[CentOS-virt] Upgrading libvirt and qemu to latest version

2013-01-19 Thread Peter Smith
Hi, I am considering upgrading the libvirt to v0.10.1 and qemu-kvm to v1.2 qemu version because they are recommended by Ceph. I am wondering does CentOS kernel support upstream qemu well? And are there rpms for theses version somewhere? or I have to build myself? Thanks. Peter

[CentOS-es] Configuraciones iniciales de DNS

2013-01-19 Thread Vincent Romero
Buenas a todos. Estoy realmente empezando en el mundo de Linux con CentOS, el cual despúes de descartar Debian Ubuntu Server me decidi a incursionar en CentOS. Ahora bien, teng o un conocimiento basisco de las configuraciones de DNS bajo Server 2003 y 2008 la nocion. Pero en CentOS no tengo ni

Re: [CentOS] evaluating backup systems: rsync

2013-01-19 Thread M. Fioretti
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 08:07:40 AM -0500, SilverTip257 wrote: Yes, that's the way it works. If you change a directory name, rsync has no way of knowing that you moved it. I was almost sure that this was the case, but it didn't hurt to ask for confirmation. Thanks to you, Reindl and all the

Re: [CentOS] Large yum update

2013-01-19 Thread Tony Molloy
On Saturday 19 January 2013 03:51:53 E.B. wrote: Hi, On about 8am GMT Jan 18, my server reported an unusually large number of yum updates available. I think this is due to the release of CentOS 5.9: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.centos.announce/7203 However, I just wanted to

Re: [CentOS] Large yum update

2013-01-19 Thread Sorin Srbu
-Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Tony Molloy Sent: den 19 januari 2013 10:43 To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Large yum update Yep CentOS 5.9 was released on thursday. 100+ package updates depending on

Re: [CentOS] Updating gtk2

2013-01-19 Thread Liam O'Toole
On 2013-01-18, Robert Heller hel...@deepsoft.com wrote: At Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:55:15 -0600 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: (...) Do I really need gtk2 running on a server anyway? Only if: 1) runlevel is 5 (for the GUI login) or you log into the console and then use

[CentOS] Subject:centos installation error

2013-01-19 Thread Shalini Saini
Hello team, I have installed centos 6.3 version from bootable pan drive.but showing kernal panic error.Pls suggest me. -- Thanks and regards Shalini 8800142207 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] evaluating backup systems: rsync

2013-01-19 Thread Nicolas Thierry-Mieg
M. Fioretti wrote: On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 08:07:40 AM -0500, SilverTip257 wrote: if you really want to eliminate that data being transferred, I suppose you could do the extra work and rename the directory at the same time on the source and destination. Not ideal in the least. Not ideal

Re: [CentOS] Updating gtk2

2013-01-19 Thread Johnny Hughes
On 01/18/2013 03:56 PM, Robert Heller wrote: At Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:55:15 -0600 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote: What does this error mean? Updating : gtk2 35/178 g_module_open() failed for

Re: [CentOS] evaluating backup systems: rsync

2013-01-19 Thread Nicolas Thierry-Mieg
Reindl Harald wrote: Am 19.01.2013 15:46, schrieb Nicolas Thierry-Mieg: M. Fioretti wrote: On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 08:07:40 AM -0500, SilverTip257 wrote: if you really want to eliminate that data being transferred, I suppose you could do the extra work and rename the directory at the same

Re: [CentOS] evaluating backup systems: rsync

2013-01-19 Thread Gordon Messmer
On 01/19/2013 10:28 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: Not true: if you change the modification time on a file, by default rsync will copy the whole file again rsync uses an efficient algorithm to compare file contents and transfer only the differences. Reindl was correct. rsync will use very

Re: [CentOS] evaluating backup systems: rsync

2013-01-19 Thread John Hinton
On 1/19/2013 1:28 PM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: Reindl Harald wrote: Am 19.01.2013 15:46, schrieb Nicolas Thierry-Mieg: M. Fioretti wrote: On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 08:07:40 AM -0500, SilverTip257 wrote: if you really want to eliminate that data being transferred, I suppose you could do the

Re: [CentOS] evaluating backup systems: rsync

2013-01-19 Thread Nicolas Thierry-Mieg
Reindl Harald wrote: Am 19.01.2013 19:28, schrieb Nicolas Thierry-Mieg: no I don't think you will, since the file modification times won't have changed. and even if the did - who cares? * rsync does not transfer unchanged data ever * rsync will sync the times to them from the sources *

Re: [CentOS] evaluating backup systems: rsync

2013-01-19 Thread Nicolas Thierry-Mieg
Gordon Messmer wrote: On 01/19/2013 10:28 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: Not true: if you change the modification time on a file, by default rsync will copy the whole file again rsync uses an efficient algorithm to compare file contents and transfer only the differences. Reindl was

Re: [CentOS] evaluating backup systems: rsync

2013-01-19 Thread Gordon Messmer
On 01/19/2013 11:31 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: agreed, except if both source and dest are local, eg back up to a USB HD. If you test that you'll see the speedup is 1 (ie no speedup). I actually never realized that. Thanks. ___ CentOS mailing

Re: [CentOS] evaluating backup systems: rsync

2013-01-19 Thread Gordon Messmer
On 01/19/2013 11:21 AM, John Hinton wrote: Yet size only is not reliable. If for instance you have a simple text file with the word hellO and someone catches the typo and changes it to hello, the filesize doesn't change as near as I can see. Right. -c is a better option, unless you're trying

[CentOS] load balancer recommendations

2013-01-19 Thread Boris Epstein
Hello all, The question is not necessarily CentOS-specific - but there are lots of bright people on here, and - quite possibly - the final implementation will be on CentOS hence I figured I'd ask it here. Here is the situation. I need to configure a Linux-based network load balancer (NLB)

Re: [CentOS] Large yum update

2013-01-19 Thread Gilbert Sebenste
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013, E.B. wrote: Hi, On about 8am GMT Jan 18, my server reported an unusually large number of yum updates available. I think this is due to the release of CentOS 5.9: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.centos.announce/7203 However, I just wanted to be a little paranoid,

Re: [CentOS] evaluating backup systems: rsync

2013-01-19 Thread Les Mikesell
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Gordon Messmer yiny...@eburg.com wrote: On 01/19/2013 11:31 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: agreed, except if both source and dest are local, eg back up to a USB HD. If you test that you'll see the speedup is 1 (ie no speedup). I actually never realized that.

