Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

1 participants
34732 discussions

Re: low end systems
by Rick Graves 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

Daniel, > CentOS 3.3 on a Pentium II with 300 Mhz, a Pentium I > with 166 Mhz, one K6 system with 200 Mhz, all working > fine, working as little build farm and test suite for > development. All systems have at 64MB RAM installed. I had yum problems on Pentium I's with 72 megs of memory -- yum would crash a lot. (This was running cAos 1, not CentOS.) I am surprised that 64 megs is working well for you. Rick

4 3

2.6 kernel
by beau 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

Any big heads up folks can offer as I set off to try building me a 2.6.9 kernel from a kernel.org tarball? -- Robert Thomas ("beau") Hayes Link Open your heart, pray for peace, preach healing (c)2004ISR http://www.semanticrestructuring.com/

3 2

Low end systems
by Michael Falzon 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

Hi All I been using whitebox 3 for a bit and am take a look at cent 3.3 and 3.1 so far like it, but i seeing with older system 200 to 800 not Intel system (amd k6/2) ( not all of them ) cent comes back in install and till me that its not made for system like this ... whitebox 3 works OK so I'm not sure why and if a can get around this .... See BUG. "That's not a bug, it's a feature!" A bug can be changed to a feature by documenting it. Michael Falzon (RHCT) Mozy's Swamp BBs & Red Dwarf BBs http://mozysswamp.org Registered LFS User #406 Registered Linux User #204397

9 10

Re: [Centos] File permission
by Dominic Iadicicco 30 Nov '04

30 Nov '04

Simple is very good for me. I definitely understand this. Thanks :) Dom >In very simple terms, if you add someone to a group, until they >re-authenticate, i.e. logout & login again, the new permissions will not be >seen by said user. > >~T > > > > >

1 0

Re: [Centos] File permission
by T'Krin 30 Nov '04

30 Nov '04

Dominic Iadicicco <diadicic(a)optonline.net> wrote: >I don't think I was really going to get an answer for this anyway but, I >figured it out. After making my change I logged out and back in again >and it worked. I think I get it but if someone could explain it to me >that would be nice. > >Thanks > > > > >Dominic Iadicicco wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> I think my file permission are completely screwed up? I created a >> file called text file called test as root user and have done chgrp on >> that file to a group called admin. I have added the users ozzie and >> root to that group. I then did a chmod g+wr on the test file and >> ozzie can still not write to the file. If I take away read access >> from the group, ozzie can still read the file. The group permissions >> have no effect what so ever. If you add or take away permissions from >> the other permissions, that will effect the test file. What did I do >> wrong? Could someone please point me in the right direction? In very simple terms, if you add someone to a group, until they re-authenticate, i.e. logout & login again, the new permissions will not be seen by said user. ~T

1 0

File permission
by Dominic Iadicicco 30 Nov '04

30 Nov '04

Hello all, I think my file permission are completely screwed up? I created a file called text file called test as root user and have done chgrp on that file to a group called admin. I have added the users ozzie and root to that group. I then did a chmod g+wr on the test file and ozzie can still not write to the file. If I take away read access from the group, ozzie can still read the file. The group permissions have no effect what so ever. If you add or take away permissions from the other permissions, that will effect the test file. What did I do wrong? Could someone please point me in the right direction? Thanks all. Dominic

2 2

Re: low end systems
by Rick Graves 30 Nov '04

30 Nov '04

Michael, CentOS works fine on Pentium 2's. Many in the world are junking Pentium 2's nowadays, so you can upgrade for very little. Also, in my experience, they tend to be reliable. Rick

1 0

Re: CentOS digest, Vol 1 #201 - 1 msg
by Phillip_James＠gardencitygroup.com 30 Nov '04

30 Nov '04

thanks for the head up. what os are you running on the blades?? Phillip James System Administrator The Garden City Group, Inc. 105 Maxess Road Melville, NY 11747-3836 Phone: (631) 470-5044 Fax: (631) 940-6561 E-mail: Phillip.James(a)GardenCityGroup.com ==================================================== This communication (including any attachments) is intended for the use of the intended recipient(s) only and may contain information that is confidential, privileged or legally protected. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication. Thank you for your cooperation. |---------+----------------------------> | | centos-request@ca| | | osity.org | | | Sent by: | | | centos-admin@caos| | | ity.org | | | | | | | | | 11/25/2004 07:00 | | | AM | | | Please respond to| | | centos | |---------+----------------------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: centos(a)caosity.org | | cc: | | Subject: CentOS digest, Vol 1 #201 - 1 msg | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| Send CentOS mailing list submissions to centos(a)caosity.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to centos-request(a)caosity.org You can reach the person managing the list at centos-admin(a)caosity.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of CentOS digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: installing CentOS on the IBM BladeCenter (Ted Kaczmarek) --__--__-- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 19:52:45 -0500 From: Ted Kaczmarek <tedkaz(a)optonline.net> Subject: Re: [Centos] installing CentOS on the IBM BladeCenter To: centos(a)caosity.org Reply-To: tedkaz(a)optonline.net The IBM Bladecenter is one of the worst abominations I have ever come across. I can see it being a web commerce site in a box, but other that that the thing is a boat anchor. Their Dlink switches are absolute garbage, after 9 upgrades I only have to reboot them once a month now. We tried the OEM Cisco switch, they gave me bad hardware, since their support people didn't know a frame from a packet they were unable to resolve it. Finally we sent the Cisco's back. Our rep finally tells us they are coming out with ethernet pass through, which we purchased. I pray that these work. The management station hangs about once every 2 months as well. Then only thing I have ever come across that compares to this POS is Sun's E10k, the memory latency rendered it useless as well. I am also perplexed how many people got sucked in on these, they where ripped to shreds on slash dot, the over subscription with 4 ports is more than 3 to 1, and qos is only of any use up to 4 queues with the Notrel hardware. Also their ROI numbers are a joke, ( I am not even considering the 150 or so man hours to get it to work at all, at 125$ a pop that pays for 4 loaded 345's) once you add the whole enchillada up, it is much cheaper to use 345's even with 14 blades in a chassis. I also have a hard time putting anything critical on a box that uses Toshiba laptop hard drives and doesn't have serial console. I guess if one doesn't need serial consoles, and real local disk IO and network IO is may be a good solution, but to me its a boat anchor. Sorry for ranting, but I needed this, just got off a bloody battle with a moron vendor who had no clue what a don't fragment flag is. They rolled out a whole bunch of Solaris patches that appear to hard code the DF flag to set. Ted On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 15:37 -0500, Phillip_James(a)gardencitygroup.com wrote: > thanks > > > Phillip James > System Administrator > The Garden City Group, Inc. > 105 Maxess Road > Melville, NY 11747-3836 > Phone: (631) 470-5044 > Fax: (631) 940-6561 > E-mail: Phillip.James(a)GardenCityGroup.com > ==================================================== > This communication (including any attachments) is intended for the use of > the intended recipient(s) only and may contain information that is > confidential, privileged or legally protected. Any unauthorized use or > dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender > by return e-mail message and delete all copies of the original > communication. Thank you for your cooperation. > > > > |---------+----------------------------> > | | Matt Shields | > | | <mattboston@gmail| > | | .com> | > | | | > | | 11/24/2004 03:36 | > | | PM | > | | Please respond to| > | | Matt Shields | > |---------+----------------------------> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > | | > | To: "phillip_james(a)gardencitygroup.com" <phillip_james(a)gardencitygroup.com> | > | cc: centos(a)caosity.org | > | Subject: Re: [Centos] installing CentOS on the IBM BladeCenter | > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > > > > > Strange, w/ RHEL3ES it didn't require any driver disks. I just used > the 4 ISO's. I'll have to see if I have a spare blade that I could > try CentOS on, but I believe the rest are all being used by our > Windows admins. > > > -- > Matt Shields > http://masnetworks.biz/ > http://www.caosity.org/ > > On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:28:32 -0500, phillip_james(a)gardencitygroup.com > <phillip_james(a)gardencitygroup.com> wrote: > > > > I got RHEL 3ES installed but the do not what to buy entittlements for all > > my servers. So I tryed to install CentOS but it did not work. > > > > I did a "linux dd" were dd = RHEL3ES dd disk for the BladeCenter but it > did > > not work. > > > > > > > > Phillip James > > System Administrator > > The Garden City Group, Inc. > > 105 Maxess Road > > Melville, NY 11747-3836 > > Phone: (631) 470-5044 > > Fax: (631) 940-6561 > > E-mail: Phillip.James(a)GardenCityGroup.com > > ==================================================== > > This communication (including any attachments) is intended for the use of > > the intended recipient(s) only and may contain information that is > > confidential, privileged or legally protected. Any unauthorized use or > > dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > > received this communication in error, please immediately notify the > sender > > by return e-mail message and delete all copies of the original > > communication. Thank you for your cooperation. > > > > > > |---------+----------------------------> > > | | Matt Shields | > > | | <mattboston@gmail| > > | | .com> | > > | | | > > | | 11/24/2004 02:50 | > > | | PM | > > | | Please respond to| > > | | Matt Shields | > > |---------+----------------------------> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > > > | > | > > | To: "phillip_james(a)gardencitygroup.com" > <phillip_james(a)gardencitygroup.com> > | > > | cc: centos(a)caosity.org > | > > | Subject: Re: [Centos] installing CentOS on the IBM BladeCenter > | > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > > > > > > > > > > > A couple months ago I installed RHEL3ES on 3 blades on each of 2 > > eSeries Blade Centers. You can even use the Blade Center's web > > interface to remotely view the screen. If you have the media in the > > system you can install it remotely. > > > > -- > > Matt Shields > > http://masnetworks.biz/ > > http://www.caosity.org/ > > > > On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:40:08 -0500, phillip_james(a)gardencitygroup.com > > <phillip_james(a)gardencitygroup.com> wrote: > > > Has any one install CentOS 3.3 or early on a IBM BladeCenter eServers > > > (HS20) > > > > > > Phillip James > > > System Administrator > > > The Garden City Group, Inc. > > > 105 Maxess Road > > > Melville, NY 11747-3836 > > > Phone: (631) 470-5044 > > > Fax: (631) 940-6561 > > > E-mail: Phillip.James(a)GardenCityGroup.com > > > ==================================================== > > > This communication (including any attachments) is intended for the use > of > > > the intended recipient(s) only and may contain information that is > > > confidential, privileged or legally protected. Any unauthorized use or > > > dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you > have > > > received this communication in error, please immediately notify the > > sender > > > by return e-mail message and delete all copies of the original > > > communication. Thank you for your cooperation. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > CentOS mailing list > > > CentOS(a)caosity.org > > > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS(a)caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos --__--__-- _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos End of CentOS Digest

2 1

IDLE still broken
by Rick Graves 27 Nov '04

27 Nov '04

Hey, Sure enough, IDLE 1.0.3 came with Python 2.3, but the update did not fix my problem. I found a entry in RedHat's bugzilla, "Inconsistent input from numeric pad when numlock off", bug 136600. I put one in on SourceForge (where Python bugs are tracked) under IDLE, "input from numeric pad always dropped when numlock off", # 1074333. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=136600 https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1074333&group_id=… I am still coding Python on my Windows box. Rick

1 0

Re: python dependency solution
by Rick Graves 27 Nov '04

27 Nov '04

Hey, It seems to be OK just to install python 2.3 via rpm. (So my idea was not so "off the wall" after all.) Since Seth's reply here indicated that my idea was an option, I decided to try it first on a test system. When I got to the rpm download page at www.python.org, I found an FAQ exactly on point: begin quote Q) Is it safe to install these RPMs on a Red Hat system? Will they over-write the system python and cause problems with other Red Hat applications that expect a different version of Python? A) The RPMs that start with "python2.3" are built to not interfere with the system Python. They install as "/usr/bin/python2.3" and will not conflict with the system Python unless you are running on a system that ships the a version of Python which has the same major/minor number. To invoke the interpreter with these packages, you will explicitly have to run "python2.3". Note that all Python RPMs provided by Python.org and Red Hat provide a "/usr/bin/python2.3" (or similar, with major/minor number), even if they also provide "/usr/bin/python". So, yes, it should be safe. end quote http://www.python.org/2.3.4/rpms.html This must have come up before, and Guido has already worked out the details. Rick

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