hese updates
> > were installed a year ago instead of now.
>
> It's definitely an annoying problem. Newer yum can log to syslog, which will
> solve this.
Syslog doesn't contain a year either. But on most machines the syslog
files are rotated more than once per year ;-)
On 2006-04-10 15:00:23 +0200, Nils Breunese (Lemonbit Internet) wrote:
> Peter J. Holzer wrote:
>
> >BTW, is there somewhere a complete up-to-date description of the spec
> >file? The file above is just a "what's new since some unspecified
> >release" file,
On 2006-04-10 11:53:04 +0100, Brian Morrison wrote:
> On 10/04/2006 Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> > > That's when the config file has essential changes for the updated
> > > package to work at all, and hence must be installed. The rpmsave
> > > file is there as
On 2006-04-10 09:38:18 +0100, Brian Morrison wrote:
> Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> > [0] Or sometimes, they are replaced and your file is renamed to
> > .rpmsave. I still haven't figured out when that happens.
>
> That's when the config file has essential changes for t
aced and your file is renamed to
.rpmsave. I still haven't figured out when that happens.
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer| If I wanted to be "academically correct",
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR | I'd be programming in Java.
| | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | I don't, and I'
listman.util.phx.redhat.com, before it was sent on.
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer| If I wanted to be "academically correct",
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR | I'd be programming in Java.
| | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | I don't, and I'm not.
__/ | http://w
red for filesystems which don't really use any device
(like proc, sys, tmpfs, etc.).It might be a good idea to use a more
descriptive string than "none", though.
> Actually, I forgot whether the tmpfs automatically adds the sticky bit on
> /tmp, or would I need to change the m
ures to stop this type of attack, but for
> this particular server, /tmp is not a mounted filesystem but part of /, so I
> can't really do that without re-partitioning the disk and creating a dedicated
> /tmp.
You could put /tmp on a tmpfs:
/etc/fstab:
none /tmp tmpfs noexec 0 0
e Project" sort of has the
> connotation of "software janitor project," or "package housekeeper
> project," or "security roto-rooter project."
In a recent survey "are these professions important for Austria?"
cleaning staff was ranked before IT profes
(even though FC2 openssh is too old to recognize
-Y) and connect with ssh -X from FC2 to debian.
> What would be the recommended fix for this?
Check the documentation and configuration of the ssh servers. Use the
option -vv to get (lots of) debug output.
hp
--
_ | Peter J. H
On 2005-09-19 11:51:59 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Monday 19 September 2005 11:42, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> >On 2005-09-19 10:48:34 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >[new version of ntpd]
> >
> >> This latter version does not seem to be writing to /var/log/ntpd.log
s done this for the last 10 years or
so).
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer| In our modern say,learn,know in a day
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR | world, perhaps being an expert is an
| | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | outdated concept.
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ |-- Catharine Drozdowski
x27;t call that joe-jobbing: Joe-jobbing implies (to me, at
least) an intention to hurt the reputation of the owner of the address.
The use of random addresses by viruses isn't designed to do that. It's
an attempt at social engineering (users are more likely to open an
attachment from s
On 2005-08-08 10:47:51 -0500, Mike Klinke wrote:
> On Monday 08 August 2005 10:40, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> > So fedora legacy includes a patched version of zlib 1.2.0.7, and
> > James offers a package for zlib 1.2.3. Where's the problem?
>
>
> And all this doesn&#
or example, why is this identified with FC1
Probably because it was built for FC1.
> when the "current" FC1 zlib package that's been released
> ( http://download.fedoralegacy.org/fedora/1/updates/i386/ ) is:
>
> rpm -qa | grep -i zlib
> zlib-1.2.0.7-2.1.legacy
S
15 matches
Mail list logo
