Re: [CentOS] 2 Ethernet cabling question
On 28.12.2010 15:20, Bowie Bailey wrote: The colors are not important aside from standardization. If you need to fix one end of the cable, you have to make sure it's the same as the other end. If you use the standard color scheme, that is not a problem. Not sure if that is true. I've always been told that the particular pin-layout is to reduce crosstalk. Ref. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/568A#Wiring -- //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 2 Ethernet cabling question
On 25.12.2010 20:29, Ryan Wagoner wrote: I commonly see jacks wired to T568B standard. I've seen some CAT6 jacks with only the colors shown for T568B. The coloring for T568A is backwards compatible with 1 or 2 line phone connectors. The B is the most common, and that is the one I use. As for the two ports on one cable, you could do that with cat7 cable, as each strand is seperately shielded. For up to 100Mb Ethernet only. As someone else said, GigE use all eight strands in the cable. Kind of moot point now, who would cable for 100Mb only? -- //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Superblock Problem
On 01.07.2010 23:32, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: mount: error mounting /dev/root on /sysroot as ext3: invalid argument setuproot: moving /root failed: No such file or directory setuproot: error mounting /proc: No such file or directory setuproot: error mounting /sys: No such file or directory switchroot: mount failed: no such file or directory Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill init! Second, I find it odd, since the kernel I have with 5.5 is 2.6.18-194.3.1.el5 (well, the initial install gave me 2.6.18-194.el5, but this was the first upgrade). I see the same on a CentOS 5.5 system here, but I only see it with the 2.6.18-194.3.1.el5 kernel. The older -164 kernels work fine. The system was updated to 5.5 from 5.4. LVM, filesystems and grub should be ok, as -164 boots ok. Only -194 has the problem. -- //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] gcc? (w/ a bit of vi vs. emacs)
Looks like brief is still available, as a rewrite for Windows as a console app. Can be run in linux using winconsole instead of wine. http://www.briefeditor.com/index.htm OTOH, I prefer ultraedit for linux (and windows) these days. -- //Morten //mor...@mortent.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Resizing a PV that belongs within a Volume Group?
Or just do it simple... take the extra free space on the disk, create a new partition there and add that as a new PV to the VG. -- //Morten //mor...@mortent.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is ext4 safe for a production server?
On 05.12.2009 18:15, Miguel Medalha wrote: And, as of CentOS 5.4, xfs is now enabled in the kernel, so no need for any external kernel module. But yes, this is available for x86_64 only ... a decision that many people have trouble at understanding! XFS is not stable on 32-bit systems. You should not use it there. You need a 64-bit kernel. Default for servers should be 64-bit now anyway. Not many reasons left for a 32-bit system, and more and more 3. party applications have less and less support for 32-bit platforms in general. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: mor...@mortent.org //IM: morten.torsten...@gmail.com I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is ext4 safe for a production server?
On 05.12.2009 22:04, John R Pierce wrote: that same OS/2 JFS was backported to AIX as JFS2, I believe. When JFS was implemented on OS/2 it was based on JFS on AIX. After that, JFS for Linux and JFS2 was based on the same code. Not sure I would say backported, but there you go There are many differences between JFS and JFS2 on AIX and the latter is better in many ways... more tuning and support for shrinking. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: mor...@mortent.org //IM: morten.torsten...@gmail.com I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is ext4 safe for a production server?
On 08.12.2009 13:34, Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote: Speaking for me (on Linux systems) on top of LVM on top of md. On IRIX as it was intended. That is a disaster combination for XFS even now. You mentioned some pretty hefty hardware in your other post... If XFS doesn't play well with LVM, how can it even be an option? I couldn't live without LVM... -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: mor...@mortent.org //IM: morten.torsten...@gmail.com I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Missing yum-priorities in 5.4?
I am looking for yum-priorities or any info on any changes here for CentOS 5.4. There is also a forum post for this here: https://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=22798forum=37 Is this missing on purpose? Function merged with another yum package? Or is it just missing as an oversight? -- //Morten //mor...@mortent.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Missing yum-priorities in 5.4?
