On Monday 05 May 2014 00:22:52 Evan Rowley wrote:
When I started this thread a week ago, I certainly did not expect
this many replies. Without a doubt it seems Network Manager is a
controversial topic. I still haven't worked out my Network Manager
woes and just lost an hour troubleshooting
On 05/05/2014 10:55 AM, Tony Molloy wrote:
On Monday 05 May 2014 00:22:52 Evan Rowley wrote:
When I started this thread a week ago, I certainly did not expect
this many replies. Without a doubt it seems Network Manager is a
controversial topic. I still haven't worked out my Network Manager
On 05/05/2014 06:55 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
you should rather set
PERRDNS=no
DNS1=bar
DNS2=foo
in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0
The options in this file are documented in:
/usr/share/doc/initscripts-*/sysconfig.txt
A great answer, but with a minor typo. The option is:
On May 1, 2014, at 11:45 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On 05/01/2014 10:56 AM, Steve Clark wrote:
I feel for you then. I guess we have been lucky in the 6 or 7 hardware
platforms we have used that the nics ( minimum 3, usually 4 or more )
have always stayed the same names in the
When I started this thread a week ago, I certainly did not expect this many
replies. Without a doubt it seems Network Manager is a controversial topic.
I still haven't worked out my Network Manager woes and just lost an hour
troubleshooting a Golang webserver which wouldn't start.
Apparently in
On Sun, May 04, 2014 at 07:22:52PM -0400, Evan Rowley wrote:
Apparently in Golang's net package, there is a DNS resolver function that's
called whenever a server is started. That function depends on a working
/etc/resolv.conf - As per usual, the /etc/resolv.conf file turned out to be
the blank
That file is 'sourced' by other network scripts so doesn't have to be
executable, but the contents set environment variables for other scripts.
Or so I believe. No doubt someone will correct me if I am wrong. 8-)
Cheers,
Cliff
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Matthew Miller mat...@mattdm.org
Keith Keller wrote:
I don't mind NM editing resolv.conf if it knows
- or even thinks it knows - how to improve
on the current settings, but what I don't understand
is why it occasionally deletes the current settings
without substituting anything else.
I can't imagine any situation where
On 04/30/2014 02:41 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
So, have you ever had to deal with a CentOS box and multiple NICs.
Especially one where you've cloned it or moved a disk to a new
chassis? Apparently there is just not a good
On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 06:54:18AM -0400, Steve Clark wrote:
On 04/30/2014 02:41 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
So, have you ever had to deal with a CentOS box and multiple NICs.
Especially one where you've cloned it or moved
On Wed, April 30, 2014 14:11, Les Mikesell wrote:
Makes me wonder why we have cars that are
all approximately the correct widths to fit on a road and brake and
accelerator pedals in the same relative positions.
Graveyards.
--
*** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel ***
James
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 5:54 AM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
On 04/30/2014 02:41 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
So, have you ever had to deal with a CentOS box and multiple NICs.
Especially one where you've cloned
On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 08:59:54AM -0400, James B. Byrne wrote:
On Wed, April 30, 2014 14:11, Les Mikesell wrote:
Makes me wonder why we have cars that are
all approximately the correct widths to fit on a road and brake and
accelerator pedals in the same relative positions.
On 2014-05-01, Scott Robbins scot...@nyc.rr.com wrote:
I haven't followed this thread too closely, so if this has already been
stated, please forgive me.
It was not explicitly stated, so I appreciate the succinct summary.
Thanks!
Judging from both recent editions of Fedora and the free beta
On 05/01/2014 09:09 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 5:54 AM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
On 04/30/2014 02:41 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
So, have you ever had to deal with a CentOS box and
Keith Keller wrote:
snip
Could this be a SIG in the future? CentOS NM-Haters SIG ;-)
Does RH really just throw these things in? It seems like they would
annoy many of their more tech-savvy customers with moves like this one
(if it were to happen).
I think I need to check with my manager -
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Keith Keller
kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us wrote:
Could this be a SIG in the future? CentOS NM-Haters SIG ;-)
Does RH really just throw these things in? It seems like they would
annoy many of their more tech-savvy customers with moves like this one
(if
On 05/01/2014 10:56 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I think I need to check with my manager - we do have a few RH licenses
- and maybe I, or several of us, should put in an enhancement request
for 7: DO NOT INSTALL NM by default *EXCEPT* for either a desktop, or,
better, a laptop install. DO
On 05/01/2014 10:56 AM, Steve Clark wrote:
I feel for you then. I guess we have been lucky in the 6 or 7 hardware
platforms we have used that the nics ( minimum 3, usually 4 or more )
have always stayed the same names in the same order.
That's actually an illusion. If the detection pulls it
On 04/30/2014 12:40 PM, Zube wrote:
I dunno. Heresy! reality check, really. Sure seems to be the case
to me. You certainly aren't praising people who don't embrace the
change you do. I'll drop it and let others decide.
'Not embracing' and 'being actively antagonistic to any change' are too
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On 05/01/2014 10:56 AM, Steve Clark wrote:
I feel for you then. I guess we have been lucky in the 6 or 7 hardware
platforms we have used that the nics ( minimum 3, usually 4 or more )
have always stayed the same names in the
Lamar Owen wrote:
On 04/30/2014 12:40 PM, Zube wrote:
snip
Sure. Given that I have no need of NM, what part is broken that NM
fixes for me?
Are you sure you will never have need for NM?
Or do the some use cases not apply to anyone who uses CentOS on
static IP desktops?
Totally static
Lamar Owen wrote:
On 05/01/2014 10:56 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I think I need to check with my manager - we do have a few RH licenses
- and maybe I, or several of us, should put in an enhancement request
for 7: DO NOT INSTALL NM by default *EXCEPT* for either a desktop, or,
better, a
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On 05/01/2014 10:56 AM, Steve Clark wrote:
I feel for you then. I guess we have been lucky in the 6 or 7 hardware
platforms we have used that the nics ( minimum 3, usually 4 or more )
have always stayed the
On 05/01/2014 01:45 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
On 05/01/2014 10:56 AM, Steve Clark wrote:
I feel for you then. I guess we have been lucky in the 6 or 7 hardware
platforms we have used that the nics ( minimum 3, usually 4 or more )
have always stayed the same names in the same order.
That's
On 05/01/2014 01:45 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
On 05/01/2014 10:56 AM, Steve Clark wrote:
I feel for you then. I guess we have been lucky in the 6 or 7 hardware
platforms we have used that the nics ( minimum 3, usually 4 or more )
have always stayed the same names in the same order.
That's
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 1:42 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
What I do when I upgrade a box via rsync is either rm
70-persistant-net.rules, or look at the MAC addresses beforehand, and edit
the rules so that they're correct for this box before the reboot.
If it is a box we've used before,
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
Yep, do it all the time - first two thing I do are:
rm -f /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules
rm -r /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth*
and then reboot.
The above makes them be rediscovered on the reboot.
On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 07:45:02AM -0700, Keith Keller wrote:
On 2014-05-01, Scott Robbins scot...@nyc.rr.com wrote:
Thanks!
Judging from both recent editions of Fedora and the free beta RH7, you
don't HAVE to use NetworkManager. You will have to manually turn it off
and turn network
On 2014-05-01, m.r...@5-cent.us m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I think I need to check with my manager - we do have a few RH licenses -
and maybe I, or several of us, should put in an enhancement request for 7:
DO NOT INSTALL NM by default *EXCEPT* for either a desktop, or, better, a
laptop install.
Les Mikesell wrote:
For example, I think there are ways to tell NM not to
mess with a specific interface setting, and maybe a way to say you
don't want it to screw up your resolv.conf file,
I don't mind NM editing resolv.conf if it knows
- or even thinks it knows - how to improve
on the
On 04/29/2014 02:42 PM, Steve Clark wrote:
This may be fine for users that don't know what they are doing or
don't have a stable networking environment, but I have found for me it
causes nothing but heartache.
