Linux-Networking Digest #914, Volume #10 Mon, 19 Apr 99 08:13:45 EDT
Contents:
Re: Newbie--3c509b can't recognize (Charles Pouliot)
Re: Email with Earthlink, Sendmail, exmh, mh, Linux libc5 (Carl Byington)
MacOS X and Samba? (Hermann Schaefer)
Re: Problem with modem after kernal upgrade to 2.2.3 (Les Hazelton)
Re: ipop3d (Villy Kruse)
IP masquerading firewall - ftp problem ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux as Mailserver, Newbie Questions (Armand)
Re: NT faster than Linux? ("Glen Kemp")
Re: NT faster than Linux? (Julian T. J. Midgley)
PPP Server on Linux (Jun Holgado)
Unsolicited network activity from Mandrake (Jason Pepper)
Re: 'Network unreachable' Help! some notice ("Jeremy L. Buchmann")
Re: Configure NE2000 compatible ethernet NIC (peter)
ICQ problems woth ip-masq (Dave Gembala)
Re: RedHat login on a Novell 4.1 server (Alexei Kakhno)
Apache-SSL, mod_ssl, and RedHat Secure Web Server (S P Arif Sahari Wibowo)
Re: Linux - My honest opinion ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
DCHP and Cable Modem (Larry)
arp called for worn IP address (Tom)
pppd error explanation needed (Chris)
Re: lost eth0 dependency information (Michael Shtemler)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Charles Pouliot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Newbie--3c509b can't recognize
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 04:37:09 GMT
When I installed linux on a Gateway 486 with 3c509b, I didn't have any
problem, but the installation disks warned that 3c509b may not get
autodetected properly (Debian linux) and suggested that if I had problems, to
recompile the kernel with explicitly indicating a 3c509b, and not to
autoprobe/autodetect. Is that what you did when you say you redid the
kernel?
In article <7fe7d4$2pgo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Kevin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can't get linux to find or recognize my ethernet card it's a 3c509b.
> It works fine in NT but I've tried to get it to go in Xwindows, no luck.
> I've redone the kernel and made sure it was enabled--nothing. When I go to
> ifconfig eth0 says it's not a device. It's listed as supported? I'm using
> redhat 5.2. Tthe book I'm using the guy is using the same card as reference.
> Please help. Email replies please to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Thanks
> Kevin
--
Charles Pouliot
Computing & Information Science Major
Saint Vincent College
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Carl Byington)
Crossposted-To: comp.mail.sendmail,comp.mail.mh,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Email with Earthlink, Sendmail, exmh, mh, Linux libc5
Date: 19 Apr 1999 01:17:10 GMT
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
In article <7fdkmd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
>
>Most likely, they'll be happy to explain why (although you should
>be ready for a suggestion that you change ISPs). If it does turn
>out to be that GULF.NET rejects connections from dialups, then the
>solution is to (as others have pointed out) pass all your SMTP
>traffic via Earthlink's servers. This actually has other advantages
>for you as well, so it's a good idea regardless of the problem
>with GULF.NET.
Except that some large subset of the earthlink outbound smtp servers
are on ORBS since they are essentially open relays. Not really open
to anyone, just anyone with a uunet or psi dialup account. As far as
I can tell, the earthlink dialup ip addresses are NOT listed on the
DUL at dul.maps.vix.com, but the earthlink main servers ARE listed on
ORBS at relays.orbs.org.
- --
PGP key available from the key servers.
Key fingerprint 95 F4 D3 94 66 BA 92 4E 06 1E 95 F8 74 A8 2F A0
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: 4.5
iQCVAgUBNxqEDtZjPoeWO7BhAQGwtAP/aB5G8ejJVwgDobOIKfbxEmg0tSZ3YTDT
B26KQ0IRJo5CEARXFnEwFGq7LKPeQU1kchKGyvQsR93Jk5cXjZMct7kl78YfPUIo
APi6s0ZMSrHOc/Mgad0uCgTeBblF2/A5TX/eD8K3enhKI3mGK3z0K9ORdMQFOKEo
S/EunEV5PT8=
=12sO
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
------------------------------
From: Hermann Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: MacOS X and Samba?
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 11:28:41 +0200
Hi,
is there any "install-ready" samba-distribution for MacOS X-Server yet?
Did anyone tried it yet?
mfg Hermann
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 21:18:10 -0400
From: Les Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Problem with modem after kernal upgrade to 2.2.3
I resolved my problem. The 2.2.3 kernel I was using was a pre compiled
binary RPM from Mandrake. I had checked that all the related packages
had been updated to the correct levels etc.. still nothing worked.
Minicom - pointing to /dev/ttyS1 - could not get responses from the
modem.
I got a copy of the 2.2.5 kernel source, compiled my own, and the
problem was gone. The only thing I can believe is that there was a
problem/mismatch with the compiled kernel and some of my other
libraries.
--
Les Hazelton
============================================
A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of.
-- Ogden Nash
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse)
Subject: Re: ipop3d
Date: 19 Apr 1999 11:40:10 +0200
In article <cjrS2.3186$_a6.152465@paloalto-snr1>,
Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I got the following message in /var/log/secure
>
>Apr 18 11:33:19 eggshells ipop3d[2946]: connect from 207.217.243.97
>Apr 18 11:33:19 eggshells ipop3d[2946]: error: cannot execute
>/usr/sbin/ipop3d: No such file or directory
>
>It seems that I dont have the ipop3d binary in /usr/sbin, or anywhere else
>on my system...
>
>My question is where can I get the ipop3d binary from?
>
Install the imap package.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
Subject: IP masquerading firewall - ftp problem
Date: 19 Apr 1999 01:26:39 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wonkoo Kim)
I've set up a Linux box (RH 5.2) for IP masquerading firewall network
server. Everything was fine, but why do I have the following problem:
ftp> pwd
257 "/pub/incoming" is current directory.
ftp> ls
200 PORT command successful.
425 Can't build data connection: No route to host.
ftp>
I can download files in Web browser, but why do ftp sessions have
problem? I tried simple ifpwadm rules:
ipfwadm -F -p deny
ipfwadm -F -a m -S 192.168.0.1/32 -D 0.0.0.0/0
ipfwadm -F -a m -S 192.168.0.2/32 -D 0.0.0.0/0
ipfwadm -F -a m -S 192.168.0.3/32 -D 0.0.0.0/0
What did I miss?
Thanks.
//--------------------------------------------------------------------
// Wonkoo Kim ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Armand)
Subject: Re: Linux as Mailserver, Newbie Questions
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 01:23:24 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <7fdguk$k4a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I'm running a little LAN with NT Servers, our own DNS and Mailserver. MS
hi
There is the Mail-HOWTO, NET-3HOWTO, ISPhookupHOWTO(mini) (all in approximate
spellings here). I just went through them, and the talk in MAIL is all about
qmail that is supposed to be saver and simpler the sendmail. Simpler it has to
be, I had it running in no time (slackware though), and the configuration
requires little work. I liked it because it is small. However, the binaries
are in the /var three, and I have not yet tried to get them to some /bin to be
more file system standard. And you have to adapt the user agent to their
system. I thought that this might interest you. The howto's are at the linux
documentation project of course, if not in your RH package.
Armand
oh yeah, www.qmail.org. It is not in your RH package probably
------------------------------
From: "Glen Kemp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: linux.samba,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: NT faster than Linux?
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 10:51:26 +0100
A Couple of points (IMHO):
1 I agree that the test was unfair on Linux, it (according to the general
consensus) was
very badly implemented
2 This is not the first time that Mindcraft have pulled a Microsoft
"sponsored" stunt against a competitor, about six months ago I read an
article on the same site that funnily enough showed NT4 trashing NetWare 5
3 This I think you will find is about the norm. NT biggest problem is that
is badly optimised most of the time and installed badly by badly trained
monkeys ( I should know, I'm a well trained monkey). Every other time I
have seen any other benchmark from any other "independent" vendor that
situation has been reversed. The Unix/Linux/NetWare Box/Whatever has been
installed by some Demi-God and the NT Box has been installed by Bobo the
chimp who is more concerned with bananas than service configuration. Sadly
I find that situation is mirror very often in the "Real World" (or whatever
passes for it). Just because NT has a pretty interface people can assume
that it can be treated as such. Less of a bimbo and more of a Sharon Stone
character.
4 I forget who suggested it but perhaps the gauntlet should be thrown down
to the big vendors and be given six hours with identical hardware. Until
then no-one will really now which is best. (Unix probably, after all that)
Please send all flames to /dev/null
Glen Kemp
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Julian T. J. Midgley)
Crossposted-To: linux.samba,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: NT faster than Linux?
Date: 19 Apr 1999 11:14:42 +0100
In article <qYtS2.14626$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Larry Brasfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Julian T. J. Midgley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:7f62e1$uk1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>Your rebuttal of my "nonsense" does nothing but
>elaborate how something different might mean
>something new. Nobody has shown that the
>systems tested do not perform as claimed.
Indeed, they probably do, but the test claims to be a valid comparison
of NT and Linux webservers. Which it patently isn't, since no Linux
server would be set up like that for genuine "enterprise" serving. If
they had said "this is a comparison of NT and a misconfigured Linux
box unlike any you will be likely to come across in practice",
doubtless there would have been fewer complaints.
Many of us object to what they actually did, which was pass off their
tests as a valid comparison of Linux and NT that might be of use to
someone choosing between the two for some enterprise operation or
other.
>> Their benchmark is in no way
>> valid as a comparison of the performance of real webservers- it is
>> only valid as a measure of the incompetence of Mindcraft.
>
>Sounds like time for somebody to perform
>some "real webserver" benchmarking. It
>should be easy for the NT side since it can
>be presumed that Mindcraft's settings for
>that OS are servicable, if not optimal.
Watch this space....
>> I am willing to stake a tenner than no-one will be able to reproduce
>> that result if they run the same test on a machine of identical spec,
>> but this time bothering to configure the Linux set-up properly, using
>> the most appropriate software.
>
>That would not be reproducing the result. That would
>be running a different test. Reproducability means
>that enough information has been given to allow
>others to validate the "exact" same test by setting
>up the same conditions and getting the same result.
I am aware of this. Perhaps I misused "reproduce". What I meant was
that their test is not currently of use to anyone wishing to make an
educated decision about whether to use Linux or NT as their webserver,
and secondly, that a test, conducted on the same hardware with both
machines as near to perfectly configured as can be attained, is likely
to produce a very different result.
--
Julian T J Midgley | http://excession.ucam.org | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Trinity Hall, Cambridge | System Administrator for FSF : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple,
neat, and wrong." (H. L. Mencken)
------------------------------
From: Jun Holgado <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: PPP Server on Linux
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 22:57:03 -0700
I'm configuring a PPP server on Redhat 5.2, I have not been succesful
doing it. Im dialing from my win95 dialup network, I setup all the
options files..
this is my /var/log/messages
Apr 18 20:48:34 matrix syslogd: Cannot glue message parts together
Apr 18 20:48:34 matrix 37>Apr 18 20:48:34 login[621]: FAILED LOGIN 1
FROM (null) FOR ~^?}#@
!}!}!} }7}"}&} }*} } }%}&} ^Fz&}'}"}(}"}-}#}&hz~~^?}#@!}#}!} }*}%}&}
^F{#Kn~~^?}#@!}!}"} }7
}"}&} }*} } }%}&} ^F{^R}'}"}(}"}-}#}&5?~~^?}#@!}#}"} }*}%}&}
^F|}/*}>~~^?}#@!}!}#} }7}"}&}
}*} } }%}&} ^F|z}'}"}(}"}-}#}&UJ~~^?}#@!}#}#} }*}%}&}
^F|hf@~~^?}#@!}!}$} }7}"}&} }*} } }%}
&} ^F}V}'}"}(}"}-}#}&^ZL~~^?}#@!}#}$} }*}%}&} ^F}D2[~~^?}#@!}!}%}
}7}"}&} }*} } }%}&} ^F~$}
'}"}(}"}-}#}&V0~~^?}#@!}#}%} }*}%}&} ^F~^R^T^K~~^?}#@!}!}&} }7}"}&} }*}
} }%}&} ^F^?} }'}"}
(}"}-}#}&s.~~^?}#@!}#}&} }*}%}&} ^F^?n(y~~^?}#@!}!}'} }7}"}&} }*} }
}%}&} ^F^?\}'}"}(}"}-}#
}&'I~~^?}#@!}#}'} }*}%}&} ^G} ItD~~^?}#@!}!}(} }7}"}&} }*} } }%}&} ^G}
7}'}"}(}"}-}#}&A^I~~
^?}#@!}#}(} }*}%}&} ^G}!%nb~~^?}#@!}!})} }7}"}&} }*} } }%}&}
^G}!^I}'}"}(}"}-}#}&d0~~^?}#@!
