remove
David Tolo
david.tolo at gmail.com
Sat Jan 24 18:13:37 UTC 2009
On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 12:00 PM, <fedora-list-request at redhat.com> wrote:
> Send fedora-list mailing list submissions to
> fedora-list at redhat.com
>
> 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 at redhat.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> fedora-list-owner at redhat.com
>
> 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 at fedoraproject.org>
> Subject: Re: Will btfrs file system obsolete LVM?
> To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using
> Fedora." <fedora-list at redhat.com>
> Message-ID: <497B2C80.30309 at fedoraproject.org>
> 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 at sbcglobal.net>
> Subject: Re: Ideal Swap Partition Size
> To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using
> Fedora." <fedora-list at redhat.com>
> Message-ID: <1232809408.3158.25.camel at 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 at sbcglobal.net
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 15:05:22 +0000
> From: Paul Smith <phhs80 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Samba problem
> To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using
> Fedora." <fedora-list at redhat.com>
> Message-ID:
> <6ade6f6c0901240705j3880108fo1d7719cd3c078dce at mail.gmail.com>
> 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 at bellsouth.net>
> Subject: Re: ATT's DSL Lite for Linux
> To: fedora-list <fedora-list at redhat.com>
> Message-ID: <497B344C.1040309 at bellsouth.net>
> 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 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Ideal Swap Partition Size
> To: fedora-list at redhat.com
> Message-ID: <1232813622.4044.96.camel at bree.homelinux.com>
> 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 at sapience.com>
> Subject: Re: gdm - displaying of information/ F10
> To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using
> Fedora." <fedora-list at redhat.com>
> Message-ID: <497B4201.1080500 at sapience.com>
> 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 at ringways.co.uk>
> Subject: Routing problem - was FC9 Linux gateways, VPN working, IP
> forwarding isn't
> To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using
> Fedora." <fedora-list at redhat.com>
> Message-ID: <200901241640.15009.gary.stainburn at ringways.co.uk>
> 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 at infinity-ltd.com>
> Subject: Re: F10+ Burn multiple discs concurrent from iso?
> To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using
> Fedora." <fedora-list at redhat.com>
> Message-ID: <497B459E.7020503 at infinity-ltd.com>
> 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 at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>
> End of fedora-list Digest, Vol 59, Issue 213
> ********************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20090124/31f01bf2/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list