Re: More than 5 SCSI disks? (solved)
Dr. Andreas Wehler wrote: Hello. There are 5 SCSI disks happily running at sda - sde. The 6th disk is accepted as /dev/sdf, as the kernel output after lilo says. But fdisk /dev/sdf fails with Unable to open /dev/sdf. strace fdisk /dev/sdf gives open(/dev/sdf, O_RDWR)= -1 ENXIO (Device not configured) open(/dev/sdf, O_RDONLY) = -1 ENXIO (Device not configured) The problem is solved with the help of this great fellow and expert: Marc SCHAEFER [EMAIL PROTECTED], who worked out the solution: :: SYMPTOM ::- Computer has two SCSI cards. The kernel has one of the SCSI driver :: monolithic, along scsi and sd. ::- After kernel boots, the second card's module is loaded. ::- The second SCSI bus has more than 2 hard drives ::- All SCSI disks from first bus are usable with no problem. However, :: only the first two of the second bus are visible. The third and :: next fail with errors :: :: SOLUTION ::- edit /usr/src/linux/drivers/hosts.h and change :: #define SD_EXTRA_DEVS 2 :: into :: #define SD_EXTRA_DEVS 3 :: if you have 3 disks on the second bus, or to 4 if you have 4, etc. :: :: Similar problems presumably for tapes, generic, etc. :: :: :: And don't forget to recompile and run LILO. And everything work now. Linux and its people are just excellent. Andreas Wehler -- CAD/CAM straessle GmbHTel.: (+49) 211 - 52740 - 228 Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wehler Fax.: (+49) 211 - 52740 - 280 http://www.cc-straessle.com
Re: More than 5 SCSI disks? (/dev/sdf: ENXIO)
Jameson Burt wrote: Hello. There are 5 SCSI disks happily running at sda - sde. The 6th disk is accepted as /dev/sdf, as the kernel output after lilo says. But fdisk /dev/sdf fails with Unable to open /dev/sdf. ... You've probably already checked it, but I have often exceeded acceptable scsi cable lengths with unusual results (eg, my tape drive would mistakenly think it had reached an end of tape). These acceptable lengths can be seen at http://www.scsita.org/terms.html Thank you for the reply. I'quadruple let check it again (the machine in question is running at another location 450km away from my office and I'm doing remote support). I know there are only these 3 ultra wide SCSI disks on the Advansys controller in an external HP-SCSI-box with external bus termination. With the internal drives on the first SCSI bus on Adaptec 2940UW we have no problems at all, after we had put one of the ultra disks at the end for termination the wide bus. This bus is 1.6m long. I really don't know where to search further, HW? driver? SCSI-kernel? Below is the output from dmesg. Thanks. Andreas Wehler == # dmesg 2077 (scsi0) Adaptec AHA-294X Ultra SCSI host adapter found at PCI 9/0 (scsi0) Wide Channel, SCSI ID=7, 16/255 SCBs (scsi0) BIOS enabled, IO Port 0xd000, IRQ 15 (scsi0) IO Memory at 0xe300, MMAP Memory at 0x8805000 (scsi0) Resetting channel (scsi0) Downloading sequencer code... 413 instructions downloaded scsi0 : Adaptec AHA274x/284x/294x (EISA/VLB/PCI-Fast SCSI) 5.0.14/3.2.4 Adaptec AHA-294X Ultra SCSI host adapter scsi : 1 host. (scsi0:0:-1:-1) Scanning channel for devices. (scsi0:0:0:0) Using wide (16 bit) transfers. (scsi0:0:0:0) Synchronous at 20.0MHz, offset 8. Vendor: IBM Model: DDRS-39130W Rev: S92A Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Detected scsi disk sda at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0 (scsi0:0:1:0) Using wide (16 bit) transfers. (scsi0:0:1:0) Synchronous at 20.0MHz, offset 8. Vendor: IBM Model: DDRS-39130W Rev: S92A Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Detected scsi disk sdb at scsi0, channel 0, id 1, lun 0 (scsi0:0:2:0) Using wide (16 bit) transfers. (scsi0:0:2:0) Synchronous at 20.0MHz, offset 8. Vendor: IBM Model: DDRS-39130W Rev: S92A Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Detected scsi disk sdc at scsi0, channel 0, id 2, lun 0 (scsi0:0:4:0) Synchronous at 10.0MHz, offset 8. Vendor: HPModel: C1533ARev: A708 Type: Sequential-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Detected scsi tape st0 at scsi0, channel 0, id 4, lun 0 Vendor: TEAC Model: CD-ROM CD-532SRev: 1.0A Type: CD-ROM ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Detected scsi CD-ROM sr0 at scsi0, channel 0, id 5, lun 0 (scsi0:0:6:0) Refusing synchronous negotiation; using asynchronous transfers. Vendor: YAMAHAModel: CRW4260 Rev: 1.0j Type: CD-ROM ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Detected scsi CD-ROM sr1 at scsi0, channel 0, id 6, lun 0 scsi : detected 1 SCSI tape 2 SCSI cdroms 3 SCSI disks total. SCSI device sda: hdwr sector= 512 bytes. Sectors= 1785 [8715 MB] [8.7 GB] SCSI device sdb: hdwr sector= 512 bytes. Sectors= 1785 [8715 MB] [8.7 GB] SCSI device sdc: hdwr sector= 512 bytes. Sectors= 1785 [8715 MB] [8.7 GB] Partition check: sda: sda1 sda2 sda3 sda4 sda5 sda6 sda7 sda8 sdb: sdb1 sdc: sdc1 sdc2 VFS: Mounted root (ext2 filesystem) readonly. PS/2 auxiliary pointing device detected -- driver installed. 3c59x.c:v0.99E 5/12/98 Donald Becker http://cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov/linux/drivers/vortex.html loading device 'eth0'... eth0: 3Com 3c905B Cyclone 100baseTx at 0xb400, 00:10:4b:b7:bd:7e, IRQ 10 8K byte-wide RAM 5:3 Rx:Tx split, autoselect/NWay Autonegotiation interface. Enabling bus-master transmits and whole-frame receives. scsi1 : AdvanSys SCSI 3.1D: PCI Ultra 16 CDB: IO B000/F, IRQ 11 scsi : 2 hosts. Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST19171N Rev: 0024 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Detected scsi disk sdd at scsi1, channel 0, id 0, lun 0 Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST19171N Rev: 0024 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Detected scsi disk sde at scsi1, channel 0, id 1, lun 0 Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST39140N Rev: 1281 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Detected scsi disk sdf at scsi1, channel 0, id 2, lun 0 SCSI device sdd: hdwr sector= 512 bytes. Sectors= 17783112 [8683 MB] [8.7 GB] sdd: sdd1 sdd2 sdd3 sdd5 sdd6 sdd7 sdd8 SCSI device sde: hdwr sector= 512 bytes. Sectors= 17783112 [8683 MB] [8.7 GB] sde: sde1 sde2 sde5 sde6 sde7 sde8 Adding Swap: 119996k swap-space (priority -1) Adding Swap: 114996k swap-space (priority -2) Disc change detected. VFS:
