On 2005-04-15, Michael Hennebry <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote:
> I can't find a dhcp executable anywhere.
> There are dhclient, dhcp6c, and dhclient-script.

Those are the one you need.

> Is that the way it is supposed to be?

Yes.

> Does that mean it got the name stmike from DHCP?

Absolutely.

> How do I set it up so that DHCP will run on boot?

From what you say, it does run at boot. And you don't have to do
anything about it.

Davide

--
The Microsoft Torque Wrench: what do you want to shear today?
--Malcolm Ray

Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> "Michael Hennebry" <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote in message
> news:1113518565.885758.74440@g14g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> > Peter T. Breuer wrote:
> >> Michael Hennebry <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote:

> >> > > > How about dd if=/dev/hdc of=/dev/hdd ?
> >> >
> >> > Would this actually work?
> >>
> >> Why wouldn't it? It's just a "cp /dev/hdc /dev/hdd". All the data
> > goes
> >> from one side to the other.
> >
> > Reasonable, but not obvious.
> > For all I knew bad things might happen if cp or dd
> > issued 3k reads and writes.
>
> "cp -a" would copy the block device, not the contents of it.

What about dd or a plain cp?
Does it matter whether the source CD was multi-session,
tao, or dao?

Davide Bianchi wrote:
> On 2005-04-15, Michael Hennebry <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu>
wrote:
> > I can't find a dhcp executable anywhere.
> > There are dhclient, dhcp6c, and dhclient-script.
>
> Those are the one you need.
>
> > Is that the way it is supposed to be?
>
> Yes.
>
> > Does that mean it got the name stmike from DHCP?
>
> Absolutely.

A DHCP server?

> > How do I set it up so that DHCP will run on boot?
>
> From what you say, it does run at boot. And you don't have to do
> anything about it.

Something needs doing.
Since stmike showed up, the outside world can ping me,
but ssh produces "Secure connection to 24.116.184.201 refused."
sshd is running.
Short of reinstalling, is there a way to get dhclient to start over?
I spent two weeks more or less continuously installing linux
and am getting rather tired of it.
stmike.cpe.cableone.net does not resolve.
stmike came from somewhere that wasn't thinking clearly
or didn't like me.

Michael Hennebry <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote:
> Since stmike [the hostname] showed up, the outside world can ping me,

That's fine. And you can ping them? (by IP address, not by name, I
mean).

> but ssh produces "Secure connection to 24.116.184.201 refused."

Good. That's also fine.

> Short of reinstalling, is there a way to get dhclient to start over?

Sure. Just run it again. But what do you think is wrong? And why?

Kill the current dhclient and run a new one. Why don't you read your
lease to learn about the current network setup that you've been
allocated?

> I spent two weeks more or less continuously installing linux
> and am getting rather tired of it.

Then cease. You seem confused abut something! Unconfuse yourself and
all will be well - no "installing" needed! Straighten out your head,
and things will be all straight!

> stmike.cpe.cableone.net does not resolve.

Is there a reason you think it should? I don't know one myself!

If you want it to resolve locally, add it to your /etc/hosts. If you
want it to resolve worldwide, register the name with the name server for
your domain.

To me it sounds as though you think the dhcp server that gave you your
lease is also a dns server that registers the name for you. Is that the
case? (I don't know if it is). Certainly you would want it named asyour
dns server if so.


> stmike came from somewhere that wasn't thinking clearly
> or didn't like me.

Regrettebly, you're the only one involved.

Peter

Peter T. Breuer wrote:
> Michael Hennebry <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote:
> > Since stmike [the hostname] showed up, the outside world can ping
me,
>
> That's fine. And you can ping them? (by IP address, not by name, I
> mean).
>
> > but ssh produces "Secure connection to 24.116.184.201 refused."
>
> Good. That's also fine.

Not fine.
Until stmike showed up again, I could ssh to my computer.

> > Short of reinstalling, is there a way to get dhclient to start
over?
>
> Sure. Just run it again. But what do you think is wrong? And why?

stmike does not belong anywhere.
I can't ssh to my computer.
I could do that before stmike showed up again.

> Kill the current dhclient and run a new one. Why don't you read your
> lease to learn about the current network setup that you've been
> allocated?

Actually I have two with overlapping terms.
For some reason they both give the hostname stmike.
Would killing and restarting dhclient
cancel current leases and get me new ones?

> > I spent two weeks more or less continuously installing linux
> > and am getting rather tired of it.
>
> Then cease. You seem confused abut something! Unconfuse yourself and
> all will be well - no "installing" needed! Straighten out your head,
> and things will be all straight!
>
> > stmike.cpe.cableone.net does not resolve.
>
> Is there a reason you think it should? I don't know one myself!

No. It was just additional data.

> If you want it to resolve locally, add it to your /etc/hosts. If you
> want it to resolve worldwide, register the name with the name server
for
> your domain.
>
> To me it sounds as though you think the dhcp server that gave you
your
> lease is also a dns server that registers the name for you. Is that
the
> case? (I don't know if it is). Certainly you would want it named
asyour
> dns server if so.

The first time I saw the name stmike was when I had a
system that wouldn't connect to the internet at all.
I want that name to go away.
It is useless.
My old IP address and old name still resolve in the outside world.
stmike came up again after readcd hung in an unkillable fashion
as did the rest of my internet troubles.

Michael Hennebry <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote:
> Peter T. Breuer wrote:
> > Michael Hennebry <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote:
> > > Since stmike [the hostname] showed up, the outside world can ping me,
> > That's fine. And you can ping them? (by IP address, not by name, I
> > mean).
> > > but ssh produces "Secure connection to 24.116.184.201 refused."
> >
> > Good. That's also fine.
>
> Not fine.

It's fine as a datum in itself.

> Until stmike showed up again, I could ssh to my computer.

Irrelevant. State a reason why you think it should not be so! Can you
ping 24.116.184.201? Is its port 22 open to your telnet?

In the first instance only pinging is of interest.

> > Sure. Just run it again. But what do you think is wrong? And why?
>
> stmike does not belong anywhere.

Then don't ask for a hostname in your dhcp setup.

> I can't ssh to my computer.

What makes you think so? Do you know your capabilities so well?

> I could do that before stmike showed up again.

I f you would stop grumbling and mumbling on like an old man and
instead start thinking rationally and analytically, I am sure all
will become light and honey.

> > Kill the current dhclient and run a new one. Why don't you read your
> > lease to learn about the current network setup that you've been
> > allocated?
>
> Actually I have two with overlapping terms.

Fine.

> For some reason they both give the hostname stmike.

Then don't ask for a hostname - but anyway, who cares what your machine
is called? Just give it one name and stick to it! Add an entry for it in
/etc/hosts (maybe bound to 192.168.1.99) and run a dummy0 interface
with that IP address, to keep things nice and stable with or without
dhcp.


> Would killing and restarting dhclient
> cancel current leases and get me new ones?

No. It'd cause you to ask the server for a new lease, which might well
turn out to be the same as an old one. Restarting the server would
probably make it new. Anyway, erase all yours on the client side before
you do so, so you can see what you get given (and read your logs).

> The first time I saw the name stmike was when I had a
> system that wouldn't connect to the internet at all.
> I want that name to go away.
> It is useless.

Then change it. What's the problem? And tell dhcp to stop overwriting
your hostname!

> My old IP address and old name still resolve in the outside world.

Then use them.


Peter

Peter T. Breuer wrote:
> Michael Hennebry <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote:
> > Peter T. Breuer wrote:
> > > Michael Hennebry <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote:
> > > > Since stmike [the hostname] showed up, the outside world can
ping me,
> > > That's fine. And you can ping them? (by IP address, not by name,
I
> > > mean).
> > > > but ssh produces "Secure connection to 24.116.184.201 refused."
> > >
> > > Good. That's also fine.
> >
> > Not fine.
>
> It's fine as a datum in itself.
>
> > Until stmike showed up again, I could ssh to my computer.
>
> Irrelevant. State a reason why you think it should not be so! Can you
> ping 24.116.184.201? Is its port 22 open to your telnet?

Ping yes, telnet no.

>
> In the first instance only pinging is of interest.
>
> > > Sure. Just run it again. But what do you think is wrong? And why?
> >
> > stmike does not belong anywhere.
>
> Then don't ask for a hostname in your dhcp setup.
>
> > I can't ssh to my computer.
>
> What makes you think so? Do you know your capabilities so well?

I tried it.

> > I could do that before stmike showed up again.
>
> I f you would stop grumbling and mumbling on like an old man and
> instead start thinking rationally and analytically, I am sure all
> will become light and honey.

qsc vfew pknra!

> > > Kill the current dhclient and run a new one. Why don't you read
your
> > > lease to learn about the current network setup that you've been
> > > allocated?
> >
> > Actually I have two with overlapping terms.
>
> Fine.
>
> > For some reason they both give the hostname stmike.
>
> Then don't ask for a hostname - but anyway, who cares what your
machine
> is called? ...

It's an indicator, like a red sky in the morning.

> ... Just give it one name and stick to it! Add an entry for
it in
> /etc/hosts (maybe bound to 192.168.1.99) and run a dummy0 interface
> with that IP address, to keep things nice and stable with or without
> dhcp.
>
>
> > Would killing and restarting dhclient
> > cancel current leases and get me new ones?
>
> No. It'd cause you to ask the server for a new lease, which might
well
> turn out to be the same as an old one. Restarting the server would
> probably make it new. Anyway, erase all yours on the client side
before
> you do so, so you can see what you get given (and read your logs).
>
> > The first time I saw the name stmike was when I had a
> > system that wouldn't connect to the internet at all.

And dhcp wasn't available.

> > I want that name to go away.
> > It is useless.
>
> Then change it. What's the problem? And tell dhcp to stop overwriting
> your hostname!

I overstated the case a bit.
Like a red sky, stmike is useful as an indicator.
The problem is that I can't ssh to my computer.
Given that both problem occured at about the same time,
it seems likely (not certain) that one caused the other.
In any case, changing things so the the hostname is what I
want regardless of dhcp would eliminate the indicator
without curing the indicated problem.

> > My old IP address and old name still resolve in the outside world.
>
> Then use them.

By itself, ping isn't terribly useful to me.

Michael Hennebry <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote:
> Peter T. Breuer wrote:
> > Irrelevant. State a reason why you think it should not be so! Can you
> > ping 24.116.184.201? Is its port 22 open to your telnet?
>
> Ping yes, telnet no.

Then there is no sshd server running on the target, or it is firewalled
from you.

I would imagine the latter. So open its firewall for you (i.e. your IP
address). Heck, open it anyway. Port 22 is meant to be accessed. That's
what it is for. DOn't leave any open passwords, and that's that.


> > > I can't ssh to my computer.
> >
> > What makes you think so? Do you know your capabilities so well?
>
> I tried it.

Then you mean "I was not then capable", not "I cannot".


> > Then change it. What's the problem? And tell dhcp to stop overwriting
> > your hostname!
>
> I overstated the case a bit.
> Like a red sky, stmike is useful as an indicator.
> The problem is that I can't ssh to my computer.

Then open your firewall or run sshd there. End. You can ping it fine,
so there is nothing wrong with your network setup, which dhcp is meant
to configure, and evidently has configured, satisfactorily.

Peter

"Michael Hennebry" <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote in message
news:1113573538.819521.172720@g14g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>
> Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>> "Michael Hennebry" <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote in message
>> news:1113518565.885758.74440@g14g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
>> > Peter T. Breuer wrote:
>> >> Michael Hennebry <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote:
>
>> >> > > > How about dd if=/dev/hdc of=/dev/hdd ?
>> >> >
>> >> > Would this actually work?
>> >>
>> >> Why wouldn't it? It's just a "cp /dev/hdc /dev/hdd". All the data
>> > goes
>> >> from one side to the other.
>> >
>> > Reasonable, but not obvious.
>> > For all I knew bad things might happen if cp or dd
>> > issued 3k reads and writes.
>>
>> "cp -a" would copy the block device, not the contents of it.
>
> What about dd or a plain cp?

The dd works fine: that's what it was built for. Plain cp won't preserve the
characteristics of the duplicated "file", which in this case is a block
device. The difference between a plain data file, a symlink, a block device,
or a pipe can get pretty fascinating: dd is a good tool for pouring the
contents of one into another.