Re: [CentOS] Replacing kernel-headers with custom compiled version (from kernel.org) - safe?

[Bagas Sanjaya]

On 26/06/19 23.51, Akemi Yagi wrote:

On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 5:20 AM Bagas Sanjaya  wrote:

Hello CentOS users,

Currently I have compiled kernel version 4.19.37, which the source is from 
kernel.org. I compiled the kernel by following
steps:
- get the kernel tarball and unpack it
- install prerequisties as described in 
https://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Custom_Kernel (in addition bc and openssl-devel)
- copy the kernel configuration:
$ cp /boot/config-3.10.0-957.21.3.el7.x86_64 ~/linux-4.19.37/.config
- create configuration:
$ cd ~/linux-4.19.37
$ make olddefconfig
$ make nconfig
- compile and create RPM package:
$ make vmlinux
$ make modules
$ make rpm-pkg
- install kernel RPM:
# yum install ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/kernel-*.rpm

However, in the last step (installing kernel RPM), I got following notice:

   PackageArch   Version
   Repository
Size

Installing:
   kernel x86_64 4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1
   /kernel-4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1.x86_64 209 
M
   kernel-devel   x86_64 4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1
   /kernel-devel-4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1.x86_64   817 
M
   kernel-headers x86_64 4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1
   /kernel-headers-4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1.x86_64 4.6 
M
   replacing  kernel-headers.x86_64 3.10.0-957.21.3.el7

Transaction Summary

Install  3 Packages

There, the compiled kernel-headers package (4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1) is about 
to replace stock version
(3.10.0-957.21.3.el7). Is it safe to continue installing from compiled RPM 
package above, or install kernel manually?

In general, you want to keep the distro's kernel-headers unless you
also plan to play with glibc. You may find the following article
useful:

https://kernelnewbies.org/KernelHeaders

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


So is it safe to install kernel RPMs generated by compilation from kernel.org 
tarball, or should I stick to manual
install?

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

Re: [CentOS] Alternitives to Firefox...

[Robert Heller]

At Wed, 26 Jun 2019 17:15:12 -0400 CentOS mailing list  
wrote:

> 
> Robert Heller wrote:
> > At Wed, 26 Jun 2019 16:39:12 -0400 CentOS mailing list
> >  wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Robert Heller wrote:
> >>
> >>> OK, I recently ugraded to the current ESR release of Firefox for
> >>> CentOS
> >>> 6.
> >>> And I am having problems with the user interface (basically it has
> >>> become hard [for me] to use).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> What alternitives are there?  (Chrome and Chromium are not possible
> >>> with CentOS, and Chrome and Chromium are actually worse).
> >>>
> >>>
> >> What's the problems? I just upgraded last week, and the STUPID MORONS
> >> made the arrows in the scrollbars go away, had to search and find a gtk
> >> config file I needed to create.
> >
> > That is one problem -- I want those arrows back. AND wider scrollbars (if
> > that is possible -- skinny scrollbars might be fashonable, but are really
> > hard to use).
> >
> This is what I used.
> 


Does not work on my *CentOS 6* system (probably because I don't have gtk 3?).

> 
> > Another is the *lack* of a place to *type* a file name when you click a
> > file upload button. The file upload browser both comes up too tall (taller
> > than my screen [why?]) and lacks a place to start typing a file name, one
> > *must*
> > scroll down though (in my case) a long list of files and directories. It
> > seems that the use of a keyboard is no longer supported. *Some* of us
> > actually use our keyboards and don't like to point and click *all of the
> > time* (or really much of the time or really at all). I know, the keyboard
> > is a piece of depreciated hardware -- we are all supposed to be using
> > touch screens with only colorful icons -- actually typing file names is so
> > 20th century... :-)
> >
> They all think they're Managers, who don't type, only wave their hands and
> point. Or, as a friend put it, their "mama dresses them funny, and [they]
> need a mouse to delete files".

Ha!

> 
>mark
> 
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> 
>  

-- 
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software-- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/  -- Linux Administration Services
hel...@deepsoft.com   -- Webhosting Services


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

Re: [CentOS] Alternitives to Firefox...

[Nicolas Kovacs]

Le 26/06/2019 à 23:21, Valeri Galtsev a écrit :
> I guess, we all (old guys) still keep our warm feelings to Netscape
> Navigator.

In that case, just use Seamonkey, which is available for both CentOS 6.x
and 7.x.

Cheers,

Niki

-- 
Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables
7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat
Site : https://www.microlinux.fr
Mail : i...@microlinux.fr
Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32
Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Alternitives to Firefox...

[Fred Smith]

On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 04:12:02PM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jun 2019 at 15:59, Robert Heller  wrote:
> 
> > OK, I recently ugraded to the current ESR release of Firefox for CentOS
> > 6.
> > And I am having problems with the user interface (basically it has become
> > hard
> > [for me] to use).
> >
> > What alternitives are there?  (Chrome and Chromium are not possible with
> > CentOS, and Chrome and Chromium are actually worse).
> >
> >
> Long story short.. there aren't any that work well. The web standards are
> constantly changing, and you end up with a web browser where all the pages
> look like crap through little fault of the browser. Most browser teams get
> burned out and realize they are better off shaving yaks for sweater wool.
> Other teams do some level of good enough but they also have to keep up with
> newer things which means that trying to run it on EL6 is not going to be
> something they want to add to their pile of crap. They also tend towards
> keeping up with the Joneses so their interfaces will look like whatever is
> Firefox/Chromiums current layout.
> 
> In the end, there are three bad choices:
> 1. Keep an out of date and buggy browser you can work with.. set up the
> system to be as sandboxed as possible and assume it is always hacked.
> 2. Learn to love and/or help improve some text based browser. Since the
> graphical layouts will change constantly as GUI standards change.. this is
> where I am headed.
> 3. Try to find a browser out of the few remaining others that works.. most
> will want you to be running something much more modern than EL6 (and even
> EL7 is probably going to be too old for many).
> 4. Just use browsers as little as possible and decide to live out life as a
> yak herder. [OK this is probably where I am really headed]
> 
> Sorry I don't have happier answersS

I occasionally use Vivaldi (on C7) and find it to be a decent browser.
I don't know how or even if it works on C6.

A potential problem is that everybody (even MS!!) except firefox uses
the same browser engine, and that is one developed by Google who seems
determined to take over the web just like MS tried with IE.


-- 
 Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us -
   I can do all things through Christ 
  who strengthens me.
-- Philippians 4:13 ---
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Alternitives to Firefox...

[mark]

Robert Heller wrote:
> At Wed, 26 Jun 2019 16:39:12 -0400 CentOS mailing list
>  wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Robert Heller wrote:
>>
>>> OK, I recently ugraded to the current ESR release of Firefox for
>>> CentOS
>>> 6.
>>> And I am having problems with the user interface (basically it has
>>> become hard [for me] to use).
>>>
>>>
>>> What alternitives are there?  (Chrome and Chromium are not possible
>>> with CentOS, and Chrome and Chromium are actually worse).
>>>
>>>
>> What's the problems? I just upgraded last week, and the STUPID MORONS
>> made the arrows in the scrollbars go away, had to search and find a gtk
>> config file I needed to create.
>
> That is one problem -- I want those arrows back. AND wider scrollbars (if
> that is possible -- skinny scrollbars might be fashonable, but are really
> hard to use).
>
This is what I used.


> Another is the *lack* of a place to *type* a file name when you click a
> file upload button. The file upload browser both comes up too tall (taller
> than my screen [why?]) and lacks a place to start typing a file name, one
> *must*
> scroll down though (in my case) a long list of files and directories. It
> seems that the use of a keyboard is no longer supported. *Some* of us
> actually use our keyboards and don't like to point and click *all of the
> time* (or really much of the time or really at all). I know, the keyboard
> is a piece of depreciated hardware -- we are all supposed to be using
> touch screens with only colorful icons -- actually typing file names is so
> 20th century... :-)
>
They all think they're Managers, who don't type, only wave their hands and
point. Or, as a friend put it, their "mama dresses them funny, and [they]
need a mouse to delete files".

   mark

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

Re: [CentOS] Alternitives to Firefox...

[Valeri Galtsev]

On 2019-06-26 15:39, mark wrote:

Robert Heller wrote:

OK, I recently ugraded to the current ESR release of Firefox for CentOS
6.
And I am having problems with the user interface (basically it has become
hard [for me] to use).


What alternitives are there?  (Chrome and Chromium are not possible with
CentOS, and Chrome and Chromium are actually worse).


What's the problems? I just upgraded last week, and the STUPID MORONS



My observation is: the bizarre at Mozilla Foundation started [quite a 
while ago] when one of the people who was here as a student (and I knew 
him personally) came to them as a production director. Then they started 
piling up extra "features", rushing new "releases", none of which does 
live up to the name "release", they are not debugged enough... just take 
a look how often security update for firefox or thunderbird are released.



