On 11/01/11 07:17, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
On 11/01/11 05:52, Edward Martinez wrote:
Seems like that is a class A ip address and I think class A ip
addresses uses a
netmask of 255.0.0.0
Seems like you're living on the internet of 20 years ago. That's not
the way netmasks work on the modern
On 11/01/11 05:52, Edward Martinez wrote:
Seems like that is a class A ip address and I think class A ip addresses uses a
netmask of 255.0.0.0
Seems like you're living on the internet of 20 years ago. That's not
the way netmasks work on the modern internet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIDR
I have re-installed the solaris express now. And i have configured my
network manually. It is done now. Anyway, thanks for help.
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 6:30 PM, Brian Wilson wrote:
> That is not the problem - you can assign whatever netmask you need.
>
> One - did you plumb the interface first?
That is not the problem - you can assign whatever netmask you need.
One - did you plumb the interface first?
- ifconfig bge1 plumb
Two - Probably what you really need. There's a new networking stack.
I've seen at least half a dozen writeups of how to setup a static IP
address. Here's one -
But when I connect my linux machine to that network I always give the
netmask 255.255.255.0 and it is connected. I think so this is not the
problem
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Edward Martinez wrote:
> **
> On 11/01/11 05:00, Syed Muhammad Mohsin Kazmi wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I have insta
On 11/01/11 05:00, Syed Muhammad Mohsin Kazmi wrote:
Hi all,
I have installed the text installation of current version of
opensolaris express on SUN ultra 45 workstation. When I try to
configure my network manually by using:
root@solaris-rbridge3:
Hi all,
I have installed the text installation of current version of
opensolaris express on SUN ultra 45 workstation. When I try to configure
my network manually by using:
root@solaris-rbridge3:~# ifconfig bge1
10.3.93.40 netmask 255.255.255.0 up
It gi
James Carlson wrote:
> Looking through the truss output on /usr/bin/network-admin, it appears
> that it invokes '/usr/sbin/dladm show-link -p'. I think that means it
> may have been broken by the integration of CR 6722523 in snv_96. I
> don't know why that hasn't been addressed in GNOME.
>
> (Th
Bill Shannon writes:
> James Carlson wrote:
> > Is there still a problem here in the networking component itself
> > (other than the GUI)? If so, I'd like to help solve it.
>
> No, after configuring it all by hand, networking is working fine.
> The question is, why didn't the GUI find the interfa
James Carlson wrote:
>> I am *so* sorry I upgrade to snv_98...
>
> I don't see how that relates to the previous poster's note about
> snv_100.
I had snv_86 working quite well on two machines and I was very happy
with it. Since upgrading those machines and installing snv_98 on
another machine (th
James Carlson wrote:
> Is there still a problem here in the networking component itself
> (other than the GUI)? If so, I'd like to help solve it.
No, after configuring it all by hand, networking is working fine.
The question is, why didn't the GUI find the interface? Is it
something about this i
Bill Shannon writes:
> Ghee Teo wrote:
> > The new network admin GUI is all integrated to work to its full
> > functionality in snv 100
> > as far as I heard.
>
> What exactly does that mean? The perfectly functional version in
> older releases was replaced with a new partially functional versio
Bill Shannon writes:
> This was a problem 15 years ago when I left the OS group and I see
> it's still a problem today. You OS guys need to understand that
> most people experience desktop systems through the GUI. If the
> GUI for *your* feature doesn't work, it's the same as your feature
> not w
Ghee Teo wrote:
> The new network admin GUI is all integrated to work to its full
> functionality in snv 100
> as far as I heard.
What exactly does that mean? The perfectly functional version in
older releases was replaced with a new partially functional version?
I am *so* sorry I upgrade to sn
James Carlson wrote:
> Bill Shannon writes:
>> I disabled svc:/network/physical:nwam and enabled
>> svc:/network/physical:default. I went to System > Administration >
>> Network. It doesn't show *any* interfaces.
>
> I'd recommend contacting the Desktop community. They're the ones who
> support
Bill Shannon writes:
> I disabled svc:/network/physical:nwam and enabled
> svc:/network/physical:default. I went to System > Administration >
> Network. It doesn't show *any* interfaces.
I'd recommend contacting the Desktop community. They're the ones who
support the GUI bits.
I can't say I us
Bill Shannon escribió:
> I installed 2008.05 on a new machine, upgraded to snv_98.
> Now I'm trying to convert to static IP.
>
> I disabled svc:/network/physical:nwam and enabled
> svc:/network/physical:default. I went to System > Administration >
> Network. It doesn't show *any* interfaces.
>
The new network admin GUI is all integrated to work to its full
functionality in snv 100
as far as I heard.
-Ghee
Bill Shannon wrote:
> I installed 2008.05 on a new machine, upgraded to snv_98.
> Now I'm trying to convert to static IP.
>
> I disabled svc:/network/physical:nwam and enabled
> svc:
I installed 2008.05 on a new machine, upgraded to snv_98.
Now I'm trying to convert to static IP.
I disabled svc:/network/physical:nwam and enabled
svc:/network/physical:default. I went to System > Administration >
Network. It doesn't show *any* interfaces.
Sigh.
I rebooted. No help.
I creat
Sorry for my delay, but I need to restart PC to log in opensolaris to get this
information and then restart it again to log in windows and access the forum ^^.
Some informations that I put in "help" forum.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ifconfig -a
lo0: flags=2001000849 mtu 8232 index 1
inet 127.0.0.1 net
Gerson Fioravanti Junior writes:
> It works fine with my hardware and just don't detect two things. The
> integrated sound card and the integrated lan card. But I have here a USB
> DLINK adapter and use it to fly in internet ^^.
The OpenSolaris boot CD has a utility you can run that checks the
h
Looks like your adapter is unknown
# kstat -c net|grep net
Whats your output?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
You need to enable physical adapter:
$ pfexec svcadm enable network/physical:default
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Hello guys.
First, sorry for my bad english.
So, going directly to the point, I am a real nub in linux (or any other system
but M$).
I like to learn linux and a friend of mine suggested to use opensolaris, so, I
have installed in a second HD this distro (2008.05).
It works fine with my hardwa
Vincenzo Sciarra wrote:
I have a problem with my network.
I'll paste below :
**
# host google.com
google.com has address 64.233.167.99
# ping 64.233.167.99
64.233.167.99 is alive
# ping google.com
ping: unkno
I have a problem with my network.
I'll paste below :
**
# host google.com
google.com has address 64.233.167.99
# ping 64.233.167.99
64.233.167.99 is alive
# ping google.com
ping: unknown host google.com
**
26 matches
Mail list logo
