Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

34758 discussions

Backup and restore for CentOS 5.5
by Denis 03 Oct '11

03 Oct '11

Hi - I have a NFS/NIS server environment running CentOS 5.5 on a Dell Optiplex 240. I would like to back it up and then move it to a new machine. Couple of questions: 1. This is an older computer Dell Optiplex 240 that I am unable to connect a USB drive to. In the "linux rescue" environment fdisk -l shows only /dev/hda but lsusb shows the three partitions that are on the drive. I would like to know how to connect the USB drive to the system so I can rsync or dd to the drive. 2. I was going to rsync a backup, excluding /proc, /sys, /dev and /tmp, either to a mounted USB drive or to a remote station. I know how to do that but how do I setup the drive up for the restore on the new computer. I have google'd but without success. I would think I need to format the hard drive, then run the LVM tools (<-very ignorant here), and install grub after all the files are in place (maybe mkinitrd too). Is there information avaiable to do this or would some be willing to provide what I would need to accomplish this. Thanks, -- Denis Becker

4 3

creating C6 xen VM and virt-install
by Mark Pryor 03 Oct '11

03 Oct '11

List, Now that Centos 6 is here, virt-install fails to launch an install for a C6 xen domU. The virt-install script is part of libvirt and is in package: python-virtinst.noarch the script, OSDistro.py, has a path hard-coded for a rhelX or centos VM install. IOW, ./images/xen is appended to the provided mirror URL to get the kernel/initrd.img pair needed for a netboot. Centos 6 repos don't have this subfolder in the images branch, but they have ./images/isolinux. Is there a reason that ./images/xen subfolder can't be created and populated with the boot pair from the ISOLINUX subfolder? I believe another RH clone project does this with good results. Help keep virt-install working with C6 and fix this, please. -- Mark

1 0

hdr SHA1: BAD, not hex
by m.roth＠5-cent.us 03 Oct '11

03 Oct '11

Got a problem with one workstation. What I'm seeing, from a yum update (saw it with make whatis first): <snip> Running rpm_check_debug error: rpmdbNextIterator: skipping h# 1211 hdr SHA1: BAD, not hex <repeated many times> <snip> ERROR with rpm_check_debug vs depsolve: libicui18n.so.36 is needed by boost-1.33.1-10.el5_7.3.i386 libicuuc.so.36 is needed by boost-1.33.1-10.el5_7.3.i386 Complete! (1, [u'Please report this error in http://bugs.centos.org/set_project.php?project_id=16&ref=http://bugs.centos…']) <snip> Are there any workarounds, or do I need to file this bug? mark

1 1

VLAN support?
by Les Mikesell 03 Oct '11

03 Oct '11

Are there any new tools in CentOS 6 to configure VLAN interfaces (where the switch passes multiple tagged VLANs over one physical link to the host) or is it best to edit /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/eth?.vlan# files manually? -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

4 7

PCI-E not supported in kernel 2.6.32-131.12.1.el6
by Lorenzo Martínez Rodríguez 03 Oct '11

03 Oct '11

Hello, I own a PCI-Express parallel card installed on my server Fujitsu TX100 S2. I am running CentOS 6 x64. In Kernel version 2.6.32-71.29.1.el6.x86_64, it was correctly detected as: [root@Carmen ~]# lspci -vvv -s 05:00.2 05:00.2 Parallel controller: NetMos Technology Device 9912 (prog-if 03 [IEEE1284]) Subsystem: Device a000:2000 Physical Slot: 4 Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr+ Stepping- SERR+ FastB2B- DisINTx- Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx- Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 32 bytes Interrupt: pin C routed to IRQ 11 Region 0: I/O ports at 2018 [size=8] Region 1: I/O ports at 2010 [size=8] Region 2: Memory at c0105000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K] Region 5: Memory at c0104000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K] Capabilities: [50] MSI: Enable- Count=1/1 Maskable- 64bit+ Address: 0000000000000000 Data: 0000 Capabilities: [78] Power Management version 3 Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1- D2- AuxCurrent=375mA PME(D0-,D1-,D2-,D3hot+,D3cold+) Status: D0 NoSoftRst+ PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME- Capabilities: [80] Express (v1) Legacy Endpoint, MSI 00 DevCap: MaxPayload 512 bytes, PhantFunc 0, Latency L0s <1us, L1 <2us ExtTag- AttnBtn- AttnInd- PwrInd- RBE+ FLReset- DevCtl: Report errors: Correctable- Non-Fatal+ Fatal+ Unsupported- RlxdOrd+ ExtTag- PhantFunc- AuxPwr- NoSnoop+ MaxPayload 128 bytes, MaxReadReq 512 bytes DevSta: CorrErr+ UncorrErr- FatalErr- UnsuppReq+ AuxPwr- TransPend- LnkCap: Port #1, Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x1, ASPM L0s L1, Latency L0 <64ns, L1 unlimited ClockPM+ Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot- LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes Disabled- Retrain- CommClk- ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt- LnkSta: Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x1, TrErr- Train- SlotClk- DLActive- BWMgmt- ABWMgmt- Capabilities: [100] Advanced Error Reporting UESta: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol- UEMsk: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq+ ACSViol- UESvrt: DLP+ SDES+ TLP- FCP+ CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF+ MalfTLP+ ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol- CESta: RxErr+ BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr+ CEMsk: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr+ AERCap: First Error Pointer: 00, GenCap- CGenEn- ChkCap- ChkEn- To be able to load it I had to configure the file /etc/modprobe.d/parport_pc.conf with the line "options parport_pc io=0x2018" Nevertheless, in CentOS the new kernel 2.6.32-131.12.1.el6 was released and I have lost all compatibility with this PCI-Express card. Now, if I execute an lspci -vv a message with the text "!!! Unknown header type 7f" appears If I downgrade to 2.6.32-71.29.1.el6.x86_64 the card is recognised and starts to work again. Can you please help me in any way? do you know if is it maybe a bug or only unsupported hardware in new kernels? Best regards, -- Lorenzo Martinez Rodriguez Visit me: http://www.lorenzomartinez.es Mail me to: lorenzo(a)lorenzomartinez.es My blog: http://www.securitybydefault.com My twitter: @lawwait PGP Fingerprint: 97CC 2584 7A04 B2BA 00F1 76C9 0D76 83A2 9BBC BDE2

1 0

Re: [CentOS] Apache security , Was: Running Apache sites as separate users
by Trey Dockendorf 02 Oct '11

02 Oct '11

On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Lucian <lucian(a)lastdot.org> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:22 AM, Trey Dockendorf <treydock(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > I had a recent request to improve security on my web servers by having > each > > website use a different user to run the hosting service. So > > example1.comhas it's own Apache instance running as apache1 and then > > example2.com has its own instance of Apache as apache2. Is this even > > possible or realistic? I understand the idea of how that would be > secure, > > much like creating a virtual machine to segregate services. The only way > I > > can think how this is done is to chroot each website. What makes this > > request even stranger is that each website will be managed by the same > CMS > > and code base. So with that being the case, I don't see how this is > > possible. Any ideas or insight are very welcome. > > Is there a specific requirement to run different http servers? Because > if there is not then you can just use Suexec+fastcgi. > Otherwise, just use Apache to proxy stuff to backend servers (can be > anything from apache to nginx). > > HTH > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS(a)centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > I do not know the exact reasoning for wanting each website to be run by a separate Apache process that has it's own user. Likely it's a misunderstanding of actual threats to websites, or using a IIS mindset to set requirements for Apache. I'll give Suexec+fastcgi a look and mod_ruid. Thanks for those suggestions While on subject of Apache security... Another request / idea was to have this CMS under development write user controls to .htaccess files to restrict download access to directories. Typically if I even allow any overrides, I set it so apache can only read .htaccess. My understanding of the more obvious implications is that if the web server can write to .htaccess so can any attacker, and then can easily inject malware or redirect the site to malicious content. Is there ever a case where it's safe to allow write access by apache to .htaccess? Does the below config for .htaccess in httpd.conf protect from this at all if write permissions were given on the file system? <Files ~ "^\.htaccess"> Order allow,deny Deny from all Satisfy All </Files> Personally I think that the CMS should handle authorization, and at then possibly rely on Apache for authentication. In the case of this CMS it will be authenticating against a campus SSO through CAS, but access has to be restricted based on user lists. - Trey

2 1

email
by siddhesh samant 02 Oct '11

02 Oct '11

linux879(a)gmail.com

1 0

Tool to track files
by Fajar Priyanto 02 Oct '11

02 Oct '11

Hi all, Due to some reason, I will have to stop using Samba as our fileserver, and instead replace it with SSH access only. Users will be able to use WinSCP for it. The question is, is there any tool to track files (what is new files, deleted files by who, etc)? In Samba I can do that. I don't know how if it's SSH access. Thank you Fajar.

2 1

Openvz inside a KVM guest?
by Bob Hoffman 02 Oct '11

02 Oct '11

Open vz is a container VM....software, not hardware dependent. Is is possible to make a server a centos 6 KVM host, install centos 6 as a guest system... and then install openvz (or something like that) in the guest OS? thus instead of two websites each with its own guest image, you can put both inside the guest and still have them kind of sandboxed? or is that crazy?

1 0

add on sata card relabeling drives, installation
by Bob Hoffman 01 Oct '11

01 Oct '11

Hi all. I have a new server and am playing with the installation. (centos 6). My onboard sata card has 6 drives attached to it, yet the server has 8 bays. I bought a sata controller card (adaptec) and added it to the mix, adding two more drives. Everything works and all is accessible, but there is one annoying issue. When installing with anaconda, the 2 drives located on the add-on sata card are being listed as sda and sdb instead of going to the back of the line. I would rather my a and b drives be the 0 and 1 sata ports of the onboard controller, but it seems the add-on is taking priority. My only thought is to install without the 2 drives connected and then add them afterwords. But again, that makes no sense to have to do it that way. Is this just normal for the add on sata cards? If I add the drives to the system after I install it all, will linux barf on it and change the drive letters? I do not want my raid 1 mirror OS to be on sdc, sdd, and sde....it just looks weird. thanks

12 37

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