521 lines
20 KiB
Plaintext
521 lines
20 KiB
Plaintext
From: Digestifier <Linux-Admin-Request@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu>
|
|
To: Linux-Admin@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu
|
|
Reply-To: Linux-Admin@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu
|
|
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 94 14:13:55 EDT
|
|
Subject: Linux-Admin Digest #181
|
|
|
|
Linux-Admin Digest #181, Volume #2 Wed, 12 Oct 94 14:13:55 EDT
|
|
|
|
Contents:
|
|
Re: Tar and z option with DAT drive (Eyal Lebedinsky)
|
|
Re: PPP Servers (Al Longyear)
|
|
Re: dosemu0.52 & linux1.1.52 problem (Frank Derichsweiler)
|
|
PPP indirectly?? (Donald Griffin (CE))
|
|
Re: [Q] I/O error with sendmail (Tim Bass (Network Systems Engineer))
|
|
Re: SCSI vs IDE (David Wright)
|
|
smail configuration woes... (Douglas Lenz)
|
|
Re: Mystery Chip...AMD (John Palaima)
|
|
Re: Mystery Chip...AMD (scott@minotaur.alve.com)
|
|
Re: dosemu0.52 & linux1.1.52 problem (Daniel Tran)
|
|
Re: Please don't post security holess... (Jeff Kesselman)
|
|
Re: Please don't post security holess... (Robin D. Wilson)
|
|
|
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: eyal@fir.canberra.edu.au (Eyal Lebedinsky)
|
|
Subject: Re: Tar and z option with DAT drive
|
|
Date: 9 Oct 94 07:30:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
In <377smd$lqc@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> adkinsg@sonata.cc.purdue.edu (Garry Adkins) writes:
|
|
|
|
>Hi all!
|
|
|
|
>I'm going to buy a DAT drive in a few days, and I was wondering about
|
|
>using the z option with the DAT drive... I assume that it slows
|
|
>the speed of the backup, but does it have any other effect?
|
|
|
|
Physically it slows it down so that the streaming is disturbed, so the
|
|
tape will not hold as much data and the volume/minute may drop
|
|
drastically.
|
|
|
|
Logically, you are taking a high risk option. One error on the tape will
|
|
make it impossible to recover anything after that point, since the whole
|
|
file is one compressed stream. It is better to use something like afio,
|
|
which is a cpio clone with file-by-file compression. If your DAT tape
|
|
already compresses (as many do) then don't do any more software
|
|
compression; the software will compress better but you will loose the
|
|
speed and transparency benefit of the hardware option.
|
|
--
|
|
Regards
|
|
Eyal Lebedinsky eyal@ise.canberra.edu.au
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: longyear@netcom.com (Al Longyear)
|
|
Subject: Re: PPP Servers
|
|
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 13:52:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
pdcawley@iest.demon.co.uk (Piers Cawley) writes:
|
|
|
|
>For linux type clients that can do dynamic allocation of IP addresses
|
|
>it's easy enough to have a separate IP address associated with each
|
|
>incoming line, with each login name being associated with the IP
|
|
>address at the other end of the link.
|
|
|
|
That is normally called a 'static' allocation. Each user is given one
|
|
and only one IP address. Each user has a unique signon which maps to
|
|
one specific IP address.
|
|
|
|
The term 'dynamic' usually means that when the same user signs on at
|
|
different times, a different IP address is assigned. The IP address is
|
|
obtained from a pool of values and is not bound to a specific user.
|
|
|
|
>However, SCO hosts seem to have
|
|
>a problem with dynamically varying either end of its PPP link and, as
|
|
>all the incoming lines are going to be sharing a common phone number
|
|
>there is a problem.
|
|
|
|
The telephone number is not a function of the IP assignment. It is
|
|
used by your local PBX and the central switching station at the
|
|
telephone company to connect to a specific pair of wires.
|
|
|
|
The easiest method of doing dynamic IP assignment is to have the
|
|
telephone company or the local PBX do a 'rotary' system. It will have
|
|
one number into which all of the calls arrive. The rotary system finds
|
|
the first non-busy 'telephone' (modem) and connects there. The modem
|
|
maps to a serial port. The serial port maps to a tty device. The tty
|
|
device maps to a unique _remote_ IP address. Then when a user calls
|
|
the one number, the call is connected to to first first available tty
|
|
device. This gives you a different IP address with each call.
|
|
|
|
>Now, given that a link can be uniquely defined by the pair
|
|
><local IP>:<remote IP>, is it possible to have all the lines with the
|
|
>same local IP address and just vary the remote IP addresses.
|
|
|
|
Yes. The routing is performed based upon the remote IP address. You
|
|
may use the same local IP address for all connections.
|
|
|
|
Your local IP address will be the remote IP address to the remote
|
|
system. However, since their frames will be sent to your server based
|
|
upon the IP address, you need to make it a legal value. Don't use
|
|
addresses such as 0.0.0.0 or 127.*. A good choice for the local IP
|
|
address on the server is one of the IP addresses associated with the
|
|
network cards.
|
|
|
|
>I know we can just 'suck it and see', but I'd rather not have to do
|
|
>this with live clients ;) If anyone knows whether this can be done
|
|
>I'd appreciate it if they could let me know.
|
|
|
|
Ok. I've done this.
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Al Longyear longyear@netcom.com
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: i31ade@applsrv.rz.unibw-muenchen.de (Frank Derichsweiler)
|
|
Subject: Re: dosemu0.52 & linux1.1.52 problem
|
|
Date: 12 Oct 1994 13:59:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
dinob@zems.etf.hr (Dino Butorac (III rac)) writes:
|
|
|
|
>I am running linux 1.1.52 and I compiled dosemu0.52. I tried to do things
|
|
>just like it is written in the Quickstart file, but when I type dos -A, I
|
|
>get a 'segmentation fault' and the machine hangs... To be worse, my floppy
|
|
>is scrambled beyond recognition after that :((. After I destroyed 2 floppies
|
|
>I had no other options but to stop experimenting.
|
|
|
|
>Help?
|
|
|
|
>--
|
|
>Dino Butorac
|
|
>dinob@zems.etf.hr
|
|
|
|
Hi there !
|
|
The dosemu 0.52 will work with kernel versions <= 1.1.29 !
|
|
If you want to use the kernel 1.1.52, you will have to get
|
|
the new 0.53 kernel. You can find it on
|
|
tsx-11 in the ALPHA/dosemu/development directory.
|
|
|
|
Hope that helps
|
|
|
|
Frank
|
|
|
|
i31ade@applsrv.rz.unibw-muenchen.de
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: dgriffin@suntan.eng.usf.edu (Donald Griffin (CE))
|
|
Subject: PPP indirectly??
|
|
Date: 12 Oct 1994 09:25:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
I am interested in setting up a PPP link to put my linux box on the
|
|
internet. I used to live in a location where I had root access to a
|
|
machine on the internet and I have since moved to a place where I just
|
|
have dial-up access. Would it be possible for me to set up the PPP
|
|
client on my Linux box and then dial-up -> telnet into the machine that I
|
|
have root privledges on to complete the PPP connection (I dont think this
|
|
is possible without some sort of mod to the code or addition). Any
|
|
assistance would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
Thanks
|
|
Chris
|
|
ps. I am using a term connection right now and I would like more than is
|
|
possible with term.
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: bass@cais2.cais.com (Tim Bass (Network Systems Engineer))
|
|
Subject: Re: [Q] I/O error with sendmail
|
|
Date: 12 Oct 1994 14:24:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
I tracked down the error and fixed it on my platform.
|
|
The problem is in lmail.c. There are two lines
|
|
in the code:
|
|
|
|
... if(fputs( ...) != strlen( ...)) which is wrong.
|
|
|
|
The correct syntax is:
|
|
|
|
... if (fputs( ...) < 0) which is correct.
|
|
|
|
Should I upload a corrected mail.c to sunsite?
|
|
|
|
John Gotts (john@linux.reshall.umich.edu) wrote:
|
|
: Tim Bass (Network Systems Engineer) (bass@cais2.cais.com) wrote:
|
|
|
|
: : Sendmail sends mail just fine. Receiving mail gives
|
|
: : the error:
|
|
|
|
: : linux[\64]/tmp> /usr/lib/sendmail -v root < /tmp/testmessage
|
|
: : root... Connecting to linux.silkroad.com (local)...
|
|
: : lmail: write failed to temp file /tmp/lmail1465
|
|
: : root... I/O error
|
|
: : linux[\65]/tmp>
|
|
|
|
: : Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
: : BTW: The /tmp/lmail* file(s) are created.
|
|
: --
|
|
|
|
: The same stuff happens to me. Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
: --
|
|
: John Gotts (jgotts@umich.edu) 73 de N8QDW URL: http://www.umich.edu/~jgotts
|
|
: GE -d+ H s+: g-- p? !au a-- w+ v C++++ UL++++ P+>++ L++ 3- E--- N+++ K- !W M--
|
|
: V-- -po+(---) Y+ t+ 5 j+ R- G? tv b+ D B- e+ u--- h f+ r n- y? <Linux rules!>
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: dmw@prism1.prism1.com (David Wright)
|
|
Subject: Re: SCSI vs IDE
|
|
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 12:42:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
|
|
|
|
>>>>> "IM" == Ian McCloghrie <ianm@qualcomm.com> writes:
|
|
|
|
IM> From what I hear, in terms of speed, it's pretty much a toss-up
|
|
IM> between Enhanced IDE and SCSI. For a system with only one or two hard
|
|
IM> drives, IDE is just fine. For a system with more than that, or with
|
|
IM> a CD-ROM*, or (especially) with a tape drive**, SCSI is worth it, if for
|
|
IM> no other reason than you get to consolidate all those drives onto
|
|
IM> one IRQ :)
|
|
|
|
No, even on systems with one drive SCSI is a better choice than IDE
|
|
unless you are running a single-tasking OS like DOS. It is definately
|
|
possible to get transfer speeds out of IDE that are close to SCSI (but not
|
|
Fast & Wide SCSI). But you are paying for the speed with CPU busy waiting.
|
|
While SCSI may not be a winner in terms if transfer when one disk is
|
|
concerned, it will definately make a difference on slower machines in terms
|
|
of CPU impact.
|
|
|
|
Dave
|
|
|
|
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
|
|
Version: 2.6
|
|
|
|
iQCVAwUBLpvZn2++A+T9du0zAQGpxAP+P9+fDfa9Dbq87zzqvefNe6W5VysqDTZJ
|
|
mnFzp4l8LQGGVitXoMUHAZxD031hSIvbRZdFa4Y4gxX//meJe0QvZjR9USw9hrli
|
|
n2AyHKVqLBHKHYF32JYl1RF+FiMZaZ+NBbazxyhlmW/1P4Jhvo5v/4amCjULGcbZ
|
|
zNSuDcArpQs=
|
|
=w/by
|
|
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
|
|
--
|
|
____________________________________________________________________________
|
|
| /\ / | Prism Computer Applications | David Wright |
|
|
| -/--\-- | 14650 Detroit Ave, Suite LL40 | dmw@Prism1.COM |
|
|
| /____\ | Lakewood, OH 44107 USA | 216-228-1400 |
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: doug@interaccess (Douglas Lenz)
|
|
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.misc
|
|
Subject: smail configuration woes...
