Package: collectd
Version: 4.10.1-1+squeeze2
sub...@bugs.debian.org
Linux debiani 2.6.32-5-vserver-686 #1 SMP Wed Jan 12 06:32:10 UTC 2011 i686
GNU/Linux
Hello
collectd worked great, but recently i gott error
message my email
Package: logcheck
Version: 1.2.69
Hello
since updating to lenny i got every hour this waring.
Starting logcheck from shell via
#su - logcheck -c "/usr/sbin/logcheck" logchec
works flawlessly
Maybe the script is started twice?
in "/usr/sbin/logcheck" i have added "$UID" to see in which contest
Package: perl-modules
Version: 5.8.8-7etch1
While upgrading got this warning message:
What to do now?
Setting up perl-modules (5.8.8-7etch1) ...
dpkg: perl-modules: warning - conffile `/etc/Net' is not a plain file or
symlink (= `/etc/Net')
# ll /etc/Net
total 8
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7513 Dec
mii-diag mii-tool not working with nforce3 or kernel 2.6.3
# mii-tool eth3
SIOCGMIIPHY on 'eth3' failed: Operation not supported
ethtool seems to have no problem:
# ethtool -i eth3
driver: forcedeth
version: 0.60
firmware-version:
bus-info: :00:05.0
vdr:~/work/flash# ethtool eth3
Settin
Package: mii-diag
Version: 2.11-2
Package: nictools-pci
Version: 1.3.8-1
Hello
mii-diag mii-tool not working with nforce3 or kernel 2.6.3
SIOCGMIIPHY on eth3 failed: Operation not supported
SIOCGMIIPHY on 'eth?' failed: Operation not permitted
Most kernels restrict
Package: cron-apt
Version: 0.4.14
Hello
Since some days i get this error message everyday:
cron-apt: Failed to fetch
http://wine.budgetdedicated.com/apt/dists/etch/Release \
Unable to find expected entry main/source/Sources in Meta-index file
(malformed Release file?)
What does cron-apt not
Package: tiger
Version: 1:3.2.1-35
Package: sudo
Version: 1.6.8p12-4
Package: openssh-client
Version: 1:4.3p2-9
Package: x11-common
Version: 1:7.1.0-19
Package: at
Version: 3.1.10
Hello
pardon the long list but i don't know where the bug is,
nor if it is a bug at all nor if it is just an
Package: jigit
Version: 1.15-2
Package: wget
Version: 1.10.2-2
Knows
-nv, --no-verbose turn off verboseness, without being quiet.
but jigit uses
--no*n*-verbose"
Or is it a flaw in wget?
Patch:
# diff -Nau /usr/bin/jigit.org /usr/bin/jigit
--- /usr/bin/jigit.org 2005-01-17 23:
Package: csh
Version: 20060813-1
or
Package: tiger
Version: 1:3.2.1-35
After upgrading tiger complaints:
OLD: --FAIL-- [misc017f] The umask setting in /etc/csh.login for the init
scripts is insecure
NEW: --WARN-- [misc021w] There are no umask entries in /etc/csh.login
Would this be a soluti
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Eric Delaunay) 12.09.07 19:51
>Rainer Zocholl wrote:
>> Package: scsitools
>> Version: 0.9-1.1
>>
>> After upgrading to the current stable version, scsiinfo seems to
>> become unable to read *any* scsi pages (see below).
>> Previous versi
Package: net-acct
Version: 0.71-7
The example script sl2rdbl seems to have a bug which inhibits the
display of any from or to ports in some cases if the port is not
"well known" in /etc/services.
Why is "$port" placed into these "()"?
Current output:
eth0 tcp I I 1242 -> www
Package: scsitools
Version: 0.9-1.1
Thanks for nice scsitools package!
But sorry, today i have to complain:
After upgrading to the current stable version, scsiinfo seems to become
unable to read *any* scsi pages (see below).
Previous version works used in a cronjob to check for grown defects (wh
Sorry, forgot to change the subj.
Please change the Subject line to:
howto suppress well known "flip flop" messages?
Further infos:
That "flip-flop" is a feature(!) of BCM570x Family PCI-Xr 10/100/1000BASE-T
"Broadcom Advanced Control Suite"
called "Smart Load Balance (SLB)".
It can be ru
Package: arpwatch
Version: 2.1a13-2
Hello
arpwatch fills the log with these "flip flop" messages below.
These are generated by a server with two gigabit broadcom interfaces
"bonded" together.
man arpwatch says:
flip flop
The ethernet address has changed from the most recently
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Debian Bug Tracking System) 09.08.07 18:54
>It has been closed by Javier Fernandez-Sanguino Pen~a
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
>Source: bastille
>Source-Version: 1:3.0.9-5
>We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
>bastille, which is due to be installed
Package: bastille
Version: 1:2.1.1-13
After a recent upgrade of bastille i see these warnings.
That problem is older (at least 2005) and i wonder what i did wrong so
only i ran into the problem(s)? (At least the second)
First:
/sbin/bastille-firewall-reset complaints about missing modules.dep
Package: collectd
Version: 3.10.4-1
Package: logcheck
Version: 1.2.55
collectd generates from time to time such warnings
Jul 10 01:08:36 debmini collectd[1313]: Cannot open `/proc/32595/stat': No such
file or
directory
Jul 10 11:30:13 debmini collectd[1313]: Cannot open `/proc/9582/stat': No
Package: logcheck
Version: 1.2.39
logcheck contains the line:
TMPDIR=$(mktemp -d -p /tmp logcheck.XX
and is storing tons of data there.
On linux-vserver (e.g.) "/tmp" defaults to just 16MB!
So, sometimes, an empty email is generated and the user "nobody"
on localhost got this error mess
Package: chkrootkit
State: installed
Automatically installed: yes
Version: 0.44-2
check root kit find command fails
it is only visible in expert mode:
### Output of: /usr/bin/find //usr/include -name icekey.h -o name iceconf.h -o
name iceseed.h
###
/usr/bin/find: paths must precede expression
Us
Package: inn2
Version: 2.4.2-3
resp.
Package: logcheck
Version: 1.2.39
Hello
i have to add that local rule, mainly because "len: nnn Mbytes" now have
a decima point.
Maybe it will be usefull too to setup es regex for
"Class (DE|INTL)" and "Buffer (DE|INTL)[0-9]+"
because that item can b
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Alexis Sukrieh) 22.08.06 14:56
Once upon a time "Alexis Sukrieh " shaped the electrons to say...
>Hello,
>Do you manage to reproduce the bug with 2.22-2 ?
2.22 has a problem with database..
Here my several tries in mostly chronologic order,
finally i purged bugzilla an remov
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Alexis Sukrieh) 22.08.06 14:56
>Hello,
>Do you manage to reproduce the bug with 2.22-2 ?
No. I have only tested with 2.22-1
2.22-1 does not hang anymore but has an other problem.
i sent both outputs in 2 mails to the list.
Is 2.22-2 a but fix for my report which should that
Again a problem of the unclear version informations of the apt;-(
It is not obious to the user which version is going to be installed
(Except a download is required.)
When i do a nromal
aptitude install bugzilla, i only get 2.1xx which is hanging
:~# aptitude dist-upgrade
Reading Package Lis
Get:1 http://ftp.freenet.de sarge/main bugzilla 2.16.7-7sarge1 [368kB]
~~!
# aptitude install bugzilla
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree
Reading extended state information
Initializing package states... Done
The fo
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Alexis Sukrieh) 14.08.06 16:54
Once upon a time "Alexis Sukrieh " shaped the electrons to say...
>tags 358196 + moreinfo
>thanks
>Hello,
>Do you manage to reproduce the bug with the last version (2.22-1) ?
