What does "srw-rw-rw-" mean?
Arthur Reynolds
I don't know what
srw-rw-rw- 1 root wheel 0 May 17 15:05 log
^--that
means. What does it mean? I know if that char is a dash, it indicates a
regular file. A 'd' means a directory, an 'l' means a link, but what the
heck does an 's' mean? And how would one create such a mode?
Thanks, Art
Michael Sierchio
> I feel ignorant. I can't believe I've been using FreeBSD all this time and
> I don't know what
>
> srw-rw-rw- 1 root wheel 0 May 17 15:05 log
> ^--that
> means. What does it mean?
man ls
Arthur Reynolds
> Arthur Reynolds wrote:
>> [what does]
>> srw-rw-rw- 1 root wheel 0 May 17 15:05 log
>> ^--that
>> mean?
>
> man ls
duh. thanks.
Gerrit Kuehn
24 May 02 13:25, Arthur Reynolds wrote to All:
AR> srw-rw-rw- 1 root wheel 0 May 17 15:05 log
AR> ^--that means. What does it mean?
From "man chmod":
r The read bits.
s The set-user-ID-on-execution and set-group-ID-on-execution
bits.
Regards,
Gerrit
Sean Hamilton
> man ls
While this serves to direct the originator of the question to an answer, it
most certainly does not improve the quality of this forum. I and many others
read this to pick up general knowledge, and for these people, I present the
appropriate snip from the man page, which took me all of several seconds:
4000 (the set-user-ID-on-execution bit) Executable files with
this bit set will run with effective uid set to the uid of
the file owner. Directories with the set-user-id bit set
will force all files and sub-directories created in them to
be owned by the directory owner and not by the uid of the
creating process, if the underlying file system supports
this feature: see chmod(2) and the suiddir option to
mount(8).
s The set-user-ID-on-execution and set-group-ID-on-execution
bits.
sh
Sean Hamilton
> "Michael Sierchio" <ku...@tenebras.com> wrote:
> > man ls
>
> While this serves to direct the originator of the question to an answer,
it
> most certainly does not improve the quality of this forum. I and many
others
> read this to pick up general knowledge, and for these people, I present
the
> appropriate snip from the man page, which took me all of several seconds:
Sorry, I seem to have gotten sidetracked with that rant. The main reason for
the post was to point out that the correct man page was chmod, not ls, and
that is what I was quoting from.
sh
read-the-...@send-spam-to-dev-null.com
Sean Hamilton <s...@planetquake.com> wrote:
> "Michael Sierchio" <ku...@tenebras.com> wrote:
>> man ls
>
> While this serves to direct the originator of the question to an answer, it
> most certainly does not improve the quality of this forum. I and many others
> read this to pick up general knowledge, and for these people, I present the
> appropriate snip from the man page, which took me all of several seconds:
>
> 4000 (the set-user-ID-on-execution bit) Executable files with
> this bit set will run with effective uid set to the uid of
Actually if "srw-rw-rw-" was not a typo, it means that it is a named socket.
setuid would look like "rws-rw-rw", notice where the 's' is.
regards
--
John J. Rushford
j j r (at) a l i s a (dot) o r g
Joost Kremers
but unfortunately, you were quoting the wrong snippet from the wrong
man page. the OP asked:
AR> srw-rw-rw- 1 root wheel 0 May 17 15:05 log
AR> ^--that means. What does it mean?
note that the `s' is *before* the first `r', in the position where
such flags as `-' (regular file) `b' (block device), `c' (character
device) `l' (soft link) and a few other are. the `s' you're talking
about would stand in the position of the `x' that indicates execute
permission.
so from `man ls':
(...) The entry type character
describes the type of file, as follows:
b Block special file.
c Character special file.
d Directory.
l Symbolic link.
s Socket link.
p FIFO.
- Regular file.
it is this `s' that the OP was asking about.
--
Joost Kremers http://baserv.uci.kun.nl/~jkremers
Ask 8 slackers how to do something, get 10 answers.
-- sl in alt.os.linux.slackware
Arthur Reynolds
> but unfortunately, you were quoting the wrong snippet from the wrong
> man page. the OP asked:
>
> AR> srw-rw-rw- 1 root wheel 0 May 17 15:05 log
> AR> ^--that means. What does it mean?
>
> note that the `s' is *before* the first `r', in the position where
> such flags as `-' (regular file) `b' (block device), `c' (character
> device) `l' (soft link) and a few other are. the `s' you're talking
> about would stand in the position of the `x' that indicates execute
> permission.
>
> so from `man ls':
>
> (...) The entry type character
> describes the type of file, as follows:
>
> b Block special file.
> c Character special file.
> d Directory.
> l Symbolic link.
> s Socket link.
> p FIFO.
> - Regular file.
>
> it is this `s' that the OP was asking about.
Quite so, and this is what I found in the man page for ls, which *is* what
I was looking for. Thanks to all who had something to say. And thanks to
Sean for making the point that a little more infomation really helps (even
if he missed the actual question). I was able to use the terse reply to
find what I wanted but a brand-newbie might not.
Art
Joost Kremers
> Quite so, and this is what I found in the man page for ls, which *is* what
> I was looking for. Thanks to all who had something to say. And thanks to
> Sean for making the point that a little more infomation really helps (even
> if he missed the actual question). I was able to use the terse reply to
> find what I wanted but a brand-newbie might not.
which raises an interesting question: where do people who start out
with FreeBSD come from? are there many among us (i'm quite new to
FreeBSD myself) that do not have any *nix experience? personally, i've
used linux for over two and a half years (and continue to use it on my
laptop) so an answer like `man ls' tells me all i need to know. now i
know that in a linux NG such an answer may not always be helpful,
because the OP may well be someone with little or no *nix
experience. must i assume the same thing here?
Richard E. Hawkins
Joost Kremers <mrlin...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>which raises an interesting question: where do people who start out
>with FreeBSD come from? are there many among us (i'm quite new to
>FreeBSD myself) that do not have any *nix experience? personally, i've
>used linux for over two and a half years (and continue to use it on my
>laptop) so an answer like `man ls' tells me all i need to know. now i
>know that in a linux NG such an answer may not always be helpful,
>because the OP may well be someone with little or no *nix
>experience. must i assume the same thing here?
I was looking for FreeBSD, but haveing seen the early stages of the GNU
project and nethack on usenet forever ago, and having heard early status
reports on 386/BSD along the way, I mangled that all into NetBSD.
And while looking for that a few years ago, to turn departmental 486's
into extra heads for the Alphas, I accidentally found Linux and assumed
that was what I was looking for.
A couple of years later, I corrected the error :)
hawk
--
Richard E. Hawkins, Asst. Prof. of Economics /"\ ASCII ribbon campaign
doc...@psu.edu Smeal 178 (814) 375-4700 \ / against HTML mail
These opinions will not be those of X and postings.
Penn State until it pays my retainer. / \
Lars Eighner
<slrnaetfuk.e...@catv0149.extern.kun.nl>, the lovely and
talented Joost Kremers broadcast on comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:
> which raises an interesting question: where do people who start out
> with FreeBSD come from? are there many among us (i'm quite new to
> FreeBSD myself) that do not have any *nix experience? personally, i've
> used linux for over two and a half years (and continue to use it on my
> laptop) so an answer like `man ls' tells me all i need to know. now i
> know that in a linux NG such an answer may not always be helpful,
> because the OP may well be someone with little or no *nix
> experience. must i assume the same thing here?
Well, see, you are supposed to buy the real documentation from
O'Reilly. That's the way this scam works: give away the operating
system with the most opaque documentation possible. Put the real
documentation in a for-pay book. This goes double for X Windows.
--
Lars Eighner -finger for geek code- eig...@io.com http://www.io.com/~eighner/
Health is merely the slowest possible rate at which one can die.
Kendra Heinicke
<read-the-...@send-spam-to-dev-null.com> wrote in message
news:ApyH8.24302$cQ3.1011@sccrnsc01...
