Submitted by -eclipse- on Wed, 04/12/2017 - 07:12 Pro Licensee
Hi Eric
I updated the Virtualmin instance Monday evening and after that I haven't been able to start the proftpd service. It keeps failing when I try to start the service and it doesn't give me any information on why... I need some help to troubleshoot this.
- Tim
Status:
Active
Comments
Submitted by -eclipse- on Wed, 04/12/2017 - 07:13 Pro Licensee Comment #1
Hi again
I have activated remote support login to the Virtualmin Pro instance.
Submitted by -eclipse- on Wed, 04/12/2017 - 07:25 Pro Licensee Comment #2
Here is some extra details.
rpm -qa | grep proftp proftpd-1.3.5d-2.el6.x86_64
/usr/sbin/proftpd 2017-04-12 14:20:48,723 glolinweb001.itoverblik.dk proftpd[10244]: fatal: unknown configuration directive 'VRootEngine' on line 16 of '/etc/proftpd.conf'
Here is the proftpd.conf file
# Cause every FTP user except adm to be chrooted into their home directory
# Aliasing /etc/security/pam_env.conf into the chroot allows pam_env to
# work at session-end time (http://bugzilla.redhat.com/477120)
VRootEngine on
DefaultRoot ~ !adm
VRootAlias /etc/security/pam_env.conf etc/security/pam_env.conf
Submitted by -eclipse- on Wed, 04/12/2017 - 07:44 Pro Licensee Comment #3
Hi again
I added the ifmodule before VRootEngine and now it starts??
<IfModule mod_vroot.c>
VRootEngine on
VRootAlias /etc/security/pam_env.conf etc/security/pam_env.conf
</IfModule>
DefaultRoot ~ !adm
Can you confirm this is the correct way to solve the issue at hand?
Submitted by andreychek on Wed, 04/12/2017 - 07:54 Comment #4
Howdy -- I was just logging in to review your config, but it looks like you did get that all fixed up there!
I was actually just going to comment out the VRoot related options, but adding in an IfModule statement around those is a good way to handle that.
I don't believe Virtualmin uses any of those VRoot related options.
Submitted by -eclipse- on Wed, 04/12/2017 - 07:56 Pro Licensee Comment #5
Hi Eric
I did a restore of the config file 2 weeks ago and the config is the same, so nothing has change in it. It must be a newer version of ProFTPD service that result in the new behaviour of the ifmodule requirement?