Re: [gentoo-user] 4G Stick Huawei E3276

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 30.03.2013 12:36, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:

> But small progress, yes.

I am close, I feel it :-)

Switched to wvdial to rule out NM etc.

wvdialconf etc 

I now have:

[Dialer Defaults]
Modem Type = Analog Modem
Dial Attempts = 1
ISDN = 0
New PPPD = yes
Init1 = ATZ
Init3 = ATQ0 V1 E1 S0=0
Modem = /dev/ttyUSB0
Baud = 9600

[Dialer pin]
Init2 = AT+CPIN=3451

[Dialer eins]
Init4 = AT+CGDCONT=1,"IP","A1.net","",0,0,0,0
Username = p...@a1plus.at
Password = ppp
Dial Command = ATDT
Dial Attempts = 3
Phone = *99#
Stupid Mode = 1

> I first run "wvdial pin" then :


# wvdial eins
--> WvDial: Internet dialer version 1.61
--> Initializing modem.
--> Sending: ATZ
ATZ
OK
--> Sending: ATQ0 V1 E1 S0=0
ATQ0 V1 E1 S0=0
OK
--> Sending: AT+CGDCONT=1,"IP","A1.net","",0,0,0,0
AT+CGDCONT=1,"IP","A1.net","",0,0,0,0
OK
--> Modem initialized.
--> Sending: ATDT*99#
--> Waiting for carrier.
ATDT*99#
CONNECT
--> Carrier detected.  Starting PPP immediately.
--> Starting pppd at Tue Apr  2 14:09:43 2013
--> Pid of pppd: 24968
--> Using interface ppp0
--> Disconnecting at Tue Apr  2 14:10:13 2013
--> The PPP daemon has died: A modem hung up the phone (exit code = 16)
--> man pppd explains pppd error codes in more detail.
--> Try again and look into /var/log/messages and the wvdial and pppd
man pages for more information.
--> Auto Reconnect will be attempted in 5 seconds
--> Initializing modem.
--> Sending: ATZ
^CCaught signal 2:  Attempting to exit gracefully...
--> Sending: ATQ0
--> Re-Sending: ATZ


Doesn't come up!

Played with options, even read the APN from the device via putty etc.

Something is still missing ...

Do I have to set up ppp as well?

Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] 4G Stick Huawei E3276

[Mick]

On Tuesday 02 Apr 2013 13:13:26 Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> Am 30.03.2013 12:36, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
> > But small progress, yes.
> 
> I am close, I feel it :-)
> 
> Switched to wvdial to rule out NM etc.
> 
> wvdialconf etc 
> 
> I now have:
> 
> [Dialer Defaults]
> Modem Type = Analog Modem

Are you sure it is an analogue modem?  Is this entry needed?

> Dial Attempts = 1
> ISDN = 0
> New PPPD = yes
> Init1 = ATZ
> Init3 = ATQ0 V1 E1 S0=0
> Modem = /dev/ttyUSB0

The driver should create a number of devices, ttyUSB0/ttyUSB1/ttyUSB2/...  Try 
them all in turn, only some may allow PPP connections.


> Baud = 9600

Unless you are just trying to dial out over a PSTN number (which you are not) 
you should be able to increase the baud to a higher number; e.g. 115200


> [Dialer pin]
> Init2 = AT+CPIN=3451
> 
> [Dialer eins]
> Init4 = AT+CGDCONT=1,"IP","A1.net","",0,0,0,0
> Username = p...@a1plus.at
> Password = ppp
> Dial Command = ATDT
> Dial Attempts = 3
> Phone = *99#
> Stupid Mode = 1
> 
> > I first run "wvdial pin" then :
> 
> 
> # wvdial eins
> --> WvDial: Internet dialer version 1.61
> --> Initializing modem.
> --> Sending: ATZ
> ATZ
> OK
> --> Sending: ATQ0 V1 E1 S0=0
> ATQ0 V1 E1 S0=0
> OK
> --> Sending: AT+CGDCONT=1,"IP","A1.net","",0,0,0,0
> AT+CGDCONT=1,"IP","A1.net","",0,0,0,0
> OK
> --> Modem initialized.
> --> Sending: ATDT*99#
> --> Waiting for carrier.
> ATDT*99#
> CONNECT
> --> Carrier detected.  Starting PPP immediately.
> --> Starting pppd at Tue Apr  2 14:09:43 2013
> --> Pid of pppd: 24968
> --> Using interface ppp0
> --> Disconnecting at Tue Apr  2 14:10:13 2013
> --> The PPP daemon has died: A modem hung up the phone (exit code = 16)
> --> man pppd explains pppd error codes in more detail.

Did you get anything more detailed in your logs?

Do you have a pap-secrets file even if empty?  If not:

touch /etc/ppp/pap-secrets; chmod 600 /etc/ppp/pap-secrets

If it still fails try adding something like this:

# Secrets for authentication using PAP
# clientserver  secret  IP addresses
"user"  *   ""


HOWEVER ... 

I thought that the whole idea is to use this modem to connect on a 4G (LTE) 
network ... yes?

In which case PPP is not the correct protocol.  If this Huawei is using 
Qualcomm chipset you should be using the qmi protocol and the cdc_ncm driver 
ought to do all the dialling using this device (from your dmesg):

[22765.769603] cdc_ncm 1-1.1:1.1 wwan0: register 'cdc_ncm' at
usb-:00:1a.0-1.1, Mobile Broadband Network Device, 0c:5b:8f:27:9a:64

Other driver/protocols that can achieve high speeds of 4G are cdc-ether, cdc-
acm, but your card ought to pick out the correct available protocol from the 
corresponding kernel module.  PPP incurs an overhead (due to packet 
encapsulation) and throughput speeds will be slower.

That's how I understand these devices to work, but unfortunately I can't 
verify any of this because I do not have access to such a device or a 4G 
network.  :-(

I hope someone else who does can chime in.
-- 
Regards,
Mick


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-user] 4G Stick Huawei E3276

[Mick]

On Tuesday 02 Apr 2013 14:06:37 you wrote:

> That's how I understand these devices to work, but unfortunately I can't
> verify any of this because I do not have access to such a device or a 4G
> network.  :-(

Yep, you are meant to see an ethernet interface coming up, which network 
manager will pick up and you should be able to configure and connect.  
However, you may need the latest drivers - have a look at this looong thread:

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libqmi-devel/2012-November/000301.html

-- 
Regards,
Mick


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-user] 4G Stick Huawei E3276

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 02.04.2013 15:19, schrieb Mick:
> On Tuesday 02 Apr 2013 14:06:37 you wrote:
> 
>> That's how I understand these devices to work, but unfortunately I 
>> can't verify any of this because I do not have access to such a 
>> device or a 4G network.  :-(
> 
> Yep, you are meant to see an ethernet interface coming up, which 
> network manager will pick up and you should be able to configure and 
> connect. However, you may need the latest drivers - have a look at 
> this looong thread:
> 
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libqmi-devel/2012-November/000301.html


Found
and read that thread already today ... I will see how to get
those drivers working.
For now I disabled PIN at least ...

S

Re: [gentoo-user] 4G Stick Huawei E3276

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 02.04.2013 15:06, schrieb Mick:
> On Tuesday 02 Apr 2013 13:13:26 Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
>> Modem Type = Analog Modem
> Are you sure it is an analogue modem?  Is this entry needed?

Dunno. Removed. No difference.

> The driver should create a number of devices,
> ttyUSB0/ttyUSB1/ttyUSB2/...  Try them all in turn, only some may
> allow PPP connections.

Checked that before, only ttyUSB0 "speaks to me" as a modem.

>> Baud = 9600
> 
> Unless you are just trying to dial out over a PSTN number (which
> you are not) you should be able to increase the baud to a higher
> number; e.g. 115200

This was detected by wvdialconf.



> Did you get anything more detailed in your logs?
> 
> Do you have a pap-secrets file even if empty?  If not:
> 
> touch /etc/ppp/pap-secrets; chmod 600 /etc/ppp/pap-secrets
> 
> If it still fails try adding something like this:
> 
> # Secrets for authentication using PAP # clientserver
> secret  IP addresses "user"  *   ""

pap-secrets exists and contains the credentials I entered in
wvdial.conf (or was set via NM before maybe?).

> HOWEVER ...
> 
> I thought that the whole idea is to use this modem to connect on a
> 4G (LTE) network ... yes?

That is the goal, right!

> In which case PPP is not the correct protocol.  If this Huawei is
> using Qualcomm chipset you should be using the qmi protocol and the
> cdc_ncm driver ought to do all the dialling using this device (from
> your dmesg):
> 
> [22765.769603] cdc_ncm 1-1.1:1.1 wwan0: register 'cdc_ncm' at 
> usb-:00:1a.0-1.1, Mobile Broadband Network Device,
> 0c:5b:8f:27:9a:64
> 
> Other driver/protocols that can achieve high speeds of 4G are
> cdc-ether, cdc- acm, but your card ought to pick out the correct
> available protocol from the corresponding kernel module.  PPP
> incurs an overhead (due to packet encapsulation) and throughput
> speeds will be slower.

Your mentioned thread says:

> Huawei E3276 does not have QMI interface so that cdc-wdm +
> qmi_wwan is not working on this device.  I tried to use Huawei
> hw_cdc_driver and cdc_ncm driver on Huawei E3276.  Both drivers are
> working good.

see
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libqmi-devel/2012-November/000310.html

So I am back on cdc_ncm now. And I removed all the stuff I installed
when testing that huawei-driver-package.

Rather hard to solve ...

Re: [gentoo-user] 4G Stick Huawei E3276

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 02.04.2013 15:52, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:

> So I am back on cdc_ncm now. And I removed all the stuff I installed
> when testing that huawei-driver-package.

phew.

Next small steps (but somehow promising):

I was able to connect via wvdial and pull an IPv4-IP-adress via dhcpcd ...

but the connection only lasted for maybe 10 seconds. Wrong parameters?

After that I have to re-plug the modem to get it working again.

This is with the modules coming with gentoo-sources-3.8.5 ... I assume
that the mentioned thread used older versions of this.

Gotta dig further.

Now time for a coffee!

S

Re: [gentoo-user] 4G Stick Huawei E3276

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

forgot my current lsmod:

> # lsmod 
Module  Size  Used by
ppp_async   6157  0
crc_ccitt   1565  1 ppp_async
ppp_generic17250  1 ppp_async
slhc4443  1 ppp_generic
option 26658  0
usb_wwan6870  1 option
cdc_ncm10023  0
usbserial  23422  2 option,usb_wwan
usbnet 19300  1 cdc_ncm
crc32c_intel   13975  0
i2c_i8018749  0

Re: [gentoo-user] 4G Stick Huawei E3276

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 02.04.2013 16:27, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
> Am 02.04.2013 15:52, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
> 
>> So I am back on cdc_ncm now. And I removed all the stuff I installed
>> when testing that huawei-driver-package.
> 
> phew.
> 
> Next small steps (but somehow promising):
> 
> I was able to connect via wvdial and pull an IPv4-IP-adress via dhcpcd ...
> 
> but the connection only lasted for maybe 10 seconds. Wrong parameters?
> 
> After that I have to re-plug the modem to get it working again.

Update:

It works. Although rather "un-polished":

I run wvdial ... it connects ... in a second terminal I pull an
IP-adress via dhcpcd and then started a ping to some remote IP immediately.

The wvdial-session then somehow loses connection to the modem or
something (I have to retry and provide the logs ... right now I am so
happy to have it working that I don't want to stop the connection  )
 this mislead me all the times as I thought it lost connectivity.

But it still pings and works thereafter.

So it is somehow useable for me as an admin ... not so much for an end-user.

Contacted the dev from the thread ... he told me that the modules coming
with linux 3.8.5 should work just fine.

So it's more of a UI-issue right now ;-)

connectivity is good so far ...

phew!

Stefan

[gentoo-user] stage3 only for i486?

[Davide Carnovale]

Hi all gentoo people!
I've been away from gentoo for a while, and I'm in the process of
reinstalling it today.
While downloading the stage 3 I noticed that only an i486 version is
available. As far as I remember, gentoo was best known, back in the
days, for being fast, as it was one of the first distro to support
i686... am i wrong with this? if not, why only i486 today?

apart from the reasons behind the decision of shipping only an i486
stage 3, do you think it's worth the pain to recompile everything
(like the old stage1) for a different arch? i have an intel i5
processor.

regards

Davide

Re: [gentoo-user] stage3 only for i486?

[Michael Hampicke]

Am 02.04.2013 19:51, schrieb Davide Carnovale:
> Hi all gentoo people!
> I've been away from gentoo for a while, and I'm in the process of
> reinstalling it today.
> While downloading the stage 3 I noticed that only an i486 version is
> available. As far as I remember, gentoo was best known, back in the
> days, for being fast, as it was one of the first distro to support
> i686... am i wrong with this? if not, why only i486 today?
> 
> apart from the reasons behind the decision of shipping only an i486
> stage 3, do you think it's worth the pain to recompile everything
> (like the old stage1) for a different arch? i have an intel i5
> processor.
> 

If you're not low on system memory (less then 2GB) you really should go
the the amd64 stage.

Re: [gentoo-user] stage3 only for i486?

[Bruce Hill]

On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 07:51:17PM +0200, Davide Carnovale wrote:
> Hi all gentoo people!
> I've been away from gentoo for a while, and I'm in the process of
> reinstalling it today.
> While downloading the stage 3 I noticed that only an i486 version is
> available. As far as I remember, gentoo was best known, back in the
> days, for being fast, as it was one of the first distro to support
> i686... am i wrong with this? if not, why only i486 today?
> 
> apart from the reasons behind the decision of shipping only an i486
> stage 3, do you think it's worth the pain to recompile everything
> (like the old stage1) for a different arch? i have an intel i5
> processor.
> 
> regards
> 
> Davide

Hi Davide,

The directories I checked read:
http://gentoo.osuosl.org/releases/x86/autobuilds/current-stage3-i686/
but the tarball states it's hardened:
http://gentoo.osuosl.org/releases/x86/autobuilds/current-stage3-i686/stage3-i686-hardened-20130326.tar.bz2

Haven't personally used a x86 in years.
-- 
Happy Penguin Computers   >')
126 Fenco Drive   ( \
Tupelo, MS 38801   ^^
supp...@happypenguincomputers.com
662-269-2706 662-205-6424
http://happypenguincomputers.com/

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.   

   
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? 

   
A: Top-posting. 

   
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting

Re: [gentoo-user] stage3 only for i486?

[Davide Carnovale]

Michael, thanks, i know amd64 would be better, i used to had a
multilib system, but for now i have a problem with java and 64-bit so
i'm stuck on the 32-bit world for now =)

Bruce, i see that, it looks like it's hardened indeed, i'll see what
being hardened means and if it fits me, thank you. anyways i'd expect
to also have a non hardened i686 stage 3...

having a better look at things i can see this:
http://gentoo.osuosl.org/releases/x86/autobuilds/20130305/default/20130305/
which has an i686 stage 3. i wonder what changed recently...
i guess i'll go with it for now and just update it...

D

2013/4/2 Bruce Hill :
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 07:51:17PM +0200, Davide Carnovale wrote:
>> Hi all gentoo people!
>> I've been away from gentoo for a while, and I'm in the process of
>> reinstalling it today.
>> While downloading the stage 3 I noticed that only an i486 version is
>> available. As far as I remember, gentoo was best known, back in the
>> days, for being fast, as it was one of the first distro to support
>> i686... am i wrong with this? if not, why only i486 today?
>>
>> apart from the reasons behind the decision of shipping only an i486
>> stage 3, do you think it's worth the pain to recompile everything
>> (like the old stage1) for a different arch? i have an intel i5
>> processor.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Davide
>
> Hi Davide,
>
> The directories I checked read:
> http://gentoo.osuosl.org/releases/x86/autobuilds/current-stage3-i686/
> but the tarball states it's hardened:
> http://gentoo.osuosl.org/releases/x86/autobuilds/current-stage3-i686/stage3-i686-hardened-20130326.tar.bz2
>
> Haven't personally used a x86 in years.
> --
> Happy Penguin Computers   >')
> 126 Fenco Drive   ( \
> Tupelo, MS 38801   ^^
> supp...@happypenguincomputers.com
> 662-269-2706 662-205-6424
> http://happypenguincomputers.com/
>
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
>
> Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting
>

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

[Paul Hartman]

On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Peter Humphrey  wrote:
> The most important para to me in the news item was: "The feature can also be
> completely disabled using net.ifnames=0 on the kernel command line." I just
> added that to my grub.conf entries and I sail blissfully on with eth0.


I updated remote virtual server (xen guest) and added this same
option, crossed my fingers and rebooted, eth0 was still there and I
was happy.

Re: [gentoo-user] stage3 only for i486?

[Alan McKinnon]

On 02/04/2013 19:51, Davide Carnovale wrote:
> Hi all gentoo people!
> I've been away from gentoo for a while, and I'm in the process of
> reinstalling it today.
> While downloading the stage 3 I noticed that only an i486 version is
> available. As far as I remember, gentoo was best known, back in the
> days, for being fast, as it was one of the first distro to support
> i686... am i wrong with this? if not, why only i486 today?
> 
> apart from the reasons behind the decision of shipping only an i486
> stage 3, do you think it's worth the pain to recompile everything
> (like the old stage1) for a different arch? i have an intel i5
> processor.

You have been gone a while :-)

These days we don't do the whole stage 1/2/3 thing while rebuilding the
whole lot multiple times.

Nowadays we just unpack a suitable stage 3 into a chroot, tweak CFLAGS,
"emerge -e world", then emerge all the packages you use.

The stage3 tarballs are normally quite out of date so you will rebuild
the whole lot anyway asap. If your workstation is also your buildhost,
the bests start for CFLAGS with a reasonably recent gcc is

CFLAGS="-march=native -O2 -pipe"

and CHOST, as always, is something you should not be touching at all.

IOW, as long as you start with the desired ABI (32 vs 64 bit) your first
update is going to optimize and fix things anyway. So don't wprry about it.

Oh, and "gentoo is fast" is a nono swear word these days. That's ricing
:-) Nowadays we say the benefit of gentoo is USE so you get what *you*
want :-)




-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

[Alan McKinnon]

On 02/04/2013 21:13, Paul Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Peter Humphrey  
> wrote:
>> The most important para to me in the news item was: "The feature can also be
>> completely disabled using net.ifnames=0 on the kernel command line." I just
>> added that to my grub.conf entries and I sail blissfully on with eth0.
> 
> 
> I updated remote virtual server (xen guest) and added this same
> option, crossed my fingers and rebooted, eth0 was still there and I
> was happy.
> 


I did this to get exactly the same result:

$ ls -al /etc/udev/rules.d/
total 8
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Apr  1 15:10 .
drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 Mar 30 20:34 ..
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root9 Apr  1 15:10 80-net-name-slot.rules -> /dev/null

Like you, I happen to *like* eth0 and wlan0 on a laptop workstation :-)
-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

[Jarry]

On 02-Apr-13 21:13, Paul Hartman wrote:

On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Peter Humphrey  wrote:

The most important para to me in the news item was: "The feature can also be
completely disabled using net.ifnames=0 on the kernel command line." I just
added that to my grub.conf entries and I sail blissfully on with eth0.


I updated remote virtual server (xen guest) and added this same
option, crossed my fingers and rebooted, eth0 was still there and I
was happy.


I think it is not necessary to add any options. If after upgrading
to udev200 you do not do anything, after reboot you still have eth0.
"Empty" 80-net-name-slot.rules takes care of it...

Jarry

--
___
This mailbox accepts e-mails only from selected mailing-lists!
Everything else is considered to be spam and therefore deleted.

Re: [gentoo-user] stage3 only for i486?

[Davide Carnovale]

Ahaha thanks Alan, very explanatory and funny email!
I won't say "gentoo is fast" anymore, I promise. :-)

As for the rest i'll just keep the i486 base and start from there since I
already compiled the kernel and stuff...

Thanks all

D
Il giorno 02/apr/2013 21:18, "Alan McKinnon"  ha
scritto:

> On 02/04/2013 19:51, Davide Carnovale wrote:
> > Hi all gentoo people!
> > I've been away from gentoo for a while, and I'm in the process of
> > reinstalling it today.
> > While downloading the stage 3 I noticed that only an i486 version is
> > available. As far as I remember, gentoo was best known, back in the
> > days, for being fast, as it was one of the first distro to support
> > i686... am i wrong with this? if not, why only i486 today?
> >
> > apart from the reasons behind the decision of shipping only an i486
> > stage 3, do you think it's worth the pain to recompile everything
> > (like the old stage1) for a different arch? i have an intel i5
> > processor.
>
> You have been gone a while :-)
>
> These days we don't do the whole stage 1/2/3 thing while rebuilding the
> whole lot multiple times.
>
> Nowadays we just unpack a suitable stage 3 into a chroot, tweak CFLAGS,
> "emerge -e world", then emerge all the packages you use.
>
> The stage3 tarballs are normally quite out of date so you will rebuild
> the whole lot anyway asap. If your workstation is also your buildhost,
> the bests start for CFLAGS with a reasonably recent gcc is
>
> CFLAGS="-march=native -O2 -pipe"
>
> and CHOST, as always, is something you should not be touching at all.
>
> IOW, as long as you start with the desired ABI (32 vs 64 bit) your first
> update is going to optimize and fix things anyway. So don't wprry about it.
>
> Oh, and "gentoo is fast" is a nono swear word these days. That's ricing
> :-) Nowadays we say the benefit of gentoo is USE so you get what *you*
> want :-)
>
>
>
>
> --
> Alan McKinnon
> alan.mckin...@gmail.com
>
>
>

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

[Tanstaafl]

On 2013-04-02 3:21 PM, Jarry  wrote:

On 02-Apr-13 21:13, Paul Hartman wrote:

On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Peter Humphrey
 wrote:

The most important para to me in the news item was: "The feature can
also be
completely disabled using net.ifnames=0 on the kernel command line."
I just
added that to my grub.conf entries and I sail blissfully on with eth0.


I updated remote virtual server (xen guest) and added this same
option, crossed my fingers and rebooted, eth0 was still there and I
was happy.


I think it is not necessary to add any options. If after upgrading
to udev200 you do not do anything, after reboot you still have eth0.
"Empty" 80-net-name-slot.rules takes care of it...


?

Are you saying that now, with udev-200, the default is the OLD way, and 
you have to intentionally enable the NEW way??


This is mind-boggling.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

[Alan McKinnon]

On 02/04/2013 21:41, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2013-04-02 3:21 PM, Jarry  wrote:
>> On 02-Apr-13 21:13, Paul Hartman wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Peter Humphrey
>>>  wrote:
 The most important para to me in the news item was: "The feature can
 also be
 completely disabled using net.ifnames=0 on the kernel command line."
 I just
 added that to my grub.conf entries and I sail blissfully on with eth0.
>>>
>>> I updated remote virtual server (xen guest) and added this same
>>> option, crossed my fingers and rebooted, eth0 was still there and I
>>> was happy.
>>
>> I think it is not necessary to add any options. If after upgrading
>> to udev200 you do not do anything, after reboot you still have eth0.
>> "Empty" 80-net-name-slot.rules takes care of it...
> 
> ?
> 
> Are you saying that now, with udev-200, the default is the OLD way, and
> you have to intentionally enable the NEW way??
> 
> This is mind-boggling.


No, you are stilling misunderstanding. The news item goes to great
lengths to explain that there is a new way and it is different from the
old way.

Jarry mentioned an EMPTY file, not an absent file. The ebuild does not
install an empty file, so it is not the default.

All the questions you have raised are clearly explained in the news
item. Please read it and study it, it really is complete. You appear to
be confusing yourself by adding things that are not there.





-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] stage3 only for i486?

[Alan McKinnon]

:-)

While we're on the welcome stage, you should be introduced to some of
the regulars around here:

I'm the snarky old git with the weird sense of humour that often morphs
into biting sarcasm.

Neil Bothwick is the eccentric English gent who can get across a whole
paragraph in two words. He also has a crystal ball in his fortune sig.

Dale is the best User Acceptance Tester in the whole universe. Dale
finds bugs that cannot possibly exist (the ones who's very existence
violates Quantum Mechanics). Anf yet, he finds them.

Volker is the voice of unreasonable reason. If you say something stupid,
he will let you know. He is usually right.

Bruce is the voice of reasonable reason, he must have picked it up in
China those 10 years he was there. He too is usually right.

Michael Mol is our resident expert on correctness, who will gladly
explain at length how any workaround you ever dream up is an abomination
and should not be suffered to live. In a strange quirk of reality, he
too is usually right.

Canek has found a voice as the Gnome3/systemd/udev evangelist. Take any
new piece of software that irks us old farts, and Canek is sure to run
it, find it to be good, and tell you all about it.

James is our embedded guy. No-one knows exactly what James does, but it
involves teeny weeny systems with less RAM than your wristwatch, and
somehow Gentoo runs on it. I think it's $MAGIC, he will say it is
$SCIENCE, I won't argue.

Grant is our entrepeneur, forever tweaking code to do stuff that none of
us comprehend. Grant speaks a foreign language, I believe it is called
"Business". The rest of us speak a different language called
"Technical". And yet somehow we communicate. It's weird.

Mark is the money guy, he does trades. On Gentoo. All trading software
is Windows only, so Mark learned $MAGIC. He hasn't been around for a
while, maybe he'll see this and say hello 

There are many more regulars. Those are just the few I know well enough
to mention them without getting ripped a new one :-)


Cheers,





On 02/04/2013 21:40, Davide Carnovale wrote:
> Ahaha thanks Alan, very explanatory and funny email!
> I won't say "gentoo is fast" anymore, I promise. :-)
> 
> As for the rest i'll just keep the i486 base and start from there since
> I already compiled the kernel and stuff...
> 
> Thanks all
> 
> D
> 
> Il giorno 02/apr/2013 21:18, "Alan McKinnon"  > ha scritto:
> 
> On 02/04/2013 19:51, Davide Carnovale wrote:
> > Hi all gentoo people!
> > I've been away from gentoo for a while, and I'm in the process of
> > reinstalling it today.
> > While downloading the stage 3 I noticed that only an i486 version is
> > available. As far as I remember, gentoo was best known, back in the
> > days, for being fast, as it was one of the first distro to support
> > i686... am i wrong with this? if not, why only i486 today?
> >
> > apart from the reasons behind the decision of shipping only an i486
> > stage 3, do you think it's worth the pain to recompile everything
> > (like the old stage1) for a different arch? i have an intel i5
> > processor.
> 
> You have been gone a while :-)
> 
> These days we don't do the whole stage 1/2/3 thing while rebuilding the
> whole lot multiple times.
> 
> Nowadays we just unpack a suitable stage 3 into a chroot, tweak CFLAGS,
> "emerge -e world", then emerge all the packages you use.
> 
> The stage3 tarballs are normally quite out of date so you will rebuild
> the whole lot anyway asap. If your workstation is also your buildhost,
> the bests start for CFLAGS with a reasonably recent gcc is
> 
> CFLAGS="-march=native -O2 -pipe"
> 
> and CHOST, as always, is something you should not be touching at all.
> 
> IOW, as long as you start with the desired ABI (32 vs 64 bit) your first
> update is going to optimize and fix things anyway. So don't wprry
> about it.
> 
> Oh, and "gentoo is fast" is a nono swear word these days. That's ricing
> :-) Nowadays we say the benefit of gentoo is USE so you get what *you*
> want :-)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Alan McKinnon
> alan.mckin...@gmail.com 
> 
> 


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

[gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

[Grant Edwards]

On 2013-04-02, Alan McKinnon  wrote:

> No, you are stilling misunderstanding.

He's not the only one.

> The news item goes to great lengths to explain that there is a new
> way and it is different from the old way.

I did grok that much.  I had a 70-persistent-net.rules file that named
my three interfaces "eth0" "eth1" and "eth2" based on their MAC
addresses. After reading the news item and flameeyes blog, I was still
pretty much at a loss regarding what I was actually supposed to _do_.

In Flameyes blog, he showed an example of using udev rules pretty much
identical to the ones I already had, so I couldn't figure out what was
different (other than the default interface names, which still aren't
really predictable).

In the end, I just did the upgrade and rebooted.  My existing rules
seemed to work fine: the interfaces came up with the same names as
before.  So I gave up trying to figure it out...

