Udev, libsysfs-2.0.0 (gnome-mount replaces pmount?)
Hi guys, Do I need to install libsysfs-2.0.0 on my system at all? I think Udev-0.80 had that support removed. I only ask as pmount needs libsysfs-2.0.0 However I don't think gnome-mount-3.0 needs libsysfs-2.0.0. And provides a eject wrapper as well. I'm only asking as I found that Gome-VFS-Manager-2.14.2 will use gnome-mount-3.0 by default. Regards Dave -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Udev, libsysfs-2.0.0 (gnome-mount replaces pmount?)
On 6/13/06, linux23dragon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I only ask as pmount needs libsysfs-2.0.0 If pmount wants to use libsysfs, then it wants to use libsysfs. I'm only asking as I found that Gome-VFS-Manager-2.14.2 will use gnome-mount-3.0 by default. Well, there's no such thing as gnome-mount-3.0. However, gnome-mount-0.4 does not need libsysfs. And if you plan on using Gnome as your main desktop, gnome-vfs, gnome-volume-manager and possibly nautilus all attempt to use gnome-mount before falling back to their own mounting methods. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Udev, libsysfs-2.0.0 (gnome-mount replaces pmount?)
On Tuesday 13 June 2006 13:03, Dan Nicholson wrote: If pmount wants to use libsysfs, then it wants to use libsysfs. yep, But does libsysfs conflict with Udev-0.9*(?) I think Udev-0.9* has its own cut down version of libsysfs. Well, there's no such thing as gnome-mount-3.0. However, gnome-mount-0.4 does not need libsysfs. Oops, I was meant to write gnome-mount-0.3 And if you plan on using Gnome as your main desktop, gnome-vfs, gnome-volume-manager and possibly nautilus all attempt to use gnome-mount before falling back to their own mounting methods. -- Dan Cool I've asked this question because of two trial and error tests, with the following results... Try 1: After installing Gnome-2.14.2 using Udev-0.92 Hal-0.5.7 and Dbus-0.61(but without pmount and libsysfs), I found that all the devices mounted would (or could) automatically start/mount their respective applications/programs. But for some resion I had device group permission issues to be seen too first. I don't have Linux-PAM installed, if that fixes the problem(?). (I did install gnome-mount-0.3 afterwards too by the way). Try 2: But after installing (yet again) Gnome-2.14.2 using Udev-0.92 Hal-0.5.7 and Dbus-0.61 with pmount and libsysfs, I found that the devices needed to be manually mounted before their respective applications/programs would start. (I didn't install gnome-mount-0.3 this time around). I did not have any device permission issues this time around. And I think that is what pmount is used for(?) A mounting wrapper for Correcting or ignoring device group permissions(?) Has any one had this sort of problem, or is it just me having bad luck? Thanks Dave -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Udev, libsysfs-2.0.0 (gnome-mount replaces pmount?)
On 6/13/06, linux23dragon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 13 June 2006 13:03, Dan Nicholson wrote: If pmount wants to use libsysfs, then it wants to use libsysfs. yep, But does libsysfs conflict with Udev-0.9*(?) I think Udev-0.9* has its own cut down version of libsysfs. I don't think so. Udev just doesn't link to libsysfs. It's seems to be a user helper library to access sysfs attributes. I doubt it interferes with Udev. Try 1: After installing Gnome-2.14.2 using Udev-0.92 Hal-0.5.7 and Dbus-0.61(but without pmount and libsysfs), I found that all the devices mounted would (or could) automatically start/mount their respective applications/programs. But for some resion I had device group permission issues to be seen too first. I don't have Linux-PAM installed, if that fixes the problem(?). (I did install gnome-mount-0.3 afterwards too by the way). Here's a couple notes on this setup. You need gnome-volume-manager to be the hal event listener, so it must be running. In this case, both hal and gnome-volume-manager will look to see if /var/console/$user/lock exists by default. This is normally done with the pam_console module. To get around it, you first need to tell hal that it's OK for certain users or groups to invoke hal methods. You need to add something like this to /etc/dbus-1/system.d/hal.conf: policy group=100 allow send_interface=org.freedesktop.Hal.Device.SystemPowerManagement/ allow send_interface=org.freedesktop.Hal.Device.LaptopPanel/ allow send_interface=org.freedesktop.Hal.Device.Volume/ allow send_interface=org.freedesktop.Hal.Device.Volume.Crypto/ /policy Where users you want are part of group 100. You could also make this group cdrom or a specific user, or whatever. gnome-volume-manager can be told to ignore the /var/console/$user/lock issue by configuring it with --disable-multiuser. Also, if you have entries in /etc/fstab for devices you want automounted, hal will return a PermissionDenied error. I had to run hald with --verbose to figure this out. I've been thinking about asking on the hal list if they could make this error clearer. Try 2: But after installing (yet again) Gnome-2.14.2 using Udev-0.92 Hal-0.5.7 and Dbus-0.61 with pmount and libsysfs, I found that the devices needed to be manually mounted before their respective applications/programs would start. (I didn't install gnome-mount-0.3 this time around). I did not have any device permission issues this time around. And I think that is what pmount is used for(?) A mounting wrapper for Correcting or ignoring device group permissions(?) Is pmount running? Again, the two points above about hal allowing specific users to invoke methods and entries in fstab are important. I don't know the specifics of running pmount, though. And pmount will not set device permissions, AFAIK. On RedHat, they use pam_console to set device permissions, but we don't need that so long as your users are in the groups that the devices are owned by. Has any one had this sort of problem, or is it just me having bad luck? I had similar problems. Hopefully the info I gave above helps sort this out. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Udev, libsysfs-2.0.0 (gnome-mount replaces pmount?)
On Tuesday 13 June 2006 14:14, Dan Nicholson wrote: On 6/13/06, linux23dragon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's a couple notes on this setup. You need gnome-volume-manager to be the hal event listener, so it must be running. In this case, both hal and gnome-volume-manager will look to see if /var/console/$user/lock exists by default. This is normally done with the pam_console module. To get around it, you first need to tell hal that it's OK for certain users or groups to invoke hal methods. You need to add something like this to /etc/dbus-1/system.d/hal.conf: policy group=100 allow send_interface=org.freedesktop.Hal.Device.SystemPowerManagement/ allow send_interface=org.freedesktop.Hal.Device.LaptopPanel/ allow send_interface=org.freedesktop.Hal.Device.Volume/ allow send_interface=org.freedesktop.Hal.Device.Volume.Crypto/ /policy Where users you want are part of group 100. You could also make this group cdrom or a specific user, or whatever. gnome-volume-manager can be told to ignore the /var/console/$user/lock issue by configuring it with --disable-multiuser. Also, if you have entries in /etc/fstab for devices you want automounted, hal will return a PermissionDenied error. I had to run hald with --verbose to figure this out. I've been thinking about asking on the hal list if they could make this error clearer. Try 2: in) Gnome-2.14.2 using Udev-0.92 Hal-0.5.7 -- Dan I'll try this out. Thanks Dan. I do remember reading about those points on this list last month (I think). In this case, I just found out in a practical way. Doh ;) Regards Dave -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [OT] Re: latest wine 0.9.14 and BLFS-SVN-2006-05-28 [Solution]
Dan Nicholson wrote: [snip] I have a 6900, and X works great with the r200 driver. Unfortunately, Xgl/Compiz doesn't work with the open source drivers. I'm so close, but compiz crashes it everytime. I'm pretty sure it needs to use the ATI drivers because they provide the necessary OpenGL features. Arggh! I dont know it this is of any value, but compiz kills Xorg for me as well on my laptop with an integrated i810/i915 chipset. Just wanting to report that your're not alone in beeing .. so close. :-( peram -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [OT] Re: latest wine 0.9.14 and BLFS-SVN-2006-05-28 [Solution]
On 6/14/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I dont know it this is of any value, but compiz kills Xorg for me as well on my laptop with an integrated i810/i915 chipset. Just wanting to report that your're not alone in beeing .. so close. :-( Well, that's encouraging in a way. However, I did read on the compiz list that somebody had it working with the open source radeon driver. I updated Mesa, xgl, compiz, glitz and libdrm to CVS head yesterday, but I haven't been able to give it a spin yet. One of the problems is that since compiz locks my system, it's really difficult to debug. Crossing my fingers... I'll be sure to write something up if I can get this thing working. I'm dangerously close to just buying an nvidia card just to get a decent setup. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: PPPoE connection using only the PPP package
You tried the correct options, not sure why they don't work. The correct value for mru and mtu is 1492, BTW. Hmm, I put mtu 1492 and mru 1492 in the /etc/ppp/peers/pppoe file, but I still get the Couldn't increase MTU to 1500 message: I need the output of pppd call pppoe dryrun in order to debug this. Plugin rp-pppoe.so loaded. RP-PPPoE plugin version 3.3 compiled against pppd 2.4.3 Hope this helps. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Inetutils
