[CentOS-es] prueba de la lista
-- Este mensaje le ha llegado mediante el servicio de correo electronico que ofrece Infomed para respaldar el cumplimiento de las misiones del Sistema Nacional de Salud. La persona que envia este correo asume el compromiso de usar el servicio a tales fines y cumplir con las regulaciones establecidas Infomed: http://www.sld.cu/ ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
[CentOS-es] Enrutamiento con dos tarjetas de red
Saludos, Tengo el siguiente problema, he instalado dos tarjetas de red una con dirección eth0 192.168.10.2 y eth1 192.168.1.4, cuando accedo al servidor solo lo puedo hacer por la IP del eth1, como puedo hacer para acceder al servidor web desde ambas direcciones IP. Ambas direcciones IP me dan ping. Atentamente, Alexander Rojas ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS-es] Enrutamiento con dos tarjetas de red
Saludos. 2011/11/17 Alexander Rojas Garcia siste...@tehindu.com Saludos, Tengo el siguiente problema, he instalado dos tarjetas de red una con dirección eth0 192.168.10.2 y eth1 192.168.1.4, cuando accedo al servidor solo lo puedo hacer por la IP del eth1, como puedo hacer para acceder al servidor web desde ambas direcciones IP. Acá se me ocurre revisar por cual ip está escuchando el puerto 80 Ambas direcciones IP me dan ping. Atentamente, Alexander Rojas ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es -- Cordialmente: Juan Pablo Botero Administrador de Sistemas informáticos Fedora Ambassador for Colombia http://www.jpilldev.net ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS-es] Enrutamiento con dos tarjetas de red
La mascara de ambas tarjetas? El 17/11/2011 23:45, Alexander Rojas Garcia siste...@tehindu.com escribió: Saludos, Tengo el siguiente problema, he instalado dos tarjetas de red una con dirección eth0 192.168.10.2 y eth1 192.168.1.4, cuando accedo al servidor solo lo puedo hacer por la IP del eth1, como puedo hacer para acceder al servidor web desde ambas direcciones IP. Ambas direcciones IP me dan ping. Atentamente, Alexander Rojas ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
Am 17.11.2011 03:23, schrieb Craig White: Consider the upcoming Asus Transformer Prime tablet which has more horsepower than my desktop computer (by far) though less RAM and less storage. The cloud can be your storage... heck all of my music is already on Google Music. uninteresting because it does not change the fact that for most things touchscreens are not really a solution and so GUIs should not be only optimized for touch-screens there has to be a option touchscreen-user or do not wste space It's thoroughly conceivable that these devices will indeed displace what is generally thought of as the irreplaceable home computer and maybe in the near future - after all, probably 80-90% of what occupies our computer usage is e-mail web browsing. Just take a look at the latest 3 phones added to Verizon... the Razr, Rezound, Nexxus. Wow! and home-computers are the real target ar least? how many computers have you at home? how many computers has even a small company? you really believe that the majority and that are surely business users switch to touchscreens for their daily work? this will not happen now an dnot in hundret years! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Antwort: Re: Difference in gnome between centos fedora
centos-boun...@centos.org schrieb am 16.11.2011 17:02:50:
Ljubomir Ljubojevic off...@plnet.rs
Gesendet von: centos-boun...@centos.org
16.11.2011 17:03
Bitte antworten an
CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
An
CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
Kopie
Thema
Re: [CentOS] Difference in gnome between centos fedora
Vreme: 11/16/2011 04:24 PM, Andreas Reschke piše:
Hello,
I've on my home PC CentOS 6 and Fedora 13 on different disks. When I
log
on the gnome enviroment at Fedora knows exactly which programm was
started
at which desktop (for example: thunderbird on desktop 1, firefox on
desktop 2, nautilus on desktop 3, ..). The same procedure on Centos
takes
all programs on the first desktop, so I must arrange the programs on
the
right desktop.
Question: why kows the gnome of Fedora al the postions and the gnome
from
CentOS doesn't? Is there a way to automaticly arrange the programs ?
I have created my own customized script for moving certain apps into
certain Workspaces (I use 6 of them), delayed for 60 seconds. Use only
part of the Title Name so you avoid having empty space in the
$Application variable.
Here is my script:
ProcessWindows(){
echo Application= $Application
#Process=$(pgrep -f $Application)
#echo Process= $Process
#WindowID=`wmctrl -l -p | grep $Application | cut -f 1 -d `
#WindowID=${WindowID#0x}
#echo WindowID= $WindowID
case $Application in
Pinger) wmctrl -r $Application -t 5;;
drlove@kancelarija) wmctrl -r $Application -t 2;;
Krusader) wmctrl -r $Application -t 1;;
Buddy) wmctrl -r $Application -t 4;;
Virtual) wmctrl -r $Application -t 4;;
Music) wmctrl -r $Application -t 4;;
Firefox) wmctrl -r $Application -t 0;;
Skype) wmctrl -r $Application -t 4;;
esac
# done
}
sleep 60
Application=Pinger; ProcessWindows
Application=drlove@kancelarija; ProcessWindows
Application=Krusader; ProcessWindows
Application=Buddy; ProcessWindows
Application=Virtual; ProcessWindows
Application=Music; ProcessWindows
Application=Firefox; ProcessWindows
Application=Skype; ProcessWindows
--
Ljubomir Ljubojevic
(Love is in the Air)
PL Computers
Serbia, Europe
Google is the Mother, Google is the Father, and traceroute is your
trusty Spiderman...
StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Thanks Ljubomir,
thats exactly what I'm looking for. Thats my script:
#!/bin/sh
set -x
ProcessWindows(){
echo Application= $Application
#Process=$(pgrep -f $Application)
#echo Process= $Process
#WindowID=`wmctrl -l -p | grep $Application | cut -f 1 -d `
#WindowID=${WindowID#0x}
#echo WindowID= $WindowID
case $Application in
Lotus) wmctrl -r $Application -t 0;;
Firefox) wmctrl -r $Application -t 1;;
Office) wmctrl -r $Application -t 2;;
secpanel) wmctrl -r $Application -t 4;;
resch) wmctrl -r $Application -t 5;;
File) wmctrl -r $Application -t 6;;
esac
# done
}
sleep 15
Application=Lotus; ProcessWindows
Application=Firefox; ProcessWindows
Application=Office; ProcessWindows
Application=secpanel; ProcessWindows
Application=resch; ProcessWindows
Application=File; ProcessWindows
Gruß
Andreas Reschke
Unix/Linux-Administration
andreas.resc...@behrgroup.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Squid 3 with SSL Bump on Centos 5.7
Fawzy Ibrhim writes: I have Centos 5.7 AMD64; is there a way to have Squid 3 with SSLBump feature in Centos 5.7? I appreciate any help on that? 3.1? Try this one - http://www.jur-linux.org/rpms/el-updates/5.4/SRPMS/ I'm using the 3.1.15 version here (w/o SSLBump), and it's been working flawlessly for a month or so. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
Vreme: 11/17/2011 09:07 AM, Reindl Harald piše: Am 17.11.2011 03:23, schrieb Craig White: Consider the upcoming Asus Transformer Prime tablet which has more horsepower than my desktop computer (by far) though less RAM and less storage. The cloud can be your storage... heck all of my music is already on Google Music. uninteresting because it does not change the fact that for most things touchscreens are not really a solution and so GUIs should not be only optimized for touch-screens there has to be a option touchscreen-user or do not wste space It's thoroughly conceivable that these devices will indeed displace what is generally thought of as the irreplaceable home computer and maybe in the near future - after all, probably 80-90% of what occupies our computer usage is e-mail web browsing. Just take a look at the latest 3 phones added to Verizon... the Razr, Rezound, Nexxus. Wow! and home-computers are the real target ar least? how many computers have you at home? how many computers has even a small company? you really believe that the majority and that are surely business users switch to touchscreens for their daily work? this will not happen now an dnot in hundret years! OK. This sub-thread has gone long enough. Maybe CentOS team should add Off-Topic mailing list so we can transfer our discussion there and just leave a link here or something. We ALL must agree to disagree. Those thinking the smartphones are the future come from consumerist mentality responsible for current economic crises (mentality, not people) They are constantly bombarded with next best thing advertisement, and they make a lot more money then the rest of the world. Other side comes from mentality which is oriented to most money for the buck or minimal spending philosophy since resources are scarce. First mentality thinks that paying 300-500 EUR for a device that can not be fixed cheaply or can be dead after just one drop from 1 meter is justified. Other side, where I belong does not. I almost cried when I payed 300 EUR for Andriod phone, just because of Wireless (I am small WISP), ability to VNC into my home PC and do what ever I need to do, and GPS software (I managed to cram IGO MyWay into HTC Wildfire). And having ~700 contacts (not numbers) is nice. Everything else I can do without. So I do not think that further discussion will help, since differences in the way we think are vast. For that reason, I ask you that we quit this, or to take it elsewhere (I always like to ) -- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe Google is the Mother, Google is the Father, and traceroute is your trusty Spiderman... StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
On 11/16/2011 09:37 PM, Smithies, Russell wrote: I came across an old post comment yesterday (from http://echenh.blogspot.com/2010/04/how-to-extend-lvm-on-vmware-guest-os.html ) discussing the hack of LVM on Linux VM guests and whether it's better not to use it to simplify disk management. I've re-posted the comment below, does it sound reasonable? Is it better to not use LVM on Linux VM guests? --Russell --- At my job, after doing the same kind of procedure graph, we began to ask ourselves, why are using a LVM on a Linux VM guests? Since we're no longer living in the physical OS world, we didn't need to use the OS hacks(LVM) to overcome physical disk limitations anymore. We decided to Just let the hypervisor and virtual storage do that work for us. For example, in our production setup (3 tier commerce with VMs for database , webserver, and appserver), we're see a great improvement in managability and performance (10%) by just dropping LVM, and most partitions. In your example, the resize process is 7 functional steps: 1. Increase size of VMDK 2. In VM OS, Create Partition (??) 3. REBOOT (!!) 4. PVCreate 5. VGExtend 6. LVExtend 7. Resize2fs Going to a LVM/partition-less setup reduces expansion to 3 steps and we don't need to take the VM OS offline! 1. Increase size of VMDK 2- Inside the VM, OS, rescan the scsi drive with:'echo 1/sys/class/scsi_device//rescan; dmesg' (dmesg will check that you drive isize has grown) 3- Resize2fs. Our current disk arrangement has 3 VM HD devices 0 - small device (100M) with a single BOOT partition 1 - entire device is / 2 - entire device is SWAP Doing this has simplified resizing so much, I now let the junior admins and my manager expand drive space as needed. It's also let's us really be spartan on space since expansion is so quick. Instead of increasing systems in 30-50GB chunks, we can do 10-15GB and let our rmonitoring system warn us when space gets tight. I'm not sure what the exact setup is but on the standard CentOS 5 setup you can extend the space of a LVM-based guest without rebooting the guest. Just add another virtual disk and it will immediately appear in the guest. Set it up there as physical volume, add it to the main volume group and then resize2fs the root filesystem. No restart or downtime required. Regards, Dennis ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011, Smithies, Russell wrote: I came across an old post comment yesterday (from http://echenh.blogspot.com/2010/04/how-to-extend-lvm-on-vmware-guest-os.html ) discussing the hack of LVM on Linux VM guests and whether it's better not to use it to simplify disk management. I've re-posted the comment below, does it sound reasonable? Is it better to not use LVM on Linux VM guests? --Russell --- At my job, after doing the same kind of procedure graph, we began to ask ourselves, why are using a LVM on a Linux VM guests? Since we're no longer living in the physical OS world, we didn't need to use the OS hacks(LVM) to overcome physical disk limitations anymore. We decided to Just let the hypervisor and virtual storage do that work for us. For example, in our production setup (3 tier commerce with VMs for database , webserver, and appserver), we're see a great improvement in managability and performance (10%) by just dropping LVM, and most partitions. In your example, the resize process is 7 functional steps: 1. Increase size of VMDK 2. In VM OS, Create Partition (??) 3. REBOOT (!!) 4. PVCreate 5. VGExtend 6. LVExtend 7. Resize2fs Going to a LVM/partition-less setup reduces expansion to 3 steps and we don't need to take the VM OS offline! 1. Increase size of VMDK 2- Inside the VM, OS, rescan the scsi drive with:'echo 1 /sys/class/scsi_device//rescan; dmesg' (dmesg will check that you drive isize has grown) 3- Resize2fs. Our current disk arrangement has 3 VM HD devices 0 - small device (100M) with a single BOOT partition 1 - entire device is / 2 - entire device is SWAP Doing this has simplified resizing so much, I now let the junior admins and my manager expand drive space as needed. It's also let's us really be spartan on space since expansion is so quick. Instead of increasing systems in 30-50GB chunks, we can do 10-15GB and let our rmonitoring system warn us when space gets tight. - One reason I choose to have separate filesystems which do use LVM instead of VMware disks is that I can use different mount options. For example my /tmp filesystems usually get noexec,nodev,nosuid .. with one root filesystem that contains everything, you can't use mount options as effectively. I also bind mount /var/tmp to /tmp for the same reason. Barry ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:07 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: Consider the upcoming Asus Transformer Prime tablet which has more horsepower than my desktop computer (by far) though less RAM and less storage. The cloud can be your storage... heck all of my music is already on Google Music. uninteresting because it does not change the fact that for most things touchscreens are not really a solution and so GUIs should not be only optimized for touch-screens there has to be a option touchscreen-user or do not wste space Not sure I understand - a soft keyboard only takes screen space when needed. And a very popular device is making news about its voice input app that is sort-of usable. And maybe you've missed the measurements showing Netflix video to be 30% of end-point internet traffic in the US. you really believe that the majority and that are surely business users switch to touchscreens for their daily work? Or embedded devices with remote controls and no keyboard at all... Netflix got their popularity by running on just about every device that can connect to the internet and a screen. But those are not replacements for the computer where you manage your queue, they are additions, but you might spend more time with them. this will not happen now an dnot in hundret years! I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
