Re: [cobalt-users] moving users from group to another group

["Julius" <lists@xxxxxxxx>]

Jeff L. wrote:

> The postgreSQL database is bad; I thought we'd agreed on that a
> long time ago;

Do you mean it is something which will always be bad
in your opinion, or in this case has gone bad?
I was never saying it wasn't, I know it is,
but it isn't as bad as you think it is, it only
has a couple of bad entries that need to be rebuilt
along the way.

> I believe I've previously recommend a complete
> system restore; you've decided that's not viable for you,

If you would know my situation, you would not be restoring
either. It simply is not an option. The RaQ is doing
dedicated webmail and email mostly. Why it is not serving
many websites is besides the point, it can be used this
way and it was the best option in this particular case.
The amount of webmail and email users is that large,
a Qube (for example) wouldn't cope with it that easy.
*they* decided to buy a RaQ4i, after my advice to do so.

First; I can't switch off the admserv, users need to be able
to change their passwords by use of the GUI, which works
nicely right now. The RaQ4 is in 'production' as we speak,
restoring it would mean a lot of things; The failoverserver
to work en be there (right now it isn't, thanks to KPNQwest),
to have all user data (user prefs/mail etc.) backed up
the way it is now and be put back the way it is now, which
can't be done; The GUI stopped functioning BEFORE anybody
knew, so a lot of things have been done with somehow
non-functional postgres and sendmail databases.
Putting those accounts, passwords, and aliases back
the way they are now would be an impossible task,
and require the exact same misery to go through
where I'm going through right now.
So the only option is to re-create the postgres databases
in a way that the GUi will show the default site again.

> you've spent more time than that by now.

No I haven't. You just don't know the details involved.
Doing a restore would imply exactly what I'm doing right now.

>> since I've done a quotaoff for /dev/hda4 and
>> cobalt's postgresql need at least some quotum,
>> it can't work without one.
>
> I don't think it's working now.

Well I'm still getting quota warnings over email
from the machine. Also, when creating a user using
(c)adduser, I can;t because the user quota is reset
the wrong way for the default user/site settings.

> Do you want to turn off the Cobalt gui entirely and run the box
> completely manually?  If you do, let me know; I have some notes on
that somewhere.  But if so you won't be able to use any of the
> Cobalt tools; not even the cobalt/adduser.

Like I wrote: It would be better if Sun Cobalt had created
a graphic interface for the shell, to function as a
complete backup for the GUI.

>> the main trouble is; editing site quota/settings
>> through use of the commandline seems impossible.
>
> Why?  Because the Cobalt system is somehow overriding them?  You
can fix that by deleting the Cobalt gui, if you really don't want
to use it.

No, I would need to delete the postgres databases,
and, as explained before, that is not an option;
They're not broken by themselves, the only thing broken
here is what's inside them.

> My first guess is that the domain isn't properly
> recognized in the local-host-names file or is incorrectly
> listed in access file, or you've changed these manually
> and not either rebuilt the database or restarted sendmail
> as required.  But it could be something else entirely,
> including a DNS error.

DNS errors are out, that I know in this case.
Note that I know this exact same erratic behavior
on RaQs WITHOUT ever having touched the shell.
There's a lot of talk about the 'bug' on the raqfaq pages.
It has to do with the order in which you enter domains
and their aliases etc. This, in my opinion, is simply
faulty design by Cobalt.

> See above, but you really do have to know
> what you're doing with sendmail.

Why are you so bound on people needing to 'learn' things
before they can solve their problems? It is totally
unnecessary, especially in this case, to 'know what
you're doing with sendmail'. I don't even have to
configure sendmail in any other way than it has been
thus far. It might be better for Sun to find a way
to create an update pkg for sendmail, since we're
behind a long way when using a RaQ with the
version of sendmail currently on it.

> As long as you realize it won't any longer be running as a RaQ,
> but rather as some kind of hybrid,

Why would it be? It hasn't changed a thing if I'm back
at what it was like and have the GUI working again.

> I know several people who've successfully run RaQs without a
> virtual site,

well, go check the admin site for a RaQ4i, create NO
virtual site and then hope it will receive email for
more than one domain name on that default site,
by only using the GUI. I wish you luck.

> and there's no reason why the RaQ "sauce" requires one.

Well I've discovered that it does.
Try to add users without there being a virtual domain name.

> I don't know what
> originally caused your problem, and I understand you cannot
> use it now, but that doesn't mean it can't be used by anyone else.