Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices?
Apologies in advance for excerpting or leaving out the messages sent to the list as i was in digest mode so got them all in one lump. Rudi Ahlers: You could assign a LABEL to each hard drive. The LABEL is attached to the drive's UID (I think?) so even if you move the drive to anther port it will still be accessible via the same LABEL Unfortunately, the removable devices are utterly random and rarely if ever the same device seen twice. Kind Security Advisors, i appreciate the potential issues resulting from not upgrading. These systems are behind VPNs, so out of reach other than from within a secured environment. They are not production systems per se - i consider them more as appliances and that necessitates a certain hands-off-it-works approach. If gives any relief, front-facing production systems i manage _are_ patched up to the earholes. However, i will take your advice seriously and look into the logistics of performing remote security-level patches without breaking something irreparably. Lamar, thank you for your comments. My suspicion is that bus enumeration is the source of the initial device ordering - a similar thing happens when installing a secondary NIC, which sets itself up as eth0/eth1 ahead of the onboard NIC ports if they haven't; been preconfigured. I'm sure you've all read about that issue. However, I'm not aware of any way to alter the order of enumeration. Module load order appears to occur further down the chain - or does it? I have this synopsis of rc.sysint: http://www.comptechdoc.org/os/linux/startupman/linux_surcsysinit.html and will see if it's possible to get my array statically mounted before all of the dynamic stuff licks in. thanks, all! If anyone has any ideas that aren't security related ;) please feel free. - cal ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices?
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Cal Sawyer cal.saw...@artsalliancemedia.com wrote: Apologies in advance for excerpting or leaving out the messages sent to the list as i was in digest mode so got them all in one lump. Rudi Ahlers: You could assign a LABEL to each hard drive. The LABEL is attached to the drive's UID (I think?) so even if you move the drive to anther port it will still be accessible via the same LABEL Unfortunately, the removable devices are utterly random and rarely if ever the same device seen twice. Yes, that's why you assign a LABEL to the device :) If the same hard drive gets used on the same server, but on random ports every time then the LABEL will still stay the same. I have a similar setup where I mount about 40-odd USB drives to a server on a regular basis. They each have their own mount points in /mnt/usb-hdd/xx and irrespective of which drive I connect to which USB port, or on which order, they all get mounted where they're supposed to :) -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers SoftDux Website: http://www.SoftDux.com Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com Office: 087 805 9573 Cell: 082 554 7532 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices?
The reason for the udev hotplug rule is simply for the purpose of mounting removable devices as read-only. If udev is left to its devices, everything plugged up is read-write which is verboten in this application. Unfortunately, there seems to be no way (i've found) to distinguish, at device/bus level, between a system HDD, a hardware RAID volume and an eSATA device and handle the eSATA device uniquely from others. All eSATA and USB devices _must_ mount read-only. If everything is lined up at boot, sda and sdb are camped via fstab and udev deals with sdc and above, mounting what are known to be removable devices as r/o. Shotgun, i know, but there is no way of knowing in advance what devices the system (er, appliance) will see. tangled, huh? thanks - csawyer Robert Heller heller at deepsoft.com Thu Mar 31 14:20:55 EDT 2011 Previous message: [CentOS] CentOS Digest, Vol 74, Issue 31 Next message: [CentOS] figuring out LogVol details for mount Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] At Thu, 31 Mar 2011 18:23:00 +0100 CentOS mailing list centos at centos.org wrote: thanks for the reply, Phil It would, were udev not inserting USB and/or eSATA drives at /dev/sdb1 and/or /dev/sdc1 and exposing the array to the udev rule intended to handle only removable devices (at sdc or sdd). The array then mounts unpredictably in /media/xxx-sdc1 or sdd1 - not what is wanted - depend on how many removable devices are plugged at the time of rebooting. Of course, a single removable device will camp at sdb, which is out of reach of udev so the whole hotplug thing is broken until someone removes all of the devices at site, allowing a clean boot. Do you have some *nonstandard* udev rule for hot plug devices? The *standard* hotplug udev rules are not tied to specific ranges of sdXX's -- my IDE-based laptop will properly handle a hot plugged USB device at /dev/sda for example. The hot plug logic should also not mess with not hot pluged devices. If your RAID array is mounted in /etc/fstab (or has a 'noauto' line in /etc/fstab with the idea of mounting it manually later or has something in automount's config for automounting it), the hot plug system should not touch it, no matter what /dev/sdXX it happens to land at, so long as you are using volume labels or some such to reference the mountable volumes. - cal sawyer ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices?
