Pantek Library
Hosting Provided By
CybrHost
High Speed Hosting
Mailing Lists: lists.debian.org > debian-user-digest > 07 > 080262.html (Request Expert lists.debian.org Support)

debian-user-digest Digest V2007 #2088

From: <debian-user-digest-request(at)lists.debian.org>
Date: Thu Aug 02 2007 - 23:33:16 EDT


Content-Type: text/plain

debian-user-digest Digest Volume 2007 : Issue 2088

Today's Topics: 

  Re: ifup fails but iwconfig and dhcl  [ Agricolae Maximus  ]
  Re: lost Applications -> Debian in t  [ Manoj Srivastava  ]
  Re: Bridged Network Question          [ Wayne Topa  ]
  Re: Bridged Network Question          [ Wayne Topa  ]
  Re: MS Word under wine/crossover off  [ "Russell L. Harris"  ]
  Re: Bridged Network Question          [ Celejar  ]

Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 01:45:15 +0200 (CEST) From: Agricolae Maximus <amax@mail15.com> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: ifup fails but iwconfig and dhclient works? 

Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 00:20:08 +0200, pizzapie_linuxanchovies wrote:

> Under Etch, I did the make, make install, and modprobe of the driver
> without problems.

>=20

> But here's the problem:

>=20
> $sudo ifup rausb0

-- snip

> Whenever this happens, I fail to get a DHCP offer. I believe these
> messages are coming from a component of Debian rather from driver code
> written by the serialmonkey group, because I grep'ed for these messages
> in all the *.c source files of the serialmonkey driver, and didn't find
> them. Then I realized these errors were occurring in response to this
> stanza of my /etc/network/interfaces:

>=20
-- snip 

>=20

> So instead, I tried issuing the iwconfig commands manually: $ sudo
> iwconfig rausb0 essid (deleted) $ sudo iwconfig rausb0 mode Managed
> $ sudo iwconfig rausb0 channel 2
> $ sudo iwconfig rausb0 key (deleted)
>=20

> Got no errors from these iwconfig commands, so then I tried:
>=20

> $ sudo dhclient rausb0
>=20

> Now I finally got my DHCP offer!
>=20

> So why does ifup fail but doing all the steps "manually" succeeds? I
> can't believe the order of the iwconfig commands matters? Could it be
> something to do with the environment created by the "sudo" command? I
> just can't fathom what changed between Sarge and Etch to give me this
> problem.
>=20

> I've been hitting my head against the wall for a few days on this
> wireless thing. Thanks in advance for any ideas!
Do you need help?X

 Check to see if "Network-Manager" is installed. If it is, un-install it=  . I had the same problem with my Atheros based card & no matter how much  dickering, tweaking & whatnot, nothing seemed to work - couldn't  establish a DHCP offer. After removing "Network-Manager", things worked

  • I've now read that there are issues with this particular app - it seems to work for some & doesn't for others.

Hope this helps.

Sincerely,

   ~A~

--=20
Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again.

  • Anonymous =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Registered Linux User No. 306834

Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:17:08 -0500
From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@ieee.org> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: lost Applications -> Debian in the menus ? Message-ID: <873az1qxob.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 19:37:31 +0200, Gerard Robin <g.robin3@free.fr> said:

Do you need more help?X

> On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 11:35:24AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:

>> From: Manoj Srivastava 
>> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>> Subject: Re: lost Applications -> Debian in the menus ?

>>> This might be a result of the menu transition[0] and maybe worth a
>>> report, if there isn???t already one.
>> 
>> I think this is by design; the GNOME folks seem to think that the

Can we help you?X

>> Debian menu is bloated, confusing, and duplicates the neat ,
>> functional, ergonomic Gnome menu, so the default is to hide the ugly >> duckling.

> I agree with them, the menu Debian duplicates the general menu, but
> not entirely and now there are many tools missing. Anyway, I am
> putting them manually in the general menu ...

        If there are things missing from the Debian menu, then that  should be reported as a bug. The Debian menu is supposedly a superset  of the xdg menu.

        manoj 

-- 
Pushing 40 is exercise enough.
Manoj Srivastava <
srivasta(at)acm.org> <
http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:26:15 -0500 From: Hugo Vanwoerkom <hvw59601@care2.com> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: where is linux-2.6_2.6.22-2.diff.gz? Message-ID: <f8tsn7$g25$1@sea.gmane.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
> Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
>> Hi Team, >> >> For quite a few days now the pages that display packages for >> linux-headers-2.6.22 (UNSTABLE) show >> http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/l/linux-2.6/linux-2.6_2.6.22-2.diff.gz >> >> as the patch file, but it does not exist, while >> linux-2.6_2.6.22-1.diff.gz does. >> >> Anybody notice that? >>
>
> Nobody.
>
> Found it in:
> http://ftp.cica.es/debian/pool/main/l/linux-2.6/
>
> But why there and not in ftp.debian.org?
>
It takes time, apparently. Does anybody notice? Hugo

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 20:34:00 -0400 From: Douglas Allan Tutty <dtutty@porchlight.ca> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Large initrd [Was: Re: booting problem (udev related?)] Message-ID: <20070803003400.GA16679@titan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 12:19:36AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 10:35:01AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:

> > So what is the significance of initrd size? (other than the obvious
> > filling up /boot issue). Is it really a problem to have "most" modules
> > in there? I can think of some situations where it might be nice to
> > have most of them -- mobo fails catastrophically and you want to be
> > able to just boot, for example.
>
> This is about it. Debian wants to provide an initrd that works even ehn
> changing hardware. Same reason for installing all -xorg-video-foo
> packages.
>
However, don't all those modules in the initrd end up staying in the kernel anyway, or do they get unloaded during boot? If they stay, and 'most' modules get added, how is that different than having a huge monolithic kernel? It may not matter on a box with huge memory, but I have mostly small-memory boxes. As for xorg-video-foo, that's why I don't install the xorg metapackage. I choose from its dependencies what I need. /rant There's a growing kitchen-sink approach in Debian (perhaps all of Linux, I don't know). There's the kernel/initrd size, there's the variable device name problems, to name two. It suggests to me that there's a missing piece of infrastructure. Perhaps the installer system should create a hardware inventory file that initrdtools (or whatever the nom de jure) can access to generate a tailord initrd, that apt can consult for what drivers to download, etc. The installer rescue mode could offer a tool to regenerate the inventory file for times when one changes hardware. /end rant Doug.

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 20:35:31 -0400 From: Douglas Allan Tutty <dtutty@porchlight.ca> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Adaptec 2100s & Debian stable Message-ID: <20070803003531.GB16679@titan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 06:54:51PM +0200, Fabrizio Pedersoli wrote:
> i have a big problem with an Adaptec 2100s scsi controller, which manages 2
> disks in RAID-0. the Debian installer found correctly that raid and the
> installation process terminates fine. But when i reboot, after linux loads
> i20 modules and founds hdd... it stops saying "waiting for root filesystem".
> any suggestions??? thanks (and sorry for my english :D).
What is your kernel command line, from /boot/grub/menu.lst? Doug.

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 20:40:39 -0400 From: Douglas Allan Tutty <dtutty@porchlight.ca> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Bridged Network Question Message-ID: <20070803004039.GC16679@titan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 03:09:48PM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote:
>
> I have been using an old laptop as an Access Point for our laptops to
> connect to the internet through the main box -> modem connection.
> The Lan (eth0) is bridged with a Netgear WG511U PCMCIA card (ath0) to
> connect to the gatway computer.
>
> It works fine, as an AP, but has one problem. The AP itself can not
> connect to the internet through the gatway. The only way to update
> the AP's software is to change /etc/network/interfaces from the
> bridged setup to just a Lan setup, reboot, do the update/upgrade,
> change the interfaces file back to the bridged mode and reboot again.

