Re: [tlug] Is having no "iptables" bad?

[Botond Botyanszki <tlug@example.com>]

On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 15:14:40 +0900
Dave M G <martin@example.com> wrote:

> >
> > No.  Appearances to the contrary...
> 
> "It's a waste of your time" certainly seemed contrary.
Using the config from the kernel.org kernel and enabling then compiling
when the need arises is a waste of your time. Considering the following
post from you, I'm really confused what you want. 

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 21:38:36 +0900
Dave M G <martin@example.com> wrote:

> It's just that for me that's where the line is crossed from using Linux 
> into enjoying Linux for it's own sake. While I appreciate other people's 
> enthusiasm for 'geeking out' and learning new levels of mastery over 
> this OS, that's not me. I would really like my Palm to work, but not at 
> the expense of introducing a new learning curve into my already busy 
> schedule.


> > everybody is in agreement that that is the right plan.
> 
> Then I'll take it on faith that the term "waste of time" is more 
> flexible than I first thought.
> 
> I guess I'll stick with my original plan, then.
Sure, it's up to you whether you do it the hard way or not.


> ... and so on. All told there are 23 options. Do I need them all?
If you read the iptables howto and the help section of the option in the
config gui, you will know what they are and how those are used.
 
> I tried selecting them all, and to compile them as modules, I ran "sudo 
> make modules modules_install". But it returned an error:
> 
> make: *** No rule to make target `modules'.  Stop.
You are not executing `make modules` in the right directory.


> What do I do to get them to actually be in effect?
Set some iptables rules that use them.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature