Hi,
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
Any suggestions on how I can get this to work?
Thank you
Keith
centos-bounces@centos.org schrieb am 11.07.2011 16:43:11:
Keith Beeby k.beeby@albion.co.uk Gesendet von: centos-bounces@centos.org
11.07.2011 16:43
Bitte antworten an CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
An
CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
Kopie
Thema
[CentOS] Centos 6 Server has no GUI
Hi,
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
Any suggestions on how I can get this to work?
Thank you
Keith _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Hello Keith,
I've installed it yesterday on a HP Microserver with GUI with the second entry from the boot list. For me it works . But I haven't installed a gui on the server, just only the installation.
Gruß Andreas Reschke
On Mon, July 11, 2011 16:43, Keith Beeby wrote:
Hi,
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
Any suggestions on how I can get this to work?
perhaps::
yum groupinstall "GNOME Desktop Environment"
Dear Giles,
On Monday, July 11, 2011 you wrote:
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
perhaps:: yum groupinstall "GNOME Desktop Environment"
There is no "GNOME Desktop Environment" group. Check with yum grouplist and you will see. And even installing "KDE Desktop" won't help, because it is not starting automatically. And then, we don't have runlevels any more, this means a little bit more looking into details is required.
best regards --- Michael Schumacher PAMAS Partikelmess- und Analysesysteme GmbH Dieselstr.10, D-71277 Rutesheim Tel +49-7152-99630 Fax +49-7152-996333 Geschäftsführer: Gerhard Schreck Handelsregister B Stuttgart HRB 252024
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 01:51:21PM +0200, Michael Schumacher wrote:
Dear Giles,
On Monday, July 11, 2011 you wrote:
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
perhaps:: yum groupinstall "GNOME Desktop Environment"
There is no "GNOME Desktop Environment" group. Check with yum grouplist and you will see. And even installing "KDE Desktop" won't help, because it is not starting automatically. And then, we don't have runlevels any more, this means a little bit more looking into details is required.
As RH has always been overly (IMHO) Gnome-centric, I believe that "Desktop Platform, or even basic desktop, will give you Gnome. (Desktop or, using the shortname, which in this case, is actually longer, @basic-desktop).
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Michael Schumacher wrote:
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org From: Michael Schumacher michael.schumacher@pamas.de Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Server has no GUI
Dear Giles,
On Monday, July 11, 2011 you wrote:
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
perhaps:: yum groupinstall "GNOME Desktop Environment"
There is no "GNOME Desktop Environment" group. Check with yum grouplist and you will see. And even installing "KDE Desktop" won't help, because it is not starting automatically. And then, we don't have runlevels any more, this means a little bit more looking into details is required.
How can Linux _not_ have run levels. I thought that was a central part of the design of Linux?
Kind Regards,
Keith
----------------------------------------------------------------- Websites: http://www.karsites.net http://www.php-debuggers.net http://www.raised-from-the-dead.org.uk
All email addresses are challenge-response protected with TMDA [http://tmda.net] -----------------------------------------------------------------
on Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Michael Schumacher wrote:
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org From: Michael Schumacher michael.schumacher@pamas.de Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Server has no GUI
Dear Giles,
On Monday, July 11, 2011 you wrote:
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've
setup
Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the
GUI but
v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the
GUI
perhaps:: yum groupinstall "GNOME Desktop Environment"
There is no "GNOME Desktop Environment" group. Check with yum grouplist and you will see. And even installing "KDE Desktop" won't help, because it is not starting automatically. And then, we don't have runlevels any more, this means a little bit more looking into details is required.
How can Linux _not_ have run levels. I thought that was a central part of the design of Linux?
Um, who says 6 doesn't have runlevels? I haven't personally looked at C6, but upstream EL6 -does- have runlevels just as previous versions:
# 0 - halt (Do NOT set initdefault to this) # 1 - Single user mode # 2 - Multiuser, without NFS (The same as 3, if you do not have networking) # 3 - Full multiuser mode # 4 - unused # 5 - X11 # 6 - reboot (Do NOT set initdefault to this)
Josh
Josh,
On Tuesday, July 12, 2011 you wrote:
help, because it is not starting automatically. And then, we don't have runlevels any more, this means a little bit more looking into details is required.
How can Linux _not_ have run levels. I thought that was a central part of the design of Linux?
Um, who says 6 doesn't have runlevels? I haven't personally looked at C6, but upstream EL6 -does- have runlevels just as previous versions:
...my fault. I had some remarks in my mind that the boot procedure had changed from rhel5 to rhel6. Now I can't find that reference. Looks like this was nonsense from my side. Sorry, still trying so sort things with our new CENTOS6 toy... :-)
best regards --- Michael Schumacher PAMAS Partikelmess- und Analysesysteme GmbH Dieselstr.10, D-71277 Rutesheim Tel +49-7152-99630 Fax +49-7152-996333 Geschäftsführer: Gerhard Schreck Handelsregister B Stuttgart HRB 252024
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 02:55:16PM +0200, Michael Schumacher wrote:
Josh,
On Tuesday, July 12, 2011 you wrote:
Um, who says 6 doesn't have runlevels? I haven't personally looked at C6, but upstream EL6 -does- have runlevels just as previous versions:
...my fault. I had some remarks in my mind that the boot procedure had changed from rhel5 to rhel6. Now I can't find that reference. Looks like this was nonsense from my side. Sorry, still trying so sort things with our new CENTOS6 toy... :-)
My guess (although no more than a guess) is that either you, or whoever wrote what you read, mistook something about Fedora's change to systemd. (Probably a tech journalist, trying for senationalism.) :)
On Tuesday, July 12, 2011 08:44:00 AM Keith Roberts wrote:
How can Linux _not_ have run levels. I thought that was a central part of the design of Linux?
No, it's a central part of the design of the old System V Init. C6, SL6, and upstream EL6 use upstart instead of SysVInit.
EL7, if the direction of Fedora is any indication, won't have classic runlevels, but will use systemd.
The Linux kernel knows nothing of runlevels; runlevels are userspace and have been since SysVInit was first used (and even before). All the kernel cares about is that it hands execution off to a userspace process that then takes care of further boot. That process can be /bin/sh or anything else, the kernel doesn't care.
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Lamar Owen wrote:
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org From: Lamar Owen lowen@pari.edu Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Server has no GUI
On Tuesday, July 12, 2011 08:44:00 AM Keith Roberts wrote:
How can Linux _not_ have run levels. I thought that was a central part of the design of Linux?
No, it's a central part of the design of the old System V Init. C6, SL6, and upstream EL6 use upstart instead of SysVInit.
EL7, if the direction of Fedora is any indication, won't have classic runlevels, but will use systemd.
The Linux kernel knows nothing of runlevels; runlevels are userspace and have been since SysVInit was first used (and even before). All the kernel cares about is that it hands execution off to a userspace process that then takes care of further boot. That process can be /bin/sh or anything else, the kernel doesn't care.
OK, thanks for pointing that out Lamar. So I take it we can still choose which services we want running at boot time on C6?
Keith
----------------------------------------------------------------- Websites: http://www.karsites.net http://www.php-debuggers.net http://www.raised-from-the-dead.org.uk
All email addresses are challenge-response protected with TMDA [http://tmda.net] -----------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Keith Roberts keith@karsites.net wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Lamar Owen wrote:
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org From: Lamar Owen lowen@pari.edu Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Server has no GUI
On Tuesday, July 12, 2011 08:44:00 AM Keith Roberts wrote:
How can Linux _not_ have run levels. I thought that was a central part of the design of Linux?
No, it's a central part of the design of the old System V Init. C6, SL6, and upstream EL6 use upstart instead of SysVInit.
EL7, if the direction of Fedora is any indication, won't have classic runlevels, but will use systemd.
The Linux kernel knows nothing of runlevels; runlevels are userspace and have been since SysVInit was first used (and even before). All the kernel cares about is that it hands execution off to a userspace process that then takes care of further boot. That process can be /bin/sh or anything else, the kernel doesn't care.
OK, thanks for pointing that out Lamar. So I take it we can still choose which services we want running at boot time on C6?
Keith
Yes, look here: http://upstart.ubuntu.com/
On 7/12/2011 12:41 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Keith Robertskeith@karsites.net wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Lamar Owen wrote:
To: CentOS mailing listcentos@centos.org From: Lamar Owenlowen@pari.edu Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Server has no GUI
On Tuesday, July 12, 2011 08:44:00 AM Keith Roberts wrote:
How can Linux _not_ have run levels. I thought that was a central part of the design of Linux?
No, it's a central part of the design of the old System V Init. C6, SL6, and upstream EL6 use upstart instead of SysVInit.
EL7, if the direction of Fedora is any indication, won't have classic runlevels, but will use systemd.
The Linux kernel knows nothing of runlevels; runlevels are userspace and have been since SysVInit was first used (and even before). All the kernel cares about is that it hands execution off to a userspace process that then takes care of further boot. That process can be /bin/sh or anything else, the kernel doesn't care.
OK, thanks for pointing that out Lamar. So I take it we can still choose which services we want running at boot time on C6?
Keith
Yes, look here: http://upstart.ubuntu.com/
Perhaps this is sheer ignorance on my part, but from reading the information at the other end of the link you provided doesn't upstart make the system more vulnerable to attack seeing how everything in upstart is event driven?
On Tuesday, July 12, 2011 12:31:07 PM Keith Roberts wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Lamar Owen wrote:
C6, SL6, and upstream EL6 use upstart instead of SysVInit.
OK, thanks for pointing that out Lamar. So I take it we can still choose which services we want running at boot time on C6?
Yes. But not in /etc/inittab.
The normal chkconfig interface still works with upstart, and the inittscripts are still in /etc/init.d, and symlinks are still in /etc/rcX.d, with upstart.
/etc/inittab is only used to set the default runlevel in upstart, as documented in /etc/inittab itself, at least on my RHEL 6.1 system.
But it's runlevel emulation, not classic SysV runlevels, and upstart is capable of event-driven daemon loading/unloading. The F15 and later systemd goes beyond that.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 01:44:00PM +0100, Keith Roberts wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Michael Schumacher wrote:
How can Linux _not_ have run levels. I thought that was a central part of the design of Linux?
Actually, in yet another bow to the desktop user, sysv will probably be dropped in favor of systemd. Made by the same person who did pulseaudio, it supposedly does some good--in my own case (on Fedora), it hasn't gotten in my way, which is about all I ask of the Fedora "improvements". However, thanks, I believe, to Bill Nottingham, at <modest cough> my suggestion, in Fedora's /etc/inittab are instructions on how to fix run level.
It seems to continue to work with chkconfig and the service command, though it is, judging from some posts on Fedora forums, causing problems for a few people. (Just search systemd on Fedora forums and user jpollard.)
However, CentOS 6 is still running /etc/inittab and one can set the runlevel there, as well as in the kernel line.
Scott Robbins wrote:
Actually, in yet another bow to the desktop user, sysv will probably be dropped in favor of systemd. Made by the same person who did pulseaudio, it supposedly does some good--in my own case (on Fedora), it hasn't gotten in my way, which is about all I ask of the Fedora "improvements".
For now, systemd is only a replacement and has no real speed improvement over current init's. In order to see speed improvements, daemons need to change and behave in compliance with systemd guidelines. Author says they are preaty easy to implement.
Ljubomir
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Michael Schumacher michael.schumacher@pamas.de wrote:
There is no "GNOME Desktop Environment" group. Check with yum grouplist and you will see. And even installing "KDE Desktop" won't help, because it is not starting automatically. And then, we don't have runlevels any more, this means a little bit more looking into details is required.
Are you confusing C6 with F15 (where levels 2-4 are merged) or Debian and derivatives (where levels 2-5 are merged)?
At Mon, 11 Jul 2011 15:43:11 +0100 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote:
Hi,
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
Any suggestions on how I can get this to work?
Why do you want a GUI on a *server*?
Thank you
Keith _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 7/11/11, Keith Beeby k.beeby@albion.co.uk wrote:
Hi,
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
If I'm not mistaken, the "Server" option does not include the GUI so you'll have to install the GUI group manually as others have suggested.
Hi,
Thanks everyone, yes server has no GUI by default, so should have added a install time, now working by adding later
Thanks
Keith
On 11 Jul 2011, at 16:33, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
On 7/11/11, Keith Beeby k.beeby@albion.co.uk wrote:
Hi,
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
If I'm not mistaken, the "Server" option does not include the GUI so you'll have to install the GUI group manually as others have suggested. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
-----Original Message----- From: Keith Beeby Sent: 11/07/2011 16:38 To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Server has no GUI
Hi,
Thanks everyone, yes server has no GUI by default, so should have added a install time, now working by adding later
Thanks
Keith
What caught me out (_doesn't_ sounds like it did you though), was that the CentOS 6 x86_64 installer chose to do a text-based install, through lack of support for the graphics card, I guess (this is inside VMware Server 1.0!). The text-based install does not give you a choice of the kind of stuff to install, you just seem to get 'minimal'.
I had much better luck after reading through the install guide (here: http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Installati... ). Booted off the iso, hit <ESC> and then at the boot prompt: linux vnc. I could then use a VNC client to do the nice graphical install.
hth someone Andy
Andy Holt wrote:
From: Keith Beeby
Thanks everyone, yes server has no GUI by default, so should have added a install time, now working by adding later
What caught me out (_doesn't_ sounds like it did you though), was that the CentOS 6 x86_64 installer chose to do a text-based install, through lack of support for the graphics card, I guess (this is inside VMware Server 1.0!). The text-based install does not give you a choice of the kind of stuff to install, you just seem to get 'minimal'.
<snip> Huh? I always use the text-based install, and check the select packages (or whatever it is) box, and the next screen's where I go down its list, and go into each, and (un)select what I want on the machine.
mark
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:55:12AM -0400, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Andy Holt wrote:
From: Keith Beeby
What caught me out (_doesn't_ sounds like it did you though), was that the CentOS 6 x86_64 installer chose to do a text-based install, through lack of support for the graphics card, I guess (this is inside VMware Server 1.0!). The text-based install does not give you a choice of the kind of stuff to install, you just seem to get 'minimal'.
<snip> Huh? I always use the text-based install, and check the select packages (or whatever it is) box, and the next screen's where I go down its list, and go into each, and (un)select what I want on the machine.
Have you done this with CentOS/RH/OLE 6? They've crippled it. In a marketing move that, again in my arrogant opinion, ranks up there with Windows Genuine Advantage, they'll tell you that they've streamlined and simplified it.
I think the rationale was that they decided to put their efforts into a GUI install and it was too much work to continue the functionality of the text mode. You'd have to dig through the Fedora testing list, I think.
However, kickstart functionality remains, so you can always use a kickstart file, and that will enable you to do partitioning, and package selection.
Scott Robbins wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:55:12AM -0400, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Andy Holt wrote:
From: Keith Beeby
What caught me out (_doesn't_ sounds like it did you though), was that the CentOS 6 x86_64 installer chose to do a text-based install, through lack of support for the graphics card, I guess (this is inside VMware Server 1.0!). The text-based install does not give you a choice of the kind of stuff to install, you just seem to get 'minimal'.
<snip> Huh? I always use the text-based install, and check the select packages (or whatever it is) box, and the next screen's where I go down its list, and go into each, and (un)select what I want on the machine.
Have you done this with CentOS/RH/OLE 6? They've crippled it. In a
When would I have tried it? I saw posts about mirrors being sync'd before I left work Friday. I'm certainly not upgrading my home system for a while....
marketing move that, again in my arrogant opinion, ranks up there with Windows Genuine Advantage, they'll tell you that they've streamlined and simplified it.
You're joking....
I think the rationale was that they decided to put their efforts into a GUI install and it was too much work to continue the functionality of the text mode. You'd have to dig through the Fedora testing list, I think.
And GUI is less work? And they couldn't leave the same code in place?
However, kickstart functionality remains, so you can always use a kickstart file, and that will enable you to do partitioning, and package selection.
And to build a test system, as I'm about to do?
Wonderful.
mark
On 07/11/2011 11:13 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Have you done this with CentOS/RH/OLE 6? They've crippled it. In a
When would I have tried it? I saw posts about mirrors being sync'd before I left work Friday. I'm certainly not upgrading my home system for a while....
RHEL6 has a trial program. http://www.redhat.com/wapps/eval/index.html?evaluation_id=1008
I think you can download Oracle Linux 6 as well.
-Mike
Michael Best wrote:
On 07/11/2011 11:13 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Have you done this with CentOS/RH/OLE 6? They've crippled it. In a
When would I have tried it? I saw posts about mirrors being sync'd before I left work Friday. I'm certainly not upgrading my home system
for a
while....
RHEL6 has a trial program. http://www.redhat.com/wapps/eval/index.html?evaluation_id=1008
I think you can download Oracle Linux 6 as well.
I'm afraid you missed the point I was making: I run CentOS at home, and I'm not upgrading my own personal machine to 6 (it'll be 6.1), and that will be semi-nervous-making, though not that bad, since I have separate LVM partitions for things... and I hadn't done any of it here at work.
Actually, I'll be doing that this afternoon, and see how it goes.
mark
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 01:13:54PM -0400, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Scott Robbins wrote:
Have you done this with CentOS/RH/OLE 6? They've crippled it. In a
When would I have tried it? I saw posts about mirrors being sync'd before I left work Friday. I'm certainly not upgrading my home system for a while....
Well... one of the various free clones, or maybe a beta?
marketing move that, again in my arrogant opinion, ranks up there with Windows Genuine Advantage, they'll tell you that they've streamlined and simplified it.
You're joking....
If you mean in trying to be amusing, yes. If you mean I am making it up for shock value, no--they really did say simplified and streamlined.
I think the rationale was that they decided to put their efforts into a GUI install and it was too much work to continue the functionality of the text mode. You'd have to dig through the Fedora testing list, I think.
And GUI is less work? And they couldn't leave the same code in place?
No, but GUIs are important. Don't you read distrowatch, and note how, if a sytem doesn't have a GUI installer, the reviewer faults it? (Yes, I am being a bit sarcastic, but the words are true. )
However, kickstart functionality remains, so you can always use a kickstart file, and that will enable you to do partitioning, and package selection.
And to build a test system, as I'm about to do?
Wonderful.
My own impression, and it is nothing more than that, is that Fedora being a testbed/devel platform, or whatever for RH has made it, in certain ways, worry more about the desktop user---on the other hand, RH with its reliance on GUIs, has also made me sometimes think it's more for those who dislike Windows than those who like Unix, and the server, et al, GUI-less installs were a pleasant surprise. On the other hand, I also wondered, cynic that I am, whether it was in part, influenced by Ubuntu server, (which is also sans GUI).
On Mon, 11 Jul 2011, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
You're joking....
I think the rationale was that they decided to put their efforts into a GUI install and it was too much work to continue the functionality of the text mode. You'd have to dig through the Fedora testing list, I think.
And GUI is less work? And they couldn't leave the same code in place?
The EL5 text mode couldn't do everything you could do in GUI mode (I was sure there were some LVM bits missing). Given VNC works perfectly, as does kickstart, I'm not sure there's a place for a text mode that behaves differently to the graphical installer, and I wouldn't want them wasting any time maintaining it.
Tested with VirtualBox 4.0.10, with 1Gbytes of RAM assigned, it installed perfectly in graphical mode, and I was free to reduce the memory after the install. Tested with less memory it did a perfect minimal install. Not tested kickstart yet as I was going to build up a Spacewalk server on CentOS6 first, but I assume that'll all be fine too.
No complaints here with their decision to trim the text mode installer.
jh
On 11/07/2011 16:46, I wrote: What caught me out (_doesn't_ sounds like it did you though), was that the CentOS 6 x86_64 installer chose to do a text-based install, through lack of support for the graphics card, I guess (this is inside VMware Server 1.0!). The text-based install does not give you a choice of the kind of stuff to install, you just seem to get 'minimal'.
Or in fact, as someone just pointed out in another thread, make sure you have >652MB of RAM, and then the graphical installer _will_ be used, even under VMware Server 1.0.
Andy
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:33:10PM +0800, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
On 7/11/11, Keith Beeby k.beeby@albion.co.uk wrote:
Hi,
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
If I'm not mistaken, the "Server" option does not include the GUI so you'll have to install the GUI group manually as others have suggested.
If I'm not mistaken, (not making fun of Emmanuel, just the same caveat), neither server nor web server have a GUI by default. IMLTHO (less than humble) this is something they should have done a long time ago, (though I would like to see either flux or openbox available as alternative--on the other hand, that's purely personal preference, and can be safely ignored--just, if I do, for whatever reason, want a GUI on a server, I'd much prefer a *box (or other--twm is available actually, but I don't like it), I'd like something light.
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Scott Robbins scottro@nyc.rr.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:33:10PM +0800, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
On 7/11/11, Keith Beeby k.beeby@albion.co.uk wrote:
Hi,
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
If I'm not mistaken, the "Server" option does not include the GUI so you'll have to install the GUI group manually as others have suggested.
If I'm not mistaken, (not making fun of Emmanuel, just the same caveat), neither server nor web server have a GUI by default. IMLTHO (less than humble) this is something they should have done a long time ago, (though I would like to see either flux or openbox available as alternative--on the other hand, that's purely personal preference, and can be safely ignored--just, if I do, for whatever reason, want a GUI on a server, I'd much prefer a *box (or other--twm is available actually, but I don't like it), I'd like something light.
--
I have to agree with Scott.
A "lightweight" server option is a long-awaited-and-much-deserved-feature but it would be nice if we could still get a very lightweight X - even if it doesn't run automatically. I often need to use X for odd stuff which only works on X - like using Firefox to check if a specific feature on a website, hosted on the server works fine. Or like using gparted to get the extra features which fdisk doesn't offer.
Just a thought.......
----- Original Message -----
A "lightweight" server option is a long-awaited-and-much-deserved-feature but it would be nice if we could still get a very lightweight X - even if it doesn't run automatically. I often need to use X for odd stuff which only works on X - like using Firefox to check if a specific feature on a website, hosted on the server works fine. Or like using gparted to get the extra features which fdisk doesn't offer.
I agree. However, in those situations, I typically run these apps headless using X forwarding over SSH.
A quick howto if you've never done this before:
http://www.cs.caltech.edu/courses/cs11/misc/xwindows.html
--Tim
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Scott Robbins scottro@nyc.rr.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:33:10PM +0800, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
On 7/11/11, Keith Beeby k.beeby@albion.co.uk wrote:
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
If I'm not mistaken, the "Server" option does not include the GUI so you'll have to install the GUI group manually as others have suggested.
<snip>
automatically. I often need to use X for odd stuff which only works on X - like using Firefox to check if a specific feature on a website, hosted on the server works fine. Or like using gparted to get the extra features which fdisk doesn't offer.
I regularly run ssh -X server, and run firefox remotely.
mark "http://localhost:631
On Mon, 11 Jul 2011, Scott Robbins wrote:
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org From: Scott Robbins scottro@nyc.rr.com Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Server has no GUI
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:33:10PM +0800, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
On 7/11/11, Keith Beeby k.beeby@albion.co.uk wrote:
Hi,
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
If I'm not mistaken, the "Server" option does not include the GUI so you'll have to install the GUI group manually as others have suggested.
If I'm not mistaken, (not making fun of Emmanuel, just the same caveat), neither server nor web server have a GUI by default. IMLTHO (less than humble) this is something they should have done a long time ago, (though I would like to see either flux or openbox available as alternative--on the other hand, that's purely personal preference, and can be safely ignored--just, if I do, for whatever reason, want a GUI on a server, I'd much prefer a *box (or other--twm is available actually, but I don't like it), I'd like something light.
On Centos 5.6 I'm running xfce4, which is reasonable.
[root]# yum groupinfo "*" > Centos6-groups.txt
should give you a listing of all Centos6 groups in a text file for refering to later.
HTH
Keith Roberts
----------------------------------------------------------------- Websites: http://www.karsites.net http://www.php-debuggers.net http://www.raised-from-the-dead.org.uk
All email addresses are challenge-response protected with TMDA [http://tmda.net] -----------------------------------------------------------------
On 7/11/2011 10:43 AM, Keith Beeby wrote:
Hi,
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
Any suggestions on how I can get this to work?
Thank you
Keith _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
install webmin or something. why load the machine down with x..:)
On Monday, July 11, 2011 07:56:53 PM William Warren wrote:
On 7/11/2011 10:43 AM, Keith Beeby wrote:
So first daft question with Centos 6 (someone had to be first!) I've setup Centos 6 as a Server but as with Centos 5 it used to boot into the GUI but v6 doesn't do this, startx etc doesn't seem to work to launch the GUI
Any suggestions on how I can get this to work?
install webmin or something. why load the machine down with x..:)
Trying not to be rude, but....
If a server is 'loaded' by having X running, either the server is too weak or it's lightly loaded. X's percentage of load on a heavily loaded modernish server is likely to be very low.
But that's something to take up with upstream, not with CentOS, since CentOS is just simply going to be 100% binary compatible with upstream.
This is something that should have been brought up during upstream's beta cycle (which started a long time ago); Karanbir for one specifically asked the list to test the upstream beta and file reports on it to help with what C6 was going to look like. But reading how some of these changes have taken folks by surprise shows that they didn't test the upstream beta as requested. Discussion was all over upstream's EL6 beta list, and it got rather interesting at times.
Likewise, it's common knowledge that tracking Fedora is one of the better ways to see what's coming down the 'pike for EL; EL5 being based roughly on Fedora 6 or so, and now EL6 being based roughly on Fedora 12/13 or so, should tell you what to expect (the differences between FC6 and F12 are rather huge).
Again, I'm trying my hardest to not be rude about this, but it's not like the featureset of EL6 came about in a vacuum or something.
-
Andreas Reschke -
Andy Holt -
Baird, Josh -
Emmanuel Noobadmin -
Giles Coochey -
John Hodrien -
Keith Beeby -
Keith Roberts -
Lamar Owen -
Lars Hecking -
Ljubomir Ljubojevic -
m.roth＠5-cent.us -
Mark Weaver -
Michael Best -
Michael Schumacher -
Robert Heller -
Rudi Ahlers -
Scott Robbins -
Tim Nelson -
Tom H -
William Warren