Re: BUG: Soft Lockup detected on CPU#
Martin wrote: The way how the soft-lockup detection works right now is broken for system that utilize virtual cpus. You could argue that all zSeries systems use virtualized cpu so the feature does not make sense. With dedicated PUs on a logical partition, and when running on raw iron the feature should work fine afaict. No? cheers, Carsten -- Carsten Otte has stopped smoking: Ich habe in 4 Monate, 2 Wochen und 1 Tag schon 665,94 Euro gespart anstatt 2.774,76 Zigaretten zu kaufen. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: TCPIP question
Line 71 is the DEFAULTNET line Avinoam ציטוט Alan Altmark: On Monday, 10/09/2006 at 09:26 ZE2, Avinoam Hirschberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'm getting this error during the startup of my tcp/ip. line 71 is the DEFAULTNET line, as far as i can see 10.0.0.1 is IPv4 address. I'm using z/VM 5.1 any idea what the error here ? DTCPRS007E Error encountered in reading PROFILE TCPIP *: DTCPRS280E Line 71: The gateway specified on the first_hop operand of the GATEWAY entry is not an IPv4 address GATEWAY ; Network First LinkMTU Subnet Subnet ; Address Hop NameSize MaskValue ; --- --- --- - - 192.168.201= ETH08192 0 10.0.0 = LCS01492 0.0.255.0 ; 10.0.0 10.0.0.1LCS0 1492 0.0.255.0 DEFAULTNET 10.0.0.1LCS0 1492 0 ; (End GATEWAY Static Routing information) ; -- You didn't tell us which line was line 71, so I'll speculate that the problem is being caused by the missing subnet value on the 10.0.0 line. It should read: 10.0.0.0 = LCS0 1492 0.0.255.0 0.0.0.0 I think the parser picked up DEFAULTNET as the subnet value on the 10.0.0 line (then probably threw it away as invalid), leaving LCS0 as the first-hop field on the next line. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: TCPIP question
Thanks, this solve my issue Regards, Avinoam ציטוט Adam Thornton: On Oct 9, 2006, at 4:05 AM, John Summerfield wrote: Avinoam Hirschberg wrote: Hi, I'm getting this error during the startup of my tcp/ip. line 71 is the DEFAULTNET line, as far as i can see 10.0.0.1 is IPv4 address. I'm using z/VM 5.1 any idea what the error here ? DTCPRS007E Error encountered in reading PROFILE TCPIP *: DTCPRS280E Line 71: The gateway specified on the first_hop operand of the GATEWAY entry is not an IPv4 address GATEWAY ; Network First Link MTU Subnet Subnet ; Address Hop Name Size Mask Value ; - --- - --- --- ; ADDITIONAL ETH ROUTE ; 11 = ETH0 8192 0 192.168.201 = ETH0 8192 0 10.0.0 = LCS0 1492 0.0.255.0 ; 10.0.0 10.0.0.1 LCS0 1492 0.0.255.0 DEFAULTNET 10.0.0.1 LCS0 1492 0 ; (End GATEWAY Static Routing information) ; - - 0.0.255.0 looks very strange to me. I would expect high-order ones, so maybe 255.255.255.0 Yeah, but that's because you're used to a SANE way of doing IP networking, not the VM (copied from z/OS) way. Assuming that what you mean is that 10.0.0.1 should be the router for everything from 10.0.0.1 to 10.0.0.254, your netmask there whould be 0.255.255.0. Why? Because Net 10 is a class A, so its inherent netmask is 255.0.0.0, and you WANT a final netmask of 255.255.255.0, so the netmask part YOU have to specify is 0.255.255.0. Intuitive, eh? Adam -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
A VSMSERVE and PORTMAP question
Hi, I'm working to configure VSMSERVE and PORTMAP in order to work with IBM SMAPI following the book SC24-6122-00 I'm getting different which i think cause some problems using the command RPCINFO -P I'm getting this output rpcinfo -p program vers proto port 102 udp111 portmapper 102 tcp111 portmapper 3007621 tcp845 3007622 tcp845 Ready; T=0.04/0.05 05:06:03 according to the book i expect to get different ports for the different versions of the 300762 program. in addition to that when using the command rpcinfo -t 127.0.0.1 300762 I'm getting the following output rpcinfo -t 127.0.0.1 300762 program 300762 version 1 ready and waiting program 300762 version 2 ready and waiting Ready; T=0.08/0.10 05:08:15 which is again to as what written in the book. I tried to use the rpcinfo -n command to change the port which one of the 300762 uses but no luck rpcinfo -n 1015 -t 127.0.0.1 300762 2 rpcinfo: RPC: Remote system error - Error 60 program 300762 version 2 is not available Ready(1); T=0.03/0.04 05:16:26 I assume those issue is the reason for getting RC=596 (internal error, undocumented ) when using the SMAPI calls. any idea and/or point to some one how can help Thanks, Avinoam -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: BUG: Soft Lockup detected on CPU#
On Tue, 2006-10-10 at 12:14 +0200, Carsten Otte wrote: The way how the soft-lockup detection works right now is broken for system that utilize virtual cpus. You could argue that all zSeries systems use virtualized cpu so the feature does not make sense. With dedicated PUs on a logical partition, and when running on raw iron the feature should work fine afaict. No? Yes, in that special case it should work. But who is using dedicated PUs on LPAR? 1% of the installed linux systems? The best thing to do is to disable the config option, as it is harmful for the majority of the systems. Heiko already sent a patch. -- blue skies, Martin. Martin Schwidefsky Linux for zSeries Development Services IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH Reality continues to ruin my life. - Calvin. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Ray Noorda, 1924-2006
Ray Noorda SALT LAKE CITY (AP) _ Ray Noorda, the Novell Inc. founder who battled Microsoft Corp. in the early years of network computers, died Monday of complications from Alzheimer's disease. He was 82. Noorda, the so-called Father of Network Computing, had suffered from Alzheimer's for years and died at his home in Orem, 35 miles south of Salt Lake City, according to a statement from family members. He became chief executive of Novell in 1983 and made it a software powerhouse, dominating the market for products that manage corporate networks and let individual computers share files and printers. But Microsoft caught up by the mid-1990s. Noorda, whom Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates once called the grumpy grandfather of technology, was bitter over Novell's failure to check Microsoft's power. He tried branching out in the early 1990s by investing in the Unix operating system, the WordPerfect word processor and other products to compete with dominant Microsoft products. But those efforts failed, and Novell went into a decline from which it has yet to fully recover. Noorda retired from Novell in 1995 to open The Canopy Group, a capital venture firm. More recently, Novell has turned to developing software for the Linux operating system, trimmed jobs and moved headquarters to Waltham, Mass., although it still keeps some operations in Provo, Utah. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: No Communication Between Guests after aplying SUSE 9 SP3
We have vm 5.1 and we are running sles9. Our servers speak to each other. I installed sp3 on 1 and the two wouldn't speak. The minute I installed sp 3 on the other it worked. mace --- José L. Ramírez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, We have been running SUSE 9 (no service pack) under zVM 4.4 for several months. Recently we added two more guests with SP3 installed, for some reason the SP3 guests can't see the older servers and also there is no communication between the two SP3 servers. Both SP3 servers are able to see the whole internal network plus they have connection to the Internet. Any ideas??? Thanks in advance... Regards, José L. Ramírez, zServer Systems Programmer (787) 277-1496 / [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Scanned by Triple-S *Attention* This electronic message, including any attachments, contains information that may be legally confidential and/or privileged. The information is intended solely for the individual or entity named above and access by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error and delete it from your system. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: BUG: Soft Lockup detected on CPU#
I am using a vanilla kernel as this is a sandbox system that I like tinkering with. Thanks for all the responses !! I'll try disabling the option and re-compiling! Greg * The information in this e-mail is intended solely for the addressee(s) named, and is confidential. Any other distribution, disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please reply by e-mail to the sender and delete or destroy all copies of this message. Les renseignements contenus dans le pr'esent message 'electronique sont confidentiels et concernent exclusivement le(s) destinataire(s) 'esign'e(s). Il est strictement interdit de distribuer ou de copier ce message. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez r'epondre par courriel `a l'exp'editeur et effacer ou d'etruire toutes les copies du pr'esent message.. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: BUG: Soft Lockup detected on CPU#
On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 01:24:20PM +0200, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: On Tue, 2006-10-10 at 12:14 +0200, Carsten Otte wrote: The way how the soft-lockup detection works right now is broken for system that utilize virtual cpus. You could argue that all zSeries systems use virtualized cpu so the feature does not make sense. With dedicated PUs on a logical partition, and when running on raw iron the feature should work fine afaict. No? Yes, in that special case it should work. But who is using dedicated PUs on LPAR? 1% of the installed linux systems? The best thing to do is to disable the config option, as it is harmful for the majority of the systems. Heiko already sent a patch. The right thing would be to disable it for virtualized systems at runtime. Especially as S/390 is not the only virtualized system these days. I wonder why no one has hit this issue with Power5 or Xen systems yet. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: No Communication Between Guests after aplying SUSE 9 SP3
