lots of good tidbits and info there.
On Friday 03 January 2003 09:35 pm, Charles Polisher wrote:
> Also see:
>http://www.rpm.org/hintskinks/repairdb/
>
>
> ___
> vox-tech mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-
Also see:
http://www.rpm.org/hintskinks/repairdb/
___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
I don't believe you've said what version of RedHat you're running.
Also, specifically, what version of rpm are you running?
"rpm -q rpm" would suffice.
Assuming it's RedHat 7.x, see:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=73198
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=565
Richard Crawford said:
> rpm does indeed have a verbose option. Here ya go:
>
> ===
>
> [root@mossroot rscrawford]# rpm --rebuilddb -vv
> D: rebuilding database /var/lib/rpm into /var/lib/rpmrebuilddb.1697
> D: creating d
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 11:34, ME wrote:
> Since it is immediate, and we see no other items in the trace, I would
> expect it is not a path issue with symlinks. It is sounding more and more
> like a file problem. Like there is an attempt to open a file (earlier)
> that is assumed to allready be open
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 11:56, ME wrote:
> Some more odd questions:
>
> Are all of your filesystems mounts (rw)?
> (just run "mount" to see)
Ayuh. Every single one.
> Before the next time you run
> # rpm --rebuilddb
> Could you check the man page for it? Is there a way to increase the level
> of
Some more odd questions:
Are all of your filesystems mounts (rw)?
(just run "mount" to see)
Before the next time you run
# rpm --rebuilddb
Could you check the man page for it? Is there a way to increase the level
of verbosity? Sometimes, apps will allow for a number like
"-d 100" to set debug lev
(Sorry, trying to get caught up on e-mail again)
Richard Crawford said:
> On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 11:58, ME wrote:
>
>> Fail after a pwrite? Hmm. Would you mind running this again, but instead
>> try:
>> # strace -f rpm --rebuilddb
>> ? The -f also does the strace on child processes spawned by the f
I did try it. No luck. *grumble*
At 11:24 AM 1/3/2003, you wrote:
Sorry to re-note this, but did you try the suggestion made by Charles
Polisher (One of the things I mentioned was a possible file system
problem with files, permissions, etc. A problem with these files could be
it. If this sugges
Sorry to re-note this, but did you try the suggestion made by Charles
Polisher (One of the things I mentioned was a possible file system
problem with files, permissions, etc. A problem with these files could be
it. If this suggestion clobbers the old db files which will be created
again anyway, thi
oh well,
I thought that there might be something to the red-carpet
rpm database vs the up2date rpm database.
-- Andy
--- Richard Crawford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I do indeed have Red Carpet on my system.
>
> I'm poking around Ximian's knowledge base now. I have a
> feeling it
> might have
sorry, not spamhaus, spamblock.
-Original Message-
From: Richard S. Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 9:57 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [vox-tech] smtp question - blocked ip
Hm, my messages seem to be coming through all right...
At 09:49 AM 1/3
ummm...email at work is MS Exchange and that works well enough protected by
an SMTP relay on the DMZ.
Existing Enterprise smtp relay entry point is also a Win32 solution that is a
cheap (cheap as in piece of crap) inflexible one at that. A Linux solution
using Postfix or Sendmail has been propose
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 09:49:24AM -0800, Steven Peck wrote:
> will prbably see a dramatic increase. The sad part is, a lot of it is to non
> existant email addresses. SO not only is the spammer irratating me, he is
> ripping off his customer.
So install a bounce handler that rejects originating
Hm, my messages seem to be coming through all right...
At 09:49 AM 1/3/2003, you wrote:
Yes well, it's enough to prevent Pete from emailing out. I like
DNSStuff.com, it's a great resource.
Spamhaus blocked Pacbell DSL ip addresses. Evidently they felt that PacBell
has been ignoring there comp
Yes well, it's enough to prevent Pete from emailing out. I like
DNSStuff.com, it's a great resource.
Spamhaus blocked Pacbell DSL ip addresses. Evidently they felt that PacBell
has been ignoring there complaints regarding a few persistent spammers. If I
thought I could get away with it here at
They blacklisted Pac Bell? Now there's a nice example of
spitting into the wind. :-)
-- Rod
http://www.sunsetsystems.com/
On Friday 03 January 2003 09:15 am, Steven Peck wrote:
> The reciever is setup to use a block list by ip address. So, lookup your
> MX and/or IP Address in a lookup sit
> ---ORIGINAL MESSAGE---
> Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 08:50:33 -0800
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: Peter Jay Salzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [vox-tech] smtp question - blocked ip
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> can someone give me a more useful description of the problem here?
[SNIP]
>
> -
The reciever is setup to use a block list by ip address. So, lookup your MX
and/or IP Address in a lookup site.
For all potential email block/spam problems, I turn to
www.dnsstuff.com
The MX for dirac.org is 'mail.dirac.org'
The IP is 64.164.47.8'
Looking up the IP Address at DNSStuff gets yo
can someone give me a more useful description of the problem here? who
is blocking whom? it sounds like my MTA rejected sending email to
netease, but ORDB and tcp wrappers for exim (which i use) should block
incoming mail from spammers, not outgoing mail to spammers.
at least, i'm pretty sure ab
20 matches
Mail list logo
