Linux-Networking Digest #682, Volume #10 Tue, 30 Mar 99 23:13:36 EST
Contents:
Re: Machine name themes - what do you use? (Fuzzy)
Re: Kernel 2.2.3 post-compilation problems (Allan)
Re: Using Linux instead of NT Server in home environment....
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: IDENT on masquerade? ("D. C. Sessions")
Re: Using Samba and NT Workstation (peter)
Backup-to home network HD (Bob Nixon)
Re: Min Computer hardware when using Linux (Matt van de Werken)
ftp server on 2 nic�s (derget)
NT logon through ip-NAT gateway (David Polete)
Re: HELP!! Final attempt at Samba installation ("Gerhard")
PPP Compression Modules not found (root)
help w/ ncpmount ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Can't ping Windows 95 from Redhat Linux 5.2 (Mogul 55)
Re: Using Linux instead of NT Server in home environment.... (Don Heffernan)
Newbie FTP Problem ("Stressed")
Re: Epson Stylus Color II + Samba 2.0.3 (Redhat 5.9 Linux) = no print ("Loren Cook")
Re: Netgear FA310TX Cards and Redhat 5.2 ("Donald E. Stidwell")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fuzzy)
Crossposted-To:
vmsnet.networks.misc,microsoft.public.windowsnt.domain,comp.unix.solaris,comp.os.os2.networking.server,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.admin.networking,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix,comp.protocols.tcp-ip.domains
Subject: Re: Machine name themes - what do you use?
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 02:09:45 GMT
On Thu, 25 Mar 1999 12:03:06 -0800, "- AJS"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> But I like that GIS company's solution of using a country
>>name and then naming mount points for citys within the
>>country! Talk about tracking down a problems being a cinch!
>
>Well, you could always name your machines after trees and leave "Root" alone
>;^).
>
>Personally, I like mythology... stick with a period/culture and do a little
>research as the network grows... (right now I need the name of an
>English/Celtic witch or 'being' associated with illusions - for a Video
>Presentation server).
>
>- AJS
>
>ps. I like the cities idea too.
I use the mythology bent too. But I'm starting to run out of names.
I've got about thirty servers, and I've used every Greek/Roman name I
can think of, and even a few Egyptian ones. Anyone have any obscure
ones they can contribute?
Ciao
Fuzzy
;-)
------------------------------
From: Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,aus.computers.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.2.3 post-compilation problems
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 12:46:38 +1200
Aaron Saikovski wrote:
> So if I make 4 partitions and make one of those bootable that might fix the
> problem.
> I currently have my drive partitioned as follows.
> (2Gb drive)
>
> 128Mb of swap space
> the rest of the drive as one big partition eg /
>
> This is what I reckon might fix it...
>
> 128Mb swap space
> 200MB /partition
> 1087Mb /usr
> /300Mb /home
Huh? I have a 4GB drive on my 480CDT with:
1.8GB FAT32 Win95
1.0GB Linux System
65MB Linux Swap
1.0GB DOS Data
Or do you have an older BIOS that's picky about this stuff?
For something like that a 500MB root partition as the FIRST partition
works well. You can then create other partitions for /usr and /home. I
quite often leave swap for the last few scraps on a disk, but if the
machine does do a bit of swapping, using the second partition can reduce
delays due to the HD heads having to traverse big chunks of the disk. Go
figure, it made a difference on my 486...
Allan.
> Peter Kropf wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >
> >It sounds like a similiar problem that I ran into. If the root partition
> >on you hard drive is configured so that it crosses the 1024 cylinder
> >(or sector, I forget which) boundry, then the PC's BIOS is unable
> >to load the boot information. I had to use Partition Magic to move
> >the root partition to the beginning of the drive, boot from the resuce
> >disk and re-run lilo. Once that was done, I no problems.
> >
> >Hope this helps...
> >
> >>
> >
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
microsoft.public.windowsnt.misc,microsoft.public.windowsnt.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Using Linux instead of NT Server in home environment....
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 01:36:19 GMT
Hello, I am thinking about doing the very same thing. I have a copy of 5.2
on a 486 with 32Meg and will be getting my dsl line next month. I was
wondering which client did you use on your W95 machine? I tried to tell my
machine to log onto an NT domain but got lost in the HOW-TOs on the Linux
side. I saw a Sun client for PCNFS sitting in the network CPL and was
wondering if it is easier to set up the W95 machine do things the Linux way
instead of the other way around.
>
> I bought Red Hat 5.2 and had my used pentium up dual booting Win 98
> and a custom Linux server install in about 2 hours. Using Red Hat
> documentation and a couple of books I was able to ping the Linux
> server on eth0 from my other PCs across a hub almost immediately.
> Setting up Apache to run a clone of my limited web site took another
> hour or so.
>
> Figuring out how to set up ipfwadm and configure a working network
> behind a second NIC on the Linux box took considerably more work. I
> ended up screwing everything up and had to reinstall Linux. But, with
> a few newsgroup questions, and a lot of HOWTOs I got that working in a
> couple of weeks. I can now connect to it from my "private" network
> using telnet, ftp, http, and I'm even exporting X terminal sessions to
> a WIN98 box upstairs. Samba is starting to look interesting. I'm
> still a bit uncertain about my security, but I seem to have everything
> from outside locked out except for http (which I want to let in). My
> SDSL line is coming in about a week and I will try turning this thing
> loose on the net.
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: "D. C. Sessions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IDENT on masquerade?
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 18:33:24 -0700
Jon-o Addleman wrote:
>
> Once upon a Mon, 29 Mar 1999 06:28:51 -0500, "Curt"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I use mident to deal with this. I think it is a part of the RH5.2
> >distribution.
> >
> >ftp://ftp.code.org/pub/linux/midentd/
>
> I use it as well, and it is also available in the latest Debian
> distro. And, of course, you can get it on freshmeat.
Got it, had compile troubles, installed the precompiled,
found out it doesn't like comment (^#.*$) lines in the
config file, got it running, traffic still hangs, checked
the logs, found out what it was sending back to the ISP,
looks good, dang if I know.
So far no answers from tech support other than "your firewall
must be misconfigured." (Duh!) Could be that they also
finger the result or some such and want a positive response.
While on the subject, why are all of the forwarding-aware
identd daemons config-file based? One would think that in
principle the daemon could identify masqueraded sockets and
forward the (edited) query back to the originating machine.
--
D. C. Sessions
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (peter)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.misc,linux.samba
Subject: Re: Using Samba and NT Workstation
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 00:18:54 GMT
In article <7djjvg$2tme$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> I'm trying to Linux with Samba and Windows NT Workstation talking. When I
> look at the Network Neighborhood on NT it will show the group but it does
> not display the computer(times out). The version of Linux I am using is 5.2
> and everything now is running on an out of the box server installation.
>
> Things that do work are Apache, FTP and pinging so I know the network does
> exist but something must be set wrong in the default install.
>
> Anyone have any ideas?
>
you also run /usr/local/smb/bin/nmbd which is necessary to see the shares
?
in a nt-command-window you can try to mount a linuxshare with the
'net use'-command. in linux you can try to see the nt-shares with
smbclient or try to mount.
if you need additional help please tell us your samba-version and your
the number of your sp.
peter
=================
pilsl@
ANTISPAM
goldfisch.atat.at
------------------------------
From: Bob Nixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Backup-to home network HD
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 02:21:03 GMT
It seems that if you want to do backups then TAPE is expected. I don't
have or want a tape for my home network but want to store backups for my
three home boxes on a large HD ~13GB's, purchaced solely for this purpose.
Here is where the trouble lies. Both Linux and NT backup software assumes
you have a tape backup system. I ended up using quick backup on the
Windows 98 machine for itself and the NT server (cable modem firewall
box), becuase it DOES allow using a file for backups.
I checked out Linuxburg (TUCOWS), downloaded and installed Kbackup after
Caldera's BRU failed the verification test on the NTFS (compressed) backup
drive. Kbackup didn't work either and it's a CLI, so you can't tell what's
going on, in progress and is a pain to configure. BTW, I thought a network
drive was a network drive and as long as it will write files, & NT should
do most, then why is the verification failing?
Any Idea's? I'd like the linux box to do scheduled backups for all three
machines via samba and base 100 internal network. The Windows 98 quick
backup will probably do the linux box too but it's a little scary running
the backup software on the most likely to fail machine.
PS. Is the preponderance of tape systems something that's lagging in
networking? It seems there are better choices, with large floptical or
HD's more reliable than any tape system. Am I missing something?
TIA..
------------------------------
From: Matt van de Werken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Min Computer hardware when using Linux
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 08:43:37 +1000
Dave Dunwoodie wrote:
>
> Minimum? Hmmm... I've installed Linux on 386-SX-16's before and used them
> as gateways. If memory serves, it was 8MB RAM and a 220MB drive, a pair of
> old 8-bit NE-1000 ethernet cards and a tired ol' 14" MONO (green) CRT.
>
> Compiling a kernel took hours and hours... Other than that, the SX did just
> fine in playing "Internet gate"...
<snip>
Quick (off-thread) question: Why did you not compile the kernel on
another
(faster) machine? Or is this not possible?
Cheers,
Matt van de Werken.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 21:00:02 +0200
From: derget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ftp server on 2 nic�s
is it possible to run an tfp server on 2 nic�s with 2 ip�s
to have more performence
the ftp server shuld be asked under only one ip
and the managing the user to both ip�s
you anderstand
derget
------------------------------
From: David Polete <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
linux.samba,comp.protocols.smb,microsoft.public.windowsnt.protocol.tcpip,comp.sys.sun.admin,compt.sys.sun.misc
Subject: NT logon through ip-NAT gateway
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 19:45:12 -0600
Question.
i'm running a network of mixed workstations (sun, linux, win95)
and having problems with domain logons. my situation requires
that i hide my 'local' network (and NTdomain) behind an ip-NAT
(actually n:1 IP-MASQ) gateway due to limited IP space while
still receiving services from the 'outside' NT domain.
essentially, i'm trying to allow win95 clients to validate against
an NT domain on the other side of a linux based IP-MASQ gateway.
from other things i've heard i'm not sure this is possible (problems
with the M$ tcp stack?) but i want other opinions before dropping
this approach. as for other approaches? would NTDOM (from samba)
allow the local samba servers to valid the PC's and still allow access
to the outside domain services without subsequent 'per service'
validations?
for anyone who might have useful info:
hence forward i'll refer to the bigger NT domain as DOMAIN-OUTSIDE
and the local domain as DOMAIN-LOCAL with the understanding that
the outside owns real world classB IP's and my local network runs
on the 192.168. for argument's sake, the DOMAIN-OUTSIDE's PDC/BDC's
live on 151.222.33.xxx and my local, 'real world' subnet is
151.222.34.xxx, while my private subnet is 192.168.100.xxx.
behind (and including) my IP-MASQ box every machine will be part of
workgroup 'DOMAIN-LOCAL' while on the other side of the IP-MASQ
everything is in 'DOMAIN-OUTSIDE'.
DOMAIN-LOCAL DOMAIN-OUTSIDE
---------
| linux |
---- 192.168.100.1-| ip-masq |- 151.222.34.2 -->|-151.222.33.100
^ | samba | | (NTserver1)
| --------- |
| |-151.222.33.101
| | (NTserver2)
| |
| |-151.222.33....
| (NTserverN)
| -----------
|- 192.168.100.2-| sun/samba |
| -----------
| -----------
|- 192.168.100.3-| pc1 |
| -----------
.
.
.
| -----------
|- 192.168.100.N-| pcN |
-----------
my goal (preference?) is to have the PC's validate against
DOMAIN-OUTSIDE (in order to be 'exchange clients') while
living in the local subnet and receiving services from the
local samba servers. i've managed this exact situation before,
and had no problems. the only difference between my previous
site and my current site is that i wasn't doing IP-NAT (MASQ).
ie, the PC's would be assigned IP's on 151.222.34.xxx therefore
eliminating the need for the IP-MASQ gateway.
while the unix side of things is working quite well, i'm having
troubles with getting the win95 PC's to validate against the
'outside' NT domain. i should mention that my two unix/linux
machines are running samba and having no problems validating
local users against the outside domain logon servrs (ie -
security = server, logon server = outside1, outside2, etc, with
the servers listed in the samba lmhosts file). for the linux
machine this is no surprise since it is the 'gateway' and owns
an IP within the IP space where the logon servers live.
but here's the quandry - the sun box (on the 192.168.) has no
problem validating the win95 users for DOMAIN-LOCAL through the
gateway against the DOMAIN-OUTSIDE logon servers. in this
situation the sun box is configured:
workgroup = DOMAIN-LOCAL
domain logons = true
security = server
logon server = NTserv1, NTserv2, NTservN
encrypt passwords = true
with the NTserv's listed in samba's lmhosts file. similarly,
i can drop domain logons from the sun/samba server, and enable
it on the linux/samba/IP-MASQ gateway, with the same results.
in this case, any of the PC's can validate against the sun/samba
logon server within DOMAIN-LOCAL, using the DOMAIN-OUTSIDE password,
and receive the local services. the problem, in order to receive
'exchange' services (from DOMAIN-OUTSIDE) the PC user must validate
a second time against DOMAIN-OUTSIDE. i find it strange that the
'windows logon' will not work through IP-MASQ, but exchanges'
validation will. i presume this is because windows is trying to
validate against a domain via a broadcast and exchange via direct
contact with the user's exchanger server.
any suggestions as to the best approach are greatly appreciated.
please e-mail any replies directly to me as well as posting in the
newsgroups.
TIA,
dp
------------------------------
From: "Gerhard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: HELP!! Final attempt at Samba installation
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 21:55:00 -0500
John,
You are obviously very frustrated and disappointed. And believe me I had a
hard time getting Samba to work as well, but a lot of good people here were
very helpful.
Your decision to build a network where the server has a different OS from
the workstations was a courageous one, but you must have been aware of the
inherent complications in such a setup.
To construct a network of 4 machines, 3 of which are running Microsoft
OS's, NT Workstation would have been a much better choice as server in my
opinion. I do this at home and it works just fine. Presumably you have no
need to establish a domain with logon security for the workstations.
I notice that your operating system experience does not include Unix, and
that may be part of the problem as well.
Even with a default configuration of Samba you should be able to see your
server in Network Neighborhood or with the net view command. You may not be
able to access it though. If you don't see your server, there are
underlying IP problems.
If you see it, but you can't access it, then you either have to disable
encrypted passwords on your Windows machines or enable it on the server.
The latter is recommended. My solution was much simpler, I simply told
Samba to use the Domain Controller for password validation.
Finally, a good book to consult is Samba by John D. Blair, published by SSC.
However there is plenty of good documentation on the web as well. Other
messages have already referred you to those sites.
Gerhard
------------------------------
From: root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: PPP Compression Modules not found
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 20:51:35 -0600
I recently set up PPP on my Linux box. I am connecting to an ISP and
everytime I look at my syslog, I notice that the following messages
pop-up:
can't locate module ppp-compress-21
can't locate module ppp-compress-26
can't locate module ppp-compress-24
I also get the following:
can't locate module net-pf-4
can't locate module net-pf-5
I'm noticing that I'm not getting nearly the bandwidth throughput I used
to: probably due to lack of compression.
Please write back if you know how to help me or point me in the right
direction.
Thanks,
Adam
Dallas, TX
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: help w/ ncpmount
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 23:16:53 GMT
I'm running RedHat 5.2 for sparc operating on a Novell 4.11 network. I
configured the IPX settings correctly and I get a list of available servers
when I type slist at the prompt, but when I try to use ncpmount using the
correct username and password it gives me the following error message:
ncpmount: NCP Request returned error code in login
Login denied
Any ideas on how I can fix this?
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mogul 55)
Subject: Re: Can't ping Windows 95 from Redhat Linux 5.2
Date: 30 Mar 1999 00:40:42 GMT
i had this problem early on when i networked a linux box with a win 98
box...the setup on the win 98 is almost nothing (as long as it works using
TCP\IP on win 95 (in your case) to win 95. Your TCP\IP settings look fine....I
would look first if your Network card is configured properly.. One way i found
to tell is go to the control pannel in x windows and go to the configure
network go to interfaces and see if the NIC is active if not click activate and
exit the net config. go right back in the net config and see if it is still
active...if it is it is probably configued fine. if not you need to modify
settings such as the driver to use. (it could be other things too.)
I tell you this when i had this prob...the driver was fine and i could ping my
self but the NIC was looking for a 10BaseT but my NIC only had a BNC. I
noticed this by the line in the boot sequence for the NIC. If this is the
prob i dont know what to do....i needed a 10BaseT NIC anyway so i ended up
replaceing it and it works fine now
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Don Heffernan)
Crossposted-To:
microsoft.public.windowsnt.misc,microsoft.public.windowsnt.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Using Linux instead of NT Server in home environment....
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 03:04:17 GMT
On Wed, 31 Mar 1999 01:36:19 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Hello, I am thinking about doing the very same thing. I have a copy of 5.2
>on a 486 with 32Meg and will be getting my dsl line next month. I was
>wondering which client did you use on your W95 machine? I tried to tell my
>machine to log onto an NT domain but got lost in the HOW-TOs on the Linux
>side. I saw a Sun client for PCNFS sitting in the network CPL and was
>wondering if it is easier to set up the W95 machine do things the Linux way
>instead of the other way around.
I think you might do that for SAMBA if you want to use the Linux box
for file and print services, but if you just want to use the Linux box
as a firewall, web server etc. then go the other way. Disable WINS,
set your gateway address to eth1 (which should be a private IP address
like 192.168.1.1 - and your Win98 boxes 192.168.1.2, etc) and set
your DNS for your ISP DNS servers.
>>
>> I bought Red Hat 5.2 and had my used pentium up dual booting Win 98
>> and a custom Linux server install in about 2 hours. Using Red Hat
>> documentation and a couple of books I was able to ping the Linux
>> server on eth0 from my other PCs across a hub almost immediately.
>> Setting up Apache to run a clone of my limited web site took another
>> hour or so.
>>
>> Figuring out how to set up ipfwadm and configure a working network
>> behind a second NIC on the Linux box took considerably more work. I
>> ended up screwing everything up and had to reinstall Linux. But, with
>> a few newsgroup questions, and a lot of HOWTOs I got that working in a
>> couple of weeks. I can now connect to it from my "private" network
>> using telnet, ftp, http, and I'm even exporting X terminal sessions to
>> a WIN98 box upstairs. Samba is starting to look interesting. I'm
>> still a bit uncertain about my security, but I seem to have everything
>> from outside locked out except for http (which I want to let in). My
>> SDSL line is coming in about a week and I will try turning this thing
>> loose on the net.
>>
>
>
>-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: "Stressed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Newbie FTP Problem
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 23:26:54 GMT
I have the typical Linux machine using IP masQ to connect my Windoze LAN to
the net via cable modem. By typical I mean I used the typical addressing
scheme (192.168.1.x) for the LAN and I use DHCP to get settings for my
gateway interface.
I have RHL 5.2 and it runs wu FTP (wu-2.4.2-academ[BETA-18-VR13]).
Whenever I try to connect to a remote (Internet) FTP site from a Windoze
machine, (going through the Linux masQ machine), I get the connection, but I
get the following error and I'm unable to see, send or recieve data:
230 User mojo7 logged in.
PWD
257 "/home/@c/h/c/mojo7" is current directory.
SYST
215 UNIX Type: L8
Host type (2): UNIX (standard)
PORT 192,168,1,2,4,47
500 Illegal PORT Command
! port cmd failed.
! DoDirList failed 0
Is this due to my masQing or to my FTP setup or both or what?
Anyone have this problem and know how to fix it?
Thanks.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Loren Cook" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
linux.samba,linux.redhat.misc,comp.protocols.smb,comp.os.linux.misc,microsoft.public.windowsnt.misc,comp.periphs.printers,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.misc
Subject: Re: Epson Stylus Color II + Samba 2.0.3 (Redhat 5.9 Linux) = no print
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 19:17:18 -0800
I can't remember how mine is setup exactly but I think the printer section
format in smb.conf is more like:
[printers]
path = /usr/spool/public
writeable = no
guest ok = yes
printable = yes
ICeeQueue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:01be7afa$1f729c10$1c0b5e18@workstation...
> Hello all...
> I'm having difficulties printing to my Samba networked printer from my
> Windows NT Workstation SP4. The printer is physically connected to my
> Linux box, and is /dev/lp0 and lpd is running and everything. Below is my
> SMB.CONF file that SWAT has created for me:
>
> # Samba config file created using SWAT
> # from ******
> # Date: 1999/03/30 14:03:35
>
> # Global parameters
> netbios name = Server
> server string = Samba Server
> update encrypted = Yes
> log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m
> max log size = 50
> socket options = TCP_NODELAY
> printcap name = /etc/printcap
> os level = 65
> preferred master = Yes
> dns proxy = No
> hosts allow = 192.168.0.
>
> [root]
> comment = Root directory
> path = /
> read only = No
>
> [cdrom]
> comment = CD-ROM
> path = /mnt/cdrom
> read only = No
>
> [wwwroot]
> comment = WWW root
> path = /home/httpd
> read only = No
>
> [Epson Stylus Color II]
> path = /tmp
> print ok = Yes
> ==================
> I can see the shares and use the mounted directories, and I added the
> printer with "Epson Stylus Color ESC/P2" driver from Windows NT 4.0. The
> Linux printtool I configured as "Epson Stylus Color - any". I also tried
> the Uniprint driver but that didn't work.
>
> If anyone can help me, it would be greatly appreciated.
> Thank you. :)
>
------------------------------
From: "Donald E. Stidwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Netgear FA310TX Cards and Redhat 5.2
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 22:18:37 -0500
This is the exact setup I have with the same cards. The driver is Tulip.
RH5.2 contains support for these cards.
Make sure you have your netmask set at 255.255.255.0. Your IP addresses are
good. Other than the the IP address and netmask you should not have to add
anything to Win98 or Linux.
Don
William Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:7dmqkk$gp7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Thanks for your help. I have been successful in getting the cards to be
> recognized by their respective computers, however, I am unable to
> successfully ping the one computer from the other. I have tried
connecting
> the cable directly and also through the hub. I have added the IP address
> (192.168.0.2) to the host file and the resolv.conf files, but still no
ping.
> I have tried pinging from the Windows 98 computer to my linux server
> (192.168.0.1) without success. I ma not sure if I have to adjust Windows
98
> to look for the linux server (192.168.0.1) or not.
>
> Help !
>
> William Cameron
>
> Peter C. DuCharme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:5tsL2.101$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I have the same network card and RH5.2 and was able to get the card
> working
> > by following the instructions included on the included diskette. Look in
> the
> > file "A:\HELP\LINUX\LINUX.txt". I also had to create a
"/etc/resolv.conf"
> > so that "dhcpcd" would get an ip address dynamically from Road Runner.
> >
> >
>
>
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.networking) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Networking Digest
******************************
