Discuss April 2019

discuss@lists.centos.org

89 participants
84 discussions

Re: [CentOS] UEFI and PXE
by isdtor 26 Apr '19

26 Apr '19

James Peltier writes: > Welcome to the world of UEFI. Certain UEFI versions have added additional support for things like the next-server option to actually be honoured. In some versions this _is_ in fact _ignored_ and you are expected to place the image on the server that answers the DHCP response. > > I have been successfully booting both legacy BIOS and UEFI machines for at least 3 years and know the pains. Thanks. This appears to be the case here. The machine is a Dell 11G server. I upgraded all the firmwares with dsu, BIOS was at latest already. After dsu, I upgraded the NIC option ROM with bootutil (I'm not using the builtin BRCM NICs, but an Intel X520-T2 card). That's all I can do on the hardware front. And it *still* shows the same behaviour. Moving tftp server it is then ...

1 0

Accessing Android phones on CentOS 7
by Nicolas Kovacs 26 Apr '19

26 Apr '19

Hi, My standard Linux desktop is based on a personal blend of CentOS 7 with KDE 4.14 and various add-ons from third-party repositories like EPEL and Nux-Dextop. After a brief stint on OpenSUSE Leap 15.0, this is what I use on my workstation and on my laptop. And this is also what I install on my client's machines, just like I did in our local school's computer room. I'm currently busy sanding down a few remaining edges, and one thing that's left is accessing Android phones. On less conservative distros based on KDE Plasma 5, this is a no-brainer, since all you have to do is plug in the phone and then browse its content using Dolphin or some other file manager. Unfortunately this is not possible with the version of KDE shipping with CentOS 7. Any ideas for that? Cheers from the rainy South of France, Niki -- Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat Site : https://www.microlinux.fr Mail : info(a)microlinux.fr Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32 Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12

6 5

Systemd, PHP-FPM, and /cgi-bin scripts
by Benjamin Smith 26 Apr '19

26 Apr '19

CentOS 7 server and Fedora 29 dev workstation, both with PHP 7.2, Apache 2.4, php-fpm, all updated. I have a web-based app I've been developing for some time, and recently the need to upload files of large size EG 1 GB or larger, has come up. So I wrote a /cgi-bin script that works, takes the input, and even runs the same application framework as the main application which normally works in php-fpm. (which also works in a shell script so it wasn't hard) So /path/to/ webroot/cgi-bin/upload.php works just fine running as a separate process as a cgi executable. Yay! But... php-fpm has its own "tmp" directory, something like /tmp/systemd- private-RANDOM-php-fpm.service-RANDOM/tmp that the cgi-bin has no access to. To be able to populate $_FILES in a way compatible with the rest of the framework, it appears that I need to be able to run the /cgi-bin in the same context as the php-fpm environment so files can be access across all the different parts of the web app. This includes related things like access to the $_SESSION data files, and so on. How do I even begin? Google searches are loaded with stuff like perl cgis having access to PHP data, PRE-SYSTEMD, and I find no apache directives (so far) that have been helpful. Any ideas?

4 6

Re: [CentOS] : Iptables blocks out going connetion some times
by likun 26 Apr '19

26 Apr '19

Yes, I have double checked and am sure there is no IP address conflicts. Likun On 4/24/19 23:28, centos wrote: >On 4/24/19 10:31, likun wrote: >> Hello, Stephen, thank you for input. >> >> Yes, these servers have the same firewall rules, and both of them have the same problem from time to time, most of time they are good. >> >> Actually, these servers are newly installed to be used as the Glusterfs storage server, so not much data flowing at this time. > >As a WAG - have you double checked to make sure there aren't any IP addressing conflicts in play? _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

1 0

Recommended PHP 7 source for Centos 7
by MRob 25 Apr '19

25 Apr '19

I know there's a couple third party repos offering PHP 7 for Centos. I prefer not to add too much third party that I don't have to and PHP 7 has been mainstream for some time now, I thought maybe it would be in EPEL by now. What is the most recommended and stable way to get an up to date PHP on Centos 7?

10 9

Are linux distros redundant?
by Andrew Holway 25 Apr '19

25 Apr '19

I just realised that I haven't touched a centos/redhat machine in more than a couple of years. Everything I do now is Kubernetes based or using cloud services (or k8s cloud services). What about it listeroons? Is your fleet of centos boxes ever expanding or are you just taking care of a single java 6 jboss application that takes care of the companies widget stocks? How are your jobs changing? Cheers, Andrew

13 23

Re: [CentOS] Are linux distros redundant?
by James B. Byrne 25 Apr '19

25 Apr '19

On Wed, April 24, 2019 11:14, Simon Matter wrote: > > I'm afraid too many clouds make the wider horizon invisible :-) > At that point it is called fog. -- *** e-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** Do NOT transmit sensitive data via e-Mail Do NOT open attachments nor follow links sent by 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

3 2

Re: [CentOS] : Iptables blocks out going connetion some times
by likun 25 Apr '19

25 Apr '19

1 0

Iptables blocks out going connetion some times
by likun 24 Apr '19

24 Apr '19

Hi，guys. There is a wierd problem with iptables recently, hopes somebody can help me. I have installed Centos 7.2.1511 on a bare metal Dell server these days, disabled firewalld and enabled iptables.services, and setup a group of very simple rules, as the following: # iptables-save # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.21 on Tue Apr 23 09:15:14 2019 *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [2449555:327804572] -A INPUT -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p icmp -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -s 172.22.0.0/16 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 49152:49664 -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -s 10.3.3.0/25 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 49152:49664 -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -s 172.22.0.0/16 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 24007 -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -s 10.3.3.0/25 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 24007 -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -s 10.3.3.0/25 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -s 10.3.7.0/25 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited -A FORWARD -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited COMMIT # Completed on Tue Apr 23 09:15:14 2019 >From time to time, when this server, say 10.3.3.3, trying to connect to port 24007 of another server 10.3.3.4, it will fail sometimes. from tcpdump output, you can see these packages: 22:49:05.992737 IP 10.3.3.3.49149 > 10.3.3.4.24007: Flags [S], seq 2454712274, win 29200, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 24055648 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 0 22:49:05.992847 IP 10.3.3.4.24007 > 10.3.3.3.49149: Flags [S.], seq 3127562073, ack 2454712275, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 17803660 ecr 24055648,nop,wscale 7], length 0 22:49:05.992872 IP 10.3.3.3 > 10.3.3.4: ICMP host 10.3.3.3 unreachable - admin prohibited, length 68 The package back from 10.3.3.4 is prohibited by 10.3.3.3, why? Obviously, the package that's been prohibited is the SYNC package that in response of the SYNC sent out by 10.3.3.3, it should match the iptables rule -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT, but still be prohibited by the rule -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited. Also, the iptables -nvL output: # iptables -nvL Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 8258 615K ACCEPT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED 1 84 ACCEPT icmp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 ACCEPT all -- lo * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 172.22.0.0/16 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpts:49152:49664 ctstate NEW 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 10.3.3.0/25 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpts:49152:49664 ctstate NEW 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 172.22.0.0/16 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:24007 ctstate NEW 918 55080 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 10.3.3.0/25 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:24007 ctstate NEW 1 60 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 10.3.3.0/25 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:22 ctstate NEW 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 10.3.7.0/25 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:22 ctstate NEW 244 14640 REJECT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-host-prohibited Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 0 0 REJECT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-host-prohibited Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 7378 packets, 957K bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination I noticed that the 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-host-prohibited one increase fast. Is this a bug of iptables, or is there something that I have not noticed? Any hints will be appreciated. Likun

3 4

... deploy CentOS 8 ... than develop Scientific Linux 8 ...
by Leon Fauster 23 Apr '19

23 Apr '19

JFYI: https://listserv.fnal.gov/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1904&L=SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-ANNO… -- LF

1 0

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Older →

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss April 2019