Hi Barry, First of all thanx for your reply but i already used the options crossmnt,fsid=0 in my exports file still i am not able to re-export it. Regards lingu On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 5:30 PM, <centos-request at centos.org> wrote: > Send CentOS mailing list submissions to > centos at centos.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > centos-request at centos.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > centos-owner at centos.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of CentOS digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 39, Issue 13 > (centos-announce-request at centos.org) > 2. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Anne Wilson) > 3. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Wojtek Pilorz) > 4. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Max Hetrick) > 5. RE-export nfs mounted share (whoami i) > 6. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Anne Wilson) > 7. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Robert Moskowitz) > 8. RE: PPPoE client help (John) > 9. Re: kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 centosplus? (Johnny Hughes) > 10. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Ned Slider) > 11. Re: 40 second delay on automounts with 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 > kernel (Johnny Hughes) > 12. Config for NFSv4 an Kerberos on CentOS 5.1 (Sebastian Marten) > 13. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Wojtek Pilorz) > 14. openafs kernel module (Markus Hetzenecker) > 15. RE: Low-memory Centos5? (Sorin at Gmail) > 16. Re: openafs kernel module (Johnny Hughes) > 17. Re: Config for NFSv4 an Kerberos on CentOS 5.1 (Barry Brimer) > 18. Re: RE-export nfs mounted share (Barry Brimer) > 19. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Bob Taylor) > 20. servercd i386 5.1 (Jerry Geis) > 21. Re: CentOS 5.2 ? (Johnny Hughes) > 22. RE: CentOS 5.2 ? (Ross S. W. Walker) > 23. Re: servercd i386 5.1 (Ned Slider) > 24. centos on ebox (Jerry Geis) > 25. Re: CentOS 5.2 ? (Ned Slider) > 26. Re: centos on ebox (Ralph Angenendt) > 27. nfsnobody 65534 vs 4294967294 (David Halik) > 28. Re: centos on ebox (Jerry Geis) > 29. Re: centos on ebox (Tru Huynh) > 30. Re: centos on ebox (Jerry Geis) > 31. Re: Re: centos on ebox (Tru Huynh) > 32. Re: Re: centos on ebox (Johnny Hughes) > 33. Re: FireFox (Scott Silva) > 34. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (MHR) > 35. Re: centos on ebox (Jerry Geis) > 36. Re: Re: centos on ebox (Johnny Hughes) > 37. Setting up a chroot (MHR) > 38. Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 (Alfred von Campe) > 39. Re: centos on ebox (Jerry Geis) > 40. Re: Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 > (Gregg McClintic) > 41. Re: Re: centos on ebox (Johnny Hughes) > 42. Re: Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 (Johnny Hughes) > 43. Re: centos on ebox (Jerry Geis) > 44. Re: Setting up a chroot (Johnny Hughes) > 45. RE: /etc/sysctl.conf edit not permanent (Joseph L. Casale) > 46. Re: 40 second delay on automounts with 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 > kernel (Joe Pruett) > 47. Re: centos on ebox (Jerry Geis) > 48. Re: Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 > (Alfred von Campe) > 49. Re: centos on ebox (Scott Silva) > 50. Re: 40 second delay on automounts with 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 > kernel (Ned Slider) > 51. Re: 40 second delay on automounts with 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 > kernel (Scott Silva) > 52. Re: Re: 40 second delay on automounts with 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 > kernel (Johnny Hughes) > 53. Re: Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 (MHR) > 54. Re: FireFox (William L. Maltby) > 55. Re: Centosplus vmware kernels....??? (Tom Bishop) > 56. Negative Values in delay pools (Sergio Belkin) > 57. Re: Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 > (Filipe Brandenburger) > 58. Re: Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 > (Filipe Brandenburger) > 59. Re: GFS (Jay Leafey) > 60. Re: Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6 > (Christopher Chan) > 61. Re: Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6 > (Matt Shields) > 62. Re: Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6 (Rob Townley) > 63. Re: Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6 > (Christopher Chan) > 64. Re: FireFox (Robert Spangler) > 65. Re: Config for NFSv4 an Kerberos on CentOS 5.1 (Sebastian Marten) > 66. offline file shares (gopinath) > 67. Re: offline file shares (John R Pierce) > 68. Re: offline file shares (Christopher Chan) > 69. Re: offline file shares (Fabian Arrotin - oxygen) > 70. Re: Centosplus vmware kernels....??? (Tru Huynh) > 71. Re: offline file shares (gopinath) > 72. Hasp Driver required (Balaji) > 73. Re: Hasp Driver required (Anne Wilson) > 74. Re: GFS (Karanbir Singh) > 75. Re: Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6 > (Karanbir Singh) > 76. Re: Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 > (Alfred von Campe) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:00:14 +0000 (UTC) > From: centos-announce-request at centos.org > Subject: [CentOS] CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 39, Issue 13 > To: centos-announce at centos.org > Message-ID: <20080529120014.8BC3EF3C973 at mail.centos.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to > centos-announce at centos.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > centos-announce-request at centos.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > centos-announce-owner at centos.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. CESA-2008:0288 Critical CentOS 3 i386 samba - security update > (Tru Huynh) > 2. CESA-2008:0288 Critical CentOS 3 x86_64 samba - security > update (Tru Huynh) > 3. CESA-2008:0288-01: Critical CentOS 2 i386 samba security > update (John Newbigin) > 4. CESA-2008:0506-05: Low CentOS 2 i386 tzdata enhancement > update (John Newbigin) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 22:10:34 +0200 > From: Tru Huynh <tru at centos.org> > Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2008:0288 Critical CentOS 3 i386 samba > - security update > To: centos-announce at centos.org > Message-ID: <20080528201034.GA10630 at sillage.bis.pasteur.fr> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > CentOS Errata and Security Advisory CESA-2008:0288 > > samba security update for CentOS 3 i386: > https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2008-0288.html > > The following updated file has been uploaded and is currently syncing to > the mirrors: > > i386: > updates/i386/RPMS/samba-3.0.9-1.3E.15.i386.rpm > updates/i386/RPMS/samba-client-3.0.9-1.3E.15.i386.rpm > updates/i386/RPMS/samba-common-3.0.9-1.3E.15.i386.rpm > updates/i386/RPMS/samba-swat-3.0.9-1.3E.15.i386.rpm > > source: > updates/SRPMS/samba-3.0.9-1.3E.15.src.rpm > > You may update your CentOS-3 i386 installations by running the command: > > yum update samba\* > > Tru > -- > Tru Huynh (mirrors, CentOS-3 i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance) > http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 189 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/attachments/20080528/1e3cf1bb/attachment-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 22:11:16 +0200 > From: Tru Huynh <tru at centos.org> > Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2008:0288 Critical CentOS 3 x86_64 > samba - security update > To: centos-announce at centos.org > Message-ID: <20080528201116.GB10630 at sillage.bis.pasteur.fr> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > CentOS Errata and Security Advisory CESA-2008:0288 > > samba security update for CentOS 3 x86_64: > https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2008-0288.html > > The following updated file has been uploaded and is currently syncing to > the mirrors: > > x86_64: > updates/x86_64/RPMS/samba-3.0.9-1.3E.15.i386.rpm > updates/x86_64/RPMS/samba-3.0.9-1.3E.15.x86_64.rpm > updates/x86_64/RPMS/samba-client-3.0.9-1.3E.15.x86_64.rpm > updates/x86_64/RPMS/samba-common-3.0.9-1.3E.15.i386.rpm > updates/x86_64/RPMS/samba-common-3.0.9-1.3E.15.x86_64.rpm > updates/x86_64/RPMS/samba-swat-3.0.9-1.3E.15.x86_64.rpm > > source: > updates/SRPMS/samba-3.0.9-1.3E.15.src.rpm > > You may update your CentOS-3 x86_64 installations by running the command: > > yum update samba\* > > Tru > -- > Tru Huynh (mirrors, CentOS-3 i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance) > http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 189 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/attachments/20080528/2eb98105/attachment-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:35:27 +1000 > From: John Newbigin <jnewbigin at ict.swin.edu.au> > Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2008:0288-01: Critical CentOS 2 i386 > samba security update > To: centos-announce at centos.org > Message-ID: <483DEC3F.4080100 at ict.swin.edu.au> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > The following errata for CentOS-2 have been built and uploaded to the > centos mirror: > > RHSA-2008:0288-01 Critical: samba security update > > Files available: > samba-2.2.12-1.21as.9.3.i386.rpm > samba-client-2.2.12-1.21as.9.3.i386.rpm > samba-common-2.2.12-1.21as.9.3.i386.rpm > samba-swat-2.2.12-1.21as.9.3.i386.rpm > > More details are available from the RedHat web site at > https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rh21as-errata.html > > The easy way to make sure you are up to date with all the latest patches > is to run: > # yum update > > -- > John Newbigin > ITS Senior Analyst / Programmer > Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies > Swinburne University of Technology > Melbourne, Australia > http://www.ict.swin.edu.au/staff/jnewbigin > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:55:51 +1000 > From: John Newbigin <jnewbigin at ict.swin.edu.au> > Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2008:0506-05: Low CentOS 2 i386 tzdata > enhancement update > To: centos-announce at centos.org > Message-ID: <483DF107.202 at ict.swin.edu.au> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > The following errata for CentOS-2 have been built and uploaded to the > centos mirror: > > RHEA-2008:0506-05 tzdata enhancement update > > Files available: > tzdata-2008b-3.el2_1.noarch.rpm > > More details are available from the RedHat web site at > https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rh21as-errata.html > > The easy way to make sure you are up to date with all the latest patches > is to run: > # yum update > > -- > John Newbigin > ITS Senior Analyst / Programmer > Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies > Swinburne University of Technology > Melbourne, Australia > http://www.ict.swin.edu.au/staff/jnewbigin > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-announce mailing list > CentOS-announce at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce > > > End of CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 39, Issue 13 > *********************************************** > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:14:24 +0100 > From: Anne Wilson <cannewilson at googlemail.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5? > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <200805291314.30954.cannewilson at googlemail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On Thursday 29 May 2008 12:31:17 Jeffrey B. Layton wrote: > > Good morning, > > > > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to > > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The > > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB. > > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with > > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox, > > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was > > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window > > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless > > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations? > > > For a time I ran FC6 on a laptop with only 256MB RAM, and I ran kde! It > was > slow, yes, but quite usable as long as I did one thing at a time. > Considering the similarity between FC6 and CentOS5 I would think you'd be > OK, > using it with care. ISTR that Firefox occasionally caused runaway cpu, but > I > doubt if the same problem exists in the current CentOS version. > > Anne > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 189 bytes > Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/851e0adf/attachment-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:22:15 +0200 > From: Wojtek Pilorz <wpilorz at bdk.pl> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5? > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <20080529122215.GB28817 at bdk.pl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 07:31:17AM -0400, Jeffrey B. Layton wrote: > > Good morning, > > > > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to > > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The > > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB. > > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with > > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox, > I was running FedoraCore6 (very close to CentOS5) > on a P4 box with 256MB of RAM, using KDE. > > OpenOffice (word, calc) was usable once it started, startup > was rather slow. > yum update was painful, I had to run it from text mode sometimes. > With 384MB and IceWM or XFCE you should be OK > (although I am not sure if Firefox and OpenOffice at the same > time will be possible ...) > One problem with old firefox is that it is (said to be) leaking memory > so restarting it every few hours of so might be useful. > I seem to remember that opera was advertised as being > less memory hungry than firefox. > > > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was > No eclipse, of course. > > > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window > > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless > > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations? > No idea here. > > > > Good luck, > > Wojtek > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 08:25:27 -0400 > From: Max Hetrick <maxhetrick at verizon.net> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5? > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EA0B7.3070800 at verizon.