On 08/17/2012 06:50 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
This somewhat describes the situation:
http://www.adminsehow.com/2011/09/gateway-on-a-different-subnet-on-linux/
That still describes a configuration where the gateway is in a local
broadcast domain.
It's impossible to create a route via a host
On 08/17/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Campbell wrote:
I got things installed yesterday, adding a routed network section
using virt-manager linked to the private interface, eth1. I left
the default NAT interface as-is.
That won't do what you want. If you want other machines on the LAN to
be able to
On 08/16/2012 09:36 AM, Bill Campbell wrote:
I assume that I can replace /var/lib/libvirt/images with a
symlink to another file system with adequate space.
Would it be safe to symlink the entire /var/lib/libvrt directory
to another file system?
As has been pointed out, SELinux may prevent
On 08/16/2012 04:55 PM, SilverTip257 wrote:
vi is generally a symlink to vim these days.
Actually, it's a shell alias. And then, only if vim is installed,
which it isn't in some configurations. IIRC, desktop systems have him
by default, but server installations do not.
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 2:31 AM, Gordon Messmer yiny...@eburg.com wrote:
On 08/16/2012 04:55 PM, SilverTip257 wrote:
vi is generally a symlink to vim these days.
Actually, it's a shell alias. And then, only if vim is installed,
which it isn't in some configurations. IIRC, desktop systems
Hello Akemi,
On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 11:52 -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
Producing an accurate list of missing packages is tricky -- mainly
because you need access to RHN.
Even though RHN of course is the ultimate resource you can get pretty
far by just checking the Technical notes for 6.1, 6.2 and
For a high-performance system (64-cores, 512GB RAM, 5TB local disk, 110TB
NFS-mounted storage) is there any advantage of dropping lvm and mounting
partitions directly?
We're not planning on changing partition sizes, but if we did we'd probably do
a full rebuild.
Has anyone done performance
On 19.08.2012 23:16, Smithies, Russell wrote:
For a high-performance system (64-cores, 512GB RAM, 5TB local disk,
110TB NFS-mounted storage) is there any advantage of dropping lvm and
mounting partitions directly?
We're not planning on changing partition sizes, but if we did we'd
probably do
On 08/19/12 3:16 PM, Smithies, Russell wrote:
For a high-performance system (64-cores, 512GB RAM, 5TB local disk, 110TB
NFS-mounted storage) is there any advantage of dropping lvm and mounting
partitions directly?
We're not planning on changing partition sizes, but if we did we'd probably
On 08/18/2012 02:57 PM, Theo Band wrote:
Do you have iptables enabled? If so add a rule for the bridge as well.
Red Hat's documentation covers that. Administrators have two options.
They can add an iptables rule that allows traffic, or they can configure
the bridged traffic to not pass
On 08/18/2012 04:43 AM, skull wrote:
I am not sure about your issue, but here is how i make my bridges:
http://www.darktemple.ch/wiki/doku.php?id=linux:kvm#network_bridging
That seems far more complicated than the vendor's documentation. Is
there a reason that you use that method?
Hi.
I have a couple of questions :
I have inherited a file server that provides Samba and NFS file
shares. We use a combination on file system acls and posix permissions
. I'm looking to better secure access to the files by trimming some of
the permissions etc.
1) What services could break if
12 matches
Mail list logo
