How to deal with package conflicts (apache)?
How should I deal with package conflicts such as apache13/apache13-mod_ssl... I've installed apache13-mod_ssl but a couple of other ports I want to install want apache13 (specifically apache-1.3.29_1) which complains of a package conflict (with apache+mod_ssl-1.3.29+2.8.16) so I'll have to force the installation. Is there a way of convincing the new packages that apache13-mod_ssl is an adequate substitute for apache13? If I leave both installed (either as packages or ports) does it matter whether I update one or the other first? I guess the real question is are there any actual conflicts between these two packages/ports or are they effectively kept in sync with each other? What about other cases (eg. can I install apache13+ipv6 in conjunction with apache13 and apache13-mod_ssl)? Is there a general rule for handling these situations or is it a package-dependent thing? Is there a resource to help with understanding which packages can co-exist? Thanks, Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: userdbpw/5.2 producing inconsistent result
Thanks to anyone who bothered to answer my earlier question. Unfortunately due to a problem related to the original reason for my question, sendmail started rejecting messages and I've lost at least a few hours worth of messages and if you replied I missed it. In the meantime I've learned about adding SALT to passwords and realise that the differing results from userdbpw weren't the source of my userdb problems which is what originally led me to think that the password encryption might have been at fault. Thanks, Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
userdbpw/5.2 producing inconsistent result
# uname -mrsv FreeBSD 5.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 5.2-RELEASE #0: Wed Feb 4 05:44:41 CST 2004 root@:/usr/src/sys/i386/compile/LILLITH-IV i386 # pkg_which /usr/local/sbin/userdbpw courier-imap-2.2.1,1 Every time I run userdbpw it's generating a different result (for the same supplied password). eg: # foreach p ( password password password ) foreach? echo $p | userdbpw foreach? end fA8HQ5zWzV.fM Vkedbdeq0kk7s Lay1EhcWhup/s # Fear not if there's anything wrong with the above because I've tried it manually with a variety of passwords and the result is the same (ie. the results are not! the same). # userdbpw Password: Reenter password: wRkPrfxswnUGo # userdbpw Password: Reenter password: yTBnb7ab/N072 I was using this without issue on 4.8. Can anyone suggest anything I should try/check or is it bug-hunting time? Thanks, Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FDisk won't detect or accept correct disk geometry from BIOS
Keith Kelly wrote: On Jan 22, 2004, at 5:24 PM, Keith Kelly wrote: I already tried (with both 4.9 and 5.1) letting the FreeBSD install proceed with fdisk's geometry value assumptions, and what I always get is a non-bootable hard drive that gives the Missing operating system error at boot. Sufficiently old motherboards and BIOS versions don't understand the LBA addressing mode used by modern drives, and are limited to seeing approx 8.4 GB using the classic C/H/S values. See whether the BIOS lets you configure the drive to LBA mode rather than automatic, C/H/S, or extended C/H/S mode. If it doesn't, check to see whether there is a BIOS update available for your hardware. The motherboard is not old. It is an MSI KT4 Ultra motherboard, if I remember the model number correctly off the top of my head, for the Athlon XP architecture. The BIOS doesn't even explicitly list what mode (LBA, CHS, extended CHS) it is using to address the drive -- I just set it to Auto, it detects the device name, and fills out a small listing telling me the C/H/S geometry it is using. The motherboard is already running the latest available BIOS update from MSI. From: Christopher Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have two 40Gig Seagate Baracuda IV's. The physical drive is 1023/256/63 The BIOS detects it at 1024/255/63 I have an 80G Seagate (ST380024A) attached to an old MB (pentium socket 7(?)) with an AMI BIOS. Seagate specify the logical geometry (for Barracuda ATA V drives) as 16383/16/63. This is also what the BIOS auto-detects the drive as. (Note this corresponds to only 8G.) I used this as the BIOS setting to install FreeBSD. However, FreeBSD (4.8) wouldn't boot from the drive until I dropped the BIOS heads setting down (to 16383/15/63). FreeBSD happily ignored this setting change which was done after FreeBSD had been installed. I had assumed that this was a bug in the BIOS. I wonder now whether there is some quirk in FreeBSD's boot managers/loaders that is affected by BIOS settings (perhaps with specific BIOSes)? The AMI BIOS has LBA, Block mode and 32-bit mode settings enabled. To further add to the curiosity, fdisk reports the drive as 9729/255/63 (which is 5103 sectors short of the drive's full capacity). dmesg.boot, however, shows: ad0: 76319MB ST380024A [155061/16/63] at ata0-master WDMA2 which corresponds to the drive's full capacity. Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How to create .iso file image of cdrom (atapi)?
