-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
http://press.redhat.com/2010/04/21/red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-beta-available...
...says it all.
Have phun!
Timo
http://press.redhat.com/2010/04/21/red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-beta-available...
...says it all.
Have phun!
Timo
Hmmm. I get a 505.
B.J.
CentOS 5.4, Linux 2.6.18-164.15.1.el5 x86_64 07:55:04 up 1 day, 22:25, 1 user, load average: 0.09, 0.14, 0.16
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
thus b.j. mcclure spake:
http://press.redhat.com/2010/04/21/red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-beta-available...
...says it all.
Have phun!
Timo
Hmmm. I get a 505.
Dito, saw just after sending here. I think they'll fix it ASAP, tho.
B.J.
Timo
CentOS 5.4, Linux 2.6.18-164.15.1.el5 x86_64 07:55:04 up 1 day, 22:25, 1 user, load average: 0.09, 0.14, 0.16
(Is that an invitation for hackers? ;)
Hi
The /rhel/ directory in the link on the redhat pages (ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/rhel/beta/6/) turns out to be a /.rhel/ directory, hope they will fix it soon.. until then a script is monitoring the ftp server ;) Also the release notes give a 404.
regards,
Michel
http://press.redhat.com/2010/04/21/red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-beta-available...
...says it all.
Have phun!
Timo
Hmmm. I get a 505.
B.J.
CentOS 5.4, Linux 2.6.18-164.15.1.el5 x86_64 07:55:04 up 1 day, 22:25, 1 user, load average: 0.09, 0.14, 0.16 _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
And now it works :) happy downloading ;)
Hi
The /rhel/ directory in the link on the redhat pages (ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/rhel/beta/6/) turns out to be a /.rhel/ directory, hope they will fix it soon.. until then a script is monitoring the ftp server ;) Also the release notes give a 404.
regards,
Michel
http://press.redhat.com/2010/04/21/red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-beta-available...
...says it all.
Have phun!
Timo
Hmmm. I get a 505.
B.J.
CentOS 5.4, Linux 2.6.18-164.15.1.el5 x86_64 07:55:04 up 1 day, 22:25, 1 user, load average: 0.09, 0.14, 0.16 _______________________________________________ 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 Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Michel van Deventer michel@van.deventer.cx wrote:
And now it works :) happy downloading ;)
Too many users already! They should invest on a proper OS from Redmond! :)
Hi,
On 04/21/2010 04:25 PM, Hakan Koseoglu wrote:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Michel van Deventer michel@van.deventer.cx wrote:
And now it works :) happy downloading ;)
Too many users already!
for whatever reason I see images appearing in here
http://www.riscworks.net/CentOS/RHEL6_Beta/
ppc is already there; x86_64 will only take some more minutes. Don't know when i386 will be there, tho.
They should invest on a proper OS from Redmond! :)
LOL
Cheers,
Timo
Timo wrote:
On 04/21/2010 04:25 PM, Hakan Koseoglu wrote:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Michel van Deventer michel@van.deventer.cx wrote:
And now it works :) happy downloading ;)
Too many users already!
<snip>
They should invest on a proper OS from Redmond! :)
LOL
I'm sorry, that doesn't work today, since MacAfee pushed out a new .dat file this morning, and it falsely identified SBC, a WinDoze component, as a virus, and Windows' response: reboot... and reboot, and reboot....
mark "of *course - *Windows* is a virus!"
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Timo Schoeler timo.schoeler@riscworks.net wrote:
Hi,
On 04/21/2010 04:25 PM, Hakan Koseoglu wrote:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Michel van Deventer michel@van.deventer.cx wrote:
And now it works :) happy downloading ;)
Too many users already!
for whatever reason I see images appearing in here
Thanks for the link, worked like a charm! I'm writing this message from my fresh RHEL6 Beta :-) http://imagebin.ca/img/nQV4PfT.png
ppc is already there; x86_64 will only take some more minutes. Don't know when i386 will be there, tho.
They should invest on a proper OS from Redmond! :)
LOL
Cheers,
Timo _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RHEL 6 mirror and torrents http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=06021
I was getting a solid 1.3 MB/s from the mirror link.
Timo Schoeler wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
http://press.redhat.com/2010/04/21/red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-beta-available...
...says it all.
Have phun!
Timo -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFLzuMEfg746kcGBOwRAgjYAJ9QkJvm40sOVAOcUk4edQ98bM5CKgCgomte W8RuS+4FvyB/54jUnP+bT+A= =m6zn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Timo Schoeler a écrit :
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
http://press.redhat.com/2010/04/21/red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-beta-available...
...says it all.
Have phun!
I just gave it a spin on two of my machines, two NEW Powermates which I use to test all kinds of distros and setups on. I've got Ghost images of about a dozen different distros on each. So let's see what RHEL6b gives.
Machine 1 : DVD boots correctly, asks for the language and then tells me it can't find the DVD. (I double-checked if the DVD was burnt correctly.)
Machine 2 : installer goes a little further, asks about the storage, and when I choose the default, it freezes.
So, the RHEL6 experience will have to wait a little further.
Niki
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Niki Kovacs contact@kikinovak.net wrote:
Timo Schoeler a écrit :
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
http://press.redhat.com/2010/04/21/red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-beta-available...
...says it all.
Have phun!
I just gave it a spin on two of my machines, two NEW Powermates which I use to test all kinds of distros and setups on. I've got Ghost images of about a dozen different distros on each. So let's see what RHEL6b gives.
Machine 1 : DVD boots correctly, asks for the language and then tells me it can't find the DVD. (I double-checked if the DVD was burnt correctly.)
Machine 2 : installer goes a little further, asks about the storage, and when I choose the default, it freezes.
So, the RHEL6 experience will have to wait a little further.
Niki
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Niki,
You should still be able to "experience" it a virtual machine; at least this is how I did it and it worked great. Maybe you should submit a bug report at redhat regarding your install issues.
On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 21:19 +0100, Lucian wrote: ...
You should still be able to "experience" it a virtual machine; at least this is how I did it and it worked great. Maybe you should submit a bug report at redhat regarding your install issues.
Works pretty well on VirtualBox 3.1.6 on CentOS 5.4 and Mac OS-X hosts. Problems with display resolution limited to 800x600 and can't get NFS client to mount shares.
See the Forum topic on RHEL6 beta for more experiences:
https://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=25876&forum=...
Phil
On 04/23/2010 02:52 PM, Niki Kovacs wrote: ...
Machine 2 : installer goes a little further, asks about the storage, and when I choose the default, it freezes.
I had to boot the installer with nmi_watchdog=0 to avoid it to freeze during installation.
Mogens
Mogens Kjaer a écrit :
On 04/23/2010 02:52 PM, Niki Kovacs wrote: ...
Machine 2 : installer goes a little further, asks about the storage, and when I choose the default, it freezes.
I had to boot the installer with nmi_watchdog=0 to avoid it to freeze during installation.
Where do you get this sort of install option from ?
Niki Kovacs wrote:
Mogens Kjaer a écrit :
On 04/23/2010 02:52 PM, Niki Kovacs wrote: ...
Machine 2 : installer goes a little further, asks about the storage, and when I choose the default, it freezes.
I had to boot the installer with nmi_watchdog=0 to avoid it to freeze during installation.
Where do you get this sort of install option from ?
Append it to the kernel boot options; it's not an installer option, it's a kernel option. See e.g.
http://centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=23135&forum=37
HTH,
Timo
sorry for bumping the thread,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=589332
not bug but feature. seems a shame to have built in obsolesence from RH. also means "new" laptop i bought for the purpose of using 6 when it comes won't work even though it is several generations of cpu newer than my current CentOS5 laptop (pentium M 1.8GHz vs P3 700MHz). fedora 12 runs well but i can't abide the churn.
mike /me going back to ebay
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 6:48 AM, Michael Simpson mikie.simpson@gmail.com wrote:
sorry for bumping the thread,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=589332
not bug but feature. seems a shame to have built in obsolesence from RH. also means "new" laptop i bought for the purpose of using 6 when it comes won't work even though it is several generations of cpu newer than my current CentOS5 laptop (pentium M 1.8GHz vs P3 700MHz). fedora 12 runs well but i can't abide the churn.
