On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 03:03 -0800, John Lowell wrote:
> I just completed a stage1 install from the minimal 2005.0 livecd on a
> box that will be used as a web server. I boot without incident, run
> ifconfig and get a perfectly suitable response, can ping my router
> successfully but, attempting to
On Friday 01 April 2005 20:03, John Lowell wrote:
> I just completed a stage1 install from the minimal 2005.0 livecd on a box
> that will be used as a web server. I boot without incident, run ifconfig
> and get a perfectly suitable response, can ping my router successfully but,
> attempting to reac
On Friday 01 April 2005 13:03, John Lowell wrote:
> I just completed a stage1 install from the minimal 2005.0 livecd on a box
> that will be used as a web server. I boot without incident, run ifconfig
> and get a perfectly suitable response, can ping my router successfully but,
> attempting to reac
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 03:03:46 -0800, John Lowell wrote:
> This same machine was working just fine before the latest install with
> the very same configuration.
Why did you reinstall if it was working fine?
If it ain't broke, etc...
--
Neil Bothwick
For every action, there is an equal and oppos
Neil,
Terribly sorry, Neil. I'll make absolutely sure next time to check with you
first before reinstalling, I promise.
jlowell
- Original Message -
From: "Neil Bothwick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 2:43 AM
Subj
Nick Rout wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 03:03 -0800, John Lowell wrote:
>> I just completed a stage1 install from the minimal 2005.0 livecd on a
>> box that will be used as a web server. I boot without incident, run
>> ifconfig and get a perfectly suitable response, can ping my router
>> successfu
Jason Stubbs wrote:
> On Friday 01 April 2005 20:03, John Lowell wrote:
>> I just completed a stage1 install from the minimal 2005.0 livecd on
>> a box that will be used as a web server. I boot without incident,
>> run ifconfig and get a perfectly suitable response, can ping my
>> router successful
Uwe Thiem wrote:
> On Friday 01 April 2005 13:03, John Lowell wrote:
>> I just completed a stage1 install from the minimal 2005.0 livecd on
>> a box that will be used as a web server. I boot without incident,
>> run ifconfig and get a perfectly suitable response, can ping my
>> router successfully
John Lowell wrote:
> Thanks for writing.
Broadcast with 0 is default in /etc/conf.d/net. I've tried it both ways with
no difference being made.
Why don't we clear this up and have you post your ifconfig and netstat -rn
kashani
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:04:34 -0800, John Lowell wrote:
> Terribly sorry, Neil. I'll make absolutely sure next time to check with
> you first before reinstalling, I promise.
What's your problem? I only asked a question. There's no reason to get
sarcy, even less reason to do it twice.
--
Neil Bot
- Original Message -
From: "Kashani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 7:58 AM
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Host, Schmost!
> John Lowell wrote:
> > Thanks for writing.
> >
> > Broadcast with 0 is default
John Lowell wrote:
> I certainly can post ifconfig and will but the netstat -rn is a
problem. The
command is not available to me with just the basic packages installed. This
was a fresh stage1. I'll need to reconfigure /etc/conf.d/net for dhcp
service to get the appropriate e-builld. Before I do
On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 10:23 -0800, John Lowell wrote:
> Uwe,
>
> Thanks for writing.
>
> Broadcast with 0 is default in /etc/conf.d/net. I've tried it both
> ways with
> no difference being made.
>
> Regards.
>
> jlowell
John, how about giving us the output of ifconfig and route -n on the
offe
On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 11:15 -0800, John Lowell wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Kashani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 7:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Host, Schmost!
>
>
> &
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 03:03:46AM -0800, John Lowell wrote
>
> The setup here is almost trite: Three workstations with dynamic
> addresses behind an ADSL router/switch which doubles as a dhcp
> server, and the webserver mentioned earlier with a static address
> outside the range authorized for dy
Nick Rout wrote:
>
>
> yeah for god's sake ifconfig and route -n
>
>>
>>
>> --
>> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>>
> --
> Nick Rout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nick, Kashani and the everyone else,
Sorry for the delay in replying. A business emergency has caused it. I'll
write later today. Tha
On Saturday 02 April 2005 22:26, John Lowell wrote:
> and *route -n *...
>
> Kernel IP routing table
> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use
> Iface 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0
> 0 eth0 127.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 255.0
your broadcast needs to be 192.168.1.255 ... what's in /etc/resolv.conf ???
can you ping any of the ip's in it ???
Kristopher W. Baker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: John Lowell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 3:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Williams wrote:
On Saturday 02 April 2005 22:26, John Lowell wrote:
and *route -n *...
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse
Iface 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0
0 eth0 127.0.0.0 127.0.0.1
On Sat, 2005-04-02 at 16:26 -0500, John Lowell wrote:
> Nick, Kashani, jstubbs and others,
>
> OK, *ifconfig *...
>
> eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:04:75:DC:B8:4E
> inet addr:192.168.1.44 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
> UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST M
Nick Rout wrote:
On Sat, 2005-04-02 at 16:26 -0500, John Lowell wrote:
Nick, Kashani, jstubbs and others,
OK, *ifconfig *...
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:04:75:DC:B8:4E
inet addr:192.168.1.44 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST
On Sat, 2005-04-02 at 18:08 -0500, John Lowell wrote:
> Nick Rout wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 2005-04-02 at 16:26 -0500, John Lowell wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Nick, Kashani, jstubbs and others,
> >>
> >>OK, *ifconfig *...
> >>
> >>eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:04:75:DC:B8:4E
> >> inet add
Nick Rout wrote:
On Sat, 2005-04-02 at 18:08 -0500, John Lowell wrote:
Nick Rout wrote:
On Sat, 2005-04-02 at 16:26 -0500, John Lowell wrote:
Nick, Kashani, jstubbs and others,
OK, *ifconfig *...
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:04:75:DC:B8:4E
inet addr:192.168.1.44
On Sunday 03 April 2005 03:10, John Lowell wrote:
> # For setting the default gateway
> #
> gateway="192.168.1.1"
gimli root # tail /etc/conf.d/net
#
#broadcast_eth0="192.168.0.255 192.168.0.255"
#netmask_eth0="255.255.255.0 255.255.255.0"
# For setting the default gateway
#
#gateway="eth0/192.1
> On Sunday 03 April 2005 03:10, John Lowell wrote:
> > # For setting the default gateway
> > #
> > gateway="192.168.1.1"
>
On Sunday 03 April 2005 11:34, Mike Williams wrote:
> # For setting the default gateway
> #
> #gateway="eth0/192.168.0.1"
> #gateway="eth0/192.168.128.1"
ie. You need the "et
Jason Stubbs wrote:
>> On Sunday 03 April 2005 03:10, John Lowell wrote:
>>> # For setting the default gateway
>>> #
>>> gateway="192.168.1.1"
>>
> On Sunday 03 April 2005 11:34, Mike Williams wrote:
>> # For setting the default gateway
>> #
>> #gateway="eth0/192.168.0.1"
>> #gateway="eth0/192.168.
26 matches
Mail list logo
