Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne
On Sunday, November 16, 2014 12:21 AM, Always Learning wrote: On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 11:50 -1000, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata wrote: I could do that I suppose, but I haven't and probably wouldn't have the time necessary to separate out the emails between the two accounts. I already have 6+ email accounts that I have to monitor so I'd rather not fork off another if I can help it. It's not the time, just the byte volume. I get ~15GB of space for free per account, I think. The vast majority of my email unfortunately is not publicly archived, so I don't have that option. Writing as a humble programmer, why don't you and Les write your own database application (using HTML, CSS, PHP and MariaDB (MySQL)) and store the important parts (or wholes) of emails in the database ? Please, not another Exchange idea. I do this. I can search on 'text', database entry descriptions, 6 keyword fields, entry date, overdue date etc. and can email out from within the database system which has menu lists of email addresses. I can have 1 million topics and each topic can have 99 items of separate correspondence. Each separate item can link to 9 web items or stored items (PDFs, ODT, pictures etc.) stored on the server. Blinks. Data can be retrieved in less than 2 seconds. The inbuilt links produce lists of related items. The system links into other databases (Names/addresses/emails/telephone numbers, information storage etc. etc.) Microsoft needs to hire you. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS list SPAM problems
On Friday, November 14, 2014 07:01 AM, Peter wrote: So let's stop ragging on James, he's done what he should be doing and it's the CentOS server that has mucked things up here. Peter Yes, we don't need Spam-L or NANAE atmosphere here. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Software RAID10 - which two disks can fail?
On Tuesday, April 08, 2014 03:47 AM, Rafał Radecki wrote: As far as I know raid10 is ~ a raid0 built on top of two raid1 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nested_RAID_levels#RAID_1.2B0 - raid10). So I think that by default in my case: No, Linux md raid10 is NOT a nested raid setup where you build a raid0 on top of two raid1 arrays. /dev/sda6 and /dev/sdb6 form the first raid1 /dev/sdd6 and /dev/sdc6 form the second raid1 So is it so that if I fail/remove for example: - /dev/sdb6 and /dev/sdc6 (different raid1's) - the raid10 will be usable/data will be ok? - /dev/sda6 and /dev/sdb6 (the same raid1) - the raid10 will be not usable/data will be lost? The man page for md which has a section on RAID10 describes the possibility of something is absolutely impossibe with a nested raid1+0 setup. Excerpt: If, for example, an array is created with 5 devices and 2 replicas, then space equivalent to 2.5 of the devices will be available, and every block will be stored on two different devices. So contrary to this statement: RAID10 provides a combination of RAID1 and RAID0, and is sometimes known as RAID1+0., linux md raid10 is NOT raid1+0. Is something entirely new and different but unfortunately called raid10 perhaps due to it being able to create a raid1+0 array and a different layout using similar concepts. I read in context of raid10 about replicas of data (2 by default) and the data layout (near/far/offset). I see in the output of mdadm -D the line Layout : near=2, far=1 and am not sure which layout is exactly used and how it influences data layout/distribution in my case :| I would really appreciate a definite answer which partitions I can remove and which I cannot remove at the same time because I need to perform some disk maintenance tasks on this raid10 array. Thanks for all help! If you want something that you can be sure about, do what I do. Make two raid1 md devices and then use them to make a raid0 device. raid10 is something cooked up by Neil Brown and but is not raid1+0. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_MD_RAID_10#LINUX-MD-RAID-10 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On Wednesday, January 08, 2014 05:14 AM, Digimer wrote: Fantastic news! CentOS and RHEL have been mutually beneficial projects for years. As a user of both, I am extremely happy to see the ties grow between the communities. digimer Centos for the desktop! RHEL for the backend! Okay, I'm done frothing. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] build postfix spec w/ mysql
On Sunday, November 20, 2011 02:11 AM, Tim Dunphy wrote: hello list! I am attempting to build an rpm of postfix that includes support for mysql. I've done this before with earlier versions on postfix but I am staring at this spec file until my eyes bleed and I just don't see why when I build the spec with rpmbuild mysql support isn't there. After I install the rpm I have a look at the modules as such: ldd $(which postfix) | grep -i mysql and nothing's there. I was hoping someone out there might not mind having a look at the spec file and let me know what I'm missing. I thought there was a postfix package with mysql enabled in the plus repo? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Bind9 zero day bug - CVE-2011-4313 - when will there be an update in Centos 5+6 ?
On Friday, November 18, 2011 05:47 PM, Morgan Cox wrote: Hi. http://www.debian.org/security/2011/dsa-2347 There is updated packages for Debian (and Ubuntu) already. Do you know how long until Centos release an update to bind ? I have looked here and couldn't see any info - http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2011-November/thread.html - Is this the correct place to look for security update info ? [09:28:22] Jeff_S pj: http://ftp-osl.osuosl.org/pub/centos/6/cr/x86_64/RPMS/bind-9.7.3-2.el6_1.P3.3.x86_64.rpm was already pushed to CR That was about 8 and a half hours ago. It's out for c5 too according to pj. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] the majority will NEVER use smartphones
On Thursday, November 17, 2011 10:10 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: Letters? You mean the things that the Post Office used to deliver? Who does that anymore? Maybe a picture or video clip instead... Gee...business people that's who...at least until we get some to use and legal digital signing. But please, there is no answer that is correct for all situations so let's drop this. I wouldn't call people doing any of those things 'computer users', but rather developers, administrators, or editors. Those jobs are all necessary but they aren't what the majority of people do with devices even now. And these users will use whatever they fancy but the devs will forever not get it (except maybe those that Steve Jobs whipped on a daily basis) so you can argue this till the cows come home. Let's also drop this too. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 smb authentication?
On Friday, November 18, 2011 03:53 AM, Ron Young wrote: Oops! My apologies for the thread hijacking. Thanks for the reminder Phil. I was mentally keyed to the samba issues and ignored the C6 and AD issues. In my case there is no AD domain involved and samba is already at the 3x level. Windows 7 not supported by C5 samba unless you rig the Windows 7 to not use SMB2. samba 3.6.x supports SMB2 but that's not on C5 I believe... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Changes at Red Hat confouding CentOS
On Wednesday, November 16, 2011 07:44 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote: Christopher Chan wrote: I find it very hard to believe that 90% of Chinese are using desktops. What about all those girls tweeting on the bus to school? There must be billions of them. Farmers/peasants have phones? All those girls tweeting? Aren't you confusing Japan with China? I wasn't in fact referring to China when I mentioned girls tweeting. I should have left a blank line. I was referring to the girls I see here (Dublin) on the bus/train. However, iPhone sales in China increased by 250% last year. I think your image of China is rather out-of-date. Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of migrant factory workers trying to move from farmer/peasant status to something else. Maybe a few more protests at Foxconn and other factories might help. Yeah...right. The Chinese way of governing has not changed - it's just another set of people with a different label. Palace intrigues replaced by Communist Party intrigues. Same old corruption at all levels of government. Same old keep the poor poor for fleecing while the powers that be live a life of extravagance. Not that that is unique to China. So you got a few more tens of millionaires - what's that compared to a billion? You don't have 90% of Chinese using phones and certainly not for email. Maybe a bit of sms. In any case, for the few (percentage wise) that use computers and the tiny portion that use Linux even...it's probably Red Flag Linux and not Centos... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Changes at Red Hat confouding CentOS
On Tuesday, November 15, 2011 11:41 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote: Benjamin Franz wrote: What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%. Mobile devices still have *under* 6% of the internet browser market. See http://www.netmarketshare.com/ I find it very hard to believe that 90% of Chinese are using desktops. What about all those girls tweeting on the bus to school? There must be billions of them. Farmers/peasants have phones? All those girls tweeting? Aren't you confusing Japan with China? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Changes at Red Hat confouding CentOS
On Tuesday, November 15, 2011 11:30 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: Vreme: 11/15/2011 04:14 PM, Rob Kampen piše: run a virtualbox with windoze XP for a realtor app that only works on IE (yeah, go figure, we are in 2011 and they force everyone to use IE) Install PlayOnLinux (Wine installer) and install IE6 inside it. Maybe your App will work without virtual Win. Yeehaa! That's it, recommend the worst IE browser available. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Changes at Red Hat confouding CentOS
On Wednesday, November 16, 2011 12:38 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: Worrk is worrk (germaniK accent intended... :) ). Home is Home. Laptops are very much entertainment and educational devices. Things useful at home even if you aren't interested in technology for its own sake or using it for communicating with friends. Ya forgot the other definition of laptops: preventor of family communication ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Postfix mail server procedure
On Saturday, November 12, 2011 01:01 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 13:23 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: You don't mention a mail store [IMAP Server]? Such as Cyrus IMAP. Something for Postfix to deliver the mail too. Mail store != imap server. Mail store = structure for mboxes/maildirs. Cyrus is sort of its own thing with its own mail store. Sorry, I keep forgetting about that crap... Never touched it and never wanted to after I heard the screams from a friend who used cyrus and swore by it until he got corrupt mailboxes. Had to help setup postfix, dovecot and vpopmail iirc. People with bad hardware can break anything; and you're probably talking about old versions anyway [anything with indexes/databases can corrupt]. You should be right on that score...this was circa 2003/2004. Cyrus is incredibly reliable, stable and fast. And the latest 2.4.x series closes numerous potential issues with how databases are managed. Oh, so Cyrus is another 'use a database as a mail store'? The other one that I know of but cannot remember the name of uses postgresql for its mailstore. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Postfix mail server procedure
On Saturday, November 12, 2011 01:04 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: +1 The shipped packages on most distributions are a bit lame; Simon's packages are the way to go. They also provision everything as Skiplist [Cyrus' preferred DB format] avoiding the ugliness that is Berkley DB [issue with which Cyrus has take a fair amount of the blame; most 'corrupt Cyrus databases' are corrupt BDB databases]. Ah, this must be the database you referred to. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Redhat vs centos vs ubuntu
On Saturday, November 12, 2011 03:59 PM, Nataraj wrote: I believe the standard desktop uses Ubuntu's own installer. The Ubuntu server and the 'alternative' distribution use the debian installer. I fought with it at first, but it is much more flexible than the redhat installer. You can build arbitrary LVM/raid configurations with it and you can also go into the shell from the installer and customize things that you can't with the redhat installer. Last time I tried, you could not do lvm on raid and it was acknowledged as such on the ubuntu-installer/ubuntu-devel-discuss list. Arbitrary lvm/raid and lvm on raid has been possible on anaconda for quite a while. 3- I don't know about having a server being forced to connect to the internet before you can even begin to secure it up. But the only way to really install it is to do that. Wait til you see the insecure firewall setup if gave me too.. I've not experienced any distribution to provide a great default firewall setup. What I do notice about Ubuntu server is there are very few services running in the default install, so if you probe a newly installed machine, it's not very vulnerable. I usually run new installs behind my Internet firewall anyway. I like doing a basic install and then adding the services that I want to enable, rather then a server install that comes up with dozens of services that you may not need and you have to turn them all off to secure the machine. Nobody said anything about any distribution providing a 'great' default setup. Someone said something about dozens of firewall management tools but in reality, they were all solutions that drive you insane. Redhat/Centos = service iptables save. End of story. 4- I picked the virtual host package, as the machine will hold guest OS's (presumably ubuntu). I do like CentOS/Redhat 6 better as a virtualization server. Thing to realize here is that Redhat is leading the development effort for KVM, libvirt etc, so Ubuntu's code lags behind redhat. For the current stable Ubuntu 10.04 LTS release Ubuntu lags behind redhat 6 and since 10.04 LTS is a stable release it doesn't just get arbitrary updates unless they are security fixes. Sometimes stuff don't get updates at all. Even when working patches have been provided. Maybe only some Canonical maintained packages get backports. One thing I like about Ubuntu/debian is the /etc/network/interfaces file over /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts /etc/sysconfig/network. I must say that that is one thing among others nice in Debian. Just like runparts is from Debian. Just another flavor of linux. There are various packages that can be installed to do this for you. ufw is one of them. I prefer to use my own scripts though. Using your own scripts is the only sane way to do things...ufw, fwbuilder, even shorewall are just either inadequate, inflexible or way too complicated to trace/optimize things. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Postfix mail server procedure
On Wednesday, November 09, 2011 07:23 PM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 01:10 -0500, Jonathan Vomacka wrote: CentOS Community I was wondering if anyone had a good resource or procedure for a step by step in installing a mail server with Centos. There ARE documents on google, however almost all that i've found were outdated from 2005. Does anyone know where I can find this type of document for a mailserver Postfix + MySQL + SpamAssassin + ClamAV + Squirrelmail + Postfixadmin, etc? MySQL has nothing to do with mail. If you can avoid using it - avoid it. The just-throw-everything-in-mysql approach to life has never made sense to me. Maybe it does not have to but it sure is a wonderful part of a system when you host thousands or millions even of mailboxes and want to be able to run server farms/clusters that can lookup a shared userinfo database. Don't bother giving me crap about generating Berkerly DB files every fifteen minutes. Don't bother pointing to ldap too because by your definition for mysql, ldap has nothing to with mail too. For CLAMAV you need to have clamd running and a milter. I'm not certain what milter's are current - when I set one up they were all had equally stale documentation. Does CentOS currently ship a working clamav milter? RHEL/Centos ships zero milters... I have no idea what Postfixadmin is; I've never seen much point in an MTA admin tool. And MTA is pretty much setup and let it run. Yeah, for a small setup. And it is not an MTA admin tool. It is a userinfo admin tool. When you want shared userinfo databases for an MTA like postfix/sendmail/qmail/exim, you tend to use mysql or postgresql. Squirelmail is an application; just use their documentation [although I'd recommend Horde over Squirrel]. Yes, horde + sieve + dovecot + dovecot sieve extension is kinda handy for generating filter recipes. Who needs crap like maildrop or procmail when dovecot provides the lda, the pop/imap servers and the glue between postfix and the userinfo db? You don't mention a mail store [IMAP Server]? Such as Cyrus IMAP. Something for Postfix to deliver the mail too. Mail store != imap server. Mail store = structure for mboxes/maildirs. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Redhat vs centos vs ubuntu
On Thursday, November 10, 2011 11:33 PM, Craig White wrote: 7- The install, of the virtual host, added libvirt. It did not however install things like virt-install or any other virt software. Infact, no guest installation tools were added, though things like virsh were installed. Sigh. 8- The firewall and network do not have the scripts folder. You have to build your own firewall file and add scripts to make it over ride the stock one via the eth you want to use it forwtf? all sorts of packages for firewall management. apt-cache search firewall | wc -l 152 why be content with the minimal firewall tool when you actually can have a choice? What? Those crap choices like ufw or fwbuilder? Oh, btw, if there really was 152 blooming choices, they would on the most part be total crap. I like how you seem to think that stuff like upsd, stone, perdition, libiax-dev for a small sample are somehow firewall related. Managing a firewall on Ubuntu is retarded and I have to write my own scripts to hook into interfaces so that I can a sane set of iptables rules loaded/unloaded without the mess from ufw/fwbuilder/whateverothercrap. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Redhat vs centos vs ubuntu
On Friday, November 11, 2011 12:37 AM, Thomas Johansson wrote: Compare systemd to Solaris Service Management Facility. Solaris SMF is a very nice and useful part of Solaris. A lot of similarities between systemd and SMF. Solaris is mainly a server OS. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_Management_Facility Why can't people just use daemontools? It's been available before these I believe :-D ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Redhat vs centos vs ubuntu
On Friday, November 11, 2011 11:49 AM, Craig White wrote: If you want something heavy duty you could simply 'apt-get install shorewall'' but I suspect that you just want to be pedantic. The point that Lamar made - that was that there wasn't any firewall installed by default at all, which I agreed with. I have seen shorewall generated rules. Far way too much branching off and following rule paths is a pain. For small setups, yes, it will do. But if you need to handle high traffic and therefore optimize the rules, forget it. Now if it's package quantity vs. quality type of discussion that you want to have... yes, there are some packages that Ubuntu has that don't interest me in the least but the quantity can be mind boggling. For example (and in my sphere of interest), Ubuntu has pre-built packages for netatalk, davical bacula which I use everywhere and I am building them from source for RHEL or CentOS deployments. To be fair however, I did have to build cyrus-imapd from source on Ubuntu whereas Simon's packages for RHEL/CentOS are terrific. 1) Not all packages in the provided repos are Canonical supported. Most of them are actually third-party aka 'community' maintained or unmaintained even and 2) You can get a similar if lesser experience with regards to quantity if you also add third-party repos on RHEL/Centos. Just because you don't get third-party packages available without a bit of tinkering is not that much of a plus for Ubuntu. Then there's the utility of aptitude/apt-get vs. yum where I can deploy and dynamically manage 'holding' packages on Ubuntu which is simply not available with an rpm/yum package provider. Yum/rpm is good, apt/dpkg is better. I can play that game too. apt/dpkg is good but yum/rpm is better because it gives me 1) checksums and 2) multi-arch support. Linux is pretty much still Linux and one thing has become obvious since I started playing around with Ubuntu the last 7 or 8 months... that my skills have improved by learning how the other half lives. I still love Red Hat stuff, still use Fedora for my desktop. Some things Ubuntu does better, some things I much prefer Red Hat methodology. In the end, it's still Linux. I just can't embrace installing an OS whose security updates have consistently lagged 3-6 months behind. I would not have said much if you have pushed Debian but Ubuntu? It's a joke. I only happen to have one Ubuntu Hardy server because I did not have a Centos disk at hand when I had to do an emergency installation of a box to take over the predecessor's read RH9 squid/nat box. I have no qualms learning the ropes of another distro but the Ubuntu distro takes the cake for faking a community and having tools that are way behind those available with RHEL/Centos. Does d-i support/have lvm on raid recipes yet? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Postfix mail server procedure
On Friday, November 11, 2011 01:00 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 6:48 PM, Christopher Chan christopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk wrote: For CLAMAV you need to have clamd running and a milter. I'm not certain what milter's are current - when I set one up they were all had equally stale documentation. Does CentOS currently ship a working clamav milter? RHEL/Centos ships zero milters... Rpmforge has MimeDefang and clamav packages. Not sure how hard it is to adapt MimeDefang to postscript but I think it is possible these days. You don't mention a mail store [IMAP Server]? Such as Cyrus IMAP. Something for Postfix to deliver the mail too. Mail store != imap server. Mail store = structure for mboxes/maildirs. Cyrus is sort of its own thing with its own mail store. Sorry, I keep forgetting about that crap... Never touched it and never wanted to after I heard the screams from a friend who used cyrus and swore by it until he got corrupt mailboxes. Had to help setup postfix, dovecot and vpopmail iirc. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Redhat vs centos vs ubuntu
On Friday, November 11, 2011 12:33 PM, Craig White wrote: On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 12:12 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: I would not have said much if you have pushed Debian but Ubuntu? It's a joke. I only happen to have one Ubuntu Hardy server because I did not have a Centos disk at hand when I had to do an emergency installation of a box to take over the predecessor's read RH9 squid/nat box. I have no qualms learning the ropes of another distro but the Ubuntu distro takes the cake for faking a community and having tools that are way behind those available with RHEL/Centos. Does d-i support/have lvm on raid recipes yet? yeah - community... see SADFL http://www.ubuntu.com/project/about-ubuntu/governance ;-) I don't know what you mean by 'd-1' d-i = debian-installer which is what Ubuntu uses for its text installer. Seems you can do pretty much anything with their version of kickstart (apparently they have incorporated anaconda now but I haven't ever used it) and they also have preseed and I am using puppet and foreman so I have other methodologies. Oh, things have improved have they? Last I tried, you could not get d-i to do lvm on raid whether on the console or through preseed. Are you telling me that you can now get that done with ks files when you could not with preseed or manually? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Postfix mail server procedure
On Friday, November 11, 2011 01:28 PM, Craig White wrote: On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 13:23 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: Sorry, I keep forgetting about that crap... Never touched it and never wanted to after I heard the screams from a friend who used cyrus and swore by it until he got corrupt mailboxes. Had to help setup postfix, dovecot and vpopmail iirc. been using cyrus-imapd for years - eats dovecot for lunch in terms of features/performance/reliability/scaling/flexibility and just about every other imaginable use for an IMAP server. Hmm, I must give it a try one day then since it comes with RHEL/Centos. Might have thought it would be useful to have some firsthand experience before you labeled something as crap. True. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Postfix mail server procedure
On Friday, November 11, 2011 01:31 PM, Craig White wrote: On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 21:12 -0800, John R Pierce wrote: On 11/10/11 4:48 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: You don't mention a mail store [IMAP Server]? Such as Cyrus IMAP. Something for Postfix to deliver the mail too. Mail store != imap server. Mail store = structure for mboxes/maildirs. indeed, reader protocol servers like imap, pop3, are a seperate category from the traditional MTA, MDA, MUA triad. in a sense, they are a MUA proxy or service, but they aren't the MUA, thats the client application (Thunderbird, etc). In spite of some claims to the contrary[1], they aren't the MDA, thats something like procmail which the MTA uses to deliver the mail to a mailbox. [1] first google hit on related keywords claimed imap/pop were part of the MDA. LMTP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_Mail_Transfer_Protocol That's still nothing to do with imap/pop3 servers. dovecot provides an LDA for just that purpose but it is separate from dovecot's imap/pop3 servers. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Postfix mail server procedure
On Wednesday, November 09, 2011 02:36 PM, John R Pierce wrote: On 11/08/11 10:10 PM, Jonathan Vomacka wrote: I was wondering if anyone had a good resource or procedure for a step by step in installing a mail server with Centos. There ARE documents on google, however almost all that i've found were outdated from 2005. Does anyone know where I can find this type of document for a mailserver Postfix + MySQL + SpamAssassin + ClamAV + Squirrelmail + Postfixadmin, etc? http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Deployment_Guide/ch-Mail_Servers.html is as good a place to start as any. not sure why mysql has to do with email servers yes, I know, you _can_ configure email servers to use SQL databases as the message stores, but I really don't think you _should_ do that, it just adds more overhead. It's not for storing messages, it's for the userinfo/mailstoremetadata/whateveryoucallit. There is only one other experiment that I know of in using a database for mail storage besides Exchange...like you say...just adds more overhead,points of failure. you left out an important part of a mail server, which is a mail user agent such as dovecot or cyrus, these provide the POP and IMAP protocols that a user mail client such as Thunderbird need to read the mail. the basics of setting these up should be covered in the redhat doc above. People still use Sam's stuff?!? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] VirtualBox on CentOS 6.0?
