devil-linux-develop Mailing List for Devil-Linux (Page 51)

Oops.. I am in a great hurry ...

> ========================================================
> for i in usermod userdel groupadd groudel groupmod
> do
>      cp -a /etc/pam.d/useradd /etc/pam.d/$i
> done

> save-config
> ========================================================



-- 
Best regards,
 Serge                            mailto:fi...@in...

> I guess, there are 2 possible causes of problem:
> 1) the package ( which contain  userdel, useradd etc) is wrongly compiled
> 2) the pam config "other" is wrong.

> I'll see tonight. But I can't start compilation on my note due to the
> note age
note == notebook

And as regards the question:
========================================================
for i in usermod userdel groupadd groudel groupmod do
     cp -a /etc/pam.d/useradd %i
done

save-config
========================================================

This one should resolve the problem. John, could you please check it?

-- 
Best regards,
 Serge                            mailto:fi...@in...

Bruce,

Tuesday, June 13, 2006, 6:31:04 PM, you wrote:

>>>>> I also get the same error when I try to delete a user or a group:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> root@squid :/etc # useradd test root@squid:/etc # userdel test
>>>>> userdel: PAM authentication failed
>>>>> root@squid:/etc #
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> root@squid:/etc # groupadd test1
>>>>> root@squid:/etc # groupdel test1
>>>>> groupdel: PAM authentication failed
>>>>> root@squid:/etc #
>>>>>
>>>>>         
>>>> Does it fix the problem if you copy /etc/pam.d/groupadd to groupdel?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> I tried that before my last message and it didn't work.
>>>
>>>
>>> root@squid:/etc # groupadd test1
>>> root@squid:/etc # groupdel test1
>>> groupdel: PAM authentication failed
>>> root@squid:/etc #
>>>
>>>
>>> But after your message I tried it again and it works!
>>> root@squid:/etc # groupadd test2
>>> root@squid:/etc # groupdel test2
>>> root@squid:/etc #
>>>
>>>
>>> However, doing the same with userdel doesn't seem to:
>>> root@squid:/etc # useradd test3
>>> root@squid:/etc # userdel test3
>>> userdel: error removing group entry
>>> userdel: error removing shadow group entry
>>> root@squid:/etc #
>>> --
>>> John Bridleman
>>>     
>>
>> It seems we should look at this problem before we release 1.2.10.
>> Guess it's time to look how other distros handle this one, I don't think
>> it makes sense to list every single program here...
>>   

> Let's not forget about 'usermod' & 'groupmod'.  Can you try those John?

As far as I know, if pam config for usermod (or groupmod) is absent, the
"other" config should be used. Otherwise we have to write configs for
_all_ binaries from the system...

I guess, there are 2 possible causes of problem:
1) the package ( which contain  userdel, useradd etc) is wrongly compiled
2) the pam config "other" is wrong.

I'll see tonight. But I can't start compilation on my note due to the
note age, so I'll see on the latest beta -
devil-linux-1.2.10-2006-06-08-i686-SMP.tar.bz2 .  I'm sorry, but I'm
now in business trip in  Sunnyvale, CA and have no access to build
environment & build boxes.


-- 
Best regards,
 Serge                            mailto:fi...@in...

On 6/13/06, Bruce Smith <bw...@ar...> wrote:
>
> Let's not forget about 'usermod' & 'groupmod'.  Can you try those John?
>

Nope.

root@squid:~ # useradd bruce
root@squid:~ # usermod -L bruce
usermod: PAM authentication failed
root@squid:~ # groupadd devil
root@squid:~ # groupmod -g 5000 devil
groupmod: PAM authentication failed
root@squid:~ #
-- 
John Bridleman

