On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 09:20:26AM +1300, Johnno wrote:
>
> dpkg package is install, any ideas?
>
One main suggestion: use an appropriate list, you are OT here.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PR
On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 09:20:26AM +1300, Johnno wrote:
> When I do a apt-get upgrade on one the the servers here I get this error
> message:
>
> Do you want to continue? [Y/n]
> dpkg: `ldconfig' not found on PATH.
> dpkg: `start-stop-daemon' not found on PATH.
> dpkg: `install-info' not found on
* Johnno wrote:
> NB: root's PATH should usually contain /usr/local/sbin, /usr/sbin and /sbin.
[...]
> dpkg package is install, any ideas?
What's the content of your root's $PATH?
Norbert
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PRO
echo $PATH as root and see if /usr/local/sbin, /usr/sbin and /sbin are
in root's path. If they are maybe you issued "su" instead of "su -".
>>> "Johnno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 10/24/04 4:20 PM >>>
Hello
When I do a apt-get upgrade on one the the servers here I get this error
message:
Do you want t
On Sun, 2004-10-24 at 16:20, Johnno wrote:
> Hello
>
> When I do a apt-get upgrade on one the the servers here I get this error
> message:
[snip]
> NB: root's PATH should usually contain /usr/local/sbin, /usr/sbin and /sbin.
export PATH=$PATH:/sbin:/usr/sbin:/usr/local/sbin
Preferably that'd b
On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 10:01:05PM +1300, Johnno wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> When I do a apt-get update I get this error:
>
> Fetched 6847kB in 33s (203kB/s)
> Reading Package Lists... Error!
> E: Dynamic MMap ran out of room
> E: Error occured while processing lg-issue29 (NewFileVer1)
> E: Problem w
On Friday 08 October 2004 22:07, Andrew P. Kaplan wrote:
> I am trying to upgrade postfix using apt-get install put it only has
> version 1.1.1 when I went to the debian the latest package is also 1.1.1
> How do I get a later package.
Hello Andrew,
http://www.backports.org/
word of warning - d
Le mercredi 29 septembre 2004 à 06:51, David Thurman écrivait:
> Is their a way to set our /etc/apt/sources.list file or a apt-get
> command to ignore MS and SA when doing security updates?
You can put thoses packages « on hold » :
echo " hold" | dpkg --set-selections
--
Auré
--
To UNSUBSCRI
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 09:03:51AM -0500, Andrew P. Kaplan wrote:
> I have an old version of Postfix running on my Debian box. I don't remember
> if I used apt-get or installed from a .tgz file. If I use apt-get install I
> am concerned I could end up with two version of Postfix. What's the best wa
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 09:03:51AM -0500, Andrew P. Kaplan wrote:
> I have an old version of Postfix running on my Debian box. I don't remember
> if I used apt-get or installed from a .tgz file. If I use apt-get install I
> am concerned I could end up with two version of Postfix. What's the best wa
On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 14:03, Andrew P. Kaplan wrote:
> I have an old version of Postfix running on my Debian box. I don't remember
> if I used apt-get or installed from a .tgz file. If I use apt-get install I
> am concerned I could end up with two version of Postfix. What's the best way
> to upgrad
On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 14:03, Andrew P. Kaplan wrote:
> I have an old version of Postfix running on my Debian box. I don't remember
> if I used apt-get or installed from a .tgz file. If I use apt-get install I
> am concerned I could end up with two version of Postfix. What's the best way
> to upgrad
How about running apache chroot'd so what apache thinks is /tmp and
what apt-get thinks is /tmp are two different things?
fstab would look something like: (untested)
#
/dev/sdc1 /var/www/tmp/ noexec, blah,blah,blah
How about running apache chroot'd so what apache thinks is /tmp and
what apt-get thinks is /tmp are two different things?
fstab would look something like: (untested)
#
/dev/sdc1 /var/www/tmp/ noexec, blah,blah,blah
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 05:06 AM 18-01-2004, you wrote:
noexec /tmp is NOT supported under Debian.
So it actually is bad practise to mount /tmp noexec? Does it break other
things than apt?
Also, are you aware that it provides very little protection?
Yes, but seeing a server nearly compromised made me very eager to ta
At 05:06 AM 18-01-2004, you wrote:
noexec /tmp is NOT supported under Debian.
So it actually is bad practise to mount /tmp noexec? Does it break other
things than apt?
Also, are you aware that it provides very little protection?
Yes, but seeing a server nearly compromised made me very eager to ta
On Sun, Jan 18, 2004 at 03:06:07PM +1100, Rob Weir wrote:
-snip-
> noexec /tmp is NOT supported under Debian. Also, are you aware that it
> provides very little protection? Try an experiment:
>
> $ cp /bin/ls /tmp
> $ /tmp/ls
> [permission denied]
> $ /lib/ld-linux.so.2 /tmp/ls
> [directory list
On Sun, Jan 18, 2004 at 03:06:07PM +1100, Rob Weir wrote:
-snip-
> noexec /tmp is NOT supported under Debian. Also, are you aware that it
> provides very little protection? Try an experiment:
>
> $ cp /bin/ls /tmp
> $ /tmp/ls
> [permission denied]
> $ /lib/ld-linux.so.2 /tmp/ls
> [directory list
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 03:53:35AM +0100, Arnoud Warmerdam said
> Hi,
>
> I have mounted my /tmp directory (which has it's own partition) with the
> noexec option. The reason i did this, was that a poorly written cgi-script
> caused a binary to be downloaded and executed in /tmp. Luckily, the
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 03:53:35AM +0100, Arnoud Warmerdam said
> Hi,
>
> I have mounted my /tmp directory (which has it's own partition) with the
> noexec option. The reason i did this, was that a poorly written cgi-script
> caused a binary to be downloaded and executed in /tmp. Luckily, the
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 03:53:35AM +0100, Arnoud Warmerdam wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have mounted my /tmp directory (which has it's own partition) with the
> noexec option. The reason i did this, was that a poorly written cgi-script
> caused a binary to be downloaded and executed in /tmp. Luckily, the
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 03:53:35AM +0100, Arnoud Warmerdam wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have mounted my /tmp directory (which has it's own partition) with the
> noexec option. The reason i did this, was that a poorly written cgi-script
> caused a binary to be downloaded and executed in /tmp. Luckily, the
> Allthough its things like this that break ones automatically
> kernelbuildingsystem for +25 debianservers :( I use to have script
> that did build an *.deb package based on config in .config but now i
> need to come up with something clever that compile the source against
> the running kernel...
> Allthough its things like this that break ones automatically
> kernelbuildingsystem for +25 debianservers :( I use to have script
> that did build an *.deb package based on config in .config but now i
> need to come up with something clever that compile the source against
> the running kernel...
On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 01:54:07PM -0600, Alex Borges wrote:
> Well, its a source module, so you will have to compile it for your
> running kernel. Other than that, ive a year and a half worth of uptime
> out of it on a woody install (gigabit and all) and it works well.
>
> This module is part o
On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 01:54:07PM -0600, Alex Borges wrote:
> Well, its a source module, so you will have to compile it for your
> running kernel. Other than that, ive a year and a half worth of uptime
> out of it on a woody install (gigabit and all) and it works well.
>
> This module is part o
On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 08:38, Dan MacNeil wrote:
> Two questions:
>
> 1) Has anyone done a:
>
> apt-get install bcm5700-module-2.4.18
>
Well, its a source module, so you will have to compile it for your
running kernel. Other than that, ive a year and a half worth of uptime
out of it on a w
On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 08:38, Dan MacNeil wrote:
> Two questions:
>
> 1) Has anyone done a:
>
> apt-get install bcm5700-module-2.4.18
>
Well, its a source module, so you will have to compile it for your
running kernel. Other than that, ive a year and a half worth of uptime
out of it on a w
On Friday 19 September 2003 14:04, Dan MacNeil wrote:
> We've a couple debian systems to patch for the new sshd problems.
>
> On one of them that is monitored closely and patched quickly. The other is
> patched less quickly.
>
> The system that is patched less quickly claims to be up to date but no
On Fri, 2003-07-04 at 17:20, Craig wrote:
> Hi Guys
>
> How do I setup dpkg/apt-get to hold back on a specific package when
> doing an
> apt-get upgrade ?
I use aptitude and hold the selected package by pressing 'h'. Sorta like
dselect but much better :-)
--
---
On Fri, 2003-07-04 at 09:20, Craig wrote:
> Hi Guys
>
> How do I setup dpkg/apt-get to hold back on a specific package when
> doing an
> apt-get upgrade ?
Take a look at apt_preferences(5)
>From the manpage:
[...]
VERSIONING
One purpose of the preferences file is to let the user
Hi,
You could do this easyly with dselect.
best regards,
sebastian
Craig said:
> Hi Guys
>
> How do I setup dpkg/apt-get to hold back on a specific package when
> doing an
> apt-get upgrade ?
>
> Many thanks
> Craig
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsub
On Fri, 2003-07-04 at 17:20, Craig wrote:
> Hi Guys
>
> How do I setup dpkg/apt-get to hold back on a specific package when
> doing an
> apt-get upgrade ?
I use aptitude and hold the selected package by pressing 'h'. Sorta like
dselect but much better :-)
--
---
On Fri, 2003-07-04 at 09:20, Craig wrote:
> Hi Guys
>
> How do I setup dpkg/apt-get to hold back on a specific package when
> doing an
> apt-get upgrade ?
Take a look at apt_preferences(5)
>From the manpage:
[...]
