- WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Summer Intern Job
by Karl Hiramoto April 22, 2004

April 22, 2004

For anyone that is interested in a programming job.. http://jobs.accusense.com/programmer-analyist-intern.html -- -- Karl Hiramoto karl at hiramoto dot org http://karl.hiramoto.org/ Mobile: 508.517.4819 Work: 978-425-2090

1 0

Linux From Scratch??
by Ken Jones April 19, 2004

April 19, 2004

Have any us tried to build a Linux From Scratch? <http://lfs.oregonstate.edu/lfs/news.html> How did it go? Is there a thread on the subject? Does anyone know of a college level course which uses this as part of its lab.? Ken Jones Fitchburg, MA

5 4

Signed e-mails and Kmail
by Andy Stewart April 18, 2004

April 18, 2004

Hi all, I'm playing around with digital signatures in e-mail, and I have that working on Kmail (KDE) wnen I send the e-mail. However, when I receive a signed e-mail, Kmail isn't able to automatically check the validity of the signature (unless I sent it). Within Kmail, I click on Settings->Configure Kmail->Security and point to libgpgme.so in the Crypto Plugins tab. I select that plugin and activate it. I then click the "configure" button and try to start the certificate manager. >From the KGpgCertManager, I get an error indicating that the symbol "initialize" was not found in libkdenetwork.so.2. I'm running SuSE 9.0 Pro, Kmail 1.5.4, and KDE 3.1.4. I've scoured the net to no avail. Does anybody have this working in Kmail? Thanks, Andy -- Andy Stewart, Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA USA http://www.wlug.org

3 3

Next meeting - topic?
by Andy Stewart April 17, 2004

April 17, 2004

HI all, We have a meeting coming up on Thursday, April 22, but we have neither a topic nor a speaker. Since I am fully consumed in my job search and the layoff process, I won't be able to do a presentation this month. I am seeking a volunteer - please?? :-) Now, now, don't push and shove, I know many of you are eager for such a challenge. Please contact me by email and we can work out the details. Thanks in advance! Andy -- Andy Stewart, Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA USA http://www.wlug.org

4 4

How Barbaric!
by sageman＠WPI.EDU April 14, 2004

April 14, 2004

--- "Hello, I'm running gentoo with 2.6.4 kernel" 2.6.4! 2.6.5 came out, like almost a whole 9 days ago! Let's see these priorities right already and upgrade this archaic, elder kernel already! Yeah, that's definitely sleep-inside-spinlock checks though. Just run your favorite kernel configurator (make config, or make xconfig or something), and under "Kernel Hacking" uncheck the "sleep-inside-spinlock checking" box. Hope it helps ^_^ http://sageman.res.wpi.net

2 1

Nvidia and 2.6.4
by orbitz＠ezabel.com April 13, 2004

April 13, 2004

Hello, I'm running gentoo with 2.6.4 kernel and my /var/log/messages is getting filled up with this junk: Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel Debug: sleeping function called from invalid context at mm/slab.c:1900 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel in_atomic():1, irqs_disabled():0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel Call Trace: Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c011a1ab>] __might_sleep+0xab/0xd0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c013d0a6>] __kmalloc+0x96/0xa0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b7db39>] os_alloc_mem+0x5c/0x87 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b97df0>] _nv001308rm+0x10/0x28 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0cb058d>] _nv001518rm+0x7c9/0xb34 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0109588>] common_interrupt+0x18/0x20 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c34d61>] _nv002465rm+0x81/0x420 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c34d78>] _nv002465rm+0x98/0x420 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b8d965>] _nv001338rm+0x1d/0x24 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b7e555>] _nv005601rm+0xd/0x34 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b85c38>] _nv000858rm+0x300/0xe14 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0124bca>] run_timer_softirq+0x10a/0x1b0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0124d5f>] do_timer+0xdf/0xf0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c010b16d>] do_IRQ+0xfd/0x130 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0109588>] common_interrupt+0x18/0x20 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b81eed>] _nv002962rm+0x2c5/0x3b8 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b9c8a9>] _nv000899rm+0x4c9/0xf70 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b9c8bc>] _nv000899rm+0x4dc/0xf70 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0ba2df9>] _nv004363rm+0x59/0x90 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0bc05ea>] _nv005046rm+0x52/0x70 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0ba2d02>] _nv004679rm+0x1be/0x1d0 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0117fba>] wake_up_state+0x1a/0x20 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0126c31>] send_group_sig_info+0x31/0x60 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c016380b>] send_sigio_to_task+0xeb/0x100 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b8d7fe>] _nv001344rm+0x46/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0cb545a>] _nv001480rm+0x3a/0x7c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0163872>] send_sigio+0x52/0xf0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0267b78>] get_device+0x18/0x30 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c02ce9c7>] uhci_submit_common+0x1f7/0x2b0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0117fba>] wake_up_state+0x1a/0x20 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0126c31>] send_group_sig_info+0x31/0x60 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0cf912f>] _nv000176rm+0x57/0x3ec [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c018c9ac>] ext3_get_block_handle+0xac/0x360 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0138535>] mempool_alloc+0x75/0x160 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c011a5e0>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x50 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0138535>] mempool_alloc+0x75/0x160 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b8d965>] _nv001338rm+0x1d/0x24 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0bb2eac>] _nv005307rm+0x54/0x544 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c6369b>] _nv001532rm+0x1f/0x28 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c6364c>] _nv001534rm+0x20/0x28 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c63e42>] _nv003621rm+0x1a/0x20 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0cfa708>] _nv000183rm+0x750/0x774 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c6369b>] _nv001532rm+0x1f/0x28 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c63e81>] _nv003619rm+0x19/0x20 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0cb29f3>] _nv003073rm+0x1b/0x30 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0cf912f>] _nv000176rm+0x57/0x3ec [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b8d7da>] _nv001344rm+0x22/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c637db>] _nv001556rm+0x5b/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b8d7da>] _nv001344rm+0x22/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c637db>] _nv001556rm+0x5b/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b8d7da>] _nv001344rm+0x22/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c637db>] _nv001556rm+0x5b/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c637db>] _nv001556rm+0x5b/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c637db>] _nv001556rm+0x5b/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0117d1e>] recalc_task_prio+0x8e/0x1b0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0cf912f>] _nv000176rm+0x57/0x3ec [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c03337f4>] kfree_skbmem+0x24/0x30 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c033385a>] __kfree_skb+0x5a/0xc0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c032fc78>] sock_aio_read+0xb8/0xd0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c015142b>] do_sync_read+0x8b/0xc0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b9bfb1>] rm_ioctl+0x19/0x20 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b7ba08>] nv_kern_ioctl+0x4de/0x529 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b9a901>] _nv000865rm+0x3d/0x48 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b7ba78>] nv_kern_isr+0x25/0x5c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0151550>] vfs_read+0xf0/0x130 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0163f13>] sys_ioctl+0xf3/0x2a0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c010941b>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb It seems pretty nvidia related, and I had this rpoblem before, but updating my kernel seems to have brought it back. Does anyone have any idea how to fix this? I suppose if worst comes to worst I can try to revert back to 2.6.2 or 3. Thanks, Malcolm

