Re: [CentOS] heads up: /boot space on kernel upgrade

[Timothy Murphy]

Devin Reade wrote:

> I have a CentOS 6 machine that was initially installed as CentOS 6.4
> in May of 2013.  It's /boot filesystem is 200M which, IIRC, was the
> default /boot size at the time.

As a matter of interest, is there any advantage today
in having a /boot partition?
I thought it went back to the days when the boot-loader
had to be near the beginning of the disk?

-- 
Timothy Murphy  
gayleard /at/ eircom.net
School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] heads up: /boot space on kernel upgrade

[Robert Nichols]

On 02/13/2016 05:57 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:

Devin Reade wrote:


I have a CentOS 6 machine that was initially installed as CentOS 6.4
in May of 2013.  It's /boot filesystem is 200M which, IIRC, was the
default /boot size at the time.


As a matter of interest, is there any advantage today
in having a /boot partition?
I thought it went back to the days when the boot-loader
had to be near the beginning of the disk?


With GRUB legacy, there are some limitations on /boot.  It cannot
be encrypted, cannot reside on some types of software RAID,
cannot be in an LVM logical volume, and must be in an ext2/3/4 
filesystem.  If your root filesystem violates any of that, then

you need a separate /boot partition.  GRUB 2 removes most of
those restrictions.

--
Bob Nichols "NOSPAM" is really part of my email address.
Do NOT delete it.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] USB Serial ports (ttyACMn) CentOS 6.7 (64-bit) vs. CentOS 6.7 (64-bit)

[Robert Heller]

I sent this out about a week or so ago, but I have heard nothing. I am
*thinking* it is a SELINUX problem, but I cannot figure out what. The SELINUX
settings for both machines are *exactly* the same (the stock defaults for a
standard CentOS 6 install).  The *only* difference is that the desktop 
(sauron) has a few VMs setup (under KVM) and the laptop (gollum) does not. The 
desktop has an AMD processor and a nVidia video chipset and the laptop has an 
Intel processor and an Intel graphic controller.  Although I can't see how 
either the processor or video chipset would have anything to to with the USB 
or USB serial port-type devices.  The desktop also has a PCI quad serial port 
card and includes the 8250.nr_uarts=8 kernel option and is set up to use an 
analog dialup modem to make PPP connections (again, I don't see that as having 
anything to do with anything).

Both machines are running the same kernel: 2.6.32-573.12.1.el6.x86_64




At Thu, 4 Feb 2016 16:13:33 -0500 Robert Heller  wrote:

> 
> I have two computers: both running CentOS 6.7, 64-bit, with 
> kernel 2.6.32-573.12.1.el6.x86_64.  One is a laptop with an 2 core Intel 
> processor and the other is a desktop machine with a 4 core AMD processor. 
> Both 
> with selinux enabled.
> 
> I have a USB serial port device (a RR-CirKits LCC-Buffer USB).  On the 
> desktop 
> I am getting this error:
> 
> sauron.deepsoft.com% sudo minicom
> Device /dev/ttyACM0 access failed: No such file or directory.
> sauron.deepsoft.com% dir -lZ /dev/ttyACM0
> crw-rw. root dialout system_u:object_r:tty_device_t:s0 /dev/ttyACM0
> 
> But it is working on the laptop!
> 
> gollum.deepsoft.com% dir -lZ /dev/ttyACM1
> crw-rw. root dialout system_u:object_r:tty_device_t:s0 /dev/ttyACM1
> 
> Same kernel, same device (except it is showing up as ttyACM1 on the laptop).
> 
> What is going on here?
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software-- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/  -- Linux Administration Services
hel...@deepsoft.com   -- Webhosting Services

   
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] USB Serial ports (ttyACMn) CentOS 6.7 (64-bit) vs. CentOS 6.7 (64-bit)

[Alexei Altuhov]

On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Robert Heller  wrote:
> I sent this out about a week or so ago, but I have heard nothing. I am
> *thinking* it is a SELINUX problem, but I cannot figure out what. The SELINUX
> settings for both machines are *exactly* the same (the stock defaults for a
> standard CentOS 6 install).  The *only* difference is that the desktop
> (sauron) has a few VMs setup (under KVM) and the laptop (gollum) does not. The
> desktop has an AMD processor and a nVidia video chipset and the laptop has an
> Intel processor and an Intel graphic controller.  Although I can't see how
> either the processor or video chipset would have anything to to with the USB
> or USB serial port-type devices.  The desktop also has a PCI quad serial port
> card and includes the 8250.nr_uarts=8 kernel option and is set up to use an
> analog dialup modem to make PPP connections (again, I don't see that as having
> anything to do with anything).
>
> Both machines are running the same kernel: 2.6.32-573.12.1.el6.x86_64
>
>
>
>
> At Thu, 4 Feb 2016 16:13:33 -0500 Robert Heller  wrote:
>
>>
>> I have two computers: both running CentOS 6.7, 64-bit, with
>> kernel 2.6.32-573.12.1.el6.x86_64.  One is a laptop with an 2 core Intel
>> processor and the other is a desktop machine with a 4 core AMD processor. 
>> Both
>> with selinux enabled.
>>
>> I have a USB serial port device (a RR-CirKits LCC-Buffer USB).  On the 
>> desktop
>> I am getting this error:
>>
>> sauron.deepsoft.com% sudo minicom
>> Device /dev/ttyACM0 access failed: No such file or directory.
>> sauron.deepsoft.com% dir -lZ /dev/ttyACM0
>> crw-rw. root dialout system_u:object_r:tty_device_t:s0 /dev/ttyACM0
>>
>> But it is working on the laptop!
>>
>> gollum.deepsoft.com% dir -lZ /dev/ttyACM1
>> crw-rw. root dialout system_u:object_r:tty_device_t:s0 /dev/ttyACM1
>>
>> Same kernel, same device (except it is showing up as ttyACM1 on the laptop).
>>
>> What is going on here?
>>

Hi,

Since  you haven't mentioned it, have you checked /var/log/dmesg to
make sure the device number is correct?  (for ex.: cdc_acm 2-1:1.4:
ttyACM0: USB ACM device)
I understand you've come a long way trying to figure this out, but I'd
had my share of hickups when the USB port had been faulty - the device
showed up and the number of the device kept changing.

Also check if there any errors in dmesg when you have just plugged in
the device.

My perms and SELinux context of the USB serial modem are the same, by the way:
ls -laZ /dev/ttyACM1
crw-rw. root dialout system_u:object_r:tty_device_t:s0

Also, just to make sure sudo settings do not interfere:
sudo -u root -g dialout minicom
Same Error?

One more thing that I would check is to run to make sure I run the
minicom as root:
sudo minicom -s
Minicom's man page says
-s
Setup. Root edits the system-wide defaults in /etc/minirc.dfl with
this option. When it is used, minicom does not initialize, but puts
you directly into the configuration menu. This is very handy if
minicom refuses to start up because your system has changed, or for
the first time you run minicom. For most systems, reasonable defaults
are already compiled in.

Googling revealed another advice - check for the drivers in place:
cat /proc/bus/usb/devices
Found your device there?
It has to have lines with Driver other than "Driver=" and "Driver =(none)"

This is what I have
...
I:* If#= 2 Alt= 0 #EPs= 0 Cls=02(comm.) Sub=fe Prot=00 Driver=cdc_phonet
I:* If#= 3 Alt= 0 #EPs= 0 Cls=0a(data ) Sub=00 Prot=00 Driver=cdc_phonet
I:  If#= 3 Alt= 1 #EPs= 2 Cls=0a(data ) Sub=00 Prot=00 Driver=cdc_phonet
I:* If#= 4 Alt= 0 #EPs= 1 Cls=02(comm.) Sub=02 Prot=01 Driver=cdc_acm
I:* If#= 5 Alt= 0 #EPs= 2 Cls=0a(data ) Sub=00 Prot=00 Driver=cdc_acm
...

Oh, and you have mentioned kernel option 8250.nr_uarts=8 - does it
mean you have 8 serial ports on the suaron?
Maybe the device  /dev/ttyACM0 does NOT belong to the device you are
trying to talk to? ( RR-CirKits LCC-Buffer USB ?)

If it is (and I am NOT an expert in serial devices debugging) than
maybe displaying the settings of that port will make you a hint?
stty --file /dev/ttyACM0 --all

Whew, an old technology sure does make you dive deep...
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] heads up: /boot space on kernel upgrade

[Valeri Galtsev]

On Sat, February 13, 2016 5:57 am, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Devin Reade wrote:
>
>> I have a CentOS 6 machine that was initially installed as CentOS 6.4
>> in May of 2013.  It's /boot filesystem is 200M which, IIRC, was the
>> default /boot size at the time.
>
> As a matter of interest, is there any advantage today
> in having a /boot partition?
> I thought it went back to the days when the boot-loader
> had to be near the beginning of the disk?
>

It is interesting to observe how perceptions are changing over time.
Decade or two ago we were partitioning small then drives (thus loosing
some of the space) just to separate regular users from those places vital
for secure and reliable running of the system. Security. There days I bet
there will be multiple experts who will bag me to death if I will try to
offer any pro partitioning argument. This is just a very interesting (for
me) observation.

Valeri


Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] heads up: /boot space on kernel upgrade

[David Both]

+1 Valeri. I agree that things have changed a lot!

However, Devin, the answer to your question is that the /boot partition 
is a necessity in a LVM environment, which everything else is by 
default. The /boot partition cannot be a logical volume; it must be a 
raw disk partition with an EXT[34] file system.


On 02/13/2016 03:19 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:

On Sat, February 13, 2016 5:57 am, Timothy Murphy wrote:

Devin Reade wrote:


I have a CentOS 6 machine that was initially installed as CentOS 6.4
in May of 2013.  It's /boot filesystem is 200M which, IIRC, was the
default /boot size at the time.

As a matter of interest, is there any advantage today
in having a /boot partition?
I thought it went back to the days when the boot-loader
had to be near the beginning of the disk?


It is interesting to observe how perceptions are changing over time.
Decade or two ago we were partitioning small then drives (thus loosing
some of the space) just to separate regular users from those places vital
for secure and reliable running of the system. Security. There days I bet
there will be multiple experts who will bag me to death if I will try to
offer any pro partitioning argument. This is just a very interesting (for
me) observation.

Valeri


Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

--


*
David P. Both, RHCE
Millennium Technology Consulting LLC
Raleigh, NC, USA
919-389-8678

db...@millennium-technology.com

www.millennium-technology.com
www.databook.bz - Home of the DataBook for Linux
DataBook is a Registered Trademark of David Both
*
This communication may be unlawfully collected and stored by the National
Security Agency (NSA) in secret. The parties to this email do not consent to the
retrieving or storing of this communication and any related metadata, as well as
printing, copying, re-transmitting, disseminating, or otherwise using it. If you
believe you have received this communication in error, please delete it
immediately.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] heads up: /boot space on kernel upgrade

[John R Pierce]

On 2/13/2016 12:19 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:

It is interesting to observe how perceptions are changing over time.
Decade or two ago we were partitioning small then drives (thus loosing
some of the space) just to separate regular users from those places vital
for secure and reliable running of the system. Security. There days I bet
there will be multiple experts who will bag me to death if I will try to
offer any pro partitioning argument. This is just a very interesting (for
me) observation.



I still like making /home its own file system, and if I'm running a 
substantial (non-trivial) database server, it also has its own volume, 
quite likely on its own raid.




--
john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Re: heads up: /boot space on kernel upgrade

[Yamaban]

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 21:24, David Both  wrote:


+1 Valeri. I agree that things have changed a lot!

However, Devin, the answer to your question is that the /boot partition is a 
necessity in a LVM environment, which everything else is by default. The /boot 
partition cannot be a logical volume; it must be a raw disk partition with an 
EXT[34] file system.


It's even more relaxed: btrfs and xfs are also valid filesystems
with grub2 on C7. If you do some extra legwork you can allow even more
filesystems, most of the ssd / flash special filesystems a possible,
as long as /boot (also as part of /(root) ) resides on a native disk
partition.

The oh-so-hyped LVM (all versions) is not a valid home for /boot
without kompling the kernel AND grub2 yourself, and even then
its much easier to move the kernels and initrds into the EFI
partition (which MUST be vfat32, per spec).

On bootloaders, well, for bios machines with just linux, or linux + win,
nothing was as easy to setup and maintain as "lilo"

But, for my new box, well it came with UEFI, and (e)lilo was just declared
discontiued, and added on top I wanted more than one Linux Distro on the
drive, so grub2 was the choice of the day.

Secureboot with the choice of multiple Distos was easy with grub2,
compared to choices for bootloaders.

YMMV. Have a nice weekend,
  - Yamaban
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS-es] [PPTP] Solo desde afuera funciona !

[angel jauregui]

Buen dia.

Configure un PPTP y abrí los puertos, desde fuera de la red local puedo
conectarme genialmente y todo va de maravilla !. Pero desde *dentro de la
red local* no puedo conectar, y es curioso porque en mis reglas de IPTables
tengo habilitada la regla INPUT y FORDWARE para el puerto del pptp, que
sera ???

Saludos !

-- 
M.S.I. Angel Haniel Cantu Jauregui.

Celular: (011-52-1)-899-871-17-22
E-Mail: angel.ca...@sie-group.net
Web: http://www.sie-group.net/
Cd. Reynosa Tamaulipas.
___
CentOS-es mailing list
CentOS-es@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es

Re: [CentOS] USB Serial ports (ttyACMn) CentOS 6.7 (64-bit) vs. CentOS 6.7 (64-bit)

[Robert Heller]

At Sat, 13 Feb 2016 10:14:30 -0500 CentOS mailing list  
wrote:

> 
> I sent this out about a week or so ago, but I have heard nothing. I am
> *thinking* it is a SELINUX problem, but I cannot figure out what. The SELINUX
> settings for both machines are *exactly* the same (the stock defaults for a
> standard CentOS 6 install).  The *only* difference is that the desktop 
> (sauron) has a few VMs setup (under KVM) and the laptop (gollum) does not. 
> The 
> desktop has an AMD processor and a nVidia video chipset and the laptop has an 
> Intel processor and an Intel graphic controller.  Although I can't see how 
> either the processor or video chipset would have anything to to with the USB 
> or USB serial port-type devices.  The desktop also has a PCI quad serial port 
> card and includes the 8250.nr_uarts=8 kernel option and is set up to use an 
> analog dialup modem to make PPP connections (again, I don't see that as 
> having 
> anything to do with anything).

OK, I tried rebooting without the '8250.nr_uarts=8' option and that had no 
effect.

I wonder if I should file a bug report?  I don't know if I should file it with 
the Red Hat bugzilla or the CentOS bugzilla.

> 
> Both machines are running the same kernel: 2.6.32-573.12.1.el6.x86_64
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At Thu, 4 Feb 2016 16:13:33 -0500 Robert Heller  wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I have two computers: both running CentOS 6.7, 64-bit, with 
> > kernel 2.6.32-573.12.1.el6.x86_64.  One is a laptop with an 2 core Intel 
> > processor and the other is a desktop machine with a 4 core AMD processor. 
> > Both 
> > with selinux enabled.
> > 
> > I have a USB serial port device (a RR-CirKits LCC-Buffer USB).  On the 
> > desktop 
> > I am getting this error:
> > 
> > sauron.deepsoft.com% sudo minicom
> > Device /dev/ttyACM0 access failed: No such file or directory.
> > sauron.deepsoft.com% dir -lZ /dev/ttyACM0
> > crw-rw. root dialout system_u:object_r:tty_device_t:s0 /dev/ttyACM0
> > 
> > But it is working on the laptop!
> > 
> > gollum.deepsoft.com% dir -lZ /dev/ttyACM1
> > crw-rw. root dialout system_u:object_r:tty_device_t:s0 /dev/ttyACM1
> > 
> > Same kernel, same device (except it is showing up as ttyACM1 on the laptop).
> > 
> > What is going on here?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 

-- 
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software-- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/  -- Linux Administration Services
hel...@deepsoft.com   -- Webhosting Services
  
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] heads up: /boot space on kernel upgrade

[Valeri Galtsev]

On Sat, February 13, 2016 2:24 pm, David Both wrote:
> +1 Valeri. I agree that things have changed a lot!

_things_ changed? I wouldn't quite agree. It is people who have changed
definitely. As far as things are concerned, they have changed a lot, but
not fundamentally. Disks are huge, but they still are not infinite. Number
of inodes filesystem can have increased multiple orders of magnitude, but
it is still finite, and so on - one can go through the whole list of good
practices dated some 15-20 years back. But we, people, have changed a lot.

Valeri

>
> However, Devin, the answer to your question is that the /boot partition
> is a necessity in a LVM environment, which everything else is by
> default. The /boot partition cannot be a logical volume; it must be a
> raw disk partition with an EXT[34] file system.
>
> On 02/13/2016 03:19 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
>> On Sat, February 13, 2016 5:57 am, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>>> Devin Reade wrote:
>>>
 I have a CentOS 6 machine that was initially installed as CentOS 6.4
 in May of 2013.  It's /boot filesystem is 200M which, IIRC, was the
 default /boot size at the time.
>>> As a matter of interest, is there any advantage today
>>> in having a /boot partition?
>>> I thought it went back to the days when the boot-loader
>>> had to be near the beginning of the disk?
>>>
>> It is interesting to observe how perceptions are changing over time.
>> Decade or two ago we were partitioning small then drives (thus loosing
>> some of the space) just to separate regular users from those places
>> vital
>> for secure and reliable running of the system. Security. There days I
>> bet
>> there will be multiple experts who will bag me to death if I will try to
>> offer any pro partitioning argument. This is just a very interesting
>> (for
>> me) observation.
>>
>> Valeri
>>
>> 
>> Valeri Galtsev
>> Sr System Administrator
>> Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
>> Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
>> University of Chicago
>> Phone: 773-702-4247
>> 
>> ___
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS@centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> *
>> David P. Both, RHCE
>> Millennium Technology Consulting LLC
>> Raleigh, NC, USA
>> 919-389-8678
>>
>> db...@millennium-technology.com
>>
>> www.millennium-technology.com
>> www.databook.bz - Home of the DataBook for Linux
>> DataBook is a Registered Trademark of David Both
>> *
>> This communication may be unlawfully collected and stored by the
>> National
>> Security Agency (NSA) in secret. The parties to this email do not
>> consent to the
>> retrieving or storing of this communication and any related metadata, as
>> well as
>> printing, copying, re-transmitting, disseminating, or otherwise using
>> it. If you
>> believe you have received this communication in error, please delete it
>> immediately.
>>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>



Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] heads up: /boot space on kernel upgrade

[Valeri Galtsev]

On Sat, February 13, 2016 2:50 pm, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 2/13/2016 12:19 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
>> It is interesting to observe how perceptions are changing over time.
>> Decade or two ago we were partitioning small then drives (thus loosing
>> some of the space) just to separate regular users from those places
>> vital
>> for secure and reliable running of the system. Security. There days I
>> bet
>> there will be multiple experts who will bag me to death if I will try to
>> offer any pro partitioning argument. This is just a very interesting
>> (for
>> me) observation.
>
>
> I still like making /home its own file system, and if I'm running a
> substantial (non-trivial) database server, it also has its own volume,
> quite likely on its own raid.
>

John, you made my day! It is so wonderful to know I'm not the only one who
still does this!

Valeri

>
>
> --
> john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>



Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] USB Serial ports (ttyACMn) CentOS 6.7 (64-bit) vs. CentOS 6.7 (64-bit)

[Alexei Altuhov]

> OK, I tried rebooting without the '8250.nr_uarts=8' option and that had no
> effect.
>
> I wonder if I should file a bug report?  I don't know if I should file it
with
> the Red Hat bugzilla or the CentOS bugzilla.

Should be with the Red Hat, I guess.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS-virt] Updated centos-release-xen packages (fixes missing initrd issue on upgrade)

[Karel Hendrych]

Thanks! Upgrade to 3.18.25-18.el6/4.4.3-10.el6 went fine. No need to 
manualy adjust grub anymore.

BR
--
Karel

On 20.1.2016 19:33, George Dunlap wrote:

I've pushed an update to the centos-release-xen package,
centos-release-xen-7-12.el6, to centos-virt-xen-testing, which should
fix the "missing initrd" issue people have been seeing.

Please test and see if it fixes your issue (and that it makes no other
issues).  If everything works well, I'll get it pushed to
centos-extras.

Thanks,
  -George


___
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt

Re: [CentOS-es] [ISPConfig] Instalando en puerto alternativo, no funciona :S

[angel jauregui]

Les comparto mi config del httpd.

ServerTokens OS
ServerRoot "/etc/httpd"
PidFile run/httpd.pid
Timeout 60
KeepAlive Off
MaxKeepAliveRequests 100
KeepAliveTimeout 15

StartServers   8
MinSpareServers5
MaxSpareServers   20
ServerLimit  256
MaxClients   256
MaxRequestsPerChild  4000


StartServers 4
MaxClients 300
MinSpareThreads 25
MaxSpareThreads 75
ThreadsPerChild 25
MaxRequestsPerChild  0

Listen 80
LoadModule auth_basic_module modules/mod_auth_basic.so
LoadModule auth_digest_module modules/mod_auth_digest.so
LoadModule authn_file_module modules/mod_authn_file.so
LoadModule authn_alias_module modules/mod_authn_alias.so
LoadModule authn_anon_module modules/mod_authn_anon.so
LoadModule authn_dbm_module modules/mod_authn_dbm.so
LoadModule authn_default_module modules/mod_authn_default.so
LoadModule authz_host_module modules/mod_authz_host.so
LoadModule authz_user_module modules/mod_authz_user.so
LoadModule authz_owner_module modules/mod_authz_owner.so
LoadModule authz_groupfile_module modules/mod_authz_groupfile.so
LoadModule authz_dbm_module modules/mod_authz_dbm.so
LoadModule authz_default_module modules/mod_authz_default.so
LoadModule ldap_module modules/mod_ldap.so
LoadModule authnz_ldap_module modules/mod_authnz_ldap.so
LoadModule include_module modules/mod_include.so
LoadModule log_config_module modules/mod_log_config.so
LoadModule logio_module modules/mod_logio.so
LoadModule env_module modules/mod_env.so
LoadModule ext_filter_module modules/mod_ext_filter.so
LoadModule mime_magic_module modules/mod_mime_magic.so
LoadModule expires_module modules/mod_expires.so
LoadModule deflate_module modules/mod_deflate.so
LoadModule headers_module modules/mod_headers.so
LoadModule usertrack_module modules/mod_usertrack.so
LoadModule setenvif_module modules/mod_setenvif.so
LoadModule mime_module modules/mod_mime.so
LoadModule dav_module modules/mod_dav.so
LoadModule status_module modules/mod_status.so
LoadModule autoindex_module modules/mod_autoindex.so
LoadModule info_module modules/mod_info.so
LoadModule dav_fs_module modules/mod_dav_fs.so
LoadModule vhost_alias_module modules/mod_vhost_alias.so
LoadModule negotiation_module modules/mod_negotiation.so
LoadModule dir_module modules/mod_dir.so
LoadModule actions_module modules/mod_actions.so
LoadModule speling_module modules/mod_speling.so
LoadModule userdir_module modules/mod_userdir.so
LoadModule alias_module modules/mod_alias.so
LoadModule substitute_module modules/mod_substitute.so
LoadModule rewrite_module modules/mod_rewrite.so
LoadModule proxy_module modules/mod_proxy.so
LoadModule proxy_balancer_module modules/mod_proxy_balancer.so
LoadModule proxy_ftp_module modules/mod_proxy_ftp.so
LoadModule proxy_http_module modules/mod_proxy_http.so
LoadModule proxy_ajp_module modules/mod_proxy_ajp.so
LoadModule proxy_connect_module modules/mod_proxy_connect.so
LoadModule cache_module modules/mod_cache.so
LoadModule suexec_module modules/mod_suexec.so
LoadModule disk_cache_module modules/mod_disk_cache.so
LoadModule cgi_module modules/mod_cgi.so
LoadModule version_module modules/mod_version.so
Include conf.d/*.conf
User apache
Group apache
ServerAdmin root@localhost
UseCanonicalName Off
DocumentRoot "/var/www/html"

Options FollowSymLinks
AllowOverride None


Options Indexes FollowSymLinks
AllowOverride None
Order allow,deny
Allow from all


UserDir disabled

DirectoryIndex index.html index.php
AccessFileName .htaccess

Order allow,deny
Deny from all
Satisfy All

TypesConfig /etc/mime.types
DefaultType text/plain

MIMEMagicFile conf/magic

HostnameLookups Off
ErrorLog logs/error_log
LogLevel warn
LogFormat "%h %l %u %t \"%r\" %>s %b \"%{Referer}i\" \"%{User-Agent}i\""
combined
LogFormat "%h %l %u %t \"%r\" %>s %b" common
LogFormat "%{Referer}i -> %U" referer
LogFormat "%{User-agent}i" agent
CustomLog logs/access_log combined
ServerSignature On
Alias /icons/ "/var/www/icons/"

Options Indexes MultiViews FollowSymLinks
AllowOverride None
Order allow,deny
Allow from all


DAVLockDB /var/lib/dav/lockdb

ScriptAlias /cgi-bin/ "/var/www/cgi-bin/"

AllowOverride None
Options None
Order allow,deny
Allow from all

IndexOptions FancyIndexing VersionSort NameWidth=* HTMLTable Charset=UTF-8
AddIconByEncoding (CMP,/icons/compressed.gif) x-compress x-gzip
AddIconByType (TXT,/icons/text.gif) text/*
AddIconByType (IMG,/icons/image2.gif) image/*
AddIconByType (SND,/icons/sound2.gif) audio/*
AddIconByType (VID,/icons/movie.gif) video/*
AddIcon /icons/binary.gif .bin .exe
AddIcon /icons/binhex.gif .hqx
AddIcon /icons/tar.gif .tar
AddIcon /icons/world2.gif .wrl .wrl.gz .vrml .vrm .iv
AddIcon /icons/compressed.gif .Z .z .tgz .gz .zip
AddIcon /icons/a.gif .ps .ai .eps
AddIcon /icons/layout.gif .html .shtml .htm .pdf
AddIcon /icons/text.gif .txt
AddIcon /icons/c.gif .c
AddIcon /icons/p.gif .pl .py
AddIcon /icons/f.gif .for
AddIcon /icons/dvi.gif .dvi
AddIcon 

Re: [CentOS] heads up: /boot space on kernel upgrade

[Always Learning]

On Sat, 2016-02-13 at 15:19 -0600, Valeri Galtsev wrote:

> _things_ changed? I wouldn't quite agree. It is people who have changed
> definitely. As far as things are concerned, they have changed a lot, but
> not fundamentally. Disks are huge, but they still are not infinite. Number
> of inodes filesystem can have increased multiple orders of magnitude, but
> it is still finite, and so on - one can go through the whole list of good
> practices dated some 15-20 years back. But we, people, have changed a lot.

Equipment and prices and have changed significantly since I started in
1967. Attitudes of genuine computer people have changed a lot less.

Disk storage will always be finite.  Everything is finite, even the
universe.

My first hard disk, for a BBC Micro, was a massive 20 MB. It cost GBP
320 (circa USD 500). My first mouse cost me GBP 53 (circa USD 80).

Yes everything continues to evolve, optimistically for the betterment of
mankind :-)


-- 
Regards,

Paul.
England, EU.  England's place is in the European Union.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos