Discuss January 2011

discuss@lists.centos.org

276 participants
290 discussions

Re: [CentOS] How to disable screen locking system-wide?
by Rudi Ahlers 20 Jan '11

20 Jan '11

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Sorin Srbu <sorin.srbu(a)orgfarm.uu.se> wrote: >>-----Original Message----- >>From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On >>Behalf Of Joshua Baker-LePain >>Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 8:47 PM >>To: CentOS mailing list >>Subject: Re: [CentOS] How to disable screen locking system-wide? >> >>> By default, CentOS v5 requires a user's password when the system wakes >>> up from the screensaver. This can be disabled by each user, but how >>> can I disable this system-wide? Many of my users forget to do this, >>> which results in workstations being locked up. >> >>Ctrl-Alt-Bksp will fix that right up. I'm not a big fan of users leaving >>workstations unsecured when they walk away. > > > Wouldn't that kill any programs, or whatever, the user has running? > Yup, and it totally defeats the purpose of what the OP actually wanted todo. Imagine your account being busy with your year-end books, and has to run to the toilet (she is a bit sick) now you come and press CTRL+ALT+Bksp and loose everything she's done. And, if she had a lot of invoices and statements already processed then she may need to redo it. Now, how do you explain to your boss that you just cost him another day with an expensive accountant because you're too ignorant to properly address the issue? -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers SoftDux Website: http://www.SoftDux.com Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com Office: 087 805 9573 Cell: 082 554 7532

3 2

CentOS 5.4 LTTng patch
by Lissade, Joel 20 Jan '11

20 Jan '11

Hi all, Has anyone successfully applied the LTTng patch to CentOS 5.4 kernel? According to the LTTng compatibility table patch28-2.6.18-lttng-0.6.41 is the one that should be used but a number of the patch files did not apply cleanly. It generated a number of rejects. If anyone has done this successfully, let me know your procedure. Thanks, Joel

1 0

Re: [CentOS] How to disable screen locking system-wide?
by John Hodrien 20 Jan '11

20 Jan '11

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011, Sorin Srbu wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On >> Behalf Of Tom H >> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 1:03 PM >> To: CentOS mailing list >> Subject: Re: [CentOS] How to disable screen locking system-wide? >> >> >> In our environment, leaving your desk without locking your >> computer/screen is punished with a disciplinary hearing and three such >> hearings result in dismissal. Having one person using another's >> account is considered a security risk. > > Sounds kinda' harsh. May I ask what industry this is in? > > >> I don't know the exact path but you can use gconftool-2 (or >> gconf-editor as a GUI) to set the screensaver not to lock (and mimick >> doing so by changing the screensaver preferences in >> "System-Preferences-Screensaver"). > > That's a per-user setting you describe, right? No, you can make that work for all users with gconf-editor by editing the right file. My previously suggested solution just does that in one go without a gui: gconftool-2 --direct \ --config-source xml:readwrite:/etc/gconf/gconf.xml.mandatory --type bool \ --set /apps/gnome-screensaver/lock_enabled false That makes it mandatory, so it can't be overridden, and will affect all users. Only fixes it for gnome, I don't know what the equivalent fix is for KDE. You need to take other steps to enforce it in the other direction, as killall gnome-screensaver would defeat it. jh

2 1

measuring performance of glibc
by Mag Gam 20 Jan '11

20 Jan '11

I was wondering, how does one measure the performance of glibc? Are there any tools? I am planning to compile my own version of glibc for educational purposes and I was simply curious. TIA

3 2

not able to check in all code into svn which creates problem in deployment
by Agnello George 20 Jan '11

20 Jan '11

HI i have currently started to deploy code into our production environment from the the dev environment, we deploy code on to the production from the svn , ( i do a svn export ) , some times not code is checked into the svn and it does not throw me a error . is there a way i can verify or write a script to check each file that is in the SVN is same as that in the dev environment . -- Regards Agnello D'souza

7 8

how to convert 7 cd iso images into one dvd image?
by Kenneth Wolcott 20 Jan '11

20 Jan '11

Hi; how to convert 7 cd iso images into one dvd image? I am unable to use bittorrent :-( Home ISP blocking bittorrent; company now blocks bittorrent. I want/need an old release (CentOS 5.2) to install as a VirtualBox guest. I suppose I could install from the cd iso images, but it is a pain to virtually eject and remount cd iso images during the install :-( So, is there a technique or an open source tool that will create a dvd iso given the cd iso images? Or how does one generate the dvd iso given a list of rpm files? (Assuming I had a list of all of the needed rpm files). It would be nice if one had something like "make centos_5.2_dvd_iso" :-) Thanks, Ken Wolcott kennethwolcott(a)gmail.com

14 14

Re: [CentOS] Troubles for an non-IT beginner
by Parshwa Murdia 20 Jan '11

20 Jan '11

On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Digimer <linux(a)alteeve.com> wrote: The kernel is, if I recall correctly, 2.6.18 that has only been patched > to fix bugs and security features. The modern kernel is 2.6.37, and a > *lot* of hardware has come along in the years in between. For example, > it's unlikely that things like bluetooth, most wireless interfaces, > modern video cards, etc, will work. > > Another option, if you are concerned about the short life cycle of > Fedora, would be to look at Ubuntu 10.04 LTS. The 'LTS' means "Long Term > Support" and will be supported for a fairly long time. 10.04 was > released last April, so it will be quite up to date. Okay, as seem Ubuntu is supposed to have a longer life. On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Cameron Kerr <cameron(a)humbledown.org>wrote: Doesn't have stability!? News to me (at least for Ubuntu). Seriously though, > you would probably find that a Fedora or Ubuntu would support your desktop > hardware (particularly things like Wireless and Graphics card) much better > than a distribution aimed at servers. It's also a lot more newbie friendly. > Okay, but my meaning to say was that it has an end of life every six months. On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 8:54 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell(a)gmail.com> wrote: Note that ubuntu has an 'LTS" (long term support) version that splits the > difference between the really fast moving releases and ones that go > unchanged > for a decade. I was pleasantly surprised a short time ago when I fired up > my > dual-boot laptop into an old install of ubuntu 8.04LTS and it asked if I > wanted > to upgrade to the newer 10.4LTS release, then proceeded to do it, > automatically > and successfully. > > There are, however, big differences in administration commands between > Ubuntu > and Centos - but if you are just starting out that probably doesn't matter. > Yes, and one main difference could be that Cent OS might serve purpose better for servers. On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Robert Heller <heller(a)deepsoft.com> wrote: RedHat does back port drivers, at least 'essential' ones. But yes, much > 'bleeding edge' hardware might not be supported. My PC is for home purpose only and I have only a small hardward - just speakers, a printer (Samsung printer), one net connection, one flatron screen with an assemble CPU having Inter Core 2 duo processor, 2 GB ram and 250 GB hard-disk. Speakers are frequently used and nothing else. In this scenario, I hope that all the drivers red hat might be supporting as it is the minimal of a computer sys., now in this bleeding edge technology era! On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Robert Heller <heller(a)deepsoft.com> wrote: In theory yes. The thing is the 'minimal install' would be very > minimal indeed. Probably no GUI or any of the other 'goodies' you > might expect to have. This would be fine for a fairly experienced IT > person, but might be somewhat 'hard' for a novice user. > > If can only manage to download *one* *CD* (either can't deal with a DVD > or don't want to download 7 CDs), then you should download the > netinstall CD. This is actually a very *small* iso image. Assuming you > have a decent Internet connection, the netinstall CD can install > packages directly from the Internet. > Ok I try one way. On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Robert Heller <heller(a)deepsoft.com> wrote: It is good for: > > 1) Taking a 'test drive' to see if linux is something you want to > pursue. Or to demostrate Linux to people who might not have seen or > used Linux -- it is easier to lug a CD than a whole computer. > > 2) To use as a multifunction rescue system. > > 3) To use Linux on a machine that Linux cannot be installed on (eg not > your machine). > > 4) To see if Linux will work on the machine in question before > committing to installing on it. Can be used to test Linux compatibity > with store display models, for example. On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Michael Klinosky <mpk2(a)enter.net> wrote: It's meant to be used to test if the distro likes your system, or test > if you like the distro. > > Do you know what a 'Live CD' is? Boot your computer from it; it'll run > the OS - but only in RAM or from the CD. It won't change anything on > your hard drive. Oh I see, this is really good option Linux has provided! On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell(a)gmail.com> wrote: CentOS will work for desktop use but it is not ideal, especially as it gets > older. With only a few exceptions, the support updates have only bug and > security fixes to the package versions shipped in the original release of > the > major distribution version number without adding new features. This is a > good > thing if you run servers with a lot of your own programming that depends on > the > exact behavior of the libraries from that version, but it is a lot less > important for an individual user that wants the newest features from all of > the > available packages. > > If you still want CentOS and aren't in a big hurry, you might wait for the > CentOS6 release which should be coming soon. CentOS 5.x has packages from > around the Fedora 6 era. CentOS 6 should jump that up to be similar to > Fedora 14. Nice, Cent OS 6 would be releasing by the Jan end or Feb, I think....? Another important thing I have is that like you are suggesting for Fedora or Ubuntu but that the newest cutting edge technology could be installed in the older hardware assuming that the hardware has minimal composition, like, only 2 gb ram, hard disk and speaker, with keyboard and a non-usb mouse. In this hardware too we can install any cutting edge OS like fedora or it really depends on the hardware that if it would accept a particular distro or not! -- Regards, Parshwa Murdia

12 24

disk quotas + centos 5,5 +xfs
by aurfalien＠gmail.com 20 Jan '11

20 Jan '11

Hi all, is any one aware quotas not working in 5,5? I'm using XFS as a file system. My fstab has the appropriate usrquota,grpquota but when I try to run; quotacheck -cug /foo I get; quotacheck: Can't find filesystem to check or filesystem not mounted with quota option. I already have a large amount of data in the mount. Do quotas get implemented on only empty filesystems and then one adds data? - aurf

4 4

Is it okay?
by Parshwa Murdia 19 Jan '11

19 Jan '11

Hi, I have downloaded the following version: CentOS-5.5-i386-LiveCD-Release2.iso from the mirror: http://ftp.iitm.ac.in/centos/5.5/isos/i386/ What I want to ask is that 'Release2' is the complete OS and after installation we can use 'yum update'. So at first, is it enough (as I am not going to download the complete set of 7 CDs)? -- Regards, Parshwa Murdia Making the simple complicated is commonplace, making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's innovation.. -C Mingus

3 3

KVM host question about host firewall
by Kwan Lowe 19 Jan '11

19 Jan '11

Hello All: I'll ask this in the virt list later if this is not the appropriate forum... Yesterday I was troubleshooting an issue with a KVM host. I was unable to access the DNS service on a KVM virtual machine. After verifying that the vm allowed through the DNS ports (53 on UDP/TCP) and still being unable to access, I was able to connect immediately after allowing those ports on the KVM host. Is there anyway around this? The reason is that I would like to allow only SSH access to the host, but allow other services to the virtual machines. I am running CentOS 5.5 on both hosts and vm. Thanks, Kwan

4 5

← Newer
1
...
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
...
29
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 January 2011