On 4/12/11, jvalido...@juanyjosefina.com jvalido...@juanyjosefina.com wrote:
For me mdadm is fine but if I set a server for a friend, relative or client
I want to be notified by email if something goes wrong, I mostly (99.5%)
work on windows so I don't really know what's out there for Linux. I
On 4/12/11, John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote:
On 04/11/11 5:41 PM, John R. Dennison wrote:
DO NOT TOP POST.
sadly, gmail/googlemail is very hostile to proper quoting practices.
it hides quoted text, while leaving the whole previous message appended,
without any form of quoting. The
Hello All
I have a brand spanking new 40TB Hardware Raid6 array to play around
with. I am looking for recommendations for which filesystem to use. I am
trying not to break this up into multiple file systems as we are going
to use it for backups. Other factors is performance and reliability.
Thank you, That's all I need.
Original Message Subject: Re: [CentOS] GUI Software Raid Monitor SoftwareFrom: Emmanuel Noobadmin centos.ad...@gmail.com;Date: Mon, April 11, 2011 11:56 pmTo: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.orgOn 4/12/11, jvalido...@juanyjosefina.com
On 04/12/11 12:23 AM, Matthew Feinberg wrote:
Hello All
I have a brand spanking new 40TB Hardware Raid6 array
never mind file systems... is that one raid set?do you have any idea
how LONG rebuilding that is going to take when there are any drive
hiccups? or how painfully slow writes
Le 12/04/2011 09:23, Matthew Feinberg a écrit :
Hello All
I have a brand spanking new 40TB Hardware Raid6 array to play around
with. I am looking for recommendations for which filesystem to use. I am
trying not to break this up into multiple file systems as we are going
to use it for
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Matthew Feinberg matt...@choopa.com wrote:
Hello All
I have a brand spanking new 40TB Hardware Raid6 array to play around
with. I am looking for recommendations for which filesystem to use. I am
trying not to break this up into multiple file systems as we are
On Tuesday 12 April 2011 10:36:54 Alain Péan wrote:
Le 12/04/2011 09:23, Matthew Feinberg a écrit :
Hello All
I have a brand spanking new 40TB Hardware Raid6 array to play around
with. I am looking for recommendations for which filesystem to use. I am
trying not to break this up into
I've got a server that initially was connected to a static WAN
connection via eth0. Now I've added a second NIC eth1 connected to a
local network switch with the intention of using it as a backup remote
access connection via a dynamic ADSL connection.
The problem now is getting the IP address of
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Marian Marinov wrote:
On Tuesday 12 April 2011 10:36:54 Alain Péan wrote:
Le 12/04/2011 09:23, Matthew Feinberg a écrit :
Hello All
I have a brand spanking new 40TB Hardware Raid6 array to play around
with. I am looking for recommendations for which filesystem to use. I
On 04/12/2011 01:21 AM, Phil Schaffner wrote:
Karanbir Singh wrote on 04/11/2011 12:20 PM:
...
No, re-read what I said. Ownership in the distro is quite a different
ballgame from userend support.
Yes, but it seems to be rather closely held.
The option I was talking about was how that can
+1
Kai
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 04/12/2011 02:01 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 04/12/2011 01:21 AM, Phil Schaffner wrote:
Karanbir Singh wrote on 04/11/2011 12:20 PM:
...
No, re-read what I said. Ownership in the distro is quite a different
ballgame from userend support.
Yes, but it seems to be rather closely held.
The
Phil Schaffner wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote on 04/11/2011 06:58 PM:
On 4/11/2011 5:32 PM, Ned Slider wrote:
...
It's laborious, it's repetitive, it's boring,
sometimes it's time-consuming but it's really NOT difficult.
That depends on where and whether you can find the component(s) that
were
On 04/12/2011 12:31 PM, Radu Gheorghiu wrote:
I think you are avoiding the real issue here, again and again. It's not
about ownership. It's not about taking ownership.
It's about making the process open. A simple wiki page describing what
you are doing now, and a ftp URL with files to download
On 04/12/2011 12:46 AM, Phil Schaffner wrote:
If you have a way to do those predictive tests, in serial or parallel,
I'm sure that would be a valuable contribution. The possible
combinations quickly lead to a combinatorial explosion.
Quite a large part of the functional tests can be automated
On Sun, 10 Apr 2011, Alain Péan wrote:
After further verification, it seems to be related to ticket granting.
Here is what I have in /var/log/messages :
su: pam_krb5[7200]: TGT failed verification using keytab and key for
'host/bardeen.lab-lpp.local@LAB-LPP.LOCAL': Cannot find ticket for
On 04/12/2011 02:37 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 04/12/2011 12:31 PM, Radu Gheorghiu wrote:
I think you are avoiding the real issue here, again and again. It's not
about ownership. It's not about taking ownership.
It's about making the process open. A simple wiki page describing what
you are
jvalido...@juanyjosefina.com wrote:
I was very impressed with the performance I got on CentOS 5.6
using software Raid 10 so I'm looking. Thanks
There are 3 ways to setup RAID 10 on Linux (mdadm). There are -n2 -f2
and -o2 options (near, far and offset) and best for ordinary use is
far (f2).
On 04/12/2011 02:37 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 04/12/2011 12:31 PM, Radu Gheorghiu wrote:
I think you are avoiding the real issue here, again and again. It's not
about ownership. It's not about taking ownership.
It's about making the process open. A simple wiki page describing what
you are
On 04/11/2011 05:07 PM, Dag Wieers wrote:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
On 4/11/2011 4:02 PM, Ned Slider wrote:
On 11/04/11 20:16, Digimer wrote:
/putting on asbestos pants.
each release is more complex than the last. The web of dependency grows,
so the reverse-engineering
On 04/12/2011 12:48 PM, Radu Gheorghiu wrote:
There are pages in the wiki that already describe what we are doing
right now.
I think you already stated that the pages about rebuilding are outdated.
Thats not what was said : we might not be using the exact same scripts
is more along the lines
On 04/12/2011 12:55 PM, Radu Gheorghiu wrote:
The bug.centos.org site is open to anyone who might want to get involved
and help fix bugs. I'm guessing you are just new to CentOS and dont
really know what you are talking about. Try thinking things though for a
change.
Why would anyone care to
Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
I've got a server that initially was connected to a static WAN
connection via eth0. Now I've added a second NIC eth1 connected to a
local network switch with the intention of using it as a backup remote
access connection via a dynamic ADSL connection.
The problem
Well, I would like to know what will be the changes before we apply the
updates. I would like to generate a kind of a report showing what will be
the changes for all packages with available updates.
Is there a way to do it?
Thanks
Bernard
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Christopher J.
Karanbir Singh wrote on 04/12/2011 07:43 AM:
Quite a large part of the functional tests can be automated - specially
if there are going to be 100's of people offering them up. Wihtout a
doubt we need more of those.
Agree - whatever can be automated should be. It is the predictive part
I was
It appears adding
%pre
...
lvm vgscan
lvm lvm vgimport vol0
lvm vgchange -a y
...
if [ -d /dev/vol0 ]; then
# do stuff
fi
lvm vgremove -f vol0
makes the volume group appear in /dev. That was definitely not need on
other hw.
___
On 12 April 2011 13:06, Bernard Fay bernard@enodegroup.com wrote:
Well, I would like to know what will be the changes before we apply the
updates. I would like to generate a kind of a report showing what will be
the changes for all packages with available updates.
Is there a way to do
On 04/11/2011 04:45 AM, Tom H wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 5:30 AM, Riccardo Veraldi
riccardo.vera...@cnaf.infn.it wrote:
Hello, after updating to Cents 5.6 and so to kvm-83-224
my KVM virtual machines qemu qcow2 based images do not start anymore.
Looking at VM console the error message is
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 04/11/2011 05:07 PM, Dag Wieers wrote:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
On 4/11/2011 4:02 PM, Ned Slider wrote:
On 11/04/11 20:16, Digimer wrote:
/putting on asbestos pants.
each release is more complex than the last. The web of
On 04/12/2011 01:06 PM, Bernard Fay wrote:
Well, I would like to know what will be the changes before we apply the
updates. I would like to generate a kind of a report showing what will
be the changes for all packages with available updates.
Is there a way to do it?
The way to do that
Bernard Fay wrote:
Well, I would like to know what will be the changes before we apply the
updates. I would like to generate a kind of a report showing what will
be the changes for all packages with available updates.
Is there a way to do it?
Thanks
Bernard
Please do not
On Apr 12, 2011, at 3:23 AM, Matthew Feinberg wrote:
ext4 does not seem to be fully baked in 5.6 yet. parted 1.8 does not
support creating ext4 (strange)
The CentOS homepage states that ext4 is now a fully supported filesystem in 5.6.
___
CentOS
Le 12/04/2011 13:46, John Hodrien a écrit :
On Sun, 10 Apr 2011, Alain Péan wrote:
After further verification, it seems to be related to ticket granting.
Here is what I have in /var/log/messages :
su: pam_krb5[7200]: TGT failed verification using keytab and key for
On 04/12/2011 06:58 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 04/12/2011 12:48 PM, Radu Gheorghiu wrote:
There are pages in the wiki that already describe what we are doing
right now.
I think you already stated that the pages about rebuilding are outdated.
Thats not what was said : we might not be using
Le 12/04/2011 14:35, Alain Péan a écrit :
Le 12/04/2011 13:46, John Hodrien a écrit :
On Sun, 10 Apr 2011, Alain Péan wrote:
After further verification, it seems to be related to ticket granting.
Here is what I have in /var/log/messages :
su: pam_krb5[7200]: TGT failed verification using
On Tuesday 12 April 2011 15:34:21 Torres, Giovanni (NIH/NINDS) [C] wrote:
On Apr 12, 2011, at 3:23 AM, Matthew Feinberg wrote:
ext4 does not seem to be fully baked in 5.6 yet. parted 1.8 does not
support creating ext4 (strange)
The CentOS homepage states that ext4 is now a fully supported
On 04/12/2011 02:28 AM, Bob Hepple wrote:
While I'm here - thanks to the whole CentOS team for a great effort on
5.6. I installed it on a laptop for the wife and she loves it!! For
myself - once I've the sources get here I can start our patch and
re-compile for our in-house discless clusters.
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf
Of Torres, Giovanni (NIH/NINDS) [C]
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 2:34 PM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] 40TB File System Recommendations
On Apr 12, 2011, at 3:23 AM, Matthew
On 12 April 2011 13:48, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote:
On 04/12/2011 02:28 AM, Bob Hepple wrote:
While I'm here - thanks to the whole CentOS team for a great effort on
5.6. I installed it on a laptop for the wife and she loves it!! For
myself - once I've the sources get here I can
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Marian Marinov m...@yuhu.biz wrote:
Steve,
I'm managing machines with 30TB of storage for more then two years. And with
good reporting and reaction we have never had to run fsck.
However I'm sure that if you have to run fsck on so big file systems, it will
On Tuesday 12 April 2011 15:34:21 Torres, Giovanni (NIH/NINDS) [C] wrote:
On Apr 12, 2011, at 3:23 AM, Matthew Feinberg wrote:
ext4 does not seem to be fully baked in 5.6 yet. parted 1.8 does not
support creating ext4 (strange)
The CentOS homepage states that ext4 is now a fully supported
On Tuesday 12 April 2011 15:56:54 rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote:
On Tuesday 12 April 2011 15:34:21 Torres, Giovanni (NIH/NINDS) [C] wrote:
On Apr 12, 2011, at 3:23 AM, Matthew Feinberg wrote:
ext4 does not seem to be fully baked in 5.6 yet. parted 1.8 does not
support creating ext4
On 4/12/11 6:37 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 04/12/2011 12:31 PM, Radu Gheorghiu wrote:
I think you are avoiding the real issue here, again and again. It's not
about ownership. It's not about taking ownership.
It's about making the process open. A simple wiki page describing what
you are
OTOH, gparted doesn't see my software raid array either. Gparted it rather
practical for regular plain vanilla partitions, but for more advanced stuff
and
filesystems, fdisk is probably better.
For filersystems 2TB, you're better off grabbing a copy of GPT fdisk.
Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 04/12/2011 12:46 AM, Phil Schaffner wrote:
If you have a way to do those predictive tests, in serial or parallel,
I'm sure that would be a valuable contribution. The possible
combinations quickly lead to a combinatorial explosion.
Quite a large part of the
On 4/12/11 7:48 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 04/12/2011 02:28 AM, Bob Hepple wrote:
While I'm here - thanks to the whole CentOS team for a great effort on
5.6. I installed it on a laptop for the wife and she loves it!! For
myself - once I've the sources get here I can start our patch and
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Marian Marinov m...@yuhu.biz wrote:
I'm managing machines with 30TB of storage for more then two years. And
with good reporting and reaction we have never had to run fsck.
However I'm sure that if you have to run fsck on so big file
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf
Of Lars Hecking
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 3:11 PM
To: centos@centos.org
Subject: Re: [CentOS] 40TB File System Recommendations
OTOH, gparted doesn't see my software raid array either.
On 04/12/2011 07:24 AM, Dag Wieers wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 04/11/2011 05:07 PM, Dag Wieers wrote:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
On 4/11/2011 4:02 PM, Ned Slider wrote:
On 11/04/11 20:16, Digimer wrote:
/putting on asbestos pants.
each release is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/11/2011 05:50 PM, Todd Cary wrote:
For a long period of time, my Apache root directory has been
/home/httpd. For security reasons, this is not so good as
SELinux has informed me. Now all of the files have been copied
to /var/www/etc
On Tuesday 12 April 2011 16:20:22 m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Marian Marinov m...@yuhu.biz wrote:
I'm managing machines with 30TB of storage for more then two years. And
with good reporting and reaction we have never had to run fsck.
On 12.4.2011 15:02, Marian Marinov wrote:
On Tuesday 12 April 2011 15:56:54
rainer-rnrd0m5o0maboiyizis...@public.gmane.org wrote:
Yes... but with such RAID10 solution you get only half of the disk space...
so
from 10 2TB drives you get only 10TB instead of 16TB with RAID6.
From a
On 04/11/2011 04:50 PM, Todd Cary wrote:
For a long period of time, my Apache root directory has been
/home/httpd. For security reasons, this is not so good as
SELinux has informed me. Now all of the files have been copied
to /var/www/etc with owner and group root. The privileges are
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Markus Falb markus.f...@fasel.at wrote:
On 12.4.2011 15:02, Marian Marinov wrote:
On Tuesday 12 April 2011 15:56:54
rainer-rnrd0m5o0maboiyizis...@public.gmane.org wrote:
Yes... but with such RAID10 solution you get only half of the disk
space... so
from
On Tuesday 12 April 2011 16:48:14 Markus Falb wrote:
On 12.4.2011 15:02, Marian Marinov wrote:
On Tuesday 12 April 2011 15:56:54
rainer-rnrd0m5o0maboiyizis...@public.gmane.org wrote:
Yes... but with such RAID10 solution you get only half of the disk
space... so from 10 2TB drives you
On Tuesday, April 12, 2011 09:30:43 AM Johnny Hughes wrote:
They are instead Beta or Alpha and should not be used in production
(IMHO) ... but everyone gets to control their own servers.
Let me echo this, and state that the alpha and beta announcements I have seen
from the SL team say the
On 04/12/2011 02:06 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
There are pages in the wiki that already describe what we are doing
right now.
Really? Where do I look to see what has been tried with packages that are
currently failing QA or not building yet? Or even what are the current
time-consuming problems
On 04/12/2011 02:11 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Let me *strongly* suggest that tests *should* be automated. Not only is it
faster, but for regression tests, a human tester will miss occasional
steps, where an automated set will guarantee every step is completed.
there is a process and request
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Alain Péan wrote:
Hi John,
Thnks for your answer. Here are the content of /etc/krb5.conf and klist
-ke. I agree that there can be siomething missing, that was working
before...
The keytab isn't valid for the host as it doesn't contain a usable principal
for doing a
On 04/11/2011 08:58 AM, Jussi Hirvi wrote:
On 11.4.2011 16.07, Torres, Giovanni (NIH/NINDS) [C] wrote:
5.6 version of the virtualization guide from RedHat includes Xen and KVM:
Oh damn. I didn't notice the URL which said 5.2. Thanks.
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 3:36 AM, Alain Péan alain.p...@lpp.polytechnique.fr
wrote:
Le 12/04/2011 09:23, Matthew Feinberg a écrit :
Hello All
I have a brand spanking new 40TB Hardware Raid6 array to play around
with. I am looking for recommendations for which filesystem to use. I am
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 8:56 AM, rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote:
That's not the issue.
The issue is rebuild-time.
The longer it takes, the more likely is another failure in the array.
With RAID6, this does not instantly kill your RAID, as with RAID5 - but I
assume it will further decrease
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Alain Péan wrote:
Sorrry, little error with the output of klit -ke, because I am testing
on a test AD domain at this moment. On the first machine, output is :
# klist -ke
Keytab name: FILE:/etc/krb5.keytab
KVNO Principal
What's the correct way to deal with this? I've rebuilt a kernel with an
additional patch for one particular module, but I'm trying to load the
new module into a distribution kernel. I'm not planning to roll out the
updated kernel package.
ksign: module signed with unknown public key
-
On Tuesday, April 12, 2011 10:07 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 04/12/2011 02:06 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
There are pages in the wiki that already describe what we are doing
right now.
Really? Where do I look to see what has been tried with packages that are
currently failing QA or not building
Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 04/12/2011 02:11 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Let me *strongly* suggest that tests *should* be automated. Not only is
it
faster, but for regression tests, a human tester will miss occasional
steps, where an automated set will guarantee every step is completed.
there
Lamar Owen wrote:
The only disagreement I would have with them is calling the alphas and betas
'releases.' But it's their distribution.
Word release means anything send out to the wild. Like you would
release some animal after you cured it's broken leg/wing.
I think proper term for what
On 04/12/2011 10:21 AM, Boris Epstein wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 3:36 AM, Alain Péan
alain.p...@lpp.polytechnique.fr
mailto:alain.p...@lpp.polytechnique.fr wrote:
snipped: two recommendations for XFS
I would chime in with a dis-commendation for XFS. At my previous
employer, two cases
On 04/12/2011 03:33 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
RW: between work, and moving, and most of my stuff in storage at the
moment while I house-hunt, and, oh, yes, worrying about whether we're
working Friday, here with the US gov't
I hear you, 38 hrs/week at dayjob, then 30hrs/week on CentOS and
On 04/12/2011 03:31 PM, Christopher Chan wrote:
How are you going to vet the stuff? The QA team will be responsible for
that? For all the talk of giving others the exact tools to replicate a
Centos distro - just how is the stuff produced by a zillion would be
contributors (assuming they don't
On 4/12/2011 9:07 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
There are pages in the wiki that already describe what we are doing
right now.
Really? Where do I look to see what has been tried with packages that are
currently failing QA or not building yet? Or even what are the current
time-consuming
On Tuesday 12 April 2011 17:36:39 John Jasen wrote:
On 04/12/2011 10:21 AM, Boris Epstein wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 3:36 AM, Alain Péan
alain.p...@lpp.polytechnique.fr
mailto:alain.p...@lpp.polytechnique.fr wrote:
snipped: two recommendations for XFS
I would chime in with a
Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 04/12/2011 03:33 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
RW: between work, and moving, and most of my stuff in storage at the
moment while I house-hunt, and, oh, yes, worrying about whether we're
working Friday, here with the US gov't
I hear you, 38 hrs/week at dayjob, then
On 4/12/2011 6:56 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 04/11/2011 04:50 PM, Todd Cary wrote:
For a long period of time, my Apache root directory has been
/home/httpd. For security reasons, this is not so good as
SELinux has informed me. Now all of the files have been copied
to /var/www/etc with
hi,
On 04/12/2011 04:02 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Sorry. Actually, here's a question along those lines: what are you testing
- the build process, or the individual packages?
At the moment there is automation around the process, not nearly as much
as I'd like - but its there and it works
centos-boun...@centos.org wrote:
I was really hoping for you to reply with something along the
lines of 'there isnt enough info about the test process' or
'are there some templates that we can start with' etc.
Those things I can try to do
something about, finding you more time in the day is
- Original Message -
| On Tuesday 12 April 2011 17:36:39 John Jasen wrote:
| On 04/12/2011 10:21 AM, Boris Epstein wrote:
| On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 3:36 AM, Alain Péan
| alain.p...@lpp.polytechnique.fr
|
| mailto:alain.p...@lpp.polytechnique.fr wrote:
| snipped: two
On 4/12/2011 9:36 AM, John Jasen wrote:
snipped: two recommendations for XFS
I would chime in with a dis-commendation for XFS. At my previous
employer, two cases involving XFS resulted in irrecoverable data
corruption. These were on RAID systems running from 4 to 20 TB.
Was this on a 32 or
On 04/12/2011 04:01 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
The process is not the product.
Exactly, and I don't see anyone complaining about the product - just
wondering if some number of months could be shaved off the process.
Fixing the timing of release is something we get from getting the
process into
On 04/12/2011 04:08 PM, Brunner, Brian T. wrote:
centos-boun...@centos.org wrote:
If compile/test servers are an issue, can we do for CentOS what we do
for distributed Prime number/SETI computation serving?
Not as far as I know, ensuring environ sanity across something of this
nature would be
Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 04/12/2011 04:08 PM, Brunner, Brian T. wrote:
centos-boun...@centos.org wrote:
If compile/test servers are an issue, can we do for CentOS what we do
for distributed Prime number/SETI computation serving?
Not as far as I know, ensuring environ sanity across something
/centos-announce/attachments/20110412/655a2dcf/attachment-0001.bin
--
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 12:20:50 +0200
From: Tru Huynh t...@centos.org
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2011:0422 Moderate CentOS 4 x86_64
postfix - security update (CENTOSPLUS Only
Hi Ned,
On 04/11/2011 10:02 PM, Ned Slider wrote:
each release is more complex than the last. The web of dependency grows,
so the reverse-engineering takes longer and longer.
This is just complete nonsense. You clearly have no understanding of the
processes involved in rebuilding RHEL. CentOS
On 04/12/2011 04:58 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Not as far as I know, ensuring environ sanity across something of this
nature would be a massive issue. Not easy to solve, unless the environ
as a whole is shipped out.
Actually, that is what's needed, perhaps: a repeatable environment, not
Le 12/04/2011 16:28, John Hodrien a écrit :
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Alain Péan wrote:
Sorrry, little error with the output of klit -ke, because I am testing
on a test AD domain at this moment. On the first machine, output is :
# klist -ke
Keytab name: FILE:/etc/krb5.keytab
KVNO Principal
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote:
On 04/12/2011 04:01 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
The process is not the product.
Exactly, and I don't see anyone complaining about the product - just
wondering if some number of months could be shaved off the process.
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 06:00:57PM +0300, Marian Marinov wrote:
Can someone(who actually knows) share with us, what is the state of
xfs-utils,
how stable and usable are they for recovery of broken XFS filesystems?
I have done an XFS repair once or twice on a real filesystem (~4TB) in a
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Alain Péan wrote:
In fact, I solved the problem using the authconfig command, but I wonder
if it is really correct, as I mixed kerberos and ldap. Here is the
authconfig command for my test domain :
Using kerberos and ldap is a perfectly reasonable thing to want to do, but
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:36:39AM -0400, John Jasen wrote:
On 04/12/2011 10:21 AM, Boris Epstein wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 3:36 AM, Alain Péan
alain.p...@lpp.polytechnique.fr
mailto:alain.p...@lpp.polytechnique.fr wrote:
snipped: two recommendations for XFS
I would chime in with
Le 12/04/2011 18:29, John Hodrien a écrit :
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Alain Péan wrote:
In fact, I solved the problem using the authconfig command, but I wonder
if it is really correct, as I mixed kerberos and ldap. Here is the
authconfig command for my test domain :
Using kerberos and ldap is a
On 04/12/2011 05:19 PM, Brian Mathis wrote:
Fixing the timing of release is something we get from getting the
process into the right place. And not the other way around. There seems
NO ONE IS SAYING TO PUSH CRAP OUT THE DOOR JUST FOR THE SAKE OF
GETTING IT OUT. EVERYONE IS SAYING TO OPEN THE
On 04/11/2011 10:27 PM, Brunner, Brian T. wrote:
If it were me, wiser you are to listen to frogs and crickets.
Dag is saying I want to help but your system is closed.
Just to be clear, Dag isnt saying that at all. What he is saying is that
'I dont want to help by actually doing anything, but I
On 4/12/2011 10:55 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
If compile/test servers are an issue, can we do for CentOS what we do
for distributed Prime number/SETI computation serving?
Not as far as I know, ensuring environ sanity across something of this
nature would be a massive issue. Not easy to solve,
On 04/12/2011 06:02 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On 4/12/2011 10:55 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
If compile/test servers are an issue, can we do for CentOS what we do
for distributed Prime number/SETI computation serving?
Not as far as I know, ensuring environ sanity across something of this
nature
On 4/12/2011 12:04 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
If compile/test servers are an issue, can we do for CentOS what we do
for distributed Prime number/SETI computation serving?
Not as far as I know, ensuring environ sanity across something of this
nature would be a massive issue. Not easy to
On 04/12/2011 06:14 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
I don't understand. That has been mentioned as the slow/hard part of the
process. What is it that really takes months if not that?
you did read my reply to this question of yours in a different part of
the thread right ?
- KB
On 4/12/2011 12:00 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 04/12/2011 05:19 PM, Brian Mathis wrote:
Fixing the timing of release is something we get from getting the
process into the right place. And not the other way around. There seems
NO ONE IS SAYING TO PUSH CRAP OUT THE DOOR JUST FOR THE SAKE OF
On Apr 12, 2011, at 12:31 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
On 04/12/11 12:23 AM, Matthew Feinberg wrote:
Hello All
I have a brand spanking new 40TB Hardware Raid6 array
never mind file systems... is that one raid set?do you have any
idea
how LONG rebuilding that is going to take when there
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
But Johnny's postings seem pretty insistent on never releasing the
actual scripts in a form that can be used elsewhere or by anyone outside
the project, so maybe a more productive approach would be some way of
oh horse puckey, troll -- it is just
1 - 100 of 203 matches
Mail list logo
