headers
Eduardo Costa Lisboa | 6 Feb 2008 18:52
Picon

Re: linux certification?

It wasn't that horrible :-)

On Aug 11, 2005 5:49 PM, Mike Hernandez <sequethin <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm replying to my own post to apologize for my horrid use of enlish
> ;) I swear I read it 5 times before clicking send... but I guess my
> eyes were reading what they thought it said and not what it actually
> said... anyway I hope my main point got across...
>
>
> Mike
> --
> http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-chat
> FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
> Unsubscribe: See the above information page
>

-- 
Eduardo Costa Lisboa
--

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-chat
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
mantiz | 8 Feb 2008 16:24
Picon

Alternative IP-Config if DHCP is not available

Hello,

I would like to know if there is a way in Gnu/Linux-Systems to use an
alternative IP-Config if no DHCP-Server is available.

I know this Feature from Windows-Systems and as I have a Linux-System
running in a VirtualBox it is possible that I switch on the VBox
connected to the LAN (DHCP supported) but it could also be that I turn
on the VBox when I'm not connected and in this case I want to give the
system a static IP.

I know that I can use a different runlevel where I could choose this
or this net-config but it would be great if there is an automatic way
for this behaviour.

Any answer or tips are welcome. Thanks. :)

greets
Christian

--

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-chat
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Matthew Burgess | 8 Feb 2008 16:32
Picon
Favicon

Re: Alternative IP-Config if DHCP is not available

On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 16:24:18 +0100, mantiz <at> gmx.net wrote:

> I know this Feature from Windows-Systems and as I have a Linux-System
> running in a VirtualBox it is possible that I switch on the VBox
> connected to the LAN (DHCP supported) but it could also be that I turn
> on the VBox when I'm not connected and in this case I want to give the
> system a static IP.

I'd have thought something like NetworkManager (http://www.gnome.org/projects/NetworkManager/)
should help out here.  There may be less desktop/GUI-oriented options available (I've only used NM
through Kubuntu's KDE implementation) but I can't think of any off the top of my head.  Then again, I only
ever configure LFS in static-IP, wired network configurations.

Regards,

Matt.

--

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-chat
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
lists | 8 Feb 2008 23:43

Re: Alternative IP-Config if DHCP is not available

mantiz <at> gmx.net wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I would like to know if there is a way in Gnu/Linux-Systems to use an
> alternative IP-Config if no DHCP-Server is available.
> 
> I know this Feature from Windows-Systems and as I have a Linux-System
> running in a VirtualBox it is possible that I switch on the VBox
> connected to the LAN (DHCP supported) but it could also be that I turn
> on the VBox when I'm not connected and in this case I want to give the
> system a static IP.
> 
> I know that I can use a different runlevel where I could choose this
> or this net-config but it would be great if there is an automatic way
> for this behaviour.
> 
> Any answer or tips are welcome. Thanks. :)
> 
> greets
> Christian
> 
Network profiles?
pick the profile you want during boot sequence.
At least, that is the way every other distro seems to handle them ;)

http://www.ces.clemson.edu/linux/network_profiles.shtml

Jaqui

--

--
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Joshua Murphy | 15 Feb 2008 19:03
Picon

Re: Alternative IP-Config if DHCP is not available

On 2/8/08, lists <lists <at> jaqui-greenlees.net> wrote:
> mantiz <at> gmx.net wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I would like to know if there is a way in Gnu/Linux-Systems to use an
> > alternative IP-Config if no DHCP-Server is available.
> >
> > I know this Feature from Windows-Systems and as I have a Linux-System
> > running in a VirtualBox it is possible that I switch on the VBox
> > connected to the LAN (DHCP supported) but it could also be that I turn
> > on the VBox when I'm not connected and in this case I want to give the
> > system a static IP.
> >
> > I know that I can use a different runlevel where I could choose this
> > or this net-config but it would be great if there is an automatic way
> > for this behaviour.
> >
> > Any answer or tips are welcome. Thanks. :)
> >
> > greets
> > Christian
> >
> Network profiles?
> pick the profile you want during boot sequence.
> At least, that is the way every other distro seems to handle them ;)
>
> http://www.ces.clemson.edu/linux/network_profiles.shtml
>
> Jaqui
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
mantiz | 16 Feb 2008 13:47
Picon

Re[2]: Alternative IP-Config if DHCP is not available

Hi all,

sorry for my late response and thanks for all answers.

