Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.5 Sofware RAID1
I have the CentOS 5.5 install DVD and trying to install with software RAID1 on two 2TB SATA drives. The CentOS install only sees one drive. This is a Supermicro motherboard with fakeraid turned off in bios. I tried the trick like so: dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=512 count=64 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb bs=512 count=64 Still no go. linux rescue console does see both sda and sdb. Whats going on? Well I figured that part out. http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/SoftwareRAIDonCentOS5 boot: linux nodmraid Locks up on formatting file system everytime now though. Ugh. nodmraid tells the kernel to ignore fakeraid. You did change the controller from RAID to AHCI in the motherboard bios? Have fake raid disabled in bios. There is an option to turn AHCI off or on. Have tried both ways. Does not install either way. Pulling my hair out on this. Its a Supermicro PDSML-LN2+ and a couple new identical Samsung 2TB SATA drives. Trying to install CentOS 5.5 64bit. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] how to install Linux on an IBM xserver 335 server without graphics card?
Hi All, I recently got some IBM Xseries 335 servers 2nd hand, and noticed they don't have any graphics card. Some google searched indicate they only have an uplink port, which you could connect to another (other model) IBM server and use that as the head node. But, I don't have one available. It has 2x GB NIC's, and what looks like a management port, but I can't figure out how to use it. SSH HTTP connections to it was futile. OR, it was assigned a dedicated IP, on a different subnet than ours but it's not written down anywhere so I don't know what IP to connect to. Does anyone know how to get Linux installed onto these devices? We have a PXE server in the office which I generally use for this setting up servers over the LAN, but they always have a VGA port. -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers SoftDux Website: http://www.SoftDux.com Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com Office: 087 805 9573 Cell: 082 554 7532 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] how to install Linux on an IBM xserver 335 server without graphics card?
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Rudi Ahlers r...@softdux.com wrote: Hi All, I recently got some IBM Xseries 335 servers 2nd hand, and noticed they don't have any graphics card. Some google searched indicate they only have an uplink port, which you could connect to another (other model) IBM server and use that as the head node. But, I don't have one available. I believe we can use serial console to it. Use a null modem cable to connect to the serial console and use tool like Hyper terminal or minicom. I hate it too when server doesn't provide such a simple graphic card and choose the cool serial console method. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] how to install Linux on an IBM xserver 335 server without graphics card?
2010/12/19 Fajar Priyanto fajar...@arinet.org On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Rudi Ahlers r...@softdux.com wrote: Hi All, I recently got some IBM Xseries 335 servers 2nd hand, and noticed they don't have any graphics card. Some google searched indicate they only have an uplink port, which you could connect to another (other model) IBM server and use that as the head node. But, I don't have one available. it may be possible to conenct it to a (special) kvm switch, and then connect the display to the kvm sw instead. -- Through political strategy they keep us hungry and, when you gonna get some food, your brother got to be your enemy. (Ambush in the Night - Robert Nesta Marley) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] how to install Linux on an IBM xserver 335 server without graphics card?
Rudi Ahlers wrote: Hi All, I recently got some IBM Xseries 335 servers 2nd hand, and noticed they don't have any graphics card. Some google searched indicate they only have an uplink port, which you could connect to another (other model) IBM server and use that as the head node. But, I don't have one available. They do have a graphics card - the 'uplink' port is a KVM port that has VGA and PS/2 - this is certainly the case with the X335's we have. If you can get hold of a C2T breakout cable, then you should be able to plug in a keyboard/mouse/screen. Just google for 'IBM C2T X335 cable' James Pearson ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] how to install Linux on an IBM xserver 335 server without graphics card?
On Sun, 2010-12-19 at 12:10 +, James Pearson wrote: Rudi Ahlers wrote: Hi All, I recently got some IBM Xseries 335 servers 2nd hand, and noticed they don't have any graphics card. Some google searched indicate they only have an uplink port, which you could connect to another (other model) IBM server and use that as the head node. But, I don't have one available. They do have a graphics card - the 'uplink' port is a KVM port that has VGA and PS/2 - this is certainly the case with the X335's we have. If you can get hold of a C2T breakout cable, then you should be able to plug in a keyboard/mouse/screen. +1 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Building packages using RPMBUILD
On Sat, 18 Dec 2010, R P Herrold wrote: To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org From: R P Herrold herr...@centos.org Subject: [CentOS] Building packages using RPMBUILD On Sat, 18 Dec 2010, Keith Roberts wrote: gpg --import-key yourkey.asc Thanks for your reply Tim. It still does not work though. [rpmbuil...@karsites qps]$ gpg --import Fedora6-GPG-public-key.asc [rpmbuil...@karsites qps]$ rpm -K qps-1.9.18.6-1.fc6.src.rpm qps-1.9.18.6-1.fc6.src.rpm: (SHA1) DSA sha1 md5 (GPG) NOT OK (MISSING KEYS: GPG#1ac70ce6) Different issue in play here -- rpm (and also perhaps rpmbuild if a --rebuild is used) needs the key in the rpm database to consult Probably as root you want: # rpm --import Fedora6-GPG-public-key.asc and then that objection will be silenced Thanks Russ. That has cured the problem. Do I need the .gpg subdirectory in my rpmbuilder homedir? Also, is there an option to rpm and rpmbuild that would allow me to do all the verification checks, except for the package signer's pub key check? Regards, Keith -- In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they are not. This email was sent from my laptop with Centos 5.5 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Building packages using RPMBUILD
On Sat, 18 Dec 2010, R P Herrold wrote: To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org From: R P Herrold herr...@centos.org Subject: [CentOS] Building packages using RPMBUILD On Sat, 18 Dec 2010, Keith Roberts wrote: gpg --import-key yourkey.asc Thanks for your reply Tim. It still does not work though. [rpmbuil...@karsites qps]$ gpg --import Fedora6-GPG-public-key.asc [rpmbuil...@karsites qps]$ rpm -K qps-1.9.18.6-1.fc6.src.rpm qps-1.9.18.6-1.fc6.src.rpm: (SHA1) DSA sha1 md5 (GPG) NOT OK (MISSING KEYS: GPG#1ac70ce6) Different issue in play here -- rpm (and also perhaps rpmbuild if a --rebuild is used) needs the key in the rpm database to consult Probably as root you want: # rpm --import Fedora6-GPG-public-key.asc and then that objection will be silenced I have rebuilt qps now Russ. Here's a snippet of the rebuild output. The full output has been copied and pasted into *.src.rpm-rebuild.txt [rpmbuil...@karsites qps]$ ls Fedora6-GPG-public-key.asc qps-1.9.18.6-1.fc6.src.rpm-rebuild.txt qps-1.9.18.6-1.fc6.src.rpm [rpmbuil...@karsites qps]$ rpmbuild --rebuild qps-1.9.18.6-1.fc6.src.rpm Installing qps-1.9.18.6-1.fc6.src.rpm warning: user mockbuild does not exist - using root warning: group mockbuild does not exist - using root warning: user mockbuild does not exist - using root warning: group mockbuild does not exist - using root Executing(%prep): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.71205 + umask 022 + cd /home/rpmbuilder/rpm-packages/BUILD + LANG=C + export LANG + unset DISPLAY + cd /home/rpmbuilder/rpm-packages/BUILD + rm -rf qps-1.9.18.6 + /usr/bin/bzip2 -dc /home/rpmbuilder/rpm-packages/SOURCES/qps-1.9.18.6.tar.bz2 Wrote: /home/rpmbuilder/rpm-packages/RPMS/i386/qps-1.9.18.6-1.i386.rpm Wrote: /home/rpmbuilder/rpm-packages/RPMS/i386/qps-debuginfo-1.9.18.6-1.i386.rpm Executing(%clean): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.16535 + umask 022 + cd /home/rpmbuilder/rpm-packages/BUILD + cd qps-1.9.18.6 + rm -rf /var/tmp/qps-1.9.18.6-1-root-rpmbuilder + exit 0 Executing(--clean): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.16535 + umask 022 + cd /home/rpmbuilder/rpm-packages/BUILD + rm -rf qps-1.9.18.6 + exit 0 [rpmbuil...@karsites qps]$ I shall test it works OK. Kind Regards, Keith -- In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they are not. This email was sent from my laptop with Centos 5.5 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Building packages using RPMBUILD
QPS works OK. Here's a screenshot of what it looks like: http://i55.tinypic.com/35l6t7b.jpg And if you like it here's a temporary link to download it from my site: http://www.karsites.net/centos/downloads/5.5/qps-1.9.18.6-1.i386.rpm The binary is not signed by me, as I've not got that far yet. Kind Regards, Keith -- In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they are not. This email was sent from my laptop with Centos 5.5 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC
On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 10:12:09PM -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Ross Walker rswwal...@gmail.com wrote: There is XenServer from Citrix and I think there is a community version too. -Ross I'd welcome your opinion. I did a bunch of integration with CentOS/RHEL 4 with the older, open source Xen utilities. This is slightly out of date now, but I evalauted a few virtualization systems, including XenServer: http://sweh.spuddy.org/Essays/Virtualization_options.html -- rgds Stephen ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] httpd log weirdness
Hi All, I setup a new Centos 5.5 bod and it will be running a site for me. Apache is running and daily I get e-mailed a log from the box. The log today said: - httpd Begin Requests with error response codes 404 Not Found http://www.cablecarmuseum.org/Car42.jpg: 1 Time(s) -- httpd End - But that is not my domain at all. How would this entry show up in my log? I ping'd the domain above and it does not resolve to the IP of the box or any of my IP's. Can anyone shed some light on this? Best, -Jason ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] httpd log weirdness
2010/12/19 Jason T. Slack-Moehrle slackmoeh...@me.com: Hi All, I setup a new Centos 5.5 bod and it will be running a site for me. Apache is running and daily I get e-mailed a log from the box. The log today said: - httpd Begin Requests with error response codes 404 Not Found http://www.cablecarmuseum.org/Car42.jpg: 1 Time(s) -- httpd End - But that is not my domain at all. How would this entry show up in my log? I ping'd the domain above and it does not resolve to the IP of the box or any of my IP's. Can anyone shed some light on this? maybe someone is trying to use your box as proxy. anyway, it is disabled by default.. -- Eero ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Building packages using RPMBUILD
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010, Keith Roberts wrote: # rpm --import Fedora6-GPG-public-key.asc and then that objection will be silenced Thanks Russ. That has cured the problem. Do I need the .gpg subdirectory in my rpmbuilder homedir? no - that was created by GnuPG for maintaining a keystore, and as the issue was not with gnupg, the ./.gpg is unused Also, is there an option to rpm and rpmbuild that would allow me to do all the verification checks, except for the package signer's pub key check? yes as for rpm, no as for rpmbuild -- Russ herrold ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] how to install Linux on an IBM xserver 335 server without graphics card?
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Fajar Priyanto fajar...@arinet.org wrote: On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Rudi Ahlers r...@softdux.com wrote: Hi All, I recently got some IBM Xseries 335 servers 2nd hand, and noticed they don't have any graphics card. Some google searched indicate they only have an uplink port, which you could connect to another (other model) IBM server and use that as the head node. But, I don't have one available. I believe we can use serial console to it. Use a null modem cable to connect to the serial console and use tool like Hyper terminal or minicom. I hate it too when server doesn't provide such a simple graphic card and choose the cool serial console method. ___ I already tried it, but the serial console doesn't output anything. -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers SoftDux Website: http://www.SoftDux.com Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com Office: 087 805 9573 Cell: 082 554 7532 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Stephen Harris li...@spuddy.org wrote: On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 10:12:09PM -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Ross Walker rswwal...@gmail.com wrote: There is XenServer from Citrix and I think there is a community version too. -Ross I'd welcome your opinion. I did a bunch of integration with CentOS/RHEL 4 with the older, open source Xen utilities. This is slightly out of date now, but I evalauted a few virtualization systems, including XenServer: http://sweh.spuddy.org/Essays/Virtualization_options.html Now, *that* is what reviews should be like. Clear side by side comparisons on the performance, features, and missing bits you need to do yourself, very useful. It is a bit out of date: I hope you get a chance to try the same tests with CentOS 6. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Building packages using RPMBUILD
On Sun, 2010-12-19 at 13:46 +, Keith Roberts wrote: http://www.karsites.net/centos/downloads/5.5/qps-1.9.18.6-1.i386.rpm You should have a /5/ /x86_64 /i386 /SRPMS Structure to the directories, with a createrepo on them. The SRPM form Fedora 9, qps-1.9.19-0.2.b.fc7.src.rpm will build also with out a hitch. You go higher than Fedora 9 you in for a rude awakening, Don't try building a 32 bit version under a multilib system. Qt4-make is needed and major work needed to build the newer. Rawhide laughed :-) You made a key?rpm --import, rpm --sign then: rpm -Kvv rpm --checkig John ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Best way to set up for PHP websites
This is not FOSS stuff, but something like ioncube might help you speed things up. http://www.ioncube.com/comments.php HTH You can also use xCache, we've had dramatsic performance improvement with it. From .12 s page load tome to 0.007 for some case. It was not druppal, but our own code tough. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] google chrome big brother
am i right, or i'm missing something? You are right. Google Chrome OS is Open Source. But with Google Chrome OS you can do exactly nothing, because there are no applications (even basic UNIX tools are not available). The My understanding is that Chrome OS is based on Chromium OS, which is more FLOSS oriented: http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os Some months ago I gave a try to this re-build of Chromium OS: http://chromeos.hexxeh.net/ and it was working (it wasn't updated since last February though). The wiki says that you can install Ubuntu packages, but I did not try: http://chromeos.hexxeh.net/wiki/doku.php?id=addingpackages So it seems possible to extend it (the question is then whether it would be useful). ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] how to install Linux on an IBM xserver 335 server without graphics card?
I recently got some IBM Xseries 335 servers 2nd hand, and noticed they don't have any graphics card. Some google searched indicate they only have an uplink port, which you could connect to another (other model) IBM server and use that as the head node. But, I don't have one available. That'd be the C2T (Cable Chaining) technology they were using back then. It's essentially a KVM switch system built into the server, the idea being that if you have a rack of 42 of them you can hookup up a single monitor/keyboard/mouse to the stack and with the press of a button switch between the servers. All you need to get access to the console on these units is a C2T Breakout cable. It looks like a custom KVM cable with PS2/VGA ports on one end and a DVI port on the other. -- Drew Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood. --Marie Curie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC
On 12/19/10 9:33 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Stephen Harrisli...@spuddy.org wrote: On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 10:12:09PM -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Ross Walkerrswwal...@gmail.com wrote: There is XenServer from Citrix and I think there is a community version too. -Ross I'd welcome your opinion. I did a bunch of integration with CentOS/RHEL 4 with the older, open source Xen utilities. This is slightly out of date now, but I evalauted a few virtualization systems, including XenServer: http://sweh.spuddy.org/Essays/Virtualization_options.html Now, *that* is what reviews should be like. Clear side by side comparisons on the performance, features, and missing bits you need to do yourself, very useful. It is a bit out of date: I hope you get a chance to try the same tests with CentOS 6. But the ESXi version isn't exactly fair to someone who would deploy on the hardware intended. Also, the restriction to 1 CPU isn't built-in - there's a place where you select the number of CPUs you will use when you are registering for the free license. I don't know what the actual maximum is, but it is at least 2 with a fairly large number of cores. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] google chrome big brother
On 12/19/10 9:50 AM, Mathieu Baudier wrote: am i right, or i'm missing something? You are right. Google Chrome OS is Open Source. But with Google Chrome OS you can do exactly nothing, because there are no applications (even basic UNIX tools are not available). The My understanding is that Chrome OS is based on Chromium OS, which is more FLOSS oriented: http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os Some months ago I gave a try to this re-build of Chromium OS: http://chromeos.hexxeh.net/ and it was working (it wasn't updated since last February though). The wiki says that you can install Ubuntu packages, but I did not try: http://chromeos.hexxeh.net/wiki/doku.php?id=addingpackages So it seems possible to extend it (the question is then whether it would be useful). I thought the point of it was that it is _just_ a browser with nothing stored locally except things applications might cache like preference settings. If you use cloud based apps (google docs, etc.) I could see this being useful for remote access with no configuration - like a spare device you might offer a guest or share when traveling, but I don't see why anyone would use it on their main computers instead of a full OS plus a browser. It might be good in an education setting to maintain more control over what is permitted, though. If all apps are remote, a central firewall can block anything easily. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
Hello All First, sorry by my poor english, hope you understand me :-) I have a problem, i don't understand or don't know how to solve I need to interconnect 2 networks with different numbers. One is 192.168.236.0/24 the other 192.168.1.0/24. Mainly i need to access services in the 236. from the 1. one. I have a CentOS 5.5 machine with 2 nics each one configured to work in one of the nets. The CentOS also uses a router for Internet access that is 192.168.1.1. 192.168.1.0/24 -192.168.1.100--[CentOS Machine]--192.168.236.74 192.168.236.0/24 So, i enable forwarding in the CentOS box echo '1' /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward And in one machine of the 1. network (this is Fedora14) I add the route: route add -net 192.168.236.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.1.100 dev eth0 Since this moment i can ping or access (ssh/http) another CentOS machine in the 236 network ping 192.168.236.74 PING 192.168.236.74 (192.168.236.74) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.74: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.281 ms But can't access or ping other machines (NOT Linux ones), ie, printers, Win servers, etc... Also tried adding: route add 192.168.1.100 eth0 before the route add -net, but no efect. This fails even if i flush IPTables. In the CentOS box that replies, i did nothing, it 'just' works. Can anyone tell what is happening / help me with this? Something to do missing in the CentOS router that joins the networks? Best,___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] VPN for iPad
Hi, 2010/12/19 Ed Warner edwarne...@yahoo.com: What is the best VPN solution for both PC and iPad? I was told that OpenVPN won't work for iPad. Ed Warner ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos You can try openswan and xl2tpd are in EPEL repositories. -- Oscar Osta Pueyo oostap.lis...@gmail.com _kiakli_ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
On 12/19/10 11:07 AM, Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote: Hello All First, sorry by my poor english, hope you understand me :-) I have a problem, i don't understand or don't know how to solve I need to interconnect 2 networks with different numbers. One is 192.168.236.0/24 the other 192.168.1.0/24. Mainly i need to access services in the 236. from the 1. one. I have a CentOS 5.5 machine with 2 nics each one configured to work in one of the nets. The CentOS also uses a router for Internet access that is 192.168.1.1. 192.168.1.0/24 -192.168.1.100--[CentOS Machine]--192.168.236.74 192.168.236.0/24 So, i enable forwarding in the CentOS box echo '1' /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward And in one machine of the 1. network (this is Fedora14) I add the route: route add -net 192.168.236.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.1.100 dev eth0 Since this moment i can ping or access (ssh/http) another CentOS machine in the 236 network ping 192.168.236.74 PING 192.168.236.74 (192.168.236.74) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.74: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.281 ms But can't access or ping other machines (NOT Linux ones), ie, printers, Win servers, etc... Also tried adding: route add 192.168.1.100 eth0 before the route add -net, but no efect. This fails even if i flush IPTables. In the CentOS box that replies, i did nothing, it 'just' works. Can anyone tell what is happening / help me with this? Something to do missing in the CentOS router that joins the networks? First make sure that you can ping/access those 'other' services from the centos box with 2 nics. It should source from the .236 interface and 'just work'. If not, you have firewalls or something else blocking traffic. When you route other traffic from the .1 network, the destination machines need some reason to send the return packets to the 192.168.236.74 address. You can either add the route to every machine or on the router that is currently their default router. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
El 19/12/2010, a las 19:01, Les Mikesell escribió: On 12/19/10 11:07 AM, Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote: Hello All First, sorry by my poor english, hope you understand me :-) I have a problem, i don't understand or don't know how to solve I need to interconnect 2 networks with different numbers. One is 192.168.236.0/24 the other 192.168.1.0/24. Mainly i need to access services in the 236. from the 1. one. I have a CentOS 5.5 machine with 2 nics each one configured to work in one of the nets. The CentOS also uses a router for Internet access that is 192.168.1.1. 192.168.1.0/24 -192.168.1.100--[CentOS Machine]--192.168.236.74 192.168.236.0/24 So, i enable forwarding in the CentOS box echo '1' /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward And in one machine of the 1. network (this is Fedora14) I add the route: route add -net 192.168.236.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.1.100 dev eth0 Since this moment i can ping or access (ssh/http) another CentOS machine in the 236 network ping 192.168.236.74 PING 192.168.236.74 (192.168.236.74) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.74: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.281 ms But can't access or ping other machines (NOT Linux ones), ie, printers, Win servers, etc... Also tried adding: route add 192.168.1.100 eth0 before the route add -net, but no efect. This fails even if i flush IPTables. In the CentOS box that replies, i did nothing, it 'just' works. Can anyone tell what is happening / help me with this? Something to do missing in the CentOS router that joins the networks? First make sure that you can ping/access those 'other' services from the centos box with 2 nics. It should source from the .236 interface and 'just work'. If not, you have firewalls or something else blocking traffic. When you route other traffic from the .1 network, the destination machines need some reason to send the return packets to the 192.168.236.74 address. You can either add the route to every machine or on the router that is currently their default router. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com Thank you Les, Yes, i can ping/access those 'other' services from the CentOS box with 2 NICs. I understand that i need, for example in a networked printer in 236. network a 'return' route. I definitely have no access to configure network on every machine in the 236 network (only a few), nor the router... This can't be solved any other way? Best ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] VPN for iPad
2010/12/19 Ed Warner edwarne...@yahoo.com: What is the best VPN solution for both PC and iPad? I was told that OpenVPN won't work for iPad. I think that it works on jailbroken ipad. anyway, ipad supports pptp directly? -- Eero ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
First make sure that you can ping/access those 'other' services from the centos box with 2 nics. It should source from the .236 interface and 'just work'. If not, you have firewalls or something else blocking traffic. When you route other traffic from the .1 network, the destination machines need some reason to send the return packets to the 192.168.236.74 address. You can either add the route to every machine or on the router that is currently their default router. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com Thank you Les, Yes, i can ping/access those 'other' services from the CentOS box with 2 NICs. I understand that i need, for example in a networked printer in 236. network a 'return' route. I definitely have no access to configure network on every machine in the 236 network (only a few), nor the router... This can't be solved any other way? Best Hello Again, I forgot: I made a mistake in my original post, the ping is to a diferent CentOS box in the 236. network (192.168.236.80) and it replies and i can access it from the Fedora machine in the 1. net. Why the other CentOS box (in the 236. net) works (reply, can be accessed) without adding any route? The Fedora box (1. network): [j...@idi ~]$ ping 192.168.236.80 PING 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=1.61 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.684 ms [j...@idi ~]$ ifconfig eth0 | grep -i 'inet addr' inet addr:192.168.1.3 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 The CentOS box (both networks): [j...@puente ~]$ ifconfig eth0 | grep -i 'inet addr' inet addr:192.168.1.100 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 [j...@puente ~]$ /sbin/ifconfig eth1 | grep -i 'inet addr' inet addr:192.168.236.74 Bcast:192.168.236.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 The CentOS box (236. network); [j...@control ~]$ /sbin/ifconfig eth1 | grep -i 'inet addr' inet addr:192.168.236.80 Bcast:192.168.236.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 Best ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] VPN for iPad
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010, Eero Volotinen wrote: 2010/12/19 Ed Warner edwarne...@yahoo.com: What is the best VPN solution for both PC and iPad? I was told that OpenVPN won't work for iPad. I think that it works on jailbroken ipad. anyway, ipad supports pptp directly? That's what we use with iPad and iPod Touches. I would prefer to use OpenVPN if it ever becomes available for the iP[ao]ds. I have never been able to get IPSec and OpenVPN to play together on the same Linux server. Bill -- INTERNET: b...@celestial.com Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC URL: http://www.celestial.com/ PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way Voice: (206) 236-1676 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820 Fax:(206) 232-9186 Skype: jwccsllc (206) 855-5792 It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees! -- Emiliano Zapata. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
On 12/19/10 12:15 PM, Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote: First make sure that you can ping/access those 'other' services from the centos box with 2 nics. It should source from the .236 interface and 'just work'. If not, you have firewalls or something else blocking traffic. When you route other traffic from the .1 network, the destination machines need some reason to send the return packets to the 192.168.236.74 address. You can either add the route to every machine or on the router that is currently their default router. Thank you Les, Yes, i can ping/access those 'other' services from the CentOS box with 2 NICs. I understand that i need, for example in a networked printer in 236. network a 'return' route. I definitely have no access to configure network on every machine in the 236 network (only a few), nor the router... This can't be solved any other way? The only other way to get the packets to return to the right place would be to use iptables to NAT routed packets to the 192.168.236.74 interface. If you only need to establish connections in one direction, that should work. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
El 19/12/10 20:23, Les Mikesell escribió: On 12/19/10 12:15 PM, Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote: First make sure that you can ping/access those 'other' services from the centos box with 2 nics. It should source from the .236 interface and 'just work'. If not, you have firewalls or something else blocking traffic. When you route other traffic from the .1 network, the destination machines need some reason to send the return packets to the 192.168.236.74 address. You can either add the route to every machine or on the router that is currently their default router. Thank you Les, Yes, i can ping/access those 'other' services from the CentOS box with 2 NICs. I understand that i need, for example in a networked printer in 236. network a 'return' route. I definitely have no access to configure network on every machine in the 236 network (only a few), nor the router... This can't be solved any other way? The only other way to get the packets to return to the right place would be to use iptables to NAT routed packets to the 192.168.236.74 interface. If you only need to establish connections in one direction, that should work. Thanks, Yes, mainly i need to connect from 1. to 236., so i'll look at that solution. Best, =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Scanned with Copfilter Version 0.84beta3a (ProxSMTP 1.6) AntiVirus: ClamAV 0.95.2/12415 - Sun Dec 19 04:26:57 2010 by Markus Madlener @ http://www.copfilter.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
On 12/19/10 12:31 PM, Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote: First make sure that you can ping/access those 'other' services from the centos box with 2 nics. It should source from the .236 interface and 'just work'. If not, you have firewalls or something else blocking traffic. When you route other traffic from the .1 network, the destination machines need some reason to send the return packets to the 192.168.236.74 address. You can either add the route to every machine or on the router that is currently their default router. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com Thank you Les, Yes, i can ping/access those 'other' services from the CentOS box with 2 NICs. I understand that i need, for example in a networked printer in 236. network a 'return' route. I definitely have no access to configure network on every machine in the 236 network (only a few), nor the router... This can't be solved any other way? Best Hello Again, I forgot: I made a mistake in my original post, the ping is to a diferent CentOS box in the 236. network (192.168.236.80) and it replies and i can access it from the Fedora machine in the 1. net. Why the other CentOS box (in the 236. net) works (reply, can be accessed) without adding any route? The Fedora box (1. network): [j...@idi ~]$ ping 192.168.236.80 PING 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=1.61 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.684 ms [j...@idi ~]$ ifconfig eth0 | grep -i 'inet addr' inet addr:192.168.1.3 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 This doesn't make much sense without a route. Can you try a traceroute to the fedora box address from the 192.168.236.80 box to see how/why it gets there? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
El 19/12/2010, a las 20:34, Les Mikesell escribió: On 12/19/10 12:31 PM, Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote: First make sure that you can ping/access those 'other' services from the centos box with 2 nics. It should source from the .236 interface and 'just work'. If not, you have firewalls or something else blocking traffic. When you route other traffic from the .1 network, the destination machines need some reason to send the return packets to the 192.168.236.74 address. You can either add the route to every machine or on the router that is currently their default router. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com Thank you Les, Yes, i can ping/access those 'other' services from the CentOS box with 2 NICs. I understand that i need, for example in a networked printer in 236. network a 'return' route. I definitely have no access to configure network on every machine in the 236 network (only a few), nor the router... This can't be solved any other way? Best Hello Again, I forgot: I made a mistake in my original post, the ping is to a diferent CentOS box in the 236. network (192.168.236.80) and it replies and i can access it from the Fedora machine in the 1. net. Why the other CentOS box (in the 236. net) works (reply, can be accessed) without adding any route? The Fedora box (1. network): [j...@idi ~]$ ping 192.168.236.80 PING 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=1.61 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.684 ms [j...@idi ~]$ ifconfig eth0 | grep -i 'inet addr' inet addr:192.168.1.3 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 This doesn't make much sense without a route. Can you try a traceroute to the fedora box address from the 192.168.236.80 box to see how/why it gets there? Sure, here it is: From fresh reboot of the Fedora14 box: [j...@idi ~]$ su - Contraseña: [r...@idi ~]# route add -net 192.168.236.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.1.100 dev eth0 [r...@idi ~]# logout [j...@idi ~]$ traceroute 192.168.236.80 traceroute to 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 puente (192.168.1.100) 0.286 ms 0.260 ms 0.239 ms 2 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80) 0.963 ms !X 0.949 ms !X 0.930 ms !X [j...@idi ~]$ ping 192.168.236.80 PING 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.668 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.599 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=0.566 ms ^C --- 192.168.236.80 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2000ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.566/0.611/0.668/0.042 ms [j...@idi ~]$ ssh 192.168.236.80 j...@192.168.236.80's password: Last login: Sun Dec 19 20:44:44 2010 from 192.168.1.3 [j...@control ~]$ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
On 12/19/10 1:45 PM, Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote: El 19/12/2010, a las 20:34, Les Mikesell escribió: On 12/19/10 12:31 PM, Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote: First make sure that you can ping/access those 'other' services from the centos box with 2 nics. It should source from the .236 interface and 'just work'. If not, you have firewalls or something else blocking traffic. When you route other traffic from the .1 network, the destination machines need some reason to send the return packets to the 192.168.236.74 address. You can either add the route to every machine or on the router that is currently their default router. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com Thank you Les, Yes, i can ping/access those 'other' services from the CentOS box with 2 NICs. I understand that i need, for example in a networked printer in 236. network a 'return' route. I definitely have no access to configure network on every machine in the 236 network (only a few), nor the router... This can't be solved any other way? Best Hello Again, I forgot: I made a mistake in my original post, the ping is to a diferent CentOS box in the 236. network (192.168.236.80) and it replies and i can access it from the Fedora machine in the 1. net. Why the other CentOS box (in the 236. net) works (reply, can be accessed) without adding any route? The Fedora box (1. network): [j...@idi ~]$ ping 192.168.236.80 PING 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=1.61 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.684 ms [j...@idi ~]$ ifconfig eth0 | grep -i 'inet addr' inet addr:192.168.1.3 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 This doesn't make much sense without a route. Can you try a traceroute to the fedora box address from the 192.168.236.80 box to see how/why it gets there? Sure, here it is: From fresh reboot of the Fedora14 box: [j...@idi ~]$ su - Contraseña: [r...@idi ~]# route add -net 192.168.236.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.1.100 dev eth0 [r...@idi ~]# logout [j...@idi ~]$ traceroute 192.168.236.80 traceroute to 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 puente (192.168.1.100) 0.286 ms 0.260 ms 0.239 ms 2 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80) 0.963 ms !X 0.949 ms !X 0.930 ms !X We know why it works this direction. [j...@idi ~]$ ping 192.168.236.80 PING 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.668 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.599 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=0.566 ms ^C --- 192.168.236.80 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2000ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.566/0.611/0.668/0.042 ms [j...@idi ~]$ ssh 192.168.236.80 j...@192.168.236.80's password: Last login: Sun Dec 19 20:44:44 2010 from 192.168.1.3 [j...@control ~]$ I wanted the reverse path. Traceroute from the 192.168.236.80 box back to the fedora address. It doesn't make sense that it can return packets without a route going through the Centos box. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
Hi, The Fedora box (1. network): [j...@idi ~]$ ping 192.168.236.80 PING 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=1.61 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.684 ms [j...@idi ~]$ ifconfig eth0 | grep -i 'inet addr' inet addr:192.168.1.3 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 This doesn't make much sense without a route. Can you try a traceroute to the fedora box address from the 192.168.236.80 box to see how/why it gets there? Sure, here it is: From fresh reboot of the Fedora14 box: [j...@idi ~]$ su - Contraseña: [r...@idi ~]# route add -net 192.168.236.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.1.100 dev eth0 [r...@idi ~]# logout [j...@idi ~]$ traceroute 192.168.236.80 traceroute to 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 puente (192.168.1.100) 0.286 ms 0.260 ms 0.239 ms 2 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80) 0.963 ms !X 0.949 ms !X 0.930 ms !X We know why it works this direction. [j...@idi ~]$ ping 192.168.236.80 PING 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.668 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.599 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=0.566 ms ^C --- 192.168.236.80 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2000ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.566/0.611/0.668/0.042 ms [j...@idi ~]$ ssh 192.168.236.80 j...@192.168.236.80's password: Last login: Sun Dec 19 20:44:44 2010 from 192.168.1.3 [j...@control ~]$ I wanted the reverse path. Traceroute from the 192.168.236.80 box back to the fedora address. It doesn't make sense that it can return packets without a route going through the Centos box. Yes it does make sense, if the machine in the 192.168.236.0/24 has the centos box in the middle (the one with two LAN cards) as a default route, then you wouldn't need a seperate route. Packets would come back. Can you give the network settings for 192.168.236.80 ? Can you tell us more about the network setup ? routers in both networks ? Maybe a quick drawing should make things more clear. If you cannot set a route on the various devices it might help to use proxy-arp. regards, Michel ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC
On 12/19/10 8:40 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: But the ESXi version isn't exactly fair to someone who would deploy on the hardware intended. Also, the restriction to 1 CPU isn't built-in - there's a place where you select the number of CPUs you will use when you are registering for the free license. I don't know what the actual maximum is, but it is at least 2 with a fairly large number of cores. I'm running the free ESXI on a 4-socket (single core opteron) server, no problems with the licensing, and I don't recall it asking how many cores per socket, just how many sockets. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
El 19/12/10 21:17, Michel van Deventer escribió: Hi, The Fedora box (1. network): [j...@idi ~]$ ping 192.168.236.80 PING 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=1.61 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.684 ms [j...@idi ~]$ ifconfig eth0 | grep -i 'inet addr' inet addr:192.168.1.3 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 This doesn't make much sense without a route. Can you try a traceroute to the fedora box address from the 192.168.236.80 box to see how/why it gets there? Sure, here it is: From fresh reboot of the Fedora14 box: [j...@idi ~]$ su - Contraseña: [r...@idi ~]# route add -net 192.168.236.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.1.100 dev eth0 [r...@idi ~]# logout [j...@idi ~]$ traceroute 192.168.236.80 traceroute to 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 puente (192.168.1.100) 0.286 ms 0.260 ms 0.239 ms 2 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80) 0.963 ms !X 0.949 ms !X 0.930 ms !X We know why it works this direction. [j...@idi ~]$ ping 192.168.236.80 PING 192.168.236.80 (192.168.236.80) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.668 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.599 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.80: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=0.566 ms ^C --- 192.168.236.80 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2000ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.566/0.611/0.668/0.042 ms [j...@idi ~]$ ssh 192.168.236.80 j...@192.168.236.80's password: Last login: Sun Dec 19 20:44:44 2010 from 192.168.1.3 [j...@control ~]$ I wanted the reverse path. Traceroute from the 192.168.236.80 box back to the fedora address. It doesn't make sense that it can return packets without a route going through the Centos box. Yes it does make sense, if the machine in the 192.168.236.0/24 has the centos box in the middle (the one with two LAN cards) as a default route, then you wouldn't need a seperate route. Packets would come back. Can you give the network settings for 192.168.236.80 ? Can you tell us more about the network setup ? routers in both networks ? Maybe a quick drawing should make things more clear. If you cannot set a route on the various devices it might help to use proxy-arp. regards, Michel Hope it helps (all addresses are 192.168. Trimmed to compact the schema): -- -- --- ! 1.3!--!1.100 ! !gw 236.21! ! gw 1.1 ! ! ! 236.74!-! 236.80 ! -- ! ! gw 1.1 ! ! --- ! -- ! ! ! [Router1] [Router2] Router 1 is a PFSense and its IP is 192.168.1.1 Router 2 is something (it is managed by other person, and i think is somekind of win server) and IP is 192.168.236.21 Best =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Scanned with Copfilter Version 0.84beta3a (ProxSMTP 1.6) AntiVirus: ClamAV 0.95.2/12415 - Sun Dec 19 04:26:57 2010 by Markus Madlener @ http://www.copfilter.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] two cents or not two cents
Les Mikesell wrote: div class=moz-text-flowed style=font-family: -moz-fixedOn 12/18/10 3:24 PM, Sean wrote: Or, you might move to java for a more self-contained, OS/distribution independent way of doing things. Why Perl? Because writing/maintaining 20,000 lines of terse Perl code is manageable, whereas the equivalent 200,000+ in Java ruled itself out at the very beginning, (even at a time when I knew some Java but no Perl). A practical decision I clap myself on the back for every single day despite knowing that had I gone with Java (and this project fallen over long ago) I could now be getting big quids from some corporate developer who needs a team of new Java graduates overseen.(hm or was it the right decision?). Starting from scratch now or recently, it would be hard to argue maintainability for perl vs. java, but back in java 1.4 days or before, it was probably the right choice. But java sort of isolates you from changes in the rest of the platform. And groovy eliminates most of the unnecessary verbosity if you don't mind a bit of a performance hit. Groovy is new one on me -- what is it? And surely the driver behind widespread Java adoption is still that others maintain your code more easily (ie the corporate/factory model), implying a price still to pay for a developer who just needs to maintain own code suite? Besides being anathema to me, strong data typing, for example, is also just one feature that explodes code size, but fits perfectly with the factory model. In 5+ years of intense coding with non-typed R/Basic I recall a total of maybe 3 compile-crashes from trying to do math on a string (seriously a non-issue for the die hard maverick!) Is code size under-rated?, conveniently swept under the carpet? Core Perl stability? I agree. Why BerkeleyDB? I dont know of an embedded-db equivalent that will store 'any and every data exactly as is'. I'd think sqlite first - these days anyway. BerkelyDB had bugs in growing existing items way to long for me to ever trust it again. Or use a server instead of embedding anything. Either postgresql or mysql are fairly trouble-free although they've had their own version-specific issues. Or if you need scale, look at something like riak. I do use postgresql for data that is person-entered, ie where interactivity facilitates personal on-the-spot correction of rejected inputs. The inbuilt constraints of the server db-model clearly targets multi-person updaters who may or may not be focussing on what they are doing. Great for keeping mega stores of artificially structured (simple) stuff like phone lists, not so good at accepting all the vagaries the real world may throw at it in automated background capture scenarios, sometimes from suspect sources. BerkeleyDB may break occasionally, but is recoverable with basic OS tools and text-editor if provided recovery tools fail (not locked in a proprietary binary closet -- been there, done that, still hurting!). Originally on RH8 for 3/4 years, the first attempt to port onto a brand new release of FC4 broke everywhere. The second attempt a year or so later went better and remains. In the meantime FC support philosophy has tightened/altered to the point where I simply must abandon it. I believe it has become just an 'alpha test ground' for RHEL. Reminds me of the painful Dos saga -- the first version to work properly (Dos-6) was just about irrelevant when finally released. So yes, CentOS has come into my sights ... (and I'm a bit long in the tooth to tiptoe around as you may have gathered!). If you had moved to Centos3 as the first step, you could have run that with nothing more drastic than a periodic 'yum update' for years, then jumped to Centos5 with no rush to change again even now. Ah, now you tell me! Sean ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] two cents or not two cents
On 12/19/10 2:40 PM, Sean wrote: Starting from scratch now or recently, it would be hard to argue maintainability for perl vs. java, but back in java 1.4 days or before, it was probably the right choice. But java sort of isolates you from changes in the rest of the platform. And groovy eliminates most of the unnecessary verbosity if you don't mind a bit of a performance hit. Groovy is new one on me -- what is it? Groovy is java to the extent that it runs under the same jvm and has access to compiled code in standard jars. But it can be run without compiling and is more dynamic and less verbose. See http://groovy.codehaus.org/ - their description is that it is the language java would be if it had been invented in this century. It adds a runtime method dispatcher so there's a bit of overhead to straight java. There's also a companion 'grails' which is the equivalent of rails for ruby (web site mostly by convention) but again, running under a stable jvm. And surely the driver behind widespread Java adoption is still that others maintain your code more easily (ie the corporate/factory model), implying a price still to pay for a developer who just needs to maintain own code suite? And that you get some massive libraries - spring/hibernate,lucene, etc. plus jdbc drivers for about every DB known to man. And there are IDEs like eclipse that do a lot of the grunge work boilerplate for you, and maven to manage components as you scale up. I do agree personally - I can't think in java and do much better when you can squeeze the logic of a routine onto one page where you can see it all at once. Besides being anathema to me, strong data typing, for example, is also just one feature that explodes code size, but fits perfectly with the factory model. In 5+ years of intense coding with non-typed R/Basic I recall a total of maybe 3 compile-crashes from trying to do math on a string (seriously a non-issue for the die hard maverick!) Is code size under-rated?, conveniently swept under the carpet? I'd relate the importance of code size to the amount of RAM you can afford. For a long time now it has been cheaper to buy RAM than to hire someone capable of shrinking your code base - unless maybe you have a mass-market application that will run on millions of boxes. Core Perl stability? I agree. Why BerkeleyDB? I dont know of an embedded-db equivalent that will store 'any and every data exactly as is'. I'd think sqlite first - these days anyway. BerkelyDB had bugs in growing existing items way to long for me to ever trust it again. Or use a server instead of embedding anything. Either postgresql or mysql are fairly trouble-free although they've had their own version-specific issues. Or if you need scale, look at something like riak. I do use postgresql for data that is person-entered, ie where interactivity facilitates personal on-the-spot correction of rejected inputs. The inbuilt constraints of the server db-model clearly targets multi-person updaters who may or may not be focussing on what they are doing. Great for keeping mega stores of artificially structured (simple) stuff like phone lists, not so good at accepting all the vagaries the real world may throw at it in automated background capture scenarios, sometimes from suspect sources. You can always do input into temporary tables structured more like the input data and process to normalized form later (if needed). BerkeleyDB may break occasionally, but is recoverable with basic OS tools and text-editor if provided recovery tools fail (not locked in a proprietary binary closet -- been there, done that, still hurting!). Sqlite should be equally usable - and easier to convert to/from server backends. That might not have been true long ago, though. If you had moved to Centos3 as the first step, you could have run that with nothing more drastic than a periodic 'yum update' for years, then jumped to Centos5 with no rush to change again even now. Ah, now you tell me! You should have asked sooner. I still have a few centos3 boxes going strong. I had problems with perl modules and a few other things in the early stages of centos4 and skipped over that for most systems. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] how to install Linux on an IBM xserver 335 server without graphics card?
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010, Drew wrote: I recently got some IBM Xseries 335 servers 2nd hand, and noticed they don't have any graphics card. Some google searched indicate they only have an uplink port, which you could connect to another (other model) IBM server and use that as the head node. But, I don't have one available. That'd be the C2T (Cable Chaining) technology they were using back then. It's essentially a KVM switch system built into the server, the idea being that if you have a rack of 42 of them you can hookup up a single monitor/keyboard/mouse to the stack and with the press of a button switch between the servers. All you need to get access to the console on these units is a C2T Breakout cable. It looks like a custom KVM cable with PS2/VGA ports on one end and a DVI port on the other. One of the more frustrating servers I've worked with. You can only use the serial port for the console after you set it up in the bios..which you can't do from the serial port if it isn't already setup. Confirm that you need the C2T cable. Be aware that there are 2 types. One about 18 long with an identical connector on each end (for stacking the servers), one as described with the KVM break out on the end. Used to cost about $60 back in the day. Out of curiosity, here is an example http://cgi.ebay.com/KVM-Breakout-C2T-Cable-IBM-x330-x335-06P6210-New-/320632050911?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0hash=item4aa728d4df Great little servers once they are installed. oh, the original bios would only allow you to set PXE boot on 1 of the interfaces at a time. -- Jim Wildman, CISSP, RHCE j...@rossberry.com http://www.rossberry.com Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one. Thomas Paine ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
On 12/19/10 2:30 PM, Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote: This doesn't make much sense without a route. Can you try a traceroute to the fedora box address from the 192.168.236.80 box to see how/why it gets there? Hope it helps (all addresses are 192.168. Trimmed to compact the schema): -- -- --- ! 1.3!--!1.100 ! !gw 236.21! ! gw 1.1 ! ! ! 236.74!-! 236.80 ! -- ! ! gw 1.1 ! ! --- ! -- ! ! ! [Router1] [Router2] Router 1 is a PFSense and its IP is 192.168.1.1 Router 2 is something (it is managed by other person, and i think is somekind of win server) and IP is 192.168.236.21 This still doesn't explain why the 192.168.236.80 box can return packets to the fedora at 192.168.1.3 when you said it didn't have a route going through 192.168.236.74. Can you check what routes you do have on 192.168.236.80 and traceroute from there to 192.168.1.3? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] how to install Linux on an IBM xserver 335 server without graphics card?
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010, Jim Wildman wrote: One of the more frustrating servers I've worked with. You can only use the serial port for the console after you set it up in the bios..which you can't do from the serial port if it isn't already setup. Confirm that you need the C2T cable. Be aware that there are 2 types. One about 18 long with an identical connector on each end (for stacking the servers), one as described with the KVM break out on the end. Used to cost about $60 back in the day. Out of curiosity, here is an example http://cgi.ebay.com/KVM-Breakout-C2T-Cable-IBM-x330-x335-06P6210-New-/320632050911?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0hash=item4aa728d4df Great little servers once they are installed. oh, the original bios would only allow you to set PXE boot on 1 of the interfaces at a time. Oh, and there are 2 ports on the back, one IN and one OUT. The KVM goes on the OUT port (right hand as I remember it) -- Jim Wildman, CISSP, RHCE j...@rossberry.com http://www.rossberry.com Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one. Thomas Paine ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Jim Wildman, CISSP, RHCE j...@rossberry.com http://www.rossberry.com Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one. Thomas Paine ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
Les Mikesell escribió: On 12/19/10 2:30 PM, Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote: This doesn't make much sense without a route. Can you try a traceroute to the fedora box address from the 192.168.236.80 box to see how/why it gets there Hope it helps (all addresses are 192.168. Trimmed to compact the schema): -- -- --- ! 1.3!--!1.100 ! !gw 236.21! ! gw 1.1 ! ! ! 236.74!-! 236.80 ! -- ! ! gw 1.1 ! ! --- ! -- ! ! ! [Router1] [Router2] Router 1 is a PFSense and its IP is 192.168.1.1 Router 2 is something (it is managed by other person, and i think is somekind of win server) and IP is 192.168.236.21 This still doesn't explain why the 192.168.236.80 box can return packets to the fedora at 192.168.1.3 when you said it didn't have a route going through 192.168.236.74. Can you check what routes you do have on 192.168.236.80 and traceroute from there to 192.168.1.3? Apologies by confusing you. I forgot that the other CentOS had 2 NICs, this is the machine where i began these tests. It's in a remote site and now when listing the routes remembered that. It's conected to the 1. network with a second NIC and IP: 192.168.1.102. Replies must be return by that iface, really? [r...@control ~]# route Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse Iface 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 00 eth1 192.168.236.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 00 eth0 169.254.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 00 eth0 default 192.168.236.21 0.0.0.0 UG0 00 eth0 I Configured a printer in the 236. network to use 192.168.236.74 as gateway and now i can access it from 1. Thanks. [j...@idi ~]$ ping 192.168.236.74 PING 192.168.236.74 (192.168.236.74) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.74: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.276 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.74: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.245 ms Thanks again Best =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Scanned with Copfilter Version 0.84beta3a (ProxSMTP 1.6) AntiVirus: ClamAV 0.95.2/12415 - Sun Dec 19 04:26:57 2010 by Markus Madlener @ http://www.copfilter.org ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
On 12/19/10 4:08 PM, José María Terry Jiménez wrote: Les Mikesell escribió: On 12/19/10 2:30 PM, Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote: This doesn't make much sense without a route. Can you try a traceroute to the fedora box address from the 192.168.236.80 box to see how/why it gets there Hope it helps (all addresses are 192.168. Trimmed to compact the schema): -- -- --- ! 1.3!--!1.100 ! !gw 236.21! ! gw 1.1 ! ! ! 236.74!-! 236.80 ! -- ! ! gw 1.1 ! ! --- ! -- ! ! ! [Router1] [Router2] Router 1 is a PFSense and its IP is 192.168.1.1 Router 2 is something (it is managed by other person, and i think is somekind of win server) and IP is 192.168.236.21 This still doesn't explain why the 192.168.236.80 box can return packets to the fedora at 192.168.1.3 when you said it didn't have a route going through 192.168.236.74. Can you check what routes you do have on 192.168.236.80 and traceroute from there to 192.168.1.3? Apologies by confusing you. I forgot that the other CentOS had 2 NICs, this is the machine where i began these tests. It's in a remote site and now when listing the routes remembered that. It's conected to the 1. network with a second NIC and IP: 192.168.1.102. Replies must be return by that iface, really? Yes, with rare exceptions routing always happens with each hop making the decision to use the interface that has the best route towards the destination, and that would have a route automatically added for anything within the netmask. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
El 19/12/2010, a las 23:15, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com escribió: On 12/19/10 4:08 PM, José María Terry Jiménez wrote: Les Mikesell escribió: On 12/19/10 2:30 PM, Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote: This doesn't make much sense without a route. Can you try a traceroute to the fedora box address from the 192.168.236.80 box to see how/why it gets there Hope it helps (all addresses are 192.168. Trimmed to compact the schema): -- -- --- ! 1.3!--!1.100 ! !gw 236.21! ! gw 1.1 ! ! ! 236.74!-! 236.80 ! -- ! ! gw 1.1 ! ! --- ! -- ! ! ! [Router1] [Router2] Router 1 is a PFSense and its IP is 192.168.1.1 Router 2 is something (it is managed by other person, and i think is somekind of win server) and IP is 192.168.236.21 This still doesn't explain why the 192.168.236.80 box can return packets to the fedora at 192.168.1.3 when you said it didn't have a route going through 192.168.236.74. Can you check what routes you do have on 192.168.236.80 and traceroute from there to 192.168.1.3? Apologies by confusing you. I forgot that the other CentOS had 2 NICs, this is the machine where i began these tests. It's in a remote site and now when listing the routes remembered that. It's conected to the 1. network with a second NIC and IP: 192.168.1.102. Replies must be return by that iface, really? Yes, with rare exceptions routing always happens with each hop making the decision to use the interface that has the best route towards the destination, and that would have a route automatically added for anything within the netmask. Thanks by your help, now i understand this a bit better, Best ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Building packages using RPMBUILD
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010, R P Herrold wrote: To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org From: R P Herrold herr...@centos.org Subject: [CentOS] Building packages using RPMBUILD On Sun, 19 Dec 2010, Keith Roberts wrote: # rpm --import Fedora6-GPG-public-key.asc and then that objection will be silenced Thanks Russ. That has cured the problem. Do I need the .gpg subdirectory in my rpmbuilder homedir? no - that was created by GnuPG for maintaining a keystore, and as the issue was not with gnupg, the ./.gpg is unused Also, is there an option to rpm and rpmbuild that would allow me to do all the verification checks, except for the package signer's pub key check? yes as for rpm, no as for rpmbuild OK. Thanks for all your help Russ. Keith -- Russ herrold ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they are not. This email was sent from my laptop with Centos 5.5 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Building packages using RPMBUILD
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010, JohnS wrote: To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org From: JohnS jse...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [CentOS] Building packages using RPMBUILD On Sun, 2010-12-19 at 13:46 +, Keith Roberts wrote: http://www.karsites.net/centos/downloads/5.5/qps-1.9.18.6-1.i386.rpm You should have a /5/ /x86_64 /i386 /SRPMS Structure to the directories, with a createrepo on them. The SRPM form Fedora 9, qps-1.9.19-0.2.b.fc7.src.rpm will build also with out a hitch. You go higher than Fedora 9 you in for a rude awakening, Don't try building a 32 bit version under a multilib system. Qt4-make is needed and major work needed to build the newer. Rawhide laughed :-) You made a key?rpm --import, rpm --sign then: rpm -Kvv rpm --checkig Thanks for the guidance John. This is not meant to be a repository - just a temporary place to upload some rpms I build. My main development machine is still down, so I'm just testing a few things out ATM on my laptop, which is where I built the Centos 5.5 qps binary rpm. You only have to point rpm or yum (or use wget) to download and then install the qps rpm locally. I'm with you on the later versions of Fedora packages not working on Centos 5.5 Running Centos 5.5 is very similar IMO to running Fedora 8. Kind Regards, Keith John ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they are not. This email was sent from my laptop with Centos 5.5 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Routing issue between 2 LANs
Hello Jose, from the picture you provided the situation looks pretty simple. - you have enabled IP forwarding on router, I recommend you to put it into /etc/sysctl.conf for persistence. - you have configured firewall rules on router to allow forwarding traffic from left to right subnet. You can also try to set up ACCEPT policy just for testing. - the default gateway for left subnet is 192.168.1.1 (you mentioned router for Internet access). Correct me if I'm wrong. - the default gateway for right subnet I assume is 192.168.236.74. You don't have to do anything with routing here. Every host in right subnet knows where to send replies. - the problem seems to be missing routing information in left subnet. Hosts don't know anything about the right subnet and thus send requests to the default gateway 192.168.1.1. - modifying routing table on every host in left subnet can be solution in case, if there is only a few hosts which need to access right subnet - if you need to have fully accessible subnets, put the static route to default gateway 192.168.1.1 to redirect requests to proper gateway. If it is Linux gateway, try something like this [r...@default-gw]# ip route add 192.168.236.0/24 via 192.168.236.74 Regards Andrej Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote: I have a CentOS 5.5 machine with 2 nics each one configured to work in one of the nets. The CentOS also uses a router for Internet access that is 192.168.1.1. 192.168.1.0/24 -192.168.1.100--[CentOS Machine]--192.168.236.74 192.168.236.0/24 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How to strip out the title bar from xterm windows on CentOS 5 GNOME?
On 18/12/10 13:37, Bart Schaefer wrote: The presence and appearance of title bars (except for the text content) are controlled by the window manager, not by the application framed in the window. In the case of the standard Gnome desktop, that application is metacity. So you need to look for how to configure title bars in metacity, not for title bars of xterm. For GNOME you can use Devilspie to do some additional window management stuff that metacity omits, like window placement and decoration. Been a while since I've used it, but you may be able to coerce it to do what you want. Kal ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] HR software use LDAP authentication
Hi , all : Is there any HR management software which used the LDAP authentication method in the linux? I used the orangeHRM tool , but found it did not have the LDAP authentication . So would anyone can give me some suggestions ? Thanks in advance. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] HR software use LDAP authentication
I used the orangeHRM tool , but found it did not have the LDAP authentication . You sure about that? http://www.orangehrm.com/wiki/index.php/33%29_How_the_ldap_works_in_OrangeHRM. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] HR software use LDAP authentication
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Joseph L. Casale jcas...@activenetwerx.com wrote: I used the orangeHRM tool , but found it did not have the LDAP authentication . You sure about that? http://www.orangehrm.com/wiki/index.php/33%29_How_the_ldap_works_in_OrangeHRM . Yes. I read that article some days ago . As it said , if you want the LDAP authentication , you should purchase that . But I don't want to purchase that, is there any other HR tools ? ___ 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
