On Wed, 21 Aug 2024 09:37:08 -0400
Stefan Monnier wrote:
> FWIW, I have
>
> MODULES=dep
> COMPRESS=lzma
>
> in `/etc/initramfs-tools/initramfs.conf`, which helps keep the size of
> the initrd in check.
Indeed. Thank you. Making the first change knocked my initrd from 67M
down to about
Ruslanas Gžibovskis composed on 2024-08-21 16:16 (UTC+0300):
> Just wondering if you have a problem when doing automated partitioning
> during the debian deployment using edu-net-install iso?
> the problem I face is too small partition size, which is 500 MB, when a
Are you sure you
Ruslanas Gžibovskis [2024-08-21 16:16:54] wrote:
> Just wondering if you have a problem when doing automated partitioning
> during the debian deployment using edu-net-install iso?
>
> the problem I face is too small partition size, which is 500 MB, when a
> simple kernel now has the
Hi all,
Just wondering if you have a problem when doing automated partitioning
during the debian deployment using edu-net-install iso?
the problem I face is too small partition size, which is 500 MB, when a
simple kernel now has the size of 234 MB, each time it needs to regenerate
even the same
Hi,
Andy Smith wrote:
> Is there some advantage in me editing one of the files in the EFI
> partition as opposed to just putting the grub serial directives in
> /boot/grub/grub.cfg of the ISO?
None that i know of.
Editing /efi/debian/grub.cfg of the EFI partition filesystem would just
happen ins
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 12:42:05PM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> Andy Smith wrote:
> > Should I just edit that into $iso_root/boot/grub/grub.cfg and repack
> > the ISO?
>
> If altering the EFI partition is not viable, then surely: Yes.
Is there some advantage in me editing one of the files
Hi,
Andy Smith wrote:
> Currently when I add the Debian 12 netinst ISO as a virtual media it
> EFI boots grub, not isolinux,
That's because Debian ISOs advertise a EFI System Partition with GRUB
initial boot equipment:
$ xorriso -indev debian-12.2.0-amd64-netinst.iso \
-report_el_t
Hi,
I am used to installing Debian by PXE boot and serial console. For
that purpose I'm familiar with editing the isolinux config files to
have the kernel serial settings (console=ttyS… etc) in
isolinux/txt.cfg.
Now for the first time I am trying to install a system that has a
management controll
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 04:54:26PM +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
>
> Wasn't sudo echo the name of a pop group?
>
> :)
If it wasn't it should've been one.
Cheers
--
t
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Wasn't sudo echo the name of a pop group?
:)
Bret Busby
Armadale
Western Australia
(UTC+0800)
.
On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 08:37:16PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> Le 13/05/2024 à 19:45, Stefan Monnier a écrit :
[...]
> > % sudo zsh -l
> > # echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
> > # ^D
> > logout
> > %
> >
> > 🙂
&
Le 13/05/2024 à 19:45, Stefan Monnier a écrit :
$ su -
Password:
# echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
# ^D
logout
$
I don't need no stinkin' sudo :-)
And if you only have `sudo`, but not the root password, of course:
% sudo zsh -l
# echo 1 > /proc/sys/net
On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 01:45:40PM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > $ su -
> > Password:
> > # echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
> > # ^D
> > logout
> > $
> >
> > I don't need no stinkin' sudo :-)
>
> And if you only have `
> $ su -
> Password:
> # echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
> # ^D
> logout
> $
>
> I don't need no stinkin' sudo :-)
And if you only have `sudo`, but not the root password, of course:
% sudo zsh -l
# echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/
On 5/13/24 18:52, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
Now share your ideas :-)
$ su -
Password:
# echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
# ^D
logout
$
I don't need no stinkin' sudo :-)
regards,
chris
Since this happens so often, I'm trying to offer a recap.
As others have noted, the above
sudo echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
won't work, since it runs echo under sudo, but the file opening
(that pesky ">") happens in your shell, which is probably running
unp
On Tue 21 Mar 2023 at 18:27:42 (-0400), Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > me second. 192.168.1.1/24 just makes me confused with 192.168.1.1/32
> > which is a real host address.
>
> Interesting.
