Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

34753 discussions

Encore/sundance boards?
by Eduardo Grosclaude 09 Oct '06

09 Oct '06

I have this cheap "ENCORE 10/100Mbps Fast Ethernet PCI Adapter" which comes with its own driver that compiles to 'sundance.ko' and performs bad (30% packet loss) on a fully updated CentOS 4.4 box. This brand, model and driver have worked OK for me on some other CentOS installations, none of which are 4.4. Short of replacing the board, which you can bet I will do, can anybody provide me with some hint? Would CentOS Plus offer any different situation? 00:0a.0 Ethernet controller: Sundance Technology Inc / IC Plus Corp IC Plus IP100A Integrated 10/100 Ethernet MAC + PHY (rev 31) Subsystem: Sundance Technology Inc / IC Plus Corp: Unknown device 0201 Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV+ VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR+ FastB2B- Status: Cap+ 66Mhz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- Latency: 32 (2500ns min, 2500ns max), Cache Line Size 08 Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 169 Region 0: I/O ports at bc00 [size=128] Region 1: Memory at febff400 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=512] Expansion ROM at ffff0000 [disabled] [size=64K] Capabilities: [50] Power Management version 2 Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1+ D2+ AuxCurrent=0mA PME(D0-,D1+,D2+,D3hot+,D3cold+) Status: D0 PME-Enable+ DSel=0 DScale=2 PME- TIA -- Eduardo Grosclaude Universidad Nacional del Comahue Neuquen, Argentina

2 1

fftw upgrade?
by Morten Kjeldgaard 09 Oct '06

09 Oct '06

I have noticed that fftw has recently been updated from major version 2 to major version 3. It seems the update stems from the mother distribution from RedHat. AFAIK, there are changes to the API in fftw version 3, which may give problems with 3rd party packages. Has anyone got experience with this? And any advice to offer? Cheers, Morten -- Morten Kjeldgaard, Asc. professor, Ph.D. Department of Molecular Biology, Aarhus University Gustav Wieds Vej 10 C, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark Lab +45 89425026 * Mobile +45 51860147 * Fax +45 86123178 Home +45 86188180 * http://www.bioxray.dk/~mok

6 6

Calling All FS Fanatics
by Kirk Bocek 09 Oct '06

09 Oct '06

Now that I've been enlightened to the terrible write performance of ext3 on my new 3Ware RAID 5 array, I'm stuck choosing an alternative filesystem. I benchmarked XFS, JFS, ReiserFS and ext3 and they came back in that order from best to worst performer. I'm leaning towards XFS because of performance and because centosplus makes kernel modules available for the stock kernel. How's the reliability of XFS? It's certainly been around long enough. Anyone care to sway me one way or another? Kirk Bocek

23 124

Looking for SQSH Rpms
by Ow Mun Heng 09 Oct '06

09 Oct '06

Hi All, I would like to obtain a copy of SQSH (www.sqsh.org) in RPM form. Does anyone know where this can/could be obtained? I do not wish to compile it from source. (because I didn't install a C compiler into my Centos 4.4 System) (I've already got a copy of FreeTDS 0.63 which it depends on in DAG's repo) Thanks

2 1

RE: [CentOS] Directories not writable (Apache/PHP)
by Mark Fitzsimmons 09 Oct '06

09 Oct '06

Update to original issue: There is error messages regarding this problem coming up on the main PC screen: -- Avc: denied [ write ] for pid=6890 com="php" name="temp" dev=dm-0 ino=442565 scontext=user_u:system_r:httpd_t tcontext=user_u:object_r:root_t tclass=dir -- Plus lots more for all the directories and files my PHP script is trying to write to. Anyone know about this issue?? Thanks, Mark. -----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Mark Fitzsimmons Sent: 09 October 2006 09:57 To: CentOS mailing list Subject: [CentOS] Directories not writable (Apache/PHP) Hi, I have a new CentOS sever install. I've also installed suPHP to replicate a live server. When I upload file via FTP the permissions seem OK, however the directories copied are not writable?? Any ideas? I have tried chmod 777 and that's not working either. Could is be a suPHP issue? I have 'suPHP_UserGroup GROUP USER' setup in my virtual directory and the user is also in the users & groups. The suPHP log file shows the php file executing OK. Any ideas? Thanks, Mark. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

2 1

Directories not writable (Apache/PHP)
by Mark Fitzsimmons 09 Oct '06

09 Oct '06

Hi, I have a new CentOS sever install. I've also installed suPHP to replicate a live server. When I upload file via FTP the permissions seem OK, however the directories copied are not writable?? Any ideas? I have tried chmod 777 and that's not working either. Could is be a suPHP issue? I have 'suPHP_UserGroup GROUP USER' setup in my virtual directory and the user is also in the users & groups. The suPHP log file shows the php file executing OK. Any ideas? Thanks, Mark.

1 0

2TB limit, weird mounting issues on reboot
by W S 09 Oct '06

09 Oct '06

Greetings, I'm seeing some weird issues surrounding the 2 terabyte limit on my 3ware (9590SE, PCI Express model) raid controller. Currently, the raid array is 6 x 500GB disks for a total of around 2.3 terabytes formatted. Looking at the documentation on the 3ware site, the raid card can handle a single partition over 2TB, but it still looks like fdisk fails to create a primary partition over the 2TB limit. I did resort to parted, and it creates a partition over 2TB. And, in fact, I can run mke2fs on this partition, and mount it. I also have an entry for this partition in the /etc/fstab file. However, if I reboot the system, the partition fails to mount from the init scripts. If I comment out the /etc/fstab line, and run a mount command from rc.local, that works; however, the partition is now seen as a 259GB partition, and not the 2.3TB I originally had to start. I have the feeling the partition table is getting hosed on a reboot. Fdisk seems to handle the partition on the raid array just fine if it is a hair under 2TB, and from all the things I've read, it seems fdisk and other disk utilities still have real problems with partitions greater than 2TB (32-bit x 512-byte blocks, etc). I guess I'm shocked. I figured this wouldn't be an issue as of 2006, but it still is..... anyone have any similar experiences? If so, any workarounds other than just stay at the 2TB limit? Regards, Will

6 8

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 20, Issue 2
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 08 Oct '06

08 Oct '06

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-2006:0689 Important CentOS 4 x86_64 kernel - security update (Johnny Hughes) 2. CESA-2006:0689 Important CentOS 4 i386 kernel - security update (Johnny Hughes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 12:42:47 -0500 From: Johnny Hughes <johnny(a)centos.org> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2006:0689 Important CentOS 4 x86_64 kernel - security update To: CentOS-Announce <centos-announce(a)centos.org> Message-ID: <1160242967.5013.80.camel(a)myth.home.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2006:0689 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2006-0689.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: x86_64: kernel-doc-2.6.9-42.0.3.EL.noarch.rpm kernel-2.6.9-42.0.3.EL.x86_64.rpm kernel-devel-2.6.9-42.0.3.EL.x86_64.rpm kernel-largesmp-2.6.9-42.0.3.EL.x86_64.rpm kernel-largesmp-devel-2.6.9-42.0.3.EL.x86_64.rpm kernel-smp-2.6.9-42.0.3.EL.x86_64.rpm kernel-smp-devel-2.6.9-42.0.3.EL.x86_64.rpm src: kernel-2.6.9-42.0.3.EL.src.rpm

1 0

lm_sensors rpm
by Michael Kress 08 Oct '06

08 Oct '06

Hello, maybe you're interested in building an rpm of lm_sensors containing a more recent lm_sensors rpm (latest snapshot 'r4197-20061007'). Then have a look at http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2006-October/018052.html Perhaps there's someone who wants to take over maintenance for building this rpm from the snapshots in some other repo than the base one... (I don't have time for that). At least, this rpm works for me now on a x86_64 and I thought, I'd share it with the centos folks out there. cu - Michael -- Michael Kress, kress(a)hal.saar.de http://www.michael-kress.de / http://kress.net P E N G U I N S A R E C O O L

1 0

problems with LVM and upgrade new kernel 2.6.18
by Thijs Joosten - Netfeed 07 Oct '06

07 Oct '06

Dear, I have a lot of problems with LVM of CentOS when upgrading to the new kernel 2.6.18. When I have compiled the new kernel and I insert the new rules in the GRUB configuration and when I restart the server I get the warnings that the group volume VolGroup00 not found and then the kernel has a panic situation (Kernal panic - not syncing: Attempting to kill init!). This problem I have on several servers, so it is not hardware related but I think CentOS software related. After a lot of searching on the internet I have seen many people with this problem but mostly no solution. At http://www.gatago.com/linux/redhat/20330778.html I read almost the same story and a solution but the solution does not work for me and I see the same situation at http://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=5087 I do not know what do to any more, hopefully you can help me with getting kernel 2.6.18 working. CentOS systems: 4.3 en 4.4 Kernel: 2.6.18 Kernelconfig: http://www.netfeed.nl/software/kernels/2.6.18/kernelconfig Many thanks in advance! -- Met vriendelijke groeten / Kind regards, Thijs Joosten

2 1

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