Hi list!
On all my 4.x boxes (didn't see this on 3.x) I get this in /var/log/messages the whole day:
Aug 17 04:02:05 weblinux1 crond(pam_unix)[32149]: session closed for user root Aug 17 05:01:01 weblinux1 crond(pam_unix)[32668]: session opened for user root b y (uid=0) Aug 17 05:01:01 weblinux1 crond(pam_unix)[32668]: session closed for user root Aug 17 06:01:01 weblinux1 crond(pam_unix)[32712]: session opened for user root b y (uid=0) Aug 17 06:01:01 weblinux1 crond(pam_unix)[32712]: session closed for user root Aug 17 07:01:01 weblinux1 crond(pam_unix)[32762]: session opened for user root b y (uid=0) Aug 17 07:01:01 weblinux1 crond(pam_unix)[32762]: session closed for user root Aug 17 08:01:01 weblinux1 crond(pam_unix)[344]: session opened for user root by (uid=0)
Logwatch reports it too every day:
crond: Unknown Entries: session closed for user root: 25 Time(s) session opened for user root by (uid=0): 25 Time(s)
Some boxes have up to 770 of these events per day
On Thu, 2005-08-18 at 08:52 +0200, Remco Barendse wrote:
Hi list!
On all my 4.x boxes (didn't see this on 3.x) I get this in /var/log/messages the whole day:
Aug 17 04:02:05 weblinux1 crond(pam_unix)[32149]: session closed for user root
Some boxes have up to 770 of these events per day
Look in /etc/cron.*.
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-18 at 08:52 +0200, Remco Barendse wrote:
Hi list!
On all my 4.x boxes (didn't see this on 3.x) I get this in /var/log/messages the whole day:
Aug 17 04:02:05 weblinux1 crond(pam_unix)[32149]: session closed for user root
Some boxes have up to 770 of these events per day
Look in /etc/cron.*.
OK, so I guess that for every cron job that is run as root such an event is written to /var/log/messages? Strange that it doesn't report which cronjob it has processed, the report as it is now is rather useless for any use.
Can I disable those messages?
Hi,
Just wanted to check which branch was the correct one for a Xeon EMT64?
TIA,
Nick
On Thursday 18 August 2005 07:11, Nick wrote:
Hi,
Just wanted to check which branch was the correct one for a Xeon EMT64?
IA64 is itanium - that's out... x86_64 or i386 depends on the intended use of your system. If it is a server and has lots of memory then the 64bit variant is the right for you. If you need something that is easier to use and do not have >2Gb ram, you're better off with i386 in my opinion.
The reason for that is that several applications (i.e. firefox plugins) will have to run 32bit even if you installed the 64bit x86_64 OS since no 64bit versions are available. To achive that, x86_64 contains a complete 32bit runtime environment. This means you need more disk space (i.e. for the 64bit and the 32bit versions of libraries) and you have a better chance of getting something wrong (i.e. the 64bit library of something you need is installed but you would need the 32bit version. A simple rpm -qa will show the package is installed but when running your 32bit app, it will still fail). Yum will take care of most of this, but if you're new to linux and/or do not want to have to deal with these things, a i386 install is just simpler.
Peter.
On Thu, 2005-08-18 at 07:19 -0400, Peter Arremann wrote:
On Thursday 18 August 2005 07:11, Nick wrote:
Hi,
Just wanted to check which branch was the correct one for a Xeon EMT64?
IA64 is itanium - that's out... x86_64 or i386 depends on the intended use of your system. If it is a server and has lots of memory then the 64bit variant is the right for you. If you need something that is easier to use and do not have >2Gb ram, you're better off with i386 in my opinion.
The reason for that is that several applications (i.e. firefox plugins) will have to run 32bit even if you installed the 64bit x86_64 OS since no 64bit versions are available. To achive that, x86_64 contains a complete 32bit runtime environment. This means you need more disk space (i.e. for the 64bit and the 32bit versions of libraries) and you have a better chance of getting something wrong (i.e. the 64bit library of something you need is installed but you would need the 32bit version. A simple rpm -qa will show the package is installed but when running your 32bit app, it will still fail). Yum will take care of most of this, but if you're new to linux and/or do not want to have to deal with these things, a i386 install is just simpler.
I agree with Peter ... if it is going to be a server that doesn't need lots of multimedia apps and openoffice, etc ... then use x86_64.
If it is going to be a workstation (or a Terminal server for many people to use as a workstation), then I would use i386.
On Thursday 18 August 2005 07:11, Nick wrote:
Hi,
Just wanted to check which branch was the correct one for a Xeon EMT64?
IA64 is itanium - that's out... x86_64 or i386 depends on the intended use of your system. If it is a server and has lots of memory then the 64bit variant is the right for you. If you need something that is easier to use and do not have >2Gb ram, you're better off with i386 in my opinion.
The reason for that is that several applications (i.e. firefox plugins) will have to run 32bit even if you installed the 64bit x86_64 OS since no 64bit versions are available. To achive that, x86_64 contains a complete 32bit runtime environment. This means you need more disk space (i.e. for the 64bit and the 32bit versions of libraries) and you have a better chance of getting something wrong (i.e. the 64bit library of something you need is installed but you would need the 32bit version. A simple rpm -qa will show the package is installed but when running your 32bit app, it will still fail). Yum will take care of most of this, but if you're new to linux and/or do not want to have to deal with these things, a i386 install is just simpler.
Thanks for that, makes it a lot clearer.
As we have a policy of keeping it simple stupid for this particular application I think I'll just go with the i386 release... saves me a couple of hours downloading too - bonus ;o)
Thanks again.
On Thu, 2005-08-18 at 21:11 +1000, Nick wrote:
Hi,
Just wanted to check which branch was the correct one for a Xeon EMT64?
TIA,
Nick
You can use either x86_64 OR i386.
x86_64 is the one that will take advantage of the extra functionality.
BUT, there are things not available for x86_64 (search the mailing list for flash problems on x86_64, for example) ... and the openoffice.org is i386.
Nick wrote:
Hi,
Just wanted to check which branch was the correct one for a Xeon EMT64?
TIA,
Nick
Hey! You hijacked a thread!
Mike
-
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams -
Johnny Hughes -
Mike McCarty -
Nick -
Peter Arremann -
Remco Barendse