Re: sorting pathnames by basename
On Monday, August 19, 2002, at 05:32 PM, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
>
> Bill Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Use Python
>
> Please show us the code.
#!/usr/bin/python
#
# basenamesort.py
#
# Unix-style filter that sorts a newline-separated
# list of files by the file basename
#
# Example usage: cat files.txt | basenamesort.py
import sys
import os
tempDict = {}
for line in sys.stdin.xreadlines():
tempDict[os.path.basename(line)] = line.rstrip()
sorted = tempDict.keys()
for key in sorted:
print tempDict[key]
# Ugly even for Python, but it does what Michael originally wanted.
--
Erik Price
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Somewhat OT: Information Wave bans RIAA
On Monday, August 19, 2002, at 01:16 PM, Ben Boulanger wrote: > http://www.informationwave.net/news/20020819riaa.php > > IWT Bans RIAA From Accessing Its Network > > August 19, 2002 > > Information Wave Technologies has announced... You left out the coolest part! " Information Wave will also deploy peer-to-peer clients on the Gnutella network from its security research and development network (honeynet) which will offer files with popular song titles derived from the Billboard Top 100 maintained by VNU eMedia. No copyright violations will take place, these files will merely have arbitrary sizes similar to the length of a 3 to 4 minute MP3 audio file encoded at 128kbps. Clients which connect to our peer-to-peer clients, and then afterwards attempt to illegally access the network will be immediately blacklisted from Information Wave's network. The data collected will be actively maintained and distributed from our network operations site." Erik -- Erik Price email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: http://www.mslinux.org/
I cannot believe someone would desecrate Tux like that, putting the Winblows symbol on him and all. That is a really sick, twisted joke. He he, cool. Jeff K. At 07:40 AM 8/19/2002 -0400, you wrote: >Check out Microsoft's distro of Linux: > > http://www.mslinux.org/ > >___ >gnhlug-discuss mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: sorting pathnames by basename
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, Kevin D. Clark hath spake thusly: > > BTW, this is actually a fairly good example of > > why my immune system always concludes that I'm > > in physical danger when perl code is visible... I would point out that it's just as possible to write virtually unintelligible code in C as it is in Perl. The Twelve Days of Christmas always comes to mind... > Honestly, I wrote that one-liner more with the intent of showing you > how cool Perl is, not with the intent of scaring you off from Perl. And yet the example you provided was far more suited to the latter... I've made some effort to learn Perl, and have written more than a handful of programs using it, some of which were long, and some of which were useful (though not necessarily both). The problem I have always had with Perl is twofold: 1. Perl seems to favor supporting a variety of features with obscure, meaningless, two-character variables that might be clearer with flags or arguments to functions that make use of it. An example is the $| variable... Additionally, it seems to like to take concepts that are common in other languages, and do them in an entirely different way. An example of this would be the equivalent of a structure in C (or Pascal or whatever). Whereas in many ways, Perl seems to have gone out of its way to work like other common Unix tools/languages (shell scripting, C, sed/grep), in others it seems to go out of its way to do things in such a way as to be as confusing as possible. 2. The people who like to program Perl seem to have a propensity to prefer to write code which takes advantage of all the obscure features, and generally to write code which is unreadable. I reject the notion that it is not possible to write readable code in Perl. I prefer to think that Perlheads just like it that way. =8^) - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9YXzIdjdlQoHP510RApskAJ9ev+dn3CYlwRdo6AdBY5EhRfaCWACgqDGg 1cCbs9Ws6MbZv1UKBJRYSqY= =8Jei -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Somewhat OT: Information Wave bans RIAA
On Mon, 2002-08-19 at 13:30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Yeah, at first I was pretty happy with this announcement, but now I'm > thinking it's just a form of censorship. They have no right to tell > me what sites I visit. If I were a customer of theirs, I'd be paying > for *Internet* access. That means the whole Internet. Not just the > sites that they've deemed safe for me to visit. If you want the whole internet experience, I take it you don't filter spam. You are paying for access to it, after all. Spam is actually relevant here. One of the ways ISPs deal with it is by blacklisting sources of it and cutting them off as much as they can. IWT is starting a blacklist that is just as legitimate and perfectly targeted. The RIAA has announced its intention to crack any boxes that it wants to and has even bought a bill that would legalize it for them. That makes the RIAA a big security threat, even bigger when you consider that they have no oversight and a long record of not caring about little things like rights. Any contact with their network makes you vulnerable. Any security type would want their network protected from snooping of any kind. Especially from a company that wants to shut down anyone it doesn't like and is protected against liability for any damage it does. An ISP blacklisting a company that does this, or even just announces that it plans to, is protecting its customers and being a good citizen. I think the idea is going to catch on. -Ryan ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: sorting pathnames by basename
Bill Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Use Python Please show us the code. Thanks, --kevin -- Kevin D. Clark / Cetacean Networks / Portsmouth, N.H. (USA) cetaceannetworks.com!kclark (GnuPG ID: B280F24E) alumni.unh.edu!kdc ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: sorting pathnames by basename
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael O'Donnell) writes:
> Thank you. I think. For the benefit of those
> here assembled, please supply an explanation.
OK, since you asked.
You have a list of stuff that you want sorted. The problem is is that
you want your stuff sorted according to a field contained in the input
(the last field). Further complicating matters is the fact that this
field is located at a non-constant place in the input field.
(I initially thought about using "sort", but then I had trouble with
the sort options, and I gave up and used my favorite tool: Perl)
Now, just to complicate matters, suppose your input consisted of a
million filenames (or so). How to do this efficiently?
Big suggestion: finding all of those comparison fields, once per
sort comparison, is going to be really expensive...
The solution: take the input, generate a list from each line, each
element in the list consists of a tuple consisting of the original
line plus the comparison key. Sort the tuple-list using the
comparison key, and then after the sort is done, strip off all of the
comparison keys, returning the original list ({sans} tuples), sorted.
This is actually a well-known technique in Perl, called the
Schwartzian Transform. Look it up on the web -- there are plenty of
good descriptions of it.
> BTW, this is actually a fairly good example of
> why my immune system always concludes that I'm
> in physical danger when perl code is visible...
Honestly, I wrote that one-liner more with the intent of showing you
how cool Perl is, not with the intent of scaring you off from Perl.
Regards,
--kevin
--
Kevin D. Clark / Cetacean Networks / Portsmouth, N.H. (USA)
cetaceannetworks.com!kclark (GnuPG ID: B280F24E)
alumni.unh.edu!kdc
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: sorting pathnames by basename
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > In a message dated: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 15:46:40 EDT > Michael O'Donnell said: > > >Suggestions for improvement welcome. > > Use perl. > -- Use Python ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: sorting pathnames by basename
>[pause to pull-start the 500cc swiss-army chainsaw...]
>
>perl -e 'print map { $_->[0], "\n" } sort { $a->[1] cmp $b->[1] } map { [$_, @{
>chomp; m#/[^/]*$#}[0]] } '
>
>Hope this helps,
Thank you. I think. For the benefit of those
here assembled, please supply an explanation.
BTW, this is actually a fairly good example of
why my immune system always concludes that I'm
in physical danger when perl code is visible...
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: sorting pathnames by basename
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, at 3:46pm, Michael O'Donnell wrote: > My current approach is a bit clunky but works as long as the pathnames in > question contain no spaces, thus: > > sed -e 's;/\([^/]*\)$; \1;' | sort -bfd +1 | sed -e 's; ;/;' Suggestion: Use a star (*) instead of a space. Filenames containing spaces are not uncommon, while filenames containing shell meta-characters are still decidedly rare. -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: sorting pathnames by basename
In a message dated: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 16:14:11 EDT Michael O'Donnell said: >So, did you suggest perl just to be a pest, or would >it actually offer an advantage? Let me guess: in perl, >the construct "$@!$*->___++" does exactly what I want... Well, I can't really hope to play "One-upmanship" with Kevin, nor could I ever attempt to come up with something as concise as he did. However, I can offer you this. Perl has a lot of sorting, and file-finding modules built into it. That, combined with hashes, could enable you to write some pretty good file sorting code which is actually readable :) -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: sorting pathnames by basename
>>Suggestions for improvement welcome. > >Use perl. I might first need to use some of those immuno-suppressive drugs they give to transplant recipients because, although I'd never deny perl's obvious utility, I think I might be allergic to it; every time I look at some perl code I get the heaves and the hives... So, did you suggest perl just to be a pest, or would it actually offer an advantage? Let me guess: in perl, the construct "$@!$*->___++" does exactly what I want... ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
suspend on laptops with GeForce2go chips
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Anyone have experience getting a laptop with an NVidia GeForce to suspend to disk? IIRC last time I tried this, it caused problems that caused the laptop to lock up and not recover. OTOH, I could just be remembering badly. It's rough getting old... =8^) - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9YVP9djdlQoHP510RAvO8AKCphri1y2SlIeyScUE8pDXIF4AS0QCfef6+ xM0Wqw9Tpuqg7ghA6tX3vok= =1QNN -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: sorting pathnames by basename
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael O'Donnell) writes:
> Given a list of pathnames, I'd like to be able to
> sort that list by the basename of each file in the
> list
[pause to pull-start the 500cc swiss-army chainsaw...]
perl -e 'print map { $_->[0], "\n" } sort { $a->[1] cmp $b->[1] } map { [$_, @{ chomp;
m#/[^/]*$#}[0]] } '
Hope this helps,
--kevin
--
Kevin D. Clark / Cetacean Networks / Portsmouth, N.H. (USA)
cetaceannetworks.com!kclark (GnuPG ID: B280F24E)
alumni.unh.edu!kdc
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Red Hat has a file called /etc/redhat-release. Debian has a file called > /etc/debian_release (or something close to that; I don't have a Debian > system to check). Other distros do similar things. Of course, this > leads to an identification algorithm which consists of a giant, messy > switch/case structure. Ugly, but often better than nothing. moon@server:~$ cat /etc/mandrake-release Mandrake Linux release 8.1 (Vitamin) for i586 moon@server:~$ -- Bill Mullen 4:12pm, 2002-08-19 ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
MELBA Meeting Wednesday night
When: Wednesday, 21 August 2002, 19:30ish Where: Martha's Exchange, Nashua (2nd floor) Why:Because we haven't gotten together there in a while. (and to heckle Ben :) Topic: We have none, but if people want to attempt a mini-install fest, bring CDs of the distro of your choice, and we'll aim to help you install. Other than that, we'll just get together and hang out :) Dinner will be at 18:00ish in the usual corner. Walk in the front door and head towards the large copper kettles to the right. At the end of the bar turn left and go all the way to the back. The geeky looking crowd talking about bizarre and arcane stuff will be us. -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: sorting pathnames by basename
In a message dated: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 15:46:40 EDT Michael O'Donnell said: >Suggestions for improvement welcome. Use perl. -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
sorting pathnames by basename
Given a list of pathnames, I'd like to be able to sort that list by the basename of each file in the list, ie. the pathname q/r/s/t/u/v/aaa ...would sort ahead of //bbb ...because the basename 'aaa' sorts lexicographically ahead of 'bbb'. My current approach is a bit clunky but works as long as the pathnames in question contain no spaces, thus: sed -e 's;/\([^/]*\)$; \1;' | sort -bfd +1 | sed -e 's; ;/;' ...which replaces the last slash in each pathname with a space, sorts that list of dual-field space-delimited records keyed on the second field, and then replaces the slashes. Suggestions for improvement welcome. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, Mark Komarinski hath spake thusly: > On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 11:15:36AM -0400, mike ledoux wrote: > > I'm curious; just how do you identify if a system is Debian or Red Hat? > > I've yet to find a reliable method. > > /etc/issue will tell you. Many system administrators wisely modify /etc/issue so that it will NOT tell you. Providing this information tells an attacker exactly which exploits are most likely going to work against the system. So this is not reliable. - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9YRCKdjdlQoHP510RAnqoAKCZvHfGsZkWY8Iofs1WgPMGisRN3QCggVEI gyNi6UVpOtkzPOJcd0zVJjQ= =RNCb -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, Jeff Macdonald hath spake thusly: > Ok, how about /proc/version? /proc/version contains the version of the kernel, the user@host it was built on, and the version of the compiler it was built with. The system it was built on need not necessarily be the machine it is running on (as is the case with ALL distribution kernels), or for that matter eventhe same operating system... It could (at least theoretically) be cross-compiled on a Solaris machine. This information is not helpful at all. - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9YTsYdjdlQoHP510RArjqAJ97rXt99nZaUTMRSn+hqeU0Aene5wCfX8Ri aoYLIVqw3cd49cJ2EGOjmu8= =gH4o -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
On 19 Aug 2002, at 2:21pm, Jeff Macdonald wrote:
> Ok, how about /proc/version?
That just appears to be the union of the information contained in "uname
-a" and "gcc -v". In particular, it does not actually give the distribution
anywhere. I suppose you could maintain a table which mapped compiler
releases to distribution releases, but that strikes me as being even uglier
than the /etc/*-{release,version} hacks. And who is to say the same
compiler won't get used for two different {distributions, releases}?
--
Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not |
| necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or |
| organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. |
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
Ok, how about /proc/version? [jeff@server1 jeff]$ more /etc/redhat-release Red Hat Linux release 6.2 (Zoot) [jeff@server1 jeff]$ more /proc/version Linux version 2.2.17-14.8RS ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version egcs-2.91.66 19990314/Linux (egcs-1.1.2 release)) #1 Fri Apr 13 01:58:55 CDT 2001 [jeff@server1 jeff]$ uname -a Linux server1.virtualbuilder.com 2.2.17-14.8RS #1 Fri Apr 13 01:58:55 CDT 2001 i586 unknown [jeff@server1 jeff]$ and [parser@jmacdonald-work mail-parser]$ more /etc/redhat-release Red Hat Linux release 7.3 (Valhalla) [parser@jmacdonald-work mail-parser]$ more /proc/version Linux version 2.4.18-4 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 2.96 2731 (Red Hat Linux 7.3 2.96-110)) #1 Thu May 2 18:47:38 EDT 2002 [parser@jmacdonald-work mail-parser]$ uname -a Linux jmacdonald-work.e-dialog.com 2.4.18-4 #1 Thu May 2 18:47:38 EDT 2002 i686 unknown Still a chore to parse. On Mon, 2002-08-19 at 13:50, Jeff Macdonald wrote: > How about using GCC? > > $ gcc -v > Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/2.96/specs > gcc version 2.96 2731 (Red Hat Linux 7.3 2.96-112) > > > On Mon, 2002-08-19 at 11:26, Michael O'Donnell wrote: > > > > > > > I'm curious; just how do you identify if a system is Debian or > > > Red Hat? I've yet to find a reliable method. > > > > Wouldn't the presence of (some combination of) the various > > apt-related directories be a reliable sign that you had > > a Debian box? Like, say, /etc/apt, /var/cache/apt and > > /var/lib/apt. Bonus points for /etc/debian_version... > > > > I don't know much about RedHat but I'd assume the > > corresponding RPM stuff could serve the same purpose. > > > > ___ > > gnhlug-discuss mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss > > > ___ > gnhlug-discuss mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Somewhat OT: Information Wave bans RIAA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > So, as Ben S. said: > > "And so it begins..." > > It will be amusing who sues for what, and what the counter-suits will > be as well :) "I will miss this...when it is gone." --kevin -- Kevin D. Clark / Cetacean Networks / Portsmouth, N.H. (USA) cetaceannetworks.com!kclark (GnuPG ID: B280F24E) alumni.unh.edu!kdc ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Somewhat OT: Information Wave bans RIAA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, [EMAIL PROTECTED] hath spake thusly: > (not that I have *ever* gone to the RIAA site before, or would ever want > to in the future, I just think this is a dangerous and slippery slope > to climb!) Know your enemy. - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD4DBQE9YTTUdjdlQoHP510RAlVLAJdMzXs/RDsfjPJ7ZDFutVkN+oWaAJwJXc2W 6Adexdv9pFOKvMxOYpOa2w== =JW3H -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, Mark Komarinski hath spake thusly: > On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 12:26:12PM -0400, Derek D. Martin wrote: > > At some point hitherto, Mark Komarinski hath spake thusly: > > > > Which most security-concious admins still remove or zero as a matter > > > > of course. Why tell the net-at-large what holes to look for? > > > > > > Uhm...how can you tell the contents of /etc/issue from the net? > > > > Telnet to the machine would be one way (assuming you can). But you > > seem to be assuming that your attacker will not be on your network. > > 70% or more of reported computer crime is done from the inside, > > according to the FBI. I concur with Ben and Mike. Said so in a post > > that I managed to munge my from: address... > > If the attacker is local, then they probably already know what > the distro and revision are, or can quickly find out without > resorting to looking at /etc/issue. Not if they don't have an account on the machine... > The CDs labeled "Debian" and "RedHat 7.3" on my desk are pretty good > indicators. Maybe I should store them in a safe? That Solaris 8 > box should probably go too. I've never worked in a place where the machines were homogenious. And yes, you should keep your media locked up. For other reasons than this... > This is a really strange discussion. You (collectively) want to know > what kind of distro you're running, but the tools you've been given > are security holes because they give the exact information you're > looking for! No. We have no tools that will reliably tell only authenticated users (who we must assume, for the purposes of this discussion, have legitimate authorized access to they system), what the distribution is. Running a command to identify a system on a system you have access to is not a security hole; even if you're an attacker. Because if you can do this, you've already gained access to the system. At such a point, it is always possible to determine what operating system the machine is running, though the means by which this is accomplished are not necessarily simple and/or convenient. > > Note that at least on newer Linux systems, there's also an > > /etc/issue.net, which is what you see if you telnet to a machine. > > Some older Unix systems, IIRC, use /etc/issue for both purposes. > > I remember writing about issue.net on Linux almost 5 years ago. > Solaris doesn't use issue. K. Hard to keep those kinds of details straight. Easiest to look at a running system, of which I have none that are not recent Linux systems, save one recent HP-UX system... - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9YTQodjdlQoHP510RAg68AKCY2mpvWhD6lp9/a5ouR7BqMplXDwCfU+Ts PQ3P12csEh3rYMvmWNISb2c= =k8Ob -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
In a message dated: 19 Aug 2002 13:50:17 EDT Jeff Macdonald said: >How about using GCC? > >$ gcc -v >Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/2.96/specs >gcc version 2.96 2731 (Red Hat Linux 7.3 2.96-112) H, interesting. However, it's not reliable, since I've seen many, many systems without gcc on them (like anything on a DMZ). -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Somewhat OT: Information Wave bans RIAA
