On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 07:57:07AM +0200, Markus Neteler wrote:
Reboot happily?
Definitely, a production system with a stuck CPU is almost always a
good candidate for a reboot
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 11:38:28PM -0700, Alex Mandel wrote:
Anyone have an opinion Fail2ban, DenyHosts or SSHGuard?
As far as I can tell without checking, "denyhosts" is running on most
of the Debian 6 VM's. If nobody complained, I suspect it's working
properly.
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 06:24:28PM +0200, Markus Neteler wrote:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Martin Spott <Martin.Spott@mgras.net> wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 11:38:28PM -0700, Alex Mandel wrote:
>> Anyone have an opinion Fail2ban, DenyHosts or SSHGuard?
>
> As far as I can tell without checking, "denyhosts" is running on most
> of the Debian 6 VM's. If nobody complained, I suspect it's working
> properly.
Note, that the "tracsvn" VM is still running on Debian 5.
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instead of creating a single forum, don't you prefer to host the
archive at the OSGeo Nabble forum? There is a forum for projects were
most of OSGeo software and data projects are welcome.
Hi Jorge: thanks for the info. Sure, good idea. What needs to happen for http://pycsw-dev.20702.n7.nabble.com/ to be part of OSGeo Nabble? FYI pycsw is an OSGeo project in incubation, so I'm not sure what the inclusion rules are.
Note that we ported the mbox from sf.net to osgeo 13 months ago (see http://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/888), so I'm not sure if this is related. Bottom line is that we need a single .mbox for Nabble to import.
Cheers
..Tom
From: jsanz@osgeo.org
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 06:06:22 +0200
To: sac@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [SAC] pycsw-devel mbox file for Nabble setup
Hi Tom,
Instead of creating a single forum, don't you prefer to host the
archive at the OSGeo Nabble forum? There is a forum for projects were
most of OSGeo software and data projects are welcome.
Hi sorry for the delay, I was at Geocamp PT in Óbidos
On 24 May 2013 14:07, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Jorge: thanks for the info. Sure, good idea. What needs to happen for http://pycsw-dev.20702.n7.nabble.com/ to be part of OSGeo Nabble? FYI pycsw is an OSGeo project in incubation, so I'm not sure what the inclusion rules are.
No problem, the only thing to happen is that pcsw project accepts
being archived at OSGeo nabble archive. Being in incubation is indeed
a strong reason.
Note that we ported the mbox from sf.net to osgeo 13 months ago (see http://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/888), so I'm not sure if this is related. Bottom line is that we need a single .mbox for Nabble to import.
Well if we can got both mbox files we can ask Nabble team to import
them, I don't see any problem. We just need to provide them links
where they can grab the files.
As your new archive is almost empty, we can just create a new one
under OSGeo forum and ask for the import at Nabble help forum. I'll do
it right now and will wait for your instructions for the mbox import.
From: jsanz@osgeo.org
Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 19:54:01 +0200
To: sac@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [SAC] pycsw-devel mbox file for Nabble setup
Hi sorry for the delay, I was at Geocamp PT in Óbidos
On 24 May 2013 14:07, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Jorge: thanks for the info. Sure, good idea. What needs to happen for http://pycsw-dev.20702.n7.nabble.com/ to be part of OSGeo Nabble? FYI pycsw is an OSGeo project in incubation, so I'm not sure what the inclusion rules are.
No problem, the only thing to happen is that pcsw project accepts
being archived at OSGeo nabble archive. Being in incubation is indeed
a strong reason.
Note that we ported the mbox from sf.net to osgeo 13 months ago (see http://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/888), so I'm not sure if this is related. Bottom line is that we need a single .mbox for Nabble to import.
Well if we can got both mbox files we can ask Nabble team to import
them, I don't see any problem. We just need to provide them links
where they can grab the files.
As your new archive is almost empty, we can just create a new one
under OSGeo forum and ask for the import at Nabble help forum. I'll do
it right now and will wait for your instructions for the mbox import.
