Discuss June 2005

discuss@lists.centos.org

197 participants
362 discussions

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 4, Issue 1
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 02 Jun '05

02 Jun '05

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to centos-announce(a)centos.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to centos-announce-request(a)centos.org You can reach the person managing the list at centos-announce-owner(a)centos.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..." Today's Topics: 1. CESA-2005:430 Moderate CentOS 4 i386 gnutls - security update (Johnny Hughes) 2. CESA-2005:430 Moderate CentOS 4 x86_64 gnutls - security update (Johnny Hughes) 3. CESA-2005:433 Moderate CentOS 4 x86_64 postgresql - security update (Johnny Hughes) 4. CESA-2005:433 Moderate CentOS 4 i386 postgresql - security update (Johnny Hughes) 5. CESA-2005:476 Moderate CentOS 4 i386 openssl - security update (Johnny Hughes) 6. CESA-2005:476 Moderate CentOS 4 x86_64 openssl - security update (Johnny Hughes) 7. CESA-2005:476 Moderate CentOS 3 i386 openssl - security update (Tru Huynh) 8. CESA-2005:476 Moderate CentOS 3 x86_64 openssl - security update (Tru Huynh) 9. CESA-2005:433 Moderate CentOS 3 i386 postgresql - security update (Tru Huynh) 10. CESA-2005:433 Moderate CentOS 3 x86_64 postgresql - security update (Tru Huynh) 11. CESA-2005:476-01: Moderate CentOS 2 i386 openssl security update (John Newbigin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 12:23:30 -0500 From: Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists(a)hughesjr.com> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2005:430 Moderate CentOS 4 i386 gnutls - security update To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <1117646610.2514.14.camel(a)myth.home.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2005:430 gnutls security update for CentOS 4 i386: https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2005-430.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: i386: gnutls-1.0.20-3.2.1.i386.rpm gnutls-devel-1.0.20-3.2.1.i386.rpm src: gnutls-1.0.20-3.2.1.src.rpm

1 0

top not showing %CPU
by Warren Harris 02 Jun '05

02 Jun '05

I'm running with CentOS4 on a 2 cpu machine. I'm running a java process which creates a large number of threads as well as other native processes running under heavy load mixing 200+ audio streams. However, top shows none of these having any %CPU time. All of them read 0.0, except for top itself which occasionally shows up with 0.7, and migration/N with 0.3. All other processes read 0.0. The load average of the machine varies between 1.5 and 4.0. Any suggestions on where to look for the problem would be appreciated, Warren

3 2

amavis+nai+clamav
by Mark Quitoriano 02 Jun '05

02 Jun '05

is it possible to parse an e-mail to 2 AV? when the server recieve an e-mail with attachment it will run on both AV? in amavis' logs i can only see one AV which is nai. And i also noticed that clamd configuration in amavisd.conf is on the av_scanners_backup part.

1 0

CentOS4 installer can't find a hard drive to install.
by Takashi Nakamura 02 Jun '05

02 Jun '05

Hi, My computer is DELL DIMENSION 8400. SATA setting is below: port0 is connected to a WDC WD2500JD-75H and making RAID1 with prot2. port1 is connected to a MAXTOR 6Y120MO and set to Non-RAID. port2 is connected to a WDC WD2500JD-75H and making RAID1 with prot0. WindowsXP is installed in the RAID1 set. I want to install CentOS4 into the MAXTER's hard drive, but I can't. CentOS4 installer says "No drive was found. Do you find a driver now?" I tried all drivers that the installer showed. Each driver doesn't work. Finally the installer says "No drive to install. Check your hardware." BIOS recognizes MAXTER and diagnostic is PASS. WindowsXP finds MAXTER as a new found device. Why CentOS4 installer can't fined any hard drives? Thanks in advance, Takashi Nakamura

1 0

ntwork problem
by William Warren 02 Jun '05

02 Jun '05

I switched my file server's hard disks from a p-2 350 to a p-3 deley 1.1 ghz. I ran kudzu and it detected the new nic and unconfigured the old one. I may have messed up the static ip assignment because hte system is not able to do anything on the network. How do i check the ipaddress asignment and also ensure the proper linksys LNE-100TX driver is loaded? thanks. William -- Computer House Calls, Networks, Security, Web Design: http://www.emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com What businesses are in Brunswick, Maryland? Check Brunswick First! http://www.checkbrunswickfirst.com My "Foundation" verse: Isa 54:17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their righteousness is of me, saith the LORD. -- carpe ductum -- "Grab the tape" CDTT (Certified Duct Tape Technician) Linux user #322099 Machines: 206822 256638 276825 http://counter.li.org/