In a message dated: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 13:46:12 EDT Ben Boulanger said: >On Mon, 19 Aug 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Yeah, at first I was pretty happy with this announcement, but now I'm >> thinking it's just a form of censorship. They have no right to tell >> me what sites I visit. If I were a customer of theirs, I'd be paying >> for *Internet* access. That means the whole Internet. Not just the >> sites that they've deemed safe for me to visit. > >They have every right to tell you what sites you can or cannot get to. >You're signing up for their service, not the other way around. You have >no "rights" to anything outside of what your contract says you have right >to... and even then, the contract usually says 'we have the right to >change this at any time'. Well, I can't find any such contract on their site. The best I could find was a sign-up form which allows me to fork over a paypal account or credit card number. However, they explicitly state that they are "a regional service provider providing Internet access, network consulting, colocation, and hosting solutions to the New York, New Jersey, Connecticut tri-state area." Last I checked, riaa.com was part of the "Internet". Now, there well may be a "Censorship clause" in the contract they insist I sign, but as I said, I could find no such thing available on their web site. What they're doing is tantamount to Verizon saying you can no longer call AT&T because "their service might cause you problems". >And likewise, you have every right to say "Sorry, you don't deserve my >money anymore". Yes I do. But my point was that they are stating on their web site that they provide internet access, but then restricting where you can go. They should say "We provide censored internet access." Which, technically, I guess they do with that news article. So, you're right, and I'm wrong. They are a private company, and can do whatever they like. Just like Blockbuster has the right to censor the movies they rent, and WalMart has the right to not sell certain movies and music. But it doesn't mean I have to like it :) (not that I have *ever* gone to the RIAA site before, or would ever want to in the future, I just think this is a dangerous and slippery slope to climb!) -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, mike ledoux hath spake thusly: > > I disagree. The solution is to provide a package specific to each > > distribution. Of course, your system admin has to pay attention... > > It would need to be named differently on each release so that it could > > not be inadvertently upgraded... > > I disagree. The solution is to fix uname to output the information it > claims to provide with the -s and -r switches: the operating system name > and release. On a Red Hat 7.3 system, that should be "Red Hat Linux" > and "7.3", *not* "Linux" and "2.4.18-5smp". I disagree. :) The OS is the kernel. This isn't really any different from the commercial world -- when the kernel is updated, often the output of uname -r and uname -v changes. It's a less obvious thing, because we're accustomed to the name of the kernel being the same as the overall product, and rarely care what the release and version are. In general in the commercial world, they don't care often enough for it to matter. And we don't have 30 different vendors shipping systems based on the Solaris kernel... > > Most distributions already do provide such a package. Of course, the > > sysadmin can always remove it... =8^) > > The distribution might provide such a package, but you need to already > know which distribution you're running on to know where to look for it, > since it isn't the same from one distro to another. This is irrelevant. My point was that the distributions can customize the new fields of the uname command based on what distribution-specific package was installed. This at least will provide a uniform interface for determining what the base installed distribution is. The alternative is to hard-code the value, and as has already been established, it would be very easy to install the wrong sh-utils package for your distribution. It's true that the distribution-specific package *could* also be wrong, but there's never any reason for it to be updated, except for the case of upgrading the entire distribution. It's unfortunate that the term operating system has come to be used to mean "the operating system, and all the application software our vendor has decided to ship with it" out of laziness. This has caused a number of problems. This is one of them. Another is Microsoft saying that there's no limit to the software that they can/should be able to make part of the operating system. Another is rms and GNU/Linux. We should prefer a different term to refer to the software distributed with an operating system. Maybe something like "operating environment" (actually I think I've seen this used before). But I suppose it doesn't matter, since it's unlikely to catch on amongst the masses who are asses, as we have already seen with attempts to distinguish things like kilobytes from 1000 bytes, or "hacker" from "cracker," or any number of other things. - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9YTJYdjdlQoHP510RAtPeAJ9j99zP09i96zIjVjyKXWyaqbuREwCbBoG5 chSTFoGpUcVwtd6VEQrbc3w= =Q5Ri -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: procmail rule
Ok, how about any non-english charset? On Mon, 2002-08-19 at 11:37, mike ledoux wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 11:15:00AM -0400, Jeff Macdonald wrote: > > anybody know a smart way to ignore any charset but US-ASCII? I currently > > have rules like this one: > > Not really, but that might not be a good idea anyway--you'd likely > block more mail than you intend. For example, this message is sent in > iso-8859-1, which is somewhat more than US-ASCII. You could recieve > english messages in any of the iso-8859-x sets if you correspond > with people from outside of the US, or in one of those Windows or Mac > character sets that are US-ASCII plus some stuff. It is still fairly > unlikely, but you might also recieve english messages in Unicode. > 'Extra' characters aside, any of these character sets will be readable > on a regular ASCII terminal. > > - -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] OpenPGP KeyID 0x57C3430B > Holder of Past Knowledge CS, O- > Put your wasted CPU cycles to use: http://www.distributed.net/ > "I prefer something slightly more melodious; like the long, drawn out > death rattle of a man suffering from terminal flatulence." Lister > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: The keyservers are broken. Get my valid public key from >http://www.volta.dyndns.org/~mwl/pgpkey.asc > > iD8DBQE9YRDX5rgdHFfDQwsRAu9jAKCsbUWwMJMSZUtr49eubytVhYs4VQCeI4lG > G5OAU2LnxsC8l4nA0pcUtVA= > =r96I > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > gnhlug-discuss mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
How about using GCC? $ gcc -v Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/2.96/specs gcc version 2.96 2731 (Red Hat Linux 7.3 2.96-112) On Mon, 2002-08-19 at 11:26, Michael O'Donnell wrote: > > > > I'm curious; just how do you identify if a system is Debian or > > Red Hat? I've yet to find a reliable method. > > Wouldn't the presence of (some combination of) the various > apt-related directories be a reliable sign that you had > a Debian box? Like, say, /etc/apt, /var/cache/apt and > /var/lib/apt. Bonus points for /etc/debian_version... > > I don't know much about RedHat but I'd assume the > corresponding RPM stuff could serve the same purpose. > > ___ > gnhlug-discuss mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Somewhat OT: Information Wave bans RIAA
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Yeah, at first I was pretty happy with this announcement, but now I'm > thinking it's just a form of censorship. They have no right to tell > me what sites I visit. If I were a customer of theirs, I'd be paying > for *Internet* access. That means the whole Internet. Not just the > sites that they've deemed safe for me to visit. They have every right to tell you what sites you can or cannot get to. You're signing up for their service, not the other way around. You have no "rights" to anything outside of what your contract says you have right to... and even then, the contract usually says 'we have the right to change this at any time'. And likewise, you have every right to say "Sorry, you don't deserve my money anymore". Ben -- So farewell hope, and with hope farewell fear, Farewell remorse: all good to me is lost; Evil, be thou my good. - John Milton ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
In a message dated: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 13:30:30 EDT Mark Komarinski said: >This is a really strange discussion. You (collectively) want to know >what kind of distro you're running, but the tools you've been given >are security holes because they give the exact information you're >looking for! Exactly! And don't tell anyone either! ;) -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 12:26:12PM -0400, Derek D. Martin wrote: > At some point hitherto, Mark Komarinski hath spake thusly: > > > Which most security-concious admins still remove or zero as a matter > > > of course. Why tell the net-at-large what holes to look for? > > > > Uhm...how can you tell the contents of /etc/issue from the net? > > Telnet to the machine would be one way (assuming you can). But you > seem to be assuming that your attacker will not be on your network. > 70% or more of reported computer crime is done from the inside, > according to the FBI. I concur with Ben and Mike. Said so in a post > that I managed to munge my from: address... If the attacker is local, then they probably already know what the distro and revision are, or can quickly find out without resorting to looking at /etc/issue. The CDs labeled "Debian" and "RedHat 7.3" on my desk are pretty good indicators. Maybe I should store them in a safe? That Solaris 8 box should probably go too. This is a really strange discussion. You (collectively) want to know what kind of distro you're running, but the tools you've been given are security holes because they give the exact information you're looking for! > Note that at least on newer Linux systems, there's also an > /etc/issue.net, which is what you see if you telnet to a machine. > Some older Unix systems, IIRC, use /etc/issue for both purposes. I remember writing about issue.net on Linux almost 5 years ago. Solaris doesn't use issue. -Mark ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Somewhat OT: Information Wave bans RIAA
In a message dated: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 13:32:53 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, at 1:16pm, Ben Boulanger wrote: >> IWT Bans RIAA From Accessing Its Network > > "And so it begins..." Yeah, at first I was pretty happy with this announcement, but now I'm thinking it's just a form of censorship. They have no right to tell me what sites I visit. If I were a customer of theirs, I'd be paying for *Internet* access. That means the whole Internet. Not just the sites that they've deemed safe for me to visit. Of course, I'm not a customer of theirs, nor do I ever expect to be. I also don't think this will have an overly large impact on most people, since most people are completely unaware that the RIAA and MPAA are slowly stealing peoples rights to begin with. So, as Ben S. said: "And so it begins..." It will be amusing who sues for what, and what the counter-suits will be as well :) -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Somewhat OT: Information Wave bans RIAA
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, at 1:16pm, Ben Boulanger wrote: > IWT Bans RIAA From Accessing Its Network "And so it begins..." -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Somewhat OT: Information Wave bans RIAA
http://www.informationwave.net/news/20020819riaa.php IWT Bans RIAA From Accessing Its Network August 19, 2002 Information Wave Technologies has announced it will actively deny the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) from accessing the contents of its network. Earlier this year, the RIAA announced its new plan to access computers without owner's consent for the sake of protecting its assets. Information Wave believes this policy puts its customers at risk of unintentional damage, corporate espionage, and invasion of privacy to say the least. Due to the nature of this matter and RIAA's previous history, we feel the RIAA will abuse software vulerabilities in a client's browser after the browser accesses its site, potentially allowing the RIAA to access and/or tamper with your data. Starting at midnight on August 19, 2002, Information Wave customers will no longer be able to reach the RIAA's web site. Information Wave will also actively seek out attempts by the RIAA to thwart this policy and apply additional filters to protect our customers' data. -- Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall. ~ Confucius ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
In a message dated: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 12:27:43 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > Figuring out which distro "flavor" you are on (Red Hat Linux, Debian >GNU/Linux, etc.) is, I think, the most we can ask for. Agreed, but it would be nice to have my cake and eat it too :) -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
>At least in 6.2, they tested for file existance before >trying to use it... 7.3 doesn't even bother doing that. You apparently missed their announcement; as of 7.3 RedHat introduced the optimization of simply assuming that *everybody* is using their distribution, so the ID files are deemed no longer necessary... ;-> ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, [EMAIL PROTECTED] hath spake thusly: > For example, if I have a RH 6.2 system, I might well upgrade the > sh-utils package to that which shipped with 7.3. Does uname now > report that I'm using 7.3 or 6.2? How does it determine this? > If it relies upon the lsb_release package, how does this determine > which release I'm on? Does it rely upon /etc/redhat_release? What > if this is not correct. This is not an easy problem to solve :( I disagree. The solution is to provide a package specific to each distribution. Of course, your system admin has to pay attention... It would need to be named differently on each release so that it could not be inadvertently upgraded... Most distributions already do provide such a package. Of course, the sysadmin can always remove it... =8^) - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9YR5rdjdlQoHP510RAnEnAJ0VYc/G9SqEgdALkvzMTr2fNDvn5gCfZP3X cSknsb8r2QsWJG1gUW//UOM= =1OCu -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Weird resumable ssh redir question...
Good day, Benjamin, Karl, all, (sorry for the late response, hope it might still be useful). On Sun, 10 Feb 2002, Benjamin Scott wrote: > On Sun, 10 Feb 2002, Karl J. Runge wrote: > > So I know I will be using a bunch of local xterms containing remote shells > > for the bulk of my work. It will be interesting to see if I can cook up a > > way to suspend & restore them... You can do IP tunneling with Linux. The 10 cent tour: - You give your laptop a _permanent_ IP address, stolen from a remote network. With permission. :-) - Your connections all use that IP as their source. - Another machine on the remote network grabs any packets heading to that IP, wraps them up in another packet destined for your dialup address, and sends them off. When they get to your modem, the kernel unwraps them and gives the original packet to the application. - Outbound packets get tunneled in the same way. I've used this quite successfully for the past few months as a way to let me keep ssh connections open even when I hang up the phone. The setup is a bit annoying; I've written some shell scripts to handle the network setup. They can be found at http://www.stearns.org/tunnel/ . I'd suggest using version 0.2.1. When you bring your link up, type: ssh tunserv /sbin/server_tunnel restart -n wls `/usr/sbin/client_tunnel restart -n wls` replace tunserv with the name or IP address of the machine willing to tunnel for you, and "wls" with the name of the section in /etc/tunnel.conf, present on both client and server. > screen(1) provides detachable, transportable terminal emulations, and > works without X. Sounds like what you want. A good tool, for text based applications. > To answer your original question: As you probably know, IP itself is > stateless. As long as your IP address does not change, the IP layer will > not notice if you leave for a year. In practice, however, things do not > work as well. For one, if your gateway is also a connection end-point, any > applications you have running will barf when the gateway interface goes down > and the address the socket was bound to disappears. Additionally, many > higher-level protocols, including TCP itself, may send "keep-alive" messages > to make sure the other end is there, and timeout your connection if not. > Finally, even fairly "passive" applications like TELNET will timeout if any > activity occurs on either end while the connection is down. You'll want to turn off tcp keepalives, yes. This can be done in the kernel, or in /etc/ssh/sshd_config for just ssh. You'll also need applications that can sit quietly while you're disconnected; I tend to go back to a shell prompt when I know I'm going to disconnect. > In short, if everything is near-perfect, you *might* be able to recover > from a very brief lost modem connection. For "detached sessions", you will > need something that is explicitly designed to separate any connection state > from your end. I have ssh connections that sit idle for the better part of a day, and suspect I could pull off a week or more. One ssh session to my colocated box has been logged in for over a week; I've been typing commands on it 10 or more dial up addresses. One nice feature; my ISP blocks outbound port 25 SMTP connections, but I can get around that with this tunneling scheme. :-) Cheers, - Bill --- "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend your right to say it with all my might." (Courtesy of Patrick Mauritz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) -- William Stearns ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). Mason, Buildkernel, named2hosts, and ipfwadm2ipchains are at:http://www.stearns.org -- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, [EMAIL PROTECTED] hath spake thusly: > I suspect redhat-release was just never included in the Kickstart profile. > Whether that is a bug in Kickstart or a bug in the dependencies depends on > your point-of-view. Either way, it is rather ironic. *sigh* Only Red > Hat... I suspect that Mike removed it. Since he told me he did about a year ago... ;-) - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9YRyAdjdlQoHP510RArGyAJ0fGlGC2h6PiFUk44DW7dFumYylAwCeKc3q LvLG8M24r8lE+RblpBc1kSc= =CmDt -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, Mark Komarinski hath spake thusly: > > Which most security-concious admins still remove or zero as a matter > > of course. Why tell the net-at-large what holes to look for? > > Uhm...how can you tell the contents of /etc/issue from the net? Telnet to the machine would be one way (assuming you can). But you seem to be assuming that your attacker will not be on your network. 70% or more of reported computer crime is done from the inside, according to the FBI. I concur with Ben and Mike. Said so in a post that I managed to munge my from: address... Note that at least on newer Linux systems, there's also an /etc/issue.net, which is what you see if you telnet to a machine. Some older Unix systems, IIRC, use /etc/issue for both purposes. - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9YRwkdjdlQoHP510RAp8TAJ4wStM+3ri5dJtqky5iqHZkn2DXhACfbVkr xEDVRUAyeo1n69AwzI0oqto= =yvAt -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, at 12:09pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > For example, if I have a RH 6.2 system, I might well upgrade the sh-utils > package to that which shipped with 7.3. Figuring out which distro "flavor" you are on (Red Hat Linux, Debian GNU/Linux, etc.) is, I think, the most we can ask for. When you start asking about the release of the distro you are on, things get rather fuzzy. Even if you stay within Red Hat Linux 6.2, how do you clarify the differences between RHL 6.2 with no optional packages and RHL 6.2 with everything? How do you tell the difference between RHL 6.2 "stock" and RHL 6.2 with all the errata updates installed? Once you've got the distribution question answered, the rest should really be handled by whatever dependency management mechanisms are in place for that distribution. For example, first determine you are on some release of RHL, and then use RPM to depend on initscripts or glibc or whatever. -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
In a message dated: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 11:59:25 EDT mike ledoux said: >That's what I thought you were going to say. Of course, as pointed out >elsethread, that method is quite unreliable, at least for Red Hat. Well, yeah, which has been my complaint for a long time. There is no reliable method to determine distro and release under Linux. The lsb_release package does offer promise, but again, it's an optionally installed package at least on Debian (I don't know about those which are now "lsb compliant"). As Derek pointed out, it would be best if distribution providers customized the uname fields appropriately for their next release. However, even that ultimately won't help unless they make those packages dependant upon something else like lsb_release. For example, if I have a RH 6.2 system, I might well upgrade the sh-utils package to that which shipped with 7.3. Does uname now report that I'm using 7.3 or 6.2? How does it determine this? If it relies upon the lsb_release package, how does this determine which release I'm on? Does it rely upon /etc/redhat_release? What if this is not correct. This is not an easy problem to solve :( -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, at 11:46am, mike ledoux wrote: > [root@ibm1 /root]# cat /etc/redhat-release > cat: /etc/redhat-release: No such file or directory > > This is on a kickstart-installed RH6.2 box. 'redhat-release' is an > optional package, at least in 6.2. *shakes head in disbelief* According to Red Hat, that file should always be there. It is not "optional" when performing an interactive install -- even with no "optional" packages selected, that gets installed. Red Hat's initscripts (the aforementioned rc.local) assume it exists. I suspect redhat-release was just never included in the Kickstart profile. Whether that is a bug in Kickstart or a bug in the dependencies depends on your point-of-view. Either way, it is rather ironic. *sigh* Only Red Hat... -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
Likewise, SuSE has a file, /etc/SuSE-release I'm not sure, but this might be part of LSB. On 19 Aug 2002 at 11:40, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Red Hat has a file called /etc/redhat-release. Debian has a file called > /etc/debian_release (or something close to that; I don't have a Debian > system to check). Other distros do similar things. Of course, this leads > to an identification algorithm which consists of a giant, messy switch/case > structure. Ugly, but often better than nothing. -- Jerry Feldman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Associate Director Boston Linux and Unix user group http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9 PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9 ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Rack Mount Servers
Good day, Ed, On 10 Aug 2002, Ed Robbins wrote: > I'm about to help a local ISP update their NOC and I'm in need of some > rack mount servers. Anyone in the group have a preferred supplier > and/or comments/experience with particular brands/models...Could I put > anymore /'s in a sentance > > As always, I will be forever indebted to all for any wisdom gleaned from > the group, said while slightly bowing at the waist I'm in the process of buying and setting up a rackmount system from eracks.com. While the article isn't at _all_ complete - the system hasn't even arrived yet, so I can hardly vouch for eracks! - I'm documenting the whole process and the use of User-Mode Linux at http://www.stearns.org/slartibartfast/ . New versions of that article will show up over the next few weeks. Cheers, - Bill --- "Patience is a minor form of despair, disguised as virtue." -- Ambrose Bierce, on qualifiers -- William Stearns ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). Mason, Buildkernel, named2hosts, and ipfwadm2ipchains are at:http://www.stearns.org -- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
In a message dated: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 11:15:36 EDT mike ledoux said: >I'm curious; just how do you identify if a system is Debian or Red Hat? >I've yet to find a reliable method. cat /etc/redhat_release || cat /etc/debian_version Almost all distros do have a similar file. -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 11:43:06AM -0400, mike ledoux wrote: > On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 11:28:09AM -0400, Mark Komarinski wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 11:15:36AM -0400, mike ledoux wrote: > > > I'm curious; just how do you identify if a system is Debian or Red Hat? > > > I've yet to find a reliable method. > > > > /etc/issue will tell you. > > Which most security-concious admins still remove or zero as a matter > of course. Why tell the net-at-large what holes to look for? Uhm...how can you tell the contents of /etc/issue from the net? -Mark ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
In a message dated: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 11:12:51 EDT Bob Bell said: >On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 10:46:21AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: >> Yeah, but even rms has conceded that a Solaris system with the GNU >> utilities added to it isn't and shouldn't be referred to as GNU/Solaris :) > >Do you have a pointer to that? Not off hand. I believe it was in one of my fruitless and pointless private arguments, er, debates with him :) I'll see if I can dig it up. >I'm curious what distinctions he makes to argue for "GNU/Linux" >but not "GNU/Solaris"... Basically it boils down to a "Linux System" is comprised of almost entirely free software from the kernel to the window manager to the shell utilities, etc. and GNU and the FSF were the ones pioneering the whole concept of Free Software. Whereas, Solaris is almost entirely non-free software which may or may not have free software added to it, therefore, it's not GNU/Solaris, since so little is free software. I'll see if I can dig up that e-mail some where. -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, at 11:26am, Michael O'Donnell wrote: > Wouldn't the presence of (some combination of) the various apt-related > directories be a reliable sign that you had a Debian box? APT has been ported to RPM. > I don't know much about RedHat but I'd assume the corresponding RPM stuff > could serve the same purpose. RPM has been ported to Debian. Additionally, many distributions aside from Red Hat use RPM -- SuSE and Mandrake are the most well-known. I think the LSB even requires RPM to be available, which would mean any LSB-compliant distro would match. -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, at 11:28am, Mark Komarinski wrote: >> I'm curious; just how do you identify if a system is Debian or Red Hat? >> I've yet to find a reliable method. > > /etc/issue will tell you. Relying on /etc/issue is a bad idea. If the admin is using /etc/issue for what it was intended for (displaying a banner prior to login), they may well have changed that. I know I sure do. -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
On Sun, 2002-08-18 at 07:10, Thomas M. Albright wrote: > On 17 Aug 2002, Paul Iadonisi wrote: > > > > Add to that the fact that Red Hat's latest beta, Limbo2 ... > > > I tried to go look at, maybe download, the new beta but all I got were > empty directories. I don't suppose you have some .iso's or maybe even > actual cd's we (actually I) could borrow? :) I got rid of 'em, too. :-( I guess maybe we can expect to see a new beta soon? Or maybe the release? Who knows, but betas are usually only available for a limited time, so I'm not surprised. You can, however, get the package under discussion in the rawhide directory (ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/rawhide). -- -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: suggestion for the restricted ssh shell