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Jeffrey B. Layton wrote: > > > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to > > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The > > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB. > > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with > > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox, > > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was > > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window > > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless > > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations? > > > If you don't have to have a Red Hat based distro for this installation, > perhaps look at DSL. > > http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/ > > You can do an installation to hard drive and it takes very little > resources. It's Debian based, not my preference, but perfect for these > types of situations. > > It's supposed to run on memory as low as 128Mb and still be fast. > > As far as your wireless, from what I read you have to use the > ndiswrapper to get cards to work under it, configuring it with > wlanconfig. I've never done it. > > Anyways, hope this helps. Not that I like suggesting non CentOS > products, but it's a suggestion. > > Regards, > Max > > > - -- > # find . "*imbecile" -exec sed -ie "s/stupidity/commonsense/g" '{}' \; > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQFIPqC3IXSX/6LmsXkRAvKHAKCG/j/xu+CLGw2Yrttki3zEKZgfMACfauEA > 7DexMfRU0Wf7dE/KVeZGcjk= > =MbcR > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 18:05:08 +0530 > From: "whoami i" <hicheerup at gmail.com> > Subject: [CentOS] RE-export nfs mounted share > To: centos at centos.org > Message-ID: > <29e045b80805290535o7893b939ye1e15fd4a8b6e7af at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hi > > Is there any way to re-export an nfs mounted directory? I am having three > servers runnning on centos4.5 and i am trying to implement nfs share in an > below manner [bcoz there is no alternative way for me to setup nfs share] > > HOST A--->>>EXPORTS /prod/data ------->>>HOST B > > HOST B ---->>MOUNTED ------>>> /prod/data-----UNDER---/PROD1 [working > fine] > > HOST B EXPORTS /PROD1 ------>>>>HOST C > > HOST C ----->>TRY MOUNTING ----->>>RESULT IN BELOW ERROR > > BUT WHEN I TRY TO MOUNT THE ALREADY MOUNTED NFS SHARE IN "HOST C " I > AM > GETTING BELOW ERROR. > > #################MOUNT ERROR########################################## > mount: 10.65.64.30:/PROD1 failed, reason given by server: Permission > denied > ########################################################################## > > Can anyone suggest me the way to work out aboVE scenario. > > > Note: I find no -r(-re-export) option in rpc.mountd > > > REGARDS > LINGU > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/20e1daf9/attachment-0001.htm > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:36:59 +0100 > From: Anne Wilson <cannewilson at googlemail.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5? > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <200805291336.59926.cannewilson at googlemail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On Thursday 29 May 2008 13:22:15 Wojtek Pilorz wrote: > > I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless > > > > > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations? > > > > No idea here. > > I'm fairly sure I've seen a how-to for that, so it's worth googling. I may > have a printout with a url, but I can't look just now. > > Anne > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 189 bytes > Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/6c93cca7/attachment-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 08:46:38 -0400 > From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm at htt-consult.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5? > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EA5AE.7030708 at htt-consult.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed" > > Jeffrey B. Layton wrote: > > Good morning, > > > > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to > > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The > > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB. > > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with > > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox, > > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was > > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window > > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless > > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations? > I have a number of 256Mb Centos installs here with Gnome. I shut off as > many services as possible, and it runs. I made the swap partition (Yes I > manually create a separate swap partition instead of running it in LVM) > at least 512Mb if not more. > > Firefox 1.5 works fine. Watch yourself with OpenOffice, don't have too > much running. > > One trick I do with Centos servers running with only 256Mb, is run > VNCserver and then from my notebook access with Gnome. This works great, > only a one line change in the vnc files to have Gnome as your GUI on the > server. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:03:36 -0400 > From: "John" <jses27 at gmail.com> > Subject: RE: [CentOS] PPPoE client help > To: "'CentOS mailing list'" <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <009d01c8c18c$6a5e3440$0700a8c0 at ethan27> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > > > -----Original Message----- > From: centos-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On > Behalf > Of Robert Moskowitz > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 4:42 PM > To: CentOS mailing list > Subject: [CentOS] PPPoE client help > > Please point me in the right direction.... > > My ISP is giving me an IPv6 prefix, but to get that I have to: > > The current Speedstream ADSL router will be configured as a bridge. I will > have to set up a Linux (read Centos, I hope) router that will connect > ethernet to the Speedstream but run PPPoE to his network and get both the > IPv4 and IPv6 route delegations. > > There is no easy way that I know of to test this ahead of time. I > basically > have to get the box configed, have my ISP switch the Speedstream to briding > mode, and GO! So I need to do some reading.... > --------------------------------------------------- > > Try http://www.ipv6.org/howtos.html . > > JohnStanley > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 08:11:23 -0500 > From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 centosplus? > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EAB7B.5050407 at centos.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Alfred von Campe wrote: > > On May 28, 2008, at 14:08, Johnny Hughes wrote: > > > >> We are currently using the builders to build centos-5.2 ... I can try > >> to get the that kernel in, but we should very soon thereafter have > >> the 5.2 one, so it might be better for you just to wait. > > > > Does the 5.2 kernel include the NFS patch (RH bug 321111 I think)? The > > only reason I am using the centosplus kernel is because of the NFS > > performance issue. Oh, and I also like to have framebuffer support in > > the kernel which was missing from the previous centosplus kernel. So if > > the 5.2 kernel includes the NFS patch, and has FB support, that would > > make my day! > > yes ... the new kernel is fixed upstream for that issue > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 252 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/c07bac5b/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:12:38 +0100 > From: Ned Slider <ned at unixmail.co.uk> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5? > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EABC6.4030505 at unixmail.co.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Jeffrey B. Layton wrote: > > Good morning, > > > > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to > > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The > > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB. > > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with > > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox, > > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was > > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window > > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless > > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations? > > > > TIA! > > > > Jeff > > > > As others have said, you should be fine with 384MB RAM. One thing to > note - I think the graphical installer requires 512MB to run (check the > release notes) so you would need to perform a text mode install. Do a > fairly minimal install and add whatever you want afterwards with YUM. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 08:22:22 -0500 > From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] 40 second delay on automounts with > 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 kernel > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EAE0E.8050805 at centos.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Joe Pruett wrote: > > On Tue, 27 May 2008, Joe Pruett wrote: > > > >> so, has anyone seen ipsec get messed up with the latest kernel? > > > > i have verified that dropping back to the 53.1.19 kernel makes ipsec > > function again. with the new 5.2 kernel coming soon, i'm not sure if it > > makes sense to try and figure this out or not. > > This is already solved on another thread ... but for closure on this > one, there is a known bug here with that kernel and ipsec: > > http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2853 > > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 252 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/ca1714a3/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 12 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:34:09 +0200 > From: Sebastian Marten <sebi4711 at gmail.com> > Subject: [CentOS] Config for NFSv4 an Kerberos on CentOS 5.1 > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EB0D1.3050506 at gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" > > Hi list, > Is it possible to set up an NFSv4/Kerberos environment on CentOS 5.1? > I set up Kerberos and NFS but get several erros > > "Warning: rpc.gssd appears not to be running. > mount.nfs4: Permission denied" > > Is this an CentOS oder an config problem? > > Greetings > Sebastian > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 542 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/a8b3f622/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 13 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:37:31 +0200 > From: Wojtek Pilorz <wpilorz at bdk.pl> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5? > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <20080529133731.GC28817 at bdk.pl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 02:12:38PM +0100, Ned Slider wrote: > > Jeffrey B. Layton wrote: > > >Good morning, > > > > > >I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to > > >use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The > > >bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB. > > >Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with > > >little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox, > [...] > > >Jeff > > > > > > > As others have said, you should be fine with 384MB RAM. One thing to > > note - I think the graphical installer requires 512MB to run (check the > > release notes) so you would need to perform a text mode install. Do a > > fairly minimal install and add whatever you want afterwards with YUM. > If no additional repositories are selected during installation, > 384MB should be OK with graphical. > If you want to be sure, run it over vnc > (needs specifying vnc vncpassword=a_password when starting installer) > (and keep in mind vnc is unencrypted protocol; > > Graphical installer tends to be more complete than text in later RedHat > systems. > > > BTW. I am using CentOS 4.6 with KDE on P4 with 128MB RAM. > Perhaps not stellar performance, but quite usable. > (And I do not run OpenOffice and firefox at the same time...) > > Good luck, > > Wojtek. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 14 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:44:22 +0200 > From: Markus Hetzenecker <markus.hetzenecker at uibk.ac.at> > Subject: [CentOS] openafs kernel module > To: centos at centos.org > Message-ID: <200805291544.22401.markus.hetzenecker at uibk.ac.at> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > We start to use centos 5 for our workstation at our site (University > Innsbruck) > and we use openafs to hold the home directories. There would be a big > advantage > to have the openafs kernel module (and the additional rpms) in the centos > extras (or addons) repository with an automatic compile for the available > kernels. > If you need any help to do this i would be happy to participate in any way. > > Cheers, Markus. > > --- > fork() off; > LinuxBetreuung Uni Ibk, fon: +43 512 507 2369 > GnuPG key: http://www.uibk.ac.at/~c102130/public_key.asc<http://www.uibk.ac.at/%7Ec102130/public_key.asc> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 15 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:51:05 +0200 > From: "Sorin at Gmail" <sorin.srbu at gmail.com> > Subject: RE: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5? > To: "'CentOS mailing list'" <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <60744A85CEE74854BEDF6B8B55A1CD7A at orgfarm.uu.local> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Jeffrey B. Layton <> scribbled on Thursday, May 29, 2008 1:31 PM: > > I use CentOS 5.1 with 256M RAM (incl X, Gnome, Firefox etc and the > proprietary > Nvidia 3D gfx drivers. Yes I know it's overkill, but it's so much nicer and > easier to move around stuff using a file manager instead of doing it on the > CLI) in a web server scenario (single family site with lots of pics). Works > very well and I haven't had any problems, except for that yum maxes out the > CPU (Amd Duron/750) occasionally. > > This is a stationary computer, and an old one at that. Portables however > have > a history of being slower generally (especially older ones), so you might > want > to inform us on what other hw you have in yours. > > XFCE is nice, fast and slick. Good choice. You might want to shut down most > daemons you don't have a need for. > > I've been running CentOS 5 on a P3/500 with 256M as well (It's a Best > Okechobee). Works fine, but some hardware might need some tweaking. I run > X, > Gnome, Firefox and OpenOffice et all on this one. CentOS even found my > obscure > noname USB-to-Ethernet adapter too! This machine runs fine and I haven't > run > into anything strange or difficult to resolve. Life is good. > > HTH. > > > > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to > > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The > > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB. > > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with > > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox, > > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was > > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window > > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless > > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations? > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: smime.p7s > Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature > Size: 5118 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/91cea634/smime-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 16 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:04:10 -0500 > From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] openafs kernel module > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EB7DA.3050008 at centos.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Markus Hetzenecker wrote: > > We start to use centos 5 for our workstation at our site (University > Innsbruck) > > and we use openafs to hold the home directories. There would be a big > advantage > > to have the openafs kernel module (and the additional rpms) in the centos > > extras (or addons) repository with an automatic compile for the available > > kernels. > > If you need any help to do this i would be happy to participate in any > way. > > > > openafs is available here: > > http://atrpms.net/dist/el5/openafs/ > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 252 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/f73bfcc5/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 17 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:04:16 -0500 > From: Barry Brimer <lists at brimer.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Config for NFSv4 an Kerberos on CentOS 5.1 > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <1212069856.483eb7e05c0d3 at mail.toucanhost.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Quoting Sebastian Marten <sebi4711 at gmail.com>: > > > Hi list, > > Is it possible to set up an NFSv4/Kerberos environment on CentOS 5.1? > > I set up Kerberos and NFS but get several erros > > > > "Warning: rpc.gssd appears not to be running. > > mount.nfs4: Permission denied" > > > > Is this an CentOS oder an config problem? > > Yes. > > Are you running all of the gss services? > Is portmap running? > Did you uncomment the SECURE_NFS="yes" in /etc/sysconfig/nfs? > Was your kerberos principal created with: > "addprinc -randkey -e des-cbc-md5:normal nfs/server.domain.com" > Was your keytab entry created with: > "ktadd -e des-cbc-md5:normal nfs/server.domain.com" > Do you have gss/krb5p just before the nfs options in parentheses? > > Hope this helps. > > Barry > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 18 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:06:34 -0500 > From: Barry Brimer <lists at brimer.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] RE-export nfs mounted share > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <1212069994.483eb86aa5555 at mail.toucanhost.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Quoting whoami i <hicheerup at gmail.com>: > > > Hi > > > > Is there any way to re-export an nfs mounted directory? I am having > three > > servers runnning on centos4.5 and i am trying to implement nfs share in > an > > below manner [bcoz there is no alternative way for me to setup nfs share] > > > Did you add the options crossmnt,fsid=0 to the top level nfs export? The > fsid=0 > might not be needed, but I'm pretty sure the crossmnt is needed. > > Barry > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 19 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 07:38:41 -0700 > From: Bob Taylor <bob8221 at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5? > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <1212071921.5483.17.camel at ann.qtpi.local> > Content-Type: text/plain > > On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 14:12 +0100, Ned Slider wrote: > > Jeffrey B. Layton wrote: > > > Good morning, > > > > > > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to > > > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The > > > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB. > > > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with > > > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox, > > > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was > > > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window > > > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless > > > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations? > > > > > As others have said, you should be fine with 384MB RAM. One thing to > > note - I think the graphical installer requires 512MB to run (check the > > release notes) so you would need to perform a text mode install. Do a > > fairly minimal install and add whatever you want afterwards with YUM. > > I have been running FC 3 and now CentOS 5.1 on an old Gateway 2000 with > only 256MB RAM. Both installed with GUI. Only some editing of services. > I have 1 Gig of swap. I currently have 1 instance of emacs, Evolution, > CDDBSlave2, Firefox 2.0.0.12 and 2 Gnome terminals plus a whole lot of > services running most of which I *hope* I don't need. Screen refresh is > slow but not too much. The machine starts to *really* slow down after > about 15% swap. All I do is logout. Oh, this is my only computer. If > anyone wants to tell me to buy a new one, please send me the money. > Otherwise keep your silence. :-) > > Bob > -- > Bob Taylor > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 20 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 10:40:00 -0400 > From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com> > Subject: [CentOS] servercd i386 5.1 > To: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EC040.3000205 at pagestation.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > I am looking for the servercd for i386 centos 5.1 on the mirrors. > Not finding it though. > > Can someone point me to it. Thanks, > > Jerry > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 21 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:54:07 -0500 > From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.2 ? > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EC38F.6050109 at centos.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 9:11 AM, MHR <mhullrich at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 2:41 AM, Ralph Angenendt < > ra+centos at br-online.de <ra%2Bcentos at br-online.de>> wrote: > >>> Answer: When it's ready. > >> Suits me - I have a different question (and it's probably up somewhere > >> I don't have time to look at the moment - I'll check when I get to > >> work, but by then I'll have forgotten this question again). > >> > >> Does 5.2 have an updated release of GDE with it? > >> > >> Every so often, among other things, when I exit Evolution, it crashes, > >> but Bug Buddy says it can't report the bug because my GDE is too old. > >> > >> 5.0 came with GDE 2.16.0. Gnome development is up to 2.23.1 (or later > >> - I lost track). > >> > > > > RHEL-5 will probably be 2.16 til its end of life. > > This is generally true .. the minor kde or gnome version (that is the 5 > in kde-3.5.4 or the 16 in gnome-2.16.0) has never changed in a the same > RHEL version in the past ... > > HOWEVER, I have heard that RHEL-6 is a ways off and that RHEL 5.3 will > continue to have major changes, even more pronounced than those in 5.2, > so we will need to wait and see :D > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 252 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/add3b705/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 22 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 11:10:57 -0400 > From: "Ross S. W. Walker" <rwalker at medallion.com> > Subject: RE: [CentOS] CentOS 5.2 ? > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: > <E2BB8074E5500C42984D980D4BD78EF9022A7212 at MFG-NYC-EXCH2.mfg.prv> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Johnny Hughes wrote: > > > Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > > On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 9:11 AM, MHR <mhullrich at gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 2:41 AM, Ralph Angenendt < > ra+centos at br-online.de <ra%2Bcentos at br-online.de>> wrote: > > >>> Answer: When it's ready. > > >> Suits me - I have a different question (and it's probably up somewhere > > >> I don't have time to look at the moment - I'll check when I get to > > >> work, but by then I'll have forgotten this question again). > > >> > > >> Does 5.2 have an updated release of GDE with it? > > >> > > >> Every so often, among other things, when I exit Evolution, it crashes, > > >> but Bug Buddy says it can't report the bug because my GDE is too old. > > >> > > >> 5.0 came with GDE 2.16.0. Gnome development is up to 2.23.1 (or > later > > >> - I lost track). > > >> > > > > > > RHEL-5 will probably be 2.16 til its end of life. > > > > This is generally true .. the minor kde or gnome version (that is the 5 > > in kde-3.5.4 or the 16 in gnome-2.16.0) has never changed in a the same > > RHEL version in the past ... > > > > HOWEVER, I have heard that RHEL-6 is a ways off and that RHEL 5.3 will > > continue to have major changes, even more pronounced than those in 5.2, > > so we will need to wait and see :D > > Well one can hope... Personally I would love to see KDE 3.5.9 > pulled in as it is a lot more stable and robust then KDE 3.5.4. > > KDE 4.0 is still way too immature even for RHEL 6, the interface > still needs a lot of working out, polishing and the icons need to > look more, well less like a child's software system. > > I still prefer to use KDE 3.5 and 3.5.9 is definitely the way to > go there. > > -Ross > > ______________________________________________________________________ > This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by > the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged > and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient > of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, > distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, > is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, > please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the > original and any copy or printout thereof. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 23 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 16:38:19 +0100 > From: Ned Slider <ned at unixmail.co.uk> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] servercd i386 5.1 > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483ECDEB.8040300 at unixmail.co.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Jerry Geis wrote: > > I am looking for the servercd for i386 centos 5.1 on the mirrors. > > Not finding it though. > > > > Can someone point me to it. Thanks, > > > > Jerry > > > There is currently no serverCD for CentOS 5.1, but you can install from > just the first CD if that helps. See here: > > > http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/CentOS5#head-c79c201900d22f163a445f134fcc6c916eb3cb6e > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 24 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 11:46:53 -0400 > From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com> > Subject: [CentOS] centos on ebox > Cc: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483ECFED.4030000 at pagestation.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > > Jerry Geis wrote: > > >/ I am looking for the servercd for i386 centos 5.1 on the mirrors. > > />/ Not finding it though. > > />/ > > />/ Can someone point me to it. Thanks, > > />/ > > />/ Jerry > > / > > > > There is currently no serverCD for CentOS 5.1, but you can install from > > just the first CD if that helps. See here: > > > > > http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/CentOS5#head-c79c201900d22f163a445f134fcc6c916eb3cb6e > > > > > > > I grabbed the first CD and tried booting. no luck at this point. > > I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox 2300 unit. > This unit has a vortex86 CPU. > When installing the unit finds the USB cdrom I type "linux text" and it > starts > vlinuz... > init.... > Screen goes black and the unit reboots. > > I also tried with acpi=off. > > Any ideas on getting anaconda to come up on this ebox unit? > > Jerry > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/4a27799f/attachment-0001.htm > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 25 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 16:49:56 +0100 > From: Ned Slider <ned at unixmail.co.uk> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.2 ? > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483ED0A4.20208 at unixmail.co.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Ross S. W. Walker wrote: > > Johnny Hughes wrote: > > > >> Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > >>> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 9:11 AM, MHR <mhullrich at gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 2:41 AM, Ralph Angenendt < > ra+centos at br-online.de <ra%2Bcentos at br-online.de>> wrote: > >>>>> Answer: When it's ready. > >>>> Suits me - I have a different question (and it's probably up somewhere > >>>> I don't have time to look at the moment - I'll check when I get to > >>>> work, but by then I'll have forgotten this question again). > >>>> > >>>> Does 5.2 have an updated release of GDE with it? > >>>> > >>>> Every so often, among other things, when I exit Evolution, it crashes, > >>>> but Bug Buddy says it can't report the bug because my GDE is too old. > >>>> > >>>> 5.0 came with GDE 2.16.0. Gnome development is up to 2.23.1 (or > later > >>>> - I lost track). > >>>> > >>> RHEL-5 will probably be 2.16 til its end of life. > >> This is generally true .. the minor kde or gnome version (that is the 5 > >> in kde-3.5.4 or the 16 in gnome-2.16.0) has never changed in a the same > >> RHEL version in the past ... > >> > >> HOWEVER, I have heard that RHEL-6 is a ways off and that RHEL 5.3 will > >> continue to have major changes, even more pronounced than those in 5.2, > >> so we will need to wait and see :D > > > > Well one can hope... Personally I would love to see KDE 3.5.9 > > pulled in as it is a lot more stable and robust then KDE 3.5.4. > > > > KDE 4.0 is still way too immature even for RHEL 6, the interface > > still needs a lot of working out, polishing and the icons need to > > look more, well less like a child's software system. > > > > I still prefer to use KDE 3.5 and 3.5.9 is definitely the way to > > go there. > > > > -Ross > > > > Well hopefully the testing of KDE 4 in Fedora 9 will answer the issue of > whether it is ready or not for RHEL6. Also, as RHEL6 is still a way off, > and KDE 4 is developing fast, things _may_ have changed by the time it > is released. But I do agree, atm I'd personally rather see KDE 3.5 > included. > > The other factor to consider is the long term support issues related to > maintaining KDE 3.5 in RHEL6 given that I _think_ qt3 is already > unsupported. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 26 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 18:03:24 +0200 > From: Ralph Angenendt <ra+centos at br-online.de <ra%2Bcentos at br-online.de>> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] centos on ebox > To: centos at centos.org > Message-ID: <20080529160324.GC7728 at br-online.de> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Jerry Geis wrote: > > > I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox 2300 unit. > > This unit has a vortex86 CPU. > > When installing the unit finds the USB cdrom I type "linux text" and it > > starts > > vlinuz... > > init.... > > Screen goes black and the unit reboots. > > Sounds like an i586 CPU which is not supported by CentOS 5. You'd > probably have better luck with CentOS 4. > > Cheers, > > Ralph > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 194 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/7c737650/attachment-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 27 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:11:01 -0400 > From: David Halik <dhalik at jla.rutgers.edu> > Subject: [CentOS] nfsnobody 65534 vs 4294967294 > To: centos at centos.org > Message-ID: <483ED595.3000301 at jla.rutgers.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > Hi, I just had a couple of questions about nfsnobody. > > We run a very large NFS infrastructure based off of a NetApp, and we're > been discussing whether or not it is necessary to have 64 bit nfsnobody > as 4294967294. I understand the reasoning behind this (2^32 - 2 gives > you a max UID), but we're having issues since we run multiple > architectures. The UID doesn't play nice across Solairs, Centos, 32 vs > 64bit, etc. > > Are there any obvious security risks or problems with using nfsnobody as > 65534 (2^16 - 2) on 64bit, or even just assigning it a random value, 300 > for example? I can't see any particular reason for having such a high > number other than to keep it above any possible real UID space. > > Also, the NetApp automatically generates quota tables based off of the > highest UID, so obviously this is a *major* problem if suddenly we have > billions of users as far as the NetApp is concerned. Ultimately, we'd > like to just assign it a low value in the range with our other system > account, but we are not sure of the potential risks with NFS etc. > > Any comments would be appreciated. > Thanks! > > -- > ================================ > David Halik > System Administrator > OIT-CSS Rutgers University > dhalik at jla.rutgers.edu > ================================ > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 28 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:24:08 -0400 > From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com> > Subject: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox > To: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483ED8A8.4040804 at pagestation.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > > Jerry Geis wrote: > > > > >/ I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox 2300 unit. > > />/ This unit has a vortex86 CPU. > > />/ When installing the unit finds the USB cdrom I type "linux text" and > it > > />/ starts > > />/ vlinuz... > > />/ init.... > > />/ Screen goes black and the unit reboots. > > / > > Sounds like an i586 CPU which is not supported by CentOS 5. You'd > > probably have better luck with CentOS 4. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Ralph > > > Ralph, > > I thought if it is a 586 CPU it should run 386 code right? > So I didnt think there should be an issue there... > > I can see not being able to run 586 code on a 386 but the other way > around should be ok. > > Jerry > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/8f78c97e/attachment-0001.htm > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 29 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 18:24:36 +0200 > From: Tru Huynh <tru at centos.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] centos on ebox > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <20080529162436.GE28463 at sillage.bis.pasteur.fr> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:46:53AM -0400, Jerry Geis wrote: > > > > I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox 2300 unit. > http://www.embeddedpc.net/eBox2300/tabid/110/Default.aspx ? > > you won't make it with only 128 MB of RAM... > is the cpu i686 compatible? > > Tru > > -- > Tru Huynh (mirrors, CentOS-3 i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance) > http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 189 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/f1fa592b/attachment-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 30 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:38:38 -0400 > From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com> > Subject: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox > To: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EDC0E.80002 at pagestation.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:46:53AM -0400, Jerry Geis wrote: > > >/ > > />/ I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox 2300 unit. > > /http://www.embeddedpc.net/eBox2300/tabid/110/Default.aspx ? > > > > you won't make it with only 128 MB of RAM... > > is the cpu i686 compatible? > > > > Tru > > > Tru, > > yes this is the box I am trying to install on... > > I dont know if its i686, either way I thought i386 should work. I am I > wrong? > > Is it the 128M memory issue? I thought I used to install with that much > - especially in text mode. > > Any suggestions. > > Jerry > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 31 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 19:11:35 +0200 > From: Tru Huynh <tru at centos.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <20080529171135.GA15177 at sillage.bis.pasteur.fr> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:38:38PM -0400, Jerry Geis wrote: > ... > > > > yes this is the box I am trying to install on... > > > > I dont know if its i686, either way I thought i386 should work. I am I > > wrong? > yes, the i686 has some additionnal instructions that a i586 does not > have. I have no idea about the cpu listed there. > > Try C4 with the i586 or i686 (default) version. You will be fixed. > C5 does not support i586 class cpu. There was a thread about it > some days/weeks ago. Not much volonteer to do/support it and the > CentOS team has other priorities ;). > > > Is it the 128M memory issue? I thought I used to install with that much > > - especially in text mode. > it's below the minimal recommended size (256MB). It may work, I haven't > tried. > > Cheers, > > Tru > -- > Tru Huynh (mirrors, CentOS-3 i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance) > http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 189 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/979e2f38/attachment-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 32 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:14:24 -0500 > From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EE470.1040107 at centos.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Jerry Geis wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:46:53AM -0400, Jerry Geis wrote: > >> >/ />/ I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox 2300 unit. > >> /http://www.embeddedpc.net/eBox2300/tabid/110/Default.aspx ? > >> > >> you won't make it with only 128 MB of RAM... > >> is the cpu i686 compatible? > > > > > yes this is the box I am trying to install on... > > > > I dont know if its i686, either way I thought i386 should work. I am I > > wrong? > > None of the RHEL branches support any processors that are < i686 for the > i386 arch. > > CentOS supports i586 in centOS-3 and CentOS-4 (things not in RHEL) .. > and only i686 in CentOS-2 and CentOS-5 (just like RHEL). > > So, NO ... and i586 processor will not run CentOS-5. > > > > Is it the 128M memory issue? I thought I used to install with that much > > - especially in text mode. > > > > Any suggestions. > > doing some research ... this is a pentium mmx compatible chip, which is > i586 ... you can use CentOS-4 on there. > > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 252 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/86d63054/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 33 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 10:22:11 -0700 > From: Scott Silva <ssilva at sgvwater.com> > Subject: [CentOS] Re: FireFox > To: centos at centos.org > Message-ID: <g1moo3$f6i$5 at ger.gmane.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > on 5-29-2008 4:55 AM Daniel de Kok spake the following: > > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Stephen John Smoogen < > smooge-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org> wrote: > >> It will depend upon if Red Hat will release a version for Red Hat > >> Enterprise Linux. The best bet will be that they will not release it > >> until RHEL-4.7 goes into beta testing. > > > > It looks like there is a good chance it will be included in 4.7: > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/nahant-list/2008-May/msg00052.html > > > > (- Added Firefox3) > > > > Take care, > > Daniel > RedHat must be trying to cut some of the costs of backporting. They seem > somewhat more willing to update versions then they used to be. > > -- > MailScanner is like deodorant... > You hope everybody uses it, and > you notice quickly if they don't!!!! > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 258 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/02cea4a7/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 34 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 11:00:22 -0700 > From: MHR <mhullrich at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5? > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: > <f4e013870805291100u2015d817gca6995deca3a9f3d at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 4:31 AM, Jeffrey B. Layton <laytonjb at charter.net> > wrote: > > Good morning, > > > > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to > > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The > > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB. > > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with > > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox, > > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was > > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window > > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless > > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations? > > > > I have an old Toshiba Tecra laptop with a P3 running 600MHz and 256MB > of memory. I installed CentOS 5.1 with the graphical installer, and > it runs GNOME fairly well. It's slow (compared to my main desktop, > but that's an AMD 64x2 4200+ with 4GB of memory), but I expect that > with an older, slower CPU like this (as opposed to a molasses crawl > /old/ CPU :-). I use OOo 2.4 on it, and that is also slow, but it > runs, and I always use the command line interface whenever I can, but > that's 'cuz I'm more comfortable there, and it works nicely all > around. > > YMMV > > mhr > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 35 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:01:31 -0400 > From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com> > Subject: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox > To: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EEF7B.8060103 at pagestation.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > > > Jerry Geis wrote: > > >>/ > > />>/ On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:46:53AM -0400, Jerry Geis wrote: > > />>/ >/ />/ I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox 2300 unit. > > />>/ /http://www.embeddedpc.net/eBox2300/tabid/110/Default.aspx ? > > />>/ > > />>/ you won't make it with only 128 MB of RAM... > > />>/ is the cpu i686 compatible? > > />/ > > / > > >/ yes this is the box I am trying to install on... > > />/ > > />/ I dont know if its i686, either way I thought i386 should work. I am > I > > />/ wrong? > > / > > None of the RHEL branches support any processors that are < i686 for the > > i386 arch. > > > > CentOS supports i586 in centOS-3 and CentOS-4 (things not in RHEL) .. > > and only i686 in CentOS-2 and CentOS-5 (just like RHEL). > > > > So, NO ... and i586 processor will not run CentOS-5. > > >/ > > />/ Is it the 128M memory issue? I thought I used to install with that > much > > />/ - especially in text mode. > > />/ > > />/ Any suggestions. > > / > > doing some research ... this is a pentium mmx compatible chip, which is > > i586 ... you can use CentOS-4 on there. > > > I just tried my old centos 4.4 i386 disk 1 > did "linux text mem=128M" and the same thing. > after vmlinuz.., and initrd... it just resets. > > Am I not boot with the correct options to get the 386 kernel and its > trying to use the 686 kernel? > > Thanks, > > Jerry > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 36 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:08:50 -0500 > From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EF132.3080409 at centos.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Jerry Geis wrote: > >> > >> Jerry Geis wrote: > >> >>/ > >> />>/ On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:46:53AM -0400, Jerry Geis wrote: > >> />>/ >/ />/ I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox 2300 unit. > >> />>/ /http://www.embeddedpc.net/eBox2300/tabid/110/Default.aspx ? > >> />>/ > >> />>/ you won't make it with only 128 MB of RAM... > >> />>/ is the cpu i686 compatible? > >> />/ / > >> >/ yes this is the box I am trying to install on... > >> />/ />/ I dont know if its i686, either way I thought i386 should > >> work. I am I />/ wrong? > >> / > >> None of the RHEL branches support any processors that are < i686 for > >> the i386 arch. > >> > >> CentOS supports i586 in centOS-3 and CentOS-4 (things not in RHEL) .. > >> and only i686 in CentOS-2 and CentOS-5 (just like RHEL). > >> > >> So, NO ... and i586 processor will not run CentOS-5. > >> >/ />/ Is it the 128M memory issue? I thought I used to install with > >> that much />/ - especially in text mode. > >> />/ />/ Any suggestions. > >> / > >> doing some research ... this is a pentium mmx compatible chip, which > >> is i586 ... you can use CentOS-4 on there. > >> > > I just tried my old centos 4.4 i386 disk 1 > > did "linux text mem=128M" and the same thing. > > after vmlinuz.., and initrd... it just resets. > > > > Am I not boot with the correct options to get the 386 kernel and its > > trying to use the 686 kernel? > > > > now do: > > i586 text mem=128 > > :D > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 252 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/25f01f9c/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 37 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 11:17:43 -0700 > From: MHR <mhullrich at gmail.com> > Subject: [CentOS] Setting up a chroot > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: > <f4e013870805291117gc3d098cocf6a4098195f05ea at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > I'm trying to build GNOME (to run a more recent version than 2.16.* on > CentOS 5.1) and I keep running into a lot of rather strange problems. > > I'm wondering if this might have something to do with my hybrid 64 and > 32 bit general environment, so I want to try a pure 64-bit chroot. > > I've never done this before, and I'm not entirely sure how to, and I > didn't see anything particularly on point, either at centos.org or > google. If I missed it, just say where and that should be enough. > > Guidelines? Suggestions (other than "go away" or other physically > difficult crudities :-)? > > Thanks. > > mhr > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 38 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:23:24 -0400 > From: Alfred von Campe <alfred at von-campe.com> > Subject: [CentOS] Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <D20517A9-FAD1-48A8-AE35-DB6D18497DAC at von-campe.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed > > Ever since I upgraded all my systems to CentOS 5.1 I have been > getting reports from users about "all their windows disappearing". A > little digging revealed that they meant all gnome-terminal windows. > Since there is only one gnome-terminal process by default for all > your open terminal windows and tabs, a crash of that process means > losing all your terminal windows. These crashes often (but not > always) occur over night when the system is otherwise idle. > > A quick Google search found a problem on Ubuntu related to VTE (the > terminal emulator widget used by gnome-terminal) but not much else of > interest. Has anyone on this list experienced this? I find it hard > to believe I'm the only one. I never saw this issue while running > CentOS 4.X on these systems... > > Alfred > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 39 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:30:05 -0400 > From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com> > Subject: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox > To: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EF62D.2060907 at pagestation.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > > > now do: > > > > i586 text mem=128 > > > > > when I do "i586 text mem=128" it says cant find kernel > so I do "linux i586 text mem=128" and I get the same behavior > Loading vmlinuz.... > Loading initrd.... > and reboot. > > Am I not correctly specifying the kernel yet? > > Jerry > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 40 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:40:56 -0400 > From: Gregg McClintic <gregg at thegbox.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <1212086456.5154.3.camel at doubleg.liquidweb.com> > Content-Type: text/plain > > On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 14:23 -0400, Alfred von Campe wrote: > > Ever since I upgraded all my systems to CentOS 5.1 I have been > > getting reports from users about "all their windows disappearing". A > > little digging revealed that they meant all gnome-terminal windows. > > Since there is only one gnome-terminal process by default for all > > your open terminal windows and tabs, a crash of that process means > > losing all your terminal windows. These crashes often (but not > > always) occur over night when the system is otherwise idle. > > > > A quick Google search found a problem on Ubuntu related to VTE (the > > terminal emulator widget used by gnome-terminal) but not much else of > > interest. Has anyone on this list experienced this? I find it hard > > to believe I'm the only one. I never saw this issue while running > > CentOS 4.X on these systems... > > > > Alfred > > > > I've seen extreme slow gnome terminals in the past on Cent 5, I even > downgraded the package for the terminal to make it work better. > > Never had it close randomly. I have however had applications randomly > close other then the terminal. > > Gregg. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 41 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:42:09 -0500 > From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EF901.6090905 at centos.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Jerry Geis wrote: > >> > >> now do: > >> > >> i586 text mem=128 > >> > >> > > when I do "i586 text mem=128" it says cant find kernel > > so I do "linux i586 text mem=128" and I get the same behavior > > Loading vmlinuz.... > > Loading initrd.... > > and reboot. > > > > Am I not correctly specifying the kernel yet? > > > > Are you sure this is a CD-1 and not a ServerCD ??? > > i586 text > > THAT should work > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 252 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/83b9661a/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 42 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:48:20 -0500 > From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EFA74.5080001 at centos.