Will it make any sense to have a file suid root, but not executable for
group or other?
A file with
-rws-r-xr-x
might illustrate better?
Or am I totally off target now? That happens
Christian Caron
> which raises an interesting question: where do people who start out
> with FreeBSD come from? are there many among us (i'm quite new to
> FreeBSD myself) that do not have any *nix experience? personally, i've
> used linux for over two and a half years (and continue to use it on my
> laptop) so an answer like `man ls' tells me all i need to know. now i
> know that in a linux NG such an answer may not always be helpful,
> because the OP may well be someone with little or no *nix
> experience. must i assume the same thing here?
>
See, the thing is that it is very easy to write "man ls", but when someone
reads the topics just for the fun to learn new things, he just miss this
one. The person asking the question will certainly try the man page, based
on the answer, but the person just reading to learn might not. If the full
explanation would have been given, then everybody win.
Am I right?
--
========================================
Christian Caron
Joost Kremers
dunno... i wasn't the one asking the question, but when i saw it i did
want to know the answer. when i saw `man ls' i immediately went to
another console to see what the man page said.
Joost Kremers
> In article <slrnaetfuk.e...@catv0149.extern.kun.nl>,
> Joost Kremers <mrlin...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>>which raises an interesting question: where do people who start out
>>with FreeBSD come from? are there many among us (i'm quite new to
>>FreeBSD myself) that do not have any *nix experience? personally, i've
>>used linux for over two and a half years (and continue to use it on my
>>laptop) so an answer like `man ls' tells me all i need to know. now i
>>know that in a linux NG such an answer may not always be helpful,
>>because the OP may well be someone with little or no *nix
>>experience. must i assume the same thing here?
>
> I was looking for FreeBSD, but haveing seen the early stages of the GNU
> project and nethack on usenet forever ago, and having heard early status
> reports on 386/BSD along the way, I mangled that all into NetBSD.
>
> And while looking for that a few years ago, to turn departmental 486's
> into extra heads for the Alphas, I accidentally found Linux and assumed
> that was what I was looking for.
>
> A couple of years later, I corrected the error :)
erm, perhaps i should point out i'm sitting at a slackware box right
now, ssh-ing into my FreeBSD box to read newsgroups. that is my usual
setup: i use slack for LaTeX, browsing etc. and i read NG's and mail
on the FreeBSD-box through ssh.
so i wouldn't say linux is an error... ;-)
jpd
> Joost Kremers wrote:
>
>> which raises an interesting question: where do people who start out
>> with FreeBSD come from? are there many among us (i'm quite new to
Personally, I've done CP/M, DOS, linux, a teeny bit of AIX, NetBSD, some
OpenBSD, and FreeBSD. Almost, but not quite, in that order. Currently I'm
using a mix of FreeBSD and NetBSD, with some OpenBSD and maybe a bit of
a few others thrown in for variation.
>> FreeBSD myself) that do not have any *nix experience? personally, i've
>> used linux for over two and a half years (and continue to use it on my
>> laptop) so an answer like `man ls' tells me all i need to know. now i
>> know that in a linux NG such an answer may not always be helpful,
>> because the OP may well be someone with little or no *nix
>> experience. must i assume the same thing here?
I think we've got a mix here, both people that can deal with the FM and
people that don't (which then are expected to learn to deal with the FM).
That is, I suspect, a not so large but nevertheless important detail why
there are so many people that think this forum well.
> See, the thing is that it is very easy to write "man ls", but when someone
> reads the topics just for the fun to learn new things, he just miss this
> one. The person asking the question will certainly try the man page, based
> on the answer, but the person just reading to learn might not. If the full
> explanation would have been given, then everybody win.
If the full explanation has to be given _again_ and _again_ and _again_
when it's perfectly well and quite comprehensively answered in _the
online reference manual_ (`man' for short and commandline), nobody wins:
The writer gets tired and will include less detail with every iteration,
and the new askers missing details that might prove important. And the
fun will be the first thing over the doorstep, ofcourse.
