On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Scott C. Best wrote:
> Goerge:
>
> Got it from Tom on the LRP list, thanks.
> One of those days when amost everything I said
> out loud was dead wrong. :) But then, if this is what
> it takes to get a no-hitter outta my Red Sox, I can
> get used to it...
Yeah, tha
Hello David.
> I'd like to see if any of you could test drive the upcoming Oxygen
> release.
>
I would like to test it, where can I get it.
> After an initial foray and some fudging, it would seem that glibc 2.1
> is the way to go. I've converted Oxygen to run with glibc 2.1, and it
> seems to
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Steven Peck wrote:
> George,
>
> try the rute tutorial at rute.sourceforge.net
> The license is very restrictive, but it's got a good tutorial on linux and a
> bit of shell scripting for free
Just started reading it a little just now - will prolly stop for the
evening and go
Steven Peck, 2001-04-04 23:09 -0700
>George,
>
>try the rute tutorial at rute.sourceforge.net
>The license is very restrictive, but it's got a good tutorial on linux and a
>bit of shell scripting for free
Steven,
How about these two?
developerWorks: Linux: Articles
http://www-105.ibm.com/develop
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 02:06:00AM -0400, George Metz scribbled:
> One of these days, I WILL learn shell scripting and C...
> Aw, who'm I kidding? =)
Shell scripting is easy. It all makes sense. You won't learn it,
of course, until you have some need to fill, though.
I've learned a lot about she
Hi all,
Has anyone else but George Metz succeeded in compiling iptables on a
glibc-2.0.x based system? I've tried to do so on RedHat 5.2 without
succes. Gcc complains about IIPROTO_ESP and IPPROTO_AH being undefined.
So now I'm wondering how George did this for his 2.4 bootdisks. Does it
requ
[EMAIL PROTECTED], 2001-04-05 10:05 -0400
>On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 02:06:00AM -0400, George Metz scribbled:
> > One of these days, I WILL learn shell scripting and C...
> > Aw, who'm I kidding? =)
>
>Shell scripting is easy. It all makes sense. You won't learn it,
>of course, until you have some n
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 07:51:15AM -0700, Mike Noyes scribbled:
> Rick & George,
> I plan on purchasing these two books, unless someone has a better idea. I
> have K&R's C book, but haven't read it yet.
That's supposed to be _the_ book to read. :)
> Beginning Linux Programming
> ISBN: 186100297
-Original Message-
From: George Metz
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Steven Peck wrote:
> George,
>
> try the rute tutorial at rute.sourceforge.net
> The license is very restrictive, but it's got a good tutorial on linux
and a
> bit of shell scripting for free
Just started reading it a little ju
Oops,
I just subscibed to this list and therefore missed the post about the
upcoming glibc-2.1 based Oxygen release. I must look like a fool. Of
course I will give that release a try. If I can find some time tomorrow
I think I'll make a kernel using Charles' patches and an iptables.lrp
Ewald
amusing product
http://www.boat.be/
read a little about FireWare and you'll understand why I say amusing, though
I do like 1U rackmounts ;-)
Does anyone know off hand how many LRP based consumer devices exist?
-Kenneth Hadley
___
Leaf-devel mailing
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Ewald Wasscher wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Has anyone else but George Metz succeeded in compiling iptables on a
> glibc-2.0.x based system? I've tried to do so on RedHat 5.2 without
> succes. Gcc complains about IIPROTO_ESP and IPPROTO_AH being undefined.
> So now I'm wondering how G
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 10:21:03AM -0700, Kenneth Hadley scribbled:
> amusing product
> http://www.boat.be/
> read a little about FireWare and you'll understand why I say amusing, though
> I do like 1U rackmounts ;-)
>
> Does anyone know off hand how many LRP based consumer devices exist?
Is it
Mike Noyes wrote:
> Very good news! Does this mean that Debian 2.1 is no longer necessary to
> build packages for Oxygen?
Yes, it does!
___
Leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> People who are good at C say that C is easy. Every time I attempt
> to learn C, I fail miserably...
Sounds like what happens to me every time I try to learn LISP or
Smalltalk.
The thing I always find fascinating is the textbooks show you how to
add 5 and 6, but no
There's been some discussion of apkg I missed.
apkg does NOT have the capability of running scripts (right now); I've
been sorely tempted in some cases. What about a .sh which would
take an argument like "start" and "stop" and others?
apkg DOES support, check, and generate *.md5 sums, but these
To me, that is what LRP and its variants are all about: these ARE
distributions, and part of maintaining a distribution is updating
packages, adding features, recompiles, et al.
As for a LEAF distribution, I think I would actually shy away from an
actual "LEAF" image; the concept is good but the
I seem to be somewhat alone in that I *LIKE* the *.lrp packaging;
there is only one change I would make: rename the files from *.lrp to
*.tgz. This adds the ability to know what the file format is, and
allows Windows hosts to decipher the file automatically.
However, there is support for unpacki
Kenneth Hadley wrote:
> amusing product
> http://www.boat.be/
> read a little about FireWare and you'll understand why I say amusing, though
> I do like 1U rackmounts ;-)
Thanks for plugging my product ;-)
> Does anyone know off hand how many LRP based consumer devices exist?
My guess is that
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 03:58:05PM -0500, David Douthitt scribbled:
> The thing I always find fascinating is the textbooks show you how to
> add 5 and 6, but not how to scan a configuration file; or they show
> you how to do a bubble sort, but not how to react to user input. It
> seems as if gene
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 04:45:59PM -0500, David Douthitt scribbled:
> As for a LEAF distribution, I think I would actually shy away from an
> actual "LEAF" image; the concept is good but the literal
> implementation would be bad. Put another way, I wouldn't have any
> problem with "Maple LRP" cre
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 04:51:59PM -0500, David Douthitt scribbled:
> I seem to be somewhat alone in that I *LIKE* the *.lrp packaging;
> there is only one change I would make: rename the files from *.lrp to
> *.tgz. This adds the ability to know what the file format is, and
> allows Windows host
On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 12:04:38AM +0200, Robert Sprockeels scribbled:
> > http://www.boat.be/
>
> Thanks for plugging my product ;-)
BTW, it's listed in lrp.c0wz.com now.
--
rick -- A mind is like a parachute... it only works when it's open.
ICQ# 1590117 [EMAIL PRO
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Sprockeels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Kenneth Hadley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "LEAF-list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "LRP-List"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 3:04 PM
Subject: [Leaf-devel] Re: [LRP] Interesting LRP consumer device
> Ken
Kenneth Hadley wrote:
> > Actually, I guess what they _really_ sell is their Linux know-how and
> their LRP
> > experience... because they like it, and they know it really WORKS!
> >
> > Robert
>
> Extremely true, even I support few LRP boxes for profit.
> Though I am extremely curious about whe
David:
I agree, there should be no distribution called LEAF,
specifically. But...there *should* be distributions called
(for instance) Maple and Oxygen that were developed by LEAF
contributors.
Essentially, we should distinguish the project name
from the distribution name. So, unl
Actually I like .lrp as well, though my complaint
with it is different. I find it difficult to extract files
from a .lrp without potentially overwriting important system
binaries on the development box.
What'd be *much* nicer is if package.lrp expanded
to /tmp/package, and then /t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 04:51:59PM -0500, David Douthitt scribbled:
> > I seem to be somewhat alone in that I *LIKE* the *.lrp packaging;
> > there is only one change I would make: rename the files from *.lrp to
> > *.tgz. This adds the ability to know what the file
David Douthitt, 2001-04-05 18:19 -0500
>UNIX originally did EVERYTHING in files why not use [files] in
>our packaging?
>
>So... NO special format, NO special databases, NO special "support"
>files needed, NO anything - just tar, gzip, and files.
David,
This package FAQs from the new Midori L
Howdy,
I've been upgrading to 2.9.8/2.0.36, and I finally decided to try out
Matthew Schalit's rc.pf script. I'd like to present to the developers
what I worked out before I post the linuxrouter.org, to flush out any
errors. I decided to figure out how to allow for dhcp, rc.pf and
psent
Everyone,
The Midori Linux project wants someone to build a router based on Midori.
http://midori.transmeta.com/projects.shtml
>If you know of someone working on one of the ideas listed here, (let us
>know on the midori-discuss mailing list and we'll update our references.
>
> A Router Base
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Scott C. Best wrote:
>
> Actually I like .lrp as well, though my complaint
> with it is different. I find it difficult to extract files
> from a .lrp without potentially overwriting important system
> binaries on the development box.
I don't grok this. I have never ha
You know, Dave C is always looking for sponsers. He does seem to mention
them on the LRP webpage, one of the few things that is updated regularly.
--
Steven Peck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sacramento, CA http://leaf.blkmtn.org
> --
Jeff:
Sorry you don't agree. What I mean to say was, suppose
my currently running system has a working /etc/dnscache (for
example). I'd be ill advised to extract a new dnscache.lrp without
carefully controlling where it untar's. The defaults would overwrite
what's my system was using.
Jon:
Heya. Two very keen improvements; good show. I might
lift them in an update to echowall...
Thanks!
-Scott
...
>Since dhclient-script is called when the IP address changes, it seems a
>natural place to call rc.pf. So, in the BOUND and TIMEOUT sections,
>right after the gatew
On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Robert Sprockeels wrote:
> I must admit they were not easy to find at all - or rather: it was not easy to
> find a supplier in Belgium, since I didn't want to import them myself... I
> found my supplier in Antwerp, and he imports... from Taiwan, of course!
Oh, of course. Wher
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Scott C. Best wrote:
>
> Actually I like .lrp as well, though my complaint
> with it is different. I find it difficult to extract files
> from a .lrp without potentially overwriting important system
> binaries on the development box.
Erm...
I've never had a problem wit
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, S.C.Best wrote:
> Jeff:
> Sorry you don't agree.
Well, I am too. I feel like one of us is operating under some
misconceptions about how lrpkg or tar works. By continuing this thread, I
hope to grok your concern, or perhaps you will find your concerns were not
justifie
38 matches
Mail list logo