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, John Abreau hath spake thusly: > "Derek D. Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Feel free to have a look. http://www.pizzashack.org/rssh/ > > I took a look at it, and found you've hit on one of my pet peeves: > when you untar it, your tarball makes a mess in the current directory. > I'd suggest having it untar into an "rssh-0.9.1" subdirectory instead. Oops! I meant to; I hate that too. That said, I've gotten into the habit of checking all unknown tar balls with tar -t... But this is fixed now. Thanks. - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9YQ9hdjdlQoHP510RAl6gAJ9XtJigK/UNEmWN4SnwP6beHngxNACeJMId 4H8T0WL60sQaWhYY/5btKRo= =5ti5 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, mike ledoux wrote: > I'm curious; just how do you identify if a system is Debian or Red Hat? > I've yet to find a reliable method. > cat /etc/redhat-release. if it doesn't work, you're not using redhat. :) -- TARogue (Linux user number 234357) When you have an efficient government, you have a dictatorship. -- Harry Truman ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, at 11:15am, mike ledoux wrote: > I'm curious; just how do you identify if a system is Debian or Red Hat? > I've yet to find a reliable method. Red Hat has a file called /etc/redhat-release. Debian has a file called /etc/debian_release (or something close to that; I don't have a Debian system to check). Other distros do similar things. Of course, this leads to an identification algorithm which consists of a giant, messy switch/case structure. Ugly, but often better than nothing. -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 11:15:36AM -0400, mike ledoux wrote: > I'm curious; just how do you identify if a system is Debian or Red Hat? > I've yet to find a reliable method. /etc/issue will tell you. -Mark ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
> I'm curious; just how do you identify if a system is Debian or > Red Hat? I've yet to find a reliable method. Wouldn't the presence of (some combination of) the various apt-related directories be a reliable sign that you had a Debian box? Like, say, /etc/apt, /var/cache/apt and /var/lib/apt. Bonus points for /etc/debian_version... I don't know much about RedHat but I'd assume the corresponding RPM stuff could serve the same purpose. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
procmail rule
anybody know a smart way to ignore any charset but US-ASCII? I currently have rules like this one: :0 h * ^Content-Type: text/html; charset="euc-kr" * !^X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (formail -r -I"Precedence: junk" \ -A"X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" ; \ echo "I only know english. I never saw your message.\ Stop sending me junkmail!") | $SENDMAIL -t with 3 different charsets. TIA! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 10:46:21AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yeah, but even rms has conceded that a Solaris system with the GNU > utilities added to it isn't and shouldn't be referred to as GNU/Solaris :) Do you have a pointer to that? I'm curious what distinctions he makes to argue for "GNU/Linux" but not "GNU/Solaris"... -- Bob Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - "To understand recursion one must first understand recursion." -- Anonymous ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: http://www.mslinux.org/
"Troubleshooting Daemon: Microsoft Linux includes a new Troubleshooting Daemon (crapd) that help you zero in on a solution if you ever have a problem." crapd in a ms product that is to funny. -Neal On Mon, 2002-08-19 at 07:40, Michael O'Donnell wrote: > > Check out Microsoft's distro of Linux: > > http://www.mslinux.org/ > > ___ > gnhlug-discuss mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss > signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: uname output ?
In a message dated: 19 Aug 2002 02:00:50 EDT Paul Iadonisi said: > I wouldn't worry about it. I would summarily ignore the 'uname -o' >functionality (if it can even be called that). Someone just pointed out >'lsb_release -d' to me. Using 'lsb_release -a' or 'lsb_release -as' you >can get all the distribution specific information you'll probably ever >need. Outstanding Of course, you need to install the lsb-release package for that, but that's only an apt-get install away :) Now we could actually make uname useful by having it call lsb_release in configure and setting that string appropriately :) -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
In a message dated: 17 Aug 2002 15:42:06 EDT Paul Iadonisi said: > I'd have to agree that this is a pretty useless feature. Only because they've chosen to make it so. Of course, there's nothing preventing us from modifying that to identify which release of which distro it is. I'll attempt to do that at some point, however, I only know how to determine whether the system is Debian or Redhat, never having used any other distro. I'll see what I can come up with and let you all know :) -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
In a message dated: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 14:55:35 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >> Therefore, the only way to discover what this field reports on other >> distros or versions of UNIX is to get the source for sh-utils ... > > Here's a radical idea: Get the source for the package and see where the >hell it gets all these identification strings in the first place. :) Hey, I did all the initial work of identifying this problem and informing the list about it. You actually want me to *look* at code too? C'mon, I know that you know I'm terribly busy with far more interesting endeavors ;) -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: uname output ?
In a message dated: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 14:17:30 EDT mike ledoux said: >Eh, if this really is a new version of GNU sh-utils, I'm sure they >wouldn't go to that trouble. Much simpler to just have the system report >itself as GNU/`uname -s`. :) Yeah, but even rms has conceded that a Solaris system with the GNU utilities added to it isn't and shouldn't be referred to as GNU/Solaris :) -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
http://www.mslinux.org/
Check out Microsoft's distro of Linux: http://www.mslinux.org/ ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: suggestion for the restricted ssh shell
"Derek D. Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Feel free to have a look. http://www.pizzashack.org/rssh/ I took a look at it, and found you've hit on one of my pet peeves: when you untar it, your tarball makes a mess in the current directory. I'd suggest having it untar into an "rssh-0.9.1" subdirectory instead. -- John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix ICQ 28611923 / AIM abreauj / JABBER [EMAIL PROTECTED] / YAHOO abreauj Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0xD5C7B5D9 PGP-Key-Fingerprint 72 FB 39 4F 3C 3B D6 5B E0 C8 5A 6E F1 2C BE 99 Some people say, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." I often respond, "When elephants fight, it's the grass that gets trampled." msg00259/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: suggestion for the restricted ssh shell
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, John Abreau hath spake thusly: > Derek; > > In regards to the dummy shell you wrote that restricts itself to scp and > sftp-server commands, it might be useful to also permit imapd and popd. It's not a bad idea, but I think it would be easy to make any number of requests like this. Someone will think it's a good idea to add lpr to the list... and so on. I really don't want to get into the role of writing a configurable restricted shell... OTOH, I have made some updates to the shell, including a cheesy, home-grown configure/make build environment, and several bugs. I still don't have any docs though. ;-) Feel free to have a look. http://www.pizzashack.org/rssh/ > I use fetchmail through an ssh tunnel, where it invokes imapd in > preauth mode. Here's what I have in my .fetchmailrc: I've always thought this was really cool. Never got around to setting it up though. - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9YJ9ddjdlQoHP510RAoiYAJ9RcLnyXzwffuyInz2JTVVqZEwD4ACfXuP5 s+5b8v8vTO4NnqS9yw3vDJE= =qJyl -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
