Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

34758 discussions

DatOptic RAID Array >2TB?
by Benjamin Karhan 08 Jun '07

08 Jun '07

i'm trying to set up a hardware RAID array (eRAID from DatOptic) under CentOS. we have two more of these arrays which have worked very well for their purposes (backup and/or portable storage), but neither of our older arrays exceeded the dreaded 2TB barrier (one of them is, in fact, 2TB). the server i'm currently testing with is running CentOS4.5, but i do have CentOS5 servers i could use. the problem i'm running into is that the array SHOULD be recognized as ~3TB, but i'm unable (even using "parted") to see it as more than ~2TB. it sounds suspiciously like the typical "2TB limitation" problem, but i was under the impression that CentOS4 (and 5) can handle much larger (8TB?) filesystems. in fact, the kernel "USB Mass Storage" driver that detects the array when i plug it in only detects the device as 2TB as well. (so, it could easily be a limitation of that hardware driver, although i couldn't find any specification for that limitation when i googled for it). i should say, although i dread the possible suggestions that may arise from admitting it, that the array also supports FireWire and SATA connections. (we are STRONGLY inclined to wanting to use the array as USB, as our primary concern is easy portability and not speed) the RAID array is the DatOptic eRAID, with 5 750GB disks in a RAID-5 array. the array itself seemed to have no problem creating the ~3TB volume, but it does not detect as that size when i hook it up. here are the relevant kernel logs: SCSI subsystem initialized Initializing USB Mass Storage driver... scsi0 : SCSI emulation for USB Mass Storage devices Vendor: USB 2.0 Model: Storage Device Rev: 0111 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 USB Mass Storage device found at 3 usbcore: registered new driver usb-storage USB Mass Storage support registered. SCSI device sda: 4294920192 512-byte hdwr sectors (2198999 MB) sda: assuming drive cache: write through SCSI device sda: 4294920191 512-byte hdwr sectors (2198999 MB) sda: assuming drive cache: write through sda: unknown partition table Attached scsi disk sda at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0 and here's what "parted" also says about the array: Disk geometry for /dev/sda: 0.000-2097128.999 megabytes Disk label type: gpt Minor Start End Filesystem Name Flags it's important that we get full use of the array (1TB is a lot of space to waste). anyone have any ideas, suggestions, comments, or criticisms? any help would be greatly appreciated... B. Karhan simon(a)pop.psu.edu PRI/SSRI Unix Administrator

3 2

C5 i386 kernel-debuginfo-common-2.6.18-8.1.3.el5.i686.rpm from vault
by David Thompson 07 Jun '07

07 Jun '07

Is anyone else having trouble getting some RPMs from vault? When I navigate to http://vault.centos.org/debuginfo/5/i386/ ...and try to click on (e.g.) kernel-PAE-debuginfo-2.6.18-8.1.3.el5.i686.rpm I get 404 errors (The requested URL /debuginfo/5/i386/kernel-PAE-debuginfo-2.6.18 -8.1.3.el5.i686.rpm was not found on this server). But then if I wait a while and try again, maybe I get it. Is anyone else seeing this? Thanks. Dave Thompson UW-Madison

2 1

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Linux Firewall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 07 Jun '07

07 Jun '07

On 6/6/07, pctech(a)mybellybutton.com <pctech(a)mybellybutton.com> wrote: > If people don't want it because of my chosen distribution method, that's fine by me. I'll just keep my documents to myself and then they don't have to worry about it. Then do so, and keep it off this list. This started an argument last year, and it seems to be starting one now. --------------------------------------------- It wouldn't have started one then, nor one now, if people wouldn't try to tell me what to do with my own document. At the end of the day I will distribute it in any manner that I see fit. Just because someone doesn't like the way I distribute it doesn't mean that they have the right to tell me what to do with it or how to give it to people. If they don't like my distribution method then they are free not to ask for it. Nobody's making them ask for it. I *CLEARLY* stated in my original e-mail who the intended target audience was. -- During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

11 18

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Linux Firewall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 07 Jun '07

07 Jun '07

--- Jordi Espasa Clofent <sistemes.llistes(a)intergrid.cat> wrote: > > I want to mention/remind that Karanbir is a very > active part of > > CentOS and has given a lot of time and hard work > to me and the > > whole community. > > Yes. When I've said my words against pctech's point > of view I've done it > with people like Karanbir, Johnny, Jim, Lance, > Ralph, Daniel and so on > in mind. > > ¿How many hours do they spend in front of their > machines, trying to > improve this beautiful project? > > At least, their altruistic and generous attitude > deserves all our respect. > > -- > Thanks, > Jordi Espasa Clofent > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS(a)centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > I took a little peak at the document in mention, and there is one thing that bothers me about it. It is the mentioning of this little sentence "this document contains information compiled from many sources." Now i am not no English major or proclaim to be, but when you take other people work and use it in your work are you not suppose to cite that? How do we know he did copy and paste other peoples work and then call it his own? there is not one citation in his work. If this has happen and that was my work, damn i know i would of be mighty pissed about that! Can not say oh since he took it from so many places he does not know all the sites, books...etc that is not an excuse either. i know my writing is bad, but you get the idea what i am trying to say!!! and the reason i am saying anything is when a person acts like a jag i can be a bigger jag!!!!!!! Steven -------------------------------------------- Actually I *DID* cite my sources in the document. Look at the section entitled "Application Documentation and HowTo Links". Nice try at slandering me though. Although I *HAVE seem to have forgotten to input the links for the Linux HA web site and HowTos. That will be corrected in the next revision. "On the side of the software box, in the 'System Requirements' section, it said 'Requires Windows or better'. So I installed Linux." _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

4 3

procmail, and the care and feeding of mailing list content received
by R P Herrold 07 Jun '07

07 Jun '07

speed kills of course -- In my immediate prior post, I reversed the match and the anchor operators. ^ *List-Id:.*centos\.centos\.org ^ *Subject:.*CentOS Based Linux Firewall Document should have been * ^List-Id:.*centos\.centos\.org * ^Subject:.*CentOS Based Linux Firewall Document of course. Fortunately, in my local setup I had set content to be dropped to be saved to a file while I tested. -- Russ Herrold

1 0

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Linux Firewall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 07 Jun '07

07 Jun '07

Hi, Ashton, Jeremy - Workstream Inc. wrote: > At least Frank took the initiative to write a document. Yes, there will > be mistakes in it. No, it will not include all the information under > the sun. Perhaps there are better documents or book available out > there. But, at least he took the initiative to do his own work. The only reason I pitched in is because, he is : (a) an idiot, with no idea of what he is talking about (b) has no regard for the work that we do (c) clueless about the idea of community and (d) I dont quite like the idea of pushing non-shareable / non-community friendly licensed material here, specially under the guise of 'hey, I am doing you all a favour'. If what he is saying is correct and a community initiative cant work, we wont have Linux today where it is and people would not be making the sort of time and effort commitments they do into these projects. Anyway, he asked a question - I just asked him to facilitate an answer. Unless, of-course, he does not really want an answer and was just taunting and blowing his own horn. > Once again I am reminded how immature the community can be at times. > Can we not all get along and drop these childish antics and retorts? Absolutely, I agree. Its a free world and people have a right to go do as they please - more so in these free software environs we like to live in, but you see what happens is that when someone is going to stand back and slagg off other people - other people have the right to call his antics just that. antics. Finally, I await this bible-of-firewall docs that he has come up with. - KB ------------------------------------------------------ I will address your points in the order and manner in which you have made them. (a) This ia an overly broad statement. What exactly do I not know that I am talking about, about? (b) Where have I *EVER* stated that I had no regard for the work that you do. Show me ONE occurrence. You cannot, because I have not. (c) How am I clueless about the idea of community? The last time I checked communities rallied together to help one another. I have offered my document FOR FREE to anyone that would like it. How is that not helping the community? (d) It is perfectly shareable. I have stated on this list many times, and to people individually, that they are free to post it wherever they like. I've even stated on this list more than once that I would be happy to send anyone that asks the source Word file that was used. I have never told ANYONE that they could not post it anywhere. I stated that *I* could not afford to host it. Where have I ever said that the community initiative doesn't or won't work? I've never stated that either. I stated that I had been burned by a wiki article to the point that lawyers were involved so I don't use wiki. I never stated that anyone else couldn't post the document to the wiki. I am not sure what question you are referring to. Which one would that be? All I see are accusations and name calling, no questions. Your sarcasm about my "bible of firewall docs" is petty and unbecoming. I never once stated that it was the be-all end-all of firewall documents. What I *DID* say, however, was that I compiled a document to help me out and thought that others in the community would like it. Nothing more and nothing less. I will be more than happy to send it to you, just like I have been more than happy to send it to everyone else. Let me know where you would like it sent to. -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219@icq _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/cento

3 2

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Linux Firewall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 07 Jun '07

07 Jun '07

>> So you chose to distribute your document via PDF and it is what 15MB in >> size? You email this to those who are interested...do you do one single >> mailing with all the addresses or do you individually email them? How >> many of these guys can take a 15MB attachment or a 20MB message? >> Probably all but I wonder how many of those who did not ask, did not do >> so because they do not have a mailbox on a system that can swallow a >> 20MB message. >> > > I chose to distribute my document via PDF because it was the best way to > make it cross platform. Nothing more, and nothing less. EVERY platform > supports PDF. Not every platform supports Microsoft Office. The > document size is 8.8Mb to be exact. A far cry from 15MB or 20MB. And, > since I didn't publish the size of the document in my e-mail they > wouldn't know how large it was to decide not to ask. If someone would > like the document source, they're welcome to it. Again, I chose PDF for > portability. No other reason. Actually, having it available in html too would be a good thing imho. > > Out of the 53 documents that I have sent out since I posted this, there > have been three bounce backs. One because someone's mailbox was full > and two because the document was too big. Well, another mode of distribution might be good then... > >> Les: >> Did you miss the 'revision history' link that removes all doubt about >> who said what? >> > > Did you see where I posted that the revision history tends to get > ignored by alot of people? I even stated what exactly happened in my > case. Sorry. Allowing someone else to revise my document, even with a > revision history, isn't worth being contacted by lawyers because of a > revision someone else made. If you can't understand that, I'm sorry. Right, so you are now going to discount the fact that on the centos wiki modifications are only possible by admins, yourself or those whom you allow? >> You then complain about >> >> "Currently I have a domain, yes, however my bandwidth is rather limited. >> By cost, not by speed. I don't feel like incurring hundreds of >> dollars in usage fees to post this on my domain." >> >> but don't feel like posting on the Centos wiki but do yap about 'big' >> names like IEEE... >> > > I "yapped" about a big site like IEEE because I am hoping that I can get > THEM to host the document, because I am limited to my monthly bandwidth. > The difference between the IEEE site and wiki is that IEEE will host the > actual document. Wiki is a whole different animal. That's like > comparing apples to corn. When I hit the cap, I have a significant > usage penalty. I am giving this document out for free. I cannot afford > to pay $100 a month in bandwidth fees when I go over my cap. Do you or do you not know that you can put a pdf in a wiki? ------------------------------------------------------- I will address your points one at a time. To be honest, I never thought about making it HTML. You're right. That wouldn't be a bad idea. I have no problem with doing that if I can find a way to do it without breaking the formatting too badly. I don't know what the CentOS wiki specifically can or cannot do. I know what my experience is with wiki's thus far. Nobody has talked to me about this one tiny bit. They have just said, "You should do this and you should do that." Nobody have ever sent me an e-mail to the list or to my e-mail about ANYTHING with regards to the wiki and what it was capable of. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

1 0

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Linux Firewall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 07 Jun '07

