Re: Apache/PHP
On Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:05, Jeff Waugh wrote: I know more about what is going on and how things work and my customers do not complain they do not have the newest PostregSQL etc. :-) Better to backport required packages to a known stable platform. sid can kick the crap out of your machine quite easily. Remember the recent PAM breakages? Imagine administering that remotely... You couldn't. This is managable. You just have to keep one root shell open while trying a second login, if you can't login again in another session then you still have the first session open to fix things. Also have busybox-static (or something similar) installed to fix problems with shared libraries. -- http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Apache/PHP
quote who=Russell Coker This is managable. You just have to keep one root shell open while trying a second login, if you can't login again in another session then you still have the first session open to fix things. Also have busybox-static (or something similar) installed to fix problems with shared libraries. I like not having to have these considerations when administering a production machine. :) - Jeff -- No clue is good clue. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Clustering mail servers - Cyrus or Courier ?
Przemyslaw Wegrzyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Jeff Waugh wrote:
You ought to check out Scalemail, which is being developed expressly for
this purpose. It is a combination of Courier POP/IMAP and postfix. Very
powerful combo.
Hmmm, I can see it's in early stage of developement.
The only thing really missing is the Courier-IMAP login
mechanism. And I think I got it done, just haven't had time to
plug it in and test it. After that, it's all bug fixes and
refactoring code to be prettier. The thing delivers to
maildirs already.
--
tv@{{hq.yok.utu,havoc,gaeshido}.fi,{debian,wanderer}.org,stonesoft.com}
double a,b=4,c;main(){for(;++a2e6;c-=(b=-b)/a++);printf(%f\n,c);}
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Failover with MySQL
On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 11:01:26AM +, Buisson Olivier wrote: Hi, I would like to know if anybody have a solution to put 2 mysql server in failover. Does anybody have setting up such architecture ? To be more understood: I would like to setup 2 mysql server. One is a master and would take all requests. When it failed, the other server takes the hand and respond to the requets. If someone have already setup this, i'm very interessed by his experiment. Cheers, Olivier Buisson -- The latest versions of mysql supports a simple replication scheme. You will need to run the mysql version from debian unstable, and I think there is documentation there of how to do it. Have not tried it myself yet though. MySQL replication is a part of my project but I'm really searching for a simple solution for failover with 2 servers. I'm searching for a testimonial of someone who have already setup such architecture. It seems that drbd can do what you want. I haven't try it yet, but it's more general solution for HA server. it works also (or even better) with postgres. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bypassing Sirc32
On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Jordi S . Bunster wrote: But, still, that makes a lot of load here. Can I, trough a sendmail and/or procmail rule, simple send those messages to /dev/null as soon as they arrive? Have anyone done something similar? Would that reduce the load? I use exim's filter language to block it: # The W32/Sircam virus is sending messages with lower case date: headers # (The upper-case CONTAINS makes the string comparison case sensitive.) if $message_headers CONTAINS \ndate: and $message_headers contains _Outlook_Express_message_boundary then fail text Suspect W32/Sircam virus message seen finish endif If you don't want to reply (bounce) with a big message set the Exim directive return_size_limit to the amount of bytes you will reply. Jeremy C. Reed echo 'G014AE824B0-07CC?/JJFFFI?D64CBD=3C427=;6HI2J' | tr /-_ :\ Sc-y./ | sed swxw`uname`w -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: your mail
On Sat, Aug 18, 2001 at 10:37:58AM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
unsubscribe
Amazing, I came directly from exim-users where someone else did the
exact same thing and in consequence was being ridiculed.
One thing is to be told to RTFM, but when people will ignore error
messages (It doesn't work! What do you mean 'error message'?), don't
read dialog boxes ('OK to wipe your entire hardrive?' *click*), or
read what's appended to every damn message from a mailinglist, what
can you do?
I'll get my coat...
--
Thomas
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bypassing Sirc32
On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 09:53:29AM -0300, Jordi S . Bunster wrote: I don't know about you guys, but here in third world countries Sircam is still making a lot of trouble. We have amavis running here on this soon to become postfix sendmail server, so we block those messages from/to our customers. But, still, that makes a lot of load here. Can I, trough a sendmail and/or procmail rule, simple send those messages to /dev/null as soon as they arrive? Have anyone done something similar? Would that reduce the load? all of the ones i've seen have an invalid Content-Disposition header. try this is your postfix header_checks: /^Content-Disposition: Multipart message/i REJECT Multipart message is an invalid Content-Disposition. it will never appear in a legitimate email. another (better, imo) option is to block all windows executable attachments with a body_checks rule: /^(Content-Disposition: attachment;.*| Content-Type:.*|(\t| )+)(file)?name=?.*\.(lnk|hta|com|pif|vbs|vbe|js|jse|exe|bat|cmd|vxd|scr|shm)?$/ REJECT this will block all outlook/windows viruses, not just sircam. at least, until microsoft invent a new security hole feature for their customers' convenience. i haven't done any benchmarking or timing on it but it is probably better to have both rules. the earlier you reject a message, the better. because there are fewer headers than body lines, a header_check is less load on the system than a body_check (remember, each header_check rule has to be matched against every line of the headers, and each body_check rule has to be matched against every line of the body) craig -- craig sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fabricati Diem, PVNC. -- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
