Menu
▾
▴
devil-linux-discuss — General Mailing List for all discussions
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2001 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(59) |
Sep
(57) |
Oct
(5) |
Nov
(45) |
Dec
(21) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2002 |
Jan
(13) |
Feb
(22) |
Mar
(14) |
Apr
(7) |
May
(33) |
Jun
(57) |
Jul
(25) |
Aug
(40) |
Sep
(53) |
Oct
(58) |
Nov
(75) |
Dec
(22) |
| 2003 |
Jan
(101) |
Feb
(101) |
Mar
(103) |
Apr
(125) |
May
(85) |
Jun
(57) |
Jul
(62) |
Aug
(42) |
Sep
(76) |
Oct
(214) |
Nov
(290) |
Dec
(274) |
| 2004 |
Jan
(187) |
Feb
(172) |
Mar
(313) |
Apr
(209) |
May
(169) |
Jun
(147) |
Jul
(118) |
Aug
(193) |
Sep
(227) |
Oct
(125) |
Nov
(246) |
Dec
(191) |
| 2005 |
Jan
(244) |
Feb
(175) |
Mar
(165) |
Apr
(130) |
May
(217) |
Jun
(122) |
Jul
(188) |
Aug
(235) |
Sep
(165) |
Oct
(133) |
Nov
(209) |
Dec
(88) |
| 2006 |
Jan
(66) |
Feb
(89) |
Mar
(108) |
Apr
(91) |
May
(29) |
Jun
(45) |
Jul
(64) |
Aug
(42) |
Sep
(44) |
Oct
(81) |
Nov
(64) |
Dec
(9) |
| 2007 |
Jan
(24) |
Feb
(122) |
Mar
(55) |
Apr
(50) |
May
(84) |
Jun
(13) |
Jul
(80) |
Aug
(70) |
Sep
(78) |
Oct
(45) |
Nov
(56) |
Dec
(42) |
| 2008 |
Jan
(65) |
Feb
(3) |
Mar
(51) |
Apr
(151) |
May
(54) |
Jun
(72) |
Jul
(73) |
Aug
(47) |
Sep
(55) |
Oct
(123) |
Nov
(16) |
Dec
(4) |
| 2009 |
Jan
(23) |
Feb
(39) |
Mar
(27) |
Apr
(36) |
May
(35) |
Jun
(51) |
Jul
(11) |
Aug
(14) |
Sep
(40) |
Oct
(67) |
Nov
(38) |
Dec
(13) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(15) |
Feb
(35) |
Mar
(40) |
Apr
(11) |
May
(26) |
Jun
(10) |
Jul
(5) |
Aug
(50) |
Sep
(86) |
Oct
(67) |
Nov
(36) |
Dec
(11) |
| 2011 |
Jan
(50) |
Feb
(6) |
Mar
(13) |
Apr
(13) |
May
(29) |
Jun
(27) |
Jul
(26) |
Aug
(27) |
Sep
(21) |
Oct
(7) |
Nov
(27) |
Dec
(4) |
| 2012 |
Jan
(11) |
Feb
(20) |
Mar
(48) |
Apr
(18) |
May
(8) |
Jun
(19) |
Jul
|
Aug
(15) |
Sep
(3) |
Oct
(4) |
Nov
(5) |
Dec
(1) |
| 2013 |
Jan
(13) |
Feb
(7) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
(25) |
May
(2) |
Jun
(8) |
Jul
(4) |
Aug
(8) |
Sep
(7) |
Oct
|
Nov
(5) |
Dec
(10) |
| 2014 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(6) |
Apr
(20) |
May
(5) |
Jun
|
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
(8) |
Oct
(21) |
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(7) |
| 2015 |
Jan
(10) |
Feb
(9) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(5) |
Sep
(11) |
Oct
|
Nov
(17) |
Dec
(32) |
| 2016 |
Jan
(10) |
Feb
(15) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
(7) |
May
(10) |
Jun
(11) |
Jul
(15) |
Aug
(26) |
Sep
(13) |
Oct
(10) |
Nov
(16) |
Dec
(6) |
| 2017 |
Jan
(9) |
Feb
(3) |
Mar
|
Apr
(2) |
May
(2) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(3) |
Sep
(3) |
Oct
(6) |
Nov
(8) |
Dec
|
| 2018 |
Jan
(12) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(4) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2009-10-01 17:47:57
|
I added it to CVS. Heiko Quoting KyleJHarper <ky...@ca...>: > > I did some poking around in the grsecurity script and found where the kernel > config parameters were. I added a line like so: > set_kernel_option CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO n > > My build is now flying along nicely and looks to have made it passed > GRSecurity in the build phase. Let me know if this was the appropriate > change to make for Devil and when CVS is updated. > > -Kyle > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Prepare-getting-error-in-fixdep.c-tp25619820p25701377.html > Sent from the devil-linux-discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA > is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your > developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay > ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf > _______________________________________________ > Devil-linux-discuss mailing list > Dev...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/devil-linux-discuss > -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2009-10-01 17:40:22
|
Quoting KyleJHarper <ky...@ca...>: > > Two things (let me know if I should break this into new posts since we've > deviated from the fixdep.c error): > > 1) Your recommendations for building were spot on. Building was much > faster (as least 2x as fast). We might want to update the documentation to > include this performance tip since multi-core systems are becoming so > prevalent. Ah documentation.... Are you volunteering? :D > 2) The build process runs and then hangs on GRSecurity. In single-job mode > it simply hung on it (no CPU use for 12 hours). In a parallel-job build it > finished everything but not this... again just sitting there. I checked the > log file "grsecurity" in build/tmp/LOGS/build. Here is is a 'tail -n 3 > grsecurity': > ... > File POSIX Capabilities (SECURITY_FILE_CAPABILITIES) [Y/n/?] y > Root Plug Support (SECURITY_ROOTPLUG) [N/y/?] n > TOMOYO Linux Support (SECURITY_TOMOYO) [N/y/?] (NEW) > > Is this a new configuration flag that the devil/LFS build environment needs > to have set? I thought we fixed that already.... -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. |
|
From: KyleJHarper <ky...@ca...> - 2009-10-01 16:39:50
|
I did some poking around in the grsecurity script and found where the kernel config parameters were. I added a line like so: set_kernel_option CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO n My build is now flying along nicely and looks to have made it passed GRSecurity in the build phase. Let me know if this was the appropriate change to make for Devil and when CVS is updated. -Kyle -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Prepare-getting-error-in-fixdep.c-tp25619820p25701377.html Sent from the devil-linux-discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. |
|
From: KyleJHarper <ky...@ca...> - 2009-09-30 21:28:37
|
Two things (let me know if I should break this into new posts since we've deviated from the fixdep.c error): 1) Your recommendations for building were spot on. Building was much faster (as least 2x as fast). We might want to update the documentation to include this performance tip since multi-core systems are becoming so prevalent. 2) The build process runs and then hangs on GRSecurity. In single-job mode it simply hung on it (no CPU use for 12 hours). In a parallel-job build it finished everything but not this... again just sitting there. I checked the log file "grsecurity" in build/tmp/LOGS/build. Here is is a 'tail -n 3 grsecurity': ... File POSIX Capabilities (SECURITY_FILE_CAPABILITIES) [Y/n/?] y Root Plug Support (SECURITY_ROOTPLUG) [N/y/?] n TOMOYO Linux Support (SECURITY_TOMOYO) [N/y/?] (NEW) Is this a new configuration flag that the devil/LFS build environment needs to have set? -Kyle -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Prepare-getting-error-in-fixdep.c-tp25619820p25689355.html Sent from the devil-linux-discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2009-09-30 11:21:56
|
> That took care of the issue. Thanks. cool! > One more quick question... I have a dedicated server for building software, > but it still takes quite some time to build devil. Do you have > recommendations on speeding up the build process? I see options for using > "Nice" and "parallel build jobs" in the config, but I avoid these because > I'm unsure how to use them properly. Any recommendations for letting > LFS/devil hammer the whole machine to build as fast as possible? Leave the nice on, this will help your scheduling a bit better. Not sure of the top of my head which option you need to change, it's either "parallel build jobs" or something similar to that. One of them you can only choose 1-2, the other one has 1-10 or something like that (doing it out of memory). Change the one with the more options. As a rule of thumb, use a number +1 or +2 of the total number of CPU cores in the machine. (I really got to disable the other selection....) Lot's of RAM makes a big difference and if you got spare HDDs, use striping. When you compile the 1.4, use a "make makefile" after the "make mrproper unpack prepare", this will enable the parallel build. -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. |
|
From: KyleJHarper <ky...@ca...> - 2009-09-29 21:29:26
|
Heiko Zuerker wrote: > > Don't specify a -r and you'll get the latest and greatest (that's what > you want). > > -- > > Regards > Heiko Zuerker > http://www.devil-linux.org > > That took care of the issue. Thanks. One more quick question... I have a dedicated server for building software, but it still takes quite some time to build devil. Do you have recommendations on speeding up the build process? I see options for using "Nice" and "parallel build jobs" in the config, but I avoid these because I'm unsure how to use them properly. Any recommendations for letting LFS/devil hammer the whole machine to build as fast as possible? Thanks, Kyle -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Prepare-getting-error-in-fixdep.c-tp25619820p25671285.html Sent from the devil-linux-discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2009-09-29 12:03:08
|
Quoting KyleJHarper <ky...@ca...>: > > Yep, I did "make unpack" first. > > I found one problem, when following the documentation I forgot the "-r > rel-x-y-patchs" option on my CVS checkout. When I've built devil in the > past I specified 1-2-patches to get a stable build. I tried 1-4-patches and > 1-3-patches but neither exist. > > I've updated my lfssystem to the "for DL 1.3.4 and up" version. Before I > download all the sources with CVS I want to be sure of the proper "-r" > switch during checkout. Can you let me know what that is? Don't specify a -r and you'll get the latest and greatest (that's what you want). -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. |
|
From: KyleJHarper <ky...@ca...> - 2009-09-28 15:55:18
|
Yep, I did "make unpack" first. I found one problem, when following the documentation I forgot the "-r rel-x-y-patchs" option on my CVS checkout. When I've built devil in the past I specified 1-2-patches to get a stable build. I tried 1-4-patches and 1-3-patches but neither exist. I've updated my lfssystem to the "for DL 1.3.4 and up" version. Before I download all the sources with CVS I want to be sure of the proper "-r" switch during checkout. Can you let me know what that is? Thanks, Kyle Heiko Zuerker wrote: > > You must be building 1.4, since 1.2 doesn't use the 2.6.30 kernel. > Stick with the 1.4, it's much better and very stable. You'll need to use > lfssystem-for-DL-1.3.4_and_up for that one. > > Did you do a "make unpack" before the prepare? > > > Heiko > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Prepare-getting-error-in-fixdep.c-tp25619820p25645417.html Sent from the devil-linux-discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2009-09-25 23:15:27
|
You must be building 1.4, since 1.2 doesn't use the 2.6.30 kernel. Stick with the 1.4, it's much better and very stable. You'll need to use lfssystem-for-DL-1.3.4_and_up for that one. Did you do a "make unpack" before the prepare? Heiko > -----Original Message----- > From: KyleJHarper [mailto:ky...@ca...] > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 4:51 PM > To: dev...@li... > Subject: [Devil-Linux-discuss] Prepare getting error in fixdep.c > > > Hello, > > I'm building devil with a default config and using the cvs checkout > steps > listed in the docs for 1.2. The LFS system I'm using is "For DL-1.0 > and > up". When I run make prepare I get the following: > > ..... > scripts/basic/fixdep.c:306: warning: unused variable `s' > make[2]: *** [scripts/basic/fixdep] Error 1 > make[1]: *** [scripts_basic] Error 2 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/build/tmp/linux-2.6.30' > make: *** [prepare] Error 1 > > Any pointers on what I am doing incorrectly? If there are any logs I > can > provide let me know. > > Thanks, > Kyle > -- > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Prepare-getting- > error-in-fixdep.c-tp25619820p25619820.html > Sent from the devil-linux-discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------- > Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA > is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart > your > developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and > stay > ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register > now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf > _______________________________________________ > Devil-linux-discuss mailing list > Dev...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/devil-linux-discuss |
|
From: KyleJHarper <ky...@ca...> - 2009-09-25 21:51:37
|
Hello, I'm building devil with a default config and using the cvs checkout steps listed in the docs for 1.2. The LFS system I'm using is "For DL-1.0 and up". When I run make prepare I get the following: ..... scripts/basic/fixdep.c:306: warning: unused variable `s' make[2]: *** [scripts/basic/fixdep] Error 1 make[1]: *** [scripts_basic] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/build/tmp/linux-2.6.30' make: *** [prepare] Error 1 Any pointers on what I am doing incorrectly? If there are any logs I can provide let me know. Thanks, Kyle -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Prepare-getting-error-in-fixdep.c-tp25619820p25619820.html Sent from the devil-linux-discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. |
|
From: Dominic R. <dl...@ed...> - 2009-09-18 17:03:46
|
Bruce Smith wrote: > In any case, I compiled a SERVER version last night (standard defaults > :) and it's on the FTP site now. > > Please let us know if Apache/Samba/Postfix/etc. run any better there. Thanks Bruce, yes Apache runs fine with ioncube on the new ftp://ftp.devil-linux.org/pub/devel/testing/devil-linux-1.4RC2-2009-09-18-i686-server.tar.bz2. Thank you! (Samba and Postfix are okay too.) Dominic |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@re...> - 2009-09-18 14:45:05
|
>>>> When checking the menuconfig options, I see some recent mention of >>>> these packages in CHANGES, but they are NOT turned on in the "default" >>>> options: >>>> >>>> - added aiccu (IPv6 broker) (Oliver Niesner/sl) >>>> - updated open-iscsi to git-20090417 (sl) >>>> - updated strongswan to 4.2.16 (sl) > >> It seems to me that if the packages have been recently added or >> updated, then maybe they should be set to "y" in the default's? >> Otherwise why add/update them? :-) > The reason why I left strongswan/open-iscsi disabled is trivial - iscsi has not > necessary init/configuration scripts, strongswan is very heavy and just a > "functional copy" of ipsec-tools. These packages are working though. If we have > at least one person who is interested in them (except me) we can enable them. > > I suppose we can enable aiccu also. Either way. I was just double checking to make sure they weren't overlooked in the "default" files. If you don't think they should be in the standard distro, that's fine with me. In any case, I compiled a SERVER version last night (standard defaults :) and it's on the FTP site now. Please let us know if Apache/Samba/Postfix/etc. run any better there. - BS |
|
From: Serge L. <fi...@in...> - 2009-09-18 06:36:36
|
Bruce Smith wrote: >>> When checking the menuconfig options, I see some recent mention of >>> these packages in CHANGES, but they are NOT turned on in the "default" >>> options: >>> >>> - added aiccu (IPv6 broker) (Oliver Niesner/sl) >>> - updated open-iscsi to git-20090417 (sl) >>> - updated strongswan to 4.2.16 (sl) > It seems to me that if the packages have been recently added or > updated, then maybe they should be set to "y" in the default's? > Otherwise why add/update them? :-) The reason why I left strongswan/open-iscsi disabled is trivial - iscsi has not necessary init/configuration scripts, strongswan is very heavy and just a "functional copy" of ipsec-tools. These packages are working though. If we have at least one person who is interested in them (except me) we can enable them. I suppose we can enable aiccu also. > > Let me know and I'll start a compile tonight... I'll double check strongswan/open-iscsi/aiccu and enable them if everything is OK. Serge |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@re...> - 2009-09-17 21:31:57
|
>> When checking the menuconfig options, I see some recent mention of >> these packages in CHANGES, but they are NOT turned on in the "default" >> options: >> >> - added aiccu (IPv6 broker) (Oliver Niesner/sl) >> - updated open-iscsi to git-20090417 (sl) >> - updated strongswan to 4.2.16 (sl) >> >> Should any of those packages be compiled by "default"? > > Do you mean the "default default" or the "server default"? ;-) I try to keep the two in sync, except for the obvious differences. > If they're on in the "default default", then they should also be on in > the "server default". :D Their not turned on in either. But it's been my experience that some people aren't real diligent about keeping the "default" files up to date, so that's why I'm asking if I should turn them on. It seems to me that if the packages have been recently added or updated, then maybe they should be set to "y" in the default's? Otherwise why add/update them? :-) Let me know and I'll start a compile tonight... - BS |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2009-09-17 19:23:13
|
Quoting Bruce Smith <bw...@re...>: >>> Maybe we can talk Bruce into creating a -server one. ;-) >> Yeah, that would be very nice Bruce! > > OK, I'll see what I can do. > > When checking the menuconfig options, I see some recent mention of > these packages in CHANGES, but they are NOT turned on in the "default" > options: > > - added aiccu (IPv6 broker) (Oliver Niesner/sl) > - updated open-iscsi to git-20090417 (sl) > - updated strongswan to 4.2.16 (sl) > > Should any of those packages be compiled by "default"? Do you mean the "default default" or the "server default"? ;-) If they're on in the "default default", then they should also be on in the "server default". :D -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@re...> - 2009-09-17 19:03:05
|
>> Maybe we can talk Bruce into creating a -server one. ;-) > Yeah, that would be very nice Bruce! OK, I'll see what I can do. When checking the menuconfig options, I see some recent mention of these packages in CHANGES, but they are NOT turned on in the "default" options: - added aiccu (IPv6 broker) (Oliver Niesner/sl) - updated open-iscsi to git-20090417 (sl) - updated strongswan to 4.2.16 (sl) Should any of those packages be compiled by "default"? - BS |
|
From: Dominic R. <dl...@ed...> - 2009-09-17 18:04:40
|
Heiko Zuerker wrote: > Quoting Dominic Raferd <dl...@ed...>: > >> the only line I have changed/added was this: >> >> zend_extension = /path/to/ioncube/ioncube_loader_lin_5.2.so >> >> so I guess this is where the trouble lies. But I need ioncube. Maybe in >> DL 1.4RC2 php is built to be 'thread safe' (it is not in 1.4RC1-server)? >> If this is the case I need to use >> >> zend_extension_ts=/path/to/ioncube/ioncube_loader_lin_5.2_ts.so >> > I didn't change any PHP options, so that can't be it. >> therwise I am stuck, although ioncube has a runtime loading option >> (which avoids having to touch php.ini) this is not supported for php 5.2.5+. >> > It may simply be that it doesn't work with the grsec version. > Maybe we can talk Bruce into creating a -server one. ;-) Yeah, that would be very nice Bruce! I tried the _ts option anyway but as expected it doesn't work. I found a page about what may be the same issue here http://forums.grsecurity.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1870. Anyway the solution seems to be take out grsec - at least I hope so! Until then, I'll stick with 1.4RC1. Thanks Heiko for your suggestions. Dominic |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2009-09-17 16:26:40
|
Quoting Dominic Raferd <dl...@ed...>: > Heiko Zuerker wrote: >> Quoting Dominic Raferd <dl...@ed...>: >>> fter some messing around I have traced the apache problem to the php5 >>> module: /usr/lib/apache2/modules/libphp5.so. With this loaded >>> (LoadModule in httpd.conf, and as provided in the default DL >>> configuration), apache segfaults. Without it, no problem, but you don't >>> have php. Which is very bad news for me. Maybe this module needs to be >>> recompiled? >>> >> I am actually sending you this email from my webserver, running >> apache2 + php5. >> Maybe also some config problem. Did you customize your php.ini? Can >> you try with the default one? > Thanks Heiko. I'm back with 1.4RC1 now (as this is a live machine), but > looking at php.ini the only line I have changed/added was this: > > zend_extension = /path/to/ioncube/ioncube_loader_lin_5.2.so > > so I guess this is where the trouble lies. But I need ioncube. Maybe in > DL 1.4RC2 php is built to be 'thread safe' (it is not in 1.4RC1-server)? > If this is the case I need to use > > zend_extension_ts=/path/to/ioncube/ioncube_loader_lin_5.2_ts.so I didn't change any PHP options, so that can't be it. > Otherwise I am stuck, although ioncube has a runtime loading option > (which avoids having to touch php.ini) this is not supported for php 5.2.5+. It may simply be that it doesn't work with the grsec version. Maybe we can talk Bruce into creating a -server one. ;-) -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. |
|
From: Dominic R. <dl...@ed...> - 2009-09-17 14:42:06
|
Heiko Zuerker wrote: > Quoting Dominic Raferd <dl...@ed...>: >> fter some messing around I have traced the apache problem to the php5 >> module: /usr/lib/apache2/modules/libphp5.so. With this loaded >> (LoadModule in httpd.conf, and as provided in the default DL >> configuration), apache segfaults. Without it, no problem, but you don't >> have php. Which is very bad news for me. Maybe this module needs to be >> recompiled? >> > I am actually sending you this email from my webserver, running > apache2 + php5. > Maybe also some config problem. Did you customize your php.ini? Can > you try with the default one? Thanks Heiko. I'm back with 1.4RC1 now (as this is a live machine), but looking at php.ini the only line I have changed/added was this: zend_extension = /path/to/ioncube/ioncube_loader_lin_5.2.so so I guess this is where the trouble lies. But I need ioncube. Maybe in DL 1.4RC2 php is built to be 'thread safe' (it is not in 1.4RC1-server)? If this is the case I need to use zend_extension_ts=/path/to/ioncube/ioncube_loader_lin_5.2_ts.so Otherwise I am stuck, although ioncube has a runtime loading option (which avoids having to touch php.ini) this is not supported for php 5.2.5+. Dominic |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2009-09-17 12:04:25
|
Hey, Quoting Dominic Raferd <dl...@ed...>: > Working with 1.4RC2: > > The samba problem was that wef Samba 3.4.0 the default setting for > passdb backend has changed from smbpasswd to tdbsam. So I needed to add > a line in [global]: > passdb backend = smbpasswd > With this my Samba is now fine. Cool! > The pam_unit(webmin:auth) authentication failure message in > /var/log/messages is still appearing. However webmin seems to be okay. Not sure about this one. I don't think I'll have time anytime soon to find out what's going on there. If anybody is bored... please help. :-) > Doing /usr/sbin/postfix upgrade-configuration did something but the > error message still appears on reboot, presumably because > /var/spool/postfix/pid is owned by postfix and not by root. But postfix > still seems to work. Unfortunately if we change the ownership of this folder to root, then postfix complains about it not being owned by 'postfix'. :-( Ignore it for now. > After some messing around I have traced the apache problem to the php5 > module: /usr/lib/apache2/modules/libphp5.so. With this loaded > (LoadModule in httpd.conf, and as provided in the default DL > configuration), apache segfaults. Without it, no problem, but you don't > have php. Which is very bad news for me. Maybe this module needs to be > recompiled? I am actually sending you this email from my webserver, running apache2 + php5. Maybe also some config problem. Did you customize your php.ini? Can you try with the default one? -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. |
|
From: Dominic R. <dl...@ed...> - 2009-09-17 10:49:21
|
Working with 1.4RC2: The samba problem was that wef Samba 3.4.0 the default setting for passdb backend has changed from smbpasswd to tdbsam. So I needed to add a line in [global]: passdb backend = smbpasswd With this my Samba is now fine. The pam_unit(webmin:auth) authentication failure message in /var/log/messages is still appearing. However webmin seems to be okay. Doing /usr/sbin/postfix upgrade-configuration did something but the error message still appears on reboot, presumably because /var/spool/postfix/pid is owned by postfix and not by root. But postfix still seems to work. After some messing around I have traced the apache problem to the php5 module: /usr/lib/apache2/modules/libphp5.so. With this loaded (LoadModule in httpd.conf, and as provided in the default DL configuration), apache segfaults. Without it, no problem, but you don't have php. Which is very bad news for me. Maybe this module needs to be recompiled? Dominic Heiko Zuerker wrote: > > Yeah postfix was upgraded too (from 2.5.x to 2.6.x). > > You could try running > > postfix upgrade-configuration (or something like that, writing it out > of memory) > > /etc/init.d/postfix restart > > > > The segfault is bad, but could always be caused from some config. > > > > Heiko > > > > *From:* Dominic Raferd [mailto:dl...@ed...] > *Sent:* Wednesday, September 16, 2009 5:12 PM > *To:* dev...@li... > *Subject:* Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] 1.4RC2 - apache won't run, samba > has problems > > > > Hi Heiko > > I see these 3 lines in /var/log/messages: > Sep 16 18:49:29 src@dl perl: pam_unix(webmin:auth): authentication > failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty= ruser= rhost= user=root > Sep 16 18:49:35 src@dl httpd[7215]: segfault at 4a0e5ecc ip 4a0d2d02 > sp 588041a8 error 7 in ld-2.5.1.so[4a0cc000+19000] > Sep 16 18:49:55 src@dl postfix/postfix-script[8515]: warning: not > owned by root: /var/spool/postfix/pid > > > The first line recurs when I reboot with 1.4RC1, but the second and > third do not. A segfault does not sound good? But it confirms that > apache just would not run. Samba did run but I had problems getting > access to some shares (others worked fine); could be down to Samba > updates, I agree. Sorry I did not get to check postfix under 1.4RC2, I > only just noticed this warning message now. > > Dominic > > Heiko Zuerker wrote: > > I have both a Samba and Apache server running with the grsec version. > Do you have any more details? Any error messages? > > The samba version changed significantly in the latest testing release, > maybe it doesn't like one of the options you have. > > Heiko > > Quoting Dominic Raferd <dl...@ed...> <mailto:dl...@ed...>: > > > > I can't seem to be able to run apache with the latest testing version of > > 1.4RC2, I guess this is because of grsec (in the past I have used DL's > > server version)? Is this 'by design' or is it possible to use apache > > with grsec? Samba also doesn't seem to be working right... > > > > (I will move back to 1.4RC1-server....) > > > > Dominic > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA > > is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your > > developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay > > ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf > > _______________________________________________ > > Devil-linux-discuss mailing list > > Dev...@li... <mailto:Dev...@li...> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/devil-linux-discuss > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA > is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your > developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay > ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Devil-linux-discuss mailing list > Dev...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/devil-linux-discuss > |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2009-09-16 23:50:40
|
Yeah postfix was upgraded too (from 2.5.x to 2.6.x). You could try running postfix upgrade-configuration (or something like that, writing it out of memory) /etc/init.d/postfix restart The segfault is bad, but could always be caused from some config. Heiko From: Dominic Raferd [mailto:dl...@ed...] Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 5:12 PM To: dev...@li... Subject: Re: [Devil-Linux-discuss] 1.4RC2 - apache won't run, samba has problems Hi Heiko I see these 3 lines in /var/log/messages: Sep 16 18:49:29 src@dl perl: pam_unix(webmin:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty= ruser= rhost= user=root Sep 16 18:49:35 src@dl httpd[7215]: segfault at 4a0e5ecc ip 4a0d2d02 sp 588041a8 error 7 in ld-2.5.1.so[4a0cc000+19000] Sep 16 18:49:55 src@dl postfix/postfix-script[8515]: warning: not owned by root: /var/spool/postfix/pid The first line recurs when I reboot with 1.4RC1, but the second and third do not. A segfault does not sound good? But it confirms that apache just would not run. Samba did run but I had problems getting access to some shares (others worked fine); could be down to Samba updates, I agree. Sorry I did not get to check postfix under 1.4RC2, I only just noticed this warning message now. Dominic Heiko Zuerker wrote: I have both a Samba and Apache server running with the grsec version. Do you have any more details? Any error messages? The samba version changed significantly in the latest testing release, maybe it doesn't like one of the options you have. Heiko Quoting Dominic Raferd <mailto:dl...@ed...> <dl...@ed...>: I can't seem to be able to run apache with the latest testing version of 1.4RC2, I guess this is because of grsec (in the past I have used DL's server version)? Is this 'by design' or is it possible to use apache with grsec? Samba also doesn't seem to be working right... (I will move back to 1.4RC1-server....) Dominic ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf _______________________________________________ Devil-linux-discuss mailing list Dev...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/devil-linux-discuss |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2009-09-16 18:58:26
|
I have both a Samba and Apache server running with the grsec version. Do you have any more details? Any error messages? The samba version changed significantly in the latest testing release, maybe it doesn't like one of the options you have. Heiko Quoting Dominic Raferd <dl...@ed...>: > I can't seem to be able to run apache with the latest testing version of > 1.4RC2, I guess this is because of grsec (in the past I have used DL's > server version)? Is this 'by design' or is it possible to use apache > with grsec? Samba also doesn't seem to be working right... > > (I will move back to 1.4RC1-server....) > > Dominic > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA > is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your > developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay > ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf > _______________________________________________ > Devil-linux-discuss mailing list > Dev...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/devil-linux-discuss > -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. |
|
From: Dominic R. <dl...@ed...> - 2009-09-16 18:03:10
|
I can't seem to be able to run apache with the latest testing version of 1.4RC2, I guess this is because of grsec (in the past I have used DL's server version)? Is this 'by design' or is it possible to use apache with grsec? Samba also doesn't seem to be working right... (I will move back to 1.4RC1-server....) Dominic |
|
From: Dietmar R. <die...@gm...> - 2009-09-14 09:38:53
|
2009/9/11 Heiko Zuerker <he...@zu...>: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Heiko Zuerker [mailto:he...@zu...] >> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 11:26 AM >> To: Devil-Linux Developer Mailinglist; Devil-Linux Discuss Mailinglist >> Subject: [Devil-Linux-discuss] new testing release >> >> I uploaded a new testing release to the FTP server. >> >> If you did submit bugs, please download and test if they're resolved >> now. >> Please respond to your bugs, so we can close them if they're fixed. > > I uploaded the latest testing version to the FTP server. I just tried the new testing version, but unfortunately the shipped version of Shorewall is buggy and therefore unusable. Would it be possible to include the fixed version shorewall-perl-4.2.11.1 or even better a recent stable version shorewall-4.4.1.2? Thanks Didi |
50 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
