[SLUG] One and a half weeks left for linux.conf.au 2009 CFP

[Mary Gardiner]

Hi all,



I know the originally CFP didn't clearly specify a closing date, the
organisers have since provided more CFP information at:
http://linux.conf.au/programme/presenter_faq and the closing date is
Friday 8th August. One and a half weeks left...



http://linux.conf.au/media/news/6

Linux.conf.au - Hobart Conference 2009 Opens Call for Papers

Linux.conf.au has announced the opening of the call for papers on
Friday 4th July 2008, giving the open source software community the
chance to present at one of the world's premier technical conferences.

Hobart TAS, Australia-- (4th July 2008)  The call for papers will
remain open for a month, after which the best papers will be selected
by an expert panel.

Ben Powell, President of the Tasmanian Linux Users Group, says the
10th annual Linux.conf.au is expected to attract influential speakers
from the international and local technical Linux and Open Source
communities.

"This is the first time that the conference has been held in Hobart
and given the unique location, and that it is celebrating its 10th
anniversary this year, we expect to see significant interest from
local and international speakers and delegates," said Mr Powell.

It is expected that over 100 speakers will be chosen to present at the
Hobart conference from a large pool of international and local
submissions.

"The conference provides a unique opportunity for Tasmanians to
discuss their ideas on an international stage, and for business to
support IT innovation," said Mr Powell.

“This year's Linux conference is expected to bring 700 delegates to
the Tasmania to enjoy one of Australia's premiere technical
conferences, with presentations by many of the leading experts in free
and open source software.

"The conference also provides an opportunity to showcase Tasmania to
the world's technical community, with many delegates keen to take in
Tasmania's famous food, wine and beautiful scenery during their stay.

"Previous years' conferences have seen up to 100 influential
international and national speakers from major IT companies and
projects, with submissions for the opportunity to speak at Australia's
internationally renowned event growing every year," said Mr Powell.

The conference will also present the best of open source software with
presentations, displays and hands-on demonstrations at the conference
free public Open Day for the Tasmanian technical industry and general
community.

"We expect to see a number of our own local speakers feature in the
lineup, so this will be a great opportunity for our own IT community
to really shine on the international stage," said Mr Powell.

Linux.conf.au, the National Linux Conference, will be held January
19-24 in Hobart at the University of Tasmania. More information about
the paper submission process can be found at http://www.linux.conf.au.

Businesses can support Linux.conf.au by visiting the website
http://linux.conf.au/become_a_sponsor

Media enquiries: Linux.conf.au on +61 432 996 932 or
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

- End forwarded message -
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

[SLUG] Re: missing drived in /proc/partitions ?

[Grant Parnell]

Grant Parnell wrote:

Er... this machine theoretically can't be running!

Platform, Ubuntu Hardy Server x86-64.


[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# cat /proc/partitions
major minor  #blocks  name

   9 0 104320 md0
   9 1   15631168 md1
   9 24891712 md2
   9 3 987840 md3
   9 4 987840 md4
   9 51959808 md5
   9 6  463820544 md6
   832  156290904 sdc
   833  156288352 sdc1
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] 
[raid4] [raid10]

md6 : active raid1 sdb8[1]
  463820544 blocks [2/1] [_U]

md5 : active raid1 sdb7[1]
  1959808 blocks [2/1] [_U]

md4 : active raid1 sda6[0] sdb6[1]
  987840 blocks [2/2] [UU]

md3 : active raid1 sda5[0] sdb5[2](F)
  987840 blocks [2/1] [U_]

md2 : active raid1 sda3[0] sdb3[1]
  4891712 blocks [2/2] [UU]

md1 : active raid1 sda2[0] sdb2[1]
  15631168 blocks [2/2] [UU]

md0 : active raid1 sda1[0] sdb1[1]
  104320 blocks [2/2] [UU]

unused devices: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~#



Just to follow up on this, it did get worse!
By the time we got to the customer's site to look at it essentially both 
drives had gone awol. Even the BIOS did not report them present.
Strangely when I took the system home last night I didn't have that 
problem. We measured the juice on-site and it varied from 190V to 247V 
AC yet their other computers didn't complain.


There's some anomalies in the attached and commented log extract though.
In particular, even though we didn't change ATA ports (although I may 
have swapped the two drives between the ports we did use). Yesterday we 
were getting errors on ata3: and ata4: and yet later it was on ata2: so 
WTF is with that?


Plus... so far on every SATA system I've got I've had SATA errors of 
SOME kind and things keep running normally so I'm finding it hard to 
tell what's of concern and what's not.


Anyway hopefully some SATA guru can tell me down the track.

For those that want a look at how a raid array dies view the attached 
file with zless.





summary.log.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

[SLUG] Re: Opinions pls on best/easiest setup Groupware suite.

[whitemice]

> Someone asked why my preference for MailDir over MBox. To my thinking,

But it isn't MailDir vs. MBox.  Cyrus doesn't use either;  the
internal structure resembled maildir but with an index component that
facilitates *extremely* good performance.

> MBox is one big file much like an Outlook .pst in that sense. MailDir is

PST isn't like MBox at all,  PST has internal indexes and is page
based.  Not that PST doesn't stink like road-kill, but comparing it to
MBox isn't very meaningful or accurate.

> file-per-message. Surely that's less network/server overhead when
> logging on.

I completely agree that MBox is horrible.

> And yes, direct spool access on occasion is, imho, a good
> safety net.

Cyrus provides excellent tools for restoring, manipulating, and
repairing the mail store.
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Opinions pls on best/easiest setup Groupware suite.

[Daniel Pittman]

Kyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

[... groupware ...]

> As mentioned, I "would like" to contiune to use T'Bird and Lightning
> with whichever solution, as the desktop access mechanism. But also
> have the web accessability when away from the office.

Ah, sorry.  I missed that.

> From my reading of both the Horde site, the Lightning extension for
> T'Bird and Zimbra, I shouldn't have any issues whichever way I choose,
> yes?

I couldn't say, as I don't have any particular experience with
Thunderbird as the client for these tools.  IMAP mail access should work
fine, but otherwise I can't help.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Opinions pls on best/easiest setup Groupware suite.

[Kyle]

I think I'm getting there.

As mentioned, I "would like" to contiune to use T'Bird and Lightning 
with whichever solution, as the desktop access mechanism. But also have 
the web accessability when away from the office.


From my reading of both the Horde site, the Lightning extension for 
T'Bird and Zimbra, I shouldn't have any issues whichever way I choose, yes?


Thanks again for the advice.


Kind Regards

Kyle



Daniel Pittman wrote:

Kyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
  

In short, I guess what I'm really looking for is something to set up
shared calendars, event/meeting invites and tasks for a single domain.



Any of the options discussed so far (Zimbra, OGo, or the web stuff) will
do that; the biggest decision to make next is what sort of client
support you want.

If "just web" is enough then you have a range of choices; if you want
more than that then you need to check each option, and the price, for
that.
  


So maybe, I don't really need groupware, but simply a shared calendar
resource (accessible over the web). 



I suggest the Horde framework; it sounds like it might well suit you,
and should work with your existing software deployment comfortably.


  

--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Opinions pls on best/easiest setup Groupware suite.

[Daniel Pittman]

Kyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Wow. Lots of opinions on this. And all good info, thank you.

It is a complex topic, and the range of users out there have wildly
different expectations.  That lends itself to long discussion. :)

> Having looked a little deeper and thought things through a little
> more, I can probably ask a better question. I found
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_collaborative_software which
> provides a lot of information, but more questions than answers.
>
> In short, I guess what I'm really looking for is something to set up
> shared calendars, event/meeting invites and tasks for a single domain.

Any of the options discussed so far (Zimbra, OGo, or the web stuff) will
do that; the biggest decision to make next is what sort of client
support you want.

If "just web" is enough then you have a range of choices; if you want
more than that then you need to check each option, and the price, for
that.

> I already have Postfix/Dovecot/Clamav/Spamassassin running. I need to
> maintain about 7 different email domains and have the users log in to
> each domain with separate accounts. (It's just nice to keep things
> separate.) And those mailboxes get pretty big over time.
>
> Someone asked why my preference for MailDir over MBox. 

