Hi guys,
Currently I have one RT machine,which runs RT version 3.0.6, now I want to upgrade to one new version.But after I installed and configured RT 3.4.5 on the other machine, when I switched it,it appears following phonemon:
Some mail boxes send mail to one queue’s mail address,it can generate tickets in the queues.
some mail boxes send mail to the same queues’s mail address, but it can’t generate tickets. That’s so strange,I don’t know how to fix it.
Also ,the apache errror log comes out any error messages, it indicates it doesn’t have any permission to create tickets.
[Tue Jun 20 01:38:55 2006] [error]: Create failed: 0 / 0 / No permission to create tickets in the queue ‘yaplock-support’ (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Interface/Email.pm:779)
[Tue Jun 20 01:44:05 2006] [crit]: No permission to create tickets in the queue ‘spy-support’ (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Interface/Email.pm:773)
[Tue Jun 20 01:44:05 2006] [error]: Create failed: 0 / 0 / No permission to create tickets in the queue ‘spy-support’ (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Interface/Email.pm:779)
[Tue Jun 20 02:05:06 2006] [crit]: No permission to create tickets in the queue ‘yaplock-support’ (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Interface/Email.pm:773)
[Tue Jun 20 02:05:06 2006] [error]: Create failed: 0 / 0 / No permission to create tickets in the queue ‘yaplock-support’ (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Interface/Email.pm:779)
[Tue Jun 20 02:09:09 2006] [crit]: No permission to create tickets in the queue ‘yaplock-support’ (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Interface/Email.pm:773)
[Tue Jun 20 02:09:09 2006] [error]: Create failed: 0 / 0 / No permission to create tickets in the queue ‘yaplock-support’ (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Interface/Email.pm:779)
This problem has blocked me for about 2 weeks, who can help me?
Thanks greatly in advance!
David Yang
msn:yangweibing@msn.com
skype:ywbadmin
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com [mailto:rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com] 代表 rt-users-request@lists.bestpractical.com
发送时间: 2006年6月13日 5:00
收件人: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
主题: RT-Users Digest, Vol 27, Issue 31
Send RT-Users mailing list submissions to
rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
The rt-users Archives
or, via email, send a message with subject or body ‘help’ to
rt-users-request@lists.bestpractical.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
rt-users-owner@lists.bestpractical.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than “Re: Contents of RT-Users digest…”
Today’s Topics:
- rt as secondary website (Justin R Findlay)
- Re: RT CLI comment problem (Jesse Vincent)
- Re: RT CLI comment problem (Joel Peter Anderson)
- Adding new system rights (Mark A Bentley)
- Rt3.012 help (Brent)
- Re: The “fsck.com-rt-” URI scheme (Jason Fenner)
- RE: The “fsck.com-rt-” URI scheme (Philip Kime)
- RE: rt as secondary website (Duncan Shannon)
Message: 1Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:54:58 -0600
From: Justin R Findlay justin@jfindlay.us
Subject: [rt-users] rt as secondary website
To: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Message-ID: 20060612185458.GE29042@jfindlay.us
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I have a server that I would like to get rt running on but I’ve come to
a couple of problems that I can’t resolve myself. The machine is CentOS
4.3 and I’ve followed the install guide for RHEL4 and have everything
installed and ready except I can’t figure out how to get to the web
interface. I thought I could run it under the html document tree of one
of the virtual hosts on the box (that we control) but I can’t seem to
get rt to work on a URL like http://www.example.com/path/to/rt3 and I
can’t clobber the site already running on http://www.example.com.
Another option I’ve thought of is to run rt on the domain name of the
server, http://host.net, but the websites we host (say
http://www.website.com) in the interest of having a signed cert for
their secure web pages host them on the server’s DN:
https://host.net/~website.com/secure/index.html and I don’t want to
interfere with this.
I hope this makes enough sense to be understandable. I’m sure there’s a
way to do it. I’m just not versed with apache and WWW enough to know
how to proceed.
Justin
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:36:16 -0400
From: Jesse Vincent jesse@bestpractical.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] RT CLI comment problem
To: Joel Peter Anderson joela@umn.edu
Cc: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Message-ID: 20060612193615.GX8022@bestpractical.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
We’re working on a transition from a system running RT 3.0.12 to 3.4.5 and
I’ve run into a problem using the RT CLI - which is important to me
because I’ve built a bunch of automation on top of the RT CLI commands.As far as I’ve tested, all the existing CLI functionality exists …
EXCEPT for adding comments. Any attempt add a comment with the CLI gets
this terse response:
This is fixed in RT 3.60pre3.
Ticket comment does not exist.
Even trying something as simple as this:
rt comment -m test 144149
Ticket comment does not exist.
Is this a known problem? Is there a fix/workaround? Thanks.
joel anderson * joela@umn.edu * 612-625-7389
→ pager: 612-648-6823
Be a part of the Next Age of Exploration
http://www.planetary.org/
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sales@bestpractical.comDiscover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.comWe’re hiring! Come hack Perl for Best Practical: Careers — Best Practical Solutions
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:45:11 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joel Peter Anderson joela@umn.edu
Subject: Re: [rt-users] RT CLI comment problem
To: Jesse Vincent jesse@bestpractical.com
Cc: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.58.0606121444170.20023@greyhavens
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
I’m getting resistance to a pre-release; is there any way to resolve the
issue in 3.4.5?
We’re working on a transition from a system running RT 3.0.12 to 3.4.5 and
I’ve run into a problem using the RT CLI - which is important to me
because I’ve built a bunch of automation on top of the RT CLI commands.As far as I’ve tested, all the existing CLI functionality exists …
EXCEPT for adding comments. Any attempt add a comment with the CLI gets
this terse response:This is fixed in RT 3.60pre3.
Ticket comment does not exist.
Even trying something as simple as this:
rt comment -m test 144149
Ticket comment does not exist.
Is this a known problem? Is there a fix/workaround? Thanks.
joel anderson * joela@umn.edu * 612-625-7389
→ pager: 612-648-6823
Be a part of the Next Age of Exploration
http://www.planetary.org/
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sales@bestpractical.comDiscover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.comWe’re hiring! Come hack Perl for Best Practical: Careers — Best Practical Solutions
–
joel anderson * joela@umn.edu * 612-625-7389
→ pager: 612-648-6823
Be a part of the Next Age of Exploration
http://www.planetary.org/
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:39:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mark A Bentley bentlema@tdg.mobilephone.net
Subject: [rt-users] Adding new system rights
To: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Message-ID:
Pine.GSO.4.62.0606121238240.22640@feyd.tdg.mobilephone.net
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Hi all,
I’m trying to add a new right as documented in Chapter 10 of “RT Essentials”.
We’re running v3.4.5. So far I’ve added a lib/RT/Queue_Local.pm that looks
like this:
package RT::Queue;
use strict;
no warnings qw(redefine);
$RIGHTS = {
SeeOnDashboard => "bentlema is testing",
%{$RIGHTS},
};
1;
I also added a Group_Local.pm that looks the same with the package name
changed.
I see the new right appear in the list, but when I try to grant that right
to a group I get a result of “System error. Right not granted.”
Is there something else I have to do to add a new right?
Thanks,
Mark
Mark A Bentley
TPR Lab Systems Support
Cingular Wireless - Redmond, WA
Email: mark.a.bentley@cingular.com
425-702-3072 (desk) / 425-702-2826 (fax)
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:41:54 -0400
From: Brent bbailey66@metrocast.net
Subject: [rt-users] Rt3.012 help
To: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Message-ID: 448DD192.2080703@metrocast.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Ive been given the task of migrating our ticketing system RT 3.0.12
running on solaris 9 w/ Apache/1.3.31 (Unix) PHP/4.3.9
mod_fastcgi/2.4.2 mod_ssl/2.8.19 OpenSSL/0.9.7d & mysql
I was more wondering how hard it would be to just default them to an
“rt” scheme since it would seem to make more sense for people who have
nothing to do with the fsck.com domain. Even RT has nothing to do with
the fsck.com domain now since I believe it was the author’s personal
domain when it was first being developed.The at scheme is just “at”, it would be nice for rt to be just “rt”
unless you really want a scheme prefix of something else which could be
a config file setting.As an exercise, I created an “rt” scheme and altered Record.pm,
Ticket_Overlay.pm and URI.pm but in 3.6 REST interface, the links still
come out as fsck.com-rt so I’ve either missed something or something’s
in the DB.PK
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Chapman [mailto:todd@chaka.net]
Sent: 11 June 2006 15:47
To: Philip Kime
Cc: RT users
Subject: Re: [rt-users] The “fsck.com-rt-” URI schemeAll tickets should have fsck.com-rt schemes. Why would that be a
problem?-Todd
Will this URI scheme thing be continued in later versions of RT? I
remember JV saying that it probably wouldn’t. I’m wondering if it’s
worth bothering with generating patches to get rid of the hard-coded
“fsck.com-rt-” scheme because I need to use a lot of REST calls makinglinks etc. and every ticket like comes out as “fsck.com-rt-” …
PK
–
Philip Kime
NOPS Systems Architect
310 401 0407
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support:
sales@bestpractical.comDiscover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.comWe’re hiring! Come hack Perl for Best Practical:
Careers — Best Practical Solutions
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sales@bestpractical.comDiscover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.comWe’re hiring! Come hack Perl for Best Practical: Careers — Best Practical Solutions
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:53:14 -0700
From: “Philip Kime” pkime@Shopzilla.com
Subject: RE: [rt-users] The “fsck.com-rt-” URI scheme
To: “Jason Fenner” jfenner@vitamix.com
Cc: RT users rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Message-ID:
58B1112F0EEB7349AE14A0AA46F9CEC00137ABFC@szexchange.Shopzilla.inc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=“us-ascii”
Well I think it’s supposed to allow you to have custom URI schemes so
that you could, for example, have custom resolver code for a certain
scheme that might even pull in data from external sources or do special
things to certain Tickets etc. the default scheme for tickets results in
URIs like this
fsck.com-rt://$RT::Organization/ticket/
It’s the “fsck.com-rt” part which is hard-coded in as the default. If
you look in the DB table “Links”, you’ll see. I think that this scheme
thing is very nice idea but I would have thought that the default would
be better left at just “rt” so URIs would default to:
rt://$RT::Organization/ticket/
But as JV has said - it might well break things for people to change
this. I have played around a little and have worked out how to change
the default without, so far, breaking anything as there are two ways of
approaching this:
- Create an “rt” scheme and make this the default for all new tickets.
This doesn’t seem to break anything since the “fsck.com-rt” scheme is
still there, just not the default any more. - Create an “rt” scheme and go through the Links table in the DB and
change all “fsck.com-rt” scheme links to “rt”. Then remove the
“fsck.com-rt” scheme. This would be tidier and I suspect it wouldn’t
break anything either.
The issue would be, do you have any code/modifications which depend on
“fsck.com-rt” being the default? I don’t so I may move to an “rt” scheme
wholesale.
The patches to do this are simple and I can post them if there is any
interest.
PK
From: Jason Fenner [mailto:jfenner@vitamix.com]
Sent: 12 June 2006 13:35
To: Philip Kime
Cc: Todd Chapman; RT users
Subject: Re: [rt-users] The “fsck.com-rt-” URI scheme
What is this URI used for in RT? How does RT use it?
Philip Kime wrote:
I was more wondering how hard it would be to just default them to an
“rt” scheme since it would seem to make more sense for people who have
nothing to do with the fsck.com domain. Even RT has nothing to do with
the fsck.com domain now since I believe it was the author’s personal
domain when it was first being developed.The at scheme is just “at”, it would be nice for rt to be just “rt”
unless you really want a scheme prefix of something else which could
be a config file setting.As an exercise, I created an “rt” scheme and altered Record.pm,
Ticket_Overlay.pm and URI.pm but in 3.6 REST interface, the links
still come out as fsck.com-rt so I’ve either missed something or
something’s in the DB.PK
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Chapman [mailto:todd@chaka.net]
Sent: 11 June 2006 15:47
To: Philip Kime
Cc: RT users
Subject: Re: [rt-users] The “fsck.com-rt-” URI schemeAll tickets should have fsck.com-rt schemes. Why would that be a
problem?-Todd
Will this URI scheme thing be continued in later versions of RT? I
remember JV saying that it probably wouldn’t. I’m wondering if it’s
worth bothering with generating patches to get rid of the hard-coded
“fsck.com-rt-” scheme because I need to use a lot of REST calls
makinglinks etc. and every ticket like comes out as “fsck.com-rt-” …
PK
–
Philip Kime
NOPS Systems Architect
310 401 0407
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support:
sales@bestpractical.comDiscover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.comWe’re hiring! Come hack Perl for Best Practical:
Careers — Best Practical Solutions
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support:
sales@bestpractical.comDiscover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.comWe’re hiring! Come hack Perl for Best Practical:
Careers — Best Practical Solutions
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:00:10 -0500
From: “Duncan Shannon” dshannon@techfluent.com
Subject: RE: [rt-users] rt as secondary website
To: “Justin R Findlay” justin@jfindlay.us,
rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Message-ID:
2B7B7880538AA440B5FBCE7A56E8CB452B4DD5@TF-FS2.internal.techfluent.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=“us-ascii”
I hope this makes enough sense to be understandable. I’m sure there’s
a
Mmm… sort of.
way to do it. I’m just not versed with apache and WWW enough to know
how to proceed.
sounds like an apache thing, not an RT thing. I’d start with apache and
virtual host configurations.
Good luck,
duncan
RT-Users mailing list
RT-Users@lists.bestpractical.com
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
End of RT-Users Digest, Vol 27, Issue 31