An upgrade should do fine, I think... the yum versions in 5.3 and 5.4 looks to be the same, so nothing would be uninstalled afaik. Looks to me that you will only see this when you do a fresh install of 5.4 -- //Morten //mor...@mortent.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] what else is missing in 5.4?
5.3/updates? On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:29 PM, Alan McKay alan.mc...@gmail.com wrote: [r...@alan centos]# du -sh 5.* 19G 5.3 14G 5.4 -- //Morten //mor...@mortent.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] New Centos 5.3 gnome backgroup
Michael Simpson wrote: My fiance (who is the artistic one of the family) thinks the new graphics are beautiful and i agree with her. Me too! I checked the artwork when it was announced and I liked it already then. Great work and thanks to all involved! -- //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4
Les Mikesell wrote: The ones that require the work that the CentOS team does to rebuild/rebrand/repackage before redistribution is permitted. This was As a corporation Red Hat HAD to do that, even if IANAL. CentOS as a model works just fine. Sure, sometimes there can be a lack of manpower for something. After all, it is a volunteer project that people run in their spare time! Of course, the geek in me waits for the next release. It is always waiting for the next release and the next new toy. If I really NEEDED the next release, I would use RHEL. Come on folks, get a perspective of what we are doing here. -- //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Memory vs. Display Card
On 09.03.2009 11:09, Rick wrote: Well, yeah, of course. But even if I got that wrong, the 4GB alone did not work in the same slots the 2GB sticks were in. So, either the memory sticks are bad (one or two of them), or the memory have bad timing in some way making them not compatible with the mobo. -- //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Mail delivery failing with 450
Kai Schaetzl wrote: - as the MX is the same as your domain name you do not need an MX It is good to always have an MX. - having four ns records all point to the same IP is just, uhm, pointless Can make it easier to separate workloads and move them to different servers later. //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] compile driver before X starts
Ed Donahue wrote: vi /etc/init.d cahnge the number 5 to 3 reboot fix driver change the 3 to 5 reboot or # telinit 3 # compile whatever # telinit 5 No reboot needed. -- //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] squid stops working several times a day
Alexander Farber wrote: Sadly, CentOS squid packages are quite old. Squid recent releases are: 2.7.STABLE5 and 3.0.STABLE12... this explains, why OpenBSD+Squid worked well for us at the same server - I guess OpenBSD's Squid package is better maintained. Except you cannot really say, just based on the version. Since CentOS is an enterprise distro there will be backported patches that is not indicated in the version of the package itself. Backported patches will typically only relate to security and stability problems. -- //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Port Forwarding
John wrote: I am an open source person but when it comes to something like that I hate to say it but Exchange has it covered. What's others opinions? How would you do it? I'm currious to know how you would do this in an environment that has many compliance problems. Mainly issues of privacy rights not being violated. For a commercial solution, Lotus Domino might be even better. It is cross platform (runs on linux), supports all those same standards for various business standards and audit policies, you get a good web-client, pop and imap in addition to the Notes client (on Windows and Linux only). Also, it is cheaper than Exchange. -- //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] OT RHEL
Per Qvindesland wrote: \ In the company we are working for we are looking at buying a p520 system with HACMP, that it why I am looking for a ppc version. RHEL 4 and 5 both works great on the IBM power systems. Ditto for PowerHA (nee HACMP) version 5.4 for both AIX and Linux. With the p520, I would seriously consider using AIX too. Many Linux tools are available there and depending on your apps you might get better scalability and stability. -- //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] difference in x86 64 bit centos between 4.x and 5.xversions
RobertH wrote: is there a reason to stay with the older version other than for specific deprecated hardware issues or something else? No, IMO. If you install a new system then install CentOS 5. Version 5 is so old by now that all major applications should be supported there. The usual YMMV apply. -- //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Bezerk they will go!
drew einhorn wrote: Note the minimalist .sig Probably should fatten it up You already did by adding a copy of your email as HTML ... ;) -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: mor...@mortent.org //IM: morten.torsten...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Old Small Box
William L. Maltby wrote: Oh boy! You've heard rumors that the BIOS manufacturers are going to begin supporting file-system-specific layouts? I find that hard to swallow. Well, in theory we don't need BIOS support. The BIOS will check that the first sector of the device is signed with 55AAh and just jump into the code in the first sector. So if LVM leaves the first sector and track (so grub can hide there) alone, it should work just fine. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: mor...@mortent.org //IM: morten.torsten...@gmail.com I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] More than 2TB RAID...
