Re: [CentOS] Package updates for 5.4?
On Jan 26, 2011, at 8:08 PM, John R Pierce wrote: On 01/26/11 5:51 PM, Mitch Patenaude wrote: On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Gene bran...@bellsouth.net mailto:bran...@bellsouth.net wrote: Can you tell us more about you cluster? Nodes? Purpose? I managed a small 90 node cluster for seismic work. 300+ nodes total, 200 in a hadoop cluster used for mapreduce, the rest in a variety of headless datacenter roles (web, mail, database, backup, etc.). They are somewhat sensitive to version updates, so I was hoping to find a way to find the security updates (patch level) without having to change versions. Upgrading to 5.6 would likely involve upgrading several core packages (mysql, ruby, python, bind, even glibc and the kernel). Is this a pipe dream? assuming the mysql, ruby, python, bind you are running are all the stock RHEL5/CentOS5 ones, the updates maintain the same x.y version as whatever was released with 5.0, the upstream vendor backports security fixes. the kernel is still 2.6.18, glibc is still 2.5, etc etc. 5.6 is not a new version, its just a snapshot of updates at that point in time. the version is 5. But still test, sometimes something can break. In point releases in the past, some things have broke like, recently, an ethernet card wouldn't work after the update. Gave weird errors. Replaced it with a newer revision of the card, and it worked fine. But generally things work fine. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] To PAE or not to PAE...
But it would allow other usages of that RAM. cache. Other programs with great memory usage. Of course, as mentioned earlier, you would have to test with your workload whether the extra overhead is more than made up with the extra memory availability. On Jul 22, 2010, at 12:07 PM, Warren Young wrote: On 7/22/2010 3:25 AM, John Doe wrote: I have a 4GB pc and was wondering if it was worth going the PAE way to gain those exta 700MB... Very few programs can use PAE to get at that extra RAM. Can the programs you run do this? Is your CPU 64-bit capable? That's generally a better idea than PAE. Keep in mind that PAE is Pentium Pro era technology. ___ 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] To PAE or not to PAE...
On Jul 22, 2010, at 12:51 PM, Markus Falb wrote: On 22/07/2010 19:07, Warren Young wrote: On 7/22/2010 3:25 AM, John Doe wrote: I have a 4GB pc and was wondering if it was worth going the PAE way to gain those exta 700MB... Very few programs can use PAE to get at that extra RAM. Can the programs you run do this? What is a program supposed to do to get at that extra RAM then ? Just curious ;-) If it is supported by your chipset, etc, then the extra RAM just goes into the pool of available RAM for system usage. An extra 700MB of program space that doesn't have to be paged out, or discard clean pages, depending on overall memory pressure of the system. But system calls are costlier, since the kernel has to do more work swapping into different address spaces. For instance, on a 3GB RAM computer with a 32 bit OS, the OS can just access any physical RAM directly. But since the OS is 32 bit too, it has more work to access upper RAM. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How current are packages?
On Jul 7, 2010, at 6:10 PM, Matthew Valentino wrote: I'm relatively new to CentOS. I ordered a VPS and requested CentOS 5.5. As I was installing packages, I noticed that some of the versions are pretty old - for example, Postfix is v 2.3 in the repo (and, according to Postfix's website - no longer mainted). Is this a security risk as the current version is 2.7.1? Building and compiling Postfix from source seems to cause additional problems with yum, so I'm not sure what to do other than perhaps switch to something like Fedora. Perhaps there's a third-party repo with updated packages that I haven't found? Thanks, During the support time of the OS, security updates will be made. If not by the package maintainer, then by the upstream Linux vendor. Sometimes, it is by backporting fixes. Sometimes (Firefox for example), an upgrade to a more current version will be made. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 194 Kernel Panic; 164 is Fine; How Do I Debug?
On Jun 6, 2010, at 1:11 PM, John Thomas wrote: Let's see - you're running a Dell and the second photo is out of focus It's worse than that. It's a Dell monitor on a custom built machine by someone who does not know what they are doing (me). Would a more focused picture help? Sorry, I just couldn't resist. No worries, just keeping helping ;) I'm wondering if is has something to do with the PAE kernel vs. your machine. Can you elaborate on that at all? Not sure what to do here. I am at hobbyist skill level. With your question, I tried using the regular (non-PAE) kernel. The system halted after udev [ok] and no other on-screen information. Thank anyhow! One option is to just continue to run a working kernel, depending on what you are doing on the system, and hope that the next kernel is fixed. I've had the problem with some revs of the kernel, both at work where we use the upstream provider and at home with CentOS, and eventually a later version worked. It apparently affected a paying customer who reported it. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is every CentOS release supported for 7 years?
