Re: [ilugd] [Long] It works
Dear ALL, it was really cool stuff and a very good case study.sharing these experiences will prove panecea for all linux savvy guys. Thanks once again. --- Raj Mathur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 So Supreet and I have been slogging our collective a** off working at a client's location (no names just yet), trying to migrate his 5000 users to Samba from a Winduhs file server. Some experiences... Client has 8 locations, including numerous factories, spread over the country. Were using NT for domain control as well as file and print services (FPS). MS got into the act, convinced them about the joys of Winduhs 2003 and got their domain controllers (DCs) upgraded to W2K3. In the meantime we'd already done most of the work to switch the FPS from NT to Linux. At the last minute (nearly) client comes to us and asks, ``Can you work with a W2K3 domain controller?''. Being the blithe spirits that we are, we searched the web, found some pointers that seemed to vaguely indicate the possibility of a chance of there being some items that could portend the peaceful co-existence of Samba and W2K3, and gave him the reply in one word, `Yes!'. Problem with W2K3 is that it only supports active directory (AD) and none of the older methods of authentication (whatever they are -- /me is no Winduhs expert). So we need a Samba that is AD aware. Lo and behold, Samba 3.0.0 (currently in final Beta) is AD aware, and Google-ification yields a few HOWTOs on how to get the two working together. OK, problem (1) solved. As long as /someone/ has got it working, we should be able to too, right? I mean, what're mailing lists, IRC channels, friends and AK-47s for if not to get you assistance with making Samba work with AD? Download, compile, test, scream, tear out hair, kill w2k3 admin because he can't properly set the one goddam registry entry that we need, find another w2k3 admin, recompile, retest, etc... you know the routine. Finally, it sort of works. Except... see, Samba has this means of automatically adding new users when they're defined on the DC but not in Linux. So we use that facility (with some 'l33t shell scripting by yours truly), but there's some conflict in the group names and permissions and whatnot, and life sucks until Supreet comes up with this weird idea: don't have Unix users at all! I look at him in dismay, thinking, ``He's really lost it this time'' and am about to suggest a long vacation, away from computers when he explains: let the password routines use Winbind to get the users. Sounds like utter cr*p to me, but we're desperate so I mangle the appropriate files, and do a getent passwd ... and Voila! here's the list of all the users on the AD server! The rest of the office is eyeing us with concern (this is at the client's office) as we go into high-fives, middle-fives, low-fives, jaffi-pa's, bhangra, balle-balles and general rejoicing. The rest of the configuration looks like a breeze... ...Until... Wait, the client also has complex access rules for his data! See, the ``folder'' Marketing belongs to the marketing group and everyone in that group has read and write access to it, only, see, the Director Projects needs to view the files in /this/ sub-folder, and the Director Finance must be able to modify the files in /this/ sub-folder and /this/ sub-folder, and... you get the idea. Linux doesn't have fine-grained filesystem access control yet (well, the new betas do, but none of the ``stable'' releases). Scratch heads (scratch patka in Supreet's case), fgrep -ir acl /usr/src/linux/Documentation with no result, try to shrug off gloom and despondency. Finally decide to bite the bullet, put our noses to the grindstone, our back to the wheel and our ear to the ground and go in for SGI's XFS. XFS is a hotsex filesystem which is going to be part of Linux 2.6, but is not available for the 2.4 series except as a patch. Rather than patch, we decide to get SGI's complete Linux kernel CVS tree for kernel 2.4.21. A few hours (170MB downloaded) and a couple of kernel compiles later we're ready to test ACLs on Linux. Bah, what testing? It's Linux, and it works as advertised. Plug ACLs into Samba, and we're ready to start testing the setup. I won't go into the details of the testing phase. Suffice it to say that it was bloody, gory and rigorous. And that it passed off without incident. Saturday (19th) night we brought the new system online. Restored from tape wherever possible -- if you restore a backup from an NT machine onto a Samba share you get the complete user, group and access control lists on each file and directory. Unfortunately some of the tapes (only worth about 10 gig of data) refuse to restore, so we have to copy those files manually from the old NT server. Next 2 hours is spent
Re: [ilugd] prob in gtk+
