Re: [CentOS] awstats, webalizer or...

[Ashley M. Kirchner]

Ray Van Dolson wrote:

So what does everyone out there use to generate web statistics these
days?  Are the tried and true awstats or webalizer still the best out
there?

Ray

   Awffull - http://www.stedee.id.au/awffull

--
H | It's not a bug - it's an undocumented feature.
 +
 Ashley M. Kirchner    .   303.442.6410 x130
 IT Director / SysAdmin / Websmith . 800.441.3873 x130
 Photo Craft Imaging   . 3550 Arapahoe Ave. #6
 http://www.pcraft.com . .  ..   Boulder, CO 80303, U.S.A. 


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] awstats, webalizer or...

[Ray Van Dolson]

So what does everyone out there use to generate web statistics these
days?  Are the tried and true awstats or webalizer still the best out
there?

Ray
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Re: Best Motherboard

[Scott Silva]

on 5-15-2008 5:13 PM Guy Boisvert spake the following:

Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Guy Boisvert 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


The only downside is that sometimes, it takes time to get them.  It's 
like

Tyan has problem producing enough for market demand.



Actually from my understanding its sort of the 'opposite'. Market
demand for white-box motherboards has gotten less over time as the
'cost' of selling them has gone up versus buying a finished built
system from a VAR. So companies like Tyan etc make more money making
the boards indirectly for VARs than they do from selling their own
boards.

Its sort of like the car engine companies of the 1900's. As time went
on they made smaller and smaller batches of specialized engines
because the companies they had sold them to either bought them up or
just had them make large batches of Ford/GM/etc engines exclusively.



Yeah, that's possible.  They could have big contracts with VARs.

I saw some Dell workstations with special models of Asus mainboards, 
which are not supported by Asus!  You have to rely on the VARs for support.


That is one of the benefits of OEM integration. You can make it and sell it 
for less because the OEM picks up the cost of support. The equipment is made 
just "different" enough so there is no doubt it is an OEM product.


--
MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Re: tar spanning

[Scott Silva]

on 5-16-2008 4:28 AM Anne Wilson spake the following:

On Thursday 15 May 2008 11:22:51 pm Scott Silva wrote:

on 5-14-2008 6:11 PM Jim Perrin spake the following:
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 8:54 PM, Fajar Priyanto 

 wrote:

Googling my own name 'Fajar Priyanto Linux' returns 12,300 hits from
Google. Maybe someday we can compile a top-ten list for this? :)

Oh hell no. If we go down that road we're doing it RIGHT, with a
winner-take-all brawl via google-fight(http://www.googlefight.com/)!

Two names enter, one name leaves!

Ha! I beat you!

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=Scott+Silva&word2=Jim
+Perrin


http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=Anne+Wilson&word2=Jim+Perrin

:-)

Anne


Thats because your name has "Heart"! ;-P



--
MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Convert a real system in a DomU

[Sergio Belkin]

2008/5/18 Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Sergio Belkin wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>> I was a server running Fedora 6. I want to migrate it to Xen on a
>> Centos 5.1. Can I make something like
>>
>
> You might want to take a look at this code that Richard has been working on
> recently :
>
> http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-p2v/
>
> --
> Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/  : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ___

Really interesting. Has someone tried it?



-- 
--
Open Kairos http://www.openkairos.com
Watch More TV http://sebelk.blogspot.com
Sergio Belkin -
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Re: OT: Top Posting

[Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams]

On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 15:00 -0700, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
> I read an interesting take on "why" once.  Can't remember the link
> though... nerds need to remember that normal folk appreciate niceities
> in conversation, and normal folk need to remember that nerds are often
> very blunt but aren't really trying to be offensive.

http://www.mit.edu/~jcb/tact.html

-- 
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PLEASE don't CC me; I'm already subscribed


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Re: clustered mail server?

[Paul Heinlein]

On Sun, 18 May 2008, Tom Diehl wrote:

If you are sending secret or sensitive information via unencrypted 
email you already have a bigger problem then weather or not google 
is harvesting info. Email by design is insecure. Why anyone would 
believe otherwise is unclear to me. If you are encrypting it than I 
would argue that it does not matter if google tries to harvest 
information from it.


There's data and then there's metadata. The former, as you note, can 
be protected via standard encryption techniques. The latter -- e.g., 
who sent messages to whom and when -- might be just as important, and 
it's not possible to encrypt.


--
Paul Heinlein <> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <> http://www.madboa.com/
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Re: OT: Top Posting

[MHR]

On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Ray Van Dolson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Someone around for 10 years much less 51 years would know that
> Karanbir's style of communication should be considered "blunt" and not
> offensive.  It's a common style of communication for developers.  I
> never take it personally...
>

Excellent advice, especially for newbies and non-nerds.

> I read an interesting take on "why" once.  Can't remember the link
> though... nerds need to remember that normal folk appreciate niceities
> in conversation, and normal folk need to remember that nerds are often
> very blunt but aren't really trying to be offensive.
>

In which case, a nerd with 51 years experience should understand
(instead of complaining).

> And for the record, top posting is evil (but ubiquitous thanks to MS
> Outlook and friends) and I much prefer mailing lists to forums. :)
>

Then you must also be a nerd.

(Me, too, of course!)

mhr
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Re: OT: Top Posting

[Scott Silva]

on 5-16-2008 8:08 AM Carol Anne Ogdin spake the following:

Les Mikesell questioned, "...who would go there to post any answers?"  The
answer is the same people who share here...and probably many more who find
this sparse medium harder to navigate.  There's a thriving community I
helped create and nurture, which I've described at
http://www.deepwoods.com/transform/pubs/Community.htm

When there's value provided, many people will rise to the challenge of
adding even more value.

And, yes, I know there's an archive of posts to this forum, but the question
is one of focus:  Do you  hold more value for a lively (virtual) meeting
with lots of participants, or a quiet library where information is archived?
This medium feels to me more like the latter.

This list is more like a game of checkers over the cracker barrel. Some work 
gets done, some bickering gets done. Some friends are made, some feelings get 
hurt. All in all, not the best list I have been on, but very far away from the 
worst.


--
MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Re: OT: Top Posting

[Ray Van Dolson]

On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 02:53:50PM -0700, Scott Silva wrote:
> on 5-16-2008 8:14 AM Carol Anne Ogdin spake the following:
>> Dear Mr. Singh:
>>
>> I understand you prefer this medium.  I have practical experience with
>> alternatives that have offered measurable and definite benefits to the
>> communities they serve.
>>
>> Your opinions are louder than your putative experience.  Unfortunately, in
>> 51 years in the computer industry, I've sometimes had to cope with behaviors
>> like yours.  It still makes me sad to experience such unhappy people who
>> think that attack is the best way to enrich a collaboration.
>
> So 51 years ago you had to be working on either Univac or a CDC 1604. There 
> wasn't much else around in 1957. Digital had just opened and hadn't 
> produced a system yet, so Sperry Rand and the new kids CDC were about it.

Someone around for 10 years much less 51 years would know that
Karanbir's style of communication should be considered "blunt" and not
offensive.  It's a common style of communication for developers.  I
never take it personally...

I read an interesting take on "why" once.  Can't remember the link
though... nerds need to remember that normal folk appreciate niceities
in conversation, and normal folk need to remember that nerds are often
very blunt but aren't really trying to be offensive.

And for the record, top posting is evil (but ubiquitous thanks to MS
Outlook and friends) and I much prefer mailing lists to forums. :)

Ray
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Re: OT: Top Posting

[John R Pierce]

Scott Silva wrote:

on 5-16-2008 8:14 AM Carol Anne Ogdin spake the following:

..Unfortunately, in
51 years in the computer industry, I've sometimes had to cope with 
behaviors

like yours.  It still makes me sad to experience such unhappy people who
think that attack is the best way to enrich a collaboration.
So 51 years ago you had to be working on either Univac or a CDC 1604. 
There wasn't much else around in 1957. Digital had just opened and 
hadn't produced a system yet, so Sperry Rand and the new kids CDC were 
about it.


you left out the IBM 1440, and card tabulating systems.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Re: OT: Top Posting

[Scott Silva]

on 5-16-2008 8:14 AM Carol Anne Ogdin spake the following:

Dear Mr. Singh:

I understand you prefer this medium.  I have practical experience with
alternatives that have offered measurable and definite benefits to the
communities they serve.

Your opinions are louder than your putative experience.  Unfortunately, in
51 years in the computer industry, I've sometimes had to cope with behaviors
like yours.  It still makes me sad to experience such unhappy people who
think that attack is the best way to enrich a collaboration.
So 51 years ago you had to be working on either Univac or a CDC 1604. There 
wasn't much else around in 1957. Digital had just opened and hadn't produced a 
system yet, so Sperry Rand and the new kids CDC were about it.


--
MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] kickstart question with 2 network cards

[Fabian Arrotin]

On Mon, 19 May 2008, Jerry Geis wrote:


I am using kickstart to automate installs. working nicely.
I now have a box with 2 NIC cards and I am getting prompted for which nick to 
use.


I have a line like:
network --device eth0 --bootproto dhcp --hostname tmp.msgnet.com

in my kickstart.
This line does not seem to be enough to say install with eth0 even though 
there may be an eth1.


How do I tell kickstart to not prompt for which network and just use eth0.

ksdevice=eth0 .. read 
http://wiki.centos.org/TipsAndTricks/KickStart?highlight=%28ksdevice%29 
for more options ...;


--
Fabian Arrotin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Internet network currently down, TCP/IP packets delivered now by UPS/Fedex ..."
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] kickstart question with 2 network cards

[Jerry Geis]

I am using kickstart to automate installs. working nicely.
I now have a box with 2 NIC cards and I am getting prompted for which 
nick to use.


I have a line like:
network --device eth0 --bootproto dhcp --hostname tmp.msgnet.com

in my kickstart.
This line does not seem to be enough to say install with eth0 even 
though there may be an eth1.


How do I tell kickstart to not prompt for which network and just use eth0.

Thanks,

Jerry
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Re: symbolic linking

[Robert Nichols]

MHR wrote:

Yes, using fqpn's is best in situations like this, but if I read the
above correctly, you want:

ln -s /mnt/jack/files /opt/files

because you said you mounted jack's /opt on jill's /mnt/jack, not
jack's / (root).

Still, why you would get /opt/files/files is a mystery to me, too.


You will get that if /opt/files is an existing directory or a symlink
to an existing directory.  The semantics of "ln -s" are that if the
target exists and is a directory, then the symlink is placed within
that directory.  That's true even when you use the "-f" flag trying
to replace an existing symlink, and I get bit by that frequently.

You just have to be very careful when symlinking directories.

--
Bob Nichols "NOSPAM" is really part of my email address.
Do NOT delete it.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] OT: Building NFS server with LVM and snapshots enabled

[Theo Band]

carlopmart wrote:

Hi all,

 I need to build a NFS CentOS 5.1 based server with LVM and snaphosts 
for disaster recovering to serve storage to three ESX servers for a 
development dept. I have 500 GB for storage. Data that I need to store 
on this server is 150 GB and can grow to 210 GB to the end of year ...


 My questions are:

 - Is it possible to do some type of scripting to do data snapshots 
every day and then copy to a remote server?? Some example, please??

Yes of course. I would suggest to use rsync for that, see the example below.
I have experimented in the past with multiple snapshots a day over a 
week for users home space. The snapshots gave users a way to quickly 
retrieve lost data. Drawback is that snapshots tend to slow down the 
file server (it freezes temporarily to update the snaphot). A temporary 
snapshot during backup works OK.


 - How can I restore snapshot data on the production server if I need 
to recover it??
Most easy way would be to make a snapshot and make this snapshot the 
active disk. If you need to revert, just remove the snapshot and create 
a new one from the original unmodified data. But since you want to use 
NFS, you will have to reboot to free up the snapshot which is not so 
nice. The other way around is also possible. Just rsync the source NFS 
disk from the snapshot.
Again I would only make a snapshot temporarily and use it to make a copy 
(or sync) to a second file system. This second file system can than be 
setup with multiple snapshots over time. This prevents the slowdown of 
the "main" file server. If you need to revert you can use rsync again. 
(rsync works incrementally so it safes a lot of time if most data is 
still the same)


Example script to run with crontab to synchronize multiple volumes to a 
backup server:


date +"$0 started: %x %T"
PATH=$PATH:/usr/sbin

volumes="vola volb volc vold"
for i in $volumes
do
 # Create a new snapshot
 # Maximum snapshot size 7G
 DATE=$(date +%a_%y%m%d_%H%M)
 lvcreate --size 10G -n ${i}_${DATE} --permission r --snapshot 
/dev/VolGroup00/$i


 # Mount the snapshot
 mkdir -p /snapshot/${DATE}/$i
 mount -o ro /dev/VolGroup00/${i}_${DATE}  /snapshot/${DATE}/$i

 rsync -aq --delete /snapshot/${DATE}/$i/ remote_host:/mnt/$i/

 umount /snapshot/${DATE}/$i
 rmdir  /snapshot/${DATE}/$i
 rmdir  /snapshot/${DATE}
 lvremove -f /dev/VolGroup00/${i}_${DATE}

done
date +"$0 finished: %x %T"


You could create daily snapshots on the remote server as well. I use 
(incremental) dump and restore for that.


Cheers,
Theo
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] symbolic linking

[MHR]

On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 7:40 AM, Bowie Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frank Cox wrote:
>> I have a number directories under /opt on computer jack.  I want some
>> (not all) of them to appear in /opt on computer jill.
>>
>> I have the /opt directory on jack mounted on jill under /mnt/jack
>>

I'm not clear on what this means - jill:/mnt/jack == jack:/opt?

