Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

2 participants
34758 discussions

RFI: Information for Centos 4 unsupported kernels
by Kari Salovaara 21 Jun '06

21 Jun '06

Hi, this may sound stupid, but; - I'd like to install unsupported x86/i386 smp kernel because I need some support (for eg. dual booting for r/w files for winXP) etc. I'm now using 4.3 latest smp kernel. (I've tested that x86 still runs better than x86_64 like I was told in January. Thanks for the advice.) Questions: Is there any documentation for how to install unsupported smp kernel so that'll be able to do normal updates (like I've been updating until now without features of unsupprted kernel) ? I've downloaded the kernel files (107), how should I install them (yes, I know how to install rpm files but; but for grub, for updating, for upgrading etc.) ? After updating kernel few times with normal updating processes there lies in grub many older kernel. Is there any process to delete them or do I have to do it manually ? If this is too boring to others or outside the topics of this mailing list, please reply straightly to me. For the CentOs Team many thanks of superb distro (used in many of our servers without any problems, and we'll have them more in near future). Regards, Kari -- Kari Salovaara Hanko, Finland

3 4

Re: [CentOS] PCI-X Sata Raid Controller
by David Thompson 21 Jun '06

21 Jun '06

Feizhou wrote: >Bryan Shelton wrote: >> Does anyone have any suggested PCI-X Sata Raid Controllers which are >> natively supported in Centos 4.3, the 2.6 kernel. I guess either with >> the new megaraid or aacraid drivers? > >3ware. THE most reliable. Never saw one fail and there were more than 10 >boxes using 3ware cards. Watch out for motherboard compatibility if you >have one of them Intel E7500 or something chipsets. If you need native kernel support, use the 9500, not the 9550. 9550 support is currently only available with the driver available from 3ware. Anyone know if 9550 support will be included in CentOS 4.4? Dave Thompson UW-Madison

2 1

Sendmail, mailertable and DNS weirdness.
by Will McDonald 21 Jun '06

21 Jun '06

Guys, I've had a weird problem with Sendmail misbehaving in a way I don't really understand. I've worked round the problem but I'd like to understand what was going on. The MX for one of our domains, blah.com, pointed at an internal Exchange server. Mail relayed to a Sendmail MailScanner which then delivered to Exchange for this domain. The domain expired leading to all its mail queueing in Sendmail. So far so sensible. While waiting for the domain to be renewed I setup a mailertable entry to bypass DNS and route mail directly to the Exchange server... blah.com smtp:[192.168.10.10] I rebuilt mailertable then tried flushing the queue with... sendmail -q -v -qRblah ... which resulted in a bunch of "Transient parse error -- message queued for future delivery" errors due to DNS resolution failure. I thought mailertable entries bypassed DNS? Does Sendmail cache the state of the destination for queued messages somehow? In the qf${msgid} files in the spool? I tried restarting MailScanner (and hence both Sendmail processes), same problem. I read ( http://www.sendmail.org/~ca/email/doc8.12/op-sh-3.html ) that Sendmail can, when configured with HostStatusDirectory enabled, retain information on the status of hosts on disk but "sendmail -bh" returned nothing and "sendmail -bH", just in case, didn't help either. So, was mailertable being bypassed because these messages had already been attempted to be delivered before the mailertable changes? Anyone know what was going on here? I worked around it by just setting up a quick zone for blah.com with an MX in it but I'd like to understand WTF was going on with mailertable for future reference. Will.

4 7

RE: [CentOS] Mailers and records MX
by israel.garcia＠cimex.com.cu 21 Jun '06

21 Jun '06

even more details: 1. I use Mailscanner/postfix in the 3 MX's servers. 2. Using dig I get exactly the same of what I have in my bind server. 3. http://dnsreport.com/ reports no problem at all. 4. I'm not using any greylisting.... Yet.. I'm setting right now spamassassin with mailscanner.. Regards Israel -----Mensaje original----- De: replies-lists-centos(a)listmail.innovate.net [mailto:replies-lists-centos@listmail.innovate.net] Enviado el: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 1:04 PM Para: SV-Israel Garcia Asunto: Re: [CentOS] Mailers and records MX are you seeing spam or "real" mail through the higher ordinal MX hosts? spammers often target higher ordinal MX hosts because they assume that there are fewer blocks there (e.g., the user base isn't checked). if it's "real" mail, it can simply be that the lower ordinal MX hosts are seen as slow by some sender's mail hosts. - Rick ------------ Original Message ------------ > Date: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 02:01:06 PM -0500 > From: israel.garcia(a)cimex.com.cu > To: centos(a)centos.org > Subject: [CentOS] Mailers and records MX > > I've installed bind on centos 4.3.. This is a part of my config file: > > example.com. IN MX 10 mail.example.com. > example.com. IN MX 15 mail1.example.com. > example.com. IN MX 20 mail2.example.com. > > mail.example.com. IN A x.x.x.x > mail1.example.com. IN A x.x.x.x > mail2.example.com. IN A x.x.x.x > > > Every seems to be fine, but I'm constantly receiving messages in my 3 > MX servers, even if mail.example.com (the less MX record) is available > waiting for connections from outside... Why if my less mx record > server is available the others servers are constantly receiving > messages for my domain? > > Thanks for your time > Israel > ---------- End Original Message ----------

