Re: [CentOS] youtube-dl No module named 'pkg_resources'
On Wed, 8 May 2019 09:08:12 -0500 (CDT) Michael Hennebry wrote: > On Wed, 8 May 2019, Nux! wrote: > > > How did you install it? > > Most recently > yum reinstall youtube-dl > > > I'm using their binary and it works great, just tested it. > > > > https://ytdl-org.github.io/youtube-dl/download.html So am I. Despite generally favoring regular repositories, in the particular case of youtube-dl I prefer to uninstall the repo version, and follow the instructions on their website above. I just do a wget and a chmod as explained there, and it downloads itself into /usr/local/bin. Whenever it fails to work, usually a simple sudo youtube-dl -U will update itself to the latest version, which does work. The errors you encounter are typically not a problem in the script itself, nor in python, but a change in the structure of the youtube.com html code. It gets changed often, and then the older youtube-dl fails to parse the new youtube.com code structure, and errors out. But usually there is an updated version (often the same day) of youtube-dl, which parses the new html code correctly. If you use the repo version of youtube-dl, it may take a couple of weeks even for the update to land. On the other hand, the above manual update works immediately, with no hassle. Never failed me so far. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 8 released
On Tue, 7 May 2019 11:05:29 -0700 John Pierce wrote: > On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 10:59 AM Marko Vojinovic > wrote: > > > > Which Fedora release was used as a base(*) for RHEL 8? > > Wikipedia says, "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 is based on Fedora 28 Oh, RHEL 8 has just been released, and there is already a wikipedia article about it, I'm impressed! ;-) So, it's based on F28, thanks for the info! :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 8 released
On Tue, 7 May 2019 10:07:15 -0400 Rich Bowen wrote: > This morning Red Hat announced the general availability of Red Hat > Enterprise Linux 8. Which Fedora release was used as a base(*) for RHEL 8? (*) As far as I am aware, RH constructs each release by taking a snapshot of a current Fedora, and then tweaking it into a latest RHEL version, roughly speaking... :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Yum refuses to install kmod-8188eu from elrepo
On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 09:41:09 -0800 Akemi Yagi wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 8:01 AM Akemi Yagi wrote: > > > > That output indicates that that kmod package is built for the EL 7.5 > > kernel and is not compatible with the current kernel. I suggest you > > file a request to have the kmod-8188eu rebuilt for EL 7.6 at > > http://elrepo.org/bugs/ . > > Users seeing the same issue can now go to: > > https://elrepo.org/bugs/view.php?id=893 Just for the record --- the kmod has been rebuilt against the new kernel (thanks for the very fast response!!), and the new version does install successfully. Of course, then I ran into a separate issue with 8188eu driver requiring the old wext driver, while NetworkManager working only with the new nl80211 driver... After some googling, it seems that this issue is best discussed here: https://www.thelinuxrain.com/articles/getting-realtek-8188eu-wireless-adapters-to-work-in-linux-and-possibly-other-wireless-realtek-chipsets Using wicd instead of NetworkManager somehow failed me, but the manual startup of wpa_supplicant did work, and the wifi dongle finally came to life, and works perfectly. Thanks again to Akemi, and elrepo! Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Yum refuses to install kmod-8188eu from elrepo
On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 12:03:22 -0500 Mike Burger wrote: > On 2019-01-22 11:01, Akemi Yagi wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 7:54 AM Marko Vojinovic > > wrote: > >> I am having trouble using the realtek wifi chip in my new tp-link > >> usb wifi dongle. [snip] > >> However, yum install kmod-8188eu refuses to install it (full yum > >> output is here: https://pastebin.com/raw/vvak6FCU ), complaining > >> that the following dependencies cannot be met: [snip] > > That output indicates that that kmod package is built for the EL 7.5 > > kernel and is not compatible with the current kernel. I suggest you > > file a request to have the kmod-8188eu rebuilt for EL 7.6 at > > http://elrepo.org/bugs/ . > > Another alternative may be to pull down the SRPM and run it through > rpmbuild to locally create a binary package compatible with the > system as it's currently installed/running. Thanks, that would certainly be a better solution than manually building the driver from source, since I could install the resulting .rpm on all of my machines. If the bug I just submitted to elrepo doesn't get resolved for whatever reason, I'll try that. Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Yum refuses to install kmod-8188eu from elrepo
On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 08:01:55 -0800 Akemi Yagi wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 7:54 AM Marko Vojinovic > wrote: > > > > I am having trouble using the realtek wifi chip in my new tp-link > > usb wifi dongle. [snip] > > However, yum install kmod-8188eu refuses to install it (full yum > > output is here: https://pastebin.com/raw/vvak6FCU ), complaining > > that the following dependencies cannot be met: [snip] > That output indicates that that kmod package is built for the EL 7.5 > kernel and is not compatible with the current kernel. I suggest you > file a request to have the kmod-8188eu rebuilt for EL 7.6 at > http://elrepo.org/bugs/ . Thanks for the suggestion, bug filed: https://elrepo.org/bugs/view.php?id=893 Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Yum refuses to install kmod-8188eu from elrepo
I am having trouble using the realtek wifi chip in my new tp-link usb wifi dongle. Upon plugging it, the device gets registered by the kernel (in /var/log/messages), but that's about it, no network device is being created (iwconfig does not see it, nothing else works). A few google searches later I found out that this realtek chip is not supported by the kernel and requires a driver, and that the driver is packaged for C7 as kmod-8188eu in elrepo. However, yum install kmod-8188eu refuses to install it (full yum output is here: https://pastebin.com/raw/vvak6FCU ), complaining that the following dependencies cannot be met: --> Processing Dependency: kernel(wireless_send_event) = 0xa02e7e03 for package: kmod-8188eu-4.1.4_6773.20130222-4.el7_5.elrepo.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: kernel(usb_submit_urb) = 0x74c6ac58 for package: kmod-8188eu-4.1.4_6773.20130222-4.el7_5.elrepo.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: kernel(usb_reset_device) = 0xddd0084e for package: kmod-8188eu-4.1.4_6773.20130222-4.el7_5.elrepo.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: kernel(usb_put_dev) = 0xf709107c for package: kmod-8188eu-4.1.4_6773.20130222-4.el7_5.elrepo.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: kernel(usb_kill_urb) = 0xa55bf715 for package: kmod-8188eu-4.1.4_6773.20130222-4.el7_5.elrepo.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: kernel(usb_get_dev) = 0x372a41af for package: kmod-8188eu-4.1.4_6773.20130222-4.el7_5.elrepo.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: kernel(usb_free_urb) = 0x739aecf4 for package: kmod-8188eu-4.1.4_6773.20130222-4.el7_5.elrepo.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: kernel(usb_control_msg) = 0xd04e3a9e for package: kmod-8188eu-4.1.4_6773.20130222-4.el7_5.elrepo.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: kernel(usb_alloc_urb) = 0x12a4948e for package: kmod-8188eu-4.1.4_6773.20130222-4.el7_5.elrepo.x86_64 I've never seen such output from yum before --- I'm guessing it is asking for a kernel with specific "properties", and failing to find one. What is the best way to resolve this? Is there some kernel package somewhere that matches these properties, or is there some other package that provides these features to an existing kernel, or something else? Or should I just ditch the kmod, and compile the 8188eu driver from source? I'd prefer to avoid this if possible, since I am not a fan of recompiling it every time the kernel is updated in C7. And I might need to use the wifi dongle on multiple machines, anyway. I'd appreciate any suggestions! TIA, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How to troubleshoot partial shutdown problem?
On Tue, 1 Jan 2019 12:47:42 +0100 Marko Vojinovic wrote: > after issuing a regular shutdown, > the system starts the shutdown procedure, but stalls at some point, > and never finishes. It gets to the console, writes the "powering down" > message and stops there --- the hardware never actually powers off. Just to add another datapoint --- when booted using the old kernel, 3.10.0-123, the shutdown proceeds correctly, while when booted using the latest kernel, 3.10.0-957.1.3, the shutdown fails. I don't have installed any other in-between kernels to test. So this appears to be kernel-related. Any suggestions? TIA, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] How to troubleshoot partial shutdown problem?
Hi folks, I've never encountered the following problem before (but I guess there is a first time for everything) --- after issuing a regular shutdown, the system starts the shutdown procedure, but stalls at some point, and never finishes. It gets to the console, writes the "powering down" message and stops there --- the hardware never actually powers off. At that time, the machine is completely unresponsive to anything, I have to hold the power button for 5 seconds to actually force it to turn off. This is a clean install of C7, fully updated. I doubt that hardware is at fault, since it *does* properly shut down when I boot it from the C7 live usb (which was used to install the system in the first place). The only difference is that the live usb is not updated at all, while the os on the hard drive has received cca 1000 updates after initial installation. So I'm guessing that something in the updates broke something in the shutdown procedure. Btw, rebooting the machine works properly, no issues. How am I to troubleshoot this? Most importantly, what is the best way to check (after the power cycle) if the hard drive had been unmounted properly during the previous shutdown, i.e. if the unmounting finished before the stall? I don't want the hard drive to "suffer" from unclean shutdowns, if possible. Also, what piece of code prints the "powering off" message in the console (since that appears to be the last thing working)? What else to look for, and where? Is this maybe a known issue, is there a fix? Other than shutting down, the machine works completely ok, so arguably this is not such a big problem (as I plan to have it running 24/7), but still, failing to shutdown when I want it to feels somewhat disturbing, I'd rather have that fixed. Any suggestions? Best, :-) Marko P.S. Happy new year to everyone! ;-) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Percent bar on screen - for 2 seconds
On Sat, 08 Aug 2015 00:07:35 + (GMT) Wes James compte...@me.com wrote: Every once in awhile I see this horizontal percent bar flash up on the screen then disappear. What is that? CentOS 7.1, kde. Is it a laptop, running on batteries? I have a configuration with a laptop with an external monitor attached, while the laptop's monitor is off. When the laptop is running on batteries (don't ask me why), the system power manager tries to readjust the screen brightness (I guess in order to honor the power settings in KDE), fails (since LVDS is off, or since VGA doesn't support brightness changes, or otherwise), then tries again a few minutes later, repeatedly. Once AC power is turned on, it stops trying. The horizontal percent bar flashing up is a notification of the brightness level changing, during each power manager's attempt at it. If you use the appropriate keyboard control combination on the laptop to change the screen brightness, you can probably trigger the percent bar manually. It is similar to changing the audio volume, and other percentage bars. This hasn't annoyed me enough (yet) to get me to look into what's causing it or how to fix it. It doesn't happen when the laptop is on AC power. It might be a simple matter of configuring it appropriately in systemsettings power management controls, but I never bothered... Or maybe your problem is caused by something else... :-) HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] An odd X question
On Thu, 25 Jun 2015 15:55:41 -0400 m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: mark and why is it called xorg-x11-server, when in X terminology, it's the client?* * Which I always thought was bass-ackward, but... You should think of it this way: the program that wants something drawn on the screen is a client; the program that does the drawing is the server. The client asks the server to draw stuff on the screen, and server is, well... servicing those requests, from various clients. So the server is always the local Xorg process that draws your display, while any remote or local program that wants things drawn on it is the client. The fact that one of them is remote and the other local is of course completely irrelevant for the client/server terminology, contrary to common opinion. This last thing is what confuses people --- they usually think of the word server as the remote machine, while client is the local machine. That is the wrong way to understand the words server and client. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] LVM hatred, was Re: /boot on a separate partition?
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 10:40:59 -0700 Gordon Messmer gordon.mess...@gmail.com wrote: On 06/23/2015 08:10 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote: For concreteness, let's say I have a guest machine, with a dedicated physical partition for it, on a single drive. Or, I have the same thing, only the dedicated partition is inside LVM. Why is there a performance difference, and how dramatic is it? Well, I said that there's a big performance hit to file-backed guests, not partition backed guests. You should see exactly the same disk performance on partition backed guests as LV backed guests. Oh, I see, I missed the detail about the guest being file-backed when I read your previous reply. Of course, I'm fully familiar with the drawbacks of file-backed virtual drives, as opposed to physical (or LVM) partitions. I was (mistakenly) under the impression that you were talking about the performance difference between a bare partition and a LVM partition that the guest lives on. However, partitions have other penalties relative to LVM. Ok, so basically what you're saying is that in the usecase when one is spinning VM's on a daily basis, LVM is more flexible than dedicating hardware partitions for each new VM. I can understand that. Although, I could guess that if one is spinning VM's on a daily basis, their performance probably isn't an issue, so that a file-backed VM would do the job... It depends on what you use them for, in the end. It's true I never came across such a scenario. In my experience so far, spinning a new VM is a rare process, which includes planning, designing, estimating resource usage, etc... And then, once the VM is put in place, it is intended to work long-term (usually until its OS reaches EOL or the hardware breaks). But I get your point, with LVM you have additional flexibility to spin test-VM's basically every day if you need to, keeping the benefit of performance level of partition-backed virtual drives. Ok, you have me convinced! :-) Next time I get my hands on a new harddrive, I'll put LVM on it, and see if it helps me manage VM's more efficiently. Doing this on a single drive doesn't run the risk of losing more than one drive's worth of data if it fails, so I'll play with it a little more in the context of VM's, and we'll see if it improves my workflow. Maybe I'll have a change of heart over LVM after all. ;-) Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] /boot on a separate partition?
On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 10:42:35 -0400 m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Timothy Murphy wrote: Do most people today have /boot on a separate partition, or do they (you) have it on the / partition ? Separate partition, 100% of the time. Inside / (which is mostly always ext4), 100% of the time. :-) That said, I prefer virtual machines over multiboot environments, and I absolutely despise LVM --- that cursed thing is never getting on my drives. Never again, that is... HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] LVM hatred, was Re: /boot on a separate partition?
On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 11:15:30 -0500 Jason Warr ja...@warr.net wrote: I'm curious what has made some people hate LVM so much. I have been using it for years on thousands of production systems with no issues that could not be easily explained as myself or someone else doing something stupid. And even those issues were pretty few and far between. /opens can of worms Well, I can only tell you my own story, I wouldn't know about other people. Basically, it boils down to the following: (1) I have no valid usecase for it. I don't remember when was the last time I needed to resize partitions (probably back when I was trying to install Windows 95). Disk space is very cheap, and if I really need to have *that* much data on a single partition, another drive and a few intelligently placed symlinks are usually enough. Cases where a symlink cannot do the job are indicative of a bad data structure design, and LVM is often not a solution, but a patch over a deeper problem elsewhere. Though I do admit there are some valid usecases for LVM. (2) It is fragile. If you have data on top of LVM spread over an array of disks, and one disk dies, the data on the whole array goes away. I don't know why such a design of LVM was preferred over something more robust (I guess there are reasons), but it doesn't feel right. A bunch of flawless drives containing corrupt data is Just Wrong(tm). I know, one should always have backups, but still... (3) It's being pushed as default on everyday ordinary users, who have absolutely no need for it. I would understand it as an opt-in feature that some people might need in datacenters, drive farms, clouds, etc., but an ordinary user installing a single OS on their everyday laptop just doesn't need it. Jumping through hoops during installation to opt-in LVM by a small number of experts outweighs similar jumping to opt-out of it by a large number of noobs. Also, related to (3), there was that famous Fedora upgrade fiasco a few Fedora releases back. It went like this: * A default installation included LVM for all partitions, except for /boot, since grub couldn't read inside LVM. * Six months later, the upgrade process to the next release of Fedora happened to require a lot of space in /boot, more than the default settings. * The /boot partition, being the only one outside LVM, was the only one that couldn't be resized on-the-fly. * People who opted-out of LVM usually didn't have a reason to create a separate /boot partition, but bundled it under /, circumventing the size issue in advance without even knowing it. So the story ended up with lots of people in upgrading griefs purely because they couldn't resize the separate /boot partition, and it was separate because LVM was present, and LVM was present with the goal of making partition resizing easy! A textbook example of a catch-22, unbelievable!! Of course, I know what you'll say --- it wasn't just LVM, but an unfortunate combination of LVM, limitations of grub, bad defaults and a lousy upgrade mechanism. And yes, you'd be right, I agree. But the bottomline was that people with LVM couldn't upgrade (without bending backwards), while people without LVM didn't even notice that there is a problem. And since hatred is an irrational thing, you need not look any further than that. ;-) Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Recording piano and voice
On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 11:14:08 -0600 Frank Cox thea...@melvilletheatre.com wrote: On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 10:15:35 -0400 Lamar Owen wrote: The USB MIDI port won't give you audio, just MIDI text. That's what I thought. To this point, I've never done anything MIDI and I really don't know much about that; I just use my piano for the purpose of playing the piano. MIDI is used to translate your piano keystrokes into a digital format a computer can understand. You play on the keyboard, and the computer outputs the score of what you are playing, so that you don't need to write the score by hand. :-) That sort of thing. I think I will try to do this with Audacity as Fred Smith suggested. If I record the speaking part first, I can then somehow play it back and record the piano track while listening to the voice track to get the timing right. What I'm doing doesn't really have a beat or rhythm like a song -- it's a dramatic reading, but some of the words have a note or chord to sound along with them so getting it coordinated will be the challenge. Record first whatever has less silence --- if the piano part is continuous, record that first. Usually words have silence in between, and can be cut and shifted around (slightly) to match the piano. But if the piano is intermittent, record the voice first, and then cutpaste piano parts later, as you would with a sound effect. Either way, for best results some dubbing and some tuning with Audacity will be unavoidable. :-) HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] LVM hatred, was Re: /boot on a separate partition?
On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 14:23:52 -0400 Mauricio Tavares raubvo...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 11:15:30 -0500 Jason Warr ja...@warr.net wrote: I'm curious what has made some people hate LVM so much. (3) It's being pushed as default on everyday ordinary users, who have absolutely no need for it. That is not lvm's fault, but the distro's decision. Agreed, but remember that hatred is not a rational thing. When one sees LVM being pushed onto them by their favorite distro, they are not going to blame the distro (because it's their favorite distro, you know...), but rather the LVM itself. Psychology is a curious thing. ;-) Also, related to (3), there was that famous Fedora upgrade fiasco a few Fedora releases back. It went like this: Fedora != lvm unless I have been lied to all these years. That Fedora stunt was just one real-world example of how things can get drastically wrong, and for a sizable number of people. I wasn't criticizing LVM, I was answering why some people hate it. :-) As far as an ordinary noob user thinks, this is how it goes. Things that participated in the problem were: - upgrade software, - boot partition, - grub bootloader, - LVM. A typical noob user knows they need the first three components for day-to-day work, and that they don't need the fourth. Also, people who didn't have the fourth component didn't have the problem. Guess which of the four will catch the blame? Moreover, the fourth component failed to help with the problem, despite it being there precisely for partition resizing. There's nothing more to discuss, it's clear as day... :-D Remember, I'm not justifying this reasoning, just reporting what I've seen happen out in the wild, and why some people hate LVM. ;-) Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] LVM hatred, was Re: /boot on a separate partition?
On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 18:42:13 -0700 Gordon Messmer gordon.mess...@gmail.com wrote: I wondered the same thing, especially in the context of someone who prefers virtual machines. LV-backed VMs have *dramatically* better disk performance than file-backed VMs. Ok, you made me curious. Just how dramatic can it be? From where I'm sitting, a read/write to a disk takes the amount of time it takes, the hardware has a certain physical speed, regardless of the presence of LVM. What am I missing? For concreteness, let's say I have a guest machine, with a dedicated physical partition for it, on a single drive. Or, I have the same thing, only the dedicated partition is inside LVM. Why is there a performance difference, and how dramatic is it? If you convince me, I might just change my opinion about LVM. :-) Oh, and just please don't tell me that the load can be spread accross two or more harddrives, cutting the file access by a factor of two (or more). I can do that with raid, no need for LVM. Stick to a single harddrive scenario, please. Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] LVM hatred, was Re: /boot on a separate partition?
On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 19:08:24 -0700 Gordon Messmer gordon.mess...@gmail.com wrote: Such as: 1) LVM makes MBR and GPT systems more consistent with each other, reducing the probability of a bug that affects only one. 2) LVM also makes RAID and non-RAID systems more consistent with each other, reducing the probability of a bug that affects only one. OTOH, it increases the probability of a bug that affects LVM itself. But really, these arguments sound like a strawman. It reduces the probability of a bug that affects one of the setups --- I have a hard time imagining a real-world usecase where something like that can be even observable, let alone relevant. 3) MBR has silly limits on the number of partitions, that don't affect LVM. Sure, GPT is better, but so long as both are supported, the best solution is the one that works in both cases. That only makes sense if I need a lot of partitions on a system that doesn't support GPT. Sure, that can happen (ever more rarely on modern hardware), but I wouldn't know how common it is. I rarely needed many partitions in my setups. 4) There are lots of situations where you might want to expand a disk/filesystem on a server or virtual machine. Desktops might do so less often, but there's no specific reason to put more engineering effort into making the two different. The best solution is the one that works in both cases. What do you mean by engineering effort? When I'm setting up a data storage farm, I'll use LVM. When I'm setting up my laptop, I won't. What effort is there? I just see it as an annoyance of having to customize my partition layout on the laptop, during the OS installation (customizing a storage farm setup is pretty mandatory either way, so it doesn't make a big difference). 5) Snapshots are the only practical way to get consistent backups, and you should be using them. That depends on what kind of data you're backing up. If you're backing up the whole filesystem, than I agree. But if you are backing up only certain critical data, I'd say that a targeted rsync can be waaay more efficient. 6) If you use virtualization, LV-backed VMs are dramatically faster than file-backed VMs. I asked for an explanation of this in the other e-mail. Let's keep it there. LVM has virtually zero cost, so there's no practical benefit to not using it. If you need it. If you don't need it, there is no practical benefit of having it, either. It's just another potential point of failure, waiting to happen. The point of view that LVM isn't needed when a symlink will do is no more valid than the opposite point of view: that there's no reason to play stupid games with symlinks when you have the ability to manage volumes. I would agree with this, up to the point of fragility/robustness (see below). (2) It is fragile. If you have data on top of LVM spread over an array of disks, and one disk dies, the data on the whole array goes away. That's true of every filesystem that doesn't use RAID or something like it. It's hardly a valid criticism of LVM. If you have a sequence of plain ext4 harddrives with several symlinks, and one drive dies, you can still read the data sitting on the other drives. With LVM, you cannot. It's as simple as that. In some cases it makes sense to maintain access to reduced amount of data, despite the fact that a chunk went missing. A webserver, for example, can keep serving the data that's still there on the healthy drives, and survive the failure of the faulty drive without downtime. OTOH, with LVM, once a single drive fails, the server looses access to all data, which then necessitates some downtime while switching to the backup, etc. LVM isn't always an optimal solution. And since hatred is an irrational thing, you need not look any further than that. ;-) Well, let's not forget that you are the one who said that you despise LVM. As long as you recognize that you aren't rational, I suppose we agree on at least one thing. :) Oh, of course! :-) The ability to be irrational is what makes us human. Otherwise life would be very boring. ;-) Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] C7: EPEL conflicts with Base and ElRepo?
On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 14:54:21 -0500 Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: To be perfectly honest, the differences between EPEL and Base+extras can usually be completely ignored anyway. While somethings may be in epel and extras .. and the extras versions might lag, the extras version likely came from EPEL in the first place and was added as a build requirement for some other package in extras. This means that if there is a newer version in EPEL later, it is likely not going to cause a problem if it is installed on CentOS .. and in reality, we should probably be pulling that newer EPEL package into extras anyway. I don't think, if you stay in the elrepo, EPEL, and Base+Extras family that you are going to be hurt very often using whatever yum finds without yum-priorities at all. I would add the NUX repo to those as well. If you go outside those 4, maybe yum-priorities become more important. I am sure with 8,000 or so total packages, one might find a conflict that matters .. but I don't know of any that matter right now. By matter, I mean that there is an actual issue using the newer package from the 4 repos, whichever one that is. Yes, I agree. After I went through the list of conflicting packages, I failed to find anything that could even remotely be called critical or dangerous. So in the end, one probably doesn't need yum-priorities if one stays within the four main repos. Anyway, thanks for the info! Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] C7: EPEL conflicts with Base and ElRepo?
On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 00:13:25 -0700 Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote: One thing people should be aware is that EPEL is built for RHEL and that the package list is not the same between RHEL and CentOS. For example, CentOS adds cloud-related ones to the centos-extras repo which may overlap EPEL's. Thanks for the info. How can I find out the package names for the overlap? Can yum spell them out for me somehow? By the way, when I ran the same yum repolist command on my RHEL box with epel enabled, there was no conflict. That's good to know. So it seems that folks in epel do take care not to create conflicts, but wrt. to RHEL, but not CentOS. Given that, I'd just like to know which packages to check for on my machine... :-) Thanks, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] C7: EPEL conflicts with Base and ElRepo?
On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 07:51:36 +0100 Ned Slider n...@unixmail.co.uk wrote: The overlap between elrepo and EPEL is due to the 5 VirtualGL packages in elrepo. VirtualGL packages, albeit 64-bit only, are also available in EPEL. They don't appear to be shipping the 32-bit VirtualGL libs. Exactly what I wanted to hear, thanks a lot! :-) Just checked, I have the elrepo version installed (and now that I've configured yum-priorities, it'll stick unless I decide I need the epel version). Thanks, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] C7: EPEL conflicts with Base and ElRepo?
On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 11:36:45 +0100 (BST) John Hodrien j.h.hodr...@leeds.ac.uk wrote: On Fri, 19 Jun 2015, Marko Vojinovic wrote: Well, a list of names of those conflicting packages would be nice to have. Or instructions how to ask yum to compile it. yum update -d3 Wow! Excellent! Thanks a bunch! Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] C7: EPEL conflicts with Base and ElRepo?
On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:01:43 +0200 Nicolas Thierry-Mieg nicolas.thierry-m...@imag.fr wrote: You are correct, but what more info do you want? Well, a list of names of those conflicting packages would be nice to have. Or instructions how to ask yum to compile it. You've spelled it out quite well, you have the solution (set the lowest prio == highest value for epel), end of story? Unfortunately, it isn't. I was running the machine for some time without having the yum-priorities plugin. I (naively) believed that EPEL is careful not to create conflicts against base (I have read on this very list that it's safe to use). Stuff got installed, updated several times over, etc. Now after I figured there are in fact conflicts, I need to figure out the consistency of the software installed on my machine. How many (and which) packages from base have been stepped over by epel on my system? How severe are the consequences? I need to know how affected my system is, which packages to reinstall (now that I've activated priorities), etc. It's a mess that needs to be cleaned up. If you want it fixed you should report this to EPEL, not here. But with a large repo like EPEL this is bound to happen again and again as the distrib is a moving target. yum priorities mostly solves it. No, I don't really care to have it fixed, yum-priorities can take care of that in the future. But I want to fix my server, to make sure that all packages from base are still there. And I also want to make some noise about it on this list, so that other people don't end up with the same problem. It should be stated clearly that epel is *not* safe to use without the priorities plugin. Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] C7: EPEL conflicts with Base and ElRepo?
On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 17:53:14 -0400 Fred Smith fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us wrote: On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 10:04:04PM +0100, Marko Vojinovic wrote: Hi everyone, This just came to my attention --- I have CentOS 7 installed on one machine, and have configured elrepo and epel as additional repositories. When I turned on the yum-priorities package (and set up priorities in the order baseupdates elrepo epel), it turns out that there are 65 conflicting packages between base and epel, and additional 5 between elrepo and epel (there are no conflicts between base and elrepo, as expected). Somehow I thought (without going to verify) that epel should be before elrepo. Just looked at my repo configs and I have epel priority at 20 and elrepo at 40. The priority between elrepo and epel is usually a matter of personal preference, but either way epel is stepping over the base and updates repos, regardless of elrepo, as I explained: # yum repolist --disablerepo=elrepo Loaded plugins: fastestmirror, langpacks, priorities [snip] 65 packages excluded due to repository priority protections This shouldn't happen, and as far as I know, it is considered a Bad Thing(tm). Does anyone have any more detailed info regarding this? Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] C7: EPEL conflicts with Base and ElRepo?