Do you have a valid group for your user? All the bash scripts are just examples. The idea with the umask one is that if the name of -- Dan I have always wondered why the group 100 is not included in LFS when /etc/group is created. When I do configure for useradd in BLFS ch.3 it always ends up complaining that GID 100 does not exist. This isn't really a problem for a skilled administrator, because I usually just run groupadd users and it takes care of this. Since LFS itself is basically an incomplete system by design, Is this something that has come up for in a discussion? I don't mean to start a flame war between the BLFS and LFS teams :) It seems like part of a basic setup to have a users group with an ID of 100. If the LFS team does not agree, it could always be part of BLFS's configuring for adding users instructions. Thanks, Craig -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
LFS does not save bash history on shutdown
Bash history is not saved on shutdown. I have commented out the line unset HISTFILE from /etc/profile so now history is saved for root, but it only works when I log out of a terminal. If I reboot or shutdown, the history does not get saved to ~/.bash_history. Does anyone know how this can be fixed? Shouldn't this be standard on the LFS system? Even if you keep unset HISTFILE for root, regular users should not lose their bash history on shutdown. Jason -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
BLFS User Group [Was Re: Inetutils]
On 6/13/06, Craig Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is this something that has come up for in a discussion? I don't mean to start a flame war between the BLFS and LFS teams :) It seems like part of a basic setup to have a users group with an ID of 100. If the LFS team does not agree, it could always be part of BLFS's configuring for adding users instructions. Probably there could be a note in the BLFS instructions. Unfortunately, groups are a bit of a sticky issue. Some people would not agree that there should be a common users group that all unprivelaged users are a part of. I think it is useful enough that it should be mentioned. On my system, I like to be in a common group with the other users. You can always set your permissions according to your preference. The problem you're having, though, isn't really related to have a users group. It's caused because you haven't defined any group. The defaults for shadow from LFS say that any new user will default to group 100 unless the group is specified. There are some switches with useradd that allow the group to be created from useradd, but I can't recall them right now. If the other BLFS editors agree, I'll add a note saying that creating a new user will default to group 100, so you should create that. And maybe I'll say something about putting all your users in a common group. That should be intuitive to anyone with a decent *nix background, though. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: BLFS User Group [Was Re: Inetutils]
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 06/13/06 13:29 CST: If the other BLFS editors agree, I'll add a note saying that creating a new user will default to group 100, so you should create that. And maybe I'll say something about putting all your users in a common group. That should be intuitive to anyone with a decent *nix background, though. Where are you considering adding the note? To the About system users and groups section in Chapter 3? If so, then I think a message can't hurt. However, Bruce wrote that page, so you should probably defer to his judgment. In any other section, I'm not sure it belongs. -- Randy rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.27] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686] 13:44:00 up 32 days, 5:44, 1 user, load average: 0.36, 0.30, 0.18 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS does not save bash history on shutdown
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 12:23 -0600, Jason Aeschilman wrote: Bash history is not saved on shutdown. I have commented out the line unset HISTFILE from /etc/profile so now history is saved for root, but it only works when I log out of a terminal. If I reboot or shutdown, the history does not get saved to ~/.bash_history. Does anyone know how this can be fixed? Shouldn't this be standard on the LFS system? Even if you keep unset HISTFILE for root, regular users should not lose their bash history on shutdown. Jason I believe this is standard. If the terminal session is not logged out of, history for that session is not saved. What I do if I reboot/shutdown from a virtual terminal: reboot ; exit I have lost history enough times, so I'm careful to logout of any session I want to save. -- S. Anthony Sequeira ++ It's hard to be humble when you're perfect. ++ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
kernel messages write to console even when not defined in syslog