Well, I asked why you specifically wanted *Maildir* compared to the
Cyrus spool format, which is not mbox.

> To my thinking, MBox is one big file much like an Outlook .pst in that
> sense. 

Well, except for being well documented and more or less standard.

> MailDir is file-per-message. Surely that's less network/server
> overhead when logging on. 

No, it makes absolutely no difference when logging on or, in fact, at
any time except for when you delete a message -- and potentially not
even then, with a well written mail server package.[1]

Mbox, in fact, puts lower demands on the OS: a large Maildir folder
makes for a very large directory, often with many very similar names.

This actually stresses the directory access algorithms quite a lot
compared to many other uses, and may make access far slower than
mbox.[2]


In the more specific case of my question, which was about Maildir vs the
Cyrus mail spool -- cyrus use an mh style spool with indexing -- is
because the Cyrus spool has the advantages of Maildir without the
drawbacks in terms of filename size...


> And yes, direct spool access on occasion is, imho, a good safety net.

Well, that probably sinks you.  Several of the tools are "one file per
email" storage, which I have found valuable, but you will need to find
something without integrated mail storage if you want to do anything but
browse the spool manually.

> So maybe, I don't really need groupware, but simply a shared calendar
> resource (accessible over the web). 

I suggest the Horde framework; it sounds like it might well suit you,
and should work with your existing software deployment comfortably.

> something that's not going to be _too heavy on resources.

You would have to define that: Zimbra is reasonably light, in my
experience, in that it will happily run a small installation on a
P4-2GHz with 2GB RAM.  (That is, ~ $700 of hardware these days.)

Horde, on the other hand, is lighter than that, in many cases, but
delivers less.  So, it really depends what you mean by "too heavy". 

Regards,
Daniel

Footnotes: 
[1]  ...you could find poorly written software that handles mbox less
 well, but none of the options discussed so far are in that
 category.

[2]  I base this on discovering a kernel performance glitch in early 2.6
 kernels and ext3, based on deleting an email from a large maildir
 spinning in the kernel for around 30 seconds, due to a 1MB
 directory on disk and sub-optimal choices by the developers in
 scanning it for the file to delete.



-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Opinions pls on best/easiest setup Groupware suite.

[Kyle]

Wow. Lots of opinions on this. And all good info, thank you.

Having looked a little deeper and thought things through a little more, 
I can probably ask a better question. I found 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_collaborative_software which 
provides a lot of information, but more questions than answers.


In short, I guess what I'm really looking for is something to set up 
shared calendars, event/meeting invites and tasks for a single domain.


I already have Postfix/Dovecot/Clamav/Spamassassin running. I need to 
maintain about 7 different email domains and have the users log in to 
each domain with separate accounts. (It's just nice to keep things 
separate.) And those mailboxes get pretty big over time.


Someone asked why my preference for MailDir over MBox. To my thinking, 
MBox is one big file much like an Outlook .pst in that sense. MailDir is 
file-per-message. Surely that's less network/server overhead when 
logging on. And yes, direct spool access on occasion is, imho, a good 
safety net.


So maybe, I don't really need groupware, but simply a shared calendar 
resource (accessible over the web).


something that's not going to be _too heavy on resources.



Kind Regards

Kyle


--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

[SLUG] Re: Opinions pls on best/easiest setup Groupware suite.

[whitemice]

> On an administrative note, was your email written with the OpenGroupware
> mail client?  Whatever tool you are using is randomly eating whitespace
> between words in my text, which leads to /very/ poor readability.

No,  I responded via Google's "Reply" button in Google Groups.  Wierd.

> > I certainly disgree about OGo's "semi-commercial" stature, but this
> > seems to be a common misconception.  There is nothing in the OGo
> > server's feature list you don't get if you check out the code from the
> > repository,
> OK.  That contrasts to Zimbra, where server-side features are also
> commercial, and explains your point of view effectively, I think.

Pretty much.  I think there is a real, and very pragmatic, distinction
between "the server" and "client applications".   Regardless of the
server anyone can license (or not) their client any which way they
want.

> > I *assume* that the notion that OGo isn't a truly Open Source project
> > came from the existence of the ZideLook (commercial) product [the
> > Outlook connector].
> My views came from the existence of commercial add-on products, and from
> the fact that the commercial vendor who (a) sells the Outlook client and
> (b) sells commercial versions of OGo is (well, was, and presumably still
> is) also a major contributor to the product in terms of person-hours.

Neither (a) or (b) are true.   Skyrix,the company that used to own
OpenGroupware, primarily takes the OGo codebase and produces their
InstantOGo product.  The line-of-code contributions from free / Open
Source developers quite significantly outnumbers that contributed by
Skyrix.   Skyrix's contributions in recent years have been very small.

Prior to 2003 OGo was a commercial product (like Netscape, Star
Office, etc...) and the connector was developed (on contract I
believe) between the OGo vendor and another organization.   The
organization that developed (and maintains?) the "old" connector
doesn't have any relationship with the OGo project.  One of developers
that works on OGo also works on the "new" [GroupDAV] connector, that
is the only connection with the "new" connector.  I've no idea who is
going to sell the new connector (or how it will be licensed) - there
really is only that tenuous a connection.

Skyrix still hosts the subversion and bugzilla servers.  Moving the
code repository to a code hosting service like Google Code is being
considered.

> In any case I didn't intend to suggest that the OGo server was not open
> source, and I am sorry my comments read that way.  

I'm just keen on disabusing the notion;  several others in other
places have made the assertion in much stonger term then you, so it is
an issue we've grown sensitive to.   You can imagine how irritating it
is to contribute, with others, a significant amount of time to an Open
Source project, do some [what you consider] interesting things, and
then have people accuse you of shilling a commercial product when
nobody has paid you anything.

Anyhow, I don't want to beat a dead horse and I think we agree 99%
anyway.
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: Opinions pls on best/easiest setup Groupware suite.

[Daniel Pittman]

whitemice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

On an administrative note, was your email written with the OpenGroupware
mail client?  Whatever tool you are using is randomly eating whitespace
between words in my text, which leads to /very/ poor readability.

>> >> OpenGroupware was technically very good when I reviewed it some time
>> >> ago, but I have not used it in production or looked at it in several
>> >> years.
>> > I'm an OpenGroupware developer, so my opinion is obvious.  We are
>> > currently working on making sure CalDAV (Sunbird) support is working
>> > smoothly.  And a new [commercial] Outlook connector is under
>> > development (pre-release soon) for any server that supports
>> > GroupDAV.

[...]

>> That said, while I would not dispute your comment on Scalix, the claim
>> that Zimbra is any less "Open Source" than OpenGroupware seems -- to
>> me -- to be a pretty hard claim to support.
>>
>> Both products seem to offer a selection of standard protocols, use
>> existingopen sourcecomponents, and provide a commercial version that
>> adds extra features including Outlook support.
>
> True, and Zimbra has certainly improved their openness.  You still
> have to get features like mobile device support (a server side
> feature) as a commercial product.  

*shrug*  OpenGroupware still make me pay for the Outlook integration;
while they may have selected different features to make commercial there
isn't much fundamental difference is business model, as far as I can
tell.

> And they use the ZPL/YPL licenses which are not OSI approved.

...but which has been, none the less, adapted sufficiently to meet
Fedora licensing requirements, which is either OSI approved, or meets
their standards for openness.

http://www.press.redhat.com/2008/07/24/zimbra-leverages-red-hat-exchange-to-navigate-license-issue/#more-439


>> As far as I can tell, from a licensing / open source perspective,
>> both Zimbra and OpenGroupware are equally "open" or "closed",
>> depending on how you count such things.
>>
>> You clearly disagree with this, from that statement, and I would be very
>> interested to know why you feel that way.  Specifically, I would be
>> happy to learn where I was mistaken in my assessment, and that might
>> well change the way I deal with recommendations in future.
>> (I would have described OpenGroupware as "semi-commercial" if I had been
>>  enthusiastic enough to annotate it, you see.)
>
> The position of Zimbra-is-"Open Source" can be argued either way.  
> I think it isn't.
>
> I certainly disgree about OGo's "semi-commercial" stature, but this
> seems to be a common misconception.  There is nothing in the OGo
> server's feature list you don't get if you check out the code from the
> repository, 

OK.  That contrasts to Zimbra, where server-side features are also
commercial, and explains your point of view effectively, I think.

[...]

> Hopefully the fact that the Outlook connector supports multiple-
> servers will break the notion that OGo's open-source server is some
> kind of straw-man for a commercial product (it isn't).

I certainly wasn't trying to set up a straw-man argument; I was working
from the readily available information I had, and my experience with the
product some years ago.

> I *assume* that the notion that OGo isn't a truly Open Source project
> came from the existence of the ZideLook (commercial) product [the
> Outlook connector].

My views came from the existence of commercial add-on products, and from
the fact that the commercial vendor who (a) sells the Outlook client and
(b) sells commercial versions of OGo is (well, was, and presumably still
is) also a major contributor to the product in terms of person-hours.


In any case I didn't intend to suggest that the OGo server was not open
source, and I am sorry my comments read that way.  

I do still believe that it, like Zimbra, is a satisfactorily "open
source" project with commercial addenda that fund the company or
companies that contribute to the suite.

I also believe that this is a good thing, in case that was not clear. :)

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

[SLUG] Re: Opinions pls on best/easiest setup Groupware suite.

[whitemice]

> >> OpenGroupware was technically very good when I reviewed it some time
> >> ago, but I have not used it in production or looked at it in several
> >> years.
> > I'm an OpenGroupware developer, so my opinion is obvious.  We are
> > currently working on making sure CalDAV (Sunbird) support is working
> > smoothly.  And a new [commercial] Outlook connector is under
> > development (pre-release soon) for any server that supports GroupDAV.
> It is good to hear that the bridges into other protocols continue to
> develop.  I would certainly review OpenGroupware again if the issue came
> up, since having something completely open would be nice.
> [...]
> >> [2]  Commercial, sorry.
> >> [3]  Semi-commercial, sorry.
> > Yep.  It is irritating to those of us who work on reallyOpen Source
> >groupwareservers to have products like Zimbra and Scalix constantly
> > injected into the discussion ofOpen Sourcegroupwareservers.
> Well, this discussion wasn't about "Open Source"groupwareservers, it
> was about "best/easiest setup"groupwareservers, as per the original
> poster.

Right, wasn't meaning that.  Just that this issue comes up allot.  It
also depends on what someone means my "open";  often people use
"open" (as in using open standards, etc...) and "Open Source"
interchangebly,  when they aren't.

> That said, while I would not dispute your comment on Scalix, the claim
> that Zimbra is any less "Open Source" than OpenGroupware seems -- to
> me -- to be a pretty hard claim to support.
> Both products seem to offer a selection of standard protocols, use
> existingopen sourcecomponents, and provide a commercial version that
> adds extra features including Outlook support.

True, and Zimbra has certainly improved their openness.  You still
have to get features like mobile device support (a server side
feature) as a commercial product.  And they use the ZPL/YPL licenses
which are not OSI approved.

> As far as I can tell, from a licensing /open sourceperspective, both
> Zimbra and OpenGroupware are equally "open" or "closed", depending on
> how you count such things.
> You clearly disagree with this, from that statement, and I would be very
> interested to know why you feel that way.  Specifically, I would be
> happy to learn where I was mistaken in my assessment, and that might
> well change the way I deal with recommendations in future.
> (I would have described OpenGroupware as "semi-commercial" if I had been
>  enthusiastic enough to annotate it, you see.)

The position of Zimbra-is-"Open Source" can be argued either way.  I
think it isn't.

I certainly disgree about OGo's "semi-commercial" stature, but this
seems to be a common misconception.  There is nothing in the OGo
server's feature list you don't get if you check out the code from the
repository,  every feature is there and you can setup one user or one
thousand users.   All the code is either GPL or LGPL (OSI approved
licenses).   There are commercial packages of OGo which makes sense
since as a product it is aimed at the business market (not many
individuals are going to be interested in a groupware server).  But
building such packages is certainly permitted under the GPL.  You can
get commercial setup of OGo from multiple sources (Skyrix, MD-Link,
and Whitemice Consulting, just to name three).

