RE: [leaf-user] Bering-uClibc 2.12 / 3COM 3C509B-TPO ISA
Dear Luiz Farias, Thanks for your modules files: ^_^ However, everytime I reboot the computer, the files will missing from HDD and the /etc/modules undo the changes. Beside, how to backup modules.lrp?? Do I need to delete if after backup? Regards, Chris Lee > You will need to add (in the modules package): > > 3c509.o (attached to this email:) > eepro.o (attached to this email:) > > Copy them to /lib/modules. > > Edit the file /etc/modules like this: > > # ISA CARDS > 3c509 > eepro io=0x350,0x300 > > Backup modules.lrp --- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: [leaf-user] Bering and shorewall 2.0.x
rawdata wrote: You may upgrade over the existing lrp. Configuration will not be saved. Generally, I open a backed-up copy of the old lrp with WinRAR, view the old configuration side-by-side with the PuTTY window with the new lrp waiting to be configured. Not "pretty," but in about 10 minutes, I can cut/paste and "shorewall restart" my way to a working upgraded Shorewall config. Granted, I always read the changelogs so that I don't inadvertantly import an old setting that is now obsolete or just plain wrong. But (knocks wood) hasn't been an issue yet. Except in rare cases (which will only occur at a major release), you can rename your /etc/shorewall directory, install the new .lrp, remove the new /etc/shorewall and replace it with the one you saved. Then backup the resulting package. The downside of this approach is that your config files will not contain documentation for new features. -Tom -- Tom Eastep\ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.net Washington USA \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: [leaf-user] uClibc 2.2.0b4 Bug? - tmp_size parameter within LEAF.CFG
freeman groups wrote:
(Really ... this is the last 'bug' that I'm aware of :)
In LEAF.CFG there are 3 memory size parms that can be adjusted:
syst_size
tmp_size (commented-out by default)
log_size
When I try to use the line:
tmp_size=3M
I get the following error message upon boot-up:
[...]
LINUXRC: Mounting a 6M TMPFS filesystem...
tmpfs: Bad mount option size
It happens upon execution of this line (158 in /linuxrc [aka
/var/lib/lrpkg/root.linuxrc]):
qt mount -t tmpfs tmpfs /tmp ${tmp_size:+-o size=$tmp_size}
I am guessing that the ${tmp_size:+ is a test for the existence of the
var tmp_size and that if it exists then the remainder (-o
size=$tmp_size) is appended. When I echo the command it shows what I
would expect and when I enter this echo'd command then I have a valid
mount made. However it just doesn't seem to want to work within the script.
I was able to make expected behaviour return by removing the space
between the -o and the size parm:
qt mount -t tmpfs tmpfs /tmp ${tmp_size:+-osize=$tmp_size}
(is this no-space-delimiter syntax officially valid?)
... or by performing the test a second time:
qt mount -t tmpfs tmpfs /tmp ${tmp_size:+-o} ${tmp_size:size=$tmp_size}
There's possibly (probably?) a more correct fix but I don't know what it
would be.
Hmm...I suspect the mount command is getting the whole chunk as one
parameter due to how the shell is handling the expansion, or if you were
typing from the command line:
qt mount -t tmpfs tmpfs /tmp "-o size=3M"
I believe the -o (no space) format is valid for the full-size
mount command, but I'm not sure about busybox (although from your tests,
it appears to be working).
It's probably safer to use the second version (seperate -o and size=
arguments) since the man page seems to indicate a space is required, or
if that seems too ugly, force there to always be at least one option
passed to mount, ie:
qt mount -t tmpfs tmpfs /tmp -o defaults${tmp_size:+,size=$tmp_size}
--
Charles Steinkuehler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 -
digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches,
unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com
leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
RE: [leaf-user] Bering and shorewall 2.0.x
You may upgrade over the existing lrp. Configuration will not be saved. Generally, I open a backed-up copy of the old lrp with WinRAR, view the old configuration side-by-side with the PuTTY window with the new lrp waiting to be configured. Not "pretty," but in about 10 minutes, I can cut/paste and "shorewall restart" my way to a working upgraded Shorewall config. Granted, I always read the changelogs so that I don't inadvertantly import an old setting that is now obsolete or just plain wrong. But (knocks wood) hasn't been an issue yet. :Max --- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
[leaf-user] uClibc 2.2.0b4 Bug? - tmp_size parameter within LEAF.CFG
(Really ... this is the last 'bug' that I'm aware of :)
In LEAF.CFG there are 3 memory size parms that can be adjusted:
syst_size
tmp_size (commented-out by default)
log_size
When I try to use the line:
tmp_size=3M
I get the following error message upon boot-up:
[...]
LINUXRC: Mounting a 6M TMPFS filesystem...
tmpfs: Bad mount option size
It happens upon execution of this line (158 in /linuxrc [aka
/var/lib/lrpkg/root.linuxrc]):
qt mount -t tmpfs tmpfs /tmp ${tmp_size:+-o size=$tmp_size}
I am guessing that the ${tmp_size:+ is a test for the existence of the
var tmp_size and that if it exists then the remainder (-o
size=$tmp_size) is appended. When I echo the command it shows what I
would expect and when I enter this echo'd command then I have a valid
mount made. However it just doesn't seem to want to work within the script.
I was able to make expected behaviour return by removing the space
between the -o and the size parm:
qt mount -t tmpfs tmpfs /tmp ${tmp_size:+-osize=$tmp_size}
(is this no-space-delimiter syntax officially valid?)
... or by performing the test a second time:
qt mount -t tmpfs tmpfs /tmp ${tmp_size:+-o} ${tmp_size:size=$tmp_size}
There's possibly (probably?) a more correct fix but I don't know what it
would be.
Thanks for LEAF!
scott; canada
---
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 -
digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches,
unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com
leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
RE: [leaf-user] Bering-uClibc 2.12 / 3COM 3C509B-TPO ISA
Dear Chris Jebsen, On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Chris Lee wrote: Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 16:57:35 +0800 From: Chris Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [leaf-user] Bering-uClibc 2.12 / 3COM 3C509B-TPO ISA Dear Henning Jebsen, Are you sure you got the correct driver ? There are 3com -modules which sound/look similar. I am not sure, as I expand the modules file, It only contain the following on 2.4.24/net folder: 3c59x.o hostap.o natsemi.o prism2_plx.o via-rhine.o eepro100.o hostap_pci.o ns820.o rtl8139.o winbond-840.o epic100.o hostap_plx.o p80211.o starfire.oyellowfin.o hamachi.o intel-gige.o pci-scan.osundance.o hostap_crypt_wep.o myson803.oprism2_pci.o tulip.o Do you use the etherlink III card ? Look for another module which is similar... Yes, but cannot found any similar module... Any Hints? Or should I upgrade to beta version or degrade to 2.1.11 version? Regards, Chris Lee I am afraid you will have to download the 6.5Mb module file from the 2.1.2 version. I too use the 3c509 card you should also look at what module the 3c509.o depends on. I do understand the pain of doing the download as I use a 56k dialup modem! I also use isa ne2000 compatable card, that is no longer in the base module.lrp file. One of these days I will download the Bering-Uclibc-2.2-beta4 and the complete module file. I do want to try the new version of Bering-Uclibc. Hope this helps. Larry Platzek [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: [leaf-user] uClibc 2.2.0_b4 - Caution using via-rhine - "kern el BUG at slab.c:1130!"/"In interrupt handler - not syncing"/"Kernel pani c"
Luis, thanks again for your feedback. In all honesty my time is too limited to go further into this and I think that I have a pretty good handle on my interrupts so freeing more is not, IMO, likely to solve it for me. Going to a different mobo/netcard is not appealing to me because of the time constraints and that I /love/ recycling old hardware into something useful (and I'm really, really cheap too :) The use of the /kernel/drivers/net via-rhine.o was the quickest, cheapest solution for me but maybe one day someone else will end up here and be able to test your ideas further. scott; canada Luis.F.Correia wrote: Hi! -Original Message- From: freeman groups [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 18, 2004 3:13 AM To: LEAF Subject: Re: [leaf-user] uClibc 2.2.0_b4 - Caution using via-rhine - "kernel BUG at slab.c:1130!"/"In interrupt handler - not syncing"/"Kernel panic" Luis, thanks for your thoughts. Luis.F.Correia wrote: Hi! Without any cable attached to the network cards, try to cat /proc/interrupts and check if there is any interrupt sharing... I didn't do that particular check but I know who was getting what interrupts and no-one was sharing. Beware, most boards have a quirk that makes the leftmost PCI slot to share the same int of the closest ISA slot, which means if you have a PCI right next to an ISA card, chances are that thay might get the same one... --- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
RE: [leaf-user] Bering-uClibc 2.12 / 3COM 3C509B-TPO ISA
Dear Henning Jebsen, > Are you sure you got the correct driver ? > There are 3com -modules which sound/look similar. I am not sure, as I expand the modules file, It only contain the following on 2.4.24/net folder: 3c59x.o hostap.o natsemi.o prism2_plx.o via-rhine.o eepro100.o hostap_pci.o ns820.o rtl8139.o winbond-840.o epic100.o hostap_plx.o p80211.o starfire.oyellowfin.o hamachi.o intel-gige.o pci-scan.osundance.o hostap_crypt_wep.o myson803.oprism2_pci.o tulip.o > Do you use the etherlink III card ? Look for another module which is similar... Yes, but cannot found any similar module... Any Hints? Or should I upgrade to beta version or degrade to 2.1.11 version? Regards, Chris Lee --- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
