a little anecdote -
I am running LTSP latest version on a VMWare server. I had set the NIC up to
Autonegotiate- it was (autonegotiating* to 100MB/full-duplex. thingsw were
running well with 15 clients.
I had heard a recent tale of someone having trouble when using
*autonegotiate* with a cheap Lin
> The install-scripts returns the following messages:
>
> ldconfig: Can't stat /usr/X11R6/lib/Xaw3d: No such file or directory
> ldconfig: Can't stat /usr/i486-linux/lib: No such file or directory
> ldconfig: Can't stat /usr/i486-linux-libc6/lib: No such file or
> directory
> ldconfig: Can't stat
Hi Juan,
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003, Juan A Seuc wrote:
> Hi:
>
> We are also conducting tests with Compaq T1510, to use in our LTSP
> environment, but we have not made any significant progress. Please post if
> you get some result.
How far have you gotten so far?
I am able to get it to load the a com
100Base-T for the server is a requirement, the client ports could be
10Base-T with a switch. Don't get me wrong, using 100Base-T for the
clients is way better and most 100Base-T cards support PCI are newer so it
is easier to find drives for them than 10Base-T. One of the good things
about the dot
Hi:
We are also conducting tests with Compaq T1510, to use in our LTSP
environment, but we have not made any significant progress. Please post if
you get some result.
--
Juan A Seuc
From: Timothy Legge
Subject: RE: [Ltsp-discuss] (no subject)
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 19:20:13 -0800
--
Hello,
I cannot install the sound package. I use ltsp 3 (ltsp_core-3.0.9-0,
ltsp_kernel-3.0.10-0, ltsp_x_core-3.0.4-0, ltsp_x_fonts-3.0.0-0) with
Suse 8.2 on a Primergy TX150 (P4, 2,8 GHz, 1 GB RAM, SCSI RAID5)
_without_ sound-hardware on the server.
I had successfully set up sound on normal PCs
Go with a switch, 100Base-T is almost a requirement.
On Tuesday 25 November 2003 09:23, Enrico Teotti wrote:
> hi,
> I'm thinking if is it better an HUB or a switch in an LTSP school
> laboratory with 10-12 clients? They will use a graphical wmaker
> interface with open office 1.0.3 and mozzila fo
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003, Enrico Teotti wrote:
> I'm thinking if is it better an HUB or a switch in an LTSP school
> laboratory with 10-12 clients? They will use a graphical wmaker
> interface with open office 1.0.3 and mozzila for browsing trough a Cisco
> ADSL router.
Enrico,
don't even thnik
hi,
I'm thinking if is it better an HUB or a switch in an LTSP school
laboratory with 10-12 clients? They will use a graphical wmaker
interface with open office 1.0.3 and mozzila for browsing trough a Cisco
ADSL router.
Thanks,
Enrico
---
Th
Hi
it's very non trivial (LTSP-3) but why would you want client security?
Anyone can download the complete ltsp image
Disk is read-only, it cannot be hacked
There ARE reasons, but 'good' or 'better' security is not one of them.
The worst someone can do is make your client not work. Boring!
LTSP
Maurice,
What I think Jason was telling you is that since your private key
would reside on the server and would be sent to the client via
unencrypted NFS, your ssh session would really be no more secure then
your nfs traffic.
I suppose you could generate a new key in the client's ramdisk each
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 08:20:45AM +0100, Cornelius Weiß wrote:
> I had the same problem, and solved it with:
> ldconfig -r lbe/opt/ltsp/i386
> I don't know what exactly it does, and if this is a "clean" solution,
> but it works for me
It updates the cache of shared libraries, but it doesn't see
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 08:20:45AM +0100, Cornelius Weiß wrote:
> I had the same problem, and solved it with:
> ldconfig -r lbe/opt/ltsp/i386
> I don't know what exactly it does, and if this is a "clean" solution,
> but it works for me
It updates the cache of shared libraries, but it doesn't se
Hi everyone!
I've got a problem with a program written in Kylix3 which is able to open
the serial ports on the host and isn't able to open them on the client
running as a local app.
Any clues why? Tia!
Christian Marschalek
Entwicklung
-
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 09:22:33PM -0500, Jason Straw wrote:
> very little security is bought by this, because all file systems on the
> clients are mounted by an unencrypted means (nfs)... it's something
> being looked at very slowly, but it isn't there yet.
sure you're right but i dont see the r
I had the same problem, and solved it with:
ldconfig -r lbe/opt/ltsp/i386
I don't know what exactly it does, and if this is a "clean" solution,
but it works for me
good luck
nelius
On Monday 24 November 2003 15:24, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have upgraded my LTSP3 server to LTSP4 a
16 matches
Mail list logo
