Linux-Networking Digest #720, Volume #10 Fri, 2 Apr 99 17:13:50 EST
Contents:
Sendmail! (Jure Krasovic)
Re: MS-LINUX (Andre van Dijk)
Can't print from 1 Linux box to another (Steve Snyder)
Min Req for NAT server? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: MS-LINUX -- it is REAL. (Joachim Feise)
Rx doesn not work for 3c509-TP ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: problem with epic100 driver versions 1.04+ ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: diald and DNS queries ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
telnetd source? ("Jonas Anden")
Re: Don't wanna run 'diald', so what else??? (Jon-o Addleman)
HELP with TELNET/FTP/POP mail check from client (Gaku Shimizu)
Re: Best Free X Windows Server for Win95/98 Box on Samba/Linux Network? (Timothy
Litwiller)
Re: Machine name themes - what do you use? (Erik Tkal)
Re: IPFWADM / Proxy Question (Greg Weeks)
Re: Min Req for NAT server? (Greg Weeks)
Re: MS-LINUX ("Nickolas S. Pattakos")
Help with Linux as Client on Sygate... (contains setup information to assist)
("Charles R. Thompson")
I have problems with DNS and pppd (Ernesto Miralles)
Re: smbmount used to work (Marc Hering)
Odd line (to me) in messages file ("Brian E. Parker")
Samba with kernel 2.2.3 (Rien Broekstra)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jure Krasovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Sendmail!
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 22:19:16 +0200
Hi !
Im running two domain (zzz.org, yyy.org) on mail mailserver with
sendmail! I would like to make that mails for [EMAIL PROTECTED] go to test1
user and that mail for [EMAIL PROTECTED] goes for somebody2. How can I do
that.
Thanks and best regards!
Jure
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andre van Dijk)
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,alt.linux.sux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.caldera,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.protocols.smb
Subject: Re: MS-LINUX
Date: 2 Apr 1999 19:54:30 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 02 Apr 1999 09:02:58 -0600, David Delikat wrote:
>Andre van Dijk wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 01 Apr 1999 20:32:22 -0800, Dan M. Johnson (LinuxBox1)(bagzman) wrote:
>> >APRIL FOOLS =)
>> >
>> CUT!
>>
>> please?
>>
>
>it is an american custom, basically we pick one day of the year
>to admit what we have been acting out the rest of the year.
I know we do it too overhere (Netherlands, and that's in Europe, you know
wooden shoes, coffee shops etc). I meant CUT literally. If you're
only replying "APRIL FOOLS", please cut the other 400, or so lines. Sorry to
sound grumpy, it was good joke :-)
--
A. van Dijk Hmmm, I smell Bacon, Elvis is in the kitchen
mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Denis Leary
icq : 4249631 Linux: What you read is what you get.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Snyder)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Can't print from 1 Linux box to another
Date: 2 Apr 1999 19:13:11 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Snyder)
I've got a problem with printing on my Linux-based (RedHat v5.2). I can
print either from this machine directly or I can send print jobs to LPD from
a remote (OS/2- or Win9x-based) machine. Either ways works fine. What I
can't do is print from another Linux box.
Machine corona is acting as the print server, i.e. the destination of the
print job. Machine pluto is the source of the print job. Obviously, LPD is
running on both machines.
This is the /etc/printcap from corona:
##PRINTTOOL3## REMOTE ljet4 600x600 letter {} LaserJet4 Default {}
lp|lj4m:\
:sd=/var/spool/lpd/lj4m:\
:mx#0:\
:sh:\
:rm=ljet4m.snydernet.lan:\
:rp=raw:\
:if=/var/spool/lpd/lj4m/filter:
dj|djet:\
:sd=/var/spool/lpd/djet:\
:mx#0:\
:sh:\
:rm=dj1120.snydernet.lan:\
:rp=raw:
And this is the /etc/printcap from pluto:
##PRINTTOOL3## REMOTE POSTSCRIPT 600x600 letter {} LaserJet4 Default {}
lp:\
:sd=/var/spool/lpd/lp:\
:mx#0:\
:sh:\
:rm=corona.snydernet.lan:\
:rp=lp:\
:if=/var/spool/lpd/lp/filter:
When I run "lpr myfile" the data should be sent to corona, which should then
print the file on the default printer (lp). Instead, no print output is
seen. If I run lpq to check the status of the print job, what I get is:
pluto.snydernet.lan: waiting for queue to be enabled on corona.snydernet.lan
Rank Owner Job Files Total Size
1st steve 8 myfile 380 bytes
corona.snydernet.lan: lpd: dj: Your host does not have line printer access
Huh? The queue *has* already been established. (As mentioned, I can print
to it either locally or from OS/2- or Win9x-based manchines.) And why is
printer dj mentioned when the default ptinter is lp?
Any advice on how to print from one Linux box to another?
Thank you.
***** Steve Snyder *****
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Min Req for NAT server?
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 23:06:19 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am having DSL service installed, and want to hook up an internal network
to it. I would like to use a Linux box to do network address translation,
and act as a firewall, and possibly a wee bit of web serving (like 1-2
hits/day max).
I have two systems available at the moment:
a) Cyrix Pentium 266, 32MB RAM, 1GB HD, 36x CD, 2mb VGA
b) AMD 486-100, 4MB RAM, 270MB HD, no CD, 512K VGA
The first I put together specifically for this task; the second was
cobbled together from parts lying around. But, after installing Linux on
the first system, I decided I'd really like to use it myself to become
more familiar with Linux and start moving away from Windoze.
So I started putting system b together, with the hopes of using it for the
network stuff, and keeping the other system for myself. Before I go out
and spend money on more memory and a CD-ROM drive, I'd like to know if I
should bother -- will the 486 (with 16MB RAM, say) be able to handle the
NAT duties and such for about 6 computers?
Of the computers I'll be hooking up, only one or two would see any serious
network access (my dad just can't seem to get into surfing the web and I
can only use so many computers at once.)
Also, if anyone has any pointers to good, basic tutorials on this, I'd
love to hear about it. Thanks!
========================================================================
Uncle Roger "There is pleasure pure in being mad
[EMAIL PROTECTED] that none but madmen know."
Roger Louis Sinasohn & Associates
San Francisco, California http://www.crl.com/~sinasohn/
------------------------------
From: Joachim Feise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,alt.linux.sux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.caldera,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.protocols.smb
Subject: Re: MS-LINUX -- it is REAL.
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 12:28:36 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gumby wrote:
[...]
> comment much more then what people already know about it. NT5/6 is still
> Dave Cutter's baby but he has announced retirement plans coinciding with NT7
^^^^^^
Do you proofread before you post? I'm sorry, but I can not take your claim
seriously as long as you manage to get Cutler's name wrong. I know that MS is
watching Linux, the Halloween papers show that. It is also already well known
that Cutler wants to get out of there. But the reason that I've heard is that
the MS top honchos push to keep Win16/32 compatibility even in the Win64
codebase, while he wants to keep the Win64 base clean and not provide kludgy
backward compatibility.
If you want to be taken seriously, back up your claims with something more than
the obvious.
-Joe
--
===================================================================
Joachim Feise Ph.D. Student, Information & Computer Science
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ics.uci.edu/~jfeise/
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===================================================================
As a computer, I find your faith in technology amusing.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Rx doesn not work for 3c509-TP
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 19:44:58 GMT
I have problems using one 3c509-TP in my Pentium 75 and one 3c509-TP in my
AMD 350 K6 computer. The 3c509-TP ccard is an 3c509 card with RJ45
connectors. I am using the ifconfig command to check the card and I can see
that my AMD 350 K6 only Tx transmitt TCP/IP packets but does not Rx recieve
any packets. The Pentium 75 computer both Tx transmitts and Rx recicve
packets. I switch the cards between the two computers the AMD 350 K6 still
have the same problem which tells my that it is my AMD 350 K6 computer that
has a problem since the fault is not following the 3c509-TP cards. What is
the problem ????
The linux configuration:
AMD 350 K6:
/sbin/modprobe 3c509
ifconfig eth0 192.168.0.1
ifconfig eth0 192.168.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 up
route add -net 192.168.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 eth0
/etc/rc.d/init.d/network start
Pentium 75:
/sbin/modprobe 3c509
ifconfig eth0 192.168.0.2
ifconfig eth0 192.168.0.2 netmask 255.255.255.0 up
route add -net 192.168.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 eth0
route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth0
ipfwadm -F -p deny
ipfwadm -F -a m -S 192.18.0.0/24 -D 0.0.0.0/0
/etc/rc.d/init.d/network start
What is the problem ??????
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: problem with epic100 driver versions 1.04+
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 20:31:54 GMT
> My NIC (SMC9432BTX) doesn't work with versions 1.04+ of epic100.c. No packets
> are transmitted. I have decided to replace the driver (v1.04) with the old one
> of 2.0.35 kernel (v0.99B) and it works.
>
> As I upgraded to 2.2.4 kernel with epic100.c, v1.06 and 1.07, it doesn't work.
>
> As all seems to be fine with version 0.99B of the driver, I think there's a
> problem in new versions of epic100.c.
>
> Has anyone experienced the same problem ?
Yes: I've written Donald Becker, the driver's author, about this problem.
I'm running Redhat 5.2; the epic100 driver rev. 0.99B works albeit with
occasional freeze-ups and transmit timeouts using MII device; 1.07 doesn't
work at all. For the time being I'm switching to my 3com 3c905b card which
does work. My sense from struggling to get a functional 100Base-T net
working is that the Linux drivers still have plenty of bugs in them.
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.protocols.smb,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: diald and DNS queries
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 12:07:51 -0500
Make sure samba has your correct work group and proper domain controler
Make sure the following is in diald.conf
# Do the same for netbios-ns broadcasts
# NOTE: your /etc/services file may not define the netbios services
# in which case you should comment out the next lines.
ignore tcp tcp.source=tcp.netbios-ns,tcp.dest=tcp.netbios-ns
ignore tcp tcp.source=tcp.netbios-dgm,tcp.dest=tcp.netbios-dgm
ignore tcp tcp.source=tcp.netbios-ssn,tcp.dest=tcp.netbios-ssn
# Do the same for netbios-ns broadcasts
# NOTE: your /etc/services file may not define the netbios services
# in which case you should comment out the next lines.
#accept udp 30 udp.dest=udp.netbios-ns
#accept udp 30 udp.source=udp.netbios-ns
ignore udp udp.source=udp.netbios-ns,udp.dest=udp.netbios-ns
ignore udp udp.source=udp.netbios-dgm,udp.dest=udp.netbios-dgm
ignore udp udp.source=udp.netbios-ssn,udp.dest=udp.netbios-ssn
Ronald Hovens wrote:
> ISP's DNS servers, (the ones that are stored within the win98 DNS
> settings an in /etc/resolv.conf). I'ts ok that diald brings up the
> connection for a DNS query, since the ISP's DNS servers are outside my
> ethernet, BUT WHY IS THE DNS LOOKUP PERFORMED, EVEN WHEN I LOOK AROUND
> WITHIN MY ETHERNET (sit 1...3)? Does running a DNS server on my own
> linux box resolve this problem?
>
> Many thanks in advance.
>
> Ronald Hovens
--
Come Visit Our Website
http://www.freeyellow.com/members/creative-services
Please Visit Our Sponsers (We get paid per visit)
------------------------------
From: "Jonas Anden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: telnetd source?
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 23:16:39 +0200
Anyone got a pointer to a telnetd source that will easily compile under
RedHat 5.2? I'm looking to create a chroot()ed version of the telnet server.
so that I can easily limit the software that may be used when telnetting in
to my servers.
// Judge
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jon-o Addleman)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Don't wanna run 'diald', so what else???
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 21:09:11 GMT
Once upon a Thu, 01 Apr 1999 12:41:49 -0500, Ronan Heffernan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Seach for "connectd" on Freshmeat or some other software index site. It is
>a server that brings a PPP connection up and down in response to remote
>commands from "WConnect" (Win32) or "connect" (linux command-line) or
>XConnect (X11). I use this to coordinate between my 4 computers. One
>great feature is that you do not explicitly control the status of the PPP
>connection. You express/release your interest in the connection. As soon
>as the number of interested users hits zero, connectd closes the
>connection. You do not have to shout over your cubicle wall, "Anybody need
>the link up?"
Gotta love that... I was just about to post some questions about how I
would go about writing a program that did just that. Now my problem is
solved! Thanks...
--
Jon-o Addleman
------------------------------
From: Gaku Shimizu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: HELP with TELNET/FTP/POP mail check from client
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 14:44:27 -0800
Hi, I am very new to this linux world and have been learning little bit at
a time.
I have a problem... I run Redhat 5.2 on my server. I have my linux box
connected to an existing network and assigned it the only static IP
address I have. Then, I attached my client computers using a hub. (I have
2 nics in my linux box) I run IP masquerading using the 192.168.xxx.xxx
format and assigned dummy IPs to all my client computers attached to my
server.
Problem. From the client computer, I cannot TELNET, FTP, or check POP
mail beyond my linux box. it almost seems like my linux server is
restricting my Telnet, FTP and POP requests to leave the server. All my
client computers see the web...I am using squid. Any ideas on how I can
fix the FTP TELNET and POP problem I have? Please assume that I know
nothing about linux when you respond. :-) Thanks...
Gaku Shimizu
Gonzaga University
Spokane, Washington
------------------------------
From: Timothy Litwiller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Best Free X Windows Server for Win95/98 Box on Samba/Linux Network?
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 15:23:46 -0600
yes, please send an URL
Eugene VonNiederhausern wrote:
> Cyrus Mehta wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am creating a dual Windows/Linux environment using Samba for file serving
> > on a standard Ethernet network. I was wondering what kind of X server software
> > for the Windows side I could use to run some X windows apps off of the LInux Box.
> >
> > Reliability is the most important factor, windows will crash often enough without
> > the help of the X server.
> >
> > Any ideas?
> >
> > CKM
>
> Yesterday, I found the best X server/viewer for windows (and linux) that I have
> seen yet and it is free (GNU Public License). It is called VNC from Olivetti and
> Oracle research laboratory. You can connect from linux->windows, windows->linux,
> linux->linux, windows->windows. It is a lot better than any of the other products
> I have seen ot this kind. I don't have the URL (it is at work) you can email me or
> post a reply and I will get it and reply.
------------------------------
From: Erik Tkal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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
Subject: Re: Machine name themes - what do you use?
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 15:02:13 -0600
Desmond Coughlan wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> What about characters from 'The Lord of the Rings' ..?
>
> gandalf ... frodo ... sauron ... legolas ...
>
> Guess who's gonna be changing his /etc/hosts this afternoon ... :-)
>
> --
> Desmond Coughlan |Restez zen ... Linux peut le faire
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [www site under construction]
Certainly better than from "Lord of the Flies"... <grin>
--
Erik Tkal
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Out the token ring, through the router, down the fiber, off
a switch, past the firewall, down the T1 ... nothing but Net."
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Greg Weeks)
Subject: Re: IPFWADM / Proxy Question
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 17:42:20 -0600
In article <7e075e$o2p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Adamson) writes:
> My setup is like this:
>
> ISP
> +--------+ +-------+ |
> | | eth1| | +-----------+
> | WIN 98 |<--------->| LINUX |<------->|CABLE MODEM|
> | | | |eth0 +-----------+
> +--------+ +-------+
>
> The Linux box handles IP forwarding for the Win98 box, which (along with
> interface eth1) uses an IP from the pool of addresses reserved for internal use.
>
> My ISP's news server has IP-restricted access without authentication, so I can
> only connect to it from the Linux box or the Win98 box. I would like to access
> it from work, on occasion. Is it possible to configure such that the Linux box
> provides IP forwarding for an arbitrary host on an outside network? (i.e. a
> host connected via eth0)
Yes, use tcp wrappers and redir on port 119. This isn't extremly
secure, but it should work ok. Redir by itself will work, but then you
look like an open news server. Your ISP would quickly kill your
account.
Greg Weeks
--
http://durendal.tzo.com/greg/
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Greg Weeks)
Subject: Re: Min Req for NAT server?
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 17:50:15 -0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I have two systems available at the moment:
>
> a) Cyrix Pentium 266, 32MB RAM, 1GB HD, 36x CD, 2mb VGA
> b) AMD 486-100, 4MB RAM, 270MB HD, no CD, 512K VGA
>
> The first I put together specifically for this task; the second was
> cobbled together from parts lying around. But, after installing Linux on
> the first system, I decided I'd really like to use it myself to become
> more familiar with Linux and start moving away from Windoze.
>
> So I started putting system b together, with the hopes of using it for the
> network stuff, and keeping the other system for myself. Before I go out
> and spend money on more memory and a CD-ROM drive, I'd like to know if I
> should bother -- will the 486 (with 16MB RAM, say) be able to handle the
> NAT duties and such for about 6 computers?
The 486-100 is plenty. I installed a setup like this last weekend on a
486-100 with 16 meg of RAM and 340 meg HD. I use a 486-33 at home as a
firewall. 4 meg isn't really enough. 8 would probably work, but I want
to make sure my firewall isn't swapping normally. You only need a CD
during the initial install. Mine at home has never had a CD. I boot
from a floppy with NFS capability and mount the CD from my other Linux
system. The install last week we put a CD in temporarily for the
software install.
Greg Weeks
--
http://durendal.tzo.com/greg/
------------------------------
From: "Nickolas S. Pattakos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,alt.linux.sux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.caldera,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.protocols.smb
Subject: Re: MS-LINUX
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 23:41:24 +0300
Microsoft according to my opinion understood that is not dominating an
up-and-coming market and now tries to enter this growing market. Linus
should understand that Microsoft will not compromise with linux, or he made
this statement because of his position. I wouldn't be surprised if there
will be linux-based changes in Win2000 or Win2003.What I say are personnal
thoughts, whose purpose is not to offend someone.
TURBO1010 wrote in message <7e1bgc$5hh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>"The Linux community and Microsoft are a great fit," says Linus
>Torvalds, creator of Linux. "After all, we both have the same goal,
>which is
>total world domination."
------------------------------
From: "Charles R. Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Help with Linux as Client on Sygate... (contains setup information to assist)
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 17:29:25 GMT
My only concern in this message is the ACTUAL Linux network
settings to get it going as a client using SyGate. I only say
this because I_read_through the first 1500 of 3200 messages
revealed last night in a search of DejaNews for my question and
I've seen all the irrelevant replies for the past year to the
very question I am asking... I've done my research time so I
think it's valid to say up front that I do NOT want...
1) To be told to use Linux as the Proxy, we aren't doing that
2) To be be told, yeah.. we got it to work. it's easy (with no
explanation of how)
3) To be told that some other NAT works better, we are using
SyGate
I know some of you have this *exact* setup and have it working
but no one ever seems to mention their settings. Any help in
this is greatly appreciated. I'm not trying to cause a flame war
or rant with the above message.. I'm only attempting to get a
*focused thread* on actually setting up Linux as the client.
With that said...
We are using a cable modem and can ping between all three
machines. The Win98 machines can ping external IP addresses and
resolve external domain names. However, the Linux is currently
limited in scope to the Internal Network and cannot ping
externally or resolve domain names. It doesn't even take a
second to try, so I know we are totally missing the resolving
part of the setup.
We've tried all kinds of combinations of settings on the Linux
box and still have not gotten it. I have reset this to ground
zero and if anyone could take a look and tell us what we need to
do where, it would be greatly appreciated. If you have this same
setup (I know from reading alot of folks do... it would be great
if you let us know how you got Linux to connect)
Thanks,
CT
config follows....
Computers
Win98 (Sygate)192.168.0.1
Win98 (Client1)192.168.0.2
Linux (Client2)192.168.0.3
On Linux in X, Administration -> Network Configuration I have
four 'tabs'.
>Names
hostname: dali.rcs.nwk
domain : rcs.nwk
search for.. domains: -blank-
nameservers : 192.168.0.1
>Hosts
IP, Name, Nicknames
127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.localdomain
192.168.0.3 dali.rcs.nwk dali
192.168.0.1 charlest.rcs.nwk crt
192.168.0.2 dogdaze.rcs.nwk pgt
>Interfaces
Interface, IP, Proto, atboot, active
lo 127.0.0.1 none yes active
eth0 192.168.0.3 none yes active
>Routing
Default Gateway: 192.168.0.1
nothing else here set.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 21:05:30 +0200
From: Ernesto Miralles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: ,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: I have problems with DNS and pppd
I connect with my pppd ( is 2.3.6 under kernel 2.2.5 and slackware 3.6 )
but it gives me like primary DNS 0.0.0.0 and secondary DNS 0.0.0.0 � why
?, I don't understood.
I have to run Windows for connect to internet.
my resolv.conf is Ok
domain arrakis.es
nameserver x.x.x.x
nameserver x.x.x.x
I don't kown to do, helpme with email too, find a new is very dificult
for me
Thanks in advance
note: I don't worry if you decided explain a lot of.
--
________________________________________________________________________
Ernesto Miralles Chiva
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Marc Hering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: smbmount used to work
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 21:40:01 GMT
tried that,,and nothing,,I have Downloaded the smbfs utils from
samba.org and they error on compile,,,(I installed the samba 2.0.2 from
the RPM that was on SuSE's web site,,,and it claims to be 2.0.2....I'm
stumped,,,,,
"Mark F. Burgo ( Systems Administrator )" wrote:
>
> The smbmount utility hsa changed in 2.0 you need to enter it as
> smbmount service <password> -c "mount <mount point>"
>
> mark
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 24 Mar 1999 13:40:43 +0000, Robert van Loghem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Marc Hering wrote:
> > >
> > >> ok, here is one that is quite annoying ;)
> > >>
> > >> I am running SuSE 6.0 and was successfully mounting my shared dir's off
> > >> my NT server using smbmount no prob. the other day I upgraded from
> > >> 2.0.36 kernel to 2.2.3 kernel and now I cannot mount my shares anymore.
> > >> When building the new kernel I make sure to include support for
> > >> smbfilesystem and I can ping the server no problem
> > >> this is the output I get when trying
> > >>
> > >> Darkstar:~ # smbmount //stargate/mhering$ /mnt/win -I 192.168.1.2 -U
> > >> mhering
> > >> Password:
> > >> mount error: Invalid argument
> > >> Please look at smbmount's manual page for possible reasons
> > >> Darkstar:~ #
> > >
> > >You should upgrade to samba 2.0, the smbmount utilities are in SAMBA while
> > >it used to be in the smbfs utils.
> > >
> > >you should uninstall the smbfs utils then upgrade to SAMBA 2.x
> > >
> > I already upgraded to Samba2.x but have the same problem. How do know smbfs is
> > still installed ?
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > Answers please in this newsgroup!
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------
>
> --
> ----------------------------------
> Burgo Systems / Consulting
> E-Mail: $m
> http://www.surfshop.net/~mfburgo
>
> Date: $d
> Time: $t
>
> This message was sent by Balsa
> On RedHat Linux 5.2
> Burgo Systems / Consulting is happy to preload Linux on your new
> BS/C System, Factory Direct
> ----------------------------------
------------------------------
From: "Brian E. Parker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Odd line (to me) in messages file
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 18:32:18 -0600
Hello,
Redhat 5.2:
The following lines are showing up in my /var/log/messages file and I'm not
sure why:
Apr 1 18:01:00 barrett PAM_pwdb[11323]: (su) session opened for user news
by (uid=9)
Apr 1 18:01:01 barrett PAM_pwdb[11323]: (su) session closed for user news
Last week, I ran the 'setup' program and deactivated 'innd' thinking this
would kill anything to do with news. I don't want news running on this
machine at all, as a news server or client.
If there is something else I need to do to kill any news access (including
deleting the news user), please let me know.
Thanks, as always,
-BEP
------------------------------
From: Rien Broekstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Samba with kernel 2.2.3
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 14:36:51 +0200
Hello all,
A couple of weeks ago my box was running linux 2.0.36 (Red Hat 5.2).
After compiling and booting 2.2.3 however smbmount doesn't work anymore
SMBFS: Need mount version 6
mount error: invalid argument
smbmount version 2.0.1
mount-2.8a
Does anyone know what is the problem here?
grtx Rien Broekstra
--
Rien Broekstra L III N N U U X X
Tel: +31(0)735517594 L I N N N U U XX
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] L I N N N U U XX
LLLLL III N N UUUU X X
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
