Hi Folks,
I want to deploy an FTP server on my Windows Server 2012r2, which is a component of Internet Information Server. Initially, I had the obvious and simple problem of the firewall blocking access to port 21, but I think I fixed that. It was a little tricky because the port was an artifact of the FTP service , not the IIE FTP component, so it took me longer than I would like to admit.
Now I have the problem of authenticating. Can't seem to authenticate. Has anybody done this?
Thanks for the help,
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
Hi Folks,
This is noteworthy. I have a Windows Server 2012R2. I am using "DFS" and "Off-Line Files".
* "DFS" is "Distributed File System", which among other things "exports" the designated Windows file systems as SMB "Shares". Its goal is to "accumulate" disparate filesystems into a single filesystem, like Linux does, with the added feature of duplication/synchronization of client filesystems. In particular, Windows user "profiles" are shared as "\\TCLC.org\users\Profile\<username>.
* "Off-line Files" syncs a client copy with the "Share" to compensate for the "Share" periodically vanishing from transient conditions or you're traveling and not "connected".
I also have a bunch of Fedora boxes. I mount my Windows user profile on "/home/cjm", which gives me everything I would see on a Windows machine.
I also have a few NASes. Parenthetically, I have an ASUStore AS3204 v2, and I can heartily recommend it. Among other features, it supports hardlinks in the filesystem, which Buffalo NASes do not, and this means rSnapshot can run on ASUStore, which is pretty good news. I also have a couple of Buffalo LinkStations, which are also acceptable, but surprisingly primitive in comparison, and not without some inconvenient bugs surrounding "ownership and permissions", however they can be hacked to expose ssh and a command line.
I mount the NASs on two paths, depending on the access I choose to grant. For root access, I mount \\NAS0.TCLC.org\d0 on /net/nas0/d0, for example, and there is nothing remarkable about this. For user access, I mount the NAS in the user's filesystem: /home/<user>/net/nas0/d0, which mount point is on the Windows filesystem, and that mount point is visible from any of the Windows desktops at the same level as "Desktop", "Documents", and "Downloads".
Now, here's the point of this post: Windows Server can see that Fedora mount! It is not clear to me who is freelancing and extending their mandate -- "DFS", or "Off-line Files", but Windows server is aware that a Fedora box has mounted a filesystem on a Widows profile directory, and copies it, meaning files that should only be visible on the Fedora box are visible on the Windows desktop! This would simply be interesting and possibly beneficial, except this storage comes at a non-zero cost in space on the Windows Server 2012r2 disk, thanks to "Offline Files", or maybe "DFS" -- I don't know.
I discovered this because I am in the middle of a project to re-factor my storage, which has become unmanageable, and I was rsync'ing big file trees around, and they started to show up on my Server!
I'm not posting this as a problem for solving because I can easily work around it by simply doing my refactoring as root. No mounts within the "profile" filesystem; no volunteer files. I am posting this as an interesting observation that might be generally useful to know. Windows Server 2012r2 is spying on you! (-:
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
Hi Folks,
The world seems to be headed toward universal multiple config files in the form <dir>.d. There are about fifty of them in /etc.
I mount some filesystems "universally", under "/net/...", and, when appropriate, in a user directory, "/home/<user>/net/...". This gives me better granularity of permissions. My fstab has become cumbersome and today I asked the question, "Maybe there is an /etc/fstab.d? Son-of-a-bitch! There is! Well, I mean, I find scattered, inaccurate references, but it is not clear to me that it works on Fedora 36, and initial experiments indicate otherwise. I can still use it, but I have a script that combines all my "components" and replaces the "real" /etc/fstab, and that's not too bad, but it is a hack, and I'd rather find out if it is supposed to work and find out why mine doesn't.
Anybody have any experience with /etc/fstab.d?
Thanks for the help,
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
Hi Folks,
I'm working with Drupal and its notoriously steep learning curve. The tags file is less helpful than it could be because I think it is tracking more than definitions. It has been awhile, but I know that tagging on something that returns 800 "choice" is probably not correct.
Does anybody know how to make "Exuberant ctags" a little less exuberant? Just the definitions, not the references?
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
Hi Folks,
This should be easy ... And I'm sure I've done it before. But either Fedora has changed or I have, and I'm not committing either way. (-:
I have a script to bounce the web-server and php-fpm with systemd and I'd like to be able to do this without "sudo" or a terminal tab permanently logged on as root. Seems like I should be able to set the script "setuid" and anybody should be able to run it. I can't seem to make it work.
In the alternative, it seems like I should be able to delegate certain services to user control with systemd, like "systemctrl restart httpd", but the discussions I've found on that are hideously complex, and I'm not really interested in going down any of those rabbit holes. It can't be this difficult ... I mean, wasn't this one of the original justification for systemd?
Thanks for the help,
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
After an all night session of drunken research I've come to the conclusion
there are no 32 bit linux distros left that will fit on a CD-R and actually
install a desktop, hell DVD-R either. Was going to give my faithful old
Dell i486 laptop to a neighbor kid to play with but I think it's dead Jim.
Suggestions?
Those that are left seem to only boot from media and will not install
anything to a hard disk.
Must be a screen door blowing shut somewhere that could use it, pretty
heavy.
I updated a laptop to it this morning! It uses Linux 6.
I wonder about this old hardware, speaking of 32 bit support.
Brian
--
Brian Lavender
http://www.brie.com/brian/
"There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to
make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other
way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies."
Professor C. A. R. Hoare
The 1980 Turing award lecture
Any thoughts on the Pale Moon web browser?
I was looking around on Honda's web site and they complained about my web browser being out of date. On that VM, its Firefox 84. I clicked on "learn more" hoping that Honda would tell me exactly why they wanted me to upgrade. It's not a bank, after all, and they offered me browser options.
Admittedly, I live under a rock. But, I had never heard of Pale Moon. I went to their home page and am going to give it a try.
I resist browser upgardes because they often change the layout, for no apparent reason. And, the new "features" are often things I don't like. Such as storing a bunch on info on my browser so they don't have to (which I suspect may be Honda's motive). So, if I was going to have to deal with I new layout anyhow, I decided to go for broke and try something actually new.
Security? Its a Honda site. Unless they want me to protect against malware from them, I don't get it.
-Gary
Well, I never heard of it and I don't care for Chromium. Are you using it? I forwarded my reply to the list because I thought it was your intention to reply there.
-Gary
On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 06:52:25AM -0700, bob r wrote:
> Gary,
> Is there any reason why you have not tried the Brave browser yet?
> Bob
>
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 6:38 PM Gary <saclug(a)garymcglinn.com> wrote:
>
> > I went to the Volkswagen site and my Firefox 84 had some problems. So, I
> > installed Firefox 106. The widgets/trim are ugly, but it didn't have any
> > issues on the Volkswagen site. Interestingly to me, the page layout was
> > completely different. Not sure what has come online recently as far as
> > what browsers have to support, but there is definitely something
> > substantial that is new.
> >
> > -Gary
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 29, 2022 at 06:36:07AM -0700, Gary wrote:
> > > OK, I've seen enough. In palemoon the "learn more" button on
> > Wolkswagens web site doesn't work. It doesn't seem to be recognized.
> > Works fine in old Firefox.
> > >
> > > -Gary
> > >
> > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2022 at 05:47:55AM -0700, Gary wrote:
> > > > Any thoughts on the Pale Moon web browser?
> > > >
> > > > I was looking around on Honda's web site and they complained about my
> > web browser being out of date. On that VM, its Firefox 84. I clicked on
> > "learn more" hoping that Honda would tell me exactly why they wanted me to
> > upgrade. It's not a bank, after all, and they offered me browser options.
> > > >
> > > > Admittedly, I live under a rock. But, I had never heard of Pale
> > Moon. I went to their home page and am going to give it a try.
> > > >
> > > > I resist browser upgardes because they often change the layout, for no
> > apparent reason. And, the new "features" are often things I don't like.
> > Such as storing a bunch on info on my browser so they don't have to (which
> > I suspect may be Honda's motive). So, if I was going to have to deal with
> > I new layout anyhow, I decided to go for broke and try something actually
> > new.
> > > >
> > > > Security? Its a Honda site. Unless they want me to protect against
> > malware from them, I don't get it.
> > > >
> > > > -Gary
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Lug-nuts mailing list -- lug-nuts(a)bigbrie.com
> > > > To unsubscribe send an email to lug-nuts-leave(a)bigbrie.com
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Lug-nuts mailing list -- lug-nuts(a)bigbrie.com
> > > To unsubscribe send an email to lug-nuts-leave(a)bigbrie.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Lug-nuts mailing list -- lug-nuts(a)bigbrie.com
> > To unsubscribe send an email to lug-nuts-leave(a)bigbrie.com
> >
Hello list,
Finally have working firewall rules analysis code up
& running. This turns out to be a hard problem!
A lot of people have worked out the math, but there
are a ton of picky obstacles to applying them to real
sets of iptables rules. I hope to flesh out the code
over the next few months and am hoping for a release
(public open source) soon.
--
Charles Polisher
