[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: swat man pages



It's not a problem to ping my linux-box. I've made so from my 
Windows-computer. I always get response. However I'm already 
using my linux-box as a small file-server and I'm also running telnet-
sessions on it, so I don't think it's really a dns-problem. I just think 
swat is not running as a deamon yet and I don't how to check it.
I think deamons are not displayed if I try "ps" or "top", or are they?
And even if I'm right, I don't have a clew to get it running properly.


> 
> $ ping your.debian.box      ??
> 
> if not try this:
>  
>  xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:901        (IP of your debian-box)
> 
> in your web-browser
> 
> have a lucky day
> Peter Wintrich
> 
> PS: sorry my poor english
> 
> 
> 
> > I've attached my /etc/services and my /etc/inetd.conf
> > Perhaps it's just a stupid, little thing to change.
> > 
> > Would be very happy, if somebody could help me!
> > 
> > 
> > > On Sat, 8 Apr 2000, FreeMan wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Hi!
> > > > 
> > > > can anybody tell me where to get the man-pages of swat or any 
> > > > instructions to configure it. Because I've downloaded and installed 
> > > > swat and all needed packages, but it doesn't work yet. It surely 
> > > > has to be run as a deamon (or not?), but at the moment it is not.
> > > > Or If it's just a small thing to to get it running, perhaps anybody can 
> > > > tell me what I've got to do.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > you must have any like this:
> > > 
> > > swat            901/tcp
> > > 
> > > in your /etc/services and 
> > > 
> > > swat    stream  tcp     nowait.400  root    /usr/sbin/swat swat
> > > 
> > > in your /etc/inetd.conf
> > > 
> > > and type:
> > > 
> > > http://your.swat.box:901
> > > 
> > > in your browser.
> > > 
> > > man swat     works fine for additional information :-)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Peter Wintrich
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe debian-user-request@lists.debian.org < /dev/null
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 

> > 
> 



Reply to: