Discuss February 2006

discuss@lists.centos.org

234 participants
297 discussions

Postfix + Cyrus + AD Windows 2003
by Cleber P. de Souza 02 Feb '06

02 Feb '06

Has someone here successfully implemented Postfix Postfix + Cyrus authentication against a Windows 2003 Active Directory? If there are, have some suggestion about this environment, tips or recommendations? -- Cleber P. de Souza

1 0

SV: SV: [CentOS] usernames with capitals
by Claus Derlien 02 Feb '06

02 Feb '06

--NoDisclaim-- Karanbir Singh wrote: >Can we not top post ? I really hate posting when the content is just >going around and around in circles. >Anyway, just so that everyone knows - this is a known issue. Expect a >fix in U7 CentOS-3, or move to CentOS-4. what does U7 means here ? >There is specific policy in place that prevents Uppercase logins from >being created. Sorry about my posting style. I have fixed my problem by hacking shadow-4.0.3 so it now suits my needs. :-) Its not pretty but now it works, according to my own policy :-) we have never had any problems with capital usernames, not even when we mail enabled the systems years ago. best regards Claus Derlien Frie Funktionærer - faglig organisation og tværfaglig a-kasse - www.f-f.dk *************************************************************************************************************************************** Denne email og alle filer vedlagt som bilag kan indeholde fortroligt materiale, der kun er beregnet for adressaten, og maa ikke udleveres eller kopieres til uvedkommende. Har De ved en fejltagelse modtaget denne email, bedes De venligst omgaaende meddele os dette pr. telefon : 6313 8550. Paa forhaand tak. *************************************************************************************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it may contain confidential information intended for the addressee(s) only. The information is not to be surrendered or copied to unauthorised persons. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone: +45 6313 8550. Thank you. ***************************************************************************************************************************************

2 1

SV: [CentOS] usernames with capitals
by Claus Derlien 02 Feb '06

02 Feb '06

--NoDisclaim-- I cant use an editor to mass update and change usernames as this is a part of an automatic useradd routine written in an ancient legacy application which calls useradd and usermod, we have been using this software for more than 15 years, so its hard for me to argue for a rewrite, so im forced to bend the OS instead it isnt a problem on redhat 8.0, so somewhere in the patches for shadow utils. there must be a change to this behaviour.. up until now i have created the useradds with lower case and manually converted them to upper case I am aware that it is a no no to use upper case usernames, but we have been doing it for years without problems so... thanks for the answers so far best regards claus derlien -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: centos-bounces(a)centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org]På vegne af Les Mikesell Sendt: 1. februar 2006 18:06 Til: CentOS mailing list Emne: Re: [CentOS] usernames with capitals On Wed, 2006-02-01 at 08:45, Barry Brimer wrote: > > If it is just for a set of existing users, I'd add them in > > lowercase, then edit > > /etc/passwd > > /etc/shadow > > /etc/group > > /etc/gshadow > > and mv the /home/ directory to names you want (making sure > > everything matches). > > You might choose to use vipw and vigr to edit the above files as well. > > If you use local mail spools, you will need to rename /var/spool/mail/user > to /var/spool/mail/USER That's actually a different problem and a good reason by itself not to ever use uppercase in a user login name. Mailers on unix-like systems usually want to lowercase the address. I've always avoided doing this myself so I'm not sure about the details or how to work around it. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell(a)gmail.com _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos **************************************************************************** Denne mail er blevet scannet af http://www.virus112.com **************************************************************************** Frie Funktionærer - faglig organisation og tværfaglig a-kasse - www.f-f.dk *************************************************************************************************************************************** Denne email og alle filer vedlagt som bilag kan indeholde fortroligt materiale, der kun er beregnet for adressaten, og maa ikke udleveres eller kopieres til uvedkommende. Har De ved en fejltagelse modtaget denne email, bedes De venligst omgaaende meddele os dette pr. telefon : 6313 8550. Paa forhaand tak. *************************************************************************************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it may contain confidential information intended for the addressee(s) only. The information is not to be surrendered or copied to unauthorised persons. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone: +45 6313 8550. Thank you. ***************************************************************************************************************************************

3 2

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 12, Issue 1
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 02 Feb '06

02 Feb '06

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to centos-announce(a)centos.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to centos-announce-request(a)centos.org You can reach the person managing the list at centos-announce-owner(a)centos.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..." Today's Topics: 1. CESA-2006:0194 Moderate CentOS 4 ia64 gd - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 2. CESA-2006:0194 Moderate CentOS 4 axp gd - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 3. CESA-2006:0194 Moderate CentOS 4 s390(x) gd - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 4. CESA-2006:0194 Moderate CentOS 4 i386 gd - security update (Johnny Hughes) 5. CESA-2006:0194 Moderate CentOS 4 x86_64 gd - security update (Johnny Hughes) 6. CESA:2006-0201-1 CentOS 4 x86_64 Cluster Suite / Global File System update (csgfs repo only) (Johnny Hughes) 7. CESA:2006-0201-1 CentOS 4 i386 Cluster Suite / Global File System update (csgfs repo only) (Johnny Hughes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 21:06:04 +0200 From: Pasi Pirhonen <upi(a)papat.org> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2006:0194 Moderate CentOS 4 ia64 gd - security update To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <20060201190604.GA4423(a)core.upi.iki.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2006:0194 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2006-0194.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: files: updates/ia64/RPMS/gd-2.0.28-4.4E.1.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/gd-devel-2.0.28-4.4E.1.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/gd-progs-2.0.28-4.4E.1.ia64.rpm -- Pasi Pirhonen - upi(a)iki.fi - http://iki.fi/upi/

1 0

PHP upgrade from 4.3.9 to 4.4.2 or 5.x
by Nigel kendrick 02 Feb '06

02 Feb '06

Sorry - noob-ish question.. I have been having problems on a CentOS 4.2 server following an upgrade to the latest version of SugarCRM (segfaults in Apache and some functions not working). Someone has just posted in the SugarCRM forums that they had exactly the same problems on CentOS 4.2 and they fixed them by upgrading from PHP 4.3.9 to 5.0.5. Being a more cautious chap, I'd like to try an upgrade to PHP 4.4.2 first but want to make sure I'm not entering a minefield with PHP as I can't find a friendly yum update so I would appreciate a heads-up on how best to go about it without screwing the whole thing up - I am reading through the notes on the PHP web site but would appreciate it if someone would outline exactly what rpms or binaries I need to install and/or compile. Assuming 4.4.2 doesn't fix things I will have to go for 5.0.5 so any advice on this would be appreciated as the last thing I want to do is lose use of SugarCRM completely! Thanks in advance.

2 2

Gnome print manager
by Jean Lee 02 Feb '06

02 Feb '06

Hi all, I want to use the gnome print manager (in order to manage the print queue) but the icon is not available in : Main menu -> System tools. Does anybody knows : In which package is it contained ? What is the command to launch it from a terminal ? Thanks, Jean

1 0

RAID1: Changing / partition from 2 to 4 active devices
by Ugo Bellavance 02 Feb '06

02 Feb '06

Hi, I have 4 disks and I want to have my swap, / (root), /boot on the 4 disks, RAID1. I successfully managed to get /boot and swap on the 4 disks, but I can't get / on the 4 disks. It is only on 2 right now. I cannot umount /, so how do I do that? Boot in rescue mode? RAID 5 is not an option for now. -- Ugo -> Please don't send a copy of your reply by e-mail. I read the list. -> Please avoid top-posting, long signatures and HTML, and cut the irrelevant parts in your replies.

2 1

RE: [CentOS] [Offtopic] tinydns -some help needed
by Drew Weaver 02 Feb '06

02 Feb '06

> Sorry - I once was sold on the idea of djb's tools and Qmail, and I've > regretted installing it ever since. Save yourself some serious agony - run > (don't walk!) away from djb-ANYTHING! I don't know what problems you had with it, but I'm hapilly using it on about 20 servers (both djbdns and qmail) and never had a problem with it. I'll remember your advice when I'll encounter my first problem, though I may just as well read the docs again when that happens... :) --- I second the djb comment, the guy is an arrogant prick; if something doesn't compile on your server he thinks its your fault. (i.e. back when he was linking all of his software to the wrong error.h and you had to mod it to get it to compile). Not only is it not written that well; but qmail for example. You have to install another piece of software to control relay, and it is totally non intuitive in any way. As far as tinydns the idea of having to install a "control daemon" to run his software is kind of ridiculous to me. Bind really couldn't be any easier to use, and it works every time. -Drew

5 5

Interesting problem
by William Warren 02 Feb '06

02 Feb '06

A friend's machine just had his / partition goto zero percent free. This is an ext3 partition. Not an hour ago he had over 5 gigs free on an 8 gig partition. Any ideas where to look? The logs don't show anything unusual. -- My "Foundation" verse: Isa 54:17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their righteousness is of me, saith the LORD. -- carpe ductum -- "Grab the tape" CDTT (Certified Duct Tape Technician) Linux user #322099 Machines: 206822 256638 276825 http://counter.li.org/

4 4

RE: [CentOS] Apache 2.x and php???
by Ash Christopher 02 Feb '06

02 Feb '06

I think that book is out to lunch! -----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of rado Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 12:34 PM To: centos Subject: [CentOS] Apache 2.x and php??? hi! It seems like everytime I turn around lately, I'm opening up another can of worms and I sure don't like what I just read. this book: Setting Up Lamp (Getting Linux, Apache, MySQL, and PHP Working Together) Sybex/Wiley ISBN 0-7821-4337-7 Page 197 to quote "Which Version of Apache to Use": Choosing your Apache version is something that should be taken from the correct perspective. Apache 1.3 is proven to be stable and, most importantly, compatible with PHP. Apache 2.0 is stable; however, there have been multiple problems with PHP compatibility. Making Apache 2.0 and PHP work together is as predictable as flipping a coin. You will never know for sure whether the configuration will work properly and you might be faced with in-depth troubleshooting and problem solving trying to find out why they will not cooperate. >From our standpoint, we really hope that Apache 2.0 and PHP cooperate sooner rather than later because the features of Apache 2.0 look very promising. For this book, we will be going with the tried and true concept and use the Apache 1.3 series to avoid any heartache you might have due to different configurations and luck of the draw. ....end of quote... wow...this book is copyrighted(2004) if that makes any difference. I sure don't like the idea of going backwards w/Apache, since, although I don't use php but w/standard xhtml/css it has shown me no problems at all and I just don't like to even think in terms of doing what they suggest. But I want to hear from y'all on this. Do y'all find that these problems between Apache 2.0 and PHP are really that prominent as they have stated? Or, maybe I am wishful thinking here but I am hoping that some will reply that they have no problems whatsoever using the 2 together...instead...just go to this website and there is a good tutorial on this subject. lol thx in advance, John Rose _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3 2

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss February 2006