Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

5 participants
34752 discussions

Bad repo file
by Lorin B Pino 20 Mar '06

20 Mar '06

I have yum working with dags and dries, etc, but I have done something to the main repo file that causes yum to error. Can anyone tell me what is wrong with this file? CentOS-Base.repo # # This file uses a new mirrorlist system developed by Lance Davis for CentOS. # The mirror system uses the connecting IP address of the client and the # update status of each mirror to pick mirrors that are updated to and # geographically close to the client. You should use this for CentOS updates # unless you are manually picking other mirrors. # # If the mirrorlist= does not work for you, as a fall back you can try the # remarked out baseurl= line instead. # # [base] name=CentOS-4 - Base #mirrorlist=http://mirrorlist.centos.org/?release=$releasever&arch=$basearch&repo=os baseurl=http://mirror.centos.org/centos/4/os/i386/ gpgcheck=1 gpgkey=http://mirror.centos.org/centos/RPM-GPG-KEY-centos4 #released updates [update] name=CentOS-4 - Updates #mirrorlist=http://mirrorlist.centos.org/?release=$releasever&arch=$basearch&repo=updates baseurl=http://mirror.centos.org/centos/4/updates/i386/ gpgcheck=1 gpgkey=http://mirror.centos.org/centos/RPM-GPG-KEY-centos4 #packages used/produced in the build but not released [addons] name=CentOS-4 - Addons #mirrorlist=http://mirrorlist.centos.org/?release=$releasever&arch=$basearch&repo=addons baseurl=http://mirror.centos.org/centos/4/addons/i386/ gpgcheck=1 gpgkey=http://mirror.centos.org/centos/RPM-GPG-KEY-centos4 #additional packages that may be useful [extras] name=CentOS-4 - Extras #mirrorlist=http://mirrorlist.centos.org/?release=$releasever&arch=$basearch&repo=extras baseurl=http://mirror.centos.org/centos/4/extras/i386/ gpgcheck=1 gpgkey=http://mirror.centos.org/centos/RPM-GPG-KEY-centos4 #additional packages that extend functionality of existing packages [centosplus] name=CentOS-4 - Plus #mirrorlist=http://mirrorlist.centos.org/?release=$releasever&arch=$basearch&repo=centosplus baseurl=http://mirror.centos.org/centos/4/centosplus/i386/ gpgcheck=1 enabled=1 gpgkey=http://mirror.centos.org/centos/RPM-GPG-KEY-centos4 #contrib - packages by Centos Users [contrib] name=CentOS-4 - Contrib #mirrorlist=http://mirrorlist.centos.org/?release=$releasever&arch=$basearch&repo=contrib baseurl=http://mirror.centos.org/centos/4.2/contrib/i386/ gpgcheck=1 enabled=1 gpgkey=http://mirror.centos.org/centos/RPM-GPG-KEY-centos4 By the way, I have just subscribed to this list, and already see that it has it's share of complainers. I have only used CentOS for a few weeks, but I am enjoying the experience. I tried FC4, but yum would hang each time I tried it, so it has been good to have things work. Good work on this distro! For whatever that is worth from a newbie. TIA ~Lorin

5 7

kannel from dag - sqlite conflict with centos 4.2
by Tony 20 Mar '06

20 Mar '06

I have a CentOS 4.1 box running Dag's Wieers kannel 1.4.0-3.2.el4.rf package which has a dependency on sqlite version 2.8.16-1.2.el4.rf also from Dag. If I try to up2date to centos 4.2 I'm hitting a conflict whereby 4.2 wants to install sqlite 3.2.2 - but kannel doesn't like that, reporting: Unresolvable chain of dependencies: kannel 1.4.0-3.2.el4.rf requires libsqlite.so.0 The new 3.2.2 version only provides libsqlite3.so.0. Anyone else seen this, or have any recommendations as to how I can have 4.2with kannel still installed? -- Cheers, Tony

6 10

libtiff-3.6.1-8 and HylaFAX 4.2.5
by Chin 20 Mar '06

20 Mar '06

Hi, I am currently replacing my old Hylafax server to a new hardware with CentOS 4.2 (x86_64). Since CentOS 4.2 (and probably RHEL4) is shipping with libtiff-3.6.1-8, I'm wondering if this version of libtiff has the patch mentioned in the hylafax bugzilla http://bugs.hylafax.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=500 and/or is it compatible with the latest Hylafax 4.2.5 (i read libtiff-3.6.1 is mentioned in the release notes as having a fatal flaw). It will be against the main purpose of using an enterprise linux if I am to update this library myself. There are binary packages for RHEL3/4, not sure whether they are compiled with libtiff-3.6.1-8 too. I can run 'rpm --test ...' on my new machine with the Fedora Core 3 (x86_64) but I haven't decided whether to go ahead or not. Thank you. --------------------------------- Meet your soulmate! Yahoo! Asia presents Meetic - where millions of singles gather

3 5

Bad repo file (solved)
by Lorin B Pino 20 Mar '06

20 Mar '06

I hit the delete button too quick, and don't know who to thank. I ended up deleting the file title and description (that were all commented out), and yum now uses it. Thanks ~Lorin

1 0

Hi
by PV Juliet 20 Mar '06

20 Mar '06

HI All, I made a distribution CD in CentOS. But when i am installing from CD it displays an error message "gunzip : std ..... /mnt/sysimage /bin/cpio : premature end of file " Any one knows why it happens like this ??? Regards juliet

2 1

Re: [CentOS] Re: Mirror Mirror on the wall, who is the slowest of them all? CentOS
by Chris Hammond 19 Mar '06

19 Mar '06

Very well said and I second this 100000000%. Chris >>> peter(a)farrows.org 03/19/06 2:04 pm >>> Dear All, Centos works for me, it is indeed a godsend. I know how much effort it takes to create such a distribution and test it. I am grateful for all the hard effort it takes. Lets not keep the Centos team tied up with threads like this that really do little more that use bandwidth and storage space in the long run for no real benefit. Those people who make good use of Centos know had solid it is, nothing more needs to be said, if anyone disagrees, they should vote with their feet and go somewhere else, but don't bother flaming people here, because it neither necessary nor wanted, nor justified. Anybody who has the audacity to criticise people who do stuff to their very best for free for the benefit of others really, does need grow up and have a reality check. Lets end it here boys and girls, if you don't like Centos then stop wasting the time of those of us who do, and push off now. regards Pete Scott Silva wrote: > Jim Smith spake the following on 3/18/2006 7:40 AM: > >> --- Craig White <craigwhite(a)azapple.com> wrote: >> >> >>> is it possible that you don't consider how offensive that comments >>> like >>> this and your insensitive and ill- informed comments last week about >>> the >>> various repos are? >>> >>> You just earned the ticket to /dev/null on my sieve scripts >>> >>> Craig >>> >> Are you the same Craig who claims to have no experience at all of kde >> somewhere on the net and elsewhere you praise the kde- redhat repo? >> Shambolic? >> >> As the the rest of you cowboys, tell me other than WhiteBox who is >> the slowest to release updates. >> >> Don't take this personally, but a cold reality check will enable you >> to understand the reality of the situation. >> >> Don't get me wrong, CentOS is (for the most part) doing a superb job. >> You can guess what needs to be improved upon. >> >> Johnny and the team need reality comments rather than ass- kissing >> lamers. >> >> >> __________________________________________________ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >> http://mail.yahoo.com >> > Anyone calling CentOS slow hasn't used Debian! But why sit here and bash > someone for their unpaid volunteer work! It isn't like they are getting six > figure salaries to make people happy. If you want fast, go get the source rpms > and rebuild them, and don't come back here asking for help from these > overworked and under respected volunteers! > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

1 0

Darwin Streaming Server (was Re: Build on CentOS 4?)
by Chris Mauritz 19 Mar '06

19 Mar '06

Steve Pflaum wrote: > Hi- > I'm having trouble getting DSS to run on CentOS 4. Has anyone > successfully compiled the source on this platform? > > It looks like the DSS linux binary version was built using gcc 3.2 and > an older version of glibc so the symbol names in the libc files are > different which is why it will not run. > > Can anyone help? I haven't built it in a while, but the last time I think I was using 3.5 and it built right out of the box once I installed the compatibility libs and turned off the SELinux bits in the kernel. The latter may not be necessary if you don't mind all the error messages in the logs. I'd also suggest turning off iptables until you settle on which ports you'll be using, then you can lock it back down. It works pretty well. I ended up going with QTSS running on a dual G5 since I had a spare one laying around and QTSS includes all the fancy management tools that are missing from DSS. If you have any specific questions, feel free to email me. Cheers,

1 0

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 13, Issue 8
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 19 Mar '06

19 Mar '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-2006:0266 Important CentOS 4 ia64 gnupg - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 2. CESA-2006:0266 Important CentOS 4 s390(x) gnupg - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 3. CESA-2006:0266 Important CentOS 4 s390(x) axp - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 4. CESA-2006:0266 Important CentOS 3 ia64 gnupg - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 5. CESA-2006:0266 Important CentOS 3 s390(x) gnupg - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 6. CESA-2006:0144 Moderate CentOS 3 ia64 kernel - updated kernel package (Pasi Pirhonen) 7. CESA-2006:0144 Moderate CentOS 3 s390(x) kernel - updated kernel package (Pasi Pirhonen) 8. CESA-2006:0015 Moderate CentOS 3 ia64 initscripts - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 9. CESA-2006:0015 Moderate CentOS 3 s390(x) initscripts - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 10. CESA-2006:0045 Moderate CentOS 3 ia64 squid - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 11. CESA-2006:0045 Moderate CentOS 3 s390(x) squid - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 12. CESA-2006:0117 Low CentOS 3 ia64 vixie-cron - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) 13. CESA-2006:0117 Low CentOS 3 s390(x) vixie-cron - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 18:19:46 +0200 From: Pasi Pirhonen <upi(a)papat.org> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2006:0266 Important CentOS 4 ia64 gnupg - security update To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <20060318161946.GA17738(a)core.upi.iki.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2006:0266 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2006-0266.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: files: updates/ia64/RPMS/gnupg-1.2.6-3.ia64.rpm -- Pasi Pirhonen - upi(a)iki.fi - http://iki.fi/upi/

1 0

multiple signed ssl certificatess on single IP address
by Ara Avvali 19 Mar '06

19 Mar '06

Good afternoon everyone, This is my first post here. I was wondering if someone could clear my mind about this. I have a dedicated server with a single ip address assigned to it. I want to host couple of site which are hosted somewhere else and they have signed certificates. Now I want to host them all on this single server. Is it possible to bound more than one cert to a single IP based apache server and host multiple virtual directories? I did a research on line and found couple answers which are all confusing me. One suggested that I need to get additional ip's and assign different sites to it. (Not a very practical solution) Other one says we can use the same cert and ip but have secondary host on different port number than default. Something likes https://www.abc.com <https://www.abc.com/> and https://www.def.com:444 <https://www.def.com:444/> and so on. But this will cause people a warning regarding the certificate error on second path, is that correct? Some one suggested a wild card certificate but how can I do that since dedicated server name is a.dedicated.hostingcompany.com and I need to generate certificates covering *.abc.com and *.def.com Would someone kindly clear my mind on this issue?

6 6

RE: [CentOS] multiple signed ssl certificatess on single IP address
by Ara Avvali 19 Mar '06

19 Mar '06

Hi Thanks for fast response. A: is expensive and I can't do it. They want 10/ ip per month so for a bout 10 site we are talking 100 dollars a month B: is better if I could convince them, but as you stated we might face problem with none standard port numbers C: sound fair and I need to search for it. We have plesk and I just saw this article. Do you think it is the solution for my question? http://www.digicert.com/ssl-certificate-installation-plesk.htm appreciated the help -----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Maciej Zenczykowski Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 4:45 PM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] multiple signed ssl certificatess on single IP address Due to the SSL specification it is _IMPOSSIBLE_ to have more than one certificate on a given ip:port pair. Why? Because the certificate has to be sent immediately after a connection to the ip:port pair _BEFORE_ the client sends information about _which_ website it intends to contact (thus the server has no way to know which certificate, if many sites are hosted on a given ip:port pair, to supply and must choose ONE). As such virtual nameservers and https are impossible to get working with different certificates. However, there are some solutions: a) get more IP's and host each https site on a different IP b) use different port numbers on the same IP BOTH a and b allow different certificates per site, since they use different host:ip pairs c) use a single wildcard certificate or a certificate for more than one site. Basically a single certificate which is valid for both abc.com and def.com. Searching around on Google should reveal a wiki with more information about how to do this and remain compatible with the major web browsers (I think the link should also be in the CentOS list archives). It should be noted that solution (b) is impractical, many places allow https traffic only on the default https/443 port. Solution (a) is feasible and easy, however requires extra public IPs and will likely increase hosting costs. Solution (c) is the cheapest, however I've yet to try implementing it. [Further note: it is possible to run https over http on port 80 with transparent upgrade, but most web browsers and proxies don't support this and as such this is also not a viable solution...] Cheers, MaZe. On Sat, 18 Mar 2006, Ara Avvali wrote: > Good afternoon everyone, > > This is my first post here. I was wondering if someone could clear my > mind about this. > > I have a dedicated server with a single ip address assigned to it. I > want to host couple of site which are hosted somewhere else and they > have signed certificates. Now I want to host them all on this single > server. > > > > Is it possible to bound more than one cert to a single IP based apache > server and host multiple virtual directories? > > I did a research on line and found couple answers which are all > confusing me. > > > > One suggested that I need to get additional ip's and assign different > sites to it. (Not a very practical solution) > > > > Other one says we can use the same cert and ip but have secondary host > on different port number than default. Something likes > https://www.abc.com <https://www.abc.com/> and https://www.def.com:444 > <https://www.def.com:444/> and so on. But this will cause people a > warning regarding the certificate error on second path, is that correct? > > > > > Some one suggested a wild card certificate but how can I do that since > dedicated server name is a.dedicated.hostingcompany.com and I need to > generate certificates covering *.abc.com and *.def.com > > > > Would someone kindly clear my mind on this issue? > > _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

2 1

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss