On Mon, 2003-02-17 at 10:39, Matt Schalit wrote:
> This is an unofficial message to let folks know what
> the short term goals are for the LEAF project, the hot
> topics being developed, just in case you're not monitoring
> the leaf-devel list. I wasn't asked to write this, but I
> figured it'd mi
I'd also suggest a change in lrp packaging by which the modules required
for a package to run is bundled with the lrp. Installing the lrp will
also insmod the module automatically. A depmod kind of facility will
make it easy to use/ configure LEAF.
I just finished seeing monowall and the screensho
You asked for comments:
I long ago created my own "database", wherein
XT_DEVICE=eth0
XT_IF= 204.001.001.001
XT_MASK=24
IT_DEVICE=wlan0
ROUTERTYPE=tunnel
IT_DHCPS=yes
A1_DEVICE=eth1
SPOOFING=no
etc,etc. (about 80 variables)
And a single pyth
S Mohan wrote:
I'd also suggest a change in lrp packaging by which the modules required
for a package to run is bundled with the lrp. Installing the lrp will
also insmod the module automatically. A depmod kind of facility will
make it easy to use/ configure LEAF.
Give me an example please of
> S Mohan wrote:
> > I'd also suggest a change in lrp packaging by which the modules
required
> > for a package to run is bundled with the lrp. Installing the lrp
will
> > also insmod the module automatically. A depmod kind of facility will
> > make it easy to use/ configure LEAF.
> Give me an exam
On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Matt Schalit wrote:
>
>
> S Mohan wrote:
> > I'd also suggest a change in lrp packaging by which the modules required
> > for a package to run is bundled with the lrp. Installing the lrp will
> > also insmod the module automatically. A depmod kind of facility will
> > make i
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You asked for comments:
I long ago created my own "database", wherein
Thanks for posting your information about the
db you created. In our discussions, we've called
this a "flat" databse, meaning that the entire
database is a single bash sourceable text file
contain
ECTED]
Subject: Re: [leaf-user] Update: Short term LEAF project goals
On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Matt Schalit wrote:
>
>
> S Mohan wrote:
> > I'd also suggest a change in lrp packaging by which the modules
> > required for a package to run is bundled with the lrp. Installing
&
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [leaf-user] Update: Short term LEAF project goals
I think that in most cases coupling the base user-level package with an
application-specific set of kernel modules makes more sense than
integrating the two. If you really want idiot-level integration, then
fa
S Mohan wrote:
While I'm not that aware of various options, I think a few modules are
mandatory or have to go with some packages. E.g. ipsec.o with
ipsec(509).lrp, bridge.o with bridge.lrp, netfilter with tc.lrp etc. I
was looking at this. In addition, 90-95% of the users would use a common
combin
On Tuesday 18 February 2003 09:19 pm, Tom Eastep wrote:
> I rather favor a mechanism whereby package->module dependencies can be
> expressed in the package. Including kernel modules in .lrp's like ppp,
> pppoa or shorwall (just to name one) will yield nightmarish results when
> we try to introduce
On Tuesday 18 February 2003 12:36 pm, Matt Schalit wrote:
> Java has ssh support built in. The LEAF system requirements
> are: sshd.lrp. That presents a space issue for any single
> floppy rollout, our classic format.
Matt,
Are lshd, stunnel, or zebedee also feasible options with Java???
--
.
Mohan
-Original Message-
From: Tom Eastep [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 19 February 2003 08:49
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [leaf-user] Update: Short term LEAF project goals
S Mohan wrote:
> While I'm not that aware of various options, I think a few
> I'm referring to only packaging meaning having within the same lrp.
> Additionally, the package installer should load all modules that are
> tarred within the package as they are deemed necessary for the
> utilities to work. I'm not suggesting that the module be compiled or
> integrated. Can we d
Lynn Avants wrote:
Matt,
Are lshd,
Sounds new. what's the benefit of lshd?
stunnel,
http://tinyurl.com/63lh
or zebedee also feasible options with Java???
Don't see why not, isn't this, like stunnel, completely
seperate from the application?
It's another thing to compile and make r
On Wednesday 19 February 2003 04:18 pm, Matt Schalit wrote:
> Lynn Avants wrote:
> > Matt,
> > Are lshd,
>
> Sounds new. what's the benefit of lshd?
It is somewhat compatible with SSH, but smaller.
It is available for uClibc-bering and probably Bering as well.
> > stunnel,
Mosquito and other o
Lynn Avants wrote:
I just didn't know how tunneling methods were integrated
into Java other than possibly a call built-into the source.
I think I'm back to my previous question, aren't these
tunnel programs run as seperate apps from the GUI?
What I mean is, there aren't any applications
17 matches
Mail list logo