2 4

advice on removing these daemons from server - rpc.statd rpc.idmapd acpid
by Robert Hanson 01 Jun '05

01 Jun '05

greetings, is there any reason i would want any of these daemons active in memory on a simple DNS server if i do not use NFS and... of course, the unit is not being used as a workstation. 1712 ? Ss 0:00 rpc.statd 1745 ? Ss 0:00 rpc.idmapd 1813 ? Ss 0:00 /usr/sbin/acpid tia - rh

5 4

Fw: [Fedora-directory-announce] Fedora Directory Server news!
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 01 Jun '05

01 Jun '05

For those of you who have been following Red Hat's purchase of Netscape Directory Server from AOL last fall (and possibly have been playing with the "technology preview release" from RHN from earlier this year), Red Hat has made good on GPL'ing it (which they were entitled to as of April 30, 2005 per their contract with AOL). To me, this is probably the most exciting announcement in the Linux world in the last 5 years. I've been deploying Netscape Directory Server since the late '90s, and have always found OpenLDAP to be lacking in comparison as a whole. "The Fedora Directory Server is a world-class Directory Server implementation. Some of the more interesting features that are included are: * 4-Way Multi-Master Replication * Scalability: thousands of operations per second, tens of thousands of concurrent users, tens of millions of entries, hundreds of gigabytes of data * SSL and SASL for secure authentication and transport * Support for most LDAPv3 features, including many common controls and extensions * Schema update over LDAP" -----Forwarded Message----- From: Bob Lord <blord(a)redhat.com> Sent: Jun 1, 2005 11:52 AM To: fedora-directory-announce(a)redhat.com Subject: [Fedora-directory-announce] Fedora Directory Server news! I'm proud to announce that the Red Hat Directory Server product, and the Fedora Directory Server open source project have launched! Here are the press releases: Red Hat Announces Directory Server http://www.redhat.com/en_us/USA/Home/Company/News%2Band%2BEvents/Red%2BHat%… Fedora Directory Server Now Available to the Open Source Community http://www.redhat.com/en_us/USA/Home/Company/News%2Band%2BEvents/Red%2BHat%… The main page for the open source project is here: http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Main_Page From there, you'll find links to mailing lists, IRC channels, and a wealth of information about the project. We invite you to get involved! -Bob -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org -- Fedora-directory-announce mailing list Fedora-directory-announce(a)redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-announce

1 0

Attempting custom CentOS4 network install
by Ajay 01 Jun '05

01 Jun '05

Hi I am installing CentOS4 over ether network using http and kickstart. I boot from the first CentOS CD and at "boot:" prompt I input "ks=http://localserver/install/custom.cfg". Except for minor glitches like "Kernel-Development group not found" warning, the process is smooth and is almost completely automated. Now, I want to add additional RPMS to the CentOS/RPMS directory to install additional packages in the default install. In preparation, I was regenerating the hdlist using "genhdlist" even before adding the extra RPMS, just to checkout. A new hdlist and hdlist2 is sucessfully regenerated in CentOS/base dir with a small reduction in file size of hdlist, but the network install fails at the end of "Preparing RPM transaction" screen with the message "install exited abnormally" and shuts down. Am I missing something? Thanks in advance Ajay

3 2

Re: Use NTFS Partition. -- only applies to same disk ...
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 01 Jun '05

01 Jun '05

From: Mark Jarvis <mark.jarvis(a)pvmail.maricopa.edu> > HUH? FAT32 problem??? No, it's a geometry issue on legacy BIOS/DOS Disk Labels (Partition Table Format) aka "Basic Disc" in NT5+ (2000+) when both NT and Linux share the disk for booting. Microsoft never standardized how geometry should be handled after NT4.0 Service Pack 4 (SP4) other than using legacy LBA32 -- i.e., always assuming Sectors/Heads of 63/255. In NT5+, this is what it does on a "Basic Disc" which cannot store geometry information, at least through NT5.1 (XP/2003) Service Pak 1 (SP1). Unfortunately, assuming LBA32 is not compatible with Extended Int13h Disk Services. And for broken BIOSes, it can cause issues with 3rd party boot managers and disk utilities. This isn't an issue with using the Logical Disk Manager (LDM) Disk Label (Partition Table Format) aka "Dynamic Disc" because all NT5+ (2000+) instances on the system can read it's explicitly reserved areas and find out the exact geometry assumed by the first NT5+ install that created it. The Linux kernel as of early 2.4.x, thanx to work done by the NTFS-LDM project, can also read this and not have to make any assumptions on geometry (which can be an issue with 2.6 and its standard support for Extended Int13h Services -- see below). Microsoft has tried to address it with both some pre-NT5.1 Service Pack 2 (SP2) hot-fixes, some applied in SP2 and even more post-NT5.1SP2 hotfixes. Because the legacy BIOS/DOS Disk Label does not have a place where to reserve disk geometry, Microsoft choose part of Cylinder 0 where it's MBR doesn't reside. Unfortunately, many 3rd party boot managers, including GRUB, do use part of that space. I've run into this first-hand where I had no problems dual-booting on even a 800GB disk array _until_ I upgraded to NT5.1SP2 (XPSP2). After the upgrade, GRUB was broken. After re-installing GRUB, it would no longer boot XP, because GRUB overwrote the hidden geometry info in Cylinder 0 that XP needed for boot-time support. After a few more systems, I discovered that XP only wrote it if the boot volume passed the 33.8GB (32GiB) barrier -- at least on my disks that were BIOS LBA32 geometry with Sectors/Heads of 63/255. On newer disk arrays that break the 2.2TB (2TiB) barrier by supporting LBA48 / >255 heads, you _must_ basically use a LDM Disk Label. It appears Microsoft is not interested in any more "hacks" to support legacy BIOS/DOS Disk Labels -- especially given the fact that a lot of PC BIOS' out there are "broken" in their Extended Int13h Services and support for geometry beyond LBA32. In a nutshell, Microsoft doesn't trust anything from the PC BIOS, and expects to always rely on the geometry info in the LDM Disk Label for now on (and I don't blame them). Linux kernel 2.6 was written to the ATA-6/LBA48 and Extended Int13h Services specifications to overcome the LBA32/2.2TB (2TiB) limit but is breaking all sorts of things in the process. Newer user-space tools like Parted and GRUB are now getting "more intelligent" in trying to apply what geometry to "assume" based on what kernel 2.6 gives them. It's no longer safe to blindly assume Sectors/Heads of 63/255, which is how 2.4 and earlier used to deal with dual-booting. > My system has two 120GB disks I've typically found that as long as: A) I'm not dual-booting late NT5.1 hot-fixes/service packs (i.e., SP2+) B) I stay under LBA28/137GB (128GiB) I don't have the issue, even when booting NT and Linux on the same disk. > and a 160 GB disk. As long as it is not the booting disk, and being shared by both NT and Linux for booting, it shouldn't matter. > The 120s have a 1GB DOS, a 24+GB NTFS, and a 84+GB FAT32 partition. > I keep (almost) all of my data in the FAT32 partition. Are you dual-booting Linux on the _same_ disk? > The first 120 is (fairly) regularly cloned onto the second. Since I upgraded > my BIOS, I have never had any trouble accessing anything in either of the > big FAT32 partitions from either the XP installation or any one of the > various Linux installations (CentOS, WBEL, SUSE, Fedora core 3, or Yoper) > on the 160GB disk. Then you're fine. As long as NT and Linux aren't sharing the same disk for boot, you'll typically have no issues. The Linux kernel, even more so 2.6, is pretty good at trying to figure out the geometry. It's only when booting that geometry can get screwed up, because you're at the mercy of the BIOS -- or a boot-loader that attempts to overcome it's limitations. On a LDM Disk Label (Dynamic Disc), it can directly read the geometry assumed by NT. On a legacy BIOS/DOS Disk Label (Basic Disc), it will try various geometries -- from legacy LBA32 to (in 2.6) full standard Extended Int13h Services geometry support. Unfortunately, NT5.1 doesn't support the latter (although more hot-fixes are attempting to). > At various times I have installed the NTFS code in a Linux installation, > but when the NTFS crew's website says "read, but don't write" I believed > them. What I'm talking about is disk geometry issues. It doesn't matter if NTFS or FAT32 is used, you can run into it when you dual-boot on the same disc. Especially when you are dual-booting NT5.1 with late hotfixes / service packs. In fact, I highly recommend using the LDM Disk Label (Dynamic Disc) on any NT5+ accessed disk to avoid geometry issues between NT5+ itself. Otherwise, I've seen people dual-booting 2000 and XP and seen the Disk Label (Partition Table) get trashed. -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