Since then I am looking for the replacement for firefox, and I still can 
not find one. Midory though good enough, and is my second choice on my 
FreeBSD workstation, still can not replace firefox for me. Don't get me 
started about chrome, chromium and friends... though I have to use 
chromium for specific purpose: to have browser that can pretend to be on 
smarthone. Palemoon is just a rebuild of Firefox. Tor browser, though it 
is rebuilt of firefox as well, is my choice when I prefer to go places I 
don't want my network provider put into their database associated with 
my name. I'm sure many of us do similar things in a course of out job 
duties.


Vivaldy almost worked out as firefox replacement on MS Windows systems 
for me, but later I changed my mind.


I had really short, like touch and go, experience with opera. And I'm 
not mentioning Safari which is my second choice (after firefox) on 
macintosh. (Well, safari, as many other things on macintosh you 
sometimes need to trick into doing what you actually want it to do).



I guess, we all (old guys) still keep our warm feelings to Netscape 
Navigator.



Valeri


made
the arrows in the scrollbars go away, had to search and find a gtk config
file I needed to create.

A month or so ago, they upgraded, and I had to find out that I had to edit
about:config to change the booleans on signature to false.

 mark

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



--

Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247

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

Re: [CentOS] Alternitives to Firefox...

[Robert Heller]

At Wed, 26 Jun 2019 16:39:12 -0400 CentOS mailing list  
wrote:

> 
> Robert Heller wrote:
> > OK, I recently ugraded to the current ESR release of Firefox for CentOS
> > 6.
> > And I am having problems with the user interface (basically it has become
> > hard [for me] to use).
> >
> >
> > What alternitives are there?  (Chrome and Chromium are not possible with
> > CentOS, and Chrome and Chromium are actually worse).
> >
> What's the problems? I just upgraded last week, and the STUPID MORONS made
> the arrows in the scrollbars go away, had to search and find a gtk config
> file I needed to create.

That is one problem -- I want those arrows back. AND wider scrollbars (if that
is possible -- skinny scrollbars might be fashonable, but are really hard to
use).

Another is the *lack* of a place to *type* a file name when you click a file
upload button. The file upload browser both comes up too tall (taller than my
screen [why?]) and lacks a place to start typing a file name, one *must*
scroll down though (in my case) a long list of files and directories. It seems
that the use of a keyboard is no longer supported. *Some* of us actually use
our keyboards and don't like to point and click *all of the time* (or really
much of the time or really at all). I know, the keyboard is a piece of
depreciated hardware -- we are all supposed to be using touch screens with 
only colorful icons -- actually typing file names is so 20th century... :-)

> 
> A month or so ago, they upgraded, and I had to find out that I had to edit
> about:config to change the booleans on signature to false.
> 
> mark
> 
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> 
> 

-- 
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software-- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/  -- Linux Administration Services
hel...@deepsoft.com   -- Webhosting Services

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

Re: [CentOS] Alternitives to Firefox...

[Valeri Galtsev]

On 2019-06-26 15:31, Robert Heller wrote:

At Thu, 27 Jun 2019 04:12:07 +0800 CentOS mailing list  
wrote:







On Wed, 2019-06-26 at 15:58 -0400, Robert Heller wrote:

OK, I recently ugraded to the current ESR release of Firefox for CentOS 6.
And I am having problems with the user interface (basically it has become
hard
[for me] to use).

What alternitives are there?  (Chrome and Chromium are not possible with
CentOS, and Chrome and Chromium are actually worse).



You can give Midori a try


Excessively clever website, but there is no working download link for either
source or binary for Linux...  It is supposed to be available for Linux,
but it does not appear to actually be available.


You can download by clicking on the "Zip" link, here is direct link I 
get from their website:


https://github.com/midori-browser/core/releases/download/v6/midori-v6.0.tar.gz

It should be easy to build, I use it on mu FreeBSD workstation (as a 
second choice of a browser); I've installed it as FreeBSD package, so I 
didn't read build instruction/dependencies, but this may add to whatever 
build instruction the ship with source (it is for FreeBSD but it gives 
you all information you need):


https://www.freshports.org/www/midori/

Good luck!

