Re: Kvm Bridge Network Problem

On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 02:17:05AM +0100, Gareth Evans wrote: > On Tue 07/05/2024 at 01:51, Gareth Evans wrote: > > I did miss a step. > > > Start VM, check DHCP address assigned > > should be > > > Edit the VM NIC settings and choose your routed network connection from the > > "Network

Re: Kvm Bridge Network Problem

On Tue 07/05/2024 at 01:51, Gareth Evans wrote: I did miss a step. > Start VM, check DHCP address assigned should be > Edit the VM NIC settings and choose your routed network connection from the > "Network Source" dropdown. Apply changes. > Start VM, check DHCP address assigned I

Re: Kvm Bridge Network Problem

On host: $ ip a|grep wl 3: wlp1s0: mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP group default qlen 1000 inet 192.168.1.100/24 ... Using: virt-manager > Edit > Connection Details > Virtual Networks > Add network Mode: Routed Network: 192.168.200.0/24 Accept default DHCP range Forward to: physical

Re: Kvm Bridge Network Problem

On Sun 05/05/2024 at 07:53, Gareth Evans wrote: > That might suggest NAT is still operative for the VM. Ah, I hadn't seen Geert's reply, which I think is closer to the mark :) This gives a routing-based approach: https://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Networking This creates an isolated network

Re: Kvm Bridge Network Problem

On Sat 04/05/2024 at 21:26, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: > ... > I have managed to follow the > instructions in: > > https://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/how-to-add-network-bridge-with-nmcli-networkmanager-on-linux/ > > ... > I was able to use the LAN > printer and the 40" TV , but could not access the

Re: Kvm Bridge Network Problem, VM accessing the host

installed br0 (copy attached). I was able to use the LAN printer and the 40" > TV , but could not access the Host. Ah, the VM guest can not access the host. (I changed 'Subject: Re: Kvm Bridge Network Problem' into 'Subject: Re: Kvm Bridge Network Problem, VM accessing the host') >

Kvm Bridge Network Problem

I am running Bookworm on my main platform. After quite a bit of googling and many errors and much head scratching I have managed to follow the instructions in: https://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/how-to-add-network-bridge-with-nmcli-networkmanager-on-linux/ . I have currently implicated this on a

Re: Network Problem: Redirection

On 2/4/24 09:03, Marco Moock wrote: Am 04.02.2024 um 07:12:50 Uhr schrieb Gremlin: I also slay all the mDNS non sense. mDNS works fine if the host names are properly set and no other way of setting the addresses (Unicast DNS, /etc/hosts) is being used. It is not needed if the network is

Re: Network Problem: Redirection

Am 04.02.2024 um 07:12:50 Uhr schrieb Gremlin: > I also slay all the mDNS non sense. mDNS works fine if the host names are properly set and no other way of setting the addresses (Unicast DNS, /etc/hosts) is being used. -- kind regards Marco Spam und Werbung bitte an

Re: Network Problem: Redirection

On 2/4/24 02:39, Marco Moock wrote: Am 02.02.2024 um 17:12:06 Uhr schrieb Gremlin: On 2/2/24 16:28, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 02:03:46PM -0700, Charles Curley wrote: root@hawk:~# host samba samba.localdomain is an alias for hawk.localdomain. hawk.localdomain has address

Re: Network Problem: Redirection

On Fri, 2024-02-02 at 16:47 -0700, Charles Curley wrote: > On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 15:52:41 -0700 > Charles Curley wrote: > > > But I don't think that will solve the routing problem. > > Well, I was wrong. That did solve the routing problems. > > I moved the apt-proxy line for the VMs' benefit into

Re: Network Problem: Redirection

Am 02.02.2024 um 17:12:06 Uhr schrieb Gremlin: > On 2/2/24 16:28, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 02:03:46PM -0700, Charles Curley wrote: > >> root@hawk:~# host samba > >> samba.localdomain is an alias for hawk.localdomain. > >> hawk.localdomain has address 192.168.100.6 > >

Re: Network Problem: Redirection

On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 15:52:41 -0700 Charles Curley wrote: > But I don't think that will solve the routing problem. Well, I was wrong. That did solve the routing problems. I moved the apt-proxy line for the VMs' benefit into a VM's /etc/hosts and took it out of hawk's /etc/hosts. samba is now an

