Re: [rox-users] halt & reboot ... revisited

[Robert Davison <robert.rdw2klt01@ha...>]

On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 02:22:02 +0000, Terry Blunt <terry@...> 
wrote:

> I comented some time ago I said that using the halt or reboot options 
> from
> ROX session gives the message 'Invalid call to subprocess'
>
> I've had the suggestion that I should use sudo.  Well I've tried that and
> got nowhere. However, by experimenting I've found that if I open a 
> terminal
> window and enter the commands directly then they perform quite correctly.
> With all of this, why does it fail when (apparently) exactly the same
> command is used in ROX sessions logout box?
>
> I am using Mandrake 9.1 and the K window manager.

I use Mandrake 9.1 and had exactly the same symptoms you describe.  But I 
did manage to get user shutdowns working via sudo with the following :-

Edit or create /etc/sudoers to contain these two lines:

root	ALL=(ALL) ALL
fred	ALL=NOPASSWD: /sbin/shutdown

which would enable the user 'fred' to use the shutdown command without a 
password prompt.  Obviously change fred to your own login name.

Then in the ROX-Session power settings dialogue have:
Halt command:   sudo /sbin/shutdown -h 0
Reboot command: sudo /sbin/shutdown -r 0


That worked for me.  If it is any different to what you have already tried 
then give it a go.

Regards,

Robert.

  

Re: [rox-users] Re: ... root-installation of AppDirs

[Jonatan Liljedahl <than@te...>]

On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 16:02:08 +0000
Thomas Leonard <tal00r@...> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 04:31:04PM +0100, Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
> 
> > Yes, I forgot to say it was only directories. I have never used the
> > SGID bit and I'm not sure why it is a good thing. So, why should
> > AppDirs and their directories be SGID?
> 
> It just depends whether the bit was set when they were made. Most
> modern distros set the bit by default.

Ok, but I mean: What is the thought behind it? Why do the people making
distros choose to set the bit?
(I haven't used the SGID bit anytime myself, and haven't bothered
learning what it's good for...)

> > > However, the easiest solution to your problems is to use Zero
> > > Install and run the apps directly from the directory
> > > /uri/0install/rox.sourceforge.net/apps instead of
> > > /usr/local/apps...
> > 
> > That's not easy, I live out in the woods with only a 56K modem! =)
> 
> How are you getting the ROX stuff at the moment, if not with a modem?

I have a friend in town who sends me punched papercards on the mail! ;)

> Besides, you don't end up downloading stuff you don't need (like the
> translations of the getting started guide or files that haven't
> changed) if you use Zero Install, so it should be quicker...

Ah, I thought that Zero Install was not for modem users, so I have not
read much about it. Maybe I will now.

/Jonatan
__  
  |   __                 ____        _          ____
  |__/__         _____  _____||___  (_) ____   _____|
  |     )(_____|(  |  )(_____||_____ | (______(_____|
 ==============|======================================
           ____|               http://www.kymatica.tk

Re: [rox-users] run .exe files with wine

[Ken Hayber <khayber@so...>]

This depends on having kernel support for MISC BINARIES enabled.  
That's what the modprobe binfmt_misc line is about.  You can also run 
Java apps with it and other things.

I think it works by having the linux loader for executables look for 
signatures in the +x files and matching them with a registered entry.  
In this case M/MZ/PE is associated with wine.


-- 

Ken Hayber (khayber@...)
Huntington Beach, CA
On Oct 27, 2003, at 8:24 AM, Arjun Asthana wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Monday 27 October 2003 04:35, you wrote:
>> On Mon, 2003-10-27 at 11:43, John Russell wrote:
>>>> i seem to recall that redhats wine package has a service where you
>>>> could chmod +x an exe and just clicking it would run it.
>>>> Not sure too much oin the specifics
>>>
>>> That sounds cool, but why can't I just get rox to do it?
>>
>> Hmmm
>> I chomod+x a file and click on it and it runs... don't ask me how... 
>> :-P
>> I seem to have a service called 'wine'
>
> I still have it. It makes you run the .exe executables by just 
> executing them
> as normal executables. Below is the copy of the script (for redhat. 
> I'm not a
> good programer, so dont ask me for other distros.):
>
> #!/bin/sh
> #
> # wine		Allow users to run Windows(tm) applications by just clicking
> #		on them (or typing ./file.exe)
> #
> # chkconfig: 2345 99 10
> # description: Allow users to run Windows(tm) applications by just 
> clicking \
> # on them (or typing ./file.exe)
> #
> # (c) 2000 Red Hat, Inc.
> #
> case "$1" in
>   start)
>     /sbin/modprobe binfmt_misc &>/dev/null
>     echo ':windows:M::MZ::/usr/bin/wine:' 
> >/proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/register
>     echo ':windowsPE:M::PE::/usr/bin/wine:' 
> >/proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/register
>     ;;
>   stop)
>     echo "-1" >/proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/windows
>     echo "-1" >/proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/windowsPE
>     ;;
>   *)
>     echo "Usage: $0 {start|stop}"
> esac
> - --------------
>
> This should work with each wm and even command line (AFAIK)
>
>> this seems to be the only way to make it work
>>
>> Alastair
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
>
> iD8DBQE/nUay9mAtgws7e1wRAivQAJ4md16HtGPG51kar+rLHnKxgabPqQCbBaMi
> Jb0hpPCICLCsKZaUyXoQZcI=
> =qL0y
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: The SF.net Donation Program.
> Do you like what SourceForge.net is doing for the Open
> Source Community?  Make a contribution, and help us add new
> features and functionality. Click here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
> _______________________________________________
> rox-users mailing list
> rox-users@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rox-users

Re: [rox-users] run .exe files with wine

[Arjun Asthana <arjunasthana@gm...>]

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

On Monday 27 October 2003 04:35, you wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-10-27 at 11:43, John Russell wrote:
> > > i seem to recall that redhats wine package has a service where you
> > > could chmod +x an exe and just clicking it would run it.
> > > Not sure too much oin the specifics
> >
> > That sounds cool, but why can't I just get rox to do it?
>
> Hmmm
> I chomod+x a file and click on it and it runs... don't ask me how... :-P
> I seem to have a service called 'wine'

I still have it. It makes you run the .exe executables by just executing them
as normal executables. Below is the copy of the script (for redhat. I'm not a
good programer, so dont ask me for other distros.):

#!/bin/sh
#
# wine		Allow users to run Windows(tm) applications by just clicking
#		on them (or typing ./file.exe)
#
# chkconfig: 2345 99 10
# description: Allow users to run Windows(tm) applications by just clicking \
# on them (or typing ./file.exe)
#
# (c) 2000 Red Hat, Inc.
#
case "$1" in
  start)
    /sbin/modprobe binfmt_misc &>/dev/null
    echo ':windows:M::MZ::/usr/bin/wine:' >/proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/register
    echo ':windowsPE:M::PE::/usr/bin/wine:' >/proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/register
    ;;
  stop)
    echo "-1" >/proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/windows
    echo "-1" >/proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/windowsPE
    ;;
  *)
    echo "Usage: $0 {start|stop}"
esac
- --------------

This should work with each wm and even command line (AFAIK)

> this seems to be the only way to make it work
>
> Alastair

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE/nUay9mAtgws7e1wRAivQAJ4md16HtGPG51kar+rLHnKxgabPqQCbBaMi
Jb0hpPCICLCsKZaUyXoQZcI=
=qL0y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [rox-users] Re: ... root-installation of AppDirs

[Thomas Leonard <tal00r@ec...>]

On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 04:31:04PM +0100, Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:

> Yes, I forgot to say it was only directories. I have never used the SGID
> bit and I'm not sure why it is a good thing. So, why should AppDirs and
> their directories be SGID?

It just depends whether the bit was set when they were made. Most modern
distros set the bit by default.

> > However, the easiest solution to your problems is to use Zero Install
> > and run the apps directly from the directory
> > /uri/0install/rox.sourceforge.net/apps instead of /usr/local/apps...
> 
> That's not easy, I live out in the woods with only a 56K modem! =)

How are you getting the ROX stuff at the moment, if not with a modem?

Besides, you don't end up downloading stuff you don't need (like the
translations of the getting started guide or files that haven't changed)
if you use Zero Install, so it should be quicker...


-- 
Thomas Leonard			http://rox.sourceforge.net
tal00r at ecs.soton.ac.uk	tal197 at users.sourceforge.net
GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6  8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1

Re: [rox-users] halt & reboot ... revisited

[gebi matt <gebhard.matt@we...>]

Terry Blunt wrote:
> I comented some time ago I said that using the halt or reboot options from
> ROX session gives the message 'Invalid call to subprocess'
> 
> I've had the suggestion that I should use sudo.  Well I've tried that and
> got nowhere. However, by experimenting I've found that if I open a terminal
> window and enter the commands directly then they perform quite correctly. Of
> course under these conditions there is no 'Are you sure' type message.
> 
> Furthermore, I can make a script with these commands and they will operate
> correctly when clicked on, including when put on the icon bar (dangerous
> that but I wanted to at least check all the combinations).
> 
> With all of this, why does it fail when (apparently) exactly the same
> command is used in ROX sessions logout box?
> 
> I am using Mandrake 9.1 and the K window manager.
> 
I'm personally using super instead of sudo - which is
easier to configure.

add the two lines with your username
in /etc/super.tab

shutdown /sbin/shutdown username
reboot  /sbin/reboot    username

and in the power options of rox-session:

Halt command:   super shutdown -h now
Reboot command: super reboot

[rox-users] Re: ... root-installation of AppDirs

[Jonatan Liljedahl <than@te...>]

On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 12:43:29 +0000
Thomas Leonard <tal00r@...> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 01:16:57PM +0100, Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
> > Now to the question:
> > Many apps should be installed in /usr/local/apps, since they will be
> > used by many users... I run a rox-filer with su, and drag
> > the app there. But how should the owner and permissions be set on an
> > AppDir? If I don't change them they will be the same as the files
> > were in the .tar.gz, and they often have GID's (and UID's) that are
> > not used on my system.
> 
> They should have the owner and group of the user that extracted them,
> since non-root users can only create files with their own user ID
> anyway. Change them to root:root (or any other system user).

Yes, but if I install them as root, I will have to chown them manually
becouse then the files will have the owner they had in the .tar.gz...

> > Should they be set root.root? I often see that the
> > SGID-bit are set in rox-packages, why is this? If this is set and i
> > chown it to root.root, then all users will have effective group-id
> > of root when in these directories, and that doesn't feel right...
> 
> Which files? Only directories should have it set (where it has a
> different and harmless meaning).

Yes, I forgot to say it was only directories. I have never used the SGID
bit and I'm not sure why it is a good thing. So, why should AppDirs and
their directories be SGID?

> However, the easiest solution to your problems is to use Zero Install
> and run the apps directly from the directory
> /uri/0install/rox.sourceforge.net/apps instead of /usr/local/apps...

That's not easy, I live out in the woods with only a 56K modem! =)

/Jonatan
__  
  |   __                 ____        _          ____
  |__/__         _____  _____||___  (_) ____   _____|
  |     )(_____|(  |  )(_____||_____ | (______(_____|
 ==============|======================================
           ____|               http://www.kymatica.tk

Re: [rox-users] halt & reboot ... revisited

[Thomas Leonard <tal00r@ec...>]

On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 02:22:02AM +0000, Terry Blunt wrote:
> I comented some time ago I said that using the halt or reboot options from
> ROX session gives the message 'Invalid call to subprocess'
> 
> I've had the suggestion that I should use sudo.  Well I've tried that
> and got nowhere. However, by experimenting I've found that if I open a
> terminal window and enter the commands directly then they perform quite
> correctly. Of course under these conditions there is no 'Are you sure'
> type message.
> 
> Furthermore, I can make a script with these commands and they will operate
> correctly when clicked on, including when put on the icon bar (dangerous
> that but I wanted to at least check all the combinations).
> 
> With all of this, why does it fail when (apparently) exactly the same
> command is used in ROX sessions logout box?

Does it ask for a password? Try 'sudo -k' just before clicking on the ones
on the panel and see if they still work. If not, you need to use NOPASSWD
in the sudoers file. Do you get an error messages?


-- 
Thomas Leonard			http://rox.sourceforge.net
tal00r at ecs.soton.ac.uk	tal197 at users.sourceforge.net
GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6  8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1

Re: [rox-users] unsubscript

[Stephen Watson <swatson@ue...>]

In message <20031027134857.GB3744@...>
          Thomas Leonard <tal00r@...> scribbled:

> On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 11:16:17AM -0200, Thiago Nascimento Nogueira wrote:
> > Sorry about this message, but I couldn't find an easy way to unsubscript 
> > the list neithen at the end of messages nor in the ROX site.
> > Could you please do this for me?
> 
> Click on the link which appears at the very end of any post to the list,
> then click on 'Edit Options'.

Alternativly check out the List-Unsubscribe header in each post.

-- 
Stephen Watson          Physicist
Ultra Electronics Ltd - Signature Management Systems (UESMS)
Tel: +44 (0)1543 878888 (switchboard)     Fax: +44 (0)1543 878249
Email: watson@...

Re: [rox-users] unsubscript

[Thomas Leonard <tal00r@ec...>]

On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 11:16:17AM -0200, Thiago Nascimento Nogueira wrote:
> Sorry about this message, but I couldn't find an easy way to unsubscript 
> the list neithen at the end of messages nor in the ROX site.
> Could you please do this for me?

Click on the link which appears at the very end of any post to the list,
then click on 'Edit Options'.


-- 
Thomas Leonard			http://rox.sourceforge.net
tal00r at ecs.soton.ac.uk	tal197 at users.sourceforge.net
GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6  8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1

Re: [rox-users] Re: run .exe files with wine

[John Russell <drjimmy42@ya...>]

These aren't on a fat partition.  I've seen the same thing when they are
on both ext3 and xfs partitions.

John

On Sun, 2003-10-26 at 22:42, Erik Harrison wrote:
> 
> --- Stephen Watson <stephen@...> wrote:
> John Russell <drjimmy42@...> wrote:
> 
> >> How can I get rox to allow me to set a run action on a .exe file. As
> >> soon as I name a file to .exe and try to set the run action, I get
> >> 
> >> You can only set Run Action on a regular file
> >> 
> >> I want to set it so that the Run Action is set to 
> >> 
> >> wine "$@"
> >
> >Use MIME-Editor (from rox.sourceforge.net) to create a new type >for .exe
> >files called something like application/x-windows-executable.  You >should
> >then be able to bind wine to it.  I think.
> 
> In addition . . .
> 
> FAT filesystems are mounted with all files set to +x. You'll need to 
> either check to use the default app for known extensions, or copy them 
> to another partition and chmod -x
> 
> 
> -Erik
> 
> 
> >
> >-- 
> >Stephen Watson     http://www.kerofin.demon.co.uk/
> 
> I woke up and I had a big idea/To buy a new soul at the start of every year
> I paid up and it cost me pretty dear/Here's a hymn to those that disappear
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: The SF.net Donation Program.
> Do you like what SourceForge.net is doing for the Open
> Source Community?  Make a contribution, and help us add new
> features and functionality. Click here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
> _______________________________________________
> rox-users mailing list
> rox-users@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rox-users
> 
> 
> _____________________________________________________________
> Sluggy.Net: The Sluggy Freelance Community!
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: The SF.net Donation Program.
> Do you like what SourceForge.net is doing for the Open
> Source Community?  Make a contribution, and help us add new
> features and functionality. Click here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
> _______________________________________________
> rox-users mailing list
> rox-users@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rox-users

[rox-users] unsubscript

[Thiago Nascimento Nogueira <thnogueira@ya...>]

Sorry about this message, but I couldn't find an easy way to unsubscript 
the list neithen at the end of messages nor in the ROX site.
Could you please do this for me?

thanks

Re: [rox-users] small presentation, root-installation of AppDirs

[Thomas Leonard <tal00r@ec...>]

On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 01:16:57PM +0100, Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
> Now to the question:
> Many apps should be installed in /usr/local/apps, since they will be
> used by many users... I run a rox-filer with su, and drag
> the app there. But how should the owner and permissions be set on an
> AppDir? If I don't change them they will be the same as the files were
> in the .tar.gz, and they often have GID's (and UID's) that are not used
> on my system.

They should have the owner and group of the user that extracted them,
since non-root users can only create files with their own user ID anyway.
Change them to root:root (or any other system user).

> Should they be set root.root? I often see that the
> SGID-bit are set in rox-packages, why is this? If this is set and i
> chown it to root.root, then all users will have effective group-id of
> root when in these directories, and that doesn't feel right...

Which files? Only directories should have it set (where it has a different
and harmless meaning).

However, the easiest solution to your problems is to use Zero Install and
run the apps directly from the directory
/uri/0install/rox.sourceforge.net/apps instead of /usr/local/apps...


-- 
Thomas Leonard			http://rox.sourceforge.net
tal00r at ecs.soton.ac.uk	tal197 at users.sourceforge.net
GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6  8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1

[rox-users] small presentation, root-installation of AppDirs

[Jonatan Liljedahl <than@te...>]

Hi, I'm new on this list and have recently discovered rox. I used to be
(and still am, in the heart ;) a hardcore shell-user but in the recent
time I've got requests on helping girlfriend, friends and parents to
install linux on their machines. These people are not at all interrested
in learning unix shell and therefore i began looking into desktop
environments. KDE & GNOME are just too bloaty and big, but then I found
rox and that was it! I even started to using it myself, and the xterm
shell gets open less and less often... And I really like the idea of
Application directories!

Now to the question:
Many apps should be installed in /usr/local/apps, since they will be
used by many users... I run a rox-filer with su, and drag
the app there. But how should the owner and permissions be set on an
AppDir? If I don't change them they will be the same as the files were
in the .tar.gz, and they often have GID's (and UID's) that are not used
on my system. Should they be set root.root? I often see that the
SGID-bit are set in rox-packages, why is this? If this is set and i
chown it to root.root, then all users will have effective group-id of
root when in these directories, and that doesn't feel right...

/Jonatan
__  
  |   __                 ____        _          ____
  |__/__         _____  _____||___  (_) ____   _____|
  |     )(_____|(  |  )(_____||_____ | (______(_____|
 ==============|======================================
           ____|               http://www.kymatica.tk

Re: [rox-users] Re: shift select

[Stephen Watson <swatson@ue...>]

In message <gemini.3f9ce2ff015c34a00d16@...>
          John Pettigrew <john@...> scribbled:

> In a previous message, Stephen Watson <stephen@...> wrote:
> 
> > It is behaving exactly as icons view where you click and hold on an item to
> > start a drag, or click and hold not on an item for a select box.
> 
> The trouble is, in List view, there is no visible indication of there this
> selectable area is (unlike in Icons view), because the entries are so
> compressed.

Just discovered that the gap height is configurable, as a property of
TreeView, but it seems to be a little buggy.

In gtkrc-2.0 (or wherever)

style "big_gap" {
  GtkTreeView::vertical-separator = 8
}

class "ViewDetails" style "big_gap"

-- 
Stephen Watson          Physicist
Ultra Electronics Ltd - Signature Management Systems (UESMS)
Tel: +44 (0)1543 878888 (switchboard)     Fax: +44 (0)1543 878249
Email: watson@...

[rox-users] Baroque 0.4.1 and acpi.py 0.2.0

[Tilo Riemer <t.riemer@vi...>]

Hello,

new versions of Baroque and acpi.py are out.

The old acpi.py didn't work. The new one fixes these bugs and covers
more ACPI features.
You need the new Baroque for colaboration with acpi.py

You can download it from http://www.iapp.de/~riemer/projects


Best regards, Tilo

Re: [rox-users] ROX-Session 0.1.21 -- no glibc versioning!

[Thomas Leonard <tal00r@ec...>]

On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 10:20:59AM +1300, Alastair Porter wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-10-27 at 04:04, Thomas Leonard wrote:
> 
> > If you've got an older glibc than me (ie, where the normal binary
> > complains about needing GLIBC-2.3), please try this version instead. Let
> > me know if it works!
> > 
> > 	0refresh rox.sourceforge.net
> Whats the difference between this and hitting the refresh button?

Nothing at all :-)


-- 
Thomas Leonard			http://rox.sourceforge.net
tal00r at ecs.soton.ac.uk	tal197 at users.sourceforge.net
GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6  8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1

[rox-users] Re: shift select

[John Pettigrew <john@xl...>]

In a previous message, Stephen Watson <stephen@...> wrote=
:

> It is behaving exactly as icons view where you click and hold on an ite=
m to
> start a drag, or click and hold not on an item for a select box.

The trouble is, in List view, there is no visible indication of there thi=
s
selectable area is (unlike in Icons view), because the entries are so
compressed.

> Actually it is the column which is determining the sort order that is
> coloured differently.  Click on the Last Modified column header to see.=


Oh  :-(  Well, that's one idea down the drain!

> Isn't Alt already used by the window manager?  Alt drag moves the windo=
w
> under Sawfish.

This is true (although configurable)! Another idea gone  :-(

John
--=20
John Pettigrew                       Headstrong Games=20
john@...          Fun : Strategy : Price=20
http://www.headstrong-games.co.uk/   Board games that won't break the ban=
k=20
Valley of the Kings: ransack an ancient Egyptian tomb but beware of mummi=
es!=20

[rox-users] Re: run .exe files with wine

[John Pettigrew <john@xl...>]

In a previous message, Stephen Watson <stephen@...> wrote=
:

> Use MIME-Editor (from rox.sourceforge.net) to create a new type for .ex=
e
> files called something like application/x-windows-executable.  You shou=
ld
> then be able to bind wine to it.  I think.

Yes, that works. Alternatively, add a "Wine" entry to the SendTo menu and=
 you
don't even have to change the MIME database. I've also got this set up  :=
-)=20
In my case, the script is:

#!/bin/sh

/home/john/Apps/cxoffice/bin/wine "$@"



HTH

John
--=20
John Pettigrew                       Headstrong Games=20
john@...          Fun : Strategy : Price=20
http://www.headstrong-games.co.uk/   Board games that won't break the ban=
k=20
Knossos: escape the ever-changing labyrinth before the Minotaur catches y=
ou!=20

Re: [rox-users] Re: run .exe files with wine

[Erik Harrison <erikharrison@sl...>]

--- Stephen Watson <stephen@...> wrote:
John Russell <drjimmy42@...> wrote:

>> How can I get rox to allow me to set a run action on a .exe file. As
>> soon as I name a file to .exe and try to set the run action, I get
>> 
>> You can only set Run Action on a regular file
>> 
>> I want to set it so that the Run Action is set to 
>> 
>> wine "$@"
>
>Use MIME-Editor (from rox.sourceforge.net) to create a new type >for .exe
>files called something like application/x-windows-executable.  You >should
>then be able to bind wine to it.  I think.

In addition . . .

FAT filesystems are mounted with all files set to +x. You'll need to 
either check to use the default app for known extensions, or copy them 
to another partition and chmod -x


-Erik


>
>-- 
>Stephen Watson     http://www.kerofin.demon.co.uk/

I woke up and I had a big idea/To buy a new soul at the start of every year
I paid up and it cost me pretty dear/Here's a hymn to those that disappear


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: The SF.net Donation Program.
Do you like what SourceForge.net is doing for the Open
Source Community?  Make a contribution, and help us add new
features and functionality. Click here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
_______________________________________________
rox-users mailing list
rox-users@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rox-users


_____________________________________________________________
Sluggy.Net: The Sluggy Freelance Community!

[rox-users] halt & reboot ... revisited

[Terry Blunt <terry@la...>]

I comented some time ago I said that using the halt or reboot options from
ROX session gives the message 'Invalid call to subprocess'

I've had the suggestion that I should use sudo.  Well I've tried that and
got nowhere. However, by experimenting I've found that if I open a terminal
window and enter the commands directly then they perform quite correctly. Of
course under these conditions there is no 'Are you sure' type message.

Furthermore, I can make a script with these commands and they will operate
correctly when clicked on, including when put on the icon bar (dangerous
that but I wanted to at least check all the combinations).

With all of this, why does it fail when (apparently) exactly the same
command is used in ROX sessions logout box?

I am using Mandrake 9.1 and the K window manager.

-- 
Terry Blunt
My nightmare is the time when you walk into a room, reach towards
a quiescent computer and a deep, sonorous voice intones:
'You are about to make a mistake'