Turns out the problem is apparently hosed keys. Richard L. Lichvar Director, Operations Knowledge Resource Center, Inc. Phone: 703-848-2100 x228 Fax: 703-848-4747 Mobile: 571-221-3430
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 12:49 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: redhat-list digest, Vol 1 #8001 - 11 msgs Send redhat-list mailing list submissions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of redhat-list digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: SSH Problem (funtom) 2. RE: rh9 samba + ldap NOT THERE (Toby Schaefer) 3. Re: Trouble With APT (Joe Giles) 4. RE: Trying to recover MRTG (Nick White) 5. RE: Dual boot configuration (again) (Matthew Saltzman) 6. RE: Dual boot configuration (again) (Matthew Saltzman) 7. Re: Linux desktop speed - Linux FUD (MWafkowski) 8. Re: Trying to recover MRTG (Edward Dekkers) 9. How do I see the dhcp leases? (Daevid Vincent) 10. RE: Help: Sending Messages to Windows Machines (Tapang, Roderick Eugenio (GXS)) 11. Re: Postgresql (Edward Croft) --__--__-- Message: 1 From: "funtom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: SSH Problem Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:50:27 +0200 Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi, If you use "ssh -v hostname -l username", you have more output... or you can make "ssh -v localhost -l root" as loopback test. regards, thomas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rich Lichvar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 11:03 PM Subject: SSH Problem > Got a new 9.0 installation on which SSH seems to be acting up. (Yes, the > service is started.) It seems we can reach it from Windows machines using, > for example, VanDyke's SecureFX and SecureCRT, but when we try to access it > from other Linux machines (RH 7.3 in our case) using SSH/SCP, the connection > is refused. Suggestions? > > Richard L. Lichvar > Director, Operations > Knowledge Resource Center, Inc. > Phone: 703-848-2100 x228 > Fax: 703-848-4747 > Mobile: 571-221-3430 > > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list --__--__-- Message: 2 From: "Toby Schaefer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: rh9 samba + ldap NOT THERE Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 08:01:18 -0500 Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Dossett Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 3:39 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: rh9 samba + ldap NOT THERE Hi, If you're considering using samba, ldap and Redhat 9, forget it. Spent all day yesterday trying to get RH9 samba srpm to compile with it and no go... I was under the impression that a lot of people use ldap to authenticate samba users for central authentication, at least I do... they are certainly going to be dissapointed if they try it with RH9. Don't really see why Redhat don't build samba with ldap support built in... it's hardly experimental any more... Really starting to lose the faith in Redhat these days... perhaps it's time to move on. Bill Dossett -------- Bill, I'm sorry to hear that you are having problems in getting LDAP authentication via Samba in Redhat 9; however, I assure you that it works correctly - we are in the process of migrating authentication from traditional windows servers to LDAP/Samba servers and have had no problems compiling either the current RH version of samba or the latest Stable build of samba for this project. Once we get past the automagically making the machine account problem with Samba 2.x, we're ready to rock and roll. Let me know if you would like a copy of the compiled samba source or the SPEC file and maybe that will make your life a little easier. In the meantime, check out http://samba.idealx.org 's How-to in getting LDAP/Samba authentication up and going.. It's a little outdated now, but it's still about 90% accurate and step-by-step oriented. Hope this helps! --__--__-- Message: 3 Subject: Re: Trouble With APT From: Joe Giles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: RedHat List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 10 Jun 2003 17:12:16 -0600 Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks for your reply, but I tried that. Still it locks. I cant figure it out for the life of me. Works great on my 7.3 and 8.0 machines, but 9 seems to not like apt . Thanks Joe On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 16:53, Gordon Messmer wrote: > Joe Giles wrote: > > > > Has anyone been able to install APT (apt-0.5.5cnc5-fr2.i386) installed > > and running on RH 9. I can install it, but when I run apt-get update, it > > goes through all the download lists, but then hangs on Reading Package > > Lists. I have to kill the term screen, I cant ctrl-c out at all. > > > > Any Ideas? > > rm -f /var/lib/rpm/__db* > killall -9 rpm > killall -9 apt-get > rpm --rebuilddb > > --__--__-- Message: 4 Subject: RE: Trying to recover MRTG Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:24:18 -0700 From: "Nick White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Did you try installing gd-1.8.4-11.i386.rpm or gd-devel-1.8.4-11.i386.rpm? You didn't specify which RedHat version you're using, but try installing either gd-1.x or gd-devel-x for your RedHat version. The filenames I specified are for RedHat 9. Nick -----Original Message----- From: Mikevl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 2:12 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Trying to recover MRTG Hi I've been having some fun upgrading MRTG without success. I think I now want to return to the old version. When I try to reinstall via rpm I get the following error. libgd.so.1 is still on the system along with some others. What do I do to get the system to recognise libgs.so.1 again.? error: failed dependencies: libgd.so.1 is needed by mrtg-2.9.11-1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# May thanks Mike -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list --__--__-- Message: 5 Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 19:29:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Matthew Saltzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: Dual boot configuration (again) Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Cannon, Andrew wrote: > Matthew, > > Other people will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that Window$ expects > to be put on the primary partition and will wipe out all the other > partitions. I would back everything up install W2K then partition the disk > and reinstall RH. Actually, I've installed W2K into an empty *primary* partition on a machine with Linux installed. The only problem was that it made /boot inactive, so I needed to have a boot diskette handy. Attempting to use the W2K disk utility to make /boot active again would consistently destroy the partition table (but fortunately, no data). My last machine didn't have the diagnostic partition, so I could have primary partitions for S2D, W2K, and /boot. If I don't want to give up the diagnostic partition or S2D, I need to move one of /boot or W2K to a logical one. The kicker is, for S2D to work, GRUB can't be in the MBR, because APM S2D rewrites the MBR. (The real solution will eventually be ACPI Linux with a hibernate function, which doesn't require a separate partition.) -- Matthew Saltzman Clemson University Math Sciences [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs --__--__-- Message: 6 Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 19:37:40 -0400 (EDT) From: Matthew Saltzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Dual boot configuration (again) Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, [ISO-8859-1] Sérgio Monteiro Basto wrote: > Hi, > 1st for windows works you just can have one primary partition active Yes, preferably /boot (unless GRUB could live in the W2K partition and still boot both OS's). > 2nd for windows works you just can have 4 primary partition Right. > 3rd so I should have partition 1 with windows, partition 2 with ext3 44M > /boot, partition 3 can't be windows (like FAT) and partition 4 should be > the extended. Right, but I want to keep the diagnostic and S2D partitions, and they need to be primary too. Total of four partitions that need to be primary *plus* the extended. > if you active partition 2 for boot, and install grub on that partition > (like I do!) this lines will make windows thing that active partition is > 1. > > title WindowsXP > rootnoverify (hd0,0) > chainloader +1 That's how I ran my old system, but it didn't have the diagnostic partition. > > First You should partition the disk, > after install the systems , > > For installation of windows you may be prefer swap active bootable > partition to 1, after installation you can put again in 2. > > Last thing swap active partition just can be done with fdisk or with > partition magic something. > > PM7 when try correct LHsometing fuck up linux partition, but if you go > to fdisk you can recover this same partition again. Thanks, but my question was a bit more involved than this. > > I have a Dell Latititude C640, with the following disk layout. > > > > (1) These things come with a pre-allocated primary partition containing > > diagnostics, and there is a BIOS boot option to boot the diagnostic > > partition. > > > > (2) To use suspend-to-disk with an APM OS, I have a second primary > > partition allocated. This holds the S2D image and a utility to save and > > restore. > > > > (3) I have /boot as a small primary partition. In order to use the S2D > > partition, GRUB has to be installed in this partition, and this partition > > is set active. > > > > (4) Next