Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

1 participants
34753 discussions

Re: [CentOS] Re: opensource backup software suggestions please -- VTL option ...
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

From: Karanbir Singh <Mail-Lists(a)karan.org> > Which is a good thing really, since you can snip off the irrelevant bits > on your way down. Yes, I do it. But in my case, I've got to manually cut'n paste and add the greater-than signs. It gets tedious (especially on my Treo). But I do it because I believe in bottom-posting. > Gmail works fine. It sets the In-Reply-To: header. I am sure your move > to a more not-as-much-brain-dead client would be appreciated. Yeah, at least GMail would be better than this account. -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

1 0

Re: opensource backup software suggestions please -- VTL option ...
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

From: Chris Mauritz <chrism(a)imntv.com> > I've found that backing up to another disk to be both faster and more > practical. We've got a number of multi-terabyte RAID arrays to store > uncompressed video. Backing all that data up to tape just isn't a > tenable solution. So we've bitten the bullet and built an extra larger > multi-terabyte array to do online backups. Periodically we do snapshots > of the data on that backup array (like you do on a netapp filer). That > system works well for us. It wouldn't cover us if the building burned > down so the next step is an offsite mirrored array. If you have the dough, Virtual Tape Libraries (VTLs) are the ultimate in flexiblity. Although there are many solutions, nearly all of them are the Red Hat Linux 7.3 + FalconStor Software combination. Although EMC, IBM and others have traditionally use standard disk arrays as they use for other solutions (with the software slapped on), Copan Systems' hardware solution is designed specifically for VTL and VTL-only. The density, power/thermal, cost and other considerations are rather interesting. -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

3 2

Re: [CentOS] Separate list for political/philosophical discussion
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

From: Ugo Bellavance <ugob(a)camo-route.com> > Hi, > How about creating another mailing list to let people vent themselves? > It would make it easier for everyone, since technical/troubleshooting > issues and opinions target different people. That's how most projects handle it. Because invariably, people will start breaking things down into marketing, legal and other meta-discussions. And I'm just the type of person that deals with them on a daily basis, so I have my viewpoints. Rule of thumb on what is on-topic for that last should default to the project maintainers, and we should respect their viewpoints. -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

2 1

Re: CentOS/RHEL versioning scheme? -- adversely affecting dist-tag
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

From: Morten Kjeldgaard <mok(a)bioxray.dk> > I am a bit puzzled at the versioning scheme of the RedHat clone family. > RedHat seems to use integer 4, Tao and Centos does the same. If you do > rpm -q --qf '%{version}\n' -f /etc/redhat-release > you get '4'. > However, Scientific Linux uses 4.0, and that seems to me to be a more > logical choise, since presumable there are going to be versions 4.1, > 4.2, etc. Unfortunately, the "release" file impacts build environments. E.g., dist-tag. So it shouldn't be done on a dime. Even Red Hat has really pulled some doozers -- like getting rid of revisions, restarting the numbering on Fedora Core to 1 which threw a wrench into the dist-tag through Red Hat Linux 9, etc... [ I can only assume there was a more important, legal reason, like not showing product lineage to protect Red Hat(R)? ] -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

1 0

S/N on this list is plummeting...
by Chris Mauritz 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

Is it possible to create an alternate list for the people who insist on spending their days posting long-winded political commentary and opinion? Maybe something like centos-offtopic? Reading the list has gone from "fun" status to "chore." Just a suggestion. Cheers, C

4 4

Re: [CentOS] Vote For CentOS :)
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

From: Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists(a)hughesjr.com> > As pointed out many times before on this list, RedHat is a great > company, and they do a lot of things for the OSS community ... but they > are not the "owners" of the code that CentOS uses. They get almost all > the items they publish from somewhere else. They are required, > therefore, to make their source code public. But Red Hat does release pretty much even anything "original" as GPL as well. > They take that requirement seriously, and they do an outstanding job > of publishing their source code openly. They should be commended for > that. I do it every chance I get :) And I personally appreciated your objectivity, alongside your dedication to the project. It's hard to find such a combo. Many people who put sweat into something are a bit eccentric. You are one who truly stands on the shoulders of others while lifting those above you far more than most. -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

1 0

Re: [CentOS] Vote For CentOS :)
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

From: Simon Perreault <nomis80(a)lqt.ca> > I think you will agree with me that the amount of work Red Hat put on CentOS > (by way of RHEL) is much more significant than the work put on CentOS by > CentOS volunteers. That is not to say that the work of CentOS volunteers is > not to be appreciated. Don't get all worked up for nothing. And I think some of us agree with you. But as I said before, we're all standing on the shoulders of others. In general, I don't like "distro contests" because there's just so much overlap. -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

1 0

Re: [CentOS] Re: Reboots -- lsof and SIGHUP, a combination to know ...
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

From: Ralph Angenendt <ra+centos(a)br-online.de> > If you can read binary :) > The script section of the glibc RPM is a very simple one: > [angenenr@shutdown dict]$rpm -q --scripts glibc > postinstall program: /usr/sbin/glibc_post_upgrade.i686 > postuninstall program: /sbin/ldconfig > And I cannot find Documentation for glibc_post_upgrade at the moment, a > "strings" on that binary doesn't really help either. I'll look through the source. Looks like it may be a bit more involved than just a simple SIGHUP. -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

1 0

Re: [CentOS] Re: Reboots -- LSB 2.1 Core Generic Section 8.5
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

From: Rodrigo Barbosa <rodrigob(a)suespammers.org> > You didn't crossed me. Maybe it is because it is late here, and > english is not my primary language. I'm sorry if I gave you that > impression. > I just get repetitive sometimes, due to lack of better language > tools. Okay, I will keep that in mind. My apologies, and I should have picked up on that when you mentioned Connectiva. -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

1 0

Separate list for political/philosophical discussion
by Ugo Bellavance 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

Hi, How about creating another mailing list to let people vent themselves? It would make it easier for everyone, since technical/troubleshooting issues and opinions target different people. This messages is a test as well. I couldn't write to the list through gmane so I corrected the address with gmane admin. Hope this works. Regards,

1 0

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