Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 10 Dec 1996 00:43:04 +1000 | From | Chai Harjo <> | Subject | Re: Mysterious reboot |
| |
Bjarni R. Einarsson wrote: > > > On Mon, 9 Dec 1996, Thomas Koenig wrote: > > > > huh, i think there is a pattern: [there were similar reports] > > > Mine was one of them.. > > > 1- you have NT activities on the net > > > Yes. > > > 2- 2.0.27 has the new SMBFS long filename fixes. > > > Happened to me with 2.0.26. Twice.. Downgraded back to 2.0.21 until a > solution is found. > > > 3- you have SMBFS enabled, as a module, but you have long filename > > support compiled into the kernel. Isnt this lethal if the NT server > > broadcasts some silly SMB stuff and your idle machine has the module > > unloaded? > > > I had SMBFS and VFAT (is this the long file name stuff you meant?), and > anything else having to do with WinXX, *available* as modules only. I was > running kerneld, so it should automagically load the needed modules if > something like that happened. Shouldn't it? > > But why in the world would it do that? I'm not mounting any drives from > the NT boxes, nor exporting anything, so why should Linux care what the NT > box does? > > Both times it happened the NT machines were basically idle (they are servers > for the company tech support, management and Win* people - who had all gone > home), but the Linux box was pretty active. (Running the WWW proxy, sendmail, > named and more for a small ISP). The reboots both occurred during the > evening, when traffic is near its peak. >
Is this another trap from Microsoft? It is possible Bill Gates puts small program in Win NT to trigger Linux to reboot. May be Bill Gates does not like Linus :) Bill Gates can not attack Linus directly, because Linux is a GPL product. The only way to make Linux looks bad is to make as if Linux is a bad operating system.
Chai Harjo
|  |