>> If I go into the /opt directory on jill and do this:
>>
>> ln -s /mnt/jack/opt/files .
>>

If the above (of mine) is correct, then you have:

jill:/mnt/jack/opt/files == jack:/opt/opt/files - this also makes no sense.

>> I get /opt/files/files on jill.  What I want is /opt/files and I
>> can't see what I'm doing wrong.
>
> I don't see anything wrong with that command.  A quick test on one of my
> systems confirms that it should do what you expect.
>
> Try specifying the target explicitly:
>
>ln -s /mnt/jack/opt/files /opt/files
>
> (no trailing slashes on either the source or destination)
>

Yes, using fqpn's is best in situations like this, but if I read the
above correctly, you want:

ln -s /mnt/jack/files /opt/files

because you said you mounted jack's /opt on jill's /mnt/jack, not
jack's / (root).

Still, why you would get /opt/files/files is a mystery to me, too.

HTH.

mhr
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

RE: [CentOS] yum problem after last kernel (SOLVED)

[Alex Palenschat]

>Hello all, I've been googling and haven't found an answer. I have a
>Centos 4.6 box that is having an issue since the last yum update. The
>nss_ldap and kernel packages were the only packages installed/updated.
>When I try to run yum I now receive:

>[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# yum update
>There was a problem importing one of the Python modules
>required to run yum. The error leading to this problem was:
>
>   /usr/lib/librpmdb-4.3.so: undefined symbol:
>xdr___db_get_name_reply[rpmdb
>
>Please install a package which provides this module, or
>verify that the module is installed correctly.
>
>It's possible that the above module doesn't match the
>current version of Python, which is:
>2.3.4 (#1, Dec 11 2007, 05:27:57)
>[GCC 3.4.6 20060404 (Red Hat 3.4.6-9)]

Responding to my own post. I'm not sure how it was corrupted, but I only
had to redownload the rpm-libs package and issue a rpm -Uvh --force
command to resolve this. So I thought I'd post it in case somebody else
runs into the same error.

alex

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Re: [CentOS-announce] Impact of the Debian OpenSSL vulnerability

[Daniel de Kok]

On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Johnny Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Does anyone know the point of the patch in the first place?  That is, why
>> would a distro-specific modification have been needed at all?  I don't
>> suspect an intentional compromise here but I'm curious about why anyone
>> would consider a non-standard change.
>>
>
> The change was added due to valgrind testing of openssh and warnings
> produced while compiling.
>
> The removal was discussed on the openssh-devel list.
>
> If was clearly an accident caused by trying to do the right thing.

And a miscommunication, it seems that the OpenSSL developers the patch
was just used for debugging purposes, while the Debian packages
understood it as a confirmation that the patch was ok.

Errors do happen, even to the brightest of all developers. Though,
most bugs do not have such  far-reaching consequences. The best thing
is to learn from it, and to move on.

Take care,
Daniel
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

RE: [CentOS] symbolic linking

[Bowie Bailey]

Frank Cox wrote:
> I have a number directories under /opt on computer jack.  I want some
> (not all) of them to appear in /opt on computer jill.
> 
> I have the /opt directory on jack mounted on jill under /mnt/jack
> 
> If I go into the /opt directory on jill and do this:
> 
> ln -s /mnt/jack/opt/files .
> 
> I get /opt/files/files on jill.  What I want is /opt/files and I
> can't see what I'm doing wrong.

I don't see anything wrong with that command.  A quick test on one of my
systems confirms that it should do what you expect.

Try specifying the target explicitly:

ln -s /mnt/jack/opt/files /opt/files

(no trailing slashes on either the source or destination)

-- 
Bowie
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Re: [CentOS-announce] Impact of the Debian OpenSSL vulnerability

[Johnny Hughes]

Les Mikesell wrote:

Ralph Angenendt wrote:



- What does our upstream think about this?
- What do the OpenSSH developers think about this?

Someone is going to need to ask those questions of the people...


I don't think the OpenSSH devels really do care about that - there is no
discussion whatsoever on the secureshell list or on the devel list.

No idea about our upstream, but I don't think so either.


Does anyone know the point of the patch in the first place?  That is, 
why would a distro-specific modification have been needed at all?  I 
don't suspect an intentional compromise here but I'm curious about why 
anyone would consider a non-standard change.




The change was added due to valgrind testing of openssh and warnings 
produced while compiling.


The removal was discussed on the openssh-devel list.

If was clearly an accident caused by trying to do the right thing.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Re: [CentOS-announce] Impact of the Debian OpenSSL vulnerability

[Les Mikesell]

Ralph Angenendt wrote:



- What does our upstream think about this?
- What do the OpenSSH developers think about this?

Someone is going to need to ask those questions of the people...


I don't think the OpenSSH devels really do care about that - there is no
discussion whatsoever on the secureshell list or on the devel list.

No idea about our upstream, but I don't think so either.


Does anyone know the point of the patch in the first place?  That is, 
why would a distro-specific modification have been needed at all?  I 
don't suspect an intentional compromise here but I'm curious about why 
anyone would consider a non-standard change.


--
  Les Mikesell
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] clustered mail server?

[Les Mikesell]

Christopher Chan wrote:


Sorry, I did not read your mail through properly. Not mounted on the 
secondary, okay. Anyway, quite a fair bit off complexity there in making 
sure the network block device does not get mounted by both boxes at the 
same time.


Is it really worth the complexity when you can have both servers online 
running off their own disks for the mail queue without having to worry 
about the other guy? If the primary is so badly whatever that a queue on 
mirrored disks cannot be brought back online with a simple reboot, what 
chances are there that the network block device won't be a victim of the 
whatever and mess up the queue so that the secondary cannot use it?


That's generally my reasoning in thinking that simple raid1 mirrors on 
the primary with swappable disks and a spare powered-off chassis are 
probably more robust.  You do need someone on-site capable of swapping 
the disks if you have a motherboard/power supply failure but with 
server-class equipment and a good UPS those are pretty rare.  You also 
need additional backups, since an operator or software error could take 
out your online filesystem including the mirrored side.


--
  Les Mikesell
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 39, Issue 9

[centos-announce-request]

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

You can reach the person managing the list at
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. CEBA-2008:0258  CentOS 5 i386 mcstrans Update (Karanbir Singh)
   2. CEBA-2008:0258  CentOS 5 x86_64 mcstrans Update (Karanbir Singh)
   3. CEBA-2008:0219 CentOS 5 i386  device-mapper-multipath Update
  (Karanbir Singh)
   4. CEBA-2008:0219 CentOS 5 x86_64device-mapper-multipath Update
  (Karanbir Singh)
   5. CESA-2008:0270 Important CentOS 5 x86_64  libvorbis Update
  (Karanbir Singh)
   6. CESA-2008:0270 Important CentOS 5 i386 libvorbis  Update
  (Karanbir Singh)


--

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 02:01:02 +0100
From: Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2008:0258  CentOS 5 i386 mcstrans
Update
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2008:0258 

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2008-0258.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename ) 

i386:
97f048f9e25b96598ece8ade3f79  mcstrans-0.2.7-1.el5.i386.rpm

Source:
c4d891a0a78fa4b39e186671862bf38e  mcstrans-0.2.7-1.el5.src.rpm


-- 
Karanbir Singh
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: z00dax, [EMAIL PROTECTED]



--

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 02:01:02 +0100
From: Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2008:0258  CentOS 5 x86_64 mcstrans
Update
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2008:0258 

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2008-0258.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename ) 

x86_64:
6fe63939ed264c22999fb31a32824c29  mcstrans-0.2.7-1.el5.x86_64.rpm

Source:
c4d891a0a78fa4b39e186671862bf38e  mcstrans-0.2.7-1.el5.src.rpm


-- 
Karanbir Singh
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: z00dax, [EMAIL PROTECTED]



--

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 02:15:53 +0100
From: Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2008:0219 CentOS 5 i386
device-mapper-multipath Update
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2008:0219 

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2008-0219.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename ) 

i386:
59550df9907e6a514156a1a39e91  
device-mapper-multipath-0.4.7-12.el5_1.4.i386.rpm
6dbc1f26ff888504fdc312c5d0cfd72d  kpartx-0.4.7-12.el5_1.4.i386.rpm

Source:
ad4f7bc83160d9902ba03b2467d06558  
device-mapper-multipath-0.4.7-12.el5_1.4.src.rpm


-- 
Karanbir Singh
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: z00dax, [EMAIL PROTECTED]



--

Message: 4
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 02:15:54 +0100
From: Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2008:0219 CentOS 5 x86_64
device-mapper-multipath Update
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2008:0219 

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2008-0219.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename ) 

x86_64:
6848614cc3bdb00abf10b5de1570098b  
device-mapper-multipath-0.4.7-12.el5_1.4.x86_64.rpm
5937c6cdf355f631c930961278748573  kpartx-0.4.7-12.el5_1.4.x86_64.rpm

Source:
ad4f7bc83160d9902ba03b2467d06558  
device-mapper-multipath-0.4.7-12.el5_1.4.src.rpm


-- 
Karanbir Singh
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: z00dax, [EMAIL PROTECTED]



--

Message: 5
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 02:19:21 +0100
From: Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2008:0270 Important CentOS 5 x86_64
libvorbis Update
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2008:0270 Important

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2008-0270.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename ) 

x86_64:
78cf5b45956016f3bd4200f4ab68e51b  libvorbis-1.1

Re: [CentOS] clustered mail server?

[Ralph Angenendt]

Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> Ralph Angenendt wrote:
>> Because it would be shooting cannons at birds in this particular case.
>> If you need to expose both nodes "to the public" all the time, you
>> probably also run the software on both nodes - which would be more of a
>> cluster than a failover setup >:)
>>   
> But, a cluster in itself is fail over :) If either node is dead, the 
> cluster is still up

I really wouldn't always count on that >:)

Cheers,

Ralph


pgpUUbkvceY0i.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] clustered mail server?

[Rudi Ahlers]

Ralph Angenendt wrote:

Christopher Chan wrote:
  

Ralph Angenendt wrote:


There are primary/primary setups possible with drbd and gfs if you need
both nodes to be exported at the same time - but that's not needed nor
recommended in a failover situation.

  

Why would it not be recommended for a failover situation?



Because it would be shooting cannons at birds in this particular case.
If you need to expose both nodes "to the public" all the time, you
probably also run the software on both nodes - which would be more of a
cluster than a failover setup >:)

Cheers,

Ralph
  



___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
  
But, a cluster in itself is fail over :) If either node is dead, the 
cluster is still up


--

Kind Regards
Rudi Ahlers
CEO, SoftDux

Web:   http://www.SoftDux.com
Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other 
technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] clustered mail server?

[Ralph Angenendt]

Christopher Chan wrote:
> Ralph Angenendt wrote:
>> There are primary/primary setups possible with drbd and gfs if you need
>> both nodes to be exported at the same time - but that's not needed nor
>> recommended in a failover situation.
>>
>
> Why would it not be recommended for a failover situation?

Because it would be shooting cannons at birds in this particular case.
If you need to expose both nodes "to the public" all the time, you
probably also run the software on both nodes - which would be more of a
cluster than a failover setup >:)

Cheers,

Ralph


pgpg3TFecKUe3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] clustered mail server?

[William L. Maltby]

On Sun, 2008-05-18 at 23:50 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> Christopher Chan wrote:
> >

> >> Besides, as John already pointed out, emails in the spools can hang 
> >> around for days. I believe most MTA's only discard completely after 
> >> 7days of non delivery.
> > 
> > That default setting is no longer applicable today. Users will scream if 
> > they find out that their mails have been sitting in the queue for a day. 
> 
> Mail will wait with a delay if there is a problem with the remote end 
> receiving the emails. Users will screan much more if they find that 
> their emails are just going into /dev/null and they are having to work 
> the retry mechanism by hand rather than their email server. Besides, if 
> I send an email at 2am and there was a network outage at the remote end, 
> its nice to know that
> 
> > For today's businesses, one day can make or break a deal and so email, 
> > being a much faster form of communication than snail mail, has come to 
> > be seen as the preferred choice. People start calling when they know 
> > they are supposed to get an email in a minute or so when it does 
> > materialize.
> 
> Your point is well made, however - email does normally go in a single 
> stream. Its when there is a problem and a retry mechanism hasto kick in 
> that there is a problem. Its only the crazy goons who develop MS 
> Exchange who havent got their head around this problem, something solved 
> by the general internet users about 25 years back.

Only as a bit of interesting (to me) FYI: actually when we were using
uucp for mail prior to the widespread deployment of the internet, this
was solved in the same way it is now. I worked for Western Electric at
the time and made a presentation to DARPA down at the U of Georgia
demonstrating how interactive terminal-to-terminal communication and
inter-node mail could be facilitated using UNIX (R).

Needless to say, there were some very bright folks there. We began
hearing about something called "internet" that would be coming on the
scene. First application was for defense. Then it spread to colleges and
universities.

I must have shipped out 200-300 UNIX (R) distributions on tape (the big
ones) to colleges and government organizations in the next year. And
volume kept growing.

Anyway, the point is that the problem was solved in the 1978 - 1979 time
frame. So its at least 30 years.

> 

-- 
Bill

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] clustered mail server?

[Christopher Chan]

Ralph Angenendt wrote:

Christopher Chan wrote:

Ralph Angenendt wrote:

No and yes. You can just use ext3 on both nodes as you normally only
have the one on the primary node mounted - the other one is not accessed
by anything. And yes, with heartbeat you "just" failover to the second
node, if the first one is dead. That will start the needed services on
the second node.
Are you positive that you can put ext3 on it and have it mounted on the 
secondary while the primary is happily hammering away without any ill 
effects? Have you done it?


No, you do *not* mount it on the secondary while the primary is happily
hammering away. heartbeat takes care of mounting and of the secondary
becoming primary in case of a failover.


Yes, I am sorry, I did not read your mail through. Heartbeat takes care 
of the mounting eh?




There are primary/primary setups possible with drbd and gfs if you need
both nodes to be exported at the same time - but that's not needed nor
recommended in a failover situation.



Why would it not be recommended for a failover situation?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] clustered mail server?

[Ralph Angenendt]

Christopher Chan wrote:
> Ralph Angenendt wrote:
>> No and yes. You can just use ext3 on both nodes as you normally only
>> have the one on the primary node mounted - the other one is not accessed
>> by anything. And yes, with heartbeat you "just" failover to the second
>> node, if the first one is dead. That will start the needed services on
>> the second node.
>
> Are you positive that you can put ext3 on it and have it mounted on the 
> secondary while the primary is happily hammering away without any ill 
> effects? Have you done it?

No, you do *not* mount it on the secondary while the primary is happily
hammering away. heartbeat takes care of mounting and of the secondary
becoming primary in case of a failover.

There are primary/primary setups possible with drbd and gfs if you need
both nodes to be exported at the same time - but that's not needed nor
recommended in a failover situation.

Ralph


pgp8IU8PiefQ9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] clustered mail server?

[Christopher Chan]

Christopher Chan wrote:

Ralph Angenendt wrote:

Christopher Chan wrote:
Okay, Les helped me with that one. RAID1 on the network. So you would 
have to use GFS or something like that with it and have the service 
down on the secondary unless it was sendmail you were running.


No and yes. You can just use ext3 on both nodes as you normally only
have the one on the primary node mounted - the other one is not accessed
by anything. And yes, with heartbeat you "just" failover to the second
node, if the first one is dead. That will start the needed services on
the second node.


Are you positive that you can put ext3 on it and have it mounted on the 
secondary while the primary is happily hammering away without any ill 
effects? Have you done it?


Sorry, I did not read your mail through properly. Not mounted on the 
secondary, okay. Anyway, quite a fair bit off complexity there in making 
sure the network block device does not get mounted by both boxes at the 
same time.


Is it really worth the complexity when you can have both servers online 
running off their own disks for the mail queue without having to worry 
about the other guy? If the primary is so badly whatever that a queue on 
mirrored disks cannot be brought back online with a simple reboot, what 
chances are there that the network block device won't be a victim of the 
whatever and mess up the queue so that the secondary cannot use it?

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] clustered mail server?

[Christopher Chan]

Ralph Angenendt wrote:

Christopher Chan wrote:
Okay, Les helped me with that one. RAID1 on the network. So you would have 
to use GFS or something like that with it and have the service down on the 
secondary unless it was sendmail you were running.


No and yes. You can just use ext3 on both nodes as you normally only
have the one on the primary node mounted - the other one is not accessed
by anything. And yes, with heartbeat you "just" failover to the second
node, if the first one is dead. That will start the needed services on
the second node.


Are you positive that you can put ext3 on it and have it mounted on the 
secondary while the primary is happily hammering away without any ill 
effects? Have you done it?

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] clustered mail server?

[Ralph Angenendt]

Christopher Chan wrote:
> Okay, Les helped me with that one. RAID1 on the network. So you would have 
> to use GFS or something like that with it and have the service down on the 
> secondary unless it was sendmail you were running.

No and yes. You can just use ext3 on both nodes as you normally only
have the one on the primary node mounted - the other one is not accessed
by anything. And yes, with heartbeat you "just" failover to the second
node, if the first one is dead. That will start the needed services on
the second node.

Ralph


pgpN231iUjuwV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] clustered mail server?

[Christopher Chan]

John R Pierce wrote:

Christopher Chan wrote:
That default setting is no longer applicable today. Users will scream 
if they find out that their mails have been sitting in the queue for a 
day. For today's businesses, one day can make or break a deal and so 
email, being a much faster form of communication than snail mail, has 
come to be seen as the preferred choice. People start calling when 
they know they are supposed to get an email in a minute or so when it 
does materialize.




So you never send any email to anyone using greylisting?   thats odd, as 
its very common nowdays.greylisting servers will auto-reject the 
first attempt at sending an email, then accept it on a later retry 
(typically 10 or 15 minutes is the default retry interval for most mail 
servers).   This /guarantees/ email will sit in your outbound queue for 
at least one retry interval.


Yes, so I get to tell the users, sorry, Yahoo is up to its antics again. 
Maybe it will go through in an hour. What advantage would I have in 
putting the queue on a distributed filesystem if I have to ensure that 
the MTAs do not try to both access the queue if they are not sendmail 
versus the simplicity of a local mirrored disk setup for the queue?


I frequently run into outbound mail that sits in my queues for several 
hours, the destination servers may be too busy, or they may be offline 
for maintenance, many reasons.  There's a k12 school district up in 
Chico CA who's mail server seems to be down as often as its up, and 
there are several folks on that server who subscribe to various email 
lists I host.the mail gets through eventually.



Do you put your outbound mail queue on a distributed filesystem?


Email is /NOT/ IM.  If your users expect it to function like Instant 
Messaging, maybe you should suggest they use IM when they want immediate 
response with feedback.




I am not going to make an issue of their expectations and make them use 
something that is not necessarily available or allowed.

Email + attachments is not quite the same as IM + File Transfers
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] clustered mail server?

[Christopher Chan]

Karanbir Singh wrote:

Christopher Chan wrote:
I am sorry but I do not share that view for incoming mail. The latency 
in getting the mail replicated probably is longer than it takes to do 
the actually delivery to the mail store.


I am not sure what you mean by the word 'replication' but in most cases 
the user mail stores are on the same shared block device. And I've 
worked with an ISP recently that deliver between 12 to 16 million emails 
per day and dont have this problem of 'latency in replication'. Using 
exim and cyrus-imapd over 2 user facing nodes.


I thought we were talking about the queues? I agree and did say that the 
mail store should be on a distributed filesystem.


Besides, as John already pointed out, emails in the spools can hang 
around for days. I believe most MTA's only discard completely after 
7days of non delivery.


That default setting is no longer applicable today. Users will scream 
if they find out that their mails have been sitting in the queue for a 
day. 


Mail will wait with a delay if there is a problem with the remote end 
receiving the emails. Users will screan much more if they find that 
their emails are just going into /dev/null and they are having to work 
the retry mechanism by hand rather than their email server. Besides, if 
I send an email at 2am and there was a network outage at the remote end, 
its nice to know that



Some people would rather be informed that their email was not delivered 
within the hour and I do not see how not putting the queue on a shared 
network block device would lead to emails going into /dev/null. 
Obviously I would recommend at least raid1 for the local block device.


For today's businesses, one day can make or break a deal and so email, 
being a much faster form of communication than snail mail, has come to 
be seen as the preferred choice. People start calling when they know 
they are supposed to get an email in a minute or so when it does 
materialize.


Your point is well made, however - email does normally go in a single 
stream. Its when there is a problem and a retry mechanism hasto kick in 
that there is a problem. Its only the crazy goons who develop MS 
Exchange who havent got their head around this problem, something solved 
by the general internet users about 25 years back.


You have lost me here. Besides the shoddy implementation of Exchange, 
especially in earlier versions, what about Exchange and its retry 
mechanism?




He is welcome to replicate the queue. His traffic levels will be so 
low that it really does not affect things but if he is using qmail I 
hope that the filesystem is completely identical on the secondary.


I personally hate qmail, its place is back in the 1990's - perhaps in 
the 1980's. But that is a pure personal opinion. I know there are plenty 
of people, some whom I even respect technically, who still use it :/




Yeah, I would not put an unpatched qmail on a MX nor do I feel like 
patching one. I use postfix with vpopmail instead notwithstanding 
vpopmailś deep links with qmail.
Also, you seem confused about the filesystem on the secondary. Its not a 
different filesystem - its the same shared block device exposed to both 
machines. if the primary fails, its the same system that the secondy 
see's when its made live. the DRBD packages are included in CentOS - you 
should give it a try. One easy way to do this is setup 2 VM's and have a 
play there. its quite cool.




Okay, Les helped me with that one. RAID1 on the network. So you would 
have to use GFS or something like that with it and have the service down 
on the secondary unless it was sendmail you were running. Pretty much 
what I said except that I was not too sure with how DRBD works since I 
have heard about stuff like this that replicated on the hour or something.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] clustered mail server?

[Christopher Chan]

DRBD works approximately like raid1 mirroring.  Unless something breaks 
it shouldn't add much latency since the duplicate disk will run at 
approximately the same speed as the master.




RAID1 + network latency. Got it.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos