Koozali.org: home of the SME Server

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1

Offline stefan24

  • ****
  • 483
  • +0/-0
    • www.sme-server.de
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« on: January 19, 2005, 10:53:42 AM »
Hi!

Beside a Samba 3.0 and SpamAssasin 3.0.2 update I cannot find any major updates in SME 6.5. (in the RPM-Changelog). No new PHP, MySQL, Apache, Kernel version.

In the port forwarding panel there is no hint, that port forwarding is now deactivated, when the server is in server-only mode. (which I found in the Changelog)

Server-Manager access is now https:// only.
Default LDAP settings on a new system are empty now.
Pseudonyms can now be nested.
Deleted files can now optionally been moved to the recycle bin (in i-bay config).
System Monitoring (with MRTG) checks Free Memory and Load Average.
Internal POP3 and IMAP SSL options are available, also SMTP Auth locally (!) like in the Securemail Contrib by Dungog. What is still lacking is the SMTP Auth feature for accessing the provider's SMTP server.

I will test our SMEPLUS Upate script now and report back, what works and what fails.

guest22

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #1 on: January 19, 2005, 11:07:54 AM »
The focus towards the final release of SME Server 6.5 is as it has always been in general for SME Server: Secure, reliable and easy to administate.

Users may choose to install contribs and apply scripts at their own risk.

Look at the default SME Server as a startingpoint for further exploration and playground for your skills or wishes.

btw, the kernel version has changed in this Beta release

Thanks!

Offline stefan24

  • ****
  • 483
  • +0/-0
    • www.sme-server.de
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2005, 11:30:12 AM »
Quote from: "guest22"
The focus towards the final release of SME Server 6.5 is as it has always been in general for SME Server: Secure, reliable and easy to administate.


OK, then please tell me, why you have not updated openSSH and ZLib, which can be found in the smeplus script and there being considered as security fixes?
Other packages have been updated, but not to really newer versions, so I cannot check, if the security fixes have been included.

Quote from: "guest22"

btw, the kernel version has changed in this Beta release


Sure:

-kernel-2.4.20-18.7.i386.rpm
+kernel-2.4.20-37.7.legacy.i386.rpm

Is any S-ATA support added here now?

Additionally, I think, that SMTP Auth towards the provider is very important, and since I have written an article about SME server for a german network magazine and have searched for a solution to send mails to the provider, which - at least in Germany - are using SMTP Auth, I can state, that there is no (legally available) solution to get this to work.

guest22

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #3 on: January 19, 2005, 11:38:35 AM »
Thanks for the comments and suggestions Stefan. Let's give it a day or so, to see who jumps into this thread too, for I personally do not have all the answers.

Offline dickmorrell

  • *
  • 22
  • +0/-0
    • http://www.dickmorrell.com
Seems strange
« Reply #4 on: January 19, 2005, 11:40:52 AM »
Why would you release a beta with known vulnerabilities ?

There are norlug rpms freely available and dagweeirs free apt site which has up to date rpms available.

Whenever I have released betas in the past I've always - always - had latest shipping versions of stable services in them so as then to make sure testing 1) worked 2) could be documented.

Seems a bit lame :(

Will 6.5 include the hard work of Jesper K etc etc or is that seen as then competing with a Lycoris version that could be easily handbuilt anyway from scripts I assume Jesper will eventually modify.

Not overly impressed so far and only 15 mins into testing.
...

Offline gregswallow

  • *
  • 651
  • +1/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #5 on: January 19, 2005, 11:53:31 AM »
A few notes about what I like so far :-)  I think it's a good start...  I'm glad to see all the e-smith* packages updated, that was a very important part of this update that no one else had contributed as far as I know.  I also like the new secure email settings built in, and the fact you now don't need to specify a DNS server if your server is behind a home router.  There is lots of good stuff in there.

I would never complain about something that was free ;-)  There is always the option to install additional contribs yourself.  A sincere thank you to everyone that helped put the 6.5 beta together, and especially thanks for sharing your work with all of us.

Offline stefan24

  • ****
  • 483
  • +0/-0
    • www.sme-server.de
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2005, 12:58:29 PM »
My PII 400 (single processor) starts now with SME-SMP.
On another customer SME 6.0, this broke the start of SME. SME 6.5 SMP starts here without problems, but since it won't use the SMP code, UP would be a better choice!?

BTW: the e-mail redirection to unknown users is far better than ever.

Quote

I would never complain about something that was free


OK, you are right in all other cases. I can update the packages myself and add other contribs. But OTOH why should everybody do this, when it has to be done once at Lycoris?