>>>> I also get the same error when I try to delete a user or a group:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> root@squid :/etc # useradd test root@squid:/etc # userdel test
>>>> userdel: PAM authentication failed
>>>> root@squid:/etc #
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> root@squid:/etc # groupadd test1
>>>> root@squid:/etc # groupdel test1
>>>> groupdel: PAM authentication failed
>>>> root@squid:/etc #
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> Does it fix the problem if you copy /etc/pam.d/groupadd to groupdel?
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> I tried that before my last message and it didn't work.
>>
>>
>> root@squid:/etc # groupadd test1
>> root@squid:/etc # groupdel test1
>> groupdel: PAM authentication failed
>> root@squid:/etc #
>>
>>
>> But after your message I tried it again and it works!
>> root@squid:/etc # groupadd test2
>> root@squid:/etc # groupdel test2
>> root@squid:/etc #
>>
>>
>> However, doing the same with userdel doesn't seem to:
>> root@squid:/etc # useradd test3
>> root@squid:/etc # userdel test3
>> userdel: error removing group entry
>> userdel: error removing shadow group entry
>> root@squid:/etc #
>> --
>> John Bridleman
>>     
>
> It seems we should look at this problem before we release 1.2.10.
> Guess it's time to look how other distros handle this one, I don't think
> it makes sense to list every single program here...
>   

Let's not forget about 'usermod' & 'groupmod'.  Can you try those John?

 - BS

Heiko Zuerker wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> On Tue, June 13, 2006 19:13, John Bridleman wrote:
>   
>> On 6/13/06, Bruce Smith <bw...@ar...> wrote:
>>
>>     
>>>> I also get the same error when I try to delete a user or a group:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> root@squid :/etc # useradd test root@squid:/etc # userdel test
>>>> userdel: PAM authentication failed
>>>> root@squid:/etc #
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> root@squid:/etc # groupadd test1
>>>> root@squid:/etc # groupdel test1
>>>> groupdel: PAM authentication failed
>>>> root@squid:/etc #
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> Does it fix the problem if you copy /etc/pam.d/groupadd to groupdel?
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> I tried that before my last message and it didn't work.
>>
>>
>> root@squid:/etc # groupadd test1
>> root@squid:/etc # groupdel test1
>> groupdel: PAM authentication failed
>> root@squid:/etc #
>>
>>
>> But after your message I tried it again and it works!
>> root@squid:/etc # groupadd test2
>> root@squid:/etc # groupdel test2
>> root@squid:/etc #
>>
>>
>> However, doing the same with userdel doesn't seem to:
>> root@squid:/etc # useradd test3
>> root@squid:/etc # userdel test3
>> userdel: error removing group entry
>> userdel: error removing shadow group entry
>> root@squid:/etc #
>> --
>> John Bridleman
>>     
>
> It seems we should look at this problem before we release 1.2.10.
> Guess it's time to look how other distros handle this one, I don't think
> it makes sense to list every single program here...
>   

SuSE 10.1 only has useradd in /etc/pam.d/.  No entries for userdel and 
group{add,del}.

 - BS

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Tue, June 13, 2006 19:13, John Bridleman wrote:
> On 6/13/06, Bruce Smith <bw...@ar...> wrote:
>
>>
>>> I also get the same error when I try to delete a user or a group:
>>>
>>>
>>> root@squid :/etc # useradd test root@squid:/etc # userdel test
>>> userdel: PAM authentication failed
>>> root@squid:/etc #
>>>
>>>
>>> root@squid:/etc # groupadd test1
>>> root@squid:/etc # groupdel test1
>>> groupdel: PAM authentication failed
>>> root@squid:/etc #
>>>
>>
>> Does it fix the problem if you copy /etc/pam.d/groupadd to groupdel?
>>
>>
>
> I tried that before my last message and it didn't work.
>
>
> root@squid:/etc # groupadd test1
> root@squid:/etc # groupdel test1
> groupdel: PAM authentication failed
> root@squid:/etc #
>
>
> But after your message I tried it again and it works!
> root@squid:/etc # groupadd test2
> root@squid:/etc # groupdel test2
> root@squid:/etc #
>
>
> However, doing the same with userdel doesn't seem to:
> root@squid:/etc # useradd test3
> root@squid:/etc # userdel test3
> userdel: error removing group entry
> userdel: error removing shadow group entry
> root@squid:/etc #
> --
> John Bridleman

It seems we should look at this problem before we release 1.2.10.
Guess it's time to look how other distros handle this one, I don't think
it makes sense to list every single program here...

