>
>
> ip_forward is set to one. Confirmed it with cat.
>
> I did this one time before. I found a iptables script and when I ran it,
> it just worked. The script is old and doesn't work anymore. The last time
> it was a gateway issue. I'm not sure this time.
>
Are there any iptables rules on s
=== On Fri, 12/10, Dale wrote: ===
> I did this. From smoker, I pinged google. I got the IP address from
> that. I then tried to ping google BY IP address on lightening. It
> gives me the error "ping: unknown host 72.14.299.99".
===
That's a different error. That is not a valid address.
S
After I've built and installed a kernel and the in-tree-modules, is
there a way to clean the kernel source/build tree down to the minimal
set of files needed to build out-of-tree modules?
I think you would end up with the same files that you would have after
doing "make modules_prepare" in a clean
On 10 December 2010 09:40, Keith Dart wrote:
> === On Fri, 12/10, Dale wrote: ===
>> I did this. From smoker, I pinged google. I got the IP address from
>> that. I then tried to ping google BY IP address on lightening. It
>> gives me the error "ping: unknown host 72.14.299.99".
>
> ===
>
> Tha
Am 09.12.2010 18:14, schrieb Neil Bothwick:
> On Thu, 09 Dec 2010 17:08:42 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
>> Wouldn't it be even more efficient (in terms of not wasting space) to
>> create that 6-devices-RAID1 smaller, for /boot and a second array, with
>> RAID6, for / ?
>>
>> Less space waste
Am 09.12.2010 18:21, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
> Put /boot on raid1, / on raid6. Don't bother with lvm - it is just
> another layer that can go wrong.
You mean "don't use lvm for /" ? ... for other stuff it's very useful,
isn't it?
;-)
I never put / on lvm, yep.
> If Raid6 is like raid5 yo
On 12/09/2010 05:31 AM, Adam Carter wrote:
Gtk-Message: Failed to load module "gnomebreakpad": libgnomebreakpad.so:
cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
I'm still trying to find out who is looking for that library. The new
version of bug-buddy no l
On Friday 10 December 2010, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> Am 09.12.2010 18:21, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
> > Put /boot on raid1, / on raid6. Don't bother with lvm - it is just
> > another layer that can go wrong.
>
> You mean "don't use lvm for /" ? ... for other stuff it's very useful,
> isn'
On Friday 10 December 2010, James wrote:
> Volker Armin Hemmann googlemail.com> writes:
> > Put /boot on raid1, / on raid6. Don't bother with lvm - it is just
> > another layer that can go wrong.
> > If Raid6 is like raid5 you should be able to have the kernel auto
> > assemble everything, so no i
On Thursday 09 December 2010, Helmut Jarausch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I see a strange effect which puzzles me.
> I have two AMD64 (~amd64) Systems. Both have 8Gb memory installed
> as reported by their BIOS as well as by lshw.
> One is a somewhat older Opteron, the other one a recent Phenom II.
> But the
On 2010-12-10, Grant Edwards wrote:
> After I've built and installed a kernel and the in-tree-modules, is
> there a way to clean the kernel source/build tree down to the minimal
> set of files needed to build out-of-tree modules?
>
> I think you would end up with the same files that you would hav
Am 2010-12-10 16:41, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
> On Friday 10 December 2010, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
>> Am 09.12.2010 18:21, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
>>> Put /boot on raid1, / on raid6. Don't bother with lvm - it is
>>> just another layer that can go wrong.
>>
>> You mean "don't use l
On Friday 10 December 2010, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> Am 2010-12-10 16:41, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
> > On Friday 10 December 2010, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> >> Am 09.12.2010 18:21, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
> >>> Put /boot on raid1, / on raid6. Don't bother with lvm - it is
> >>>
Mick wrote:
On 10 December 2010 09:40, Keith Dart wrote:
=== On Fri, 12/10, Dale wrote: ===
I did this. From smoker, I pinged google. I got the IP address from
that. I then tried to ping google BY IP address on lightening. It
gives me the error "ping: unknown host 72.14.299.99".
Volker Armin Hemmann googlemail.com> writes:
> > http://www.acnc.com/04_01_06.html
> http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/RAID/Software
> looks ok.
Good to know.
The next time somebody ask about RAID, I'll
pop them up, as the RAID[leve] pages have
really nice diagrams and explanations.
thanks
Am 2010-12-10 19:03, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann:
> well, what is so 'great' about lvm? That you can shove around free
> space where it is needed.
>
> You can do the same with bind mounting.
>
> With the additional bonus that mount simply works. Unlike lvm.
>
> Btw, does lvm still eat barriers?
=== On Fri, 12/10, Dale wrote: ===
> The modem I have is a Motorola Netopia 2210-02. I took that info
> from the home page of the modem. Just looking at it, it's the little
> silver colored thing and I did pay almost $80.00 for that thing. It
> also says it has a DNS server and it is on.
===
O
Peter Humphrey wrote:
On Thursday 09 December 2010 14:32:57 Florian Philipp wrote:
Probably an issue with your desktop theme. Try to switch it and maybe
log-out/log-in.
I'm not aware of having a desktop theme. I certainly haven't changed
anything in that department.
I may have to re
On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 16:47:18 +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> a) bios limitiation. Some bad bios implementations (even from expensive
> vendors) map the pci space into the 3.5-4gb or 7.5-8gb area. Stupid.
Although you usually change the BIOS settings to not act broken just to
appease rubbish
On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:47:26 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> > Since / only needs about 200MB, space isn't really an issue, and RAID1
> > gives the highest redundancy. The main reason I don't put / on a
> > higher RAID level is that it adds the complication of another
> > filesystem and parti
Hi,
The subject pretty much says it all. Anyone using xorg-server-1.9 yet?
I'm doing a install on a new rig and thought about just jumping ahead a
little bit and not having to deal with hal so much.
Anybody had problems with it yet? Works fine? Blows smoke?
Dale
:-) :-)
=== On Fri, 12/10, Dale wrote: ===
> The subject pretty much says it all. Anyone using xorg-server-1.9
> yet?
===
I'm using it now. Works fine. But of course that really all depends on
what kind of video card you have and what driver you use.
-- Keith Dart
--
-- ~~
Keith Dart wrote:
=== On Fri, 12/10, Dale wrote: ===
The subject pretty much says it all. Anyone using xorg-server-1.9
yet?
===
I'm using it now. Works fine. But of course that really all depends on
what kind of video card you have and what driver you use.
-- Keith Dart
It'
Apparently, though unproven, at 04:17 on Saturday 11 December 2010, Dale did
opine thusly:
> Hi,
>
> The subject pretty much says it all. Anyone using xorg-server-1.9 yet?
> I'm doing a install on a new rig and thought about just jumping ahead a
> little bit and not having to deal with hal so m
24 matches
Mail list logo
