Re: Weird network troubles

2003-06-20 Thread Andrew Sharp
On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 11:07:44PM +0200, Philippe Sainte-Marie wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I'm having troubles with my Ultra5 and RTL8139 PCI Ethernet card.
> 
> Here is what happens:
> 
> eth0 is integrated Sun Ethernet Adapter with local ip  192.168.1.42
> 01:01.1 Ethernet controller: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Happy Meal 
> (rev 01)
> 
> eth1 is RTL8139 PCI Ethernet card with local ip 192.168.1.43
> 02:01.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. 
> RTL-8139/8139C/8139C+ (rev 10)
> 
> module is loaded properly
> Module  Size  Used by   Not tainted
> ipv6  174504  -1 
> 8139too15264  1 
> mii   33280[8139too]
> 
> when i unplug the cable from eth1 (RTL Card) and eth0 is connected
> i can ping both interface even if one is not connected
> 
> when i unplug the cable from eth0 (Sun eth) and eth1 is connected
> i can't ping anything.

What is the mac address for each card?

a



Weird network troubles

2003-06-20 Thread Philippe Sainte-Marie
Hi

I'm having troubles with my Ultra5 and RTL8139 PCI Ethernet card.

Here is what happens:

eth0 is integrated Sun Ethernet Adapter with local ip  192.168.1.42
01:01.1 Ethernet controller: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Happy Meal 
(rev 01)

eth1 is RTL8139 PCI Ethernet card with local ip 192.168.1.43
02:01.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. 
RTL-8139/8139C/8139C+ (rev 10)

module is loaded properly
Module  SizeUsed by   Not tainted
ipv6174504  -1 
8139too152641 
mii 33280[8139too]

when i unplug the cable from eth1 (RTL Card) and eth0 is connected
i can ping both interface even if one is not connected

when i unplug the cable from eth0 (Sun eth) and eth1 is connected
i can't ping anything.

i really don't understand how this is possible !

Any help would be great

-- 
Philippe Sainte-Marie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



port source code

2003-06-20 Thread pura life CR

Hi, where can I view the debain sparc source code port online?
If not possible to see it online, Where Can I get it by ftp?
Only the source code, I dont want the binaries.


regards,

_
Charla con tus amigos en lĂ­nea mediante MSN Messenger: 
http://messenger.yupimsn.com/




Re: Performance Question

2003-06-20 Thread Jim Crilly
I realize it's not really Sparc specifc, but I didn't know if recompiling it
with gcc-3.3 would help any. I was hoping someone would have done some speed
testing with the different versions of gcc.

Jim.

Quoting Patrick Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> You might try asking about this on the Courier IMAP list:
> 
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/courier-imap
> 
> Your problem's not really specific to Sparc (or even Linux), and you're 
> probably much more apt to get a good answer there.
> 
> Jim Crilly wrote:
> 
> >The problem now is that on the really large mailboxes (the cut off seems to
> be
> >around 9K messages) the sort capability causes problems with IMP because it
> >takes so long. 
> >
> 
> 
> 




-
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/



Re: Performance Question

2003-06-20 Thread Patrick Morris

You might try asking about this on the Courier IMAP list:

http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/courier-imap

Your problem's not really specific to Sparc (or even Linux), and you're 
probably much more apt to get a good answer there.


Jim Crilly wrote:


The problem now is that on the really large mailboxes (the cut off seems to be
around 9K messages) the sort capability causes problems with IMP because it
takes so long. 






Performance Question

2003-06-20 Thread Jim Crilly
I recently setup Courier-IMAP on a Ultra2 with 2x300Mhz CPUs because the old
slower hardware and wu-imapd/mbox setup was just getting too slow. For the most
part the combination of newer hardware and Maildir was a big difference,
especially on bigger mailboxes.

The problem now is that on the really large mailboxes (the cut off seems to be
around 9K messages) the sort capability causes problems with IMP because it
takes so long. If I disable server-side sorting it's magnitudes faster, but IMP
loses some functionality. I don't think there's much I can do since it just
takes a long time for imapd to sort 9K messages, but I thought I'd ask anyway
incase I'm missing something. Recompiling the package wouldn't help anything,
right? Would a different imap daemon do better?

Thanks for any input,
Jim

-
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/