And please tell me, how to connect to a provider's SMTP server, if it only supports SMTP Auth.
I use a DSL access with dynamic IP addresses, so sending my mails directly to the receipent's SMTP server is no choice, since these IP address ranges are banned by many SPAM filters.

tenanji

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2005, 03:16:09 PM »
Is this the Centos Port?

bovnet

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #8 on: January 19, 2005, 03:35:11 PM »
smp kernel on my via c3 1ghz. Seems to work ok though.

Its not a major leap i was hoping for. Many distros now on 2.6 even servers.

Steve.

Offline CharlieBrady

  • *
  • 6,918
  • +3/-0
Re: Seems strange
« Reply #9 on: January 19, 2005, 03:42:06 PM »
Quote from: "dickmorrell"
Why would you release a beta with known vulnerabilities ?


Hi Dick.

If you know of any vulnerabilities, please report them to security@contribs.org.

Regards

Offline gzartman

  • *
  • 305
  • +0/-0
    • LEI Engineering & Surveying
Re: first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #10 on: January 19, 2005, 04:48:55 PM »
Quote from: "stefan24"
Hi!

Beside a Samba 3.0 and SpamAssasin 3.0.2 update I cannot find any major updates in SME 6.5. (in the RPM-Changelog). No new PHP, MySQL, Apache, Kernel version.


SME 6.5 basically represents an updated to all current Fedora legacy packages that are relevent to SME.  While this isn't a major release, it certainly is a valuable one.  Remember, we aren't trying to build a distro out of cutting edge packages, but a stable one.  I think this release does just this and provides a good stepping stone for a move to a new OS base.

Greg Zartman
----
Greg J. Zartman
LEI Engineering & Surveying

SME user and community member since 2000.

Offline gzartman

  • *
  • 305
  • +0/-0
    • LEI Engineering & Surveying
Re: Seems strange
« Reply #11 on: January 19, 2005, 05:02:40 PM »
Quote from: "dickmorrell"
Why would you release a beta with known vulnerabilities ?


What are you talking about Dick?


Quote from: "dickmorrell"

Whenever I have released betas in the past I've always - always - had latest shipping versions of stable services in them so as then to make sure testing 1) worked 2) could be documented.


You are always talking about all these betas that you put out, but I've yet to see you contribute a single line of code to SME, ever.  

Quote from: "dickmorrell"

Will 6.5 include the hard work of Jesper K etc etc or is that seen as then competing with a Lycoris version that could be easily handbuilt anyway from scripts I assume Jesper will eventually modify.


First, this is not a Lycoris release, this is a community release.  Lycoris had nothing to do with this.  Shad Lords was the driving force behind getting this release out and therefore he deserves the credit.

Second, SME 6.5 includes what you see in the changelog.  Any work that was in the community that added to the "Core" OS w/o sacrificing stability was included.


Quote from: "dickmorrell"

Not overly impressed so far and only 15 mins into testing.


Spend more than 15min with SME 6.5.  There's alot more there than can be seen by looking at server-manager.  As I previously stated in this thread, we know this isn't an earth shattering major release.  However, it is a significant improvement of 6.0.1.  Basically, we've moved from a RH 7.3 core to a RH 9 core.  I think this will position us well for a move to a RHEL core.

Greg
----
Greg J. Zartman
LEI Engineering & Surveying

SME user and community member since 2000.

Offline gzartman

  • *
  • 305
  • +0/-0
    • LEI Engineering & Surveying
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #12 on: January 19, 2005, 05:05:54 PM »
Quote from: "bovnet"
Its not a major leap i was hoping for. Many distros now on 2.6 even servers.
Steve.


Not true.  RHEL is still using a 2.4 kernel.  

Greg Zartman
----
Greg J. Zartman
LEI Engineering & Surveying

SME user and community member since 2000.

bovnet


wallyrp

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2005, 05:43:56 PM »
Good Morning,

First off, kudos and credits to everyone involved in any community release! Your efforts are much appreciated by myself. I refuse to use terminology such as loser, lamer, etc. when dealing with a community effort because of how it affects teamwork.

I will attempt to work with the new release and see where it leads me. I still strongly encourage different flavors of community SME server iso's. I like the options provided by the various folks. Hell, I might release a REDNECK SME Server iso. :)

With the understanding that everyone can't be everything to everyone, I have a couple of requests for the "flavor" folks. I would like a "flavor" that is tailored to a "server-only" setup and another one tailored to a "server/gateway" setup. There are different needs in either setup. Example, I don't need SAMBA on a server-gateway solution when that's all I'm using it for but I would like stats from the various services like web, email, and others.

The more I think about the REDNECK SME Server iso, the more I like it. Hrmm.... Some of ya'll though wouldn't be able to decipher the language used in the panels and other places. :)

Example:

M R Ducks
M R Not
O S A R
C M Wangs
L I B
M R Ducks

Translation:

Them are ducks
Them are not
Oh yes they are
See them wings
Well I Be
Them are Ducks

Offline slords

  • ****
  • 235
  • +3/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #15 on: January 19, 2005, 06:02:29 PM »
Quote from: "stefan24"
OK, then please tell me, why you have not updated openSSH and ZLib, which can be found in the smeplus script and there being considered as security fixes?


Why do you think these are necessary.  What research have you done to verify that the security patches haven't been backported into the current packages included.  You can't trust the version numbers to tell you if a security patch has been applied or not. (btw this is all rkhunter does)

Quote from: "stefan24"
-kernel-2.4.20-18.7.i386.rpm
+kernel-2.4.20-37.7.legacy.i386.rpm

Is any S-ATA support added here now?


Unless the stock RH kernel supports SATA then no we don't support that yet.  When we move to RHEL4/CentOS4 then the support should be there.

Quote from: "stefan24"
Additionally, I think, that SMTP Auth towards the provider is very important, and since I have written an article about SME server for a german network magazine and have searched for a solution to send mails to the provider, which - at least in Germany - are using SMTP Auth, I can state, that there is no (legally available) solution to get this to work.


You are more then welcome to develop this support and suggest that it be included in the next distro.  As far as I know, no one has stepped up and found a way to reliably do this and provide a panel to configure it.

Quote from: "dickmorrell"
Why would you release a beta with known vulnerabilities ?


Back on your high horse again Dick.  You always seem to come in saying that this is vulnerable and this has problems.  If you have so much experience in all of this why don't you quit your complaining and start helping.  You have been asked many times to point out problems or security issues and have yet to step up and do either.

Quote from: "dickmorrell"
Whenever I have released betas in the past I've always - always - had latest shipping versions of stable services in them so as then to make sure testing 1) worked 2) could be documented.


This is exactly what we have done.  If you look at the fedoralegacy and what we have they are identical.  Just because there is a newer version out there doesn't make it necessary or more stable.

Quote from: "dickmorrell"
Will 6.5 include the hard work of Jesper K etc etc or is that seen as then competing with a Lycoris version that could be easily handbuilt anyway from scripts I assume Jesper will eventually modify.


He is welcome to modify his script to work with 6.5.  The reason that many of the packages in that script weren't included was because they aren't really necessary (security fixes, see version crap above), or the contrib packages aren't integrated very well with the template system, or are extras that may either affect stability or security of the base distro.

Quote from: "dickmorrell"
Not overly impressed so far and only 15 mins into testing.


Well since you are never impressed with anything anyone but you does this really doesn't hold much weight with me and probably a lot of others.  Please either be a contributing member of this community or go crawl back in your hole.

-Shad
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs,
and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." -- Rich Cook

Offline smeghead

  • *
  • 557
  • +0/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #16 on: January 19, 2005, 06:03:20 PM »
.. to achieve the best support for SATA it looks like the kernel will need to be 2.4.27 or newer:

http://www.linuxmafia.com/faq/Hardware/sata.html
..................

wallyrp

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #17 on: January 19, 2005, 06:50:57 PM »
Good Afternoon,

I don't know if anyone has been keeping up with the kernel iso that has been recently released from I believe skavenger? I know it has some SATA support but I'm not sure as to where it will go. I understand that the Official community release may not ever support SATA until the porting over to CENTOS but would exchanging any information with skavenger's release be any help to upgrading the kernel in the official community release?

Just a thought.

Offline CharlieBrady

  • *
  • 6,918
  • +3/-0
SMTP auth to ISP
« Reply #18 on: January 19, 2005, 07:12:53 PM »
Quote from: "stefan24"

Additionally, I think, that SMTP Auth towards the provider is very important, and since I have written an article about SME server for a german network magazine and have searched for a solution to send mails to the provider, which - at least in Germany - are using SMTP Auth, I can state, that there is no (legally available) solution to get this to work.


The e-smith-email RPM included in 6.5beta1 includes an
an SMTP authentication proxy. The server can be configured so that qmail uses this proxy for all outgoing SMTP connections. Mitel made this software available in e-smith-email-4.15.1-06 in the devel directory on the various mirrors, and Shad has picked that version up as the basis for his work on 6.5.

Because qmail has not been modified in any way, there's no legal restriction on distribution of this solution.

As I understand it, there is no panel support for this feature. To enable it from the command line, do:

config setprop smtp-auth-proxy status enabled
config setprop smtp-auth-proxy Userid aaaaa
config setprop smtp-auth-proxy Passwd xxxxxxxxx
config set SMTPSmartHost smtp.your.isp
signal-event email-update

Offline marsa_matruh

  • ****
  • 249
  • +0/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #19 on: January 19, 2005, 07:24:22 PM »
Quote from: "slords"
Unless the stock RH kernel supports SATA then no we don't support that yet.  When we move to RHEL4/CentOS4 then the support should be there.

-Shad


So, you are planning to move to a RHLE4 basis :-D which is still at beta stage   :-?

For SME 7.0?

Any roadmap?

Offline slords

  • ****
  • 235
  • +3/-0
Re: SMTP auth to ISP
« Reply #20 on: January 19, 2005, 09:16:24 PM »
Quote from: "CharlieBrady"
The e-smith-email RPM included in 6.5beta1 includes an
an SMTP authentication proxy. The server can be configured so that qmail uses this proxy for all outgoing SMTP connections. Mitel made this software available in e-smith-email-4.15.1-06 in the devel directory on the various mirrors, and Shad has picked that version up as the basis for his work on 6.5.

Because qmail has not been modified in any way, there's no legal restriction on distribution of this solution.

As I understand it, there is no panel support for this feature. To enable it from the command line, do:

config setprop smtp-auth-proxy status enabled
config setprop smtp-auth-proxy Userid aaaaa
config setprop smtp-auth-proxy Passwd xxxxxxxxx
config set SMTPSmartHost smtp.your.isp
signal-event email-update


Thanks for this update Charlie.  I saw that this was in there but wasn't sure what it was.  Glad to have some explination as to what it is doing.

-Shad
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs,
and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." -- Rich Cook

adamperry

Re: Seems strange
« Reply #21 on: January 19, 2005, 09:34:51 PM »
Thanks to everyone for working on the new beta.  There's always a bit of glee when I see a new SME version available!  I've been using SME as my home file server for years and it's been solid as a rock.  

Also, thanks for clearing up the confusion as to who released this.  I figured this was Lycoris code before I read Greg's message.  

Though I don't use SME as anything other than a file server, I would be very interested to see more of what Dick (who has expertise in this arena from his prior development of Smoothwall) has to say with regard to specific vulnerabilities in the beta.  That's why there are betas.  Tell us more.  It seems like you could make a significant contribution here.


Quote from: "gzartman"
Quote from: "dickmorrell"
Why would you release a beta with known vulnerabilities ?


What are you talking about Dick?


Quote from: "dickmorrell"

Whenever I have released betas in the past I've always - always - had latest shipping versions of stable services in them so as then to make sure testing 1) worked 2) could be documented.


You are always talking about all these betas that you put out, but I've yet to see you contribute a single line of code to SME, ever.  

Quote from: "dickmorrell"

Will 6.5 include the hard work of Jesper K etc etc or is that seen as then competing with a Lycoris version that could be easily handbuilt anyway from scripts I assume Jesper will eventually modify.


First, this is not a Lycoris release, this is a community release.  Lycoris had nothing to do with this.  Shad Lords was the driving force behind getting this release out and therefore he deserves the credit.

Second, SME 6.5 includes what you see in the changelog.  Any work that was in the community that added to the "Core" OS w/o sacrificing stability was included.


Quote from: "dickmorrell"

Not overly impressed so far and only 15 mins into testing.


Spend more than 15min with SME 6.5.  There's alot more there than can be seen by looking at server-manager.  As I previously stated in this thread, we know this isn't an earth shattering major release.  However, it is a significant improvement of 6.0.1.  Basically, we've moved from a RH 7.3 core to a RH 9 core.  I think this will position us well for a move to a RHEL core.

Greg

jcoleman

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #22 on: January 19, 2005, 11:19:16 PM »
Posting in these forums that this is a vulnerable release without defining those vulnerabilities in writing to security@contribs.org is the same as yelling "Tsunami!" at the beach without proof.

There has always been, and will always be, immediate attention paid to all security reports.  If you know of a vulnerability, report it.  Otherwise, posting that the distro is vulnerable is of little value to anyone and potentially scares off users who may not know better.  

So, how do you like the new iso?  :-)

Have fun playing with it and constructive feedback is always welcome.

-jeff

Offline jahlewis

  • *
  • 151
  • +0/-0
    • http://www.arachnerd.com/
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #23 on: January 19, 2005, 11:27:19 PM »
What sort of testing are you hoping for?  What would be great for us users is a list of things to try out...

Like installing the contribs we are using now and reporting to the owners the problems
or restoring backups etc.

Any ideas for us?
............

Offline CharlieBrady

  • *
  • 6,918
  • +3/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #24 on: January 19, 2005, 11:37:53 PM »
Quote from: "smeghead"
.. to achieve the best support for SATA it looks like the kernel will need to be 2.4.27 or newer:

http://www.linuxmafia.com/faq/Hardware/sata.html


Many of  the features of 2.4.27 have been backported to earlier kernels. RedHat backport features all the time.

