Discuss May 2005

discuss@lists.centos.org

221 participants
344 discussions

Re: [CentOS] alias keeps changing (fwd)
by Michael Rock 10 May '05

10 May '05

To respond to my own post I think I found it at this link under "4.2.1 split access" and hope it applies to Redhat. http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Adv-Routing-HOWTO/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html If I reboot I assume I need to create a shell script to automatically add these changes back? --- Michael Rock <mikerocks65(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Thanks. I ended up putting a NIC from a different > name > brand so they would not be identical. I did delete > the garbage out of /etc/sysconfig but it did not > work, > perhaps if I tried deleting the entire config and > starting over it may have worked. > > Now that I have both working how can you have two > default gateways (one for each adapter) so they both > service the separate IP networks independently of > each > other? > > I made sure ip forwarding is turned off in > sysctl.conf. But with default gateway set on both > they > will not respond to outside requests. > > > > Discover Yahoo! > Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and > more. Check it out! > http://discover.yahoo.com/mobile.html > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS(a)centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail Mobile Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail

1 0

Re: [CentOS] Re: Hardware RAID Controller
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 10 May '05

10 May '05

From: Lee W <centos-list(a)unassemble.co.uk> > Thanks for the heads up See my (now dated) "Dissecting ATA RAID Options" article in SysAdmin 2004 April. It covers 4 approaches to ATA RAID: - OS LVM (software) - FRAID (software) - microcontroller+DRAM (hardware) - ASIC+SRAM (hardware) > No, just another toy to play with. I'm currently looking a playing with > Software RAID but would like to have H/W as well. The only time I implement RAID-5 is for lots of reads. E.g., a MySQL server on the Internet. I prefer RAID-0+1 for most operations -- definitely system disks. RAID-3 is nice for desktop data and single user operations.** RAID-4 is best for NFS server and large file transfer servers (A/V). If I'm mega-anal on performance, I'll use multiple hardware RAID-0+1 cards on different PCI-X channels and volumes with a spanned RAID-0 LVM/LVM2 software volume across them. I would kill to have a HP DL585 with (3) Escalade 8506 cards, one on their own PCI-X channel, plus a 10GbE on the final PCI-X channel. [ **NOTE: For 32/64-bit I/O desktops, NetCell's 3 or 5-disc "RAID-XL" is actually the most ideal design I've ever seen. Instead of striped blocks, you have parallel reads/writes. ] > I'm certainly liking what I have seen of the 3Ware card's so far. Stock kernel support since version 2.2.15 (that's 2._2_ ;-). It's nice to be able to move volumes from older cards to newer ones without issue as well. > Their site lists quite a few distros as supported, including RHEL 3 which > from a simplistic guess would also mean that Centos 3 (and possibly 4) > would also be supported. Been using them in servers since Red Hat Linux 5.2. The drivers for most microcontroller or ASIC-driven hardware RAID are rather simplistic, because all the "intelligence" is on-board the card itself. 3Ware's 3DM/3DM2 management suite is a nice addition, although there have been some SCSI IOCTL changes that are rendering the older Escalade 6000 as deprecated. -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

1 0

New kernel causes kernel panic/unable to mount root
by Martyn Drake 10 May '05

10 May '05

Hi, I've just moved over to an Opteron 246 dedicated server and have used up2date to install the latest kernel (2.4.21-27.0.4.Elsmp). However, when the machine reboots it never comes back up and according to the datacentre technicians, this is what's happening: VFS: Cannot open root device"806" or 08:06 Please append a correct "root=" boot option Kernel Panic:VFS:Unable to mount root fs on 08:06 The technician then needs to reboot with the original kernel (2.4.21-27.0.2.Elsmp) to get it to work. Apparently there are no third party modules/drivers loaded. This didn't occur when I did exactly the same thing with a dual Xeon 3.06Ghz machine. Both machines use SATA drives. Any ideas? Any pointers are greatly appreciated. Incidently, lilo.conf currently looks like this: prompt timeout=50 default=linux boot=/dev/sda map=/boot/map install=/boot/boot.b message=/boot/message linear image=/boot/vmlinuz-2.4.21-27.0.4.ELsmp label=newlinux initrd=/boot/initrd-2.4.21-27.0.4.ELsmp.img read-only root=/dev/sda6 image=/boot/vmlinuz-2.4.21-27.0.4.EL label=2.4.21-27.0.4.E initrd=/boot/initrd-2.4.21-27.0.4.EL.img read-only root=/dev/sda6 image=/boot/vmlinuz-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELsmp label=linux initrd=/boot/initrd-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELsmp.img read-only root=/dev/sda6 Regards, Martyn

