I figured out what was wrong, and the problem was udp-sender.
I found a little bug in the source code of udp-sender, which caused udp-sender not
being able to track the time that passed since the first connection.
I attached a diff patch to this e-mail which fixes that issue. If you apply this
Hi people!
After install everything properly, i have a problem cause in the
clients installed, the hostname is properly given but not included in
the /etc/hosts. There is no DNS so some applications failed to start. Is
there any way to update /etc/hosts with the client hostname Thanks.
Ghe Rivero wrote:
Hi people!
After install everything properly, i have a problem cause in the
clients installed, the hostname is properly given but not included in
the /etc/hosts. There is no DNS so some applications failed to start. Is
there any way to update /etc/hosts with the client
Thanks a lot for your udp-sender patch, Ramon.
About your tips on multicast, i can add that if the whole image ( multicast.tgz ) is
big, it's not sufficient to set
the tmpfs size to an high value, as writed in the FAQ.
If it's bigger than swap+memory then you must create additional swap
Next release will include pre-install and post-install script
capability, and I'll be asking for submissions to post on the web
as examples.
This could be a good example.
Just something to keep in mind...
Thus spake Bas van der Vlies ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Ghe Rivero wrote:
Hi people!
yes, I will rebuild the patches and resubmit but I think we're also
having a big disconnect with respect to grub-install. The bottom line
is it's busted and I can't find any way to make it work without patching
it - more on that in a minute. So that begs the question if one cannot
completely
Thus spake Ramon Bastiaans ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
I figured out what was wrong, and the problem was udp-sender.
I found a little bug in the source code of udp-sender, which caused udp-sender not
being able to track the time that passed since the first connection.
I attached a diff patch to this
Thanks, Samuele,
I'll have a look there.
-Brian
Thus spake Tognini Samuele ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
On Fri, 28 May 2004, Brian Elliott Finley wrote:
COUNT=0 seems to be already getting set, but I may be looking in the
wrong place. Can you send in a patch?
I think the solution is not to set COUNT=0.