[389-users] Re: Plugin-in Guide for 1.4.0
At the minimum, you'll probably need to recompile the plugins against the newer versions/headers to eliminate some possible issues that could be occurring. > On 28 Aug 2020, at 20:32, Jan Tomasek wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm migrating 389DS from 1.2.11 to 1.4.0.11 on Debian Buster. I have two > plug-ins which I would like to use with new server, they compile ok. But > server crashes when they are about to be used. > > What is actual documentation? I've found > > https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_directory_server/10/html/plug-in_guide/Plugin_Programming_Guide-Preface-Using_DS_Plug_in_APIs > > But I'm not sure it this is latest for plugins. For server itself it is > not, it speaks about obsoleted Admin Console. > > Thanks > -- > --- > Jan Tomasek aka Semik > http://www.tomasek.cz/ > > ___ > 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org — Sincerely, William Brown Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server SUSE Labs ___ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
[389-users] Re: LDAP Error Code 21- Invalid Syntax
I just realised version you are on (1.2.x) doesn't have auditfail logs, so you'll need to get the original entry that the persons input was so we can see what's going wrong. We mean we need to see the ldif that they tried to apply - any application, gui, cli, they will all eventually try to emit and apply an ldif to the directory if they are attempting a change. That's what we'll need to see. Hope that helps, > On 30 Aug 2020, at 21:03, Thaddeus Brown wrote: > > Okay. How would I turn on auditing? Also I am not sure about the entry? I am > reaching out to the person who made it to see what the input was? I am > assuming you mean if entered in from a GUI, command line or application what > fields did they input or type in? > > On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 8:20 PM William Brown wrote: > You can also turn on the audit and auditerror logs to see more about the > failing entry and the results too. :) > > But as mark said, can we see the entry you are trying to add? > > > On 29 Aug 2020, at 01:20, Mark Reynolds wrote: > > > > Something about the entry you are adding is incorrect. Can you provide the > > entry so we can look it over? Looks like you have an attribute "c" with an > > invalid value(missing value?), but we need to see the entry to confirm... > > > > On 8/28/20 11:08 AM, Thad wrote: > >> I am working with rh 9.1/389 1.2.11.15 and getting a syntax error. I am > >> still in newbie phase of working with directory server so not sure how to > >> determine the the syntax error and where to look to determine what the > >> user did wrong. Any help figuring it out (and links to tutorials) would be > >> appreciated. > >> > >> Output from log file: > >> > >> [27/Aug/2020:16:14:49 -0400] conn=1969 TLS1.0 128-bit AES > >> [27/Aug/2020:16:14:49 -0400] conn=1969 op=0 BIND dn="uid=mboone1,o=OUR > >> Employees,o=OUR.com" method=128 version=3 > >> [27/Aug/2020:16:14:49 -0400] conn=1969 op=0 RESULT err=0 tag=97 nentries=0 > >> etime=0 dn="uid=mboone1,o=our employees,o=OUR.com" > >> [27/Aug/2020:16:14:49 -0400] conn=1969 op=1 ADD dn="uid=eboone,o=OUR > >> Employees,o=OUR.com" > >> [27/Aug/2020:16:14:49 -0400] conn=1969 op=1 RESULT err=21 tag=105 > >> nentries=0 etime=0 - c: value #0 invalid per syntax > >> [27/Aug/2020:16:14:49 -0400] conn=1969 op=2 UNBIND > >> [27/Aug/2020:16:14:49 -0400] conn=1969 op=2 fd=67 closed - U1 > >> ___ > >> 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org > >> To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > >> Fedora Code of Conduct: > >> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > >> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > >> List Archives: > >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org > > > > -- > > > > 389 Directory Server Development Team > > ___ > > 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > > Fedora Code of Conduct: > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > > List Archives: > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org > > — > Sincerely, > > William Brown > > Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server > SUSE Labs > — Sincerely, William Brown Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server SUSE Labs ___ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Questions for the hard disk recovery gurus
On Sun, 30 Aug 2020 at 04:08, Philip Rhoades wrote: > People, > > I know this is not strictly a Fedora issue but I only use Fedora so I am > hoping people here can help - maybe we should have a separate mailing > list or forum topic for this sort of hard disk stuff? > > Just after a full backup (fortunately) the 7.2TB /home partition > (/dev/sda5) on my email server somehow got corrupted. Think about possible hardware issues including: overheating, bad cables, failed disk. smartmontools can tell you about problems with the drive and run the drive's built-in tests. Some vendors will issue a warranty return authorization on the strength of linux smartctl results. > After I realised > there was a problem, I unmounted the partition and tried: > >e2fsck -y /dev/sda5 > > but the process hangs after “Clone multiply-claimed blocks?” and the > disk goes quiet - I could still break out with CTRL-C but I can't get > past this point in the attempted fix process. So I thought I would just > produce a list of the affected files and then just delete the inodes or > just restore from backup but when I tried: > >debugfs -R "ncheck 187536544" /dev/sda5 > > it took hours to find nothing but printed screenfulls of: > >ncheck: "Directory block checksum" does not match directory block > while calling ext2_dir_iterate > > and there are 1069 inodes to check! > > I am guessing that if I just try to delete each of the inodes with: > >debugfs -R "clri " /dev/sda5 > > that it would take weeks! So unless someone can suggest a faster method > of fixing the partition (mainly just as an exercise now) or at least > just working out what is wrong with it, I guess I will just have to > re-create the partition? > I wouldn't spend any time on this drive until I had confidence in the hardware. -- George N. White III ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Grub2 entanglement
On 8/28/20 2:15 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 8/27/20 3:01 PM, Robert McBroom via users wrote: Second system has f32 on sda and f31 on sdb.?? The f32 system is the only one that will boot. There are entries in /boot/loader for both. but only f32 will boot.?? Seems to be an issue on boot in the root versus boot in a boot partition. UEFI or legacy boot? You say there are entries in /boot/loader for both, but are they all in the same directory or two different /boot/loader directories??? If this is a legacy boot, you should be able to chainload the other GRUB, but I'm not sure about UEFI.?? With either boot method you should be able to add an entry that loads the config file from the other GRUB. ___ Pre UEFI bios systems. Used chainload with grub for a long time but missing something to do it with grub2. The configurations in /boot/loader previously had the UUID for the root partition in the kernel line but lately that is not the case. Can get?? boot of the other install to work by using the old grub2 description in a custom file in /etc/grub.d ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Questions for the hard disk recovery gurus
On Sun, 2020-08-30 at 08:10 -0500, Robert Nichols wrote: > On 8/30/20 3:01 AM, Philip Rhoades wrote: > > Samuel, > > > > > > On 2020-08-30 17:12, Samuel Sieb wrote: > > > On 8/30/20 12:07 AM, Philip Rhoades wrote: > > > > that it would take weeks! So unless someone can suggest a faster > > > > method of fixing the partition (mainly just as an exercise now) or at > > > > least just working out what is wrong with it, I guess I will just have > > > > to re-create the partition? > > > > > > Since you have a very recent full backup, I would recommend just > > > reformatting the partition. If the damage is that extensive, it's not > > > worth trying to fix it. > > > > You are probably right - it would be an interesting exercise if it could be > > done though . . > > There is no point in even trying. "Multiply claimed blocks" is an > unrecoverable situation. Sure, each block can be cloned to give each file its > own copy. The filesystem will now be consistent, but the some files will have > corrupted content. Only one of those files (probably the newest one) claiming > the block will hold its correct data. It's the job of _fsck_ to make the > filesystem consistent, and not necessarily to preserve user data in the > process. Having a consistent filesystem with corrupted file content is > arguably a worse situation than a filesystem with known, detectable > corruption. I always used to tell people that "an empty filesystem is consistent". poc ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Questions for the hard disk recovery gurus
On 8/30/20 3:01 AM, Philip Rhoades wrote: Samuel, On 2020-08-30 17:12, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 8/30/20 12:07 AM, Philip Rhoades wrote: that it would take weeks! So unless someone can suggest a faster method of fixing the partition (mainly just as an exercise now) or at least just working out what is wrong with it, I guess I will just have to re-create the partition? Since you have a very recent full backup, I would recommend just reformatting the partition. If the damage is that extensive, it's not worth trying to fix it. You are probably right - it would be an interesting exercise if it could be done though . . There is no point in even trying. "Multiply claimed blocks" is an unrecoverable situation. Sure, each block can be cloned to give each file its own copy. The filesystem will now be consistent, but the some files will have corrupted content. Only one of those files (probably the newest one) claiming the block will hold its correct data. It's the job of _fsck_ to make the filesystem consistent, and not necessarily to preserve user data in the process. Having a consistent filesystem with corrupted file content is arguably a worse situation than a filesystem with known, detectable corruption. -- Bob Nichols "NOSPAM" is really part of my email address. Do NOT delete it. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
[389-users] Re: LDAP Error Code 21- Invalid Syntax
Okay. How would I turn on auditing? Also I am not sure about the entry? I am reaching out to the person who made it to see what the input was? I am assuming you mean if entered in from a GUI, command line or application what fields did they input or type in? On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 8:20 PM William Brown wrote: > You can also turn on the audit and auditerror logs to see more about the > failing entry and the results too. :) > > But as mark said, can we see the entry you are trying to add? > > > On 29 Aug 2020, at 01:20, Mark Reynolds wrote: > > > > Something about the entry you are adding is incorrect. Can you provide > the entry so we can look it over? Looks like you have an attribute "c" > with an invalid value(missing value?), but we need to see the entry to > confirm... > > > > On 8/28/20 11:08 AM, Thad wrote: > >> I am working with rh 9.1/389 1.2.11.15 and getting a syntax error. I am > still in newbie phase of working with directory server so not sure how to > determine the the syntax error and where to look to determine what the user > did wrong. Any help figuring it out (and links to tutorials) would be > appreciated. > >> > >> Output from log file: > >> > >> [27/Aug/2020:16:14:49 -0400] conn=1969 TLS1.0 128-bit AES > >> [27/Aug/2020:16:14:49 -0400] conn=1969 op=0 BIND dn="uid=mboone1,o=OUR > Employees,o=OUR.com" method=128 version=3 > >> [27/Aug/2020:16:14:49 -0400] conn=1969 op=0 RESULT err=0 tag=97 > nentries=0 etime=0 dn="uid=mboone1,o=our employees,o=OUR.com" > >> [27/Aug/2020:16:14:49 -0400] conn=1969 op=1 ADD dn="uid=eboone,o=OUR > Employees,o=OUR.com" > >> [27/Aug/2020:16:14:49 -0400] conn=1969 op=1 RESULT err=21 tag=105 > nentries=0 etime=0 - c: value #0 invalid per syntax > >> [27/Aug/2020:16:14:49 -0400] conn=1969 op=2 UNBIND > >> [27/Aug/2020:16:14:49 -0400] conn=1969 op=2 fd=67 closed - U1 > >> ___ > >> 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org > >> To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > >> Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > >> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > >> List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org > > > > -- > > > > 389 Directory Server Development Team > > ___ > > 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org > > — > Sincerely, > > William Brown > > Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server > SUSE Labs > > ___ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Questions for the hard disk recovery gurus
Samuel, On 2020-08-30 17:12, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 8/30/20 12:07 AM, Philip Rhoades wrote: that it would take weeks! So unless someone can suggest a faster method of fixing the partition (mainly just as an exercise now) or at least just working out what is wrong with it, I guess I will just have to re-create the partition? Since you have a very recent full backup, I would recommend just reformatting the partition. If the damage is that extensive, it's not worth trying to fix it. You are probably right - it would be an interesting exercise if it could be done though . . P. -- Philip Rhoades PO Box 896 Cowra NSW 2794 Australia E-mail: p...@pricom.com.au ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Questions for the hard disk recovery gurus
On 8/30/20 12:07 AM, Philip Rhoades wrote: that it would take weeks! So unless someone can suggest a faster method of fixing the partition (mainly just as an exercise now) or at least just working out what is wrong with it, I guess I will just have to re-create the partition? Since you have a very recent full backup, I would recommend just reformatting the partition. If the damage is that extensive, it's not worth trying to fix it. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Questions for the hard disk recovery gurus
People, I know this is not strictly a Fedora issue but I only use Fedora so I am hoping people here can help - maybe we should have a separate mailing list or forum topic for this sort of hard disk stuff? Just after a full backup (fortunately) the 7.2TB /home partition (/dev/sda5) on my email server somehow got corrupted. After I realised there was a problem, I unmounted the partition and tried: e2fsck -y /dev/sda5 but the process hangs after “Clone multiply-claimed blocks?” and the disk goes quiet - I could still break out with CTRL-C but I can't get past this point in the attempted fix process. So I thought I would just produce a list of the affected files and then just delete the inodes or just restore from backup but when I tried: debugfs -R "ncheck 187536544" /dev/sda5 it took hours to find nothing but printed screenfulls of: ncheck: "Directory block checksum" does not match directory block while calling ext2_dir_iterate and there are 1069 inodes to check! I am guessing that if I just try to delete each of the inodes with: debugfs -R "clri " /dev/sda5 that it would take weeks! So unless someone can suggest a faster method of fixing the partition (mainly just as an exercise now) or at least just working out what is wrong with it, I guess I will just have to re-create the partition? Thanks, Phil. -- Philip Rhoades PO Box 896 Cowra NSW 2794 Australia E-mail: p...@pricom.com.au ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
