devil-linux-discuss — General Mailing List for all discussions

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] Realtek Network Card Drivers

[John B. <jbr...@gm...>]

On 7/7/06, Neobyte <neo...@gm...> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>           I've just been testing out some different flavours of Linux as a
> router and I'm fairly impressed with the "Devil" distro.
> My only problem is that I need to add realtek drivers for my cards.
>
> Can someone please direct me as where to put them so they come up on the
> setup list?
>

Try the 8139cp or the 8139too drivers.
-- 
John Bridleman

[Devil-Linux-discuss] Realtek Network Card Drivers

[Neobyte <neo...@gm...>]

Hi All,
          I've just been testing out some different flavours of Linux as a
router and I'm fairly impressed with the "Devil" distro.
My only problem is that I need to add realtek drivers for my cards.

Can someone please direct me as where to put them so they come up on the
setup list?

Regards
Neobyte

[Devil-Linux-discuss] rsync problem

[Oliver N. <dig...@gm...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi!

I have some trouble with rsync. I use a self-compiled cvs-version of DL (1.2.10).
I want to rsync from a remote machine to get a mirror of my ftp,
but a "rsync --daemon" simply returns nothing and a "ps aux" shows that no rsync process
is started.
Could anyone confirm this, or did i broke something by myself?

Thx for helping out

Olli
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with CentOS - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFErNTn724ZL5LNhNcRAi9HAJwMiTRAx5ALhFMysXTLHcB+j0JtPQCdFzOB
WaycD+OhPAdwX2J6tw7nIP0=
=cw07
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] Small Devil running only a few services

[Heiko Z. <he...@zu...>]

On Wed, July 5, 2006 14:43, James Hoegl wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
> I am working for an ISP that is looking into running a DNS server on a
> 32MB
> chip that is capable of remote GUI administration.
>
> I have found Devil to be pretty much what I need, however the distro size
> is quite large, and I am finding trouble in creating a smaller OS using
> the Devil distro.
>
>
> I need it to have pretty much everything the core Devil has (including
> the NIC drivers), but it only needs to run DNS (BIND), SAMBA, and SSH.
> Samaba
> will be used for the remote administration of the BIND files and the SSH
> will be used for remote management of the OS.
>
> These are going to fit onto 32MB FLASH cards that have an adapter to make
>  them from PCMCIA bus into IDE buses.
>
> I have some Linux experience, but I have a question about the
> configurability of Devil.
>
> First off, I noted that you can "customize" the CD, or distro. However,
> it states that it wants the full ISO in a folder in order to make the
> distro. I am wondering if all the files/folders + any new folders/files
> will be added to the custom ISO, or can I opt out of certian packages?
>
> Secondly, do I need to configure this on a Linux box? I have noted that I
>  can not copy the distro to a Windows box, due to naming conventions.
>
> Thanks,
> James

You need to get the DL Development Environment and compile your own ISO.
You can select which packages you want and so strip it down quite a bit.
Check our documentation on how to do this.

-- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

[Devil-Linux-discuss] Small Devil running only a few services

[James H. <jam...@gm...>]

Hello,

I am working for an ISP that is looking into running a DNS server on a 32MB
chip that is capable of remote GUI administration.

I have found Devil to be pretty much what I need, however the distro size is
quite large, and I am finding trouble in creating a smaller OS using the
Devil distro.

I need it to have pretty much everything the core Devil has (including the
NIC drivers), but it only needs to run DNS (BIND), SAMBA, and SSH. Samaba
will be used for the remote administration of the BIND files and the SSH
will be used for remote management of the OS.

These are going to fit onto 32MB FLASH cards that have an adapter to make
them from PCMCIA bus into IDE buses.

I have some Linux experience, but I have a question about the
configurability of Devil.

First off, I noted that you can "customize" the CD, or distro. However, it
states that it wants the full ISO in a folder in order to make the distro. I
am wondering if all the files/folders + any new folders/files will be added
to the custom ISO, or can I opt out of certian packages?

Secondly, do I need to configure this on a Linux box? I have noted that I
can not copy the distro to a Windows box, due to naming conventions.

Thanks,
James

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] Feature Request!

[Heiko Z. <he...@zu...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Wed, July 5, 2006 01:59, Jos...@le... wrote:
> Hello!
>
>
> Since the VMware Player and also then VMware Server is now freely
> available, it would be great if the support software could be included.
> (see http://www.vmware.com/download/ section "Free virtualization
> Products" )
>
>
> The problem of using DL inside a virtual machine is, that the vmware
> tools couldn't get installed into the virtual box.
>
> I don't know if this is possible or not.
>
>
> Perhaps you can provide a DL distribution that has the Vmware client
> tools installed as a freely available and ready configured "virtual
> appliance" like those you can find on
> http://www.vmware.com/vmtn/appliances/directory/
>
>
> Maybe this could be done.

Maybe it is already done. ;-)
1.2.10 has support for VMWare !

1.2.10 will be released in a few days (if we don't encounter any major
problems).

- -- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkSrp/sACgkQUcytMSbs+YVaPgCeI783pqLK09iu1qfjVTzYhSzi
9HAAn2COdC9sglfqsXTXm8SKF2+HaaBg
=E6aU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] additional configuration

[<Her...@sp...>]

dev...@li... wrote on 18.04.2004
00:15:25:

> Her...@sp... wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > dev...@li... wrote on 17.04.2004
> > 15:13:31:
> >
> >
> >>Her...@sp... wrote:
> >>
> >>>This is a bit too restrictive for me, I'd rather like to fall back to
a
> >>>default save config instad of not booting. Otherwise, if I forget to
> >
> > sign
> >
> >>>my changes and I perform a reboot I'm lost...
> >>
> >>Yes the this risk will exist....
> >>
> >>What about burning a default "ermergency mode" etc.tar.bz2 onto the CD
?
> >>
> >>Heiko
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Sounds good, but it should be configurable before burning in order to
have
> > at least some networking like ssh server to fix the bad signature.
>
> We have to put some carefull thought in there, because we need to make
> sure that an intruder can use this functionality.

Hi all

I'd like to pick up this very old thread...

You were talking about adding a fallback method in case the signature for
the etc.tar.bz2 file is wrong. Has this feature ever been implemented?

Also would it be possible, instead of signing the whole etc.tar.bz2 to
generate for example an MD5 sum of the etc.tar.bz2 and then sign that sum?
This way I wouldn't have to copy the whole etc.tar.bz2 file to my admin
station (This can be anoying on low bandwith connections).

Herbert
>
> Heiko
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
> Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
> GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
> administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Devil-linux-discuss mailing list
> Dev...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/devil-linux-discuss

[Devil-Linux-discuss] Feature Request!

[<Jos...@le...>]

Hello!

Since the VMware Player and also then VMware Server is now freely
available, it would be great if the support software could be included.
(see http://www.vmware.com/download/ section "Free virtualization
Products" )

The problem of using DL inside a virtual machine is, that the vmware
tools couldn't get installed into the virtual box.

I don't know if this is possible or not.=20

Perhaps you can provide a DL distribution that has the Vmware client
tools installed as a freely available and ready configured "virtual
appliance" like those you can find on
http://www.vmware.com/vmtn/appliances/directory/

Maybe this could be done.=20

Greetings
Josef Fuchs
###########################################=0A=
=0A=
This message has been scanned by F-Secure Anti-Virus for Microsoft =
Exchange.=0A=
For more information, connect to http://www.f-secure.com/

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] Call for testers!

[<fe...@fr...>]

I did test Pam with Radius and it works fine.


>On Ven Juin 23 15:08 , Bruce Smith <br...@ar...> sent:
>
>I made a bunch of changes in PAM and would like some people to test the
>changes and provide feedback before we release 1.2.10.

>I compiled a 'server' release (without grsecurity) optimized for i586,
>so it will work as a server, or as a firewall on an older box.

>Please get: devil-linux-1.2.10-2006-06-18-i586-SMP-server-bs.tar.bz2

>in the /pub/devel/testing/ directory on your favorite DL FTP mirror.
>And let us know how it goes! :-)

>- BS


Nouveau: le premier abonnement ADSL sans taxe mensuelle!
Changez d=E8s =E0 pr=E9sent pour sunrise ADSL free.
http://www.sunrise.ch/fr/privatkunden/iminternetsurfen/adsl/adsl_abosundp=
reise/adsl_gelegenheitssurfer/adsl_free.htm

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] Devil-linux-discuss Digest, Vol 1, Issue 1319

[<cc...@fr...>]

> I've been using DL for some time now as a NAS for my home network,
> problem is I just went gigabit and the r8169 driver wont recognize my
> card...

I have the same problem with a D-Link DEG-528T card. I get the kernel message 
"no adapter found" when I try to load the module. I have no problem with 
r8169 drivers from recent kernels (2.6.x).
Where is the problem ?

Christian

[Devil-Linux-discuss] r8169 driver

[Caio Z. <io...@te...>]

Hi everyone!

I've been using DL for some time now as a NAS for my home network, 
problem is I just went gigabit and the r8169 driver wont recognize my 
card...
It is a TP-Link 3269 that uses the 8169 chipset...
The card manufacturer included a source code for the driver but I don't 
know how to compile it and include it in DL.
Can you give me the directions on how do I make it work? I got a SuSE 
and a Knoppix system I can use, but no experience on cross compiling 
anything...

cheers,
Caio.

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] The Devil-linux-discuss Archives

[Bruce S. <bw...@ar...>]

> I can't read the Devil-linux-discuss Archives. The link displays a page with 
> the following message :
> ERROR
> Either your mailing list name was misspelled or your mailing list has not been 
> archived yet. If this list has just been created, please retry in 2-4 hours.
> 
> There are no archives ?

There are archives the last time I looked.

It appears that SourceForge has them down for awhile.  ALL of the DL
lists have the status of:  "Mailing list archives temporarily disabled"

Try it later and hopefully it will work.

 - BS

[Devil-Linux-discuss] The Devil-linux-discuss Archives

[<cc...@fr...>]

Hello,

I can't read the Devil-linux-discuss Archives. The link displays a page with 
the following message :
ERROR
Either your mailing list name was misspelled or your mailing list has not been 
archived yet. If this list has just been created, please retry in 2-4 hours.

There are no archives ?

Christian

[Devil-Linux-discuss] Call for testers!

[Bruce S. <br...@ar...>]

I made a bunch of changes in PAM and would like some people to test the
changes and provide feedback before we release 1.2.10.

I compiled a 'server' release (without grsecurity) optimized for i586,
so it will work as a server, or as a firewall on an older box.

Please get:  devil-linux-1.2.10-2006-06-18-i586-SMP-server-bs.tar.bz2

in the /pub/devel/testing/ directory on your favorite DL FTP mirror.
And let us know how it goes!  :-)

 - BS

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] Binding nics to interfaces

[Serge L. <fi...@in...>]

 Frank,

Thursday, June 22, 2006, 5:28:54 AM, you wrote:

>> > is there a way to bind a particular nic to a particular interface in DL,
>> > i.e. a way to map that says eth0 has MAC address xxxx etc?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> Program name is "nameif"
>>

> Thanks Serge
>  this could be what I have been looking for, but it is not easy to use in DL
> (at least not with an /etc/mactab file): nameif needs to be run when the nic
> modules are loaded, but the interfaces are still down... if I insert a call
> to nameif in the /etc/init.d/network script after the modprobe, the name of
> the device being configured changes in the middle of the script. 
 You can do the following any time( rename eth2 (00:0C:29:40:65:27) to
 eth10 with saving all NIC settings )
 ifconfig eth2 down
 nameif eth10 00:0C:29:40:65:27
 ifconfig eth10 up

> In order to use this, I'd have to introduce a new param into the nic-config
> file (eg HWADDR) and then make a single 'command-line' call  to nameif after
> the module has been loaded.
Another "MAC" option ?
But may be just do it in another way:
Assign necessary MAC address to the interface by using "MAC" option of
nic configuration file.


-- 
Best regards,
 Serge                            mailto:fi...@in...

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] Binding nics to interfaces

[Frank W. <Fra...@ct...>]

On Wednesday 21 June 2006 21:55, Serge Leschinsky wrote:
> Frank,
>
> Tuesday, June 20, 2006, 11:57:41 PM, you wrote:
> > is there a way to bind a particular nic to a particular interface in DL,
> > i.e. a way to map that says eth0 has MAC address xxxx etc?
>
> Yes.
>
> Program name is "nameif"
>

Thanks Serge
 this could be what I have been looking for, but it is not easy to use in DL 
(at least not with an /etc/mactab file): nameif needs to be run when the nic 
modules are loaded, but the interfaces are still down... if I insert a call 
to nameif in the /etc/init.d/network script after the modprobe, the name of 
the device being configured changes in the middle of the script. 

In order to use this, I'd have to introduce a new param into the nic-config 
file (eg HWADDR) and then make a single 'command-line' call  to nameif after 
the module has been loaded.

Thanks,

Frank

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] Binding nics to interfaces

[Serge L. <fi...@in...>]

Frank,

Tuesday, June 20, 2006, 11:57:41 PM, you wrote:

> is there a way to bind a particular nic to a particular interface in DL, i.e.
> a way to map that says eth0 has MAC address xxxx etc?
Yes.

Program name is "nameif"

man nameif :

NAME
       nameif - name network interfaces based on MAC addresses

SYNOPSIS
       nameif [-c configfile] [-s]
       nameif [-c configfile] [-s] {interface macaddress}

DESCRIPTION
       nameif  renames  network  interfaces  based on mac addresses. When no arguments are given /etc/mactab is read. Each
       line  of it contains an interface name and a Ethernet MAC address. Comments are allowed starting with #.  Otherwise
       the  interfaces  specified  on  the  command line are processed.  nameif looks for the interface with the given MAC
       address and renames it to the name given.

       When the -s argument is given all error messages go to the syslog.

       When the -c argument is given with a file name that file is read instead of /etc/mactab.

NOTES
       nameif should be run before the interface is up, otherwise it'll fail.

FILES
       /etc/mactab

BUGS
       Only works for Ethernet currently.

net-tools                                               18 Oct 2000                                              NAMEIF(8)

-- 
Best regards,
 Serge                            mailto:fi...@in...

[Devil-Linux-discuss] Binding nics to interfaces

[Frank W. <Fra...@ct...>]

Hi all,

is there a way to bind a particular nic to a particular interface in DL, i.e. 
a way to map that says eth0 has MAC address xxxx etc?

Thanks a lot in advance,

Frank

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] dhcpcd config query for DSL-MAX and D-link DSL-300T

[Dick M. <di...@li...>]

vk...@ex... wrote:
>> I've recently changed adsl service and my adsl modem and now have a
>> problem.  If the adsl line goes down, which it does occasionally when it
>> feels the need to renegotiate the line rate, the DL network connection
>> is disrupted and doesn't recover without manual intervention.
> ....
>> My question is: has anybody else experienced this problem and is it a
>> reasonable way to work around it?  Is there a better way?
> 
> Not sure about a better way but I have the following script running as a
> minutely cron job:

It must be a better way because setting the client lease time doesn't 
work! Well, it does the first time, then it reverts.  However I just 
reduced the DHCP lease time in the modem which essentially the same. 
That does work; it means the network is down for up to half an hour but 
I think I can live with that.

Thanks for your script. Unfortunately as my modem handles the ppp 
encapsulation (and my ISP uses pppoa) using the pppoe scripts is not a 
possibility.

Dick

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] dhcpcd config query for DSL-MAX and D-link DSL-300T

[<vk...@ex...>]

> I've recently changed adsl service and my adsl modem and now have a
> problem.  If the adsl line goes down, which it does occasionally when it
> feels the need to renegotiate the line rate, the DL network connection
> is disrupted and doesn't recover without manual intervention.
....
> My question is: has anybody else experienced this problem and is it a
> reasonable way to work around it?  Is there a better way?

Not sure about a better way but I have the following script running as a
minutely cron job:

#!/bin/bash
export PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/usr/sbin
#echo "Checking the network connection..."
status=`ifconfig | egrep "^ppp0"`
#echo "Result: $status"
if [[ -z "$status" ]]
then
        #echo "Oops, network is down. We are in trouble. Stopping ADSL"
        pppoe-stop
        #echo "Waiting 4 seconds"
        sleep 4
        #echo "Starting ADSL"
        pppoe-start
fi


I tried hooking to ppp-down before but if the box cant reconnect
immediately things get messy.


Regards

Vesselin

[Devil-Linux-discuss] dhcpcd config query for DSL-MAX and D-link DSL-300T

[Dick M. <di...@li...>]

I've recently changed adsl service and my adsl modem and now have a 
problem.  If the adsl line goes down, which it does occasionally when it 
feels the need to renegotiate the line rate, the DL network connection 
is disrupted and doesn't recover without manual intervention.

I suspect this is due to the modem (D-link DSL-300T) not setting up its 
internal bridging until it receives a DHCP request from DL.   I've set 
the client lease time in DL to 1800s in the hope that eventually DL will 
renew the lease and recover.

My question is: has anybody else experienced this problem and is it a 
reasonable way to work around it?  Is there a better way?

Dick

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] DL 1.2.10 (& 9): Slow Samba - LDAP problem?

[Dom <dl...@ed...>]

Dom wrote:
> Dom wrote:
>>
>>
>> Dom wrote:
>>> [this stems from thread: 'DL 1.2.9 upgrade from 1.2.6 (SMP Server) - 
>>> but slow?' The new subject title is hopefully more useful, as the 
>>> problem relates to Samba and, I think, LDAP]
>>>
>>> With Devil-Linux 1.2.6 our very simple (perhaps too simple) Samba 
>>> setup [see below] worked like a charm.
>>>
>>> Now using DL 1.2.10 (test) it is very slow for the first access by 
>>> any machine, and again after a while (if the Samba share has not 
>>> been accessed in a while) it is very slow again. A similar problem 
>>> (though it seemed worse) occurred with DL 1.2.9.
>>>
>>> Looking at the log files (which I never did before, they weren't 
>>> even saved previously), I find this stuff (for the log file for any 
>>> machine that has accessed the Samba share):
>>>
>>> [2006/06/11 07:28:09, 0] passdb/secrets.c:fetch_ldap_pw(629)
>>>   fetch_ldap_pw: neither ldap secret retrieved!
>>> [2006/06/11 07:28:09, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_connect_system(851)
>>>   ldap_connect_system: Failed to retrieve password from secrets.tdb
>>> [2006/06/11 07:28:09, 1] lib/smbldap.c:another_ldap_try(1051)
>>>   Connection to LDAP server failed for the 1 try!
>>>
>>> ...(and repeating every second)...
>>>
>>> [2006/06/11 07:28:23, 0] passdb/secrets.c:fetch_ldap_pw(629)
>>>   fetch_ldap_pw: neither ldap secret retrieved!
>>> [2006/06/11 07:28:23, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_connect_system(851)
>>>   ldap_connect_system: Failed to retrieve password from secrets.tdb
>>> [2006/06/11 07:28:23, 1] lib/smbldap.c:another_ldap_try(1051)
>>>   Connection to LDAP server failed for the 15 try!
>>> [2006/06/11 07:28:24, 0] passdb/secrets.c:fetch_ldap_pw(629)
>>>   fetch_ldap_pw: neither ldap secret retrieved!
>>> [2006/06/11 07:28:24, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_connect_system(851)
>>>   ldap_connect_system: Failed to retrieve password from secrets.tdb
>>> [2006/06/11 07:28:24, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_search_suffix(1346)
>>>   smbldap_search_suffix: Problem during the LDAP search: (unknown) 
>>> (Time limit exceeded)
>>> [2006/06/11 07:28:24, 1] smbd/service.c:make_connection_snum(693)
>>>   192.168.101.90 (192.168.101.90) connect to service d initially as 
>>> user someone (uid=1000, gid=100) (pid 2773)
>>>
>>> So it seems to me that when a machine accesses a Samba share, Samba 
>>> tries repeatedly to use LDAP and fails, then after 16 tries (and 16 
>>> seconds) it gives up and provides access anyway.
>>>
>>> Either I need to get the Samba - LDAP bit working (which I guess was 
>>> not a requirement with DL 1.2.6 / Samba 3.0.14a), or find a way to 
>>> force Samba to work the old way. I see that DL 1.2.7 'added samba 
>>> smbldap-tools (Heiko / Thomas Eder)' - I don't know whether this 
>>> could be related, and Samba is now 3.0.22. I have tried starting 
>>> slapd (/etc/init.d/slapd start) which I never used previously, it 
>>> hasn't helped. I guess I would have to configure it - I found info 
>>> about configuring Samba with LDAP here 
>>> http://times.usefulinc.com/2005/09/25-ldap and here 
>>> http://www.idealx.com/downloads/samba3-ldap-howto.pdf but they both 
>>> look a bit scary. I just want it to be like it was before, really!
>>>
>>> Here is my smb.conf file, all of it:
>>>
>>> --------------
>>>
>>> *[global]
>>> workgroup = MY_WORKGROUP
>>> server string = Samba Server
>>> security = SHARE
>>> guest account = someone
>>> log file = /home/z-shares/public/var/log.%m
>>> max log size = 50
>>> dns proxy = No
>>> wins support = Yes*
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> [ourdocs]
>>> path = /home/z-shares/public
>>> read only = No
>>> guest only = Yes
>>> guest ok = Yes
>>>
>>> *----------------
>>> ****Any help gratefully received!
>>>
>>> Dom
>>>   
>> An old posting I found which makes me wonder if LDAP is integrated 
>> and is required in the new Samba build in DL:
>> "Samba does not require LDAP libraries, but it sounds like the nmbd binary you are using has been
>> compiled with LDAP support included. If you want to use Samba without LDAP you will need to obtain
>> a binary compiled without LDAP support, or compile your own binary from the source code."
>> from: http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2004-February/081597.html
>>
>> Dom
> I think I have solved this by adding to [global] in smb.conf:
>
> passdb backend = smbpasswd
>
> I think what has happened is that with LDAP now installed in the DL 
> Samba build, if you don't specify the passdb backend method, it tries 
> LDAP then tdb (or possibly the other way round). Eventually it goes 
> back to smbpasswd (I guess) but takes a very long time (16 seconds) to 
> do so.
>
> With this parameter my Samba server is now running at speed again.
>
> Dom
>
My previous postings on this thread appear in the archive as blank, tho 
they were copied out by email okay. I am resubmitting this in text 
format so hopefully this will appear, then it could help others in the 
future...

Dom

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] DL 1.2.10 (& 9): Slow Samba - LDAP problem?

[Dom <dl...@ed...>]

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Dom wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid...@ed..."
 type="cite"> <br>
  <br>
Dom wrote:
  <blockquote cite="mid...@ed..."
 type="cite"> [this stems from thread: 'DL 1.2.9 upgrade from 1.2.6
(SMP Server) -
but slow?' The new subject title is hopefully more useful, as the
problem relates to Samba and, I think, LDAP]<br>
    <br>
With Devil-Linux 1.2.6 our very simple (perhaps too simple) Samba setup
[see below] worked like a charm.<br>
    <br>
Now using DL 1.2.10 (test) it is very slow for the first access by any
machine, and again after a while (if the Samba share has not been
accessed in a while) it is very slow again. A similar problem (though
it seemed worse) occurred with DL 1.2.9.<br>
    <br>
Looking at the log files (which I never did before, they weren't even
saved previously), I find this stuff (for the log file for any machine
that has accessed the Samba share):<br>
    <br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:09, 0] passdb/secrets.c:fetch_ldap_pw(629)<br>
&nbsp; fetch_ldap_pw: neither ldap secret retrieved!<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:09, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_connect_system(851)<br>
&nbsp; ldap_connect_system: Failed to retrieve password from secrets.tdb<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:09, 1] lib/smbldap.c:another_ldap_try(1051)<br>
&nbsp; Connection to LDAP server failed for the 1 try!<br>
    <br>
...(and repeating every second)...<br>
    <br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:23, 0] passdb/secrets.c:fetch_ldap_pw(629)<br>
&nbsp; fetch_ldap_pw: neither ldap secret retrieved!<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:23, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_connect_system(851)<br>
&nbsp; ldap_connect_system: Failed to retrieve password from secrets.tdb<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:23, 1] lib/smbldap.c:another_ldap_try(1051)<br>
&nbsp; Connection to LDAP server failed for the 15 try!<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:24, 0] passdb/secrets.c:fetch_ldap_pw(629)<br>
&nbsp; fetch_ldap_pw: neither ldap secret retrieved!<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:24, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_connect_system(851)<br>
&nbsp; ldap_connect_system: Failed to retrieve password from secrets.tdb<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:24, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_search_suffix(1346)<br>
&nbsp; smbldap_search_suffix: Problem during the LDAP search: (unknown)
(Time limit exceeded)<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:24, 1] smbd/service.c:make_connection_snum(693)<br>
&nbsp; 192.168.101.90 (192.168.101.90) connect to service d initially as
user someone (uid=1000, gid=100) (pid 2773)<br>
    <br>
So it seems to me that when a machine accesses a Samba share, Samba
tries repeatedly to use LDAP and fails, then after 16 tries (and 16
seconds) it gives up and provides access anyway.<br>
    <br>
Either I need to get the Samba - LDAP bit working (which I guess was
not a requirement with DL 1.2.6 / Samba 3.0.14a), or find a way to
force Samba to work the old way. I see that DL 1.2.7 'added samba
smbldap-tools (Heiko / Thomas Eder)' - I don't know whether this could
be related, and Samba is now 3.0.22. I have tried starting slapd
(/etc/init.d/slapd start) which I never used previously, it hasn't
helped. I guess I would have to configure it - I found info about
configuring Samba with LDAP here <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
 href="http://times.usefulinc.com/2005/09/25-ldap">http://times.usefulinc.com/2005/09/25-ldap</a>
and here <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
 href="http://www.idealx.com/downloads/samba3-ldap-howto.pdf">http://www.idealx.com/downloads/samba3-ldap-howto.pdf</a>
but they both
look a bit scary. I just want it to be like it was before, really!<br>
    <br>
Here is my smb.conf file, all of it:<br>
    <br>
--------------<br>
    <p><strong>[global]<br>
workgroup = MY_WORKGROUP<br>
server string = Samba Server<br>
security = SHARE<br>
guest account = someone<br>
log file = /home/z-shares/public/var/log.%m<br>
max log size = 50<br>
dns proxy = No<br>
wins support = Yes</strong> </p>
    <strong>
    <p>[ourdocs]<br>
path = /home/z-shares/public<br>
read only = No<br>
guest only = Yes<br>
guest ok = Yes<br>
    </p>
    </strong>----------------<br>
    <strong></strong><strong></strong>Any help gratefully received!<br>
    <br>
Dom<br>
    <pre wrap="">  </pre>
  </blockquote>
An old posting I found which makes me wonder if LDAP is integrated and
is required in the new Samba build in DL:<br>
  <pre>"Samba does not require LDAP libraries, but it sounds like the nmbd binary you are using has been
compiled with LDAP support included. If you want to use Samba without LDAP you will need to obtain
a binary compiled without LDAP support, or compile your own binary from the source code."</pre>
from: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
 href="http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2004-February/081597.html">http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2004-February/081597.html</a><br>
  <br>
Dom</blockquote>
I think I have solved this by adding to [global] in smb.conf:<br>
<br>
passdb backend = smbpasswd<br>
<br>
I think what has happened is that with LDAP now installed in the DL
Samba build, if you don't specify the passdb backend method, it tries
LDAP then tdb (or possibly the other way round). Eventually it goes
back to smbpasswd (I guess) but takes a very long time (16 seconds) to
do so.<br>
<br>
With this parameter my Samba server is now running at speed again.<br>
<br>
Dom<br>
</body>
</html>

Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] DL 1.2.10 (& 9): Slow Samba - LDAP problem?

[Dom <dl...@ed...>]

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  <title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
Dom wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid...@ed..."
 type="cite">
  <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  <title></title>
[this stems from thread: 'DL 1.2.9 upgrade from 1.2.6 (SMP Server) -
but slow?' The new subject title is hopefully more useful, as the
problem relates to Samba and, I think, LDAP]<br>
  <br>
With Devil-Linux 1.2.6 our very simple (perhaps too simple) Samba setup
[see below] worked like a charm.<br>
  <br>
Now using DL 1.2.10 (test) it is very slow for the first access by any
machine, and again after a while (if the Samba share has not been
accessed in a while) it is very slow again. A similar problem (though
it seemed worse) occurred with DL 1.2.9.<br>
  <br>
Looking at the log files (which I never did before, they weren't even
saved previously), I find this stuff (for the log file for any machine
that has accessed the Samba share):<br>
  <br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:09, 0] passdb/secrets.c:fetch_ldap_pw(629)<br>
&nbsp; fetch_ldap_pw: neither ldap secret retrieved!<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:09, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_connect_system(851)<br>
&nbsp; ldap_connect_system: Failed to retrieve password from secrets.tdb<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:09, 1] lib/smbldap.c:another_ldap_try(1051)<br>
&nbsp; Connection to LDAP server failed for the 1 try!<br>
  <br>
...(and repeating every second)...<br>
  <br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:23, 0] passdb/secrets.c:fetch_ldap_pw(629)<br>
&nbsp; fetch_ldap_pw: neither ldap secret retrieved!<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:23, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_connect_system(851)<br>
&nbsp; ldap_connect_system: Failed to retrieve password from secrets.tdb<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:23, 1] lib/smbldap.c:another_ldap_try(1051)<br>
&nbsp; Connection to LDAP server failed for the 15 try!<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:24, 0] passdb/secrets.c:fetch_ldap_pw(629)<br>
&nbsp; fetch_ldap_pw: neither ldap secret retrieved!<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:24, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_connect_system(851)<br>
&nbsp; ldap_connect_system: Failed to retrieve password from secrets.tdb<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:24, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_search_suffix(1346)<br>
&nbsp; smbldap_search_suffix: Problem during the LDAP search: (unknown)
(Time limit exceeded)<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:24, 1] smbd/service.c:make_connection_snum(693)<br>
&nbsp; 192.168.101.90 (192.168.101.90) connect to service d initially as
user someone (uid=1000, gid=100) (pid 2773)<br>
  <br>
So it seems to me that when a machine accesses a Samba share, Samba
tries repeatedly to use LDAP and fails, then after 16 tries (and 16
seconds) it gives up and provides access anyway.<br>
  <br>
Either I need to get the Samba - LDAP bit working (which I guess was
not a requirement with DL 1.2.6 / Samba 3.0.14a), or find a way to
force Samba to work the old way. I see that DL 1.2.7 'added samba
smbldap-tools (Heiko / Thomas Eder)' - I don't know whether this could
be related, and Samba is now 3.0.22. I have tried starting slapd
(/etc/init.d/slapd start) which I never used previously, it hasn't
helped. I guess I would have to configure it - I found info about
configuring Samba with LDAP here
  <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
 href="http://times.usefulinc.com/2005/09/25-ldap">http://times.usefulinc.com/2005/09/25-ldap</a>
and here
  <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
 href="http://www.idealx.com/downloads/samba3-ldap-howto.pdf">http://www.idealx.com/downloads/samba3-ldap-howto.pdf</a>
but they both
look a bit scary. I just want it to be like it was before, really!<br>
  <br>
Here is my smb.conf file, all of it:<br>
  <br>
--------------<br>
  <p><strong>[global]<br>
workgroup = MY_WORKGROUP<br>
server string = Samba Server<br>
security = SHARE<br>
guest account = someone<br>
log file = /home/z-shares/public/var/log.%m<br>
max log size = 50<br>
dns proxy = No<br>
wins support = Yes</strong> </p>
  <strong>
  <p>[ourdocs]<br>
path = /home/z-shares/public<br>
read only = No<br>
guest only = Yes<br>
guest ok = Yes<br>
  </p>
  </strong>----------------<br>
  <strong></strong><strong></strong>Any help gratefully received!<br>
  <br>
Dom<br>
  <pre wrap="">

  </pre>
</blockquote>
An old posting I found which makes me wonder if LDAP is integrated and
is required in the new Samba build in DL:<br>
<pre>"Samba does not require LDAP libraries, but it sounds like the nmbd binary you are using has been
compiled with LDAP support included. If you want to use Samba without LDAP you will need to obtain
a binary compiled without LDAP support, or compile your own binary from the source code."</pre>
from: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2004-February/081597.html">http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2004-February/081597.html</a><br>
<br>
Dom
</body>
</html>

[Devil-Linux-discuss] DL 1.2.10 (& 9): Slow Samba - LDAP problem?