I'll try at friday.
>Thanks for giving me some feedback about that
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Rainer Zocholl) 15.06.06 23:33
Hello, what will happen now?
>[EMAIL PROTECTED](Daniel Burrows) 14.06.06 19:46
>> As I understand it, this is a feature request that "aptitude show"
>>should display the currently installed version by default?
&g
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Daniel Burrows) 14.06.06 19:46
> As I understand it, this is a feature request that "aptitude show"
>should display the currently installed version by default?
Too, yes.
But:
1st.
At least it would be required that "aptitude show" does not
declare the first found package a
inja can learn new skills. Backupninja is a silent flower blossom death
strike to
lost data.
>Also, it helps the person who has to handle your bug if you do not cut
>information from the output of your commands.
The output below was not "cut" in anyway.
(See the misstyped "
Package: aptitude
State: installed
Version: 0.2.15.9-2
Priority: important
Hello
"aptitude show" says
Package: aptitude
State: installed
Version: 0.4.1-1.1
but installed is actually 0.2.15.9-2!
The info aptitude delivers are missleading wrong
when the "installed" does not belong to the show
igc++-2.0-0c2a (>= 2.0.2), libstdc++6 (>= 4.1.0)
Recommends: aptitude-doc-en | aptitude-doc
Suggests: libparse-debianchangelog-perl, tasksel, debtags
micah riseup.net(Micah Anderson) 12.06.06 23:28
>Rainer Zocholl wrote:
>> Package: backupninja
>> New: yes
>> State: inst
Package: backupninja
New: yes
State: installed
Automatically installed: no
Version: 0.9.3-6
Priority: optional
Section: admin
Maintainer: Micah Anderson
seems not to contain/install "ninjahelper"
According to
http://bugs.donarmstrong.com/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=341239
ninjahelper should had
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Aurelien Jarno) 17.05.06 04:07
Once upon a time "Aurelien Jarno " shaped the electrons to say...
>Rainer Zocholl wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED](Lars Wirzenius) 29.04.06 23:15
>>
>>
>>> la, 2006-04-29 kello 20:56 +0200, Rainer Zocholl kir
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Aurelien Jarno) 17.05.06 04:07
>Rainer Zocholl wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED](Lars Wirzenius) 29.04.06 23:15
>>
>>
>>> la, 2006-04-29 kello 20:56 +0200, Rainer Zocholl kirjoitti:
>>>> Install libc6 fails because(?) no sed was installed b
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Lars Wirzenius) 29.04.06 23:15
>la, 2006-04-29 kello 20:56 +0200, Rainer Zocholl kirjoitti:
>> Install libc6 fails because(?) no sed was installed but seems to
>> be used in libc6.postinst.
>sed is essential, so always guaranteed to be there:
>[EMAIL PRO
Package: libc6
State: partially configured
Automatically installed: no
Version: 2.3.2.ds1-22sarge3
Priority: required
Section: base
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers
Uncompressed Size: 15.7M
Depends: libdb1-compat
Suggests: locales, glibc-doc
Install libc6 fails because(?) no sed was installed bu
Package: libc6
State: partially configured
Automatically installed: no
Version: 2.3.2.ds1-22sarge3
Priority: required
Section: base
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers
Uncompressed Size: 15.7M
Depends: libdb1-compat
Suggests: locales, glibc-doc
Install libc6 fails because(?) no sed was installed bu
Hello
is the problem solved or located at this end of line?
pls. give a hint what's going wrong.
Thanks.
Rainer---<=> Vertraulich
//
//
<=>--ocholl, Kiel, Germany
--
To UNS
Package: libacl1
Version: 2.2.36-1
Priority: required
Section: libs
Maintainer: Nathan Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Uncompressed Size: 45.1k
Depends: libattr1 (>= 2.4.4-1), libc6 (>= 2.3.5-1)
Conflicts: acl (< 2.0.0), libacl1-kerberos4kth
Description: Access control list shared library
This package c
Package: bugzilla
Version: 2.20-1
Hello
Trying to install bugzilla it always hangs, 100% reprodicible.
CNTL-C can terminate the process.
It seems to expect an other terminal as I have...??
(I'm using ssh putty, TERM=xterm, LINES=57, COLUMNS=146(=more then 127))
Reducing size let it work a step f
Package: php4
Version: 4:4.3.10-16
or
Package: tutos
Version: 1.1.20031017-2
Package: apache
Version: 1.3.33-6sarge1
Hello
Installed "tutos" package without any problem, but when ever i try to
open the URL i get:
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /tutos/php/mytutos.php on this
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Debian Bug Tracking System) 24.10.05 14:03
>> To make this work, no further access to the hardware clock may
>> occure. So i renamed K25hwclock.sh to _K25hwclock.sh=20
>> So ACPI wake up worked flawlessly without since months!
>> But one package restores the K25hwclock.sh links,
Package: util-linux
Version: 2.12p-4sarge1
Hello
running "VDR":
To save a significant amount of energy the box is powered off
until the next recording will need it.
To implement that acpi_wakeup is used by simply
WAKETIME=`date -d "1970-01-01 UTC $1 sec -5 min" +"%Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S"`
echo $WA
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Stephen Gran) 21.09.05 23:55
>This one time, at band camp, Rainer Zocholl said:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED](Stephen Gran) 19.09.05 08:58
>>>Debian backports security fixes, rather than upgrading to new
>>>versions with new bugs.
>>
>> Jepp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Debian Bug Tracking System) 20.09.05 15:48
>Well, it seems like this was a misunderstanding
>about Debian's security handling.
Yes, it does not become clear for the user that
debian 0.84 is equivalent to 0.86 in security.
>Since I have heard nothing back from the
>submitter
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Stephen Gran) 19.09.05 08:58
>This one time, at band camp, Rainer Zocholl said:
>> Hello
>>
>> it happend that i can't update clamav on a box.
>>
>> That was caused by the line
>>
>> # cat apt.conf
>> Apt::Default-Release
Package: clamav
Version: 0.84-2.sarge.2
Priority: optional
Section: utils
Hello
it happend that i can't update clamav on a box.
That was caused by the line
# cat apt.conf
Apt::Default-Release "stable";
aptitude remove clamav clamv-base ,
aptitude clean
aptitude install
shows:
Get:1
Package: sendmail
Version: 8.13.4-3
Hello
i don't know if this list is right.
If not pls. drop my a mail.
Situation:
No mail leaving box after an aptitude upgrade
# netstat -tulpen
Active Internet connections (only servers)
Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Stephen Gran) 12.08.05 09:41
Once upon a time "Stephen Gran " shaped the electrons to say...
>This one time, at band camp, Stephen Gran said:
>> It sounds to me like you have testing or stable in your
>> sources.list,
Right, I have stable and unstable in the sources.list. But
Package: testdisk
New: yes
State: installed
Automatically installed: no
Version: 5.8-2
Priority: optional
Section: admin
Maintainer: Jean-Michel Kelbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Uncompressed Size: 1034k
Depends: e2fslibs, libc6 (>= 2.3.5-1), libjpeg62, libncurses5 (>= 5.4-5),
libntfs5 (>= 1.9.4
Package: libclamav1
Version: 0.86.2-3
Priority: optional
Section: libs
Maintainer: Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Uncompressed Size: 483k
Depends: libbz2-1.0, libc6 (>= 2.3.5-1), libcurl3 (>= 7.13.1-1), libgmp3c2 |
libgmp3, libidn11 (>= 0.5.18), libssl0.9.7, zlib1g (>= 1:1.2.1)
Conflicts
Package: mii-diag
Version: 2.09-1
Severity: wishlist
Maybe this this script "mii-mon" (mii-monitor) helps.
cat /etc/init.d/mii-mon
#!/bin/sh
PATH=/sbin:/bin
test -x /sbin/mii-tool || exit 0
#This is required because insmod may litter log file with complaints
# every second if non existing et
Package: mii-diag
Version: 2.09-1
I already submitted this some days ago, but it do not
show up in http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=mii-diag.
Sorry if that's now a dupe.
Linux version 2.4.28.20050609 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian
1:3.3.5-13))
Linux version 2.4.
Package: mii-diag
Version: 2.09-1
I wonder where the line
"product info: vendor 00:50:43, model 5 rev 4"
is derivated from.
Neither lspci nor ifconfig shows those values.
59,40 are the first letters "PC" from "PCIR"...
PCI Expansion PROM Data Structure Format
00-03 Signature: always P C I R (50
Package: mii-diag
Version: 2.09-1
See Bug#301239 but here
Some more infos from an other system.
Test script:
ping -c2 n.n.n.n
mii-tool -v -r eth0
for (( ; 1 ; ))
do
date
ping -c 2 n.n.n.n
mii-tool -v eth0
done
restarting autonegotiation...
Mon Aug 1 13:34:29 CEST 2005
PING n.n.n.
[EMAIL PROTECTED](maximilian attems) 23.07.05 17:48
>On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Rainer Zocholl wrote:
>>>from time to time i get such (false) "Security Event".
>>
>> Seems to become common practice :-(
>>
>> Again an "security event", i assume
>Package: logcheck
>Version: 1.2.39
>Hello
>from time to time i get such (false) "Security Event".
Seems to become common practice :-(
Again an "security event", i assume "promiscuous" in msgid triggered.
Jul 23 14:46:26 host sm-mta[25759]: j6NCkQTS025759:
from=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, size=16186
Package: logcheck
Version: 1.2.39
Hello
from time to time i get such (false) "Security Event".
after a while you will see the
message-ID "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
containing the nagic word "illegal"...
Question:
Can't that be abused for DoS or logfile floodding because it's
only to the sender t
Package: mii-diag
Version: 2.09-1
Maintainer: Alain Schroeder
Linux version 2.4.28.20050609 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian
1:3.3.5-13))
Linux version 2.4.29 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc-Version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-8))
(Shows the effect)
Linux version 2.4.18 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (g
[EMAIL PROTECTED](maximilian attems) 18.07.05 14:21
Once upon a time "maximilian attems " shaped the electrons to say...
>please try to post concise bug reports.
>your previous tale is hard to follow.
>On Thu, 14 Jul 2005, Rainer Zocholl wrote:
>>>oogrs...
>&g
[EMAIL PROTECTED](maximilian attems) 06.07.05 11:27
>well without some fresh log messages the rules can't be improved.
>of course you are welcome to try yourself to add to that file
>fine regexes.
The rules you posted fits very good.
I added the rule for 3 further log entries, that need not be r
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Jamie L. Penman-Smithson) 18.07.05 14:38
Once upon a time "Jamie L. Penman-Smithson " shaped the electrons to say...
>On Sun, 2005-07-17 at 20:19 +0200, Rainer Zocholl wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED](Jamie L. Penman-Smithson) 17.07.05 13:31
>>>since al
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Jamie L. Penman-Smithson) 17.07.05 13:31
>Your rule has a trailing space,
i know that. Without it did not work either.
>since all log messages have trailing
>spaces stripped before they are processed, your rule will never match
>anything.
Sorry, i wasn't aware of that and
Package: logcheck
Version: "most recent stable"
Hello
i can't block the spamd warning.
Why?
may the problem be the end of line terminated in ". $"
But using "\. $" does not help.
[23:33:42]host1:/etc/logcheck/ignore.d.server# ll spamd
-rw-r- 1 root logcheck 789 Jul 16 23:32 spamd
[2
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Rainer Zocholl) 12.07.05 20:24
>oogrs...
>now it works. The lines are not shown anymore.
Sorry, not true.
That was caused by the "normal" logcheck run updating the offsets.
So that question is still open;:
Why does a rule, that looks good, that works as expe
[EMAIL PROTECTED](maximilian attems) 11.07.05 13:55
Once upon a time "maximilian attems " shaped the electrons to say...
>> i change the rules but logcheck seems to ignore them
>>
>> One example:
>>
>> REPORTLEVEL="server"
>>
>> logcheck send mails containing:
>>
>> Security Events
>> =-=-=-=-=-
Package: logcheck
Version: 1.2.39
Hello
i change the rules but logcheck seems to ignore them
One example:
REPORTLEVEL="server"
logcheck send mails containing:
Security Events
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Jul 10 09:11:53 machine ipop3ds[10304]: AUTHENTICATE CRAM-MD5 failure
host=p548D1585.dip0.t-ipconn
[EMAIL PROTECTED](maximilian attems) 05.07.05 20:46
>hello,
>On Sat, 02 Jul 2005, Rainer Zocholl wrote:
>> (Why)Can't exim log file not be checked by logcheck?
>good question,
>seems like all the logcheck maintainers prefer postfix.
But debian defaults to "exim
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Jamie L. Penman-Smithson) 02.07.05 14:57
>package logcheck
>reassign 316618 hddtemp
>retitle 316618 hddtemp: logcheck rules do not ignore drive sleeping
>messages thanks
>On Sat, 2005-07-02 at 15:22 +0200, Rainer Zocholl wrote:
>
>>>Jul 2 09:25:5
[EMAIL PROTECTED](Rainer Zocholl) 02.07.05 11:59
Once upon a time "Rainer Zocholl " shaped the electrons to say...
>Package: logcheck
>Version: 1.2.40
>System Events
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>Jul 2 09:05:51 data hddtemp[15424]: /dev/hda: IBM-DJNA-351520: 43 C
>Jul 2 09:05:
Package: logcheck
Version: 1.2.40
Hello
(Why)Can't exim log file not be checked by logcheck?
In logcheck.logfiles i found a nasty
#/var/log/exim/mainlog
as i installed exim4 (debian 3.1)
i removed the "#" and got an hourly 1:1 copy of the "mainlog" file ;-)
(Lukly that were only some few
Package: logcheck
Version: 1.2.40
Hello
Thanks a lot for logcheck!
After installing "hddtemp" to poll every 5 minutes the disk temperature
i got those system events below.
Is it possbile to ignore thos as long as ": XX C" evaluates(?)
to a value below say "45"?
I don't think that the te
Package: logcheck
Version: most current debian 3.1
Hello
(Why)Can't exim log file not be checked by logcheck?
In logcheck.logfiles i found a nasty
#/var/log/exim/mainlog
as i installed exim4 (debian 3.1)
i removed the "#" and got an hourly 1:1 copy of the "mainlog" file ;-)
(Lukly that w
Package: logcheck
Version: most current debian (can't come to the box, only get logcheck mails)
Hello
Thanks a lot for logcheck!
After installing "hddtemp" to poll every 5 minutes the disk temperature
i got those system events below.
Is it possbile to ignore thos as long as ": XX C" eval
[EMAIL PROTECTED](maximilian attems) 18.04.05 09:31
>On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Rainer Zocholl wrote:
>> Everytime(!) i upgrade debian logcheck i run into the error
>> that logcheck is trying to generate its lockfile at a
>> forbidden location.
>> The error message/mail is
Package: logcheck
Version: 1.2.37
Everytime(!) i upgrade debian logcheck i run into the error
that logcheck is trying to generate its lockfile at a
forbidden location.
The error message/mail is a bit missleading too.
When will that error be fixed? (I think i reported it already several
week
75 matches
Mail list logo