Hi, Is there a straightforward way of creating a file image (.iso) of a data cdrom mounted in an atapi cd-rom drive? All my googling has turned up is suggestions like dd if=/dev/acd0 ... but I neither have nor can create (with MAKEDEV) /dev/acd0 (only /dev/acd0a and /dev/acd0c - FreeBSD 4.8) I've previously used Windows solutions to do this and thought I should be able to do it in FreeBSD with my eyes closed, but now I could use some help in prising them open! Thanks, Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How to create .iso file image of cdrom (atapi)?
Scott Mitchell wrote: You want to use /dev/acd0c - the 'c' partition covers the whole disk. Something like: dd if=/dev/acd0c of=foo.iso bs=64k Ah! Thanks for that. The bs argument is crucial, I hadn't thought to try anything further when without it I got: dd: /dev/acd0c: Invalid argument I let myself be led astray into thinking that there must be something amiss with using that device. So if the 'c' partition is the whole disk, what's the 'a' partition, out of curiosity? Thanks, Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Using maildrop from sendmail aliases file
W. Sierke wrote: to recap: I'm trying to run maildrop from /etc/mail/aliases with the following entry: second-domain-tld:|/usr/local/bin/maildrop -d [EMAIL PROTECTED] where second-domain-tld is from an entry in virtusertable. Initially this gave me: Dec 25 17:05:19 maildrop[75657]: Cannot set my user or group id. so as per the above included text, I tried making maildrop setuid: Dec 26 15:08:20 maildrop[93442]: You are not a trusted user. Turns out this was an issue with the maildrop port. There doesn't appear to be a way of configuring 'trusted users' for maildrop without directly modifying the Makefile. And maildrop doesn't get installed suid despite having it's --enable-maildrop-uid option set. Making maildrop suid and configuring it with user:mailnull as a trusted user got it working. Time for a change request I think. Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Using maildrop from sendmail aliases file
W. Sierke wrote: More guessing (as I'm still not clear on the specifics of what is failing)... Is sendmail running as user:smmsp when it's calling maildrop? That would explain why maildrop isn't able to change itself to user:vmail, no? Should setting the setuid bit circumvent this? When I try that I get: Dec 26 15:08:20 maildrop[93442]: You are not a trusted user. where I guess You = smmsp? If this is the case, then it must be a problem for any program run from /etc/mail/aliases, is this just too hard to do on a default FreeBSD? Still out of my depth here but learning a bit more. :) I'm curious about the lack of response since I was thinking there was a good chance this would be a fairly obvious one for our more experienced players. Am I wrong in thinking that this is just a permissions/security issue? Just to recap: I'm trying to run maildrop from /etc/mail/aliases with the following entry: second-domain-tld:|/usr/local/bin/maildrop -d [EMAIL PROTECTED] where second-domain-tld is from an entry in virtusertable. Initially this gave me: Dec 25 17:05:19 maildrop[75657]: Cannot set my user or group id. so as per the above included text, I tried making maildrop setuid: Dec 26 15:08:20 maildrop[93442]: You are not a trusted user. Any and all hints, suggestions, advice and abuse welcome as all my research efforts are getting me nowhere at the moment. Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using maildrop from sendmail aliases file
I am attempting to configure sendmail to pass mail addressed to a particular domain to maildrop. maildrop is already installed and used with getmail to collect mail from a number of pop accounts. It has been installed as user:vmail group:vmail. This existing setup works fine. I've added the following to the sendmail configuration: in /etc/mail/virtusertable ... @second.domain.tldsecond-domain-tld and in /etc/mail/aliases ... second-domain-tld:| /usr/local/bin/maildrop -d [EMAIL PROTECTED] It looks as though it's ready to work except for this in /var/log/maillog: ... Dec 25 17:05:19 maildrop[75657]: Cannot set my user or group id. Presumably this is because maildrop wants to set itself to run as user:vmail and the existing setup I have works as-is because getmail (which calls maildrop) is configured to run as user:vmail in /etc/crontab. Either I need to find a way to allow maildrop to change itself to user:vmail when called from sendmail (which I don't know how to achieve) or I need to change maildrop to run as (I'm guessing) user:root which if memory serves was something that was suggested to be avoided. What would be the best approach? Thanks, Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Using maildrop from sendmail aliases file