8 8

Appended "1" in /etc/fstab entries CentOS4.X installs
by Chris Weisiger 21 Jun '06

21 Jun '06

In my /etc/fstab here is just a snippet LABEL=/1 ....<rest of line> LABEL=/boot1 ....<rest of line> When i installed centOS-4.3 and it has appeared after starting to use any version of centOS4 was that the labels in my fstab were getting the "1" appended to each label... but if the all the labels for my partitions are appended with the "1" and i format and reload they show up in my partition setup during installation and i re-label them appropriately without the "1" and the /etc/fstab doesnt have the "1" appended... its like every other install the "1" gets appended....anyone come across this... if show how can i change it....i know its not like it makes a difference but I just noticed wondering why this happens.

1 0

Postpone/avoid swaping while there is still free RAM.
by Alexander Georgiev 21 Jun '06

21 Jun '06

Hi people, I got Centos 4.3 on a 1GB Pentium IV machine. The output of free ------------------- $ free total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 1026896 573848 453048 0 2988 131712 -/+ buffers/cache: 439148 587748 Swap: 1052248 137568 914680 ------------------ There is plenty of free ram, but the kernel prefers to swap unused pages to disk. And later I have to wait for them to be unswapped, the Desktop looses its promptness - annoying. In win2k and winXP there is a registry key property which prevents swapping while there is still RAM. Do you know whether I can achieve the same in linux? Best regards! alex

5 4

xorg display problems
by Mike M 21 Jun '06

21 Jun '06

Hi all, Up until today everything has been fine with CentOS on my Toshiba laptop. I booted into CentOS 4.3 today and Kudzu detected my video card for some reason. I let it configure it (wish I hadn't now). I can still get in. X and Gnome work. But the video resolution is 800x640. The LCD is capable of 1024x768. I cannot change it using Gnome tools or direct editing of /etc/X11/xorg.conf With the Gnome "Display" system tool I cannot change the monitor to "Generic LCD Display". Any help you can offer on getting the 1024x768 display mode to work again would be appreciated. Here are the relevant sections from /etc/X11/xorg.conf Section "Monitor" Identifier "Monitor0" VendorName "Monitor Vendor" ModelName "Unknown monitor" HorizSync 31.5 - 37.9 VertRefresh 50.0 - 70.0 Option "dpms" EndSection Section "Device" Identifier "Videocard0" Driver "i810" VendorName "Videocard vendor" BoardName "Intel 852" EndSection Section "Screen" Identifier "Screen0" Device "Videocard0" Monitor "Monitor0" DefaultDepth 16 SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 16 Modes "800x600" "640x480" EndSubSection EndSection -- Mike

2 2

RE: [CentOS] SuperMicro X7DBE with CentOS4?
by Bowie Bailey 20 Jun '06

20 Jun '06

Joshua Baker-LePain wrote: > > Is there any reason you're locked into Xeon/FB-DIMM? SuperMicro makes > many rather nice Opteron boards, with good ol' DDR SDRAM. And there > aren't many areas where Xeon outperforms Opteron these days, if any. Not really, can you recommend a comparable Opteron MB? I need PCI-X 133 for the raid card, capability of at least 32MB RAM, and preferably onboard video and LAN. -- Bowie

3 2

SuperMicro X7DBE with CentOS4?
by Bowie Bailey 20 Jun '06

20 Jun '06

I am planning to build a server based on the SuperMicro X7DBE+-O motherboard. This server will have two dual-core Xeon processors and a 3ware 9550SX raid card. Has anyone built a server based on this motherboard? Are there any issues with the smp/dual-core support in CentOS4 that might cause problems? I appreciate any input. I'm just looking to find out about any possible problems before I spend the money for the MB, CPU, and amazingly expensive RAM. Thanks, -- Bowie

3 2

Mailers and records MX
by israel.garcia＠cimex.com.cu 20 Jun '06

20 Jun '06

I've installed bind on centos 4.3.. This is a part of my config file: example.com. IN MX 10 mail.example.com. example.com. IN MX 15 mail1.example.com. example.com. IN MX 20 mail2.example.com. mail.example.com. IN A x.x.x.x mail1.example.com. IN A x.x.x.x mail2.example.com. IN A x.x.x.x Every seems to be fine, but I'm constantly receiving messages in my 3 MX servers, even if mail.example.com (the less MX record) is available waiting for connections from outside... Why if my less mx record server is available the others servers are constantly receiving messages for my domain? Thanks for your time Israel

4 3

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