Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

1 participants
34730 discussions

Dovecot .99.11 build fails; libiconv
by Karl S. Katzke 22 Apr '05

22 Apr '05

Well, it seems this just isn't my day. Using the source RPM from a centos mirror, I tried to rebuild (and, after that fails) build manually a dovecot RPM. I get several errors about automake's iconv macro, AM_ICONV, missing, and then the install fails while looking for libiconv. I tested by first trying to rebuild the RPM, and when that failed, building the RPM manually by installing in sources and building, and when THAT failed, by unpacking the tarball and manually ./configure and make. Thanks to some googling around, I found that libiconv is a GNU package that's available in source, but that should generally be satisfied in glibc according to postings on the redhat mailing list. However... well, it seems that it isn't. Either that, or it's settled by a specific version of glibc, which I don't have in my glibc-2.3.4-2 ... and yes, I do have -common, -devel, -headers, -kernheaders, etc. installed for i686. I do have iconv.h on my system, but dovecot is specifically looking for libiconv. Anyone seen this before? Thanks, Karl Katzke

1 0

RE: [CentOS] X330 Keyboard/box dies on install 4.0, not on 3.4
by Graham Johnston 21 Apr '05

21 Apr '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org > [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Karl S. Katzke > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 5:57 PM > To: centos(a)centos.org > Subject: [CentOS] X330 Keyboard/box dies on install 4.0, not on 3.4 > > I've got a handful of IBM X330's at my colo and another couple at the > office for testing purposes. Currently, they're running > CentOS 3.4 and > are very happy doing so. The 3.4 install was perfectly seamless. > > When I tried to upgrade one of my test machines to 4.0, the keyboard > died once I got into the install every single time once I boot to > anaconda from the CD. It dies as soon as the blue-background screen > appears, and it dies no matter which selection I choose at isolinux. > (I'm sure the system isn't locked because the keyboard is > dead while the > SCSI driver is loading, and the system keeps chugging along happily > until it needs input.) > The CD passes all of the tests I can apply to it, from > checksum to media > check, and has been used to install a half dozen machines > both before or > since. I also downloaded a new ISO from a different mirror > and reburnt > another one; it's most certainly the install package. The box itself > runs 3.4 quite happily. Note that x330s use IBM's cable-chaining > technology, which is great if you've got a tiny colo rack > with a lot of > servers in it like I do, since I don't have to have a KVM. > > So what changed in the install process? How can I get this > resolved well > enough to be able to use the CentOS 4 CDs? both the 3.4 and > 4.0 install > I realize that I could reaim my repository and upgrade to 4 > via yum, but > that's a pain if I'm having to bring a whole box back up from > scratch... > not to mention a nice hit to my bandwidth bill at my colo. > > Suggestions? Ideas? > > Thanks in advance, > -Karl Katzke Karl, I am not sure that it is the x330. We also have half a dozen x330s and although I don't have centos 4 on all of them I am confident that we have successfully installed centos 4 at least three times on this server. We are also using the dvi like breakout cable, and it attaches to an HP cat5 kvm. Graham

1 0

X330 Keyboard/box dies on install 4.0, not on 3.4
by Karl S. Katzke 21 Apr '05

21 Apr '05

I've got a handful of IBM X330's at my colo and another couple at the office for testing purposes. Currently, they're running CentOS 3.4 and are very happy doing so. The 3.4 install was perfectly seamless. When I tried to upgrade one of my test machines to 4.0, the keyboard died once I got into the install every single time once I boot to anaconda from the CD. It dies as soon as the blue-background screen appears, and it dies no matter which selection I choose at isolinux. (I'm sure the system isn't locked because the keyboard is dead while the SCSI driver is loading, and the system keeps chugging along happily until it needs input.) The CD passes all of the tests I can apply to it, from checksum to media check, and has been used to install a half dozen machines both before or since. I also downloaded a new ISO from a different mirror and reburnt another one; it's most certainly the install package. The box itself runs 3.4 quite happily. Note that x330s use IBM's cable-chaining technology, which is great if you've got a tiny colo rack with a lot of servers in it like I do, since I don't have to have a KVM. So what changed in the install process? How can I get this resolved well enough to be able to use the CentOS 4 CDs? both the 3.4 and 4.0 install I realize that I could reaim my repository and upgrade to 4 via yum, but that's a pain if I'm having to bring a whole box back up from scratch... not to mention a nice hit to my bandwidth bill at my colo. Suggestions? Ideas? Thanks in advance, -Karl Katzke

1 0

Re: [CentOS] Centos EOL changes
by Michael Rock 21 Apr '05

21 Apr '05

I went ahead with the yum update, now 'rpm -q centos-release' shows: centos-release-3.3-1 centos-release-3-4.2 I had walked away from a vnc session as it was yum updating and came back to a closed vnc sessions. So I thought maybe it did not finish. However a server reboot and a subsequent 'yum clean' and 'yum update' did not yield any new additions. So it looks like it got everything but not sure if it should show both versions in 'rpm -q centos-release'? thx again -- Mike --- Matt Hyclak <hyclak(a)math.ohiou.edu> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 02:14:07PM -0700, Michael > Rock enlightened us: > > I was getting security updates from yum centos > > mirrors regularly on the 3.3-1 servers and checked > the > > Centos errata. So I assumed the default unchanged > > centos yum.conf was giving me everything I needed. > Now > > it seems yum will jump me from 3.3-1 to 3.4. > > > > Does this all sound about right? > > > > (I figured after seeing this I must be doing > something > > wrong or the process changed somewhere. I do not > > remember seeing an announcement other than the one > > back in January but later someone mentioned the > > automatic update to 3.4 would not happen). > > > > If my memory serves me, there was a problem with > bind breaking during an > upgrade from 3.3 to 3.4, so until the problem was > fixed (within the last > week or two), both the 3.3 and 3.4 trees were > maintained separately. Now > that the problem has been resolved, the maintainers > have combined it all > back into a single tree. > > Matt > > -- > Matt Hyclak > Department of Mathematics > Department of Social Work > Ohio University > (740) 593-1263 > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS(a)centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

2 1

RE: [CentOS] Apache, MySQL, and PHP
by Mark A. Lewis 21 Apr '05

21 Apr '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org > [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Olaf Greve > Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 3:17 AM > To: CentOS mailing list > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Apache, MySQL, and PHP > > Hi, > > I have set up this combination on various platforms, > including Windows, FreeBSD, RHEL and CentOS and I must say > that by far the easiest was CentOS. Now, how is this any different than what you would do on RHEL? Seeing as Cent is based on it, it would be identical. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

6 6

Re: [CentOS] Centos EOL changes
by Michael Rock 21 Apr '05

21 Apr '05

Hi, I was getting security updates from yum centos mirrors regularly on the 3.3-1 servers and checked the Centos errata. So I assumed the default unchanged centos yum.conf was giving me everything I needed. Now it seems yum will jump me from 3.3-1 to 3.4. Does this all sound about right? (I figured after seeing this I must be doing something wrong or the process changed somewhere. I do not remember seeing an announcement other than the one back in January but later someone mentioned the automatic update to 3.4 would not happen). Thx -- Mike --- Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists(a)hughesjr.com> wrote: > Centos-3 is the distro > > When RHEL puts out a quarterly update (ie update 4) > we call it version > 3.4. > > So 3.3 will go to 3.4 and to 3.5 and so on. > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

2 1

Module loading order during install
by Joshua Baker-LePain 21 Apr '05

21 Apr '05

Is there a way in a kickstart install to affect the order in which modules get loaded? I want to load 3w-xxxx before 3w-9xxx so that my OS mirror drives take their proper place as sda and sdb, but centos-4 wants to load 3x-9xxx first, making my (unbootable) big arrays the first two drives. In this configuration, it seems that even trying to install grub to /dev/sdc fails. Ideas? Thanks. -- Joshua Baker-LePain Department of Biomedical Engineering Duke University

5 6

RE: [CentOS] 1 GB RAM CentOS 4 only sees 885 MB
by Bryan J. Smith 21 Apr '05

21 Apr '05

Research the 1/3GB (32-bit) v. 4/4GB (PAE36) addressing models for Intel PAE36. If the kernel is the former, you'll run into the limit you have. If the kernel is the latter, you won't, but you'll take a paging hit as PAE36 swaps in/out 512MB pages from above 4GB (yes, I know, you only have 1GB but it's complicated to explain :-). BTW, *all* Athlons, both 32-bit and 64-bit, are actually 40-bit EV6 (Alpha 264), and not 32-bit/PAE36 addressing. But the Athlon uses 32-bit/PAE36 paging for compatibility. If you have a mainboard with a BIOS that has a "Linux" option for memory/IO addressing (very rare), there is a way to use the Linux kernel to get a "flat" 64GB model, as well as get the 32-bit Athlon's AGPgart (which is in the CPU, not the chipset - at least on the MP) to act like an I/O MMU for "safe" >4GB I/O transfers. Not even Intel's EM64T offers that BTW, I have *never* done this personally with a 32-bit Athlon. I only read about the kernel hack and the few mainboard BIOSes that support it (which prevents Windows from booting when set). Understand the 32-bit and 64-bit AMD processors are the same core design (even 48-bit/PAE52, although much is not enabled/useful on the 32-bit), including the *physical* 40-bit/1TB addressing of EV6. Intel is still using 32-bit/4GB GTL+ *physically* on even their latest EM64T processors, which is a major performance issue. -----Original Message----- From: ryan Date: 4/20/05 8:27 pm To: CentOS mailing list Subj: [CentOS] 1 GB RAM CentOS 4 only sees 885 MB Is this a known bug? Suprisingly google didn't turn up much. I'm running DDR RAM and a AMD XP processor on CentOS 4. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

1 0

Accessing shell in CentOS 4 install
by Brendon Colby 21 Apr '05

21 Apr '05

Greetings, I'm having trouble accessing a shell when I boot into the installation of CentOS 4 (text mode). Alt-2 (which is where the shell should be started?) shows nothing (nothing any other console). How do I access the shell within the installation? Thanks. Brendon Colby

3 3

NX (execshield)
by tobaccofarm 21 Apr '05

21 Apr '05

I heard something about execshield in some thread on OSnews.com. Does CentOS4 have an execshield compiled kernel? kind regards, Peter

4 3

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