is the extended partition. It holds logical partitions for /, > > /usr, /home, and swap. > > > > (5) I have some unallocated space, and I'd like to reload the Win2K that > > came with the machine and set up dual boot. > > > > Obviously, I've used up my three primary partitions. I can make the Win2K > > partition inside the extended partition, but that raises my questions: > > > > (1) Can I boot into an OS in a logical partition from GRUB? > > > > (2) Can I boot into Windows in a logical partition with the usual MBR boot > > loader if I make the /boot partition inactive? (I wouldn't do this > > normally, but if I need Dell support, the pedants there insist that they > > won't support a dual boot machine, so I need to be able to make the thing > > boot directly into Windows.) > > > > (3) Alternatively, can I make /boot a logical partition and still make it > > active? > > > > TIA. > > > > -- > > Matthew Saltzman > > > > Clemson University Math Sciences > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs > > > > > > -- > > redhat-list mailing list > > unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list > > > > > > **************************************************************************** ******* > > NNC Limited > > Booths Hall > > Chelford Road > > Knutsford > > Cheshire > > WA16 8QZ > > > > Country of Registration: United Kingdom > > Registered Number: 1120437 > > > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and > > intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they > > are addressed. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify > > the NNC system manager by e-mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > **************************************************************************** ******* > > > > > > -- > > redhat-list mailing list > > unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list > -- Matthew Saltzman Clemson University Math Sciences [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs --__--__-- Message: 7 From: "MWafkowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Linux desktop speed - Linux FUD Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 19:43:54 -0400 Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] You've had the nerve (or the innocence 8^) to expose the "elephant" in the middle of the living room. <rant> Among all the high fives and rah-rahing on this list (and other Linux lists I belong to) about Linux vs Windows there are some things most of us would seem to rather ignore. Linux people have there own version of FUD going. Flame bait?! I don't think so. Here are a few truths we hold self evident. Myth #1 - Stability. Linux is a more stable OS then windows (2000/XP). This true enough, UNLESS you're talking about desktop Linux ie: KDE or Gnome. To believe that any "out of the box" install of any current major distro setup as a desktop (KDE or Gnome) is more stable than an equivalent install of XP or 2000 on the same hardware is plain NUTS! I've never worked with an OS where so many apps crash and burn on a regular basis! Mozilla just stopped loading, don't ask why, it's Linux! Evolution crashing and burning...can't be, it's Linux. Want to start doing all kinds of multimedia, better start reading and learning patience. I can't remember that last time any major app broke on me in Windows. Myth #2 - Speed - Plain fact is, Windows is faster than KDE or Gnome on equivalent hardware...no way around it and there is no TWEAKING that is going to change that! Get a $200 Celeron 800 with 128 megs of ram and some 8 meg video card running Windows 2000 and it will be so much more faster than any current Linux "desktop" distro on the same hardware that it's not even a joke. The great failing of Linux as a desktop distro (IMNSHO) is of course X. X was a bad kludge to start with, but it worked sort of to allow remote gui interaction with a host system. it's not getting any better with age. For Linux to really take on the desktop space I believe someone(s) going to have to write a NEW graphic layer subsystem for Linux. But there doesn't seem to even be a hint of that (that I'm aware of) going on. If so, please let me know. This leads to a sub myth. People who write windows code suck at it, esp. MS programmers. To my old eyes the graphic subsystem of Windows is a work of art compared to X I really HATE X - it truly sucks in every way imaginable! The other issue that hardly ever gets referred to in the great OS debate is the gui itself. True, Linux has improved greatly with font anti-aliasing, TT fonts, etc. But the display still is no match for windows in terms of viewability. Take a joe user and sit him in front of your choice of Linux distros for four hours and then do that with Windows. Ask joe use which display he'd rather sit in front of all day...not even close. </rant> I Love Linux, for what it is, and what it is currently is NOT a replacement desktop OS for either joe user or joe corporate user. It could be I guess. But not this year. Heck, I don't really even care if it does become the "competition" to Windows. Jeez...crazy me! Regards, Mike Wafkowski Linux user since 1995 Mostly as a server OS ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "RedHat user mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 5:59 PM Subject: Linux desktop speed... > I have been using Linux on the desktop at work and home for the past 18 > months and I really like it. However, at times it is woefully slow to do > anything. > > ==================================================================== > Current work PC specification: > > Duron 1.3 > 256Mb RAM > 512Mb swap space > 30Gb 5400RPM IDE HDD with no slave device > Red Hat 9 (Shrike) Workstation installation and all current updates > 2.4.20-18.9 kernel > > Time comparisons are between the Red Hat box and another PC on my desk > running Win2K with Celeron 900, 256K RAM and 5400RPM 30Gb HDD and no slave > device. > > No performance tweaking of either OS has been performed. > > Typical usage has 4 or 5 windows open running Galeon, Gnome-terminal, > Xchat, gFTP etc, and I have timed the following. Note: these are typically > "cold-load" times and are not cached due to a recent load action. > > Starting OpenOffice Writer 1.02 on Shrike can sometimes take OVER A > MINUTE, which is ridiculous. > Word97 on Win2K takes around 5 seconds to start. > > Evolution (my chosen email client, running imap) on Shrike takes nearly 40 > seconds to start and become usable, and often up to 15 seconds to close. I > have not been able to compare to Outlook, but Evolution seems to cause > serious havoc with Red Hat as it consumes a lot of resources and causes > large slow-downs at times. I have a suspicion that the imap server/mail > protocol may be at fault as POP does seem a little happier. > > Kmail 1.5 on Shrike takes around 50 seconds from start to becoming usable. > Outlook Express 6 on Win2K takes about 6 seconds to become usable. > > Mozilla 1.2.1 on Shrike takes 23 seconds to start and become usable. > Mozilla 1.3a on Win2K takes less than 10 seconds. This is a new startup and > not using the preload of Mozilla under Windows. > > Mozilla Mail 1.21 on Shrike takes about 13 seconds. > Mozilla Mail 1.3a on Win2K takes about 6 seconds. This is a new startup and > not using the preload of Mozilla under Windows. > > Nautilus 2.2.1 on Shrike takes around 30 seconds to become usable. > Windows Explorer on Win2K takes around 4 seconds to load and be usable. > ==================================================================== > > The HD light is usually on hard as applications load, indicating heavy use > of the swap file. > > These are fairly typical figures and you can see a clear and consistant > speed difference between the two systems. At times, if I have a few extra > windows open, Linux is just unusable as it swaps heavily to the hard disk. > At these times, I often just go and get a coffee as it can sometimes take > MINUTES to recover. Yes, it is a very stable OS and basically never > actually "crashes" - at least not in the Windows sense. But I have found > that applications like Evolution do crash and/or become unusable far too > often, and this constant HD swapping is VERY wearisome, as I often have to > wait until the system catches up with me before I can go on. By > comparison, the other PC on my desk running Win2K doesn't suffer from > these annoying lags AT ALL in my experience so far (~12 months). > > With the exception of Evolution, once these applications are cached the > system does run a little better, but still not quite as well as Win2K with > cached applications. Evolution with imap doesn't run "easily" any time > from my experience. > > I have read of some application loading speed improvements in the Linux > 2.6 kernel, so perhaps that may make a difference. It will need to, as I > have been trying to get Linux into my workplace, but I know that the > majority of the staff will be unhappy with the performance as it currently > stands. > > My desktop experience extends from 7.2, 7.3, 8.0 and now 9. They have all > been pretty standard Workstation installlations with no tweaking at all, > and they have all been patched with the current updates, and they have all > exhibited the same slow-speed problem. > > The above times are taken on my work PC. At home I have an > XP2000/512Mb/Voodoo III 3500 and it is a little better, but still somewhat > slower than my wife's Win98/256K/Duron 1300 PC. > > >From my viewpoint, Linux may be ready for the desktop from an application > support/availability perspective, but it is certainly not ready from a > speed perspective. > > The server is a much different story, and I have been installing it since > 5.1. Without the overhead of a GUI, it is an EXCELLENT platform and why > anyone would choose Windows over Linux on the server is a mystery to me. > > I would welcome any comments/advice/hints as I am really committed to > Linux and Red Hat and *really* don't like Windows any more as it's so > limiting. > > Regards, > Brad > > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.487 / Virus Database: 286 - Release Date: 6/1/03 --__--__-- Message: 8 Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 07:51:17 +0800 From: Edward Dekkers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Trying to recover MRTG Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mikevl wrote: > Hi > > I've been having some fun upgrading MRTG without success. I think I now want > to return to the old version. When I try to reinstall via rpm I get the > following error. libgd.so.1 is still on the system along with some others. > What do I do to get the system to recognise libgs.so.1 again.? > > error: failed dependencies: > libgd.so.1 is needed by mrtg-2.9.11-1 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# > > > May thanks > > Mike > > You could try to rebuild the RPM database, but it seems it has lost track of some files while you were trying to install the new one. Maybe forcing the package which installs libgd.so.1 might resolve the problem? Regards, Ed. --__--__-- Message: 9 From: "Daevid Vincent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: How do I see the dhcp leases? Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 17:03:07 -0700 Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I've searched the web, but I can't find any way to see all the leases my dhcp server is handing out? Is there some command line (ideally) or GUI or something that will list all the active IP addresses and "names"? By names I mean, all the computer names I see in network neighborhood on windows. "cat /var/lib/dhcp/dhcpd.leases" lists ALL leases for several past days -- some of which are not current. --__--__-- Message: 10 From: "Tapang, Roderick Eugenio (GXS)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Help: Sending Messages to Windows Machines Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 20:18:28 -0400 Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi, >-----Original Message----- >From: Hill, Benjamin W [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 6:33 AM >To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' >Subject: Help: Sending Messages to Windows Machines > > >Hi, > >Is there any way to send a message from a Redhat machine to a Windows >machine like a Windows "net send [USERNAME]" command? yep, there is: echo "test" | smbclient -M netbios_name_of_target -U Administrator I've only tested this on win2k machines (with the messenger service running, of course). running 'smbclient -M netbios_name -U Administrator' will prompt u for the message. End it with CTRL+D. hth. /erik --__--__-- Message: 11 Subject: Re: Postgresql From: Edward Croft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: Date: 10 Jun 2003 09:17:29 -0400 Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 20:04, Alex wrote: > I did su - postgres but when I try to insert the file I get the same error. > :( > > -bash-2.05b$ psql -U bbstatus -e bbstatus < bbstatus.sql > psql: FATAL: IDENT authentication failed for user "bbstatus" > > Alex > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mufit Eribol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 2:49 AM > Subject: Re: Postgresql > > > > Enter 'su postgres' first. Then issue postgresql commands. > > > > Mufit > > The IDENT authentication failure could be if you aren't running the identd daemon. /etc/init.d/identd start. Don't forget chkconfig --level 2345 identd on, to be sure that it is restarted after reboot. There is also a file in the data directory called pg_ident.conf. This does the linux -> postgres user matchups that Identd uses. So say I have the lines: MYGROUP postgres postgres MYGROUP postgres dbuser MYGROUP myusername postgres MYGROUP myusername guest THATGROUP hisusername guest And in the pg_hba.conf file: # TYPE DATABASE IP_ADDRESS MASK AUTH_TYPE AUTH_ARGUMENT local all trust host all 127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 trust host mydb 10.0.0.135 255.255.255.255 ident THATGROUP host all 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 ident MYGROUP Note that in the pg_hba.conf file the AUTH_TYPE is set to ident and that corresponds to a group in the pg_ident.conf file. You will find a lot of documentation at www.postgresql.org. Ed. --__--__-- __ redhat-list mailing list Unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list End of redhat-list Digest -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