On 26 May 2013 20:19, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis@hotmail.com> wrote:
From: jsanz@osgeo.org
Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 19:54:01 +0200
To: sac@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [SAC] pycsw-devel mbox file for Nabble setup
Hi sorry for the delay, I was at Geocamp PT in Óbidos
On 24 May 2013 14:07, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Jorge: thanks for the info. Sure, good idea. What needs to happen for http://pycsw-dev.20702.n7.nabble.com/ to be part of OSGeo Nabble? FYI pycsw is an OSGeo project in incubation, so I'm not sure what the inclusion rules are.
No problem, the only thing to happen is that pcsw project accepts
being archived at OSGeo nabble archive. Being in incubation is indeed
a strong reason.
Note that we ported the mbox from sf.net to osgeo 13 months ago (see http://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/888), so I'm not sure if this is related. Bottom line is that we need a single .mbox for Nabble to import.
Well if we can got both mbox files we can ask Nabble team to import
them, I don't see any problem. We just need to provide them links
where they can grab the files.
As your new archive is almost empty, we can just create a new one
under OSGeo forum and ask for the import at Nabble help forum. I'll do
it right now and will wait for your instructions for the mbox import.
On 26 May 2013 20:29, Jorge Gaspar Sanz Salinas <jsanz@osgeo.org> wrote:
On 26 May 2013 20:19, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis@hotmail.com> wrote:
From: jsanz@osgeo.org
Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 19:54:01 +0200
To: sac@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [SAC] pycsw-devel mbox file for Nabble setup
Hi sorry for the delay, I was at Geocamp PT in Óbidos
On 24 May 2013 14:07, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Jorge: thanks for the info. Sure, good idea. What needs to happen for http://pycsw-dev.20702.n7.nabble.com/ to be part of OSGeo Nabble? FYI pycsw is an OSGeo project in incubation, so I'm not sure what the inclusion rules are.
No problem, the only thing to happen is that pcsw project accepts
being archived at OSGeo nabble archive. Being in incubation is indeed
a strong reason.
Note that we ported the mbox from sf.net to osgeo 13 months ago (see http://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/888), so I'm not sure if this is related. Bottom line is that we need a single .mbox for Nabble to import.
Well if we can got both mbox files we can ask Nabble team to import
them, I don't see any problem. We just need to provide them links
where they can grab the files.
As your new archive is almost empty, we can just create a new one
under OSGeo forum and ask for the import at Nabble help forum. I'll do
it right now and will wait for your instructions for the mbox import.
On 2013-05-27, at 13:09, "Jorge Gaspar Sanz Salinas" <jsanz@osgeo.org> wrote:
On 26 May 2013 20:29, Jorge Gaspar Sanz Salinas <jsanz@osgeo.org> wrote:
On 26 May 2013 20:19, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis@hotmail.com> wrote:
From: jsanz@osgeo.org
Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 19:54:01 +0200
To: sac@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [SAC] pycsw-devel mbox file for Nabble setup
Hi sorry for the delay, I was at Geocamp PT in Óbidos
On 24 May 2013 14:07, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Jorge: thanks for the info. Sure, good idea. What needs to happen for http://pycsw-dev.20702.n7.nabble.com/ to be part of OSGeo Nabble? FYI pycsw is an OSGeo project in incubation, so I'm not sure what the inclusion rules are.
No problem, the only thing to happen is that pcsw project accepts
being archived at OSGeo nabble archive. Being in incubation is indeed
a strong reason.
Note that we ported the mbox from sf.net to osgeo 13 months ago (see http://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/888), so I'm not sure if this is related. Bottom line is that we need a single .mbox for Nabble to import.
Well if we can got both mbox files we can ask Nabble team to import
them, I don't see any problem. We just need to provide them links
where they can grab the files.
As your new archive is almost empty, we can just create a new one
under OSGeo forum and ask for the import at Nabble help forum. I'll do
it right now and will wait for your instructions for the mbox import.