> I can't remember ever seeing 192.168.1.1/32 used. In my my part of the
> world, it's only meaningful as a deg
On Mon 20 Mar 2023 at 07:36:41 (+0800), Jeremy Ardley wrote:
> On 20/3/23 02:48, David Wright wrote:
> > > Checking the RFC. To my reading the final stanza is not checked
> > > " The is compared to the given network. If CIDR prefix length
> > >
> > > high-order bits match, the mechanism match
On 22/3/23 06:27, Stefan Monnier wrote:
Interesting.
I can't remember ever seeing 192.168.1.1/32 used. In my my part of the
world, it's only meaningful as a degenerate form: all the syntaxes I've
seen which accept the IP/NN notation also accept just IP to mean IP/32,
so writing IP/32 is just
> me second. 192.168.1.1/24 just makes me confused with 192.168.1.1/32
> which is a real host address.
Interesting.
I can't remember ever seeing 192.168.1.1/32 used. In my my part of the
world, it's only meaningful as a degenerate form: all the syntaxes I've
seen which accept the IP/NN notation a
Le 3/19/23 à 18:51, DdB a écrit :
Wow!
Great hint there!
I just tested it in a couple of areas and found it to be quite useful,
by far more up-to-date and i did enjoy the experience.
Thank you for sharing it.
Am 19.03.2023 um 12:01 schrieb Yassine Chaouche:
In contrast,
a tool like perplexity.a
On 2023-03-20 07:36, Jeremy Ardley wrote:
As for the RFC? It's precise and definitive. My only concern is that
some mail system implementer may 'improve' the RFC and restrict the
acceptable address range to a /32 when they see a non zero final qnum
in a /24
me second. 192.168.1.1/24 just mak
On 20/3/23 02:48, David Wright wrote:
O
Checking the RFC. To my reading the final stanza is not checked
" The is compared to the given network. If CIDR prefix length
high-order bits match, the mechanism matches."
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7208#section-5.6
So in this case
On 3/19/23 03:28, cor...@free.fr wrote:
On 19/03/2023 18:00, David Christensen wrote:
On 3/18/23 16:31, cor...@free.fr wrote:
On 19/03/2023 06:17, Kushal Kumaran wrote:
On Sat, Mar 18 2023 at 07:28:23 PM, cor...@free.fr wrote:
Hello
I know 192.168.1.0/24 is a valid C range for network addres
On Sun 19 Mar 2023 at 17:16:47 (-), Curt wrote:
> On 2023-03-19, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 06:38:41PM +0800, cor...@free.fr wrote:
> >> So,
> >>
> >> * 188.66.63.1/24 is a range, not a single host in SPF
> >> * why it's not written as 188.66.63.0/24 which is more clear?
On Sun 19 Mar 2023 at 19:36:47 (+0800), Jeremy Ardley wrote:
> On 19/3/23 19:29, Jeremy Ardley wrote:
> >
> > In this case of the /24 it gave an answer I expected. I imagine it
> > will take a trawl of the RFC and then of actual implementations to
> > find out for sure.
> >
> > The best descripti
Wow!
Great hint there!
I just tested it in a couple of areas and found it to be quite useful,
by far more up-to-date and i did enjoy the experience.
Thank you for sharing it.
Am 19.03.2023 um 12:01 schrieb Yassine Chaouche:
> In contrast,
> a tool like perplexity.ai is an answer-questionning tool.
On Sun 19 Mar 2023 at 08:25:28 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 12:45:06PM +0100, Nicolas George wrote:
> > #!/bin/sh
> > eval "$(recode b64..data < > H4sIACv1FmQAAzXMPQrCQBAG0H5O8TFEMII/BA3BVF7AXoLFsI5kCdl1d5JC8PCSIuVrnro+gm82
> > QPBVO4aINKtNPoYrU1Z5YZ+RyIkpuNh+sg/TG7wxRpHw
On 2023-03-19, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 06:38:41PM +0800, cor...@free.fr wrote:
>> So,
>>
>> * 188.66.63.1/24 is a range, not a single host in SPF
>> * why it's not written as 188.66.63.0/24 which is more clear?
>
> Because it was written by a human being who made a tiny err
On 2023-03-19, wrote:
>
> Yes, it is just a simulation of knowledge (it can be pretty
> convincing at that,though).
