Re: Getting a Dinamic Remote IP

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Hi,
You need to obtain a program called "ddclient" from the dyndns.org site, 
which you run on your system. It will check to see if dyndns.org has the 
correct IP address every few minutes, and tell dyndns.org about it when 
it changes.

Ch;uck
On Wed, 18 May 2005, Romulo Sousa wrote:
Hello again,
Thanks for gimme a way to start everybody. I visited https://www.dyndns.org/
and created my account there. My doubt now is that how my ip will be
updated on dyndns's "database" all the time its changes?
For instance: if I have the following domain:
mydomain.dyndns.org -> 200.x.y.z
-> means "pointing to the public ip"
after the renew from my ISP's dhcp server:
mydomain.dyndns.org -> 200.a.b.c
how my.domain.dyndns.org is gonna "chase" the new ip provided by my
ISP in order to get the new ip from there?
Please, if I was not clear on my doubt, let me know.
By the way, I loved the joke and now I wanna make a little SOHO's
proxy. I'm studying how it works but I haven't found if I'm able to
authenticate user's from my /home/* only to use it as proxy through
mydomain.dyndns.org. In order words, I give my girlfriend
mydomain.dyndns.org as well as the port and she, and only she, can
access the proxy server after an authentication from his job for
instance. Is it possible??
Ok, I went to far. Step by stepbut I would be glad if I have some
clues to start kidding around this subject.
Thank you all,
Romulo Sousa
On 5/18/05, starmoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Sven Arvidsson wrote:
Romulo Sousa wrote:

I would like to get an remote IP. It's about my girlfriend's computer
where I share some directories and install some packages. The problem
is that all the time I need to connect via ssh into her computer I
must call her asking for its IP provided by her ISP throughout
ifconfig output.
What can I do in order to get the IP from her computer all the time
the machine is booted? Is it possible to send a message by email, SMS
or whatever way to do that? Further, her computer is connected by a
ADSL (dinamic) and my computer uses cable modem (dinamic also).

The best way to solve the problem is that she have a dynamic dns. There are
many websites supply free dynamic dns. You can find and register one. And
then install the client application on the computer in order to refresh the
ip address when she dial up. So you just only keep the domain in mind.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (74% of Full)
There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
Those who count in binary, and those who do not.
You can download some things from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Smooth upgrade from testing to unstable

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Hi list,

Smooth as silk in under an hour, no known problems yet.

However, in changing "testing" to "unstable" throughout 
/etc/apt/sources.list, one reference became broken. It is:


deb http://security.debian.org/ unstable/updates main

I commented this line out before doing apt-get dist-upgrade. But is 
there a better solution? Is there a proper link to use for "unstable"?


Thanks much,
Chuck


--
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (99% of Full)
There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
Those who count in binary, and those who do not.
You can download some things from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Smooth upgrade from testing to unstable

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Many thanks.


On Tue, 24 May 2005, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:


Quoting Charles Hallenbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


Hi list,

Smooth as silk in under an hour, no known problems yet.

However, in changing "testing" to "unstable" throughout 
/etc/apt/sources.list, one reference became broken. It is:


deb http://security.debian.org/ unstable/updates main

I commented this line out before doing apt-get dist-upgrade. But is there a 
better solution? Is there a proper link to use for "unstable"?




http://www.debian.org/security/faq.en.html
http://www.debian.org/releases/unstable/index.en.html

"Please note that security updates for "unstable" distribution are not 
managed

by the security team. Hence, "unstable" does not get security updates in a
timely manner. For more information please see the Security Team's FAQ."

-Roberto




--
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (99% of Full)
There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
Those who count in binary, and those who do not.
You can download some things from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: The dumb things we do to ourselves.

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Roberto,

I normally try to use an alias in a case like that. An alias would have 
escaped that trap, I think.


Chuck


On Tue, 24 May 2005, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:


Be careful what you wish for.  Today I decided, instead of doing my
homework, that I was going to start learning mutt.  I normally localize
my system to es_ES, but this makes the default key bindings not make
sense when I look at a UI in Spanish.  I decided to whip up a two line
shell script called mutt:

#!/bin/sh
LANG=C mutt

I placed in ~/bin, which ordinarily, would not be a problem.  The
problem came with this:

$ echo $PATH
/home/sanchezr/bin:/home/sanchezr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/opt/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/bin/X11:/usr/games

This way, when I typed `mutt' at the command line, I would hit the `mutt'
in ~/bin and not the one in /usr/bin.  Naturally, since I did not
specify an explicit path to the `mutt' in my script, my invocation
caused a fork to execute mutt, which happened to be the shell script, since
it was before the binary in /usr/bin.  Imagine my surprise when it
fairly locked my machine up and consumed all my memory (1 GB) and swap
(another 1 GB) in about a minute with fork after fork racing to execute
the `mutt' in ~/bin.

I fixed the script like this:

#!/bin/sh
LANG=C /usr/bin/mutt

Hopefully, someone gets a chuckle out of this.

-Roberto




--
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (97% of Full)
But you can download some things from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Custom kernel building and mkinitrd

[Charles Hallenbeck]

On Wed, 25 May 2005, Marty wrote:



apt-get install make-kpkg;man make-kpkg



I tried to fetch that package, with this result:

hhs48:~# apt-get install make-kpkg
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
E: Couldn't find package make-kpkg
I am tracking unstable through mirrors.kernel.org. Any suggestion about 
where to find this puppy?


Chuck

--
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (95% of Full)
But you can download some things from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: root compromise on debian woody

[Charles Hallenbeck]

I am a newbie to Debian, a Slackware convert, but not a newbie 
otherwise. I compile my own kernels since I use a set of kernel patches 
to support speech synthesizer to the console, called "speakup". A 
precompiled kernel for 2.4.27 package got me started with an 
installation disk, but I quickly got me a 2.6.11 source package, patched 
it for speech access, installed it on Sarge, and then went on a binge 
adding stuff to my system, like a kid in a candy store.


I recently read the FAQ by the guy at Cornell (forgive me for not 
looking up your name) and was persuaded that it made sense for me to 
move on over to unstable rather than following Sarge to stable or 
staying with testing, and as I posted here, that upgrade went smooth as 
silk. But now I see I have put myself beyond the reach of the Debian 
security team, without a graceful way to go back.


Oh well. I will just have to live on the edge and keep an eye out for 
problems. (okay, an ear!)


Chuck

On Fri, 27 May 2005, Robert Vangel wrote:


Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:



As long as you make a concious decision to do this.  Unfortunately, many
people go out and grab some package from the upstream site and then
think that the security updates will roll in along with all the other
apt-get stuff.  They won't, but then you understand that.  Personally, I
roll my own kernel, but I choose the Debian kernel-source-* packages for
that.  Then I don't need to remember to personally keep such close track
of the security vulnerabilities.  I still track them, but I realize that
when fixes become available, I will see them in the new kernel-source
packages that come down.

-Roberto



I had considered doing this, but decided there are still things in the 
kernel-source package that I am just not ever going to need and I would 
rather include *just* those that I require.


Btw, I use this procedure on machines like servers where I really need to 
make sure I know what's going on with them. On my desktop I just use Ubuntu's 
packages.




--
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (83% of Full)
But you can still get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: root compromise on debian woody

[Charles Hallenbeck]

On Fri, 27 May 2005, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:


Chuck,

Please be sure and don't top post.  It is considered bad list ettiquette
:-)


Sorry. My bad etiquette was not deleting the prior pieces of the thred.



If you are running a regular desktop, chances are that:

1) You are behond a firewall/router of some sort.
2) You are not really using it in a mutliuser environment (i.e., giving
out accounts to random people you don't know).
3) Are able to inconvenience yourself/your limited users (e.g., family)
if necessary.


Exactly my circumstances.



The people that really need to worry are those that are trying to run a
weg hosting business with Sid servers.  There you would need a fill time
person to stay on top of security updates.  However, with Sid it is not
usually so bad since the maintainers usually upload the security updates
in a fairly reasonable time frame.

-Roberto


I appreciate your comments.

Chuck





--
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (82% of Full)
But you can still get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: root compromise on debian woody

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Hi Kevin,
Forgive me for not ansering sooner...

On Sat, 28 May 2005, Kevin Mark wrote:


Chuck

Hi Chuck,
Any time someone mentions 'speakup', it peeks my interest to know how
linux is advancing towards better  support for people with vision
difficulties. Have you ever made a comparison between support in the
OS's you have used? Do you have any articles documenting your
experiences? I am working with a group trying to bring Free software to
youth and while we have had supported student who speak non-english languages 
-- chinese, we have
not had anyone with vision difficulties. It would be helpful to have
someone who is using Debian comment upon this as that is what we use.
Thanks for your time and consideration,
Kev



Here is a not-so-current background piece:

http://www.hhs48.com/why_linux.html

You can also get more current info at www.linux-speakup.org

Many distributions now come with "speakup-modified" kernels permitting 
"eyes free" installation and operation. There are other access solutions 
besides speakup, but those require that you have a running system before 
starting the speech access solution. Speakup is a set of kernel patches 
that allows the console to talk from startup to shutdown. Once a system 
is running you can switch it to using software speech, but a hardware 
synthesizer is required normally. Speakup does not support GUI access, 
although both the gnome folks and the KDE folks are working on access 
solutions (very slowly). Speakup was developed by blind folks mostly, so 
the developers have a stake in its performance.


I have only used Slackware and Debian myself, and there is nothing in 
either distro that bears on the effectiveness of speakup. It works great 
in both. I prefer Debian for reasons unrelated to access. (as presumably 
you do, too )


Chuck






--
The Moon is Waxing Crescent (6% of Full)
But you can still get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

apt-get broken, packages not fully installed or removed

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Hi list,

I am running Debian unstable without x, except that some console apps 
seem to require some of the x infrastructure. Lately my apt-get upgrade, 
dist-upgrade, install, and remove all seem to fail because of a package 
or two that are neither fully installed or removed. I can't seem to find 
A handle on this problem, and hope someone can suggest how to fix it, or 
how to get more info about it. 

Below are snapshots of two failed apt-get comands. The first is an 
apt-get dist-upgrade, issued after a normal apt-get update. The second 
is from the apt-get -f install command without specifying any packages.

Snapshot 1: apt-get dist-upgrade

Script started on Wed 14 Jun 2006 04:48:03 AM EDT

Reading package lists... 0%

Reading package lists... 100%

Reading package lists... Done


Building dependency tree... 0%

Building dependency tree... 0%

Building dependency tree... 50%

Building dependency tree... 50%

Building dependency tree... Done

You might want to run `apt-get -f install' to correct these.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
  libice6: Depends: x11-common but it is not installed
  libsm6: Depends: x11-common but it is not installed
  libx11-6: PreDepends: x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0) but it is not installed
  libx11-data: PreDepends: x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0) but it is not installed
  libxau6: Depends: x11-common but it is not installed
  libxaw7: Depends: x11-common but it is not installed
  libxdmcp6: Depends: x11-common (>= 1:7.0) but it is not installed
  libxext6: Depends: x11-common but it is not installed
  libxfixes3: PreDepends: x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0) but it is not installed
  libxft2: PreDepends: x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0) but it is not installed
  libxi6: Depends: x11-common but it is not installed
  libxinerama1: Depends: x11-common but it is not installed
  libxmu6: Depends: x11-common but it is not installed
  libxpm4: Depends: x11-common but it is not installed
  libxrandr2: Depends: x11-common but it is not installed
  libxt6: PreDepends: x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0) but it is not installed
  libxv1: Depends: x11-common but it is not installed
  libxvmc1: Depends: x11-common but it is not installed
  libxxf86dga1: Depends: x11-common but it is not installed
  libxxf86vm1: Depends: x11-common but it is not installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.

Script done on Wed 14 Jun 2006 04:48:04 AM EDT

Snapshot 2: apt-get -f install
Script started on Wed 14 Jun 2006 04:55:13 AM EDT

Reading package lists... 0%

Reading package lists... 100%

Reading package lists... Done


Building dependency tree... 0%

Building dependency tree... 0%

Building dependency tree... 50%

Building dependency tree... 50%

Building dependency tree... Done

Correcting dependencies... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
  x11-common
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  x11-common
0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 23 not upgraded.
1 not fully installed or removed.
Need to get 0B/285kB of archives.
After unpacking 598kB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? y




Reading package fields... 0%

Reading package fields... Done

  
Reading package status... 0%

Reading package status... Done

  
Retrieving bug reports... 0% [0/1]
  
Retrieving bug reports... 0% [0/1]
  
Retrieving bug reports... Done
Preconfiguring packages ...
x11-common failed to preconfigure, with exit status 1
Setting up debconf (1.5.2) ...
dpkg: error processing debconf (--configure):
 subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1
Errors were encountered while processing:
 debconf

Script done on Wed 14 Jun 2006 04:55:59 AM EDT

Thanks for any suggestions.
Chuck


-- 
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (91% of Full)
Get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
  and remember, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: apt-get broken, packages not fully installed or removed

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Hi Dave,
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 05:02:30PM +0700, Dave Patterson wrote:
> * Charles Hallenbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-14 05:42:43 -0400]:
> 
> Try:
> apt-get remove --purge X11-common
> apt-get dist-upgrade
> 
> 

Here is what happens when I do the remove:

Script started on Wed 14 Jun 2006 06:05:37 AM EDT

Reading package lists... 0%

Reading package lists... 100%

Reading package lists... Done


Building dependency tree... 0%

Building dependency tree... 0%

Building dependency tree... 50%

Building dependency tree... 50%

Building dependency tree... Done

Package x11-common is not installed, so not removed
You might want to run `apt-get -f install' to correct these:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
  libice6: Depends: x11-common but it is not going to be installed
  libsm6: Depends: x11-common but it is not going to be installed
  libx11-6: PreDepends: x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0) but it is not going to be 
installed
  libx11-data: PreDepends: x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0) but it is not going to be 
installed
  libxau6: Depends: x11-common but it is not going to be installed
  libxaw7: Depends: x11-common but it is not going to be installed
  libxdmcp6: Depends: x11-common (>= 1:7.0) but it is not going to be installed
  libxext6: Depends: x11-common but it is not going to be installed
  libxfixes3: PreDepends: x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0) but it is not going to be 
installed
  libxft2: PreDepends: x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0) but it is not going to be 
installed
  libxi6: Depends: x11-common but it is not going to be installed
  libxinerama1: Depends: x11-common but it is not going to be installed
  libxmu6: Depends: x11-common but it is not going to be installed
  libxpm4: Depends: x11-common but it is not going to be installed
  libxrandr2: Depends: x11-common but it is not going to be installed
  libxt6: PreDepends: x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0) but it is not going to be 
installed
  libxv1: Depends: x11-common but it is not going to be installed
  libxvmc1: Depends: x11-common but it is not going to be installed
  libxxf86dga1: Depends: x11-common but it is not going to be installed
  libxxf86vm1: Depends: x11-common but it is not going to be installed
E: Unmet dependencies. Try 'apt-get -f install' with no packages (or specify a 
solution).

Script done on Wed 14 Jun 2006 06:05:37 AM EDT


I just can't get past this point.

Chuck



-- 
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (91% of Full)
Get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
  and remember, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: apt-get broken, packages not fully installed or removed

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Hi, Joris


On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 12:37:17PM +0200, Joris Huizer wrote:
> Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> >Package x11-common is not installed, so not removed
> 
> Hmm, you could try `dpkg --purge x11-common`

Unfortunately I get the same familiar output:

Script started on Wed 14 Jun 2006 06:38:49 AM EDT
dpkg: dependency problems prevent removal of x11-common:
 libxau6 depends on x11-common.
 libxt6 depends on x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0).
 libxxf86vm1 depends on x11-common.
 libsm6 depends on x11-common.
 libx11-data depends on x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0).
 libice6 depends on x11-common.
 libx11-6 depends on x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0).
 libxft2 depends on x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0).
 libxaw7 depends on x11-common.
 libxmu6 depends on x11-common.
 libxfixes3 depends on x11-common (>= 1:7.0.0).
 libxi6 depends on x11-common.
 libxv1 depends on x11-common.
 libxrandr2 depends on x11-common.
 libxpm4 depends on x11-common.
 libxvmc1 depends on x11-common.
 libxext6 depends on x11-common.
 libxxf86dga1 depends on x11-common.
 libxinerama1 depends on x11-common.
 libxdmcp6 depends on x11-common (>= 1:7.0).
dpkg: error processing x11-common (--purge):
 dependency problems - not removing
Errors were encountered while processing:
 x11-common

Script done on Wed 14 Jun 2006 06:38:50 AM EDT



-- 
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (91% of Full)
Get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
  and remember, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: apt-get broken, packages not fully installed or removed

[Charles Hallenbeck]

On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 05:39:07PM +0700, Dave Patterson wrote:
> Ok, it looks like x11-common can't do anything because somethings hosed
> with debconf.
> Try apt-get -f install debconf, or dpkg-reconfigure debconf, and see what
> happens there.


The apt-get -f install debconf gives me the same complaint, and the 
dpkg-reconfigure debconf says this:

hq:~# dpkg-reconfigure debconf
/usr/sbin/dpkg-reconfigure: debconf is broken or not fully installed


Do I dare try to remove debconf? I better do a backup first, this is 
getting serious 


-- 
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (91% of Full)
Get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
  and remember, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: apt-get broken, packages not fully installed or removed

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Hi Simone,
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 12:36:47PM +0200, Simone Soldateschi wrote:
> 
> I had a similar problem two days ago trying to update 'libwx2.6-dev' from
> backports.
> 'apt-get' failed package upgrade due to  unmet dependencies and I was unable
> to fix the problem with 'apt -f install'.
> A debian user suggested me to fix the problem using synaptic and filtering
> defective packages..  it did the job.
> 


I do not have synaptic installed, and can no longer install anything 
until I get this thing fixed. Catch 22! I'll keep that in mind though.

Chuck


-- 
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (91% of Full)
Get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
  and remember, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: apt-get broken, packages not fully installed or removed

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Hi Joris,

When I add either the --force-depends or the --force-all option to the 
dpkg --purge x11-common command, they also fail to remove the package. 
When I then do an apt-get -f install, I get the same familiar failure as 
I reported earlier.

I may have to save what I can and reinstall my system, although there 
has GOT to be a better way. I am beginning to think like a Windows user, 
and I have never been one! 

Chuck

-- 
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (91% of Full)
Get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
  and remember, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: apt-get broken, packages not fully installed or removed

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Dave,

On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 06:12:29PM +0700, Dave Patterson wrote:
> * Charles Hallenbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-14 06:50:32 -0400]:
> 
>  
> 'Eek!' said I, and yes, do a backup.
> 
> Then, yank it out.


Yeah, but I can't yank it out! It is not fully installed, and nothing in 
my arsenal can yank it out.
> 
> Then, pull debconf from the testing
> repository manually and install with dpkg -i (full packagename.deb) from the
> directory you put it in. 
> 
> Or, do this: add the testing repository to you /etc/apt/sources.list
> 
> apt-get update
> 
> apt-get remove --purge debconf

I wish that command would work, but it will not.

> 

Ditto.

The real trouble with abandoning the problem by reinstalling my system 
from scratch is, since I don't know what caused it, I might just run 
into it again. I think I will rummage around some more before pulling 
the plug.



-- 
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (91% of Full)
Get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
  and remember, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: apt-get broken, packages not fully installed or removed

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Hi Joey,

On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 12:21:32PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> 
> Edit /var/lib/dpkg/info/x11-common.config and
> /var/lib/dpkg/info/debconf.postinst and add a new line as the second
> line of each script:
> 
> set -e
> 
> Then re-run this apt-get -f install and we should be able to figure out
> what's really wrong.
> 

The first of those files, x11-common.config, does not exist, and the 
other one, debconf.postinst, already has set -e on the second line.

Chuck


-- 
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (89% of Full)
Get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
  and remember, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: apt-get broken, packages not fully installed or removed (solved?)

[Charles Hallenbeck]

The strange problem of the "not fully installed or removed" packages I 
have been reporting has been resolved, but I do not understand it.

It seems that a short while ago I have switched shells from bash to zsh 
to explore its new features. I did it gradually, first doing a usermod 
for each of my accounts to make /bin/zsh the login shell, then after 
hammering out an agreeable configuration, changing the symbolic link 
/bin/sh to point to /bin/zsh instead of /bin/bash. 

After looking at those files in /var/lib/dpkg/info mentioned by Dave and 
Joey, I changed the link to point to /bin/bash again, re-ran apt-get -f 
install successfully, then ran apt-get upgrade also successfully, and I 
have a resolved system.

But why? I do upgrades at least once a day, and they usually went 
without a hitch using zsh. But evidently this was somehow the cause of 
the current problem.

It's a little vague to report it as a zsh bug just yet, I think. And I 
am nervous about trying to replicate the problem. So what do I do? give 
up zsh? 

Chuck

-- 
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (89% of Full)
Get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
  and remember, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: apt-get broken, packages not fully installed or removed

[Charles Hallenbeck]

On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 02:26:18PM -0400, Greg Folkert wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 23:57 +0700, Dave Patterson wrote:
> > * Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-14 12:21:32 -0400]:
> > 
> 
> Chuck needs to have a large scrollback and paste it to here for us to
> understand the entire functional problem.
> 

I have had good luck using "script" to capture as much output as 
necessary. If someone would like to tell me what to run, I'll be happy 
to generate output. But I sure don't want to put my system to risk, now 
that it is resolved.

I have not seen my mail describing the resolution of the problem yet. 
Turns out to be a problem of dueling shells, zsh vs. bash.

Chuck


-- 
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (89% of Full)
Get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
  and remember, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Xorg Configuration in Etch

[Charles Hallenbeck]

On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 06:53:58PM -0700, Willie Wonka wrote:
> 
> Willie Wonka wrote:

> and this too;
> 
> 
> so 'dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg' should do the trick - there's a way
> (through the Priority option to make it also even ask for the most
> low-priority settings)...something like adding a '-plow' option
> appended to command before the .
> 
> Ex: 
> 'dpkg-reconfigure -plow xserver-xorg'
> 
> see man(8) 'dpkg-reconfigure'  ...and man(7) 'debconf' for the
> "priority" options
> 

I have a related problem. When I use dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg, 
everything apparently goes well, except the results of the 
reconfiguration never get written anywhere. There is no warning or error 
produced, but no xorg.conf file anywhere on the system. When I do startx 
after reconfiguring and examine the log file, it tells me no 
configuration file was found, and falls back to built-in defaults.

I have read the man pages and much else, but cannot get a handle on this 
one. Any suggestions much appreciated.

Chuck


-- 
The Moon is Waning Crescent (1% of Full)
Get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
  and remember, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Xorg Configuration in Etch

[Charles Hallenbeck]

On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 04:47:06PM +0200, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 09:34:38 -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> 
> So, if I understand you correctly, you don't have an /etc/X11/xorg.conf
> file at all, and "dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg" refuses to generate
> one? (Usually people have trouble with an existing customized xorg.conf
> which dpkg-reconfigure refuses to update.)

That's right. Except that Bill Jones just told me where I can download a 
default copy. I did so, repeated my attempt to reconfigure after copying 
the new xorg.conf to /etc/X11, and I get the same behavior. The 
reconfigure dialog seems normal, but the new file is not update. The 
modification time matches when I copied it there, not when I 
reconfigured, and a diff between it and the downloaded copy show no 
differences.

> Do you have the file /var/lib/x11/xorg.conf.md5sum? Maybe that is
> confusing the configuration script. (I think that a non-existing file
> can never match any md5sum.)

No, I do not have such a file.

> What version of xserver-xorg are you using? Is it a fresh install or an
> upgrade from an older Xorg/XFree86?

It is a fresh install. Never had Xfree 86 on the system, although some 
console apps I have been using had brought in some x libraries. 
pdftotext for instance is part of the xpdf package. But I have never 
done a full install of any x-window-system until I did the xorg install.

Chuck


-- 
The Moon is Waning Crescent (1% of Full)
Get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
  and remember, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Xorg Configuration in Etch

[Charles Hallenbeck]

On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 12:54:28PM -0400, Bill Jones wrote:
> 
> Is this an ATI or nVidia video card?  I do not use an xorg.conf file
> on my ATI systems; however for nVidia systems the file I pointed you
> to will work unless your xorg system is broken in some unknown way.

Hi Bill,

My video system is nVidea and configuring the xserver-xorg lets me 
choose the nv driver, and correctly names the video system to match what 
lspci shows.

> 
> Did you simply try installing the /etc/X11/xorg.conf.Dell270_Master
> file as /etc/X11/xorg.conf ?

No. What I first did was unpack the tgz package into a dummy directory, 
then copy xorg.conf to /etc/X11. After getting your current email, I 
tried two other things:

1. copying xorg.conf.Dell270-Master to /etc/X11/xorg.conf. Running 
startx told me "no devices found" so next, I did:

2. I unpacked the tgz package into /etc/X11 instead of into its own 
dummy directory. Running startx now seems to work. 

> 
> Then Ctrl-Alt F7 and Ctrl-Backspace to see if the X Server starts up?

ctrl-alt-F7 shows me the startx output in text mode, but ctrl-backspace 
does not restart the server. I normally terminate an X session with 
ctrl-alt-backspace, but this did not work either. Ctrl-C terminated the 
session and returned me to text mode with the last couple of lines from 
startx finishing the screen and a text mode prompt.



> 
> Also, if this is a brand new install did you try updating the drivers?
> apt-get update; apt-get upgrade; apt-get dist-upgrade
> 

Many times. Once I even tried apt-get install --reinstall xserver-xorg 
to no avail.

Finally, I just tried dpkg-reconfigure again and it still does not 
rewrite xorg.conf. The log file tells me it is using /etc/X11/xorg.conf 
but I can't seem to get any changes into it unless I add them manually.

BTW, I am running a Sid system, not Etch, kernel 2.6.16.

Chuck


-- 
The Moon is Waning Crescent (1% of Full)
Get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
  and remember, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Xorg Configuration in Etch

[Charles Hallenbeck]

On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 07:30:23PM +0200, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> It would be interesting to know if running
> 
> md5sum /etc/X11/xorg.conf > /var/lib/x11/xorg.conf.md5sum

Nope. I generated the md5sum as you suggested, ran dpkg-reconfigure 
again, the dialogue looked good again, but the file remained unchanged 
with the same modification date.

Chuck

-- 
The Moon is Waning Crescent (1% of Full)
Get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh
  and remember, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: More information about 'installer for the blind - Speakup"

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Hi,

On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 10:28:49AM +0100, Petra Ritter wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I am new to this List and a newbe to Linux as well. I hope I am on the
> 'right' list other way please point me to an list were I am 'right'.
> 
> I am visually impaired and I plan to setup a Debian system in the next
> flew months.
> 
> On the page http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/debian-installer/ I
> find some informations about an 'installer for the blind'.
> 
> Please could give me someone more information on this installer?
> Is it a specially installer or it it 'only' a boot floppy with support
> for speech and/or braille display which give access to the standard
> installer from Debian 3.1?

There is modified net-install CD image available that uses 
speakup-modified kernels, allowing independent installation of sarge 
with speech or braille. You may then choose to have one of those kernels 
installed in the running system. You can choose 2.4.27 or 2.6.8. It is 
otherwise a standard sarge net-install disk. You can find it at:

http://people.debian.org/~shane/netinst-speakup/

The iso image is 150 MB and has good documentation.

Chuck.


-- 
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (90% of Full)
But you can still get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

apt-get update seems silent on unstable recently

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Hi folks,

For several days now, there have been no new packages reported with apt-get 
update, which seems unusual in my 
experience. I have been keeping my sid distro quite current, and now am 
wondering if I have a problem, or if the 
archives are idle. Anybody else been able to do a productive apt-get update for 
unstable packages this week?

Thanks,
Chuck

-- 
The Moon is Waning Crescent (6% of Full)
But you can still get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: apt-get update seems silent on unstable recently

[Charles Hallenbeck]

On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 11:24:55AM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> 
> I;ve had plenty of updates the past few days (I think it was about 7 today 
> after many many yesterday). Try a different mirror.
> 
> A

Several people showed me lines from their sources.list file which were all 
working fine, and they work fine for me too. 
But I noticed they they all used "unstable" for the distro name, whereas my 
references to mirrors.kernel.org used "sid".  
When I changed sid to unstable, mirrors.kernel.org began working again too.

Chuck


> 
> > 
> > raju
> > 
> > -- 
> > Kamaraju S Kusumanchi
> > http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/kk288/
> > http://malayamaarutham.blogspot.com/
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 



-- 
The Moon is Waning Crescent (5% of Full)
But you can still get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

netdev watchdog messages

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Lately I am getting kernel messages like this:

NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out
eth0: Transmit timed out, status , resetting...

They appear in /var/log/messages and also at the console where I am 
working, even being inserted into text I am editing.

My kernel is 2.6.11, my distribution is Sid and is current, and I am 
running apache and a variety of other apps that normally have not been a 
problem. Not sure when these messages began appearing, and cannot figure 
out where to look for the problem. My internet connection is broadband 
cable.

Any pointers or suggestions greatly appreciated.

Chuck


-- 
The Moon is Waxing Crescent (21% of Full)
But you can still get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

exim4 clientside authentication

[Charles Hallenbeck]

The instructions seem straightforward in README.SMTP-AUTH, but I am 
failing to authenticate when sending mail to my ISP's SMTP server, which 
requires plain text authentication (verizon.net). 

I am using the exim4 lite package, could that be the problem? Must I use 
the heavy package to get clientside authentication? The docs have never 
said so. 

My delivery error notices contain this message:

host outgoing.verizon.net [206.46.232.12]: 550 5.7.1 Authentication 
Required

This looks to me like authentication has not been attempted, rather than 
a failed authentication attempt. Am I overlooking something? Must I 
replace my exim4 lite with the heavy package?

Thanks for any suggestions.

Chuck




-- 
The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (96% of Full)
But you can still get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

client authentication in exim4, sarge vs. sid

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Hello list,

I could sure use some pointers on trouble shooting this one. I am 
running a Debian Sid system using exim4 to send my mail to a smart host 
who requires authentication, and have it working okay. The steps were 
actually simple. My exim4 is version 4.52, and I did nothing beyond 
placing the necessary entries in /etc/exim4/passwd.client and 
/etc/exim4/update-exim4.conf.conf, then doing the usual update and 
restarting.

Now I am attempting to duplicate the above on a Debian Sarge box, where 
exim4 is version 4.50, and where the identical instructions for 
achieving authentication are present. I plugged the same data into the 
Sarge files as I have in the corresponding Sid files. But my ISP rejects 
my mail advising me that "authentication is required" when I send from 
Sarge, but happily accepts the mail when sent from Sid.

I'm sure there must be something I have neglected to install on the 
Sarge box, but I have no clue as to where to look. I am not new to 
Linux, not even to Debian any more, but I have had very little 
experience with encryption and authentication. 

Why won't my Sarge box do what my Sid box does? Where should I look for 
differences? Any suggestions are not only welcome, but eagerly awaited.

Chuck

-- 
The Moon is Waning Crescent (2% of Full)
But you can still get downloads from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]