On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 07:50:34PM -0500, R P Herrold wrote:
>wget -O xinetd-2.1.8.9pre14-5.i386.rpm \
> ftp://rawhide.redhat.com/rawhide/i386/RedHat/RPMS/xinetd-2.1.8.9pre14-5.i386.rpm
>rpm -Uvh xinetd-2.1.8.9pre14-5.i386.rpm
>service xinetd restart
Ever tried just:
rpm -Uvh
ftp://
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Robert Soros wrote:
> Okay, you guys may find this interesting.. I'm not sure what it means or
> what is happening, maybe somebody here could shed some light on this
> weirdness. I restarted xinetd after all the changes and noticed this
> strangeness (also, i added debugging
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Robert Soros wrote:
> Okay, Thanks. That did solve the problem. Are rawhide and the fisher
> beta different branches ?
betas are somewhat tested snapshots of rawhide.
--
Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oyn
Okay, sorry guys for leading you all down a bumpy dead end road...
Upgrading to the latest version of xinetd from rawhide has solved the
problem.. . thanks and I do appreciate the feedback.
Robert Soros
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://soros.ath.cx
On 17 Feb 2001 18:55:52 -0500, R P Herrold wrote:
Okay, Thanks. That did solve the problem. Are rawhide and the fisher
beta different branches ?
On 2001.02.17 19:23:29 -0500 Trond Eivind Glomsrød wrote:
> Robert Soros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hey guys, need a little help here as my mbox is filling up very
> quickly...
> >
> > Ha
Okay, you guys may find this interesting.. I'm not sure what it means or
what is happening, maybe somebody here could shed some light on this
weirdness. I restarted xinetd after all the changes and noticed this
strangeness (also, i added debugging info > file in the /etc/init.d/xinetd
script)..
Robert Soros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hey guys, need a little help here as my mbox is filling up very quickly...
>
> Having a little problem setting up pop3 server/telnet/ftp, etc etc, etc,
> etc
Get a new xinetd from rawhide.
--
Trond Eivind Glomsrød
Red Hat, Inc.
___
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, R P Herrold wrote:
> ... uggh -- you've found a problem in the beta ... I'll verify
> and file a bugzilla -- they've omitted tcpdchk, looks like
> ...
UURK ... My bad ... I spoke too quickly ... the RH 7.0 cutover
to xinet changed things ... checking ...
-- Russ
___
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, R P Herrold wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Robert Soros wrote:
>
> > Whats tcpdchk ? Dont have it and locate finds nothing (part of
> > tcp_wrappers ? rpm -qil doesn't show it)...
>
> [herrold@swampfox herrold]$ rpm -qf `which tcpdchk`
> tcp_wrappers-7.6-9
>
> ... uggh -- y
[root@soros rpms]# rpm -q tcp_wrappers
tcp_wrappers-7.6-17
[root@soros rpms]# rpm -qf `which tcpdchk`
/usr/bin/which: no tcpdchk in
(/usr/local/sbin:/usr/sbin:/sbin:/bin:/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/bin/X11:/usr/X11R6/bin:/root/bin)
r
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Robert Soros wrote:
> Whats tcpdchk ? Dont have it and locate finds nothing (part of
> tcp_wrappers ? rpm -qil doesn't show it)...
It is a wrappers issue location tool.
Please run
> >echo "127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain" >> /etc/hosts
then:
telnet localhos
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Robert Soros wrote:
> Whats tcpdchk ? Dont have it and locate finds nothing (part of
> tcp_wrappers ? rpm -qil doesn't show it)...
[herrold@swampfox herrold]$ rpm -qf `which tcpdchk`
tcp_wrappers-7.6-9
... uggh -- you've found a problem in the beta ... I'll verify
and f
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Robert Soros wrote:
> Whats tcpdchk ? Dont have it and locate finds nothing (part of
> tcp_wrappers ? rpm -qil doesn't show it)...
These were removed from tcp_wrappers for RHL7:
---
* Tue Aug 15 2000 Jeff Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- remove utilities that expect /etc/
Whats tcpdchk ? Dont have it and locate finds nothing (part of
tcp_wrappers ? rpm -qil doesn't show it)...
On 2001.02.17 18:20:18 -0500 R P Herrold wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Robert Soros wrote:
>
> > Not that I can find any, but maybe this will help.. Been occuring since
> the
> > host.a
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Robert Soros wrote:
> Not that I can find any, but maybe this will help.. Been occuring since the
> host.allow change
>
> Feb 17 18:12:22 localhost xinetd[23255]: warning: /etc/hosts.allow, line 6:
> can't verify hostname: gethostbyname(localhost.localdomain) failed
Please r
Not that I can find any, but maybe this will help.. Been occuring since the
host.allow change
Feb 17 18:12:22 localhost xinetd[23255]: warning: /etc/hosts.allow, line 6:
can't verify hostname: gethostbyname(localhost.localdomain) failed
Feb 17 18:12:22 localhost xinetd[23255]: execv( /usr/sbin/ip
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Robert Soros wrote:
> [root@soros rpms]# rpm -V `rpm -qf /usr/sbin/ipop3d`
> ...T c /etc/pam.d/pop
> S.5T c /etc/xinetd.d/ipop3
>
> No luck even after editing the hosts.allow file.. any other suggestions ?
hmmm ... there is the high security install option ... Is a
[root@soros rpms]# rpm -V `rpm -qf /usr/sbin/ipop3d`
...T c /etc/pam.d/pop
S.5T c /etc/xinetd.d/ipop3
i did fool around with both files (which explains why they failed certain
tests S 5 and T) , but both have been returned to the original state..
No luck even after editing the hosts.al
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Robert Soros wrote:
> running (used chkconfig --list to find out), the port is open and accepts
> the connection initially, but drop its due to this error.
>
> >>> Feb 17 17:10:05 localhost xinetd[22859]: execv( /usr/sbin/ipop3d )
> failed: Bad address (errno = 14)
Please re
Hey guys, need a little help here as my mbox is filling up very quickly...
Having a little problem setting up pop3 server/telnet/ftp, etc etc, etc,
etc Not exactly sure what is going wrong but I can give some feedback
from the logs. Basically what it amounts to is this, The pop3 service is
20 matches
Mail list logo
