Re: [CentOS] Desktop: Evolution & Bug Buddy issues (GNOME)
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Lanny Marcus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I also have KDE installed (rarely used, but it's there) and during some very > brief use, with KDE, the Evolution Calendar Application also crashed, so it > is not limited to GNOME. > > I did not have this issue, before the recent upgrade to CentOS 5.2. > I've been getting this one for about four or five months - CentOS 5.1 and 5.2. I mentioned this as one reason that RH ought to consider moving to a newer GNOME, one reason _I_ wanted to try one with CentOS (which is a major pita), etc. Welcome to the club! mhr ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Can't run a bash script from USB drive
MHR, this has been asked already yesterday. *Please* do read other posts! Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] mod_python - apache crash
one of my developers is using a mod_python module called xml.dom.minidom and its causing the issue as outlined below http://www.dscpl.com.au/wiki/ModPython/Articles/ExpatCausingApacheCrash This is on CentOS 4.5 and so Apache 2.0.52-38 - I cant change the OS version but i could change the apache and or mod_python version. Does anyone know of any fixes to this apart from rolling my own? thanks ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?
On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 21:11 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote: > > Is there some way, (with dd I might guess) to do a hardare level copy? I've seen many posts on this list that recommend Clonezilla for this sort of thing. You run off CD and it is said to be faster than DD because it is hardware aware (forgive the alliteration) and so only copies actual data. I've not had occassion to use it though. > > I would want to copy the paritition table and my 3 partitions (/boot, > swap, LVM (/ and /home ext3 partitions in the LVM)) and all their contents. > > Thing is I only have one USB drive enclosure so I would be running from > the drive I want to copy from. > > I would hope this is faster than 2 more installs. > HTH -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Message size rejected
Anne Wilson wrote: > So 'size_limit' is what I'm looking for. Thanks everyone. Now comes the > really hard bit. I have to tell her, blindfolded, how to tell the size of > the message she is sending. She uses btinternet's yahoo mailer, and I > haven't a clue what she can see there. :-( See how large the file is and add around a third of that size to get the "real" size of that attachment. Ralph pgpVh1LV7rSAJ.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] UTF-8 support in PCRE
Amitava Shee wrote: > How do I get utf-8 support with PCRE? > > I am having problems building lucene index using Zend_Lucene. I get the > following error > > > PHP Notice: iconv(): Detected an illegal character in input string in > /var/www/ZendFramework-1.5.2/library/Zend/Search/Lucene/Analysis/Analyzer/Common/Text.php > on line 56 a) What does that have to do with pcre? (which can do UTF-8) b) What is on line 56 in that file? Looks like iconv is choking on that. So try to process that file with iconv on the command line. Ralph pgp6ULWuEqDEf.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up thedrives?
How about installing one, and using the anaconda-ks that is generated to install the other two? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William L. Maltby Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 4:23 AM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up thedrives? On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 21:11 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote: > > Is there some way, (with dd I might guess) to do a hardare level copy? I've seen many posts on this list that recommend Clonezilla for this sort of thing. You run off CD and it is said to be faster than DD because it is hardware aware (forgive the alliteration) and so only copies actual data. I've not had occassion to use it though. > > I would want to copy the paritition table and my 3 partitions (/boot, > swap, LVM (/ and /home ext3 partitions in the LVM)) and all their contents. > > Thing is I only have one USB drive enclosure so I would be running from > the drive I want to copy from. > > I would hope this is faster than 2 more installs. > HTH -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Acer 5920 audio chip does not work in CentOS 5.2?
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 12:41 +1000, hce wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 12:18 AM, William L. Maltby
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 07:57 -0500, Alex White wrote:
> >>
> >
> >>
> >
> > /proc delivers the *truth*. And for some things, settings can be changed
> > there that are not easily addressed through utilities.
> > .
> > After this, I'll pop in Mark Knoppfler's "Shangri-La" and diff the two
> > files.
> > # cd /proc/asound
> > # find . -type f -exec echo {} \; -exec cat {} \; >/tmp/asound
>
> I guess alsa and /proc are all fine on my machine, but I've got a
> blank result on /proc/asound running following find, no sure if that
> was significant:
Blank result? I'm skeptical about that. <*scratching head*>
>
> [asound]$ find . -type f -exec echo {} \; -exec cat {} \; > /tmp/asound
The /tmp/asound file should contain at least the file names that it
found. And I can't believe that trying to play something would remove
the contents of those files. 1) It would have to be root and 2) IIRC, we
can't remove stuff in /proc as it is from the kernel and not a real file
system and 3) We could only change the contents of *some* things.
I tested the above command with a C&P and it worked. Maybe you had a
typo or the frustration is getting to you and you examined the wrong
file?
> $ rpm -qa | grep -i alsaalsa-utils-1.0.14-3.rc4.el5
> alsa-lib-devel-1.0.14-1.rc4.el5
> alsa-lib-1.0.14-1.rc4.el5
>
> ]$ rpm --verify alsa-lib-1.0.14-1.rc4.el5.i386
> alsa-utils-1.0.14-3.rc4.el5.i386 | echo $?
> 0
The above command s/b rpm --verify ; echo $?
|
If you meant "||", it would still be logically incorrect as we want to
see the return value, regardless.
>
> [asound]$ ls
> card0 cards devices Intel modules oss pcm seq timers version
>
> [asound]$ pwd && cat modules && cat cards /proc/asound
> 0 snd_hda_intel
> 0 [Intel ]: HDA-Intel - HDA Intel
> HDA Intel at 0xf050 irq 66
>
>
> I've also tried to ls in /proc/asound/Intel:
>
> $ ls
> codec#0 codec#1 id oss_mixer pcm0c pcm0p pcm2c
>
> Seems, all drivers there, is there any command such as cat to verify
> low level drivers by playing a sound?
You need an application to do that. I've only used various Gnome desktop
facilities. The file manager (Nautilus?) should do that when you double
click a sound file. I'll test ... BRB
Yep. I went to /usr/share/sounds/alsa, using file manager, and it opened
totem and played the sounds. This means that you could open totem
directly, or any other sound playing application and try it.
Unfortunately, unless we suspect broken applications are the problem,
this really only is the same as what you tried to do originally, less
the CD.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Jim
>
--
Bill
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 05:22 -0400, William L. Maltby wrote: > On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 21:11 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote: > > > > > > because it is hardware aware (forgive the alliteration) and so only s/hardware/file system/ # I *knew* I needed coffee first. > copies actual data. > -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] How do I check the real size of a filesystem?
I'm having a spot of bother with a large (900GB) partition. fdisk claims it's 900GB. I made an ext3 fs on it and df says it's only 94GB. Which is correct? Or did I do something wrong? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up thedrives?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about installing one, and using the anaconda-ks that is generated to install the other two? That was my first plan. But that just saves the time going through the install selection and getting the same stuff installed. I would still have to do the yum update (though there was the post about how to include the update repo in a kickstart install. Then I have the powerk8 kernel patch to install (these are old systems with new drives), followed by a number of config file changes (setting up IPtables, changing SSHD, configing VNC, etc). All that is a lot to work out for a kickstart install. The pointer of running dd fromLinux Rescue sounded good. But Clonezilla calls for some real investigation. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William L. Maltby Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 4:23 AM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up thedrives? On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 21:11 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote: Is there some way, (with dd I might guess) to do a hardare level copy? I've seen many posts on this list that recommend Clonezilla for this sort of thing. You run off CD and it is said to be faster than DD because it is hardware aware (forgive the alliteration) and so only copies actual data. I've not had occassion to use it though. I would want to copy the paritition table and my 3 partitions (/boot, swap, LVM (/ and /home ext3 partitions in the LVM)) and all their contents. Thing is I only have one USB drive enclosure so I would be running from the drive I want to copy from. I would hope this is faster than 2 more installs. HTH ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?
