Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Reinhold

Pages: [1] 2
Installation and Upgrades / Re: 3.0rc1 needs USB Stick install !
« on: September 01, 2012, 01:57:25 pm »
Hi Udo

Thanks for the reply  ?...never tried unetbootin or LiLi ???

Making a bootable stick with the/from the zentyal .iso isn't the problem...
...even the window'sers do it for years with the above linux-origin tools now  ;D

Zentyal does have A "PROBLEM" in it's installer (since the 'old ebox days')
"Right after keyboard identification the installer insists on accessing the cdrom"  :-[ ...and the stick is (mostly) /dev/sdb1)
The solution on the zentyal trac (and the one in the forum) is no longer working with 3.0rc1 (at least not for me).

With the whole world going "OPTICAL-DRIVE-less" I feel there must be someone with a solution out there  ;D
(BTW: installing a plain ubuntu server from one of my bootable sticks would probably let me install from ppa _but_...)
((If you find time check unetbootin ! it's a fabulous tool)

Installation and Upgrades / 3.0rc1 needs USB Stick install !
« on: August 31, 2012, 11:44:25 pm »

(In the days of UNetbootin ( and LiLi (
I have come so used to install via USB Boot stick that I did not expect 3.0rc1
to still "suffer" the CD-ROM mount problem...  :'( :-[

A.D. 2012: All my recent machines have NO CD/DVD ROM - any more  ;D

The two methods I know to install zentyal (and used for 2.x):,1428.msg10281.html#msg10281

DO NOT WORK        (...or at least I cannot get them to work, no CD ROM Driver install)

I really would like to test zentyal 3.0rc1...
...but feel I can only do so with an install via booting USB stick

Hi conce

Haven't tried it in a looooong time (and never on zentyal)
so you pls take all the precautions necessary
you might want to have a look at:
ACLbit – ACL Backup and Inspect Tool
which did work for me... (and it's php so I do not expect anything bad)


Installation and Upgrades / Re: home directory ownership messed up
« on: October 12, 2011, 10:04:28 pm »
... i dropped into a admin console session and did a ls in the /home directory and saw that all of my user folders had the owner of frank and _USERS_. i couldn't rm -f the directory so i had to rename it and then i could recreate the user with the correct permissions. ...

The users you set up via the Zentyal WebIF are "LDAP" users thus the group name of "__USERS__"
...I prefer the "add and edit" route to prevent "undefinded but created"-mistakes in the WebIF

Being on the console (ssh) you edit local users (not LDAPed, just Linux)
rm -f would only work as root (su, sudo) ... (you are admin not root, got no such rights)
Are you sure that you _do_ have the right group & permissions for your external users now ???  ;)

Installation and Upgrades / Re: RecycleBin
« on: October 12, 2011, 09:52:18 pm »
I wonder if there is a way to set the eBox to delete
Folders "trash" that he believed in shared directories?

If you don't like the Recycle Bin ...

did you notice that in the zentyal interface you may just turn it off:
<log into your box, look left down>
Code: [Select]
   File Sharing
                   Recycle Bin  (look to the right!)
                      Enable Recycle Bin: [x]
(NOTE: it's a samba feature and only present in the samba shared directories, where you may even modify it with "exceptions")

...else jjm is right ...a simple cron script will do (but this is so unsafe that imho you may as well turn it off  :P )


Hi jjm1982

...This is what I had to do to add my admin user to the list of users.
...YESsss don't you hate it that your zentyal admin user is local only!  And I am sure 90% of ZentyalAdmins do  8) (see the other thread <lol>)

I am not familiar with Apache Directory Studio. Will look into it right now <g> - THANKS

OTOH isn't there a "simple" CLI procedure to "just do it"


Just a thought - this may be the Ubuntu server installer bug where partitions on any individual 500GB physical disk must not total to exactly 500GB or over (eg 500.1GB total may be offered by the installer - say after creating 2GB swap you get offered 498.1GB - not OK) - its some miscalculation to do with total numbers of sectors or something. It is an obscure one that is avoided by say creating partitions that total eg 499GB.

I am pretty sure this is not the case here... (...running several "2digit" TB servers here i.e. 10TB or more on 2 and 3TB drives and partitions)

Actually for zentyal this applies (imho)(MD or lvm2 or dm-crypt):
8EB for 64-bit CPUs on 2.6 kernels

...hard to realize physically A.D.2011  :D

Installation and Upgrades / Re: Cannot boot to any Software RAID setup
« on: October 12, 2011, 09:21:54 pm »
HI 3dge

Quote from: 3dge14
...with the same outcome: "Gave up waiting for root device" "dev/mapper/****-ROOT does not exist. Dropping to a shell"
The RAID5 partition contains LVM with volumes for / and /home for storage.  Boots perfectly fine now.

It's obviously too late for you ...since you got it running... but the problem shows right in your above quote.
The automatic installer "forget's" to install lvm2 an automatic install would never get to the raid5 md
Should be solved in UBUNTU
... else just to a manual partitioning/install _and/or_ add lvm2 install when dropped to that shell

I am placing /boot on its own RAID1 partition at the beginning of the disks using ext3, I have tried including / in the RAID1 partition with /boot and tried including it with /home in the RAID5 partition with lvm.
For similar reasons you have to "/boot" from a (/dev/mdx), a raid1 
(no booting from (soft-)raid5, not without serious fiddling)...
...(best) location of root "/" is (imho) the raid5
...and most of use do this whole stuff to locate and protect "/home" in the raid5 anyhow ;-)

- There's no reason to use RAID for swap performance reasons. The kernel itself can stripe swapping on several devices...(if needed see software raid How-To)(otoh you can do)
- The offset or order of partitioning you did should (will!) have no influence. Linux Softraid "mdadm" is partition based and could care less where they are
- Note that you may have to check two things: i) is your bios set to boot from THAT raid1 disk ? ii) make partitions you want to be bootable - "bootable" (active, fdisk)



I need to access:

/home/samba/shares/music which is owned (obviously) by  ebox  __USERS__  i.e. belongs to the domain users group

How do I "add" the local user "squeezebox" to the "__USERS__" group ?

Note: "squeezebox" is the uid that runs a local music-service via port 9000 and I need to give "him" access to the samba shared music files...
(there is another thread "Squeeezboxserver needs open ports 9000 and 3483" on my Squeezebox venture)


- One could be to define squeezebox user in LDPA and grant it for PAM. This could be tricky as such user already exists (and has to be removed or at least renamed), goal being at the end to have this UID/GID attached to LDAP account.
...(in a different case) tried this about a year ago on a different ebox -> (completely confused ldap,pam,acl) -> finally setting box up from scratch
I AM SURE there must be several zentyal users that fight this problem, namely all that DO use zentyal samba... ;-)
(For instance the admin account _is_ only a local account to the box (which I personally find quite frustrating every once in a while))

- one could be to add Unix Squeezebox account to group granted for access right on your music folder
This is what I was asking above ... I have no idea how to access/modify "__USERS__" group

- any ACL one could customize in Samba Zentyal?
All the usual samba stuff ( "@") ... which does not help here...
"squeezeboxserver" is a local user trying to access a local path
(...and samba is a hindrance and everything in zentyal below /home/samba/ seems quite unaccessible locally)

Do you mind if I open a new post: "How do I "add" the local user "squeezebox" to the "__USERS__" group ?"


...almost there

Squeezebox-Setup is accessible and done !
I want to share:
/home/samba/shares/music    which is owned (obviously) by ebox __USERS__  i.e. the domain users group only

How do I "add" the local user "squeezebox" to the "__USERS__" group ?


Code: [Select]
Decision Source Service Description                 Action
^               Any          any         for squeezeboxserver

(but the logic of declaring eth0 -which is of course the "internal if" in this setup - escapes me)
(care to explain ?)


Hi c4rdinal

Another thanks ...

You have to create a new 'Service' using Port 9000. Then create a firewall rule in "LAN to Zentyal" to allow this ports.
Sound's EXACTLY like what I expected <BIG GRIN>
...except I have no idea how to do this on Zentyal
Sorry to ask: Could you describe those steps in more detail
point me to documentation on how to do it (=not to lazy to search, maybe just unlucky (or dumb  :o ))


Hi Christian

Thanks for your reply ... and sorry for my (obviously) bad representation of the problem...

i) your summary is correct. Zentyal = Samba server on, Squeezebox on same box

ii) Modules (basically all ;-):
Code: [Select]
Firewall Network
VPN Network
Users and Groups
FTP Users and Groups
File Sharing Network, Users and Groups
User Corner Users and Groups
Printer Sharing File Sharing

Query Logs ▸ Full Reports
Code: [Select]
Events relevant messages
There are no logs for this domain
There are no logs for this domain
There are no logs for this domain
Samba access relevant messages
Samba quarantine
There are no logs for this domain
Samba virus
There are no logs for this domain

Code: [Select]
ifconfig -a
eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  Hardware Adresse 48:5b:39:__:__:__
          inet Adresse:  Bcast:  Maske:
          inet6-Adresse: fe80::4a5b:____:feed:948f/64 Gültigkeitsbereich:Verbindung
          RX packets:107937742 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:99667173 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          Kollisionen:0 Sendewarteschlangenlänge:1000
          RX bytes:119296856309 (119.2 GB)  TX bytes:105124962992 (105.1 GB)
          Interrupt:25 Basisadresse:0x8000

eth1      Link encap:Ethernet  Hardware Adresse 00:02:44:__:__:__
          BROADCAST MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metrik:1
          RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          Kollisionen:0 Sendewarteschlangenlänge:1000
          RX bytes:0 (0.0 B)  TX bytes:0 (0.0 B)
          Interrupt:21 Basisadresse:0xe800

lo        Link encap:Lokale Schleife
          inet Adresse:  Maske:
          inet6-Adresse: ::1/128 Gültigkeitsbereich:Maschine
          UP LOOPBACK RUNNING  MTU:16436  Metrik:1
          RX packets:24572953 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:24572953 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          Kollisionen:0 Sendewarteschlangenlänge:0
          RX bytes:3777214215 (3.7 GB)  TX bytes:3777214215 (3.7 GB)

virbr0    Link encap:Ethernet  Hardware Adresse 5a:09:9d:__:__:__
          inet Adresse:  Bcast:  Maske:
          inet6-Adresse: fe80::5809:9dff:fec6:____/64 Gültigkeitsbereich:Verbindung
          RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:27 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          Kollisionen:0 Sendewarteschlangenlänge:0
          RX bytes:0 (0.0 B)  TX bytes:4583 (4.5 KB)

- Did you look at firewall rules? and log?
YES I did look ...
(since I expected something there _and_ since this Zentyal Box did run as a gateway before
but ... iptables response is negative/empty (also see orginal post)
root@tera10:/home/rhu# iptables -L -n | grep 9000
note: I am not a netfilter 'hero' <g> but I did not see anything relevant
...and 'something' does reply to netstat (doesn't it?)
What specifically should I look for ??? ?

- I can see "/usr/sbin/squeezeboxserver" running in htop
- "/var/log/squeezeboxserver" does contain a "server.log"

   2011-09-29 22:15:23 squeezeboxserver_safe started.
[11-09-29 22:15:26.1174] main::init (350) Starting Squeezebox Server (v7.6.1, r33110, Wed Aug 17 18:50:10 PDT 2011) perl 5.010001

QUESTION: Does Zentyal have something running (conflicting) on ports 9000 and/or 3483 ???

muchas gracias

Hi C4rdinal

Thanks for the reply... but I DO HAVE A MOST SERIOUS PROBLEM (as written above)

... but I cannot connect to it's web-control-port 9000     from
(x.x.x.11 is the zentyal server  (dhcp is router at x.x.x.1)) response with chrome,firefox or internet explorer
and I'm expecting to do a lot of setup via this port

...and now I have no idea how to proceed


Pages: [1] 2