W. Sierke wrote: I am attempting to configure sendmail to pass mail addressed to a particular domain to maildrop. ... I've added the following to the sendmail configuration: in /etc/mail/virtusertable ... @second.domain.tldsecond-domain-tld and in /etc/mail/aliases ... second-domain-tld:| /usr/local/bin/maildrop -d [EMAIL PROTECTED] It looks as though it's ready to work except for this in /var/log/maillog: ... Dec 25 17:05:19 maildrop[75657]: Cannot set my user or group id. Presumably this is because maildrop wants to set itself to run as user:vmail and the existing setup I have works as-is because getmail (which calls maildrop) is configured to run as user:vmail in /etc/crontab. More guessing (as I'm still not clear on the specifics of what is failing)... Is sendmail running as user:smmsp when it's calling maildrop? That would explain why maildrop isn't able to change itself to user:vmail, no? Should setting the setuid bit circumvent this? When I try that I get: Dec 26 15:08:20 maildrop[93442]: You are not a trusted user. where I guess You = smmsp? If this is the case, then it must be a problem for any program run from /etc/mail/aliases, is this just too hard to do on a default FreeBSD? Still out of my depth here but learning a bit more. :) Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Using maildrop from sendmail aliases file
W. Sierke wrote: I am attempting to configure sendmail to pass mail addressed to a particular domain to maildrop. ... I've added the following to the sendmail configuration: in /etc/mail/virtusertable ... @second.domain.tldsecond-domain-tld and in /etc/mail/aliases ... second-domain-tld:| /usr/local/bin/maildrop -d [EMAIL PROTECTED] It looks as though it's ready to work except for this in /var/log/maillog: ... Dec 25 17:05:19 maildrop[75657]: Cannot set my user or group id. Presumably this is because maildrop wants to set itself to run as user:vmail and the existing setup I have works as-is because getmail (which calls maildrop) is configured to run as user:vmail in /etc/crontab. More guessing (as I'm still not clear on the specifics of what is failing)... Is sendmail running as user:smmsp when it's calling maildrop? That would explain why maildrop isn't able to change itself to user:vmail, no? Should setting the setuid bit circumvent this? When I try that I get: Dec 26 15:08:20 maildrop[93442]: You are not a trusted user. where I guess You = smmsp? If this is the case, then it must be a problem for any program run from /etc/mail/aliases, is this just too hard to do on a default FreeBSD? Still out of my depth here but learning a bit more. :) Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Recovering ext2fs partitions after crash
Update: I booted with tomrsrtbt disk: http://www.toms.net/rb/ and successfully ran the included e2fsck which appears to be the same version as I have installed on my 4.8 box. However I still get the same error when I try to run e2fsck under FBSD: # e2fsck /dev/ad0s5 e2fsck 1.27 (8-Mar-2002) The filesystem size (according to the superblock) is 1281175 blocks The physical size of the device is 0 blocks Either the superblock or the partition table is likely to be corrupt! Aborty? The ext2fs partitions exist in an extended partition. Am I missing some knowledge about using extended partitions? They mount normally and have otherwise (until the system crashed/hung) operated flawlessly to date. Does anyone know why I'm unable to use the ext2fs utilities (installed from /usr/ports/sysutils/e2fsprogs)? Thanks, Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Recovering ext2fs partitions after crash
Hi, My 4.8 box died (after 70+ days) for reasons as yet unknown. I couldn't log in remotely or at virtual consoles, main console was completely unresponsive and I couldn't ctrl-alt-del so I had to hit reset. I've got the box back up but I can't mount my 2 ext2fs partitions (had to comment them out of /etc/fstab): # mount_ext2fs /dev/ad0s5 /mnt/store1 mount_ext2fs: /dev/ad0s5: Operation not permitted # e2fsck /dev/ad0s5 e2fsck 1.27 (8-Mar-2002) The filesystem size (according to the superblock) is 1281175 blocks The physical size of the device is 0 blocks Either the superblock or the partition table is likely to be corrupt! Aborty? Uh-oh. That's not good! I don't think that superblock version of the size is correct, either. Any suggestions as to the best way to proceed from here? (Please don't use the dreaded B word! :) Thanks, Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PPPoE not working
From: E. J. Cerejo [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have a weird problem here with PPPoE, I had it working with this configuration before I bought a belkin router: ... set device PPPoE:fpx0: -- I also tried without this colon. ..^^ ... fxp0: flags=8802BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 ...^^ Finger trouble? Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Loopback filesystem support?
