Re: exim question
Can anyone tell me how you'd do same in postfix? b. On Thu, 2002-02-21 at 11:31, Peter Billson wrote: In your alias file, as your last rule, put *: username where username is the account the mail should goto. Username can also be a remote address i.e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pete -- http://www.elbnet.com ELB Internet Services, Inc. Web Design, Computer Consulting, Internet Hosting Bernie Berg wrote: im running potato with the unstable packages. How do I get exim to spit all mail that there isn't a user defined for to a certain mail box? so [EMAIL PROTECTED] goes to [EMAIL PROTECTED] thanks! bernie -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- cheers, Brad Thomson [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: 0421 920 497 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: downgrading woody kernel 2.4 - 2.2
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 09:01:51AM +0100, David Biro (DaV3|D3) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 27 lines which said: if not, just tell me please ;), so I decided to downgrade the kernel to 2.2 (whis is available in woody). You use Debian compiled kernels? OK, just 'apt-get install kernel-image-2.2.xxx' or, if you already have it, swap the symlinks vmlinuz* in / and rerun lilo (unless you use grub, in that case you'll have no more to do). because I really hate to reset the server every day. (Well, maybe it's a hw problem, but who knows?) Probably. (We use custom-compiled 2.4 kernels on many machines.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: downgrading woody kernel 2.4 - 2.2
On Thu, 21 Feb 2002 19:01, David Biro (DaV3|D3) wrote: experiencing several crashes. I think it's because the 2.4 kernel (but if not, just tell me please ;), so I decided to downgrade the kernel to 2.2 (whis is available in woody). It's not possible for us to even comment on the likely cause of your problems. To be able to make any guess at the cause of your problems we need to know the exact kernel version, the details of your hardware, and some information on what your server does would be handy (but is not as important). Without such information it's not even worth guessing. FWIW All my most important machines run 2.4.x machines and are quite reliable. Currently the only reliability issue I have in any of my machines is directly related to a binary-only kernel module. Apart from that all my machines are capable of running for months at a time (apart from power failures, kernel upgrades, hardware changes, etc). -- Signatures 4 lines are rude. If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I am subscribed to which has 4 lines of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I wish with the message (the sig won't be read). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
downgrading woody kernel 2.4 - 2.2 (fwd)
I just upgraded to Woody from potato and I was running the 2.2 kernel. It told be that binutils may play up with the 2.2 kernel and to do the following: in arch/i386/vmlinux.lds.S delete any reference to (.text.exit) in arch/boot/i386/Makefile change -oformat to --oformat Interestingly I couldn't find either in my kernel source, so I don't know if it was for later versions of the 2.2 kernels (I have 2.2.19pre17) I suppose just try it and see. I am running 2.4.17-686 kernel at the moment and touch wood it seems to be stable. Rob.. - message from David Biro (DaV3|D3) - Hi! We're using Debian Woody (testing) on one of our servers, a we're experiencing several crashes. I think it's because the 2.4 kernel (but if not, just tell me please ;), so I decided to downgrade the kernel to 2.2 (whis is available in woody). I'd ask if there will be any problems after downgrading? Or i have to download 2.2 source (apt-get install ...), compile, and that's it? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: downgrading woody kernel 2.4 - 2.2
Hi! experiencing several crashes. I think it's because the 2.4 kernel (but if not, just tell me please ;), so I decided to downgrade the kernel to 2.2 (whis is available in woody). It's not possible for us to even comment on the likely cause of your problems. Ok, to be more specific. The customer ran a script nightly from cron, and the script is very resource intensive. (commandline PHP script, with high Postgres usage). After the script started, various problems happened, often the whole sytem died. I found entries like this in the logfiles: : Code: ff 0b 0f 94 c0 84 c0 0f 84 88 00 00 00 8b 43 0c 50 e8 40 66 : 1Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address c080 : printing eip: : c011b676 : *pde = : Oops: 0002 : CPU:0 : EIP:0010:[exit_sighand+26/80]Not tainted : EFLAGS: 00010002 : eax: ebx: c932c000 ecx: c932c264 edx: c080 : esi: c932c000 edi: 000b ebp: 7960 esp: c932dc78 : ds: 0018 es: 0018 ss: 0018 : Process postmaster (pid: 13023, stackpage=c932d000) : Stack: c0116ef5 c932c000 0002 0002 c01113c8 c010704b 000b : c0111717 c020bd1e c932dd54 0002 c932c000 0002 c01113c8 :8080 c016c6ce c932c000 c00bbac0 0001 00030001 c02a3f14 : Call Trace: [do_exit+349/460] [do_page_fault+0/1176] [die+79/80] [do_page_faul :[set_cursor+110/128] [vt_console_print+718/736] [__call_console_drivers+58/ :[do_exit+194/460] [do_page_fault+0/1176] [die+79/80] [do_page_fault+847/117 :[page_cache_release+44/48] [free_page_and_swap_cache+49/52] [__free_pte+58/ :[die+79/80] [do_page_fault+847/1176] [do_page_fault+0/1176] [file_read_acto :[generic_file_read+129/308] [error_code+52/60] [fget+17/40] [sys_read+22/20 But the same happened with the other daemons too... The system is a PIII@833 with 256Mb of ECC SDRAM. I was using a self compiled 2.4.17, but the same happened with 2.4.9. Well, I compiled a 2.2.20 kernel, and installed it with no problems. It seems to be stable now, but it needs some more testing. (I started the script, runs smoothly). I don't know if you get something usable from the above log, if not, please tell me what should I send. Best Regards, David Biro To be able to make any guess at the cause of your problems we need to know the exact kernel version, the details of your hardware, and some information on what your server does would be handy (but is not as important). Without such information it's not even worth guessing. FWIW All my most important machines run 2.4.x machines and are quite reliable. Currently the only reliability issue I have in any of my machines is directly related to a binary-only kernel module. Apart from that all my machines are capable of running for months at a time (apart from power failures, kernel upgrades, hardware changes, etc). -- Signatures 4 lines are rude. If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I am subscribed to which has 4 lines of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I wish with the message (the sig won't be read). -- [ http://www.wh.hu - webhosting - webdesign - http://www.wh.hu ] [ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ipop3d not moving mail from /var/spool/mail to mbox
Hi, Just wanted to let everybody know that this was fixed by moving the mailboxes to /var/mail and making /var/spool/mail a symlink that points to it. I wonder why the upgrade script didn't do it automatically. Apparently Mail and Ipop3d have been upgraded to use /var/mail already but Exim and Pine (obviously, since I've built it myself) still use /var/spool/mail. - Jarno On Sunday 17. Februaryta 2002 00:55, Jarno Elonen wrote: I have a small problem with ipop3d. After a recent system update, ipop3d stopped moving users' mail from /var/spool/mail to mbox. Now both 'mail' command and pop3 clients show empty mailbox even if exim has in fact pumped /var/spool/mail full of new messages. I previously had ipop3d with stunnel for SSL, but while trying to fix this problem I updated it to package 'ipop3d-ssl'. When the mails where working, /var/log/mail.info looked like this: -- clip -- Feb 14 09:07:30 host ipop3d[16394]: Moved 4188 bytes of new mail to /home/user/mbox from /var/spool/mail/user host= host [127.0.0.1] Feb 14 09:07:30 host ipop3d[16394]: Login user=user host=host [127.0.0.1] nmsgs=2/2 -- clip -- Now the 'Moved xxx bytes' message is gone: -- clip -- Feb 16 23:18:15 host ipop3d[30143]: pop3s SSL service init from 123.456.789.012 Feb 16 23:18:17 host ipop3d[30143]: Auth user=user host=users.computer.net [123.456.789.012] nmsgs=0/0 -- clip -- Anyone know a way to fix this? - Jarno -- What good is an obscenity trial except to popularize literature? -- Nero Wolfe, The League of Frightened Men -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: exim question
Pete: In your alias file, as your last rule, put *: username Does that really work for you? I had trouble with it because with a line like this, the alias file can never fail. Exim would qualify username and run it through again, it would also run any aliases generated by other rules in the file through a second time, and wind up mapping lots of addresses to username@qualify_domian Maybe I just ran into trouble since I have include_domain on and explicitly handle several virtual domains in my aliases filebut the *: construct was a big enough gun that I sure blew my foot off with it! -- Ward -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[±¤ °í] Çؿܱ³Æ÷µéÀÇ Çѱ¹½ÄÇ° Á¾ÇÕ¼îÇθô
Title: :+: ÇѺ£ÀÌ È«º¸¸ÞÀÏ :+: + Ŭ¸¯ÇÏ½Ã¸é ¹Ù·Î ÀúÈñ ÀÚ·á¿¡¼ ±ÍÇÏÀÇ À̸ÞÀÏ ÁÖ¼Ò°¡ »èÁ¦µË´Ï´Ù ¢Ñ ¼ö½Å°ÅºÎ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: exim question
Ward, Yes, it really does work for me. I thought the point of the original poster is that he wanted any address that didn't match a real user (and I assume another alias) to be delivered to a particular mailbox. He wanted the alias file to never fail. The original poster didn't mention that he was doing virtual domains on the box. To do virtual hosts I configure exim to use multiple alias files (one for each domain) and then the *: rule would go in the appropriate alias file. Trying to do virtual domains in one alias file is troublesome and the *: rule in that case would probably be bad. Pete Ward Willats wrote: Pete: In your alias file, as your last rule, put *: username Does that really work for you? I had trouble with it because with a line like this, the alias file can never fail. Exim would qualify username and run it through again, it would also run any aliases generated by other rules in the file through a second time, and wind up mapping lots of addresses to username@qualify_domian Maybe I just ran into trouble since I have include_domain on and explicitly handle several virtual domains in my aliases filebut the *: construct was a big enough gun that I sure blew my foot off with it! -- Ward -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.elbnet.com ELB Internet Services, Inc. Web Design, Computer Consulting, Internet Hosting -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: samba and PAM/LDAP
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 06:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Folks. I'm in the process of helping create a fully PAMified box with LDAP authentication, and one thing I can not figure out how to work is SAMBA and PAM. We've recompiled samba with PAM support, ldd shows the pam libs linked, but authentication fails, and we never see any hits on the LDAP server. Has anyone gone down this road before? Hi, You can get a nice Samba/LDAP setup by following the instructions on this web site: http://samba.idelax.org. It is RedHat oriented but should work nicely with Debian too :) -- Eric-Olivier Lamey -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
downgrading woody kernel 2.4 - 2.2
Hi! We're using Debian Woody (testing) on one of our servers, a we're experiencing several crashes. I think it's because the 2.4 kernel (but if not, just tell me please ;), so I decided to downgrade the kernel to 2.2 (whis is available in woody). I'd ask if there will be any problems after downgrading? Or i have to download 2.2 source (apt-get install ...), compile, and that's it? Anyyway, any suggestion about stabilizing woody would be welcome, because I really hate to reset the server every day. (Well, maybe it's a hw problem, but who knows?) Thanks in advance, .DaVe -- [ http://www.wh.hu - webhosting - webdesign - http://www.wh.hu ] [ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Re: exim question
In your alias file, as your last rule, put *: username where username is the account the mail should goto. Username can also be a remote address i.e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pete -- http://www.elbnet.com ELB Internet Services, Inc. Web Design, Computer Consulting, Internet Hosting Bernie Berg wrote: im running potato with the unstable packages. How do I get exim to spit all mail that there isn't a user defined for to a certain mail box? so [EMAIL PROTECTED] goes to [EMAIL PROTECTED] thanks! bernie -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: exim question
Can anyone tell me how you'd do same in postfix? b. On Thu, 2002-02-21 at 11:31, Peter Billson wrote: In your alias file, as your last rule, put *: username where username is the account the mail should goto. Username can also be a remote address i.e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pete -- http://www.elbnet.com ELB Internet Services, Inc. Web Design, Computer Consulting, Internet Hosting Bernie Berg wrote: im running potato with the unstable packages. How do I get exim to spit all mail that there isn't a user defined for to a certain mail box? so [EMAIL PROTECTED] goes to [EMAIL PROTECTED] thanks! bernie -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- cheers, Brad Thomson [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: 0421 920 497 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: downgrading woody kernel 2.4 - 2.2
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 09:01:51AM +0100, David Biro (DaV3|D3) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 27 lines which said: if not, just tell me please ;), so I decided to downgrade the kernel to 2.2 (whis is available in woody). You use Debian compiled kernels? OK, just 'apt-get install kernel-image-2.2.xxx' or, if you already have it, swap the symlinks vmlinuz* in / and rerun lilo (unless you use grub, in that case you'll have no more to do). because I really hate to reset the server every day. (Well, maybe it's a hw problem, but who knows?) Probably. (We use custom-compiled 2.4 kernels on many machines.)
Re: downgrading woody kernel 2.4 - 2.2
Hi! experiencing several crashes. I think it's because the 2.4 kernel (but if not, just tell me please ;), so I decided to downgrade the kernel to 2.2 (whis is available in woody). It's not possible for us to even comment on the likely cause of your problems. Ok, to be more specific. The customer ran a script nightly from cron, and the script is very resource intensive. (commandline PHP script, with high Postgres usage). After the script started, various problems happened, often the whole sytem died. I found entries like this in the logfiles: : Code: ff 0b 0f 94 c0 84 c0 0f 84 88 00 00 00 8b 43 0c 50 e8 40 66 : 1Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address c080 : printing eip: : c011b676 : *pde = : Oops: 0002 : CPU:0 : EIP:0010:[exit_sighand+26/80]Not tainted : EFLAGS: 00010002 : eax: ebx: c932c000 ecx: c932c264 edx: c080 : esi: c932c000 edi: 000b ebp: 7960 esp: c932dc78 : ds: 0018 es: 0018 ss: 0018 : Process postmaster (pid: 13023, stackpage=c932d000) : Stack: c0116ef5 c932c000 0002 0002 c01113c8 c010704b 000b : c0111717 c020bd1e c932dd54 0002 c932c000 0002 c01113c8 :8080 c016c6ce c932c000 c00bbac0 0001 00030001 c02a3f14 : Call Trace: [do_exit+349/460] [do_page_fault+0/1176] [die+79/80] [do_page_faul :[set_cursor+110/128] [vt_console_print+718/736] [__call_console_drivers+58/ :[do_exit+194/460] [do_page_fault+0/1176] [die+79/80] [do_page_fault+847/117 :[page_cache_release+44/48] [free_page_and_swap_cache+49/52] [__free_pte+58/ :[die+79/80] [do_page_fault+847/1176] [do_page_fault+0/1176] [file_read_acto :[generic_file_read+129/308] [error_code+52/60] [fget+17/40] [sys_read+22/20 But the same happened with the other daemons too... The system is a [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 256Mb of ECC SDRAM. I was using a self compiled 2.4.17, but the same happened with 2.4.9. Well, I compiled a 2.2.20 kernel, and installed it with no problems. It seems to be stable now, but it needs some more testing. (I started the script, runs smoothly). I don't know if you get something usable from the above log, if not, please tell me what should I send. Best Regards, David Biro To be able to make any guess at the cause of your problems we need to know the exact kernel version, the details of your hardware, and some information on what your server does would be handy (but is not as important). Without such information it's not even worth guessing. FWIW All my most important machines run 2.4.x machines and are quite reliable. Currently the only reliability issue I have in any of my machines is directly related to a binary-only kernel module. Apart from that all my machines are capable of running for months at a time (apart from power failures, kernel upgrades, hardware changes, etc). -- Signatures 4 lines are rude. If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I am subscribed to which has 4 lines of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I wish with the message (the sig won't be read). -- [ http://www.wh.hu - webhosting - webdesign - http://www.wh.hu ] [ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Re: ipop3d not moving mail from /var/spool/mail to mbox
Hi, Just wanted to let everybody know that this was fixed by moving the mailboxes to /var/mail and making /var/spool/mail a symlink that points to it. I wonder why the upgrade script didn't do it automatically. Apparently Mail and Ipop3d have been upgraded to use /var/mail already but Exim and Pine (obviously, since I've built it myself) still use /var/spool/mail. - Jarno On Sunday 17. Februaryta 2002 00:55, Jarno Elonen wrote: I have a small problem with ipop3d. After a recent system update, ipop3d stopped moving users' mail from /var/spool/mail to mbox. Now both 'mail' command and pop3 clients show empty mailbox even if exim has in fact pumped /var/spool/mail full of new messages. I previously had ipop3d with stunnel for SSL, but while trying to fix this problem I updated it to package 'ipop3d-ssl'. When the mails where working, /var/log/mail.info looked like this: -- clip -- Feb 14 09:07:30 host ipop3d[16394]: Moved 4188 bytes of new mail to /home/user/mbox from /var/spool/mail/user host= host [127.0.0.1] Feb 14 09:07:30 host ipop3d[16394]: Login user=user host=host [127.0.0.1] nmsgs=2/2 -- clip -- Now the 'Moved xxx bytes' message is gone: -- clip -- Feb 16 23:18:15 host ipop3d[30143]: pop3s SSL service init from 123.456.789.012 Feb 16 23:18:17 host ipop3d[30143]: Auth user=user host=users.computer.net [123.456.789.012] nmsgs=0/0 -- clip -- Anyone know a way to fix this? - Jarno -- What good is an obscenity trial except to popularize literature? -- Nero Wolfe, The League of Frightened Men
Re: exim question
Pete: In your alias file, as your last rule, put *: username Does that really work for you? I had trouble with it because with a line like this, the alias file can never fail. Exim would qualify username and run it through again, it would also run any aliases generated by other rules in the file through a second time, and wind up mapping lots of addresses to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Maybe I just ran into trouble since I have include_domain on and explicitly handle several virtual domains in my aliases filebut the *: construct was a big enough gun that I sure blew my foot off with it! -- Ward
[±¤ °í] Çؿܱ³Æ÷µéÀÇ Çѱ¹½ÄÇ° Á¾ÇÕ¼îÇθô
Title: :+: :+: +
Re: exim question
Ward, Yes, it really does work for me. I thought the point of the original poster is that he wanted any address that didn't match a real user (and I assume another alias) to be delivered to a particular mailbox. He wanted the alias file to never fail. The original poster didn't mention that he was doing virtual domains on the box. To do virtual hosts I configure exim to use multiple alias files (one for each domain) and then the *: rule would go in the appropriate alias file. Trying to do virtual domains in one alias file is troublesome and the *: rule in that case would probably be bad. Pete Ward Willats wrote: Pete: In your alias file, as your last rule, put *: username Does that really work for you? I had trouble with it because with a line like this, the alias file can never fail. Exim would qualify username and run it through again, it would also run any aliases generated by other rules in the file through a second time, and wind up mapping lots of addresses to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Maybe I just ran into trouble since I have include_domain on and explicitly handle several virtual domains in my aliases filebut the *: construct was a big enough gun that I sure blew my foot off with it! -- Ward -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.elbnet.com ELB Internet Services, Inc. Web Design, Computer Consulting, Internet Hosting
Re: I thought everyone would be interested in this
[deception toolkit http://www.all.net/dtk/] I like the idea of this thing but what happens if there's a bug in those scripts that fakes the vulnerabillities? Then couldn't it just be vulnerable too? If you want your firewall to remain safe forward the deceptive ports to a dedicated deception machine, maybe on a separate network with access to your private networks blocked. Bernhard
Re: samba and PAM/LDAP
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 06:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Folks. I'm in the process of helping create a fully PAMified box with LDAP authentication, and one thing I can not figure out how to work is SAMBA and PAM. We've recompiled samba with PAM support, ldd shows the pam libs linked, but authentication fails, and we never see any hits on the LDAP server. Has anyone gone down this road before? Hi, You can get a nice Samba/LDAP setup by following the instructions on this web site: http://samba.idelax.org. It is RedHat oriented but should work nicely with Debian too :) -- Eric-Olivier Lamey