The [OGo] Outlook connector isn't maintained by the project or really
event attached to the project,  it was developed by a third-party.
The new GroupDAV Outlook connector is developed by some of the same
people and should work with OpenXchange, SOGo, Citadel and any other
server that supports GroupDAV (as does OGo).  It is just an
unfortunate pragmatic fact that Outlook connectors are going to be
proprietary things due to licensing, testing, and toolchain costs.
Note that I'm not involved in the development of the connector in any
way,  I just communicate with some of the people working on it.
Hopefully the fact that the Outlook connector supports multiple-
servers will break the notion that OGo's open-source server is some
kind of straw-man for a commercial product (it isn't).   I *assume*
that the notion that OGo isn't a truly Open Source project came from
the existence of the ZideLook (commercial) product [the Outlook
connector].

OpenGroupware provides mobile device support via a GroupDAV connector
(Open Source) for Funambol (Open Source, developed by BIONIC Message).

As an aside, I'll freely admit that OGo is probably not going to be
most point-and-click install product;  probably not by a long shot
[ unless you are using OpenSUSE,  the distro I test on :) ]   But I
think the openness of the project and its focus on open protocols and
a robust API are unique features.   To get the most benefit groupware
shouldn't be viewed as a collection of [integrated] applications but
as a platform,  which is where OGo stands about.  Especially with our
new zOGI API  so you can built your
own clients and integrate with your Intranet/Extranet

Re: [SLUG] mii-tool or ethtool ?

[Jeff Waugh]

> Anyone ever had mii-tool and ethtool tell them different things? As you
> can see the duplex setting is being reported differently (this is a
> Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme II BCM5706 Gigabit Ethernet (rev 02)). Does
> anyone know of another method to check the Duplex setting so I can verify
> which one is correct?

ethtool is the preferred and more modern [1] of the two.

- Jeff

[1] Open Source translation: someone actually maintains the sucker. ;-)

-- 
OSDC 2008: Sydney, Australiahttp://www.osdc.com.au/2008/
 
 make: *** No rule to make target `whoopee'.  Stop.
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] mii-tool or ethtool ?

[daveg]

Quoting Tony Sceats <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


Anyone ever had mii-tool and ethtool tell them different things? As you can
see the duplex setting is being reported differently (this is a Broadcom
Corporation NetXtreme II BCM5706 Gigabit Ethernet (rev 02)). Does anyone
know of another method to check the Duplex setting so I can verify which one
is correct?


From my experience ethtool is always correct and mii-tool comes back  
with random results (run "watch mii-tool" to see what I mean).


--
dave.

--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

[SLUG] mii-tool or ethtool ?

[Tony Sceats]

Hi Sluggers,

Anyone ever had mii-tool and ethtool tell them different things? As you can
see the duplex setting is being reported differently (this is a Broadcom
Corporation NetXtreme II BCM5706 Gigabit Ethernet (rev 02)). Does anyone
know of another method to check the Duplex setting so I can verify which one
is correct?

(btw, I had changed the settings using mii-tool)

# ethtool eth0
Settings for eth0:
Supported ports: [ TP ]
Supported link modes:   10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full
1000baseT/Full
Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
Advertised link modes:  Not reported
Advertised auto-negotiation: No
Speed: 100Mb/s
Duplex: Half
Port: Twisted Pair
PHYAD: 1
Transceiver: internal
Auto-negotiation: off
Supports Wake-on: g
Wake-on: d
Link detected: yes
# mii-tool -v eth0
eth0: 100 Mbit, full duplex, link ok
  product info: vendor 00:08:18, model 21 rev 2
  basic mode:   100 Mbit, full duplex
  basic status: link ok
  capabilities: 100baseTx-FD 100baseTx-HD 10baseT-FD 10baseT-HD
  advertising:  100baseTx-FD 100baseTx-HD 10baseT-FD 10baseT-HD flow-control
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html