to use gnome functionalities with gtk, you should include gnome headers and link with gnome libraries. if you don't use gnome funcitions at all, you don't need gnome.h to include your own headers, you should use the -Imydir ( mydir directory will contain your headers) with your gcc command CHEERS!!! http://www.sijin.8m.net From: saurabh singh [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: saurabh singh [EMAIL PROTECTED],The Linux-Delhi mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ilugd] prob in gtk+ Date: 16 Jul 2003 10:59:02 - hi , I make a simple prog in gtk+ when i include gnome.h library file . but when i compile prog by gcc command then it says the gnome.h: no such file or directory found. i read in book that we have to set path for this library file. how do i set the path? and if i want to use my own header file. should i have to set path for it? where should i save that header file? i m using RH 7.3 bye ___ Click below to experience Sooraj R Barjatya's latest offering 'Main Prem Ki Diwani Hoon' starring Hrithik, Abhishek Kareena http://www.mpkdh.com ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd _ It's all happening @ F1. Feel the thrill! http://server1.msn.co.in/sp03/formula2003/index.asp Race along right here! ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] [Long] It works
Dear ALL, it was really cool stuff and a very good case study.sharing these experiences will prove panecea for all linux savvy guys. Thanks once again. --- Raj Mathur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 So Supreet and I have been slogging our collective a** off working at a client's location (no names just yet), trying to migrate his 5000 users to Samba from a Winduhs file server. Some experiences... Client has 8 locations, including numerous factories, spread over the country. Were using NT for domain control as well as file and print services (FPS). MS got into the act, convinced them about the joys of Winduhs 2003 and got their domain controllers (DCs) upgraded to W2K3. In the meantime we'd already done most of the work to switch the FPS from NT to Linux. At the last minute (nearly) client comes to us and asks, ``Can you work with a W2K3 domain controller?''. Being the blithe spirits that we are, we searched the web, found some pointers that seemed to vaguely indicate the possibility of a chance of there being some items that could portend the peaceful co-existence of Samba and W2K3, and gave him the reply in one word, `Yes!'. Problem with W2K3 is that it only supports active directory (AD) and none of the older methods of authentication (whatever they are -- /me is no Winduhs expert). So we need a Samba that is AD aware. Lo and behold, Samba 3.0.0 (currently in final Beta) is AD aware, and Google-ification yields a few HOWTOs on how to get the two working together. OK, problem (1) solved. As long as /someone/ has got it working, we should be able to too, right? I mean, what're mailing lists, IRC channels, friends and AK-47s for if not to get you assistance with making Samba work with AD? Download, compile, test, scream, tear out hair, kill w2k3 admin because he can't properly set the one goddam registry entry that we need, find another w2k3 admin, recompile, retest, etc... you know the routine. Finally, it sort of works. Except... see, Samba has this means of automatically adding new users when they're defined on the DC but not in Linux. So we use that facility (with some 'l33t shell scripting by yours truly), but there's some conflict in the group names and permissions and whatnot, and life sucks until Supreet comes up with this weird idea: don't have Unix users at all! I look at him in dismay, thinking, ``He's really lost it this time'' and am about to suggest a long vacation, away from computers when he explains: let the password routines use Winbind to get the users. Sounds like utter cr*p to me, but we're desperate so I mangle the appropriate files, and do a getent passwd ... and Voila! here's the list of all the users on the AD server! The rest of the office is eyeing us with concern (this is at the client's office) as we go into high-fives, middle-fives, low-fives, jaffi-pa's, bhangra, balle-balles and general rejoicing. The rest of the configuration looks like a breeze... ...Until... Wait, the client also has complex access rules for his data! See, the ``folder'' Marketing belongs to the marketing group and everyone in that group has read and write access to it, only, see, the Director Projects needs to view the files in /this/ sub-folder, and the Director Finance must be able to modify the files in /this/ sub-folder and /this/ sub-folder, and... you get the idea. Linux doesn't have fine-grained filesystem access control yet (well, the new betas do, but none of the ``stable'' releases). Scratch heads (scratch patka in Supreet's case), fgrep -ir acl /usr/src/linux/Documentation with no result, try to shrug off gloom and despondency. Finally decide to bite the bullet, put our noses to the grindstone, our back to the wheel and our ear to the ground and go in for SGI's XFS. XFS is a hotsex filesystem which is going to be part of Linux 2.6, but is not available for the 2.4 series except as a patch. Rather than patch, we decide to get SGI's complete Linux kernel CVS tree for kernel 2.4.21. A few hours (170MB downloaded) and a couple of kernel compiles later we're ready to test ACLs on Linux. Bah, what testing? It's Linux, and it works as advertised. Plug ACLs into Samba, and we're ready to start testing the setup. I won't go into the details of the testing phase. Suffice it to say that it was bloody, gory and rigorous. And that it passed off without incident. Saturday (19th) night we brought the new system online. Restored from tape wherever possible -- if you restore a backup from an NT machine onto a Samba share you get the complete user, group and access control lists on each file and directory. Unfortunately some of the tapes (only worth about 10 gig of data) refuse to restore, so we have to copy those files manually from the old NT server. Next 2 hours is spent
[ilugd] Re: why linux-delhi is pathetic
Dear all, Many regrets for my non-attendance. Out of town first abroad, then for sister's wedding. See you all in the August meet. Let's have a show of force this time, Regards, Ashwin Baindur [EMAIL PROTECTED] LinuxLingam writes: dear all, linux-delhi is pathetic. unlike the rest of linux user groups in india, we are in the captial of the country. more importantly, we have been invited to hold our meetings in the conference room of the ministry of communications, information, and technology. we are usually full of fire and brimstone with our convictions. despite all this, only six to seven showed up for this month's ilug-d meet, from our nearly 2,000 people in the mailing list. wretched support. don't blame the rains. what happened to dhruv, pankaj, supreet, sandip bhattacharya, vivek, hemant saraf, ashwin baindur, alolita, amit goel, ghane, ravi, ajay, prakash, pawan, ravi, tarun dua, amitabh, everybody else who has been regularly attending the meets, and the lurkers on the list? i suppose this goes to show two things: linux-delhi is falling apart. linux is dead. :-( LL ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] [Long] It works
**Disclaimer Information contained in this E-MAIL being proprietary to Wipro Limited is 'privileged' and 'confidential' and intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. You are notified that any use, copying or dissemination of the information contained in the E-MAIL in any manner whatsoever is strictly prohibited. *** Kettle calls the pot black. ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
[ilugd] some help
hi all, Please inform me abt the next meet.. and are there any pre-condtions to appear for this meet.. like , maybe i shud be an expert in linuxor something of this kind.. then i m going to miss this meet for sure :) saurabh singh... i can help u with the redhat 7.3, 8.0 and 9.0 CD's but u will have to pick them up.. and of course pay for the media.. no writing charges... also please clear what is freeduck??? waht is it supposed to do?? -vishesh kaul Get Your Private, Free E-mail from Indiatimes at http://email.indiatimes.com Buy The Best In BOOKS at http://www.bestsellers.indiatimes.com Bid for for Air Tickets @ Re.1 on Air Sahara Flights. Just log on to http://airsahara.indiatimes.com and Bid Now! ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
RE: [ilugd] [Long] It works
Congrats guys !! Was thinking of using winbind for some time now .. Will definitely try it out. -js -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Raj Mathur Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 11:03 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ilugd] [Long] It works -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 So Supreet and I have been slogging our collective a** off working at a client's location (no names just yet), trying to migrate his 5000 users to Samba from a Winduhs file server. Some experiences... Client has 8 locations, including numerous factories, spread over the country. Were using NT for domain control as well as file and print services (FPS). MS got into the act, convinced them about the joys of Winduhs 2003 and got their domain controllers (DCs) upgraded to W2K3. In the meantime we'd already done most of the work to switch the FPS from NT to Linux. At the last minute (nearly) client comes to us and asks, ``Can you work with a W2K3 domain controller?''. Being the blithe spirits that we are, we searched the web, found some pointers that seemed to vaguely indicate the possibility of a chance of there being some items that could portend the peaceful co-existence of Samba and W2K3, and gave him the reply in one word, `Yes!'. Problem with W2K3 is that it only supports active directory (AD) and none of the older methods of authentication (whatever they are -- /me is no Winduhs expert). So we need a Samba that is AD aware. Lo and behold, Samba 3.0.0 (currently in final Beta) is AD aware, and Google-ification yields a few HOWTOs on how to get the two working together. OK, problem (1) solved. As long as /someone/ has got it working, we should be able to too, right? I mean, what're mailing lists, IRC channels, friends and AK-47s for if not to get you assistance with making Samba work with AD? Download, compile, test, scream, tear out hair, kill w2k3 admin because he can't properly set the one goddam registry entry that we need, find another w2k3 admin, recompile, retest, etc... you know the routine. Finally, it sort of works. Except... see, Samba has this means of automatically adding new users when they're defined on the DC but not in Linux. So we use that facility (with some 'l33t shell scripting by yours truly), but there's some conflict in the group names and permissions and whatnot, and life sucks until Supreet comes up with this weird idea: don't have Unix users at all! I look at him in dismay, thinking, ``He's really lost it this time'' and am about to suggest a long vacation, away from computers when he explains: let the password routines use Winbind to get the users. Sounds like utter cr*p to me, but we're desperate so I mangle the appropriate files, and do a getent passwd ... and Voila! here's the list of all the users on the AD server! The rest of the office is eyeing us with concern (this is at the client's office) as we go into high-fives, middle-fives, low-fives, jaffi-pa's, bhangra, balle-balles and general rejoicing. The rest of the configuration looks like a breeze... ...Until... Wait, the client also has complex access rules for his data! See, the ``folder'' Marketing belongs to the marketing group and everyone in that group has read and write access to it, only, see, the Director Projects needs to view the files in /this/ sub-folder, and the Director Finance must be able to modify the files in /this/ sub-folder and /this/ sub-folder, and... you get the idea. Linux doesn't have fine-grained filesystem access control yet (well, the new betas do, but none of the ``stable'' releases). Scratch heads (scratch patka in Supreet's case), fgrep -ir acl /usr/src/linux/Documentation with no result, try to shrug off gloom and despondency. Finally decide to bite the bullet, put our noses to the grindstone, our back to the wheel and our ear to the ground and go in for SGI's XFS. XFS is a hotsex filesystem which is going to be part of Linux 2.6, but is not available for the 2.4 series except as a patch. Rather than patch, we decide to get SGI's complete Linux kernel CVS tree for kernel 2.4.21. A few hours (170MB downloaded) and a couple of kernel compiles later we're ready to test ACLs on Linux. Bah, what testing? It's Linux, and it works as advertised. Plug ACLs into Samba, and we're ready to start testing the setup. I won't go into the details of the testing phase. Suffice it to say that it was bloody, gory and rigorous. And that it passed off without incident. Saturday (19th) night we brought the new system online. Restored from tape wherever possible -- if you restore a backup from an NT machine onto a Samba share you get the complete user, group and access control lists on each file and directory. Unfortunately some of the tapes (only worth about 10 gig of data) refuse to restore, so we have to copy those files manually from the old NT server. Next 2 hours is spent with the client's IT bossman,
Re: [ilugd] [Long] It works
Kettle calls the pot black. wish it was under my control. one of the reason i resist mailing to the list . ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd **Disclaimer Information contained in this E-MAIL being proprietary to Wipro Limited is 'privileged' and 'confidential' and intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. You are notified that any use, copying or dissemination of the information contained in the E-MAIL in any manner whatsoever is strictly prohibited. *** ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
[ilugd] Re: [LIG] [Long [not any more]] It works
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Philip == Philip S Tellis Philip writes: Philip On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, Raj Mathur wrote: I won't go into the details of the testing phase. Suffice it to say Philip but could you put the details of your testing up on a Philip website near here... it would be good from a puts on Philip running shoes QA pov runs. We'd already done most of the actual file-sharing testing with the earlier (NT-based) domain controllers, so this time it was primarily access testing. Some of the things we did: - - Set 2770 on directories, and then check whether (a) files were created with the correct modes and ownership and (b) whether a file created by one user of a group was writable by other users in the group or not. The 2 in 2770 forces the directory to pass permissions (file/directory modes) and group ownership downward. In other words, if you have a directory with mode 2770, all files created in it will belong to the group the directory belongs to, and directories created under it will also have identical ownership and permissions. - - Set the ACLs through Linux and check the access control. Linux has getfacl and setfacl for respectively getting the current ACLs on a file or directory and setting them to a desired value. We set ACLs for users and groups on directories and files to which those users/groups otherwise didn't have access, and checked that they could access the files afterwards. I must say that XFS ACLs are very comprehensive. For instance, you have the concept of a default ACL for a directory, which propagates downward just like the 2xxx bit on a regular filesystem directory mode. getfacl and setfacl also are quite comprehensive and fortunately easily scriptable. E.g. one of the aforementioned shell scripts descended a directory tree and automatically set the default ACLs for all directories to their current ACL, after mangling the current ACLs a bit. - - Set ACLs through Winduhs and check the result. This was quite similar -- we'd first check if the Linux (XFS) ACLs that actually got applied appeared to match what had been set through Winduhs, and then test the share with different users and groups. You can set fine0grained access control in Winduhs by right-clicking on a file name, selecting Properties and selecting the Security tab. Only works with NT, 2000 co, not with 95 or 98. - - AD testing was pretty straightforward. Once Winbind managed to display us the AD users and groups we didn't really have to test very much. Samba sets supplementary groups under certain conditions, so verifying that took a simple cat /proc/pid/status, which shows you the primary user and group and supplementary groups of the smbd process associated with a particular share in use. Regards, - -- Raju - -- Raj Mathur[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kandalaya.org/ GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5 0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F It is the mind that moves -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.6 and Gnu Privacy Guard http://www.gnupg.org/ iD8DBQE/HOgKyWjQ78xo0X8RAl/SAJ41oYb1OFwV669tIAyS6E48mXj0GwCglaWO H6g7hhbu5SEhNoUFWZNBYn8= =K9wH -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
[ilugd] Wipro Disclaimers
On Tue, 2003-07-22 at 13:03, Lalit Kumar Bhasin wrote: Kettle calls the pot black. wish it was under my control. one of the reason i resist mailing to the list . I thought they had gone away. Raj had mentioned that Wipro has a procedure in place to let its employees post to mailing lists without the customary disclaimers. -Tarun Dua -Forwarded Message- From: Tarun Dua [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Linux Users Group Delhi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ilugd]: Increasing Linux Partition space Date: 02 Apr 2003 18:02:14 +0530 On Wed, 2003-04-02 at 17:36, Lalit Kumar Bhasin wrote: Hi all, I have a dual boot system with Windows-2000 and Linux 8.0. The total hard disk space is 40 GB, and about 5 GB is dedicated to Linux , and rest for windows. Now, I wanted to increase the Linux Ext space from 5 GB to say 10 GB. I tried Partition magic ,but it failed. Is there some other way to do it. Please suggest. Regds, Lalit good to see wiproites on list without the customary disclaimer!! ^^^ did Partition Magic fail create free space from a windows partition or it failed to increase the space available in Linux once you have free space available on the disk you can add it to a new linux partition. ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
[ilugd] Robins!
hee hee!!! alright Robins...my sincerest apologies...! i wont forget now! Cheers! Robins Tharakan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: no issues ( yet! ;-D ) but just for reference sake, my name is Robins and not robin affly On Mon, 2003-07-21 at 09:47, @*[EMAIL PROTECTED]#^ wrote: Robin, you're right! ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd SMS using the Yahoo! Messenger;Download latest version. ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] frodo.hserus.net : smtp restrictions (once again)
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 11:29:56AM +0530, mary wrote: Was trying to send mails to the ilugd list in the morning and discovered that some of the vsnl servers are listed in the spamblock databases that frodo.hserus.net is using to ward off unwanted mail. [ For ex: http://spamblock.outblaze.com/203.200.125.245 ] AFAIK, outblaze is configured to block all mails from dialup SMTP servers. ie dialup users running their own SMTP. Such users are requested to use their smarthost to relay mails. vsnl.net IPs where in the block list for some time back. But now they are not in block list. Regards -- .''`. Dileep M. Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] : :' :http://www.kumarayil.net `. `'` `- Debian GNU/Linux - Choice of the Freedom Lovers ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
[ilugd] (no subject)
HI ALL I AM facing a prob my shadow file has caught only read only permission it is no changing even as root user the rights are -r--- only even after placing hard disk on another system and changing rights does not succeed even we can not change yhe contents plz help me in this regard prac -- __ http://www.indiainfo.com Now with POP3/SMTP access for only US$14.95/yr Powered by Outblaze ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] I would like to know about 'Free Duck' andfreedombased GnuLinux
ok! right away !! :D hello sir, welcome to the real world! we generally kindly provide information, but sending details is slightly beyond most of the people's league out here... a request, well ok, but frankly i doubt anyone's going to do that... anyhow, if you wish to know more, why don't you search the net? or maybe ask for pointers? no one's anyways, going to Mail! you the details ... affly robins On Tue, 2003-07-22 at 11:55, subodh chandra wrote: I would like to know about 'Free Duck' and freedombased GnuLinux... Kindly send the details to Ashim Bose, 2, Khalisha Kota Pally, P.O. Italgacha, Kolkata-700 079 by Post or Courier. Thanks. ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] [Long] It works
Too add to raju's description of episode, Howto for installing Samba which could talk to Windows '03 is available at www.nixbeta.org. You can leave the kerberos part out. It works without it. The HOWTO covers most rudimentary setup Supreet ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] Re: Please Reply
A lot of people are really surprised when they get to know that this scan originally started with snail mail and has been around for a long time. Ambar Roy - Original Message - From: Raj Mathur [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Nigerian scam has been around for much longer than PCQ, BTW. ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Re: [ilugd] Booting into a compiled kernel
I think its always better to do the compiling in the /usr/src/linux xxx directory. The steps are like this.. 1. make oldconfig - this will produce the default configuration file .Config and you can save this in another directory if u need it later, 2. make mrproper 3. make menuconfig or make xconfig(use this one, this is very graphical and easy - and run this in xwindow terminal) - (make the changes that u want) 4. edit the MakeFile and give your linux kernel version name 5. make dep 6. make clean 7. make bzImage 8. make modules 9. make modules_install 10. make install You can run commands 5 tp 10 in a single command line using ; to differentiate between commands. There is no need to copy the bz image or edit the grub, as all this is done automatically. But in case if the system shows some error in booting up, edit the grub file, and change the label, and give the correct root partition path. Thanks Balu - Original Message - From: Robins Tharakan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Linux-Delhi mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 3:34 PM Subject: Re: [ilugd] Booting into a compiled kernel there could be two problems. 1. you have specified incorrect partition number... which is almost certainly out of question since you copied the lines from the original configuration... 2. you probably specified to build the root filesystem [generally its ext2) (or even ext3 if you are like me...) into modules. That doesnt work, since atleast the root filesystem needs to be inbuilt into the kernel(i.e. say y rather than m for the root filesystem that you use). basically the idea is that the modules are read from the root filesystem, so if you read even the root filesystem modules from the root, it becomes more of a chicken vs egg problem, thereby causing the error... if i messed up in analysis, probably an exact description of the error that you get could help. affly robins On Mon, 2003-07-21 at 14:59, D.Venkatasubramanian, Noida wrote: Hi, I have installed RHL 9 on my machine. As I required a kernel without version support, I decided to compile a new one. I created a directory /home/all and copied the kernel sources into it from /usr/src/linux### and compiled the kernel in /home/all/linux###. Followed the steps given, make menuconfig, make dep, make modules_install exactly as gien in the README ... Well, everything went off smoothly, no make errors of any kind. Then I copied the kernel, to /boot/ with a new name mylinux. The problem is I can't boot into this kernel using grub. I added a new entry similar to the already present entry. Then I even used rdev to specify the root device, but still am unable. I tried all combinations, including : title Linux_something root (hd0,8) kernel /boot/mylinux It says Kernel Panic : cannot mount root fs or something like that. What could be the problem? Should I build the kernel in /usr/src/linux### directly. Any help would be appreciated. Regards, Venky PS : ### is the version number. ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
[ilugd] lalit bhaseen's problem
From: Tarun Dua [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Linux Users Group Delhi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ilugd]: Increasing Linux Partition space Date: 02 Apr 2003 18:02:14 +0530 On Wed, 2003-04-02 at 17:36, Lalit Kumar Bhasin wrote: Hi all, I have a dual boot system with Windows-2000 and Linux 8.0. The total hard disk space is 40 GB, and about 5 GB is dedicated to Linux , and rest for windows. Now, I wanted to increase the Linux Ext space from 5 GB to say 10 GB. I tried Partition magic ,but it failed. Is there some other way to do it. Please suggest. Regds, Lalit lalit , a lot will depend on how you have parttioned ur disk, if ur disk is something like this.. --- | || | | WIN | Linux| WIN 2| --- then u can do it with partition magic by taking space from win2.. but if u have kept linux at end of ur hard-drive the it is very difficult to find any solution. maybe u can extract some space from windows partition and format it using partition magic pro (v7) as ext2 and see whether the space adds up but it seems highly unlikely to me.. just give it a try.. also specify which version of partition magic you are using... Get Your Private, Free E-mail from Indiatimes at http://email.indiatimes.com Buy The Best In BOOKS at http://www.bestsellers.indiatimes.com Bid for for Air Tickets @ Re.1 on Air Sahara Flights. Just log on to http://airsahara.indiatimes.com and Bid Now! ___ ilugd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
