[CentOS-es] nas
saludos, saben si habrá una aplicacion grafica en centos que sirva para conectarme a un nas , asi como lo tiene el yast de opensuse pero en centos gracias. ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS-es] nas
NAS es x IP : mount.cifs //ip -u usurio eso bastaria asi tengo yo mi NAS El 16 de febrero de 2011 15:11, el linuxero linuxerodep...@hotmail.comescribió: saludos, saben si habrá una aplicacion grafica en centos que sirva para conectarme a un nas , asi como lo tiene el yast de opensuse pero en centos gracias. ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es -- Atentamente : Hector Cuadros Prosopio . Movil :(511)995-412-884 ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
[CentOS-es] Duda 64/32
Hola amigos de la lista. Tengo una duda y no comprendo muy bien. ¿Por qué cuando actualizo mi Centos 5.5 64b también instala versiones i386 de 32b en algunas librerías y programas? De hecho, en el raíz hay dos directorios lib: Un es /lib y el otro /lib64 Gracias Normando ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 15/02/11 02:48, Brian Mathis wrote: On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 4:05 PM, John R. Dennison j...@gerdesas.com wrote: On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 05:00:43PM -0400, robert mena wrote: Hi, Despite the mailing list and twitter I did not find any updated info on either versions regarding the current status. So, what is the current status of both versions? (like 60%) Your request just moved it back by 15% and 2 weeks, not to mention all the innocent kittens that were killed. John I wish people would take these requests as: Hey guys, I really love this project and I know there's a new version on the way. I've been following all the right places for news, but I just can't contain my excitement. Does anyone know when the next release is? I'm more excited about it than most people are about Apple's new iThing ...and react accordingly. Instead, we get: Don't bother people. Get off my lawn. Go pay for it if you want it so bad. To be fair this thread hasn't been as bad as most, but reflecting some excitement is free. Anyway, here's my response: Hey man, I'm just as excited as you. I really want to see what C6 looks like and to start playing with it. I'm so happy there's a modern kernel and recent packages so I don't have to hunt them down. I think C6 is going to be really cool. I know the CentOS guys put in a lot of work and I have a lot of respect for them, but they're busy with real life too. KB posted something on his Twitter, but you know how deadlines can be. Stuff comes up. All we can really do is wait until it comes out. If you wanted to help out, here's a link for info on how to do that... [someone please fill in link here]. +1 ... Such feedback would really be a lot better than anything else. Keep people in the darkness, and they'll start looking for the light switch ... provide them with a candle, and they'll sit more calmness, observing and having fun. kind regards, David Sommerseth ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 15/02/11 17:25, Gilbert Sebenste wrote: Let's see. 7 weeks after a RHEL release, we have: For RHEL6, lets make that 14 weeks. And RHEL5.6 got released 9 weeks after RHEL6. It's amazing how much smoother things would be, in regards to controlling the anticipation *if* we could find some regular updates on the progress. We don't need exact dates, but an idea of how the progress is going. Also some progress information of what is troublesome? What is taking time? How can the rest of the community help? This information could be given out even bi-weekly, and I'm sure it would calm down this tension a lot. The whole CentOS release progress is surprisingly closed, considering it is an open source project. Is it really too much to ask for information on the progress? And frankly, these references below doesn't shed too much light on the situation http://twitter.com/centos http://www.karan.org/blog/index.php http://planet.centos.org/ I'm sorry if I've missed some other more obvious places with more updated information ... so if that is the case, please enlighten me. kind regards, David Sommerseth ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Authentication Problems
Hi List, We have a CentOS VPS running a web site in a DC far away. The chap that dev's this site told me he couldn't SFTP in yesterday, his password was being rejected (I went to his desk to confirm and saw it was telling him the password was incorrect but neither him nor me had changed it and we are the only two with access to this VPS). So I logged in as root and reset his password, be he still couldn't log in (same problem, claiming the password was wrong). [root@server ~]# passwd webdevuser Changing password for user webdevuser. New UNIX password: Retype new UNIX password: passwd: all authentication tokens updates successfully. I tried to SSH in as the web dev user and it wouldn't let me in. Returning back to my root console window; [root@server ~]# su - webdevuser [webdevuser@server ~]# passwd Changing password for user webdevuser. Changing password for webdevuser. (current) UNIX password: passwd: Authentication token manipulation error Firstly; I am stracthing my head as to why his password was no longer working in the first place? Secondly; Why I can't reset it? Googling around many people suggest there is a discrepancy between the /etc/passwd and /etc/shadow files and by deleting /etc/shadow and using pwconv to recreate shadow and the same for /etc/groups, deleting gshadow recreating it with grpconv will solve the problem but I still can't login as the web dev user. Any ideas anyone? -- James. http://www.jamesbensley.co.cc/ There are 10 kinds of people in the world; Those who understand Vigesimal, and J others...? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:31 PM, David Sommerseth d...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: Is it really too much to ask for information on the progress? And frankly, these references below doesn't shed too much light on the situation List, Please relax. The CentOS team are doing their job. We aren't client or customers, we are supporters. -- Stephen Cox ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Authentication Problems
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 7:28 AM, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com wrote: Hi List, We have a CentOS VPS running a web site in a DC far away. The chap that dev's this site told me he couldn't SFTP in yesterday, his password was being rejected (I went to his desk to confirm and saw it was telling him the password was incorrect but neither him nor me had changed it and we are the only two with access to this VPS). So I logged in as root and reset his password, be he still couldn't log in (same problem, claiming the password was wrong). [root@server ~]# passwd webdevuser Changing password for user webdevuser. New UNIX password: Retype new UNIX password: passwd: all authentication tokens updates successfully. I tried to SSH in as the web dev user and it wouldn't let me in. Returning back to my root console window; [root@server ~]# su - webdevuser [webdevuser@server ~]# passwd Changing password for user webdevuser. Changing password for webdevuser. (current) UNIX password: passwd: Authentication token manipulation error Firstly; I am stracthing my head as to why his password was no longer working in the first place? Secondly; Why I can't reset it? Googling around many people suggest there is a discrepancy between the /etc/passwd and /etc/shadow files and by deleting /etc/shadow and using pwconv to recreate shadow and the same for /etc/groups, deleting gshadow recreating it with grpconv will solve the problem but I still can't login as the web dev user. Any ideas anyone? Uh-oh. Has your developer, or you, been editing the /etc/passwd, /etc/shadow, /etc/group, or /etc/gshadow files manually? And do you use NIS or LDAP for authentication? And this is a publicly exposed webserver, right? How fast can you rebuild it if it's been rootkitted? Check the /etc/shadow and /etc/group for consistent numbers of entries, and /etc/group and /etc/gshadow. Do you have other users who can still log in or not? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Authentication Problems
On 16 Feb 2011 12:34, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: Uh-oh. Has your developer, or you, been editing the /etc/passwd, /etc/shadow, /etc/group, or /etc/gshadow files manually? Nope. And do you use NIS or LDAP for authentication? Nope. And this is a publicly exposed webserver, right? How fast can you rebuild it if it's been rootkitted? How long is a peice of string? As quick as I can reupload the data, but thats another issue for another day. Check the /etc/shadow and /etc/group for consistent numbers of entries, and /etc/group and /etc/gshadow. Do you mean duplicate entries? If so there are none of those. Do you have other users who can still log in or not? There is only the root and web dev user on this box. Thanks for your input Nico :) --James. (This email was sent from a mobile device) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Authentication Problems
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 7:43 AM, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 Feb 2011 12:34, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: Uh-oh. Has your developer, or you, been editing the /etc/passwd, /etc/shadow, /etc/group, or /etc/gshadow files manually? Nope. And do you use NIS or LDAP for authentication? Nope. And this is a publicly exposed webserver, right? How fast can you rebuild it if it's been rootkitted? How long is a peice of string? As quick as I can reupload the data, but thats another issue for another day. Check the /etc/shadow and /etc/group for consistent numbers of entries, and /etc/group and /etc/gshadow. Do you mean duplicate entries? If so there are none of those. No, I mean the sam enumber of entries. wc /etc/shadow /etc/passwd cut -f1 -d: /etc/shasow /etc/passwd | sort | uniq -c And actually go line by line down these files, checking for matching usernames, correct layout of ':' separated entries, correct numbers of entries, and blank lines. I've seen serous problems where one or ther other of these files were corrupted by something, especially badly written installer scripts that only edited /etc/passwd directly and ignored /etc/shadow, or which mishandled $ entries in newly created encrypted passwords. Do you have other users who can still log in or not? There is only the root and web dev user on this box. Thanks for your input Nico :) --James. (This email was sent from a mobile device) Are you *sure*? Can you back this thing up for review and rebuilding? It might be safest to image it for analysis and simply rebuild it. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 16/02/11 13:31, Stephen Cox wrote: On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:31 PM, David Sommerseth d...@users.sourceforge.net mailto:d...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: Is it really too much to ask for information on the progress? And frankly, these references below doesn't shed too much light on the situation List, Please relax. The CentOS team are doing their job. We aren't client or customers, we are supporters. Exactly! Supporters who could most probably do even more, than just to sit here idle waiting for the next release - if we only knew what the issues are they are facing. kind regards, David Sommerseth ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Authentication Problems
On 16/02/11 13:28, James Bensley wrote: Hi List, We have a CentOS VPS running a web site in a DC far away. The chap that dev's this site told me he couldn't SFTP in yesterday, his password was being rejected (I went to his desk to confirm and saw it was telling him the password was incorrect but neither him nor me had changed it and we are the only two with access to this VPS). So I logged in as root and reset his password, be he still couldn't log in (same problem, claiming the password was wrong). [root@server ~]# passwd webdevuser Changing password for user webdevuser. New UNIX password: Retype new UNIX password: passwd: all authentication tokens updates successfully. I tried to SSH in as the web dev user and it wouldn't let me in. Returning back to my root console window; [root@server ~]# su - webdevuser [webdevuser@server ~]# passwd Changing password for user webdevuser. Changing password for webdevuser. (current) UNIX password: passwd: Authentication token manipulation error Firstly; I am stracthing my head as to why his password was no longer working in the first place? Secondly; Why I can't reset it? Googling around many people suggest there is a discrepancy between the /etc/passwd and /etc/shadow files and by deleting /etc/shadow and using pwconv to recreate shadow and the same for /etc/groups, deleting gshadow recreating it with grpconv will solve the problem but I still can't login as the web dev user. Any ideas anyone? - Could the account have become locked somehow? (passwd -u $user) Or could the account have become expired? - Are the permissions strict on the users ~/.ssh? (0700 on the directory, and 0600 on any files inside that directory - like authorized_keys ...) - Is SELinux in Enforced mode and are the SELinux file context correct on /home? (restorecon -rv /home) Also double check /var/log/messages, /var/log/secure and /var/log/audit/audit.log carefully when trying to log in as that user. kind regards, David Sommerseth ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Bacula
Thank you all for your sound advice. Just to fill you in on why I am such a spoon at sys admin, this system cost £50K+ and there is no sys admin and it comes with really poor service support. So I am learning on the job. I now have a list of databases and there is not one called Bacula. I will go away and mull/read and make a plan. Again, thanks a lot, the simplest of tasks for your guys is the unknown for me, so your help appreciated. Kind regards, John. On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 5:18 AM, John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote: On 02/15/11 5:22 PM, Craig White wrote: talk to the system database administrator for the machine, assuming they are interested in getting it backed up. I think by default, user 'postgres' doesn't need a password but then again, I wouldn't use that user on active database. I would create a user for that purpose...it's rather trivial. indeed, my examples were purely for diagnostic purposes. the postgres unix account should ONLY be used for database administration. it typically has no password on a clean install, I showed the # prompt to indicate those commands would be issued by root. if you're doing an initial install of bacula (I was assuming this was a previously working system that somehow stopped working), then something like.. # su - postgres postgres$ psql postgres= create user bacula with password 'xxxyyy'; CREATE USER postgres= create database bacula with owner bacula; CREATE DATABASE; postgres= \q postgres$ exit ... would create a bacula SQL user and a empty bacula database owned by this user, which you could use for bacula. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Authentication Problems
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 7:28 AM, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com wrote: [root@server ~]# su - webdevuser [webdevuser@server ~]# passwd Changing password for user webdevuser. Changing password for webdevuser. (current) UNIX password: passwd: Authentication token manipulation error A lot of things can cause this, including a full /var filesystem :/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 02/16/2011 04:31 AM, David Sommerseth wrote: On 15/02/11 17:25, Gilbert Sebenste wrote: Let's see. 7 weeks after a RHEL release, we have: For RHEL6, lets make that 14 weeks. And RHEL5.6 got released 9 weeks after RHEL6. The FIRST build of a distribution (the .0 of 4.0 or 5.0) takes MUCH longer than the subsequent rebuilds. This is because you have NOTHING to start from except SRPMS. You also do not know the environment that upstream is using to run their Build Roots in. We also know nothing about which packages will and will not build as written (there are many that require us to research and provide hints to the build suystem. Hints are things that need to be added that are not called out in the SRPM). These phantom RPMS (non released by Red Hat, but in their build tree for their initial development of the OS) are sometimes very hard to replicate. They are versions that are no where to be found. Oracle has supposedly released their EL 6 build (last Friday) ... but they have not released their sources as of this post. http://oss.oracle.com/el5/ === EL 5 Sources http://oss.oracle.com/el6/ === 404 Error Red Hat still has not put several of the sources in their public tree either. It's amazing how much smoother things would be, in regards to controlling the anticipation *if* we could find some regular updates on the progress. We don't need exact dates, but an idea of how the progress is going. Also some progress information of what is troublesome? What is taking time? How can the rest of the community help? This information could be given out even bi-weekly, and I'm sure it would calm down this tension a lot. And how much more time does that add to the development process. It is already taking too long for you, so you want the developers to spend more time on other things? They don't have enough time now to spend on CentOS, how is adding time to the process going to help. When they try, it is seen as not enough (see you comments below). The whole CentOS release progress is surprisingly closed, considering it is an open source project. CentOS releases our source on exactly the same day as our binary files. We published scripts and RPMS on how we generate our build system, on how we check our binaries, on how we generate our ISOs. How is that not open? (See if you can get Red Hat or Oracle to tell you what they use as a build engine for their enterprise products ...) We do not KNOW how long it is going to take to get this right .. especially CentOS 6. We have NO IDEA what problems we are going to incur until we hit them. There is NO WAY to know what RPM is not going to build correctly until it fails to build. There is no way to figure out why it did not build until you see the errors. Sometimes the build of a package seems complete, but the package does not contain the correct files or it is not linked against the correct packages. Sometimes the order of building the packages is important. Sometimes there are interim build packages that upstream had in their build roots that do not exist anywhere outside their build system, and that impacts how things build. We have to design a whole new build system for the new TREE, we have to bootstrap the packages in the correct order to build the tree. Once we have that tree, we need to build it again. Sometimes the underlying OS that the build roots run in (Build roots get built dynamically to build each package in a clean environment) matters. The bottom line is that is process is trial and error, especially the first one in a series (the .0 build). Is it really too much to ask for information on the progress? And frankly, these references below doesn't shed too much light on the situation http://twitter.com/centos http://www.karan.org/blog/index.php http://planet.centos.org/ I'm sorry if I've missed some other more obvious places with more updated information ... so if that is the case, please enlighten me. If you want timely enterprise open source software, you should: 1. Pay for it from RHEL 2. Learn to build it yourself, then you can ask yourself how long it is going to take. You still won't know ... but you will know who you yell at. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 01:50:55PM +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: Exactly! Supporters who could most probably do even more, than just to sit here idle waiting for the next release - if we only knew what the issues are they are facing. I find it amusing that all these offers of help and assistance, even the round-about ones such as this, occur when people get antsy about the release. Did you step up when the call for people to get involved at the very beginning of the CentOS 6 release cycle occurred? From everything I've heard on the various IRC channels the response to that initial call for help was, shall we say, lackluster at best. It's incredibly easy to consume; much more difficult to produce. And no, I am not singling out _you_, specifically, on this. But between the people on this list wanting the release to happen and wanting updates, and those on the forums that I can only describe as possessed by a large sense of entitlement as compared to the people that have actually contributed time and effort into making it a reality I see a huge discrepancy. And no, I've done nothing whatsoever to contribute either, other than not pester them for updates and demanding a release to occur on my time-line rather than theirs. If people want transparency in the process (which I include myself in to some extent; I feel things could, and honestly should, be more open, for some value of more) then I must point out that the project's upstream provides no transparency at all, including a complete lack of release time-line. If they don't do so, why all the clamoring for CentOS to do so? Just a thought. John -- Much of what looks like rudeness in hacker circles is not intended to give offense. Rather, it's the product of the direct, cut-through-the-bullshit communications style that is natural to people who are more concerned about solving problems than making others feel warm and fuzzy. http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html pgpzwPUYYtgTy.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] write-back cache question