- -- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkSPYEgACgkQUcytMSbs+YX0UgCeKhhfpH6Wsp09FqTCtOKK25dT
d1sAoJG1Ct0+eDvTBCIGEKUxXKTB6K3Z
=suq2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On 6/13/06, Bruce Smith <bw...@ar...> wrote:
>
> > I also get the same error when I try to delete a user or a group:
> >
> > root@squid :/etc # useradd test
> > root@squid:/etc # userdel test
> > userdel: PAM authentication failed
> > root@squid:/etc #
> >
> > root@squid:/etc # groupadd test1
> > root@squid:/etc # groupdel test1
> > groupdel: PAM authentication failed
> > root@squid:/etc #
>
> Does it fix the problem if you copy /etc/pam.d/groupadd to groupdel?
>

I tried that before my last message and it didn't work.

root@squid:/etc # groupadd test1
root@squid:/etc # groupdel test1
groupdel: PAM authentication failed
root@squid:/etc #

But after your message I tried it again and it works!
root@squid:/etc # groupadd test2
root@squid:/etc # groupdel test2
root@squid:/etc #

However, doing the same with userdel doesn't seem to:
root@squid:/etc # useradd test3
root@squid:/etc # userdel test3
userdel: error removing group entry
userdel: error removing shadow group entry
root@squid:/etc #
-- 
John Bridleman

> I also get the same error when I try to delete a user or a group:
> 
> root@squid :/etc # useradd test
> root@squid:/etc # userdel test
> userdel: PAM authentication failed
> root@squid:/etc #
> 
> root@squid:/etc # groupadd test1
> root@squid:/etc # groupdel test1
> groupdel: PAM authentication failed 
> root@squid:/etc #

Does it fix the problem if you copy /etc/pam.d/groupadd to groupdel?

 - BS

On 6/13/06, Bruce Smith <br...@ar...> wrote:
>
> Serge, someone told me that 'groupadd' wasn't working (PAM problem), and
> found the cause and solution of the problem here:
>
>
> http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/blfs-support/2004-December/052929.html
>
> So I changed the Linux-PAM install script to copy /etc/pam.d/useradd
> to /etc/pamd.d/groupadd as quick fix to get 1.2.10 released soon.
>
> I wasn't sure if I should add groupadd to $SRCDIR/pam.d.tar.bz2 or not.
>
> Feel free to redo my "fix" for 1.2.11 if there is a better way to solve
> the groupadd problem.  :-)
>

I also get the same error when I try to delete a user or a group:

root@squid:/etc # useradd test
root@squid:/etc # userdel test
userdel: PAM authentication failed
root@squid:/etc #

root@squid:/etc # groupadd test1
root@squid:/etc # groupdel test1
groupdel: PAM authentication failed
root@squid:/etc #
-- 
John Bridleman

Serge, someone told me that 'groupadd' wasn't working (PAM problem), and
found the cause and solution of the problem here:

http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/blfs-support/2004-December/052929.html

So I changed the Linux-PAM install script to copy /etc/pam.d/useradd
to /etc/pamd.d/groupadd as quick fix to get 1.2.10 released soon.

I wasn't sure if I should add groupadd to $SRCDIR/pam.d.tar.bz2 or not.

Feel free to redo my "fix" for 1.2.11 if there is a better way to solve
the groupadd problem.  :-)

 - BS

On Mon, June 12, 2006 08:53, Bruce Smith wrote:
> Update of /cvsroot/devil-linux/build/scripts/configuration/profiles
> In directory
> sc8-pr-cvs4.sourceforge.net:/tmp/cvs-serv1727/scripts/configuration/profi
> les
>
> Modified Files:
> Tag: rel-1-2-patches
> server Log Message:
> I wish people would update this file when they add packages!  :)

Freaking people ;-)

On Fri, June 9, 2006 07:11, Bruce Smith wrote:
>> Can we hold off these changes until 1.2.10 is out?
>>
>
> Sure.
>
>
> For now, shall I just tar up the dansguardian /etc files and stick them
> on the CD for people to manually install?

Probably best.

-- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

> Can we hold off these changes until 1.2.10 is out?

Sure.

For now, shall I just tar up the dansguardian /etc files and stick them
on the CD for people to manually install?

 - BS

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Can we hold off these changes until 1.2.10 is out?
I really want to release it soon, but this time thing...

- -- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkSI1ggACgkQUcytMSbs+YWPjgCeKAt1nQxUYJUy8XC5AGgFGXQg
m0IAoIMekgYUaY6iAMWjPSiv2gatw4jD
=tpg8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Bruce Smith wrote on 08.06.2006 22:56 MET:
>>>I also like your idea of moving the l7 stuff to the CD and sym-linking
>>>it from /etc.  I don't think they need to be modified by the user... ?
>>
>>The user can even set the location to something different from /etc/l7-protocols:
>>   <http://l7-filter.sourceforge.net/L7-HOWTO-Netfilter#conform>
> 
> 
> Doesn't that say you have to specify the directory on every 'iptables'
> command if you use a different directory?  That sounds like a pain.  

L7="-m layer7 --l7dir /usr/lib/l7-protocols"
But I won't argue over it ;-)

> I'd put a symlink in /etc for people who use the standard patterns,
> unless the default location can be specified during the compile.

Probably right.

>>If possible I'd suggest configuring the default protocols dir to be something 
>>like /usr/lib/l7-protocols. Anyway if a user wants to use his own protocol files 
>>he can specify the new directory as show on the page referenced above,

-- 
MfG / Regards
Friedrich Lobenstock
____________________________________________________________________
Friedrich Lobenstock                       Linux Services Lobenstock
URL: http://www.lsl.at/                         Email: fl...@fl...
____________________________________________________________________

> > I also like your idea of moving the l7 stuff to the CD and sym-linking
> > it from /etc.  I don't think they need to be modified by the user... ?
> 
> The user can even set the location to something different from /etc/l7-protocols:
>    <http://l7-filter.sourceforge.net/L7-HOWTO-Netfilter#conform>

Doesn't that say you have to specify the directory on every 'iptables'
command if you use a different directory?  That sounds like a pain.  

I'd put a symlink in /etc for people who use the standard patterns,
unless the default location can be specified during the compile.

> If possible I'd suggest configuring the default protocols dir to be something 
> like /usr/lib/l7-protocols. Anyway if a user wants to use his own protocol files 
> he can specify the new directory as show on the page referenced above,

 - BS

Bruce Smith wrote on 08.06.2006 22:41 MET:
>>>>I agree that we have to do something about the size of /etc. It eats up
>>>>a lot of RAM and also makes it harder to fit the config on a floppy. But
>>>>whatever you do, keep it simple for the user. We can't make them jump
>>>>through hoops.
>>>
>>>How about my idea of creating a new 'setup' menu, with selections
>>>to unpack each individual package's etc files?
>>>
>>>We should also limit it to fairly advanced (requires manual
>>>configuration), or obscure packages, so it won't effect our less-technical
>>>users.
>>
>>Actually I would prefer a combination of your and Friedl's suggestions.
>>If we add a function which unpacks the config, we can add this to the init
>>scripts to avoid problems when a program gets started.
> 
> 
> I was thinking that the files need to be unpacked and customized BEFORE
> the init script is run.  In most cases anyway.  But I supposed there are
> some packages that will run with stock/unmodified configs.
> 
> I also like your idea of moving the l7 stuff to the CD and sym-linking
> it from /etc.  I don't think they need to be modified by the user... ?

The user can even set the location to something different from /etc/l7-protocols:
   <http://l7-filter.sourceforge.net/L7-HOWTO-Netfilter#conform>

If possible I'd suggest configuring the default protocols dir to be something 
like /usr/lib/l7-protocols. Anyway if a user wants to use his own protocol files 
he can specify the new directory as show on the page referenced above,

-- 
MfG / Regards
Friedrich Lobenstock
____________________________________________________________________
Friedrich Lobenstock                       Linux Services Lobenstock
URL: http://www.lsl.at/                         Email: fl...@fl...
____________________________________________________________________

> >> I agree that we have to do something about the size of /etc. It eats up
> >> a lot of RAM and also makes it harder to fit the config on a floppy. But
> >> whatever you do, keep it simple for the user. We can't make them jump
> >> through hoops.
> >
> > How about my idea of creating a new 'setup' menu, with selections
> > to unpack each individual package's etc files?
> >
> > We should also limit it to fairly advanced (requires manual
> > configuration), or obscure packages, so it won't effect our less-technical
> > users.
> 
> Actually I would prefer a combination of your and Friedl's suggestions.
> If we add a function which unpacks the config, we can add this to the init
> scripts to avoid problems when a program gets started.

