On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, James Miller wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Ray Olszewski wrote:
>
> > This is a wordy way of telling you that you should run depmod. The modutils
> > init script is supposed to do this for you, but it may interact with initrd
> > in funny ways. So to be safe, do this (followin
On Monday 14 June 2004 20:50, Ray Olszewski wrote:
> BTW, I read through the man page for initrd, and from what is there, I
> would expect linuxrc to use /etc/modules as its information source about
> what modules to load. I could easily be wrong here, though ... the man page
> *really* is unclear
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Ray Olszewski wrote:
> This is a wordy way of telling you that you should run depmod. The modutils
> init script is supposed to do this for you, but it may interact with initrd
> in funny ways. So to be safe, do this (following the dpkg-reconfigure):
>
> 1. Reboot the
At 01:06 PM 6/14/2004 -0500, James Miller wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, James Miller wrote:
> Thanks for the input, Ray. Unfortunately, I don't have any very clear
> recollection of specifics of that error message, other than it telling me
> there was some sort of problem setting up modules since mo
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, James Miller wrote:
> Thanks for the input, Ray. Unfortunately, I don't have any very clear
> recollection of specifics of that error message, other than it telling me
> there was some sort of problem setting up modules since modules were in
> use by the current kernel, and g
Thanks for the input, Ray. Unfortunately, I don't have any very clear
recollection of specifics of that error message, other than it telling me
there was some sort of problem setting up modules since modules were in
use by the current kernel, and giving a very stern warning about the need
to reboo
encountering **may** be an outdated or incomplete
> listing of module dependencies. If you modprobe'd each invidivually and in
> the right order, you simply bypassed this problem in your hand install. The
> way to get this cleaned up is to run "depmod -a", which will rebuild the
>
> appropriate modules.dep file. The init script I referred to above -- I
> checked and it is /etc/init.d/modutils -- is supposed to do this for you
> during init.
The only modprobing I did was for NIC modules - this because I had no 'net
connection when the machine booted up (that holds
James Miller wrote:
This has all been a long-winded preface to the question: what
the heck I gotta do to get my NIC modules back to loading on boot? Am I
Well, since you know the modules to be loaded , the quick and dirty
solution would be to put a shell script
in /etc/init.d which says modp
k wasn't pointing to the
right initrd.img). But I did manage to reboot with the old kernel after
the new one rebooting failed and to straighten out that mistake. It was
at that point that I spotted the fearful message "eth0 ERROR while getting
interface flags: no such device."
mg). But I did manage to reboot with the old kernel after
the new one rebooting failed and to straighten out that mistake. It was
at that point that I spotted the fearful message "eth0 ERROR while getting
interface flags: no such device." And, sure enough, there was no net
connection. And
cundo Suárez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "linux-newbie list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 2:39 AM
Subject: Re: 2 ethernet jacks -> single net connection?
| See the file /usr/src/linux-2.6.0/Documentation/networking/bonding.txt
| for more informatio
OTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 1:58 AM
Subject: Re: 2 ethernet jacks -> single net connection?
| First off, I have no actual experience with this, and I am just going
| off the kernel documentation. It is possible, and you even remembered
| the term correctly - ethernet channel bon
those are de two i want to use "bonded" ?
Thanks !
- Original Message -
From: "Beolach" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "James Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 1:58 AM
Subject: Re: 2 ethernet jac
Thanks for that info, Conway. What's on the other end is actually a
university network, and beyond that their ISP. I have no idea how this
network is set up or the nature of their internet service, and cannot
really even conjecture whether the setup might support such bonding. I
would guess that
First off, I have no actual experience with this, and I am just going
off the kernel documentation. It is possible, and you even remembered
the term correctly - ethernet channel bonding. What will most likely be
the deciding factor on whether or not you can actually set this up is if
the othe
I've got 2 physical ethernet jacks available to me here. I assume each
processes traffic independently: I've been online at both simultaneoulsy
with 2 different computers, anyway. Since I'll be setting up a
firewall/router here (LRP type thing, with an older computer), I was just
wondering about
At 01:54 PM 12/16/2003 -0600, James Miller wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Ray Olszewski wrote:
> problem down a bit. As to the source ... I'm assuming that the 2.2.20
> kernel did get a DHCP lease from this server before you switched to
> 2.4.something_or_other and that you made no changes to the har
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Ray Olszewski wrote:
> problem down a bit. As to the source ... I'm assuming that the 2.2.20
> kernel did get a DHCP lease from this server before you switched to
> 2.4.something_or_other and that you made no changes to the hardware or the
> BIOS settings after you switched ke
At 03:03 PM 12/15/2003 -0600, James Miller wrote:
On a Debian install I recently did, I ended up getting a newer kernel to
replace the 2.2.20 kernel I initially installed on the system. But the
old kernel remains on the system, and I can boot from it if I enter
"LinuxOLD" at the command prompt. T
lease visit http://www.isc.org/dhcp-contrib.html
Mon Dec 15 12:20:59 2003:
Mon Dec 15 12:21:00 2003: Listening on LPF/eth0/00:00:c0:1a:19:76
Mon Dec 15 12:21:00 2003: Sending on LPF/eth0/00:00:c0:1a:19:76
Mon Dec 15 12:21:00 2003: Sending on Socket/fallback/fallback-net
Mon Dec 15 12:21:0
to
interfere with the umount command. Or the control file "/etc/amd.net" may
contain illuminating information.
At 09:29 PM 10/29/02 -0500, Bryan Simmons wrote:
Here is what /etc/mtab says about /net:
brainpress:(pid1532) /net nfs
intr,rw,port=1023,timeo=8,retrans=110,indirect,map
=/etc/am
Here is what /etc/mtab says about /net:
brainpress:(pid1532) /net nfs
intr,rw,port=1023,timeo=8,retrans=110,indirect,map
=/etc/amd.net,dev=000b 0 0
automount(pid1622) /net autofs rw,fd=5,pgrp=1622,minproto=2,maxproto=4 0
0
Here's what I know: I'm running Mandrake 9.0 kernel 2.
ou need to tell
us what is mounted as /net (look in /etc/fstab to find out, if you don't
know, or look at the output of "df").
Usually, a "device busy" error from umount means that some active process
is using the partition that umount is trying to unmount. Without more
de
iven, I get the error: umount2: : umount /net: device busy
and right there, all attempts to shutdown/reboot are ended. The system
just sits there. The only thing I can do is hit the reset button. If
not for XFS, I'd be running fsck at every frickin reboot.
I have an AthlonXP 2100+ system, integ
25 matches
Mail list logo