Can anyone with write-back cache working just confirm that they see some sort of indication of write-back in dmesg? As I mentioned I talked with Dell and they claim it is working, however I spoke with VMWare and they said if it isn't indicated in dmesg, then it isn't working. It would just be good to know it is indicated as functional in this way for others so I can have something to go on with Dell. On 2/11/2011 10:00 AM, James Chase wrote: I have a perc5i (and perc5e) raid controller in my poweredge 2970 running centos 5.5. The RAID controller config is set for write-back policy, which I can confirm by checking in OpenManage. I also called Dell and ran their reporting application and had them double check to make sure everything looks OK hardware wise and they confirm that it does Yet when CentOS boots is appears to use the write through policy as can be seen below from dmesg output. Am I wrong that CentOS should query the RAID controller and go into the correct write mode: write-back? hub 1-5:1.0: 4 ports detected Vendor: DPModel: BACKPLANE Rev: 1.00 Type: Enclosure ANSI SCSI revision: 05 Vendor: DELL Model: PERC 5/i Rev: 1.03 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05 SCSI device sda: 2435317760 512-byte hdwr sectors (1246883 MB) sda: Write Protect is off sda: Mode Sense: 1f 00 00 08 SCSI device sda: drive cache: write through SCSI device sda: 2435317760 512-byte hdwr sectors (1246883 MB) sda: Write Protect is off sda: Mode Sense: 1f 00 00 08 SCSI device sda: drive cache: write through sda: sda1 sda2 sda3 sd 0:2:0:0: Attached scsi disk sda megasas: 0x1028:0x0015:0x1028:0x1f01: bus 16:slot 14:func 0 GSI 21 sharing vector 0x62 and IRQ 21 ACPI: PCI Interrupt :10:0e.0[A] - GSI 18 (level, low) - IRQ 98 megasas: FW now in Ready state ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 2/16/11 7:15 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: If you want timely enterprise open source software, you should: 1. Pay for it from RHEL 2. Learn to build it yourself, then you can ask yourself how long it is going to take. You still won't know ... but you will know who you yell at. Or if you just want something to start testing your own hardware/software compatibility, Scientific Linux has their 3rd beta out, which should be pretty close. http://listserv.fnal.gov/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1102L=scientific-linux-develT=0P=2898 Interestingly, they have liveCD and DVD spins. Is this planned for Centos? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 07:18 -0600, John R. Dennison wrote: From everything I've heard on the various IRC channels the response to that initial call for help was, shall we say, lackluster at best. I, and I suspect many other Centos users too, do not indulge in IRC. We have better things to do with our scarce time. In the future, perhaps the 'call' should be shared with the readership of this mailing list. -- With best regards, Paul. England, EU. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
2011/2/16 Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org: Oracle has supposedly released their EL 6 build (last Friday) ... but they have not released their sources as of this post. http://oss.oracle.com/el5/ === EL 5 Sources http://oss.oracle.com/el6/ === 404 Error No, the sources are here: http://oss.oracle.com/ol6/ And the RPMs: http://public-yum.oracle.com/repo/OracleLinux/OL6/0/base/ Best regards, Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 01:46:19PM +, Always Learning wrote: I, and I suspect many other Centos users too, do not indulge in IRC. We have better things to do with our scarce time. That's nice. You do realize, I hope, that the centos dev team is on IRC on a near daily basis; and for a project such as this IRC makes more sense than mailing lists or forums? In the future, perhaps the 'call' should be shared with the readership of this mailing list. Postings were made to the lists; I don't have a message ID, nor do I have either the time at the moment to search, or the inclination to do so. The archives are public and searchable, however, if you find the desire to do so. John -- This is all happening because my father didn't buy me a train set as a kid. -- Warren Buffett, joking about his decision to buy a railroad, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation, New York Times, 4 November 2009 pgpL7fttBAzEr.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 2/16/11, Always Learning cen...@g7.u22.net wrote: In the future, perhaps the 'call' should be shared with the readershi of this mailing list. Always, There is no negotiation, there will only be an announcement on the list when 5.6 is done. -- Stephen Cox ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 01:46:19PM +, Always Learning wrote: I, and I suspect many other Centos users too, do not indulge in IRC. We have better things to do with our scarce time. That's nice. You do realize, I hope, that the centos dev team is on IRC on a near daily basis; and for a project such as this IRC makes more sense than mailing lists or forums? In the future, perhaps the 'call' should be shared with the readership of this mailing list. I think, if you have no time to idle on IRC - how are you supposed to help with the release? ;-) I started playing with building packages for FreeBSD using tinderbox - a much more defined process with very little magic - but still there is a lot of work involved and a lot of small details have a lot of influence on the end-result. So, I don't envy the people who have to do the build or CentOS. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 16/02/11 14:18, John R. Dennison wrote: On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 01:50:55PM +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: Exactly! Supporters who could most probably do even more, than just to sit here idle waiting for the next release - if we only knew what the issues are they are facing. I find it amusing that all these offers of help and assistance, even the round-about ones such as this, occur when people get antsy about the release. Did you step up when the call for people to get involved at the very beginning of the CentOS 6 release cycle occurred? From everything I've heard on the various IRC channels the response to that initial call for help was, shall we say, lackluster at best. That's a fair critique! It's incredibly easy to consume; much more difficult to produce. And it is even more difficult to join and participate if you don't know exactly what you are going to do. Having a much more open process with more information, might encourage people to step up. A call for help at the very beginning, and then practically not hearing anything afterwards, may just as well be a signal that we got the resources we need. [...snip...] If people want transparency in the process (which I include myself in to some extent; I feel things could, and honestly should, be more open, for some value of more) then I must point out that the project's upstream provides no transparency at all, including a complete lack of release time-line. If they don't do so, why all the clamoring for CentOS to do so? Just a thought. That Red Hat keeps their work schedule private is not directly comparable to a CentOS community effort, how I see it. Red Hat is also a big financial organisation, which CentOS is not. In that context, Red Hat is much more responsible for stock holders, informing the stock market on economical issues. And market speculations needs to be controlled much more differently. It will be market speculations, like it or not, no matter what, all which most often are related to product releases. In addition, Red Hat also are responsible for customer and partner agreements, certification training, etc, etc. It's a big machinery, which is tightly connected to the Open Source work Red Hat does. And revealing some of the Open Source process might reveal other things indirectly, which makes the market speculate more wildly. CentOS does not need to be responsible for a board of stock holders (or what the proper term is), partners, (paying) customers, training organisations, etc, etc. In such regard, CentOS is quite more lucky - it can focus primarily on the Open Source part. Red Hat does also much more than just pulling the pieces together to form the RHEL distribution. These pieces are improved continuously to make them work well in the big distribution perspective, as well making sure it is tested on a vast variety of certified hardware [1]. CentOS basically takes the core result of all those processes and the labour Red Hat has put into RHEL, strips out/replaces the trademarks with CentOS replacements, recompiles everything and have a release ready. Hence, the CentOS process should, in theory at least, be a lot easier than the RHEL process - the majority of the hard work is already done when Red Hat delivers an installable RHEL distribution. Given that CentOS can focus primarily on the Open Source part, it should also be able to be more transparent on its process. kind regards, David Sommerseth [1] http://www.redhat.com/rhel/compatibility/hardware/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Authentication Problems
Thanks to all for your various replies On 16 February 2011 12:50, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: Check the /etc/shadow and /etc/group for consistent numbers of entries, and /etc/group and /etc/gshadow. Do you mean duplicate entries? If so there are none of those. No, I mean the sam enumber of entries. wc /etc/shadow /etc/passwd cut -f1 -d: /etc/shasow /etc/passwd | sort | uniq -c This came back 2 for each user, so no differences. And actually go line by line down these files, checking for matching usernames, correct layout of ':' separated entries, correct numbers of entries, and blank lines. I've seen serous problems where one or ther other of these files were corrupted by something, especially badly written installer scripts that only edited /etc/passwd directly and ignored /etc/shadow, or which mishandled $ entries in newly created encrypted passwords. I'm now going through this although its all looking intact. Do you have other users who can still log in or not? There is only the root and web dev user on this box. Are you *sure*? Can you back this thing up for review and rebuilding? It might be safest to image it for analysis and simply rebuild it. Yes, but I like to fix things. If I can't fix this I will restore the box but for now I'm going to continue troubleshooting. The root user and web dev user are the only two that have hash value in the passwd file so I would expect this to mean they are the only two users than can actually log in? On 16 February 2011 12:59, David Sommerseth d...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: - Could the account have become locked somehow? (passwd -u $user) Or could the account have become expired? [root@server ~]# passwd -u futuread. Unlocking password for user futuread. paswd: Success. But I still get access denied. - Are the permissions strict on the users ~/.ssh? (0700 on the directory, and 0600 on any files inside that directory - like authorized_keys ...) If I remove execute permissions form the web dev home folder a website will stop working, its within that users home folder. I.e. virtual site1 is inside the home folder of user 'virtual1' and virtual site2 is within the home folder of the user 'virtual2'. The web dev chap logins in as say virtual1 and edits all sites with that account. There is no .ssh subfolder in the home folder? Could this be the problem? If he saw it in there and deleted it perhaps (although I imagine it would just be recreated if needed?). - Is SELinux in Enforced mode and are the SELinux file context correct on /home? (restorecon -rv /home) [root@server ~]# getenforce Disabled Also double check /var/log/messages, /var/log/secure and /var/log/audit/audit.log carefully when trying to log in as that user. /var/log/audit is empty. Is this normal, this VPS comes initially configured from the provider? /var/log/messages and /var/log/secure both just show a generic invalid login attemp: /var/log/messages: Feb 16 13:53:58 server1882 sshd(pam_unix)[16225]: authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=1.2.3.4 user=webdevuser /var/log/secure: Feb 16 13:53:50 server1882 sshd[16225]: Failed password for futuread from :::1.2.3.4 port 1536 ssh2 On 16 February 2011 13:08, Kwan Lowe kwan.l...@gmail.com wrote: A lot of things can cause this, including a full /var filesystem :/ Nope, only %75 full (60GB filesystem), there's some room left in her yet ;) Thanks everyone for your help so far its really appreciated. -- James. http://www.jamesbensley.co.cc/ There are 10 kinds of people in the world; Those who understand Vigesimal, and J others...? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Authentication Problems
On 16 February 2011 13:00, ... wrote: you realize that there are no passwords in /etc/passwd, so if you delete /etc/shadow and rebuild it using pwconv there will be no passwords in the new /etc/shadow... depending on the exact state, you either won't be able to log in, or the machine will be totally open. Yes sorry I meant that the other way round :) i'd suggest looking at the log files (/var/log/secure and .../messages), for indications of why you're having trouble logging in as the other user. you can also, in a terminal window from a mere mortal (not root) login, try: su - user as that may give you some feedback. something like having an invalid shell will cause what you're seeing. As root, if I 'su - webdevuser' it doesn't prompt me for a password and drops me in as the user, presumably what is intended? -- James. http://www.jamesbensley.co.cc/ There are 10 kinds of people in the world; Those who understand Vigesimal, and J others...? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Authentication Problems
Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 7:43 AM, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 Feb 2011 12:34, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: snip Do you have other users who can still log in or not? There is only the root and web dev user on this box. snip What does lastlog | grep -v Never show you? mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
2011/2/16 David Sommerseth d...@users.sourceforge.net: That Red Hat keeps their work schedule private is not directly comparable to a CentOS community effort, how I see it. Red Hat is also a big financial organisation, which CentOS is not. In that context, Red Hat is much more responsible for stock holders, informing the stock market on economical issues. And market speculations needs to be controlled much more differently. It will be market speculations, like it or not, no matter what, all which most often are related to product releases. In addition, Red Hat also are responsible for customer and partner agreements, certification training, etc, etc. It's a big machinery, which is tightly connected to the Open Source work Red Hat does. And revealing some of the Open Source process might reveal other things indirectly, which makes the market speculate more wildly. CentOS does not need to be responsible for a board of stock holders (or what the proper term is), partners, (paying) customers, training organisations, etc, etc. In such regard, CentOS is quite more lucky - it can focus primarily on the Open Source part. Red Hat does also much more than just pulling the pieces together to form the RHEL distribution. These pieces are improved continuously to make them work well in the big distribution perspective, as well making sure it is tested on a vast variety of certified hardware [1]. CentOS basically takes the core result of all those processes and the labour Red Hat has put into RHEL, strips out/replaces the trademarks with CentOS replacements, recompiles everything and have a release ready. Hence, the CentOS process should, in theory at least, be a lot easier than the RHEL process - the majority of the hard work is already done when Red Hat delivers an installable RHEL distribution. Given that CentOS can focus primarily on the Open Source part, it should also be able to be more transparent on its process. Hi David, You're absolutely right. The best example is Scientific Linux. There are schedules and an open development process. What is the reason for the closed development process in CentOS? Best regards, Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Authentication Problems
On 16 February 2011 14:17, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: What does lastlog | grep -v Never show you? Hi Mark, This has shown something (potentially) interesting: [root@server ~]# lastlog | grep -v Never Username Port From Latest root pts/2x.x.x.x Wed Feb 16 13:41:40 + 2011 webmasterpts/2y.y.y.y Sun Dec 14 03:46:07 + 2008 So, I am logged in as root right now, however, the 'webmaster' entry is what is interesting me. The y.y.y.y address is the web dev's address (he hasn't logged in since sunday, he notified my yesterday when he tried to get back on that he couldn't). However he always uses the webdev account which lastlog shows as never logged in, so when accessing the VPS as the webdev user account are we somehow actually accessing the VPS as webmaster? Is it possible the VPS providers performed some crazy voodoo magic here? Perhaps I should change the password for the webmaster account (this doesn't have one according to the passwd file), so I could 'su - webmaster', set a password and then try and login as the webdev user? Or is this possibly going to make matters worse? -- James. http://www.jamesbensley.co.cc/ There are 10 kinds of people in the world; Those who understand Vigesimal, and J others...? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 16/02/11 14:15, Johnny Hughes wrote:
[...snip...]
These phantom RPMS (non released by Red Hat, but in their build tree
for their initial development of the OS) are sometimes very hard to
replicate. They are versions that are no where to be found.
Fair enough. But please misunderstand me correctly. We all *do*
understand that there is a lot of work behind it, and we *do* appreciate
the work all of you do put into CentOS.
But *not* knowing what you're fighting against, just leaves the community
restless ... and the more restless the community gets, the more noisy it gets.
[...snip...]
We don't need exact dates, but an idea of how the progress is going. Also
some progress information of what is troublesome? What is taking time?
How can the rest of the community help? This information could be given
out even bi-weekly, and I'm sure it would calm down this tension a lot.
And how much more time does that add to the development process. It is
already taking too long for you, so you want the developers to spend
more time on other things? They don't have enough time now to spend on
CentOS, how is adding time to the process going to help. When they try,
it is seen as not enough (see you comments below).
Does one or two hours (which I believe is a major over-estimate) bi-weekly
for writing an little update (which could be as little as one or two
paragraphs long) by one of those of you who are deeply involved and knows
what going on really set you back *that* much?
We're not asking for a full executive summary. Just to have a feeling how
the progress is going forward.
The whole CentOS release progress is surprisingly closed, considering it is
an open source project.
CentOS releases our source on exactly the same day as our binary files.
I said release *progress*, in the context that CentOS is an open source
project, being community driven.
The result, when it is released, is very open - just as it should be.
[...snip...]
We do not KNOW how long it is going to take to get this right ..
especially CentOS 6. We have NO IDEA what problems we are going to
incur until we hit them. There is NO WAY to know what RPM is not going
to build correctly until it fails to build. There is no way to figure
out why it did not build until you see the errors.
Fair enough! I don't expect exact dates, which I stated earlier. I simply
asked for an *estimate*, and an estimate can be adjusted as time goes on.
It's as easy as We estimated 2 weeks in the last report, unfortunately it
will probably take 3 more weeks to get this right due to some unexpected
issues with {short simple brief summary} ... do you have any idea how much
such a sentence can calm down anticipating people?
[...snip...]
The bottom line is that is process is trial and error, especially the
first one in a series (the .0 build).
I do completely understand, and I'm sure more of the community does as
well. We do understand this is difficult and time consuming. And my
responses have not been a critique of *what* the developers/packagers are
doing. All who are involved in the hard work are doing *a lot* of good
work, which we all *do* appreciate.
But we are missing *some* information on the progress. And *something* is
way better than *nothing*, which is the current situation.
kind regards,
David Sommerseth
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Authentication Problems
On 16/02/11 15:16, James Bensley wrote: i'd suggest looking at the log files (/var/log/secure and .../messages), for indications of why you're having trouble logging in as the other user. you can also, in a terminal window from a mere mortal (not root) login, try: su - user as that may give you some feedback. something like having an invalid shell will cause what you're seeing. As root, if I 'su - webdevuser' it doesn't prompt me for a password and drops me in as the user, presumably what is intended? This is normal behaviour. root can su to which ever user without being asked for any password by default. kind regards, David Sommerseth ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 02/16/2011 02:22 PM, Morten P.D. Stevens wrote: The best example is Scientific Linux. There are schedules and an open development process. What is the reason for the closed development process in CentOS? Its funny you say that Morten, since you actually offered to help. Didnt you ? But then when I asked you to look at something specific, you backed off saying you had other things to do ( I remember being quite taken aback by your response at the time ). Why you dont you just stick to lurking, since you clearly dont actually want to do anything to help - just get in the way and try to make a lot of noise you dont either understand or want to put any effort into understanding. Would you call that a fair take on the state of your envolvement Morten ? - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Authentication Problems
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 6:28 AM, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com wrote: Hi List, We have a CentOS VPS running a web site in a DC far away. The chap that dev's this site told me he couldn't SFTP in yesterday, his password was being rejected (I went to his desk to confirm and saw it was telling him the password was incorrect but neither him nor me had changed it and we are the only two with access to this VPS). So I logged in as root and reset his password, be he still couldn't log in (same problem, claiming the password was wrong). [root@server ~]# passwd webdevuser Changing password for user webdevuser. New UNIX password: Retype new UNIX password: passwd: all authentication tokens updates successfully. I tried to SSH in as the web dev user and it wouldn't let me in. Returning back to my root console window; [root@server ~]# su - webdevuser [webdevuser@server ~]# passwd Changing password for user webdevuser. Changing password for webdevuser. (current) UNIX password: passwd: Authentication token manipulation error Firstly; I am stracthing my head as to why his password was no longer working in the first place? Secondly; Why I can't reset it? Googling around many people suggest there is a discrepancy between the /etc/passwd and /etc/shadow files and by deleting /etc/shadow and using pwconv to recreate shadow and the same for /etc/groups, deleting gshadow recreating it with grpconv will solve the problem but I still can't login as the web dev user. Any ideas anyone? What does /etc/nsswitch.conf look like? Anything other than files for passwd, shadow and group? If that's OK, I would start comparing files in /etc/pam.d to a known-good system. -- Jeff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Creating floppy image without root permissions?
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 5:37 PM, James Pearson jame...@moving-picture.com wrote: Have a look at mtools (part of CentOS) - you can do something similar as above as a non-root user: mformat -C -i floppy.flp -f 360 :: mcopy -i floppy.flp base_kickstart.ks ::ks.cfg Well, hey now! That works nicely. Thank you! ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] CentOS 5 on a Thinkpad T60 laptop
Hello, I'm considering buying a second-hand Thinkpad T60 (with 2 GB RAM), as a secondary laptop in order to run CentOS 5 on the field. My main focus is therefore to have something robust, reliable and above all well compatible with CentOS. Hibernate / suspend feature are important to me, because that's the main issue I have with CentOS on other laptops. I have found the following information so far: http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Installation_CentOS_5_on_a_Thinkpad_T60 The processor is a T2300 (so 32 bits apparently): http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=27233 I would be grateful if people having used CentOS on this model could share their experience (good or bad). Thanks in advance! Mathieu ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Authentication Problems
On 16 February 2011 14:34, ... wrote: yes, that is what doing an su - user as *root* will do, which doesn't tell you much. instead of doing this from a root login, do it from a regular account (you don't routinely log in as root i hope - actually it sounds like you do). if this works, then the issue isn't with the password or shell. No other user is allowed to execute /bin/su :) (This is something the VPS providers have put in place, apart from root, all other users for each virtual site have their shell set to /usr/local/cpanel/bin/jailshell or /usr/local/cpanel/bin/noshell) by the way, it doesn't sound like the accounts on this machine are set up very well. you should *never* log in as root (that capability should be disabled actually). rather you should log in to a regular, unprivileged, account and su (or sudo) to root only when you need to do something privileged and only for that moment. your developer's access sounds rather odd too, with the seeming lack of separation between the login and the site content. Its not my server so those aren't my decisions to make. I don't normally allow root ssh, I would have probably installed fail2ban, set up SELinux blah blah blah and many other things but this isn't my VPS, I've just been tasked with it so this is the way it is! :s -- James. http://www.jamesbensley.co.cc/ There are 10 kinds of people in the world; Those who understand Vigesimal, and J others...? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
Hi David, On 02/16/2011 12:50 PM, David Sommerseth wrote: Exactly! Supporters who could most probably do even more, than just to sit here idle waiting for the next release - if we only knew what the issues are they are facing. So what happened in the early days of when EL6 came out - we asked people to help, there were many threads on how people could get involved ( on the centos-devel list, which is - I am sure you will agree, the appropriate place ). Nothing happened, not one person beyond the usual-people actually did anything. After a few weeks, when people started getting antsy about the fact that they cant see progress (I dont know why they would care, given they dont want to help) more noise started getting made about how we ( and i mean the people doing the work ) were being difficult and not open. So the process of asking for help started again in mid/late December. A few people did get involved and we did see some level of open involvement. Even at the cost of not doing anything ourselves, but spending all of our open source time on helping people get into the right mindset and educating them to get into helpful situations. Things tapered off again with near zero momentum. Now the bit that really cheeses me off is that we cant go through the same loop again and again everytime someone new comes along and cant be bothered to see what has happened in the past. I am not saying you did this, its possible you didnt know about the existence of these threads on centos-devel etc. To cut a long story short - lots of people who use centos dont understand what the project is about, what we do, why we do it and how they can help. On the other hand, we also seem unable to hold people's attention ( and i mean people at large, not just the centos community ) in order to get them thinking about the project ( and not the distro, remember project != distro, needs of the hour are trivial, needs for the project to sustain and exist are more important ). We can try to solve these problems now, or we can get the distro's out - then goto solving these issues. As many have suggested, and I partially buy into - solving the problems while there is a need for the distro is likely to get a better and wider reception. On the other hand, getting the distro's out gets more urgent with every package release upstream and app release side-stream / internet / inhouse etc. The problems can be solved. Of all similar projects I know of and have had the privilege to be a part of, none come close to the maturity and pragmatic thought levels that the CentOS community has. On the other hand, the drive-by posters and people with random fluff to not-really-contribute are always going to an issue. I guess its reasonable to expect them around as well, serves as a nice reminder as to what the extreme sets are. For now, as was really decided on the centos-devel list, lets just do things the way centos has in the past. lets get the distro's out - and then look at solving specific issues. The whole idea that people cant help is just noise, hopefully the website ver2 project will make that visible a bit more than has been so far. I do know that once the distro's are out; the number of people wanting to 'help' is also going to fall drastically. On the other hand, the ones who do stick around are all people who really do want to help! Regards, - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 7:11 AM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: Because they also have $dayjobs too ... Oracle (with billions of dollars and unlimited machines and personnel) just released their el6 on Friday. Is there some reason you can't buy RHEL6? Johnny et al, If ya'll are masochists (as might be indicated by the turning off of even the donation input if I understand correctly), then hit DELETE now. Of course, like Dennis Miller, I could be wrong about that. You hear/read quite a few folks saying the equivalent of something like corporations favor subscriptions over donations.' Give them a chance to put their money where their mouth is :) A friend at FedEx told me yesterday they buy the $8600 licenses from Redhat and the $10K plus licenses from VMware and feel good about it because there is a team taking care of their security at the OS level. While it wouldn't produce unlimited machines and personnel, if you could find a wordsmith/lawyer on the list or elsewhere who is willing to pro bono wordsmith subcribe/donate in a fashion acceptable to the CentOS core team, thus keeping you folks happy that you are only getting donations rather than subscriptions, it seems like you could at least raise enough money for a couple of the fastest machines known to man to help with the builds. kind regards/ldv/rural ISP/WISP ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 02/15/2011 07:06 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: As I said before, Oracle has not had their stuff released for very long and while Scientific Linus has released some Alpha/Beta stuff along the way, they also have not released 5.6 or 6.0 either. This is not easy. It takes time. Just for the sake of completeness, I've heard people mention that SL6 has had Red Hat binaries for the longest time. Not sure if they have all those removed as yet or not. - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] apache 2 and php 5.2
