Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

34758 discussions

Upgrade Question
by Gene Poole 12 Mar '12

12 Mar '12

We've got about 200 existing servers running CentOS/RHEL 5.6 and all new servers are being provisioned using CentOS/RHEL 6.1. So that everything is consistent we need to upgrade the servers running CentOS/RHEL 5.6. I've searched the CentOS wiki, the Red Hat site, and the internet looking for something official on upgrading/migrating from CentOS/RHEL 5.x to CentOS/RHEL 6.x. There's got to be a way other than having 2 times hardware. Any ideas??? Thanks, Gene Poole + It's impossible for everything to be true. +

6 8

init/upstart issue? ypbind and autofs
by Lars Hecking 12 Mar '12

12 Mar '12

One problem I have with custom CentOS 6 installation is that NIS auto.* maps are not available. According to boot.log, ypbind starts before autofs, but when I login to the machine, the maps are not available until I issue a service autofs restart. Any pointers on what to check?

3 8

perl .spec / srpm
by Nick 12 Mar '12

12 Mar '12

Hi Can anyone here point me in the direction of a .spec or SRPM for Perl 5.12.4 for CentOS6? Or even any newer version would do. Whilst I'm asking, ditto a Perl-enabled version of OpenLDAP (latest stable release)? IIRC, the version in the base repo has the Perl extensions disabled. Thanks, Nick

3 3

Re: [CentOS] php-pear problem on yum update
by Nikos Gatsis - Qbit 12 Mar '12

12 Mar '12

Thank you all for answering Finally I exclude php-pear for updating. Leonard you are right, for some reason rpm forge has install some packs for pear. I'll leave it as is, I cant afford causing problems. We have a lot of web pages and databases running so we cant take any risk. Thank you again On 09/03/2012 7:00 μμ, centos-request(a)centos.org wrote: > Hello Nikos, On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 11:16 +0200, Nikos Gatsis - Qbit > wrote: >> > I have never Install a package out of yum so this conflict is very >> > strange to me. >> > I try to clean up yum, and update with --skip-broken with no luck. > The .rf packages come from the Repoforge (formerly RPMForge) repo. The > conflict you see is caused by similar packages being provided by > multiple repos. You can only fix that by excluding them from all but one > repo. > >> > Is good to install php packages excluding php-pear? >> > Actually I dont use it. > The fact that you have so many PEAR packages on your system suggest > someone on your system might be using them. Don't blow them away unless > you want to break existing PHP websites that use them. > > All that said, for me the easiest approach managing PEAR packages is > just using PEAR itself to install and update modules. Install the > php-pear rpm once, then exclude it from the updates in your base repo > config. > > (If you take this approach yourself make a list of the installed pear > module rpms before you uninstall them with yum. After uninstalling the > rpms you have to reinstall the modules using "pear install".) > > Regards, > Leonard. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Γατσής Νίκος - Gatsis Nikos* Web developer tel.: 2108256721 - 2108256722 fax: 2108256712 email: ngatsis(a)qbit.gr http://www.qbit.gr

1 0

Re: [CentOS] Thunderbird and Firefox 10 font rendering
by Toralf Lund 12 Mar '12

12 Mar '12

On 08/03/12 12:35, Sorin Srbu wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf > Of Toralf Lund > Sent: den 8 mars 2012 11:36 > To: CentOS mailing list > Subject: [CentOS] Thunderbird and Firefox 10 font rendering > > Does anyone else experience this? Any idea how to fix it (besides > downgrading)? > > =============== > > Just tried this on a virtual machine. Looks good here. Maybe your monitor is > flakey? Have you tried experimenting with screen resolution and colour I don't see how this can be a monitor problem when everything is fine in *all* applications besides the ones mentioned - including the older versions of Thunderbird and Firefox. > depth? Try pressing Ctrl-0 ("zero") to set your Fx to the default character > sizes. Makes no difference... BTW, besides the bluryness, the fonts also look thinner somehow; I get a distinct feeling of having returned to Gtk/GNOME version 1, if you know what I mean... Perhaps anti-aliasing is disabled? - Toralf > This e-mail, including any attachments and response string, may contain proprietary information which is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is for the intended recipient only. If you are not the intended recipient or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, please notify the author by return e-mail and delete this message and any attachment immediately. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, distribute, forward, copy, print or rely on this e-mail in any way except as permitted by the author.

4 9

Samba Print Share Problem
by Mark LaPierre 12 Mar '12

12 Mar '12

I had my samba printer shares working after many hours of struggling with the samba.conf file. I was happy. Now the printer shares have quit working. I checked the yum log to see if anything had been changed. Nothing applicable seems to have been changed. I've been surfing the net for the last couple of days trying to find a solution to the problem but I find many outdated and conflicting articles which only contribute to my confusion. [mlapier@mushroom ~]$ rpm -qa | grep samba samba-3.5.10-114.el6.i686 samba-client-3.5.10-114.el6.i686 samba-common-3.5.10-114.el6.i686 samba-winbind-devel-3.5.10-114.el6.i686 samba-domainjoin-gui-3.5.10-114.el6.i686 samba-winbind-clients-3.5.10-114.el6.i686 samba4-libs-4.0.0-23.alpha11.el6.i686 samba-swat-3.5.10-114.el6.i686 samba-doc-3.5.10-114.el6.i686 samba-winbind-3.5.10-114.el6.i686 samba-winbind-krb5-locator-3.5.10-114.el6.i686 [mlapier@mushroom ~]$ uname -a Linux mushroom.patch 2.6.32-220.7.1.el6.i686 #1 SMP Tue Mar 6 21:21:22 GMT 2012 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux [mlapier@mushroom ~]$ CentOS 6.2 [mlapier@mushroom etc]$ ll | grep samba drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root 4096 Mar 11 13:59 samba drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root 4096 Nov 11 2010 samba4 [mlapier@mushroom etc]$ What's with the samba4 directory? It looks like I have samba 3.5.10 on my system. Here are the applicable stanzas of my samba.conf file [global] workgroup = MYGROUP server string = Samba Server Version %v log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m max log size = 50 security = user passdb backend = tdbsam load printers = yes cups options = raw printcap name = /etc/printcap printing = cups [printers] comment = All Printers path = /var/spool/samba browseable = no guest ok = yes writable = no printable = yes [WorkForce-1100] comment = EPSON WorkForce 1100 path = /var/spool/samba read only = No guest ok = Yes printable = Yes printer name = WorkForce-1100 oplocks = No share modes = No [Samsung-ML-1740] comment = Samsung ML-1740 path = /var/spool/samba read only = No guest ok = Yes printable = Yes printer name = Samsung-ML-1740 oplocks = No share modes = No When I try to mount a printer from the Win XP machine no print shares are visible. Any samba experts see anything wrong with my samba.conf file? Do I need to provide more information? -- _ °v° /(_)\ ^ ^ Mark LaPierre Registerd Linux user No #267004

1 1

NSS ldap problems
by Kristen Eisenberg 11 Mar '12

11 Mar '12

One difference I ran into with samba authentication is in cent 5 /etc/pam.d/system-auth-ac is the file to change but in cent 6 its /etc/pam.d/password-auth-ac. I found that changes I made only to system-auth-ac in 5 had to be made to both system-auth-ac and password-auth-ac in 6. This was to have authentication work for things like ssh and sudo in centos 6. Kristen Eisenberg Billige Flüge Marketing GmbH Emanuelstr. 3, 10317 Berlin Deutschland Telefon: +49 (33) 5310967 Email: utebachmeier at gmail.com Site: http://flug.airego.de - Billige Flüge vergleichen

2 1

Interface starts when it shouldn't
by Steve Thompson 11 Mar '12

11 Mar '12

In CentOS 5.7 and earlier versions, an alias interface is defined via ifcfg-<interface>:foo which contains "ONBOOT=no". The ONBOOT setting appears to be ignored, and the interface always starts when the system boots or if networking is restarted. This is a serious bug that seems to date back many years (I found references in 2005). Anyone know why it hasn't been fixed, or if there is indeed a fix? Steve -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Thompson E-mail: smt AT vgersoft DOT com Voyager Software LLC Web: http://www DOT vgersoft DOT com 39 Smugglers Path VSW Support: support AT vgersoft DOT com Ithaca, NY 14850 "186,282 miles per second: it's not just a good idea, it's the law" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

File permissions
by Robert Spangler 11 Mar '12

11 Mar '12

Hello, I need to know if there is something I am missing about file permission as I believe I am seeing some strange stuff on my system. I have a directory as follows: drwxrwxrwx 7 root root 4096 Mar 10 13:35 temp In this directory I have a file: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 137 Oct 30 02:16 208-109-248-33test As a normal user should I be able to rename this file? I believe that only root should be able to modify this file but as a normal user I am able to rename it without elevated privileges as so: temp $ mv 208-109-248-33test 208-109-248-33-mv [Sat Mar 10 13:41:05] /temp temp $ lt 208* -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 137 Oct 30 02:16 208-109-248-33-mv How is this possible? If it is possible what am I missing or not understanding? Thnx. -- Regards Robert Linux The adventure of a lifetime. Linux User #296285 Get Counted http://linuxcounter.net/

4 4

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.8 update
by Johnny Hughes 11 Mar '12

11 Mar '12

On 03/08/2012 02:48 AM, Sorin Srbu wrote: > Another smooth update. Thanks CentOS-team! Thanks! Lots of very hard work by the QA team. Everyone needs to look at their /var/log/messages if they have an SAS hard drive. This is a very big (and potentially dangerous) problem: http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=5575

4 9

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss