Re: [CentOS-docs] [CentOS] Securing SSH wiki article outdated
On 12/02/15 20:03, Warren Young wrote: Hi, just a quick note to whoever is maintaining this page: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Network/SecuringSSH The procedure is missing the firewall-cmd calls necessary in EL7: firewall-cmd --add-port 2345/tcp firewall-cmd --add-port 2345/tcp --permanent Also, it may be worth mentioning that semanage is in the policycoreutils-python package, which isn’t installed by default in all stock configurations. Thank you, and copying to the centos-docs list for reference. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] [CentOS] Broadcom WiFi Wiki Updated
On 19/11/14 11:17, Milos Blazevic wrote: Hi all, Long time, no speak. Shifting from private sector job to full-time freelance work took its toll. As a result, among other things, the Broadcom Wiki page http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Laptops/Wireless/Broadcom I maintain was neglected, and over the past couple of years I've been receiving e-mail inquiries about the Wiki and its applicability. I'm happy to say and let you all know that the Wiki page has been updated with instructions for compiling the latest Broadcom driver with the latest kernel release, and the driver was tested. The current instructions are applicable to CentOS 6 x86_64, but I'm hoping to expand that to CentOS 7 as well. CentOS 5 instructions were removed. Of course, I can post compilation instructions for 5 also, but it'd be tested on a VM and the driver module wouldn't actually go through proper testing. Your thoughts on this matter are certainly welcome. The page is still being reviewed/edited by myself and could use 'polishing', but again, your feedback is always more than welcome and even desired! Hi Milos, Always great to see folks contributing, so thanks for your efforts! Regarding Step 4a: Loading the driver module into kernel: modprobe understands module dependencies and will automatically resolve them whereas insmod does not. Therefore one should probably use modprobe to load the module. You mix the usage of insmod and modprobe in section 4a - for consistency I would stick to modprobe at which point the discussion about manually loading module dependencies becomes irrelevant and could be removed to simplify the section. I've also copied my reply to the centos-docs list. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Error in SecuringSSH Iptables Description
On 28/12/13 17:57, Eli L. wrote: The description for the iptables -m limit rule is incorrect[1], and I don't have edit permissions to fix it: The first line will accept new connections on port 22 provided that IP address hasn't made more than 3 connection attempts in the last minute. Should read more like: The first line will accept new connections on port 22 provided there haven't been more than 3 connection attempts across all clients in the last minute. Important distinction as it opens you up to being denied login when anyone tries to brute force. Might be worth dropping the limit example altogether since the preceding -m recent example is far safer. -- -Eli [1] Third set of rules on http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Network/SecuringSSH#head-a296ec93e31637aa349538be07b37f67d836688a Many thanks for the feedback. As you say, that example doesn't really add anything over and above the first example so as suggested I've removed it. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/postfix
On 20/07/12 12:00, Christoph Galuschka wrote:
Am 20.07.2012 01:25, schrieb Edward Cavill:
Hi in the wiki, using 64 without the trailing M gives an error.
code
The dovecot configuration file is located at /etc/dovecot.conf. The
following lines should be added, edited or uncommented:
login_process_size = 64
[root@localhost etc]# /etc/init.d/dovecot start
Starting Dovecot Imap: doveconf: Warning: NOTE: You can get a new clean
config file with: doveconf -n dovecot-new.conf
doveconf: Warning: Obsolete setting in /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf:21:
protocols=imaps is no longer necessary, remove it
doveconf: Warning: Obsolete setting in /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf:21:
protocols=pop3s is no longer necessary, remove it
doveconf: Warning: Obsolete setting in /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf:86:
login_process_size has been replaced by service { vsz_limit }
doveconf: Fatal: Error in configuration file /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf:
service(pop3-login): vsz_limit is too low
/code
Adding the M after the login_process_size = resolves the issue, as can
be seen below
login_process_size = 64M
[root@localhost etc]# /etc/init.d/dovecot start
Starting Dovecot Imap: doveconf: Warning: NOTE: You can get a new clean
config file with: doveconf -n dovecot-new.conf
doveconf: Warning: Obsolete setting in /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf:21:
protocols=imaps is no longer necessary, remove it
doveconf: Warning: Obsolete setting in /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf:21:
protocols=pop3s is no longer necessary, remove it
doveconf: Warning: Obsolete setting in /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf:86:
login_process_size has been replaced by service { vsz_limit }
[ OK ]
Please could you update the wiki to show these changes.
the two occurrences are at
1) login_process_size = 64
2) the Dovecot package on x86_64 kernels requires the parameter
login_process_size = 64
[root@localhost etc]# uname -ams
Linux xx 2.6.32-220.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Dec 6 19:48:22 GMT
2011 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Thanks
Hi,
I'Ve added the changes - thanks for finding them.
cheers
One issue I see here is that the original howto was written for CentOS-5
with dovecot 1.x.
The OP here is clearly using CentOS-6, which uses dovecot 2.x and no
surprises for guessing that there are a few incompatibilities between
the config files for dovecot 1 and 2.
Personally, I'd suggest forking the original article and maintaining
separate versions for CentOS-5 and CentOS-6, or have separate sections
within the article for CentOS-5 and CentOS-6 where they differ.
To the best of my knowledge this list never did agree a mechanism for
handling documentation differences between product versions. The danger
is that if we keep editing changes for CentOS-6 into docs for CentOS-5
we will end up with broken useless docs.
How do others feel this type of situation should best be handled?
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
[CentOS-docs] Postfix howto update for 6
Hi list, As the author of the Postfix howto: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/postfix I'm receiving some feedback that some things have changed in el6 (e.g, dovecot confs). As I don't have any plans to update my mail server to el6 (I intend to run el5 until EOL), does anyone have any interest in documenting changes for CentOS6 once released? On a wider note, have we given any thought on how we will handle docs for CentOS6? For example, will we just document differences between the two within the same article or will we have separate branches and docs for where there are major differences? ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] [CentOS] New CentOS ToDo Page Required
On 09/04/11 11:36, Mister IT Guru wrote: Due to recent list traffic, it seems that we need to have a new todo list! I propose the following 1) Nuke current todo page 2) Create new todo page 3) Clear out ancient todo items a) Get rid of the items that are no longer relevant b) Reword those that are 4) Update Wiki a) Gasp as the magnitude at the job b) Inject coffee, add ego - write mini todo and propose to list c) Expand on b) till the list stops quibbling d) Find volunteers, and get cracking on Updating the wiki Any ideas? Anyone want to comment? I'm not sure this is the correct list for this (being Wiki related), or at the very least this should be CCd to the centos-docs list too. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Suggestion for how to section: easy way to install the JDK?
On 09/10/10 08:32, Manuel Wolfshant wrote: snip At least the jre package (and I am almost sure jdk too) from Sun comes with the following structure: lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Apr 10 01:25 default - /usr/java/latest drwxr-xr-x 7 root root 4096 Jun 28 23:34 jre1.6.0_20 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 Jun 28 23:35 latest - /usr/java/jre1.6.0_20 Using /usr/java/latest and / or /usr/java/default in your scripts makes them immune to upgrades, as long as you stick with Sun's packages ( which - sad but true - make the java-openjdk / gcj packages useless and offer ( for the moment ) better compatibility with the real world. At least from I where I stand. Are these redistributable? I'm sure they are as Red Hat has Sun's Java packages on it's RHEL Supplementary disk for RHEL5 which it (re)distributes to customers. In which case why doesn't someone just repackage these and stick them in CentOS Extras/rpmforge or somewhere and the problem largely goes away. Or am I missing something? If we had decent packages that Just Worked, we wouldn't need convoluted documentation on how to install Java. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Suggestion for how to section: easy way to install the JDK?
On 09/10/10 13:13, R P Herrold wrote: On Sat, 9 Oct 2010, Ned Slider wrote: Are these redistributable? I'm sure they are as Red Hat has Sun's Java packages on it's RHEL Supplementary disk for RHEL5 which it (re)distributes to customers. No, not without exposing oneself to some liability and obligations to Sun / Oracle. -- Russ herrold OK, thanks for that Russ, and probably explains why no one has done the obvious before now! Regards. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] update HOWTO page for how to copy ssh pub keys
On 07/10/10 12:29, Robert P. J. Day wrote: here: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Network/SecuringSSH the recipe for how to copy your id_rsa.pub file to a remote system is given as: Copy the public key (id_rsa.pub) to the server and install it to the authorized_keys list: $ cat id_rsa.pub ~/.ssh/authorized_keys i suspect it would be better if that were rewritten in terms of using ssh-copy-id, just to be simpler and less error-prone. rday Thanks for volunteering :-) Please submit your proposed changes to this list and we can make it happen. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] edit by AlanBartlett
On 29/07/10 21:03, Akemi Yagi wrote: So, here comes the positive thinking part: what would have worked better if placing the query within the page did not do the job? 'Asking on this mailing list' comes to my mind. That way, chances of getting attention will be quite good. Posting here will also be useful especially if a question is something that is best discussed by people on the -doc list rather than something the person who wrote the sentence decides. Akemi I agree 100% IMHO discussion should best take place on this docs discussion mailing list, not within the docs themselves. If you feel a paragraph/doc is broken, feel free to fix it - that's the purpose of a Wiki. If you simply want to point out that a paragraph/doc is broken, raise it here for discussion on how/who best to fix it. I feel much the same way about this edit: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/postfix_sasl?action=diffrev2=22rev1=21 It adds nothing to the document and merely leaves the target audience confused. If there's a simpler/better way then take 5 minutes to edit the document to make that change. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] ACL changes...
Cris Rhea wrote: I would like to know if there's a more proper way to get stuff done (fixing ACLs and updating Contents/Index pages) than sending to this list. Not that I'm aware of - sending to this list is the way to go :) BTW, nice job on the nvidia/xen page :) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] General FAQ addition
Karanbir Singh wrote: I dont want to get in the way or be irritating, but if there is an attempt to do something, I dont see any harm in making that into a more useful tool that might benefit a few more people. Which is exactly the point of bringing it to this list for discussion, so what started life as a (suggestion for a) tool to assist forum community members/helpers may also be considered by helpers in other community support channels (i.e, IRC and mailing lists). ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] wiki contribution
On 01/15/2010 03:32 AM, R P Herrold wrote: On Thu, 14 Jan 2010, Ned Slider wrote: Again, I would reiterate Ralph's request for you to use plain English[1] when communicating with this list, especially considering that it's a documentation list. Shall I use crayons as well, to make the pictures easier for you? Words of not more than two syllables? No -- I will not kowtow to the shallow end of the gene pool. Pick your fights elsewhere. Not picking a fight Russ, just reiterating Ralph's concern that many people have absolutely no idea what you are on about in many of your postings (not just to this list). It's not about kowtowing to some perceived lesser intelligence, but rather about getting your point across in a clear and concise fashion, as you have clearly demonstrated above you do have the ability to do. Wrapping your point in cleverly constructed prose to the point where it gets lost in translation doesn't really achieve anything. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] wiki contribution
As this thread is alive again... On 11/30/2009 11:35 PM, R P Herrold wrote: On Mon, 30 Nov 2009, Ralph Angenendt wrote: Am 30.11.09 22:49, schrieb R P Herrold: I was considering 'axes' to refactor it along over the weekend Please do consider plain English too, while doing so, as I have no idea what you mean by what you wrote in your last sentence:) hey -- I did 'highlight' the hard term, after all ;) Axes -- pl. of axis -- a collection of vectors of classification. Axes -- pl. of axe -- a tool used to chop (traditionally wood) into smaller pieces. As a native English speaker, I assumed you were metaphorically going to take an axe to the page and chop it up. Here a series of partitions of the Repositories page refactor problemspace, which I will use to carve it up into a more intelligible (and one hopes, more useful) taxonomy yes -- I really did think thru the problem (and many other tecnical matter problems) just that way. ;) -- Russ herrold Again, I would reiterate Ralph's request for you to use plain English[1] when communitcating with this list, especially considering that it's a documentation list. [1] http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/ Thanks ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Broadcom's BCM4311-, BCM4312-, BCM4321-, and BCM4322-based hardware install manual
On 12/13/2009 01:02 PM, Milos Blazevic wrote: Hello (again), I saw I've been granted the rights to edit the page. Thanks Ralph! I'd like to thank all for supporting me on this matter. And yes Ralph, good point about sending from the address I registered with,... never really thought about it. In the next few days I'll be editing the wiki page so the manual will become available and all critical input is welcome - we all want a comprehenssive manual, don't we? Also, I personally think we can't presume to bind this particular WLAN card to a particular laptop model (in respect of the manual), and vice versa. For instance, Inspiron 1525 I'm using usually comes with several different flavors of WLAN cards - don't be surprised if you find it working with iwl1395 driver because yes, they sometimes do come with Intel wireless card. Agreed. I would think the logical location would be in the Wireless page: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Laptops/Wireless where there is already a small section near the bottom that could be replaced, or if your contribution is too large to fit conveniently on that page then do it as a separate page and link it from there. It might be a good idea to do it as a separate page in your own area first as a draft (Ralph can probably help with that?), then once this list has had a chance to review it, it can be moved to the correct location? That way we don't have draft content sitting on a finished page whilst being written, if that makes sense. As for the drivers RPM Fusion and that no-vim-distro repos :) provide, this is the matter which the developers will certainly much better explain, especially since ELrepo developers are engaged in this discussion. Also, I myself was under the impression that Phil (NedSlider) considered thoroughly the option of building and .rpm for this driver. I have no idea what the policy of others is on redistributing such content, but as others have said, when I looked at it for inclusion in ELRepo I was concerned by the terms for redistribution in the license, and sought advice from the Software Freedom Law Center. We concluded that we (ELRepo.org) couldn't redistribute it under the current terms, hence why I feel such a guide here would be hugely beneficial. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] the iredmail project
Hi, I'm not sure why this would be sent directly to me so I'm forwarding it to the CentOS Documentation mailing list as that would seem a more appropriate place. http://wiki.centos.org/Contribute#head-42b3d8e26400a106851a61aebe5c2cca54dd79e5 shake chen wrote: hello I am a team member of iRedMail. http://code.google.com/p/iredmail/w/list the iredmail is open source mail soultion , now it support centos 5x. we hope can add the iredmail to CentOS mail wiki. thank you. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] New User Wishes to Contribute
Steve Bonds wrote: On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Phil Schaffner P.R.Schaffner-at-IEEE.org |CentOS| ... wrote: On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 16:25 -0700, Steve Bonds wrote: As requested on http://wiki.centos.org/Contribute, here is my info: # your FirstnameLastname username [SteveBonds] # the proposed subject of your Wiki contribution(s) [Personal Page] # the proposed location of your Wiki contribution(s) [Personal Page] I'll branch out from here. Maybe. While I understand the problem with spammers, asking each user to send each proposed page to the list for creation, then wait until it's created, and only then get to edit... is pretty onerous compared to other options. Agreed, and there have been discussions of opening the process. For now it's a meritocracy. Follow the process, become known to the community, make some good contributions, then ask for a higher level of access. Chances are it will be granted. Welcome to centos-docs! Phil P.S. Also develop a thick skin. :-) This could be a proving-ground for technical writers in-training, and the constructive criticism can sometimes be a bit heavy, but it is generally well-intended. Thanks, Phil. I've been on the Internet for 20 years. I could loan my skin out to elephants. Well... most days. :-) -- Steve Welcome Steve :) Nothing much to add above what Phil has already said, other than to say welcome. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Contribution to wiki: nagios incompatibility with centos 5.2
Ralph Angenendt wrote: On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Christopher Chan But before we go on, may I ask what is the purpose of the Centos Wiki? That is a good question. IM not so HO it should contain documentation which gets people going with things on CentOS. Which is a very broad view. Broad views are good IMHO as I think it's easier to address on a case by case basis largely as this list does at present by asking to see and discussing proposed documentation. Because people will *always* look for documentation on CentOS venues first before even thinking about going to the sendmail.org webpage, for example. That is one of the reasons why people like Distributions like Ubuntu, Arch and Gentoo - their documentation is rather extensive. Ralph Agreed :) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] proposed nvidia wiki page
JohnS wrote: On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 15:11 -0400, Scott Robbins wrote: On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 08:51:23PM +0200, Dag Wieers wrote: On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Akemi Yagi wrote: The only reason for me to keep maintaining the dkms packages, would be for those people not running supported kernels (recent/official). But if we could describe and automate the building of kmod packages, I would prefer that route over dkms at any time. For what it's worth, the elrepo version worked well with my unsupported kernel (a VServer 2.6.22 kernel) --- Could those that are trying out the kmod driver please report what video card model you have. Would be nice to have a good list of the Legacy and Newer Cards. JohnStanley That tends to change as the drivers move forward over time, older cards become legacy and are no longer supported by the latest driver. For a list of cards supported by the latest driver, the user is better off referring to nvidia's documentation. Looking at the docs for the current driver leads me to believe that GeForce 6000 series cards are the oldest supported by this driver (GeForce 5x00 series is supported by the 173.14.xx driver and older still GeForce2/3/4 by driver 96.43.xx). We (ELRepo) haven't packaged older nvidia drivers (yet) but we can certainly look into that if there is a demand. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] proposed nvidia wiki page
Phil Schaffner wrote: lostson wrote: On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 23:39 -0400, JohnS wrote: ... [1] http://wiki.centos.org/HardwareList/Nvidia_Graphics JohnStanley I was reading yours over today and yes they are very similar, hopefully i can get edit permissions soon and we can get it all squared away. Might want to have a look at this forum post - did a pretty detailed procedure. https://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=85280topic_id=22003forum=39#forumpost85280 Phil Do we need to decide what the official (or preferred) CentOS Way is for this? Or do we just present all the options without prejudice? There are (to my knowledge) the Nvidia binary installer, dkms driver from rpmforge, kmdl package from ATrpms, and a kmod driver from elrepo. I should probably declare a conflict of interests so I'll just ask the question rather than providing opinion towards the answer :) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] requesting to become a contributor
Richard Bronosky wrote: I had already created that account, but could not do the step of creating the homepage because of permissions. Great. I'm sure Ralph will get you set up in due course :) Also, please would you bottom post replies (rather than top posting) as that is the convention on these mailing lists. Thanks ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Well, I wasn't a member of this list until today
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Jim Perrin wrote: But I guess with Akemi dragging me out over the OS_Protection page, I'm a member now :-P I've got no problem discussing it or other changes here. I set it up on my blog mostly because there wasn't a way to have comments on the page, and I didn't want to open the wiki page up to editing by outside sources right away. Too late! (Well, no, only EditGroup can). Cheers, Ralph If you (Jim) are actively maintaining the page and prefer edits to come through you, then I'm sure members of this list will respect that. Some contributors prefer to maintain their contributions whereas others are more than happy for members of the EditGroup to make amendments saving them the time/effort :) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Well, I wasn't a member of this list until today
Jim Perrin wrote: On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Ralph Angenendtra+cen...@br-online.de wrote: I've got no problem discussing it or other changes here. I set it up on my blog mostly because there wasn't a way to have comments on the page, and I didn't want to open the wiki page up to editing by outside sources right away. Too late! (Well, no, only EditGroup can). Hey, I'm just happy that there's positive feedback for it. Ralph, is it possible to set it up as a page of includes, so it could be added to a section at a time? I'm worried that it's just too long in current form to be useful. Should we have a wiki.centos.org/Security/ section with Security/OS and Security/Daemons or Services? The closest we have at present is the Security section under HowTo's: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos#head-ed8017672e89d33d57ffd0ed8148abd139e88421 Currently some of that content is linked directly under the top level /HowTos and others is linked from /HowTos/Network. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] About the article OS_Protection by JimPerrin
Ned Slider wrote: +1 - discussions should take place on list, not on disparate blogs. +1 for the wiki article... excellent! Ned One other thing... the page appears locked. Despite being a member of the Edit Group, I can't even view revisions :( Please can someone (Ralph??) fix the ACLs? ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] New page InstallFromUSBkey
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Karanbir Singh wrote: On 06/19/2009 01:56 PM, Phil Schaffner wrote: Ralph Angenendt wrote: Phil Schaffner wrote: Bingo! The man wins the prize! :-) So is this the time where I send you my account number? Sure, let me supply you my Nigerian e-mail address to send it to, and we'll work out the details. ;-) Pfizer has a 30% sale on today ( I got email saying so... ) - Maybe gift vouchers ? That was a rather stiff joke. Ralph All together... *groan* ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Comments on draft TipsAndTricks/InstallWebminRepo page
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Ralph Angenendt wrote: Ralph Angenendt wrote: Karanbir Singh wrote: A 'whats new' section in a block, on the right side of the home-page, perhaps push the screenshot up, and put this box in under that ( is one option ) http://moinmo.in/MacroMarket/RecentlyCreatedPages This will also show created HomePages, but I think we can live with that. Check http://wiki.centos.org/RalphAngenendt/recent Don't you love when Threads just die like this? So what: Any opinions? Ralph +1 for the general idea of having a what's new block on the homepage, but could translations possible be excluded. No disrespect intended to the EXCELLENT work being done by all the translators, but being only an English speaker/reader, I personally have little interest when all 10 slots of a what's new list are filled by translated pages. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Typo on TipsAndTricks/VncHeadlessInstall wiki page
Timothy Lee wrote: Dear all, On the TipsAndTricks/VncHeadlessInstall wiki page, the first sentence under Download ISO section should be changed from: The first thing you will need is once if the ISO's from the CentOS mirrors. to: The first thing you will need is one of the ISO's from the CentOS mirrors. Thanks - updated :-) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] XPS1530 Draft Comments Please
Lalit Dhiri wrote: Good morning, Would anyone with CentOS Wiki experience consider giving feedback on the state of my draft article at? http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Laptops/Dell/XPS_M1530 I will be adding info ref Nvidia graphics card driver, hard drive Load Cycle and hope to have the article completed later today or tomorrow assuming I've not messed something up :-). For now off to boldly go where I've never been before ;-) Have a good day and thanks for any comments. The hardware looks very similar to the XPS M1330 here (other than you have the nVidia graphics option): http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Laptops/Dell/XPS_M1330?highlight=(1330) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Potential loss of a wiki contributor.
Dag Wieers wrote: Also I am very much inclined to ask on the mailinglist and forums that everyone sends in a top-3 or a top-5 of items that the project needs to work on to me and I will compile that into something we could discuss on a CentOS conference or an internal IRL meeting. I know I do not have to ask for a permission for this, but what do others think about this ? I agree that an open discussion is needed about ways to improve the project. How best that happens, I'm not sure. If you feel this is the best way to facilitate that, then you get my +1 :-) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] New Wiki Page
Dag Wieers wrote: On Sat, 9 May 2009, R P Herrold wrote: I think you like to complain I for one find that type of attitude offensive and not an appropriate way to talk to contributors on this list, not to mention damaging to the wider project. If you don't understand why, then Dag does a rather good job of explaining it below. How many people tell the waiter that they were not satisfied with a meal ? How many people just don't return to a restaurant when they were not satisfied with a meal ? I prefer feedback, so we can improve. I don't like people not returning back with no feedback. And I certainly don't like a waiter who tells me I am wrong if I don't like the food. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Updated How to Setup a Software RAID on CentOS 5
R P Herrold wrote: On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Phil Schaffner wrote: R P Herrold wrote: On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Ned Slider wrote: unknown prior wrote ... There's always going to be an argument about whether to put /boot and swap on RAID. It's all about performance most of the time being slightly better versus stability in the event of device failure. I can't think of a good argument for not having /boot on the raid1. Then you do not support it, and see the recurring support load in #centos -- we get this load all the time. ... That's pretty much what the article started with if you follow the long history of the first thread on the contribution, but the consensus of the people who commented was overwhelmingly in favor of /boot on RAID1, ... My response was simply in reply to the 'I can't think of a good argument' comment by 'Ned Slider'. To respond to 'the consensus ... overwhelmingly' remark, the mice also overwhelmingly voted to bell the cat. Counting noses does not make a bad answer more correct; using raid rather than flat RO /boot partitions is still less robust Well it seems you are alone in your view (at present, on this list). I have yet to see a convincing argument to change my opinion to not place /boot on a software RAID1 where one has chosen to use software RAID1. You state 'putting /boot on raid adds complexity' - I disagree in this case (for software raid1), it removes the additional complexity of having to manually resync /boot if it's *not* on the software RAID1 every time it's updated, and that appears to be the opinion held by others (and the very reason the page was created in the first place). Why add complexity - why not let the raid do the work for you. If either drive fails the system will still boot and the faulty drive can be replaced. More robust, but with additional complexity doesn't necessarily make a better solution for new (inexperienced) users. Best practices are usually derived through discussion and consensus, something I believe this thread is striving to achieve. so that's where it is now. Would be glad to add a footnote with your POV, or feel free to do so yourself. No, when it irritates me enough that the clueless newbies who don't read and don't research are not helped by yet another writeup not to read, and keep coming back for spoons, I may add a Method B subsection. Or more likely ignore what I consider a bad support method and point to our rebuild of upstreams doc's Upstream docs appear to advocate *exactly* what the current Wiki page describes (as do the CentOS docs): http://www.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5/html/Deployment_Guide/s1-raid-config.html http://www.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5/html/Deployment_Guide/s1-raid-diskdruid-manual-devmnt.html I remain unconvinced that replicating documentation, and adding places for entropy to rot in a wiki is a win. I'd upstream the change, instead, as there is NO CentOS specific aspect here. I guess the point here is people don't read the docs but might search/read the Wiki, and we are able to amend/add to the Wiki were we are unable to do so in upstream derived docs. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Updated How to Setup a Software RAID on CentOS 5
Phil Schaffner wrote: I have attempted to address all comments: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/SoftwareRAIDonCentOS5 Give me your best shot! :-D Phil Nice job Phil :) /remembering my disclaimer/ I'm not a raid/grub expert... Presumably Section two is required because grub is installed to the mbr of /dev/sda so /dev/sdb isn't bootable in the event /dev/sda should fail? Would using grub be simpler rather than directly editing /boot/grub/device.map ? Something like... Following on from Section 1, reboot... Stop at the grub menu and enter the c option, which gives you the grub prompt. Then: grub device (hd0) /dev/sda grub root (hd0,0) grub setup (hd0) grub device (hd1) /dev/sdb grub root (hd1,0) grub setup (hd1) grub exit and test both disks are bootable. Achieves the same thing I guess. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Updated How to Setup a Software RAID on CentOS 5
Marcus Moeller wrote: ... If you are planning to setup a RAID1, I still wonder why not to place /boot on a raid partition? Section one, point 4 ? ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Updated How to Setup a Software RAID on CentOS 5
Phil Schaffner wrote: Ned Slider wrote:... Would using grub be simpler rather than directly editing /boot/grub/device.map ? Something like... Following on from Section 1, reboot... Stop at the grub menu and enter the c option, which gives you the grub prompt. Then: grub device (hd0) /dev/sda grub root (hd0,0) grub setup (hd0) grub device (hd1) /dev/sdb grub root (hd1,0) grub setup (hd1) grub exit and test both disks are bootable. Achieves the same thing I guess. I believe that's true, in fact I think that approach is used in some of the links referenced from the RAID FAQ entry. Could put it in as an alternate method. ... I guess even the first part above is unnecessary if grub has already been correctly installed to the mbr of /dev/sda during installation. IMHO I don't think there's a need for both - just which ever is considered the /right/best/approved/ method (maybe something for others to comment on?). Both work, both achieve the same thing :) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Updated How to Setup a Software RAID on CentOS 5
Ed Heron wrote: From: Phil Schaffner, Tuesday, April 28, 2009 5:36 PM I have attempted to address all comments: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/SoftwareRAIDonCentOS5 Give me your best shot! :-D Phil There's always going to be an argument about whether to put /boot and swap on RAID. It's all about performance most of the time being slightly better versus stability in the event of device failure. I can't think of a good argument for not having /boot on the raid1. Presumably performance isn't an issue as the contents of /boot gets read once at system boot (other than maybe fast booting performance, but that's not really going to be an issue for a server running raid1, right?) SWAP on raid0 is a bad idea as one drive failure may cause the system to fail to boot. I guess SWAP on raid1 is the safe option. If SWAP performance is critical, then maybe two independent non-raid partitions, one at the start of each drive, and set to the same priority would be a better solution (effectively giving stripped raid0 performance). Presumably then a drive failure wouldn't prevent booting but would result in a warning that one of the SWAPs was unavailable (assuming the system could function fine with the size of the remaining SWAP)? Hopefully someone can verify my logic here. What's the disaster recovery plan here? Obviously, if the second drive fails, there's no issue. Standard removal and eventual addition of replacement device(s). If the first drive fails, are we hoping the computer will boot off the second drive or are we moving the second drive to the first interface? If grub is present on the mbr of both drives, then the system will remain functional if *either* drive fails without any further intervention. I would think this is the ideal. Is it outside the scope of this document to describe and test disaster recovery? I think it is. I'm just making a note to suggest a further complimentary page at some time in the future... (though, at this time, I am NOT volunteering to write it) Is there a wiki page todo list somewhere? I would be in favour of extending the current page to include testing/recovery information in the event of a drive failure. If the information is not specific to only raid1, then maybe a separate page is warranted. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] HowTo/RAID/convert non-RAID CentOS 5 system tosoftware RAID1 using rescue mode
Marcus Moeller wrote: Hi Ed. Does documentation exist describing how to convert a simple, single disk non-RAID CentOS 5 system to software RAID1 using the CentOS install CD/DVD as a rescue disk? (Assuming not) Is there a need for such? (Assuming need) I volunteer to produce it. +1 from me, Ed :) I don't see any conflict or duplication between his page and my proposed page. Actually, I see the pages as complimentary. If Phil is going to broaden the scope of his page, then, of course, I would withdraw my request. However, I would recommend against having too much on a single page. I agree on that and that's what I have written before. We just need to ensure the quality of the 'simple' RAID1 page, before starting a new one. I don't see any reason to delay Ed going ahead and drafting this page (provided it's clearly marked as in draft until finished/checked etc). And I agree, should be a separate, but complimentary, page to the existing installing on software RAID1 page. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] proposed changes option
Akemi Yagi wrote: On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Marcus Moeller m...@marcus-moeller.de wrote: Test procedure is: snip - test forum functionality (hope Ned and some of the forum mods will join us then) When participation of the forum mods is needed, I'd be happy to join in. Akemi Absolutely Marcus. I've been rather busy of late so haven't been following the full details of this discussion (just briefly reading), but the moment you're ready for us to jump in with some testing, please give us a loud shout and we'll be there :) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] wiki contribs 4 centos
Fabian Arrotin wrote: Steffen Mann wrote: Hello Gents, I feel I should do more for the community and contribute writing the occasional wiki article to improof the overall centos experience. Having worked for the upsteam .src provider for nearly 7 years I should be able to do so... Hope you'll open this up4me Cheers, Steff Hi Steffen, If you're used to this list, you know that you have to provide your existing wiki login name (and if you don't have one already you can create it , FirstnameLastname being the convention) Then ask on this list which topic you want to write on (and provide some kind of draft maybe) and then Ralph (aka the Wiki Master) can change the ACLs on the newly created page for your topic .. Welcome :D BTW, I'd just like to add - please don't feel put off by the hoop jumping, we are in the process of trying to open up the Wiki so more people can easily contribute but at the same time trying to keep spammers off the Wiki. I echo Fabian's Welcome :-) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
[CentOS-docs] Nice work Alain
Hey Alain, Nice work on the updated admonitions here: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Wiki/Editing IMHO they look great, and a nice improvement on the previous set. Thanks for the hard work making our wiki pages look great! Ned ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Improving the website and forums
Akemi Yagi wrote: On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote: Forum moderators would be able to provide more feedback here : how relevant and accurate are most topic's for threads ? If they are bang-on, perhaps it might be a good idea to replace the entire title of the page with just the title of the post, drop everything else. opinion - subject to discussion. Just my humble opinion (not quite as a forum moderator) ... I agree that it is not necessary to show the forum topics. Seeing General Support, for example, does not add anything useful. Most people seem to put a short summary of the problem/question when they post. So the title of the post should be good as such when getting indexed. Akemi Agreed. The thread title should (hopefully) contain the keywords so that's what should be returned by a search. Personally, I'd prefer to see the title of the thread/post followed by the source returned for a search. So when googling best Linux the searcher may get the following results: Is it true that CentOS is the best Linux ever? - CentOS forums Is it true that CentOS is the best Linux ever? - CentOS Wiki Is it true that CentOS is the best Linux ever? - CentOS Mailing List etc Now, if we could just do something about those URGENT - PLEASE HELP!!! threads for which google returns 474,000 hits (not all of which are on centos!) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Permission to add an entry to the Webcams page
Marko A. Jennings wrote: On Fri, January 2, 2009 5:18 am, Ralph Angenendt wrote: Marko A. Jennings wrote: On Thu, January 1, 2009 1:00 pm, Ralph Angenendt wrote: Marko A. Jennings wrote: I would like to add an entry for the Logitech QuickCam Communicate STX to this page: http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/HardwareList/Webcams I need your WikiName for that ... So sorry, getting old and forgetful: MarkoJennings Done. Ralph, please remove edit permissions for this page for my WikiName, I am done adding content. Thank you. Marko Thanks for your addition Marko :-) WRT your additional note regarding the inbuilt mic not working if the camera is plugged in at boot - I experienced the opposite with the Logitech QuickCam Pro 9000 (onboard sound didn't work if the webcam was plugged in at boot) and posted a workaround on that page. I wonder if defining the sound device in /etc/modprobe.conf for the webcam (snd_usb_audio maybe??) would solve the issue? Anyway, thanks again for your contribution. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Screenshot on FrontPage
Marcus Moeller wrote: Dear Dag. .. This is to notify that I have put a screenshot on the FrontPage. It is not an exciting screenshot, just a simple default desktop with the browser opened and pointed to the wiki itself. I don't think it's a good idea to put a screenshot on the frontpage as... I actually quite like it :) You may want to take a look at openSUSE.org to see how it's handled there. They make use of some AJAX elements to keep the content in front. IMHO, the opensuse.org front page is visually light years ahead of anything CentOS currently has to offer on the InterWeb. Just my opinion... I'll go put on my flame-proof suit now ;) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] HardwareList - webcams
Karanbir Singh wrote: Ned Slider wrote: I hope you'll add your Philips webcam to the list when you get a chance ;) Added info about that. Thanks. However, I completely failed to find a click path from the home page to the webcams page. Is the page hidden away from the world by design ? Link added to the HardwareList page :) Incidentally, is that any different for anything listed on the HardwareList page - I don't see a click path from the home page for any of that. I'm guessing most users would find those pages by using the search feature. Do you think the HardwareList page needs adding somewhere else or maybe I just missed it? ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] HardwareList - webcams
Karanbir Singh wrote: Ned Slider wrote: http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/HardwareList/Webcams I dont see the point of 'high end', 'midrange' and 'entry level' sections. If there is any reason for it to be there, some info on howto decide what section each webcam should go into should also be included on the page. Fine - removed. It was just an attempt to beak up the page and give it some structure. The important thing is the info that it works :) But honestly, I dont see the point to that segmentation at all. People will buy and use the webcam that works for them best, mostly looking for the wiki as a means to work out which of those have been tested before etc. So rather than doing the segmentation based on 'range' perhaps more info on the camera / sample video + still output etc would go down a lot better. I didn't envisage turning it into a mini review of each cam - there's already plenty of those on youtube etc. What's missing is purely a list of cams that *will* work under CentOS, plus any relevant details for getting it working. I hope you'll add your Philips webcam to the list when you get a chance ;) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
[CentOS-docs] HardwareList - webcams
Hi List, The hardware list page on the Wiki: http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/HardwareList says: I'd like to see this page as an entry point for hardware that does not work with CentOS out of the box or only with some effort. I do not see a need for a list which states all working hardware. I'd like to ask if we can make a small exception to that rule for webcams, and ask for permission to start a section for webcams known to work with CentOS. The reason being that when researching the purchase of a webcam for use on CentOS/Skype, I was unable to find any decent resources (specifically referencing CentOS) other than personal recommendations from other users. I still seems as though buying a webcam for use with CentOS is a lottery although things are definitely improving. I'm thinking of a page that details: Webcam make and model CentOS version tested under Driver used, minimal install details (source, RPM etc) Applications tested with Anything else relevant and maybe split into 3 sections for high-end, mid-range and entry-level webcams. For reference (and those searching on google who may find this), I could get things started with the Logitech Quickcam Pro 9000 which works on CentOS5 with the uvc driver (compiled from the latest source tarball), tested with Skype. Karanbir also mentioned on IRC that he'd had success with a Philips SPC 900NC. Thoughts/objections? ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] What's an Enterprise class OS
Akemi Yagi wrote: Thank, Ned. I went ahead and added this to the wiki FAQ with minor modifications: http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/General (currently the last item) Thanks Akemi :) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] What's an Enterprise class OS
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Steve Tindall wrote: When looking for a reference to post in response to a question, I often find it hard to locate questions in the FAQs that I know exist, but sometimes that's because of the web vs. wiki FAQs issue (i.e., I'm looking in the wrong one). The problem with the FAQs on the web site is, that only a small amount of people can edit there - and those are the people who tend to have not enough time as it is at the moment. The more I think about this, and in relation to the whole WebSite2 vision, I'm wondering if a simple static page at www.centos.org is all that may be needed combined with wiki.centos.org for content/docs etc, forums.centos.org, MLs and IRC for support, and projects.centos.org/trac for the other stuff. At least with a simple static front page that say what the project is all about and links to the important areas it's not something that needs updating and thus isn't a burden on those who can least afford the time plus then the Wiki editorial group could take on much of the rest hopefully freeing up the core devs to do what only they can do. The Wiki could host much of the content that's currently on www.centos.org. Don't shoot me... just thinking out loud :D I'd be interested to hear opinion from Karanbir, Dag and others who've been active in this area recently. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
[CentOS-docs] What's an Enterprise class OS
Hi all, One of the concepts we see arise on the forums time and time again that's poorly understood is the concept of an Enterprise Class OS and everything that involves. I think it would be of benefit to have a one stop page to point users to that explains the concepts and provides the information required. Much of this content already exists on the Wiki but it is scattered over many individual pages and new users often don't find it (new users often don't search at all!) I'm thinking something that covers the following topics: Relationship with the upstream product stability and long term support (vs bleeding edge) Support lifecycle backporting Not installing software from source ... Much of this could be a narrative linking to existing content on the Wiki where possible - not really that much new content, just bringing it all together in one place in an easy to read/navigate format. Initially I envisaged this as an About type page but that already exists (in title), so maybe something like Understanding an Enterprise Class Operating System. I'd also written a forum post in the FAQ and ReadMe First section on Installing Software: http://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=14408forum=47 and am wondering about transferring this content to the Wiki too - maybe under the /HowTos/PackageManagement section, and some of that obviously relates to the content above. IMHO it makes sense to have this information centrally available on the Wiki rather than separately on the forums. I guess the reason for this post stems from frustration that the information is there on the Wiki but many new users are simply not finding it (I think forum users are maybe less inclined to search before asking than ML users). This makes me think we need to look at how we can restructure the information on the Wiki to make it more accessible or maybe produce pages that bring together related but individually scattered content in a more structured (easier to find and navigate) manner. ATM we tend to find ourselves writing the same answers over and over again which demonstrates a need for a centralised page covering all of this related content. Any thoughts? ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] What's an Enterprise class OS
William L. Maltby wrote: On Sat, 2008-11-08 at 09:29 -0500, Scott Robbins wrote: On Sat, Nov 08, 2008 at 12:59:02PM +, Ned Slider wrote: Hi all, One of the concepts we see arise on the forums time and time again that's poorly understood is the concept of an Enterprise Class OS and everything that involves. I think it would be of benefit to have a one stop page to point users to that explains the concepts and provides the information required. Much of this content already exists on the Wiki but it is scattered over many individual pages and new users often don't find it (new users often don't search at all!) IMO, the FAQ, http://www.centos.org/modules/smartfaq/ is the proper place for this sort of information. Regardless of whether the questioners search or not, a frequently asked questiuon belongs there. Maybe the CentOS page needs to highlight the FAQ more by moving it out from under the Information drop-down and putting it as a big splash right there on the home page? snip Good point Bill. Maybe these issues just need splitting up into individual FAQs and adding to that section. And if the answer requires much more than a couple of sentences then a separate page can be created and linked to provide a more in depth answer. BTW, a more maintained version of the FAQs now resides on the Wiki: http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] What's an Enterprise class OS
Akemi Yagi wrote: Many of you on this mailing list may still remember the longish thread regarding the writing of a HowTo rpmbuild article. At that time, I quoted several forum posts to demonstrate the fact that we repeatedly *type* the same answer each time a new person asks the same question. This was because there wasn't really a good single point of reference we could use and the best way of responding was to write the whole thing out (again and again). At lease for me, the most propelling reason for creating a new article is to make things easier for people helping new users rather than to expect new users to read it. And the article/subject Ned is proposing is indeed worth writing. With so many people switching from Fedora and other distros, we have been having so many occasions in which we should explain what an enterprise class OS (thus CentOS) is about. See, you put that so much better than I did! As Bill suggested, if the FAQ section were more comprehensive, that would work equally well. For me, it's as much an issue of structuring the information in a way that makes it easy to find/link to as it is about merely creating the relevant content. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Opening of the wiki Part III(?) ...
