Discuss January 2013

discuss@lists.centos.org

186 participants
156 discussions

pid location from clamav on Centos 6.3
by Robert Moskowitz 30 Jan '13

30 Jan '13

I was getting nowhere with my clamav permissions problem, so I blew away my test system and did a total rebuild. I am now up to the part right after the install of amavis-new, clamav, clamav-devel, and clamd all from the epel.repo (spamassassin, also installed at the same time comes from the base repo). Prior to this, I rebuild the system from my kickstart file, and did the postfix, postfixadmin, mysql, dovecot, and roundcube setups all from instructions and scripts that I have put together over the past number of weeks, and this part went right through with no apparent problems. So now I am carefully checking out clamav before I make any config changes and right away I notice discrepencies with where clamd.pid is located. In /etc/clamd.conf it is placed in /var/run/clamav/clamd.pid In /etc/clamd.d/amavisd.conf it is placed in /var/run/amavisd/clamd.pid /etc/amavisd/amaviisd.conf does not reference the clamd.pid, only the .sock and warns you to point it to the same place as in /etc/clamd.conf. But what gives with the pid file locations? I might think that in a base install the pid file would be pointed to the same place? Obviously, I have figured out I really need to make these two enteries the same, but still. :(

1 0

Is this a NFSv4 bug??
by C. L. Martinez 29 Jan '13

29 Jan '13

HI all, I have configured a CentOS 6.3 x86_64 as a NFSv4 server and I am suffering errors like this: perl[7889]: segfault at a80 ip 00007fb870227ea2 sp 00007fff2fecda30 error 4 in libperl.so[7fb870193000+162000] The symptoms are the same as described in this thread: http://serverfault.com/questions/235059/vfs-file-max-limit-1231582-reached Can anyone confirm that is a bug when NFSv4 is used? My actual options are: fs.file-max = 1639200 [root@server01 fs]# lsof |wc -l 3962 [root@server01 fs]# cat file-nr 3040 0 1639200

3 3

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 95, Issue 10
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 29 Jan '13

29 Jan '13

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to centos-announce(a)centos.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to centos-announce-request(a)centos.org You can reach the person managing the list at centos-announce-owner(a)centos.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..." Today's Topics: 1. CESA-2013:0199 Important CentOS 6 libvirt Update (Johnny Hughes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 21:41:46 +0000 From: Johnny Hughes <johnny(a)centos.org> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2013:0199 Important CentOS 6 libvirt Update To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <20130128214146.GA12493(a)chakra.karan.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2013:0199 Important Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-0199.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) i386: 880a2564b9c1b120b001ebfc57a2765763ef66a170b40405deef201e4ba5698a libvirt-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.i686.rpm f132baecba83484560d1720c9cefebe2029514315878b32f1bc7294473669937 libvirt-client-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.i686.rpm d24ba4cdd52ea49e1a270a4a571e006f2f5e8b518af932e3124817cc193b45de libvirt-devel-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.i686.rpm d7bca83b7d2ac0a2ec89f108158a88ff2907fc5fa974f4c2b8775b480daecca3 libvirt-python-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.i686.rpm x86_64: 27d7eb63e13c6b6089f5dcd0b363236ea3d882062f7cfd392dc46317a48574ee libvirt-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.x86_64.rpm f132baecba83484560d1720c9cefebe2029514315878b32f1bc7294473669937 libvirt-client-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.i686.rpm fae89ea4ccc4e98dbe8bc0adf0d96ac3275e4818eb3a31f97407e891f467c92f libvirt-client-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.x86_64.rpm d24ba4cdd52ea49e1a270a4a571e006f2f5e8b518af932e3124817cc193b45de libvirt-devel-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.i686.rpm 1c1e7dea98cf5cfa0ba319525c5de482c7e4e1c64cb1ba279cb1a49819ac3245 libvirt-devel-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.x86_64.rpm 82711c817a9fe952e876d56295ed186bd8e574be45acde611f7f2261923216a0 libvirt-lock-sanlock-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.x86_64.rpm b966795762b8c83bfb11e16adf3f4847ee4b6b720a23c3c80afc005e8967403a libvirt-python-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.x86_64.rpm Source: 05cb232df3bc8b740dbadae94666e4e260bfc119a5dc63d97f8953c1806a4504 libvirt-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.src.rpm -- Johnny Hughes CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ } irc: hughesjr, #centos(a)irc.freenode.net ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ CentOS-announce mailing list CentOS-announce(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce End of CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 95, Issue 10 ***********************************************