I think the best way will be a script for network-profiles and switch
them manually.

greets
Christian

--

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-chat
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jeremy Henty | 22 Feb 2008 14:31

./configure humour


Can't resist resurrecting this thread!  From xchat:

    configure complete, now type 'make' and pray.

:-)

Jeremy Henty 
--

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-chat
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Jeremy Huntwork | 25 Feb 2008 16:37
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

LiveCD or No LiveCD?

Hello Everyone,

It has recently been suggested to me that the LFS LiveCD project be 
killed. The main arguments for this are, essentially:

1) It is currently unmaintained
2) It removes the essential prerequisite of being able to configure a 
Linux system
3) It leads to less testing from other hosts
4) A seeming lack of community interest in contributing. Especially, 
essential testing (and reports on the results of tests!) on varied 
hardware does not seem to be taking place

As you may guess, I have mixed feelings about this. But after reflecting 
on it a bit, my hesitancy to agree comes mostly from personal attachment 
to the CD and perhaps not what is best for LFS.

At this point I need community input. I realize that many of you may use 
and appreciate the CD, just as I do. But realistically, this project 
will die of its own if it does not get some help. And if that happens, 
then LFS would be better off removing the dead weight.

I have some energy and some ideas to put back into the project, but only 
if I get some help with development and testing. I need to know two things:

* Does the community still want the LiveCD project? (Consider that a 
couple of the arguments above imply that the LFS LiveCD by its nature is 
degrading the quality of LFS)

* If so, is the community prepared to lend help in keeping it alive?
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 23 comments |
headers
Jerry McBride | 25 Feb 2008 18:08
Picon

Re: LiveCD or No LiveCD?

On Monday 25 February 2008 10:37:13 am Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> It has recently been suggested to me that the LFS LiveCD project be
> killed. The main arguments for this are, essentially:
>
> 1) It is currently unmaintained
> 2) It removes the essential prerequisite of being able to configure a
> Linux system
> 3) It leads to less testing from other hosts
> 4) A seeming lack of community interest in contributing. Especially,
> essential testing (and reports on the results of tests!) on varied
> hardware does not seem to be taking place
>
> As you may guess, I have mixed feelings about this. But after reflecting
> on it a bit, my hesitancy to agree comes mostly from personal attachment
> to the CD and perhaps not what is best for LFS.
>
> At this point I need community input. I realize that many of you may use
> and appreciate the CD, just as I do. But realistically, this project
> will die of its own if it does not get some help. And if that happens,
> then LFS would be better off removing the dead weight.
>
> I have some energy and some ideas to put back into the project, but only
> if I get some help with development and testing. I need to know two things:
>
> * Does the community still want the LiveCD project? (Consider that a
> couple of the arguments above imply that the LFS LiveCD by its nature is
> degrading the quality of LFS)
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
R.Quenett | 25 Feb 2008 18:27

Re: LiveCD or No LiveCD?


from Jerry McBride 25 Feb 2008:

" On Monday 25 February 2008 10:37:13 am Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
" > Hello Everyone,
" >
" > It has recently been suggested to me that the LFS LiveCD project be
" > killed. The main arguments for this are, essentially:
" >
" > 1) It is currently unmaintained
" > 2) It removes the essential prerequisite of being able to configure a
" > Linux system
" > 3) It leads to less testing from other hosts
" > 4) A seeming lack of community interest in contributing. Especially,
" > essential testing (and reports on the results of tests!) on varied
" > hardware does not seem to be taking place
" >
" > As you may guess, I have mixed feelings about this. But after reflecting
" > on it a bit, my hesitancy to agree comes mostly from personal attachment
" > to the CD and perhaps not what is best for LFS.
" >
" > At this point I need community input. I realize that many of you may use
" > and appreciate the CD, just as I do. But realistically, this project
" > will die of its own if it does not get some help. And if that happens,
" > then LFS would be better off removing the dead weight.
" >
" > I have some energy and some ideas to put back into the project, but only
" > if I get some help with development and testing. I need to know two things:
" >
" > * Does the community still want the LiveCD project? (Consider that a
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane