apt upgrade
Hi, I used script with apt-get upgrade -y on Debian 3.0 Woody in crond. Everything was ok when one day call me for problem in that linux. When I enter in console I saw in logs that previous day he was apt-get upgrade -y and upgraded squid. The problem was the new version of squid has one more option in squid.conf, and i have to append the file and done the job by hand. My quiestion is how I can avoid that kind of problems when on some Debian I have that kind of apt scripts. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: apt upgrade
On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 22:58:40 +0300, Ivan wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi, > I used script with apt-get upgrade -y on Debian 3.0 Woody in crond. > Everything was ok when one day call me for problem in that linux. > When I enter in console I saw in logs that previous day he was apt-get > upgrade -y > and upgraded squid. The problem was the new version of squid has one > more option in squid.conf, and i have to append the file and done the > job by hand. > My quiestion is how I can avoid that kind of problems when on some > Debian I have that kind of apt scripts. ..'apt-get -suy upgrade && apt-get -uy upgrade '? -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Apache 1.3 mod_vhost_alias, ServerAlias and logging
Hi, I'm setting up a new server and would like to use mod_vhost_alias, or other mass virtual hosting method, if possible. mod_vhost_alias is very simple to setup and works as advertised: LoadModule vhost_alias_module /usr/lib/apache/1.3/mod_vhost_alias.so UseCanonicalName Off VirtualDocumentRoot /var/www/%0/web Unfortunately, it is as simple as it is simple to setup ;-) My question is in regards to ServerAlias. "Normal" clients host their website at http://www.abcd.com/ but they (and I) also like it when http://abcd.com/ works as well. Is there any way (besides filesystem link) to make vhost_alias find the right DocumentRoot? Ideally I'd like a directory structure like this: /var/www/com/abcd/web/ /var/www/com/abcd/subdomain/web/ When serving http://www.abcd.com/ apache wouldn't find /var/www/com/abcd/www/web/ so it would fallback to /var/www/com/abcd/web/, if that were missing it would fallback to /var/www/com/web/ and then to /var/www/web/ Perhaps something like the above is possible using mod_rewrite??? I'll keep plugging away for a while but if anyone knows the answer I'm all for shortcuts. Second question. Supposing that the above can work somehow I'd like to use one common logfile for all virtualhosts, with the virtualhost's name prepended to each log line. This is easy of course. The catch of course is that I'd like to have consistent names for hosts, i.e. I don't want to be splitting off logfiles for www.abcd.com and abcd.com when those are actually the same site. Basically, I'd like apache logging to be smart enough to realize that it is actually serving abcd.com although the hostname in the request was www.abcd.com. -- Fraser Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.wehave.net/ Georgetown, Ontario, Canada Debian GNU/Linux -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Console on serial
On Fri, 3 Sep 2004, Frode Haugsgjerd wrote: > The script /etc/init.d/single kills all processes, then switches to > single user mode, and executes the line "~~:S:wait:/sbin/sulogin" in > inittab but not the getty on the serial console. I have read the > manpages init and inittab, and can't see why my entry fails to start. As Rainer points out your kernel needs to be aware that you want it to consider the serial port as a console. What you had running was not a console at all, but just a serial terminal. Years ago I often had a real dumbterm hanging off a serial port on my Linux boxes. Very useful for (say) sending an email with pine when the graphical console is being used by someone else. Rob -- Robert Brockway B.Sc. Senior Technical Consultant, OpenTrend Solutions Ltd. Phone: 416-669-3073, Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.opentrend.net OpenTrend Solutions: Reliable, secure solutions to real world problems. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RAID-1 to RAID-5 online migration?
On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 09:28:02AM +0100, Gavin Hamill wrote: > On Friday 03 September 2004 06:28, Dave Watkins wrote: > > >After that is done you can delete the old raid1 completly and add the now > > >free disk to the raid5... > > > Ralph Pa?gang wrote: I've actually done this exact thing before and it > > worked flawlessly. > > Ooh you lovely people - thank you for the good news :) i've done it too, and it works.but the catch is that it takes a lot longer to do it this way than to just backup your data, create the new raid from scratch, and restore. making a raid array is a very quick operation. so to do it from scratch takes: whatever time to backup your data, less than a minute to mkraid and mkfs. then however long it takes to restore your data. if you have significantly less than 200GB of data (i.e. the size of each disk in the array), then this will be much quicker than hot-adding a third drive into a degraded-mode raid-5 array. doing it this way will take: a minute to mkraid and mkfs the new raid-5, however long to copy your data, and then a long time to hot-add the third drive. of course, the advantage is that even though it takes a long time for the hot-add to complete, it is running in the background so the machine can be up and running as normal (but slower for the duration). actually, downtime for both ways of doing it is about the same (time to mkraid/mkfs and either copy or restore your data). the difference is that doing it from scratch, the job will be finished as soon as you've restored, but with array juggling it won't be finished until the entire 200GB drive is synced with the rest of the array. FYI, on one of my boxes (P3-933, 512MB RAM) it took about 9 or 10 hours to hot-add an 80GB drive (seagate barracuda 7200rpm, 8MB cache) in the background. the machine was running as normal but was quite slow until it finished. the entire operation worked perfectly. it wouldn't have taken anywhere near that long to just copy 80GB of data from one drive to another, so the parity calculations must be really slowing it down. craig PS: i wouldn't recommend software raid 5 if you care about performance. i am going to convert one of my raid-5 machines (4 x 80GB barracudas) to raid-1 (2 x 200GB barracudas) very soon because i'm unhappy with the performance(*)...if i had a spare approx $600AUD, i'd buy an IDE raid card with at least 32MB non-volatile cache memory and that would give me raid-5 with decent performance, but it's just not worth that much to me for a workstation. (*) also because it gives me the 4 x 80GB drives to use in other machines :) -- craig sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The next time you vote, remember that "Regime change begins at home" -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