On May 22, 2010, at 1:09 PM, Aniruddha wrote: Hi, I've read some posts in the forums which seems to indicate that not every CentOS version is well supported. Is it possible to install CentOS 5.5 on a server and only apply security updates for 7 years? Or is the preferred way to upgrade to each minor version? Thanks in advance! Relevant forum quotes: Probably not relevant to the problem; however, the current release is 5.4 - 5.3 is getting seriously obsolete with respect to security problems and bugs. http://centos.caosity.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flatorder=ASCtopic_id=25069forum=39move=prevtopic_time=1267482814 If you really mean 5.0, it is seriously obsolete and has numerous known bugs and security issues that have been fixed in subsequent updates. Obsolete releases are not supported, nor is it advisable to be installing or running them. See the CentOS 5.5 Release Notes for details. https://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=26339forum=37 The basic CentOS 5 is supported for a total of 7 years from initial release. Since 5 first came out in April 2007, the support will last until April 2014. 5.2, 5.3, etc, are essentially wrap up releases of the basic CentOS 5, with all known fixes applied as of that time, along with new functionality provided by the upstream vendor. So you can start with 5.5 and not have to download large amounts of fixes that starting with an older release would entail. Each increment doesn't start a 7 year support cycle, just the major CentOS 4, 5, etc. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is every CentOS release supported for 7 years?
On May 22, 2010, at 2:23 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: On 05/22/2010 11:09 AM, Aniruddha wrote: I've read some posts in the forums which seems to indicate that not every CentOS version is well supported. Is it possible to install CentOS 5.5 on a server and only apply security updates for 7 years? No. As best I understand Red Hat's model, EL 5 will have 7 years of support from the time of its initial release. CentOS will rebuild their packages to provide the same. In neither case can you install the current version today and expect 7 years of support. With Red Hat's EL you have the option to install a given point release and apply only security fixes, staying at point release until the EOL for the remainder of the major release's support lifetime. CentOS does not provide that option easily. You could watch the errata feed and manually apply only the security related patches, but if you use yum update without further options, you'll be updated to whatever point release is current. Or is the preferred way to upgrade to each minor version? The preference is yours. Keeping your system current is the easiest management strategy I've seen extended release support from the upstream vendor for some specific kernels. I haven't looked closely into this, to see why. My suspicion is that they are maintaining some kernels from just before more major updates (like the addition of KVM) that may have negatively impacted certain larger customers. Unfortunately, in my case, when these have been released they didn't resolve some security issue in them that we were interested in. So we had to go with the latest kernel anyway. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is every CentOS release supported for 7 years?
Another issue with trying to apply just security updates for older point updates is that newer updates may be built differently. On 5.3, a package may not require another package be installed. But at some point later on, say, 5.5, it may gain a dependency. So if you try to install it, it may fail. if you are maintaining a system that is not directly connected to the internet, that can be an issue. I suppose that if it is, then you can end up having to upgrade more packages than you originally expected. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] The directory that I am trying to clean up is huge
On Jan 26, 2010, at 6:06 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On 1/25/2010 8:49 AM, Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote:
Anas Alnaffar wrote:
I tried to run this command
find -name *.access* -mtime +2 -exec rm {} \;
Should have been: find ./ -name \*.access\* -mtime +2 -exec rm -f {} \;
No difference. If the path is omitted, current versions of find assume
the current directory, and double quotes are fine for avoiding shell
expansion of wildcards. (But, I'm guessing the quotes were omitted on
the command that generated the error).
In my defense, I didn't realize that there were versions of find that didn't
require a starting location. And I've tended to remain with more standard
versions of commands like this, since I've had to use too many stripped down
systems through the years, plus I still use several different versions of Unix
like systems. Centos 5 does work without the path, but I wonder now when that
was added to Linux? OS X doesn't support that variant. I don't know yet about
Solaris.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] The directory that I am trying to clean up is huge
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf
Of James B. Byrne
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 10:06 AM
To: Robert Nichols
Cc: centos@centos.org
Subject: Re: [CentOS] The directory that I am trying to clean up is huge
On Mon, January 25, 2010 10:31, Robert Nichols wrote:
\
Now if the {} string appears more than once then the command line
contains that path more than once, but it is essentially impossible
to exceed the kernel's MAX_ARG_PAGES this way.
The only issue with using -exec command {} ; for a huge number of
files is one of performance. If there are 100,000 matched files,
the command will be invoked 100,000 times.
--
Bob Nichols rnichol...@comcast.net
Since the OP reported that the command he used:
find -name *.access* -mtime +2 -exec rm {} \;
in fact failed, one may infer that more than performance is at issue.
The OP's problem lies not with the -exec construction but with the
unstated, but nonetheless present, './' of his find invocation.
Therefore he begins a recursive descent into that directory tree.
Since the depth of that tree is not given us, nor its contents, we
may only infer that there must be some number of files therein which
are causing the MAXPAGES limit to be exceeded before the recursion
returns.
I deduce that he could provide the -prune option or the -maxdepth= 0
option to avoid this recursion instead. I have not tried either but
I understand that one, or both, should work.