Nope sir. Assume never the same device twice and no control over those devices, so UUID is out of the question. thank you, - csawyer From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Rudi Ahlers Sent: 01 April 2011 09:24 To: CentOS mailing list Cc: Cal Sawyer Subject: Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices? On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Cal Sawyer cal.saw...@artsalliancemedia.com wrote: Apologies in advance for excerpting or leaving out the messages sent to the list as i was in digest mode so got them all in one lump. Rudi Ahlers: You could assign a LABEL to each hard drive. The LABEL is attached to the drive's UID (I think?) so even if you move the drive to anther port it will still be accessible via the same LABEL Unfortunately, the removable devices are utterly random and rarely if ever the same device seen twice. Yes, that's why you assign a LABEL to the device :) If the same hard drive gets used on the same server, but on random ports every time then the LABEL will still stay the same. I have a similar setup where I mount about 40-odd USB drives to a server on a regular basis. They each have their own mount points in /mnt/usb-hdd/xx and irrespective of which drive I connect to which USB port, or on which order, they all get mounted where they're supposed to :) -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers SoftDux Website: http://www.SoftDux.com Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com Office: 087 805 9573 Cell: 082 554 7532 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] WD RE4-GP Dropped From Raid
Hi All, I have a WD RE4-GP which dropped an Adaptec 51645 RAID controller. I ran a smartctl short test on the drive and it failed with a read error. So I ran the Western Digital's own diagnostic software (DLGDIAG), both the short and extended test on the drive and it passed with no errors. So I ran the smartctl short test again and again it failed. I then ran smartctl long test and that also failed at the same logical block address as the short test. Can anyone shed any light on this? Can I RMA the drive even if it passes Western Digital's own tests? Thanks in advance for any advice. Cheers, Steve ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices?
At Fri, 1 Apr 2011 11:05:35 +0100 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote:
The reason for the udev hotplug rule is simply for the purpose of mounting
removable devices as read-only. If udev is left to its devices, everything
plugged up is read-write which is verboten in this application.
Unfortunately, there seems to be no way (i've found) to distinguish, at
device/bus level, between a system HDD, a hardware RAID volume and an eSATA
device and handle the eSATA device uniquely from others. All eSATA and USB
devices _must_ mount read-only. If everything is lined up at boot, sda and
sdb are camped via fstab and udev deals with sdc and above, mounting what are
known to be removable devices as r/o. Shotgun, i know, but there is no way
of knowing in advance what devices the system (er, appliance) will see.
tangled, huh?
Does this give you a clue (this is a rule I use for my thumb drive,
which is a vfat file system, and thus cannot have a LABEL'd file system):
gollum.deepsoft.com% cat /etc/udev/rules.d/10-local.rules
KERNEL==sd[a-z]*, BUS==scsi, SYSFS{device/vendor}==Kingston, NAME=thumb
Hint: the 'brand' of thumb drive I have is Kingston and == can be
replaced with !=.
In your special mount read-only hot plug rule, you just need a
SYSFS{device/vendor}!=3ware (or whatever the vendor of the RAID array
shows up as -- look in /sys/block/sdmumble/device/vendor)
thanks
- csawyer
Robert Heller heller at deepsoft.com
Thu Mar 31 14:20:55 EDT 2011
Previous message: [CentOS] CentOS Digest, Vol 74, Issue 31
Next message: [CentOS] figuring out LogVol details for mount
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
At Thu, 31 Mar 2011 18:23:00 +0100 CentOS mailing list centos at centos.org
wrote:
thanks for the reply, Phil
It would, were udev not inserting USB and/or eSATA drives at /dev/sdb1
and/or /dev/sdc1 and exposing the array to the udev rule intended to
handle only removable devices (at sdc or sdd). The array then mounts
unpredictably in /media/xxx-sdc1 or sdd1 - not what is wanted - depend
on how many removable devices are plugged at the time of rebooting. Of
course, a single removable device will camp at sdb, which is out of
reach of udev so the whole hotplug thing is broken until someone removes
all of the devices at site, allowing a clean boot.
Do you have some *nonstandard* udev rule for hot plug devices? The
*standard* hotplug udev rules are not tied to specific ranges of sdXX's
-- my IDE-based laptop will properly handle a hot plugged USB device at
/dev/sda for example.
The hot plug logic should also not mess with not hot pluged devices. If
your RAID array is mounted in /etc/fstab (or has a 'noauto' line in
/etc/fstab with the idea of mounting it manually later or has something
in automount's config for automounting it), the hot plug system should
not touch it, no matter what /dev/sdXX it happens to land at, so long as
you are using volume labels or some such to reference the mountable
volumes.
- cal sawyer
Â
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices?
On Friday, April 01, 2011 04:23:40 am Rudi Ahlers wrote: Yes, that's why you assign a LABEL to the device :) According to the OP's initial message, I think he's already doing this: SATA system HDD /dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 / RAID array LABEL=STORE /store ## mounts == /dev/sdb1 But I could be wrong. The issue seemed to be that the udev rule prevented the detection of the LVM on that RAID completely when it came up as /dev/sdd. The other udev rule in-thread seems to be a possible solution; will be interesting to see if it works. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Cent OS clustering and Support.
One we start our qualification, we might need some help in resolving issues/defects on CentOS. Can we open a channel or Point of contact who will be able to help us out with such issues. I would also request to forward this email to the right forum if the mailing list we are sending to is not the appropriate one. Presumably you have a contact at Redhat. CentOS follows RHEL bug for bug. Go talk to them and validate with them - if you qualify RHEL then CentOS will work by default (in general). ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices?
centos-boun...@centos.org wrote: Nope sir. Assume never the same device twice and no control over those devices, so UUID is out of the question. UUID is out of the question where I have 3 drives (main and two backup) with wear leveling wherein ANY of the drives, put in /dev/sda's position, is the boot drive, the identical backup on /dev/sdb will get backed-up-to on a daily basis, and on a weekly basis the drive in /dev/sdb moves to /dev/sda's connector (becoming the boot drive), '/dev/sda' goes off-site, and the third moves to /dev/sdb's position (and gets backed-up-onto promptly. LABEL also fails here. Yes, that's why you assign a LABEL to the device :) If the same hard drive gets used on the same server, but on random ports every time then the LABEL will still stay the same. I have a similar setup where I mount about 40-odd USB drives to a server on a regular basis. They each have their own mount points in /mnt/usb-hdd/xx and irrespective of which drive I connect to which USB port, or on which order, they all get mounted where they're supposed to :) This is excellent where each drive has distinct content. Insert spiffy .sig here: Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary parts. //me *** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. www.Hubbell.com - Hubbell Incorporated** ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices?
Nope, no LVM on the RIAD array. It just needs to load right after the main LVM so that something removable doesn't wiggle its way in and mess up the device order. Yes, the suggestion from Robert H looks promising - working on it now. Did i say i hate udev? I thought there was going to be a replacement for it at some point? - cal sawyer -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Lamar Owen Sent: 01 April 2011 14:18 To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices? On Friday, April 01, 2011 04:23:40 am Rudi Ahlers wrote: Yes, that's why you assign a LABEL to the device :) According to the OP's initial message, I think he's already doing this: SATA system HDD /dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 / RAID array LABEL=STORE /store ## mounts == /dev/sdb1 But I could be wrong. The issue seemed to be that the udev rule prevented the detection of the LVM on that RAID completely when it came up as /dev/sdd. The other udev rule in-thread seems to be a possible solution; will be interesting to see if it works. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices?
I think that everyone lese lives in a far more ordered universe than i do. My problem - no, wait - challenge is that i have zero control over the origin of incoming media on USB and eSATA. Could be any brand of USB stick sold under the sun or HDDs formatted FAT32, NTFS, ext2/3. The only constants are things i directly control (sysdisk, RAID) - everything else is a crap-shoot. Everyone else can use labels. I don't know about you but it feels like mounting a RAID array, possibly with an active mySQL database on it under udev is kind of disaster-prone. I would much rather mount via fstab. - csawyer -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Brunner, Brian T. Sent: 01 April 2011 14:51 To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices? centos-boun...@centos.org wrote: Nope sir. Assume never the same device twice and no control over those devices, so UUID is out of the question. UUID is out of the question where I have 3 drives (main and two backup) with wear leveling wherein ANY of the drives, put in /dev/sda's position, is the boot drive, the identical backup on /dev/sdb will get backed-up-to on a daily basis, and on a weekly basis the drive in /dev/sdb moves to /dev/sda's connector (becoming the boot drive), '/dev/sda' goes off-site, and the third moves to /dev/sdb's position (and gets backed-up-onto promptly. LABEL also fails here. Yes, that's why you assign a LABEL to the device :) If the same hard drive gets used on the same server, but on random ports every time then the LABEL will still stay the same. I have a similar setup where I mount about 40-odd USB drives to a server on a regular basis. They each have their own mount points in /mnt/usb-hdd/xx and irrespective of which drive I connect to which USB port, or on which order, they all get mounted where they're supposed to :) This is excellent where each drive has distinct content. Insert spiffy .sig here: Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary parts. //me *** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. www.Hubbell.com - Hubbell Incorporated** ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices?
On Friday, April 01, 2011 09:53:06 am Cal Sawyer wrote: Nope, no LVM on the RIAD array. It just needs to load right after the main LVM so that something removable doesn't wiggle its way in and mess up the device order. Ok, so the LVM line was for the previous filesystem; it wasn't completely clear from the post. The LABEL line was clear, though. Yes, the suggestion from Robert H looks promising - working on it now. Did i say i hate udev? I thought there was going to be a replacement for it at some point? udev *is* the replacement, and with C6 you're going to find it far earlier in the boot process, inside the initramfs courtesy of dracut. Like it or not, fixed always-the-same device ids are going away for disk drives in Fedora-derived (and by extension, Red Hat derived) distributions. udev might seem to be overkill, but it is what it is and it's here to stay, in CentOS-land at least, for as long as C6 is supported. Might as well bite the bullet and learn how to do what needs to be done in udev. Once figured out, you might find it more powerful than fixed ids ever were; I don't know, because I've not tried to do things like your situation. Let us know if the suggeston works, and how well or not well it works. Your 'read-only for all external drives' situation is unique; note that there are times that I've booted up a box with a removable plugged in, and the removable failed to enumerate at all. It would only enumerate when it was hotplugged after the kernel systems were up; the particular case is with a USB3 drive and an ExpressCard USB 3 controller on Fedora 14, but I have had the issue with USB 2 devices on previous Fedoras, that might be reflected in C6. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] WD RE4-GP Dropped From Raid
on 4/1/2011 4:35 AM Steve Brooks spake the following: Hi All, I have a WD RE4-GP which dropped an Adaptec 51645 RAID controller. I ran a smartctl short test on the drive and it failed with a read error. So I ran the Western Digital's own diagnostic software (DLGDIAG), both the short and extended test on the drive and it passed with no errors. So I ran the smartctl short test again and again it failed. I then ran smartctl long test and that also failed at the same logical block address as the short test. Can anyone shed any light on this? Can I RMA the drive even if it passes Western Digital's own tests? Thanks in advance for any advice. Cheers, Steve I have RMA'd many drives to WD without any proof of testing. They usually will send you a rebuilt equivalent drive. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] WD RE4-GP Dropped From Raid
I have a WD RE4-GP which dropped an Adaptec 51645 RAID controller. I ran a smartctl short test on the drive and it failed with a read error. What does smart say about reallocated sectors, pending sector count, drive temperature, etc? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices?
