[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] pptpd current b-u problems

Hello Paul, > I got my dev environment working (limping) again. > I built a pptpd with symbols and statically linked. > > > It was crashing in libwrap. > I added the line "pptpd: ALL" to /etc/hosts.allow and now it works. > > > My libwrap hosts.deny is the default, libwrap should obviously not > b

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] pptpd current b-u problems

I got my dev environment working (limping) again. I built a pptpd with symbols and statically linked. It was crashing in libwrap. I added the line "pptpd: ALL" to /etc/hosts.allow and now it works. My libwrap hosts.deny is the default, libwrap should obviously not be crashing. Unfortunately I di

[leaf-devel] Re: leaf-devel digest, Vol 1 #1454 - 1 msg

>For the Bering-uClibc folks - a version control client will be heavy. The core >system should be implemented as shell scripts, so the base system >still fits on floppy; I'm fairly passionate that a basic SOHO firewall be able to RUN from a single write-protectable floppy, but that doesn't neces

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] esfq

On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 10:18:29PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hello Jaap, > > Thanks for explaining. > It is somewhat late to include it in Bering-uClibc 2.3, but it would be a > nice addition for 2.3.1 or so. Please keep us updated about your > experience with it (usability and stability).

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Bering-uClibc: qmail ???

Hi Michael, I am very surprised that I cannot find qmail for Bering-uClibc. What am I missing? Can somebody, please, make a Bering-uClibc qmail.lrp ??? Short version is: read http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html and tell us how we can provide a qmail.lrp that complies to the qmail license (and no, I ha

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-cvs-ci] src/bering-uclibc/buildtool buildpacket.pl,1.26,1.27

Hi Hans Ulrich, Unfortunately, this patch does not fix the problem (debug output added by me): That's too bad - I'll have a look at it as soon as I have time However, I wonder why the wildcard stuff is not done with glob() or File::Glob... that one is easily explained - I never liked the whole "wil

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-cvs-ci] src/bering-uclibc/buildtool buildpacket.pl,1.26,1.27

Martin Hejl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Update of /cvsroot/leaf/src/bering-uclibc/buildtool > In directory sc8-pr-cvs1.sourceforge.net:/tmp/cvs-serv32764 > > Modified Files: > buildpacket.pl > Log Message: > Hopefully fixed problem with permissions of directories that are also used in >

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] 2.4.26 kernel for wd1100.o

Victor At 09:30 30.10.2004 -0700, Victor McAllister wrote: According to Erich Titl's instructions on LEAF. Quote: "The Bering kernel has the softdog driver compiled statically into the kernel. It must be made a module in order to use the wd1100 driver." uClibc seems to use both softdog and wd1100

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Shorewall rfc1918 list

Patrick At 13:34 23.09.2004 +0200, Patrick Benson wrote: >Erich Titl wrote: >> >> Hi everybody >> >> Networks 83.0.0.0 and 84.0.0.0 have been assigned to RIPE last year. In my version >> (1.4.8) of shorewall these networks are still blocked by the rfc1918 rules. It it >> probably worthwhile to

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Shorewall rfc1918 list

On Thursday 23 September 2004 05:14, Erich Titl wrote: > Patrick > > At 13:34 23.09.2004 +0200, Patrick Benson wrote: > >Erich Titl wrote: > >> Hi everybody > >> > >> Networks 83.0.0.0 and 84.0.0.0 have been assigned to RIPE last year. In > >> my version (1.4.8) of shorewall these networks are stil

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Traceroute issues through Bering 1.2

On Tuesday 21 September 2004 13:14, Tom Eastep wrote: > > > > So I think the above link is in error. Unless there is a different "UDP > > traceroute" that I don't know of... ? > > The 'traceroute' program on any *nix system. The 'tracert' thingy on > Windoze systems uses ICMP echo-request (ping).

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Re: uClibc hdsupp: syslinux error; plus doco errors

On Mon, 2004-06-28 at 16:28, Eric House wrote: > > > I'd guess that there's something wrong with fat12 support in the > > > hdsupp package. Any ideas or suggestions? There seems indeed to be something fundamentally wrong... I tried to configure a new Bering-uClib 2.2.0-beta4 on a DiskOnChip this

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] OT: UPX v1.11

At 06:29 06.04.2004 -0500, Charles Steinkuehler wrote: >Vic Berdin wrote: >>Hi, >>I've been searching for a downloadable source of the said upx version. >>An attemp to log to cvs using: >>cvs -d:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvsroot/upx login fails. >>Any help/link/e-mail attachment with complete (tgz

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] bering-uclibc libc207.lrp and bash.lrp bugs (fwd)

On Thu, 2004-02-19 at 11:54, Mike Noyes wrote: > The SF tracker system has some limitations (see Alexandria RFEs). Also, > making sure trackers are placed in the proper category, and assigned to > appropriate project members is not easy when all the trackers are open. I forgot to mention that our

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] bering-uclibc libc207.lrp and bash.lrp bugs (fwd)

On Thu, 2004-02-19 at 08:46, K.-P. KirchdÃrfer wrote: > AFAIK all other tracker pages are reserved for admins. The entry for users is > via support page and one of the admins will take care to move the request to > the correct tracker. > I don't know why it is that way, but Mike I'm shure Mike wi

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Broken links to Bering documentation

On Mon, 2004-02-02 at 08:40, K.-P. KirchdÃrfer wrote: > They should be still at the same place; but it seems the URL is on another > server, which is unavailable from time to time (and pretty often, I agree). K.-P., Nope. Same server. It's just the main record on SF for our project. Main dom

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] ANN: Bering-uClibc 2.1-rc1

Am Donnerstag, 15. Januar 2004 23:04 schrieb M Lu: > Hi, > > I really want to switch from Bering to Bering-uClibc but I am stuck as I am > using a couple of packages not available for Bering-uClib yet. The most > important one is BIND9, found in > http://chinese-watercolor.com/LRP/hd/lrpfile.html.

RE: [leaf-devel] RE: [leaf-user] ip_conntrack_ftp -find: /proc/19764 No such file or directory

Hello Erich Alexm list This part of the script comes from a time that insmod was not so flexible. You could only insmod a modules if you gave the complete path. The idea was that if a module has to be added which could be the case at new setup, the modules would still be on the boot media ( speak

RE: [leaf-devel] RE: [leaf-user] ip_conntrack_ftp -find: /proc/19764 No such file or directory

Alex At 15:11 29.12.2003 +0100, Alex Rhomberg wrote: >... >> It starts its search at /, which is probably fine to detect all >> sorts of modules in the directory tree. > >This obviously is the part that produces the original error message. > >Not looking everywhere for modules might break some set

RE: [leaf-devel] RE: [leaf-user] ip_conntrack_ftp -find: /proc/19764 No such file or directory

> I looked into the corresponding script (/etc/init.d/modutils), > the culprit is probably > > echo -n "$module - " > MODTOLOAD=`find / -name $module.o |sort |sed -n 1p` > if [ "$MODTOLOAD" = "" ] ;then >module="` echo $module | cut -c-8`" >MODTOLOAD

[leaf-devel] RE: [leaf-user] ip_conntrack_ftp -find: /proc/19764 No such file or directory

Alex (crossposting to leaf-devel) At 08:29 29.12.2003 +0100, Alex Rhomberg wrote: >> Hello. I'm runnig Bering 1.2 with 3 NIC's and wireless access on DMZ. >> Since I put third NIC I noticed message on boot: >> ip_conntrack_ftp -find: /proc/19764 No such file or directory >> Using /lib/modules/ip

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Moving from Dachstein to Bering

Charles Steinkuehler wrote: Eddie Wilson wrote: Hi Charles, I do have the /29 being routed as you expected. I have had them assigned to the same interface as the p-t-p /30 address for the last 2 years and running fine. If there is a better (correct) way of doing this I would be greatfull for

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Bering: time to hand on the torch ...

Jacques, List I want to thank you for your great contribution to this project, and for your trust in me to carry on the project. I hope that I will be able to do it as good as you did. I also hope that we will be seeing you around in the near future All the best and thanks a lot merci beaucoup

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Open SSH exploit - will be fix available for ssh package?

Dominik Strnad wrote: As announced on security servers, there is exploit for openssh http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd-misc&m=106371592604940 Please can anybody compile and create new ssh lrp package? There are new packages (using the latest source for Openssh 3.7.1 from www.openssh.org)

[leaf-devel] Re: leaf-devel] Bering development system.

S Mohan wrote: Can the compiled Bering 1.2 LEAF UML kernel (2.4.20) and file system populated with the patched kernel sources, modules and gcc 2.95 be put on the site for download please. I have a rh9 system and have been trying to compile a 2.4.20 uml kernel for LEAF in vain. Patches do not apply

Re: [leaf-devel] Re: leaf-devel] Bering development system.

Greg At 23:15 06.08.2003 -0700, Greg Morgan wrote: S Mohan wrote: I think you will drive yourself nutty trying to compile on the RH box directly. Please read http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.html. I stopped banging my head against the wall once I understood this article. The way

[leaf-devel] RE: [leaf-user] "htpasswd" Generator

Okay, I believe what I want is a working version of "cryptpw" or at least the source so I can compile on my RHAT 5.2 box. Thx -Original Message- From: Bihari, Steve Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 11:38 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: [leaf-user] "htpasswd" Generator Hello all,

[leaf-devel] RE: LEAF in a commercial world

I got a mail that my document could not be located. Links below. Comments please. Mohan - original message from Jacques Hi Mohan I have created the xml file from you contribution here: http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/leaf

Re: [leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] question about vlan in linux

Jacques Nilo wrote: but now I am working with Red Hat 7.3 (kernel 2.4.18) and I don't find that file in anywhere. I question whether the fellow is even posting on the correct list -- If he's running RH 7.3, I don't know why he's posting on the LEAF list with this question. Do any of you know wha

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] question about vlan in linux

Le Mercredi 26 Février 2003 22:08, Jose Luis Abuelo Sebio a écrit : > Hi guys: > > I'm trying to enable the vlan software in a linux > machine. There is a module called 8021q.o which I > already installed with the comand > insmod 8021q > but the problem is when I reboot the system all the > confi

Re: [leaf-devel] Re: LEAF

> Chris Travers wrote: > > I am the project admin and main developer for another > > Sourceforge project you might find useful. I noticed that > > LEAF was a firewall appliance (I assume with IPTables) and I > > was wondering if you have any means for firewall reports to be > > emailed to the

[leaf-devel] RE: [leaf-user] ANNOUNCE: New udhcp packages available

Bewdy Lynn. I will give it a go! David Pitts IT Services Manager Reid Library University of Western Australia Telephone: (08) 9380 3492 Fax: (08) 9380 1012 -Original Message- From: Lynn Avants [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, 20 February 2003 2:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROT

[leaf-devel] Re: leaf-devel digest, Vol 1 #949 - 10 msgs

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Send leaf-devel mailing list submissions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] need to connect to corp sidewinder firewall

On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 06:47, Don Seiler wrote: > I'm getting formatting errors with your emails. Pine says "Formatting > error: Non-hexadecimal character in QP encoding". So the second part of > your response was cut off. Everyone, This is a known problem, and is being worked on by the SourceF

[leaf-devel] Re: LEAF

I have forwarded your e-mail to the leaf-developer list. While there are versions of LEAF that use IPTables (as well as older versions with IPChains), perl is typically not available on the firewall due to the small run-time footprint typical of most LEAF systems (the general goal is a compete

[leaf-devel] Re: [ leaf-Support Requests-675725 ] IPSEC error messages(SourceForge.net)

On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 07:14, Chad Carr wrote: > If you wish to package ipsec or ipsec509 for uClibc bering, I have a > little development environment to do so that you night be inserested in. > It is still a little hairier than I would like due to lack of time, but > contact me off list if you are

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Some time off

> Until further notice, I will not be involved in Shorewall development or > support. > > I'm simply burned out and have no more to give... I'm fairly certain I speak for many of us here when I say Thanks, Tom, for all of your hard work. That Shorewall is a cornerstone of many of our firewalls

[leaf-devel] RE: [leaf-user] Bering 1.0-stable: kernel 2.4.20 available !

Is this kernel compiled with IMQ support? IMQ is a useful virtual device for traffic shaping where incoming and outgoing bandwidth together need to be allocated. It is good to know bridge-nf-0.0.7 has been compiled. This would enable transparent firewalling. I've just finished configuring Bering a

[leaf-devel] RE: [leaf-user] Bering v1.0-stable released !

Hi, can I be the first? :-) CONGRATULATION!!! Thanks for yourk great work. Regards LTOW -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:leaf-user-admin@;lists.sourceforge.net]On Behalf Of Jacques Nilo Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 11:53 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [

[leaf-devel] Re: leaf-devel digest, Vol 1 #850 - 6 msgs

Eric, thanks for the Info ... Jacques, I am stuck :( can you compile those USB-modem drivers for me then as a quick fix ? (I am now behind schedule for this USB business...) However I'd be interested to go further for "next time" ;-) so your comments on using ULM for compiling kernel modules

[leaf-devel] RE: [Leaf-announce] Bering v1.0-rc4 available

Jacques, I was just about to compile a new UML kernel and found that the patches and patch sequence for -rc4 have not been posted yet. Also I noticed that the patch sequence file that the documentation references is no longer there. Could you send me a copy of the old one? When do you expect that

[leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Best way to control "ppp-on-demand" ?

From: Elmar Gerwalin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Larry Platzek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject:Re: [leaf-user] Best way to control "ppp-on- demand" ? Copies to: leaflist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date sent: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 18:13:0

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Dachstein v1.03 CD?

On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 15:25, Charles Steinkuehler wrote: > notes to myself in the todo file, I'll forget stuff like this :-) I'm for sure even worse at remembering such things :-[ > > > > Update binaries (or gnu instead of busybox version): > > > ?last > > > ?ps > > > ?tinylogin >

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Dachstein v1.03 CD?

Migrated to leaf-devel... > > ?Use busybox to build links instead of root.bb.links > > Does this bring any advantage? This will make busybox bigger, and we'll > still need the root.bb.links file, so this will add to the size of > root.lrp. If there isn't a good reason I'd forget about this. Ex

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Webbased configuration

On Fri, 2002-08-30 at 21:40, Charles Steinkuehler wrote: > > I'm well aware of mini_httpd, but it's 40K...sh-httpd is about 9K > (including the conf file), and it's text so it compresses well in *.lrp > packages! > Agreed! > There's also micro_httpd, but it won't do CGI... > > You can "wrap"

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Webbased configuration

> On Thu, 2002-08-29 at 21:59, Charles Steinkuehler wrote: > > > > using sh-httpd. or a > > > > small server (boa, thttpd) > > It looks as if almost noone knows about mini_httpd > (http://www.acme.com/). It's from the same authors as thttpd. It's a > little slower than thttpd, but smaller (40k vs.

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Webbased configuration

On Friday 30 August 2002 14:04, Ewald Wasscher wrote: > On Thu, 2002-08-29 at 21:59, Charles Steinkuehler wrote: > > > > using sh-httpd. or a > > > > small server (boa, thttpd) > > It looks as if almost noone knows about mini_httpd > (http://www.acme.com/). It's from the same authors as thttpd. It

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Webbased configuration

On Thu, 2002-08-29 at 21:59, Charles Steinkuehler wrote: > > > using sh-httpd. or a > > > small server (boa, thttpd) It looks as if almost noone knows about mini_httpd (http://www.acme.com/). It's from the same authors as thttpd. It's a little slower than thttpd, but smaller (40k vs. 71k) and it

