OK, I understood that netraverse is not making dist-specific kernels anymore, so there is no win4lin kernel for suse 9.1. Instead netraverse says to use the generic 2.6.x kernel they provide. I read also some reports that it would work fine. My question now is: What will not work anymore / what will I be missing if I replace my SuSE kernel with the win4lin generic 2.6.x kernel? I can't imagine that SuSE does all that work to customize the kernel and then it will be the same to use the generic one. And then the next question is if it works fine to install both kernels, using grub to boot the one or the other, depending if I need to run one of these old legacy windose apps... if yes, is there a kernel 2.6 specific howto somewhere? Thanks, Matt
Matt T. wrote:
OK, I understood that netraverse is not making dist-specific kernels anymore, so there is no win4lin kernel for suse 9.1. Instead netraverse says to use the generic 2.6.x kernel they provide. I read also some reports that it would work fine.
My question now is: What will not work anymore / what will I be missing if I replace my SuSE kernel with the win4lin generic 2.6.x kernel?
I can't imagine that SuSE does all that work to customize the kernel and then it will be the same to use the generic one.
And then the next question is if it works fine to install both kernels, using grub to boot the one or the other, depending if I need to run one of these old legacy windose apps... if yes, is there a kernel 2.6 specific howto somewhere?
The point here is: if it becomes necessary to boot with a second linux kernel in order to be able to use Win4Lin then Win4Lin have shot themselves in the foot because it is much easier to simply boot into a system running Windows. Right? Cheers. -- I am not young enough to know everything.
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 16:00, Basil Chupin wrote:
Matt T. wrote:
OK, I understood that netraverse is not making dist-specific kernels anymore, so there is no win4lin kernel for suse 9.1. Instead netraverse says to use the generic 2.6.x kernel they provide. I read also some reports that it would work fine.
My question now is: What will not work anymore / what will I be missing if I replace my SuSE kernel with the win4lin generic 2.6.x kernel?
I can't imagine that SuSE does all that work to customize the kernel and then it will be the same to use the generic one.
And then the next question is if it works fine to install both kernels, using grub to boot the one or the other, depending if I need to run one of these old legacy windose apps... if yes, is there a kernel 2.6 specific howto somewhere?
The point here is: if it becomes necessary to boot with a second linux kernel in order to be able to use Win4Lin then Win4Lin have shot themselves in the foot because it is much easier to simply boot into a system running Windows. Right?
That's what I'm trying to understand. According to Netraverse it is no problem to use their kernel, but they recommend to use a distribution which has their kernel already build in. I understand that it is much better to have the win4lin hooks already build in the kernel by the distribution, instead of having the user installing a new kernel to be able to use win4lin. But how about the users of SuSE and other distributions without pre-build in win4lin hooks? I hope that using the generic win4lin 2.6.x kernel does not cause too many annoyances. Otherwise Netraverse did a bad move, indeed. Or, just wait another year, and wine / crossover is there, or gimp, quanta etc... ;-) there is not much missing anymore!
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 07:31 am, Matt T. wrote:
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 16:00, Basil Chupin wrote:
Matt T. wrote:
OK, I understood that netraverse is not making dist-specific kernels anymore, so there is no win4lin kernel for suse 9.1. Instead netraverse says to use the generic 2.6.x kernel they provide. I read also some reports that it would work fine.
My question now is: What will not work anymore / what will I be missing if I replace my SuSE kernel with the win4lin generic 2.6.x kernel?
I can't imagine that SuSE does all that work to customize the kernel and then it will be the same to use the generic one.
And then the next question is if it works fine to install both kernels, using grub to boot the one or the other, depending if I need to run one of these old legacy windose apps... if yes, is there a kernel 2.6 specific howto somewhere?
The point here is: if it becomes necessary to boot with a second linux kernel in order to be able to use Win4Lin then Win4Lin have shot themselves in the foot because it is much easier to simply boot into a system running Windows. Right?
That's what I'm trying to understand. According to Netraverse it is no problem to use their kernel, but they recommend to use a distribution which has their kernel already build in. I understand that it is much better to have the win4lin hooks already build in the kernel by the distribution, instead of having the user installing a new kernel to be able to use win4lin. But how about the users of SuSE and other distributions without pre-build in win4lin hooks?
I hope that using the generic win4lin 2.6.x kernel does not cause too many annoyances. Otherwise Netraverse did a bad move, indeed.
Nettraverse made a bad move when they decided to mod the kernel... IMHO. This is why I gave up on Win4Lin long, long ago and moved to VMWare. No problems since running *any* kernel. (using 2.6.6 on 9.0 here)
Or, just wait another year, and wine / crossover is there, or gimp, quanta etc... ;-) there is not much missing anymore!
-- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 06/08/04 07:39 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "A bird in hand is worth two in the bush. -- Cervantes A bird in the bush can't relieve itself in your hand."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 08 June 2004 06:31, Matt T. wrote:
Or, just wait another year, and wine / crossover is there, or gimp, quanta etc... ;-) there is not much missing anymore!
I own crossover, and it works great for standard apps, but there is a *LOT* missing. And, yes, I've done the recent upgrade. I can't run "Final Draft" (script writing software which I absolutely need) under cxoffice. I haven't found any good label creation software for Linux - nor have I found any Windows label creation packages that run under cxoffice. I'm not expecting Final Draft to be ported to Linux anytime soon (sad, as it *DOES* run natively on the Mac). I'd love to completely forget about Windows, but it's not realistic, yet. Usining Win4Lin, I don't have to reboot to run the packages I need. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAxdppjeziQOokQnARAmwHAJ0eObSYPiF6zA6qZxS/WJgDOoFRLQCglP5N iz+155e70Vf6SSZjm1CR/Gc= =2LF8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 11:25, Michael Satterwhite wrote:
I can't run "Final Draft" (script writing software which I absolutely need) under cxoffice. I haven't found any good label creation software for Linux - nor have I found any Windows label creation packages that run under cxoffice.
I'm not expecting Final Draft to be ported to Linux anytime soon (sad, as it *DOES* run natively on the Mac). I'd love to completely forget about Windows, but it's not realistic, yet. Usining Win4Lin, I don't have to reboot to run the packages I need.
I've run FD just fine under plain old wine in SUSE 9.1. Have you tried that? J.C.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 08 June 2004 10:17, John Coldrick wrote:
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 11:25, Michael Satterwhite wrote:
I can't run "Final Draft" (script writing software which I absolutely need) under cxoffice. I haven't found any good label creation software for Linux - nor have I found any Windows label creation packages that run under cxoffice.
I'm not expecting Final Draft to be ported to Linux anytime soon (sad, as it *DOES* run natively on the Mac). I'd love to completely forget about Windows, but it's not realistic, yet. Usining Win4Lin, I don't have to reboot to run the packages I need.
I've run FD just fine under plain old wine in SUSE 9.1. Have you tried that?
Not yet as I haven't upgraded to SuSE 9.1 (yet! I do intend to). This would be enough of a reason for me to do so, though. Thanks for the heads up!! Is it Wine straight out of the box, or did you download their latest release? Do you know of any label generation software that runs under Wine / cxoffice? Thanks again! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAxd13jeziQOokQnARAm4rAJ9Ob6Z3sa7iyuEayWFbyix+T3DnSACeLzze XmNqlY5h2/sjmPlxkcmdkEw= =BeBf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 11:38, Michael Satterwhite wrote:
Not yet as I haven't upgraded to SuSE 9.1 (yet! I do intend to). This would be enough of a reason for me to do so, though. Thanks for the heads up!! Is it Wine straight out of the box, or did you download their latest release?
Wine as installed in 9.1 - but I've been keeping up the patching so there may have been an upgrade - not sure. FD is a pretty basic program - really just a stripped down, specialized word processor - I'm surprised any of the wine forks had trouble with it! I would be *extremely* surprised that you couldn't test this before committing to 9.1. I'm running wine-20040213-41 - perhaps you could upgrade to that on your current system and test first...
Do you know of any label generation software that runs under Wine / cxoffice?
Sorry, no... Cheers, J.C.
In a previous message, Michael Satterwhite
I haven't found any good label creation software for Linux
Have you tried gLabels? It's pretty good and lets you create your own templates. There's a SUSE package available from http://www.usr-local-bin.org/. John -- John Pettigrew Headstrong Games john@headstrong-games.co.uk Fun : Strategy : Price http://www.headstrong-games.co.uk/ Board games that won't break the bank Fields of Valour: 2 Norse clans battle on one of 3 different boards
On Tuesday 08 Jun 2004 16:25, Michael Satterwhite wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 06:31, Matt T. wrote:
Or, just wait another year, and wine / crossover is there, or gimp, quanta etc... ;-) there is not much missing anymore!
I own crossover, and it works great for standard apps, but there is a *LOT* missing. And, yes, I've done the recent upgrade. well i have never managed to get crossover to run so it got canned
I can't run "Final Draft" (script writing software which I absolutely need) under cxoffice.
I haven't found any good label creation software for Linux -
nor have I found any Windows label creation packages that run under cxoffice.
I'm not expecting Final Draft to be ported to Linux anytime soon (sad, as it *DOES* run natively on the Mac) run one of the Mac emulators . I'd love to completely forget about Windows,
Script writing as in for films ,plays ect...I´m shure a bit of digging would reveal something more than capable and suitable that depends on what your description of decent is does it not does your description of decent mean a huge waste of space GUI or an command line based one ...?... thats very easy to do i did it around 10 years ago ..
but it's not realistic, yet. Usining Win4Lin, I don't have to reboot to run the packages I need.
and any how there is always VMware if win4Lin dont do it for you personally they are both a waste of space .
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFAxdppjeziQOokQnARAmwHAJ0eObSYPiF6zA6qZxS/WJgDOoFRLQCglP5N iz+155e70Vf6SSZjm1CR/Gc= =2LF8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- Linux user No: 256242 Machine No: 139931 G6NJR Pete also MSA registered "Quinton 11" A Linux Only area Happy bug hunting M$ clan PGN
On Wednesday 09 June 2004 09:39, peter Nikolic wrote:
On Tuesday 08 Jun 2004 16:25, Michael Satterwhite wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 06:31, Matt T. wrote:
Or, just wait another year, and wine / crossover is there, or gimp, quanta etc... ;-) there is not much missing anymore!
I own crossover, and it works great for standard apps, but there is a *LOT* missing. And, yes, I've done the recent upgrade.
well i have never managed to get crossover to run so it got canned
[snip]
. I'd love to completely forget about Windows,
thats very easy to do i did it around 10 years ago ..
but it's not realistic, yet. Usining Win4Lin, I don't have to reboot to run the packages I need.
and any how there is always VMware if win4Lin dont do it for you personally they are both a waste of space .
yes, in an ideal world it shouldn't be necessary to put in so much effort just to run windows apps. But sometimes I cannot afford that luxury of not using some windows apps. (Besides doing some reverse engineering ;-) If I have a limited time to do a job, and with the old win app I know I can do it in minutes, and the linux apps (I know) will take significantly more time to do the job, or more time than I have, than I got no choice. Tools like win4lin allow me to minimize the windose usage as much as possible. As an example take photoshop and gimp. I can do, and I do, more and more in Gimp. But some things, such as text effects, are still just taking way too much time there, so I do them in Photoshop. Now to make my life easier I still like to know if I can dare to use the generic win4lin 2.6.x kernels instead of the SuSE one, or if I will run into big problems. Can you help me with that? Thanks, Matt
On Wednesday 09 June 2004 04:32 am, Matt T. wrote:
On Wednesday 09 June 2004 09:39, peter Nikolic wrote:
On Tuesday 08 Jun 2004 16:25, Michael Satterwhite wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 06:31, Matt T. wrote:
Or, just wait another year, and wine / crossover is there, or gimp, quanta etc... ;-) there is not much missing anymore!
I own crossover, and it works great for standard apps, but there is a *LOT* missing. And, yes, I've done the recent upgrade.
well i have never managed to get crossover to run so it got canned
[snip]
. I'd love to completely forget about Windows,
thats very easy to do i did it around 10 years ago ..
but it's not realistic, yet. Usining Win4Lin, I don't have to reboot to run the packages I need.
and any how there is always VMware if win4Lin dont do it for you personally they are both a waste of space .
yes, in an ideal world it shouldn't be necessary to put in so much effort just to run windows apps. But sometimes I cannot afford that luxury of not using some windows apps. (Besides doing some reverse engineering ;-)
If I have a limited time to do a job, and with the old win app I know I can do it in minutes, and the linux apps (I know) will take significantly more time to do the job, or more time than I have, than I got no choice. Tools like win4lin allow me to minimize the windose usage as much as possible.
As an example take photoshop and gimp. I can do, and I do, more and more in Gimp. But some things, such as text effects, are still just taking way too much time there, so I do them in Photoshop.
Now to make my life easier I still like to know if I can dare to use the generic win4lin 2.6.x kernels instead of the SuSE one, or if I will run into big problems. Can you help me with that?
Thanks, Matt
You can *ALWAYS* add a new kernel to your system without making the old one unusable. I have a 9.1 machine here and as soon as I got 9.1 installed, I switched over to using a vanilla 2.6.6 kernel. But the original kernel from SuSE is still there and I can (and have) booted it to compare things. So stop asking the question, and just do it. Get the win4lin kernel and install it alongside your normal kernel and see whether it works for you. -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 06/09/04 07:43 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "Iron rusts from disuse, stagnant water loses its purity, and in cold weather becomes frozen, even so does inaction sap the vigors of the mind." - Leonardo Da Vinci
On Wednesday 09 June 2004 18:45, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Wednesday 09 June 2004 04:32 am, Matt T. wrote: [snip]
Now to make my life easier I still like to know if I can dare to use the generic win4lin 2.6.x kernels instead of the SuSE one, or if I will run into big problems. Can you help me with that?
Thanks, Matt
You can *ALWAYS* add a new kernel to your system without making the old one unusable. I have a 9.1 machine here and as soon as I got 9.1 installed, I switched over to using a vanilla 2.6.6 kernel. But the original kernel from SuSE is still there and I can (and have) booted it to compare things.
So it seems to be working fine for you, Bruce. Good!
So stop asking the question, and just do it. Get the win4lin kernel and install it alongside your normal kernel and see whether it works for you.
Please forgive me, I still have a lot of respect of touching the kernel - may be too much ;-) However after your encouragement I understand that I can try it without risking too much, thanks! (There is however still this voice in me asking what SuSE did do to the kernel...) Regards, Matt
On Wednesday 09 June 2004 09:57 am, Matt T. wrote:
On Wednesday 09 June 2004 18:45, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Wednesday 09 June 2004 04:32 am, Matt T. wrote:
[snip]
Now to make my life easier I still like to know if I can dare to use the generic win4lin 2.6.x kernels instead of the SuSE one, or if I will run into big problems. Can you help me with that?
Thanks, Matt
You can *ALWAYS* add a new kernel to your system without making the old one unusable. I have a 9.1 machine here and as soon as I got 9.1 installed, I switched over to using a vanilla 2.6.6 kernel. But the original kernel from SuSE is still there and I can (and have) booted it to compare things.
So it seems to be working fine for you, Bruce. Good!
So stop asking the question, and just do it. Get the win4lin kernel and install it alongside your normal kernel and see whether it works for you.
Please forgive me, I still have a lot of respect of touching the kernel - may be too much ;-)
Yup... I think you do... Heck, I think I can still boot 8.2 on this 9.0 machine, with about 3 kernel flavors on each. The only think you really need to know is how to add a kernel into your /boot/grub/menu.lst and once you learn that, you are pretty much kernel-proof and can always retreat. If you're going to deal with Win4lin, you'd better learn to add kernels.
However after your encouragement I understand that I can try it without risking too much, thanks!
(There is however still this voice in me asking what SuSE did do to the kernel...)
Regards, Matt
-- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 06/09/04 09:56 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "There is many a good man to be found under a shabby hat."
Matt T. wrote:
On Wednesday 09 June 2004 09:39, peter Nikolic wrote:
On Tuesday 08 Jun 2004 16:25, Michael Satterwhite wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 06:31, Matt T. wrote:
Or, just wait another year, and wine / crossover is there, or gimp, quanta etc... ;-) there is not much missing anymore!
I own crossover, and it works great for standard apps, but there is a *LOT* missing. And, yes, I've done the recent upgrade.
well i have never managed to get crossover to run so it got canned
[snip]
. I'd love to completely forget about Windows,
thats very easy to do i did it around 10 years ago ..
but it's not realistic, yet. Usining Win4Lin, I don't have to reboot to run the packages I need.
and any how there is always VMware if win4Lin dont do it for you personally they are both a waste of space .
yes, in an ideal world it shouldn't be necessary to put in so much effort just to run windows apps. But sometimes I cannot afford that luxury of not using some windows apps. (Besides doing some reverse engineering ;-)
If I have a limited time to do a job, and with the old win app I know I can do it in minutes, and the linux apps (I know) will take significantly more time to do the job, or more time than I have, than I got no choice. Tools like win4lin allow me to minimize the windose usage as much as possible.
