On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 12:00 PM, <fedora-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Send fedora-list mailing list submissions to
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
fedora-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx
You can reach the person managing the list at
fedora-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxx
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of fedora-list digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Will btfrs file system obsolete LVM? (Rahul Sundaram)
2. Re: Ideal Swap Partition Size (Aaron Konstam)
3. Samba problem (Paul Smith)
4. Re: ATT's DSL Lite for Linux (g)
5. Re: Ideal Swap Partition Size (Patrick O'Callaghan)
6. Re: gdm - displaying of information/ F10 (Mail Lists)
7. Routing problem - was FC9 Linux gateways, VPN working, IP
forwarding isn't (Gary Stainburn)
8. Re: F10+ Burn multiple discs concurrent from iso?
(Mikkel L. Ellertson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 20:28:08 +0530
From: Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Will btfrs file system obsolete LVM?
To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using
Fedora." <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <497B2C80.30309@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Leslie Satenstein wrote:
> My question is in the subject line.
>
Btrfs will take more time to mature (maybe a couple more releases
atleast) but essentially, yes.
Btrfs features are listed in
http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page
Rahul
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 09:03:28 -0600
From: Aaron Konstam <akonstam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Ideal Swap Partition Size
To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using
Fedora." <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <1232809408.3158.25.camel@cyrus>
Content-Type: text/plain
On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 15:42 -0800, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> Aaron Konstam wrote:
> >
> > This is explained in nearly all textbooks on Computer Architecture. So
> > the question remains, where is the address space in Linux.
>
> Patrick isn't the only one confused by your question. I can't make
> heads or tails of it. Are you asking where the mapping between the
> virtual address space and physical memory is done, or what?
>
No I am asking where the virtual address space resides of the machine.
--
=======================================================================
Pie are not square. Pie are round. Cornbread are square.
=======================================================================
Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 15:05:22 +0000
From: Paul Smith <phhs80@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Samba problem
To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using
Fedora." <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<6ade6f6c0901240705j3880108fo1d7719cd3c078dce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Dear All,
I could access to a directory in my F10 partition from a VMware
virtual machine (MS Windows2000) through Samba, but not now. This is
very strange because I have not changed any samba settings. Any ideas?
Thanks in advance,
Paul
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 15:31:24 +0000
From: g <geleem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: ATT's DSL Lite for Linux
To: fedora-list <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <497B344C.1040309@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Tim wrote:
> A Dlink DIR-300. I'm none-too-impressed with it, for more than just
> that reason.
it is nice to 'be true to your native country', but some times a simple
search on google will help you make up your mind.
--
peace out.
tc,hago.
g
.
****
in a free world without fences, who needs gates.
**
help microsoft stamp out piracy - give linux to a friend today
**
to mess up a linux box, you need to work at it;
to mess up an ms windows box, you just need to *look at* it.
**
learn linux:
'Rute User's Tutorial and Exposition' http://rute.2038bug.com/index.html
'The Linux Documentation Project' http://www.tldp.org/
'LDP HOWTO-index' http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/HOWTO-INDEX/index.html
'HowtoForge' http://howtoforge.com/
****
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20090124/a70977a3/signature.bin
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 11:43:42 -0430
From: "Patrick O'Callaghan" <pocallaghan@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Ideal Swap Partition Size
To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <1232813622.4044.96.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain
On Sat, 2009-01-24 at 09:03 -0600, Aaron Konstam wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 15:42 -0800, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> > Aaron Konstam wrote:
> > >
> > > This is explained in nearly all textbooks on Computer Architecture. So
> > > the question remains, where is the address space in Linux.
> >
> > Patrick isn't the only one confused by your question. I can't make
> > heads or tails of it. Are you asking where the mapping between the
> > virtual address space and physical memory is done, or what?
> >
> No I am asking where the virtual address space resides of the machine.
No, sorry, nothing coming through. The question as phrased makes no
sense.
If you're asking where does a given address in the virtual address space
map to, it depends on whether the corresponding page of the process
address space is currently in RAM, or on backing store (disk or
whatever), or nowhere because it hasn't been allocated, but the question
"where is the address space" has no meaning.
Furthermore, the *machine* as such has no "virtual address space".
poc
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 11:29:53 -0500
From: Mail Lists <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: gdm - displaying of information/ F10
To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using
Fedora." <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <497B4201.1080500@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On 01/24/2009 09:01 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 22:50 -0500, Mail Lists wrote:
>> Our policy is to minimize information leakage - we recently switched
>> from kdm/kde to gdm/gnome and I cannot find how to adjust gdm greeter to
>> achieve :
>
> Dear Mr Lists
I did put my name at the bottom.
>
> Have you considered using kdm with Gnome?
Yep, as I said in the original post
++ I did try kdm but there was some nasty white flash before the blue
++ background was loaded as gnome/metacity was started by kdm)
This was only on one computer where I ran the test, a lenovo laptop
with nvidia graphics. Its a possible workaround for gdm - I am still
wondering how to do it with gdm tho'. We are obviously most concerned
with laptops rather than desktops.
As an aside, we plan to revisit kde periodically to see if its
usability and configurabilty are maturing back to kde 3.5 type of
levels. Fro the time being we have switched to gnome.
Thanks for your suggestion
gene/
>
> poc
>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 16:40:14 +0000
From: Gary Stainburn <gary.stainburn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Routing problem - was FC9 Linux gateways, VPN working, IP
forwarding isn't
To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using
Fedora." <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <200901241640.15009.gary.stainburn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
On Saturday 24 January 2009 11:19:05 Giany wrote:
> If you say ip_forward is enabled then either there is a routing problem
> or some firewall issue.
>
I've been going round in circles all day and now my head's spinning. I even
got it working once, but don't know how and can't repeat it.
Iptables on all four machines set ACCEPT on INPUT, OUTPUT and FORWARD. IP
forwarding enabled on both gateways.
This only leaves routing.
Both gateways talk to each other.
Client and Server can talk to their local gateway
Local gateway can talk to remote server.
Remote gateway cannot talk to client
Client cannot talk to remote gateway or server
server cannot talk to local gateway or client
Layout
Client eth0 10.6.1.2/16
Network 10.6.0.0/16
Local GW eth0 10.6.1.1/16
eth1 192.168.1.1/24 (internet connection)
ppp0 192.168.127.2/32 P-to-P 192.168.127.1
VPN ppp-over-ssh
Remote eth0 10.1.1.115/16
GW ppp1 192.168.127.1/32 P-to-P 192.168.127.2
Network 10.1.0.0/16
Server eth0 10.1.1.104
route tables
Client
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
192.168.128.1 10.6.1.1 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 eth0
192.168.127.1 10.6.1.1 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 eth0
10.6.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 1 0 0 eth0
0.0.0.0 10.6.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
Local Gateway
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
192.168.127.1 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0
192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
10.2.0.0 192.168.127.1 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0
136.0.0.0 192.168.127.1 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0
10.1.0.0 192.168.127.1 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0
10.6.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
10.5.0.0 192.168.127.1 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0
172.0.0.0 192.168.127.1 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0
169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
0.0.0.0 192.168.1.254 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth1
Remote Gateway
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
192.168.127.2 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp1
10.2.0.0 10.1.1.1 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
172.24.0.0 10.1.1.16 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
10.1.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
10.4.0.0 10.1.1.112 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
10.5.0.0 10.1.1.112 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
136.9.0.0 10.1.1.16 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
0.0.0.0 10.1.1.112 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
Server
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
192.168.127.2 10.1.1.115 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 eth0
10.2.0.0 10.1.1.1 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
172.24.0.0 10.1.1.16 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
10.1.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
10.6.0.0 10.1.1.115 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
10.4.0.0 10.1.1.112 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
10.5.0.0 10.1.1.112 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
136.9.0.0 10.1.1.16 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
0.0.0.0 10.1.1.112 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
--
Gary Stainburn
This email does not contain private or confidential material as it
may be snooped on by interested government parties for unknown
and undisclosed purposes - Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, 2000
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 10:45:18 -0600
From: "Mikkel L. Ellertson" <mikkel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: F10+ Burn multiple discs concurrent from iso?
To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using
Fedora." <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <497B459E.7020503@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Robin Laing wrote:
> Frank Murphy wrote:
>> Can any of the fedora supplied, GUI Burners,
>> burn multiple copies concurrent.
>> Looking at setting up a PC based Duplicator.
>>
>> Any controller card better than another Fedora POV?
>> May 6 devices Internal.
>>
>> Frank
>>
>
> I think you would be better off using a script and a CLI tool. It isn't
> that hard. It may actually work better as each burner, even if
> identical will have different properties and operating characteristics.
>
> But you ask a good question and it will be interesting to see.
I suspect that a SCSI controller, and an external LUN controller
with the drives in it would work better. I would not want the load
of 6 drives burring at the same time on the PC's power supply.
Depending on the burn speed, you might run into data transfer
problems on the PCI bus in any case. You could run external SATA
drives, but the cabling would be a problem and you still have the
PCI bus speed limit.
Mikkel
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20090124/561b043e/signature.bin
------------------------------
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
End of fedora-list Digest, Vol 59, Issue 213
********************************************
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
