On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 02:32:03PM -0500, All Internet Services wrote:
> I am running Debian Linux 2.19. On one of my site, which
> I switched from old domain to new. There is a strange problem.
> I am hosting a site http://www.jennswing.com
> on this server. When the site is brought, then inste
On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 12:25:25PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2001 19:27, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> > IIRC, that was the first release for Linux. First releases are only
> > going to work on the target distribution, if at all.
>
> As far as I recall Oracle first
On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 09:06:58AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 05:41:11PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> > The Oracle installation software is written by some really stupid
> > people. It has plenty of moving X widgets etc to show that the
> > installation is in progress,
On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 05:41:11PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2001 13:25, Peter Billson wrote:
> > > Oracle will do the trick, but the installation on linux seems so fragile:
> >
...
> > those issues. RedHat's 6.2EE series applied a lot of the 2.4
> > modifications to the 2.2 ser
On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 02:13:19AM +0200, Diego Torres wrote:
>
> i need to serve webpages under a domain (example.com), but i
> have a problem. the machine with the external ip is a fw, that
> does port forwarding to the apache box. this is not a very big
> problem, but gets really annoying when
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 01:46:32PM -0500, Matt Fair wrote:
> Dmitry,
> Recompile the kernel without APM support.
> Matt
>
Isn't there an ioctl that will let you disable apm at runtime?
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 01:46:32PM -0500, Matt Fair wrote:
> Dmitry,
> Recompile the kernel without APM support.
> Matt
>
Isn't there an ioctl that will let you disable apm at runtime?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTE
On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 11:29:46PM -0400, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
> Are your DSL uplinks from different ISPs, or from the same IP provider? If
They are different providers.
DSL 1 is 384k/1.5m adsl at pacbell
dsl2 is 768k sdsl landmark (lmki)
> they are differing providers, there is no way you ca
On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 11:29:46PM -0400, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
> Are your DSL uplinks from different ISPs, or from the same IP provider? If
They are different providers.
DSL 1 is 384k/1.5m adsl at pacbell
dsl2 is 768k sdsl landmark (lmki)
> they are differing providers, there is no way you c
Hi,
I don't believe I'm subscribed to this list, so please cc me also. (I'm on
so many debian lists, and I put all of the low traffic ones in one folder...)
I already have multiple DSL links to the Internet, but I haven't done
anything more as far as incoming connections besides SMTP and a couple
Hi,
I don't believe I'm subscribed to this list, so please cc me also. (I'm on
so many debian lists, and I put all of the low traffic ones in one folder...)
I already have multiple DSL links to the Internet, but I haven't done
anything more as far as incoming connections besides SMTP and a coupl
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 07:03:54PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi:
> Mem "used" is more big ?
> Mem "free" is more little ?
> whats..???
>
> thanks.no speaken englishsorry
>
> 2:05pm up 2:39, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
> 55 processes: 54 sleeping, 1 running, 0
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 07:03:54PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi:
> Mem "used" is more big ?
> Mem "free" is more little ?
> whats..???
>
> thanks.no speaken englishsorry
>
> 2:05pm up 2:39, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
> 55 processes: 54 sleeping, 1 running,
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 10:43:42AM -0400, Haim Dimermanas wrote:
>
> > My problem is the following : the master sends NOTIFY request to the
> > slaves for that zone every 8 seconds (sometimes 10 sec, sometimes 4
> > sec).
>
> Thanks to the folks from the South Florida Linux User Exchange, we
>
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 10:40:27PM -0700, Ted Deppner wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:41:38PM -0700, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> > My concern was that for a hotel with 1000s of rooms that a switch port for
> > each room would be a very high cost, but what you described looks like an
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 10:43:42AM -0400, Haim Dimermanas wrote:
>
> > My problem is the following : the master sends NOTIFY request to the
> > slaves for that zone every 8 seconds (sometimes 10 sec, sometimes 4
> > sec).
>
> Thanks to the folks from the South Florida Linux User Exchange, we
>
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 10:40:27PM -0700, Ted Deppner wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:41:38PM -0700, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> > My concern was that for a hotel with 1000s of rooms that a switch port for
> > each room would be a very high cost, but what you described looks like an
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 10:30:18PM -0400, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
>
> If you read up on Private LANs and don't grok it, I could provide an
> explaination. The clue level on this thread has been higher than most on
> this list (thankfully, stuff like this is why I remain subscribed) but this
> is an
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 10:30:18PM -0400, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
>
> If you read up on Private LANs and don't grok it, I could provide an
> explaination. The clue level on this thread has been higher than most on
> this list (thankfully, stuff like this is why I remain subscribed) but this
> is a
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 07:28:54PM -0700, Ted Deppner wrote:
> Hubs (shudder) and switches (even most Cisco stuff) would allow snooping,
> break two 10.0.0.1 customers from working, broadcast collisions, gateway
> and next hop collisions, etc...
>
> The concept is the customer is directly connecte
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 07:28:54PM -0700, Ted Deppner wrote:
> Hubs (shudder) and switches (even most Cisco stuff) would allow snooping,
> break two 10.0.0.1 customers from working, broadcast collisions, gateway
> and next hop collisions, etc...
>
> The concept is the customer is directly connect
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 07:32:03AM -0700, Ted Deppner wrote:
> Another huge component is automatic MAC and GatewayIP address discovery.
> The good systems allow you to use ANY settings on your laptop, DO NOT
> require you to use DHCP, and can allow multiple people who have 10.0.0.1
> as their ip ad
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 06:12:20PM -0700, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> I added an IP (IPs changed for this example):
>
> ifconfig eth0:1 192.168.197.179 netmask 255.255.255.128 up
>
> It was listed with "ifconfig -a".
>
> Then I removed it with:
>
> ifconfig eth0:1 192.168.197.179 down
>
> And it
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 07:32:03AM -0700, Ted Deppner wrote:
> Another huge component is automatic MAC and GatewayIP address discovery.
> The good systems allow you to use ANY settings on your laptop, DO NOT
> require you to use DHCP, and can allow multiple people who have 10.0.0.1
> as their ip a
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 06:12:20PM -0700, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> I added an IP (IPs changed for this example):
>
> ifconfig eth0:1 192.168.197.179 netmask 255.255.255.128 up
>
> It was listed with "ifconfig -a".
>
> Then I removed it with:
>
> ifconfig eth0:1 192.168.197.179 down
>
> And i
On Wed, Apr 11, 2001 at 10:31:58AM +0530, Raju wrote:
> I am in need of a hard disk , Could somebody supply it to me with price
> details.
>
> SCSG HARD DISK
> 18 GB ULTRA WHITE WITH ADEPEC CONTROLLER
> MANUFACTURE DATE: 200 OR 1999
>
> BRAND ANY OF SEAGATE, MAXELL,IBM OR ID
>
> Thanks
> Raju
c
On Wed, Apr 11, 2001 at 10:31:58AM +0530, Raju wrote:
> I am in need of a hard disk , Could somebody supply it to me with price details.
>
> SCSG HARD DISK
> 18 GB ULTRA WHITE WITH ADEPEC CONTROLLER
> MANUFACTURE DATE: 200 OR 1999
>
> BRAND ANY OF SEAGATE, MAXELL,IBM OR ID
>
> Thanks
> Raju
che
On Mon, Apr 02, 2001 at 05:55:41PM +0200, I. Forbes wrote:
> The problems:
>
> "apt-get --deslect-upgrade" is painfully slow - particularly on slow
> hardware. And you have to sit and watch and answer "y/n" stuff 'till
> it is finished. (Can't wait for debconf to be working on a useful
> leve
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 09:37:13AM +0300, Hery Zo RAKOTONDRAMANANA wrote:
> I'm now trying amanda (www.amanda.org) that seems to show some nice
> features.
>
I'm currently using retrospect on mac (yes, I know, I know...) and I'm
wondering if I could use another *nix package to restore files backe
On Mon, Apr 02, 2001 at 05:55:41PM +0200, I. Forbes wrote:
> The problems:
>
> "apt-get --deslect-upgrade" is painfully slow - particularly on slow
> hardware. And you have to sit and watch and answer "y/n" stuff 'till
> it is finished. (Can't wait for debconf to be working on a useful
> lev
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 09:37:13AM +0300, Hery Zo RAKOTONDRAMANANA wrote:
> I'm now trying amanda (www.amanda.org) that seems to show some nice
> features.
>
I'm currently using retrospect on mac (yes, I know, I know...) and I'm
wondering if I could use another *nix package to restore files back
On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 09:24:56PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Mar 101 12:28:54 -0500 (EST), Allen Ahoffman
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >can someone tell me how to secure a network so that:
> >the router won't route traffic if the specific mac address isn't
> >registered before hand?
>
On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 12:27:16PM -0700, John Gonzalez/netMDC admin wrote:
>
> Back in the 2.0.XX days of the kernel, i used to add virtual hosts in the
> following fashion, and it worked beautiful. I could even add hosts out of
> a diff subnet then the primary interface.
>
> It would take and s
On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 09:24:56PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Mar 101 12:28:54 -0500 (EST), Allen Ahoffman
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >can someone tell me how to secure a network so that:
> >the router won't route traffic if the specific mac address isn't
> >registered before hand?
On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 12:28:54PM -0500, Allen Ahoffman wrote:
> can someone tell me how to secure a network so that:
> the router won't route traffic if the specific mac address isn't
> registered before hand?
> it would keep people in line.
> better, a table with mac addresses and ip(s) (its alr
On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 12:27:16PM -0700, John Gonzalez/netMDC admin wrote:
>
> Back in the 2.0.XX days of the kernel, i used to add virtual hosts in the
> following fashion, and it worked beautiful. I could even add hosts out of
> a diff subnet then the primary interface.
>
> It would take and
On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 12:28:54PM -0500, Allen Ahoffman wrote:
> can someone tell me how to secure a network so that:
> the router won't route traffic if the specific mac address isn't
> registered before hand?
> it would keep people in line.
> better, a table with mac addresses and ip(s) (its al
On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 04:49:33PM -0700, David Bishop wrote:
>
> All appropriate hosts?? Seeing as I plan on hitting this box from many
> different places (it's going to be public), and even our local machines total
> more than 300 boxes, that's not really an option... :-)
>
Sure, it's only a f
On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 04:49:33PM -0700, David Bishop wrote:
>
> All appropriate hosts?? Seeing as I plan on hitting this box from many
> different places (it's going to be public), and even our local machines total
> more than 300 boxes, that's not really an option... :-)
>
Sure, it's only a
est thing you can do is go to the address in your web browser and see if
the files are still there or have been reorganized.
I've done that a couple times, and it's fun building your own sources.list
lines.
--
Mike Fedyk "They that can give
.name source community
#com2sec paranoid default public
com2sec readonly 10.0.0.1 public
#com2sec readwrite default private
You have something similar in your snmpd.conf. The above lets only 10.0.0.1
access the snmp. This was good enough for me, buy the manual
h hundreds, maybe thousands of ISPs. Although, this could be a
project to organize.
Anyway, I don't know how if there would be any drawbacks to a semi-country coded
distributed LKML (for exampele). Maybe you guys have some ideas.
Mike
--
Mike Fedyk "They that c
42 matches
Mail list logo
