Re: [CentOS] Release 6?
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Joseph L. Casale jcas...@activenetwerx.com wrote: Well all valid, I always laugh when I see posts in Fedora list about people setting up Fedora as servers at work. I can't imagine such a practice. I use at home only on my desktop for the bleeding edge support, but given the public approach to its model, its happened before that people have pushed bad updates that broke things badly. Just one of many reasons... I run Fedora on servers at home without any issues. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] SSH Remote Execution - su?
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 3:36 PM, James Hogarth james.hoga...@gmail.comwrote: On 3 March 2010 21:20, Tim Nelson tnel...@rockbochs.com wrote: Greetings All- I'm about to embark on some remote management testing and need a way to login to a remote system running CentOS 4.x/5.x via SSH, su to root (using a password), then execute a command. I currently login to the boxes using key based SSH like this: ssh -i ~/remote_key ad...@$remoteip Then, I SU to root. However, if I try to do this automatically like this: ssh -i ~/remote_key ad...@$remoteip 'su -l' I'm getting: standard in must be a tty So, how am I able to remote login using SSH, su to root, then execute a command as root? All comments and suggestions welcome. Thanks! --Tim ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Best off configuring sudo for that user (with no password) and make sure that user has !requiretty in the sudoers configuration. James ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Does ssh -t help? -- j ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 7:07 AM, Miguel Di Ciurcio Filho mig...@ic.unicamp.br wrote: mbneto wrote: Hi, The last status (from twitter) is 2 days old with the '5.4 is baked! centos internal network will start syncing up today. Release ~ soon!'. Any ETA? Just relax and wait, this is a _volunteer_ based project. Want a release date? Go pay for RHEL. This response is just as annoying as the request for an update. -- j ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Software RAID resync
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Rajagopal Swaminathan raju.rajs...@gmail.com wrote: I have configured 2x 500G sata HDD as Software RAID1 with three partitions md0,md1 and md2 with md2 as 400+ gigs Now it is almost 36 hours the status is cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid1] md0 : active raid1 hdb1[1] hda1[0] 104320 blocks [2/2] [UU] resync=DELAYED md1 : active raid1 hdb2[1] hda2[0] 4096448 blocks [2/2] [UU] resync=DELAYED md2 : active raid1 hdb3[1] hda3[0] 484182912 blocks [2/2] [UU] [==..] resync = 51.8% (251168768/484182912) finish=1975. 7min speed=1964K/sec unused devices: none I have reniced the md2-resync to -10 Q1. Does is take this long? Q2. How to speed it up Google: http://www.google.com/search?hl=enrlz=1B3GGGL_enUS326US326q=mdadm+resync+speedbtnG=Search -- j ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] iFolder on Centos
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 12:01 PM, dnk d.k.emailli...@gmail.com wrote: Has anyone had a go with the iFolder stuff on Centos 5? I saw there used to be repos for Centos 4, but those are out of date. Didn't iFolder die a long time ago? -- j ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Suitable VPN RPM on centos 5?
Karanbir Singh wrote: Indunil Jayasooriya wrote: Peer IP: 194.237.227.202 http://194.237.227.202 Server IP: 192.168.0.2 http://192.168.0.2 / 255.255.255.255 http://255.255.255.255 Pre-shared key: d769hdsKJ Ike, Phase1: 3des, sha, dh2 Ipsec, Phase2: 3des, sha I hope you realise that by posting such information you have just compromised the site. I'm not sure I entirely understand why this list has become what appears to be backend support for Indunil Jayasooriya's company. -- jeremy ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Re: Zimbra error on centos 4.4
Indunil Jayasooriya wrote: Is anybody out there that has successfully installed Zimbra on Centos 4.4. I downloaded .tgz for RHEL4 from Zimbra site. it is the opensource edition. *** http://www.zimbra.com/community/downloads.html* this is the one I downloded. zcs-4.5.7_GA_1319.RHEL4.tgz I extracted and run istall.sh. Then, I got below error? You would receive a much better response over at the Zimbra forums - they see installation issues all the time over there. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 4gb ram shows as 3.3gb
Martin Marques wrote: John R Pierce wrote: but thats neither here nor there, PAE is a universal issue for any x86 32bit system with 4GB+ ram, with PAE disabled, the BIOS, PCI, AGP or PCI-express, etc IO spaces consume anywheres from .5 to 1GB of the 32bit address space. PAE is a hardware workaround implemented in pretty much all Intel and AMD CPUs made in the last 5+ years, and allows the OS to access more than 4GB of physical address space. PAE introduces some hardware overhead because it involves larger page tables and another level of indirection in the TLB lookups. CentOS 5 installs defaults to PAE off because there are some systems where PAE is crash-happy.Someone here has already explained how to enable PAE and in fact the original poster tried it and is happy with his full 4GB now. Well, looks like I'm having quite a bit of a problem then. :-( I have PAE kernel running, and all I see is 3.2Gb of the 4Gb. dmidecode gives me this (intel chip): Handle 0x, DMI type 0, 20 bytes. BIOS Information Vendor: Intel Corp. Version: EV91510A.86A.0482.2006.0222.2350 And later this: Handle 0x0041, DMI type 19, 15 bytes. Memory Array Mapped Address Starting Address: 0x000 Ending Address: 0x000C77F Range Size: 3192 MB Physical Array Handle: 0x0040 Partition Width: 0 [snip] Handle 0x0048, DMI type 17, 27 bytes. Memory Device Array Handle: 0x0040 Error Information Handle: 0x003F Total Width: 64 bits Data Width: 64 bits Size: 1024 MB Form Factor: DIMM Set: 2 Locator: J6H2 Bank Locator: CHANNEL B DIMM1 Type: DDR Type Detail: Synchronous Speed: 400 MHz (2.5 ns) Manufacturer: Manufacturer4 Serial Number: SerNum4 Asset Tag: AssetTagNum4 Part Number: PartNum4 Handle 0x0049, DMI type 20, 19 bytes. Memory Device Mapped Address Starting Address: 0x000C000 Ending Address: 0x000C6FF Range Size: 112 MB Physical Device Handle: 0x0048 Memory Array Mapped Address Handle: 0x0041 Partition Row Position: 2 Interleave Position: 2 Interleaved Data Depth: 2 As you can see, the last 1Gb bank is only used at 11%. Any ideas on why I can't see all 4Gb? This thread may be a start: http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/7/26/204 It sounds like this is a problem with this particular chipset. -- jeremy ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
