How to obtain older rpm?

Vahis · External Since: May 19, 2007 Posts: 79

I got into trouble with updating vlc and vlc mozillaplugin.
I think especially the plugin.
The current versions lost the functionality I need them for.
The troublesome current version is 1.0.0-2.3

My ISP has a service where you can record and watch TV programs, like a
VCR on their server.
Watching the recorded video stream requires vlc and mozillaplugin.

I had version 0.99_1.0.0rc4-1-4 on several boxes (11.0 and 11.1)
working just fine.
Against better knowledge I updated them to the current 1.0.0-2.3

And I can't watch the recorded stream anymore.

Luckily I had a box lying around un-updated, still having the old
versions mentioned above.
When I learned this I locked them from modification of course.

Now, how could I get those older versions rolled back on my updated
boxes?

I can find them only for MacOS and Win in vlc repos.

And yes, I know: Don't fix it if it and stuff...

I can still download the video TS file onto mydisk and watch that
even with the new vlc so it's not the player but the plugin that
trashed the system.

Vahis
--
"Sunrise 4:39am (EEST), sunset 10:13pm (EEST) at Espoo, Finland (17:33 hours daylight)"
http://waxborg.servepics.com
Linux 2.6.25.20-0.4-default #1 SMP 2009-06-01 09:57:12 +0200 x86_64
6:26pm up 38 days 3:00, 11 users, load average: 1.06, 1.21, 1.20

Kevin Nathan · External Since: Apr 04, 2004 Posts: 1241

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:34:39 GMT
Vahis <waxborg.TakeThisOut@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

>I found out that both are also available in Packman repo, as versions
>vlc-1.0.0-0.pm.1 (The ones I had vere from vlc)
>
>I also found out that they bloody work!
>
>Troubles over, they're protected, for now.
>Good-ole-packman Smile

>

Did you originally install them via YaST? If so, go into YaST Software
Management, search for vlc (or whatever) and then highlight one of the
installed ones and click on the 'Versions' tab -- it should list all
versions you have installed and you can select the one to which you
want to revert, doesn't it? Smile

--
Kevin Nathan (Arizona, USA)
Linux Potpourri and a.o.l.s. FAQ -- (temporarily offline)

Open standards. Open source. Open minds.
The command line is the front line.
Linux 2.6.25.20-0.4-pae
11:02am up 3 days 12:24, 29 users, load average: 0.29, 0.35, 0.53

Vahis · External Since: May 19, 2007 Posts: 79

On 2009-07-22, Vahis <waxborg.DeleteThis@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> I got into trouble with updating vlc and vlc mozillaplugin.
> I think especially the plugin.
> The current versions lost the functionality I need them for.
> The troublesome current version is 1.0.0-2.3

I found out that both are also available in Packman repo, as versions
vlc-1.0.0-0.pm.1 (The ones I had vere from vlc)

I also found out that they bloody work!

Troubles over, they're protected, for now.
Good-ole-packman Smile

Vahis
--
"Sunrise 4:39am (EEST), sunset 10:13pm (EEST) at Espoo, Finland (17:33 hours daylight)"
http://waxborg.servepics.com
Linux 2.6.25.20-0.4-default #1 SMP 2009-06-01 09:57:12 +0200 x86_64
7:28pm up 38 days 4:02, 11 users, load average: 1.50, 1.39, 1.23

David Bolt · External Since: Feb 14, 2006 Posts: 526

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009, Vahis wrote:-

>On 2009-07-22, Vahis <waxborg.RemoveThis@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>> I got into trouble with updating vlc and vlc mozillaplugin.
>> I think especially the plugin.
>> The current versions lost the functionality I need them for.
>> The troublesome current version is 1.0.0-2.3
>
>I found out that both are also available in Packman repo, as versions
>vlc-1.0.0-0.pm.1 (The ones I had vere from vlc)
>
>I also found out that they bloody work!
>
>Troubles over, they're protected, for now.
>Good-ole-packman Smile

If you've got libdvdcss installed, disable the VLC repo as it can cause
some issues when it's enabled alongside Packman. Alternatively, if
you're using 11.0+, set Packman's priority to be higher than VLC and
then the Packman packages will be used in preference to those from VLC.

