[CentOS-announce] CESA-2013:1829 Important CentOS 6 nss-util Update
CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2013:1829 Important
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-1829.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
e707fc4c876ecaf174af3f4fa26aaee01ed05579700bff334f6f28eaffed01ec
nss-util-3.15.3-1.el6_5.i686.rpm
fa94d0c9da9039e57403d54e5f60fbde23fe1dc56ca80656da703149c5a6a0c0
nss-util-devel-3.15.3-1.el6_5.i686.rpm
x86_64:
e707fc4c876ecaf174af3f4fa26aaee01ed05579700bff334f6f28eaffed01ec
nss-util-3.15.3-1.el6_5.i686.rpm
9ec6a98d107597a0808a6b30ac579b959c69d5ef53d8a0c4f987ad3f03ffdaeb
nss-util-3.15.3-1.el6_5.x86_64.rpm
fa94d0c9da9039e57403d54e5f60fbde23fe1dc56ca80656da703149c5a6a0c0
nss-util-devel-3.15.3-1.el6_5.i686.rpm
9b2f78ddc5d4a633f0157c2cd0d4361a42cd1545abb53ccc5a7ca7a74dc5b990
nss-util-devel-3.15.3-1.el6_5.x86_64.rpm
Source:
db051ad1968d4f865bcedbf59e99942648257f5bd6ac9e58c619f0a650ea84a5
nss-util-3.15.3-1.el6_5.src.rpm
--
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
___
CentOS-announce mailing list
CentOS-announce@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
[CentOS-announce] CESA-2013:1829 Important CentOS 6 nspr Update
CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2013:1829 Important
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-1829.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
c3b251ec21cf9ee3c4ee241966fc9e7b2d5530c5f595e4073adbae2fbd6f4714
nspr-4.10.2-1.el6_5.i686.rpm
ec5dceb7588d92e1a9c26adef262ff019bc06b6a43a6abf25891ce7e72e438ad
nspr-devel-4.10.2-1.el6_5.i686.rpm
x86_64:
c3b251ec21cf9ee3c4ee241966fc9e7b2d5530c5f595e4073adbae2fbd6f4714
nspr-4.10.2-1.el6_5.i686.rpm
296b92ad2eefdd624c5e0e20d2d4211e8a0299caf8b80bac6f26c2e8f0c7a5d9
nspr-4.10.2-1.el6_5.x86_64.rpm
ec5dceb7588d92e1a9c26adef262ff019bc06b6a43a6abf25891ce7e72e438ad
nspr-devel-4.10.2-1.el6_5.i686.rpm
fbb72919d15049f2ee5ef615db654bad3a3d8def990f0921a4950b4cc427f37e
nspr-devel-4.10.2-1.el6_5.x86_64.rpm
Source:
349b30c29e0b3051824309a6776a8b8b6b935881460e79f70b4d4216955caabf
nspr-4.10.2-1.el6_5.src.rpm
--
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
___
CentOS-announce mailing list
CentOS-announce@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
[CentOS-announce] CESA-2013:1812 Critical CentOS 6 firefox Update
CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2013:1812 Critical
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-1812.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
5b31ce9b71d1a392c418429aa142a2d183e552284560f7361d9dd2198d0267e4
firefox-24.2.0-1.el6.centos.i686.rpm
x86_64:
5b31ce9b71d1a392c418429aa142a2d183e552284560f7361d9dd2198d0267e4
firefox-24.2.0-1.el6.centos.i686.rpm
66de1cc9a8467678c09db805c6d75efe3a8815db218d22a85218b074fcc77a55
firefox-24.2.0-1.el6.centos.x86_64.rpm
Source:
17fd65c6cd6e515ce8eece8f049e22d2629817283911aafb9fc9297bfe078e99
firefox-24.2.0-1.el6.centos.src.rpm
--
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
___
CentOS-announce mailing list
CentOS-announce@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
[CentOS-announce] CESA-2013:1801 Important CentOS 6 kernel Update
CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2013:1801 Important
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-1801.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
7a276b20cff8d7f39494ee598445f59394303c080d263e7bc80180c047ece83e
kernel-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.i686.rpm
64d9f6efb2e0ca6a9f937ed61b816dfeec5bf8d2fcd0136a7807df105c414914
kernel-abi-whitelists-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.noarch.rpm
e80bea7aea40e092aec8c09e65724ba5c771e770c4ae3143bb2361edc4bc14be
kernel-debug-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.i686.rpm
ad57764454007da2cd66fa16cc79cefc330db03af97bc588c9d1c740d7537107
kernel-debug-devel-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.i686.rpm
f904f73c326d72e68b30e5a13fddd7a3bfe4e703da21ac74eadae9ccc407d48f
kernel-devel-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.i686.rpm
1916a892606b2123784f3de1e66b8a78875f21205cf88cb40adaaf79a75b93b4
kernel-doc-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.noarch.rpm
202c4d16cb79091884cdd89993610bae41d8f367c153ac0fc0c25f5e61cabbc1
kernel-firmware-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.noarch.rpm
ebba107981dbf893227908a83565984dcb49540fd5b3c95beb5c8a89b7cbe1dd
kernel-headers-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.i686.rpm
e9eb95d986a997bced6745ce47e2ae754076d09d6772da2caa83b8c3563e1082
perf-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.i686.rpm
63ad857812f96cd22efbf9f71b8ed84a0108593841253d225e702d699d30b505
python-perf-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.i686.rpm
x86_64:
60e353e373702bd1ddcab5c7ff0a6ba0dfa8a4d2ccce10edf67c6490e4fb3bec
kernel-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.x86_64.rpm
64d9f6efb2e0ca6a9f937ed61b816dfeec5bf8d2fcd0136a7807df105c414914
kernel-abi-whitelists-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.noarch.rpm
e2913755c846141429be0272ee7bd341344d2fa3cf2f1ba7b3e2b1b0f242f7c9
kernel-debug-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.x86_64.rpm
2383b8ecefe1e6a0b590f8c1c6057a2546877e3867280cffae2db78fe4bbc4ff
kernel-debug-devel-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.x86_64.rpm
94e745e3441259d1d2f580ed0b368eb160a5e642c69b799bda3a497d2402dc8a
kernel-devel-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.x86_64.rpm
1916a892606b2123784f3de1e66b8a78875f21205cf88cb40adaaf79a75b93b4
kernel-doc-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.noarch.rpm
202c4d16cb79091884cdd89993610bae41d8f367c153ac0fc0c25f5e61cabbc1
kernel-firmware-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.noarch.rpm
296cfcc357d2607cbaf910a94f45228a92f29644066a54a4f48dde7d14ce14b7
kernel-headers-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.x86_64.rpm
c7252273eb3c9d3625991941f8bf10d7ed1d11d7b27bc66fd0943e9ceeeaf281
perf-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.x86_64.rpm
6decaa7fc84694d1e4330822c47c7998786df4de4021a2a878c2ec90efe9992b
python-perf-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.x86_64.rpm
Source:
07bf7b8d8a0629c31d25ebe5be04bb38d691033dafd02af283a6d0a314b95454
kernel-2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.src.rpm
--
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
___
CentOS-announce mailing list
CentOS-announce@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
[CentOS-virt] rhel7beta1 kernel and xen dom0
hi who wants to have a stab at the rhel7beta1 kernel ( 3.10 based ) to see what is needed to enable dom0 support ? I suspect it wont be much, but is merely a suspicion. regards, -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-es] MySQL se cae !
Ma~ana checare a primera hora los Logs, porque hoy nuevamente sucedio !... Saludos ! El 11 de diciembre de 2013 15:33, Rodolfo Vargas edgarr...@gmail.comescribió: El 11/12/13, angel jauregui darkdiabl...@gmail.com escribió: Buen día. Ayer tuve la novedad que MySQL estaba caido y cuando intentaba reiniciar el servicio me decia un mensaje de que *habia otro programa usando el mismo socket* o algo asi... Pero cuál fue el motivo?, qué dice los logs?, no es normal que pase ello, yo he usado bastante mysql en CentOS y nuca que yo sepa se me ha caído, algo está pasando, algo hizo y no lo hizo bien (añadiendo algu sw o configuración) y está generando conflicto, revise antes y trate de arreglar algun error y no trate de forzar la solución, vea cual era la cuasa y solucione ello y seguro que mysql en centos estará trabajando con normalidad, saludos. La solucion fue eliminar dicho socket y reiniciar el servicio: shell# rm -f /var/lib/mysql/mysql.sock shell# /etc/init.d/mysqld restart En fin, *hoy nuevamente sucedio*, llegando por la ma~ana me topo que estaba caido otra vez :S ! Alguien le ha sucedido ?, se me hace muy extra~o porque dicho server solo tiene los servicios de: http, mysql y postfix. Esta detras de un firewall, el acceso a mysql no esta abierto para remoto (por ISP), solo acceso interno (localnet). Saludos ! -- M.S.I. Angel Haniel Cantu Jauregui. Celular: (011-52-1)-899-871-17-22 E-Mail: angel.ca...@sie-group.net Web: http://www.sie-group.net/ Cd. Reynosa Tamaulipas. ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es -- Live free or die! ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es -- M.S.I. Angel Haniel Cantu Jauregui. Celular: (011-52-1)-899-871-17-22 E-Mail: angel.ca...@sie-group.net Web: http://www.sie-group.net/ Cd. Reynosa Tamaulipas. ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On 12/11/2013 11:49 PM, Sorin Srbu wrote: I see nobody's asked when CentOS 7 will be out yet.;-) well, they can't even really start until RHEL 7 is a done deal and released. Investing too much effort in porting a beta often is wasted when the final release has structural changes. -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On 12/12/2013 09:16 PM, John R Pierce wrote: On 12/11/2013 11:49 PM, Sorin Srbu wrote: I see nobody's asked when CentOS 7 will be out yet.;-) well, they can't even really start until RHEL 7 is a done deal and released. Investing too much effort in porting a beta often is wasted when the final release has structural changes. Yes, but this seems to indicate otherwise: Within CentOS, we are going to do a CentOS7Beta1 build to match the release upsteam That said, there is, of course, no way to even speculate when CentOS 7 final will be released until upstream releases 7. Peter ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
Op 12-12-13 08:49, Sorin Srbu schreef: -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Karanbir Singh Sent: den 11 december 2013 16:56 To: CentOS mailing list Subject: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public Hi, http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/rhel/beta/7/ Go get it ( maybe consider using a mirror ), play with it, test it, and file reports. Dont use it in production. As in the past, we highly encourage people to use the official beta builds from Red Hat and to report issues at http://bugzilla.redhat.com/ Within CentOS, we are going to do a CentOS7Beta1 build to match the release upsteam, and do it in a manner that allows lots of people to get involved and track progress. Keep an eye out on posts on the centos-devel list to see how you can get involved and help with the CentOS Builds and testing process. I see nobody's asked when CentOS 7 will be out yet. ;-) Anyway, will be interesting to check out the new gnome. -- //Sorin ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos just installed it in Vurtualbox. That went fine. greetings, J. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
Le 12/12/2013 09:28, Peter a écrit : Within CentOS, we are going to do a CentOS7Beta1 build to match the release upsteam That said, there is, of course, no way to even speculate when CentOS 7 final will be released until upstream releases 7. Yes, but experience shows it takes about 6 months after the beta release, so I expect it for ~June. CentOS 6 has been released in November 2010, so it will be 3 years and a half after this. There is about 3 years between each major release. Alain -- Administrateur Système/Réseau Laboratoire de Photonique et Nanostructures (LPN/CNRS - UPR20) Centre de Recherche Alcatel Data IV - Marcoussis route de Nozay - 91460 Marcoussis Tel : 01-69-63-61-34 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
Le 12/12/2013 10:41, Alain Péan a écrit : CentOS 6 has been released in November 2010 Ooops, I meant RHEL 6, of course. -- Administrateur Système/Réseau Laboratoire de Photonique et Nanostructures (LPN/CNRS - UPR20) Centre de Recherche Alcatel Data IV - Marcoussis route de Nozay - 91460 Marcoussis Tel : 01-69-63-61-34 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
-Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Johan Vermeulen Sent: den 12 december 2013 10:44 To: centos@centos.org Subject: Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public just installed it in Vurtualbox. That went fine. I did that too, installed to VirtualBox, but didn't get a GUI for some reason... -- //Sorin ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On 12/12/2013 08:28 AM, Peter wrote: well, they can't even really start until RHEL 7 is a done deal and released. Investing too much effort in porting a beta often is wasted when the final release has structural changes. Yes, but this seems to indicate otherwise: Within CentOS, we are going to do a CentOS7Beta1 build to match the release upsteam The overall aim is to have as many people as possible test the rhel7 beta and file bugs at bugzilla.redhat.com; that way everyone is testing anf doing feedback against the same builds, and we all win with a better overall end result. However, we are still going to - slowly maybe - get a CentOS-7 beta build going, so that CentOS users can start testing their depoyment strategies, start writing docs at wiki.centos.org, start doing migration testing etc so that when CentOS-7 comes around for release, its not all a big surprise. The reason I say slowly, is because I would like to build a more open and more inclusive process that allows a larger audience to help build and promote the resulting distro. Lots of ideas at this point, the coming weeks should see some of them firm up into a process. What I will say is : for anyone looking to get involved, start brushing up your git skills and hang out in irc #centos-devel as and when you can. -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
Greetings, On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote: snip strategies, start writing docs at wiki.centos.org, start doing migration snip +1 Important considering that new critical things like grub2, systemd, firewalld and the such. With rhel7 entering many of us will be baby-sitting at least 4 releases - 4, 5, 6 and 7 at least for couple of more years I am of course aware that there are many RHEL 2 and possilbly Redhat Linux 9 boxens out there. -- Regards, Rajagopal ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
Good informations. I will testing soon. I think I will installed on Virtualbox and review. Nếu có bất cứ vấn đề gì khác, hãy cho chúng tôi biết ngay. Cám ơn bạn đã liên hệ với bộ phận chăm sóc khách hàng. Regards, Công Nghệ VPS - LEVU BIS Co., Ltd Website : http://congnghevps.net Email : i...@congnghevps.net Phone : 055.3.842.159 Yahoo : levubis XEN VPS, Cloud VPS, Dedicated Server, Game Server Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 15:58:35 +0530 From: raju.rajs...@gmail.com To: centos@centos.org Subject: Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public Greetings, On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote: snip strategies, start writing docs at wiki.centos.org, start doing migration snip +1 Important considering that new critical things like grub2, systemd, firewalld and the such. With rhel7 entering many of us will be baby-sitting at least 4 releases - 4, 5, 6 and 7 at least for couple of more years I am of course aware that there are many RHEL 2 and possilbly Redhat Linux 9 boxens out there. -- Regards, Rajagopal ___ 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] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On 12/12/2013 11:05 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote: The overall aim is to have as many people as possible test the rhel7 beta and file bugs at bugzilla.redhat.com; that way everyone is testing anf doing feedback against the same builds, and we all win with a better overall end result. I've installed RHEL7 onto a Xen VM running off a CentOS 6 host. I used yum to do the install as opposed to installing from the ISO so I've got a bit of a unique perspective on it. Anyways, I'll probably file a few bugs along the following lines: The core group includes NetworkManager and postfix, neither should be core packages and should be excluded from a core or minimal install. I had problems with selinux and sshd, I had to add a new policy and autorelabel before it would work with selinux in enforcing mode. I think needing to add the policy is probably a bug, but the autorelabel may be expected considering the rather unusual install method I used. Problems with the mirrorlist, I had to comment it out and uncomment the baseurl from the repo file to get yum to work. I think this is known and will likely be resolved soon anyways. Peter ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On 12/12/2013 11:03 AM, Peter wrote: I've installed RHEL7 onto a Xen VM running off a CentOS 6 host. this is a great test to have done. Would really like to hear comments about process and result. I presume this is with the Xen4CentOS stack ? - KB -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
On 12.12.2013 05:00, Jason T. Slack-Moehrle wrote: Hi All, So my electricity bill is through the roof and I need to pair down some equipment. I have a CentOS 6.5 Server (a few TB, 32gb RAM) running some simple web stuff and Zimbra. I have 5 static IP's from Comcast. I am considering giving this server a public IP and plugging it directly into my cable modem. This box can handle everything with room for me to do more. Doing this would allow me to power down my pfSense box and additional servers by consolidating onto this single box. I have the firewall on on the server and only allowing the few ports I need. I dont run ssh on 22 What do you guys think? Jason I'd ditch the PFsense box. -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] thunderbird-24.2.0-2.el5 is borked
Leon Fauster writes in RHEL 7 Beta is now public: RHEL7 without thunderbird :-( Speaking of which, the tb-24 update in 5.10 is totally broken. Cannot get lightning calendar to work all, even after starting with a fresh setup. There are two calendar toolbars, the New Calendar iitem and nearly everything else in this menu are grayed out, and the Day/Week/Multiweek/Month tabs don't work. tb-24+lightning 2.6.4 certainly work fine on my machine at home (not CentOS). ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On 12/13/2013 12:17 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote: On 12/12/2013 11:03 AM, Peter wrote: I've installed RHEL7 onto a Xen VM running off a CentOS 6 host. this is a great test to have done. Would really like to hear comments about process and result. I presume this is with the Xen4CentOS stack ? No, it's with CRCinAU's stack, actually, and mainly because I was running this server before Xen4CentOS was released. Oh I forgot to mention the other issue, I'm running it under pvgrub (and it works fine with a normal grub.conf file, btw, no need to install grub2 that way), and I had to regenerate the initramfs, the one supplied with the kernel did not come with the xenblk and xennet drivers installed. That was also somewhat expected, though, and not necessarily a bug, but RHEL7 is supposed to be supported as a Xen domu, so it may be. Peter ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On 12/13/2013 12:30 AM, Peter wrote: Oh I forgot to mention the other issue, I'm running it under pvgrub (and it works fine with a normal grub.conf file, btw, no need to install grub2 that way), and I had to regenerate the initramfs, the one supplied with the kernel did not come with the xenblk and xennet drivers installed. That was also somewhat expected, though, and not necessarily a bug, but RHEL7 is supposed to be supported as a Xen domu, so it may be. ...and speaking of upstream Xen support, RedHat have actually disabled Xen Dom0 support in the kernel. This would be something that they had to do on purpose, so I'm quite sure that it will be a waste of time to file a bug on it. It does mean that assuming that CentOS updates Xen4CentOS for CentOS 7 you'll need to once again supply the kernel for the dom0 as you can't get away with just using the stock RedHat one. On the bright side the kernel does have dom0 support and will just require a config file change to enable it, so the dom0 kernel can be just a rebuild of the stock one and not require a completely different kernel as is now the case. Peter ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] thunderbird-24.2.0-2.el5 is borked
On 12.12.2013 11:27, Lars Hecking wrote: Leon Fauster writes in RHEL 7 Beta is now public: RHEL7 without thunderbird :-( Speaking of which, the tb-24 update in 5.10 is totally broken. Cannot get lightning calendar to work all, even after starting with a fresh setup. There are two calendar toolbars, the New Calendar iitem and nearly everything else in this menu are grayed out, and the Day/Week/Multiweek/Month tabs don't work. tb-24+lightning 2.6.4 certainly work fine on my machine at home (not CentOS). Try to export your calendars and import them on a fresh install, see if the problem persists. -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 106, Issue 7
Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to
centos-annou...@centos.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
centos-announce-requ...@centos.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
centos-announce-ow...@centos.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest...
Today's Topics:
1. CEBA-2013:1821 CentOS 6 ricci Update (Johnny Hughes)
2. CESA-2013:1812 Critical CentOS 5 firefox Update (Johnny Hughes)
3. CESA-2013:1823 Important CentOS 5 thunderbird Update
(Johnny Hughes)
--
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:24:46 +
From: Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2013:1821 CentOS 6 ricci Update
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Message-ID: 2013122446.ga18...@n04.lon1.karan.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2013:1821
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2013-1821.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
80ff871f6c19feceac33011557da23d1a4ebb91acfdca8f0bc464d3376f0babd
ccs-0.16.2-69.el6_5.1.i686.rpm
4899d79c807f7473065fabfc2138842b43d1854f98614a9e7abc82e94c4284c4
ricci-0.16.2-69.el6_5.1.i686.rpm
x86_64:
b5000de7854dbbe5cba448345e2515f5c8c10b2da270e75e2da7be55df08e79e
ccs-0.16.2-69.el6_5.1.x86_64.rpm
d8dcf661a7121d66f7cd935da1415c083a512ea4bced6bbef99fba314eb2607e
ricci-0.16.2-69.el6_5.1.x86_64.rpm
Source:
2a19e00c515277cbe2c8510d42744af888d3a554450ac194a67df8a14b2dd908
ricci-0.16.2-69.el6_5.1.src.rpm
--
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
--
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:44:39 +
From: Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2013:1812 Critical CentOS 5 firefox
Update
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Message-ID: 2013124439.ga...@chakra.karan.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2013:1812 Critical
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-1812.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
3ddecbd7876061379a2f639742cca74e03c6abf00ae93e8156e9e015a26aa2d6
firefox-24.2.0-1.el5.centos.i386.rpm
x86_64:
3ddecbd7876061379a2f639742cca74e03c6abf00ae93e8156e9e015a26aa2d6
firefox-24.2.0-1.el5.centos.i386.rpm
dd4ddbebe7344ff255183977d1ec5fef2ebde2523dc5426978431075ca12c42d
firefox-24.2.0-1.el5.centos.x86_64.rpm
Source:
ba6b752b236b9aeeafbd6d7a87f27fb55e37dc7f4061e0fc1ad7018440b5b817
firefox-24.2.0-1.el5.centos.src.rpm
--
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
--
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 23:13:52 +
From: Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2013:1823 Important CentOS 5
thunderbird Update
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Message-ID: 20131211231352.ga2...@chakra.karan.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2013:1823 Important
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-1823.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
7fad0030fce543b339b258f567ff902c1fcb5ebc334909ad1f227057701ff402
thunderbird-24.2.0-2.el5.centos.i386.rpm
x86_64:
e2ff2a8d3e1002a7a344ab3cbbc177fc43e1e33b4f1caefc2d7ed39e44224363
thunderbird-24.2.0-2.el5.centos.x86_64.rpm
Source:
1ba5e70c99fc2db5d2d8e84c02eea187ca28ddc0903eb29d63717ddf43a5004f
thunderbird-24.2.0-2.el5.centos.src.rpm
--
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
--
___
CentOS-announce mailing list
centos-annou...@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
End of CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 106, Issue 7
***
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:03:55AM +1300, Peter wrote: On 12/12/2013 11:05 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote: The core group includes NetworkManager and postfix, neither should be core packages and should be excluded from a core or minimal install. Fedora, and RedHat, apparently feel that NetworkManager is the way to go. As I never use it, I'm not sure if they ever fixed the fact that it can't handle bridges. To me (and I admit I'm an aging grouch), it's the sort of thing that RH has a bad habit of doing, taking things that aren't necessarily bad for something like Fedora, aimed at a single user laptop, and putting it into their system which is often used as a server. (One can argue about Fedora's use case, but judging from their forums, and the various changes that have come over the years, I feel that most of its developers are thinking of a single user laptop.) Somewhere in the release notes, it states that system-config-network is being removed in favor of some NetworkManager cli tool. -- 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] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On 12/13/2013 01:04 AM, Scott Robbins wrote: On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:03:55AM +1300, Peter wrote: On 12/12/2013 11:05 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote: The core group includes NetworkManager and postfix, neither should be core packages and should be excluded from a core or minimal install. Fedora, and RedHat, apparently feel that NetworkManager is the way to go. As I never use it, I'm not sure if they ever fixed the fact that it can't handle bridges. To me (and I admit I'm an aging grouch), it's the sort of thing that RH has a bad habit of doing, taking things that aren't necessarily bad for something like Fedora, aimed at a single user laptop, and putting it into their system which is often used as a server. (One can argue about Fedora's use case, but judging from their forums, and the various changes that have come over the years, I feel that most of its developers are thinking of a single user laptop.) Somewhere in the release notes, it states that system-config-network is being removed in favor of some NetworkManager cli tool. Right, but core should be just the bare minimum. NetworkManager is certainly not required to configure your network, in fact el7 runs just fine without it. Just set your ifcfg-eth0 scripts, etc, and you're good to go. I found that I can exclude NM and postfix when group installing core from yum and it works just fine. Peter ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Peter said the following on 12/12/2013 13:19: Right, but core should be just the bare minimum. NetworkManager is certainly not required to configure your network, in fact el7 runs just fine without it. Just set your ifcfg-eth0 scripts, etc, and you're good to go. I think that before choosing what should be included in the minimal installation we must define the goals of the minimal installation. For instance the MTA is used by some programs to warn/report the SysAdmin; this could be the reason why the standard MTA is included. Ciao, luigi - -- / +--[Luigi Rosa]-- \ Always burn your bridges behind you. You never know who might be trying to follow. --Enabran Tain, Improbable Cause -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlKpqyYACgkQ3kWu7Tfl6ZQNdwCdF+ibDSuw/30KFWaJNTivFK07 MiIAoKImXxWCyq+ETZ3ZTj5ARhWmgTCt =AVkm -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] New SCL updates pushed
We have Software Collections for CentOS currently in our testing repo: http://dev.centos.org/centos/6/SCL/ To date I don't think I have gotten any feedback, positive or negative, for these SCL RPMs though I know there are hundreds of people using them (or at least downloading them). I have added the following SCL updates to the repo: Critical: ruby193-ruby security update: http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-1763.html Important: ruby193-rubygem-actionpack security update: http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-1794.html Critical: php security update: http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-1815.html If we are ever going to get these out of testing and into production, we need to get some feedback. Feedback accepted on this list, the centos-devel mailing list, or this bug: http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=6719 Thanks, Johnny Hughes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 01:19:26 +1300 Peter pe...@pajamian.dhs.org wrote: Right, but core should be just the bare minimum. NetworkManager is certainly not required to configure your network, in fact el7 runs just fine without it. Just set your ifcfg-eth0 scripts, etc, and you're good to go. By the same logic you could argue that a text editor is not required for a bare minimum --- namely, you can always use cat and echo from the command line to edit the config files. The point of the text editor in a minimal installation is to make life easier for a sysadmin. The point of NetworkManager is the same --- it is included so that you don't have to just set your ifcfg-eth0 scripts. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
I used to run everything in a similar manner, behind an IPCop system. The UVerse gateway doesn't handle multiple IPs on the same interface, when plugged directly into the gateway, so I wound up ditching the IPCop system and using my server as both the server and a firewall/router as you're asking about. You should be able to do so with no trouble. -- Mike Burger http://www.bubbanfriends.org It's always suicide-mission this, save-the-planet that. No one ever just stops by to say 'hi' anymore. --Colonel Jack O'Neill, SG1 Hi All, So my electricity bill is through the roof and I need to pair down some equipment. I have a CentOS 6.5 Server (a few TB, 32gb RAM) running some simple web stuff and Zimbra. I have 5 static IP's from Comcast. I am considering giving this server a public IP and plugging it directly into my cable modem. This box can handle everything with room for me to do more. Doing this would allow me to power down my pfSense box and additional servers by consolidating onto this single box. I have the firewall on on the server and only allowing the few ports I need. I dont run ssh on 22 What do you guys think? Jason ___ 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] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/12/2013 06:03 AM, Peter wrote: On 12/12/2013 11:05 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote: The overall aim is to have as many people as possible test the rhel7 beta and file bugs at bugzilla.redhat.com; that way everyone is testing anf doing feedback against the same builds, and we all win with a better overall end result. I've installed RHEL7 onto a Xen VM running off a CentOS 6 host. I used yum to do the install as opposed to installing from the ISO so I've got a bit of a unique perspective on it. Anyways, I'll probably file a few bugs along the following lines: The core group includes NetworkManager and postfix, neither should be core packages and should be excluded from a core or minimal install. I had problems with selinux and sshd, I had to add a new policy and autorelabel before it would work with selinux in enforcing mode. I think needing to add the policy is probably a bug, but the autorelabel may be expected considering the rather unusual install method I used. Problems with the mirrorlist, I had to comment it out and uncomment the baseurl from the repo file to get yum to work. I think this is known and will likely be resolved soon anyways. Peter ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos What SELInux issue did you have? What policy did you need to add? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEUEARECAAYFAlKpvdwACgkQrlYvE4MpobMBvwCY2nzFHoyBrRpTTXte4jfylBOA vgCgzgKVtn/1N+j5zpWzEpRJn6WWRvs= =O0SR -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
Am 11.12.2013 um 17:03 schrieb Alain Péan alain.p...@lpn.cnrs.fr: Le 11/12/2013 16:56, Karanbir Singh a écrit : http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/rhel/beta/7/ Go get it ( maybe consider using a mirror ), play with it, test it, and file reports. Dont use it in production. As in the past, we highly encourage people to use the official beta builds from Red Hat and to report issues athttp://bugzilla.redhat.com/ Within CentOS, we are going to do a CentOS7Beta1 build to match the release upsteam, and do it in a manner that allows lots of people to get involved and track progress. Keep an eye out on posts on the centos-devel list to see how you can get involved and help with the CentOS Builds and testing process. There seems to be only x86_64 release ? That would be in the current trend... that is really an issue for us because we use EL for some small i586 hw (router etc.). -- LF ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
Le 12/12/2013 14:49, Leon Fauster a écrit : that is really an issue for us because we use EL for some small i586 hw (router etc.). You can still use CentOS 6 or RHEL 6 (maintained until 2020) ? Or buy a cheap hardware. They are now all 64 bits. You cannot say your i586 hw will live this long... Alain -- Administrateur Système/Réseau Laboratoire de Photonique et Nanostructures (LPN/CNRS - UPR20) Centre de Recherche Alcatel Data IV - Marcoussis route de Nozay - 91460 Marcoussis Tel : 01-69-63-61-34 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
Marko Vojinovic wrote: On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 01:19:26 +1300 Peter pe...@pajamian.dhs.org wrote: Right, but core should be just the bare minimum. NetworkManager is certainly not required to configure your network, in fact el7 runs just fine without it. Just set your ifcfg-eth0 scripts, etc, and you're good to go. By the same logic you could argue that a text editor is not required for a bare minimum --- namely, you can always use cat and echo from the command line to edit the config files. The point of the text editor in a minimal installation is to make life easier for a sysadmin. The point of NetworkManager is the same --- it is included so that you don't have to just set your ifcfg-eth0 scripts. I disagree. NetworkManager is fine... on a laptop, where you're going to be moving it from network to network. For a wired network - that is, for any server (remember the Enterprise part of the name?) - it's utterly unnecessary. And it wall worked fine before NM. And NM has caused problems on occasion, before we just turned the thing *off*. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
Mike Burger wrote: I used to run everything in a similar manner, behind an IPCop system. The UVerse gateway doesn't handle multiple IPs on the same interface, when plugged directly into the gateway, so I wound up ditching the IPCop system and using my server as both the server and a firewall/router as you're asking about. You should be able to do so with no trouble. I'm a tad more paranoid - I don't necessarily trust the phone company's management of the router in my house. mark, still trying to get USB printing working on the router I bought* * Asus. AsusWRT. DD-WRT. Don't ask. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On 12 December 2013 14:06, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Marko Vojinovic wrote: By the same logic you could argue that a text editor is not required for a bare minimum --- namely, you can always use cat and echo from the command line to edit the config files. The point of the text editor in a minimal installation is to make life easier for a sysadmin. The point of NetworkManager is the same --- it is included so that you don't have to just set your ifcfg-eth0 scripts. I disagree. NetworkManager is fine... on a laptop, where you're going to be moving it from network to network. For a wired network - that is, for any server (remember the Enterprise part of the name?) - it's utterly unnecessary. And it wall worked fine before NM. And NM has caused problems on occasion, before we just turned the thing *off*. The NetworkManager in EL6 is pretty poor - everyone knows that. The NetworkManager in F19/20 (and EL7) is a vastly different beast with most of the reasons for disabling it in EL6 (bonding, bridging, vlans, etc) no longer being an issue. Remember that the standard network service is literally source the relevant ifcfg-*, rule-* or route-* file and then using the variables just sourced run shell scripts calling ip addr, ip link, ip route, ip rule, etc to get the system into the state you want. One of the drivers behind systemd in the beginning was to avoid arbitrary shell scripts configuring the system and resulting in the potential for confusion with selinux contexts and inherited environments when directly run by a user... With NM handling the connection the correct details are obtained and then through the netlink APIs the interfaces configured as per the state desired without shell scripts and forking all over the place... Read through the networking documentation, fire up a EL7 system and give it an honest try: https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7-Beta/html-single/Networking_Guide/index.html ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 09:00:25PM -0800, Jason T. Slack-Moehrle wrote: Hi All, So my electricity bill is through the roof and I need to pair down some equipment. I have a CentOS 6.5 Server (a few TB, 32gb RAM) running some simple web stuff and Zimbra. I have 5 static IP's from Comcast. I am considering giving this server a public IP and plugging it directly into my cable modem. This box can handle everything with room for me to do more. Doing this would allow me to power down my pfSense box and additional servers by consolidating onto this single box. I have the firewall on on the server and only allowing the few ports I need. I dont run ssh on 22 What do you guys think? You certainly CAN do it that way. Being paranoid, I'm in favor of having one box that does firewall/routing duties without any other apps running, to reduce the exposed attack surface. I used to run a Smoothwall GPL box as firewall, but like you, I wanted to do a little something about the power usage. My solution' was a dedicated consumer router, which used probably (not measured) a tenth of the juice of the old PC that ran Smoothwall. I used dd-wrt on it instead of the original firmware. -- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us - The Lord detests the way of the wicked but he loves those who pursue righteousness. - Proverbs 15:9 (niv) - ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:00 PM, Jason T. Slack-Moehrle slackmoeh...@gmail.com wrote: So my electricity bill is through the roof and I need to pair down some equipment. If you are in the USA, get yourself a Kill-a-Watt power meter. I'm sure other parts of the world have similar products. It's a device that goes between your electrical product (e.g. server) and the wall AC outlet, and tells you what the power draw is. It also keeps a cumulative total for number of Watts and Volt-Amps used in the time period it's plugged in. (If you have a 100% efficient PFC in your power supply, Watts will always equal Volt-Amps. I believe this is mandated in Europe. But a PFC below 1.0 will cause Volt-Amps to be higher than Watts. In the USA you are typically billed by Watts, but if you have a UPS, the Volt-Amp number matters.) The question is, are you sure it's all your computers causing the spike in your power bill? For example, if you have an old refrigerator, those are typically very inefficient and use more power than necessary. The Kill-a-Watt will tell you which devices are most power greedy. I have a CentOS 6.5 Server (a few TB, 32gb RAM) running some simple web stuff and Zimbra. I have 5 static IP's from Comcast. I am considering giving this server a public IP and plugging it directly into my cable modem. This box can handle everything with room for me to do more. Doing this would allow me to power down my pfSense box and additional servers by consolidating onto this single box. What kind of hardware is your pfSense box? I too have a pfSense server, but it's on a fairly low-power Atom board. Pulls less than 20 watts at any given time. The average cost of electricity in the USA is about $0.11/kwh. Using that number, a constant X watt draw conveniently works out to costing $X/year. So my pfSense box costs less than $20/year in electricity. Obviously, if your electricity is much more expensive, it changes the equation. Just food for thought. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On 12/11/2013 08:56, Karanbir Singh wrote: Within CentOS, we are going to do a CentOS7Beta1 build to match the release upsteam In the aftermath of the CentOS 6.0 trauma, I recall there being speculation that building the next major release wouldn't be as troublesome, for various reasons[*]. Did that turn out to be true? [*] a) Improved procedures, b) grand works that, done once, don't need to be done over again as long as upstream doesn't change the world again, etc. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
Fred Smith wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 09:00:25PM -0800, Jason T. Slack-Moehrle wrote: Hi All, So my electricity bill is through the roof and I need to pair down some equipment. I have a CentOS 6.5 Server (a few TB, 32gb RAM) running some simple web stuff and Zimbra. I have 5 static IP's from Comcast. I am considering giving this server a public IP and plugging it directly into my cable modem. This box can handle everything with room for me to do more. Doing this would allow me to power down my pfSense box and additional servers by consolidating onto this single box. I have the firewall on on the server and only allowing the few ports I need. I dont run ssh on 22 Were you planning on ssh'ing in from outside? Remember, security through obscurity isn't security. nmap, for example, would find it. What do you guys think? You certainly CAN do it that way. Being paranoid, I'm in favor of having one box that does firewall/routing duties without any other apps running, to reduce the exposed attack surface. Yup. For about 10 years, I ran an old PC at home with redhat 7.x, then 9. (pre-fedora/RHEL). I had *nothing* on it - no compilers, no languages not required, no web stuff, no *nuthin'*. Then I ran Bastille Linux on it (that's not a distro, it's a set of hardening scripts - everything not explicitly required is verboten). To the best of my knowledge, I never had an intrusion. Of course, I wasn't offering an open website I used to run a Smoothwall GPL box as firewall, but like you, I wanted to do a little something about the power usage. My solution' was a dedicated consumer router, which used probably (not measured) a tenth of the juice of the old PC that ran Smoothwall. I used dd-wrt on it instead of the original firmware. Doing that now - uses a *lot* less power. Now, if I could just find a firmware that meets my needs mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
Matt Garman wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:00 PM, Jason T. Slack-Moehrle slackmoeh...@gmail.com wrote: So my electricity bill is through the roof and I need to pair down some equipment. If you are in the USA, get yourself a Kill-a-Watt power meter. I'm sure other parts of the world have similar products. It's a device that goes between your electrical product (e.g. server) and the wall AC outlet, and tells you what the power draw is. It also keeps a cumulative total for number of Watts and Volt-Amps used in the time period it's plugged in. (If you have a 100% efficient PFC in your power supply, Watts will always equal Volt-Amps. I believe this is mandated in Europe. But a PFC below 1.0 will cause Volt-Amps to be higher than Watts. In the USA you are typically billed by Watts, but if you have a UPS, the Volt-Amp number matters.) The question is, are you sure it's all your computers causing the spike in your power bill? For example, if you have an old refrigerator, those are snip That's a *really* good question. Did you get a plasma TV (baaad! they're *always* on, and draw a lot of power). For that matter, if you have electric heat or HVAC, have it checked. About 9 years ago, living in FL, we had a deeply insane electric bill... and got someone from the electric co to check, and then got maintenance on the HVAC... which had the board go bad, and was running *both* heat and cool full out at the same time. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On 12 December 2013 15:32, Warren Young war...@etr-usa.com wrote: On 12/11/2013 08:56, Karanbir Singh wrote: Within CentOS, we are going to do a CentOS7Beta1 build to match the release upsteam In the aftermath of the CentOS 6.0 trauma, I recall there being speculation that building the next major release wouldn't be as troublesome, for various reasons[*]. Did that turn out to be true? [*] a) Improved procedures, b) grand works that, done once, don't need to be done over again as long as upstream doesn't change the world again, etc. Well seeing as we haven't had a major release since then it's hard to say (although times for the point releases to come out have been markedly short)... Guess EL7 will be a true test ;) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Automatic network speed test and reporting
The ISP that I do some occasional work for is planning to roll out a new and much faster Internet service, and as such they will be coming here on Monday to upgrade my connection so I can test and play with it for a few weeks before they roll it out for the general public. It would be convenient if I could set up a cron job that would run some sort of an upload/download speed test from me back to one of their central office servers (or somewhere else in the big scary world, I suppose, though I suspect they will be more interested in the connection from here to another point on their own network) on a regular basis throughout the day, and then generate a nice report of some kind that I could then email to the technical services folks. Does anyone have any recommendations for something like this? -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
On 12/11/2013 22:00, Jason T. Slack-Moehrle wrote: I have a CentOS 6.5 Server (a few TB, 32gb RAM) running some simple web stuff and Zimbra. I have 5 static IP's from Comcast. I am considering giving this server a public IP and plugging it directly into my cable modem. This box can handle everything with room for me to do more. Doing this would allow me to power down my pfSense box and additional servers by consolidating onto this single box. I have the firewall on on the server and only allowing the few ports I need. I dont run ssh on 22 What do you guys think? Have you considered moving all the public web services to a VPS, so you can use the simple firewall in your cable modem/router? You'll get much better bandwidth, and all the hardware problems are someone else's. If the machine gets broken into, it isn't a stepping stone into your private LAN. I suspect the Zimbra instance isn't public, which is good, because with its minimum RAM requirement of 2 GB, it probably isn't worth hosting publicly on your own. (Insert when I was a boy rant about 48 kB being enough here.) If you really do have to do public facing web services from your private LAN for whatever reason, though: I'd keep the separate firewall, but put it on more efficient hardware. You should be able to do this in about 5 W. At 11 cents per kWh, that's about $5 per year if it runs continually. I suspect it could actually be done in more like 2 W. (For comparison's sake, a Mac Mini idles at about 10 W, and a Raspberry Pi *peaks* at 3.5 W.) If you had to build the firewall yourself for whatever reason, there are small BSD/Linux-ready embeddable PCs you could use for this. They tend to be targeted at industrial applications and have low sales volumes, so expect to pay $200+ for them. If you're willing to go bare-bones, a Raspberry Pi, Arduino Galileo, or BeagleBone Black plus a USB-to-Ethernet adapter would do the job for under $100. If you can give up a bit of control, you can buy DD-WRT based routers off the shelf from the likes of Buffalo and Asus these days. The Buffalo unit I looked at claims to need 13 W peak, but at idle with the wireless turned off so it's a wired-only router, I'd be surprised if it didn't drop below 5 W. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Automatic network speed test and reporting
You might want to be using some kind of apache benchmark tool such as ab. Run it every minute or so on very small files and some very large files and it will give you the relative latency and bandwidth. On 12 December 2013 16:22, Frank Cox thea...@melvilletheatre.com wrote: The ISP that I do some occasional work for is planning to roll out a new and much faster Internet service, and as such they will be coming here on Monday to upgrade my connection so I can test and play with it for a few weeks before they roll it out for the general public. It would be convenient if I could set up a cron job that would run some sort of an upload/download speed test from me back to one of their central office servers (or somewhere else in the big scary world, I suppose, though I suspect they will be more interested in the connection from here to another point on their own network) on a regular basis throughout the day, and then generate a nice report of some kind that I could then email to the technical services folks. Does anyone have any recommendations for something like this? -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com ___ 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] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On 12/12/2013 09:13, James Hogarth wrote: On 12 December 2013 15:32, Warren Young war...@etr-usa.com wrote: On 12/11/2013 08:56, Karanbir Singh wrote: Within CentOS, we are going to do a CentOS7Beta1 build to match the release upsteam In the aftermath of the CentOS 6.0 trauma, I recall there being speculation that building the next major release wouldn't be as troublesome, for various reasons[*]. Did that turn out to be true? [*] a) Improved procedures, b) grand works that, done once, don't need to be done over again as long as upstream doesn't change the world again, etc. Well seeing as we haven't had a major release since then it's hard to say (although times for the point releases to come out have been markedly short)... My assumption when asking is that they had already taken enough of a look at the RH7 beta to see if Red Hat had undone the hard work of getting CentOS 6 out the door. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:00 PM, Jason T. Slack-Moehrle slackmoeh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, So my electricity bill is through the roof and I need to pair down some equipment. I have a CentOS 6.5 Server (a few TB, 32gb RAM) running some simple web stuff and Zimbra. I have 5 static IP's from Comcast. I am considering giving this server a public IP and plugging it directly into my cable modem. This box can handle everything with room for me to do more. Doing this would allow me to power down my pfSense box and additional servers by consolidating onto this single box. I have the firewall on on the server and only allowing the few ports I need. I dont run ssh on 22 What do you guys think? Why not consolidate to a single physical box but continue to run whatever you want as virtual machines under KVM? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
On Wed, 11 Dec 2013, Jason T. Slack-Moehrle wrote: Hi All, So my electricity bill is through the roof and I need to pair down some equipment. I have a CentOS 6.5 Server (a few TB, 32gb RAM) running some simple web stuff and Zimbra. I have 5 static IP's from Comcast. I am considering giving this server a public IP and plugging it directly into my cable modem. This box can handle everything with room for me to do more. Doing this would allow me to power down my pfSense box and additional servers by consolidating onto this single box. I have the firewall on on the server and only allowing the few ports I need. I dont run ssh on 22 An additional consideration on Comcast's network is IPv6. Comcast will assign your routing device a /64 netblock in many, perhaps most, markets. If, after being connected directly to your Comcast connection and having its network service restarted, your CentOS box still has an fe80::/64 address, you have no worries (yet). If you're on a 2601::/64 (or other 2xxx::/64) network, then you're accessible via IPv6. So make sure that in addition to iptables, you brush up on ip6tables as well. -- Paul Heinlein heinl...@madboa.com 45°38' N, 122°6' W___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
Mike Burger wrote: I used to run everything in a similar manner, behind an IPCop system. The UVerse gateway doesn't handle multiple IPs on the same interface, when plugged directly into the gateway, so I wound up ditching the IPCop system and using my server as both the server and a firewall/router as you're asking about. You should be able to do so with no trouble. I'm a tad more paranoid - I don't necessarily trust the phone company's management of the router in my house. mark, still trying to get USB printing working on the router I bought* Nor do I...that's why I manage it myself. Alas, with UVerse, I have to use their gateway, or the TV service doesn't work. That's why my CentOS box is my server as well as my firewall. -- Mike Burger http://www.bubbanfriends.org It's always suicide-mission this, save-the-planet that. No one ever just stops by to say 'hi' anymore. --Colonel Jack O'Neill, SG1 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
Mike Burger wrote: Mike Burger wrote: I used to run everything in a similar manner, behind an IPCop system. The UVerse gateway doesn't handle multiple IPs on the same interface, when plugged directly into the gateway, so I wound up ditching the IPCop system and using my server as both the server and a firewall/router as you're asking about. You should be able to do so with no trouble. I'm a tad more paranoid - I don't necessarily trust the phone company's management of the router in my house. mark, still trying to get USB printing working on the router I bought* Nor do I...that's why I manage it myself. Alas, with UVerse, I have to use their gateway, or the TV service doesn't work. That's why my CentOS box is my server as well as my firewall. You misunderstand me: I have the router plugged into the phone co. router, going into my router's uplink port. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
On 12/12/2013 9:56 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: You misunderstand me: I have the router plugged into the phone co. router, going into my router's uplink port. so you have two layers of network address translation? or is one or the other of those 'routers' set to bridge ? -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
John R Pierce wrote: On 12/12/2013 9:56 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: You misunderstand me: I have the router plugged into the phone co. router, going into my router's uplink port. so you have two layers of network address translation? or is one or the other of those 'routers' set to bridge ? Not exactly: I just have my router in a different 192.168 address space than the phone company one. As I said, I plugged the uplink port on my router directly into one of the regular ports on their router, after setting the IP address of my router, and it just works. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
On 12/12/2013 10:24 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: so you have two layers of network address translation? or is one or the other of those 'routers' set to bridge ? Not exactly: I just have my router in a different 192.168 address space than the phone company one. As I said, I plugged the uplink port on my router directly into one of the regular ports on their router, after setting the IP address of my router, and it just works. thats 2 layers of NAT, then. I usually try and avoid that as it complicates troubleshooting immensely -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On 12/12/13 11:17, Karanbir Singh wrote: On 12/12/2013 11:03 AM, Peter wrote: I've installed RHEL7 onto a Xen VM running off a CentOS 6 host. this is a great test to have done. Would really like to hear comments about process and result. I presume this is with the Xen4CentOS stack ? - KB I intend to install it using KVM on CentOS 6.5 host. I'll post the results. Cheers, Phil... -- currently (ab)using Arch Linux, CentOS 6.4, Debian Squeeze Wheezy, Fedora 19 20, OS X Snow Leopard Tiger, Ubuntu Quantal, Raring Saucy GnuGPG Key : http://phildobbin.org/publickey.asc ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/13/2013 02:45 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
What SELInux issue did you have? What policy did you need to add?
Unfortunately I've misplaced the audit logs and report of the problem,
but this is the policy I had to add:
module mypol 1.0;
require {
type unconfined_t;
type sshd_net_t;
type kernel_t;
class process { dyntransition transition sigchld };
}
#= kernel_t ==
allow kernel_t sshd_net_t:process dyntransition;
allow kernel_t unconfined_t:process { dyntransition transition };
#= sshd_net_t ==
allow sshd_net_t kernel_t:process sigchld;
Peter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSqgUdAAoJEAUijw0EjkDvUv4H/0mpXttdzTV7ZfWtFiV+3nJF
Kd0wJ6hUxOJqiR/hmckFNKMatzCZBrinDEnOaNYrXLcAoCAVrX6bTQZkiiY4bIAD
7H3MSihnSIn5pBq6rcCtQcEIr56BetnMGtUJeQTIO8JZyYZvst3/8sdwXNd/1d2u
p0OaS7r/AEAXKaTsrUSrNAp/stzObvRJpqJecVXLBJP84A2uQQYoxp5NaUY9slli
qUt6UYRHMSyJgyZitG2FsyvtMM3y66a3lfell13GMIZbYvBXC7CbvjgmjXpQ5Ktt
4inIpt1tQynZJQodpcQ/FrR4BdURbHKwAvIdMRN/4z7c5ZCk294vAJ2f8Mdb1X0=
=3qfe
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/12/2013 01:49 PM, Peter wrote:
On 12/13/2013 02:45 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
What SELInux issue did you have? What policy did you need to add?
Unfortunately I've misplaced the audit logs and report of the problem, but
this is the policy I had to add:
module mypol 1.0;
require { type unconfined_t; type sshd_net_t; type kernel_t; class process
{ dyntransition transition sigchld }; }
#= kernel_t == allow kernel_t sshd_net_t:process
dyntransition; allow kernel_t unconfined_t:process { dyntransition
transition };
#= sshd_net_t == allow sshd_net_t kernel_t:process
sigchld;
Peter ___ CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
I actually do not think you need these, these were all caused by the
originally mislabeled system. If you remove your custom policy, I bet it will
work fine.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlKqDGsACgkQrlYvE4MpobMHjwCg3cjJgnPgVLCzUltfgqr6zdeP
Z5gAniUHm/Uuc2a7lRPTAjvUML8LVzbz
=UNzS
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] mod_fastcgi on 6.5?
Hi, I upgraded from 6.4 to 6.5, and I don't see mod_fastcgi anymore. Yum cannot find it to install either. I do have fasttrack repo added. Any suggestions please? -AM ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] mkbootdisk error????
we have CENTOS 5.10 on server. I tried to created bootable CD and have error. Any ideal? #mkbootdisk --verbose --iso --device /tmp/boot.iso 2.6.18-371.1.2.el5 Installing isolinux... cp: cannot stat `/usr/lib/syslinux/isolinux.bin': No such file or directory done Copying /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.18-371.1.2.el5... done. Copying /boot/initrd-2.6.18-371.1.2.el5.img... done. Configuring bootloader... done. mkisofs: Uh oh, I cant find the boot image 'isolinux/isolinux.bin' ! ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/13/2013 08:20 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
On 12/12/2013 01:49 PM, Peter wrote:
On 12/13/2013 02:45 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
What SELInux issue did you have? What policy did you need to
add?
Unfortunately I've misplaced the audit logs and report of the
problem, but this is the policy I had to add:
module mypol 1.0;
require { type unconfined_t; type sshd_net_t; type kernel_t;
class process { dyntransition transition sigchld }; }
#= kernel_t == allow kernel_t
sshd_net_t:process dyntransition; allow kernel_t
unconfined_t:process { dyntransition transition };
#= sshd_net_t == allow sshd_net_t
kernel_t:process sigchld;
Peter ___ CentOS
mailing list CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
I actually do not think you need these, these were all caused by
the originally mislabeled system. If you remove your custom
policy, I bet it will work fine.
That makes sense. I will try removing them and see how it goes (any
pointers on how to remove a policy?).
Peter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSqhwJAAoJEAUijw0EjkDvsvkIAJcK5hTl1NkQarl/oipRd1iU
tg0Os4VNqj3oW7wCc9Qnc6YzPXffASyue/eX6TwEu0OrD3IXr8VC2YdFY+VXbdTL
B7mfr5PxNY/jG8/SdauCzKaFRl5nTCGpkO8RxSsmJSpkHgrBrtjJRS0HJJ9RPUFh
Gmt0YYXaCJXu445i4oEeZV72/UJjLfk+sOwm7aDBSfcO5PtvUtCdEc7x7AQ0tYEz
B1t6v5pm9EaiHzNC4eCxGzHRN8E8FlBwQTpUXYfD7E4yVpj/XQyMzgq2P9lZrc74
HNxelDiENUBELG2CIAkO4IrLADVfGhZEvNUMYIV3ANCowA8qslUqznfp8R/nFlQ=
=ZJEe
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/13/2013 09:26 AM, Peter wrote: I actually do not think you need these, these were all caused by the originally mislabeled system. If you remove your custom policy, I bet it will work fine. That makes sense. I will try removing them and see how it goes (any pointers on how to remove a policy?). I figured it out, and you are quite correct, it works fine without the policy. What I will have to remember is that from now on when doing this type of install to always do a relabel. Thanks, Peter -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSqh1MAAoJEAUijw0EjkDvHDoH/27XC4JJ12FmN+jILoeTC8lT yUmoK0xqT+ZmnRZCkY72sOnKk/p8CtKKrO0MoK2LFTNSuPWW1ReCIhAIWfnkf1tL s4xBWWE+AbWLN5oSowzgg34avMIAKzpGBTHGOoZxaxRPDSjyvUN35eRcigWzjbEz 3fv2Li5Rr2kWifcIcXWKTa7o1F4baY2OTEEZEtL781YUFtw4p1xLpypHKdASJ9wN uO5Jisg6ODCc5Wdp9SfCum+hk/wHpriT4D3CiceZWKPWENYu/GsUZDYXLmLHrsn2 nVIzaU6B1rrgcTuaHdTdGv+mJ6Fl6qTfO3vdgaaeK69VuEAHPo3TgiloSfEe8fY= =bMvG -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mod_fastcgi on 6.5?
In article 52aa1175.5060...@gmail.com, moeinvaz moein...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I upgraded from 6.4 to 6.5, and I don't see mod_fastcgi anymore. Yum cannot find it to install either. I do have fasttrack repo added. Any suggestions please? I don't remember finding it in 6.4 either. I have been using mod_fcgid from the EPEL repo instead, with great success. Regards Tony -- Tony Mountifield Work: t...@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: t...@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Leon Fauster leonfaus...@googlemail.comwrote: Am 11.12.2013 um 17:03 schrieb Alain Péan alain.p...@lpn.cnrs.fr: Le 11/12/2013 16:56, Karanbir Singh a écrit : http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/rhel/beta/7/ Go get it ( maybe consider using a mirror ), play with it, test it, and file reports. Dont use it in production. As in the past, we highly encourage people to use the official beta builds from Red Hat and to report issues athttp://bugzilla.redhat.com/ Within CentOS, we are going to do a CentOS7Beta1 build to match the release upsteam, and do it in a manner that allows lots of people to get involved and track progress. Keep an eye out on posts on the centos-devel list to see how you can get involved and help with the CentOS Builds and testing process. There seems to be only x86_64 release ? That would be in the current trend... that is really an issue for us because we use EL for some small i586 hw (router etc.). Indeed. Now RHEL/CentOS won't be able to run on PC Engines ALIX hardware (with PAE enabled in CentOS 6 the kernel needed recompiled, but that's not too horrible). I opted to run another distro, so I never went through all the work for ALIX hardware. In a way it's a shame... At the same time I can see why RH is going x86_64 only ... much hardware in data centers is 64bit capable and running 64bit OSes. And they're also will be supporting three releases (5, 6, 7) for a period of time as well. It's probably a good time to consider other alternatives. :-/ Fedora, Debian, Voyage, OpenWrt, Gentoo, etc, etc. Unless it's embedded hardware ... by the time EL6 isn't supported I'll be you'll have a beefier x86_64 machine as a firewall! :) -- LF ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ---~~.~~--- Mike // SilverTip257 // ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Do I need a dedicated firewall?
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Warren Young war...@etr-usa.com wrote: I'd keep the separate firewall, but put it on more efficient hardware. You should be able to do this in about 5 W. At 11 cents per kWh, that's about $5 per year if it runs continually. I suspect it could actually be done in more like 2 W. +1 (For comparison's sake, a Mac Mini idles at about 10 W, and a Raspberry Pi *peaks* at 3.5 W.) If you had to build the firewall yourself for whatever reason, there are small BSD/Linux-ready embeddable PCs you could use for this. They tend to be targeted at industrial applications and have low sales volumes, so expect to pay $200+ for them. PC Engines ALIX [0] - AMD Geode x86 CPUs Soekris boards [1] - AMD Geode x86 CPUs and now some Intel Atom CPUs But yeah, they're in the approximate $180 to $200+ price range. And use around 5 watts (ALIXes). There's also other embedded gear. I don't have power measurements on any of these, but I'd expect they're 5 to 10 watts max. Mikrotik Routerboards [2] - mipsbe architecture ; ex RB750GL [4] Ubiquiti EdgeRouters [3] - mips64 architecture [0] http://pcengines.ch/alix.htm [1] https://soekris.com/ [2] http://routerboard.com/ [3] http://www.ubnt.com/edgemax#EdgeMAXhardware [4] http://routerboard.com/RB750GL If you're willing to go bare-bones, a Raspberry Pi, Arduino Galileo, or BeagleBone Black plus a USB-to-Ethernet adapter would do the job for under $100. Raspberry Pi's don't have but one NIC _if_ you get that model. Not to mention that they don't have a built-in switch like the consumer gear, so you'd want a switch as well. E ... what's the performance like on those USB Ethernet dongles? It certainly depends what chipset, revison, etc but some of units are not so great. Maybe it's just me, but it's a bit ghetto as well. If you can give up a bit of control, you can buy DD-WRT based routers off the shelf from the likes of Buffalo and Asus these days. The Buffalo unit I looked at claims to need 13 W peak, but at idle with the wireless turned off so it's a wired-only router, I'd be surprised if it didn't drop below 5 W. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ---~~.~~--- Mike // SilverTip257 // ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
Am 12.12.2013 um 22:35 schrieb SilverTip257 silvertip...@gmail.com: On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Leon Fauster leonfaus...@googlemail.comwrote: that is really an issue for us because we use EL for some small i586 hw (router etc.). Indeed. Now RHEL/CentOS won't be able to run on PC Engines ALIX hardware (with PAE enabled in CentOS 6 the kernel needed recompiled, but that's not too horrible). I opted to run another distro, so I never went through all the work for ALIX hardware. yep. the same hw here. i had tested openwall os some years ago. They have some correlation with rhel. Rebuilding rpms from EL should be straight forward but it will lead to more work :-) In a way it's a shame... At the same time I can see why RH is going x86_64 only ... much hardware in data centers is 64bit capable and running 64bit OSes. And they're also will be supporting three releases (5, 6, 7) for a period of time as well. It's probably a good time to consider other alternatives. :-/ Fedora, Debian, Voyage, OpenWrt, Gentoo, etc, etc. http://www.openwall.com/Owl/ Unless it's embedded hardware ... by the time EL6 isn't supported I'll be you'll have a beefier x86_64 machine as a firewall! :) any suggestions? -- LF ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
Does NM need a gui to configure interfaces, etc. On 12/12/2013 09:40 AM, James Hogarth wrote: On 12 December 2013 14:06, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Marko Vojinovic wrote: By the same logic you could argue that a text editor is not required for a bare minimum --- namely, you can always use cat and echo from the command line to edit the config files. The point of the text editor in a minimal installation is to make life easier for a sysadmin. The point of NetworkManager is the same --- it is included so that you don't have to just set your ifcfg-eth0 scripts. I disagree. NetworkManager is fine... on a laptop, where you're going to be moving it from network to network. For a wired network - that is, for any server (remember the Enterprise part of the name?) - it's utterly unnecessary. And it wall worked fine before NM. And NM has caused problems on occasion, before we just turned the thing *off*. The NetworkManager in EL6 is pretty poor - everyone knows that. The NetworkManager in F19/20 (and EL7) is a vastly different beast with most of the reasons for disabling it in EL6 (bonding, bridging, vlans, etc) no longer being an issue. Remember that the standard network service is literally source the relevant ifcfg-*, rule-* or route-* file and then using the variables just sourced run shell scripts calling ip addr, ip link, ip route, ip rule, etc to get the system into the state you want. One of the drivers behind systemd in the beginning was to avoid arbitrary shell scripts configuring the system and resulting in the potential for confusion with selinux contexts and inherited environments when directly run by a user... With NM handling the connection the correct details are obtained and then through the netlink APIs the interfaces configured as per the state desired without shell scripts and forking all over the place... Read through the networking documentation, fire up a EL7 system and give it an honest try: https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7-Beta/html-single/Networking_Guide/index.html ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Stephen Clark *NetWolves* Director of Technology Phone: 813-579-3200 Fax: 813-882-0209 Email: steve.cl...@netwolves.com http://www.netwolves.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Leon Fauster leonfaus...@googlemail.comwrote: Am 12.12.2013 um 22:35 schrieb SilverTip257 silvertip...@gmail.com: On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Leon Fauster leonfaus...@googlemail.comwrote: that is really an issue for us because we use EL for some small i586 hw (router etc.). Indeed. Now RHEL/CentOS won't be able to run on PC Engines ALIX hardware (with PAE enabled in CentOS 6 the kernel needed recompiled, but that's not too horrible). I opted to run another distro, so I never went through all the work for ALIX hardware. yep. the same hw here. i had tested openwall os some years ago. They have some correlation with rhel. Rebuilding rpms from EL should be straight forward but it will lead to more work :-) I have some old embedded boards (older than ALIX) lying around I figured I'd lab with... Go figure I had to recompile kernels in order to enable support for certain chips/devices. In a way it's a shame... At the same time I can see why RH is going x86_64 only ... much hardware in data centers is 64bit capable and running 64bit OSes. And they're also will be supporting three releases (5, 6, 7) for a period of time as well. It's probably a good time to consider other alternatives. :-/ Fedora, Debian, Voyage, OpenWrt, Gentoo, etc, etc. http://www.openwall.com/Owl/ Unless it's embedded hardware ... by the time EL6 isn't supported I'll be you'll have a beefier x86_64 machine as a firewall! :) any suggestions? I was thinking maybe a Soekris board with Intel Atom CPUs can get you the 64-bit CPUs you want. But no ... once you get through the models that have AMD Geode LX CPUs (which are 486/586) you stumble into models that have Intel Atom CPUs that are in the E6xx family which are not 64-bit capable. And boy are the upper-end models a bit salty (might be a bit cheaper from a distributor/reseller). You could build a mini-ITX system ... but you'd probably quadruple power consumption (~5w for Geode LX800 systems and likely ~20w for Atom systems). Sorry :-( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Atom_microprocessors http://soekris.com/products/net6501-30-board-case.html http://soekris.com/products/net6501-50-board-case.html http://soekris.com/products/net6501-70-board-case.html -- LF ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ---~~.~~--- Mike // SilverTip257 // ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 06:47:40PM -0500, Steve Clark wrote: Does NM need a gui to configure interfaces, etc. No, there's some sort of cli tool. Again, I don't use it. You're still able to get rid of it if desired. -- 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
[CentOS] audio CD playing oddity
Hi all! This isn't anything like urgent, or ultimately even particularly important, but I find it a curious oddity and thought to in quire if any of you have thoughts on it... On my Centos 6.5 box, I have a PATA CDRW drive, and a SATA dvd drive. when playing a CD in the CDRW drive, every short while I get a sudden break in the audio while the CD is spun up. when playing the same CD in the dvd drive, I get no such phenomenon. I'm theorizing that it's one of: 1. weird PATA drive (next time I open up the case I'll try one of the spare drives I have on the shelf, and see). 2. some issue with the way PATA drives work 3. some issue with the way Linux accesses PATA drives. 4. something else. I note that the drive spins madly once it starts up to read a block of audio data, slowly spinning down afterwards. If the next read of audio data occurs before it has stopped, it will read it and spin up further. if, however, it has spun down (I assume stopped) until the drive seems to be stopped (or at least silent) I get the pause. Is there some knob to twist in the PATA subsystem that would have some effect on this? or any other pertinent thoughts. -- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us - The Lord detests the way of the wicked but he loves those who pursue righteousness. - Proverbs 15:9 (niv) - ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mod_fastcgi on 6.5?
On 12/12/2013 23:23, Tony Mountifield wrote: In article 52aa1175.5060...@gmail.com, moeinvaz moein...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I upgraded from 6.4 to 6.5, and I don't see mod_fastcgi anymore. Yum cannot find it to install either. I do have fasttrack repo added. Any suggestions please? I don't remember finding it in 6.4 either. RPMForge have mod_fastcgi: http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories/RPMForge#head-f0c3ecee3dbb407e4eed79a56ec0ae92d1398e01 Levi ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta Hidden WIFI issue
Im having problems connecting to Hidden WIFI networks on my RHEL 7 beta. I have an HP Elitebook 2560p. But if I make the Wireless Access Point visible, im able to connect to it, and NM is able to save the connection script under /sysconfig/network-scripts. I tried on 3 different Hidden Networks, The solution was to manually create the connection script in /sysconfig/network-scripts.after copying one from a network I had connected to. That's when the hidden wireless became visible and im now connected. But is this the way one needs to connect to a hidden Wireless? I thought having SSID, security type and password were sufficient. Regards Bonnie Mtengwa ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
