On 02/09/2013 04:26, Joseph wrote:
> On 09/01/13 08:50, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>> On 01/09/2013 05:27, Joseph wrote:
>>> On 08/31/13 19:10, Joseph wrote:
After recent upgrade I'm getting an error when trying to start the
virtualbox.
Failed to access the USB subsystem.
Could n
On Sunday 01 Sep 2013 20:18:54 you wrote:
> On Sunday 01 Sep 2013 19:25:45 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > Just to confirm, this is vapier's overlay you are using? Not niifaq?
>
> Yes, this is vapier's overlay.
I think I got to the bottom of it.
I reinstalled layman and all errors seem to have gone fo
On Sun, Sep 01, 2013 at 01:41:30PM +0800, Mark David Dumlao wrote
> Case in point - do you enable all the ext4 options, like acls and
> whatnot? Let's say no.
>
> What if you suddenly have to mount an external hard disk to
> recover some system on your server and the hard disk uses those ext4
> o
On Sep 2, 2013 5:21 AM, "Walter Dnes" wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 01, 2013 at 09:49:23AM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote
> > Walter Dnes wrote:
> >
> > > You can get away with most stuff as modules; ***BUT NOT THE ROOT
> > > FILESYSTEM***. Think about it for a minute. Gentoo reads modules off
> > > t
On Sun, Sep 01, 2013 at 10:11:01AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote
> You don't, it is only *required* if you have a separate /usr... in fact
> that is what the whole argument was about.
>
> At least that is my understanding of the situation now... please don't
> tell me I'm wrong and there was another v
On 09/01/13 08:50, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On 01/09/2013 05:27, Joseph wrote:
On 08/31/13 19:10, Joseph wrote:
After recent upgrade I'm getting an error when trying to start the
virtualbox.
Failed to access the USB subsystem.
Could not load the Host USB Proxy service: VERR_NOT_FOUND.
Details:
Re
On Sun, Sep 01, 2013 at 09:49:23AM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote
> Walter Dnes wrote:
>
> > You can get away with most stuff as modules; ***BUT NOT THE ROOT
> > FILESYSTEM***. Think about it for a minute. Gentoo reads modules off
> > the disk. If the code for the root filesystem is a module,
On Sunday 01 Sep 2013 19:25:45 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> That overlay hasn't been manifested properly, the checksums and file
> sizes don't match. You have two options:
>
> redigest every ebuild in the entire overlay
I wasn't going to do this, given that one machine is happy.
> resync and hope it'
On Sunday 01 Sep 2013 19:50:53 Grant wrote:
> >> So the culprit is the first IP that should appear in the list but
> >> doesn't? If so, how is that helpful since it's not displayed?
> >
> > This is where it gets tricky. You identify the last router in the list
> > for which you have an address o
On Sunday 01 Sep 2013 18:54:45 Grant wrote:
> >> OK, does PMTUD lower the outgoing packet size on my system due to the
> >> hotel router's lower MTU or does the hotel router itself fragment my
> >> 1500 byte packets in order to send them out? Just curious.
> >
> > If you are sending out packets w
> My laptop can't ping my remote system but it can ping others
> (google.com, yahoo.com, etc). I've tried disabling my firewall on
> both ends with '/etc/init.d/shorewall stop && shorewall clear'. Could
> my AT&T business ADSL connection on the remote system be blo
On 01/09/2013 20:07, Grant wrote:
My laptop can't ping my remote system but it can ping others
(google.com, yahoo.com, etc). I've tried disabling my firewall on
both ends with '/etc/init.d/shorewall stop && shorewall clear'. Could
my AT&T business ADSL connecti
Am 01.09.2013 20:16, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
> On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
>> Some syntax error in line 26 as far as syntax highlighting in vim tells
>> me ... everything red from down there ... but it works ...
>
> Well, a proper editor, like Emacs, highligh
That overlay hasn't been manifested properly, the checksums and file
sizes don't match. You have two options:
redigest every ebuild in the entire overlay
resync and hope it's fixed (maybe report a bug)
Just to confirm, this is vapier's overlay you are using? Not niifaq?
