411 reputation
210
bio website
location California
age
visits member for 4 years, 9 months
seen Oct 25 '13 at 22:48

I started with computers when I was 14 and became a computer professional at age 17 when I wrote a real-time multi-tasking operating system for ship, pipeline and refinery control while attending Tulane University in New Orleans.

From there, at 19 I passed on jobs at Apple and Microsoft (in '83) to join Digital Equipment Corporation where I helped found two support businesses for them.

I then joined Relational Technology Inc. (later Ingres Corp), and, as a direct report to the Sr. VP of Sales, performed just about every technical role in the company, curriculum development, consulting, technical support, development, benchmarking, created Demos, represented the company at trade shows, etc, and I even helped sell the product.

After a while as an independent consultant, Professor Michael Stonebraker invited me to lead a research team at UC Berkeley's Electronics Research Laboratory wherein I developed the world's first "Grid" computing system - which was also the first truly heterogeneous distributed computing system, today known as "cloud computing."

In '97 I commercialized the work and founded several companies where today I have a split life as "executive" and technical wizard - in short, I serve as chief cook and bottle washer. I'm a jack of trades, and specialize in computing performance and heterogeneity with an eye toward production work, stability, maintainability and up-time performance.

In the last few years I have become involved with life-sciences computing, and last year served as CTO / VP Engineering of a company bringing health-information to the masses, but unfortunately that venture folded due to what I will politely call, "capitalization issues."


Oct
14
comment SETUID / SETGID on a binary executable stopped working following upgrade of Fedora Core
@MIfe I've been trying but there seems to be a bug; NOTHING happens. I either look at your link and it's blank, or I try the "automatically move this discussion to chat " and I see things but NO chance to type anything. It says I should log in to chat at the bottom BUT I AM LOGGED IN, clearly!
Oct
14
comment SETUID / SETGID on a binary executable stopped working following upgrade of Fedora Core
let us continue this discussion in chat
Oct
14
comment SETUID / SETGID on a binary executable stopped working following upgrade of Fedora Core
@MIfe Note the code that's running is now in the question section above. At first I said maybe it was the part that was calling Java, but no, it has trouble before that and I cited the code...
Oct
14
comment SETUID / SETGID on a binary executable stopped working following upgrade of Fedora Core
@MIfe Of course. It runs perfectly as the developer which is why I never noticed the problem over this long period of time!
Oct
14
comment SETUID / SETGID on a binary executable stopped working following upgrade of Fedora Core
@MIfe Sorry, I thought "program" was enough to make it clear it's NOT a script. It's actually a C program. I'm not sure just what the file access error would be, but it refuses the reads. Your guess about NFS was good: yes, NFS. ...The application was first written in 1997 or thereabouts and has worked all this time under the exact same scenario - the only thing that has changed is the OS version, even the build scripts and NFS mounting are the same!
Sep
26
comment FC19 FirewallD debugging help requested: ports not forwarding
@MichaelHampton OK, you're right; it was a too-easy assumption. Frankly, I don't think a down-vote should be permitted without a comment on WHY. In this case, I suspect this answer got downvoted three times because it reflects that I finally realized you were right - Fedora Core isn't ready for Prime Time, "production use", at least not THIS version of it. And people don't like facing the reality that their favorite whatever actually deserves criticism. BTW, FWIW, I like FirewallD / Firewall-cmd, they're just not ready yet.
Sep
25
comment FC19 FirewallD debugging help requested: ports not forwarding
@MichaelHampton Thanks for the down-vote - it's obvious my comment pertains to the network issues related to firewalld, but you want to voice your snit. fine.
Sep
24
comment Dovecot with Postfix on Ubuntu: warning: SASL: Connect to private/auth-client failed: No such file or directory
None of the answers worked with my version BUT, they got me thinking and I solved it. . . So, I gave your question credit! (My symptoms match yours but my config files differ considerably.)
Sep
22
comment How does Postfix handle conflicting aliases?
@IainHallam Not off hand, but it may be in the main.cf file. ...I'd go look, but our mail server is down and I'm focused on that right now...
Sep
21
comment Bizzare routing: EITHER accepts emails OR sends depending if NetworkManager is running
@michaelHampton ...What would you like to see? There's nothing in the logs to reflect the not-seen inbound packets. I can add some network timeout entries from postfix trying to send... Would that actually help? I'll do it if you think so.
Sep
20
comment How to get pairs of name server - ip for some domain?
Sorry the formatting got a bit screwed up - I'm not sure how to fix it! ...But the data is there!...
Sep
18
comment Cannot reach website from outside of LAN
I haven't any good suggestion - except to be thorough - and I don't care all that much one way or there the other (just mildly curious), but I'm giving your question an up-vote because I think it's terrible some people down-vote what they perceive as novice questions - frankly, you've got a lot more clue than some I've seen! Good luck...
Sep
18
comment firewalld: trouble forwarding port 25 while other ports forward just fine, “rich rule” logging shows NO entries
@MichaelHampton ...I'm stupified!... I help out the Postgres open-source project, and for us the idea of putting out a release that wasn't darned stable is unthinkable - I guess the OS guys aren't as careful! Keep in mind that firewalld is the_default firewall software! ...But I appreciate you making the point. Know of any method to convert the firewalld rules to IP-Tables?
Feb
1
comment Confusion Post FedoraCore Upgrade: NAT / port forwarding trouble, and POSTROUTING MASQUERADE has unexpected influence on forwarding ports
@MichaelHampton The point is I'm NOT applying to eth0 and 1, those interface names aren't even used on my box AT ALL. The script I posted was from the old, original system and, before I just edited it recently, it said exactly that, but I updated it a little to TRY and be briefer and include comments on things I'd tried. Again, any comment on the ACTUAL problem?
Feb
1
comment Confusion Post FedoraCore Upgrade: NAT / port forwarding trouble, and POSTROUTING MASQUERADE has unexpected influence on forwarding ports
@MichaelHampton "...your question doesn't reflect the changes you claim to have made." Ugh. OK. Any ideas on the actual problem? This seems simple enough, WAS working and now I'm completely "dead in the water," we're not receiving emails for WAY too long, people are upset. I guess it worked by magic before. -shrug- In particular, as netstat -ln doesn't show a local use of port 25, I don't get why it's not forwarding on the second system I scrounged up. The first one seems to ONLY forward with the wrong interface masqueraded?!
Feb
1
comment Confusion Post FedoraCore Upgrade: NAT / port forwarding trouble, and POSTROUTING MASQUERADE has unexpected influence on forwarding ports
@MichaelHampton ...I'm not that dumb / ignorant / etc; I of course have been trying that for days. No joy. My suspicion is that the name I see from ifconfig isn't the same as what iptables wants to use. I sourced up another system that's older and doesn't have the name issue and it at least port-forwards correctly - except for port 25 and I'm not sure why (it doesn't have sendmail, etc)...
Feb
1
comment Confusion Post FedoraCore Upgrade: NAT / port forwarding trouble, and POSTROUTING MASQUERADE has unexpected influence on forwarding ports
@MichaelHampton MAYBE YOUR HUNCH WAS CORRECT: after more hours than I'd like to admit trying to get this system working correctly, I've come to think that maybe you are on to something. Here are some other thoughts: serverfault.com/questions/474449/… Any suggestions?
Jan
31
comment Confusion Post FedoraCore Upgrade: NAT / port forwarding trouble, and POSTROUTING MASQUERADE has unexpected influence on forwarding ports
Sorry again - I must be TERRIBLE at communication today: On your observation I switched the interfaces used in that statement, from -o eth0 to -o eth1 and THAT is when "no packets get passed at all." So when you ask "where's the rule", my answer is that I just switched interfaces - isn't THAT what was my error?!?! CLEARLY the original script had one or the other - I didn't do a damned thing to it (knowingly). Sorry to be less than clear; NEITHER masquerade works as hoped: one passes zero (no forwards), the other forwards but masquerades the wrong direction.
Jan
31
comment Confusion Post FedoraCore Upgrade: NAT / port forwarding trouble, and POSTROUTING MASQUERADE has unexpected influence on forwarding ports
Sorry; connections from the external interface should be either explicitly forwarded to the internal interface (as outlined above, ports 222 and 25) or are either locally accepted (only 22) or rejected. All connections from the internal interface should either be locally accepted (only port 22) or masqueraded on the external interface. This same set of rules was formerly doing just that, except for any errors I just introduced. Thanks for your thoughts / observations.
Jan
31
comment Confusion Post FedoraCore Upgrade: NAT / port forwarding trouble, and POSTROUTING MASQUERADE has unexpected influence on forwarding ports
Thanks, David, ... I feel sooooooo silly! BUT, when I do that - eliminate the rule or change it to the actual OUTBOUND interface - no packets get passed at all. Any suggestions?