Re: Forcing a packet through an interface (OT?)
Yep, that'll do it. Just choose two time servers that you would never need
to use in real life. From google, you should be able to find a list of
nearby public time servers.
-john
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Mario Lobo wrote:
> That sounds close to what I need !!
>
> > > 1) rl0 ---> router --> antenna --> ISPx -->
> > > internet
>
> So would it be something like:
> route add -host ${ip.of.public.host} netmask 255.255.255.255 gateway
> ${ip.of.rl0}
>
> is that correct?
>
> In this case that host will be "sacrificed", if rl0 is down.
>
> Do you have any suggestions on time or whois servers? Don't worry
> because the pings I send are standard 56 bytes long.
>
> Thanks John !
>
> P.S. - I'm replying to your post from my home e-mail. I made the post from my
> work e-mail.
> --
>//| //||
> // | // ||
> -//--//--|| ARIO LOBO
> // //||
> -
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://mariolobo.70d.com
> http://www.mallavoodoo.com.br
>
>
> > Mario,
> >
> > I think the only way to do what you want is to find two hosts on the
> > internet that don't conflict with what you do on a day to day basis. Then
> > add custom routes for those two specific hosts, and with those routes, you
> > force traffic through each NIC.
> >
> > A perfect example of two public servers would be time or whois servers.
> > Just be nice and dont ping too much (i.e., only send two "small" pings
> > every 2 minutes or something).
> >
> > -john
> >
> > On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Mario Lobo wrote:
> >
> > > Yeah Stefan. They do take the default route. That is what I am already
> > > doing.
> > >
> > > I even wrote a little prog using a variation of ping to do just that.
> > >
> > > The problem lies with the fact that, there is a router between my rl0 and
> > > the internet.
> > >
>
> > >
> > > So the fact that i can ping the hop next to rl0 doesn´t mean the link is
> > > up :(.
> > >
> > > That is why I NEED to ping something on the internet.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > --
> > >//| //||
> > > // | // ||
> > > -//--//---|| ARIO LOBO
> > > // //||
> > > -
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > http://www.ipad.com.br
> > >
> > >
> > > On 12 Jul 2005 at 15:48, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > > In case you got a static IP on rl0 from ISP x (and rl0 is up),
> > > >
> > > > ping -I www.google.com
> > > >
> > > > might help.
> > > >
> > > > Just a guess though. Packets might still take the default route, even
> > > > with -I.
> > > >
> > > > Good luck,
> > > > --
> > > > stefan
> > > > http://stsp.in-berlin.de PGP Key:
> > > > 0xF59D25F0
> > > > ___
> > > > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
> > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> > > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
> > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> > >
> > >
> > ___
> > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> >
>
>
>
> ___
> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>
>
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
mailing list archives
A few years ago I remember being able to download (from freebsd ftp server) mail spool files for the entire years worth of messages for a given mailing list. I would periodically, download these, parse them with a perl script and generate a file-based directory structure of all the message to search on. Can you still download these? I was on ftp2.freebsd.org looking around and I didn't see them anywhere. PS - I am not subscribed, so please reply directly to my email. Thanks John ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
weird problem following 4.10-STABLE build....
After upgrading to 4.10-STABLE I have noticed some weird issues with email. My remote clients are unable to connect to the mail server, even though they can access websites on it. Since they arent even getting to the server, the logs show nothing. At first I suspected networking issues. I checked everything and there dont seem to be any problems. The only thing I changed when doing the upgrade was I increased kern.maxfiles to 12288. Also, my top level ISP does not delegate reverse authority. So the mail server ip reverses to something else when outside my network. Any ideas? Thanks John ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: (2) rsh and rcp problems between Solaris and FreeBSD
One more thing. Apparently, if I do 'rsh -n host cmd' on the Solaris box, it no longer hangs, and I can do it back to back indefinitely. Say I do ten of them, 5 secs apart. I still see the following 10 times in netstat: tcp4 0 0 mx100.841 embryo.bluebell..1014 TIME_WAIT After 30 secs they go away. On Solaris 2.6, the -n to rsh is: -n Redirect the input of rsh to /dev/null. You sometimes need this option to avoid unfor- tunate interactions between rsh and the shell which invokes it. For example, if you are running rsh and invoke a rsh in the back- ground without redirecting its input away from the terminal, it will block even if no reads are posted by the remote command. The -n option will prevent this. This doesn't affect rcp, so those are still slow. The only other thing is that I am going through a firewall, from an internal network to a dmz. -John On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Matthew Seaman wrote: > On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 11:42:41PM -0500, John Von Essen wrote: > > > > I have a Solaris 2.6 box that has been sending data to a Solaris 8 box > > via rsh and rcp. > > > > I finally changed the Solaris 8 box to a FreeBSD 4.9-STABLE machine. > > > > Unfortunately, I am noticing alot of problems with my rsh and rcp > > calls. Again, the rsh/rcp calls are being initiated on my Solaris 2.6 > > and are hitting a FreeBSD 4.9-STABLE box. > > > > Here is what happens: > > > > My first rsh works, but if I try another rsh within a few seconds it > > takes a really long time (30 - 60 sec) to return - but it does return > > successful. If I issue my rsh calls every 2 minutes, it returns quick > > everytime. But if I do rsh calls to close together (5 sec delays) they > > hang for a long time. > > Now that is weird. 30-60 second delay sounds like classic DNS > breakage, but in that case you'ld see it the first time you connected > and probably subsequent times. > > How are you doing name resolution on this system -- host files, NIS, > DNS, something else? Are you using Kerberos at all? Does toggling > the use of the '-D' and '-n' flags in inetd.conf on the FreeBSD side > make any difference? > > Hmmm... does this happen all of the time, or do you get a grace period > of a few minutes immediately after rebooting the FreeBSD box? Are you > perhaps ending up with an awful lot of connections sitting in > CLOSE_WAIT stage on the FBSD box? > > > The rcp behaves the same way - but with an added oddity... I can't seem > > to 'rcp -r' directories. For example, say I have /tmp/test and in there > > I have three files (a, b, and c.). When I try to rcp -r that directory, > > I get the following: > > > > # rcp -r /tmp/test host:/tmp > > rcp: /tmp/test/a/b: Not a directory > > rcp: /tmp/test/a/b/c: Not a directory > > > > Very weird! > > Does saying: > > # rcp -r /tmp/test host:/tmp/ > > (note the trailing '/') make a difference? This is by analogy to > cp(1) where trailing slashes do have a similar sort of effect -- I > think that's a feature of BSD-ish Unices but not SysV-ish flavours. > > > Anyone have any ideas? If I can't get this resolved I am going to have > > to go back to the old SUN to SUN setup and scrap the FreeBSD machine. > > rcp(1) and rsh(1) are really considered as legacy stuff on FreeBSD > nowadays. Most people will strongly advise you to use ssh(1) and > scp(1) instead -- those are standard on Solaris 9 but you'll have to > compile yourself up a copy on Solaris 2.6. You can use key based > authentication with ssh-agent(1) in order to avoid having to put in > passwords all the time: see the SSH FAQ at > > http://www.snailbook.com/faq/no-passphrase.auto.html > > Note too that sshd(8) under FreeBSD disallows root access by default, > but there's a pretty obvious control in the /etc/ssh/sshd.conf config > file. > > Cheers, > > Matthew > > -- > Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks > Savill Way > PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow > Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK > ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: rsh and rcp problems between Solaris and FreeBSD
I can do two rsh's back to back with no problems, its the third (and 4th and so on) that hang. On the FreeBSD side, after the first rsh, netstat shows: tcp4 0 0 mx100.851 embryo.bluebell..1021 TIME_WAIT tcp4 0 0 mx100.shellembryo.bluebell..1022 TIME_WAIT Those connections stay around for awhile, about 30 seconds. Only when they disappear does the next rsh work. As for the rcp, I was missing a trailing slash, apparently rcp -r syntax between Solaris and FreeBSD is a little different. So the rcp's work, but that take just as long as the rsh calls. As for name resolution, the Solaris box uses dns, and so does FreeBSD. Both have some entries in the hosts file. -John On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Matthew Seaman wrote: > On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 11:42:41PM -0500, John Von Essen wrote: > > > > I have a Solaris 2.6 box that has been sending data to a Solaris 8 box > > via rsh and rcp. > > > > I finally changed the Solaris 8 box to a FreeBSD 4.9-STABLE machine. > > > > Unfortunately, I am noticing alot of problems with my rsh and rcp > > calls. Again, the rsh/rcp calls are being initiated on my Solaris 2.6 > > and are hitting a FreeBSD 4.9-STABLE box. > > > > Here is what happens: > > > > My first rsh works, but if I try another rsh within a few seconds it > > takes a really long time (30 - 60 sec) to return - but it does return > > successful. If I issue my rsh calls every 2 minutes, it returns quick > > everytime. But if I do rsh calls to close together (5 sec delays) they > > hang for a long time. > > Now that is weird. 30-60 second delay sounds like classic DNS > breakage, but in that case you'ld see it the first time you connected > and probably subsequent times. > > How are you doing name resolution on this system -- host files, NIS, > DNS, something else? Are you using Kerberos at all? Does toggling > the use of the '-D' and '-n' flags in inetd.conf on the FreeBSD side > make any difference? > > Hmmm... does this happen all of the time, or do you get a grace period > of a few minutes immediately after rebooting the FreeBSD box? Are you > perhaps ending up with an awful lot of connections sitting in > CLOSE_WAIT stage on the FBSD box? > > > The rcp behaves the same way - but with an added oddity... I can't seem > > to 'rcp -r' directories. For example, say I have /tmp/test and in there > > I have three files (a, b, and c.). When I try to rcp -r that directory, > > I get the following: > > > > # rcp -r /tmp/test host:/tmp > > rcp: /tmp/test/a/b: Not a directory > > rcp: /tmp/test/a/b/c: Not a directory > > > > Very weird! > > Does saying: > > # rcp -r /tmp/test host:/tmp/ > > (note the trailing '/') make a difference? This is by analogy to > cp(1) where trailing slashes do have a similar sort of effect -- I > think that's a feature of BSD-ish Unices but not SysV-ish flavours. > > > Anyone have any ideas? If I can't get this resolved I am going to have > > to go back to the old SUN to SUN setup and scrap the FreeBSD machine. > > rcp(1) and rsh(1) are really considered as legacy stuff on FreeBSD > nowadays. Most people will strongly advise you to use ssh(1) and > scp(1) instead -- those are standard on Solaris 9 but you'll have to > compile yourself up a copy on Solaris 2.6. You can use key based > authentication with ssh-agent(1) in order to avoid having to put in > passwords all the time: see the SSH FAQ at > > http://www.snailbook.com/faq/no-passphrase.auto.html > > Note too that sshd(8) under FreeBSD disallows root access by default, > but there's a pretty obvious control in the /etc/ssh/sshd.conf config > file. > > Cheers, > > Matthew > > -- > Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks > Savill Way > PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow > Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK > ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
rsh and rcp problems between Solaris and FreeBSD
I have a Solaris 2.6 box that has been sending data to a Solaris 8 box via rsh and rcp. I finally changed the Solaris 8 box to a FreeBSD 4.9-STABLE machine. Unfortunately, I am noticing alot of problems with my rsh and rcp calls. Again, the rsh/rcp calls are being initiated on my Solaris 2.6 and are hitting a FreeBSD 4.9-STABLE box. Here is what happens: My first rsh works, but if I try another rsh within a few seconds it takes a really long time (30 - 60 sec) to return - but it does return successful. If I issue my rsh calls every 2 minutes, it returns quick everytime. But if I do rsh calls to close together (5 sec delays) they hang for a long time. The rcp behaves the same way - but with an added oddity... I can't seem to 'rcp -r' directories. For example, say I have /tmp/test and in there I have three files (a, b, and c.). When I try to rcp -r that directory, I get the following: # rcp -r /tmp/test host:/tmp rcp: /tmp/test/a/b: Not a directory rcp: /tmp/test/a/b/c: Not a directory Very weird! Anyone have any ideas? If I can't get this resolved I am going to have to go back to the old SUN to SUN setup and scrap the FreeBSD machine. Thanks John ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: what actually happens with rejected mail?
