On Jan 26, 2011, at 8:08 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
On 01/26/11 5:51 PM, Mitch Patenaude wrote:
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Gene bran...@bellsouth.net
mailto:bran...@bellsouth.net wrote:
Can you tell us more about you cluster? Nodes? Purpose? I managed
a small 90 node
But it would allow other usages of that RAM. cache. Other programs with great
memory usage.
Of course, as mentioned earlier, you would have to test with your workload
whether the extra overhead is more than made up with the extra memory
availability.
On Jul 22, 2010, at 12:07 PM, Warren
On Jul 22, 2010, at 12:51 PM, Markus Falb wrote:
On 22/07/2010 19:07, Warren Young wrote:
On 7/22/2010 3:25 AM, John Doe wrote:
I have a 4GB pc and was wondering if it was worth going the PAE way to gain
those exta 700MB...
Very few programs can use PAE to get at that extra RAM. Can
On Jul 7, 2010, at 6:10 PM, Matthew Valentino wrote:
I'm relatively new to CentOS. I ordered a VPS and requested CentOS 5.5. As I
was installing packages, I noticed that some of the versions are pretty old -
for example, Postfix is v 2.3 in the repo (and, according to Postfix's
website -
On Jun 6, 2010, at 1:11 PM, John Thomas wrote:
Let's see - you're running a Dell and the second photo is out of focus
It's worse than that. It's a Dell monitor on a custom built machine by
someone who does not know what they are doing (me). Would a more
focused picture help?
On May 22, 2010, at 1:09 PM, Aniruddha wrote:
Hi,
I've read some posts in the forums which seems to indicate that not
every CentOS version is well supported. Is it possible to install
CentOS 5.5 on a server and only apply security updates for 7 years? Or
is the preferred way to upgrade to
On May 22, 2010, at 2:23 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 05/22/2010 11:09 AM, Aniruddha wrote:
I've read some posts in the forums which seems to indicate that not
every CentOS version is well supported. Is it possible to install
CentOS 5.5 on a server and only apply security updates for 7
Another issue with trying to apply just security updates for older point
updates is that newer updates may be built differently. On 5.3, a package may
not require another package be installed. But at some point later on, say,
5.5, it may gain a dependency. So if you try to install it, it may
On Jan 26, 2010, at 6:06 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On 1/25/2010 8:49 AM, Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote:
Anas Alnaffar wrote:
I tried to run this command
find -name *.access* -mtime +2 -exec rm {} \;
Should have been: find ./ -name \*.access\* -mtime +2 -exec rm -f {} \;
No
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf
Of James B. Byrne
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 10:06 AM
To: Robert Nichols
Cc: centos@centos.org
Subject: Re: [CentOS] The directory that I am trying to clean up is huge
On Mon, January 25,
On Jan 23, 2010, at 7:07 AM, Anas Alnaffar wrote:
I tried to run this command
find -name *.access* -mtime +2 -exec rm {} \;
and I have same error message
Anas
There must have been more to it, since the command above is invalid. you need
to specify where to start the find.
find on CentOS 5.4 supports
find path -exec {} +;
which avoids the negative effect of spawning new subprocesses when using
-exec {} \;
find on CentOS 4.8 does not support that.
I'll have to give that a try sometime. A person gets used to a subset of a
command, and doesn't
As mentioned previously, requiring certificates, and not allowing
interactive logins, is safest.
But even if you decide to allow interactive logins, there are things
you SHOULD do.
Disable admin/root login.
Update sshd so that only named users can login via SSH, all other
users that might
On Oct 6, 2009, at 2:23 AM, Sorin Srbu wrote:
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On
Behalf
Of Paul Heinlein
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 12:35 AM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] How fast?
The bigger issue is
On Aug 18, 2009, at 6:48 AM, Rainer Duffner wrote:
Yaovi Atohoun schrieb:
Hi all,
I am going to install CENTOS 5..3 on three HP Proliant ML 350G
servers. The processor is Quad-core Xeon E5420 and E5335 for one of
them. They all have 1GB Memory. Should I install a 32 bits version or
64
On Jun 7, 2009, at 12:06 PM, Niki Kovacs wrote:
Rainer Duffner a écrit :
Ideally, the zero'ing of the disk should take place before the OS is
installed, via a boot-cd and using dd with the disk-device itself
Erm... how exactly would you go about that? Let's say I want to do
that
with a
On Jun 7, 2009, at 12:34 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
Niki Kovacs wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently experimenting with G4U (Ghost for Unix), a small
cloning
application sending disk images to an FTP server.
The application reads the whole disk bit by bit, compresses it and
then
stores it
On Jun 7, 2009, at 12:54 PM, Niki Kovacs wrote:
Rainer Duffner a écrit :
Ever booted a live-CD?
It also knows your disks (unless it's a server, except for maybe the
CentOS LiveCD, most other's suck on servers - they simply don't
recognize the controllers).
The question was not about the
On Jun 7, 2009, at 1:11 PM, Niki Kovacs wrote:
Rainer Duffner a écrit :
Yup.
If you have the time, you can experiment with the blocksize and see
where the throughput is best.
http://unix.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/FreeBSD/questions/2008-09/msg01375.html
Interesting thread. Guess I'll
On Jun 7, 2009, at 2:59 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
Kevin Krieser wrote:
I'll second the recommendation for clonezilla. It knows enough
about
most filesystems (including windows ntfs) to only store the used
blocks
and it can use network storage over nfs, smb, or sshfs if you use
On May 21, 2009, at 12:08 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Ralph Angenendt ra+cen...@br-online.de
wrote:
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
--- Package file.i386 0:4.17-15.el5_3.1 set to be updated
-- Processing Dependency: /usr/share/magic.mime for package: httpd
--
On Apr 4, 2009, at 9:30 AM, Michael A. Peters wrote:
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
I updated two machines yesterday. No problems after reboot so far.
Very
smooth.
I also updated two servers in the last few days without any problems.
I don't think I have ever had such a
On Mar 2, 2009, at 2:34 AM, Kay Diederichs wrote:
Joseph L. Casale schrieb:
I have an issue with a busy CentOS server exporting iSCSI and NFS/
SMB shares.
Some of the files are very large, and when they get deleted IO
climbs to an
unacceptable rate. Is there a way to purge a file with
2.1's support ends in a couple months.
The last time I tried to put a Linux on an obsolete box, it was on a
computer with only 80MB of RAM. Pick an old enough distribution to
fit that, and I had all sorts of problems getting a PCMCIA LAN card to
work.
If I had got it to work, it would
You don't really need to prepend the x if the $remaining is in quotes,
do you? If you didn't use quotes, then you could end up with a error
if $remaining isn't set.
On Feb 27, 2009, at 5:24 AM, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Tom Brown wrote:
Hi
Below if $remaining is empty i want the if to
On Jan 28, 2009, at 7:43 PM, Matt Shields wrote:
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Kevin Krieser k_krie...@sbcglobal.net
wrote:
On Jan 28, 2009, at 10:46 AM, Anne Wilson wrote:
On Wednesday 28 January 2009 16:20:47 Kevin Krieser wrote:
The information IS in the headers, but many email
On Jan 28, 2009, at 10:00 AM, Brian Mathis wrote:
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 8:56 AM, cent osserver
centoser...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 8:33 AM, Ned Slider n...@unixmail.co.uk
wrote:
Was that REALLY called for? Couldn't you have simply filed it in /
dev/null?
Yes, I
On Jan 28, 2009, at 10:46 AM, Anne Wilson wrote:
On Wednesday 28 January 2009 16:20:47 Kevin Krieser wrote:
The information IS in the headers, but many email programs don't show
the full headers, extracting only the information that many people
want (subject, TO:, CC:, etc). So if you
On Jan 28, 2009, at 3:41 PM, RobertH wrote:
i am new to the x86 64 bit centos versions.
ive always used the 32 bit version on industrial type HP hardware
for those of you that are running x86 64 bit centos, other than
specific
hardware issues, are you finding that 5.x centos is better
You can install 5 on it, but you probably won't be too happy with it.
Make sure to have more than the default amount of swap installed.
On Jan 21, 2009, at 5:16 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Mike -- EMAIL IGNORED
m_d_berger_1...@yahoo.com wrote:
I have an
Just to comment that this was with an actual RH installation DVD, not
CentOS. The only systems I've installed CentOS on has had at least
1GB of RAM.
On Jan 21, 2009, at 6:54 PM, Kevin Krieser wrote:
You can install 5 on it, but you probably won't be too happy with it.
Make sure to have
On Dec 7, 2008, at 1:37 PM, Morten Torstensen wrote:
Kevin Krieser wrote:
At least with regard to the upstream provider, on X86 the desktop
version has a limit of 4GB of RAM, regardless of how much more memory
you have. And they removed the hugemem version, so instead of up to
64GB of RAM
On Dec 6, 2008, at 10:44 AM, Ross Walker wrote:
On Dec 5, 2008, at 7:18 PM, Rainer Duffner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Am 06.12.2008 um 01:02 schrieb Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams:
On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 23:57 +, Michael Holmes wrote:
2008/12/5 Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I have a server running
On Oct 17, 2008, at 7:58 PM, thad wrote:
Satchel Paige - Don't look back. Something might be gaining on you.
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 4:36 AM, Laurent Wandrebeck
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/10/17 Jussi Hirvi [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Since when is there a limit in how long directory listings
On Oct 18, 2008, at 8:13 PM, mouss wrote:
Jussi Hirvi a écrit :
Since when is there a limit in how long directory listings CentOS
can show
(ls), or how large directories can be removed (rm). It is really
annoying to
say, for example
rm -rf /var/amavis/tmp
and get only argument list
On Aug 26, 2008, at 12:36 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 10:32 AM, MHR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 5:49 AM, Jim Perrin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Rather than guessing, why not look at the output from the rpm
command
he ran, which gives the name of the
I read this question as being Will RHEL 6 be based on Fedora 10?
On 7/30/08 9:45 AM, Rudi Ahlers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote:
Hi All,
The subject says it all. I'm asking because I've found Fedora 9 to be
buggy as hell - it is one of the worst Fedora releases I've
On May 22, 2008, at 11:32 PM, Paul wrote:
On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 15:42 -0400, Matt Hyclak wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 12:03:23PM -0700, Florin Andrei enlightened
us:
Anybody knows when CentOS 5.2 will be made available?
http://www.linux.com/feature/135980
When it's done. For crying out
issues.
On Apr 30, 2008, at 12:07 PM, Szabolcs Szakacsits wrote:
Hi Kevin,
Kevin Krieser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I just tried NTFS-3G on a thumbdrive, and I was able to create a file
that differed only by case from another. Then something got
corrupted.
Could you please elaborate what
39 matches
Mail list logo