John Doe wrote: I just received a new server (HP DL180G5) with 12x 1TB HDs and I bumped into fdisks 2TB limits... I would create two raid logical volumes, one for centos (say, 20GB to 100GB) and one with the rest of the space. Install centos and normal MBR on /dev/sda and then use lvm on the /dev/sdb directly with no partition table needed. I would also strongly consider having two disks mirrored for the system in one lvm vg and the rest in another, but with 1TB disks it is kind of wasted space. Tho with 12 disks you can have 2 disks for RAID1, then 8+P+1 in RAID5. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: mor...@mortent.org //IM: morten.torsten...@gmail.com I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] More than 2TB RAID...
John Doe wrote: The best solution would be to be able somehow to run the avanced RAID utility... For that, I need a running OS where I could install it. They don't have a bootable CD image with the tools? I am only familiar with the IBM ServeRAID adapters where you have such a tool. Another option is of course to create a number of 2TB partitions and create a VG with all of them as PVs. Of course, you would need 6 partitions for this, but once you have them addded to a VG it is pretty seamless. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: mor...@mortent.org //IM: morten.torsten...@gmail.com I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Old Small Box
Ross Walker wrote: Well the only reason /boot isn't possible in LVM is because grub can't of yet handle reading LVM volumes. As soon as it can though, there will be no need for a separate /boot. Then we just need BIOS support to boot from LVM, and we can create the PV on /dev/sda and never care about the old partitions anymore. Everything should be in LVM for ease of management. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: mor...@mortent.org //IM: morten.torsten...@gmail.com I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Antivirus for CentOS? (yuck!)
Rainer Traut wrote: Am 22.01.2009 02:19, schrieb Amos Shapira: 2. Alternatively - what linux anti-virus (oh, the shame of typing this word combination :() do you use which doesn't affect our systems performance too much. http://www.f-prot.com/products/corporate_users/unix/ has some Linux AV products. And just for completeness, Symantec has AV for Linux too... it is better there than on the Windows platform, but that doesn't say much. The advantage of Symantec is that it is a well-known brand, so in some cases it can be a easy option to push through red-tape bureaucrats. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: mor...@mortent.org //IM: morten.torsten...@gmail.com I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CENTOS 4.7 or 5.2 32 bits O.S. for ORACLE DB server??
Adam Tauno Williams wrote: Not true. The comparison of PAE to EMS/XMS is completely bogus, the technologies aren't alike at all. PAE does *NOT* involve any bank switching; a system using PAE can address that 16 GB all at once. Comparing PAE to EMS/XMS has the same level of validity as comparing a .NET or Java virtual machine to a shell script interpreter. You need a memory window in the 32bit address area to map 4GB memory to the process. It is all about the page tables and remapping, that is true, but you can not just like that address the 16GB (or up to 64GB) memory all at once. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: mor...@mortent.org //IM: morten.torsten...@gmail.com I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CENTOS 4.7 or 5.2 32 bits O.S. for ORACLE DB server??
Warren Young wrote: All this aside: you aren't seriously trying to talk this guy into using PAE mode, are you? Are you not, in fact, just being pedantic, yet agree with me on the most important point, which is that he should be using a 64-bit OS and application here? I hope he is not. Based on real world experience with running Oracle RAC on RHEL with 16 CPUs and 16GB memory on a NUMA machine, I would discourage anyone running PAE on systems with much more than 8GB. Basically, for any RDBMS server, I would go 64-bit even if your machine only had 4GB memory (or 2GB)... almost for sure your database will need more memory sooner rather than later, and 8-16GB memory on a RDBMS isn't that much anymore. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: mor...@mortent.org //IM: morten.torsten...@gmail.com I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Checking fan state
John R Pierce wrote: risk?whats risky about the hardware managing the fans without CPU software intervention? If anything thats LESS risky then assuming the OS is properly configured to recognize the system specific fan hardware and will properly react to the particular boards sensor configurations. That was exactly my thought too... a fully automated hardware fan/temperature management systems is the way to go. It would be nice to have a standard way to get readings tho even for desktops/laptops, for your peace of mind :) lm_sensors is often useless, as it either doesn't detect anything or the readings it gets is just nonsense. Updating lm_sensors is not high on the priority list for Red Hat. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: mor...@mortent.org //IM: morten.torsten...@gmail.com I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] flash fails to work on Los Angeles Times website - fix
Russell Miller wrote: That's not a CentOS bug. That's a bug with your local configuration. I don't understand what you want CentOS people to do here. Is this hosts entry actually added by a package? If so, that's the real bug here. I don't think the OP wanted to report it as a bug, it was just something he wanted to share with others. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: mor...@mortent.org //IM: morten.torsten...@gmail.com I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Adding RAM
John R Pierce wrote: thats not at all an accurate description (other than the 64GB part) It was a simplified description of how PAE works. The point was that PAE work at the page table level and just remaps memory pages to fit within the virtual 32-bit/4GB address space for a 32-bit process. There are still constraints in PAE on how much memory one single process can use and adding memory to a machine where you use PAE does not automagically solve all your memory bottlenecks. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Adding RAM
Kevin Krieser wrote: At least with regard to the upstream provider, on X86 the desktop version has a limit of 4GB of RAM, regardless of how much more memory you have. And they removed the hugemem version, so instead of up to 64GB of RAM on 32 bit, you can only get to 16GB for server versions. With PAE you can access up to 64GB memory. It works much the same way as XMS memory in DOS, where high mem is mapped to a low mem window. It is just addresses that are mapped, there is no physical copying of memory that you had with EMS memory. Generally, PAE would not make much sense on 16GB memory machines, as you still need the space in the 4GB range to address it. Personally I would use PAE on machines with up to 8-12GB memory (assuming x86_64 wasn't an option). With more than 16GB I would recommend against it, as you get a lot of remapping and/or limited space in the 4GB range. YMMV depending on specific workload of course. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Stop the FUD Xen is not deprecated
Les Mikesell wrote: Well, but why do you assume people run Windows where you run your browser? You need a Windows license to run VIC, so the price of installing ESXi/VIC is around $100 and up. To someone who doesn't already have a windows license? I wouldn't have a spare one, and even if you do have one you still paid for it at some point. Now, if only IBM could implement the Power hardware Hypervisor to the Intel/AMD world... -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Cluster Heart Beat Using Cross Over Cable
lingu wrote: Since it is a very critical and busy server may be due to heavy network load some hear beat signal is getting missed resulting in shifting of service from one node to another. For automated takeover systems, especially critical ones (tho you can argue that any system setup with automatic takeover is critical by definition), you should have multiple heartbeat paths. Ethernet, serial cable, on shared disk, fibre or whatnot. Having false takeovers due to missed heartbeat on one set of ethernet cards could also likely be missed on another set of cards, even with a crossover cable. Maybe you should investigate alternate paths? -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] SATA errors on CentOS 5.2
MHR wrote: enhanced, the other is set to IDE, but can be set to RAID or AHCI. I've used CentOS5 with many different mobos and SATA. I always configure SATA to AHCI if the mobo/bios allows it. I have not seen any problems with AHCI. A couple machines with both PATA and SATA has brought some issues with boot order, but nothing that could not be solved by specifying boot order in the bios. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer Poland. -- Woody Allen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] new list proposal
Kenneth Price wrote: I favor one-stop shopping. I agree with Jeff. While I understand this general list can become a bit overwhelming for the CentOS Staff, we all must remember that this is a GENERAL list. I think the general CentOS list should be an open and embracing community. A centos-tech list sounds more like the name of the developer or power user list than a semi-off-topic technology discussion group. That was my first thought when seeing the new name. ...and fwiw I would put the new list into the same label/folder too, so I don't really care :) -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if it turns out that there is a God, I don't believe that he is evil. The worst that can be said is that he's an underachiever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] CentOS 5 on POWER
Any news on this? Will we see a POWER version of CentOS 5? -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if it turns out that there is a God, I don't believe that he is evil. The worst that can be said is that he's an underachiever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Installing Postfix/Dovecot
Giulio Troccoli wrote: I have tried both mail and Thunderbird. mail of course doesn't work because it read from /var/spool/mail while postfix puts the email in Maildir. However I would have thought that I could download the emails with Thunderbird (on my laptop). I have a similar setup, but I use mbox instead of Maildir. I keep my inbox in /var/spool/mail and have my folders in ~/Mail. I can use Thunderbird (or any client) through dovecot and mail (or mutt etc) locally. Squirrelmail is also happy with this setup. //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Re: PHP 5.2.5 when ?
Michael A. Peters wrote: PHP is a module that adds functionality to Apache. The only parts of the PHP is the programming language that drives a large chunk of web applications out there. It is not just an apache module. Back to the point though, PHP is not a major component of RHEL/CentOS. It the last part of a LAMP that gets installed, LAM does not need php, php needs LAM (well, you could use Windows, IIS, Oracle ... so I guess technically not ... but anyway ...) The point is that replacing PHP and NOT replacing all the other pieces of glue (apache php modules, mysql php modules ...) breaks support and introduces many unknowns into the system. Many websites would not work if you ran it on just LAM, as the code is written in PHP and PHP needs to interact with the other components. In my book PHP is a major part of a web server. PHP is a major component of LAMP and replacing it just because there is a new version of PHP out with some new features and maybe some bugfixes you don't need is NOT a good enough reason to go through all that hassle. YMMV. The upstream provider will backport fixes that are important enough to backport. With an enterprise distro of Linux, you make the apps work with what is in the base distro, NOT the other way around. You can of course do whatever you want with the computers you control, but I really disagree that PHP is a minor component and that building your own is easy and with no consequences to talk about. //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Re: PHP 5.2.5 when ?
Steven Vishoot wrote: I can't understand why people choose an enterprise distro for it's longevity, and then proceed to try and break it. It is almost like buying a brand new car and then immediately replacing the engine. Does Having your cake and eating come to mind? No, because in this case your cake disappears in thin air as soon as you try to eat it. Replacing major components in CentOS really goes against the entire idea of an enterprise linux distro. Do it only if you really really have to and if you really understand every implication of it. You make your apps work on CentOS/RHEL, you don't make CentOS/RHEL work with your apps. This is how the enterprise work. The application vendors of enterprise grade apps test and develop to the enterprise linux distros. I am afraid the analogy police will have to come and arrest you... :) //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Re: are RPMForge and EPEL compatible?
[snip away bible quotes] This is getting way off topic, please consider what you post. //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [Fwd: dovecot errors after upgrade to 5.1]
Gregory P. Ennis wrote: Everyone, Looks like my Centos 5.0 mail server upgraded automatically last night to 5.1. It appears to have worked normally until about 16:00 CST when dovecot began to fail. I have rebooted the system to be able to use the 5.1 kernel, but dovecot still continues to fail. Has anyone else made this observation? It is a known problem, please read the release notes. You need to alter a parameter in the dovecot config. //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Sort imap e-mail remotely
Christopher Chan wrote: solution(maybe I'm search with the wrong keywords). I found fetchmail procmail, but I wasn't able to figure out if they can do it. http://imapfilter.hellug.gr/ But then he needs to have imapfilter running. For automated sorting of email I use procmail. Check with your ISP if they have set up delivery to use procmail. Then you make a ~/.procmailrc with contents like this: LOGFILE=$HOME/procmail.log VERBOSE=on :0fw | /usr/bin/spamc :0D * X-Spam-Flag:.*YES Mail/Junk :0D * ^Subject:.*CentOS-announce Mail/CentOS :0D * ^Subject:.*\[CentOS\] Mail/CentOS - //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 5 on Large Disks [SOLVED]
Anup Shukla wrote: Still, given the suggestion, i will surely try to reduce the number of slices. I would make one system LUN at say 20GB and one data LUN with the rest of the RADI5 space. On the system LUN I would make a /boot filesystem and a LVM partition with at least a / filesystem and swap. Usually I make /, /usr, /opt, /home, /var and /tmp but it varies a bit depending on what kind of machine it is. The data LUN I would use as a PV directly for LVM and not bother with partitions at all. //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 5 on Large Disks
Anup Shukla wrote: Format and run the dd command again. The speed is 130MB/s now. It can vary a quite a bit depending on where you hit the disk. Remember, what you are testing is just how fast dd can read from /dev/zero and write to the file in a filesystem with 1k blocks. How that will map to real performance is another matter. Its a bit confusing. Does LVM slow down things? Or i did something that is not really of any relevance to check IO speed. LVM adds very little overhead. The file and placement on disk can have more to do with raw I/O bandwidth than anything else in this particular scenario. I used mkfs.ext3 -m0 -E stride=96 -O dir_index /dev/sdb1 ... I have a RAID5 volume consisting of 6 disk with stripe size = 64k I hope the stride=96 is optimal. Depends what you want... With 4k blocks in ext3 (default) a stride of 16 (16 times 4 is 64) would read one stripe from a disk. With 6 disk 16 times 6 is 96, so for every I/O you will hit each disk once and read one stripe. Ditto for writes. In general that is a good start. Should i stick with LVM, or go back to the older way? I would never really consider not using LVM. The flexibility it adds for disk management is essential for managing your disks. //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 5 on Large Disks.
Anup Shukla wrote: So finally, i am putting a 300G SATA to act as the system drive. Then use the other 750G's to be the big RAID 5 Volume (XFS) If you use a hardware RAID adapter, you can make two LUNs from the disks. So make one big RAID5 array but two logical drives. I would still use LVM anyway for management down the road. Not all hardware RAID adapters might support this, but if yours does you will get data protection for free on your system drive. //Morten ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Install CentOS
spasti wrote: 512MB memory ,80G IDE HD. And i also run a WinXP on my computer,it prsents very good. The fact that Windows works ok is no indication that the hardware is 100% in working order. It is just an indication that the hardware works in Windows with the particular workload you use there. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if it turns out that there is a God, I don't believe that he is evil. The worst that can be said is that he's an underachiever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] apt-cacher for CentOS
James A. Peltier wrote: If there isn't an equivalent, would someone please point me in the direction of how I might accomplish this with CentOS? The Upstream have a Satellite program that provides local copies for their distribution/management network. Don't know if that is something that could be re-packaged? -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if it turns out that there is a God, I don't believe that he is evil. The worst that can be said is that he's an underachiever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Can't get XFS enabled on Centos 5.0
Dan Carl wrote: I also installed these packages as described in a post I found yum install --enablerepo=centosplus xfsprogs xfsprogs-devel lsmod shows nothing about XFS Well, have you tried to format and mount an xfs filesystem? The module would not be loaded until needed I think. Maybe it is that simple? -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if it turns out that there is a God, I don't believe that he is evil. The worst that can be said is that he's an underachiever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Logwatch for postfix
On CentOS5 with the latest updates applied, the logwatch filter for postfix returns way too many lines from the log. I get an unmatched entries message and all messages that have gone through the system is listed. Here is an example: 8F930A8092: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], orig_to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], relay=local, delay=0.19, delays=0.06/0.01/0/0.12, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered to command: /usr/bin/procmail) I have tried to look at the logwatch config and some google hits on similar problems but on debian. The hints there does not match what is relevant for CentOS. Anyone seen this problem on CentOS or is it some specific problem to my configuration? I use fetchmail/postfix/dovecot/procmail locally on the server to consolidate mail. Could be that it tries to filter on some hostname/domain name? -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if it turns out that there is a God, I don't believe that he is evil. The worst that can be said is that he's an underachiever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Logwatch for postfix
Stephen Harris wrote: Yeah. My fix was to copy the services/postfix file in to /etc/logwatch/scripts/services/postfix and edit the file. Thanks, your patch solved the problem for me. Tho all the config files are under /usr/share/logwatch on my system. There are some stubs in /etc/logwatch too, but I could not see any config entries that pointed logwatch there. Anyway, patching /usr/share/logwatch/services/postfix with your patch fixed it. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if it turns out that there is a God, I don't believe that he is evil. The worst that can be said is that he's an underachiever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Logwatch for postfix
Les Bell wrote: You can suppress messages by adding regexp patterns to /etc/logwatch/conf/ignore.conf. For example: Thanks, that can be a handy way too. But I preferred to fix the filter and will keep ignore.conf as a last stopgap measure. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if it turns out that there is a God, I don't believe that he is evil. The worst that can be said is that he's an underachiever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Logwatch for postfix
Morten Torstensen wrote: Anyway, patching /usr/share/logwatch/services/postfix with your patch fixed it. /usr/share/logwatch/scripts/services/postfix of course... -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if it turns out that there is a God, I don't believe that he is evil. The worst that can be said is that he's an underachiever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Re: Logwatch for postfix
Scott Silva wrote: Are you using the latest from www.logwatch.org (7.3.6) or the old version bundled with CentOS? I am using the base yum repos. No time to remember to chase down a myriad of different program packages from different websites. I am sure this problem is solved in newer logwatch versions, as it is pretty obvious, but I want to keep to the base repos as much as possible. But thanks for the tip! I got a patch for the postfix script for logwatch that works great for me. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if it turns out that there is a God, I don't believe that he is evil. The worst that can be said is that he's an underachiever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mysql and windows
Peter Arremann wrote: If you're looking to do more interesting things like tablespaces (stuff that you can find in the large commercial engines) you need to go with pg. many people get turned off pg when they can't figure out authentication within the first 5 minutes but it is well worth it to me. Apache Derby (nee Cloudscape) is nice too, and for scalability up to and exceeding Oracle, DB2 Express-C is nice too. It is free as in beer. The free version is limited in memory and cpus etc but is fully featured... but if you need it you can scale out on many kinds of hardware. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if it turns out that there is a God, I don't believe that he is evil. The worst that can be said is that he's an underachiever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] need help on second Ethernet port (eth1) point to point connect
Robert Moskowitz wrote: A large number of NICs are autosensing. They do not need a crossover And rx/tx autosensing is part of the gigabit ethernet standard afaik. Modern gigabit cards should be able to autosense speed, duplex and direction. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if it turns out that there is a God, I don't believe that he is evil. The worst that can be said is that he's an underachiever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] DVD Drive Recommendations
John R Pierce wrote: I've used an Optiarc to burn all that in Linux, some with cdrecord some with NeroLinux. Optiarc is a joint NEC/Sony company. DVD drives/burners are commodity these days with standard interfaces. not many support dvd-ram, however, which was buried in his list. But the Optiarchs that supports Lightscribe also supports DVD-RAM. So the NEC AD-5170 does not support DVD-RAM, but the NEC AD-7173 does. My point was more that you just find a DVD-burner with the specs you need and it should work. I have used Plextor, Sony, NEC and Optiarc over the last year or so and I have not detected any functional differences in use in linux, apart from the different feature sets and speeds. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if it turns out that there is a God, I don't believe that he is evil. The worst that can be said is that he's an underachiever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] DVD Drive Recommendations
Camron W. Fox wrote: DVD hyper multidrive, capable of reading and writing DVD-R, DVD-RW, DVD+R, DVD+RW, DVD-RAM, DVD-R for DL, and DVD+R DL. I've used an Optiarc to burn all that in Linux, some with cdrecord some with NeroLinux. Optiarc is a joint NEC/Sony company. DVD drives/burners are commodity these days with standard interfaces. -- //Morten Torstensen //Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] And if it turns out that there is a God, I don't believe that he is evil. The worst that can be said is that he's an underachiever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
