Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

34753 discussions

Simple web server with Apache: web page permissions ?
by Niki Kovacs 15 Sep '09

15 Sep '09

Hi, I'm currently sinking my teeth into the fine "Definitive Guide to CentOS". Right now I'm reading the chapter about Apache. One thing puzzles me: no mention is made of web page permissions. Let's say I'm using Apache's default configuration for setting up the most simple no-frills web server, e. g. no virtual hosts, only a series of static HTML pages in /var/www/html. Q: what permissions should I define for these pages? I remember having setup some web servers on Debian, and the tradition was that everything under /var/www/html (as in this example) was to be owned by user www-data and group www-data. What's the "tradition" with RHEL/CentOS? Cheers, Niki

7 13

No envelope information
by Luis campo 15 Sep '09

15 Sep '09

hi, have installed centos 4.7 We have installed qmail + simscan + vpopmail + SpamAssassin + clanAV and when we send a mail from a particular domain, the following error leaves us simscan: no envelope information, deferred exit and checking our log shows me the following 2009-09-14 18:18:06.929624500 16910 < Received: from mail pickup service by cp197.mysite4now.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; 2009-09-14 18:18:06.929631500 16910 < Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:14:25 -0700 2009-09-14 18:18:06.929635500 16910 < thread-index: Aco1iLhSamfTCiVGQWqn8JicKvfRZQ== 2009-09-14 18:18:06.929639500 16910 < Thread-Topic: Encuesta de clima laboral 2009-09-14 18:18:06.929642500 16910 < From: <gptw(a)gptwperu.com.pe> 2009-09-14 18:18:06.929646500 16910 < To: <jmarin@enlace+ 2009-09-14 18:18:06.929650500 16910 < aduanero.com.pe> 2009-09-14 18:18:06.929727500 16910 < Subject: Encuesta I wonder if this problem can be for Centos 4.7 or which would be the problem. Greetings Luis _________________________________________________________________ Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=…

3 2

Centos 5.4 'prerelease-access' - is there such a thing?
by Peter l Jakobi 15 Sep '09

15 Sep '09

Hi, excluding the Frankengrade from CENTOS5.3 to upstream RHEL5.4, is there are procedure / repository access / nightly builds / ... to what will be CENTOS 5.4? URLs? Howtos? Discussion threads or notes? I checked help, wiki and forums and google, but came up empty. Of course, this kind of use is depending on the way the new upstream RHEL sources are processed, so maybe there won't be a complete set of packages at all until maybe one or two weeks before the release. But again I got no lucky search hits for this kind of internals either. I'll gladly collect and summarize for a (hopefully easier locatable) wiki-page to be :). cu, Peter -- cu Peter l Jakobi lists(a)kefk.oa.shuttle.de

2 1

SUMMARY : Repair Filesystem prompt , after inode has illegal blocks ; qla2xxx message on reboot
by McCulloch, Alan 15 Sep '09