As an example take photoshop and gimp. I can do, and I do, more and more in Gimp. But some things, such as text effects, are still just taking way too much time there, so I do them in Photoshop.
The gimp was developed in answer to Adobe's refusal to hear the pleas of very many Linux users for a port, even telling them that photoshop ran on Linux under the Mac emulator (Executor) didn't make them budge. Much later when they said they were considering a port, but the interest was no longer there amongst Linux users.
Now to make my life easier I still like to know if I can dare to use the generic win4lin 2.6.x kernels instead of the SuSE one, or if I will run into big problems. Can you help me with that?
I used VMware for quite a while until it refused to work with the latest greatest kernels back at 2.2.x. I now have crossover office which I got as proof of concept as colleagues considering a move to Linux said they had to have Lotus Notes (ran under wine for years) and MS Office. The first excursion in trying to get Notes running became very political, the person I'd been dealing with at our datacentre trying to verify my settings, spoke to their Director and I was told if I wanted to change back from Notes, I'd have to get permission from my manager and he would have to get the OK from our Managing Director, I said I could get it to work given time, then I got a call from a "Linux guru" so called who told me it wouldn't work and to abandon it. Five minutes online in the office one morning and Notes was working. A few of us were determined to do eveything under Linux, occasionally people in the datacentre refused to talk to us, we got things working, then a few of them woke up and decided to try Linux and started asking me questions when they knew the success we were having using Linux for all our corporate work. It's worth the try with generic 2.6.x kernels, if it doesn't work first off, no bones are broken and that should soon be fixed. 2.6.x kernels are not seeing any siesmic changes now. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer ===== LINUX ONLY USED HERE =====
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 08 June 2004 04:00, Basil Chupin wrote:
The point here is: if it becomes necessary to boot with a second linux kernel in order to be able to use Win4Lin then Win4Lin have shot themselves in the foot because it is much easier to simply boot into a system running Windows. Right?
Actually, the idea is to use the Win4Lin enabled kernel as the kernel you normally use. Then there's no need to reboot at all when you run the package. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAxdI0jeziQOokQnARArmRAKCqcNAoI84BWOJkZBT7dhTlIfZN6wCfan/C SGjGw9YsoITj8JRSyU26b24= =OH/v -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 21:50, Michael Satterwhite wrote:
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 04:00, Basil Chupin wrote:
The point here is: if it becomes necessary to boot with a second linux kernel in order to be able to use Win4Lin then Win4Lin have shot themselves in the foot because it is much easier to simply boot into a system running Windows. Right?
Actually, the idea is to use the Win4Lin enabled kernel as the kernel you normally use. Then there's no need to reboot at all when you run the package.
Yes, yes, that is what I have done all the time, and I was quite happy with it. Win4Lin is a great product, allowing me to fire up (which happens less and less) a windose app without having to reboot. The big question for me is now if that can still be done with SuSE 9.1 without loosing functionality (as the win4lin kernel is a generic 2.6.x one and not the modified SuSE 2.6.x kernel). To quote myself:
My question now is: What will not work anymore / what will I be missing if I replace my SuSE kernel with the win4lin generic 2.6.x kernel?
I can't imagine that SuSE does all that work to customize the kernel and then it will be the same to use the generic one.
Does anyone know more about that? Thanks, Matt
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 08 June 2004 11:01, Matt T. wrote:
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 21:50, Michael Satterwhite wrote:
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 04:00, Basil Chupin wrote:
The point here is: if it becomes necessary to boot with a second linux kernel in order to be able to use Win4Lin then Win4Lin have shot themselves in the foot because it is much easier to simply boot into a system running Windows. Right?
Actually, the idea is to use the Win4Lin enabled kernel as the kernel you normally use. Then there's no need to reboot at all when you run the package.
Yes, yes, that is what I have done all the time, and I was quite happy with it. Win4Lin is a great product, allowing me to fire up (which happens less and less) a windose app without having to reboot.
The big question for me is now if that can still be done with SuSE 9.1 without loosing functionality (as the win4lin kernel is a generic 2.6.x one and not the modified SuSE 2.6.x kernel).
I haven't upgraded to 9.1 yet, but on 9.0 I recompiled the SuSE kernel with the Win4Lin patches added. I *DO* think this is a major flaw in their marketing as it requires the user to be (much) more savy than the average Windows user. I have some friends that can't do much more than find the on/ off button and start their browser. I wish that SuSE would simply add the patches. It would help everybody. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAxdzAjeziQOokQnARAgKBAKCmtX0BsS/8sA4z3wz8iz3s4f2AbQCfcGbs MugG5WSaYNuinyO2wCpJxMo= =Haoc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Matt T. wrote:
I can't imagine that SuSE does all that work to customize the kernel and
then
it will be the same to use the generic one.
Does anyone know more about that?
I've tried it and the win4lin kernel seems to be fine. I felt that the win4lin kernel was a little more sluggish on startup than the SuSE one, but I don't have any timings to confirm this. I believe there are one or two other issues if your're trying to run win4lin as (say) and NFS server. It ought to be possible to get a hybrid suse-win4lin kernel, but you can't just patch because the SuSE and win4lin patches clash. I haven't the energy to try creating a kernel, mainly because the number of applications I now use that actually need win4lin is so small that I normally use the SuSE kernel. -- JDL
I am trying to setup a Samba as a primary domain controller using 9.1. There are five servers and five clients on the network. The servers are all Linux, the clients are mostly Windows 2K and XP. I need a little guidance at this point on how to proceed. I can mount shares using the IP address "net use * \\192.168.1.34\SomeShare" works just fine. But I cannot join the domain.
From my reading and the error messages so far, I realize that I have to setup DNS also. OK, but in reading the DNS info in talks about setting up zone files where I hardcode the IP addresses for each hostname on the network. That seems to defeat the purpose of DHCP though. I'm currently using a Linksys firewall as a DHCP server for my Windows clients. Do I have to disable DHCP to get this working correctly?
Also, for such a small LAN, using LDAP for user management would be overkill - right? I can just create an account for each LAN user on the PDC? Thanks in advance - Richard
Don't know if it helps but....... I believe only the newer domain (with active directory) require DNS. The old domain (< NT4) doesn't as far as I know. B-) On Tuesday 08 June 2004 12:45 pm, Richard Mixon (qwest) wrote:
I am trying to setup a Samba as a primary domain controller using 9.1. There are five servers and five clients on the network. The servers are all Linux, the clients are mostly Windows 2K and XP.
I need a little guidance at this point on how to proceed. I can mount shares using the IP address "net use * \\192.168.1.34\SomeShare" works just fine. But I cannot join the domain.
From my reading and the error messages so far, I realize that I have to setup DNS also. OK, but in reading the DNS info in talks about setting up zone files where I hardcode the IP addresses for each hostname on the network. That seems to defeat the purpose of DHCP though. I'm currently using a Linksys firewall as a DHCP server for my Windows clients. Do I have to disable DHCP to get this working correctly?
Also, for such a small LAN, using LDAP for user management would be overkill - right? I can just create an account for each LAN user on the PDC?
Thanks in advance - Richard
-----Original Message----- From: Brad Bourn [mailto:brad@summitrd.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 12:04 PM To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] Samba and DNS setup with SuSE Pro 9.1
Don't know if it helps but.......
I believe only the newer domain (with active directory) require DNS.
The old domain (< NT4) doesn't as far as I know.
B-)
Brad - thank you. That makes sense. I'm still considering using LDAP, if the configuration does not end up being too difficult - otherwise fall back to a simpler authentication scheme. I guess I'll send a new post and try to get some insight as to how DNS and DHCP interact :)
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 12:45 pm, Richard Mixon (qwest) wrote:
I am trying to setup a Samba as a primary domain controller using 9.1. There are five servers and five clients on the network. The servers are all Linux, the clients are mostly Windows 2K and XP.
I need a little guidance at this point on how to proceed. I can mount shares using the IP address "net use * \\192.168.1.34\SomeShare" works just fine. But I cannot join the domain.
From my reading and the error messages so far, I realize that I have to setup DNS also. OK, but in reading the DNS info in talks about setting up zone files where I hardcode the IP addresses for each hostname on the network. That seems to defeat the purpose of DHCP though. I'm currently using a Linksys firewall as a DHCP server for my Windows clients. Do I have to disable DHCP to get this working correctly?
Also, for such a small LAN, using LDAP for user management would be overkill - right? I can just create an account for each LAN user on the PDC?
Thanks in advance - Richard
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
I am a noobie when it comes to configuring DNS - some guidance is appreciated. I am reading the DNS info in the 9.1 administration guide. It talks about setting up zone files where one ends up hardcoding the IP addresses for each hostname on the network. That seems to defeat the purpose of DHCP though. I'm currently using a Linksys firewall as a DHCP server for my Windows clients. I am setting up a SuSE Pro 9.1 server that will serve two main purposes: - Samba file and print sharing; - CVS source code server. We currently only have six users. I would really like to get rid of the host files that I have been using on each server and workstation (servers Linus, workstations Windows 2000/XP). I think I need to setup a caching DNS server, plus 1 zone that identifies my local network servers and workstations. But as I said above, that seems like it defeats the purpose of DHCP. What am I missing. Thank you - Richard
Richard Mixon (qwest) wrote:
I am a noobie when it comes to configuring DNS - some guidance is appreciated.
I am reading the DNS info in the 9.1 administration guide. It talks about setting up zone files where one ends up hardcoding the IP addresses for each hostname on the network. That seems to defeat the purpose of DHCP though. I'm currently using a Linksys firewall as a DHCP server for my Windows clients.
I am setting up a SuSE Pro 9.1 server that will serve two main purposes: - Samba file and print sharing; - CVS source code server.
We currently only have six users. I would really like to get rid of the host files that I have been using on each server and workstation (servers Linus, workstations Windows 2000/XP). I think I need to setup a caching DNS server, plus 1 zone that identifies my local network servers and workstations.
But as I said above, that seems like it defeats the purpose of DHCP. What am I missing.
Thank you - Richard
The only way to use servers in a DHCP network is to hardcode the servers addresses, in both DHCP and DNS (if you insist on DHCP for the servers), or use Dynamic DNS. If your Linksys firewall is capable of Dynamic DNS, then you need a DNS-server that accepts the updates of DHCP. BIND9 should be able to do this (didn't do this myself, but it's on my ToDo/Wish-list). If your Linksys can't do DDNS, then you need to set up a DDNS-capable DHCP server, and disable the Linksys' DHCP. Hope this helps somewhat. -- Met vriendelijke groeten, Koenraad Lelong R&D Manager ACE electronics n.v.
-----Original Message----- From: Koenraad Lelong [mailto:k.lelong@ace-electronics.be] Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 12:59 AM Cc: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] SuSE Pro 9.1 - DNS and DHCP interaction
I am a noobie when it comes to configuring DNS - some guidance is appreciated.
