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

Re: Big dummy at work again



On Sunday 12 June 2016 12:55:18 Lisi Reisz wrote:

> On Sunday 12 June 2016 17:42:51 Gene Heskett wrote:
> > not that I've found, but the sob is tearing down my system down even
> > as I gave it a q after looking at a list of packages it wants to
> > remove. If I cannot control it, it will NEVER be used here again.
> >  It will take days to re-install the stuff I use, like geany, maybe
> > 100 times a day!  Thats equ to that found on the ground after the
> > male bovine has relieved himself!
>
> What on earth did you type????

A single 'q', and all hell took off and bombed my system, leaving only 
that which was in memory & running. It did not accept another q, nor a 
ctl+c. Bad dog, no dinner.

All the config stuff was left behind I think, yes, I had a heck of a 
time for almost a week making xsane see and use the brother mfc drivers,
but with the usual 7 second lag, it works just fine at recognizing the 
scanner and its ADF.  The 7 second lag is because the brother drivers 
are crap and the first 6 access requests it sends to the scanners IP 
address have a bad checksum, but eventually it gets its excrement in 
one sock and speaks proper tcp to it, after 6 tries at one second 
intervals.

There is a similar 7+ second lag starting either firefox or iceweasel 
because the home page is localhost:631/printers, and the printer is at 
the same address, so I assume the same comm lag.
No, its decoding the name,  and here are the bad checksums_(word-wrap off):

tcpdump: listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535 bytes
    coyote.coyote.den.42734 > scanner.coyote.den.54921: Flags [S], cksum 0x0f98 (incorrect -> 0x51c5), seq 1088217712, win 29200, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 
61788237 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 0
    scanner.coyote.den.54921 > coyote.coyote.den.42734: Flags [S.], cksum 0xe540 (correct), seq 1543065333, ack 1088217713, win 8688, options [mss 1460,nop,wscale 
0,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,nop,TS val 614325000 ecr 61788237], length 0
    coyote.coyote.den.42734 > scanner.coyote.den.54921: Flags [.], cksum 0x0f90 (incorrect -> 0x4717), seq 1, ack 1, win 229, options [nop,nop,TS val 61788237 ecr 
614325000], length 0
    scanner.coyote.den.54921 > coyote.coyote.den.42734: Flags [P.], cksum 0x3e6c (correct), seq 1:10, ack 1, win 8688, options [nop,nop,TS val 614326250 ecr 
61788237], length 9
    coyote.coyote.den.42734 > scanner.coyote.den.54921: Flags [.], cksum 0x0f90 (incorrect -> 0x40c1), seq 1, ack 10, win 229, options [nop,nop,TS val 61788600 ecr 
614326250], length 0
    coyote.coyote.den.42734 > scanner.coyote.den.54921: Flags [P.], cksum 0x0f94 (incorrect -> 0x19ce), seq 1:5, ack 10, win 229, options [nop,nop,TS val 61788878 
ecr 614326250], length 4
    scanner.coyote.den.54921 > coyote.coyote.den.42734: Flags [.], cksum 0x19f0 (correct), seq 10, ack 5, win 8684, options [nop,nop,TS val 614327450 ecr 61788878], 
length 0
    scanner.coyote.den.54921 > coyote.coyote.den.42734: Flags [P.], cksum 0xe631 (correct), seq 10:65, ack 5, win 8684, options [nop,nop,TS val 614327900 ecr 
61788878], length 55
    coyote.coyote.den.42734 > scanner.coyote.den.54921: Flags [.], cksum 0x0f90 (incorrect -> 0x38a3), seq 5, ack 65, win 229, options [nop,nop,TS val 61788969 ecr 
614327900], length 0
    coyote.coyote.den.42734 > scanner.coyote.den.54921: Flags [F.], cksum 0x0f90 (incorrect -> 0x38a2), seq 5, ack 65, win 229, options [nop,nop,TS val 61788969 ecr 
614327900], length 0

But it does work well after that.

I am back to where its might be safe to reboot, I have now re-
installed 245 packages aptitude ripped out.  And cups, which it ripped 
out, can now do a test page from firefox looking at 
localhost:631/printers/MFCJ6920DW.  So I'd say at this point I am 50% 
or more restored.

>
> Lisi


Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>


Reply to: