Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

2 participants
34758 discussions

Boot message of a modprobe.d conf file that does not exist
by Tim 28 Apr '15

28 Apr '15

Hi all, I got a message at boot: dracut-pre-udev: libkmod: kmod_config_parse: /etc/modprobe.d/thinkpad_battery.conf line 2: ignoring bad line starting with 'options' I have had this file to load modules for my thinkpad (acpi_call & tp_smapi) but I removed it after recompiling the modules for a new kernel and using "make install load". My question is, why this nonexistent file is still demanded. Thanks in advance Tim

2 2

CentOS 6.6 x86_64, rpm error: rpmdbNextIterator: skipping h# ...
by carlh04426＠gmail.com 28 Apr '15

28 Apr '15

Hi All, I had some health issues for a few months and I barely recall dealing with Heartbleed ... it's all just a blur. Now I'm getting back up to speed, but I have a pair of CentOS 6.6 x86_64 + Virtualmin 4.13 GPL servers which no longer seem to be picking up available updates. 'yum check' ran for about 25 minutes this evening on one of them and returned nothing useful. rpm -qa --last is returning this (lines intentionally split): error: rpmdbNextIterator: skipping h# 259 Header V3 RSA/SHA256 \ Signature, key ID c105b9de: BAD error: rpmdbNextIterator: skipping h# 4 Header V3 RSA/SHA256 \ Signature, key ID c105b9de: BAD error: rpmdbNextIterator: skipping h# 1028 Header V3 RSA/SHA1 \ Signature, key ID c105b9de: BAD - - - - 8< snipped for brevity, continuing to end - - - - ->8 - - - - error: rpmdbNextIterator: skipping h# 1019 Header V3 RSA/SHA1 \ Signature, key ID c105b9de: BAD gpg-pubkey-fe837f6f-4e0fd77e Thu 17 Jul 2014 12:00:11 AM EDT gpg-pubkey-ef1d6db8-4e0fd7f0 Thu 17 Jul 2014 12:00:11 AM EDT gpg-pubkey-d0ff3d16-4e0fd442 Thu 17 Jul 2014 12:00:11 AM EDT gpg-pubkey-a0bdbcf9-42d1d837 Thu 17 Jul 2014 12:00:11 AM EDT gpg-pubkey-11f63c51-3c7dc11d Thu 17 Jul 2014 12:00:11 AM EDT gpg-pubkey-c105b9de-4e0fd3a3 Tue 15 Jul 2014 02:32:15 AM EDT gpg-pubkey-0608b895-4bd22942 Mon 14 Jul 2014 07:59:25 PM EDT gpg-pubkey-6b8d79e6-3f49313d Mon 14 Jul 2014 07:57:56 PM EDT I'd be extremely grateful for any guidance or ideas you may wish to share. TIA & regards, Carl

2 3

Route traffic through private IP for only certain hosts
by Ian 28 Apr '15

28 Apr '15

Hi I am having a weird problem which I cant figure out - so I was hoping someone here could give me a hand. First off the end goal is that a specific server in my network runs an IPSEC connection to another company and I want all other servers to route traffic for the IP on that network through this single server. Server 1 in this example is the server that runs the IPSEC connection. (CentOS 6.6) Server 2 in this example is an app server that would route traffic for only that specific IP through server 1. (CentOS 6.5) **Some IP's that will be used below:** Server 1 <pre> Server 1 Public IP: x.x.x.x Server 1 Public Broadcast: x.x.x.y Server 1 Public Gateway: x.x.x.z Server 1 Internal IP: 10.0.64.10/24 </pre> Server 2 <pre> Server 2 Public IP: y.y.y.y Server 2 Public Broadcast: y.y.y.z Server 2 Public Gateway: y.y.y.a Server 2 Internal IP: 10.0.64.150/24 </pre> Those servers have full connectivity between them internally (i.e. I can ping, ssh etc from one to the other without problem). They also both have full acceess to the internet and can be reached that way ---------- **Server 1** Here is an *ip a* for that <pre># ip a 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo inet6 ::1/128 scope host valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000 link/ether 00:0c:29:99:12:85 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet x.x.x.x/28 brd x.x.x.y scope global eth0 inet6 xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000 link/ether 00:0c:29:99:12:8f brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 10.0.64.10/24 brd 10.0.64.255 scope global eth1 inet6 fe80::20c:29ff:fe99:128f/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever </pre> Here is an *ip route* <pre># ip route x.x.x.y/28 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src x.x.x.x 10.0.64.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 10.0.64.10 169.254.0.0/16 dev eth0 scope link metric 1002 169.254.0.0/16 dev eth1 scope link metric 1003 default via x.x.x.z dev eth0 </pre> Here is a *sysctl -p* <pre> # sysctl -p net.ipv4.conf.default.rp_filter = 1 net.ipv4.conf.default.accept_source_route = 0 kernel.sysrq = 0 kernel.core_uses_pid = 1 net.ipv4.tcp_syncookies = 1 kernel.msgmnb = 65536 kernel.msgmax = 65536 kernel.shmmax = 68719476736 kernel.shmall = 4294967296 net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1 net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding = 1 net.ipv4.conf.default.proxy_arp = 1 net.ipv4.conf.all.rp_filter = 1 kernel.sysrq = 1 net.ipv4.conf.default.send_redirects = 1 net.ipv4.conf.all.send_redirects = 1 </pre> ---------- **Server 2** I've added a single test ip (8.8.8.8) to server two to test if it works before bringing IPSEC into the equation Here is an *ip a* <pre> # ip a 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo inet6 ::1/128 scope host valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP qlen 1000 link/ether 00:0c:29:15:8b:01 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet y.y.y.y/29 brd y.y.y.z scope global eth0 inet6 fe80::20c:29ff:fe15:8b01/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP qlen 1000 link/ether 00:0c:29:15:8b:0b brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 10.0.64.150/24 brd 10.0.64.255 scope global eth1 inet6 fe80::20c:29ff:fe15:8b0b/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever </pre> Here is an *ip route* <pre> # ip route 8.8.8.8 via 10.0.64.10 dev eth1 y.y.y.z/29 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src y.y.y.y 10.0.64.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 10.0.64.150 default via y.y.y.a dev eth0 </pre> ---------- Now when I try do a ping from Server 2 -> 8.8.8.8 here are the tcpdumps from each server: **Server 2** If I tcpdump on eth0 i get no matches (so the route appears right!). eth1 gets matches: <pre> # tcpdump -vvv -i eth1 -n host 8.8.8.8 tcpdump: listening on eth1, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535 bytes 11:25:55.609902 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84) 10.0.64.150 > 8.8.8.8: ICMP echo request, id 17999, seq 1, length 64 11:25:56.609262 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84) 10.0.64.150 > 8.8.8.8: ICMP echo request, id 17999, seq 2, length 64 </pre> **Server 1 (The hopeful gateway for 8.8.8.8)** On eth1 (Private) <pre> # tcpdump -vv -i eth1 -n host 8.8.8.8 tcpdump: listening on eth1, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535 bytes 11:27:20.608766 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84) 10.0.64.150 > 8.8.8.8: ICMP echo request, id 17999, seq 86, length 64 11:27:21.608738 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84) 10.0.64.150 > 8.8.8.8: ICMP echo request, id 17999, seq 87, length 64 </pre> On eth0 (public) <pre> # tcpdump -vv -i eth0 -n host 8.8.8.8 tcpdump: listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535 bytes 11:29:04.608773 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 63, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84) 10.0.64.150 > 8.8.8.8: ICMP echo request, id 17999, seq 190, length 64 11:29:05.608800 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 63, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84) 10.0.64.150 > 8.8.8.8: ICMP echo request, id 17999, seq 191, length 64 </pre> I've disabled the FW on both (as a test), made sure to not have any blocking rules on FORWARD traffic (as a separate test) and I just never get my traffic through from Server 2 to 8.8.8.8. I've also tried substituting 8.8.8.8 for another server that is reachable from both servers and the same thing happens. I'm open to any suggestions - i'm super confused :) Thanks in advance, Ian

3 2

Re: [CentOS] Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts
by m.roth＠5-cent.us 27 Apr '15

27 Apr '15

Joerg Schilling wrote: > Les Mikesell <lesmikesell(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Joerg Schilling >> <Joerg.Schilling(a)fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: >> > > >> > If you combine ZFS and Linux, you create a permitted "collective work" and the GPL cannot extend it's rules to the CDDLd separate and independend >> > work ZFS of course. >> >> Which countries' copyright laws would permit that explicitly even when some of the components' licenses prohibit it? > > Fortunately, Europe and the USA declare the same parts of the GPL void, these parts would prevent such a combination. <snip> First, I was not aware that the US had declared any part of the GPL null and void. Second, just to play Eris... which *version* of the GPL are you talking about in this arguement, 1.x, 2.x, or 3.x? mark

2 1

CentOS 7.1 How to change panel background
by Globe Trotter 27 Apr '15

27 Apr '15

Hi, I just installed CentOS and have been trying to change the desktop panel background (in gnome classic) to black. How do I do this? Holding the alt button while right-clicking on the mouse does not seem to do anything. I do not have anything installed (other than what came with the LiveCD). Many thanks!

1 0

CentOS 7 /boot location
by Devin Reade 27 Apr '15

27 Apr '15

I noticed that (in a case with a two disk md mirror and lvm), the CentOS 7 installer is now placing /boot as the *last* partition on the disk. I'm assuming that others are seeing this behavior. Does anyone know why it's now the last instead of the first? (Seems to work, though.) Devin

2 2

can't install gd-devel on centos 7.1
by Tim Dunphy 27 Apr '15

27 Apr '15

Hey guys, I'm trying to instal gd-devel onto a CentOS 7 host. --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Package: gd-last-devel-2.1.1-2.el7.remi.x86_64 (remi) Requires: libvpx-devel(x86-64) You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest But when I try to do that I get the error you see above. These are the repos I have installed and enabled: repo id repo name status epel/x86_64 Extra Packages for Enterprise 7,718 puppetlabs-deps/x86_64 Puppet Labs Dependencies El 7 17 puppetlabs-products/x86_64 Puppet Labs Products El 7 - x 162 remi Les RPM de remi pour Enterpri 1,928 rhui-REGION-client-config-server-7/x86_64 Red Hat Update Infrastructure 4 rhui-REGION-rhel-server-releases/7Server/x86_64 Red Hat Enterprise Linux Serv 6,851 rhui-REGION-rhel-server-rh-common/7Server/x86_64 Red Hat Enterprise Linux Serv 131 rpmforge RHEL 7Server - RPMforge.net - 245 webtatic/x86_64 Webtatic Repository EL7 - x86 519 I originally had nothing more than the base CentOS repo enabled. Along with the puppetlabs repo and epel when I first encountered this error. But then I tried adding some repos to find out if I could find the needed package in any of them. The package that it seems to be complaining about not having is called: libvpx-devel(x86-64) But when I try to instal that this is the result I get: [root@monitor1:~] #yum install libvpx-devel Loaded plugins: amazon-id, rhui-lb No package libvpx-devel available. Error: Nothing to do Does anybody have any ideas on how I can get around this problem? I only want to install gd-devel. Seems like it should be so simple! But not in this case. :( Thanks!! Tim -- GPG me!! gpg --keyserver pool.sks-keyservers.net --recv-keys F186197B

4 6

Broken Selinux Postfix Policy?
by E.B. 26 Apr '15

26 Apr '15

Trying to restart postfix installed from yum. Restart fails, I get: type=AVC msg=audit(1430429813.721:12167): avc: denied { unlink } for pid=31624 comm="master" name="defer" dev="dm-0" ino=981632 scontext=system_u:system_r:postfix_master_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:postfix_spool_maildrop_t:s0 tclass=sock_file I guess it needs to remove the /var/spool/postfix/defer socket file. audit2allow says this will fix it: allow postfix_master_t postfix_spool_maildrop_t:sock_file unlink; But how do I add this permission to the existing Postfix Selinux policy??? Why was it missing??? By the way, I also had AVCs when I tried to add another instance of Postfix smtpd on local port 20025. Very frustrating there is no docs how to add a rule for this common change. I don't know if I did the right thing: semanage port -a -t smtp_port_t -p tcp 20025 Is this the right way? Why isn't this documented somewhere?

2 2

25 Apr '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I use a dual headed system with one screen on the digital and the other on the analogue ports. Since 7.1 the update the login has switched from the analogue to the digital. This wouldn't be a problem, but I have the digital rotated 90 degrees into a portrait mode. Login is thus best done lying down! Once I've logged in there is no problem, the screens are easily configured in the settings menu. Can I set it globally though? I've had a look at xrandr and can't see anything. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJVPAi2AAoJEAF3yXsqtyBlZzMP/3in2vFd8whbrZrghVhRF61V IPKEK2E3gYg4jYTa7j5ewwVic9sRU5ix6Hx0ZmqK5dSFqpBY6llK4+zcpmvqq1fR 91uwY/o8o+wEPppyvNm43i01Vb/nwuFeLfyfsn4IHak2ss0mMn76z71EsWw6yfU2 spAHxkkhwWN5YjXpgP0jVj0ot7h5l20d08vjRZ8uwK+cWjlGk2xZBoN4K9L4yyhu TwJAVDivS/VVztJ3ag8ZA413vk5+jl8AjsJELDD+JD7Wab9zpU4HHKk7odga9ekJ TI6FEZub9k46532O0cjnPYrzv/qoh2IxWgMOSp6egObwJs0oENadSl4Zhw3SsmiE yiH/ZjnYcoTzp3c/+To/ZkdFLw+aNn3OxiBgKv1p4mtxLovtPIaiok+XU2tLXIap MHu/rQnFUmMhdR1c5y2rsTIHg2X0uZmBZskr5SLfLTCD+1IdIvu2Av5tYYyaswIT ctHRqSL2dC4ViJnA5IgBoXPDT4Hz0AsTNOvXfWpNNPdUPqV4Ppsa+d8xyE+EM7Sp +6/4l26qZ4NVlYfNodvU38YoR0lvtVwhe73OSLuYHusYAAeT9WQj68svOiS5bhuD 1Jux7m0Df3UgxsxG9mH66GzgIMOIuRkBoQNYNXEN5PxOMZBgXly6WS+zdiys+iXW w3Meq+Ym8DgNiClIAyuc =+WI9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: [CentOS] Forcing yum update
by Александр Кириллов 25 Apr '15

25 Apr '15

>>> I have tried launching yum shell and then remove libmodplug, >>> install >>> libmodplug while having made sure epel is available. This after >>> having >>> read that it is a bad idea to use no-deps with yum. My attempt, >>> however, fails with a not found message. >>> >>> What would the correct approach be? >> >> The correct approach would be to use yum-plugin-priorities, set >> rpmforge >> priority to a higher value (lower priority) than epel and run yum >> distro-sync. > > Thank you. Unfortunately distro-sync fails with not found which seems > to apply to libmodplug at epel. Check if you have exclude=libmodplug in /etc/yum.repos.d/epel.repo and comment this line out.

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