AIUI, RHEL3/CentOS3 has good support for SATA hardware. The latest RHEL kernel is 2.4.21-27.0.1.EL.

Offline CharlieBrady

  • *
  • 6,918
  • +3/-0
Re: first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #25 on: January 20, 2005, 01:39:33 AM »
Quote from: "stefan24"
Hi!
In the port forwarding panel there is no hint, that port forwarding is now deactivated, when the server is in server-only mode. (which I found in the Changelog)


Port forwarding has always been deactivated in server-only mode.   It only makes any sense in server-gateway mode.

Offline mrjhb3

  • *
  • 1,188
  • +0/-0
    • John Bennett Services
Re: first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #26 on: January 20, 2005, 03:22:25 AM »
Quote from: "CharlieBrady"
Quote from: "stefan24"
Hi!
In the port forwarding panel there is no hint, that port forwarding is now deactivated, when the server is in server-only mode. (which I found in the Changelog)


Port forwarding has always been deactivated in server-only mode.   It only makes any sense in server-gateway mode.




This might be true, but one gets the false sense that it can be done in server-only mode because in server-manager you have the ability to create port-forwarding rules.  Whether they really take effect of not.  6.5 just now clearly states that port-forwarding isn't supported in server-only mode.
......

SSBN

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #27 on: January 20, 2005, 04:20:45 AM »
I look forward to testing the new SME. Good to se people debating newest versions vs. older proven versions. We have that one in our office all the time. Proven wins most of the time. Good job guys.

Offline stefan24

  • ****
  • 483
  • +0/-0
    • www.sme-server.de
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #28 on: January 20, 2005, 09:40:40 AM »
Quote from: "slords"
Quote from: "stefan24"
OK, then please tell me, why you have not updated openSSH and ZLib, ...


Why do you think these are necessary.  What research have you done to verify that the security patches haven't been backported into the current packages included.  You can't trust the version numbers to tell you if a security patch has been applied or not. (btw this is all rkhunter does)


openSSH is not listed as changed in the changelog, and yes, rkhunter complains about it. And I already said,  "I cannot check, if the security fixes have been included." Maybe you could have written that to a changelog file.

Quote from: "slords"

Unless the stock RH kernel supports SATA then no we don't support that yet.  When we move to RHEL4/CentOS4 then the support should be there.


OK. But please read the forums, where some users ask for S-ATA support. And I think many others have read the negative answers and are waiting for this support.

Quote from: "slords"


You are more then welcome to develop this support (for Auth SMTP) and suggest that it be included in the next distro.


Come on! If I could do this for myself, I won't have to ask. I can test solutions like the one from Charlie, but I tried this already with 6.01 and it did not work. I give it another try with SME 6.5.

Offline marsa_matruh

  • ****
  • 249
  • +0/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #29 on: January 20, 2005, 09:56:22 AM »
Quote from: "jcoleman"
So, how do you like the new iso?  :-)

-jeff


Why so big?

6.01 ISO : 350 Mb
6.5beta1 ISO : 440 Mb

Samba 2 -> Samba 3 : 15 Mb

Missing 65 Mb.

gocdo

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #30 on: January 20, 2005, 10:05:15 AM »
For those interested SATA support works for me.

I have a 1RU box with 2 SATA disks only. I can install the 6.5 beta on this box (in Raid1 mode). Performance is great with hdparam -t reporting over 60MB/sec.

Nice to see an interim update while waiting for Lycoris. I presume the developers had a chance to try installing many of the common contribs - such as those in the upgrade scripts etc. Any chance of a list of the contribs that have been found to work or not.

Appreciated
regards
kevin

Offline ngomes

  • ***
  • 129
  • +0/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #31 on: January 20, 2005, 11:43:45 AM »
Hi all,

For all of you that don’t have time to read the following important docs stated in here:
+ SME Server 6.5 Beta1 Changed RPMS
+ SME Server 6.5 Beta1 Changelog

Please READ a résumé in here:
+ SME Server 6.5 beta contribs compatibility issues

And please also note the following:
+ SME Server 6.5 Beta1 is a Public/Community Release, NOT a Lycoris Release.
+ Many developers worked directly or indirectly (Devinfo Mailing List and Bug Tracker People) on this 6.5 version.
+ Special thanks go to these main/core developers (alphabetically):
+ Charlie Brady from http://www.e-smith.com
+ Gordon Rowell from http://www.e-smith.com
+ Greg J. Zartman from http://www.leiinc.com
+ Jay Fenlason from http://www.redhat.com
+ Michael Soulier from http://www.e-smith.com
+ Mark Knox from http://www.e-smith.com
+ Shad Lords from http://lordsfam.net
+ Tony Clayton from http://www.e-smith.com

Thanks in advanced,
Nuno Rafael Gomes
Learning everyday from everyday problems...