From: Rus Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi All, Does FreeBSD have any support for loopback filesystems. i.e. I mean being able to mount a file as a filesystem ala Linux. Googling didn't chuck back much and the nearest I found was mount_null. Is it possible? man vn man vnconfig /dev/vn* e.g.: # vnconfig -c vn0 file.iso mount_cd9660 /dev/vn0 /mnt ... # umount /mnt vnconfig -u vn0 Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: localhost name resolution problem
From: Ryan Merrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] W. Sierke wrote: hosts contains ::1 localhost.my.domain localhost 127.0.0.1 localhost.my.domain localhost 192.168.100.1 this_machine.my.domain this_machine 192.168.100.2 another_machine.my.domain another_machine ... Your #/etc/hosts file should read for IPv4 localhost 127.0.0.1localhost.Your_local_domain.com localhost There should be another line in #/etc/hosts your host 192.168.100.1My_host.Your_local_domain.com My_host You can add as many lines as you want. with IP address, hostname, nickname. Indeed, but despite the presence of the (IPv4) localhost entry, sendmail was resolving localhost to my internet IP address, rather than 127.0.0.1. It was suggested to me that the name resolution method that sendmail uses would not use /etc/hosts anyway and since that matched my own experience I'm inclined to think it's true, that's why I resorted to adding bind to the system. After further investigation I've seen two approaches to resolving this issue, one to substitute 127.0.0.1 in place of 'localhost' in the sendmail config files[1], the other to add the sendmail config file /etc/mail/service.switch with the line hosts files dns. But now I'm curious about why these options aren't used in the default installation of sendmail on FreeBSD, given that my situation doesn't appear to be unusual. Does sendmail not use the hosts file by default as a security measure? In any case it just feels dirty to me to have to circumvent this issue on a case-by-case basis - i.e. my thinking at the moment is that a dns facility should resolve 'localhost' correctly. Is that a shared sentiment? Or am I just barking up the wrong tree altogether? Thanks, Wayne [1] - by having FEATURE(`msp', `[127.0.0.1]') in submit.mc ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
localhost name resolution problem
Hi, In the course of trying to resolve a problem with sendmail (refusing to deliver even local mail), I saw a note in the sendmail configuration docs which says host localhost must resolve to 127.0.0.1. However, when I checked my system I instead found (details obscured): # host localhost localhost.my.domain is a nickname for my.domain my.domain has address 202.x.x.x Someone suggested I check localhost.: # host localhost. Host not found. I'm not (wasn't) running a nameserver, my host.conf contains the entries hosts and bind in that order, resolv.conf has a single, automatic (from PPPoE) nameserver entry which works, hostname is set to this_machine.my.domain. hosts contains ::1 localhost.my.domain localhost 127.0.0.1 localhost.my.domain localhost 192.168.100.1 this_machine.my.domain this_machine 192.168.100.2 another_machine.my.domain another_machine ... The domain I'm using is one serviced by dyndns.org, and I have a dynamic IP address. I've now installed bind and have got to the point where localhost again resolves to 127.0.0.1 (and sendmail appears to be happy again). Notably in the process of doing this I've changed my domain name from something.fictitious to my.domain. Now, however, (in part): # host -v localhost Trying domain my.domain rcode = 3 (Non-existent domain), ancount=0 Trying domain domain rcode = 0 (Success), ancount=1 The following answer is not authoritative: The following answer is not verified as authentic by the server: localhost.domain 66929 INA 127.0.0.1 # host -v localhost. rcode = 3 (Non-existent domain), ancount=0 Host not found. Even though I've overcome my initial problem, I'm not happy and rather feel as though I've begun creating a monster (and that's the last thing I wanted to be doing when moving to FreeBSD). For example, I feel somewhat uncomfortable that localhost is now resolving from domain instead of my.domain. I'm also confused about how I should be configuring bind when dyndns.org handles the dns for my domain (and whether I should really be running it at all). But I've exhausted my pitiful knowledge and searching capabilities for the moment. The handbook doesn't appear to be complete (following its example doesn't appear to help with the localhost resolution issue) and all of the material I've trawled up from the 'net is either too hard to follow or too old. Thanks, Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: write failed, disk is full
From: Jason End [EMAIL PROTECTED] Installing 4.7 through ftp, I get a series of errors that say things like: / write failed. disk is full failed to create /usr/src disk is full The disk is new, and certainly isn't full, so I'm thinking it could be a problem of where I've place the partitions on the disk. The disk is a new 120Gb WD1200JB and the relevant partitions are as such (in this order): 10gb ntfs 3gb freebsd (/) 800mb freebsd (swap) 55gb freebsd (/usr) I had a similar experience, albeit on a much smaller partition. Just to be sure, check that you haven't run out of inodes somewhere (assuming you can boot into a console): df -i I recently talked with someone on IRC who had just had a similar experience. I'm wondering if there might be an issue here in that perhaps the default block/fragment size being used during new installations is too small? Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problem using pkg_add -r net-snmp
Hi, # pkg_add -r net-snmp Error: FTP Unable to get ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-4.7-release/Latest/net -snmp.tgz: File unavailable (e.g., file not found, no access) pkg_add: unable to fetch 'ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-4.7-release/Latest/ne t-snmp.tgz' by URL However: ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-4.7-release/net-snmp-5 .0.3_2.tgz exists. Just curious. Thanks, Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mitsubishi Diamond Touch keyboard problem
Greg 'groggy' Lehy wrote: This is probably a timing problem with the keyboard. I had a couple snip I'd suggest you try 4.8 or 5.0 and see if the problem persists. You Thanks for that, Greg. In fact I had originally attempted an install of 5.0 and when I sought assistance with that same problem it was suggested that I drop back to 4.7. So the problem does still appear to be present. Who could I speak to in order to determine whether any assistance can be offered in debugging any outstanding issues with this keyboard? Thanks, Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mitsubishi Diamond Touch keyboard problem
Hi, I recently completed an installation of 4.7 (using the kern.flp mfsroot.flp) and which was originally hanging at the first 'sysinstall' screen (sorry, can't remember the question that was posed - load kernel modules? perhaps?). The keyboard (Mitsubishi Diamond Touch) would not respond and the only avenue was a reboot, rinse and repeat. After only a dozen or two consecutive failed attempts, I wised up and pulled out my trusty old 101-key beast which made those locked-up blues disappear. The best result of my search efforts was a vague reference that there might be problems with keyboards with 'extra' keys such as power control keys which this keyboard has. I was hoping someone might be able to point me at something a bit more definitive as to whether I can expect problems if I swap back to the Mitsubishi keyboard, which I would like to do. Unrelated I'd like to say how much I enjoyed installing FreeBSD on this old system which is destined to become a home file server. A P166 with 64M and 80G Seagate Barracuda V and D-Link 530TX. While the keyboard (and a couple of other 'issues') detracted a little, I was chuffed when I got to the disk-slicing stage and found all 80G sitting there in their shining glory. So much for my MS-centric colleagues who said it couldn't be done with such an old bios (of the 8G vintage). Ultimately the bios proved to be a sticking point in that it wouldn't boot when set to 16383/16/63, but dropping the heads to 15 (a buggy AMI bios, I think I may have read somewhere?) and away we went. FreeBSD gracefully ignored the bios drive settings throughout the procedure and used what it 'knew' to be right, even with the drive disabled in the bios. Woo-hoo. Thanks, Wayne ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