William L. Maltby wrote: On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 21:11 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote: Is there some way, (with dd I might guess) to do a hardare level copy? I've seen many posts on this list that recommend Clonezilla for this sort of thing. You run off CD and it is said to be faster than DD because it is hardware aware (forgive the alliteration) and so only copies actual data. Now this sounds of real interest. Off to google Clonezilla. Thanks. I've not had occassion to use it though. I would want to copy the paritition table and my 3 partitions (/boot, swap, LVM (/ and /home ext3 partitions in the LVM)) and all their contents. Thing is I only have one USB drive enclosure so I would be running from the drive I want to copy from. I would hope this is faster than 2 more installs. HTH ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mod_python - apache crash
Tom Brown wrote: one of my developers is using a mod_python module called xml.dom.minidom and its causing the issue as outlined below http://www.dscpl.com.au/wiki/ModPython/Articles/ExpatCausingApacheCrash This is on CentOS 4.5 and so Apache 2.0.52-38 - I cant change the OS version but i could change the apache and or mod_python version. Does anyone know of any fixes to this apart from rolling my own? OK ... did you check the expat versions used by all the items involved? which one needs to be recompiled :D signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mod_python - apache crash
Johnny Hughes wrote: Tom Brown wrote: one of my developers is using a mod_python module called xml.dom.minidom and its causing the issue as outlined below http://www.dscpl.com.au/wiki/ModPython/Articles/ExpatCausingApacheCrash This is on CentOS 4.5 and so Apache 2.0.52-38 - I cant change the OS version but i could change the apache and or mod_python version. Does anyone know of any fixes to this apart from rolling my own? OK ... did you check the expat versions used by all the items involved? which one needs to be recompiled :D Specifically ... I am looking at the httpd and python and pyexpat used in CentOS 4 ... I get this: = [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# python Python 2.3.4 (#1, Dec 11 2007, 05:28:55) [GCC 3.4.6 20060404 (Red Hat 3.4.6-9)] on linux2 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> import pyexpat >>> pyexpat.version_info (1, 95, 7) = [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# ldd /usr/sbin/httpd | grep expat libexpat.so.0 => /usr/lib64/libexpat.so.0 (0x002a95dba000) [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# strings /usr/lib64/libexpat.so.0 | grep expat_ expat_1.95.7 = So, it does not seem that Apache or Python or pyexpat that comes standard in CentOS-4 has this issue. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How do I check the real size of a filesystem?
Kevin Thorpe wrote: I'm having a spot of bother with a large (900GB) partition. fdisk claims it's 900GB. I made an ext3 fs on it and df says it's only 94GB. Which is correct? Or did I do something wrong? If this partition is on a LARGER drive, you may need to use parted and not fdisk to create your partitions. Large drives need gpt labels and are not able to be partitioned with fdisk. However, that is not usually a problem with 900GB drive. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] BackupPC won't fork after CentOS 5.2 upgrade
Ben wrote: Johnny Hughes wrote: Ben wrote: For some time now i have been running BackupPC 3.1.0 on CentOS 5.1 x86_64 however after upgrading to CentOS 5.2 BackupPC will not start. "sudo /etc/init.d/backuppc start" return OK but there is no BackupPC processes. This fails also. # sudo -u backuppc /usr/bin/BackupPC -d # echo $? 0 This succeeds, but of course does not fork. # sudo -u backuppc /usr/bin/BackupPC So for some reason after the CentOS 5.2 upgrade it will not fork into the background. I have run the perl debugger over it and up until the fork everything is fine. Nothing appears in the LOG. Any ideas would be appreciated. Ben I am running backuppc on 3 CentOS-5.2 machines (and several more on CentOS-4.6 machines). I had no issues after upgrading to 5.2 on those machines. Good to hear. Are they i386 or x86_64? Are they using 3.0 or 3.1? version 3.1.0 ... 1 x86_64 machine, 2 i386 machines signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mod_python - apache crash
Specifically ... I am looking at the httpd and python and pyexpat used in CentOS 4 ... I get this: = [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# python Python 2.3.4 (#1, Dec 11 2007, 05:28:55) [GCC 3.4.6 20060404 (Red Hat 3.4.6-9)] on linux2 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> import pyexpat >>> pyexpat.version_info (1, 95, 7) = [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# ldd /usr/sbin/httpd | grep expat libexpat.so.0 => /usr/lib64/libexpat.so.0 (0x002a95dba000) [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# strings /usr/lib64/libexpat.so.0 | grep expat_ expat_1.95.7 = So, it does not seem that Apache or Python or pyexpat that comes standard in CentOS-4 has this issue. quite right - # /usr/sbin/lsof -p 19836 | grep expat httpd 19836 root memREG 8,3 123496 2792038 /usr/lib/libexpat.so.0.5.0 # strings /usr/lib/libexpat.so.0.5.0 | grep expat libexpat.so.0 expat_1.95.7 # python Python 2.3.4 (#1, Oct 11 2006, 06:18:43) [GCC 3.4.6 20060404 (Red Hat 3.4.6-3)] on linux2 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> import pyexpat >>> pyexpat.version_info (1, 95, 7) so i am a little confused as so why i'm seeing this now, i may kick my developer a bit to see if this is really what i am seeing thanks ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?
Robert Moskowitz wrote: I am building three identical systems. Well they will have different host names, and with time the software setups will drift. But at install time they are identical. ..snip... I would hope this is faster than 2 more installs. its not do the install over the network from a http server, given the same network, it would be many times faster to do the 2nd and 3rd install using the ks.cfg generated from the 1st one ( as Terry Polzin already pointed out ). It will be many times faster than doing DD images of entire drives. eg. in my case here, i can provision a new machine in 2 min and 43 seconds for a base+core minimal centos-5 install. installing over http from a machine on a GiB/sec link and installing to a 2 disk raid-1 - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How do I check the real size of a filesystem?
On Friday 04 July 2008, Johnny Hughes wrote: > Kevin Thorpe wrote: > > I'm having a spot of bother with a large (900GB) partition. > > > > fdisk claims it's 900GB. I made an ext3 fs on it and df says it's only > > 94GB. Which is correct? Or did I do something wrong? > > If this partition is on a LARGER drive, you may need to use parted and > not fdisk to create your partitions. Large drives need gpt labels and > are not able to be partitioned with fdisk. Put differently, if you run fdisk on a device >2T fdisks behaviour is undefined. It will commonly create broken layouts without logging any error messages. All this because fdisk only uses msdos-style partition tables which by design doesn't work for >2T devices. Of course the worst part of all this is fdisks complete lack of error checking... I your device/drive is not larger than 2T then this theory falls. /Peter > However, that is not usually a problem with 900GB drive. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rpmforge-release install/rpm problem
Jim Perrin wrote on Thu, 3 Jul 2008 15:47:03 -0400: > This is a known issue with rpm's http code. It doesn't do cookies. It > can't really follow redirects (302 or otherwise) well, and generally > it's a hack. Ah, well, now I understand. Yes, there occurs a redirect. It once used to work, with apt.sw.be, which obviously wasn't a redirect. Thanks, it's the first time I've seen this, I think. Or at least so long ago that I forgot about the last one. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Anaconda ignores "cmdline" directive
Amos Shapira wrote on Fri, 4 Jul 2008 14:12:41 +1000: > For a start, the "cmdline" directive in the kickstart seems to be > ignored and it stays in "text" (ncurses) mode. I'm using cmdline all the time and there *is* a difference to text. The output is b/w and if it has to fallback to the "gui" that gets drawn with ascii characters and not with "blocks" and such. What's the output that you get? I wouldn't say that "cmdline" is any better for debugging apart from the fact that you get most output line by line, so you can review it later. This line by line output mostly applies to the list of software that gets installed. I don't have a %post% install section. AFAIk, postinstall is a problem as it isn't run as root or so (see deployment guide section for kickstart). Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] How do I check the real size of a filesystem?
> Kevin Thorpe wrote: > > I'm having a spot of bother with a large (900GB) partition. > > fdisk claims it's 900GB. I made an ext3 fs on it and df says it's only > > 94GB. Which is correct? Or did I do something wrong? > > If this partition is on a LARGER drive, you may need to use > parted and > not fdisk to create your partitions. Large drives need gpt > labels and > are not able to be partitioned with fdisk. > > However, that is not usually a problem with 900GB drive. parted claims it's 879GB so the partition appears to be ok. Have I managed to format a small filesystem on a large partition? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How do I check the real size of a filesystem?
Hi, On Fri, July 4, 2008 6:16 am, Kevin Thorpe wrote: > I'm having a spot of bother with a large (900GB) partition. > > fdisk claims it's 900GB. I made an ext3 fs on it and df says it's only > 94GB. Which is correct? Or did I do something wrong? I would to check `parted /device/path print` to verify your tables. Cheers, Shaun ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How do I check the real size of a filesystem?
On Friday 04 July 2008, Kevin Thorpe wrote: > > Kevin Thorpe wrote: > > > I'm having a spot of bother with a large (900GB) partition. > > > fdisk claims it's 900GB. I made an ext3 fs on it and df says it's > > only > > > > 94GB. Which is correct? Or did I do something wrong? > > > > If this partition is on a LARGER drive, you may need to use > > parted and > > not fdisk to create your partitions. Large drives need gpt > > labels and > > are not able to be partitioned with fdisk. > > > > However, that is not usually a problem with 900GB drive. > > parted claims it's 879GB so the partition appears to be ok. Have I > managed to format a small filesystem on a large partition? How big is the drive/device on which you have created this partition? /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?
Karanbir Singh wrote: Robert Moskowitz wrote: I am building three identical systems. Well they will have different host names, and with time the software setups will drift. But at install time they are identical. ..snip... I would hope this is faster than 2 more installs. its not do the install over the network from a http server, given the same network, it would be many times faster to do the 2nd and 3rd install using the ks.cfg generated from the 1st one ( as Terry Polzin already pointed out ). It will be many times faster than doing DD images of entire drives. eg. in my case here, i can provision a new machine in 2 min and 43 seconds for a base+core minimal centos-5 install. installing over http from a machine on a GiB/sec link and installing to a 2 disk raid-1 There is much good to say about using kickstart method than learning a new approach like Clonezilla. I have not used kickstart since Centos 4.something, so I have no good notes and will have to dig again. But this is pretty much a one-time clone and Clonezilla does not seem to set up the partitioning info on the new drive so that would be one more thing to learn. So I take the anaconda-ks.cfg file, add stuff so it will boot off the network and use the update repo as well as the base. Then rediscover the command to run linux from a kickstart file on a diskette. Piece of CAKE! :) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] How do I check the real size of a filesystem?
> On Friday 04 July 2008, Kevin Thorpe wrote: > > > Kevin Thorpe wrote: > > > > I'm having a spot of bother with a large (900GB) > partition. fdisk > > > > claims it's 900GB. I made an ext3 fs on it and df says it's > > > > only > > > > > > 94GB. Which is correct? Or did I do something wrong? > > > > > > If this partition is on a LARGER drive, you may need to > use parted > > > and not fdisk to create your partitions. Large drives need gpt > > > labels and > > > are not able to be partitioned with fdisk. > > > > > > However, that is not usually a problem with 900GB drive. > > > > parted claims it's 879GB so the partition appears to be ok. Have I > > managed to format a small filesystem on a large partition? > > How big is the drive/device on which you have created this partition? It's a terabyte hardware RAID array. I've got a 100GB partition for the system and I want to use the remaining 900GB as a backup storage location. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] How do I check the real size of a filesystem?
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 14:09 +0100, Kevin Thorpe wrote: > > Kevin Thorpe wrote: > > > I'm having a spot of bother with a large (900GB) partition. > > > fdisk claims it's 900GB. I made an ext3 fs on it and df says it's > only > > > 94GB. Which is correct? Or did I do something wrong? > > > > If this partition is on a LARGER drive, you may need to use > > parted and > > not fdisk to create your partitions. Large drives need gpt > > labels and > > are not able to be partitioned with fdisk. > > > > However, that is not usually a problem with 900GB drive. > > parted claims it's 879GB so the partition appears to be ok. Have I > managed to format a small filesystem on a large partition? I suggest running e2fsck -n. See the man page. Then, think of the -m parameter. The default, IIRC, is 5%. On small drives of the past this was appropriate. Now, I make most of mine with 1%. 900GB * .05 = appx. 45GB. There's your loss. > HTH -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] How do I check the real size of a filesystem?
> > > Kevin Thorpe wrote: > > > > I'm having a spot of bother with a large (900GB) > partition. fdisk > > > > claims it's 900GB. I made an ext3 fs on it and df says it's > > only > > > > 94GB. Which is correct? Or did I do something wrong? > > parted claims it's 879GB so the partition appears to be ok. Have I > > managed to format a small filesystem on a large partition? > > I suggest running e2fsck -n. See the man page. Then, think of > the -m parameter. The default, IIRC, is 5%. On small drives > of the past this was appropriate. Now, I make most of mine with 1%. > > 900GB * .05 = appx. 45GB. There's your loss. I'm not bothered about an odd 45GB, it's that df says it's only 94GB in total that worries me. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] How do I check the real size of a filesystem?
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 15:29 +0100, Kevin Thorpe wrote: > > > > Kevin Thorpe wrote: > > > > > I'm having a spot of bother with a large (900GB) > > partition. fdisk > > > > > claims it's 900GB. I made an ext3 fs on it and df says it's > > > only > > > > > 94GB. Which is correct? Or did I do something wrong? > > > > parted claims it's 879GB so the partition appears to be ok. Have I > > > managed to format a small filesystem on a large partition? > > > > I suggest running e2fsck -n. See the man page. Then, think of > > the -m parameter. The default, IIRC, is 5%. On small drives > > of the past this was appropriate. Now, I make most of mine with 1%. > > > > 900GB * .05 = appx. 45GB. There's your loss. > > I'm not bothered about an odd 45GB, it's that df says it's only 94GB > in total that worries me. That was just an aside. The -n, IIRC would be the useful thing. There's other things you can do to: "df -ih". The point was that the -n will tell you what you want to know without having to actually read the man page(s). > -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Status of tracker for 64bit?
Good morning to you all: I've been trying for a few hours to connect to the tracker for the 5.2 x64 DVD. It has been giving a "connection refused" error. A few days ago the 5.2 i386 downloaded succesfully. Is the tracker down?? Or is something odd happening on my side?? thanks, Kwan ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Status of tracker for 64bit?
On Fri, July 4, 2008 10:22 am, Kwan Lowe wrote: > Good morning to you all: >I've been trying for a few hours to connect to the tracker for the > 5.2 x64 DVD. It has been giving a "connection refused" error. A few > days ago the 5.2 i386 downloaded succesfully. Is the tracker down?? > Or is something odd happening on my side?? > > thanks, > Kwan Hi, I just tried the torrent, it is giving me the same error. It can't have been offline very long as I just downloaded the x64 version yesterday. Shaun ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Status of tracker for 64bit?
Shaun Meyer wrote: On Fri, July 4, 2008 10:22 am, Kwan Lowe wrote: Good morning to you all: I've been trying for a few hours to connect to the tracker for the 5.2 x64 DVD. It has been giving a "connection refused" error. A few days ago the 5.2 i386 downloaded succesfully. Is the tracker down?? Or is something odd happening on my side?? thanks, Kwan Hi, I just tried the torrent, it is giving me the same error. It can't have been offline very long as I just downloaded the x64 version yesterday. Should be back up now, give it a try. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How do I check the real size of a filesystem?
Kevin Thorpe wrote on Fri, 4 Jul 2008 15:29:40 +0100: > I'm not bothered about an odd 45GB, it's that df says it's only 94GB > in total that worries me. There's no chance you or the software somehow confuses that 100GB partition with the big one? I mean 94 GB ~ 100 GB. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?
Karanbir Singh wrote: Robert Moskowitz wrote: I am building three identical systems. Well they will have different host names, and with time the software setups will drift. But at install time they are identical. ..snip... I would hope this is faster than 2 more installs. its not do the install over the network from a http server, given the same network, it would be many times faster to do the 2nd and 3rd install using the ks.cfg generated from the 1st one ( as Terry Polzin already pointed out ). It will be many times faster than doing DD images of entire drives. eg. in my case here, i can provision a new machine in 2 min and 43 seconds for a base+core minimal centos-5 install. installing over http from a machine on a GiB/sec link and installing to a 2 disk raid-1 Yes, dd is actually pretty slow in wall clock time. Where it wins is in human time since you just type a short command line and go away, and it duplicates any setup work you've done in addition too installing the packages. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?
Robert Moskowitz wrote: Is there some way, (with dd I might guess) to do a hardare level copy? I've seen many posts on this list that recommend Clonezilla for this sort of thing. You run off CD and it is said to be faster than DD because it is hardware aware (forgive the alliteration) and so only copies actual data. Now this sounds of real interest. Off to google Clonezilla. Thanks. Clonezilla-live is the one you want. It is a bootable iso and if you have a place on the network to hold the image you won't have to get the drives connected to the same machine. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Message size rejected
Anne Wilson wrote: On Thursday 03 July 2008 23:05:19 nate wrote: Anne Wilson wrote: So 'size_limit' is what I'm looking for. Thanks everyone. Now comes the really hard bit. I have to tell her, blindfolded, how to tell the size of the message she is sending. She uses btinternet's yahoo mailer, and I haven't a clue what she can see there. :-) Don't forget to account for encoding overhead, which can be up to 30% (maybe more). That's the bit I thought I'd have to guess. Thanks for the estimate. Anne ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos why not setup a vsFTPd account for her to upload to? much easier to deal with and can be chroot'd, and used by others as well. files go directly to file system as opposed to having to be processed by MTA. When clients ask me this same kind of question I generally tell them there's a lot of good reasons why the internet standard for a 5MB attachment limit, and if folks need to send files larger than that, then FTP services are better suited for such things. -- Mark Ignorance, like Reality, is a matter of perspective. - If more people used Linux, Gas would be cheaper! ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Back to my Xwindows kernel panic
I have a newly built drive with 5.2 fresh install (that I will be cloning shortly) in my DECtop and it is failing with X the same way the upgrade from 5.1 drive did (not too supprising there). In 5.1 X worked. I could startx from init 3 and get into GNOME. Also VNC into the box and have a GNOME screen. With 5.2, I get a kernel panic. Well I guess it is a kernel panic because once I run startx from the console, my SSH session to the box from my notebook is frozen. From /etc/sysconfig/hwconf I have: class: VIDEO bus: PCI detached: 0 desc: "National Semiconductor Corporation Geode GX2 Graphics Processor" vendorId: 100b deviceId: 0030 subVendorId: 100b subDeviceId: 0030 pciType: 1 pcidom:0 pcibus: 0 pcidev: 1 pcifn: 1 the /etc/X11/xorg.conf has # Xorg configuration created by system-config-display Section "ServerLayout" Identifier "single head configuration" Screen 0 "Screen0" 0 0 InputDevice"Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard" EndSection Section "InputDevice" Identifier "Keyboard0" Driver "kbd" Option"XkbModel" "pc105" Option"XkbLayout" "us" EndSection Section "Monitor" Identifier "Monitor0" ModelName"Monitor 1024x768" ### Comment all HorizSync and VertSync values to use DDC: HorizSync31.5 - 57.0 VertRefresh 50.0 - 70.0 Option"dpms" EndSection Section "Device" Identifier "Videocard0" Driver "vesa" EndSection Section "Screen" Identifier "Screen0" Device "Videocard0" Monitor"Monitor0" DefaultDepth 24 SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 24 Modes"1024x768" "800x600" "640x480" EndSubSection EndSection Now the way I got this working in 5.1 and 5.2 (5.1 install died for some reason or other, forget which and for 5.2 this unit has the powerk8 patch requirement), I install on an old compaq and change to init 3. I then move the drive and run system-config-display to get the unit to read the hwconf file and reset xorg.conf. This worked fine in 5.1. In 5.2, the system hangs. What to do? btw, i tried pci=noapci with no change. A couple other facts about this system. No accessable bios. When the system is booting (in character mode) the video frequently goes off then back on; some refresh problem. I have also seen this at times in a session on the console when I enter some commands. It would be nice to fix this. It might also tie in with the X problem. Thank you for your continued help. . ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 11:41 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: > > Yes, dd is actually pretty slow in wall clock time. Where it wins is in > human time since you just type a short command line and go away, and it > duplicates any setup work you've done in addition too installing the > packages. But it's not as slow as most think. They just don't take advantage of capabilities, like bs=16384. This makes a *huge* difference in both system overhead and wall clock time. -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Message size rejected
On Friday 04 July 2008 17:45:33 Mark Weaver wrote: > Anne Wilson wrote: > > On Thursday 03 July 2008 23:05:19 nate wrote: > >> Anne Wilson wrote: > >>> So 'size_limit' is what I'm looking for. Thanks everyone. Now comes > >>> the really hard bit. I have to tell her, blindfolded, how to tell the > >>> size of the message she is sending. She uses btinternet's yahoo > >>> mailer, and I haven't a clue what she can see there. :-) > >> > >> Don't forget to account for encoding overhead, which can be up to 30% > >> (maybe more). > > > > That's the bit I thought I'd have to guess. Thanks for the estimate. > > > why not setup a vsFTPd account for her to upload to? much easier to deal > with and can be chroot'd, and used by others as well. files go directly > to file system as opposed to having to be processed by MTA. When clients > ask me this same kind of question I generally tell them there's a lot of > good reasons why the internet standard for a 5MB attachment limit, and > if folks need to send files larger than that, then FTP services are > better suited for such things. You haven't met my daughter :-) I'm not saying that she's stubborn, but Anne ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Can't run a bash script from USB drive
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Kai Schaetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MHR, this has been asked already yesterday. *Please* do read other posts! > Strange - I read everything posted in this list. I don't always understand everything, but I read them all. I ran a search for "usb script" in the archives and did not find anything - pray tell, where was I so blind? Thanks. mhr ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Message size rejected
Anne Wilson wrote: On Friday 04 July 2008 17:45:33 Mark Weaver wrote: Anne Wilson wrote: On Thursday 03 July 2008 23:05:19 nate wrote: Anne Wilson wrote: So 'size_limit' is what I'm looking for. Thanks everyone. Now comes the really hard bit. I have to tell her, blindfolded, how to tell the size of the message she is sending. She uses btinternet's yahoo mailer, and I haven't a clue what she can see there. :-) Don't forget to account for encoding overhead, which can be up to 30% (maybe more). That's the bit I thought I'd have to guess. Thanks for the estimate. why not setup a vsFTPd account for her to upload to? much easier to deal with and can be chroot'd, and used by others as well. files go directly to file system as opposed to having to be processed by MTA. When clients ask me this same kind of question I generally tell them there's a lot of good reasons why the internet standard for a 5MB attachment limit, and if folks need to send files larger than that, then FTP services are better suited for such things. You haven't met my daughter :-) I'm not saying that she's stubborn, but Anne ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos :) I know what you mean. I have a few clients like that. When I explain to them it's less trouble and effort they soon come around. -- Mark Ignorance, like Reality, is a matter of perspective. - If more people used Linux, Gas would be cheaper! ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up thedrives?
Robert Moskowitz wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about installing one, and using the anaconda-ks that is generated to install the other two? That was my first plan. But that just saves the time going through the install selection and getting the same stuff installed. I would still have to do the yum update (though there was the post about how to include the update repo in a kickstart install. Then I have the powerk8 kernel patch to install (these are old systems with new drives), followed by a number of config file changes (setting up IPtables, changing SSHD, configing VNC, etc). All that is a lot to work out for a kickstart install. The pointer of running dd fromLinux Rescue sounded good. But Clonezilla calls for some real investigation. have you tried using Norton Ghost? I've used this many times and works nicely replicating complete systems. Upon boot though, unless the hardware/chipsets are identical as well, you'll go through some minor gyrations while kudzu removes and adds drivers for the systems. -- Mark Ignorance, like Reality, is a matter of perspective. - If more people used Linux, Gas would be cheaper! ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Acer 5920 audio chip does not work in CentOS 5.2?
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 3:10 AM, William L. Maltby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You need an application to do that. I've only used various Gnome desktop > facilities. The file manager (Nautilus?) should do that when you double > click a sound file. I'll test ... BRB > > Yep. I went to /usr/share/sounds/alsa, using file manager, and it opened > totem and played the sounds. This means that you could open totem > directly, or any other sound playing application and try it. > Unfortunately, unless we suspect broken applications are the problem, > this really only is the same as what you tried to do originally, less > the CD. > This is too weird for me. Yesterday, I could not get the volume control to do anything, including unmute the sound. Today, I went to /usr/share/sounds/alsa and played the sounds with mplayer. After fiddling with the volume controls for a few seconds, suddenly everything is working fine. Note that this _is_ a desktop, but hanged if I know what happened. Pilot error? (Nah, couldn't be! ;^) mhr PS: Another really strange item - on the FC8 boot, mplayer (the kernel?) was running the sound too fast, so I had to slow it down to 95% speed. On C 5.2, it works as advertised (no speed reduction required). ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?
Robert Moskowitz wrote: It will be many times faster than doing DD images of entire drives. eg. in my case here, i can provision a new machine in 2 min and 43 seconds for a base+core minimal centos-5 install. installing over http from a machine on a GiB/sec link and installing to a 2 disk raid-1 There is much good to say about using kickstart method than learning a new approach like Clonezilla. I have not used kickstart since Centos 4.something, so I have no good notes and will have to dig again. But this is pretty much a one-time clone and Clonezilla does not seem to set up the partitioning info on the new drive so that would be one more thing to learn. You are reading the wrong thing about clonezilla. In disk image mode it will duplicate the partitioning for you and it knows enough about most filesystems to just copy the used portions. There are options to just take one partition if you want, but if you do the whole disk it will set up the partitions for you. It understands LVM, but not multi-disk software raid. I'd expect it to be faster than any other way to duplicate systems if you don't count downloading the iso and making your initial image copy from the master. So I take the anaconda-ks.cfg file, add stuff so it will boot off the network and use the update repo as well as the base. Then rediscover the command to run linux from a kickstart file on a diskette. Piece of CAKE! Clonezilla can also be network-booted if you have enough machines to be worth the trouble to set up (and it can clone windows and other linux distributions as well). There is a companion project called DRBL that handles network booting and provides NFS storage for the clients to save and load images. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] update Centos 5 with DRBD
Hi, I have a server with Centos 5 + DRBD installed and is working fine, but when i run yum for udpate system show this error: Transaction Check Error: file /etc/drbd.conf conflicts between attempted installs of drbd-8.0.12-1.el5.centos and drbd82-8.2.6-1.el5.centos file /etc/rc.d/init.d/drbd conflicts between attempted installs of drbd-8.0.12-1.el5.centos and drbd82-8.2.6-1.el5.centos file /sbin/drbdadm conflicts between attempted installs of drbd-8.0.12-1.el5.centos and drbd82-8.2.6-1.el5.centos file /sbin/drbdmeta conflicts between attempted installs of drbd-8.0.12-1.el5.centos and drbd82-8.2.6-1.el5.centos file /sbin/drbdsetup conflicts between attempted installs of drbd-8.0.12-1.el5.centos and drbd82-8.2.6-1.el5.centos file /usr/share/man/man5/drbd.conf.5.gz conflicts between attempted installs of drbd-8.0.12-1.el5.centos and drbd82-8.2.6-1.el5.centos file /usr/share/man/man8/drbd.8.gz conflicts between attempted installs of drbd-8.0.12-1.el5.centos and drbd82-8.2.6-1.el5.centos file /usr/share/man/man8/drbdadm.8.gz conflicts between attempted installs of drbd-8.0.12-1.el5.centos and drbd82-8.2.6-1.el5.centos file /usr/share/man/man8/drbddisk.8.gz conflicts between attempted installs of drbd-8.0.12-1.el5.centos and drbd82-8.2.6-1.el5.centos file /usr/share/man/man8/drbdmeta.8.gz conflicts between attempted installs of drbd-8.0.12-1.el5.centos and drbd82-8.2.6-1.el5.centos file /usr/share/man/man8/drbdsetup.8.gz conflicts between attempted installs of drbd-8.0.12-1.el5.centos and drbd82-8.2.6-1.el5.centos Error Summary - Anybody have any idea? Thanks, -- Daniel Bruno http://danielbruno.argo.com.br [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Can't run a bash script from USB drive
Mhr wrote on Fri, 4 Jul 2008 10:47:39 -0700: > I ran a search for "usb script" in the archives and did not find > anything - pray tell, where was I so blind? It's <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Running shell scripts from external media". Maybe it got lost in your spam filter? Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?
I am building the Clonezilla live CD now Les Mikesell wrote: Robert Moskowitz wrote: It will be many times faster than doing DD images of entire drives. eg. in my case here, i can provision a new machine in 2 min and 43 seconds for a base+core minimal centos-5 install. installing over http from a machine on a GiB/sec link and installing to a 2 disk raid-1 There is much good to say about using kickstart method than learning a new approach like Clonezilla. I have not used kickstart since Centos 4.something, so I have no good notes and will have to dig again. But this is pretty much a one-time clone and Clonezilla does not seem to set up the partitioning info on the new drive so that would be one more thing to learn. You are reading the wrong thing about clonezilla. In disk image mode it will duplicate the partitioning for you and it knows enough about most filesystems to just copy the used portions. There are options to just take one partition if you want, but if you do the whole disk it will set up the partitions for you. It understands LVM, but not multi-disk software raid. I'd expect it to be faster than any other way to duplicate systems if you don't count downloading the iso and making your initial image copy from the master. So I take the anaconda-ks.cfg file, add stuff so it will boot off the network and use the update repo as well as the base. Then rediscover the command to run linux from a kickstart file on a diskette. Piece of CAKE! Clonezilla can also be network-booted if you have enough machines to be worth the trouble to set up (and it can clone windows and other linux distributions as well). There is a companion project called DRBL that handles network booting and provides NFS storage for the clients to save and load images. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Can't run a bash script from USB drive
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Kai Schaetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It's <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > "Running shell scripts from external media". Maybe it got lost in your > spam filter? > Nope I found the thread in my deleted (read) mail. It only partially answered the question. Spiro's post (this thread) was more complete (for me). Sometimes it's good to have an issue raised more than once, if it helps. This one helped me. Thanks. mhr ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Can't run a bash script from USB drive
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 10:47 -0700, MHR wrote: > On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Kai Schaetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > MHR, this has been asked already yesterday. *Please* do read other posts! > > > > Strange - I read everything posted in this list. I don't always > understand everything, but I read them all. > > I ran a search for "usb script" in the archives and did not find > anything - pray tell, where was I so blind? Your blindness is caused by a broken (IMO) search. I also had recently searched for this and another thread. AFAICT, the "search" button on the mailing lists intro page only checks archived stuff. I had also tried this going directly from Google using site:centos.org. Again no joy. For a sample, search for your name & 2008 and July. NADA! > > Thanks. > > mhr > -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] OT: General Help in chroot build environment
I am trying to compile a module for a Realtek 8168 for thinstation. I have pulled the developer tarball and executed the script to enter its build environment. I also have the source for the module I want to compile, but when I execute #make clean modules it errors out. Reading the errors, I can see it tried to look for the kernel source of the systems actual running kernel. From within the chroot build environment, I run a #uname -r and see it displays exactly that, and not the build environments expected 2.6.21.1 that it has in the /source/kernel-2.6.21.1/linux-2.6.21.1 dir. I have ran an #export KERNELSRC=/source/kernel-2.6.21.1/linux-2.6.21.1 Any ideas on what's left to convince make it is running with the expected kernel and not my actual one? Thanks! jlc ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] [OT] bad header (Was: Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?)
Robert Moskowitz wrote: I am building the Clonezilla live CD now is there any reason why your system sends multiple References: headers: References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This is invalid according to RFC2822, section 3.6, where there is references 0* 1 SHOULD occur in some replies - see 3.6.4 which means there may be at most one such header. sorry to nitpick... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Problem with Bonding Driver
Hi, I've using linux bonding in active-backup mode to combine two pairs of GigE NICs (eth0/eth1, eth2/eth3) into two logical bonds (bond0/bond1). All is working fine. However, I would like to specify a primary interface for each bond. This means I need to specify different options to the bonding module for each bond. I have tried every conceivable incantation of options and cannot get the kernel to recognize the second set of options. Initially, my modprobe.conf looked like this: alias bond0 bonding alias bond1 bonding options bonding mode=active-backup miimon=100 max_bonds=2 What I am trying to achieve should be possible by changing modprobe.conf to this: alias bond0 bonding options bond0 -o bond0 miimon=100 mode=active-backup primary=eth0 alias bond1 bonding options bond1 -o bond1 miimon=100 mode=active-backup primary=eth2 But this results in fatal errors while bringing up the bonding interfaces. Changing to this eliminates the errors, but bond1 ignores the different options: alias bond0 bonding options bond0 -o bond0 miimon=100 mode=active-backup primary=eth0 max_bonds=1 alias bond1 bonding options bond1 -o bond1 miimon=100 mode=active-backup primary=eth2 max_bonds=1 I have tried many other combinations as well: install bond1 /sbin/modprobe --ignore-install bonding -o bond1 mode=active-backup primary=eth2 Nothing works. I also came across this note in the bonding docs: "NOTE: It has been observed that some Red Hat supplied kernels are apparently unable to rename modules at load time (the "-o bond1" part). Attempts to pass that option to modprobe will produce an "Operation not permitted" error. This has been reported on some Fedora Core kernels, and has been seen on RHEL 4 as well. On kernels exhibiting this problem, it will be impossible to configure multiple bonds with differing parameters." I have seen that error as well with certain combinations of options in my modprobe.conf. Am I simply out of luck here? Does anyone know of a solution? Thanks. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Can't run a bash script from USB drive
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 12:54 PM, William L. Maltby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > For a sample, search for your name & 2008 and July. NADA! > Well, at least THAT part works properly :-) mhr ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] OT: General Help in chroot build environment
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 13:59 -0600, Joseph L. Casale wrote: > > running kernel. From within the chroot build environment, I run a #uname -r > and see it displays exactly > that, and not the build environments expected 2.6.21.1 that it has in the > /source/kernel-2.6.21.1/linux-2.6.21.1 > dir. I have ran an #export KERNELSRC=/source/kernel-2.6.21.1/linux-2.6.21.1 > > Any ideas on what's left to convince make it is running with the expected > kernel and not my actual one? I don't normally dink with this stuff anymore. But from watching the lists, IIRC, you need a kernel development rpm to be installed. Use the yum available stuff and if you see something promising, give it a shot. Being a holiday here, I don't know how long until someone knowledgeable will reply. > > Thanks! > jlc > HTH -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Can't run a bash script from USB drive
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 13:15 -0700, MHR wrote: > On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 12:54 PM, William L. Maltby > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > For a sample, search for your name & 2008 and July. NADA! > > > > Well, at least THAT part works properly How so? Did you not post earlier? ... OH! s/your name/your initials/ > > :-) > > mhr > -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Can't run a bash script from USB drive
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:28 PM, William L. Maltby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 13:15 -0700, MHR wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 12:54 PM, William L. Maltby >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > For a sample, search for your name & 2008 and July. NADA! >> > >> >> Well, at least THAT part works properly > > How so? Did you not post earlier? ... OH! > > s/your name/your initials/ > >> :-) I meant it as a joke. (sigh) mhr ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Migrating windows to linux proxy server
HI, I am migraing from windows to linux squid proxy server.I configured squid its working fine.But i want to integrate with windows 2003 Active Directory Service for user authentication.Can any one help me in configuring the same. its very urgent for me. Thanks in advance lingu ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Migrating windows to linux proxy server
On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 02:25:32AM +0530, lingu wrote: > HI, > > I am migraing from windows to linux squid proxy server.I configured squid its > working fine.But i want to integrate with windows 2003 Active Directory > Service for user authentication.Can any one help me in configuring the same. > its very urgent for me. > http://wiki.squid-cache.org/ConfigExamples/WindowsAuthenticationNTLM http://wiki.squid-cache.org/ConfigExamples/SquidAndLDAP Should get you going. I use the LDAP method to authenticate AD and it works quite well. Ray ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?
William L. Maltby wrote: On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 11:41 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: Yes, dd is actually pretty slow in wall clock time. Where it wins is in human time since you just type a short command line and go away, and it duplicates any setup work you've done in addition too installing the packages. But it's not as slow as most think. They just don't take advantage of capabilities, like bs=16384. This makes a *huge* difference in both system overhead and wall clock time. Well Clonezilla is busy cloning the drive, but there is a problem here cloning to a USB attached drive. One of the partitions is LVM and since this is a drive clone, including the partition table and boot sector, both LVMs (source and target) have the same name. So Clonezilla switches to using DD with probably some bad parameters. After running an hour, it has only copied 4Gb out of 37Gb. Note that the USB port is v1.1. Now actually, I would have perfered renaming the LVM partition and its internal ext3 partitions. I even had a naming convention laid out if I had do this via Install instead. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] mkdep vs. makedepend
Where I work, we have an application that has been merrily running away (and being built) on FC1 (yes, you read that right). One of my assignments is to bring this up to CentOS, but on my first effort, I ran into this interesting "feature." The original build process (FC1) uses mkdep to generate the dependency files that are subsequently used by the makes to build the app. mkdep does not exist in CentOS 5.2. There is a makedepend command that operates slightly differently. Can someone enlighten me on this, particularly w.r.t. 1) how do I use makedepend to generate the same files mkdep did and is this a good idea (my impression is that it's not really that hard but also not necessarily a good idea or 2) convert all the makefiles to be makedepend friendly (seems relatively easy, though fairly extensive, but probably a better idea and also harmless should I wish/need to continue to build on the FC1 system? Probably a really basic question or two, but neither google nor the archives have a good article on this that I could find. Thanks. mhr ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] OT: General Help in chroot build environment
>I don't normally dink with this stuff anymore. But from watching the >lists, IIRC, you need a kernel development rpm to be installed. Use the >yum available stuff and if you see something promising, give it a shot. >Being a holiday here, I don't know how long until someone knowledgeable >will reply. Actually, Looking at the output from make, I just edited the expansion in the makefile's and put what I wanted in there. It built w/o error, but the module isn't loading. Back to the drawing board:) jlc ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mkdep vs. makedepend
MHR wrote: Where I work, we have an application that has been merrily running away (and being built) on FC1 (yes, you read that right). One of my assignments is to bring this up to CentOS, but on my first effort, I ran into this interesting "feature." The original build process (FC1) uses mkdep to generate the dependency files that are subsequently used by the makes to build the app. mkdep does not exist in CentOS 5.2. There is a makedepend command that operates slightly differently. Can someone enlighten me on this, particularly w.r.t. 1) how do I use makedepend to generate the same files mkdep did and is this a good idea (my impression is that it's not really that hard but also not necessarily a good idea or 2) convert all the makefiles to be makedepend friendly (seems relatively easy, though fairly extensive, but probably a better idea and also harmless should I wish/need to continue to build on the FC1 system? Probably a really basic question or two, but neither google nor the archives have a good article on this that I could find. That will probably build as is on CentOS-3 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mkdep vs. makedepend
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 3:08 PM, Johnny Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That will probably build as is on CentOS-3 > Our aim is to bring it up to 5.2 (the latest) if possible. Thanks. mhr ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 17:38 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote: > William L. Maltby wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 11:41 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> Yes, dd is actually pretty slow in wall clock time. Where it wins is in > >> human time since you just type a short command line and go away, and it > >> duplicates any setup work you've done in addition too installing the > >> packages. > >> > > > > But it's not as slow as most think. They just don't take advantage of > > capabilities, like bs=16384. This makes a *huge* difference in both > > system overhead and wall clock time. > Well Clonezilla is busy cloning the drive, but there is a problem here > cloning to a USB attached drive. > > One of the partitions is LVM and since this is a drive clone, including > the partition table and boot sector, both LVMs (source and target) have > the same name. So Clonezilla switches to using DD with probably some > bad parameters. After running an hour, it has only copied 4Gb out of > 37Gb. Note that the USB port is v1.1. > > > Now actually, I would have perfered renaming the LVM partition and its > internal ext3 partitions. I even had a naming convention laid out if I > had do this via Install instead. I've not ever read up on clonezilla, so I don't know if this is a good thought or not. If you can tell clonezilla to just make the partitions and copy the non-LVM stuff, it might then be faster to do a manual dd of the LVM PV because you can specify a large blocksize (bs=x, I usually do a cyl size as the blocksize) and it might go much faster. WARNING: if you have more than one PV in the volgroup this can be dicey because of the LV records stored on the PVs. I would not recommend it. OTOH, if it is cranking away and you are now free to do other things, you might want to just let it run. Now, I wanted to make you aware of a recent experience I had using a usb external drive. I don't know if it will/does affect you. I moved all my CentOS torrent stuff to a brand new Tosh 80GB external usb drive. Then on CentOS 4.6, I fired up the torrents and started sharing with the world. Nothing else was running. Three consecutive days, the rtorrent screen became unresponsive. The machine was not locked up. But there was a lock in the wait channel for the drive and it could not be broken. None of the kills (HUP, USR1, KILL) would break the lock and kill the process. This is usb 2.x and, again CentOS 4.6. I have no idea of the cause or if it may behave the same in 5.x or if it is unique to rtorrent or the Tosh drive or 4.6. I'm going to try it on 5.2 this P.M. Sleep well! >:-) > HTH -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 17:38 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote: > > Now actually, I would have perfered renaming the LVM partition and its > internal ext3 partitions. I even had a naming convention laid out if I > had do this via Install instead. If it's a boot drive, remember to rebuild your initrd and modify the init file to ignore lvm lock failures with the new VG name. Otherwise you'll be fighting some more battles. > -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] cvs command failure on 5.2
Another little problem I am now having on CentOS 5.2 that I was not seeing on FC8: [EMAIL PROTECTED] lane]$ cvs update poll: protocol failure in circuit setup cvs [update aborted]: end of file from server (consult above messages if any) I could understand if there was something that had changed from FC1 to CentOS 5.2, but if it works in FC8, why not here? Here's what's in the CVS directory and files: [EMAIL PROTECTED] lane]$ ls CVS Entries Repository Root Tag [EMAIL PROTECTED] lane]$ for i in CVS/*; do echo $i; cat $i; echo ""; done CVS/Entries /Makefile.template/1.2/Thu Oct 6 19:06:14 2005//TDEV_608 /makefile.include/2.6/Wed Dec 6 21:58:01 2006//TDEV_608 D/bin D/cron_jobs D/devices D/doc D/drivers D/include D/lanecon D/lib_src D/main D/parser D/sim D/tcautil D/viewcon D/webmon /Makefile/1.2/Fri Jul 4 23:22:10 2008//TDEV_608 CVS/Repository linuxlane/lane CVS/Root khan:/home/stage/CVS CVS/Tag TDEV_608 (Khan is our main file server, and it's running a Linux that's even older than FC1 - not sure what: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mrichter]$ uname -a Linux khan 2.4.21-15.ELsmp #1 SMP Thu Apr 22 00:18:24 EDT 2004 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux Our execution/test server is viper, with FC1: [EMAIL PROTECTED] lane]$ uname -a Linux viper 2.4.23HZ_opt #12 Fri Apr 1 13:57:09 PST 2005 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux What command tells me which distro I'm on? I forget) I'm a little rusty on my cvs mastery (?) but most of this looks ok to me, and, as I mentioned, it works in FC8, but not CentOS 5.2. Any ideas/suggestions/etc? Thanks. mhr ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mkdep vs. makedepend
On Jul 4, 2008, at 17:50, MHR wrote: One of my assignments is to bring this up to CentOS, but on my first effort, I ran into this interesting "feature." The original build process (FC1) uses mkdep to generate the dependency files that are subsequently used by the makes to build the app. mkdep does not exist in CentOS 5.2. There is a makedepend command that operates slightly differently. I'm not 100% positive on this, but I believe that mkdep/makedepend are optional and only needed for build avoidance. If you do a "make clean" followed by a "make all" (or simply "make clean all"), it should rebuild your application from scratch (assuming that the "all" target is defined to do so) and no dependency rules are needed. It will take longer to rebuild since it has to recompile everything, but it doesn't sound like you run this build every day. Alfred ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mkdep vs. makedepend
> One of my assignments is to bring this up to CentOS, but on my first > effort, I ran into this interesting "feature." The original build > process (FC1) uses mkdep to generate the dependency files that are My FC2 system doesn't have a mkdep command. > Can someone enlighten me on this, particularly w.r.t. 1) how do I use > makedepend to generate the same files mkdep did and is this a good > idea (my impression is that it's not really that hard but also not If you require a non-standard tool (I've really wouldn't depend on this! Even makedepend is in the X package on FC2) then you should bundle it as part of your build process. -- rgds Stephen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] cvs command failure on 5.2
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 16:32 -0700, MHR wrote: > > What command tells me which distro I'm on? I forget) # rpm -q centos-release centos-release-5-2.el5.centos # lsb_release -a LSB Version::core-3.1-ia32:core-3.1-noarch:graphics-3.1-ia32:graphics-3.1-noarch Distributor ID: CentOS Description:CentOS release 5.2 (Final) Release:5.2 Codename: Final > -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Desktop: Evolution & Bug Buddy issues (GNOME)
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 2:32 AM, MHR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Lanny Marcus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > I also have KDE installed (rarely used, but it's there) and during some > very > > brief use, with KDE, the Evolution Calendar Application also crashed, so > it > > is not limited to GNOME. > > > > I did not have this issue, before the recent upgrade to CentOS 5.2. > > > > I've been getting this one for about four or five months - CentOS 5.1 and > 5.2. > > I mentioned this as one reason that RH ought to consider moving to a > newer GNOME, one reason _I_ wanted to try one with CentOS (which is a > major pita), etc. > > Welcome to the club! Mark: Thanks. I am a brand new member of this club. I did *not* have this problem, until I updated (I didn't RFM and I did yum update instead of yum upgrade) to CentOS 5.2. As I wrote in my first post, I also tried this using KDE and Evolution crashed there when I closed it, as it does in GNOME. It is an intermittent thing, but rather common. Has this been documented, in the CentOS Bugzilla and/or Upstream Bugzilla? There seem to be two (2) unrelated problems: (a) Evolution Calendar crashing. when closing Evolution (although I never use Evolution Calendar) and (b) The problem with Bug Buddy not being able to send the Error data it collects, because it want's a more recent version of GNOME. I have used Evolution for email for several years and this problem closing it is something that for me began after I began using CentOS 5.2. I rarely use KDE, but I will try to remember to use KDE more frequently, so I can verify my belief that Evolution crashes in KDE, just like it does in GNOME. Lanny ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting upthedrives?
Understood. However, the investment in ks, now, may reap greater dividends in the future. My opinion, only. Daniel -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Moskowitz Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 6:35 AM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting upthedrives? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > How about installing one, and using the anaconda-ks that is generated to > install the other two? > That was my first plan. But that just saves the time going through the install selection and getting the same stuff installed. I would still have to do the yum update (though there was the post about how to include the update repo in a kickstart install. Then I have the powerk8 kernel patch to install (these are old systems with new drives), followed by a number of config file changes (setting up IPtables, changing SSHD, configing VNC, etc). All that is a lot to work out for a kickstart install. The pointer of running dd fromLinux Rescue sounded good. But Clonezilla calls for some real investigation. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of William L. Maltby > Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 4:23 AM > To: CentOS mailing list > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up > thedrives? > > > On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 21:11 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote: > >> >> > > >> Is there some way, (with dd I might guess) to do a hardare level copy? >> > > I've seen many posts on this list that recommend Clonezilla for this > sort of thing. You run off CD and it is said to be faster than DD > because it is hardware aware (forgive the alliteration) and so only > copies actual data. > > I've not had occassion to use it though. > > >> >> > > >> I would want to copy the paritition table and my 3 partitions (/boot, >> swap, LVM (/ and /home ext3 partitions in the LVM)) and all their >> > contents. > >> Thing is I only have one USB drive enclosure so I would be running >> > from > >> the drive I want to copy from. >> >> I would hope this is faster than 2 more installs. >> >> > > HTH > ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting up the drives?
Robert Moskowitz wrote: William L. Maltby wrote: On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 11:41 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: Yes, dd is actually pretty slow in wall clock time. Where it wins is in human time since you just type a short command line and go away, and it duplicates any setup work you've done in addition too installing the packages. But it's not as slow as most think. They just don't take advantage of capabilities, like bs=16384. This makes a *huge* difference in both system overhead and wall clock time. Well Clonezilla is busy cloning the drive, but there is a problem here cloning to a USB attached drive. One of the partitions is LVM and since this is a drive clone, including the partition table and boot sector, both LVMs (source and target) have the same name. So Clonezilla switches to using DD with probably some bad parameters. After running an hour, it has only copied 4Gb out of 37Gb. Note that the USB port is v1.1. Now actually, I would have perfered renaming the LVM partition and its internal ext3 partitions. I even had a naming convention laid out if I had do this via Install instead. If you have any other system on the network that could hold a compressed image copy you would be better off working with the disks in their target machines instead of the USB adapter. Clonezilla can use smb, nfs, or ssh to connect to network storage, so you can use space from windows or linux. After saving the master image, you would just boot the clone machines from the CD, connect to the same network location, and restore to the local drive. That would elminate both the duplicate LVM problem and the slowness of USB 1.1. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Three Identical systems - short cut to setting upthedrives?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Understood. However, the investment in ks, now, may reap greater dividends in the future. My opinion, only. Unless, of course, you'd like to copy a windows image or some other distribution that doesn't use kickstart. Clonezilla is pretty agnostic about the contents that it clones. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Wanted: minimal install ks.cfg
Greetings, all. I'm in need of a minimal ks.cfg file for the smallest possible install with yum. I've got the scripting for yum to install the apps I need, I just want to insure all the cruft is not on the system as well. Using the s-c-ks app, the smallest I have gotten is 600MB. This is for a server appliance vm that I need to deploy quickly and dynamically. Thanks Dnaiel ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
