Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

34758 discussions

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 60, Issue 1
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 04 Feb '10

04 Feb '10

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-2010:0076 Important CentOS 4 i386 kernel - security and bug fix update (Tru Huynh) 2. CESA-2010:0076 Important CentOS 4 x86_64 kernel - security and bug fix update (Tru Huynh) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 13:33:45 +0100 From: Tru Huynh <tru(a)centos.org> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2010:0076 Important CentOS 4 i386 kernel - security and bug fix update To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <20100204123345.GE24821(a)sillage.bis.pasteur.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" CentOS Errata and Security Advisory CESA-2010:0076 kernel security update for CentOS 4 i386: https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2010-0076.html The following updated file has been uploaded and is currently syncing to the mirrors: i386: updates/i386/RPMS/kernel-2.6.9-89.0.20.EL.i586.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/kernel-2.6.9-89.0.20.EL.i686.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/kernel-devel-2.6.9-89.0.20.EL.i586.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/kernel-devel-2.6.9-89.0.20.EL.i686.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/kernel-hugemem-2.6.9-89.0.20.EL.i686.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/kernel-hugemem-devel-2.6.9-89.0.20.EL.i686.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/kernel-smp-2.6.9-89.0.20.EL.i586.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/kernel-smp-2.6.9-89.0.20.EL.i686.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/kernel-smp-devel-2.6.9-89.0.20.EL.i586.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/kernel-smp-devel-2.6.9-89.0.20.EL.i686.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/kernel-xenU-2.6.9-89.0.20.EL.i686.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/kernel-xenU-devel-2.6.9-89.0.20.EL.i686.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/kernel-doc-2.6.9-89.0.20.EL.noarch.rpm source: updates/SRPMS/kernel-2.6.9-89.0.20.EL.src.rpm You may update your CentOS-4 i386 installations by running the command: yum update kernel\* Tru -- Tru Huynh (mirrors, CentOS-3 i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance) http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B

1 0

alsa
by mattias 04 Feb '10

04 Feb '10

How to install alsa for sound I use vmware and it requre alsa

2 3

Yum: strange dependencies
by Fajar Priyanto 04 Feb '10

04 Feb '10

Hi all, On Centos 5.4 minimum installation, I tried to install these packages (notice the dependencies): =================================================================================================================== Package Arch Version Repository Size =================================================================================================================== Installing: mc i386 1:4.6.1a-35.el5 base 2.1 M mdadm i386 2.6.9-2.el5 base 827 k ntp i386 4.2.2p1-9.el5.centos.2.1 updates 1.3 M sudo i386 1.6.9p17-5.el5 base 218 k Installing for dependencies: exim i386 4.63-3.el5 base 1.2 M mysql i386 5.0.77-4.el5_4.1 updates 4.8 M perl i386 4:5.8.8-27.el5 base 12 M perl-DBI i386 1.52-2.el5 base 600 k postgresql-libs i386 8.1.18-2.el5_4.1 updates 196 k Transaction Summary =================================================================================================================== Install 9 Package(s) Update 0 Package(s) Remove 0 Package(s) Total download size: 23 M I didn't want all those dependencies, especially exim and mysql. So, instead of installing mc, mdadm, ntp, and sudo at the same time, I installed them one by one and this time no exim and mysql (mc still wanted perl, fine) dependencies. Any thought why was that? Thank you.

2 2

Updating gfortran in CentOS 5.4?
by Jon Forrest 04 Feb '10

04 Feb '10

We're finding that several of the packages we need don't compile using the version 4.1.2 of gfortran that comes with CentOS 5.4. So, I've built the latest version of gfortran (e.g. 4.4.2) but I've done it so that all the new version's files go in /share/apps/gnu so that they don't interfere with the standard gcc distribution (building gfortran requires building some parts of gcc). Although I can compile and run a simple fortran "Hello, world" program using the version of gfortran I built this way, trying to run a more complex application, such as charmm (a molecular dynamics program), fails. When I run charmm, I get the message "Killed". Running strace ./charmm shows execve("./charmm", ["./charmm"], [/* 43 vars */] <unfinished ...> +++ killed by SIGKILL Since "Hello, world" compiles and runs, but charmm compiles and doesn't run, there's something wrong with how charmm is linked. Also, although the 'file charmm' command shows an ELF 64-bit dynamically linked file, 'ldd charmm' says " not a dynamic executable" (note no file name). So, something is strange. What have other people done about building new versions of gfortran on CentOS 5.4? Is this worth the trouble? Or, is it better to just go with Intel Fortran? Cordially, -- Jon Forrest Research Computing Support College of Chemistry 173 Tan Hall University of California Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94720-1460 510-643-1032 jlforrest(a)berkeley.edu

