Re: [CentOS] Centos 7 specific cure for Spamassassin DNS lookup problem

On Thursday 10 August 2017 09:21:31 Gary Stainburn wrote: > I have the following error message in my /var/log/spamd > > spf: lookup failed: available_nameservers: No DNS servers available! > > Having Googled the error message I've found a number of responses which > involve patching Perl or

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

On Thu, 10 Aug 2017, Robert Moskowitz wrote: Other than the 17K output from smartctl -x, what do you recommend? smartctl -a is a little easier on the eye. jh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017, 6:48 AM Robert Moskowitz wrote: > > > On 08/09/2017 10:46 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: > > If it's a bad sector problem, you'd write to sector 17066160 and see if > the > > drive complies or spits back a write error. It looks like a bad sector in > > that

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

On 08/10/2017 10:31 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Robert Moskowitz wrote: On 08/09/2017 10:44 PM, mad.scientist.at.la...@tutanota.com wrote: what file system are you using? ssd drives have different characteristics that need to be accomadated (including a relatively slow write process which

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

Robert Moskowitz wrote: On 08/09/2017 01:48 PM, hw wrote: Robert Moskowitz wrote: I am building a new system using an Kingston 240GB SSD drive I pulled from my notebook (when I had to upgrade to a 500GB SSD drive). Centos install went fine and ran for a couple days then got errors on the

Re: [CentOS] Centos 7 specific cure for Spamassassin DNS lookup problem

On Thu, 10 Aug 2017, Gary Stainburn wrote: I have the following error message in my /var/log/spamd spf: lookup failed: available_nameservers: No DNS servers available! Having Googled the error message I've found a number of responses which involve patching Perl or Spamassassin or other

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017, 11:55 AM Mark Haney wrote: > To be honest, I'd not try a btrfs volume on a notebook SSD. I did that on a > couple of systems and it corrupted pretty quickly. I'd stick with xfs/ext4 if you manage to get the drive working again. > Sounds like a

[CentOS] E-invoicing to OpenPeppol with Oxalis on CentOS anyone ?

Hello list, I'm desperately trying to get the latest Oxalis software (https://github.com/difi/oxalis ) to run in Tomcat on CentOS 6.9 but I'm getting a obscure Java error. Something about a a method not found: Java.lang.NoSuchMethodError:

[CentOS] Centos 7 specific cure for Spamassassin DNS lookup problem

I have the following error message in my /var/log/spamd spf: lookup failed: available_nameservers: No DNS servers available! Having Googled the error message I've found a number of responses which involve patching Perl or Spamassassin or other cures. Before I start changing things I was

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

On Thu, 10 Aug 2017, mad.scientist.at.la...@tutanota.com wrote: what file system are you using?  ssd drives have different characteristics that need to be accomadated (including a relatively slow write process which is obvious as soon as the buffer is full), and never, never put a swap

[CentOS] gluster-containers with CentOS and Gluster 3.11

Hi, I am trying to get a glusterfs container based on CentOS and GlusterFS version 3.11 (https://github.com/gluster/gluster-containers) But there is no centos-release-gluster311 package, right? Or have I missed something? How can I yum install version 3.11? best Christopher

Re: [CentOS] Centos 7 specific cure for Spamassassin DNS lookup problem

On 10/08/17 15:37, Paul Heinlein wrote: On Thu, 10 Aug 2017, Gary Stainburn wrote: I have the following error message in my /var/log/spamd spf: lookup failed: available_nameservers: No DNS servers available! Having Googled the error message I've found a number of responses which involve

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

On Aug 10, 2017, at 2:07 AM, John Hodrien wrote: > > For a well configured desktop that rarely needs to swap, I struggle to see the > load on the SSD as being significant, and yet obviously the performance of an > SSD would make it ideal for swap. I agree. It’s a bad

Re: [CentOS] BIND 9.9 RRL

> Am 10.08.2017 um 21:00 schrieb Mark Haney : > > I can't seem to find anything clear on this, but is the C7 version of BIND > 9.9 built with Request Rate Limiting? _Response_ Rate Limiting - I think its possible since EL6:

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

On 8/10/2017 1:12 PM, Warren Young wrote: It’s a bad idea to do without swap even if you almost never use it, because today’s bloated apps often have many pages of virtual memory they rarely or never actually touch. You want those pages to get swapped out quickly so that the precious RAM can

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

On Aug 10, 2017, at 10:46 AM, mad.scientist.at.la...@tutanota.com wrote: > > is that because the drive is compressing the information? No. I believe by “probabilistic representation” the parent poster simply means that in any given data cell, you don’t have a hard “1” or “0”, you have some

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

On 10/08/17 21:17, John R Pierce wrote: > On 8/10/2017 1:12 PM, Warren Young wrote: >> It’s a bad idea to do without swap even if you almost never use it, >> because today’s bloated apps often have many pages of virtual memory >> they rarely or never actually touch. You want those pages to get >>

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

On Aug 10, 2017, at 2:17 PM, John R Pierce wrote: > > On 8/10/2017 1:12 PM, Warren Young wrote: >> You want those pages to get swapped out quickly so that the precious RAM can >> be used more productively; by the buffer cache, if nothing else. > > most modern virtual

Re: [CentOS] Acroread9 crash in CentOS7

On Fri, 11 Aug 2017, wwp wrote: I'm still using acroread on CentOS6 (other computers than this C7 one) and never had a single problem. It might be still usable but it isn't secure. --- Ian ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

is that because the drive is compressing the information?  is there a way to turn this off?  i hate mandatory compression as losing one bit in a compressed file tends to be a big deal compared to the same in an uncompressed file. -- Securely sent with Tutanota. Claim your encrypted mailbox

Re: [CentOS] BIND 9.9 RRL

On 10/08/2017 21:00, Mark Haney wrote: > I can't seem to find anything clear on this, but is the C7 version of > BIND 9.9 built with Request Rate Limiting? Run "named -V" and it will output the features it was compiled with. See if RRL is in there. Regards, Anand

[CentOS] Centos7 - Mate : screensaver troubles after Freeipa-config

Hello All, these days one of my tasks is connecting some Centos7 laptops to Freeipa, also running on Centos7. After doing that, some users report nog being able to unlock their screens. Only after reboot are they able to login again. I see this em in /var/log/secure: Aug 10 13:34:37

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

Robert Moskowitz wrote: > On 08/09/2017 10:44 PM, mad.scientist.at.la...@tutanota.com wrote: >> what file system are you using? ssd drives have different >> characteristics that need to be accomadated (including a relatively slow >> write process which is obvious as soon as the buffer is full),

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

Mark Haney wrote: To be honest, I'd not try a btrfs volume on a notebook SSD. I did that on a couple of systems and it corrupted pretty quickly. I'd stick with xfs/ext4 if you manage to get the drive working again. That was merely to see if a trim operation on the whole device would bring

Re: [CentOS] Acroread9 crash in CentOS7

Hello Ian, On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 02:59:36 + Ian Mortimer wrote: > On Tue, 2017-08-08 at 23:13 +0200, wwp wrote: > > > I'm getting a crash with acroread on my CentOS7 > > (AdobeReader_enu-9.5.5-1.i486). > > I install the official rpms from > >

[CentOS] BIND 9.9 RRL

I can't seem to find anything clear on this, but is the C7 version of BIND 9.9 built with Request Rate Limiting? -- Mark Haney Network Engineer at NeoNova 919-460-3330 option 1 mark.ha...@neonova.net www.neonova.net ___ CentOS mailing list

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

Chris Murphy wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017, 6:48 AM Robert Moskowitz > wrote: > >> >> >> On 08/09/2017 10:46 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> > If it's a bad sector problem, you'd write to sector 17066160 and see >> if >> the >> > drive complies or spits back a write error. It

Re: [CentOS] Centos 7 specific cure for Spamassassin DNS lookup problem

On 08/10/2017 01:21 AM, Gary Stainburn wrote: I have the following error message in my /var/log/spamd spf: lookup failed: available_nameservers: No DNS servers available! Try starting spamassassin later. Run "systemctl edit spamassassin.service" and insert two lines: [Unit]

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

On 08/09/2017 10:46 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: If it's a bad sector problem, you'd write to sector 17066160 and see if the drive complies or spits back a write error. It looks like a bad sector in that the same LBA is reported each time but I've only ever seen this with both a read error and a

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

On 08/09/2017 01:48 PM, hw wrote: Robert Moskowitz wrote: I am building a new system using an Kingston 240GB SSD drive I pulled from my notebook (when I had to upgrade to a 500GB SSD drive). Centos install went fine and ran for a couple days then got errors on the console. Here is an

Re: [CentOS] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 36s! [swapper/0:0]

Never saw this emailDid anyone get it?  anyone know how to fix this?thanks again. From: KM To: CentOS mailing list Sent: Monday, August 7, 2017 11:26 AM Subject: Re: [CentOS] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 36s! [swapper/0:0]

Re: [CentOS] Errors on an SSD drive

On 08/09/2017 10:44 PM, mad.scientist.at.la...@tutanota.com wrote: what file system are you using? ssd drives have different characteristics that need to be accomadated (including a relatively slow write process which is obvious as soon as the buffer is full), and never, never put a swap