CentOS Errata and Enhancement Advisory 2011:1410
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2011-1410.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename )
i386:
db84db44361267bb39e3f974f4a65eb5
CentOS Errata and Enhancement Advisory 2011:1410
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2011-1410.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename )
x86_64:
466d9a218b6611a8a0120857defa1a5e
CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2011:1416
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-1416.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename )
i386:
425161f79a78747b8e6b38a8cc0b2984
CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2011:1416
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-1416.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename )
x86_64:
425161f79a78747b8e6b38a8cc0b2984
CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2011:1420
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-1420.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename )
i386:
9bc81f7a42dac956e382e671bc0d48f2
CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2011:1420
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-1420.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename )
x86_64:
eec28ede0b25766232f8b900726bbcbe
CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2011:1422 Moderate
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2011-1422.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename )
i386:
ffbe79dac3ca8237d6cc0afbe994ff47
CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2011:1423 Moderate
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2011-1423.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename )
i386:
223af9e4f04f1d42d3508ada752cdb02
CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2011:1423 Moderate
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2011-1423.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename )
x86_64:
dff715443179e84abd9b6a9ef0988f59
Buenas gente... una cortita y al pie como decimos en Argentina...
Es posible con lvm2 realizar un relayout de un volumen lógico estripeado?,
Ej:
Supongamos que tengo el vg01 que esta compuesto por 4 pv (sdb1 sdc1
sde1 sdf1), y dentro de ese vg tengo el volumen lógico lv00 que fue
creado estripeado
El día 1 de noviembre de 2011 10:56, Diego Chacón
di...@gridshield.net escribió:
Aqui esta la informacion:
http://www.shorewall.net/shorewall_logging.html
--
thnk lo estare viendo ..
--
rickygm
http://gnuforever.homelinux.com
___
CentOS-es
A few things:
- It didn't/doesn't play well with other virtual machine libraries.
- Don't forget to install the vbox extensions if you want/need to use USB 2.0
- Don't forget to install DKMS before pretty much anything else.
- It _is_ worth the hassle of adding the vbox guest additions to
I had problems with VBox 4 in my CentOS6, so I had to install
VirtualBox-3.2-3.2.12_68302_rhel6-1.x86_64 and I am very very happy with it.
VMware Server meant a lot of problems with new kernels and the patch
any-any... so I think Virtualbox does the trick.
El 02/11/11 09:04, Roy Trubshaw
Vreme: 11/02/2011 09:10 AM, Lorenzo Martínez Rodríguez piše:
I had problems with VBox 4 in my CentOS6, so I had to install
VirtualBox-3.2-3.2.12_68302_rhel6-1.x86_64 and I am very very happy with it.
VMware Server meant a lot of problems with new kernels and the patch
any-any... so I think
In article 4eb05844.5060...@unixmail.co.uk,
Ned Slider n...@unixmail.co.uk wrote:
A 2 socket virtualization platform is $1,999 giving unlimited virtual
guests.
What is a socket in their pricing model? The word can mean so many
different things...
Tony
--
Tony Mountifield
Work:
If you want to install Virtualbox in CentOS, it is easy. Go to this download
link http://download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/4.1.4/VirtualBox-4.1-4.1.4_74291_rhel6-1.i686.rpm .
and download the RPM File, after simply install it.
I am not such a fan of Virtualbox neither but You can try
On 11/02/2011 11:02 AM, Tony Mountifield wrote:
What is a socket in their pricing model? The word can mean so many
different things...
Afaik it refers to a physical cpu socket. So they count actual cpu's,
not the amount of cores in each cpu.
Regards,
Patrick
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 4:04 AM, Roy Trubshaw roy.trubs...@yahoo.co.ukwrote:
- Here's a relatively complete description on turning VirtualBox into a
service under Redhat/Centos/Fedora (
http://www.kernelhardware.org/virtualbox-auto-start-vm-centos-fedora-redhat/
).