Keith/guys thanks for the suggestions, here is what I have found. It shows loaded config file is /etc/php.ini but if I remove that file and restart apache it still works. I also did as Keith suggested I removed a comment ';' and I got no errors apache started and it loaded the /etc/php.ini file. It's just completely ignoring that file, if its there or if its not there. PHP Version 5.2.17 System Linux testip5.meganet.net 2.6.18-194.26.1.el5PAE #1 SMP Tue Nov 9 13:34:42 EST 2010 i686 Build Date Jan 7 2011 08:50:02 Configure Command './configure' '--build=i686-redhat-linux-gnu' '--host=i686-redhat-linux-gnu' '--target=i386-redhat-linux-gnu' '--program-prefix=' '--prefix=/usr' '--exec-prefix=/usr' '--bindir=/usr/bin' '--sbindir=/usr/sbin' '--sysconfdir=/etc' '--datadir=/usr/share' '--includedir=/usr/include' '--libdir=/usr/lib' '--libexecdir=/usr/libexec' '--localstatedir=/var' '--sharedstatedir=/usr/com' '--mandir=/usr/share/man' '--infodir=/usr/share/info' '--cache-file=../config.cache' '--with-libdir=lib' '--with-config-file-path=/etc' '--with-config-file-scan-dir=/etc/php.d' '--disable-debug' '--with-pic' '--disable-rpath' '--without-pear' '--with-bz2' '--with-exec-dir=/usr/bin' '--with-freetype-dir=/usr' '--with-png-dir=/usr' '--with-xpm-dir=/usr' '--enable-gd-native-ttf' '--with-t1lib=/usr' '--without-gdbm' '--with-gettext' '--with-gmp' '--with-iconv' '--with-jpeg-dir=/usr' '--with-openssl' '--with-pcre-regex' '--with-zlib' '--with-layout=GNU' '--enable-exif' '--enable-ftp' '--enable-magic-quotes' '--enable-sockets' '--enable-sysvsem' '--enable-sysvshm' '--enable-sysvmsg' '--with-kerberos' '--enable-ucd-snmp-hack' '--enable-shmop' '--enable-calendar' '--without-mime-magic' '--without-sqlite' '--with-libxml-dir=/usr' '--with-xml' '--with-system-tzdata' '--with-apxs2=/usr/sbin/apxs' '--without-mysql' '--without-gd' '--disable-dom' '--disable-dba' '--without-unixODBC' '--disable-pdo' '--disable-xmlreader' '--disable-xmlwriter' '--disable-json' '--without-pspell' '--disable-wddx' '--without-curl' '--disable-posix' '--disable-sysvmsg' '--disable-sysvshm' '--disable-sysvsem' Server API Apache 2.0 Handler Virtual Directory Support disabled Configuration File (php.ini) Path /etc Loaded Configuration File /etc/php.ini Scan this dir for additional .ini files /etc/php.d additional .ini files parsed/etc/php.d/Fileinfo.ini, /etc/php.d/curl.ini, /etc/php.d/dba.ini, /etc/php.d/dbase.ini, /etc/php.d/dom.ini, /etc/php.d/gd.ini, /etc/php.d/imap.ini, /etc/php.d/json.ini, /etc/php.d/ldap.ini, /etc/php.d/mbstring.ini, /etc/php.d/mcrypt.ini, /etc/php.d/mysql.ini, /etc/php.d/mysqli.ini, /etc/php.d/odbc.ini, /etc/php.d/pdo.ini, /etc/php.d/pdo_mysql.ini, /etc/php.d/pdo_odbc.ini, /etc/php.d/pdo_pgsql.ini, /etc/php.d/pdo_sqlite.ini, /etc/php.d/pgsql.ini, /etc/php.d/soap.ini, /etc/php.d/wddx.ini, /etc/php.d/xmlreader.ini, /etc/php.d/xmlrpc.ini, /etc/php.d/xmlwriter.ini, /etc/php.d/xsl.ini, /etc/php.d/zip.ini PHP API 20041225 PHP Extension 20060613 Zend Extension 220060519 Debug Build no Thread Safety disabled Zend Memory Manager enabled IPv6 Supportenabled Registered PHP Streams https, ftps, compress.zlib, compress.bzip2, php, file, data, http, ftp, zip Registered Stream Socket Transports tcp, udp, unix, udg, ssl, sslv3, sslv2, tls Registered Stream Filters zlib.*, bzip2.*, convert.iconv.*, string.rot13, string.toupper, string.tolower, string.strip_tags, convert.*, consumed Zend logo This program makes use of the Zend Scripting Language Engine: Zend Engine v2.2.0, Copyright (c) 1998-2010 Zend Technologies -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Keith Roberts Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 6:01 PM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] apache 2 and php 5.2 On Wed, 16 Feb 2011, Eero Volotinen wrote: *snip* how about running php --info from commandline? Good point Eero. Would that not just return the basic configuration settings for the CLI version of php? What if the OP has used a different php configuration for the apache php module, by using php configuration directives in the httpd.conf file? These php config settings would not show up when running the CLI version of php. Eg. /etc/php.ini ; open_basedir, if set, limits all file operations to the ; defined directory and below. This directive makes most ; sense if used in a per-directory or per-virtualhost web server ; configuration file. This directive is *NOT* affected by ; whether Safe Mode is turned On or Off. ; ; see also /etc/httpd.conf for overriding these settings for ; the apache php module. ; for CLI PHP version only open_basedir = ./:/tmp/:/loads/of/different/paths/here/: ;open_basedir = /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf #== #APACHE ACCESS TO FILESYSTEM SERVER DOCUMENT TREE
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 16/02/11 15:47, Karanbir Singh wrote: On 02/16/2011 02:22 PM, Morten P.D. Stevens wrote: The best example is Scientific Linux. There are schedules and an open development process. What is the reason for the closed development process in CentOS? Its funny you say that Morten, since you actually offered to help. Didnt you ? But then when I asked you to look at something specific, you backed off saying you had other things to do ( I remember being quite taken aback by your response at the time ). If whoever wants to help out in a community project, and then see that when a task come and then gives a response that this was the wrong timing, due to other obligations - this is pretty fair response. Committing to a community project does not mean you have the resources available for your disposal whenever you need it. People committing to a community project just gives you an idea that people are interested in helping out. Why you dont you just stick to lurking, since you clearly dont actually want to do anything to help - just get in the way and try to make a lot of noise you dont either understand or want to put any effort into understanding. Would you call that a fair take on the state of your envolvement Morten ? Okay, I see that the CentOS developers are under a high pressure and stress level. Maybe a too high stress level. So I'm willing to stretch myself that far to see this incident in that light. Even though I do not know the background for this attack, I do dislike this kind of personal attacks - at least in the full public. I'm disappointed to see such happening here by the key people in the CentOS community. kind regards, David Sommerseth ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
Hi David, its me again :) On 02/15/2011 05:11 PM, David Hornford wrote: When will CentOS 6 be out? The CentOS team does not have a fixed release schedule following an upstream release. The release timeframe is based upon the number of bugs In many cases's its still helpful to have some sort of a timeframe in mind. Eg. for 5.6 we were hoping to start seeding last weekend, but it looks like were slipping 3 - 4 days on that now. Similarly with C6, getting a release ready for end of this month isnt hard and *should* happen. In many cases, the slippage happens with a : people doing this just didnt have enough time during the period. And that isnt, contrary to what many people think, an easy problem to solve. For every new person who becomes a part of the process - it needs a significant time on the part of people doing this stuff to bring that person upto speed. So doing this at a time when its pretty much nose on the grinding stone kind of pace, isn't ideal. On the other hand, having people who stick around and understand the process, when there isnt a deadline looming is hard and counter productive. A lesson learnt the hard way with the c6 effort in the first few weeks. Anyway, I'm not trying to solve any issue here - just putting my perspective across. - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 02/16/2011 03:11 PM, David Sommerseth wrote: If whoever wants to help out in a community project, and then see that when a task come and then gives a response that this was the wrong timing, due to other obligations - this is pretty fair response. Not really. If someone says 'what can i do right now to help make X happen' and gets a response 'do this please' - a fair response would be 'i'd rather do things like Z or A, and not this;'. I dont think a response along the lines of 'I want my name in the list, I would like early access' but am willing to do nothing to help is fair. Either open source or otherwise. Committing to a community project does not mean you have the resources available for your disposal whenever you need it. People committing to a community project just gives you an idea that people are interested in helping out. To me, the idea of commuting to something is committing to something. If you dont have the time or resource or willingness to really help, don't waste other peoples time. Even though I do not know the background for this attack, I do dislike this kind of personal attacks - at least in the full public. I'm disappointed to see such happening here by the key people in the CentOS community. its not an attack at all, its where things stand. Besides, Morten and I have had this conversation in the past as well. - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 02/16/2011 03:03 PM, Larry Vaden wrote: You hear/read quite a few folks saying the equivalent of something like corporations favor subscriptions over donations.' Give them a chance to put their money where their mouth is :) I believe we are working on making that happen, a few things need to come together on the project side of things first. Lets say early summer this year, we should have something in place. - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: As I said before, Oracle has not had their stuff released for very long and while Scientific Linus has released some Alpha/Beta stuff along the way, they also have not released 5.6 or 6.0 either. This is not easy. It takes time. Johnny, A minor correction; Oracle released late last month and SL released even earlier per the first trouble report at http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?contribId=8sessionId=1resId=1materialId=slidesconfId=106641, namely: • 5.6 release history: – RedHat released RHEL 5.6 on 13-Jan – CERN released SLC 5.6 on 20-Jan – FNAL released SL 5.6 last week We've been running SL 5.6 for quite some time (ONLY ON CERTAIN BOXEN while waiting on CentOS). kind regards/ldv ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
2011/2/16 Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org: On 02/16/2011 02:22 PM, Morten P.D. Stevens wrote: The best example is Scientific Linux. There are schedules and an open development process. What is the reason for the closed development process in CentOS? Its funny you say that Morten, since you actually offered to help. Didnt you ? But then when I asked you to look at something specific, you backed off saying you had other things to do ( I remember being quite taken aback by your response at the time ). Why you dont you just stick to lurking, since you clearly dont actually want to do anything to help - just get in the way and try to make a lot of noise you dont either understand or want to put any effort into understanding. Would you call that a fair take on the state of your envolvement Morten ? Karanbir, this is not quite right. And you know it. I offered my help for testing. (qa process) You have offered me to help with packages that need upstream branding removed. This is very difficult to realize when the primary mailing list (centos-qa) is completely closed to outsiders. Many people (including me) would like to CentOS help if the development process would be more open. I think you are doing a great job with CentOS! And for that you have my full appreciation. Best regards, Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Authentication Problems
Ok, everything is fixed now. I spoke with the VPS providers; The jailed shell was removed from the webdev user (and the webmaster user?) and they reset the password. I logged into ssh as the webdev user to change the password and they told me off for trying and said I must do it through WHM/cPanel. I suspect there is some crazy arrangement here I don't know about and there is some link between those two accounts. When I tried (apparently wrongly) to change the webdev users password I still got passwd: Authentication token manipulation error but they said to leave it alone?! I'm just glad its over, thanks everyone for your support :D -- James. http://www.jamesbensley.co.cc/ There are 10 kinds of people in the world; Those who understand Vigesimal, and J others...? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 02:54:14PM +0100, Morten P.D. Stevens wrote: 2011/2/16 Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org: No, the sources are here: http://oss.oracle.com/ol6/ And the RPMs: http://public-yum.oracle.com/repo/OracleLinux/OL6/0/base/ Note that, according to its FAQ, the repo is only the contents of the install media. It will not provide updates, not even security updates. To further aggravate me, at least, if no one else, Oracle does not yet (as of today, at least), support Oracle Linux 6 as a hardware platform for Oracle database. -- Scott Robbins PGP keyID EB3467D6 ( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 ) gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6 Willow: Nervous? Xander: No way. I'm full of that good old kamikazee spirit. Giles: Xander, just because this is never going to work, there's no need to be negative. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 02/16/2011 03:20 PM, Morten P.D. Stevens wrote: Karanbir, this is not quite right. And you know it. I offered my help for testing. (qa process) A very large part - if not all - of the qa effort is branding and role specific within centos. Most of the other things only contribute towards documentation - not the release process itself. Of course there are exceptions ( like the installer... ) but not many You have offered me to help with packages that need upstream branding removed. This is very difficult to realize when the primary mailing list (centos-qa) is completely closed to outsiders. This is a bit of a confused state of things - and I am not sure what can we done about clearing out the situation that the -qa list does not have any C6 specific / testing / branding anything content on there. One idea is to rename the QA team into what it really is - the Release team, and have a whitelist based package tree available to a larger number of people ( but still not public - we cant do public builds, and thats already been covered extensively ) Many people (including me) would like to CentOS help if the development process would be more open. You will need to speak to Red Hat about that; Because the centos development community all have @redhat.com email address :) So the question here really is : how best can we communicate that to a wider audience and have that idea persist ? - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Scott Robbins scot...@nyc.rr.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 02:54:14PM +0100, Morten P.D. Stevens wrote: 2011/2/16 Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org: No, the sources are here: http://oss.oracle.com/ol6/ And the RPMs: http://public-yum.oracle.com/repo/OracleLinux/OL6/0/base/ Note that, according to its FAQ, the repo is only the contents of the install media. It will not provide updates, not even security updates. To further aggravate me, at least, if no one else, Oracle does not yet (as of today, at least), support Oracle Linux 6 as a hardware platform for Oracle database. Well, if you believe in YUM (as I want to and do to the limit of my understanding), that's not a problem unless Seth Vidal says it is. That said, I believe there are a couple of hurdles that Oracle threw in to make it more difficult, but I have watched a lot of Dennis Miller and could be wrong about that. kind regards/ldv/rural ISP/WISP ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
KB, On Wednesday, February 16, 2011 09:58:31 am Karanbir Singh wrote: snip Now the bit that really cheeses me off is that we cant go through the same loop again and again everytime someone new comes along and cant be bothered to see what has happened in the past. more really well written message removed This is off list since I didn't want to start an argument with anyone. I was (until Oracle pretty efficiently pissed everyone off) in the same boat as you. In my experience there are some people out there that are willing to help out, but they unfortunately always seem to offer their help when you are already working hard. I've been on the centos lists for quite a while and I've seen the offers for help and then how it just fizzles out. But all these loops were just before a major release. After that, people are off upgrading their own boxes to the latest release, working around the changes that happened and so on. We had similar issues and we got it (mostly) solved by asking people to help between major releases. That way, we had time to focus on getting the bugs fixed that were always reported right after a new release and then when there was less work (I'd assume for you that is a few weeks after 5.6 and 6.0 are out) you can spend some time on teaching others what they have to do. It solves the problem of doing double duty as well as reduces the number of people that offer help just so they can get quicker access or get their name into the code with as little effort as possible. Its really a win-win - you get fewer people to guide and the people you do get are of higher quality - more motivated, more focused and fewer that take cheap shots to get their name into a project somewhere... Thanks for all your hard work on the project, Peter. -- Censorship: noun, circa 1591. a: Relief of the burden of independent thinking. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 16/02/11 15:58, Karanbir Singh wrote: Hi David, On 02/16/2011 12:50 PM, David Sommerseth wrote: Exactly! Supporters who could most probably do even more, than just to sit here idle waiting for the next release - if we only knew what the issues are they are facing. So what happened in the early days of when EL6 came out - we asked people to help, there were many threads on how people could get involved ( on the centos-devel list, which is - I am sure you will agree, the appropriate place ). Nothing happened, not one person beyond the usual-people actually did anything. I understand centos-devel might seem to be the proper place to ask for help. But sometimes, I believe it's better to have a much broader audience for such messages. However, let this be a discussion after CentOS5.6 and CentOS6 is released. Rather start a new fresh thread when everyone (especially developers) have had some rest after the releases. [...snip...] Now the bit that really cheeses me off is that we cant go through the same loop again and again everytime someone new comes along and cant be bothered to see what has happened in the past. I am not saying you did this, its possible you didnt know about the existence of these threads on centos-devel etc. This I've been seeing in many other projects as well. However, those places where this happens the least, are where there are some communication of the progress. And I admit I have not paid too much attention to the centos-devel list. Basically, because I know the next CentOS releases will come when they come. But I would like to know more about the progress, which has been my agenda in today's mails. That is something which, in my eyes (I might be wrong though), belongs more to this generic list. To cut a long story short - lots of people who use centos dont understand what the project is about, what we do, why we do it and how they can help. On the other hand, we also seem unable to hold people's attention ( and i mean people at large, not just the centos community ) in order to get them thinking about the project ( and not the distro, remember project != distro, needs of the hour are trivial, needs for the project to sustain and exist are more important ). And this is indeed challenging. And you probably need a combination of what Fedora does with their ambassadors and what Canonical manages with profiling Ubuntu as a Linux distribution for everyone, to be able to get the people at large scale. Unfortunately, CentOS will most likely be for a more narrow group ... those who wants a stable release for a long time. Which basically ends up mostly being on servers, as the desktop side needs to be much more a moving target against newer versions. And this is practically the same issues RHEL fights with as well. We can try to solve these problems now, or we can get the distro's out - then goto solving these issues. As many have suggested, and I partially buy into - solving the problems while there is a need for the distro is likely to get a better and wider reception. On the other hand, getting the distro's out gets more urgent with every package release upstream and app release side-stream / internet / inhouse etc. I agree with you, that solving issues is definitely the way to go. However, when you only solve issues along the way without providing any information on why things takes time - and it begins to take a lot of time, then people begin to want to see results. Again, as I've said many times today, providing *some* information on the progress can calm things down for a while. But keeping people in the darkness, will result in a lot of noise. The problems can be solved. Of all similar projects I know of and have had the privilege to be a part of, none come close to the maturity and pragmatic thought levels that the CentOS community has. On the other hand, the drive-by posters and people with random fluff to not-really-contribute are always going to an issue. I guess its reasonable to expect them around as well, serves as a nice reminder as to what the extreme sets are. Absolutely! For now, as was really decided on the centos-devel list, lets just do things the way centos has in the past. lets get the distro's out - and then look at solving specific issues. The whole idea that people cant help is just noise, hopefully the website ver2 project will make that visible a bit more than has been so far. I do know that once the distro's are out; the number of people wanting to 'help' is also going to fall drastically. On the other hand, the ones who do stick around are all people who really do want to help! Good! And it's a good thing that you're looking into more visibility. I believe this can remove, or at least reduce, some of the impatience and restlessness which can be found on this list. People come and go, in all kind of projects, and major releases gives a lot of attraction -
Re: [CentOS] Looking for back versions of centos 3
On 2/14/2011 1:23 AM, Bruce Ferrell wrote: Yeah, I'm rebuilding a server with Oracle RAC and I wasn't sure exactly what version of RedHat was used to build it originally. Centos 5.5 results in the external iscsi volumes being improperly sized. It turns out Centos 3.5 works. Once, many years ago, someone told me he wouldn't tackle a job he was 100 percent sure of. This is one of those so I'm doing this very gingerly to avoide losing the DB on the raw disk If you are going with CentOS 3, you might as well go ahead and get 3.9. 3.5 + security updates = 3.9 -- Bowie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
Hi, On 02/16/2011 03:38 PM, David Sommerseth wrote: However, let this be a discussion after CentOS5.6 and CentOS6 is released. Rather start a new fresh thread when everyone (especially developers) have had some rest after the releases. Right, well volunteered to setup and get this conversation traction once the time-is-right :) - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 02/16/2011 09:20 AM, Larry Vaden wrote: On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: As I said before, Oracle has not had their stuff released for very long and while Scientific Linus has released some Alpha/Beta stuff along the way, they also have not released 5.6 or 6.0 either. This is not easy. It takes time. Johnny, A minor correction; Oracle released late last month and SL released even earlier per the first trouble report at http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?contribId=8sessionId=1resId=1materialId=slidesconfId=106641, namely: • 5.6 release history: – RedHat released RHEL 5.6 on 13-Jan – CERN released SLC 5.6 on 20-Jan – FNAL released SL 5.6 last week We've been running SL 5.6 for quite some time (ONLY ON CERTAIN BOXEN while waiting on CentOS). To the best of my knowledge, you are running BETA's or ALPHA's and not released 5.6 products for SL 5.6 ... http://www.scientificlinux.org/distributions Or maybe I am missing something? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 on a Thinkpad T60 laptop
Mathieu Baudier wrote: I'm considering buying a second-hand Thinkpad T60 (with 2 GB RAM), as a secondary laptop in order to run CentOS 5 on the field. snip I would be grateful if people having used CentOS on this model could share their experience (good or bad). Oddly enough, I asked on another techie mailing list I'm on just last week or so, for someone I know considering a laptop, and a T60 was greatly approved of. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 02/16/2011 09:03 AM, Larry Vaden wrote: On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 7:11 AM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: Because they also have $dayjobs too ... Oracle (with billions of dollars and unlimited machines and personnel) just released their el6 on Friday. Is there some reason you can't buy RHEL6? Johnny et al, If ya'll are masochists (as might be indicated by the turning off of even the donation input if I understand correctly), then hit DELETE now. Of course, like Dennis Miller, I could be wrong about that. You hear/read quite a few folks saying the equivalent of something like corporations favor subscriptions over donations.' Give them a chance to put their money where their mouth is :) A friend at FedEx told me yesterday they buy the $8600 licenses from Redhat and the $10K plus licenses from VMware and feel good about it because there is a team taking care of their security at the OS level. While it wouldn't produce unlimited machines and personnel, if you could find a wordsmith/lawyer on the list or elsewhere who is willing to pro bono wordsmith subcribe/donate in a fashion acceptable to the CentOS core team, thus keeping you folks happy that you are only getting donations rather than subscriptions, it seems like you could at least raise enough money for a couple of the fastest machines known to man to help with the builds. The problem will be that if you PAY anyone for doing things, everyone wants to be paid. (Remember the Ubuntu fiasco with getting a release done). The CentOS Project can not afford to hire and pay someone a full salary to do nothing but CentOS full time. If the project could do that, then they would. But, if they did hire said person, then what would the OTHER volunteer guys do? Why would they stay around if Billy Bob is getting paid for his work? If we could hire 3 or 4 people (and provide any kind of reasonable job security for their future), that might be an option. Otherwise I think injecting a limited amount of cash into the process just produces hurt feelings and degrades, not improves, the process. That is just one thought ... signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 8:02 AM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: To the best of my knowledge, you are running BETA's or ALPHA's and not released 5.6 products for SL 5.6 ... http://www.scientificlinux.org/distributions Or maybe I am missing something? Apparently there was some confusion around the release of SL 5.6 alpha. Troy Dawson cleared it up in his post to the main SL mailing list: http://listserv.fnal.gov/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1102L=scientific-linux-usersT=0X=78ED2C774C38226BC0Y=amyagi%40gmail.comP=6965 Akemi ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: The CentOS Project can not afford to hire and pay someone a full salary to do nothing but CentOS full time. If the project could do that, then they would. But, if they did hire said person, then what would the OTHER volunteer guys do? Why would they stay around if Billy Bob is getting paid for his work? That can change provided the core team wants it to. AFAIK, perhaps the team wants to remain volunteers. AFAIK, the team would like to leave their job$ and become full time CentOS folks. I dunno which and it may vary with team member. If we could hire 3 or 4 people (and provide any kind of reasonable job security for their future), that might be an option. Otherwise I think injecting a limited amount of cash into the process just produces hurt feelings and degrades, not improves, the process. That is just one thought ... Is there an URL which describes what the CentOS team is in most need of? e.g., the fastest build server known to man ? e.g., monies to send to RedHat for licenses? yada 3, ..., yada n. kind regards/ldv ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
Hi, Since I was the one who created this topic (with different purpose) let me suggest that after the 5.6/6.0 release consider a 'business model' for the CentOS. And by business model I mean take some time to: a) Evaluate _if_ one or more paid staff would ease some of the taks that must be done by the core team b) If a) is true set up a campaign to raise the money pretty much as wikipedia does (we need X $$ to cover those costs) c) Prepare some communication protocol for those tasks (technical etc) to gather more people and let them informed For me it is hard to offer to help (besides downloading and using the packages) if I do not know what is really involved, expected to be done or how much time would be necessary. For example, let's say I have 1h/day or week to help and no programming skills. What tasks could I do, and so on. Again communication. I have mixed feelings. In one hand I know this is a community-driven-no-guarantees and in the other I feel in the dark without any sense of progress/future and I depend on CentOS for my business. Since I like the long term support philosophy and being a Fedora/CentOS user for a long time (i.e like the way the distro works) there is actually no other option since RedHat ($) is too expensive. Regards. On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: On 02/16/2011 09:03 AM, Larry Vaden wrote: On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 7:11 AM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: Because they also have $dayjobs too ... Oracle (with billions of dollars and unlimited machines and personnel) just released their el6 on Friday. Is there some reason you can't buy RHEL6? Johnny et al, If ya'll are masochists (as might be indicated by the turning off of even the donation input if I understand correctly), then hit DELETE now. Of course, like Dennis Miller, I could be wrong about that. You hear/read quite a few folks saying the equivalent of something like corporations favor subscriptions over donations.' Give them a chance to put their money where their mouth is :) A friend at FedEx told me yesterday they buy the $8600 licenses from Redhat and the $10K plus licenses from VMware and feel good about it because there is a team taking care of their security at the OS level. While it wouldn't produce unlimited machines and personnel, if you could find a wordsmith/lawyer on the list or elsewhere who is willing to pro bono wordsmith subcribe/donate in a fashion acceptable to the CentOS core team, thus keeping you folks happy that you are only getting donations rather than subscriptions, it seems like you could at least raise enough money for a couple of the fastest machines known to man to help with the builds. The problem will be that if you PAY anyone for doing things, everyone wants to be paid. (Remember the Ubuntu fiasco with getting a release done). The CentOS Project can not afford to hire and pay someone a full salary to do nothing but CentOS full time. If the project could do that, then they would. But, if they did hire said person, then what would the OTHER volunteer guys do? Why would they stay around if Billy Bob is getting paid for his work? If we could hire 3 or 4 people (and provide any kind of reasonable job security for their future), that might be an option. Otherwise I think injecting a limited amount of cash into the process just produces hurt feelings and degrades, not improves, the process. That is just one thought ... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 2/16/2011 10:15 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: If we could hire 3 or 4 people (and provide any kind of reasonable job security for their future), that might be an option. Otherwise I think injecting a limited amount of cash into the process just produces hurt feelings and degrades, not improves, the process. That is just one thought ... Job security - what's that? Maybe you could pay someone to post the status updates that apparently no one else wants to do - and deflect the criticism when the time estimates are wrong. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote: Apparently there was some confusion around the release of SL 5.6 alpha. Troy Dawson cleared it up in his post to the main SL mailing list: http://listserv.fnal.gov/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1102L=scientific-linux-usersT=0X=78ED2C774C38226BC0Y=amyagi%40gmail.comP=6965 I am not confused; as a former summer employee at ORINS and ORNL when in college 4 decades ago, what's good enough for the national labs is good enough for me _now_. See http://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/5rolling/i386/SL/ for the gory details of changes since Jan 14. Back in the Sputnik days, one had to leaf through meters of Nuclear Science Abstracts to find applicable gems; these days, Troy announces on distrowatch. I think Troy's (ANL) and Matthias' (CERN) approach is VERY GOOD, having released preliminary alpha/beta/gamma code a week after RedHat and we have benefited from that with the only inconvenience being that the install process starts with boot.iso and required mirroring the SL repository in order to avoid load on ANL, which is probably unnecessary given they are on Internet2. IMHO, Complete and correct doesn't exist in the sw world (vs. hardware) and Troy's and Matthias' approach is very reasonable and timely. Which leads me to another favorite point: has anyone calculated the average age of RHEL at release time? kind regards/ldv ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] apache 2 and php 5.2
On Wed, 16 Feb 2011, Paul A wrote: To: 'CentOS mailing list' centos@centos.org From: Paul A ra...@meganet.net Subject: Re: [CentOS] apache 2 and php 5.2 Keith/guys thanks for the suggestions, here is what I have found. It shows loaded config file is /etc/php.ini but if I remove that file and restart apache it still works. I also did as Keith suggested I removed a comment ';' and I got no errors apache started and it loaded the /etc/php.ini file. It's just completely ignoring that file, if its there or if its not there. All I can think of is that you have more than one version of PHP installed, and it's looking in a non-standard place for the php.ini - possibly under /usr/php-version or /usr/local/php-version. Try a file search on your system, and see how many php.ini files you can find there. Eg. [root@karsites ~]# locate php.ini /downloads/php-src/5.2.1/php-5.2.1/php.ini-dist /downloads/php-src/5.2.1/php-5.2.1/php.ini-recommended /downloads/php-src/5.2.4/php-5.2.4/php.ini-dist /downloads/php-src/5.2.4/php-5.2.4/php.ini-recommended /downloads/php-src/5.2.4/php-5.2.4/tmp-php.ini /downloads/php-src/5.2.5/php-5.2.5/php.ini-dist /downloads/php-src/5.2.5/php-5.2.5/php.ini-recommended /etc/php.ini /etc/php.ini.bak /etc/php.ini.centos5-5.org /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.2/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.2/php.ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.2/php.ini.centos5-5.org /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.3/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.3/php.ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.3/php.ini.centos5-5.org /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/php.ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/tmp-backups/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/tmp-backups/php.ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-DBG /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-DBG.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-XDEBUG /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-XDEBUG.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backups/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backups/php.ini-DBG /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backups/php.ini-DBG.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backups/php.ini-XDEBUG /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backups/php.ini-XDEBUG.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backups/php.ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.1/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.1/php.ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.1/php.ini.f12.org /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.2/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.2/php.ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.2/php.ini.f12.org /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/php.ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/tmp-backups/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/tmp-backups/php.ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-DBG /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-DBG.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-XDEBUG /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-XDEBUG.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backups/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backups/php.ini-DBG /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backups/php.ini-DBG.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backups/php.ini-XDEBUG /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backups/php.ini-XDEBUG.bak
Re: [CentOS] kmod-e1000e and Intel Network Card
Am 16.02.2011 01:27, schrieb Soporte Virtual: 2011/2/15 Soporte Virtual sopor...@gmail.com: Hi list It's my first message here, but I use CentOS from long time ago (sorry my language, I'm spanish from Colombia) I have a Intel board with an Integrated Network Card 82578DC. I've sucessfully installed the driver with the RPM kmod-e1000e; I've found it in ElRepo.org, and I've installed it via Yum. After I've installed the package (see this: http://lists.elrepo.org/pipermail/elrepo/2010-December/000416.html ), I do: ifdown eth1 modprobe -r e1000e ifup eth1 After these steps, my card works OK and get a valid IP address. However, when I reboot my machine, I must write those commands again. I've tried to put e1000e in /etc/modprobe.d/blachlist; however, it doesn't works. Does anubody knows what must I do to have my network card working from start? Thanks! Hi again, list! I've solved it! I've checked in /etc/sysconfig/networking/devices/ifcfg-eth1, and it had ONBOOT=no. With ONBOOT=yes issue was solved. Glad you were able to solve your problem your own. Just a note about how the ELrepo package works: It sets the original kernel module (shipping with the CentOS/RHEL) kernel on a blacklist and forces to load the own module instead. Though both modules have the same name. # cat /etc/depmod.d/kmod-e1000e.conf override e1000e * weak-updates/e1000e Just curious, any specific reason why to choose the ELrepo module over the one coming with the CentOS kernel? I have an RHEL 6 system with an Intel Corporation 82574L Gigabit Network Connection NIC, where the e1000e module of the RHEL kernel fails to drive the hardware (no traffic possible, strange effects when tcpduming it). With the kmod-e1000e from ELrepo the 2 onboard 82574L NICs now work. Alexander ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Software RAID Level 1, smartd and changing dev numbers
We have about 50 CentOS servers with software RAID level 1 (mirroring). Each week, we swap out one of the drives (the one in the second of four hot-swap bays, only the first two of which contain drives) on each server and take them offsite for safekeeping. The problem is, the kernel seemingly randomly switches between /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc for these devices. This makes the process slower by requiring more manual input where a script(s) could otherwise suffice. It also confuses smartd, which AFAIK, needs the correct device names to report accurately. Ideally, we'd like to force the OS at some level to always see these devices as /dev/sda and /dev/sdb. If not, is there at least some way to configure smartd to be smart and recognize which devices are in use? TIA, ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 02/16/2011 10:50 AM, Larry Vaden wrote: On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote: Apparently there was some confusion around the release of SL 5.6 alpha. Troy Dawson cleared it up in his post to the main SL mailing list: http://listserv.fnal.gov/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1102L=scientific-linux-usersT=0X=78ED2C774C38226BC0Y=amyagi%40gmail.comP=6965 I am not confused; as a former summer employee at ORINS and ORNL when in college 4 decades ago, what's good enough for the national labs is good enough for me _now_. See http://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/5rolling/i386/SL/ for the gory details of changes since Jan 14. Back in the Sputnik days, one had to leaf through meters of Nuclear Science Abstracts to find applicable gems; these days, Troy announces on distrowatch. I think Troy's (ANL) and Matthias' (CERN) approach is VERY GOOD, having released preliminary alpha/beta/gamma code a week after RedHat and we have benefited from that with the only inconvenience being that the install process starts with boot.iso and required mirroring the SL repository in order to avoid load on ANL, which is probably unnecessary given they are on Internet2. IMHO, Complete and correct doesn't exist in the sw world (vs. hardware) and Troy's and Matthias' approach is very reasonable and timely. Which leads me to another favorite point: has anyone calculated the average age of RHEL at release time? There is nothing wrong with their approach. However, CentOS has dozens of internal servers and millions of machines that update against CentOS repos on our trees that mirrored external of CentOS. We do not want to distribute things we think are broken or not complete. WRT the age of RHEL ... that is what enterprise Linux is. Fedora (or Ubuntu non LTS, or opensuse, or Debian SID, or any number of other alternatives) exist if you don't want the more stable (ie, older) items. Again, nothing wrong with their approach (I like Troy in any dealings we have had), however it is not what CentOS does or is going to do. When we release, we basically loose meaningful access to our machines for a week as dozens of internal servers, hundreds of external mirrors, and millions of individual machines get updated. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 on a Thinkpad T60 laptop
On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 15:52 +0100, Mathieu Baudier wrote: I'm considering buying a second-hand Thinkpad T60 (with 2 GB RAM), as a secondary laptop in order to run CentOS 5 on the field. One thing you might, or happily might not, have difficulties with is the wifi driver. Most drivers are available from various sources. C5 is based on kernel 2.6.18. More wifi drivers were added to kernel 2.6.27, I think. C6 will be based on kernel 2.6.34, I believe. If you have difficulties with wifi, you'll get help here. Centos is a splendid choice for laptop reliability. I have it on a netbook and on a laptop. Its so much better, for me certainly, than Windoze. With best regards, Paul. England, EU. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote: I just finished pushing through the 5.6 distro tree's into the distro builders ( so isos get built etc and moved to qa ). Was hoping to have this done by the weekend but a series of unfortunate incidents ( like large scale hdd failures ) meant that things at the $dayjob got a bit hectic and this slipped a few days. There's proof from the horse's mouth that the CentOS team should follow Browning's advice, namely: “Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a heaven for?” In the old days of direct mail, a good response was 3%. On a particularly important project in the early 80s, we achieved 36% inviting folks to travel internationally to the Paris Air Show with regard to ruggedized computers. Given the size of the installed base of CentOS, it should be kleine kartoffels to prevent future delays based on hardware failures, but let us not get pedantic. kind regards/ldv ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] kmod-e1000e and Intel Network Card
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Alexander Dalloz ad+li...@uni-x.org wrote: Just a note about how the ELrepo package works: It sets the original kernel module (shipping with the CentOS/RHEL) kernel on a blacklist and forces to load the own module instead. Though both modules have the same name. # cat /etc/depmod.d/kmod-e1000e.conf override e1000e * weak-updates/e1000e Just curious, any specific reason why to choose the ELrepo module over the one coming with the CentOS kernel? I have an RHEL 6 system with an Intel Corporation 82574L Gigabit Network Connection NIC, where the e1000e module of the RHEL kernel fails to drive the hardware (no traffic possible, strange effects when tcpduming it). With the kmod-e1000e from ELrepo the 2 onboard 82574L NICs now work. You may want to look through this ELRepo web site: http://elrepo.org/tiki/Driver+Versions As for the e1000e driver, the version offered by ELRepo is newer than what is in the EL6 kernel. Often times, ELRepo drivers are built from the manufacturer's source files, which would not happen with the upstream kernels because their source is from kernel.org). But if you'd like more info or questions regarding ELRepo's drivers, you will need to ask on the ELRepo mailing list. Akemi ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Authentication Problems
On 02/16/11 6:27 AM, James Bensley wrote: However he always uses the webdev account which lastlog shows as never logged in, so when accessing the VPS as the webdev user account are we somehow actually accessing the VPS as webmaster? Is it possible the VPS providers performed some crazy voodoo magic here? does webdev and webmaster have the same UID in /etc/passwd ? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 14:58 +, Karanbir Singh wrote: Nothing happened, not one person beyond the usual-people actually did anything. When you have time please tell all of us, preferably on this list, what resources you need and how 'ordinary' people can help. Give us a list of tasks that need doing and optimistically some will volunteer for some of the tasks. Many of us would willing do the odd task regardless of how boring or menial it might be. More enlighten others will gladly do other things to help. Perhaps a mailing list entitle Centos Devoir (home work / jobs to do) could carry a regular list of jobs that need doing ? -- With best regards, Paul. England, EU. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] NIC bonding - missing eth0?
On 16/02/2011, at 3:12 PM, Smithies, Russell wrote: 802.3ad info LACP rate: slow Active Aggregator Info: Aggregator ID: 19 Number of ports: 3 Actor Key: 17 Partner Key: 5 Partner Mac Address: 00:1b:90:3d:90:c0 Slave Interface: eth0 MII Status: up Link Failure Count: 0 Permanent HW addr: 1c:c1:de:74:97:5c Aggregator ID: 18 This is different. Slave Interface: eth1 MII Status: up Link Failure Count: 0 Permanent HW addr: 1c:c1:de:74:97:5d Aggregator ID: 19 Slave Interface: eth2 MII Status: up Link Failure Count: 0 Permanent HW addr: 1c:c1:de:74:97:5e Aggregator ID: 19 Slave Interface: eth3 MII Status: up Link Failure Count: 0 Permanent HW addr: 1c:c1:de:74:97:5f Aggregator ID: 19 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: WRT the age of RHEL ... that is what enterprise Linux is. Fedora (or Ubuntu non LTS, or opensuse, or Debian SID, or any number of other alternatives) exist if you don't want the more stable (ie, older) items. Again, nothing wrong with their approach (I like Troy in any dealings we have had), however it is not what CentOS does or is going to do. When we release, we basically loose meaningful access to our machines for a week as dozens of internal servers, hundreds of external mirrors, and millions of individual machines get updated. 1) With industry experts saying things like It's fundamentally wrong for RedHat to attempt to backport security patches for such a fundamental service. I'd cuss a blue streak about this point, in fact, except that I don't want to trigger the anti-cuss features at Dr. Vaughn's place of employment. I think I'll continue with the effort to get RedHat to see the wisdom wrt certain essential elements of the Internet infrastructure (like BIND). 2) Further, I think I'll continue with RedHat/CentOS/SL because I have the layout of the file system memorized, if for no other reason. Too much time on where did they put that? in Ubuntu/Debian/et al. Yeah, I should probably stress the 64 year old neurons with memorizing the Ubuntu file structure, but then I wouldn't have time to post remarks like these, including prodding the CentOS team to follow Browning and grasp beyond their reach. :) kind regards/ldv ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Always Learning cen...@g7.u22.net wrote: Perhaps a mailing list entitle Centos Devoir (home work / jobs to do) could carry a regular list of jobs that need doing ? +1 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: Again, nothing wrong with their approach (I like Troy in any dealings we have had), however it is not what CentOS does or is going to do. When we release, we basically loose meaningful access to our machines for a week as dozens of internal servers, hundreds of external mirrors, and millions of individual machines get updated. More from the mouths of the Clydesdales give of themeselves so fruitfully for the benefit of the CentOS community --- another view of the need clearly identified for those willing to help. Who is in charge of approaching HP, Dell, Sun/Oracle, SuperMicro et al? kind regards/ldv ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Software RAID Level 1, smartd and changing dev numbers
At Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:00:27 -0500 (EST) CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: We have about 50 CentOS servers with software RAID level 1 (mirroring). Each week, we swap out one of the drives (the one in the second of four hot-swap bays, only the first two of which contain drives) on each server and take them offsite for safekeeping. The problem is, the kernel seemingly randomly switches between /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc for these devices. This makes the process slower by requiring more manual input where a script(s) could otherwise suffice. I'm assuming these are actually SATA disks with a controller that supports hot-swap. What I think is happening is that the kernel retains some 'memory' of the pulled drive (say /dev/sdb) and when the fresh drive is installed, a new dev file is created (/dev/sdc). Eventually, /dev/sdb is forgotten by the time the next 'swap' and /dev/sdb is assigned to the next fresh disk. Question: are you always swapping in a *new* disk each week or re-inserting the disk from the previous week? It also confuses smartd, which AFAIK, needs the correct device names to report accurately. Ideally, we'd like to force the OS at some level to always see these devices as /dev/sda and /dev/sdb. If not, is there at least some way to configure smartd to be smart and recognize which devices are in use? The cure might be that you need to do a reboot to properly rescan the disks. TIA, ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/ () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 on a Thinkpad T60 laptop
At Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:02:57 -0500 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: Mathieu Baudier wrote: I'm considering buying a second-hand Thinkpad T60 (with 2 GB RAM), as a secondary laptop in order to run CentOS 5 on the field. snip I would be grateful if people having used CentOS on this model could share their experience (good or bad). Oddly enough, I asked on another techie mailing list I'm on just last week or so, for someone I know considering a laptop, and a T60 was greatly approved of. I have CentOS 5.5 (i386) running happily on an X31 Thinkpad. IBM laptops are really good laptops. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/ () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
Les Mikesell wrote: On 2/16/2011 10:15 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: If we could hire 3 or 4 people (and provide any kind of reasonable job security for their future), that might be an option. Otherwise I think injecting a limited amount of cash into the process just produces hurt feelings and degrades, not improves, the process. That is just one thought ... Job security - what's that? I'll second that - what on *earth* is job security? Wait, wait, it's coming back to me, from the misty past, y'know, like 25 or 30 years ago...*right*, that's when employers would actually try to hang onto their employees, and not let them take their skills and knowledge elsewhere, and even, sometimes, paid them what they were worth mark hasn't been seen in decades (but management thinks that they should get this thing they call 'loyalty') ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 2/16/2011 11:06 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: Again, nothing wrong with their approach (I like Troy in any dealings we have had), however it is not what CentOS does or is going to do. When we release, we basically loose meaningful access to our machines for a week as dozens of internal servers, hundreds of external mirrors, and millions of individual machines get updated. I thought I saw offers of torrent seeders/bandwidth a while back - and I suspect there would be more if you wanted to release betas. On the other hand, it is somewhat evil to ship something without an infrastructure in place for updating the bugs that are almost certainly going to be included. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 02/16/2011 11:17 AM, Always Learning wrote: On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 14:58 +, Karanbir Singh wrote: Nothing happened, not one person beyond the usual-people actually did anything. When you have time please tell all of us, preferably on this list, what resources you need and how 'ordinary' people can help. Give us a list of tasks that need doing and optimistically some will volunteer for some of the tasks. Many of us would willing do the odd task regardless of how boring or menial it might be. More enlighten others will gladly do other things to help. Perhaps a mailing list entitle Centos Devoir (home work / jobs to do) could carry a regular list of jobs that need doing ? Ordinary people can help by having a bugs.centos.org account, by testing the things that are reported to see if they are issues, etc. If they are issues, you could search through the Red Hat bugzilla and see if this issue has been reported upstream and if there is a fix. You could update the CentOS bugs software with the RH Bugzilla link so people can look both places. If you have the knowledge and ability to create patches, you could see if you can fix said problem, test it in a package that you build. If it works, you can attach any any patches you recommend to our bug system and/or RH's bugzilla. That is one way anyone can help. Here is another ... We need people to answer questions on our Forums when users need help. If you have knowledge about how to fix things, give the CentOS community a hand there. The people that we add to our inner team come from doing those kind of things. We see them taking intuitive there and we ask them to do more things as time goes on. That is how it works ... no more magic to it than that. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Software RAID Level 1, smartd and changing dev numbers
At Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:00:27 -0500 (EST) CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: We have about 50 CentOS servers with software RAID level 1 (mirroring). Each week, we swap out one of the drives (the one in the second of four hot-swap bays, only the first two of which contain drives) on each server and take them offsite for safekeeping. The problem is, the kernel seemingly randomly switches between /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc for these devices. This makes the process slower by requiring more manual input where a script(s) could otherwise suffice. I'm assuming these are actually SATA disks with a controller that supports hot-swap. Correct. What I think is happening is that the kernel retains some 'memory' of the pulled drive (say /dev/sdb) and when the fresh drive is installed, a new dev file is created (/dev/sdc). Eventually, /dev/sdb is forgotten by the time the next 'swap' and /dev/sdb is assigned to the next fresh disk. Interesting...one would think that this behavior would be consistent across all servers then, but it isn't. Most accept the same dev, /dev/sdb, but some assign /dev/sdc. Is there a way to just disable /dev/sdc and force the kernel to use /dev/sdb every time? Question: are you always swapping in a *new* disk each week or re-inserting the disk from the previous week? It's a rotation, so re-inserting from the previous week. It also confuses smartd, which AFAIK, needs the correct device names to report accurately. Ideally, we'd like to force the OS at some level to always see these devices as /dev/sda and /dev/sdb. If not, is there at least some way to configure smartd to be smart and recognize which devices are in use? The cure might be that you need to do a reboot to properly rescan the disks. Ugh. Thanks for your reponse. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 on a Thinkpad T60 laptop
On 02/16/2011 12:30 PM, Robert Heller wrote: At Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:02:57 -0500 CentOS mailing listcentos@centos.org wrote: Mathieu Baudier wrote: I'm considering buying a second-hand Thinkpad T60 (with 2 GB RAM), as a secondary laptop in order to run CentOS 5 on the field. snip I would be grateful if people having used CentOS on this model could share their experience (good or bad). Oddly enough, I asked on another techie mailing list I'm on just last week or so, for someone I know considering a laptop, and a T60 was greatly approved of. I have CentOS 5.5 (i386) running happily on an X31 Thinkpad. IBM laptops are really good laptops. I also have run Centos 5.5 on an X31 and moved to a X200. The T60 fits in between these in the Thinkpad evolution, IIRC. It was fine on both and I had no trouble with wireless on either. The wireless concern was mentioned in another response on this thread. good luck, roger wells mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Roger Wells, P.E. SAIC 221 Third St Newport, RI 02840 401-847-4210 (voice) 401-849-1585 (fax) roger.k.we...@saic.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Software RAID Level 1, smartd and changing dev numbers
The problem is, the kernel seemingly randomly switches between /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc for these devices. I use the UUID in fstab rather than '/dev/sda', etc ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] apache 2 and php 5.2
No there is only on php.ini on there located in /etc/php.ini, this is so weird. -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Keith Roberts Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 11:56 AM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] apache 2 and php 5.2 On Wed, 16 Feb 2011, Paul A wrote: To: 'CentOS mailing list' centos@centos.org From: Paul A ra...@meganet.net Subject: Re: [CentOS] apache 2 and php 5.2 Keith/guys thanks for the suggestions, here is what I have found. It shows loaded config file is /etc/php.ini but if I remove that file and restart apache it still works. I also did as Keith suggested I removed a comment ';' and I got no errors apache started and it loaded the /etc/php.ini file. It's just completely ignoring that file, if its there or if its not there. All I can think of is that you have more than one version of PHP installed, and it's looking in a non-standard place for the php.ini - possibly under /usr/php-version or /usr/local/php-version. Try a file search on your system, and see how many php.ini files you can find there. Eg. [root@karsites ~]# locate php.ini /downloads/php-src/5.2.1/php-5.2.1/php.ini-dist /downloads/php-src/5.2.1/php-5.2.1/php.ini-recommended /downloads/php-src/5.2.4/php-5.2.4/php.ini-dist /downloads/php-src/5.2.4/php-5.2.4/php.ini-recommended /downloads/php-src/5.2.4/php-5.2.4/tmp-php.ini /downloads/php-src/5.2.5/php-5.2.5/php.ini-dist /downloads/php-src/5.2.5/php-5.2.5/php.ini-recommended /etc/php.ini /etc/php.ini.bak /etc/php.ini.centos5-5.org /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.2/php. ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.2/php. ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.2/php. ini.centos5-5.org /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.3/php. ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.3/php. ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.3/php. ini.centos5-5.org /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/php.ini.b ak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/tmp-backu ps/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/tmp-backu ps/php.ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-D BG /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-D BG.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-X DEBUG /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-X DEBUG.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini.b ak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backu ps/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backu ps/php.ini-DBG /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backu ps/php.ini-DBG.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backu ps/php.ini-XDEBUG /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backu ps/php.ini-XDEBUG.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/Centos/5.5/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backu ps/php.ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.1/php.i ni /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.1/php.i ni.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.1/php.i ni.f12.org /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.2/php.i ni /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.2/php.i ni.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/FEDORA-DEFAULT-PACKAGES/php-5.3.2/php.i ni.f12.org /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/php.ini.ba k /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/tmp-backup s/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.4/tmp-backup s/php.ini.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-DB G /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-DB G.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-XD EBUG /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini-XD EBUG.bak /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/php.ini.ba k /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backup s/php.ini /home/keith/my-docs/system/fedora/12/SELF-COMPILED-PKGS/php-5.2.5/tmp-backup
Re: [CentOS] Blasphemous? any support for a REPO of current edition BIND, et al (e.g., BZ561299)?
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote: [1]: I say that with a pinch of salt though - EL6 is a tad overdue. A lot of new projects and services need a codebase newer than whats on offer in C5. Karabir, Should the effort to build community support for an auxiliary repo of current release RPMs be moved to another list? Check out http://pkgs.org/search/?keyword=wordpresssearch_on=smartdistro=0arch=32-bitexact=0, e.g. Or, if you are interested in more fundamental Internet functions that must be as close to complete and correct, see http://pkgs.org/search/?keyword=bindsearch_on=smartdistro=0arch=32-bitexact=0. kind regards/ldv ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Software RAID Level 1, smartd and changing dev numbers
On 2/16/2011 12:09 PM, compdoc wrote: The problem is, the kernel seemingly randomly switches between /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc for these devices. I use the UUID in fstab rather than '/dev/sda', etc In this case it would be something you give to mdadm to add a device back to a set. And you'd have to know which one in a rotation was coming back to which machine, something you wouldn't otherwise have to track since it is going to overwrite everything with the re-sync anyway. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] kmod-e1000e and Intel Network Card
Am 16.02.2011 18:09, schrieb Akemi Yagi: On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Alexander Dalloz ad+li...@uni-x.org wrote: Just curious, any specific reason why to choose the ELrepo module over the one coming with the CentOS kernel? I have an RHEL 6 system with an Intel Corporation 82574L Gigabit Network Connection NIC, where the e1000e module of the RHEL kernel fails to drive the hardware (no traffic possible, strange effects when tcpduming it). With the kmod-e1000e from ELrepo the 2 onboard 82574L NICs now work. You may want to look through this ELRepo web site: http://elrepo.org/tiki/Driver+Versions As for the e1000e driver, the version offered by ELRepo is newer than what is in the EL6 kernel. Often times, ELRepo drivers are built from the manufacturer's source files, which would not happen with the upstream kernels because their source is from kernel.org). But if you'd like more info or questions regarding ELRepo's drivers, you will need to ask on the ELRepo mailing list. Akemi Thanks Akemi for your response. I know you are part of the ELrepo team and saw you contributing to a bugzilla ticket, asking for updating the e1000e kernel module with recent Intel sources. I understand the point the Red Hat team is making, when they say, they will only update when the Intel version found their way into Linus's vanilla kernel tree. Though I am planning to open an upstream ticket because the 2 Intel 82574L NICs are not usable with plain RHEL 6, but they are using the ELrepo module. Unfortunately I was not able to trace and dump much useful information to fill in the ticket besides to note that simply no network traffic is going through the NICs with the RHEL 6 kernel module. Sidenote: The e1000e module coming with CentOS 5.5 does drive the Intel 82574L chips correctly on another box. The boards are btw. a Supermicro X8SIL. Glad there is the ELrepo! :) Regards Alexander ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Software RAID Level 1, smartd and changing dev numbers
partprobe as root should refresh the kernel partition / disk cache instead of a reboot. On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Robert Heller hel...@deepsoft.com wrote: At Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:00:27 -0500 (EST) CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: We have about 50 CentOS servers with software RAID level 1 (mirroring). Each week, we swap out one of the drives (the one in the second of four hot-swap bays, only the first two of which contain drives) on each server and take them offsite for safekeeping. The problem is, the kernel seemingly randomly switches between /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc for these devices. This makes the process slower by requiring more manual input where a script(s) could otherwise suffice. I'm assuming these are actually SATA disks with a controller that supports hot-swap. What I think is happening is that the kernel retains some 'memory' of the pulled drive (say /dev/sdb) and when the fresh drive is installed, a new dev file is created (/dev/sdc). Eventually, /dev/sdb is forgotten by the time the next 'swap' and /dev/sdb is assigned to the next fresh disk. Question: are you always swapping in a *new* disk each week or re-inserting the disk from the previous week? It also confuses smartd, which AFAIK, needs the correct device names to report accurately. Ideally, we'd like to force the OS at some level to always see these devices as /dev/sda and /dev/sdb. If not, is there at least some way to configure smartd to be smart and recognize which devices are in use? The cure might be that you need to do a reboot to properly rescan the disks. TIA, ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com Deepwoods Software -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Best Regards, Yonatan Pingle RHCT | RHCSA | CCNA1 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 on a Thinkpad T60 laptop
On 16/02/11 18:08, Always Learning wrote: On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 15:52 +0100, Mathieu Baudier wrote: I'm considering buying a second-hand Thinkpad T60 (with 2 GB RAM), as a secondary laptop in order to run CentOS 5 on the field. One thing you might, or happily might not, have difficulties with is the wifi driver. Most drivers are available from various sources. C5 is based on kernel 2.6.18. More wifi drivers were added to kernel 2.6.27, I think. C6 will be based on kernel 2.6.34, I believe. As long as the CentOS kernel is based on the RHEL kernel works, a lot of drivers from newer kernels will have been backported to the 2.6.18 based kernel, which makes newer hardware work on RHEL kernels. The RHEL 2.6.18 kernel only sounds old and expired due to its name. But the content inside really isn't as old as it sounds like - even though there are a big part of original 2.6.18 code in it as well. Check the release notes for more info ... Like for RHEL5.5 http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5/html/5.5_Release_Notes/ar01s04.html kind regards, David Sommerseth ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 on a Thinkpad T60 laptop
At Wed, 16 Feb 2011 13:04:00 -0500 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: On 02/16/2011 12:30 PM, Robert Heller wrote: At Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:02:57 -0500 CentOS mailing listcentos@centos.org wrote: Mathieu Baudier wrote: I'm considering buying a second-hand Thinkpad T60 (with 2 GB RAM), as a secondary laptop in order to run CentOS 5 on the field. snip I would be grateful if people having used CentOS on this model could share their experience (good or bad). Oddly enough, I asked on another techie mailing list I'm on just last week or so, for someone I know considering a laptop, and a T60 was greatly approved of. I have CentOS 5.5 (i386) running happily on an X31 Thinkpad. IBM laptops are really good laptops. I also have run Centos 5.5 on an X31 and moved to a X200. The T60 fits in between these in the Thinkpad evolution, IIRC. It was fine on both and I had no trouble with wireless on either. The wireless concern was mentioned in another response on this thread. The wireless on the X31 is an Intel Corporation PRO/Wireless LAN 2100 3B Mini PCI Adapter (rev 04). Intel wireless chips are *very well* supported *out of the box* under CentOS. You do need to download and install the proper firmware. good luck, roger wells mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/ () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Software RAID Level 1, smartd and changing dev numbers
At Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:38:53 -0500 (EST) CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: At Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:00:27 -0500 (EST) CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: We have about 50 CentOS servers with software RAID level 1 (mirroring). Each week, we swap out one of the drives (the one in the second of four hot-swap bays, only the first two of which contain drives) on each server and take them offsite for safekeeping. The problem is, the kernel seemingly randomly switches between /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc for these devices. This makes the process slower by requiring more manual input where a script(s) could otherwise suffice. I'm assuming these are actually SATA disks with a controller that supports hot-swap. Correct. What I think is happening is that the kernel retains some 'memory' of the pulled drive (say /dev/sdb) and when the fresh drive is installed, a new dev file is created (/dev/sdc). Eventually, /dev/sdb is forgotten by the time the next 'swap' and /dev/sdb is assigned to the next fresh disk. Interesting...one would think that this behavior would be consistent across all servers then, but it isn't. Most accept the same dev, /dev/sdb, but some assign /dev/sdc. Is there a way to just disable /dev/sdc and force the kernel to use /dev/sdb every time? It could be something as simple as 'timing'. Like how long it takes for the kernel to get around to re-cycling the device objects. I would also look real closely at the *exact* order of tasks (mdadm -f ..., mdadm -r ..) and how much time there is between these tasks and how 'busy' the specific machine is. It could be that the disk is being pulled too soon or not enough time is left between the 'fail' and the 'remove' -- that is the kernel is still doing something with the disk (eg has some 'unfinished business') and is thus not releasing the device object. It is likely that the amount of time needed for things to 'settle' will vary based on things like system load and just what the system is doing (eg a database server will be different from a file server which will be different from a DNS server, etc.). And it might also depend on the size of the disks and the type of controller (and the driver it uses). Question: are you always swapping in a *new* disk each week or re-inserting the disk from the previous week? It's a rotation, so re-inserting from the previous week. Umm. It has been stated elsewhere, but RAID is not really a substistute for proper backups. It also confuses smartd, which AFAIK, needs the correct device names to report accurately. Ideally, we'd like to force the OS at some level to always see these devices as /dev/sda and /dev/sdb. If not, is there at least some way to configure smartd to be smart and recognize which devices are in use? The cure might be that you need to do a reboot to properly rescan the disks. Ugh. Thanks for your reponse. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/ () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Software RAID Level 1, smartd and changing dev numbers
On 2/16/2011 12:09 PM, compdoc wrote: The problem is, the kernel seemingly randomly switches between /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc for these devices. I use the UUID in fstab rather than '/dev/sda', etc In this case it would be something you give to mdadm to add a device back to a set. And you'd have to know which one in a rotation was coming back to which machine, something you wouldn't otherwise have to track since it is going to overwrite everything with the re-sync anyway. We do track (and physically label) that, because there are drives of different size/manufacturer/geometry on different servers, so that would be ok. However, we're not set up for UUIDs, the fstab just shows /dev/md0, etc. Perhaps this is the answer for us, but I'll have to look into how tricky it would be to migrate roughly 50 production servers. Thanks again! ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Software RAID Level 1, smartd and changing dev numbers
On Wed, 16 Feb 2011, James Smallacombe wrote: To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org From: James Smallacombe ja...@sicom.com Subject: Re: [CentOS] Software RAID Level 1, smartd and changing dev numbers At Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:00:27 -0500 (EST) CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: The problem is, the kernel seemingly randomly switches between /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc for these devices. This makes the process slower by requiring more manual input where a script(s) could otherwise suffice. I'm assuming these are actually SATA disks with a controller that supports hot-swap. Correct. What I think is happening is that the kernel retains some 'memory' of the pulled drive (say /dev/sdb) and when the fresh drive is installed, a new dev file is created (/dev/sdc). Eventually, /dev/sdb is forgotten by the time the next 'swap' and /dev/sdb is assigned to the next fresh disk. Interesting...one would think that this behavior would be consistent across all servers then, but it isn't. Most accept the same dev, /dev/sdb, but some assign /dev/sdc. Is there a way to just disable /dev/sdc and force the kernel to use /dev/sdb every time? Can you identify any differences in the machines that don't re-assign the dev files, and the machines that do? Is this anything to do with UUID's on the drives/partitions? What parts do you have on the RAID drives? How are the drives setup as RAID - as bare drives/partitions, or via LVG? Keith - Websites: http://www.karsites.net http://www.php-debuggers.net http://www.raised-from-the-dead.org.uk All email addresses are challenge-response protected with TMDA [http://tmda.net] - ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Software RAID Level 1, smartd and changing dev numbers
At Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:38:53 -0500 (EST) CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: At Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:00:27 -0500 (EST) CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: We have about 50 CentOS servers with software RAID level 1 (mirroring). Each week, we swap out one of the drives (the one in the second of four hot-swap bays, only the first two of which contain drives) on each server and take them offsite for safekeeping. The problem is, the kernel seemingly randomly switches between /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc for these devices. This makes the process slower by requiring more manual input where a script(s) could otherwise suffice. I'm assuming these are actually SATA disks with a controller that supports hot-swap. Correct. What I think is happening is that the kernel retains some 'memory' of the pulled drive (say /dev/sdb) and when the fresh drive is installed, a new dev file is created (/dev/sdc). Eventually, /dev/sdb is forgotten by the time the next 'swap' and /dev/sdb is assigned to the next fresh disk. Interesting...one would think that this behavior would be consistent across all servers then, but it isn't. Most accept the same dev, /dev/sdb, but some assign /dev/sdc. Is there a way to just disable /dev/sdc and force the kernel to use /dev/sdb every time? It could be something as simple as 'timing'. Like how long it takes for the kernel to get around to re-cycling the device objects. I would also look real closely at the *exact* order of tasks (mdadm -f ..., mdadm -r ..) and how much time there is between these tasks and how 'busy' the specific machine is. It could be that the disk is being pulled too soon or not enough time is left between the 'fail' and the 'remove' -- that is the kernel is still doing something with the disk (eg has some 'unfinished business') and is thus not releasing the device object. It is likely that the amount of time needed for things to 'settle' will vary based on things like system load and just what the system is doing (eg a database server will be different from a file server which will be different from a DNS server, etc.). And it might also depend on the size of the disks and the type of controller (and the driver it uses). Interesting...I will discuss with the tech who swaps the drives out. Question: are you always swapping in a *new* disk each week or re-inserting the disk from the previous week? It's a rotation, so re-inserting from the previous week. Umm. It has been stated elsewhere, but RAID is not really a substistute for proper backups. I agree. Proper archiving is also in place. This system is also in place, to allow for a faster recovery in the event of other hardware failure. It has been useful many times already. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] apache 2 and php 5.2
Paul A wrote: From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Keith Roberts On Wed, 16 Feb 2011, Paul A wrote: From: Paul A ra...@meganet.net Keith/guys thanks for the suggestions, here is what I have found. It shows loaded config file is /etc/php.ini but if I remove that file and restart apache it still works. I also did as Keith suggested I removed a comment ';' and I got no errors apache started and it loaded the /etc/php.ini file. It's just completely ignoring that file, if its there or if its not there. All I can think of is that you have more than one version of PHP installed, and it's looking in a non-standard place for the php.ini - possibly under /usr/php-version or /usr/local/php-version. Try a file search on your system, and see how many php.ini files you can find there. Eg. [root@karsites ~]# locate php.ini /downloads/php-src/5.2.1/php-5.2.1/php.ini-dist /downloads/php-src/5.2.1/php-5.2.1/php.ini-recommended /downloads/php-src/5.2.4/php-5.2.4/php.ini-dist /downloads/php-src/5.2.4/php-5.2.4/php.ini-recommended No there is only on php.ini on there located in /etc/php.ini, this is so weird. May we assume that you did locate php.ini ? And *please* stop top posting. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Software RAID Level 1, smartd and changing dev numbers
At Wed, 16 Feb 2011 13:43:16 -0500 (EST) CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: On 2/16/2011 12:09 PM, compdoc wrote: The problem is, the kernel seemingly randomly switches between /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc for these devices. I use the UUID in fstab rather than '/dev/sda', etc In this case it would be something you give to mdadm to add a device back to a set. And you'd have to know which one in a rotation was coming back to which machine, something you wouldn't otherwise have to track since it is going to overwrite everything with the re-sync anyway. We do track (and physically label) that, because there are drives of different size/manufacturer/geometry on different servers, so that would be ok. Thought question: is there any *pattern* to the seemingly randomness of the /dev/sdb vs. /dev/sdc business? Do disks of certain sizes/manufacturer/geometry do the switch more or less often? However, we're not set up for UUIDs, the fstab just shows /dev/md0, etc. Perhaps this is the answer for us, but I'll have to look into how tricky it would be to migrate roughly 50 production servers. Thanks again! ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/ () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] apache 2 and php 5.2
On Wed, 16 Feb 2011, Paul A wrote: To: 'CentOS mailing list' centos@centos.org From: Paul A ra...@meganet.net Subject: Re: [CentOS] apache 2 and php 5.2 No there is only on php.ini on there located in /etc/php.ini, this is so weird. It is - very odd! What's your file permissions for php.ini ? Mine are: -rw-r--r-- root root76376 Nov 1 11:55 php.ini Try some of these commands to identify which php you have installed: [root@karsites ~]# rpm -qv php php-5.3.3-1.el5.remi [root@karsites ~]# rpm -qf `which php` file /usr/local/bin/php is not owned by any package [root@karsites ~]# ls -l /usr/local/bin/php lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Jan 1 15:25 /usr/local/bin/php - /usr/bin/php [root@karsites ~]# which php /usr/local/bin/php The symlink is my own doing for when I used to compile upstream php from source tar.gz I tried to generate a php error in my /etc/php.ini but nothing happened. Keith - Websites: http://www.karsites.net http://www.php-debuggers.net http://www.raised-from-the-dead.org.uk All email addresses are challenge-response protected with TMDA [http://tmda.net] - ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 on a Thinkpad T60 laptop
On 2/16/2011 12:41 PM, Robert Heller wrote: The wireless on the X31 is an Intel Corporation PRO/Wireless LAN 2100 3B Mini PCI Adapter (rev 04). Intel wireless chips are *very well* supported *out of the box* under CentOS. You do need to download and install the proper firmware. Isn't being supported out of the box and having to download something else a contradiction in terms? Not to mention a catch-22 when your usual connection to download is over wireless... -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
On 2/16/2011 11:17 AM, Larry Vaden wrote: I think I'll continue with the effort to get RedHat to see the wisdom wrt certain essential elements of the Internet infrastructure (like BIND). I thought the RHEL 5.6 release notes said it contains BIND 9.7. What more do you want? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] apache 2 and php 5.2
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Paul A wrote: To: 'CentOS mailing list' centos@centos.org From: Paul A ra...@meganet.net Subject: [CentOS] apache 2 and php 5.2 Hi originally I installed php 4 on centos 5.5 and then a few repos including the remi repo to upgrade to php5, which seems to upgrade/work without any issues. It might be worth removing all php packages, and doing a fresh install of php 5. Is that too much trouble? Start with a clean slate, so to speak? Kind Regards, Keith - Websites: http://www.karsites.net http://www.php-debuggers.net http://www.raised-from-the-dead.org.uk All email addresses are challenge-response protected with TMDA [http://tmda.net] - ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