I still suspect that the OP had an unquoted wildcard someplace on his
original command. Either a find * -name ..., or find . -name *.access*...
I see people all the time forget to quote the argument to -name, which would
normally work if the wildcard doesn't match more than 1 file in the current
directory. But if there is more than 1 file, then find will return an error
since the second file would likely not match an option to find.
If there are too many matches in the current directory, the unquoted example
would fail even before the find command could execute.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] The directory that I am trying to clean up is huge
On Jan 23, 2010, at 7:07 AM, Anas Alnaffar wrote:
I tried to run this command
find -name *.access* -mtime +2 -exec rm {} \;
and I have same error message
Anas
There must have been more to it, since the command above is invalid. you need
to specify where to start the find.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] The directory that I am trying to clean up is huge
find on CentOS 5.4 supports
find path -exec {} +;
which avoids the negative effect of spawning new subprocesses when using
-exec {} \;
find on CentOS 4.8 does not support that.
I'll have to give that a try sometime. A person gets used to a subset of a
command, and doesn't necessarily look for new options being added.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Running SSH on a different port
As mentioned previously, requiring certificates, and not allowing interactive logins, is safest. But even if you decide to allow interactive logins, there are things you SHOULD do. Disable admin/root login. Update sshd so that only named users can login via SSH, all other users that might be on the system cannot login. Require SSH 2 as mentioned in another email. it probably helps too if the named user isn't a common name, like mark, etc, like I've seen in logs when I've perused them. Running firewall tools that block IP addresses with several failed attempts. And, of course, a strong password. I've never setup certificates for my private, personal, use to my box. But I've disabled root login, only 1 account can connect, ssh2 is required, I don't use a common name,. An I have a strong password. On Oct 24, 2009, at 7:56 AM, ML wrote: HI All, With my new firewall in place, it has opened my eyes to how much traffic gets blocked in a single day and also what are the most active rules. I get *a lot* of requests for port 22. How does one switch ssh ports? What is a good port to use? What ramifications does it have when I need to ssh in? Is it as simple as ssh u...@hots:port? Best, -ML ___ 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] How fast?
On Oct 6, 2009, at 2:23 AM, Sorin Srbu wrote: -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Paul Heinlein Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 12:35 AM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] How fast? The bigger issue is ensuring that an older computer has enough disk space to house a modern distro and enough RAM to run modern kernels -- and even then you can tighten things up if you're willing to work with a speciality distro. I second that, nicely put! If I may suggest Smoothwall for a firewall appliance...? This is a specialty distro, IPCop is another similar distro. Smoothwall's even got a simple static DNS built-in, just the thing for a smallish home network. Might be just what the OP is looking for? -- i know I used to use a Linux PC as a firewall for my home system. Back before the inexpensive routers, and before the fairly easy to find specialty loads. The thing that got me away from it was it was my only Linux system at the time, and a botched update ended up with me having an unbootable system. And an emergency trip to Staples to buy the distribution they had there. A couple days without a protected home network, and I decided to eventually go with a dedicated box. Things would be different if I wanted to get fancier than what these standalone systems provided. But right now, I don't need the extra capability. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Install 32 or 64 bits
On Aug 18, 2009, at 6:48 AM, Rainer Duffner wrote: Yaovi Atohoun schrieb: Hi all, I am going to install CENTOS 5..3 on three HP Proliant ML 350G servers. The processor is Quad-core Xeon E5420 and E5335 for one of them. They all have 1GB Memory. Should I install a 32 bits version or 64 bits versions? The servers will be used an organization about 50 peoples for Web, Mail and related services. 64bit can still run 32bit programs. So it's a no-brainer: go 64bit right from the start. I see the reason for the question. WIth the limited memory, there is less need for a 64 bit version, and 64 bit will use additional memory anyway. So does any of the applications needed benefit from the larger virtual address space? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Question about dd (fill a hard disks' unused space with blanks)
On Jun 7, 2009, at 12:06 PM, Niki Kovacs wrote: Rainer Duffner a écrit : Ideally, the zero'ing of the disk should take place before the OS is installed, via a boot-cd and using dd with the disk-device itself Erm... how exactly would you go about that? Let's say I want to do that with a Knoppix boot CD, and the only hard disk I have on the PC is /dev/hdc. I've done the zeroing out thing on mounted filesystems before when I wanted to move the contents of a drive to another. zeroing out before would be best if you planned to do an install, then back it up for later. Otherwise, you end up with a lot of unused space that has remnants of old data scattered around. It does take awhile. Especially if you stuck the disk in an USB enclosure. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Question about dd (fill a hard disks' unused space with blanks)
On Jun 7, 2009, at 12:34 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: Niki Kovacs wrote: Hi, I'm currently experimenting with G4U (Ghost for Unix), a small cloning application sending disk images to an FTP server. The application reads the whole disk bit by bit, compresses it and then stores it remotely. Due to this approach, it's more or less filesystem-independent. The drawback is that it sometimes results in huge image files. Now I'm currently following a hint which suggests to fill the disks' unused space with zero bits. Here's the command for that: # dd if=/dev/zero of=/0bits bs=20M # rm /0bits Now I gave that a shot, but after half an hour or so, I got a bit impatient. Now the computer does not respond any more. Does that mean he's just way too busy with dd? Or is there some mistake in the command? As I see it, it will just be chugging on and on, no? Shouldn't there be a 'count=x' option somewhere? I'll second the recommendation for clonezilla. It knows enough about most filesystems (including windows ntfs) to only store the used blocks and it can use network storage over nfs, smb, or sshfs if you use the bootable CD clonezilla-live version. If you do a lot of cloning, you can also use the network-booting drbl version on a server that will PXE boot a client into clonezilla with the image storage directory already NFS-mounted. There is an rpm for Centos to install this. The problem I had with clonezilla I had when I tried it once was I was attempting to clone a hard drive (windows) that had some bad sectors. Clonezilla didn't handle that well at all. Either in duplicating the drive from one drive to another, or when I tried to back it up to a file on another USB drive failed verify. Luckily, I had done a recent windows backup, so I went through the recovery DVD route on the new drive, removed programs I had previously removed from the factory install, then restored over itself. I spent a lot of effort trying to avoid that. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Question about dd (fill a hard disks' unused space with blanks)
On Jun 7, 2009, at 12:54 PM, Niki Kovacs wrote: Rainer Duffner a écrit : Ever booted a live-CD? It also knows your disks (unless it's a server, except for maybe the CentOS LiveCD, most other's suck on servers - they simply don't recognize the controllers). The question was not about the LiveCD, but more about the use of dd. So, blanking a disk (say, /dev/hdc) from a LiveCD would amount to: # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hdc bs=20M And that's it. Correct? Yes. I generally don't use a 20M block size, but it is what I've used. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Question about dd (fill a hard disks' unused space with blanks)
On Jun 7, 2009, at 1:11 PM, Niki Kovacs wrote:
Rainer Duffner a écrit :
Yup.
If you have the time, you can experiment with the blocksize and see
where the throughput is best.
http://unix.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/FreeBSD/questions/2008-09/msg01375.html
Interesting thread. Guess I'll give it a few spins with different
blocksizes (20k, 200k, 2M, 20M) and time { } the operation. Just
curious.
Anyway: thanks!
Niki
I suspect that once you get to some small size multiple of the lower
level protocol, larger block sizes probably don't matter too much.
512 byte blocks are small, so there would be considerable overhead.
1MB or larger blocks, you have exceeded the probably block size of the
lower level driver or hardware, so then it is just being split up by
the driver.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Question about dd (fill a hard disks' unused space with blanks)
On Jun 7, 2009, at 2:59 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: Kevin Krieser wrote: I'll second the recommendation for clonezilla. It knows enough about most filesystems (including windows ntfs) to only store the used blocks and it can use network storage over nfs, smb, or sshfs if you use the bootable CD clonezilla-live version. If you do a lot of cloning, you can also use the network-booting drbl version on a server that will PXE boot a client into clonezilla with the image storage directory already NFS-mounted. There is an rpm for Centos to install this. The problem I had with clonezilla I had when I tried it once was I was attempting to clone a hard drive (windows) that had some bad sectors. Clonezilla didn't handle that well at all. That doesn't sound like a clonezilla-specific problem. Have you found some other tool that magically reads bad sector? Either in duplicating the drive from one drive to another, or when I tried to back it up to a file on another USB drive failed verify. Luckily, I had done a recent windows backup, so I went through the recovery DVD route on the new drive, removed programs I had previously removed from the factory install, then restored over itself. I spent a lot of effort trying to avoid that. But - how often are you planning to clone bad drives? I'd try to use something like ddrescue to try to recover first. In the normal case, clonezilla does a good job. In my case, I was hoping it would avoid the bad sector since the bad sectors were in free space. So the hope was that it would skip it. Bad disks are a difficult case, and not a reason to avoid a tool unless it claims to be able to handle it. Even ignoring the feature of Clonezilla where it can be used to install cloned images on many systems with lower overhead, there is the advantage that it doesn't have to be installed on the system you are cloning, like more recent versions of Ghost. If I had known about it a year ago when I wanted to clone a hard drive before sending a computer out for repair, I would have used it. Instead, I used knoppix, dd, and gzip to backup a system. Took forever, having to go backup all the unused sectors on the disk. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] magic.mime dependency problem between file and httpd
On May 21, 2009, at 12:08 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote: On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Ralph Angenendt ra+cen...@br-online.de wrote: Marko Vojinovic wrote: --- Package file.i386 0:4.17-15.el5_3.1 set to be updated -- Processing Dependency: /usr/share/magic.mime for package: httpd -- Finished Dependency Resolution httpd-2.2.3-22.el5.centos.i386 from installed has depsolving problems -- Missing Dependency: /usr/share/magic.mime is needed by package httpd-2.2.3-22.el5.centos.i386 (installed) Error: Missing Dependency: /usr/share/magic.mime is needed by package httpd-2.2.3-22.el5.centos.i386 (installed) So what is wrong and why? We still don't know why, but yum clean metadata or yum clean all should fix that problem. Indeed, yum clean all yum update did fix it. Thanks! :-) So it wasn't just me. But I fixed it by rpm --nodeps -e file, then I could finish updating, then I did a yum install file ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 5.3 Update Success
On Apr 4, 2009, at 9:30 AM, Michael A. Peters wrote: Timothy Murphy wrote: Kai Schaetzl wrote: I updated two machines yesterday. No problems after reboot so far. Very smooth. I also updated two servers in the last few days without any problems. I don't think I have ever had such a simple upgrade of any system. I have - twice before. Once was when I went from 5.0 to 5.1 and once when I went from 5.1 to 5.2 One time on an upgrade, some kernel problem prevented my system from booting. Somewhere between 5 and 5.1. I had to stick with the original kernel until some later kernel fixed the problem. It was around the time the system recognized my video, I believe. Kernel problems happen. At work, with the upstream vender, one of the 5.1 era kernels didn't handle the Pentium III on one of our systems very well, and would panic in some Athlon power management driver. Later, it too was fixed. I just upgraded my home system today, and it came up fine. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Deleting Large Files
On Mar 2, 2009, at 2:34 AM, Kay Diederichs wrote: Joseph L. Casale schrieb: I have an issue with a busy CentOS server exporting iSCSI and NFS/ SMB shares. Some of the files are very large, and when they get deleted IO climbs to an unacceptable rate. Is there a way to purge a file with little to no IO overhead on ext3? Thanks! jlc Have you tried to delete locally, instead of over NFS? Maybe by deleting over SMB from a Windows machine, the file is not deleted but rather moved to a Trash folder on a different disk (which would explain the I/O)? (Same could happen with a Unix desktop, like KDE) Have you tried the unlink command instead of rm ? Kay I've seen length delete times too when deleting a 30+ GB file on an ext3 filesystem, locally. I don't think that Windows (XP at least) will move remote files to a trash folder, only local files. Though there is no telling what it might do if you have some 3rd party application installed that may provide an undelete functionality. I haven't researched it enough to check I/O stats. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Best CentOS to install on *old* laptop?
2.1's support ends in a couple months. The last time I tried to put a Linux on an obsolete box, it was on a computer with only 80MB of RAM. Pick an old enough distribution to fit that, and I had all sorts of problems getting a PCMCIA LAN card to work. If I had got it to work, it would have been usable only as a proof of concept. On Mar 1, 2009, at 1:31 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: Bart Schaefer wrote: I've found an old IBM OmniBook 800 and am curious whether I can get it going again. (Currently it boots either Windows 95 or some then-contemporary version of Slackware.) The CDROM is external (SCSI, I think) and the machine won't boot from it, so it'd require a boot floppy. Any suggestions? Or is CentOS entirely the wrong Linux to be thinking about for this? What are you planning to do with it? Given the current prices on much faster/lighter laptops I'm not sure how much time you want to waste on an old one that isn't going to be a good GUI workstation anyway. If it boots from USB or a floppy that transfers bios control to the CDROM you can probably make the install work. Centos3.x might be more lightweight and efficient if you don't need current desktop apps. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.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] simple if statement
You don't really need to prepend the x if the $remaining is in quotes,
do you? If you didn't use quotes, then you could end up with a error
if $remaining isn't set.
On Feb 27, 2009, at 5:24 AM, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Tom Brown wrote:
Hi
Below if $remaining is empty i want the if to finish - what is it i
need
to put in SOMETHING?
if [ $remaining = ] ; then
SOMETHING ;
else
kill -9 $remaining
fi
if [ x${remaining} != x ] ; then
kill -9 ${remaining}
fi
Ralph
___
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] unsubscribe
On Jan 28, 2009, at 7:43 PM, Matt Shields wrote: On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Kevin Krieser k_krie...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On Jan 28, 2009, at 10:46 AM, Anne Wilson wrote: On Wednesday 28 January 2009 16:20:47 Kevin Krieser wrote: The information IS in the headers, but many email programs don't show the full headers, extracting only the information that many people want (subject, TO:, CC:, etc). So if you aren't aware of it being hidden in the headers, you may not notice it. I generally look at the footers, when present, to see how to unsubscribe. And many people don't even go that far. CentOS probably should add just a little more to their footers, such as a note that the link provided is also to unsubscribe. It's easy to find when you know, but then we're not newbies, are we? Anne I've been on several different lists, on and off, so I am not a newbie here. And even then, unless I remembered, I probably wouldn't think of looking at the normally hidden headers. Now when there is a footer added that says to unsubscribe, send a message to a specified address, it can be frustrating. But I guess it works, a list manager will probably remove the poster. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Who cares about the headers every single message from the list has a footer appended to it with the information about the list. Click on the link and it tells you how to unsubscribe. Not to mention that, but once a month I get an email from the mailing list telling me about my subscription and how to log in and make changes to my subscription. -matt http://www.sysadminvalley.com http://www.beantownhost.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mattboston Bill Cosby - A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones that need the advice. Mentioned the headers since some early replies referred the OP to the headers. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] unsubscribe
On Jan 28, 2009, at 10:00 AM, Brian Mathis wrote: On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 8:56 AM, cent osserver centoser...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 8:33 AM, Ned Slider n...@unixmail.co.uk wrote: Was that REALLY called for? Couldn't you have simply filed it in / dev/null? Yes, I should have. I gave into impulse in a weak moment and then REALLY screwed up by not noticing I was replying to the list and not the individual. (Most lists have reply-to set to the individual, not the list) Sorry. If this is how you reply to people, ESPECIALLY privately, and during weak moments, your Internet privileges are hereby revoked. Your status as a decent human being isn't looking good either. Get control over yourself. Also realize that if you were to reply to someone like this in private, you are doing more damage to the community than if you did it in public. At least if you do it in public, we can rip you apart for it. A mailing list is not there to provide you with punching bags for when you have a bad day. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos The information IS in the headers, but many email programs don't show the full headers, extracting only the information that many people want (subject, TO:, CC:, etc). So if you aren't aware of it being hidden in the headers, you may not notice it. I generally look at the footers, when present, to see how to unsubscribe. And many people don't even go that far. CentOS probably should add just a little more to their footers, such as a note that the link provided is also to unsubscribe. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] unsubscribe
On Jan 28, 2009, at 10:46 AM, Anne Wilson wrote: On Wednesday 28 January 2009 16:20:47 Kevin Krieser wrote: The information IS in the headers, but many email programs don't show the full headers, extracting only the information that many people want (subject, TO:, CC:, etc). So if you aren't aware of it being hidden in the headers, you may not notice it. I generally look at the footers, when present, to see how to unsubscribe. And many people don't even go that far. CentOS probably should add just a little more to their footers, such as a note that the link provided is also to unsubscribe. It's easy to find when you know, but then we're not newbies, are we? Anne ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos I've been on several different lists, on and off, so I am not a newbie here. And even then, unless I remembered, I probably wouldn't think of looking at the normally hidden headers. Now when there is a footer added that says to unsubscribe, send a message to a specified address, it can be frustrating. But I guess it works, a list manager will probably remove the poster. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] difference in x86 64 bit centos between 4.x and 5.x versions
On Jan 28, 2009, at 3:41 PM, RobertH wrote: i am new to the x86 64 bit centos versions. ive always used the 32 bit version on industrial type HP hardware for those of you that are running x86 64 bit centos, other than specific hardware issues, are you finding that 5.x centos is better than 4.x centos for x86 64 bit processing? does it matter in the amd vrs intel hardware differences what you choose to use for centos version? other things to make note of? if i need to be more specific in the general-ness of the approach, please let me know. thanks in advance for feedback. - rh My opinion is to first determine a few issues. How much RAM will it need? If over 3GB of physical RAM, consider 64 bit. Are there third party applications you need to run on it? If they are 64 bit, that answers the question too. If 32 bit, are they supported on 64 bit OS? Do they have different versions for 32 and 64 bit? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Old Small Box
You can install 5 on it, but you probably won't be too happy with it. Make sure to have more than the default amount of swap installed. On Jan 21, 2009, at 5:16 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Mike -- EMAIL IGNORED m_d_berger_1...@yahoo.com wrote: I have an old 400mHz Dell with a 20G hard drive and 125M ram. Can I install and run CentOS on it? Thanks, You can install/run the CentOS-3 OS. CentOS-4 might run. I do not think CentOS-5 would be able to be installed on the system. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. The Merchant of Venice ___ 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] Old Small Box
Just to comment that this was with an actual RH installation DVD, not CentOS. The only systems I've installed CentOS on has had at least 1GB of RAM. On Jan 21, 2009, at 6:54 PM, Kevin Krieser wrote: You can install 5 on it, but you probably won't be too happy with it. Make sure to have more than the default amount of swap installed. On Jan 21, 2009, at 5:16 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Mike -- EMAIL IGNORED m_d_berger_1...@yahoo.com wrote: I have an old 400mHz Dell with a 20G hard drive and 125M ram. Can I install and run CentOS on it? Thanks, You can install/run the CentOS-3 OS. CentOS-4 might run. I do not think CentOS-5 would be able to be installed on the system. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. The Merchant of Venice ___ 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 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Adding RAM
On Dec 7, 2008, at 1:37 PM, Morten Torstensen wrote: Kevin Krieser wrote: At least with regard to the upstream provider, on X86 the desktop version has a limit of 4GB of RAM, regardless of how much more memory you have. And they removed the hugemem version, so instead of up to 64GB of RAM on 32 bit, you can only get to 16GB for server versions. With PAE you can access up to 64GB memory. It works much the same way as XMS memory in DOS, where high mem is mapped to a low mem window. It is just addresses that are mapped, there is no physical copying of memory that you had with EMS memory. Generally, PAE would not make much sense on 16GB memory machines, as you still need the space in the 4GB range to address it. Personally I would use PAE on machines with up to 8-12GB memory (assuming x86_64 wasn't an option). With more than 16GB I would recommend against it, as you get a lot of remapping and/or limited space in the 4GB range. YMMV depending on specific workload of course. I'm just going by what the redhat site says for EL 5. On this version, they don't provide the hugemem version for server anymore, on the assumption that if you really need to use more than 16GB of RAM you should be running 64 bits. I assume that this also helps with reducing sizes of page tables, and testing. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Adding RAM
On Dec 6, 2008, at 10:44 AM, Ross Walker wrote: On Dec 5, 2008, at 7:18 PM, Rainer Duffner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am 06.12.2008 um 01:02 schrieb Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams: On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 23:57 +, Michael Holmes wrote: 2008/12/5 Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I have a server running Centos 4.7 32bit. Will moving from 4Gig of RAM to 8Gig do any good? Since its 32bit I assume it will only be able to address the first 4Gig not? As long as you are using a SMP kernel you can use up to 64GB of RAM (though each proccess can only address 4GB of this). So if you can find any trace of SMP in the uname (grep is your friend) then it should work fine. PAE, not SMP. He should be able to replace the kernel via rpm -e and rpm -i That said, I doubt he'll actually see a benefit. PAE is slow. If you want to see a real performance-gain, install 5.2 x86-64. He'll see a benefit. PAE slowdown is humanly unnoticeable for short- term transactions, it's difference is in high nano seconds or low micro seconds. All 5.0 kernels are PAE by default. So are WinXP_SP2/Win2K3/Vista/Win2k8 and Mac OS X kernels. Only go 64-bit if it's completely necessary. I see that I had mis remembered some changes in 5. At least with regard to the upstream provider, on X86 the desktop version has a limit of 4GB of RAM, regardless of how much more memory you have. And they removed the hugemem version, so instead of up to 64GB of RAM on 32 bit, you can only get to 16GB for server versions. I was combining the bunch, and thinking that you could now only get to 4GB on 32 bit. Of course, I believe that XP SP2 is now limited to 4GB of RAM on 32 bit OS's, less when you factor in device space, due to problems with some device drivers. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ls and rm: argument list too long
On Oct 17, 2008, at 7:58 PM, thad wrote:
Satchel Paige - Don't look back. Something might be gaining on you.
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 4:36 AM, Laurent Wandrebeck
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/10/17 Jussi Hirvi [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Since when is there a limit in how long directory listings CentOS
can show
(ls), or how large directories can be removed (rm). It is really
annoying to
say, for example
rm -rf /var/amavis/tmp
and get only argument list too long as feedback.
Is there a way to go round this problem?
I have CentOS 5.2.
- Jussi
try something like:
for i in /var/amavis/tmp/*
do
rm -rf $i
done
it should be:
for i in `ls /var/amavis/tmp`
do
rm $i
done
___
Taking into account the valid objections others have mentioned, such
as problems of embedded whitespace in names, rm -rf $i and rm $i above
are not the same.
Even if there are no directories under the /var/amavis/tmp/, depending
on aliases, etc, rm $i may prompt you for confirmation. the other
will go ahead and do the remove if you have permission to do it (or at
least the -f).
The -r for files is unnecessary, and offends me when I see people do
it, but doesn't really cause any harm :)
I personally either rm -rf directory, and recreate the directory if
necessary, or do a find /var/amavis/tmp -type f ... because of
experience through the years with too long of command lines. Unixes
in the past had even smaller limits. xargs most frequently, and if
things fail, I may just do -exec rm -f {} \; on the find.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ls and rm: argument list too long
On Oct 18, 2008, at 8:13 PM, mouss wrote: Jussi Hirvi a écrit : Since when is there a limit in how long directory listings CentOS can show (ls), or how large directories can be removed (rm). It is really annoying to say, for example rm -rf /var/amavis/tmp and get only argument list too long as feedback. I doubt this. argument list too long is a shell error, and in your command the shell doesn't see many arguments. I guess you want to remove amavisd-new temp files and you did rm -rf /var/amavis/tmp/* In this case, the shell would need to replace that with rm -rf /var/amavis/tmp/foo1 /var/amavis/tmp/foo2 in which case, it needs to store these arguments in memory. so it would need to allocate enough memory for all these before passing them to the rm command. so a limitation is necessary to avoid consuming all your memory. This limitation exists on all unix systems that I have seen. Is there a way to go round this problem? Since amavisd-new temp files have no spaces in them, you can do for f in in /var/amavis/tmp/*; do rm -rf $f; done (Here, the shell does the loop, so doesn't need to expand the list at once). alternatively, you could remove the whole directory (rm -rf /var/amavis/tmp) and recreate it (don't forget to reset the owner and permisions). I have CentOS 5.2. Possible to learn something new every day. I would have expected the for loop to fail too, thinking it would attempt to expand the wildcard before starting it's iteration. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] how can I get the kernel source codes of CentOS5.2
On Aug 26, 2008, at 12:36 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote: On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 10:32 AM, MHR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 5:49 AM, Jim Perrin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rather than guessing, why not look at the output from the rpm command he ran, which gives the name of the package he's missing? Filipe nailed this one a little earlier in the thread with unifdef.x86_64 needing to be installed. I remember running into this a while back. That being the case, shouldn't unifdef be included in kernel-devel, or at least one of the packages that are required for building a kernel? Seems like it sticks out like a sore thumb this way Alternatively, how do I go about suggesting this in a formal way (bugzilla, etc.)? Alan and I are now talking about this so we can amend the Wiki article appropriately. According to him, unifdef is not required on his 32-bit system. I will update on this subject as soon as I gather more info. I've needed it on RHEL 5 systems before I could build the kernel source on 32 bit systems. I probably did with CentOS too, but I don't recall for sure. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Will CentOS 6's upstream be based on Fedora 10?
I read this question as being Will RHEL 6 be based on Fedora 10? On 7/30/08 9:45 AM, Rudi Ahlers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote: Hi All, The subject says it all. I'm asking because I've found Fedora 9 to be buggy as hell - it is one of the worst Fedora releases I've ever used (and I've been using it since Fedora Core 1). I'm putting up with it for my work laptop, but it's not fun. :( My main home machine is still on Fedora Core 6 and will stay there until CentOS 6 comes out. I don't want to use CentOS 5 because it's upstream is based on Fedora Core 6, and I want something new! When CentOS 6 hits, I will be using it for my work laptop. I might just keep Fedora for home my machine. I haven't decided yet if I want to move up to Fedora 10 or CentOS 6. Regards, Ranbir Not likely. Fedora Core is a different branch than CentOS, and it has a lot of different stuff (ideas, software, etc) which CentOS doesn't have. CentOS is mainly based on the Red Hat Enterprise branch. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.2 ?
On May 22, 2008, at 11:32 PM, Paul wrote: On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 15:42 -0400, Matt Hyclak wrote: On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 12:03:23PM -0700, Florin Andrei enlightened us: Anybody knows when CentOS 5.2 will be made available? http://www.linux.com/feature/135980 When it's done. For crying out loud, upstream has only released 5.2 less than 24 hours ago. It will be at least a couple of weeks for the builds to finish and preliminary QA to take place. Can we please hold off on these questions until June at the very least? LOL, it's *almost* funny how quick people start asking when the next version will come out when after upstream has released a new version. I'm looking forward to some of the new apps features, but I can wait the 2-3 weeks it usually takes. I wasn't expecting RHEL 5.2 yesterday, hadn't been giving it much thought. Then, saw report about a vulnerable SSL, saw that Red Hat had released a fix a couple days ago, and did a quick yum update, and got 685MB worth of updates :) So I expect that I'll have nearly that many updates in a few weeks when the CentOS group can finalize their update. Best wishes, don't work too hard this holiday weekend (in US). Kevin ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Re: case insensitive file system
I can't think of anything I did special other than using force because I hadn't done a Safely Remove device on Windows last time. I plan to try some experimentation again. I had previously successfully copied many gigabytes of files from an NTFS USB hard drive during the same boot without issues. On Apr 30, 2008, at 12:07 PM, Szabolcs Szakacsits wrote: Hi Kevin, Kevin Krieser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I just tried NTFS-3G on a thumbdrive, and I was able to create a file that differed only by case from another. Then something got corrupted. Could you please elaborate what you did and what kind of corruption happened? We are doing very exhaustive testing (http://ntfs-3g.org/ quality.html) before all public driver releases and we're not aware of any corruption problem, nor we have been reported using the latest driver, version 1.2412. The only issue I can imagine is if the thumbdrive wasn't properly unmounted before removal. This can cause I/O errors like described at http://ntfs-3g.org/support.html#ioerror NTFS is case preserving and case sensitive in the NTFS POSIX filename space what NTFS-3G uses. This may confuse some Windows applications but unfortunately there isn't anything we could do about it, because exactly the same thing happen when one uses the Microsoft NTFS driver to do the same. No difference. More at http://ntfs-3g.org/support.html#posixfilenames1 Regards, Szaka -- NTFS-3G Lead Developer: http://ntfs-3g.org ___ 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