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Alfred von Campe wrote: > > Ever since I upgraded all my systems to CentOS 5.1 I have been getting > > reports from users about "all their windows disappearing". A little > > digging revealed that they meant all gnome-terminal windows. Since > > there is only one gnome-terminal process by default for all your open > > terminal windows and tabs, a crash of that process means losing all your > > terminal windows. These crashes often (but not always) occur over night > > when the system is otherwise idle. > > > > A quick Google search found a problem on Ubuntu related to VTE (the > > terminal emulator widget used by gnome-terminal) but not much else of > > interest. Has anyone on this list experienced this? I find it hard to > > believe I'm the only one. I never saw this issue while running CentOS > > 4.X on these systems... > > > > How did you upgrade? > > I am running CentOS-5 on many workstations that stay on all the time and > I have never had the gnome-terminal crash. > > Is it possible that you have older (possibly orphaned) binaries still > installed from the upgrade process? > > If this is from a NEW install, then we need more info to help. > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 252 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/09205167/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 43 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:52:11 -0400 > From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com> > Subject: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox > To: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EFB5B.3000209 at pagestation.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > > > Jerry Geis wrote: > > >>/ > > />>/ now do: > > />>/ > > />>/ i586 text mem=128 > > />>/ > > />>/ > > />/ when I do "i586 text mem=128" it says cant find kernel > > />/ so I do "linux i586 text mem=128" and I get the same behavior > > />/ Loading vmlinuz.... > > />/ Loading initrd.... > > />/ and reboot. > > />/ > > />/ Am I not correctly specifying the kernel yet? > > />/ > > / > > Are you sure this is a CD-1 and not a ServerCD ??? > > > > i586 text > > > > THAT should work > > > Sure enough I had the centos 4 server CD, I looked deaper and got the CD > disk 1 out of my pack > and "i586 text" does a BUNCH more... thanks. > > Now I see on the screen that hda is discovered on the IDE interface as a > 1 GIG device. > The last 2 lines printed are: > > Cannot open root device "<NULL>" or unknown block (8,3) > kernel panic not syncing unable to mount root. > > What do I do with that? > > Everything above that looks normal as detect PS/2 etc... > > Jerry > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 44 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:52:25 -0500 > From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Setting up a chroot > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483EFB69.3050509 at centos.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > MHR wrote: > > I'm trying to build GNOME (to run a more recent version than 2.16.* on > > CentOS 5.1) and I keep running into a lot of rather strange problems. > > > > I'm wondering if this might have something to do with my hybrid 64 and > > 32 bit general environment, so I want to try a pure 64-bit chroot. > > > > I've never done this before, and I'm not entirely sure how to, and I > > didn't see anything particularly on point, either at centos.org or > > google. If I missed it, just say where and that should be enough. > > > > Guidelines? Suggestions (other than "go away" or other physically > > difficult crudities :-)? > > > > Probably the best thing to do is to use mock to build in. > > You provide it with some repos and it automatically creates a chroot to > build things. > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Projects/Mock > > That has some instructions, though you should be able to yum install mock. > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 252 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/b4b64779/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 45 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:55:48 -0600 > From: "Joseph L. Casale" <JCasale at activenetwerx.com> > Subject: RE: [CentOS] /etc/sysctl.conf edit not permanent > To: 'CentOS mailing list' <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: > <49627735003F5C479100225C339F9FE06F0C8F322A at Mail.activenetwerx.int> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > >I expect that you will see "net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1" > > > >Please confirm. > > > >Barry > > You were right, thanks for the info. > jlc > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 46 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 11:58:49 -0700 (PDT) > From: Joe Pruett <joey at clean.q7.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] 40 second delay on automounts with > 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 kernel > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.1.10.0805291157360.2794 at q7.q7.com> > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > On Thu, 29 May 2008, Johnny Hughes wrote: > > > This is already solved on another thread ... but for closure on this one, > > there is a known bug here with that kernel and ipsec: > > > > http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2853 > > that bug entry does say to use the upstream bug for info about a > workaround, but the upstream bug is blocked to mere mortals. is there a > workaround other than just using the older kernel? > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 47 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:13:18 -0400 > From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com> > Subject: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox > To: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483F004E.3050906 at pagestation.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Jerry Geis wrote: > >> > >> Jerry Geis wrote: > >> >>/ > >> />>/ now do: > >> />>/ > >> />>/ i586 text mem=128 > >> />>/ > >> />>/ />/ when I do "i586 text mem=128" it says cant find kernel > >> />/ so I do "linux i586 text mem=128" and I get the same behavior > >> />/ Loading vmlinuz.... > >> />/ Loading initrd.... > >> />/ and reboot. > >> />/ />/ Am I not correctly specifying the kernel yet? > >> />/ / > >> Are you sure this is a CD-1 and not a ServerCD ??? > >> > >> i586 text > >> > >> THAT should work > >> > > Sure enough I had the centos 4 server CD, I looked deaper and got the > > CD disk 1 out of my pack > > and "i586 text" does a BUNCH more... thanks. > > > > Now I see on the screen that hda is discovered on the IDE interface as > > a 1 GIG device. > > The last 2 lines printed are: > > > > Cannot open root device "<NULL>" or unknown block (8,3) > > kernel panic not syncing unable to mount root. > > > > What do I do with that? > > > > Everything above that looks normal as detect PS/2 etc... > > > > Jerry > > > I am booting now with "i586 text mem=128M root=/dev/hda" > > and I am well into the menus of installing now... > > Thanks all for the suggestions. > > Jerry > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 48 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:14:31 -0400 > From: Alfred von Campe <alfred at von-campe.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <FA326913-1514-41EC-9420-CE8FDFD03FEB at von-campe.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed > > On May 29, 2008, at 14:48, Johnny Hughes wrote: > > > How did you upgrade? > > Fresh install via kickstart. I reformatted the root and /boot > partitions, but left one user partition untouched. > > > Is it possible that you have older (possibly orphaned) binaries > > still installed from the upgrade process? > > I don't think this is possible since I reformatted the root partition > (I only have /, /boot, and /scratch partitions in addition to a swap > partition). > > > If this is from a NEW install, then we need more info to help. > > The process ends without leaving a trace unfortunately (at least that > I can find). I did have an strace running on one system attached to > the gnone-terminal process and it finally died after 5 days or so. > Here are the last 20 lines from the log: > > open("/usr/share/X11/XErrorDB", O_RDONLY) = 27 > fstat64(27, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=37949, ...}) = 0 > read(27, "! $Xorg: XErrorDB,v 1.3 2000/08/"..., 37949) = 37949 > close(27) = 0 > write(2, "The program \'gnome-terminal\' rec"..., 592) = 592 > close(18) = 0 > kill(15700, SIGTERM) = 0 > writev(14, [{"GIOP\1\2\1\5\0\0\0\0", 12}], 1) = 12 > close(14) = 0 > writev(15, [{"GIOP\1\2\1\5\0\0\0\0", 12}], 1) = 12 > close(15) = 0 > writev(13, [{"GIOP\1\2\1\5\0\0\0\0", 12}], 1) = 12 > close(13) = 0 > writev(11, [{"GIOP\1\2\1\5\0\0\0\0", 12}], 1) = 12 > close(11) = 0 > close(9) = 0 > close(8) = 0 > unlink("/tmp/orbit-kb12698/linc-3d51-0-2491c193d89b6") = 0 > close(12) = 0 > exit_group(1) = ? > > Is there a better way than strace to get some information on this crash? > > Alfred > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 49 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:18:55 -0700 > From: Scott Silva <ssilva at sgvwater.com> > Subject: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox > To: centos at centos.org > Message-ID: <g1mvj4$ir0$1 at ger.gmane.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > on 5-29-2008 11:52 AM Jerry Geis spake the following: > >> > >> Jerry Geis wrote: > >> >>/ > >> />>/ now do: > >> />>/ > >> />>/ i586 text mem=128 > >> />>/ > >> />>/ />/ when I do "i586 text mem=128" it says cant find kernel > >> />/ so I do "linux i586 text mem=128" and I get the same behavior > >> />/ Loading vmlinuz.... > >> />/ Loading initrd.... > >> />/ and reboot. > >> />/ />/ Am I not correctly specifying the kernel yet? > >> />/ / > >> Are you sure this is a CD-1 and not a ServerCD ??? > >> > >> i586 text > >> > >> THAT should work > >> > > Sure enough I had the centos 4 server CD, I looked deaper and got the CD > > disk 1 out of my pack > > and "i586 text" does a BUNCH more... thanks. > > > > Now I see on the screen that hda is discovered on the IDE interface as a > > 1 GIG device. > > The last 2 lines printed are: > > > > Cannot open root device "<NULL>" or unknown block (8,3) > > kernel panic not syncing unable to mount root. > > > > What do I do with that? > > > > Everything above that looks normal as detect PS/2 etc... > > > > Jerry > It must be either the hardware or a bad disc as I just did a quick install > in > vmware with 128 Mgs of ram and it went OK. > > -- > MailScanner is like deodorant... > You hope everybody uses it, and > you notice quickly if they don't!!!! > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 258 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/ac5a75e1/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 50 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 20:42:17 +0100 > From: Ned Slider <ned at unixmail.co.uk> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] 40 second delay on automounts with > 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 kernel > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483F0719.80700 at unixmail.co.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Joe Pruett wrote: > > On Thu, 29 May 2008, Johnny Hughes wrote: > > > >> This is already solved on another thread ... but for closure on this > >> one, there is a known bug here with that kernel and ipsec: > >> > >> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2853 > > > > that bug entry does say to use the upstream bug for info about a > > workaround, but the upstream bug is blocked to mere mortals. is there a > > workaround other than just using the older kernel? > > > Did you see the added note? > > I quote: > > "For the benefit of those who do not have access to the upstream > bugzilla report, this bug has been fixed in the updated 5.2 kernel > (version number 2.6.18-92.el5), and this kernel also contains the > CVE-2007-6282 patch. I would recommend that people affected by this bug > upgrade to 2.6.18-92.el5." > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 51 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:02:16 -0700 > From: Scott Silva <ssilva at sgvwater.com> > Subject: [CentOS] Re: 40 second delay on automounts with > 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 kernel > To: centos at centos.org > Message-ID: <g1n248$st6$1 at ger.gmane.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > on 5-29-2008 12:42 PM Ned Slider spake the following: > > Joe Pruett wrote: > >> On Thu, 29 May 2008, Johnny Hughes wrote: > >> > >>> This is already solved on another thread ... but for closure on this > >>> one, there is a known bug here with that kernel and ipsec: > >>> > >>> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2853 > >> > >> that bug entry does say to use the upstream bug for info about a > >> workaround, but the upstream bug is blocked to mere mortals. is there > >> a workaround other than just using the older kernel? > > > > > > Did you see the added note? > > > > I quote: > > > > "For the benefit of those who do not have access to the upstream > > bugzilla report, this bug has been fixed in the updated 5.2 kernel > > (version number 2.6.18-92.el5), and this kernel also contains the > > CVE-2007-6282 patch. I would recommend that people affected by this bug > > upgrade to 2.6.18-92.el5." > Is that the kernel to be released with 5.2? > > > -- > MailScanner is like deodorant... > You hope everybody uses it, and > you notice quickly if they don't!!!! > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 258 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/897a60d3/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 52 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:21:56 -0500 > From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Re: 40 second delay on automounts with > 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 kernel > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483F1064.3030300 at centos.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Scott Silva wrote: > > on 5-29-2008 12:42 PM Ned Slider spake the following: > >> Joe Pruett wrote: > >>> On Thu, 29 May 2008, Johnny Hughes wrote: > >>> > >>>> This is already solved on another thread ... but for closure on this > >>>> one, there is a known bug here with that kernel and ipsec: > >>>> > >>>> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2853 > >>> > >>> that bug entry does say to use the upstream bug for info about a > >>> workaround, but the upstream bug is blocked to mere mortals. is > >>> there a workaround other than just using the older kernel? > >> > >> > >> Did you see the added note? > >> > >> I quote: > >> > >> "For the benefit of those who do not have access to the upstream > >> bugzilla report, this bug has been fixed in the updated 5.2 kernel > >> (version number 2.6.18-92.el5), and this kernel also contains the > >> CVE-2007-6282 patch. I would recommend that people affected by this > >> bug upgrade to 2.6.18-92.el5." > > Is that the kernel to be released with 5.2? > > yes ... and we have it built already ... but I am not sure everything > else that might need to go with it. module-init-tools and mkinitrd are > also upgrades so those for sure > > But rather than releasing pieces, I would think that using the older > kernels on ipsec machines would be best for a couple weeks. > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 252 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/c6c0f834/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 53 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:23:07 -0700 > From: MHR <mhullrich at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: > <f4e013870805291323m29774f82xd963d67b8e47eec4 at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Alfred von Campe <alfred at von-campe.com> > wrote: > > > > Fresh install via kickstart. I reformatted the root and /boot > partitions, > > but left one user partition untouched. > > > > I don't think this is possible since I reformatted the root partition (I > > only have /, /boot, and /scratch partitions in addition to a swap > > partition). > > > > The process ends without leaving a trace unfortunately (at least that I > can > > find). I did have an strace running on one system attached to the > > gnone-terminal process and it finally died after 5 days or so. Here are > the > > last 20 lines from the log: > > > > Is it possible you have some kind of time-out set, like an idle time > cut-off? If it's only happening at night, this might explain it. > > I have Seamonkey crashes and strange behavior related to nautilus > windows when I try to open Netowrk Connections, but I've never seen or > heard of anything like this. > > mhr > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 54 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 17:55:05 -0400 > From: "William L. Maltby" <CentOS4Bill at triad.rr.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] FireFox > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <1212098105.3714.4.camel at centos501.homegroannetworking> > Content-Type: text/plain > > On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 13:09 +0200, Bernhard Gschaider wrote: > > >>>>> On Tue, 27 May 2008 21:51:07 -0400 > > >>>>> "WLM" == William L Maltby <CentOS4Bill at triad.rr.com> wrote: > > <snip> > > > WLM> I chose not to uninstall the distributed one. I unpackaed the > > WLM> 3.0rc1 tarball in the $HOME of a user and run it from there. > > > > <snipped recipe> > > > > WLM> This lets all other users get the box-stock version while I > > WLM> test the new one. So far it's looking pretty good. > > > > Question: if I do this, will I be able to move back to the > > stock-1.5-version without problems. In other words: is the stuff like > > bookmarks, history etc that is written to disk backward-compatible? > > Last time I did something like this was with the beta 5 release. In that > case I removed the box version and installed globally. Going that > direction, the per-user config files seemed to hold as normal. Once I > discovered that the needed Java app wouldn't work, I uninstalled the > beta, reinstalled box-stock. > > Again, no config issues. > > Before everybody beats me like a rented mule, there was no risk to other > users - I'm it, just with different logons. So I felt comfortable with > picking up the pieces if it broke and did not grab one of my other > machines for testing. > > > <snip sig stuff> > > HTH > -- > Bill > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 55 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 17:19:44 -0500 > From: "Tom Bishop" <bishoptf at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centosplus vmware kernels....??? > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: > <fc808e200805291519x6829323dk60427b801171b592 at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Thanks Tru and Johnny, one more question. Can I just use the > centos5-testing repo, ie, yum enablerepoxxx install kernel-vm? I ask > because I tried and while it worked it loaded an older kernel. Should I > just go to tru's directory and install the RPM directly? Also, ok more > than > one question, are the open-vm-tools in the same repo or only found in > Johnny's testing directory. Thanks again... > > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 8:59 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Ruslan Sivak wrote: > > > >> > >>>> > >>> > >>> Thanks to Tru, kernel-vm is all up-to-date and you can find it here: > >>> > >>> http://people.centos.org/tru/kernel-vm/ > >>> > >>> and yes, using the clocksource=pit option should not be an issue with > >>> these kernels. > >>> > >>> Akemi > >>> > >>> > >> So if I understand this correctly, one should not be using a stock > kernel > >> when running inside a vm, but should use the kernel-vm kernel? > >> > > > > It depends on the host hardware and OS - many combinations have trouble > > servicing the 1000hz guest clock which has to be simulated in software. > > Also, some host systems have variable speed CPUs controlled by power > > managment which throws off the guests: > > > > > http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&cmd=displayKC&externalId=1591 > > > > -- > > Les Mikesell > > lesmikesell at gmail.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > CentOS mailing list > > CentOS at centos.org > > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/abd5e7e2/attachment-0001.htm > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 56 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 20:01:48 -0300 > From: "Sergio Belkin" <sebelk at gmail.com> > Subject: [CentOS] Negative Values in delay pools > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: > <8c6f7f450805291601k6e15c9edk623bf1f9b111fb5f at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Hi, > I configured delay pools on squid. I get the following from squidclient: > > Delay pools configured: 2 > > Pool: 1 > Class: 1 > > Aggregate: > Disabled. > > Pool: 2 > Class: 1 > > Aggregate: > Max: 187500 > Restore: 187500 > Current: -6 > > Memory Used: 624 bytes > > End of Output > > What does mean Current with a negative value? > > Thanks in advance > > -- > -- > Open Kairos http://www.openkairos.com > Watch More TV http://sebelk.blogspot.com > Sergio Belkin - > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 57 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 20:58:14 -0400 > From: "Filipe Brandenburger" <filbranden at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: > <e814db780805291758l5b74dff5rc0d9233b025e19d4 at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Alfred von Campe <alfred at von-campe.com> > wrote: > > write(2, "The program \'gnome-terminal\' rec"..., 592) = 592 > > This looks interesting, but unfortunately you cut the message too > short to know what it was saying... You might find it in > /var/log/Xorg.0.log, but I wouldn't bet on that. > > > Is there a better way than strace to get some information on this crash? > > strace seems fine, just use some options to enhance the output you get: > -s 1024: take 1024 bytes for every string. This wouldn't have cut that one > short > -tt: if you want timestamps > -f: to follow forked processes > > I almost always call strace like this: > > $ strace -f -tt -s 1024 -o /tmp/strace_PROCESSNAME.$$ PIDOFTHEPROCESS > > Try to do it again and you might find out what gnome-terminal was > trying to tell you. > > HTH, > Filipe > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 58 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 20:59:19 -0400 > From: "Filipe Brandenburger" <filbranden at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: > <e814db780805291759m203c1391q4f084f7ba66501b3 at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Filipe Brandenburger > <filbranden at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Alfred von Campe <alfred at von-campe.com> > wrote: > >> write(2, "The program \'gnome-terminal\' rec"..., 592) = 592 > > > > This looks interesting, but unfortunately you cut the message too > > short to know what it was saying... You might find it in > > /var/log/Xorg.0.log, but I wouldn't bet on that. > > Try ~/.xsession-errors, that's a more likely place to find the error > message. > > HTH, > Filipe > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 59 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 22:21:39 -0500 > From: Jay Leafey <jay.leafey at mindless.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] GFS > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483F72C3.9070107 at mindless.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Mag Gam wrote: > > Hello: > > > > I am planning to implement GFS for my university as a summer project. I > > have 10 servers each with SAN disks attached. I will be reading and > > writing many files for professor's research projects. Each file can be > > anywhere from 1k to 120GB (fluid dynamic research images). The 10 > > servers will be using NIC bonding (1GB/network). So, would GFS be ideal > > for this? I have been reading a lot about it and it seems like a perfect > > solution. > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > TIA > > > > "Perfect"? No, but usable. We've got a cluster of 4 systems attached > to a fibre-channel-based SAN running CentOS 4 and the Cluster Suite > components with multiple instances of the Oracle database. It actually > works pretty well and fails over nicely in the case of exceptions. It > is moderately complex to set up, but the information needed REALLY IS in > the docs... you just have to REALLY read them! > > We haven't tried CentOS 5 and the new cluster components as Oracle only > supports the version of the database we're running on Red Hat EL4. > Given that, the combination looks a bit more "finished" than the > versions in EL4. > > Another alternative that we are examining is using OCFS2 (Oracle Cluster > File System 2) and iSCSI for the shared storage with Heartbeat for > service management. This combination looks to be a bit "lighter" than > the Cluster Suite and GFS, but I'm hoping to confirm or disprove that > impression this summer in my "copious free time". > > As usual, you mileage may vary. > -- > Jay Leafey - Memphis, TN > jay.leafey at mindless.com > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: smime.p7s > Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature > Size: 5177 bytes > Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/a677a6d5/smime-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 60 > Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 11:43:47 +0800 > From: Christopher Chan <christopher at ias.com.hk> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6 > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483F77F3.4090400 at ias.com.hk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Robert Moskowitz wrote: > > We have kernel support for IPv6 in Centos, but not stateful firewall > > support. > > > > That requires at least the 2.6.20 kernel, which means Fedora Core 6 or > > some other Linux distro. > > > > None of the various free Linux firewalls have IPv6 support. Supposedly > > FWBuilder can manage Netfilters for a Linux Kernel, but that seems to be > > the extent of it. > > > > More sad facts as I uncover them..... > > Just use openbsd. We cannot expect Linux to rule everything. Use what > best fits the job. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 61 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 23:53:12 -0400 > From: "Matt Shields" <mattboston at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6 > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: > <100716920805292053q1c1d26ecqa18ae7635b8c687c at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Christopher Chan > <christopher at ias.com.hk> wrote: > > Robert Moskowitz wrote: > >> > >> We have kernel support for IPv6 in Centos, but not stateful firewall > >> support. > >> > >> That requires at least the 2.6.20 kernel, which means Fedora Core 6 or > >> some other Linux distro. > >> > >> None of the various free Linux firewalls have IPv6 support. Supposedly > >> FWBuilder can manage Netfilters for a Linux Kernel, but that seems to be > the > >> extent of it. > >> > >> More sad facts as I uncover them..... > > > > Just use openbsd. We cannot expect Linux to rule everything. Use what > best > > fits the job. > > Not sure about FC6, but in both CentOS 4 & 5 there is an ip6tables. I > haven't used it, but I'm assuming that you can build rules just like > you do with iptables. > > -- > -matt > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 62 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 22:57:32 -0500 > From: "Rob Townley" <rob.townley at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6 > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: > <7e84ed60805292057ra4bb873r71abf40eb1f91d17 at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 10:53 PM, Matt Shields <mattboston at gmail.com> > wrote: > > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Christopher Chan > > <christopher at ias.com.hk> wrote: > > > Robert Moskowitz wrote: > > >> > > >> We have kernel support for IPv6 in Centos, but not stateful firewall > > >> support. > > >> > > >> That requires at least the 2.6.20 kernel, which means Fedora Core 6 or > > >> some other Linux distro. > > >> > > >> None of the various free Linux firewalls have IPv6 support. > Supposedly > > >> FWBuilder can manage Netfilters for a Linux Kernel, but that seems to > be > > the > > >> extent of it. > > >> > > >> More sad facts as I uncover them..... > > > > > > Just use openbsd. We cannot expect Linux to rule everything. Use what > > best > > > fits the job. > > > > Not sure about FC6, but in both CentOS 4 & 5 there is an ip6tables. I > > haven't used it, but I'm assuming that you can build rules just like > > you do with iptables. > > > > -- > > -matt > > _______________________________________________ > > CentOS mailing list > > CentOS at centos.org > > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > > > My dd-wrt web page has a IPv6 checkbox, but don't know what it does. i am > shunning IPv6 bc securing the private side of a NAT is hard enough. > Securing IPv6 seems much much much tougher. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/c2b6ef9d/attachment-0001.htm > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 63 > Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 12:13:28 +0800 > From: Christopher Chan <christopher at ias.com.hk> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6 > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483F7EE8.90303 at ias.com.hk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Matt Shields wrote: > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Christopher Chan > > <christopher at ias.com.hk> wrote: > >> Robert Moskowitz wrote: > >>> We have kernel support for IPv6 in Centos, but not stateful firewall > >>> support. > >>> > > > Not sure about FC6, but in both CentOS 4 & 5 there is an ip6tables. I > > haven't used it, but I'm assuming that you can build rules just like > > you do with iptables. > > > > The OP is not saying there is no ipv6 netfilter support. He said that > there is no ipv6 state netfilter module or something like that. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 64 > Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 00:22:39 -0400 > From: Robert Spangler <mlists at zoominternet.net> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] FireFox > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <200805300022.39665.mlists at zoominternet.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On Tuesday 27 May 2008 20:19, MHR wrote: > > > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Robert Spangler > > > > <mlists at zoominternet.net> wrote: > > > Can I use one out of the Fedora's repos? If so, which repo? > > > > You can just pull down the latest version from mozilla.org - they're > > pretty good about compatibility. I'd try it out in a different > > install directory, though, just to be sure, but you can always > > uninstall it and re-load the release version if it doesn't work right > > for you. > > I downloaded the tar file from Mozilla and placed it under my home Dir. > Seems > to be working fine presently. After some more tests if there are no issues > I'll replace 1.5 with 2.0. Thank for your help. > > > -- > > Regards > Robert > > Smile... it increases your face value! > Linux User #296285 > http://counter.li.org > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 65 > Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 08:54:48 +0200 > From: Sebastian Marten <sebi4711 at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Config for NFSv4 an Kerberos on CentOS 5.1 > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483FA4B8.4050405 at gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hi, > > Barry Brimer schrieb: > > Quoting Sebastian Marten <sebi4711 at gmail.com>: > > > >> Hi list, > >> Is it possible to set up an NFSv4/Kerberos environment on CentOS 5.1? > >> I set up Kerberos and NFS but get several erros > >> > >> "Warning: rpc.gssd appears not to be running. > >> mount.nfs4: Permission denied" > >> > >> Is this an CentOS oder an config problem? > > > > Yes. > > > > Are you running all of the gss services? > > Is portmap running? > > Did you uncomment the SECURE_NFS="yes" in /etc/sysconfig/nfs? > > Was your kerberos principal created with: > > "addprinc -randkey -e des-cbc-md5:normal nfs/server.domain.com" > > Was your keytab entry created with: > > "ktadd -e des-cbc-md5:normal nfs/server.domain.com" > > Do you have gss/krb5p just before the nfs options in parentheses? > > > > I've done all this + add princs for the host. (tested with ds and > ds.example.lan) > > I get this error: > ds rpc.svcgssd[4686]: ERROR: GSS-API: error in gss_acquire_cred(): > Unspecified GSS failure. Minor code may provide more information - No > principal in keytab matches desired name > ds rpc.svcgssd[4686]: Unable to obtain credentials for 'nfs' > ds rpc.svcgssd[4686]: unable to obtain root (machine) credentials > ds rpc.svcgssd[4686]: do you have a keytab entry for > nfs/<your.host>@<YOUR.REALM> in /etc/krb5.keytab? > > But: kadmin.local listprincs return: > > K/M at EXAMPLE.COM > host/ds.example.lan at EXAMPLE.COM > host/ds at EXAMPLE.COM > kadmin/admin at EXAMPLE.COM > kadmin/changepw at EXAMPLE.COM > kadmin/history at EXAMPLE.COM > kadmin/localhost.localdomain at EXAMPLE.COM > krbtgt/EXAMPLE.COM at EXAMPLE.COM > nfs/ds.example.lan at EXAMPLE.COM > nfs/ds at EXAMPLE.COM > root/admin at EXAMPLE.COM > root at EXAMPLE.COM > > The hostname is ds.example.lan > > /tec/krb5.conf points on the right server. > > kinit and klist works > > kinit > Password for root at EXAMPLE.COM: > [root at ds ~]# klist > Ticket cache: FILE:/tmp/krb5cc_0 > Default principal: root at EXAMPLE.COM > > Valid starting Expires Service principal > 05/30/08 08:52:48 05/31/08 08:52:47 krbtgt/EXAMPLE.COM at EXAMPLE.COM > > > Kerberos 4 ticket cache: /tmp/tkt0 > klist: You have no tickets cached > > > There is my problem? > > > > Hope this helps. > > > > Barry > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 542 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080530/13fcd479/signature-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 66 > Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 12:26:21 +0530 > From: "gopinath" <gopinath at signal-networks.com> > Subject: [CentOS] offline file shares > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <000801c8c222$44ae9d70$0101a8c0 at signet> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > can we configure offline file shares in samba as we do on a windows pc > > Gopinath > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080530/35b07475/attachment-0001.htm > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 67 > Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 00:51:30 -0700 > From: John R Pierce <pierce at hogranch.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] offline file shares > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483FB202.4010802 at hogranch.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > gopinath wrote: > > can we configure offline file shares in samba as we do on a windows pc > > afaik, a windows client can be told to support an offline share thats on > a samba serrver, as the offline feature involves client side caching of > the files. > > I seriously doubt the samba client for unix would know how to do offline > files, however. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 68 > Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 15:53:14 +0800 > From: Christopher Chan <christopher at ias.com.hk> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] offline file shares > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483FB26A.8010805 at ias.com.hk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > gopinath wrote: > > can we configure offline file shares in samba as we do on a windows pc > > Whatcha mean? Prevent offline caching? > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 69 > Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:27:52 +0200 > From: Fabian Arrotin - oxygen <fabian.arrotin at arrfab.net> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] offline file shares > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <483FBA88.10004 at arrfab.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > gopinath wrote: > > can we configure offline file shares in samba as we do on a windows pc > > > > Gopinath > Do you mean caching files coming from a Windows/SMB share to your CentOS > box ? > Nothing does that but you can write a rsync script if needed ... but > attention to the way rsync will synchronize .. or use unison ? > > Fabian > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 70 > Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:40:27 +0200 > From: Tru Huynh <tru at centos.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centosplus vmware kernels....??? > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <20080530084027.GA10027 at sillage.bis.pasteur.fr> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 05:19:44PM -0500, Tom Bishop wrote: > > Thanks Tru and Johnny, one more question. Can I just use the > > centos5-testing repo, ie, yum enablerepoxxx install kernel-vm? I ask > > because I tried and while it worked it loaded an older kernel. Should I > > just go to tru's directory and install the RPM directly? Also, ok more > than > > one question, are the open-vm-tools in the same repo or only found in > > Johnny's testing directory. Thanks again... > > Hi Les, > > Everything under http://people.centos.org/tru/ is signed for testing and > feedback before it can be built by the CentOS build systems and > enter either the regular testing repository or their final destination. > You can look at it as alpha release ;). > > Cheers, > > Tru > -- > Tru Huynh (mirrors, CentOS-3 i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance) > http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 189 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080530/533dacbc/attachment-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 71 > Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 14:37:32 +0530 > From: "gopinath" <gopinath at signal-networks.com> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] offline file shares > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Message-ID: <000b01c8c234$97d8b9b0$0101a8c0 at signet> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > to create offline share of windows pc in centos of linux box. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Fabian Arrotin - oxygen" <fabian.arrotin at arrfab.net> > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 1:57 PM > Subject: Re: [CentOS] offline fi... > > [Message clipped] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080609/e8f81831/attachment-0003.html>