I am reading the DNS info in the 9.1 administration guide. It talks about setting up zone files where one ends up hardcoding the IP addresses for each hostname on the network. That seems to defeat the purpose of DHCP though. I'm currently using a Linksys firewall as a DHCP server for my Windows clients.
I am setting up a SuSE Pro 9.1 server that will serve two main purposes: - Samba file and print sharing; - CVS source code server.
We currently only have six users. I would really like to get rid of the host files that I have been using on each server and workstation (servers Linus, workstations Windows 2000/XP). I think I need to setup a caching DNS server, plus 1 zone
Richard Mixon (qwest) wrote: that identifies
my local network servers and workstations.
But as I said above, that seems like it defeats the purpose of DHCP. What am I missing.
Thank you - Richard
The only way to use servers in a DHCP network is to hardcode the servers addresses, in both DHCP and DNS (if you insist on DHCP for the servers), or use Dynamic DNS. If your Linksys firewall is capable of Dynamic DNS, then you need a DNS-server that accepts the updates of DHCP. BIND9 should be able to do this (didn't do this myself, but it's on my ToDo/Wish-list). If your Linksys can't do DDNS, then you need to set up a DDNS-capable DHCP server, and disable the Linksys' DHCP. Hope this helps somewhat.
Koenraad, This definitely helps - and makes sense. I know where to start now. Thanks.
-- Met vriendelijke groeten, Koenraad Lelong R&D Manager ACE electronics n.v.
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 23:59, Koenraad Lelong wrote:
I am a noobie when it comes to configuring DNS - some guidance is appreciated.
I am reading the DNS info in the 9.1 administration guide. It talks about setting up zone files where one ends up hardcoding the IP addresses for each hostname on the network. That seems to defeat the purpose of DHCP though. I'm currently using a Linksys firewall as a DHCP server for my Windows clients.
I am setting up a SuSE Pro 9.1 server that will serve two main purposes: - Samba file and print sharing; - CVS source code server.
We currently only have six users. I would really like to get rid of the host files that I have been using on each server and workstation (servers Linus, workstations Windows 2000/XP). I think I need to setup a caching DNS server, plus 1 zone that identifies my local network servers and workstations.
But as I said above, that seems like it defeats the purpose of DHCP. What am I missing.
You are missing the fact that you don't need a DNS server at all. Forget it. Use the Linksys to serve IPs by DHCP, OR if you prefer set up the SuSE box to do the DHCP. Linksys usually supplies DNS services, and you can tell it to just pass it thru if you want. With SUSE serving IPs, it can also issue the IPs of DNS servers. Just set up the SuSE dhcp server to use your ISP's dns server. Want Static IPs for some machines? SuSE dhcp server can be set up to issue specific IPs to specific MacAddresses. In the windows world you just use machine names for in-house lookups. You really haven't made a confincing argument that you need a DNS server. -- _____________________________________ John Andersen
There are many PROS/CONS regarding hassles and benefits of DNS/DHCP services for a small network. - I've been reading up and playing around myself with this topic now for several months. Here is my personal conclusion: The hosts config file solution is easy to understand and can be copied to all participating machines within a local network. - But it only can provide name resolution for that LAN, nothing more. - And it quickly becomes cumbersome, when workstations have multi-os-boot configurations. Or even worst, booting up Live-CD systems always needs manual configuration. Looking at a DNS/DHCP combination (DDC) instead, one achieves dynamic configuration for all workstations including those with heterogeneous OS environments and temporary Live-CD systems. This is not just a simple mapping between machine names & aliases with their associated IP addresses, but it also serves to dynamically configure DNS, MAIL or GATEWAY addresses for the entire LAN. Now DHCP, can provide dynamic or static IPs to a workstation (WS). Dynamic IPs get temporarily assigned to a WS. But unless the associated machine name is dynamically updated with the DNS server (kept in sync), a direct access from one WS to another by means such as SSH is cumbersome. By telling the DHCP server to map a fixed IP address to the unique MAC-address of a network interface card (NIC) , a WS is allways assigned the same machine name and IP address at boot time. That is even true for Live-CDs. When needed, I'm more than happy to send you my current configuration files. Regards, Rainer On Wednesday 09 June 2004 16:40, Richard Mixon (qwest) wrote:
I am a noobie when it comes to configuring DNS - some guidance is appreciated.
I am reading the DNS info in the 9.1 administration guide. It talks about setting up zone files where one ends up hardcoding the IP addresses for each hostname on the network. That seems to defeat the purpose of DHCP though. I'm currently using a Linksys firewall as a DHCP server for my Windows clients.
I am setting up a SuSE Pro 9.1 server that will serve two main purposes: - Samba file and print sharing; - CVS source code server.
We currently only have six users. I would really like to get rid of the host files that I have been using on each server and workstation (servers Linus, workstations Windows 2000/XP). I think I need to setup a caching DNS server, plus 1 zone that identifies my local network servers and workstations.
But as I said above, that seems like it defeats the purpose of DHCP. What am I missing.
Thank you - Richard
On Tue, 08 Jun, 2004 at 23:40:10 -0700, Richard Mixon (qwest) wrote:
I am a noobie when it comes to configuring DNS - some guidance is appreciated.
I am reading the DNS info in the 9.1 administration guide. It talks about setting up zone files where one ends up hardcoding the IP addresses for each hostname on the network. That seems to defeat the purpose of DHCP though. I'm currently using a Linksys firewall as a DHCP server for my Windows clients.
I am setting up a SuSE Pro 9.1 server that will serve two main purposes: - Samba file and print sharing; - CVS source code server.
We currently only have six users. I would really like to get rid of the host files that I have been using on each server and workstation (servers Linus, workstations Windows 2000/XP). I think I need to setup a caching DNS server, plus 1 zone that identifies my local network servers and workstations.
But as I said above, that seems like it defeats the purpose of DHCP. What am I missing.
You might want to have a look at dnsmasq: http://thekelleys.org.uk/dnsmasq/doc.html I came across it recently but haven't, as yet, had time to check it out. I find it an interesting concept, and it would seem to fit your needs. HTH Jon Clausen -- Whatever rocks your boat!
Thanks everyone for ALL the responses. John is correct that my stated requirements do not require/warrant DNS. But I had forgot to mention that most days we end up connecting at least one transient (customer's) computer the LAN. Invariably someone forgets to put the host file on the customer computer, and later forgets to take it off when they leave. So, I am willing to invest the time in setting up some better form of IP address and name management. Jon, the dnsmasq does look like it is a nice fit - but I am trying to stay with the SuSE 9.1 packages for now, so I'll skip it for now. I think I will first look at Koenraad's suggestion about DDNS. If that does not work, I think I understand how DHCP and DNS can work together now. Thanks again - Richard
-----Original Message----- From: Jon Clausen [mailto:jon@stevnsgade.dk] Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 9:56 AM To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] SuSE Pro 9.1 - DNS and DHCP interaction
I am a noobie when it comes to configuring DNS - some guidance is appreciated.
I am reading the DNS info in the 9.1 administration guide. It talks about setting up zone files where one ends up hardcoding the IP addresses for each hostname on the network. That seems to defeat the purpose of DHCP though. I'm currently using a Linksys firewall as a DHCP server for my Windows clients.
I am setting up a SuSE Pro 9.1 server that will serve two main purposes: - Samba file and print sharing; - CVS source code server.
We currently only have six users. I would really like to get rid of the host files that I have been using on each server and workstation (servers Linus, workstations Windows 2000/XP). I think I need to setup a caching DNS server, plus 1 zone
On Tue, 08 Jun, 2004 at 23:40:10 -0700, Richard Mixon (qwest) wrote: that identifies
my local network servers and workstations.
But as I said above, that seems like it defeats the purpose of DHCP. What am I missing.
You might want to have a look at dnsmasq:
http://thekelleys.org.uk/dnsmasq/doc.html
I came across it recently but haven't, as yet, had time to check it out. I find it an interesting concept, and it would seem to fit your needs.
HTH Jon Clausen
-- Whatever rocks your boat!
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 11:40:10PM -0700, Richard Mixon (qwest) wrote:
I am a noobie when it comes to configuring DNS - some guidance is appreciated.
I am reading the DNS info in the 9.1 administration guide. It talks about setting up zone files where one ends up hardcoding the IP addresses for each hostname on the network. That seems to defeat the purpose of DHCP though.
No, that is a misunderstanding. You would in fact put IP addresses and their names into the zone files, but list _names_ only in the DHCP server configuration. (The DHCP server automatically does the necessary lookups.) Your dhcpd.conf doesn't need to list any (server) hostnames _at all_. The DNS zone files would be the primary repository of the name/address allocations. Nevertheless, to associate fixed hostnames to clients you still need to tell the DHCP server some identifier that is coupled to a name (usually MAC address), and you would need to add hostnames to the DNS zone manuall. That's where DDNS steps in: It reduces the administrative task to nothing but entering a hostname on the client -- the DHCP server will automatically update the DNS zone for you if that new client pops up. That's pretty elegant and very efficient. No more editing of dhcpd.conf for host statements, and no more editing of zone files, and always a working and consistent installation. /usr/share/doc/packages/dhcp-server/DDNS-howto.txt
[...] I'm currently using a Linksys firewall as a DHCP server for my Windows clients.
I am setting up a SuSE Pro 9.1 server that will serve two main purposes: - Samba file and print sharing; - CVS source code server.
We currently only have six users. I would really like to get rid of the host files that I have been using on each server and workstation (servers Linus, workstations Windows 2000/XP). I think I need to setup a caching DNS server, plus 1 zone that identifies my local network servers and workstations.
Oh. Host files. You'll NEVER get them consistent. Really, get rid of them for good. :)
But as I said above, that seems like it defeats the purpose of DHCP. What am I missing.
Thank you - Richard
Peter
Peter - thanks for the very nice summary and explanation. Yes, DDNS looks good. I'll try it later today. - Richard
-----Original Message----- From: poeml@poeml.de [mailto:poeml@poeml.de]On Behalf Of poeml@cmdline.net Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 10:29 AM To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] SuSE Pro 9.1 - DNS and DHCP interaction
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 11:40:10PM -0700, Richard Mixon (qwest) wrote:
I am a noobie when it comes to configuring DNS - some guidance is appreciated.
I am reading the DNS info in the 9.1 administration guide. It talks about setting up zone files where one ends up hardcoding the IP addresses for each hostname on the network. That seems to defeat the purpose of DHCP though.
No, that is a misunderstanding. You would in fact put IP addresses and their names into the zone files, but list _names_ only in the DHCP server configuration. (The DHCP server automatically does the necessary lookups.)
Your dhcpd.conf doesn't need to list any (server) hostnames _at all_.
The DNS zone files would be the primary repository of the name/address allocations.
Nevertheless, to associate fixed hostnames to clients you still need to tell the DHCP server some identifier that is coupled to a name (usually MAC address), and you would need to add hostnames to the DNS zone manuall.
That's where DDNS steps in: It reduces the administrative task to nothing but entering a hostname on the client -- the DHCP server will automatically update the DNS zone for you if that new client pops up.
That's pretty elegant and very efficient. No more editing of dhcpd.conf for host statements, and no more editing of zone files, and always a working and consistent installation.
/usr/share/doc/packages/dhcp-server/DDNS-howto.txt
[...] I'm currently using a Linksys firewall as a DHCP server for my Windows clients.
I am setting up a SuSE Pro 9.1 server that will serve two main purposes: - Samba file and print sharing; - CVS source code server.
We currently only have six users. I would really like to get rid of the host files that I have been using on each server and workstation (servers Linus, workstations Windows 2000/XP). I think I need to setup a caching DNS server, plus 1 zone that identifies my local network servers and workstations.
Oh. Host files. You'll NEVER get them consistent. Really, get rid of them for good. :)
But as I said above, that seems like it defeats the purpose of DHCP. What am I missing.
Thank you - Richard
Peter
I spoke too fast in my reply (see below).
-----Original Message----- From: poeml@poeml.de [mailto:poeml@poeml.de]On Behalf Of poeml@cmdline.net Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 10:29 AM To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] SuSE Pro 9.1 - DNS and DHCP interaction
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 11:40:10PM -0700, Richard Mixon (qwest) wrote:
I am a noobie when it comes to configuring DNS - some guidance is appreciated.
I am reading the DNS info in the 9.1 administration guide. It talks about setting up zone files where one ends up hardcoding the IP addresses for each hostname on the network. That seems to defeat the purpose of DHCP though.
No, that is a misunderstanding. You would in fact put IP addresses and their names into the zone files, but list _names_ only in the DHCP server configuration. (The DHCP server automatically does the necessary lookups.)
Your dhcpd.conf doesn't need to list any (server) hostnames _at all_.
The DNS zone files would be the primary repository of the name/address allocations.
Nevertheless, to associate fixed hostnames to clients you still need to tell the DHCP server some identifier that is coupled to a name (usually MAC address), and you would need to add hostnames to the DNS zone manuall.
That's where DDNS steps in: It reduces the administrative task to nothing but entering a hostname on the client -- the DHCP server will automatically update the DNS zone for you if that new client pops up.
OK, I've done my research on DDSN. But everything I read about DDNS indicates its only purpose it to let folks on the internet get to your home website (or other IP server) using a hostname, even if your IP address is assigned and renewed using DHCP (i.e. you do not have a static IP address). I thought maybe DDNS is also a more generic feature of DNS servers. I looked through the BIND9 README and FAQ. I do see the mention of dynamic updates, an "allow-updates" parm and something called TSIG. Is that the feature I want? THANKS again - Richard all I find, is about pointing your home/office to a DDNS provider
That's pretty elegant and very efficient. No more editing of dhcpd.conf for host statements, and no more editing of zone files, and always a working and consistent installation.
/usr/share/doc/packages/dhcp-server/DDNS-howto.txt
[...] I'm currently using a Linksys firewall as a DHCP server for my Windows clients.
I am setting up a SuSE Pro 9.1 server that will serve two main purposes: - Samba file and print sharing; - CVS source code server.
We currently only have six users. I would really like to get rid of the host files that I have been using on each server and workstation (servers Linus, workstations Windows 2000/XP). I think I need to setup a caching DNS server, plus 1 zone that identifies my local network servers and workstations.
Oh. Host files. You'll NEVER get them consistent. Really, get rid of them for good. :)
But as I said above, that seems like it defeats the purpose of DHCP. What am I missing.
Thank you - Richard
Peter
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 06:55:45PM -0700, Richard Mixon (qwest) wrote:
OK, I've done my research on DDSN. But everything I read about DDNS indicates its only purpose it to let folks on the internet get to your home website (or other IP server) using a hostname, even if your IP address is assigned and renewed using DHCP (i.e. you do not have a static IP address).
You are referring to what is well-known as DynDNS. It is a publicly available DDNS server for your home machine, and the update is initiated with a custom application using a custom protocol (not TSIG based to my knowledge).
I thought maybe DDNS is also a more generic feature of DNS servers. I looked through the BIND9 README and FAQ. I do see the mention of dynamic updates, an "allow-updates" parm and something called TSIG. Is that the feature I want?
Exactly. Unfortunately I cannot point to much more information either. But it's not so complicated. The needed information to set up the TSIG key and server configuration is in the man pages, and it should be easy going with the HOWTO I mentioned before. The best resource about DHCP in general (and probably also about dynamical DNS) is the DHCP book from Ted Lemon and Ralph Droms. Peter
On Wednesday 09 June 2004 01:31, John Lamb wrote:
Matt T. wrote:
I can't imagine that SuSE does all that work to customize the kernel and then it will be the same to use the generic one.
Does anyone know more about that?
I've tried it and the win4lin kernel seems to be fine. I felt that the win4lin kernel was a little more sluggish on startup than the SuSE one, but I don't have any timings to confirm this. I believe there are one or two other issues if your're trying to run win4lin as (say) and NFS server.
Thanks, John, that is the information I need! So if I try I have to watch if the NFS server, which I use from time to time, does still work. Do you remember more of the "one or two other issues"?
It ought to be possible to get a hybrid suse-win4lin kernel, but you can't just patch because the SuSE and win4lin patches clash. I haven't the energy to try creating a kernel, mainly because the number of applications I now use that actually need win4lin is so small that I normally use the SuSE kernel.
I would love to do that, but no way I can find the time for that.
-- JDL
Thanks, Matt
participants (16)
-
Basil Chupin -
Brad Bourn -
Bruce Marshall -
John Andersen -
John Coldrick -
John Lamb -
John Pettigrew -
Jon Clausen -
Koenraad Lelong -
Matt T. -
Michael Satterwhite -
peter Nikolic -
poeml＠cmdline.net -
Rainer Klein -
Richard Mixon (qwest) -
Sid Boyce