Offline Tib

  • *
  • 571
  • +0/-0
    • http://www.tibors.net
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #32 on: January 20, 2005, 02:44:43 PM »
Hello all,

Well I've had an interesting load with the new 6.5 ver.

I decided to do an update to a 6.0.1-01 install wich had the smeupdate script run on it as well as a couple of other addons like egroupware, phpmyadmin, twig not (twiggi) ... twiggi is part of the smeupdate script, openvpn and phpldapadmin are a few I can think off.

this server is in server only mode atm.

The update went well except for good old mysql ... it broke ... with a little stuffing arround and updates I got it going again.

First I updated mysql to 4.0 ... it ran like a dream again ... then i got greedy and decided to update it to 4.1 with smeghead's update script and I broke it again.

But again with a little stuffing around I got it to run ... not fixed properly as it won't come online after a re-boot but if I start it manually it's fine ... I think I've butchered it up a bit as I can't start it with "service mysqld start" I have to use "service mysql start".
Ohh and I had password problems ... I set the password manually but how do you get it back to normal ??

I can access all the features I've tried so far like webmail, egroupware, phpmyadmin, phpldapadmin,twiggi and twig ... they seem to be functioning properly ... haven't tested out openvpn yet but it started up with an OK at startup so I would think it's fine.

Anyway enough testing for one night ... I'll check a few more things out tomorrow and the weekend.

Could someone help me get MySQL back on track please.

Regards,

Tib

P.S sorry for the double post ... wan't sure if I had to post here or the General discussion section.

guest22

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #33 on: January 20, 2005, 03:05:10 PM »
Please avoid cross-postings. Thx.

jok11n

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #34 on: January 20, 2005, 11:55:06 PM »
Quote from: "marsa_matruh"
Why so big?

6.01 ISO : 350 Mb
6.5beta1 ISO : 440 Mb

Samba 2 -> Samba 3 : 15 Mb

Missing 65 Mb.


From what I understand there are a bunch of dev tools in the beta iso (although not installed, just there) I would suspect that they may be left out of the final release though.

Offline stefan24

  • ****
  • 483
  • +0/-0
    • www.sme-server.de
Re: SMTP auth to ISP
« Reply #35 on: January 21, 2005, 08:57:38 AM »
Quote from: "CharlieBrady"

The e-smith-email RPM included in 6.5beta1 includes an
an SMTP authentication proxy.
[...]
To enable it from the command line, do:

config setprop smtp-auth-proxy status enabled
config setprop smtp-auth-proxy Userid aaaaa
config setprop smtp-auth-proxy Passwd xxxxxxxxx
config set SMTPSmartHost smtp.your.isp
signal-event email-update


This works with SME 6.5 without any problem. Thank you!
I know, that I tried that with SME 6.01, and it did not work, but maybe I did not have the right e-smith-email.rpm there.

Quote from: "CharlieBrady"

As I understand it, there is no panel support for this feature.


Since the Userid and Passwd normally is the pop username and password and since the SMTPSmartHost is (at least here) the "Address of Internet provider's mail server" from the e-mail panel, this should work without an additional panel!?
You just have to create a new check box "use the pop username /password as SMTP Auth" in the e-mail panel and fill it with the contents like described!?

But sorry, I cannot do myself.

Offline stefan24

  • ****
  • 483
  • +0/-0
    • www.sme-server.de
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #36 on: January 21, 2005, 10:38:15 AM »
Hi!

So, the SMEPLUS script seems to work with SME 6.5 with most of the updates and contribs.

I just had to update the 6.0x check, remark the already installed updates and only have minor problems with the AV script from Jesper and major problems with the SpamAssasin script from Jesper. We are already talking via E-Mail about a solution of the problems.

I will update the existing script to support also SME 6.5 ASAP, and include Jesper's scripts again, when the problems are fixed.

Offline gregswallow

  • *
  • 651
  • +1/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #37 on: January 21, 2005, 10:59:15 AM »
Stefan, did you have trouble with the mysql 4.0.xx update? It is late and maybe I mistyped something but it seems to me that the way to upgrade to mysql 4 needs to be changed.  I get an error that the username and password must be specified when running the fix_privelege_tables part.  I think you have to specify the root username and password similarly to the howto I made here for MySQL 4.1 - http://forums.contribs.org/index.php?topic=25414.0.  There are some changes to the default /etc/my.cnf file from 6.0.1 to 6.5 that are causing this I think - probably better security??

Offline gregswallow

  • *
  • 651
  • +1/-0
Re: SMTP auth to ISP
« Reply #38 on: January 21, 2005, 11:04:01 AM »
Quote from: "stefan24"
Since the Userid and Passwd normally is the pop username and password and since the SMTPSmartHost is (at least here) the "Address of Internet provider's mail server" from the e-mail panel, this should work without an additional panel!?
You just have to create a new check box "use the pop username /password as SMTP Auth" in the e-mail panel and fill it with the contents like described!?

But sorry, I cannot do myself.


Maybe add a note in the bug tracker about this?  If any contribs.org staff are reading this, is it ok to use the bug tracker for minor feature requests such as this?

guest22

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #39 on: January 21, 2005, 12:49:33 PM »
Hi Greg,

actually the bugtracker is strictly for the base distro. For now user contributed rpm/files/scripts should be discussed directly with the author. On the other hand I personally understand your request, we're simply not yet equiped for that, sorry. Maybe we can set up a contribs category for this, I will discuss this.

Offline CharlieBrady

  • *
  • 6,918
  • +3/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #40 on: January 21, 2005, 05:45:45 PM »
Quote from: "marsa_matruh"

Why so big?

6.01 ISO : 350 Mb
6.5beta1 ISO : 440 Mb


Dev tools (compilers, libraries) are included, in case anyone wants to help out with the development.

Offline hmuhammad

  • **
  • 65
  • +0/-0
Prefer to name a system 'server' which the beta disallows.
« Reply #41 on: January 21, 2005, 07:07:04 PM »
I tried to name my first SME 6.5beta1 test installation 'server' and the configuration dialogs refused to allow it.

I would really appreciate the option to continue naming servers 'server'.

I've historically named servers 'server' and domains 'network', which, for me, makes for naturally easy user training; especially in small offices having only one server.

Its just natural to refer to the network as 'network' rather than trying to explain 'domain' to users. If there's only one server its just simple to name it 'server' (eliminates an additional name being used). I think the words 'network' and 'server' are now common in the business world; I just find it easier to not introduce more names (like domain and its domainname; server and its servername).

Thanks for the good effort and work,
Hasan
...............

Offline gregswallow

  • *
  • 651
  • +1/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #42 on: January 21, 2005, 07:36:13 PM »
Quote from: "guest22"
...actually the bugtracker is strictly for the base distro...

For this case if someone made a bug report with the setting "Severity=Feature", would that be appropriate?  It is basically a request to modify an existing package (e-smith-email I think).

Offline markehle

  • ***
  • 125
  • +0/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #43 on: January 21, 2005, 07:50:19 PM »
Somewhere on this website I saw a thread about the newest version of imp (3?). It has a slew of really neat features.

Is there any chance that it could make it into the next version of SME?

Thanks!

Mark

guest22

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #44 on: January 21, 2005, 11:36:19 PM »
@greg, sure, if you or anybody else suspects is a part of the base distro, please feel free to report it as a bug or feature request. Thanks!

felipevidal

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #45 on: January 22, 2005, 04:38:45 AM »
Quote from: "gregswallow"
Stefan, did you have trouble with the mysql 4.0.xx update? It is late and maybe I mistyped something but it seems to me that the way to upgrade to mysql 4 needs to be changed.  I get an error that the username and password must be specified when running the fix_privelege_tables part.  I think you have to specify the root username and password similarly to the howto I made here for MySQL 4.1 - http://forums.contribs.org/index.php?topic=25414.0.  There are some changes to the default /etc/my.cnf file from 6.0.1 to 6.5 that are causing this I think - probably better security??


I think the problem you are experiencing has to do with a change in MySQL's password hashing method.  They 'improved' it to make it more secure.  I had similar problems with ClarkConnect 3.0beta when they upgraded in the beta cycle.

See this article at the MySQL website here.

I hope this was helpful.
Regards,
-felipe

Offline gregswallow

  • *
  • 651
  • +1/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #46 on: January 23, 2005, 01:17:49 PM »
Quote from: "felipevidal"
I think the problem you are experiencing has to do with a change in MySQL's password hashing method.  They 'improved' it to make it more secure.  I had similar problems with ClarkConnect 3.0beta when they upgraded in the beta cycle.
That is definitly an issue when upgrading from 4.0 to 4.1 on SME - it is necessary to use the --old-passwords option.  But something else changed from 6.0.1 to 6.5b1 that made it necessary to specify the password in the fix_privileges_table command when going from 3 to 4.0.  I made a mysql 4.0.23 upgrade script for 6.5b1 here - http://no.longer.valid/phpwiki/index.php/SME6.5UpdateScripts

Skydiver

6.5 Beta Tests results
« Reply #47 on: January 24, 2005, 09:25:16 PM »
Hi everyone,

Just thought i would add my results of the 6.5 install.
The company i work for are primary VOIP providers and we have been testing asterisk PBX with digium cards as a small office solution etc.. on SME 5.6 & 6.01.

