At 21:31 12/04/2002, Mike Noyes wrote:
Hi everyone,
I just finished adding descriptions & versions & original webpage for all
the packages on the html list.
Its an excell sheet (I know I know) But this way I could do some of the
stuff at work :-)
Version were taken from the version file in the
Doh...overlooked this change from eiger to dach. Works great now. Thanks for
the help and patience.
Regards,
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "Simon Bolduc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 11:46 AM
Subject: Re: [leaf-user] da
I have received many off-list requests about how to compile a Bering
linux kernel.
So here is a short how-to:
1/ Bering rc2 is built from linux kernel 2.4.18
2/ Bering can work without any patch. Especially none of the former LRP
patches are required.
3/ Bering is compiled with patches to add ext
At 11:33 AM 5/1/02 -0500, steve crowl wrote:
>Yes, it appears the NICs are not initializing. As another thread observed,
>there is no /proc/pci file, either. I am using rtl8139.o driver from
>http://lrp.steinkuehler.net/files/kernels/Dachstein-normal/modules/net/rtl81
>39.o
>
>If I try manual inst
Did you uncomment pci-scan and make sure its entry is above the nic module
entry in your modules file as mentioned in my previous post? That is
probably the problem.
S
>From: "steve crowl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: [leaf-user] dachstein question
>Date: Wed, 1
At 11:22 AM 5/1/02 -0500, Michael D. Schleif wrote:
[...]
>Ray Olszewski wrote:
>>
>> If I had to *guess*, my guess would be that what you logged is an icmp reply
>> from a router on the path to some host you were trying to reach. The router
>> in question is *supposed* to be AT&T's route to the
Steve,
You will indeed learn a lot from this project, and of course you can do
that learning while tethered to the power pole.
Having dealt with alternate energy systems since 1985, including remote
sites operating radio and telecommunications gear, I can assure you that
you will not be operatio
Yes, it appears the NICs are not initializing. As another thread observed,
there is no /proc/pci file, either. I am using rtl8139.o driver from
http://lrp.steinkuehler.net/files/kernels/Dachstein-normal/modules/net/rtl81
39.o
If I try manual install: insmod /lib/modules/rtl8139.o
the response is:
Thank you, for your ideas.
Ray Olszewski wrote:
>
> If I had to *guess*, my guess would be that what you logged is an icmp reply
> from a router on the path to some host you were trying to reach. The router
> in question is *supposed* to be AT&T's route to the address you were trying
> to reach
If I had to *guess*, my guess would be that what you logged is an icmp reply
from a router on the path to some host you were trying to reach. The router
in question is *supposed* to be AT&T's route to the address you were trying
to reach, but it actually cannot reach it. (For example, it is a dial
On Wed, 1 May 2002, Victor McAllister wrote:
> I am looking to build a transparent firewall with proxy arp so that internal boxes
> can use public IPs. I have been using the LEAF mountain series and switched to
> Dachstein about 5 months ago. I have been trying to read up on the Bering LEAF
>
Am I right in thinking that this question refers to the package that
identifies itself as qmail (www.qmail.org), not q-mail? Assuming so ... I'm
a bit confused from the way you pose your question. For qmail, relay-ctrl
(http://untroubled.org/relay-ctrl/) seems to be a plug-in that handles
*outgoin
I am looking to build a transparent firewall with proxy arp so that internal boxes
can use public IPs. I have been using the LEAF mountain series and switched to
Dachstein about 5 months ago. I have been trying to read up on the Bering LEAF
system which is a derivative of Dachstein. Bering use
On Wed, 1 May 2002, Eric B Kiser wrote:
> Since installing Bering 1.0-rc1 the only thing that I have changed in my
> shorewall config is adding the lines below. My understanding is that this is
> not static since it is my single publicly routable address on one side and I
> have three workstation
Since installing Bering 1.0-rc1 the only thing that I have changed in my
shorewall config is adding the lines below. My understanding is that this is
not static since it is my single publicly routable address on one side and I
have three workstations using 192.168.1.x on the other side. Is static
Hi
We have a q-mail server set up using relay-ctrl for e-mail relay
control. It is a stand alone machine with a public IP address.
People are able to get their e-mail everywhere except from our internal
network (that uses a different ISP & a different set of IP #'s) which is
behind a Dachstein
On Wed, 1 May 2002, Eric B Kiser wrote:
> Tom, thanks for getting back to me so quickly yesterday.
>
> I have success! I am using NAT and these rules...
>
> ACCEPTnet loc udp 500
> ACCEPTnet loc 50 all
>
> Thanks for your help, works like a charm.
> /Er
Tom, thanks for getting back to me so quickly yesterday.
I have success! I am using NAT and these rules...
ACCEPT net loc udp 500
ACCEPT net loc 50 all
Thanks for your help, works like a charm.
/Eric
-Original Message-
From: Tom Eastep [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECT
As you know, I sometimes run into seemingly inexplicable anomalies, for
which I do not know what corroborative evidence is appropriate.
This is another one of those ;>
[1] My question is, *how* can an icmp packet get through DCD _and_ get
to an internal, NAT'ed system ???
[2] Stock DCD, regard
First thanks all for feedback As usual for me, my haste injects
problems. As a new information lead in I specifically suspect the cable
company. The cable modem over a period of time of low to no use, that is,
when I'm away will be displaying upon my return an indication that it is
having a
> Their all PCI, all use tulip.o,
>
> I've tried mixing the nic's around to see if there is order to this, oddly
> regardless of what slot the 10bT nic is in it is always comes up eth2.
> While the other two can be interchanged. Though this motherboard seems
to
> assign eth0 starting on the nic
Hi Brock
Thanks for your concerns on power consumption and I would have to agree
about using an AP, particularly if buying everything from the start it
would be better.
The wireless cards only cost me $13USD each and I have everything else
except coax and connectors so even with the extra power c
22 matches
Mail list logo
