Search Results

Search found 7 results on 1 pages for 'xerxes'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • Hotmail — avoid sign up confirmation / lost password being marked as spam

    - by Xerxes Cameron
    When sending legit large volume Emails from our IP (e.g. for sign up confirmation or Lost password) it gets marked as Junk in Hotmail. In the past, there was the Sender ID SPF Record Submission Form, where you could put yourself on the radar of Microsoft. See this old discussion. However, as of April 2012 this has been abandoned. Any hints what to do now? What is a good way to contact the Hotmail team?

    Read the article

  • cf3 Can't stat ... in files.copyfrom promise

    - by Xerxes
    On the client: # cf-agent -KIv ... cf3 -> Handling file existence constraints on /etc/cfengine3 cf3 -> Copy file /etc/cfengine3 from /srv/cfengine/sysconf/server/inputs check cf3 No existing connection to 172.31.69.83 is established... cf3 Set cfengine port number to 5308 = 5308 cf3 -> Connect to 172.31.69.83 = 172.31.69.83 on port 5308 cf3 LastSaw host 172.31.69.83 now cf3 Loaded /var/lib/cfengine3/ppkeys/root-172.31.69.83.pub cf3 .....................[.h.a.i.l.]................................. cf3 Strong authentication of server=172.31.69.83 connection confirmed cf3 Server returned error: Unspecified server refusal (see verbose server output) cf3 Can't stat /srv/cfengine/sysconf/server/inputs in files.copyfrom promise cf3 ?> defining promise result class Cfengine_Inputs_Updated_Failed .... cf3 ......................................................... cf3 Promise handle: cf3 Promise made by: [cf-agent.cf ] FAILED 172.31.69.83:///srv/cfengine/sysconf/server/inputs -> localhost:///etc/cfengine3 However, on the server (172.31.69.83), there's no reason why it can't stat the directory: cyrus:/srv/cfengine/sysconf/server# ls -l /srv/cfengine/sysconf/server/inputs total 52 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2142 Sep 6 21:54 cf-agent.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 831 Sep 6 18:31 cf-execd.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4517 Sep 6 21:44 cf-serverd.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3082 Sep 6 21:44 dns.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2028 Sep 6 15:12 failsafe.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5966 Sep 6 21:44 ldap-masters.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4380 Sep 6 18:31 ldap-security.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2735 Sep 6 08:21 lib-core.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1506 Sep 6 21:45 lib-utils.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2635 Sep 6 20:27 lib-vars.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2057 Sep 3 17:46 nss.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1472 Sep 6 18:31 packages.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1257 Sep 6 18:01 pam-security.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4019 Sep 6 19:32 promises.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2808 Sep 3 17:22 site.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1670 Sep 6 18:31 sudo-security.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 831 Sep 6 18:31 sys-security.cf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 890 Sep 6 18:31 sys-users.cf cyrus:/srv/cfengine/sysconf/server# I don't see anything interesting server side either when running: /usr/sbin/cf-serverd -d4 --verbose --no-fork And the following does not have any complaints: /usr/sbin/cf-promises -v Any ideas? I'm running cfengine3 on debian, v3.0.5+dfsg-1 - and the cf-agent.cf file is as follows: bundle agent Update { files: linux:: "${cf3.path[inputs]}" action => immediate, move_obstructions => "true", depth_search => Recursive, copy_from => MirrorFrom( "${cf3.host[server]}", "${cf3.path[scm-inputs]}", "true", "0400" ), classes => DefineSoftClass("Cfengine_Inputs_Updated") ; "${cf3.path[sbin]}" comment => "Setting cf3 client sbin scripts: ${cf3.path[sbin]}/", action => immediate, depth_search => Recursive, copy_from => MirrorFrom( "${cf3.host[server]}", "${cf3.path[scm-cnt-scripts]}", "false", "0555" ) ; reports: Cfengine_Inputs_Updated:: "[cf-agent.cf ] Services:CFAgent:Inputs:Updated"; Cfengine_Inputs_Updated_Failed:: "[cf-agent.cf ] FAILED ${cf3.host[server]}://${cf3.path[scm-inputs]} -> localhost://${cf3.path[inputs]}"; } I lie, there is something interesting with a little more debugging... AccessControl(/srv/cfengine/sysconf/server/inputs) AccessControl, match(/srv/cfengine/sysconf/server/inputs,client.com.au) encrypt request=1 Examining rule in access list (/srv/cfengine/sysconf/server/inputs,/home/cfengine)? cf3 Host client.com.au denied access to /srv/cfengine/sysconf/server/inputs Unappending Host client.com.au denied access to /srv/cfengine/sysconf/server/inputs cf3 Access control in sync Unappending Access control in sync Transaction Send[t 59][Packed text] Attempting to send 67 bytes SendSocketStream, sent 67 cf3 From (host=client.com.au,user=root,ip=172.31.69.3) Unappending From (host=client.com.au,user=root,ip=172.31.69.3) cf3 REFUSAL of request from connecting host: (SYNCH 1283777156 STAT /srv/cfengine/sysconf/server/inputs) Unappending REFUSAL of request from connecting host: (SYNCH 1283777156 STAT /srv/cfengine/sysconf/server/inputs) RecvSocketStream(8) cf3 -> Accepting a connection I'll keep looking.

    Read the article

  • SLES AutoYaST Script Validity Verification

    - by Xerxes
    Does anyone here write their own customized AutoYaST scripts for building SLES servers? I'm not talking about generating them with yast2 autoyast. If so, have you found a way to verify the syntax? xmllint is good as far as telling you that the XML syntax is valid, but with an upto date DTD, it can't tell you anything more, and the shipped DTDs are out-of-date. I've opened a ticket with Novell on this, but who knows when and what I'll hear back.

    Read the article

  • How do you pronounce Linux?

    - by Xerxes
    I'm tired of the old fart at work who keeps coming upto my desk and telling me all about his "years of experience in working with Unix and Lye-nix". I couldn't vent it out at him because that would be wrong, so I'm going to vent it out here - because obviously (that's the right thing to do...). Anyway, for all the people that practice in this disgusting behaviour - the pronunciation is.... (Hmmm - anyone know phonetics?) - "Li-nix" Note: Despite hating him for this - he is otherwise a very nice (but sometimes rather annoying) person. Now... to formally make this a "question" - Could someone write the phonetics for pronouncing "Linux", and also the notorious "Lye-nix", so I can make a note of it for future ventings? I think this is right... L?n?x, NOT L?n?x. ...or perhaps... L?n?x, NOT L?n?x* Can someone confirm the correct phonetics? (Listen to Linus on the matter).

    Read the article

  • Fast, lightweight HTML parser for C++

    - by Jen
    I'm looking for a fast, lightweight open-source HTML parser -- something along the lines of a non-validating SAX parser (except, of course, for HTML). The answers to this question cover a parser that generates a DOM (don't want that), and these answers suggest conforming the HTML to XML before sending it to Xerxes (can't do that in my case). Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • samba joined to AD canot see users when in the security tab on client

    - by Jonathan
    I've got samba joined via kerberos and winbindd to our AD network and user authentication and everything else is working great. However when I try to add users/groups to file permissions it tells me they are not found. All the users groups show up fine with getent so I'm not sure why they are not showing up. Here is my smb.conf and I would much appreciate any help with this. #GLOBAL PARAMETERS [global] socket options = TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY SO_KEEPALIVE SO_RCVBUF=11264 SO_SNDBUF=11264 workgroup = [hidden] realm = [hidden] preferred master = no server string = xerxes web/file server security = ADS encrypt passwords = yes log level = 3 log file = /var/log/samba/%m max log size = 50 printcap name = cups printing = cups winbind enum users = Yes winbind enum groups = Yes winbind use default domain = Yes winbind nested groups = Yes winbind separator = + winbind refresh tickets = yes idmap uid = 1600-20000 idmap gid = 1600-20000 template primary group = "Domain Users" template shell = /bin/bash kerberos method = system keytab nt acl support = yes [homes] comment = Home Direcotries valid users = %S read only = No browseable = No create mask = 0770 directory mask = 0770 force create mode = 0660 force directory mode = 2770 inherit owner = no [test] comment = Test path=/mnt/test writeable=yes valid users = %s create mask = 0770 directory mask = 0770 force create mode = 0660 force directory mode = 2770 inherit owner = no [printers] comment = All Printers path = /var/spool/cups browseable = no printable = yes

    Read the article

  • Take Two: Comparing JVMs on ARM/Linux

    - by user12608080
    Although the intent of the previous article, entitled Comparing JVMs on ARM/Linux, was to introduce and highlight the availability of the HotSpot server compiler (referred to as c2) for Java SE-Embedded ARM v7,  it seems, based on feedback, that everyone was more interested in the OpenJDK comparisons to Java SE-E.  In fact there were two main concerns: The fact that the previous article compared Java SE-E 7 against OpenJDK 6 might be construed as an unlevel playing field because version 7 is newer and therefore potentially more optimized. That the generic compiler settings chosen to build the OpenJDK implementations did not put those versions in a particularly favorable light. With those considerations in mind, we'll institute the following changes to this version of the benchmarking: In order to help alleviate an additional concern that there is some sort of benchmark bias, we'll use a different suite, called DaCapo.  Funded and supported by many prestigious organizations, DaCapo's aim is to benchmark real world applications.  Further information about DaCapo can be found at http://dacapobench.org. At the suggestion of Xerxes Ranby, who has been a great help through this entire exercise, a newer Linux distribution will be used to assure that the OpenJDK implementations were built with more optimal compiler settings.  The Linux distribution in this instance is Ubuntu 11.10 Oneiric Ocelot. Having experienced difficulties getting Ubuntu 11.10 to run on the original D2Plug ARMv7 platform, for these benchmarks, we'll switch to an embedded system that has a supported Ubuntu 11.10 release.  That platform is the Freescale i.MX53 Quick Start Board.  It has an ARMv7 Coretex-A8 processor running at 1GHz with 1GB RAM. We'll limit comparisons to 4 JVM implementations: Java SE-E 7 Update 2 c1 compiler (default) Java SE-E 6 Update 30 (c1 compiler is the only option) OpenJDK 6 IcedTea6 1.11pre 6b23~pre11-0ubuntu1.11.10.2 CACAO build 1.1.0pre2 OpenJDK 6 IcedTea6 1.11pre 6b23~pre11-0ubuntu1.11.10.2 JamVM build-1.6.0-devel Certain OpenJDK implementations were eliminated from this round of testing for the simple reason that their performance was not competitive.  The Java SE 7u2 c2 compiler was also removed because although quite respectable, it did not perform as well as the c1 compilers.  Recall that c2 works optimally in long-lived situations.  Many of these benchmarks completed in a relatively short period of time.  To get a feel for where c2 shines, take a look at the first chart in this blog. The first chart that follows includes performance of all benchmark runs on all platforms.  Later on we'll look more at individual tests.  In all runs, smaller means faster.  The DaCapo aficionado may notice that only 10 of the 14 DaCapo tests for this version were executed.  The reason for this is that these 10 tests represent the only ones successfully completed by all 4 JVMs.  Only the Java SE-E 6u30 could successfully run all of the tests.  Both OpenJDK instances not only failed to complete certain tests, but also experienced VM aborts too. One of the first observations that can be made between Java SE-E 6 and 7 is that, for all intents and purposes, they are on par with regards to performance.  While it is a fact that successive Java SE releases add additional optimizations, it is also true that Java SE 7 introduces additional complexity to the Java platform thus balancing out any potential performance gains at this point.  We are still early into Java SE 7.  We would expect further performance enhancements for Java SE-E 7 in future updates. In comparing Java SE-E to OpenJDK performance, among both OpenJDK VMs, Cacao results are respectable in 4 of the 10 tests.  The charts that follow show the individual results of those four tests.  Both Java SE-E versions do win every test and outperform Cacao in the range of 9% to 55%. For the remaining 6 tests, Java SE-E significantly outperforms Cacao in the range of 114% to 311% So it looks like OpenJDK results are mixed for this round of benchmarks.  In some cases, performance looks to have improved.  But in a majority of instances, OpenJDK still lags behind Java SE-Embedded considerably. Time to put on my asbestos suit.  Let the flames begin...

    Read the article

1