4 5

atime, relatime query
by Rajagopal Swaminathan 04 Feb '10

04 Feb '10

Greetings, I am aware that mounting filesystems with noatime option greatly increases speed. I have tried to follow discussion on the pros and cons of using noatime. I have however not been able to mount with the option relatime in centos 5.2. But in a production db server, which is backed up by HP DP, is it advisable to mount with noatime? Anybody care to share their experience on it? Regards Rajagopal

6 9

subversion 1.6.9 and sqlite 3.6.22
by Benjamin Franz 03 Feb '10

03 Feb '10

I'm in the process of setting up subversion and since the version packages with C5 is, shall we say, showing its age, I've built an updated version. In order to do that I had to upgrade sqlite from the default 3.3.6 (which the current subversion will not build with) and I went with 3.6.22. Has anyone else had any experience with whether or not that breaks anything? I'm a little nervous because sqlite is used all over the place (rpm, X11, apache, yum, selinux, system-config-*, various perl modules, gnome, gimp, php, and so on). -- Benjamin Franz

3 3

Re: [CentOS] how to find out promiscuous mode
by Les Bell 03 Feb '10

03 Feb '10

"Les Bell" <lesbell(a)lesbell.com.au> wrote: >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/prodetect/ << Sorry - just remembered that's a Windows program. The classic tool for monitoring IP/Ethernet address pairings is arpwatch, but unlike prodetect, it will only report an ARP cache poisoning attack, not someone silently sniffing (which isn't much use on switched networks anyway). Best, --- Les Bell [http://www.lesbell.com.au] Tel: +61 2 9451 1144

1 0

pointer to Searchable Archives for the list pls
by Simon Billis 03 Feb '10

03 Feb '10

Hi Folks, Can you point me in the direction of searchable archives for the list? I'm obviously missing something. I would like to be able to search the archives before asking my question. Thanks in advance Simon

5 5

Re: [CentOS] Skype and problem with ALSA mixer driver?
by Andrew 03 Feb '10

03 Feb '10

On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 09:54 -0500, Brent L. Bates wrote: > Why are you trying to use 5.3? Why not 5.4? After installing 5.4, try > everything again, even the newer kernel module. I've been reading these lists > long enough to remember people saying they have had the same problem as you > with earlier versions of the OS. I do not remember the details, but the > solution has something to do with software settings. You might want to do a > Google search for `skype' and `mic'. The answer may even be in the CentOS > archives. I think I saw it on this list. It may have been the Scientific > Linux list instead. I subscribe to and read both lists, so the solution may > have been on the SL list instead of CentOS. I hope this helps some. Good > luck. > Hi Brent, Thanks for taking the trouble to reply to me personally. I'm using CentOS 5.3 on my PC simply because that's the latest version which I had downloaded and burnt to CDs! I'm afraid I'm a bit slow in keeping up with the fast-moving development of CentOS and am always a bit reluctant to rebuild/reinstall the operating system on my PC. However, I thought that 5.3 was sufficiently up-to-date for my purposes, but was disappointed when I found that neither the wifi on my laptop nor skype on my PC worked properly! I'm now using Ubuntu 9.04 on my laptop which seems to work brilliantly and is very user-friendly. I'm thinking of using Ubuntu (server edition?) on my PC, after years of using RedHat and CentOS, because as a 'semi-tech' user (and great supporter of linux) I do like the user-friendliness of Ubuntu! Best regards, Andy

1 0

Logrotate in CentOS 5.4 more brutal (to httpd at least) than in 5.3?
by Christopher Thorjussen 03 Feb '10

03 Feb '10

I've just updated a few CentOS 5.3 servers to 5.4. One of them were a Apache Webserver. Doing a diff/check on the new ".rpmnew" config files that are made, I saw that the logrotate command for apache was changed. In 5.3 it did a reload, but in 5.4 it does a hard kill: CentOS 5.3: /var/log/httpd/*log { missingok notifempty sharedscripts postrotate /sbin/service httpd reload > /dev/null 2>/dev/null || true endscript } CentOS 5.4: /var/log/httpd/*log { missingok notifempty sharedscripts postrotate /bin/kill -HUP `cat /var/run/httpd.pid 2>/dev/null` 2> /dev/null || true endscript } Isn't this a bit harsh in 5.4? Wouldn't the 5.3 method be better? -Christopher Thorjussen

8 7

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