> I think this has been asked and answered on this group, but I can't find the
> info anymore ...
>
> I do not require that my new e-smith server be used for atalk, samba, or
> lptr access. Only for proxying and as an email server.
>
> How do I turn off the services I do not want. For me it just plugs possible
> security holes (and I don't need to worry about possible future exploits)
Well, you can nuke them with an rpm -e <packagename>
In the old days (I am still running 3.1 customized) you could run ntsysv
and turn them off.
Nowadays, since e-smith runs at a non-standard runlevel and normal Linux
tools do not apply, you have to get down & dirty.
You can to go to /etc/rc.d/rc7.d (??)
and delete the symlinks that start the services. But if I recall, e-smith
now has this "self-healing" cruft, and it will attempt to undo your
changes. But I gave up on getting 4.x to cooperate.
SO NOW A LONG SUPPRESSED RANT to the e-smith developers:
1) Forget the non-standard run-level stuff! I missed the arguments on why
runlevel 3 wa not good enough, but I still disagree!
2) This "self-healing" crap is for the birds, excluding flightless
antartic waterfoul. I custimize my setup, but the next time I go through
the console setup and reboot, it re-up-gerfuckulates things again. YES, i
know I can spend god knows how long editing template files ad nauseum, but
I think that a knowledgable user should not be hampered by the mentality
that Dilbert's boss'es nephew may mangle the setup and it needs to be
"healed". Remember, uncontrolled and automatic "healing" is what causes
cancer.
3) Don't get me wrong...I have been an e-smith user and cheerleader for
over 2 years, and I use it at home and at work (3.1)....what seduced me
was the 20 minute install and 3 minute
configure. As I learned more Linux stuff, I decided to make
modifications to the base setup....with each release it has become more
and more difficult to make tweaks without having it "healed", or learning
the template scheme.
4) NO, I do not support the notion of dropping netatalk or samba.
5) I DO support the notion of forking e-smith, or at least providing
various levels of sysadmin "compentence" in a setup.
6) Maybe I don't like the whole ibay scheme: I work at a small company,
and the big feat I accomplished with e-smith early on was having one
"directory" that could be accesssed by SMB (Windows) users, Mac users,
FTP, HTTP, and telnet for people running DOS but with FTP Software's
client packages. Plus I added NFS for the local network so _everybody_
could get to _everything_. (OK, flame me about NFS, but I have it set up
to only accept on 192.*, and as I see it, only if someone at our ISP turns
evil will we have a problem). But I am waiting for CODA or the next best
thing to crush NFS.
7) MY proposals for forks:
a) router/gateway only, ala LRP with sex appeal
b) above, with qmail and apache
c) above, with every e-smith feature, easily configured by
non-stoopid people
d) above, in heal mode, ala version 4.x
It is because I love e-smith so much and have such respect for the people
that have made it happen that I have spoken up. I have been much too
busy with my *real* work to contribute too much to this list, but I hope I
am heard.
--Peter
PS See you all at the ByTown soon!
>
> I will be adding a news server to the box, and have downloaded (but not
> installed) inn-2.2.3-3.i386.rpm for Redhat 7.0 from rpmfind.net. Does anyone
> know of any reason not to install this on e-smith ?
Well, unless there is some security alert on this particular version of
this package, go for it!
>
> TIA
>
> Hugh