Marcus Moeller wrote:
Good Evening.
...
Courtesy and to have something within the centos space to point to.
Plus: Finding the manuals on upstream *all in one place* (like
clustermanagement, virtualization and so on) isn't that easy.
I personally welcome that the docs are mirrored on CentOS.org. Maybe
we could spend some more time to de-brand them completly.
I don't think that's possible looking at the notice at the bottom of the
documentation:
/---
Note: This documentation is provided {and copyrighted} by Red Hat®, Inc.
and is released via the Open Publication License. The copyright holder
has added the further requirement that Distribution of substantively
modified versions of this document is prohibited without the explicit
permission of the copyright holder. The CentOS project redistributes
these original works (in their unmodified form) as a reference for
CentOS-5 because CentOS-5 is built from publicly available, open source
SRPMS. The documentation is unmodified to be compliant with upstream
distribution policy. Neither CentOS-5 nor the CentOS Project are in any
way affiliated with or sponsored by Red Hat®, Inc.
---/
One more thing - I'm wondering about the continued use of the prominent
North American Enterprise Linux vendor phrase that appears on the
website. Presumably this dates back to a time when Red Hat was less
receptive to CentOS but that has changed now? Is this something that
could/should be dropped now relations are friendlier?
You may want to take a look at the Trademark Guidelines, Ch.A. Use of
the Brand ...
The only way to obtain permissions to use the RH's trademark is by
entering into a written license agreement with RH Inc. ... Absolutely
no exeptions.
But maybe we could just ask for it.
I don't think it's about using RH's trademark, but simply referring to
them by name (who they are) rather than by some cryptic phrase for fear
of infringing on their trademark. I'm sure this has some history that
dates back to a time when Red Hat were less enthusiastic about community
rebuilds of their product than they are now. My point was simply that if
times have moved on then maybe it's time the language used to describe
the upstream vendor should move on too?
For example, take a look at the text used on the CentOS home page:
http://www.centos.org/
/---
*CentOS Overview*
CentOS is an Enterprise-class Linux Distribution derived from sources
freely provided to the public by a prominent North American Enterprise
Linux vendor.
---/
The homepage and About page are littered with references to a prominent
North American Enterprise Linux vendor and upstream, whilst also
containing many links to Red Hat's servers, yet fail to directly mention
Red Hat anywhere by name. I was under the impression that the
relationship was somewhat warmer than that now??
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Opening of the wiki Part III(?) ...
Akemi Yagi wrote: On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 8:54 AM, Ralph Angenendt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ned Slider wrote: Also, whilst undergoing this process, would it also be a good time to request and/or formalize a documentation SIG as there doesn't appear to be one at present. Presumably those who have raised their hands would be obvious candidates for such a SIG. Ummm. I thought this was it? Or please rephrase what you mean by documentation SIG ... Well, it is listed under Future SIGs: http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup Akemi Yes, that's all I meant :-) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] CentOS on the Aspire One
Scott Robbins wrote: The Aspire One is one of those netbooks that have become so popular recently. I've installed CentOS on the hard drive model, and have been considering doing a wiki article about it, and probably will unless there are strenuous objections. Go for it Scott. There is already a page for an Asus eee on the Wiki under /HowTos/Laptops/ so unless anyone feels the need for a section specifically for netbooks, I would think it would be right at home there. The objections might come from the fact that outside drivers are required for wireless, webcam, sound, and even wired ethernet. I think if it's clearly stated that hardware isn't supported out of the box and you show how to get that hardware working in a way that's consistent with the distro packaging (ie, using a kmod package), then I don't see much ground for objection. It does open the possibility to debate how best to get those packages hosted in some form of repository but that may be a topic more suited to the -devel list?? I have an article on my own pages, with a CentOS section at http://home.nyc.rr.com/computertaijutsu/aspireone160GB.html Note that I used Alan's kmods--I also tested Wolfy's dkms rpms for the wired ethernet and they also worked. I went with Alan's in this case because kmods are usually a bit less work and they were the ones I was using when I wrote the article. Thanks for any feedback. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Opening of the wiki Part III(?) ...
Ralph Angenendt wrote: And even more important: Who wanted to be on the Editorial Team? Being on it means that you are supposed to subscribe to *all* pages on the wiki (meaning that you'll get a changelog diff for all changed pages via mail). And it means that you should at least skim through those diffs to see if there is a violation of the wiki guidelines (or if some spammer still does his spamruns manually). So please raise your hands *NOW*. Anything else I missed? Cheers, Ralph Having given this much thought (mostly around my available free time), if it's not too late I'd also like to also raise my hand and in so doing give this thread a little bump. Also, whilst undergoing this process, would it also be a good time to request and/or formalize a documentation SIG as there doesn't appear to be one at present. Presumably those who have raised their hands would be obvious candidates for such a SIG. Ned ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Samba Docs
Spike Turner wrote: Fabian Arrotin wrote: So not related to CentOS ... and on another I've got 3.0.28 (the latest from upstream). The docs look almost the same and the docs refer to security = share. However 3.0.32 comes with a blank smb.conf making it harder to get a secure server up and running. Same as above These are the rpms on my CentOS box samba-3.0.28-0.el4.9.i386.rpm samba-client-3.0.28-0.el4.9.i386.rpm samba-common-3.0.28-0.el4.9.i386.rpm samba-swat-3.0.28-0.el4.9.i386.rpm they are the latest that CentOS rebuilt from upstream. As an aside the RFE on the upstream provider refers to the version shipped (and by extension by CentOS) not covering all bugs and issues fixed in 3.0.29 to 3.0.32. Spike, Please read this to understand how upstream (and by extension CentOS) handles security issues: http://www.redhat.com/advice/speaks_backport.html ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Samba
Akemi Yagi wrote: On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Will F. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Fabian, Thanks for sharing your thoughts. It always seemed to me that HowTo pages catered to those people who didn't want to read millions of pages of manpages and just wanted things to work now. Turnkey solutions. I completely agree that an article on how to setup a simple public share is REALLY easy and all it takes is a quick Google search or skim of the smb.conf man page. But at the same time, so are the rest of the articles. My vision for this HowTo is really giving the yum command to grab the package, a basic smb.conf, the location on where to put it, and the service name on how to start it. That way someone can get a share up in less than 5 minutes. I believe these are the more CentOS-related bits of Samba. Getting deeper into the advanced topics of Samba explaining how to configure the backend (old smbpasswd, newer tdbsam, or ldap when acting as a pdc), how to integrate in existing Samba/Windows domain/AD , explaining Filesystem ACLs seem better suited for samba.org since anyone who wants to implement that really needs intimate knowledge of their environment. I don't think they would want to read a summarized version in a CentOS wiki. Comments? Thanks, -will I agree with your view. I would suggest you get started with a draft and we can all join in and make it most suitable for CentOS users. Akemi Agreed - many hands make light work for a task like this. As a thought - I'm wondering if the topic needs slitting up into multiple sections/pages? Maybe something like: An introduction/overview to samba (users, file permissions etc) Basic samba setup with example (security=share) Group shares with examples (security=user) Printing AD integration etc ... That way folks could chip in more easily on the bits they feel able to contribute towards and it needn't seem like a herculean task from the outset. Thoughts? ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] SELinux
Ned Slider wrote: Hi list, I've knocked up a contribution on SELinux here: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/SELinux Any suggestions as to where this should be linked under http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos ? I don't see an obvious existing category to add it under. Any thoughts? ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] SELinux
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Ned Slider wrote: Hi list, I've knocked up a contribution on SELinux here: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/SELinux I've tried to pitch it as an introduction for those not already familiar with SELinux but also hopefully a useful reference. Great article. What maybe should be added to the article is the fact, that SELinux doesn't need programs to be changed, meaning that programs do not (need to) know about SELinux at all for it to work. So a SELinux denial just looks like a normal access denied to any program. Cheers, Ralph Thanks Ralph. Added the following sentence: Because SELinux is implemented within the kernel, individual applications do not need to be especially written or modified to work with SELinux. If SELinux blocks an action, this appears as just a normal access denied type error to the application. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] SELinux
Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
Ned Slider wrote:
Hi list,
I've knocked up a contribution on SELinux here:
http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/SELinux
I've tried to pitch it as an introduction for those not already
familiar with SELinux but also hopefully a useful reference.
I'm relatively new to SELinux and have covered pretty much everything
I know to the limits of my limited knowledge. If folks think other
material needs to be covered then it may be more appropriate for them
to make the additions rather than me. Consider it a get the ball
rolling contribution that the community can add to as necessary :)
Comments welcomed,
I would add the following just before Sumamry (in case one wants to
edit the rules suggested by audit2allow):
Building module policy manually
- grep sendmail /var/log/audit/audit.log | audit2allow -M postfix
- while reviewing the generated postfix.te
module local 1.0;
require {
type httpd_log_t;
type postfix_postdrop_t;
class dir getattr;
class file { read getattr };
}
#= postfix_postdrop_t ==
allow postfix_postdrop_t httpd_log_t:file getattr;
Wolfy,
Are you able to supply an example of the audit.log AVC message(s) that
are used to create this .te policy? It might be useful to show the
actual AVC error messages in explaining this process.
Thanks,
Ned
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] SELinux
Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 08/12/2008 07:12 PM, Ned Slider wrote:
Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
Ned Slider wrote:
Hi list,
I've knocked up a contribution on SELinux here:
http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/SELinux
I've tried to pitch it as an introduction for those not already
familiar with SELinux but also hopefully a useful reference.
I'm relatively new to SELinux and have covered pretty much
everything I know to the limits of my limited knowledge. If folks
think other material needs to be covered then it may be more
appropriate for them to make the additions rather than me. Consider
it a get the ball rolling contribution that the community can add
to as necessary :)
Comments welcomed,
I would add the following just before Sumamry (in case one wants to
edit the rules suggested by audit2allow):
Building module policy manually
- grep sendmail /var/log/audit/audit.log | audit2allow -M postfix
- while reviewing the generated postfix.te
module local 1.0;
require {
type httpd_log_t;
type postfix_postdrop_t;
class dir getattr;
class file { read getattr };
}
#= postfix_postdrop_t ==
allow postfix_postdrop_t httpd_log_t:file getattr;
Wolfy,
Are you able to supply an example of the audit.log AVC message(s) that
are used to create this .te policy? It might be useful to show the
actual AVC error messages in explaining this process.
Thanks,
here you are. I hope I have not trashed anything valuable but most of
the info must be here
Thanks.
One wonders why postdrop is interested in /var/log/httpd/error_log?
PS, for those who might be tempted to comment about the kernel version:
I already know what you want to say.
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] mod_ssl How To Submission
Ralph Angenendt wrote: George Ornbo wrote: http://snipurl.com/37hl7 Looks good. If it useful to others I'd like to share this content on the Wiki under How Tos Miscellaneous. My username is GeorgeOrnbo. You should be able to create http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Https which I already linked to from the HowTo page (under the section Webserver). Cheers, Ralph Nice job George :) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] nspluginwrapper
Scott Robbins wrote: As the subject of nspluginwrapper came up recently, it might be worth mentioning that it's not properly documented. The README seems to be the official nspluginwrapper README, which, oddly enough, states that it's used with the command nspluginwrapper However, RedHat based systems seem to all use mozilla-config-plugin. (I'm not sure about other distributions--FreeBSD uses the more intuitive command nspluginwrapper and gives a message about its usage upon installation.) The only way I discovered this was by googling and coming across the unofficial Fedora FAQ. I don't know if it merits a wiki entry, but perhaps either a README.RedHat or even a small FAQ entry might be useful. It would just require a couple of lines, to the effect of Note that the command to run nspluginwrapper is mozilla-config-plugins. Running mozilla-config-plugins --help will show the available options. It may be documented elsewhere, but it's not easy to find. At least, I didn't find it in the wiki or FAQ. The Japanese page which does come up in a wiki search only mentions it as a package, with no indications about its use. (My Japanese reading is weak, but even someone who can't read it at all will see that it's only mentioned once in a list of packages. I don't know if it's of any help as I've not used nspluginwrapper before, but I stumbled across this guide by Tammy Fox recently: http://www.linuxheadquarters.com/howto/64-bit/flash64.shtml Thought I'd mention it in case it might be useful for anyone putting together any documentation on the subject. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] RTL8111 Wiki Pages
Kirk Bocek wrote: Howdy, It appears that CentOS 5.2's support for the RTL8111B/C chip is incomplete. The wiki has some blanket statements regarding this support: http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/HardwareList/CentOS5/RealTek/r1000 http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/HardwareList/RealTekRTL8111b I could dive in an make the changes *I* think need to happen but I'd like to talk to people first. The gritty details: Last night I attempted to install 5.2 x86_64 on a new Gigabyte GA-G31M-S2L. This motherboard has an RTL8111C NIC on-board. After PXE booting into the 5.2 installer, the installer hung while waiting for DHCP information. Checking the various consoles, it's clear that the installer identified the NIC and loaded the r8169 driver. But the driver obviously failed. I have a Gigabyte board with RTL8111/8168B and that works fine with the 5.2 kernel. I wonder if it's as simple as 'B' revision chips work and 'C' doesn't? Otherwise, presumably the advice should be if the stock kernel driver doesn't work, try the methods described therein. My only other vested interest in those pages are that they are a brilliant resource for referring users to from the forums. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Article for wiki consideration
Alan Bartlett wrote: On 07/06/2008, Scott Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 03:15:43PM +0100, Alan Bartlett wrote: Still points to the Road Runner site displaying [quote] Sorry, the page you requested was not found. Please go to our web site to find out more about the Road Runner service which connects its customers' home PCs to the Internet at unparalleled speeds. [/quote] for me. D'oh. Did you refresh your browser? That first link now points to my KVM article on the wiki. Yep. And still no-go for me. Anyone else care to comment before I get Scott to pull out the rest of his hair? Alan. Doesn't work for me either Alan. We are talking about the *KVM's* link in the first papa pointing here: http://home.nyc.rr.com/computertaijutsu/centoskvm Gives: Sorry, the page you requested was not found. Maybe the Interwebby is just a bit slow in the UK at finding pages today :D ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Opening of the Wiki - Part I
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Ralph Angenendt wrote: Moin as we know it cannot do that on the account creation page. So there would be two solutions: Allow everyone to edit content everywhere except on especially hidden or protected pages and/or create a new account creation mechanism for moin. Or as a third way: Require people to mail their account names to the above mentioned editor team with some signed text we'd still have to write up. Then - in a timely fashion - one of this editor group can put that account on the EditGroup page. Okay, this has gone to sleep. I'd like to know two things: 1: Who would like to be on an editorial team for the wiki? That means that you must monitor changes to all pages. In the interests of many hands make light work, I'd be prepared to sign up to that so long as I'm not the only one! :) 2: Is everbody fine with the following? Contributors add their account to the wiki and after that have to send us a mail in which they state that they are okay with putting their content under the CC license the wiki is running under. After that mail has come in, one of the editorial team adds that account to http://wiki.centos.org/EditGroup. Yes Regarding this I don't know yet where that mail should be sent. Or do we still want to have people who want to contribute subscribe to this list? Either here (centos-docs) or a dedicated Wiki editorial team ML? As this list already exists, may as well just use it? ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Opening of the Wiki - Part I
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Ned Slider wrote: Regarding this I don't know yet where that mail should be sent. Or do we still want to have people who want to contribute subscribe to this list? Either here (centos-docs) or a dedicated Wiki editorial team ML? As this list already exists, may as well just use it? But this would mean that we have to either open up this list for everyone, or take all of the people on the editorial team into the moderators team for this list (which I don't have any problem with), or require people to subscribe here. I don't follow what you mean. Wouldn't someone simply subscribe to this list and then send a mail stating they agree with the CC license etc, and a member of the editorial team upon seeing that message adds them to the Wiki editorial group and replies to the message to let the person know they've been added. I would think that anyone who wants to contribute to the Wiki should be subscribed to this list anyway so IMHO it makes sense to use this list. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Opening of the Wiki - Part I
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Ned Slider wrote: Ralph Angenendt wrote: But this would mean that we have to either open up this list for everyone, or take all of the people on the editorial team into the moderators team for this list (which I don't have any problem with), or require people to subscribe here. I don't follow what you mean. Wouldn't someone simply subscribe to this list and then send a mail stating they agree with the CC license etc, and a member of the editorial team upon seeing that message adds them to the Wiki editorial group and replies to the message to let the person know they've been added. This is what I wanted to know: Do we want people who want to edit the wiki to be subscribed to this list? This is taking the barrier a step higher. Presumably the alternative is for them to simply register an account on the Wiki and off they go. But if you take that route, at what point do they formally agree to the Wiki CC license - part of the Wiki account signup process? I would think that anyone who wants to contribute to the Wiki should be subscribed to this list anyway so IMHO it makes sense to use this list. That's what I asked :) Cheers, Ralph See, great minds thing alike :D /ned needs more caffeine :) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] I want to add a tip.
Florian La Roche wrote: On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 12:19:11PM +0900, TAIRA Hajime wrote: Thanks. I think this step should be a bit more verbose, telling people to replace 'sda' with the actual disk device. http://wiki.centos.org/TipsAndTricks/ReinstallGRUB I added verbose information about disk device. Please confirm it? There is a small typo at the beginning: cann't - can't regards, Florian La Roche I have corrected a couple of typos, including this one. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Searching the wiki
Dag Wieers wrote: I guess the default really should be text search for most users. If I can make the mistake anyone can, right ? :) Agreed. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] FAQs
Ned Slider wrote: Hi all, Akemi and I have recently been drafting a few posts for a new forum subsection (Readme First FAQs) to aid new forums members in getting help. Apologies, for those that have no idea what I'm talking about because they can't see it, I'll get a temp copy up on the Wiki in a bit :) Ned ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] FAQs
Karanbir Singh wrote: Ned, Ned Slider wrote: Presumably it would be preferable if there was just one, and as the main site FAQs seem old, plus Akemi and I both have edit rights to the Wiki, we would propose to add missing content contained in the main site FAQs onto the Wiki page as necessary making this the most complete FAQ repository. Sounds like a good idea. Perhaps an expansion of the GettingHelp wiki page is called for - and overdue. So a general 'ask a sensible question, get a sensible reply' document would be very cool to have. Thanks for taking this effort up. Good idea - I was trying to think where that content would logically sit on the Wiki. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] CentOS wiki section for job postings?
Karanbir Singh wrote: Bart Schaefer wrote: Jim Perrin mentioned a job opening on the CentOS list yesterday. I'd like to do the same, but I'm leery of contributing to topic drift. Is there any interest in creating a job-board section of some kind on the wiki? Anyone have experience with unusual problems that such a section might cause? you dont want job postings to stay online for years do you ? I'd guess something that 'moves on' might be a better way of doing job postings for CentOS. Wiki perhaps not. How about a section in the forums, then once positions are filled the thread could be removed from public view. It would seem a better option than either mailing lists or the Wiki. Ned ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] amavisd-new, spamassassin and clamav
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Ned Slider wrote: I've finished the main parts that I intended to cover now, just the introduction to write plus a bit more on testing at the end, and apply a bit of spit and polish: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/postfix_amavisd Okay, I changed two small bits about spamassassin (on a mail scanning gateway you really want to use rpmforge's spamassassin, as that is more current). The rest looks okay. Thanks Ralph. I haven't been able to get any sort of a real world feel for spamassassin on my mail server as my postfix restrictions (DNSBLs) and greylisting takes out all spam before it ever reaches spamassassin. I have access to an unused spammy domain for testing (~600-700 spam per day) that's currently parked as a spamtrap for uceprotect. I used this for about a month to test the rules in the postfix restrictions Wiki guide. What should be stressed (maybe I can get that in later today) is that you shouldn't bounce mails back if you think that they are spam. There are a few configuration variables in amavisd to control that. I agree, if they *are* spam, sender addresses are almost certainly forged and it only generates backscatter. Presumably that behaviour is controlled with the following settings: # $final_virus_destiny = D_DISCARD; # $final_banned_destiny = D_BOUNCE; #change to D_DISCARD # $final_spam_destiny = D_BOUNCE; #change to D_DISCARD # $final_bad_header_destiny = D_PASS; # $bad_header_quarantine_method = undef; and is triggered by $sa_kill_level_deflt, ...and this doesn't affect quarantine behaviour? I'm also wondering about $sa_dsn_cutoff_level - so would one want to set this to equal $sa_kill_level_deflt on the same basis, otherwise you're no longer bouncing the message, but *are* still sending a DSN?? ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] amavisd-new, spamassassin and clamav
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Ned Slider wrote: I hope to make a start on a Wiki page in the next week or so, so if anyone has any experience with this combo and would like to offer advice, tips and proof-reading once I get going, that would be more than welcome. I'd be happy to proof-read it, as we/I have been using that combo for several years now. Or if you have any questions - go ahead and ask. Thank you for the work you have put into documentation over the last few weeks/months! Cheers, Ralph Thanks Ralph :) I've finished the main parts that I intended to cover now, just the introduction to write plus a bit more on testing at the end, and apply a bit of spit and polish: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/postfix_amavisd Perhaps you (and others) could take a look and give me your impressions. Amavisd-new is all a bit new to me and I'm still feeling my way around my system so your experience with it will be invaluable. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
[CentOS-docs] amavisd-new, spamassassin and clamav
Hi List, I've been working on documenting an amavisd-new, spamassassin and clamav installation for postfix on CentOS5 with regards to writing this up for the Wiki (with invaluable help from forum member WhatsHisName - thanks!). I hope to make a start on a Wiki page in the next week or so, so if anyone has any experience with this combo and would like to offer advice, tips and proof-reading once I get going, that would be more than welcome. Assuming there are no objections, I'll post a link once I get started :) Regards, Ned ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] becoming root
Manuel Wolfshant wrote: On 04/20/2008 01:51 PM, Nils Ratusznik wrote: - About the NOPASSWD version of the quick and dirty setup : I'm not against it if there is a big fat warning sign attached. I am against it. Those who do not need the warning sign already know the message we try to send via this page and those who do need the warning sign would better avoid NOPASSWD. Well, there is already a warning, just that it's not in HUGE red bold font: sudo will ask for a password. This password is bob's password, and not root's password, so be careful when you give rights to a user with sudo. Maybe we could make the wording a little stronger, bold or something just in case anyone skips over it without the significance sinking in! ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Guide to Using KVM
Akemi Yagi wrote: Hi all, Our CentOS Forum contributor, scottro, has written a guide to using KVM with CentOS-5.1 and made it available at: http://home.nyc.rr.com/computertaijutsu/centoskvm.html He is offering it for us to put on the CentOS wiki. I would be happy to wikify it and welcome any comments and suggestions. The contents will be updated as he adds more to his writing. Thanks Akemi. I register an expression of interest and think it would be great to have something on the Wiki. Maybe we should just double check scottro understands and agrees with the licensing terms of the Wiki? Unfortunately, no time to read tonight, but I'm sure I'll have time to have a look during the week. Regards, Ned ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] becoming root
Nils Ratusznik wrote: Akemi Yagi a écrit : Excellent! Guess Alan can polish it up if needed :-D Akemi Your help is also welcome ;) Here is what I wrote. I wrote it without wiki syntax so someone will surely polish it up. Regards, Nils Hi Nils, Your sudo content has now been posted to the Wiki: http://wiki.centos.org/TipsAndTricks/BecomingRoot Please do check that I haven't messed up any of the formatting and it appears as you intended :) Thank you again for the contribution! *Everyone* I think we're nearing the point that we can sign off on this page, and link to it in the TipsAndTricks/Admin tricks and shell one-liners section once everyone is happy with the content. Any thoughts? Regards, Ned ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] becoming root
Nils Ratusznik wrote: Akemi Yagi a écrit : Excellent! Guess Alan can polish it up if needed :-D Akemi Your help is also welcome ;) Here is what I wrote. I wrote it without wiki syntax so someone will surely polish it up. Regards, Nils Thanks Nils :) I'm happy to get it on to the Wiki, just that I'm not an sudoer so am unable to adjudge the content technically correct. If someone else can take part of that aspect, we'll have ourselves a real team (community) effort. Regards, Ned ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] becoming root
Rafał Ślubowski wrote: 2008/4/8, Ned Slider [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Rafał Ślubowski wrote: I've mentioned consolehelper just because I think I can write such section. Of course it should be proofreaded because of my English. Brilliant. I'm more than happy to proof read if you would be so kind as to write something :) I wrote it. Please, feel free to correct my errors. Regards, Rafal Brilliant - thanks Rafal. I'll take a look over the weekend. For everyone else, the link is here: http://wiki.centos.org/TipsAndTricks/BecomingRoot We still need a *volunteer* to write something on sudo (and gnome gui if anything exists??). Better to volunteer now before I start twisting arms :D Regards, Ned ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Postfix pages
Michael Crider wrote: First I would like to thank everybody who has contributed to the Postfix pages so far. I recently undertook replacing our existing mail server (which used the CentOS 4 howto at hughesjr.com) with a new machine running CentOS 5 in Xen. The machine is actually running two Xen images: mail and web server (the old machine did both functions in one install). I have done two things that go beyond the existing howtos. 1) I set up OpenLDAP and used it for the database of email users. As I see it this has two advantages. From a security standpoint, no user has a shell login without any extra steps (I know - this can be blocked in other ways). For future upgrades, it is simple to export an LDIF and import it in the new machine. 2) I set up MailScanner with ClamAV for virus scanning and Spamassassin for spam filtering. All of this was done with packages from the main repository or from DAG's repository, except for MailScanner itself which used the rpm installer from their website. If there is any interest in wiki pages for either or both of these, I would be happy to write them. Hi Michael, I wrote most of the postfix pages so far, with invaluable contributions from others! As you will have noted, I have tried to keep each guide modular so that it may be plugged into a working postfix setup achieved from following the first guide. The idea was that users could then pick and choose the functionality they required to roll their own custom solutions. IMHO I think both your suggestions would make excellent additions and it would be nice if they could follow the modular approach (so assume users have the basic guide up and running). Regards, Ned ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] becoming root
Rafał Ślubowski wrote:
2008/4/6, Alan Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Perhaps a mention of sudo and sudoers could also be made?
And consolehelper for GUI users.
Regards,
Rafal
Hi Rafał,
I've had a quick look at consolehelper, and I'm still not sure I fully
understand how it works, at least enough to be able to write a section
on it. I understand it uses pam authentication when running a program
that requires root privileges and requests the root password
(system-config-services being an example), but I don't fully understand
how a user would use it, although I see any application could
potentially be configured in /etc/pam.d/
My initial intent was to write a short article to be useful to beginners
explaining how they could become root in order to achieve common tasks
(as opposed to logging in to the GUI desktop as root!) and highlight
some of the common pitfalls ('su' vs 'su -'), as much to serve as a
quick FAQ for forum helpers to link to rather than explaining it over
and over again. I fear it is beyond my abilities/knowledge to expand the
article much further than this.
How far such an article should be expanded, and whether we wish to cover
every conceivable method for launching something with root privileges is
probably not something for me to answer. That said, if you'd (or anyone)
like to expand on my initial remit and write an additional section,
please feel free :)
On an additional note, whilst investigating consolehelper, I also
noticed the Run Command... option on the KDE Menu (for those who don't
use KDE, it's a graphical run box that also allows one to specify a
different users credentials). I could see how that would be useful to
new users who are afraid of the command line, and should maybe be
included, but again I have no knowledge of the underlying mechanism by
which it works. Perhaps a gnome user could advise if gnome has similar
functionality?
Regards,
Ned
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] becoming root
Rafał Ślubowski wrote: There is a gnomesu (http://xsu.sourceforge.net/) project. Is this included on a standard CentOS gnome install? I don't think so - yum cannot find it. OK, thanks, I might have to fire up gnome and have a browse through the menus to see if there's anything similar to the Run Command... in KDE. One would think gnome would have some sort of GUI run as root applet somewhere?? ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] becoming root
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Ned Slider wrote: Any suggestions as to where might be an appropriate home for this on the Wiki? I think TipsAndTricks is appropriate for that, maybe under Admin Tricks and shell one-liners? I don't see it under HowTo ... su or su - but the above are NOT the same thing. ... but the two commands above behave differently. When you become root by using 'su -', you also adopt root's PATH whereas using just 'su' retains the original users PATH, hence why becoming root using just 'su' and trying to run a command located in /usr/local/sbin, /usr/sbin, or /sbin results in a 'command not found' error. Please mention the bash manual page (and the section about login shells), where this behaviour is explained in more detail. Otherwise: Go ahead. Cheers, Ralph Thanks Ralph, will try and get something up later this week. Ned ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Wiki Link
John wrote: Ralph, Akemi, and Ned http://wiki.centos.org/HardwareList/Nvidia_Graphics That will be the Link. Thanks John. I should be able to have a bash at the RPMForge/dkms method in about a week (unless someone beats me to it!). Ned ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Wiki Link
Akemi Yagi wrote: On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 12:41 PM, Ned Slider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John wrote: Ralph, Akemi, and Ned http://wiki.centos.org/HardwareList/Nvidia_Graphics That will be the Link. Thanks John. I should be able to have a bash at the RPMForge/dkms method in about a week (unless someone beats me to it!). Ned I suppose this page will have a description for the differences between the three methods and how to choose one. ?? Akemi That would be great - thanks for volunteering!!! I was kind of avoiding that one due to lack of experience with methods 1 3. I went straight with method 2 and it has worked great for me, the obvious advantage being that it just works upon a kernel update. YMMV :) What did you have in mind? A separate introductory and/or summary section, or a pros cons for each section and leave the reader to make up their own mind which is best for them (I tend to prefer the latter option). ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Wiki Link
Akemi Yagi wrote: Way to go, Ned. Akemi You're too kind! Question: I already have the RPMForge/dkms driver installed on all my machine(s). How do I best disable/remove the drivers to simulate a fresh install for the purpose of taking notes. I can't remember if I had to configure anything or if it was just a case of installing the RPMForge repo and yum installing dkms and the appropriate nvidia driver. I guess I need to rpm -e them and manually reconfigure xorg.conf back to using the original xorg nv driver? (just checked - I do have a backup of my original pristine vanilla xorg.conf using the nv driver) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] becoming root
Alan Bartlett wrote: As someone who was used to all users having the same search-path (I'm going back 25 or so years), when I first came across the use of a separate path for the super-user I asked the question Why?. I have long since answered that question and support the concept. (An aside, can anyone tell me why one of the original grep flags, -y, was changed to -i ?) Perhaps what also needs to be said is that su user gives the current user the identity of user whilst su - user gives the current user the identity of user *along with* user's environment that would normally be obtained by logging in as user. I probably haven't expressed the above very well. Looking in my old Unix System V manuals for the su command, I read An initial - flag causes the environment to be changed to the one that would be expected if the user actually logged in again. Your explanation is fine, and probably better than mine :) Perhaps a mention of sudo and sudoers could also be made? Alan. Good idea - I'll leave that for someone else to add once Ralph/someone gives me an indication where the page should sit. Thanks for the feedback Alan :) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] To do List
Akemi Yagi wrote: On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 5:03 PM, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 00:25 +0100, Ned Slider wrote: John wrote: Sure we could do that no problem. OK I think maybe what I am thinking of is writing it in text. Then we can collaberate on it then add the screenshots etc for the dkms part? The Wiki is a collaborative tool so we can use that. Once a page is started, others can add sections to it. It need not be publicly linked until ready for public consumption. An outline before we start might be useful. There appears to be 3 methods: 1. Install direct from nvidia 2. Install from RPMForge - dkms/nvidia rpm 3. Install from ATrpms A section covering each. The next (obvious) question a user will probably ask is which method should I use? I'm not best equipped to answer that or how best that is dealt with. John - have you created a Wiki user account yet? Once you have, please post your Wiki username to the list and Ralph can get you added. Users don't initially have permissions to do anything until Ralph adds them (a practice designed to limit spam etc and hopefully not too restrictive to genuine contributors!). And it would be great if someone can write about the kmdl method offered by ATrpms. In some situations it is a better choice than the dkms. Sorry, I'm not familiar with that so it won't be me :) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
[CentOS-docs] Wiki content policy?
Hi List, I have a general question about the CentOS Wiki policy that's probably best addressed here. Akemi and I were recently discussing (read Akemi was twisting my arm!!) the possibility of doing a Wiki article on SSL (what are SSL certificates, certificate generation, becoming your own CA, CA-signed vs self-signed etc), but I'm wondering on the merits of such an article for the CentOS Wiki. There are already good examples of general articles elsewhere and it's not necessarily a subject that is specific to CentOS. So, my question - should the CentOS Wiki specifically be for articles directly relating to CentOS, or should it be a general repository for good articles/information for CentOS users/community? Where a topic is generic (not distro specific), is inclusion on the Wiki warranted? Personally, I'd like to see any/all well presented and useful documentation on the Wiki, but that's just my personal opinion and I can understand if others deem it a place best kept to CentOS specific content. The other issue (if the Wiki were kept CentOS specific) is where to draw the line. Take my own Howtos/articles on securing SSH and IPTables - both are essentially generic content applicable to all distros that contain very little that is specific to CentOS. Interested to hear others thoughts :) Regards, Ned ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Postfix + CyrusImapd + SALS
Hi Alain, LOL, great timing! As we speak I am working on a guide for SASL with ssl/tls but using dovecot's SASL implementation rather than Cyrus SASL as I used dovecot for imap/pop3 in my original postfix guide rather than Cyrusimapd. See here: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/postfix_sasl At the moment I'm just trying to figure out generating certs for ssl/tls as this aspect is all a bit new to me. Anyway, two different approaches to crack the same nut. So how best to proceed? Obviously we don't want to duplicate each other's efforts. Maybe there is scope for both as they use very different implementations. Your guide also covers quotas and virtual domains which is something I have yet to cover in any of my guides (although virtual domains was on my list of things to do). Anyway, I'm easy and open to suggestions on how best to proceed to the best benefit of the Wiki and community :) Regards, Ned Alain Reguera Delgado wrote: Hi guys, Take a look at: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Postfix+CyrusImapd+SASL this intend to be a basic guide on how to build a Postfix+CyrusImapd+SASL Mail System with quotas and virtual domains on CentOS 5.0. Could we improve it some way ?. What do you suggest, ... comments ? Maybe it would be linked from HowTos when you conceder it ready. This guide could be a complement to the NedSlider's postfix articles series (if Ned and you guys agree that, of course :) ). Thanks, al. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
[CentOS-docs] SASL and SSL/TLS guide for postfix/dovecot
Hi List, Following on in my ever expanding series of postfix/dovecot guides, I've created a page and started a SASL and SSL/TLS guide for postfix/dovecot: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/postfix_sasl The SASL section is pretty much complete but I am yet to start the SSL/TLS section (hope to get this done over the next week or so). As usual I'd welcome comments, particularly from those with any experience in this area :) Regards, Ned ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Re: rpm for r8168
Or could you also provide the instructions that will help newbies install this driver? There was someone who was looking for the driver for this particular card. He could not understand the wiki and therefore was asking if there is some easier method. Well, IF a link to the rpm would be added in the wiki, it SHOULD contain something along the following lines: In order to use this driver link to driver here, you will need the dkms package available from rpmforge. Please add this repository to your list of local repositories (as described in http://wiki.centos.org/Repositories) and run the following commands: yum install dkms --enablerepo rpmforge rpm -Uvh link to dkms-r8168.noarch.rpm [*] Maybe also add some words about the benefit of dkms over lkmdl... Yes, brief instructions will be helpful. By the way, that someone was in the CentOS forum and he apparently decided to buy a new card that works out of the box (upon other's suggestion). I felt it was appropriate advice given his newbie status. Oops - sorry, I guess that was me :D I tried to word it as an alternative suggestion, giving him options, rather than deliberately steering him in that direction. Like you say Akemi, he didn't appear to have the knowledge to follow the current Wiki guide and I could see him getting frustrated by a perceived lack of progress (having a working Internet connection seems to be a critical requirement to most new users). ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Reporting for Duty.
Akemi Yagi wrote: On Jan 20, 2008 8:15 AM, Ned Slider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Welcome to the Wiki :) Dr Alan J Bartlett wrote: In the nicest possible way, Community members Akemi and Ned (aka toracat and NedSlider) have been twisting my arm to get me to agree to join the Wiki editors. Being susceptible to the right sort of persuasion, I eventually agreed. Don't blame me, it was all Akemi's doing ;) Ned == turncoat ;-D hehe, just kidding :) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Short postgrey guide?
Alain Reguera Delgado wrote: Of course ... it is into a table, in order to center it on the page. Feel free to move its position. Thanks Alain - looks great! ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Short postgrey guide?
Alain Reguera Delgado wrote: On 12/17/07, Ned Slider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Guys, ... Could we add the following image: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/postgrey?action=AttachFiledo=gettarget=postgrey-en.png I found the article very clear and easy to read. I would like to thank you with this image, if it helps of course. If some modification is needed, tell me please, I will be glad to fix it. Cheers, al. Thanks Alain - nice image and explains the concept well. Any objections to adding it from anyone? ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Short postgrey guide?
Karanbir Singh wrote: Ned Slider wrote: Anyway, if you can point me in the right direction, I'm happy to try and can amend the article if you think it's better that way (maybe you could also explain why unix sockets are preferable to a network socket - security maybe??) check_policy_service unix:postgrey/socket in the smtpd_recipient_restrictions = line is all you need, and postfix will check on /var/spool/postfix/postgrey/socket which is what postgrey will listen on. Great - thanks. Got that working so I'll update the page :) Security is one reason, better load handling is another. There is a lot less resources required to setup and teardown a unix socket than a network socket. Thanks for the explanation :) ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
[CentOS-docs] Short postgrey guide?
Hi Guys, Are you interested in a brief guide on how to set up postgrey (anti-spam greylisting) with postfix? I set it up today and it took me a while to get it working as the config is slightly different from that on many of the googled guides (many are debian/ubuntu based). The darn config file lives in /etc/sysconfig on RH/CentOS rather than /etc/default as mentioned in all the guides I found! Anyway, happy to write something if you feel it would be useful (below is a summary of my notes to give you an idea) Regards, Ned --- Notes: # Install postgrey from RPMForge: yum install postgrey # Configure postgrey: Create /etc/sysconfig/postgrey with: OPTIONS=--inet=127.0.0.1:6 --delay=60 # Configure postfix to use postgrey in main.cf: smtpd_recipient_restrictions = reject_unknown_recipient_domain, permit_mynetworks, check_policy_service inet:127.0.0.1:6 permit # Start the postgrey service: /etc/init.d/postgrey restart (check service to automatically start in runlevels 3,4,5) # reload postfix configs postfix reload # Check maillog for signs of postgrey working: # postgrey loads: Dec 17 21:44:58 jessie postgrey[6844]: Process Backgrounded Dec 17 21:44:58 jessie postgrey[6844]: 2007/12/17-21:44:58 postgrey (type Net::Server::Multiplex) starting! pid(6844) Dec 17 21:44:58 jessie postgrey[6844]: Binding to TCP port 6 on host 127.0.0.1 Dec 17 21:44:58 jessie postgrey[6844]: Setting gid to 101 101 Dec 17 21:44:58 jessie postgrey[6844]: Setting uid to 100 #postgrey working: Dec 17 21:23:49 jessie postfix/smtpd[6714]: connect from mk-outboundfilter-4-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com[212.74.114.8] Dec 17 21:23:49 jessie postfix/smtpd[6714]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from mk-outboundfilter-4-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com[212.74.114.8]: 450 4.2.0 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Recipient address rejected: Greylisted, see http://postgrey.schweikert.ch/help/example.com.html; from=[EMAIL PROTECTED] to=[EMAIL PROTECTED] proto=ESMTP helo=mk-outboundfilter-4-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com Dec 17 21:23:54 jessie postfix/smtpd[6714]: disconnect from mk-outboundfilter-4-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com[212.74.114.8] ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Traduccion de Securing SSH
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Ned Slider wrote: I apologize for my level of ignorance in foreign (to me) languages, but any chance someone can give me the general gist of Manuel's message. Thanks in advance. I think it was in spanish, it had a rar file as an attachment - why ever - and it was about the Securing SSH page on the wiki. Manuel: Sorry, this is an english language list (not all of us have that as their first language), so could you repost that in english? Thanks, Ralph ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs Hi Ralph, everyone, Just to clarify, I wrote the Securing SSH article and I guess am responsible for maintaining it, hence my request :) I _think_ Traduccion means Translation(??) so I'm guessing Manuel is offering to translate the page into Spanish or maybe asking if there is a Spanish translation available? ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] SSH contribution?
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Ned Slider wrote: Thank you Ralph. In the absence of any further comments/corrections on: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Network/IPTables I'm happy for you to go ahead and live link it in the Wiki at your discretion. Oh, I already did so - see the HowTos page :) Cheers, Ralph ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs Thanks - I missed that! ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
