Discuss May 2011

discuss@lists.centos.org

225 participants
153 discussions

Re: [CentOS] Some thoughts about EL 6
by Gerhard Schneider 18 May '11

18 May '11

> Is there any bugzilla report for this? > SL or redhat? > Thx > Rainer Not from my side. I'm CentOS user - only testing 6.0 The tape issue has been discussed on the linux-scsi mailing list 6 months ago - including some fix - and there was a bug report for the Ubuntu 2.6.32 kernel. The slab issue has been discussed in the rhelv6-list in February. Sorry, but the large servers I used for testing are back in business with CentOS 5.6 after playing around for one week (it's my way to check that issues are not hardware related). Gerhard Schneider -- Gerhard Schneider Institute of Lightweight Design and e-Mail: gs(a)ilsb.tuwien.ac.at Structural Biomechanics (E317) Tel.: +43 664 60 588 3171 Vienna University of Technology / Austria Fax: +43 1 58801 31799 A-1040 Wien, Gusshausstrasse 27-29 http://www.ilsb.tuwien.ac.at/~gs/

2 1

sipwitch for Centos 5
by Dario Lesca 18 May '11

18 May '11

Hi, someone have use or rebuild sipwitch on Centos 5.x? http://www.gnu.org/software/sipwitch/ http://pkgs.org/package/sipwitch-runtime Someone know where is (if exist) a rpm for centos5? Thanks for info ... and Thanks to All for the great Work, Centos5.6 is a great S.O. server! -- Dario Lesca <d.lesca(a)solinos.it>

2 1

a hardware question
by m.roth＠5-cent.us 18 May '11

18 May '11

We need to replace several servers, quickly - four of our Dell PE 1950's died in one week. (!!!) So, we're looking around, and I was checking out IBM. I customized to what we want, and hit 'continue', and suddenly there's another $800 for a "system common planar" that's "required". Googling only finds specs with it - does anyone know what it is? I mean, it's not like it's the motherboard, right? mark

7 11

Can't build Keepalived 1.2.1 on CentOS-4
by Santi Saez 18 May '11

18 May '11

Hello, I get this error when trying to build Keepalived 1.2.1 on a CentOS-4 box: # gcc -g -O2 (..) -D_WITH_LVS_ -D_WITH_VRRP_ -c smtp.c In file included from ../include/vrrp.h:31, from ../include/smtp.h:34, from smtp.c:27: *../include/vrrp_ipaddress.h:32:27: linux/if_addr.h: No such file or directory* In file included from ../include/vrrp.h:31, from ../include/smtp.h:34, from smtp.c:27: In a CentOS-5 box 'linux/if_addr.h' file is owned by "kernel-headers" package and I can build Keepalived 1.2.1 without problems, but in CentOS-4 there is no such file, how can I solve this? thanks! Regards, -- Santi Saez http://powerstack.org/

1 0

Some thoughts about EL 6
by Gerhard Schneider 18 May '11

18 May '11

Many people seem to wait for the announcement of CentOS 6.0, so I want to share some test results I did with SL 6.0.. The actual 6.0 kernel can NOT allocate tape buffers when the server is heavily loaded at least on some LSILogic hardware. There is a big problem of slab buffer increase that can cause reboot/freeze of the server under load. Reported by many and verified by me :-( So perhaps it's a good idea to wait for 6.1 for mission critical servers.. Gerhard Schneider -- Gerhard Schneider e-Mail:gs@ilsb.tuwien.ac.at Institute of Lightweight Design and Tel.: +43 1 58801 31716 Structural Biomechanics (E317) Fax.: +43 1 58801 31799 Vienna University of Technology / Austria DVR: 0005886 A-1040 Wien, Gusshausstrasse 27-29 http://www.ilsb.tuwien.ac.at/

2 1

Problem Making Tarballs
by John J. Boyer 18 May '11

18 May '11

I have a CentOS virtual private server from 1and1.com If I checkout or pull something from a repository, it will contain an autogen.sh file Running this and then configure seems to work. However, when I run make I get a lot of error messages from libtool saying that such and such a command could not be found on some line or that there is a syntax error. This happens even with the latest updates. Several people have been unable to help. What is the problem, and what should I do about it? Thanks, John -- John J. Boyer; President, Chief Software Developer Abilitiessoft, Inc. http://www.abilitiessoft.com Madison, Wisconsin USA Developing software for people with disabilities

9 13

Re: [CentOS] a hardware question
by aly.khimji＠gmail.com 17 May '11

17 May '11

Indeed I agree, we are a full IBM shop and after working with there gear for a very long time, I also suggest the same, this will ensure you get everything you need and all the correct parts to get you back asap. Its just a safe bet with IBM. Aly ------Original Message------ From: John R Pierce Sender: centos-bounces(a)centos.org To: centos(a)centos.org ReplyTo: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] a hardware question Sent: May 17, 2011 4:47 PM On 05/17/11 12:49 PM, m.roth(a)5-cent.us wrote: > We need to replace several servers, quickly - four of our Dell PE 1950's > died in one week. (!!!) So, we're looking around, and I was checking out > IBM. I customized to what we want, and hit 'continue', and suddenly > there's another $800 for a "system common planar" that's "required". > Googling only finds specs with it - does anyone know what it is? I mean, > it's not like it's the motherboard, right? indeed, Planar is IBM-speak for a mainboard. IBM has a lot of their own unique terminology. For ages disk drives were called DASD (Direct Access Storage Devices). generally, on the IBM 'express' configurations, everything required is included in the base configuration. sounds like you were off in their custom build land, which is mostly intended for bulk orders and everything is /a la carte/. I *highly* recommend working with an IBM VAR who will sort out the configurations for you. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network

1 0

So sorry! was: Re: EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)
by Benjamin Smith 17 May '11

17 May '11

As the OP for this thread, it saddens me to see that the thread I started has now been used as a forum for behavior of the worst kind seen in professional circles. I'm a longtime user of CentOS and merely wanted to know of users' past experiences transitioning between SL and CentOS. My first experience with CentOS was as a transition from Whitebox to CentOS, and the process was as simple as swapping out perhap 3 RPMs and a "yum update". That's it, and that same server is still chugging along today many years later. Both CentOS and WBEL had the same goal, near-perfect compatibility with RHEL, but SL has slightly different goals. What are users' past experiences doing a "hot swap out" of SL for CentOS and/or vice versa? I have tremendoud respect for the CentOS project. The developers here cast an extremely long shadow that we should all admire and respect. This is a bit of a dark time here, prompted by a delayed release of EL6 that was already delayed by Red Hat for their own (probably similar) reasons. SysAdmin frustration is at a high point as a result of these combined factors, causing many involved to question even the very best of decisions. I suspect that the many requests for ETAs are exacerbating the issue that the CentOS developers simply cannot predict a final release date, which is further exacerbated by the otherwise noteworthy, high-quality QA now in place, which is causing requests for build changes that delay the release and cause need for further QA checks on packages rebuild due to deps changes. It's a perfect storm of factors that, together, result in the current situation. I'm a developer; this type of situation is unfortunately common and can be frustrating for all involved, and just cannot be completely avoided! The choices are clear, however: 1) Stick w/CentOS, get a high quality, highly compatible release at little/no cost, with an uncertain release date. 2) Switch to SL, get a high quality, reduced compatibility release (due to slightly different goals and qualities) at little/no cost, right now; 3) Switch to RHEL, get a quality release at significant cost, right now. 4) Complain loudly about how it's not perfect and/or get angry at people who question your motives and/or competence after years of otherwise successful cooperation. I wish option #4 was not so commonly exercised here. It really might be a good time to consider moderation. Anybody want to volunteer as a moderator? -Benjamin Smith -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

12 14

Why is iptables configured to accept packets on ports 50 and 51?
by Aleksey Tsalolikhin 17 May '11

17 May '11

[root@hwdltsaloli ~]# cat /etc/sysconfig/iptables # Firewall configuration written by system-config-securitylevel # Manual customization of this file is not recommended. *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :RH-Firewall-1-INPUT - [0:0] -A INPUT -j RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -A FORWARD -j RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -p icmp --icmp-type any -j ACCEPT -A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -p 50 -j ACCEPT -A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -p 51 -j ACCEPT -A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT -A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited COMMIT [root@hwdltsaloli ~]# lsof -i:50 [root@hwdltsaloli ~]# lsof -i:51 [root@hwdltsaloli ~]# /etc/services says: re-mail-ck 50/tcp # Remote Mail Checking Protocol re-mail-ck 50/udp # Remote Mail Checking Protocol la-maint 51/tcp # la-maint 51/udp # IMP Logical Address Maintenance Google turns up RMCP is a simple lightweight DP protocol for checking if you have mail on a server A quick Google search failed to turn up what is "IMP Logical Address Maintenance" Why is this in the default iptables configuration? Thanks, Aleksey

4 4

securing sshd with selinux
by Hajo Locke 17 May '11

17 May '11

Hello List, dont have experience with selinux, but i want to know if it would be a practicable way to secure sshd with selinux. i have some webservers and want to grant ssh-access to some users. my plan ist to make new server where users are able to log in. the homes from webserver are mounted in by nfs etc. i dont like chroot-env for ssh, a lot of disadvantages... also i dont like if users would scrabble folders that doesn't concern them. so i thought it would be possible to restrict users by selinux so they dont are able to see too much... objective is to restrict users to there home (as far as possible) and run some typical programms like perl, php, some binaries and hide all other... is this a useful scenario for selinux? If not, are there alternatives? Thanks, Hajo

3 2

← Newer
1
...
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
...
16
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 May 2011