I was thinking that the files need to be unpacked and customized BEFORE
the init script is run.  In most cases anyway.  But I supposed there are
some packages that will run with stock/unmodified configs.

I also like your idea of moving the l7 stuff to the CD and sym-linking
it from /etc.  I don't think they need to be modified by the user... ?

> Additionally it make it really easy then, to just call the same function
> from the setup program.

Yup.

 - BS

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Thu, June 8, 2006 15:24, Bruce Smith wrote:
>> I agree that we have to do something about the size of /etc. It eats up
>> a lot of RAM and also makes it harder to fit the config on a floppy. But
>> whatever you do, keep it simple for the user. We can't make them jump
>> through hoops.
>
> How about my idea of creating a new 'setup' menu, with selections
> to unpack each individual package's etc files?
>
> We should also limit it to fairly advanced (requires manual
> configuration), or obscure packages, so it won't effect our less-technical
> users.

Actually I would prefer a combination of your and Friedl's suggestions.
If we add a function which unpacks the config, we can add this to the init
scripts to avoid problems when a program gets started.
Additionally it make it really easy then, to just call the same function
from the setup program.

- -- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkSIiRwACgkQUcytMSbs+YW+0ACfZ91wXsUnRyCxW+RJysUWSZNH
b3wAn0L/PhIY6/9ey104W6avFuaR6rvf
=sSYR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Thu, June 8, 2006 15:21, Bruce Smith wrote:
>>> Looking at the disk usage on /etc now, I see two other large
>>> directories that have potential for moving their /etc files to
>>> /config/*.tar.gz.
>>> One is snort.  The other is 'l7-protocols' ... no idea what it is ...
>>>
>>
>> (OSI model) Layer 7 (=application layer) protocol descriptions
>>
>
> Yeah, I guessed that much.  :-)
>
>
> What I meant was I have no idea what uses it, or what bad things will
> happen if it's not there.
>
>>> I see l7-protocols is created in patch-o-matic, but I'm not sure what
>>>  package(s) use it.  Is it something that can be moved too?  It's
>>> currently the largest subdirectory under /etc (about 1MB).
>>
>> I guess it's used by iptables or some other support tool. I have to
>> admit I did never use it before. I usually delete those subdirectories
>> which I don't need.
>
> I also guessed that it might be used by some iptables module that does
> l7 filtering.
>
> It's be good to know for sure what uses it to make sure we don't break
> something (like our stock firewall scripts) before we move it.

Yes it's for the l7 netfilter module.
As long as people don't load it, they don't need it.
What about moving the l7 stuff to a directory in the CD ? I don't think we
need write access for that.

>> I personally would like to see the following subdirectories of /etc/
>> moved to /config/etc-PACKAGE.tar.bz2 or so:
>> * apache2
>> * curl
>> * apcupsd
>> * awstats
>> * eagle-usb
>> * ha.d
>> * joe/{syntax,doc} (317k)
>> * l7-protocols (993k)
>> * lpd
>> * mgetty+sendfax
>> * openldap (224k)
>> * pcmcia (225k)
>> * postfix (241k)
>> * ppp
>> * raddb (305k)
>> * sarg (101k)
>> * shorewall (197k)
>> * snort (689k)
>> * socks
>> * ups
>> * wlan
>> * zebra
>>
>>
>> Total of the above is 4.3 MB of 7.0 MB for the whole etc.tar.bz2. So on
>> a very basic system my config would shrink by more than 50% compared to
>> now.
>
> Sounds good to me.
>
>
> One other thought...  We also need to modify the upgrade script (to a
> new DL version) so updates to files in those optional directories will also
> get applied.  I think that can be done without too much hassle.

May be worth it.

- -- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkSIiLwACgkQUcytMSbs+YVrSACfUTAmESHL3ZIog+lAKQ43wbMt
aS0Anjy4Ay2jvzIGuaBCH4Ms/lOSpC9q
=MJIM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

> I agree that we have to do something about the size of /etc. It eats up a
> lot of RAM and also makes it harder to fit the config on a floppy.
> But whatever you do, keep it simple for the user. We can't make them jump
> through hoops.

How about my idea of creating a new 'setup' menu, with selections 
to unpack each individual package's etc files?

We should also limit it to fairly advanced (requires manual
configuration), or obscure packages, so it won't effect our
less-technical users.

 - BS

> > Looking at the disk usage on /etc now, I see two other large directories
> > that have potential for moving their /etc files to /config/*.tar.gz.
> > One is snort.  The other is 'l7-protocols' ... no idea what it is ...
> 
> (OSI model) Layer 7 (=application layer) protocol descriptions

Yeah, I guessed that much.  :-)

What I meant was I have no idea what uses it, or what bad things will
happen if it's not there.

> > I see l7-protocols is created in patch-o-matic, but I'm not sure what
> > package(s) use it.  Is it something that can be moved too?  It's
> > currently the largest subdirectory under /etc (about 1MB).
> 
> I guess it's used by iptables or some other support tool. I have to admit I did 
> never use it before. I usually delete those subdirectories which I don't need.

I also guessed that it might be used by some iptables module that does
l7 filtering.

It's be good to know for sure what uses it to make sure we don't break
something (like our stock firewall scripts) before we move it.

> I personally would like to see the following subdirectories of /etc/ moved to 
> /config/etc-PACKAGE.tar.bz2 or so:
>   * apache2
>   * curl
>   * apcupsd
>   * awstats
>   * eagle-usb
>   * ha.d
>   * joe/{syntax,doc} (317k)
>   * l7-protocols (993k)
>   * lpd
>   * mgetty+sendfax
>   * openldap (224k)
>   * pcmcia (225k)
>   * postfix (241k)
>   * ppp
>   * raddb (305k)
>   * sarg (101k)
>   * shorewall (197k)
>   * snort (689k)
>   * socks
>   * ups
>   * wlan
>   * zebra
> 
> Total of the above is 4.3 MB of 7.0 MB for the whole etc.tar.bz2. So on a very 
> basic system my config would shrink by more than 50% compared to now.

Sounds good to me.

One other thought...  We also need to modify the upgrade script (to a
new DL version) so updates to files in those optional directories will
also get applied.  I think that can be done without too much hassle.

 - BS

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I agree that we have to do something about the size of /etc. It eats up a
lot of RAM and also makes it harder to fit the config on a floppy.
But whatever you do, keep it simple for the user. We can't make them jump
through hoops.

- -- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkSIhmMACgkQUcytMSbs+YWTaACdGX6zCfisOHu5LajU79m64/lg
n7oAnipVA1qn9BUcECjQzpNEQgaPzMW4
=Zoeg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Bruce Smith wrote on 08.06.2006 21:37 MET:
> 
> Looking at the disk usage on /etc now, I see two other large directories
> that have potential for moving their /etc files to /config/*.tar.gz.
> One is snort.  The other is 'l7-protocols' ... no idea what it is ...

(OSI model) Layer 7 (=application layer) protocol descriptions

Layer 2 = data link layer = Ethernet
Layer 3 = network layer   = IP
Layer 4 = transport layer = TCP and UDP
Layer 5 (Internet model) = Layer 7 (OSI Model) = application layer = http, smtp, ...

> I see l7-protocols is created in patch-o-matic, but I'm not sure what
> package(s) use it.  Is it something that can be moved too?  It's
> currently the largest subdirectory under /etc (about 1MB).

I guess it's used by iptables or some other support tool. I have to admit I did 
never use it before. I usually delete those subdirectories which I don't need.

I personally would like to see the following subdirectories of /etc/ moved to 
/config/etc-PACKAGE.tar.bz2 or so:
  * apache2
  * curl
  * apcupsd
  * awstats
  * eagle-usb
  * ha.d
  * joe/{syntax,doc} (317k)
  * l7-protocols (993k)
  * lpd
  * mgetty+sendfax
  * openldap (224k)
  * pcmcia (225k)
  * postfix (241k)
  * ppp
  * raddb (305k)
  * sarg (101k)
  * shorewall (197k)
  * snort (689k)
  * socks
  * ups
  * wlan
  * zebra

Total of the above is 4.3 MB of 7.0 MB for the whole etc.tar.bz2. So on a very 
basic system my config would shrink by more than 50% compared to now.

-- 
MfG / Regards
Friedrich Lobenstock
____________________________________________________________________
Friedrich Lobenstock                       Linux Services Lobenstock
URL: http://www.lsl.at/                         Email: fl...@fl...
____________________________________________________________________