Subject pretty much says it all. I want the 5.2 without the xen kernel. I've grabbed bits from 2 different mirrors and they all appear to have xen on them. It would be very nice if someone could throw some text into the mirrors file to differentiate the two "versions".. Oh yeah, I need the x86_64 .iso.
Thanks
Sam
Sam Drinkard wrote:
Subject pretty much says it all. I want the 5.2 without the xen kernel. I've grabbed bits from 2 different mirrors and they all appear to have xen on them. It would be very nice if someone could throw some text into the mirrors file to differentiate the two "versions".. Oh yeah, I need the x86_64 .iso.
I'm not sure i've got the point ... you have the normal kernel and the choice to install xen if you want .. it's up to you : nobody forces you to install it. The same rule applies to Gnome/KDE/etc ;-)
Fabian Arrotin wrote:
Sam Drinkard wrote:
Subject pretty much says it all. I want the 5.2 without the xen kernel. I've grabbed bits from 2 different mirrors and they all appear to have xen on them. It would be very nice if someone could throw some text into the mirrors file to differentiate the two "versions".. Oh yeah, I need the x86_64 .iso.
I'm not sure i've got the point ... you have the normal kernel and the choice to install xen if you want .. it's up to you : nobody forces you to install it. The same rule applies to Gnome/KDE/etc ;-)
That's not possible with the DVD I have.. it does not give any option to not install xen. I'd have to boot back into the DVD but if there is an option to not install it, I've sure missed it.. I will look tho..
Sam
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Sam Drinkard sam@wa4phy.net wrote:
Fabian Arrotin wrote:
Sam Drinkard wrote:
Subject pretty much says it all. I want the 5.2 without the xen kernel. I've grabbed bits from 2 different mirrors and they all appear to have xen on them. It would be very nice if someone could throw some text into the mirrors file to differentiate the two "versions".. Oh yeah, I need the x86_64 .iso.
I'm not sure i've got the point ... you have the normal kernel and the choice to install xen if you want .. it's up to you : nobody forces you to install it. The same rule applies to Gnome/KDE/etc ;-)
That's not possible with the DVD I have.. it does not give any option to not install xen. I'd have to boot back into the DVD but if there is an option to not install it, I've sure missed it.. I will look tho..
Where, o, where did you get that iso?
I've never seen one that forces you to install virtualization - that's an optional package that is always off unless you specifically select it in the package options (or just off, if you don't customize right away).
I'd go back and get another, or download directly from the centos.org mirror sites.
BTW, I install with both the x86_64 DVD iso and the i386 DVD iso - depends on the target machine.
HTH
mhr
MHR wrote:
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Sam Drinkard sam@wa4phy.net wrote:
Fabian Arrotin wrote:
Sam Drinkard wrote:
Subject pretty much says it all. I want the 5.2 without the xen kernel. I've grabbed bits from 2 different mirrors and they all appear to have xen on them. It would be very nice if someone could throw some text into the mirrors file to differentiate the two "versions".. Oh yeah, I need the x86_64 .iso.
I'm not sure i've got the point ... you have the normal kernel and the choice to install xen if you want .. it's up to you : nobody forces you to install it. The same rule applies to Gnome/KDE/etc ;-)
That's not possible with the DVD I have.. it does not give any option to not install xen. I'd have to boot back into the DVD but if there is an option to not install it, I've sure missed it.. I will look tho..
Where, o, where did you get that iso?
I've never seen one that forces you to install virtualization - that's an optional package that is always off unless you specifically select it in the package options (or just off, if you don't customize right away).
I'd go back and get another, or download directly from the centos.org mirror sites.
BTW, I install with both the x86_64 DVD iso and the i386 DVD iso - depends on the target machine.
HTH
mhr _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Actually, I guess I did not know what the virtualization package was. If it had been called Xen, I know I'd not have installed it, but essentially looking through the first parts of install (which I'm doing right now) I see it there, clear as day, and I can assure you, that box is not checked ! It's very possible I may have had one or two too many 'ritas when I was doing the install and just said the heck with it.. check everything! Now, if I wind up with a kernel with xen in it, I'm gonna wonder why, 'cause I sure as heck don't want it. As for the where on the DVD, I think that one came from gatech.
