CentOS 7.1503 installed.
Installed Samba 4 from sernet: Version 4.1.17-SerNet-RedHat-11.el7 (to be
configured).
The samba wiki Readme First page states, "Some distributions like . . . Red
Hat Enterprise Linux (and clones), ship BIND9 packages with disabled
GSS-SPNEGO option, which is required for signed DNS updates when using BIND
as DNS backend on your Samba DC. This circumstance requires to self compile
BIND9."
Is there any way to use a yum command to install Bind9 with gss-spnego
enabled?
I'm worried about installing from source and creating future problems when
trying to update other CentOS packages that may be affected by the source
install of Bind9. Is it safe to obtain a bind9 source tarball for install
on an rpm-based CentOS 7 server?
If anyone has installed Bind for use with Samba 4 on CentOS 7, please let
me know what worked.
Thanks for your time and patience.
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. CEBA-2015:0817 CentOS 6 kdelibs BugFix Update (Johnny Hughes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 17:46:06 +0000
From: Johnny Hughes <johnny(a)centos.org>
To: centos-announce(a)centos.org
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2015:0817 CentOS 6 kdelibs BugFix
Update
Message-ID: <20150416174606.GA12699(a)n04.lon1.karan.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2015:0817
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2015-0817.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
c975b917bdae041e063e7c6e10feb945b75353d41a999128ac57a2afa8f219ce kdelibs-4.3.4-23.el6_6.i686.rpm
389b3427db0aa9c1ec190b68ebbeb96b1c5608226a7865c0ab10bbc4d541a4d9 kdelibs-apidocs-4.3.4-23.el6_6.noarch.rpm
0ca04fb3a946ebd75935d94dcc17be09cf98debc046d47ac5faca5ced067d477 kdelibs-common-4.3.4-23.el6_6.i686.rpm
85b1234aa3b4a233c8c8c72369e8bb07e37401387d5ef7c174e052ccec63f3da kdelibs-devel-4.3.4-23.el6_6.i686.rpm
x86_64:
c975b917bdae041e063e7c6e10feb945b75353d41a999128ac57a2afa8f219ce kdelibs-4.3.4-23.el6_6.i686.rpm
ac4a090e2040bc0c86bb16d1202e8374003e31c26a83ccd01dfcd8f941deb818 kdelibs-4.3.4-23.el6_6.x86_64.rpm
389b3427db0aa9c1ec190b68ebbeb96b1c5608226a7865c0ab10bbc4d541a4d9 kdelibs-apidocs-4.3.4-23.el6_6.noarch.rpm
582cfb9cce3c4a34e021b63177c89201dcde6623cd424f560cc4a241e984d07b kdelibs-common-4.3.4-23.el6_6.x86_64.rpm
85b1234aa3b4a233c8c8c72369e8bb07e37401387d5ef7c174e052ccec63f3da kdelibs-devel-4.3.4-23.el6_6.i686.rpm
dcca1c741d99e7a608b4a2bc21a06dcd1a3ce1c51e472f30a284a47696baea14 kdelibs-devel-4.3.4-23.el6_6.x86_64.rpm
Source:
cfa00bed58c19b65415066f6cecd188637af37c34ec9d5ef429850e6f87960c2 kdelibs-4.3.4-23.el6_6.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 122, Issue 9
***********************************************
Is there a generic way that processes written to share files with
(say) apache in /tmp can figure out that they are running on an OS
with systemd and in that case, where the daemon in question thinks
/tmp is?
For example, twiki has a backup/restore add-in where the backup part
is normally done from cron with a command line script but the
resulting archives that go in /tmp are supposed to be seen in the web
interface where you can choose and restore from them. How should that
have been written so the file lands where systemd has remapped /tmp
for httpd if it happens to be running on a host with systemd?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
Hello all,
According to [CentOS-announce] Release for CentOS Linux 7 (1503 ) on x86_64:
"Debuginfo packages are also being signed and pushed. Yum configs
shipped in the new release file will have all the context required for
debuginfo to be available on every CentOS Linux install."
Specifically, I'm looking for
kernel-debuginfo-3.10.0-229.1.2.el7.x86_64, but the latest debuginfo
file is kernel-debuginfo-3.10.0-123.13.2.el7.x86_64.rpm, which isn't
even the most recent release from 7.0.1406. Is my Google-fu failing me
or is http://debuginfo.centos.org/7/x86_64/ no longer the current
debuginfo repo?
e
Hi,
I have an NFS storage system and want to run jpegoptim on several GB's
of jpeg images and I'm wondering what the best approach is.
Is it ok to run this operation on the Server itself while the clients
have it mounted or will this lead to problems like e.g. the dreaded
"stale filehandle"?
Regards,
Dennis
Hi there,
Yesterday I've updated from 7 to 7.1 and today I've noticed on 2 server
that postgresql systemd file was replaced with default values. This make
postgres to no start and webserver give me problem. This problem was
fixed and now all works good. It's normal that on major update I can get
this problem? If so, I've ridden release change but I have not ridden
about postgresql problem.
Someone had the same issue?
I've got a netbook, circe 2009. When I got it, not that I was wild about
ubuntu, but there was specifically an ubuntu netbook remix. Well, it's a
few years later - has anyone put CentOS (6, preferably) on a netbook, and
were there any problems?
mark
I am experimenting with routing tables to obtain a little
understanding of how things work.
I have a kvm hypervisor host (KVM1) with two physical Ethernet nics
configured as bridges (br0 and br1). KVM1 br0 is configured with a
public ipv4 address [x.y.z.42/24] and br1 is configured with a private
ipv4 address [192.168.216.42/24]. A second kvm hypervisor, KVM2, is
similarly configured albeit with different IPv4 addresses of course.
Packet forwarding is enabled on both hypervisor hosts and both have
IPTABLES configured, albeit not for masquerading.
Guest systems on each of the two kvm hosts are also configured with two
virtual nics, eth0 and eth1, mapped to br0 and br1 respectively.
Guests on KVM2 usually have eth0 downed and eth1 configured with a
private ipv4 address in this address space, [192.168.216.0/24].
Guests on KVM1 usually have eth0 configured with a public ipv4 and
always have eth1 configured with a private address also belonging to
[192.168.216.0/24].
The KVM1 hypervisor host has its br1 connected via x-over cable to the
br1 port of the KVM2 hypervisor host. The reason for the X-over is to
allow matching guests on the different KVM systems to conduct large
network transfers between themselves without hitting the LAN.
We have a gateway router whose eth1 faces the LAN with the public
address [x.y.z.1/24] and the WAN with an address in the form
[x.y.A.0/30]. The ASCII diagram below represents the situation.
You will need to view this part with a monospaced font.
<pre>
~
ISP ethx[x.y.A.2/30] >-----< eth0[x.y.A.3/30] |
ISP GWAY |
eth1[x.y.z.1/24] >----------< |
GWAY |
|
br0[x.y.z.42/24] >---------------------------------< |
KVM2 |
br0[x.y.z.42/24] >-----< |
KVM1 ~
br1[192.168.216.43/24] >--X--< br1[192.168.216.42/24]
KVM2 KVM1 |
| |
| >-----< eth1[192.168.216.21/24] |
| >-----< eth1[192.168.216.25/24] |
|
eth1[192.168.216.221/24] >-----< |
eth1[192.168.216.223/24] >-----< |
</pre>
This setup works as intended. However, it is sufficiently oddball
that I consider it a good candidate to discover for myself the
practical issues surrounding network routing, a field of knowledge of
which I readily admit profound ignorance.
My trial is to allow a ping from eth1[192.168.216.221/24] to reach any
other public addressed [x.y.z.0/24]i/f on the LAN and successfully be
returned.
The questions are:
1. What additional (virtual) network i/f(s) needsbe configured to get
this to happen?
2. Do any systems require static routes to be preconfigured? If so,
which systems and what is that configuration?
3. Is masquerading required or not?
My thoughts so far:
The default gateway for all of the public hosts on our LAN is
eth1[x.y.z.1/24] so it seems necessary that eth1 on GWAY must have
some interface that recognizes [192.168.216.0/24] and a route that
will send the ping back to the public i/f from which it originates,
br0[x.y.z.42/24].
The KVM1 host must have a route to allow [192.168.216.221/24] out onto
the LAN via br0[x.y.z.42/24] for all destinations other than
[192.168.216.0/24] and route that netblock via br1[192.168.216.42/24].
If this is anywhere near the actual requirements then I think
something like this is required on GWAY eth1[x.y.z.1/24]:
ifcfg-eth1:192168
BOOTPROTO=none
BROADCAST=192.168.255.255
DEVICE=eth1:192168
IPADDR=192.168.0.1
IPV6INIT=no
NETMASK=255.255.0.0
NETWORK=192.168.0.0
#ONBOOT=yes
ONPARENT=yes
route-eth1
192.168.216.0/24 via x.y.z.42 dev eth1
And on KVM1 I would need:
ifcfg-br0
BOOTPROTO="none"
DEFROUTE="yes"
DEVICE="br0"
GATEWAY="x.y.z.1"
IPADDR="x.y.z.42"
IPV4_FAILURE_FATAL="no"
IPV6INIT="no"
NAME="System br0"
NETMASK="255.255.255.0"
NETWORK="x.y.z.0"
NM_CONTROLLED="no"
ONBOOT="yes"
TYPE="Bridge"
USERCTL="no
ifcfg-br1
BOOTPROTO="none"
DEVICE="br1"
GATEWAY="x.w.z.42"
IPADDR="192.168.216.42"
IPV4_FAILURE_FATAL="no"
IPV6INIT="no"
NAME="System br1"
NM_CONTROLLED="no"
ONBOOT="yes"
PREFIX="24"
TYPE="Bridge"
USERCTL="no"
How far off am I in these musings? I would like to have some clue of
the trouble I am in for before I go and break something. Your
comments and suggestions are welcome.
--
*** 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
Does anyone have the magic incantation required to getting
*independent* multi-monitors going under CentOS 7? Ideally
under xfce or trinity, but I'm interested about GNOME/KDE
observations as well.
I'm trying to move my main workstation from CentOS5 to CentOS7
and while the spanned desktop works, not having independent
monitors really cuts into my productivity. i.e.: I couldn't
care less about dragging things from one screen to another, but
not having a 3x3 virtual desktop grid on each monitor independently
really sucks.
Devin