We have reported a similar problem where a Linux server -will- ping a peer on the same Virtual Switch until such time as the Linux server shuts down and reboots. After the reboot a Linux server can -no longer- ping another Linux server on the same Virtual Switch. Odd. But very repeatable. The circumvention is to shutdown Linux, log the virtual machine off, log back onto VM, then reboot Linux. In other words, a virtual machine reIPL leaves to servers unable to speak to each other, although they can speak to the outside world. I am suspicious of VM63895. IBM suspects a difference in the VLAN tagging of the frames. I wonder why a reIPL vs. a logoff/logon should matter, with regard to VLAN tagging. But I readily admit that this is an area of TCP/IP where I have limited skills. (PMR 57324 may be of interest to any IBMers.) Hope this helps! -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of José L. Ramírez Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 10:36 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: No Communication Between Guests after aplying SUSE 9 SP3 Hi, We have been running SUSE 9 (no service pack) under zVM 4.4 for several months. Recently we added two more guests with SP3 installed, for some reason the SP3 guests can't see the older servers and also there is no communication between the two SP3 servers. Both SP3 servers are able to see the whole internal network plus they have connection to the Internet. Any ideas??? Thanks in advance... Regards, José L. Ramírez, zServer Systems Programmer (787) 277-1496 / [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Scanned by Triple-S *Attention* This electronic message, including any attachments, contains information that may be legally confidential and/or privileged. The information is intended solely for the individual or entity named above and access by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error and delete it from your system. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: No Communication Between Guests after aplying SUSE 9 SP3
Hi, Thanks, as soon as I can I will shutdown and logoff the virtual machine. Anyway, I just reported the problem to Novell to see if they can find something. Thanks... Regards, Jose. -Original Message- From: Scully, William P [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 10:19 AM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: No Communication Between Guests after aplying SUSE 9 SP3 We have reported a similar problem where a Linux server -will- ping a peer on the same Virtual Switch until such time as the Linux server shuts down and reboots. After the reboot a Linux server can -no longer- ping another Linux server on the same Virtual Switch. Odd. But very repeatable. The circumvention is to shutdown Linux, log the virtual machine off, log back onto VM, then reboot Linux. In other words, a virtual machine reIPL leaves to servers unable to speak to each other, although they can speak to the outside world. I am suspicious of VM63895. IBM suspects a difference in the VLAN tagging of the frames. I wonder why a reIPL vs. a logoff/logon should matter, with regard to VLAN tagging. But I readily admit that this is an area of TCP/IP where I have limited skills. (PMR 57324 may be of interest to any IBMers.) Hope this helps! -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of José L. Ramírez Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 10:36 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: No Communication Between Guests after aplying SUSE 9 SP3 Hi, We have been running SUSE 9 (no service pack) under zVM 4.4 for several months. Recently we added two more guests with SP3 installed, for some reason the SP3 guests can't see the older servers and also there is no communication between the two SP3 servers. Both SP3 servers are able to see the whole internal network plus they have connection to the Internet. Any ideas??? Thanks in advance... Regards, José L. Ramírez, zServer Systems Programmer (787) 277-1496 / [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Scanned by Triple-S *Attention* This electronic message, including any attachments, contains information that may be legally confidential and/or privileged. The information is intended solely for the individual or entity named above and access by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error and delete it from your system. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 [Scanned by McAfee] -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
LVM - can both CKD and FBA reside in same volume group?
Hi all, I'm new to this, so my terminology may be incorrect. We are primarily z/OS but have recently delved in to SuSE (SLES9) running as a guest under z/VM 5.1. Up until now we've used ECKD but will be installing a DS8100 formatted as FBA (SCSI over FCP). Cloning guests is painless and quick on CKD, but am told cloning FCP-attached SCSI Linux systems is more complicated. Currently our master image resides on 2 3390-9s , and except for /boot, is defined in one volume group. This relatively small system can then be propogated with each Linux instance needed. It takes about 30-45 minutes to create a new Linux image. Once a Linux image is built, if additional space is needed we're hoping we can simply add the larger SCSI disk to the volume group. I am having a hard time finding information on mixing disk architecture in an LVM. Since the CKD is emulating FBA, does LVM even care that it is CKD as opposed to FBA? Is anyone out there doing this? Thanks in advance for any help. Susan -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: LVM - can both CKD and FBA reside in same volume group?
It's OK to use FBA disks in a LVM volume group that has CKD disks in it. If Make the FBA's LVM physical extent (PE) size the same as the CKD's PE size. This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system. -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan Zimmerman Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 12:59 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: LVM - can both CKD and FBA reside in same volume group? Hi all, I'm new to this, so my terminology may be incorrect. We are primarily z/OS but have recently delved in to SuSE (SLES9) running as a guest under z/VM 5.1. Up until now we've used ECKD but will be installing a DS8100 formatted as FBA (SCSI over FCP). Cloning guests is painless and quick on CKD, but am told cloning FCP-attached SCSI Linux systems is more complicated. Currently our master image resides on 2 3390-9s , and except for /boot, is defined in one volume group. This relatively small system can then be propogated with each Linux instance needed. It takes about 30-45 minutes to create a new Linux image. Once a Linux image is built, if additional space is needed we're hoping we can simply add the larger SCSI disk to the volume group. I am having a hard time finding information on mixing disk architecture in an LVM. Since the CKD is emulating FBA, does LVM even care that it is CKD as opposed to FBA? Is anyone out there doing this? Thanks in advance for any help. Susan -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: LVM - can both CKD and FBA reside in same volume group?
