On Tue, 23 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What is the kernel RPM building procedure?
RPMs are self documenting. Download the src.rpm for the kernel and install
it. It will install the kernel source, all the additional packages (like
pcmcia) and patches that were used to build the kernel r
What is the kernel RPM building procedure?
-A.
___
Redhat-devel-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-devel-list
Hello...
Mario Torre wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a problem with traceroute, when I ask it to trace something the call
> goes in timeout:
This is the 'devel' list you probably want the guinness list.
>
> $ /usr/sbin/traceroute www.kataweb.com (eveything I try!)
>
> traceroute to www.
Hi,
I have a problem with traceroute, when I ask it to trace something the call
goes in timeout:
$ /usr/sbin/traceroute www.kataweb.com (eveything I try!)
traceroute to www.kataweb.com (194.185.98.179), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 * * *
2 * * *
3 * * *
4 * * *
5 * * *
.
.
On Tue Jan 23 2001 at 17:20, Matt Fahrner wrote:
> At any rate, as I said I don't mind if other options are there as well,
> but I think sendmail should remain.
Agree 100%.
But it should be one option of several mail server packages on
offer. (Which may bring up the issue of "distribution bloa
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Isn't RedHat playing with fire and making us play with fire by using
> software
If you don't like Red Hat Linux, go use something else. OpenBSD maybe, We've
had this debate before and before and
--
Cheers
John Summerfield
http://www2.ami.com.au/ for OS/2 & linux
Though I have no issue with offering an option other than "sendmail", I
wouldn't want to see "sendmail" go away. We pretty much use the same
"sendmail" configs on all of our heterogeneous systems including Suns
and wouldn't want to have to port "postfix" or something to all of our
non-Linux system
On Tue, Jan 23, 2001 at 09:02:40PM +0100, Jean Francois Martinez wrote:
> Isn't RedHat playing with fire and making us play with fire by using
> software who is either a regular provider of security problems ie
> wu-ftpd (what is wrong with proftpd?) or software who is
> _structurally_ unsecure li
On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Bernhard Rosenkraenzer wrote:
> On 23 Jan 2001, Jean Francois Martinez wrote:
>
> > or software who is _structurally_ unsecure like sendmail?
>
> I personally don't understand it either, I've been pushing to replace it
> with postfix for quite a while.
>
> The main arguments
Jean Francois Martinez ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
> Isn't RedHat playing with fire and making us play with fire by using software
> who is either a regular provider of security problems ie wu-ftpd (what is wrong
> with proftpd?)
The fact that proftpd has been a) historically worse b) unmaintained
On 23 Jan 2001, Jean Francois Martinez wrote:
> Isn't RedHat playing with fire and making us play with fire by using
> software who is either a regular provider of security problems ie
> wu-ftpd (what is wrong with proftpd?)
proftpd is at least as much of a security problem as wu-ftpd.
Take a lo
Jean Francois Martinez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2001 20:05:41 +0100 (CET), Bernhard Rosenkraenzer said:
>
> > On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Albert E. Whale wrote:
> >
> > > Today I found that several unwanted guests have been able to connect via
> > > ftp (not any more!). I also
On Tue, 23 Jan 2001 20:05:41 +0100 (CET), Bernhard Rosenkraenzer said:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Albert E. Whale wrote:
>
> > Today I found that several unwanted guests have been able to connect via
> > ftp (not any more!). I also found some mysterious files 'running' on
> > the server. I wa
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Chances are they replaced your ps with a patched version that doesn't
> show their stuff. Reinstall the procps package. Better yet, reinstall
> the system. You never know what else they've done to you.
Rhis command will give some clues about what's changed:
rpm --verify
On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Albert E. Whale wrote:
> Today I found that several unwanted guests have been able to connect via
> ftp (not any more!). I also found some mysterious files 'running' on
> the server. I was able to detect the processes using the monitor
> utility (or top). However, I was UN
Matilainen Panu (NRC/Helsinki) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
> > Also, for some this is a policy decision. At least if you want to
> > automate the upgrading.
> >
> > In a bigger scale this would also be way faster on 100 Mbit/s
> > connection ;-)
>
> I have a hard time imagining life without apt o
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> but there's no way to tell wget to download only the packages that
> are installed on the system.
That's true. It's also true I'm not at the computer waiting for them to
download.
And there's the further point that when I decide to install something
additional, th
"the X server would wedge." what does this mean, or better look like?!
/gat
Dax Kelson wrote:
>
> There has been a long standing bug where if you obscured a running OpenGL
> app (or switched to a different virtual desktop), the X server would
> wedge.
>
>
On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, ext Pekka Savola wrote:
> On 22 Jan 2001, Trond Eivind Glomsrød wrote:
> > Arnaud Gomes-do-Vale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > The Debian APT tool is included in Conectiva Linux 6.0 with an RPM
> > > back-end. Are there plans to include it in RHL ? I
19 matches
Mail list logo