Next stage We wanted to complete some tests with SME as a soft switch between our GateKeeper and a PSTN company using SIP from the PSTN Co to SME with H323 then to our H323 Gatekeeper.

Installation on a production server was easy and no issues noted. We added all the required dependencies and once again no issues noted.

All in all for a novice the 6.5 release has the thumbs up. Any server software that you can simply place the cd in the rom drive and follow a few simple prompts and find as an end result the server can be operational as a Secure web/mail server and is easy to manage has to be a winner.

The developers need to take a bow, with all SME releases i have experienced and deployed to small companies i have nothing but good results.

Thanks for the updated Version & Keep up the good work. Many People are lucky to have SME and the support of the developers.

Cheers
SkyDiver

Offline kmccarn

  • ***
  • 112
  • +0/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #48 on: January 25, 2005, 01:25:28 PM »
Well - I finally upgraded my home server to the 6.5b1

Sincere thanks to all who worked on it.

So far - the only major thing I've noticed is that it seems way faster than before. (might be my perception though)

I ran through the update scripts from Greg (thanks) and only had one error in step 3 "sh phpize - no such command" or something like that.

But webmail still works - so I'm not sure it's critical.

I also noticed that in the new (?) webmail you can choose the local LDAP directory - hadn't noticed that before.

Still wondering how to activate the Spamassassin that is mentioned in the changelog - but I have to work today.

Thanks again - and kudos for all your efforts.

Kevin
Kevin in WV 8-)......

haj

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #49 on: January 25, 2005, 11:08:07 PM »
Hello,

Upgraded to 6.5 in garteway mode and I can not connect to gmail smtp server using ssl...

Offline kmccarn

  • ***
  • 112
  • +0/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #50 on: January 26, 2005, 12:04:48 AM »
OK - I have tested the vpn remote access from 2 different PC's on different domains.

WORKS GREAT !!

Using it now from Starbucks - 40 miles from home - I can browse all my files -- maybe I'll try printing something.

HOORAY !

 :lol:
Kevin in WV 8-)......

Offline jahlewis

  • *
  • 151
  • +0/-0
    • http://www.arachnerd.com/
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #51 on: January 27, 2005, 04:56:12 PM »
I installed it on a clean box, and everything went well with the install.  I noticed 6.5b1 has a new system monitoring screen, which when expanded, included memory and processor load with rrd/mrtg maps.

I REALLY like using the sysmon rpms Shad used to maintain, and was hoping for similar coverage (memory, load, processes, uptime, network etc.) as well as the nice graphs... in 6.5b1

Can anyone shed light into what the plans are with the system monitoring aspect?

I also want to add my thanks and kudo's to all the work put into this, and again reiterate the questions of some guidiance on what we should be testing.
............

Offline jmartin

  • **
  • 58
  • +0/-0
    • http://www.ci.wayne.mi.us
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #52 on: January 27, 2005, 09:32:15 PM »
I upgraded a test box from 6.0.1 to 6.5beta1 and it worked great.

GREAT JOB and thanks for all the hard work

Do the recycle bins in the user home directories and ibays get cleaned out automatically or do they need to be cleaned out manually?

duncan

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #53 on: January 28, 2005, 02:46:47 AM »
Hi,

1st up - nice job guys.

I note in the list of changes that Pattern matching has been included - however I cant see any method of enabling this. Is this a command line thing?

Regards Duncan

Offline slords

  • ****
  • 235
  • +3/-0
first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #54 on: January 28, 2005, 04:43:39 AM »
Quote from: "jmartin"
Do the recycle bins in the user home directories and ibays get cleaned out automatically or do they need to be cleaned out manually?


They need to be cleaned out manually.

Quote from: "duncan"
I note in the list of changes that Pattern matching has been included - however I cant see any method of enabling this. Is this a command line thing?


There is section for them in the email panel once it is enabled.  To enable issue the following command:

Code: [Select]
/sbin/e-smith/config setprop smtpfront-qmail Patterns enabled

if you want pattern matching on the secure interface as well do the following:

Code: [Select]
/sbin/e-smith/config setprop ssmtpfront-qmail Patterns enabled

Once you have done this then go to the email panel and configure what you want blocked and save.

-Shad
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs,
and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." -- Rich Cook

duncan

first experiences with SME 6.5 Beta1
« Reply #55 on: January 28, 2005, 07:27:27 AM »
Hi Shad.

Im guessing its

Code: [Select]
/sbin/e-smith/config setprop smtpfront-qmail Patterns enabled

Regards Duncan