I haven't had this many errors doing a make in a long, long, long, long
time... maybe never. (I'm saying that I'm guessing here) It could
be that you were in the wrong directory when you ran "make" or, more
likely, you skipped a command (perhaps ".configure") that should have
been run before
The repository to which I am referring is the liblouis repository on
googlecode. I get a working copy, which has an autogen.sh file. I run
this and then configure. Make gives the following errors
../libtool: line 826: X--tag=CC: command not found
../libtool: line 859: libtool: ignoring unknown t
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 11:32:24PM -0500, John J. Boyer wrote:
> I have a CentOS virtual private server from 1and1.com If I checkout or
> pull something from a repository, it will contain an autogen.sh file
> Running this and then configure seems to work. However, when I run make
> I get a lot o
On 05/15/2011 11:32 PM, John J. Boyer wrote:
> I have a CentOS virtual private server from 1and1.com If I checkout or
> pull something from a repository, it will contain an autogen.sh file
> Running this and then configure seems to work. However, when I run make
> I get a lot of error messages f
I have a CentOS virtual private server from 1and1.com If I checkout or
pull something from a repository, it will contain an autogen.sh file
Running this and then configure seems to work. However, when I run make
I get a lot of error messages from libtool saying that such and such a
command coul
Hello,
I've got apache running on a centos 5.6 machine. All of my users have
a umask of 077 set in /etc/bashrc. I'm now wanting to give several of
them permission to write to a web area so they can place content
visible to the web server. I've got two groups webdev1 and webdev2
which I want one to
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> Look at wikipedia's page describing CentOS. They include a column for
> the delay between the upstream release and CentOS's. For the 5 series,
> it looks like:
>
> Release Delay
> 5 28d
> 5.1 25d
> 5.2 34d
> 5.3 69d
> 5.
On 05/12/2011 02:31 PM, Craig White wrote:
> Apparently my company will potentially need to put in some servers for Asia
> and is hoping to find a highly reliable data center in either Singapore or
> Hong Kong if anyone has recommendations.
>
> Thanks
>
You might check out the forums on http://ww
On 05/15/2011 05:56 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 05/15/11 5:00 PM, Miguel Medalha wrote:
>> http://routerboard.com/pricelist.php?showProduct=98
>>
>> 13 Gigabit ports
> note 10 of those ports are on ethernet switches, so the actual router
> probably only has 5 ethernet ports, 3 dedicated and 2 sw
On 05/15/2011 05:12 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 05/15/2011 02:23 PM, Ron Blizzard wrote:
>> Obviously I missed the part where I (or someone) said (or claimed)
>> that 6.1 could be done in a month.
>
> Well, that is where this branch of the thread began.
>
> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/ce
On 05/15/11 5:00 PM, Miguel Medalha wrote:
> http://routerboard.com/pricelist.php?showProduct=98
>
> 13 Gigabit ports
note 10 of those ports are on ethernet switches, so the actual router
probably only has 5 ethernet ports, 3 dedicated and 2 switch groups of 5
ports each.
also note this doesn't
I'm a big fan of Sonicwall have a look at what they offer ... price not
too bad either
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:00 AM, Miguel Medalha wrote:
>
> > Does it have to be 1RU ?
> >
> This one is 1U:
>
> http://routerboard.com/pricelist.php?showProduct=98
>
> 13 Gigabit ports
>
>
> Does it have to be 1RU ?
>
This one is 1U:
http://routerboard.com/pricelist.php?showProduct=98
13 Gigabit ports
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Sorry wrong URL;
I was trying to point you to the RB750G model in particular.
http://routerboard.com/pricelist.php?showProduct=90
Cheers.
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 9:07 AM, Brian McKerr wrote:
> Does it have to be 1RU ?
>
> These are excellent;
>
> http://routerboard.com/index.php?showProduct=9
Does it have to be 1RU ?
These are excellent;
http://routerboard.com/index.php?showProduct=90
5 GIGABIT etc
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
> Hi List,
>
> I am looking for 1U firewall hardware, any ideas? Something like that
> (
> http://www.applianceshop.eu/index.php
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Miguel Medalha wrote:
>> I was assuming the same. That's why I suggested the Jetway solution. I
>> is economic and works very well in many scenarios.
>> Not, of course, if you need *concurrent* Gigabit access on several
>> interfaces. I stress *concurrent*
>
> I bu
> I was assuming the same. That's why I suggested the Jetway solution. I
> is economic and works very well in many scenarios.
> Not, of course, if you need *concurrent* Gigabit access on several
> interfaces. I stress *concurrent*
I built one of these to connect several vlans to a 24Mbit ADSL int
> I'm assuming the OP is trying to save money. A firewall with 5xGbe
> interfaces is going to thousands of dollars.
I was assuming the same. That's why I suggested the Jetway solution. I
is economic and works very well in many scenarios.
Not, of course, if you need *concurrent* Gigabit access on
On 05/15/2011 02:23 PM, Ron Blizzard wrote:
> Obviously I missed the part where I (or someone) said (or claimed)
> that 6.1 could be done in a month.
Well, that is where this branch of the thread began.
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2011-May/111443.html
Ljubomir Ljubojevic began the b
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Miguel Medalha wrote:
>
>>> pci is a shared bus with a max of 2 gigabits. you'll see a gigabit but
>>> never see two or more.
>> I am aware of that. But as I said it depends on your particular needs in
>> *concurrent* traffic. Although it cannot sustain simultaneo
> The daughterboard I pointed to contains Intel 3 Gigabit chips.
Ooops, I meant *3 Intel Gigabit chips*.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> I would defiantly stick with PCIe for 5 NICs. Additionally Realtek
> NICs don't offer the best performance and their drivers are hit or
> miss. The Supermicro board has Intel PCIe NICs onboard and a PCIe
> expansion slot. This should give you full performance depending on the
> Atom processor. I
>> pci is a shared bus with a max of 2 gigabits. you'll see a gigabit but
>> never see two or more.
> I am aware of that. But as I said it depends on your particular needs in
> *concurrent* traffic. Although it cannot sustain simultaneous Gigabit
> debits on all interfaces, i can sustain Gigabit
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 5:38 PM, William Warren
wrote:
> On 5/15/2011 5:26 PM, Miguel Medalha wrote:
>> You can use something like this Atom 525 dual core motherboard:
>>
>> http://www.jetwaycomputer.com/NF99.html
>>
>> Or this Atom C550 dual core board:
>>
>> http://www.jetwaycomputer.com/NC9C.ht
> pci is a shared bus with a max of 2 gigabits. you'll see a gigabit but
> never see two or more.
I am aware of that. But as I said it depends on your particular needs in
*concurrent* traffic. Although it cannot sustain simultaneous Gigabit
debits on all interfaces, i can sustain Gigabit burs
On 5/15/2011 5:26 PM, Miguel Medalha wrote:
> You can use something like this Atom 525 dual core motherboard:
>
> http://www.jetwaycomputer.com/NF99.html
>
> Or this Atom C550 dual core board:
>
> http://www.jetwaycomputer.com/NC9C.html
>
> With the AD3INLAN-G daughterboard:
>
> http://www.jetwayco
You can use something like this Atom 525 dual core motherboard:
http://www.jetwaycomputer.com/NF99.html
Or this Atom C550 dual core board:
http://www.jetwaycomputer.com/NC9C.html
With the AD3INLAN-G daughterboard:
http://www.jetwaycomputer.com/Daughter_Board.html
This will give you 5 Gigabit
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> No, I'm not. Neither I nor Dag, as far as I saw, brought SL into the
> conversation at all. The question is not whether CentOS can build
> releases in less time than SL, or even a reasonable amount of time. The
> question that Dag posed w
On 05/15/2011 03:52 AM, Ron Blizzard wrote:
> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 3:11 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
>> As far as users know, all work on 6.0 was postponed to get 5.6 done. At
>> the time of 5.6's release, it was the only release the team was working
>> on. Work on 5 should have been something t
2011/5/15 Ryan Wagoner :
> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
>> Hi List,
>>
>> I am looking for 1U firewall hardware, any ideas? Something like that
>> (http://www.applianceshop.eu/index.php/firewalls/opnsense/opnsense-pfsense-ghz-19-appliance-1.html)
>> but at least with 5GBi
I am going to move this thread to the apache users list, as there are no other
applications having trouble in the chroot
Apache is setting REMOTE_ADDR=16.0.0.0 for PHP and cgi scripts.
Searching the web, I keep finding my own posts:
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/apache/users/388695
--
-
On 05/15/2011 08:41 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 16:35, Michel Donais wrote:
>> A perhaps stupid question from a newby
>>
>> Why 4.9 is out in a so long time frame after 5.0?
>>
>>
>> 5.6 -- CentOS - 4/8/11SL - (Soon) <--
>> same time frame (1 of 3)
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 16:35, Michel Donais wrote:
> A perhaps stupid question from a newby
>
> Why 4.9 is out in a so long time frame after 5.0?
>
>
> 5.6 -- CentOS - 4/8/11 SL - (Soon) <--
> same time frame (1 of 3)
> 5.5 -- CentOS - 5/14/10 SL
A perhaps stupid question from a newby
Why 4.9 is out in a so long time frame after 5.0?
5.6 -- CentOS - 4/8/11SL - (Soon) <--
same time frame (1 of 3)
5.5 -- CentOS - 5/14/10 SL - 5/19/10
5.4 -- CentOS - 10/21/9 SL -
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
> Hi List,
>
> I am looking for 1U firewall hardware, any ideas? Something like that
> (http://www.applianceshop.eu/index.php/firewalls/opnsense/opnsense-pfsense-ghz-19-appliance-1.html)
> but at least with 5GBit nics and more memory.
>
> --
>
Hi List,
I am looking for 1U firewall hardware, any ideas? Something like that
(http://www.applianceshop.eu/index.php/firewalls/opnsense/opnsense-pfsense-ghz-19-appliance-1.html)
but at least with 5GBit nics and more memory.
--
Eero
___
CentOS mailing l
On 15 May 2011 12:58, Hakan Koseoglu
> You should be looking at glibc source code.
Scratch that, i'm talking rubbish
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 15 May 2011 12:45, Frank Chang wrote:
> In order to understand mmap better, we decided to try to find the
> Centos 5.5 source code for mmap.c. We already installed the kernel source
You should be looking at glibc source code.
___
CentOS mailing l
Good morning, We are trying to figure out how to properly provide adresss
hints to mmap on 32-bit Centos 5.5. Does any documentation exist about to how
to provide address hints to mmap on 32-bit Centos 5.5? If so, where can we find
this documentation.
In order to understand mmap better, w
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 3:11 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 05/12/2011 02:05 AM, Ron Blizzard wrote:
>> But at that time there should only be one point release on the table,
>> instead of two point releases and one major release. Is everyone
>> forgetting that 4.9, 5.6 and 6.0 were all out at the
On 05/12/2011 02:05 AM, Ron Blizzard wrote:
> But at that time there should only be one point release on the table,
> instead of two point releases and one major release. Is everyone
> forgetting that 4.9, 5.6 and 6.0 were all out at the same time?
As far as users know, all work on 6.0 was postpon
41 matches
Mail list logo
