Re: [CentOS] Thunderbird randomly segfaults at startup
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Mark LaPierre wrote: > On 01/10/15 20:39, Robert Nichols wrote: >> Anyone else seeing this? This is happening on a straight "Desktop" install >> of CentOS 6.6 fully updated. I have made no changes other than >> installing Thunderbird. Thunderbird will occasionally (10 to 20% of the >> time) fail to >> start, and the abrt report indicates a signal 11 (SIGSEGV). I don't see >> any other reports of this. Is no one using Thunderbird these days? > I have the same problem with Thunderbird and Firefox after the update > from C6.5 to C6.6. I've wined and complained about it on this list in > the past but have not seen any useful response. > Mark LaPierre Are you referring to this thread by any chance? http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2014-December/148445.html The upstream bugzilla referenced in there is now private but I provided the known workaround. Have you tried it? It worked for me and others. Akemi ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Thunderbird randomly segfaults at startup
I haven't seen this, but I'm curious if it has something to do with your configuration. What I would suggest trying is working from a clean config. mv ~/.thunderbird ~/.thunderbird.backup Try it like that. If it starts correctly, then it is your config and you'll probably have to recreate your config to make it work. If it doesn't, then rename .thunderbird.config back to .thunderbird. No harm done. You can also install the latest version of thunderbird from Mozilla.org and install it in /opt or /usr/local or where ever you are comfortable. - Jason On 2015-01-10 23:31, Robert Nichols wrote: On 01/10/2015 07:39 PM, Robert Nichols wrote: Anyone else seeing this? This is happening on a straight "Desktop" install of CentOS 6.6 fully updated. I have made no changes other than installing Thunderbird. Thunderbird will occasionally (10 to 20% of the time) fail to start, and the abrt report indicates a signal 11 (SIGSEGV). I don't see any other reports of this. Is no one using Thunderbird these days? Do abrt reports submitted from CentOS go anywhere useful these days? I saw some discussion a while back, but don't recall the results. Should I submit one? Another data point: If I install CentOS 6.6 from the distribution ISO and do _not_ do an update, Thunderbird seems to start reliably -- 100 starts and no failures. As soon as I install the current set of updates, it starts failing. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Help with IPv6 /48 block
On 1/10/2015 9:19 PM, F. Mendez wrote: Yup. It is actually just a way to figure out how to handle this with easy. But this will be use for a wide spread implementation. how to handle what? you've never explained what you're trying to do, except in the most vague terms. -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Help with IPv6 /48 block
El 10/01/2015 a las 11:41 p.m., John R Pierce escribió: On 1/10/2015 8:10 PM, F. Mendez wrote: El 10/01/2015 a las 04:03 p.m., John R Pierce escribió: On 1/10/2015 12:56 PM, F. Mendez wrote: We need that same with IPv6 since we have a /48 and we need to have all IPv6s available for usage. Do you realize that a ipv6 /48 is a septillion IP addresses? thats 1,208,925,819,614,629,200,000,000 individual IPs ? Or, its 65536 /64 subnets of 18,446,744,073,709,552,000 hosts each. Hello. Yes I confirm...its a /48 (this guys are crazy here at my work...). so what is it you want to do with these 1.2 septillion IP addresses? you certainly can't assign them all to one system, there's not that many file handles, nor can one system have anywheres remotely close to that many vhosts. Yup. It is actually just a way to figure out how to handle this with easy. But this will be use for a wide spread implementation. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Help with IPv6 /48 block
El 11/01/2015 a las 12:10 a.m., John R Pierce escribió: On 1/10/2015 8:38 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: On 01/10/2015 08:10 PM, F. Mendez wrote: Hello. Yes I confirm...its a /48 (this guys are crazy here at my work...). It's not crazy, that's the standard deployment for a building. It's almost certainly not possible to use all of the addresses in such a space, but that's the point. IPv6 is intended to eliminate address scarcity. yes, but whats crazy is the OP's original request, he apparently thinks he wants a lan alias on every single IP It happens that at the company I'm working decided to start migration of IPs tech. So they got a /48 block. I were trying to add it with: ifcfg-eth0-range1 (0 is already in use with IPv4 range): IPV6ADDR_START= IPV6ADDR_END= CLONENUM_START=0 But of course I am assuming that like in IPv4 IPADDR_START/END is implemented. Please give some guidance as I need this to done already and the hole /48 must be available and virtualized. Well I was trying to figure out a simple way to have it done. As it works on IPv4 I thought to give it a try :) Hopefully you guys that have more expertice on this may share a better solution. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Help with IPv6 /48 block
On 1/10/2015 8:38 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: On 01/10/2015 08:10 PM, F. Mendez wrote: Hello. Yes I confirm...its a /48 (this guys are crazy here at my work...). It's not crazy, that's the standard deployment for a building. It's almost certainly not possible to use all of the addresses in such a space, but that's the point. IPv6 is intended to eliminate address scarcity. yes, but whats crazy is the OP's original request, he apparently thinks he wants a lan alias on every single IP It happens that at the company I'm working decided to start migration of IPs tech. So they got a /48 block. I were trying to add it with: ifcfg-eth0-range1 (0 is already in use with IPv4 range): IPV6ADDR_START= IPV6ADDR_END= CLONENUM_START=0 But of course I am assuming that like in IPv4 IPADDR_START/END is implemented. Please give some guidance as I need this to done already and the hole /48 must be available and virtualized. -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Help with IPv6 /48 block
On 1/10/2015 8:10 PM, F. Mendez wrote: El 10/01/2015 a las 04:03 p.m., John R Pierce escribió: On 1/10/2015 12:56 PM, F. Mendez wrote: We need that same with IPv6 since we have a /48 and we need to have all IPv6s available for usage. Do you realize that a ipv6 /48 is a septillion IP addresses? thats 1,208,925,819,614,629,200,000,000 individual IPs ? Or, its 65536 /64 subnets of 18,446,744,073,709,552,000 hosts each. Hello. Yes I confirm...its a /48 (this guys are crazy here at my work...). so what is it you want to do with these 1.2 septillion IP addresses? you certainly can't assign them all to one system, there's not that many file handles, nor can one system have anywheres remotely close to that many vhosts. -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Help with IPv6 /48 block
On 01/10/2015 08:10 PM, F. Mendez wrote: Hello. Yes I confirm...its a /48 (this guys are crazy here at my work...). It's not crazy, that's the standard deployment for a building. It's almost certainly not possible to use all of the addresses in such a space, but that's the point. IPv6 is intended to eliminate address scarcity. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Thunderbird randomly segfaults at startup
On 01/10/2015 07:39 PM, Robert Nichols wrote: Anyone else seeing this? This is happening on a straight "Desktop" install of CentOS 6.6 fully updated. I have made no changes other than installing Thunderbird. Thunderbird will occasionally (10 to 20% of the time) fail to start, and the abrt report indicates a signal 11 (SIGSEGV). I don't see any other reports of this. Is no one using Thunderbird these days? Do abrt reports submitted from CentOS go anywhere useful these days? I saw some discussion a while back, but don't recall the results. Should I submit one? Another data point: If I install CentOS 6.6 from the distribution ISO and do _not_ do an update, Thunderbird seems to start reliably -- 100 starts and no failures. As soon as I install the current set of updates, it starts failing. -- Bob Nichols "NOSPAM" is really part of my email address. Do NOT delete it. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Help with IPv6 /48 block
El 10/01/2015 a las 04:03 p.m., John R Pierce escribió: On 1/10/2015 12:56 PM, F. Mendez wrote: We need that same with IPv6 since we have a /48 and we need to have all IPv6s available for usage. Do you realize that a ipv6 /48 is a septillion IP addresses? thats 1,208,925,819,614,629,200,000,000 individual IPs ? Or, its 65536 /64 subnets of 18,446,744,073,709,552,000 hosts each. Hello. Yes I confirm...its a /48 (this guys are crazy here at my work...). ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Design changes are done in Fedora
For those who don't know, as of version 21, Fedora has split into 3 streams: workstation, server, and cloud. This addresses many of the concerns raised in this thread. See https://getfedora.org/ for details. I gather we'll see the impact of this change with CentOS-8. Kal ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Design changes are done in Fedora
I am a newcomer to CentOS and I appreciate the discussion. It would seem to me - and I am sure I am not the first one to state the obvious - Fedora is primarily a desktop OS while CentOS is primarily a server OS. The user needs are very different, the features needed are very, very different, hence many of the current features, or future features, should remain in one or the other and not cross over. It seems CentOS is at risk of losing features highly appreciated by its core group of users, obviously a very different type of user that depends on and appreciates Fedora. Yes, I know CentOS is derived from RedHat and simply follows upstream development. On January 10, 2015 9:42:49 PM EST, "James B. Byrne" wrote: > >On Fri, January 9, 2015 17:36, John R Pierce wrote: >> On 1/9/2015 2:32 PM, Always Learning wrote: >>> Enterprise, in the RHEL context, suggests stability or have I >>> misunderstood the USA definition of "Enterprise" ? >> >> >> Enterprise to me implies large business > >Enterprise literally means 'undertaking'. It has been used >euphemistically since the later 1980s as a code word for associations >having a legally recognised form that operate for some sensibly >describable outcome. So one has large, medium and small enterprises, >not-for-profit enterprises, commercial enterprises, social enterprises >and so forth. > >> Businesses that don't adapt to external changes become fossils >> and die off. > >The greatest threat to the survival of any organism or organisation is >a change to its environment. It is because of this that widespread >adoption of so much innovation is delayed using societal pressure. >This is not done entirely out of narrow self-interest but from a >sensible appreciation of the limits to the speed at which people can >adapt to change. > >As is noted elsewhere, change is inevitable. But there are many kinds >of change. For instance, there is the change wrought by sudden and >dramatic increases in productivity. How many here are cognisant of >the fact that the O2 steel making process introduced in the 1950s >lowered the labour content of a Tonne of steel by three orders of >magnitude? Without that single change much of what we invisibly >accept as part of the urban landscape today would not exist. Without >that change it is likely that Bethlehem and Republic would still be in >business. Without that change hundreds of thousands would still be >employed in the steel mills of North America. > >Then there is fashion. > >An enterprise has its hands full with just dealing with the former >type of change. It can ill afford to waste resources on the later. > >With respect to RHEL7 the question is: Which are we dealing with, >substance or fashion? Or rather, which type predominates? > >I have no argument against claiming the switch to xfs is substance, >not fashion. But then again that change over, however beneficial, is >nearly invisible to most of us; subsumed as it is in the overarching >effort of setting up a new system from scratch. Once a host is set up >its file-system certainly has little further discernible day-to-impact >upon anyone, much less end-users. > >But Gnome3? Systemd? These seem highly intrusive changes that >directly affect, often negatively, the daily tasks of many people. >Are these substance or fashion? Do the changes they make >fundamentally improve RHEL or just do the same things a little >differently? How much is it worth to an Enterprise to have a similar >desktop metaphor on the workstation as on a tablet? How many desktop >workstations will be replaced by the smart-phone, the tablet? I do not >have an answer but I suspect, not much and not many. > >What does systemd buy the enterprise that sysinit did not provide? >Leaving aside upstart as a sterile diversion. > >I am not certain of anything here either. I have learned that my >initial resistance to change, any change, is just as emotionally >charged as that of the next person. So, I tend to wait and see. But, >I do ask questions. If only to discover if I am alone in my concerns. > I am but one person and I need the views of others, agreeable or >disagreeable to my prejudices as the case may be, so as to form an >informed opinion. > >I am admittedly somewhat concerned about the overall direction of the >RHEL product. I fundamentally disagree with their Frozen Chosen >approach to key software components. And with the lock-step forced >upgrades that are the result. I am not at all certain that >back-porting security fixes to obsolescent software is a profitable >activity when often for much the same effort, if not less, the most >recent software could be made to run on the older release without >adverse effects elsewhere. > >However, I offer no answers and promote no particular course of >action, saving only reflection of what is happening now and the price >that is paid for it. I am simply seeking the alternative views of >others on these issues. > >-- >*** E
Re: [CentOS] Thunderbird randomly segfaults at startup
On 01/10/15 20:39, Robert Nichols wrote:
> Anyone else seeing this? This is happening on a straight "Desktop" install
> of CentOS 6.6 fully updated. I have made no changes other than
> installing Thunderbird. Thunderbird will occasionally (10 to 20% of the
> time) fail to
> start, and the abrt report indicates a signal 11 (SIGSEGV). I don't see
> any other reports of this. Is no one using Thunderbird these days?
>
> Do abrt reports submitted from CentOS go anywhere useful these days? I
> saw some discussion a while back, but don't recall the results. Should
> I submit one?
>
I have the same problem with Thunderbird and Firefox after the update
from C6.5 to C6.6. I've wined and complained about it on this list in
the past but have not seen any useful response. Other users on this
same system have the same issue so it's not my personal profile that's
causing the issue.
The C6.6 update also broke web camera functionality. I understand
there's a kernel patch that fixed the web camera issue but it has yet to
ship in any production C6 32 bit or 64 bit kernels.
To work around the Thunderbird/Firefox issue I start them in a terminal:
[mlapier@mushroom ~]$ thunderbird &
[mlapier@mushroom ~]$ firefox &
If they fail to start after a reasonable time I use the up cursor key
and replay the command until it does work.
[mlapier@mushroom ~]$ thunderbird &
[1] 22072
[mlapier@mushroom ~]$ [calBackendLoader] Using libical backend at
/home/mlapier/.thunderbird/1qzdaguv.default/extensions/{e2fda1a4-762b-4020-b5ad-a41df1933103}/components/libical.manifest
enigmail.js: Registered components
mimeVerify.jsm: module initialized
[mlapier@mushroom ~]$ firefox &
[2] 22125
[mlapier@mushroom ~]$ firefox &
[3] 22158
[2] Segmentation fault (core dumped) firefox
[mlapier@mushroom ~]$ firefox &
[4] 22244
[3] Segmentation fault (core dumped) firefox
[mlapier@mushroom ~]$ firefox &
[5] 22340
[4] Segmentation fault (core dumped) firefox
[mlapier@mushroom ~]$ firefox &
[6] 22426
[5] Segmentation fault (core dumped) firefox
[mlapier@mushroom ~]$
CentOS release 6.6 (Final)
Linux mushroom.patch 2.6.32-504.3.3.el6.i686 #1 SMP Tue Dec 16 22:55:44
UTC 2014 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
21:54:52 up 1 day, 13:27, 3 users, load average: 2.02, 2.07, 2.14
--
_
°v°
/(_)\
^ ^ Mark LaPierre
Registered Linux user No #267004
https://linuxcounter.net/
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Help with IPv6 /48 block
On 01/10/2015 12:56 PM, F. Mendez wrote: Currently we have a /26 range of IPv4. So we have eth0:1...eth0:59 Interface aliases are deprecated, IIRC. An interface can have multiple addresses in V4 or V6 managed with the "ip" tool rather than "ifconfig." We need that same with IPv6 since we have a /48 and we need to have all IPv6s available for usage. If you need additional IPs for HTTPS virtual hosts or something like that, it looks like you can use IPV6ADDR_SECONDARIES in the ifcfg file. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Design changes are done in Fedora
On Fri, January 9, 2015 17:36, John R Pierce wrote: > On 1/9/2015 2:32 PM, Always Learning wrote: >> Enterprise, in the RHEL context, suggests stability or have I >> misunderstood the USA definition of "Enterprise" ? > > > Enterprise to me implies large business Enterprise literally means 'undertaking'. It has been used euphemistically since the later 1980s as a code word for associations having a legally recognised form that operate for some sensibly describable outcome. So one has large, medium and small enterprises, not-for-profit enterprises, commercial enterprises, social enterprises and so forth. > Businesses that don't adapt to external changes become fossils > and die off. The greatest threat to the survival of any organism or organisation is a change to its environment. It is because of this that widespread adoption of so much innovation is delayed using societal pressure. This is not done entirely out of narrow self-interest but from a sensible appreciation of the limits to the speed at which people can adapt to change. As is noted elsewhere, change is inevitable. But there are many kinds of change. For instance, there is the change wrought by sudden and dramatic increases in productivity. How many here are cognisant of the fact that the O2 steel making process introduced in the 1950s lowered the labour content of a Tonne of steel by three orders of magnitude? Without that single change much of what we invisibly accept as part of the urban landscape today would not exist. Without that change it is likely that Bethlehem and Republic would still be in business. Without that change hundreds of thousands would still be employed in the steel mills of North America. Then there is fashion. An enterprise has its hands full with just dealing with the former type of change. It can ill afford to waste resources on the later. With respect to RHEL7 the question is: Which are we dealing with, substance or fashion? Or rather, which type predominates? I have no argument against claiming the switch to xfs is substance, not fashion. But then again that change over, however beneficial, is nearly invisible to most of us; subsumed as it is in the overarching effort of setting up a new system from scratch. Once a host is set up its file-system certainly has little further discernible day-to-impact upon anyone, much less end-users. But Gnome3? Systemd? These seem highly intrusive changes that directly affect, often negatively, the daily tasks of many people. Are these substance or fashion? Do the changes they make fundamentally improve RHEL or just do the same things a little differently? How much is it worth to an Enterprise to have a similar desktop metaphor on the workstation as on a tablet? How many desktop workstations will be replaced by the smart-phone, the tablet? I do not have an answer but I suspect, not much and not many. What does systemd buy the enterprise that sysinit did not provide? Leaving aside upstart as a sterile diversion. I am not certain of anything here either. I have learned that my initial resistance to change, any change, is just as emotionally charged as that of the next person. So, I tend to wait and see. But, I do ask questions. If only to discover if I am alone in my concerns. I am but one person and I need the views of others, agreeable or disagreeable to my prejudices as the case may be, so as to form an informed opinion. I am admittedly somewhat concerned about the overall direction of the RHEL product. I fundamentally disagree with their Frozen Chosen approach to key software components. And with the lock-step forced upgrades that are the result. I am not at all certain that back-porting security fixes to obsolescent software is a profitable activity when often for much the same effort, if not less, the most recent software could be made to run on the older release without adverse effects elsewhere. However, I offer no answers and promote no particular course of action, saving only reflection of what is happening now and the price that is paid for it. I am simply seeking the alternative views of others on these issues. -- *** 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] Thunderbird randomly segfaults at startup
Anyone else seeing this? This is happening on a straight "Desktop" install of CentOS 6.6 fully updated. I have made no changes other than installing Thunderbird. Thunderbird will occasionally (10 to 20% of the time) fail to start, and the abrt report indicates a signal 11 (SIGSEGV). I don't see any other reports of this. Is no one using Thunderbird these days? Do abrt reports submitted from CentOS go anywhere useful these days? I saw some discussion a while back, but don't recall the results. Should I submit one? -- Bob Nichols "NOSPAM" is really part of my email address. Do NOT delete it. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] C-6, Gnome question
On 2015-01-10, Fred Smith wrote: > On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 01:12:27PM +, Liam O'Toole wrote: >> On 2015-01-10, Leon Fauster >> wrote: >> > Am 10.01.2015 um 01:56 schrieb Fred Smith >> > : >> >> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 12:12:14AM +, Liam O'Toole wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Have you tried different window manager themes? Some of them have >> >>> larger grab areas. >> >> >> >> Which makes me wonder how one modifies a theme... there must be a >> >> special toolkit for it somewhere... ?? >> > >> > >> > System -> Preferences -> Appearance >> > >> >> I think Fred is talking about modifying a theme in the sense of >> customising it. >> >> To Fred: I'm not aware of a toolkit for the purpose. People just hack >> the gtkrc or xml files which comprise a theme. There are lots of >> examples under /usr/share/themes/. > > ah, thanks! > > I found the way, as described above, to choose a different border > style, which solves my immediate problem, But I'll go take a look at > your suggestion, too. > > thanks! > > I forgot to mention the "begin resize" keyboard shortcut, which is Alt-F8 by default. If you press that key combination, and then move the mouse towards a window edge or corner, the window will be resized in the corresponding direction. No need to find the narrow window border with your mouse. -- Liam ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Help with IPv6 /48 block
I'm not sure how you plan to manage your /48, but this is how I've seen it done in the past: 1) You are given a single IPv6 address (a /128) for your Internet-facing router. You are expected to add this address to your untrusted interface. You are also given the address of a router at your ISP which is your IPv6 default route. 2) You are also given a block of addresses. In my case this case a /64, although it should work for any size prefix. You are expected to hand these addresses out on your trusted interface via either DHCPv6 or SLAAC (depending on your preference). Assign one of the addresses in the block to your router's LAN interface and supply this as the default route for your LAN hosts. Good luck. On Jan 10, 2015 10:10 AM, "F. Mendez" wrote: > Hello. > > It happens that at the company I'm working decided to start migration of > IPs tech. > > So they got a /48 block. I were trying to add it with: > > ifcfg-eth0-range1 (0 is already in use with IPv4 range): > > IPV6ADDR_START= > IPV6ADDR_END= > CLONENUM_START=0 > > But of course I am assuming that like in IPv4 IPADDR_START/END is > implemented. > > Please give some guidance as I need this to done already and the hole /48 > must be available and virtualized. > > > Thanks. > ___ > 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] Help with IPv6 /48 block
On 1/10/2015 12:56 PM, F. Mendez wrote: We need that same with IPv6 since we have a /48 and we need to have all IPv6s available for usage. Do you realize that a ipv6 /48 is a septillion IP addresses? thats 1,208,925,819,614,629,200,000,000 individual IPs ? Or, its 65536 /64 subnets of 18,446,744,073,709,552,000 hosts each. -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] LVM - pvmove and multiple servers
On 01/10/2015 05:13 AM, Daniel Hoffman wrote: 4. Use pvmove to move all the data from one PV to another. http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/html_single/LVM-HOWTO/#sharinglvm1 "The key thing to remember when sharing volumes is that all the LVM administration must be done on one node only and that all other nodes must have LVM shut down before changing anything on the admin node." ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Help with IPv6 /48 block
El 10/01/2015 a las 03:40 p.m., Gordon Messmer escribió: On 01/10/2015 10:10 AM, F. Mendez wrote: But of course I am assuming that like in IPv4 IPADDR_START/END is implemented. I don't think so. The START and END bits of ifup-aliases appear to be v4 specific. Please give some guidance as I need this to done already and the hole /48 must be available and virtualized. Well, the whole network will be available as long as you have an active address on a node that's capable of acting as a router. I'm not sure what you mean by virtualized, though. https://access.redhat.com/solutions/347693 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Hello. Thanks for your reply. Currently we have a /26 range of IPv4. So we have eth0:1...eth0:59 We need that same with IPv6 since we have a /48 and we need to have all IPv6s available for usage. I tried to use same ifcfg-eth0-range0 same config by adding: IPV6ADDR_START= which seems not to work for this. None IPADDR_START too. We need a simple way to have our virtual eth's with IPv6 all the range available. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Help with IPv6 /48 block
On 01/10/2015 10:10 AM, F. Mendez wrote: But of course I am assuming that like in IPv4 IPADDR_START/END is implemented. I don't think so. The START and END bits of ifup-aliases appear to be v4 specific. Please give some guidance as I need this to done already and the hole /48 must be available and virtualized. Well, the whole network will be available as long as you have an active address on a node that's capable of acting as a router. I'm not sure what you mean by virtualized, though. https://access.redhat.com/solutions/347693 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] LVM - pvmove and multiple servers
On 1/10/2015 5:13 AM, Daniel Hoffman wrote: Looking for some guidance/experience with LVM and pvmove. I have a LUN/PV being presented from a iscsi SAN. The LUN/PV is presented to 5 servers as a shared VG they all have LV's they use for data, they are all connected via iSCSI. As the SAN I am using is being replaced I need to move onto a new unit. My migration strategy at this time is to 1. Present a new LUN from the new SAN to all machines. 2. Make a PV with the new LUN. 3. Add it to the existing VG. 4. Use pvmove to move all the data from one PV to another. 5. Once the old LUN is empty, complete a pvresize to remove the old LUN. This all seems sound but looking for advice, specifically around the fact that the VG/PV data is being used by a number of machines/servers and the LV's are active on a number of different nodes. All the documentation/examples I can find assume a disk in a server, not a LUN on a SAN being shared by a number of servers. only way I'd do that would be to shutdown the other 4 servers, redo the LVM, then bring the other 4 servers back up so they can discover the new LV/PV structures. -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] LVM - pvmove and multiple servers
On Sun, 2015-01-11 at 00:13 +1100, Daniel Hoffman wrote: > Hi All. > > Looking for some guidance/experience with LVM and pvmove. > > I have a LUN/PV being presented from a iscsi SAN. The LUN/PV is presented > to 5 servers as a shared VG they all have LV's they use for data, they are > all connected via iSCSI. > > As the SAN I am using is being replaced I need to move onto a new unit. > > My migration strategy at this time is to > > 1. Present a new LUN from the new SAN to all machines. > 2. Make a PV with the new LUN. > 3. Add it to the existing VG. > 4. Use pvmove to move all the data from one PV to another. > 5. Once the old LUN is empty, complete a pvresize to remove the old LUN. > > This all seems sound but looking for advice, specifically around the fact > that the VG/PV data is being used by a number of machines/servers and the > LV's are active on a number of different nodes. > > All the documentation/examples I can find assume a disk in a server, not a > LUN on a SAN being shared by a number of servers. > > Any advice is appreciated. Cannot help with the SAN question other than to say that you are just adding another PV block device to a VG and LVM shouldn't care. My comment is on step 5. You want to "vgreduce -a " to remove empty PVs (assuming only the old one is empty) followed by "pvremove " to remove the old PV. As always, be wary of any "Are you sure?" or "You need to --force" LVM output. Steve ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Help with IPv6 /48 block
Hello. It happens that at the company I'm working decided to start migration of IPs tech. So they got a /48 block. I were trying to add it with: ifcfg-eth0-range1 (0 is already in use with IPv4 range): IPV6ADDR_START= IPV6ADDR_END= CLONENUM_START=0 But of course I am assuming that like in IPv4 IPADDR_START/END is implemented. Please give some guidance as I need this to done already and the hole /48 must be available and virtualized. Thanks. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] C-6, Gnome question
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 01:12:27PM +, Liam O'Toole wrote: > On 2015-01-10, Leon Fauster > wrote: > > Am 10.01.2015 um 01:56 schrieb Fred Smith > > : > >> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 12:12:14AM +, Liam O'Toole wrote: > >>> > >>> Have you tried different window manager themes? Some of them have > >>> larger grab areas. > >> > >> Which makes me wonder how one modifies a theme... there must be a > >> special toolkit for it somewhere... ?? > > > > > > System -> Preferences -> Appearance > > > > I think Fred is talking about modifying a theme in the sense of > customising it. > > To Fred: I'm not aware of a toolkit for the purpose. People just hack > the gtkrc or xml files which comprise a theme. There are lots of > examples under /usr/share/themes/. ah, thanks! I found the way, as described above, to choose a different border style, which solves my immediate problem, But I'll go take a look at your suggestion, too. thanks! -- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us Do you not know? Have you not heard? The LORD is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth. He will not grow tired or weary, and his understanding no one can fathom. - Isaiah 40:28 (niv) - ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] LVM - pvmove and multiple servers
Hi All. Looking for some guidance/experience with LVM and pvmove. I have a LUN/PV being presented from a iscsi SAN. The LUN/PV is presented to 5 servers as a shared VG they all have LV's they use for data, they are all connected via iSCSI. As the SAN I am using is being replaced I need to move onto a new unit. My migration strategy at this time is to 1. Present a new LUN from the new SAN to all machines. 2. Make a PV with the new LUN. 3. Add it to the existing VG. 4. Use pvmove to move all the data from one PV to another. 5. Once the old LUN is empty, complete a pvresize to remove the old LUN. This all seems sound but looking for advice, specifically around the fact that the VG/PV data is being used by a number of machines/servers and the LV's are active on a number of different nodes. All the documentation/examples I can find assume a disk in a server, not a LUN on a SAN being shared by a number of servers. Any advice is appreciated. Thanks Daniel ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] C-6, Gnome question
On 2015-01-10, Leon Fauster wrote: > Am 10.01.2015 um 01:56 schrieb Fred Smith > : >> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 12:12:14AM +, Liam O'Toole wrote: >>> >>> Have you tried different window manager themes? Some of them have >>> larger grab areas. >> >> Which makes me wonder how one modifies a theme... there must be a >> special toolkit for it somewhere... ?? > > > System -> Preferences -> Appearance > I think Fred is talking about modifying a theme in the sense of customising it. To Fred: I'm not aware of a toolkit for the purpose. People just hack the gtkrc or xml files which comprise a theme. There are lots of examples under /usr/share/themes/. -- Liam ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] C-6, Gnome question
Am 10.01.2015 um 01:56 schrieb Fred Smith : > On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 12:12:14AM +, Liam O'Toole wrote: >> >> Have you tried different window manager themes? Some of them have larger >> grab areas. > > Which makes me wonder how one modifies a theme... there must be a > special toolkit for it somewhere... ?? System -> Preferences -> Appearance -- LF ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
