Discuss February 2012

discuss@lists.centos.org

205 participants
193 discussions

gdm in 6.2 missing keyboard menu?
by James Pearson 07 Mar '12

07 Mar '12

I have a box running 6.0 that gives a keyboard layout menu via gdm when logging in. I've just installed a 6.2 box, but there is no keyboard layout menu I've found a bugzilla entry at: <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=746923> which says that with gdm in 6.2, it now only shows keyboard layouts listed in /etc/sysconfig/keyboard However, I've added a list of keyboard layouts as suggested by that BZ, but I still don't get a keyboard menu. Is there anything else I've missed? Thanks James Pearson

2 1

Re: [CentOS] LibreOffice rpm's vs Centos testing repo
by James B. Byrne 07 Mar '12

07 Mar '12

On Mon, February 27, 2012 12:10, nux(a)li.nux.ro wrote: > Ljubomir Ljubojevic writes: > >> Those packages do not need to stay in testing repo. All >> that is >> necessary is for several people use packages from >> testing repo and >> report that they are working without issues to the >> Centos-devel mailing >> list in this thread: >> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2011-September/008159.html >> , >> and packages will be moved to Extras repo. > > Hi, > > Several people have tested this successfully. You can even > get slightly > newer packages from here: > http://li.nux.ro/download/nux/libreoffice/el6/x86_64/ that > Karanbir hasn't > yet got around to putting in testing (there's a *-release > rpm there, too). > I would advise against using libeoffice.org supplied RPMs > at this stage as > RHEL are also getting ready to release LO 3.4.5 in EL6 > that will (hopefully) > gracefully upgrade my packages. > For what it is worth, I am running LibreOffice 3.5.0 installed from rpms provided by the document foundation and having no troubles with write or calc. I do not really use the other parts so on those I cannot comment. In fact, the experience is far better than I had with OpenOffice-3.3, which was so bad I went back to the 3.2 version provided with CentOS. -- *** 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

3 3

Software RAID1 with CentOS-6.2
by Kahlil Hodgson 07 Mar '12

07 Mar '12

Hello, Having a problem with software RAID that is driving me crazy. Here's the details: 1. CentOS 6.2 x86_64 install from the minimal iso (via pxeboot). 2. Reasonably good PC hardware (i.e. not budget, but not server grade either) with a pair of 1TB Western Digital SATA3 Drives. 3. Drives are plugged into the SATA3 ports on the mainboard (both drives and cables say they can do 6Gb/s). 4. During the install I set up software RAID1 for the two drives with two raid partitions: md0 - 500M for /boot md1 - "the rest" for a physical volume 5. Setup LVM on md1 in the standard slash, swap, home layout Install goes fine (actually really fast) and I reboot into CentoS 6.2. Next I ran yum update, added a few minor packages and performed some basic configuration. Now I start to get I/O errors on printed on the console. Run 'mdadm -D /dev/md1' and see the array is degraded and /dev/sdb2 has been marked as faulty. Okay, fair enough, I've got at least one bad drive. I boot the system from a live usb and run the short and long SMART tests on both drive. No problems reported but I know that can be misleading, so I'm going to have to gather some evidence before I try to return these drives. I run badblocks in destructive mode on both drives as follows badblocks -w -b 4096 -c 98304 -s /dev/sda badblocks -w -b 4096 -c 98304 -s /dev/sdb Come back the next day and see that no errors are reported. Er thats odd. I check the SMART data in case badblocks activity has triggered something. Nope. Maybe I screwed up the install somehow? So I start again and repeat the install process very carefully. This time I check the raid array straight after boot. mdadm -D /dev/md0 - all is fine. mdadm -D /dev/md1 - the two drives are resyncing. Okay, that is odd. The RAID1 array was created at the start of the install process, before any software was installed. Surely it should be in sync already? Googled a bit and found a post were someone else had seen same thing happen. The advice was to just wait until the drives sync so the 'blocks match exactly' but I'm not really happy with the explanation. At this rate its going to take a whole day to do a single minimal install and I'm sure I would have heard others complaining about the process. Anyway, I leave the system to sync for the rest of the day. When I get back to it I see the same (similar) I/O errors on the console and mdadm shows the RAID array is degraded, /dev/sdb2 has been marked as faulty. This time I notice that the I/O errors all refer to /dev/sda. Have to reboot because the fs is now readonly. When the system comes back up, its trying to resync the drive again. Eh? Any ideas what is going on here? If its bad drives, I really need some confirmation independent of the software raid failing. I thought SMART or badblocks give me that. Perhaps it has nothing to do with the drives. Could a problem with the mainboard or the memory cause this issue? Is it a SATA3 issue? Should I try it on the 3Gb/s channels since there's probably little speed difference with non-SSDs? Cheers, Kal

11 18

Baffled by selinux
by Lars Hecking 06 Mar '12

06 Mar '12

Apache DocumentRoot on an NFS directory: [root@localhost ~]# service httpd start Starting httpd: Warning: DocumentRoot [/home/www/html] does not exist Syntax error on line 292 of /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf: DocumentRoot must be a directory [FAILED] [root@localhost ~]# After some research, I found this (dated) link http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-list/2005-July/msg02443.html and followed the suggestion, setsebool -P use_nfs_home_dirs=1. But I still can't start httpd. Not sure what to make of the audit log: type=AVC msg=audit(1329395502.678:61926): avc: denied { search } for pid=25674 comm="httpd" name="" dev=0:23 ino=3471615 scontext=unconfined_u:system_r:httpd_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:nfs_t:s0 tclass=dir type=SYSCALL msg=audit(1329395502.678:61926): arch=c000003e syscall=4 success=no exit=-13 a0=7fef342bc080 a1=7fffaf747370 a2=7fffaf747370 a3=7fef30c65c30 items=0 ppid=25673 pid=25674 auid=0 uid=0 gid=0 euid=0 suid=0 fsuid=0 egid=0 sgid=0 fsgid=0 tty=pts0 ses=2 comm="httpd" exe="/usr/sbin/httpd" subj=unconfined_u:system_r:httpd_t:s0 key=(null) type=AVC msg=audit(1329395502.681:61927): avc: denied { search } for pid=25674 comm="httpd" name="" dev=0:23 ino=3471615 scontext=unconfined_u:system_r:httpd_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:nfs_t:s0 tclass=dir type=SYSCALL msg=audit(1329395502.681:61927): arch=c000003e syscall=4 success=no exit=-13 a0=7fef342eae68 a1=7fffaf747630 a2=7fffaf747630 a3=50 items=0 ppid=25673 pid=25674 auid=0 uid=0 gid=0 euid=0 suid=0 fsuid=0 egid=0 sgid=0 fsgid=0 tty=pts0 ses=2 comm="httpd" exe="/usr/sbin/httpd" subj=unconfined_u:system_r:httpd_t:s0 key=(null)

6 9

CentOS 5.8 Critical Samba Update
by Johnny Hughes 05 Mar '12

05 Mar '12

There is a critical update for samba for centos-5.8 ... we are working on CentOS-5.8 right now and I fully expect it to be released in a week or less. For those of you who can not wait for a week, here is the samba critical update: http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/c58-samba/x8664/critical/ http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/c58-samba/i386/critical/ These may or may not work without the rest of 5.8 ... for those who do try them, please provide feedback here in this thread. Thanks, Johnny Hughes

4 6

Centos6: Boot from usb 3.0
by Volker Poplawski 02 Mar '12

02 Mar '12

Hi all, I'm booting Centos6 from a usb 3.0 stick. This works fine as long as the usb-stick is connected to a usb 2.0 port. Once I plug the the usb-stick into a blue usb 3.0 port centos fails on mounting the root filesystem. Any hints on that? Regards .....Volker

4 5

Is there a way to _remove_ dependencies from an RPM built from source?
by Michael Lampe 02 Mar '12

02 Mar '12

I'm building my own openmpi packages derived from upstream SRPMs. Problem: The ones built with Intel's compiler can only be installed by force, because Intel doesn't register their provided libs with rpm. Any idea how this can be done? (Alternative ideas are appreciated as well -- as long as they don't read as: make Intel fix this.) -Michael

11 23

build rpm from tar.xz tarball
by fakessh ＠ 29 Feb '12

29 Feb '12

hello centos list hello guys hello master of "Fu" how to create a rpm package for centos 5 with an archive tar.xz. I possess a source rpm of gnutls http://ns.fakessh.eu/rpms/gnutls-2.12.16-1.el5.src.rpm and I would try to compile the latest version of gnutls What is the correct procedure to build an rpm with this type of package tar.xz sincerely -- http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC2626742 gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-key C2626742 http://urlshort.eu fakessh @ http://gplus.to/sshfake http://gplus.to/sshswilting http://gplus.to/john.swilting https://lists.fakessh.eu/mailman/ This list is moderated by me, but all applications will be accepted provided they receive a note of presentation

4 4

centos4 and rhel4 upstream effective eol
by R - elists 29 Feb '12

29 Feb '12

what exactly is the planned day and time that centos4 will be moved removed from working "yum update" & current mirrored functionality ?? march 1st or a day or two later please? - rh

2 1

OT: Sysadmin position
by Tony Placilla 29 Feb '12

29 Feb '12

Apologies if this is out of line. I have an opening for a full-time Systems Administrator. Please contact me off list for details Tony Placilla <aplacilla(a)jhu.edu> IT Operations & Projects Manager Physics & Astronomy Johns Hopkins University 3400 N. Charles St. Baltimore MD 21218 410-516-0632

4 3

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 February 2012