15 Sep '09

hi All, thanks for the responses. After being dropped into the # Filesystem repair prompt, ( on account of "inode 27344909 has illegal blocks" ) following warm reboot (via "reboot") after finding (SAN ) filesystem in read-only mode yesterday morning (possibly because of HBA fault on SAN) , I ran fsck -r /data (Linux version 2.6.18-92.1.18.el5 , Red Hat 4.1.2-42 , ext3 filesystem) This took a couple of hours or so , prompting me for various changes all of which I accepted. This appeared to complete OK, but then the system would not boot, with the following error from the qla2xxx driver. . . qla2xxx 0000:05:0d.0: Mailbox command timeout occurred. Scheduling ISP abort. qla2xxx 0000:05:0d.0: Mailbox command timeout occurred. Scheduling ISP abort. . etc However after powering down the system and cold-booting, the system was able to boot up and mount the repaired filesystem without any obvious damage, but with abnormal not to mention scary looking boot messages and ongoing warnings from multipath. This morning (as I sort of expected) the filesystem had dropped back down to read-only mode, but meanwhile the source of our woes was identified, a fibre port on the SAN controller which was degraded but not completely failed, so that there had been no clean failover to the twin controller, and therefore a degraded virtual device was presented to the O/S, with consequence for the filesystem. After that port and controller was quarantined, this time around I did a cold power-off reboot of the server , and this time there was a more normal looking boot and the filesystem came up normally without any repair being requested. (My hypothesis is that in this situation - i.e. ext3 filesystem has put itself in read-only mode - a warm boot , via reboot, does not cleanly remount the filesystem and apply the journal quite like a cold power-off reboot does. I think it is likely that the lengthy session of me answering "yes" to fsck's interactive repair, the first time around, simply applied all of the fixes that would automatically have been done from the journal , had I cold-rebooted in the first place. However that is only a hunch. But I will be making sure to do cold power-off reboots in general, in future.) Another lesson is that a sophisticated system of twin SAN controllers with failover does not protect against a situation where a device is degrading rather than failing completely. Thanks again for the responses and sorry if my questions were a bit basic but I have been dropped in a little out of my depth with this system. Cheers AMcC ======================================================================= Attention: The information contained in this message and/or attachments from AgResearch Limited is intended only for the persons or entities to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipients is prohibited by AgResearch Limited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately. =======================================================================

2 1

"Point Releases" Question
by Jorge Fábregas 15 Sep '09

15 Sep '09

Hello everyone, Let say 5.4 goes out today; If I fully update (today) my 5.2 system...will it be equivalent to 5.4 (all RPM packages with same version/release number?)? Or is it possible for the new point release to include NEW packages that weren't on the base relase (in this case CentOS 5)? Thanks, Jorge

4 4

LF examples - using site-specific RPMs for config
by Alan McKay 15 Sep '09

15 Sep '09

Hey folks, A week or two ago someone mentioned something about using their own home-grown RPMs for managing config info on their boxes. I really like this idea and would like to learn more about it. Are there some examples out there? I have lots of custom config info and think this would be an ideal way to manage it. Others mentioned puppet and CF engine which probably have their merits as well. But I don't really have time at the moment to learn those. Perhaps in this thread we could even discuss the +/- of each method. cheers, -Alan -- “Don't eat anything you've ever seen advertised on TV” - Michael Pollan, author of "In Defense of Food"

8 7

problem installing CentOS 5.3
by Buz Davis 15 Sep '09

15 Sep '09

I have a small fixed ip network at home, running red hat 9 on two amd k6 500 Mhz boxes. One has 256 M memory and the other 320 M. They pretty much meet my needs, but lately I have detected that the internet sites I frequent are requiring some more modern software than I can run. I attempted to install Fedora 8, but that failed on the AMD processors. So I ordered a set of CentOS 5.3 i386 disks. The CentOS install fails also. I could get the first screen up, offering choices of how to boot, and if I asked for memtest86 that would start. (I had verified memory earlier, during my F8 attempts). However, any other choice resulted in a reboot (generally during loading of vmlinux). Sometimes the disk wouldn't be recognized as bootable. I have convinced myself that the disks are OK (see below) and that I must need either better hardware or more memory (but this is the i386 version of CentOS 5.3) or some parameter on the install that I haven't tried (and I've tried about all I have found or remember). I would appreciate any help. What I've done so far: At first I thought that the CentOS 1of6 disk must be bad (couldn't even run a mediacheck) and emailed the vendor. Then it occurred to me that I could perhaps download and burn disk 1of6 and use that to get the install started. (Up until my attempts at F8 I had not had the capability to burn a CD. While trying with F8 I bought a used "intel inside" computer with a broken XP system on it. I blew that away but F8 found problems with the hard disk and wouldn't install. I managed to install RedHat 9, which gave me access to the CD). I reaized that the process would be a bit "iffy" on a box with hard-disk problems, and also I had never burned a cd, but googled around for instructions and plunged in. I downloaded an ios, checked it with md5sum and it was OK. I copied it to the "new" computer via NFS and checked it again: OK. I burned a CD using cdrecord, and the burn appeared to work. The result behaved much like the original had. I tried two more times, varying stuff that I thought might affect the burn, and always got the same sort of behavior. Finally I tried mounting (on a RH9 box) each of the four disks 1of6 I now had and copied (from /dev/cdrom rather than /mnt/cdrom, so as to avoid separating out the files) each to a separate directory and compared them. All three that I burned were identical. The "store bought" disk was a little larger, but compared OK up to EOF on the other (and I recall reading that mass-produced disks might be different in their padding). So I am convinced now that there is nothing wrong with either the original or recently burned disks 1of6 and the problem must either be requiring better/more hardware (but this is the i386 version of cent OS) or some parameter on the install I have never heard of. Again, any advice would be appreciated. Buz

3 2

problem with a repo
by Dave 14 Sep '09

14 Sep '09

Hello, I've got rpmforge and epel on centos 5.3. I'm trying to do an install of perl-Image-Info for spamassassin image scanning. The package was picked up in rpmforge since first, but it is failing to install because a dependency is missing. I added perl-Image-Info to rpmforge's excludepkgs line and tried to install the package again this time thinking it would pull from epel. This did not occur yum still tried to fetch from rpmforge. For my excludepkgs line i tried: excludepkgs=package1,package2,perl-Image-Info and since the changes weren't picked up i did: excludepkgs=package1 package2 perl-Image-Info Any help appreciated. Thanks. Dave.

5 4

Securely backing up Linux machines to NAS?
by Scott Ehrlich 14 Sep '09

14 Sep '09

I have been tasked with having a Buffalo Terastation Pro 2 NAS box, likely to be connected to a Linux box via samba, be the storage device to back up mostly Ubuntu and Centos systems. The trick is, the machines to be backed up need to do so in an automated fashion and make a secure, encrypted connection to my Linux box hosting the NAS. The NAS does have SSL enabled for web admin access, though the same login credentials are used to authenticate the Linux host via samba to the NAS. So what are the simplest options to back up the Linux hosts? rsync does come to mind, but how to do so securely from each host? I'd consider something via ssh, but that would mean an interactive login, and encrypting individual files on the hosts is not an option. NFS is also available on the NAS, but considering the security concerns, I will not use that, nor do I want to enable any more services on the linux machines being backed up than necessary, meaning samba is not an option, unless it remains the ONLY one. I ONLY plan to use samba to mount the NAS to my Linux server, unless someone comes up with a more secure method, or even away to negate the need of the Linux server and permit the hosts to back up directly to the NAS... Ideas are welcome. Thanks. Scott

10 9

Re: [CentOS] Securely backing up Linux machines to NAS?
by Glenn 14 Sep '09

14 Sep '09

At 10:42 PM 9/11/2009, you wrote: >I have been tasked with having a Buffalo Terastation Pro 2 NAS box, >likely to be connected to a Linux box via samba, be the storage device >to back up mostly Ubuntu and Centos systems. The trick is, the >machines to be backed up need to do so in an automated fashion and >make a secure, encrypted connection to my Linux box hosting the NAS. >The NAS does have SSL enabled for web admin access, though the same >login credentials are used to authenticate the Linux host via samba to >the NAS. > >So what are the simplest options to back up the Linux hosts? rsync >does come to mind, but how to do so securely from each host? I'd >consider something via ssh, but that would mean an interactive login, >and encrypting individual files on the hosts is not an option. > >NFS is also available on the NAS, but considering the security >concerns, I will not use that, nor do I want to enable any more >services on the linux machines being backed up than necessary, meaning >samba is not an option, unless it remains the ONLY one. > >I ONLY plan to use samba to mount the NAS to my Linux server, unless >someone comes up with a more secure method, or even away to negate the >need of the Linux server and permit the hosts to back up directly to >the NAS... > >Ideas are welcome. > >Thanks. > >Scott Scott, http://www.jms1.net/code/rsync-backup.shtml Cheers!

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