have any idle > CPU percentages. On Red Hat seti@home would slow me down when I was > really working the computer's resources. Haven't seen that happen yet in > Gentoo. Running *exactly* the same kernel? Not just the same version as returned by uname -a, but precisely the same line-for-line code base? Most distros patch the kernel, and the scheduler can make a huge difference in situations like that, regardless of whether you or the developer compiled it. > So, maybe its not the compiles that make it faster. But the capability to > customize it, its inherent leanness (do I really want to install this if > it takes 4 hours to compile)?, and its package system make it my linux > distro of choice. Interestingly enough, those are exactly the same reasons that I prefer RedHat over gentoo. -- Frank Sweetser fs at wpi.edu WPI Network Engineer

March 4, 2004

Gentoo...

by Ryan Caron

Whoa, didn't mean to start a mini flame war! I think the portage system does wonders with the dependencies, and as I understand it portage is very BSD-like (I don't have any experience with BSD yet) with their package system. OK, one box boots up in 24 seconds (from GRUB menu to XDM login), and the other in 16 seconds (GRUB to CLI login). Now, thats a lot faster than default Red Hat installs, which can take minutes on a similarly capable machine. A good part of the faster bootup is that my Gentoo installation is, at least for now, much leaner than Red Hat and doesn't have to load as many daemons. But major distros like Red Hat, for compatibility sake, compile their code (or at least used to) as i386 for compatibility. Some have moved to i586. But my gentoo box is specifically compiled for the P4 with O3 compile flag. So that does speed things up a bit. Also, I run seti@home 24/7 on my personal boxes, so I never have any idle CPU percentages. On Red Hat seti@home would slow me down when I was really working the computer's resources. Haven't seen that happen yet in Gentoo. So, maybe its not the compiles that make it faster. But the capability to customize it, its inherent leanness (do I really want to install this if it takes 4 hours to compile)?, and its package system make it my linux distro of choice. Ryan Caron ACM Secretary

March 4, 2004

Re: [Wlug] DistCC

by orbitz＠ezabel.com

I have you don't any tests for over a network with latency like the internet? I'm wondering if, because the curernt distcc protocol is rather gross, one will get better compile times considering teh transfering of the files might take longer than actually compiling. On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 19:27:37 -0500 (EST) Ryan Caron <rcaron(a)WPI.EDU> wrote: > It appears that at least a couple people here are using Gentoo. I am > working on building a DistCC (Distributed C Compiling) network so that our > "emerge -u world" and Stage 1 installations go by that much quicker. It > has substantially improved my installation time - my first Stage 1 > install, which did not use Distcc took nearly 3 days (some downtime was > incurred since I had to sleep and go to class). With only 2 Pentium 4's > and 1 Pentium 3, I was able to cut that time down to about 24 hours - the > installation was on my 1.6Ghz Celeron, so you know that most of the > compiling capabilities wasn't done on that! > > If you would like to use the Distcc network I'm putting together to get > your Gentoo box running or to make emerge -u world that much quicker, all > I ask is that you please run the Distcc server on your machine as well. > The list of servers, scheduled emerge -u world times, and a script I wrote > to automatically do emerge -u world is available at: > http://www.acm.wpi.edu/~rcaron/Gentoo.shtml > > Gentoo's HOW-TO on configuring DistCC is at: > http://www.Gentoo.org/doc/en/distcc.xml > > Please email me if you have any questions or would like to contribute to > the network. > > Sincerely, > Ryan Caron > ACM Secretary > > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug >

March 4, 2004