}#})} }*}%}&} ^G}!u}>y~~^?}#@!}!}*} }7}"}&} }*} } }%}&}
^G}"a}'}"}(}"}-}#}&J ~~^?}#@!}#}*}
}*}%}&} ^G}"O(};~~^?}#@!}!}+} }7}"}&} }*} } }%}&}
^G}#/}'}"}(}"}-}#}&}6}1~~^?}#@!}#}+} }*}%
}&} ^G}#^]}:>~~^?}#@!}!},} }7}"}&} }*} } }%}&}
Apr 18 20:48:34 matrix @!}!}-} }7}"}&} }*} } }%}&}
^G}$Y}'}"}(}"}-}#}&#I~~^?}#@!}#}-} }*, U
ser not known to the underlying authentication module
Apr 18 20:49:22 matrix uugetty[625]: exiting on HANGUP signal
Apr 18 20:49:54 matrix uugetty[626]: warning: INIT sequence failed on
/dev/cua0
I hope somebody can help me with this.
Thanks in advance.
------------------------------
From: Jason Pepper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.mandrake,linux.redhat.install
Subject: Unsolicited network activity from Mandrake
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 10:30:35 +0000
Dear All,
I have recently upgraded to Mandrake 5.3 and as I work from home a lot I
have the following network setup..
[Win & Linux PC's]--[Home Hub]--[Gandalf]--[ISDN]--[Office]
The Gandalf is a clever little box that executes an ISDN dialout when
any of the PC's on my network make a call for something outside of the
home LAN.
Theoretically this should enable me to leave my idle Linux machine
turned on and plugged in to the hub all the time (just as I do my NT
machines) and only execute a dial out when the PC needs something.
However...
Since upgrading to Mandrake, when this unit is connected to the hub, it
never allows the line to go down, as though it is broadcasting network
packets for no explicit reason.
When I take it off the hub (leaving only two NT machines), the line will
go down after a timeout of 10 seconds - thus saving me money !
This didn't happen with RH 5.1
So ....
My questions are -
What has changed ?
How do I trace what is causing the generation of an externally destined
packet ?
How the bloody hell do I fix this without having to unplug the Linux
box from the hub
whenever I'm not using it ?
Any help gratefully received - this is driving me round the bend !
--
Regards
Jason Pepper
P.S Sorry for the crosspost I wasn't sure where to send this question !
=======================================================================================
Opinions expressed here are mine and do not
neccessarily reflect those of Oracle Corporation.
------------------------------
From: "Jeremy L. Buchmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 'Network unreachable' Help! some notice
Date: 19 Apr 1999 01:50:42 GMT
Michael Shtemler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: I see next message while mounting system:
: modprobe : No dependency information for module :
: /lib/modules/2.0.34/mics/ipx.o
: modprobe : No dependency information
: /lib/modules/2.0.34/mics/applet_alk.o
: modprobe : No dependency information
: /lib/modules/2.0.34/mics/eepro100.o
: (eepro100 is name of my network card!)
: I tried 'make modules' & make modules_install
: but with same result
: depmod -a doesnt helps too.
: Any ideas?
I'm confused...why are you compiling your network card driver as a module?
Try insmod /lib/modules/2.0.34/mics/eepro100.o
^^^^
Are you sure this is spelled right?
===================================================================
Jeremy Buchmann "Those who trade freedom for safety deserve
[EMAIL PROTECTED] neither freedom nor safety." -- Ben Franklin
===================================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (peter)
Subject: Re: Configure NE2000 compatible ethernet NIC
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 10:58:44 GMT
In article <7fe44f$72t$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
> Peter,
>
> I am quite sure I have an NE2000 compatible NIC, since Win 95 has no trouble
> recognizing the card.
>
> I will try to empty /etc/conf.modules and load the modules manually. I
> learned that ne.o depends on 8390.o, so I installed the 8390.o module before
> ne.o. The unresolved symbols went away, but insmod complained that the
> device was busy. I assume it means the ethernet card. Now I must determine
> why it thinks the card is busy.
>
I�m really not familar with this things and just a beginner to linux. but
I guess, when you load that module before that module will make your
device busy !! when I had a ne2000 I didnt had to load any modules before
!!
peter
=================
pilsl@
ANTISPAM
goldfisch.atat.at
------------------------------
From: Dave Gembala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ICQ problems woth ip-masq
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 18:47:13 -0700
Hello, I was wondering if anyone has experience with this. I am trying
to set up my firewall to allow icq to work. I have followed the
instructions on the IP-Masq how-to. I have set the port-forwarder to
forward 20 TCP ports to the machine with ICQ. I have also configured
ICQ to use those ports. Running the firewall test passes.
The problem I'm having is in connecting to the server to look up users.
Everything else seems to work, but the user-lookup just seems to hang.
Any clues?
I am running a 2.0.36 kernal with the port-forwarding patch.
Thanks for any help,
Dave Gembala
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexei Kakhno)
Subject: Re: RedHat login on a Novell 4.1 server
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 11:22:14 GMT
On Sun, 18 Apr 1999 22:39:54 +0200, MazterVIP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>How do i logon a Novell 4.1 server from linux....i cant find any client
>on novell's homepage...
>
>can somebody help me
>
>///MazterVIP
>
if you say about how to mount Novell volume
you need to install NCP package
use ncpmount command
Alexei, Russia
------------------------------
From: S P Arif Sahari Wibowo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix,linux.redhat.rpm,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Apache-SSL, mod_ssl, and RedHat Secure Web Server
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 02:05:51 -0500
Hai!
In US and Canada we have to pay license to use the RSA encryption inside
SSL. If I bought the RedHat Secure Web Server version 1, is that mean I
can use other version of SSL on Apache?
I found some pages explaining why to use mod_ssl over Apache-SSL. Is there
any pages giving arguments favorable to Apache-SSL?
Is the key created for RedHat Secure Web Server can be used for mod_ssl or
Apache-SSL?
Thank you.
S P Arif Sahari Wibowo
_____ _____ _____ _____
/____ /____/ /____/ /____ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_____/ / / / _____/ http://spas.8m.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux - My honest opinion
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 06:45:46 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gareth Jones) wrote:
> "Eugene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >You seem to be implying that Linux is not well docomented.
>
> He also seems to be implying that MS Operating Systems are well
> documented. This is not true. Well - there are more books in print
> about MS systems than about Linux, but there are important aspects of
> NT (for example) that are not documented anywhere.
>
> Gareth
>
*NOT* Surprisingly, there are a couple of MS Windows books which document the
undocumented... it just shows that MS does not document their product
properly.
Anyway, just go to www.amazon.com, and type in the query "Windows
Undocumented" to see what I mean.
Linux is very well documented for a non-corporate organisation. IMHO,
documentation is even better some other commercial OSes out there.
Kelvin
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: Larry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: DCHP and Cable Modem
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 02:11:09 GMT
I've just compiled a 2.2.4 kernal, and I'm using Red Hat 5.2. I've got
two NE2000 clone cards in the machine, one to see the local network and
one to see out my cable modem. I can get either card to see the local
network without a problem (run ifdown, edit the configs, switch the
cables and run ifup - and both work).
However, DHCP through the cable modem constantly fails. Is there a
config setting I didn't select in the kernal config? Any ideas?
Thanks.
------------------------------
From: Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: arp called for worn IP address
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 19:54:52 -0700
I am getting "Kernel ARP: arp called for own IP address" w/"last message
repeated xxx times" in /var/log/messages. This is in a SuSE 6.0
installation with the 2.0.36 kernel.
This is a box with three NICs, one (eth0) to the outside world with a
real static IP address, and two to masqueraded internal LANs with
addresses 192.168.1.0/24 and 192.168.2.0/24, respectively.
I am also having difficulty pinging the inside interfaces (eth 1 & eth2)
FROM the LAN workstations. _Sometimes_ I can ping from this box TO a
host on one of the LANs until I try to ping back to it simultaneously
from one of the LAN (Win9x) workstations at which time the outgoing ping
begins to fail. This also seems to provoke the arp messages.
The LAN workstations also cannot see anything beyond the tri-homed host,
but I want to eliminate this problem first. I have tried "route add
-host 192.168.1.1 eth1" sort of commands to all interfaces as
recommended a couple of years ago in kernel discussion archives, but
that hasn't fixed the problem. Any ideas?
:Tom
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris)
Subject: pppd error explanation needed
Date: 19 Apr 1999 07:39:57 GMT
After connecting (seemingly ok) I get the following messages form pppd
LCP: Timeout sending config-requests
Connection Terminated
Receive Serial link is not 8 bit clean
Problem: all had bit 7 set to 0
- any ideas what causes this ??
ChrisMM
------------------------------
From: Michael Shtemler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: lost eth0 dependency information
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 10:24:24 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I run against exactly the same problem and I solved it by next procedure
>cd /usr/src/linux
> make xconfig
chose "Network Device Support" and set to 'y' all boxes where there is a
reference EtherExpress .
I hope it will help.
Mike
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
