Re: [SLUG] Death to trackerd
Only yesterday I installed LinuxMint 4.0 (Gnome) on one of my PCs which has 5 HDD's ( which Mint automounts), 4 of them full of data ( almost) and wondered why the drives were coninually bashng away. Finally remembered about indexing ( had same problem with Beagle on Kubuntu some time ago). Fixed problem - removed tracker from system. Why distros don't give one the option of install/don't install such programs I cannot understand, especially when distro concerned automounts everything. Bill -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Death to trackerd
quote who=bill Why distros don't give one the option of install/don't install such programs I cannot understand Because if you take that choice into account, there are 100 more that people will whinge about. The best approach is to do the right thing by default and let users with specific needs use the fully installed, complete interface to modify their environment. Unfortunately in this case, I'm not sure the right decision was made at the beginning of that process (ie. include tracker). - Jeff -- linux.conf.au 2008: Melbourne, Australiahttp://lca2008.linux.org.au/ He'd never undressed a woman with his eyes. Perhaps army boots, school uniform, or a nightie, but never undressed. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
[SLUG] Java and Fedora Core 8
Hi After lurking on this list for many years, it's time I contributed. Sun's Java under FC 8 is broken, and no Java apps that use X11 will run. Error is xcb_xlib.c:50: xcb_xlib_unlock: Assertion 'c-xlib.lock' failed Other distros may have the same problem. Sun claim it is a bug with XCB. XCB claim it is a long-standing bug with Java. Fedora won't include a workaround that just warns about broken locks instead of stopping. The problem seems to be Java making Xlib calls in a sequence not allowed under the Xlib replacement XCB. The only workaround that actually seems to work for me so far has been to download and install the rpms libxcb-1.0-3.i_acknowledge_that_my_jdk_is_broken.fc9.i386.rpm and ibxcb-devel-1.0-3.i_acknowledge_that_my_jdk_is_broken.fc9.i386.rpm from http://ajax.fedorapeople.org/libxcb/. Then run Java with export LIBXCB_ALLOW_SLOPPY_LOCK=1. This replaces libxcb.1.0.3 with a version that only complains instead of barfing. See http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6532373, https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11390, https://bugs.launchpad.net/sun-java/+bug/86103, http://www.fedoraforum.org/forum/showthread.php?t=171763page=1, etc. Cheers Jan -- Dr Jan Newmarch IT Degree Course Leader Box Hill Institute Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://jan.newmarch.name Tel: +61 4 0117 0509 Do what you think is interesting, do something that you think is fun and worthwhile, because otherwise you won't do it well anyway. -- Brian Kernighan -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Domain Name Servers
Rick Phillips wrote: I have always thought that DNS servers for a domain may reside totally outside the domain. i.e. server.main.domain has no dns server running but has DNS servers other.server.com and another.server.com act authoritatively for server.main.domain. That is correct. We have a server with very sensitive information and the boss does not want anything other than a web port open to the world. Okay, that is fine and fits in with your previous statement. My experience has always been that the server in question is at least the primary DNS. This seems to contradict your previous statement. If you don't wish this server in question with the sensitive information, to run DNS services, why not set up the configuration that you already established as probable, with the DNS hosted entirely by different servers? I don't understand why the current configuration of some particular server should rule out the possibility of a different configuration being possible? Perhaps I misunderstand. Thanks, Jeremy -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
[SLUG] Domain Name Servers
I have always thought that DNS servers for a domain may reside totally outside the domain. i.e. server.main.domain has no dns server running but has DNS servers other.server.com and another.server.com act authoritatively for server.main.domain. We have a server with very sensitive information and the boss does not want anything other than a web port open to the world. My experience has always been that the server in question is at least the primary DNS. Is this possible or do we have to think again? Rick Phillips -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Domain Name Servers
Jeremy, This seems to contradict your previous statement. If you don't wish this server in question with the sensitive information, to run DNS services, why not set up the configuration that you already established as probable, with the DNS hosted entirely by different servers? I don't understand why the current configuration of some particular server should rule out the possibility of a different configuration being possible? Perhaps I misunderstand. Ah, I think when I added a new sentence I messed up my meaning. Sometimes an attempt at further clarification makes things a little less clear. I did mean server A is served by servers B C in the naming stakes. Thanks for the confirmation that it is possible. Regards, Rick -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] Domain Name Servers
I have always thought that DNS servers for a domain may reside
totally
outside the domain. i.e. server.main.domain has no dns server
running
but has DNS servers other.server.com and another.server.com act
authoritatively for server.main.domain.
We have a server with very sensitive information and the boss does
not
want anything other than a web port open to the world. My
experience
has always been that the server in question is at least the primary
DNS.
Is this possible or do we have to think again?
According to my Oreilly BIND 8.x book, primary and slave DNS servers are a
misnomer.
There're only authoritative and non-authoritative servers. And the
distribution / updating of
zone files between authoritative servers depend on the zone file's SOA serial
number and how
the slave {...}; and master {...}; directives are set up.
You don't need to set up a DNS server on your secured server. As long as people
outside your
network, or outside your web server can resolve to your web port and connect,
then HTTP should
handle the rest. You might need to essentially open port 53 and configure
resolv.conf for DNS
names resolution on the web server; which may be required for some
anti-spoofing software,
firewall tools etc.
Alternatively you could set up an internal DNS server on a separate machine
inside your network
which can initiate a zone file transfer with external DNS servers hosting your
domain. The internal
DNS server could be the DNS server for the rest of your network.
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] D-Link 604T as an access point?
On Dec 3, 2007 3:38 PM, Amos Shapira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also - am I correct to assume that the 604T can run WRT? Not sure which WRT you are referring to, but neither http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Supported_Devices nor http://wiki.openwrt.org/TableOfHardware would instill much confidence in that statement. As the name indicates, the WRT software variants were primarily written to support the Linksys WRT-54G family. Boxes with very close chipsets seem to have had ports done for them. It doesn't seem that the D-link boxes readily fall into that category - though YMMV. (And even within the Linksys range there is enough variation within similarly packaged boxes to make choosing the correct box a little tricky) -- Regards, Martin Martin Visser -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] virtualisation and wine on ubuntu gutsey for adobe photoshop flash premier etc
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 12:03 +1100, David Peterson wrote: I also run vmware Win XP on linux and do the scp trick. I am wondering whether there is an easier way to move files between my host FS and the vmware instance, as it's a bit of a hassle using scp all the time. If you're running VMware Tools in your XP guest, you can simply drag files from a Nautilus window onto a window in your VM, and VMware will copy it across. Not sure if it works with Linux guests. -- Jeremy Visser http://jeremy.visser.name/ () ascii ribbon campaign — against HTML e-mail /\ http://asciiribbon.org/ -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
[SLUG] Calender Syncing...yet again
Hi all, The issue of finding a piece of opensource software that runs on a linux box and allows outlook users to share calendars continues to evade me. I have many customers that need this functionality (as they all use windowz clients and most use Outlook that syncs with thier PDA's or phones) Is there anything out there that is GPL FREE and talks to outlook calendars WITHOUT needing to purchase connector software? My kingdom for a GPL calendar server!!! -- Regards, Trent -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