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Webbased configuration

> On Thursday 29 August 2002 14:59, Charles Steinkuehler wrote: > > I can commit to any updates/modifications to sh-httpd that may be > > required. I think it's possible to dramatically increase the CGI > > response of the existing sh-httpd when running CGI's, which would be > > a big help for a

RE: [Leaf-devel] RE: [leaf-user] Webbased configuration

>I also agree perl would be an overkill. What we need is to create a >framework like we have for lrps for web based management. Every lrp must >have a web based config template that will be used by a master web script. >The template format and scripting needs to be developed and standardised. Wh

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Webbased configuration

combined reply to several posts and some ideas (at the bottom): On Thursday 29 August 2002 14:59, Charles Steinkuehler wrote: > > to leaf-devel. Is anyone ready to work on and/or discuss any > > sections of this??? > > I can commit to any updates/modifications to sh-httpd that may be > required.

[Leaf-devel] RE: [leaf-user] Webbased configuration

I also agree perl would be an overkill. What we need is to create a framework like we have for lrps for web based management. Every lrp must have a web based config template that will be used by a master web script. The template format and scripting needs to be developed and standardised. I'm not

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Webbased configuration

Hi Eric, Lynn, Charles Asking for permission to come aboard. regards Erich THINK Püntenstrasse 39 8143 Stallikon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Fingerprint: BC9A 25BC 3954 3BC8 C024 8D8A B7D4 FF9D 05B8 0A16 --- This sf.net email is sponsore

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Webbased configuration

Hello Charles, Lynn , list > > > Alternatively, use the same fields and write the > > > engine in shell.script or php using sh-httpd. or a > > > small server (boa, thttpd) > > > > It can be done with sh-httpd. Mosquito has used thttpd, > > but thttpd is considerably larger (and more versitile). >

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Webbased configuration

> > Alternatively, use the same fields and write the > > engine in shell.script or php using sh-httpd. or a > > small server (boa, thttpd) > > It can be done with sh-httpd. Mosquito has used thttpd, > but thttpd is considerably larger (and more versitile). > My vote would be to use sh-httpd w/POST

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Webbased configuration

On Wednesday 28 August 2002 12:56, Eric Wolzak wrote: (snip) I agree with your summary Eric. > Advantage of webmin, there are all kinds of > modules. Adaption is much easier than building > from scratch. > > Disadvantage memory and CPU. I would be against using Perl personally. Porting Webmin w

[Leaf-devel] Re: Leaf-devel digest, Vol 1 #768 - 7 msgs

Michael D. Schleif wrote: > Anybody care to shed light on the flurry of changes in openssl since > last week? Perhaps this helps from the Redhat site? Redhat even recommends rebooting because the code is used so pervasively in Linux. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2002-160.html "Updated Open

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: leaf-announce ML

On Thu, 2002-08-01 at 20:21, Dan Harkless wrote: > > Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Further conversation on this topic is welcome, > > Personally I think we've talked it to death. Dan, Agreed. > > My recommendation remains: > > Announcements should be posted on our leaf-announ

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: leaf-announce ML

Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Dan, > I've stated my position, and you've articulated yours. We agree the > announce list would be useful if it were utilized by our project > members. We disagree in some of the implementation details. However, > we've only had two comments by other peop

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: leaf-announce ML

Dan, I've stated my position, and you've articulated yours. We agree the announce list would be useful if it were utilized by our project members. We disagree in some of the implementation details. However, we've only had two comments by other people in this thread. This is hardly a consensus. Fur

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: leaf-announce ML

Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Dan, > My "semantics" are not weird. > > Google search results. > "Security Announcement" 25,600 > "Security Advisory" 117,000 I wouldn't dispute that "security advisory" is a more common phrase than "security announcement" (in fact I'm surprised it's on

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: leaf-announce ML

First off, I'm nobody, so remember that when you get to the end ;) I can relate to his point... I wear many hats during the course of a day (I run a computer shop, own the local wireless ISP and administer another ISP among other things), and am subscribed to way more mailing lists than I

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: leaf-announce ML

On Wed, 2002-07-31 at 22:55, guitarlynn wrote: > In light of not catching the entire thread, I will give my 0.02. > Most users, especially in a commercial environment are > subscribed to the leaf-user and/or leaf-devel mailing lists. > The leaf-announce list is seldom used and has few subscribers.

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: leaf-announce ML

I apologize for my absence, I have some personal business that has been taking up most of my time at the present. :-( In light of not catching the entire thread, I will give my 0.02. Most users, especially in a commercial environment are subscribed to the leaf-user and/or leaf-devel mailing lis

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: leaf-announce ML

Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > "The person making the announcement needs to decide the target audience" > > _is_ more vague than "security advisories should be posted to > > leaf-announce". > > You keep returning to security advisories. I'm talking about > announcements. In my mind t

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: leaf-announce ML

Dan, We're not communicating well. I'll try to explain this to the best of my ability. On Wed, 2002-07-31 at 20:00, Dan Harkless wrote: > > Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > That is not what I had in mind. The person making the announcement needs > > > > to decide the target audienc

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: leaf-announce ML

Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > That is not what I had in mind. The person making the announcement needs > > > to decide the target audience. Our mailing lists reach a different set > > > of users than our web site. > > > > I think you're making the criteria more vague and complicat

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: leaf-announce ML

On Tue, 2002-07-30 at 21:46, Dan Harkless wrote: > Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I suspect what you had in mind when you said "and/or" was that important > > > stuff, including, but not limited to, security advisories, should go to > > > leaf-announce, and less important stuff, like

[Leaf-devel] Re: leaf-announce ML

Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Right. And security advisories are a subcategory of "announcements", are > > they not? That's "announcements" as in "leaf-announce". > > Dan, > Security advisories are not a subset of announcements. They are in most people's minds. That's why I wan

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Bering: PPTP server updated (pptpd.lrp)

Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Everyone, > > > Announcements should be posted on our leaf-announce list, and/or posted > > ^^ > > > on our phpWebSite. Please don't cross post announcements to leaf-user. > > > > Um, tha

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Bering: PPTP server updated(pptpd.lrp)

On Mon, 2002-07-29 at 04:02, Dan Harkless wrote: > > Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Sat, 2002-07-27 at 22:48, Jacques Nilo wrote: > > > Le Dimanche 28 Juillet 2002 01:55, Dan Harkless a écrit : > > > > Jacques Nilo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Isn't this the kind of thing th

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Bering: PPTP server updated (pptpd.lrp)

Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, 2002-07-27 at 22:48, Jacques Nilo wrote: > > Le Dimanche 28 Juillet 2002 01:55, Dan Harkless a écrit : > > > Jacques Nilo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Isn't this the kind of thing that should be sent to the leaf-announce > > > mailing list? [.

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Bering: PPTP server updated(pptpd.lrp)

On Sat, 2002-07-27 at 22:48, Jacques Nilo wrote: > Le Dimanche 28 Juillet 2002 01:55, Dan Harkless a écrit : > > Jacques Nilo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Isn't this the kind of thing that should be sent to the leaf-announce > > mailing list? > > > > I'm currently subscribed to leaf-user while

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Bering: PPTP server updated (pptpd.lrp)

Le Dimanche 28 Juillet 2002 01:55, Dan Harkless a écrit : > Jacques Nilo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The pptpd.lrp package formerly available in the > > http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/jnilo/bering/latest/packages/ > > directory was buggy. > > > > It has been updated with the latest version

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Bering: PPTP server updated (pptpd.lrp)

Jacques Nilo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The pptpd.lrp package formerly available in the > http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/jnilo/bering/latest/packages/ > directory was buggy. > > It has been updated with the latest version (1.1.3) of the PoPToP server. See: > http://www.poptop.org/ > > Th

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] gzip doesn't work as a filter

Le Jeudi 18 Juillet 2002 18:32, Brad Fritz a écrit : > On Thu, 18 Jul 2002 11:13:48 CDT Russ Price wrote: > > Brad Fritz wrote: > > > > I'm using RC3. Here's what I get: > > > > # gzip --help > > BusyBox v0.60.3 (2002.06.08-17:56+) multi-call binary > > > > # gzip bar.txt.gz > > # ls -l bar.t

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] is Bering GNU?

On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, George Georgalis wrote: > > I even asked a few well read LUG groups what the lrp format was, or > how I could run the lrcfg that I read about without actually booting > the distro. Nobody knew because the design is not conducive to group > development, it's intended use is

RE: [Leaf-devel] RE: [leaf-user] Weblet Dev Demo Update

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tue 7/2/2002 6:50 AM >I know what he meant about the hosts.allow. I noticed it yesterday! >Your syslog file has lots of these messages in it: > Jul 2 07:01:09 BeringFWWeblet sh-httpd[11991]: warning: /etc/ho

[Leaf-devel] RE: [leaf-user] Weblet Dev Demo Update

Good sugestion on the date time. Not sure what you mean by with the hosts.allow. It is suposed to allow everyone to the weblet for the demo. Richard Amerman -Original Message- From: Eyal Lebedinsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tue 7/2/2002 1:41 AM To: Richard Amerman Cc:

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] Weblet Dev Demo Update

Richard Amerman wrote: > > I have made some major modifications to the LEAF Weblet. These have been posted to >the Weblet Dev Demo site. > Demo Site Location: > 207.202.227.167 One thing I have in my weblet, which I see is missing in the above demo is a standard date/time at the top of each lo

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] SSHD Flaw

And I will be getting an updated DachCD out someday soon! With OpenSSH 3.4 I hope. Lost a hard drive. Been trying to recover. I'll be back at it soon. I've got to sync up with everyone on any more script changes that should be included. Sean > On Thu, 2002-06-27 at 04:33, Philippe Lepot w

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] To Bering users: help us to release 1.0

I'm doing this now. Attached is a VERY simple shell script (netload.sh) that downloads and installs the lrp files, using the tftp binary (aprox 19k, uncompressed) that I've compiled from the www.linuxassembly.org project. The config file (netload.conf) just contains the tftp instructions (one per

RE: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] To Bering users: help us to release 1.0

>> And as a last point: >> The current CD building process with isolinux is technically the most >> advanced solution, anyway I can't boot with it. HP Anvin tells us in a >> few places, that a lot of older bios are buggy and will only boot >> with the ugly syslinux/bootdisk.img solution. In op

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] To Bering users: help us torelease 1.0

> Oxygen uses elvis-tiny, which covers most of the important parts of > vi, and does it well. Are there any advantages to using elvis-tiny to compiling vim with -tiny (I think that's what it is...)? I know it's personal preference, but although I'm a very big vi fan, I've never liked Elvis. I

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] To Bering users: help us to release 1.0

On Monday 03 June 2002 08:22 am, T Burt wrote: > One feature that I particularly liked in Trinux, is the ability to > download packages from an ftp or http server during system startup. Oxygen did this very early on - in fact, Trinux was an inspiration for Oxygen development. > Has anyone cons

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] To Bering users: help us to release 1.0

> > Another point, is the handling of /lib/modules. > > Charles approach in Dachstein-CD has been an intelligent /etc/modules and > > load process - with mount/umount commands and cd capabilty. Eric create a > > link and hold the CD mount in /cdmnt. Couldn't decide, which way is > > better... > >

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] To Bering users: help us to release 1.0

Le Lundi 3 Juin 2002 18:39, K.-P. Kirchdörfer a écrit : > Am Montag 03 Juni 2002 08:03 schrieb Jacques Nilo: > > Dear all: > > With its v1.0-rc2 version Bering appears now fairly stable and it seems > > that quite a lot of people have been giving it a try. > > We would like to stabilize this first

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] To Bering users: help us to release 1.0

Am Montag 03 Juni 2002 08:03 schrieb Jacques Nilo: > Dear all: > With its v1.0-rc2 version Bering appears now fairly stable and it seems > that quite a lot of people have been giving it a try. > We would like to stabilize this first version with a "last" rc3 before > final release. > rc3 should in

[Leaf-devel] Re: [leaf-user] To Bering users: help us to release 1.0

If I can come up to speed quickly enough, I would be glad to help. One feature that I particularly liked in Trinux, is the ability to download packages from an ftp or http server during system startup. This takes the pressure off the space limitations of the floppy, and allows one to includ

[Leaf-devel] Re: [Leaf-user] Bering user's guide ("the cook book")

--- Jacques Nilo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Next contributions under preparation: > 3/ PPoE configuration (Eric) I anxiously await! :-) __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage http://sports.yahoo.com/

[Leaf-devel] Re: [Leaf-user] Bering v1.0-rc1 disk images regenerated

> >The Bering v1.0-rc1 images released yesterday appeared corrupted to some users. > >They have been regenerated. > >Follow the md5sum you should get for each file: > >4ebc430648ec51cd131595213e415f14 bering-1680-v1.0-rc1.bin > >8efc3afc3161b8b6a653f04d4a20aa49 bering-1680-v1.0-rc1.exe > > > >So

[Leaf-devel] Re: [Leaf-user] Bering v1.0-rc1 disk images regenerated

Jacques Nilo wrote: >The Bering v1.0-rc1 images released yesterday appeared corrupted to some users. >They have been regenerated. >Follow the md5sum you should get for each file: >4ebc430648ec51cd131595213e415f14 bering-1680-v1.0-rc1.bin >8efc3afc3161b8b6a653f04d4a20aa49 bering-1680-v1.0-rc1.ex

[Leaf-devel] Re: Leaf-devel digest, Vol 1 #599 - 7 msgs

It seems my day is being rearranged for me :-) > >Message: 7 >From: "Luis.F.Correia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: LEAF Development <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: [Leaf-devel] Re: Standards and due process :-) >Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 11:36:13 - > >Adding water to a boiling and already full kettl

[Leaf-devel] Re: [Leaf-user] udhcp package

The udhcp.lrp package for Dachstein/mountain releases is ready for testing. This package includes both a dhcp server and client and weighs in at 22.6KB total. Full support for everything except aliased interfaces should be there and working. You can get it at: http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/gu

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [Leaf-user] Possible virus?

At 2002-02-08 06:59 -0800, Kenneth Hadley wrote: >http://www.virusbtn.com/vb2000/Programme/papers/kaminski.pdf > > From what I understand it infects ELF headers Kenneth, That's what I'm able to find out also. Here is a quote from the Virus Bulletin Conference, Sep. 2000 p. 8-9 http://google.com

[Leaf-devel] Re: [Leaf-user] Possible virus?

http://www.virusbtn.com/vb2000/Programme/papers/kaminski.pdf >From what I understand it infects ELF headers Though I couldn't find any info on this virus from Sophos or Trend Micro...which struck me as strange since both have Linux/Unix based Antivirus software and are big name companies. -Kenn

[Leaf-devel] Re: [Leaf-user] How to search for LRP packages ???

At 2002-01-30 16:51 -0600, Michael D. Schleif wrote: >What am I missing? > > > >Let's say, I want to find zebra.lrp -- how do I do that? > >The search facility returns: `No matches found to your query' for both >announcements and pages. > >If I goto Main Menu | Pack

[Leaf-devel] Re: [Leaf-user] glibc & pppoe...

- Original Message - From: "Charles Steinkuehler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 8:29 AM Subject: Re: [Leaf-user] glibc & pppoe... > > When LEAF leaves the single floppy behind, the entire project target > > changes and all the indications poin

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [Leaf-user] Dachstein source tree?

> Interested? Are there Dachstein patches to busybox? Actually, yes. The patches I was referring to are patches I submitted to busybox...one to support extended regular-expressions in egrep (egrep was just an alias for grep), and some significant fixes to the hostname command (including support

Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [Leaf-user] Dachstein source tree?

David Douthitt wrote: > >Interested? Are there Dachstein patches to busybox? > None that I know of. But POSIXness currently uses the ash getopts builtin, so using busybox ash would either require enabling it in ash.c, or some changes to POSIXness. Ewald Wasscher.

  1   2   >