On Tue, 2003-10-14 at 21:45, Mike Klein wrote:
> I've been locking down different parts of my server, specifically
> w/respect to certain services and the user they run under.
>
> I realize that it's best to run as a special user (i.e. nobody or
> account based on service name).
>
> I've notice
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 09:34:29 -0400, Edward Croft wrote:
> Okay, I have been beating my head regarding tripwire. First off, let me
> thank Bret Hughes for his twpolclean.pl. That decreased my error count
> due to files not on the system.
> My question
David Eduardo Gomez Noguera wrote:
1. Cant mount interpret shell variables on fstab?
No.
I tried to tell it
that samba credentials file for a mount are in their home directory, and
that the mount point should be there too to no effect.
Make smbmnt and smbumount SUID root, and users will be able t
On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 08:28, David Eduardo Gomez Noguera wrote:
> Hello.
> I am having problems with the inhability of fstab (or of me) to handle
> this.
>
> 1. Cant mount interpret shell variables on fstab? I tried to tell it
> that samba credentials file for a mount are in their home directory,
On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 01:28:39PM -0400, Aeryn wrote:
> Hola, I was wondering who has used MRTG to measure bandwidth usage on their
> server? I have it compiled and ready to be used, except I still have a few
> questions. How hard is it to setup snmp on the server?
Not hard at all. Just check t
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 11:08 PM
> Subject: Re: Questions ( SOA and MX ) of DNS
>
>
> "Cowles, Steve" wrote:
> > Because I could not register a different host name to the
> > same IP
"Cowles, Steve" wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: nate
> > Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2003 12:54 PM
> > Subject: Re: Questions ( SOA and MX ) of DNS
> >
> >
> > > If there is only a DNS and a Mail Server to control more
> &g
"Cowles, Steve" wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 9:50 AM
> > Subject: Re: Questions ( SOA and MX ) of DNS
> >
> > >
> > > ;##
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 9:50 AM
> Subject: Re: Questions ( SOA and MX ) of DNS
>
> >
> > ;##
> > ; Start of Authority for mydomain-2.c
"Cowles, Steve" wrote:
> I think he's talking about a single system that is the SOA for multiple
> domains. Plus e-mail! i.e. virtual
>
> If thats the case (see below)... Note that ns1.mydomain-1.com and
> ns2.mydomain-1.com are the SOA/NS for both zones. In other words, they are
> the name server
> -Original Message-
> From: nate
> Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2003 12:54 PM
> Subject: Re: Questions ( SOA and MX ) of DNS
>
>
> > If there is only a DNS and a Mail Server to control more
> > than one Domain_name and its mails, then how to identify
> &
> If there is only a DNS and a Mail Server to control more than one
> Domain_name and its mails,
> then how to identify the nameserver behind of SOA and nameserver of MX
> record about each of zone file ( each of Domain_name ) ?
> Any sample about this kind of problem for me to understand ?
perha
Dear all,
Would you mind to help me to check the config files are correct ( right ) ?
Question : Now, assume apply two domains "123.org.us" and "456.org.us" from
"usnic"...
The Server Name of Linux ( hostname ) for domains "123.org.us" and
"456.org.us" to runing DNS : 123svr1.123.org.us
The IP_Ad
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 9:09 AM
> To: DNS
> Subject: Questions about a DNS to operate more than one domains
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> Would you mind to help me to check the config files are
> correct ( right ) ?
>
> Question : Now, assum
>
> # 0k SECOND time for this quesion
> # No Answers the first time
>
I actually read your first post, but I *THINK* the rest of the people who
read it are in the same boat as me - we don't know muc
I normally make 2 partitions 1 for windows and 1 for linux I then install
windows then I install linux and during the install process of linux I use
disk druid to configure my linux partitions.
Note I said partitions 1 native and 1 swap. Others make different partitions
it all depends on your pref
--- Will Standley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev: > Two
questions...
>
> 1 - How should I partition a hard disk before I do a
> virgin Redhat install?
>
Use fdisk for the windows partitions first and then
redhat xxx rescue bootdisk to format the linux
partition.
> (Normally for Windows I do 3 parti
I will try that Mike. The second "user" or the first or both? Hmm,
about the virus, that is probably true. But in all honesty i use linux
more than windows anyway, as long as it didn't get to my mbr i would be
ok, which it probably couldn't do cuz it would have to execute windows
api's right?
On 25 Jan 2002 17:52:00 -0800
Brandon Dorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> scribbled in frustration:
> Hello,
>
> Below is a copy of my /etc/fstab. I can't seem to be able to tweak it
> so that upon booting, my normal user account can write to say, the
> windows drive (mounted as /dev/hde1, /c of course)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brandon Dorman wrote:
>Hello,
>
>Below is a copy of my /etc/fstab. I can't seem to be able to tweak it
>so that upon booting, my normal user account can write to say, the
>windows drive (mounted as /dev/hde1, /c of course)
Well, your message is a
At 02:25 PM 1/8/02 +0100, you wrote:
> Hello Julian,
>
> > Again, though, it's perfectly valid to use your ISP's server in a
> caching mode
> > if you want local caching, but want to offload the searching job from
> your own
> > machine.
>
> Using forwarding instead of querying
Hello Julian,
> Again, though, it's perfectly valid to use your ISP's server in a caching mode
> if you want local caching, but want to offload the searching job from your own
> machine.
Using forwarding instead of querying the root servers directly has one more
advantage that
At 12:58 AM 1/8/02 +0100, you wrote:
> Hi again Julian,
>
> > The forwarding statement only changes HOW it goes
> > about getting names resolved, it doesn't stop it from caching the results.
>
> > Given the setup I was talking about in the first place was four
> machines on a
> >
Hi Julian,
> Right. After all, if you didn't have a local DNS server, your ISP's server
> would do it anyway, right? So by caching with your DNS server, you're actually
> potentially reducing the load on him. What a nice guy ;-)
Alright, you already got that :). That makes my la
Hi again Julian,
> The forwarding statement only changes HOW it goes
> about getting names resolved, it doesn't stop it from caching the results.
> Given the setup I was talking about in the first place was four machines on a
> LAN, one of which was a Linbox running bind, there'
At 05:19 PM 1/6/02 -0500, you wrote:
>
>
>Strange - I found a couple other man pages that do that, but not all
>of them. Guess I'll check the man page RPM and maybe force its
>reinstall and see if it still happens and then post to the enigma list
>if it still does.
I've not experienced it at all,
> From: Julian Opificius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >I'm still not convinced that using the forwarders isn't the
> >best/correct solution.
>
> For you or me it certainly may be the _best_ solution - because it reduces
> the work done by our local DNS server :-) Correct vs incorrect is not a
> use
At 02:23 PM 1/6/02 -0500, you wrote:
> > From: Julian Opificius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>
> > Now, if you put a forwarder statement in your zone file, then your DNS
> > server will go to your ISP's DNS server(s) before trying to resolve an
> > address itself. Your ISP's DNS server has to do all th
> From: Julian Opificius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Now, if you put a forwarder statement in your zone file, then your DNS
> server will go to your ISP's DNS server(s) before trying to resolve an
> address itself. Your ISP's DNS server has to do all the work. That's fine:
> this will reduce the l
At 09:38 PM 1/5/02 -0500, you wrote:
> > X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > From: Julian Opificius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Hi Dave,
> > Comments below.
>
>I think I understand what you said, but other than the forward lines,
>nowhere else is my ISP's DNS servers specified. How else do I tell it
>
Morning folks :-)
Well the local DNS is building a cache anyway - whether it's configured to
use the upstream server as a forwarder or not.
I was doing some research late into last night to provide an accurate
answer to this. It'll come in a separate post in a few minutes,
julian.
===
> From: "Leonard den Ottolander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> > I think I understand what you said, but other than the forward lines,
> > nowhere else is my ISP's DNS servers specified. How else do I tell it
> > to look there first if it's not in it's local cache?
>
> ? T
Hi Dave,
> I think I understand what you said, but other than the forward lines,
> nowhere else is my ISP's DNS servers specified. How else do I tell it
> to look there first if it's not in it's local cache?
? That is what the forward line is for. What do you need another mechan
Hi Julian,
> >The way I interpret that is that if an address cannot be resolved in
> >my DNS cache, then it looks to my ISP's nameserver (and ideally finds
> >the answer in its cache). Otherwise how is this any different than
> >putting the ISP's nameservers in /etc/resolv.conf (I
"Timothy R. Butler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi everyone,
> I am preparing to do a review of RedHat Linux 7.2 for my e-zine (Open for
> Business, www.ofb.biz), but as someone who hasn't used RedHat since version
> 5.1 and generally uses Mandrake or SuSE, I feel sort of out of my element
If I understand the discssion correctly; I would recommend putting
forwarders in. The forwarders (more than one) should be your ISP's DNS
servers and aother organizations DNS server. The second thing I would
suggest is adding a second DNS server which is a slave of the first. Two
reasons for th
> X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: Julian Opificius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Hi Dave,
> Comments below.
I think I understand what you said, but other than the forward lines,
nowhere else is my ISP's DNS servers specified. How else do I tell it
to look there first if it's not in it's local cach
Hi Dave,
Comments below.
At 07:20 PM 1/5/02 -0500, you wrote:
> > From: Julian Opificius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > In response to Dave Reeds post ...
> >
> > Well, in the absence of a response by a guru, here's the scoop on
> > forwarding ...
> >
> > Forwarding was intended to be used in larger
> From: Julian Opificius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> In response to Dave Reeds post ...
>
> Well, in the absence of a response by a guru, here's the scoop on
> forwarding ...
>
> Forwarding was intended to be used in larger networks where there are
> multiple names servers. To minimize traffic to
In response to Dave Reeds post ...
Well, in the absence of a response by a guru, here's the scoop on
forwarding ...
Forwarding was intended to be used in larger networks where there are
multiple names servers. To minimize traffic to the "big cloud" one server
is nominated as a local master, a
Hi Julian,
> My only worry now is if there's a door I haven't closed which is even now
> trying to tell the world about my local LAN!
Is this machine directly connected to the internet or behind a firewall? In
the first case somebody could try talking to your nameserver. Not su
Thanks for your great explanation (and everyone else's, for that matter).
By using bindconf, I think I've achieved exactly what you suggest. Please
see my accompanying post.
j.
==
At 06:24 PM 1/5/02 +0100, you wrote:
> Hi Dave, Julian,
>
> Although most has alrea
Thanks David.
I don't know what the forwarding bit is all about yet. I sent the wife out
to the bookstore to pick up Bind and DNS from O'Reilly, so I should be able
to read up on that any moment now.
Here's what I did.
I ran the graphic utility "bindconf". As a result of my clumsy stumbling
> From: "Leonard den Ottolander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Hi Julian,
>
> > My question should have been:- how does the machine running bind satisfy
> > DNS requests from OTHER machines on local (private) network if it doesn't look
> > at hosts ?
>
> It looks at the zone files in
Hi Julian,
> My question should have been:- how does the machine running bind satisfy
> DNS requests from OTHER machines on local (private) network if it doesn't look
> at hosts ?
It looks at the zone files in /var/named, or queries another name server.
Hi Dave, Julian,
Although most has already been said I can't keep myself from jumping on this
wagon ;).
> > I thought (don't ask me where I got this idea) that bind (ie.named) looked in
> > /etc/hosts first before going to an upstream DNS server.
>
> This is usually true becau
On Sat, Jan 05, 2002 at 01:10:16AM -0600, Julian Opificius wrote:
> >There is only one worth having:
> >
> >DNS and BIND, 4th Edition by Paul Albitz & Cricket Liu published by
> >O'Reilly.
I'll second this. THE reference to own.
> Well my understanding is that up till recently they've been comp
Chuck,
At 01:13 AM 1/5/02 -0500, you wrote:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On Sat, 5 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
>
>JO>Wow, thanks for writing that up, Bret.
>JO>
>JO>I'm not sure what changes on your ISP's DNS server to make it a
>"forwarder"
>JO>- a DNS
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 5 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
JO>Wow, thanks for writing that up, Bret.
JO>
JO>I'm not sure what changes on your ISP's DNS server to make it a "forwarder"
JO>- a DNS server that didn't forward the results wouldn't be too
Wow, thanks for writing that up, Bret.
I'm not sure what changes on your ISP's DNS server to make it a "forwarder"
- a DNS server that didn't forward the results wouldn't be too helpful ...
I'll read up on the forwarder idea tomorrow - I'm taking a trip down to my
local Barnes and Noble to fin
On Fri, 2002-01-04 at 11:40, Julian Opificius wrote:
> Dave,
>
> I want to do exactly as you described below - use my DNS server for local
> static resolution, and as a cache for real world addresses.
> What I need to do now is find out how to build my zone files to support the
> local network.
Dave,
I want to do exactly as you described below - use my DNS server for local
static resolution, and as a cache for real world addresses.
What I need to do now is find out how to build my zone files to support the
local network.
For those who have been patiently following (or wading past) th
On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 09:38:55AM -0600, Julian Opificius wrote:
> But I'm afraid your answer to my last lingering question was a little
> unclear, I think because I didn't phrase the question properly :-
> ...
> My question should have been:- how does the machine running bind satisfy
> DNS req
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
JO>Thanks Brian.
JO>
JO>So bind does do local DNS, but it uses zone files, not the "hosts" file.
JO>That's the answer I was looking for. Now I know where to go.
JO>
JO>Sincere thanks again t
Thanks Brian.
So bind does do local DNS, but it uses zone files, not the "hosts" file.
That's the answer I was looking for. Now I know where to go.
Sincere thanks again to all who contributed to this thread.
julian.
==
At 11:23 AM 1/4/02 -0500, you wrote:
>On Friday 04 Janu
On Friday 04 January 2002 11:19, you babbled something about:
>
> So the question is: HOW do I give it those local mappings, if not the host
> file ??? That appears to be the big question here.
You might want to try the DNS HOWTO.
The hosts file is for the "hosts style look-ups". So you need to
At 10:52 AM 1/4/02 -0500, you wrote:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
>
>JO>Remember that a LAN machine making a DNS request doesn't know yet if
>JO>the machine whose IP address it wants is on the same network or off
>JO>
At 10:43 AM 1/4/02 -0500, you wrote:
Good morning Chuck,
>The ip stack cannot use a name, it must have an ip address to choose a
>route. We humans prefer names so a host file can be used to provide that
>relationship so that the resolver can turn a name into an ip address
>(and ultimately a MAC
On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 08:45:43AM -0600 or thereabouts, Dave Ihnat wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 08:11:31AM -0600, Gary wrote:
> > hosts does not give resolution for static names, just IP addresses. Your
> > windows / Linux LAN cannot ping by name, just IP address only, no
> > aliases either.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
JO>Remember that a LAN machine making a DNS request doesn't know yet if
JO>the machine whose IP address it wants is on the same network or off
JO>in Outer Mongolia.
DNS doesn't care about l
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
JO>At 08:11 AM 1/4/02 -0600, you wrote:
JO>>On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 11:15:12PM -0600 or thereabouts, Julian Opificius
JO>>wrote:
JO>> > At 11:58 PM 1/3/02 -0500, you wrote:
JO>> >
JO>> >
JO>
Dave, thanks a million for this clarification. It was enormously helpful.
But I'm afraid your answer to my last lingering question was a little
unclear, I think because I didn't phrase the question properly :-
Here's the question again ...
> Basically, how does a machine on the LAN get resolu
At 08:11 AM 1/4/02 -0600, you wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 11:15:12PM -0600 or thereabouts, Julian Opificius
>wrote:
> > At 11:58 PM 1/3/02 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> >
> > >[csm@stealth csm]$ cat /etc/host.conf
> > >order hosts,bind
> > >
> > >You see?
> >
> > Think so, try this out:-
> >
> > 1
On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 08:11:31AM -0600, Gary wrote:
> hosts does not give resolution for static names, just IP addresses. Your
> windows / Linux LAN cannot ping by name, just IP address only, no
> aliases either. That is for DNS
I'm sorry, but this is just so totally, absolutely, flat-out wrong
On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 10:46:25PM -0600, Julian Opificius wrote:
> That much I knew ... it's a data file containing links between IPs and
> friendly names. But who uses it?
It's used in small networks. It's also used as a "shim" to fix bad DNS
responses. A good example--a friend of mine has D
This has been commented on in part, but it's got some things wrong enough I
want to emphasize them:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 10:18:50PM -0600, Gary wrote:
> Hi Julian, A /etc/hosts file is not a named daemon.
True.
> It will not resolve name and address, only DNS does that, i.e. BIND.
> The Host
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
JO>>[csm@stealth csm]$ cat /etc/host.conf
JO>>order hosts,bind
JO>3) Bind on Linux defaults to using the hosts file before going to an
JO>upstream DNS server.
No. The name resolution order
At 11:58 PM 1/3/02 -0500, you wrote:
>[csm@stealth csm]$ cat /etc/host.conf
>order hosts,bind
>
>You see?
Think so, try this out:-
1) Hosts and resolv are not used by a service, per se, they are used by the
local protocol stack., such that:
1.1) /etc/hosts gives fast resolution of static name
EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Julian Opificius
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 8:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: questions about named and sendmail
Hi Gary, hope you can clarify this for me ...
At 10:18 PM 1/3/02 -0600, you wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 03:57:17PM -0600 or t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
JO>Maybe if you could also tell me where WINS fits into all this, that would
JO>help a lot too!
This link should help a little with WINS:
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/samba/chapter/book/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
JO>Hi Gary, hope you can clarify this for me ...
JO>
JO>At 10:18 PM 1/3/02 -0600, you wrote:
JO>>On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 03:57:17PM -0600 or thereabouts, Julian Opificius
JO>>wrote:
JO>> > U
Hi Gary, hope you can clarify this for me ...
At 10:18 PM 1/3/02 -0600, you wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 03:57:17PM -0600 or thereabouts, Julian Opificius
>wrote:
> > Using RH 7.2, KDE - new install.
>
> > 2) I don't think my named daemon is doing anything. I have a valid hosts
> > file, but
On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 03:57:17PM -0600 or thereabouts, Julian Opificius wrote:
> Using RH 7.2, KDE - new install.
> 2) I don't think my named daemon is doing anything. I have a valid hosts
> file, but my windows clients - who are pointed at the linux box - can't
> resolve LAN names that are
On Thu, 03 Jan 2002 19:35:58 -0600
Julian Opificius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> implied:
https://www.redhat.com/support/resources/howto/RH-postfix-HOWTO/book1.html
Saved my butt a couple of times and made it easy, too.
> Sound good. I think I'll take your advice, go the postfix route, and
> "read a fin
Cheers Chuck - I'll plough through it this evening once I've got the kids
off to bed!
j.
At 08:36 PM 1/3/02 -0500, you wrote:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
>
>JO>At 04:41 PM 1/3/02 -0600, you wro
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
JO>Sound good. I think I'll take your advice, go the postfix route, and "read
JO>a fine manual".
JO>
JO>It would be a lot easier if there was a template or sample sendmail.conf
JO>with dece
Thanks for the info Dave.
I've dabbled in Forth myself, a long while ago. Write only is right!
Robert Finneran recommended I go to Postfix, and I think I'll do that.
Cheers!
julian.
==
At 05:27 PM 1/3/02 -0600, you wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 05:09:03PM -0600, Julian Opi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
JO>At 04:41 PM 1/3/02 -0600, you wrote:
JO>>I'll second that - don't use linuxconf for sendmail.
JO>>
JO>>Just:
JO>>FEATURE(`dnsbl', `relays.ordb.org', `Open spam relay - see
JO>>http://ordb
t;publishing are a must have if your using either postfix and qmail.
>
>Hope this helps!
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Julian Opificius
>Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 3:09 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subj
On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 05:09:03PM -0600, Julian Opificius wrote:
> Sorry, I don't know what FEATURE is, and I don't know what m4 is.
Not a problem. 'm4' is a venerable yet powerful macro preprocessor
that has been in Unix since, well, forever. It is the basis of the C
and original C++ macro pr
Of Julian Opificius
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 3:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: questions about named and sendmail
At 04:41 PM 1/3/02 -0600, you wrote:
>I'll second that - don't use linuxconf for sendmail.
>
>Just:
>FEATURE(`dnsbl', `relays.ordb.org', `Op
At 04:41 PM 1/3/02 -0600, you wrote:
>I'll second that - don't use linuxconf for sendmail.
>
>Just:
>FEATURE(`dnsbl', `relays.ordb.org', `Open spam relay - see
>http://ordb.org/')dnl
>in your .mc file and use m4
Sorry, I don't know what FEATURE is, and I don't know what m4 is.
GO easy on me her
If you are stuck on using a gui admin tool, use webmin. It is very good
as configuring core services like sendmail, dns, nis, etc..
But as someone already said, the m4 method is very easy. Just place all
your macros in a file, run m4, and presto.
CC
>
> At 05:29 PM 1/3/02 -0500, you wrote:
>
I'll second that - don't use linuxconf for sendmail.
Just:
FEATURE(`dnsbl', `relays.ordb.org', `Open spam relay - see http://ordb.org/')dnl
in your .mc file and use m4
Chuck Mead wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the foll
At 05:29 PM 1/3/02 -0500, you wrote:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
>
>JO>Well, top marks for a cryptic reply.