The reject email summary will most likely never reach the sender, but things like "User Unknown" are communicated during the SMTP conversation, in which the sending spammer will get some info indicating that you are a bad recipient. Spammers usually try their best to get rid of addresses that they know is bad. This is why milters are so good. You can have the milter send back a 550 User unknown when you encounter spam. John On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Chuck Swiger wrote: > Marco Beishuizen wrote: > [ ... ] > > Everything is working fine, but now I wonder what happens with the > > spammail that is being rejected? Are those spammails being deleted? Or > > are they send back to my ISP? My maillogfiles show that spam is > > correctly filtered, and a message with the errorcode is send back. But > > who else is seeing those errormessages? > > Probably nobody. Normally, when your mail server rejects an incoming message > with a 5xx, the sending MTA is supposed to generate a DSN to the sender, letting > them know that their attempt to mail you failed (with the reason you gave). > > In the case of spam, that address is typically forged and the spamware MTA may > well simply drop the reject. > > -- > -Chuck > > > ___ > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: rc.sendmail
The problem with depending on sendmail -bd -q30m to clean out /var/spool/mqueue is that it is slow! This is why I want to run a separate Persistent Queue runner for mqueue. In my case I have a fallback mx server which gets all the "bad" email (undeliverable, slow recipient, etc.,.). The problem is sometimes the fallback is under heavy load, and mail to the fallback gets queued on my slave nodes. The mail has to get off the slave nodes quickly, this is why I want a persistent queue runner for mqueue and clientmqueue. The fallback machine is doing the standard -bd -q1h and -Ac -q1h, which works fine. Obviously this all comes down to preference. In my case I WANT a listening daemon, mqueue runner, and clientmqueue runner. I am surprised that rc.sendmail wont grant my request. In the end, I will simply re-code rc.sendmail to do what I want. But again, I dont understand the harm of having rc.sendmail behave the way I want it to behave. If I select sendmail_outbound_enable="YES" - what is the harm is doing what I ask - why does rc.sendmail have to get in my way. John On Sunday, June 22, 2003, at 04:14 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote: On Sat, Jun 21, 2003 at 11:50:21PM -0400, John Von Essen wrote: Okay, before people send more responses... Yes, I have looked at man rc.sendmail and I do understand how everything works. My question is WHY was it designed to behave they way it does? Why isn't rc.sendmail setup such that you can start the listening daemon for inbound, queue runner for outbound, and the msp queue runner. (Currently, you cant start that config with rc.conf and rc.sendmail due to rc.sendmail's logic) You seem to be under the misconception that running sendmail with the '-bd' flag so that it listens on port 25 for incoming messages somehow negates the '-q15m' flag that tells it to scan and process the mail queue every fifteen minutes. ie. you don't need separate sm-mta and sm-queue processes for those functions, as the sm-mta will do both. If your site handles a sufficient volume of e-mail that running separate listener and queue flushing daemons would be advantageous, then I'd recommend looking at an alternative MTA: one of exim, postfix or qmail should be appropriate -- the FreeBSD.org mail system pumps out enormous amounts of mailing list traffic using postfix. Obviously, you can't run the localhost submission daemon AND the port 25 remote daemon listening for inbound. For that case, it is either one or the other - so that part of rc.sendmail makes sense. But if I select "YES" to enable both the mqueue runner and the clientmqueue runner in rc.conf, the rc.sendmail script will not perform this. The logic of rc.sendmail will only start mqueue if sendmail and sendmail submit are set to "NO". Likewise, if you select sendmail "YES", then the only other thing you can run is the clientmqueue runner. In my case, I need to run the sendmail daemon, the mqueue runner, and the clientmqueue runner. In other words, I need the following at startup: /usr/sbin/sendmail -L sm-mta -bd -q1h /usr/sbin/sendmail -L sm-mqueue -qp5m Why not just run: /usr/sbin/sendmail -L sm-mta -bd -q5m ? The overhead of sendmail forking a child every five minutes is trivial. /usr/sbin/sendmail -L sm-clientmqueue -Ac -qp5m I'm not sure either why you want to flush the queue quite so frequently. Sendmail will attempt to deliver any new message immediately. It's only if the other side can't receive the message straight away that the messagegets stuck into the queue. Any message held in this way should stay queued for a sufficient time to allow the other end a chance to clear whatever problem it was causing the hold-up. rc.conf and rc.sendmail cannot startup what I want. As a result, I have to do sendmail_enable="NONE", and then from rc.local startup what I want manually. Why can't rc.sendmail be designed such that whatever has "YES" in rc.conf will get started? If you think you can do it better, please do submit patches. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks Savill Way PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Granting access on MySQL
Konrad, What errors did you get? Your GRANT command seems unusual. You would do something like: GRANT ALL ON databasename.* TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] IDENTIFIED BY "password" or GRANT ALL ON databasename.* TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] IDENTIFIED BY "password" The second is if you connect remotely. Obviously, the user has to exist before you do the GRANT. Also, it is not wise to do GRANT ALL on a database unless the user is going to be at superuser level. You do the GRANT at the table level. Say the table is account_info. You would do: GRANT ALL ON databasename.account_info TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] IDENTIFIED BY "password" If you don't want to do ALL, you can be specific: GRANT DELETE,INSERT,SELECT,UPDATE ON databasename.account_info TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] IDENTIFIED BY "password" If you still have trouble look at the tables in the mysql database, in particular, the db and user tables. -John On Sunday, June 22, 2003, at 06:45 PM, Konrad Scorciapino wrote: Hello, I need to grant a user access to a database. How can I do it? This is what I've tried: mysql> grant all on databasename.* to username; I got no error messages, but I after connecting as the user, I couldn't use the database. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" John Von Essen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) President, Essenz Consulting (www.essenz.com) Phone: (800) 248-1736 Fax: (800) 852-3387 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: rc.sendmail
Okay, before people send more responses... Yes, I have looked at man rc.sendmail and I do understand how everything works. My question is WHY was it designed to behave they way it does? Why isn't rc.sendmail setup such that you can start the listening daemon for inbound, queue runner for outbound, and the msp queue runner. (Currently, you cant start that config with rc.conf and rc.sendmail due to rc.sendmail's logic) Obviously, you can't run the localhost submission daemon AND the port 25 remote daemon listening for inbound. For that case, it is either one or the other - so that part of rc.sendmail makes sense. But if I select "YES" to enable both the mqueue runner and the clientmqueue runner in rc.conf, the rc.sendmail script will not perform this. The logic of rc.sendmail will only start mqueue if sendmail and sendmail submit are set to "NO". Likewise, if you select sendmail "YES", then the only other thing you can run is the clientmqueue runner. In my case, I need to run the sendmail daemon, the mqueue runner, and the clientmqueue runner. In other words, I need the following at startup: /usr/sbin/sendmail -L sm-mta -bd -q1h /usr/sbin/sendmail -L sm-mqueue -qp5m /usr/sbin/sendmail -L sm-clientmqueue -Ac -qp5m rc.conf and rc.sendmail cannot startup what I want. As a result, I have to do sendmail_enable="NONE", and then from rc.local startup what I want manually. Why can't rc.sendmail be designed such that whatever has "YES" in rc.conf will get started? John On Saturday, June 21, 2003, at 10:53 PM, Makoto Matsushita wrote: john> Could someone please explain rc.sendmail to me? Is rc.sendmail(8) not enough for you? -- - Makoto `MAR' Matsushita ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
rc.sendmail
Could someone please explain rc.sendmail to me? I am unclear why it does what it does. I currently have everything enabled in rc.conf: mta_start_script="/etc/rc.sendmail" sendmail_enable="YES" (1) sendmail_flags="-L sm-mta -bd -q30m" sendmail_submit_enable="YES" (2) sendmail_submit_flags="-L sm-mta -bd -q30m -ODaemonPortOptions=Addr=localhost" sendmail_outbound_enable="YES" (3) sendmail_outbound_flags="-L sm-queue -q30m" sendmail_msp_queue_enable="YES" (4) sendmail_msp_queue_flags="-L sm-msp-queue -Ac -q30m" With the above settings, when I do a 'make start', only (1) and (4) get started. If I set sendmail_enable="NO", then only (2) and (4) start. If I set sendmail_enable="NO" and sendmail_submit="NO", then only (3) and (4). This doesn't make any sense to me. For starters, why would I ever want just (3) and (4) running? Furthermore, I can't seem to get (1), (3), and (4) to all start together. I imagine people would want those three since you need your main sendmail running, and you could have a need for an "always-on" queue runner for mqueue and clientmqueue. Thanks. John ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: sendmail
Sendmail's configuration file is horrendous to "humans" because it is not intended to be messed around with by humans - only the beginning of sendmail.cf should be touched (i.e. modifying path to sendmail.cw). REASON: You use a .mc file and m4 to build a respective sendmail.cf config file. In the .mc file you declare the features you want to use - within the .mc file you do your personal configs. The .mc file is very "readable" and is easy to work with. -John Von Essen On Wednesday, December 4, 2002, at 12:35 PM, Yann Golanski wrote: Quoth Peter Jamrisko on Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 18:08:28 +0100 OK Boys, But I assume it must working with sendmail and then can I install another MTA. Sendmail has a horrendouse configuration file that takes years to understand much less change. Other MTAs such as Exim, Postfix and Qmail are better designed and have clearer configuratin files. Have a look at all three (www.exim.org, www.postfix.org, www.qmail.org) and get the one that you like best. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -=*=- www.kierun.org PGP: 009D 7287 C4A7 FD4F 1680 06E4 F751 7006 9DE2 6318 IRC: nick kierun, server spod.uk.amiganet.org, channel #sanctus NNGS: nick kierun, server nngs.cosmic.org, port 9696. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: Mail Server Advice
Uhh When did Sendmail become a third-string MTA? -John Von Essen On Friday, November 29, 2002, at 12:17 AM, Ber Ez wrote: now i'm facing a new battle ,postfix vs qmail To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: RAID Recomendation
Alvaro, For a hardware solution, I would recommend the Adaptec 2400A - which supports up to four drives. The retail kit includes cables and goes for around $340. This card allows you to boot from the array. -John Von Essen On Thursday, November 21, 2002, at 01:51 PM, Alvaro Gil wrote: I am in the process of upgrading my P120 server to a more modern PII. I want to have a RAID setup because i am pretty paranoid about data loss and setup time. Yes I do have backups of everything, but I want to avoid downtime if possible. I would like a RAID 1 setup of two ATA 100 hard disks. My questions are: 1 - Can I do this with software? I have read sections 12 and 13 but I am still a bit confused if I can back up the entire disk? That is, if one fails will it boot with the other? I would like to mirror everything, including the OS. 2 - If I need a card what card would you recommend? Price is the main concern, performance is not, I just want security. Also a two channel is suffice. Thanks very much, any info appreciated. -- Alvaro Gil http://www.AlvaroGil.com '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 15 psi '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: please help: how do I replace words
Use the following with the -e option, not the -n option: sed -e 's/192.168.0.1/172.16.0.1/g' in-file > out-file With in-file containing: abc.com 192.168.0.1 localhost.abc.com 127.0.0.1 And resulting out-file containing: abc.com 172.16.0.1 localhost.abc.com 127.0.0.1 -John Von Essen On Thursday, November 21, 2002, at 02:23 PM, adrian kok wrote: Hi all I have problem to replace words from 192.168.0.1 to 172.16.0.1 in file abc.com file content: abc.com 192.168.0.1 localhost.abc.com 127.0.0.1 I tried: sed -n 's/192.168.0.1/172.16.0.1/w abc.com.tmp' abc.com file abc.com.tmp only shows l line abc.com 172.16.0.1 and missing localhost.abc.com 127.0.0.1 I tried and it is same! sed -n 's/192.168.0.1/172.16.0.1/gw abc.com.tmp' abc.com I can't use perl because the sed is within shell script TIA ___ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com.hk address at http://mail.english.yahoo.com.hk To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message Do: To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
perl version in -STABLE build
I am curious about something. When you cvsup to -STABLE and do a make world, the version of perl that is built is 5.00503. The problem is that more and more perl mods require 5.6 or higher. Even some stuff in ports which depends on perl requires 5.6 or higher. According to http://www.cpan.org/src/README.html the stable release of perl is 5.8.0. So whats going on? Shouldn't -STABLE build Perl 5.8 now? -John Von Essen To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Boot manager...
Im curious about something. On my machine, the freebsd boot manager displays something like: F1 FreeBSD F2 DOS F5 Drive 1 Nothing will boot on F5, its just an extra drive I use for my /usr mount. Question is... is it possible to change that "Drive 1" label to something else? If so, I would like to know how to do it. Thanks... -john To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: awk to remove backet
Im confused. Wouldn't s/(\([^)]*\))/\1/g just replace exactly what it finds? I think the outer ()'s got mixed up. To take (hello) and change it to hello, you would do: sed 's/\(([\w]+)\)/\1/g' \w is fine if you only want the cases where text only is inside. -John Von Essen On Monday, November 11, 2002, at 04:57 PM, Benoit Lacherez wrote: What about sed 's/(\([^)]*\))/\1/g' ? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