But if one of them is faster, you will be slowed down to speed of slower one of course. Marian --- Romanowski, John (OFT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's OK to use FBA disks in a LVM volume group that has CKD disks in it. If Make the FBA's LVM physical extent (PE) size the same as the CKD's PE size. This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system. -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan Zimmerman Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 12:59 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: LVM - can both CKD and FBA reside in same volume group? Hi all, I'm new to this, so my terminology may be incorrect. We are primarily z/OS but have recently delved in to SuSE (SLES9) running as a guest under z/VM 5.1. Up until now we've used ECKD but will be installing a DS8100 formatted as FBA (SCSI over FCP). Cloning guests is painless and quick on CKD, but am told cloning FCP-attached SCSI Linux systems is more complicated. Currently our master image resides on 2 3390-9s , and except for /boot, is defined in one volume group. This relatively small system can then be propogated with each Linux instance needed. It takes about 30-45 minutes to create a new Linux image. Once a Linux image is built, if additional space is needed we're hoping we can simply add the larger SCSI disk to the volume group. I am having a hard time finding information on mixing disk architecture in an LVM. Since the CKD is emulating FBA, does LVM even care that it is CKD as opposed to FBA? Is anyone out there doing this? Thanks in advance for any help. Susan -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Odd problem with SU command
Running Sles9x, SP3. We have sw installed that authenticates users against Active Directory using pam.d stuff (Vintela VAS). Those users don't have to be in /etc/passwd at all. In trying to install db2, we needed to create a local userid. Fine, no problem this is supported. But the su command returns rc 1 if the user is local and rc 0 if the user is VAS. This makes the db2icrt script fail. Was wondering if someone out there is also using an off server authentication method could check and see if it fails for them too? From root: su (localuser) -c id echo $? su (non-localuser) -c id echo $? Return code 1 is supposed to mean su failed, but su doesn't fail - we do get the results of the command properly. The RH Intel Linux servers don't have this problem and removing the VAS calls from /etc/pam.d/su didn't seem to make a difference either. We're reporting it to support, but was hoping to narrow it down to whose support :) Marcy Cortes This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: Odd problem with SU command
Marcy, Your syntax is suspect to me. According to the man page, -c specifies a command to be executed, not a userid. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcy Cortes Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 3:24 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Odd problem with SU command Running Sles9x, SP3. We have sw installed that authenticates users against Active Directory using pam.d stuff (Vintela VAS). Those users don't have to be in /etc/passwd at all. In trying to install db2, we needed to create a local userid. Fine, no problem this is supported. But the su command returns rc 1 if the user is local and rc 0 if the user is VAS. This makes the db2icrt script fail. Was wondering if someone out there is also using an off server authentication method could check and see if it fails for them too? From root: su (localuser) -c id echo $? su (non-localuser) -c id echo $? Return code 1 is supposed to mean su failed, but su doesn't fail - we do get the results of the command properly. The RH Intel Linux servers don't have this problem and removing the VAS calls from /etc/pam.d/su didn't seem to make a difference either. We're reporting it to support, but was hoping to narrow it down to whose support :) Marcy Cortes -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: Odd problem with SU command
Right, the id (/usr/bin/id) command for test. db2 uses -c /bin/pwd I just tried id because then one can tell that it did really execute as someone else. Marcy Cortes This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Post, Mark K Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 12:55 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Odd problem with SU command Marcy, Your syntax is suspect to me. According to the man page, -c specifies a command to be executed, not a userid. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcy Cortes Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 3:24 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Odd problem with SU command Running Sles9x, SP3. We have sw installed that authenticates users against Active Directory using pam.d stuff (Vintela VAS). Those users don't have to be in /etc/passwd at all. In trying to install db2, we needed to create a local userid. Fine, no problem this is supported. But the su command returns rc 1 if the user is local and rc 0 if the user is VAS. This makes the db2icrt script fail. Was wondering if someone out there is also using an off server authentication method could check and see if it fails for them too? From root: su (localuser) -c id echo $? su (non-localuser) -c id echo $? Return code 1 is supposed to mean su failed, but su doesn't fail - we do get the results of the command properly. The RH Intel Linux servers don't have this problem and removing the VAS calls from /etc/pam.d/su didn't seem to make a difference either. We're reporting it to support, but was hoping to narrow it down to whose support :) Marcy Cortes -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: Odd problem with SU command
