After a new installation, I had problems with MySQL (Interworx could not update anything about MySQL in the "MySQL Server - Overview" page AND cannot use PHPMyAdmin, talking about error 1251). So I first tried to reinstall MySQL from the RHEL repos (version 5.1.52-1.el6_0.1) and it did not change anything.
Then I searched for some answers and found out about the "old_passwords=1" in the my.cnf file and after a MySQL restart, that did not change anything, I still have problems using the MySQL Overview page in Interworx and using PHPMyAdmin...
Note: I am running RHEL6 so maybe this is related to MySQL being too recent for what is included in Interworx... On my other Interworx servers running CentOS 5, I have version 5.0.77-4.el5_5.5 which runs just fine...
Added note: The exact error message I get when I try to change the MySQL password in Interworx is “A system error has occured, replyCode: 500, replyText: Generic Server Issue, replyData: null”
Thanks for any answers!
Here is the answer (received from support team) for any of you who may live the same issue:
The issue was that, although you correctly figured out to set old_passwords=1, the passwords that were generated for iworx were generated before that setting was put into place, and thus the passwords were still using the “new” format. We “refreshed” all the passwords in your DB with
UPDATE user SET Password = PASSWORD(’[iworx.ini’s rootdsn password]’) WHERE User = ‘iworx’;
and that corrected the problem.
thanks for sharing
As bear said… useful & thanks for sharing!
I personally believe this old & new password format issue is garbage and it should not be an issue at all. (This of course is NOT any issue with JUST InterWorx but with many many scripts out there.) The end solution should be to test which format is in use and adjust accordingly. And, just to any of the InterWorx team that reads this… This is by no means an attack on you guys. I just happened to see this thread and it brought back rather annoyed thoughts on the issue. There are ways of doing this that would not require a lot of extra coding or hurt efficiency. And, with some of the great features the CP already has this would be just one more nicety… that little extra touch of a well thought out product.
Just because something “works” does not mean it is the best way to go about the task. Also, just because something “works” does not mean it can’t be changed for better/new/more popular methodologies.