> I would like to move the AP to an old 500Mhz headless box so that I
> can setup the firewall and a mailserver, etc on it and free up the
> laptop. I can't see how to do that with the above problem.
I've never needed bridge and I'm wondering why you do? Bridging makes the two networks look like one, but expecially when you start firewalling, they need to be different. For details on setting this up, read the shorewall-doc package, even if you don't want to use shorewall. Doug.

Can't find what you're looking for?X

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 20:57:17 -0400 From: Douglas Allan Tutty <dtutty@porchlight.ca> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: cheap scsi card recomendation Message-ID: <20070803005717.GD16679@titan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 03:04:03PM -0500, Rodney Richison wrote:
> I've about 20 of old netserver lpr machines that have the old megaraid
> raid card. The kernal has dropped support for these cards. I'm tired of
> dealing with it.
>
> Can someone recomend a card that will work well with a stock debian that
> I might find on ebay?
>
> The drives are ultra3 18g
> (only raid 1 needed, do NOT need raid 5)
> 10rpm hard drives
I don't know specifically what MegaRaid cards you have, but just FYI and not any sort of endorcement, I see that OpenBSD includes support for several MegaRaid cards. I have an old 486 that is a dog under Etch but is quite zippy under OBSD. I've found that Linux development focuses on newer and newer stuff at the expense of old stuff. I have lots of old stuff, always looking for more (free). Doug.

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 21:01:34 -0400 From: Douglas Allan Tutty <dtutty@porchlight.ca> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: MS Word under wine/crossover office Message-ID: <20070803010134.GE16679@titan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 11:41:54PM +0000, Tyler Smith wrote:
> Which brings me to my question: do any of you have any experience
> using wine or crossover office with MSWord? Does it work? If it is
> possible to produce true, well-formatted .doc files this way then it
> will definitely be an improvement over hunting down a computer running
> Word under MSWindows to check my submissions. But it needs to be
> completely identical to regular Word - if I have to check the
> crossover/wine Word version with native Word I won't have saved any
> time. Is this possible? Any other suggestions regarding producing true
> .doc formats without resorting to installing Windows would be welcome,
> but in this case OpenOffice is definitely not good enough. It's great,
> of course, but not when it comes to exchanging .doc files with
> critical formatting intact.
>
Do the people to whom you send the word docs have to edit them? If not, what about sending pdf? I never send anyone a doc file, and I've never used OpenOffice; I just make a pdf from LaTex. Just lucky, I guess. Doug.

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 18:21:41 -0700 From: David Brodbeck <brodbd@u.washington.edu> To: List Debian User <debian-user@lists.debian.org> Subject: Re: Bridged Network Question Message-Id: <807F9119-6600-43BB-B648-5653F0A564BD@u.washington.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 03:09:48PM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote:
>> >> I have been using an old laptop as an Access Point for our laptops to >> connect to the internet through the main box -> modem connection. >> The Lan (eth0) is bridged with a Netgear WG511U PCMCIA card (ath0) to >> connect to the gatway computer. >> >> It works fine, as an AP, but has one problem. The AP itself can not >> connect to the internet through the gatway. The only way to update >> the AP's software is to change /etc/network/interfaces from the >> bridged setup to just a Lan setup, reboot, do the update/upgrade, >> change the interfaces file back to the bridged mode and reboot again. Do you have an IP address associated with the bridge? Setting an IP on one of the network cards won't work if they're bridged -- it has to be on the bridge interface.

