Discuss December 2015

discuss@lists.centos.org

131 participants
134 discussions

Start a nNew thread

curious numbering (way off-topic, levity)
by Zube 15 Dec '15

15 Dec '15

Latest CentOS: 7.2-1511 Latest Win10: Version 1511 Hmm. :) Cheers, Zube

1 0

Re: [CentOS] firewalld clue needed
by Nicholas Geovanis 14 Dec '15

14 Dec '15

>> I don't really understand the intent behind firewalld. The RHEL7 Security >> Guide states "A graphical configuration tool, *firewall-config*, is used to >> configure firewalld, which in turn uses *iptables tool* to communicate with >> *Netfilter* in the kernel which implements packet filtering". >Well, the order from Kernel inside outward is: > >1. Netfilter (inside Kernel), not directly accessible by userland >2. iptables/iptables6, the userland cli tools to manipulate the Netfilter > .... >3. firewalld(RedHat/CentOS), or SuSEfirewall(Suse), or similar are the > .... >4. GUI tools, that allow to manipulate the config of firewalld (or similar), .... >Does that answer your question about *value added* by GUI tools? >Not every user that needs to change firewall settings is a certified UNIX admin. I don't dispute the value of GUIs. I have a comment and a question, first that in "the data center" my experience is that iptables rules are put into place and only rarely changed thereafter, like the network configuration at the server. But my question was partly this: What is the specific need for a continuously running daemon firewalld if what we wanted was a GUI front-end for iptables? Thanks....Nick Geo

3 2

rpm requires logic
by Leon Fauster 14 Dec '15

14 Dec '15

Exists the possibility to define an RPM requires statement with a logic? Like: Requires: mysql-server OR mysql55-mysql-server MTAs like postfix have "Provides: MTA" to provide such facility. I do not see such possibility for DB packages ... Thanks -- LF

2 2

CentOS 7, NetworkMangler
by m.roth＠5-cent.us 14 Dec '15

14 Dec '15

This is annoying. I yum removed NetworkManager-wifi... and I'm still getting this junk in the logs: MetworkManager[7723]: <warn> error requesting auth for org.freedesktop.NetworkManager.enable-disable-wifi: (0) Authorization check failed: GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.NoReply: Message did not receive a reply (timeout by message bus) Anyone have a clue as to what or why this is happening? I won't even mention the same for -wwan, and "sleep-wake". mark

1 0

tsocks or equivalent for CentOS 7
by Leroy Tennison 13 Dec '15

13 Dec '15

Does such exist? I looked for dante and couldn't find that. I found and tried using a version from CentOS 6 but it didn't work. If anyone can point me to an rpm (or set of same) I would most certainly appreciate it. Thanks. Confidentiality Notice | This email and any included attachments may be privileged, confidential and/or otherwise protected from disclosure. Access to this email by anyone other than the intended recipient is unauthorized. If you believe you have received this email in error, please contact the sender immediately and delete all copies. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

3 4

CentOS 7 Lost NIC
by Günther J. Niederwimmer 13 Dec '15

13 Dec '15

Hello, I have a big problem with my servers. I have 4 NIC on all my KVM Servers but the most time on a start (restart) I lost one NIC? It is not always the same, but this two are virtio NICs. with ifup eth0(1) the system say,I have no configured eth0 or eth1 file ? Can any tell me what I can do? thank's for a answer NetworkManager is disabled. -- mit freundlichen Grüßen / best regards, Günther J. Niederwimmer

2 4

Need firewalld clue
by Nicholas Geovanis 13 Dec '15

13 Dec '15

I don't really understand the intent behind firewalld. The RHEL7 Security Guide states "A graphical configuration tool, *firewall-config*, is used to configure firewalld, which in turn uses *iptables tool* to communicate with *Netfilter* in the kernel which implements packet filtering". So is the goal for firewalld to implement a GUI for iptables? What is the "value added" by firewalld? Thanks....Nick Geo

3 2

CentOS 7, NetworkMangler, and ipv6
by m.roth＠5-cent.us 11 Dec '15

11 Dec '15

We've started having a problem with a CentOS 7 server. It looses its IPv6 address, if I understand this issue correctly. We can get in, if we do ssh -4, though. In the logs, I'm seeing this about twice an hour: <warn> (pid 98466) unhandled DHCP event for interface ens3f0 Now, in googling, I get very few hits putting quotes around "unhanded dhcp exception" - in fact, the only one I found that seemed to talk about it was from someone's slackware box, where there was some sort of configuration, perhaps similar to ifcfg-<if>, and they were telling that person to remove it, because it conflicted with what Networkmanager was trying to do, leaving it in a confused state. Any thoughts? mark

4 8

Re: [CentOS] wifi on servers and fedora [was Re: 7.2 kernel panic on boot]
by James B. Byrne 11 Dec '15

11 Dec '15

On Tue, December 8, 2015 11:05, Matthew Miller wrote: > >> I have been bitten by things done in Fedora that only have any use >> on >> a laptop and that should never have been allowed into a server >> distribution. But I cannot see how I would have been aware of them >> until they manifested themselves on equipment under my care. By >> which > > ^ right, this. > >> time it is rather too late to influence the decision to include >> them. > > Well, not if you get involved early. That's the point. > > If you don't *want* to, that's fine, but there's only so much > complainy cake that you can have and eat at the same time. > So, the implication of your suggestion, if I understand it aright, is that I should audit all of the communication forums in use by Fedora developers and then point out whenever any of the many dozens or hundreds of contributors introduces something that in my opinion may impact a server installation. To do this I am required to obtain such intimate personal knowledge of the internal workings of the distribution as to be able to identify these items as soon as they are introduced. naturally, I am also supposed to be able to immediately identify the negative impact of these things and prepare and present a cogent argument against their adoption or propose patches to correct the deficiencies that I believe that I have detected. I am to do this whilst running a CentOS installation that will not allow Fedora onto the premises. SO, no doubt, the intent is that I should run Fedora on my home systems and work diligently in my off hours to protect any future version of CentOS from that vantage. And of course, if I miss something then it is my fault for not having paid enough attention to that item. Am I correct? -- *** e-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** Do NOT transmit sensitive data via e-Mail 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

13 29

Re: [CentOS] wifi on servers and fedora [was Re: 7.2 kernel panic on boot]
by James B. Byrne 11 Dec '15

11 Dec '15

On Wed, December 9, 2015 16:50, James Hogarth wrote: > On 9 Dec 2015 9:07 p.m., "Lamar Owen" <lowen(a)pari.edu> wrote: >> > >> No, it seems to me that a suitably motivated CentOS user needs to >> scratch this itch; and, no, I am not volunteering, as I've >> followed Fedora before......and just simply cannot give the >> time to it at this point in time in my life. >> > > <snip> > >> >> So who wants to be the CentOS-Users to Fedora liaison, likely to be >> one of the most thankless jobs on the planet? >> >> > > I'm an active Fedora packager and yet I dare say Mark would hate me as > liaison for I find the changes in EL7 most refreshing and look forward > to bring able to make better use of them in due course ;) > > But I really do question whether someone in this industry is really > not able to spend 30 minutes or so every six months checking changes > for anything interesting. > > And frankly if one isn't willing to get either get a subscription and > feedback as a paying customer or to get involved with the upstream > sources then no one does not have say in direction and one shouldn't > be surprised by that. > > If it was a democracy with a vote on every possible choice then we'd > never get anywhere given the time to carry out such a survey and the > vast differences in opinions. > > No, as the Debian folks say it is a meritocracy instead and those > who get stuck in and actively discuss at the right time provide > the influence on what happens next. > Since the import of what I was trying to convey has been lost, no doubt due to my poor choice of words, I will restate the obvious: If the bulk of the developers working on Fedora use laptops as their platform then, inevitably, Fedora will become in essence a laptop distribution and RHEL will follow. Talking about the server community monitoring the Fedora development channel once every six months, or every day for that matter, is simply not going to change this. A handful of voices representing server installations, who by definition are not development types, has no hope of dealing with the incremental changes introduced every day by hundreds of people that use laptops as their primary development platform and all of whom have their own 'itch' to scratch. That is just the way it is in open source. The choice to go to Fedora for RHEL development was a commitment to the laptop environment, whether consciously made or not. And it is not in the control of RH to dictate this. If the Fedora developers take up tablets en masse then guess what?: We will end up with a tablet distribution. The OS distro we get is the consequence of the culture and environment predominant in the development community. This is neither good nor bad. It just is. Our firm has specific requirements which to date have been more than adequately met by RHEL and CentOS. But that seems to us to be changing in ways that no longer meet our expectations from a server based distro. A server based distro to us has certain characteristics that are orientated to long running processes and system uptimes measured in months if not years. I have given up counting how many times I have to reboot all of our CentOS servers in the past year because of updates. On the other hand I have this task running on a different server with a different OS: Priority = DS; Inpri = 8; Time = UNLIMITED seconds. Job number = #j3719. TUE, NOV 4, 2014, 2:04 PM. We do not need plug-and-play; or usb hot-swapping; or hibernation; or screen savers; or audio-video players; or power optimisation. All of which are worthy things in their own right and certainly have their place in computing. While these occasionally have proved convenient for me none are really necessary for a server host and their presence undoubtedly significantly increases the complexity and maintenance burden of the distribution. What we need is simplicity, stability, reliability, and consistency. What seems to be happening instead is feature-creep, software-bloat and increased coupling. And lest I be accused of 'wingeing' from the sideline I have been contributing to Open Source in a modest way since 1995, starting with Sendmail-8.7 on HP-UX. I just have limited time to give over to these things. The selection of RHEL for our primary platform was, in large part, to reduce the resources given over to managing the software. It would be ironic in the extreme were the reverse prove the case. -- *** e-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** Do NOT transmit sensitive data via e-Mail 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

5 6

← Newer
1
...
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
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 December 2015