Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

8 participants
34745 discussions

NFS over ssh problems
by Harald Finnås 04 Apr '05

04 Apr '05

I've got a setup where I run nfs over ssh on several distros, and it's been working like a charm on suse, mandrake, redhat 7-9 etc, but I've been unable to get it to work on CentOS. First I set up ssh portforwarding using: /usr/bin/ssh root@<remotehost> -L 250:irc.dynip.no:2049 -f sleep 60d & Then I mount using the following params in fstab: localhost:/somedir /somedir nfs rw,tcp,hard,intr,port=250,mountport=251 0 0 I can telnet to port 250/251 and it answers like expected. I can also see the packets travelling through the tunnel using tcpdump. However, if I try to mount the dir (mount -a), I get this error: mount to NFS server 'localhost' failed: server is down. Sniffing on port 22 when running the mount command, nothing happens. It kinda seems like it ignores the port/mountport options. Any ideas? Regards, Harald

1 1

Default CentOS 4 desktop
by Chris Hammond 04 Apr '05

04 Apr '05

Simple question that I appear to be missing the answer to, how do I specify the default desktop? I know I am probably going to kick myself when I find out but the guy I work with and I just can't seem to find it. :( Thanks Chris

6 6

RE: [Centos] Apache Web Server mod_jk configuration
by Vaneet Sharma 04 Apr '05

04 Apr '05

Im getting the following error No JkShmFile defined in httpd.conf. LoadBalancer will not function properly! I running centos 3.4 , apache 2.something, and jakarta-tomcat-connector 1.2.10 Thankx for help in advance Vaneet -----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces(a)caosity.org [mailto:centos-bounces@caosity.org] On Behalf Of Troy Engel Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 1:50 AM To: CentOS discussion and information list Subject: Re: [Centos] Apache Web Server mod_jk configuration Vaneet Sharma wrote: > i downloaded this connector > jakarta-tomcat-connectors-jk-1.2.6-linux-fc2-i386-apache-2.0.50.so > from tomcat link : > http://www.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connectors/jk/binaries/linux/j k-1.2.6/ I recommend not using download binaries, and taking a few moments to compile your own from the source tarball. Download: http://www.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connectors/jk/source/jk-1.2.8/ jakarta-tomcat-connectors-1.2.8-src.tar.gz I haven't had a chance to work with the brand new (5 days old) 1.2.9 yet, so stay with 1.2.8 for now. - Make sure 'httpd-devel' RPM is installed, and that you have the j2sdk installed somewhere on your system (/usr/local/java). - Untar the mod_jk source above, and compile: - cd jakarta-tomcat-connectors-1.2.8-src/jk/native - ./configure --with-apxs=/usr/sbin/apxs --with-java=/usr/local/java - make You will have a ./apache-2.0/mod_jk.so file ready to use that matches your Apache perfectly. Put this in your modules directory. > and after that i followed the procedure of configuration described in connector section at apache.org website. > > NOTE: i did not configured this connector. ( because it is binary and i dont think i need to configure or compile) You have to do two things: connect apache<=>mod_jk, and configure mod_jk<=>tomcat. When you say you "followed the procedure" on the apache.org website, which portions did you do? -te -- Troy Engel | Systems Engineer Fluid, Inc | http://www.fluid.com _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Vaneet Sharma executive manager iDeasTank Limited an iwg business dolphins' court po 388 valletta, m-malta/europe mobile: +356 9943 8263 skype: CALLVANEET fax: +356 9952 8888 phone: +356 9942 8888 vaneet(a)iwg.info call me on www.skype.com - my ID is CALLVANEET Want a signature like this? - www.plaxo.com\signature iwg is a global e-mobile company creating, building and growing new businesses. iwg founders are pioneers in creating multi-billion dollar mobile and Internet businesses in Europe, Asia and the US. www.iWG.info www.countryprofiler.com/iWG www.visitmalta.com www.mfc.com.mt Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email.

1 0

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 2, Issue 2
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 04 Apr '05

04 Apr '05

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-2005-0402-001: Information CentOS 3.3 x86_64 librsvg2 - dependency conflict resolution (Tru Huynh) 2. CESA-2005-0402-001: Information CentOS 3.3 i386 librsvg2 - dependency conflict resolution (Tru Huynh) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 22:56:40 +0200 From: Tru Huynh <tru(a)centos.org> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2005-0402-001: Information CentOS 3.3 x86_64 librsvg2 - dependency conflict resolution To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <20050402205640.GA3654(a)sillage.bis.pasteur.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2005-0402-001 for CentOS 3.3 only librsvg2 required update for CentOS 3.3 x86_64 (resolving dependency conflicts) for the gtk2 security update (CESA 2005:344) The following updated file has been uploaded and is currently syncing to the mirrors: x86_64: updates/x86_64/RPMS/librsvg2-2.2.3-6.x86_64.rpm updates/x86_64/RPMS/librsvg2-devel-2.2.3-6.x86_64.rpm Tru -- Tru Huynh (CentOS-3 i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance) http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B

1 0

autofs
by Michael Falzon 04 Apr '05

04 Apr '05

Hi not sure how long this has been going on for ( sure it has not been that long ) when i get auto fs to try map a shair using CentOS release 3.4 the shairs UID is not set right Ie cat /etc/auto.misc uber_work -fstype=smbfs,username=me,password=XXX,workgroup=box,uid=500 //sys/uber when ls i get drwxrwx--- 1 root 2015 0 Mar 2 16:50 1 drwxrwxr-x 1 2001 2015 0 Mar 3 11:55 2 drwxrwx--- 1 root 2015 0 Dec 6 11:02 3 drwxrwx--- 1 root 2015 0 Dec 6 11:02 4 drwxrwx--- 1 root 2015 0 Dec 6 11:03 5 drwxrwx--- 1 root 2015 0 Dec 6 11:02 6 as you can see the UID's are not right not 100% sure why some info samba-3.0.9-1.3E.2 autofs-4.1.3-47 See BUG. "That's not a bug, it's a feature!" A bug can be changed to a feature by documenting it. Michael Falzon (RHCT) Mozy's Swamp BBs & Red Dwarf BBs http://mozysswamp.org Registered LFS User #406 Registered Linux User #204397 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- UNINTENDED RECIPIENT: This email and any attachments are confidential. They may contain legally privileged information or copyright material. You should not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact us at once by return email and then permanently delete both messages. VIRUS WARNING: Mozy's Swamp & Red Dwarf BBs does not accept liability in connection with computer viruses, data corruption, delay or denial of service as a result of virus infection.

1 0

RE: [CentOS] Re: postfix tightening
by Mark A. Lewis 04 Apr '05

04 Apr '05

> On Saturday 02 April 2005 05:32 pm, karl(a)streetlampsoftware.com wrote: > > > How > > would I go about providing a good, solid *matching* ptr (as > in, mail > > from AcmeWidget.com reflects to mail.AcmeWidget.com at x.x.x.219 ... > > which also happens to be mail.hostco.com) for the bazillion and one > > virtual-hosted email accounts on mail.hostco.com? > > You wouldn't. That's not and never was the purpose of a ptr record. > The ptr record is to attach responsibility for the IP#. > That's done by pointing it to the hostname. But, in this case, it has multiple hostnames, all of which are valid. > You could have multiple ptr records, but there exists no > facility in any DNS or resolution system to match up ptr > records with a records. If I recall correctly, behavior in > the case of multiple ptr records is undefined. Interesting, never tried creating multiple ptr records. I guess if the MTA knew how to deal with that it would be a very good solution. I will have to do some testing to see how it reacts to the scenario. It all comes back to a few key points: 1) Refusing mail based on HELO not matching the ptr record is not RFC compliant, but it is not uncommon. 2) There are some vanity issues with someone who cares what the mail headers say in them. As someone else said, if they are expecting that, they should expect to pay for it. 3) All of the RFCs pertaining to this were written in a much more trusting time, and as we are seeing, they need to be revisited. 4) There are some easy to do HELO checks that can eliminate a large number of spammers and misconfigured MTAs. I do think that the RFCs need to address dynamic address space more sufficently. I think that the one proposal where the source IP must be listed under a particular record type in DNS will go a long way towards addressing many of these issues. IMO, none of the cost based solutions I have read such as "postage" or something mildly CPU intensive will accomplish anything but a mess. Good discussion though, I have learned a lot by actually reading some of the RFCs and some dicussions on them. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

3 2

Re: postfix tightening
by karl＠streetlampsoftware.com 03 Apr '05

03 Apr '05

>Tom Ivar Helbekkmo writes: > >"Mark A. Lewis" <mark(a)siliconjunkie.net> writes: > >> Lets say that Acme Widget has their mail hosted with Hostco. Acme Widget >> would rather not have mail.hostco.com in the mail headers for whatever >> reason. So, hostco doesn't setup a ptr record for it. This does not make >> Acme Widget or Hostco any more likely to be spammers, it just makes you >> more likely to drop their mail. > >Actually, the problem you're describing is routinely solved at any >decent ISP *without* breaking any rules. If the above were a genuine >scenario, I would conclude that Hostco is run by nincompoops. ;-) For the posterity of the list, and the wonderful information that's been provided so far for all of the newbie nincompoops out in CentOS list lurker-land ... Let's say that I'm a nincompoop newbie sysadmin from HostCo that would like to avoid breaking any rules. (In reality, I'm a PHB, and I let my sysadmin worry about the rule-breaking.) How would I go about providing a good, solid *matching* ptr (as in, mail from AcmeWidget.com reflects to mail.AcmeWidget.com at x.x.x.219 ... which also happens to be mail.hostco.com) for the bazillion and one virtual-hosted email accounts on mail.hostco.com? -Karl Katzke

3 2

RE: [CentOS] Re: postfix tightening
by Mark A. Lewis 03 Apr '05

03 Apr '05

Stumbled across this while researching the points raised in this thread. Very good writeup IMO and addresses many of the questions/concerns. http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/misc/postfix-anti-UCE.txt -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

2 1

CentOS 3.4 to CentOS 4
by Jason 03 Apr '05

03 Apr '05

I have upgraded to CentOS 4 from 3.4. I am having trouble figuring out the mail changes. Under 3.4, Imap and POP were modules that xinetd controlled. Under 4.0, I have a choice of either Cyrus-Imapd or Dovecot. After googling all week, I was about to get my user account authenticated under Cyrus and the saslpasswd program, as well as dovecot. My problem is that they don't know where my mail is. I run postfix, and have mail delivered to /var/spool/mail/%u. I put this into Cyrus' mail directory but it still doesn't see anything. Dovecot always tries to chdir to the user's home directory, ignoring anything I put into dovecot.conf concerning mail locations. Any ideas? Thanks.

1 0

RE: [CentOS] postfix tightening
by Mark A. Lewis 03 Apr '05

03 Apr '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org > [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of > ryanag(a)zoominternet.net > Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 9:24 PM > To: CentOS mailing list > Subject: RE: [CentOS] postfix tightening > > On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 21:04 -0600, Mark A. Lewis wrote: > > > > Riight. Ever done a reverse lookup on a RR IP? Rogers? SBC? All of > > them will have valid reverse entries. > See below. > > http://searchcio.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid19_gci917504,00.html > > "Reverse DNS (rDNS) is a method of resolving an IP address > into a domain > name, just as the domain name system (DNS) resolves domain names into > associated IP addresses. One of the applications of reverse > DNS is as a > spam filter. Here's how it works: Typically, a spammer uses an invalid > IP address, one that doesn't match the domain name. A reverse > DNS lookup > program inputs IP addresses of incoming messages to a DNS database. If > no valid name is found to match the IP address, the server blocks that > message." So, here is the problem. Lets say that Acme Widget has their mail hosted with Hostco. Acme Widget would rather not have mail.hostco.com in the mail headers for whatever reason. So, hostco doesn't setup a ptr record for it. This does not make Acme Widget or Hostco any more likely to be spammers, it just makes you more likely to drop their mail. Now, the other side of that... Foospam wants to send out 87 bazillion mail messages to everyone about fooagra. So, they set their mail server to helo with fooco.com and set the ptr record to be mail.fooco.com and they just danced right by all of this with very minimal effort. For that matter, you can use whatever ptr your ISP sets up for you. The whole accountablity thing is a fallacy. I can buy a domain right now for $8, put whatever I want in the whois info and just use that for the ptr record part, it could be a throwaway domain for all I care. At the end of the day, it bought the person reciving the spam nothing. Reverse DNS or not, you can see what IP the mail came from, you can tell who is the owner of that IP and they can find out what user has that IP. The problem is that most of them are simply unwilling to do so, they ignore mail to the abuse address or just give you a canned answer. My point is that relying on this only makes you more likely to drop legit mail and poses no problem to the spammers. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

7 9

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