I recall manifest problem
On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> Am 01.09.2013 19:30, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
>
>> I have been using it in all of my machines for some days now, and it
>> works for me; but I take no responsibility if it breaks your machine,
>> or if it kills your dog.
>
> So far
>>> My laptop can't ping my remote system but it can ping others
>>> (google.com, yahoo.com, etc). I've tried disabling my firewall on
>>> both ends with '/etc/init.d/shorewall stop && shorewall clear'. Could
>>> my AT&T business ADSL connection on the remote system be blocking
>>
>> > My laptop can't ping my remote system but it can ping others
>> > (google.com, yahoo.com, etc). I've tried disabling my firewall on
>> > both ends with '/etc/init.d/shorewall stop && shorewall clear'.
>> > Could my AT&T business ADSL connection on the remote system be
>> >
Am 01.09.2013 19:30, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
> I have been using it in all of my machines for some days now, and it
> works for me; but I take no responsibility if it breaks your machine,
> or if it kills your dog.
So far the cat still lives ... your script worked fine here in the first
try.
>> OK, does PMTUD lower the outgoing packet size on my system due to the
>> hotel router's lower MTU or does the hotel router itself fragment my
>> 1500 byte packets in order to send them out? Just curious.
>
> If you are sending out packets with the DF bit set no fragmentation will take
> place -
On 01/09/2013 17:04, Grant wrote:
>> My laptop can't ping my remote system but it can ping others
>> (google.com, yahoo.com, etc). I've tried disabling my firewall on
>> both ends with '/etc/init.d/shorewall stop && shorewall clear'. Could
>> my AT&T business ADSL connection on th
I am following vanilla-sources in all my machines, which is what
people like Greg Kroah-Hartman actually recommends [1][2]. Since they
are now never stabilized [3], this means that I need to update them
pretty regularly to keep them safe.
This implies that I have to change the /usr/src/linux symbo
On Sunday 01 Sep 2013 17:17:37 Grant wrote:
> OK, does PMTUD lower the outgoing packet size on my system due to the
> hotel router's lower MTU or does the hotel router itself fragment my
> 1500 byte packets in order to send them out? Just curious.
If you are sending out packets with the DF bit s
On Sunday 01 Sep 2013 16:04:17 Grant wrote:
> > My laptop can't ping my remote system but it can ping others
> > (google.com, yahoo.com, etc). I've tried disabling my firewall on
> > both ends with '/etc/init.d/shorewall stop && shorewall clear'.
> > Could my AT&T business ADSL co
On Sunday 01 Sep 2013 15:45:05 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> What's the contents of the Manifest file in those two directories?
> What does "ls -al" say ebuild the supposedly faulty ebuilds?
>
> I also note the error reported in both cases is exactly 6 bytes.
> Might be significant, let's keep that in m
> The hotel's router/modem may be using PPPoE to authenticate with their ISP,
> which has a larger header size and requires an MTU of 1492 (1464+28=1492)
>
> So, although your NIC is configured to the full ethernet MTU size, the router
> drops the size down to 1492 to be able to squeeze it out thro
On Sunday 01 Sep 2013 14:59:19 Grant wrote:
> >> Could ICMP packets not getting through be to blame for my proxy server
> >> problem? My laptop can't seem to ping anyone (blocked at the firewall
> >> in this hotel I suppose) and certainly the proxy server can't ping my
> >> laptop.
> >
> > Not al
>> My laptop can't ping my remote system but it can ping others
>> (google.com, yahoo.com, etc). I've tried disabling my firewall on
>> both ends with '/etc/init.d/shorewall stop && shorewall clear'. Could
>> my AT&T business ADSL connection on the remote system be blocking
>> inbound pings?
>
>
> My laptop can't ping my remote system but it can ping others
> (google.com, yahoo.com, etc). I've tried disabling my firewall on
> both ends with '/etc/init.d/shorewall stop && shorewall clear'. Could
> my AT&T business ADSL connection on the remote system be blocking
> inbo
On 01/09/13 15:28, Grant wrote:
My laptop can't ping my remote system but it can ping others
(google.com, yahoo.com, etc). I've tried disabling my firewall on
both ends with '/etc/init.d/shorewall stop && shorewall clear'. Could
my AT&T business ADSL connection on the remote system be blocking
On 01/09/2013 16:30, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2013-09-01 12:31 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>> Of course, support for an initramfs is not actually a file system
>> (it's not even in the File systems section of the kernel
>> configuration, is in General setup); it's not possible to have
>> initramfs
On 01/09/2013 15:07, Mick wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I updated the enlightenment overlay on two PCs. The first which incidentally
> I use as a portage mirror for my LAN works as expected, while the second PC
> is
> coming up with these type of errors:
>
> # emerge -uaDv world
>
> These are the pac
On 01/09/2013 15:28, Grant wrote:
My laptop can't ping my remote system but it can ping others
(google.com, yahoo.com, etc). I've tried disabling my firewall on
both ends with '/etc/init.d/shorewall stop && shorewall clear'. Could
my AT&T business ADSL connection on the remote
On 2013-09-01 12:31 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
Of course, support for an initramfs is not actually a file system
(it's not even in the File systems section of the kernel
configuration, is in General setup); it's not possible to have
initramfs as a module (that would make no sense at all); an
On 2013-08-31 7:32 AM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
If this is not mainline, and it is not trivial gentoo kernels
maintainer patch, and you must have this as static, you can just put
the patch within/etc/portage/patches/sys-kernel/gentoo-sources/, so
it will patch your kernel every time you emerge new on
On 2013-08-31 11:55 PM, Walter Dnes wrote:
Also, I really wonder what the point is in having to use
initramfs on a system where /usr is part of /.
You don't, it is only *required* if you have a separate /usr... in fact
that is what the whole argument was about.
At least that is my understan
>> Could ICMP packets not getting through be to blame for my proxy server
>> problem? My laptop can't seem to ping anyone (blocked at the firewall
>> in this hotel I suppose) and certainly the proxy server can't ping my
>> laptop.
>
> Not all ICMP packets are relevant to detecting the MTU of a nod
On 2013-08-31 7:29 AM, Joerg Schilling
wrote:
Tanstaafl wrote:
You must have missed the point that this is for*servers*, that most
people*disable modules* on. I*know* that it is available as a module.
Why, for security reasons?
Because if you don't need something, why enable it?
If modu
>>> My laptop can't ping my remote system but it can ping others
>>> (google.com, yahoo.com, etc). I've tried disabling my firewall on
>>> both ends with '/etc/init.d/shorewall stop && shorewall clear'. Could
>>> my AT&T business ADSL connection on the remote system be blocking
>>> inbound pings?
Hi All,
I updated the enlightenment overlay on two PCs. The first which incidentally
I use as a portage mirror for my LAN works as expected, while the second PC is
coming up with these type of errors:
# emerge -uaDv world
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dep
On Sunday 01 Sep 2013 12:17:28 Grant wrote:
> > Communications between IPv4 end points use PMTUD by setting a Don't
> > Fragment (DF) bit in the headers of the outgoing packet. If a
> > router/server along the path has a smaller MTU, it will drop that packet
> > and respond with an ICMP 'Destinati
Am 01.09.2013 14:54, schrieb Michael Hampicke:
> Am 01.09.2013 14:28, schrieb Grant:
>> My laptop can't ping my remote system but it can ping others
>> (google.com, yahoo.com, etc). I've tried disabling my firewall on
>> both ends with '/etc/init.d/shorewall stop && shorewall clear'. Could
>> my
Am 01.09.2013 14:28, schrieb Grant:
> My laptop can't ping my remote system but it can ping others
> (google.com, yahoo.com, etc). I've tried disabling my firewall on
> both ends with '/etc/init.d/shorewall stop && shorewall clear'. Could
> my AT&T business ADSL connection on the remote system be
My laptop can't ping my remote system but it can ping others
(google.com, yahoo.com, etc). I've tried disabling my firewall on
both ends with '/etc/init.d/shorewall stop && shorewall clear'. Could
my AT&T business ADSL connection on the remote system be blocking
inbound pings?
- Grant
>> > If you are still troubled by the proxy connection stalling problem, have
>> > you tried transferring large files over the network using scp/sftp to
>> > see if you are also getting similar symptoms? This would isolate it to
>> > the application level (squid) or if the problem remains would po
On Sunday 01 Sep 2013 11:31:10 Grant wrote:
> > If you are still troubled by the proxy connection stalling problem, have
> > you tried transferring large files over the network using scp/sftp to
> > see if you are also getting similar symptoms? This would isolate it to
> > the application level (
> Communications between IPv4 end points use PMTUD by setting a Don't Fragment
> (DF) bit in the headers of the outgoing packet. If a router/server along the
> path has a smaller MTU, it will drop that packet and respond with an ICMP
> 'Destination Unreachable -- Fragmentation Needed' packet inclu
>> Thanks Mick. Can you generally rely on PMTUD to set the MTU optimally
>> or should this be experimented with when changing connections?
>
> Short answer: default Linux machine settings behave properly as network
> devices and acknowledge packets larger than their MTU value with the
> appropria
postfix has a new whitelist feature in 2.11. A main.cf config like this:
postscreen_greet_action = enforce
postscreen_pipelining_enable = yes
postscreen_pipelining_action = enforce
postscreen_non_smtp_command_enable = yes
postscreen_non_smtp_command_action = enforce
postscreen_bare_newline_enable
On Tuesday 30 July 2013 12:11:37 you wrote:
> After the first launch, some entries immediately appear in History. I
> visited those before, but it's not everything I visited. Approximately
> 10-20 entries.
> From where is this information taken? If it's Google servers, what info is
> used for ident
>> Does this look OK?
>>
>> $ dig soa MASKED.com +short @MASKED1.MASKED.com
>> MASKED1.MASKED.com. MASKED.MASKED.com. MMDD00 3600 1801 604800 3601
>
> That looks OK, doubly so if all listed NS servers return the same answer
They do indeed.
> In all likelihood I'd say you are dealing with a DN
On 01/09/2013 10:24, Grant wrote:
>> Instead just use dig, using google.com as an example get the NS records
>> > first:
>> >
>> > $ dig ns google.com +short
>> > ns3.google.com.
>> > ns2.google.com.
>> > ns1.google.com.
>> > ns4.google.com.
>> >
>> > Then query each of those name server in turn di
On Sunday 01 Sep 2013 08:40:20 Grant wrote:
> >> How is PMTUD enabled/disabled on Gentoo? I've recently been made
> >> aware of the existence of MTU and I'm wondering if mine is set
> >> properly for a cell phone tethered connection.
>
> Thanks Mick. Can you generally rely on PMTUD to set the MT
>> I use a fairly well-known (free) DNS provider. I just checked my DNS
>> settings at dnscheck.pingdom.com and I got:
>>
>> 1. No SOA record was found when querying the name server. This is most
>> probably due to a misconfiguration at the name server - a zone must
>> have a SOA record.
>>
>> 2.
Walter Dnes wrote:
> You can get away with most stuff as modules; ***BUT NOT THE ROOT
> FILESYSTEM***. Think about it for a minute. Gentoo reads modules off
> the disk. If the code for the root filesystem is a module, Gentoo would
> have to read the module off the disk to enable it to read t
>> How is PMTUD enabled/disabled on Gentoo? I've recently been made
>> aware of the existence of MTU and I'm wondering if mine is set
>> properly for a cell phone tethered connection.
Thanks Mick. Can you generally rely on PMTUD to set the MTU optimally
or should this be experimented with when c
55 matches
Mail list logo
