qpopper apop and pam

I am trying to build qpopper. I am not going to configure very serious pop-server, just for small network. I was trying PAM, but I think, that this does not prevent to send passwords over the network. I assume that this solution is rather insecure. So I was trying --enable-apop. From the

Re: Doubt about Expect configure

or directory make: *** [Dbg.o] Error 1 I am completely confused... juras256 - Panorama Internetu - prognoza pogody, poczta e-mail z największym załącznikiem, SMS, wyszukiwarki: Gooru, Anonser, serwisy: randki, ogłoszenia, wakacje, program TV, Kina, muzyka, DVD, newsy, inne. http

Re: Doubt about Expect configure

, juras256 - Panorama Internetu - prognoza pogody, poczta e-mail z największym załącznikiem, SMS, wyszukiwarki: Gooru, Anonser, serwisy: randki, ogłoszenia, wakacje, program TV, Kina, muzyka, DVD, newsy, inne. http://www.panoramainternetu.pl/ (http://www.epf.pl/) -- http

Re: domainname - proper for NSS-3.11.3 and for /etc/issue

Dan Nicholson napisał(a): (...) net-tools. It has simple utilities for setting the domainname. I added this little bit to /etc/rc.d/init.d/localnet: if [ -x /bin/dnsdomainname ]; then boot_mesg Setting domainname to $(dnsdomainname)...

Re: domainname - proper for NSS-3.11.3 and for /etc/issue

rblythe napisał(a): (...) I believe the trouble may be with: 192.168.0.101 kaptah.homelinux.net kaptah ^ Try changing it to 127.0.0.1 kaptah.homelinux.net kaptah 127.0.0.1 is the loop back (home address) of your computer. It did not help in my case :-( Still 670 tests of 800 Only

domainname - proper for NSS-3.11.3 and for /etc/issue

The Book says that most tests of NSS-3.11.3 will fail without defined proper domainname in DUMSUF. I think I have defined proper domainname, but I'm in doubt what does it mean proper... The only place I defined something like domainname in my system is /etc/hosts file. 192.168.0.101

Re: PATH=

proper path when you issue: su (without -) you have to add the needed path to /root/.bashrc for example: export PATH=/sbin:/usr/sbin:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin The book says that this in the last Note in chapter describing shadow. Jerzy Goca (aka juras256) - Panorama

Re: Xorg 6.9.0: xdm seems not to use LinuxPAM

Dan Nicholson napisał(a): On 10/14/06, juras256 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dan Nicholson napisał(a): (...) I think you're right. It looks like we're missing something crucial in the host.def. I think you need to add #define HasPam #define HasPam YES There's one more actually, used

Xorg 6.9.0: xdm seems not to use LinuxPAM

LFS 6.2+BLFS svn in progress... I have installed Xorg 6.9.0 and xdm seems not to use LinuxPAM. No information in logs. No complain without /etc/pam.d/xdm... What I have missed? Where to find info about necessary configuration. The Book says it should work :-( - Panorama

Re: Xorg 6.9.0: xdm seems not to use LinuxPAM

Dan Nicholson napisał(a): [...] Could you let me know if adding the missing #define fixes the issue? If so, it'll need to be added to the book. Sure, I'll let you know. I get to work now. By the way. We have in the host.def also #define HasExpat YES Shouldn't be the Expat library added at

Re: Xorg 6.9.0: xdm seems not to use LinuxPAM

features, tools etc. So I am trying to figure out if that package is required or recommended for any other package I want to install. So this way I am trying to figure out what to install first. Is this the right way? juras256 - Panorama Internetu - prognoza pogody

Re: Xorg 6.9.0: xdm seems not to use LinuxPAM

' after updating host.def. Not sure there. Confirmed. Now It has libpam.so and it works as I expected. Thank you for your help Could you let me know if adding the missing #define fixes the issue? If so, it'll need to be added to the book. juras256 - Panorama Internetu - prognoza

Re: inex, xinetd - to be or not to be?

Archaic wrote: On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 07:53:05PM +0200, juras256 wrote: I know, the answer is, it depends what you want to accomplish. The only time you need xinetd (which is preferred over inetd) is when you want to run a daemon that requires it. sshd is not one of those daemons

inex, xinetd - to be or not to be?

Hi, I know that most servers controlled by inetd or xinetd are rather not safe. Better replacement is sshd. Do I need inetd if I plan to install sshd? I was told that inetd is the most important daemon in Unix system. If I do not intend to unlock any of the services run by (x)inetd do I have to

BLFS 6.1 - openSSHD - all the regress/tests are supposed to pass?

Hi everyone, I am following the stable BLFS 6.1 (I have completed LFS 6.1.1). The problem is that the regress/tests fail at: - login-timeout - reexec fallback without privsep - multiplex with message: no sshd running on port 4242 It hapens in every configuration I tried: - with and