Re: [CentOS] load balancer recommendations

2013-01-19 Thread Leon Fauster
Am 19.01.2013 um 21:35 schrieb Boris Epstein borepst...@gmail.com: Hello all, The question is not necessarily CentOS-specific - but there are lots of bright people on here, and - quite possibly - the final implementation will be on CentOS hence I figured I'd ask it here. Here is the

Re: [CentOS] load balancer recommendations

2013-01-19 Thread Boris Epstein
Leon, Thanks! Looks good - though seems to be highly specific. I will check it out. Boris. On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Leon Fauster leonfaus...@googlemail.comwrote: Am 19.01.2013 um 21:35 schrieb Boris Epstein borepst...@gmail.com: Hello all, The question is not necessarily

[CentOS] Newer SANE packages for 5.9 ??

2013-01-19 Thread fred smith
I just got a Canon Canoscan LiDE 210 scanner, which the SANE project pages say works completely with Sane. but what isn't obvious without a lot of digging is that the version of Sane in EL5 isn't new enough. it works fine with what's on my eeepc (Fedora 17) but not Centos 5.9. I've been messing

Re: [CentOS] load balancer recommendations

2013-01-19 Thread Joseph Spenner
Am 19.01.2013 um 21:35 schrieb Boris Epstein borepst...@gmail.com: Hello all, The question is not necessarily CentOS-specific - but there are lots of bright people on here, and - quite possibly - the final implementation will be on CentOS hence I figured I'd ask it here. Here is the

Re: [CentOS] load balancer recommendations

2013-01-19 Thread Boris Epstein
Joseph, Thanks! Did you mean this: https://www.barracudanetworks.com/products/loadbalancer But this looks like an integrated solution, hardware and software. I am just looking for the software part. Boris. On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Joseph Spenner joseph85...@yahoo.comwrote: Am

Re: [CentOS] Newer SANE packages for 5.9 ??

2013-01-19 Thread Frank Cox
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 19:06:08 -0500 fred smith wrote: I've been messing around with building sane from source, but have not been fully successful, yet, so thought before butchering my system any further I should ask if anyone has (or can point me to) newer Sane packages for EL5?? This may be

Re: [CentOS] load balancer recommendations

2013-01-19 Thread Joseph Spenner
From: Boris Epstein borepst...@gmail.com To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 5:10 PM Subject: Re: [CentOS] load balancer recommendations Joseph, Thanks! Did you mean this: https://www.barracudanetworks.com/products/loadbalancer But this looks like an

Re: [CentOS] load balancer recommendations

2013-01-19 Thread Boris Epstein
Absolutely. The solution seems really robust and the price is not bad. In my case, however, this is not the answer as I need a solution that can be implemented in a whole variety of networks, including virtual ones. Thanks anyways. Boris. On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Joseph Spenner

Re: [CentOS] Newer SANE packages for 5.9 ??

2013-01-19 Thread Akemi Yagi
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Frank Cox thea...@melvilletheatre.com wrote: On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 19:06:08 -0500 fred smith wrote: I've been messing around with building sane from source, but have not been fully successful, yet, so thought before butchering my system any further I should ask

Re: [CentOS] evaluating backup systems: rsync

2013-01-19 Thread Benjamin Franz
On 01/19/2013 11:31 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: agreed, except if both source and dest are local, eg back up to a USB HD. If you test that you'll see the speedup is 1 (ie no speedup) That makes sense because it would take longer to locally checksum both files and then make a difference

Re: [CentOS] load balancer recommendations

2013-01-19 Thread Ian Forde
FYI - HAProxy is in EPEL, so it's a fairly easy installation to test. Especially in virtual environments... ;) -I On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Boris Epstein borepst...@gmail.com wrote: Absolutely. The solution seems really robust and the price is not bad. In my case, however, this is

Re: [CentOS] Newer SANE packages for 5.9 ??

2013-01-19 Thread fred smith
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 04:24:33PM -0800, Akemi Yagi wrote: On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Frank Cox thea...@melvilletheatre.com wrote: On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 19:06:08 -0500 fred smith wrote: I've been messing around with building sane from source, but have not been fully successful,

Re: [CentOS] load balancer recommendations

2013-01-19 Thread Brian Mathis
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Boris Epstein borepst...@gmail.com wrote: Hello all, The question is not necessarily CentOS-specific - but there are lots of bright people on here, and - quite possibly - the final implementation will be on CentOS hence I figured I'd ask it here. Here is the

Re: [CentOS] evaluating backup systems: rsync

2013-01-19 Thread Robert Nichols
On 01/19/2013 01:21 PM, John Hinton wrote: On 1/19/2013 1:28 PM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: See man rsync: Rsync finds files that need to be transferred using a “quick check” algorithm (by default) that looks for files that have changed in size or in last-modified time. and yes I've