On 12/28/2012 3:21 PM, James Freer wrote:
> You mean the bin DVD. Thing is with the DVD they are big for broadband
> download. I think i'd buy one. But i appreciate your advice.
unless your broadband is metered, or really slow (and then should it be
called broadband?), 4GB or whatever is really n
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Yves Bellefeuille wrote:
> Phil Dobbin wrote:
>
>> Download the netinstall & choose your window manager. Save you a lot
>> of time.
>
> My advice is different: download the regular DVD (not the live DVD)
> and use it to install. The first disk is sufficient.
>
> T
Phil Dobbin wrote:
> Download the netinstall & choose your window manager. Save you a lot
> of time.
My advice is different: download the regular DVD (not the live DVD)
and use it to install. The first disk is sufficient.
The reason I have a different opinion is because netinstall is too
minimal
On Fri, 28 Dec 2012, Phil Dobbin wrote:
> On 12/28/2012 08:28 PM, James Freer wrote:
>
>> Hi folks
>>
>> I'm just about to start using Centos again. I used it briefly a couple of
>> years
>> ago but found the switch to rpm a bit much after using deb for 5 years. Now
>> there seem to be a lot of c
I decided to completely delete everything out of udev's rules file and
restart the system. This brought up the devices in whatever discovered
order. Then I modified the rules file to set them in the correct order
(simply by changing the NAME= key) and rebooted again.
Now they're all coming up in
On 12/28/2012 08:28 PM, James Freer wrote:
> Hi folks
>
> I'm just about to start using Centos again. I used it briefly a couple of
> years
> ago but found the switch to rpm a bit much after using deb for 5 years. Now
> there seem to be a lot of changes on the deb front so i'm going to try aga
Hi folks
I'm just about to start using Centos again. I used it briefly a couple of years
ago but found the switch to rpm a bit much after using deb for 5 years. Now
there seem to be a lot of changes on the deb front so i'm going to try again
with rpm.
I noticed that there is now a live CD (as
BIOS lists one device.
Motherboard does not have an interface card.
No fiber optic.
No BNC connector.
I commented out the "ghost" MAC address from udev's rules file and
rebooted. It has not reappeared. However, the problem I have is that the
ethernet ports don't stick in the same order. They
> Remember, udev's rules lists FOUR devices. There are only THREE.
>
> What does the BIOS say about ethernet devices?
>
> Does the motherboard have a management interface card with its own
> ethernet port, perhaps potential but not actually installed?
>
>
An IPMI may have its own MAC, but share
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Ashley M. Kirchner wrote:
> But it is. The MAC address on the motherboard port is NOT the same as the
> mystery device. And it DOES match one of the entries in udev's rules, and
> it's operational right now as eth0 (as it should be.) However, the mystery
> MAC
But it is. The MAC address on the motherboard port is NOT the same as the
mystery device. And it DOES match one of the entries in udev's rules, and
it's operational right now as eth0 (as it should be.) However, the mystery
MAC address that's listed in udev's rules matches nothing in either lshw
On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 11:21:22 -0700
Ashley M. Kirchner wrote:
> Yeah, rpmforge or repoforge. But, I'm looking for what exactly? It only
> lists a single ethernet port (the built-in one).
That's what you're looking for. Now you know that the mysterious device isn't
something that you didn't know
Yeah, rpmforge or repoforge. But, I'm looking for what exactly? It only
lists a single ethernet port (the built-in one).
lspci lists the other two, and all of those MAC addresses are correct. The
one that doesn't match ONLY appears in the udev rules file.
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Fra
On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 13:16:10 -0500
Mark LaPierre wrote:
> There is no lshw on my CentOS 6.3 system and it is not found in the
> add/remove software tool. Where did you find lshw?
rpmforge
--
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com
www.creekfm.com - FIFTY THOUSAND
On 12/28/2012 01:05 PM, Frank Cox wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 09:55:05 -0700
> Ashley M. Kirchner wrote:
>
>> It's the hardware MAC address that's puzzling to me as it doesn't exist on
>> this machine anywhere. At least not that I can tell.
>
> lshw
>
There is no lshw on my CentOS 6.3 system and
On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 09:55:05 -0700
Ashley M. Kirchner wrote:
> It's the hardware MAC address that's puzzling to me as it doesn't exist on
> this machine anywhere. At least not that I can tell.
lshw
--
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com
www.creekfm.com - FIFTY
By the way, I know that the tulip drives is what is driving the SMC1255TX
... in case anyone was wondering if that's what I'm asking. It's not.
It's the hardware MAC address that's puzzling to me as it doesn't exist on
this machine anywhere. At least not that I can tell.
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at
So I just finished doing a fresh install of CentOS 6.3. The
machine has three ethernet ports in it: one on the motherboard (VIA
Rhine), and two add-on cards, an Intel Pro100 and an old SMC1255TX. When
CentOS comes up, this is what I see in the dmesg output:
# dmesg | grep eth
e
You need to open the service in the firewall
Type setup and go to the firewall and mark samba
Then you will see all folders in the windows pc
On Dec 28, 2012 10:11 AM, "Craig White" wrote:
>
> On Dec 28, 2012, at 5:13 AM, Ibrahim Yurtseven wrote:
>
> > Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> >> Not a great idea
On Dec 28, 2012, at 5:13 AM, Ibrahim Yurtseven wrote:
> Daniel J Walsh wrote:
>> Not a great idea since every user will be allowed to read/write/execute in
>> this directory.
> I ran chown with root:users for data public in recursive mode and added
> nobody to the group users, but via samba creat
2012/12/28 Clint Dilks :
> Sorry was doing this at 2am in the morning and didn't realise I mis-copied
>
> alias_database = hash:/etc/aliases
> alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases
> command_directory = /usr/sbin
> config_directory = /etc/postfix
> daemon_directory = /usr/libexec/postfix
> data_directory
Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> Not a great idea since every user will be allowed to read/write/execute in
> this directory.
I ran chown with root:users for data public in recursive mode and added
nobody to the group users, but via samba created files will own by
nobody:nobody instead of nobody:users, so i
Am 28.12.2012 08:37, schrieb Clint Dilks:
> Sorry was doing this at 2am in the morning and didn't realise I mis-copied
>
> alias_database = hash:/etc/aliases
> alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases
> command_directory = /usr/sbin
> config_directory = /etc/postfix
> daemon_directory = /usr/libexec/postfix
23 matches
Mail list logo
