Best way to update perl on Woody Stable ?
We are back to needing to upgrade perl on one of our mail servers. The version perl-5.8.1.tar.gz is being called for one our apps needed. I am sure I am not the first to run into this on production servers and wondered what approach other folks take ? Thanks, Dee -- W.D.McKinney (Dee) | Affordable E-Mail and Internet Solutions Alaska Wireless Systems | for Schools, Libraries, Clinics Business' http://www.akwireless.net | Call 1-907-349-4308 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Best way to update perl on Woody Stable ?
On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 16:14, Rod Rodolico wrote: You could install the CPAN module on your current system, then use it to update Perl. CAVEAT: CPAN and Debian have, in the past, placed Perl in two separate locations. When I did this before, I did have a problem configuring Perl correctly afterwards. It (CPAN) is mainly designed, from what I saw, to update a Standard perl installation, standard being whatever CPAN (the organization) says it is (which is pretty standard). Other than that, I don't know. Look at http://cpan.org/ports/index.html for one thing. But, I'm not sure if any of these will break a Debian install. Rod Thanks Rod. I tried that awhile ago today and it puked. shell-init: could not get current directory: getcwd: cannot access parent directories: No such file or directory Everything is up to date. Type '/usr/bin/make test' to run test suite. /usr/bin/make -- OK Running make test Couldn't chdir to /root/.cpan/build/perl-5.8.1 at /usr/share/perl/5.6.1/CPAN.pm line 5480 I have a friend is one the best perl guys around so I'll ask him about it, but he doesn't like Debian and rolls his own distro. Dee -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Best way to update perl on Woody Stable ?
On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 17:40, Rod Rodolico wrote: Is there a way to tell apt (dselect) you have certain packages installed? If so, it would make sense to just trash the Debian perl install and install it all from source. I agree with your Perl guru -- roll your own is the best way to go. I just don't have the time. I still install some packages (webmin, usermin, squirrelmail) myself, because other packages are not dependant on them. But I have no idea how to tell apt that, yes, I already have Perl installed so you don't have to mess with it. From the log you sent, looks like the cwd disappeared out from under you, so of course it could not get the parents or anything. What dir were you in when you executed it? Did the directory /root/.cpan exist? I had problems, but those were not the ones I had. Rod Hi, Yes I did use /root # perl -MCPAN -e shell to invoke the connection. I'll break some installed apps if de-install. So I amy have to re-install everything again :-) Dee On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 16:14, Rod Rodolico wrote: You could install the CPAN module on your current system, then use it to update Perl. CAVEAT: CPAN and Debian have, in the past, placed Perl in two separate locations. When I did this before, I did have a problem configuring Perl correctly afterwards. It (CPAN) is mainly designed, from what I saw, to update a Standard perl installation, standard being whatever CPAN (the organization) says it is (which is pretty standard). Other than that, I don't know. Look at http://cpan.org/ports/index.html for one thing. But, I'm not sure if any of these will break a Debian install. Rod Thanks Rod. I tried that awhile ago today and it puked. shell-init: could not get current directory: getcwd: cannot access parent directories: No such file or directory Everything is up to date. Type '/usr/bin/make test' to run test suite. /usr/bin/make -- OK Running make test Couldn't chdir to /root/.cpan/build/perl-5.8.1 at /usr/share/perl/5.6.1/CPAN.pm line 5480 I have a friend is one the best perl guys around so I'll ask him about it, but he doesn't like Debian and rolls his own distro. Dee -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- W.D.McKinney (Dee) | Affordable E-Mail and Internet Solutions Alaska Wireless Systems | for Schools, Libraries, Clinics Business' http://www.akwireless.net | Call 1-907-349-4308 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
migrating a large mail system
Sure hope you like Postfix better. It's PITB when you don't get along with your MTA. Best Wishes. Dee On Mon, 2003-09-08 at 07:44, Cameron Moore wrote: * [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Craig Sanders) [2003.09.07 20:55]: qmail is so different to sendmail, exim, postfix, and just about every other unix MTA that migrating to it is a major PITA. migrating away from it is at least as bad. qmail has some very nice features, and is much faster and far more secure than sendmail but it's a technology trap as bad as any proprietary MTA. Just wanted to give anyone considering using qmail a chance to read what he said again because Craig nailed it. I'm in the process of migrating a large mail system from qmail to postfix. I can't tell you how much I hate qmail. Like Craig said, it's like working with a proprietary/commercial product -- it controls what you do, not the other way around. -- Cameron Moore [ Is it wrong that only one company makes a game called 'Monopoly'? ] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail or Qmail ? ..
On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 03:43:33PM +1000, Rudi Starcevic wrote: Sendmail or Qmail ? That is my question. Well Rudi, You have heard from most camps of users who prefer MTA's for various reasons. Interesting enough, Debian ships exim default, and uses Mailman for it's Debian hosted lists, SuSE ships Postfix, oh yea but they use qmail for the MTA of choice and ezmlm for all the SuSE hosted lists, and the so on and so on. Opinions abound on which is better but I have found after running them all, that I personally like one over the other. Personal convictions because of personal experience. In other words, only the experienced walk with a limp. I trust that regardless of what your MTA of choice is, you have fun and learn, which is more important than which MTA. Warm Regards, Dee -- W.D.McKinney (Dee) - CEO President Alaska Wireless Systems Direct (907)349-4308 -=- Mobile (907)230-5048 http://www.akwireless.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail or Qmail ? ..
Hmm. Since '98 ...good for you. All the patches in the world don't help some folks anyway.Qmail has many ways to skin a cat. In the end, it's pick a horse and ride it. Exim, Postfix, Sendmail and qmail all have querks. Like the Mutt homepage, All mail clients suck. This one just sucks less. -me, circa 1995 I know of several big mail servers running qmail and the sys admins don't have the same viewpoint that you do. That doesn't make you wrong or them wrong though. Dee On Sat, 2003-09-06 at 08:19, Cameron L. Spitzer wrote: I've been running Qmail since '98. It's got a bottleneck in disk writes, but aside from that it's fast. (Anybody tried running the queue in a ramdisk? Howabout in an fs made in a file mounted looback?) It's secure and reliable. Unfortunately, it's not being maintained by its author. If you want the functionality of a modern MTA, you need to wade through a disorganized and unverifiable swamp of contributed patches and add-ons. I'm sure most of the add-ons are great, if you can figure out where to get them and how to use them. But the ones I've tried (mjinject and a couple of SMTP AUTH's) were broken, and unsupported by *their* authors. I'm not going to ask hundreds of users to rely on a cobbled-together mess like that. Apologies and respects to Dave Sill. So I've given up on Qmail. I'm using Exim for small systems, and I'll try Postfix for my next big one. -- Cameron Ps. I read debian-isp at Newsguy. The From: address here is /dev/nulled. My address can be found at http://greens.org/~cls -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail or Qmail ? ..
On Thu, 2003-09-04 at 14:54, martin f krafft wrote: - qmail isn't available as a binary package for Debian Wrong. See http://smarden.org/pape/Debian/ . - qmail support includes being flamed by the author Wrong. Ask a question and find out. Many helpful people who don't flame but as they highly experienced folks they expect one to think through the issue and post the needed info to reply with help. I like debian by the way :-) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail or Qmail ? ..
On Thu, 2003-09-04 at 04:58, Eric Sproul wrote: On Thu, 2003-09-04 at 01:43, Rudi Starcevic wrote: Hi, Sorry to bother you all with this repeat question. I've have searched around and seen plenty of opinions but I'd like to ask again and get the latest from this list. Sendmail or Qmail ? That is my question. Rudi, I work at an ISP that used to use Qmail, but now uses Sendmail. There are several reasons why the switch was made, none having anything to do with the religion surrounding either one. The following is my opinion, illustrated with some examples from my company. First, scale is a consideration. Once we began to grow our customer base, our email volume began to increase dramatically. Qmail queues everything to disk, so the more mail you do, the more pressure you put on your disk I/O. The server running Qmail was always blocking while it tried to keep up with the disk writes. We had to decide whether to spend huge $$$ on a big-iron server to handle it all, or to go cheap and modular using some other MTA. We opted for the latter. We replaced our single mailserver with four mail routing servers and two mail storage servers, where customer accounts reside. qmail is more modular than any other MTA, especially Sendmail. Sendmail uses RAM more heavily than Qmail, relieving some of the disk I/O pressure, and improving performance under heavy loads. In order to go modular, we needed a directory service to tie it all together (so that each mail router can reference a system-wide config, and figure out where the mailbox is). We chose OpenLDAP. At the time (1999), Qmail did not have LDAP support (correct me if I'm wrong). Sendmail did. Even if Qmail did have LDAP support then, Sendmail's source was *much* easier to dig through for the performance tuning we did. Sendmail's milter plug-in system has also been invaluable when we implemented server-side bayesian spam filtering, and as we work on virus scanning. qmail being modular has the capability of performing this also. Today we are very happy with our Sendmail installation. Debian and Sendmail play very happily together, and with our modular setup we process over 4 million messages a day with over 60,000 mailboxes. Yes, Sendmail has had several high-profile vulnerabilities, but with Debian and apt, we were able to stay on top of it with little difficulty. I can see how Qmail could look attractive to a smaller site with a less complex setup, but for us, Sendmail was the way to go. Regards, Eric Good to know you are happy. That makes a big difference. Dee -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New to list
Good for you and good choice. Try http://www.tldp.org for starters. Have fun ! Dee On Sun, 2003-08-03 at 20:13, Anil Gupte wrote: Hi all! I am newbie to Linux, and decide to throw my lot in with Debian. I always learned by asking questions, so I hope you won't mind newbie questions here. We are a small ISP in Milwaukee and Chicago, been around for about 5 years, mostly Windows and Cisco. Any pointers, web sites, books etc. will be appreciated. I already have Debian GNU/Linux 2.1 Unleashed, and a couple of machines someone installed for me that I am putzing with. One runs a couple of web sites, the other one is a toy. Cheers! Anil Gupte -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BIND 8 or 9 version ?
and djb is not compatible with working OSes. :) As in which OS that is not compatible ? And Bind is ? Dee On Tue, 2003-07-22 at 13:53, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 05:06:39PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: It is partly a matter of taste. - v8 is faster - v8 is stable - v8 does not have views OTOH different views can't use the same files. :( bad bad bad - v9 can be used with db/sql - but i would recommend powerdns for that task (powerdns is fastest authoritive dns server around and it works with mysql/oracle/mysql, BUT it lacks ACLs and you can't have per-zone settings - only general (notify, transfer,...) there is another dns auth serevr project that ripe started, but i can't remember the name and djb is not compatible with working OSes. :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SSL wrapping of Outlook ?
Question: We run sslwrap for POP3 wrapping and I see Outlook for XP when selecting Advanced Options and using SSL enabled for both SMTP and POP connections, that with Ethereal the clear text password is still there in view ? Is this an SSL issue or an Outlook bug ? Previous verions of Outlook only showed a handshake between the MTU and ssl connection. Anyone have any ideas how to make Outlook XP not show the password ? Dee -- Dee McKinney Honor the Past, Live the Present, Plan for the Future.
SSL wrapping of Outlook ?
Question: We run sslwrap for POP3 wrapping and I see Outlook for XP when selecting Advanced Options and using SSL enabled for both SMTP and POP connections, that with Ethereal the clear text password is still there in view ? Is this an SSL issue or an Outlook bug ? Previous verions of Outlook only showed a handshake between the MTU and ssl connection. Anyone have any ideas how to make Outlook XP not show the password ? Dee -- Dee McKinney Honor the Past, Live the Present, Plan for the Future. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Which SSL Company? (Slightly OT)
Maybe reading a little deeper (broader) on the website and you could answer that question. :-( http://www.whichssl.com/html/who/index.html Dee W.D.McKinney (Dee) Alaska Wireless Systems http://3233667600 On Sun, 2003-05-25 at 04:15, Marc Haber wrote: On Thu, 22 May 2003 12:32:33 +0200, Marcel Hicking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For a comparison of SSL companies maybe check http://www.whichssl.com/comparisons/index.html That web site lists Comodo first, and it looks like they would like readers to prefer Comodo. Oh yeah, right, the domain belongs to comodo and the web page has a comodo copyright. May I suggest that the judgement made on that web site is biased?
Re: sendmail or qmail or what?
On Wed, 2003-05-21 at 07:10, Ana Paula Sabelli wrote: Hi, I´m setting up a mail server, I ´d like to hear opinions about which one is better. TIA Ana Paula Sabelli OK, it's a sysadmin preference type isssue for sure. Having run Sendmail, Exim, Postfix, qmail and atmail, we have settled on qmail as it has been rock solid. What else do you need ? See http://lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html Dee -- W.D.McKinney (Dee) Alaska Wireless Systems http://3233667600