I might occasionally fire up man or google for 30 secs and quote, but the
asker may google himself as well. In fact, I see, and use, a quote from a
manpage as a clear hint to look at the obvious entries of man more often.
Helping newbies helping themselves is just much more effective, and leaves
more room for really interresting questions. After all, usenet isn't just
your personal helpdesk, it's a discussion forum, a place for new ideas to
be discussed.
--
j p d (at) d s b (dot) t u d e l f t (dot) n l .
jpd
ObOtherpost: already noted for another poster:
But not in _that_ place. See ls(1).
Richard E. Hawkins
Joost Kremers <mrlin...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>Richard E. Hawkins wrote:
>> I was looking for FreeBSD, but haveing seen the early stages of the GNU
>> project and nethack on usenet forever ago, and having heard early status
>> reports on 386/BSD along the way, I mangled that all into NetBSD.
>>
>> And while looking for that a few years ago, to turn departmental 486's
>> into extra heads for the Alphas, I accidentally found Linux and assumed
>> that was what I was looking for.
>> A couple of years later, I corrected the error :)
>erm, perhaps i should point out i'm sitting at a slackware box right
>now, ssh-ing into my FreeBSD box to read newsgroups. that is my usual
>setup: i use slack for LaTeX, browsing etc. and i read NG's and mail
>on the FreeBSD-box through ssh.
>so i wouldn't say linux is an error... ;-)
I'm not saying that linux is alwasys an eror; I still have it on my 486
laptock, and a partial install on Eyry, my old desktop/server (once it
has a working modem again, I'll switch, but windows trashed the whole
system when I let the kids play some games on it . . .)
But I was looking for FreeBSD (though under an older name) and thought
I'd found what I was looking for and stopped--in error :)
Joost Kremers
>>so i wouldn't say linux is an error... ;-)
>
> I'd found what I was looking for and stopped--in error :)
ah, ok... i completely misunderstood what you were saying. :-)
tje...@telusplanet.net
<mrlin...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> which raises an interesting question: where do people who start out
> with FreeBSD come from?
OS/2 since 1994.
I played with SCO Openserver for a bit then gave up but that was
several years ago.
Tim
--
Kirk Strauser
At 2002-05-24T22:38:48Z, Joost Kremers <mrlin...@nospam.invalid> writes:
> which raises an interesting question: where do people who start out with
> FreeBSD come from? are there many among us (i'm quite new to FreeBSD
> myself) that do not have any *nix experience? personally, i've used linux
> for over two and a half years (and continue to use it on my laptop) so an
> answer like `man ls' tells me all i need to know. now i know that in a
> linux NG such an answer may not always be helpful, because the OP may well
> be someone with little or no *nix experience. must i assume the same thing
> here?
I was a die-hard Amiga user, of all things, up through late '99. I'd used
Linux (primarily Red Hat) for a few years at the ISP where I worked, but
hadn't really done anything with it at home. My conversion point was when
my Amiga's hard drive failed and my (supposedly) high-grade backup software
ceased to recognize its own tapes. I knew that I had no real option except
moving to an Intel box, but there was no way on Earth I was going to install
Windows. I liked what I'd seen of Linux but wanted something more
"professional" than Red Hat, and a co-worker suggested I try FreeBSD. I
bought an CD set of 3.4, booted, and fell in love.
--
Kirk Strauser
The Strauser Group - http://www.strausergroup.com/
Dave Pimlott
> which raises an interesting question: where do people who start out
> with FreeBSD come from? are there many among us (i'm quite new to
I was a DOS / windows man, I felt I should expand my horizons with a bit
of 'yoonix' knowledge. I asked my friends what they recommended and I
was lucky enough that two of them were running FreeBSD 2.2.8 (at the
time) so I went to Walnut Creek and got the Complete FreeBSD set... I
have stuck with FreeBSD since then and I now have FreeBSD running on all
the machines I own. I have also started to play with Linux recently, to
see if the grass really is greener on the other side... I can happily
state that so far the grass is *much* greener on *this* side!
At the moment I boot windows only to play games, but this will only last
until I can get Wine to compile openGL support into itself and nVidia
get their act together and release a driver with 3D support...
Dave Pimlott.
Joost Kremers
> Joost Kremers wrote:
>
>> which raises an interesting question: where do people who start out
>> with FreeBSD come from? are there many among us (i'm quite new to
>
> I was a DOS / windows man, I felt I should expand my horizons with a bit
it's interesting to see that people using FreeBSD come from very
different backgrounds. until now i thought most FBSD users would
certainly have been using linux before they moved to FBSD, but it
seems that's somewhat of a misconception...
Dave Pimlott
> it's interesting to see that people using FreeBSD come from very
> different backgrounds. until now i thought most FBSD users would
> certainly have been using linux before they moved to FBSD, but it
> seems that's somewhat of a misconception...
In my case it was more luck, than judgement :-) if my friends had been
running linux I might have been hanging out on C.O.L.* instead of
here...
Dave Pimlott
snipthism...@blueyonder.co.uk
(and Mike possibly snipped)...
>On Fri, 24 May 2002 22:38:48 UTC, Joost Kremers
><mrlin...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> which raises an interesting question: where do people who start out
>> with FreeBSD come from?
I'm looking to replace my W95 OS with something better. I've played around
with a few Linux bits, Redhat, Caldera and the Slackware based Vector Linux
which I liked a lot but couldn't get much info on. I did take a quick look
at FreeBSD a while back but got the impression it was close to vanishing
due to changes that were happening to the teams behind it at the time.
I was pleasantly surprised to see the project is not only alive and well,
but seems to be marching on stronger than ever.
So.... as I like what the Vector Linux chaps did with the bits of Slackware
they worked with, I thought it may be an idea to try and put together a
similar FreeBSD system for my gas powered P90.
Would it be ok to post a breakdown of what I think I need and get a bit of
advice?
-------------------------------------------
Some of this in the opinion of
Mi...@N.UK
-------------------------------------------
"Disability is an external influence."
-------------------------------------------
http://www.mikeswebsite.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
-------------------------------------------
mikeo...@blueyonder.co.uk
-------------------------------------------
Joost Kremers
>
> Would it be ok to post a breakdown of what I think I need and get a bit of
> advice?
>
i think that's one of the things this NG is intended for, so go
ahead. although being a FreeBSD newbie myself, i doubt i'll be able to
help much, but others here will. (and i'll keep lurking just to learn
a bit.)
jpd
Mi...@N.UK <snipthism...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
> So.... as I like what the Vector Linux chaps did with the bits of Slackware
> they worked with, I thought it may be an idea to try and put together a
> similar FreeBSD system for my gas powered P90.
Please remember that FreeBSD isn't linux, and it doesn't work
`like linux' other than being a `un*x like' operating system.
> Would it be ok to post a breakdown of what I think I need and get a bit of
> advice?
If, as I suspect you are, trying to rig up some software, please keep in
mind the FreeBSD operating system is in itself a complete system and
doesn't need gathering up bits and pieces. Instead, once it is installed
it serves as a platform to easily install all sorts of other software.
It can even help you find that software (eg, `ports').
In short: please first take a look at how FreeBSD done things, then
decide whether you want to re-invent the weel, instead of the other way
around. The handbook is ofcourse an excellent starting point:
http://www.freebsd.org/handbook/index.html
snipthism...@blueyonder.co.uk
(and Mike possibly snipped)...
>On Fri, 31 May 2002 17:57:15 GMT,
>Mi...@N.UK <snipthism...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> So.... as I like what the Vector Linux chaps did with the bits of Slackware
>> they worked with, I thought it may be an idea to try and put together a
>> similar FreeBSD system for my gas powered P90.
>
>Please remember that FreeBSD isn't linux, and it doesn't work
>`like linux' other than being a `un*x like' operating system.
Heheh! If only I were that competent! What I meant was to get something
that already worked and install things/tweak it a bit to present me with
the programs I need.
>> Would it be ok to post a breakdown of what I think I need and get a bit of
>> advice?
>
>If, as I suspect you are, trying to rig up some software, please keep in
>mind the FreeBSD operating system is in itself a complete system and
>doesn't need gathering up bits and pieces. Instead, once it is installed
>it serves as a platform to easily install all sorts of other software.
>It can even help you find that software (eg, `ports').
This is what I want to do really. I've read a few times that BSD stuff is
the way to go for with regard to stability, consistency and reliability.
All I need on top is a few favorite programs to do my internet stuff and
access my W98 LAN connection, though I'd like these programs to make the
same kind of sense and not require too much complex setting up or compiling
(M$ user, need to take things one step at a time!). Though I'm almost in
love with IceWM (I used it with Vector Linux), I would like to be able to
do things from the command line and maybe even dabble in a bit of
scripting/programming too.
>In short: please first take a look at how FreeBSD done things, then
>decide whether you want to re-invent the weel, instead of the other way
>around. The handbook is ofcourse an excellent starting point:
I've downloaded the text zip (html would have been nice, ah well!) and will
be digging through it tommorrow. RTFM eh? ;-} Always a good idea.
> http://www.freebsd.org/handbook/index.html
At the moment I'm running W95/Opera/Agent/Arachnophilia/WS_FTP/PSP for the
things I use the P90 for. All other work is done on the offline machine.
Its the P90 I want to get re-installed with something I can trust a bit
more than the W95/ZoneAlarm setup I have now. It works, but I'm not sure if
the ZA crashes when attempting large downloads have left it open to the
net-grotties. I need to learn more about whats happening in that box too,
and maybe take a bit more charge of it than M$ want me to.
My interest in FreeBSD is, apart from the reputation, is that it is one
development with one basic concept behind it, rather than the untied
colours of Linux (nothing wrong with Linux, it just confuses me when I get
17 different help files/how2s that all say something different!) If I'm
going to take my CPU in my hand and leap into the knowable, I would like to
think there are people out there who will know what I'm asking when I screw
things up, rather than just guessing what version of which distro I may
have, plus updates etc.
I've a feeling I'm going to get told FreeBSD can do all this and more. The
question I seem to have is, as you put your finger on quite well, is, is it
what I need?
jpd
Mi...@N.UK <snipthism...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> jpd wrote,
> (and Mike possibly snipped)...
>
>>On Fri, 31 May 2002 17:57:15 GMT,
>>Mi...@N.UK <snipthism...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> So.... as I like what the Vector Linux chaps did with the bits of Slackware
>>> they worked with, I thought it may be an idea to try and put together a
>>> similar FreeBSD system for my gas powered P90.
>>
>>Please remember that FreeBSD isn't linux, and it doesn't work
>>`like linux' other than being a `un*x like' operating system.
>
> Heheh! If only I were that competent! What I meant was to get something
> that already worked and install things/tweak it a bit to present me with
> the programs I need.
Start with an install of at least the base system (including manpages),
and the documentation if you've got room.
[snip: just install the beast]
>
> This is what I want to do really. I've read a few times that BSD stuff is
> the way to go for with regard to stability, consistency and reliability.
> All I need on top is a few favorite programs to do my internet stuff and
> access my W98 LAN connection, though I'd like these programs to make the
> same kind of sense and not require too much complex setting up or compiling
> (M$ user, need to take things one step at a time!). Though I'm almost in
> love with IceWM (I used it with Vector Linux), I would like to be able to
> do things from the command line and maybe even dabble in a bit of
> scripting/programming too.
You get lots of things in the base system, and FreeBSD comes with a
compiler[0] in the base system. And, as of yet, with perl, too. Apart
from that, you've got the standard set of utilities like (t)csh, sh,
sed, awk. All of them take scripts in their language.
Dialup support comes in at least two flavours, one of which can do
PPPoE. It has built-in firewall and NAT support, too.
FreeBSD has NFS, ftp, ssh->sftp/scp and more in the base system. Samba
(for w98 `networking') is in the ports.
You probably want to install X from the ports[1], and there are lots of
window managers in the ports. KDE and gnome are there, too.
[snip]
> I've downloaded the text zip (html would have been nice, ah well!) and will
> be digging through it tommorrow. RTFM eh? ;-} Always a good idea.
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/
Html (both split and one file), text, pdf, pdb, ps and even rtf. Zipped,
gzipped or bz2ed. You choose.
[snip]
> I've a feeling I'm going to get told FreeBSD can do all this and more. The
> question I seem to have is, as you put your finger on quite well, is, is it
> what I need?
I don't know. All I can tell you is that you should try and see if it's
what you need. It most probably can do what you want it to. I can tell
you, however, that starting un*x wasn't easy for me. I'm still happy I
took the effort, because it does have huge advantages, at least for me.
And seemingly I am not the only one. Once learned it _will_ pay back.
Advice I do have for you: It really helps to have a nice book on un*x
basics in general and, especially for installing, a nice book on FreeBSD
for the specifics. The FreeBSD handbook does a good job of the latter
(especially when combined with the FAQ) and even tries a bit at the
former, altough it may be enlightening to have a more `generic' book at
hand. I'm told
is an acceptable book for that purpose. I haven't read it myself tho, as
when I found out about it I'd already found out most the hard way[2]. :-)
Of course there are many more books, I'll mention just two more here:
_FreeBSD: An Open Source Operating System for Your Personal Computer_
http://www.bsdmall.com/freebosforyo.html
_The Design and Implementation of the 4.4BSD Operating System_
http://www.aw.com/catalog/academic/product/1,4096,0201549794,00.html
The latter isn't about FreeBSD, but about 4.4BSD, from which it was
derived. It is useful for background and explanation of internals.
Which is probably not what you need right now, but something to know
about and come back to later.
Last thing to mention,
http://www.freebsd.org/docs.html
has links to handbook, FAQ, articles, books, web interface to manpages,
and lots more documentation. I think this'll keep you busy for some
time. <grin/>
[0] NetBSD, for example, can easily be installed without system cc.
[1] As opposed to the X distribution that you can install with the
system installer, because that one is 3.x, and the one in the ports
is 4.x.
[2] Which may be the reason why I'm so much in love with good
documentation nowadays.
snipthism...@blueyonder.co.uk
(and Mike possibly snipped)...
<SNIP>
>Start with an install of at least the base system (including manpages),
>and the documentation if you've got room.
>
>[snip: just install the beast]
Sounds like the best way to get my feet wet.
I'm having a spot'o'bother with ZA at the moment. It keeps crashing and
locking up my system after about 4hours/10% of the install.iso. I think I'm
going to fire up Vector Linux and try to get the file that way, before I
nuke poor old VL of my HDD to make way for the new toy. (Oops! Only a
figure of speech!) Oh, I do so want to get rid of this M$ rubbish! A full
triple finger salute just because a (probably defective) sub-routine got
snarled up is way beyond crap! <RANT="END">
<SNIP>
>Dialup support comes in at least two flavours, one of which can do
>PPPoE. It has built-in firewall and NAT support, too.
Cool!
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/
>
>Html (both split and one file), text, pdf, pdb, ps and even rtf. Zipped,
>gzipped or bz2ed. You choose.
The txt file is a zip but the html is a unix something then zipped. I
should be ok with the text file for now as I intend to scan through it all
to get an idea what the *game* is like.
<SNIP>
>Last thing to mention,
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/docs.html
>
>has links to handbook, FAQ, articles, books, web interface to manpages,
>and lots more documentation. I think this'll keep you busy for some
>time. <grin/>
At least it should refer to the same system everyone else is using (or near
enough)! ;-}
>[0] NetBSD, for example, can easily be installed without system cc.
>[1] As opposed to the X distribution that you can install with the
> system installer, because that one is 3.x, and the one in the ports
> is 4.x.
>[2] Which may be the reason why I'm so much in love with good
> documentation nowadays.
Eep!
Once I get the iso file downloaded and burned I'll get started on
installing and no doubt have a list of things I screwed up in a week or so.
CU later, and thanks for the advice. Much appreciated.
jpd
Mi...@N.UK <snipthism...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> jpd wrote,
> (and Mike possibly snipped)...
>
>>
>>Html (both split and one file), text, pdf, pdb, ps and even rtf. Zipped,
>>gzipped or bz2ed. You choose.
>
> The txt file is a zip but the html is a unix something then zipped. I
> should be ok with the text file for now as I intend to scan through it all
> to get an idea what the *game* is like.
Yes, that's a bit strange as it isn't necessairy, the zip format can
archive as well[0]. But, winzip and IIRC winrar can extract .tar files
just fine.
[0] gzip and bzip2 can't.
John van Gurp
On 24 May 2002, Joost Kremers wrote:
>
> which raises an interesting question: where do people who start out
> with FreeBSD come from? are there many among us (i'm quite new to
> FreeBSD myself) that do not have any *nix experience? personally, i've
> used linux for over two and a half years (and continue to use it on my
> laptop) so an answer like `man ls' tells me all i need to know. now i
> know that in a linux NG such an answer may not always be helpful,
> because the OP may well be someone with little or no *nix
> experience. must i assume the same thing here?
>
> --
> Joost Kremers http://baserv.uci.kun.nl/~jkremers
> Ask 8 slackers how to do something, get 10 answers.
> -- sl in alt.os.linux.slackware
You really want to know? I'm 41. Around 30 years ago I was sitting in a
Saturday morning computer kids class at the local university being taught
how to write a compound interest program in Basic on punch cards. Other
than that, my computer use for quite a few years was extremely limited
although I borrowed a C64 in 1985 or so and connected to a BBS. So now as
a middle aged office working fart I have a few networked pcs at home, play
games, fool around with html, and have a 23 YEAR OLD NEPHEW who has shown
me the DEVIL'S TOOLS and by god I just gotta learn how to use it! Lurking
here is the best way for now. Every question that I have is being/has been
asked by someone else (except for "Where do "free"BSD newbies come
from?").
Cheers!
John AS3OF+
Ean Kingston
short answer is I went to university.
The long answer is... The university had UNIX. I found it way more
useful than the DOS (it was MS DOS 4/5 era) I had at home. I asked
around about getting UNIX for my home computer and was told about
LINUX and the BSDs. Since I knew nothing about how to get them
working, I asked a bunch of the people I knew who had some form of
UNIX at home what they used. Most were using FreeBSD. So, I chose to
look into FreeBSD since I had more people I could ask question of.
Now I run UNIX systems for a living (AIX, Solaris mostly).
John van Gurp <j...@chebucto.ns.ca> wrote in message news:<Pine.GSO.3.95.iB1.0.102...@halifax.chebucto.ns.ca>...
Kristian Rask
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:16:09 -0300, John van Gurp <j...@chebucto.ns.ca>
wrote:
>
>On 24 May 2002, Joost Kremers wrote:
>>
>> which raises an interesting question: where do people who start out
>> with FreeBSD come from? are there many among us (i'm quite new to
>> FreeBSD myself) that do not have any *nix experience? personally, i've
approx. 10 years ago i saw an add for a used 250 Megs Tape drive of
the proper type (having a wangtec compatible (/dev/wt) controller.
I went to buy the tape drive and when he told me that he had no dos
software, i said - doesnt matter.. i'm gonne use SCO Xenix anyway.. or
possibly this new Linux thing..
The guy looked at me and handed me a tape named named 386bsd 0.1 and a
two boot floppies.. I havent run unix systems continuesly for 10
years, but i call the guy every 2nd year or so.. and on one occasion
he started talking about it being named FreeBSD 2.1.something and that
it was now availeable on CD ;-) I have used it regularly since 3.2
regards
Kristian aka The eternal newbie