Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

34753 discussions

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 48, Issue 8
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 20 Feb '09

20 Feb '09

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-2009:0308 Important CentOS 4 ia64 cups - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 2. CESA-2009:0275 Moderate CentOS 3 ia64 imap - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 3. CESA-2009:0308 Important CentOS 3 s390(x) cups - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 4. CESA-2009:0275 Moderate CentOS 3 s390(x) imap - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 5. CESA-2009:0275 Moderate CentOS 3 i386 imap - security update (Tru Huynh) 6. CESA-2009:0275 Moderate CentOS 3 x86_64 imap - security update (Tru Huynh) 7. CESA-2009:0308 Important CentOS 3 i386 cups - security update (Tru Huynh) 8. CESA-2009:0308 Important CentOS 3 x86_64 cups - security update (Tru Huynh) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 20:19:28 +0200 From: Pasi Pirhonen <upi(a)centos.fi> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2009:0308 Important CentOS 4 ia64 cups - security update To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <20090219181928.GP12358(a)centos.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2009:0308 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2009-0308.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ia64: updates/ia64/RPMS/cups-1.1.17-13.3.56.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/cups-devel-1.1.17-13.3.56.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/cups-libs-1.1.17-13.3.56.ia64.rpm -- Pasi Pirhonen - upi(a)iki.fi - http://pasi.pirhonen.eu/ Top-postings silently ignored

1 0

Re: [CentOS] Keepalive...
by John Doe 20 Feb '09

20 Feb '09

> vrrp_instance VI_1 { > state MASTER ### BACKUP on the backup ### > interface eth0 > lvs_sync_daemon_interface eth1 > virtual_router_id 51 > priority 100 ### 99 on the backup ### > advert_int 1 > smtp_alert > virtual_ipaddress { > 192.168.16.123 > } > } Suddenly, I went a bit further... I saw a different (from the outdated doc) config on the web and tried it succesfully: virtual_ipaddress { 192.168.16.123/32 brd 192.168.31.255 scope global } And get these extra bits: Feb 20 16:19:56 lvs1 Keepalived_vrrp: VRRP_Instance(VI_1) Transition to MASTER STATE Feb 20 16:19:57 lvs1 Keepalived_vrrp: VRRP_Instance(VI_1) Entering MASTER STATE Feb 20 16:19:57 lvs1 Keepalived_vrrp: VRRP_Instance(VI_1) setting protocol VIPs. Feb 20 16:19:57 lvs1 Keepalived_vrrp: VRRP_Instance(VI_1) Sending gratuitous ARPs on eth0 for 192.168.16.123 Feb 20 16:19:57 lvs1 Keepalived_vrrp: Remote SMTP server [127.0.0.1:25] connected. Feb 20 16:19:57 lvs1 Keepalived_vrrp: SMTP alert successfully sent. 2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 link/ether 00:04:23:9e:f3:74 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 192.168.28.226/20 brd 192.168.31.255 scope global eth0 inet 192.168.16.123/32 brd 192.168.31.255 scope global eth0 inet6 fe80::204:23ff:fe9e:f374/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever But not sure both lvs are talking vrrp to each other; tcpdump does not intercept anything... JD

1 0

BiND Failover
by Per Qvindesland 20 Feb '09

20 Feb '09

Hi list, I've two servers running the same ldap service. A is primary server and B is simply a mirror, and accounts from server A are constantly synchronized with B. Now I don't have a automatic failover solution, whenever server A goes down, I have to point the domain's A record to server B and wait for the DNS to get updated. Takes quite a lot of time but the ldap service is crucial to the system and shouldn't be down for longer than a few minutes. I've heard about Dyndns? They provide automatic failover if one server does down, what I want to know is if I can do the same using Bind? And if it's possible to do it automatically? Without human intervention. I don't want a round-robin solution, I want a automatic switchover if primary box goes down. Regards Per Qvindesland

5 5

question on hwclock
by Jerry Geis 20 Feb '09

20 Feb '09

I am trying to hwclock to set the time. (hwclock -w) this is what I get on standard 5.2 x86_64. hwclock --debug hwclock from util-linux-2.13-pre7 hwclock: Open of /dev/rtc failed, errno=19: No such device. No usable clock interface found. Cannot access the Hardware Clock via any known method. [root@devcentos5x64 src]# ls -l /dev/rtc crw------- 1 root root 10, 135 Feb 6 13:32 /dev/rtc Any thoughts? Jerry

5 7

Getting "poll: protocol failure in circuit setup" from rsh
by Sorin Srbu 20 Feb '09

20 Feb '09

Hi all, I inherited a cpu-stats script from the previous *nixadmin at our department. This script relies on a rsh-command to get the vmstats from the remote machines and then using a perl script to push it to a web server. Now I've just added a new machine running CentOS 5.2 x64 to the script and I get the error message in the subject line; "poll: protocol failure in circuit setup". What I've done so far is to check whether the command "rsh mach218 uptime" from m2 works with and w/o iptables running on mach218, checking that m2 is allowed to rlogin in m218 hosts.allow, hosts is properly setup, xinetd rsh and rlogin services are on and started AFAICT. In neither case does rsh work when run against m218, I still get the protocol failure-message. I have another machine, m14, that also runs CentOS 5.2 but the x86-flavour, and here rsh works. As far as I can tell, the machines are identically setup with respect to iptables, hosts and hosts.allow. Also the /etc/xinetd.conf are identical on both m14 and m218. Feels like I'm missing something obvious... Can you guys help? Thx. -- BW, Sorin ----------------------------------------------------------- # Sorin Srbu [Sysadmin, Systems Engineer] # Dept of Medicinal Chemistry, Phone: +46 (0)18-4714482 >3 signals> GSM # Div of Org Pharm Chem, Mobile: +46 (0)701-718023 # Box 574, Uppsala University, Fax: +46 (0)18-4714482 # SE-751 23 Uppsala, Sweden Visit: BMC, Husargatan 3, D5:512b # Web: http://www.orgfarm.uu.se ----------------------------------------------------------- # () ASCII ribbon campaign - Against html E-mail # /\ # # MotD follows: # If it wasn't backed-up, then it wasn't important. -The sysadmin's motto.

1 0

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 video driver for Intel DG965WHMKR at 1680X1050 resolution?
by Dick Holland 20 Feb '09

20 Feb '09

On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 08:12 +0100, Sorin Srbu wrote: > >-----Original Message----- > >From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On > Behalf > >Of Dick Holland > >Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 11:26 PM > >To: centos(a)centos.org > >Subject: [CentOS] CentOS 5 video driver for Intel DG965WHMKR at 1680X1050 > >resolution? > > > >I'm trying to find a CentOS 5 x86_64 video driver for an Intel > >DG965WHMKR mobo to support 1680X1050 resolution. There appears to be > >nothing at Intel - or anywhere else that I can find. > > Is this an mobo-integrated gfx-card? Did you check Intels download site? > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS(a)centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Yes, it is integrated graphics and I checked Intel and could find nothing. -- Dick Holland

2 1

CentOS 5 video driver for Intel DG965WHMKR at 1680X1050 resolution?
by Dick Holland 20 Feb '09

20 Feb '09

I'm trying to find a CentOS 5 x86_64 video driver for an Intel DG965WHMKR mobo to support 1680X1050 resolution. There appears to be nothing at Intel - or anywhere else that I can find. Anyone know where I can find one? -- Dick Holland

3 5

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 video driver for Intel DG965WHMKR at 1680X1050 resolution?
by Sorin Srbu 20 Feb '09

20 Feb '09

>-----Original Message----- >From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf >Of Sorin Srbu >Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 8:12 AM >To: 'CentOS mailing list' >Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 video driver for Intel DG965WHMKR at 1680X1050 >resolution? > >>I'm trying to find a CentOS 5 x86_64 video driver for an Intel >>DG965WHMKR mobo to support 1680X1050 resolution. There appears to be >>nothing at Intel - or anywhere else that I can find. > >Is this an mobo-integrated gfx-card? Did you check Intels download site? Sorry, missed the line where you said you'd already checked Intels site. -- /Sorin

1 0

testing
by bruce 20 Feb '09

20 Feb '09

test.. please ignore..

1 0

ip6tables forwarding rule
by Robert Moskowitz 20 Feb '09

20 Feb '09

I have 2 boxes that act as IPv6 routers. One with 2 physical interfaces, the other with 6 vlan 'interfaces' on one physical interface plus a second physical interface. On both systems I have in /etc/sysconfig/network IPV6FORWARDING=yes But if I have my 'basic' ip6tables service running, only ICMP messages get through. Since both of these boxes are Centos based, I can't use the new shorewall6 that requires at least FC9 (both boxes have shorewall for IPv4 routing controls). Is there a 'simple' rule to add to forward all IPv6 traffic between the interfaces, with the other rules only impacting traffic for each host itself?

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