Re: debian-user-digest Digest V97 #1127
unsubsdebian-user-digest-request@lists.debian.org wrote:
>
> Subject:
>
> debian-user-digest Digest Volume 97 : Issue 1127
>
> Today's Topics:
> Re: XDM seem to hang until I reboot.
> Re: kernel sound defaults wrong?
> Re: Debian/WindowsNT partitioning
> Re: PPP problem (?)
> Re: Partitioning
> COMMERCIAL: Arkeia v4.0r6 - network backup software (fwd)
> Re: kernel sound defaults wrong?
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject: Re: XDM seem to hang until I reboot.
> Date: 10 Dec 1997 18:18:52 -0000
> From: cpb4@ukc.ac.uk (Charles Briscoe-Smith)
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>
> In article <[🔎] 2090112795E@adm105.adm.louisville.edu>,
> Jay Barbee <jay.barbee@louisville.edu> wrote:
> >
> >What I am having problems with is a lockup or hangup from XDM. If I
> >am running a X session, it is possible to hangup, and I cannot seem
> >to run anything. I cannot click on an XTERM button, or even run
> >xterm if I have a free window up. When I do run a new 'xterm &' from
> >an available window, after a certain time it tells me it cannot write
> >to the display.
>
> It sounds to me like you're saying that the X programs which are already
> running continue to run, but new ones do not start. I've come across
> a similar problem when using eXceed here; eXceed was running on PC-NFS,
> which could only handle 16 network connections at a time. When the limit
> was reached, typing "xterm" in a shell window would give an error message.
> NT might have a similar limit. (I'd expect it to be much higher, though.)
>
> Are you getting an error message when you type "xterm" (without an
> "&")? How long do you have to wait until you get the error (it might
> be some minutes)? If there's no error message, what exactly happens
> when you type "xterm"? Do you get your prompt back, or do you have to
> press control-C to get a prompt?
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Charles Briscoe-Smith
> White pages entry, with PGP key: <URL:http://alethea.ukc.ac.uk/wp?95cpb4>
> PGP public keyprint: 74 68 AB 2E 1C 60 22 94 B8 21 2D 01 DE 66 13 E2
>
> --
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
> debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
> Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject: Re: kernel sound defaults wrong?
> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 12:25:56 -0600
> From: "Jens B. Jorgensen" <jjorgens@bdsinc.com>
> To: Rick Hawkins <hawk@eyry.econ.iastate.edu>
> CC: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>
> Rick Hawkins wrote:
> >
> > After playing for an extended period with the default settings, I finally
> > figured out why my sound card wouldn't work: the defaults in the kernel
> > package use Irq 7 rather than 5. Isn't 5 the standard on this?
>
> "standard"? Surely you jest. Yeah, it's also the "standard" for a lot
> of other ISA cards whose manufacturer decided that 5 should be the
> "standard" IRQ for their board. I believe this myth has originated
> because the Creative Labs Soundblaster board factory-defaults to an
> IRQ of 5. This by no means makes it a standard. Since there are only
> 15 IRQs on the Intel (AT) platform and closer to half of them are
> actually usable by add-on boards, there can't ever be a standard on
> a given board (or board-type, eg. "sound card") using a certain IRQ.
> Granted there are "tendencies" one sees among manufacturers.
>
> --
> Jens B. Jorgensen
> jjorgens@bdsinc.com
>
> --
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
> debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
> Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject: Re: Debian/WindowsNT partitioning
> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 10:21:24 -0500 (EST)
> From: Bill Leach <bleach@bellsouth.net>
> To: Gertjan Klein <gklein@xs4all.nl>
> CC: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>
> Yes I am aware of this but also have experienced in the past that doing
> this (fdisk/mbr) has made it possible to partition a disk that would not
> otherwise be accepted by fdisk. Because of what you say, I feel as though
> it borders on "FM" but possibly it has something to do with the BIOS of
> the particular machines where this has workded?
>
> best,
> -bill
> bleach@BellSouth.net b.leach@Worldnet.att.net
> b.leach@usa.net LinuxPC@Hotmail.com
> from a 1996 Micro$loth ad campaign:
> "The less you know about computers the more you want Micro$oft!"
> See! They do get some things right!
>
> On Wed, 10 Dec 1997, Gertjan Klein wrote:
>
> > Bill Leach <bleach@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >
> > > If you can boot a DOS session, you might want to try doing a fdisk/mbr on
> > > that drive. Not being sure just exactly what you are trying to do though,
> > > realize that issuing the above command _will_ wipe out everything on the
> > > drive.
> >
> > The (undocumented) fdisk /mbr command replaces the MBR software of the
> > first harddisk with the standard MS-DOS software. It does not alter the
> > partition table in any way, so all present partitions will remain
> > accessible. It also doen't change anything _in_ those partitions. If a
> > boot manager program such as LILO was installed in the MBR, it will of
> > course be removed (in fact, this is one thing the command is often used
> > for).
> >
> > Gertjan.
> >
> > --
> > Gertjan Klein <gklein@xs4all.nl>
> > The Boot Control home page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gklein/bcpage.html
>
> --
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
> debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
> Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject: Re: PPP problem (?)
> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 11:55:22 -0500 (EST)
> From: Bill Leach <bleach@bellsouth.net>
> To: Liran Zvibel <liranz@math.tau.ac.il>
> CC: Debian Mailing List <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
>
> Before you connect do a "/sbin/route -n" command and note how many lines
> of entries you have. You should probably have just one like this (I am
> assuming that you do not have an ethernet card or a slip/plip link also
> up):
>
> bash-2.01$ /sbin/route -n
> Kernel IP routing table
> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
> 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 8 lo
>
> When you connect, wait for about a half a minute and do a "/sbin/route -n"
> command again. This time there should be "new entries" (two, one for the
> connection "Iface ppp0" and one for the "default").
>
> You _REALLY_ need to look at the PPP-HOWTO (and maybe the NET3-HOWTO)!
>
> >From your description it is not possible to tell if you did or did not
> successfully connect. If the above commands give the sort of results that
> I mentioned then you did indeed connect and your problem is probably a
> basic network setup problem (see NET3-HOWTO).
>
> And NO, PAP is most definately not a Micro$loth "invention"!! Indeed, I
> am astonished that Micro$loth has not figured out a way to create an
> incompatible version of PAP for no valid technical reason such as they did
> do in creating their useless derivative "MS-CHAP"!
>
> Contrary to the BS that you see, read, and hear in the media and most
> especially in the popular computing press, Micro$loth has probably not
> created a single advancement in computer technology no matter how trivial.
> Contrast that with Sun Microsystems, AT&T, DEC, and a few others. Though
> I personally have no real "love" for IBM the true facts of the matter are
> that IBM Labs has invented &/or developed &/or been a significant force in
> the development of almost every item of computer technology that has any
> importance to computing whatsoever--even if IBM never exploited or even
> tried to exploit the item commercially.
>
> Sun Microsystems' contributions to the development of ARPANET, DARPANET,
> and Internet as well as to the development of AT&T's Unix is legendary.
> That Micro$loth should come along with their unbelievably arrogant and
> superior attitude, claiming to be at the "forefront" of computer
> technology, and appearently insisting "that their way is the only right
> way" is enough to make anyone with even a little knowledge of the truth
> sick and disgusted!
>
> Indeed, Linux is practically proof all by itself as to where Micro$loth
> stands with respect to "forefront of computer technology". That a
> multitasking, multiuser operating system (freely developed no less) can
> run something like X-windows and STILL beat the cr** out of Win95 in
> performance says a whole lot about "forefront".
>
> Micro$loths's DOS was the most inferior OS available for the Intel chipset
> when it was introduced and that condition remained unchanged.
>
> To hear Gates' talk, Micro$loth _invented_ windows (this stuff reminds me
> of the Joseph Stalin method of governmental information handling).
> Naturally at least some of the 'computing public" knew or remembered that
> Apple MacIntosh was a windowing computer system but it seems that far too
> many knew or know that Xerox "gave" the world the basic windowing
> environment upon which MacIntosh, MS-Windows, and even X is based.
>
> I suppose that after all of this I should apologize (for the bandwidth)
> and do a:
> <flame off>
>
> best,
> -bill
> bleach@BellSouth.net b.leach@Worldnet.att.net
> b.leach@usa.net LinuxPC@Hotmail.com
> from a 1996 Micro$loth ad campaign:
> "The less you know about computers the more you want Micro$oft!"
> See! They do get some things right!
>
> On Wed, 10 Dec 1997, Liran Zvibel wrote:
>
> > Hello again!!!
> > Thanks for helping me set my Debian system last week. Everything works OK
> > but the ppp connection.
> > The modem problem was an incorrect irq setting. Now I'm able to dial. I
> > downloaded XISP and configured it (was pretty easy - cleaver user
> > interface!) and dialed (using PAP). It finished negotiating with the
> > server quickly (took it less time then win.95 does it - isn't PAP a
> > win.95 protocol?) and changed the IP from --------- to
> > ???.???.???.??? when ? is a digit from 0 to 9. I thought I was connected,
> > but when I tried to use lynx, ftp or telnet they told me they couldn't
> > find host. (when I configured XISP I included the two DNS addresses my
> > ISP use). Am I missing something?
> >
> > Please help.
> > Thanks in advance,
> >
> > Liran Zvibel.
>
> --
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
> debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
> Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject: Re: Partitioning
> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 13:46:32 -0500 (EST)
> From: Bill Leach <bleach@bellsouth.net>
> To: Gertjan Klein <gklein@xs4all.nl>
> CC: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>
> On Wed, 10 Dec 1997, Gertjan Klein wrote:
>
> > Bill Leach <bleach@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > ...
> > > Though it depends upon what one might mean by the term "knows", the PC
> > > BIOS _IS_ the implementation of this particular filesystem abstraction.
> >
> > You constantly confuse the issue. The BIOS 'knows' how to load a
> > sector from disk to memory or vice versa. This has _nothing_ to do with
> > filesystems. Filesystems define how data is ordered and stored on these
> > sectors.
>
> We appear to be "arguing" from different perspectives about the same
> things. I am probably guilty in that I am not being at all specific about
> what I mean when I talk about the BIOS. The BIOS, as you point out
> (implicitly anyway) is not the same today as yesterday, etc. Obviously
> these are judgement calls and opinions but when the original hard disk code
> was written decisions were made concerning such things as sizes for device
> storage parameters. While what you have said about the cost of 10Meg HDs
> and the like is true, that fact did not seem to influence others in such a
> limiting way about how to deal with the matter. More importantly, I
> think, is that it has taken many years to finally to address this issue.
>
> > ...
> > > ...
>
> > I'm not exactly sure what you think is the nightmare part of the
> > original design (and frankly, I don't care). There are a ...
>
> And if you don't care then we are probably both wasting our time.
>
> > ...
>
> > ... sequential block numbers, though, and e.g. W95 _will_ install MBR
> > software that uses these (and install itself on a partition with a type
> > that MS-DOS doesn't understand) if installed on a HD/partition of above
> > (I believe) 2 GB.
>
> Though, I must admit that you have provided a piece of information that I
> was not aware of, since I have never installed Win95 nor tried to install
> Linux on a machine with Win95 (I would look at the appropriate HOW-TO
> before making such an attempt however).
>
> > * There is a limited number of primary partitions available in the MBR.
> > This limitation is no serious problem, as many modern OSes don't object
> > to being installed in an extended partition (of which there can be as
> > many as required). Of course the MS-DOS MBR software does not support
> > booting them, but should modern PC hardware be judged by old software?
> > There are plenty decent boot mangers around.
>
> Yes, many often incompatible workarounds exist. As to your question, I
> still maintain that the PC is a nightmare of horrible design decisions.
> You obviously, to me anyway, to not agree -- so be it.
>
> > ...
>
> > > Linux, for very practical reasons, chooses to honor this brain dead,
> > > convoluted drive abstraction.
> >
> > There is nothing brain-dead about partitioning a drive - it is a
> > perfectly logical way of having multiple independent filesystems and/or
> > operating systems on one disk.
>
> No there is nothing brain dead about partitioning a drive and I see no way
> that anyone could conclude from anything that I have said that I think
> otherwise. It is the arbitrary decision to create the "tiered" partition
> types (primary, extended, and logical) abstraction that I object to.
>
> >
> > > ...
>
> > ...
> > Not in modern BIOSes. It is backward compatibility that makes LILO
> > use the old-style BIOS calls, but it is probably (by now) capable of
> > making the newer style calls if told to (I can't check that as I don't
> > have the latest version here). (Note that it is also backward
> > compatibility that made the PC to what it is now: powerful hardware for
> > very low prices).
>
> These "modern BIOSes" have finally caught up with BIOSes of more than
> twenty years ago. Are you suggesting that had different decisions
> concerning how to deal compatibly with the various limitation that were
> arbitrarily built into the original design had been handled differently
> that the PC would not be as popular or have such a favorable
> performance/price ratio as it currently has?
>
> > > I repeat: There is _nothing_ inherent in Linux that requires any of this
> > > "grew like topsy", screwball "design".
> >
> > Ignoring your qualifications here, I never said there was. I was
> > objecting to your misinformation about the basic PC hardware and BIOS.
>
> I have "lost it". In as much as I really do not wish to mislead anyone
> then by "misinformation" are you talking about my assertions with respect
> to the BIOS design (and indeed design evolution) upon the overall
> filesystem design, or rather my (admitted) failure to even mention that
> there are new BIOS designs that do not themselves impose this scheme, or
> both?
>
> > > ...
> > ...
> > > I would be
> > > willing to defer to your claims that I am wrong concerning primary
> > > partitions being visible in DOS, but am having some trouble with that.
> > > My experience with DOS and Windoz is _very_ limited.
> >
> > Mine is quite extensive. Why do you not believe me, when you yourself
> > say that your experience here is _very_ limited, and I am telling you I
> > have the very thing you claim to be impossible running on my system (and
> > on quite a few others, I might add)? Why do you combine lack of
> > experience with such strong opinions?
>
> As I pointed out in the previous message, I have seen many PCs with
> multiple primary partitions where only ONE primary partition is visible to
> DOS or Windoz (or OS2 for that matter). In addition I have read in
> multiple books on PC machines that such is the normal design behaviour
> for a PC. Though I consider my experience with PCs to be "_very_ limited"
> in part because I have written very little software to run on ix86 or
> under DOS and none to run under Windoz.
>
> OTOH, I have HAD to fight with PC boxes from time to time for over 20
> years. I have (several different times) had experience with PC scsi
> controllers that refused to work with drives that would work fine on
> non-PC scsi buses. I have had to solve (employers) problems with
> incompatible hardware and software (hundreds of different times).
>
> I have seen (though thankfully was not involved) with machine upgrades
> where the new IDE drives were of the same make an model as the existing
> drive but would not work as master/slave pairs. Yet the same drives would
> work just fine on several other brands of PCs (and of course different IDE
> drives would work on these PCs). The company was not thrilled as there
> were several hundred of these machines.
>
> I have worked with many hundreds of computers ranging from dedicated
> micro-controllers to Super-Minis. While each certainly offered its'
> problem sets, I honestly believe that none provided problems as ludicrous
> as are available to you in the average PC.
>
> Are you "right" that this disaster is what has given us an affordable
> computing platform that has capabilities almost unimaginable 20 years ago?
> I admit that I don't know for sure. The only real example in the PC world
> suggests to me that you are right. IBM's microchannel attempted to
> address many of the major points of the disaster but was clearly a
> failure. Though if one asks why, then those answers are not so clear.
> The "success" of things like "win-modems" suggests a possible answer to
> me. And that is that the overwhelming majority of people buying computers
> are attentive to price to such an extent that almost no other factor
> "matters" (short of Windoz compatibility). It is also likely that
> whatever does cause the incredible popularity of the PC and Micro$loth is
> also involved in preventing a great many technically superior hardware and
> software innovations from becoming common.
>
> In a sense all of this opinion matters not. The PC is what it is and it
> does seem to be evolving in the "right" direction even if it has taken
> nearly 15 years to do make significant progress. In the meantime all of
> the "standards" and incompatibilities that exist in the PC world are the
> "part and parcel" of a huge percentage of the development work in Linux
> and the activities of listservers.
>
> best,
> -bill
>
> bleach@BellSouth.net b.leach@Worldnet.att.net
> b.leach@usa.net LinuxPC@Hotmail.com
> from a 1996 Micro$loth ad campaign:
> "The less you know about computers the more you want Micro$oft!"
> See! They do get some things right!
>
>
> --
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
> debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
> Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject: COMMERCIAL: Arkeia v4.0r6 - network backup software (fwd)
> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 11:58:02 -0800 (PST)
> From: <mike@bcinternet.com>
> To: Debian Users mailling list <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
>
> I saw this in c.o.l.a. and didn't see this mentioned on
> debian-user or the webpage. Did I miss this or is this news to everyone
> else? Either way if it's not bulls*$t then it's pretty cool.
>
> Micro$oft, what do you want to spend today?
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 09:16:38 GMT
> From: Knox Software <sales@knox-software.com>
> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.announce
> Subject: COMMERCIAL: Arkeia v4.0r6 - network backup software
> Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 11:30:46 -0800 (PST)
> Resent-From: <mike@bcinternet.com>
> Resent-To: mike@bcinternet.com
> Followup-To: comp.os.linux.misc
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> Knox Software announces the release of Arkeia v4.0r6 for Linux.
>
> Arkeia network backup software, by Knox Software,
> is now available as shareware for Linux home users.
> A fully functional copy of Arkeia is available for download at
> http://www.knox-software.com or ftp://ftp.knox-software.com.
> Suggested contribution is $25.00 US dollars.
> 25% of each contribution over $20.00 will be donated to Software in the
> public interest.
> This is the parent organization of the Debian Linux distribution.
>
> Knox Software is also making Arkeia available at an entry-level price of
> $199.00 for small work group settings.
> This package lets you interactively backup any mix of 5 Linux and
> Windows 95
> client machines to a Linux based backup server.
> See www.knox-software.com for download instructions.
>
> BURLINGAME, Calif. (November 24, 1997) - Knox Software today announced
> Arkeia for Linux, v4.0r6, network backup software.
> This software enables system administrators to implement a fast, easy,
> reliable
> and economical backup solution for Linux powered networks.
>
> "By leveraging 10 years of large scale UNIX backup expertise,
> Knox Software is making it possible for Linux system administrators
> to provide the type robust network backup solution previously available
> only in large UNIX shops," said Sam Siegel, general manager of Knox
> Software USA.
> "With Arkeia v4.0r6, we are providing a high-performance network backup
> solution
> for both large and small Linux environments such as ISPs,
> Web development, workgroups, and home users."
>
> The system, originally developed for the Sun, HP, and AIX environments,
> and now ported to Linux, is designed for centralized operations with
> remote control.
> Each backup server can be accessed from any client that has the user
> interface loaded.
> This password-controlled access lets the system administrator manage the
> backup
> server from any machine on the network.
> The administrator can even dial-in from a remote location, to perform
> backup,
> and restore operations. Only control information is communicated to the
> client machine.
> There is no X traffic over the network when the remote machine is an X
> server.
> A Java based user interface is provided for Windows NT and Windows 95
> clients.
>
> Arkeia v4.0 for Linux features:
>
> Backup server:
> O Backup as many as 200 clients at a time.
> O Manage multiple tape drives simultaneously.
> O Perform backup and restore operations simultaneously.
> O Maintain an online catalog of backups.
> Catalog size is typically less than 1% of the amount of data
> backed up.
> O Provide policy based security mechanism.
> O Drive autostackers, libraries and robotics.
> O Maintain an online catalog of tape pools.
> O Does not require root login when doing backup or restore
> operations.
> O Monitor tape drive, library and TCP/IP for errors and initiate
> recovery.
> O Monitor client connections; retry backup from point of failure
> if client goes offline and comes back online.
> O Maintains log files.
> O License management.
>
> Graphical interface:
> O X11 interface for Linux systems.
> O Java interfaces for Windows 95 and Windows NT clients.
> O Configure Tape drive, Drive pool and library definitions.
> O Configure Tape, and Tape pool definitions.
> O Configure Savepacks (a savepack defines machines and directories
> to backup)
> O Configure periodic backup schedule.
> O Initiate interactive backup.
> O ID and password management.
> O Initiate interactive restores.
> O Browse catalog of backups.
> O Browse log files.
> O Login to local or remote backup server.
> O Interactively monitors backup and restore operations.
> O User customizable color and background settings.
>
> Client:
> O Compress files during backup. (At user option.)
> O Encrypt files during backup. (At user option.)
> O Pace network data transmission with backup server.
> O Uncompress files, if required, during restore.
> O Unencrypt files, if required, during restore.
>
> Arkeia v4.0r6 supported software:
> O Caldera - Tested and working.
> O Redhat - Tested and working.
> O Slackware - Tested and working.
> O SusE - Tested and working.
> O Most Linux, v2.0.0 or higher, distributions.
>
> Arkeia v4.0r6 hardware requirements:
> O 16 MB ram (32MB recommended)
> O SCSI card (AH2940 recommended)
> O 486 or higher processor
> O 1GB disk drive or greater. (30MB for code and room for catalog
> growth.)
> O Linux v2.0.0 or greater; TCP/IP up and running.
>
> Supported Server Operating systems:
> Linux
> Solaris
> IRIX
> AIX
> HPUX
> And, others.
>
> Supported Client Operating Systems
> Linux
> Solaris
> IRIX
> AIX
> HPUX
> Windows NT
> Windows 95
> Windows 3.x
> And others.
>
> What you get for shareware: ($0.00 - $50.00)
> O Arkeia backup server for Linux
> Supports a single-tape tape drive
> Supports interactive backup
> O 2 clients any mix of Linux or Windows 95.
> O X interface for Linux backup server.
> O X interface for Linux clients.
> O Java interface for Windows 95 clients.
>
> What you get for $199.00:
> Basic offer
> O Arkeia backup server for Linux
> Supports a single-tape tape drive
> Supports interactive backup
> O 5 clients any mix of Linux or Windows 95.
> O X interface for Linux backup server.
> O X interface for Linux clients.
> O Java interface for Windows 95 clients.
>
> What you get for $699.00:
> Mini Lan Offer
> O Arkeia backup server for Linux
> Supports a single-tape tape drive
> Supports interactive backup
> Supports unattended, scheduled, backup
> O 5 clients: any mix of Linux or Windows 95.
> O 1 Unix/NT/Novell client
> O X interface for Linux backup server.
> O X interface for Linux clients.
> O Java interface for Windows 95 clients.
>
> What you get for $899.00:
> Enterprise Lan Offer
> O Arkeia backup server for Linux
> Supports a single-tape tape drive
> Supports interactive backup
> Supports unattended, scheduled, backup
> O 10 clients: any mix of Linux or Windows 95.
> O 2 Unix/NT/Novell client
> O X interface for Linux backup server.
> O X interface for Linux clients.
> O Java interface for Windows 95 clients.
>
> Optional features:
> O Automated unattended backup scheduling; for Basic offer only:
> $500.00
> O Additional Windows 95 or Linux client:
> $40.00
> O Additional Unix/NT/Novell client:
> $150.00
> O Client 10-pack for Unix/NT/Novell
> $1,100.00
>
> Please contact us for pricing on the following items.
> O Multiple tape drives support.
> O Library support.
>
> Users can download and evaluate a demo copy of Arkeia v4.0r6 for Linux
> right now from the Knox Software Internet site:
> http://www.knox-software.com,
> or ftp://ftp.knox-software.com
>
> In addition to supporting the Linux platform, Arkeia, v4.0r6, is also
> available
> for use larger facilities that use HP, SUN, HP, IBM AIX, and SGI.
>
> Additional information on Knox Software is available on the Internet at
> http://www.knox-software.com or by sending email to
> sales@knox-software.com.
>
> Knox Software, Arkeia and the Knox logo are registered trademarks of
> Knox Software,
> which is registered in the United States and other jurisdictions.
> All prices are US dollars and do NOT include local taxes, shipping and
> handling.
>
> - --
> This article has been digitally signed by the moderator, using PGP.
> http://www.iki.fi/mjr/cola-public-key.asc has PGP key for validating signature.
> Send submissions for comp.os.linux.announce to: linux-announce@news.ornl.gov
> PLEASE remember a short description of the software and the LOCATION.
> This group is archived at http://www.iki.fi/liw/linux/cola.html
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.6.3ia
> Charset: latin1
>
> iQCVAgUBNIfGdlrUI/eHXJZ5AQEtwAP+LnpDfZJ6Rx7VWEkJoq146GdFezxsKD7P
> Dd1etKu++yXwkKfMSDHwlHS5nd1E4xj1zxohTL+v7O5/i+HwESbtKzAJb3HYVQ8x
> O3xys2NoDmmcNXqcF6EAgeyxCzmOVCUuG2y4ozEvzPTCSVAzNhMVqfIN4/qpBVim
> xpe9kEzHT3c=
> =tnSq
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> --
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
> debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
> Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
>
UNSUBSCRIBE NOW
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: