June 2006 - WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] Webmail: What do you like?

by freak4uxxx＠gmail.com

check out squirell mail. Really easy to setup, works w/imap -Eric -----Original Message----- From: Richard Klein <rich(a)richardklein.org> Subj: [Wlug] Webmail: What do you like? Date: Fri Jun 16, 2006 10:43 pm Size: 704 bytes To: Worcester Linux Users Group <wlug(a)mail.wlug.org> I was at the meeting in April or May, but, unfortunately, haven't had time for the list or for meetings since then. At the time, I was looking for help setting up an IMAP server. I eventually got that working with Debian Sarge, Postfix, UW-IMAP, and the howto at: http://howtoforge.com/perfect_setup_debian_sarge I think everything is working now, although I haven't switched my MX record to this server yet, but I'm still lacking a webmail interface. What do you guys like for webmail? Is there any particular reason why you like one package over another? -- Rich _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

June 17, 2006

Re: [Wlug] Webmail: What do you like?

by Scott Venier

Richard Klein wrote: > What do you guys like for webmail? Is there any particular reason why > you like one package over another? > I like squirrelmail. Debian sarge has 1.4.6 in it, iirc, but I like 1.5.1 better. Some nice extra features, mostly just bells & whistles, but I like them. Pretty simple to use and configure, might require an extra bit of apache knowledge if you go with 1.5.1 instead of just 'apt-get install squirrelmail' I'm afraid that I can't really compare it to anything else since I haven't used them. I've heard of at least Imp and OpenWebMail. Scott

June 17, 2006

Webmail: What do you like?

by Richard Klein

I was at the meeting in April or May, but, unfortunately, haven't had time for the list or for meetings since then. At the time, I was looking for help setting up an IMAP server. I eventually got that working with Debian Sarge, Postfix, UW-IMAP, and the howto at: http://howtoforge.com/perfect_setup_debian_sarge I think everything is working now, although I haven't switched my MX record to this server yet, but I'm still lacking a webmail interface. What do you guys like for webmail? Is there any particular reason why you like one package over another? -- Rich

June 15, 2006

Re: [Wlug] Filesystem usage

by Eric Stein

My up to date Ubuntu system: root@pippin:/ # du --max-depth=1 -h 48K ./lost+found 34M ./etc 20K ./media 473M ./var 2.8G ./usr 4.8M ./bin 21M ./boot 2.9M ./dev 132G ./home 196M ./lib 4.0K ./mnt 909M ./proc 216K ./root 9.6M ./sbin 5.8M ./tmp 0 ./sys 4.0K ./srv 170M ./opt 4.0K ./initrd 4.0K ./test 136G . Bill Smith wrote: > This is what I got on an up-to-date Fedora Core 5 system: > > [root@sherbrooke ~]# cd / > [root@sherbrooke /]# du --max-depth=1 -h > 8.0K ./mnt > 21M ./sbin > 9.5G ./home > 8.0K ./.automount > 8.0K ./selinux > 43M ./root > 0 ./sys > 8.2M ./boot > 8.0K ./media > 8.0K ./srv > 101M ./etc > 112K ./dev > 900M ./proc > 0 ./net > 4.7G ./usr > 34M ./opt > 7.3M ./bin > 28K ./.rh-fontconfig > 37M ./apps > 96M ./lib > 8.0K ./misc > 206M ./var > 16G . > > > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

June 14, 2006

Re: [Wlug] Filesystem usage

by Bill Smith

On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 22:20 -0400, Mike Perry wrote: > Hi there, > I am curious on some statistics and I was wondering you could help me > out. I'm wondering what the output of the following command is on your > system: > > root@chao:/tmp# cd / > root@chao:/# du --max-depth=1 -h > 4.2M ./bin > 253K ./dev > 36M ./etc > 336M ./lib > 0 ./mnt > 436M ./opt > 0 ./srv > 18K ./tmp > 0 ./sys > 743M ./var > 3.8G ./usr > 38M ./boot > 22G ./home > 900M ./proc > 9.0M ./sbin > 4.5M ./root > 0 ./media > 0 ./initrd > 28G . This is what I got on an up-to-date Fedora Core 5 system: [root@sherbrooke ~]# cd / [root@sherbrooke /]# du --max-depth=1 -h 8.0K ./mnt 21M ./sbin 9.5G ./home 8.0K ./.automount 8.0K ./selinux 43M ./root 0 ./sys 8.2M ./boot 8.0K ./media 8.0K ./srv 101M ./etc 112K ./dev 900M ./proc 0 ./net 4.7G ./usr 34M ./opt 7.3M ./bin 28K ./.rh-fontconfig 37M ./apps 96M ./lib 8.0K ./misc 206M ./var 16G .

June 14, 2006

Re: [Wlug] Filesystem usage

by Jared Greenwald

This is my highly-custom Gentoo Laptop. laptop-wifi / # du --max-depth=1 -h 7.3M ./bin 260K ./dev 32M ./etc 50M ./lib 0 ./mnt 277M ./opt 15M ./tmp 0 ./sys 3.7G ./var 7.8G ./usr 14M ./boot 3.4G ./home 899M ./proc 9.5M ./sbin 19M ./root 0 ./media 0 ./.reiserfs_priv 20K ./laptop 17G . I'm sure I could trim this down as I have 1.7G in /var/tmp/portage (the place the portage actually builds packages from source) and 2.5G in /usr/portage/distfiles (the place where portage stores the source kits) - both of which are not essential after the package is built and installed. On 6/13/06, Mike Perry <mwp(a)sdf.lonestar.org> wrote: > Hi there, > I am curious on some statistics and I was wondering you could help me > out. I'm wondering what the output of the following command is on your > system: > > root@chao:/tmp# cd / > root@chao:/# du --max-depth=1 -h > 4.2M ./bin > 253K ./dev > 36M ./etc > 336M ./lib > 0 ./mnt > 436M ./opt > 0 ./srv > 18K ./tmp > 0 ./sys > 743M ./var > 3.8G ./usr > 38M ./boot > 22G ./home > 900M ./proc > 9.0M ./sbin > 4.5M ./root > 0 ./media > 0 ./initrd > 28G . > > > The system I ran on above is an ubuntu desktop machine that hasn't been > rebuild in over a year closer to a year and half. > > For comparison a relatively stock ubuntu machine I have looks like: > > 4.4M ./bin > 103K ./dev > 12M ./etc > 167M ./lib > 0 ./mnt > 0 ./opt > 8.0K ./tmp > 0 ./sys > 209M ./var > 1.6G ./usr > 19M ./boot > 2.3M ./home > 513M ./proc > 9.9M ./sbin > 260K ./root > 0 ./media > 0 ./backup > 0 ./initrd > 2G . > > > Thanks, > Mike > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug >

June 14, 2006

Filesystem usage

by Mike Perry

Hi there, I am curious on some statistics and I was wondering you could help me out. I'm wondering what the output of the following command is on your system: root@chao:/tmp# cd / root@chao:/# du --max-depth=1 -h 4.2M ./bin 253K ./dev 36M ./etc 336M ./lib 0 ./mnt 436M ./opt 0 ./srv 18K ./tmp 0 ./sys 743M ./var 3.8G ./usr 38M ./boot 22G ./home 900M ./proc 9.0M ./sbin 4.5M ./root 0 ./media 0 ./initrd 28G . The system I ran on above is an ubuntu desktop machine that hasn't been rebuild in over a year closer to a year and half. For comparison a relatively stock ubuntu machine I have looks like: 4.4M ./bin 103K ./dev 12M ./etc 167M ./lib 0 ./mnt 0 ./opt 8.0K ./tmp 0 ./sys 209M ./var 1.6G ./usr 19M ./boot 2.3M ./home 513M ./proc 9.9M ./sbin 260K ./root 0 ./media 0 ./backup 0 ./initrd 2G . Thanks, Mike

June 14, 2006

Anyone actually using SPF and SRS in a Sendmail production env?

by Dwight A. Ernest

Is anyone here actually using SPF and SRS in a Sendmail production environment? If so, I'd love to ask a few questions about resources, performance, and real-world experience. Thanks.

June 10, 2006

Re: [Wlug] SoC's with USB host

by Andy Stewart

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Mike Leo wrote: > http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS3880195342.html > > This is what you should have used for your router Andy! You're right - that's pretty cool! Its tempting to buy it just for yucks (but one would have to buy the boards also so the connectors will line up). Thanks for the pointer! Andy - -- Andy Stewart, Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA, USA http://www.wlug.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEihUsHl0iXDssISsRArc7AJ4+vcr4+GXk3a9FIP5R12aygLkQ3wCcCbfZ cYmfbGWqIEL7e4q6U3+dJOI= =C9n4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

June 10, 2006

Re: [Wlug] SoC's with USB host

by Mike Leo

http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS3880195342.html This is what you should have used for your router Andy! --- Jamie Guinan <guinan(a)bluebutton.com> wrote: > > To follow up on discussion about USB capabilities, I took a quick look > at which platforms support USB host (so you can plug webcams, etc. > *into* it), > > $ cd linux-2.6.16 > $ find . | grep ohci > ... > ./drivers/usb/host/ohci-s3c2410.c [ Samsung ARM 920T ] > ./drivers/usb/host/ohci-sa1111.c [ StrongARM(SA1110) companion Chip ] > ./drivers/usb/host/ohci-lh7a404.c [ Sharp ARM920T ] > ./drivers/usb/host/ohci-ppc-soc.c [ Various PowerPC (Freescale) ] > ./drivers/usb/host/ohci-au1xxx.c [ AMD (formerly Alchemy) MIPS Au1000 ] > ./drivers/usb/host/ohci-pxa27x.c [ XScale ARM (successor to SA1110] > ... > > Those modules are thin hardware-specific glue around the main ohci/usb > kernel code. > > I think the gumstix is a pxa25x, and only the 27x supports USB host. > > Development boards for a lot of these are priced rather high for the > typical hobbyist budget, from a few hundred $$ on up, > > http://www.embeddedplanet.com/products/sbc.asp > http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T062/0378.pdf > http://www.hitechglobal.com/boards/ARM920T.htm > > It looks like Gumstix and routerboard are the cheapest available > products in this class. And they're great, but hopefully in the > we'll see more things aimed at hobbyists, with USB host capability. > > -Jamie > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug >

June 9, 2006