Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

34758 discussions

CentOS 2.6.9-42.0.8 issue - no keyboard after reboot
by Mark Hull-Richter 09 Feb '07

09 Feb '07

I did this twice now, although the first couple of builds seemed to work ok, they just weren't configured quite right. On my third and fourth builds of the 42.0.8 kernel rpm, when booting, kudzu came up and ran, but the keyboard was somehow not recognized and I had to reboot using the mouse on the login screen (no text appears no matter what I type). I'm using the rpm build strategy from Jim's wiki, which works nicely, but my fallback is a 42.0.3 non-smp kernel. My main question, though, is how did this happen? Is there a config switch or something else I missed? I'm using the base kernel-2.6.9-x86_64-smp.config, and tweaking it to include ext3 and xfs in the kernel (instead of loadable ext3 and no xfs). Why? Well, we need xfs to load so we can find out why it's so damned slow on cached vs. direct i/o. We have some tweaks we put into xfs (current version, using SuSE Linux 9.something) in order to be able to control the way the extents are allocated. We need to be able to do large i/os in large chunks quickly, and that kind of allocation works better than little pieces all over the place. (We're looking at 8Mb chunks and larger.) With direct i/o, we can get around 30-40Mb/s transfer rates, but with cached (i.e., kernel) i/o, we are stuck at 8, which is too slow. It turns out we get better performance from jfs, but we want to use xfs because it is faster with our changes. The main issue here, though, is the failure of CentOS 2.6.9-42.0.8 to recognize the keyboard - why would that happen? Thanks. mhr

2 1

RE: [CentOS] Problem with 2.6.11.4 kernel and e1000 driver -Correction
by Mark Hull-Richter 09 Feb '07

09 Feb '07

We're looking at 2.6.16 or higher now, and also 2.6.9-42.0.8 (CentOS 4.4 updated) - thanks. -----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Peter Kjellstrom Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 11:02 PM To: centos(a)centos.org Subject: Re: [CentOS] Problem with 2.6.11.4 kernel and e1000 driver -Correction On Wednesday 07 February 2007 03:21, Mark Hull-Richter wrote: > 1) I'm actually not building a custom kernel per se, just one from the > standard 2.6.11.4 with our configuration. I may be adding a custom > driver, but unless I can get the standard kernel to boot,... Custom is defined as not-a-centos-one. > 2) I have been told that after 2.6.11.4, support for the Infiniband > driver is dropped, and we need that. Both Centos-4.3 and 4.4 (2.6.9-34.xx and -42.xx) has comparable or newer infiniband drivers though I recommend that you download and install ofed-1.1 (and that you use latest 4.4, 2.6.9-42.0.8). If you do feel the need to use a kernel.org kernel then I _really_ recommend using a newer one than what you tried. 1) do you think the first ever infiniband drop for the mainline kernel is what you want? 2) how many security problems do you think there are in that old kernel? (hint: quite a few). So go with 2.6.19.x for x as large as you can find. /Peter > If this is not the case, I would > be delighted to know that and proceed accordingly. I'm not sure, but I > believe that CentOS version 5 will not happen soon enough for what we > need. > > Thanks. > > mhr

1 0

RE: [CentOS] Problem with 2.6.11.4 kernel and e1000 driver -Correction
by Mark Hull-Richter 09 Feb '07

09 Feb '07

I hear you, and this would not be my best choice either. New issue coming shortly, with the 42.0.8 distribution rpm.... Thanks, all! mhr -----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Jim Perrin Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 4:27 PM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Problem with 2.6.11.4 kernel and e1000 driver -Correction > Again, this works exactly as is on 32-bit builds. It only fails on the > 64 bit build. Is this a completely clean x86_64 box you're building on? Any i386 packages on it? You could very likely be getting cross-chatter across library arch versions if not. <soap box>This is one of the reasons I recommend against doing stuff like this. You introduce loads more variables into your sys-admin time vs duties vs system stability matrix. In addition, if you build fresh on every new box, you can end up with sporadic and unreproducible problems due to subtle differences. </soap box> -- 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

1 0

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 24, Issue 5
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 09 Feb '07

09 Feb '07

1 0

SATA controller Dell Optiplex 745
by Henk van Lingen 09 Feb '07

09 Feb '07

Hi, The CentOS 4.4 installation doesn't work on a Optiplex 745 because it doesn't support the sata controller. Is there a known work-around? (smaller prob: dvi video doesn't work at install time, vga only) If only we had CentOS 5 :-) Cheers, -- Henk van Lingen, Systems Administrator & DBA (o- -+ Dept. of Computer Science, Utrecht University. /\ | phone: +31-30-2534107 v_/_ http://henk.vanlingen.net/ http://www.tuxtown.net/netiquette/

4 5

What is the diffrence between port filtering and packet filtering ?
by Indunil Jayasooriya 09 Feb '07

09 Feb '07

Hi all, I want to set up a firewall on CentOS 4.4. I wnat to know the diiffrence between port filtering and packet filtering ? Can iptables do both? Is there another pkg better than this? if so, pls let me know. The purpose of this is to setup a firewall for production use. -- Thank you Indunil Jayasooriya

7 7

mod_perl and httpd2
by Peter Serwe 09 Feb '07

09 Feb '07

I've got httpd and mod_perl installed, but I seem to have an application that requires part of mod_perl that doesn't seem to be properly installed into perl, notably, the 'Apache' portion. To 'fix' this, cpan would like to install either mod_perl-1.29, or alternatively to install mod_perl-2.0.2. 1.29 doesn't seem smart, and 2.0.2 absolutely will not install over the top of 1.99-16. I've looked for a package using: yum list available | grep -i perl yum list available | grep -i apache And I don't get anything decent in terms of output. For repositories, I've got CentOS-Base, CentOS-Media, kbsingh-CentOS-Extras, rpmforge. # rpm -qa | grep httpd httpd-2.0.52-28.ent.centos4 httpd-suexec-2.0.52-28.ent.centos4 httpd-manual-2.0.52-28.ent.centos4 httpd-devel-2.0.52-28.ent.centos4 # rpm -qa | grep perl perl-HTML-Tagset-3.03-30 perl-DBI-1.40-8 perl-XML-Dumper-0.71-2 perl-5.8.5-36.RHEL4 perl-URI-1.30-4 perl-HTML-Parser-3.35-6 perl-XML-Parser-2.34-5 perl-Parse-Yapp-1.05-32 perl-XML-Encoding-1.01-26 perl-libxml-enno-1.02-31 perl-libxml-perl-0.07-30 mod_perl-1.99_16-4.centos4 mod_perl-devel-1.99_16-4.centos4 perl-Digest-SHA1-2.07-5 perl-Digest-HMAC-1.01-13 perl-CGI-Simple-0.077-5.el4.kb perl-Filter-1.30-6 newt-perl-1.08-7 perl-libwww-perl-5.79-5 perl-DateManip-5.42a-3 perl-DBD-MySQL-2.9004-3.1 perl-Net-DNS-0.48-1 perl-Apache-Session-1.6-1 # The behavior I'm experiencing that has me suspecting my mod_perl installation is that when I type I get this 'Can't locate blah blah blah blah' message. # perl use Apache2::Const; Can't locate Apache2/Const.pm in @INC (@INC contains: /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.5/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.5 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.5/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.4/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.3/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.2/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.1/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.5 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.4 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.3 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.2 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.1 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.5/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.4/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.3/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.2/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.0/i386-linux-thread-multi /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.5 /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.4 /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.3 /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.2 /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1 /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.0 /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl .) at - line 1. BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at - line 1. Where do I begin to fix this? Peter -- Peter Serwe <peter at infostreet dot com> http://www.infostreet.com "The only true sports are bullfighting, mountain climbing and auto racing." -Earnest Hemingway "Because everything else requires only one ball." -Unknown "Do you wanna go fast or suck?" -Mike Kojima "There are two things no man will admit he cannot do well: drive and make love." -Sir Stirling Moss

3 2

Is anybody else dealing with Security Metrics?
by John Hinton 09 Feb '07

09 Feb '07

Seems that some of the credit card processors demand the use of Security Metrics to test their web hosting for meeting a fairly good security standard. First, it doesn't matter if they do online credit card processing or not, just credit card processing period. This makes some sense, as someone could hack in a form pretending to ask for this information... so there is at least some risk.. and we all no credit card companies ultimately want to achieve 0 risk. ;) Anyway, the frustration is this and early on their reports even talked about it. Redhat doesn't follow the normal numbering system for a lot of their security updates for various packages. PHP is a great example of the time. Security Metrics says I must be running 5.1 due to exploits in earlier versions due to CANXXXX whereas Redhat has clearly addressed the issue, sent out a patch and generally we have it installed 2 to 6 months before SM starts a failing process. ---- The real question ---- Basically, I was wondering if there were many of you 'jumping through these same hoops'? If there are, perhaps we as a group could do something to get them to check for CentOS and then look for RHEL versions in hopes of ending these hassles. ---- end real question ---- I have found that by contacting SM, they will make a correction to a test once they know what you are running, but this seems to come up with each and every test. And the testing is done by domain, not by server, so you have to deal with each domain tested with the exact same crap.. which amounts to jumping through a hoop. Also, I've come to realize that some of what they ask that you do, equates to having your locked car in the driveway with the keys in your pocket.. this fails... But, if you put those keys in a different locked car beside it in the driveway and put the keys to that car in your pocket, it passes. Very sad...... And never once have they considered talking about the very basics like a good password policy. :( One other thing that bothers me about them is they 'sell appliances'. So, if your server/host can't pass or doesn't want to deal with it, we can 'sell' them something, making more money which to me seems like a conflict of interest for someone operating under the guise of security.

3 2

New Bind Update
by John Hinton 08 Feb '07

08 Feb '07

I was wondering if the new bind update is going smoothly for those who have done it? I've been a little hesitant to run it yet as the last time forced a bit of time fixing things. I'm trying to plan if I need to have some hours available for this or if it is like most of the time.. just do it and everything's ok. Best, John Hinton

7 7

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 24, Issue 4
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 08 Feb '07

08 Feb '07

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-2007:0064 Moderate CentOS 3 i386 postgresql - security update (Tru Huynh) 2. CESA-2007:0064 Moderate CentOS 3 x86_64 postgresql - security update (Tru Huynh) 3. CESA-2007:0044 Moderate CentOS 3 ia64 bind - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 4. CESA-2007:0064 Moderate CentOS 3 ia64 postgresql - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 5. CESA-2007:0044 Moderate CentOS 4 ia64 bind - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 6. CESA-2007:0064 Moderate CentOS 4 ia64 postgresql - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 7. CESA-2007:0044 Moderate CentOS 3 s390(x) bind - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 8. CESA-2007:0044 Moderate CentOS 4 s390(x) bind - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 9. CESA-2007:0064 Moderate CentOS 3 s390(x) postgresql - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 10. CESA-2007:0064 Moderate CentOS 4 s390(x) postgresql - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 11. CESA-2007:0064 Moderate CentOS 4 x86_64 postgresql - security update (Johnny Hughes) 12. CESA-2007:0064 Moderate CentOS 4 i386 postgresql - security update (Johnny Hughes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 00:16:48 +0100 From: Tru Huynh <tru(a)centos.org> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2007:0064 Moderate CentOS 3 i386 postgresql - security update To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <20070207231648.GB13796(a)sillage.bis.pasteur.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" CentOS Errata and Security Advisory CESA-2007:0064 postgresql security update for CentOS 3 i386: https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2007-0064.html The following updated file has been uploaded and is currently syncing to the mirrors: i386: updates/i386/RPMS/rh-postgresql-7.3.18-1.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/rh-postgresql-contrib-7.3.18-1.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/rh-postgresql-devel-7.3.18-1.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/rh-postgresql-docs-7.3.18-1.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/rh-postgresql-jdbc-7.3.18-1.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/rh-postgresql-libs-7.3.18-1.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/rh-postgresql-pl-7.3.18-1.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/rh-postgresql-python-7.3.18-1.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/rh-postgresql-server-7.3.18-1.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/rh-postgresql-tcl-7.3.18-1.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/rh-postgresql-test-7.3.18-1.i386.rpm source: updates/SRPMS/rh-postgresql-7.3.18-1.src.rpm You may update your CentOS-3 i386 installations by running the command: yum update postgresql\* Tru -- Tru Huynh (CentOS-3 i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance) http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B

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