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 04:55 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: Vreme: 11/02/2011 09:10 AM, Lorenzo Martínez Rodríguez piše: I had problems with VBox 4 in my CentOS6, so I had to install VirtualBox-3.2-3.2.12_68302_rhel6-1.x86_64 and I am very very happy with it. VMware Server meant a lot of problems with new kernels and the patch any-any... so I think Virtualbox does the trick. I use VBox 4.x (there is even repository for it) without problems. There was some initial problems with USB, but it was solved 3-4 months ago. 4.0.x was okay for me (Windows server guests) but 4.1.4 was a complete disaster. The guest literally moved at SNAIL pace. Removed all cores save one and then it moved at TURTLE pace. 4.1.x is do not touch even with a ten foot pole. At least with Windows guests. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] VirtualBox on CentOS 6.0?
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 10:33 PM, John Hodrien wrote: On Wed, 2 Nov 2011, Christopher Chan wrote: 4.0.x was okay for me (Windows server guests) but 4.1.4 was a complete disaster. The guest literally moved at SNAIL pace. Removed all cores save one and then it moved at TURTLE pace. 4.1.x is do not touch even with a ten foot pole. At least with Windows guests. This doesn't appear to be universally true. We've run 4.1.4 with Windows 7 64bit on top of CentOS 6 and not seen any noticeable performance problems. The way you describe it makes me think it's not the sort of thing we could not notice if it was happening. This was Windows 7 Enterprise as opposed to a server OS guest. How many cores assigned? VT-X/AMD-V enabled? Hardware? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] VirtualBox on CentOS 6.0?
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 10:33 PM, John Hodrien wrote: On Wed, 2 Nov 2011, Christopher Chan wrote: 4.0.x was okay for me (Windows server guests) but 4.1.4 was a complete disaster. The guest literally moved at SNAIL pace. Removed all cores save one and then it moved at TURTLE pace. 4.1.x is do not touch even with a ten foot pole. At least with Windows guests. This doesn't appear to be universally true. We've run 4.1.4 with Windows 7 64bit on top of CentOS 6 and not seen any noticeable performance problems. The way you describe it makes me think it's not the sort of thing we could not notice if it was happening. This was Windows 7 Enterprise as opposed to a server OS guest. Oh, was io-apic enabled too? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] redhat vs centos
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 10:38 PM, Marcio Carneiro wrote: I think it is time to reconsider and think on OpenIndiana. Er...once the illumos kernel team sorts out that zfs bug that is currently plaguing some io151a users yes. /me not moving an inch from oi_147 till then. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] redhat vs centos
On Thursday, November 03, 2011 03:35 AM, John R Pierce wrote: On 11/02/11 12:19 PM, Marcio Carneiro wrote: OpenIndiana.org I wouldn't want to hitch my sleigh to something dependent on Oracle's good will. It is not dependent on Oracle's good will. Not any longer as they have switched to illumos for their base OS. Then there is nexenta... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] redhat vs centos
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 12:47 AM, David Hrbáč wrote: Dne 1.11.2011 17:27, Akemi Yagi napsal(a): Real problem with recent release troubles with CentOS is that some (or many?) are migrating to Ubuntu/Debian rather than to other RHEL clones, which might eventually hurt the entire Red Hat community. Well, there are no other RHEL clones except SL/Centos. We have quite large infrastructure and we want it homogeneous as possible. Because we run a few boxes with IBM, Ora stuff we need certified OSes, certified is only RHEL or SuSE. So we are using RHEL and Centos. We have been running happily and smoothly for a few years with this concept. Because of the lastest issues with CentOS we are really considering moving back to Debian. Ever heard of WBL? :-D ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] redhat vs centos
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 11:47 AM, fred smith wrote: On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 10:30:57AM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 12:47 AM, David Hrbáč wrote: Dne 1.11.2011 17:27, Akemi Yagi napsal(a): Real problem with recent release troubles with CentOS is that some (or many?) are migrating to Ubuntu/Debian rather than to other RHEL clones, which might eventually hurt the entire Red Hat community. Well, there are no other RHEL clones except SL/Centos. We have quite large infrastructure and we want it homogeneous as possible. Because we run a few boxes with IBM, Ora stuff we need certified OSes, certified is only RHEL or SuSE. So we are using RHEL and Centos. We have been running happily and smoothly for a few years with this concept. Because of the lastest issues with CentOS we are really considering moving back to Debian. Ever heard of WBL? :-D White Box Linux? Isn't it dead? Same thought I had when I saw someone on irc say he is using WBL... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] What happened to 6.1
On Monday, October 31, 2011 12:11 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: Vreme: 10/30/2011 03:46 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn piše: On 10/30/2011 02:14 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: I do not think there is much to be worried for now. Most/all security patches will come out fairly fast now that CR repo is in place. If need be, there can always be another repo that will be reserved for fast fixes that are not compatible with RHEL, like package with important fix that is not exactly compatible, but does the job same as upstream package. This would be only for unresolved packages with important fix, and only as long as complete fix is not completed. But this approach has been rejected in the past with the argument that all builds need to be binary compatible with upstream. This begs the question if the centos project still considers itself viable? It's one thing to lag behind because of technical difficulties but another if the upstream provider essentially wants to prevent you from doing what you are doing. In that case the project probably doesn't have much of a future because even if it gets back on track with reasonably timely releases then upstream will probably just react by making it even harder to build a clone. First off, I do NOT speak for dev team. Next, what I said was if there is a problem with, for example missing src rpm for a security fix, and centos team knows what patch was applied (looking at the source and bug tracker), then I would be fine with alternative package with same patch that would bridge the time until upstream provides that src and it is possible to rebuild exact package. It is not just what patches were applied. It is also what version of the toolchains and libraries were used in building the package. That is where the main problem is base on what the devs say besides the Redhat problem of packages that should not be distributed to others if you want to keep your RHN access... Further, what is exactly difference between going to totally new distro and having not-100% compatible distro? Are small and rare differences enough to warrant switch of entire distro? I do not think so. The Centos team wants to do 100% binary compatibility. Then any problem is upstream's fault. They are not like Oracle who can afford to leech off Redhat and hire their own engineers to do some tinkering on the side too. And what is with all that I will switch to Ubuntu, I am switching to Ubuntu and all of you better do the same? Why is there need for sensationalism? If you want to go, then go. There is no need to alarm other users with doom prophecies. With CR repo (created only month or two ago) there is viable way to receive important updates. +1 If things complicate more on security front, CR can become enabled by default or update repo for current minor version will be populated with appropriate security fixes (my view, can not say for devs). I would sincerely like to see number of security updates that are not in CR, and number released to CR repo, so we can deal with facts rather then I haven't seen any updates for a while and I am convinced that every distro *must* have large number of security updates mentality. Every distro DOES have a large number of security updates. The real biggie is how many of them are remote root exploits and for those who provide shell access, how many of those are local root/privilege exploits. That's a HEALTHY mentality if you have Internet facing boxes or you have secrets/confidential stuff that you want to keep from other departments/colleagues. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] What happened to 6.1
On Sunday, October 30, 2011 04:31 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Craig Whitecraigwh...@azapple.com wrote: /me is puzzled. You spelt it correctly. Maybe not so keen on learning the intricacies of Debian and the 'Debian way'. Linux is still Linux and while there is some learning curve, it does tend to broaden one's knowledge base. I gave up on learning everything there is to know a long time ago and try to be more selective now. Learning a different way to accomplish the same thing just isn't that appealing. Especially when there are whole large books of obscure details involved, and all of that stuff that only anaconda and whatever equivalent debian/ubuntu use really understands but you have to deal with afterwards... Yeah, never got my head around preseed and its DEFICIENCIES. Like no lvm over mdraid support. Although that might have been solved now in debian-installer. Oh, and they only recently got multi-arch support i think or are they still working on it? Speaking of Ubuntu, yeah, Ubuntu has nice big repositories but not all the packages are Canonical supported and so you can get stuff that are raw deals. Yup, real good reasons to move to Ubuntu LTS ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] What happened to 6.1
On Sunday, October 30, 2011 08:38 PM, William Warren wrote: Or move to another distro that has timely security updates and long term support like Centos. What...Ubuntu LTS? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] What happened to 6.1
On Saturday, October 29, 2011 04:36 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: It's a bad thing if you think clones should exist at all. Realistically, we would all probably be better off jumping ship the day of the fedora/EL split, but I've just been too lazy to learn to spell apt-get. /me is puzzled. You spelt it correctly. Maybe not so keen on learning the intricacies of Debian and the 'Debian way'. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Samba + Openldap
On Tuesday, October 25, 2011 11:38 PM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: Samba 4 is currently not yet in a state where it can replace existing production deployments. [1] [1] http://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba4#Current_Status That is the official story - but try it - it works *BETTER* than an NT4 Samba 3.x domain. Seriously, really. Recent Samba 4 builds *are* in production at several sites. It works. http://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba4/HOWTO Note that Samba 4 is best discussed on the technical list, not yet on the users list. /me salutes the white mice that will make samba4 better and completely ready to take over the Windows AD service. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Samba + Openldap
