Slackware networking woes

Hi all,

recently i've installed Slackware 11 on a shiny new machine (yay for tax refunds).

I am more or less a linux newb....ive 'tried' several linux variations, but have resorted back to *god forbid* windoze....

recently, I threw in the towel for windows. Ive been a mac user for the past few years, as I am a graphic designer by trade. Ive still got my XP dell box, and after some issues doing just basic tasks, I decided to give up on windows.

newayz, like I said I've recently installed a fresh Slackware 11 box. All parts, except for the cd and dvd drives, are completely brand spankin' new.

The install went smooth enough, and now I'm in the process of running slackware, both as a file server for my home network, and as a print server for my personal use.

I have been unsuccessful at getting my box to connect to the network. I've posted at linuxquestions.org and was told to edit the:

Quote:

---

/etc/rc.d/rc.inet1.conf

---

to un-comment:

Quote:

---

USE_DHCP[0]="yes"

---

I did so, issued a:

Quote:

---

/etc/rc.d/rc.inet1 restart

---

logged in as both root and my main user, but stiill have been unable to connect to my network or the net.

I try to enable "eth0" ((KDE, settings, internet & network, network setings)), but as I enable it, it rapidly goes back to disabled (within one second).

any suggestions?

sorry if this is not in the correct forum, i couldnt figure out where to put it.

thanks for your help.

-john

hmmmmm.....well, i issued a static ip, gave up, powered down, booted back up, and now.....


I'm online :-)


sorry if you were going out of your way to help me...but, its working.... :-)

now, onto samba......

-john

Good deal. You probably want a static IP anyway if it's going to be a file/print server on the network. Good luck with Samba and whatever you use for the print server and let us know if you run into any problems.

Hi, just a few things real quick:

This is in fact the correct forum for an OS question, so thanks much, a lot of people pop it in GCC and whine they don't get a quick answer ;)

Also, just a few quickies, you said you were new to Linux, so congrats on getting Slackware going, and also congrats on making what you were asking clear, and what you did exactly clear to show you've tried something... I'm kind of babbling a little but I haven't seen a GOOD question like this in a while and wanted to say congrats heh.

Anyway, if you're new to Linux in general Slackware should be great, it doesn't do a thing for you by itself, meaning you'll get awesome experience, but at the same time it's stable as a brick.

You might want to look here:

http://store.slackware.com

You can order a book there called "Slackware Essentials" grab the second edition if you have the cash laying around, I have that and the first edition and it's a good book, not to long, and is made for Slackware. Also it has a chapter on some security basics I'd say to check as well.

Also if you don't have the cash laying around, check this out:

http://www.slackbook.org/

Actually anyone new to Linux should at least check it out but it's done for Slackware. So it should give you some pointers. Enjoy.

Great book none the less, besides -- Slack is pretty much the field standard for people wanting to "learn" Linux. Get the book, why not?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ngboot

Get the book, why not?

---

Cash, my friend, cash....

Unfortunatly I havent had a whole hell of a lot of time to mess around with my new toy this past week(end), but I plan on it once school is done.

My other summer goal is getting A+ cert. Oh how I (used to) love to read :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ngboot

Great book none the less, besides -- Slack is pretty much the field standard for people wanting to "learn" Linux. Get the book, why not?

---

Since the post is no longer an active discussion, I've got to ask the question. How do ya figure? Generally slack is considered to be one of the more difficult to learn Linux distros and Ubuntu / Debian and FC / RH are generally considered the new to Linux distros...


z31200n3:

For you... I'm curious as to why you say "*god forbid* windoze"...

This is quickly becoming one of my favourite discussions to have with people :) Perhaps if there's interest we'll have a thread on the subject.

Quote:

---

For you... I'm curious as to why you say "*god forbid* windoze"...

---

I've also felt that way. I'll use linux for a while and then I'll need to do something besides surfing the web... like playing games or using m$ office tools or something that I *could* do on linux, but would take me far too long to learn how to do it so I just do it on windows for the sake of saving time and Tylenol.

I've just accepted that for the time being, whenever I need to work (outlook, word, excel, powerpoint, visio, project), I'll use windows. Whenever I want to have fun (FPS games), I'll use windows. When I have some spare time and I want to learn something or when I need to use security tools, I'll use linux.

Don't get me wrong. I've gotten some very cool tools running on linux and use it all the time. There are some very nice open source (*nix) tools that just work better than the commercial (win32) alternative. Most of them happen to be network administration, network monitoring or security tools. Well, the ones I use anyway.

So, I use both OS's... just have to learn to use the right tool for the right job. You could use a hammer to dig a 2 foot deep hole, but why would you when you've got the shovel right there?

phish, I can understand what you're saying... but I see a different between a business use of an operating system or an OS being required for specific programs and just saying "*god forbid* windoze" because you think "Windows sucks and Linux Rules"... which based on the skiddie spelling of Windows was my assumption here... so I wanted to hear the reasoning.

What you are saying makes sense... although more and more these days I'm hard pressed to find something I can't do with Windows... I installed my first Linux distro around 96/97 and went several years without having Windows again.. in 2000 I ran both operating systems each on their own PC... In College, while we were "required" to have Windows... I ran Linux... Then I became an OS X / Windows SysAdmin... and right now I don't even have a Windows PC in my house... I suppose I have Vista on my laptop but I primarily boot VectorLinux... My Desktop is OS X and my shell server is Ubuntu... The gf as XP Home but that's it... Even though I don't run Windows... or maybe because I don't run Windows... I've developed a profound love for it (it's my desktop at work)...

I seldom have a network / security tool that I require that won't run on Windows... sure there are plenty of them... but they are 1 time use type tools, not daily use tools.. so a nice shell box in the corner works well... As I use a computer more and more Linux doesn't strike me as being up-to-par and ready to be a Desktop Operating System.... and I've got plenty of wrench time in running Linux as my desktop and I'm saying this... Although I also believe that OS X is ready to be a mainstream Desktop Operating System... and that's why Windows holds the market.... neither OS can compete..

Linux:
Pros: Powerful, Stable, Plenty of FOSS
Cons: Lack of hardware support, difficulty installing software for the average user (Package Management doesn't count because it can take ages for some software to have the new version released as a package and some software doesn't have packages), doesn't play nice in a domain environment (i.e. workplace)

OS X:
Pros: Powerful, Stable, Purdy UI, Availability of a Unix Prompt
Cons: Bigger RAM Hog than Windows... The concept that each application window is a "file" (as someone once explained it to me)... Lack of freeware software for general purpose (text editor is a great example), doesn't play nice in a domain environment (i.e. workplace)

Windows:
Pros: Powerful, Stable (unless yer an idiot), Purdy UI, Plenty of FOSS, Availability of a Unix Prompt (Cygwin, SFU, SUA), Amazing Domain Management Capabilities.
Cons: More exploits are released, more malware exists, some security/network/admin tools don't exist.

To me this is why OS X and Linux will never take over... They just don't have what it takes... Sure consumers may get viruses and malware (I can tell you it's been an eternity since I've had either... generally you're playing with "grey-area"/illegal programs or you're not the sharpest tool in the shed).. but if everyone moved to OS X or to Linux then those operating systems would have the same problem... which negates the Cons for Windows... except for the tools issue and that's a minor point... Especially with VMWare and the live CDs available today.

To sum it all up... I can't wait to have a Windows PC again (hopefully I'm picking up a play-box tomorrow to put Windows on)