clutch

Might want to check this out: http://www.ntcompatible.com/thread.php?id=31173

This is a copy of an old post, and I will try to update as I have more links (and for some reason the forum software will not parse the tags correctly on most of the links). Windows 2000 DNS and Active Directory Information and Technical Resources (298448) http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;[LN];298448 How to Configure Active Directory on a Home Network (260362) http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;[LN];260362 HOW TO: Create an Active Directory Server in Windows 2000 (300921) http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;[LN];300921 Troubleshooting Common Active Directory Setup Issues in Windows 2000 (260371) http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;[LN];260371 Setting Up the Domain Name System for Active Directory (237675) http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;[LN];237675 Configuring Windows 2000 DNS to Support Active Directory http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/techinfo/reskit/deploymentscenarios/scenarios/dns_02_sir.asp How to Verify an Active Directory Installation (298143) http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;[LN];298143 Remember, DNS is the absolute backbone to getting this to work. Make sure you understand how DNS is to be setup *before* you start deploying AD. Most of the stuff that applies to Windows 2000 Server will be the same for Windows Server 2003. However, Windows Server 2003 has more tools and utilities for working with AD, and that can be researched separately.

Honestly, AD is not meant to be super easy to install, but rather a scalable method of managing many objects in an enterprise. You might want to redo everything, and follow some how-tos regarding AD. Now, did you try using static entries for the clients? Try that first, as I mentioned before, and see what happens.

One can only hope it died. Reason #1 - Move vendor support to X.org and leave it there, rather than splintering it (Linux has enough issues with vendor support, this doesn't need to be another one) Reason #2 - He deserves to get dropped for such a pinheaded idea with the licensing

Originally posted by dtav: Quote: In DNS, the individual pcs do not appear. This is a problem. If those PCs do not appear in DNS, then you are sunk. Try adding static records for them ("A" Host) and set the IPs and TCP properties statically on the clients as well.

The drive issue could simply require an update of the motherboard's BIOS, so I would look into that. Your issues with browsing look a lot like your client is not registering itself with DNS. You should see a record for your client in your DNS console. Make sure you have dynamic up[censored] enabled in DNS by: 1. Open up your DNS console 2. Expand "Forward Lookup Zones" 3. Expand your AD DNS zone (i.e. mydomain.com) and select properties 4. Look at "Type", and if it isn't AD-Integrated, then click "Change" and adjust it 5. Change "Dynamic Updates" to "Secure Only" After this is done, either reboot the machines on your network (might be the best idea) or use "ipconfig /registerdns" on your workstations, and "net stop netlogon" followed by "net start netlogon" on your server. If you choose to reboot all of the machines, shut down your workstations, and reboot the server. Then, start your workstations a few minutes after the server is started.

Also, dr_grey, stop drumming up business for your site. You are using the same link for all posts, and that link has no information on it other than a need for registration.

Make sure that your PCs are getting the right DNS server (namely, the domain controller hosting your DNS zone). In addition, make sure that you are using secure updates for that zone (it will need to be AD integrated, and not simply "primary"). If they are DHCP and not getting the right DNS IP, check the scope (or server) options on your DHCP server.

Does the rebuilt box have a different icon (such as a warning) in AD Users and Computers? Did you check the logs on the client for errors, such as "Could not process GPO" or "Could not locate Domain Controller"? Are you positive that the NIC is getting an IP and it is being registered in DNS?

Are there any users of Virtual Server 2005 or VMware Workstation/GSX/ESX? I am working on a how-to to create a virtual router using routerlinux 1.1, which will let you create and use multiple subnets on the host. I have a PDF of the how-to right now, so if someone needs it let me know.

Game companies are there to make money, period. Apart from programming for alternate operating systems (program directly for the OS, or develop VMs for each and using a single game application) you need to support them. You know that they won't support all distributions of Linux, and throw in the different kernels and infinite configuration options you can have a support nightmare. Remember, there are people that are having a hard enough time getting 3D drivers compiled and installed, and many of these games require acceleration. I don't think that gaming companies want to field these questions (remember when Q3A first came out with their application that installed the latest OpenGL/GLWrappers for video cards in Windows? Do you think it worked?). What's really strange though, is that Linux would be the ideal gaming platform since it can be stripped down to only support the hardware and services necessary to run a given game. Since Windows does not provide the ability (yet) to completely remove unnecessary libraries and services it would seem ideal to run games on Linux. Maybe when Linux makes a stronger hit at home you will see more games being developed for it.

Well, can you give us more information (what errors are you getting, what's you connection, etc.)? Also, have you checked out the Gentoo forums? They get a ton of traffic, and you might find several people with the same problem you have. http://forums.gentoo.org/

http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/kde-config.xml Check out "exec startkde". Just make sure that you are logged on as yourself (and not root) when you create the .xinitrc file. Once you have it started, and you are ready to commit it to all users, check out the later steps in that doc. This is the important one: # nano -w /etc/rc.conf (Edit the following two variables) XSESSION="kde-3.2.1" DISPLAYMANAGER="kdm"

Kinda hard for people to demand service for stolen items. However, this just means that all of those stolen items can be used to attack legit systems. If people use XP SP2 (and soon Windows Server 2003 SP1) in their default modes, the firewall will block all unsolicited incoming crap, so that should help.

It is scary. No OS is safe, period (unless it's Novell, and that's because nobody cares).

I had these problems with Phoenix in .4 and .5, but I can't remember it being an issue since then in Linux. I have been using it since .5 in Windows and it was never a problem there. I remember Mozilla would crash out X server when I went to the nVidia site and ran the mouse of a menu. It seemed to be a combination of Mozilla, X, and my nVidia module. When a new version of Mozilla came out, I tried it and it was fine. Anything sound familiar?

Much like these? http://www.egocrew.de/download-category-4.html http://www.packetstormsecurity.org/UNIX/penetration/rootkits/ Now, just think what would happen (or did it?) if one of these was uploaded to a "legitimate" site and thousands of downloads occured before it was caught.

I thought there was a separate box version for Linux Q3A, but is there a simple executable that can be used to convert between the two? I would like to run Q3A under Linux without emulation to see how it runs, and in the process evaluate whether or not I get rid of Windows on my primary box. Thanks.

You really, really shouldn't need a 3rd party partitioning tool to get rid of any Linux OS. Try using Mandrake, and let it "automagically" partition your drive. It might be easier to use as well.

You might only be able to alter it as root. I don't have an installation of it running to advise you any further, but hopefully someone can point us in the right direction. If I get a chance, I might fire up another virtual machine to set it up and find out otherwise.

I am not very familiar with FC3 in its default state, but do you have a shortcut on your desktop to your floppy drive? If so, you might want to right click on it, go to properties, and look for an option to mount in read/write mode (Knoppix defaults to read only with its shortcuts, thought it might be the same). Remember, for most people half of learning Linux is un-learning a previous OS, be it Windows, Apple, whatever. Linux will be easy once you get familiar with it.

Is that a PII 233, or a Pentium Classic (such as a P200 or P166)? Also, while 98SE crashing isn't much of a surprise in general it could be an indicator of failing hardware which might be complicating your experience with Fedora. You could try something like Mepis, Knoppix, or any other distro and simply delete all of the partitions and start over if you would like. As for the printing, have you checked to make sure that your printer is supported using the printing application (probably CUPS) in FC3?

Indeed. I remember when there was a standards body trying to standardize on a package management system. This was when the Linux community had a perfect time to show that it could (http://slashdot.org/articles/02/02/01/141215.shtml): 1. Come together and stop running down separate paths in an effort to promote usability, and 2. Back a system that promotes good design, rather than a system that has more corporate backing Well, the LSB decided to back RedHat Package Management (RPM) over apt. This is funny, considering that you couldn't even get all of the RPM-based distros to agree on a common installer themselves, much less get all distributions to agree to use RPMs in general. What makes this funny is that people complain that MS has leveraged its popularity to push its standards, and here we are with the advantages of Open Source and seeing the same thing. Of course, I think people of all sorts can agree on the biggest abuse of this type: Apple and the iPod. Controlling the proprietary DRM functionality of the "Open Source" AAC format (at least according to Apple it was Open Source). Ever since this LSB/RPM fiasco I stopped caring about standardizing Linux. Some can, and will, argue that this is what Linux is about; choice. You can choose your distro, you can choose to compile from scratch, and you can choose to ignore a standards body that insists on smoking crack. However, how long do you think not following a standard can run without doing real damage to the movement? Only time will tell.

Interesting response. So... MS not being used in firewalling is a common thing. I mean, why install a host OS, then a firewall application on a server when you could just use some form of appliance like a PIX (we like these, along with Netscreen products as we had issues with Sidewinders). Most AD deployments break DNS into multiple zones, especially when fielding multiple forests. It is common to use MS DNS for the clients in the forest to resolve intra-forest resources, while using a hardened DNS for inter-forest and non-AD assets. Bear in mind that no government agency relies on pure BIND, as it has been one of the most hacked applications in history but rather a BIND hybrid (DNS application that supports BIND behaviors and protocols) called "Protected DNS", and is usually provided by a vendor. It is highly doubtful that you would see a simple BIND installation on a RedHat server hosting sensitive records. Haven't had a need for a non-Windows print spool host (many of our printers are network-aware, so we host the spoolers elsewhere) but that's just us. Well, we do have Lindows/Linspire for the "root user" argument, but this is more an issue of education. I still see noobs logging in as root doing basic stuff, only to get attacked on forums and IRC channels for doing it (and rightly so). However, most Windows users don't think twice about this because this was how they were taught, not that this was "forced" upon them for day-to-day use. Yes, the XP installation will not only grant your initial user account admin rights, but it will also let you logon with no password. Completely stupid. In addition, MS did try to re-train admins in Windows 2000 with "run as", which is similar to "switch user" (su). While Windows still has "Power Users" (think full-time "sudo") many things still don't work right unless you are a full admin when installing them. In fact, you might not even be able to use application after it has been installed because of poor installation design (improperly placed files and reg keys during setup with restricted access only admins can get to). In addition, just running "setup.exe" might launch the installer, only to find out that it's a decompression program that expands the application, and launches the real installer with your normal credentials. This can happen in Linux when trying to install applications and other complicated administrative tasks using sudo, and you wind up going "su -" and running it as a full admin. The point is that MS tried, but nobody is bothering to learn how to make it work.

There is a thread going on at NTComp's sister site that asks the question "What is more secure, Linux or Windows?". It appears that I am the only one there offering options for Windows and why it can be very secure. If there are people here that are interested, check it out: http://www.linuxcompatible.org/thread.php?id=30675 Please post there if you have anything to contribute (and please, no trolling ).