>
> In other words: if you want an answer from it, you have to
> know the answer beforehand.
So the specific answer it gave cited above is wrong? Or did you already know
the answer
Yassine Chaouche wrote:
> Le 3/18/23 à 12:28, cor...@free.fr a écrit :
> > Hello
> >
> > I know 192.168.1.0/24 is a valid C range for network address.
> >
> > but what does 192.168.1.1/24 mean?
> >
> > I ask this just for a setting in the SPF:
> >
> > spf.pinoad.se. 300 IN TXT
> * 188.66.63.1/24 is a range, not a single host in SPF
> * why it's not written as 188.66.63.0/24 which is more clear?
Which is more likely:
- someone erroneously added `/24` when they really meant to specify just
one host.
- someone wrote `1` instead of the more conventional `0` at the spot
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 12:45:06PM +0100, Nicolas George wrote:
> #!/bin/sh
> eval "$(recode b64..data < H4sIACv1FmQAAzXMPQrCQBAG0H5O8TFEMII/BA3BVF7AXoLFsI5kCdl1d5JC8PCSIuVrnro+gm82
> QPBVO4aINKtNPoYrU1Z5YZ+RyIkpuNh+sg/TG7wxRpHwg/VSXWqbx5LhA6E7Vee6EafPXQld9ofa
> oW0Jq+9xoZo4+gNQ3NCSfg==
> EOF
>
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 06:38:41PM +0800, cor...@free.fr wrote:
> So,
>
> * 188.66.63.1/24 is a range, not a single host in SPF
> * why it's not written as 188.66.63.0/24 which is more clear?
Because it was written by a human being who made a tiny error. One that
makes no difference in practice.
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 07:07:06PM +0800, f...@dnsbed.com wrote:
[...]
> For this kind of definition with clear rules (SPF), I think chatGPT is more
> precise than person.
Sometimes. But you won't know which times beforehand. Of course,
you could order ChatGPT to give you the right answer ;-D
C
Jeremy Ardley (12023-03-19):
> So in this case AI got it right.
Try the following AI:
#!/bin/sh
eval "$(recode b64..data <
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 19/3/23 19:29, Jeremy Ardley wrote:
In this case of the /24 it gave an answer I expected. I imagine it
will take a trawl of the RFC and then of actual implementations to
find out for sure.
The best description of the AI is it is informative but not authorative.
Checking the RFC. To my
On 2023-03-19 19:01, Yassine Chaouche wrote:
It only knows about saying things that sound plausible,
not necessarily true.
It doesn't fetch info from the internet,
process it,
then give it you.
It rather generates text,
using statisics.
Don't get mislead by it.
It often gives wrong answers.
On 19/3/23 19:10, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
[...]
Yes, it is just a simulation of knowledge (it can be pretty
convincing at that,though).
In other words: if you want an answer from it, you have to
know the answer beforehand.
I have actually paid for a subscription and have used it for a month n
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 12:12:15PM +0100, Nicolas George wrote:
> to...@tuxteam.de (12023-03-19):
> > Yes, it is just a simulation of knowledge (it can be pretty
> > convincing at that,though).
> >
> > In other words: if you want an answer from it, you have to
> > know the answer beforehand.
>
>
to...@tuxteam.de (12023-03-19):
> Yes, it is just a simulation of knowledge (it can be pretty
> convincing at that,though).
>
> In other words: if you want an answer from it, you have to
> know the answer beforehand.
Ted Chiang described it very accurately as a blurry JPEG of the web:
https://ww
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 12:01:19PM +0100, Yassine Chaouche wrote:
> Le 3/19/23 à 11:32, Jeremy Ardley a écrit :
> >
> > On 19/3/23 18:28, cor...@free.fr wrote:
> > > "v=spf1 ip4:188.66.63.1/24 -all"
> >
> > According to an AI version 4 that cannot be named:
> >
>
> I'm new to the list,
> thus,
ttom and the top addresses are
actual host addresses; this is particularly useful when
the subnet has just two addresses (i.e. /31), for
example in a "transfer net".
