Ray,
Are you using RedHat 6.2?
Red Hat 7.1 (the last version released for alpha) with
many many many rawhide updates.
(and various source installs)
What is your CMOS clock set to?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (/etc/sysconfig) <11:26PM>
$ /sbin/hwclock && date
Sun Jun 23 23:26:20 2002 -0.082152 secon
Ray,
Are you using RedHat 6.2? I had an issue with that.
What is your CMOS clock set to?
Ray Strode wrote:
Dean Fujioka wrote:
Ray, Can you change your date / time.. I think you're in
yesterdayland ;-)
I'd love to fix the problem, but i'm not exactly sure how...observe:
[EMAIL PROTE
MonMotha wrote:
Is your timezone set wrong?
No, I dont' think so.
That would be the most likely cause of that kind of behavior.
I'd agree, but if you'll note from my original email:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (~) < 5:18PM>
$ date
Fri Jun 21 17:18:47 GMT-10 2002
GMT +10 vice GMT -10?
Apparently that's what it thinks (but doesn't say)
--Ray
Is your timezone set wrong? That would be the most likely cause of that
kind of behavior.
--MonMotha
John & Sheila Nickerson wrote:
GMT +10 vice GMT -10?
On Thursday 20 June 2002 09:20 pm, you wrote:
Dean Fujioka wrote:
> Ray, Can you change your date / time.. I think you're in
> yesterd
GMT +10 vice GMT -10?
On Thursday 20 June 2002 09:20 pm, you wrote:
Dean Fujioka wrote:
> Ray, Can you change your date / time.. I think you're in
> yesterdayland ;-)
I'd love to fix the problem, but i'm not exactly sure how...observe:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (~) < 5:18PM>
$ date
Fri Jun 21 1
Dean Fujioka wrote:
Ray, Can you change your date / time.. I think you're in
yesterdayland ;-)
I'd love to fix the problem, but i'm not exactly sure how...observe:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (~) < 5:18PM>
$ date
Fri Jun 21 17:18:47 GMT-10 2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (~) < 5:18PM>
$ date -u
Fri Jun 21 0
Ray, Can you change your date / time.. I think you're in yesterdayland
;-)
dean
Ray Strode wrote:
However, if you're on Win32 or a 64 bit UNIX platform (UltraSparc,
IA-64, x86-64, Alpha, etc) make sure you patch IMMEDIATELY as there
is the possibility of running arbitrary code as the user
Find instructions attached. This is for a static install though, not
modules.
--MonMotha
Dustin Cross wrote:
Too bad there aren't any updated/patched binaries for Apache on 64-bit
Unix. I have looked everywhere for my SuSE Sparc64 system. Guess I have
to compile it. Is there anything i nee
Too bad there aren't any updated/patched binaries for Apache on 64-bit
Unix. I have looked everywhere for my SuSE Sparc64 system. Guess I have
to compile it. Is there anything i need to know about compiling apache and
getting mod_ssl and mod_php to work?
Dusty
> Patching this is important on
However, if you're on Win32 or a 64 bit UNIX platform (UltraSparc,
IA-64, x86-64, Alpha, etc) make sure you patch IMMEDIATELY as there is
the possibility of running arbitrary code as the user apache is
running as.
Actually, it is only a DoS for Apache 2.0 on 64-bit systems too.
--Ray
Patching this is important on any system, but remember that on 32 bit
UNIX systems, it's only a DoS attack. So if you have your apache limits
tuned down like I do, limited damage should be possible (I only allow
like 5 children on my server...). However, if you're on Win32 or a 64
bit UNIX pl
timely post, Warren! I wasn't aware RedHat had released a patch.
-ho'ala
Warren Togami said:
> Patch your Apache, and please spread the word to everyone you know that
> is running Apache. This applies to home systems too, even if you think
> your system is "not important".
>
> Red Hat Apache up
Patch your Apache, and please spread the word to everyone you know that
is running Apache. This applies to home systems too, even if you think
your system is "not important".
Red Hat Apache update
http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2002-06-20-010-26-SC-RH-SV
Mandrake Apache update
http://
14 matches
Mail list logo