Re: Network Problem: Redirection

On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 16:52:48 -0500 Greg Wooledge wrote: > Well, we don't know what's "right" or "wrong" on your networks. These > are private (non-routable) addresses with no meaning to anyone but you > and your fellow network denizens. Agree. > > If you need different name resolution

Re: Network Problem: Redirection

On 2/2/24 16:28, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 02:03:46PM -0700, Charles Curley wrote: root@hawk:~# host samba samba.localdomain is an alias for hawk.localdomain. hawk.localdomain has address 192.168.100.6 host(1) looks in DNS only. It doesn't do the standard name resolution

Re: Network Problem: Redirection

> > > # For the benefit of virtual machines. > > > 192.168.100.12 apt-proxy > > > 192.168.122.1 samba samba.localdomain > > > > And that's where it came from (/etc/hosts). If this IP address is > > wrong, then it shouldn't be in here. > > Gnrrr. It's right for the virtual network

Re: Network Problem: Redirection

On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 22:10:19 +0100 Marco Moock wrote: > Sorry for the first post. > Your problem is located in the name resolution. > > Show /etc/nsswitch.conf I have not touched this. root@hawk:~# cat /etc/nsswitch.conf # /etc/nsswitch.conf # # Example configuration of GNU Name Service

Re: Network Problem: Redirection

On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 16:28:06 -0500 Greg Wooledge wrote: > > However, when I try to ping samba by host name: > > > > root@hawk:~# ping samba > > PING samba (192.168.122.1) 56(84) bytes of data. > > Note that this is a *different* IP address. Good catch, thank you. > > > # For the benefit of

Re: Network Problem: Redirection

On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 02:03:46PM -0700, Charles Curley wrote: > root@hawk:~# host samba > samba.localdomain is an alias for hawk.localdomain. > hawk.localdomain has address 192.168.100.6 host(1) looks in DNS only. It doesn't do the standard name resolution that applications do. > root@hawk:~#

Re: Network Problem: Redirection

Am 02.02.2024 um 14:03:46 Uhr schrieb Charles Curley: > root@hawk:~# host samba > samba.localdomain is an alias for hawk.localdomain. > hawk.localdomain has address 192.168.100.6 > root@hawk:~# ping samba > PING samba (192.168.122.1) 56(84) bytes of data. Sorry for the first post. Your

Re: Network Problem: Redirection

Am 02.02.2024 um 14:03:46 Uhr schrieb Charles Curley: > From apt-proxy (192.168.100.12): icmp_seq=2 Redirect Host(New > nexthop: hawk.localdomain (192.168.100.6)) Check the routing table on apt-proxy. ICMP redirect happens if you have 2 routers on the same ethernet link and the router you try to

Network Problem: Redirection

I have an interesting network problem. I have a samba service on hawk. I have an alias for it in DNS: root@hawk:~# host samba samba.localdomain is an alias for hawk.localdomain. hawk.localdomain has address 192.168.100.6 root@hawk:~# host hawk hawk.localdomain has address 192.168.100.6 root@hawk

Re: network problem (fwd)

On Thu, 7 Oct 2021 at 12:53, Lee wrote: > On 10/6/21, David wrote: > > But others here are vastly more knowledgeable than I am about > > networks, so additions or corrections are welcome, as always :) > It's Classless Inter-domain Routing (CIDR) now and network masks are > no longer supported

Re: network problem (fwd)

On 10/6/21, David wrote: > On Thu, 7 Oct 2021 at 10:53, wrote: >> On Wednesday, October 06, 2021 11:15:11 AM Brian wrote: >> > On Wed 06 Oct 2021 at 14:09:23 +0200, Pierre Frenkiel wrote: >> >> > >netmask 255.255.255.0 >> > >gateway 192.168.1.1 >> > >> > Just in passing: The line with

Re: network problem (fwd)

On Wed 06 Oct 2021 at 14:09:23 (+0200), Pierre Frenkiel wrote: > please note that the main problem is > "why the /etc/network/interfaces" is not used?" > I have the following problem on my laptop. > my /etc/network/interfaces file contains: >auto enp0s1 >iface enp0s1 inet static >

Re: network problem (fwd)

On Thu, 7 Oct 2021 at 10:53, wrote: > On Wednesday, October 06, 2021 11:15:11 AM Brian wrote: > > On Wed 06 Oct 2021 at 14:09:23 +0200, Pierre Frenkiel wrote: > > > >netmask 255.255.255.0 > > >gateway 192.168.1.1 > > > > Just in passing: The line with netmask 255.255.255.0 can be deleted.

Re: network problem (fwd)

On Wednesday, October 06, 2021 11:15:11 AM Brian wrote: > On Wed 06 Oct 2021 at 14:09:23 +0200, Pierre Frenkiel wrote: > >netmask 255.255.255.0 > >gateway 192.168.1.1 > > Just in passing: The line with netmask 255.255.255.0 can be deleted. > It is a deprecated option, as is broadcast.

Re: network problem (fwd)

On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 at 23:09, Pierre Frenkiel wrote: > > please note that the main problem is >"why the /etc/network/interfaces" is not used?" Ok. Noted. Several knowledgeable and helpful people have already made an effort trying to help you answer exactly this. You can find those efforts in

Re: network problem (fwd)

On Wed 06 Oct 2021 at 16:40:55 +0100, Thomas Pircher wrote: > Brian wrote: > > Just in passing: The line with netmask 255.255.255.0 can be deleted. > > It is a deprecated option, as is broadcast. See #912220. > > Crikey, it is indeed deprecated. Just removing the line will probably > not be a

Re: network problem (fwd)

Brian wrote: Just in passing: The line with netmask 255.255.255.0 can be deleted. It is a deprecated option, as is broadcast. See #912220. Crikey, it is indeed deprecated. Just removing the line will probably not be a good idea. I guess it can be deleted only when the address line contains the

Re: network problem (fwd)

On Wed 06 Oct 2021 at 14:09:23 +0200, Pierre Frenkiel wrote: [...] > I have the following problem on my laptop. > my /etc/network/interfaces file contains: >auto enp0s1 >iface enp0s1 inet static >address 192.168.1.10 >netmask 255.255.255.0 >gateway 192.168.1.1 Just in

Re: network problem (fwd)

On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 02:09:23PM +0200, Pierre Frenkiel wrote: > please note that the main problem is > "why the /etc/network/interfaces" is not used?" Please show us the information you've been asked to show, by multiple people: ip addr ip route

network problem (fwd)

please note that the main problem is "why the /etc/network/interfaces" is not used?" best regards, -- Pierre Frenkiel--- Begin Message --- hi, I have the following problem on my laptop. my /etc/network/interfaces file contains: auto enp0s1 iface enp0s1 inet static address

Re: network problem

Hi. On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 10:00:45PM +0200, Pierre Frenkiel wrote: > hi, > I have the following problem on my laptop. > my /etc/network/interfaces file contains: >auto enp0s1 >iface enp0s1 inet static >address 192.168.1.10 >netmask 255.255.255.0 >gateway 192.168.1.1

Re: network problem

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Tuesday, October 5, 2021 2:00 PM, Pierre Frenkiel wrote: > hi, > I have the following problem on my laptop. > my /etc/network/interfaces file contains: > auto enp0s1 > iface enp0s1 inet static > address

Re: network problem

On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 10:00:45PM +0200, Pierre Frenkiel wrote: > hi, > I have the following problem on my laptop. > my /etc/network/interfaces file contains: >auto enp0s1 >iface enp0s1 inet static >address 192.168.1.10 >netmask 255.255.255.0 >gateway 192.168.1.1 > >but

Re: network problem

Pierre Frenkiel wrote: > hi, > I have the following problem on my laptop. > my /etc/network/interfaces file contains: >auto enp0s1 >iface enp0s1 inet static >address 192.168.1.10 >netmask 255.255.255.0 >gateway 192.168.1.1 > >but after boot, ifconfig gives > >

network problem

hi, I have the following problem on my laptop. my /etc/network/interfaces file contains: auto enp0s1 iface enp0s1 inet static address 192.168.1.10 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 192.168.1.1 but after boot, ifconfig gives address 192.168.0.163 netmask 255.255.255.0

Re: Strange Network Problem

On 09/02/2018 03:22 PM, mick crane wrote: On 2018-09-02 19:39, David Christensen wrote: On 09/02/2018 05:48 AM, mick crane wrote: On 2018-09-02 13:16, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: The Firewall Passthrough is set to Allocation Mode set to 'Passthrough with the Passthrough Mode set to

Re: Strange Network Problem

On 2018-09-02 19:39, David Christensen wrote: On 09/02/2018 05:48 AM, mick crane wrote: On 2018-09-02 13:16, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: The Firewall Passthrough is set to Allocation Mode set to 'Passthrough with the Passthrough Mode set to 'DHCPS-dynamic '. It's my intention to change the

