Re: Linux and data storage?

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Sean M McMahon]

Actually I found her fadora howto  much more helpfull, if you use fedora, 
then her email stream today would lead you to think.  We all can play 
different roles I guess.  It seems to have a lot of good suggestions for 
how to get speakup if you use a kernel compiled with speakup as modules, 
that means you can start and stop speakup on a running system.  If you 
choose to use a system like debian, there other places which might serve 
you better if you use a version of speakup deb provided on the debian 
site.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

I have not been given a site where I can compare distributions with each 
other and make that decision.
As for your post before, I cannot be certain that the unzip options are on 
that other site, or even the same ones.
  As even this small exchange shows, not every distribution is exactly the 
same, and I cannot know what has or has not been included over there.
For example they are about 7 or so editions of pine behind.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Sean M McMahon wrote:

> Actually I found her fadora howto  much more helpfull, if you use fedora,
> then her email stream today would lead you to think.  We all can play
> different roles I guess.  It seems to have a lot of good suggestions for
> how to get speakup if you use a kernel compiled with speakup as modules,
> that means you can start and stop speakup on a running system.  If you
> choose to use a system like debian, there other places which might serve
> you better if you use a version of speakup deb provided on the debian
> site.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

Do you want a backup, or a mirror?  If you want a backup, then you will 
never have to expand that data--it is just there in case something goes 
seriously wrong on Shellworld.

If they are running Linux, then they have tar.  If they are running Linux, 
then they have gzip.
As for bzip2, that may be questionable, but if you have shell access, you 
could always just check.

  On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> I have not been given a site where I can compare distributions with each

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Gregory Nowak]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Even if they're using freebsd, tar, bzip, and bzip2 should still be
there. These are not gnu/linux-specific utilities.

Greg


On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 07:23:08PM -0500, Luke Davis wrote:
> Do you want a backup, or a mirror?  If you want a backup, then you will 
> never have to expand that data--it is just there in case something goes 
> seriously wrong on Shellworld.
> 
> If they are running Linux, then they have tar.  If they are running Linux, 
> then they have gzip.
> As for bzip2, that may be questionable, but if you have shell access, you 
> could always just check.
> 

- -- 
Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBWLF67s9z/XlyUyARAnBKAKCGn93IlyhQGdu72V9gcxyTPWg7rACfTmWf
+e2J68TOQ+PewItu2yhkAtI=
=c1g1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

This is true.  She seems to be worried, that they won't be there, on an 
old version of Redhat.

As I said earlier--she seems to have an irrational fear of compression--in 
short: a fobia: an irrational fear, not based upon reality.


On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Gregory Nowak wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Even if they're using freebsd, tar, bzip, and bzip2 should still be
> there. These are not gnu/linux-specific utilities.
>
> Greg

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Hart Larry]

Well, in standing up for Karen for a second, I know that if you run zip with 
other switches you can ruin the file.  For example, if you convert to ascii or 
even automaticly nuke the files upon completion.  I know as I have done these.
Also, from what I've heard you may only save %4 while compressing wave or mp3s
Hart

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Thanks Hart,
You are kind to stand up for me but there is no need.  The data is not 
going to be compressed period.
There is not one soul on this list who can move me as to this.  Call me 
whatever you like, but I have reasons not to trust the insolation over 
there,  and have already said that  once I have  my own setup fully 
knowledgeable of the tools at hand, I can  consider this option then.  Not 
now however.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Hart Larry wrote:

> Well, in standing up for Karen for a second, I know that if you run zip with 
> other switches you can ruin the file.  For example, if you convert to ascii 
> or even automaticly nuke the files upon completion.  I know as I have done 
> these.
> Also, from what I've heard you may only save %4 while compressing wave or 
> mp3s
> Hart
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Steve Holmes]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ahh this fear of compression! Can't say for sure about over the net
between the two machines (shell world and your web host) but I know
for sure that files transferred via a 56K modem are compressed in
transit and then decompressed as they spill onto your computer so at
the day you wish to pull those files down to a local machine of yours
over the modem, guess what, compression will be there like it or not.
If I were a system administrator preparing to transfer someone's files
over to another location, I would use tar, compress it with the gzip
or bzip2 option and ship that over and then do likewise to unpack it;
no questions asked.  This situation is 100% reliable! I havenever
lost data in the 20 years I've been computing due to any file
compression.  Now since rsync has been discussed here as a viable
method of transferring files and keeping them in sync in the future, I
recall there being a "compress on the fly" option and I would
incourage its use simply to move things more quickly.  But that is an
option in itself.

On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 07:32:50AM -0400, Karen Lewellen wrote:
> Thanks Hart,
> You are kind to stand up for me but there is no need.  The data is not 
> going to be compressed period.
> There is not one soul on this list who can move me as to this.  Call me 
> whatever you like, but I have reasons not to trust the insolation over 
> there,  and have already said that  once I have  my own setup fully 
> knowledgeable of the tools at hand, I can  consider this option then.  Not 
> now however.
> Karen
> 
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Hart Larry wrote:
> 
> >Well, in standing up for Karen for a second, I know that if you run zip 
> >with other switches you can ruin the file.  For example, if you convert to 
> >ascii or even automaticly nuke the files upon completion.  I know as I 
> >have done these.
> >Also, from what I've heard you may only save %4 while compressing wave or 
> >mp3s
> >Hart
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Speakup mailing list
> >Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> 

- -- 
HolmesGrown Solutions
The best solutions for the best price!
http://ld.net/?holmesgrown
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBW6kuWSjv55S0LfERAjG5AJ92BrYMwv1EV8e+bk3Z08xBsA979ACguwyz
GjFwVwuS5gKtpG4geSvYFI8=
=Yao7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Chuck Hallenbeck]

Steve,

I have been thinking about why folks get so gun shy with respect to such
reliable technologies. I think sometimes it originates with the all too
common disasters that come from working in the DOS world, or Windows
world, where there has always been this utterly stupid and risky
business about "text mode" vs. "binary mode" for file transfers and
compression. Making the wrong choice here can really cause you to shoot
yourself in the foot.

For me, one of the enormous advantages of saying bye bye to the
Microsoft atrocities is the ability to forget about that distinction,
text mode vs. binary mode. Data are compressed and uncompressed,
uploaded and downloaded, without ever once having to give a second
thought to those modes, which are nowadays only booby traps.

But I have no idea how one overcomes being nervous about the matter.
Maybe we need a mailing list for "recovering MS-holics!"

Chuck

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Steve Holmes wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Ahh this fear of compression! Can't say for sure about over the net
> between the two machines (shell world and your web host) but I know
> for sure that files transferred via a 56K modem are compressed in
> transit and then decompressed as they spill onto your computer so at
> the day you wish to pull those files down to a local machine of yours
> over the modem, guess what, compression will be there like it or not.
> If I were a system administrator preparing to transfer someone's files
> over to another location, I would use tar, compress it with the gzip
> or bzip2 option and ship that over and then do likewise to unpack it;
> no questions asked.  This situation is 100% reliable! I havenever
> lost data in the 20 years I've been computing due to any file
> compression.  Now since rsync has been discussed here as a viable
> method of transferring files and keeping them in sync in the future, I
> recall there being a "compress on the fly" option and I would
> incourage its use simply to move things more quickly.  But that is an
> option in itself.

-- 
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (96% of Full)
Home page at http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
Speakfreely address 24.105.197.112:2074

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

As I have said before, if I had a Linux setup of my own already this would 
be a different situation.  However I do not,  have many many reasons 
personally not to want to risk the second site for a compression transfer 
and prefer to error on the side of comfort in this case.  hopefully  when 
i want to take this data down from the second site to my own system I will 
have the setup space and no need for so much caution.
Karen

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, Chuck Hallenbeck wrote:

> Steve,
>
> I have been thinking about why folks get so gun shy with respect to such
> reliable technologies. I think sometimes it originates with the all too
> common disasters that come from working in the DOS world, or Windows
> world, where there has always been this utterly stupid and risky
> business about "text mode" vs. "binary mode" for file transfers and
> compression. Making the wrong choice here can really cause you to shoot
> yourself in the foot.
>
> For me, one of the enormous advantages of saying bye bye to the
> Microsoft atrocities is the ability to forget about that distinction,
> text mode vs. binary mode. Data are compressed and uncompressed,
> uploaded and downloaded, without ever once having to give a second
> thought to those modes, which are nowadays only booby traps.
>
> But I have no idea how one overcomes being nervous about the matter.
> Maybe we need a mailing list for "recovering MS-holics!"
>
> Chuck
>
> On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Steve Holmes wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> Ahh this fear of compression! Can't say for sure about over the net
>> between the two machines (shell world and your web host) but I know
>> for sure that files transferred via a 56K modem are compressed in
>> transit and then decompressed as they spill onto your computer so at
>> the day you wish to pull those files down to a local machine of yours
>> over the modem, guess what, compression will be there like it or not.
>> If I were a system administrator preparing to transfer someone's files
>> over to another location, I would use tar, compress it with the gzip
>> or bzip2 option and ship that over and then do likewise to unpack it;
>> no questions asked.  This situation is 100% reliable! I havenever
>> lost data in the 20 years I've been computing due to any file
>> compression.  Now since rsync has been discussed here as a viable
>> method of transferring files and keeping them in sync in the future, I
>> recall there being a "compress on the fly" option and I would
>> incourage its use simply to move things more quickly.  But that is an
>> option in itself.
>
> -- 
> The Moon is Waning Gibbous (96% of Full)
> Home page at http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
> Speakfreely address 24.105.197.112:2074
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Chuck Hallenbeck writes:
> Maybe we need a mailing list for "recovering MS-holics!"
I like that idea Chuck. I like it a lot.

First off if would reinforce the too easily ignored fact that a change
of attitude is essential to success on Linux.

But, most of all, it should give us a very entertaining FAQ.
> 

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Adam Myrow]

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, Chuck Hallenbeck wrote:

> For me, one of the enormous advantages of saying bye bye to the
> Microsoft atrocities is the ability to forget about that distinction,
> text mode vs. binary mode. Data are compressed and uncompressed,
> uploaded and downloaded, without ever once having to give a second
> thought to those modes, which are nowadays only booby traps.

Really?  FTP still has ASCII mode and binary mode.  Furthermore, depending 
on which version of Unix or Linux you use, the default will be different. 
For example, Solaris 8 and earlier defaulted to ASCII mode when you 
connected to another machine with FTP.  Solaris 9 and later default to 
binary mode.  Thankfully, ncftp seems to have always defaulted to binary 
mode.  Then, when you have to read a file produced in Windows or DOS, you 
might have to convert the end-of-line characters.  All of this would be a 
non-issue if everybody would agree on the same end-of-line convention, but 
there seems to be this notion that making things incompatible will ensure 
that nobody will switch from one OS to another.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Chuck Hallenbeck]

Exactly my point. Those are the booby traps I referred to. They are all
anachronistic gestures to the MS world. The strategy for Linux users who
wonder when to use "ascii" (AKA "text") modes, is a resounding NEVER!
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, Adam Myrow wrote:

> Really?  FTP still has ASCII mode and binary mode.  Furthermore, depending on 
> which version of Unix or Linux you use, the default will be different. For 
> example, Solaris 8 and earlier defaulted to ASCII mode when you connected to 
> another machine with FTP.  Solaris 9 and later default to binary mode. 
> Thankfully, ncftp seems to have always defaulted to binary mode.  Then, when 
> you have to read a file produced in Windows or DOS, you might have to convert 
> the end-of-line characters.  All of this would be a non-issue if everybody 
> would agree on the same end-of-line convention, but there seems to be this 
> notion that making things incompatible will ensure that nobody will switch 
> from one OS to another.
>
-- 
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (94% of Full)
Home page at http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
Speakfreely address 24.105.197.112:2074

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Its my reality and my experience with those who run this site.  Whatever my 
reasons, such is my choice.
I have all the experience with those running this service to know that i 
would rather not risk it.
better decompressed and  safe than  compressed and flawed in a way i do 
not discover until after the fact.
The risks are both small and I have chosen the one I prefer.
I do not have to give you my reasons or even make them clear to you.  you 
may disagree all you wish but It will make know difference to my final 
choice.
Consider Luc, Ken knows what he is doing and has lost every scrap of data 
up here once before, and almost did it again over the weekend.  He knows 
what he is doing and  has done this.  I am not going to chance  this with 
people who openly admit they are not that informed about Linux, and 
install even lynx incorrectly.
  Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

> This is true.  She seems to be worried, that they won't be there, on an old 
> version of Redhat.
>
> As I said earlier--she seems to have an irrational fear of compression--in 
> short: a fobia: an irrational fear, not based upon reality.
>
>
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Gregory Nowak wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> Even if they're using freebsd, tar, bzip, and bzip2 should still be
>> there. These are not gnu/linux-specific utilities.
>> 
>> Greg
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

Tell me this: if they are so very incompetent, why are you trusting your 
data to them at all?  Also, data corruption, of any kind, is more likely 
to happen to two gig of data, than it is to a far smaller singular file. 
In fact, with a single file, you could always make two copies. In fact, 
once you get it over there, you can decompress it immediately, and keep an 
uncompressed version.  It is only the transfer of that much data, about 
which you should be concerned.

Then again, maybe you should just buy the extra bandwidth from Shellworld, 
and not worry about it.

You can do what ever you wish, of course, but you asked for advice, and 
you now have to live with receiving it.


  On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> Its my reality and my experience with those who run this site.  Whatever my 
> reasons, such is my choice.
> I have all the experience with those running this service to know that i 
> would rather not risk it.
> better decompressed and  safe than  compressed and flawed in a way i do not 
> discover until after the fact.
> The risks are both small and I have chosen the one I prefer.
> I do not have to give you my reasons or even make them clear to you.  you may 
> disagree all you wish but It will make know difference to my final choice.
> Consider Luc, Ken knows what he is doing and has lost every scrap of data up 
> here once before, and almost did it again over the weekend.  He knows what he 
> is doing and  has done this.  I am not going to chance  this with people who 
> openly admit they are not that informed about Linux, and install even lynx 
> incorrectly.
> Karen
>
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:
>
>> This is true.  She seems to be worried, that they won't be there, on an 
>> old version of Redhat.
>> 
>> As I said earlier--she seems to have an irrational fear of 
>> compression--in short: a fobia: an irrational fear, not based upon 
>> reality.
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Gregory Nowak wrote:
>> 
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>> 
>>> Even if they're using freebsd, tar, bzip, and bzip2 should still be
>>> there. These are not gnu/linux-specific utilities.
>>> 
>>> Greg
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> 
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

because I do not have a choice Luc, it is my only other ftp location.
I was supposed to have a Linux machine months ago to forestal this, but 
the person  has not held up their end, and clearly has no plans to do 
this.
It was not until  ken  almost lost everything i have up here that i 
realized something must be done.
I am not discussing this any further.  No zip of this data.  Why are you 
insisting upon trying to force this issue?
btw, I did not read all of your post.  I am very  busy at work and only 
opened it at all out of respect for you.
Karen

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

> Tell me this: if they are so very incompetent, why are you trusting your data 
> to them at all?  Also, data corruption, of any kind, is more likely to happen 
> to two gig of data, than it is to a far smaller singular file. In fact, with 
> a single file, you could always make two copies. In fact, once you get it 
> over there, you can decompress it immediately, and keep an uncompressed 
> version.  It is only the transfer of that much data, about which you should 
> be concerned.
>
> Then again, maybe you should just buy the extra bandwidth from Shellworld, 
> and not worry about it.
>
> You can do what ever you wish, of course, but you asked for advice, and you 
> now have to live with receiving it.
>
>
> On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> Its my reality and my experience with those who run this site.  Whatever 
>> my reasons, such is my choice.
>> I have all the experience with those running this service to know that i 
>> would rather not risk it.
>> better decompressed and  safe than  compressed and flawed in a way i do 
>> not discover until after the fact.
>> The risks are both small and I have chosen the one I prefer.
>> I do not have to give you my reasons or even make them clear to you.  you 
>> may disagree all you wish but It will make know difference to my final 
>> choice.
>> Consider Luc, Ken knows what he is doing and has lost every scrap of data 
>> up here once before, and almost did it again over the weekend.  He knows 
>> what he is doing and  has done this.  I am not going to chance  this with 
>> people who openly admit they are not that informed about Linux, and 
>> install even lynx incorrectly.
>> Karen
>> 
>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:
>> 
>>> This is true.  She seems to be worried, that they won't be there, on an 
>>> old version of Redhat.
>>> 
>>> As I said earlier--she seems to have an irrational fear of 
>>> compression--in short: a fobia: an irrational fear, not based upon 
>>> reality.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Gregory Nowak wrote:
>>> 
>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>> 
>>>> Even if they're using freebsd, tar, bzip, and bzip2 should still be
>>>> there. These are not gnu/linux-specific utilities.
>>>> 
>>>> Greg
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Speakup mailing list
>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> 
>> 
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> It was not until  ken  almost lost everything i have up here that i realized

He didn't, but you're probably not reading this, so I won't waste my time 
explaining that, or anything else.

> I am not discussing this any further.  No zip of this data.  Why are you 
> insisting upon trying to force this issue?

I've explained that (but maybe it was something you skipped).

> btw, I did not read all of your post.  I am very  busy at work and only 
> opened it at all out of respect for you.

Then I shall not trouble you further with having to open and read parts of 
my messages.  Trying to reason with you on this matter has proven a 
pointless exercise in temporal wasteature.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Hi,
Now that i have a minute.
I appreciate your wisdom but the matter was never open for discussion as I 
said countless times.  That you wanted to try to reason on a closed issue 
was fine, but fruitless.
thanks though,
Karen

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

> On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> It was not until  ken  almost lost everything i have up here that i 
>> realized
>
> He didn't, but you're probably not reading this, so I won't waste my time 
> explaining that, or anything else.
>
>> I am not discussing this any further.  No zip of this data.  Why are you 
>> insisting upon trying to force this issue?
>
> I've explained that (but maybe it was something you skipped).
>
>> btw, I did not read all of your post.  I am very  busy at work and only 
>> opened it at all out of respect for you.
>
> Then I shall not trouble you further with having to open and read parts of my 
> messages.  Trying to reason with you on this matter has proven a pointless 
> exercise in temporal wasteature.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Thanks by the way for the site in your note above.
They are not using freebds, and do not know how to install even the basic 
things.  Pine is at 4.0 or4.1 and even it does not function properly.
I do not trust their limited knowledge to compress data that may or may 
not be  decompressed later.  it is red hat that they use...they think.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Gregory Nowak wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Even if they're using freebsd, tar, bzip, and bzip2 should still be
> there. These are not gnu/linux-specific utilities.
>
> Greg
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 07:23:08PM -0500, Luke Davis wrote:
>> Do you want a backup, or a mirror?  If you want a backup, then you will
>> never have to expand that data--it is just there in case something goes
>> seriously wrong on Shellworld.
>>
>> If they are running Linux, then they have tar.  If they are running Linux,
>> then they have gzip.
>> As for bzip2, that may be questionable, but if you have shell access, you
>> could always just check.
>>
>
> - --
> Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFBWLF67s9z/XlyUyARAnBKAKCGn93IlyhQGdu72V9gcxyTPWg7rACfTmWf
> +e2J68TOQ+PewItu2yhkAtI=
> =c1g1
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

Karen, you could find out all of these things yourself, without their 
intervention--see Janina's latest message on this thread.  The compression 
is also your issue--it's not them you have to trust to uncompress it, it 
is you who has to be (dis)trusted to decompress it.

If you are unsure of yourself, I suggest you learn a little before you do 
anything.  Doing it that way because somebody told you to, with your own 
emotional biases coloring the degree to which you follow the advice given, 
is a dangerous thing, without knowing exactly what you are doing.

Read the rsync manual page.  That will give you your syntax.

Re compression: in ten years of compressing everything from text 
documents, to operating systems, to entire file systems, to boot disks, I 
have never, I say again: never, had a compressed file, either PK zip, Gnu 
zip, or bzip2, spontaineously corrupt.

Given your fear, I imagine that you have, but in those circumstances, was 
it the compressed nature of the data, or the compression medium? 
Floppies, for example, have a tendancy to lose data.


On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> Thanks by the way for the site in your note above.
> They are not using freebds, and do not know how to install even the basic 
> things.  Pine is at 4.0 or4.1 and even it does not function properly.
> I do not trust their limited knowledge to compress data that may or may not 
> be  decompressed later.  it is red hat that they use...they think.
> Karen
>
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Gregory Nowak wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> Even if they're using freebsd, tar, bzip, and bzip2 should still be
>> there. These are not gnu/linux-specific utilities.
>> 
>> Greg
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 07:23:08PM -0500, Luke Davis wrote:
>>> Do you want a backup, or a mirror?  If you want a backup, then you will
>>> never have to expand that data--it is just there in case something goes
>>> seriously wrong on Shellworld.
>>> 
>>> If they are running Linux, then they have tar.  If they are running 
>>> Linux,
>>> then they have gzip.
>>> As for bzip2, that may be questionable, but if you have shell access, 
>>> you
>>> could always just check.
>>> 
>> 
>> - --
>> Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
>> 
>> iD8DBQFBWLF67s9z/XlyUyARAnBKAKCGn93IlyhQGdu72V9gcxyTPWg7rACfTmWf
>> +e2J68TOQ+PewItu2yhkAtI=
>> =c1g1
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> 
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Thanks Luc,
I will read the rsync manual pa ge before trying anything to be sure.
and I am happy you have not had this experience, indeed i have, and I am 
not talking about floppies either.  I would not be this firm without  the 
reason of experience.
Thanks for your wisdom none the less.
Karen


On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

> Karen, you could find out all of these things yourself, without their 
> intervention--see Janina's latest message on this thread.  The compression is 
> also your issue--it's not them you have to trust to uncompress it, it is you 
> who has to be (dis)trusted to decompress it.
>
> If you are unsure of yourself, I suggest you learn a little before you do 
> anything.  Doing it that way because somebody told you to, with your own 
> emotional biases coloring the degree to which you follow the advice given, is 
> a dangerous thing, without knowing exactly what you are doing.
>
> Read the rsync manual page.  That will give you your syntax.
>
> Re compression: in ten years of compressing everything from text documents, 
> to operating systems, to entire file systems, to boot disks, I have never, I 
> say again: never, had a compressed file, either PK zip, Gnu zip, or bzip2, 
> spontaineously corrupt.
>
> Given your fear, I imagine that you have, but in those circumstances, was it 
> the compressed nature of the data, or the compression medium? Floppies, for 
> example, have a tendancy to lose data.
>
>
> On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> Thanks by the way for the site in your note above.
>> They are not using freebds, and do not know how to install even the basic 
>> things.  Pine is at 4.0 or4.1 and even it does not function properly.
>> I do not trust their limited knowledge to compress data that may or may 
>> not be  decompressed later.  it is red hat that they use...they think.
>> Karen
>> 
>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Gregory Nowak wrote:
>> 
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>> 
>>> Even if they're using freebsd, tar, bzip, and bzip2 should still be
>>> there. These are not gnu/linux-specific utilities.
>>> 
>>> Greg
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 07:23:08PM -0500, Luke Davis wrote:
>>>> Do you want a backup, or a mirror?  If you want a backup, then you 
>>>> will
>>>> never have to expand that data--it is just there in case something 
>>>> goes
>>>> seriously wrong on Shellworld.
>>>> 
>>>> If they are running Linux, then they have tar.  If they are running 
>>>> Linux,
>>>> then they have gzip.
>>>> As for bzip2, that may be questionable, but if you have shell access, 
>>>> you
>>>> could always just check.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> - --
>>> Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
>>> 
>>> iD8DBQFBWLF67s9z/XlyUyARAnBKAKCGn93IlyhQGdu72V9gcxyTPWg7rACfTmWf
>>> +e2J68TOQ+PewItu2yhkAtI=
>>> =c1g1
>>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Speakup mailing list
>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> 
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

May i have the command line for rsync please?
If it has been given, would someone mind reposting it?
Thanks very much!
Karen
<who could just look this up of course grin.>


On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

> Do you want a backup, or a mirror?  If you want a backup, then you will never 
> have to expand that data--it is just there in case something goes seriously 
> wrong on Shellworld.
>
> If they are running Linux, then they have tar.  If they are running Linux, 
> then they have gzip.
> As for bzip2, that may be questionable, but if you have shell access, you 
> could always just check.
>
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> I have not been given a site where I can compare distributions with each
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

On the theory that you should crawl before walking or running, you might
first want to establish that rsync is available at both ends. I would
suggest using the command line to find out, not the telephone to first
tier tech support who will likely be over their heads with such
questions.

Commands like:

uname

will tell you what OS/version that computer is running.

A command like:

which

will tell you whether the executable you want is available.

It's likely you will need to set up ssh for your user identity at both
ends in order to accomplish the transfer, and you're probably well
advised to do so regardless just as a good safe computing practice.
Perhaps you've done this already, but I haven't noted this in your
posts.

Then, too, it would be helpful to know your username on both ends, else
any help that someone here gives wwould be more of the form [user.id].
Ditto for the system address.

Lastly, it would be smart, I think, to do a test transaction of a
single, smallish file, before attempting the full job so that you can
work out the kinks in your command more easily.

PS: You can check the version of most software installed very directly
from the command line. You don't need those first-tier tech people. It's
usually '[executable] -v' or '[executable --version' or perhaps with a
-V.

PPS: The man page for rsync is recommended reading. It's one of the
better man pages in the man tree.

Karen Lewellen writes:
> May i have the command line for rsync please?
> If it has been given, would someone mind reposting it?
> Thanks very much!
> Karen
> <who could just look this up of course grin.>
> 
> 
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:
> 
> >Do you want a backup, or a mirror?  If you want a backup, then you will 
> >never have to expand that data--it is just there in case something goes 
> >seriously wrong on Shellworld.
> >
> >If they are running Linux, then they have tar.  If they are running Linux, 
> >then they have gzip.
> >As for bzip2, that may be questionable, but if you have shell access, you 
> >could always just check.
> >
> >On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
> >
> >>I have not been given a site where I can compare distributions with each
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Speakup mailing list
> >Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Gregory Nowak]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 07:54:48PM -0400, Karen Lewellen wrote:
> I have not been given a site where I can compare distributions with each 
> other and make that decision.

Try looking on http://www.tldp.org. There should be a linux info sheet
howto, which I believe describes all the distributions, and what the
differences between them are. I'm not sure I'm thinking of the right
howto here, but I know that what I'm thinking of does exist, I just
can't find what it's called exactly. Maybe someone who knows exactly
which howto I'm talking about here will jump in.

Greg



- -- 
Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBWK/J7s9z/XlyUyARAgH2AKCmSnbz0lurHpFGl4p3lTW8QzpCEgCghEtV
PQg9aq3Dqggw3ht1uzqlkcQ=
=zA/Y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Linux and data storage?

[nick G]

Or, if you choose to use a cheep plastic roger like zipspeak or something, 
use ACB Radio's howtos for getting Linux up and running
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sean M McMahon" <smcmahon@usgs.gov>
To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 7:34 PM
Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?


> Actually I found her fadora howto  much more helpfull, if you use fedora,
> then her email stream today would lead you to think.  We all can play
> different roles I guess.  It seems to have a lot of good suggestions for
> how to get speakup if you use a kernel compiled with speakup as modules,
> that means you can start and stop speakup on a running system.  If you
> choose to use a system like debian, there other places which might serve
> you better if you use a version of speakup deb provided on the debian
> site.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Sean M McMahon]

Gladly:  Not knowing about rcink's capabilities, the only program I'd seen 
which can update parts of a file is cvs.  Only knowing that I assumed to 
perform a backup from one system to another, you'd have to setup one 
system as the cvs server, the other as the client.  That's how I came to 
that conclusion  Of course it isn't really that usable because you can't 
files with . in them.  And it would take a lot of configuring. 




Gregory Nowak <greg@romuald.net.eu.org>
Sent by: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca
09/27/2004 05:09 PM
Please respond to "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." 

 
        To:     "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: Linux and data storage?


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 04:45:09PM -0700, Sean M McMahon wrote:
> I didn't know that about rsinc.  I always thaught you'd have to use cvs 
> for that kind of backup. 

Hmmm, cvs? Can you explain your reasoning for reaching such a
conclusion? I'd be genuinely interested in hearing it.

Greg



- -- 
Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBWKu57s9z/XlyUyARApWJAKCP9+Ol2KY86TIJzyQy9tjDKoikvwCfUdjG
JdpoCHK4c/RvmPcF2zoy6X4=
=FT+8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Sean M McMahon]

I don't know of any site which compares distrobutions.  The thing to 
remember is  distrobutions are a method of collecting and packaging 
programs.  The main difference you see is where things are located on your 
system, how your system handles upgrades, what comes with a "standard" 
system.  Some are very large in size while others are not.  Most of the 
programms are the same.  when you get a functioning system using info and 
man will tell you the options for that program.  I can really only speak 
with limited authority on two distrobutions, fedora(formerly redhat) and 
debian.  Both have pre-compiled speakup kernels with speakup available. 
That means that you can boot speakup and linux with speach if you have a 
hardware synthesiser.  All distrobutions use the same keywords for the 
name of your synthesiser because that is controlled by speakup and that 
information is available in a few places on the speakup website.  Both 
distrobutions have a ystem for organizing, managing software.  Debian's 
system is more advanced I think then rpm because if you install a package 
which needs another package, you should get that package as well whithout 
having to specify you need that package.  Debian clasifies their versions 
as either stable, testing or unstable.  Stable is what they determine as a 
production system, it's disadvantage is that it may lack some features or 
software you need.  Testing will have a few more buggs but  more features 
and unstable continues this trend.  The standard Fedora distrobution with 
speakup will be more recent interms of what it offers for software, how 
well it detects your hardware like usb and cd berners then the standard 
speakup debian distrobution.  To install debian you can get or bern  cd 
images of all the cds or do an installation which starts with floppies 
and/or cd images and install the rest as you need it over a internet 
connection.  The standard fedora distrobution is better suited for berning 
cd immages and installing.  Fedora has a better howto for installing 
itwith speakup, but debian also has great documentation explaining the 
general installation procedure.  Keep in mind these are just two 
distrobutions to choose from there are several others, slackware, gintu, 
etc.  Because this is linux, you don't have to stick to one distrobution's 
philosophy or even use a packaged distrobution at all.  You could start 
with one distrobution and install everything else from source not using a 
package manager.  I chose Debian because I like it's package manager, it 
was easy for me to setup as a command-line or console system, I could 
install what I needed over a network and I have a co-worker who is 
familear with Debian.  I can't say one distrobution is better then another 
or that speakup runns better on one or another because everything is so 
customizable.  Some may need more tweeking to make everything work the way 
you want.  I hope that answers some of your questions, that I haven't 
confused you and that I haven't said anything incorrect here.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Gregory Nowak]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

If you have access to a spell checker, then may I nicely suggest that
you use it? At the very least, take the time to proof read what you've
written, cleaner posts make for easier listening.

Greg


On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 06:50:01PM -0700, Sean M McMahon wrote:
> I don't know of any site which compares distrobutions.  The thing to 
> remember is  distrobutions are a method of collecting and packaging 
> programs.  The main difference you see is where things are located on your 
> system, how your system handles upgrades, what comes with a "standard" 
> system.  Some are very large in size while others are not.  Most of the 
> programms are the same.  when you get a functioning system using info and 
> man will tell you the options for that program.  I can really only speak 
> with limited authority on two distrobutions, fedora(formerly redhat) and 
> debian.  Both have pre-compiled speakup kernels with speakup available. 
> That means that you can boot speakup and linux with speach if you have a 
> hardware synthesiser.  All distrobutions use the same keywords for the 
> name of your synthesiser because that is controlled by speakup and that 
> information is available in a few places on the speakup website.  Both 
> distrobutions have a ystem for organizing, managing software.  Debian's 
> system is more advanced I think then rpm because if you install a package 
> which needs another package, you should get that package as well whithout 
> having to specify you need that package.  Debian clasifies their versions 
> as either stable, testing or unstable.  Stable is what they determine as a 
> production system, it's disadvantage is that it may lack some features or 
> software you need.  Testing will have a few more buggs but  more features 
> and unstable continues this trend.  The standard Fedora distrobution with 
> speakup will be more recent interms of what it offers for software, how 
> well it detects your hardware like usb and cd berners then the standard 
> speakup debian distrobution.  To install debian you can get or bern  cd 
> images of all the cds or do an installation which starts with floppies 
> and/or cd images and install the rest as you need it over a internet 
> connection.  The standard fedora distrobution is better suited for berning 
> cd immages and installing.  Fedora has a better howto for installing 
> itwith speakup, but debian also has great documentation explaining the 
> general installation procedure.  Keep in mind these are just two 
> distrobutions to choose from there are several others, slackware, gintu, 
> etc.  Because this is linux, you don't have to stick to one distrobution's 
> philosophy or even use a packaged distrobution at all.  You could start 
> with one distrobution and install everything else from source not using a 
> package manager.  I chose Debian because I like it's package manager, it 
> was easy for me to setup as a command-line or console system, I could 
> install what I needed over a network and I have a co-worker who is 
> familear with Debian.  I can't say one distrobution is better then another 
> or that speakup runns better on one or another because everything is so 
> customizable.  Some may need more tweeking to make everything work the way 
> you want.  I hope that answers some of your questions, that I haven't 
> confused you and that I haven't said anything incorrect here.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> 
> !DSPAM:4158c381274338849283056!
> 
> 

- -- 
Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBWM9Q7s9z/XlyUyARAiVHAJ0ZRVR1GNS3Wj8r7w1i8xTwaCktNQCfd1Rw
QWScWpWn3c+qlAu/YbN+u2Q=
=lsGk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Sean M McMahon]

Tar using the compression option compresses well, without specifying that 
option, it only creates an archive.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Gregory Nowak]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Tar is only an archiver. Using the compression switches just tells tar
to call bzip2 or gzip, and to use them in a pipe to compress the
archive. Tar does no compression on its own.

Greg


On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 06:12:10PM -0700, Sean M McMahon wrote:
> Tar using the compression option compresses well, without specifying that 
> option, it only creates an archive.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> 
> !DSPAM:4158ba97271377026713145!
> 
> 

- -- 
Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBWM6m7s9z/XlyUyARAo6yAKCev4MD2UNJPNtCuITuVUDs3ZvlHgCgo3Z+
K5hcuUy45ebVK2Uhy80K3dQ=
=4cFf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Sean M McMahon]

I didn't know that about rsinc.  I always thaught you'd have to use cvs 
for that kind of backup.  Informative indeed.




Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Sent by: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca
09/27/2004 04:34 PM
Please respond to "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." 

 
        To:     "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: Linux and data storage?


Just to finish up on backup strategies:

The first backup is the big chore. But, it's not the last word--unless,
of course, one never changes one's data. Not likely.

So, a backup routine is the real target.

rsync is the right tool especially for the backup routine because it
intelligently copies only those portions that have changed. Very
effective, especially on low bandwidth connections.

Luke Davis writes:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
> 
> >You have already shown that you are not first hand aware of the 
shellworld 
> >setup, given your mistake in using the du program.
> >It is better that Luc give me the answers as he knows this service 
better
> 
> Be careful with exclusionary statements such as that.  You will alienate 

> help.  I happen to be here right now.  When I leave tonight, I may not 
> pick back up on this conversation for days.
> 
> Take help where you can get it.  You told her that Shellworld was Linux. 

> It is not, it is FreeBSD.  She gave you a Linux command syntax, because 
> you told her that was what you were using.
> 
> Luke
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
 
                                                                 Janina 
Sajka, Chair
 Accessibility Workgroup
                                                                 Free 
Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org                 Phone: +1 202.494.7040


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Gregory Nowak]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 04:45:09PM -0700, Sean M McMahon wrote:
> I didn't know that about rsinc.  I always thaught you'd have to use cvs 
> for that kind of backup. 

Hmmm, cvs? Can you explain your reasoning for reaching such a
conclusion? I'd be genuinely interested in hearing it.

Greg



- -- 
Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBWKu57s9z/XlyUyARApWJAKCP9+Ol2KY86TIJzyQy9tjDKoikvwCfUdjG
JdpoCHK4c/RvmPcF2zoy6X4=
=FT+8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Sean M McMahon]

Someone will undoubtedly correct me about this, zip does not compress 
music files more then they are already compressed.  Zip is a loss-less 
compression format.  All your data could be there.  Yes in answer to your 
question, there are methods which have been suggested which will meet your 
goals and not compress your data.




Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net>
Sent by: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca
09/27/2004 04:21 PM
Please respond to "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." 

 
        To:     "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: Linux and data storage?


Much of this is music materials and the like which do not compress well 
when using those programs  as I have tried.
I do not want to chance it.
Call me a chicken if you wish but it is my data.  Will the methods 
suggested do this, no compression involved?
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> I have no intention of risking a zip of any of these files, nor do i 
want 
>> to
>
> Risking a zip?  What does that mean?  Where is the risk?  Gnu Zip (not 
PK 
> Zip), and Bzip2, are highly stable formats.
> Tar is an archiving method used for decades on unix.  In fact, Linux 
uses 
> bzip2 as its kernel format these days.
>
> This exact method is how many of us who backup shellworld user data, do 
it, 
> on a regular basis--tar archived into bzip, or gzip.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

So I too have been told by our site administrator, and  discovered when i 
tired it too.  I am not getting  much smaller by compressing, and as I 
cannot insure the decompression options is there and sound, I do not wish 
to try this.


On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Sean M McMahon wrote:

> Someone will undoubtedly correct me about this, zip does not compress
> music files more then they are already compressed.  Zip is a loss-less
> compression format.  All your data could be there.  Yes in answer to your
> question, there are methods which have been suggested which will meet your
> goals and not compress your data.
>
>
>
>
> Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net>
> Sent by: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca
> 09/27/2004 04:21 PM
> Please respond to "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux."
>
>
>        To:     "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
>        cc:
>        Subject:        Re: Linux and data storage?
>
>
> Much of this is music materials and the like which do not compress well
> when using those programs  as I have tried.
> I do not want to chance it.
> Call me a chicken if you wish but it is my data.  Will the methods
> suggested do this, no compression involved?
> Karen
>
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>>
>>> I have no intention of risking a zip of any of these files, nor do i
> want
>>> to
>>
>> Risking a zip?  What does that mean?  Where is the risk?  Gnu Zip (not
> PK
>> Zip), and Bzip2, are highly stable formats.
>> Tar is an archiving method used for decades on unix.  In fact, Linux
> uses
>> bzip2 as its kernel format these days.
>>
>> This exact method is how many of us who backup shellworld user data, do
> it,
>> on a regular basis--tar archived into bzip, or gzip.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Gregory Nowak]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 04:41:59PM -0700, Sean M McMahon wrote:
> Someone will undoubtedly correct me about this, zip does not compress 
> music files more then they are already compressed.  Zip is a loss-less 
> compression format. 

If the music in question is mp3 or ogg, yes, this is correct. This not
only holds for zip, but also holds for gzip, bzip2, or any other
compression algorithm out there.

Greg


- -- 
Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBWKsF7s9z/XlyUyARAoaaAJ47gl8gMrjiVkg832IbfI6SlwkxqgCffvne
JexlRWI/OzSGhv/QE3t/J0k=
=Tk2R
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Sean M McMahon]

What's wrong with zipping files into a archive then uncompressing them at 
their new home?  I think the rsinc solution you were given should fulfil 
this need.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Sean M McMahon]

You mention  using du -ms to find out how much data you have.  What is the 
difference between that and using df -k .  ?




Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Sent by: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca
09/27/2004 11:11 AM
Please respond to "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." 

 
        To:     "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: Linux and data storage?


Hi, Karen:

You don't say how much data you have there? Issue the following command
from your home directory to find out how much data you have:

du -ms .

It will give you a number in megabytes. It may take some time to run.

Now, to your question. You ask whether it would be easy. Well, yes, it
might be, or it might not be.

It's not likely to be pleasant to move copious amounts of data over a
dial up modem connection, but there are easy technologies that can
insure you get a true copy even if it takes some time to accomplish.

I'm thinking of rsync.

And, yes, you are on the right track. Hardware and software can be
replaced. One's work/data files cannot be so readily replaced. So, it is
wise to have one's important data in two physical clocations.

But let's start out by defining how much "a lot" is.

Karen Lewellen writes:
> Hi all,
> This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
> I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and 
> thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up 

> the machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming 

> through.
> In any case, I do use a Linux shell service extensively.  I fear almost 
> too extensively, as you will understand in a moment.
> The OS on the system i use mostly is dos, and I use nettamer to telnet 
to 
> my Linux shell.
> In the workspace of my shell service i have a great deal of 
irreplaceable 
> files and programs.  I eave them up here, for ease, but I just was 
> reminded that this may be a venerable state of affairs.
> Fortunately when the server went down nothing was lost or so it seems, 
but 
> I have a serious factor to consider.
>  My question has two parts.
> first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the 
> workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with 
> relative ease,  and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
> second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage 
be 
> easy to do?
> As I said before I do not have such a machine, but this has shaken me up 

> enough that if a full Linux or Linux/dos or Linux/windows machine would 
> give me some firm safe backup, I will have to start advertising for 
> someone to build this for me and encurl the expense.
>  I have too busy a professional life to do this myself, and would rather 

> pay someone with the skills than lose valuable time trying to re-invent 
the 
> wheel.
> Thanks,
> Karen
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
 
                                                                 Janina 
Sajka, Chair
 Accessibility Workgroup
                                                                 Free 
Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org                 Phone: +1 202.494.7040


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Thomas Stivers]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Sep 27 2004 at 12:16:18PM -0700, Sean M McMahon wrote:
> You mention  using du -ms to find out how much data you have.  What is the 
> difference between that and using df -k .  ?

You use df to tell you how much space is used and free in a partition.
OTOH du should be used to tell how much space the files and directories
within a directory use. I.E. when I do "du -h" in my home dir I find out
how much space my home directory is using. When I do "df -h ." I find
out how much of the file system containing the current directory is
being used and how much is free.

Check the man pages to find out what all the options do.

HTH

- -- 
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan

Thomas Stivers	e-mail: stivers_t@tomass.dyndns.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBWGoV5JK61UXLur0RAuULAJ4vULzj+dbFP9JJYWMBFI3859Ti3QCfXAWJ
aaLd0RBd4fmm7Tddlwnegjc=
=9vDr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Sean M McMahon wrote:

> You mention  using du -ms to find out how much data you have.  What is the
> difference between that and using df -k .  ?

The latter will only show you information about file systems, not 
individual user directories.

Luke

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

du will give you data for a particular directory tree. df will give data
for the entire partition.

In this instance she has an account on Shell World. I'm sure she doesn't
have the entire partition. She's probably /home/karen, or something like
that. Many other people have their files on /home (or something like
that). df would give you the counts for /home, whereas du-ms would give
just the data under /home/karen.

Sean M McMahon writes:
> You mention  using du -ms to find out how much data you have.  What is the 
> difference between that and using df -k .  ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
> Sent by: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca
> 09/27/2004 11:11 AM
> Please respond to "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." 
> 
>  
>         To:     "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
>         cc: 
>         Subject:        Re: Linux and data storage?
> 
> 
> Hi, Karen:
> 
> You don't say how much data you have there? Issue the following command
> from your home directory to find out how much data you have:
> 
> du -ms .
> 
> It will give you a number in megabytes. It may take some time to run.
> 
> Now, to your question. You ask whether it would be easy. Well, yes, it
> might be, or it might not be.
> 
> It's not likely to be pleasant to move copious amounts of data over a
> dial up modem connection, but there are easy technologies that can
> insure you get a true copy even if it takes some time to accomplish.
> 
> I'm thinking of rsync.
> 
> And, yes, you are on the right track. Hardware and software can be
> replaced. One's work/data files cannot be so readily replaced. So, it is
> wise to have one's important data in two physical clocations.
> 
> But let's start out by defining how much "a lot" is.
> 
> Karen Lewellen writes:
> > Hi all,
> > This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
> > I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and 
> > thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up 
> 
> > the machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming 
> 
> > through.
> > In any case, I do use a Linux shell service extensively.  I fear almost 
> > too extensively, as you will understand in a moment.
> > The OS on the system i use mostly is dos, and I use nettamer to telnet 
> to 
> > my Linux shell.
> > In the workspace of my shell service i have a great deal of 
> irreplaceable 
> > files and programs.  I eave them up here, for ease, but I just was 
> > reminded that this may be a venerable state of affairs.
> > Fortunately when the server went down nothing was lost or so it seems, 
> but 
> > I have a serious factor to consider.
> >  My question has two parts.
> > first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the 
> > workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with 
> > relative ease,  and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
> > second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage 
> be 
> > easy to do?
> > As I said before I do not have such a machine, but this has shaken me up 
> 
> > enough that if a full Linux or Linux/dos or Linux/windows machine would 
> > give me some firm safe backup, I will have to start advertising for 
> > someone to build this for me and encurl the expense.
> >  I have too busy a professional life to do this myself, and would rather 
> 
> > pay someone with the skills than lose valuable time trying to re-invent 
> the 
> > wheel.
> > Thanks,
> > Karen
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> -- 
>  
>                                                                  Janina 
> Sajka, Chair
>  Accessibility Workgroup
>                                                                  Free 
> Standards Group (FSG)
> 
> janina@freestandards.org                 Phone: +1 202.494.7040
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> that). df would give you the counts for /home, whereas du-ms would give

you an error, since -m is not supported under FreeBSD.  As I said, use -h.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Sean M McMahon]

What kind of machine do you want size, type of internet connection .  How 
old is your doss machine?  You may just be able to set up as a linux 
machine.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Sean,
I detailed an answer to this when replying to Carol, but just got a note 
saying the message is being held due to its size.
again I explain why i do not want to use this machine, even though a 
Pentium, and ask again for places to go to read Linux distribution 
reviews, so one can see the pros and cons to distributions, and asking 
again for a good book or set of texts  on Linux commands from the ground 
up.
If it does not come through I will try to post it again.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Sean M McMahon wrote:

> What kind of machine do you want size, type of internet connection .  How
> old is your doss machine?  You may just be able to set up as a linux
> machine.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

The "message is to big" thing is something Kirk did for this list. Some
of us hate it, but we all live with it. 

It's not anything about Linux or about your computer. It's only about
this list.

As for studying Linux from the ground up, you probably would hate it
that way, but there is good guidance that you would not hate.

May I suggest the pointers in my installation HOWTO? There's a whole
"Now What?" section that's inteded for exactly that purpose.


Karen Lewellen writes:
> Sean,
> I detailed an answer to this when replying to Carol, but just got a note 
> saying the message is being held due to its size.
> again I explain why i do not want to use this machine, even though a 
> Pentium, and ask again for places to go to read Linux distribution 
> reviews, so one can see the pros and cons to distributions, and asking 
> again for a good book or set of texts  on Linux commands from the ground 
> up.
> If it does not come through I will try to post it again.
> Karen

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Miss,
you seem to very rather good at claiming to know what i would hate or what 
i might not.
If i did not want to learn Linux in this fashion I would not have 
suggested it.
Given how you seem to treat others,  I can only guess that information 
provided by you for others to review would be equally disrespectful.
I will skip your suggestion thanks.
   And, I know the list content factor has nothing to do with my computer. 
Why ever would I think as much?
I am,however, going to cut down that message and post it so that *others* 
can give their  opinion.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> The "message is to big" thing is something Kirk did for this list. Some
> of us hate it, but we all live with it.
>
> It's not anything about Linux or about your computer. It's only about
> this list.
>
> As for studying Linux from the ground up, you probably would hate it
> that way, but there is good guidance that you would not hate.
>
> May I suggest the pointers in my installation HOWTO? There's a whole
> "Now What?" section that's inteded for exactly that purpose.
>
>
> Karen Lewellen writes:
>> Sean,
>> I detailed an answer to this when replying to Carol, but just got a note
>> saying the message is being held due to its size.
>> again I explain why i do not want to use this machine, even though a
>> Pentium, and ask again for places to go to read Linux distribution
>> reviews, so one can see the pros and cons to distributions, and asking
>> again for a good book or set of texts  on Linux commands from the ground
>> up.
>> If it does not come through I will try to post it again.
>> Karen
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

>From the ground up, eh?

Now, ground to you may just be different from what a technical notion of
"ground up" might be.

That's all I meant. No more.

Karen Lewellen writes:
> Miss,
> you seem to very rather good at claiming to know what i would hate or what 
> i might not.
> If i did not want to learn Linux in this fashion I would not have 
> suggested it.
> Given how you seem to treat others,  I can only guess that information 
> provided by you for others to review would be equally disrespectful.
> I will skip your suggestion thanks.
>   And, I know the list content factor has nothing to do with my computer. 
> Why ever would I think as much?
> I am,however, going to cut down that message and post it so that *others* 
> can give their  opinion.
> Karen
> 
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> 
> >The "message is to big" thing is something Kirk did for this list. Some
> >of us hate it, but we all live with it.
> >
> >It's not anything about Linux or about your computer. It's only about
> >this list.
> >
> >As for studying Linux from the ground up, you probably would hate it
> >that way, but there is good guidance that you would not hate.
> >
> >May I suggest the pointers in my installation HOWTO? There's a whole
> >"Now What?" section that's inteded for exactly that purpose.
> >
> >
> >Karen Lewellen writes:
> >>Sean,
> >>I detailed an answer to this when replying to Carol, but just got a note
> >>saying the message is being held due to its size.
> >>again I explain why i do not want to use this machine, even though a
> >>Pentium, and ask again for places to go to read Linux distribution
> >>reviews, so one can see the pros and cons to distributions, and asking
> >>again for a good book or set of texts  on Linux commands from the ground
> >>up.
> >>If it does not come through I will try to post it again.
> >>Karen
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Speakup mailing list
> >Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Using Grub with Speech

[Sean M McMahon]

I just found some sample menu.lst files.  Here's one with a lot of stuff 
in it but it shows a few lines with boot perameters after the kernel name 
and lines with windows 95 loaded, or one of those windows systems.
http://www.antlinux.com/lifebook/menu.lst
here's another posted at
http://www.dewback.cl/files/public/confs/menu.lst
how would you get lilo to talk?  I may use it instead.

Re: Using Grub with Speech

[Steve Holmes]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, Sep 16, 2004 at 11:27:40AM -0700, Sean M McMahon wrote:
> how would you get lilo to talk?  I may use it instead.

I just inserted the following line in the top of my lilo.conf file:
serial = 0,9600n8

That works great with my speakout synth.  Does your question mean that
grub doesn't talk at all? Is there no way to get speech from the grub prompt?

- -- 
HolmesGrown Solutions
The best solutions for the best price!
http://ld.net/?holmesgrown
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBTyzRWSjv55S0LfERAljzAKD1K2B285MyPyB5Qc15/wH7OswvHQCfXmcP
yVxjR5d2F0y4+NOC7A5VBys=
=G6Sy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Hi all,
This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and 
thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up the 
machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming 
through.
In any case, I do use a Linux shell service extensively.  I fear almost 
too extensively, as you will understand in a moment.
The OS on the system i use mostly is dos, and I use nettamer to telnet to 
my Linux shell.
In the workspace of my shell service i have a great deal of irreplaceable 
files and programs.  I eave them up here, for ease, but I just was 
reminded that this may be a venerable state of affairs.
Fortunately when the server went down nothing was lost or so it seems, but 
I have a serious factor to consider.
  My question has two parts.
first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the 
workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with 
relative ease,  and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage be 
easy to do?
As I said before I do not have such a machine, but this has shaken me up 
enough that if a full Linux or Linux/dos or Linux/windows machine would 
give me some firm safe backup, I will have to start advertising for 
someone to build this for me and encurl the expense.
  I have too busy a professional life to do this myself, and would rather 
pay someone with the skills than lose valuable time trying to re-invent the 
wheel.
Thanks,
Karen

Re: Linux and data storage?

[hank]

where do you get your shell service from>?
am curious.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Karen Lewellen" <klewellen@shellworld.net>
To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 5:23 PM
Subject: Linux and data storage?


> Hi all,
> This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
> I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and 
> thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up 
> the machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming 
> through.
> In any case, I do use a Linux shell service extensively.  I fear almost 
> too extensively, as you will understand in a moment.
> The OS on the system i use mostly is dos, and I use nettamer to telnet to 
> my Linux shell.
> In the workspace of my shell service i have a great deal of irreplaceable 
> files and programs.  I eave them up here, for ease, but I just was 
> reminded that this may be a venerable state of affairs.
> Fortunately when the server went down nothing was lost or so it seems, but 
> I have a serious factor to consider.
>  My question has two parts.
> first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the 
> workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with 
> relative ease,  and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
> second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage be 
> easy to do?
> As I said before I do not have such a machine, but this has shaken me up 
> enough that if a full Linux or Linux/dos or Linux/windows machine would 
> give me some firm safe backup, I will have to start advertising for 
> someone to build this for me and encurl the expense.
>  I have too busy a professional life to do this myself, and would rather 
> pay someone with the skills than lose valuable time trying to re-invent 
> the wheel.
> Thanks,
> Karen
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup 

----------------------------------------
My Inbox is protected by SPAMfighter
219 spam mails have been blocked so far.
Download free www.spamfighter.com today!

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

shellworld.net
www.shellworld.net
admin@shellworld.net
for the contact.


On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, hank wrote:

> where do you get your shell service from>?
> am curious.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Karen Lewellen" 
> <klewellen@shellworld.net>
> To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 5:23 PM
> Subject: Linux and data storage?
>
>
>> Hi all,
>> This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
>> I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and 
>> thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up 
>> the machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming 
>> through.
>> In any case, I do use a Linux shell service extensively.  I fear almost 
>> too extensively, as you will understand in a moment.
>> The OS on the system i use mostly is dos, and I use nettamer to telnet to 
>> my Linux shell.
>> In the workspace of my shell service i have a great deal of irreplaceable 
>> files and programs.  I eave them up here, for ease, but I just was 
>> reminded that this may be a venerable state of affairs.
>> Fortunately when the server went down nothing was lost or so it seems, 
>> but I have a serious factor to consider.
>> My question has two parts.
>> first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the 
>> workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with 
>> relative ease,  and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
>> second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage be 
>> easy to do?
>> As I said before I do not have such a machine, but this has shaken me up 
>> enough that if a full Linux or Linux/dos or Linux/windows machine would 
>> give me some firm safe backup, I will have to start advertising for 
>> someone to build this for me and encurl the expense.
>> I have too busy a professional life to do this myself, and would rather 
>> pay someone with the skills than lose valuable time trying to re-invent 
>> the wheel.
>> Thanks,
>> Karen
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup 
>
> ----------------------------------------
> My Inbox is protected by SPAMfighter
> 219 spam mails have been blocked so far.
> Download free www.spamfighter.com today!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Chuck Hallenbeck]

Karen,

You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate
those precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and
then move that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its
ftp facility, but it might take forever over a dialup link.

If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C",
assuming you had the necessary access permissions and such.

Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although
nettamer is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize
limits.

Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you
would be home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP
client, move them to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.

My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively
to backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily
redundant. I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.

Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I
have a DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just
in case, but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own
situation, I cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return
to DOS and Nettamer.

Chuck


On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> Hi all,
> This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
> I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and thought I 
> had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up the machines 
> they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming through.
> In any case, I do use a Linux shell service extensively.  I fear almost too 
> extensively, as you will understand in a moment.
> The OS on the system i use mostly is dos, and I use nettamer to telnet to my 
> Linux shell.
> In the workspace of my shell service i have a great deal of irreplaceable 
> files and programs.  I eave them up here, for ease, but I just was reminded 
> that this may be a venerable state of affairs.
> Fortunately when the server went down nothing was lost or so it seems, but I 
> have a serious factor to consider.
> My question has two parts.
> first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the workspace 
> of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with relative ease, 
> and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
> second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage be 
> easy to do?
> As I said before I do not have such a machine, but this has shaken me up 
> enough that if a full Linux or Linux/dos or Linux/windows machine would give 
> me some firm safe backup, I will have to start advertising for someone to 
> build this for me and encurl the expense.
> I have too busy a professional life to do this myself, and would rather pay 
> someone with the skills than lose valuable time trying to re-invent the 
> wheel.
> Thanks,
> Karen
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

-- 
The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (97% of Full)
Home page at http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
Speakfreely address 24.105.197.112:2074

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Sina Bahram]

If I may humbly suggest?

Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows someone to
connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and then say, FTP A,
copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit back and let the data
packets flow...it doesn't go through your system at all: so you could
transfer information at any speed, only limited by the two ftp servers, not
by your own connection.

*shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?

Take care,
Sina

No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 
-----Original Message-----
From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?

Karen,

You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate those
precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and then move
that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its ftp facility,
but it might take forever over a dialup link.

If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C", assuming
you had the necessary access permissions and such.

Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although nettamer
is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize limits.

Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you would be
home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP client, move them
to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.

My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively to
backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily redundant.
I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.

Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I have a
DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just in case,
but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own situation, I
cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return to DOS and
Nettamer.

Chuck

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

hmm,
Let me be sure I follow you.
This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the contents 
of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course> to say the 
storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is not located on 
shellworld?
if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
Karen

On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:

> If I may humbly suggest?
>
> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows someone to
> connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and then say, FTP A,
> copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit back and let the data
> packets flow...it doesn't go through your system at all: so you could
> transfer information at any speed, only limited by the two ftp servers, not
> by your own connection.
>
> *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
>
> Take care,
> Sina
>
> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
> electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
>
> Karen,
>
> You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
> other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate those
> precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and then move
> that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its ftp facility,
> but it might take forever over a dialup link.
>
> If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
> call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C", assuming
> you had the necessary access permissions and such.
>
> Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although nettamer
> is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize limits.
>
> Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you would be
> home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP client, move them
> to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
>
> My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively to
> backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily redundant.
> I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
>
> Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I have a
> DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just in case,
> but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own situation, I
> cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return to DOS and
> Nettamer.
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Sina Bahram]

Fxp can be found at 

www.flashfxp.com

Hope that helps.

Take care,
Sina

No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 
-----Original Message-----
From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
On Behalf Of Karen Lewellen
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 9:15 PM
To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
Subject: RE: Linux and data storage?

hmm,
Let me be sure I follow you.
This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the contents
of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course> to say the
storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is not located on
shellworld?
if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
Karen

On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:

> If I may humbly suggest?
>
> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows 
> someone to connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and 
> then say, FTP A, copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit 
> back and let the data packets flow...it doesn't go through your system 
> at all: so you could transfer information at any speed, only limited 
> by the two ftp servers, not by your own connection.
>
> *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
>
> Take care,
> Sina
>
> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large 
> number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca 
> [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
>
> Karen,
>
> You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, 
> the other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to 
> aggregate those precious files into one archive, assuming you have the 
> space, and then move that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve 
> it with its ftp facility, but it might take forever over a dialup link.
>
> If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your 
> desktop, call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system 
> C", assuming you had the necessary access permissions and such.
>
> Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although 
> nettamer is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize
limits.
>
> Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you 
> would be home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP 
> client, move them to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
>
> My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively 
> to backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily
redundant.
> I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
>
> Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I 
> have a DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, 
> just in case, but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my 
> own situation, I cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to 
> return to DOS and Nettamer.
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Thanks, It may.
While the Linux machine I have been waiting for nearly 6months or more 
seems to be nonexistent, I know more than a few people who use windows 
grin.
Karen


On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:

> Fxp can be found at
>
> www.flashfxp.com
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Take care,
> Sina
>
> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
> electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> On Behalf Of Karen Lewellen
> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 9:15 PM
> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> Subject: RE: Linux and data storage?
>
> hmm,
> Let me be sure I follow you.
> This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the contents
> of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course> to say the
> storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is not located on
> shellworld?
> if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
> Karen
>
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:
>
>> If I may humbly suggest?
>>
>> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows
>> someone to connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and
>> then say, FTP A, copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit
>> back and let the data packets flow...it doesn't go through your system
>> at all: so you could transfer information at any speed, only limited
>> by the two ftp servers, not by your own connection.
>>
>> *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
>>
>> Take care,
>> Sina
>>
>> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large
>> number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca
>> [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
>> On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
>> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
>> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
>> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
>>
>> Karen,
>>
>> You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed,
>> the other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to
>> aggregate those precious files into one archive, assuming you have the
>> space, and then move that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve
>> it with its ftp facility, but it might take forever over a dialup link.
>>
>> If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your
>> desktop, call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system
>> C", assuming you had the necessary access permissions and such.
>>
>> Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although
>> nettamer is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize
> limits.
>>
>> Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you
>> would be home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP
>> client, move them to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
>>
>> My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively
>> to backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily
> redundant.
>> I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
>>
>> Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I
>> have a DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs,
>> just in case, but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my
>> own situation, I cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to
>> return to DOS and Nettamer.
>>
>> Chuck
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Hart Larry]

I agree with Karen, these last 30 hours on Shellworld should be a wakeup call 
for all of us.  While we have our files-and-data back again, I should really 
consider eventually handling pine and all the features of a shell right here 
locally.  I suppose however, if I were running some mail server software, I 
would almost never be able to boot the machine in to windows to run openbook, 
as the mail server would not be collecting incoming messages?
Back in January, when I left CTS, another shell provider, I tried downloading 
everything, but I may not have it all.  I was thinking earlier that I was going 
to have to move items around.  Last night we tried logging in to cts, but I 
think they are gone?
Hart

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Terry D. Cudney]

Hi Karen, Larry, et al,

	To answer your original question, Karen, if you get your linux machine up and running you can use 'rsync' to transfer selective file/directory/sub-directoies to/from the shell account to your linux box. That is, if the shellworld machine has 'rsync' available.

	For your question Larry, if you want to dual boot between  Linux and another OS you can do that easily using one of the boot managers (lilo or grub). If you are worried about losing mail while in the other OS, just let your ISP spool the mail while you are not up in Linux. You can do that by using a pop retrieval program like 'fetchmail' to retrieve mail periodically from your isp, or just put a '.forward' file in the home directory of your shell account to push mail to your mta (exim or whichever you like). You then just rename the .forward file to something else while booted to the other os on your local machine. Mail then waits in your mailbox on the ISP until you enable forwarding again.

	There are just so many ways to do things in Linux! As others have mentioned, ftp, local redundancy, various backup methods, etc. It is very much worth the effort to move to Linux... <grin>

	HTH,

	--terry

On Sun, Sep 26, 2004 at 06:36:58PM -0700, Hart Larry wrote:
> I agree with Karen, these last 30 hours on Shellworld should be a wakeup 
> call for all of us.  While we have our files-and-data back again, I should 
> really consider eventually handling pine and all the features of a shell 
> right here locally.  I suppose however, if I were running some mail server 
> software, I would almost never be able to boot the machine in to windows to 
> run openbook, as the mail server would not be collecting incoming messages?
> Back in January, when I left CTS, another shell provider, I tried 
> downloading everything, but I may not have it all.  I was thinking earlier 
> that I was going to have to move items around.  Last night we tried logging 
> in to cts, but I think they are gone?
> Hart
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 

Name:	Terry D. Cudney
Phone:	(705) 422-0039
E-mail:	terry@wasaga.dyns.net

Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like...
having a peeing sectionin a swimming pool.

Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Thanks, but i have no Linux machine to get up and running.
I have the promise of Linux machine that has not materialized, and no new 
source for such a machine.
anyone do Linux config system setup work?
Karen

On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Terry D. Cudney wrote:

> Hi Karen, Larry, et al,
>
> 	To answer your original question, Karen, if you get your linux machine up and running you can use 'rsync' to transfer selective file/directory/sub-directoies to/from the shell account to your linux box. That is, if the shellworld machine has 'rsync' available.
>
> 	For your question Larry, if you want to dual boot between  Linux and another OS you can do that easily using one of the boot managers (lilo or grub). If you are worried about losing mail while in the other OS, just let your ISP spool the mail while you are not up in Linux. You can do that by using a pop retrieval program like 'fetchmail' to retrieve mail periodically from your isp, or just put a '.forward' file in the home directory of your shell account to push mail to your mta (exim or whichever you like). You then just rename the .forward file to something else while booted to the other os on your local machine. Mail then waits in your mailbox on the ISP until you enable forwarding again.
>
> 	There are just so many ways to do things in Linux! As others have mentioned, ftp, local redundancy, various backup methods, etc. It is very much worth the effort to move to Linux... <grin>
>
> 	HTH,
>
> 	--terry
>
> On Sun, Sep 26, 2004 at 06:36:58PM -0700, Hart Larry wrote:
>> I agree with Karen, these last 30 hours on Shellworld should be a wakeup
>> call for all of us.  While we have our files-and-data back again, I should
>> really consider eventually handling pine and all the features of a shell
>> right here locally.  I suppose however, if I were running some mail server
>> software, I would almost never be able to boot the machine in to windows to
>> run openbook, as the mail server would not be collecting incoming messages?
>> Back in January, when I left CTS, another shell provider, I tried
>> downloading everything, but I may not have it all.  I was thinking earlier
>> that I was going to have to move items around.  Last night we tried logging
>> in to cts, but I think they are gone?
>> Hart
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> -- 
>
> Name:	Terry D. Cudney
> Phone:	(705) 422-0039
> E-mail:	terry@wasaga.dyns.net
>
> Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like...
> having a peeing sectionin a swimming pool.
>
> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
> See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Terry D. Cudney]

Hi Karen,

	Well, if you have a machine running DOS now, you have a machine that almost certainly would run Linux. The only two criteria that I can think of are 1) sufficient disk space to dual boot between Linux and your current OS and 2) a hardware synth that works with speakup.. For several years I ran Linux and Windows on one machine, booting Windows less and less often until recently I got rid of Windows on that machine altogether. Yes I do have another machine with Windows on it now but I didn't have a second machine for several years.

	You did say that you don't have the time to set up Linux. I understand that. It does take time to setup/learn. But you don't have to abandon your other os while you  do it. The time spent to learn to install/configure/manage your linux system is time that will pay rich dividends in the long run. On the other hand if you have someone else install/configure for you you still won't know how it works to be able to manage the system on a day-to-day basis.

	I guess it depends on what yu want. If you want to use the power of Linux, you need to know how it works to some degree at least. You really learn that by doing your own installation and configuration.

	If you or anyone wants to install linux on any system for personal use,  my suggestion  is to do the homework first, reading about the options available, methods of installation for your chosen linux distribution, etc. When you feel that you understand what you have to do, then go for it. the actual installation should easily be completed in an evening, after which you should still have your other os available if you want it.

	As I said above though, it depends on what you want... If you really want Linux that is the best way to go. If it's too much bother for you, then probably it's not worth your time and just carry on with what you have already.

	HTH,

	--terry

-- 

Name:	Terry D. Cudney
Phone:	(705) 422-0039
E-mail:	terry@wasaga.dyns.net

Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like...
having a peeing sectionin a swimming pool.

Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Hart Larry]

Well Terry, you are absolutely right.  First of all Karen could use dosemu 
while in linux.  Gee, I wish I could better run that?
Next, you see that the first 2 years I was running DOS, I was just typing 
commands.  I had very little idea what they meant or how you use them in other 
areas.  Well, then in 1995 I got a shell account, but I knew nothing about 
unix.  I actually thought it should be declared a swear-word.  I feel much 
differently today.
Last October 2 friends installed linux--and certainly the machine is lots more 
stable than the every other day crashes in windows.
Sure I still have plenty of outstanding issues, but basicly I would love to 
find a live interactive linux class where I can learn the basics--and 
eventually configure-and-installing programs, without as much handholding.
A live instructor would be the best
Thanks from Southern Cal
Hart

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Ann Parsons]

Hi all,

I have to disagree in part here, Terry.  I had help in installing my
linux system, and although I've learned a great deal in the past few
years, when I started, I knew very little but I learned as I went.  I
do admit that learning administration after the fact may not be the
best way to go, but it does work.  

I suggest that you do two things.  First, do the reading that Terry
suggests.  That's one good thing about Linux, there's lots and lots of
documentation. 

Then, I suggest you contact your Linux Users Group and see if someone
can work with you to get a machine up and running.  

Ann P.

-- 
			Ann K. Parsons  
email:  akp@eznet.net 			
WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
"All that is gold does not glitter.  
Not all those who wander are lost."  JRRT

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

If you have ftp access on two machines, forget Windows, and just log
into one. Launch a good ftp client like ncftp, start the transfer,
and go to bed.

You certainly don't need Windows.

PS: If you use ncftp you could even use bgget (or bgput) to run the
transfers in background, which means you could log off and your files
would still get transfered.

Now, does Windows have that? Huh, Sina?

Karen Lewellen writes:
> hmm,
> Let me be sure I follow you.
> This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the contents 
> of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course> to say the 
> storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is not located on 
> shellworld?
> if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
> Karen
> 
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:
> 
> >If I may humbly suggest?
> >
> >Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows someone 
> >to
> >connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and then say, FTP A,
> >copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit back and let the data
> >packets flow...it doesn't go through your system at all: so you could
> >transfer information at any speed, only limited by the two ftp servers, not
> >by your own connection.
> >
> >*shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
> >
> >Take care,
> >Sina
> >
> >No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
> >electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca 
> >[mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> >On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
> >Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
> >To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> >Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
> >
> >Karen,
> >
> >You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
> >other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate 
> >those
> >precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and then move
> >that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its ftp facility,
> >but it might take forever over a dialup link.
> >
> >If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
> >call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C", assuming
> >you had the necessary access permissions and such.
> >
> >Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although nettamer
> >is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize limits.
> >
> >Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you would 
> >be
> >home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP client, move them
> >to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
> >
> >My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively to
> >backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily 
> >redundant.
> >I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
> >
> >Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I have 
> >a
> >DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just in case,
> >but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own situation, I
> >cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return to DOS and
> >Nettamer.
> >
> >Chuck
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Speakup mailing list
> >Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Sina Bahram]

Hi Janina,

Actually there very well could be a Windows equivalent; not that I'd really
care if there is or isn't.

I wasn't suggesting that Windows was in any way, shape, or form needed here.
I said that there was a windows tool, which I mistakenly at first called fxp
rather than Flash XP. Then someone pointed out that fxp was the
protocall...and I sent a message asking for a Linux use of this so that she
can get her transfer complete.

In short...i've tried to be helpful, while you have in two separate emails
offered help in conjunction with criticism towards me for my suggestion,
which I did point out quite humbly, and secondly offered an extremely
immature and unbecoming attitude.

I do appologise to Karen for Janina's attitude. Karen, I wish you the best
of luck in getting your data transferred.

Take care,
Sina 

No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 
-----Original Message-----
From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 2:18 PM
To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?

If you have ftp access on two machines, forget Windows, and just log into
one. Launch a good ftp client like ncftp, start the transfer, and go to bed.

You certainly don't need Windows.

PS: If you use ncftp you could even use bgget (or bgput) to run the
transfers in background, which means you could log off and your files would
still get transfered.

Now, does Windows have that? Huh, Sina?

Karen Lewellen writes:
> hmm,
> Let me be sure I follow you.
> This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the 
> contents of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course> 
> to say the storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is 
> not located on shellworld?
> if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
> Karen
> 
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:
> 
> >If I may humbly suggest?
> >
> >Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows 
> >someone to connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and 
> >then say, FTP A, copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is 
> >sit back and let the data packets flow...it doesn't go through your 
> >system at all: so you could transfer information at any speed, only 
> >limited by the two ftp servers, not by your own connection.
> >
> >*shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
> >
> >Take care,
> >Sina
> >
> >No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large 
> >number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Hi Sina,
I for one thank you for your help here.  There is no such thing as too much 
information in a case like this.
The idea of doing the transfer from my ftp here on shellworld to the ftp on 
my site as a quick solution while I find another one is fine by me.
I apologize that Janina does not agree, but it is not her data.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:

> Hi Janina,
>
> Actually there very well could be a Windows equivalent; not that I'd really
> care if there is or isn't.
>
> I wasn't suggesting that Windows was in any way, shape, or form needed here.
> I said that there was a windows tool, which I mistakenly at first called fxp
> rather than Flash XP. Then someone pointed out that fxp was the
> protocall...and I sent a message asking for a Linux use of this so that she
> can get her transfer complete.
>
> In short...i've tried to be helpful, while you have in two separate emails
> offered help in conjunction with criticism towards me for my suggestion,
> which I did point out quite humbly, and secondly offered an extremely
> immature and unbecoming attitude.
>
> I do appologise to Karen for Janina's attitude. Karen, I wish you the best
> of luck in getting your data transferred.
>
> Take care,
> Sina
>
> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
> electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 2:18 PM
> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
>
> If you have ftp access on two machines, forget Windows, and just log into
> one. Launch a good ftp client like ncftp, start the transfer, and go to bed.
>
> You certainly don't need Windows.
>
> PS: If you use ncftp you could even use bgget (or bgput) to run the
> transfers in background, which means you could log off and your files would
> still get transfered.
>
> Now, does Windows have that? Huh, Sina?
>
> Karen Lewellen writes:
>> hmm,
>> Let me be sure I follow you.
>> This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the
>> contents of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course>
>> to say the storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is
>> not located on shellworld?
>> if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
>> Karen
>>
>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:
>>
>>> If I may humbly suggest?
>>>
>>> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows
>>> someone to connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and
>>> then say, FTP A, copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is
>>> sit back and let the data packets flow...it doesn't go through your
>>> system at all: so you could transfer information at any speed, only
>>> limited by the two ftp servers, not by your own connection.
>>>
>>> *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
>>>
>>> Take care,
>>> Sina
>>>
>>> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large
>>> number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Huh? I've been explaining several ways to do it. None of the commands I
gave you for doing this require you to go get any software. They're all
about using what you already have access to on shell world, most likely.

Yes, it's certainly your data. And, if you want to use Windows, I'm
certainly not going to stop you. But I will complain if we start using
this list to discuss using Windows to do this job.

Karen Lewellen writes:
> Hi Sina,
> I for one thank you for your help here.  There is no such thing as too much 
> information in a case like this.
> The idea of doing the transfer from my ftp here on shellworld to the ftp on 
> my site as a quick solution while I find another one is fine by me.
> I apologize that Janina does not agree, but it is not her data.
> Karen
> 
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:
> 
> >Hi Janina,
> >
> >Actually there very well could be a Windows equivalent; not that I'd really
> >care if there is or isn't.
> >
> >I wasn't suggesting that Windows was in any way, shape, or form needed 
> >here.
> >I said that there was a windows tool, which I mistakenly at first called 
> >fxp
> >rather than Flash XP. Then someone pointed out that fxp was the
> >protocall...and I sent a message asking for a Linux use of this so that she
> >can get her transfer complete.
> >
> >In short...i've tried to be helpful, while you have in two separate emails
> >offered help in conjunction with criticism towards me for my suggestion,
> >which I did point out quite humbly, and secondly offered an extremely
> >immature and unbecoming attitude.
> >
> >I do appologise to Karen for Janina's attitude. Karen, I wish you the best
> >of luck in getting your data transferred.
> >
> >Take care,
> >Sina
> >
> >No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
> >electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca 
> >[mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> >On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
> >Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 2:18 PM
> >To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> >Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
> >
> >If you have ftp access on two machines, forget Windows, and just log into
> >one. Launch a good ftp client like ncftp, start the transfer, and go to 
> >bed.
> >
> >You certainly don't need Windows.
> >
> >PS: If you use ncftp you could even use bgget (or bgput) to run the
> >transfers in background, which means you could log off and your files would
> >still get transfered.
> >
> >Now, does Windows have that? Huh, Sina?
> >
> >Karen Lewellen writes:
> >>hmm,
> >>Let me be sure I follow you.
> >>This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the
> >>contents of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course>
> >>to say the storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is
> >>not located on shellworld?
> >>if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
> >>Karen
> >>
> >>On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:
> >>
> >>>If I may humbly suggest?
> >>>
> >>>Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows
> >>>someone to connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and
> >>>then say, FTP A, copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is
> >>>sit back and let the data packets flow...it doesn't go through your
> >>>system at all: so you could transfer information at any speed, only
> >>>limited by the two ftp servers, not by your own connection.
> >>>
> >>>*shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
> >>>
> >>>Take care,
> >>>Sina
> >>>
> >>>No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large
> >>>number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Speakup mailing list
> >Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Sina Bahram]

All the best to you...good luck transfering the data.

Take care,
Sina 

No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 
-----Original Message-----
From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
On Behalf Of Karen Lewellen
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 4:53 PM
To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
Subject: RE: Linux and data storage?

Hi Sina,
I for one thank you for your help here.  There is no such thing as too much
information in a case like this.
The idea of doing the transfer from my ftp here on shellworld to the ftp on
my site as a quick solution while I find another one is fine by me.
I apologize that Janina does not agree, but it is not her data.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:

> Hi Janina,
>
> Actually there very well could be a Windows equivalent; not that I'd 
> really care if there is or isn't.
>
> I wasn't suggesting that Windows was in any way, shape, or form needed
here.
> I said that there was a windows tool, which I mistakenly at first 
> called fxp rather than Flash XP. Then someone pointed out that fxp was 
> the protocall...and I sent a message asking for a Linux use of this so 
> that she can get her transfer complete.
>
> In short...i've tried to be helpful, while you have in two separate 
> emails offered help in conjunction with criticism towards me for my 
> suggestion, which I did point out quite humbly, and secondly offered 
> an extremely immature and unbecoming attitude.
>
> I do appologise to Karen for Janina's attitude. Karen, I wish you the 
> best of luck in getting your data transferred.
>
> Take care,
> Sina
>
> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large 
> number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca 
> [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 2:18 PM
> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
>
> If you have ftp access on two machines, forget Windows, and just log 
> into one. Launch a good ftp client like ncftp, start the transfer, and go
to bed.
>
> You certainly don't need Windows.
>
> PS: If you use ncftp you could even use bgget (or bgput) to run the 
> transfers in background, which means you could log off and your files 
> would still get transfered.
>
> Now, does Windows have that? Huh, Sina?
>
> Karen Lewellen writes:
>> hmm,
>> Let me be sure I follow you.
>> This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the 
>> contents of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course> 
>> to say the storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is 
>> not located on shellworld?
>> if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
>> Karen
>>
>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:
>>
>>> If I may humbly suggest?
>>>
>>> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows 
>>> someone to connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and 
>>> then say, FTP A, copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is 
>>> sit back and let the data packets flow...it doesn't go through your 
>>> system at all: so you could transfer information at any speed, only 
>>> limited by the two ftp servers, not by your own connection.
>>>
>>> *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
>>>
>>> Take care,
>>> Sina
>>>
>>> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large 
>>> number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Linux and data storage?

[doc]

Can you make ncftp secure and if so how?
Doc Wright
http://wrightplaceinc.net
If we can't look at ourselves, and ask, why?
then where does the learning start?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Janina Sajka" <janina@rednote.net>
To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?


If you have ftp access on two machines, forget Windows, and just log
into one. Launch a good ftp client like ncftp, start the transfer,
and go to bed.

You certainly don't need Windows.

PS: If you use ncftp you could even use bgget (or bgput) to run the
transfers in background, which means you could log off and your files
would still get transfered.

Now, does Windows have that? Huh, Sina?

Karen Lewellen writes:
> hmm,
> Let me be sure I follow you.
> This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the
contents
> of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course> to say the
> storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is not located on
> shellworld?
> if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
> Karen
>
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:
>
> >If I may humbly suggest?
> >
> >Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows someone
> >to
> >connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and then say, FTP A,
> >copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit back and let the
data
> >packets flow...it doesn't go through your system at all: so you could
> >transfer information at any speed, only limited by the two ftp servers,
not
> >by your own connection.
> >
> >*shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
> >
> >Take care,
> >Sina
> >
> >No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number
of
> >electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca
> >[mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> >On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
> >Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
> >To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> >Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
> >
> >Karen,
> >
> >You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
> >other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate
> >those
> >precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and then
move
> >that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its ftp facility,
> >but it might take forever over a dialup link.
> >
> >If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
> >call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C", assuming
> >you had the necessary access permissions and such.
> >
> >Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although
nettamer
> >is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize limits.
> >
> >Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you would
> >be
> >home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP client, move
them
> >to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
> >
> >My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively to
> >backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily
> >redundant.
> >I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
> >
> >Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I
have
> >a
> >DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just in case,
> >but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own situation, I
> >cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return to DOS and
> >Nettamer.
> >
> >Chuck
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Speakup mailing list
> >Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 

Janina Sajka, Chair
Accessibility Workgroup
Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org Phone: +1 202.494.7040


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

No, you can't, not in any useful way.

However, I'm not aware that security is the largest concern here. We're
talking about a one time file transfer. I would certainly not suggest
ncftp for regular use backing up data because the password does get sent
in the clear.

Frankly, building the .tar.bz2 file in /tmp might be considered
insecure, as anyone might get at it there.

The background transfer of ncftp is a very nic feature, though. You can
get similar securely with nohup and scp or rsync.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> Frankly, building the .tar.bz2 file in /tmp might be considered
> insecure, as anyone might get at it there.

Even if it is chmoded to 0600?

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

600 certainly does help. Can you build a tar and chmod at the same time?
I realize we're splitting hairs here.

Luke Davis writes:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> 
> >Frankly, building the .tar.bz2 file in /tmp might be considered
> >insecure, as anyone might get at it there.
> 
> Even if it is chmoded to 0600?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> 600 certainly does help. Can you build a tar and chmod at the same time?

Hmm, an interesting question.  There are two ways to test this idea, which 
I will now attempt...

Starting the tar process in one window (using screen), and in another 
listing the file in /tmp, shows, 644.  Doing a chmod to 600, while the tar 
is still in progress, then listing the file again, shows 600.  So that 
solution appears to work, as would, of course, backgrounding the tar 
process, and changing the mode.

The other method:

touch /tmp/ldtf.tbz
chmod 600 /tmp/ldtf.tbz
tar --bzip2 -cf /tmp/ldtf.tbz ~/

also acomplishes the task of keeping the file private, so I suppose the 
answer is yes, in all possible ways.

> I realize we're splitting hairs here.

So what?  The more hairs you split, the more lessons you learn about hair.
Put another way: in order to determine the means by which something 
operates, is frequently to split it open, and see!

Luke

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Yes, this is useful. It's probably beyond what she needs to be concerned
about, but certainly useful.

Luke Davis writes:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> 
> >600 certainly does help. Can you build a tar and chmod at the same time?
> 
> Hmm, an interesting question.  There are two ways to test this idea, which 
> I will now attempt...
> 
> Starting the tar process in one window (using screen), and in another 
> listing the file in /tmp, shows, 644.  Doing a chmod to 600, while the tar 
> is still in progress, then listing the file again, shows 600.  So that 
> solution appears to work, as would, of course, backgrounding the tar 
> process, and changing the mode.
> 
> The other method:
> 
> touch /tmp/ldtf.tbz
> chmod 600 /tmp/ldtf.tbz
> tar --bzip2 -cf /tmp/ldtf.tbz ~/
> 
> also acomplishes the task of keeping the file private, so I suppose the 
> answer is yes, in all possible ways.
> 
> >I realize we're splitting hairs here.
> 
> So what?  The more hairs you split, the more lessons you learn about hair.
> Put another way: in order to determine the means by which something 
> operates, is frequently to split it open, and see!
> 
> Luke
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

A word to Karen: if you do any of the tarish things discussed in this 
thread, be certain to delete the backup archive, after it has completed 
its transit.  /tmp is only cleared on reboot, and that usually only 
happens 1.5 times per year.

  On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> Yes, this is useful. It's probably beyond what she needs to be concerned
> about, but certainly useful.
>
> Luke Davis writes:
>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
>>
>>> 600 certainly does help. Can you build a tar and chmod at the same time?
>>
>> Hmm, an interesting question.  There are two ways to test this idea, which
>> I will now attempt...
>>
>> Starting the tar process in one window (using screen), and in another
>> listing the file in /tmp, shows, 644.  Doing a chmod to 600, while the tar
>> is still in progress, then listing the file again, shows 600.  So that
>> solution appears to work, as would, of course, backgrounding the tar
>> process, and changing the mode.
>>
>> The other method:
>>
>> touch /tmp/ldtf.tbz
>> chmod 600 /tmp/ldtf.tbz
>> tar --bzip2 -cf /tmp/ldtf.tbz ~/
>>
>> also acomplishes the task of keeping the file private, so I suppose the
>> answer is yes, in all possible ways.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

And my example tar command is probably not the most advisable. Better to
do something like:
tar -cjpf /tmp/karen.tbz ../karen/

You want a tar archive file that will create a directory when you
uncompress and copy all your files into that directory.
Luke Davis writes:
> A word to Karen: if you do any of the tarish things discussed in this 
> thread, be certain to delete the backup archive, after it has completed 
> its transit.  /tmp is only cleared on reboot, and that usually only 
> happens 1.5 times per year.
> 
>  On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> 
> >Yes, this is useful. It's probably beyond what she needs to be concerned
> >about, but certainly useful.
> >
> >Luke Davis writes:
> >>On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> >>
> >>>600 certainly does help. Can you build a tar and chmod at the same time?
> >>
> >>Hmm, an interesting question.  There are two ways to test this idea, which
> >>I will now attempt...
> >>
> >>Starting the tar process in one window (using screen), and in another
> >>listing the file in /tmp, shows, 644.  Doing a chmod to 600, while the tar
> >>is still in progress, then listing the file again, shows 600.  So that
> >>solution appears to work, as would, of course, backgrounding the tar
> >>process, and changing the mode.
> >>
> >>The other method:
> >>
> >>touch /tmp/ldtf.tbz
> >>chmod 600 /tmp/ldtf.tbz
> >>tar --bzip2 -cf /tmp/ldtf.tbz ~/
> >>
> >>also acomplishes the task of keeping the file private, so I suppose the
> >>answer is yes, in all possible ways.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

600 certainly does help. Can you build a tar and chmod at the same time?
I realize we're splitting hairs here.

Luke Davis writes:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> 
> >Frankly, building the .tar.bz2 file in /tmp might be considered
> >insecure, as anyone might get at it there.
> 
> Even if it is chmoded to 0600?

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, doc wrote:

> Can you make ncftp secure and if so how?

Why would you want to expend the effort, when SFTP and similar tools are 
available?

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

  Hi janina,
Perhaps you did not read all of my post, but again I only have one 
machine.
If the program suggested does not require my system, but does require 
windows, anyone living anywhere that I know an complete the task for me it 
seems.  but your suggestion involves my having two computers which I have 
said I do not have.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> If you have ftp access on two machines, forget Windows, and just log
> into one. Launch a good ftp client like ncftp, start the transfer,
> and go to bed.
>
> You certainly don't need Windows.
>
> PS: If you use ncftp you could even use bgget (or bgput) to run the
> transfers in background, which means you could log off and your files
> would still get transfered.
>
> Now, does Windows have that? Huh, Sina?
>
> Karen Lewellen writes:
>> hmm,
>> Let me be sure I follow you.
>> This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the contents
>> of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course> to say the
>> storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is not located on
>> shellworld?
>> if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
>> Karen
>>
>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:
>>
>>> If I may humbly suggest?
>>>
>>> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows someone
>>> to
>>> connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and then say, FTP A,
>>> copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit back and let the data
>>> packets flow...it doesn't go through your system at all: so you could
>>> transfer information at any speed, only limited by the two ftp servers, not
>>> by your own connection.
>>>
>>> *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
>>>
>>> Take care,
>>> Sina
>>>
>>> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
>>> electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca
>>> [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
>>> On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
>>> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
>>> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
>>> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
>>>
>>> Karen,
>>>
>>> You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
>>> other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate
>>> those
>>> precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and then move
>>> that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its ftp facility,
>>> but it might take forever over a dialup link.
>>>
>>> If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
>>> call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C", assuming
>>> you had the necessary access permissions and such.
>>>
>>> Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although nettamer
>>> is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize limits.
>>>
>>> Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you would
>>> be
>>> home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP client, move them
>>> to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
>>>
>>> My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively to
>>> backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily
>>> redundant.
>>> I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
>>>
>>> Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I have
>>> a
>>> DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just in case,
>>> but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own situation, I
>>> cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return to DOS and
>>> Nettamer.
>>>
>>> Chuck
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Speakup mailing list
>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> -- 
>
> 				Janina Sajka, Chair
> 				Accessibility Workgroup
> 				Free Standards Group (FSG)
>
> janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

Karen, you just said, that you have a web server, not on Shellworld, 
whereon you could store your data.  Janina is talking about FTPing 
directly from Shellworld to that, as I also suggested in another message.

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> Hi janina,
> Perhaps you did not read all of my post, but again I only have one machine.
> If the program suggested does not require my system, but does require 
> windows, anyone living anywhere that I know an complete the task for me it 
> seems.  but your suggestion involves my having two computers which I have 
> said I do not have.
> Karen
>
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
>
>> If you have ftp access on two machines, forget Windows, and just log
>> into one. Launch a good ftp client like ncftp, start the transfer,
>> and go to bed.
>> 
>> You certainly don't need Windows.
>> 
>> PS: If you use ncftp you could even use bgget (or bgput) to run the
>> transfers in background, which means you could log off and your files
>> would still get transfered.
>> 
>> Now, does Windows have that? Huh, Sina?
>> 
>> Karen Lewellen writes:
>>> hmm,
>>> Let me be sure I follow you.
>>> This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the 
>>> contents
>>> of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course> to say the
>>> storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is not located 
>>> on
>>> shellworld?
>>> if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
>>> Karen
>>> 
>>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:
>>> 
>>>> If I may humbly suggest?
>>>> 
>>>> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows 
>>>> someone
>>>> to
>>>> connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and then say, FTP 
>>>> A,
>>>> copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit back and let 
>>>> the data
>>>> packets flow...it doesn't go through your system at all: so you could
>>>> transfer information at any speed, only limited by the two ftp 
>>>> servers, not
>>>> by your own connection.
>>>> 
>>>> *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
>>>> 
>>>> Take care,
>>>> Sina
>>>> 
>>>> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large 
>>>> number of
>>>> electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca
>>>> [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
>>>> On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
>>>> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
>>>> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
>>>> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
>>>> 
>>>> Karen,
>>>> 
>>>> You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, 
>>>> the
>>>> other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to 
>>>> aggregate
>>>> those
>>>> precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and 
>>>> then move
>>>> that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its ftp 
>>>> facility,
>>>> but it might take forever over a dialup link.
>>>> 
>>>> If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your 
>>>> desktop,
>>>> call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C", 
>>>> assuming
>>>> you had the necessary access permissions and such.
>>>> 
>>>> Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although 
>>>> nettamer
>>>> is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize 
>>>> limits.
>>>> 
>>>> Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you 
>>>> would
>>>> be
>>>> home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP client, move 
>>>> them
>>>> to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
>>>> 
>>>> My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used 
>>>> extensively to
>>>> backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily
>>>> redundant.
>>>> I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
>>>> 
>>>> Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I 
>>>> have
>>>> a
>>>> DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just in 
>>>> case,
>>>> but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own situation, 
>>>> I
>>>> cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return to DOS and
>>>> Nettamer.
>>>> 
>>>> Chuck
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Speakup mailing list
>>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Speakup mailing list
>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> 
>> -- 
>> 
>> Janina Sajka, Chair
>> Accessibility Workgroup
>> Free Standards Group (FSG)
>> 
>> janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> 
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Skywalker,
I did note your message and replied to it, hitting the size limit again 
it seems so let me try again.
I ask you specifically as you too are on shellworld.
As i said I have no intention of zipping anything, so if i understand this 
i should be able to do the following.
a, create a directory on the server where my site resides, which too is a 
Linux based server let's call it backup.
b, from my shellworld home prompt run sftp or tar or one of the other ftp 
based transfer programs  and copy the contents of my home directory to 
the so created directory on my website server?
I do not want to have to specify, so if this does mean  i must coy over 
mail and the like so be it.  frankly it might not be so bad an idea given 
the folders in that area too.
I would rather have everything even if more than i need, than lose 
anything seeking what i think i want.
What say you, do I understand the process correctly?
Karen

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> As i said I have no intention of zipping anything, so if i understand this i

and as I said, that seems a strange fobia.  Regardless, however--

> should be able to do the following.
> a, create a directory on the server where my site resides, which too is a 
> Linux based server let's call it backup.

What do you mean, "which too"?  If we are talking about Shellworld, it is 
not Linux, in any way, shape, or form.

> b, from my shellworld home prompt run sftp or tar or one of the other ftp 
> based transfer programs  and copy the contents of my home directory to the so 
> created directory on my website server?

tar is not a transfer program.  It is an archival tool.

Tar takes several files, and copies them into one large file.  It stands 
for "tape archiver", and was originally used for exactly that purpose.
For example, if you did:

cd ~/
tar --exclude ~/mail -cf /tmp/karen_backup.tar ../

Will copy your entire home directory, excepting the mail directory which 
contains your saved messages, into a contiguous archive, in the file 
/tmp/karen_backup.tar.  That file may then be moved to another server or 
the like.

Better, would be to compress it using gzip, or, still better, bzip2, and 
then transfer it, using sftp, rsync, ftp, ncftp, or some transfer program.

> I do not want to have to specify, so if this does mean  i must coy over mail 
> and the like so be it.  frankly it might not be so bad an idea given the 
> folders in that area too.

To copy in the way you suggest, a transfer using rsync, is probably the 
best option.

> What say you, do I understand the process correctly?

Parts of it, yes.  Other parts, not so much.

Luke

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Sorry, granted a lot of this has gotten off center with all of janina's 
needless chattering.

first, the server that hosts my site has a Linux shell base to it, using 
the red hat distribution  which I know has a different name now.
You pointed out before when we were discussing du that shellworld too uses 
a Linux element to  its foundation, and many of the programs here are Linux 
based and  the services is advertised to some as a Linux shell.
Thus my description.
I am not going to archive so from your explanation, i will not need tar.
so rsynch will accomplish a copy of the  data here save for the mail in my 
inbox at the time of the transfer?
now am I more on point?
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> As i said I have no intention of zipping anything, so if i understand 
>> this i
>
> and as I said, that seems a strange fobia.  Regardless, however--
>
>> should be able to do the following.
>> a, create a directory on the server where my site resides, which too is a 
>> Linux based server let's call it backup.
>
> What do you mean, "which too"?  If we are talking about Shellworld, it is not 
> Linux, in any way, shape, or form.
>
>> b, from my shellworld home prompt run sftp or tar or one of the other ftp 
>> based transfer programs  and copy the contents of my home directory to 
>> the so created directory on my website server?
>
> tar is not a transfer program.  It is an archival tool.
>
> Tar takes several files, and copies them into one large file.  It stands for 
> "tape archiver", and was originally used for exactly that purpose.
> For example, if you did:
>
> cd ~/
> tar --exclude ~/mail -cf /tmp/karen_backup.tar ../
>
> Will copy your entire home directory, excepting the mail directory which 
> contains your saved messages, into a contiguous archive, in the file 
> /tmp/karen_backup.tar.  That file may then be moved to another server or the 
> like.
>
> Better, would be to compress it using gzip, or, still better, bzip2, and then 
> transfer it, using sftp, rsync, ftp, ncftp, or some transfer program.
>
>> I do not want to have to specify, so if this does mean  i must coy over 
>> mail and the like so be it.  frankly it might not be so bad an idea given 
>> the folders in that area too.
>
> To copy in the way you suggest, a transfer using rsync, is probably the best 
> option.
>
>> What say you, do I understand the process correctly?
>
> Parts of it, yes.  Other parts, not so much.
>
> Luke
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> You pointed out before when we were discussing du that shellworld too uses a 
> Linux element to  its foundation, and many of the programs here are Linux 
> based and  the services is advertised to some as a Linux shell.
> Thus my description.

I said no such thing.  That is, to borrow Janina's word, bunk.

> I am not going to archive so from your explanation, i will not need tar.
> so rsynch will accomplish a copy of the  data here save for the mail in my 
> inbox at the time of the transfer?

The program is "rsync", not "rsynch".  The answer is yes.

Good luck.

Luke

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

thanks for the correction and the good wishes!
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> You pointed out before when we were discussing du that shellworld too 
>> uses a Linux element to  its foundation, and many of the programs here 
>> are Linux based and  the services is advertised to some as a Linux shell.
>> Thus my description.
>
> I said no such thing.  That is, to borrow Janina's word, bunk.
>
>> I am not going to archive so from your explanation, i will not need tar.
>> so rsynch will accomplish a copy of the  data here save for the mail in 
>> my inbox at the time of the transfer?
>
> The program is "rsync", not "rsynch".  The answer is yes.
>
> Good luck.
>
> Luke
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> You pointed out before when we were discussing du that shellworld too uses a 
> Linux element to  its foundation, and many of the programs here are Linux 
> based and  the services is advertised to some as a Linux shell.

Where is Shellworld advertising a Linux shell?

It hasn't been Linux based for years, and if someone is still running ads 
saying that it is, they should probably stop.

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

Um, if you have FTP access on both, why would you need that tool?  Why not 
just telnet to Shellworld, from there FTP to your web server (sftp or scp 
or rsync would be better), and transfer the files directly?

  On Sun, 26 Sep 
2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> hmm,
> Let me be sure I follow you.
> This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the contents 
> of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course> to say the 
> storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is not located on 
> shellworld?
> if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
> Karen
>
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:
>
>> If I may humbly suggest?
>> 
>> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows someone 
>> to
>> connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and then say, FTP A,
>> copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit back and let the 
>> data
>> packets flow...it doesn't go through your system at all: so you could
>> transfer information at any speed, only limited by the two ftp servers, 
>> not
>> by your own connection.
>> 
>> *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
>> 
>> Take care,
>> Sina
>> 
>> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number 
>> of
>> electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca 
>> [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
>> On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
>> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
>> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
>> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
>> 
>> Karen,
>> 
>> You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
>> other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate 
>> those
>> precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and then 
>> move
>> that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its ftp facility,
>> but it might take forever over a dialup link.
>> 
>> If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
>> call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C", assuming
>> you had the necessary access permissions and such.
>> 
>> Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although 
>> nettamer
>> is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize limits.
>> 
>> Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you would 
>> be
>> home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP client, move 
>> them
>> to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
>> 
>> My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively to
>> backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily 
>> redundant.
>> I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
>> 
>> Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I 
>> have a
>> DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just in case,
>> but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own situation, I
>> cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return to DOS and
>> Nettamer.
>> 
>> Chuck
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> 
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Exactly why I'm on Sinna's case about this. He's clouded and confused
things.

Luke Davis writes:
> Um, if you have FTP access on both, why would you need that tool?  Why not 
> just telnet to Shellworld, from there FTP to your web server (sftp or scp 
> or rsync would be better), and transfer the files directly?
> 
>  On Sun, 26 Sep 
> 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
> 
> >hmm,
> >Let me be sure I follow you.
> >This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the 
> >contents of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course> to 
> >say the storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is not 
> >located on shellworld?
> >if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
> >Karen
> >
> >On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:
> >
> >>If I may humbly suggest?
> >>
> >>Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows someone 
> >>to
> >>connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and then say, FTP A,
> >>copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit back and let the 
> >>data
> >>packets flow...it doesn't go through your system at all: so you could
> >>transfer information at any speed, only limited by the two ftp servers, 
> >>not
> >>by your own connection.
> >>
> >>*shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
> >>
> >>Take care,
> >>Sina
> >>
> >>No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number 
> >>of
> >>electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca 
> >>[mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> >>On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
> >>Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
> >>To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> >>Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
> >>
> >>Karen,
> >>
> >>You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
> >>other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate 
> >>those
> >>precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and then 
> >>move
> >>that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its ftp facility,
> >>but it might take forever over a dialup link.
> >>
> >>If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
> >>call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C", assuming
> >>you had the necessary access permissions and such.
> >>
> >>Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although 
> >>nettamer
> >>is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize limits.
> >>
> >>Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you would 
> >>be
> >>home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP client, move 
> >>them
> >>to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
> >>
> >>My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively to
> >>backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily 
> >>redundant.
> >>I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
> >>
> >>Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I 
> >>have a
> >>DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just in case,
> >>but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own situation, I
> >>cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return to DOS and
> >>Nettamer.
> >>
> >>Chuck
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Speakup mailing list
> >>Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >>
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Speakup mailing list
> >Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> Exactly why I'm on Sinna's case about this. He's clouded and confused
> things.

Agreed that the suggestion was not directly useful to the current 
situation, but I still don't believe it was suggesting use of Windows. 
His "if I may suggest", I took to refer to the last line, "might there be 
a linux solution similar to this?", not to the middle section of 
explanatory text, describing what he wanted a Linux solution for.
(paraphrasing)

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Oh, and we could continue to parse that first email from him, but why?
To prove what an ogre I am? I can defend myself quite nicely, thank you,
including on a parse of that message.

Point is it did hijack the discussion. You and I are still trying to
clear it up, e.g. a direct file transfer between two external machines.

Luke Davis writes:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> 
> >Exactly why I'm on Sinna's case about this. He's clouded and confused
> >things.
> 
> Agreed that the suggestion was not directly useful to the current 
> situation, but I still don't believe it was suggesting use of Windows. 
> His "if I may suggest", I took to refer to the last line, "might there be 
> a linux solution similar to this?", not to the middle section of 
> explanatory text, describing what he wanted a Linux solution for.
> (paraphrasing)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Clear it up for whom janina?
You have already shown that you are not first hand aware of the shellworld 
setup, given your mistake in using the du program.
It is better that Luc give me the answers as he knows this service better 
than you do.
and in an effort to split further hairs, i have not two external machines. 
I have two ftp accounts which is not the same thing.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> Oh, and we could continue to parse that first email from him, but why?
> To prove what an ogre I am? I can defend myself quite nicely, thank you,
> including on a parse of that message.
>
> Point is it did hijack the discussion. You and I are still trying to
> clear it up, e.g. a direct file transfer between two external machines.
>
> Luke Davis writes:
>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
>>
>>> Exactly why I'm on Sinna's case about this. He's clouded and confused
>>> things.
>>
>> Agreed that the suggestion was not directly useful to the current
>> situation, but I still don't believe it was suggesting use of Windows.
>> His "if I may suggest", I took to refer to the last line, "might there be
>> a linux solution similar to this?", not to the middle section of
>> explanatory text, describing what he wanted a Linux solution for.
>> (paraphrasing)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> -- 
>
> 				Janina Sajka, Chair
> 				Accessibility Workgroup
> 				Free Standards Group (FSG)
>
> janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> You have already shown that you are not first hand aware of the shellworld 
> setup, given your mistake in using the du program.
> It is better that Luc give me the answers as he knows this service better

Be careful with exclusionary statements such as that.  You will alienate 
help.  I happen to be here right now.  When I leave tonight, I may not 
pick back up on this conversation for days.

Take help where you can get it.  You told her that Shellworld was Linux. 
It is not, it is FreeBSD.  She gave you a Linux command syntax, because 
you told her that was what you were using.

Luke

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Just to finish up on backup strategies:

The first backup is the big chore. But, it's not the last word--unless,
of course, one never changes one's data. Not likely.

So, a backup routine is the real target.

rsync is the right tool especially for the backup routine because it
intelligently copies only those portions that have changed. Very
effective, especially on low bandwidth connections.

Luke Davis writes:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
> 
> >You have already shown that you are not first hand aware of the shellworld 
> >setup, given your mistake in using the du program.
> >It is better that Luc give me the answers as he knows this service better
> 
> Be careful with exclusionary statements such as that.  You will alienate 
> help.  I happen to be here right now.  When I leave tonight, I may not 
> pick back up on this conversation for days.
> 
> Take help where you can get it.  You told her that Shellworld was Linux. 
> It is not, it is FreeBSD.  She gave you a Linux command syntax, because 
> you told her that was what you were using.
> 
> Luke
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

I dislike her treatment of others.  She is spending time defending herself 
and  I do not consider her to be helping at all.

so,
if you may leave the table, care to add and i am sorry if it has been 
given already the command land for using rsync?
Thus I can end this thread and let others get back to business?

Thanks,
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> You have already shown that you are not first hand aware of the 
>> shellworld setup, given your mistake in using the du program.
>> It is better that Luc give me the answers as he knows this service better
>
> Be careful with exclusionary statements such as that.  You will alienate 
> help.  I happen to be here right now.  When I leave tonight, I may not pick 
> back up on this conversation for days.
>
> Take help where you can get it.  You told her that Shellworld was Linux. It 
> is not, it is FreeBSD.  She gave you a Linux command syntax, because you told 
> her that was what you were using.
>
> Luke
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Oh, and we could continue to parse that first email from him, but why?
To prove what an ogre I am? I can defend myself quite nicely, thank you,
including on a parse of that message.

Point is it did hijack the discussion. You and I are still trying to
clear it up, e.g. a direct file transfer between two external machines.

Luke Davis writes:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> 
> >Exactly why I'm on Sinna's case about this. He's clouded and confused
> >things.
> 
> Agreed that the suggestion was not directly useful to the current 
> situation, but I still don't believe it was suggesting use of Windows. 
> His "if I may suggest", I took to refer to the last line, "might there be 
> a linux solution similar to this?", not to the middle section of 
> explanatory text, describing what he wanted a Linux solution for.
> (paraphrasing)

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Not for me!
it is one idea among many.
i am sorry if you are confused though janina.


On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> Exactly why I'm on Sinna's case about this. He's clouded and confused
> things.
>
> Luke Davis writes:
>> Um, if you have FTP access on both, why would you need that tool?  Why not
>> just telnet to Shellworld, from there FTP to your web server (sftp or scp
>> or rsync would be better), and transfer the files directly?
>>
>>  On Sun, 26 Sep
>> 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>>
>>> hmm,
>>> Let me be sure I follow you.
>>> This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the
>>> contents of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course> to
>>> say the storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is not
>>> located on shellworld?
>>> if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
>>> Karen
>>>
>>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:
>>>
>>>> If I may humbly suggest?
>>>>
>>>> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows someone
>>>> to
>>>> connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and then say, FTP A,
>>>> copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit back and let the
>>>> data
>>>> packets flow...it doesn't go through your system at all: so you could
>>>> transfer information at any speed, only limited by the two ftp servers,
>>>> not
>>>> by your own connection.
>>>>
>>>> *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
>>>>
>>>> Take care,
>>>> Sina
>>>>
>>>> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number
>>>> of
>>>> electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca
>>>> [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
>>>> On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
>>>> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
>>>> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
>>>> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
>>>>
>>>> Karen,
>>>>
>>>> You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
>>>> other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate
>>>> those
>>>> precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and then
>>>> move
>>>> that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its ftp facility,
>>>> but it might take forever over a dialup link.
>>>>
>>>> If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
>>>> call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C", assuming
>>>> you had the necessary access permissions and such.
>>>>
>>>> Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although
>>>> nettamer
>>>> is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize limits.
>>>>
>>>> Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you would
>>>> be
>>>> home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP client, move
>>>> them
>>>> to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
>>>>
>>>> My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively to
>>>> backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily
>>>> redundant.
>>>> I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
>>>>
>>>> Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I
>>>> have a
>>>> DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just in case,
>>>> but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own situation, I
>>>> cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return to DOS and
>>>> Nettamer.
>>>>
>>>> Chuck
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Speakup mailing list
>>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Speakup mailing list
>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> -- 
>
> 				Janina Sajka, Chair
> 				Accessibility Workgroup
> 				Free Standards Group (FSG)
>
> janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Sina Bahram]

No..i believe you previously stated that you were on my case about
Windows...are we changing the issue now?

Janina...that's exactly all you are...you're just on my case...you're not
helping by attacking me for something I didn't even suggest, namely using
Windows, and I don't see how the helps things at all...

Take care,
Sina 

No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 
-----Original Message-----
From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 4:30 PM
To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?

Exactly why I'm on Sinna's case about this. He's clouded and confused
things.

Luke Davis writes:
> Um, if you have FTP access on both, why would you need that tool?  Why 
> not just telnet to Shellworld, from there FTP to your web server (sftp 
> or scp or rsync would be better), and transfer the files directly?
> 
>  On Sun, 26 Sep
> 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
> 
> >hmm,
> >Let me be sure I follow you.
> >This is a program that runs in windows, that would let me move the 
> >contents of my shellworld workspace,  <i have ftp here too of course> 
> >to say the storage on my website<where I also  have ftp,> and that is 
> >not located on shellworld?
> >if all this is true, where can i find this tool?
> >Karen
> >
> >On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Sina Bahram wrote:
> >
> >>If I may humbly suggest?
> >>
> >>Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows 
> >>someone to connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and 
> >>then say, FTP A, copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is 
> >>sit back and let the data packets flow...it doesn't go through your 
> >>system at all: so you could transfer information at any speed, only 
> >>limited by the two ftp servers, not by your own connection.
> >>
> >>*shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
> >>
> >>Take care,
> >>Sina
> >>
> >>No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large 
> >>number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca 
> >>[mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> >>On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
> >>Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
> >>To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> >>Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
> >>
> >>Karen,
> >>
> >>You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, 
> >>the other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to 
> >>aggregate those precious files into one archive, assuming you have 
> >>the space, and then move that archive somewhere. Nettamer could 
> >>retrieve it with its ftp facility, but it might take forever over a 
> >>dialup link.
> >>
> >>If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your 
> >>desktop, call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to 
> >>"system C", assuming you had the necessary access permissions and such.
> >>
> >>Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although 
> >>nettamer is a little weird about attachments, and then you have 
> >>filesize limits.
> >>
> >>Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you 
> >>would be home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP 
> >>client, move them to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need 
> >>to.
> >>
> >>My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used 
> >>extensively to backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, 
> >>but heavily redundant.
> >>I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
> >>
> >>Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. 
> >>I have a DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, 
> >>just in case, but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my 
> >>own situation, I cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to 
> >>return to DOS and Nettamer.
> >>
> >>Chuck
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Speakup mailing list
> >>Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >>
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Speakup mailing list
> >Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Our shellworld administrator suggested the following as an alternative to 
du:
kwota
from which i got
your files occupy 1902.82 megabits of system space.
very polite that program.
and I hope i just stated that number correctly grin
Karen

Re: Linux and data storage?

[nick G]

The Tool itself is called FlashFXP.  FXP is the protacall.
Thanks,
Nick
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sina Bahram" <sbahram@nc.rr.com>
To: "'Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.'" 
<speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 9:01 PM
Subject: RE: Linux and data storage?


> If I may humbly suggest?
>
> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows someone 
> to
> connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and then say, FTP A,
> copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit back and let the 
> data
> packets flow...it doesn't go through your system at all: so you could
> transfer information at any speed, only limited by the two ftp servers, 
> not
> by your own connection.
>
> *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
>
> Take care,
> Sina
>
> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number 
> of
> electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca 
> [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
>
> Karen,
>
> You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
> other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate 
> those
> precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and then 
> move
> that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its ftp facility,
> but it might take forever over a dialup link.
>
> If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
> call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C", assuming
> you had the necessary access permissions and such.
>
> Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although 
> nettamer
> is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize limits.
>
> Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you would 
> be
> home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP client, move them
> to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
>
> My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively to
> backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily 
> redundant.
> I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
>
> Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I have 
> a
> DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just in case,
> but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own situation, I
> cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return to DOS and
> Nettamer.
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Sina Bahram]

There ya go....

Then is there a linux tool that can do fxp for her?

 Take care,
Sina

No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 
-----Original Message-----
From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
On Behalf Of nick G
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 9:58 PM
To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?

The Tool itself is called FlashFXP.  FXP is the protacall.
Thanks,
Nick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sina Bahram" <sbahram@nc.rr.com>
To: "'Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.'" 
<speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 9:01 PM
Subject: RE: Linux and data storage?


> If I may humbly suggest?
>
> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows someone 
> to
> connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and then say, FTP A,
> copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit back and let the 
> data
> packets flow...it doesn't go through your system at all: so you could
> transfer information at any speed, only limited by the two ftp servers, 
> not
> by your own connection.
>
> *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
>
> Take care,
> Sina
>
> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number 
> of
> electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca 
> [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
>
> Karen,
>
> You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
> other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate 
> those
> precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and then 
> move
> that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its ftp facility,
> but it might take forever over a dialup link.
>
> If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
> call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C", assuming
> you had the necessary access permissions and such.
>
> Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although 
> nettamer
> is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize limits.
>
> Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you would 
> be
> home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP client, move them
> to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
>
> My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively to
> backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily 
> redundant.
> I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
>
> Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I have

> a
> DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just in case,
> but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own situation, I
> cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return to DOS and
> Nettamer.
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

What do you mean "Is there a Linux equivalent?"

Have you forgotten where networking was invented? It certainly wasn't
invented on Windows, Sina. Sheesh. What a question.

This is trivial on Linux. We've done it for years. There are several
ways to accomplish it.

Get a clue.

Sina Bahram writes:
> If I may humbly suggest?
> 
> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows someone to
> connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and then say, FTP A,
> copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit back and let the data
> packets flow...it doesn't go through your system at all: so you could
> transfer information at any speed, only limited by the two ftp servers, not
> by your own connection.
> 
> *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
> 
> Take care,
> Sina
> 
> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
> electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
> 
> Karen,
> 
> You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
> other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate those
> precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and then move
> that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its ftp facility,
> but it might take forever over a dialup link.
> 
> If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
> call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C", assuming
> you had the necessary access permissions and such.
> 
> Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although nettamer
> is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize limits.
> 
> Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you would be
> home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP client, move them
> to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
> 
> My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively to
> backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily redundant.
> I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
> 
> Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I have a
> DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just in case,
> but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own situation, I
> cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return to DOS and
> Nettamer.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Sina Bahram]

Thank you for that ever so polite answer Janina *smile*

You are, as always, as helpful as ever.

Have a nice day.

Take care,
Sina

No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 
-----Original Message-----
From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 2:15 PM
To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?

What do you mean "Is there a Linux equivalent?"

Have you forgotten where networking was invented? It certainly wasn't
invented on Windows, Sina. Sheesh. What a question.

This is trivial on Linux. We've done it for years. There are several ways to
accomplish it.

Get a clue.

Sina Bahram writes:
> If I may humbly suggest?
> 
> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows 
> someone to connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and 
> then say, FTP A, copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit 
> back and let the data packets flow...it doesn't go through your system 
> at all: so you could transfer information at any speed, only limited 
> by the two ftp servers, not by your own connection.
> 
> *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
> 
> Take care,
> Sina
> 
> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large 
> number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca 
> [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
> 
> Karen,
> 
> You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, 
> the other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to 
> aggregate those precious files into one archive, assuming you have the 
> space, and then move that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve 
> it with its ftp facility, but it might take forever over a dialup link.
> 
> If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your 
> desktop, call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system 
> C", assuming you had the necessary access permissions and such.
> 
> Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although 
> nettamer is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize
limits.
> 
> Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you 
> would be home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP 
> client, move them to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
> 
> My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively 
> to backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily
redundant.
> I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
> 
> Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I 
> have a DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, 
> just in case, but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my 
> own situation, I cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to 
> return to DOS and Nettamer.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Frankly, Sina, I really don't care whether you like my posts or not.

Point is, your advice isn't very good in this instance, to put it
bluntly. 

Shell World already has all the tools shee needs. No need to go looking
for some application to install on some Windows machine.

There are times, Sinna, when bad help is less helpful than keeping
quiet. Frankly, I consider any advice that says "go get Windows" to be
pretty bad advice, especially on this list.

So, if you feel put upon by me, you should.


Sina Bahram writes:
> Thank you for that ever so polite answer Janina *smile*
> 
> You are, as always, as helpful as ever.
> 
> Have a nice day.
> 
> Take care,
> Sina
> 
> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
> electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 2:15 PM
> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
> 
> What do you mean "Is there a Linux equivalent?"
> 
> Have you forgotten where networking was invented? It certainly wasn't
> invented on Windows, Sina. Sheesh. What a question.
> 
> This is trivial on Linux. We've done it for years. There are several ways to
> accomplish it.
> 
> Get a clue.
> 
> Sina Bahram writes:
> > If I may humbly suggest?
> > 
> > Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows 
> > someone to connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and 
> > then say, FTP A, copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit 
> > back and let the data packets flow...it doesn't go through your system 
> > at all: so you could transfer information at any speed, only limited 
> > by the two ftp servers, not by your own connection.
> > 
> > *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
> > 
> > Take care,
> > Sina
> > 
> > No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large 
> > number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca 
> > [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> > On Behalf Of Chuck Hallenbeck
> > Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 8:51 PM
> > To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> > Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
> > 
> > Karen,
> > 
> > You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, 
> > the other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to 
> > aggregate those precious files into one archive, assuming you have the 
> > space, and then move that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve 
> > it with its ftp facility, but it might take forever over a dialup link.
> > 
> > If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your 
> > desktop, call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system 
> > C", assuming you had the necessary access permissions and such.
> > 
> > Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although 
> > nettamer is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize
> limits.
> > 
> > Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you 
> > would be home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP 
> > client, move them to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
> > 
> > My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively 
> > to backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily
> redundant.
> > I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
> > 
> > Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I 
> > have a DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, 
> > just in case, but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my 
> > own situation, I cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to 
> > return to DOS and Nettamer.
> > 
> > Chuck
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> -- 
> 	
> 				Janina Sajka, Chair
> 				Accessibility Workgroup
> 				Free Standards Group (FSG)
> 
> janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Sina Bahram]

Hi Janina,

Please point out where I recommended the installation of, the use of, the
installing upon, or any other permutation of Windows? I said I was familiar
with a Windows tool, and in fact...if you refer to my post: I asked for the
linux equivalent: for Karen, and also for my own edification.

Please explain where I recommended Windows?

Take care,
Sina

No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 
-----Original Message-----
From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 2:51 PM
To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?

Frankly, Sina, I really don't care whether you like my posts or not.

Point is, your advice isn't very good in this instance, to put it bluntly. 

Shell World already has all the tools shee needs. No need to go looking for
some application to install on some Windows machine.

There are times, Sinna, when bad help is less helpful than keeping quiet.
Frankly, I consider any advice that says "go get Windows" to be pretty bad
advice, especially on this list.

So, if you feel put upon by me, you should.


Sina Bahram writes:
> Thank you for that ever so polite answer Janina *smile*
> 
> You are, as always, as helpful as ever.
> 
> Have a nice day.
> 
> Take care,
> Sina
> 
> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large 
> number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca 
> [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 2:15 PM
> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
> 
> What do you mean "Is there a Linux equivalent?"
> 
> Have you forgotten where networking was invented? It certainly wasn't 
> invented on Windows, Sina. Sheesh. What a question.
> 
> This is trivial on Linux. We've done it for years. There are several 
> ways to accomplish it.
> 
> Get a clue.
> 
> Sina Bahram writes:
> > If I may humbly suggest?
> > 
> > Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows 
> > someone to connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and 
> > then say, FTP A, copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is 
> > sit back and let the data packets flow...it doesn't go through your 
> > system at all: so you could transfer information at any speed, only 
> > limited by the two ftp servers, not by your own connection.
> > 
> > *shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?
> > 
> > Take care,
> > Sina
> > 
> > No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large 
> > number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Sina Bahram writes:
> Hi Janina,
> 
> Please point out where I recommended the installation of, the use of, the
> installing upon, or any other permutation of Windows? I said I was
> familiar

No, that's not what you said. Your words exactly:

"If I may humbly suggest?

Sounds like a recommendation to me.

Find your message at:

http://braille.uwo.ca/pipermail/speakup/2004-September/030120.html

You may want to spin it differently now that you've been challenged on
it, but I'm not going to continue down this road with you because it's
fruitless. It's not my point to piss you off. As I said, bad advice is
often worse than no advice at all. The above referenced email is clearly
a suggestion for a particular tool. It may be sufficient for the task,
but it's by no means the best, or even the only choice. If you don't
know a Linux answer on a Linux list, perhaps you might wait and learn
something rather than hijacking the thread and the list.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

nope,
suggest means well suggest.
if the  question had been or if there had been no question,
a recommendation might have be considered as to have been implied.
assuming one is reading more into the he sentence than needful, as you seem to 
have been doing.
That the word suggestion was used, and as a question, was not or does not 
to me imply a recommendation.
It was directed to me.
Karen
as Miss Teach

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> Sina Bahram writes:
>> Hi Janina,
>>
>> Please point out where I recommended the installation of, the use of, the
>> installing upon, or any other permutation of Windows? I said I was
>> familiar
>
> No, that's not what you said. Your words exactly:
>
> "If I may humbly suggest?
>
> Sounds like a recommendation to me.
>
> Find your message at:
>
> http://braille.uwo.ca/pipermail/speakup/2004-September/030120.html
>
> You may want to spin it differently now that you've been challenged on
> it, but I'm not going to continue down this road with you because it's
> fruitless. It's not my point to piss you off. As I said, bad advice is
> often worse than no advice at all. The above referenced email is clearly
> a suggestion for a particular tool. It may be sufficient for the task,
> but it's by no means the best, or even the only choice. If you don't
> know a Linux answer on a Linux list, perhaps you might wait and learn
> something rather than hijacking the thread and the list.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Karen Lewellen writes:
> nope,
> suggest means well suggest.
> if the  question had been or if there had been no question,
> a recommendation might have be considered as to have been implied.

Well, let's try the dictionary. May I suggest Wordnet's #1, #3, and
possibly #5 would apply as well.

May I also note that your interpretation is #2 on the word list order,
and mine is #1?

dict suggest
3 definitions found

>From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]:

  Suggest \Sug*gest"\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. {Suggested}; p. pr. &
     vb. n. {Suggesting}.] [L. suggestus, p. p. of suggerere to
     put under, furnish, suggest; sub under + gerere to carry, to
     bring. See {Jest}.]
     1. To introduce indirectly to the thoughts; to cause to be
        thought of, usually by the agency of other objects.

              Some ideas . . . are suggested to the mind by all
              the ways of sensation and reflection. --Locke.

     2. To propose with difference or modesty; to hint; to
        intimate; as, to suggest a difficulty.

     3. To seduce; to prompt to evil; to tempt. [Obs.]

              Knowing that tender youth is soon suggested. --Shak.

     4. To inform secretly. [Obs.]

     Syn: To hint; allude to; refer to; insinuate.

>From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]:

  Suggest \Sug*gest"\, v. i.
     To make suggestions; to tempt. [Obs.]

           And ever weaker grows through acted crime, Or
           seeming-genial, venial fault, Recurring and suggesting
           still.                                   --Tennyson.

>From WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]:

  suggest
       v 1: make a proposal, declare a plan for something [syn:
{propose},
             {advise}]
       2: imply as a possibility; "The evidence suggests a need for
          more clarification" [syn: {intimate}]
       3: drop a hint; intimate by a hint [syn: {hint}]
       4: suggest the necessity of an intervention; in medicine;
          "Tetracycline is indicated in such cases" [syn: {indicate}]
          [ant: {contraindicate}]
       5: call to mind or evoke [syn: {evoke}, {paint a picture}]

> assuming one is reading more into the he sentence than needful, as you seem 
> to have been doing.
> That the word suggestion was used, and as a question, was not or does not 
> to me imply a recommendation.
> It was directed to me.
> Karen
> as Miss Teach

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

wrong again,
My definition as it was my question involving my situation is numberone in 
the only dictionary that mattershere.


On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> Karen Lewellen writes:
>> nope,
>> suggest means well suggest.
>> if the  question had been or if there had been no question,
>> a recommendation might have be considered as to have been implied.
>
> Well, let's try the dictionary. May I suggest Wordnet's #1, #3, and
> possibly #5 would apply as well.
>
> May I also note that your interpretation is #2 on the word list order,
> and mine is #1?
>
> dict suggest
> 3 definitions found
>
>> From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]:
>
>  Suggest \Sug*gest"\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. {Suggested}; p. pr. &
>     vb. n. {Suggesting}.] [L. suggestus, p. p. of suggerere to
>     put under, furnish, suggest; sub under + gerere to carry, to
>     bring. See {Jest}.]
>     1. To introduce indirectly to the thoughts; to cause to be
>        thought of, usually by the agency of other objects.
>
>              Some ideas . . . are suggested to the mind by all
>              the ways of sensation and reflection. --Locke.
>
>     2. To propose with difference or modesty; to hint; to
>        intimate; as, to suggest a difficulty.
>
>     3. To seduce; to prompt to evil; to tempt. [Obs.]
>
>              Knowing that tender youth is soon suggested. --Shak.
>
>     4. To inform secretly. [Obs.]
>
>     Syn: To hint; allude to; refer to; insinuate.
>
>> From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]:
>
>  Suggest \Sug*gest"\, v. i.
>     To make suggestions; to tempt. [Obs.]
>
>           And ever weaker grows through acted crime, Or
>           seeming-genial, venial fault, Recurring and suggesting
>           still.                                   --Tennyson.
>
>> From WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]:
>
>  suggest
>       v 1: make a proposal, declare a plan for something [syn:
> {propose},
>             {advise}]
>       2: imply as a possibility; "The evidence suggests a need for
>          more clarification" [syn: {intimate}]
>       3: drop a hint; intimate by a hint [syn: {hint}]
>       4: suggest the necessity of an intervention; in medicine;
>          "Tetracycline is indicated in such cases" [syn: {indicate}]
>          [ant: {contraindicate}]
>       5: call to mind or evoke [syn: {evoke}, {paint a picture}]
>
>> assuming one is reading more into the he sentence than needful, as you seem
>> to have been doing.
>> That the word suggestion was used, and as a question, was not or does not
>> to me imply a recommendation.
>> It was directed to me.
>> Karen
>> as Miss Teach
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Sounds like Humpty Dumpty logic, actually.

"When I use a word, it means precisely what I mean it to mean, no more,
no less."

That really helps, now, doesn't it?

Karen Lewellen writes:
> wrong again,
> My definition as it was my question involving my situation is numberone in 
> the only dictionary that mattershere.
> 
> 
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> 
> >Karen Lewellen writes:
> >>nope,
> >>suggest means well suggest.
> >>if the  question had been or if there had been no question,
> >>a recommendation might have be considered as to have been implied.
> >
> >Well, let's try the dictionary. May I suggest Wordnet's #1, #3, and
> >possibly #5 would apply as well.
> >
> >May I also note that your interpretation is #2 on the word list order,
> >and mine is #1?
> >
> >dict suggest
> >3 definitions found
> >
> >>From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]:
> >
> > Suggest \Sug*gest"\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. {Suggested}; p. pr. &
> >    vb. n. {Suggesting}.] [L. suggestus, p. p. of suggerere to
> >    put under, furnish, suggest; sub under + gerere to carry, to
> >    bring. See {Jest}.]
> >    1. To introduce indirectly to the thoughts; to cause to be
> >       thought of, usually by the agency of other objects.
> >
> >             Some ideas . . . are suggested to the mind by all
> >             the ways of sensation and reflection. --Locke.
> >
> >    2. To propose with difference or modesty; to hint; to
> >       intimate; as, to suggest a difficulty.
> >
> >    3. To seduce; to prompt to evil; to tempt. [Obs.]
> >
> >             Knowing that tender youth is soon suggested. --Shak.
> >
> >    4. To inform secretly. [Obs.]
> >
> >    Syn: To hint; allude to; refer to; insinuate.
> >
> >>From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]:
> >
> > Suggest \Sug*gest"\, v. i.
> >    To make suggestions; to tempt. [Obs.]
> >
> >          And ever weaker grows through acted crime, Or
> >          seeming-genial, venial fault, Recurring and suggesting
> >          still.                                   --Tennyson.
> >
> >>From WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]:
> >
> > suggest
> >      v 1: make a proposal, declare a plan for something [syn:
> >{propose},
> >            {advise}]
> >      2: imply as a possibility; "The evidence suggests a need for
> >         more clarification" [syn: {intimate}]
> >      3: drop a hint; intimate by a hint [syn: {hint}]
> >      4: suggest the necessity of an intervention; in medicine;
> >         "Tetracycline is indicated in such cases" [syn: {indicate}]
> >         [ant: {contraindicate}]
> >      5: call to mind or evoke [syn: {evoke}, {paint a picture}]
> >
> >>assuming one is reading more into the he sentence than needful, as you 
> >>seem
> >>to have been doing.
> >>That the word suggestion was used, and as a question, was not or does not
> >>to me imply a recommendation.
> >>It was directed to me.
> >>Karen
> >>as Miss Teach
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Speakup mailing list
> >Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Sina Bahram]

Hi Janina,

Sina Bahram said:

Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows someone to
connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and then say, FTP A,
copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit back and let the data
packets flow...it doesn't go through your system at all: so you could
transfer information at any speed, only limited by the two ftp servers, not
by your own connection.

Then Sina Bahram said:

*shrug* is there a linux equivalent to this tool/protocall?

Which of course we know there is. Again...where is my recommendation of
Windows?

That is a direct quote...no spinning at all. Please point it out. As for
hijacking the thread, I believe you have done a wonderful job of this by
somehow convincing yourself that I made a recommendation which I did not,
and then criticising me on it numerous times.

By the way...i'm not pissed off. In fact, by the tone of your emails: it
seems you are the one who is upset. I can simply shrug off a
misunderstanding and absolutely not worry about it, but you continue to use
an acusatory tone, and act as if I have done something wrong.

Thank you for your suggestion to sit back and learn something: I constantly
learn things on this list, and I'm sorry that your attitude is one that does
not encourage learning or educated discussion, but rather one of baseless
acusations and false claims.

Take care,
Sina
 
No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 
-----Original Message-----
From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 4:21 PM
To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?

Sina Bahram writes:
> Hi Janina,
> 
> Please point out where I recommended the installation of, the use of, 
> the installing upon, or any other permutation of Windows? I said I was 
> familiar

No, that's not what you said. Your words exactly:

"If I may humbly suggest?

Sounds like a recommendation to me.

Find your message at:

http://braille.uwo.ca/pipermail/speakup/2004-September/030120.html

You may want to spin it differently now that you've been challenged on it,
but I'm not going to continue down this road with you because it's
fruitless. It's not my point to piss you off. As I said, bad advice is often
worse than no advice at all. The above referenced email is clearly a
suggestion for a particular tool. It may be sufficient for the task, but
it's by no means the best, or even the only choice. If you don't know a
Linux answer on a Linux list, perhaps you might wait and learn something
rather than hijacking the thread and the list.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Fascinating, why would you delete your first sentence from your post
while resending it this time?

Have you bethought yourself?

Sina Bahram writes:
> Hi Janina,
> 
> Sina Bahram said:
> 
> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows someone to
> connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and then say, FTP A,
> copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit back and let the data
> packets flow...it doesn't go through your system at all: so you could
> transfer information at any speed, only limited by the two ftp servers, not
> by your own connection.

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Sina Bahram]

Hi Janina,

Because you had already quoted it.

Where's your response...i only see the complaint about not quoting my first
sentence?

Take care,
Sina

No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 
-----Original Message-----
From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 7:04 PM
To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?

Fascinating, why would you delete your first sentence from your post while
resending it this time?

Have you bethought yourself?

Sina Bahram writes:
> Hi Janina,
> 
> Sina Bahram said:
> 
> Fxp, or flash xp as I think it is...is a windows tool that allows 
> someone to connect to one ftp, then connect to the other ftp...and 
> then say, FTP A, copy stuff to FTP B....then all you have to do is sit 
> back and let the data packets flow...it doesn't go through your system 
> at all: so you could transfer information at any speed, only limited 
> by the two ftp servers, not by your own connection.

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Sina Bahram writes:
> Hi Janina,
> 
> Please point out where I recommended the installation of, the use of, the
> installing upon, or any other permutation of Windows? I said I was familiar
> with a Windows tool, and in fact...if you refer to my post: I asked for the
> linux equivalent: for Karen, and also for my own edification.
> 
> Please explain where I recommended Windows?

So, how do you now spin your "shrug?"

RE: Linux and data storage?

[Sina Bahram]

How do you mean Janina?

Again...you just requoted me without saying anything except asking me how I
would change my opinion.

I ask the same question which you are unable to answer.

Where did I recommend the use of Windows?

This is not a hard question...you faulted me for this: I submit I did not do
it. I think this is inappropriate on your part.

Take care,
Sina 

No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 
-----Original Message-----
From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 7:02 PM
To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?

Sina Bahram writes:
> Hi Janina,
> 
> Please point out where I recommended the installation of, the use of, 
> the installing upon, or any other permutation of Windows? I said I was 
> familiar with a Windows tool, and in fact...if you refer to my post: I 
> asked for the linux equivalent: for Karen, and also for my own
edification.
> 
> Please explain where I recommended Windows?

So, how do you now spin your "shrug?"

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Yes, Sina, I answered you. If you choose to think differently, that is
your perogative. 

PS: Expect the same in the future if I'm around and you cook up some
wacky advice. I'm far more interested in good tech support on this list
than I am in smoothing ruffled feathers.


Sina Bahram writes:
> How do you mean Janina?
> 
> Again...you just requoted me without saying anything except asking me how I
> would change my opinion.
> 
> I ask the same question which you are unable to answer.
> 
> Where did I recommend the use of Windows?
> 
> This is not a hard question...you faulted me for this: I submit I did not do
> it. I think this is inappropriate on your part.
> 
> Take care,
> Sina 
> 
> No trees were destroyed in sending this message; however, a large number of
> electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
> On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 7:02 PM
> To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.
> Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?
> 
> Sina Bahram writes:
> > Hi Janina,
> > 
> > Please point out where I recommended the installation of, the use of, 
> > the installing upon, or any other permutation of Windows? I said I was 
> > familiar with a Windows tool, and in fact...if you refer to my post: I 
> > asked for the linux equivalent: for Karen, and also for my own
> edification.
> > 
> > Please explain where I recommended Windows?
> 
> So, how do you now spin your "shrug?"
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

Janina

Sina did not suggest use of windows.  He said, that windows can do this: 
how is it done in Linux?

Your condecention and insults, were not called for in this case, 
Janina--you misread his original message.  You are the only one who 
thought he suggested using Windows.  I also notice, that, while in your 
bluster, you state the inferiority of Windows, and the application 
mentioned, you never answered Sina's question, about how it is done in 
Linux.

Saying something is so, and being unable or unwilling to explain it, 
serves absolutely no purpose.

Is it possible that you could have been at fault here, not Sina?


On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> Frankly, Sina, I really don't care whether you like my posts or not.
>
> Point is, your advice isn't very good in this instance, to put it
> bluntly.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

I think you misread me, then. I did say how to do it in Linux. I said
rsync would be preferred. I also talked about ftp, particularly the bg
facility of ncftp.

Besides, she asked whether it was easy to do in Linux. That would make a
Windows suggestion unresponsive at best.

So, Luke, have you canvased all readers of the list to isolate me as the
only one who misunderstood? Bunk.

Luke Davis writes:
> Janina
> 
> Sina did not suggest use of windows.  He said, that windows can do this: 
> how is it done in Linux?
> 
> Your condecention and insults, were not called for in this case, 
> Janina--you misread his original message.  You are the only one who 
> thought he suggested using Windows.  I also notice, that, while in your 
> bluster, you state the inferiority of Windows, and the application 
> mentioned, you never answered Sina's question, about how it is done in 
> Linux.
> 
> Saying something is so, and being unable or unwilling to explain it, 
> serves absolutely no purpose.
> 
> Is it possible that you could have been at fault here, not Sina?
> 
> 
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> 
> >Frankly, Sina, I really don't care whether you like my posts or not.
> >
> >Point is, your advice isn't very good in this instance, to put it
> >bluntly.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> I think you misread me, then. I did say how to do it in Linux. I said
> rsync would be preferred. I also talked about ftp, particularly the bg
> facility of ncftp.

My bad, then.  If Rsync can do what ever kind of transfers are done by the 
windows app mentioned, then fine.

> Besides, she asked whether it was easy to do in Linux. That would make a
> Windows suggestion unresponsive at best.

<sie> I saw no Windows suggestion.  This is pointless.

> So, Luke, have you canvased all readers of the list to isolate me as the
> only one who misunderstood? Bunk.

No, I have canvased all responders, by their public comments.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Luke Davis writes:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
mm> 
> >I think you misread me, then. I did say how to do it in Linux. I said
> >rsync would be preferred. I also talked about ftp, particularly the bg
> >facility of ncftp.
> 
> My bad, then.  If Rsync can do what ever kind of transfers are done by the 
> windows app mentioned, then fine.
> 
> >Besides, she asked whether it was easy to do in Linux. That would make a
> >Windows suggestion unresponsive at best.
> 
> <sie> I saw no Windows suggestion.  This is pointless.
So, are we agreed to stop it?
> 

> >So, Luke, have you canvased all readers of the list to isolate me as the
> >only one who misunderstood? Bunk.
> 
> No, I have canvased all responders, by their public comments.
> 
You and him so far equals all.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

>> <sie> I saw no Windows suggestion.  This is pointless.
> So, are we agreed to stop it?

You will not conceed, I will not conceed; we have no choice but to stop 
it.  There is no new data upon which further debate could be based.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Would it indeed janina?
  the mention of windows not possibly be easy y given my personal array of 
associates who use windows, compared to those that use Linux?
You are enough of an expert on my personal  situation to know how many 
computers I have, and just how i might define easy?
It seems you were not only misunderstanding, you were making mind reading 
assumptions too.  very bad ones at that.

Indeed Luc is correct.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> I think you misread me, then. I did say how to do it in Linux. I said
> rsync would be preferred. I also talked about ftp, particularly the bg
> facility of ncftp.
>
> Besides, she asked whether it was easy to do in Linux. That would make a
> Windows suggestion unresponsive at best.
>
> So, Luke, have you canvased all readers of the list to isolate me as the
> only one who misunderstood? Bunk.
>
> Luke Davis writes:
>> Janina
>>
>> Sina did not suggest use of windows.  He said, that windows can do this:
>> how is it done in Linux?
>>
>> Your condecention and insults, were not called for in this case,
>> Janina--you misread his original message.  You are the only one who
>> thought he suggested using Windows.  I also notice, that, while in your
>> bluster, you state the inferiority of Windows, and the application
>> mentioned, you never answered Sina's question, about how it is done in
>> Linux.
>>
>> Saying something is so, and being unable or unwilling to explain it,
>> serves absolutely no purpose.
>>
>> Is it possible that you could have been at fault here, not Sina?
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
>>
>>> Frankly, Sina, I really don't care whether you like my posts or not.
>>>
>>> Point is, your advice isn't very good in this instance, to put it
>>> bluntly.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> -- 
>
> 				Janina Sajka, Chair
> 				Accessibility Workgroup
> 				Free Standards Group (FSG)
>
> janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Karen Lewellen writes:
> Would it indeed janina?
>  the mention of windows not possibly be easy y given my personal array of 
> associates who use windows, compared to those that use Linux?
> You are enough of an expert on my personal  situation to know how many 
> computers I have, and just how i might define easy?
> It seems you were not only misunderstanding, you were making mind reading 
> assumptions too.  very bad ones at that.
Huh? Karen, what you posted was:

http://braille.uwo.ca/pipermail/speakup/2004-September/030116.html

"
"My question has two parts.
first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the
workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with
relative ease,  and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage
be
easy to do?""

So, I have no notion of what you meant beyond what you said. And,
frankly, it's nothing to me. As you yourself said, it's your data.
As far as I'm concerned, you're welcome to copy it longhand, if you
prefer.
There are people for whom that would be easier, I'm sure.

> 
> Indeed Luc is correct.
> Karen
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> 
> >I think you misread me, then. I did say how to do it in Linux. I said
> >rsync would be preferred. I also talked about ftp, particularly the bg
> >facility of ncftp.
> >
> >Besides, she asked whether it was easy to do in Linux. That would make a
> >Windows suggestion unresponsive at best.
> >
> >So, Luke, have you canvased all readers of the list to isolate me as the
> >only one who misunderstood? Bunk.
> >
> >Luke Davis writes:
> >>Janina
> >>
> >>Sina did not suggest use of windows.  He said, that windows can do this:
> >>how is it done in Linux?
> >>
> >>Your condecention and insults, were not called for in this case,
> >>Janina--you misread his original message.  You are the only one who
> >>thought he suggested using Windows.  I also notice, that, while in your
> >>bluster, you state the inferiority of Windows, and the application
> >>mentioned, you never answered Sina's question, about how it is done in
> >>Linux.
> >>
> >>Saying something is so, and being unable or unwilling to explain it,
> >>serves absolutely no purpose.
> >>
> >>Is it possible that you could have been at fault here, not Sina?
> >>
> >>
> >>On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> >>
> >>>Frankly, Sina, I really don't care whether you like my posts or not.
> >>>
> >>>Point is, your advice isn't very good in this instance, to put it
> >>>bluntly.
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Speakup mailing list
> >>Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >-- 
> >
> >				Janina Sajka, Chair
> >				Accessibility Workgroup
> >				Free Standards Group (FSG)
> >
> >janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Speakup mailing list
> >Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Hi,
I would not use nettamer's ftp facilities for this.  i have a great ftp 
client called agents, which is fast and clean, but again i am using a 
dialup so am  limited via the 56k connection speed.
would tar work with my isp as a ppp/ip connection, and in dos?
Not holding on to dos so much as seeking a fast solution.
as a telnet to shellworld, nettamer is wonderful.  as the best solution, 
I realize its drawbacks, but I know no one with the Linux expertise at 
this end.
So while the Linux setup with a high speed connection sounds marvelous, I 
am still short a technical mind for this.
Thanks for the tar idea, where might i find this?
Karen

On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Chuck Hallenbeck wrote:

> Karen,
>
> You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
> other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate
> those precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and
> then move that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its
> ftp facility, but it might take forever over a dialup link.
>
> If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
> call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C",
> assuming you had the necessary access permissions and such.
>
> Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although
> nettamer is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize
> limits.
>
> Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you
> would be home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP
> client, move them to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
>
> My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively
> to backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily
> redundant. I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
>
> Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I
> have a DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just
> in case, but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own
> situation, I cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return
> to DOS and Nettamer.
>
> Chuck
>
>
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
>> I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and 
>> thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up 
>> the machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming 
>> through.
>> In any case, I do use a Linux shell service extensively.  I fear almost 
>> too extensively, as you will understand in a moment.
>> The OS on the system i use mostly is dos, and I use nettamer to telnet to 
>> my Linux shell.
>> In the workspace of my shell service i have a great deal of irreplaceable 
>> files and programs.  I eave them up here, for ease, but I just was 
>> reminded that this may be a venerable state of affairs.
>> Fortunately when the server went down nothing was lost or so it seems, 
>> but I have a serious factor to consider.
>> My question has two parts.
>> first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the 
>> workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with 
>> relative ease, and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
>> second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage be 
>> easy to do?
>> As I said before I do not have such a machine, but this has shaken me up 
>> enough that if a full Linux or Linux/dos or Linux/windows machine would 
>> give me some firm safe backup, I will have to start advertising for 
>> someone to build this for me and encurl the expense.
>> I have too busy a professional life to do this myself, and would rather 
>> pay someone with the skills than lose valuable time trying to re-invent 
>> the wheel.
>> Thanks,
>> Karen
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> 
>
> -- 
> The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (97% of Full)
> Home page at http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
> Speakfreely address 24.105.197.112:2074
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

I don't know specifically about her shell provider, but it would be
customary that she could build her .tar.bz2 archive under /tmp and then
rscync it off.

I'm willing to bet, though, that she has far less than a CD ROM's worth
of data. Perhaps we'll soon see.

Chuck Hallenbeck writes:
> Karen,
> 
> You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
> other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate
> those precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and
> then move that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its
> ftp facility, but it might take forever over a dialup link.
> 
> If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
> call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C",
> assuming you had the necessary access permissions and such.
> 
> Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although
> nettamer is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize
> limits.
> 
> Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you
> would be home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP
> client, move them to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
> 
> My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively
> to backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily
> redundant. I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
> 
> Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I
> have a DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just
> in case, but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own
> situation, I cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return
> to DOS and Nettamer.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> 
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
> 
> >Hi all,
> >This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
> >I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and 
> >thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up 
> >the machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming 
> >through.
> >In any case, I do use a Linux shell service extensively.  I fear almost 
> >too extensively, as you will understand in a moment.
> >The OS on the system i use mostly is dos, and I use nettamer to telnet to 
> >my Linux shell.
> >In the workspace of my shell service i have a great deal of irreplaceable 
> >files and programs.  I eave them up here, for ease, but I just was 
> >reminded that this may be a venerable state of affairs.
> >Fortunately when the server went down nothing was lost or so it seems, but 
> >I have a serious factor to consider.
> >My question has two parts.
> >first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the 
> >workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with 
> >relative ease, and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
> >second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage be 
> >easy to do?
> >As I said before I do not have such a machine, but this has shaken me up 
> >enough that if a full Linux or Linux/dos or Linux/windows machine would 
> >give me some firm safe backup, I will have to start advertising for 
> >someone to build this for me and encurl the expense.
> >I have too busy a professional life to do this myself, and would rather 
> >pay someone with the skills than lose valuable time trying to re-invent 
> >the wheel.
> >Thanks,
> >Karen
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Speakup mailing list
> >Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> -- 
> The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (97% of Full)
> Home page at http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
> Speakfreely address 24.105.197.112:2074
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Janina,
We shall not see quite yet grin.  It seems that there is no -m option in 
our edition of the "du" program.
  I ran it in this way:
du -ms
I was told that  following:
illegal usage du -m
with a list of other command line options.
I have asked our system administrator how the program works for us.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> I don't know specifically about her shell provider, but it would be
> customary that she could build her .tar.bz2 archive under /tmp and then
> rscync it off.
>
> I'm willing to bet, though, that she has far less than a CD ROM's worth
> of data. Perhaps we'll soon see.
>
> Chuck Hallenbeck writes:
>> Karen,
>>
>> You have two bottlenecks, seems to me. One is your connection speed, the
>> other is nettamer. You can use "tar" on your ISP's system to aggregate
>> those precious files into one archive, assuming you have the space, and
>> then move that archive somewhere. Nettamer could retrieve it with its
>> ftp facility, but it might take forever over a dialup link.
>>
>> If you had a linux desktop, you could use an ftp client on your desktop,
>> call it "system A", to move files from "system B" to "system C",
>> assuming you had the necessary access permissions and such.
>>
>> Also, you could email stuff to yourself with attachments, although
>> nettamer is a little weird about attachments, and then you have filesize
>> limits.
>>
>> Finally, if you had a Linux desktop and a high speed connection you
>> would be home free. Just grab all those files quickly with an FTP
>> client, move them to your desktop, and burn them to a CD if you need to.
>>
>> My Linux system uses two 40 GB disks, one of which is used extensively
>> to backup stuff on the other. Not exactly a raid system, but heavily
>> redundant. I do use CD backups too once in a blue moon.
>>
>> Your DOS desktop has limited HD storage. A Linux desktop would not. I
>> have a DOS partition of 500 MB on each of my two 40 GB hard discs, just
>> in case, but have not booted into DOS in several years. For my own
>> situation, I cannot imagine ever being able (psychologically) to return
>> to DOS and Nettamer.
>>
>> Chuck
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
>>> I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and
>>> thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up
>>> the machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming
>>> through.
>>> In any case, I do use a Linux shell service extensively.  I fear almost
>>> too extensively, as you will understand in a moment.
>>> The OS on the system i use mostly is dos, and I use nettamer to telnet to
>>> my Linux shell.
>>> In the workspace of my shell service i have a great deal of irreplaceable
>>> files and programs.  I eave them up here, for ease, but I just was
>>> reminded that this may be a venerable state of affairs.
>>> Fortunately when the server went down nothing was lost or so it seems, but
>>> I have a serious factor to consider.
>>> My question has two parts.
>>> first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the
>>> workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with
>>> relative ease, and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
>>> second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage be
>>> easy to do?
>>> As I said before I do not have such a machine, but this has shaken me up
>>> enough that if a full Linux or Linux/dos or Linux/windows machine would
>>> give me some firm safe backup, I will have to start advertising for
>>> someone to build this for me and encurl the expense.
>>> I have too busy a professional life to do this myself, and would rather
>>> pay someone with the skills than lose valuable time trying to re-invent
>>> the wheel.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Karen
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Speakup mailing list
>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>>
>>
>> --
>> The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (97% of Full)
>> Home page at http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
>> Speakfreely address 24.105.197.112:2074
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> -- 
>
> 				Janina Sajka, Chair
> 				Accessibility Workgroup
> 				Free Standards Group (FSG)
>
> janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Yes, Luke was just point out that -m is not available on BSD.

But, you probably do have:

du --help

You should check from your prompt on shell world, but I suspect you can
just do:

du -s

and get a result in kilobytes. The -m just gives the result in
megabytes..

But, having also myself just looked at du --help, I can now ammend
something else I just said a minute ago. Instead of subtracting a total
for mail, do:

du -s -x mail/

to exclude the mail directory from the calculations.

So, get anything better with these commands?

Karen Lewellen writes:
> Janina,
> We shall not see quite yet grin.  It seems that there is no -m option in 
> our edition of the "du" program.
>  I ran it in this way:
> du -ms
> I was told that  following:
> illegal usage du -m
> with a list of other command line options.
> I have asked our system administrator how the program works for us.
> Karen

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Again you are incorrect.
kwota was far more informative than du was in any case.
again you are not knowledgeable as to shellworld's specific setup to 
contribute to this in my opinion.
Its my data, so my opinion is what matters in the long run grin.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> Yes, Luke was just point out that -m is not available on BSD.
>
> But, you probably do have:
>
> du --help
>
> You should check from your prompt on shell world, but I suspect you can
> just do:
>
> du -s
>
> and get a result in kilobytes. The -m just gives the result in
> megabytes..
>
> But, having also myself just looked at du --help, I can now ammend
> something else I just said a minute ago. Instead of subtracting a total
> for mail, do:
>
> du -s -x mail/
>
> to exclude the mail directory from the calculations.
>
> So, get anything better with these commands?
>
> Karen Lewellen writes:
>> Janina,
>> We shall not see quite yet grin.  It seems that there is no -m option in
>> our edition of the "du" program.
>>  I ran it in this way:
>> du -ms
>> I was told that  following:
>> illegal usage du -m
>> with a list of other command line options.
>> I have asked our system administrator how the program works for us.
>> Karen
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> kwota was far more informative than du was in any case.

They actually said about the same thing, which is what I was expecting.

1900 Megabytes at 1,000 byte kilobytes, is quite the same thing as 1.8 
gigabytes, in 1024 byte megabytes, which is what du gave you.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

well yes I know that, but I like the expression given better grin.


On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> kwota was far more informative than du was in any case.
>
> They actually said about the same thing, which is what I was expecting.
>
> 1900 Megabytes at 1,000 byte kilobytes, is quite the same thing as 1.8 
> gigabytes, in 1024 byte megabytes, which is what du gave you.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Yelavich]

On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 10:23:46AM EST, Karen Lewellen wrote:
> Hi all,
> This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
> I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and 
> thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up 
> the machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming 
> through.

Thats a shame, but I guess it can't be helped.

<Snip>
> first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the 
> workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with 
> relative ease,  and without taking all of the data on the entire system?

There is certainly a way of doing this, read below.

> second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage be 
> easy to do?

If you had a Linux machine locally, I.E one that you owned and used yourself,
it would be a lot easier to do, as the tools that I am thinking of are readily
available on Linux.

The tools I am thinking of, are the SSH suite of tools, particularly one command
being scp. This command allows you to copy data securely over a network
connection, by means of encryption.

You will have to investigate whether such tools are available for DOS, but if
there is, it will be easy to copy all the data over in one command, without
bringing the rest of the system with it.

The only problem might be that you may have to use tools other than net tamer
to connect to the net in order to use scp.

As I said earlier, if you have local access to a Linux machine, this would be
a hell of a lot easier to do.

I hope this helps.

Luke

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Hi,
I have no local access to a Linux  machine, as said.  However nettamer 
is not necessarily  the only way I can connect to the net.
I have all the connection information, so any program that is a stand 
alone ppp/ip, as with agents for example, can get me to the net.
I will ask about these tools in dos, and a connection method.
Thanks,
Karen


On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Yelavich wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 10:23:46AM EST, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
>> I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and
>> thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up
>> the machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming
>> through.
>
> Thats a shame, but I guess it can't be helped.
>
> <Snip>
>> first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the
>> workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with
>> relative ease,  and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
>
> There is certainly a way of doing this, read below.
>
>> second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage be
>> easy to do?
>
> If you had a Linux machine locally, I.E one that you owned and used yourself,
> it would be a lot easier to do, as the tools that I am thinking of are readily
> available on Linux.
>
> The tools I am thinking of, are the SSH suite of tools, particularly one command
> being scp. This command allows you to copy data securely over a network
> connection, by means of encryption.
>
> You will have to investigate whether such tools are available for DOS, but if
> there is, it will be easy to copy all the data over in one command, without
> bringing the rest of the system with it.
>
> The only problem might be that you may have to use tools other than net tamer
> to connect to the net in order to use scp.
>
> As I said earlier, if you have local access to a Linux machine, this would be
> a hell of a lot easier to do.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> Luke
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Yelavich wrote:

> The tools I am thinking of, are the SSH suite of tools, particularly one 
> command being scp. This command allows you to copy data securely over a 
> network connection, by means of encryption.

sftp, might be a better option, for several files.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

I don't know how sftp would be better?

1.)	You can specify a file mask to transfer multiple files with scp.

2.)	You can specify multiple source files with scp, and do so in one
command where sftp would require you to do one at a time if you didn't
use a file mask.

And, didn't we agree that the better strategy would be to tar and either
bun or gun zip the archive first?

Luke Davis writes:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Yelavich wrote:
> 
> >The tools I am thinking of, are the SSH suite of tools, particularly one 
> >command being scp. This command allows you to copy data securely over a 
> >network connection, by means of encryption.
> 
> sftp, might be a better option, for several files.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> I don't know how sftp would be better?

Six of one, half a duzzen...  Which ever usage type to which she is used, 
will be better.  Options, options, options.

> And, didn't we agree that the better strategy would be to tar and either
> bun or gun zip the archive first?

It would be easier than an rsync, not to mention less annoying to the 
system administrator, yes.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

I would tar even for an rsync.

To me rsync is the top tool because it checks that what was received is
a true copy of what was sent--more so than just byte count, time and
date.

And, it supports ssh.

Luke Davis writes:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> 
> >I don't know how sftp would be better?
> 
> Six of one, half a duzzen...  Which ever usage type to which she is used, 
> will be better.  Options, options, options.
> 
> >And, didn't we agree that the better strategy would be to tar and either
> >bun or gun zip the archive first?
> 
> It would be easier than an rsync, not to mention less annoying to the 
> system administrator, yes.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> I would tar even for an rsync.
> To me rsync is the top tool because it checks that what was received is
> a true copy of what was sent--more so than just byte count, time and
> date.

Oh yes, I forgot about that capability.  That does indeed give it the 
advantage.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

*we* agreed on no such thing.
I have no intention of risking a zip of any of these files, nor do i want 
to have to create alist.
I want a direct uninterrupted transfer of the entire contents of  my home 
directory here minus the shellworld programs themselves to a directory so 
created on the ftp area of my site to so store them as a backup.
no one said anything about ziping anything.
Tar was s mentioned before you came in this morning yes.


On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> I don't know how sftp would be better?
>
> 1.)	You can specify a file mask to transfer multiple files with scp.
>
> 2.)	You can specify multiple source files with scp, and do so in one
> command where sftp would require you to do one at a time if you didn't
> use a file mask.
>
> And, didn't we agree that the better strategy would be to tar and either
> bun or gun zip the archive first?
>
> Luke Davis writes:
>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Yelavich wrote:
>>
>>> The tools I am thinking of, are the SSH suite of tools, particularly one
>>> command being scp. This command allows you to copy data securely over a
>>> network connection, by means of encryption.
>>
>> sftp, might be a better option, for several files.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> -- 
>
> 				Janina Sajka, Chair
> 				Accessibility Workgroup
> 				Free Standards Group (FSG)
>
> janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> I have no intention of risking a zip of any of these files, nor do i want to

Risking a zip?  What does that mean?  Where is the risk?  Gnu Zip (not PK 
Zip), and Bzip2, are highly stable formats.
Tar is an archiving method used for decades on unix.  In fact, Linux uses 
bzip2 as its kernel format these days.

This exact method is how many of us who backup shellworld user data, do 
it, on a regular basis--tar archived into bzip, or gzip.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Much of this is music materials and the like which do not compress well 
when using those programs  as I have tried.
I do not want to chance it.
Call me a chicken if you wish but it is my data.  Will the methods 
suggested do this, no compression involved?
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> I have no intention of risking a zip of any of these files, nor do i want 
>> to
>
> Risking a zip?  What does that mean?  Where is the risk?  Gnu Zip (not PK 
> Zip), and Bzip2, are highly stable formats.
> Tar is an archiving method used for decades on unix.  In fact, Linux uses 
> bzip2 as its kernel format these days.
>
> This exact method is how many of us who backup shellworld user data, do it, 
> on a regular basis--tar archived into bzip, or gzip.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

You forget what tar is.  It adds everything together, so it compresses far 
better, than any of it would individually.
For example, a gig of text, and maybe a third of binary data, can compress 
down to about 350 MB.

Now, keep in mind the system: does Shellworld admin, want you moving a 
Gig of data across its connection, when there is a choice to compress it 
into a few hundred MB?

Yes, it is your data, but it is not your system.

You still haven't explained what the risk is.  Additionally, it is not as 
if the original data was not still there.

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> Much of this is music materials and the like which do not compress well when 
> using those programs  as I have tried.
> I do not want to chance it.
> Call me a chicken if you wish but it is my data.  Will the methods suggested 
> do this, no compression involved?
> Karen
>
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>> 
>>> I have no intention of risking a zip of any of these files, nor do i 
>>> want to
>> 
>> Risking a zip?  What does that mean?  Where is the risk?  Gnu Zip (not PK 
>> Zip), and Bzip2, are highly stable formats.
>> Tar is an archiving method used for decades on unix.  In fact, Linux uses 
>> bzip2 as its kernel format these days.
>> 
>> This exact method is how many of us who backup shellworld user data, do 
>> it, on a regular basis--tar archived into bzip, or gzip.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> 
>> 
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

I will have no problem transferring the data as i desire.   I have 200 gb 
of storage over there,  another 1.8 or so is not going to be noticed. 
Besides i hope it will be temporary with my taking it down to my own 
system at some point.

If janina is to be believed it is my system, I have two of them remember?
I plan to inform them that the data is going to be transfered, and as they 
have a rather simple idea of   the shell setup, light years behind 
shellworld,  transferring the data as i wish is what I pay for in a sense.
The risk is any of the data not being compressed properly, a chance with 
any such program, and one I choose not to take
yes the data is still here....now, but it might not have been very easily 
indeed.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

> You forget what tar is.  It adds everything together, so it compresses far 
> better, than any of it would individually.
> For example, a gig of text, and maybe a third of binary data, can compress 
> down to about 350 MB.
>
> Now, keep in mind the system: does Shellworld admin, want you moving a Gig of 
> data across its connection, when there is a choice to compress it into a few 
> hundred MB?
>
> Yes, it is your data, but it is not your system.
>
> You still haven't explained what the risk is.  Additionally, it is not as if 
> the original data was not still there.
>
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> Much of this is music materials and the like which do not compress well 
>> when using those programs  as I have tried.
>> I do not want to chance it.
>> Call me a chicken if you wish but it is my data.  Will the methods 
>> suggested do this, no compression involved?
>> Karen
>> 
>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:
>> 
>>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I have no intention of risking a zip of any of these files, nor do i 
>>>> want to
>>> 
>>> Risking a zip?  What does that mean?  Where is the risk?  Gnu Zip (not 
>>> PK Zip), and Bzip2, are highly stable formats.
>>> Tar is an archiving method used for decades on unix.  In fact, Linux 
>>> uses bzip2 as its kernel format these days.
>>> 
>>> This exact method is how many of us who backup shellworld user data, do 
>>> it, on a regular basis--tar archived into bzip, or gzip.
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Speakup mailing list
>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> 
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Chuck Hallenbeck]

Karen,

The choice of whether to compress or not is your choice, of course, but
you should know that the risk you are worried about is virtually
non-existent in most Linux users view. There is another downside to
transferring your data without compression. You will be transferring two
or three times as much data as you would if compressed, it will
therefore take two or three times as long, and will be two or three
times more likely to be encounter transmission errors, system
interruptions, and other acts of God. Those risks are small too, nearly
as small as compression/decompression failures. But the choice is yours,
and either way it will work.

Chuck

non-

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> I will have no problem transferring the data as i desire.   I have 200 gb of 
> storage over there,  another 1.8 or so is not going to be noticed. Besides i 
> hope it will be temporary with my taking it down to my own system at some 
> point.
>
> If janina is to be believed it is my system, I have two of them remember?
> I plan to inform them that the data is going to be transfered, and as they 
> have a rather simple idea of   the shell setup, light years behind 
> shellworld,  transferring the data as i wish is what I pay for in a sense.
> The risk is any of the data not being compressed properly, a chance with any 
> such program, and one I choose not to take
> yes the data is still here....now, but it might not have been very easily 
> indeed.
> Karen
>
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:
>
>> You forget what tar is.  It adds everything together, so it compresses far 
>> better, than any of it would individually.
>> For example, a gig of text, and maybe a third of binary data, can compress 
>> down to about 350 MB.
>> 
>> Now, keep in mind the system: does Shellworld admin, want you moving a Gig 
>> of data across its connection, when there is a choice to compress it into 
>> a few hundred MB?
>> 
>> Yes, it is your data, but it is not your system.
>> 
>> You still haven't explained what the risk is.  Additionally, it is not as 
>> if the original data was not still there.
>> 
>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>> 
>>> Much of this is music materials and the like which do not compress well 
>>> when using those programs  as I have tried.
>>> I do not want to chance it.
>>> Call me a chicken if you wish but it is my data.  Will the methods 
>>> suggested do this, no compression involved?
>>> Karen
>>> 
>>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I have no intention of risking a zip of any of these files, nor do i 
>>>>> want to
>>>> 
>>>> Risking a zip?  What does that mean?  Where is the risk?  Gnu Zip (not 
>>>> PK Zip), and Bzip2, are highly stable formats.
>>>> Tar is an archiving method used for decades on unix.  In fact, Linux 
>>>> uses bzip2 as its kernel format these days.
>>>> 
>>>> This exact method is how many of us who backup shellworld user data, 
>>>> do it, on a regular basis--tar archived into bzip, or gzip.
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Speakup mailing list
>>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Speakup mailing list
>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> 
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

-- 
The Moon is Full
Home page at http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
Speakfreely address 24.105.197.112:2074

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Thanks Chuck,
I wold rather run the risk of an act of God, than the risk of poorly 
compressed data.
As I have stated clearly, I am not as of yet a true Linux user save for my 
shell experiences.  i do, however, know that the people running my site's 
server have not installed everything nor everything correctly. i do not 
want a compressed file i cannot decompress later.
Also, When I want the data transfered to my own system, I can compress at 
that point.  I would know what decompression tools I have on my end 
at least, once I have a Linux system of some kind.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Chuck Hallenbeck wrote:

> Karen,
>
> The choice of whether to compress or not is your choice, of course, but
> you should know that the risk you are worried about is virtually
> non-existent in most Linux users view. There is another downside to
> transferring your data without compression. You will be transferring two
> or three times as much data as you would if compressed, it will
> therefore take two or three times as long, and will be two or three
> times more likely to be encounter transmission errors, system
> interruptions, and other acts of God. Those risks are small too, nearly
> as small as compression/decompression failures. But the choice is yours,
> and either way it will work.
>
> Chuck
>
> non-
>
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> I will have no problem transferring the data as i desire.   I have 200 gb 
>> of storage over there,  another 1.8 or so is not going to be noticed. 
>> Besides i hope it will be temporary with my taking it down to my own 
>> system at some point.
>> 
>> If janina is to be believed it is my system, I have two of them remember?
>> I plan to inform them that the data is going to be transfered, and as 
>> they have a rather simple idea of   the shell setup, light years behind 
>> shellworld,  transferring the data as i wish is what I pay for in a 
>> sense.
>> The risk is any of the data not being compressed properly, a chance with 
>> any such program, and one I choose not to take
>> yes the data is still here....now, but it might not have been very easily 
>> indeed.
>> Karen
>> 
>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:
>> 
>>> You forget what tar is.  It adds everything together, so it compresses 
>>> far better, than any of it would individually.
>>> For example, a gig of text, and maybe a third of binary data, can 
>>> compress down to about 350 MB.
>>> 
>>> Now, keep in mind the system: does Shellworld admin, want you moving a 
>>> Gig of data across its connection, when there is a choice to compress 
>>> it into a few hundred MB?
>>> 
>>> Yes, it is your data, but it is not your system.
>>> 
>>> You still haven't explained what the risk is.  Additionally, it is not 
>>> as if the original data was not still there.
>>> 
>>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Much of this is music materials and the like which do not compress 
>>>> well when using those programs  as I have tried.
>>>> I do not want to chance it.
>>>> Call me a chicken if you wish but it is my data.  Will the methods 
>>>> suggested do this, no compression involved?
>>>> Karen
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I have no intention of risking a zip of any of these files, nor 
>>>>>> do i want to
>>>>> 
>>>>> Risking a zip?  What does that mean?  Where is the risk?  Gnu Zip 
>>>>> (not PK Zip), and Bzip2, are highly stable formats.
>>>>> Tar is an archiving method used for decades on unix.  In fact, 
>>>>> Linux uses bzip2 as its kernel format these days.
>>>>> 
>>>>> This exact method is how many of us who backup shellworld user 
>>>>> data, do it, on a regular basis--tar archived into bzip, or gzip.
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Speakup mailing list
>>>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Speakup mailing list
>>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Speakup mailing list
>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> 
>
> -- 
> The Moon is Full
> Home page at http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
> Speakfreely address 24.105.197.112:2074
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

You have tried bzip2?

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> Much of this is music materials and the like which do not compress well when 
> using those programs  as I have tried.
> I do not want to chance it.
> Call me a chicken if you wish but it is my data.  Will the methods suggested 
> do this, no compression involved?
> Karen
>
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

Re: Linux and data storage?

[nick G]

It is really hard to corrupt a zip file.  There are no risks involved.  And 
If you create a zip, you don't have to delete what is in your home directory 
anyway...Or so I believe.  Your welcome to correct me, go on, do it!
Thanks,
Nick
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Karen Lewellen" <klewellen@shellworld.net>
To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 6:18 PM
Subject: Re: Linux and data storage?


> *we* agreed on no such thing.
> I have no intention of risking a zip of any of these files, nor do i want 
> to have to create alist.
> I want a direct uninterrupted transfer of the entire contents of  my home 
> directory here minus the shellworld programs themselves to a directory so 
> created on the ftp area of my site to so store them as a backup.
> no one said anything about ziping anything.
> Tar was s mentioned before you came in this morning yes.
>
>
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
>
>> I don't know how sftp would be better?
>>
>> 1.) You can specify a file mask to transfer multiple files with scp.
>>
>> 2.) You can specify multiple source files with scp, and do so in one
>> command where sftp would require you to do one at a time if you didn't
>> use a file mask.
>>
>> And, didn't we agree that the better strategy would be to tar and either
>> bun or gun zip the archive first?
>>
>> Luke Davis writes:
>>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Yelavich wrote:
>>>
>>>> The tools I am thinking of, are the SSH suite of tools, particularly 
>>>> one
>>>> command being scp. This command allows you to copy data securely over a
>>>> network connection, by means of encryption.
>>>
>>> sftp, might be a better option, for several files.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Speakup mailing list
>>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Janina Sajka, Chair
>> Accessibility Workgroup
>> Free Standards Group (FSG)
>>
>> janina@freestandards.org Phone: +1 202.494.7040
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: Linux and data storage?

[doc]

Looking for tips on how to install rpm programs.
Doc Wright
http://wrightplaceinc.net
If we can't look at ourselves, and ask, why?
then where does the learning start?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Karen Lewellen" <klewellen@shellworld.net>
To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 6:23 PM
Subject: Linux and data storage?


Hi all,
This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and
thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up the
machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming
through.
In any case, I do use a Linux shell service extensively.  I fear almost
too extensively, as you will understand in a moment.
The OS on the system i use mostly is dos, and I use nettamer to telnet to
my Linux shell.
In the workspace of my shell service i have a great deal of irreplaceable
files and programs.  I eave them up here, for ease, but I just was
reminded that this may be a venerable state of affairs.
Fortunately when the server went down nothing was lost or so it seems, but
I have a serious factor to consider.
  My question has two parts.
first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the
workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with
relative ease,  and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage be
easy to do?
As I said before I do not have such a machine, but this has shaken me up
enough that if a full Linux or Linux/dos or Linux/windows machine would
give me some firm safe backup, I will have to start advertising for
someone to build this for me and encurl the expense.
  I have too busy a professional life to do this myself, and would rather
pay someone with the skills than lose valuable time trying to re-invent the
wheel.
Thanks,
Karen


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, doc wrote:

> Looking for tips on how to install rpm programs.

With the RPM program.  It comes with Redhat.  If you don't have Redhat, 
look into alien.

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

I have two answers for you.

1.)	First I give you your fish:

rpm -iv [package-name].rpm

2.)	I teach you to fish:

rpm --help 2>&1 |more
man rpm

Or, go to the net and find a copy of Miximum RPM (freely available on
line) and bookmark it.

doc writes:
> Looking for tips on how to install rpm programs.
> Doc Wright
> http://wrightplaceinc.net
> If we can't look at ourselves, and ask, why?
> then where does the learning start?
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Karen Lewellen" <klewellen@shellworld.net>
> To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 6:23 PM
> Subject: Linux and data storage?
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
> I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and
> thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up the
> machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming
> through.
> In any case, I do use a Linux shell service extensively.  I fear almost
> too extensively, as you will understand in a moment.
> The OS on the system i use mostly is dos, and I use nettamer to telnet to
> my Linux shell.
> In the workspace of my shell service i have a great deal of irreplaceable
> files and programs.  I eave them up here, for ease, but I just was
> reminded that this may be a venerable state of affairs.
> Fortunately when the server went down nothing was lost or so it seems, but
> I have a serious factor to consider.
>   My question has two parts.
> first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the
> workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with
> relative ease,  and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
> second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage be
> easy to do?
> As I said before I do not have such a machine, but this has shaken me up
> enough that if a full Linux or Linux/dos or Linux/windows machine would
> give me some firm safe backup, I will have to start advertising for
> someone to build this for me and encurl the expense.
>   I have too busy a professional life to do this myself, and would rather
> pay someone with the skills than lose valuable time trying to re-invent the
> wheel.
> Thanks,
> Karen
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Hi, Karen:

You don't say how much data you have there? Issue the following command
from your home directory to find out how much data you have:

du -ms .

It will give you a number in megabytes. It may take some time to run.

Now, to your question. You ask whether it would be easy. Well, yes, it
might be, or it might not be.

It's not likely to be pleasant to move copious amounts of data over a
dial up modem connection, but there are easy technologies that can
insure you get a true copy even if it takes some time to accomplish.

I'm thinking of rsync.

And, yes, you are on the right track. Hardware and software can be
replaced. One's work/data files cannot be so readily replaced. So, it is
wise to have one's important data in two physical clocations.

But let's start out by defining how much "a lot" is.

Karen Lewellen writes:
> Hi all,
> This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
> I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and 
> thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up 
> the machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming 
> through.
> In any case, I do use a Linux shell service extensively.  I fear almost 
> too extensively, as you will understand in a moment.
> The OS on the system i use mostly is dos, and I use nettamer to telnet to 
> my Linux shell.
> In the workspace of my shell service i have a great deal of irreplaceable 
> files and programs.  I eave them up here, for ease, but I just was 
> reminded that this may be a venerable state of affairs.
> Fortunately when the server went down nothing was lost or so it seems, but 
> I have a serious factor to consider.
>  My question has two parts.
> first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the 
> workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with 
> relative ease,  and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
> second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage be 
> easy to do?
> As I said before I do not have such a machine, but this has shaken me up 
> enough that if a full Linux or Linux/dos or Linux/windows machine would 
> give me some firm safe backup, I will have to start advertising for 
> someone to build this for me and encurl the expense.
>  I have too busy a professional life to do this myself, and would rather 
> pay someone with the skills than lose valuable time trying to re-invent the 
> wheel.
> Thanks,
> Karen
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> You don't say how much data you have there? Issue the following command
> from your home directory to find out how much data you have:
> du -ms .

-m is not a supported option under the du provided with FreeBSD, which is 
what Shellworld is running, assuming that is the ISP she is talking about.

-h should probably work for the same effect.

Luke

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Good point, Luke. I betray my ignorance of bsd.

Luke Davis writes:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> 
> >You don't say how much data you have there? Issue the following command
> >from your home directory to find out how much data you have:
> >du -ms .
> 
> -m is not a supported option under the du provided with FreeBSD, which is 
> what Shellworld is running, assuming that is the ISP she is talking about.
> 
> -h should probably work for the same effect.
> 
> Luke
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Yes Skywalker, I do mean my data at Shellworld, and yes it seems your -h 
solution did work...I think.
I ran this twice.
first i did:
du -hs
keeping janina's  inclusion.
i was told.
1.8g
now, i ran
du -h
and got more of a directory breakdown, but still got the same total.
some of this is under sub directories like /vicq and /amil,
the data from which I might not want to copy.
but in theory I have almost 2gb of data up here everything included.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
>
>> You don't say how much data you have there? Issue the following command
>> from your home directory to find out how much data you have:
>> du -ms .
>
> -m is not a supported option under the du provided with FreeBSD, which is 
> what Shellworld is running, assuming that is the ISP she is talking about.
>
> -h should probably work for the same effect.
>
> Luke
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

Okay, since you're on shellworld, you can run:

kwota

Do that, and show us the results.

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> Yes Skywalker, I do mean my data at Shellworld, and yes it seems your -h 
> solution did work...I think.
> I ran this twice.
> first i did:
> du -hs
> keeping janina's  inclusion.
> i was told.
> 1.8g
> now, i ran
> du -h
> and got more of a directory breakdown, but still got the same total.
> some of this is under sub directories like /vicq and /amil,
> the data from which I might not want to copy.
> but in theory I have almost 2gb of data up here everything included.
> Karen

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

Hi again
Thanks for the command!
I will want to know this regardless, and am guessing, I hope correctly, 
that it is only my home directory, not the data stored in pine for me.
Thanks again,
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:

> Hi, Karen:
>
> You don't say how much data you have there? Issue the following command
> from your home directory to find out how much data you have:
>
> du -ms .
>
> It will give you a number in megabytes. It may take some time to run.
>
> Now, to your question. You ask whether it would be easy. Well, yes, it
> might be, or it might not be.
>
> It's not likely to be pleasant to move copious amounts of data over a
> dial up modem connection, but there are easy technologies that can
> insure you get a true copy even if it takes some time to accomplish.
>
> I'm thinking of rsync.
>
> And, yes, you are on the right track. Hardware and software can be
> replaced. One's work/data files cannot be so readily replaced. So, it is
> wise to have one's important data in two physical clocations.
>
> But let's start out by defining how much "a lot" is.
>
> Karen Lewellen writes:
>> Hi all,
>> This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
>> I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and
>> thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up
>> the machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming
>> through.
>> In any case, I do use a Linux shell service extensively.  I fear almost
>> too extensively, as you will understand in a moment.
>> The OS on the system i use mostly is dos, and I use nettamer to telnet to
>> my Linux shell.
>> In the workspace of my shell service i have a great deal of irreplaceable
>> files and programs.  I eave them up here, for ease, but I just was
>> reminded that this may be a venerable state of affairs.
>> Fortunately when the server went down nothing was lost or so it seems, but
>> I have a serious factor to consider.
>>  My question has two parts.
>> first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the
>> workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with
>> relative ease,  and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
>> second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage be
>> easy to do?
>> As I said before I do not have such a machine, but this has shaken me up
>> enough that if a full Linux or Linux/dos or Linux/windows machine would
>> give me some firm safe backup, I will have to start advertising for
>> someone to build this for me and encurl the expense.
>>  I have too busy a professional life to do this myself, and would rather
>> pay someone with the skills than lose valuable time trying to re-invent the
>> wheel.
>> Thanks,
>> Karen
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> -- 
>
> 				Janina Sajka, Chair
> 				Accessibility Workgroup
> 				Free Standards Group (FSG)
>
> janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Janina Sajka]

Your "data stored in Pine for you," as you put it, is probably also part
of your home directory. It's probably in a directory called mail.

Never fear. There are ways to exclude the mail directory when you copy
your files into a tar archive file.

The best way to get a number on how much you have to back up, then, is
probably to get a total on your home directory and all its
subdirectories, then do the same thing for the mail directory and
subtract.

Karen Lewellen writes:
> Hi again
> Thanks for the command!
> I will want to know this regardless, and am guessing, I hope correctly, 
> that it is only my home directory, not the data stored in pine for me.
> Thanks again,
> Karen
> 
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Janina Sajka wrote:
> 
> >Hi, Karen:
> >
> >You don't say how much data you have there? Issue the following command
> >from your home directory to find out how much data you have:
> >
> >du -ms .
> >
> >It will give you a number in megabytes. It may take some time to run.
> >
> >Now, to your question. You ask whether it would be easy. Well, yes, it
> >might be, or it might not be.
> >
> >It's not likely to be pleasant to move copious amounts of data over a
> >dial up modem connection, but there are easy technologies that can
> >insure you get a true copy even if it takes some time to accomplish.
> >
> >I'm thinking of rsync.
> >
> >And, yes, you are on the right track. Hardware and software can be
> >replaced. One's work/data files cannot be so readily replaced. So, it is
> >wise to have one's important data in two physical clocations.
> >
> >But let's start out by defining how much "a lot" is.
> >
> >Karen Lewellen writes:
> >>Hi all,
> >>This is an odd one, so I hope I ask it in such a way to make sense.
> >>I do not have a Linux machine.  I have been trying to get this, and
> >>thought I had one in the he works but it seems that party either made up
> >>the machines they were offering, or  for some other reason is not coming
> >>through.
> >>In any case, I do use a Linux shell service extensively.  I fear almost
> >>too extensively, as you will understand in a moment.
> >>The OS on the system i use mostly is dos, and I use nettamer to telnet to
> >>my Linux shell.
> >>In the workspace of my shell service i have a great deal of irreplaceable
> >>files and programs.  I eave them up here, for ease, but I just was
> >>reminded that this may be a venerable state of affairs.
> >>Fortunately when the server went down nothing was lost or so it seems, but
> >>I have a serious factor to consider.
> >> My question has two parts.
> >>first, is there a way to move large amounts of data stored in the
> >>workspace of a Linux shell service to another location in tact, with
> >>relative ease,  and without taking all of the data on the entire system?
> >>second, if my machine was also a Linux one, would this kind of storage be
> >>easy to do?
> >>As I said before I do not have such a machine, but this has shaken me up
> >>enough that if a full Linux or Linux/dos or Linux/windows machine would
> >>give me some firm safe backup, I will have to start advertising for
> >>someone to build this for me and encurl the expense.
> >> I have too busy a professional life to do this myself, and would rather
> >>pay someone with the skills than lose valuable time trying to re-invent 
> >>the
> >>wheel.
> >>Thanks,
> >>Karen
> >>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Speakup mailing list
> >>Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >-- 
> >
> >				Janina Sajka, Chair
> >				Accessibility Workgroup
> >				Free Standards Group (FSG)
> >
> >janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Speakup mailing list
> >Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina@freestandards.org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Luke Davis]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:

> I will want to know this regardless, and am guessing, I hope correctly, that 
> it is only my home directory, not the data stored in pine for me.

Pine is a program.  It does not store any data for you.

If you're talking about your saved mail, in folders such as 
saved-messages, sent-mail, and other folders you have created: they are 
under ~/mail, so they would be included in the du command, and in the 
backup.

If you are talking about new mail, or any other mail stored in your inbox: 
that would not be included, as it is in /var/mail/klewellen.

Luke

Re: Linux and data storage?

[Karen Lewellen]

,Thanks for the distinction.  In that case, I will want to include the 
/mail directory as well.
Karen

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Luke Davis wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>> I will want to know this regardless, and am guessing, I hope correctly, 
>> that it is only my home directory, not the data stored in pine for me.
>
> Pine is a program.  It does not store any data for you.
>
> If you're talking about your saved mail, in folders such as saved-messages, 
> sent-mail, and other folders you have created: they are under ~/mail, so they 
> would be included in the du command, and in the backup.
>
> If you are talking about new mail, or any other mail stored in your inbox: 
> that would not be included, as it is in /var/mail/klewellen.
>
> Luke
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>