date:20120116

Re: [Astlinux-users] Gtalk

2012-01-16 Thread James Babiak

Hey Lonnie,

Nope, using 1.4. I thought about possibly switching over to it, but 
decided against it. Didn't want to have to rewrite all my dialplan, etc. 
Plus we use 1.4 at work.

I played around with it a bit more, and I was able to login to both 
accounts using other jabber clients. So that eliminates things on the 
Google side. I have to believe it's some type of issue with either the 
module or Asterisk 1.4, since every other variable seems to be 
eliminated. Has anyone else on 1.4 got it working?

Thanks.

-James

On 01/15/2012 06:27 PM, Lonnie Abelbeck wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> Are you using Asterisk 1.8 ?  If not, you may have better results with 
> Asterisk 1.8.
>
> I know along with Michael, David Kerr also got GTalk working properly.  Both 
> use Asterisk 1.8.
>
> Lonnie
>
>
> On Jan 15, 2012, at 3:49 PM, James Babiak wrote:
>
>> Very weird...
>>
>> Since it seems like my configuration is kosher, I started looking into 
>> possible networking/system problems which might be causing this. I tried 
>> pinging talk.google.com, and low and behold I see that the traffic is going 
>> across my ipv6 tunnel with he.net. I assumed this might be the source of the 
>> issue, so I disabled the tunnel and tried again. I confirmed that 
>> talk.google.com was resolving to an ipv4 address, and that I could ping it 
>> and connect to port 5222, and tried again. Still having the problem. I did a 
>> packet capture on the traffic and confirmed two-way communication. I'm 
>> seeing the following:
>>
>> (Omitting irrelevant ACKs)
>> SYN, SYN/ACK, ACK Handsake
>> 40.04118971.180.124.16874.125.157.125Jabber/XML
>> Request:> xmlns:stream='http://etherx.jabber.org/streams' xmlns='jabber:client' 
>> to='gmail.com' version='1.0'>
>> 60.08267374.125.157.12571.180.124.168Jabber/XML
>> Response:> xmlns:stream="http://etherx.jabber.org/streams"; xmlns="jabber:client">
>> 80.08271174.125.157.12571.180.124.168Jabber/XML
>> Response:> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-tls">> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-sasl">X-GOOGLE-TOKENX-OAUTH2
>> 100.08287271.180.124.16874.125.157.125Jabber/XML
>> Request:
>> 110.12357974.125.157.12571.180.124.168Jabber/XML
>> Response:
>> 134.08438671.180.124.16874.125.157.125Jabber/XMLRequest: 
>> \200\211\001\003\001\000`\000\000\000 
>> \000\0009\000\0008\000\0005\000\000\210\000\000\207\000\000\204\000\000\026\000\000\023\000\000
>> 144.08466071.180.124.16874.125.157.125Jabber/XMLRequest: 
>> \200\211\001\003\001\000`\000\000\000 
>> \000\0009\000\0008\000\0005\000\000\210\000\000\207\000\000\204\000\000\026\000\000\023\000\000
>> 154.08485071.180.124.16874.125.157.125Jabber/XMLRequest: 
>> \204\000\000\026\000\000\023\000\000
>> 164.12610174.125.157.12571.180.124.168TCPxmpp-client>  
>> 43773 [ACK] Seq=430 Ack=1744 Win=19200 Len=0 TSV=165017604 TSER=14984656
>> 174.12625271.180.124.16874.125.157.125Jabber/XMLRequest: 
>> \000\000A\003\000\200\000\000\005\000\000\004\001\000\200\000\000\025\000\000\022\000\000\t\006\000@\000\000\024\000\000\021\000\000\b\000\000\006\004\000\200\000\000\003\002\000\200\000\000\377\336\252*\217a\322\177f\035@)\215\0314L\303\023\230\341
>> 184.13109474.125.157.12571.180.124.168TCPxmpp-client>  
>> 43773 [FIN, ACK] Seq=430 Ack=3162 Win=22016 Len=0 TSV=165017608 TSER=14984656
>> 194.13120071.180.124.16874.125.157.125Jabber/XMLRequest: 
>> \211\001\003\001\000`\000\000\000 
>> \000\0009\000\0008\000\0005\000\000\210\000\000\207\000\000\204\000\000\026\000\000\023\000\000
>> 204.16856974.125.157.12571.180.124.168TCPxmpp-client>  
>> 43773 [RST] Seq=430 Win=0 Len=0
>> 214.17106874.125.157.12571.180.124.168TCPxmpp-client>  
>> 43773 [RST] Seq=430 Win=0 Len=0
>> 224.17109774.125.157.12571.180.124.168TCPxmpp-client>  
>> 43773 [RST] Seq=430 Win=0 Len=0
>> 234.17356374.125.157.12571.180.124.168TCPxmpp-client>  
>> 43773 [RST] Seq=431 Win=0 Len=0
>> 244.17606574.125.157.12571.180.124.168TCPxmpp-client>  
>> 43773 [RST] Seq=431 Win=0 Len=0
>>
>> I've never really messed around with jabber, so I'm not sure if the output 
>> above looks normal or not. It seems like it begins the authentication 
>> negotiation, begins TLS, sends a bunch of Jabber requests, but then gets a 
>> FIN back followed by a bunch of RSTs.
>>
>> It's at this point that the Jabber module basically begins to freak out and 
>> loop. No more communication continues on after this point, unless I restart 
>> Asterisk.
>>
>> So, it seems like my configuration is good and the network connectivity is 
>> good. Since I'm running the standard Astlinux 1.0.1 build of Jabber (which 
>> others have no problem with), I have to believe it's not a module/Asterisk 
>> related issue. Any idea

Re: [Astlinux-users] Gtalk

2012-01-16 Thread Michael Keuter


Am 16.01.2012 um 14:32 schrieb James Babiak:

> Hey Lonnie,
> 
> Nope, using 1.4. I thought about possibly switching over to it, but 
> decided against it. Didn't want to have to rewrite all my dialplan, etc. 
> Plus we use 1.4 at work.
> 
> I played around with it a bit more, and I was able to login to both 
> accounts using other jabber clients. So that eliminates things on the 
> Google side. I have to believe it's some type of issue with either the 
> module or Asterisk 1.4, since every other variable seems to be 
> eliminated. Has anyone else on 1.4 got it working?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> -James


I never tested it in 1.4. But Asterisk 1.8.8.1 is now stable enough to give it 
a try.

Michael

http://www.mksolutions.info





--
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Mar 27 - Feb 2
Save $400 by Jan. 27
Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2
___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
pay...@krisk.org.

[Astlinux-users] multi-NIC

2012-01-16 Thread Shamus Rask

I'm looking for advice on how to best manage a multi-NIC server. My current
AstLinux box has 2 NICs; I would like to do the following and would
appreciate any guidance/suggestions:

NIC 1 - WAN
  - PPPoE based
  - used only for SIP trunk to provider
  - only ports to be opened are 5060 + RTP ports
  - deploy firewall on this port

NIC 2 - LAN
  - DHCP based
  - used for on-net phones (mixture of SIP, IAX and UNISTIM)
  - ssh access to box
  - web-access

Looking in Asterisk I see there is a "bindaddr" command for both SIP.conf
and IAX.conf. I don't see anything similar for the UNISTIM file. Is there a
broader .conf file that could control this?

For the WAN port, how do I bindaddr when my ISP can and does change my
external IP periodically?

cheers,
   Shamus
--
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Mar 27 - Feb 2
Save $400 by Jan. 27
Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
pay...@krisk.org.

Re: [Astlinux-users] multi-NIC

2012-01-16 Thread Michael Keuter


Am 16.01.2012 um 15:18 schrieb Shamus Rask:

> I'm looking for advice on how to best manage a multi-NIC server. My current 
> AstLinux box has 2 NICs; I would like to do the following and would 
> appreciate any guidance/suggestions:
> 
> NIC 1 - WAN
>   - PPPoE based
>   - used only for SIP trunk to provider
>   - only ports to be opened are 5060 + RTP ports
>   - deploy firewall on this port
> 
> NIC 2 - LAN
>   - DHCP based
>   - used for on-net phones (mixture of SIP, IAX and UNISTIM)
>   - ssh access to box
>   - web-access
> 
> Looking in Asterisk I see there is a "bindaddr" command for both SIP.conf and 
> IAX.conf. I don't see anything similar for the UNISTIM file. Is there a 
> broader .conf file that could control this?
> 
> For the WAN port, how do I bindaddr when my ISP can and does change my 
> external IP periodically? 
> 
> cheers,
>Shamus

There is no bindaddr for unistim. It was not supported very well in Asterisk, 
but now Igor Goncharovsky  maintains it.

In Asterisk 1.8 you can use 'res_stun_monitor.conf' and enter a STUN server, 
works fine for me. 

Michael

http://www.mksolutions.info





--
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Mar 27 - Feb 2
Save $400 by Jan. 27
Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2
___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
pay...@krisk.org.

Re: [Astlinux-users] multi-NIC

2012-01-16 Thread James Babiak

Shamus,

Since you have two NICs and you want Asterisk to bind to both (WAN and
LAN), use the address 0.0.0.0 for the value of bindaddr. I believe this is
the default anyway, and it will bind to all interfaces. When you use this,
it doesn't matter if your IP address changes.

You can use the built in firewall to specify what ports are available on
the WAN interface and block all but 5060UDP and the RTP range.

-James

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Shamus Rask  wrote:

> I'm looking for advice on how to best manage a multi-NIC server. My
> current AstLinux box has 2 NICs; I would like to do the following and would
> appreciate any guidance/suggestions:
>
> NIC 1 - WAN
>   - PPPoE based
>   - used only for SIP trunk to provider
>   - only ports to be opened are 5060 + RTP ports
>   - deploy firewall on this port
>
> NIC 2 - LAN
>   - DHCP based
>   - used for on-net phones (mixture of SIP, IAX and UNISTIM)
>   - ssh access to box
>   - web-access
>
> Looking in Asterisk I see there is a "bindaddr" command for both SIP.conf
> and IAX.conf. I don't see anything similar for the UNISTIM file. Is there a
> broader .conf file that could control this?
>
> For the WAN port, how do I bindaddr when my ISP can and does change my
> external IP periodically?
>
> cheers,
>Shamus
>
>
> --
> RSA(R) Conference 2012
> Mar 27 - Feb 2
> Save $400 by Jan. 27
> Register now!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2
> ___
> Astlinux-users mailing list
> Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users
>
> Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to
> pay...@krisk.org.
>
--
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Mar 27 - Feb 2
Save $400 by Jan. 27
Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
pay...@krisk.org.

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread dan


AstLinux Team,
 
Thank your for your tireless efforts.  I know it's often said, but it truly 
bears repeating.
 
I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous 
[http://doc.astlinux.org/userdoc:upgrade-0.7] upgrade instructions, which I 
followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 1.0.1.  
Everything was going according to the instructions until I rebooted.  My first 
indication that things hadn't gone well came from the Web Interface, which 
revealed a number of failed registrations.  ("Registration Sent" was shown for 
all providers under SIP Trunk Registrations.)
 
Further investigation revealed many pages of Notices, Warnings, and Errors in 
the log.  There are too many to list here, but I saved the file and would 
gladly forward it to one or more developers by private e-mail.  Although I was 
able to access the machine by SSH and HTTPS, it was apparent that much of the 
trouble impacted network functionality.  Even a PING to one of our providers 
didn't work.  No IP address was revealed, suggesting we were having trouble 
with DNS resolution.  I regret that I wasn't able to do more troubleshooting; I 
was anxious to get the unit back in service.
 
Because the web interface was working, I used it to revert to 0.7.10 and 
reboot.  However, the hardware didn't successfully boot.  A check of the local 
monitor suggested (I think) that Runnix 0.4 wasn't compatible with 0.7.10.  
After entering "xrunnix" at the local console, everything seems to be working 
as it had before - under Runnix 0.3.3 & AstLinux 0.7.10.
 
My immediate concern is that I'd like to get the hardware to a point where 
it'll survive a power failure without trying to boot into the new version of 
Runnix or AstLinux.  While we don't experience many power failures and the PBX 
is on a big, fat UPS, Murphy's Law dictates that any power failure will occur 
the next time I'm out-of-town or otherwise unavailable.  Until a solution is 
found, can you tell me how to temporarily remove the new versions of Runnix and 
AstLinux?  That would be very helpful.
 
Of course, it might also be nice to figure out what's causing this trouble - 
just in case it impacts other users.  Also, while AstLinux 0.7.10 is working 
perfectly for my present purposes, I'd prefer to not be stuck-in-time.
 
By the way, there's a significant likelihood that this problem is a result of 
some hardware incompatibility, which I've had before with this machine.  It's a 
HP DC7300, 1.8 GHz Pentium Dual Core Blade Workstation with 512 MB RAM.  
Previously, earlier AstLinux versions wouldn't load from the SATA 
Drive-on-module.  That was solved quite some time ago and doesn't seem to be 
the case now.  Also, it appears that both NICs are being detected and drivers 
are being loaded.
 
Thanks in advance for everyone's thoughts and advice.
 
Dan--
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Mar 27 - Feb 2
Save $400 by Jan. 27
Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
pay...@krisk.org.

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread Tom Chadwin

Hi Dan

 

If you SSH to the box, you can swap the runnix and xrunnix files:

 

/oldroot/cdrom/runnix

/oldroot/cdrom/runnix.img

/oldroot/cdrom/Xrunnix

/oldroot/cdrom/Xrunnix.img

 

That should mean that it will reboot without intervention. I’ve had to go 
through the same process for live box of ours.

 

Hope this helps

 

Tom

 

 

From: d...@ryson.org [mailto:d...@ryson.org] 
Sent: 16 January 2012 15:21
To: AstLinux Users Mailing List
Cc: AstLinux Users Mailing List (astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net)
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

 

AstLinux Team,

 

Thank your for your tireless efforts.  I know it's often said, but it truly 
bears repeating.

 

I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous upgrade instructions 
 , which I followed explicitly 
when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 1.0.1.  Everything was going 
according to the instructions until I rebooted.  My first indication that 
things hadn't gone well came from the Web Interface, which revealed a number of 
failed registrations.  ("Registration Sent" was shown for all providers under 
SIP Trunk Registrations.)

 

Further investigation revealed many pages of Notices, Warnings, and Errors in 
the log.  There are too many to list here, but I saved the file and would 
gladly forward it to one or more developers by private e-mail.  Although I was 
able to access the machine by SSH and HTTPS, it was apparent that much of the 
trouble impacted network functionality.  Even a PING to one of our providers 
didn't work.  No IP address was revealed, suggesting we were having trouble 
with DNS resolution.  I regret that I wasn't able to do more troubleshooting; I 
was anxious to get the unit back in service.

 

Because the web interface was working, I used it to revert to 0.7.10 and 
reboot.  However, the hardware didn't successfully boot.  A check of the local 
monitor suggested (I think) that Runnix 0.4 wasn't compatible with 0.7.10.  
After entering "xrunnix" at the local console, everything seems to be working 
as it had before - under Runnix 0.3.3 & AstLinux 0.7.10.

 

My immediate concern is that I'd like to get the hardware to a point where 
it'll survive a power failure without trying to boot into the new version of 
Runnix or AstLinux.  While we don't experience many power failures and the PBX 
is on a big, fat UPS, Murphy's Law dictates that any power failure will occur 
the next time I'm out-of-town or otherwise unavailable.  Until a solution is 
found, can you tell me how to temporarily remove the new versions of Runnix and 
AstLinux?  That would be very helpful.

 

Of course, it might also be nice to figure out what's causing this trouble - 
just in case it impacts other users.  Also, while AstLinux 0.7.10 is working 
perfectly for my present purposes, I'd prefer to not be stuck-in-time.

 

By the way, there's a significant likelihood that this problem is a result of 
some hardware incompatibility, which I've had before with this machine.  It's a 
HP DC7300, 1.8 GHz Pentium Dual Core Blade Workstation with 512 MB RAM.  
Previously, earlier AstLinux versions wouldn't load from the SATA 
Drive-on-module.  That was solved quite some time ago and doesn't seem to be 
the case now.  Also, it appears that both NICs are being detected and drivers 
are being loaded.

 

Thanks in advance for everyone's thoughts and advice.

 

Dan

--
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Mar 27 - Feb 2
Save $400 by Jan. 27
Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
pay...@krisk.org.

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread dan


Hi Tom,
 
That worked perfectly. The system now boots perfectly, without user 
intervention, using the prior Runnix and AstLinux versions.
 
The AstLinux web interface is still reporting "Runnix Release: runnix-0.4-5339" 
but I suspect it's reading that from the "ver" file, which is also located in 
/oldboot/cdrom and shows the approximate date and time of my upgrade attempt.
 
Thanks for the help!
 
Dan
 
-Original Message-
From: "Tom Chadwin" 
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 10:56am
To: "'AstLinux Users Mailing List'" 
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released




Hi Dan
 
 
 
If you SSH to the box, you can swap the runnix and xrunnix files:
 
 
 
/oldroot/cdrom/runnix
/oldroot/cdrom/runnix.img
/oldroot/cdrom/Xrunnix
/oldroot/cdrom/Xrunnix.img
 
 
 
That should mean that it will reboot without intervention. I’ve had to go 
through the same process for live box of ours.
 
 
 
Hope this helps
 
 
 
Tom
 
 
 
 
 
 

From: d...@ryson.org [mailto:d...@ryson.org] 
Sent: 16 January 2012 15:21
To: AstLinux Users Mailing List
Cc: AstLinux Users Mailing List (astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net)
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
 
 
 
AstLinux Team,
 
Thank your for your tireless efforts.  I know it's often said, but it truly 
bears repeating.
 
I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous 
[http://doc.astlinux.org/userdoc:upgrade-0.7] upgrade instructions, which I 
followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 1.0.1.  
Everything was going according to the instructions until I rebooted.  My first 
indication that things hadn't gone well came from the Web Interface, which 
revealed a number of failed registrations.  ("Registration Sent" was shown for 
all providers under SIP Trunk Registrations.)
 
Further investigation revealed many pages of Notices, Warnings, and Errors in 
the log.  There are too many to list here, but I saved the file and would 
gladly forward it to one or more developers by private e-mail.  Although I was 
able to access the machine by SSH and HTTPS, it was apparent that much of the 
trouble impacted network functionality.  Even a PING to one of our providers 
didn't work.  No IP address was revealed, suggesting we were having trouble 
with DNS resolution.  I regret that I wasn't able to do more troubleshooting; I 
was anxious to get the unit back in service.
 
Because the web interface was working, I used it to revert to 0.7.10 and 
reboot.  However, the hardware didn't successfully boot.  A check of the local 
monitor suggested (I think) that Runnix 0.4 wasn't compatible with 0.7.10.  
After entering "xrunnix" at the local console, everything seems to be working 
as it had before - under Runnix 0.3.3 & AstLinux 0.7.10.
 
My immediate concern is that I'd like to get the hardware to a point where 
it'll survive a power failure without trying to boot into the new version of 
Runnix or AstLinux.  While we don't experience many power failures and the PBX 
is on a big, fat UPS, Murphy's Law dictates that any power failure will occur 
the next time I'm out-of-town or otherwise unavailable.  Until a solution is 
found, can you tell me how to temporarily remove the new versions of Runnix and 
AstLinux?  That would be very helpful.
 
Of course, it might also be nice to figure out what's causing this trouble - 
just in case it impacts other users.  Also, while AstLinux 0.7.10 is working 
perfectly for my present purposes, I'd prefer to not be stuck-in-time.
 
By the way, there's a significant likelihood that this problem is a result of 
some hardware incompatibility, which I've had before with this machine.  It's a 
HP DC7300, 1.8 GHz Pentium Dual Core Blade Workstation with 512 MB RAM.  
Previously, earlier AstLinux versions wouldn't load from the SATA 
Drive-on-module.  That was solved quite some time ago and doesn't seem to be 
the case now.  Also, it appears that both NICs are being detected and drivers 
are being loaded.
 
Thanks in advance for everyone's thoughts and advice.
 
Dan--
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Mar 27 - Feb 2
Save $400 by Jan. 27
Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
pay...@krisk.org.

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread Lonnie Abelbeck

Hi Dan,

The proper method to revert to runnix-0.3 from runnix-0.4 after you upgraded 
was to simply use the System tab -> 

RUNNIX Bootloader Upgrade:

[ Revert to Previous ] - Runnix - _x_ Confirm

If you did the above at the same time you reverted from AstLinux 1.0.1 to 
AstLinux 0.7.10 in the System tab all would have been good.

In your case, when you reverted to AstLinux 0.7.10 and were able to boot via 
"xrunnix" you could have also used the same System tab method to make it stick.

Tom's suggestion should only be used as a last resort, ie, when AstLinux can't 
be booted because of a RUNNIX / AstLinux mismatch.

Back to your original issue...

It seems to me your hardware is being recognized properly by AstLinux 1.0.1, 
since you booted and SSH and HTTPS worked.

Feel free to privately email your logs to me, that would help.

Is is possible you upgraded to a different version of Asterisk than you had 
previously?

Lonnie



On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:20 AM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

> AstLinux Team,
>  
> Thank your for your tireless efforts.  I know it's often said, but it truly 
> bears repeating.
>  
> I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous upgrade instructions, which I 
> followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 1.0.1.  
> Everything was going according to the instructions until I rebooted.  My 
> first indication that things hadn't gone well came from the Web Interface, 
> which revealed a number of failed registrations.  ("Registration Sent" was 
> shown for all providers under SIP Trunk Registrations.)
>  
> Further investigation revealed many pages of Notices, Warnings, and Errors in 
> the log.  There are too many to list here, but I saved the file and would 
> gladly forward it to one or more developers by private e-mail.  Although I 
> was able to access the machine by SSH and HTTPS, it was apparent that much of 
> the trouble impacted network functionality.  Even a PING to one of our 
> providers didn't work.  No IP address was revealed, suggesting we were having 
> trouble with DNS resolution.  I regret that I wasn't able to do more 
> troubleshooting; I was anxious to get the unit back in service.
>  
> Because the web interface was working, I used it to revert to 0.7.10 and 
> reboot.  However, the hardware didn't successfully boot.  A check of the 
> local monitor suggested (I think) that Runnix 0.4 wasn't compatible with 
> 0.7.10.  After entering "xrunnix" at the local console, everything seems to 
> be working as it had before - under Runnix 0.3.3 & AstLinux 0.7.10.
>  
> My immediate concern is that I'd like to get the hardware to a point where 
> it'll survive a power failure without trying to boot into the new version of 
> Runnix or AstLinux.  While we don't experience many power failures and the 
> PBX is on a big, fat UPS, Murphy's Law dictates that any power failure will 
> occur the next time I'm out-of-town or otherwise unavailable.  Until a 
> solution is found, can you tell me how to temporarily remove the new versions 
> of Runnix and AstLinux?  That would be very helpful.
>  
> Of course, it might also be nice to figure out what's causing this trouble - 
> just in case it impacts other users.  Also, while AstLinux 0.7.10 is working 
> perfectly for my present purposes, I'd prefer to not be stuck-in-time.
>  
> By the way, there's a significant likelihood that this problem is a result of 
> some hardware incompatibility, which I've had before with this machine.  It's 
> a HP DC7300, 1.8 GHz Pentium Dual Core Blade Workstation with 512 MB RAM.  
> Previously, earlier AstLinux versions wouldn't load from the SATA 
> Drive-on-module.  That was solved quite some time ago and doesn't seem to be 
> the case now.  Also, it appears that both NICs are being detected and drivers 
> are being loaded.
>  
> Thanks in advance for everyone's thoughts and advice.
>  
> Dan



--
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Mar 27 - Feb 2
Save $400 by Jan. 27
Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2
___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
pay...@krisk.org.

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread dan

Lonnie,

Thanks for coming to my rescue (yet again).

I wonder if by not using the proper method to revert to runnix-0.4, I've 
managed to get the Web Interface out of sync.  When I ask it to Show Installed, 
I get this reply:

Current version is: runnix-0.4-5339, Previous saved version is: runnix-0.3.3

However, I suspect I'm running the older runnix, since the first thing logged 
was use of Busybox v1.12.4.

At this point, shall I use the System tab to "Revert to Previous" to get back 
in sync?  At this point, I'm not sure which version "Previous" is referring to. 
 I'd like to revert to runnix-0.3.3 but that's what I'm running.

Thanks for agreeing to take a look at the log.  I'll send it to you shortly.

Sorry, I'm not sure what you meant by this question, "Is is possible you 
upgraded to a different version of Asterisk than you had previously?"  But 
perhaps this will answer it:

I had been running 0.7.10. 
I changed the Repository URL in the Web interface to this:
http://mirror.astlinux.org/ast18-firmware-1.x
When I clicked "Check for New" firmware, I was advised that I was running 
0.7.10 and new version 1.0.1 was available.
After reverting to previous and checking "Show Installed", I now get this:
Current version is: astlinux-0.7.10, Previous saved version is: astlinux-1.0.1
However, from the CLI, I verified that Asterisk 1.8.7.1 is operating.  Isn't 
that what is supposed to be in 1.0.0?  Specifically, core show version reveals 
this:
Asterisk 1.8.7.1 built by dhartman @ centos32 on a i686 running Linux on 
2011-10-18 03:34:39 UTC

Dan

-Original Message-
From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 12:28pm
To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Hi Dan,

The proper method to revert to runnix-0.3 from runnix-0.4 after you upgraded 
was to simply use the System tab -> 

RUNNIX Bootloader Upgrade:

[ Revert to Previous ] - Runnix - _x_ Confirm

If you did the above at the same time you reverted from AstLinux 1.0.1 to 
AstLinux 0.7.10 in the System tab all would have been good.

In your case, when you reverted to AstLinux 0.7.10 and were able to boot via 
"xrunnix" you could have also used the same System tab method to make it stick.

Tom's suggestion should only be used as a last resort, ie, when AstLinux can't 
be booted because of a RUNNIX / AstLinux mismatch.

Back to your original issue...

It seems to me your hardware is being recognized properly by AstLinux 1.0.1, 
since you booted and SSH and HTTPS worked.

Feel free to privately email your logs to me, that would help.

Is is possible you upgraded to a different version of Asterisk than you had 
previously?

Lonnie

On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:20 AM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

> AstLinux Team,
>  
> Thank your for your tireless efforts.  I know it's often said, but it truly 
> bears repeating.
>  
> I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous upgrade instructions, which I 
> followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 1.0.1.  
> Everything was going according to the instructions until I rebooted.  My 
> first indication that things hadn't gone well came from the Web Interface, 
> which revealed a number of failed registrations.  ("Registration Sent" was 
> shown for all providers under SIP Trunk Registrations.)
>  
> Further investigation revealed many pages of Notices, Warnings, and Errors in 
> the log.  There are too many to list here, but I saved the file and would 
> gladly forward it to one or more developers by private e-mail.  Although I 
> was able to access the machine by SSH and HTTPS, it was apparent that much of 
> the trouble impacted network functionality.  Even a PING to one of our 
> providers didn't work.  No IP address was revealed, suggesting we were having 
> trouble with DNS resolution.  I regret that I wasn't able to do more 
> troubleshooting; I was anxious to get the unit back in service.
>  
> Because the web interface was working, I used it to revert to 0.7.10 and 
> reboot.  However, the hardware didn't successfully boot.  A check of the 
> local monitor suggested (I think) that Runnix 0.4 wasn't compatible with 
> 0.7.10.  After entering "xrunnix" at the local console, everything seems to 
> be working as it had before - under Runnix 0.3.3 & AstLinux 0.7.10.
>  
> My immediate concern is that I'd like to get the hardware to a point where 
> it'll survive a power failure without trying to boot into the new version of 
> Runnix or AstLinux.  While we don't experience many power failures and the 
> PBX is on a big, fat UPS, Murphy's Law dictates that any power failure will 
> occur the next time I'm out-of-town or otherwise unavailable.  Until a 
> solution is found, can you tell me how to temporarily remove the new versions 
> of Runnix and AstLinux?  That would be very helpful.
>  
> Of course, it might also be nice to figure out what's causing this trouble - 
> just in case it impacts other users.  Also, while AstLinux

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread Michael Keuter


Am 16.01.2012 um 19:48 schrieb d...@ryson.org:

> Lonnie,
>  
> Thanks for coming to my rescue (yet again).
>  
> I wonder if by not using the proper method to revert to runnix-0.4, I've 
> managed to get the Web Interface out of sync.  When I ask it to Show 
> Installed, I get this reply:
>  
> Current version is: runnix-0.4-5339, Previous saved version is: runnix-0.3.3

It is because you didn't swapped 'ver' + 'Xver'. 
The Webinterface shows the content of the 'ver' file, both for Runnix and 
Astlinux (os/ver).

Michael

http://www.mksolutions.info





--
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Mar 27 - Feb 2
Save $400 by Jan. 27
Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2
___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
pay...@krisk.org.

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread Lonnie Abelbeck

Dan,

Yes, there are also /oldroot/cdrom/ver and /oldroot/cdrom/Xver files that need 
swapped if you went under the hood and swapped the runnix files.

Probably the safest is to do now is a Runnix "upgrade" via the System tab to 
get the latest RUNNIX for that 0.7.10 AstLinux version, and then ignore what 
the "previous" RUNNIX is displayed until you do a "upgrade-RUNNIX-image upgrade 
http://mirror.astlinux.org/runnix4"; when you want to give 1.0.1 a try again.


Both AstLinux 0.7.x and 1.0.x can use either Asterisk 1.4 or Asterisk 1.8, that 
is your choice, but are different images, different repos.

If your 0.7.10 is Asterisk 1.4, you should upgrade to AstLinux 1.0.1 using the 
"http://mirror.astlinux.org/firmware-1.x"; to use Asterisk 1.4.

If at a later date you want to upgrade to Asterisk 1.8, you can do that within 
the 1.0.x series.  One step at a time, please. :-)

Lonnie



On Jan 16, 2012, at 12:48 PM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

> Lonnie,
>  
> Thanks for coming to my rescue (yet again).
>  
> I wonder if by not using the proper method to revert to runnix-0.4, I've 
> managed to get the Web Interface out of sync.  When I ask it to Show 
> Installed, I get this reply:
>  
> Current version is: runnix-0.4-5339, Previous saved version is: runnix-0.3.3
>  
> However, I suspect I'm running the older runnix, since the first thing logged 
> was use of Busybox v1.12.4.
>  
> At this point, shall I use the System tab to "Revert to Previous" to get back 
> in sync?  At this point, I'm not sure which version "Previous" is referring 
> to.  I'd like to revert to runnix-0.3.3 but that's what I'm running.
>  
> Thanks for agreeing to take a look at the log.  I'll send it to you shortly.
>  
> Sorry, I'm not sure what you meant by this question, "Is is possible you 
> upgraded to a different version of Asterisk than you had previously?"  But 
> perhaps this will answer it:
>  
>   • I had been running 0.7.10.
>   • I changed the Repository URL in the Web interface to this:
>   • http://mirror.astlinux.org/ast18-firmware-1.x
>   • When I clicked "Check for New" firmware, I was advised that I was 
> running 0.7.10 and new version 1.0.1 was available.
>   • After reverting to previous and checking "Show Installed", I now get 
> this:
>   • Current version is: astlinux-0.7.10, Previous saved version is: 
> astlinux-1.0.1
>   • However, from the CLI, I verified that Asterisk 1.8.7.1 is operating. 
>  Isn't that what is supposed to be in 1.0.0?  Specifically, core show version 
> reveals this:
>   • Asterisk 1.8.7.1 built by dhartman @ centos32 on a i686 running Linux 
> on 2011-10-18 03:34:39 UTC
>  
> Dan
>  
>  
> -Original Message-
> From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 12:28pm
> To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
> Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
> 
> Hi Dan,
> 
> The proper method to revert to runnix-0.3 from runnix-0.4 after you upgraded 
> was to simply use the System tab -> 
> 
> RUNNIX Bootloader Upgrade:
> 
> [ Revert to Previous ] - Runnix - _x_ Confirm
> 
> If you did the above at the same time you reverted from AstLinux 1.0.1 to 
> AstLinux 0.7.10 in the System tab all would have been good.
> 
> In your case, when you reverted to AstLinux 0.7.10 and were able to boot via 
> "xrunnix" you could have also used the same System tab method to make it 
> stick.
> 
> Tom's suggestion should only be used as a last resort, ie, when AstLinux 
> can't be booted because of a RUNNIX / AstLinux mismatch.
> 
> Back to your original issue...
> 
> It seems to me your hardware is being recognized properly by AstLinux 1.0.1, 
> since you booted and SSH and HTTPS worked.
> 
> Feel free to privately email your logs to me, that would help.
> 
> Is is possible you upgraded to a different version of Asterisk than you had 
> previously?
> 
> Lonnie
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:20 AM, d...@ryson.org wrote:
> 
> > AstLinux Team,
> > 
> > Thank your for your tireless efforts. I know it's often said, but it truly 
> > bears repeating.
> > 
> > I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous upgrade instructions, which I 
> > followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 1.0.1. 
> > Everything was going according to the instructions until I rebooted. My 
> > first indication that things hadn't gone well came from the Web Interface, 
> > which revealed a number of failed registrations. ("Registration Sent" was 
> > shown for all providers under SIP Trunk Registrations.)
> > 
> > Further investigation revealed many pages of Notices, Warnings, and Errors 
> > in the log. There are too many to list here, but I saved the file and would 
> > gladly forward it to one or more developers by private e-mail. Although I 
> > was able to access the machine by SSH and HTTPS, it was apparent that much 
> > of the trouble impacted network functionality. Even a PING to one of our 
> > providers didn't work. No IP address was revealed, suggesting we wer

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread dan

Thanks Michael.  Now I understand!

Dan

-Original Message-
From: "Michael Keuter" 
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 1:58pm
To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Am 16.01.2012 um 19:48 schrieb d...@ryson.org:

> Lonnie,
>  
> Thanks for coming to my rescue (yet again).
>  
> I wonder if by not using the proper method to revert to runnix-0.4, I've 
> managed to get the Web Interface out of sync.  When I ask it to Show 
> Installed, I get this reply:
>  
> Current version is: runnix-0.4-5339, Previous saved version is: runnix-0.3.3

It is because you didn't swapped 'ver' + 'Xver'. 
The Webinterface shows the content of the 'ver' file, both for Runnix and 
Astlinux (os/ver).

Michael

http://www.mksolutions.info

--
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Mar 27 - Feb 2
Save $400 by Jan. 27
Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2
___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
pay...@krisk.org.--
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Mar 27 - Feb 2
Save $400 by Jan. 27
Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
pay...@krisk.org.

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread dan


Lonnie,
 
I'll "upgrade" Runnix, double check the ver and Xver files, in hopes of getting 
back in sync.
 
Thanks for the reminder about the different repos. We were upgrading from 
0.7.10/Asterisk 1.8 so used the http://mirror.astlinux.org/ast18-firmware-1.x 
repo.
 
Really, I wasn't trying to tempt fate!
 
Dan
 
-Original Message-
From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 2:12pm
To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released



Dan,

Yes, there are also /oldroot/cdrom/ver and /oldroot/cdrom/Xver files that need 
swapped if you went under the hood and swapped the runnix files.

Probably the safest is to do now is a Runnix "upgrade" via the System tab to 
get the latest RUNNIX for that 0.7.10 AstLinux version, and then ignore what 
the "previous" RUNNIX is displayed until you do a "upgrade-RUNNIX-image upgrade 
http://mirror.astlinux.org/runnix4"; when you want to give 1.0.1 a try again.


Both AstLinux 0.7.x and 1.0.x can use either Asterisk 1.4 or Asterisk 1.8, that 
is your choice, but are different images, different repos.

If your 0.7.10 is Asterisk 1.4, you should upgrade to AstLinux 1.0.1 using the 
"http://mirror.astlinux.org/firmware-1.x"; to use Asterisk 1.4.

If at a later date you want to upgrade to Asterisk 1.8, you can do that within 
the 1.0.x series.  One step at a time, please. :-)

Lonnie



On Jan 16, 2012, at 12:48 PM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

> Lonnie,
>  
> Thanks for coming to my rescue (yet again).
>  
> I wonder if by not using the proper method to revert to runnix-0.4, I've 
> managed to get the Web Interface out of sync.  When I ask it to Show 
> Installed, I get this reply:
>  
> Current version is: runnix-0.4-5339, Previous saved version is: runnix-0.3.3
>  
> However, I suspect I'm running the older runnix, since the first thing logged 
> was use of Busybox v1.12.4.
>  
> At this point, shall I use the System tab to "Revert to Previous" to get back 
> in sync?  At this point, I'm not sure which version "Previous" is referring 
> to.  I'd like to revert to runnix-0.3.3 but that's what I'm running.
>  
> Thanks for agreeing to take a look at the log.  I'll send it to you shortly.
>  
> Sorry, I'm not sure what you meant by this question, "Is is possible you 
> upgraded to a different version of Asterisk than you had previously?"  But 
> perhaps this will answer it:
>  
>   • I had been running 0.7.10.
>   • I changed the Repository URL in the Web interface to this:
>   • http://mirror.astlinux.org/ast18-firmware-1.x
>   • When I clicked "Check for New" firmware, I was advised that I was 
> running 0.7.10 and new version 1.0.1 was available.
>   • After reverting to previous and checking "Show Installed", I now get 
> this:
>   • Current version is: astlinux-0.7.10, Previous saved version is: 
> astlinux-1.0.1
>   • However, from the CLI, I verified that Asterisk 1.8.7.1 is operating. 
>  Isn't that what is supposed to be in 1.0.0?  Specifically, core show version 
> reveals this:
>   • Asterisk 1.8.7.1 built by dhartman @ centos32 on a i686 running Linux 
> on 2011-10-18 03:34:39 UTC
>  
> Dan
>  
>  
> -Original Message-
> From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 12:28pm
> To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
> Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
> 
> Hi Dan,
> 
> The proper method to revert to runnix-0.3 from runnix-0.4 after you upgraded 
> was to simply use the System tab -> 
> 
> RUNNIX Bootloader Upgrade:
> 
> [ Revert to Previous ] - Runnix - _x_ Confirm
> 
> If you did the above at the same time you reverted from AstLinux 1.0.1 to 
> AstLinux 0.7.10 in the System tab all would have been good.
> 
> In your case, when you reverted to AstLinux 0.7.10 and were able to boot via 
> "xrunnix" you could have also used the same System tab method to make it 
> stick.
> 
> Tom's suggestion should only be used as a last resort, ie, when AstLinux 
> can't be booted because of a RUNNIX / AstLinux mismatch.
> 
> Back to your original issue...
> 
> It seems to me your hardware is being recognized properly by AstLinux 1.0.1, 
> since you booted and SSH and HTTPS worked.
> 
> Feel free to privately email your logs to me, that would help.
> 
> Is is possible you upgraded to a different version of Asterisk than you had 
> previously?
> 
> Lonnie
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:20 AM, d...@ryson.org wrote:
> 
> > AstLinux Team,
> > 
> > Thank your for your tireless efforts. I know it's often said, but it truly 
> > bears repeating.
> > 
> > I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous upgrade instructions, which I 
> > followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 1.0.1. 
> > Everything was going according to the instructions until I rebooted. My 
> > first indication that things hadn't gone well came from the Web Interface, 
> > which revealed a number of failed registrations. ("Registration Sent" was 
> > shown for all providers under SIP

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread Darrick Hartman

have you modified the kcmd? Do you have a keydisk or are you only using asturw?

-Original Message-
From: d...@ryson.org [d...@ryson.org]
Received: Monday, 16 Jan 2012, 1:44pm
To: AstLinux Users Mailing List [astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net]
CC: AstLinux Users Mailing List [astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net]
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released


Lonnie,



I'll "upgrade" Runnix, double check the ver and Xver files, in hopes of getting 
back in sync.



Thanks for the reminder about the different repos. We were upgrading from 
0.7.10/Asterisk 1.8 so used the http://mirror.astlinux.org/ast18-firmware-1.x 
repo.



Really, I wasn't trying to tempt fate!



Dan



-Original Message-
From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 2:12pm
To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released


Dan,

Yes, there are also /oldroot/cdrom/ver and /oldroot/cdrom/Xver files that need 
swapped if you went under the hood and swapped the runnix files.

Probably the safest is to do now is a Runnix "upgrade" via the System tab to 
get the latest RUNNIX for that 0.7.10 AstLinux version, and then ignore what 
the "previous" RUNNIX is displayed until you do a "upgrade-RUNNIX-image upgrade 
http://mirror.astlinux.org/runnix4"; when you want to give 1.0.1 a try again.


Both AstLinux 0.7.x and 1.0.x can use either Asterisk 1.4 or Asterisk 1.8, that 
is your choice, but are different images, different repos.

If your 0.7.10 is Asterisk 1.4, you should upgrade to AstLinux 1.0.1 using the 
"http://mirror.astlinux.org/firmware-1.x"; to use Asterisk 1.4.

If at a later date you want to upgrade to Asterisk 1.8, you can do that within 
the 1.0.x series. One step at a time, please. :-)

Lonnie



On Jan 16, 2012, at 12:48 PM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

> Lonnie,
>
> Thanks for coming to my rescue (yet again).
>
> I wonder if by not using the proper method to revert to runnix-0.4, I've 
> managed to get the Web Interface out of sync. When I ask it to Show 
> Installed, I get this reply:
>
> Current version is: runnix-0.4-5339, Previous saved version is: runnix-0.3.3
>
> However, I suspect I'm running the older runnix, since the first thing logged 
> was use of Busybox v1.12.4.
>
> At this point, shall I use the System tab to "Revert to Previous" to get back 
> in sync? At this point, I'm not sure which version "Previous" is referring 
> to. I'd like to revert to runnix-0.3.3 but that's what I'm running.
>
> Thanks for agreeing to take a look at the log. I'll send it to you shortly.
>
> Sorry, I'm not sure what you meant by this question, "Is is possible you 
> upgraded to a different version of Asterisk than you had previously?" But 
> perhaps this will answer it:
>
> • I had been running 0.7.10.
> • I changed the Repository URL in the Web interface to this:
> • http://mirror.astlinux.org/ast18-firmware-1.x
> • When I clicked "Check for New" firmware, I was advised that I was running 
> 0.7.10 and new version 1.0.1 was available.
> • After reverting to previous and checking "Show Installed", I now get this:
> • Current version is: astlinux-0.7.10, Previous saved version is: 
> astlinux-1.0.1
> • However, from the CLI, I verified that Asterisk 1.8.7.1 is operating. Isn't 
> that what is supposed to be in 1.0.0? Specifically, core show version reveals 
> this:
> • Asterisk 1.8.7.1 built by dhartman @ centos32 on a i686 running Linux on 
> 2011-10-18 03:34:39 UTC
>
> Dan
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 12:28pm
> To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
> Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> The proper method to revert to runnix-0.3 from runnix-0.4 after you upgraded 
> was to simply use the System tab ->
>
> RUNNIX Bootloader Upgrade:
>
> [ Revert to Previous ] - Runnix - _x_ Confirm
>
> If you did the above at the same time you reverted from AstLinux 1.0.1 to 
> AstLinux 0.7.10 in the System tab all would have been good.
>
> In your case, when you reverted to AstLinux 0.7.10 and were able to boot via 
> "xrunnix" you could have also used the same System tab method to make it 
> stick.
>
> Tom's suggestion should only be used as a last resort, ie, when AstLinux 
> can't be booted because of a RUNNIX / AstLinux mismatch.
>
> Back to your original issue...
>
> It seems to me your hardware is being recognized properly by AstLinux 1.0.1, 
> since you booted and SSH and HTTPS worked.
>
> Feel free to privately email your logs to me, that would help.
>
> Is is possible you upgraded to a different version of Asterisk than you had 
> previously?
>
> Lonnie
>
>
>
> On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:20 AM, d...@ryson.org wrote:
>
> > AstLinux Team,
> >
> > Thank your for your tireless efforts. I know it's often said, but it truly 
> > bears repeating.
> >
> > I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous upgrade instructions, which I 
> > followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread dan


Hi Darrick,
 
No keydisk; I'm only using asturw.  Sorry; I'm not sure what kcmd is, so I 
doubt I ever modified it.  What's the best way to check?
 
Dan
 
-Original Message-
From: "Darrick Hartman" 
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 2:59pm
To: "astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net" 

Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released


have you modified the kcmd? Do you have a keydisk or are you only using asturw?

-Original Message- 
From: d...@ryson.org [d...@ryson.org]
Received: Monday, 16 Jan 2012, 1:44pm
To: AstLinux Users Mailing List [astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net]
CC: AstLinux Users Mailing List [astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net]
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released



Lonnie,
 
I'll "upgrade" Runnix, double check the ver and Xver files, in hopes of getting 
back in sync.
 
Thanks for the reminder about the different repos. We were upgrading from 
0.7.10/Asterisk 1.8 so used the http://mirror.astlinux.org/ast18-firmware-1.x 
repo.
 
Really, I wasn't trying to tempt fate!
 
Dan
 
-Original Message-
 From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
 Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 2:12pm
 To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
 Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released



Dan,

 Yes, there are also /oldroot/cdrom/ver and /oldroot/cdrom/Xver files that need 
swapped if you went under the hood and swapped the runnix files.

 Probably the safest is to do now is a Runnix "upgrade" via the System tab to 
get the latest RUNNIX for that 0.7.10 AstLinux version, and then ignore what 
the "previous" RUNNIX is displayed until you do a "upgrade-RUNNIX-image upgrade 
http://mirror.astlinux.org/runnix4";  when you want to give 1.0.1 a try again.


 Both AstLinux 0.7.x and 1.0.x can use either Asterisk 1.4 or Asterisk 1.8, 
that is your choice, but are different images, different repos.

 If your 0.7.10 is Asterisk 1.4, you should upgrade to AstLinux 1.0.1 using the 
"http://mirror.astlinux.org/firmware-1.x"; to use Asterisk 1.4.

 If at a later date you want to upgrade to Asterisk 1.8, you can do that within 
the 1.0.x series. One step at a time, please. :-)

 Lonnie



 On Jan 16, 2012, at 12:48 PM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

 > Lonnie,
 > 
 > Thanks for coming to my rescue (yet again).
 > 
 > I wonder if by not using the proper method to revert to runnix-0.4, I've 
 > managed to get the Web Interface out of sync. When I ask it to Show 
 > Installed, I get this reply:
 > 
 > Current version is: runnix-0.4-5339, Previous saved version is: runnix-0.3.3
 > 
 > However, I suspect I'm running the older runnix, since the first thing 
 > logged was use of Busybox v1.12.4.
 > 
 > At this point, shall I use the System tab to "Revert to Previous" to get 
 > back in sync? At this point, I'm not sure which version "Previous" is 
 > referring to. I'd like to revert to runnix-0.3.3 but that's what I'm running.
 > 
 > Thanks for agreeing to take a look at the log. I'll send it to you shortly.
 > 
 > Sorry, I'm not sure what you meant by this question, "Is is possible you 
 > upgraded to a different version of Asterisk than you had previously?" But 
 > perhaps this will answer it:
 > 
 > • I had been running 0.7.10.
 > • I changed the Repository URL in the Web interface to this:
 > • http://mirror.astlinux.org/ast18-firmware-1.x
 > • When I clicked "Check for New" firmware, I was advised that I was running 
 > 0.7.10 and new version 1.0.1 was available.
 > • After reverting to previous and checking "Show Installed", I now get this:
 > • Current version is: astlinux-0.7.10, Previous saved version is: 
 > astlinux-1.0.1
 > • However, from the CLI, I verified that Asterisk 1.8.7.1 is operating. 
 > Isn't that what is supposed to be in 1.0.0? Specifically, core show version 
 > reveals this:
 > • Asterisk 1.8.7.1 built by dhartman @ centos32 on a i686 running Linux on 
 > 2011-10-18 03:34:39 UTC
 > 
 > Dan
 > 
 > 
 > -Original Message-
 > From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
 > Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 12:28pm
 > To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
 > Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
 > 
 > Hi Dan,
 > 
 > The proper method to revert to runnix-0.3 from runnix-0.4 after you upgraded 
 > was to simply use the System tab -> 
 > 
 > RUNNIX Bootloader Upgrade:
 > 
 > [ Revert to Previous ] - Runnix - _x_ Confirm
 > 
 > If you did the above at the same time you reverted from AstLinux 1.0.1 to 
 > AstLinux 0.7.10 in the System tab all would have been good.
 > 
 > In your case, when you reverted to AstLinux 0.7.10 and were able to boot via 
 > "xrunnix" you could have also used the same System tab method to make it 
 > stick.
 > 
 > Tom's suggestion should only be used as a last resort, ie, when AstLinux 
 > can't be booted because of a RUNNIX / AstLinux mismatch.
 > 
 > Back to your original issue...
 > 
 > It seems to me your hardware is being recognized properly by AstLinux 1.0.1, 
 > since you booted and SSH and HTTPS worked.
 > 
 > Feel free to privately email your logs to me, that woul

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread Darrick Hartman

Dan

If you didn't modify it, we shouldn't need to worry about it. I thought you may 
have been manually specifying the partition in the kcmd file. That device node 
would have changed with the 1.0.1 upgrade.

In otherwords, nevermind.

Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown (www.nitrodesk.com)

-Original Message-
From: d...@ryson.org [d...@ryson.org]
Received: Monday, 16 Jan 2012, 2:09pm
To: AstLinux Users Mailing List [astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net]
CC: astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net [astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net]
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Hi Darrick,

No keydisk; I'm only using asturw.  Sorry; I'm not sure what kcmd is, so I 
doubt I ever modified it.  What's the best way to check?

Dan

-Original Message-
From: "Darrick Hartman" 
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 2:59pm
To: "astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net" 

Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

have you modified the kcmd? Do you have a keydisk or are you only using asturw?

-Original Message-
From: d...@ryson.org [d...@ryson.org]
Received: Monday, 16 Jan 2012, 1:44pm
To: AstLinux Users Mailing List [astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net]
CC: AstLinux Users Mailing List [astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net]
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Lonnie,

I'll "upgrade" Runnix, double check the ver and Xver files, in hopes of getting 
back in sync.

Thanks for the reminder about the different repos. We were upgrading from 
0.7.10/Asterisk 1.8 so used the http://mirror.astlinux.org/ast18-firmware-1.x 
repo.

Really, I wasn't trying to tempt fate!

Dan

-Original Message-
From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 2:12pm
To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Dan,

Yes, there are also /oldroot/cdrom/ver and /oldroot/cdrom/Xver files that need 
swapped if you went under the hood and swapped the runnix files.

Probably the safest is to do now is a Runnix "upgrade" via the System tab to 
get the latest RUNNIX for that 0.7.10 AstLinux version, and then ignore what 
the "previous" RUNNIX is displayed until you do a "upgrade-RUNNIX-image upgrade 
http://mirror.astlinux.org/runnix4"; when you want to give 1.0.1 a try again.

Both AstLinux 0.7.x and 1.0.x can use either Asterisk 1.4 or Asterisk 1.8, that 
is your choice, but are different images, different repos.

If your 0.7.10 is Asterisk 1.4, you should upgrade to AstLinux 1.0.1 using the 
"http://mirror.astlinux.org/firmware-1.x"; to use Asterisk 1.4.

If at a later date you want to upgrade to Asterisk 1.8, you can do that within 
the 1.0.x series. One step at a time, please. :-)

Lonnie

On Jan 16, 2012, at 12:48 PM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

> Lonnie,
>
> Thanks for coming to my rescue (yet again).
>
> I wonder if by not using the proper method to revert to runnix-0.4, I've 
> managed to get the Web Interface out of sync. When I ask it to Show 
> Installed, I get this reply:
>
> Current version is: runnix-0.4-5339, Previous saved version is: runnix-0.3.3
>
> However, I suspect I'm running the older runnix, since the first thing logged 
> was use of Busybox v1.12.4.
>
> At this point, shall I use the System tab to "Revert to Previous" to get back 
> in sync? At this point, I'm not sure which version "Previous" is referring 
> to. I'd like to revert to runnix-0.3.3 but that's what I'm running.
>
> Thanks for agreeing to take a look at the log. I'll send it to you shortly.
>
> Sorry, I'm not sure what you meant by this question, "Is is possible you 
> upgraded to a different version of Asterisk than you had previously?" But 
> perhaps this will answer it:
>
> • I had been running 0.7.10.
> • I changed the Repository URL in the Web interface to this:
> • http://mirror.astlinux.org/ast18-firmware-1.x
> • When I clicked "Check for New" firmware, I was advised that I was running 
> 0.7.10 and new version 1.0.1 was available.
> • After reverting to previous and checking "Show Installed", I now get this:
> • Current version is: astlinux-0.7.10, Previous saved version is: 
> astlinux-1.0.1
> • However, from the CLI, I verified that Asterisk 1.8.7.1 is operating. Isn't 
> that what is supposed to be in 1.0.0? Specifically, core show version reveals 
> this:
> • Asterisk 1.8.7.1 built by dhartman @ centos32 on a i686 running Linux on 
> 2011-10-18 03:34:39 UTC
>
> Dan
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 12:28pm
> To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
> Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> The proper method to revert to runnix-0.3 from runnix-0.4 after you upgraded 
> was to simply use the System tab ->
>
> RUNNIX Bootloader Upgrade:
>
> [ Revert to Previous ] - Runnix - _x_ Confirm
>
> If you did the above at the same time you reverted from AstLinux 1.0.1 to 
> AstLinux 0.7.10 in the System tab all would have been good.
>
> In your case

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread dan

Thanks Darrick.

Original Message-
From: "Darrick Hartman" 
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 3:22pm
To: "astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net" 

Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Dan

 If you didn't modify it, we shouldn't need to worry about it. I thought you 
may have been manually specifying the partition in the kcmd file. That device 
node would have changed with the 1.0.1 upgrade.

 In otherwords, nevermind.

 Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown (www.nitrodesk.com)

-Original Message- 
From: d...@ryson.org [d...@ryson.org]
Received: Monday, 16 Jan 2012, 2:09pm
To: AstLinux Users Mailing List [astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net]
CC: astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net [astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net]
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Hi Darrick,

No keydisk; I'm only using asturw.  Sorry; I'm not sure what kcmd is, so I 
doubt I ever modified it.  What's the best way to check?

Dan

-Original Message-
 From: "Darrick Hartman" 
 Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 2:59pm
 To: "astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net" 

 Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

have you modified the kcmd? Do you have a keydisk or are you only using asturw?

-Original Message- 
From: d...@ryson.org [d...@ryson.org]
Received: Monday, 16 Jan 2012, 1:44pm
To: AstLinux Users Mailing List [astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net]
CC: AstLinux Users Mailing List [astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net]
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Lonnie,

I'll "upgrade" Runnix, double check the ver and Xver files, in hopes of getting 
back in sync.

Thanks for the reminder about the different repos. We were upgrading from 
0.7.10/Asterisk 1.8 so used the http://mirror.astlinux.org/ast18-firmware-1.x 
repo.

Really, I wasn't trying to tempt fate!

Dan

-Original Message-
 From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
 Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 2:12pm
 To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
 Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Dan,

 Yes, there are also /oldroot/cdrom/ver and /oldroot/cdrom/Xver files that need 
swapped if you went under the hood and swapped the runnix files.

 Probably the safest is to do now is a Runnix "upgrade" via the System tab to 
get the latest RUNNIX for that 0.7.10 AstLinux version, and then ignore what 
the "previous" RUNNIX is displayed until you do a "upgrade-RUNNIX-image upgrade 
http://mirror.astlinux.org/runnix4";  when you want to give 1.0.1 a try again.

 Both AstLinux 0.7.x and 1.0.x can use either Asterisk 1.4 or Asterisk 1.8, 
that is your choice, but are different images, different repos.

 If your 0.7.10 is Asterisk 1.4, you should upgrade to AstLinux 1.0.1 using the 
"http://mirror.astlinux.org/firmware-1.x"; to use Asterisk 1.4.

 If at a later date you want to upgrade to Asterisk 1.8, you can do that within 
the 1.0.x series. One step at a time, please. :-)

 Lonnie

 On Jan 16, 2012, at 12:48 PM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

 > Lonnie,
 > 
 > Thanks for coming to my rescue (yet again).
 > 
 > I wonder if by not using the proper method to revert to runnix-0.4, I've 
 > managed to get the Web Interface out of sync. When I ask it to Show 
 > Installed, I get this reply:
 > 
 > Current version is: runnix-0.4-5339, Previous saved version is: runnix-0.3.3
 > 
 > However, I suspect I'm running the older runnix, since the first thing 
 > logged was use of Busybox v1.12.4.
 > 
 > At this point, shall I use the System tab to "Revert to Previous" to get 
 > back in sync? At this point, I'm not sure which version "Previous" is 
 > referring to. I'd like to revert to runnix-0.3.3 but that's what I'm running.
 > 
 > Thanks for agreeing to take a look at the log. I'll send it to you shortly.
 > 
 > Sorry, I'm not sure what you meant by this question, "Is is possible you 
 > upgraded to a different version of Asterisk than you had previously?" But 
 > perhaps this will answer it:
 > 
 > • I had been running 0.7.10.
 > • I changed the Repository URL in the Web interface to this:
 > • http://mirror.astlinux.org/ast18-firmware-1.x
 > • When I clicked "Check for New" firmware, I was advised that I was running 
 > 0.7.10 and new version 1.0.1 was available.
 > • After reverting to previous and checking "Show Installed", I now get this:
 > • Current version is: astlinux-0.7.10, Previous saved version is: 
 > astlinux-1.0.1
 > • However, from the CLI, I verified that Asterisk 1.8.7.1 is operating. 
 > Isn't that what is supposed to be in 1.0.0? Specifically, core show version 
 > reveals this:
 > • Asterisk 1.8.7.1 built by dhartman @ centos32 on a i686 running Linux on 
 > 2011-10-18 03:34:39 UTC
 > 
 > Dan
 > 
 > 
 > -Original Message-
 > From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
 > Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 12:28pm
 > To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
 > Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
 > 
 > Hi Dan,
 > 
 > The proper method to revert to runnix-0.3 from runnix-0.4 after you

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread Lonnie Abelbeck

Hi Dan,

Thanks to your logs I see your problem.

Your box has two NIC's one is a:

eepro100 :07:04.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 20 (level, low) -> IRQ 20
eth0: :07:04.0, 00:d0:b7:xx:xx:xx, IRQ 20.

and the other...

e1000e :00:19.0: PCI INT B -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 19
:00:19.0: eth1: (PCI Express:2.5GB/s:Width x1) 00:21:5a:xx:xx:xx
:00:19.0: eth1: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection

The problem is with your first NIC, eepro100, is not longer support in AstLinux 
1.0.x kernel 2.6.35.  It appears to be last available in Linux Kernel 2.6.28.

http://cateee.net/lkddb/web-lkddb/EEPRO100.html

http://lwn.net/Articles/216082/

So question to Darrick, and others, is support for this "eepro100" NIC included 
in another driver, or is "eepro100" NIC hardware SOL?

Dan, what kind of a box is this, can the eepro100 NIC be upgraded or is on the 
motherboard.  ie, more info on your hardware.

Lonnie


On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:20 AM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

> AstLinux Team,
>  
> Thank your for your tireless efforts.  I know it's often said, but it truly 
> bears repeating.
>  
> I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous upgrade instructions, which I 
> followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 1.0.1.  
> Everything was going according to the instructions until I rebooted.  My 
> first indication that things hadn't gone well came from the Web Interface, 
> which revealed a number of failed registrations.  ("Registration Sent" was 
> shown for all providers under SIP Trunk Registrations.)
>  
> Further investigation revealed many pages of Notices, Warnings, and Errors in 
> the log.  There are too many to list here, but I saved the file and would 
> gladly forward it to one or more developers by private e-mail.  Although I 
> was able to access the machine by SSH and HTTPS, it was apparent that much of 
> the trouble impacted network functionality.  Even a PING to one of our 
> providers didn't work.  No IP address was revealed, suggesting we were having 
> trouble with DNS resolution.  I regret that I wasn't able to do more 
> troubleshooting; I was anxious to get the unit back in service.


--
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
pay...@krisk.org.

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread dan

Lonnie,

That would certainly explain it!

There's really nothing special about this NIC card.  It's a garden variety, 
low-profile PCI card that can easily be replaced - at far less cost than the 
value of AstLinux developers' time.  Ironically, the reason I bought it in the 
first place is because the chipset (at one time) was quite widely supported.

The Intel Pro/1000 is on the motherboard.  I'll see if I can find a 
low-profile, PCI version of it - and try again with AstLinux 1.0.1 with newer 
hardware.

Thanks for your hard work and research.

Dan

-Original Message-
From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 3:53pm
To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Hi Dan,

Thanks to your logs I see your problem.

Your box has two NIC's one is a:

eepro100 :07:04.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 20 (level, low) -> IRQ 20
eth0: :07:04.0, 00:d0:b7:xx:xx:xx, IRQ 20.

and the other...

e1000e :00:19.0: PCI INT B -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 19
:00:19.0: eth1: (PCI Express:2.5GB/s:Width x1) 00:21:5a:xx:xx:xx
:00:19.0: eth1: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection

The problem is with your first NIC, eepro100, is not longer support in AstLinux 
1.0.x kernel 2.6.35.  It appears to be last available in Linux Kernel 2.6.28.

http://cateee.net/lkddb/web-lkddb/EEPRO100.html

http://lwn.net/Articles/216082/

So question to Darrick, and others, is support for this "eepro100" NIC included 
in another driver, or is "eepro100" NIC hardware SOL?

Dan, what kind of a box is this, can the eepro100 NIC be upgraded or is on the 
motherboard.  ie, more info on your hardware.

Lonnie

On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:20 AM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

> AstLinux Team,
>  
> Thank your for your tireless efforts.  I know it's often said, but it truly 
> bears repeating.
>  
> I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous upgrade instructions, which I 
> followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 1.0.1.  
> Everything was going according to the instructions until I rebooted.  My 
> first indication that things hadn't gone well came from the Web Interface, 
> which revealed a number of failed registrations.  ("Registration Sent" was 
> shown for all providers under SIP Trunk Registrations.)
>  
> Further investigation revealed many pages of Notices, Warnings, and Errors in 
> the log.  There are too many to list here, but I saved the file and would 
> gladly forward it to one or more developers by private e-mail.  Although I 
> was able to access the machine by SSH and HTTPS, it was apparent that much of 
> the trouble impacted network functionality.  Even a PING to one of our 
> providers didn't work.  No IP address was revealed, suggesting we were having 
> trouble with DNS resolution.  I regret that I wasn't able to do more 
> troubleshooting; I was anxious to get the unit back in service.

--
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
pay...@krisk.org.--
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
pay...@krisk.org.

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread Lonnie Abelbeck

Dan, (update)

> There's really nothing special about this NIC card.  It's a garden variety, 
> low-profile PCI card that can easily be replaced - at far less cost than the 
> value of AstLinux developers' time.  Ironically, the reason I bought it in 
> the first place is because the chipset (at one time) was quite widely 
> supported.

Ahhh, updating to a "e1000" card would be a good idea, an Intel PCI PRO/1000 
would be good. Note you would have to edit your 
"/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules" file to make the new card eth0, it 
will appear as eth2, remove the old eth0 and rename eth2 to eth0 in the 
"/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules" file.

But...

It appears the "e100" kernel driver *might* work for you in the newer kernel.

If you choose to accept this mission...

Given you are now back at 0.7.10, Follow the "Upgrade from 0.7.x to 1.0.x" as 
before:

http://doc.astlinux.org/userdoc:upgrade-0.7

When in AstLinux 1.0.1 we know it still won't recognize your old NIC for eth0, 
but you can SSH in from a LAN computer using eth1.  Then type:

modprobe e100

and see if you old NIC comes to life, looking at /var/log/messages or dmesg .

If so, edit "/etc/rc.modules" and change the "eepro100" line to "e100", save 
and reboot.  You should be good to go.

If the modprobe did nothing, you need a new NIC, but to get back to 0.7.10, 
simply do a "Revert to Previous" for *both* the Firmware and RUNNIX, then 
reboot, you are back at 0.7.10.


Lonnie



On Jan 16, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Lonnie Abelbeck wrote:

> Hi Dan,
> 
> Thanks to your logs I see your problem.
> 
> Your box has two NIC's one is a:
> 
> eepro100 :07:04.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 20 (level, low) -> IRQ 20
> eth0: :07:04.0, 00:d0:b7:xx:xx:xx, IRQ 20.
> 
> and the other...
> 
> e1000e :00:19.0: PCI INT B -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 19
> :00:19.0: eth1: (PCI Express:2.5GB/s:Width x1) 00:21:5a:xx:xx:xx
> :00:19.0: eth1: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
> 
> The problem is with your first NIC, eepro100, is not longer support in 
> AstLinux 1.0.x kernel 2.6.35.  It appears to be last available in Linux 
> Kernel 2.6.28.
> 
> http://cateee.net/lkddb/web-lkddb/EEPRO100.html
> 
> http://lwn.net/Articles/216082/
> 
> So question to Darrick, and others, is support for this "eepro100" NIC 
> included in another driver, or is "eepro100" NIC hardware SOL?
> 
> Dan, what kind of a box is this, can the eepro100 NIC be upgraded or is on 
> the motherboard.  ie, more info on your hardware.
> 
> Lonnie
> 
> 
> On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:20 AM, d...@ryson.org wrote:
> 
>> AstLinux Team,
>> 
>> Thank your for your tireless efforts.  I know it's often said, but it truly 
>> bears repeating.
>> 
>> I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous upgrade instructions, which I 
>> followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 1.0.1.  
>> Everything was going according to the instructions until I rebooted.  My 
>> first indication that things hadn't gone well came from the Web Interface, 
>> which revealed a number of failed registrations.  ("Registration Sent" was 
>> shown for all providers under SIP Trunk Registrations.)
>> 
>> Further investigation revealed many pages of Notices, Warnings, and Errors 
>> in the log.  There are too many to list here, but I saved the file and would 
>> gladly forward it to one or more developers by private e-mail.  Although I 
>> was able to access the machine by SSH and HTTPS, it was apparent that much 
>> of the trouble impacted network functionality.  Even a PING to one of our 
>> providers didn't work.  No IP address was revealed, suggesting we were 
>> having trouble with DNS resolution.  I regret that I wasn't able to do more 
>> troubleshooting; I was anxious to get the unit back in service.
> 
> 
> --
> Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
> The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
> is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
> Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
> ___
> Astlinux-users mailing list
> Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users
> 
> Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
> pay...@krisk.org.
> 
> 


--
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
___
Astlinux-users mailing list
Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread dan


Lonnie,
 
I'll likely order the new NIC - in hopes of saving heartburn that would surely 
come about later.  However, if there are others on the list using the eepro100 
driver, I'll gladly "...choose to accept this mission*" and test the e100 
kernel driver instructions that you kindly provided.
 
Again, thanks for your help!
 
Dan
 
* - Mission Impossible reference noted.
 
-Original Message-
From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 4:33pm
To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released



Dan, (update)

> There's really nothing special about this NIC card.  It's a garden variety, 
> low-profile PCI card that can easily be replaced - at far less cost than the 
> value of AstLinux developers' time.  Ironically, the reason I bought it in 
> the first place is because the chipset (at one time) was quite widely 
> supported.

Ahhh, updating to a "e1000" card would be a good idea, an Intel PCI PRO/1000 
would be good. Note you would have to edit your 
"/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules" file to make the new card eth0, it 
will appear as eth2, remove the old eth0 and rename eth2 to eth0 in the 
"/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules" file.

But...

It appears the "e100" kernel driver *might* work for you in the newer kernel.

If you choose to accept this mission...

Given you are now back at 0.7.10, Follow the "Upgrade from 0.7.x to 1.0.x" as 
before:

http://doc.astlinux.org/userdoc:upgrade-0.7

When in AstLinux 1.0.1 we know it still won't recognize your old NIC for eth0, 
but you can SSH in from a LAN computer using eth1.  Then type:

modprobe e100

and see if you old NIC comes to life, looking at /var/log/messages or dmesg .

If so, edit "/etc/rc.modules" and change the "eepro100" line to "e100", save 
and reboot.  You should be good to go.

If the modprobe did nothing, you need a new NIC, but to get back to 0.7.10, 
simply do a "Revert to Previous" for *both* the Firmware and RUNNIX, then 
reboot, you are back at 0.7.10.


Lonnie



On Jan 16, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Lonnie Abelbeck wrote:

> Hi Dan,
> 
> Thanks to your logs I see your problem.
> 
> Your box has two NIC's one is a:
> 
> eepro100 :07:04.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 20 (level, low) -> IRQ 20
> eth0: :07:04.0, 00:d0:b7:xx:xx:xx, IRQ 20.
> 
> and the other...
> 
> e1000e :00:19.0: PCI INT B -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 19
> :00:19.0: eth1: (PCI Express:2.5GB/s:Width x1) 00:21:5a:xx:xx:xx
> :00:19.0: eth1: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
> 
> The problem is with your first NIC, eepro100, is not longer support in 
> AstLinux 1.0.x kernel 2.6.35.  It appears to be last available in Linux 
> Kernel 2.6.28.
> 
> http://cateee.net/lkddb/web-lkddb/EEPRO100.html
> 
> http://lwn.net/Articles/216082/
> 
> So question to Darrick, and others, is support for this "eepro100" NIC 
> included in another driver, or is "eepro100" NIC hardware SOL?
> 
> Dan, what kind of a box is this, can the eepro100 NIC be upgraded or is on 
> the motherboard.  ie, more info on your hardware.
> 
> Lonnie
> 
> 
> On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:20 AM, d...@ryson.org wrote:
> 
>> AstLinux Team,
>> 
>> Thank your for your tireless efforts.  I know it's often said, but it truly 
>> bears repeating.
>> 
>> I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous upgrade instructions, which I 
>> followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 1.0.1.  
>> Everything was going according to the instructions until I rebooted.  My 
>> first indication that things hadn't gone well came from the Web Interface, 
>> which revealed a number of failed registrations.  ("Registration Sent" was 
>> shown for all providers under SIP Trunk Registrations.)
>> 
>> Further investigation revealed many pages of Notices, Warnings, and Errors 
>> in the log.  There are too many to list here, but I saved the file and would 
>> gladly forward it to one or more developers by private e-mail.  Although I 
>> was able to access the machine by SSH and HTTPS, it was apparent that much 
>> of the trouble impacted network functionality.  Even a PING to one of our 
>> providers didn't work.  No IP address was revealed, suggesting we were 
>> having trouble with DNS resolution.  I regret that I wasn't able to do more 
>> troubleshooting; I was anxious to get the unit back in service.
> 
> 
> --
> Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
> The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
> is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
> Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
> ___
> Astlinux-users mailing list
> Astlinux-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users
> 
> Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to 
> pay..

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread Lonnie Abelbeck

Dan,

If you wouldn't mind trying the e100 driver, the results would be useful to the 
project.

Lonnie


On Jan 16, 2012, at 3:50 PM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

> Lonnie,
>  
> I'll likely order the new NIC - in hopes of saving heartburn that would 
> surely come about later.  However, if there are others on the list using the 
> eepro100 driver, I'll gladly "...choose to accept this mission*" and test the 
> e100 kernel driver instructions that you kindly provided.
>  
> Again, thanks for your help!
>  
> Dan
>  
> * - Mission Impossible reference noted.
>  
> -Original Message-
> From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 4:33pm
> To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
> Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
> 
> Dan, (update)
> 
> > There's really nothing special about this NIC card. It's a garden variety, 
> > low-profile PCI card that can easily be replaced - at far less cost than 
> > the value of AstLinux developers' time. Ironically, the reason I bought it 
> > in the first place is because the chipset (at one time) was quite widely 
> > supported.
> 
> Ahhh, updating to a "e1000" card would be a good idea, an Intel PCI PRO/1000 
> would be good. Note you would have to edit your 
> "/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules" file to make the new card eth0, 
> it will appear as eth2, remove the old eth0 and rename eth2 to eth0 in the 
> "/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules" file.
> 
> But...
> 
> It appears the "e100" kernel driver *might* work for you in the newer kernel.
> 
> If you choose to accept this mission...
> 
> Given you are now back at 0.7.10, Follow the "Upgrade from 0.7.x to 1.0.x" as 
> before:
> 
> http://doc.astlinux.org/userdoc:upgrade-0.7
> 
> When in AstLinux 1.0.1 we know it still won't recognize your old NIC for 
> eth0, but you can SSH in from a LAN computer using eth1. Then type:
> 
> modprobe e100
> 
> and see if you old NIC comes to life, looking at /var/log/messages or dmesg .
> 
> If so, edit "/etc/rc.modules" and change the "eepro100" line to "e100", save 
> and reboot. You should be good to go.
> 
> If the modprobe did nothing, you need a new NIC, but to get back to 0.7.10, 
> simply do a "Revert to Previous" for *both* the Firmware and RUNNIX, then 
> reboot, you are back at 0.7.10.
> 
> 
> Lonnie
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 16, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Lonnie Abelbeck wrote:
> 
> > Hi Dan,
> > 
> > Thanks to your logs I see your problem.
> > 
> > Your box has two NIC's one is a:
> > 
> > eepro100 :07:04.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 20 (level, low) -> IRQ 20
> > eth0: :07:04.0, 00:d0:b7:xx:xx:xx, IRQ 20.
> > 
> > and the other...
> > 
> > e1000e :00:19.0: PCI INT B -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 19
> > :00:19.0: eth1: (PCI Express:2.5GB/s:Width x1) 00:21:5a:xx:xx:xx
> > :00:19.0: eth1: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
> > 
> > The problem is with your first NIC, eepro100, is not longer support in 
> > AstLinux 1.0.x kernel 2.6.35. It appears to be last available in Linux 
> > Kernel 2.6.28.
> > 
> > http://cateee.net/lkddb/web-lkddb/EEPRO100.html
> > 
> > http://lwn.net/Articles/216082/
> > 
> > So question to Darrick, and others, is support for this "eepro100" NIC 
> > included in another driver, or is "eepro100" NIC hardware SOL?
> > 
> > Dan, what kind of a box is this, can the eepro100 NIC be upgraded or is on 
> > the motherboard. ie, more info on your hardware.
> > 
> > Lonnie
> > 
> > 
> > On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:20 AM, d...@ryson.org wrote:
> > 
> >> AstLinux Team,
> >> 
> >> Thank your for your tireless efforts. I know it's often said, but it truly 
> >> bears repeating.
> >> 
> >> I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous upgrade instructions, which I 
> >> followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 
> >> 1.0.1. Everything was going according to the instructions until I 
> >> rebooted. My first indication that things hadn't gone well came from the 
> >> Web Interface, which revealed a number of failed registrations. 
> >> ("Registration Sent" was shown for all providers under SIP Trunk 
> >> Registrations.)
> >> 
> >> Further investigation revealed many pages of Notices, Warnings, and Errors 
> >> in the log. There are too many to list here, but I saved the file and 
> >> would gladly forward it to one or more developers by private e-mail. 
> >> Although I was able to access the machine by SSH and HTTPS, it was 
> >> apparent that much of the trouble impacted network functionality. Even a 
> >> PING to one of our providers didn't work. No IP address was revealed, 
> >> suggesting we were having trouble with DNS resolution. I regret that I 
> >> wasn't able to do more troubleshooting; I was anxious to get the unit back 
> >> in service.
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
> > The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
> > is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint,

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread dan


Yep.  Will do!
 
Dan
 
-Original Message-
From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 5:01pm
To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released



Dan,

If you wouldn't mind trying the e100 driver, the results would be useful to the 
project.

Lonnie

On Jan 16, 2012, at 3:50 PM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

> Lonnie,
>  
> I'll likely order the new NIC - in hopes of saving heartburn that would 
> surely come about later.  However, if there are others on the list using the 
> eepro100 driver, I'll gladly "...choose to accept this mission*" and test the 
> e100 kernel driver instructions that you kindly provided.
>  
> Again, thanks for your help!
>  
> Dan
>  
> * - Mission Impossible reference noted.
>  
> -Original Message-
> From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 4:33pm
> To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
> Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
> 
> Dan, (update)
> 
> > There's really nothing special about this NIC card. It's a garden variety, 
> > low-profile PCI card that can easily be replaced - at far less cost than 
> > the value of AstLinux developers' time. Ironically, the reason I bought it 
> > in the first place is because the chipset (at one time) was quite widely 
> > supported.
> 
> Ahhh, updating to a "e1000" card would be a good idea, an Intel PCI PRO/1000 
> would be good. Note you would have to edit your 
> "/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules" file to make the new card eth0, 
> it will appear as eth2, remove the old eth0 and rename eth2 to eth0 in the 
> "/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules" file.
> 
> But...
> 
> It appears the "e100" kernel driver *might* work for you in the newer kernel.
> 
> If you choose to accept this mission...
> 
> Given you are now back at 0.7.10, Follow the "Upgrade from 0.7.x to 1.0.x" as 
> before:
> 
> http://doc.astlinux.org/userdoc:upgrade-0.7
> 
> When in AstLinux 1.0.1 we know it still won't recognize your old NIC for 
> eth0, but you can SSH in from a LAN computer using eth1. Then type:
> 
> modprobe e100
> 
> and see if you old NIC comes to life, looking at /var/log/messages or dmesg .
> 
> If so, edit "/etc/rc.modules" and change the "eepro100" line to "e100", save 
> and reboot. You should be good to go.
> 
> If the modprobe did nothing, you need a new NIC, but to get back to 0.7.10, 
> simply do a "Revert to Previous" for *both* the Firmware and RUNNIX, then 
> reboot, you are back at 0.7.10.
> 
> 
> Lonnie
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 16, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Lonnie Abelbeck wrote:
> 
> > Hi Dan,
> > 
> > Thanks to your logs I see your problem.
> > 
> > Your box has two NIC's one is a:
> > 
> > eepro100 :07:04.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 20 (level, low) -> IRQ 20
> > eth0: :07:04.0, 00:d0:b7:xx:xx:xx, IRQ 20.
> > 
> > and the other...
> > 
> > e1000e :00:19.0: PCI INT B -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 19
> > :00:19.0: eth1: (PCI Express:2.5GB/s:Width x1) 00:21:5a:xx:xx:xx
> > :00:19.0: eth1: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
> > 
> > The problem is with your first NIC, eepro100, is not longer support in 
> > AstLinux 1.0.x kernel 2.6.35. It appears to be last available in Linux 
> > Kernel 2.6.28.
> > 
> > http://cateee.net/lkddb/web-lkddb/EEPRO100.html
> > 
> > http://lwn.net/Articles/216082/
> > 
> > So question to Darrick, and others, is support for this "eepro100" NIC 
> > included in another driver, or is "eepro100" NIC hardware SOL?
> > 
> > Dan, what kind of a box is this, can the eepro100 NIC be upgraded or is on 
> > the motherboard. ie, more info on your hardware.
> > 
> > Lonnie
> > 
> > 
> > On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:20 AM, d...@ryson.org wrote:
> > 
> >> AstLinux Team,
> >> 
> >> Thank your for your tireless efforts. I know it's often said, but it truly 
> >> bears repeating.
> >> 
> >> I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous upgrade instructions, which I 
> >> followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 
> >> 1.0.1. Everything was going according to the instructions until I 
> >> rebooted. My first indication that things hadn't gone well came from the 
> >> Web Interface, which revealed a number of failed registrations. 
> >> ("Registration Sent" was shown for all providers under SIP Trunk 
> >> Registrations.)
> >> 
> >> Further investigation revealed many pages of Notices, Warnings, and Errors 
> >> in the log. There are too many to list here, but I saved the file and 
> >> would gladly forward it to one or more developers by private e-mail. 
> >> Although I was able to access the machine by SSH and HTTPS, it was 
> >> apparent that much of the trouble impacted network functionality. Even a 
> >> PING to one of our providers didn't work. No IP address was revealed, 
> >> suggesting we were having trouble with DNS resolution. I regret that I 
> >> wasn't able to do more troubleshooting; I was anxious to get the unit back 
> >> in service.
> > 
> > 
> > --

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread dan


Lonnie and all,
 
As instructed, I upgraded to AstLinux 1.0.1 Runnix 0.4.X, rebooted, and then 
typed "modprobe e100".  Unfortunately, a subsequent check of /var/log/messages 
and dmesg revealed no flicker of life of eth0.
 
This time, I was able to get the PBX up and running with 0.7.10 and Runnix 
0.3.X, with no fuss whatsoever, using the Web Interface.
 
I've also ordered a new NIC card - and will report our findings upon receipt.
 
Thanks,
 
Dan
 
-Original Message-
From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 5:01pm
To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released



Dan,

If you wouldn't mind trying the e100 driver, the results would be useful to the 
project.

Lonnie


On Jan 16, 2012, at 3:50 PM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

> Lonnie,
>  
> I'll likely order the new NIC - in hopes of saving heartburn that would 
> surely come about later.  However, if there are others on the list using the 
> eepro100 driver, I'll gladly "...choose to accept this mission*" and test the 
> e100 kernel driver instructions that you kindly provided.
>  
> Again, thanks for your help!
>  
> Dan
>  
> * - Mission Impossible reference noted.
>  
> -Original Message-
> From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 4:33pm
> To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
> Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
> 
> Dan, (update)
> 
> > There's really nothing special about this NIC card. It's a garden variety, 
> > low-profile PCI card that can easily be replaced - at far less cost than 
> > the value of AstLinux developers' time. Ironically, the reason I bought it 
> > in the first place is because the chipset (at one time) was quite widely 
> > supported.
> 
> Ahhh, updating to a "e1000" card would be a good idea, an Intel PCI PRO/1000 
> would be good. Note you would have to edit your 
> "/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules" file to make the new card eth0, 
> it will appear as eth2, remove the old eth0 and rename eth2 to eth0 in the 
> "/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules" file.
> 
> But...
> 
> It appears the "e100" kernel driver *might* work for you in the newer kernel.
> 
> If you choose to accept this mission...
> 
> Given you are now back at 0.7.10, Follow the "Upgrade from 0.7.x to 1.0.x" as 
> before:
> 
> http://doc.astlinux.org/userdoc:upgrade-0.7
> 
> When in AstLinux 1.0.1 we know it still won't recognize your old NIC for 
> eth0, but you can SSH in from a LAN computer using eth1. Then type:
> 
> modprobe e100
> 
> and see if you old NIC comes to life, looking at /var/log/messages or dmesg .
> 
> If so, edit "/etc/rc.modules" and change the "eepro100" line to "e100", save 
> and reboot. You should be good to go.
> 
> If the modprobe did nothing, you need a new NIC, but to get back to 0.7.10, 
> simply do a "Revert to Previous" for *both* the Firmware and RUNNIX, then 
> reboot, you are back at 0.7.10.
> 
> 
> Lonnie
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 16, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Lonnie Abelbeck wrote:
> 
> > Hi Dan,
> > 
> > Thanks to your logs I see your problem.
> > 
> > Your box has two NIC's one is a:
> > 
> > eepro100 :07:04.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 20 (level, low) -> IRQ 20
> > eth0: :07:04.0, 00:d0:b7:xx:xx:xx, IRQ 20.
> > 
> > and the other...
> > 
> > e1000e :00:19.0: PCI INT B -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 19
> > :00:19.0: eth1: (PCI Express:2.5GB/s:Width x1) 00:21:5a:xx:xx:xx
> > :00:19.0: eth1: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
> > 
> > The problem is with your first NIC, eepro100, is not longer support in 
> > AstLinux 1.0.x kernel 2.6.35. It appears to be last available in Linux 
> > Kernel 2.6.28.
> > 
> > http://cateee.net/lkddb/web-lkddb/EEPRO100.html
> > 
> > http://lwn.net/Articles/216082/
> > 
> > So question to Darrick, and others, is support for this "eepro100" NIC 
> > included in another driver, or is "eepro100" NIC hardware SOL?
> > 
> > Dan, what kind of a box is this, can the eepro100 NIC be upgraded or is on 
> > the motherboard. ie, more info on your hardware.
> > 
> > Lonnie
> > 
> > 
> > On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:20 AM, d...@ryson.org wrote:
> > 
> >> AstLinux Team,
> >> 
> >> Thank your for your tireless efforts. I know it's often said, but it truly 
> >> bears repeating.
> >> 
> >> I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous upgrade instructions, which I 
> >> followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 
> >> 1.0.1. Everything was going according to the instructions until I 
> >> rebooted. My first indication that things hadn't gone well came from the 
> >> Web Interface, which revealed a number of failed registrations. 
> >> ("Registration Sent" was shown for all providers under SIP Trunk 
> >> Registrations.)
> >> 
> >> Further investigation revealed many pages of Notices, Warnings, and Errors 
> >> in the log. There are too many to list here, but I saved the file and 
> >> would gladly forward it to one or more developers by private e-mail. 
> >> Although I was able to access th

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread Lonnie Abelbeck

Hi Dan,

Thanks much for testing, we all learned something with this exercise. :-)

Lonnie


On Jan 16, 2012, at 6:14 PM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

> Lonnie and all,
>  
> As instructed, I upgraded to AstLinux 1.0.1 Runnix 0.4.X, rebooted, and then 
> typed "modprobe e100".  Unfortunately, a subsequent check of 
> /var/log/messages and dmesg revealed no flicker of life of eth0.
>  
> This time, I was able to get the PBX up and running with 0.7.10 and Runnix 
> 0.3.X, with no fuss whatsoever, using the Web Interface.
>  
> I've also ordered a new NIC card - and will report our findings upon receipt.
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Dan
>  
> -Original Message-
> From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 5:01pm
> To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
> Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
> 
> Dan,
> 
> If you wouldn't mind trying the e100 driver, the results would be useful to 
> the project.
> 
> Lonnie
> 
> 
> On Jan 16, 2012, at 3:50 PM, d...@ryson.org wrote:
> 
> > Lonnie,
> > 
> > I'll likely order the new NIC - in hopes of saving heartburn that would 
> > surely come about later. However, if there are others on the list using the 
> > eepro100 driver, I'll gladly "...choose to accept this mission*" and test 
> > the e100 kernel driver instructions that you kindly provided.
> > 
> > Again, thanks for your help!
> > 
> > Dan
> > 
> > * - Mission Impossible reference noted.
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
> > Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 4:33pm
> > To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
> > Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
> > 
> > Dan, (update)
> > 
> > > There's really nothing special about this NIC card. It's a garden 
> > > variety, low-profile PCI card that can easily be replaced - at far less 
> > > cost than the value of AstLinux developers' time. Ironically, the reason 
> > > I bought it in the first place is because the chipset (at one time) was 
> > > quite widely supported.
> > 
> > Ahhh, updating to a "e1000" card would be a good idea, an Intel PCI 
> > PRO/1000 would be good. Note you would have to edit your 
> > "/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules" file to make the new card eth0, 
> > it will appear as eth2, remove the old eth0 and rename eth2 to eth0 in the 
> > "/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules" file.
> > 
> > But...
> > 
> > It appears the "e100" kernel driver *might* work for you in the newer 
> > kernel.
> > 
> > If you choose to accept this mission...
> > 
> > Given you are now back at 0.7.10, Follow the "Upgrade from 0.7.x to 1.0.x" 
> > as before:
> > 
> > http://doc.astlinux.org/userdoc:upgrade-0.7
> > 
> > When in AstLinux 1.0.1 we know it still won't recognize your old NIC for 
> > eth0, but you can SSH in from a LAN computer using eth1. Then type:
> > 
> > modprobe e100
> > 
> > and see if you old NIC comes to life, looking at /var/log/messages or dmesg 
> > .
> > 
> > If so, edit "/etc/rc.modules" and change the "eepro100" line to "e100", 
> > save and reboot. You should be good to go.
> > 
> > If the modprobe did nothing, you need a new NIC, but to get back to 0.7.10, 
> > simply do a "Revert to Previous" for *both* the Firmware and RUNNIX, then 
> > reboot, you are back at 0.7.10.
> > 
> > 
> > Lonnie
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Jan 16, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Lonnie Abelbeck wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Dan,
> > > 
> > > Thanks to your logs I see your problem.
> > > 
> > > Your box has two NIC's one is a:
> > > 
> > > eepro100 :07:04.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 20 (level, low) -> IRQ 20
> > > eth0: :07:04.0, 00:d0:b7:xx:xx:xx, IRQ 20.
> > > 
> > > and the other...
> > > 
> > > e1000e :00:19.0: PCI INT B -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 19
> > > :00:19.0: eth1: (PCI Express:2.5GB/s:Width x1) 00:21:5a:xx:xx:xx
> > > :00:19.0: eth1: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
> > > 
> > > The problem is with your first NIC, eepro100, is not longer support in 
> > > AstLinux 1.0.x kernel 2.6.35. It appears to be last available in Linux 
> > > Kernel 2.6.28.
> > > 
> > > http://cateee.net/lkddb/web-lkddb/EEPRO100.html
> > > 
> > > http://lwn.net/Articles/216082/
> > > 
> > > So question to Darrick, and others, is support for this "eepro100" NIC 
> > > included in another driver, or is "eepro100" NIC hardware SOL?
> > > 
> > > Dan, what kind of a box is this, can the eepro100 NIC be upgraded or is 
> > > on the motherboard. ie, more info on your hardware.
> > > 
> > > Lonnie
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:20 AM, d...@ryson.org wrote:
> > > 
> > >> AstLinux Team,
> > >> 
> > >> Thank your for your tireless efforts. I know it's often said, but it 
> > >> truly bears repeating.
> > >> 
> > >> I also appreciate the clear, unambiguous upgrade instructions, which I 
> > >> followed explicitly when making the effort to upgrade from 0.7.10 to 
> > >> 1.0.1. Everything was going according to the instructions until I 
> > >> rebooted. My first indication that things hadn't gone well came from the 
> > >> Web In

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

2012-01-16 Thread Ionel Chila

This community is absolutely FANTASTIC... When I got my new Atom 525 system I 
had several options as far as the PBX OS goes but I decided to stay with 
Astlinux for those very reasons, great product with awesome community support.

Thanks guys..




 From: Lonnie Abelbeck 
To: AstLinux Users Mailing List  
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
 
Hi Dan,

Thanks much for testing, we all learned something with this exercise. :-)

Lonnie


On Jan 16, 2012, at 6:14 PM, d...@ryson.org wrote:

> Lonnie and all,
>  
> As instructed, I upgraded to AstLinux 1.0.1 Runnix 0.4.X, rebooted, and then 
> typed "modprobe e100".  Unfortunately, a subsequent check of 
> /var/log/messages and dmesg revealed no flicker of life of eth0.
>  
> This time, I was able to get the PBX up and running with 0.7.10 and Runnix 
> 0.3.X, with no fuss whatsoever, using the Web Interface.
>  
> I've also ordered a new NIC card - and will report our findings upon receipt.
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Dan
>  
> -Original Message-
> From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 5:01pm
> To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
> Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
> 
> Dan,
> 
> If you wouldn't mind trying the e100 driver, the results would be useful to 
> the project.
> 
> Lonnie
> 
> 
> On Jan 16, 2012, at 3:50 PM, d...@ryson.org wrote:
> 
> > Lonnie,
> > 
> > I'll likely order the new NIC - in hopes of saving heartburn that would 
> > surely come about later. However, if there are others on the list using the 
> > eepro100 driver, I'll gladly "...choose to accept this mission*" and test 
> > the e100 kernel driver instructions that you kindly provided.
> > 
> > Again, thanks for your help!
> > 
> > Dan
> > 
> > * - Mission Impossible reference noted.
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: "Lonnie Abelbeck" 
> > Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 4:33pm
> > To: "AstLinux Users Mailing List" 
> > Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released
> > 
> > Dan, (update)
> > 
> > > There's really nothing special about this NIC card. It's a garden 
> > > variety, low-profile PCI card that can easily be replaced - at far less 
> > > cost than the value of AstLinux developers' time. Ironically, the reason 
> > > I bought it in the first place is because the chipset (at one time) was 
> > > quite widely supported.
> > 
> > Ahhh, updating to a "e1000" card would be a good idea, an Intel PCI 
> > PRO/1000 would be good. Note you would have to edit your 
> > "/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules" file to make the new card eth0, 
> > it will appear as eth2, remove the old eth0 and rename eth2 to eth0 in the 
> > "/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules" file.
> > 
> > But...
> > 
> > It appears the "e100" kernel driver *might* work for you in the newer 
> > kernel.
> > 
> > If you choose to accept this mission...
> > 
> > Given you are now back at 0.7.10, Follow the "Upgrade from 0.7.x to 1.0.x" 
> > as before:
> > 
> > http://doc.astlinux.org/userdoc:upgrade-0.7
> > 
> > When in AstLinux 1.0.1 we know it still won't recognize your old NIC for 
> > eth0, but you can SSH in from a LAN computer using eth1. Then type:
> > 
> > modprobe e100
> > 
> > and see if you old NIC comes to life, looking at /var/log/messages or dmesg 
> > .
> > 
> > If so, edit "/etc/rc.modules" and change the "eepro100" line to "e100", 
> > save and reboot. You should be good to go.
> > 
> > If the modprobe did nothing, you need a new NIC, but to get back to 0.7.10, 
> > simply do a "Revert to Previous" for *both* the Firmware and RUNNIX, then 
> > reboot, you are back at 0.7.10.
> > 
> > 
> > Lonnie
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Jan 16, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Lonnie Abelbeck wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Dan,
> > > 
> > > Thanks to your logs I see your problem.
> > > 
> > > Your box has two NIC's one is a:
> > > 
> > > eepro100 :07:04.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 20 (level, low) -> IRQ 20
> > > eth0: :07:04.0, 00:d0:b7:xx:xx:xx, IRQ 20.
> > > 
> > > and the other...
> > > 
> > > e1000e :00:19.0: PCI INT B -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 19
> > > :00:19.0: eth1: (PCI Express:2.5GB/s:Width x1) 00:21:5a:xx:xx:xx
> > > :00:19.0: eth1: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
> > > 
> > > The problem is with your first NIC, eepro100, is not longer support in 
> > > AstLinux 1.0.x kernel 2.6.35. It appears to be last available in Linux 
> > > Kernel 2.6.28.
> > > 
> > > http://cateee.net/lkddb/web-lkddb/EEPRO100.html
> > > 
> > > http://lwn.net/Articles/216082/
> > > 
> > > So question to Darrick, and others, is support for this "eepro100" NIC 
> > > included in another driver, or is "eepro100" NIC hardware SOL?
> > > 
> > > Dan, what kind of a box is this, can the eepro100 NIC be upgraded or is 
> > > on the motherboard. ie, more info on your hardware.
> > > 
> > > Lonnie
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:20 AM, d...@ryson.org wrote:
> > > 
> > >> AstLinux Team,
> > >>

Re: [Astlinux-users] Gtalk

Re: [Astlinux-users] Gtalk

[Astlinux-users] multi-NIC

Re: [Astlinux-users] multi-NIC

Re: [Astlinux-users] multi-NIC

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

Re: [Astlinux-users] AstLinux 1.01 Released

27 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information