RE: Linux NAT questions- (kernel upgrade??)

2001-05-02 Thread Michel Wilson
possible But http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/IP-Masquerade-HOWTO-6.html#ss6.8 may be of interest to you. Greetings, Michel Wilson. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

RE: Linux NAT questions

2001-05-02 Thread Michel Wilson
--dst 1.1.1.160 -i eth1 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.200.2 This should work, AFAIK, but i didn't try it myself. You could also try to use the arp command (see 'man arp'), but i don't know exactly how that works. Good luck! Michel Wilson. - To unsubscribe from this list: s

RE: 2.4.4-pre8 undefined symbols

2001-04-27 Thread Michel Wilson
I think Andrea's rwsem-patches fix these, but i'm not sure. You might give it a try, though. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jeff Chua > Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 18:11 > To: Linux Kernel > Cc: Jeff Chua > Subject: 2.4.4-pre8 unde

RE: menuconfig snafu?

2001-03-28 Thread Michel Wilson
> its seems that "make menuconfig" only allows you to select 1 processor > type. it seems impossible that you cant build a generic kernel that > supports different processors. Its this just a menuconfig bug? > > Dennis Use i386 to make a generic kernel, this option will make it work on all Intel

RE: [PATCH] OOM handling

2001-03-27 Thread Michel Wilson
off' the runtime at a certain point: if(runtime > something_big) runtime = something_big; This would of course need some tuning. The only thing i don't like about this is that it's a kind of 'magical value', but i suppose it's not a very good idea

RE: Larger dev_t

2001-03-25 Thread Michel Wilson
> Ever heard of cut-and-paste? Surely you can afford a mouse... And > for when > you you are not inputting manually but running a script/whatever, > who cares > what the numbers are... > > Cheers, > > Anton Oops. Okay, you're right. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "u

RE: Larger dev_t

2001-03-25 Thread Michel Wilson
> Wichert Akkerman wrote: > > You are just delaying the problem then, at some point your uptime will > > be large enough that you have run through all 64bit pids for example. > > 64 bits is enough to fork 1 million processes per second for over > 500,000 years. I think that's putting the problem

Multicast and IP-conntrack problem

2001-03-22 Thread Michel Wilson
r these messages, because it generated several megs each day) I'm currently using kernel 2.4.0-test9, but a friend of mine is using 2.4.0 and is experiencing the same problem. Is this a known problem which can't be fixed, or is it fixable? And am i asking this question in the right pla