Am 17.11.2011 14:44, schrieb Les Mikesell: Not sure I understand - a soft keyboard only takes screen space when needed. And a very popular device is making news about its voice input app that is sort-of usable. i do not speak about soft-keyboard i speak about wasting braindead space with big icons and big spaces between icons to make interfaces better working with touch-displays while it wastes space for users of a classical computer and PLEASE do not tell me about usability of small icons for some people since i am nearly blind on my right eye after some medical operations in the context computer screen and have on the left one 60-75% - that does not change the fact that i could jump in any developers face which is wasting space on my screen so that i see finally the same on my 23 as some years before with 17 I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway. *lol* you really believe you want to write a letter with voice control? you really believe you want operate with eclipse and voice control? you really believe you want to operate in a root-terminal with voice control? you really believe you want to edit config-files with voice control? you really believe you want to work with spreadsheets and voice control? you really believe you want to work with GIMP and voice control? you really believe you want to edit videos with voice control? you can replace voice control with touch-keyboard! recognize that there are MANY users which are NOT plaing a little bit with their devices - they are WORKING with their devices and in times where nearly in all jobs computers are needed to do the daily work it is simply ignorant start designing interfaces PRIMARY for the next big thing because some homeusers are happy with all this crap signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway. *lol* you really believe you want to write a letter with voice control? Letters? You mean the things that the Post Office used to deliver? Who does that anymore? Maybe a picture or video clip instead... you really believe you want operate with eclipse and voice control? you really believe you want to operate in a root-terminal with voice control? you really believe you want to edit config-files with voice control? you really believe you want to work with spreadsheets and voice control? you really believe you want to work with GIMP and voice control? you really believe you want to edit videos with voice control? you can replace voice control with touch-keyboard! recognize that there are MANY users which are NOT plaing a little bit with their devices - they are WORKING with their devices and in times where nearly in all jobs computers are needed to do the daily work it is simply ignorant start designing interfaces PRIMARY for the next big thing because some homeusers are happy with all this crap I wouldn't call people doing any of those things 'computer users', but rather developers, administrators, or editors. Those jobs are all necessary but they aren't what the majority of people do with devices even now. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
On Thursday, November 17, 2011 10:10 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: Letters? You mean the things that the Post Office used to deliver? Who does that anymore? Maybe a picture or video clip instead... Gee...business people that's who...at least until we get some to use and legal digital signing. But please, there is no answer that is correct for all situations so let's drop this. I wouldn't call people doing any of those things 'computer users', but rather developers, administrators, or editors. Those jobs are all necessary but they aren't what the majority of people do with devices even now. And these users will use whatever they fancy but the devs will forever not get it (except maybe those that Steve Jobs whipped on a daily basis) so you can argue this till the cows come home. Let's also drop this too. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
Les Mikesell wrote: On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:07 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: snip Or embedded devices with remote controls and no keyboard at all... Netflix got their popularity by running on just about every device that can connect to the internet and a screen. But those are not replacements for the computer where you manage your queue, they are additions, but you might spend more time with them. this will not happen now an dnot in hundret years! I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway. And overwhelmingly, most folks will use keyboards at work or home, unless they have an office with a door they can shut. As I've been saying for 20 or more years, voice computing will never come in: e.g., the employee who's just been fired, walks out of the office and yells, FORMAT c:; YES, YES, YES!!! And no one's going to want to have to have employees wasting time training a voice recognition system to only recognize their voice. mark where's the jack behind my ear? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
Les Mikesell wrote: On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway. *lol* you really believe you want to write a letter with voice control? Letters? You mean the things that the Post Office used to deliver? Who does that anymore? Maybe a picture or video clip instead... I do. And then there's email letters. snip mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
Christopher Chan wrote: On Thursday, November 17, 2011 10:10 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: Letters? You mean the things that the Post Office used to deliver? Who does that anymore? Maybe a picture or video clip instead... Gee...business people that's who...at least until we get some to use and legal digital signing. But please, there is no answer that is correct for all situations so let's drop this. I wouldn't call people doing any of those things 'computer users', but rather developers, administrators, or editors. Those jobs are all necessary but they aren't what the majority of people do with devices even now. And these users will use whatever they fancy but the devs will forever not get it (except maybe those that Steve Jobs whipped on a daily basis) so you can argue this till the cows come home. Let's also drop this too. I'll make one last comment, before I drop this thread: y'know, I know this *great* o/s with a ton of software, and it lets you do whatever you want the way *YOU* want to, not the way some turkey in, say, Redmond, thinks you should. It's called *Nix mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
Greetings, On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:49 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Les Mikesell wrote: or more years, voice computing will never come in: e.g., the employee who's just been fired, walks out of the office and yells, FORMAT c:; YES, YES, YES!!! ROTFL!!! I don't remamber thy guy who invented the qwerty (IMHO quirky) layout, but sure it is not gonna fade off! And thinking that the handheld devices are the panacea to bring world peace is meant for those MBAs and PHB's; a joke at the least. OTOH, Voice training is easier using the language substrate of Sanskrit (the oldest and most well defined language spoken by very few in India) and can be easily adapted to Indian Languages, at least. I know. Now that serves right for about 1/6th (add a couple of hundred couple of 100 million counting te diaspora not Living in India) Of course, I don't know Latin. Never heard it. -- Regards, Rajagopal ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
Am 17.11.2011 15:10, schrieb Les Mikesell: On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway. *lol* you really believe you want to write a letter with voice control? Letters? You mean the things that the Post Office used to deliver? Who does that anymore? Maybe a picture or video clip instead... go away with your i am a private person and nobody needs things i do not need attitude - the major use of computer was, is and will be business and not peopole who do bot know what business is because they get no job signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] nfs4 problem in CENTOS6
Hi, This is slightly offtopic, but I have been trying to resolve that problem for two days now without much success. It looks like this may be something that works with CENTOS5, but not with CENTOS6! I have two machines, fileserver1 and server5. fileserver1 runs on CENTOS6 (virtualized, if this is important), server5 runs on Centos5. Both are running with the most recent updates. Server5 is a machine to store backups on. Several servers, including fileserver1, are mounted with nfs4 on server5. fileserver1 has this /etc/fstab: ---8---/etc/fstab--- UUID=73254e19-895f-4190-b2e3-13a2b0bec9ce / ext4defaults1 1 UUID=ac658802-73e4-4c87-bb03-6f9af1ebc4f8 /mnt/data ext4defaults1 2 UUID=4836335a-2d66-4d12-9dec-7197dc772d77 swap swapdefaults0 0 tmpfs /dev/shmtmpfs defaults0 0 devpts /dev/ptsdevpts gid=5,mode=620 0 0 sysfs /syssysfs defaults0 0 proc/proc procdefaults0 0 /mnt /mnt dazukofs / /nfsexport/root nonebind0 0 /mnt/data /nfsexport/data nonebind0 0 ---8--- AS you can see, /mnt/data is a partition mounted below /. I am binding both partitions to /nfsexport/... and export them in /etc/exports with ---8---/etc/exports--- / server*.pamas.local(ro,secure,no_root_squash,crossmnt,fsid=0) /mnt/data server2.pamas.local(ro,secure,no_root_squash,nohide) server5.pamas.local(ro,secure,no_root_squash,nohide) ---8--- If I execute [root@server5 ~]# /etc/init.d/nfs reload I get exportfs: /mnt/data does not support NFS export exportfs: /mnt/data does not support NFS export on the console, but nothing in the log-files. On server5, I entered [root@server5 ~]# mount -t nfs4 192.168.1.202:/ /mnt/nfs/fileserver1/root successfully and [root@server5 ~]# mount -t nfs4 192.168.1.202:/mnt/data /mnt/nfs/fileserver1/data returns: mount: pinging: prog 13 vers 4 prot tcp port 2049 and hangs. ctrl-c returns me to the prompt, but /mnt/data is not mounted. The active mount /mnt/nfs/fileserver/root is working nicely, but if I cd into /mnt/nfs/fileserver/root/mnt and enter ls there, the console hangs infinetly. As I wrote, server5 also mounts other servers filesystems without problems. All working systems are CENTOS5, the one not working is CENTOS6. Any idea? best regards --- Michael Schumacher ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Bridging wifi with Centos6/kvm
1.. Is it even possible? Every example I've seen has bridged eth* rather wlan*. 2.. If it helps here are my scripts: $ more /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-wlan0 ESSID=snip MODE=Managed KEY_MGMT=WPA-PSK TYPE=Wireless BOOTPROTO=dhcp DEFROUTE=yes PEERDNS=yes PEERROUTES=yes IPV4_FAILURE_FATAL=yes IPV6INIT=no NAME=wlan0 UUID=2b508481-ec01-4311-8903-af7aaeb9879d ONBOOT=yes BRIDGE=br0 $ more /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-br0 DEVICE=br0 TYPE=Bridge BOOTPROTO=dhcp ONBOOT=yes DELAY=0 I've never done vm bridging in kvm so if there's something obvious I'm missing I'm not seeing it. Thx, - Joe ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Bridging wifi with Centos6/kvm
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:26:35AM -0500, Joe Tseng wrote: 1.. Is it even possible? Every example I've seen has bridged eth* rather wlan*. 2.. If it helps here are my scripts: I have an old page on this--written back when VirtualBox couldn't do it with a mouse click either. http://home.roadrunner.com/~computertaijutsu/vboxbridge.html There is a program parprouted that can be used. Go down to the wireless section. It was written on Fedora 8, so not sure how much of it will work, totally untested in recent years by me. -- Scott Robbins PGP keyID EB3467D6 ( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 ) gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: Am 17.11.2011 15:10, schrieb Les Mikesell: On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway. *lol* you really believe you want to write a letter with voice control? Letters? You mean the things that the Post Office used to deliver? Who does that anymore? Maybe a picture or video clip instead... go away with your i am a private person and nobody needs things i do not need attitude - the major use of computer was, is and will be business and not peopole who do bot know what business is because they get no job I've never said 'nobody needs'. I'm just pointing out the split between producing and consuming data and media and that there tend to be more consumers than producers (as it should be with content where copying and transporting is nearly free). Thus I consider your comments about 'the majority' to be very wrong. That is, for everyone editing video with it's necessary input devices you should expect many people watching with a simple interface, or for everyone programming in eclipse there will be many users of the resulting program interacting with it's (probably) simple interface. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
On Nov 17, 2011, at 6:55 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 17.11.2011 14:44, schrieb Les Mikesell: Not sure I understand - a soft keyboard only takes screen space when needed. And a very popular device is making news about its voice input app that is sort-of usable. i do not speak about soft-keyboard i speak about wasting braindead space with big icons and big spaces between icons to make interfaces better working with touch-displays while it wastes space for users of a classical computer and PLEASE do not tell me about usability of small icons for some people since i am nearly blind on my right eye after some medical operations in the context computer screen and have on the left one 60-75% - that does not change the fact that i could jump in any developers face which is wasting space on my screen so that i see finally the same on my 23 as some years before with 17 I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway. *lol* you really believe you want to write a letter with voice control? people do this right now you really believe you want operate with eclipse and voice control? probably not but eclipse is used by only a small percentage of people with specific needs you really believe you want to operate in a root-terminal with voice control? sure you really believe you want to edit config-files with voice control? sure you really believe you want to work with spreadsheets and voice control? sure you really believe you want to work with GIMP and voice control? that would take considerable advancement of vocal interface you really believe you want to edit videos with voice control? sure you can replace voice control with touch-keyboard! recognize that there are MANY users which are NOT plaing a little bit with their devices - they are WORKING with their devices and in times where nearly in all jobs computers are needed to do the daily work it is simply ignorant start designing interfaces PRIMARY for the next big thing because some homeusers are happy with all this crap development follows the money. Computer sales are flat and convergent devices such as smart phones and tablets are selling. Why is it so hard to figure out that computer development is following the money? Recognize that it's not just Linux development but Microsoft is developing Windows 8 to run on many different hardware platforms including ARM and it's clear that they see this as essential to their continued existence. Apple is seeking to parlay their small device success into greater penetration into the main computer sales. You are seeing the convergence of what is known as smart phones, tablet computing and the personal computer into an amorphous OS that can take any form. Don't forget that even the computer on everyone's desk at their work place is really just a 'personal computer' with some ability to use shared resources, whether physically at the office or somewhere in the Internet cloud. As for the majority... more than 50% of all phones sold now are smart phones. Soon everyone, everywhere will have one. Craig ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
Hello, - Original Message - From: Russell Smithies russell.smith...@agresearch.co.nz To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 2:37:54 PM Subject: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests? I came across an old post comment yesterday (from http://echenh.blogspot.com/2010/04/how-to-extend-lvm-on-vmware-guest-os.html ) discussing the hack of LVM on Linux VM guests and whether it's better not to use it to simplify disk management. I've re-posted the comment below, does it sound reasonable? Is it better to not use LVM on Linux VM guests? --Russell I've had the same question. I've decided to continue to use LVM, for these 2 reasons: 1) my hypervisor, good, bad or indifferent, is VMware ESX 4.x and ESXi 4.x. Those hypervisors can't create virtual disks greater than 256 GB. So, if I want a file-system larger than 256 GB, I have to have some other software - LVM, in this case. 2) I like being able to give disk devices descriptive names, like /dev/mapper/zimbra-data instead of simply '/dev/sdb' or similar. There are probably ways other than LVM to do that, but LVM does offer that flexibility. One thing I do avoid, however, is partitioning the virtual disks that might need to grow. This is because of the pain described in part below. The kernel often seems to have a hard time letting go of it's view of the partition table - either i have to umount the partition, or reboot. However, if i use the disk unpartitioned, the kernel has no prob, and I can *extend and/or resize*fs without umount or reboot. - Jon --- At my job, after doing the same kind of procedure graph, we began to ask ourselves, why are using a LVM on a Linux VM guests? Since we're no longer living in the physical OS world, we didn't need to use the OS hacks(LVM) to overcome physical disk limitations anymore. We decided to Just let the hypervisor and virtual storage do that work for us. For example, in our production setup (3 tier commerce with VMs for database , webserver, and appserver), we're see a great improvement in managability and performance (10%) by just dropping LVM, and most partitions. In your example, the resize process is 7 functional steps: 1. Increase size of VMDK 2. In VM OS, Create Partition (??) 3. REBOOT (!!) 4. PVCreate 5. VGExtend 6. LVExtend 7. Resize2fs Going to a LVM/partition-less setup reduces expansion to 3 steps and we don't need to take the VM OS offline! 1. Increase size of VMDK 2- Inside the VM, OS, rescan the scsi drive with:'echo 1 /sys/class/scsi_device//rescan; dmesg' (dmesg will check that you drive isize has grown) 3- Resize2fs. Our current disk arrangement has 3 VM HD devices 0 - small device (100M) with a single BOOT partition 1 - entire device is / 2 - entire device is SWAP Doing this has simplified resizing so much, I now let the junior admins and my manager expand drive space as needed. It's also let's us really be spartan on space since expansion is so quick. Instead of increasing systems in 30-50GB chunks, we can do 10-15GB and let our rmonitoring system warn us when space gets tight. - === Attention: The information contained in this message and/or attachments from AgResearch Limited is intended only for the persons or entities to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipients is prohibited by AgResearch Limited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately. === ___ 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] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
Am 17.11.2011 17:02, schrieb Craig White: As for the majority... more than 50% of all phones sold now are smart phones. Soon everyone, everywhere will have one. and for you this does mean they have ONLY a smartphone jesus christ i have a smartphone too and i like optimized interfaces for it, but it is braindead optimize everything in the first place for smartphones you are missing the fact that having millions of smartphones flying around is worthless without look how often and how long they are permanently used if i am at home or at work i am using my workstations, and this is 90% of time if i am outside (lunch, parties, in a train...) i am using my smartphone and please to not tell the world that i am the only one. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
Craig White wrote: On Nov 17, 2011, at 6:55 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 17.11.2011 14:44, schrieb Les Mikesell: snip As for the majority... more than 50% of all phones sold now are smart phones. Soon everyone, everywhere will have one. Ah, now I understand: you've drunk the Kool-Aid. No, NOT everyone will have one. Not everyone *wants* one. Try looking at the surveys that happen every year or two, and something like 2/3rds of older Americans, and a good percentage of younger, only want A PHONE THAT WORKS, so that they can call someone and do this thing called talk. They don't want to screw around with a phone. And that's not going to change... unless, as I said yesterday, you, personally, want to spring the money out of your pocket for, say, me to have eye surgery, so I get 15/20 vision, so I can *read* the friggin' email at 4 point type. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011, Jon Detert wrote: One thing I do avoid, however, is partitioning the virtual disks that might need to grow. This is because of the pain described in part below. The kernel often seems to have a hard time letting go of it's view of the partition table - either i have to umount the partition, or reboot. However, if i use the disk unpartitioned, the kernel has no prob, and I can *extend and/or resize*fs without umount or reboot. I think that's the main message to take away from this. There's no obvious benefit of having partitions over having whole disks. jh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] CentOS 6 smb authentication?
I have some services on Centos5 boxes that use smb authentication against the Windows domain as a low-maintenance way to handle most of our office users for things that don't need home directories (web/file shares, etc.). Running authconfig is all it takes to add it to PAM, then adding mod_auth_pam to apache makes it work with that and local users. This all works without any particular involvement with the Windows group or administrative access there. Is there a better way to do this on C6 that does not involve 'joining' the windows domain? And is there a way to make samba (C5 or 6) work with Windows7 other than configuring every client to to send NTLM authentication when requested? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 smb authentication?
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011, Les Mikesell wrote: I have some services on Centos5 boxes that use smb authentication against the Windows domain as a low-maintenance way to handle most of our office users for things that don't need home directories (web/file shares, etc.). Running authconfig is all it takes to add it to PAM, then adding mod_auth_pam to apache makes it work with that and local users. This all works without any particular involvement with the Windows group or administrative access there. Is there a better way to do this on C6 that does not involve 'joining' the windows domain? You don't *have* to join it to the domain, you can use pam_krb5 without joining if you want. There are advantages if you do though, since a joined machine offering samba shares to windows users on a domain won't prompt for a password, as it'll use their existing kerberos ticket. Joining *is* just a case of a correct smb.conf/krb5.conf and net ads join with an account with sufficient privs, so isn't really much pain for servers. And is there a way to make samba (C5 or 6) work with Windows7 other than configuring every client to to send NTLM authentication when requested? On C5 I thought upgrading to samb3x was sufficient, and that C6 it should just work. I'm assuming that not the case? jh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
On 11/17/11 8:02 AM, Craig White wrote: As for the majority... more than 50% of all phones sold now are smart phones. Soon everyone, everywhere will have one. So they all can walk off a cliff while fondling their angrybirds like a bunch of lemmings. That said, what in Dogs name does this thread have to do with CentOS??Can we please STOP already? -- john r pierceN 37, W 122 santa cruz ca mid-left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 smb authentication?
I just installed win 7 pro @home in order to be more compatible with my new @work environment. I am likewise having a problem with samba shares. The samba shares are on a C5.7 server and were readily available from the same machine running XP for the last couple of years. The new w7pro install is on the same network as the previous XP install on that machine and in fact has the same IP address as the former XP os. Now with the fresh install of w7pro I cannot see any of the samba shares from the w7pro machine. All of the googled solutions I have found so far have not worked. I have added a couple of entries to the smb.conf that were suggested and restarted smb but no joy. Anyone have pointers that may get me going again? Regards, Ron Young 919-621-9015 http://www.linkedin.com/in/ronhyoung +++ Little tiny dreams require little tiny thoughts and little tiny steps. Great big dreams require great big thoughts and little tiny steps. +++ Kosh: The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:26 PM, John Hodrien j.h.hodr...@leeds.ac.uk wrote: On Thu, 17 Nov 2011, Les Mikesell wrote: I have some services on Centos5 boxes that use smb authentication against the Windows domain as a low-maintenance way to handle most of our office users for things that don't need home directories (web/file shares, etc.). Running authconfig is all it takes to add it to PAM, then adding mod_auth_pam to apache makes it work with that and local users. This all works without any particular involvement with the Windows group or administrative access there. Is there a better way to do this on C6 that does not involve 'joining' the windows domain? You don't *have* to join it to the domain, you can use pam_krb5 without joining if you want. There are advantages if you do though, since a joined machine offering samba shares to windows users on a domain won't prompt for a password, as it'll use their existing kerberos ticket. Joining *is* just a case of a correct smb.conf/krb5.conf and net ads join with an account with sufficient privs, so isn't really much pain for servers. And is there a way to make samba (C5 or 6) work with Windows7 other than configuring every client to to send NTLM authentication when requested? On C5 I thought upgrading to samb3x was sufficient, and that C6 it should just work. I'm assuming that not the case? jh ___ 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] CentOS 6 smb authentication?
Ron Young wrote on 11/17/2011 01:11 PM: I just installed win 7 pro @home in order to be more compatible with my new @work environment. I am likewise having a problem with samba shares. The samba shares are on a C5.7 server and were readily available from the same machine running XP for the last couple of years. The new w7pro install is on the same network as the previous XP install on that machine and in fact has the same IP address as the former XP os. Now with the fresh install of w7pro I cannot see any of the samba shares from the w7pro machine. All of the googled solutions I have found so far have not worked. I have added a couple of entries to the smb.conf that were suggested and restarted smb but no joy. Anyone have pointers that may get me going again? Have you replaced samba packages with samba3x packages? Phil ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 smb authentication?
Phil Schaffner wrote on 11/17/2011 01:18 PM: Have you replaced samba packages with samba3x packages? P.S. Just noticed I am an accessory to a thread hijacking. This thread is about CentOS-6. Sorry. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 smb authentication?
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011, Ron Young wrote: I just installed win 7 pro @home in order to be more compatible with my new @work environment. I am likewise having a problem with samba shares. The samba shares are on a C5.7 server and were readily available from the same machine running XP for the last couple of years. The new w7pro install is on the same network as the previous XP install on that machine and in fact has the same IP address as the former XP os. Now with the fresh install of w7pro I cannot see any of the samba shares from the w7pro machine. All of the googled solutions I have found so far have not worked. I have added a couple of entries to the smb.conf that were suggested and restarted smb but no joy. Anyone have pointers that may get me going again? Have you seen this: http://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Windows7 In particular the registry on w7 needs modification in order to join. I have numerous w7 machines in a couple of smb domains working as advertised. Hope this helps. -- Tom m...@tdiehl.org Spamtrap address me...@tdiehl.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 smb authentication?
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:30 PM, m...@tdiehl.org wrote: I just installed win 7 pro @home in order to be more compatible with my new @work environment. I am likewise having a problem with samba shares. The samba shares are on a C5.7 server and were readily available from the same machine running XP for the last couple of years. The new w7pro install is on the same network as the previous XP install on that machine and in fact has the same IP address as the former XP os. Now with the fresh install of w7pro I cannot see any of the samba shares from the w7pro machine. All of the googled solutions I have found so far have not worked. I have added a couple of entries to the smb.conf that were suggested and restarted smb but no joy. Anyone have pointers that may get me going again? Have you seen this: http://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Windows7 In particular the registry on w7 needs modification in order to join. I have numerous w7 machines in a couple of smb domains working as advertised. I don't think you need that unless you are using samba as a domain controller. If you just want a windows7 (pro...) client to send it's NTLM credentials to samba like XP would, run 'secpol.msc' and under Under Local Policies, Security Options, Network security, change option from ‘not defined’ to ‘Send LM NTLM use NTLMv2 session security if negotiated. Otherwise you can only connect to shares with security = share and guests allowed. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
On 11/17/2011 11:13 AM, Jon Detert wrote: Hello, - Original Message - From: Russell Smithiesrussell.smith...@agresearch.co.nz To: CentOS mailing listcentos@centos.org Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 2:37:54 PM Subject: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests? I came across an old post comment yesterday (from http://echenh.blogspot.com/2010/04/how-to-extend-lvm-on-vmware-guest-os.html ) discussing the hack of LVM on Linux VM guests and whether it's better not to use it to simplify disk management. I've re-posted the comment below, does it sound reasonable? Is it better to not use LVM on Linux VM guests? --Russell I've had the same question. I've decided to continue to use LVM, for these 2 reasons: 1) my hypervisor, good, bad or indifferent, is VMware ESX 4.x and ESXi 4.x. Those hypervisors can't create virtual disks greater than 256 GB. So, if I want a file-system larger than 256 GB, I have to have some other software - LVM, in this case. Just to clarify one thing with large virtual disks. The size limitation is determined by the block size. To create a file bigger than 256GB, the VMFS filesystem needs to have a block size larger than 1MB. These are the maximums: VMFS-3 (ESX/ESXi 4.x) Block Size Maximum File Size 1 MB - 256 GB (default) 2 MB - 512 GB 4 MB - 1 TB 8 MB - 2 TB http://kb.vmware.com/kb/1003565 With VMFS-5 has a maximum virtual disk size of 2TB minus 512B, with a 1 MB block size. Cheers, Paul ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 smb authentication?
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:26 AM, John Hodrien j.h.hodr...@leeds.ac.uk wrote: I have some services on Centos5 boxes that use smb authentication against the Windows domain as a low-maintenance way to handle most of our office users for things that don't need home directories (web/file shares, etc.). Running authconfig is all it takes to add it to PAM, then adding mod_auth_pam to apache makes it work with that and local users. This all works without any particular involvement with the Windows group or administrative access there. Is there a better way to do this on C6 that does not involve 'joining' the windows domain? You don't *have* to join it to the domain, you can use pam_krb5 without joining if you want. I don't see that as an option in authconfig (or smb either now). Are there examples of how to set that up? And does apache have to be configured separately? There are advantages if you do though, since a joined machine offering samba shares to windows users on a domain won't prompt for a password, as it'll use their existing kerberos ticket. Joining *is* just a case of a correct smb.conf/krb5.conf and net ads join with an account with sufficient privs, so isn't really much pain for servers. I thought 'sufficient privs' was an admin account in AD. I don't have/want that, and I'd prefer for the people running the AD servers to continue to not know which linux servers are bouncing password checks their way. And is there a way to make samba (C5 or 6) work with Windows7 other than configuring every client to to send NTLM authentication when requested? On C5 I thought upgrading to samb3x was sufficient, and that C6 it should just work. I'm assuming that not the case? Maybe, if you have krb stuff passed through to a joined AD. I was hoping NTLM would still work. And I want it to also work transparently with local linux accounts that don't exist in AD. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
-Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Jon Detert Sent: Friday, 18 November 2011 5:13 a.m. To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests? Hello, - Original Message - From: Russell Smithies russell.smith...@agresearch.co.nz To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 2:37:54 PM Subject: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests? I came across an old post comment yesterday (from http://echenh.blogspot.com/2010/04/how-to-extend-lvm-on-vmware- guest-o s.html ) discussing the hack of LVM on Linux VM guests and whether it's better not to use it to simplify disk management. I've re-posted the comment below, does it sound reasonable? Is it better to not use LVM on Linux VM guests? --Russell I've had the same question. I've decided to continue to use LVM, for these 2 reasons: 1) my hypervisor, good, bad or indifferent, is VMware ESX 4.x and ESXi 4.x. Those hypervisors can't create virtual disks greater than 256 GB. So, if I want a file-system larger than 256 GB, I have to have some other software - LVM, in this case. 2) I like being able to give disk devices descriptive names, like /dev/mapper/zimbra-data instead of simply '/dev/sdb' or similar. There are probably ways other than LVM to do that, but LVM does offer that flexibility. One thing I do avoid, however, is partitioning the virtual disks that might need to grow. This is because of the pain described in part below. The kernel often seems to have a hard time letting go of it's view of the partition table - either i have to umount the partition, or reboot. However, if i use the disk unpartitioned, the kernel has no prob, and I can *extend and/or resize*fs without umount or reboot. - Jon I have the same problem - I can never get the partition table reread without a reboot. It's a little annoying as I can resize the disk on a Win2k8 VM without a reboot but not Linux :-( --Russell === Attention: The information contained in this message and/or attachments from AgResearch Limited is intended only for the persons or entities to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipients is prohibited by AgResearch Limited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately. === ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
-Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Paul Griffith Sent: Friday, 18 November 2011 8:04 a.m. To: centos@centos.org Subject: Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests? On 11/17/2011 11:13 AM, Jon Detert wrote: Hello, - Original Message - From: Russell Smithiesrussell.smith...@agresearch.co.nz To: CentOS mailing listcentos@centos.org Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 2:37:54 PM Subject: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests? I came across an old post comment yesterday (from http://echenh.blogspot.com/2010/04/how-to-extend-lvm-on-vmware- guest- os.html ) discussing the hack of LVM on Linux VM guests and whether it's better not to use it to simplify disk management. I've re-posted the comment below, does it sound reasonable? Is it better to not use LVM on Linux VM guests? --Russell I've had the same question. I've decided to continue to use LVM, for these 2 reasons: 1) my hypervisor, good, bad or indifferent, is VMware ESX 4.x and ESXi 4.x. Those hypervisors can't create virtual disks greater than 256 GB. So, if I want a file-system larger than 256 GB, I have to have some other software - LVM, in this case. Just to clarify one thing with large virtual disks. The size limitation is determined by the block size. To create a file bigger than 256GB, the VMFS filesystem needs to have a block size larger than 1MB. These are the maximums: VMFS-3 (ESX/ESXi 4.x) Block Size Maximum File Size 1 MB - 256 GB (default) 2 MB - 512 GB 4 MB - 1 TB 8 MB - 2 TB http://kb.vmware.com/kb/1003565 With VMFS-5 has a maximum virtual disk size of 2TB minus 512B, with a 1 MB block size. Cheers, Paul I just did the vSphere 5 What's New course and it looked they'd pumped all the maximums up to usable levels now. Be nice if they could decide on a licensing model that made more sense... --Russell === Attention: The information contained in this message and/or attachments from AgResearch Limited is intended only for the persons or entities to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipients is prohibited by AgResearch Limited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately. === ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 smb authentication?
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011, Les Mikesell wrote: You don't *have* to join it to the domain, you can use pam_krb5 without joining if you want. I don't see that as an option in authconfig (or smb either now). Are there examples of how to set that up? And does apache have to be configured separately? With authconfig it's --enablekrb5 and the related ones for setting the details. Since you're not worried about group membership krb5's all you need. If pam_smb type stuff was enough then you don't need to worry about validation, although it's definitely better if you do. I thought 'sufficient privs' was an admin account in AD. I don't have/want that, and I'd prefer for the people running the AD servers to continue to not know which linux servers are bouncing password checks their way. No, you don't need that much. You just need permissions to create a machine object within a specific OU, which is much lower grade. The password checks would end up with the AD controllers, but I doubt it's anything they're likely to notice. Maybe, if you have krb stuff passed through to a joined AD. I was hoping NTLM would still work. And I want it to also work transparently with local linux accounts that don't exist in AD. On that side, I pass. jh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 smb authentication?
Oops! My apologies for the thread hijacking. Thanks for the reminder Phil. I was mentally keyed to the samba issues and ignored the C6 and AD issues. In my case there is no AD domain involved and samba is already at the 3x level. Regards, Ron Young 919-621-9015 http://www.linkedin.com/in/ronhyoung +++ Little tiny dreams require little tiny thoughts and little tiny steps. Great big dreams require great big thoughts and little tiny steps. +++ Kosh: The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Phil Schaffner philip.r.schaff...@nasa.gov wrote: Phil Schaffner wrote on 11/17/2011 01:18 PM: Have you replaced samba packages with samba3x packages? P.S. Just noticed I am an accessory to a thread hijacking. This thread is about CentOS-6. Sorry. ___ 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] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
Am 17.11.2011 20:25, schrieb Smithies, Russell: I have the same problem - I can never get the partition table reread without a reboot. It's a little annoying as I can resize the disk on a Win2k8 VM without a reboot but not Linux :-( Next time simply use the partprobe command. --Russell Alexander ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
Tried that, as well as rescanning the scsi bus, Everything I've tried returns a warning about kernel unable to reread partition table and requiring a reboot to see any modifications. --Russell -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Dalloz Sent: Friday, 18 November 2011 9:07 a.m. To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests? Am 17.11.2011 20:25, schrieb Smithies, Russell: I have the same problem - I can never get the partition table reread without a reboot. It's a little annoying as I can resize the disk on a Win2k8 VM without a reboot but not Linux :-( Next time simply use the partprobe command. --Russell Alexander ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos === Attention: The information contained in this message and/or attachments from AgResearch Limited is intended only for the persons or entities to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipients is prohibited by AgResearch Limited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately. === ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
Am 17.11.2011 22:36, schrieb Smithies, Russell: Tried that, as well as rescanning the scsi bus, Everything I've tried returns a warning about kernel unable to reread partition table and requiring a reboot to see any modifications. gparted does tell you this since years after modify but i have never in my life rebooted a linux system because partition changes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
Perhaps I'm doing it wrong then. 1). In Vmware, extend the existing disk by changing the provisioned size in the vSphere client. 2). In Centos, create an additional partition with fdisk, 3). Somehow reread the partition table without rebooting?? 4). pvcreate 5). vgextend 6). lvextend 7). resize2fs What I find is that without a reboot, the OS doesn't see the partition so can't pvcreate etc. --Russell -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Reindl Harald Sent: Friday, 18 November 2011 10:48 a.m. To: centos@centos.org Subject: Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests? Am 17.11.2011 22:36, schrieb Smithies, Russell: Tried that, as well as rescanning the scsi bus, Everything I've tried returns a warning about kernel unable to reread partition table and requiring a reboot to see any modifications. gparted does tell you this since years after modify but i have never in my life rebooted a linux system because partition changes === Attention: The information contained in this message and/or attachments from AgResearch Limited is intended only for the persons or entities to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipients is prohibited by AgResearch Limited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately. === ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
Quoting Smithies, Russell russell.smith...@agresearch.co.nz: Perhaps I'm doing it wrong then. 1). In Vmware, extend the existing disk by changing the provisioned size in the vSphere client. 2). In Centos, create an additional partition with fdisk, 3). Somehow reread the partition table without rebooting?? 4). pvcreate 5). vgextend 6). lvextend 7). resize2fs What I find is that without a reboot, the OS doesn't see the partition so can't pvcreate etc. --Russell -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Reindl Harald Sent: Friday, 18 November 2011 10:48 a.m. To: centos@centos.org Subject: Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests? Am 17.11.2011 22:36, schrieb Smithies, Russell: Tried that, as well as rescanning the scsi bus, Everything I've tried returns a warning about kernel unable to reread partition table and requiring a reboot to see any modifications. gparted does tell you this since years after modify but i have never in my life rebooted a linux system because partition changes Step 3 .. run partprobe. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
I've tried that, it returns a warning about kernel unable to reread partition table and requiring a reboot to see any modifications. Then the next call to pvcreate fails as it can't find the partition. --Russell -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Barry Brimer Sent: Friday, 18 November 2011 11:13 a.m. To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests? Quoting Smithies, Russell russell.smith...@agresearch.co.nz: Perhaps I'm doing it wrong then. 1). In Vmware, extend the existing disk by changing the provisioned size in the vSphere client. 2). In Centos, create an additional partition with fdisk, 3). Somehow reread the partition table without rebooting?? 4). pvcreate 5). vgextend 6). lvextend 7). resize2fs What I find is that without a reboot, the OS doesn't see the partition so can't pvcreate etc. --Russell -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Reindl Harald Sent: Friday, 18 November 2011 10:48 a.m. To: centos@centos.org Subject: Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests? Am 17.11.2011 22:36, schrieb Smithies, Russell: Tried that, as well as rescanning the scsi bus, Everything I've tried returns a warning about kernel unable to reread partition table and requiring a reboot to see any modifications. gparted does tell you this since years after modify but i have never in my life rebooted a linux system because partition changes Step 3 .. run partprobe. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos === Attention: The information contained in this message and/or attachments from AgResearch Limited is intended only for the persons or entities to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipients is prohibited by AgResearch Limited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately. === ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 smb authentication?
On Friday, November 18, 2011 03:53 AM, Ron Young wrote: Oops! My apologies for the thread hijacking. Thanks for the reminder Phil. I was mentally keyed to the samba issues and ignored the C6 and AD issues. In my case there is no AD domain involved and samba is already at the 3x level. Windows 7 not supported by C5 samba unless you rig the Windows 7 to not use SMB2. samba 3.6.x supports SMB2 but that's not on C5 I believe... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 3:38 AM, John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote: That said, what in Dogs name does this thread have to do with CentOS?? Can we please STOP already? Hi, Not wanting to drag out this topic, or post anything inflamatory. Also I am not necessarily replying only to John, but to the thread in general :-) Where I work, a number of staff are being given ipods and ipads to use corporate web applications. The system is eventually going to completely replace a network of thin clients around the place. In my opinion, the touch screen creates a whole new paradigm for computing. The downside of this paradigm shift, is that our employee facing systems do need to be updated to fully support touch screens. In our tests, we have found users WANT to use an ipod to help them with their work. And when they use an ipod, they take more pride in their work, and make less errors. And when they do make errors, they tend to fix them on the spot. This all has something to do with CentOS in a round-about way. I am using CentOS to host our corporate web apps in a tomcat6 instance. Just adding my 2 cents. Regards, Dan ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 11:14 -0500, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Craig White wrote: On Nov 17, 2011, at 6:55 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 17.11.2011 14:44, schrieb Les Mikesell: snip As for the majority... more than 50% of all phones sold now are smart phones. Soon everyone, everywhere will have one. Ah, now I understand: you've drunk the Kool-Aid. No, NOT everyone will have one. Not everyone *wants* one. Try looking at the surveys that happen every year or two, and something like 2/3rds of older Americans, and a good percentage of younger, only want A PHONE THAT WORKS, so that they can call someone and do this thing called talk. They don't want to screw around with a phone. And that's not going to change... unless, as I said yesterday, you, personally, want to spring the money out of your pocket for, say, me to have eye surgery, so I get 15/20 vision, so I can *read* the friggin' email at 4 point type. Clearly you are out of touch with reality here... http://www.mobilechoices.co.uk/news/older-mobile-users-switch-on-to-smartphones-09.html From which I quote... While a US study found that just 30% of over-55s currently have smartphones, their rate of ownership jumped by 5% in the last three months alone. Survey source... Nielson Here's a hint... they have this technology called pinch to zoom which allows you to make everything large enough to compensate for your vision problems. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
I've tried that, it returns a warning about kernel unable to reread partition table and requiring a reboot to see any modifications. Then the next call to pvcreate fails as it can't find the partition. --Russell -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Barry Brimer Sent: Friday, 18 November 2011 11:13 a.m. To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests? Quoting Smithies, Russell russell.smith...@agresearch.co.nz: Perhaps I'm doing it wrong then. 1). In Vmware, extend the existing disk by changing the provisioned size in the vSphere client. 2). In Centos, create an additional partition with fdisk, 3). Somehow reread the partition table without rebooting?? 4). pvcreate 5). vgextend 6). lvextend 7). resize2fs What I find is that without a reboot, the OS doesn't see the partition so can't pvcreate etc. --Russell I don't believe partprobe works when you change the partitiontable of the disk that the root filesystem is on. I could be remembering it wrong. Barry ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests?
- Original Message - | I've tried that, it returns a warning about kernel unable to reread | partition table and requiring a reboot to see any modifications. | Then the next call to pvcreate fails as it can't find the partition. | | --Russell | | -Original Message- | From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] | On | Behalf Of Barry Brimer | Sent: Friday, 18 November 2011 11:13 a.m. | To: CentOS mailing list | Subject: Re: [CentOS] not using LVM for Linux VM guests? | | Quoting Smithies, Russell russell.smith...@agresearch.co.nz: | | Perhaps I'm doing it wrong then. | | 1). In Vmware, extend the existing disk by changing the | provisioned | size in the vSphere client. | 2). In Centos, create an additional partition with fdisk, 3). | Somehow | reread the partition table without rebooting?? | 4). pvcreate | 5). vgextend | 6). lvextend | 7). resize2fs | | What I find is that without a reboot, the OS doesn't see the | partition | so can't pvcreate etc. | | --Russell | | I don't believe partprobe works when you change the partitiontable of | the | disk that the root filesystem is on. I could be remembering it wrong. | | Barry It does but it (the new size) is not recognized until you delete the partition, recreate it with the new size, then run partprobe again, then resize the file system. It's worked for me in the past. -- James A. Peltier IT Services - Research Computing Group Simon Fraser University - Burnaby Campus Phone : 778-782-6573 Fax : 778-782-3045 E-Mail : jpelt...@sfu.ca Website : http://www.sfu.ca/itservices http://blogs.sfu.ca/people/jpeltier I will do the best I can with the talent I have ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos6 - Xfce - howto add usb automount
Op 15-11-11 19:16, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg schreef: Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: Vreme: 11/15/2011 07:03 PM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg piše: So I don't know where you got it from, and how it's packaged. It's in EPEL. ah yes, and I see they carry a thunar-volman package. OP, install that and you should be good. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos dear All, thanks for the many replies. I tested this some more : *thunar-volman is installed by default, so does not seem to automount usb in CentOs6 *I install autofs #autofs (1) 1775 output: -bash: autofs : command not found. so also no usb. I also tried starting autofs via system-config-services. * Thunar --daemon : howto do that ? The good thing is, when installing Nautilus, the usb now also automounts in Thunar. greetings, J. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
On Thursday, November 17, 2011 08:02:00 AM Craig White wrote: development follows the money. Computer sales are flat and convergent devices such as smart phones and tablets are selling. Why is it so hard to figure out that computer development is following the money? Recognize that it's not just Linux development but Microsoft is developing Windows 8 to run on many different hardware platforms including ARM and it's clear that they see this as essential to their continued existence. Apple is seeking to parlay their small device success into greater penetration into the main computer sales. You are seeing the convergence of what is known as smart phones, tablet computing and the personal computer into an amorphous OS that can take any form. Don't forget that even the computer on everyone's desk at their work place is really just a 'personal computer' with some ability to use shared resources, whether physically at the office or somewhere in the Internet cloud. As for the majority... more than 50% of all phones sold now are smart phones. Soon everyone, everywhere will have one. How did this thread get started on CentOS? Anyway, I do a good 1/3 to 1/2 of my casual browsing on my Moto Droid 2. When I listen to the radio, I use my phone with a blue tooth headset and an app that lets me listen to any radio station anywhere in the world. I read books on my phone, I answer lightweight emails, schedule meetings, skype chat, play a game or two, read a 'book' with my nook app. I reset my sprinklers by downloading the PDF manual and reading it on my phone while I dicker with the buttons. Why my Internet capable smart phone is far easier to use than my sprinkler timer is reason enough for a smart competitor to bankrupt Rainbird. Anybody who doesn't think smart phones are going to be mainstream is missing something! No, I don't code on my phone, but I don't crack out my laptop at the bus stop, either. My smart phone, with its slide-out keyboard, does passable-to-great at everything up to serious work. Give it an optional external monitor/keyboard, and it could easily grow into that, too, given a few years. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
On 11/17/11 5:40 PM, Dan Irwin wrote: This all has something to do with CentOS in a round-about way. I am using CentOS to host our corporate web apps in a tomcat6 instance. except, nothing aobut centos's user interface is different than its upstream source. so, if you want to champion user interface paradigm shifts, you should be doing it upstream, not here. if said upstream vendor adds fondleslab-friendly user interfaces, they'll be adopted by centos. -- john r pierceN 37, W 122 santa cruz ca mid-left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