I'm using a kernel module that sends warn (KERN_WARN ) log level messages to the console but I want them to only go to the logs. I would like only kernel messages that are log level error or higher to go to the console. So I added the following to the top of the default LFS /etc/syslog.conf file: *.error /dev/console However, this does not prevent the warning messages from going to the console. In fact, I even tried this: *.* /dev/null And STILL the warning messages go to the console. I'm at a loss as to why this is. Any help or guidance would be appreciated. I've looked at the man page for syslog and I couldn't find anything there as to why this would be happening. Now what I did find out so far is that the command setterm -msglevel 3 will prevent KERN_WARN messages from going to the console, but I'm concerned that this would interfere with syslog.conf which is where this stuff should be set anyway. Also, this command is terminal specific and I'm not sure how I would even execute it for each terminal. I don't want any KERN_WARN messages going to any console, even when nobody is logged in, otherwise it just periodically spams the heck out of the console. Jason -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: BLFS User Group [Was Re: Inetutils]
On 6/13/06, Randy McMurchy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Where are you considering adding the note? To the About system users and groups section in Chapter 3? Yeah. If so, then I think a message can't hurt. However, Bruce wrote that page, so you should probably defer to his judgment. Agreed. Bruce? -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: kernel messages write to console even when not defined in syslog
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 12:58:50PM -0600, Jason Aeschilman wrote: I'm using a kernel module that sends warn (KERN_WARN ) log level messages to the console but I want them to only go to the logs. I would like only kernel messages that are log level error or higher to go to the console. So I added the following to the top of the default LFS /etc/syslog.conf file: *.error /dev/console However, this does not prevent the warning messages from going to the console. See man 8 klogd. I do the following on all my builds, which is close to what you wish to achieve, but best to double-check the level against the log page: sed -i 's/\(loadproc klogd\)/\1 -c 4/' /etc/rc.d/init.d/sysklogd Ken -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
samba configuration
Hi All I wondered if anyone could help with a couple of questions I have in regards to setting up samba? The first isn't about samba but a group called wheel this vaguely seems familiar in a slackware install? I found this reference to it in the samba mini HOWTO. admin users = @wheel ; domain administrators domain admin group = @wheel domain admin users = root Do I generate this group for my lfs box? Presumingly, I could use any group name I wished but what is the wheel group for and what would be a good choice? My second question is about the useradd command. How do you set disabled-login and disabled-password? For previous distributions I've used the guide: http://dcfonline.sfu.ca/ying/linux/samba/part6.html While this is a vulnerable configuration, it has served me well for a number of years, allowing me at home move files from the MS platform to the Linux platform within my home. In preparation I've looked at the useradd man page as well as others attempting to see how to set nologin and no password switches but I can't see it for looking. I've probably opened a can of worms here but I'd like to develope my understanding on what would be a suitable samba configuration and why? Gena -- Wow! Linux From Scratch -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: samba configuration
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote these words on 06/13/06 14:47 CST: I wondered if anyone could help with a couple of questions I have in regards to setting up samba? Sorry I can't be of more help, but I've found that searching the following 4 sources of information (all included in the Samba source tarball) has always provided the answers to any question I've ever had about Samba. Using Samba, 2nd Edition; a popular book published by O'Reilly file:///usr/share/samba/swat/using_samba/toc.html The Official Samba HOWTO and Reference Guide file:///usr/share/samba/swat/help/Samba-HOWTO-Collection/index.html Samba-3 by Example file:///usr/share/samba/swat/help/Samba-Guide/index.html The Samba-3 man Pages file:///usr/share/samba/swat/help/samba.7.html -- Randy rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.27] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686] 15:06:00 up 32 days, 7:06, 1 user, load average: 0.66, 0.20, 0.07 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Fontconfig 2.3.2 fails
Hi I wondered if someone could point me in the right direction to get fontconfig installed. I've installed docbook and it's the docbook catalogue that seems to be causing the problem. After googling around I got the impression that I needed to update my catalogue but I'd followed the blfs book, so confused what to do next? Here's an extract from the error: docbook2man ../fc-cache/fc-cache.sgml Using catalogs: /etc/sgml/catalog Using stylesheet: /usr/share/sgml/docbook/utils-0.6.14/docbook-utils.dsl#print Working on: /home/gena/src/fontconfig-2.3.2/fc-cache/../fc-cache/fc-cache.sgml nsgmls:/home/gena/src/fontconfig-2.3.2/fc-cache/../fc-cache/fc-cache.sgml:1:59:W: cannot generate system identifier for public text -//OASIS//DTD DocBook V4.1//EN nsgmls:/home/gena/src/fontconfig-2.3.2/fc-cache/../fc-cache/fc-cache.sgml:35:0:E: reference to entity REFENTRY for which no system identifier could be generated Cheers Gena -- Wow! Linux From Scratch -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: samba configuration
Hi Thanks for reading my questions. Gena On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 03:08:58PM -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote these words on 06/13/06 14:47 CST: I wondered if anyone could help with a couple of questions I have in regards to setting up samba? Sorry I can't be of more help, but I've found that searching the following 4 sources of information (all included in the Samba source tarball) has always provided the answers to any question I've ever had about Samba. Using Samba, 2nd Edition; a popular book published by O'Reilly file:///usr/share/samba/swat/using_samba/toc.html The Official Samba HOWTO and Reference Guide file:///usr/share/samba/swat/help/Samba-HOWTO-Collection/index.html Samba-3 by Example file:///usr/share/samba/swat/help/Samba-Guide/index.html The Samba-3 man Pages file:///usr/share/samba/swat/help/samba.7.html -- Randy rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.27] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686] 15:06:00 up 32 days, 7:06, 1 user, load average: 0.66, 0.20, 0.07 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page ---end quoted text--- -- Wow! Linux From Scratch -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: kernel messages write to console even when not defined in syslog
Ken Moffat wrote: On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 12:58:50PM -0600, Jason Aeschilman wrote: I'm using a kernel module that sends warn (KERN_WARN ) log level messages to the console but I want them to only go to the logs. I would like only kernel messages that are log level error or higher to go to the console. So I added the following to the top of the default LFS /etc/syslog.conf file: *.error /dev/console However, this does not prevent the warning messages from going to the console. See man 8 klogd. I do the following on all my builds, which is close to what you wish to achieve, but best to double-check the level against the log page: sed -i 's/\(loadproc klogd\)/\1 -c 4/' /etc/rc.d/init.d/sysklogd Ken Thanks, I'll try that. Does anyone know why putting settings like I did in /etc/syslog.conf is not doing what I expect? How do the popular distros handle this? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Starting hplip before CUPS Server?
DJ Lucas wrote:
snip
Ideally, you should have S23hplip links in rc{3,4,5}.d/ to start in
multiuser, multiuser-test, and graphical user modes reps. You should
also have K35hplip links in rc{0,1,6}.d/ to stop on shutdown, single
user mode, and reboot repsectively. Runlevel 2 is questionable. You
should have one or the other but it depends on weather the service is
dependent on the network being up. RL2 is no network. I don't know
much about hplip. My question is, do you need it? Personally I need
only the IJS portion of it, so that is all that is built and installed.
-- DJ Lucas
DJ,
Thanks for the info. As for needing it, I am only working from what I
see on my host disto and from the hplip.sourceforge.net website. I have
seen where others only installed the IJS portion of it, but I decided
against that route. I will research it further for future builds but
now that it is on the system I'll work with it.
Thanks again,
rblythe
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: kernel messages write to console even when not defined in syslog
Jason Aeschilman wrote: Thanks, I'll try that. Does anyone know why putting settings like I did in /etc/syslog.conf is not doing what I expect? How do the popular distros handle this? 'echo kernel.printk=3 /etc/sysctl.conf' See 'man sysctl' for more info. --DJ Lucas -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: PPPoE connection using only the PPP package
Angel Tsankov wrote: You tried the correct options, not sure why they don't work. The correct value for mru and mtu is 1492, BTW. Hmm, I put mtu 1492 and mru 1492 in the /etc/ppp/peers/pppoe file, but I still get the Couldn't increase MTU to 1500 message: I need the output of pppd call pppoe dryrun in order to debug this. Plugin rp-pppoe.so loaded. RP-PPPoE plugin version 3.3 compiled against pppd 2.4.3 Hope this helps. No, that doesn't. pppd call pppoe dryrun eth0 -- Alexander E. Patrakov -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
