gettin' the Sparc Classic on the network...
Hello all, Settin' up the box I won at the last WLUG meeting. I wanna get it on the network here at work. When I watch the boot messages, I see "eth0 LANCE <mac address>" and "eth0 using auto-carrier-detection", but i don't see an entry for /dev/eth0 when i look there. I can ping the local loopback, but when I try to use DHCP in linuxconf to let it grab an address, but in ifconfig, i still only see the entry for the local loopback. Is there a different location for the eth0 device? Any hints? Anything would be appreciated. Thanx everyone. - Sands Fish - eCommerce - telecomNOW - sands@telecomnow.com
Well, I might be a little out of touch with my old-fashioned Slackware ways, but I don't think there's supposed to be a /dev/eth0. DHCP must not be working if it's not showing up in ifconfig, but try ifconfig eth0 to see if the interface exists. You can always try running dhcpcd manually, too. On Wed, 22 Aug 2001, Sands Fish wrote:
Hello all, Settin' up the box I won at the last WLUG meeting. I wanna get it on the network here at work. When I watch the boot messages, I see "eth0 LANCE <mac address>" and "eth0 using auto-carrier-detection", but i don't see an entry for /dev/eth0 when i look there. I can ping the local loopback, but when I try to use DHCP in linuxconf to let it grab an address, but in ifconfig, i still only see the entry for the local loopback. Is there a different location for the eth0 device? Any hints? Anything would be appreciated. Thanx everyone.
- Sands Fish - eCommerce - telecomNOW - sands@telecomnow.com
On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 05:04:44PM -0400, Ben Dow wrote:
Well, I might be a little out of touch with my old-fashioned Slackware ways, but I don't think there's supposed to be a /dev/eth0. DHCP must not be working if it's not showing up in ifconfig, but try ifconfig eth0 to see if the interface exists. You can always try running dhcpcd manually, too.
Right. eth0 is a network interface, not a device, so there is no /dev/ entry. If you're just trying to test the interface, you can also just assign it an IP by hand by doing "ifconfig eth0 192.168.blah.blah". You might also need some -netmask goodness, but I'm not sure. "man ifconfig" has the goods. Then once that works, I'd start getting into DHCP. I'm a little paranoid with DHCP... at work I use dhcpcd because pump doesn't work. At home (with road-runner), I use pump because dhcpcd doesn't work. Am I on crack? -Chuck
I'm a little paranoid with DHCP... at work I use dhcpcd because pump doesn't work. At home (with road-runner), I use pump because dhcpcd doesn't work. Am I on crack?
Probably not (though there is room for error on that one). At work I've gotten neither pump nor ISC's dhcpclient to work on my laptop, but dhcpcd works perfectly. I haven't tried any others at WPI, as it worked there on the first try. I don't suppose anyone has a real explanation for flakiness between DHCP servers/clients, other than claiming that our Win2k DHCP server at work sucks (I already know THAT)? Brian J. Conway dogbert@clue4all.net "LINUX is obsolete" - Andrew S. Tanenbaum, creator of Minix
Sands> Settin' up the box I won at the last WLUG meeting. I wanna Sands> get it on the network here at work. When I watch the boot Sands> messages, I see "eth0 LANCE <mac address>" and "eth0 using Sands> auto-carrier-detection", but i don't see an entry for /dev/eth0 Sands> when i look there. I can ping the local loopback, but when I Sands> try to use DHCP in linuxconf to let it grab an address, but in Sands> ifconfig, i still only see the entry for the local loopback. Sands> Is there a different location for the eth0 device? Any hints? Sands> Anything would be appreciated. Thanx everyone. The box should already be semi setup to use an address between 192.168.1.101-105, or something like that. I don't remember exactly what I used and I'm not at home to check. The LANCE part is the ethernet chip, eth0 is the interface you need to use to access the net. Do you have any errors in the log file when you run dhcpd on the box? It might need to have some stuff put into /etc/dhcpd.conf to get it working right. I can check this at home if need be. And if need be, I can rip a copy of RH 6.1 for Sparc and bring it to the next meeting for those who'd like to get packages for it. John
John, Tuesday came and went ... the next times I can come by are Friday (8/24) or Monday (8/27). If either of these days work, please send directions and possible times. Thanks, Andrew
A> Tuesday came and went ... the next times I can come by are A> Friday (8/24) or Monday (8/27). If either of these days work, A> please send directions and possible times. Thanks, Andrew Sorry, it's been a bad week, we just let go a bunch of people and I'm doing account lock downs, etc. Anyway, tomorrow after around 6pm would be fine, or monday after 6pm. Simple directions from Natick... Rt 90 West to Rt 495 North to Rt 290 West to Exit 23B, Rt 140 North to Go about 1.5 miles, turn left onto Sewall Street. Third Right onto "Long Leaf" First Left onto Fox Tail Way Fourth driveway on left, #25. 508-579-6331 (cell).
Fuck!! I just got burned by this stupid reply-to goes to the list, not the writer of the email. Chalk me up as one who is pissed by this setup too. John
Just use pine guys, it asks you if you want to use reply-to address or from address. personal, i can deal with deleteing e-mails i dont' want, and i prefer it this way so that when somebody answers somebodies question, i get to know how it was done incase i ever run into it in the future. but tha tis just me. Orbitz p.s. sorry this is so horribly typed, i'm sleepy
Orbitz <orbitz@firest0rm.org> writes:
Just use pine guys, it asks you if you want to use reply-to address or from address. personal, i can deal with deleteing e-mails i dont' want, and i prefer it this way so that when somebody answers somebodies question, i get to know how it was done incase i ever run into it in the future. but tha tis just me.
oh god, not someone suggesting pine! :P Reasonable email clients should have this configurable... for mutt: ignore_list_reply_to Type: boolean Default: no Affects the behaviour of the reply function when replying to messages from mailing lists. When set, if the "Reply-To:" field is set to the same value as the "To:" field, Mutt assumes that the "Reply- To:" field was set by the mailing list to automate responses to the list, and will ignore this field. To direct a response to the mailing list when this option is set, use the list-reply function; group- reply will reply to both the sender and the list. Mutt's a great console based email client, and I strongly reccommend it over pine. ttyl, -- Josh Huber
participants (9)
-
A. Perry -
Ben Dow -
Brian J.Conway -
Chuck Homic -
John Stoffel -
john＠stoffel.org -
Josh Huber -
Orbitz -
Sands Fish