Creo que me perdí de algo ... podrían enviar nuevamente el link, no tengo el
mail donde lo enviaron.
Saludos y gracias.
Javier.
-Mensaje original-
De: centos-es-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-es-boun...@centos.org] En
nombre de alberto Crego
Enviado el: viernes, 30 de septiembre de
Es este:
http://www.server-world.info/en/note?os=CentOS_6p=download
Saludos,
El 30 de septiembre de 2011 15:33, Javier Aquino H.
jaqu...@lexuseditores.com escribió:
Creo que me perdí de algo ... podrían enviar nuevamente el link, no tengo
el
mail donde lo enviaron.
Saludos y gracias.
Gracias por el link, muy interesante :)
-Mensaje original-
De: centos-es-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-es-boun...@centos.org] En
nombre de Arturo Limón
Enviado el: viernes, 30 de septiembre de 2011 08:35 a.m.
Para: centos-es@centos.org
Asunto: Re: [CentOS-es] Estupenda web de
On 30 September 2011 02:22, Trey Dockendorf treyd...@gmail.com wrote:
I had a recent request to improve security on my web servers by having each
website use a different user to run the hosting service. So
example1.comhas it's own Apache instance running as apache1 and then
example2.com has
From: Silvio Tadeu silvio.in...@hotmail.com
root@server [/tmp]# ldconfig -p | grep libmysqlclient.so.15
libmysqlclient.so.15 (libc6,x86-64) = /usr/lib/libmysqlclient.so.15
libmysqlclient.so.15 (libc6,x86-64) =
/usr/lib64/libmysqlclient.so.15
How come an x86_64 lib appears in
On 29/09/11 22:19, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
When I build, our PXEboot ks partitions and labels the partitions. When I
add or replace, I make the partition, the fs, and e2label them. I've
gotten to really appreciate labeling. I hate the UUIDs - they're
ludicrously too long, and bear no
Hi Les,
On 29/09/11 22:25, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 4:19 PM,m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
When I build, our PXEboot ks partitions and labels the partitions. When I
add or replace, I make the partition, the fs, and e2label them. I've
gotten to really appreciate labeling. I hate
On Fri, 2011-09-30 at 10:47 +0100, Hakan Koseoglu wrote:
On 30 September 2011 02:22, Trey Dockendorf treyd...@gmail.com wrote:
I had a recent request to improve security on my web servers by having each
website use a different user to run the hosting service. So
example1.comhas it's own
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 08:22:59PM -0500, Trey Dockendorf wrote:
I had a recent request to improve security on my web servers by having each
website use a different user to run the hosting service. So
example1.comhas it's own Apache instance running as apache1 and then
example2.com has its
On 9/27/2011 8:31 AM, John Hinton wrote:
For those of you running mailservers on CentOS 6, what are the
suggestions for programs to expunge old email? For instance, deleting
email from a Spam folder that is 2 weeks old or older.
I see that Dovecot does have a solution, but was wondering about
Jerry McAllister wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 08:22:59PM -0500, Trey Dockendorf wrote:
I had a recent request to improve security on my web servers by having
each website use a different user to run the hosting service. So
example1.comhas it's own Apache instance running as apache1 and
On Sep 30, 2011, at 8:01 AM, John Hinton wrote:
As a side note... Since Outlook has chosen to pretty much hide and only
use the term Expunge to empty trash on IMAP accounts (and average email
users don't find it and don't know what expunge means) We're seeing
a lot of trash left
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:06 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I had a recent request to improve security on my web servers by having
each website use a different user to run the hosting service. So
example1.comhas it's own Apache instance running as apache1 and then
example2.com has its own
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:56 AM, Hakan Koseoglu ha...@koseoglu.org wrote:
What happens when you move the disks around among machines? Or don't
you ever do that after they contain data?
Why would you move disks around machines unless you're recovering them
after a failure?
Because I can.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:56 AM, Hakan Koseoglu ha...@koseoglu.org
wrote:
What happens when you move the disks around among machines? Or don't
you ever do that after they contain data?
Why would you move disks around machines unless you're recovering them
after a
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Michael Crilly mrcri...@gmail.com wrote:
Not sure if someone has asked this previously, but have you got the 8021q
kernel module installed and loaded?
That seems to have happened by itself - and I now see that if the
NetworkManager service is not running the 5.x
I think Trey needs to push back - *IF* I understand him correctly, it
sounds like duplicate websites, but running as different users. That, to
me, literally makes no sense..., unless a) the source of the request
doesn't understand what he wants, or b) there's something illegal going
on,
Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to
centos-annou...@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
On Friday, September 30, 2011 11:41:02 AM Les Mikesell wrote:
Because I can. Why wouldn't you?
...
That doesn't any more sense than having to label all your shipping
containers descriptively before you know what you are going to put in
them. And besides, most of the labels are applied by
On 9/30/2011 8:41 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:56 AM, Hakan Koseogluha...@koseoglu.org wrote:
Why would you move disks around machines unless you're recovering them
after a failure?
Because I can. Why wouldn't you? Mine are nearly all in swappable
carriers and it is a
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
While finding the corner cases seems to be your specialty, Les, recognize
that there will always be a corner case not covered by any filesystem
labeling/naming scheme, no matter what scheme is used.
I've found that it is a
On Sep 30, 2011 10:58 AM, Drew drew@gmail.com wrote:
I think Trey needs to push back - *IF* I understand him correctly, it
sounds like duplicate websites, but running as different users. That,
to
me, literally makes no sense..., unless a) the source of the request
doesn't
I'm seeing a strange issue on my C-5.7 system.
running Firefox 7 with the very latest flash plugin.
browse to CNN, I can view any of the videos directly linked on the main
page, or directly linked on sub-pages.
but if I click on the video link at the top of the page (in the red bar)
Firefox
On 09/30/11 9:26 AM, Trey Dockendorf wrote:
However they also
want to have the CMS write to the .htaccess files to dynamically control
which users can access the dowloads portion of the sites. That Im strongly
against.
CMS systems almost always use their own authentication and downloading
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Benjamin Franz jfr...@freerun.com wrote:
Why would you move disks around machines unless you're recovering them
after a failure?
Because I can. Why wouldn't you? Mine are nearly all in swappable
carriers and it is a lot faster to move them than to ship
On Friday, September 30, 2011 12:26:28 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
For example when mounting by label was
first implemented, having a duplicate label (very likely if you move
disks around at all since the installer always used
Benjamin Franz wrote:
On 9/30/2011 8:41 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 4:56 AM, Hakan Koseogluha...@koseoglu.org
wrote:
Why would you move disks around machines unless you're recovering them
after a failure?
Because I can. Why wouldn't you? Mine are nearly all in
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 12:55 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Most of our servers have all drives in hot swap bays (and the older ones
that don't are being surplussed as fast as we can)... *ALL* of which have
sleds they have to fit in. The only drives I swap on a regular basis are
our offline
On Sep 30, 2011 11:43 AM, John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote:
On 09/30/11 9:26 AM, Trey Dockendorf wrote:
However they also
want to have the CMS write to the .htaccess files to dynamically control
which users can access the dowloads portion of the sites. That Im
strongly
against.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 12:55 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Most of our servers have all drives in hot swap bays (and the older ones
that don't are being surplussed as fast as we can)... *ALL* of which
have sleds they have to fit in. The only drives I swap on a regular
I'm not sure why you would want each website on its own Apache process (as
that just isn't needed), but some of the ideas here are a bit...
over-the-top.
There are a few options of improving the security of your Apache setup. You
can use something like FastCGI based PHP applications or suPHP;
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 1:39 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
And no, I do not toss my backups at work in my shirt:
Figuratively speaking, of course - the 2.5 drives are just easier for
any use where the capacity makes sense.
the offline backups,
fully encrypted disks, go in the fire safe in
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 1:39 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
And no, I do not toss my backups at work in my shirt:
Figuratively speaking, of course - the 2.5 drives are just easier for
any use where the capacity makes sense.
Um, we just went from the 1TB drives to 3TB
Well, first thing is I got lucky and not bought all the same drives. If
I had all the same I would never have known I put my OS on the two
drives added with the new sata card, something I DID NOT want to do.
If they were all 1 tb drives, it would have been a disaster to me.
Luckily I set up
I am having no luck getting NIS to work on a clean install of CentOS 6. It
seems to be an issue with ypbind.
I have simple /etc/yp.conf which explicitly sets the server
domain myDomain server myServer
The service seems to start okay
#service ypbind start
Starting NIS service: [OK]
Binding
On Thu, September 29, 2011 15:13, Akemi Yagi wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:54 AM, James B. Byrne
byrn...@harte-lyne.ca wrote:
Is there anything special in the way of configuration
that
is required to enable a CentOS box to act as the point
of
origin for an http request routed to it via
On Thu, 2011-09-29 at 14:15 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 11:12 PM, James A. Peltier jpelt...@sfu.ca wrote:
| Are there any new tools in CentOS 6 to configure VLAN interfaces
| (where
| the switch passes multiple tagged VLANs over one physical link to the
| host) or
On Friday, September 30, 2011 03:36:50 PM Bob Hoffman wrote:
Below is the issue I am talking about. The system ignores the sda/sdb
etc labeling to use UUID and things like hd0, hd1...
Yet mdstat shows you the drives in the useless labeling way...sda sdab
...
Useless? Those names are what the
On 09/30/11 12:27 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Um, we just went from the 1TB drives to 3TB drives, so I only need four.
yes, but 12 2.5 1TB drives take the same amount of space (1U), and are
capable of higher IO throughput due to being more spindles.
--
john r pierce
John R Pierce wrote:
On 09/30/11 12:27 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Um, we just went from the 1TB drives to 3TB drives, so I only need four.
yes, but 12 2.5 1TB drives take the same amount of space (1U), and are
capable of higher IO throughput due to being more spindles.
You missed what I
On Sep 30, 2011 1:49 PM, Michael Crilly mrcri...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not sure why you would want each website on its own Apache process (as
that just isn't needed), but some of the ideas here are a bit...
over-the-top.
There are a few options of improving the security of your Apache setup.
With a bit more digging it seems that the rpc registration is somehow failing.
#rpcinfo -p | grep ypbind
Returns nothing, but it should return something like
172 udp620 ypbind
171 udp620 ypbind
172 tcp623 ypbind
171 tcp
Martyn Klassen wrote:
With a bit more digging it seems that the rpc registration is somehow
failing.
#rpcinfo -p | grep ypbind
Returns nothing, but it should return something like
172 udp620 ypbind
171 udp620 ypbind
172 tcp623
- Original Message -
| On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Michael Crilly mrcri...@gmail.com
| wrote:
| Not sure if someone has asked this previously, but have you got the
| 8021q
| kernel module installed and loaded?
|
| That seems to have happened by itself - and I now see that if the
|
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
But 'breakage' and 'bugginess' are not synonyms; something can be broken for
a corner case but not be a bug in the general sense. Is the current
filesystem mounting standard broken? In certain use cases most certainly.
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 5:03 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
UUID is, IMHO at least, the worst of all worlds due to the length
and the user-unfriendliness of it all (it's been the Ubuntu default
for a while, though!). It is guaranteed unique (until you use
complete clones), but is the
46 matches
Mail list logo