--
t
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Le 3/19/23 à 11:32, Jeremy Ardley a écrit :
On 19/3/23 18:28, cor...@free.fr wrote:
"v=spf1 ip4:188.66.63.1/24 -all"
According to an AI version 4 that cannot be named:
I'm new to the list,
thus,
I don't know how many people have told you this before
(or not)
but that AI is a speech generat
On 19/3/23 18:38, cor...@free.fr wrote:
So,
* 188.66.63.1/24 is a range, not a single host in SPF
* why it's not written as 188.66.63.0/24 which is more clear?
In the very specific case of an SPF there will be a rule. I assume given
the AI response that the rule is to use th
On 19/03/2023 18:32, Jeremy Ardley wrote:
On 19/3/23 18:28, cor...@free.fr wrote:
"v=spf1 ip4:188.66.63.1/24 -all"
According to an AI version 4 that cannot be named:
This is an SPF (Sender Policy Framework) record, which is a TXT record
in a domain's DNS settings. SPF records are used to help
On 19/3/23 18:28, cor...@free.fr wrote:
"v=spf1 ip4:188.66.63.1/24 -all"
According to an AI version 4 that cannot be named:
This is an SPF (Sender Policy Framework) record, which is a TXT record
in a domain's DNS settings. SPF records are used to help prevent email
spoofing by specifying w
On 19/03/2023 18:00, David Christensen wrote:
On 3/18/23 16:31, cor...@free.fr wrote:
On 19/03/2023 06:17, Kushal Kumaran wrote:
On Sat, Mar 18 2023 at 07:28:23 PM, cor...@free.fr wrote:
Hello
I know 192.168.1.0/24 is a valid C range for network address.
but what does 192.168.1.1/24 mean?
I
On 3/18/23 16:31, cor...@free.fr wrote:
On 19/03/2023 06:17, Kushal Kumaran wrote:
On Sat, Mar 18 2023 at 07:28:23 PM, cor...@free.fr wrote:
Hello
I know 192.168.1.0/24 is a valid C range for network address.
but what does 192.168.1.1/24 mean?
I ask this just for a setting in the SPF:
spf.p
Le 3/19/23 à 09:53, Yassine Chaouche a écrit :
The A.B.C.D/24 notation can be used to either :
- specify an IP address along with its netmask
See for example this snippet from the output of the ip command:
10:02:21 /usr/share/man -1- $ ip -4 address show eth4 | grep inet
inet 192.168.2
Le 3/18/23 à 12:28, cor...@free.fr a écrit :
Hello
I know 192.168.1.0/24 is a valid C range for network address.
but what does 192.168.1.1/24 mean?
I ask this just for a setting in the SPF:
spf.pinoad.se. 300 IN TXT "v=spf1 ip4:188.66.63.1/24 -all"
Thanks.
The A.B.C.D/24
On 19/03/2023 06:17, Kushal Kumaran wrote:
On Sat, Mar 18 2023 at 07:28:23 PM, cor...@free.fr wrote:
Hello
I know 192.168.1.0/24 is a valid C range for network address.
but what does 192.168.1.1/24 mean?
I ask this just for a setting in the SPF:
spf.pinoad.se. 300 IN TXT
On Sat, Mar 18 2023 at 07:28:23 PM, cor...@free.fr wrote:
> Hello
>
> I know 192.168.1.0/24 is a valid C range for network address.
>
> but what does 192.168.1.1/24 mean?
>
> I ask this just for a setting in the SPF:
>
> spf.pinoad.se.300 IN TXT "v=spf1
> ip4:188.66.63
On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 7:28 AM wrote:
> Hello
>
> I know 192.168.1.0/24 is a valid C range for network address.
>
> but what does 192.168.1.1/24 mean?
>
192.168.1.1 is a host address usually assigned to the router. The network
subnet mask is /24 or 255.255.255.0. 192.168.1.0 is the network and
18.03.23, 12:28 +0100, cor...@free.fr:
I know 192.168.1.0/24 is a valid C range for network address.
but what does 192.168.1.1/24 mean?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classless_Inter-Domain_Routing
--
Regards
mks
Hello
I know 192.168.1.0/24 is a valid C range for network address.
but what does 192.168.1.1/24 mean?
I ask this just for a setting in the SPF:
spf.pinoad.se. 300 IN TXT "v=spf1 ip4:188.66.63.1/24 -all"
Thanks.