3 8

Re: CentOS Digest, Vol 4, Issue 10
by Lance Lucas 10 May '05

10 May '05

>Message: 55 >Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 15:01:56 +0800 >From: Mark Quitoriano <markquitoriano(a)gmail.com> >Subject: Re: [CentOS] bind and caching-nameserver >To: CentOS mailing list <centos(a)centos.org> >Message-ID: <6b542ec9050510000161fff8d3(a)mail.gmail.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >well that's my problem with bind. once i cut myself to the internet i >can't resolve all domain. i did this as a test i ping google.com first >while i am connected to the net and then i disconnect my cable and try >to ping it again but it can't resolve google.com anymore, my >resolve.conf is "nameserver 127.0.0.1", and i don't know how to >configure bind to cache domain's ip addressess at least 1 day or so. This seems like normal behavior to me. If by "cut myself to the internet", you mean physical disconnection (or all ports blocked), then how would ping receive a reply from google.com? You may be able to make DNS lookup requests, with dig or nslookup, but ping requires an actual connection to the address being queried, which it seems to be disconnected for you (dialup?). Lance Lucas

1 0

RE: [CentOS] bind and caching-nameserver
by Marc Powell 10 May '05

10 May '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On > Behalf Of Mark Quitoriano > Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 2:02 AM > To: CentOS mailing list > Subject: Re: [CentOS] bind and caching-nameserver > > well that's my problem with bind. once i cut myself to the internet i > can't resolve all domain. i did this as a test i ping google.com first > while i am connected to the net and then i disconnect my cable and try > to ping it again but it can't resolve google.com anymore, my > resolve.conf is "nameserver 127.0.0.1", and i don't know how to > configure bind to cache domain's ip addressess at least 1 day or so. There are a number of programs designed for this type of situation. pdnsd (http://www.phys.uu.nl/~rombouts/pdnsd.html) looks like it's just what you're looking for. If not, try searching for 'dns proxy', 'dns cache' or 'dns proxy cache' on freshmeat or google. -- Marc

1 0

bind and caching-nameserver
by Mark Quitoriano 10 May '05

10 May '05

i was thinking if is it possible to cache some urls in bind? I just want to do when you send the command "ping domain.com" even if you are disconnected to the internet it will still resolve the ip of domain.com -- Regards, Mark Quitoriano, CCNA http://www.atamanetworks.com

6 9

Re: [CentOS] alias keeps changing (fwd)
by Michael Rock 10 May '05

10 May '05

Thanks. I ended up putting a NIC from a different name brand so they would not be identical. I did delete the garbage out of /etc/sysconfig but it did not work, perhaps if I tried deleting the entire config and starting over it may have worked. Now that I have both working how can you have two default gateways (one for each adapter) so they both service the separate IP networks independently of each other? I made sure ip forwarding is turned off in sysctl.conf. But with default gateway set on both they will not respond to outside requests. Discover Yahoo! Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/mobile.html

1 0

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Convert Question
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 10 May '05