Steve, first, if this comes off as a rant, that's not my intention, and
it's not
On 04/29/2014 03:05 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
There are two sides to this. On the one hand you want to be able to
nail down server configurations - and probably anything that is going
to stay wired.
Ok, I'll bite on this one.
*Why* do we want a server configuration to be nailed down? Is it
On 04/29/2014 03:17 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I think upstream might consider, esp. that we're now a partner,
talking to *us*. I mean, this is an ENTERPRISE o/s, and that means,
heavily, *servers*, and does anyone actually use wireless, or anything
other than hardwired, for a server?
Lamar Owen wrote:
On 04/29/2014 02:42 PM, Steve Clark wrote:
This may be fine for users that don't know what they are doing or
don't have a stable networking environment, but I have found for me it
causes nothing but heartache.
snip
My experience? There is no such thing as a 100% stable
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 9:15 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
NetworkManager is well-documented. You just have to read the docs and
be willing to try something new. It also logs to /var/log/messages in
plain text, too. There are more pieces, yes, to trace through. But,
unless you
Lamar Owen wrote:
On 04/29/2014 03:05 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
There are two sides to this. On the one hand you want to be able to
nail down server configurations - and probably anything that is going
to stay wired.
Ok, I'll bite on this one.
*Why* do we want a server configuration to be
On 04/30/2014 10:36 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 9:15 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
...If you install the Desktop
package, there's a bit of an assumption that you want a Desktop, no?
No. Just no. Not if you think that means there is just one Desktop
and it is
Lamar Owen wrote:
My experience? There is no such thing as a 100% stable networking
environment.
I agree that WiFi networking is difficult,
but ethernet networking, in my experience, is 99.9% stable.
I wish NM would just stick to WiFi.
NetworkManager is well-documented.
Where?
I haven't
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On 04/29/2014 03:05 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
There are two sides to this. On the one hand you want to be able to
nail down server configurations - and probably anything that is going
to stay wired.
Ok, I'll bite on this one.
On 2014-04-30, Timothy Murphy gayle...@eircom.net wrote:
I don't mind NM editing resolv.conf if it knows
- or even thinks it knows - how to improve
on the current settings, but what I don't understand
is why it occasionally deletes the current settings
without substituting anything else.
I
My last test with Network Manager was a couple of years ago. At that time,
a client that was set to boot using DHCP and NM would not set its hostname
when such was provided with the DHCP response. That was a show stopper for
me (none of my 200+ non-wifi clients have any configuration on them
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 9:55 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
That hasn't been a reasonable assumption for anything running X, ever, and
even less so with freenx/x2go.
Interestingly, X turns the whole client/server thing on its head.
and always has.
But freenx/NX/x2go put the big
On 04/30/2014 10:41 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Define stable. please.
I define stable in this context as 'behaving in a completely consistent
and predictable fashion.'
I have servers (and I really, REALLY want to
reboot them, but they're home directory or project servers, and so it's
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Keith Keller
kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us wrote:
No settings might be better. If I take my laptop from one site to
another, keeping my previous resolv.conf intact, and NM doesn't remove
it, then my laptop will try to query the previous site's DNS. They
On Wed Apr 30 11:22:56 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
I really try hard to not be snide or offend very often, but the idea
that something needs to stay a certain way either just because it's
always been that way or because we can't do it the way someone else who
we don't like has done it deserves a
On 04/30/2014 11:18 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
But freenx/NX/x2go put the big picture back the way it belongs.
For certain usess I agree with that; for others, not so much. Seamlessly
pulling applications from an application server to the display server
has its distinct advantages, particularly
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On 04/30/2014 11:18 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
But freenx/NX/x2go put the big picture back the way it belongs.
For certain usess I agree with that; for others, not so much. Seamlessly
pulling applications from an application
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Zube z...@stat.colostate.edu wrote:
I run CentOS because I want stability. It works and I know how to
work it. When something like this is changed, there is an opportunity
cost for having to figure out how to get it back to the way I want it
to be (compare
On 04/30/2014 11:39 AM, Zube wrote:
I find this common argument execrable. It seems to suggest that if
I don't accept and embrace the new things that you do, I'm somehow a
Luddite or my thinking is backwards.
That's not what I think, nor is it what I said. Being unwilling to even
try
On 04/30/2014 12:02 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
I think it is unfortunate there there is no standard defined for
configuration files or tools to stabilize it and make common
operations across platforms possible in spite of the bizarre
differences each vendor tries to add. Something like posix
On Wed Apr 30 12:12:41 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
That's not what I think, nor is it what I said.
Quote 1:
Back in the late 1800's people who had used tillers to steer their
horseless carriages probably though the same thing about this new fancy
gizmo called a steering wheel. And automatic
On 04/30/2014 11:01 AM, Keith Keller wrote:
I don't use NetworkManager, so I don't know the answer to this
question: is there a way to tell it not to clobber portions of your
network configuration, and/or to provide it with defaults if it can't
determine values for a particular option?
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On 04/30/2014 12:02 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
I think it is unfortunate there there is no standard defined for
configuration files or tools to stabilize it and make common
operations across platforms possible in spite of the
On 04/30/2014 10:47 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I've got two rooms, with a number of servers in each room behind a
firewall, *required* by US law (HIPAA PII data). I've got compute
clusters, and all the compute nodes are all 192.168.etc, and they MUST
NOT CHANGE, EVER!!! All of those
On 04/30/2014 11:22 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
On 04/30/2014 10:41 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Define stable. please.
I define stable in this context as 'behaving in a completely consistent
and predictable fashion.'
I have servers (and I really, REALLY want to
reboot them, but they're home
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On 04/30/2014 10:47 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I've got two rooms, with a number of servers in each room behind a
firewall, *required* by US law (HIPAA PII data). I've got compute
clusters, and all the compute nodes are all
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
What I meant about Windows is everything seems to be hidden behind some gui
interface, which
leads people to not really understand the underpinnings of what is truly
happening. NM seems akin
to this, at least the
On 04/30/2014 11:03 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
You forgot to mention interoperable along with effective and complete.
No, I didn't forget it.
Dynamic DNS and/or mDNS with associated addresses deals with the need
for a static IP;
Is that secure?
Dynamic DNS can be, yes. It depends upon the
On 04/30/2014 12:56 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
Choice is great, surprises not so much. And I find it surprising that
NM sometimes runs, sometimes doesn't, depending on seemingly unrelated
things.
Those would be bugs, and bugs need fixing. But they can't be fixed if
they're not reported.
On 04/30/2014 11:10 AM, Steve Thompson wrote:
My last test with Network Manager was a couple of years ago. At that time,
a client that was set to boot using DHCP and NM would not set its hostname
when such was provided with the DHCP response. That was a show stopper for
me (none of my 200+
On 04/30/2014 12:54 PM, Steve Clark wrote:
What I meant about Windows is everything seems to be hidden behind
some gui interface, which
leads people to not really understand the underpinnings of what is
truly happening.
A GUI and a registry; and I agree with that assessment.
NM seems
Lamar Owen wrote:
snip
But the simple fact is that NetworkManager is with us for a long time
coming. You don't have to use it if you don't need it's particular
snip
Which leads to a thought: you said that the time to vote on NM was long
past. My response was that none of *us* saw, or were
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
You forgot to mention interoperable along with effective and complete.
No, I didn't forget it.
Dynamic DNS and/or mDNS with associated addresses deals with the need
for a static IP;
Is that secure?
Dynamic DNS can be,
On 04/30/2014 10:57 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I agree that WiFi networking is difficult, but ethernet networking, in
my experience, is 99.9% stable.
Sure is; but we do bonding for a reason.
I wish NM would just stick to WiFi.
There are other interfaces, like various VPN's and WWAN cards,
On 04/30/2014 01:48 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I do have a reason for that hope... remember the thread a month or so
ago, where *we* *were* asked about tcp-wrappers?
Yes; I don't recall if I commented or not.
For things that mean major changes - systemd, NM, etc, I'm hoping
that, in the
On 04/30/2014 01:01 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
What I meant about Windows is everything seems to be hidden behind some gui
interface, which
leads people to not really understand the underpinnings of what is truly
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On 04/30/2014 12:02 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
snip
Yes, I blame all our economic problems on the wastefulness of
duplicated effort in learning to manage computers. That and everyone
having to stock a
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com
wrote:
What I meant about Windows is everything seems to be hidden behind some
gui interface, which
leads people to not really understand the underpinnings of what is truly
happening. NM seems akin
to
Lamar Owen wrote:
On 04/30/2014 10:57 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
snip
The upstream documentation has some info; the man pages (nm-applet(1),
nm-connection-editor(1), nm-online(1), nm-tool(1), nmcli(1),
NetworkManager.conf(5), nm-system-settings.conf(5), and
NetworkManager(8) all have useful
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1:04 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On 04/30/2014 12:02 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
snip
Yes, I blame all our economic problems on the wastefulness of
duplicated effort in learning to
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1:04 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On 04/30/2014 12:02 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
snip
Yes, I blame all our economic problems on the wastefulness of
duplicated
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
You do know that windows servers have a fairly complete set of command
line options, don't you?
Well the one and only time I configured an interface on windows from the
command line I couldn't believe I had to type
On 04/30/2014 01:46 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
Dynamic DNS can be, yes. It depends upon the way the zone file is
updated and whether it's Internet-exposed on not.
So how can it be dynamic, but controlled at the same time?
Set up
On 4/30/2014 11:13 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Makes me wonder why we have cars that are
all approximately the correct widths to fit on a road and brake and
accelerator pedals in the same relative positions.
a) Human fits to where pedals are.
b) I still go with the Roman milspec on main
Lamar Owen wrote:
On 04/30/2014 01:46 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
Dynamic DNS can be, yes. It depends upon the way the zone file is
updated and whether it's Internet-exposed on not.
So how can it be dynamic, but controlled at the
On 04/30/2014 02:16 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
You do know that windows servers have a fairly complete set of command
line options, don't you?
Well the one and only time I configured an interface on windows from the
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
I'll take [SRV record examples] as a 'no' for the general case.
How is an RFC quote and an example of a running standardized application
using the feature a 'no?' Please read
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRV_record and see
On 04/30/2014 02:10 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Just like what Lose, I mean, WinDoze, logs... paragraph long error
messages that are mostly useless and information-free.
As long as there is unique information to google, it will work out. And
while I detest them, the Windows hexadecimal codes
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
So, have you ever had to deal with a CentOS box and multiple NICs.
Especially one where you've cloned it or moved a disk to a new
chassis? Apparently there is just not a good way to identify
interfaces.
Yep, do it
On 2014-04-30, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Keith Keller
kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us wrote:
No settings might be better. If I take my laptop from one site to
another, keeping my previous resolv.conf intact, and NM doesn't remove
it, then
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Keith Keller
kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us wrote:
At any rate, for CentOS 6 we can still say if you don't like NM, don't
use it.
Yes, but we are approaching the end of an era. As soon as 7 is out,
you won't be able to get applications for 6 and you'll
On 04/28/2014 06:19 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Is this an impromptu poll? I think we had one for NM (it's so much
better in fedora, it was reworked...), and everyone else, if it's not
a laptop, wants it to Go Away. But will they listen to us?
The answer is found in the package set for RHEL7.
On 04/29/2014 02:22 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
On 04/28/2014 06:19 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Is this an impromptu poll? I think we had one for NM (it's so much
better in fedora, it was reworked...), and everyone else, if it's not
a laptop, wants it to Go Away. But will they listen to us?
The
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
This may be fine for users that don't know what they are doing or don't have
a stable networking environment,
but I have found for me it causes nothing but heartache. The first thing I do
is disable it.
The sad part
Steve Clark wrote:
On 04/29/2014 02:22 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
On 04/28/2014 06:19 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Is this an impromptu poll? I think we had one for NM (it's so much
better in fedora, it was reworked...), and everyone else, if it's not
a laptop, wants it to Go Away. But will they
On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 15:17:09 -0400
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
does anyone actually use wireless, or anything other than
hardwired, for a server?
That depends on how you define server.
--
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com
On 4/29/2014 13:05, Les Mikesell wrote:
can you tell it
that adding a USB device and picking up a dchp address is OK, but you
don't want to change your default route just because dhcp offers it?
Mixed DHCP and static IP configurations is a very useful but often
neglected combination. [1]
Frank Cox wrote:
On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 15:17:09 -0400
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
does anyone actually use wireless, or anything other than
hardwired, for a server?
That depends on how you define server.
A Dell PowerEdge, or an HP DLx80, or a Penguin, or Why, what other
values of server do
On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 15:44:10 -0400
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
A Dell PowerEdge, or an HP DLx80, or a Penguin, or Why, what other
values of server do you have?
Transferring files from one computer to another via ssh or ftp, for one.
Backup via rsync for two. Database access for three.
Need
Frank Cox wrote:
On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 15:44:10 -0400
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
A Dell PowerEdge, or an HP DLx80, or a Penguin, or Why, what other
values of server do you have?
Transferring files from one computer to another via ssh or ftp, for one.
Backup via rsync for two. Database
On 4/29/2014 13:17, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I mean, this is an ENTERPRISE o/s, and that means, heavily,
*servers*, and does anyone actually use wireless, or anything other than
hardwired, for a server?
I think you're setting up false dichotomies here. It isn't about
desktop vs server, or
On 4/29/2014 14:02, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Trains stop at a train station, buses stop at a bus station
Taxis stop at the train station, cars park at the bus station, busses
pull up to the airport...
The lines aren't as sharp as you're trying to draw them.
Warren Young wrote:
On 4/29/2014 13:17, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I mean, this is an ENTERPRISE o/s, and that means, heavily,
*servers*, and does anyone actually use wireless, or anything other than
hardwired, for a server?
I think you're setting up false dichotomies here. It isn't about
Warren Young wrote:
On 4/29/2014 14:02, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Trains stop at a train station, buses stop at a bus station
Taxis stop at the train station, cars park at the bus station, busses
pull up to the airport...
The lines aren't as sharp as you're trying to draw them.
You
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Warren Young war...@etr-usa.com wrote:
On 4/29/2014 13:05, Les Mikesell wrote:
can you tell it
that adding a USB device and picking up a dchp address is OK, but you
don't want to change your default route just because dhcp offers it?
Mixed DHCP and static IP
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Warren Young war...@etr-usa.com wrote:
On 4/29/2014 13:05, Les Mikesell wrote:
can you tell it
that adding a USB device and picking up a dchp address is OK, but you
don't want to change your default route just because dhcp offers it?
On 4/29/2014 14:15, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Compute node... it automatically detects a
GPU(s)? It comes with PBS/Torque installed? Fuse? Gluster? Ready to be
joined to a cluster? I'd like to see what their definition of compute
node is
It's probably the RHEL7 version of their HPC
On 04/27/2014 10:14 AM, Christopher Jacoby wrote:
I don't use NetworkManager on servers, only my laptop. Makes servers act
weird.
You know, you don't get NetworkManager on a server if you don't install
the 'Desktop' group. The list of packages that actually require
NetworkManager is very
On Apr 26, 2014, at 10:37 PM, John R. Dennison j...@gerdesas.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 12:33:27AM -0400, Evan Rowley wrote:
Is anyone frustrated by Network Manager? I wish CentOS just used the basic
configuration files like the ones on BSD-style OSes. Those are so simple in
1 - 100 of 106 matches
Mail list logo
