Discuss November 2007

discuss@lists.centos.org

256 participants
327 discussions

Persist perms on devices after reboots
by Tom Brown 30 Nov '07

30 Nov '07

Hi Dumb question i think but how can i make devices permissions persist after a reboot. I dont think i have come across this issue before but i have some SAN disks that need to be oracle:dba as their perms but after a reboot they reset back to brw------- 1 root root 120, 49 Nov 30 10:40 /dev/emcpowerd1 any thoughts? thanks

2 1

kernel-2.6.9-55.0.12.EL not booting (lvm? 3ware?)
by Ugo Bellavance 30 Nov '07

30 Nov '07

Hi, Here's he setup. Original Kernel: kernel-smp-2.6.9-42.EL, booting fine. Error with kernel-2.6.9-55.0.12.EL (and kernel-2.6.9-55.0.12.ELsmp) No volume groups found Volume group "VolGroup00" not found. ERROR: /bin/lvm exited abnormally! The system has a 3ware 9000 Storage Controller Model: 9500S-4LP Firmware FE9X 2.08.00.006, BIOS BE9X 2.03.01.052, Ports: 4. Anyone seen this? I've googled but can't find anything, except that: [184523] -add support for 3ware 9650SE SATA-RAID (Chip Coldwell) ... in 2.6.9-44 Regards, Ugo

3 2

Stuck at GRUB
by Ugo Bellavance 30 Nov '07

30 Nov '07

Hi, I have a Dell poweredge 400SC here with an LSI scsi card. I installed Centos4 a while ago and put it in a datacenter. I rebooted many weeks after, and the machine didn't come back up. So I went to the datacenter tonight to find out that the server was stuck at "GRUB". Nothing more. So I decided to re-install Centos4. The partitions were already there, so I just made sure partitions were formatted and the install went fine. When I rebooted, "GRUB". I'm at this point and I don't know exactly what I could do to diagnose furthere. Any ideas? Regards, Ugo

7 19

ieee1394 firewire disk unable to see or mount [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
by Lawson Hanson 30 Nov '07

30 Nov '07

We have some LaCie 1 TB external disks which work fine on other Linux servers (running Red Hat 9, and Ubuntu 7.04), but which fail to be seen on our CentOS 4.3 system with kernel 2.6.9-34.107.plus.c4smp The interface card is a Sunix 64 bit Firewire 800 ieee1394b adapter plugged into a PCI slot in our Linux server, which is a Tyan Thunder K8SD Pro S2882-D, 64 bit AMD Opteron CPU Using "cat" to examine the "/proc/scsi/scsi" information shows our system hard disk and internal RAID array: cat /proc/scsi/scsi ------------------- Attached devices: Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 00 Lun: 00 Vendor: ATA Model: WDC WD360GD-00FL Rev: 33.0 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05 Host: scsi4 Channel: 00 Id: 00 Lun: 00 Vendor: AMCC Model: 9550SX-8LP DISK Rev: 3.01 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 03 I have found various items in the centos list archives, but none of these has provided a definitive solution; I have used commands such as "lspci", and "lsmod" to ensure that the system sees the firewire card, and has iee1394 and other modules loaded: lspci | grep 1394 ----------------- 01:03.0 Firewire (IEEE 1394): Texas Instruments TSB82AA2 \ IEEE-1394b Link Layer Controller (rev 01) lsmod | egrep '1394|sbp2|s.*_mod' --------------------------------- sbp2 26825 0 ohci1394 36953 0 ieee1394 124601 2 sbp2,ohci1394 sd_mod 19393 7 scsi_mod 140561 4 sbp2,3w_9xxx,libata,sd_mod Somewhere I found a note about trying the "serialize_io=1" option with the "sbp2" module, and now have tried that, but still have no joy: dmesg | grep sbp ---------------- sbp2: $Rev: 1219 $ Ben Collins <bcollins(a)debian.org> sbp2: $Rev: 1219 $ Ben Collins <bcollins(a)debian.org> ieee1394: sbp2: Driver forced to serialize I/O (serialize_io = 1) The "1394" messages in "dmesg" are: dmesg | grep 1394 ----------------- ieee1394: Initialized config rom entry `ip1394' ohci1394: $Rev: 1223 $ Ben Collins <bcollins(a)debian.org> ohci1394: fw-host0: OHCI-1394 1.1 (PCI): IRQ=[209] \ MMIO=[fc7fe800-fc7fefff] Max Packet=[4096] ieee1394: Host added: ID:BUS[0-00:1023] GUID[080028560000470a] ieee1394: Error parsing configrom for node 0-01:1023 ieee1394: The root node is not cycle master capable; \ selecting a new root node and resetting... ieee1394: Error parsing configrom for node 0-00:1023 ieee1394: Node changed: 0-00:1023 -> 0-01:1023 ieee1394: Error parsing configrom for node 0-00:1023 ieee1394: Node changed: 0-01:1023 -> 0-00:1023 ieee1394: Error parsing configrom for node 0-01:1023 ieee1394: The root node is not cycle master capable; \ selecting a new root node and resetting... ieee1394: Error parsing configrom for node 0-00:1023 ieee1394: Error parsing configrom for node 0-01:1023 ieee1394: The root node is not cycle master capable; \ selecting a new root node and resetting... ieee1394: Error parsing configrom for node 0-00:1023 ieee1394: Node changed: 0-00:1023 -> 0-01:1023 ieee1394: Error parsing configrom for node 0-00:1023 ieee1394: sbp2: Driver forced to serialize I/O (serialize_io = 1) If anyone can suggest how I might proceed to get our LaCie disks to run on the Firewire card under CentOS 4.3, I shall be delighted to see what I need to do, thanks Best regards, Lawson Hanson ------ Climate Change Group Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research

1 0

Re: [CentOS] CleanLog.h
by Ross S. W. Walker 30 Nov '07

30 Nov '07

Find out how they got in and make sure that hole is fixed. Do an rpm verify on all installed packages (excluding configs), reinstall the rpms that fail the verify. Find all binaries that are not accountable in rpm and nuke them. Harden your host with selinux and audit, keep audit logs of all changes to binary files and essential configs and make sure the audit logs are immutable. Keep an eye on the system for a while to make sure you haven't missed anything. Keep LVM snapshots of your OS LVs. -Ross -----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org <centos-bounces(a)centos.org> To: CentOS mailing list <centos(a)centos.org> Sent: Thu Nov 29 17:43:44 2007 Subject: [CentOS] CleanLog.h Sad to say one of my file servers was exploited and used to run a Phishing scam. Have identified subject virus amongst other things. It appears twice in a virus scan; /sbin/z (which I assume can just be deleted) and /sys/bus/serio/drivers/atkbd/description. The latter file is also present in identical uninfected machines. I have been unable to open the file, even with root privileges, although it appears to be a text file. Any suggestions on how to proceed appreciated. Guess I could delete it and copy over the file from an identical machine. Thanks in advance, B.J. CentOS 5.0, Linux 2.6.18-8.1.15.el5 x86_64 16:26:48 up 10:46, 1 user, load average: 0.07, 0.08, 0.04 ______________________________________________________________________ This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy or printout thereof.

3 2

Re: [CentOS] special tricks for developers box on centos 5
by Ross S. W. Walker 29 Nov '07

29 Nov '07

More importantly, mount your dev filesys with atimes disabled and ext3 indexing on. Use tmpfs for /tmp, /usr/tmp, /var/tmp, it uses swappable ram filesys which helps a lot too. Make sure nothing gets put in those tmp dirs that needs to persist across a reboot and limit the max size each can take to 1/2 total memory. More memory... As far as background jobs go, reschedule them for day time hours when your asleep ;-) -Ross -----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org <centos-bounces(a)centos.org> To: CentOS mailing list <centos(a)centos.org> Sent: Thu Nov 29 18:26:56 2007 Subject: Re: [CentOS] special tricks for developers box on centos 5 Jerry, --- Jerry Geis <geisj(a)pagestation.com> wrote: > I was just wondering if there are special tricks > people do > that compile A LOT on centos? Do RAM disks help or > something else I dont > about that minimizes your compile time? I presently > have and AMD x2 > 4800+ with 2GIG ram. > > Just curious if I can reduce any more time out of my > compiles. Watch out for background processes that steal resources: Move /etc/cron.daily/ mlocate prelink to /etc/cron.weekly Remove /etc/cron.daily/makewhatis and let it only run weekly (its already in weekly) Open /etc/updatedb and tune it for your system: add ntfs-3g or vfat to prunefs If you have any mock partitions, add that to prunepath -- Mark My C5 repo with RequestTracker http://www.tlviewer.org/centos ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ______________________________________________________________________ This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy or printout thereof.

1 0

SNMP Log entries
by Enyo 29 Nov '07

29 Nov '07

Hi, Does anyone know how to prevent snmpd from writing the below into /var/log/messages/ Nov 29 19:35:02 serenity snmpd[2287]: Received SNMP packet(s) from UDP: [127.0.0.1]:34309 Nov 29 19:35:02 serenity snmpd[2287]: Connection from UDP: [127.0.0.1]:34309 Nov 29 19:35:02 serenity last message repeated 7 times Nov 29 19:40:02 serenity snmpd[2287]: Connection from UDP: [127.0.0.1]:34313 Nov 29 19:40:02 serenity snmpd[2287]: Received SNMP packet(s) from UDP: [127.0.0.1]:34313 Nov 29 19:40:02 serenity snmpd[2287]: Connection from UDP: [127.0.0.1]:34313 Nov 29 19:40:02 serenity last message repeated 7 times Nov 29 19:45:02 serenity snmpd[2287]: Connection from UDP: [127.0.0.1]:34319 Nov 29 19:45:02 serenity snmpd[2287]: Received SNMP packet(s) from UDP: [127.0.0.1]:34319 Nov 29 19:45:02 serenity snmpd[2287]: Connection from UDP: [127.0.0.1]:34319 We query the server to gain load stats etc every 5 mins and this is causing /var/log/messages to fill up pretty quickly/ I do not care about seeing normal connection info from snmpd, but retaining logging for other info such as malformed packets, bad community strings etc is of interest. Thanks

2 1

RAID, LVM, extra disks...
by Ugo Bellavance 29 Nov '07

29 Nov '07

Hi, This is my current config: /dev/md0 -> 200 MB -> sda1 + sdd1 -> /boot /dev/md1 -> 36 GB -> sda2 + sdd2 -> form VolGroup00 with md2 /dev/md2 -> 18 GB -> sdb1 + sde1 -> form VolGroup00 with md1 sda,sdd -> 36 GB 10k SCSI HDDs sdb,sde -> 18 GB 10k SCSI HDDs I have added 2 36 GB 10K SCSI drives in it, they are detected as sdc and sdf. What should I do if I want to optimize disk space? The simplest solution would be to create /dev/md3 out of sdc1 and sdf1, and add it to the VG, and increase the size of my /vz logical volume. However, if I could convert that to a RAID5 (it could be possible to re-install, but I would rather not), I could have 6 drives in RAID5, so I'd have 5x36 GB (180) of space available total, instead of 3*36 (108). Also, please note that this is a Dual PIII 1.2 Tualatin. I'm runing OpenVZ with virtual machines that are not really CPU expensive, but I would not like to see my processors spending most of their time computing XORs for the RAID5. Any suggestions/tips welcome. Regards, Ugo

3 9

32-bit xen pv domU on 64-bit dom0?
by Amos Shapira 29 Nov '07

29 Nov '07

Hello, I'm hitting a problem with heartbeat which might be related to the use of x86_64. My test system is CentOS 5 Xen DomU x86_64 under CentOS 5 Dom0. Can I run i386 CentOS 5 DomU under x86_64 Dom0? Thanks, --Amos

1 0

RE: [CentOS] Re: Mail Server Install
by James D. Parra 29 Nov '07

29 Nov '07

-----Original Message----- From: Scott Silva [mailto:ssilva@sgvwater.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 10:37 AM To: centos(a)centos.org Subject: [CentOS] Re: Mail Server Install on 11/28/2007 10:24 AM Alain Spineux spake the following: > On Nov 28, 2007 2:54 AM, Jun Salen <nokijun(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> Hi Friends, >> >> I am planning to upgrade my mail server from CentOS4.5 to CentOS5. By this, I also planned to replace my postfix mail server with Scalix although the community edition limit me to just 25 premium user, I think it is suffice for us with the remaining user as standard user (with approx. <> 100 users total). Is there a catch on using Scalix based on your experience. I see that Horde is available from Dag's repository, do you think it is better for me to use that instead? Is there anyone using it that may share their gotchas and good points from their experience for me to prepare and be ready. Thank you in advance. > > You could take a look at kolab. > Their is no native binary for package for centos, but the openpkg > packaging work well on centos-5. > > All user are premium user on kolab and are not limited :-) > Except Outlook users, which must pay to play through the toltec connector. ~~~~~ My personal experience with Scalix is pretty bad. Administering it is cumbersome and trying to find a user's mailbox is problematic, not to mention other issues. Perhaps your experience would be better. ~James

6 11

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
...
33
Older →

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 November 2007