I was hoping there already was a port available. So I second this request.
-----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Dag Wieers Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 7:54 AM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Red Hat Cluster Suite Importance: High
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 16:53 -0400, Adam Breaux wrote:
Is there an equivalent for CentOS?
For CentOS-3 here: http://bender.it.swin.edu.au/centos-3/
For CentOS-4: GFS 6.1 (and RHCS) is not yet released
Not wanting to add extra load on the CentOS developers, but it would be nice to have this as part of CentOS :)
Or this there a problem distributing this ?
-- dag wieers, dag@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power] _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
It sort of is ... that is John Newbigin's site (the CentOS-2 maintainer) and it works for CentOS-3.x.
I will make the RHGFS 6.1 / RHCS part of CentOS-4 somehow {either a separate repo or part of the current extras (or centosplus ... if it upgrades anything)} when it released for EL-4.
On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 08:56 -0400, Adam Breaux wrote:
I was hoping there already was a port available. So I second this request.
-----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Dag Wieers Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 7:54 AM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Red Hat Cluster Suite Importance: High
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 16:53 -0400, Adam Breaux wrote:
Is there an equivalent for CentOS?
For CentOS-3 here: http://bender.it.swin.edu.au/centos-3/
For CentOS-4: GFS 6.1 (and RHCS) is not yet released
Not wanting to add extra load on the CentOS developers, but it would be nice to have this as part of CentOS :)
Or this there a problem distributing this ?
-- dag wieers, dag@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power] _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
There is no problem on my end. If people want it I can upload it somewhere.
It is a lot easier to maintain now. It is just a case of rebuild, sign & upload.
I am slowly working through my mail backlog. I spent last week doing RH300 and I am now a RHCE!
There are a few outstanding errata emails for CentOS-2 as well. The errata is built, I just have not had a chance to send the mail yet.
John.
Johnny Hughes wrote:
It sort of is ... that is John Newbigin's site (the CentOS-2 maintainer) and it works for CentOS-3.x.
I will make the RHGFS 6.1 / RHCS part of CentOS-4 somehow {either a separate repo or part of the current extras (or centosplus ... if it upgrades anything)} when it released for EL-4.
On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 08:56 -0400, Adam Breaux wrote:
I was hoping there already was a port available. So I second this request.
-----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Dag Wieers Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 7:54 AM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Red Hat Cluster Suite Importance: High
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 16:53 -0400, Adam Breaux wrote:
Is there an equivalent for CentOS?
For CentOS-3 here: http://bender.it.swin.edu.au/centos-3/
For CentOS-4: GFS 6.1 (and RHCS) is not yet released
Not wanting to add extra load on the CentOS developers, but it would be nice to have this as part of CentOS :)
Or this there a problem distributing this ?
-- dag wieers, dag@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power] _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
I'm interested...
John
John Newbigin jnewbigin@ict.swin.edu.au wrote: There is no problem on my end. If people want it I can upload it somewhere.
It is a lot easier to maintain now. It is just a case of rebuild, sign & upload.
I am slowly working through my mail backlog. I spent last week doing RH300 and I am now a RHCE!
There are a few outstanding errata emails for CentOS-2 as well. The errata is built, I just have not had a chance to send the mail yet.
John.
Johnny Hughes wrote:
It sort of is ... that is John Newbigin's site (the CentOS-2 maintainer) and it works for CentOS-3.x.
I will make the RHGFS 6.1 / RHCS part of CentOS-4 somehow {either a separate repo or part of the current extras (or centosplus ... if it upgrades anything)} when it released for EL-4.
On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 08:56 -0400, Adam Breaux wrote:
I was hoping there already was a port available. So I second this request.
-----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Dag Wieers Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 7:54 AM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Red Hat Cluster Suite Importance: High
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 16:53 -0400, Adam Breaux wrote:
Is there an equivalent for CentOS?
For CentOS-3 here: http://bender.it.swin.edu.au/centos-3/
For CentOS-4: GFS 6.1 (and RHCS) is not yet released
Not wanting to add extra load on the CentOS developers, but it would be nice to have this as part of CentOS :)
Or this there a problem distributing this ?
-- dag wieers, dag@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power] _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 08:43 +1000, John Newbigin wrote:
I spent last week doing RH300 and I am now a RHCE!
Congrats! Glad you got to take the full RH300 track. I sure wish I would have and I definitely will next time. That exam will knock you on your butt if you don't prepare!
I got lucky on my RH302 (exam-only), I only got a 77% in a compulsory RHCE subsection requirement that required a 70%, but 96.1% overall (perfect 100% on everything else). I came close to only getting the RHCT because of that one compulsory RHCE subsection. I know many others that missed the RHCE, despite getting over a 90% total (and no section less than an 85%).
My long story short, my new client (and rather short-lived, I left them in the first 90 days citing, in writing, repeated contract violations despite warnings) pushed me to get my MCSE and RHCE. I did half my MCSE (the MCSA) at lunch every day that week, in between working almost 50 hours. I then drove 450 miles overnight Thursday to take my RHCE (exam- only) on the brand new RHL9 exam on Friday.
And my new client wondered why I didn't have the cert when I came back (duh, it takes a week to find out, at least when I took it!).
In retrospect, "cert-whoring" (what I called it) for a few clients was the best thing for actually getting more work. I hate certs in general, but it's the stupid thing that self-markets (sadly enough). Sigh.
Bryan J. Smith wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 08:43 +1000, John Newbigin wrote:
I spent last week doing RH300 and I am now a RHCE!
Congrats! Glad you got to take the full RH300 track. I sure wish I would have and I definitely will next time. That exam will knock you on your butt if you don't prepare!
I got lucky on my RH302 (exam-only), I only got a 77% in a compulsory RHCE subsection requirement that required a 70%, but 96.1% overall (perfect 100% on everything else). I came close to only getting the RHCT because of that one compulsory RHCE subsection. I know many others that missed the RHCE, despite getting over a 90% total (and no section less than an 85%).
I got 100% on all sections :)
They did work us hard, 9 till 6 Monday to Thursday and and then 5.5 hours of exams on Friday. I spent 3.5 hours in the exams.
And they said I would have to wait till the following Wednesday for the results but I got it on the Saturday night.
John.
My long story short, my new client (and rather short-lived, I left them in the first 90 days citing, in writing, repeated contract violations despite warnings) pushed me to get my MCSE and RHCE. I did half my MCSE (the MCSA) at lunch every day that week, in between working almost 50 hours. I then drove 450 miles overnight Thursday to take my RHCE (exam- only) on the brand new RHL9 exam on Friday.
And my new client wondered why I didn't have the cert when I came back (duh, it takes a week to find out, at least when I took it!).
In retrospect, "cert-whoring" (what I called it) for a few clients was the best thing for actually getting more work. I hate certs in general, but it's the stupid thing that self-markets (sadly enough). Sigh.
On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 11:19 +1000, John Newbigin wrote:
I got 100% on all sections :)
Congrats. Bested me (and I'm sure many others did as well).
They did work us hard, 9 till 6 Monday to Thursday
Well, give me credit, I didn't sleep much the night before (driving 8 hours), and I took the exam "cold turkey" (no crash course ;-). Plus I had all the "infestation" of the other four (4) 2-3 hour exams in my mind from earlier in the week. @-ppp
and and then 5.5 hours of exams on Friday. I spent 3.5 hours in the exams.
I think most everyone gets through the first part very early. But I definitely took the whole period for the second part.
And they said I would have to wait till the following Wednesday for the results but I got it on the Saturday night.
Well, I took the RHL9 exam the very first week it was offered. There were still a few bugs with the autograder, enough they had to do it manually.