Discuss July 2005

discuss@lists.centos.org

190 participants
231 discussions

Start a nNew thread

4g/4g
by Wayne 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

Hi, Anybody know if centos 4 has the 4g/4g kernel module that's in fedora 2/3 but being dropped for 4? Thanks, Wayne

3 4

'old' rpms in CentOS 3.5
by Jan Kees van Amerongen 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

Hi, Just to let you know These rpms in CentOS 3.5 i386 : elinks-0.4.2-7.i386.rpm dos2unix-3.1-15.i386.rpm unix2dos-2.2-19.i386.rpm should be replaced by elinks-0.4.2-8.i386.rpm dos2unix-3.1-15.EL.22.i386.rpm unix2dos-2.2-19.EL.25.i386.rpm The SRPMS dir of CentOS 3.5 has both versions, so that's probably the cause of this. _________________________ Jan Kees van Amerongen Bioinformatics group, Utrecht University Room Z506, Padualaan 8, 3584 CH Utrecht, the Netherlands phone: +31 30 2533695 fax: +31 30 2513655 email: J.K.vanAmerongen(a)bio.uu.nl

1 0

Low RAM
by User Lists 19 Jul '05

19 Jul '05

Hi all, Is it possible to install (and run) CentOS-3 with only 160 MB of RAM?? Have I put special params to boot it?? Thank you very much __________________________________________________ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis! Regístrate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/

3 3

what are the raw device size limitations
by Robin Mordasiewicz 19 Jul '05

19 Jul '05

Does anyone know the raw device size limitation with CentOS-3 and CentOS-4

2 1

Migrating from RHEL 4 to CentOS
by techlist＠pathfinder.phys.utk.edu 19 Jul '05

19 Jul '05

Hello, I'm thinking about migrating from RHEL 4 to CentOS. Is there a document that provide pointer / guidance for doing that ? or is this document: http://www.centos.org/modules/smartfaq/faq.php?faqid=19 relevant enough to follow in my situation ? I understand that I should probably strip the install of any RedHat images, trademark, etc, as to not infringing any copyright. So I am wondering if there's a list of things to do / document to show that. My current installation is: $ cat /etc/redhat-release Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS release 4 (Nahant Update 1) Thanks for any help / pointer. RDB

4 4

FreeRADIUS
by Joseph T Mai 19 Jul '05

19 Jul '05

Greetings list, I'm haveing problem with FreeRADIUS v1.0.1-3 which came with CentOS 4.1 FreeRADIUS refuses to use system accounts for authentication. The latest freeradius-1.0.4 is working correctly. Can we have this update or have to wail till RH release new rpm src? Thanks, -j

2 1

RE: [CentOS] FreeRADIUS
by Joshua Hirsh 19 Jul '05

19 Jul '05

> I'm haveing problem with FreeRADIUS v1.0.1-3 which came with > CentOS 4.1 > FreeRADIUS refuses to use system accounts for authentication. Hi Joseph, FreeRadius 1.0.1-3 works fine on my systems using local system authentication (using UNIX instead of PAM). In my users configuration file, I have the following defined: "DEFAULT Auth-Type = System". Please also note, however, that your daemon will require READ access to your /etc/shadow file and you probably have it running with little to no permissions. You should create a new group (ex: shadow) and assign it to your /etc/shadow with read access and add your FreeRadius user into the group. That should correct your authentication issues. I vaguely recall having problems when I first tried to have it use PAM authentication (based on the RHEL3 version), but I haven't looked at the issue since then. Regards, -Joshua

1 0

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 5, Issue 7
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 19 Jul '05

19 Jul '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-2005:562-01: Critical CentOS 2 i386 krb5 security update (John Newbigin) 2. CESA-2005:470-04: Low CentOS 2 i386 fileutils bug fix update (John Newbigin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 09:04:00 +1000 From: John Newbigin <jnewbigin(a)ict.swin.edu.au> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2005:562-01: Critical CentOS 2 i386 krb5 security update To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <42DC3560.5000009(a)ict.swin.edu.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed The following errata for CentOS-2 have been built and uploaded to the centos mirror: RHSA-2005:562-01 Critical: krb5 security update Files available: krb5-devel-1.2.2-37.i386.rpm krb5-libs-1.2.2-37.i386.rpm krb5-server-1.2.2-37.i386.rpm krb5-workstation-1.2.2-37.i386.rpm More details are available from the RedHat web site at https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rh21as-errata.html The easy way to make sure you are up to date with all the latest patches is to run: # yum update -- John Newbigin Computer Systems Officer Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies Swinburne University of Technology Melbourne, Australia http://www.ict.swin.edu.au/staff/jnewbigin ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 09:05:15 +1000 From: John Newbigin <jnewbigin(a)ict.swin.edu.au> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2005:470-04: Low CentOS 2 i386 fileutils bug fix update To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <42DC35AB.9070900(a)ict.swin.edu.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed The following errata for CentOS-2 have been built and uploaded to the centos mirror: RHBA-2005:470-04 fileutils bug fix update Files available: fileutils-4.1-10.9.i386.rpm More details are available from the RedHat web site at https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rh21as-errata.html The easy way to make sure you are up to date with all the latest patches is to run: # yum update -- John Newbigin Computer Systems Officer Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies Swinburne University of Technology Melbourne, Australia http://www.ict.swin.edu.au/staff/jnewbigin ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ CentOS-announce mailing list CentOS-announce(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce End of CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 5, Issue 7 *********************************************

1 0

RE: [CentOS] Red Hat Cluster Suite
by Adam Breaux 19 Jul '05

19 Jul '05

I was hoping there already was a port available. So I second this request. -----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Dag Wieers Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 7:54 AM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Red Hat Cluster Suite Importance: High On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 16:53 -0400, Adam Breaux wrote: > > Is there an equivalent for CentOS? > > For CentOS-3 here: > http://bender.it.swin.edu.au/centos-3/ > > For CentOS-4: > GFS 6.1 (and RHCS) is not yet released Not wanting to add extra load on the CentOS developers, but it would be nice to have this as part of CentOS :) Or this there a problem distributing this ? -- dag wieers, dag(a)wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power] _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

5 6

Re: [CentOS] CentOS on Compaq Proliant Rackmount Servers
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 19 Jul '05

19 Jul '05

From: John Hinton <webmaster(a)ew3d.com> > Yup, it's a shame to waste expensive horsepower if you don't need it and > most web stuff doesn't use a lot of horsepower.. Buy a bit above your > needs. Quality over horsepower as well, has been my philosophy. Actually, it's not about waste IMHO. It's about believing a newer processor design means the interconnect is better. A dual-P3 on a ServerSet IIIHE-SL will slap a P4-Celeron silly when it comes to server I/O. Especially when you throw a GbE on one PCI channel, and your SATA RAID on another. > I would advise going to the DL380 series. These use only the ultra2 > or 3 scsi drives.. not the mix of ultra and wide-ultra. Actually, it wasn't until recently that most 36, 73, 146GB SCSI drives started breaking 40MBps sustained. Ultra2/3 (aka Ultra80/160) offer LVD (low-voltate differential) for longer bus length and integrity. But yes, at today's disk speeds, Ultra2(80) is minimum. And you typically don't want more than 2-3 drives per channel. Although Ultra640 is planned, Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) is going to quickly kill it. A parallel storage bus is yesteryear. Until then, a SATA controller with queuing and "enterprise" SATA drives is the best of all worlds. The great thing is that SAS can use SATA drives too (so you can recycle your "enterprise" SATA drive investments). > I very nice speed improvement. Also, when buying, watch for drives > quanity, size and speed (try to avoid the 7200rpm and get the 10 or > 15k units). Because in many cases, many current 7200rpm drives come off the same line as ATA and SATA drives too. Interface is not an indicator of reliability, the actual mechanics are. A good indicator is the vibration and other tolerances in the spec sheet. "Enterprise" drives (typically the 9, 18, 36, 73 and 146GB capacities) vibrate 3-8x less than "Commodity" drives (typically the 40, 80, 120, 160, 200, 250, 300, 320 and 400GB capacities). E.g., WD Raptor 73 and 146GB 10,000rpm SATA drives come off the same line as Hitachi 10,000 U320 SCSI drives. > I think that was the ending point for the 1850s. The DL380s are almost > the same unit with a lot of parts being interchangable. The 380s are > just more modern in terms of processors, circuitry, raids, drives... and > pretty much picked up I think at the 600mhtz point and have grown from > there. The dual 866s and up to about 1.2 giggers are very reasonble on ebay >From what I was reading, the 1850 and similar era are 440 and 450 series chipsets. The 440 is _crap_. The 450NX is so-so, but bridges on extra PCI channels (for either 2 or 5 total). It still doesn't compare to a ServerWorks ServerSet III series. > A t-1 is still only 1/6th of a ten base ethernet card... and how much > power does it take to deliver products at one sixth of a 10base card? > Yeah, I know.... it's more complex than that. Database apps can eat up a > lot, email/spam systems can eat up HUGE amounts of processing power. But > if you're mostly delivering web pages, it just doesn't take much. I guess I've been too used to having a GbE saturated. ;-> -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

3 2

← Newer
1
...
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
...
24
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 July 2005