2 3

RE: [Wlug] Next meeting - topic?
by Martin, Eric April 13, 2004

April 13, 2004

I'm game -----Original Message----- From: Charles R. Anderson [mailto:cra@WPI.EDU] Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 5:54 PM To: Worcester Linux Users Group Subject: Re: [Wlug] Next meeting - topic? Who wants to do a PGP Keysigning? It would involve advance preparation from everyone who would like to participate. By now I'd imagine most of you have gotten your feet wet with GnuPG :-) If not, see: http://www.wlug.org/files/pgp-slides/index.html If there is interest, please let me know in the next couple days so I can organize the procedure and send out instructions. _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

1 0

RE: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE
by Martin, Eric April 9, 2004

April 9, 2004

I personally have my firewall configured to drop pings. If they don't know you're there, you aren't a target. Granted it doesn't keep seasoned hackers off your box, but it's one more piece of security. -----Original Message----- From: Josh Huber [mailto:huber@alum.wpi.edu] Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2004 10:50 AM To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org Subject: Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE avedis(a)rcn.com writes: > [...] > then could surf, with download speeds up to 1.7M/s. Just curious, is that bytes or bits? (I wasn't aware of verizon offering such a fast link) > I even got my firewall working with the new connection, but two things > seems to have changed. SuSEfirewall2 was set not to accept pings, and > it looks like it's still set that way, but Gibson Research's port > scanning utility can ping me. The other thing is that before, I had to > manually enter commands > (iptables) to drop packets to port 119 to put it into "stealth" mode. > Now, I don't have to do that, as it already appears stealthed. Can > anyone explain either of these phenomena? I'm not sure why you would want to drop all pings. You'll probably find that the default firewalling rules drop some kinds of ICMP packets, but there are some which are useful to keep around. (personally, I think dropping all inbound ICMP is pretty annoying when trying to diagnose network issues...) As for port 119, this appears to be the NNTP (net news) port -- why would you be running a news server I'm not sure :) -- Josh Huber _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

3 5

RE: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE
by Martin, Eric April 9, 2004

April 9, 2004

Please elaborate. I know what a DDoS and DoS are, but smurf/fraggle amplication; now I'm lost. -----Original Message----- From: Frank Sweetser [mailto:fs@WPI.EDU] Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 10:53 AM To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org Subject: Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE On Fri, Apr 09, 2004 at 10:50:18AM -0400, Josh Huber wrote: > "Martin, Eric" <MartinE(a)worc.k12.ma.us> writes: > > > I personally have my firewall configured to drop pings. If they > > don't know you're there, you aren't a target. Granted it doesn't > > keep seasoned hackers off your box, but it's one more piece of > > security. > > I don't buy that argument. Two situations: How about the fact that if you don't, you're open to acting as an unwitting participant in a smurf/fraggle amplification DoS? -- Frank Sweetser fs at wpi.edu WPI Network Engineer GPG fingerprint = 6174 1257 129E 0D21 D8D4 E8A3 8E39 29E3 E2E8 8CEC _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

1 0

RE: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE
by Martin, Eric April 9, 2004

April 9, 2004

I have 0 visible services, but I still don't want people doing port scans. Why pose a target when I don't have to. There is no reason why anybody should be pinging my house. Therefore, I don't let them. Why would I enable anything to let people see me? Stardard security practice: Only allow what is *needed*, and I don't *need* anybody pinging me. If I do, I'll turn it on. Eric -----Original Message----- From: Josh Huber [mailto:huber@alum.wpi.edu] Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 10:50 AM To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org Subject: Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE "Martin, Eric" <MartinE(a)worc.k12.ma.us> writes: > I personally have my firewall configured to drop pings. If they don't > know you're there, you aren't a target. Granted it doesn't keep > seasoned hackers off your box, but it's one more piece of security. I don't buy that argument. Two situations: 1) You have no other internet-visible services: * What's the harm in allowing icmp echo? Who cares, unless there happens to be some vulnerable ICMP code in the kernel. I suppose that's a risk I'd be willing to take. :) 2) You have other internet-visible services: * A port scan will reveal you, regardless of ICMP responses. -- Josh Huber _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

1 0