Re: More than 5 SCSI disks? (/dev/sdf: ENXIO)
Hello. Is it possible to run 2 Adaptec 2940UW simultaneously? Then we would consider to change Advansys by Adaptec. Thanks. Andreas Wehler -- CAD/CAM straessle GmbHTel.: (+49) 211 - 52740 - 228 Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wehler Fax.: (+49) 211 - 52740 - 280 http://www.cc-straessle.com
More than 5 SCSI disks? (/dev/sdf: ENXIO)
Hello. There are 5 SCSI disks happily running at sda - sde. The 6th disk is accepted as /dev/sdf, as the kernel output after lilo says. But fdisk /dev/sdf fails with Unable to open /dev/sdf. strace fdisk /dev/sdf gives open(/dev/sdf, O_RDWR)= -1 ENXIO (Device not configured) open(/dev/sdf, O_RDONLY) = -1 ENXIO (Device not configured) What is missing here? Other details follow, thank you. Andreas Wehler Debian 2.0 # uname -a Linux classix 2.0.34 #3 Thu Jan 14 10:38:59 CET 1999 i686 unknown # cat /proc/scsi/scsi Attached devices: Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 00 Lun: 00 (- sda) Vendor: IBM Model: DDRS-39130W Rev: S92A Type: Direct-AccessANSI SCSI revision: 02 Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 01 Lun: 00 (- sdb) Vendor: IBM Model: DDRS-39130W Rev: S92A Type: Direct-AccessANSI SCSI revision: 02 Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 02 Lun: 00 (- sdc) Vendor: IBM Model: DDRS-39130W Rev: S92A Type: Direct-AccessANSI SCSI revision: 02 Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 04 Lun: 00 Vendor: HP Model: C1533A Rev: A708 Type: Sequential-AccessANSI SCSI revision: 02 Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 05 Lun: 00 Vendor: TEAC Model: CD-ROM CD-532S Rev: 1.0A Type: CD-ROM ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 06 Lun: 00 Vendor: YAMAHA Model: CRW4260 Rev: 1.0j Type: CD-ROM ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Host: scsi1 Channel: 00 Id: 00 Lun: 00 (- sdd) Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST19171N Rev: 0024 Type: Direct-AccessANSI SCSI revision: 02 Host: scsi1 Channel: 00 Id: 01 Lun: 00 (- sde) Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST19171N Rev: 0024 Type: Direct-AccessANSI SCSI revision: 02 Host: scsi1 Channel: 00 Id: 02 Lun: 00 (- sdf) Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST39140N Rev: 1281 Type: Direct-AccessANSI SCSI revision: 02 # ls -al /dev/sdf* brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 80 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 81 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf1 brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 90 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf10 brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 91 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf11 brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 92 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf12 brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 93 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf13 brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 94 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf14 brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 95 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf15 brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 82 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf2 brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 83 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf3 brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 84 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf4 brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 85 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf5 brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 86 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf6 brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 87 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf7 brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 88 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf8 brw-rw 1 root disk 8, 89 Jun 24 1998 /dev/sdf9 -- CAD/CAM straessle GmbHTel.: (+49) 211 - 52740 - 228 Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wehler Fax.: (+49) 211 - 52740 - 280 http://www.cc-straessle.com
Re: X11: HELP for ATI 3DChar 4MB RageIIC AGP
Thank you fpr your reply! We've found the PCI-versions of the VGA card ATI Mach64 GT (Rage II) (rev. 154),ATI 3D-Charger 2MB in the most of the other of 12 PCs, which run fine. Just the AGP version doesn't, but we can live with it. Thank you again, Andreas Wehler Subject: Re: X11: HELP for ATI 3DChar 4MB RageIIC AGP Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 20:49:53 +0200 (CEST) From: Santiago Vila Doncel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: jörg bode Joerg.Bode CC: debian-user@lists.debian.org Hi. For an ATI Mach64 3D RAGE II C, I use: ChipId 0x4755 and it seems to work, more or less. I found this in the XFree86 FAQ. Hope this helps. -- CAD/CAM straessle GmbHTel.: (+49) 211 - 52740 - 228 Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wehler Fax.: (+49) 211 - 52740 - 280 http://www.cc-straessle.com
Re: CD Writer Recommendation
David Warnock wrote: Hi, I need to add a CD Writer to my system. Can anyone give me a recommendation for a very reliable and fast writer (I only need writeable not re-writeable). I am only interested in a SCSI interface and would prefer an internal unit. Yamaha 4-2-6, is the same as Traxdata CDRW4260. Not the cheapest devices: about 600 US $. They come with 2MB buffer, definively no timing probs with 100MHz Pentium at 4x-write. Then, xcdroast is in hamm. Have fun! A. Wehler -- CAD/CAM straessle GmbHTel.: (+49) 211 - 52740 - 228 Dr.-Ing. Andreas Wehler Fax.: (+49) 211 - 52740 - 280 http://www.cc-straessle.com
Re: PLEASE, postmaster@debian.org, are you there?
If this message comes through, then t-online has dissappeared from the badmailfrom list. THANKS to Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] and to Pete Templin [EMAIL PROTECTED]. Andreas Wehler -- Dr. Andreas Wehler Tel./Fax.: (+49) 202 75 36 64 Luebecker Str. 16 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 42109 Wuppertal http://home.t-online.de/home/Dr.A.wehler/profil.html -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: PLEASE, postmaster@debian.org, are you there?
Hello. 1. Looking for a way to discuss the badmailfrom-list-problem I've resubscribed the debian user list with my old uni accout. Guess what happened: I'm getting all posting twice now since a while (no prices). 2. If postings are not permitted, the T-Online account is useless with respect to debian. So, this is a call for unsubscription. But how does one unsubscribe a address listed in the badmailfrom list? (Sorry for the lengthy headers below). 3. T-Online runs a few local news groups, where just local topics are discussed. The Linux folks there are still a minority, but a growing one. Did I make something wrong when mentioning Debian as the most mature and professional Linux distribution (IMHO) and pointing to the debian homepage etc.? The badmailfrom list problem is going to give Debian a strange taste, if this sort of protection will be permanent. 4. No, I'm not going to change my ISP tomorrow. 5. Assumption: When posting the first time from my uni account (in 1996 ?) I had to reply an agreement with a few statements concerning spam and netiquette etc, which was ok. Wouldn't this be a more professional solution than to just shield any posting from hosts on the badmailfrom list? 6. What ISPs are on this black list today and which will problably be tomorrow? This could become of some interest to anyone. 7. Could someone please wake up the real postmaster (thanks, Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED], for your statements so far) ? 8. Yes, I would be glad if this thread could be ended with a positive answer. Thank you. Andreas Wehler. == failure to unsubscribe == :From: Mail Delivery System [EMAIL PROTECTED] :Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender :To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] :Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 21:29:58 +0100 :Mail-from: From POPmail Fri Jan 2 23:39:46 1998 :Return-Path: MAILER-DAEMON :Received: from mailout01.btx.dtag.de ([194.25.2.149]) by mailin00.btx.dtag.de with : smtp (S3.1.29.1) id m0xoDk5-000ACFC; Fri, 2 Jan 1998 21:30:53 +0100 :Received: from root by mailout01.btx.dtag.de with local :id 0xoDjC-0003yz-00; Fri, 2 Jan 1998 21:29:58 +0100 :Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] :Lines: 32 :Xref: midi2.prisi.de other:557 :X-Gnus-Newsgroup: other:557 Fri Jan 2 23:44:39 1998 : :This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. : :A message that you sent could not be delivered to all of its recipients. The :following address(es) failed: : : [EMAIL PROTECTED]: :SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO: :[EMAIL PROTECTED]: :host debian.novare.net [205.229.104.5]: :553 sorry, your envelope sender is in my badmailfrom list (#5.7.1) : :-- This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. -- : :Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] :Received: from (fwd06.btx.dtag.de) [194.25.2.166] :by mailout01.btx.dtag.de with smtp :id 0xoDi9-0003nW-00; Fri, 2 Jan 1998 21:28:53 +0100 :Received: from midi2.prisi.de (0202753664-0001(btxid)@[193.159.59.181]) :by fwd06.btx.dtag.de with smtp (S3.1.29.1) :id m0xoDhu-0003XUC; Fri, 2 Jan 1998 21:28:38 +0100 :Received: by midi2.prisi.de :id m0xoDiB-0009cDC :(Debian Smail-3.2 1996-Jul-4 #2); Fri, 2 Jan 1998 21:28:55 +0100 (MET) :Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] :Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 21:28:55 +0100 (MET) :To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] :Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] :Bcc: :X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] :From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dr. Andreas Wehler - Wuppertal) : :unsubscribe -- Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Luebecker Str. 16, 42109 Wuppertal; Tel./Fax.: (0202) 753664 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: PLEASE, postmaster@debian.org, are you there?
Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: :Yes, t-online.de is listed in the badmailfrom list. It has been added :due to spam I think. Thank you for the answer. The color of my face has become bleached a bit. Nevertheless I hope this is more a joke than the last answer, or is it in the spirit of debian to cut all folks from any debian conncetion for historical reasons? I know that T-Online keeps an eye No, but as spam has come up the debian lists aren't excluded . As we couldn't tell the spammers not to use the debian lists we needed a different mechanism. I don't know exactly how the list has been generated but I think it comes from spamdb and it's resources. You might want to check that out. Thanks for the answer. Now, that the not-too-little ISP T-Online is marked in the badmailfrom list, there come 2 questions. 1. What exactly did cause T-Online to find itself on badmailfrom list? No just guesses please. The T-Online Team told me, they would have had a few problems with admins, who applied a faulty patch to sendmail which wrongly assumed, their canonical email address (envelope-sender!) would be inadmissible. In the moment they can't test it for debian.novare.net is not accessible (?). If this is the case, please remove/modify that patch. 2. Under which conditions may T-Online recover from there? Thank you, Andreas. -- Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Luebecker Str. 16, 42109 Wuppertal; Tel./Fax.: (0202) 753664 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: PLEASE, postmaster@debian.org, are you there?
Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks for the answer. Now, that the not-too-little ISP T-Online Now I can be a bit more precise: today there are about 1.8 million users at T-Online, it is the greatest ISP in Europe. is marked in the badmailfrom list, there come 2 questions. 1. What exactly did cause T-Online to find itself on badmailfrom list? No just guesses please. The T-Online Team told me, they would have had a few problems with admins, who applied a faulty patch to sendmail which wrongly assumed, their canonical email address (envelope-sender!) would be inadmissible. In the moment they can't test it for debian.novare.net is not accessible (?). If this is the case, please remove/modify that patch. No, we use qmail on master and there is a badmailfrom file. It's a real file containing hostnames. Oh, so the easiest solution isnt one. Then the 2nd Q comes into the play: : 2. Under which conditions may T-Online recover from there? I hope but doubt somehow, this will be solved by this year? Andreas. -- Dr. Andreas Wehler Tel./Fax.: (+49) 202 75 36 64 Luebecker Str. 16 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 42109 Wuppertal http://home.t-online.de/home/Dr.A.wehler/profil.html -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
PLEASE, postmaster@debian.org, are you there?
This mail is from my old uni-account. I'm having massive problems with my new private email address, from which any mail to debian.org is refused for an entry in the badmailfrom list. Please?... Thank you. Andreas. -- Dr. Andreas Wehler Tel./Fax.: (+49) 202 75 36 64 Luebecker Str. 16 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 42109 Wuppertal http://home.t-online.de/home/Dr.A.wehler/profil.html problems stuff == From: Dr. Andreas Wehler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: HOWTO escape from the badmailfrom list? To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 09:06:29 +0100 (MET) Resent-Date: 13 Dec 1997 07:57:54 - Resent-Cc: recipient list not shown: ; Gnus-Warning: This is a duplicate of message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Message-ID: F8h9fB.A.ZjB.BAkk0@debian Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org Resent-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mail-from: From POPmail Sat Dec 13 17:07:34 1997 Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from debian.novare.net ([205.229.104.5]) by mailin04.btx.dtag.de with smtp (S3.1.29.1) id m0xgmaE-0030gOn; Sat, 13 Dec 1997 09:05:58 +0100 Received: (qmail 6376 invoked by uid 38); 13 Dec 1997 07:57:54 - X-Envelope-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 6342 invoked from network); 13 Dec 1997 07:57:49 - Received: from welfa4.elektro.uni-wuppertal.de ([EMAIL PROTECTED]@132.195.13.11) by 205.229.104.5 with SMTP; 13 Dec 1997 07:57:49 - Received: by welfa4.elektro.uni-wuppertal.de id m0xgmaj-000El8C (Debian Smail-3.2 1996-Jul-4 #2); Sat, 13 Dec 1997 09:06:29 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Original-Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailing-List: debian-user@lists.debian.org archive/latest/21442 X-Loop: debian-user@lists.debian.org Precedence: list Lines: 181 Xref: midi2 lists.debian.user:1848 X-Gnus-Newsgroup: lists.debian.user:1848 Sat Dec 13 17:08:28 1997 Hello. there are problems with my private mail address. Whats wrong with it, how could I proceed? Thank you. -- Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Luebecker Str. 16, 42109 Wuppertal; Tel./Fax.: (0202) 753664 From: Mail Delivery System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:57:10 +0100 Mail-from: From POPmail Sat Dec 13 08:57:45 1997 Return-Path: MAILER-DAEMON Received: from mailout02.btx.dtag.de ([194.25.2.150]) by mailin02.btx.dtag.de with smtp (S3.1.29.1) id m0xgey6-002Q1RC; Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:58:06 +0100 Received: from root by mailout02.btx.dtag.de with local id 0xgexC-00078m-00; Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:57:10 +0100 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lines: 146 Xref: midi2 other:173 X-Gnus-Newsgroup: other:173 Sat Dec 13 08:58:32 1997 This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. A message that you sent could not be delivered to all of its recipients. The following address(es) failed: debian-user@lists.debian.org: SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO: debian-user@lists.debian.org: host debian.novare.net [205.229.104.5]: 553 sorry, your envelope sender is in my badmailfrom list (#5.7.1) -- This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. -- Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from (fwd09.btx.dtag.de) [194.25.2.169] by mailout02.btx.dtag.de with smtp id 0xgevy-0006k8-00; Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:55:54 +0100 Received: from midi2 (0202753664-0001(btxid)@[193.159.59.140]) by fwd09.btx.dtag.de with smtp (S3.1.29.1) id m0xgevv-0003TRC; Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:55:51 +0100 Received: by midi2 id m0xgewZ-0009ZFC (Debian Smail-3.2 1996-Jul-4 #2); Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:56:31 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:56:31 +0100 (MET) To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: HOWTO escape from the badmailfrom list? Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bcc: X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dr. Andreas Wehler - Wuppertal) Hello. after trials to contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] and then [EMAIL PROTECTED] I got the following replies. What's wrong, what should I do? Thank you. Andreas. -- Dr. Andreas Wehler Tel./Fax.: (+49) 202 75 36 64 Luebecker Str. 16 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 42109 Wuppertal http://home.t-online.de/home/Dr.A.wehler/profil.html From: Mail Delivery System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:53:36 +0100 Mail-from: From POPmail Fri Dec 12 23:27:19 1997 Return-Path: MAILER-DAEMON Received: from mailout00.btx.dtag.de ([194.25.2.148]) by mailin01.btx.dtag.de with smtp (S3.1.29.1) id m0xgRoM-00181LC; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:55:10 +0100 Received: from root by mailout00.btx.dtag.de with local id 0xgRmq-0006TZ-00; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:53:36 +0100 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lines: 154
Re: PLEASE, postmaster@debian.org, are you there?
from Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED]: :On Tue, Dec 30, 1997 at 09:30:05AM +0100, Dr. Andreas Wehler wrote: : This mail is from my old uni-account. I'm having massive problems : with my new private email address, from which any mail to debian.org : is refused for an entry in the badmailfrom list. Please?... Thank : :Yes, t-online.de is listed in the badmailfrom list. It has been added :due to spam I think. : :What you could do against it is to get another provider. I know that :there's at least franken.de and mayn.de in your area providing reasonable :access to the internet. Thank you for the answer. The color of my face has become bleached a bit. Nevertheless I hope this is more a joke than the last answer, or is it in the spirit of debian to cut all folks from any debian conncetion for historical reasons? I know that T-Online keeps an eye or two on spammers, so the *masters of each side should be able to solve any problems with spammers. Thank you. Andreas. -- Dr. Andreas Wehler Tel./Fax.: (+49) 202 75 36 64 Luebecker Str. 16 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 42109 Wuppertal http://home.t-online.de/home/Dr.A.wehler/profil.html -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
HOWTO escape from the badmailfrom list?
Hello. there are problems with my private mail address. Whats wrong with it, how could I proceed? Thank you. -- Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Luebecker Str. 16, 42109 Wuppertal; Tel./Fax.: (0202) 753664 From: Mail Delivery System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:57:10 +0100 Mail-from: From POPmail Sat Dec 13 08:57:45 1997 Return-Path: MAILER-DAEMON Received: from mailout02.btx.dtag.de ([194.25.2.150]) by mailin02.btx.dtag.de with smtp (S3.1.29.1) id m0xgey6-002Q1RC; Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:58:06 +0100 Received: from root by mailout02.btx.dtag.de with local id 0xgexC-00078m-00; Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:57:10 +0100 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lines: 146 Xref: midi2 other:173 X-Gnus-Newsgroup: other:173 Sat Dec 13 08:58:32 1997 This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. A message that you sent could not be delivered to all of its recipients. The following address(es) failed: debian-user@lists.debian.org: SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO: debian-user@lists.debian.org: host debian.novare.net [205.229.104.5]: 553 sorry, your envelope sender is in my badmailfrom list (#5.7.1) -- This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. -- Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from (fwd09.btx.dtag.de) [194.25.2.169] by mailout02.btx.dtag.de with smtp id 0xgevy-0006k8-00; Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:55:54 +0100 Received: from midi2 (0202753664-0001(btxid)@[193.159.59.140]) by fwd09.btx.dtag.de with smtp (S3.1.29.1) id m0xgevv-0003TRC; Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:55:51 +0100 Received: by midi2 id m0xgewZ-0009ZFC (Debian Smail-3.2 1996-Jul-4 #2); Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:56:31 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:56:31 +0100 (MET) To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: HOWTO escape from the badmailfrom list? Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bcc: X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dr. Andreas Wehler - Wuppertal) Hello. after trials to contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] and then [EMAIL PROTECTED] I got the following replies. What's wrong, what should I do? Thank you. Andreas. -- Dr. Andreas Wehler Tel./Fax.: (+49) 202 75 36 64 Luebecker Str. 16 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 42109 Wuppertal http://home.t-online.de/home/Dr.A.wehler/profil.html From: Mail Delivery System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:53:36 +0100 Mail-from: From POPmail Fri Dec 12 23:27:19 1997 Return-Path: MAILER-DAEMON Received: from mailout00.btx.dtag.de ([194.25.2.148]) by mailin01.btx.dtag.de with smtp (S3.1.29.1) id m0xgRoM-00181LC; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:55:10 +0100 Received: from root by mailout00.btx.dtag.de with local id 0xgRmq-0006TZ-00; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:53:36 +0100 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lines: 154 Xref: midi2 other:165 X-Gnus-Newsgroup: other:165 Sat Dec 13 00:46:02 1997 This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. A message that you sent could not be delivered to all of its recipients. The following address(es) failed: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: host debian.novare.net [205.229.104.5]: 553 sorry, your envelope sender is in my badmailfrom list (#5.7.1) -- This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. -- Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from (fwd11.btx.dtag.de) [194.25.2.171] by mailout00.btx.dtag.de with smtp id 0xgRlS-00067W-00; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:52:10 +0100 Received: from midi2 (0202753664-0001(btxid)@[193.159.59.145]) by fwd11.btx.dtag.de with smtp (S3.1.29.1) id m0xgRlN-0003cWC; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:52:05 +0100 Received: by midi2 id m0xgRhj-0009ZFC (Debian Smail-3.2 1996-Jul-4 #2); Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:48:19 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:48:19 +0100 (MET) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Why? rejected email, badmailfrom list (#5.7.1) Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bcc: X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dr. Andreas Wehler - Wuppertal) From: Mail Delivery System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 11 Dec 1997 17:08:30 +0100 Mail-from: From POPmail Fri Dec 12 10:39:31 1997 Return-Path: MAILER-DAEMON Received: from mailout00.btx.dtag.de ([194.25.2.148]) by mailin00.btx.dtag.de with smtp (S3.1.29.1) id m0xgBCy-0018JyC; Thu, 11 Dec 1997 17:11:28 +0100 Received: from root by mailout00.btx.dtag.de with local id 0xgBA6-0006wW-00; Thu, 11 Dec 1997 17:08:30 +0100 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lines: 107 Xref: midi2 other:159 X-Gnus-Newsgroup: other:159 Fri Dec 12 10:41:02 1997 This message
Re: Linux in Wired
That sentence: Microsoft's huge installed base of users and wide range of applications is unlikely to be surpassed, despite what believers in the Linux magic might hope is depressingly accurate. There's an awful lot of people out there using a wide range of MS software, and if your living depends on dealing with them then you have to come to terms with it. Isn't this true mostly with respect to windows 3.x and windows 95? The number of NT apps around there is limited. Should we expect a 2-way splitted MS-world for ever? : IMO, microsoft should get out of the operating system game and : leave it to those who actually have a clue about OSeslike : linux or bsd kernel hackers and unix programmers for example. Very good idea. Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Help transfering data....
: find / -xdev -print | cpio -padm /mnt Oh, that's not the help. find / -xdev | grep proc gives you: ... /var/lib/dpkg/info/procmeter.postinst /var/lib/dpkg/info/procmeter.list /var/lib/dpkg/info/procmeter.postrm /var/lib/dpkg/info/xproc.list /proc Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Help transfering data (Correction)....
Sorry, please forget my too fast launched reply about find still finding proc. : : find / -xdev -print | cpio -padm /mnt : : Oh, that's not the help. : : : find / -xdev | grep proc : : gives you: : : ... : /var/lib/dpkg/info/procmeter.postinst : /var/lib/dpkg/info/procmeter.list : /var/lib/dpkg/info/procmeter.postrm : /var/lib/dpkg/info/xproc.list : /proc It does finds proc, but doesn't descend it. I remembered an old fault of mine when trying cd / tar -clf /dev/null * when proc was found AND descended by tar ... Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Problems with fdisk
: da starnews.stardivision.com ein Newsserver fuer nichtoeffentliche : ^^^ : Newsgruppen stardivision.com.public.announce zu sein scheint, : bleibt leider nur die Moeglichkeit, Netscape umschaltbar mit den Aha. Das geht auch mit gnus unter emacs, wie ich gerade zu lesen beginne. Vielen Dank fuer die Information! Andreas. P.S.: Meine Zeit laeuft am 30.09.97 hier ab. Bin gespannt, was mich dann erwartet. Die FHs sind derzeit dicht, wegen Stellensperren und Sparen dauert alles endlos lange. Wahrscheinlich werde ich in der Industrie landen, zumindest fuer einige Zeit. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Problems with fdisk (Sorry, misleaded mail)
Sorry for the last german misleaded mail. Andreas. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Debian as a server.
Thanks, really. Thank you very much for your comprehensive good news! Andreas. : I use Debian Linux boxes for nearly all important (i.e. can't afford any : downtime) internet related servers. I also use it as the main Windows : SMB file server (with samba) at my main job. : : Linux's reliability can't be beat, especially if the core kernel is : surrounded by an excellent quality distribution like debian. ... : In fact, my experiences over the last 4 or 5 years have convinced me : beyond *any* doubt that commercial software vendors can NOT even begin : to approach either the stability OR the speed of development cycle which : freeware community-developed systems like Linux have. : : New features are developed and debugged in about a tenth of the time on : Linuxmostly because of the huge number of enthusiastic volunteers, : and partly because the development is driven by tech-heads who (mostly : :-) know what they're doing rather than by marketing-droids who probably : can't even set the clock on their VCRs. : : Craig -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: rsh with .rhosts problems (SOLVED)
: Hi, : : I don't have access to a Linux machine from where I work so I can't : check on this advice, but see if there is a man page for : hosts.equiv. On Solaris machines, /etc/hosts.equiv is the other ^^^ : piece that controls remote access via rsh, rlogin, etc. : : Good luck, : Randy Stocking Thank you and the other responsers very much! At one host the /etc/hosts.equiv file was missing, where I was sure it would have been there. Now, after editing this file everything is ok. A. Wehler -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
rsh with .rhosts problems
Hello, does someone know any peculiarities with rsh and .rhosts? I would like to transfer per cron job certain files from hotsA to hostB with rsh and pipes. The rsh-pipe-mechanism works fine for certain hosts, and does not for others for permission denied problems. They all are running the net*-packages from the stable tree, and the .rhosts files are triple checked as to be ok. e.g., why this?! -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# rsh -l normaluser hostB.full.domain.name date -- Permission denied. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# rsh -l normaluser hostA.full.domain.name date -- Wed Apr 30 09:56:53 MET DST 1997 Thanks! A. Wehler -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
eth0: Insufficient memory; nuking packet. (??)
Hi. Does someone know how to cure this sort of a hung net? I understand that testing a beta version software may result in an adventure. When testing LyX at some point with the try to produce a real LaTeX-preview the net completely hung. In /var/log/messages there were the following entries: Feb 20 09:36:25 welfa4 kernel: Couldn't get a free page. Feb 20 09:36:25 welfa4 kernel: eth0: Insufficient memory; nuking packet. Feb 20 09:36:25 welfa4 last message repeated 6 times I never experienced such a situation before. The net couldn't even be shut down by ''ifconfig down eth0''. ifconfig showed about more than 1100 errors for Transmissions. -Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is there a dictionary ... solved
Thank you all for your help! I was overwhelmed when looking into the many mails about abbreviations and how to look them up. Nevertheless I'll probably not adopt the taste of speaking abbreviated, rather express it in C. Thanks all you helpers! Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 21041 dec-chip
: i have just installed debian on my machine, however the : network is unreachable. i have an smc with a 21041 : dec-chipset on it. the module (tulip) was added without any : problem upon installation. however when i rebooted the system : i get these errors: This reminds me at the cable not connected problem that we have with a new smc 8432BT EtherPower PCI card, sized just 70mm x 100mm, connected to BNC. The net works ok with another, 1 year old card, and this new mini card has worked too for about 1 month. With ezstart the loopback test fails, even on a 2m cable, terminated with 2 resistors. The generated and received electrical signals look ok (observed with a digital scope), but the card doesn't be happy with them. We called for a new one. (Do you see any messages in /var/log/messages?) - Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How long should it take to extract 1GIG off Tape?
My Wangtek QIC 150 tape (an old 5110 ES drive) runs at a rate of 5MB/min, or 300MB/h, which should give 1GB in something near/below 4h (if the 250MB-tapes are changed fast enough). The streaming throughput should be limited from the tape, not the host. : I'm just checking but whenever I extract the contents of my mirrored : tapes it seems to take nearly all night to extract. At least 6 hours. : That doesn't seem right to me. Is the kernel configured to work with all : SCSI tape drives in an optimal manner? Is there the same kind of QIC : interpretation problem like under Solaris here? ie. stconf.c? -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there a dictionary for abbreviations like WTF?