Sam
Sam Drinkard írta:
Subject pretty much says it all. I want the 5.2 without the xen kernel. I've grabbed bits from 2 different mirrors and they all appear to have xen on them. It would be very nice if someone could throw some text into the mirrors file to differentiate the two "versions".. Oh yeah, I need the x86_64 .iso. Thanks
you just dont install xen, thats all no magic!
t
Sam Drinkard wrote:
Subject pretty much says it all. I want the 5.2 without the xen kernel. I've grabbed bits from 2 different mirrors and they all appear to have xen on them. It would be very nice if someone could throw some text into the mirrors file to differentiate the two "versions".. Oh yeah, I need the x86_64 .iso.
Do not install "Virtualization" and you won't have xen. There are no different ISOs for "with xen" and "without xen".
Ralph
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Do not install "Virtualization" and you won't have xen. There are no different ISOs for "with xen" and "without xen".
This means that the OP did not even bother checking the responses to his question.
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2008-November/068124.html
even looking at the recent kernel updates one can see for themselves :-
x86_64: kernel-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.x86_64.rpm kernel-debug-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.x86_64.rpm kernel-debug-devel-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.x86_64.rpm kernel-devel-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.x86_64.rpm kernel-doc-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.noarch.rpm kernel-headers-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.x86_64.rpm kernel-xen-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.x86_64.rpm kernel-xen-devel-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.x86_64.rpm
Regards, Vandaman.
Vandaman wrote:
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Do not install "Virtualization" and you won't have xen. There are no different ISOs for "with xen" and "without xen".
This means that the OP did not even bother checking the responses to his question.
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2008-November/068124.html
even looking at the recent kernel updates one can see for themselves :-
x86_64: kernel-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.x86_64.rpm kernel-debug-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.x86_64.rpm kernel-debug-devel-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.x86_64.rpm kernel-devel-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.x86_64.rpm kernel-doc-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.noarch.rpm kernel-headers-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.x86_64.rpm kernel-xen-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.x86_64.rpm kernel-xen-devel-2.6.18-92.1.17.el5.x86_64.rpm
Regards, Vandaman.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Not to start a pissing contest, but I can assure you, I've read every response to my question. I did not reply to each and every one because there is no need to duplicate answers. As for "seeing things" No, I did not see anything related to virtualization when I started the install. My fault that I missed it, but sometimes we tend to take things on the fly and I'm sure while you've never missed anything ever, at least I'll 'fess up to it..
Sam
Sam, please don't abandon threads you initiated yourself about the same topic, this is noob behavior. You should know better by now. You waste other people's time as they cannot know all content of all threads.
Kai
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Sam, please don't abandon threads you initiated yourself about the same topic, this is noob behavior. You should know better by now. You waste other people's time as they cannot know all content of all threads.
Kai
Kai,
I'm not abandoning the threads.. I have been up to my ass in alligators all week, and while I didn't respond to every reply, I caught several with one reply.. no point in duplications. I apologize if I'm acting like a noob, but I get so frustrated when things get blown out of proportion. I'm not a Centos newbie, but when I get a curve ball thrown at me when unexpected, I have to ask questions. I'm amazed that I missed the virtualization when I did the install.. I'm going to blow it all away and start fresh, mainly because I didn't like the default partitioning on the drives. I'm in uncharted waters for me with the raid array, and trying to figure out what is what.
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Sam Drinkard sam@wa4phy.net wrote: <snip>
unexpected, I have to ask questions. I'm amazed that I missed the virtualization when I did the install.. I'm going to blow it all away and start fresh, mainly because I didn't like the default partitioning on the drives. I'm in uncharted waters for me with the raid array, and trying to figure out what is what.
Sam: As I recall, when you do the installation, it asks you if you want to select the packages now or later. Select now and I think Virtualization is at or near the end of the lists of different groups of packages. Seems like xen is depreciated (?) and/or there are other virtualization methods that are easier to work with? You may want to scan the list archives for things about xen. Also, Download the documentation, from the CentOS web site and from Upstream (they may have more manuals available for download) regarding setting up RAID and check out the CentOS Wiki. GL & 73, Lanny
Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Sam Drinkard sam@wa4phy.net wrote:
<snip>
unexpected, I have to ask questions. I'm amazed that I missed the virtualization when I did the install.. I'm going to blow it all away and start fresh, mainly because I didn't like the default partitioning on the drives. I'm in uncharted waters for me with the raid array, and trying to figure out what is what.
Sam: As I recall, when you do the installation, it asks you if you want to select the packages now or later. Select now and I think Virtualization is at or near the end of the lists of different groups of packages. Seems like xen is depreciated (?) and/or there are other virtualization methods that are easier to work with? You may want to scan the list archives for things about xen. Also, Download the documentation, from the CentOS web site and from Upstream (they may have more manuals available for download) regarding setting up RAID and check out the CentOS Wiki. GL & 73, Lanny _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Hi Lanny,
I was very particular when doing this install, and I did see the virtualization box. I suppose I assumed it was something else when I did the first install. I've now got a good install afaik at this point, so I'll start off by updating the basic system. I know there is a heap of stuff that has changed since 4.7, and I just gotta play catch up. I'm not one to jump on the latest and greatest... xen is like a foreign language to me.. don't want it or need it. Will peruse the archives and see what else I've got to get updated on..
73,
Sam
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 3:35 PM, Sam Drinkard sam@wa4phy.net wrote:
Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Sam Drinkard sam@wa4phy.net wrote:
<snip> > unexpected, I have to ask questions. I'm amazed that I missed the > virtualization when I did the install.. I'm going to blow it all away and > start fresh, mainly because I didn't like the default partitioning on the > drives. I'm in uncharted waters for me with the raid array, and trying > to > figure out what is what.
<snip>
I was very particular when doing this install, and I did see the virtualization box. I suppose I assumed it was something else when I did the first install. I've now got a good install afaik at this point, so I'll start off by updating the basic system. I know there is a heap of stuff that has changed since 4.7, and I just gotta play catch up. I'm not one to jump on the latest and greatest... xen is like a foreign language to me.. don't want it or need it. Will peruse the archives and see what else I've got to get updated on..
Sounds good. After I clicked "send", I reread your post and realized that you didn't want xen (which, I believe, is depreciated). VMWare Server seems to be very popular here. A good idea to install only what you need, but, it's usually safer installing on Linux than installing something on M$ Windoze, which can really screw up the box. BTW, check the "Services" that are running on your box and turn off anything you don't need running. I'm always puzzled by services upstream has started, many of them, I don't want or need.
Tom Brown wrote:
Sounds good. After I clicked "send", I reread your post and realized that you didn't want xen (which, I believe, is depreciated).
what makes you think that ?
Some are interpreting this:
http://www.redhat.com/promo/qumranet/
as an indication that xen will be dropped from RHEL6 as they direct their efforts towards KVM.
Some are interpreting this:
http://www.redhat.com/promo/qumranet/
as an indication that xen will be dropped from RHEL6 as they direct their efforts towards KVM.
makes sense
On Tue, 2008-11-25 at 13:57 +0000, Ned Slider wrote:
Tom Brown wrote:
Sounds good. After I clicked "send", I reread your post and realized that you didn't want xen (which, I believe, is depreciated).
what makes you think that ?
Some are interpreting this:
http://www.redhat.com/promo/qumranet/
as an indication that xen will be dropped from RHEL6 as they direct their efforts towards KVM.
I very much doubt that ... I would expect XEN to be supported in RHEL6, now RHEL7 probably not.
Regards, Paul
-
Fabian Arrotin -
Kai Schaetzl -
Lanny Marcus -
MHR -
Ned Slider -
Paul -
Pintér Tibor -
Ralph Angenendt -
Sam Drinkard -
Tom Brown -
Vandaman