We run using LDAP for the bulk of our authentication. I tried your test and got a zero return code for both: rockhopper:~ # su suseftp -c id uid=1002(suseftp) gid=100(users) groups=14(uucp),16(dialout),17(audio),33(video),100(users) rockhopper:~ # echo $? 0 rockhopper:~ # su rpn01 -c id uid=42312(rpn01) gid=5037(rpn01) groups=4(nssunix),100(users),500(mail),2501(nssldap),5036(nssprintmgr),5 037(rpn01),5146(focapp),5147(rrisapp),5148(ecapp),5149(retroapp),5150(bs c),5151(prptng) rockhopper:~ # echo $? 0 rockhopper:~ # -- .~.Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation /V\RO-OC-1-13 200 First Street SW /( )\ 507-284-0844Rochester, MN 55905 ^^-^^ - In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different. -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcy Cortes Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 2:24 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Odd problem with SU command Running Sles9x, SP3. We have sw installed that authenticates users against Active Directory using pam.d stuff (Vintela VAS). Those users don't have to be in /etc/passwd at all. In trying to install db2, we needed to create a local userid. Fine, no problem this is supported. But the su command returns rc 1 if the user is local and rc 0 if the user is VAS. This makes the db2icrt script fail. Was wondering if someone out there is also using an off server authentication method could check and see if it fails for them too? From root: su (localuser) -c id echo $? su (non-localuser) -c id echo $? Return code 1 is supposed to mean su failed, but su doesn't fail - we do get the results of the command properly. The RH Intel Linux servers don't have this problem and removing the VAS calls from /etc/pam.d/su didn't seem to make a difference either. We're reporting it to support, but was hoping to narrow it down to whose support :) Marcy Cortes This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: Odd problem with SU command
Post, Mark K wrote: Marcy, Your syntax is suspect to me. According to the man page, -c specifies a command to be executed, not a userid. Whatcha smokin, man? id is a command: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ su root -c id Password: uid=0(root) gid=0(root) groups=0(root),1(bin),2(daemon),3(sys),4(adm),6(disk),10(wheel) context=root:system_r:unconfined_t [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ This, of course, us how Marcy should have shown is what works, what doesn't;-) Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcy Cortes Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 3:24 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Odd problem with SU command Running Sles9x, SP3. We have sw installed that authenticates users against Active Directory using pam.d stuff (Vintela VAS). Those users don't have to be in /etc/passwd at all. In trying to install db2, we needed to create a local userid. Fine, no problem this is supported. But the su command returns rc 1 if the user is local and rc 0 if the user is VAS. This makes the db2icrt script fail. Was wondering if someone out there is also using an off server authentication method could check and see if it fails for them too? From root: su (localuser) -c id echo $? su (non-localuser) -c id echo $? Return code 1 is supposed to mean su failed, but su doesn't fail - we do get the results of the command properly. The RH Intel Linux servers don't have this problem and removing the VAS calls from /etc/pam.d/su didn't seem to make a difference either. We're reporting it to support, but was hoping to narrow it down to whose support :) Marcy Cortes -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- Cheers John -- spambait [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tourist pics http://portgeographe.environmentaldisasters.cds.merseine.nu/ Please do not reply off-list -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: No Communication Between Guests after aplying SUSE 9 SP3
Scully, William P wrote: We have reported a similar problem where a Linux server -will- ping a peer on the same Virtual Switch until such time as the Linux server shuts down and reboots. After the reboot a Linux server can -no longer- ping another Linux server on the same Virtual Switch. Odd. But very repeatable. The circumvention is to shutdown Linux, log the virtual machine off, log back onto VM, then reboot Linux. In other words, a virtual machine reIPL leaves to servers unable to speak to each other, although they can speak to the outside world. I am suspicious of VM63895. IBM suspects a difference in the VLAN tagging of the frames. I wonder why a reIPL vs. a logoff/logon should matter, with regard to VLAN tagging. But I readily admit that this is an area of TCP/IP where I have limited skills. (PMR 57324 may be of interest to any IBMers.) Hope this helps! Presumably, logoff/logon resets the hardware, like cycling power on my peecees. -- Cheers John -- spambait [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tourist pics http://portgeographe.environmentaldisasters.cds.merseine.nu/ Please do not reply off-list -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