07 Jun '07

On Wednesday 06 June 2007 23:06:30 John bowden wrote: > On Wednesday 06 June 2007 16:27:28 Max Hetrick wrote: > > pctech(a)mybellybutton.com wrote: > > > Unfortunately, I have had nothing, thus far, but bad experiences with > > > wikis. Especially when you begin letting others "mark up" something > > > that you've posted there. At that point, because your name is on it, > > > you "own" all of their mistakes. I'm not saying that the CentOS wiki > > > is like that, just wikis in general. > > > > > > WikiPedia is probably one of the most horrifically obvious examples of > > > what I am talking about. Not only do you have all of the blatant > > > inaccuracies, which tend to get attributed back to the original article > > > author, but you also have all of the drama that goes along with it. > > > > > > Things start to go sideways when you begin to let others exert their > > > own creative control over something with your name on it. I'm all for > > > the free exchange of ideas, information, and knowledge. I'm not all > > > for getting blamed for some crap someone added to something with my > > > name on it. Been there, done that, don't need that drama anymore. > > > > > > Some wikis, again I speak in general, not of the CentOS wiki, also > > > demand that you turn over any and all rights to whatever you post > > > there. While I enjoy sharing my knowledge with the world for free, I > > > will be damned if I will give up my rights to profit from it in the > > > future. Even the BSD license doesn't expect this. > > > > > > This document, the firewall one, is the first in a series of documents > > > that I plan on writing. I've worked very hard to get it to the state > > > that it is at right now. It's what I consider a "living document" and > > > will be changing as necessary. The second in the series is a document > > > on building a network monitor based on open source tools. I've just > > > begun writing it. I am hoping to have it completed in a couple of > > > months, now that I have a format I am happy with for my documents. The > > > third of the series will be on building a VPN concentrator based on > > > open source tools. Part of what takes me so long to write these > > > documents is that I don't actually enjoy writing. I enjoy doing. The > > > firewall document started out of necessity to build multiple Linux > > > based firewalls consistently and rapidly for myself and just morphed > > > into something that I decided to share with the community. I figured > > > that since there wasn't much out there that was useful others might > > > like it. > > > > > > While it's, most definitely, not the be-all end-all of Linux based > > > firewall information, I think it's a pretty good document that I've > > > worked very hard to write in a presentable manner that most people > > > could understand and even expand upon for themselves. I am all for > > > receiving comments and suggestions for future revisions of the > > > document, any document that I write for that matter. I'm just not all > > > for having my documents hacked apart by every Tom, Dick, and Harry on > > > the Internet and then all of the misinformation getting lumped onto my > > > shoulders because I happen to be the person that wrote the original > > > document. I've already had enough drama from the CentOS forums where I > > > got accused of being an e-mail address harvester for a spammer. No > > > thanks. I don't need that in my life. I'm just a computer network > > > engineer that THOUGHT he was doing the right thing by giving back to > > > the community. > > > > Understood, that's your right. It seems kind of silly, though, to go to > > the trouble of writing so much, then limit yourself with sharing to only > > a very small percentage of the CentOS community by broadcasting a > > message to e-mail you for documentation. Documentation is supposed to be > > readily available, that's the point of it, at least from my perspective, > > no matter what the license or stipulations of the content are. > > > > Although you can pick out a license for your material that would cover > > protecting the interests you have expressed, yet at the same time > > allowing others to share in your material. One of the Creative Commons > > license, or another, would do the trick. > > > > That said, do you not have a place to host the document then? It seems > > that if you've gone to that much trouble to write something, then > > perhaps you just need a spot somewhere to host the document? > > > > Regards, > > Max > > _______________________________________________ > > CentOS mailing list > > CentOS(a)centos.org > > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > Just a thought how about releasing it as a "how to"? Can I have a copy please? I don't care how you distribute it, e mail, snail mail or by pigeon mail. My cat prefers the pigeon method ;-) -------------------------------------------------- Sure. Where would you like me to send it ot? I'd be more than happy to. -- Guy Fawkes, the only man to enter the house's of parliment with honest intentions, (he was going to blow them up!) Registered Linux user number 414240 _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

1 0

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Linux Firewall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 07 Jun '07

07 Jun '07

Frank Tanner III wrote: >> I think you should keep it locked up and not share it with anyone. >> There are probably hundreds of similar documents freely available out there. > Name me a dozen documents that contain similar information to what mine > contains. Send me a copy of what your document is, and I shall be happy to point out a dozen or so resouces that have *better* info than what you provide. - KB -------------------------------------------------- Sure. Where would you like me to send it to? -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219@icq _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

1 0

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Linux Firewall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 07 Jun '07

07 Jun '07

hey pctech, Instead of sniping with you over your chosen way to control access: May i have a copy please? If I like it i would offer the following: I'll put this up on my businesses site for you, give you full accreditation, and it will only be a downloadable document(unless you want it viewable as well). Since my server is unmetered bandwidth overages aren't an issue. ----------------------------------------- Sure. I have no problem with this, and never have. Where would you like me to send it to? pctech(a)mybellybutton.com wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > pctech(a)mybellybutton.com wrote: >> Unfortunately, I have had nothing, thus far, but bad experiences with wikis. > Especially when you begin letting others "mark up" something that you've posted > there. At that point, because your name is on it, you "own" all of their > mistakes. I'm not saying that the CentOS wiki is like that, just wikis in > general. >> WikiPedia is probably one of the most horrifically obvious examples of what I > am talking about. Not only do you have all of the blatant inaccuracies, which > tend to get attributed back to the original article author, but you also have > all of the drama that goes along with it. >> Things start to go sideways when you begin to let others exert their own > creative control over something with your name on it. I'm all for the free > exchange of ideas, information, and knowledge. I'm not all for getting blamed > for some crap someone added to something with my name on it. Been there, done > that, don't need that drama anymore. >> Some wikis, again I speak in general, not of the CentOS wiki, also demand > that you turn over any and all rights to whatever you post there. While I > enjoy sharing my knowledge with the world for free, I will be damned if I will > give up my rights to profit from it in the future. Even the BSD license > doesn't expect this. >> This document, the firewall one, is the first in a series of documents that I > plan on writing. I've worked very hard to get it to the state that it is at > right now. It's what I consider a "living document" and will be changing as > necessary. The second in the series is a document on building a network > monitor based on open source tools. I've just begun writing it. I am hoping > to have it completed in a couple of months, now that I have a format I am happy > with for my documents. The third of the series will be on building a VPN > concentrator based on open source tools. Part of what takes me so long to > write these documents is that I don't actually enjoy writing. I enjoy doing. > The firewall document started out of necessity to build multiple Linux based > firewalls consistently and rapidly for myself and just morphed into something > that I decided to share with the community. I figured that since there wasn't > much out there that was useful others might like it. >> While it's, most definitely, not the be-all end-all of Linux based firewall > information, I think it's a pretty good document that I've worked very hard to > write in a presentable manner that most people could understand and even expand > upon for themselves. I am all for receiving comments and suggestions for > future revisions of the document, any document that I write for that matter. > I'm just not all for having my documents hacked apart by every Tom, Dick, and > Harry on the Internet and then all of the misinformation getting lumped onto my > shoulders because I happen to be the person that wrote the original document. > I've already had enough drama from the CentOS forums where I got accused of > being an e-mail address harvester for a spammer. No thanks. I don't need that > in my life. I'm just a computer network engineer that THOUGHT he was doing the > right thing by giving back to the community. > > > Understood, that's your right. It seems kind of silly, though, to go to > the trouble of writing so much, then limit yourself with sharing to only > a very small percentage of the CentOS community by broadcasting a > message to e-mail you for documentation. Documentation is supposed to be > readily available, that's the point of it, at least from my perspective, > no matter what the license or stipulations of the content are. > > Although you can pick out a license for your material that would cover > protecting the interests you have expressed, yet at the same time > allowing others to share in your material. One of the Creative Commons > license, or another, would do the trick. > > That said, do you not have a place to host the document then? It seems > that if you've gone to that much trouble to write something, then > perhaps you just need a spot somewhere to host the document? > > ---------------------------------------- > > Currently I have a domain, yes, however my bandwidth is rather limited. By cost, not by speed. I don't feel like incurring hundreds of dollars in usage fees to post this on my domain. > > > Licensing is good and fine, except for the fact that once you post something on a wiki, in most cases, anyone that comes along can freely add to and modify the content of what you've posted. This happens on Wikipedia quite frequently. This doesn't cover the "It's your fault because you wrote the document" blame that gets lumped on you when something goes wrong from a change that someone else made. The person who's name is on the document is the one that is going to get his or her neck wrung by the pissed off person. I've had it happen in the past. I don't care to repeat it. I really don't like lawyers sending me letters because of stupidity like that. > > I originally chose the method that I use for disseminating it because, to be honest, I don't really see that there is enough interest in it to invest the time or money into something larger. I have, however, considered asking the admins of the IEEE Computer Society, LOPSA, or AZSAGE if I could post it on their sites when I renew my memberships. > > > > Regards, > Max > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQFGZtJgHoeeepPau2ERAvcMAJ4voQ+EUg/StcW3vEg5ZhLMGv3NcQCgpsha > podiuZE3dvwhaV4GUcI3C5Y= > =n8/R > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS(a)centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS(a)centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > > > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Scanned with Copfilter Version 0.84beta2 (P3Scan 2.2.1) > AntiSpam: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 > AntiVirus: ClamAV 0.90.2/3369 - Wed Jun 6 15:12:37 2007 > by Markus Madlener @ http://www.copfilter.org > -- My "Foundation" verse: Isa 54:17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their righteousness is of me, saith the LORD. -- carpe ductum -- "Grab the tape" CDTT (Certified Duct Tape Technician) Linux user #322099 Machines: 206822 256638 276825 http://counter.li.org/ _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

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