Hi, I would like to resolve these many abbreviations today, as AKA (also known as) WTF (???) ... So, is there any appropriate dictionary? Thanks. Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: tar dumps core
Yes, I've experienced this too. : It won't dump core if file is smaller (say a few KB) or the option M : is not used. I've put together a set of 3 QIC-150 tapes with debian 1.2. Reading/testing every single tape back is ok, where of course the overlapping files are lost. Reading it back with M-option makes the first tape give a Segmentation fault at an offset of about 60MB. At the first glance I thought it were a bad media, but the critical point has shown to be exactly at the same byte on another media. Anyway, I had to put in the variable LD_PRELOAD=/usr/lib/libgnumalloc.so.5 in debian 1.2 to make tar go without seg fault, but this didn't help against that multi volume trap. Then I realized the same behavior on this special set of tapes at another system, running an older kernel and another distribution, but the same tar version GNU tar 1.11.8. So, is this fault really ((tar-version) + data)-dependent? I usually read my tapes back with the -t option, to avoid media problems and know in advance, what surely will bit me in the future, and worked around with reading the tapes as single tapes. -Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WHY does xemacs CONFLICT with emacs?
xemacs uses 6MB (on some other machine), emacs 2MB (on linux). So my question: why may xemacs and emacs not be used alternately under linux, as they play on e.g. IRIX? Thank you, Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/etc/hostname, Contents?
Hi. My problems concerning lprm job; permission denied!? are solved now. After having a look over the lpr package it turned out, that a compare between welfa4 (my hostname?!) and welfa4.elektro.uni-wuppertal.de didn't match in function isowner(), so the neat permission denied message. Now, I changed /etc/hostname to hold my full host name, and lprm works. The question is, as I remember a similar posting in the past about talk problems: -- What exactly has to be now in /etc/hostname? Is -- my correction correct or is lpr still buggy at -- that point? (I'm sure it is, at least for that -- misleading message!). Greetings, Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
LD_PRELOAD still solves tar -M problems
Hi, didn't thought that my private mail archive will serve me that much, as I recorded a message from Marek Duszynski at 07 Dec 1996. It is still valid, depart from [TAB] doesnt work, it must be: LD_PRELOAD=/usr/lib/libgnumalloc.so.5 (still can't lprm from normal user because of permission denied, alias suid-problems!) Thanks, Marek! Andreas. : Date: Sat, 07 Dec 1996 20:28:52 + : From: Marek Duszynski [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Subject: tar multivolume archive - problem solved : : Hi, : : Thanks to all who responded to my problem of not being able : to use the tar command with the 'M' option for multivolume : archive. : : The machine was capable of creating such archives and then : reading its contents, but every attempt of extracting it : with the command: : tar xvMf /dev/fd0 : ended up in segfault message. : : Things are sorted now and all the credit goes to Arrigo. : If anybody experiences the same problem on Debian1.1, the : solution is to define the environment variable LP_PRELOAD: : LD_PRELOAD=/usr/lib/libgnumalloc[TAB]; export LD_PRELOAD : The [TAB] will give you your system version of libgnumalloc. : : I would like to know one thing, though. Should this be set in the : 1.2 release of Debian, or was it set already and my installation of : Debian 1.1 was not quite up to scratch :-) ? : : -- : : : Marek -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: lprm job; permission denied!?
I got a private mail from David Puryear [EMAIL PROTECTED], but a reply bounced with: : Return-Path: MAILER-DAEMON : Subject: Delivery failure : From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 01:01:39 -0700 : To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : : Your message has encountered delivery problems : to local user dayear. : (Originally addressed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) : : User does not have a mailbox : : Your message reads (in part): So here it is again (hope, David, you'll get your mailbox soon): == resent message Thanky you for the reply! : Can you reinstall lpr? I noticed that sometimes you do need to reinstall : debian packages using dpkg -i instead of dselect. Yes, I did it, with no effect. Btw, dpkg -i leaves the configured dirs and files in place, so I wondered if it would be a good idea to purge lpr out first and reinstall it, but this is refused by dpkg, for lpr is an essential package. Very odd and reproducable behavior: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/d100$ lpr -Pps04 d100.ps [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/d100$ lpq -Pps04 ps04 is ready and printing Rank Owner Job Files Total Size active wehler238 d100.ps 3218699 bytes [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/d100$ lprm -Pps04 38 cfA038Aa00133: Permission denied cfA038Aa00133: Permission denied [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/d100$ su -c lprm -Pps04 38 Password: dfA038Aa00133 dequeued cfA038Aa00133 dequeued [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/d100$ Thank you, Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SUID problems. experts?
Hi. My problems with lprm not working for ordinal users is caused by another odd problem: suid isn't working for a few programs! E. g. mmm is a wrapper of mine with a few combined actions for the normal user. mmm calls just mount/umount/fsck/fdformat/mkfs and so on, depending on argv[0]. The normal user may call it with m3, u3 ... Whereas, mount and umount don't work, although the are adorned with the suid bit. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ strace mmm execve(/usr/local/bin/mmm, [mmm], [/* 33 vars */]) = 0 strace: exec: Operation not permitted ok, wehler2 must not strace a suid program, as we learn. So, lets look at the permissions. == [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/bin# ls -dal mmm *mount . [mu][35] drwxrwxr-x 2 root staff1024 Dec 20 16:59 . -rwsr-xr-x 1 root root 5744 Dec 9 22:18 mmm -rwsr-xr-x 1 root root29724 Aug 19 04:54 mount -rwsr-xr-x 1 root root16228 Aug 19 04:54 umount lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root3 Dec 12 16:59 m3 - mmm lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root3 Dec 12 16:59 m5 - mmm lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root3 Dec 12 16:59 u3 - mmm lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root3 Dec 12 16:59 u5 - mmm == mount and umount are exact copies from /bin/*mount, to exclude any permission problem with directories. AND NOW this, WHY?! == [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/bin$ ./mount /debian mount: only root can mount ftp:/ftp/pub/linux/debian on /debian [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/bin$ [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/bin# ./mount /debian [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/bin# [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/bin$ ./umount /debian umount: only root can unmount ftp:/ftp/pub/linux/debian from /debian [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/bin$ == Please... I'm at the end now. Mounting isn't my problem, it is only shown as a test to hopefully some time understand what is going on here. Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: lprm job; permission denied!?
Hmm, : I use lprm all the time with Debian 1.2 and had no problem. : But I would just do: lprm 21 : Instead of what you are doing. all I know until now is, that lprm works for several remote printers, but doesn't for all of the 2 local printers. Only root may lprm something, in spite of /usr/bin/lp* having set their suid,sgid bits set. Very odd, isn't it? -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
lprm job; permission denied!?
Is there some 'one who understands why lprm in Debian 1.2 doesn't work as normal user? Even if a normal user is put into the lp-group there is following error message: == [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/zar/tmp$ lpq -Pps04 ps04 is ready and printing Rank Owner Job Files Total Size active wehler218 c-functions.ps52219 bytes 1stwehler219 c-functions.ps52219 bytes 2ndwehler220 c-functions.ps52219 bytes 3rdwehler221 c-functions.ps52219 bytes [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/zar/tmp$ lprm -Pps04 21 cfA021Aa25070: Permission denied [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/zar/tmp$ strace lprm -Pps04 21 execve(/usr/bin/lprm, [lprm, -Pps04, 21], [/* 33 vars */]) = 0 strace: exec: Operation not permitted [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/zar/tmp$ ls -al /var/spool/lpd/ps04 total 217 drwxrwsrwx 2 root lp 1024 Dec 18 16:19 . drwxrwsr-x 9 root lp 1024 Dec 17 12:03 .. -rw-rw---x 1 root lp 4 Dec 18 16:19 .seq -rw-rw 1 daemon lp146 Dec 18 16:19 cfA018Aa25062 -rw-rw 1 daemon lp146 Dec 18 16:19 cfA019Aa25066 -rw-rw 1 daemon lp146 Dec 18 16:19 cfA020Aa25068 -rw-rw 1 daemon lp146 Dec 18 16:19 cfA021Aa25070 -rw-rw 1 wehler2 lp 52219 Dec 18 16:19 dfA018Aa25062 -rw-rw 1 wehler2 lp 52219 Dec 18 16:19 dfA019Aa25066 -rw-rw 1 wehler2 lp 52219 Dec 18 16:19 dfA020Aa25068 -rw-rw 1 wehler2 lp 52219 Dec 18 16:19 dfA021Aa25070 -rw-rw-r-- 1 root lp 0 Nov 24 21:04 errs -rw-rw-r-- 1 root lp 20 Dec 18 16:19 lock -rw-rw-r-- 1 root lp 27 Dec 18 16:19 status [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/zar/tmp$ id uid=210(wehler2) gid=7(lp) groups=300(sti),100(users) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/zar/tmp$ Thank you. Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
lprm job; permission denied!?
What is going on here? The permissions are: == [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/spool$ ls -dal /var/spool/lp* drwxrwsr-x 6 root lp 1024 Dec 10 11:40 /var/spool/lpd [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/spool$ ls -al /var/spool/lpd/ total 6 drwxrwsr-x 6 root lp 1024 Dec 10 11:40 . drwxr-xr-x 13 root root 1024 Dec 2 22:15 .. drwxrwsr-x 2 root lp 1024 Dec 10 11:50 lp drwxrwsr-x 2 root lp 1024 Dec 17 09:02 ps drwxrwsr-x 2 root lp 1024 Jul 29 23:25 remote drwxrwsr-x 2 root lp 1024 Dec 10 11:49 vt9 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/bin$ ls -al /usr/bin/lp* -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 4969 Nov 24 21:04 /usr/bin/lpf -rwsr-sr-x 1 root lp 13317 Nov 24 21:04 /usr/bin/lpq -rwsr-sr-x 1 root lp 14277 Nov 24 21:04 /usr/bin/lpr -rwsr-sr-x 1 root lp 13157 Nov 24 21:04 /usr/bin/lprm -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 3329 Nov 24 21:04 /usr/bin/lptest [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/bin$ lpq -Plps lps is ready and printing Rank Owner Job Files Total Size active wehler27pearl96.ps513763 bytes 1stwehler28pearl96.ps513763 bytes 2ndwehler29pearl96.ps513763 bytes [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/bin$ lprm -Plps 8 9 cfA008Aa19418: Permission denied cfA009Aa19420: Permission denied == any ideas? Thank you. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
lprm job; permission denied!?
I forgot to mention the print job files: == [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/spool/lpd/ps# ls -alrt total 5065 drwxrwsr-x 6 root lp 1024 Dec 10 11:40 .. -rw-rw-r-- 1 root lp 26 Dec 17 08:55 status -rw-rw 1 wehler2 lp 513763 Dec 17 08:55 dfA007Aa19416 -rw-rw 1 daemon lp138 Dec 17 08:55 cfA007Aa19416 -rw-rw 1 wehler2 lp 513763 Dec 17 08:55 dfA008Aa19418 -rw-rw 1 daemon lp138 Dec 17 08:55 cfA008Aa19418 -rw-rx 1 root lp 4 Dec 17 08:56 .seq drwxrwsr-x 2 root lp 1024 Dec 17 09:02 . -rw-r--r-- 1 root lp 20 Dec 17 09:02 lock == Thanks, Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HOW can I CREATE a missing /dev/printer?
Help, please. There is 1 old (sorry, no-debian)-box which has for one or the other reason lost his /dev/printer socket entry. How can I create a new one? tar -c, called on another machine, produces a named fifo entry for /dev/printer, and /dev/MAKEDEV printer doesn't know about how to create a printer device! Andreas. -- Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009 Dr. Andreas Wehler; [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