I guess it comes down to diminishing returns. PAE has been around for a few years and it may not be worth the effort for that prominent vendor to provide support for 5 year old, non-server systems that may be just fractions of their market.
However, it's *just* a kernel... Kernels are relatively easy to build and don't necessarily affect much in the user space. You may be able to take the CentOS image, once it's ready, then rebuild with a non-PAE kernel.
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 4:01 AM, Kwan Lowe kwan.lowe@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 6:48 AM, Michael Simpson mikie.simpson@gmail.com wrote:
sorry for bumping the thread,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=589332
not bug but feature.
Interesting, I didn't realize the Pentium M didn't have PAE support.
seems a shame to have built in obsolesence from RH. also means "new" laptop i bought for the purpose of using 6 when it comes won't work even though it is several generations of cpu newer than my current CentOS5 laptop (pentium M 1.8GHz vs P3 700MHz). fedora 12 runs well but i can't abide the churn.
I guess it comes down to diminishing returns. PAE has been around for a few years and it may not be worth the effort for that prominent vendor to provide support for 5 year old, non-server systems that may be just fractions of their market.
However, it's *just* a kernel... Kernels are relatively easy to build and don't necessarily affect much in the user space. You may be able to take the CentOS image, once it's ready, then rebuild with a non-PAE kernel.
In fact centos already makes i586 kernels for centos5. I wouldn't be surprised if they did the same for centos6.
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Mike Fedyk mfedyk@mikefedyk.com wrote:
In fact centos already makes i586 kernels for centos5. I wouldn't be surprised if they did the same for centos6.
Well, CentOS provides i586 kernels for CentOS-4 but not -5.
Akemi
On Sat, 2010-05-15 at 15:36 -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Mike Fedyk mfedyk@mikefedyk.com wrote:
In fact centos already makes i586 kernels for centos5. I wouldn't be surprised if they did the same for centos6.
Well, CentOS provides i586 kernels for CentOS-4 but not -5.
This is an interesting point. Is it possible that the CentOS team might provide a non-PAE kernel alternative, similar to the way they did the i586 kernel for CentOS 4? It seems like this would be useful to those like me who use primarily recycled ( older ) hardware.
What would be the proper way to request such a thing?
Akemi
On 16 May 2010 10:39, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 05/15/2010 11:48 PM, Ron Loftin wrote:
What would be the proper way to request such a thing?
s/request/offer to do this/ and its game on.
Open an issue at bugs.centos.org, with the details, and we can help from there on.
- KB
Whilst it may be that CentOS as a community can pull together to offer a non-PAE kernel (presumably as a CentOS-Plus) it seems odd that RH would have insist on something that has been present since the Pentium Pro (ffs) but which isn't part of the first 2 iterations of the pentium M (i believe the post dothan CPUs that went with the sonoma chipset was the first to have pae "enabled"). The idea that they are doing this deliberatly to ensure newish hardware is poppycock (sorry about the swearing). What happens if intel decide to ship new supa-budget chips which also have no pae or emt-64? Why make it a i386 kernel (with pae) rather than a i686 without or are there some 80(2/3/4)86 revisions with pae that i don't know of? It just seems to be a bad engineering decision.
Anyways wrong place for a rant never liked Mondays
On a more useful note: I would be more than happy to help out in any effort to provide a non-pae kernel for CentOS 6 :)
mike
-
Akemi Yagi -
b.j. mcclure -
Hakan Koseoglu -
Karanbir Singh -
Kwan Lowe -
Lucian -
m.roth＠5-cent.us -
Michael Simpson -
Michel van Deventer -
Mike Fedyk -
Mogens Kjaer -
Niki Kovacs -
Paul Norton -
Phil Schaffner -
Ron Loftin -
Timo Schoeler