1 0

Not respected repo priorities...
by John Doe 29 Jan '13

29 Jan '13

Ah ah, the demo effect... just after I said I did not have much issues with repos... ^_^ A collegue installed some packages (for perconna) and since then a server insists on replacing 2 base packages with 2 rfx packages, even when I gave a lower priority to rfx... Installed: perl-IO-Compress-Base-2.020-127.el6.x86_64 Installed: 1:perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib-2.020-127.el6.x86_64 Installed: perl-IO-Compress-Zlib-2.020-127.el6.x86_64 Installed: perl-Compress-Zlib-2.020-127.el6.x86_64 Installed: perl-HTML-Tagset-3.20-4.el6.noarch Installed: perl-HTML-Parser-3.64-2.el6.x86_64 Installed: perl-libwww-perl-5.833-2.el6.noarch Installed: perl-Params-Validate-0.92-3.el6.x86_64 Installed: perl-Log-Dispatch-2.26-1.el6.rf.noarch Installed: perl-Parallel-ForkManager-0.7.5-2.2.el6.rf.noarch Installed: 4:perl-Time-HiRes-1.9721-127.el6.x86_64 Installed: perl-Config-Tiny-2.12-7.1.el6.noarch # yum update Loaded plugins: changelog, fastestmirror, priorities, security Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile * epel: mirror.affix.me * rpmforge: archive.cs.uu.nl * rpmforge-extras: archive.cs.uu.nl rpmforge | 1.9 kB 00:00 rpmforge-extras | 1.9 kB 00:00 1913 packages excluded due to repository priority protections Setting up Update Process Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package perl-Compress-Zlib.x86_64 0:2.020-127.el6 will be obsoleted ---> Package perl-IO-Compress.noarch 0:2.037-1.el6.rfx will be obsoleting --> Processing Dependency: perl(Compress::Raw::Bzip2) = 2.037 for package: perl-IO-Compress-2.037-1.el6.rfx.noarch --> Processing Dependency: perl(Compress::Raw::Zlib) = 2.037 for package: perl-IO-Compress-2.037-1.el6.rfx.noarch ---> Package perl-IO-Compress-Base.x86_64 0:2.020-127.el6 will be obsoleted ---> Package perl-IO-Compress-Zlib.x86_64 0:2.020-127.el6 will be obsoleted --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Package: perl-IO-Compress-2.037-1.el6.rfx.noarch (rpmforge-extras) Requires: perl(Compress::Raw::Bzip2) = 2.037 Available: perl-Compress-Raw-Bzip2-2.020-127.el6.x86_64 (base) perl(Compress::Raw::Bzip2) = 2.020 Error: Package: perl-IO-Compress-2.037-1.el6.rfx.noarch (rpmforge-extras) Requires: perl(Compress::Raw::Zlib) = 2.037 Installed: 1:perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib-2.020-127.el6.x86_64 (@base) perl(Compress::Raw::Zlib) = 2.020 You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem Is it a yum/priority bug or a repoforge bug? I suspect it might be due to the new fedora release? Doesn't priority also blocks obsoleted/obsoleting packages...? I did a clean all... Thx, JD

2 2

Ceph - best practices
by Nux! 29 Jan '13

29 Jan '13

Hello, I'm looking into installing ceph, can anyone share his experiences and advices? What kernels you used and so on, installation repos, are there any selinux issues? Etc. -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro

1 0

selinux policy for nginx
by Eero Volotinen 29 Jan '13

29 Jan '13

Hi list, any working selinux policy for nginx on centos 6.3 ? this is not working on centos: http://sourceforge.net/projects/selinuxnginx/ -- Eero

2 1

permission problems with avamis and Centos 6.3
by Robert Moskowitz 28 Jan '13

28 Jan '13

I am trying to follow: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Amavisd Which seems to really be written for Centos 5, with just some selinux references for Centos 6. There are real problems here for Centos 6 with the userids section. It gives the following command and result: cat /etc/passwd | grep "amavis\|clamav" clamav:x:101:102:Clam Anti Virus Checker:/var/clamav:/sbin/nologin amavis:x:102:103:Amavis email scan user:/var/amavis:/bin/sh But my Centos 6.3 has: clam:x:494:490:Clam Anti Virus Checker:/var/lib/clamav:/sbin/nologin amavis:x:493:489::/var/spool/amavisd:/sbin/nologin Note the difference in userid clam instead of clamav. So this causes problems with the group recommendation: In addition, the clamav user should automatically have been added to the amavis group: # groups clamav clamav : clamav amavis If not, you can manually add clamav to the amavis group: gpasswd -a clamav amavis so I did: gpasswd -a clam amavis So far, it seems just changing what userid is now used by clamav... But in testing for spam I see the following in /var/log/maillog Jan 23 15:56:17 test1 amavis[25669]: (25669-01) (!)run_av (ClamAV-clamd) FAILED - unexpected , output="/var/spool/amavisd/tmp/amavis-20130123T155617-25669/parts: lstat() failed: Permission denied. ERROR\n" I checked this directory tree and all along the tree the permissions are to amavis:amavis So where is my permission problem?

3 11

firefox 18
by fred smith 28 Jan '13

28 Jan '13

Has anyone managed to get FF 18.0 to work on Centos 5.8? I've been hacking at it, placing a stack of .so files (from Centos 6) into a private directory, then using LD_LIBRARY_PATH to point the system to (in a shellscript that subsequently invokes ff 18) but so far I've not managed to find the right combination. I've moved over libstdc++, all or nearly all the .so files from glib2 and glibc packages. now I"m getting: ./firefox: symbol lookup error: ./libstdc++.so.6: undefined symbol: _ZNSt7num_getIcSt19istreambuf_iteratorIcSt11char_traitsIcEEE2idE, version GLIBCXX_3.4 and dunno either what I've done wrong, or what other things need to be brought over. Clues appreciated. :) -- ---- Fred Smith -- fredex(a)fcshome.stoneham.ma.us ----------------------------- I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. ------------------------------ Philippians 4:13 -------------------------------

7 29

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.3 - which repos to use?
by James Freer 28 Jan '13

28 Jan '13

4 3

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.3 - which repos to use?
by James Freer 27 Jan '13

27 Jan '13

On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 9:12 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl(a)thelounge.net> wrote: > > > Am 26.01.2013 22:07, schrieb James Freer: >> From what i have seen of fedora and centos in the rpm world the repos >> are very much better in the debian world. To me the stability comes >> from the distro and it's repos. Not being able to install Abiword or >> yumex, having to spend time selecting options for repos to me simply >> isn't worth it. >> >> I've just installed a Slackware distro today and it's the best i've >> ever tried in 6 years of using linux. It's speed, ease of installation >> put's it in a league of its own. Or as their 'chilling warning goes' >> Once you go Slack... you never go back! What! > have fun with a package management without dependency tracking > well, without the probles above are hidden, but not solved > > a funny thing to play with - but laughable for production environments > which you maintain over many years without reinstall them ever >From what i've read Slackware has had dependency problems covered since it introduced Gslapt ans Slapt. From what i could see last evening it seems as good as apt/synaptic. Although one could say that's not much good; synaptic doesn't completely remove all associated files, neither does apt's --purge option, although the more recent --autoremove does. But Debian's default package manager aptitude which few know how to use as they don't print off and read the 1 ins thick manual that comes with it - aptitude is the best package manager of all. There was only dependency problems with rpm and debian's dpkg - the apps didn't cope with it. Yum may do it now but it is also very slow by comparison with Aptitude. I think you've been unfairly critical tbh. From what i can deduce neither Debian or Redhat systems come close to the speed of slackware and i don't know why yet. james

1 0

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
...
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 January 2013