Re: Strange Network Problem

On 09/02/2018 05:48 AM, mick crane wrote: On 2018-09-02 13:16, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: The Firewall Passthrough is set to Allocation Mode set to 'Passthrough with the Passthrough Mode set to 'DHCPS-dynamic '. It's my intention to change the Allocation Mode to 'Off', as soon as I talk to AT

Re: Strange Network Problem

On 2018-09-02 13:16, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: The Firewall Passthrough is set to Allocation Mode set to 'Passthrough with the Passthrough Mode set to 'DHCPS-dynamic '. It's my intention to change the Allocation Mode to 'Off', as soon as I talk to AT Tech Support to make sure that doesn't mess

Re: Strange Network Problem

On 09/02/2018 01:37 AM, David Christensen wrote: On 09/01/2018 04:05 AM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: On 08/31/2018 10:41 PM, David Christensen wrote: On 08/31/2018 12:50 PM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform. I have noticed low internet traffic when

Re: Strange Network Problem

On 09/01/2018 04:05 AM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: On 08/31/2018 10:41 PM, David Christensen wrote: On 08/31/2018 12:50 PM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform. I have noticed low internet traffic when I have not been doing anything outside of my LAN. 

Re: Strange Network Problem

On Saturday, September 01, 2018 11:59:27 AM Stephen P. Molnar wrote: > On 09/01/2018 08:26 AM, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Saturday, September 01, 2018 07:05:55 AM Stephen P. Molnar wrote: > >> On 08/31/2018 10:41 PM, David Christensen wrote: > >>> On 08/31/2018 12:50 PM, Stephen P. Molnar

Re: Strange Network Problem

On 09/01/2018 08:26 AM, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: On Saturday, September 01, 2018 07:05:55 AM Stephen P. Molnar wrote: On 08/31/2018 10:41 PM, David Christensen wrote: On 08/31/2018 12:50 PM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform. I have noticed low

Re: Strange Network Problem

On Saturday, September 01, 2018 07:05:55 AM Stephen P. Molnar wrote: > On 08/31/2018 10:41 PM, David Christensen wrote: > > On 08/31/2018 12:50 PM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: > >> I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform. > >> > >> I have noticed low internet traffic when I have not been

Re: Strange Network Problem

On 08/31/2018 10:41 PM, David Christensen wrote: On 08/31/2018 12:50 PM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform. I have noticed low internet traffic when I have not been doing anything outside of my LAN. This has made me a tad suspicious. Now:

Re: Strange Network Problem

On 2018-08-31 20:50, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform. I have noticed low internet traffic when I have not been doing anything outside of my LAN. This has made me a tad suspicious. Now: root@AbNormal:/home/comp# ifconfig enp2s0: flags=4163 mtu 1500

Re: Strange Network Problem

On 08/31/2018 12:50 PM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote: I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform. I have noticed low internet traffic when I have not been doing anything outside of my LAN.  This has made me a tad suspicious. Now: root@AbNormal:/home/comp# ifconfig enp2s0: flags=4163  mtu

Re: Strange Network Problem

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Stephen P. Molnar wrote: > I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform. > > I have noticed low internet traffic when I have not been doing > anything outside of my LAN. This has made me a tad suspicious. > > > It turns out that this ISP,

Strange Network Problem

I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform. I have noticed low internet traffic when I have not been doing anything outside of my LAN. This has made me a tad suspicious. Now: root@AbNormal:/home/comp# ifconfig enp2s0: flags=4163 mtu 1500 inet 162.237.98.238 netmask

Re: dhclient or network problem

On Monday, 10 July 2017 11:28:12 CEST Franz Angeli wrote: > for example interface name eno52 (tg3, Broadcom Limited NetXtreme > BCM5719 Gigabit Ethernet PCIe (rev 01) : I had a similar issue due to a missing firmware. I think it was on a broadcom card. Please check the kernel logs (journalctl

Re: dhclient or network problem

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 12:55:53PM +0200, Dejan Jocic wrote: > On 10-07-17, Franz Angeli wrote: > > Hi, > > > > i have a problem with dhclient: > > > > for example interface name eno52 (tg3, Broadcom Limited NetXtreme > > BCM5719 Gigabit Ethernet PCIe (rev 01) : > > > > root@:~#

Re: Debain 9 dhclient or network problem

On Tue 11 Jul 2017 at 09:24:01 +0200, Dejan Jocic wrote: > You are doing lspci as root, so with A10 it does not get to the kernel > driver and module part. Can you see what is there by using A15 instead? If the driver turns out to be tg3 then firmware from nonfree is required. -- Brian.

Re: Debain 9 dhclient or network problem

nothing usefull... one strange thing is that during debian installation all works fine because i use net-install with a iso. 2017-07-11 9:27 GMT+02:00 Johann Spies : > On 11 July 2017 at 08:29, Franz Angeli wrote: > >> i tried every other

Re: Debain 9 dhclient or network problem

On 11 July 2017 at 08:29, Franz Angeli wrote: > i tried every other interface butt it's the same > > i tried also to disable interface renaming but doesn't work. What information do you get from /var/log/messages, /var/log/syslog and dmesg about your interfaces? Regards

Re: Debain 9 dhclient or network problem

On 11-07-17, Franz Angeli wrote: > Hi, > > i have a problem with dhclient: > > for example interface name eno52 (tg3, Broadcom Limited NetXtreme > BCM5719 Gigabit Ethernet PCIe (rev 01) : > > root@:~# dhclient eno52 -v > Internet Systems Consortium DHCP Client 4.3.5 > Copyright

Re: Debain 9 dhclient or network problem

Hi, i tried every other interface butt it's the same i tried also to disable interface renaming but doesn't work. 2017-07-11 8:02 GMT+02:00 Johann Spies : > On 11 July 2017 at 07:48, Franz Angeli wrote: >> Hi, >> >> i have a problem with

Re: Debain 9 dhclient or network problem

On 11 July 2017 at 07:48, Franz Angeli wrote: > Hi, > > i have a problem with dhclient: > > for example interface name eno52 (tg3, Broadcom Limited NetXtreme > BCM5719 Gigabit Ethernet PCIe (rev 01) : > > root@:~# dhclient eno52 -v > Internet Systems Consortium

Debain 9 dhclient or network problem

Hi, i have a problem with dhclient: for example interface name eno52 (tg3, Broadcom Limited NetXtreme BCM5719 Gigabit Ethernet PCIe (rev 01) : root@:~# dhclient eno52 -v Internet Systems Consortium DHCP Client 4.3.5 Copyright 2004-2016 Internet Systems Consortium. All rights reserved.

Re: dhclient or network problem

On 10-07-17, Franz Angeli wrote: > Hi, > > i have a problem with dhclient: > > for example interface name eno52 (tg3, Broadcom Limited NetXtreme > BCM5719 Gigabit Ethernet PCIe (rev 01) : > > root@:~# dhclient eno52 -v > Internet Systems Consortium DHCP Client 4.3.5 > Copyright

dhclient or network problem

Hi, i have a problem with dhclient: for example interface name eno52 (tg3, Broadcom Limited NetXtreme BCM5719 Gigabit Ethernet PCIe (rev 01) : root@:~# dhclient eno52 -v Internet Systems Consortium DHCP Client 4.3.5 Copyright 2004-2016 Internet Systems Consortium. All rights reserved.

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

[Please don't top post] On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 11:09:02PM +, John L. Ries wrote: > I guess my first question would be why the script below has anything to do > with /opt. I don't see a change of directory to anything under that > directory and I would assume this is running in some

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

On Thursday 19 May 2016 05:48:19 Gene Heskett wrote: [...] > > What I'd do > > > > Consider making a subdirectory of /opt dedicated to whatever you > > are doing with these scripts and setting its ownership to gene > > (start as restricted as possible with that and widen as necessary, > > e.g.

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

On Thu, 19 May 2016, Lisi Reisz wrote: Doesn't being old _suck_? Word dat. -- Man is essentially a dreamer, wakened sometimes for a moment by some peculiarly obtrusive element in the outer world, but lapsing again quickly into the happy somnolence of imagination.

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

On Thursday 19 May 2016 12:24:38 Dan Purgert wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Thursday 19 May 2016 09:04:54 Lisi Reisz wrote: > >> [snip] > >> Will reply to Gene off-list as well in order to send a screenshot. > >> But no, it is still not working. Tried in Chromium and Firefox. > >> > >> Lisi

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

Gene Heskett wrote: > On Thursday 19 May 2016 09:04:54 Lisi Reisz wrote: >> [snip] >> Will reply to Gene off-list as well in order to send a screenshot. >> But no, it is still not working. Tried in Chromium and Firefox. >> >> Lisi > > For those following along, I had apache2 listening on port

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

On Thursday 19 May 2016 09:30:21 Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Thursday 19 May 2016 12:25:41 Gene Heskett wrote: > > > cramps, took big B-12, should kick in shortly. > A 2500mg. I have a 250mg in my daily pilltainer, but overdid it a bit yesterday, so that wasn't enough. The Metformin we take for the

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

On Thursday 19 May 2016 09:04:54 Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Thursday 19 May 2016 12:25:41 Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Thursday 19 May 2016 05:56:49 Lisi Reisz wrote: > > > On Thursday 19 May 2016 10:48:19 Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > Yes, its the link in the sig. > > > > > > Which has been unreachable

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

On Thursday 19 May 2016 12:25:41 Gene Heskett wrote: > > > cramps, took big B-12, should kick in shortly. Didn't know that one! (B12) Doesn't being old _suck_? Lisi

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

On Thursday 19 May 2016 12:25:41 Gene Heskett wrote: > On Thursday 19 May 2016 05:56:49 Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Thursday 19 May 2016 10:48:19 Gene Heskett wrote: > > > Yes, its the link in the sig. > > > > Which has been unreachable all morning from here. :-( (Morning by > > BST=UTC+1) > > > >

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

On Thursday 19 May 2016 05:56:49 Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Thursday 19 May 2016 10:48:19 Gene Heskett wrote: > > Yes, its the link in the sig. > > Which has been unreachable all morning from here. :-( (Morning by > BST=UTC+1) > > Lisi Thats Lisi, I'll check that out when I wake up again. Bad

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

On Thursday 19 May 2016 10:48:19 Gene Heskett wrote: > Yes, its the link in the sig. Which has been unreachable all morning from here. :-( (Morning by BST=UTC+1) Lisi

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

On Thursday 19 May 2016 04:14:55 to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 10:45:12PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > > I feel I've been warned off commenting here in case I come across as > > a pontificating know-it-all who's insisting that you do everything > > in "My Way" [...] > > ;-) >

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 10:45:12PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > I feel I've been warned off commenting here in case I come across as a > pontificating know-it-all who's insisting that you do everything in > "My Way" [...] ;-) Yes, I totally agree

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

I feel I've been warned off commenting here in case I come across as a pontificating know-it-all who's insisting that you do everything in "My Way". Well, if there are any opinions here about how things *should* be done, they're nothing to do with me, but just taken from the FHS (2015-03-19). It

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

5:34 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org<mailto:debian-user@lists.debian.org> Subject: Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one This seems to me that it may be a bug in the version of bash that is running on the system, but I could be very wrong. To address that: gene@coyote:/$ ls -l

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

67-8885 > > From: Logan Erbst <lo...@iccamnetworking.us> > Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:34 PM > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Subject: Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one > > This seems to me that it may be a bug in

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

On Wednesday 18 May 2016 17:42:59 Gene Heskett wrote: > Greetings all; > > I am, because my web page serves as a backup site for the os and some > tools for use with the now 30 year old trs-80 color computers, have a > script IP can run that pulls fresh copies of the sources for this code > using

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

, 2016 5:34 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one This seems to me that it may be a bug in the version of bash that is running on the system, but I could be very wrong. On 5/18/2016 4:42 PM, Gene Heskett wrote: Greetings all; I am, beca

Re: Got that network problem solved, now a new one

This seems to me that it may be a bug in the version of bash that is running on the system, but I could be very wrong. On 5/18/2016 4:42 PM, Gene Heskett wrote: > Greetings all; > > I am, because my web page serves as a backup site for the os and some > tools for use with the now 30 year old

Got that network problem solved, now a new one

Greetings all; I am, because my web page serves as a backup site for the os and some tools for use with the now 30 year old trs-80 color computers, have a script IP can run that pulls fresh copies of the sources for this code using hg, then builds fresh copies and makes it all available on my

Re: Network Problem

On 28 April 2016 at 18:23, NightC Core wrote: > > The card works in 32 but not under debian 64, when looking around on > google I find many similar cases to mine. > https://www.google.com/search?q=debian%208%20marvell%2088E8056=j > Nightcore > > I see here(

Re: Network Problem

Hello, Thank you for your reply. What makes me say this is his because I install debian on 8 pc in 32 everything worked, and during installation in 64 unable to configure the network ... or after installation! If I specify my nationnalité is to avoid the problems linked to language. If I need 64

Re: Network Problem

Le decadi 10 floréal, an CCXXIV, NightC Core a écrit : > I am a French user I fail to see how your nationality is relevant to the issue, but no matter. >and I have a big problem, I created a debian server on > an old pc except that I need 64bit debian and my network card is a

Re: Network Problem

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 01:16:05AM +0200, NightC Core wrote: > Hello, > I am a French user and I have a big problem, I created a debian server on > an old pc except that I need 64bit debian and my network card is a Marvell > 88E8056 is that it only works in 32? Can not you do a 64 with the driver

Network Problem

Hello, I am a French user and I have a big problem, I created a debian server on an old pc except that I need 64bit debian and my network card is a Marvell 88E8056 is that it only works in 32? Can not you do a 64 with the driver or other packages or the 32 used to operate the network card? Please.

[Solved] Strange network problem with Xen 4.0 on stable

Hi. For the archives: Le 15883ième jour après Epoch, François TOURDE écrivait: Hi list. I'm using Xen (long time ago), and I've a strange problem with one of the DomU. It's the only DomU with this behaviour. It doesn't reply to ping and can't have access to the net. In detail: [...]

Strange network problem with Xen 4.0 on stable

Hi list. I'm using Xen (long time ago), and I've a strange problem with one of the DomU. It's the only DomU with this behaviour. It doesn't reply to ping and can't have access to the net. In detail: Dom0 Debian stable: Linux srv04 2.6.32-5-xen-amd64 #1 SMP Fri May 10 11:48:05 UTC 2013 x86_64

Re: Odd Network Problem

On 20/05/13 23:08, george cox wrote: - Original Message - From: Klaus Doering Sent: 05/20/13 04:27 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Odd Network Problem On 20/05/13 15:19, george cox wrote: I think the one thing I would want to know about my original

Re: Odd Network Problem

On Monday 20 May 2013 00:15:30 george cox wrote: I don't know why it wasn't quoted, I'm just hitting re  ply in the email providers web interface. Not sure what you mean by no air. I'll see what this email looks like when I send this one, maybe it was just a fluke. Yes, some providers do

Re: Odd Network Problem

- Original Message - From: Lisi Reisz Sent: 05/20/13 04:47 AM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Odd Network Problem On Monday 20 May 2013 00:15:30 george cox wrote: I don't know why it wasn't quoted, I'm just hitting re ply in the email providers web interface. Not sure

Re: Odd Network Problem

On 20/05/13 15:19, george cox wrote: I think the one thing I would want to know about my original problem is in the squeeze version of gnome's network-manager, left-clicking on its notification area icon would, show several options one of which is auto eth0, this seemed to reliably attach

Re: Odd Network Problem

- Original Message - From: Klaus Doering Sent: 05/20/13 04:27 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Odd Network Problem On 20/05/13 15:19, george cox wrote: I think the one thing I would want to know about my original problem is in the squeeze version of gnome's network

Odd Network Problem

I have a piece of equipment that when conntected to my cablebox/TV allows me to view my home TV on any computer from anywhere on the internet. This device only has a hardwired internet connection so I use a wireless print-server (it has a 4 ethernet ports that it bridges to the wireless) to

Re: Odd Network Problem

On 19/05/13 13:30, george cox wrote: I have a piece of equipment that when conntected to my cablebox/TV allows me to view my home TV on any computer from anywhere on the internet. This device only has a hardwired internet connection so I use a wireless print-server (it has a 4 ethernet ports

Re: Odd Network Problem

This could still be a network config issue. An easy way around might be to connect (wired) both, the print server and the new laptop, to your router (assuming that the router also acts as the dhcp server, and that both clients are configured to get their ip address through dhcp). In the

Re: Odd Network Problem

On Sunday 19 May 2013 16:43:31 george cox wrote: This could still be a network config issue. An easy way around might be to connect (wired) both, the print server and the new laptop, to your router (assuming that the router also acts as the dhcp server, and that both clients are configured to

Re: Odd Network Problem

On Sunday 19 May 2013 16:43:31 george cox wrote: This could still be a network config issue. An easy way around might be to connect (wired) both, the print server and the new laptop, to your router (assuming that the router also acts as the dhcp server, and that both clients are configured

  1   2   3   4   5   >