10 May '05

admin(a)dougware.net <admin(a)dougware.net> wrote: > I need a network based distributed operating system, something like > Intermezzo or Coda to keep two servers in sync on one partition. I have a > server at work and at home that I want to keep a MyDocuments partition in > sync. NFS will not work because I need a offline or online solution. The newer autofs allows you to automount multiple systems. So you could have it mount a local share if the server isn't available, then automate rsync updates the local to the server when the server is detected. There are also other network filesystems that offer what you need. > RSYNC will not work, who many inconsistancies from files being created > and removed. I've never had this issue at all with my users. I maintain a "~/work" directory and a "~/worksync" directory. I know whatever I have in "work" stays on the server, and what is in "worksync" is synchronized between the local and the server. On the portables, work is a symlink to worksync, so they have no, non-synced storage. I really think this is more of a workflow issue than a technology one. > Will GFS work for my needs when they release U1 for CentOS? If > not, does anyone have any coda or intermezzo rpms for CentOS4? Hmmm, my use of GFS has always been very, very different. I guess it could be used for such though? From: Greg Knaddison <greg.knaddison(a)gmail.com> > I really like having things stored in a version control system (e.g. > cvs, svn, git, arch). That way your machine at home is the repository > and you can use a "cvs checkout documents/taxes" to get all of those > documents and also do an update to see which ones have changed locally > and need to be committed back to the server. Mega-dittos there! Version control is wholly undervalued for everything, and solves the overwhelming majority of workflow and other issues -- even just for 1 person on their own (let alone multiple people working together). Hell, I'd just be happy if someone would do a "ci -l filename" before and after editing a file as root. RCS is so simplistic to use, yet so powerful for just standalone configuration file management. And ,v files are always importable to any other revision controll system. Of course, at the same time, I'm an evil man who _loves_ to catch people who modify /etc files, forget, but it leaves the system in a state that is not usable or at least not bootable the next time. By simply using rcsdiff from the last time I edited -- pointing out the changes, line-by-line, until someone fesses up. In reality, my ultimate goal is to get them to just do a "ci -l filename" as well, so they can revert to what they had before if needbe. > Subversion is a bit more efficient than cvs. It handles binaries inherently too, all will being CVS client syntax compatible. Combined with its WebDAV-DeltaV option via Apache 2, it's absolutely awesome for less technical users as well (who aren't commonly CVS familiar). > I haven't looked heavily at git or arch, but they have smart people working > on them. > Personal disk space is cheap...why not keep all revisions of your documents :) The great thing about modern, reverse-delta revisioning programs is that they don't eat up a lot of disk space either. They revision very tight, especially Subversions for many common binary formats. -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

1 0

CentOS Convert Question
by admin＠dougware.net 10 May '05

10 May '05

Hi, First, I want to say that I have fallen in love with CentOS4. I have been using RedHat since the 5.x days. After RedHat dropped the stable system to go to a unstable system and a Enterprise system I felt like I was being left out in the cold. I quickly found out about WhiteBox and used it for quite a while. Then I learned about CentOS...and switched to it for my server needs. I have switched to CentOS4 and it is an awsome stable operating system. I just wanted to add my praise before I asked my question. I need a network based distributed operating system, something like Intermezzo or Coda to keep two servers in sync on one partition. I have a server at work and at home that I want to keep a MyDocuments partition in sync. NFS will not work because I need a offline or online solution. RSYNC will not work, who many inconsistancies from files being created and removed. Will GFS work for my needs when they release U1 for CentOS? If not, does anyone have any coda or intermezzo rpms for CentOS4? Thanks again, Doug Eubanks admin(a)dougware.net

4 3

RE: MIrrored drives won't boot after installation
by Kevin Pendleton 10 May '05

10 May '05

Chris, Grub needs to be configured to boot of either drive, run the two install lines referenced in this doc and you should be good: http://www.dur.ac.uk/a.d.stribblehill/mirrored_grub.html Kevin On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 12:00 +0000, centos-request(a)centos.org wrote: > Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 22:25:26 -0400 > From: "Chris Mason" <lists(a)masonc.com> > Subject: RE: [CentOS] MIrrored drives won't boot after installation > To: "'CentOS mailing list'" <centos(a)centos.org> > Message-ID: <20050426023208.C929092C3FC(a)mercury.mason.home> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > When you configure the drives as RAID1 the installer never request where > > to install the boot record. If configuring with one drive (no raid) the > > installer will ask where to install the record. > > > > Gerald > > So how do I fix this? I really need to get a mirrored drive system up and > running. > > Chris Mason > US Number: (646)722-0001 US Fax (815)301-9759

3 2

← Newer
1
...
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
...
35
Older →

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 May 2005