[Dom <dl...@ed...>]

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  <title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
[this stems from thread: 'DL 1.2.9 upgrade from 1.2.6 (SMP Server) -
but slow?' The new subject title is hopefully more useful, as the
problem relates to Samba and, I think, LDAP]<br>
<br>
With Devil-Linux 1.2.6 our very simple (perhaps too simple) Samba setup
[see below] worked like a charm.<br>
<br>
Now using DL 1.2.10 (test) it is very slow for the first access by any
machine, and again after a while (if the Samba share has not been
accessed in a while) it is very slow again. A similar problem (though
it seemed worse) occurred with DL 1.2.9.<br>
<br>
Looking at the log files (which I never did before, they weren't even
saved previously), I find this stuff (for the log file for any machine
that has accessed the Samba share):<br>
<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:09, 0] passdb/secrets.c:fetch_ldap_pw(629)<br>
&nbsp; fetch_ldap_pw: neither ldap secret retrieved!<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:09, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_connect_system(851)<br>
&nbsp; ldap_connect_system: Failed to retrieve password from secrets.tdb<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:09, 1] lib/smbldap.c:another_ldap_try(1051)<br>
&nbsp; Connection to LDAP server failed for the 1 try!<br>
<br>
...(and repeating every second)...<br>
<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:23, 0] passdb/secrets.c:fetch_ldap_pw(629)<br>
&nbsp; fetch_ldap_pw: neither ldap secret retrieved!<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:23, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_connect_system(851)<br>
&nbsp; ldap_connect_system: Failed to retrieve password from secrets.tdb<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:23, 1] lib/smbldap.c:another_ldap_try(1051)<br>
&nbsp; Connection to LDAP server failed for the 15 try!<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:24, 0] passdb/secrets.c:fetch_ldap_pw(629)<br>
&nbsp; fetch_ldap_pw: neither ldap secret retrieved!<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:24, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_connect_system(851)<br>
&nbsp; ldap_connect_system: Failed to retrieve password from secrets.tdb<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:24, 0] lib/smbldap.c:smbldap_search_suffix(1346)<br>
&nbsp; smbldap_search_suffix: Problem during the LDAP search: (unknown)
(Time limit exceeded)<br>
[2006/06/11 07:28:24, 1] smbd/service.c:make_connection_snum(693)<br>
&nbsp; 192.168.101.90 (192.168.101.90) connect to service d initially as
user someone (uid=1000, gid=100) (pid 2773)<br>
<br>
So it seems to me that when a machine accesses a Samba share, Samba
tries repeatedly to use LDAP and fails, then after 16 tries (and 16
seconds) it gives up and provides access anyway.<br>
<br>
Either I need to get the Samba - LDAP bit working (which I guess was
not a requirement with DL 1.2.6 / Samba 3.0.14a), or find a way to
force Samba to work the old way. I see that DL 1.2.7 'added samba
smbldap-tools (Heiko / Thomas Eder)' - I don't know whether this could
be related, and Samba is now 3.0.22. I have tried starting slapd
(/etc/init.d/slapd start) which I never used previously, it hasn't
helped. I guess I would have to configure it - I found info about
configuring Samba with LDAP here
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://times.usefulinc.com/2005/09/25-ldap">http://times.usefulinc.com/2005/09/25-ldap</a> and here
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.idealx.com/downloads/samba3-ldap-howto.pdf">http://www.idealx.com/downloads/samba3-ldap-howto.pdf</a> but they both
look a bit scary. I just want it to be like it was before, really!<br>
<br>
Here is my smb.conf file, all of it:<br>
<br>
--------------<br>
<p><strong>[global]<br>
workgroup = MY_WORKGROUP<br>
server string = Samba Server<br>
security = SHARE<br>
guest account = someone<br>
log file = /home/z-shares/public/var/log.%m<br>
max log size = 50<br>
dns proxy = No<br>
wins support = Yes</strong> </p>
<strong>
<p>[ourdocs]<br>
path = /home/z-shares/public<br>
read only = No<br>
guest only = Yes<br>
guest ok = Yes<br>
</p>
</strong>----------------<br>
<strong></strong><strong></strong>Any help gratefully received!<br>
<br>
Dom<br>
</body>
</html>