VERSIONING
One purpose of the preferences file is to let the user
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 09:20:19AM +0200, Craig wrote:
> Hi Guys
>
> How do I setup dpkg/apt-get to hold back on a specific package when doing an
> apt-get upgrade ?
i don't think that apt-get can do it, but the following shell script will hold
a package:
---cut here---
#! /bin/bash
# dpkg-hol
Hi,
You could do this easyly with dselect.
best regards,
sebastian
Craig said:
> Hi Guys
>
> How do I setup dpkg/apt-get to hold back on a specific package when
> doing an
> apt-get upgrade ?
>
> Many thanks
> Craig
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsub
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 09:20:19AM +0200, Craig wrote:
> Hi Guys
>
> How do I setup dpkg/apt-get to hold back on a specific package when doing an
> apt-get upgrade ?
i don't think that apt-get can do it, but the following shell script will hold
a package:
---cut here---
#! /bin/bash
# dpkg-hol
lsattr /usr/bin/du - chances are it was made immutable ('i' attribute).
Matt.
- Original Message -
From: "Brad Lay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Roger Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 12:10 AM
Subject: Re: apt-get dist-
lsattr /usr/bin/du - chances are it was made immutable ('i' attribute).
Matt.
- Original Message -
From: "Brad Lay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Roger Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 12
Unfortunatly, I think you are right :(.
This machine turns out to have had some exploitable stuff on it, which was what
I was trying to upgrade...
-Roger
Quoting Brad Lay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> First thing I would be doing is apt-get install chkrootkit - I had a
> machine do this exact same p
Unfortunatly, I think you are right :(.
This machine turns out to have had some exploitable stuff on it, which was what
I was trying to upgrade...
-Roger
Quoting Brad Lay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> First thing I would be doing is apt-get install chkrootkit - I had a
> machine do this exact same p
First thing I would be doing is apt-get install chkrootkit - I had a
machine do this exact same problem. I found it had been rootkitted. YMMV.
It could be something else but I'd check anyway.
Regards,
Brad Lay
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Roger Ward wrote:
> I have a wierd error fr
First thing I would be doing is apt-get install chkrootkit - I had a
machine do this exact same problem. I found it had been rootkitted. YMMV.
It could be something else but I'd check anyway.
Regards,
Brad Lay
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Roger Ward wrote:
> I have a wierd error fr
Whoever told you that is wrong...
If you know how to program stuff and you can modify any source you get
then you may have a use in getting the source code of a package, or even
if compiling yourself gives you a functionality you need that is not in
the precompiled packages.
But if you are just g
Whoever told you that is wrong...
If you know how to program stuff and you can modify any source you get
then you may have a use in getting the source code of a package, or even
if compiling yourself gives you a functionality you need that is not in
the precompiled packages.
But if you are just
On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, Craig wrote:
> Hi again fellas
>
> Is there a why to upgrade only on package using apt-get ?
If you only want to upgrade one paackage:
# apt-get update
# apt-get install fubar
That will install the newest version of fubar and any required libraries.
Yours Tony.
/*
* "The
On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, Craig wrote:
> Hi again fellas
>
> Is there a why to upgrade only on package using apt-get ?
If you only want to upgrade one paackage:
# apt-get update
# apt-get install fubar
That will install the newest version of fubar and any required libraries.
Yours Tony.
/*
* "Th
On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 11:16:02PM +0100, H.P. Stroebel wrote:
> hi list,
>
> 1) i switched recently from redhat to debian for an internet server
> installation
A very good move. MUCH easier to maintain.
> i deleted unnecessary users and groups like games, audio etc., but they
> were reinstalle
On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 11:16:02PM +0100, H.P. Stroebel wrote:
> hi list,
>
> 1) i switched recently from redhat to debian for an internet server
> installation
A very good move. MUCH easier to maintain.
> i deleted unnecessary users and groups like games, audio etc., but they
> were reinstall
On Thu, 23 Nov 2000, Bob Billson wrote:
> Seems a lot of hams use Debian vs. other Linux distros. Don't know if it
> is a fact or just perception on my part.
Fact.
73 de G5FM
--
Martin Wheeler -StarTEXT - Glastonbury - BA6 9PH - England
[1] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ht
On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 02:49:24PM -, James Preece wrote:
> Your a ham too (2e1avx)
Seems a lot of hams use Debian vs. other Linux distros. Don't know if it
is a fact or just perception on my part.
> Cheers for the inform, learning apt-get at the moment, can select the
> packages but what d
On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 08:23:28AM -0500, Peter Billson wrote:
> business. I use the following lines in my sources.list:
>
> # Binaries
> deb htt://ftp.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free
^^^
oops... should be http
If you want to be able to get the Debian source to recompile the
> I am getting problems when trying to install various packages, it times out
> when trying to pull the package from certain ftp sites.
>
> Is there a way to change or specify a ftp site to download from.
>
> and if so please can you give me a list or suggest the sites for me.
You can specify a
Doug Bean wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I been having a bit of trouble accessing one of my servers in the sources
> list for apt.
> Is there anywhere where there is a list of public servers or mirror sites to
> add to this file. I get the following error:
> Err http://mirror.aarnet.edu.au stable/non-US Pa
54 matches
Mail list logo
