On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 02:25:25PM +, Mike Crowe wrote:
> On Friday 27 January 2017 at 09:48:22 +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > Independent of this changing the default TFTP_ADDRESS to ":69" to get
> > ipv6 connectivity would be nice. Or maybe still better to ":tftp".
>
> Indeed. As I wrote
On Friday 27 January 2017 at 09:48:22 +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Independent of this changing the default TFTP_ADDRESS to ":69" to get
> ipv6 connectivity would be nice. Or maybe still better to ":tftp".
Indeed. As I wrote in message #95, the debconf question for TFTP_ADDRESS
even implies th
Hello,
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 09:48:22AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> I acknowledge Norbert's expectations for the ipv4 world. So I did the
> following with python to test my expectations:
>
> >>> import socket
> >>> fd4 = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_DGRAM, 0)
>
Hello,
FTR: I'm annoyed by the behaviour of tftp here, too.
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 09:38:36AM +0930, Ron wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:23:28PM +0200, Norbert Lange wrote:
> > 2015-05-21 16:59 GMT+02:00 Ron :
> > > As we discussed earlier in this bug, if that's what you *want* it
> > > is f
I would separate the tftp use cases then:
*) Binding to an ip address.
This would raise the question, when should tftp daemon be started and how.
The necessary hook would be: Event "TFT_IP is available" -> start tftp daemon.
This is as far as I know not part of init systems and the Tftp package
is
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:15:00AM +0200, Norbert Lange wrote:
> Hi Ron
>
> 2015-05-22 2:08 GMT+02:00 Ron :
> >
> > From a sample space of two, Networkmanager appears to be emerging as
> > the common culprit ...
>
> Quite possibly its Networkmanager fault, but its strange that only
> tftp-hpa is
Hi Ron
2015-05-22 2:08 GMT+02:00 Ron :
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:23:28PM +0200, Norbert Lange wrote:
>> 2015-05-21 16:59 GMT+02:00 Ron :
>> >
>> > Hi Norbert,
>> >
>> > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:25:38AM +0200, Norbert Lange wrote:
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> since this behaviour is still on Jessi
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:23:28PM +0200, Norbert Lange wrote:
> 2015-05-21 16:59 GMT+02:00 Ron :
> >
> > Hi Norbert,
> >
> > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:25:38AM +0200, Norbert Lange wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> since this behaviour is still on Jessie and is rather inconvenient.
> >> Whats the recom
2015-05-21 16:59 GMT+02:00 Ron :
>
> Hi Norbert,
>
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:25:38AM +0200, Norbert Lange wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> since this behaviour is still on Jessie and is rather inconvenient.
>> Whats the recommended workaround nowadays?
>
> Can you elaborate a little more on exactly what c
Hi Norbert,
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:25:38AM +0200, Norbert Lange wrote:
> Hello,
>
> since this behaviour is still on Jessie and is rather inconvenient.
> Whats the recommended workaround nowadays?
Can you elaborate a little more on exactly what configuration you have
with Jessie that you se
I went ahead and patched the init script so you can omit all Variables
in the configuration. In my opinion its the cleanest to just dont set
the TFTP_ADDRESS variable and the script then doesnt pass the
--address option to in.tftpd.
--- tftpd-hpa.save 2015-05-21 11:23:28.841023590 +0200
+++ tftpd-
Hello,
since this behaviour is still on Jessie and is rather inconvenient.
Whats the recommended workaround nowadays?
I want to serve on 2 networks, so setting my ip address wont cut it.
Is changing to TFTP_ADDRESS=":69" cause any issues, or a if-up.d
script still the best option?
Kind Regards,
N
On Sunday 30 November 2014 at 08:05:46 +1030, Ron wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 08:32:05PM +, Mike Crowe wrote:
> > But I don't think that the default of :69 is any worse than 0.0.0.0:69
> > would be though - unless you have a deep distrust of anyone on IPv6. :)
>
> Right, I'm not saying it
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 08:32:05PM +, Mike Crowe wrote:
> On Sunday 30 November 2014 at 06:40:26 +1030, Ron wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 07:14:16PM +, Mike Crowe wrote:
> > > On Sunday 30 November 2014 at 05:25:10 +1030, Ron wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 04:09:09PM +, Mik
On Sunday 30 November 2014 at 06:40:26 +1030, Ron wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 07:14:16PM +, Mike Crowe wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 November 2014 at 05:25:10 +1030, Ron wrote:
> > > On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 04:09:09PM +, Mike Crowe wrote:
> > > > When a Wheezy or Jessie machine is fitted wit
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 07:14:16PM +, Mike Crowe wrote:
> Hi Ron,
>
> Thanks for quick response.
>
> On Sunday 30 November 2014 at 05:25:10 +1030, Ron wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 04:09:09PM +, Mike Crowe wrote:
> > > Package: tftpd-hpa
> > > Version: 5.2+20140608-3
> > > Severity:
Hi Ron,
Thanks for quick response.
On Sunday 30 November 2014 at 05:25:10 +1030, Ron wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 04:09:09PM +, Mike Crowe wrote:
> > Package: tftpd-hpa
> > Version: 5.2+20140608-3
> > Severity: important
> > Tags: patch
> >
> > Dear Maintainer,
> >
> > When a Wheezy or
Hi Mike,
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 04:09:09PM +, Mike Crowe wrote:
> Package: tftpd-hpa
> Version: 5.2+20140608-3
> Severity: important
> Tags: patch
>
> Dear Maintainer,
>
> When a Wheezy or Jessie machine is fitted with an SSD the machine often
> boots so quickly that tftpd-hpa is started b
Package: tftpd-hpa
Version: 5.2+20140608-3
Severity: important
Tags: patch
Dear Maintainer,
When a Wheezy or Jessie machine is fitted with an SSD the machine often
boots so quickly that tftpd-hpa is started before the network is fully
configured. The problem is reproducible with sysvinit (on Whee
19 matches
Mail list logo
