Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 2 Jun 1997 05:46:50 +0000 Received: (qmail 15702 invoked from network); 2 Jun 1997 05:46:48 -0000 Received: from laurel.actlab.utexas.edu (cynbe@128.83.194.15) by master.debian.org with SMTP; 2 Jun 1997 05:46:48 -0000 Received: (from cynbe@localhost) by laurel.actlab.utexas.edu (8.8.4/8.6.12) id AAA18895 for submit@bugs.debian.org; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 00:46:44 -0500 Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 00:46:44 -0500 From: Cynbe ru Taren Message-Id: <199706020546.AAA18895@laurel.actlab.utexas.edu> To: submit@bugs.debian.org Subject: README.tunnel Info in linux/drivers/net/README.tunnel doesn't seem to correspond with the actual new_tunnel.c being shipped. I'm thrashing my way slowly through anyhow, since I need it running, but it's chewing up lots of my time since I'm totally ignorant of modules and Linux kernel stuff... or was when I began, at least. Be nice if other people were saved the trouble! The first two example lines in README.tunnel are in fact both wrong, which would matter less if any other documentation existed :) ... The insmod ipip.o; insmod tunnel.o won't work 'cause the file is now "new_tunnel.o". (Ok, mebbe anyone who can't figure that out deserves to suffer, but it's nicer to have it right...) The ifconfig tunl 111.112.100.87 pointopoint 111.112.100.86 will fail because the devices are now numbered, apparently: One needs ifconfig tunl0 111.112.100.87 pointopoint 111.112.100.86 Figuring that out took me several chronological weeks of cleaning off my disk and installing Debian completely from scratch to make sure nothing was trashed, updating to the very latest 2.0.x release to see if it was a recently fixed bug, trying tun1 instead of tunl on the assumption the doc had a typo (close, but no cigar!) &tc... I think I'll take a week's vacation before tackling line three in the docs :)