-- 
Grant Edwards   grant.b.edwardsYow! Of course, you
  at   UNDERSTAND about the PLAIDS
  gmail.comin the SPIN CYCLE --

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

[Alan McKinnon]

On 02/04/2013 22:31, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2013-04-02, Alan McKinnon  wrote:
> 
>> No, you are stilling misunderstanding.
> 
> He's not the only one.
> 
>> The news item goes to great lengths to explain that there is a new
>> way and it is different from the old way.
> 
> I did grok that much.  I had a 70-persistent-net.rules file that named
> my three interfaces "eth0" "eth1" and "eth2" based on their MAC
> addresses. After reading the news item and flameeyes blog, I was still
> pretty much at a loss regarding what I was actually supposed to _do_.
> 
> In Flameyes blog, he showed an example of using udev rules pretty much
> identical to the ones I already had, so I couldn't figure out what was
> different (other than the default interface names, which still aren't
> really predictable).
> 
> In the end, I just did the upgrade and rebooted.  My existing rules
> seemed to work fine: the interfaces came up with the same names as
> before.  So I gave up trying to figure it out...
> 

That is the expected result - you have explicit udev rules that lay out
how you want every interface to be named, and udev did what you told it
to do.

The issue at hand, for the most part, is what udev will do if you
*don't* have explicit unambiguous rules, i.e. you leave it up to the
software to make a decision. The new version is most likely going to do
something different to what earlier versions did. That's not hard to
understand.

The trick with all this new udev stuff is to read what is coming out of
the horse's mouth and ignore all the frenetic noise that the internet is
spewing out.


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] stage3 only for i486?

[Francesco Talamona]

On Tuesday 02 April 2013 19:51:17 Davide Carnovale wrote:
> Hi all gentoo people!
> I've been away from gentoo for a while, and I'm in the process of
> reinstalling it today.
> While downloading the stage 3 I noticed that only an i486 version is
> available. As far as I remember, gentoo was best known, back in the
> days, for being fast, as it was one of the first distro to support
> i686... am i wrong with this? if not, why only i486 today?
> 
> apart from the reasons behind the decision of shipping only an i486
> stage 3, do you think it's worth the pain to recompile everything
> (like the old stage1) for a different arch? i have an intel i5
> processor.
> 
> regards
> 
> Davide

Your bookmarks are very very old ;)

The stage3 is available for almost every supported arch, see for example:

http://distfiles.gentoo.org/releases/alpha/autobuilds/current-stage3/
http://distfiles.gentoo.org/releases/amd64/autobuilds/current-stage3/

those above are two links taken from:

http://www.gentoo.org/main/it/where.xml

HTH. Ciao
Francesco

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

[Marc Joliet]

Am Tue, 2 Apr 2013 20:31:10 + (UTC)
schrieb Grant Edwards :

> On 2013-04-02, Alan McKinnon  wrote:
> 
> > No, you are stilling misunderstanding.
> 
> He's not the only one.
> 
> > The news item goes to great lengths to explain that there is a new
> > way and it is different from the old way.
> 
> I did grok that much.  I had a 70-persistent-net.rules file that named
> my three interfaces "eth0" "eth1" and "eth2" based on their MAC
> addresses. After reading the news item and flameeyes blog, I was still
> pretty much at a loss regarding what I was actually supposed to _do_.

AFAIU, as soon as the names in your rules file differ from the in-kernel names
(e.g., if the kernel switches eth0 and eth1), bad things can happen during
renaming, due to deadlocks or something like that (others will have understood
it better and should explain it rather than I).

So, again AFAIU, it's enough to change the network device names from eth* to
net*, or whatever you desire (I went with Flameeyes naming scheme).  The
important thing is that your device names *don't* use the in-kernel namespace
"eth*". See section 3 "Old interface naming rules" in the news item and the
references therein.

The new default naming scheme is AFAICT orthogonal to that.

HTH
-- 
Marc Joliet
--
"People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we
don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

[Marc Joliet]

Am Tue, 2 Apr 2013 23:15:40 +0200
schrieb Marc Joliet :

> Am Tue, 2 Apr 2013 20:31:10 + (UTC)
> schrieb Grant Edwards :
> 
> > On 2013-04-02, Alan McKinnon  wrote:
> > 
> > > No, you are stilling misunderstanding.
> > 
> > He's not the only one.
> > 
> > > The news item goes to great lengths to explain that there is a new
> > > way and it is different from the old way.
> > 
> > I did grok that much.  I had a 70-persistent-net.rules file that named
> > my three interfaces "eth0" "eth1" and "eth2" based on their MAC
> > addresses. After reading the news item and flameeyes blog, I was still
> > pretty much at a loss regarding what I was actually supposed to _do_.
> 
> AFAIU, as soon as the names in your rules file differ from the in-kernel names
> (e.g., if the kernel switches eth0 and eth1), bad things can happen during
> renaming, due to deadlocks or something like that (others will have understood
> it better and should explain it rather than I).

OK, I should have looked first. Here's a technical explanation from
http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetworkInterfaceNames
(referenced in the news item, BTW):

  For a longer time udev shipped support for assigning permanent "ethX" names to
  certain interfaces based on their MAC addresses. This turned out to have a
  multitude of problems, among them: [snipped various other reasons]. The
  biggest of all however is that the userspace components trying to assign the
  interface name raced against the kernel assigning new names from the same
  "ethX" namespace, a race condition with all kinds of weird effects, among
  them that assignment of names sometimes failed. As a result support for this
  has been removed from systemd/udev a while back.

So not a deadlock, but a race condition.

-- 
Marc Joliet
--
"People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we
don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

[Neil Bothwick]

On Tue, 2 Apr 2013 20:31:10 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote:

> In Flameyes blog, he showed an example of using udev rules pretty much
> identical to the ones I already had, so I couldn't figure out what was
> different (other than the default interface names, which still aren't
> really predictable).

They are totally predictable, since the names are specified in the rules,
so you can predict what the interface will be called, it's what the rules
file says it will be called. However, the important issue is persistence,
whatever name an interface has is the name it will always have. The rules
renaming within the kernel namespace, eth, wlan etc, could not guarantee
that because of race conditions, and the so-called persistent names from
the new udev still cannot do the same for devices that can be physically
moved (mainly USB).

The simplest solution is to do what the news item suggests, rename the
persistent-net rules file and rename the interfaces within it to not
clash with the kernel. That's all you need to worry about when going from
197 to 200, upgrading from earlier versions means you should act on the
parts about DEVTMPFS and runlevel files.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Am I ignorant or apathetic? I don't know and don't care!


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-user] stage3 only for i486?

[Davide Carnovale]

Alan, thanks a lot for the cool description of you guys, I hope i'll get to
know you all :-)

Francesco, thank you, but you linked alpha and amd64, and i can't see any
recent one for x86

D
Il giorno 02/apr/2013 23:01, "Francesco Talamona" <
francesco.talam...@know.eu> ha scritto:

> On Tuesday 02 April 2013 19:51:17 Davide Carnovale wrote:
> > Hi all gentoo people!
> > I've been away from gentoo for a while, and I'm in the process of
> > reinstalling it today.
> > While downloading the stage 3 I noticed that only an i486 version is
> > available. As far as I remember, gentoo was best known, back in the
> > days, for being fast, as it was one of the first distro to support
> > i686... am i wrong with this? if not, why only i486 today?
> >
> > apart from the reasons behind the decision of shipping only an i486
> > stage 3, do you think it's worth the pain to recompile everything
> > (like the old stage1) for a different arch? i have an intel i5
> > processor.
> >
> > regards
> >
> > Davide
>
> Your bookmarks are very very old ;)
>
> The stage3 is available for almost every supported arch, see for example:
>
> http://distfiles.gentoo.org/releases/alpha/autobuilds/current-stage3/
> http://distfiles.gentoo.org/releases/amd64/autobuilds/current-stage3/
>
> those above are two links taken from:
>
> http://www.gentoo.org/main/it/where.xml
>
> HTH. Ciao
> Francesco
>
>
>

[gentoo-user] ntp-daemons

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

I always used net-misc/ntp for syncing time.

Now I found net-misc/chrony and set it up  looks good so far.

Any opinions and experiences on the various ways of getting THE TIME?

Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] stage3 only for i486?

[Daniel Frey]

On 04/02/2013 12:17 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> 
> Oh, and "gentoo is fast" is a nono swear word these days. That's ricing
> :-) Nowadays we say the benefit of gentoo is USE so you get what *you*
> want :-)
> 

When I'm asked, I say that gentoo is extremely flexible and can be
tailored in almost infinite ways depending on its application.

It's why I'm still using it on the desktop, maintenance time be damned.
I've tried other distros and always come back to gentoo. The lack of
flexibility with other package managers (or lack of being able to
replace the default package manager) on other distros is very
disappointing. Guess I've been spoiled too much...

Dan

[gentoo-user] Re: [way OT but interesting] Massive recent DDOS attack

[walt]

On 03/31/2013 06:00 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> Am 01.04.2013 01:12, schrieb walt:
>> Any of you admin types out there have any grumpy thoughts about this
>> article? :)  Is it really just marketing BS from cloudflare, or is it
>> solid stuff?
>>
>> http://blog.cloudflare.com/the-ddos-that-almost-broke-the-internet
>>
>>
>>
> and since pretty much every technological site PLUS a lot of mainstream
> news sites reported that attack days ago, it is really great to see
> ANOTHER thread spawned by this non-news.

Thanks Volker.  You haven't yelled at me for ages and I was beginning to
worry about you ;p

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [way OT but interesting] Massive recent DDOS attack

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

Am 03.04.2013 02:35, schrieb walt:
> On 03/31/2013 06:00 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
>> Am 01.04.2013 01:12, schrieb walt:
>>> Any of you admin types out there have any grumpy thoughts about this
>>> article? :)  Is it really just marketing BS from cloudflare, or is it
>>> solid stuff?
>>>
>>> http://blog.cloudflare.com/the-ddos-that-almost-broke-the-internet
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> and since pretty much every technological site PLUS a lot of mainstream
>> news sites reported that attack days ago, it is really great to see
>> ANOTHER thread spawned by this non-news.
> Thanks Volker.  You haven't yelled at me for ages and I was beginning to
> worry about you ;p
>
it's my guinea pigs. They make me non-grumpy.

[gentoo-user] Re: [way OT but interesting] Massive recent DDOS attack

[walt]

On 03/31/2013 08:37 PM, luis jure wrote:

> i'm more than irritated by the
> assholes minimizing the problem, or treating this as "non-news". 

Of course I don't know exactly which irritating people you mean, but
there is one senior poster in this mailing list who (very rarely) lapses
into posting insulting replies -- and then suddenly returns to his usual
pattern of providing very helpful and wise advice.

I've wondered if perhaps he has a seizure disorder or maybe a problem with
alcohol that overcomes him periodically.

In any case, I always heed his advice when he offers it, and have found no
reason to regret it -- yet :)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [way OT but interesting] Massive recent DDOS attack

[luis jure]

on 2013-04-02 at 17:58 walt wrote:


> On 03/31/2013 08:37 PM, luis jure wrote:
> 
> > i'm more than irritated by the
> > assholes minimizing the problem, or treating this as "non-news". 
> 
> Of course I don't know exactly which irritating people you mean,

i was referring specifically to the guardian article cited in the post i
replied to, as i think should be clear from the part of the thread i quoted
above my own post.

most of what the author says about journalism is right. unfortunately it
all applies to her, in reverse (i think to remember the author was a
woman, i don't care to read it again to check).

i'm sorry if people agreeing with the article feel offended by my harsh
epithet, it was not my intention. but that's my opinion of the ideas in
the article, nevertheless. 


best,


lj

Re: [gentoo-user] stage3 only for i486?

[Raymond Jennings]

as for the i486 only thing, my guess is because the kernel dropped support
for 386 when 3.8 came out


On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Daniel Frey  wrote:

> On 04/02/2013 12:17 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> >
> > Oh, and "gentoo is fast" is a nono swear word these days. That's ricing
> > :-) Nowadays we say the benefit of gentoo is USE so you get what *you*
> > want :-)
> >
>
> When I'm asked, I say that gentoo is extremely flexible and can be
> tailored in almost infinite ways depending on its application.
>
> It's why I'm still using it on the desktop, maintenance time be damned.
> I've tried other distros and always come back to gentoo. The lack of
> flexibility with other package managers (or lack of being able to
> replace the default package manager) on other distros is very
> disappointing. Guess I've been spoiled too much...
>
> Dan
>
>
>

Re: [gentoo-user] [way OT but interesting] Massive recent DDOS attack

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

Am 01.04.2013 05:37, schrieb luis jure:
>
> i'm glad for all the people who weren't affected. but whatever it was, i've
> been suffering the consequences. so i'm more than irritated by the
> assholes minimizing the problem, or treating this as "non-news". 
>
if you meant me - it is none-news. Or, it became none-news. Because:
everybody already reported it. Spamhaus was hit hard. But at no point
was 'the internet in danger'.  London exchange had a bit surplus traffic
which resulted in some irregularities - for a whole hour. Frankfurt
didn't measure anything outside of the usual statistical noise.
http://www.de-cix.net/about/statistics/

But somebody had to blow it up. And even more people jumped on it. Boohoo.

So the next time you start insulting people, base your findings on more
than a blog written by those guys who have an economical interest to
blow the whole mess out of proportion.

300gbit/s sounds like a lot. London exchange does 1tbit/s on a normal
day. Frankfurt 1.5tbit/s on average.

And they have reserves.

Of course, those responsible - all those guys with unpatched boxes whose
little zombies took part in this attack, need a good kicking. But that
is no excuse for spamming mailing lists with something the media already
abused to no end.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [way OT but interesting] Massive recent DDOS attack

[Raymond Jennings]

Do guinea pigs work better or worse than tribbles at calming you?


On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann <
volkerar...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Am 03.04.2013 02:35, schrieb walt:
> > On 03/31/2013 06:00 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> >> Am 01.04.2013 01:12, schrieb walt:
> >>> Any of you admin types out there have any grumpy thoughts about this
> >>> article? :)  Is it really just marketing BS from cloudflare, or is it
> >>> solid stuff?
> >>>
> >>> http://blog.cloudflare.com/the-ddos-that-almost-broke-the-internet
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> and since pretty much every technological site PLUS a lot of mainstream
> >> news sites reported that attack days ago, it is really great to see
> >> ANOTHER thread spawned by this non-news.
> > Thanks Volker.  You haven't yelled at me for ages and I was beginning to
> > worry about you ;p
> >
> it's my guinea pigs. They make me non-grumpy.
>
>

Re: [gentoo-user] [way OT but interesting] Massive recent DDOS attack

[luis jure]

on 2013-04-03 at 03:33 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:


> if you meant me - 

read my previous post(s). 

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [way OT but interesting] Massive recent DDOS attack

[J. Roeleveld]

Raymond Jennings  wrote:

>Do guinea pigs work better or worse than tribbles at calming you?
>
>
>On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann <
>volkerar...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Am 03.04.2013 02:35, schrieb walt:
>> > On 03/31/2013 06:00 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
>> >> Am 01.04.2013 01:12, schrieb walt:
>> >>> Any of you admin types out there have any grumpy thoughts about
>this
>> >>> article? :)  Is it really just marketing BS from cloudflare, or
>is it
>> >>> solid stuff?
>> >>>
>> >>>
>http://blog.cloudflare.com/the-ddos-that-almost-broke-the-internet
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >> and since pretty much every technological site PLUS a lot of
>mainstream
>> >> news sites reported that attack days ago, it is really great to
>see
>> >> ANOTHER thread spawned by this non-news.
>> > Thanks Volker.  You haven't yelled at me for ages and I was
>beginning to
>> > worry about you ;p
>> >
>> it's my guinea pigs. They make me non-grumpy.
>>
>>

Please don't top-post.

Tribbles don't keep people calm indefinitely. At some point they all die from 
starvation and humans would follow soon after :)
-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: [gentoo-user] 4G Stick Huawei E3276

[Mick]

On Tuesday 02 Apr 2013 16:48:26 Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> Am 02.04.2013 16:27, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
> > Am 02.04.2013 15:52, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
> >> So I am back on cdc_ncm now. And I removed all the stuff I installed
> >> when testing that huawei-driver-package.
> > 
> > phew.
> > 
> > Next small steps (but somehow promising):
> > 
> > I was able to connect via wvdial and pull an IPv4-IP-adress via dhcpcd
> > ...
> > 
> > but the connection only lasted for maybe 10 seconds. Wrong parameters?
> > 
> > After that I have to re-plug the modem to get it working again.
> 
> Update:
> 
> It works. Although rather "un-polished":
> 
> I run wvdial ... it connects ... in a second terminal I pull an
> IP-adress via dhcpcd and then started a ping to some remote IP immediately.
> 
> The wvdial-session then somehow loses connection to the modem or
> something (I have to retry and provide the logs ... right now I am so
> happy to have it working that I don't want to stop the connection  )
>  this mislead me all the times as I thought it lost connectivity.
> 
> But it still pings and works thereafter.
> 
> So it is somehow useable for me as an admin ... not so much for an
> end-user.
> 
> Contacted the dev from the thread ... he told me that the modules coming
> with linux 3.8.5 should work just fine.
> 
> So it's more of a UI-issue right now ;-)
> 
> connectivity is good so far ...
> 
> phew!

Glad to hear to you got somewhere with this effort!  :-)

If you configure your /etc/conf.d/net for wwan0 (or whatever it is now called) 
to use dhcpcd you should not need to manually attempt getting an IP address:

  config_wwan0="dhcpc"

Don't forget to create a symlink for your interface in /etc/init.d/net.lo:

  cd /etc/init.d

  ln -s net.lo net.wwan0

  rc-update add net.wwan0 default

PS.  No idea if NM will barf with these settings, but this is the vanilla 
gentoo approach to network configuration and it will deal with the non-admin 
user problem.
-- 
Regards,
Mick


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.