|
|
Date: 12 Oct 1994 05:50:57 GMT
|
|
Reply-To: doug@interaccess.com
|
|
|
|
I'm currently connecting to the internet via a dialin PPP connection. I've
|
|
configured smail to route mail through my PPP host as a smart_host (I'm using
|
|
it right now), but it only works if I'm actually connected via PPP. If I
|
|
try to send mail while I'm not connected, I get the following:
|
|
|
|
|------------------------- Failed addresses follow: ---------------------|
|
|
lenz@comm.mot.com ... transport smtp: connect: Network is unreachable
|
|
|------------------------- Message text follows: ------------------------|
|
|
|
|
I've tried using the 'retry' file and durations in my smail config, but it
|
|
insists on dying if my PPP connection is not up when I try to send mail.
|
|
|
|
Is there ANY way to be able to have smail retry sending mail if the smtp
|
|
connection is down?
|
|
|
|
Right now I've kludged it my having smail only queue mail. Then when I start
|
|
up my PPP connection, I enable smail to process the queue in the background.
|
|
When I shut down my PPP connection it likewise kills smail so that it won't
|
|
try sending anything. Certainly there must be a better way.
|
|
|
|
ANY help would be appreciated (I can forward my config files if needed).
|
|
|
|
Thanks in Advance!
|
|
|
|
Doug
|
|
|
|
doug@interaccess.com
|
|
lenz@comm.mot.com
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: jolt@gnu.ai.mit.edu (John Palaima)
|
|
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.systems,comp.os.linux.misc
|
|
Subject: Re: Mystery Chip...AMD
|
|
Date: 12 Oct 1994 16:16:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <rkean.8.0001DE5D@scsn.net>, Rob Kean <rkean@scsn.net> wrote:
|
|
>AMD is about to release, yes you guessed it, their 486DX2-80MHz!!!!!
|
|
>
|
|
>From what I've heard through my venders, It will run about $20 more than an
|
|
>Intel 66MHz.
|
|
|
|
Hah. Apparently you didn't hear that the Am486 DX/2 66 could be safely
|
|
over-clocked to run at 80Mhz. All the DX2-80 is is a relabeled DX2-66.
|
|
That's why it's not much more expensive. It's the same chip. Anyone wanna
|
|
take bets that new 66Mhz chips will be "crippled" so they can't be over-
|
|
clocked? :)
|
|
--
|
|
Richard Cooley Extraordinaire "Yeah. Arrgh."
|
|
rcooley96@dgl.ssc.mass.edu These are my opinions, not MITs etc...
|
|
rcooley@nyx.cs.du.edu Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux
|
|
"LILO - it's not just a boot loader, it's a way of life" -- me
|
|
|
|
-- what, no suck^H^H^H^Htakers? :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: scott@minotaur.alve.com
|
|
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.systems,comp.os.linux.misc
|
|
Subject: Re: Mystery Chip...AMD
|
|
Date: 5 Oct 1994 23:49:57 -0500
|
|
|
|
> While responding to an add inteh local paper for a $99 486 upgrade it came
|
|
> to light that this upgrade was a quote "486/66 Mhz" which was a "faster chip and
|
|
> less expensive than the i486DX2-66". This propted my query on what the hell
|
|
> this chip was and the response was AMD. I was not aware of this chip. I was
|
|
> under the impression that all the 66's 75's 100's etc (non-Pentium) were
|
|
> overclocked 33 Mhz chips. Does a 'real' 66 Mhz chip exist? If so (and I dont'
|
|
|
|
The chip is manufactured (here in Austin, I might add) by Advanced Micro
|
|
Devices (AMD). It is an internally clock-doubled 33MHz CPU, just like the
|
|
i486DX2-66. As far as I know, there are no 'real' 66 MHz chips. The pin-out
|
|
is identical to the Intel; it is supposed to work in Intel 486-compatible
|
|
motherboards, although from experience this is not always the case.
|
|
|
|
> think so" do traditional mother boards ( ie that could handle a DX2) support
|
|
> this chip. And Finally, if this is true is it compatble and reliable.
|
|
|
|
I am running Linux 1.1.45 on a mystery motherboard (UMC chipset) with an AMD
|
|
486DX2/66 with no problems, although my first motherboard choice (OPTi chipset)
|
|
had trouble when I upgraded the cache from 64K to 256K. Older versions of the
|
|
chip reportedly had problems with Ghostscript, but gs (and everything
|
|
else) runs just fine on mine. Be sure to get one with the MS Windows-
|
|
compatible logo on it; these are newer and more compatible, and you can cover
|
|
up the logo with a heatsink!
|
|
|
|
>
|
|
> INquiring minds want to know!! ;-))
|
|
> Thanks...Colin
|
|
|
|
===============================================================================
|
|
Scott Taylor ALVE, L.C.
|
|
scott@minotaur.alve.com (512) 467-8868 (voice)
|
|
(512) 467-8898 (FAX)
|
|
--
|
|
===============================================================================
|
|
Scott Taylor ALVE, L.C.
|
|
scott@minotaur.alve.com (512) 467-8868 (voice)
|
|
(512) 467-8898 (FAX)
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: dtran@emelnitz.ucla.edu (Daniel Tran)
|
|
Subject: Re: dosemu0.52 & linux1.1.52 problem
|
|
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 15:06:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <37gq45$jgp@archsrv.rz.unibw-muenchen.de> i31ade@applsrv.rz.unibw-muenchen.de (Frank Derichsweiler) writes:
|
|
>dinob@zems.etf.hr (Dino Butorac (III rac)) writes:
|
|
|
|
>>I am running linux 1.1.52 and I compiled dosemu0.52. I tried to do things
|
|
>>just like it is written in the Quickstart file, but when I type dos -A, I
|
|
>>get a 'segmentation fault' and the machine hangs... To be worse, my floppy
|
|
>>is scrambled beyond recognition after that :((. After I destroyed 2 floppies
|
|
>>I had no other options but to stop experimenting.
|
|
|
|
>>Help?
|
|
|
|
>>--
|
|
>>Dino Butorac
|
|
>>dinob@zems.etf.hr
|
|
|
|
>Hi there !
|
|
>The dosemu 0.52 will work with kernel versions <= 1.1.29 !
|
|
>If you want to use the kernel 1.1.52, you will have to get
|
|
>the new 0.53 kernel. You can find it on
|
|
>tsx-11 in the ALPHA/dosemu/development directory.
|
|
|
|
>Hope that helps
|
|
|
|
>Frank
|
|
|
|
>i31ade@applsrv.rz.unibw-muenchen.de
|
|
|
|
dosemu 0.52 is working on my machine with kernel 1.1.45. However i can
|
|
start it up if I do it from an Xterm. If i start at the console the I'll get
|
|
a black screen. Could this be one of the problem?
|
|
|
|
Daniel Tran - dtran@emelnitz.ucla.edu
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: jeffpk@netcom.com (Jeff Kesselman)
|
|
Subject: Re: Please don't post security holess...
|
|
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 1994 03:58:08 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <1994Oct9.200011.311@acad.ursinus.edu>,
|
|
Steve Kneizys <STEVO@acad.ursinus.edu> wrote:
|
|
>Tim Bass (Network Systems Engineer) (bass@cais2.cais.com) wrote:
|
|
>: [stuff deleted]
|
|
>
|
|
>: SOAPBOX
|
|
>
|
|
>: In a free and open society, ALL information should be available.
|
|
>: Many governments and orgs withhold information in the interest
|
|
>: of 'security' to the detriment of society as a whole. All this
|
|
>: done in the name of 'security'
|
|
>
|
|
>: BACK ON THE GROUND
|
|
>
|
|
>: [more stuff deleted]
|
|
>
|
|
>All information eh? Like
|
|
|
|
>
|
|
>Your sexual practices...how to make a nuclear device...your BANK CARD
|
|
>mag strip info with your PIN #...medical history...trade secrets...
|
|
>list of ppl's houses and how to defeat their home security system...
|
|
>President's moment by moment schedule...usernames and passwords...
|
|
|
|
Hmm. Its worth noting that of this list,
|
|
|
|
I) The plans to a Nuclear device ARE freely available. All the
|
|
information needed is in non-classified papers. In fact, an A-bomb's
|
|
plans were assembled many years ago by a college student as a research
|
|
project. The plans for an H-bomb werer printed in Progressive magazine.
|
|
the governtment DID try to stop Progressive from printing the arival but
|
|
the courts (rightly in my opinion) ruled that in our society the
|
|
government may NOT impede the publishign of information as long the
|
|
sources for that information were legal, which in this case they were.
|
|
|
|
II) Medical History -- Freely available from the Medical Information Board
|
|
(MIB). Insurance companies report into this database, and then
|
|
organizations who are members (like those self same insurance companies)
|
|
can request a file on any one of us. (Thats how an inusrance company
|
|
tracks down things like pre-existing conditions.)
|
|
|
|
I'm not saying I necessarily agree that these points bear back to the
|
|
debate at hand. Frankly, I think the analogy was rather strained...
|
|
|
|
JK
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: robin@pencom.com (Robin D. Wilson)
|
|
Subject: Re: Please don't post security holess...
|
|
Date: 12 Oct 1994 14:50:31 GMT
|
|
Reply-To: robin@pencom.com
|
|
|
|
In article <37foqi$8g2@nntp1.u.washington.edu> mkshenk@u.washington.edu (M.
|
|
K. Shenk) writes:
|
|
:In article <1994Oct11.152740.15304@cs.cornell.edu>,
|
|
:La'szlo' Lada'nyi <ladanyi@cs.cornell.edu> wrote:
|
|
:>mkshenk@u.washington.edu (M. K. Shenk) writes:
|
|
:>[...]
|
|
:>>>> Penetrating the security of a
|
|
:>>>> computer system is totally harmless in and of itself.
|
|
:>>> ^^^ LOOOK! LOOOOK at this! "in and of itself."
|
|
:>>>This is your opinion, and you would probably find that 99% of
|
|
:>>>administrators will disagree with you.
|
|
|
|
Mr. Shenk, you are _simply_ (and completely) WRONG! Privacy is a _very_
|
|
significant thing. You are advocating a way of life that leaves people no
|
|
choice but to completely conceal their private information within their own
|
|
heads.
|
|
|
|
If I simply walked up to your front door, picked the lock, opened the door,
|
|
and then walked away -- would you feel any less secure? I'll bet you'd
|
|
figure out how to put a better lock on the door. When people put password
|
|
protection on their systems, it is simply a means to prevent _unwanted_
|
|
access to their systems. People know (most of them anyway) that the password
|
|
protection is no more of a guarantee than a deadbolt on the front door, but
|
|
it is an attempt -- with the tools at hand. When you break that protection,
|
|
you have violated their _wishes_ (100% of the time -- not even 99%),
|
|
otherwise they wouldn't have placed the restriction on the system in the
|
|
first place. Even if they have it _poorly_ protected, that simply says more
|
|
about thier _ability_ to protect the system -- not about thier intentions.
|
|
|
|
Clearly, you have alot to learn about being _human_...
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
=============================================================================
|
|
*** These are my opinions... Mine! All Mine! Minemineminemineminemine! ***
|
|
=============================================================================
|
|
Robin D. Wilson robin@pencom.com Pencom Software
|
|
701 Canyon Bend Dr. 9050 Capital of Texas Hwy
|
|
Pflugerville, TX 78660 Austin, TX 78759
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
|
|
|
|
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
|
|
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
|
|
|
|
Internet: Linux-Admin-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
|
|
|
|
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.admin) via:
|
|
|
|
Internet: Linux-Admin@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
|
|
|
|
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
|
|
nic.funet.fi pub/OS/Linux
|
|
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
|
|
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
|
|
|
|
End of Linux-Admin Digest
|
|
******************************
|