>JO>Removing linuxconf wasn't quite what I had in mind.
>JO>
>JO>Now "rpm -e windows" seems like a much bett
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
JO>Well, top marks for a cryptic reply.
JO>Removing linuxconf wasn't quite what I had in mind.
JO>
JO>Now "rpm -e windows" seems like a much better idea ;-)
JO>
JO>Any other ideas?
I was ser
Well, top marks for a cryptic reply.
Removing linuxconf wasn't quite what I had in mind.
Now "rpm -e windows" seems like a much better idea ;-)
Any other ideas?
j.
At 05:14 PM 1/3/02 -0500, you wrote:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Julian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Julian Opificius posted the following:
JO>Hello folks, I'm brand new on the list.
JO>Using RH 7.2, KDE - new install.
JO>
JO>1) I'm having problems configuring sendmail: I successfully added sendmail
JO>into linuxconf's list of m
Kevin Tyle wrote:
>
> Hi RH users,
>
> I have the need to use a 2nd ethernet card in one of my
> machines.
>
> The exsisting one, using interface eth0, is for my company's
> LAN.
>
> I want to interface the 2nd one with the ethernet port of
> a satellite data receiver from which I can read dat
On Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 03:07:12PM -0400, Kevin Tyle wrote:
> 1. The satellite receiver runs only at 10-Base T. What would
> be the appropriate way to force the 2nd NIC into 10BaseT mode
> without having to use the 3COM DOS diskette? Are there
> some lines in my conf.modules I need to add?
get
On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 05:19:17PM -0500, Bret Hughes wrote:
> Gary Nielson wrote:
>
> > I am trying to understand how to deal with users, groups and permissions
> > with directories that are mounted via nfs from a remote server. I am
> > mounting a subdirectory under Irix 6.5, using the xfs file
Gary Nielson wrote:
> I am trying to understand how to deal with users, groups and permissions
> with directories that are mounted via nfs from a remote server. I am
> mounting a subdirectory under Irix 6.5, using the xfs filesystem, from
> Redhat 6.2.
>
> The uid and gids mean different things o
Setting a umask to 006 is almost certainly not what you want. Not a knock,
but I just wanted to explain it so that the issue is clear.
Technically, yes you are correct that files are created with a mask of
666, unless the files are executable. In that case they would come out
with a mask of 777.
Thanks. Questions below:
On Sun, 20 Aug 2000, rpjday wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Aug 2000, Gary Nielson wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I need to make a system-wide change so that every user when creating a
> > file will have it set to rw-rw. So the umask setting would be 007. I
> > understand that by ch
On Sun, 20 Aug 2000, Gary Nielson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need to make a system-wide change so that every user when creating a
> file will have it set to rw-rw. So the umask setting would be 007. I
> understand that by changing the setting in /etc/profile, it will go into
> effect system wide for
On Sun, 02 Jul 2000, Steven Pierce wrote:
> Thank you. I did not know man pages covered these. After I am done, then I will
>ask questions..
>
> DEAL..
>
No problem. I wasn't sure if they did or not, so I tried 'em. :-) It
never hurts to TRY a man command... :-)
John
--
To unsubscr
Thank you. I did not know man pages covered these. After I am done, then I will ask
questions..
DEAL..
Steven
*** REPLY SEPARATOR ***
On 7/2/2000 at 8:50 AM John Aldrich wrote:
>On Sun, 02 Jul 2000, Steven Pierce wrote:
>> Being a newbie, what should be in the allow and
On Sun, 02 Jul 2000, Steven Pierce wrote:
> Being a newbie, what should be in the allow and deny files?? I just found out that
>I have more
> ports open then I like. I am working to get them shut down. This would help..
>
I'm going to teach you to fish -- read the man pages for
hosts.allow an
Being a newbie, what should be in the allow and deny files?? I just found out that I
have more
ports open then I like. I am working to get them shut down. This would help..
Steven
*** REPLY SEPARATOR ***
On 6/30/2000 at 9:43 PM John Aldrich wrote:
>On Fri, 30 Jun 2000, Jo
Have a look at your /etc/services file to complete the below task.
On Sat, 01 Jul 2000, John Gao wrote:
> It there a way to stop people from telnet the server remotely ( i.e
> internet user) but only allow user to do
> it through local area net work?
>
> Thanks
>
> John
>
>
> --
> To unsubs
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