Valeri




Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iQEzBAABCAAdFiEE1NmgX7wrrpfbBP5dWqpQSG2Cj/YFAl0T0ZgACgkQWqpQSG2C
j/ZHUwf/cZnrnoYjvaNgYiilQzEWfUAOcEYi046hQ8kTmBKfO6c4sdpPSMWTPoyt
xAuDLQEO//DKNXGH1QpRpcwWbmEp2GGsYypLQol8NDfcDjBQ/tLYb+Dy+fvHpPAh
t5Lamnc3AblH3GA1jNm3pZlIwW6J+Z9Yy/Jqrw5xDGOwvzT2w6CafzKNXS2qPQrQ
TT75lgSooZoE8GVVM04N82YnXHkz2hl29G38OgvrcXaftGV1zKWpRfmrhRU9+5I1
SMg3zzXj74D0L5cI2m7LJbDFOYGu3RzZ2pNd0rR607Nde9xotMUCFhLZB5X97kzD
iNe8+KlpJ1ERC7pESAIg9o8Ufty65g==
=imVA
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

MIME-Version: 1.0

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






--

Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247

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

Re: [CentOS] Alternitives to Firefox...

[mark]

Robert Heller wrote:
> OK, I recently ugraded to the current ESR release of Firefox for CentOS
> 6.
> And I am having problems with the user interface (basically it has become
> hard [for me] to use).
>
>
> What alternitives are there?  (Chrome and Chromium are not possible with
> CentOS, and Chrome and Chromium are actually worse).
>
What's the problems? I just upgraded last week, and the STUPID MORONS made
the arrows in the scrollbars go away, had to search and find a gtk config
file I needed to create.

A month or so ago, they upgraded, and I had to find out that I had to edit
about:config to change the booleans on signature to false.

mark

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

Re: [CentOS] Alternitives to Firefox...

[Robert Heller]

At Thu, 27 Jun 2019 04:12:07 +0800 CentOS mailing list  
wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2019-06-26 at 15:58 -0400, Robert Heller wrote:
> > OK, I recently ugraded to the current ESR release of Firefox for CentOS 6.  
> > And I am having problems with the user interface (basically it has become
> > hard 
> > [for me] to use).
> > 
> > What alternitives are there?  (Chrome and Chromium are not possible with 
> > CentOS, and Chrome and Chromium are actually worse).
> > 
> > 
> You can give Midori a try

Excessively clever website, but there is no working download link for either 
source or binary for Linux...  It is supposed to be available for Linux, 
but it does not appear to actually be available.

> Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
> 
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> 
> iQEzBAABCAAdFiEE1NmgX7wrrpfbBP5dWqpQSG2Cj/YFAl0T0ZgACgkQWqpQSG2C
> j/ZHUwf/cZnrnoYjvaNgYiilQzEWfUAOcEYi046hQ8kTmBKfO6c4sdpPSMWTPoyt
> xAuDLQEO//DKNXGH1QpRpcwWbmEp2GGsYypLQol8NDfcDjBQ/tLYb+Dy+fvHpPAh
> t5Lamnc3AblH3GA1jNm3pZlIwW6J+Z9Yy/Jqrw5xDGOwvzT2w6CafzKNXS2qPQrQ
> TT75lgSooZoE8GVVM04N82YnXHkz2hl29G38OgvrcXaftGV1zKWpRfmrhRU9+5I1
> SMg3zzXj74D0L5cI2m7LJbDFOYGu3RzZ2pNd0rR607Nde9xotMUCFhLZB5X97kzD
> iNe8+KlpJ1ERC7pESAIg9o8Ufty65g==
> =imVA
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> 
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> 
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> 
>   
>  

-- 
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software-- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/  -- Linux Administration Services
hel...@deepsoft.com   -- Webhosting Services
   
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Alternitives to Firefox...

[Earl Ramirez]

On Wed, 2019-06-26 at 15:58 -0400, Robert Heller wrote:
> OK, I recently ugraded to the current ESR release of Firefox for CentOS 6.  
> And I am having problems with the user interface (basically it has become
> hard 
> [for me] to use).
> 
> What alternitives are there?  (Chrome and Chromium are not possible with 
> CentOS, and Chrome and Chromium are actually worse).
> 
> 

Pale moon is also one that I have used on CentOS


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

Re: [CentOS] Alternitives to Firefox...

[Earl Ramirez]

On Wed, 2019-06-26 at 15:58 -0400, Robert Heller wrote:
> OK, I recently ugraded to the current ESR release of Firefox for CentOS 6.  
> And I am having problems with the user interface (basically it has become
> hard 
> [for me] to use).
> 
> What alternitives are there?  (Chrome and Chromium are not possible with 
> CentOS, and Chrome and Chromium are actually worse).
> 
> 
You can give Midori a try


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

Re: [CentOS] Alternitives to Firefox...

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Wed, 26 Jun 2019 at 15:59, Robert Heller  wrote:

> OK, I recently ugraded to the current ESR release of Firefox for CentOS
> 6.
> And I am having problems with the user interface (basically it has become
> hard
> [for me] to use).
>
> What alternitives are there?  (Chrome and Chromium are not possible with
> CentOS, and Chrome and Chromium are actually worse).
>
>
Long story short.. there aren't any that work well. The web standards are
constantly changing, and you end up with a web browser where all the pages
look like crap through little fault of the browser. Most browser teams get
burned out and realize they are better off shaving yaks for sweater wool.
Other teams do some level of good enough but they also have to keep up with
newer things which means that trying to run it on EL6 is not going to be
something they want to add to their pile of crap. They also tend towards
keeping up with the Joneses so their interfaces will look like whatever is
Firefox/Chromiums current layout.

In the end, there are three bad choices:
1. Keep an out of date and buggy browser you can work with.. set up the
system to be as sandboxed as possible and assume it is always hacked.
2. Learn to love and/or help improve some text based browser. Since the
graphical layouts will change constantly as GUI standards change.. this is
where I am headed.
3. Try to find a browser out of the few remaining others that works.. most
will want you to be running something much more modern than EL6 (and even
EL7 is probably going to be too old for many).
4. Just use browsers as little as possible and decide to live out life as a
yak herder. [OK this is probably where I am really headed]

Sorry I don't have happier answers


>
> --
> Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
> Deepwoods Software-- Custom Software Services
> http://www.deepsoft.com/  -- Linux Administration Services
> hel...@deepsoft.com   -- Webhosting Services
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Alternitives to Firefox...

[Robert Heller]

OK, I recently ugraded to the current ESR release of Firefox for CentOS 6.  
And I am having problems with the user interface (basically it has become hard 
[for me] to use).

What alternitives are there?  (Chrome and Chromium are not possible with 
CentOS, and Chrome and Chromium are actually worse).


-- 
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software-- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/  -- Linux Administration Services
hel...@deepsoft.com   -- Webhosting Services

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

Re: [CentOS] Replacing kernel-headers with custom compiled version (from kernel.org) - safe?

[Akemi Yagi]

On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 5:20 AM Bagas Sanjaya  wrote:
>
> Hello CentOS users,
>
> Currently I have compiled kernel version 4.19.37, which the source is from 
> kernel.org. I compiled the kernel by following
> steps:
> - get the kernel tarball and unpack it
> - install prerequisties as described in 
> https://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Custom_Kernel (in addition bc and 
> openssl-devel)
> - copy the kernel configuration:
>$ cp /boot/config-3.10.0-957.21.3.el7.x86_64 ~/linux-4.19.37/.config
> - create configuration:
>$ cd ~/linux-4.19.37
>$ make olddefconfig
>$ make nconfig
> - compile and create RPM package:
>$ make vmlinux
>$ make modules
>$ make rpm-pkg
> - install kernel RPM:
># yum install ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/kernel-*.rpm
>
> However, in the last step (installing kernel RPM), I got following notice:
> 
>   PackageArch   Version
>   Repository
> Size
> 
> Installing:
>   kernel x86_64 4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1
>   /kernel-4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1.x86_64 
> 209 M
>   kernel-devel   x86_64 4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1
>   /kernel-devel-4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1.x86_64   
> 817 M
>   kernel-headers x86_64 4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1
>   /kernel-headers-4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1.x86_64 
> 4.6 M
>   replacing  kernel-headers.x86_64 3.10.0-957.21.3.el7
>
> Transaction Summary
> 
> Install  3 Packages
>
> There, the compiled kernel-headers package (4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1) is 
> about to replace stock version
> (3.10.0-957.21.3.el7). Is it safe to continue installing from compiled RPM 
> package above, or install kernel manually?

In general, you want to keep the distro's kernel-headers unless you
also plan to play with glibc. You may find the following article
useful:

https://kernelnewbies.org/KernelHeaders

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

Re: [CentOS] iptables - how to block established connections with fail2ban?

[Mike Burger]

On 2019-06-26 02:41, MRob wrote:

I am working to a CentOS 6 server with nonstandard iptables system
without rule for ACCEPT ESTABLISHED connections. All tables and chains
empty (flush by legacy custom script) so only filter/INPUT chain has
rules (also fail2ban chain):

Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source   destination
f2b-postfix   tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0
ACCEPT all  --  192.168.0.0/16   0.0.0.0/0
ACCEPT all  --  127.0.0.0/8  0.0.0.0/0
ACCEPT tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp dpt:22
ACCEPT tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp dpt:25
ACCEPT tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp dpt:80
ACCEPT tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp 
dpt:443
ACCEPT tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp 
dpt:587
ACCEPT tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp 
dpt:993
ACCEPT tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp 
dpt:995
DROP   tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp 
flags:0x17/0x02


Chain f2b-postfix (1 references)
target prot opt source   destination
REJECT all  --  200.23.235.300.0.0.0/0
reject-with icmp-port-unreachable
REJECT all  --  177.11.167.570.0.0.0/0
reject-with icmp-port-unreachable
RETURN all  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0

When fail2ban block a IP address, established connections are allowed
to continue, but with no rule to accept established connections how is
that possible? Why doesn't f2b first rule block established
connections?


The short answer is that the firewall rules REJECT...Fail2Ban only tells 
the firewall what to reject, at the point of entry.


Think of it this way:

Fail2Ban is the manager of a popular dance club. He determines the list 
of who may or may not be admitted to the club.


The firewall is the guy at the door of a popular club. He's doing his 
job, checking IDs, checking against the list of allowed or rejected 
guests and acting accordingly.


If the manager updates the list, it's not the door guy's job to go back 
through the club to find anyone who may have been admitted prior to the 
list having been updated. That's the job of a bouncer.


If you want the door guy to also be a bouncer, you'll need to configure 
your Fail2Ban actions to add iptables rules which invoke DROP instead of 
REJECT.


--
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
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Replacing kernel-headers with custom compiled version (from kernel.org) - safe?

[Bagas Sanjaya]

Hello CentOS users,

Currently I have compiled kernel version 4.19.37, which the source is from 
kernel.org. I compiled the kernel by following
steps:
- get the kernel tarball and unpack it
- install prerequisties as described in 
https://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Custom_Kernel (in addition bc and openssl-devel)
- copy the kernel configuration:
  $ cp /boot/config-3.10.0-957.21.3.el7.x86_64 ~/linux-4.19.37/.config
- create configuration:
  $ cd ~/linux-4.19.37
  $ make olddefconfig
  $ make nconfig
- compile and create RPM package:
  $ make vmlinux
  $ make modules
  $ make rpm-pkg
- install kernel RPM:
  # yum install ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/kernel-*.rpm

However, in the last step (installing kernel RPM), I got following notice:

 PackageArch   Version
 RepositorySize

Installing:
 kernel x86_64 4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1
 /kernel-4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1.x86_64 209 M
 kernel-devel   x86_64 4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1
 /kernel-devel-4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1.x86_64   817 M
 kernel-headers x86_64 4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1
 /kernel-headers-4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1.x86_64 4.6 M
 replacing  kernel-headers.x86_64 3.10.0-957.21.3.el7

Transaction Summary

Install  3 Packages

There, the compiled kernel-headers package (4.19.37_sentinel_custom-1) is about 
to replace stock version
(3.10.0-957.21.3.el7). Is it safe to continue installing from compiled RPM 
package above, or install kernel manually?

Regards, Bagas

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

[CentOS] iptables - how to block established connections with fail2ban?

[MRob]

I am working to a CentOS 6 server with nonstandard iptables system 
without rule for ACCEPT ESTABLISHED connections. All tables and chains 
empty (flush by legacy custom script) so only filter/INPUT chain has 
rules (also fail2ban chain):


Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source   destination
f2b-postfix   tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0
ACCEPT all  --  192.168.0.0/16   0.0.0.0/0
ACCEPT all  --  127.0.0.0/8  0.0.0.0/0
ACCEPT tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp dpt:22
ACCEPT tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp dpt:25
ACCEPT tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp dpt:80
ACCEPT tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp dpt:443
ACCEPT tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp dpt:587
ACCEPT tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp dpt:993
ACCEPT tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp dpt:995
DROP   tcp  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0   tcp 
flags:0x17/0x02


Chain f2b-postfix (1 references)
target prot opt source   destination
REJECT all  --  200.23.235.300.0.0.0/0   reject-with 
icmp-port-unreachable
REJECT all  --  177.11.167.570.0.0.0/0   reject-with 
icmp-port-unreachable

RETURN all  --  0.0.0.0/00.0.0.0/0

When fail2ban block a IP address, established connections are allowed to 
continue, but with no rule to accept established connections how is that 
possible? Why doesn't f2b first rule block established connections?

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