Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

2 participants
34758 discussions

single CD server install ISO disk ready?
by Robert 17 Nov '05

17 Nov '05

greetings, i was wondering if i missed an announcement or if the quarterly update pushed back the release of the single CD server install ISO ??? :-) is there an ETA please? thank you! - rh -- Robert Hanson - Abba Communications Computer & Internet Services (509) 624-7159 - www.abbacomm.net

6 6

Re: [CentOS] SELinux threads, cynicism, one-upmanship, etc.
by Brian T. Brunner 17 Nov '05

17 Nov '05

Brian: DON'T focus blame on "consultancy". The management style you lambaste is prevalent to the point of being pandemic. The problem is NOT lack of accountability, it is rather one of "to whom are we accountable?" My products are NOT reviewed by geeks, theorists, and techno-pedants. My products are accountable to testers who are accountable to marketing who are accountable to stock holders and well-drillers and factory owners. They want a profit product, not a perfect product. "Good, fast, cheap; pick two" says it well. --the *other* pedantic Brian-- Brian Brunner brian.t.brunner(a)gai-tronics.com (610)796-5838 >>> thebs413(a)earthlink.net 11/17/05 01:08PM >>> Peter Farrow <peter(a)farrows.org> wrote: > running a consultancy business where time is money, tunring > it off and configuring as we always did before represents Consulting is why the IT infrastructure and security of this country has gone to crap. There is no accountability. There is only the pressure to complete things in unrealistic timeframes. Sound security policy has been put out-the-window by consulting, support non-sense, etc... You have to "tear it down" so you can "dumb it down" for people. And it happens in the most crucial of our nation's networks. Why? Consultants aren't accountable in most cases. And that's typically because the clients want it done now. ******************************************************************* This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. www.hubbell.com - Hubbell Incorporated

4 5

Custom kernel RPM/SRPM
by Giovanni P. Tirloni 17 Nov '05

17 Nov '05

Hi, I've built customs kernels from the SRPMs with the following: rpmbuild -bp --target=i686 /path/to/spec cd /usr/src ln -s /usr/src/redhat/BUILD/kernel-x.y.z/linux-x.y.z linux cd linux make oldconfig make menuconfig make all make modules make modules_install And it works just fine. The problem now is that I think installing that way isn't "cool": I wan to build my own custom kernel RPM/SRPM. I thought about doing a "rpmbuild -bp" and change the options. Then a "rpmbuild -bc --short-circuit" and a "rpmbuild -bi --short-circuit". What's the correct way of doing this? Thanks in advance, -- Giovanni P. Tirloni http://blog.tirloni.org

8 14

Re: [CentOS] SELinux threads, cynicism, one-upmanship, etc.
by Brian T. Brunner 17 Nov '05

17 Nov '05

What I implied, that Brian deleted, is that my product is in alien hands (some of whom can spell "Linux") and must pass the muster of the testers who answer to the marketeers who answer to the stock holders and customers. My product must fit the hands that work it. NONE of them know what SELinux is (compared to Linux) and (properly) resent every extent of my making them learn Linux. Their day job has NOTHING to do with learning Linux, let alone SELinux. Therefore, if SELinux breaks *anything* it gets switched off and is not part of the product. If it is a seamless fit, with no regression, then it can be allowed. Any self-important pedant who insists that this bully-boss attribute shall be catered to will be pedanted off the drilling platform. Walk home, twit! Land is only 2 miles away (straight down). "Ahhh but this is better and it is the future!" When (if) it doesn't break my stride, it will become the present. Until then it's already history. This rant/diatribe is for the benefit of people making "improvements" in a running, deployed, supported product. I think, at this point, I'll depart from the debate. Brian Brunner brian.t.brunner(a)gai-tronics.com (610)796-5838 >>> lesmikesell(a)gmail.com 11/17/05 01:40PM >>> On Thu, 2005-11-17 at 12:29, Bryan J. Smith wrote: > "Brian T. Brunner" wrote: > > it is rather one of "to whom are we accountable?" > > I'm accountable to myself. > > I know I shock people, but if I'm to blame for anything, I'm > the first to admit it. I don't hide behind things, and I > have refused to do things before. And I've been let go by a > client for it too. Accepting the blame remotely isn't quite the same as working at the same place for a decade or more and having to live with what you built. Your rants on the side of security vs. convenience would be more believable if you added that you did all of your own work under such conditions and planned to continue for the foreseeable future. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell(a)gmail.com _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ******************************************************************* This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. www.hubbell.com - Hubbell Incorporated

2 1

migration from redhat AS3/4
by Bassett, Mark 17 Nov '05

17 Nov '05

We have 30 or so boxes that are currently running either redhat as3 or as4 and would like to migrate them to Centos 4.2. We have a local centos 4.2 repository using yam. I have in the past updated es3 to as3 by removing the redhat-release rpm and installing the other redhat rpm. I realize there are virtually no differences in es and as3, except for access to additional packages. In any case, on the AS4 boxes would we be able to do the same thing? Remove the redhat-release rpm and install the centos-release file then switch the yum repository and update? Or are we talking a reinstall? I doubt that it will work from AS3 however, but I thought I'd throw that in as well. Thanks in advance, Mark

2 1

Putting /etc in cvs
by Ugo Bellavance 17 Nov '05

17 Nov '05

Hi, I'd like to put my servers' config files in cvs to make it easier to manage (yes, I know about Cfengine). I've been looking for a tutorial and I could find any, and since I'm not a CVS guru, I tried a few things, without even knowing if I'm doing it right. Any hints? Regards, -- Ugo -> Please don't send a copy of your reply by e-mail. I read the list. -> Please avoid top-posting, long signatures and HTML, and cut the irrelevant parts in your replies.

2 2

kqemu centos3
by Dave 17 Nov '05

17 Nov '05

Anyone get kqemu to make in Centos3? I'm getting modules disabled messages, AFAIK module support is enabled, its the stock kernel. make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/qemu-0.7.2/mips-softmmu' make -C kqemu make[1]: Entering directory `/tmp/qemu-0.7.2/kqemu' make -C /lib/modules/2.4.21-37.EL/build SUBDIRS=`pwd` modules make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.21-37.EL' The present kernel configuration has modules disabled. Type 'make config' and enable loadable module support. Then build a kernel with module support enabled. make[2]: *** [modules] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.21-37.EL' make[1]: *** [kqemu.o] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/qemu-0.7.2/kqemu' make: *** [all] Error 2

2 2

CESA-2005:810 / CESA-2005:811 -- missing src.rpms?
by Matthew Miller 17 Nov '05

17 Nov '05

Recent updates to gdk-pixbuf and gtk2 have the binary rpms in the updates tree, but not the src.rpms. I know we can just get those from Red Hat, but it's nicer if we've got a coherent, self-contained distribution here.... -- Matthew Miller mattdm(a)mattdm.org <http://mattdm.org/> Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>

2 3

RE: [CentOS] SELinux threads, cynicism, one-upmanship, etc.
by Brian T. Brunner 17 Nov '05

17 Nov '05

>All I want is enough power to do my job... and to not be distracted from *my* job to tackle what some stranger in Illinois thinks my job should be! SELinux is my alligator, not my swamp. CentOS4 allowed me to switch the thing off at install. Done. When SELinux is my job, I'll figure it out. Until then, I don't care who I irk, disappoint, or perturb by switching it off. Brian Brunner brian.t.brunner(a)gai-tronics.com (610)796-5838 >>> noyler(a)khimetrics.com 11/16/05 05:05PM >>> > The main reason I think sysadmins in general seem to hate SELinux is the > 'Mandatory' part of 'Mandatory Access Control' : that is, superuser power > is too addictive to get rid of, and SELinux can do away with 'superuser' > powers entirely. I disagree with this. The main reason I dislike SELinux is the way I was introduced to it. I wasted quite a bit of time on an issue before I even knew what SELinux was because it was turned on by default on an FC2 machine. I was asked by another admin to use FC2 on a particular job, and I never saw SELinux. The turning it on by default irked me. Superuser power as a trip is just silly. What's the difference? All I want is enough power to do my job. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ******************************************************************* This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. www.hubbell.com - Hubbell Incorporated

1 0

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 9, Issue 11
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 17 Nov '05

17 Nov '05

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. CESA-2005:810-01: Important CentOS 2 i386 gdk-pixbuf security update (John Newbigin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 09:24:45 +1100 From: John Newbigin <jnewbigin(a)ict.swin.edu.au> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2005:810-01: Important CentOS 2 i386 gdk-pixbuf security update To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <437BB1AD.7030501(a)ict.swin.edu.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed The following errata for CentOS-2 have been built and uploaded to the centos mirror: RHSA-2005:810-01 Important: gdk-pixbuf security update Files available: gdk-pixbuf-0.22.0-12.el2.3.i386.rpm gdk-pixbuf-devel-0.22.0-12.el2.3.i386.rpm gdk-pixbuf-gnome-0.22.0-12.el2.3.i386.rpm More details are available from the RedHat web site at https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rh21as-errata.html The easy way to make sure you are up to date with all the latest patches is to run: # yum update -- John Newbigin Computer Systems Officer Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies Swinburne University of Technology Melbourne, Australia http://www.ict.swin.edu.au/staff/jnewbigin ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ CentOS-announce mailing list CentOS-announce(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce End of CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 9, Issue 11 **********************************************

1 0

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