At Fri, 1 Apr 2011 15:04:04 +0100 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote:
I think that everyone lese lives in a far more ordered universe than i
do. My problem - no, wait - challenge is that i have zero control
over the origin of incoming media on USB and eSATA. Could be any brand
of USB stick sold under the sun or HDDs formatted FAT32, NTFS, ext2/3.
The only constants are things i directly control (sysdisk, RAID) -
everything else is a crap-shoot. Everyone else can use labels.
Nevermind the incoming (removable) media on USB and eSATA -- that is
not really your problem. *Your* problem is only the system disk and
the 3ware RAID disk. I understand that the sysdisk gets handed
properly early in the initrd (before udev's hotplug rule ruins your
day), this leaves the RAID disk. It presumable shows up with
*something* in .../device/vender that is specific to the 3ware
controller. Since the (hardware) RAID disk is never going to be real
hardware disk (I presume you are not running the controller in JOBD
mode), it is going to have some 'made up' disk vendor / model,
generated by the RAID controller. You should be able to use this
information in a SYSFS{device/vendor} check (eg
SYSFS{device/vendor}!=3warediskvendor) in your special hotplug rule
to force read-only mounting of random removable USB and eSATA disks
to force this rule to leave the RAID disk alone, no matter what it
shows up as. OR you can have another rule to make the RAID disk show
up as *something* other than /dev/sdXX -- this is what I did with my
thumb drive, making it show up as /dev/thumb -- I also did something
similar with an old (now defunk) SCSI Zip and ORB2 drive. There is
nother 'sacred' about the device files being /dev/sdXX, so long as the
major and minor device numbers are correct for the physical device.
I don't know about you but it feels like mounting a RAID array,
possibly with an active mySQL database on it under udev is kind of
disaster-prone. I would much rather mount via fstab.
- csawyer
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On
Behalf Of Brunner, Brian T.
Sent: 01 April 2011 14:51
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices?
centos-boun...@centos.org wrote:
Nope sir. Assume never the same device twice and no control
over those devices, so UUID is out of the question.
UUID is out of the question where I have 3 drives (main and two backup)
with wear leveling wherein ANY of the drives, put in /dev/sda's
position, is the boot drive, the identical backup on /dev/sdb will get
backed-up-to on a daily basis, and on a weekly basis the drive in
/dev/sdb moves to /dev/sda's connector (becoming the boot drive),
'/dev/sda' goes off-site, and the third moves to /dev/sdb's position
(and gets backed-up-onto promptly.
LABEL also fails here.
Yes, that's why you assign a LABEL to the device :) If the
same hard drive gets used on the same server, but on random
ports every time then the LABEL will still stay the same. I
have a similar setup where I mount about 40-odd USB drives to
a server on a regular basis. They each have their own mount
points in /mnt/usb-hdd/xx and irrespective of which
drive I connect to which USB port, or on which order, they
all get mounted where they're supposed to :)
This is excellent where each drive has distinct content.
Insert spiffy .sig here:
Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary parts.
//me
***
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom
they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please
notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this
email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses.
www.Hubbell.com - Hubbell Incorporated**
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] repeated local ephemeral to 80
On my CentOS box that I use mainly as a web server, I have iptables set to log and reject anything that I don't expect. So lately, I have getting things like this: Mar 29 17:27:20 mbrc20 kernel: IPT-DROP IN= OUT=lo SRC=192.168.9.20 DST=192.168.9.20 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=46910 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=56624 DPT=80 WINDOW=32792 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 OPT (0204400C0402080A4A26F7A501030307) UID=0 that on at least one occasion repeated for every few seconds for more than three hours. The ephemeral source port keeps changing in an irregular manner. Any suggestions? Thanks, Mike ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] logical volume - device present without table
I am trying to mount a logical volume for creating new initrd image. The lvs command is showing a logical volume with 'd' attribute - device present without tables. It's getting listed under /dev/mapper but not under /dev/VolGroup00. Any help on what might be wrong here? -- thanks, neuby.r ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] repeated local ephemeral to 80
Michael D. Berger wrote: On my CentOS box that I use mainly as a web server, I have iptables set to log and reject anything that I don't expect. So lately, I have getting things like this: Mar 29 17:27:20 mbrc20 kernel: IPT-DROP IN= OUT=lo SRC=192.168.9.20 DST=192.168.9.20 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=46910 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=56624 DPT=80 WINDOW=32792 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 OPT (0204400C0402080A4A26F7A501030307) UID=0 that on at least one occasion repeated for every few seconds for more than three hours. The ephemeral source port keeps changing in an irregular manner. snip Not great on this, but *if* I understand it, it's saying that the IP address of your server is 192.168.9.20, and it's talking to itself, at destination port 80 - apache, that would be. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] question on software raid
dmesg is not reporting any issues. The /proc/mdstat looks fine. md0 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[0] X blocks [2/2] [UU] however /var/log/messages says: smartd[3392] Device /dev/sda 20 offline uncorrectable sectors The machine is running fine.. raid array looks good - what is up with smartd? THanks, Jerry ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] logical volume - device present without table
on 4/1/2011 8:22 AM neubyr spake the following: I am trying to mount a logical volume for creating new initrd image. The lvs command is showing a logical volume with 'd' attribute - device present without tables. It's getting listed under /dev/mapper but not under /dev/VolGroup00. Any help on what might be wrong here? -- thanks, neuby.r Does it span 2 PV's? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] question on software raid
on 4/1/2011 8:32 AM Jerry Geis spake the following: dmesg is not reporting any issues. The /proc/mdstat looks fine. md0 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[0] X blocks [2/2] [UU] however /var/log/messages says: smartd[3392] Device /dev/sda 20 offline uncorrectable sectors The machine is running fine.. raid array looks good - what is up with smartd? THanks, Jerry Could it be that the bad sectors so far have been in unused areas? Once a drive runs out of sectors to map corrections to, I would really think about replacing it. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] repeated local ephemeral to 80
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:32:16 -0400, m.roth-x6lchVBUigD1P9xLtpHBDw wrote: Michael D. Berger wrote: [...] snip Not great on this, but *if* I understand it, it's saying that the IP address of your server is 192.168.9.20, and it's talking to itself, at destination port 80 - apache, that would be. mark Yes, that is true, but the question is who is doing the talking?. Another block of them just ended. It lasted just under an hour. Mike. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] repeated local ephemeral to 80
Michael D. Berger wrote: On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:32:16 -0400, m.roth-x6lchVBUigD1P9xLtpHBDw wrote: Michael D. Berger wrote: [...] snip Not great on this, but *if* I understand it, it's saying that the IP address of your server is 192.168.9.20, and it's talking to itself, at destination port 80 - apache, that would be. mark Yes, that is true, but the question is who is doing the talking?. Another block of them just ended. It lasted just under an hour. you might be able to see the process with netstat when it's happening. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] question on software raid
Jerry Geis wrote: dmesg is not reporting any issues. The /proc/mdstat looks fine. md0 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[0] X blocks [2/2] [UU] however /var/log/messages says: smartd[3392] Device /dev/sda 20 offline uncorrectable sectors The machine is running fine.. raid array looks good - what is up with smartd? search the list archives for offline uncorrectable sectors. e2fsck -cc might help, though I don't know how that will go with raid. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] repeated local ephemeral to 80
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 17:55:37 +0200, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: [...] you might be able to see the process with netstat when it's happening. I tried that; so far without success. Mike. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] repeated local ephemeral to 80
Michael D. Berger wrote: On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 17:55:37 +0200, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: [...] you might be able to see the process with netstat when it's happening. I tried that; so far without success. Mike. Hmmm, maybe lsof. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices?
ack, i can feel my hair greying ... again. *But*, i do appreciate your insight into the future direction of CentOS device handling. Having read this, i'm going to bite the bullet and dive into smarting-up my udev rules, feeding a handler script that will decide what to do about what kind of device before blindly executing mounts based on KERNEL values. Two silly questions: 1. in udev rule's RUN+-, can i pass an arbitrary string that's not one of the %tokens? I pass %k %n, of course, but i'd like to tag something to indicate which rule was processed in a downstream script. 2. Will udev, as it develops (i hope), will there be any provision blacklisting/whitelisting devices? Were it not for the removable-read-only requirement, i'd have been content with HAL doing the work. It does work well for handling CD/DVDROM discs (the 3rd type of removable we deal with) but doesn't do granular device detection well enough to set read-only for removable media only and a read-only RAID array is not that useful. many thanks - good weekend, all - csawyer -Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Lamar Owen Sent: 01 April 2011 15:19 To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Controlling the order of /dev/sdX devices? On Friday, April 01, 2011 09:53:06 am Cal Sawyer wrote: Nope, no LVM on the RIAD array. It just needs to load right after the main LVM so that something removable doesn't wiggle its way in and mess up the device order. Ok, so the LVM line was for the previous filesystem; it wasn't completely clear from the post. The LABEL line was clear, though. Yes, the suggestion from Robert H looks promising - working on it now. Did i say i hate udev? I thought there was going to be a replacement for it at some point? udev *is* the replacement, and with C6 you're going to find it far earlier in the boot process, inside the initramfs courtesy of dracut. Like it or not, fixed always-the-same device ids are going away for disk drives in Fedora-derived (and by extension, Red Hat derived) distributions. udev might seem to be overkill, but it is what it is and it's here to stay, in CentOS-land at least, for as long as C6 is supported. Might as well bite the bullet and learn how to do what needs to be done in udev. Once figured out, you might find it more powerful than fixed ids ever were; I don't know, because I've not tried to do things like your situation. Let us know if the suggeston works, and how well or not well it works. Your 'read-only for all external drives' situation is unique; note that there are times that I've booted up a box with a removable plugged in, and the removable failed to enumerate at all. It would only enumerate when it was hotplugged after the kernel systems were up; the particular case is with a USB3 drive and an ExpressCard USB 3 controller on Fedora 14, but I have had the issue with USB 2 devices on previous Fedoras, that might be reflected in C6. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] WD RE4-GP Dropped From Raid
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:29 AM, compdoc comp...@hotrodpc.com wrote: I have a WD RE4-GP which dropped an Adaptec 51645 RAID controller. I ran a smartctl short test on the drive and it failed with a read error. What does smart say about reallocated sectors, pending sector count, drive temperature, etc? WD will send you a new one if it's an enterprise drive. No questions asked. I've done this many a time. Brandon ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] WD RE4-GP Dropped From Raid
On Fri, 1 Apr 2011, compdoc wrote: I have a WD RE4-GP which dropped an Adaptec 51645 RAID controller. I ran a smartctl short test on the drive and it failed with a read error. What does smart say about reallocated sectors, pending sector count, drive temperature, etc? They are clean, no reallocated sectors or pending sector count. Temp about 35C. Steve ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] WD RE4-GP Dropped From Raid
Brandon Ooi wrote: On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:29 AM, compdoc comp...@hotrodpc.com wrote: I have a WD RE4-GP which dropped an Adaptec 51645 RAID controller. I ran a smartctl short test on the drive and it failed with a read error. What does smart say about reallocated sectors, pending sector count, drive temperature, etc? WD will send you a new one if it's an enterprise drive. No questions asked. I've done this many a time. Also, watch it for a few days, then every week. If it doesn't change, I wouldn't worry; if it does, have it replaced. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Kernel Panic on HP/Compaq ProLiant G7
On 3/24/2011 11:03 AM, Windsor Dave L. (AdP/TEF7.1) wrote: Hello Everyone, I recently installed CentOS 5.5 x86_64 on a brand new ProLiant DL380 G7. I have identical OS software running reock-solid on two other DL380 ProLiant servers, but they are G6 models, not G7. On the G7, the installation went perfectly and the machine ran great for about 2 weeks, when it just seemed to stop. The system stopped responding on the network, and there was no video on the console (or remote console via iLO). It would not reboot or cold boot through iLO, I actually had to hold the power to turn it off and then hit it again to power up. This happened several times within a few days of each other. Each time, there was no evidence in any logs of a problem - the system just seemed to stop or lock up. We did have a CPU problem light appear on the front, so HP came in and replaced the one 4-core CPU. Since then, it has run as long as two weeks, but still crashes randomly. After the last reboot, I left the console in text mode on vt1, and when it crashed again this morning this was displayed on the screen: CS: 0010 DS: ES: CR0: 80050033 CR2: 8100dc435cf0 CR3: 8a6ca000 CR4: 06e0 Process smbd (pid: 18970, threadinfo 81001529e000, task 81011f5347a0) snipped 0Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception OK everyone, here is an update: The server crashed again overnight. This time, the following error messages were on the console: HARDWARE ERROR CPU 3: Machine Check Exception:4 Bank 5: ba400405 TSC 5172b45d44f0a MISC 80 This is not a software problem! Run through mcelog --ascii to decode and contact your hardware vendor HARDWARE ERROR CPU 7: Machine Check Exception:4 Bank 5: ba400405 TSC 5172b45d45bba MISC 80 This is not a software problem! Run through mcelog --ascii to decode and contact your hardware vendor HARDWARE ERROR CPU 5: Machine Check Exception:4 Bank 8: TSC 0 This is not a software problem! Run through mcelog --ascii to decode and contact your hardware vendor Kernel panic - not syncing: Uncorrected machine check After reboot, running the first error through mcelog --ascii gives CPU 3: Machine Check Exception:4 Bank 5: ba400405 HARDWARE ERROR. This is *NOT* a software problem! Please contact your hardware vendor mcelog: Unknown Intel CPU type family 6 model 2c CPU 3 BANK 5 MCG status:MCIP MCi status: Uncorrected error Error enabled MCi_MISC register valid Processor context corrupt MCA: Internal unclassified error: 405 STATUS ba400405 MCGSTATUS 4 The second error gives CPU 7: Machine Check Exception: 4 Bank 5: ba400405 HARDWARE ERROR. This is *NOT* a software problem! Please contact your hardware vendor mcelog: Unknown Intel CPU type family 6 model 2c CPU 7 BANK 5 MCG status:MCIP MCi status: Uncorrected error Error enabled MCi_MISC register valid Processor context corrupt MCA: Internal unclassified error: 405 STATUS ba400405 MCGSTATUS 4 And the third gives CPU 3: Machine Check Exception: 4 Bank 5: ba400405 HARDWARE ERROR. This is *NOT* a software problem! Please contact your hardware vendor mcelog: Unknown Intel CPU type family 6 model 2c CPU 3 BANK 5 MCG status:MCIP MCi status: Uncorrected error Error enabled MCi_MISC register valid Processor context corrupt MCA: Internal unclassified error: 405 STATUS ba400405 MCGSTATUS 4 I have been able to move all workloads onto other servers. As at least two people suggested, I booted from the HP SmartStart CD and ran 100 loops of systems diagnostics and tests, especially for the memory and CPU. No problems were found. I think I will run memtest86 over the weekend. We have placed a hardware support call in to HP. Best Regards, Dave Windsor Robert Bosch LLC Team Leader, MES Database Infrastructure Group (AdP/TEF7.1) 4421 Highway 81 North Anderson, SC 29621 USA www.bosch.us ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] question on software raid
On Fri, 1 Apr 2011, Jerry Geis wrote: dmesg is not reporting any issues. The /proc/mdstat looks fine. md0 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[0] X blocks [2/2] [UU] however /var/log/messages says: smartd[3392] Device /dev/sda 20 offline uncorrectable sectors The machine is running fine.. raid array looks good - what is up with smartd? This page is one I like for understanding SMART attributes. http://www.z-a-recovery.com/man-smart.htm Steve ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] repeated local ephemeral to 80
On 1.4.2011 17:20, Michael D. Berger wrote: On my CentOS box that I use mainly as a web server, I have iptables set to log and reject anything that I don't expect. So lately, I have getting things like this: Mar 29 17:27:20 mbrc20 kernel: IPT-DROP IN= OUT=lo SRC=192.168.9.20 DST=192.168.9.20 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=46910 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=56624 DPT=80 WINDOW=32792 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 OPT (0204400C0402080A4A26F7A501030307) UID=0 that on at least one occasion repeated for every few seconds for more than three hours. The ephemeral source port keeps changing in an irregular manner. Any suggestions? Too restrictive OUT=lo This is the loopback device! Add a rule that allows traffic from and to lo -- Kind Regards, Markus Falb signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] repeated local ephemeral to 80
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 22:10:58 +0200, Markus Falb wrote: [...] Mar 29 17:27:20 mbrc20 kernel: IPT-DROP IN= OUT=lo SRC=192.168.9.20 DST=192.168.9.20 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=46910 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=56624 DPT=80 WINDOW=32792 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 OPT (0204400C0402080A4A26F7A501030307) UID=0 [...] Too restrictive OUT=lo This is the loopback device! Add a rule that allows traffic from and to lo What sort of thing might be using it? It only shows up every day or two. Mike. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] cobbler installation of CentOS-5.5
Timothy Murphy wrote: I'm trying to install CentOS-5.5 on my new HP micro-server, which has no CD drive. I've set up cobbler and cobbler-web on my old server, and can access cobbler-web from my laptop. Just to end the story. Having found the DVD ISO with the help of this newsgroup, I installed CentOS-5.5 on my HP micro-server using cobbler, with no trouble at all. But I was surprised to find that this had deleted the partitioning which I had carefully installed with Fedora Live CD on a USB stick, and assigned the whole disk to LVM. I looked on the web to see how I could modify ks.cfg to make a partition of my own choice, but decided after a brief study that life is too short to spend on the intricacies of kickstart. So I have given up cobbler, and will try the netinstall CD next, installing it on a USB stick. If that doesn't work I shall put the CentOS Live CD on a stick, and install that on the hard disk. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Door not hitting me on my way out
Sorry, folks. I wish our release developers well, and hope that they can open up their processes to allow much needed community involvment. But I've hopped to Scientific Linux and find it much more usable due to their willingness to publish updates even without the entire new release bundled, and the much timelier updates from the upstream vendor. php53 and bind97 are directly available for their verison 5.x release, and their version 6.0 has now taken over my testing environments. This makes EPEL's version of drupal, and various Samba 4 testing accessible, and I don't have to waste my time on backports that will be replaced by a release that is further, and further, and further behind. Perhaps in the future the configuration of the build and patch environments can be opened up, or the patching going on for the package rebundling can be published in just the way people with RHEL would publish their kernel patches, rather than presenting merely the results. But such ideas have been rejected as unnecessary, and even the suggestion was rejected with hostility. I know very well how much work such projects take, and regret that I was unable to assist further. My tweaks and bundles will now be going over to Fedora and Scientific Linux, rather than here or in the developer's list. Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] cobbler installation of CentOS-5.5
--- On Fri, 4/1/11, Timothy Murphy gayle...@eircom.net wrote: From: Timothy Murphy gayle...@eircom.net Subject: Re: [CentOS] cobbler installation of CentOS-5.5 To: centos@centos.org Date: Friday, April 1, 2011, 5:46 PM Timothy Murphy wrote: I'm trying to install CentOS-5.5 on my new HP micro-server, which has no CD drive. I've set up cobbler and cobbler-web on my old server, and can access cobbler-web from my laptop. Just to end the story. Having found the DVD ISO with the help of this newsgroup, I installed CentOS-5.5 on my HP micro-server using cobbler, with no trouble at all. But I was surprised to find that this had deleted the partitioning which I had carefully installed with Fedora Live CD on a USB stick, and assigned the whole disk to LVM. I looked on the web to see how I could modify ks.cfg to make a partition of my own choice, but decided after a brief study that life is too short to spend on the intricacies of kickstart. So I have given up cobbler, and will try the netinstall CD next, installing it on a USB stick. If that doesn't work I shall put the CentOS Live CD on a stick, and install that on the hard disk. If all you want to do is kick-off an install via USB stick, you want http://mirrors.kernel.org/centos/5.5/os/x86_64/images/diskboot.img and use syslinux/memdisk to boot it on a vfat partition - syslinux.cfg label c564 kernel memdisk append initrd=/diskboot.img - snip you can dd the whole IMG to your stick, but its cleaner to collect such images and reference them in syslinux.cfg. To setup your stick to boot #syslinux -s /dev/sda (unmounted USB disk) -- Mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Door not hitting me on my way out
On 04/01/2011 09:37 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: Sorry, folks. I wish our release developers well, and hope that they can open up their processes to allow much needed community involvment. But I've hopped to Scientific Linux and find it much more usable due to their willingness to publish updates even without the entire new release bundled, and the much timelier updates from the upstream vendor. php53 and bind97 are directly available for their verison 5.x release, and their version 6.0 has now taken over my testing environments. This makes EPEL's version of drupal, and various Samba 4 testing accessible, and I don't have to waste my time on backports that will be replaced by a release that is further, and further, and further behind. Perhaps in the future the configuration of the build and patch environments can be opened up, or the patching going on for the package rebundling can be published in just the way people with RHEL would publish their kernel patches, rather than presenting merely the results. But such ideas have been rejected as unnecessary, and even the suggestion was rejected with hostility. I know very well how much work such projects take, and regret that I was unable to assist further. My tweaks and bundles will now be going over to Fedora and Scientific Linux, rather than here or in the developer's list. Nico Kadel-Garcia I would not fault someone for moving on, but I would when said person does so in a manner that only leads to unhelpful drama. Anyway, best in the future. -- Digimer E-Mail: digi...@alteeve.com AN!Whitepapers: http://alteeve.com Node Assassin: http://nodeassassin.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Door not hitting me on my way out
On 04/01/11 6:54 PM, Digimer wrote: I would not fault someone for moving on, but I would when said person does so in a manner that only leads to unhelpful drama. yeah, seriously. call the WHAHmbulance. meh. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS-es] Problema cluster al bootear
Hola muy buenas, he seguido el siguiente tutorial que está muy bien: http://www.howtoforge.com/setting-up-an-active-active-samba-ctdb-cluster-using-gfs-and-drbd-centos-5.5 El problema, es que cuando bootean los nodos, tiene puesto que en el archivo /etc/fstab de arranque, monte la partición /dev/drbd0 en /clusterdata en ambos nodos y eso se ejecuta antes de sincronizar las particiones drbd y no se monta porque no existe en ése momento...Podría ejecutar un servicio antes que otro? Cómo puedo solucionar esto? Es más, aparte, que cuando reinicias uno de los nodos y arranca ya no se sincroniza y hay que repetir el proceso... Alguien me puede ayudar? Esto lo he montado en otros sistemas linux y se han sincronizado correctamente en el booteo. Un saludo. ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS-es] Problemas al activar la RED
Hola, 2011/3/31 Julio Martinez hul...@yahoo.com: Yurkis, Sé un poco mas esfecífico con tu problema para ayudarte con mayor facilidad está iniciando y cuando trata de levantar la interfaz de RED eth0 se me apaga. ¿Se apaga el computador? ¿Has intentado iniciar en init 1 y luego solamente activar el servicio de red? ¿Has intentado desconectar (o cambiar) la tarjeta de red? ¿Te dicen algo los logs? En caso de ser un problema de kernel activalo para que te envíe mensajes a un archivo agregando la siguiente línea al archivo /etc/rsyslog.conf kern.* /var/log/kernel.log Y si puedes instala kdump (http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/kdump-centos.html) para el debug y volcado de kernel. -- Oscar Osta Pueyo oostap.lis...@gmail.com _kiakli_ ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
