main

main@lists.alug.org.uk

10372 discussions

Shell buzzer
by Wayne Stallwood 27 Feb '04

27 Feb '04

I am running SuSE 9.0 here, but I've seen this on other distros When in either a tty session on a shell using konsole I have a really annoying warning bleep when I do certain things, an example is pressing backspace when there is nothing to backspace to of if I try to tab complete something that does not exist. In konsole it is using the soundcard and on the tty sessions it uses the PC speaker. How do you get rid of it ? Regards Wayne

9 9

Announce digest, Vol 3 #4 - 1 msg
by announce-request＠lists.alug.org.uk 27 Feb '04

27 Feb '04

Send Announce mailing list submissions to announce(a)lists.alug.org.uk To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/announce or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to announce-request(a)lists.alug.org.uk You can reach the person managing the list at announce-admin(a)lists.alug.org.uk When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Announce digest..." --------------.--------------------------------------------.------------ alug-announce | Newsletter of the Anglian Linux User Group | Weekly(ish) --------------'--------------------------------------------'------------ ** Please send articles for this letter to announce(a)lists.alug.org.uk ** *** Please send replies to main(a)lists.alug.org.uk, not announce... *** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Today's Topics: 1. [lugmaster] Update on the EU's IP Enforcement Directive (James Heald) --__--__-- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:50:08 +0000 From: James Heald <j.heald(a)ucl.ac.uk> To: lugmaster(a)mailman.lug.org.uk Reply-To: "A closed discussion list for UK LUGMasters." <lugmaster(a)mailman.lug.org.uk> Subject: [Alug Announce][lugmaster] Update on the EU's IP Enforcement Directive -- FFII News Update -- 25 February 2004 -- +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ -- For immediate release -- Please redistribute widely As expected, the proposed text for the Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive (IPRED) was nodded through by the European Parliament's Legal Affairs committee without a vote on Monday afternoon. The Directive is now scheduled to be debated by the full Parliament on Monday 8 March, and voted on (with amendments possible) on Tuesday 9 March, ready to be approved by ministers on Thursday 11 March. A report of the MEP's discussion can be found at: http://www.ipjustice.org/CODE/Report_of_JURI_Committee_Meeting.html =09 One notable comment is that of Malcolm Harbour (UK Conservative MEP), who said that: "This Directive, contrary to public presentation, is not mainly about the commercial interests of the software industry, but about important brandnames that are an incentive for criminal elements (tangibles)... When getting e-mails MEPs should reply that the Directive is not about Free Software and not even about the digital world. It should pass in First Reading". This should be read in the context of Article 2 of the Directive, which states that: "...the measures and procedures provided for by this Directive shall apply, in accordance with Article 3, to any infringement of intellectual property rights as provided for by Community law and/or by the national law of the Member State concerned". A page by Ian Brown of the Foundation for Information Policy Research (FIPR), outlines some of the measures in the directive and how they could be used by claimed rightsholders against small software projects: http://www.ffii.org.uk/ip_enforce/oss.html EFF Alert =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Electronic Freedom Frontier (EFF) today also issued a briefing about the directive, and an online petition which will be sent to key MEPs, http://action.eff.org/action/moreinfo.asp?item=3D2873 http://action.eff.org/action/index.asp?step=3D2&item=3D2873 =09 "The European Parliament is poised to adopt a controversial directive on Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement that would give rights-holders incredibly powerful tools in their fight against intellectual property infringers. While this might sound like a good idea at first, a closer look reveals that the directive doesn't distinguish between unintentional, non-commercial infringers and for-profit, criminal counterfeiting organizations. If this directive is adopted, a person who unwittingly infringes copyright -- even if it has no effect on the market -- could potentially have her assets seized, bank accounts frozen and home invaded. Don=92t let these tactics become the latest weapons in intellectual property rights-holders' destructive war on "piracy".=09 =09 "The key to the directive is the definition of 'commercial scale'. Several of the more extreme new remedies are only available for commercial- scale infringement. However, this is largely undermined by the definition in new recital 13a of the directive, which states, 'The acts which are committed on a commercial scale are those carried out for direct or indirect economic or commercial advantage'. "Although it goes on to say, 'This would normally exclude acts done by end consumers acting in good faith,' the meaning of 'indirect economic advantage' is unclear and the directive is not limited to intentional infringements. Therefore, there is concern that rights-holders will be able to use the new tougher penalties against consumers who accidentally or unknowingly infringe, including those who commit minor infringements without any commercial purpose or impact." FFII view =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =09 FFII stands by its previous statements about the Directive, as picked up for example in this Slashdot discussion: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=3D04/02/20/216227 =09 In particular FFII draws attention to the proposal to make "Anton Piller" orders available for all alleged IP infringements, without even the proposed restriction to commercial scale. Currently these measures are unknown outside the UK and France. Furthermore, in the UK, after very strong criticisms from the most senior judges, a strict new code of practice was brought in in the early 90s which cut the number of applications granted by a factor of ten.=09 =09 "We are talking about unannounced dawn raids by private security firms, piling in with legal authority and seizing entire computer systems and filing cabinets full of documents. That is a terrifying and destructive experience for a small firm," explains FFII's James Heald. That is why FFII is arguing that such measures should only be available in the most extreme circumstances, and where there is clear evidence of a deliberate knowing intent to infringe for commercial gain on a commercial scale. Such measures are simply not appropriate where there is no such deliberate piracy, and no such emergency, in cases as complex as those in patent law and disputed ownership of confidential information/trade secrets, which routinely can take five years in court. "FFII says that without better defined safeguards the Directive will lead to a far more agressive, lawyer-driven legal environment for creative businesses. Having seen how similar legislation is used in the United States, FFII fears that it will provide the perfect means for agressive litigators holding dubious intellectual property rights to "pull a SCO" and use the powers of the Directive to seriously harass and damage small open-source projects and innovative businesses". FFII believes that: 1. Disputes about patents and trade secrets/confidential information should be taken out of the scope of the directive altogether. The draconian measures being discussed are completely inappropriate for such complex disputes. Ideally the directive should be limited back to its original proposed scope, namely commercially organised, fully intentional, copyright and trademark infringement. 2. The Directive should only apply where there is intent to infringe for commercial gain on a commercial scale. It should not apply unless there is good evidence of recklessness or a deliberate knowing intention to infringe. 3. Articles 7 to 10 should even then only apply in exceptional cases. It should be clearly stated in the Directive (as at the moment it is not) that they are not intended to become automatic standard procedure in all IP disputes. *** FFII urges all European citizens to contact their local constituency MEPs as soon as possible, to make them aware of the dangers of this Directive. *** Contact details for UK MEPs can be found at: http://www.europarl.org.uk/uk_meps/MembersMain.htm =09 =09 James Heald, UK co-ordinator, FFII http://www.ffii.org.uk/ip_enforce/ipred.html _______________________________________________ lugmaster mailing list lugmaster(a)mailman.lug.org.uk http://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/lugmaster --__--__-- _______________________________________________ Announce mailing list Announce(a)lists.alug.org.uk http://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/announce End of Announce Digest

1 0

OT: e-mail accounts
by Richard Lewis 26 Feb '04

26 Feb '04

Hello List, (Sorry, this may be a little off topic...) As should be obvious I currently use an e-mail account from UEA. But, as with all good things, my time at UEA must eventually come to an end and I was just wandering if anyone knew of anyone who provides free e-mail accounts that would work well with a normal mail client (like KMail, Evolution etc.) I suppose I mean POP-based rather than Web-based. Cheers, Richard

3 2

OpenSSH
by Craig 25 Feb '04

25 Feb '04

They just released v3.8 today. *stretches* It is still morning and I need another cup of tea... (Off topic.. does anyone love other tea? Like English Breakfast, Assam, Earl Grey etc? ;) C

3 3

Postfix sender address
by bsamuels＠beenthere-donethat.org.uk 25 Feb '04

25 Feb '04

I'm running Postfix under Debian (Testing). At present I use an option in my mailer to translate my senders local address to the address I want but I'd prefer to have it done by Postfix. I want barry@localdomain to be translated to barry(a)beenthere-donethat.org.uk I looked through the Postfix documentation and assumed that I need to use the /etc/postfix/canonical file. I have tried the following entries: barry@localdomain barry(a)beenthere-donethat.org.uk @localdomain beenthere-donethat.org.uk None of these work. I still get the included sender address as barry@localdomain. I did remember to run postmap /etc/postfix/canonical and to be on the safe side I also ran postfix reload. Can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong? Barry Samuels http://www.beenthere-donethat.org.uk The Unofficial Guide to Great Britain

1 0

Re: Any ssh experts around?
by Jenny Hopkins 24 Feb '04

24 Feb '04

Chris Green wrote: > > So, why doesn't the first one work? I think I've set > everything up but I may have missed something obvious. Any > ideas anyone? > Chris, sorry if you wrote you did this and I didn't spot it (digests are cumbersome to follow), but have you changed the "Password Authentication" line in /etc/ssh/sshd_config file? Jen ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________

3 3

firefox browser
by Bryce Martin 24 Feb '04

24 Feb '04

Has anybody else had persistent trouble trying to download firefox 0.8 from the official website. I haven't been able to do it for more than two weeks now. I keep getting timed out on the server. I initially thought this might be a short-lived problem, but it has persisted for a long time now. Can anyone offer advice about this? -- Regards, Bryce.

3 2

ADSL
by Vasko Tomanov 24 Feb '04

24 Feb '04

I want to receive 256 MBit ADSL connection for my company with one static IP address. I live in Marlow , SL7 3EA I have my own modem etc. I have BT Line I not need some setup help. And I will be happy to buy this service from some one who run his business on Linux .. if some one in this list provide this type of services send me his phone number to give him a call Cheers Vasko

2 1

Any ssh experts around?
by Chris Green 23 Feb '04

23 Feb '04

I'm trying to set up an ssh connection to a remote system where I have a shell login account and I can't get it to do RSA (or DSA) authentication and not askk me for a password. I have a number of other logins where the passwordless login works fine. If I turn debugging on (with -vvv) the sequence up to where it demands a password is:- debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,password debug3: start over, passed a different list publickey,password debug3: preferred publickey,keyboard-interactive,password debug3: authmethod_lookup publickey debug3: remaining preferred: keyboard-interactive,password debug3: authmethod_is_enabled publickey debug1: Next authentication method: publickey debug1: Offering public key: /home/chris/.ssh/id_rsa debug3: send_pubkey_test debug2: we sent a publickey packet, wait for reply debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,password debug1: Offering public key: /home/chris/.ssh/id_dsa debug3: send_pubkey_test debug2: we sent a publickey packet, wait for reply debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,password debug2: we did not send a packet, disable method debug3: authmethod_lookup password debug3: remaining preferred: ,password debug3: authmethod_is_enabled password debug1: Next authentication method: password On a very similar system where the passwordless login works I get:- debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,password,keyboard-interactive debug3: start over, passed a different list publickey,password,keyboard-interactive debug3: preferred publickey,keyboard-interactive,password debug3: authmethod_lookup publickey debug3: remaining preferred: keyboard-interactive,password debug3: authmethod_is_enabled publickey debug1: Next authentication method: publickey debug1: Offering public key: /home/chris/.ssh/id_rsa debug3: send_pubkey_test debug2: we sent a publickey packet, wait for reply debug1: Server accepts key: pkalg ssh-rsa blen 149 So, why doesn't the first one work? I think I've set everything up but I may have missed something obvious. Any ideas anyone? -- Chris Green (chris(a)areti.co.uk)

3 4

Weekly IRC reminder
by Neill Newman 23 Feb '04

23 Feb '04

This is the automated ALUG IRC meeting reminder sent to remind you that there is an IRC meeting tonight (Monday) at 8.00pm. The meeting takes place on the irc server irc.alug.org.uk in the #alug channel. Most IRC clients should allow you to get there with the commands "/server irc.alug.org.uk" and "/join #alug". Popular IRC clients include tkirc, bitchx, xchat and EPIC on Unix, and Mirc under windows. Here are some links to help you get started with irc. Unix http://www.xchat.org/ http://freshmeat.net/ http://www.epicsol.org/ Windows http://www.mirc.com (loads of help with irc for newbies!)

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

main