[cobalt-users] gui link to site admin page not working

[Alfredo <alfredo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The GUI adminpage not showing problem has been discussed on the list but, after searching the archives for a longgg time, I don't see the following specifics addressed. This is on a Raq4i which is dedicated (one production site and another site with the name of the box that resolves to the "home" directory).

Everything was working fine and then a week ago, I suddenly couldn't access the admin pages for these sites. The gui admin page came up and everything else functioned perfectly but when I hit the link for managing the site (to get the screen with the links for user management, site configs, etc.) I got that "url not found" error. In other words, the link to this site's admin pages is not working. (all Internet services for both sites remained functional -- it was only a gui problem)

I didn't have time to analyze so...using the gui (and tarring the site's contents) I just erased and then rebuilt the production site, uploaded and untarred the old site contents and it's now working fine. Full gui access to that site. But I still can't access the gui for the site with the box's name. Okay...now here's what I found and I can't find this addressed in the archives:

In the directory /usr/admserv/html/.cobalt/siteManage there are subs for both sites (home and site1) and two symlinks. 

The symlink for the name of the production site goes to site1, as it should.

lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root           42 Jul 30 00:55 www.domainname.org -> /usr/admserv/html/.cobalt/siteManage/site1 

BUT the symlink for the "home" site (the box's name site) also goes to site1 

lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root           42 Jul 30 00:55 216.223.xxx.xxx -> /usr/admserv/html/.cobalt/siteManage/site1

and I KNOW that it shouldn't (it should point to "home"). 

Obviously, something messed up the symlinks and one was corrected when I rebuilt that production site in the gui. But I'd like to fix this with a quick fix rather than start changing the box's canonical name, etc.

So my questions are:

1 -- Is this symlink the problem or a symptom of the problem?

2 -- If the latter, where do I look for the real problem and what should be done? 

3 -- If it's the former, should I just do a new symlink with the ln -s command to point properly? Would that mess anything else up?

Thanks.

Alfredo