Discuss April 2009

discuss@lists.centos.org

291 participants
340 discussions

Re: [CentOS] Dual-boot with WinXP, CentOS already installed
by David G. Miller 17 Apr '09

17 Apr '09

"Sorin Srbu" <sorin.srbu(a)orgfarm.uu.se> wrote: > Hi all, > > I'd like to deploy a solution with dual-booting systems where CentOS 5.3 is > already installed and WinXP will be installed to a separate disk. > > I found > http://apcmag.com/how_to_dual_boot_linux_and_windows_xp_linux_installed_fir… > and it seems straight forward enough, although the description is for Ubuntu. > > The problem as I see it, is that the how-to differs from how CentOS looks in > /etc/grub.conf and the boot-loader in Ubuntu with respect to making grub work > again after the Windows install. > > I found Tldp.org mentioning dual-boot plenty, but most or all articles listed > are using lilo as a boot-loader, which seems a bit obsolete and besides I > can't quite translate the instructions from lilo to grub. 8-/ > > Basically, what would I need to change in the how-to from apcmag.com above?? > Thanks for any pointers. As noted in other replies, Windows not not play well with anything else. Your best bet would be to disable/remove/disconnect the drive with CentOS and then do the Windows install to the other drive. Once Windows is installed, you can reconnect the CentOS drive and then easily edit grub.conf to boot Windows using the "chainloader" directive. This approach will only work if there are no primary partitions on the CentOS drive that Windows recognizes. Windows (just like DOS) assigns drive letters to partitions in drive number order starting with the primary partitions and then moving on to the extended partitions. The bottom line is that you want the first Windows partition on the non-CentOS drive to get assigned drive letter C: when Windows boots. As long as Windows doesn't recognize the partition type (e.g., ext3), no drive letter gets assigned. The problem with suggestions to just install Windows and then either use another boot loader or repair the grub installation is that you are stuck doing that work through Windows. My experience has been that Windows isn't as easy to work with for making changes to the boot loader and any approach that overwrites the Windows boot loader may leave you with Windows not being bootable. The approach I described above leaves the Windows boot loader in place although you may need to edit C:\boot.ini to make sure it can still find Windows when both disks are "present." Here is the grub.conf that I use on my laptop. The internal drive boots to either CentOS or Windows while Fedora 10 and Ubuntu are on an external USB drive. # grub.conf generated by anaconda # # Note that you do not have to rerun grub after making changes to this file # NOTICE: You have a /boot partition. This means that # all kernel and initrd paths are relative to /boot/, eg. # root (hd0,2) # kernel /vmlinuz-version ro root=/dev/hda6 # initrd /initrd-version.img #boot=/dev/hda default=0 timeout=5 splashimage=(hd0,2)/grub/splash.xpm.gz hiddenmenu title CentOS (2.6.18-92.1.22.el5) root (hd0,2) kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.18-92.1.22.el5 ro root=LABEL=/ rhgb initrd /initrd-2.6.18-92.1.22.el5.img title CentOS (2.6.18-92.1.18.el5) root (hd0,2) kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.18-92.1.18.el5 ro root=LABEL=/ rhgb initrd /initrd-2.6.18-92.1.18.el5.img title Fedora (2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.x86_64) root (hd1,0) kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.x86_64 ro root=UUID=232029fe-c524-47b4-a5d6-d45c0ce7e56b rhgb nomodeset initrd /initrd-2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.x86_64.img title Ubuntu (2.6.27-7 x86_64) root (hd1,4) kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.27-7-generic ro root=LABEL=uSlash initrd /initrd-2.6.27-7-generic title Windoze rootnoverify (hd0,0) chainloader +1 My grub.conf points to Windows on a partition on the internal drive. Yours would point to Windows on the "second" drive (probably hd1). Likewise, your boot.ini will need to point to Windows with something like: multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP" changing to: multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(1)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP" Note the change -----^ I'm assuming your Windows disk would end up being /dev/hdb in a Linux world. If your system is using SATA drives or the Windows drive would be something other than /dev/hdb, you may need to make some adjustments to what I have suggested. Cheers, Dave -- Politics, n. Strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. -- Ambrose Bierce

7 8

Re: [CentOS] Dual-boot with WinXP, CentOS already installed
by Kai Schaetzl 17 Apr '09

17 Apr '09

Sorin Srbu wrote on Thu, 16 Apr 2009 14:35:40 +0200: > Googled some more. Realised /boot/grub/menu.lst *is* /etc/grub.conf... Duh! You want to change /boot/grub/grub.conf, nothing else ! > > Also some people say it's better to have Windows installed to the first > harddrive and the first partition (so that C: is the where it should be on > 1st hd/1st partition). Doesn't matter. > > Would I be better off disconnecting the drive containing CentOS and > reconnect it when I'm done installing Windows. Then boot with CentOS rescue > and reinstall grub to the Windows-hd MBR? Why? If you want to put them on separate *hardware* then you don't have to reinstall anything. Just make sure that the CentOS drive is the first boot drive. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com

3 4

Re: [CentOS] Dual-boot with WinXP, CentOS already installed
by Kai Schaetzl 17 Apr '09

17 Apr '09

Sorin Srbu wrote on Thu, 16 Apr 2009 16:03:53 +0200: > Generally speaking, which one is the easiest and/or safest if time is an issue > and you want to things fast and streamlined doing this, grub-install or backup > and restore MBR. That is assuming I don't screw up when I do either and > mistype or something. > > Or are both things different sides of the same coin kinda' thing? I think I prefer the grub-install way because it's easier to remember what you have to do and harder to mistype. Using dd works 100%, though, if done correctly. Even if there is something wrong with grub-install or grub in the live disk, dd is hardly affected. But, as I said, if you use two disks and pull the first out you do not have to reinstall/restore the MBR anyway. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com

2 1

Re: [CentOS] Dual-boot with WinXP, CentOS already installed
by Kai Schaetzl 17 Apr '09

17 Apr '09

Sorin Srbu wrote on Thu, 16 Apr 2009 14:08:57 +0200: > Basically, what would I need to change in the how-to from apcmag.com above?? It's like that tutorial says. Forget about backing up grub.conf. This is nonsense. You want to make a backup before changing it, just in case, but not because of the XP installation. After the installation you have to reinstall grub with "grub-install" (from a live disk) and add the chainloader stuff to grub.conf. mount /dev/sda2 /mnt/linux (if that is where you linux resides) grub-install --root-directory=/mnt/linux /dev/sda (if you want to install it to the partition use sda2 instead of sda, then the partition has to be active, so that you can boot from it) Instead of using grub-install you can backup the mbr before the installation and then restore it afterwards. You can easily get bad results from that if you mistype, though. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com

3 5

Re: [CentOS] rt3 3.8.2 latest version as rpm for C5?
by Mark Pryor 17 Apr '09

17 Apr '09

Jim, --- On Tue, 4/14/09, Jim Perrin <jperrin(a)gmail.com> wrote: > From: Jim Perrin <jperrin(a)gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] rt3 3.8.2 latest version as rpm for C5? > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos(a)centos.org> > Date: Tuesday, April 14, 2009, 5:12 PM > On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 3:07 AM, > Rainer Traut <tr.ml(a)gmx.de> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I know, epel has rt3 in version 3.6.x. > > And - sadly - for version 3.8.x the perl module > dependencies are way > > ahead of what I can find in epel or rpmforge. > > But we really need some of the 3.8.x series features. > > > > So has anybody maybe built those modules + rt3 v3.8.x > for C5? > > Any hint? > > I started to run down this rabbit hole and had most of it > built via > mock and one of dag's cpan-> rpm scripts. After a few > rounds of > builds, it became immediately apparent that some of the > requirements > directly conflict with the perl rpm shipped by centos and > RHEL. > Specifically the Encode bits required by RT 3.8 are much > newer than > what is provided in the centos perl rpm. I wasn't willing > to do that > level of replacement when building RT because I didn't need > the > feature sets in 3.8 and I wasn't aware of what else that > might impact > for other users. After trying for 2 hours, I ran into 3 brickwall-issues. Like you found, there are two base perl modules which require newer versions than that which comes with 5.3. These modules are File::Temp and Encode (core) cpan2rpm can package them OK, but there are fatal transaction check errors when installing. Mr. JV is the author of RT3 and DBIx::SearchBuilder. The SearchBuilder module also stopped me (briefly) with a dependency on DBD::Oracle. To grab this from CPAN requires the supporting Orable Libs. I altered the spec and removed any Oracle depends. These 3 issues were enough to cause me to give up. -- Mark

2 1

Many missing updates for CentOS 4?
by Tom G. Christensen 16 Apr '09

16 Apr '09

According to centos-announce there's been no updates for CentOS 4 i386/x86_64 since the seamonkey errata (CESA-2009:0325) on 2009-03-06. A quick rundown shows a rather worrying backlog of missing security updates, some more than a month old: 2009:0313 - Moderate: wireshark 2009:0333 - Moderate: libpng/libpng10 2009:0331 - Important: kernel 2009:0344 - Moderate: libsoup 2009:0354 - Moderate: evolution-data-server 2009:0355 - Moderate: evolution and evolution-data-server 2009:0341 - Moderate: curl 2009:0345 - Moderate: ghostscript (superceded by 2009:0420) 2009:0258 - Moderate: thunderbird 2009:0362 - Moderate: NetworkManager 2009:0373 - Moderate: systemtap 2009:0397 - Critical: firefox 2009:0398 - Critical: seamonkey 2009:0337 - Moderate: php 2009:0409 - Important: krb5 2009:0411 - Moderate: device-mapper-multipath 2009:0420 - Moderate: ghostscript Is there any work being done on these? -tgc

2 2

Redland rdf libraries
by James B. Byrne 16 Apr '09

16 Apr '09

I may have a requirement for these libraries on my CentOS-5.3 box. Does anyone know of a recent rpm for centos that provides them? -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrne mailto:ByrneJB@Harte-Lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3

2 1

Re: [CentOS] Odd SELinux messages during+after 5.3 upgrade (system_mail_t and postfix_postdrop_t access rpm_var_lib_t)
by Dianne Yumul 16 Apr '09

16 Apr '09

Dan Mensom wrote: > Does anyone know what these accesses are? > <snip> > Also, on a related note, is it normally best practices to > 'setenforce 0' > during a 5.x upgrade? I also got these type of messages. I just did a yum update from 5.2. Output from audit2allow are as follows: allow useradd_t rpm_t:tcp_socket { read write }; allow useradd_t rpm_var_lib_t:file { read write }; allow useradd_t var_lib_t:file write; allow useradd_t var_t:file read; I have similar messages for auditctl_t, cupsd_t, groupadd_t, rdisc_t, restorecon_t, restorecond_t, semanage_t and setrans_t. It looks like they only happened during the upgrade and haven't gotten any every since. Just wondering too if these messages are normal (everything is working flawlessly) and if there's anything I should've done to ensure the upgrade is complete. Thank you. Dianne Wells Gaming Research (800) 854-6809 (775) 826-3232

1 0

Sendmail forwarding external email sent to root
by Neil Aggarwal 16 Apr '09

16 Apr '09

Hello: On a CentOS5 machine I set up for a client, in /etc/aliases, I set root's mail to forward to my email address so I can get notices from cron, etc. Unfortunately, I am now getting a lot of spam which is sent to root(a)theservername.com How can I tell sendmail to not accept external email to root? I searched the Internet and found some horribly convoluted solutions. There has to be a simple way to do this, like putting a line in sendmail.mc or something. Anyone know a good solution? Thanks Neil -- Neil Aggarwal, (832)245-7314, www.JAMMConsulting.com Eliminate junk email and reclaim your inbox. Visit http://www.spammilter.com for details.

3 4

Re: [CentOS] re-install package
by David G. Miller 16 Apr '09

16 Apr '09

Dag Wieers <dag(a)centos.org> wrote: > On Tue, 14 Apr 2009, Erik Laxdal wrote: >> > Jerry Geis wrote: >> >>> >> I tried to install alsa 1.0.19 on centos 5.3 64 - did not work - compile >>> >> errors. >>> >> >>> >> I need to re-install alsa-lib and alsa-util . >>> >> I dont want to do rpm -e first on those packages as dependcy is crazy. >>> >> I know they were installed (rpm -qa | grep alsa tells me so) I just want >>> >> to re-install ? >>> >> How do I do that? >>> >> > >> > Try the new "reinstall" option in CentOS 5.3's version of yum: >> > >> > yum reinstall alsa-lib alsa-util >> > > Finally ! 10 years after apt :) I saw a t-shirt advertised recently that said "apt-get girlfriend". I'm guessing yum still can't do that ;-). Cheers, Dave -- Politics, n. Strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. -- Ambrose Bierce

8 8

← Newer
1
...
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
...
34
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 April 2009