[CentOS-docs] What I would like to contribute with
Hi, I saw some errors in the Amamda backup article that I would correct and then I would like to start a Banners article that describes what files have what meaning like, motd, issue, issue.net and what info they should/could contain. I have also worked a lot with Asterisk and is keen to move the Fedora 1.4 to CentOS addons but I don't know if this is the right forum. And then Im also working in a project where a How to bake your own CD/DVD could be comming out from. My Account is: matsk A merry Christmas /Mats ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] What I would like to contribute with
On Mon, Dec 24, 2007 at 11:48:44AM +0100, Mats Karlsson enlightened us: I saw some errors in the Amamda backup article that I would correct and then I would like to start a Banners article that describes what files have what meaning like, motd, issue, issue.net and what info they should/could contain. I'm interested in what those errors are? Feel free to e-mail me off-list if you want to talk about them before editing. Matt -- Matt Hyclak Department of Mathematics Department of Social Work Ohio University (740) 593-1263 ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] What I would like to contribute with
Matt Hyclak wrote: On Mon, Dec 24, 2007 at 11:48:44AM +0100, Mats Karlsson enlightened us: I saw some errors in the Amamda backup article that I would correct and then I would like to start a Banners article that describes what files have what meaning like, motd, issue, issue.net and what info they should/could contain. I'm interested in what those errors are? Feel free to e-mail me off-list if you want to talk about them before editing. Matt Matt, I don't have your email. But I did the change, it was a change in wiki.zmanda.org to wiki.zmanda.com But I will conferee with you if I make any other adjustments to the content, this was just a typo or that amanda has killed the wiki in the .org domain. And please read my first contribution Banners and area that is forgotten, except for old timers like me ;-) Merry Christmas Mats ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] What I would like to contribute with
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Mats Karlsson wrote: Hi, I saw some errors in the Amamda backup article that I would correct Go ahead. But edit with care. I will, I'm not normally the careless dude. and then I would like to start a Banners article that describes what files have what meaning like, motd, issue, issue.net and what info they should/could contain. http://wiki.centos.org/TipsAndTricks/BannerFiles - normally we weould like to see something you already wrote, but I'm weak during christmas time :) Please check the first draft, its not complete but I think you get the gist of the content from it. But is it allowed to add attachments like the samples or script so they could be downloaded to computers with wget instead of copypast from the wiki ? Lets talk about the rest after you contributed there ... I will, it is in my interest that the contributions is in line with the rest of the wiki. Cheers, Ralph And thx for the incredibly fast response on a holiday. Kind regards Mats ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Short postgrey guide?
On 12/17/07, Ned Slider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Guys, ... Could we add the following image: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/postgrey?action=AttachFiledo=gettarget=postgrey-en.png I found the article very clear and easy to read. I would like to thank you with this image, if it helps of course. If some modification is needed, tell me please, I will be glad to fix it. Cheers, al. ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] Short postgrey guide?
Alain Reguera Delgado wrote: On 12/17/07, Ned Slider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Guys, ... Could we add the following image: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/postgrey?action=AttachFiledo=gettarget=postgrey-en.png I found the article very clear and easy to read. I would like to thank you with this image, if it helps of course. If some modification is needed, tell me please, I will be glad to fix it. Cheers, al. Thanks Alain - nice image and explains the concept well. Any objections to adding it from anyone? ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
RE: [CentOS-es] solucionado
Saludos hermano. Hola a todos y especialmente a Hector, ya arregle el problema, en vez de cambiar de IDE a AHCI tenia que cambiarlo a Raid...y funciono. ¡Qué bien! Me alegro por ti. :D Además, estamos aquí para ayudarnos, ¿no? Un saludo. Lo propio para ti. ___ CentOS-es mailing list CentOS-es@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
Re: [CentOS] yum --security and staying with 5.0
Amos Shapira wrote: On 13/12/2007, Ralph Angenendt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Amos Shapira wrote: I'll just try to avoid updates for now. Why? It is *highly* unlikely that 5.1 will break *anything* for you. I mean: Those are still the *SAME* software versions as in 5.0. And those are the same software versions which will be in CentOS 5.5. Or 5.7. You will *NOT* get any security updates that way, you are leaving your machines vulnerable - and that for *NO* reason. I just got the impression from the subject in the mailing list for the last couple of weeks that 5.1 introduced some problems to people who upgraded. Going through the archive today I see that it looks like all problems resulted from people deviating from the recommended path (just yum update) by having their own kernels or mixing 5.1 with packages from other sources. Thanks. --Amos Amos, Sure there are a couple of problems with the updates. We have had more that 2 million machines get updates in the last month. There are a handful of problems reported ... what, 10-15 accounts of something going wrong on the list. The vast majority of problems are usually caused by yum .repo file configuration problems or some other instance of non supported (ie, non centos software installed) problems. There was a major nfs/autofs issue that is now corrected ... and I am sure there are a couple other problems, but 99.9% of the upgrades went perfectly. So, not upgrading is probably not warranted. Thanks, Johnny Hughes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] yum --security and staying with 5.0
Amos Shapira wrote: Hello, So I've watched a few threads about the new 5.0 vs. 5.1 upgrade and have a couple of (hopefully) practical questions about this: Context - I'd like to stick to 5.0 at least for a while until the dust around 5.1 settles down (and I'm back from holidays). As an example - In Debian, as long as I stick to stable I can be sure that the only updates I receive there are for heavily tested very important bugs and security issues, so I should generally apply them. 1. If I read the FAQ correctly, in order to force yum to stay with 5.0 should I just manually edit /etc/redhat-release from: CentOS release 5 (Final) to: CentOS release 5.0 (Final) (i.e. add .0 to the version)? If not then what should I do? 2. I am hoping that yum-security will allow me to stick to the latest security updates for 5.0 without forcing me to upgrade to 5.1 until the dust settles down. Am I correct that this is possible with yum-security and the repositories provided by CentOS? Will yum update --security update packages with later versions only if those versions fix security issues? Are security updates maintained for 5.0? Here is what I get right now on one of my systems (without doing the change I asked about in (1)): # yum --security list updates Loading security plugin Loading installonlyn plugin Setting up repositories base 100% |=| 1.1 kB00:00 updates 100% |=| 951 B00:00 addons100% |=| 951 B00:00 extras100% |=| 1.1 kB00:00 Reading repository metadata in from local files Limiting package lists to security relevant ones No packages needed, for security, 196 available If I drop the --security flag I indeed get a list of196 packages to upgrade. So to clarify my question - is my system secure (in terms of package versions) by sticking to yum update --security? Thanks, --Amos I would also like to address this whole subtree (or z series) issue. First ... The upstream guys have not offered this service yet. When they do, it will offer a subset of updates for some people who really want to have only a very small subset of updates for their equipment for 18 months. It is explained fully (at least as it has been explained to us) in this post to the list: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2007-December/091189.html Second ... Since this is not really implemented (in practice) by upstream, it is currently vaporware. When they implement it, then we can see in practice what they actually do and emulate it. Third ... What happens to the 5.1.3 people (automatically) at the 5.1.3 EOL / 5.5 point is the one major issue that I see as problematic. I would guess that they would move up to the 5.2.3 tree ... then on the 5.6 release (5.2.3 EOL), they would have to move up to the 5.3.3 tree ... then on 5.7 (5.3.3 EOL) to the 5.4.3 tree, etc. What to do to those people automatically is critical, and we will have to see what upstream does to make our decision. If upstream stays as conservative as they currently are between point releases (ie, 5.0 to 5.1, 5.1 to 5.2), moving from 5.1.3 to either 5.2.3 OR 5.5.0 should be equally possible. However, I have heard tell of things between point release sets MAYBE becoming a bit less conservative between the 5.1 and 5.2 branches after they get the z series stuff implemented. If that is the case, then moving between branches MAY become a little bit harder. HOWEVER, until the vaporware becomes reality and until we can actually see what the version schemes REALLY DO (and if the changese between branches become less conservative), this whole thread is just speculative conjecture. Let's see the programs in action and see what happens at 5.1.3 EOL time, etc. In the mean time, people who want security updates need to do what they RHEL people did ... update. There is no channel for the upstream people to do only security updates right now, they run yum and they get all the latest updates ... the same thing happens in CentOS. Also ... the yum --security feature would only tell you CVE and other security information about a package. It does not actually perform security only updates, it just provide security information if a package is a security update. As posted in other places in this thread and the 5.1 release notes, the CentOS version of yum does not have this feature. Thanks, Johnny Hughes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] system hibernating?
I'm in the process of setting up a new system and I have found that the system is hibernating when its sitting idle for a long period of time. How do I stop this? TIA, Jeff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] system hibernating?
Hmm, I'm never encountered this myself. Could it be BIOS power management settings? - Chris On 24 Dec, 2007, at 8:58 AM, Jeffrey Ross wrote: I'm in the process of setting up a new system and I have found that the system is hibernating when its sitting idle for a long period of time. How do I stop this? TIA, Jeff ___ 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] system hibernating?
I set them to user defined and then disable for all the options. Chris Brentano wrote: Hmm, I'm never encountered this myself. Could it be BIOS power management settings? - Chris On 24 Dec, 2007, at 8:58 AM, Jeffrey Ross wrote: I'm in the process of setting up a new system and I have found that the system is hibernating when its sitting idle for a long period of time. How do I stop this? TIA, Jeff ___ 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 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] system hibernating?
Hi Jeff, This wouldn't be an IBM netvista wouldn't it? I have the same behaviour on my machines as well. Phil On December 24, 2007, Jeffrey Ross wrote: I'm in the process of setting up a new system and I have found that the system is hibernating when its sitting idle for a long period of time. How do I stop this? TIA, Jeff ___ 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] system hibernating?
Phil Savoie wrote: Hi Jeff, This wouldn't be an IBM netvista wouldn't it? I have the same behaviour on my machines as well. Phil On December 24, 2007, Jeffrey Ross wrote: I'm in the process of setting up a new system and I have found that the system is hibernating when its sitting idle for a long period of time. How do I stop this? TIA, Jeff No, its an old system, its an SBC8173 All-in-One PCI/ISA CPU Card I just pulled two cards out that I'm not using and I just started running memtest just to make sure. Thanks, Jeff ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] system hibernating?
I have a netvista and have not been able to upgrade my kernel since 2.9.9-34.0.2. I wouldn't call it hibernating, just after a long period of idle time (overnight), it runs really slw. Would really love it figure this one out. TIA -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Phil Savoie Sent: Monday, December 24, 2007 12:22 PM To: centos@centos.org Subject: Re: [CentOS] system hibernating? Hi Jeff, This wouldn't be an IBM netvista wouldn't it? I have the same behaviour on my machines as well. Phil On December 24, 2007, Jeffrey Ross wrote: I'm in the process of setting up a new system and I have found that the system is hibernating when its sitting idle for a long period of time. How do I stop this? TIA, Jeff ___ 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 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Prelink: Something's happening here
Bill Campbell wrote: On Sun, Dec 23, 2007, Johnny Hughes wrote: Johnny Hughes wrote: ... How did the RPM database have the right values for the sqlite3 file before prelink was run? Or, another way, why was the file different in the first place, that running prelink against it fixed it? And if undoing the prelink changed something, why wasn't it changed back when I ran prelink against the sqlite3 file the second time? Finding this confusing as H__L. I have *alot* of files on this system with this issue - I discovered this while debugging a problem with MailScanner. And, why do I see similar behavior on another system that's freshly built? EG: just ran the installer and yum update and see the same issue with a smaller number of files? ... We have been in touch with the upstream provider on this ... first some issues: The default prelink setup can take up to 2 weeks to rerun a full prelink. This is due to serveral settings in the file /etc/sysconfig/prelink. So, after an update, it may take up to 14 days for a file to get prelinked after it's libraries are updated. You can manually prelink sooner if required. It seems the only real thing affected by this is rpm -V. A minor problem if one is trying to find changes on a possibly cracked system. Personally I figure being able to verify a system at any time is far more important than any possible optimization from prelinking so remove/disable prelink. Sure ... and that is an option for the user. RHEL ships with prelinking enabled by default, so CentOS will too. Does prelinking really help ... maybe for some things. It just depends on your priorities. Thanks, Johnny Hughes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] happy holidays
hi, Just want to wish everyone a happy holiday season and a good new year ahead. Its been a great year for CentOS and for everyone involved with it including the developers, supporters, contributors, editors, bug reporters, everyone. You all know who you are. And I want to take this opportunity to thank all of you for the time and efforts that you have put into the project. 2008 will be bigger, better, noisier and even more fun! Enjoy. -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] system hibernating?
Hi Thomas, I may have a solution which I found on an Ubuntu list. Seems that my BIOS needed upgrading as it wasn't the latest. This is what the ubuntu list indicated as to what the underlying problem was. I just upgraded my bios just now and will see what happens, i.e., if it slows down again. For your info, please start here: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=346168 Then go here for the bios update; I used the cdrom image... http://www-307.ibm.com/pc/support/site.wss/document.do?sitestyle=lenovolndocid=MIGR-42952 Regards, Phil On December 24, 2007, Thomas Dukes wrote: I have a netvista and have not been able to upgrade my kernel since 2.9.9-34.0.2. I wouldn't call it hibernating, just after a long period of idle time (overnight), it runs really slw. Would really love it figure this one out. TIA -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Phil Savoie Sent: Monday, December 24, 2007 12:22 PM To: centos@centos.org Subject: Re: [CentOS] system hibernating? Hi Jeff, This wouldn't be an IBM netvista wouldn't it? I have the same behaviour on my machines as well. Phil On December 24, 2007, Jeffrey Ross wrote: I'm in the process of setting up a new system and I have found that the system is hibernating when its sitting idle for a long period of time. How do I stop this? TIA, Jeff ___ 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 ___ 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
[CentOS] T43 wireless ipw2200 centos 4.4
Hi ALL, Short description of my problem: I am not able to make wireless network working on the IBM ThinkPad T43p. System: T43p OS: CentOS 4.4 kernel: 2.6.9-34.EL firmware: ipw2200-firmware-3.0-3.nodist.rf.noarch.rpm What did I do ? - installed firmware from RPM package - removed kernel driver (/sbin/rmmod ipw2200) - installed kernel module (/sbin/modprobe ipw2200) dmesg output: = Dec 24 16:45:43 localhost kernel: ipw2200: Intel(R) PRO/Wireless 2200/2915 Network Driver, 1.0.0 Dec 24 16:45:43 localhost kernel: ipw2200: Copyright(c) 2003-2004 Intel Corporation Dec 24 16:45:43 localhost kernel: ACPI: PCI interrupt :04:02.0[A] - GSI 11 (level, low) - IRQ 11 Dec 24 16:45:43 localhost kernel: ipw2200: Detected Intel PRO/Wireless 2200BG Network Connection Dec 24 16:45:44 localhost hald[3408]: Timed out waiting for hotplug event 577. Rebasing to 578 Dec 24 16:45:44 localhost kernel: ip_tables: (C) 2000-2002 Netfilter core team Dec 24 16:46:00 localhost hald[3408]: Timed out waiting for hotplug event 580. Rebasing to 581 Dec 24 16:46:02 localhost hald[3408]: Timed out waiting for hotplug event 583. Rebasing to 584 Dec 24 16:46:04 localhost hald[3408]: Timed out waiting for hotplug event 587. Rebasing to 588 Dec 24 16:46:06 localhost hald[3408]: Timed out waiting for hotplug event 590. Rebasing to 591 Dec 24 16:46:08 localhost hald[3408]: Timed out waiting for hotplug event 593. Rebasing to 594 - started 'system-config-network' tool - checked eth1 (wireless) (aka enabled wireless) - edited (via edit buton ) eth1 configuration Mode: auto Network name (SSID): linksys Channel: 1 Transmit rate: auto Key: 0x? (26 hex numbers) - clicked the Activate button Result: dmesg output: Dec 24 19:25:06 localhost kernel: ip_tables: (C) 2000-2002 Netfilter core team Dec 24 19:25:07 localhost hald[3408]: Timed out waiting for hotplug event 626. Rebasing to 627 Dec 24 19:25:21 localhost hald[3408]: Timed out waiting for hotplug event 629. Rebasing to 630 Dec 24 19:25:23 localhost hald[3408]: Timed out waiting for hotplug event 632. Rebasing to 633 terminal output: Error for wireless request Set Bit Rate (8B20) : SET failed on device eth1 ; Operation not supported. Determining IP information for eth1... failed; no link present. Check cable? Can some merciful soul give me a hint or/and solution or/and RTFM pointer for my problem ? Thanks in advance Igor -- Experience is what you get when you didn't get what you wanted. Randy Pausch ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
