Re: [CentOS] Updating hardware clock from cron
on 15:04 Fri 04 Mar, Denniston, Todd A CIV NAVSURFWARCENDIV Crane (todd.dennis...@navy.mil) wrote: > > > -Original Message- > > From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On > > Behalf Of Kenneth Porter > > Sent: Friday, March 04, 2011 14:15 > > To: CentOS mailing list > > Subject: [CentOS] Updating hardware clock from cron > > > > Is there a package to do this? > > > > Normally the hardware clock is set during shutdown if one is running > > ntpd. > > No, > hwclock --systohc is only called at start time (in > /etc/rc.d/init.d/ntpd), and only if ntpdate got a good time, which is a > good thing. > > > But if a long-running server shuts down unexpectedly, this isn't > > done, and the hardware clock might be off by a lot when it comes > > back up. > > Not if you are running ntp and it was able to sync, because ntpd > activates a mode in the kernel that sets the hwclock every 11 minutes > when ntp declares it got synced. > > If your hwclock is off by a lot when it comes up I believe it is from > one of the following: > A) bad cmos battery. > B) poor cmos clock > C) confusing info in /etc/adjtime due to using both hwclock --adjust [at > boot] and ntp (long story, but it is due to both tweaking the clock > without coordination between them). > D) booting a different OS with different ideas of timezones. > E) manual tweaking of time via bios. F) Hardware clock set to local time and booting after a standard -> daylight savings or daylight savings -> standard time shift. I saw this in a large production environmet. The main effect was that system logs would show a very large slew during boot, after ntpdate was run. Annoying, possibly confusing, but not a show-stopper. Generally, the solution is: 1: use ntp, chrony, or another time service to sync system clocks while running. 2: set hwclock to UTC, the way Krell intended it to be. 3: periodically sync the hwclock from system time. I don't really care if you do this hourly, daily, weekly, or monthly (I'd probably select daily myself). But it will tend to avoid big time jumps. If you're particularly anal, you could periodically compare system and hwclock time, and raise a flag to replace the CMOS battery when this starts to drift. Since other CMOS and BIOS settings can be lost, and about the only perceptible sign is a drifting hwclock, this is actually probably a pretty good practice. -- Dr. Ed Morbius, Chief Scientist /| Robot Wrangler / Staff Psychologist| When you seek unlimited power Krell Power Systems Unlimited| Go to Krell! ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] IPTABLES rule for separating users
I have an OpenWrt 10.03 router [ IP: 192.168.1.1 ], and it has a DHCP server pool: 192.168.1.0/24 - clients are using it through wireless/wired connection. Ok! Here's the catch: I need to separate the users from each other. How i need to do it: by IPTABLES rule [ /etc/firewall.user ]. Ok! "Loud thinking": So i need a rule something like this [on the OpenWrt router]: - DROP where SOURCE: 192.168.1.2-192.168.1.255 and DESTINATION is 192.168.1.2-192.168.1.255 The idea is this. Ok! Questions! - Will i lock out myself if i apply this firewall rule? - Is this a secure method? [ is it easy to do this?: hello, i'm a client, and i say, my IP address is 192.168.1.1! - now it can sniff the unencrypted traffic! :( - because all the clients are in the same subnet! ] - Are there any good methods to find/audit for duplicated IP addresses? - Are the any good methods to find/audit for duplicated MAC addresses? - Are there any good methods to do this IPTALBES rule on Layer2?: `$ wget -q "http://downloads.openwrt.org/backfire/10.03/ar71xx/packages/"; -O - | grep -i ebtables` `$ ` p.s.: The rule would be [is it on a good chain?]: iptables -A FORWARD -m iprange --src-range 192.168.1.2-192.168.1.255 --dst-range 192.168.1.2-192.168.1.255 -j DROP Thank you! ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IPTABLES rule for separating users
On 03/05/11 12:58 AM, erikmccaskey64 wrote: > I have an OpenWrt 10.03 router [ IP: 192.168.1.1 ], and it has a DHCP > server pool: 192.168.1.0/24 - clients are using it through > wireless/wired connection. Ok! > um, this is CentOS, not OpenWRT, I believe they have their own email lists... however, since we're here and I've looked into those htings in some depth The LAN ports on the WRT54 family routers are a hardware ethernet switch, and packets aren't normally passed through the WRT's processor. You *can* reconfigure the switch to make each LAN port a different VLAN but then every packet has to go through the rather slow WRT CPU, and it only has a single 100baseT ethernet port, which now has to service 5 VLAN (WAN + 4 LANs). The WLAN is on a seperate port to the processor which normally it bridges. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Updating hardware clock from cron
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Denniston, Todd A CIV NAVSURFWARCENDIV Crane wrote: [snip] > If your hwclock is off by a lot when it comes up I believe it is from > one of the following: > A) bad cmos battery. > B) poor cmos clock > C) confusing info in /etc/adjtime due to using both hwclock --adjust [at > boot] and ntp (long story, but it is due to both tweaking the clock > without coordination between them). > D) booting a different OS with different ideas of timezones. > E) manual tweaking of time via bios. [snip] good list.. I'd also add "F) Running inside a virtual machine." The VMWare clock skew can be enormous. On some systems it drifts by a minute per hour if not adjusted via ntp. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] bind 9.7.3 and libp11 engine_pkcs11 of fedoca core 14
2011/3/4 fakessh @ : > hello list centos. > > I installed the packages libp11 and engine_pkcs11 of fedora core 14 on > my centos 5.5 to allow me to compile the latest version of bind. this > is the only way I found to compile bind 9.7.3. you know another way to > compile bind 9.7.3 on centos 5.5 > > thanks for all your return > -- Yes... install from centos5 testing or wait till centos 5.6 is released in a few days and get it from the main repos. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Will CentOS become obsolete now because of the changes Red Hat is implementing?
This post appeared on another forum: Will CentOS become obsolete now because of the changes Red Hat is implementing? Red Hat has changed the way it distributes Enterprise Linux kernel code in an effort to prevent Oracle and Novell from stealing its customers, making it more difficult for these competitors to understand which patches have been applied where. Some have speculated that the change is designed to make it harder for Oracle as well as the open source CentOS project to build their own Linux distributions. But Stevens says this is not the case. He says the change is meant to hamper Oracle and Novell's ability to offer support to customers who are already running Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). "We made the change, quite honestly, because we are absolutely making a set of steps that make it more difficult for competitors that wish to provide support services on top of Red Hat Enterprise Linux," Red Hat chief technology officer Brian Stevens tells The Register, before naming those competitors. "Today, there are two competitors that I'm aware of that go to our customers directly, offering to support RHEL directly for them...Oracle and Novell." In essence, Red Hat is trying to hide information from these competitors that is essential to providing support for RHEL specifically. "What we're trying to impede is competitors that come to customers who are already running RHEL under subscription from Red Hat and saying 'Don't pay Red Hat anymore, pay us, and don't make any changes to your systems'," Stevens says. He insists that the change does not violate either the letter or the spirit of RHEL's GPL open source license. "We were very careful that what we've done does not impede what our customers need to accomplish or what the community needs to accomplish." And he says that the change would not really hamper the development of other Linux distros, including CentOS. "We haven't at all restricted CentOS's ability to grab source code and recompile it and clean-out trademarks and package it. It's just some of the knowledge of the insides that we're hiding," he explains. One longtime CentOS developer agrees. "I'll not lose sleep on the matter," CentOS co-founder Russ Herold tells The Reg. In November, with the release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6, the company released its kernel package with all patches pre-applied. "In the past, we distributed the kernel as a base file and then a set of add-on patches that accompany it. Then when you did a build, the build process automatically applied all those patches to the kernel file," Stevens says. "Now, we integrate those patch files directly into that kernel. We do the first part of the build process prior to distribution." This was recently noticed by kernel-community member and LWN editor Jonathan Corbet, who took issue with the change, calling Red Hat's package "obfuscated" kernel source code. "Distribution in this form should satisfy the GPL, but it makes life hard for anybody else wanting to see what has been done with this kernel," Corbet wrote. "Hopefully it is simply a mistake which will be corrected soon." Others speculated that the move would undermine not only Oracle's Unbreakable Linux, but also CentOS. Both are based on RHEL. CentOS is meant to be a RHEL clone. Whereas the compiled bits of Red Hat Enterprise Linux are only available under a Red Hat paid subscription, CentOS is completely free. "The changes will make work harder for distributions such as CentOS, the community-built Linux distribution ... based on Red Hat's sources," H Online said. "CentOS is built from the RHEL source by a limited number of volunteers and Red Hat's change in policy will mean more work for them unless more volunteers or other companies step in and provide them with assistance." We heard similar noises from an experienced Linux kernel developer. He said that Red Hat's change was like shuffling all the cards in an old fashioned Dewey Decimal library file system – the card you want is still there, but finding it is no easy task – and that this would cause problems for CentOS, which is an economic threat to Red Hat. But CentOS founder Russ Herold insists the change is not a big issue. "Private local trial builds of the released RHEL 6 sources by me and others have proceeded with no major problems. I just do not see that the changes as some earth-shattering change. I just think [the patches will be] incrementally more difficult to figure out," he says. "Nothing in Red Hat's new approach prevents a person from running a local version-control system, containing the pristine kernel at point A, and the Red Hat variant which we might call point B. Then one runs a 'diff' in that version-control system between A and B, and starts reading the diffs to see what is happening. Over time, both the pristine kernel, and the patched Red Hat versions will vary, and one will get a sense for which 'diff' parts matter, and which are cosmetic cleanups." Other distros will not be
Re: [CentOS] Will CentOS become obsolete now because of the changes Red Hat is implementing?
On 05/03/11 10:07, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> This post appeared on another forum:
>
> Will CentOS become obsolete now because of the changes Red Hat is
> implementing?
>
>
> But CentOS founder Russ Herold insists the change is not a big issue.
> "Private local trial builds of the released RHEL 6 sources by me and
> others have proceeded with no major problems. I just do not see that
> the changes as some earth-shattering change. I just think [the patches
> will be] incrementally more difficult to figure out," he says.
>
> "Nothing in Red Hat's new approach prevents a person from running a
> local version-control system, containing the pristine kernel at point
> A, and the Red Hat variant which we might call point B. Then one runs
> a 'diff' in that version-control system between A and B, and starts
> reading the diffs to see what is happening. Over time, both the
> pristine kernel, and the patched Red Hat versions will vary, and one
> will get a sense for which 'diff' parts matter, and which are cosmetic
> cleanups."
>
>
> Full story here : http://www.channelregister.co.uk/201...ode_packaging/
>
full non-truncated link:
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2011/03/04/red_hat_twarts_oracle_and_novell_with_change_to_source_code_packaging/
>
> Can any of the CentOS team please comment on this?
>
Which part of Russ Herold's ("CentOS founder") comments above did you
not read?
Come on, this whole story is total nonsense and has been responded to a
number of times. Red Hat are legitimately protecting their business
model against competitors (namely, Oracle and Novel) and the changes
have no impact towards rebuilders. This is a good thing - if Red Hat
doesn't exist the CentOS doesn't exist.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Will CentOS become obsolete now because of the changes Red Hat is implementing?
On 03/05/2011 04:07 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > This post appeared on another forum: > This kernel change does not impact the ability to rebuild the source as is, it just makes it much harder to do anything except build the pristine kernel from kernel.org or the Red Hat kernel. You can still compare the RH tarball to the pristine kernel and see all the changes ... they are just not added one at a time. This will make it very difficult to back out one patch (because your server is running version xyz of farmer joe's ethernet card, and that does not work with PatchA). This should not impact building the kernel ... it might impact things like the CentOSPlus Kernel or CentOS providing a "stop gap" kernel (in the testing repo) while waiting for Red Hat to correct a problem and get their kernel through engineering and then released. That is not to say I like the changes, as it will have impacts ... but as long as they only do it to the kernel, it is not a big problem. If they do it to every package in the OS, then that would be a much bigger problem. It is much easier for us to find and remove trademarks when they are inserted via a patch into existing upstream code ... if we only had the modified tarballs and not the patches, it would be much harder to find all the things that need changing. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IPTABLES rule for separating users
John, by answering you just encourage him to go on with this. He's a parallel menace of 4 mailing lists. Ralph wanted to unsubscribe him, but he didn't have access to the interface then. I'll remind him. Kai ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] HOW to REDIRECT to HTTPS?
Ralph Angenendt wrote on Thu, 3 Mar 2011 16:26:29 +0100: > Hope I remember it this evening. No real access to the CentOS mail stuff > from here :) Hi Ralph, wollte nochmal an das unsubscribe erinnern. Es ist: from: erikmccaskey64 Schöne Grüße, Kai ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Will CentOS become obsolete now because of the changes Red Hat is implementing?
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 5:07 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > This post appeared on another forum: > > Will CentOS become obsolete now because of the changes Red Hat is > implementing? > > Red Hat has changed the way it distributes Enterprise Linux kernel > code in an effort to prevent Oracle and Novell from stealing its > customers, making it more difficult for these competitors to > understand which patches have been applied where. Oh, son of a .. . I once spent six months *un-obfuscating* a lot of kernel code changes in a company's internally used and optimized kernel, becuase the developers had been doing their developments off in la-la-land. It's a good story, ask if you're curious. Such tweaking makes it very hard to integrate other published kernel changes from local kernels or the upstream kernel. This is, of course, the *point*, but if you're someone like me who's sometimes asked to incorporate optimizations or drivers on top of someone else's code changes, it makes it considerably harder to tell which changes you might be overwriting or conflicting with. It really shouldn't affect CentOS releases: the kernel code doesn't have lots of trademarks in it, so it shouldn't be hard to recompile the kernel without tweaks. But for someone like me who gets asked to support Infiniband (before it was popular) or various fiber channel cards with RHEL 4 or CentOS 4 for software compatibility reasons, it could be an issue. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Gnu Screen - terminal issues
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 12:50 AM, Larry Vaden wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 6:46 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: >> >> It's default behavior for the Nomachine Windows client. When you close >> it, it asks if you want to "disconnect" or "terminate" the session. >> Whether it works well is heavily dependent on the server, whether >> Neatx, FreeNX, or the NoMachine server. > > Please extend your remarks about which server you think is best and why. > > thanks/ldv Larry, please check the archives. I already covered that. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Will CentOS become obsolete now because of the changes Red Hat is implementing?
On Saturday, March 05, 2011 05:07:10 am Rudi Ahlers wrote: > Can any of the CentOS team please comment on this? One did, and he's quoted in the article referenced. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS and Marvell SAS/SATA drivers
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 4:16 PM, compdoc wrote: >>If the Marvell drivers don't pan out, it looks like I'll have >>to either spend money on a 3Ware|LSI|Promise controller > > The 3ware are excellent... And Promise, historically, is *not*. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Will CentOS become obsolete now because of the changes Red Hat is implementing?
yeah but he wants to hear from the horse's mouth Who knows what the guy really said when a reporter quotes something On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: > On Saturday, March 05, 2011 05:07:10 am Rudi Ahlers wrote: > > Can any of the CentOS team please comment on this? > > One did, and he's quoted in the article referenced. > ___ > 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] CentOS and Marvell SAS/SATA drivers
areca works.. eero On 5 Mar 2011 16:36, "Nico Kadel-Garcia" wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 4:16 PM, compdoc wrote: >>>If the Marvell drivers don't pan out, it looks like I'll have >>>to either spend money on a 3Ware|LSI|Promise controller >> >> The 3ware are excellent... > > And Promise, historically, is *not*. > ___ > 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
[CentOS] Will CentOS become obsolete now because of the changes Red Hat is implementing?
On Sat, 5 Mar 2011, robert mena wrote: > yeah but he wants to hear from the horse's mouth > > Who knows what the guy really said when a reporter quotes something The 'pull quotes' attributed to me (the horse in question) by the Reg are accurate and carry good context Anyone who follows this mailing list and -devel or my blog, has seen the balance of what I said, over and over. People who want to understand how to solve the issues of rebuilding ... need to roll up their sleeves and get down and dirty doing rebuilds, so they see and learn how to solve the issues. Talking about it, speculating, conducting 'thought experiments' about what _should_ happen do little that is useful There is no magic bullet or shortcut to becoming a rebuilder, no 'secret sauce' as hughesjr says. Just systematic problem solving Exactly ONE PERSON has followed through since I offered private guidance over three months ago, and that person now has a server oriented, trimmed down RHEL 6 sources rebuild. I offered pointers, but they learned by doing. I am proud to see the install CD sized ISOs for i386 and x86_64 rather than the bloat DVD images of RHEL (some surgery to anaconda was required, and that spin does not seek binary identical replication of the upstream, so it is not a CentOS clone or competitor. I'll probably offer the image at pmman soon) It's not magic folks -- Russ herrold ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] bind 9.7.3 and libp11 engine_pkcs11 of fedoca core 14
I installed the packages and libp11 engine_pkcs11 to allow me to recover the rpm of bind depositing unofficial CentALT. is the only way to properly recompile the source rpm this in order to to safety the last holes in bind > Yes... install from centos5 testing or wait till centos 5.6 is > released in a few days and get it from the main repos. -- gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-key 092164A7 http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x092164A7 signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] bind 9.7.3 and libp11 engine_pkcs11 of fedoca core 14
On Sat, 5 Mar 2011, fakessh @ wrote: > I installed the packages and libp11 engine_pkcs11 > to allow me to recover the rpm of bind depositing unofficial CentALT. > is the only way to properly recompile the source rpm > this in order to to safety the last holes in bind there is a fake bind that runs a ssh daemon out in exploit land. WHY IN THE WORLD would anyone respond to a post by you 'fakessh', as to a non-centos archive? -- Russ herrold ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS and Marvell SAS/SATA drivers
On 03/05/2011 09:00 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 4:16 PM, compdoc wrote: >>> >>If the Marvell drivers don't pan out, it looks like I'll have >>> >>to either spend money on a 3Ware|LSI|Promise controller >> > >> > The 3ware are excellent... > And Promise, historically, is*not*. > > Yes, I've had problems with Promise cards in the past, but haven't bought any for a long time. They seem to be moving upscale these days. Regarding the Marvell drivers, I had good luck with the 'sata_mv' driver in Scientific Linux 6 just yesterday, running a pair of 4-port PCIe-x4 Tempo 'Sonnet' controller cards. So it appears someone has fixed that particular driver. I've decided to stick with those cards rather than re-install the Supermicro/Marvell SAS/SATA 8-port controllers, which use the 'mvsas' driver that I had problems with on the RHEL-6 evaluation distro. So far, SL-6 has performed very well, all RAID-6 arrays re-synced properly, and running concurrent forced fscks on eight arrays was very fast (because the ext4 filesystems were still empty :-) ). I think I'll stick with SL-6 as the VM host OS, but will use CentOS for the guest VMs. CentOS-5.x will do fine for now, and I'll have the luxury of upgrading guest OSs to CentOS-6 as the opportunity arises. Chuck ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Will CentOS become obsolete now because of the changes Red Hat is implementing?
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 4:57 PM, robert mena wrote: > yeah but he wants to hear from the horse's mouth > Who knows what the guy really said when a reporter quotes something > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: >> >> On Saturday, March 05, 2011 05:07:10 am Rudi Ahlers wrote: >> > Can any of the CentOS team please comment on this? >> >> One did, and he's quoted in the article referenced. >> ___ Exactly, I don't know how "twisted" that article really is. And it would be good to hear from our devs directly :) -- 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] Will CentOS become obsolete now because of the changes Red Hat is implementing?
On Mar 5, 2011, at 11:25 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 4:57 PM, robert mena > wrote: >> yeah but he wants to hear from the horse's mouth >> Who knows what the guy really said when a reporter quotes >> something >> >> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: >>> >>> On Saturday, March 05, 2011 05:07:10 am Rudi Ahlers wrote: Can any of the CentOS team please comment on this? >>> >>> One did, and he's quoted in the article referenced. >>> ___ > > > Exactly, I don't know how "twisted" that article really is. And it > would be good to hear from our devs directly :) There's been some traction on the SL list about this as well, pretty much saying what was quoted from Centos. Basically no big deal other then perhaps having some impact centosplus kernel. The article seemed pretty clear to me but perhaps I missed something? - aurf ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS and Marvell SAS/SATA drivers
>Regarding the Marvell drivers, I had good luck with the 'sata_mv' driver >in Scientific Linux 6 just yesterday, running a pair of 4-port PCIe-x4 >Tempo 'Sonnet' controller cards. Are those the Mac/Windows Sonnet cards that go for less than $200? What kind of performance you seeing? Are you doing software raid on them? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS and Marvell SAS/SATA drivers
On 03/05/11 7:01 AM, Eero Volotinen wrote: > > areca works.. > > for SAS, I prefer LSI Logic. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Will CentOS become obsolete now because of the changes Red Hat is implementing?
On 03/05/2011 04:22 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 03/05/2011 04:07 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: >> This post appeared on another forum: >> > This kernel change does not impact the ability to rebuild the source as > is, it just makes it much harder to do anything except build the > pristine kernel from kernel.org or the Red Hat kernel. > > You can still compare the RH tarball to the pristine kernel and see all > the changes ... they are just not added one at a time. > > This will make it very difficult to back out one patch (because your > server is running version xyz of farmer joe's ethernet card, and that > does not work with PatchA). > > This should not impact building the kernel ... it might impact things > like the CentOSPlus Kernel or CentOS providing a "stop gap" kernel (in > the testing repo) while waiting for Red Hat to correct a problem and get > their kernel through engineering and then released. > > That is not to say I like the changes, as it will have impacts ... but > as long as they only do it to the kernel, it is not a big problem. > > If they do it to every package in the OS, then that would be a much > bigger problem. It is much easier for us to find and remove trademarks > when they are inserted via a patch into existing upstream code ... if we > only had the modified tarballs and not the patches, it would be much > harder to find all the things that need changing. > It's my sense that Redhat views CentOS and SL as benificial for them and not as competition. I think over time many people install CentOS and it leads to them selling more redhat licenses from companies who really do need support. Our testing and filing of bugs in their database is also supportive of the development process in the same way that it is with fedora. Over the years, I've talked several times to redhat sales people and they've always recognized people that contribute to the Open Source community and were not really in need of a support contract and told them to just download Open Source distributions. I've never once felt pressure from them to replace my CentOS systems with Redhat licenses, though I've purchased a few over time. I think redhat is a great example of an open source company that truly gives back to the community without fear of losing business as a result. Their concerns around these two large commercial competitors are legit and it is apropriate for them to be addressed. We all benefit from having companies like Redhat around. Nataraj ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] [Fwd: Re: Centos 6 - What are you looking forward to?]
On Fri, March 4, 2011 14:12, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote: > On Mar 4, 2011, at 11:07 AM, Kenneth Porter wrote: > >> --On Thursday, March 03, 2011 10:11 AM -0500 Digimer >> > > >> wrote: >> >>> How about the rest of you? What are you looking forward to in >>> CentOS 6 when it is released? >> >> A new Ruby > > +1 I solved this problem on my 5.5 servers in the following manner: login: not_as_root_user . . . $ # Add rpmforge repos to yum per: $ # http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories/RPMForge $ sudo yum install checkinstall $ wget ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/ruby-1.8.7-p334.tar.gz $ # to get latest or most desired source change version as required $ tar -xzf ruby-1.8.7-p334.tar.gz $ # expand source archives in /tmp $ cd ruby-1.8.7-p334 $ # change to source directory $ ./configure $ # configure makefile for this host $ make $ # build the Ruby VM $ checkinstall $ # package ruby VM and suppport files as an RPM package $ sudo yum localinstall \ /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/ruby-1.8.7-p334-1.i386.rpm \ --nogpgcheck $ # install the rpm package from the checkinstall location -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] OT: grep regex pointer appreciated
Hi,
My grep regex foo is not very good and googling is getting me nowhere so
hopefully someone is kind enough to give me some pointers.
Goal: grep (non .dbg) filenames and versions from a ftp dir listing and
a raw html file:
$ wget --no-remove-listing -O ftp-index.txt ftp://127.0.0.1/test/
$ wget --no-remove-listing -O index.html http://127.0.0.1/test/
The relevant parts of the files above (first one is ftp listing, second
part is the html file, both copied to test_regex.txt) are:
2011 Jan 28 21:25 File ftp://127.0.0.1/bar-4.5.6.i686.dbg.tgz";>bar-4.5.6.i686.dbg.tgz
(5551274 bytes)
2011 Jan 28 21:25 File ftp://127.0.0.1/bar-4.5.6.i686.tgz";>bar-4.5.6.i686.tgz
(5551274 bytes)
2011 Jan 28 21:25 File ftp://127.0.0.1/bar-4.5.6.x86_64.dbg.tgz";>bar-4.5.6.x86_64.dbg.tgz
(5551274 bytes)
2011 Jan 28 21:25 File ftp://127.0.0.1/bar-4.5.6.x86_64.tgz";>bar-4.5.6.x86_64.tgz
(5551274 bytes)
foo-bar-1.2.3+1.2.3.tar.gz
This is what I now have (improvements most welcome):
$ egrep -o
">([A-Za-z_-]+)([[:digit:]]{1,3}(\.[[:digit:]]{1,3})*).+(.|t)gz"
./test_regex.txt | grep -v ".dbg" | tr -d '>'
Output:
foo-bar-1.2.3+1.2.3.tar.gz
baz-4.5.6.i686.tgz
baz-4.5.6.x86_64.tgz
So far so good but now I also want to get the version numbers which I
can't figure out. Anyone have a pointer how to get the version number
from these filenames (1.2.3+1.2.3 and 4.5.6)?
Thanks!
Patrick
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] OT: grep regex pointer appreciated
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Patrick Lists
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My grep regex foo is not very good and googling is getting me nowhere so
> hopefully someone is kind enough to give me some pointers.
>
> Goal: grep (non .dbg) filenames and versions from a ftp dir listing and
> a raw html file:
>
> $ wget --no-remove-listing -O ftp-index.txt ftp://127.0.0.1/test/
> $ wget --no-remove-listing -O index.html http://127.0.0.1/test/
>
> The relevant parts of the files above (first one is ftp listing, second
> part is the html file, both copied to test_regex.txt) are:
>
> 2011 Jan 28 21:25 File href="ftp://127.0.0.1/bar-4.5.6.i686.dbg.tgz";>bar-4.5.6.i686.dbg.tgz
> (5551274 bytes)
> 2011 Jan 28 21:25 File href="ftp://127.0.0.1/bar-4.5.6.i686.tgz";>bar-4.5.6.i686.tgz
> (5551274 bytes)
> 2011 Jan 28 21:25 File href="ftp://127.0.0.1/bar-4.5.6.x86_64.dbg.tgz";>bar-4.5.6.x86_64.dbg.tgz
> (5551274 bytes)
> 2011 Jan 28 21:25 File href="ftp://127.0.0.1/bar-4.5.6.x86_64.tgz";>bar-4.5.6.x86_64.tgz
> (5551274 bytes)
>
> href="foo-bar-1.2.3+1.2.3.tar.gz">foo-bar-1.2.3+1.2.3.tar.gz
>
> This is what I now have (improvements most welcome):
>
> $ egrep -o
> ">([A-Za-z_-]+)([[:digit:]]{1,3}(\.[[:digit:]]{1,3})*).+(.|t)gz"
> ./test_regex.txt | grep -v ".dbg" | tr -d '>'
>
> Output:
>
> foo-bar-1.2.3+1.2.3.tar.gz
> baz-4.5.6.i686.tgz
> baz-4.5.6.x86_64.tgz
>
> So far so good but now I also want to get the version numbers which I
> can't figure out. Anyone have a pointer how to get the version number
> from these filenames (1.2.3+1.2.3 and 4.5.6)?
Separate the ".i686.tgz" with something like a '-' or "_", not a dot.
and be consistent about using .tar.gz instead of mixing .tar.gz and
.tgz, if possible.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] kernel NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 10:14 PM, wrote: > sync wrote: > > > > Sometimes my server network connection on Linux goes down with short > > message in syslog saying: "[localhost kernel] NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: > > transmit timed out" (or similar). > > > > By the way , I installed the CentOS 5.4 x86_64 bit and the kernel version > > was 2.6.18-164. > > > > Has anyone experienced this problem or is it the bug of the kernel ? > > > > I restart the network and that problem have resolved just now. > > How are you connecting to the 'Net? Is this a commercial line, or only, > say, DSL? > > What is the DSL? > mark, just fought the good fight with Verizon over the latter > > ___ > 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