Hi everyone, This just came to my attention --- I have CentOS 7 installed on one machine, and have configured elrepo and epel as additional repositories. When I turned on the yum-priorities package (and set up priorities in the order baseupdates elrepo epel), it turns out that there are 65 conflicting packages between base and epel, and additional 5 between elrepo and epel (there are no conflicts between base and elrepo, as expected). As far as I understand, this shouldn't happen. Does anyone know which packages are conflicting, and why? Here is the relevant yum output, note the excluded packages info: # yum repolist Loaded plugins: fastestmirror, langpacks, priorities Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile * base: ftp.ines.lug.ro * elrepo: ftp.ines.lug.ro * epel: mirror.pmf.kg.ac.rs * extras: ftp.ines.lug.ro * updates: ftp.ines.lug.ro 70 packages excluded due to repository priority protections repo id repo name status base/7/x86_64CentOS-7 - Base 8,652 elrepo ELRepo.org Community Enterprise Linux Repository - el7 143 epel/x86_64 Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux 7 - x86_64 8,025+70 extras/7/x86_64 CentOS-7 - Extras 128 updates/7/x86_64 CentOS-7 - Updates 682 repolist: 17,630 # yum repolist --disablerepo=elrepo Loaded plugins: fastestmirror, langpacks, priorities Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile * base: ftp.ines.lug.ro * epel: mirror.pmf.kg.ac.rs * extras: ftp.ines.lug.ro * updates: ftp.ines.lug.ro 65 packages excluded due to repository priority protections repo id repo name status base/7/x86_64CentOS-7 - Base 8,652 epel/x86_64 Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux 7 - x86_64 8,030+65 extras/7/x86_64 CentOS-7 - Extras 128 updates/7/x86_64 CentOS-7 - Updates 682 repolist: 17,492 # yum repolist --disablerepo=epel Loaded plugins: fastestmirror, langpacks, priorities Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile * base: ftp.ines.lug.ro * elrepo: ftp.ines.lug.ro * extras: ftp.ines.lug.ro * updates: ftp.ines.lug.ro repo id repo name status base/7/x86_64 CentOS-7 - Base 8,652 elrepo ELRepo.org Community Enterprise Linux Repository - el7143 extras/7/x86_64 CentOS-7 - Extras 128 updates/7/x86_64 CentOS-7 - Updates682 repolist: 9,605 So what's going on with epel? TIA, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Looking for a life-save LVM Guru
On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 19:24:57 -0800 John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote: On 2/27/2015 4:52 PM, Khemara Lyn wrote: What is the right way to recover the remaining PVs left? take a filing cabinet packed full of 10s of 1000s of files of 100s of pages each, with the index cards interleaved in the files, and remove 1/4th of the pages in the folders, including some of the indexes... and toss everything else on the floor...this is what you have. 3 out of 4 pages, semi-randomly with no idea whats what. And this is why I don't like LVM to begin with. If one of the drives dies, you're screwed not only for the data on that drive, but even for data on remaining healthy drives. I never really saw the point of LVM. Storing data on plain physical partitions, having an intelligent directory structure and a few wise well-placed symlinks across the drives can go a long way in having flexible storage, which is way more robust than LVM. With today's huge drive capacities, I really see no reason to adjust the sizes of partitions on-the-fly, and putting several TB of data in a single directory is just Bad Design to begin with. That said, if you have a multi-TB amount of critical data while not having at least a simple RAID-1 backup, you are already standing in a big pile of sh*t just waiting to become obvious, regardless of LVM and stuff. Hardware fails, and storing data without a backup is just simply a disaster waiting to happen. Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Another Fedora decision
On Fri, 30 Jan 2015 14:15:05 -0800 Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Scott Robbins scot...@nyc.rr.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 03:39:47PM -0600, Frank Cox wrote: On Fri, 30 Jan 2015 16:13:17 -0500 Scott Robbins wrote: You may have noticed how if Fedora, by some odd scheme, deems your password unworthy, you have to click Done two times. Centos 7 does that as well. Heh, I guess I've used good passwords in my installs then. I have to tap it twice all the time. But don't tell this to anyone! ;-) OP's point is that probably in RHEL8 you won't be able to do even that anymore. While I personally think this is a good idea, this has some potential to maybe cause trouble or inconvenience down the line, with regards to automated installs, broken kickstart scripts, various company policies regarding the root password, etc. I guess there are sensitive scenarios out there. So if any CentOS user think they can be hurt by this change, they should do something about it now, rather than bitch about compatibility breakage when RHEL8 comes out in a couple of years. :-) HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 7 Nvidia openGL breaks vncserver
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 11:32:36 -0700 Stan Cruise stancru...@me.com wrote: Bare metal Centos 6.5, vncserver running, client able to connect with perfect resolution. Nvidia GT240, driver 331.49. Upgrade to Centos 7 with nouveau basic driver, all still works fine. Resolution poor on wire connected monitor, but perfect on vnc client session (1920x1080). Upgrade Nvidia driver via elrepo. 340.58; removed nouveau via 'Software' manager. Excellent wired monitor resolution. But Client vnc connect receives the dreaded 'oh no, something has .' Are you maybe trying to run Gnome3 through vnc by any chance? Because Gnome3 requires 3D acceleration, and I'm not sure that nvidia driver would simulate 3D stuff in software (nouveau should fall back to mesa in case hardware acceleration fails --- typical of a vnc session). So my suggestion is to try KDE or XFCE or LXDE or Mate or... any other DE which doesn't require 3D features to work. Such DE should work through vnc using nvidia driver no problem --- the only exception is Gnome3. Backed out Nvidia 340.58, back to nouveau, client vnc works again. Also tried 304 driver (only other one in elrepo for el7) - same problem. You don't want to guess which driver you need. Use the nvidia-detect utility from elrepo, it will tell you which driver to install. Research seems to indicate that openGL does not play well with vnc. I cannot see any solutions posted as yet. So, what are my options? My choice would be to try a less demanding DE first. Maybe change out the video card for AMD? I cannot know if the Catalyst driver will work, but there is a much more active and extensive open driver community, which could work better than nouveau? Catalyst driver has always been a pure gamble for me (i.e. worked 50% of time, supported 50% of video cards, and could be installed on 50% distributions... or so...). The open-source radeon driver is much better supported. That said, the radeon community is not any more active or more extensive than the nouveau community. It's just that AMD has released the specs for their cards, so they have a much easier job of maintaining the radeon driver than the nouveau community (which basically needs to RE everything from scratch). HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.5 equivalents in CentOS 7
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 03:56:58 + Always Learning cen...@u62.u22.net wrote: iptables -A table-name -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT No reboot needed. 'table-name' can be INPUT or another user defined table name. firewall-cmd with its Windoze-like structure and syntax is definitely unappealing to many normal firewall users. If you compare the syntax of the two equivalent commands, iptables -I INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT and firewall-cmd --add-service=http I'd say that the second one appears simpler, more readable, more intuitive, and less sensitive to typos. No reboot is required for either. I fail to see what is so unappealing to a user in the second one. I don't know who is a normal firewall user. Finally, I don't see any Windows-like syntax in the second one (AFAIK, Windows doesn't have any syntax, you need to click your way through menus and checkboxes and stuff to tweak the firewall in Windows). Incidentally, since I started using Linux I have always found iptables to have a very user-unfriendly syntax. Whenever I needed to tweak the firewall, I had to look up the man page for iptables, in order to make sure I don't screw myself over between -A and -I, -N and -n, -P and -p, etc. It was a royal pain having to pay attention to the order of the rules in the table. It was stupid having to look up explicit port numbers for common services. Various GUIs and TUIs of the time only added a whole new level of obscurity. So I find the firewall-cmd syntax to be a major step forward wrt to iptables. At least for the vast majority of common usecases. And no, I am not a novice user from Windowsland --- I've been Linux-only since RedHat 6.2 (Zoot), back in the previous millennium... ;-) Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.5 equivalents in CentOS 7
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 16:24:02 +1300 Peter pe...@pajamian.dhs.org wrote: On 10/30/2014 04:16 PM, Jason T. Slack-Moehrle wrote: yes, so I just figured out. Thank you so much. Where does `semanage` come from? I tried policycoreutils-python but it cannot be found. It should be in policycoreutils-python. Try: yum provides \*bin/semanage Yes, it is there: policycoreutils-python-2.2.5-11.el7_0.1.x86_64 : SELinux policy core python utilities Repo: @updates Matched from: Filename: /sbin/semanage HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.5 equivalents in CentOS 7
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:04:32 + Always Learning cen...@u62.u22.net wrote: The order of rules in any IPtables table is pure common sense and very logical. Essentially, the first rule is the first action. The second rule is the second action etc. Sure, I do know how it works. :-) However, the iptables requires me to think about it when specifying -I or -A every time I modify the rules. My beef is that in most situations I don't really need to be bothered with that --- if I want to open a http port, the machine should be the one to figure out where to put the rule. I want to be bothered with rule order only when I am doing something complicated enough, not for every firewall modification. The firewall-cmd syntax appears to me to be dumbing-down and de-skilling. It hides the technical information behind the command, to the detriment of the technical user. I'd say that the vast majority of users never actually need to see that technical information. Most server deployments are standardized, and the user just wants to say I have http, ssh, openvpn, dhcp... services running on this machine, open appropriate ports. Only the more intricate configurations should require a learning curve. You seem to be pushing the argument that we should give up Office suites and force the user to write everything in TeX, since it is more powerful and exposes a lot more technical details to the user. But TeX comes with a steep learning curve, and the vast majority of people don't really need it. Similarly, C is far more powerful then, say, Phyton or a bash script, so should we do all our scripting in C? I have a feeling that RedHat has some internal statistics coming from customer support channels, and that in 99% of the cases the question is how do I open a firewall port for httpd, while only in 1% of the cases the question is I'm masquerading a subnet from one LAN, while I want trusted access for three machines from another LAN, but only through a customized sshd port, while everything else should go as usual, except for mail originating from a local server So the idea is to adapt the firewall-cmd tool for the most common usecases, and not requre them to touch stuff under the hood for simple tasks. People who need complicated setups can either learn how to achieve that using firewall-cmd itself, or shut down firewalld and configure iptables manually. But this should be an exception, rather than a rule, IMHO. In IPtables -A 4web -p tcp --dport 81 -j ACCEPT In firewall-cmd firewall-cmd --add-service=http but that refers to port 80. firewall-cmd --add-port=81/tcp Look at the examples section of man firewall-cmd. :-) Hence IPtables is a lot more flexible. The contrast is like playing a piano without gloves and then wearing boxing gloves - the precision has vanished. Running httpd on port 81 is not really common, since all real-world clients are expecting it on to be on port 80. Besides, I haven't came across a configuration which can be achieved via iptables but not via firewall-cmd (though that doesn't mean that such a config doesn't exist). IMO firewall-cmd and iptables are fairly equivalent in expressive power, while the former is easier to use in most common situations. So precision is not lost, should you require it. But in most cases you don't really need it. An informed user derives more from his computer system than someone who uses the 'dumb-down' simplified pre-packaged alternative - especially when there is a problem. I have a feeling that it's just the case of lazy sysadmins who don't want to bother reading the man page for firewall-cmd. They seem to be the ones who are not informed. Moreover, the lockdown and panic options seem to be an improvement in functionality, which does not exist if you only use iptables. There might also be other functionality upgrades, I haven't studied firewalld in detail yet. Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.5 equivalents in CentOS 7
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 17:50:54 -0700 Jason T. Slack-Moehrle slackmoeh...@gmail.com wrote: I tried to install CentOS 7 on a new system. It works. However, I'm noticing small things: 1. system-config-network-tui is not installed and yum cannot find it. I realized for this -- nmtui What about firewall? I can't seem to understand the replacement from system-config-firewall-tui man firewall-cmd HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Systemd Adding Its Own Console To Linux Systems
On Fri, 10 Oct 2014 11:05:19 -0500 (CDT) Valeri Galtsev galt...@kicp.uchicago.edu wrote: It is about fundamental approach. We always modularize things: split into smaller subunits each of the last doing its smaller task. This allows to make smaller things work reliably, and test these smaller things more comprehensively. As it is much smaller number of combinations of factors you need to repeat your test with in case of subunits. People use this approach for ages. Programs are split into subroutines. Rockets are built from to awful degree independent modules. We had this modular system V boot until recently. We lost it. What makes you think that systemd is not modular? Have you actually looked at its structure (let alone the code)? If you look inside /usr/lib/systemd/ do you see one big monolithic library which represents one big failure point, or do you see a few dozen dedicated small libraries, each doing one particular thing? I don't really see how systemd violates the do one thing and do it well philosophy. A lot of people seem to ignore the fact that systemd is *not* one binary executable which replaces init and tries to take control of everything, but rather a whole swarm of independent binaries, each in charge of one particular function of the OS. If one of them breaks for some reason, others will still keep functioning. It appears to me that much of bashing of systemd is just FUD. One of the typical misconceptions is the disable vs. mask for services --- despite appearances, the systemd disable does *exactly* the same thing that SYSV disable did. But people simply refuse to understand it (or never even bother to learn the details), and keep bashing systemd for making the distinction between disabling and masking a service. I'd suggest to go get familiar with the internals of systemd first, and only after that come back and criticize its shortcomings. Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Skype on CentOS 6.5
On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 21:09:41 -0400 Mark LaPierre marklap...@gmail.com wrote: About a week ago my Skype installation stopped working. I can start it up but I can't log on. [snip] Can anyone offer some sound advice to getting my Skype running again? The reason skype stopped working is that Microsoft decided to change its communication protocol in an incompatible way, starting from 1. August. In order to continue working, all devices running skype (computers, smartphones, etc.) on all operating systems must update to the latest version of skype for their platform. For Linux, this is version 4.3.0.37. As far as CentOS 6 is concerned, you want to download the latest dynamic skype tarball from the skype website [1], and install it as per instructions on the CentOS wiki [2]. Essentially, the installation is the same as for previous versions, no surprises. Works well for me. As far as CentOS 5 is concerned, no support, forget it. HTH, :-) Marko [1] http://www.skype.com/en/download-skype/skype-for-computer/ [2] http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Skype ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] KVM in CentOS 5?
Hi folks, I've been trying to do some KVM virtualization on a C5 host, and to my surprise, there seems to be no kvm package in any of the repos. Yum install kvm says: No package kvm available. Nothing to do This machine is a CentOS release 5.10 (Final) with the 2.6.18-371.11.1.el5 kernel. Also, the docs related to C5 on http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/KVM seem to be terribly outdated. What am I missing here? TIA, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] KVM in CentOS 5?
On Thu, 7 Aug 2014 22:54:40 +0300 Eero Volotinen eero.voloti...@iki.fi wrote: 2014-08-07 22:49 GMT+03:00 Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com: I've been trying to do some KVM virtualization on a C5 host, and to my surprise, there seems to be no kvm package in any of the repos. read docs at https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5/pdf/Virtualization/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux-5-Virtualization-en-US.pdf I did read those. On page 31 the instructions say that kvm can be installed via yum by saying yum install kvm. That's where I got stuck. Why you are using Centos 5 ? version 6 and 7 are already released? This host is a remote machine, and I will not have physical access to it until next month. While I do plan to scrap it and install C7, I don't feel like attempting to do that remotely. :-) As for guests that should run on that host, I figured that I could create and run them even now, and just back them up when I get to upgrading the host. I wouldn't like to waste a whole month of guests not running, just waiting for the host upgrade. So, is there any possibility to have kvm on C5? Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] KVM in CentOS 5?
On Thu, 7 Aug 2014 16:27:50 -0400 Fred Smith fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us wrote: On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 09:21:31PM +0100, Marko Vojinovic wrote: On Thu, 7 Aug 2014 22:54:40 +0300 Eero Volotinen eero.voloti...@iki.fi wrote: 2014-08-07 22:49 GMT+03:00 Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com: I've been trying to do some KVM virtualization on a C5 host, and to my surprise, there seems to be no kvm package in any of the repos. read docs at https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5/pdf/Virtualization/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux-5-Virtualization-en-US.pdf I did read those. On page 31 the instructions say that kvm can be installed via yum by saying yum install kvm. That's where I got stuck. At the bottom of page 15 it specifies that you must be running a 64-bit OS on (obviously) 64-bit hardware. are you? Oooh, no. The hardware certainly is 64-bit, and does have the vmx flag. But it turns out that the C5 installed on it is 32-bit... Damn old thing, I completely missed to check for OS arch. I guess that explains it, then. Sorry for the noise. :-( Thanks, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] KVM in CentOS 5?
On Thu, 7 Aug 2014 23:39:01 +0300 Eero Volotinen eero.voloti...@iki.fi wrote: 2014-08-07 23:21 GMT+03:00 Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com: On Thu, 7 Aug 2014 22:54:40 +0300 Eero Volotinen eero.voloti...@iki.fi wrote: 2014-08-07 22:49 GMT+03:00 Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com: So, is there any possibility to have kvm on C5? yes, just do 'yum install kvm' and remember that x86_64 cpu with hardware virtualization is needed .. ... And in addition to that, I need to have a 64-bit OS running on it, which I apparently don't. Just my luck. :-( Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?
On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 10:32:16 -0500 Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Jonathan Billings billi...@negate.org wrote: It also is significantly less-featureful than a shell programming language. Yes, you're going to be using shell elsewhere, but in my experience, the structure of most SysVinit scripts is nearly identical, and where it deviates is where things often get confusing to people not as familiar with shell scripting. Many of the helper functions in /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions seem to exist to STOP people from writing unique shell code in their init scripts. Yes, reusing common code and knowledge is a good thing. But spending a bit of time learning shell syntax will help you with pretty much everything else you'll ever do on a unix-like system, where spending that time learning a new way to make your program start at boot will just get you back to what you already could do on previous systems. Les, I could re-use your logic to argue that one should never even try to learn bash, and stick to C instead. Every *real* user of UNIX-like systems should be capable of writing C code, which is used in so many more circumstances than bash. C is so much more powerful, more expressive, immensely faster, covers a broader set of use-cases, is being used in so many more circumstances than bash, is far more generic, and in the long run it's a good investment in programming skills and knowledge. Why would you ever want to start your system using some clunky shell-based interpreter like bash, (which cannot even share memory between processes in a native way), when you can simply write a short piece of C code, fork() all your services, compile it, and run? All major pieces of any UNIX-like system were traditionally written in C, so what would be the point of ever introducing a less powerful language like bash, and doing the system startup in that? And if you really insist on writing commands interactively into a command prompt, you are welcome to use tcsh, and reuse all the syntax and well-earned knowledge of C, rather than invest time to learn yet-another-obscure-scripting-language... Right? Or not? If not, you may want to reconsider your argument against systemd --- it's simple, clean, declarative, does one thing and does it well, and it doesn't pretend to be a panacea of system administration like bash does. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] List attitude and content
On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 13:44:25 +1000 Anthony K akcen...@anroet.com wrote: Having to open up a thread just to find +1 is a waste of time for us all! +1 // Sorry, couldn't resist... ;-) // Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] OpenVPN problem
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 01:15:15 + Timothy Murphy gayle...@eircom.net wrote: I'm interested to know how you - or anyone else implementing OpenVPN - actually uses it in practice. Well, I tend to support a number of people (Linux/computing noobs in general), maintaining their laptops and desktops. So each machine that I maintain is connected to my VPN, and I can access it whenever the client needs me to, wherever their laptop might be at the moment. Most of those machines are personal laptops, being carried all over the planet and connected to all sorts of networks. Any dynamic DNS stuff is useless for them, and they are typically behind some NAT in some third-party's LAN, in a hotel room or a university wireless LAN or an airport or at home or... You get the picture. So having them all in my VPN is very efficient. I typically use SSH to access them, VNC if needed. I also roll an apache server on one of my machines, so that I can access it from client-side if needed. As far as fixing problems and maintenance goes, it's the next best thing to having the machine in my office on my desk. The only two things I cannot troubleshoot are hardware problems and network access failures. :-) Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] OpenVPN problem
On Sun, 09 Feb 2014 19:33:49 + Timothy Murphy gayle...@eircom.net wrote: I have OpenVPN set up; I found the brief instructions that come with CentOS openvpn (eg /etc/openvpn/2.0/README) perfectly adequate - what I'm asking about is the _use_ of OpenVPN. Sorry, what exactly are you asking for here? The implemented OpenVPN is nothing but a (virtual, distributed, etc...) LAN. Imagine several hosts connected together with a switch and a bunch of ethernet cables. It is used in the same way an ordinary LAN can be used. Imagine having several computers connected in a local network. How do you use this LAN? Well, you can ssh/ftp/ping among hosts, you can deploy various services among them (dns, nfs, samba, apache, mta, gaming servers, whatever...), and so on. The network is *virtual* in the sense that there are no physical cables and switches connecting the nodes directly. It is *private* because all communication is encrypted. But other than that, a VPN is simply a *network*, like any other network, and can be used in all the ways an ordinary network can. An additional usage point is managing access certificates --- if you share your VPN with other people, you can issue certificates to all people who are supposed to join the network, revoke certificates from people you want to kick out of the network, etc. One obvious benefit of VPN is that the nodes can be widely distributed geographically, while still connected into a single (virtual) LAN. It is also completely immaterial how is any given node physically connected to the Internet --- VPN is transparent to firewalls, NAT-s, etc. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] OpenVPN problem
On Sun, 09 Feb 2014 18:14:12 + Ken Smith k...@kensnet.org wrote: Its down to the question about what you are needing to do. If you just need SSH access then SSH direct without VPN is just fine. SSH itself is encrypted and the VPN just encrypts the already encrypted traffic again and just slows things down. Direct SSH access might be impossible if the remote machine is behind a NAT. Using SSH through VPN is a very convenient solution in those cases. I also happen to use OpenVPN, for precisely that reason. HTH, :-) Marko ___ 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] CentOS 6.5 VirtualBox
On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 09:50:41 -0800 John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote: On 12/5/2013 5:35 AM, Toralf Lund wrote: Precisely! An the host being the CentOS 6.5 system. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough about this, although it seemed obvious when I wrote the post. The guest OS really doesn't come into the picture at all, in that VirtualBox seems to crash long before it starts thinking about loading it. have you considered using KVM rather than VirtualBox for this? Configured properly, its much higher performance. AFAIK, KVM does not support host CPU's which don't have virtualization support. If OP has somewhat aged hardware, he may have no option but to use VirtualBox. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.5 VirtualBox
On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 15:28:29 -0800 John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote: On 12/5/2013 12:30 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote: AFAIK, KVM does not support host CPU's which don't have virtualization support. If OP has somewhat aged hardware, he may have no option but to use VirtualBox. that would be some old crufty hardware, like pentium-4 (or the equivalent single core xeon stuff), hardly worth TRYING to virtualize on, except for very low performance 32-bit-only VM's, for test/dev kind of applications. Well, I have a 64-bit Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T5250 @ 1.50GHz and it does not have hardware virtualization support. This processor is not *that* old. According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_VT-x#Intel_virtualization_.28VT-x.29), even some 2011 processors (namely P6100 series) do not have virtualization support. For the full list of which cpu's have/don't have vmx flag see for example http://ark.intel.com/Products/VirtualizationTechnology So cpu's without vmx are not as ancient as they might appear. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] k3b - cddb doesn't work
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 13:25:23 +0200 Joerg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote: John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote: The allegation was that some of it is CDDL, which is problematic. The CDDL was accepted as definitely OSS compliant by bopensource.org within 14 days and without to mention problems. The GPL did take a longer time to get approved because the GPL license text is in conflict with the OpenSource definition. The approval was given with a longer delay after the FSF explained that the GPL has to be interpreted in a way that makes it OSS compliant. The issue is not compliance with opensource.org or otherwise. Each distro decides which licenses to prefer, which to tolerate and which to not tolerate. In the Linux communities, GPL is by far the most commonly used license, and it is accepted by virtually all Linux distros. So if you want your software to be used by the majority of Linux distros without license-related hiccups, you can always just re-license it to GPL and everyone will be happy. If, on the other hand, you have a reason to prefer CDDL over GPL for your software, then you should also acknowledge that each distro has an equal right to prefer GPL over CDDL, whatever the reasons. It's democracy --- as much as you have the right to license your software as you see fit, they equally have the right to not like your license and to boycott your software because of it. And there should be no hard feelings --- everyone is responsible for the consequences of their choices. Live with it. :-) HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] k3b - cddb doesn't work
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 18:09:10 +0200 Joerg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote: Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com wrote: So if you want your software to be used by the majority of Linux distros without license-related hiccups, you can always just re-license it to GPL and everyone will be happy. You seem to be missinformed: When cdrtools have been 100% GPL, it was attacked by Debian _because_ it was 100% GPL and because the GPL is a frequently missinterpreted license. ...so I decided to choose a less problematic license than the GPL. It is indeed true that I might be misinformed --- I am writing from my (possibly faulty) memory here... But as far as my memory serves, the issue was not that cdrtools were GPL, but that the toolchain for building cdrtools source (was that called schilly-tools?) was non-GPL. And the dispute was about the interpretation of the GPL --- does it require you to license the whole build-toolchain as GPL if cdrtools are GPL, or does it not require you to do so. And that was where things regarding GPL interpretations got complicated, and all that ugly story with Debian folks that followed. In essence, the conclusion was that there was no fully-GPL-kind of way (whatever that might mean) to distribute cdrtools such that the binaries could be built from source, if toolchain for the build is non-GPL. That was the reason why cdrtools were attacked for being GPL, as you said. So to avoid this problem, you re-licensed cdrtools to CDDL, which does not require any restrictions on the licence of the toolchain. And ever since then, various distros refuse to bundle cdrtools since the toolchain used for building the cdrtools binaries has a license that makes it unsuitable for them. Or something along those lines. That is how I remember the whole story, in short. Of course, my memory might be faulty, you certainly know all those details much better than I remember them. Nevertheless, my point was the following --- assuming that the dispute was as I described it above, or something along those lines, the whole thing could be resolved if you just re-license *both* cdrtools and the schilly toolchain to be GPL. Or maybe dual-licence them, as Les suggested in another post. Not wanting to do that is of course your prerogative, but I believe it would solve all license-related problems for the cdrtools in one single and simple step. That way all distros could be allowed to bundle your software without any issues. software as you see fit, they equally have the right to not like your license and to boycott your software because of it. Democracy is that the doers and this are software authors decide about the license. Sure, no argument there. :-) Distros are just users of the software and have to accept the license and as long as the license is doubtless OSS compliant, I see no reason why a distro should complain. Well, it is certainly more complicated than that. Different distros obey different internal and external rules which licenses to accept and which to refuse. There are many things in play there --- legislation of the country of origin, eventual patent issues, internal distro policies about what constitutes as freedom, etc... Fedora is a typical example where one can find all sorts of complicated reasons why something was not included. So while every distro is of course required to accept the way you licensed your own software, other reasons might prevent them to bundle your software, despite your license being generally OSS compliant. This is of course unfortunate, but it is not simply the case of distro being evil or something --- it may be a consequence of complicated interactions between several sets of rules, etc., leaving them with no choice in the matter. Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] k3b - cddb doesn't work
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 11:18:48 -0700 John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote: On 8/21/2013 10:05 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: But Debian attacked cdrtools for using the GPL when it has been 100% GPL. I find this an extremely odd assertation. I am not nor ever have been a Debian user, but I know Debian is based on the Linux Kernel, uses GCC, gnu libc, etc as its core, and these are ALL gpl. in what way were you 'attacked' by a 'project' (not an individual? we all know individuals can act loony) for using the same license as the bulk of the rest of the Debian distribution? While Joerg certainly knows better... I think the issue was that cdrtools could be built only with the schilly-toolchain (or whatever the exact name), and that was *not* GPL. So according to some interpretations of the GPL, while cdrtools was claiming to be GPL-licensed, there was no GPL-compatible way to build the binaries from that source, which arguably made it violate GPL. That's why Debian folks attacked, as far as I understood. The issue was resolved by Joerg re-licensing the cdrtools to CDDL, which does not impose restrictions on the toolchain used to build it. And that made it a no-go for mostly all distros since. All this with the usual caveat that my memory might not be very correct here... ;-) Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL Subscriptions
On Sun, 18 Aug 2013 19:50:23 -0700 Keith Keller kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us wrote: On 2013-08-19, Anthony K akcen...@anroet.com wrote: I was recently approached by Dell stating that I HAVE TO renew my Red Hat Subscriptions. ...or what? ...or else!!! // ...sorry, couldn't resist... :-D // :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] convert webpage to image
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 07:20:03 -0700 (PDT) Joseph Spenner joseph85...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Carl T. Miller c...@carltm.com To: CentOS centos@centos.org Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 5:47 AM Subject: [CentOS] convert webpage to image What is the easiest way to convert a webpage into a jpg or png file? I've seen several programs that can do various conversions, but nothing open source that can do it in a single conversion. I wrote a few lines to do this, but it involves using firefox, and 'import' from ImageMagick. The first script starts firefox in a virtual frame: === Xvfb :2 -screen 0 1280x1024x24 /dev/null 21 export DISPLAY=localhost:2.0 firefox http://ip.of.your.page/page.html === Then the second script captures/crops what I want: === export DISPLAY=localhost:2.0 import -crop '1024x512+54+235' -window root /path/to/result.png == You'll have to adjust the crop values to what you want. But what if the size of the website is larger than the screen size? I assume the OP wants to see the whole website in a single picture, and the website might span more than a single visible screen (and require scrolling to see the whole thing). All screenshot-related methods would then need to take multiple pictures, scroll the website in the browser a windowfull at a time in all directions, and afterwards calculate how to concatenate all those pictures into a big one. While this can be done in principle, I think that any implementation would get Real Ugly Real Soon(tm). A more reasonable approach would be to have the browser itself dump the image of the site --- the browser is the one actually rendering the thing from html in the first place. Any browser plugins around for this? Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Touchpad doesn't work with C6, kernel-related...
On Sat, 23 Mar 2013 07:24:25 -0700 Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 7:04 AM, Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com wrote: I have a Fujitsu Lifebook U series laptop running updated CentOS 6.4 (64bit), and the touchpad doesn't work. It's a new laptop, the touchpad works correctly in Fedora 18 Live (given the kernel parameters below), no hardware problems. I searched the web all around, and it's a known issue for several laptop models. The only solution, quoted everywhere, it is to append the i8042.notimeout i8042.nomux to the kernel parameters. The problem is that the latest CentOS6 kernel (2.6.32-358.2.1.el6.x86_64) doesn't appear to recognize these. Or it otherwise ignores them. I did append the parameters, but (unlike in Fedora) the touchpad is still dead. Just did a quick check. The current CentOS kernel (centosplus kernel as well) seems to have code for i8042.nomux but not i8042.notimeout in linux/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c . You might want to give ELRepo's kernel-ml a try: http://elrepo.org/tiki/kernel-ml It is the latest mainline kernel that runs on CentOS. The mainline kernel works beautifully, thanks! :-) Now the only question is how does it coexist with the regular kernels? More precisely, when I do a yum update, and there are new kernels available in the update, how will they be ordered in /boot/grub/grub.conf, and which one will be the default on a subsequent boot? I have enabled the elrepo-kernel repository, so both types of kernels will get updates. However, I want to boot only from the mainline kernels, never from the regular ones. How should I configure grub and/or yum, to make this stick? Thanks again for the advice! :-) Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Touchpad doesn't work with C6, kernel-related...
On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 14:34:15 + Nux! n...@li.nux.ro wrote: On 24.03.2013 14:29, Marko Vojinovic wrote: The mainline kernel works beautifully, thanks! :-) Now the only question is how does it coexist with the regular kernels? More precisely, when I do a yum update, and there are new kernels available in the update, how will they be ordered in /boot/grub/grub.conf, and which one will be the default on a subsequent boot? I have enabled the elrepo-kernel repository, so both types of kernels will get updates. However, I want to boot only from the mainline kernels, never from the regular ones. How should I configure grub and/or yum, to make this stick? The 2 kernels will coexist peacefully. If you modify /boot/grub/menu.lst to boot the elrepo kernel-ml it will remember to boot the same kernel next time, after an update. Thanks for the info! I have already modified it to boot the ml kernel by default, but I was worried since the first installation of the ml kernel has left the original kernel as a default. But at this point, if yum will always do the Right Thing and make the current default stick to ml, then the issue is solved. :-) Thanks again! Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Touchpad doesn't work with C6, kernel-related...
Hi folks! :-) I have a Fujitsu Lifebook U series laptop running updated CentOS 6.4 (64bit), and the touchpad doesn't work. It's a new laptop, the touchpad works correctly in Fedora 18 Live (given the kernel parameters below), no hardware problems. I searched the web all around, and it's a known issue for several laptop models. The only solution, quoted everywhere, it is to append the i8042.notimeout i8042.nomux to the kernel parameters. The problem is that the latest CentOS6 kernel (2.6.32-358.2.1.el6.x86_64) doesn't appear to recognize these. Or it otherwise ignores them. I did append the parameters, but (unlike in Fedora) the touchpad is still dead. This laptop is to be used by a noob user who needs a LTS distro and is already accustomed to CentOS, so a more modern distro like Fedora or Ubuntu is not an option. What can be done about this? Would a CentOSplus kernel work? It is somehow too lousy to tell the client The touchpad of your brand-new laptop doesn't work because CentOS is too old, use an USB mouse instead. Any advice appreciated. TIA, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] X/Display resolution configuration
On Monday, 8. October 2012. 12.52.18 Mike Watson wrote: On 10/08/2012 12:38 PM, Nux! wrote: On 08.10.2012 18:20, Mike Watson wrote: I've installed CentOS 6.3 on a new system. I've a nagging problem that I'm trying to fix---the screen resolution changes. I've a flat screen monitor that has 1600x900 capability. However when I logout and then log back in the resolution changes to 1280x1024. When I looked at the xorg.conf.d directory it was empty---both in /etc and in /usr/share. Where is xorg.conf and it's monitor section now? BTW, I'm use KDE. On Gnome you would use gnome-display-properties to set the resolution. Not sure if it works on KDE though. Tried that. It's present in KDE, too. I've set it numerous times but the next time I logout and back in, the resolution drops to a lower density. Where is this value stored in 6.3. My previous box, Fedora 7 used Xorg but I can't find the Xorg.conf file for 6.3. All I've found so far is an empty directory. KDE/Gnome is irrelevant, the monitor resolution is controlled by X. The proper way to troubleshoot these issues is to provide us with the output of xrandr, and the complete log file /var/log/Xorg.0.log, for both the correct- and wrong- resolution sessions. It is possible that your monitor is not providing the correct EDID data, or you have two monitors plugged in at the same time, or something similar. Please provide the logs and describe your setup (graphics card, video driver, number of monitors, etc.), and then we should be able to tell you what is going on and why. As for the xorg.conf file, it does not exist anymore by default, unless you create one yourself. The proper path is /etc/X11/xorg.conf . Write the part of configuration that you need customized (other stuff you can leave to be autodetected). HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] X/Display resolution configuration
On Monday, 8. October 2012. 15.54.19 Mike Watson wrote: Here's the output of xrandr. My Xorg.0.log does not exist. That is very very weird. The log file should exist. Here is one of my machines: [root@bojan ~]# ll /var/log/Xorg.0.log -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 31880 Sep 21 14:18 /var/log/Xorg.0.log [root@bojan ~]# uname -a Linux bojan 2.6.32-279.5.2.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Fri Aug 24 01:07:11 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux Note that 0 in the filename is the digit zero, not the capital letter O. Maybe the confusion is there. Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 1600 x 900, maximum 8192 x 8192 VGA1 connected 1600x900+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 440mm x 250mm 1600x900 60.0*+ 1280x1024 75.0 60.0 1280x960 60.0 1280x800 59.8 1152x864 75.0 1280x720 60.0 1024x768 75.1 70.1 60.0 832x62474.6 800x60072.2 75.0 60.3 56.2 640x48072.8 75.0 66.7 60.0 720x40070.1 HDMI1 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) DP1 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) This looks perfectly normal. The 1600x900 resolution is the preferred default and active. My system will run the 1600x900 60.0*+ selection if I choose it at login. Otherwise it reverts to a lower selection 1280x1024. What do you mean by choose at login? How exactly are you logging in and where are you offered this choice? HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] slowness with new kernel+nouveau?
On Thursday, 16. August 2012. 16.34.01 Sorin Srbu wrote: -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of m.r...@5-cent.us Sent: den 16 augusti 2012 16:13 To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] slowness with new kernel+nouveau? I hear rumors that kmod-nvidia will be coming in RHEL soon, and so here to CentOS. Any source for the rumors? It'd be great though! It's in fc17. No it isn't. As long as nVidia drivers are closed source and proprietary, they will never be in Fedora. I wouldn't know about RHEL, though, they might decide whatever they want to do. However, some main Nouveau developers are employed by RH, so I wouldn't bet on RHEL importing nVidia drivers. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] SSD as system drive - partitioning question
On Tuesday, 17. April 2012. 17.40.32 Frank Cox wrote: My plan is to have everything that doesn't change (much) on the SSD, such as /boot, /lib, /bin and so on. I want to put /tmp and /var and /home on the regular hard drive. Now that I'm at the stage of actually setting this up I have discovered that I don't understand enough about drive partitioning to make this work the way that I want it to. Perhaps I'm missing something obvious. I could create separate partitions on the SSD for /lib, /bin and everything else that I want to put there, then put / on the hard drive, but I would really prefer to put /boot and one other partition on the SSD, and one partition on the hard drive. How can I tell the system that I want /bin and friends on the SSD and /home and /var on the hard drive, but still have just one partition on each drive (plus /boot on the SSD)? If I create / on the hard drive and /ssd on the SSD, then putting bin on the SSD would make it /ssd/bin and that would obviously not be what I want to see. You want to create two partitions on the SSD and three on the HD. The SSD partitions should have the mount points /boot and /, while the HD partitions should have mount points /tmp, /var and /home. That's all there is to it, really. It seems that you are just missing the observation that (by default) everything that does not have its own mount point will be put as a directory into / during the installation. However, directories that *do* have their own mount points will be put on their respective drives, and just logically mounted into the / tree. So you just create separate partitions for stuff you want to go to the HD, and everything else will go inside the / partition, which should be on the SSD. Btw, I stopped bothering to create a separate /boot partition some time ago, and never looked back... What is your usecase for having it separated from / ? HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Need help configuring wireless NIC
On Tuesday, 27. March 2012. 19.45.33 Ned Slider wrote: That ndiswrapper issue should hopefully be fixed now with the kmod-ndiswrapper-1.57-1.el6 release. It at least gives you that option should the native driver prove fruitless. Indeed, the new ndiswrapper works perfectly! :-) The compat-wireless looks promising, but it still seems rough around the edges, and I needed a working solution asap, so... ;-) Thanks for help! Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Need help configuring wireless NIC
On Tuesday, 27. March 2012. 10.02.25 Arun Khan wrote: On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com wrote: Yesterday I managed to find a driver for my USB wireless dongle, and it is now correctly recognized by the kernel. However, I don't know how to configure it. How did you install the driver that you found? Basically, I did this (following the advice of Ned Slider, from another thread): # yum --enablerepo=elrepo-testing kmod-compat-wireless # modprobe usb8xxx Namely, on the http://elrepo.org/tiki/kmod-compat-wireless there is a list of drivers corresponding to various devices. My device is # lsusb Bus 001 Device 006: ID 1286:1fab Marvell Semiconductor, Inc. 88W8338 [Libertas] 802.11g so I did a search on the site for 1286 and found two relevant modules, usb8xxx and libertas. Modprobe-ing usb8xxx loads the following: # lsmod Module Size Used by usb8xxx13926 0 libertas 105931 1 usb8xxx libertas_tf12514 0 mac80211 234108 1 libertas_tf cfg80211 164625 2 libertas,mac80211 rfkill 15242 1 cfg80211 compat 16607 2 mac80211,cfg80211 lib802114194 1 libertas When I plug in the device, /var/log/messages says: Mar 27 08:10:30 CicaMaca kernel: usb 1-2: new high speed USB device using ehci_hcd and address 7 Mar 27 08:10:31 CicaMaca kernel: usb 1-2: New USB device found, idVendor=1286, idProduct=1fab Mar 27 08:10:31 CicaMaca kernel: usb 1-2: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=0 Mar 27 08:10:31 CicaMaca kernel: usb 1-2: Product: 54M USB Wireless NIC Mar 27 08:10:31 CicaMaca kernel: usb 1-2: Manufacturer: Tenda.. Mar 27 08:10:31 CicaMaca kernel: usb 1-2: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice which is basically the same information as found in dmesg. The device is correctly recognized, as far as it goes. What is the output of /sbin/ifconfig -a does it list the wifi device i.e. wlan0 ? No, ifconfig lists only my two wired ethernet devices (eth0, eth1), and the openvpn virtual ethernet device (tap0). No mention of anything wireless. Do ethtool --driver ifaceto find the driver associated with your wifi network interface. What should iface be? There isn't one associated to the wireless NIC, or I am unable to find it. I tried the following methods: # ifconfig -a # lshw -C network # rfkill list # iwconfig None of these report anything except my three wired devices (if at all). I vaguely understand that all these utilities are querrying the kernel for the info about hardware, but the kernel does not seem to be exposing it (or requires some non-automatic initialization). I tried looking at various places under /proc (to see if I can read something manually), but I found nothing, and TBH I don't quite know where to look. Usuall the NetworkManager detects all the active network interfaces and presents the devices. In your case, I suspect the wifi device is not being initialized. The NetworkManager does indeed give some indication that there is a wireless device, but it doesn't tell much. When I do a service NetworkManager restart, this is the only relevant thing I recognized about wireless from /var/log/messages: Mar 27 08:24:24 CicaMaca NetworkManager[30454]: info WiFi enabled by radio killswitch; enabled by state file Mar 27 08:24:24 CicaMaca NetworkManager[30454]: info WWAN enabled by radio killswitch; enabled by state file Mar 27 08:24:24 CicaMaca NetworkManager[30454]: info WiMAX enabled by radio killswitch; enabled by state file Mar 27 08:24:24 CicaMaca NetworkManager[30454]: info Networking is enabled by state file Everything else is about eth0, eth1 and tap0 devices. I can provide full logs if you think I missed something. I am almost out of patience with this, and I'm already considering buying another wireless card, or rather a wireless router which can act as a client to another wireless router, so that I can connect the computer via wired ethernet. I'd prefer not to waste any money on this, especially if it is just a software configuration issue, but I also need the damn thing to start working sooner than later. Btw, the device is working properly under Windows, and it used to work properly under Linux with ndiswrapper. But current ndiswrapper fails to work (or even fails to compile) on current CentOS, so my only option is to try a native Linux driver from kmod-compat-wireless. If there is any way to make this work without throwing money at the problem, I'd appreciate to know. Also
[CentOS] Need help configuring wireless NIC
Hi everyone! :-) Yesterday I managed to find a driver for my USB wireless dongle, and it is now correctly recognized by the kernel. However, I don't know how to configure it. The system-config-network opens up in text mode and is not very forthcoming (it lists ethernet, ISDN and modem as possibilities for configuring a new device). I don't know how to create an /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-whatever manually for my wireless card. NetworkManager doesn't see the device since the ifcfg* script doesn't exist. What am I supposed to do? (Google also didn't help...). The device is listed by lsusb as: # lsusb | grep 802 Bus 001 Device 005: ID 1286:1fab Marvell Semiconductor, Inc. 88W8338 [Libertas] 802.11g The libertas kernel module is loaded: # lsmod | grep liber libertas 105931 0 cfg80211 164625 1 libertas lib802114194 1 libertas How do I find out the name of the device, and how do I create the ifcfg script properly? Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Ndiswrapper refuses to install?
Hi everyone! :-) I have a problem with making a wireless USB dongle work under CentOS 6. The dongle is known to not work natively under Linux and last time I used it (cca 3 years ago) I managed to get it working using ndiswrapper. This time I was hoping to make it work again in the same way. But the yum install kmod-ndiswrapper reports the following (among other regular stuff): Error: Package: kmod-ndiswrapper-1.56-1.el6.elrepo.i686 (elrepo) Requires: kernel(per_cpu__kstat) = 0xb3994c7a Installed: kernel-2.6.32-220.2.1.el6.i686 (@updates) kernel(per_cpu__kstat) = 0x0954e8e2 Installed: kernel-2.6.32-220.4.2.el6.i686 (@updates) kernel(per_cpu__kstat) = 0x0954e8e2 Installed: kernel-2.6.32-220.7.1.el6.i686 (@updates) kernel(per_cpu__kstat) = 0x0954e8e2 Available: kernel-2.6.32-220.el6.i686 (base) kernel(per_cpu__kstat) = 0x0954e8e2 Available: kernel-2.6.32-220.4.1.el6.i686 (updates) kernel(per_cpu__kstat) = 0x0954e8e2 Available: kernel-debug-2.6.32-220.el6.i686 (base) kernel(per_cpu__kstat) = 0x0954e8e2 Available: kernel-debug-2.6.32-220.2.1.el6.i686 (updates) kernel(per_cpu__kstat) = 0x0954e8e2 Available: kernel-debug-2.6.32-220.4.1.el6.i686 (updates) kernel(per_cpu__kstat) = 0x0954e8e2 Available: kernel-debug-2.6.32-220.4.2.el6.i686 (updates) kernel(per_cpu__kstat) = 0x0954e8e2 Available: kernel-debug-2.6.32-220.7.1.el6.i686 (updates) kernel(per_cpu__kstat) = 0x0954e8e2 And yum refuses to install it. I've never seen this kind of report by yum. What's going on here? And more importantly, how do I install kmod-ndiswrapper on my up-to-date CentOS 6.2? Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Ndiswrapper refuses to install?
On Friday, 23. March 2012. 14.36.26 Akemi Yagi wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com wrote: This time I was hoping to make it work again in the same way. But the yum install kmod-ndiswrapper reports the following (among other regular stuff): And yum refuses to install it. I've never seen this kind of report by yum. What's going on here? And more importantly, how do I install kmod-ndiswrapper on my up-to-date CentOS 6.2? That is odd. What is your kernel? uname -mri That would be the latest regular CentOS 6.2 kernel: # uname -mri 2.6.32-220.7.1.el6.i686 i686 i386 Also, there is some chance that you can find a driver for your wireless USB dongle. That would eliminate the need for ndiswrapper. Please give more detailed info. Output from the lsusb command will be useful. lsusb didn't provide any nontrivial output (it reported all USB ports as empty). There was something nontrivial going on in /var/log/messages about kernel not being able to recognize the device or something, but I cannot remember it now. But Ned Slider suggested the kmod-compat-wireless package from elrepo-testing, and after that both /var/log/messages and lsusb reported the proper device (see my response to Ned for details). And it appears to be working fine (so far, I am yet to try to connect with it...). OK, just found that version of kmod-ndiswrapper would not install in CentOS 6.2 kernels. I still hope you don't have to use ndiswrapper. Of course, it is always much better if there are native drivers available. And I'll settle even for the kmod-compat-wireless if it works. The ndiswrapper solution was the last resort, but in the end it seems I won't need it, which is great! :-) Anyway, thanks for help! Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Ndiswrapper refuses to install?
On Friday, 23. March 2012. 21.36.54 Ned Slider wrote: On 23/03/12 21:16, Marko Vojinovic wrote: I have a problem with making a wireless USB dongle work under CentOS 6. The dongle is known to not work natively under Linux and last time I used it (cca 3 years ago) I managed to get it working using ndiswrapper. This time I was hoping to make it work again in the same way. But the yum install kmod-ndiswrapper reports the following (among other regular stuff): [snip] And yum refuses to install it. I've never seen this kind of report by yum. What's going on here? And more importantly, how do I install kmod-ndiswrapper on my up-to-date CentOS 6.2? First up, this is really the wrong list. kmod-ndiswrapper is from the elrepo repository so you should really report end user issues there, not here on the CentOS mailing list. But since we are here... Right, sorry about that... This is a known issue - kmod-ndiswrapper fails on RHEL-6.2 due to kABI breakage. We tried rebuilding 1.56 against the 6.2 kernel but the code fails to compile. The best we could do was to update to 1.57-rc1 (kmod-ndiswrapper-1.57-0.1.rc1.el6.elrepo.i686.rpm) which was the latest release at the time. This package has been in the testing repo since the release of RHEL-6.2 and has yet to receive any feedback - please feel free to be the first: I see. Well, I just tried to install it, and it fails again, this time with a similar but different error: # yum --enablerepo=elrepo-testing install kmod-ndiswrapper [snip regular stuff] Error: Package: kmod-ndiswrapper-1.57-0.1.rc1.el6.elrepo.i686 (elrepo-testing) Requires: ksym(__vmalloc) = 0x5705088a So it still wants something my kernel doesn't seem to have. :-( # uname -mri 2.6.32-220.7.1.el6.i686 i686 i386 However, have you considered using a native Linux driver for your wireless? What chipset is it? The elrepo project has just released kmod-compat-wireless for el6 which is a backport of the kernel-3.3 wireless stack supporting many wireless devices. http://elrepo.org/tiki/kmod-compat-wireless This looks interesting. I just installed it, and it seems to be working! After plugging in the USB dongle, /var/log/messages correctly recognizes the device: Mar 23 23:06:06 CicaMaca kernel: usb 1-2: new high speed USB device using ehci_hcd and address 2 Mar 23 23:06:06 CicaMaca kernel: usb 1-2: New USB device found, idVendor=1286, idProduct=1fab Mar 23 23:06:06 CicaMaca kernel: usb 1-2: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=0 Mar 23 23:06:06 CicaMaca kernel: usb 1-2: Product: 54M USB Wireless NIC Mar 23 23:06:06 CicaMaca kernel: usb 1-2: Manufacturer: Tenda.. Mar 23 23:06:06 CicaMaca kernel: usb 1-2: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice And lsusb now reports: Bus 001 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0002 Linux Foundation 2.0 root hub Bus 002 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0001 Linux Foundation 1.1 root hub Bus 003 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0001 Linux Foundation 1.1 root hub Bus 001 Device 002: ID 1286:1fab Marvell Semiconductor, Inc. 88W8338 [Libertas] 802.11g Both Tenda and Marvell are correct. Now I'll try to start NetworkManager and see if I can get it to connect... :-) Thanks for help! Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Sound drop out with totem. mplayer Can't open audio device /dev/dsp
On Sunday 12 February 2012 18:03:03 Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: On 02/12/2012 05:07 PM, Mark LaPierre wrote: Hey all. This morning I found that my audio playback is randomly sprinkled with sound skips and dropouts. I went to /var/log/yum.log and found this: Feb 09 20:18:22 Updated: lame-3.99.4-2.el6.rf.i686 I'm not saying that caused the problem but it's all I could find that changed. lame-3.99.4-2.el6.rf.i686 is RepoForge package, and if he is the culprit, you have to take it on their mailing list. Lame should not be responsible for the missing /dev/dsp. It is likely that something else got updated as well (what else is in the yum.log?), or that something crashed (pulseaudio, alsa, the kernel... :-) ). The simplest way is to try to logout and login, and see if that helps. If not, reboot. If not, reboot to an older kernel. If not, read logs for pulseaudio etc. Btw, I am writing off the top of my head here, but I think that mplayer should not even try to use /dev/dsp. Try it with mplayer -ao pulse file.wav That should force mplayer to use pulseaudio (which should be the default by now, IIRC). If necessary, put it in mplayer's config file. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] confidence in partitioning tool (6.2)
On Tuesday 31 January 2012 05:34:21 Larry Martell wrote: On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Arun Khan knu...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 9:57 PM, Ken godee k...@perfect-image.com wrote: Maybe a little different answer than you're looking for But why not install VMware Workstation (free)? The OP does not have admin rights to the Windows OS. I presume he would need it to install any piece of software (I use Virtual Box). I can't even defrag the disk without admin rights :-( I'm going to make one more push to get admin, and if not, just go ahead and install CentOS and see what happens. Beware that resizing a Windows partition which has not been defrag'ed is a Bad Idea, and works only if you are lucky enough that Windows didn't use the end- portion of the partition. Maybe it will work on a freshly installed and not- ever-seriously-used Windows, but it's a gamble. If it doesn't work, you're looking at data loss and corruption of the ntfs partition (fixing of the latter may require you to have admin privileges...). If your Windows admin doesn't want to provide you with the privileges, why don't you ask him to resize the partition for you? HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How does a linux DHCP machine inform DNS of its name and obtained address
On Tuesday 31 January 2012 22:06:53 Jerry Geis wrote: I am using a number of DHCP devices on a network. Working fine with CentOS 5 x86_64. My question is now how do I tell the DNS (after I get my DHCP address) about my devices name and IP address so that others can find me by my machine name? What you want is called Dynamic DNS (or DDNS for short), and it needs to be active on the DNS server, if it is to work. You cannot make that work only by configuring the client. I thought that was an automatic thing - but it appears not. It is not automatic by default because in principle it can represent a security vulnerability, if not used properly. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is avahi essential?
On Saturday 14 January 2012 21:43:00 Gordon Messmer wrote: On 01/14/2012 04:19 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote: If running mediatomb avoids the necessity for Avahi, can you give a concrete example of a situation where Avahi_is_ needed? I did. If two PCs were running a collaborative editor, like gobby, they'll use mDNS to find each other. Chat clients such as GNOME's and iChat will locate other chat clients on the LAN if configured to do so. Rhythmbox will use mDNS to locate DAAP servers for media. CUPS will also use Avahi to locate networked printers. Pulseaudio will use Avahi for audio streaming over a LAN. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] NOUVEAU driver video acceleration
On Sunday 15 January 2012 10:58:35 Mark LaPierre wrote: My Xorg.0.log file says: [snip] [ 64601.469]GeForce 6 (NV4x) [ 64601.474] (--) NOUVEAU(0): Chipset: NVIDIA NV4b I have no xorg.conf file. I have a GeForce 7 (G7x) chip set on my video card. The NOUVEAU driver is misidentifying my chip set. No, it is not. The GeForce 7 family is the NV40 family, and your specific card appears to be NV4B. Refer to http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/CodeNames for details. I suspect that this is a major part of the reason why video acceleration is not working. I doubt. For the general review about what is supported by Nouveau for the NV40 family (and other families), refer to the Nouveau feature matrix, at http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/FeatureMatrix However, I am not sure how much of the current driver's functionality is actually present in the kernel module that comes with CentOS. You didn't specify which version of CentOS you use, but at best (CentOS 6.x) the kernel is from Fedora 12 timeframe. I am not familiar if all the features and bugfixes that have been introduced to Nouveau since that time are actually backported to the CentOS kernel. Not sure if it is even possible. YMMV. If you absolutely need 3D acceleration, maybe take a look at the nvidia proprietary drivers --- you can find CentOS-packaged yum-installable rpm's in elrepo (or was it rpmforge?)... HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] NOUVEAU driver video acceleration
On Sunday 15 January 2012 21:57:28 Mark LaPierre wrote: On 01/15/2012 09:34 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote: If you absolutely need 3D acceleration, maybe take a look at the nvidia proprietary drivers --- you can find CentOS-packaged yum-installable rpm's in elrepo (or was it rpmforge?)... I enabled both epel and rpmforge. Umm... elrepo != epel. ;-) HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] vmware player CentOS 6 2-button 3-button touch pad with pointing device Lenovo ThinkPad
On Monday 09 January 2012 23:36:53 Igor Furlan wrote: Is there a way to revert the 'copypaste' functionality back to the traditional UNIX way of doing it, highlight the text with left mouse/touchpad button and paste it with the middle mouse/touchpad button. AFAIK, it *should* work while in CentOS. I mean, when both the select and paste operations are inside CentOS. Selecting in Windows and pasting in CentOS (and vice versa) has to be done in the Windows-style. I am yet to see a Windows machine configured to have the select and copy operations merged into one, let alone paste-ing with the middle mouse button... ;-) Any hint | solution | RTFM pointer | advice is more than welcome Maybe take a look at gpm? man gpm yum info gpm HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] SELinux and access across 'similar types'
On Monday 09 January 2012 11:45:26 Daniel J Walsh wrote: SELinux has no idea what the labels are in /tmp, so restorecon will not change the labels. It would be best to just remove the content from /tmp and allow new content to be created. If you want the content to be accessible from apache, you could change it to httpd_tmp_t chcon -t httpd_tmp_t /tmp/PATH But isn't there a policy for default labelling of arbitrary files put in /tmp? I mean, when apache puts a file in /tmp, it should be labelled *somehow*, according to the rules for apache and/or the /tmp directory, right? This should happen in both enforcing and permissive modes. So is the default type label for such a case file_t? If it is, it's a bug, since SELinux would deny subsequent access to that file, per policy, right? If I understood the OP correctly, he enabled SELinux (into permissive mode), relabeled the whole filesystem, rebooted several times, and after all that apache creates a file in /tmp with a label file_t. AFAIK, this should *never* happen, with the default policy. Or am I missing something? The only way I can understand how this can happen is to conjecture that the OP has turned on SELinux and --- *before* proper relabelling of the filesystem --- customized the policy (using audit2allow) to allow apache to read/write files of type file_t (this was neither confirmed nor denied by the OP). Since this is inconsistent with other rules in the policy, my suggestion was to reset the policy to CentOS default and relabel everything again before making any further customizations. However, I don't know how to actually do the reset the policy step, since I never needed it. :-) Is there an alternative explanation to the whole mess? Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] SELinux and access across 'similar types'
On Monday 09 January 2012 15:29:59 Daniel J Walsh wrote: file_t means the file has no label, so the only way to create this type of file would be to remove the security attributes on the file. On an SELinux system, file_t should never be created, they are only created on a disabled SELinux system. I guess you could try to use chcon -t file_t on a file, but I believe the kernel will block that. Or you could attempt to delete the SELinux label, but that might also be denied. Ok, now I think I understand. The OP has stale files in /tmp which are not labelled, due to not purging /tmp on reboot. SELinux doesn't know how these files should be labelled, so it doesn't even try, and gives them the type file_t, which is a synonym for this file doesn't have a type. So the answer for the OP is to use chcon on this file to label it somehow. If that doesn't work, he should delete the file and recreate it (while SELinux is active), so that it gets properly labelled. I learned something new today. :-) Thanks for the explanation! Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] SELinux and access across 'similar types'
On Sunday 08 January 2012 04:31:05 Bennett Haselton wrote: [root@g6950-21025 ~]# ls -lZ /tmp/hostname_SKYSLICE.INFO -rw-r--r-- apache apache system_u:object_r:file_t /tmp/hostname_SKYSLICE.INFO [root@g6950-21025 ~]# restorecon -v /tmp/hostname_SKYSLICE.INFO [root@g6950-21025 ~]# ls -lZ /tmp/hostname_SKYSLICE.INFO -rw-r--r-- apache apache system_u:object_r:file_t /tmp/hostname_SKYSLICE.INFO [root@g6950-21025 ~]# Well... With this output I would say that your policy has been customized to have file_t as the default label for that file. Have you used audit2allow on that machine before the filesystem was properly relabeled? I am not sure at this point, but I would say that your SELinux policy has been customized into an inconsistent state (since no file should have the type file_t by default, and yet restorecon says that this is the default label for that file). However, I don't know how to reset the customizations once they have been made (except for the brute force method). I have never had any machine with SELinux in this kind of state, so I am a bit wary of giving you further advice on this matter. Also, you should probably start a new thread about this problem (quoting the above restorecon output and a brief history of the machine), since more eyeballs would be good in this situation. As for the brute force method, it would go on the lines of * disable SELinux * reboot * delete all policy files in /etc/selinux/ * reinstall selinux-policy-targeted via yum * enable SELinux for the next reboot * prepare the autorelabel * reboot The idea is to get you back to the CentOS default for both the policy and the file labels. However, there may be gotchas above or a more elegant way to restore the default policy, so someone else might chime in with a better advice (Dan?). HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] SELinux and access across 'similar types'
On Friday 06 January 2012 18:27:05 Bennett Haselton wrote: On 1/6/2012 6:16 PM, RILINDO FOSTER wrote: On Jan 6, 2012, at 10:35 AM, Bennett Haselton wrote: I'm pretty sure this machine was never upgraded to CentOS 5.2, it was just imaged with 5.7 when the hosting company set it up, but SELinux *was* off until I turned it on. So probably the doc should say, if the system was *installed* with 5.2, then do this (and presumably it's 5.2 or later, not just 5.2). Either that, or the base install was an earlier version of Centos 5.x, with SELinux turned off then upgraded to the current version. Could be in theory but if the hosting company was provisioning a new machine I don't know why they'd set up an earlier version and then upgrade, instead of just imaging the latest version at the time. How about --- the hosting company installs CentOS once (the 5.2 version) as their master image, turns off SELinux, and keeps updating the image over time? And when a customer asks for a new machine, they just make a copy of the current state of the master image? I guess that would be much easier (for them), compared to actually installing the latest version of CentOS from scratch, for every customer. Why don't you ask the hosting company exactly what kind of system did they provide to you? Since SELinux was off by default, it certainly is not just a default installation of CentOS 5.7 (nor any other version of CentOS). They obviously made some manual after-install customizations before they handed you the system. IMHO, if a hosting company does that sort of things (especially turning off SELinux), I wouldn't touch them with a ten-foot pole. Who knows what else they might have customized, in their infinite wisdom... :-) Care to share the name of that hosting company? As for the original question -- when the docs say that access is allowed only across similar types, what determines what counts as similar types? How do you know for example that httpd running as type httpd_t can access /var/www/html/robots.txt which has type httpd_sys_content_t? AFAIK, the interactions between various labels (ie. rules who can access what) are determined by the SELinux targeted policy (the selinux-policy- targeted package). These rules evolve over time (the package sometimes gets updated and your filesystem autorelabeled to match), and IIRC they can get pretty complicated. You want to look inside that package to find all the rules. But in usual circumstances you shouldn't need to know any details, just let the system label the files as they are supposed to be labeled, and everything should Just Work (tm). If you need to customize something, you can use semanagerestorecon to override the default policy. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] SELinux and access across 'similar types'
On Saturday 07 January 2012 04:43:31 Bennett Haselton wrote: On 1/7/2012 4:16 AM, Marko Vojinovic wrote: IMHO, if a hosting company does that sort of things (especially turning off SELinux), I wouldn't touch them with a ten-foot pole. Who knows what else they might have customized, in their infinite wisdom... :-) Care to share the name of that hosting company? Virtually every hosting company I've ever bought a CentOS server from has had SELinux turned off by default. (So, a partial list would include FDCServers, Superb.net, SiteGenie, SecuredServers (ho, ho), AeroVPS (sells dedicated servers despite their name), Netelligent, ServerBeach and I don't remember all the others). Don't hold me to that list 100% since some might have changed their policies for new servers but it's pretty universal. What hosting company sells sub-$100 unmanaged CentOS dedicated servers and *doesn't* have SELinux turned off? I wouldn't know, I don't use such services (typically I have my production systems on my own hardware). And now that you say most of them turn SELinux off by default, I am discuraged to even consider having my system hosted by such companies... ;-) As for the original question -- when the docs say that access is allowed only across similar types, what determines what counts as similar types? How do you know for example that httpd running as type httpd_t can access /var/www/html/robots.txt which has type httpd_sys_content_t? AFAIK, the interactions between various labels (ie. rules who can access what) are determined by the SELinux targeted policy (the selinux-policy- targeted package). These rules evolve over time (the package sometimes gets updated and your filesystem autorelabeled to match), and IIRC they can get pretty complicated. You want to look inside that package to find all the rules. OK. Is it easy to look inside the package and where would I look? Well, a rpm -ql selinux-policy-targeted lists a whole bunch of files, mostly all residing under /etc/selinux/targeted/ directory. So you can take a look at what is in there. If that is not enough (ie. if you want to look inside the binary modules), you'll probably want to read the corresponding srpm. Use the Source, Luke! ;-) Btw, your question is about some quite low-level-inside-guts of the SELinux policy. I cannot imagine why you would want to know the detailed relationships between labels, unless you are a SELinux developer. Or is it just curiosity? HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] SELinux and access across 'similar types'
On Saturday 07 January 2012 05:39:15 Bennett Haselton wrote: On 1/7/2012 5:25 AM, John R. Dennison wrote: On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 04:43:31AM -0800, Bennett Haselton wrote: Virtually every hosting company I've ever bought a CentOS server from has had SELinux turned off by default. (So, a partial list would include FDCServers, Superb.net, SiteGenie, SecuredServers (ho, ho), AeroVPS (sells dedicated servers despite their name), Netelligent, ServerBeach and I don't remember all the others). Don't hold me to that list 100% since some might have changed their policies for new servers but it's pretty universal. Then these companies should be universally boycotted as it's pretty evident that they don't place security at the top of the importance stack. People that don't run selinux deserve _everything_ they get and then some. [snip] Apparently the marketplace favors hosting companies turning SELinux off because the failures it causes are too obscure and it causes too many support headaches. Ignorance is bliss... ;-) A hosting company should certainly have SELinux turned on by default. A customer who doesn't know how to handle it should be told to RTFM. If they don't want to deal with SELinux, they can easily turn it off themselves (at their own responsibility). This is analogous to having a rent-a-car agency renting cars without safety belts, because they are inconvenient for the users and most people don't put them on anyway. Being irresponsible cannot be justified with what marketplace does or does not favor. A non-changing-human-nature solution might be to notify the user directly when SELinux blocks something. The GUI apparently already does this via a dialog box when viewing a desktop; perhaps there's a way to do it on the command line too. (When the user runs something that's blocked by SELinux, just send a message to the terminal saying SELinux blocked this, or something. Would be a start.) Sometimes there is a message on stderr about permission denied or such. But in general every AVC denial is written in /var/log/audit/audit.log. There are also setroubleshootd and sealert, to help you translate the AVC denial into something more user-friendly, and suggest what to do about it. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] SELinux and access across 'similar types'
On Saturday 07 January 2012 08:15:35 Bennett Haselton wrote: On 1/7/2012 6:50 AM, Marko Vojinovic wrote: On Saturday 07 January 2012 05:39:15 Bennett Haselton wrote: Apparently the marketplace favors hosting companies turning SELinux off because the failures it causes are too obscure and it causes too many support headaches. Ignorance is bliss... ;-) A hosting company should certainly have SELinux turned on by default. A customer who doesn't know how to handle it should be told to RTFM. See what I wrote to John about should-statements... you can't change human nature, but you can make better defaults. What do you mean by better defaults? Better for the user, or better for the hosting company? Better in terms of quality/security, or better in terms of ease of use? There is no obvious better default, IMHO. This is about trading security for convenience, and if a hosting company puts convenience before security, they are doing a lousy job. Turning off SELinux is a choice that should be done by the *customer*, not by the hosting company. I am still waiting for the day when SELinux will become completely mandatory, just as the owner/group permissions are today. ;-) Sometimes there is a message on stderr about permission denied or such. But in general every AVC denial is written in /var/log/audit/audit.log. There are also setroubleshootd and sealert, to help you translate the AVC denial into something more user-friendly, and suggest what to do about it. Yes, once you know that SELinux is the cause, the tools for diagnosing what to do are pretty helpful. But what hosting companies care about -- in terms of inconvenience to the user -- is that there's no easy way to find out for the first time that SELinux is the cause of something not working. Hence the idea for having SELinux send messages to the terminal saying SELinux blocked such-and-such. There's probably some better way. Well, when something gets blocked by iptables, that doesn't even get into a log, let alone interactive messages. An administrator needs to be intelligent enough to *guess* that the app doesn't work because some port might be closed by the firewall. That's even worse than the situation with SELinux, and nobody has ever fixed that one in decades. :-) I guess it could be easily implemented, though. All AVC denials are being communicated via dbus, and can probably be caught and sent to a terminal as well. Read man audispd and related stuff --- I guess one can customize the relevant log daemon to send messages to the terminal too, in addition to the log file. If you manage to customize it, send us the recipe, I guess it could be helpful for others as well. :-) HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] SELinux and access across 'similar types'
On Saturday 07 January 2012 17:23:57 Bennett Haselton wrote: [root@g6950-21025 ~]# ls -lZ /tmp/hostname_SKYSLICE.INFO -rw-r--r-- apache apache system_u:object_r:file_t /tmp/hostname_SKYSLICE.INFO Any ideas? What does # restorecon -v /tmp/hostname_SKYSLICE.INFO return? HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] A simplistic parental-control setup
On Thursday 05 January 2012 11:16:05 Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: On 01/05/2012 01:21 AM, Marko Vojinovic wrote: On Wednesday 04 January 2012 18:04:43 Frank Cox wrote: On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 23:58:17 + Marko Vojinovic wrote: The point is that I need a simple, easy-to-implement, easy-to-configure and easy-to-maintain solution for this particular usecase. Put the disallowed addresses into your /etc/hosts file and associate those addresses with whatever you want them to resolve to. Hmm... that sure looks simple enough. :-) I'll give it a try, thanks! /etc/hosts is local DNS server. It does not work when http://1.2.3.4/xxx is used. You need iptables/PREROUTING/redirect? rules for that. Also, I think you will need some kind of http server, at least like lighttpd. Yes, it turns out that /etc/hosts doesn't handle all requirements that I asked for. Shouldn't there be a firefox plugin, or something similar, that would take care of all this? I cannot believe that parental control software is something so uncommon... :-) Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] A simplistic parental-control setup
On Thursday 05 January 2012 01:39:49 Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: On 01/05/2012 12:58 AM, Marko Vojinovic wrote: I am looking at the simplest (implementation-wise) solution to the following problem (on CentOS 6.2): I have a list of web addresses (like http://www.example.com, https://1.2.3.4/, etc.) that should be forbidden to access from a particular host. On access attempt, the browser should be redirected to a local web page (file on the hard disk) with the explanation that those addresses are forbidden. The possible ways of disallowed access include: * typing www.example.com or http://1.2.3.4/ in the browser * typing www.example.com/anyfolder/somefile.html in the browser * clicking on www.example.com when listed as a link on some other web site (say, Google search results) * nothing else. The last point above assumes that the users will never try any other method of accessing the site. These user's knowledge about computers in general is known to be elementary, so I don't need protection against geniouses who can figure out some obscure way to circumvent the lockdown (and please don't tell me that this is an irrational assumption, I know it is...). If possible, all this should be on a per user basis, but if implementing it system-wide would be much simpler, I could live with it. :-) The point is that I need a simple, easy-to-implement, easy-to-configure and easy-to-maintain solution for this particular usecase. What I don't need is some over-engineered solution that covers my usecase along with a whole bunch of stuff I will never need, and takes two months to configure properly. It should also be F/OSS, preferably included in CentOS repos or elsewhere. Or alternatively I could go along with manually setting up a bogus httpd/dns/iptables configuration which would do all this, but I have a feeling that it would not be the easiest thing to maintain... I'd appreciate any suggestions. :-) There is squidguard in RepoForge repository. It's a plugin for squid. There is also dansguardian. I'll take a look at both of these, thanks! :-) If you use separate firewall box, you can use ClearOS, it has dansguardian set up. No, the machine is already installed with CentOS. Furthermore, I am supposed to set up all this remotely (via ssh), since I don't have physical access to the box itself... Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] yum warning...
On Thursday 05 January 2012 06:17:17 John Doe wrote: # yum update ... Downloading Packages: vsftpd-2.2.2-6.el6_2.1.x86_64.rpm | 149 kB 00:01 Running rpm_check_debug Running Transaction Test Transaction Test Succeeded Running Transaction Warning: RPMDB altered outside of yum. Updating : vsftpd-2.2.2-6.el6_2.1.x86_64 1/2 Cleanup: vsftpd-2.2.2-6.el6_0.1.x86_64 2/2 Updated: vsftpd.x86_64 0:2.2.2-6.el6_2.1 Complete! How come a simple update of a a single package from CentOS update would alter RPMDB outside of yum...? The warning is generated by yum, saying that its own database of installed packages does not match the rpm database. This basically means that sometime back you have used rpm directly to install/remove some package, circumventing yum. You are not supposed to install rpm packages behind yum's back. :-) The warning has nothing to do with the vsftpd package which is being updated in this instance. It's rather yum performing the database check when the transaction starts. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] A simplistic parental-control setup
On Wednesday 04 January 2012 18:04:43 Frank Cox wrote: On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 23:58:17 + Marko Vojinovic wrote: The point is that I need a simple, easy-to-implement, easy-to-configure and easy-to-maintain solution for this particular usecase. Put the disallowed addresses into your /etc/hosts file and associate those addresses with whatever you want them to resolve to. Hmm... that sure looks simple enough. :-) I'll give it a try, thanks! Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] what percent of time are there unpatched exploits against default config?
On Friday 30 December 2011 19:40:55 夜神 岩男 wrote: [snip] We can start a 10,000 computer botnet (or, more realistically, a 10m computer botnet these days, and this is a technique used right now) working on the problem of assembling a new index table that orders and assigns every possible valid hash said algorithm can produce, and start assigning values. Essentially, we can move the computing cost up-front by assuming that we indeed *do* have to try *every* possible password, which means computing done 5 years ago applies to your brand new password today. [snip] In short, keys, man, keys. Its not perfect, but it is much stronger than passwords and in my experience FAR much less hassle. You are basically saying that, given enough resources, you can precalculate all hashes for all possible passwords in advance. Can the same be said for keys? Given enough resources, you could precalculate all possible public/private key combinations, right? Please don't get me wrong --- I'm not saying that the resources needed are equal (or even comparable) for the two cases. But theoretically, both keys and passwords rely on the assumption that the inverse operation (be it calculating a password from a hash or factoring a large integer into primes) is too expensive to be feasible. But given enough time and resources, you could in principle have prebuilt tables for both, right? Just asking... :-) ...while waiting for the first successful build of a quantum computer, which will fundamentally redefine all current concepts of security... ;-) Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] what percent of time are there unpatched exploits against default config?
On Thursday 29 December 2011 14:59:14 Reindl Harald wrote: Am 29.12.2011 14:21, schrieb Marko Vojinovic: so explain me why discuss to use or not to use the best currently availbale method in context of security? Using the ssh key can be problematic because it is too long and too random to be memorized --- you have to carry it on a usb stick (or whereever). This provides an additional point of failure should your stick get lost or stolen. Human brain is still by far the most secure information-storage device. :-) this is bullshit most people have their ssh-key on a usb-stick And how are you going to access your servers if the stick gets broken or lost? I guess you would have to travel back to where the server is hosted, in order to copy/recreate the key. I did not argue that the key is not more secure than a password. I was just pointing out that sometimes it can be more inconvenient. Your question was why discuss to use or not to use the best currently availbale method in context of security?, and my answer was there can be a tradeoff between security and convenience. I don't see why do you consider this to be bullshit. Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] what percent of time are there unpatched exploits against default config?
On Thursday 29 December 2011 13:07:56 Reindl Harald wrote: Am 29.12.2011 12:56, schrieb Leonard den Ottolander: Hello Reindl, On Thu, 2011-12-29 at 12:29 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 29.12.2011 09:17, schrieb Bennett Haselton: Even though the ssh key is more random, they're both sufficiently random that it would take at least hundreds of years to get in by trial and error. if you really think your 12-chars password is as secure as a ssh-key protcected with this password you should consider to take some education in security Bennett clearly states that he understands the ssh key is more random, but wonders why a 12 char password (of roughly 6 bits entropy per byte assuming upper lower case characters and numbers) wouldn't be sufficient. so explain me why discuss to use or not to use the best currently availbale method in context of security? Using the ssh key can be problematic because it is too long and too random to be memorized --- you have to carry it on a usb stick (or whereever). This provides an additional point of failure should your stick get lost or stolen. Human brain is still by far the most secure information-storage device. :-) It is very inconvenient for people who need to login to their servers from random remote locations (ie. people who travel a lot or work in hardware- controlled environment). Besides, it is essentially a question of overkill. If password is not good enough, you could argue that the key is also not good enough --- two keys (or a larger one) would be more secure. Where do you draw the line? Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 6.x - find interface with link up
On Thursday 15 December 2011 16:04:35 Les Mikesell wrote: On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 3:39 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: In earlier versions 'mii-tool' would iterate over interfaces and show which have link up. In 6.x it wants an interface as a parameter. What is the appropriate way to find which of some number of of interfaces are connected? Better yet, what is the least typing to get the mac addresses of those interfaces? Dumb question: in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts, do the ifcfg-* have HWADDRs? They do, but the case I want to cover is where an existing server is cloned, or the disk has been moved from a failed chassis to a spare. And in this case the existing files will be wrong, and the nics will be named more or less randomly. Assume the hands-on operators don't know much about linux and you can't actively help until they get at least one of the right IP's on the right NIC. With 5.x I'd use mii-tool to find the connected interface (connecting one wire at a time if necessary), then ifconfig on that interface to get the hwaddr, then edit that into the ifcfg-* file for the names I want the active NICs to have, and reboot. That's awkward enough to ask someone to do who already prefers windows, and it looks like it just got harder by having to explicitly run mii-tool for each possible interface (and we always have 4 to 6 per box). There has to be a better way. I thought 6.1 was going to have a new NIC name convention but I haven't had time to look into it and have to make something work now. Your situation is the textbook usecase example for biosdevname (http://linux.dell.com/biosdevname). It is a way to consistently name the network devices according to their physical location in a computer. For example, a typical NIC would not have a name eth1, but p2p3 (which means port 3 of the NIC in PCI slot 2) or em2 (which is 2nd ethernet port on the motherboard). So once the hands-on operator plugs a cable into a particular port, you immediately know the corresponding interface name that the system will use for that connection. And in addition, this is MAC-address independent, so moving the hard drive from one box to the other requires basically no reconfiguration (as long as the operator plugs the same cables into the same sockets). The biosdevname was first introduced in Fedora 15 (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ConsistentNetworkDeviceNaming), ie. only after RHEL 6 was already rolled out. Apparently, it has to cooperate intimately with the kernel, udev, initscripts, dracut, anaconda, kickstart, etc., --- so it is not just a userland app which one could yum install in a trivial way. Therefore, somehow I doubt that CentOS 6 will ever see biosdevname implemented (maybe in the CentOSplus kernel and a use at your own risk label?), since it involves too many system changes and breaks backward compatibility. But RHEL 7 is almost certainly going to have it, since this is actually the proper (and permanent) solution to the problem you have. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Redhat vs centos vs ubuntu
On Saturday 12 November 2011 22:47:28 Yves Bellefeuille wrote: On Friday 11 November 2011 07:44, John Hodrien wrote: grub in EL6 can boot of ext4, and that's grub-0.97-68.el6.x86_64. Grub (version 1) from CentOS 6 has apparently been patched to be able to handle ext4. There's no doubt that Grub 1 by itself can't boot an ext4 file system. Patched or not, Grub 1 has been successfully booting my F14 machine from an ext4 partition for a full year now, since I first installed F14. Ability to boot from ext4 is certainly *not* the reason for moving to Grub 2, one way or the other. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] redhat vs centos
Am I missing something here, or is the conversation below just an elaborate joke on my expense? Am 07.11.2011 22:50, schrieb Marko Vojinovic: Typically, you have no way of knowing the physical structure of the cloud machine where your virtual machine is being hosted. On Monday 07 November 2011 22:23:09 Reindl Harald wrote: the physical structure does not matter you pay for virtaul CPUs as you do also for virtual appliances On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com wrote: Well, what I don't understand is how many vCPU's are equal to one socket. Does RH have a formula for the number of sockets as a function of the number of vCPU's (and vice versa)? On Tuesday 08 November 2011 03:17:11 Trey Dockendorf wrote: Socket != vCPU. There is no need for a formula. The licensing is done based on the hosting hardware. What gives? Let me stress again: there is *no* *information* about the hosting hardware! It is in the cloud, on some mainframe or cluster of the cloud provider. That hardware is potentially subject to change over time and at provider's discretion, without me even knowing about it. There are no sockets for me to count anywhere, only vCPU's. Damn, that's why it' called s a *virtual* machine! RH licence model is based on the assumption that I own or otherwise have physical access to the hardware on which I am to install RHEL, and can consequently count the physical sockets of that hardware. This assumption is *false* for the situation discussed above. The hardware is *not* available for counting sockets, and in addition is a moving target (subject to changes). If RH does not have that case covered at all, I can understand, and that's OK. It's probably best to contact a RH representative and discuss what to do on a case-by-case basis, which is also OK. What is *not* OK is people on this list authoritatively telling me that everything is clear and that I have difficulty understanding what they are saying. When in fact it is the other way around. Is this an April's Fool joke, or what? Yesterday when I checked the calender it said November... Or are some people on this list just too ignorant to read and too dense to understand the actual question when replying? Sheesh! :-@ Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] redhat vs centos
On Tuesday 08 November 2011 14:32:06 Johnny Hughes wrote: Instead of everyone speculating what Red Hat would charge for a given situation (I have a virtual machine on the cloud with 16 VCPUs ... I have 1 machine with 8 Quad Core CPUs, I have X with Y, etc.) on the CentOS mailing list ... the answer is: You're right, Johnny, this thread got too OT, sorry... :-) Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] redhat vs centos
On Monday 07 November 2011 20:13:58 Trey Dockendorf wrote: On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:42 AM, John Beranek j...@redux.org.uk wrote: On 02/11/2011 10:31, Patrick Lists wrote: On 11/02/2011 11:02 AM, Tony Mountifield wrote: What is a socket in their pricing model? The word can mean so many different things... Afaik it refers to a physical cpu socket. So they count actual cpu's, not the amount of cores in each cpu. I was just asking myself this very question the other day, and I couldn't determine how many sockets you are using if you use, say, 2 _virtual_ processors. The sockets refers to the literal, physical CPUs. Virtual CPUs (for guests) or cores do not count. Unless your running some kind of mainframe you will likely have a server with anywhere from 1-2 sockets. My understanding of the licensing is that you pay for the host/hypervisor/machine to have RHEL, plus however many guests the license includes. So 4 or unlimited. I think John was asking about the scenario where you *do* *not* have any physical hardware, like deploying RHEL on someone else's virtual environment (think cloud computing). So you sign up for a virtual machine with, say, 16 cores and your provider assigns you virtual hardware according to your spec. How would you count sockets on that? Typically, you have no way of knowing the physical structure of the cloud machine where your virtual machine is being hosted. Also, this structure may even change over time due to upgrades of the cloud hardware (by the cloud provider). You wouldn't even know about it. How many RHEL licences would you need to buy for such a virtual system? Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] redhat vs centos
On Monday 07 November 2011 22:23:09 Reindl Harald wrote: Am 07.11.2011 22:50, schrieb Marko Vojinovic: Typically, you have no way of knowing the physical structure of the cloud machine where your virtual machine is being hosted. Also, this structure may even change over time due to upgrades of the cloud hardware (by the cloud provider). You wouldn't even know about it. again: the physical structure does not matter you pay for virtaul CPUs as you do also for virtual appliances of some vendors where you can get a license with 2 vCPUs or 4 vCPUs - independent if you have your own hardware or using any hsoting service what is there so difficulty to understand? Well, what I don't understand is how many vCPU's are equal to one socket. Or, to be explicit, let me invent an example: suppose that I have leased virtual hardware from some 3rd party, and have obtained a virtual machine with 6 vCPU's. I want to buy RHEL licences to install on that machine. AFAIK, RH counts licences in sockets. How many licences should I buy? Or, iow, how many sockets is equal to 6 vCPU's? Does RH have a formula for the number of sockets as a function of the number of vCPU's (and vice versa)? Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 updating policy
On Friday 04 November 2011 13:24:32 David McGiven wrote: I am migrating from debian to RHEL (CentOS) and I am wondering how the CentOS 6 updating system works. Suppose I install CentOS 6.1 now. Suppose in 8 months CentOS 6.2 is released. Now I issue a yum update, so my system will be updated to CentOS 6.2, or I will have an updated 6.1 ? It would be updated to 6.2. What if I have been issuing yum update very day just to be sure there are no packages with urgent security bugs ? I am having a very updated 6.1 or an almost 6.2 ? Or are they the same thing? AFAIK, they would be the same thing. I wouldn't know of any major difference between a very updated 6.1 and almost 6.2. But I may be wrong here, I'm not a CentOS developer. :-) I think that during this time I should be using Continous Release repository, right ? This is more complicated. The story above would be the usual way of working, and it indeed is for CentOS 4 and 5. They do not have the CR repository. However, for CentOS 6 there is an additional quirk --- once the upstream (that is, Red Hat) releases a new point release (say, 6.1), it naturally stops providing updates for the previos point release (say, 6.0), expects everyone to just update to 6.1 and receive updates to that from now on. The problem is that for version 6 CentOS devs have a hard time finishing the CentOS rebuild of the new release (6.1), so the CentOS 6 users stay on 6.0, and stop receiving any updates for it, because upstream doesn't provide any anymore. The CR repo is used for those situations --- it provides updates to CentOS 6.0 which were supposed to be updates for CentOS 6.1, if CentOS 6.1 had existed at the time of issuing the update. The bottom line is --- if you use the CR repo, you'll have an up-to-date CentOS 6 system as possible, regardless of the minor version number still being 0. This is *less* updated than the upstream's 6.1 system, because of the mentioned problems with rebuilding certain packages. If you believe these missing updates are so very crucial for your system, go buy Red hat and you'll be provided with those. Otherwise, use the CR repo and wait for the CentOS devs to finish building them. Eventually, when the 6.1 build of CentOS becomes complete, version numbers will be back in sync with what is actually installed on your system (via an ordinary yum update), and your syste will be an up-to-date 6.1, regardless of whether or not you have used the CR repo in the meantime. The CR repository will become empty at that time. So, yes, you probably want to use the CR repository until 6.1 is finished. Maybe there will be a lag for 6.2 release as well, and then there will be the CR repo again for the same reasons. Also, which is the policy regarding new versions of software, kernel and libs ? The bugfixes will be backported or there will be major differences between, let’s say, 6.1 and 6.4 ? AFAIK, most of the software is kept on the single version, but there might be some exceptions. For example the kernel version will be fixed throughout the 6.x releases, and all bugfixes and the rest will be backported. I don't know exactly about the exceptions, but I think I remember that firefox version may be bumped within 6.x releases, or something like that... I couldn’t find all of these question properly answered in the FAQs CentOS follows exactly the release strategy of upstream. You probably want to look up the FAQ of RedHat. :-) HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] redhat vs centos
On Wednesday 02 November 2011 22:55:39 Ian Pilcher wrote: On 11/02/2011 09:35 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote: There is the Oracle unbreakable Linux (or whatever they call it), which is a RHEL clone. The recent RH packaging changes are aimed squarely at that distro from what I understand. The problem is that the changes affect *all* clones the same way, including CentOS. To what changes are you referring? As far as I know, the only packaging change in RHEL 6 is that the source in the kernel SRPM is now one big tarball, rather than an upstream tarball and a bunch of separate patches. This shouldn't have any effect on anyone who is simply rebuilding the SRPM. (I just tested this by successfully building the latest kernel SRPM from ftp://ftp.redhat.com in mock's epel-6-i386 chroot on my Fedora system.) Is there another change of which I'm unaware? Umm, the new AUP? Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] What happened to 6.1
On Friday 28 October 2011 18:54:25 Les Mikesell wrote: On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Ned Slider n...@unixmail.co.uk wrote: The question is, how can a contract containing restrictions on what you can do with GPL covered content not invalidate your own right to redistribute, given that the GPL prohibits additional restrictions? As I understand, Red Hat's AUP is more about protecting content other than sources and binaries that resides on RHN (yes, RHN is far more than just a distribution channel for SRPMs/RPMs). Such content and material is vital in supporting it's customers, and I believe the likes of Oracle and Suse were leveraging such content to try to sell support to existing RHEL customers. This is what Red Hat presumably seeks to stop. OK, but then it should have specific exceptions for GPL content already 'protected' from such proprietary behavior and restrictions. What is the point of the GPL existing if companies are allowed to add restrictions when they redistribute? But RH did not add restrictions. Whatever you get from them, you are free to redistribute, in accord with GPL. There can be *no* *legal* *action* against you if you do so. OTOH, it is their choice whether or not to give you anything else in the future. GPL is not broken by the choice they make. Of course it is a form of a blackmail --- don't redistribute or we'll cut off future support --- but that is not in contradiction with the GPL, due to the word future. Rather, it seems to be a loophole in the GPL itself, and a pretty nifty one, if you ask me. :-) Also, the essential idea of the GPL (that source should be free) is preserved --- you can always take whatever has been given to you through RHN and fork a project, without legal worry. In addition, it appears that the business strategy of RH is essentially based on this loophole, and now they are just pushing it to the extreme, thanks to the challange from Oracle. It's a good business strategy, and personally I agree with it --- RH has found a way to fight other companies from stealing their work and customers, while upholding the GPL and giving a lot back to the community through upstream patches and support of Fedora. Of course, there are some collateral damage side-effects for the clones like CentOS and SL, but then that's life, nobody is perfect... ;-) Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] What happened to 6.1
On Friday 28 October 2011 20:45:16 Les Mikesell wrote: On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Marko Vojinovic vvma...@gmail.com wrote: But RH did not add restrictions. Whatever you get from them, you are free to redistribute, in accord with GPL. There can be *no* *legal* *action* against you if you do so. OTOH, it is their choice whether or not to give you anything else in the future. GPL is not broken by the choice they make. That logic depends on a very strange interpretation of the term restriction. The GPL doesn't narrowly define it narrowly as legal actions, it says you may not impost any further restrictions. True, and that is why it is a loophole. You can interpret the word restriction in more than one way. IIUC, RH's interpretation is that restriction is something that is against the law if violated, in the sense that you can get sued by someone if you redistribute RH's code. There are no restrictions by RH, in that sense. Whether or not this interpretation was meant when GPL was designed is an entirely different matter. IMHO, the FSF should have been more specific about what restriction means in the text of the GPL. But they weren't, and now RH has used this room to manouver around. But I don't see it as a bad thing, all in all. If you want support from RH, pay for it. If not, use CentOS or some other clone. If they fall behind in providing updates, that amounts to the price that you didn't pay for RH's support. I think that's fair, given that RH developers are the ones doing the most of the heavyweight work. Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] this is strange and dark
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote: On 09/25/2011 07:07 AM, fakessh wrote: hello admin This is strange and dark: it receives more than one hundred updates and deposits are still not updated are welcome ... I am not sure what this means ... anyone? Maybe something like this: dark = mysterious deposits = repositories Still, it requires further explanation from the OP, I guess... ;-) :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Was: Re: Upgrade from 5.6 = 5.7, is, programming with style
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Emmanuel Noobadmin centos.ad...@gmail.com wrote: On 9/16/11, m.r...@5-cent.us m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Remember, even among those who studied, a) half of them were in the bottom of their class, and b) too many are True Believers in the latest programming (not the P word!) paradigm; y'know, recursion is the answer to *everything*, or OO, or Part of the problem is sometimes otherwise intelligent customers who heard of the latest buzzword be it XML/Ruby/Web 2.0/HTML5 start demanding that you use it for their application regardless of whether it's relevant or if they really know what it is about . If you try to educate them any other way, they start thinking you're outdated. Well, you can always lie to those people. :-) I had a situation once when a client asked me to implement something fairly trivial, but insisted that I use C++ (overkill would be an understatement here...). Namely, they heard from some expert that all real programming is done in C++... Naturally, I implemented the solution as a bash script, and just told them sure, no problem, it is pure C++. They had no interest (nor the knowledge) to check it, and everyone was happy. :-) I tend to develop a relationship with clients where they trust my decisions, so lying to them for their own benefit now and then doesn't hurt, and I don't consider it too unethical. I also remember the situation where one client received that typical somefile.exe is a virus hoax e-mail (Windows users, of course), and insisted that I check and disinfect all machines on the premises. There was no point in trying to explain that such e-mails are hoaxes and that the issue is nonexistent. Instead, I just told him sure, I'll get right on it, and then did absolutely nothing about it. The guy didn't know how to check the presence of a file himself, so tomorrow when he asked me about the threat, I just replied that all machines have been disinfected and there is nothing to worry about anymore. He went on to commend my prompt reaction to others... ;-) There are lots of such anecdotes. Being a sysadmin is a social skill as much as a technical one. ;-) Best, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6: Making KDE Default
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:19 AM, Always Learning cen...@u61.u22.net wrote: Just the answer to my previous question. What is C6 like compared to 5.6 ? It is quite different and not to be compared in any way. C5 was based on F6, while C6 is based on F12. Differences are quite extreme in some aspects (for example KDE3 vs KDE4). Even the set of available packages is different (for example switchdesk). HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6: Making KDE Default
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Devin Reade g...@gno.org wrote: Jeremy Sanders jer...@jeremysanders.net wrote: Assuming it is the same as fedora, put the lines DESKTOP=KDE DISPLAYMANAGER=KDE in /etc/sysconfig/desktop to change it for all users. IIRC, setting DESKTOP there only has an effect for new users; after someone has already logged in once then I think their default is set in some other state file in their home directory. I'm afraid I don't remember the details on that, though. The display manager is the same for all users. As for the desktop, AFAIK it is controlled by the ~/.dmrc file, per user. For example, I have the following: $ cat ~/.dmrc [Desktop] Session=kde Language=en_US.utf8 Layout=us If there is no .dmrc file in the user's home directory, the setting from /etc/sysconfig/desktop is used as a default. HTH, :-) Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