Using VB 4.1.x under
On Tue, 2011-11-01 at 23:47 -0400, fred smith wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 10:30:57AM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 12:47 AM, David Hrbáč wrote:
Dne 1.11.2011 17:27, Akemi Yagi napsal(a):
Real problem with recent release troubles with CentOS is that some
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 04:55 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Vreme: 11/02/2011 09:10 AM, Lorenzo Martínez Rodríguez piše:
I had problems with VBox 4 in my CentOS6, so I had to install
VirtualBox-3.2-3.2.12_68302_rhel6-1.x86_64 and I am very very happy with it.
VMware Server meant a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/01/2011 09:12 PM, Trey Dockendorf wrote:
Do you have the
allow_httpd_mod_auth_pam
boolean turned on?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
Hi,
did anybody did an update from 1.x - 2.x yet?
I'D like to use the rpm from http://packages.atrpms.net/dist/el5/dovecot/
May be someone has some suggestions?
Regards . Götz
--
Götz Reinicke
IT-Koordinator
Tel. +49 7141 969 420
Fax +49 7141 969 55 420
E-Mail
On 11/1/2011 3:53 PM, Scott Silva wrote:
on 11/1/2011 10:30 AM Grant McChesney spake the following:
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 10:19 AM, John Hintonwebmas...@ew3d.com wrote:
For those of you that still are running CentOS 4... I have one system
that is still going... there is a problem with the
centos-boun...@centos.org schrieb am 02.11.2011 15:01:03:
Götz Reinicke goetz.reini...@filmakademie.de
Gesendet von: centos-boun...@centos.org
02.11.2011 15:01
Bitte antworten an
CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
An
centos@centos.org
Kopie
Thema
[CentOS] dovecot
On Wed, 2 Nov 2011, Christopher Chan wrote:
4.0.x was okay for me (Windows server guests) but 4.1.4 was a complete
disaster. The guest literally moved at SNAIL pace. Removed all cores
save one and then it moved at TURTLE pace. 4.1.x is do not touch even
with a ten foot pole. At least with
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 18:47, David Hrbáč david-li...@hrbac.cz wrote:
Well, there are no other RHEL clones except SL/Centos. We have quite
large infrastructure and we want it homogeneous as possible. Because we
run a few boxes with IBM, Ora stuff we need certified OSes, certified
is only RHEL
I think it is time to reconsider and think on OpenIndiana.
2011/11/2 Dotan Cohen dotanco...@gmail.com
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 18:47, David Hrbáč david-li...@hrbac.cz wrote:
Well, there are no other RHEL clones except SL/Centos. We have quite
large infrastructure and we want it homogeneous
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 20:27, Bob Hoffman b...@bobhoffman.com wrote:
Centos is fun, but I am kinda interested in more modern packages that
ubu seems to offer. Worried about
having to relearn a full system though.
Ubuntu server a bit different, but not terribly so. Apache is called
apache and
Dotan Cohen wrote:
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 20:27, Bob Hoffman b...@bobhoffman.com wrote:
Centos is fun, but I am kinda interested in more modern packages that
ubu seems to offer. Worried about
having to relearn a full system though.
Ubuntu server a bit different, but not terribly so. Apache
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 10:52:36AM -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Dotan Cohen wrote:
I also really dislike their equivalent of grub.conf - it's a long, long
script, with stuff buried in it, and it calls a bunch of other files,
rather than the simple, clean one in RH/CentOS.
Yes, it's grub2.
On Tuesday, November 01, 2011 11:24:24 AM Les Mikesell wrote:
If, in fact, you cannot rebuild a src rpm and get a working
copy then in that respect you might as well be using closed,
proprietary software.
Working and binary compatible are two different things, and typically the
100% binary
On Tuesday, November 01, 2011 01:46:57 AM Bob Hoffman wrote:
Personally I am thinking of staying away from all red hat clones due to
redhat's actions for my own security.
The only thing on the horizon I see is ubuntu server as best supported
and up to date.
There are really two good
Am 02.11.2011 15:01, schrieb Götz Reinicke:
did anybody did an update from 1.x - 2.x yet?
I'D like to use the rpm from http://packages.atrpms.net/dist/el5/dovecot/
May be someone has some suggestions?
I recompiled the SRPMs from http://www.city-fan.org/ftp/contrib/mail/
Updating the
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
centos-boun...@centos.org schrieb am 02.11.2011 16:50:33:
Peter Hinse l...@d0pefish.de
Gesendet von: centos-boun...@centos.org
02.11.2011 16:56
Bitte antworten an
CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
An
CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
Kopie
Thema
Re: [CentOS]
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
I've had some issues with Ubuntu LTS in the past; perhaps they've worked
those out, but since they're somewhat based off of Debian, why not go to the
source if you're going to go 'Debian-like?'
Does Debian include all the
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On Tuesday, November 01, 2011 11:24:24 AM Les Mikesell wrote:
If, in fact, you cannot rebuild a src rpm and get a working
copy then in that respect you might as well be using closed,
proprietary software.
Working and binary
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 12:44:27 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
Does Debian include all the same drivers as Ubuntu these days?
Sounds like a question for a Debian list, not here.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 12:53:29 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
Try the other way around: build RHEL from their src rpms, try to run
the 3rd party binary... I thought you said that didn't work. If you
can't rebuild that source so it works, you might as well not use open
source.
Ok, let me
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 12:53:29 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
Try the other way around: build RHEL from their src rpms, try to run
the 3rd party binary... I thought you said that didn't work. If you
can't rebuild that source
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 12:44:27 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
Does Debian include all the same drivers as Ubuntu these days?
Sounds like a question for a Debian list, not here.
I thought you were the one who brought up the
On Wed, 2 Nov 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
I don't care in general, but dislike hypocrisy. If you are going to
claim to be open source, it should work to rebuild.
les ... go rent a forum of your own -- this has no centos
aspect any more
-- Russ herrold
On Nov 2, 2011, at 9:44 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
I've had some issues with Ubuntu LTS in the past; perhaps they've worked
those out, but since they're somewhat based off of Debian, why not go to the
source if you're going
On Nov 2, 2011, at 8:42 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
On Tuesday, November 01, 2011 01:46:57 AM Bob Hoffman wrote:
Personally I am thinking of staying away from all red hat clones due to
redhat's actions for my own security.
The only thing on the horizon I see is ubuntu server as best supported
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011, Lamar Owen wrote:
On Tuesday, November 01, 2011 01:46:57 AM Bob Hoffman wrote:
Personally I am thinking of staying away from all red hat clones due to
redhat's actions for my own security.
The only thing on the horizon I see is ubuntu server as best supported
and up to
On Nov 2, 2011, at 10:43 AM, Bill Campbell wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011, Lamar Owen wrote:
On Tuesday, November 01, 2011 01:46:57 AM Bob Hoffman wrote:
Personally I am thinking of staying away from all red hat clones due to
redhat's actions for my own security.
The only thing on the horizon
This doesn't appear to be universally true. We've run 4.1.4 with Windows 7
64bit on top of CentOS 6 and not seen any noticeable performance problems.
The way you describe it makes me think it's not the sort of thing we could not
notice if it was happening. This was Windows 7 Enterprise as
Hi all,
I have an odd problem, for which I couldn't find any suggestions on google.
A CentOS 5.7x64 gives me a blank screen on bootup, both to the 17 LCD
monitor connected to the VGA port, and to the KVMOVIP device
built-into the server,
I can see the GRUB boot loader, and everything booting
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 08:14:17PM +0200, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Hi all,
I have an odd problem, for which I couldn't find any suggestions on google.
A CentOS 5.7x64 gives me a blank screen on bootup, both to the 17 LCD
monitor connected to the VGA port, and to the KVMOVIP device
built-into
I have a bunch of old mail spread variously across dovecot maildirs
and mbox format files on several machines that are headed for the
trash. Is there anything considered to be a portable archive format
for mail messages, and if so are there tools to copy into it - or do I
have to pick a client
I have a bunch of old mail spread variously across dovecot maildirs and mbox
format files on several machines that are headed for the trash. Is there
anything considered to be a portable archive format for mail messages, and
if so are there tools to copy into it - or do I have to pick a
OpenIndiana.org
2011/11/2 Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu
On Tuesday, November 01, 2011 01:46:57 AM Bob Hoffman wrote:
Personally I am thinking of staying away from all red hat clones due to
redhat's actions for my own security.
The only thing on the horizon I see is ubuntu server as best
Vreme: 11/02/2011 07:53 PM, Phoenix, Merka piše:
I have a bunch of old mail spread variously across dovecot maildirs and
mbox format files on several machines that are headed for the trash. Is
there anything considered to be a portable archive format for mail
messages, and if so are there
On 11/02/11 12:19 PM, Marcio Carneiro wrote:
OpenIndiana.org
I wouldn't want to hitch my sleigh to something dependent on Oracle's
good will.
--
john r pierceN 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast
John R Pierce wrote:
On 11/02/11 12:19 PM, Marcio Carneiro wrote:
OpenIndiana.org
I wouldn't want to hitch my sleigh to something dependent on Oracle's
good will.
I'm sorry, I'm achieving cognitive dissonance here, associating Oracle
and good will.
mark try googling my posts from the
Dne 2.11.2011 18:43, Bill Campbell napsal(a):
We were using that about 5 years ago, and paid Novell a fair amount of
money in their Partner program. Novell's support was slim to non-existent
leading to our move to CentOS.
Given the recent sale to Attachmate and such, I wouldn't invest any
David HrbÃ¡Ä wrote:
Dne 2.11.2011 18:43, Bill Campbell napsal(a):
We were using that about 5 years ago, and paid Novell a fair amount of
money in their Partner program. Novell's support was slim to
non-existent leading to our move to CentOS.
Given the recent sale to Attachmate and such, I
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 03:19:07 PM Marcio Carneiro wrote:
2011/11/2 Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu
There are really two good enterprise-grade alternatives, in my opinion,
one free and one not:
OpenIndiana.org
I was limiting myself to Linux, and I really should have said so. If any
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Scott Robbins scot...@nyc.rr.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 08:14:17PM +0200, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Hi all,
I have an odd problem, for which I couldn't find any suggestions on google.
A CentOS 5.7x64 gives me a blank screen on bootup, both to the 17 LCD
Vreme: 11/02/2011 08:19 PM, Marcio Carneiro piše:
OpenIndiana.org
2011/11/2 Lamar Owenlo...@pari.edu
On Tuesday, November 01, 2011 01:46:57 AM Bob Hoffman wrote:
Personally I am thinking of staying away from all red hat clones due to
redhat's actions for my own security.
The only thing on
Vreme: 11/02/2011 09:32 PM, Rudi Ahlers piše:
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Scott Robbinsscot...@nyc.rr.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 08:14:17PM +0200, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Hi all,
I have an odd problem, for which I couldn't find any suggestions on google.
A CentOS 5.7x64 gives me a
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic off...@plnet.rs wrote:
Vreme: 11/02/2011 07:53 PM, Phoenix, Merka piše:
I have a bunch of old mail spread variously across dovecot maildirs and
mbox format files on several machines that are headed for the trash. Is
there anything
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Vreme: 11/02/2011 09:32 PM, Rudi Ahlers pie:
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Scott Robbinsscot...@nyc.rr.com
wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 08:14:17PM +0200, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Hi all,
I have an odd problem, for which I couldn't find any suggestions on
google.
Vreme: 11/02/2011 09:42 PM, Les Mikesell piše:
Thanks - I think most of what I'd want to keep is still accessible via
imap. What I'm wondering is if there is a general consensus about
the file format for long term storage that would be most likely to
permit direct search and access from some
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic off...@plnet.rs wrote:
Vreme: 11/02/2011 07:53 PM, Phoenix, Merka piše:
I have a bunch of old mail spread variously across dovecot maildirs
and mbox format files on several machines that are headed for the
trash. Is there anything
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
...
Thanks - I think most of what I'd want to keep is still accessible via
imap. What I'm wondering is if there is a general consensus about
the file format for long term storage that would be most likely to
permit direct search and access from some
Vreme: 11/02/2011 11:26 PM, Bill Campbell piše:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
...
Thanks - I think most of what I'd want to keep is still accessible via
imap. What I'm wondering is if there is a general consensus about
the file format for long term storage that would be most
On 11/02/2011 06:34 AM, Ned Slider wrote:
On 01/11/11 22:26, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
On 11/01/2011 09:36 PM, Ned Slider wrote:
On 01/11/11 18:27, Bob Hoffman wrote:
David Miller wrote
---
You can go with the self support option. Seeing you are willing to go with
2011/11/2 Phoenix, Merka merka.phoe...@hp.com:
You don't need an IMAP server to access these files. The MBOX format (one
large file with all the messages inside) and MAILDIR format (collection of
one text file per message within a directory) are simple text files. Most
e-mail clients (such
On 11/02/2011 09:35 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
There is the Oracle unbreakable Linux (or whatever they call it),
which is a RHEL clone. The recent RH packaging changes are aimed
squarely at that distro from what I understand. The problem is that
the changes affect *all* clones the same way,
On 11/02/11 3:43 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
I understand the file types and contents - but was hoping that by now
there would be a standard file type that didn't have to be 'imported'
to a mail reader's message store before being accessed.
well that depends on your mail program. if they use
On Wednesday 02 November 2011 22:55:39 Ian Pilcher wrote:
On 11/02/2011 09:35 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
There is the Oracle unbreakable Linux (or whatever they call it),
which is a RHEL clone. The recent RH packaging changes are aimed
squarely at that distro from what I understand. The problem
On 11/02/2011 06:33 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
On Wednesday 02 November 2011 22:55:39 Ian Pilcher wrote:
On 11/02/2011 09:35 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
There is the Oracle unbreakable Linux (or whatever they call it),
which is a RHEL clone. The recent RH packaging changes are aimed
squarely at
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 10:33 PM, John Hodrien wrote:
On Wed, 2 Nov 2011, Christopher Chan wrote:
4.0.x was okay for me (Windows server guests) but 4.1.4 was a complete
disaster. The guest literally moved at SNAIL pace. Removed all cores
save one and then it moved at TURTLE pace.
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 10:33 PM, John Hodrien wrote:
On Wed, 2 Nov 2011, Christopher Chan wrote:
4.0.x was okay for me (Windows server guests) but 4.1.4 was a complete
disaster. The guest literally moved at SNAIL pace. Removed all cores
save one and then it moved at TURTLE pace.
On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 10:38 PM, Marcio Carneiro wrote:
I think it is time to reconsider and think on OpenIndiana.
Er...once the illumos kernel team sorts out that zfs bug that is
currently plaguing some io151a users yes.
/me not moving an inch from oi_147 till then.
On Thursday, November 03, 2011 03:35 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
On 11/02/11 12:19 PM, Marcio Carneiro wrote:
OpenIndiana.org
I wouldn't want to hitch my sleigh to something dependent on Oracle's
good will.
It is not dependent on Oracle's good will. Not any longer as they have
switched to
Hi all,
I haven't found anything in Google about this.
I'm creating a firewall router with Centos with few virtual IP using iptables.
May I ask for your experience?
Is there any pitfall or bad side of using virtual IP for this purpose?
I'm using few virtual IP to accommodate few subnets that go
78 matches
Mail list logo