On Wednesday, October 26, 2011 10:16 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Wed, 2011-10-26 at 07:57 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: On Tuesday, October 25, 2011 11:38 PM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: Samba 4 is currently not yet in a state where it can replace existing production deployments. [1] [1] http://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba4#Current_Status That is the official story - but try it - it works *BETTER* than an NT4 Samba 3.x domain. Seriously, really. Recent Samba 4 builds *are* in production at several sites. It works. http://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba4/HOWTO Note that Samba 4 is best discussed on the technical list, not yet on the users list. /me salutes the white mice that will make samba4 better and completely ready to take over the Windows AD service. You can already have a mix of Samba 4 and Windows 2008R2 domain controllers in the same domain. I know...but I wanna not have to have any Windows AD. If you create an S3 domain you face the grisly prospects of having to upgrade that domain to an S4/AD domain someday. Which is *not* fun. Thanks. I'll stick with the current Windows 2000 AD until samba4 is ready! ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Fried Email Server! Perl Problem
On Wednesday, October 19, 2011 06:40 AM, Jack Fredrikson wrote: From: John R Piercepie...@hogranch.com To: centos@centos.org Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 4:45 PM Subject: Re: [CentOS] Fried Email Server! Perl Problem On 10/18/11 1:16 PM, Jack Fredrikson wrote: @40004e9ddbd81c826894 Can't load '/usr/lib64/perl5/5.8.8/x86_64-linux-thread-multi/auto/DB_File/DB_File.so' for module DB_File: libdb-4.3.so: failed to map segment from shared object: Cannot allocate memory at /usr/lib64/perl5/5.8.8/x86_64-linux-thread-multi/XSLoader.pm line 70. How do I do that? I don't even know which program is complaining here! What does it do on line 70 of XSLoader.pm? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 5.2 beta relased
On Monday, October 10, 2011 03:23 AM, Rajagopal Swaminathan wrote: Greetings, http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/red-hat-enterprise-linux-62-beta-is-out-now/9686 Thanks for taking us back in time. :-D ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Kerberos auth
On Thursday, October 06, 2011 08:52 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: On Oct 6, 2011, at 3:38 AM, Bazybaz...@gmail.com wrote: I'm thinking of implementing centralized authentication using Kerberos on 48 servers, all Linux. I have no Active Directory. Can you please point me out to where I should RTFM :-) maybe some of you have tips or tutorials for me. Sorry, missed your email from 03:38, so I've also missed earlier responses. However, other than Kerberos, you might also consider openLDAP. Hopefully, the tools have *slightly* matured since '06 What about opendj? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Choosing a CentOS version
On Tuesday, October 04, 2011 02:17 PM, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote: On 10/4/11, m.r...@5-cent.usm.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Note that the above is true of every single o/s: for example, I think Windows XP is approaching EoL, while Internet Exploder 6 is *past* that (and there was much rejoicing). IIRC WinXP is already EoL'd for general end users but still a couple of years for those on extended commercial support. up to 2014 and only SP3. Sp2 and older are EOL. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] innovation of micro$oft...
On Saturday, October 01, 2011 02:22 PM, lancebaynes87 wrote: http://chrome.blogspot.com/2011/09/problems-with-microsoft-security.html It was just an accident, or not, mr. micro$oft? ...f*ck you.. I don't think this chap will fit in here... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] This doesn't make sense
On Monday, September 26, 2011 06:40 PM, Lamar Owen wrote: If it's not supported it shouldn't be enabled and easily (ab)used. This is part of the reason you have to add a boot argument to get CentOS to do a version upgrade; it's known to not work properly, and thus is semi-hidden. Now that's pounding Ubuntu properly. But it will fall on deaf ears. Complain on the list and they will tell you that it is YOUR fault because you did not read the documentation or bother to google how to dist-upgrade before doing 'apt-get dist-upgrade'. With such devs, where's the 'community' or who is the 'community'? If that's what some folks here want over too tired to communicate devs, be our guest eh Lamar? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] This doesn't make sense
On Saturday, September 24, 2011 03:13 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: On Friday, September 23, 2011 02:35:40 PM Craig White wrote: I moved to Ubuntu on my own server, some of my customers servers as has my employer. This is not a Ubuntu list. I have had my share of problems with more than one of the LTS Ubuntu distributions, more than I have had with CentOS. Dist-upgrade has broken more things, in my experience with several versions, than I care to detail. Ah...you're supposed to use do-release-upgrade and not 'apt dist-upgrade' Ubuntu ain't Debian. It's something worse and requires uber hacks to get around crap. Them uber hacks are loaded in do-release-upgrade. Pound Ubuntu properly pal. Giving examples of unsupported processes ain't pounding it properly. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Finding i/o bottleneck
On Wednesday, September 21, 2011 09:33 PM, Nicolas Ross wrote: In the meen time, I'd still like to find a tool to know what files are requeted to the filesystem and what ones are being waited for... atop and iotop are tools that do that...when the kernel has been appropriately patched or the kernel is of an appropriate version... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Ekiga - camera
On Thursday, September 22, 2011 01:55 AM, Johan Vermeulen wrote: dear All, when first installing CentOs some 6 months ago, I noticed this strange thing called Ekiga. You need an ILS server/service or a sip server to make ekiga useful. ILS is going/has gone the way of the dodo...so any sip client that supports video should do. If ekiga does not work, try others. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] This doesn't make sense
On Thursday, September 22, 2011 12:50 AM, Craig White wrote: I don't have to worry about 'long term support' Cause there is none. Ubuntu != Debian No LTS? - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LTS For Ubuntu's definition of 'support'. It is in no way comparable to what you can get in previous Centos releases. It is 'comparable' to CEntos 6 - none ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] This doesn't make sense
On Thursday, September 22, 2011 07:00 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Christopher Chan christopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk wrote: No LTS? - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LTS For Ubuntu's definition of 'support'. It is in no way comparable to what you can get in previous Centos releases. It is 'comparable' to CEntos 6 - none Errr, what? Apt-get is still happily getting updates, and without any fiddling around with temporary changes to recommended-but-not-default repositories. Errr, like not fixing functional breakage even though the package is in a current LTS release and even though patches that work were provided by others. eg: Hardy - pidgin which lost YM capabilities. Backports like the big ones RH did for C5 do not exist in any Ubuntu release. So please, do not ever compare Ubuntu LTS with RHEL. Ubuntu LTS is a joke. Of course, currently Centos 6 is a joke too but the landscape is probably going to change very soon. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ekiga
Hadi, Forget it. I suspect you would have to upgrade a whole load of libraries and if it were you doing it, you will break your system beyond recognition. Christopher On Monday, September 19, 2011 12:48 PM, hadi motamedi wrote: Dear All I have installed Asterisk on my centos 5.0 and I have two other centos 6.0 and centos 5.6 with ekiga sip client. The centos 6.0 can make successful sip calls but centos 5.6 cannot. Among the Asterisk logs, I found that the centos 6.0 has ekiga 3.2.6 but centos 5.6 has ekiga 2.0.2 . How can I install/upgrade my older ekiga? Thank you ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ekiga
On Monday, September 19, 2011 03:30 PM, hadi motamedi wrote: On 9/19/11, Christopher Chanchristopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk wrote: Hadi, Forget it. I suspect you would have to upgrade a whole load of libraries and if it were you doing it, you will break your system beyond recognition. Thank you very much for your help. You mean it is better to just rely on centos 6.0 and have all clients running it as well? If you want them all running the same version, then yes, just go centos 6 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ekiga
On Monday, September 19, 2011 06:30 PM, hadi motamedi wrote: Thank you very much for your help. Excuse me, do we have other sip clients rather than ekiga that I can give them a try? The ekiga 2.0.2 is too old to work with my new Asterisk version on my centos 5.0 . I will upgrade my other clients to centos 6.0 (as you told me) but for unknown reasons this version of Asterisk does not work on my centos 6.0 but just my centos 5.0 so I need to keep my Asterisk server still running centos 5.0 but I will upgrade all of my other clients to centos 6.0 to make use of this new version of ekiga 3.2.6 . How about searching for sip clients? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] sarg
On Monday, September 19, 2011 06:34 AM, John R Pierce wrote: On 09/18/11 2:17 PM, madu...@gmail.com wrote: I am running squid + sarg, how can I change the ip-address in the generated report into username? The users are free to surf the web anonymously, no need to provide a login or any authentication to the proxy. without requiring a proxy login, how would the squid server know who is running the browser at a given IP address to do this? It might be possible with AD + kerberos/ntlm to do it in a SLO manner...so not anonymous but also without requiring users to login or authenticate themselves. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Upgrade from 5.6 = 5.7
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 08:21 PM, Always Learning wrote: The integrity of the data can be divided into two aspects: ensuring the data remains constant (unaltered) while stored, which is the responsibility of the operation system and the database software, and the data's integrity from an application perspective. Junk-in always causes Junk-out even when using 'non-dumb' databases :-) Did you mentor DJB? :-D ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Upgrade from 5.6 = 5.7
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 09:08 AM, John R Pierce wrote: On 09/14/11 6:03 PM, Thomas Dukes wrote: One day, if I have time, I want to programme a complete commercial accounts systems using HTML, PHP and MySQL. Its a piece of cake to do well (meaning easily) but a little time consuming. The only difficulty I can think of is printing things locally. I love the challenge. I'm a hacker from way back. While this sort of stuff isn't humorous now days and since I've 'grown up', I understand why. Still, I love it!! an accounting system thats in plain HTML would be incredibly clunky to use. you really want to do this in ajax/jquery or whatever so its more interactive also, I'd suggest using postgresql for better data integrity, and anything-but-php (Python?) for better webside security. How about perl with postgresql? sql-ledger - double entry goodness. Sure shorts out my brain when I try to contemplate creating the COA, ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Dedup (again)
On Friday, September 16, 2011 11:58 AM, Fajar Priyanto wrote: Hi all, Back in March someone asked about deduplication in Centos and I replied I'm using LessFS. I want to report that my overall experience is that I have performance issue up to the point that I would like to abandon it. The OP was asking http://www.opendedup.org/ How is it? ZFS, ZFS, ZFS ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] fax over ip?
On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 02:32 PM, hadi motamedi wrote: On 9/13/11, Christopher Chanchristopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk wrote: On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 11:51 AM, hadi motamedi wrote: Thank you very much for your help. I have experience with Asterisk but on my Debian not on my centos. It is serving as DECT server for telephony calls. It can provide sip calls as well. Do you mean it can event provide fax over ip? You're using asterisk with telephony hardware but you cannot think that one out!? Any blinking pots line will do fax (the possible speeds will vary according to the quality of the line yes) and all you need is to find a way to interface your 'fax' with it. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Excuse me, I mean fax over ip but not fax over modem. Do you mean sip calls through my Asterisk can support for fax over ip as well? Nevermind. You interface 'normal' phones with sip and not sip phones with lines. There is a fax over ip standard but I have not looked into it much as no provider offered it when I was looking for it last year. Have fun. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] fax over ip?
Do us a favour. Please stop posting here and go find a fax over ip provider if you can. If you actually manage to find one, ask that provider for the software. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] fax over ip?
On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 11:51 AM, hadi motamedi wrote: Thank you very much for your help. I have experience with Asterisk but on my Debian not on my centos. It is serving as DECT server for telephony calls. It can provide sip calls as well. Do you mean it can event provide fax over ip? You're using asterisk with telephony hardware but you cannot think that one out!? Any blinking pots line will do fax (the possible speeds will vary according to the quality of the line yes) and all you need is to find a way to interface your 'fax' with it. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] OT: help with email list reading programs w/ best features to read the centos and other lists that can filter people etc
On Wednesday, August 31, 2011 12:46 PM, R - elists wrote: we need to filter out various peoples posts on this list would some kind soul(s) please direct us in locating the best email list reading programs w/ the best features to read the centos and other lists. It's not an email program but I think it has the best filtering capabilities of all - the brain. the CentOS list signal/noise ratio is so bad that we need something better than just outlook like clients or whatever Huh? What signal/noise ratio? I don't see any of the usual can't be bother to read manuals/to use google suspects...unless you're complaining about our most recent top poster... appropriate windows and linux recommendations would be most appreciated How about mutt as a client? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Upstart file format
On Tuesday, August 30, 2011 09:51 AM, Michael D. Berger wrote: Where can I find documentation on the new format of the files in /etc/init.d/? You mean /etc/event.d? Upstart...I thought Centos 6 uses systemd? Thanks, Mike. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Upstart file format
On Tuesday, August 30, 2011 10:06 AM, Always Learning wrote: On Mon, 2011-08-29 at 22:03 -0400, Scott Robbins wrote: It does seem, though this may be my age and grouchiness speaking, that much of the development used to be done by people who thought like system administrators, whereas these days, it's done by people who think like smartphone users. Much of Fedora seems aimed (and nothing wrong with this) at the less experienced user with a laptop using DHCP, but the trouble is that RH seems to blindly put in the things aimed at said user. Dumbing down ? Yeah...as opposed to making more convenient/efficient to use ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Upstart file format
On Tuesday, August 30, 2011 10:16 AM, Michael D. Berger wrote: On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 09:57:22 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: On Tuesday, August 30, 2011 09:51 AM, Michael D. Berger wrote: Where can I find documentation on the new format of the files in /etc/init.d/? You mean /etc/event.d? Upstart...I thought Centos 6 uses systemd? Thanks, Mike. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos On my new Centos 6, if you type: man init it mentions: init - Upstart process management daemon Also, if you look at a file in /etc/init.d/, you can see that there is a new file format. It is the documentation of this new format that I would like to read. I'm sure the RHEL 6 manuals will have it covered somewhere. Have you taken a look there? /me starts flogging /etc/event.d on his Hardy Upstart ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Off topic list for centos please?
On Sunday, August 28, 2011 09:59 PM, Always Learning wrote: On Sun, 2011-08-28 at 14:39 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote: heh, I've been to belgium 8 times in the last 5 years. Its never failed to rain on me ( even snow one in a while ). A CentOS Conference would be nice, its been brought up often. If you want to help make it happen - come join the centos-promo list and lets see if we can do something. You, purposely ?, omitted the time of the year when it rained :-) Snow is unlikely in June, July and August in the northern hemisphere. Maybe he meant hail :p ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Apache Changing IPtables C 5.6 via Apache
On Sunday, August 21, 2011 08:46 PM, Craig White wrote: On Sun, 2011-08-21 at 02:00 +0100, Always Learning wrote: On Sun, 2011-08-21 at 02:50 +0200, Patrick Lists wrote: Maybe SELinux blocks Apache from writing to /etc/sysconfig/iptables? Have you looked at ? These apps seem to offer a similar solution. I'm not using SELinux at the moment simply because I don't have the time to understand it. I'm a self-taught Linuxist. I believe it uses the 'labels' inherent with every file description block. With Craig's SU suggestion, I believe my attack detection system will successfully block the attacker's IP address on a server and for a selected ports only. I will look at fail2ban and denyhosts and see how they can help. I'm going to present another view of what I think is a larger picture. What you seem to want to do is to block host access (TCP possibly UDP) based upon certain GET/POST activities on your web server. Thus you are attempting to create a curtain based upon things that have already failed and eventually you will get a huge IPTABLES filter that will slow up all traffic while parsing the rules. I would suspect that this would also be the same system that is also the web server - thus you will slow down the very system you want to be fast. The entire predicate is reactive. You would also need to have a system to expire those rules after a period of time. It's all a waste of energy focused on giving you satisfaction that you are at least doing something to block script kiddies. is ipset stable yet? Maybe he is better off with two redundant OpenBSD boxes using pf to protect his boxes and his apache instances scripting them bsd boxen firewall rules. /me loses the 'simple and works' challenge ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] SAS storage arrays, C6, and SES lights
OpenIndiana has all that builtin... /me ducks. - Original Message - From: John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com To: centos@centos.org Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 10:03 PM Subject: Re: [CentOS] SAS storage arrays, C6, and SES lights On 08/16/11 12:59 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: ie. you need a daemon/tool that monitors status of disks, and keeps the Linux disk- ses slot mapping up-to-date. i'm amazed this doesn't exist. isn't this a really common problem with storage arrays? -- john r pierceN 37, W 122 santa cruz ca mid-left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] drop manitu.net
On Thursday, August 11, 2011 11:28 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: That conversation would make sense if there were any spam blockers that cared about the collateral damage to unrelated hosts that happen to be So, in your experience, there aren't *any*, they all block an entire range? If so, why is that a valid method for blocking spam? I haven't done extensive research, but there's not really a good way to do it at all, much less correctly. Man, this is getting to sound more and more like SPAM-L. Outblaze Ltd, before they sold their message business to IBM, did the right thing. Where net blocks are proven to be entirely spew engines, the whole net block gets blocked, persistent abusive ones get firewalled. Said net block would be released a year later for review in case it had been reassigned. Single mail servers with spammy domains and clean ones get 'whitelisted' in that the ip is not stuffed in the block rules but the domains are. in an IP range that they don't like. I don't think you'll find any. And it has always been that way since the start of those businesses. Yes, 15 years ago. I reiterate: it has been *completely* wrong for about 10 years. It was always wrong. That doesn't mean it won't happen. Whether it is wrong depends on the black list maintainer imho. Some black lists are very clear in their criteria. Whole country. eg: China. Don't like that? Don't use it. That's what you want? Good for you. When a black list starts doing things inconsistently, then maybe you can label them wrong. Maybe the Centos mail admins might want to take another look into manitu.net... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] dual sound
On Saturday, July 30, 2011 03:29 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Les Mikesell wrote: On 7/29/2011 1:22 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: And I've had the external speakers jacked in both in the front headphones jack, and the traditional one in the back, and sound comes both out of the external speakers and a speaker inside the machine. That's usually a hardware thing where plugging something into the headphone jack breaks the connections to the speakers. I know. That's why I mentioned what I'd done, and that I was confused, because that's the result I expected, and I'm not getting it. I *think* I've got it: my manager suggested pavucontrol, but the only place I found that was a repo he'd rather I didn't use. Then I tried playing, again, with kmix from the panel, and this time I went to configure it, and tried adding the control for IEC958I; I mute that, and it seems to be quiet, and the speakers are working. mark system-config-soundcard is too complicated, I guess... What happened to the screaming and pulseaudio bashing? This is so serene... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] VLAN's
On Friday, July 22, 2011 10:55 PM, Jennifer Botten wrote: Hi Julio, -A FORWARD -i eth2.2 -s 192.168.1.0/24 -d 10.30.4.28 -p udp -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i eth2.2 -s 192.168.1.0/24 -d 192.168.0.0/24 -p tcp -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i eth1 -s 192.168.0.0/24 -d 192.168.1.0/24 -p tcp -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i eth3 -s 10.30.4.28 -o eth2.2 -p udp -j ACCEPT -A POSTROUTING -m helper --helper sip -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED dumb question but do you have ip forwarding enabled? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] SPAM on the List
On Monday, July 18, 2011 09:19 PM, Stephen Harris wrote: SPAM-L is that way == oh wait, it's dead... Maybe we can keep discussions about blackhat, incompetent networks, about SMTP, open proxies/relays, honeypots and what have you off this list? Just limit it to sendmail/postfix/exim configuration if you have to discuss these things but please leave everything else outside in NANAE/your favourite spitting pot. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] SPAM on the List
On Monday, July 18, 2011 11:29 PM, 夜神 岩男 wrote: On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 22:17 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: On Monday, July 18, 2011 09:19 PM, Stephen Harris wrote: SPAM-L is that way == oh wait, it's dead... Maybe we can keep discussions about blackhat, incompetent networks, about SMTP, open proxies/relays, honeypots and what have you off this list? Just limit it to sendmail/postfix/exim configuration if you have to discuss these things but please leave everything else outside in NANAE/your favourite spitting pot. You wouldn't be insinuating that [CentOS] SPAM on the list has become SPAM on the list now, would you? Kinda hard...I mean, SPAM is edible you know and I don't remember being able to transport SPAM over email. But it has become offtopic and is no longer relevant to Centos. We don't need another SPAM-L/NANAE/whatever ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] cent0s-6 and virtualbox
On Monday, July 18, 2011 01:52 AM, Michel Donais wrote: I want to get a look at Cents-6 The computer is a portable Thinkpad T-42 The base OS is Windows XP Professionnal I tried to use both Microsoft Virtual PC and Oracle Virtual Box with the same result I boot from the CD (wich have been burned from an ISO downloaded from a Centos -6 repo). The version is CentOS-6.0-i386-bin-DVD.iso With each virtual machine I get this result at the beginning of the installation: This kernel requires the following features not present on the cpu pae Unable to boot - please use a kernel appropriate for your CPU I undeerstand that perhaps the computer processor is too old. But is there a patch to overpass this problem? You need to have a cpu that has a hardware visor. Otherwise, the only other option will be qemu which is slow. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] cent0s-6 and virtualbox
On Monday, July 18, 2011 09:32 AM, Christopher Chan wrote: On Monday, July 18, 2011 01:52 AM, Michel Donais wrote: I want to get a look at Cents-6 The computer is a portable Thinkpad T-42 The base OS is Windows XP Professionnal I tried to use both Microsoft Virtual PC and Oracle Virtual Box with the same result I boot from the CD (wich have been burned from an ISO downloaded from a Centos -6 repo). The version is CentOS-6.0-i386-bin-DVD.iso With each virtual machine I get this result at the beginning of the installation: This kernel requires the following features not present on the cpu pae Unable to boot - please use a kernel appropriate for your CPU I undeerstand that perhaps the computer processor is too old. But is there a patch to overpass this problem? You need to have a cpu that has a hardware visor. Otherwise, the only other option will be qemu which is slow. Oops, taking that back, virtualbox is not like kvm or xen. It looks like that it does not need a hardware hypervisor. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] firewall?
On Monday, July 18, 2011 01:14 PM, hadi motamedi wrote: Thank you very much for your reply. Can you please let me know what is the centos mailing list for basic users like me? Try ubuntu-us...@lists.ubuntu.com They always have spoon and milk powder ready and then some. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] firewall?
On Monday, July 18, 2011 01:30 PM, hadi motamedi wrote: On 7/18/11, Christopher Chanchristopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk wrote: On Monday, July 18, 2011 01:14 PM, hadi motamedi wrote: Thank you very much for your reply. Can you please let me know what is the centos mailing list for basic users like me? Try ubuntu-us...@lists.ubuntu.com They always have spoon and milk powder ready and then some. It is very hard for me to miss technical support from you gentlemen and centos experts. Please let me to just listen to the list. Thank you again Why don't you just buy a book, read it, experiment on a spare computer? You can listen all you like but it will do you squat unless you actually try and think about why you have been given a certain command or piece of advice. It will forever be just 'theory'. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] really large file systems with centos
On Thursday, July 14, 2011 11:20 PM, Devin Reade wrote: Two thoughts: 1. Others have already inquired as to your motivation to move away from ZFS/Solaris. If it is just the hardware licensing aspect, you might want to consider ZFS on FreeBSD. (I understand that unlike the Linux ZFS implementation, the FreeBSD one is in-kernel.) I would not touch ZFS on FreeBSD with a ten-foot pole. I don't see a problem with using Nexenta/OpenIndiana but then I only have twelve disks in my setup currently ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] really large file systems with centos
On Saturday, July 16, 2011 04:24 AM, Devin Reade wrote: --On Friday, July 15, 2011 10:54:35 PM +0800 Christopher Chan christopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk wrote: I would not touch ZFS on FreeBSD with a ten-foot pole. Would you care to elaborate as to why? And specifically if it is particular to FreeBSD or ZFS or the combination. This is particular to the ZFS implementation on FreeBSD. It is not stable, please check its list. However, I have not bothered checking on things within the last year or so after I went with OpenIndiana. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Suggest Hardware Raid Controller Card
On Tuesday, July 12, 2011 04:27 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: John R Pierce wrote: On 07/11/11 6:10 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: Wait, wait. So using SSDs as FAST writing disks is a load of hogwash? You still need stuff like umem nvram cards? What's the deal with things like Fusion IO then? the high end enterprise SSDs have supercaps to give them time to flush their write buffers to flash in case of power failure events. but these drives are way more expensive than the $200 120GB stuff you'll find in the whitebox market. the whitebox stuff has fast writes because they buffer them, but in case of power failure with pending write operations, all bets are off on your data integrity. If I understood correctly, SSD's, even whitebox are good to place ext3/4 journaling files on keeping ext3/4 partitions on HDD's. Right? I would appreciate real-case scenario advice for cheaper drives, for home and small business applications. Thanks Depends on the flash chips used. SLC flash is safer than MLC flash...but by how much I do not know. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Celebrating Centos 6.0 Day World-wide
On Monday, July 11, 2011 10:03 PM, Brunner, Brian T. wrote: Ljubomir The Wise wrote: Short version (I am hungry): Experience (19 years of Windows phone support and 5 years of Linux administration and usage as a desktop surrounded by Windows users) says that in order to convert (reluctant) Windows user you have to fully replicate Windows environment with compatible Linux Apps. Period. +googolplex! DirectX games, facebook, facebook games, other games, skype, garage-band, and many many more. Many of these *can* be tweaked into running under Linux, by somebody who knows how. My wife will *never* know how. Yum install World of Warcraft (or whatever game, which looks for the game installed on your NTFS file system, downloads anything needed, configures and leaves a ready-to-click-and-play WoW on the Linux side) or forget it, you're not ready to push Windows off the desktop. I hear that WoW is going the way of the dodo due to lack of creativity there. Maybe you have some other more pressing example likeminesweeper? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Celebrating Centos 6.0 Day World-wide
On Monday, July 11, 2011 11:09 PM, Brunner, Brian T. wrote: centos-boun...@centos.org wrote: On Monday, July 11, 2011 10:03 PM, Brunner, Brian T. wrote: Ljubomir The Wise wrote: Short version (I am hungry): Experience (19 years of Windows phone support and 5 years of Linux administration and usage as a desktop surrounded by Windows users) says that in order to convert (reluctant) Windows user you have to fully replicate Windows environment with compatible Linux Apps. Period. +googolplex! DirectX games, facebook, facebook games, other games, skype, garage-band, and many many more. Many of these *can* be tweaked into running under Linux, by somebody who knows how. My wife will *never* know how. Yum install World of Warcraft (or whatever game, which looks for the game installed on your NTFS file system, downloads anything needed, configures and leaves a ready-to-click-and-play WoW on the Linux side) or forget it, you're not ready to push Windows off the desktop. I hear that WoW is going the way of the dodo due to lack of creativity Those voices aren't technologically savvy. WoW is still growing. there. Maybe you have some other more pressing example likeminesweeper? ___ I am at a loss parsing your reply as anything other than ignorant derision. Why do you think minesweeper is more pressing? Sorry, forgot the smiley! But having WoW or whatever on Linux ain't going to make any difference. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Suggest Hardware Raid Controller Card
- Original Message - From: John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com To: centos@centos.org Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 12:34 AM Subject: Re: [CentOS] Suggest Hardware Raid Controller Card On 07/11/11 9:30 AM, Drew wrote: Which is funny because Intel's SASUC8i (rebranded LSI3082E-R) is true hardware RAID which I recently picked up*new* for $150. They don't do RAID-5/6 or have a BBU but IMO you don't need a BBU for RAID-0/1/10. you want BBU (or flash-backed cache) if you want write-back cache, and not mandate write-through. This is quite independent of the RAID type. It greatly speeds up 'committed' random writes such as are generated by a transactional database. Who needs bbu when you can get an SSD to work with your ext3/ext4 that is sitting on an md raid 1/0/nested 1+0/10? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Suggest Hardware Raid Controller Card
- Original Message - From: John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com To: centos@centos.org Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 8:34 AM Subject: Re: [CentOS] Suggest Hardware Raid Controller Card On 07/11/11 5:16 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: Who needs bbu when you can get an SSD to work with your ext3/ext4 that is sitting on an md raid 1/0/nested 1+0/10? lI hope your SSD isn't write buffering on commits. many (most?) consumer priced SSDs can corrupt file systems badly on power failures during active file allocation operations, and drop pending database writes on the floor. If an SSD doesn't do write buffering, its brutally slow relative to its read speeds. Only the more expensive enterprise drives have 'supercap' or other power backups for emergency buffer flushing in case of abrupt power shutdowns. Wait, wait. So using SSDs as FAST writing disks is a load of hogwash? You still need stuff like umem nvram cards? What's the deal with things like Fusion IO then? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 supported hardware
On Sunday, July 10, 2011 12:24 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: Christopher Chan wrote: On Saturday, July 09, 2011 10:35 PM, Lamar Owen wrote: On Friday, July 08, 2011 12:01:36 PM Christopher Chan wrote: Professional Wireless Router? That knocked me off my seat :-D. 'Wireless router' has become associated in my mind with that device you put in homes. So what professional wireless routers are out there? Cisco has a few; see the ISR G2 1941W for one that is a 'cut above' the former Linksys product lines. Larger Cisco ISR's (2900 and 3900 series) support a network module that acts as a supervisor of sorts for Cisco access points, too. /me shrugs. I am happy as a fish in water with them Aerohive 340 APs and HP 2910al PoE+ switches. Lifetime warranty, downloadable firmware for the switches and the access points have proven to be pain free once setup. No blooming uber expensive support contract to deal with. Those can be marked as Office applications, but not the professional. What are you blabbering about? What Office applications? Professional link Today would be those that can pass 150Mbps of *real* throughtput with full routing up to the distance of 30km, or 75Mbps up to 55km. And it can be done under 1000 EUR ($1500) without large batteries, solar chargers or similar accessory gear. And those routers/AP's that are rated 300Mbps and have 100Mbps LAN and weak CPU. heh. Excuse me? We are talking about WIFI and not just wireless 'wan' links right? In any case, I suspect that the Aerohive 340 can do uber km too with a change to directional antennae and other stuff to boost signal quality. BTW, if you are implying that the Aerohive only has FastEthernet ports, you are dead wrong. They have dual Gigabit ports, have done 20MiB/sec transfers on a single host, support up to 40 clients simultaneously and these were the results in the UAT. A bit short of their claim of 60 clients simultaneously but that is probably human error...we did not have 60 persons to simultaneously click the file download but we managed to get 40 going at the same time. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Celebrating Centos 6.0 Day World-wide
On Sunday, July 10, 2011 03:46 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: Also worth mentioning is that there is Kaspersky for Linux Workstations and Servers, and even for the Mac: http://www.kaspersky.com/applications_list Aw, nobody put in a word for NOD32 from Eset? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Celebrating Centos 6.0 Day World-wide
On Sunday, July 10, 2011 09:52 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: Christopher Chan wrote: On Sunday, July 10, 2011 03:46 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: Also worth mentioning is that there is Kaspersky for Linux Workstations and Servers, and even for the Mac: http://www.kaspersky.com/applications_list Aw, nobody put in a word for NOD32 from Eset? Well, I place it between Kaspersky KIS and above the rest. Some people do love it because of the ease of cracking it's license :-D . Really? Talk about irony. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Celebrating Centos 6.0 Day World-wide
On Sunday, July 10, 2011 05:50 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: I must be the only one keeping entire/beggining of the conversation in mind why replying. Either that or I am nutz. Which one would you have us believe? :p But seriously, one thing you have to understand is that threads always drift. People have different takes on what it is that is in the way of the mass adoption of the Linux desktop. Everybody has their pet app that would singlehandedly put Linux on the desktop. Like 3D Pinball. /me ducks. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Working with the upstream vendor
On Sunday, July 10, 2011 10:41 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: The actual point I wanted to make is not what western world has done to my country, that has been, is now (Libya for instance) and will be, and I am not moping about that. But looking from the other side of the presented truth (by corporate media) I have witnessed deliberate and opened lies from every single news media from *every* country including mine and from politicians and corporations, so perception that (even) Red Hat is not trying to undermine those he sees as enemies/competitors is for me false. I hope this clears things a bit and convince you I was focusing on deception and not the any political agenda. Redhat does not try to undermine enemies/competitors. They get open source and GPL and they have an entire business model based on these two concepts. They do not need to undermine anybody because that is impossible with open source and especially so with software under GPL. Redhat has gone BEYOND the GPL. The GPL only requires that you make the source and build scripts available to those that you distribute to. Nor are you required to make the source/build scripts available for free. The fact that you can get your grubby hands on the source rpms without even downloading RHEL let alone use/install RHEL is testimony to the fact that Redhat does not need to and has never tried to undermine any would be enemy/competitor. Think about it. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Working with the upstream vendor
On Sunday, July 10, 2011 11:31 PM, Always Learning wrote: On Sun, 2011-07-10 at 17:29 +0200, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: Hey, you are on my side. We are Europeans so we should be bothers AND we both like Centos :-) OH yes, you lot should be BOTHERS. :-D ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Working with the upstream vendor
On Sunday, July 10, 2011 11:23 PM, Always Learning wrote: Christopher Chan wrote: Redhat has gone BEYOND the GPL. The GPL only requires that you make the source and build scripts available to those that you distribute to. Nor are you required to make the source/build scripts available for free. The fact that you can get your grubby hands on the source rpms without even downloading RHEL let alone use/install RHEL is testimony to the fact that Redhat does not need to and has never tried to undermine any would be enemy/competitor. Think about it. 1. Red Hat, commercially, has to survive as a financially viable entity. Meaning it must make a profit. 2. Competitors especially large ones like Oracle potentially, if not actually, threaten Red Hat's profit making ability. The potential or actual damage to Red Hat's profits may be small but the more established Oracle's Red Hat Linux becomes, the greater the financial damage to the essential profit making ability of Red Hat. Reduced profits at Red Hat can adversely affect Red Hat's operation and inevitably Centos will suffer to our detriment. 3. Therefore, contrary to your assertion Redhat does not need to and has never tried to undermine any would be enemy/competitor. Think about it. Red Hat must always consider how to undermine any would be enemy/competitor because, ultimately, Red Hat's own survival depends on exactly that type of action. No profits = No Red Hat. Redhat closing their bugzilla to clients only or merging all patches to the kernel they maintain for RHEL into one and sans comments is undermining the competition? Oracle can still get the source rpm and rebuild the very same kernel that Redhat puts out there. Redhat making Oracle do their own legwork as respects kernel maintenance and finding/fixing bugs outside of Redhat knowledge is undermining the competition? You just don't get Redhat do you? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Celebrating Centos 6.0 Day World-wide
On Sunday, July 10, 2011 05:12 AM, John R. Dennison wrote: On Sat, Jul 09, 2011 at 02:05:26PM -0700, Craig White wrote: The reality is that applications are becoming more and more web based SAAS and as the costs of specific applications needed on specific platforms (ie, Quickbooks) rise, web based SAAS will replace them. The point is that for end users, the OS is eventually going to become irrelevant. Tell that to the gamers that drive computer sales and technology advances. /me rotfl. How big is the PC gaming market again? Compared to that of the console gaming market and other software markets. Oh, and the fact that crap like the Intel Atom have become rather popular. Where is the blooming mass market HMD? How many gamers play as depicted in .hack? Look at the blow gaming accessories such as joysticks, rudders and throttles have taken. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 supported hardware
On Saturday, July 09, 2011 10:35 PM, Lamar Owen wrote: On Friday, July 08, 2011 12:01:36 PM Christopher Chan wrote: Professional Wireless Router? That knocked me off my seat :-D. 'Wireless router' has become associated in my mind with that device you put in homes. So what professional wireless routers are out there? Cisco has a few; see the ISR G2 1941W for one that is a 'cut above' the former Linksys product lines. Larger Cisco ISR's (2900 and 3900 series) support a network module that acts as a supervisor of sorts for Cisco access points, too. /me shrugs. I am happy as a fish in water with them Aerohive 340 APs and HP 2910al PoE+ switches. Lifetime warranty, downloadable firmware for the switches and the access points have proven to be pain free once setup. No blooming uber expensive support contract to deal with. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 supported hardware
On Thursday, July 07, 2011 11:53 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: Lamar Owen wrote: The Apple Airport in an Intel Mac is Broadcom; many Intel Dell's have the option of Broadcom, which is typically less expensive than the 3945 or similar Intel wireless chipset. My Dell Inspiron 640m came with a Broadcom card; my Precision M65 had an Intel 3945 but has a Broadcom now (for other various reasons that are beyond the scope of the CentOS list). The one AMD laptop I had that had PCIe wifi had an Atheros chipset. but YMMV. Intel, Broadcom, Ralink and Realtek chips are mostly used only for Laptops. Any decent (professional) Wireless router will have Atheros based radio. And the are excellent Atheros open source drivers. Professional Wireless Router? That knocked me off my seat :-D. 'Wireless router' has become associated in my mind with that device you put in homes. So what professional wireless routers are out there? I have Aerohive 340 access points over here (uses Atheros btw) but I cannot seem to remember whether it supported routing but it does support tying profiles to vlans and a host of other stuff. From manufacturers, Winstron and Compex are most respected. This is from 7 years of professional experience. Let's see if we win the obscure wireless product awards ;) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Where can I download centos 6
On Friday, July 08, 2011 10:48 PM, Mark Bradbury wrote: Reading QA web site, fair estimate is it will take 2-3 days for us to be able to download, since there where last minute changes to some packages and sync to external mirrors should have started last night and should last for 2-3 days. Keep in mind this is only my estimate. right, there is a website with status updates, and Jeff and others are doing a great job at keeping it up to date (thanks!). http://qaweb.dev.centos.org/qa/dashboard This is what people were asking for, now we have it! So please, if you want to know about C6 go visit the website, but don't post here... thank you. Bollocks. this IS the only place to post to, as information is sorely lacking. Really this whole release cycle has been a complete balls up. the little information we have such as http://qaweb.dev.centos.org/qa has no history, and changed every week. now the you have posted some new information at http://qaweb.dev.centos.org/qa/dashboard of which I, and I would say most others, were unaware of, which implies that the release has been delayed yet again. For goodness sake I hope that the next release will be more transparent and professional. It really does not look good for CentOS and open source in general. ascendos is that way ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 supported hardware
On Saturday, July 09, 2011 12:48 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: Christopher Chan wrote: On Thursday, July 07, 2011 11:53 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: Lamar Owen wrote: The Apple Airport in an Intel Mac is Broadcom; many Intel Dell's have the option of Broadcom, which is typically less expensive than the 3945 or similar Intel wireless chipset. My Dell Inspiron 640m came with a Broadcom card; my Precision M65 had an Intel 3945 but has a Broadcom now (for other various reasons that are beyond the scope of the CentOS list). The one AMD laptop I had that had PCIe wifi had an Atheros chipset. but YMMV. Intel, Broadcom, Ralink and Realtek chips are mostly used only for Laptops. Any decent (professional) Wireless router will have Atheros based radio. And the are excellent Atheros open source drivers. Professional Wireless Router? That knocked me off my seat :-D. 'Wireless router' has become associated in my mind with that device you put in homes. So what professional wireless routers are out there? I have Aerohive 340 access points over here (uses Atheros btw) but I cannot seem to remember whether it supported routing but it does support tying profiles to vlans and a host of other stuff. There are Wireless Access points (without routing capability) and only one wireless radio, semi-routers with only one wireless radio but with rudimentary routing and firewall/NAT support (most Ubiquity products) and there are full fledged routers with one or multiple LAN and wireless radios cards. In the last group, most used is Mikrotik hardware with their RouterOS software that supports most of the routing protocols and extensive firewall/NAT/mangle capabilities. My favorite is StarOS software that runs on larger number of hardware platforms including regular PC's (as does RouterOS). There are other software/OS's but those 2 are, in my opinion, the best ones. Both of them support *only* Atheros chipsets. And when I say routing, I mean RIP, OSPF, OLSR, BGP... Bah, those for are sissies. I know of one chap who manually maintained the routing tables for checkpoint firewalls in a full mesh configuration and who had over 20 sites in that particular vpn network (works for a global conglomerate). Yes, I would be a sissy if I ever had to deploy a multi-site vpn network/multi-site network. :-P From manufacturers, Winstron and Compex are most respected. This is from 7 years of professional experience. Let's see if we win the obscure wireless product awards ;) I was refering to manufacturers of Atheros based radio cards, not routers. Sorry is I have not stated that clearly. OIC. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in CentOS 5.6?
On Tuesday, July 05, 2011 07:28 PM, James Hogarth wrote: If you're running a database on it, you might re-think using a journaled filesystem. For that, ext2 will be faster and much less prone to unrecoverable data loss. Did you mean EXT4, or in actual fact EXT2? I thought EXT4 was faster than EXT2? The optimum on an EXT basis for a filesystem that does not require journaling going forwards would be EXT4 with no journal... that way you get the benefit of extents etc without a journal slowing you down A better option than EXT2 ;) Test, test, and test again for your own particular case. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ext4 in CentOS 5.6?
On Tuesday, July 05, 2011 10:26 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: (I'm sharpening my axe for the Use ZFS, it's bulletproof discussion.) /me puts on asbestos suit...stares...switches to asbestos armor instead. HAHA, what's your take on ZFS then? We've been running ZFS on a few storage servers, both in the office and for our hosting clients for about 2 years now and all I can say it that it's rock solid. +1 Although I have seen screams from others on the opensolaris/openindiana lists I personally have not experienced them. With raidz2 (similar to RAID6) we've never had any data loss or corruption due to hard drive failure and long rebuilds. And if you use SSD for ZIL LARC2 cache, it's super fast. the same systems with EXT3 simply couldn't match the performance we got got from ZFS. I take it you limit your raidz2 arrays to a maximum of 9 drives? /me wonders what an md raid array with an ext3 fs that has its journal on an ssd in full data journal mode give in terms of performance. I would not give zfs the performance crown just yet. Have you tried using ext3 with an external journal on the ssd and ext3 on raid6? What kind of usage pattern do you have on those zfs filesystems? BUT, since we're not allowed to talk about anything else other than CentOS on this list people don't mention it. I find that this list is generally tolerant of offtopic but technical topics. What it does not like is flamewars made of posts that have zero technical merit. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Power-outage
On Saturday, July 02, 2011 09:42 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote: Jason Pyeron wrote: Could you (or anyone) suggest a cheap UPS? This is only a tiny server (HP MicroServer) on a home LAN. http://www.amazon.com/APC-Back-UPS-shutdown-software-UPS- BE350G/dp/B001985SWW/ Thanks, I'll look into that. I'm sure you are right, as I know nothing at all about power supplies. But surely computers actually use DC, so couldn't my torch-battery device just supply the PC components directly? You will either need many different batteries for the different voltages (1.2, 3.3, 5, 12, -12, -5) or a DC ATX power supply (not cheap and not very powerful until the 48V input variety) Surely one 12v battery would do? It is only meant to last for 30 seconds or so, so wouldn't reducing the voltage be easy enough? I repeat that I don't know what I'm talking about ... The PSU transforms incoming electricity to various voltages on multiple rails. You need more than just a 12V lead acid battery. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Power-outage
On Friday, July 01, 2011 11:46 PM, Brunner, Brian T. wrote: centos-boun...@centos.org wrote: On 7/1/2011 10:59 AM, Robert Heller wrote: APC UPSes are supported by apcupsd. Other brands, not so much. Some (read: cheaper models) have their own special protocol and don't include Linux support. These solutions are intended for the cheaper or otherwise 'unsupported' UPSes. It *sounds* like the OP does not need something smart and is probably looking for something cheap. And the APC Smart-UPS 750 units are not all that expensive either. Even the 1500VA units are a lot less expensive then they were 5-10 years ago. $250-$300 to protect $2000-$6000 worth of hardware is worth it in my book. To what extent does a UPS *protect* the hardware? Maintaining up-time during brief brown-outs is one thing I expect of a UPS, Orderly shutdown is another thing I expect of a UPS. *protection* of the PC from irregularity in the AC Mains by a UPS, however, I question. Rather, it seems, any power irregularity that would kill a PC by propagating through the PSU will also propagate through the UPS. PSUs must love Regular under voltage electricity and so too your data if the batteries of the UPS are anything to go by. Batteries died within two years on one particular circuit and the connected servers suffered while I was getting replacement batteries. Apparently one motherboard loved it so much that the thing would not POST anymore. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] iptables port forwarding
On Tuesday, June 28, 2011 04:05 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Christopher Chan wrote:
On Tuesday, June 28, 2011 02:38 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
John R Pierce wrote:
On 06/27/11 10:43 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
note that doesn't show all the pertinent info. I prefer `iptable -L
-vn`, and it still doesn't show the nat tables, you also need
`iptable -L -vn -t nat` to see those chains, and `iptable -L -vn -t
mangle` if you're using any mangle entries.
iptables-save is designed for iptables output.
sure, for saving to the startup scripts the commands I listed
above were to display the tables with full info... Without the -v
flag, -L only shows part of the important stuff.
iptables-save man:
DESCRIPTION:
iptables-save is used to dump the contents of an IP Table in easily
parseable format to STDOUT. Use I/O-redirection provided by your shell
to write to a file.
You seem to have a problem understanding what John is saying. When you
add the v flag, iptables will also report in/out interfaces so that
you don't have to guess when you are trying to fix up the rules on the
spot and not by editing some file.
My point should have been that listing digested result with iptables
-L... is not what we needed from OP. In order to help him solve his
problem, he needed to output his *rules*. not a nice presentation of
used rules.
Er, you are not making much sense here. John posts that -v is needed to
not get the 'digested result' but the 'full result' and then you go off
on a branch about iptables-save. Oh, I still don't see what difference
there is between iptables -nv -L ${table} and iptables-save.
iptables-save sounds more like the 'nice presentation of used rules'
according to the man page.
With iptables-save he/we could see actual rules used for creating Fedora
and CentOS firewall, so he/we can use that output to suggest exact rules
he needs.
Strawman argument. Who needs to see the actual rules in
/etc/sysconfig/iptables for 'creating the firewall' when you are just
going to overwrite it with a working set by running 'service iptables
save'? Or rather, both iptables -nv -L and iptables-save will provide
you the actual rules but just presented differently.
I started wrestling with iptables rules in 2005 when I started working
as networking admin and had to solve some very hard problems including
policy routing, marking packets in right order, etc. Since then gained a
lot of experience in helping others (on several forum sites) understand
what they have and what they need to add/remove/change.
What's this? Get off your high horse. I have worked with ipchains, gone
through the differences between netfilter and ipchains, messed with
ipset due to the potential thousands of rules needed to be loaded but
ultimately had to give up due to the instability of ipset, done iproute2
for multiple routing tables, done traffic shaping, done pf on OpenBSD,
done ipfw on Solaris and John R Pierce probably has more experience than
I do. You have arrived late to the party.
With iptables-save you get reusable output and all you need to do is to
say used this, this, and that rule, change that one and remove that
one, and it should work, so there is no chance of making an error in
converting (retyping) iptables -L to actual rules already provided with
iptables-save.
Hahaha, the OP still managed to mistype instructions he was given, I
somehow doubt that fixing up iptables-save output for him will make any
difference.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] iptables port forwarding
On Tuesday, June 28, 2011 05:22 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Christopher Chan wrote:
Er, you are not making much sense here. John posts that -v is needed
to not get the 'digested result' but the 'full result' and then you go
off on a branch about iptables-save. Oh, I still don't see what
difference there is between iptables -nv -L ${table} and
iptables-save. iptables-save sounds more like the 'nice presentation
of used rules' according to the man page.
Then please tell some noob to just copy a rule from iptables -nv -L
${table}. And good luck with that.
Go on, be snide. The OP had no problem pasting /sbin/iptables -L
[snip]
Strawman argument. Who needs to see the actual rules in
/etc/sysconfig/iptables for 'creating the firewall' when you are just
going to overwrite it with a working set by running 'service iptables
save'? Or rather, both iptables -nv -L and iptables-save will provide
you the actual rules but just presented differently.
Exactly the point. One will show you *what* is being done, and other
*how* it's being done. Not the same. Like it's not the same to use
compiled program to explain where the error in source code is.
That sounds hilarious. Your comparison does not even match. There is no
'what' or 'how' differences. It is all 'what' just presented differently.
I started wrestling with iptables rules in 2005 when I started working
as networking admin and had to solve some very hard problems including
policy routing, marking packets in right order, etc. Since then gained a
lot of experience in helping others (on several forum sites) understand
what they have and what they need to add/remove/change.
What's this? Get off your high horse. I have worked with ipchains,
gone through the differences between netfilter and ipchains, messed
with ipset due to the potential thousands of rules needed to be loaded
but ultimately had to give up due to the instability of ipset, done
iproute2 for multiple routing tables, done traffic shaping, done pf on
OpenBSD, done ipfw on Solaris and John R Pierce probably has more
experience than I do. You have arrived late to the party.
Knowing to do something and finding the best path to extract info from
noob person and explaining him what exactly to do are totally different
things. But whatever, I do not have time and will to argue about
irrelevant stuff with heap of work on my schedule.
Oh, so are you saying that you cannot understand the output of iptables
-nv -L? I mean, cor, it must make such a big deal to a noob person when
he is asked to paste the output of 'iptables-save' versus 'iptables -nv
-L; iptables -nv -L nat; iptables -nv -L mangle'. Don't let me get in
the way of your big pile of work.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Mail Question
On Tuesday, June 28, 2011 07:54 PM, Bo Lynch wrote: On Mon, June 27, 2011 8:18 pm, Christopher Chan wrote: On Tuesday, June 28, 2011 03:01 AM, Bo Lynch wrote: /var/mail/farmer for user farmer. cannot open file: File too large self compiled postfix? ___ No self compiled postfixit appears to be something with the MDA. If I tell postfix to use procmail it works just fine. However after doing some reading I have heard some pretty good things about Dovecot LDA. So I'm gonna try that I guess. What does postfix use as a default MDA? Any recomendations on procmail vs Dovecot LDA? Thanks again for all your help Like devin suggested, change your mail store format to maildir and get a whole host of benefits over mbox. All filesystems in Centos 5 have indexed/hashed directories so you should not have problems with thousands of email in each mailbox. As for your lda, choose whatever you can support. I don't know whether you have to generate filter recipes or not but take those into account if you do. I personally am using postfix and dovecot lda with sieve support. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