Regards,
David Bolt

--
Team Acorn: http://www.distributed.net/ OGR-NG @ ~100Mnodes RC5-72 @ ~1Mkeys/s
openSUSE 10.3 32b | openSUSE 11.0 32b | |
openSUSE 10.3 64b | openSUSE 11.0 64b | openSUSE 11.1 64b |
RISC OS 3.6 | RISC OS 3.11 | openSUSE 11.1 PPC | TOS 4.02

Vahis · External Since: May 19, 2007 Posts: 79

On 2009-07-22, Kevin Nathan <knathan RemoveThis @project54.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:34:39 GMT
> Vahis <waxborg RemoveThis @gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>I found out that both are also available in Packman repo, as versions
>>vlc-1.0.0-0.pm.1 (The ones I had vere from vlc)
>>
>>I also found out that they bloody work!
>>
>>Troubles over, they're protected, for now.
>>Good-ole-packman Smile

>>
>
> Did you originally install them via YaST?

Sure I did.
I always do, YaST is my biggest reason to run suse in the
first place Smile

> If so, go into YaST Software
> Management, search for vlc (or whatever) and then highlight one of the
> installed ones and click on the 'Versions' tab -- it should list all
> versions you have installed and you can select the one to which you
> want to revert, doesn't it? Smile

It only lists the ones that I have now, the Packman stuff.
I never had anything else than the ones from vlc.
I thought they'd be the ones to know but packman seems to be on the
money there Smile

I had a version of vlc for a while where the player and the video were
in separate windows. I kept updating till it got back to the looks it
had had before, everything in one window.

I should have stopped there. But I kept going although it wasn't broken.
Till it was again...

Vahis
--
"Sunrise 4:39am (EEST), sunset 10:13pm (EEST) at Espoo, Finland (17:33 hours daylight)"
http://waxborg.servepics.com
Linux 2.6.25.20-0.4-default #1 SMP 2009-06-01 09:57:12 +0200 x86_64
9:10pm up 38 days 5:44, 11 users, load average: 0.35, 0.35, 0.32

houghi · External Since: Apr 25, 2004 Posts: 3249

Vahis wrote:
>> Did you originally install them via YaST?
>
> Sure I did.
> I always do, YaST is my biggest reason to run suse in the
> first place Smile

You mean there is another reason?
Joking aside, I now know they do a LOT of other very interesting stuff
as well. Studio is one, the build server is another.

But I think that besides the installation of the distro 9and
subsequently the packages later) there is not too much difference
between distro's.

I have seen running distro's and once the wallpaper has been changed, it
is not easy to decide wich distro I was running and it actualy did not
matter.

Are there other advantages (or disadvatages) of running openSUSE besides
installation of OS and/or packages (including availablilty?) for
you(plural)?

Just curious. Not an attempt to troll. Again everything besides
installability and availablity of packages and distro, as that will
definatly lead to trolling)

As a start, I will tell why I run openSUSE. When I started with Linux, I
was able to buy a magazine with SuSE 5.3 or 5.4. I did not have a CD
burner and I was on dialup, so downloading was not realy an option.
Later on I bought the boxed sets and now I can download or make my own
CD/DVD. So for me it was availability.

houghi
--
Let's not be too tough on our own ignorance. It's the thing that makes
America great. If America weren't incomparably ignorant, how could we
have tolerated the last eight years? -- Frank Zappa, in 1988

Vahis · External Since: May 19, 2007 Posts: 79

On 2009-07-22, houghi <houghi.TakeThisOut@houghi.org.invalid> wrote:
> Vahis wrote:
>>> Did you originally install them via YaST?
>>
>> Sure I did.
>> I always do, YaST is my biggest reason to run suse in the
>> first place Smile

>
> You mean there is another reason?

Not really.

> Joking aside, I now know they do a LOT of other very interesting stuff
> as well. Studio is one, the build server is another.
>
> But I think that besides the installation of the distro 9and
> subsequently the packages later) there is not too much difference
> between distro's.

If one knows where and what to edit, they're all the same.
In Linux everything is a file. Just edit a file and you're cool with any
adjustments in any flavor of Linux.

But in _my_ distro there's Yet another Setup Tool.
Nobody else has it. And it does everything.

In case something is missing there, just create/edit another file.
Like here:
http://worldofxor.blogspot.com/2009/01/package-search-module-in-yast2.html
>
>
> As a start, I will tell why I run openSUSE. When I started with Linux, I
> was able to buy a magazine with SuSE 5.3 or 5.4. I did not have a CD
> burner and I was on dialup, so downloading was not realy an option.
> Later on I bought the boxed sets and now I can download or make my own
> CD/DVD. So for me it was availability.

Mine was on LinuxFormat cover, it was 9.1 I think.
I tried some others before that and even after.

Most of the time I went with rpm cos I regarded RedHat as professional.

Mandrake was pretty cool with their tools.
They had a lot of them for different purposes.

Then I found YaST. It does it all.

Vahis
--
"Sunrise 4:39am (EEST), sunset 10:13pm (EEST) at Espoo, Finland (17:33 hours daylight)"
http://waxborg.servepics.com
Linux 2.6.25.20-0.4-default #1 SMP 2009-06-01 09:57:12 +0200 x86_64
10:33pm up 38 days 7:07, 11 users, load average: 0.02, 0.19, 0.40

David Bolt · External Since: Feb 14, 2006 Posts: 526

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009, Vahis wrote:-

>But in _my_ distro there's Yet another Setup Tool.
>Nobody else has it. And it does everything.

Debian has it, or at least a partial port of it.

Regards,
David Bolt

--
Team Acorn: http://www.distributed.net/ OGR-NG @ ~100Mnodes RC5-72 @ ~1Mkeys/s
openSUSE 10.3 32b | openSUSE 11.0 32b | |
openSUSE 10.3 64b | openSUSE 11.0 64b | openSUSE 11.1 64b |
RISC OS 3.6 | RISC OS 3.11 | openSUSE 11.1 PPC | TOS 4.02

David Bolt · External Since: Feb 14, 2006 Posts: 526

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009, houghi wrote:-

>I have seen running distro's and once the wallpaper has been changed, it
>is not easy to decide wich distro I was running and it actualy did not
>matter.

I can tell when I'm using Fedora, Mandriva, or openSUSE. There's a
slightly different "feel" to each of them. In truth, there are some
aspects of Fedora[0] that I like, although it would actually be
difficult for me to put them into words. At the same time, the last time
I tried Mandriva, 2007 IIRC, it just felt so "wrong" that I removed it
again quite quickly.

I might grab a copy of the Mandriva 2009 release, just to have another
look at it. Unfortunately, I already know that I'm quite biased against
it, so it's going to have to be a very nice release to make me even
consider keeping it installed.

>Are there other advantages (or disadvatages) of running openSUSE besides
>installation of OS and/or packages (including availablilty?) for
>you(plural)?

You mean other than makeSUSEdvd? Smile

>As a start, I will tell why I run openSUSE. When I started with Linux, I
>was able to buy a magazine with SuSE 5.3 or 5.4.

I started a bit later than that. My first version was 6.1, bought as a
boxed set. After installing it, I passed it on to a friend, the same as
I did with the 6.3 I bought a little later[1]. As to why I picked
S.u.S.E. instead of Redhat, I don't know. I think it was a purely random
choice at the time, but I'm quite happy with the choice I made.

>I did not have a CD
>burner and I was on dialup, so downloading was not realy an option.

That reminds me of both the joys and pains of 7.0. I bought the 7.0
personal version, and wished I had put the extra towards getting the
professional version. The first thing I ended up doing was spending
several hours downloading a load of packages that I was missing.

Then there was the online upgrade to 7.1 and 7.2, both of which were
quite "fun". The joy of a download timing out part way through
downloading a 20MB package at 28.8k, and having to restart the download,
meant spending quite a while watching as the install proceeded.

After that, I decided that it would be much easier on me if I just
bought 7.3.

>Later on I bought the boxed sets

I was doing that upto 10.3, where Novell were kind enough to send me
copies of that release and 11.0, although I wasn't offered one for 11.1.

>and now I can download or make my own
>CD/DVD. So for me it was availability.

Mine was purely a random choice, and one that I stuck with.

[0] I still have a Fedora Core 10 installed and have to upgrade it to
11. Not sure when I'll get around to doing that.

[1] I still have the installation media for 7.0, 7.3, 8.1, 8.2, 9.1,
9.2, 9.3, 10.0, 10.2, 10.3 and 11.0, all of which are within easy reach.
Not sure where 8.3 or 9.0 media went.

Regards,
David Bolt

--
Team Acorn: http://www.distributed.net/ OGR-NG @ ~100Mnodes RC5-72 @ ~1Mkeys/s
openSUSE 10.3 32b | openSUSE 11.0 32b | |
openSUSE 10.3 64b | openSUSE 11.0 64b | openSUSE 11.1 64b |
RISC OS 3.6 | RISC OS 3.11 | openSUSE 11.1 PPC | TOS 4.02

houghi · External Since: Apr 25, 2004 Posts: 3249

David Bolt wrote:
>>Are there other advantages (or disadvatages) of running openSUSE besides
>>installation of OS and/or packages (including availablilty?) for
>>you(plural)?
>
> You mean other than makeSUSEdvd? Smile

> I started a bit later than that. My first version was 6.1, bought as a
> boxed set. After installing it, I passed it on to a friend, the same as
> I did with the 6.3 I bought a little later[1]. As to why I picked
> S.u.S.E. instead of Redhat, I don't know. I think it was a purely random
> choice at the time, but I'm quite happy with the choice I made.

I never passed ol version to others. I just advised them to buy the one
I had.

> That reminds me of both the joys and pains of 7.0. I bought the 7.0
> personal version, and wished I had put the extra towards getting the
> professional version. The first thing I ended up doing was spending
> several hours downloading a load of packages that I was missing.

Ah yes, the differences between personal and pro. The fact that people
where downloading the official version before the FTP server placed them
online.

How things have changed. I used to go to the store to buy my version of
SuSE. Now Novell sends me a boxed set. Very Happy

> After that, I decided that it would be much easier on me if I just
> bought 7.3.

I wish I would have kept all the manuals, because in the earlier
versions there was a description on how to write a Linux virus (and why
it would not work) Those where some good manuals about Linux in general.

>>Later on I bought the boxed sets
>
> I was doing that upto 10.3, where Novell were kind enough to send me
> copies of that release and 11.0, although I wasn't offered one for 11.1.

I got one. What I would like is that they send a USB with an image
instead of a boxed set. Although the boxed set stand proudly at the
office where I make the IT people jealous about Novell sending me the
boxed set. When they ask how that happens, I almost shrug it of and say
as casual as possible "Oh, I do some development for Novell on the
side."

Hey, I do. Don't laugh. See that red colour when you log in as root in
CLI? That took about 2 years development. (OK, nagging is more like it.)

> [1] I still have the installation media for 7.0, 7.3, 8.1, 8.2, 9.1,
> 9.2, 9.3, 10.0, 10.2, 10.3 and 11.0, all of which are within easy reach.
> Not sure where 8.3 or 9.0 media went.

Could you do a grep on 'virus' on the manuals (I believe they are in
HTML as well, otherwise on the pdf file) to see if it has the
explanation of how to write a Linux virus? Not sure if it was in the
admin or the user manual. It was something together with an explanation
of root.

Start with 7.0 as that will be the one that is most likely to have it.

Perhaps best with a -A 3 -B 3 so as to see a bit of the content. Very Happy

houghi
--
For a long time now I have tried simply to write the best I can. Sometimes I
have good luck and write better than I can.
-- Ernest Hemingway

Tinkerer Atlarge · External Since: Jul 23, 2009 Posts: 2

houghi <houghi.DeleteThis@houghi.org.invalid> wrote:

> Are there other advantages (or disadvatages) of running openSUSE besides
> installation of OS and/or packages (including availablilty?) for
> you(plural)?

I run a few PowerPC eMacs and I am in the process of trying out Linux
for the first time. I found four current distros which support ppc Macs
plus a ubuntu which is a couple of years old. (They are debian, fedora,
suse, ydl and ubuntu). Also gentoo which I haven't tried yet as I lack
the necessary expertise. I have gained the impression from various
online forums that the eMac's video chip with two outlets makes it less
likely than a lot of other Macintoshes to install correctly straight off
the installation media.

Open-SuSE was the only one which installed and booted up to the full
graphical desktop without a glitch. It even gets the time right without
fighting Mac OS X over it -- something the other distros fail to do. The
trick seems to be ticking the UTC box during installation -- the
opposite of what I believe is done when installing suse on a regular x86
PC. The other distros disrupt OS X timekeeping regardless of whether I
select utc or not.

Debian's installation and bootup were flawless, but the grapical login
failed to appear. (It took me 2 days to find out all I had to do was
press Ctrl-something-F2 to get a usable text screen). Thence,
overwriting debian's /etc/X11/xorg.conf with the suse equivalent and
rebooting was all it took to cure debian's hang-up in a single stroke.

YDL also responded positively to having its xorg.conf replaced by the
one from suse, but its installer decided early on that my eMac was only
fit for a text login and made no attempt to take it beyond runlevel 3.
(But at least I didn't have to spend 2 days lacking any hint about what
I might have to do next). It was also the only distro which literally
implemented the vast viewport defined in suse's xorg.conf, causing a
little confusion at first, since all the windows opening in response to
my clicking were way off-screen and took a lot of scrolling to find. The
problem went away after I created a non-root user account and logged in
using that instead. Subsequently even a root login ignored the defined
virtual screen size, which seems to be the normal response. Strange,
that..

The remaining two distros also decided my computer was suitable only for
a text-menu installation. Their installers got me to a standard login
prompt. They deteriorated visually as they progressed, and my impression
was they only just made it. Unlike the previous two distros, copying the
suse xorg.conf failed to provide a graphical desktop. (Perhaps through
lack of persistence on my part, as I already had three working distros
to go back to by then).

In a word, suse (v11.1) is the one I would recommend to any other eMac
user wishing to try out linux from among the current crop of distros,
unless they have the time, expertise and inclination to welcome
troubleshooting as part of normal practice.

My only complaint about suse was that it won't install properly on my
external FireWire drive. Debian installed on it without a glitch, and
when I then plugged the resulting installation into another more recent
eMac, it also booted up and ran on that machine via FireWire without any
problems.

However I am now trying to reinstall debian on that same FireWire drive,
and it is proving more troublesome than my original attempt. This time
it only comes up to runlevel 2 and refuses to install the bootstrap on
the external drive. Perhaps it's me rather than the distros that are
the problem...

houghi · External Since: Apr 25, 2004 Posts: 3249

Tinkerer Atlarge wrote:
> In a word, suse (v11.1) is the one I would recommend to any other eMac
> user wishing to try out linux from among the current crop of distros,
> unless they have the time, expertise and inclination to welcome
> troubleshooting as part of normal practice.

Thanks for the feedback. Mac users are sometimes a bit neglected not
only here but also sometimes at openSUSE. The reason is just lack of
hardware and also lack of users.

I am sure that those other distributions that worked with the openSUSE
config file would be happy to recieve the file together with the
hardware details. That way they can improve their distro and if then
something does not work with openSUSE but does with the others, users of
that can inform openSUSE about it.

> My only complaint about suse was that it won't install properly on my
> external FireWire drive. Debian installed on it without a glitch, and
> when I then plugged the resulting installation into another more recent
> eMac, it also booted up and ran on that machine via FireWire without any
> problems.

Mmm. I can imagine that here also not enough people try this out. USB
sticks are being tested all the time and even images exist for that.
Firewire might need some different things to get going. No idea, to be
honest. Can't test it, unless somebody gives me a firewire HD.

Anybody from the Factory testers here who can try it out and bugreport?

houghi
--
For a long time now I have tried simply to write the best I can. Sometimes I
have good luck and write better than I can.
-- Ernest Hemingway

David Bolt · External Since: Feb 14, 2006 Posts: 526

On Thu, 23 Jul 2009, Tinkerer Atlarge wrote:-

>houghi <houghi.RemoveThis@houghi.org.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Are there other advantages (or disadvatages) of running openSUSE besides
>> installation of OS and/or packages (including availablilty?) for
>> you(plural)?
>
>I run a few PowerPC eMacs and I am in the process of trying out Linux
>for the first time. I found four current distros which support ppc Macs
>plus a ubuntu which is a couple of years old. (They are debian, fedora,
>suse, ydl and ubuntu).

I've tried two of those on my iMac[0], Debian and openSUSE. I'll let you
guess which one is on there right now.

>Debian's installation and bootup were flawless, but the grapical login
>failed to appear.

Now that I didn't have a problem with. The only real issue I had was I'm
not keen on Debian, mainly because I don't like the package management
system, much preferring RPM.

>(It took me 2 days to find out all I had to do was
>press Ctrl-something-F2 to get a usable text screen). Thence,
>overwriting debian's /etc/X11/xorg.conf with the suse equivalent and
>rebooting was all it took to cure debian's hang-up in a single stroke.

Don't you just love it when it's so simple?

>The
>problem went away after I created a non-root user account and logged in
>using that instead. Subsequently even a root login ignored the defined
^^^^^^^^^^
It's not a good idea to log in as root, especially using a GUI.

>virtual screen size, which seems to be the normal response. Strange,
>that..

>In a word, suse (v11.1) is the one I would recommend to any other eMac

Or on an iMac.

>My only complaint about suse was that it won't install properly on my
>external FireWire drive.

Can't help there as my iMac doesn't have Firewire. It also won't run OS
X either, but that's of not an issue since I've no desire to run it.
However, there is a PPC specific mailing list so you might be able to
get some help there.

>However I am now trying to reinstall debian on that same FireWire drive,
>and it is proving more troublesome than my original attempt. This time
>it only comes up to runlevel 2 and refuses to install the bootstrap on
>the external drive. Perhaps it's me rather than the distros that are
>the problem...

Have a look around just in case there's someone called Murphy close by.

[0] G3 @ 333MHz, 384MiB and an 80GB drive. Quite sluggish with the KDE4
desktop but, since it spends most of its time idle and without me logged
in, that's fine. Still, I've to install XFCE and see how much of an
improvement that ends up being.

Regards,
David Bolt

--
Team Acorn: http://www.distributed.net/ OGR-NG @ ~100Mnodes RC5-72 @ ~1Mkeys/s
openSUSE 10.3 32b | openSUSE 11.0 32b | |
openSUSE 10.3 64b | openSUSE 11.0 64b | openSUSE 11.1 64b |
RISC OS 3.6 | RISC OS 3.11 | openSUSE 11.1 PPC | TOS 4.02

David Bolt · External Since: Feb 14, 2006 Posts: 526

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009, houghi wrote:-

>David Bolt wrote:

>> I started a bit later than that. My first version was 6.1, bought as a
>> boxed set. After installing it, I passed it on to a friend, the same as
>> I did with the 6.3 I bought a little later[1]. As to why I picked
>> S.u.S.E. instead of Redhat, I don't know. I think it was a purely random
>> choice at the time, but I'm quite happy with the choice I made.
>
>I never passed ol version to others. I just advised them to buy the one
>I had.

I passed them on virtually as soon as I'd installed them, so they were
current at the time they were installed.

>How things have changed. I used to go to the store to buy my version of
>SuSE. Now Novell sends me a boxed set. Very Happy

They occasionally do that to me as well.

>> After that, I decided that it would be much easier on me if I just
>> bought 7.3.
>
>I wish I would have kept all the manuals, because in the earlier
>versions there was a description on how to write a Linux virus

There was?

>(and why
>it would not work) Those where some good manuals about Linux in general.

I had kept most of the manuals but, due to unforeseen circumstances[0],
I only have the cut-down version from 10.3 and 11.0.

>> I was doing that upto 10.3, where Novell were kind enough to send me
>> copies of that release and 11.0, although I wasn't offered one for 11.1.
>
>I got one. What I would like is that they send a USB with an image
>instead of a boxed set.

A choice would be a nice thing.

>Although the boxed set stand proudly at the
>office where I make the IT people jealous about Novell sending me the
>boxed set.

Now that is a very good reason for them continuing to send the boxed set
Smile

>When they ask how that happens, I almost shrug it of and say
>as casual as possible "Oh, I do some development for Novell on the
>side."

Smile

>Hey, I do. Don't laugh. See that red colour when you log in as root in
>CLI? That took about 2 years development. (OK, nagging is more like it.)

I think they finally did that to stop the nagging Smile

Not to forget about having a separate /home ...

>> [1] I still have the installation media for 7.0, 7.3, 8.1, 8.2, 9.1,
>> 9.2, 9.3, 10.0, 10.2, 10.3 and 11.0, all of which are within easy reach.
>> Not sure where 8.3 or 9.0 media went.
>
>Could you do a grep on 'virus' on the manuals (I believe they are in
>HTML as well, otherwise on the pdf file) to see if it has the
>explanation of how to write a Linux virus?

I haven't found anything like that in the 7.0 or 7.3 manuals. They just
refer to how LILO has a similar sequence to some DOS viruses, some on
protection from viruses and, at the time the manuals were created,
there'd only been 2 known Linux viruses. Oh, and there's this nice piece
of text in /usr/share/doc/Books/LDP/install-guide-3.2.dvi dated 20
February 1998 (books-2000.7.27-1.noarch.rpm):

In fact, you may even hear this referred to as the ?Microsoft virus?. This is not a virus in
the true sense of the word, just arrogance on the part of Microsoft, that one would only
want a Microsoft operating system to boot. Linux does not cause such problems, and in
fact provides a way to choose the default boot image. It also allows you to intervene during
the boot process to specify which operating system to boot. This is a standard part of Linux
installation procedures.

I like the "Microsoft virus" part Smile

I'll look through the others later and see if I can see anything,
however I'm going to guess that it may be from before 7.0[1].

>Not sure if it was in the
>admin or the user manual. It was something together with an explanation
>of root.
>
>Start with 7.0 as that will be the one that is most likely to have it.

I had a look at that and can't see anything as you describe. Maybe on a
later version, or on one of the earlier ones that I don't have.

>Perhaps best with a -A 3 -B 3 so as to see a bit of the content. Very Happy

I used -C 3, as it gives the same effect with less typing, and didn't
find much.

[0] They were stored in a box with several dozen other books that I was
unconcerned about and ended up getting disposed of by mistake. It wasn't
until several weeks later that I discovered this.

[1] I had a quick look a the old mirror of 5.3, just to see if the docs
there mentioned it, but didn't see anything.

Regards,
David Bolt

--
Team Acorn: http://www.distributed.net/ OGR-NG @ ~100Mnodes RC5-72 @ ~1Mkeys/s
openSUSE 10.3 32b | openSUSE 11.0 32b | |
openSUSE 10.3 64b | openSUSE 11.0 64b | openSUSE 11.1 64b |
RISC OS 3.6 | RISC OS 3.11 | openSUSE 11.1 PPC | TOS 4.02

houghi · External Since: Apr 25, 2004 Posts: 3249

David Bolt wrote:
>>I wish I would have kept all the manuals, because in the earlier
>>versions there was a description on how to write a Linux virus
>
> There was?

I am sure of it. That does not mean it is actualy true though. I am also
sure that I will live forever and am good looking. Very Happy

>>I got one. What I would like is that they send a USB with an image
>>instead of a boxed set.
>
> A choice would be a nice thing.

They send a poll with the question of what you would like as an
alternative to a boxed set as a gift. USB key with openSUSE installed
was one, t-shirt was another.
I think they might not yet do it for two reasons.
1) The boxed set is cheaper for them
2) There is no good upgrade installation for the USB key as it places an
image on it, overwriting your /home.
That would mean you must first back up /home and perhaps other files as
well, place the image and set things back.
When they give you an USB key, they might get slammed with calls of
people who lost their data.

>>Hey, I do. Don't laugh. See that red colour when you log in as root in
>>CLI? That took about 2 years development. (OK, nagging is more like it.)
>
> I think they finally did that to stop the nagging Smile

I am sure of that as well.

> Not to forget about having a separate /home ...

Well, that as well. That was much faster.

* Would it not be a good idea to have a seperate /home
- Yeah it would, but how would we devide it
* <looks at his own system> Like this
- OK. Anybody any better idea? No, ok, this is a go.

> I'll look through the others later and see if I can see anything,
> however I'm going to guess that it may be from before 7.0[1].

Yeah, could be the 6.* series.
> I had a look at that and can't see anything as you describe. Maybe on a
> later version, or on one of the earlier ones that I don't have.

I doubt it.

> [1] I had a quick look a the old mirror of 5.3, just to see if the docs
> there mentioned it, but didn't see anything.

What is the URL again? I can then look myself.

houghi
--
For a long time now I have tried simply to write the best I can. Sometimes I
have good luck and write better than I can.
-- Ernest Hemingway

Harold Stevens · External Since: Jul 23, 2009 Posts: 1

In <O7Uhl99eNCaKFwAt.RemoveThis@dev.null.davjam.org> David Bolt:

[Snip...]

> Don't you just love it when it's so simple?

The X configuration scheme with *buntu drives me crazy. One one hand, it's
quite good at initial detection and setup of a working GUI via Xorg during
install. But that actually seems fairly common these days with most recent
mainstream Linux distributions (IMO).

OTOH, IME *ubuntu is primitive at tweaking on X after install. There's not
anything remotely as good as SuSE sax, AFAICT.

A few days ago, I fired up sax on SuSE 10.0 dualbooting with Kubuntu, just
for a much more sophisticated and useful xorg.conf to replace the barebone
primitive X setup Kubuntu provided. It's the third time I've resorted to a
EOL version of SuSE dualboot to get Kubuntu X working "properly" for me.

JMO...

--
Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
Really, it's (wyrd) at airmail, dotted with net. DO NOT SPAM IT.
I toss GoogleGroup posts from gitgo (http://improve-usenet.org).

houghi · External Since: Apr 25, 2004 Posts: 3249

Harold Stevens wrote:
> OTOH, IME *ubuntu is primitive at tweaking on X after install. There's not
> anything remotely as good as SuSE sax, AFAICT.

The strange thing with sax is that it has different behaviour from
version to version with identical hardware. Especially when looking at
dual screens. I had a Matrox G450 card for a long time (and long before
dual cards were common).

One version I could easily install it as it recognised all, including
the two screens. The next time I needed to run it with options and then
again all well and then recognised, but needed to go into sax afterwards
to configure dualscreen and then something else.

Once I needed to copy the old version of the conf file as I could not
get it going.

When I hear about other distro's, it is often a hit and miss and the
result is still impressive, thinking that there is no feedback from the
companies. Neither the videocard nor the screens.

Even the hardware information that can be retrieved is sometimes not
correct. So they have to go by what people tell them on bugreports.

houghi
--
First we thought the PC was a calculator. Then we found out how to turn
numbers into letters with ASCII and we thought it was a typewriter. Then
we discovered graphics, and we thought it was television. With the World
Wide Web, we've realized it's a brochure. -- Douglas Adams.

houghi · External Since: Apr 25, 2004 Posts: 3249

Vahis wrote:
> I have this, the USB one:
> http://news.opensuse.org/2009/01/09/unofficial-kde-35-live-cd-for-opensuse-111/
>
> It's great. You put the image on a stick and run the installation.
> Then it becomes a real installation, with everything, updates and stuff, the
> real thing on a USB stick Smile

I make my own: http://en.opensuse.org/SUSE_Studio

Making a 3.5 KDE live CD or anything else never has been easier. I have
even made a version with a working MPlaeyr installed

houghi
--
First we thought the PC was a calculator. Then we found out how to turn
numbers into letters with ASCII and we thought it was a typewriter. Then
we discovered graphics, and we thought it was television. With the World
Wide Web, we've realized it's a brochure. -- Douglas Adams.

Vahis · External Since: May 19, 2007 Posts: 79

On 2009-07-24, houghi <houghi.TakeThisOut@houghi.org.invalid> wrote:
> Vahis wrote:
>> I have this, the USB one:
>> http://news.opensuse.org/2009/01/09/unofficial-kde-35-live-cd-for-opensuse-111/
>>
>> It's great. You put the image on a stick and run the installation.
>> Then it becomes a real installation, with everything, updates and stuff, the
>> real thing on a USB stick Smile

>
> I make my own: http://en.opensuse.org/SUSE_Studio
>
> Making a 3.5 KDE live CD or anything else never has been easier. I have
> even made a version with a working MPlaeyr installed
>
Can you make a USB thingy like the one there with it?

Vahis
--
"Sunrise 4:43am (EEST), sunset 10:08pm (EEST) at Espoo, Finland (17:24 hours daylight)"
http://waxborg.servepics.com
Linux 2.6.25.20-0.4-default #1 SMP 2009-06-01 09:57:12 +0200 x86_64
2:32pm up 39 days 23:06, 13 users, load average: 0.22, 0.82, 0.93

houghi · External Since: Apr 25, 2004 Posts: 3249

Vahis wrote:
>> Making a 3.5 KDE live CD or anything else never has been easier. I have
>> even made a version with a working MPlaeyr installed
>>
> Can you make a USB thingy like the one there with it?

Yes. Screenshots : http://houghi.org/susestudio/

http://houghi.org/susestudio/1245263066.jpg has the selection you can
make at first.
You can add any software from almost everywhere. You can add
repositories, so it will be easier to add software.

A possible way to do it.
1) Select a standard
2) Build it
3) Download it

Another more complicate way to do it
1) Make your own repo with the build service
2) Select a very basic install
3) Add the repo to that install
4) Add software
5) Add scrips to run
6) Edit whatever you like
7) Remove things
Cool

Build it
9) Test it online
10) change what is needed
11) repeat till it works
12) Delete the project

Oh wait, that last one was not so OK.

I just build a 1.5GB USB image. Will test it later tonight. Unfortunatly
I do not have the space to host it, so here the highly illegal torrent:
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5020999

(OK, not so illegal.) I do not have a high speed upload. Size is just
under 470MB.

houghi
--
First we thought the PC was a calculator. Then we found out how to turn
numbers into letters with ASCII and we thought it was a typewriter. Then
we discovered graphics, and we thought it was television. With the World
Wide Web, we've realized it's a brochure. -- Douglas Adams.