Subject: [netatalk-admins] Re: RedHat 6.0 help
From: Curtis Fulton (curtisf@sensenet.uoregon.edu)
Date: Mon Jun 14 1999 - 16:56:06 EDT
I think the source of John's problem is the same as mine.
To remind everyone, I wrote in about two weeks ago explaining that atalkd
core-dumps directly after initializing. This is a binary compiled on my
system. An RPM distribution works fine, but I need to compile-in some
options.
I think it has something to do with the kernel source. Does anyone out
there have an idea of what the proper state one's source code should be
when compiling netatalk? Will it compile at all with 2.2.x? Should I use
2.0.36 kernel source instead?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Curtis Fulton
On Fri, 11 Jun 1999, John Barnett wrote:
> Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 13:57:00 -0400
> From: John Barnett <jdb@server.nsnva.pvt.k12.va.us>
> To: netatalk-admins@umich.edu
> Subject: [netatalk-admins] RedHat 6.0 help
>
> Hi-
>
> I've run netatalk before on a rh5.1 system, but I just upgraded to
> 6.0, and I'm having problems. Appletalk is loaded as a module, but
> when I try and start netatalk services (by calling
> /etc/rc.d/init.d/atalk start), it prints this error message:
>
> AppleTalk not up! Child exited with 1.
>
> (which I checked at the FAQ-O-Matic, but it didn't apply to my problem,
> as far as I could see)
>
> --and, I get the following messages in /var/log/messages:
>
> Jun 11 13:45:55 server kernel: NET4: AppleTalk 0.18 for Linux NET4.0
> Jun 11 13:45:59 server atalkd[4617]: restart (1.4b2+asun2.1.3)
> Jun 11 13:45:59 server atalkd[4617]: setifaddr: lo: Operation not permitted
> Jun 11 13:45:59 server atalkd[4617]: difaddr(0.0): Operation not permitted
> Jun 11 13:45:59 server atalkd[4617]: difaddr(0.0): Operation not permitted
> Jun 11 13:45:59 server atalkd: difaddr(0.0): Operation not permitted
>
>
> Anyone have an idea as to what my problem might be? I've tried
> a few different RPMs, and also compiled and installed it from
> the source, but all give the same results; I read somewhere that something
> about the DDP code in the Linux kernel changed in 2.2-- could this
> have something to do with it?
>
> Thanks, anyone who can help out on this.
>
> -John Barnett
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Dec 18 1999 - 16:16:49 EST