Linux-Networking Digest #956, Volume #10 Sat, 24 Apr 99 18:13:37 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux, Win95/98, Samba and "Dial-up Networking" (David H. Brown)
Re: Still unable to FTP or Telnet (mist)
trouble between inter and intranet connection (Giovanni Volante)
HELP Needed Bandwidth management Tool for slow connection ? ("Kostis Kaggelides")
VPN through Linux IP-Masquerade (David Peavey)
Re: VPN through Linux IP-Masquerade ("Andrew")
Re: VPN through Linux IP-Masquerade (Mark Topham)
Re: Can the default message of telnet be modified? (Pekka Savola)
Re: Can ping "localhost" but can't ping my own IP...why? (Pekka Savola)
Change group name (Newman Sze)
Re: NFS update delay ("Stefan Monnier "
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
can't locate module eth1 (Jim LaSalle)
Samba ("v4cal")
Re: win98 - linux best solution? (Mark)
Re: FLOPPY ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Networking errors with Kernel 2.2.6 (Lin Zhi-Ming)
Re: slow ethernet ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
auto.home ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
HELP URGENT! - Kaffe with JServ (Alex Turner)
Re: HDD Spindown - For a Year! (Byron A Jeff)
Re: RealTek RTL 8029 PCI Ethernet Driver (Mark)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David H. Brown)
Subject: Re: Linux, Win95/98, Samba and "Dial-up Networking"
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 24 Apr 99 19:02:54 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Yanko Sheiretov wrote:
>
>If what I wrote above is true, then I have another question: does Win
>have a routing table? If not, how can I tell it to talk to the linux box
>when it sees its IP address but send everything else via the dial-up
>adapter?
If I understand, you want to do the dial-up on the Win box, right?
And also be connected to a lan, right? Then on your Win box, you
have 2 TCP/IP setups... On the modem, you set up TCP/IP for that
device, and use DHCP ("IP address assigned automatically" or something
like that). Then on the network card, you attach TCP/IP protocol, and
in that setup you put a static IP address. Also, in C:\Windows (or
whatever) you add a "hosts" file, with the IPs and names of your lan
machines.
There's probably a HOWTO for this, but I don't know how much it tells
you about the Win95/98 side... seems to me I had to figure it out.
--
Dave Brown Austin, TX
------------------------------
From: mist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Still unable to FTP or Telnet
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 19:08:12 +0100
Reply-To: mist <new$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] scribed to us that -
<Snip>
>>>
>>> >from FTP:
>>> > Connected to box1.net.
>>> > 421 - Service not available, remote server has closed connection.
>>> >
Perhaps the FTP service is misconfigured? It can be set up to deny on
basis of which computer you're connecting from.. Does it work from
localhost?
>>> >from Telnet:
>>> > Trying box1.net.
>>> > Connected to box1.net.
>>> > Escape character is '^]'.
>>> > Connection closed by foreign host.
>>> >
>>> >Does anyone know why? I have checked the following as suggested, but to no
>>> >avail.
>>> >
>>> >1. Check /etc/hosts.allow to see if box2's ip is allowed in. -- file is
>>> >empty
>>> >2. Check /etc/hosts.deny to see if any ip is denied. -- file is empty
An unsafe way of doing things, really. Add
ALL : ALL to hosts.deny and appropraite entries to hosts.allow
ALL : 127.0.0.1
ALL : LOCAL
ALL : box2.dotted.ip.addy
<snip>
>
>>Check inetd.conf to make sure the inetd knows how to start those
>>services.
>
>if the services weren't running he'd get a "connection refused" instead
>of a "connection closed by foreign host". It's probably something with
>the DNS and tcp wrappers fighting each other. For a quick fix, disable
>the wrappers all together in the inetd.conf. e.g. change
>
<snip instructions on disabling TCP wrappers>
I don't think that's the way to go. It's a backwards step in terms of
security unless the boxes are never going to be connected to any
external network.
Try re-installing the telnet daemon. Pop ALL : ALL in hosts.allow
temporarily if you want to get around possible wrapper problems.
Install wu_ftpd and set it up yourself, then you know that the other
machine is on the okay list. Check if there's anything like ftpaccess
or whatever in /etc/ to see what is allowed to connect from where.
HTH
--
Mist.
------------------------------
From: Giovanni Volante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: trouble between inter and intranet connection
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 17:12:47 +0200
I always used the utility pppsetup to set up my internet connections.
Then I installed a little net: netaddr 192.168.1.0 bcast 192.168.1.255
server 192.168.1.1 host 192.168.1.2 (i wrote that these addresses are
reserved for private use). Since then, when I try to connect to
internet, I get the line, but I can't reach any internet site (my
browswer stops on "looking up host....."
Can anyonr help me ?
------------------------------
From: "Kostis Kaggelides" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: HELP Needed Bandwidth management Tool for slow connection ?
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 22:40:38 +0300
Greeting to Linux community,
I use a linux box to connect our company's lan to the internet (suse
5.3, leased line 33.6 async, pppd). The mail server is on a different
machine . Squid runs on the linux to provide internet proxying.
The PROBLEM is that SMTP sessions timeout mostly when large mails are sent .
This is mostly due to the fact that there is a lot of internet traffic which
seems to get all the bandwith (after all squid runs on the router). The
obvious solution would be to upgrade connection but it costs and it is not
the solution since internet browsing traffic is just going to get bigger. I
really don't want to filter user access on a time of day or size content
basis.
The solution should be a bandwidth management apps . Is there any ?
Any other ideas ?
Thanks a lot in advance
Kostis
Gnomon Informatics
------------------------------
From: David Peavey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: athome.users-unix
Subject: VPN through Linux IP-Masquerade
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 17:44:00 GMT
I finally got my home network connected to ATHOME through my
linux (running Red-Hat 5.2) box using IP-Masquerading. I have
3 computers on a LAN connected to my Linux box. The Linux box
(having 2 NIC's) is the only machine connected to the internet
(it goes to my cable modem). (One NIC to my LAN, One NIC to my
ISP's Cable modem).
But ever since I inserted the Linux box between my Win 95 machine
and the internet, my VPN to my company (where I work during the
day) doesn't work any more. It just sits there trying to log in
and finally fails - saying something like the server is not
resonding. I not talking about setting up a VPN TO my linux box
- I need to connect my Microslop WIN95 machine to another machine
(WIN NT I think) on the other side of the internet THROUGH the my
IP firewall (aka Masquerade).
Has anybody gotten a VPN to work through Linux Masquerading? Do
I need to set my ipfwadm differently? My ipfwadm is very
simple. It is:
ipfwadm -F -p deny
ipfwadm -F -a m -S my.local.lan.address/24 -D 0.0.0.0/0
I spoke to my Networking professor and he doubted that it would
work saying something about the VPN dealing with the IP
layer?!?!? I really need this VPN to work as I do a lot of work
at home and need access to the company network resources. If I
can't get VPN working, I will probably have to tear down my
IP-Masquerade. :-(
Thanks in advance,
David
------------------------------
From: "Andrew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: athome.users-unix
Subject: Re: VPN through Linux IP-Masquerade
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 18:56:33 GMT
Hi,
I am no expert because I haven't done it yet.... BUT what you want is port
forwarding.
Your VPN works on a certain port (or a few ports)
The problem is now that port is connected to your Linux box and not on your
Windows box behind it.
What you need to do then, is to find out what port(s) your VPN requires and
forward them to your Windows machine.
I think:
If you are using Kernel <2.2 you want IPAUTOFW
If you are using Kernel 2.2 or greater you want IP Chains.
I am pretty sure you can do an even nicer job with SSH. It can encrypt and
compress the information going across your link. (which should make it extra
nice and secure)
Like I said, I haven't got around to doing this quite yet... If someone else
has, by all means please post and share the wealth.
Andrew
>I finally got my home network connected to ATHOME through my
>linux (running Red-Hat 5.2) box using IP-Masquerading. I have
>3 computers on a LAN connected to my Linux box. The Linux box
>(having 2 NIC's) is the only machine connected to the internet
>(it goes to my cable modem). (One NIC to my LAN, One NIC to my
>ISP's Cable modem).
>
>But ever since I inserted the Linux box between my Win 95 machine
>and the internet, my VPN to my company (where I work during the
>day) doesn't work any more. It just sits there trying to log in
>and finally fails - saying something like the server is not
>resonding. I not talking about setting up a VPN TO my linux box
>- I need to connect my Microslop WIN95 machine to another machine
>(WIN NT I think) on the other side of the internet THROUGH the my
>IP firewall (aka Masquerade).
>
>Has anybody gotten a VPN to work through Linux Masquerading? Do
>I need to set my ipfwadm differently? My ipfwadm is very
>simple. It is:
>
>ipfwadm -F -p deny
>ipfwadm -F -a m -S my.local.lan.address/24 -D 0.0.0.0/0
>
>I spoke to my Networking professor and he doubted that it would
>work saying something about the VPN dealing with the IP
>layer?!?!? I really need this VPN to work as I do a lot of work
>at home and need access to the company network resources. If I
>can't get VPN working, I will probably have to tear down my
>IP-Masquerade. :-(
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>David
------------------------------
From: Mark Topham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: athome.users-unix
Subject: Re: VPN through Linux IP-Masquerade
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 19:27:24 GMT
I had it working before a harddrive failure corrupted my firewall
system. I haven't yet restored it to full function. (Partly because the
configuration on the firewall wasn't perfect and now I'm running into a
minor LILO problem (refuses to boot to the HD, using a floppy to boot at
the moment.).
The problem with VPN, specifically Microsoft's implementation is it runs
at the IP layer, not TCP or UDP. By default ipfw doesn't work with these
packets. There is a patch available to fix it, you apply the patch and
your set... well, actually your not. Because Microsoft fucked up
again... there is a nasty, non obvious catch that prevented me from
having it work for a long while. You must also enable your firewall to
forward packets. (Not great I know, but I'll explain why...). It seems
some of the packets Intended for the other end of the VPN connection
have the *WRONG* IP address. They have the IP address of your half of
the VPN connection but those particular packets must be sent over the
Internet and not through the tunnel. If your firewall is configured like
mine you must change it to allow forwarding and, specifically to keep
security reasonably high, the particular address range for your VPN.
Feel free to send me email if you need the specifics, I'm currently not
in linux on this machine and the patch isn't on my firewall. SO I don't
remember the full name of the patch, nor have it assessable at the
moment. A quick scan of the net should turn it up though, that is how I
found it. I specifically had it working with RH5.1.
The 2.2 kernels use IPchains and, as I understand, do not suffer from
the same problem as IPfwadm. Personally I think I'm going to go with RH6
when it is released in a few days. (it is due Monday isn't it?) with the
new kernel.
David Peavey wrote:
> I finally got my home network connected to ATHOME through my
> linux (running Red-Hat 5.2) box using IP-Masquerading. I have
> 3 computers on a LAN connected to my Linux box. The Linux box
> (having 2 NIC's) is the only machine connected to the internet
> (it goes to my cable modem). (One NIC to my LAN, One NIC to my
> ISP's Cable modem).
>
> But ever since I inserted the Linux box between my Win 95 machine
> and the internet, my VPN to my company (where I work during the
> day) doesn't work any more. It just sits there trying to log in
> and finally fails - saying something like the server is not
> resonding. I not talking about setting up a VPN TO my linux box
> - I need to connect my Microslop WIN95 machine to another machine
> (WIN NT I think) on the other side of the internet THROUGH the my
> IP firewall (aka Masquerade).
>
> Has anybody gotten a VPN to work through Linux Masquerading? Do
> I need to set my ipfwadm differently? My ipfwadm is very
> simple. It is:
>
> ipfwadm -F -p deny
> ipfwadm -F -a m -S my.local.lan.address/24 -D 0.0.0.0/0
>
> I spoke to my Networking professor and he doubted that it would
> work saying something about the VPN dealing with the IP
> layer?!?!? I really need this VPN to work as I do a lot of work
> at home and need access to the company network resources. If I
> can't get VPN working, I will probably have to tear down my
> IP-Masquerade. :-(
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> David
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pekka Savola)
Subject: Re: Can the default message of telnet be modified?
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 19:53:20 GMT
>+--------------------------------------------------------+
>Red Hat Linux release 5.2 (Apollo)
>Kernel 2.0.36 on an i586
>+--------------------------------------------------------+
>
>Did anyone know how can I replace that message to my faviour one or
>disable that message?
Try
/etc/issue and /etc/issue.net
Pekka Savola pekkas at netcore dot fi
---
Across the nations the stories spread like spiderweb laid upon spiderweb,
and men and women planned the future, believing they knew truth. They
planned, and the Pattern absorbed their plans, weaving toward the future
foretold. -- Robert Jordan: The Path of Daggers
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pekka Savola)
Subject: Re: Can ping "localhost" but can't ping my own IP...why?
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 19:54:58 GMT
> I can ping localhost on my linux server but I can't ping it own ip
>(192.168.100.4). During the installation process, redhat (5.2) detected my
>network card without any problem. I entered the ip I wanna have but can't
>ping it. Why? Any idea? Tanx.
You haven't set up routes properly or the device isn't configured
properly.
Try:
ifconfig 192.168.100.4 eth0
route add -net 192.168.100.0 eth0
Pekka Savola pekkas at netcore dot fi
---
Across the nations the stories spread like spiderweb laid upon spiderweb,
and men and women planned the future, believing they knew truth. They
planned, and the Pattern absorbed their plans, weaving toward the future
foretold. -- Robert Jordan: The Path of Daggers
------------------------------
From: Newman Sze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Change group name
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:46:21 -0400
Hi there,
I have installed Linux to a PC which connected to LAN. When I browsed
the network
with windows 95 'Network Neighborhood', I saw my Linux box belonged to a
group
called Mygroup. I thought that may be the default group name. However, I
want to
change it to another group. I have tried linuxconfig but could not
figure out how to
do it.
I would greatly appreciate it if anybody could tell me how to change it.
Thank you very much!
Newman
------------------------------
From: "Stefan Monnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NFS update delay
Date: 24 Apr 1999 16:06:33 -0400
>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Richards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We're having the same problem with the same setup (RH5.2+updates, 2.2.5,
> 100baseT, SMP). From what I have been able to determine updates seem to be
> occuring every 12 seconds so the delay is somewhere between 0 and 12 seconds
> but can be up to 30s under some circumstances. If the client is a 2.0.3x
> machine the delay is usually less than 1 second. Using solaris as the client
> also leads to sub-second delays.
I've definitely seen similar problems on Solaris and Irix. Maybe less
often, tho. The thing is that those are not really "bugs" in the sense
that they are still fully within the NFS specs: NFSv2 requires that
any changes be propagated to the server within 3 seconds and that a
cached file not be more than 30s older than the most recent version on
the server. So it can theoretically take up to 33s to transfer the update
from one client to another.
So, yes, NFSv2 has really weak consistency guarantees.
Now, the fact that such slow propagations are often seen on Linux may
indeed be due to a bug, but maybe not. It might just be a (mis)feature.
Stefan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim LaSalle)
Subject: can't locate module eth1
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 20:19:09 GMT
I am still trying to get RH 5.2 Linux to recognize a second NIC.
I added append = "ether=0,0,eth1" to lilo.conf and ran lilo
When I reboot these messages appear:
modprobe: can't locate module eth1
Delaying eth1 initialization
Do I have to recompile? Both cards are the same NE-2000 compatible
cards. One is set to 0x300, IRQ10 the other to 0x320, IRQ5. These
resourses have no conflicts. The only difference is one card's
tranceiver is setup for 10baseT the other for 10base2. The eth0
device works fine. It can see and be seen by the network.
I have not progressed to the point where I can assign an IP to the
second NIC
------------------------------
From: "v4cal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Samba
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 14:01:02 -0700
Is there a graphic version of samba
if so where would i get it and what is it called
I am useing KDE on linux and i want to give access to differant users in my
network to devernt parts of my net work
i would like to know haw to do that and is there a easy why of doing it and
if so haw
Norbert
------------------------------
From: Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: win98 - linux best solution?
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 21:02:07 GMT
I have an old PCI card by SIIG. They don't make those cards anymore, but
it seems to work well with both linux and windows 98. It uses the RTL8029
chip. I just bought the SMC EZ Card 10/100 and then someone gave me
another PCI NIC with the RTL8029 chip. The SMC didn't configure (my
fault?) and I pulled it and replaced it with the gift card. Upon booting,
RedHat just configured it and it works. Use the ne2k-pci.o driver. Need I
say more?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I plan to connect 2 computers at home at 100mB speed via network card.
>
> which brand is most cost effective and reliable?, I am relatively new to
> linux.
>
> thanks,
>
> --
> ====
> Gregory Chang
> USC
> Glendale, CA
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FLOPPY
Date: 24 Apr 99 20:47:36 GMT
>how can i use my floppy drive under REDHAT 5.2
>
>i tried : mount /mnt/floppy
>
>(but then i have a ERROR ,unknown FS)
under redhat 5.x the first floppy drive is called /dev/fd0, i'm
not sure if /dev/fd0 is listed in your fstab or not. Either way
try
mkdir /floppy
mount /dev/fd0 /floppy
------------------------------
From: Lin Zhi-Ming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Networking errors with Kernel 2.2.6
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 13:09:46 -0400
Thanks for letting me know about that. I actually forgot to upgrade some
programmes but nonetheless the services are still *not* working.
Do you have any other ideas?
Sincerely,
Lin Zhi-Ming ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Pekka Savola wrote:
> >Since the installation of the 2.2.6 kernel several services fail to
> >work. While initialising (running the init files in /sbin/init.d) three
> >services fail, namely route, rpc, and nfsserver. I get the following
> >error messages:
> >
> >Do you guys have any ideas?
>
> Didn�t you read the documentation that came with 2.2 kernel? You
> need to upgrade (possibly) dozens of pieces of software so that
> nothing will break. It looks very likely you have too old versions of
> nettools, nfs etc.
>
> Check /usr/src/linux/Documentation/Changes.
>
> Pekka Savola pekkas at netcore dot fi
> ---
> Across the nations the stories spread like spiderweb laid upon spiderweb,
> and men and women planned the future, believing they knew truth. They
> planned, and the Pattern absorbed their plans, weaving toward the future
> foretold. -- Robert Jordan: The Path of Daggers
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: slow ethernet
Date: 24 Apr 99 17:05:17 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rahul wrote:
>I have the exact same problem .... only I don't know what
>could I possibly have done..... I replaced my ethernet card,
>reinstalled win 98 .... god I have no clue what the hell is wrong!!
>I am getting the same 8kbps max on my intranet as well !!
>I've been searching for a solution for months now .... if you
>happen to find something please tell me and vice versa!
if your running old ISA cards, there is the possibilty of an IRQ/base port
address conflict between the cards. Did you manually configure the said
parameters or are the cards in PnP mode?
Also, your computer's internal data bus may be saturated with data. Are you
perhaps playing some mp3s off a cdrom in the background while you try to
move data around between machines on your LAN? Is there a lot of traffic
on your LAN, like someone on your LAN segment running multimedia apps across
the wire?
I realize that the following probably isn't your problem. But an old 386
box running linux will probably have a max throughput around 8kbps. Also
many 386 boxes have a UART that maxes out at 9600baud, so if you want to
make a cheap proxy IPMasq box out of spare parts use a 486.
>>I have two computers, one running linux and one running win98.
>>Together they make up a network, the linux using a 3Com 3C503 and the win98
>>using a NE2000. I just to get transfer rates around 800kb/s, but after I
>>reinstalled the drivers on the win98 box (no other config changes) the
>>transfer rate when I receive from the linux box is about 8kb/s and when I
>>send to it about 800kb/s. I have tried almost everything, but I can't
>figure
>>out what can be wrong.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: auto.home
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 21:07:55 GMT
I'm having a bad time trying to get autofs to work with NIS. The NIS part
works okay. I can use just plain old NFS to mount the users home directories,
and that works fine. But I want to mount the users home directories with
autofs using auto.home, and it doesn't work. Can someone give me a copy of
auto.home that does work so I can see what one is supposed to look like for
sure. I've got my set like this right now:
#auto.home
theuser -rw,intr thenismaster:/export/home
and then auto.master, of course, says:
/test /etc/auto.home
and then I do a make in /var/yp and the auto.home and auto.master maps get
made and sent out. And on my master server a /test directory automagically
appears after I run /etc/rc.d/init.d/autofs restart, but there's nothing in
it. Same on my slaves. And the users home directories don't get mounted. They
can log in, but with the usual "no home directory, etc." So what gives?
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: Alex Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,alt.linux
Subject: HELP URGENT! - Kaffe with JServ
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 13:29:21 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HELP!
I am trying to evalute Linux for my boss, because they are considering
switching from NT. Alot of our stuff runs as servlets. I have got
JServ working fine with the blackdown port and TYA, but I can't see to
get it to work with Kaffe.
If anyone has any ideas, please mail me ASAP!
Yours
Alex Turner ([EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED])
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Byron A Jeff)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.portable
Subject: Re: HDD Spindown - For a Year!
Date: 24 Apr 1999 17:27:45 -0400
Posted and Mailed to David.
In article <7fg0pb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
David Peavey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-I have an application whereby I would like to use a Linux machine as a
-network gateway. This particular function requires a very high Mean time
-between failures (MTBF) - I.E. 10 years without failure. I would like to
-set it up to powered up, with the necessary things loaded, and then left ..
-possibly forever. I would like to be able to run the thing for upwards of a
-YEAR or so without needing the HDD. Basically, the only time that the HDD
-would be required is for boot up when power returns after a power failure.
-I would turn off all CRON functions that access the HDD. Any error or event
-logging could be buffered locally (for example in a ram drive) and then sent
-to a remote Monitor and Control system periodically (Say once per hour or
-once per day). As far as I can tell, I don't believe the software apps need
-the HDD once they're loaded.
-
You need a change in perception here. You have an applications that doesn't
need a hard disk at all.
-My questions are:
-1) Can Linux run without the primary HDD spinning? (I would imagine so
-since laptops can run Linux - but for how long?)
Linux can run without a hard disk. Simply set up the system to boot off a
floppy, CDROM, or ZIP , and set up a ram disk. On boot load the entire
system into the ramdisk from the boot media and run the system from the
RAMDISK. The boot media need not be accessed again until the next boot.
Another possibility is have a machine that loads off of a Flash disk or
even boots from the network. Then you'd have no moving parts at all except
the power supply fans.
You probably don't want a HD at all here because it has worse MTBF than
the other media.
-2) If so, what are the implications of the swap file (could I replace it
-with a ram disk?), and
No swap. Slap enough RAM into the system so that it never swaps.
-3) how could the the proc file system be handled (another ram disk?)
It's virtual. Doesn't really exist.
-4) Is there a s/w application (or LINUX configuration) that spins down the
-HDD on command or after a timeout?
hdparm. But I tell you it's best to build a system without a hard disk at all.
BAJ
-
-Any discussion on this would be greatly appreciated.
-
-
-
------------------------------
From: Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: RealTek RTL 8029 PCI Ethernet Driver
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 21:30:38 GMT
Iain Campbell wrote:
> Is there one ? Is there a compatible one?
> (For RedHat 5.2)
>
> Is there a Santa Claus ???
>
> TIA
>
> iain
>
> --
> Iain Campbell - Senior Associate
>
> sandon associates 520 Second Street West Owen Sound On
> Tel (519) 371-6242 FAX (519) 371-4417 email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
When I installed Mandrake 5.3 (Redhat 5.2 with KDE) recently, my RTL8029
worked right away with the ne2k-pci.o driver file. I installed another
RTL8029 NIC a few days later and upon booting the card was recognized
and working right away. Sometimes luck is all you need.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
