Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 12 Oct 1996 16:46:33 -0700 (MST)
From:      Don Yuniskis <dgy@rtd.com>
To:        danf@server1.bisnet.net (Daniel C. Fifield)
Cc:        dgy@rtd.com, adam@veda.is, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Problem setting up nntpd (fwd)
Message-ID:  <199610122346.QAA29928@seagull.rtd.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.91.961012180210.8659B-100000@server1.bisnet.net> from "Daniel C. Fifield" at Oct 12, 96 06:17:13 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
It seems that Daniel C. Fifield said:
> On Sat, 12 Oct 1996, Don Yuniskis wrote:
> > It seems that Adam David said:
> > > 
> > > Daniel C. Fifield:
> > > >I am attempting to setup nntpd.  I installed it and changed the owner and 
> > > >group to news on all the files.  I also changed the nntp line in the 
> > > >/etc/inetd.conf file to look like:
> > > 
> > > >nntp  stream  tcp  nowait  news  /usr/local/libexec/nntpd  nntpd
> > > 
> > > >I sent a HUP signal to the inetd process, but I am still getting 
> > > >Connection Refused if I attempt to telnet to the 119 port.
> > > 
> > > I am assuming you are using an older version, since the default installation
> > > is now as a standalone daemon. Hmmm.... I don't see what you could be missing.
> > 
> > Yes, unfortunately there is no mention of what FBSD release this applies
> > to, etc.  :-(   One possible problem could be he's trying to run the
> > -current style ALONE daemon.  Another problem could be he's exec-ing
> > /usr/local/libexec/nntpd when the daemon is really in /usr/local/sbin/nntpd.
> > Perhaps digging through the log files (hint hint, Dan) might be in order!
> Yes,
> 
> I am quite aware of logs, thank you.
> 
> I solve the problem base on another reply from someone who's main concern 
> was not to talk down to someone, but trying to help a fellow colleague in 
> need of advice.

I'm sorry if you mistook my comment as "talking down to someone" as it
was not intended in that way.  Rather, it was intended as a suggestion
that you dig through the logs to see if inetd was, in fact, exec-ing
nntpd as it should.  I think if you reread Adam's comments -- and my
own regarding the *changes* introduced to the nntpd port *after* 2.1R
(hence the reason my first comment inquired about the FBSD version)
-- you'll see that it's possible that you could have had a NEWER
nntpd port (which resides in /usr/local/sbin/nntpd) with an OLDER
inetd.conf (referencing /usr/local/libexec/nntpd) so inetd would
gag!
 
> Since you asked I am currently running version 2.1 of FreeBSD and 
> installed the nntp from the same cd.  After getting it working and 

I don't know the state of the nntpd package on the 2.1R CD (or even
if there *is* one!) but I just recently built the *port* for that
same CD and was able to get it working reasonably well -- with the
exception of a few buglets I had already conveyed to Adam.  Indeed,
I suspect that is the reason he cc'd me on his reply to your post
(since his -current version of nntpd has moved away from the 2.1R
version).

> reading though the mail archives on the FreeBSD site, I decided to switch 
> to inn, which has more documentation and features.

Yes, the nntpd documentation is a bit sparse.  Hence the reason I
built the port -- to be able to dig through the sources and embellish
some of the documentation (in config files, etc.).  I was able to
patch at least one buglet in the process (as evidenced in my earlier
post to -ports).  Should you find that your problem was code or
documentation related, you might elect to post a summary for others
who stumble upon this in the future (even for a *newer* port, etc.).

It is for these reasons that I have been systematically going through
*all* of the ports... inn is later today with trn and tin coming
sometime tomorrow.

> > > I probably assumed wrong. Try starting it from /usr/local/sbin/nntpd by hand,

(Note the new home of nntpd ---------------------------^^^)

> > > and if that works put a line in /etc/rc.local so it starts when the machine
> > > comes up.
> > 
> > Note that this will only work if he's using the -current (i.e. #define ALONE)
> > version, right?  (did this just change in -current or is it also the case
> > for 2.1.5R?)

Again, apologies if I ruffled any feathers.  I rely quite a bit on others
(in this case, Adam) for help and *try* to pass along what little I can...

--don



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610122346.QAA29928>