> We updated our ROACH’s BORPH kernel on August 2 using the version in svn. > o...@roach1:~$ uname -a > Linux roach1 2.6.25-svn3252 #1 Mon Aug 2 16:56:18 PDT 2010 ppc GNU/Linux
The latest binary in SVN is from 2009 (http://casper.berkeley.edu/svn/trunk/roach/sw/binaries/linux/uImage-jiffy-20091110). Did you recompile the kernel yourself? > We are using tcpborphserver 0.2110. Is this the latest version? No, latest version is http://casper.berkeley.edu/svn/trunk/roach/sw/binaries/tcpborphserver/tcpborphserver2-2010-08-27-r3304-signfix You could try that one. I don't have any problems using other commands or running tut2 (the 10GbE tutorial) using the recommended versions... Check out the new wikipage with current latest versions (as at 2010-10-28) http://casper.berkeley.edu/wiki/LatestVersions Last time we tried web pages with lists of latest versions people started complaining that they didn't know to look for updates. So we started sending out emails but those seem to be ignored and then can't be found again afterwards. So maybe we need to do both; hopefully we won't find ourselves in a situation with conflicting recommendations. I know there was a version of tcpborphserver that did not include the wordwrite/read commands. There was a movement to deprecate these to force ppl to use the read and write commands but I think they were put back in. I wouldn't recommend using them if you can avoid it though. They're not very efficient (transferring ASCII around) and basically only there for use during human debugging of the telnet interface. But I think in those versions you'd get an error message saying the command was not understood. So I'm not sure what's happening here. I'd suggest trying the versions listed on the wiki page and check if the problem still exists. Jason
