I noticed my laptop’s wireless interface is named eth1, whereas the wireless on a netbook is named wlan0 (both have a wired eth0 in addition to wireless).
I suppose both are set by /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules:
# PCI device 0x8086:0x1043 (ipw2100)
SUBSYSTEM==”net”, ACTION==”add”, DRIVERS==”?*”, ATTR{address}==” (the MAC address) ”, ATTR{dev_id}==”0x0″, ATTR{type}==”1″, KERNEL==”eth*”, NAME=”eth1″
vs.
# PCI device 0x168c:0x001c (ath5k)
SUBSYSTEM==”net”, ACTION==”add”, DRIVERS==”?*”, ATTR{address}==” (the MAC address) ”, ATTR{dev_id}==”0x0″, ATTR{type}==”1″, KERNEL==”wlan*”, NAME=”wlan0″
Is there a reasoning behind calling ipw2100’s interface eth1 and not wlan0? Is there any reason I shouldn’t change the name (by editing 70-persistent-net.rules to name the ipw2100 interface ”wlan0”, to make the two systems more alike)? I’m not sure I’ll actually do that, but was interested in what the difference means from both theoretical and practical points of view.
This is apparently caused by something not in Chromium itself: it’s not reproducible in a VM running Oneiric, with 17.0.963.26 from ppa:chromium-daily/dev nor with Chrome 17.0.96356. It *is* reproducible in Precise with the latter too, but not reproducible with Firefox nor Epiphany. In Precise with Chromium 17, it’s reproducible with a temporary profile and a guest login also.
With Chromium 17, I can no longer drag ’n’ drop tabs to reorganize them in an existing window: the tabs area no longer lets me drop tabs onto it, so each tab I pick up gets a new window when dropped. Dragging the tab from the new window into the old won’t work either (cannot drop the tab into where the tabs area should be).
I left an old netbook to do an ”apt-get -y dist-upgrade” overnight, and when I returned to it the next morning, the upgrades were unfinished because libc upgrade was waiting for me to respond to ”Restart services during package upgrades without asking?”
It looks like the question is prioritized depending on whether the upgrade is done on desktop or not, and if it’s not, the priority is set critical. According to documentation [1], critical is for ”Items that will probably break the system without user intervention.” I don’t think restart-without-asking satisfies that condition.
* [1] http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/debconf_specification.html#AEN101
With both 3.2.0-16 and 3.2.0-17, what I said in #8 still holds, with -16 and -17 behaving just as -15 did. 3.2.0-17 added something interesting though: booting 3.2.0-17-pae in recovery mode ”breaks” the -pae’s like (non-recovery booting) 3.2.0-14-pae does. To be sure, I tried recovery booting other kernels going back to 3.2.0-14, and couldn’t reproduce this with them (not even with 3.2.0-14-pae!) . Recovery booting 3.2.0-17 non-pae also doesn’t bring it on, it’s just recovery booting 3.2.0-17-pae.
The steps to reproducing this freeze with 3.2.0-17 are:
1. Boot 3.2.0-17-pae in recovery mode.
2. In the recovery menu, select ”root”.
3. From the root prompt, just reboot.
4. Boot 3.2.0-17-pae (normally).
The ”fix” also still holds: just boot a non-pae kernel once, and the pae’s again work.
Köhöm, WordPress != WordPress.com (mikäli ulkopuolisella alustalla jälkimmäiseen viitattiin).
Mutta asiaan: onko tuo looginen captcha yleisessä jakelussa oleva Drupal-lisäosa vai talon sisällä kehitelty? Onko se tehokas? Kiinnostaa, koska se on täysin suomenkielisenä poikkeuksellisen käyttäjäystävällinen.
Ihan jees ja sinänsä kannatettavaa, mutta voi kun samalla olisi korjattu ”Yle Uutiset” -nimeen sisältyvä kielivirhe.
”Kyselyyn pääset tästä” -linkki on rikki, se viittaa jonkun jo täyttämän lomakkeen kiitossivulle. Linkin pitäisi ilmeisesti viitata osoitteeseen https://www.tem.fi/banner/112#, josta kukin vastaaja saa oman, uuden lomakkeensa. (Lisäksi suosittelen yleensä linkittämään siten, että linkitetyt sanat kuvaavat linkityksen kohdetta, ei ”tästä”- tai ”tämä linkki” -tyylisesti. Tässä yhteydessä siis esimerkiksi sana ”Kyselyyn” lauseesta ”Kyselyyn voi vastata 26. helmikuuta saakka” olisi luonnollinen kyselyn osoitteeseen linkitettävä.)
The list seems to be missing the Istanbul–Ankara express crash of 2004: ”July 23, 2004 – An Istanbul–Ankara express with 230 people on board, derails at Pamukova, Sakarya Province, Turkey and the carriages overturn, according to Turkish government official confirmed, killing at least 38 people, injuring another 80.”
Did you find out the exact PD they suspected, or is that what you’re now trying to uncover from the files?