Search Results

Search found 15 results on 1 pages for 'shteef'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• Pinning based on origin of a reprepro repository.

  - by Shtééf

  I'm on Ubuntu 10.04, and trying to set up a repository using reprepro. I'd also like the pin everything in that repository to be preferred over anything else, even if packages are older versions. (It will only contain a select set of packages.) However, I cannot seem to get the pinning to work, and believe it has something to do with the repository side of things, rather than the apt configuration on the client. I've taken the following steps to set up my repository Installed a web server (my personal choice here is Cherokee), Created the directory /var/www/apt/, Created the file conf/distributions, like so: Origin: Shteef Label: Shteef Suite: lucid Version: 10.04 Codename: lucid Architectures: i386 amd64 source Components: main Description: My personal repository Ran reprepro export from the /var/www/apt/ directory. Now on any other machine, I can add this (empty) repository over HTTP to my /etc/apt/sources.list, and run apt-get update without any errors: Ign http://archive.lan lucid Release.gpg Ign http://archive.lan/apt/ lucid/main Translation-en_US Get:1 http://archive.lan lucid Release [2,244B] Ign http://archive.lan lucid/main Packages Ign http://archive.lan lucid/main Sources Ign http://archive.lan lucid/main Packages Ign http://archive.lan lucid/main Sources Hit http://archive.lan lucid/main Packages Hit http://archive.lan lucid/main Sources In my case, now I want to use an old version of Asterisk, namely Asterisk 1.4. I rebuilt the asterisk-1:1.4.21.2~dfsg-3ubuntu2.1 package from Ubuntu 9.04 (with some small changes to fix dependencies) and uploaded it to my repository. At this point I can see the new package in aptitude, but it naturally prefers the newer Asterisk 1.6 currently in the Ubuntu 10.04 repositories. To try and fix that, I have created /etc/apt/preferences.d/personal like so: Package: * Pin: release o=Shteef Pin-Priority: 1000 But when I try to install the asterisk package, it will still prefer the 1.6 version over my own 1.4 version. This is what apt-cache policy asterisk shows: asterisk: Installed: (none) Candidate: 1:1.6.2.5-0ubuntu1 Version table: 1:1.6.2.5-0ubuntu1 0 500 http://nl.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid/universe Packages 1:1.4.21.2~dfsg-3ubuntu2.1shteef1 0 500 http://archive.lan/apt/ lucid/main Packages Clearly, it is not picking up my pin. In fact, when I run just apt-cache policy, I get the following: Package files: 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status release a=now 500 http://archive.lan/apt/ lucid/main Packages origin archive.lan 500 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid-security/multiverse Packages release v=10.04,o=Ubuntu,a=lucid-security,n=lucid,l=Ubuntu,c=multiverse origin security.ubuntu.com [...] Unlike Ubuntu's repository, apt doesn't seem to pick up a release-line at all for my own repository. I'm suspecting this is the cause why I can't pin on release o=Shteef in my preferences file. But I can't find any noticable difference between my repository's Release files and Ubuntu's that would cause this. Is there a step I've missed or mistake I've made in setting up my repository?

  Read the article

• Challenge a .name registration?

  - by Shtééf

  The Wikipedia page on .name says the following: Registration restrictions: No prior restriction on registration, but registrations can be challenged if not by or on behalf of individual with name similar to that of domain, or fictional character in which registrant has rights But there's no further info on how this actually works. Can a .name domain registration be challenged, and if so, how?

  Read the article

• Experiences with BIRD for BGP?

  - by Shtééf

  We're currently using Quagga with Debian Linux to run a full table BGP router. The set-up has been dead simple up to now, but we've come to a point where I have to reconfigure the router quite a bit, and want to tighten things up. I've never really understood Quagga, and always found its documentation to be lacking. It appears to be mimicking Cisco, of which I only have basic understanding. BIRD has caught my eye recently. The couple of articles / presentations I found promote it as lightweight and more responsive under stress compared to Quagga. And it actually seems to have very decent documentation. So I'd like to know: Who's running BIRD right now, and in what kind of set-up? How is it stability-wise? I've read about it running in a couple of sites in production. Let's say I don't care at all for a Cisco-feel to configuration. How is configuration, maintainance, monitoring, etc. of BIRD in general? And any other notable experiences you may have with it.

  Read the article

• To clone or to automate a system installation?

  - by Shtééf

  Let's say you're setting up a cluster of servers performing the same task. Or say you're just setting up a bunch of different servers, but you expect to use a base configuration on all of your servers. Would it be better practice to create a base image and clone it, or to automate the installation and configuration? I occasionally end up in this argument with my boss, in situations where we're time-pressed. When he sees me struggle with perfecting the automation, his suggestion is often to clone the entire disk to the other machines. But my instinct has always been to avoid cloning. This is mostly from an Ubuntu perspective, but the question is fairly general. My reasons for avoiding cloning are: On a typical install, even if it's fresh, there are already several unique identifiers installed: filesystem UUIDs, SSH host keys, among others. These would have to be regenerated. Network needs to be reconfigured for each clone. This would need to be done off-line, of course, or the settings will conflict with other machines on the network. On the other hand, some of the cloning advantages are quite clear as well: (Initially?) less effort required than automating configuration. Tools exist to quickly address (some) of the above disadvantages. (I can see right through my own bias there.)

  Read the article

• Updating Dell PowerEdge firmware on Ubuntu?

  - by Shtééf

  The company I work for recently got hands on a batch of second hand PowerEdge SC1425 machines. We'd like to put these to good use. Our operating system of choice is Ubuntu Server 10.04 64-bit, which installs just peachy on this type of machine. Now I'd like to install the firmware updates from Dell, which are apparently marked as recommended. This includes the updates for the BIOS, the BMC, and possibly some other hardware. I find it incredibly difficult to locate the files on the Dell website, and install any of them on an Ubuntu system: I downloaded the file OM_6.2.0_SUU_A01.iso. I believe I've read that the SUU DVD should be able to update any recent PowerEdge. Is this correct? Is this the latest version? Besides the version number, does A01 have any meaning? Is this image bootable? (At the moment, I just nosed around with a loop device mount.) Running /bin/bash ./suu from the DVD, I get: # /bin/bash ./suu ./suu: line 262: ./java/linux/i386/bin/java: No such file or directory The file exists and is executable, though. But I cannot execute it directly from the shell either.

  Read the article

• How to configure machines in a public subnet with two gateways?

  - by Shtééf

  We have a single public /24 subnet, with a BGP router as the primary gateway. Now I'm interested in configuring a second router for redundancy. How do I deal with multiple gateways on the servers in our public subnet? I found some other questions related to multiple gateways that seem to deal with NAT set-ups. In my situation, the servers all have public routed IP-addresses. So from what I can tell, it doesn't really matter which route incoming or outgoing packets take. But I figure the servers need some way of telling when one of the gateways is down, and route around it? Is this accomplished with protocols such as OSPF? And do I need to deploy this on all my servers?

  Read the article

• NIC is receiving, but not transmitting at all?

  - by Shtééf

  I'm trying to fix a very strange problem remotely on a machine at a customer site. The machine is a Dell PowerEdge, I believe a 1950 (haven't verified, but the lspci output matches specs I found.) The machine has two similar NICs, identified as Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme II BCM5708 Gigabit Ethernet (rev 12) by lspci, and using the bnx2 driver. (I suspect these are on-board and on the same controller, which is what I'm accustomed to for this type of machine.) The primary interface eth0 works perfectly, and is in fact how I am ssh'd in. However, the secondary interface eth1 is not transmitting. I can see this in ifconfig output, for example, where the TX field is always 0. However, it is receiving, and tcpdump shows ARP requests coming from the ISP's gateway on the other side. The interface is physically connected to a Siemens BSTU4 modem, configured by the ISP. The link is properly set to 10MBps and full duplex, without negotation, as the ISP requested. A small /30 subnet is configured. For the sake of anonimity, let's say the machine is 3.3.3.2/30, and the ISP's gateway .1. The machine has no firewall settings whatsoever. Even running something like arping -I eth1 3.3.3.1, and running tcpdump alongside, shows no traffic whatsoever being transmitted on the interface. (But the other side keeps steadily sending ARP requests, and that is all that can be seen.) What could be causing this? Here's some output, anonymized, which may hopefully help: $ ethtool eth1 Settings for eth1: Supported ports: [ TP ] Supported link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full 100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full 1000baseT/Full Supports auto-negotiation: Yes Advertised link modes: Not reported Advertised auto-negotiation: No Speed: 10Mb/s Duplex: Full Port: Twisted Pair PHYAD: 1 Transceiver: internal Auto-negotiation: off Supports Wake-on: d Wake-on: d Link detected: yes $ ip link show eth1 3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 link/ether 00:15:c5:xx:xx:xx brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff $ ip -4 addr show eth1 3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 inet 3.3.3.2/30 brd 3.3.3.3 scope global eth1 $ ip -4 route show match 3.3.3.0/30 3.3.3.0/30 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 3.3.3.2 default via 10.0.0.5 dev eth0

  Read the article

• Things to check for an internet-facing email server.

  - by Shtééf

  I'm faced with the task of setting up a public-internet-facing email server, that will be relaying mail for all of our other servers in the network. While the software in itself is set up in few keystrokes, what little experience I have with managing an email server has thought me that there are tons of awkward filtering techniques employed by other email systems. Systems that my own server will inevitably interact with a some point. Hence, my questions: What things should be kept in mind and double checked when setting up an email server? What resources are available for checking if my email server is set-up correctly? I'm specifically NOT looking for instructions for any given mail server, such as Exchange or Postfix. But it's okay to say: “you should have X and Y in your set-up, because when talking to server software Z, it typically tries to weed out open relays by checking for these.” Some things I've discovered myself: Make sure forward and reverse DNS are set up. Mail servers tend to do a reverse lookup for the peer IP-address when receiving. Matching a reverse look up with a follow-up forward lookup is probably employed to weed out open relays run through malware on home networks. Make sure the user in the From-address exists. The From-address is easily spoofed. A receiving mail server may try to contact the mail server in the From-domain, and see if the From-user actually exists.

  Read the article

• What is the `shadow` group used for?

  - by Shtééf

  On my Ubuntu 9.10 system, there's a shadow system group. There does not appear to be any user assigned to this group at all. The only files that I can find belonging to this group are /etc/shadow and /etc/gshadow. I'm aware that the purpose of these files is to store the passwords separately, out of reach from regular users who still might want to access passwd for other reasons. But what is the purpose of the shadow group? The reason I'm curious about this, is because I'm thinking about configuring nsswitch.conf to store it elsewhere, and would like to know if anything is actually trying to access the shadow database using shadow group credentials.

  Read the article

• What is the network address (x.x.x.0) used for?

  - by Shtééf

  It appears to be common practice to not use the first address in a subnet, that is the IP 192.168.0.0/24, or a more exotic example would be 172.20.20.64/29. The ipcalc tool I frequently use follows the same practice: $ ipcalc -n -b 172.20.20.64/29 Address: 172.20.20.64 Netmask: 255.255.255.248 = 29 Wildcard: 0.0.0.7 => Network: 172.20.20.64/29 HostMin: 172.20.20.65 HostMax: 172.20.20.70 Broadcast: 172.20.20.71 Hosts/Net: 6 Class B, Private Internet But why is that HostMin is not simply 64 in this case? The 64 address is a valid address, right? And whatever the answer, does the same apply to IPv6? Perhaps slightly related: it also appears possible to use a TCP port 0 and an UDP port 0. Are these valid or used anywhere?

  Read the article

• Skip makefile dependency generation for certain targets (e.g. `clean`)

  - by Shtééf

  I have several C and C++ projects that all follow a basic structure I've been using for a while now. My source files go in src/*.c, intermediate files in obj/*.[do], and the actual executable in the top level directory. My makefiles follow roughly this template: # The final executable TARGET := something # Source files (without src/) INPUTS := foo.c bar.c baz.c # OBJECTS will contain: obj/foo.o obj/bar.o obj/baz.o OBJECTS := $(INPUTS:%.cpp=obj/%.o) # DEPFILES will contain: obj/foo.d obj/bar.d obj/baz.d DEPFILES := $(OBJECTS:%.o=%.d) all: $(TARGET) obj/%.o: src/%.cpp $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -c -o $@ $< obj/%.d: src/%.cpp $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -M -MF $@ -MT $(@:%.d=%.o) $< $(TARGET): $(OBJECTS) $(LD) $(LDFLAGS) -o $@ $(OBJECTS) .PHONY: clean clean: -rm -f $(OBJECTS) $(DEPFILES) $(RPOFILES) $(TARGET) -include $(DEPFILES) Now I'm at the point where I'm packaging this for a Debian system. I'm using debuild to build the Debian source package, and pbuilder to build the binary package. The debuild step only has to execute the clean target, but even this causes the dependency files to be generated and included. In short, my question is really: Can I somehow prevent make from generating dependencies when all I want is to run the clean target?

  Read the article

• Return a dynamic string from std::exception's `what`

  - by Shtééf

  I'm convinced at this point that I should be creating subclasses of std::exception for all my exception throwing needs. Now I'm looking at how to override the what method. The situation that I'm facing, it would be really handy if the string what returns be dynamic. Some pieces of code parse an XML file for example, and adding a position or line number to the error message is useful to me. What I'd like to know: what returns a const char *, which implies any catcher is likely not going to free the string. So I need some other place to store the result, but where would that be? (I need thread-safety.) what also includes throw() in its signature. While I can prevent my what from throwing anything, it seems to me that this method really isn't intended for anything too dynamic. If what is not the right place, then where should I be doing this instead?

  Read the article

• How to hand-over a TCP listening socket with minimal downtime?

  - by Shtééf

  While this question is tagged EventMachine, generic BSD-socket solutions in any language are much appreciated too. Some background: I have an application listening on a TCP socket. It is started and shut down with a regular System V style init script. My problem is that it needs some time to start up before it is ready to service the TCP socket. It's not too long, perhaps only 5 seconds, but that's 5 seconds too long when a restart needs to be performed during a workday. It's also crucial that existing connections remain open and are finished normally. Reasons for a restart of the application are patches, upgrades, and the like. I unfortunately find myself in the position that, every once in a while, I need to do this kind of thing in production. The question: I'm looking for a way to do a neat hand-over of the TCP listening socket, from one process to another, and as a result get only a split second of downtime. I'd like existing connections / sockets to remain open and finish processing in the old process, while the new process starts servicing new connectinos. Is there some proven method of doing this using BSD-sockets? (Bonus points for an EventMachine solution.) Are there perhaps open-source libraries out there implementing this, that I can use as is, or use as a reference? (Again, non-Ruby and non-EventMachine solutions are appreciated too!)

  Read the article

• Getting the instance when Constructor#newInstance throws?

  - by Shtééf

  I'm working on a simple plugin system, where third party plugins implement a Plugin interface. A directory of JARs is scanned, and the implementing classes are instantiated with Constructor#newInstance. The thing is, these plugins call back into register* methods of the plugin host. These registrations use the Plugin instance as a handle. My problem is how to clean up these registrations if the constructor decides to fail and throw halfway through. InvocationTargetException doesn't seem to have anything on it to get the instance. Is there a way to get at the instance of an exception throwing constructor? P.S.: It's typically strongly advised to users that the constructor not do anything, but in practice people are doing it any ways.

  Read the article

• `enable_shared_from_this` has a non-virtual destructor

  - by Shtééf

  I have a pet project with which I experiment with new features of the upcoming C++0x standard. While I have experience with C, I'm fairly new to C++. To train myself into best practices, (besides reading a lot), I have enabled some strict compiler parameters (using GCC 4.4.1): -std=c++0x -Werror -Wall -Winline -Weffc++ -pedantic-errors This has worked fine for me. Until now, I have been able to resolve all obstacles. However, I have a need for enable_shared_from_this, and this is causing me problems. I get the following warning (error, in my case) when compiling my code (probably triggered by -Weffc++): base class ‘class std::enable_shared_from_this<Package>’ has a non-virtual destructor So basically, I'm a bit bugged by this implementation of enable_shared_from_this, because: A destructor of a class that is intended for subclassing should always be virtual, IMHO. The destructor is empty, why have it at all? I can't imagine anyone would want to delete their instance by reference to enable_shared_from_this. But I'm looking for ways to deal with this, so my question is really, is there a proper way to deal with this? And: am I correct in thinking that this destructor is bogus, or is there a real purpose to it?

  Read the article

1