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 21:24:35 -0400 From: Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: MS Word under wine/crossover office Message-ID: <20070803012435.GA3355@nitpicking.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 11:41:54PM +0000, Tyler Smith wrote:
> Which brings me to my question: do any of you have any experience
> using wine or crossover office with MSWord? Does it work? If it is
> possible to produce true, well-formatted .doc files this way then it
> will definitely be an improvement over hunting down a computer running
> Word under MSWindows to check my submissions. But it needs to be
> completely identical to regular Word - if I have to check the
> crossover/wine Word version with native Word I won't have saved any
> time. Is this possible? Any other suggestions regarding producing true
> .doc formats without resorting to installing Windows would be welcome,
> but in this case OpenOffice is definitely not good enough. It's great,
> of course, but not when it comes to exchanging .doc files with
> critical formatting intact.
A couple of years ago, I discovered that the MS Word Viewer worked great under Wine. If you just want to inspect formatting that would help you, and it's way lighter-weight than Word itself. -- Carl Fink nitpicking@nitpicking.com Read my blog at nitpickingblog.blogspot.com. Reviews! Observations! Stupid mistakes you can correct!

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 21:47:58 -0400 From: Wayne Topa <linuxone@intergate.com> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Bridged Network Question Message-ID: <20070803014757.GA7007@buddy.mtntop.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Douglas Allan Tutty(dtutty@porchlight.ca) is reported to have said:
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 03:09:48PM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote:
> >
> > I have been using an old laptop as an Access Point for our laptops to
> > connect to the internet through the main box -> modem connection.
> > The Lan (eth0) is bridged with a Netgear WG511U PCMCIA card (ath0) to
> > connect to the gatway computer.
> >
> > It works fine, as an AP, but has one problem. The AP itself can not
> > connect to the internet through the gatway. The only way to update
> > the AP's software is to change /etc/network/interfaces from the
> > bridged setup to just a Lan setup, reboot, do the update/upgrade,
> > change the interfaces file back to the bridged mode and reboot again.
>
> > I would like to move the AP to an old 500Mhz headless box so that I
> > can setup the firewall and a mailserver, etc on it and free up the
> > laptop. I can't see how to do that with the above problem.
>
> I've never needed bridge and I'm wondering why you do? Bridging makes
> the two networks look like one, but expecially when you start
> firewalling, they need to be different. For details on setting this up,
> read the shorewall-doc package, even if you don't want to use shorewall.
I did not explain this very well then. :-( I use the AP laptop to allow our wireless laptops the ability to access the internet form anywhere on our property. They connect, via DHCP, to the AP and the bridge sends them, via ethernet, to the gateway and thus to the internet. The AP (bridge) is open to all and the firewall is on the gateway box. The AP is selective as to which MAC's it allows a connection to. I have been firewalling since the ipchains era so really have no need for shorewall. The problem is, simply, the AP box, which is running testing, can ping everyone including the internet, BUT, it never receives answers from the internet. All the laptops connecting through the AP do not have any problem getting replies. I have only read of one other person having this problem and he never, AFAICT, received a reply. I must be doing something wrong, but I know not what. This would not be the method I would use if I was able to get a broadband connection here, but as that will not happen while I am alive, it is best I can do for now. Sorry for the confusion Wayne -- The day-to-day travails of the IBM programmer are so amusing to most of us who are fortunate enough never to have been one -- like watching Charlie Chaplin trying to cook a shoe. _______________________________________________________

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 21:53:51 -0400 From: Wayne Topa <linuxone@intergate.com> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Bridged Network Question Message-ID: <20070803015351.GB7007@buddy.mtntop.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline David Brodbeck(brodbd@u.washington.edu) is reported to have said:
>
> >On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 03:09:48PM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote:
> >>
> >>I have been using an old laptop as an Access Point for our laptops to
> >>connect to the internet through the main box -> modem connection.
> >>The Lan (eth0) is bridged with a Netgear WG511U PCMCIA card (ath0) to
> >>connect to the gatway computer.
> >>
> >>It works fine, as an AP, but has one problem. The AP itself can not
> >>connect to the internet through the gatway. The only way to update
> >>the AP's software is to change /etc/network/interfaces from the
> >>bridged setup to just a Lan setup, reboot, do the update/upgrade,
> >>change the interfaces file back to the bridged mode and reboot again.
>
> Do you have an IP address associated with the bridge? Setting an IP
> on one of the network cards won't work if they're bridged -- it has
> to be on the bridge interface.
>
Yes, I discovered that when I first set the AP up. # The Debian Bridge method auto br0 iface br0 inet static address 192.168.1.8 network 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.1.255 gateway 192.168.1.3 # bridge_ports all # this doesn't bring up ath0 bridge_ports ath0 eth0 route add default gateway 192.168.1.3 dns-nameservers 192.168.1.3 64.136.173.5 164.136.164.77 # Just added but didn't help I must have missed something but darned if I can find what! Thanks Wayne -- Plug-and-Play is really nice, unfortunately it only works 50% of the time. To be specific the "Plug" almost always works. --unknown source _______________________________________________________

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 21:00:26 -0500 From: "Russell L. Harris" <rlharris@oplink.net> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Cc: Tyler Smith <tyler.smith@mail.mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: MS Word under wine/crossover office Message-ID: <20070803020026.GA4909@oplink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline * Tyler Smith <tyler.smith@mail.mcgill.ca> [070802 20:42]:
> Hi,
>
> I am getting really frustrated with exchanging documents with
> colleagues who only use Word. I am quite happy now working with LaTeX
> Which brings me to my question: do any of you have any experience
> using wine or crossover office with MSWord? Does it work? If it is
As I recall, MS Office/MS Word is the touchstone for CodeWeavers CrossOver. If any application runs properly under CrossOver, MS Office/MS Word should. For several years, I have been using CrossOver Pro in order to run BibleWorks 5.0. Many moons ago, my first step after installing CrossOver Pro was to install Word for Windows 2000. But with the advent of OpenOffice, I no longer have need for Word, so I haven't tried it lately with CrossOver Pro. Being lazy, I haven't bothered to keep up with Wine. And with each revision, CrossOver has been getting easier to install, so that now it is almost a trivial matter. There even is a Debian package, which is the way I install it. If I recall correctly, CodeWeavers offers a free trial. (Once CrossOver quits, you need to pay to get an activation code.) RLH

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 22:08:14 -0400 From: Douglas Allan Tutty <dtutty@porchlight.ca> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Bridged Network Question Message-ID: <20070803020814.GA17492@titan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 09:47:58PM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote:
> Douglas Allan Tutty(dtutty@porchlight.ca) is reported to have said:
> > On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 03:09:48PM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote:
> > >
> > > I have been using an old laptop as an Access Point for our laptops to
> > > connect to the internet through the main box -> modem connection.
> > > The Lan (eth0) is bridged with a Netgear WG511U PCMCIA card (ath0) to
> > > connect to the gatway computer.
> > >
I think I understand your setup, although I've never used wireless. I too am on dialup and at one point had a laptop that I connected with a serial cable to a box that then connected to the box that had the modem. I set up the access box with NAT at the time by simply installing ipmasq and dnsmasq and setting forwarding. All boxes could access the internet. I never needed bridge and wonder why you're using it. As I understand it, bridging is for making stand-alone boxes that perform the same function as the various ubiquetous blue ones: routers, switches, etc. They themselves don't need to access the internet. Anyway, if you're happy to bridge, good, but I don't know how to make it do what you want. Good luck. Doug.

Don't know where to look next?X

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 22:45:43 -0400 From: Wayne Topa <linuxone@intergate.com> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Bridged Network Question Message-ID: <20070803024543.GA9875@buddy.mtntop.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Douglas Allan Tutty(dtutty@porchlight.ca) is reported to have said:
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 09:47:58PM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote:
> > Douglas Allan Tutty(dtutty@porchlight.ca) is reported to have said:
> > > On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 03:09:48PM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I have been using an old laptop as an Access Point for our laptops to
> > > > connect to the internet through the main box -> modem connection.
> > > > The Lan (eth0) is bridged with a Netgear WG511U PCMCIA card (ath0) to
> > > > connect to the gatway computer.
> > > >
>
> I think I understand your setup, although I've never used wireless. I
> too am on dialup and at one point had a laptop that I connected with a
> serial cable to a box that then connected to the box that had the modem.
The AP laptop -is- connected to the gatway machine via Cat5 cable to the gateway.
>
> I set up the access box with NAT at the time by simply installing ipmasq
> and dnsmasq and setting forwarding. All boxes could access the
> internet.
>
> I never needed bridge and wonder why you're using it.
Because I needed a way to connect the wireles laptops to the internet. The AP has the the wireless adapter and an ethernet adapter in it do does what you did with your laptop except it accepts wireless signals in/out.
> As I understand
> it, bridging is for making stand-alone boxes that perform the same
> function as the various ubiquetous blue ones: routers, switches, etc.
But I didn't have a router/switch and I did have an old laptop. :-)
> They themselves don't need to access the internet.
As this one can do much more then a switch, it runs Debian you know, it was an easy choice to make. Getting it to work as an AP alone isn't all I wanted to do. It's a PITA to have to reconfigure it to upgrade but if I can find a way -not- to reconfigure, it will be just great. >
> Anyway, if you're happy to bridge, good, but I don't know how to make it
> do what you want.
I'm about as happy with the bridge, as it is now, as I am with my 2.5KBs dialup connection. ~6 minutes for each Meg downloaded is a bigger PITA but I don't have any other alternative, currently. It may not be possible to do what I am trying to do. I don't know so that is why it took me 4 months to ask. Thanks for trying, anyway. Regards Wayne -- A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q. Why is top posting bad? _______________________________________________________

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 22:54:00 -0400 From: Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Bridged Network Question Message-Id: <20070802225400.14cb0513.celejar@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 22:45:43 -0400 Wayne Topa <linuxone@intergate.com> wrote:
> Douglas Allan Tutty(dtutty@porchlight.ca) is reported to have said:
> > On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 09:47:58PM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote:
> > > Douglas Allan Tutty(dtutty@porchlight.ca) is reported to have said:
> > > > On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 03:09:48PM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I have been using an old laptop as an Access Point for our laptops to
> > > > > connect to the internet through the main box -> modem connection.
> > > > > The Lan (eth0) is bridged with a Netgear WG511U PCMCIA card (ath0) to
> > > > > connect to the gatway computer.
> > > > >
> >
> > I think I understand your setup, although I've never used wireless. I
> > too am on dialup and at one point had a laptop that I connected with a
> > serial cable to a box that then connected to the box that had the modem.
>
> The AP laptop -is- connected to the gatway machine via Cat5 cable to
> the gateway.
>
> >
> > I set up the access box with NAT at the time by simply installing ipmasq
> > and dnsmasq and setting forwarding. All boxes could access the
> > internet.
> >
> > I never needed bridge and wonder why you're using it.
>
> Because I needed a way to connect the wireles laptops to the internet.
> The AP has the the wireless adapter and an ethernet adapter in it do
> does what you did with your laptop except it accepts wireless signals
> in/out.
The question is whether you can accomplish this without bridging. I think you can set up both the modem box and the laptop AP as routers. Have the laptop / AP forward its wireless clients' packets to the gateway / modem box, and have that box then forward them to the internet (as you're doing now).
> Regards
> Wayne
Celejar -- mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator End of debian-user-digest Digest V2007 Issue #2088 ************************************************** Received on Thu Aug 2 23:30:09 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Aug 09 2007 - 19:05:38 EDT

Contact Us  Legal Notices  Order Services Online 
Pantek Home  Privacy Policy  IT news  Site Map  Pantek Library