World: r3wp

Hoary preview?

I installed Warty. Is the font size in /View a problem on Hoary?

well, it's the latest update. just switched out warty with hoary 
in the sources.list and so I run Hoary :-) I think I need to check 
the DPI on both machines. I don't have any warty machines.

ok, it's a bit funny, because some fonts are bigger, such as in the 
chat area, but headlines are smaller.

It could be related to which fonts are installed

But not garbled?

no garbling at all. just slightly different font sizes.

OK, thanks. Most Debian-derived distros don't trigger the font bug

http://hmkdesign.dk/debian.pngand http://hmkdesign.dk/ubuntu.png

:-)

ok, DPI setting for the ubuntu box is 96 DPI. maybe AltME has an 
"anti-garbling" feature of headlines by turning down the font size 
while everything else is bigger

debian is 72 DPI

The Ubuntu one is more readable, actually

I'm going to use Hoary to finally switch from Windows

I'm a bit surprised at how far ahead Hoary is compared to debian 
unstable

my debian runs gnome 2.8.2 from experimental, but ubuntu runs 2.10 
and it's a lot more stable.

Yes, they're doing much better release management

I had a number of problems with Warty, but it's just the first release, 
and it still compares favorably with the alternatives

hoary is pretty good. I had a single problem detecting two network 
cards in my laptop when I first tried it, but I got it running.

does Warty have the system update tool? Its pretty cool.

No, Warty doesn't have it yet. Yes, there are nice improvements in 
Hoary, but I couldn't use the preview yet. I did add a number of 
repositories and applications, so I got halfway towards Hoary after 
all

Maybe its related, on suse 9.0 i change in xf86config
  FontPath     "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi:unscaled"
to
  FontPath     "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi:scaled"
Else /view finds only a few matching font-sizes.

Does that fix garbled fonts?

No, font-size-problems. before the default was to large, and some 
things like h1 did not work.

http://thinstation.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/ThIndex

I think Rebol/services can beat that !

http://www.goosee.com/puppy/

Yes, that's a good one. An annoying thing, though, is that it doesn't 
seem capable of changing the refresh rate from a flicker

Ok, here is a thing I want to use /Core for, which IMO is useful 
to a lot of people: Locking out IPs after multiple failed sshd login 
attempts

I'm not a Linux guru. There are some solutions using a tool named 
SWATCH but it's not that easy.

So what's needed:

1. We need a way to continually parse the SSHD log-file, something 
like tial

2. We extract the IP address and add it to some firewall, to block 
it for some time
3. We need to remove the IP from the firewall

Anyone interested in such a project?

Did you read here? same wording :) http://www.plug.org/pipermail/plug/2004-October/011457.html

do we have skip on files now?

Yes, I read this. swatch is working but getting everything tied together 
is as always with Unix akward. I just want a simple Rebol solution 
:-))

iptables: Is this a tool that I need to start or is it a system tool 
to alter internal things uses by the kernel anway?

its in that thread: /etc/hosts.deny . juast add ips to block there.

has a partner /etc/hosts.allow . IIRC .deny has priority.

http://www.linuxfibel.de/nettest.htm(german)

should then be lines like
 ALL: 123.234.345.456
but better wait for our real linux-pros.

When is this file re-read? I mean if we append something, how to 
activate it.

What happens if the same IP tries again? The request is blocked immediatly? 
Why might using a firewall or iptables be better?

good questions. don't know.

Hmm. maybe host.deny works only with inetd? http://www.tu-darmstadt.de/hrz/durchblick/db96-2/wrapper.html

Hmm... strange I can add the same iptabels rule several times. Don't 
know what's this for?

can you dump current rules? is it stored three times, or only the 
last keept?

seems iptables can be changed on the fly from the command line. i 
guess you can switch things on and of, or just change them to what 
they are.

Yes, I dumped the rules and see the same IP several times.

But, if filterting would work correct, it should be DROPed anyway. 
So, if I add a DROP rule for an IP address, I shouldn't get any more 
packets.

Robert, with IPTables the rules are parsed in order so if a rule 
will allow the packet before it gets to your deny rule then the packet 
is allowed. (IIUC)

This is the behaviour that I saw when playing with IPTables...