1 0

Centos4 SMP Kernel OOM
by Maciej Żenczykowski 01 Jun '05

01 Jun '05

Hello, I've just run out of memory on a dual xeon with 5GB ram, considering there should have been around 4GB free (not counting buffers and cache)... this is unusual. Now after it OOM'ed I tried running top and memory usage was fine (around 1GB of 5, no swap usage of 12GB). So I thought it was a temporary thing, but processes kept on OOM'ing for no understandable reason... while swap was empty and memory continued to show 3GB free (and look at the weird log messages...) A reboot helped though, but still... :) [this is the normal CentOS4 i686 SMP kernel 2.6.9-5.0.5.ELsmp] May 31 22:31:25 tcs kernel: oom-killer: gfp_mask=0xd0 May 31 22:31:25 tcs kernel: DMA per-cpu: May 31 22:31:25 tcs kernel: cpu 0 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 May 31 22:31:25 tcs kernel: cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 May 31 22:31:25 tcs kernel: cpu 1 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 May 31 22:31:25 tcs kernel: cpu 1 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 May 31 22:31:25 tcs kernel: cpu 2 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 May 31 22:31:25 tcs kernel: cpu 2 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 May 31 22:31:25 tcs kernel: cpu 3 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 May 31 22:31:25 tcs kernel: cpu 3 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 May 31 22:31:25 tcs kernel: Normal per-cpu: May 31 22:31:25 tcs kernel: cpu 0 hot: low 32, high 96, batch 16 May 31 22:31:25 tcs kernel: cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 32, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs postfix: Process did not exit cleanly, returned 0 with signal 9 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: cpu 1 hot: low 32, high 96, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: cpu 1 cold: low 0, high 32, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: cpu 2 hot: low 32, high 96, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: cpu 2 cold: low 0, high 32, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: cpu 3 hot: low 32, high 96, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: cpu 3 cold: low 0, high 32, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: HighMem per-cpu: May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: cpu 0 hot: low 32, high 96, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 32, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: cpu 1 hot: low 32, high 96, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: cpu 1 cold: low 0, high 32, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: cpu 2 hot: low 32, high 96, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: cpu 2 cold: low 0, high 32, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: cpu 3 hot: low 32, high 96, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: cpu 3 cold: low 0, high 32, batch 16 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: Free pages: 3579344kB (3578432kB HighMem) May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: Active:96900 inactive:20481 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 free:894836 slab:212200 mapped:86012 pagetabl es:1438 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: DMA free:16kB min:16kB low:32kB high:48kB active:16kB inactive:0kB present:16384kB May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: protections[]: 0 0 0 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: Normal free:896kB min:936kB low:1872kB high:2808kB active:240kB inactive:416kB present:901120kB May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: protections[]: 0 0 0 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: HighMem free:3578432kB min:512kB low:1024kB high:1536kB active:387344kB inactive:81508kB present:4325372 kB May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: protections[]: 0 0 0 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: DMA: 0*4kB 0*8kB 1*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB = 16kB May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: Normal: 0*4kB 0*8kB 2*16kB 1*32kB 1*64kB 0*128kB 1*256kB 1*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB = 896kB May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: HighMem: 1560*4kB 5190*8kB 4683*16kB 1632*32kB 2304*64kB 1512*128kB 781*256kB 349*512kB 157*1024kB 66*20 48kB 583*4096kB = 3578432kB May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: Swap cache: add 0, delete 0, find 0/0, race 0+0 May 31 22:31:26 tcs kernel: Out of Memory: Killed process 11250 (MailScanner). and again moments later... May 31 22:31:30 tcs kernel: oom-killer: gfp_mask=0xd0 ... and repeat two dozen or more times for different processes. Cheers, MaZe.

3 2

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss June 2005