Discuss February 2010

discuss@lists.centos.org

273 participants
231 discussions

openfiler (was: using CentOS as an iSCSI server?)
by Alan McKay 07 Apr '10

07 Apr '10

> Simple, it's only a NAS device, and not really a file server / web > server / data base server as well. Here is something I am currently lokoing at, and wondering if you'd considered it or if anyone here has done it. I've got a bunch of existing hardware - really good IBM stuff that is all installed with CentOS (with a few exceptions). We want to move to virtualization, but the direct-attached storage is a bit of an issue because with VMWare ESXi you cannot do some of the fancy stuff like "VMove" (moving a live running server from one host to another). So of course Openfiler comes to mine. However, most of this hardware has pretty significant CPU and RAM horsepower, so just running it as openfiler would be quite wasteful. What I se some people doing is - install ESXi (4.0) onto the bare metal - install openfiler as a virtual machine - give open filer all the disk - serve the disk out to other VMs via openfiler This may seem redundant vs just doing it without openfiler, but as mentioned a lot of the fancy features you only get with virtualized disk. I am about to do some benchmarks on this stuff to see what percentage of performance I give up for doing it this way. -- “Don't eat anything you've ever seen advertised on TV” - Michael Pollan, author of "In Defense of Food"

9 22

how to push the bounds and get newer packages for centos 5.4?
by Robert P. J. Day 22 Mar '10

22 Mar '10

i've just started looking after a (virtual) centos 5.4 server that's hosted at rackspace and, unsurprisingly, it was set up with all the standard defaults. part of the work i'll be doing involves php and, as i read it, the standard php version with centos 5.4 is php-5.1. if i *wanted* to move up to a more recent version (say, php-5.3), obviously, i'd need to go outside the limits of the standard centos yum repos. in my travels, i ran across this site: http://blog.famillecollet.com/pages/Config-en with the corresponding instructions: wget http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/epel/5/i386/epel-release-5-3.noarch.r… wget http://rpms.famillecollet.com/enterprise/remi-release-5.rpm rpm -Uvh remi-release-5*.rpm epel-release-5*.rpm i'm suitably leery of 3rd-party repos but i recall that someone else (on this list?) recommended that site. and i can see that it has an x86_64 version of php-5.3 ready to go for centos 5.4: http://rpms.famillecollet.com/enterprise/5/remi/x86_64/repoview/php.html what are the recommendations for well-respected 3rd-party repos for centos 5.4 if i want to get newer packages? the centos 5.4 system in question is purely an internal development system so i have the freedom to customize it to some extent if newer packages are called for. thanks. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry. Web page: http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday ========================================================================

9 10

proftpd wrap
by CList 09 Mar '10

09 Mar '10

Hi, My ftpd is being abused. Maximum login attempts exceeded from hosts: ::ffff:64.251.22.142[::ffff:64.251.22.142] : 24197 Time(s) I had came across an article stating that proftpd with mod wrap can actually block these IP using denyhosts. I had googled but I did not see any proftpd rpm with mod wrap. Is there anyone with a copy would like to share? Or can someone share a spec file, so I can roll my own rpm. I am running on CentOS 5.4. Thanks wL

2 1

creating partitions on a 2.7TB drive
by Khusro Jaleel 08 Mar '10

08 Mar '10

Hello, sorry for the long email, it's a little hard to explain this issue. The gist of it is that the Ubuntu version of parted allowed me to do something which perhaps should not be allowed i.e. creating partitions on a 2.7TB drive when the partition table is not *gpt* but *msdos*. I am trying to configure 2 identical servers, both are Dell Poweredge 2970 machines with 6 disks in them configured as a RAID 5 with one hotspare, and both give me 2.726TB of space after the RAID 5 is configured. There are slight differences between the BIOS versions and Firmware versions of the LSI disk controller, etc but I'm not sure that matters in this case. Now, I setup server "A" a few months ago and for some reason that I don't remember now I resorted to using a Ubuntu 64-bit LiveCD to create the partitions. Since the disk is larger than 2TB, I had to use 'parted' to create the partitions. So I happily created the partitions I wanted which are below: / 50 GB /var 20 GB /data the remainder (a large partition) Now, after a few months I forgot all about the Ubuntu LiveCD and tried to setup server "B" using the CentOS 5.3 x86_64 CD. However the installer immediately complained that "this disk in using a GPT partition table and this computer cannot boot using GPT" and it keeps saying this no matter what I do. I've tried creating a separate /boot partition, using LVMs for everything, etc but nothing works, even "dd" did not give me much luck, although perhaps I should try deleting the "end" of the disk rather than the beginning? I have now noticed that when press Ctrl-Alt-F2 on server "B" during the CentOS install and attempt to use 'parted' it says that the "label" type is "gpt". It allows me to create new partitions, etc but it's no help because the installer keeps complaining that the machine will not boot with a GPT partition table. So I need to really use a "msdos" partition type to boot this machine successfully, but the CentOS version of parted will not allow me to do that. The additional mystery is that if I check server "A" which I partitioned a few months ago using Ubuntu, the "label" type is "msdos"!! How is that possible? In addition if I use the CentOS CD and try to use parted on server "A" now, it gives the following error: --------------------------- # parted GNU Parted 1.8.1 Using /dev/sda Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands. (parted) p Error: msdos labels do not support devices that have more than 4294967295 sectors. --------------------------- BUT if I reboot this same server (server A) again using the Ubuntu LiveCD parted works just fine! It prints the label type as "msdos", and it prints the above partition table correctly and gives me the right size for it and everything. So what is going on here? Is the Ubuntu parted somehow buggy and allowing me to do something dangerous that I will regret later, or can I just ignore the label setting in parted and continue to setup Server "B" the same as "A" and hope for the best? I would appreciate any insights.

10 17

Call for Firefox 3.6.1 and Thunderbird 3.0.1 testers
by David Hrbáč 04 Mar '10

04 Mar '10

Hi, I have made complete rebuild and backport of Firefox 3.6.1 and Thunderbird 3.0.1 to CentOS 5. Packages come with language packs, debuginfo packages, xulrunner etc. I'm looking for QA testers. Upgrade from distro versions works pretty fine. Thanks, David Hrbáč

3 3

puzzling md error ?
by John R Pierce 03 Mar '10

03 Mar '10

this has never happened to me before, and I'm somewhat at a loss. got a email from the cron thing... /etc/cron.weekly/99-raid-check: WARNING: mismatch_cnt is not 0 on /dev/md10 WARNING: mismatch_cnt is not 0 on /dev/md11 ok, md10 and md11 are each raid1's made from 2 x 72GB scsi drives, on a dell 2850 or something dual single-core 3ghz server. these two md's are in turn a striped LVM volume group dmesg shows.... md: syncing RAID array md10 md: minimum _guaranteed_ reconstruction speed: 1000 KB/sec/disc. md: using maximum available idle IO bandwidth (but not more than 200000 KB/sec) for reconstruction. md: using 128k window, over a total of 143374656 blocks. md: syncing RAID array md11 md: minimum _guaranteed_ reconstruction speed: 1000 KB/sec/disc. md: using maximum available idle IO bandwidth (but not more than 200000 KB/sec) for reconstruction. md: using 128k window, over a total of 143374656 blocks. md: md10: sync done. RAID1 conf printout: --- wd:2 rd:2 disk 0, wo:0, o:1, dev:sdc1 disk 1, wo:0, o:1, dev:sdd1 md: md11: sync done. RAID1 conf printout: --- wd:2 rd:2 disk 0, wo:0, o:1, dev:sde1 disk 1, wo:0, o:1, dev:sdf1 I'm not sure what thats telling me. the last thing prior to this in dmesg was when I added a swap to this vg last week. and mdadm --detail shows... # mdadm --detail /dev/md10 /dev/md10: Version : 0.90 Creation Time : Wed Oct 8 12:54:48 2008 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 143374656 (136.73 GiB 146.82 GB) Used Dev Size : 143374656 (136.73 GiB 146.82 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 10 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Sun Feb 28 04:53:29 2010 State : clean Active Devices : 2 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 0 UUID : b6da4dc5:c7372d6e:63f32b9c:49fa95f9 Events : 0.84 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 33 0 active sync /dev/sdc1 1 8 49 1 active sync /dev/sdd1 # mdadm --detail /dev/md11 /dev/md11: Version : 0.90 Creation Time : Wed Oct 8 12:54:57 2008 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 143374656 (136.73 GiB 146.82 GB) Used Dev Size : 143374656 (136.73 GiB 146.82 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 11 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Sun Feb 28 11:49:45 2010 State : clean Active Devices : 2 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 0 UUID : be475cd9:b98ee3ff:d18e668c:a5a6e06b Events : 0.62 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 65 0 active sync /dev/sde1 1 8 81 1 active sync /dev/sdf1 I don't see anything wrong here ? lvm shows no problems I detect either... # vgdisplay vg1 Volume group "vgdisplay" not found LV VG Attr LSize Origin Snap% Move Log Copy% Convert glassfish vg1 -wi-ao 10.00G lv1 vg1 -wi-ao 97.66G oradata vg1 -wi-ao 30.00G pgdata vg1 -wi-ao 25.00G pgdata_lss_idx vg1 -wi-ao 20.00G pgdata_lss_tab vg1 -wi-ao 20.00G swapper vg1 -wi-ao 3.00G vmware vg1 -wi-ao 50.00G # pvdisplay /dev/md10 /dev/md11 --- Physical volume --- PV Name /dev/md10 VG Name vg1 PV Size 136.73 GB / not usable 2.31 MB Allocatable yes PE Size (KByte) 4096 Total PE 35003 Free PE 1998 Allocated PE 33005 PV UUID oAgJY7-Tmf7-ac35-KoUH-15uz-Q5Ae-bmFCys --- Physical volume --- PV Name /dev/md11 VG Name vg1 PV Size 136.73 GB / not usable 2.31 MB Allocatable yes PE Size (KByte) 4096 Total PE 35003 Free PE 2560 Allocated PE 32443 PV UUID A4Qb3P-j5Lr-8ZEv-FjbC-Iczm-QkC8-bqP0zv

9 17

Python Script Issue
by Joseph L. Casale 01 Mar '10

01 Mar '10

Hey Guys, I am trying to get a python script running but I get the following error: atexit.register(atexit_handler) NameError: global name 'atexit' is not defined A Google search doesn't really help me, except confirm that I don't know anything about python:) Anyone got any ideas? Thanks, jlc

7 19

cron mystery
by Timothy Murphy 01 Mar '10

01 Mar '10

I've just noticed that cron.daily, etc, do not seem to be running on my CentOS-5.4 system. The scripts in /etc/cron.d/ all run fine, but those in /etc/cron.hourly, etc, seem to be ignored. I see that according to /var/log/cron these commands are seen, eg Feb 28 18:01:01 helen crond[6680]: (root) CMD (run-parts /etc/cron.hourly) but none of the scripts in this directory seem to be touched. I've tried running them by hand, and this seems to work fine. Is there some problem, or subtlety, about crond under CentOS? -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland

3 2

emergency! linux kickstart pxe boot needed
by Alan McKay 01 Mar '10

01 Mar '10

Hey folks, I'm at colocaiton in the middle of a big rebuild and it seems I have a faulty CD rom in the server that I need to put Centos on via Kickstart. So I cannot boot the Centos 5.4 net install CD. Is PXE kickstart easy to set up? I have a laptop here with DHCP already going. I google and a bunch of stuff comes up but it does not look simple. I'm just shooting htis out ther eon the odd chance someone gets it soon nad knows of a really easy howto for this thanks! -- “Don't eat anything you've ever seen advertised on TV” - Michael Pollan, author of "In Defense of Food"

8 10

Re: [CentOS] Backuppc-updates on CentOS
by John R Pierce 01 Mar '10

01 Mar '10

>> epel is the best large 3rd party repo in terms of avoiding conflicts >> with the base. >> > > Yeah, I noticed that with rpmforge. I was just under the impression that > epel was a bit "dodgy" as repos come. Never too late to be enlightened > though. ;-) > the following is my opinion, and nothing else: epel doesn't use a repository tag in their RPM names. this makes it hard to use with other repositories.

3 2

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss February 2010