date:20171103

On 11/02/2017 01:00 PM, Wells, Roger K. wrote:
> On 11/02/2017 01:42 PM, Fred Smith wrote:
>> I'm looking to replace my (old, creaky) netbook (Acer Aspire One D255e,
>> a screaming dual core 1.6 GHz Atom, and a whole 2 gigs of RAM) with
>> something faster but not too large. Sometimes (usually) the netbook is
>> painfully slow.
>>
>> Something like a  hi-res 14 (or 15) inch screen (full HD), minimum of
>> 4 gigs
>> RAM, HD of a half terabyte or bigger.
>>
>> I'd like to not have to go over 600-700 dollars, so I know my choices
>> are somewhat limited if I want to avoid the 400-500 dollar windows 10
>> junk^H^H^H^Hsystems from BJs, etc.
>>
>> Something with a quad-core processor, and all hardware works with C7.
>>
>> I've glanced at Lenovo Thinkpads on amazon where there are several
>> "factory refurbished" ones with similar specs to what I mention above
>> in the $500-700 range, but I don't know if they're any good or not
>>
>> I'm open to suggestions from any/all of you!
>>
>> thanks in advance!
>>
>> Fred
>>
> I have been running Linux, mostly Redhat flavors, for a long time mostly
> on Thinkpads but some other IBM/Lenovo laptops for a long time.
> Never have had a problem.  Currently running Fedora 26 on a X260, two
> with Centos 7.4, X200 & X220, all used for software development.
> HTH
> 

Red Hat provides Lenovo Thinkpad machines to employees, so almost
everything for RHEL (and therefore CentOS) works with those. Also the X1
Carbon.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] /usr/bin/x0vncserver large blocks on screen at times

2017-11-03 Thread Jerry Geis

I use this vnc program to remote into my station. (C 7.4)

When I do, about every 5 to 10 seconds a big solid block appears on my
screen. About six inches long and 3 inches wide. it quickly then goes away.

I use the realvnc.com viewer when I do this.

Is there some setting that would help with this ?

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

Re: [CentOS] anaconda not installing to sda?

2017-11-03 Thread Christopher Wood

Just to follow up for posterity, found the issue some time ago. In short, using 
a slightly older version of cobbler with a later version of CentOS shipping an 
updated ifconfig. Upshot, keep cobbler up to date.

More details (identifying information has been munged):

It turns out that under the hood, the pre_install_network_config snippet is 
generating this code in Cobbler 2.6.11 (released in January 2016):

IFNAME=$(ifconfig -a | grep -i '00:50:56:8e:44:ee' | cut -d " " -f 1)

However the output format of the ifconfig command changed in Fedora way before 
that (Fedora feeds into RHEL which feeds into CentOS):

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784314

(Now that said, lots of people are so used to ifconfig, which has been 
deprecated for at least a decade, that they still use it even though ip exists 
and is installed by default.)

The output changed like so, and obviously that expression would not function.

[root@c6.9 ~]# ifconfig eth0 | head -4
eth0  Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:50:56:8E:82:05
  inet addr:1.2.3.4  Bcast:1.2.3.255  Mask:255.255.255.0
  inet6 addr: fe80::250:56ff:fe8e:6605/64 Scope:Link
  UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1

[root@c7.4 ~]# ifconfig eth0 | head -4
eth0: flags=4163  mtu 1500
inet 2.3.4.5  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 2.3.4.255
inet6 fe80::250:56ff:feb9:ec1f  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20
ether 00:50:56:b9:ab:1f  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)

It turns out that cobbler 2.8 (in EPEL) has a new pre_install_network_config 
snippet which uses iproute2's "ip link", something like this:

ip -o link | grep -i '00:50:56:b9:ec:1f' | awk -F': ' '{print $2}'

I didn't want to mess around with cheetah or updating cobbler right before we 
really needed it for a large build, so I copied in the updated 
pre_install_network_config snippet under a new name, and duped the existing 
network_config snippet under a new name to call the pre-install snippet.

$SNIPPET('network_config_el7')
$SNIPPET('pre_install_network_config_el7')

As to how this previously worked with CentOS 7, I am quite puzzled. I suspect 
maybe anaconda was rebuilt with a new net-tools (package including ifconfig) 
for 7.4 but that sounds wrong. However since investigating this would require 
more time spent digging around in anaconda internals I have decided that I have 
anything else to do first.

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 10:47:11AM -0400, Christopher Wood wrote:
> I'm having what appears at first glance to be a kickstart+anaconda issue on 
> CentOS 7.4.
> 
> As near as I can tell in the program.log in the anaconda environment, the 
> partitioning instructions downloaded with the kickstart from cobbler appear 
> to simply not be applied. Then /mnt/sysimage is not mounted, the logs are not 
> copied to /mnt/sysimage/root and the installation stalls due to the anamon 
> checking. (Also anaconda is trying to e2fsck /dev/loop devices which is 
> puzzling.)
> 
> If anybody has hints about what I would double-check or if you've resolved a 
> similar issue I would be quite interested.
> 
> More details:
> 
> I see the same behaviour after cutting most items out of the cobbler 
> kickstart template, however I confirm that /run/install/ks.cfg in the 
> anaconda environment has the following:
> 
> ignoredisk --only-use=sda
> 
> zerombr
> bootloader --location=mbr
> clearpart --all
> part / --label="/" --fstype=ext4 --grow --asprimary
> 
> program.log from the anaconda environment is here:
> 
> https://gist.github.com/christopherwood/72f390d7e5788b9bc9e841d40c926895
> 
> The system does boot and install just fine from the CentOS 7.4 iso without 
> being kickstarted.
> 
> This is on vmware (esxi 6.0), I've tried with the paravirtual and lsi logic 
> scsi controllers with the same result.
> 
> I've tried different previously (CentOS 7.3) working cobbler profiles that do 
> not work with 7.4 now.
> 
> If I change the drive name (sda) to a ludicrous value anaconda simply errors, 
> so at some level it's understanding about sda.
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Repository with current FreeTDS?

2017-11-03 Thread Adam Tauno Williams

Anyone know of a repository with the current - 1.0 - version of
FreeTDS?  

The packaged version 0.91 from EPEL is considerably out of data.

-- 
Meetings Coordinator, Michigan Association of Railroad Passengers
537 Shirley St NE Grand Rapids, MI 49503-1754 Phone: 616.581.8010
E-mail: awill...@whitemice.org GPG#D95ED383 Web: http://www.marp.org
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] modestly priced laptop for C7

On 11/03/2017 12:09 PM, Fred Smith wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 06:48:11AM -0700, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> On 11/02/2017 03:38 PM, Fred Smith wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 02:09:04PM -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
 Yves Bellefeuille wrote:
> Valeri Galtsev  wrote:
>
>> Not intending to contradict (if that ends up as pain, it will be
>> your pain anyway ;-) but I would go higher with specs if you intend
>> to use Linux on it. Linux tends to grow its demands for resources
>> pretty much exponentially (same as Windows does, only from lower
>> starting point).
>
> On my Acer Aspire One 522 (two-core AMD C-50 1.0 GHz processor with 2
> GB of RAM), CentOS 6 is noticeably smoother than Windows 7. Windows
> uses the battery more efficiently, however.
>
 The reql question is what the o/p wants the system *for*. As I mentioned,
 I have my '09 HP Netbook (1101?), and I just loaded CentOS 6 i386 on it,
 and it runs acceptably. Now, once I switch the WM from *bleah* Gnome to
 KDE, or maybe something lighter, I'll be fine... but I only use it while
 traveling, for mail and browsing.

 What *are* you going to be doing with it?
>>>
>>> mostly portable email and browsing. if it is good enough it'll probably
>>> have dev tools on it too for the uncommon occasions when I need to
>>> build something. If it is good enough I may find other thiings to do
>>> with it, but I have a reasonably powerful desktop also running C7, so
>>> many of those "other" things are taken care of there.
>>>
>>> Fred
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/inspiron-11-3000/spd/inspiron-11-3162-laptop
>>
>> I use that when i want to travel light .. with an SSD and 8gb of RAM (it
>> says 4gb max, 8gb will work), I get good performance and I can do
>> anything I need while traveling.  Everything works with CentOS Linux 7
>> (wifi, graphics, volume buttons, touchpad, etc)
>  
> Johnny:
> how hard is it to replace RAM or SSD? and battery, too, when that time
> comes. 'cause I'd want to do like you and definitely upgrade it right
> away, cause that 2gig RAM and abysmal 32G storage is pathetic.
> 
> and I'm going to guess that 1.6 Ghz processor is similar to the 1.6b Ghz
> Atom I now have, but hopefully less canine-like.
> 
> I'd be interested in the 14 inch model except it has the same wimpy specs.
> so, again how much hassle  (and cost) is involved in upgrading like you did?
> 
> thanks again!

OH .. mine the Insprion 11 that is a generation older than that and does
not have an eMMC

The memory and hard drive were easy to replace .. BUT .. that one might
not be.

I have not had to replace the battery.

This is the one I have:
https://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2468360,00.asp



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] low end file server with h/w RAID - recommendations

2017-11-03 Thread m . roth

Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> On Fri, November 3, 2017 3:36 am, hw wrote:
>> Valeri Galtsev wrote:

>>> LSI (or whoever owns that line these days - Intel was the last one, I
>>> recollect)
>>>
>>> With LSI beware that they have really nasty command line client, and do
>>> not have raid watch daemon with web interface like late 3ware had
>>> (alas, 3ware after they were bought out several times by competitors were
>>> drawn down out of existence).

Um, er, if you think the MegaRAID command line tool his user-unfriendly,
the 3-Com one was downright user-hostile. *shudder* I'm really glad the
systems with those have been surplussed.
>>
>> I like CLIs and donÂ´t like web interfaces ...
>
> I _am_ a command line person myself. Yet, when dealing with RAID, I do
> prefer GUI interface, as it is much harder to screw up when you use 3ware
> web interface, compared to, say, 3ware command client interface, the last
> being much better and clearer than LSI command client... Again, it can be
> just me, or it can be the same for many people that our perception of
> things in GUI is less prone to grave mistakes.

As I said, anyone who wants an easy to use script that works with
MegaRAID< drop me an email, and I'll send it to you. It's a script, so you
can verify it's not going to hold your RAID for ransom. https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?

2017-11-03 Thread Valeri Galtsev

On Fri, November 3, 2017 3:01 am, Sorin Srbu wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: CentOS [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Valeri
Galtsev
>> Sent: den 2 november 2017 15:21
>> To: CentOS mailing list 
>> Subject: Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?
>> On Thu, November 2, 2017 8:29 am, Sorin Srbu wrote:
>> > Hello all,
>> >
>> > I'm looking into getting HP laptops for our department running CentOS
>> 7.
>> I usually recommend against HP laptops. I had Compaq quite some time
ago
>> (the last was bought out by HP shortly after I got my laptop), and I
have
>> seen a bunch of HP laptops people in our Department got themselves.
That
>> (dealing with these, looking inside hardware etc) developed strong
allergy
>> towards HP laptops in me. My Compaq, BTW, has a list of "approved
hardware" in BIOS, which is evil: I had to edit BIOS with hex editor to
replace piece of crap broadcom wireless adapter with Intel one. To be fair
I must mention here that I love HP printers, and the whole
attitude of HP towards printers they make. Decent HP laser printers are
manageable, last forever, and HP keeps making supplies for them. I just
retired still working B/W LaserJet 4050, that worked for over 16 years,
was heavily used, still works, print quality is the same as it always had,
>> and HP still makes supplies for it.
>> I usually recommend Dell: business lines of laptops, see which are
offered
>> with 3 to 5 years warranty, I do get cheapest 3 year warranty, but Dell
committing to maintain it for 5 years tell you that that is solidly built,
>> and is not expected to be obsoleted soon.
>> I recommended IBM before they sold laptop line to Lenovo. After
watching
>> Lenovo for about 3 years, I started recommending them (they were same
well
>> engineered as IBMs were), but shortly after that they had a scandal:
sold
>> a bunch of laptops with malware preinstalled, that did it: I gave up on
Lenovo for good.
>> From smaller players, I would just see which makes business oriented
laptops for some time (offering purchase of long warranties is a good
sign). And if you can handle one before purchasing - say, you can go to
computer store and handle on on display, - I would recommend "propeller
test". Grab sides of laptop and try to twist it into propeller shape. If
>> it is flexible, it is junk that will fail soon. If it is solid, it has
great chance to last long. Flexing system board - motherboard is common
jargon for over 30 years - leads to developing microcracks in it:
copper
>> when going through plastic deformation hardens, then cracks.
>
> Funny you should mention the "propeller test", as this is why I've
stayed
> away from Dell laptops, and instead went for the HP Compaq's with the
magnesium chassis in the early 00's! I've stayed with HP since then.

Dell is huge, they make everything, and "consumer grade" Dell laptops are
"flexible" junk. But for business the ones that you can buy even with 5
year warranty are solid built.

I hate Compaq (bought out by HP) and HP laptop line. I got Compaq once
when it was the first and the only one on market that had new AMD 64 bit
Turion CPU (we had Opterons in the server room, and Turion was its laptop
counterpart...). However, when I installed Linux on it I discovered it has
crappy broadcom BCM44 WiFi card. You may have heard of that: it sits on 64
bit PCI express bus, but is 32 bit inside... Anyway, I got laptop with 64
bit CPU to have 64 bit Linux on it, and I didn't want to make ugly
workarounds like NDIS wrapper for piece of crap WiFi chip. Luckily, there
is great WiFi: Intel (Atheros would be the second choice), I pulled out
broadcom card, put in Intel one, I boot the machine, and BIOS tells me:
remove unapproved hardware, and reboot the machine. Darn Compaq hardcoded
into BIOS PCI IDs of "approved" cards you can put into they trash
creature. I was mad as hell, especially as it is the same Compaq that used
"clean room" approach to re-create IBM PC bootcode (phoenix BIOS it was
called later IIRC), and got 50 or more times more than invested in the
revenues the very first year they started selling "IBM PC compatible"...
Anyway, I decided to keep the beast, there was no 64 bit alternative
laptop then, and get strong allergy to Compaq. Also, I decided to confirm
my both degrees: in Computer Science and Electrical Engineering... I
disassembled the laptop, unsoldered EEPROM chip, dumped BIOS from it,
edited BIOS with hex editor, and instead of some unused PCI ID I put my
Intel card PCI ID, and I edited another unused one to keep checksum the
same. Dumped edited BIOS on new EEPROM chip. Soldered socked in place of
EEPROM chip, and put into it the chip with edited BIOS. And happily used
64 bit Linux laptop with nice Intel wireless till its retirement time,
solidly developing allergy to Compaq.

Whoever wants to listen to my advise, it will be: stay away from HP and
Compaq laptops (but if you need printer: HP will be the best in my opinion
choice).

Re: [CentOS] modestly priced laptop for C7

2017-11-03 Thread Fred Smith

On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 06:48:11AM -0700, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 11/02/2017 03:38 PM, Fred Smith wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 02:09:04PM -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> >> Yves Bellefeuille wrote:
> >>> Valeri Galtsev  wrote:
> >>>
>  Not intending to contradict (if that ends up as pain, it will be
>  your pain anyway ;-) but I would go higher with specs if you intend
>  to use Linux on it. Linux tends to grow its demands for resources
>  pretty much exponentially (same as Windows does, only from lower
>  starting point).
> >>>
> >>> On my Acer Aspire One 522 (two-core AMD C-50 1.0 GHz processor with 2
> >>> GB of RAM), CentOS 6 is noticeably smoother than Windows 7. Windows
> >>> uses the battery more efficiently, however.
> >>>
> >> The reql question is what the o/p wants the system *for*. As I mentioned,
> >> I have my '09 HP Netbook (1101?), and I just loaded CentOS 6 i386 on it,
> >> and it runs acceptably. Now, once I switch the WM from *bleah* Gnome to
> >> KDE, or maybe something lighter, I'll be fine... but I only use it while
> >> traveling, for mail and browsing.
> >>
> >> What *are* you going to be doing with it?
> > 
> > mostly portable email and browsing. if it is good enough it'll probably
> > have dev tools on it too for the uncommon occasions when I need to
> > build something. If it is good enough I may find other thiings to do
> > with it, but I have a reasonably powerful desktop also running C7, so
> > many of those "other" things are taken care of there.
> > 
> > Fred
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/inspiron-11-3000/spd/inspiron-11-3162-laptop
> 
> I use that when i want to travel light .. with an SSD and 8gb of RAM (it
> says 4gb max, 8gb will work), I get good performance and I can do
> anything I need while traveling.  Everything works with CentOS Linux 7
> (wifi, graphics, volume buttons, touchpad, etc)
 
Johnny:
how hard is it to replace RAM or SSD? and battery, too, when that time
comes. 'cause I'd want to do like you and definitely upgrade it right
away, cause that 2gig RAM and abysmal 32G storage is pathetic.

and I'm going to guess that 1.6 Ghz processor is similar to the 1.6b Ghz
Atom I now have, but hopefully less canine-like.

I'd be interested in the 14 inch model except it has the same wimpy specs.
so, again how much hassle  (and cost) is involved in upgrading like you did?

thanks again!


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


-- 
 Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us -
   "For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged 
   sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; 
  it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart."  
 Hebrews 4:12 (niv) --
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 P2V alternatives?

2017-11-03 Thread Mark Haney


On 11/03/2017 12:48 PM, Robert Nichols wrote:

On 11/03/2017 09:02 AM, hw wrote:

Robert Nichols wrote:


How would you recover if that server were suddenly destroyed, let's 
say by a power supply failure that fried the motherboard and all the 
disks? If you can't bring up a machine on new, bare iron starting 
with nothing but your backups and a CD or USB stick with a recovery 
tool, you need to seriously reconsider your backup strategy.


That´s a very good point.

What options are there to make complete and consistent backups of 
machines
and VMs while they are running?  Just shutting down a VM to make a 
backup
is troublesome because you sometimes need to run 'virsh shutdown xx' 
several
times for the VM to actually shut down, and I have VMs that do not 
shut down
no matter how often you try.  If you manage to shut down the VM, 
there is no
guarantee that it will actually restart when you try --- and that 
goes for
non-VMs as well.  Shutting them down manually frequently to make 
backups is

not an option, either.


Every backup tool that can be run on a physical machine can also be 
run in the VM. For databases that cannot be simply copied while they 
are active, there should be a way to generate a snapshot or other 
consistent representation that can be backed up and restored if 
necessary, and any database that does not provide such a capability 
should not be considered suitable for the task at hand. Long-running 
jobs should always have checkpoints to allow them to be continued 
should the machine crash. (I have such a job running right now. 
Coincidentally, it's verifying the consistency of 3 years of backups 
that I just reorganized.)


There is no "one size fits all" answer. The needs of a transaction 
processing system that can never, ever lose a transaction once it's 
been acknowledged are radically different from those of a system that 
can afford to lose an hours, or days, worth of work.




I'll toss my two cents worth in having dealt with a similar situation 
recently (well 2015, but close enough).  If this server is /that/ 
important, I'd really consider building a completely new virtual 
instance on the hypervisor of your choice.  Though, to be completely 
honest, Hyper-V is just awful in my testing. There are far more P2V 
options for VMWare, including it's own P2V software which I've not had 
particular trouble with in a half-decade, if you insist on a P2V migration.


If we're just talking backups, Veeam for Hyper-V  (and ESXi) works 
really well and you can bring up the backed up VM on the fly if you need 
to recover data from it, or for DR/BC.  I've never had a problem with it 
and, at my last position, had it set to run the backups on a remote 
cloud in case of catastrophic damage to the office.  Of course, there's 
no such thing as too many backups, so critical data on a server like you 
have was replicated to a warm/cold site, or part of a cluster for DBs to 
make sure data integrity was kept and uptime maximized.


--
Mark Haney
Network Engineer at NeoNova
919-460-3330 option 1
mark.ha...@neonova.net
www.neonova.net

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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 P2V alternatives?

2017-11-03 Thread Robert Nichols

On 11/03/2017 09:02 AM, hw wrote:

Robert Nichols wrote:

How would you recover if that server were suddenly destroyed, let's say by a
power supply failure that fried the motherboard and all the disks? If you can't
bring up a machine on new, bare iron starting with nothing but your backups and
a CD or USB stick with a recovery tool, you need to seriously reconsider your
backup strategy.

That´s a very good point.

What options are there to make complete and consistent backups of machines
and VMs while they are running? Just shutting down a VM to make a backup
is troublesome because you sometimes need to run 'virsh shutdown xx' several
times for the VM to actually shut down, and I have VMs that do not shut down
no matter how often you try. If you manage to shut down the VM, there is no
guarantee that it will actually restart when you try --- and that goes for
non-VMs as well. Shutting them down manually frequently to make backups is
not an option, either.

Every backup tool that can be run on a physical machine can also be run in the
VM. For databases that cannot be simply copied while they are active, there
should be a way to generate a snapshot or other consistent representation that
can be backed up and restored if necessary, and any database that does not
provide such a capability should not be considered suitable for the task at
hand. Long-running jobs should always have checkpoints to allow them to be
continued should the machine crash. (I have such a job running right now.
Coincidentally, it's verifying the consistency of 3 years of backups that I
just reorganized.)

There is no "one size fits all" answer. The needs of a transaction processing
system that can never, ever lose a transaction once it's been acknowledged are radically
different from those of a system that can afford to lose an hours, or days, worth of work.

--
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-docs] Draft review request (php7 on CentOS) [Was: Documentation proposal]

2017-11-03 Thread Akemi Yagi

It's been a week, so I set up a place for you in HowTo:

https://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/php7

Akemi


On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Thibaut Perrin 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> How long should we wait to decide if we should publish it elsewhere ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Thibaut
>
> On 27 October 2017 at 16:05, [-=X.L.O.R.D=-]  wrote:
>
>> Akemi,
>>
>> Thank for info, seems many developer are using “centos-release-scl”
>> these days, that makes life easier, however, it is little to governance the
>> “software source collection” if they are right or wrong.
>>
>> Anyway it is nice to know and thank you again!
>>
>>
>>
>> Xlord
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* CentOS-docs [mailto:centos-docs-boun...@centos.org] *On Behalf
>> Of *Akemi Yagi
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 27, 2017 9:34 PM
>> *To:* Mail list for wiki articles 
>> *Subject:* Re: [CentOS-docs] Draft review request (php7 on CentOS) [Was:
>> Documentation proposal]
>>
>>
>>
>> A wiki article about how to use php7.x on CentOS 7 has been written by 
>> Thibaut
>> Perrin. His draft can be found in the Scratch section of:
>>
>>
>> https://wiki.centos.org/ThibautPerrin
>>
>> Feedback welcome.
>>
>> Akemi
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Thibaut Perrin 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> No problem, everyone has a life, I understand that ;)
>>
>>
>>
>> I've put the draft of the article in the Scratch section, let me know
>> what you think.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>> Thibaut
>>
>>
>>
>> >>> Hi everyone,
>> >>>
>> >>> ThibautPerrin here, I would like to propose a How-To to use php7.x on
>> >>> CentOS 7, using the SCL, as most of the articles you can find on the
>> web
>> >>> offer to do this using third party repositories, which might not be
>> the most
>> >>> appropriate thing to do :)
>> >>>
>> >>> The location would probably be in the How-Tos I'm guessing, unless
>> >>> somebody has a better location to offer ?
>> >>>
>> >>> I already wrote the document, and I'd be happy to submit it for
>> review /
>> >>> discussion.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>>
>> >>> Thibaut
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> CentOS-docs mailing list
>> CentOS-docs@centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
>>
>>
>
> ___
> CentOS-docs mailing list
> CentOS-docs@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
>
>
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs

Re: [CentOS-docs] Draft review request (php7 on CentOS) [Was: Documentation proposal]

2017-11-03 Thread Thibaut Perrin

Hi all,

How long should we wait to decide if we should publish it elsewhere ?

Thanks,

Thibaut

On 27 October 2017 at 16:05, [-=X.L.O.R.D=-]  wrote:

> Akemi,
>
> Thank for info, seems many developer are using “centos-release-scl” these
> days, that makes life easier, however, it is little to governance the
> “software source collection” if they are right or wrong.
>
> Anyway it is nice to know and thank you again!
>
>
>
> Xlord
>
>
>
> *From:* CentOS-docs [mailto:centos-docs-boun...@centos.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Akemi Yagi
> *Sent:* Friday, October 27, 2017 9:34 PM
> *To:* Mail list for wiki articles 
> *Subject:* Re: [CentOS-docs] Draft review request (php7 on CentOS) [Was:
> Documentation proposal]
>
>
>
> A wiki article about how to use php7.x on CentOS 7 has been written by 
> Thibaut
> Perrin. His draft can be found in the Scratch section of:
>
>
> https://wiki.centos.org/ThibautPerrin
>
> Feedback welcome.
>
> Akemi
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Thibaut Perrin 
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> No problem, everyone has a life, I understand that ;)
>
>
>
> I've put the draft of the article in the Scratch section, let me know what
> you think.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Thibaut
>
>
>
> >>> Hi everyone,
> >>>
> >>> ThibautPerrin here, I would like to propose a How-To to use php7.x on
> >>> CentOS 7, using the SCL, as most of the articles you can find on the
> web
> >>> offer to do this using third party repositories, which might not be
> the most
> >>> appropriate thing to do :)
> >>>
> >>> The location would probably be in the How-Tos I'm guessing, unless
> >>> somebody has a better location to offer ?
> >>>
> >>> I already wrote the document, and I'd be happy to submit it for review
> /
> >>> discussion.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Thibaut
>
>
>
> ___
> CentOS-docs mailing list
> CentOS-docs@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
>
>
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs

Re: [CentOS] Kickstart ksdevice question

2017-11-03 Thread Paul Heinlein


On Fri, 3 Nov 2017, Mark Haney wrote:


On 11/01/2017 05:02 PM, James A. Peltier wrote:

 Leaving ksdevice= off the command line will prompt you for the location of
 the kickstart file and the device you want to use to kickstart

Well, things just got weird with this.  The first couple of times I included 
the biosdevname etc, on the command line with ksdevice=eth0 it worked 
perfectly.  Sometime yesterday (and I verified this a few minutes ago) that 
stopped working.  It's the same hardware (in fact, the exact same hardware as 
I tested earlier, as it's the same box) and now, it's naming the interfaces 
eno1/eno2 again.


Honestly, not that I care, since taking the ksdevice= bit off worked just 
fine, even with the interface names changed to eth0/eth1 in the kickstart 
file. I have no idea why this happened, and finding an answer isn't critical 
to getting these boxes kicked, though I would like to understand why the 
BIOSDEVNAME NET.IFRAMES options stopped working suddenly.  It's the same boot 
image, and the exact same server that renamed the interfaces correctly 
yesterday.  Granted, it's Friday and maybe anaconda is tired of my crap and 
has decided to throw a tantrum.


I haven't been following this thread all that closely, so I'm unsure 
what system and firmware you have -- but we recently encountered a 
BIOS bug that has disrupted some local kickstarts.


The short version is that our Intel SMBIOS reports duplicate names for 
onboard ethernet devices, which in our case are I350 1G cards:


[root ~]# biosdevname -d | grep 'BIOS device'
BIOS device: em1
BIOS device: em1
BIOS device: p785p1

Ideally, the second device would be em2. Since they report the same, 
systemd gets inconsistently confused and the devices' "Kernel name" 
entries bounce between enoX and ethX.


Worse, if I log in via the console, disable the interfaces, use 
modprobe to remove the igb modules, and the re-load it -- the 
interfaces may end up with different designations than they had at 
boot time.


Intel has released a BIOS update that supposedly fixes the problem, 
but I haven't been able yet to travel to the data center to apply and 
test the patch. (No RMM modules in this rack, so I can't attach 
virtual boot media. Sigh.)


Anyway, that may not be your problem, but it might be worth looking 
into.


--
Paul Heinlein
heinl...@madboa.com
45°38' N, 122°6' W
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] low end file server with h/w RAID - recommendations

2017-11-03 Thread Valeri Galtsev

On Fri, November 3, 2017 3:36 am, hw wrote:
> Valeri Galtsev wrote:
>> If you have not Dell server hardware my choice of [hardware] RAID cards
>> would be:
>>
>> Areca
>
> Areca is forbiddingly expensive.

Yes, and it is worth every dollar it costs. All good RAID cards will be on
the same price level. Those cheaper ones I will not let into our stables
(don't get me started ranting about them...)

>
>> LSI (or whoever owns that line these days - Intel was the last one, I
>> recollect)
>>
>> With LSI beware that they have really nasty command line client, and do
>> not have raid watch daemon with web interface like late 3ware had (alas,
>> 3ware after they were bought out several times by competitors were drawn
>> down out of existence).
>
> I like CLIs and donÂ´t like web interfaces ...

I _am_ a command line person myself. Yet, when dealing with RAID, I do
prefer GUI interface, as it is much harder to screw up when you use 3ware
web interface, compared to, say, 3ware command client interface, the last
being much better and clearer than LSI command client... Again, it can be
just me, or it can be the same for many people that our perception of
things in GUI is less prone to grave mistakes.

Valeri

>  3ware used to make good
> cards,
> though also expensive.
> ___
> 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

[CentOS-docs] [Gitblit] arrfab pushed 1 commits => websites/centos.org.git

2017-11-03 Thread Gitblit

https://git.centos.org/summary/websites!centos.org.git

>---
 master branch updated (1 commits)
>---

 Fabian Arrotin 
 Friday, November 3, 2017 16:12 +

 - Renamed calendar.markdown to calendar.md (that's the file used by   nanoc), 
and pushed changes "live"

 
https://git.centos.org/commit/websites!centos.org.git/00bfe196023e1aa7372761cea3a0661ca710904b
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs

Re: [CentOS] modestly priced laptop for C7

2017-11-03 Thread Valeri Galtsev


On Fri, November 3, 2017 8:48 am, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 11/02/2017 03:38 PM, Fred Smith wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 02:09:04PM -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>> Yves Bellefeuille wrote:
 Valeri Galtsev  wrote:

> Not intending to contradict (if that ends up as pain, it will be
> your pain anyway ;-) but I would go higher with specs if you intend
> to use Linux on it. Linux tends to grow its demands for resources
> pretty much exponentially (same as Windows does, only from lower
> starting point).

 On my Acer Aspire One 522 (two-core AMD C-50 1.0 GHz processor with 2
 GB of RAM), CentOS 6 is noticeably smoother than Windows 7. Windows
 uses the battery more efficiently, however.

>>> The reql question is what the o/p wants the system *for*. As I
>>> mentioned,
>>> I have my '09 HP Netbook (1101?), and I just loaded CentOS 6 i386 on
>>> it,
>>> and it runs acceptably. Now, once I switch the WM from *bleah* Gnome to
>>> KDE, or maybe something lighter, I'll be fine... but I only use it
>>> while
>>> traveling, for mail and browsing.
>>>
>>> What *are* you going to be doing with it?
>>
>> mostly portable email and browsing. if it is good enough it'll probably
>> have dev tools on it too for the uncommon occasions when I need to
>> build something. If it is good enough I may find other thiings to do
>> with it, but I have a reasonably powerful desktop also running C7, so
>> many of those "other" things are taken care of there.

To add to that: with Dell always watch which WiFi you are ordering, avoid
by all means "dell" WiFi which as such does not exist, it is just
re-branded as dell anything, so you actually don't know what chipset you
get until the machine is in your hands. Luckily Dell got better, and you
can choose Intel WiFi, and that is virtually guaranteed to work with any
modern Linux kernel (FreeBSD may be a bit behind, they probably still
haven't added to wireless stack what is necessary for _the_latest_ Intel
WiFi).

Just my $0.02

Valeri

>>
>> Fred
>>
>
>
>
> http://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/inspiron-11-3000/spd/inspiron-11-3162-laptop
>
> I use that when i want to travel light .. with an SSD and 8gb of RAM (it
> says 4gb max, 8gb will work), I get good performance and I can do
> anything I need while traveling.  Everything works with CentOS Linux 7
> (wifi, graphics, volume buttons, touchpad, etc)
>
> ___
> 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

[CentOS] Semi-OT: a docker log question

2017-11-03 Thread m . roth

Hi, folks,

   Is there *any* way, other than writing my own logging driver, to get
the docker daemon to write to its very own file, like, say,
/var/log/docker, so that it doesn't spew crap into /var/log/messages?

Thanks in advance.

  mark

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

Re: [CentOS] Maria 10 breaks unixodbc mysql connector

2017-11-03 Thread John Harragin

I think the solution may exist.

The compatibility of mysql-connector-odbc with maria may just means the
driver can access the mariadb - but my experience suggests not live on the
same host.

maria has its own connector:
https://downloads.mariadb.org/connector-odbc/

it does not look like this is in the sig, so I'll have to turn to the maria
repo.

I'll try replacing the driver first, then install the server - and I may be
good to go.

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 10:23 AM, John Harragin 
wrote:

> What I have found is that the only new shared objects between the
> different versions of the running isqls is:
>
> < lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 24 Oct 31 21:25 
> /usr/lib64/mysql/libmysqlclient.so.18
> -> libmysqlclient.so.18.0.0
> > lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 24 Nov  2 12:13 
> > /usr/lib64/mysql/libmysqlclient.so.18
> -> libmysqlclient.so.18.0.0
>
> ... also this is the only shared object with a different node-ID between
> the 2 instances.
>
>
> From the journal:
>
> Nov 02 12:17:23 ec-ast kernel: isql[39065]: segfault at 10070 ip
> 7ff0998b3f7e sp 7ffc9693bb90 error 4 in libmyodbc5w.so[7ff09988d000+
> 47000]
>
> # yum search odbc | grep -E "my|mar"
> mysql-connector-odbc.x86_64 : ODBC driver for MySQL
>
> [root@ec-ast unixodbcproblem]# yum info mysql-connector-odbc.x86_64
> Loaded plugins: fastestmirror
> Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
>  * base: mirrors.lga7.us.voxel.net
>  * epel: epel.mirror.constant.com
>  * extras: mirror.atlanticmetro.net
>  * updates: mirror.atlanticmetro.net
> Installed Packages
> Name: mysql-connector-odbc
> Arch: x86_64
> Version : 5.2.5
> Release : 6.el7
> Size: 427 k
> Repo: installed
> From repo   : base
> Summary : ODBC driver for MySQL
> URL : http://dev.mysql.com/downloads/connector/odbc/
> License : GPLv2 with exceptions
> Description : An ODBC (rev 3) driver for MySQL, for use with unixODBC.
>
> yum whatprovides '*libmyodbc5w.so'
> ...indicates that this is the only source (for my Repo list) for this
> package which contains the segfaulting file.
>
> ...
>
> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 1:38 PM, John Harragin 
> wrote:
>
>> OK, I tried again. I ran the following series of commands (some output in
>> attached file):
>>
>> On a separate session, the first sqli process 29669 worked continually.
>> On a separate session (after mariadb-server 10.1 is installed), isql
>> opens (proc 39065), but SegFaults upon running a query.
>>
>>
>> mkdir /tmp/unixodbcproblem
>> ps -A | grep isql
>> PROCESS=29669
>> lsof | grep ${PROCESS} > /tmp/unixodbcproblem/lsof.${PROCESS}
>> for f in $(pldd ${PROCESS}); do ls -l $f; done >
>> /tmp/unixodbcproblem/pldd.${PROCESS}
>> yum install mariadb-server
>> ps -A | grep isql
>> PROCESS=39065
>> lsof | grep ${PROCESS} > /tmp/unixodbcproblem/lsof.${PROCESS}
>> for f in $(pldd ${PROCESS}); do ls -l $f; done >
>> /tmp/unixodbcproblem/pldd.${PROCESS}
>> setenforce 0# Ran isql again. Still segmentation
>> fault. Just to make sure this not the problem
>> sestatus
>> yum history list# This reported the most recent
>> mariadb-server install as: 53
>> yum history undo 53
>> exit
>>
>> # ls /tmp/unixodbcproblem/
>> lsof.29669  lsof.39065  pldd.29669  pldd.39065
>>
>>
>>
>> This is what I get when mariadb-server 10.1 is installed:
>>
>> # isql -vv mccmysql ec-ast ec
>> +---+
>> | Connected!|
>> |   |
>> | sql-statement |
>> | help [tablename]  |
>> | quit  |
>> |   |
>> +---+
>> SQL> SELECT e_extnum FROM ext LIMIT 5;
>> Segmentation fault
>>
>>
>> This is what I get when mariadb-server is not installed:
>>
>> # isql -vv mccmysql ec-ast ec
>> +---+
>> | Connected!|
>> |   |
>> | sql-statement |
>> | help [tablename]  |
>> | quit  |
>> |   |
>> +---+
>> SQL> SELECT e_extnum FROM ext LIMIT 1;
>> +-+
>> | e_extnum|
>> +-+
>> | 6011|
>> +-+
>> SQLRowCount returns 1
>> 1 rows fetched
>> SQL> quit
>>
>>
>> I going to sed & diff... these files to see what I find. If anyone has
>> any suggestions of tools for this type of investigation, I would love to
>> hear about it.
>>
>> John
>>
>
>
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Maria 10 breaks unixodbc mysql connector

2017-11-03 Thread John Harragin

What I have found is that the only new shared objects between the different
versions of the running isqls is:

< lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 24 Oct 31 21:25
/usr/lib64/mysql/libmysqlclient.so.18 -> libmysqlclient.so.18.0.0
> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 24 Nov  2 12:13
/usr/lib64/mysql/libmysqlclient.so.18 -> libmysqlclient.so.18.0.0

... also this is the only shared object with a different node-ID between
the 2 instances.


>From the journal:

Nov 02 12:17:23 ec-ast kernel: isql[39065]: segfault at 10070 ip
7ff0998b3f7e sp 7ffc9693bb90 error 4 in
libmyodbc5w.so[7ff09988d000+47000]

# yum search odbc | grep -E "my|mar"
mysql-connector-odbc.x86_64 : ODBC driver for MySQL

[root@ec-ast unixodbcproblem]# yum info mysql-connector-odbc.x86_64
Loaded plugins: fastestmirror
Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
 * base: mirrors.lga7.us.voxel.net
 * epel: epel.mirror.constant.com
 * extras: mirror.atlanticmetro.net
 * updates: mirror.atlanticmetro.net
Installed Packages
Name: mysql-connector-odbc
Arch: x86_64
Version : 5.2.5
Release : 6.el7
Size: 427 k
Repo: installed
>From repo   : base
Summary : ODBC driver for MySQL
URL : http://dev.mysql.com/downloads/connector/odbc/
License : GPLv2 with exceptions
Description : An ODBC (rev 3) driver for MySQL, for use with unixODBC.

yum whatprovides '*libmyodbc5w.so'
...indicates that this is the only source (for my Repo list) for this
package which contains the segfaulting file.

...

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 1:38 PM, John Harragin  wrote:

> OK, I tried again. I ran the following series of commands (some output in
> attached file):
>
> On a separate session, the first sqli process 29669 worked continually.
> On a separate session (after mariadb-server 10.1 is installed), isql opens
> (proc 39065), but SegFaults upon running a query.
>
>
> mkdir /tmp/unixodbcproblem
> ps -A | grep isql
> PROCESS=29669
> lsof | grep ${PROCESS} > /tmp/unixodbcproblem/lsof.${PROCESS}
> for f in $(pldd ${PROCESS}); do ls -l $f; done >
> /tmp/unixodbcproblem/pldd.${PROCESS}
> yum install mariadb-server
> ps -A | grep isql
> PROCESS=39065
> lsof | grep ${PROCESS} > /tmp/unixodbcproblem/lsof.${PROCESS}
> for f in $(pldd ${PROCESS}); do ls -l $f; done >
> /tmp/unixodbcproblem/pldd.${PROCESS}
> setenforce 0# Ran isql again. Still segmentation
> fault. Just to make sure this not the problem
> sestatus
> yum history list# This reported the most recent
> mariadb-server install as: 53
> yum history undo 53
> exit
>
> # ls /tmp/unixodbcproblem/
> lsof.29669  lsof.39065  pldd.29669  pldd.39065
>
>
>
> This is what I get when mariadb-server 10.1 is installed:
>
> # isql -vv mccmysql ec-ast ec
> +---+
> | Connected!|
> |   |
> | sql-statement |
> | help [tablename]  |
> | quit  |
> |   |
> +---+
> SQL> SELECT e_extnum FROM ext LIMIT 5;
> Segmentation fault
>
>
> This is what I get when mariadb-server is not installed:
>
> # isql -vv mccmysql ec-ast ec
> +---+
> | Connected!|
> |   |
> | sql-statement |
> | help [tablename]  |
> | quit  |
> |   |
> +---+
> SQL> SELECT e_extnum FROM ext LIMIT 1;
> +-+
> | e_extnum|
> +-+
> | 6011|
> +-+
> SQLRowCount returns 1
> 1 rows fetched
> SQL> quit
>
>
> I going to sed & diff... these files to see what I find. If anyone has any
> suggestions of tools for this type of investigation, I would love to hear
> about it.
>
> John
>
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Kickstart ksdevice question

2017-11-03 Thread Mark Haney


On 11/01/2017 05:02 PM, James A. Peltier wrote:

Leaving ksdevice= off the command line will prompt you for the location of the 
kickstart file and the device you want to use to kickstart

Well, things just got weird with this.  The first couple of times I 
included the biosdevname etc, on the command line with ksdevice=eth0 it 
worked perfectly.  Sometime yesterday (and I verified this a few minutes 
ago) that stopped working.  It's the same hardware (in fact, the exact 
same hardware as I tested earlier, as it's the same box) and now, it's 
naming the interfaces eno1/eno2 again.


Honestly, not that I care, since taking the ksdevice= bit off worked 
just fine, even with the interface names changed to eth0/eth1 in the 
kickstart file. I have no idea why this happened, and finding an answer 
isn't critical to getting these boxes kicked, though I would like to 
understand why the BIOSDEVNAME NET.IFRAMES options stopped working 
suddenly.  It's the same boot image, and the exact same server that 
renamed the interfaces correctly yesterday.  Granted, it's Friday and 
maybe anaconda is tired of my crap and has decided to throw a tantrum.


--
Mark Haney
Network Engineer at NeoNova
919-460-3330 option 1
mark.ha...@neonova.net
www.neonova.net

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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 P2V alternatives?


Robert Nichols wrote:

On 11/03/2017 06:09 AM, hw wrote:

Sorin Srbu wrote:

Hello all,

This week I've tested out a few ways to do a P2V on a rather ancient CentOS
6 server, in order to move it to a Hyper-V host.

So far my tests have failed rather spectacularly.
Initially I was set on doing a simple dd-routine, but was told that the
server cannot be taken off-line as it's being used daily, so had to look for
other solutions.

The disk setup is currently as follows:

Three 500 GB sata-disks, sda, sdb and sdc, are used to build a software raid
called md0. No LVM's here.

Sdd is a 120 GB drive, with partitions for boot, swap, home and /.
No LVM's here either.

The farthest I've gotten is with the Rear solution.
http://relax-and-recover.org/

The backup goes well, but recovery for some reason fails to create initramfs
with all the installed kernels, as well as failing with an error saying it
cannot find /boot/grub, after which the recovery terminates.

Virtualizing systems like this is kinda' new to me, having it done on
Windows only, and I'm not really sure
how to proceed when it's a CentOS system in question.

The physical CentOS-server runs a few license managers and nfs-shares that
server molecular modeling software, that are rather intricately set up (I
inherited this server some fifteen years ago).

Are there any easier ways to do a P2V at all?



I think I would try to create a VM that has the physical disks passed through
and also has access to whatever storage it´s supposed to reside on once the
conversion to a VM is completed.  Then copy it from the physical disks to that
storage.

Converting without shutting the machine down is probably not possible.


How would you recover if that server were suddenly destroyed, let's say by a 
power supply failure that fried the motherboard and all the disks? If you can't 
bring up a machine on new, bare iron starting with nothing but your backups and 
a CD or USB stick with a recovery tool, you need to seriously reconsider your 
backup strategy.


That´s a very good point.

What options are there to make complete and consistent backups of machines
and VMs while they are running?  Just shutting down a VM to make a backup
is troublesome because you sometimes need to run 'virsh shutdown xx' several
times for the VM to actually shut down, and I have VMs that do not shut down
no matter how often you try.  If you manage to shut down the VM, there is no
guarantee that it will actually restart when you try --- and that goes for
non-VMs as well.  Shutting them down manually frequently to make backups is
not an option, either.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?

Johnny Hughes wrote:

On 11/03/2017 03:53 AM, Sorin Srbu wrote:

-Original Message-
From: CentOS [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Gary
Stainburn
Sent: den 3 november 2017 11:43
To: CentOS mailing list 
Subject: Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?

yeah, it's just a normal USB dongle, and it's supported by the Linux

Kernel,

that's why I tried it. I have tried other USB dongles with Linux before

and

failed.

Cool, thanks!

For the vast majority of laptops that are not based on the absolute
latest chipsets, CentOS Linux 7 just works.  There are sometimes issues
with the latest Intel Graphics or the latest Intel CPU chipset.  The
latest kernel did get newer hardware drivers.

We also have an experimental kernel here that can be tried if you have a
specific issue as well:

https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/AltArch/i386

(look at the .repo file for experimental kernel at the bottom of the
page .. it works for i386 and x86_64 CentOS Linux 7 arches)

BTW, where are the kernel-headers for kernel-ml kernels which would be
needed to install NVIDIA drivers from their web site?

Since the problem with the missing fence.h apparently has been fixed, we
should be able to take advantage of the enhancements that this change
(hopefully) has brought about.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] modestly priced laptop for C7

On 11/02/2017 03:38 PM, Fred Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 02:09:04PM -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> Yves Bellefeuille wrote:
>>> Valeri Galtsev  wrote:
>>>
 Not intending to contradict (if that ends up as pain, it will be
 your pain anyway ;-) but I would go higher with specs if you intend
 to use Linux on it. Linux tends to grow its demands for resources
 pretty much exponentially (same as Windows does, only from lower
 starting point).
>>>
>>> On my Acer Aspire One 522 (two-core AMD C-50 1.0 GHz processor with 2
>>> GB of RAM), CentOS 6 is noticeably smoother than Windows 7. Windows
>>> uses the battery more efficiently, however.
>>>
>> The reql question is what the o/p wants the system *for*. As I mentioned,
>> I have my '09 HP Netbook (1101?), and I just loaded CentOS 6 i386 on it,
>> and it runs acceptably. Now, once I switch the WM from *bleah* Gnome to
>> KDE, or maybe something lighter, I'll be fine... but I only use it while
>> traveling, for mail and browsing.
>>
>> What *are* you going to be doing with it?
> 
> mostly portable email and browsing. if it is good enough it'll probably
> have dev tools on it too for the uncommon occasions when I need to
> build something. If it is good enough I may find other thiings to do
> with it, but I have a reasonably powerful desktop also running C7, so
> many of those "other" things are taken care of there.
> 
> Fred
> 



http://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/inspiron-11-3000/spd/inspiron-11-3162-laptop

I use that when i want to travel light .. with an SSD and 8gb of RAM (it
says 4gb max, 8gb will work), I get good performance and I can do
anything I need while traveling.  Everything works with CentOS Linux 7
(wifi, graphics, volume buttons, touchpad, etc)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 P2V alternatives?

2017-11-03 Thread Robert Nichols


On 11/03/2017 06:09 AM, hw wrote:

Sorin Srbu wrote:

Hello all,

This week I've tested out a few ways to do a P2V on a rather ancient CentOS
6 server, in order to move it to a Hyper-V host.

So far my tests have failed rather spectacularly.
Initially I was set on doing a simple dd-routine, but was told that the
server cannot be taken off-line as it's being used daily, so had to look for
other solutions.

The disk setup is currently as follows:

Three 500 GB sata-disks, sda, sdb and sdc, are used to build a software raid
called md0. No LVM's here.

Sdd is a 120 GB drive, with partitions for boot, swap, home and /.
No LVM's here either.

The farthest I've gotten is with the Rear solution.
http://relax-and-recover.org/

The backup goes well, but recovery for some reason fails to create initramfs
with all the installed kernels, as well as failing with an error saying it
cannot find /boot/grub, after which the recovery terminates.

Virtualizing systems like this is kinda' new to me, having it done on
Windows only, and I'm not really sure
how to proceed when it's a CentOS system in question.

The physical CentOS-server runs a few license managers and nfs-shares that
server molecular modeling software, that are rather intricately set up (I
inherited this server some fifteen years ago).

Are there any easier ways to do a P2V at all?



I think I would try to create a VM that has the physical disks passed through
and also has access to whatever storage it´s supposed to reside on once the
conversion to a VM is completed.  Then copy it from the physical disks to that
storage.

Converting without shutting the machine down is probably not possible.


How would you recover if that server were suddenly destroyed, let's say by a 
power supply failure that fried the motherboard and all the disks? If you can't 
bring up a machine on new, bare iron starting with nothing but your backups and 
a CD or USB stick with a recovery tool, you need to seriously reconsider your 
backup strategy.

--
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] HP laptops with CentOS 7?

On 11/03/2017 03:53 AM, Sorin Srbu wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: CentOS [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Gary
>> Stainburn
>> Sent: den 3 november 2017 11:43
>> To: CentOS mailing list 
>> Subject: Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?
>>
>> yeah, it's just a normal USB dongle, and it's supported by the Linux
> Kernel,
>> that's why I tried it. I have tried other USB dongles with Linux before
> and
>> failed.
> 
> Cool, thanks!
> 

For the vast majority of laptops that are not based on the absolute
latest chipsets, CentOS Linux 7 just works.  There are sometimes issues
with the latest Intel Graphics or the latest Intel CPU chipset.  The
latest kernel did get newer hardware drivers.

We also have an experimental kernel here that can be tried if you have a
specific issue as well:

https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/AltArch/i386

(look at the .repo file for experimental kernel at the bottom of the
page .. it works for i386 and x86_64 CentOS Linux 7 arches)

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 P2V alternatives?


Sorin Srbu wrote:

Hello all,

This week I've tested out a few ways to do a P2V on a rather ancient CentOS
6 server, in order to move it to a Hyper-V host.

So far my tests have failed rather spectacularly.
Initially I was set on doing a simple dd-routine, but was told that the
server cannot be taken off-line as it's being used daily, so had to look for
other solutions.

The disk setup is currently as follows:

Three 500 GB sata-disks, sda, sdb and sdc, are used to build a software raid
called md0. No LVM's here.

Sdd is a 120 GB drive, with partitions for boot, swap, home and /.
No LVM's here either.

The farthest I've gotten is with the Rear solution.
http://relax-and-recover.org/

The backup goes well, but recovery for some reason fails to create initramfs
with all the installed kernels, as well as failing with an error saying it
cannot find /boot/grub, after which the recovery terminates.

Virtualizing systems like this is kinda' new to me, having it done on
Windows only, and I'm not really sure
how to proceed when it's a CentOS system in question.

The physical CentOS-server runs a few license managers and nfs-shares that
server molecular modeling software, that are rather intricately set up (I
inherited this server some fifteen years ago).

Are there any easier ways to do a P2V at all?



I think I would try to create a VM that has the physical disks passed through
and also has access to whatever storage it´s supposed to reside on once the
conversion to a VM is completed.  Then copy it from the physical disks to that
storage.

Converting without shutting the machine down is probably not possible.  Passing
the disks through may give you the advantage that the downtime can be kept to
a minimum.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?

> -Original Message-
> From: CentOS [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Gary
> Stainburn
> Sent: den 3 november 2017 11:43
> To: CentOS mailing list 
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?
> 
> yeah, it's just a normal USB dongle, and it's supported by the Linux
Kernel,
> that's why I tried it. I have tried other USB dongles with Linux before
and
> failed.

Cool, thanks!

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

Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?

2017-11-03 Thread Gary Stainburn

Hi

yeah, it's just a normal USB dongle, and it's supported by the Linux Kernel, 
that's why I tried it. I have tried other USB dongles with Linux before and 
failed.

This one was plug and play.

Gary

On Friday 03 November 2017 07:49:56 Sorin Srbu wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: CentOS [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Gary
> > Stainburn
> > Sent: den 2 november 2017 15:10
> > To: centos@centos.org
> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?
> >
> > On Thursday 02 November 2017 14:04:11 Gary Stainburn wrote:
> > > On Thursday 02 November 2017 13:54:41 Sorin Srbu wrote:
> > > > Thanks.
> > > > Would you know what chipset that particular wifi-dongle is running?
> > > >
> > > > A wifi-dongle may work, but I'm thinking it's not really desirable to
>
> go
>
> > > > that way.
> > > > I'm figuring the users will loose that dongle sooner than later! :-)
> > >
> > > The laptop is in the car so I can't check at the moment, but this is
> > > the item.
> > >
> > > I understand your concern regarding the users, but thet can't be any
>
> worse
>
> > > than mine, and they're capable of not losing their mouse dongle.
> > >
> > > It would be nicer to get it working with the internal one at some
> > > point.
> >
> > It would have helped to incluide the URL
> >
> > https://thepihut.com/collections/raspberry-pi-wifi/products/usb-wifi-
> > adapter-for-the-raspberry-pi
>
> Huh? Raspberry Pi-dongles work on off-the-shelf laptops too?
>
>
> --
> //Sorin
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos



-- 
Gary Stainburn
Group I.T. Manager
Ringways Garages
http://www.ringways.co.uk 

https://fundraise.cancerresearchuk.org/page/garys-march-march
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS-docs] [Gitblit] bexelbie pushed 1 commits => websites/centos.org.git

2017-11-03 Thread Gitblit

https://git.centos.org/summary/websites!centos.org.git

>---
 master branch updated (1 commits)
>---

 Brian (bex) Exelbierd 
 Friday, November 3, 2017 10:30 +

 Adding updated calendar

 
https://git.centos.org/commit/websites!centos.org.git/c9c92d2a8accb93e0ad4f138c43cb37c5cb3c25f
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs

[CentOS] CentOS 6 P2V alternatives?

Hello all,

This week I've tested out a few ways to do a P2V on a rather ancient CentOS
6 server, in order to move it to a Hyper-V host.

So far my tests have failed rather spectacularly.
Initially I was set on doing a simple dd-routine, but was told that the
server cannot be taken off-line as it's being used daily, so had to look for
other solutions.

The disk setup is currently as follows:

Three 500 GB sata-disks, sda, sdb and sdc, are used to build a software raid
called md0. No LVM's here.

Sdd is a 120 GB drive, with partitions for boot, swap, home and /. 
No LVM's here either.

The farthest I've gotten is with the Rear solution. 
http://relax-and-recover.org/

The backup goes well, but recovery for some reason fails to create initramfs
with all the installed kernels, as well as failing with an error saying it
cannot find /boot/grub, after which the recovery terminates.

Virtualizing systems like this is kinda' new to me, having it done on
Windows only, and I'm not really sure
how to proceed when it's a CentOS system in question.

The physical CentOS-server runs a few license managers and nfs-shares that
server molecular modeling software, that are rather intricately set up (I
inherited this server some fifteen years ago).

Are there any easier ways to do a P2V at all?

-- 
BW,
Sorin
---
# Sorin Srbu, Sysadmin
# Uppsala University
# Dept of Medicinal Chemistry
# Div of Org Pharm Chem
# Box 574
# SE-75123 Uppsala
# Sweden
#
# Phone: +46 (0)18-4714482
# Visit: BMC, Husargatan 3, D5:512b
# Web: http://www.orgfarm.uu.se
---
# O<  ASCII ribbon campaign - Against html E-mail 
# http://tinyurl.com/ascii-ribbon-campaign
#
# This message was not sent from an iProduct!
#
# Please consider the environment before printing this email.
# Join the campaign at http://thinkBeforePrinting.org
#
# MotD follows:
Spare yourself many hard falls; don't jump to conclusions

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

Re: [CentOS] low end file server with h/w RAID - recommendations


m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:

hw wrote:

m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:

hw wrote:

Richard Zimmerman wrote:

DO NOT buy the newer HPE DL20 gen9 or ML10 gen9 servers then
(especially
if using CentOS 6.x)





And I do *not* want to buy from HP, because their
support is nothing like good.


Indeed, I wouldn´t buy HP new.  They don´t even give you a price for
a new battery for an UPS but tell you to open a ticket to get a price
and expect you to pay for opening the ticket, and they have finally
managed to completely mess up their web site so that you can´t find
anything anymore.


But wait, it's worse: the replacement *parts* have a different part number
than the original. I had to replace a PSU on a blade enclosure, and had to
get HP, or maybe a reseller, I forget, to tell me what the correct part
number for the replacement part was, and, IIRC, there were both 6-digit
number, or maybe 12



Well, I ended up buying a new UPS because a replacement battery was
unavailable.  Now I wouldn´t buy anything but APC for an UPS anymore.


[...]

If you get a Dell, and one of their PERC cards, you're getting a
rebranded LSI, sorry, Avago, um, who bought it last? Those are good
and reliable, not super expensive.


Those don´t work at all.  I had to return two of them because none of them
worked in any of the boards I tried them, and the smart arrays I replaced
them with work in the same boards.  Dell always had a reputation for
making incompatible hardware, and that experience proved it.

Maybe they work when you have Dell hardware, but I have none.


Oh, ok, I was assuming you did. No, if you're not buying Dell hardware,
with their own PERC cards, get an LSI/AVAGO/whoever. They *do* work on
anything, and MegaRAID software is not hard to find. Note: if you go that
route, I have a script I found only that makes basic monitoring *much*
easier than the hostile MegaRAID interface


I wouldn´t say I don´t buy Dell, only that I haven´t yet.  HP is much
easier to get (perhaps everyone is throwing them out because they can´t
get firmware updates anymore).

There´s also something to HP hardware --- for example, what´s Dells
equivalent to an ML350?  I couldn´t find anything like it from Dell.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] low end file server with h/w RAID - recommendations


Valeri Galtsev wrote:

If you have not Dell server hardware my choice of [hardware] RAID cards
would be:

Areca


Areca is forbiddingly expensive.


LSI (or whoever owns that line these days - Intel was the last one, I
recollect)

With LSI beware that they have really nasty command line client, and do
not have raid watch daemon with web interface like late 3ware had (alas,
3ware after they were bought out several times by competitors were drawn
down out of existence).


I like CLIs and don´t like web interfaces ...  3ware used to make good cards,
though also expensive.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] low end file server with h/w RAID - recommendations

John R Pierce wrote:

On 11/2/2017 9:21 AM, hw wrote:

Richard Zimmerman wrote:

hw wrote:

Next question: you want RAID, how much storage do you need? Will 4 or 8 3.5" drives be enough (DO
NOT GET crappy 2.5" drives - they're *much* more expensive than the 3.5" drives, and
>smaller disk space. For the price of a 1TB 2.5", I can get at least a 4TB WD Red.

I will second Marks comments here. Yes, 2.5" drive enterprise drives have been an
issue. +1 for the WD Red drives, so far 3.5" w/ 2tb and 4tb drives, ZERO issues.
I've had good luck with HGST NAS drives too. Unfortunately, that will come to an end soon
(With WD owning HGST).

Most servers can fit only 2.5" disks these days. I keep wondering what
everyone is doing about storage.

2.5" SAS drives spinning at 10k and 15k RPM are the performance solution for online storage, like
databases and so forth. also make more sense for large arrays of SSDs, as they don't even come in
3.5".With 2.5" you can pack more disks per U (24-25 2.5" per 2U face, vs 12 3.5"
max per 2U)... more disks == more IOPS.

That´s not for storage because it´s so expensive that you can only use it
for the limited amounts of data that actually benefit from, or require,
the advantage in performance. For this application, it makes perfectly
sense.

3.5" SATA drives spinning at 5400 and 7200 rpm are the choice for large
capacity bulk 'nearline' storage which is typically sequentially written once

Why would you write them only once? Where are you storing your data when you
do that?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] low end file server with h/w RAID - recommendations


m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:

hw wrote:

Richard Zimmerman wrote:

hw wrote:

Next question: you want RAID, how much storage do you need? Will 4 or 8
3.5" drives be enough (DO NOT GET crappy 2.5" drives - they're *much*
more expensive than the 3.5" drives, and >smaller disk space. For the
price of a 1TB 2.5", I can get at least a 4TB WD Red.


I will second Marks comments here. Yes, 2.5" drive enterprise drives
have been an issue. +1 for the WD Red drives, so far 3.5" w/ 2tb and 4tb
drives, ZERO issues. I've had good luck with HGST NAS drives too.
Unfortunately, that will come to an end soon (With WD owning HGST).


Most servers can fit only 2.5" disks these days.  I keep wondering what
everyone is doing about storage.


Sorry, that depends 100% on what you *order*. We tell our resellers that
we want 3.5" drives, that's what we get. All the vendors, intluding Dell,
and the smaller ones, online you can configure what you want, to price it
out, and they *all* offer 3.5" drives.

The only 2.5" drives that we're ok with getting are the two internal SSD's
for RAID 1 for the o/s, and nothing else.

You may not be talking to the right sales folks.


That only goes when you buy new.  Look at what you can get used, and you´ll
see that there´s basically nothing that fits 3.5" drives.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] low end file server with h/w RAID - recommendations


m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:

Valeri Galtsev wrote:


On Thu, November 2, 2017 11:21 am, hw wrote:

Richard Zimmerman wrote:

hw wrote:

Next question: you want RAID, how much storage do you need? Will 4 or
8
3.5" drives be enough (DO NOT GET crappy 2.5" drives - they're *much*
more expensive than the 3.5" drives, and >smaller disk space. For the
price of a 1TB 2.5", I can get at least a 4TB WD Red.


I will second Marks comments here. Yes, 2.5" drive enterprise drives
have been an issue. +1 for the WD Red drives, so far 3.5" w/ 2tb and
4tb
drives, ZERO issues. I've had good luck with HGST NAS drives too.
Unfortunately, that will come to an end soon (With WD owning HGST).


Most servers can fit only 2.5" disks these days.  I keep wondering what
everyone is doing about storage.


Ignoring existence of 2.5 inch, and getting rackmount machines with with
3.5 inch drives. Space wise (meaning GB wise) per U of rack they are at
the very least the same, only much cheaper per GB.


Y'know, I just had a thought: are there folks here who, when they say
"server", are *not* thinking of rackmount servers?


Does it matter?  19" cases are very well thought out, easy to work on
and fit nicely into the racks.  You can always use something else and
enjoy the disadvantages, but why would you.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] low end file server with h/w RAID - recommendations


Stephen John Smoogen wrote:

On 2 November 2017 at 12:21, hw  wrote:

Richard Zimmerman wrote:


hw wrote:


Next question: you want RAID, how much storage do you need? Will 4 or 8
3.5" drives be enough (DO NOT GET crappy 2.5" drives - they're *much* more
expensive than the 3.5" drives, and >smaller disk space. For the price of a
1TB 2.5", I can get at least a 4TB WD Red.



I will second Marks comments here. Yes, 2.5" drive enterprise drives have
been an issue. +1 for the WD Red drives, so far 3.5" w/ 2tb and 4tb drives,
ZERO issues. I've had good luck with HGST NAS drives too. Unfortunately,
that will come to an end soon (With WD owning HGST).



Most servers can fit only 2.5" disks these days.  I keep wondering what
everyone is doing about storage.



The 2.5 inch drives have a pretty good lifetime these days and seem to
be all you can get for various storage systems. It is like back when
we all wanted and loved 5.25 drives and all you could get was the
crappy 3.5 inch ones. And I expect in 3-5 years the 2.5 inch ones will
be replaced with only able to get the in card SIMM like drives.


Look at the prices.  Who can afford even 20TB storage in 2.5" disks.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?

> -Original Message-
> From: CentOS [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of m.roth@5-
> cent.us
> Sent: den 2 november 2017 15:46
> To: CentOS mailing list 
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?
> 
> > I usually recommend Dell: business lines of laptops, see which are
offered
> > with 3 to 5 years warranty, I do get cheapest 3 year warranty, but Dell
> > committing to maintain it for 5 years tell you that that is solidly
built,
> > and is not expected to be obsoleted soon.
> 
> Seconded. Hell, I tell everyone, including my kids, DO NOT BUY
> consumer-grade laptops, only business-grade. Even buying one used online,
> they'll last longer than any crap consumer grade.
> 
> We have a lot of Dell Latitudes here at work.

Why would anybody buy consumer-grade laptops for use in a business?

Actually, I recommended a used HP Elitebook to a retired lecturer here at
work when he asked for advice on a new laptop to start writing a new edition
of medicinal chemistry book. Boy, was he pleased with the two-three year old
laptop!

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

Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?

> -Original Message-
> From: CentOS [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Valeri
> Galtsev
> Sent: den 2 november 2017 15:21
> To: CentOS mailing list 
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?
> 
> 
> On Thu, November 2, 2017 8:29 am, Sorin Srbu wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I'm looking into getting HP laptops for our department running CentOS 7.
> 
> I usually recommend against HP laptops. I had Compaq quite some time ago
> (the last was bought out by HP shortly after I got my laptop), and I have
> seen a bunch of HP laptops people in our Department got themselves. That
> (dealing with these, looking inside hardware etc) developed strong allergy
> towards HP laptops in me. My Compaq, BTW, has a list of "approved
> hardware" in BIOS, which is evil: I had to edit BIOS with hex editor to
> replace piece of crap broadcom wireless adapter with Intel one.
> 
> To be fair I must mention here that I love HP printers, and the whole
> attitude of HP towards printers they make. Decent HP laser printers are
> manageable, last forever, and HP keeps making supplies for them. I just
> retired still working B/W LaserJet 4050, that worked for over 16 years,
> was heavily used, still works, print quality is the same as it always had,
> and HP still makes supplies for it.
> 
> I usually recommend Dell: business lines of laptops, see which are offered
> with 3 to 5 years warranty, I do get cheapest 3 year warranty, but Dell
> committing to maintain it for 5 years tell you that that is solidly built,
> and is not expected to be obsoleted soon.
> 
> I recommended IBM before they sold laptop line to Lenovo. After watching
> Lenovo for about 3 years, I started recommending them (they were same
> well
> engineered as IBMs were), but shortly after that they had a scandal: sold
> a bunch of laptops with malware preinstalled, that did it: I gave up on
> Lenovo for good.
> 
> From smaller players, I would just see which makes business oriented
> laptops for some time (offering purchase of long warranties is a good
> sign). And if you can handle one before purchasing - say, you can go to
> computer store and handle on on display, - I would recommend "propeller
> test". Grab sides of laptop and try to twist it into propeller shape. If
> it is flexible, it is junk that will fail soon. If it is solid, it has
> great chance to last long. Flexing system board - motherboard is common
> jargon for over 30 years - leads to developing microcracks in it: copper
> when going through plastic deformation hardens, then cracks.

Funny you should mention the "propeller test", as this is why I've stayed
away from Dell laptops, and instead went for the HP Compaq's with the
magnesium chassis in the early 00's! I've stayed with HP since then.

HP has however had a habit of replacing the hardware anytime within a series
while calling the models the same. This has bitten both me and the people at
central IT sourcing the Microsoft SCCM infrastructure for us.

I think I'll keep an open mind for Dell laptops for now.

Thanks for the feedback!



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

Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?

> -Original Message-
> From: CentOS [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Tru Huynh
> Sent: den 2 november 2017 15:13
> To: CentOS mailing list 
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?
> 
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 01:29:53PM +, Sorin Srbu wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I'm looking into getting HP laptops for our department running CentOS 7.
> 
> At daily work, we have elitebook 840g2 and 840g3, works out of the box
with C7.
> (on the g3, the FN/light shortcuts are not working). ymmv.

Awesome, thanks!


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

Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?

> -Original Message-
> From: CentOS [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Gary
> Stainburn
> Sent: den 2 november 2017 15:10
> To: centos@centos.org
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?
> 
> On Thursday 02 November 2017 14:04:11 Gary Stainburn wrote:
> > On Thursday 02 November 2017 13:54:41 Sorin Srbu wrote:
> > > Thanks.
> > > Would you know what chipset that particular wifi-dongle is running?
> > >
> > > A wifi-dongle may work, but I'm thinking it's not really desirable to
go
> > > that way.
> > > I'm figuring the users will loose that dongle sooner than later! :-)
> >
> > The laptop is in the car so I can't check at the moment, but this is the
> > item.
> >
> > I understand your concern regarding the users, but thet can't be any
worse
> > than mine, and they're capable of not losing their mouse dongle.
> >
> > It would be nicer to get it working with the internal one at some point.
> 
> 
> It would have helped to incluide the URL
> 
> https://thepihut.com/collections/raspberry-pi-wifi/products/usb-wifi-
> adapter-for-the-raspberry-pi

Huh? Raspberry Pi-dongles work on off-the-shelf laptops too?


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

Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?

> -Original Message-
> From: CentOS [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Ian Pilcher
> Sent: den 2 november 2017 16:36
> To: centos@centos.org
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?
> 
> > Anybody care to chime in with a comment or hint on the laptop situation
> > and-or their experiences?
> 
> I'm very happy with my Dell Precision 5520 "developer edition".  It
> shipped with Ubuntu and runs Fedora pretty much flawlessly.  I haven't
> tried CentOS, but Dell claims that RHEL support on their spec sheet, so
> I would expect it to work well.
> 
> Dell also have the XPS 13 "developer edition" for those looking for a
> smaller footprint.


Ouch!
The 5520's seems pricey!
The XPS's slightly less so.
HP does have an advantage wrt price.

Thanks for the feedback!

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

Re: [CentOS] HP laptops with CentOS 7?