Re: Kernel Panic, after a build

2000-09-20 Thread Charles Hixson
"GYGAX,OTTO (HP-Corvallis,ex1)" wrote: > I built a new version of the kernel under RH6.2, currently running > 2.2.14-5.0smp. The new version is 2.2.17. Compilation and building of the > required modules succeeded. lilo.conf has also been updated to reflect the new > kernel name. System.map, initr

Re: Kernel Panic, after a build

2000-09-20 Thread Matilainen Panu (NRC/Helsinki)
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, EXT GYGAX,OTTO (HP-Corvallis,ex1) wrote: > I built a new version of the kernel under RH6.2, currently running > 2.2.14-5.0smp. The new version is 2.2.17. Compilation and building of the > required modules succeeded. lilo.conf has also been updated to reflect the new You shou

Re: Tcp_wrappers enhancements?

2000-09-20 Thread Matilainen Panu (NRC/Helsinki)
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, EXT Pekka Savola wrote: > Hello all, > > Does anyone know if someone has already implemented the following > tcp_wrappers enhancements wrt. /etc/hosts.allow/deny : > > - Support for '?' and '*' wildcards for hostnames >* .domain.com use is _way_ too inflexible if subdo

Re: Kernel Panic, after a build

2000-09-20 Thread Jeff
As a first guess, I would imagine that A: you accidentally overwrote your original kernel, and B, while you did change lilo.conf, you didnt rerun lilo to write teh changes to the MBR, causing LILO to look for a kernel image that isnt there. that or you just didnt quite get lilo configured right.

Re: Kernel Panic, after a build

2000-09-20 Thread Yuzz
DO you compile the tar.gz kernel or updated from RPM packages?? If tar.gz ..i think you should take the same configuration as 2.2.14-5smp(rpm) kernel configuration in the kernel source (/usr/src/linux/config) ..then check if you want to enable anything in the new 2.2.17 kernel and recompile back

Re: Reiser FS

2000-09-20 Thread jfm2
> > Whither backups? A journaled filesystem will NOT protect against: 1) > failed hard drive; 2) hacker damage; 3) virus/worm damage; 4) accidental > file deletions or modifications. In my experience managing about 300 > computers, hard drives fail more often than it is necessary to run fsck >

Re: Tcp_wrappers enhancements?

2000-09-20 Thread Pekka Savola
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Pekka Savola wrote: > - Support for including external files to hosts.allow for specific > services. >* This would make hosts.allow easier to maintain > (esp. wrt. synchronization) if a lot of different services use > /etc/hosts.allow. This has been done in recent vers

Kernel Panic, after a build

2000-09-20 Thread GYGAX,OTTO (HP-Corvallis,ex1)
I built a new version of the kernel under RH6.2, currently running 2.2.14-5.0smp. The new version is 2.2.17. Compilation and building of the required modules succeeded. lilo.conf has also been updated to reflect the new kernel name. System.map, initrd.x.img, vmlinuz and vmlinux have all been place

Re: Reiser FS

2000-09-20 Thread Jonathan F. Dill
Whither backups? A journaled filesystem will NOT protect against: 1) failed hard drive; 2) hacker damage; 3) virus/worm damage; 4) accidental file deletions or modifications. In my experience managing about 300 computers, hard drives fail more often than it is necessary to run fsck "manually."

Tcp_wrappers enhancements?

2000-09-20 Thread Pekka Savola
Hello all, Does anyone know if someone has already implemented the following tcp_wrappers enhancements wrt. /etc/hosts.allow/deny : - Support for '?' and '*' wildcards for hostnames * .domain.com use is _way_ too inflexible if subdomains haven't been named with great care. - Support for in

Re: Reiser FS

2000-09-20 Thread John Summerfield
> -"No. I know of a litterture professor who after an untimely powerdown, > found that the automatic fsck failed so he was asked to repair manualy > and found himself unable to do it" > > Losing important data due to an untimely crash or powerdown is also an > issue in serious applications. H

Re: Reiser FS

2000-09-20 Thread Daniel Hammer
BS"D We surely need an FS who is better at error recovery than ext2fs. But anyway, guys at Compaq use to talk much if the day is long! >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > A few months ago a Compaq guy told me: > > "-Linux will never be ready for Joe Users" > "-It is nearing" > -"No. I know of a litt