Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

34753 discussions

Re: [CentOS] system startup sound
by Ritika Garg 11 Dec '10

11 Dec '10

The system is DELL laptop. So i am not sure if the cable of the internal PC speaker can be pulled. In preferences->sound->system beep, i unchecked the option "enable system beep". This solves the problem, but is there any way to change the system beep?

1 0

system startup sound
by Ritika Garg 10 Dec '10

10 Dec '10

Whenever the system boots there is sound ( beep ). Is there any way to disable it?

5 5

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Digest, Vol 71, Issue 10
by Rodney Mercer 10 Dec '10

10 Dec '10

On Fri, 2010-12-10 at 12:00 -0500, centos-request(a)centos.org wrote: > Message: 35 > Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 17:45:45 +0100 > From: Timo Schoeler <timo.schoeler(a)riscworks.net> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] system startup sound > To: CentOS mailing list <centos(a)centos.org> > Message-ID: <4D025939.6030109(a)riscworks.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > On 12/10/2010 05:42 PM, m.roth(a)5-cent.us wrote: > > Ritika Garg wrote: > >> Whenever the system boots there is sound ( beep ). Is there any way to > >> disable it? > > > > That's a firmware/BIOS thing, if it's the one I think. > > > > mark > > Pull the cable of the internal PC speaker. The annoying 'beep' is the > only sensible sound that thing is capable of, anyways. (Yes, I know > there are ways to redirect sound to that crappy device an yes, I had > hard laughs of it way back in Amiga times, too. :) > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS(a)centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > ************************************** Remove the pc speaker modules http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/How_to_disable_the_pc_speaker_%28beep!%29

1 0

Re: [CentOS] Optimal VPN
by J.Witvliet＠mindef.nl 10 Dec '10

10 Dec '10

-----Original Message----- > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS(a)centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > My sense is that openvpn is the easiest to configure, the most robust and fault tolerant, as far as keeping connections up and reestablishing failed connections. The downside of openvpn is incompatibility with most mobile devices, not relevant if you are able to install openvpn clients. You can configure fixed IP addresses using either the ccd files or the client-connect script. Based on other discussussions on the list my recollection is that IPSEC provides better performance if you need GigE or better data rates on your VPNs. My sense is that IPSEC may be more difficult to configure and less robust at keeping connections up, but this has probably improved in recent years. The main advantage to pptp that I see is compatibility with mobile devices. A disadvantage of PPTP, as far as I know it cannot easily be tunneled through something like a linux firewall because it uses non-standard protocol packets (not TCP/UDP). Both OPENVPN and IPSEC can easily be tunneled through most firewalls. Though I have not researched this extensively, just based on watching list of security updates that get released for Centos, Fedora etc, It seems that OPENVPN has had very few security issues. I have definely seen a few for strongswan and openswan (both are IPSEC implementations). Again this is just gut feeling, not the result of any investigation. I do note though that OPENVPN runs easily in a chroot environment, just by enabling options in the config file. I'm not sure if openswan or strongswan can do this. Nataraj _______________________________________________ Hi, If you don't use any fancy features, OpenVPN is rather easy to set up. Additional effort is needed with: -certificates -routing -smartcards Exactly _the same troubles_ you will encounter with ipsec (though i have only used with strongswan) If it is only master/slave configuration, openvpn will do, for a more complex topology (meshed) consider ipsec Will you be confronted with IPv6 in the (not so) near future? Forget OpenVPN, it is still beta there, while it has been implemented in strongswan for ages, and part of there standard test plan. Furthermore, openvpn is only compatible with openvpn, while using ipsec you might be able to connect to other boxes. If you can install software on both ends, openvpn is available for many platforms. hw ______________________________________________________________________ Dit bericht kan informatie bevatten die niet voor u is bestemd. Indien u niet de geadresseerde bent of dit bericht abusievelijk aan u is toegezonden, wordt u verzocht dat aan de afzender te melden en het bericht te verwijderen. De Staat aanvaardt geen aansprakelijkheid voor schade, van welke aard ook, die verband houdt met risico's verbonden aan het elektronisch verzenden van berichten. This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are requested to inform the sender and delete the message. The State accepts no liability for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent in the electronic transmission of messages.

6 6

noatime effect
by Mag Gam 10 Dec '10

10 Dec '10

I know that with noatime attribute, http://tldp.org/LDP/solrhe/Securing-Optimizing-Linux-RH-Edition-v1.3/chap6s…, it will have a performance gain. I want to know how I can figure out how much the kernel is waiting its time without noatime. Is the possible?

1 0

CentOS 5.5 with MediaWiki
by Clovis Tristao 10 Dec '10

10 Dec '10

Hi, How do I install php-xml 5.2.10 on CentOS 5.5? I'm trying to install MediaWiki, and asks that package as a dependency. Cheers, Clóvis -- Clovis Tristao - UNICAMP/Faculdade de Engenharia Agricola Administrador de Redes - Secao de Informatica (SINFO) E-mail: clovis(a)feagri.unicamp.br http://www.feagri.unicamp.br Fone(0xx19) 35211031-35211038-91173116 ou FAX(55xx19) 35211005/35211010

4 11

Re: [CentOS] IPV4 is nearly depleted, are you ready for IPV6?
by David 10 Dec '10

10 Dec '10

Folks I have been following the IPV6 comments. What concerns me with the loss of NAT are the following issues: 1) My friend from half-way around the world comes to visit. He turns on his IPV6 enabled device (think Ipad), and wants to use my ISP's connection. What IP address does he get? If it's his home address, that makes routing difficult. If he dynamically gets one of "my" addresses a) Did my ISP give me enough? b) Do I get charged by my ISP on a per-device basis? 2) Today, my ISP doesn't know (or doesn't care) how many devices I have in my home -- my Linux gateay with DHCP and NAT hides all of that. With IPV6, what is to prevent my ISP from charging me a per-device fee? 3) When I connect my IPV6 refrigerator with its automatic inventory system tracking every RFID-enabled carrot I use, won't I be making my shopping habits visible to all those annoying advertisers? Or, in other words, am I compromising my privacy? Actually, although such dissemination of information can be blocked by a correctly designed firewall, I suspect the "Free IPv6 DSL Modem and Router, Sponsored by <your-favorite-commercial-site>" that comes with your ISP contract, would err on the side of promiscuity. Concerned Linux/Windows/Mac/Wii/Iphone/Ipod/Ipad/Xbox user David

19 37

PERC 6/E continue switch between "write though" and "write back"????
by mcclnx mcc 10 Dec '10

10 Dec '10

We have several DELL R900 server with PERC 6/E adapter in it. O.S. is CENTOS 5.5. recently one of server continue pop-up messages on /var/log/message for switch status between "write back" and "write through". ============================== Dec 6 08:09:31 host01 Server Administrator: Storage Service EventID: 2189 The controller write policy has been changed to Write Back.: Battery 0 Controller 0 Dec 7 13:20:13 host01 Server Administrator: Storage Service EventID: 2188 The controller write policy has been changed to Write Through.: Battery 0 Controller 0 Dec 9 01:09:39 host01 Server Administrator: Storage Service EventID: 2188 The controller write policy has been changed to Write Through.: Battery 0 Controller 0 Dec 9 07:38:29 host01 Server Administrator: Storage Service EventID: 2189 The controller write policy has been changed to Write Back.: Battery 0 Controller 0 ================================ I double check PERC 6/E is NOT on battery "learn cycle". When it change to "write though" I also use OPMN check status and NO battery low issue. I tried to use OPMN change status from "write though" to "write back" but it not work. Anyone know why PERC 6/E status continue change? Thanks.

2 1

IPV4 is nearly depleted, are you ready for IPV6?
by Rudi Ahlers 10 Dec '10

10 Dec '10

Seeing as IPV4 is near it's end of life (http://www.internetnews.com/infra/article.php/3915471/IPv4+Nearing+Final+Da…) I'm curios as who know whether everyone is ready for the changeover to IPV6? Is anyone using it in production already, and what are your experiences with it? -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers SoftDux Website: http://www.SoftDux.com Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com Office: 087 805 9573 Cell: 082 554 7532

28 81

The Natives are Restless!
by John Hinton 09 Dec '10

09 Dec '10

Has anyone noticed over the years, that every time a major new CentOS release is just about to happen, suddenly there starts to be a few very long and drawn out threads? Has anyone ever considered that the core team is in fact monitoring this thread while trying to devote as much time as possible to actually getting the next release out the door? Could it possibly take longer for the next release to be launched due to the increase in volume on this list? So, when is CentOS 7 going to be released? ;) Sorry to add to the problem with this message, but I do find it really odd that this happened just before 4 and then again just before 5 and now just before 6. -- John Hinton 877-777-1407 ext 502 http://www.ew3d.com Comprehensive Online Solutions

3 2

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