Discuss July 2010

discuss@lists.centos.org

242 participants
193 discussions

Paravirtualized Centos 5.5 guest under Xen
by David Dyer-Bennet 19 Jul '10

19 Jul '10

The virtualization manual doesn't seem to say; does one have to do anything to get the Centos 5.5 paravirtualization drivers installed? Or is it sufficient to specify a paravirtualized guest, and the Centos install will then detect that and load the right things? And, is there a way to check in the guest that the right drivers are loaded? What are they? -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b(a)dd-b.net; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

2 1

Re-exporting an NFS mount.. Possible?
by Kwan Lowe 19 Jul '10

19 Jul '10

I have an issue that is not all that unique, so I'm hoping someone has done it before. On the client end I have some very old RedHat based systems. On the server end is a Windows 2008 system running NFS server software. The clients mount the server resource as an NFS2 mount but some compliance issues were discovered with the setup. For various reasons, updating the client is not an option at this time. The fix the issue, the server needs to export NFS3 mounts but the clients do not support that version. As a workaround, I considered adding a third system running CentOS that would mount the server and re-export it to the clients. This will mitigate the current issue related to visibility of the share from certain groups. It does not appear possible, using the current kernel-based NFS server, to export an NFS-mounted filesystem. However, it appears that there is a FUSE NFS project that might work. Does anyone have any experience with such a setup?

6 15

Re: [CentOS] 2X app server alternatives
by John R Pierce 19 Jul '10

19 Jul '10

On 07/18/10 11:15 AM, Silviu Hutanu wrote: > Yeap, but it will be nice to be based on VNC, actually I use Ulteo > Virtual Desktop ( http://www.ulteo.com ) I'm trying to figure out if > there is a better alternative.2X app server is just an example of a > better alternative. > > NX could be also an alternative. I suspect you'll need to define what your requirements are before discussing alternatives to some commercial package. 2X runs windows apps on a windows server, using the RDP protocol. apparently if you're considering VNC and other such things, none of those are requirements, leading me to wonder just what your requirements are. otoh, this discussion really has nothing to do with CentOS per se.

1 0

2X app server alternatives
by Silviu Hutanu 18 Jul '10

18 Jul '10

Does anyone know any oss alternatives to 2x aplication server ? Regards, Silviu Hutanu

4 3

noReplaceConfig equivalent for /etc/yum.conf
by FHDATA 17 Jul '10

17 Jul '10

Greetings, In up2date config file there is a directive by the name of noReplaceConfig . . . Do you know what is the /etc/yum.conf equivalent for that? noReplaceConfig[comment]=When selected, no packages that would change configuration data are automatically installed noReplaceConfig=1 Thank you,

2 1

Xen / KVM CentOS-5 How To Document
by gene.poole＠macys.com 17 Jul '10

17 Jul '10

Does anyone have any idea where I can locate a 'GOOD' how-to document on implementing Xen and/or KVM on a CentOS-5.3 system? I'm currently running VMware Server 2.0.2, but I would like to make the move to the open source virtualization - if possible. What I found is somewhat short on the networking piece. It doesn't matter if it's TUI or GUI. Thanks, Gene Poole gene.poole(a)macys.com

4 3

Error message downloading latest Spamassassin data files via sa-update
by Gilbert Sebenste 16 Jul '10

16 Jul '10

Hello everyone, When I type "sa-update" to get the latest files for Spamassassin, I see this error: ]# sa-update Argument "1.39_01" isn't numeric in subroutine entry at /usr/bin/sa-update line 83. My Google-fu came up with nothing when searching for this error. Am I the only one getting this to happen, or are any of you seeing it as well? Gilbert ******************************************************************************* Gilbert Sebenste ******** (My opinions only!) ****** *******************************************************************************

3 3

Subject=Re:CentOS Simple solution for small network in school
by Paul Schoonderwoerd 16 Jul '10

16 Jul '10

Hello, I would use some (old) pc's as thin clients and have them boot over the network from the server, or from cd. Then, have them make a connection to the server with the NX protocol. Thinstation.org provides all this. Just install FreeNX on the server (yum install) and manage the accounts as local accounts. Can't have it any simpeler than that in my opinion, also for management. Regards, -- Paul Schoonderwoerd Pollux IT - Open Source oplossingen & Netwerk beveiliging http://www.Pollux-IT.nl 0294-283832

1 0

Grub booting issue
by Jason Pyeron 16 Jul '10

16 Jul '10

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499204 Given I can boot the install disk and chroot in, there must be away around Grub while still keeping LVM installed. Any ideas? Screen says: Booting Centos (2.6.18-194.3.1.el5) root (hd0,0) Filesystem type is ext2fs, partition type 0x83 kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.18-194.3.1.el5 ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 [Linux-bzImage, setup=0x1e00, size=0x1db35c] And then hangs. It is aleged that Grub probes aroung the bios which chrashes on optiplex 320s -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - - - Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us - - Principal Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100 - - +1 (443) 269-1555 x333 Baltimore, Maryland 21218 - - - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00.

3 9

Disks for virtualization
by David Dyer-Bennet 16 Jul '10

16 Jul '10

I'm not looking to move virtual machines between physical platforms; just want some protection between applications sharing a physical server. They'll all be using local disk in one form or another. Much the easiest to manage is just having the virtual machine use a file in dom0 as its disk. Without pre-allocating, this lets me over-commit somewhat to cover unknown future needs, for example. The alternative seems to be LVM partitions. Those are easy to throw around too, but after enough creation / destruction you can end up with your free-space fragmented so you can't use it, right? But I imagine there's a performance benefit to LVM partitions over dom0 files. For things like foswiki for internal use by a development team, and Nagios monitoring for about a dozen systems, do i need that extra performance? Does anybody have a rule-of-thumb for the difference? -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b(a)dd-b.net; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

2 1

← Newer
1
...
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
...
20
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 2010