Re: [Leaf-devel] [dachstein] feature add
Hi Mike, Considering the political reasons for the mass exodus from LRP to LEAF, I'm glad to see these figures. Regards, HiltonT On Tue, 2002-01-15 at 23:26, Mike Noyes wrote: > At 2002-01-14 23:12 -0800, Matt Schalit wrote: > >How about deciding to call leaf stuff leaf > >and not lrp anymore? > > > >.lrp files > > > > lrp all over sourceforge documents. > > 45 hits for Linux Router Project > http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Linux+Router+Project%22+site%3Aleaf.source > forge.net > > 523 hits for LRP > http://www.google.com/search?q=LRP+site%3Aleaf.sourceforge.net > > 223 hits for Linux Embedded Appliance Firewall > http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Linux+Embedded+Appliance+Firewall%22+site% > 3Aleaf.sourceforge.net > > 2200 hits for LEAF > http://www.google.com/search?q=LEAF+site%3Aleaf.sourceforge.net > > It looks like things are changing. It's just taking a while. Most of the > LRP hits are in the individual developer content devel tree. > > -- > Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > http://leaf.sourceforge.net/ > > > ___ > Leaf-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel > ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
[Leaf-devel] RE: [Leaf-user] Dachstein
I will, once one is available, but there was only an RC2 on the site a day ago... - Hilton > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael D. > Schleif > Sent: Saturday, 17 November 2001 11:34 > To: Hilton Travis > Cc: LEAF Users; LEAF Developers > Subject: Re: [Leaf-user] Dachstein > > > > Hilton Travis wrote: > > > > Rocks. I just changed from Tel$tra cable to Optus@home cable, > downloaded > > Dachstein RC2, and installed it fine. works a treat. > > > > I'll be making images for Tel$tra BigPond and Optus users, and > replacing my > > earlier images on http://quarkau.cjb.net when I get back from > camping next > > week. > > Please, consider a post-RC release . . . > > -- > > Best Regards, > > mds > mds resource > 888.250.3987 > > Dare to fix things before they break . . . > > Our capacity for understanding is inversely proportional to how much we > think we know. The more I know, the more I know I don't know . . . > > ___ > Leaf-user mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user > > ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
[Leaf-devel] Dachstein
Rocks. I just changed from Tel$tra cable to Optus@home cable, downloaded Dachstein RC2, and installed it fine. works a treat. I'll be making images for Tel$tra BigPond and Optus users, and replacing my earlier images on http://quarkau.cjb.net when I get back from camping next week. Regards, Hilton Travis ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
[Leaf-devel] Groovy Router Idea?
aling with Telstra. There is an easy way around this issue - build a Linux/BSD-based router, and use it to firewall. NAT and port-forward all that is needed. Cheaper than a Nabisco router too! The 4-port card would be configured as Port-1 for the encoder, Port-2 for a local LAN, Port-3 for an "Internet Cafe", and Port-4 for conection to another LAN/ADSL router/whatever (if the Internet connection is not an OnRamp ISDN connection). This will make it possible to allocate set bandwidth to the encoder, and have the rest available for the rest of the LAN segments - the encoder is the highest priority device. Now, if anyone here has had experience with the DFE-570TX, or ISDN cards in a LEAF box, could you please let me know your experiences. I have ready access to everything I need for this, except an ISDN connection (however, I'm sure I can locate one when I need to test the ISDN configuration). If anyone has any configuration hints for me, they'd be appreciated. I'll probably base this on ES2B (or the latest version still in the pipeline), however if Oxygen would be a better base for this sort of functionality, I'd be willing to look at that. (I am currently running a couple of ES2B-based LEAF boxes in different places, and am more confortable with ES than O2.) Regards, Hilton Travis E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Manager Telephone: +61-419-792-394 _--_|\ Quark AudioVisual / * Quark Computers \_.--._/ (Brisbane, Australia) v
RE: [Leaf-devel] New User Interface Tool: Breakthrough!
Hi, I purchased a Dick Smith "System 80" quite a few years ago - it was an Australian TRS-80 Model III clone. This box was awesome - with 48KB RAM and an inbuilt tape drive. It absolutely screamed along. I even got a small B&W TV with the deal (second hand PC and TV) to use as a monitor. :-) After a while I thought I'd get a bit more adventurous - I purchased a TRS-80 Model III with Level I and II ROMs (selectable via a toggle switch), but it had only 16KB RAM. I purchased a number of 4116 RAM Ics and increased the RAM in this unit to 48KB - now I had two awesomely powerful machines at my disposal. I then decided that tapes were a bit slow for my liking, and started looking at hard drives. For AU$1000 I could purchase an expansion unit and a 10MB hard drive - bargain. However, as I could not possibly see me using that humungous amount of storage, I decided against purchasing this. O! the joys of the early home computer days - we'll never get those back again. Regards, Hilton Travis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of John Ridout Sent: Tuesday, 17 July 2001 21:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Leaf-devel] New User Interface Tool: Breakthrough! You had it easy. I used to load programs from audio cassettes with my ZX81. I was a power user though, I had a 16k RAM pack. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David > Douthitt > Sent: 17 July 2001 11:01 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Leaf-devel] New User Interface Tool: Breakthrough! > > > Matthew Schalit wrote: > > > > Ray Olszewski wrote: > > > > > > At 08:37 AM 7/13/01 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, David Douthitt wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hilton Travis wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > Are those the 8" floppy disks? > > > > > > > >I think the 8" floppy disks never held more than 250KB > at most, anyway. > > > > > > Actually, Jeff, us old timers remember them growing to > the *huge* (at the > > > time, anyway) capacity of 1.2 MB. I ran my first real > CP/M compiler (Digital > > > Research Pascal, I think) on a dual-8 system. > > > Ah yes, the joy of loading Wordstar on a CP/M off of an 8" diskette > > and fighting through that revolutionary user interface of theirs. > > I remember running Wordstar on Apple II CP/M - or compiling with Turbo > Pascal or Small-C. In fact, I put that Apple II CP/M machine on the > "Internet" (look up deety.uucp in the UUCP maps) > > Unlike many, I liked CP/M - still do - I really do miss ZCPR3 (a later > enhanced CP/M lookalike for Z80s). > > But that machine never got used, and it was not doing me any good > lugging it around (sigh). > > I remember when the Apple II 3.5" disk drives came out - as Apple II > users, we went from 140k to 800k overnight. Paid $400 for one of > those... > > ___ > Leaf-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel > ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
RE: [Leaf-devel] New User Interface Tool: Breakthrough!
Are those the 8" floppy disks? :-) - Hilton > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dale Long > Sent: Friday, 13 July 2001 10:24 > To: LEAF Devel > Subject: Re: [Leaf-devel] New User Interface Tool: Breakthrough! > > > On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, David Douthitt wrote: > > The drawback is the size of it all: 600M. However, this could > > potentially be trimmed by using libraries (not static), by > stripping > > libraries, and removing some functions like gauge and tailbox > > functions... However, since I had 800M free on the disk, > just to get > > it working I didn't worry too much about giving up all that space. > > You do use big floppy disks. > > Dale. > > > ___ > Leaf-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/le> af-devel > ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
RE: [Leaf-devel] Tel$tra Bigpuddle is imposing a 3GB TOTAL traffic limit
Hi All, Does anyone have any input on my ideas below? I'd really like my LEAF box to be able to supply logs/statistics so I can measure throughput per IP address. I understand that I can run MRTG on a Windows or Linux box, but am unsure if it will display stats based on IPs so I can check traffic quantities per IP on my LAN. I still need a way for the logs on the LEAF box to be archived and exported daily so there's a more permanent record of this traffic. Regards, Hilton > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > Hilton Travis > Sent: Friday, 22 June 2001 1:38 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Leaf-devel] Tel$tra Bigpuddle is imposing a 3GB > TOTAL traffic limit > > > Hi All, > > I am in the unfortunate position of being a Telstra customer. > I stupidly thought that due to the immense profits that > Telstra continues to make, they would have had the initiative > to put some of this money back into building their > infrastructure. I was sadly mistaken. > > It appears that Telstra has decided that users of their Cable > and ADSL Freedom (sic) Plan service will now be subjected to > a limit of 3GB traffic per month. This is a total of 3GB > inbound and outbound. For a broadband service that was > advertized as having "unlimited" monthly traffic, this is a > kick in the guts. The average unlimited modem connection > costs about AU$20 (US$10.50) per month, has unlimited monthly > traffic, and I can pull around 0.5GB/day over a modem, approx > 15GB/month. Now, the Cable Freedom (sic) Plan costs AU$71.55 > (US$35) per month, allows about 100MB/day (3GB/month), and is > limited in every way you look at it. > > Telstra's Freedom (sic) Plan has the following terms of use: > 1. You cannot run an Internet Server on this connection (web, > ftp, filesharing, mail, etc) 2. You cannot connect a LAN to > this service (including hardware firewalls, by definition) 3. > You cannot have more than 3GB of total traffic per month (inbound and > outbound) > 4. You have a maximum inbound/outbound speed of 512kbps/128kbps > > If anyone can see where the term "freedom" applies under > these conditions, please enlighten me. > > With the unfortunate situation where Telstra refuses to > invest in their own network infrastructure, this means that > they will cram as many people onto their seriously > underperforming Broadband network as they can, and limit > their customer's use of this network to FAR BELOW what they > could achieve with a normal dialup account and a 56kbps modem. > > My recommendations to all Internet users in Australia who are > considering connecting to the Telstra Broadband network - > look at Optus, they have a *much* better plan, conditions and > business outlook for their clients. > > Now, getting off my soapbox, I have modified Charles' Es2B > images for both Optus@Home and Telstra Broadband Cable users > in Australia. These are available at > http://users.bigpond.net.au/htravis for > download by anoyone > who so chooses. > > What I want to do is this: > 1. Change from the older ES2B to the newer images that have > been created 2. Remove *all* reference to www.linuxrouter.org > for obvious reasons 3. Have the ability to archive the logs > daily and mail them out of the system 4. Have the ability to > graph the traffic through the router per internal IP address, > either on the router directly, or most probably by using the > mailed logs on another machine (with a hard drive that can > store the data for longer). 5. Make this image available for > all users who need/want it > > Due to the immense amount of work I have on at the moment, > and my limited Linux experience, I am unable to get this all > sorted out for a few weeks. I would *really* appreciate > those with the necessary knowledge/experience to make > suggestions about my goals, and the likelihood that they can > be achieved. Or, of course, improvements upon my ideas! > > Any and all input in this area, I'm sure, will help other > users of LEAF and help the project in general. > > > Regards, > > Hilton Travis E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Manager Telephone: +61-419-792-394 _--_|\ > Quark AudioVisual / * > Quark Computers\_.--._/ > (Brisbane, Australia)v > > > ___ > Leaf-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/le> af-devel > ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
[Leaf-devel] Tel$tra Bigpuddle is imposing a 3GB TOTAL traffic limit
Hi All, I am in the unfortunate position of being a Telstra customer. I stupidly thought that due to the immense profits that Telstra continues to make, they would have had the initiative to put some of this money back into building their infrastructure. I was sadly mistaken. It appears that Telstra has decided that users of their Cable and ADSL Freedom (sic) Plan service will now be subjected to a limit of 3GB traffic per month. This is a total of 3GB inbound and outbound. For a broadband service that was advertized as having "unlimited" monthly traffic, this is a kick in the guts. The average unlimited modem connection costs about AU$20 (US$10.50) per month, has unlimited monthly traffic, and I can pull around 0.5GB/day over a modem, approx 15GB/month. Now, the Cable Freedom (sic) Plan costs AU$71.55 (US$35) per month, allows about 100MB/day (3GB/month), and is limited in every way you look at it. Telstra's Freedom (sic) Plan has the following terms of use: 1. You cannot run an Internet Server on this connection (web, ftp, filesharing, mail, etc) 2. You cannot connect a LAN to this service (including hardware firewalls, by definition) 3. You cannot have more than 3GB of total traffic per month (inbound and outbound) 4. You have a maximum inbound/outbound speed of 512kbps/128kbps If anyone can see where the term "freedom" applies under these conditions, please enlighten me. With the unfortunate situation where Telstra refuses to invest in their own network infrastructure, this means that they will cram as many people onto their seriously underperforming Broadband network as they can, and limit their customer's use of this network to FAR BELOW what they could achieve with a normal dialup account and a 56kbps modem. My recommendations to all Internet users in Australia who are considering connecting to the Telstra Broadband network - look at Optus, they have a *much* better plan, conditions and business outlook for their clients. Now, getting off my soapbox, I have modified Charles' Es2B images for both Optus@Home and Telstra Broadband Cable users in Australia. These are available at http://users.bigpond.net.au/htravis for download by anoyone who so chooses. What I want to do is this: 1. Change from the older ES2B to the newer images that have been created 2. Remove *all* reference to www.linuxrouter.org for obvious reasons 3. Have the ability to archive the logs daily and mail them out of the system 4. Have the ability to graph the traffic through the router per internal IP address, either on the router directly, or most probably by using the mailed logs on another machine (with a hard drive that can store the data for longer). 5. Make this image available for all users who need/want it Due to the immense amount of work I have on at the moment, and my limited Linux experience, I am unable to get this all sorted out for a few weeks. I would *really* appreciate those with the necessary knowledge/experience to make suggestions about my goals, and the likelihood that they can be achieved. Or, of course, improvements upon my ideas! Any and all input in this area, I'm sure, will help other users of LEAF and help the project in general. Regards, Hilton Travis E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Manager Telephone: +61-419-792-394 _--_|\ Quark AudioVisual / * Quark Computers\_.--._/ (Brisbane, Australia)v ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
RE: OT Re: [Leaf-devel] linuxrouter.org draft?
Hi Morgan, Sounds fine to me. I may or may not personally agree with Capital Punishment (or terrorism), but I sure as hell don't think that my views belong in such an obvious place on such an unrelated home page as that of www.linuxrouter.org. And I think it is an abuse of position/power that Dave used it for his political views. I will sign the text that is decided upon by all LEAFers. I think I may unsubscribe from the LRP mailing lists if there are others doing this too, as a statement of "protest" (for lack of a better word). Regards, Hilton Travis > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > Morgan Reed > Sent: Tuesday, 12 June 2001 2:53 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: OT Re: [Leaf-devel] linuxrouter.org draft? > > > This is an inital rough draft that I think/hope represents > all of the ideas mentioned here. > > Again, I agree with Bao, Ray and Dave, that treading > cautionsly is best, and I agree, to a limited degree, with > Ray's most recent assertion that silence does not always = > agreement, but, as I think you may see from my draft, Dave's > decision does represent a breach of overall trust. > > I agree with Ray that some notibles have reamined silent, and > if there cannot be a consensus, then so be it, and a statemnt > dies on the vine. My intent in suggestion a letter was to > avoid an nudrectd "counterstrike" made in haste. > > All of that niceness aside, soem times, ya gotta say > BULLSHIT, or the unchallenged comment goes on to become > accepted. Anyway, it is late, this is very rough, and > probably sucks toilet water. Here goes: > > Dear fellow LRP supporters, users and friends, > > Recently, one of the common web sites for Linux Router > Project information was used for a purpose that was decidedly > unrelated to LRP; instead, the domain name was exploited to > make a political statement that had no bearing , except in > the broadest interpretation, on anything connected to LRP. > > While we all support the concept and practice of free and > open political speech, we do not, and cannot condone the use > of an open source, community based project to support an > individual member of the communities' political position. > > We believe that the global attention drawn to the LRP website > is there because of all the participants, not just a single > developer. We understand that the holder of the domain name > can technically do as he/she wishes with the domain, but > insofar as an open source project is conceptualized, written, > supported and expanded by a truly diverse community, it seems > wrong at the very core to essentially hijack the work of many > to serve a single person's political goals. > > We hope this letter can serve a dual purpose; to let others > know that the message that appeared on the website was not > shared by (any/the vast > majority) of us, and to show our disapproval for the abuse of > the community trust placed in the domain name holder's hands. > > If a project is truly open source, then it can know no single > political position, no single political ideology. It should, > we believe, represent to everyone an example of how people > from all places and walks of life can focus on a project that > has no clear material gain, no self serving purpose and > produce a remarkable product free for everyone to use and > benefit from. > > Signed > > __ > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ray > > Olszewski > > Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 12:24 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: OT Re: [Leaf-devel] linuxrouter.org > > > > > > At 08:25 PM 6/11/01 -0700, Mike Noyes wrote: > > ... > > >I agree with Scott's wording. I recognized my mistake as soon as > > I read his > > >message. I think we should give Morgan a chance to write a > draft. He > > >may come up with something we can all agree on. > > ... > > > > We need to be careful here. Silence does not equal assent, > and many of > > the important participants in LEAF have been most notable for their > > silence on this thread. Some of them may not share the > sentiments of > > those of us who have spoken up, but hesitate to start a > confrontation > > here on this list. Understandably. Others may share the general > > sentiment but feel that it is not a proper topic of > discussion here. > > Again, understandably. In other contexts, I've been in both &
RE: OT Re: [Leaf-devel] linuxrouter.org
Hi Kenneth, Sorry to say, but I agree with you Kenneth and all others expressing the same opinion. DC seems to be a horribly mislead and lost person regarding this issue. Hero - my a$$. I think after this seriously misdirected "memorial", that linuxrouter.org should be removed from the links page on all current and new LRP images. Political statements, as has been said, are not appropriate for non-political websites, especially when the statement goes against rationalism and sensibility. Regards, Hilton Travis > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > Mike Sensney > Sent: Tuesday, 12 June 2001 3:12 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OT Re: [Leaf-devel] linuxrouter.org > > > At 09:39 AM 06/11/2001 -0700, Kenneth Hadley wrote: > > >I hope that someone hacked his web server otherwise Ive lost what > >little respect for Dave Cinege I had left after his fiasco with > >acepting help. > > I echo your opinion. > Would Dave C feel the same if his own family had been > "collateral damage"? > ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
RE: [Leaf-devel] Patched kernel 2.4.3 (about to be) available.
Hi George, Cool - I will start playing with this as soon as I get some spare time. :-) As for ipchains and ipfwadm - bugger it. If we are going to make the leap to a 2.4.x kernel, then I say we should also make the leap to a true iptables stateful firewall configuration too. I'm definitely interested in the updating work currently being done to the Eigerstein 2 Beta image, and would be more than happy to contribute where and when I can. Unfortunately, I am a bit tied down at the moment so am finding it difficult to find the time to apply to lrp. I'm looking at rearranging my time so I sleep less and play more, but I may take some convincing on that. Regards, Hilton > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:leaf-devel- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of George Metz > Sent: Friday, 20 April 2001 4:58 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Leaf-devel] Patched kernel 2.4.3 (about to be) available. > > Okay gang, got the FTP security patch from the Netfilter boys and applied > it. Kernel is compiled and I'm about to tar and gzip it. I also took the > opportunity to go weeding. > > The final result is as follows: > > 1. Kernel is no longer able to mount filesystem images on the loopback >device. > 2. There is no longer a PCI Device Database, so PCI devices are listed in >/proc/pci by card ID. > 3. The Network Block Device was removed, as I couldn't really see a need >for it on a secure system. > 4. Modularized serial support. > > Some of these are a little questionable in my own mind, to be honest, so > I'd like some feedback from people on whether or not the tradeoff is > acceptable. However, the final results are impressive. Here's the previous > Standard and UPX-Compressed 2.4.3 kernels: > > -rw-r--r-- 1 wolfstar root 552k Apr 11 03:45 kernel.standard > -rw-r--r-- 1 wolfstar root 481k Apr 11 03:46 kernel.upx > > Here's the current one: > > -rw-r--r-- 1 wolfstar root 474k Apr 20 02:38 kernel.standard > -rw-r--r-- 1 wolfstar root 411k Apr 20 02:39 kernel.upx > > So we're looking at about 70-75k of space savings, and that's TRULY > spectacular. I might go back in and try putting back the Serial support > and see how that affects kernel size, but this is a LOT of space saving. > > On another note, I was also going to add the ipchains and ipfwadm > compatibility modules, but I discovered that that would require building > the default conntrack module and the iptables module AS modules, instead > of built in. > > -- > George Metz > Commercial Routing Engineer > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "We know what deterrence was with 'mutually assured destruction' during > the Cold War. But what is deterrence in information warfare?" -- Brigadier > General Douglas Richardson, USAF, Commander - Space Warfare Center > > > ___ > Leaf-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
[Leaf-devel] RE: [LRP] Kernel 2.4.x and IPTables
George Metz, on Fri 23 February 2001 at 04:55 channelled: > > On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, George Metz wrote: > > > And finally, done. > > And what should greet my wondering eyes this morning, > after all that work last night, but the announcement > on Slashdot that Linus et al. have released Kernel > 2.4.2 today. Looks like I need to compile one for my > box tonight. Oh, the irony. =) Hi George, I downloaded your 2.4.1 1.68MB image and stuck it on a disk. I just un-commented the following modules (and added the 3c509.0 module from your kernel tarball to the disk): iptable_natip_nat_ftp ip_conntrack ip_conntrack_ftp ipt_LOGipt_mac ipt_state (all exist in the original downloaded image) and am receiving the following errors upon boot: ip_conntrack_ftp - ip_nat_ftp - /lib/modules/ip_nat_ftp.o: unresolved symbol ip_nat_expect_register /lib/modules/ip_nat_ftp.o: unresolved symbol ip_nat_helper_register /lib/modules/ip_nat_ftp.o: unresolved symbol ip_nat_helper_unregister /lib/modules/ip_nat_ftp.o: unresolved symbol ip_nat_expect_unregister /lib/modules/ip_nat_ftp.o: unresolved symbol ip_nat_cheat_check /lib/modules/ip_nat_ftp.o: unresolved symbol ip_nat_setup_info /lib/modules/ipt_LOG.o: unresolved symbol ipt_register_target_Rc2629570 /lib/modules/ipt_LOG.o: unresolved symbol ipt_unregister_target_Rd09de455 /lib/modules/ipt_mac.o: unresolved symbol ipt_register_match_Ra8f99fa5 /lib/modules/ipt_mac.o: unresolved symbol ipt_unregister_match_R47dc74f4 /lib/modules/ipt_state.o: unresolved symbol ipt_register_match_Ra8f99fa5 /lib/modules/ipt_state.o: unresolved symbol ipt_unregister_match_R47dc74f4 /lib/modules/iptable_nat.o: unresolved symbol ipt_register_target_Rc2629570 /lib/modules/iptable_nat.o: unresolved symbol ipt_do_table_R5f4c29b0 /lib/modules/iptable_nat.o: unresolved symbol ipt_register_table_Rac1c54e9 /lib/modules/iptable_nat.o: unresolved symbol ipt_unregister_target_Rd09de455 /lib/modules/iptable_nat.o: unresolved symbol ipt_unregister_table_R9b146f17 I assume there is some issue with the kernel compile itself - looks like something (1) was left out that should have been left in. Maybe. I really want to have a play with the new kernel and iptables to see what I can come up with, but unfortunately do not have another working Linux box here at present on which I can try a kernel compile myself. Anyway, when you get your 2.4.2 kernel and associated files uploaded I'll be downloading and trying these out. All the best. Regards, Hilton (1) Buggers me what tho ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