01, 2022 at 03:47:52PM +0300, Patrick Kirk wrote:
> > /var/log/messages:Sep 1 12:41:34 debian-s-websites kernel:
> > [31104249.962672] .NET ThreadPool invoked oom-killer:
> > gfp_mask=0x6280ca(GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE|__GFP_ZERO), nodemask=(null),
> > order=0, oom_score_adj=0
>
On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 03:47:52PM +0300, Patrick Kirk wrote:
> /var/log/messages:Sep 1 12:41:34 debian-s-websites kernel:
> [31104249.962672] .NET ThreadPool invoked oom-killer:
> gfp_mask=0x6280ca(GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE|__GFP_ZERO), nodemask=(null),
> order=0, oom_score_adj=
Hi Dan,
Yes I've been coding for a living for 15 years in C#.
/var/log/messages:Sep 1 12:41:34 debian-s-websites kernel:
[31104249.962672] .NET ThreadPool invoked oom-killer:
gfp_mask=0x6280ca(GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE|__GFP_ZERO), nodemask=(null),
order=0, oom_score_adj=0
/var/log/messages:S
framing the question.
Did you write this program?
Are you a fluent .Net Core programmer?
Has it ever run on some other system?
What happens if you try with a dataset of ten records?
-dsr-
Hi all,
I have a program that is meant to run on my Debian VPS which is hosted by
Digital Ocean. My access to the server is via Putty. Unfortunately the
program simply stops, silently, after a few minutes.
My code is littered with try catch statements. The console window shows no
errors. It just
On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 16:00:20 +0300
IL Ka wrote:
> While installing, what was the result of "Detect network hardware" and
> "Configure the network" steps?
> Click "ctrl+alt+F2", and type "ip addr" to check if address is configured
> correctly. Try to ping your router. Then, mirror.
>
>
>
> On F
On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 15:01:23 +0200
Christian Britz wrote:
> On 2022-04-29 13:54 UTC+0200, Charlie wrote:
>
> > On both of these the installer does not find any mirror I select, for
> > the last 3 days.
>
> Can you give more details of the error message? Have you tried the CDN
> deb.debian.org
On 2022-04-29 13:54 UTC+0200, Charlie wrote:
> On both of these the installer does not find any mirror I select, for
> the last 3 days.
Can you give more details of the error message? Have you tried the CDN
deb.debian.org as mirror? That is usually the best option.
> No error messages that th
While installing, what was the result of "Detect network hardware" and
"Configure the network" steps?
Click "ctrl+alt+F2", and type "ip addr" to check if address is configured
correctly. Try to ping your router. Then, mirror.
On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 2:55 PM Charlie wrote:
>
> Hello Eve
Hello Everyone,
I have used from this site:
https://www.debian.org/CD/netinst/#netinst-stable
the Debian installer 11.3.0 bullseye AMD64 on a laptop and a desktop.
On both of these the installer does not find any mirror I select, for
the last 3 days.
No error messages
On Sat, Apr 09, 2022 at 05:42:43PM -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
> Roberto C. Sánchez composed on 2022-04-09 17:16 (UTC-0400):
>
> > Have you tried the option to manually enter the mirror information? In
> > the past I have successfully used this point at archive.debian.org for
> > an installation of
Roberto C. Sánchez composed on 2022-04-09 17:16 (UTC-0400):
> Have you tried the option to manually enter the mirror information?
Gripped by blindness the first several tries, I eventually noticed that manual
entry topped the list, and installation has been proceeding. :p
--
Evolution as taught
On 4/9/22 14:08, Felix Miata wrote:
https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/ch05s03.en.html doesn't seem to show
the possibility exists. Is it not possible? What doc explains?
The problem: I want to install on a K6/2. The newest installation kernel that
doesn't require cmov that K6/2 doesn't
On Sat, Apr 09, 2022 at 05:36:25PM -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
> Andrew M.A. Cater composed on 2022-04-09 21:15 (UTC):
>
> > YOu could try expert mode and select your own mirror.
>
> Only way I can find in expert mode to select a mirror is from the lists from
> the
> various countries presented, a
the URL http://archive.debian.org/debian/ (IIRC).
Is there a more detailed menu where manual entry is offered? All that's
presented is:
Choose lang
Config kb
Detect net hdwe
config net
"Choose a mirror of the Debian Archive"
download installer components
change debconf priority
sa
Andrew M.A. Cater composed on 2022-04-09 21:15 (UTC):
> YOu could try expert mode and select your own mirror.
Only way I can find in expert mode to select a mirror is from the lists from the
various countries presented, among which archive.debian.org is not listed in
USA,
UK or Germany. Is it sq
On Sat, Apr 09, 2022 at 05:08:50PM -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
> https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/ch05s03.en.html doesn't seem to
> show
> the possibility exists. Is it not possible? What doc explains?
>
> The problem: I want to install on a K6/2. The newest installation kernel that
> do
On Sat, Apr 09, 2022 at 05:08:50PM -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
> https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/ch05s03.en.html doesn't seem to
> show
> the possibility exists. Is it not possible? What doc explains?
>
> The problem: I want to install on a K6/2. The newest installation kernel that
> do
https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/ch05s03.en.html doesn't seem to show
the possibility exists. Is it not possible? What doc explains?
The problem: I want to install on a K6/2. The newest installation kernel that
doesn't require cmov that K6/2 doesn't have is Wheezy. When I boot the Wheez
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 3:15 AM Tixy wrote:
>
> Sorry, I know nothing about all this, I just got curious about your
> problem and looked at the source code.
>
>
Wow. That's quite impressive Tixy. I would not even know where to begin
looking! Thank you for all that leg work. I will be looking
problem and looked at the source code.
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/drivers/net/usb/ax88179_178a.c?h=v5.10.101&id=9fb137aef34e4eedaa23307d309b0ebe8358fea1
[2]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/drivers/net/u
> I did not have this problem in Debian 10. I do not know if the card's
driver has changed between the two versions of Debian, so I am going to
boot into a Debian 10 live image and see if it displays the same behavior.
Good news: I verified that this whole thing is indeed introduced in Debian
11
Hi.
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 10:56:43AM -0600, Nicholas Geovanis wrote:
> > It's possible, of course. What's also possible is card's EEPROM may have
> > gone haywire. I had a similar problem back in the day with rtl8139 NIC,
> > IIRC. One day the thing simply started to assign itself a rand
es" are merely means to configure udev, they mean
> nothing to the kernel. By default udev should not randomize NIC's MAC.
>
>
> > > > I also tried adding a udev file (/etc/udev/rules.d/99_fix_usb.rules)
> with
> > > > the following content to try to for
Hi.
On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 05:30:10PM -0600, Flacusbigotis wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 1:06 AM Reco wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 12:32:48AM -0600, Flacusbigotis wrote:
> > > Thanks Reco & Greg. I did see the
> > > /lib/systemd/network/73-u
On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 1:06 AM Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 12:32:48AM -0600, Flacusbigotis wrote:
> > Thanks Reco & Greg. I did see the
> > /lib/systemd/network/73-usb-net-by-mac.link file. Thanks for that.
> >
> > I don't k
Hi.
On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 12:32:48AM -0600, Flacusbigotis wrote:
> Thanks Reco & Greg. I did see the
> /lib/systemd/network/73-usb-net-by-mac.link file. Thanks for that.
>
> I don't know exactly what is happening, but the MAC address of the device
> keeps c
Thanks Reco & Greg. I did see the
/lib/systemd/network/73-usb-net-by-mac.link file. Thanks for that.
I don't know exactly what is happening, but the MAC address of the device
keeps changing after an ifdown/ifup cycle post boot. When the device
boots up, it comes up with its own real
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 05:30:17PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 03:55:21AM -0600, Flacusbigotis wrote:
> > Back in Debian Buster, I learned that the "predictive" naming of this USB
> > ethernet interface would be governed by "73-us
Hi.
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 03:55:21AM -0600, Flacusbigotis wrote:
> Back in Debian Buster, I learned that the "predictive" naming of this USB
> ethernet interface would be governed by "73-usb-net-by-mac.rules" and so I
> had it configured accordingly with a
My internet connection is off the ethernet port of a PCI-E card that also
has USB ports on it, so the ethernet device is recognized as a "USB
ethernet device"...
Back in Debian Buster, I learned that the "predictive" naming of this USB
ethernet interface would be govern
On Thu 27 Jan 2022 at 08:21:49 +, Tixy wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-01-26 at 19:26 +, Brian wrote:
> > On Wed 26 Jan 2022 at 10:42:38 -0600, David Wright wrote:
> >
> > [Snipping]
> >
> > > I've worked this way for 15 years and, unlike Gene, I'm not having
> > > to fight any battles over it. I'
Tixy wrote:
>
> I can't see what the problem with DHCP is, if I want to have static IP
> addresses or use names to identify machines on the network, I can take
> a minute to add a line to dnsmasq.conf on my router. I know some people
> say that DHCP is a single point of failure, or they don't wan
On Wed, 2022-01-26 at 19:26 +, Brian wrote:
> On Wed 26 Jan 2022 at 10:42:38 -0600, David Wright wrote:
>
> [Snipping]
>
> > I've worked this way for 15 years and, unlike Gene, I'm not having
> > to fight any battles over it. I'm sure mDNS is perfect for people
> > with different demands from
On Wed 26 Jan 2022 at 18:56:17 (+0100), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Mi, 26 ian 22, 11:55:36, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 10:42:23AM -0600, David Wright wrote:
> > > And the first word in "CONTENTS/usr/share/man/man5/dhcpcd.conf.5.gz"
> > > should tell you that I don't have that
On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 10:49:35 AM EST Brian wrote:
> On Wed 26 Jan 2022 at 10:39:42 -0500, gene heskett wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 10:31:46 AM EST Brian wrote:
> > > On Tue 25 Jan 2022 at 18:35:54 -0600, David Wright wrote:
> > > > On Tue 25 Jan 2022 at 09:31:57 (+0100), And
On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 11:55:36 AM EST Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 10:42:23AM -0600, David Wright wrote:
> > And the first word in "CONTENTS/usr/share/man/man5/dhcpcd.conf.5.gz"
> > should tell you that I don't have that file either, but I downloaded
> > dhcpcd5_7.1.0-2+b
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 07:26:49PM +, Brian wrote:
> On Wed 26 Jan 2022 at 10:42:38 -0600, David Wright wrote:
> > I've worked this way for 15 years and, unlike Gene, I'm not having
> > to fight any battles over it. I'm sure mDNS is perfect for people
> > with different demands from mine.
>
>
On Wed 26 Jan 2022 at 10:42:38 -0600, David Wright wrote:
[Snipping]
> I've worked this way for 15 years and, unlike Gene, I'm not having
> to fight any battles over it. I'm sure mDNS is perfect for people
> with different demands from mine.
My question was really directed at all users, particul
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 07:11:36PM +0100, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > # fallback to static profile on eth0
> > interface eth0
> > fallback static_eth0
> >
> > So if dhcpd fails, it uses the above, and it Just Works.
> > And I've not found any reference to it in the man page. So I've no clue
> > why
On Ma, 25 ian 22, 21:27:17, gene heskett wrote:
>
> It works fine with no complaints.
>
> Here is the bottom of /etc/dhcpcd.conf:
>
> # Example static IP configuration:
> #interface eth0
> #static ip_address=192.168.0.10/24
> #static ip6_address=fd51:42f8:caae:d92e::ff/64
> #static routers=192.1
On Mi, 26 ian 22, 11:55:36, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 10:42:23AM -0600, David Wright wrote:
> > And the first word in "CONTENTS/usr/share/man/man5/dhcpcd.conf.5.gz"
> > should tell you that I don't have that file either, but I downloaded
> > dhcpcd5_7.1.0-2+b1_amd64.deb just as
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 10:42:23AM -0600, David Wright wrote:
> And the first word in "CONTENTS/usr/share/man/man5/dhcpcd.conf.5.gz"
> should tell you that I don't have that file either, but I downloaded
> dhcpcd5_7.1.0-2+b1_amd64.deb just as I did last time you raised this.
> And if I type "man" i
On Wed 26 Jan 2022 at 15:31:46 (+), Brian wrote:
> On Tue 25 Jan 2022 at 18:35:54 -0600, David Wright wrote:
> > On Tue 25 Jan 2022 at 09:31:57 (+0100), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > > On Lu, 24 ian 22, 23:54:41, Brian wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Resolving hostnames on the local network is simple and r
1 - 100 of 1057 matches
Mail list logo
