Re: [CentOS] updating tzdata on CentOS 7
On 03/31/2015 08:23 AM, Dulmandakh wrote: Hello, I believe all 7 updates are on hold til 7.1 releases, 'any day now’. We’re having a bit of mess in here :D it may be in the CR repo ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] OpenSSL vulnerability fix
Well, read article from: https://access.redhat.com/articles/1384453 Anyway, If You are really running centos 5.5 then you are missing more important security patches and you should immediately update to latest version 5.11 -- Eero 2015-03-31 9:57 GMT+03:00 Venkateswara Rao Dokku : > just for my curiosity, How can we make sure that its not affected? > > Is there any script to check whether its vulnerable or not (as in bash > shell shock vulnerability test)? > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Eero Volotinen > wrote: > > > Centos 5 is not affected by this bug, so fix is not available. > > > > Eero > > 31.3.2015 9.48 ap. kirjoitti "Venkateswara Rao Dokku" < > dvrao@gmail.com > > >: > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > I wanted to fix the openssl vulnerabilities (CVE-2014-3569, > > CVE-2014-3570, > > > CVE-2014-3571, CVE-2014-3572) in my CentOS 5.5 and found out that > 0.9.8zd > > > has the fixes I am looking for (from the > > > https://www.openssl.org/news/vulnerabilities.html link). > > > > > > But, When I tried to find the openssl-0.9.8zd rpm package, I did not > find > > > it in http://mirror.centos.org/centos/5/updates/x86_64/RPMS/. > > > > > > The latest that I could find was 0.9.8e-31-el5. > > > > > > Can you please help me on how can I find the rpm I am looking for or > How > > > can I fix the vulnerabilities.? > > > > > > Thanks for your help. > > > > > > -- > > > Thanks & Regards, > > > Venkateswara Rao Dokku. > > > ___ > > > 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 > > > > > > -- > Thanks & Regards, > Venkateswara Rao Dokku. > ___ > 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] race conditions in dbus-1.2
Hi everyone, I'm having some issue with a Qt application using D-Bus (Qt API) in a threaded appllication on CentOS 6. Searching for the cause has led me to the following issues in the dbus library: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=857 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17754 It appears that there are threading issues with the dbus library version < 1.6. However there doesn't seem to be other version than 1.2 available for CentOS 6. Can someone advise what approach can be used to either work around or solve the issue? For instance, is it even possible to upgrade to a newer dbus version without side effects? Kind regards, Danny Smit ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Hdd maximum size
Server is a Lenovo RV-340 E2420 build 70AB001VUX 8go Support for Sata-3 6gbps and Raid-5 Did someone can tell if it can handle 6tb hard drives? -- Michel Donais ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 121, Issue 13
Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to
centos-annou...@centos.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
centos-announce-requ...@centos.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
centos-announce-ow...@centos.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. CEBA-2015:0754 CentOS 6 cronie FASTTRACK BugFix Update
(Johnny Hughes)
2. CEBA-2015:0755 CentOS 6 pinentry FASTTRACK BugFix Update
(Johnny Hughes)
3. CESA-2015:0750 Moderate CentOS 6 postgresql Security Update
(Johnny Hughes)
4. CEBA-2015:0756 CentOS 6 gnome-terminal BugFix Update
(Johnny Hughes)
--
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 13:24:20 +
From: Johnny Hughes
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2015:0754 CentOS 6 cronie FASTTRACK
BugFix Update
Message-ID: <20150330132420.ga60...@n04.lon1.karan.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2015:0754
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2015-0754.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
28de493fc3a314d52bb60c96688fd807c986e4a3885be4eb339c696229dd6b7c
cronie-1.4.4-15.el6.i686.rpm
ec22b667ff1f9f11ad54f9cb8eeaaf1fcbea2c4eb2a96f655bea877084b739ef
cronie-anacron-1.4.4-15.el6.i686.rpm
5223d45f4a40ae9b521844f666504d55778e166f1c5cd8e8dc92bfd3ac22a2b6
cronie-noanacron-1.4.4-15.el6.i686.rpm
x86_64:
d2238fa4100380f7607393e48345614bc90e1385f1426dc1269c40b01f07b4bb
cronie-1.4.4-15.el6.x86_64.rpm
f3ea8f9f6fe548d64699592ccbe326ed474f7b1ae17df7a35b3010b419ed26d0
cronie-anacron-1.4.4-15.el6.x86_64.rpm
606d1a6d304f77eb0e05259fcc1e56391073469f4603040e32ba5637e17a34d6
cronie-noanacron-1.4.4-15.el6.x86_64.rpm
Source:
eba4bb44466ffc8965cd6f3e58e298ad522b0e95eca38cbc2f3b4521500b80ac
cronie-1.4.4-15.el6.src.rpm
--
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
--
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 13:24:44 +
From: Johnny Hughes
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2015:0755 CentOS 6 pinentry FASTTRACK
BugFix Update
Message-ID: <20150330132444.ga60...@n04.lon1.karan.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2015:0755
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2015-0755.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
d1f4465b64e0161267195bb8fe53f9a8b5b1ee6e6159c3a6f983deae186bda0e
pinentry-0.7.6-8.el6.i686.rpm
ff437591b4f488bb9e7536e66495fe43ec35c58425b57cabc89e1d066e0365ec
pinentry-gtk-0.7.6-8.el6.i686.rpm
f72857f70505a1533aa91203b0d2e2b9de4d23b34ea170ea2202073b2ad2705e
pinentry-qt-0.7.6-8.el6.i686.rpm
2b5d65c30499cc59b4eeb23b8f166c4511d0419250efa54414fc82c32c51e4c4
pinentry-qt4-0.7.6-8.el6.i686.rpm
x86_64:
6c0de956f85b7f1f86b258462fb2546ee8f7f4f3b9e6eecd26a1ea80541964fe
pinentry-0.7.6-8.el6.x86_64.rpm
335fec896578be4933278eb11d00a5613092f8e4a94f71339cd445b727bdc05e
pinentry-gtk-0.7.6-8.el6.x86_64.rpm
fb70a14ae035381aec2b738e8eb807bc61bdbe1dbda8fa5fb45cf003a8de8eb9
pinentry-qt-0.7.6-8.el6.x86_64.rpm
e020b8d550bcdeac8b0842500592c857ad5fb4ca0b9938423162f420b39e5e02
pinentry-qt4-0.7.6-8.el6.x86_64.rpm
Source:
8ef5e67049e28dfadf0bbcafe5ef34b2cc195f3f238c273ff9b3123d2d7f11f1
pinentry-0.7.6-8.el6.src.rpm
--
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
--
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 13:25:17 +
From: Johnny Hughes
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2015:0750 Moderate CentOS 6 postgresql
Security Update
Message-ID: <20150330132516.ga61...@n04.lon1.karan.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2015:0750 Moderate
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2015-0750.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
9b1c5e6fc09b4bd771526bba9121531dd56ae1066a7e976fcb0a9e59424ecf01
postgresql-8.4.20-2.el6_6.i686.rpm
2d6f25109301286cd1b4c70d76d8b55773aed22d102dee287604db820ef51f1c
postgresql-contrib-8.4.20-2.el6_6.i686.rpm
20b37d3688e1231aadbbba02d9de9b1ef0ce14d29df11ddaba457b4e86c3c29f
postgresql-devel-8.4.20-2.el6_6.i686.rpm
30e1bd187bf84d8972c738df54008b70bf6479ecbf9a062e0150dd34144a0819
postgresql-docs-8.4.20-2.el6_6.i686.rpm
54e959b271e297dceeaa579a1f7ae7681da67e967977be5bfc3ffd6d2f11066d
pos
Re: [CentOS] Hdd maximum size
On 31.3.2015 14.43, donais wrote: Server is a Lenovo RV-340 E2420 build 70AB001VUX 8go Support for Sata-3 6gbps and Raid-5 Did someone can tell if it can handle 6tb hard drives? See this. It depends on the operating system version and filesystem (ext4, xfs etc.). http://wiki.centos.org/About/Product The page does not directly mention disk sizes, but I imagine it does not matter how big the disk is, as long as the max filesystem size is not exceeded. - Jussi ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RAID not software raid
On Mon, 30 Mar 2015 19:42:05 -0400, Stephen wrote: > > 16G/swap 500MB/boot 80G/home 50G/root > > 800G/sdb > > will not install Grub bootloader Fatal error Um, this is JBOD, and not RAID1. Raid1 would be 2x drives (sda & sdb) appearing as one single drive to the OS. Data is byte for byte mirrored between them. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Hdd maximum size
2015-03-31 15:07 GMT+03:00 Jussi Hirvi : > On 31.3.2015 14.43, donais wrote: > >> Server is a Lenovo RV-340 E2420 build 70AB001VUX 8go >> Support for Sata-3 6gbps and Raid-5 >> Did someone can tell if it can handle 6tb hard drives? >> > > See this. It depends on the operating system version and filesystem (ext4, > xfs etc.). > > http://wiki.centos.org/About/Product > > The page does not directly mention disk sizes, but I imagine it does not > matter how big the disk is, as long as the max filesystem size is not > exceeded. and some sata/raid controllers can cause some other limits. Eero ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Building a newer glibc RPM for CentOS 6 and installing into an alternate path
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 10:47:24PM -0400, Alfred von Campe wrote: > Forget I ever said I wanted to replace glibc. Assume it’s a different > library or application. Except libc is not just like any other library. Unless you're going to recompile the software, the location of the ld loader is hard-coded to your existing ld-linux.so.2, and even if you had a parallel version of glibc elsewhere, it'll try to load the wrong ld-linux and throw symbol errors. You can use LD_PRELOAD to get around this, but you can run into other dependency problems when other OS-packaged libraries are used by along with LD_PRELOAD. If this were some non-core library, sure, its possible to build and package it for an alternative directory, and either hard code rpath when compiling or use environment variables to use it (which we do quite often with environment modules (http://modules.sourceforge.net/). glibc just happens to be much more complex, which is why its easier to just use a newer version of CentOS either in a VM or a chroot. -- Jonathan Billings ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] NTLM Authentication ISA Server
After a long time I found the following solution: I use the "traditional" way by exporting an environment variable http_proxy. After editing yum.conf by adding a line "proxy=libproxy" everything works fine. Regards Tim Am 16.01.2015 um 22:52 schrieb Tim: I read sth. about cntlm, but it is not installed by default. I will give the mentioned solutions a try. Any other suggestions are welcome. Am 16. Januar 2015 13:08:51 MEZ, schrieb Kwan Lowe : On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Tim wrote: Hello list, how can I get CentOS 7 to authenticate against a Microsoft ISA server for package installations after the OS is installed. In Debian/Ubuntu apt.conf just needs to be edited and it works. How to do so in CentOS? I use a program called cntlm. I don't know if an RPM is available but the source is trivial to build. I believe it also includes a SPEC file. ___ 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 mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] heavy IO load when working with sparse files (centos 6.4)
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 9:28 PM, Dave Johansen wrote: > On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Ron E wrote: > >> Dear List, >> >> We have noticed a variety of reproducible conditions working with sparse >> files on multiple servers under load with CentOS 6.4. >> >> The short story is that processes that read / write sparse files with >> large "holes" can generate an IO storm. Oddly, this only happens with holes >> and not with the sections of the files that contain data. >> >> We have seen extremely high IO load for example copying a 40 or 80gb >> sparse file that only has a few gigs of data in it. Attempts to lower the >> io priority and cpu priority of these processes do not make any measurable >> difference. (ionice, nice) This has been observed with processes such as: >> >> cp >> rsync >> sha1sum >> >> The server does have to be under some load to reproduce the necessary >> conditions. The cases we have seen involve servers running 10-30 guests >> under kvm. Load is in acceptable norms when the processes are run, such as >> load avg 5-15 on a 24 core (12 core with HT enabled) server. We also verify >> before starting such a process that the spindle with the file we're working >> on is not being unduly hammered by another process. >> >> These servers have one hardware raid controller each (Dell H700 >> controller with write cache enabled) and multiple raid arrays (separate >> sets of physical spindles). Interestingly, the IO storm is not limited to >> the array / spindles where the sparse file resides but affects all IO on >> that server. >> >> We have looked extensively and not found any account of a similar issue. >> We have seen this on configurations that are 'plain vanilla' enough to >> think that this is not something specific to our environment. >> >> Wondering if anyone else has seen this and if any suggestions on >> gathering more data / troubleshooting. We wonder if we've found either a >> raid controller driver issue, an OS issue or some other such thing. What >> seems to point in this direction is that even with ionice -c3 which should >> prevent the process from using IO unless the storage is idle, an io storm >> which appears to saturate the entire raid bus on a given server can occur. >> > > Did you ever figure anything out from this? I've noticed a similar sort of > issue on some of our machines, so I was curious if you found the cause of > the issue or any way to improve the situation. > I made a simple reproducer of the problem I had observed and the responses on the Fedora mailing list ( https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-March/209506.html ) were very helpful. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Building a newer glibc RPM for CentOS 6 and installing into an alternate path
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Alfred von Campe wrote: > >> Tell your vendor you want a centos 6 version of the library, it's really >> not a huge ask, esp if you are paying them. If they say no, do a new >> install of centos 7 and run it on a different box. It's the only reasonable >> thing to do, and if you do anything else and make anyone else support it, >> you are a bad person. > > I’m not quite ready to move to CentOS 7 yet. I would have to upgrade about > 80 desktops, a couple of dozen VMs, and a handful of servers. That’s after > some extensive testing to make sure all our applications and cross compilers > run on CentOS 7. I realize the dependency hell a newer version of glib would > cause, but I want to at least try it. Isn't this the problem that docker was invented to solve? > Forget I ever said I wanted to replace glibc. Assume it’s a different > library or application. I guess what I really need to know is how to > rebuild a source RPM after modifying the installation path. A quick > peek at the spec file for glibc did not reveal any easy options, but > then again I don’t really speak the RPM spec file language. If you build a stock rpm - or just grab an existing binary rpm you can install the files in a different location with: cd /some/location rpm2cpio some_package.rpm | cpio -idmv --no-absolute-filenames (that's sort of routine for debugging cores from a different system) But I'd expect some close coupling between the compiler and glibc too, so you probably can't compile a new version either without installing newer tools too. What kind of application is this? Would it be practical to run it remotely via ssh or a remote X window so you would only need one or a few systems capable of running it? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Building a newer glibc RPM for CentOS 6 and installing into an alternate path
On 03/31/2015 11:12 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Alfred von Campe > wrote: >> >>> Tell your vendor you want a centos 6 version of the library, it's really >>> not a huge ask, esp if you are paying them. If they say no, do a new >>> install of centos 7 and run it on a different box. It's the only reasonable >>> thing to do, and if you do anything else and make anyone else support it, >>> you are a bad person. >> >> I’m not quite ready to move to CentOS 7 yet. I would have to upgrade about >> 80 desktops, a couple of dozen VMs, and a handful of servers. That’s after >> some extensive testing to make sure all our applications and cross compilers >> run on CentOS 7. I realize the dependency hell a newer version of glib would >> cause, but I want to at least try it. > > Isn't this the problem that docker was invented to solve? Yes, you could address this with docker quite easily, depending on the app. -- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] upstart CentOS vs upstart Ubuntu is there any difference between them?
I'm moving some server configurations from Ubuntu Server 12.04 to CentOS 6.6. Now I'm working on `/etc/init` script that should be handled by `upstart` at both OS as far as I know. The files on both server are the same and I mean the same at content level and also at path level and permissions level, is the exactly copy from Ubuntu to CentOS. I'm having some issues with upstart at CentOS since scripts doesn't start and I can't find why (the cause). This is the output from `initctl list` at Ubuntu server: # Ubuntu 12.04 root@qa:/etc/init# initctl list // rest of processes goes here pdoneVendorBroker start/running, process 854 repToolBroker start/running, process 3705 emailBroker start/running, process 3738 cmeBroker start/running, process 3760 messageBroker start/running, process 3727 shareEventHandler start/running, process 3686 edetailBroker start/running, process 3749 pdoneLoginProctor start/running, process 3716 All the processes has been started at OS boot, that's fine. This is the output from CentOS server: # CentOS 6.6 root@staging:/etc/init# initctl list // rest of processes goes here pdoneVendorBroker stop/waiting repToolBroker stop/waiting emailBroker stop/waiting cmeBroker stop/waiting messageBroker stop/waiting shareEventHandler stop/waiting edetailBroker stop/waiting pdoneLoginProctor stop/waiting None processes has been started after OS boot, and that's wrong. Why? What I'm missing here? Can any give me some advice? At CentOS I've tried also to start the process manually by running this: initctl start messageBroker And this is the output at console: messageBroker start/running, process 3587 But if I run the command `initctl list` I didn't see the process started: initctl list rc stop/waiting tty (/dev/tty3) start/running, process 2565 tty (/dev/tty2) start/running, process 2562 tty (/dev/tty1) start/running, process 2558 tty (/dev/tty6) start/running, process 2577 tty (/dev/tty5) start/running, process 2574 tty (/dev/tty4) start/running, process 2571 plymouth-shutdown stop/waiting control-alt-delete stop/waiting debug stop/waiting rcS-emergency stop/waiting kexec-disable stop/waiting pdoneVendorBroker stop/waiting quit-plymouth stop/waiting rcS stop/waiting prefdm stop/waiting repToolBroker stop/waiting init-system-dbus stop/waiting emailBroker stop/waiting splash-manager stop/waiting cmeBroker stop/waiting start-ttys stop/waiting messageBroker stop/waiting shareEventHandler stop/waiting edetailBroker stop/waiting pdoneLoginProctor stop/waiting rcS-sulogin stop/waiting serial stop/waiting This is the content for the file `/ etc/init/messageBroker.conf`: description "messageBroker" start on runlevel [234] stop on runlevel [0156] respawn exec php /usr/local/bin/messageBroker/messageBroker.php post-start script PID=`status messageBroker| egrep -oi '([0-9]+)$' | head -n1` echo $PID > /var/run/messageBroker.pid end script post-stop script rm -f /var/run/messageBroker.pid end script Why it's not starting? What is wrong? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] Release for CentOS Linux 7 (1503 ) on x86_64
As a CentOs newbie, I'm not sure, will we still have CentOS 7.1 which derive from RHEL 7.1? or this is the new naming conversion for CentOS 7. Thanks! -Ryan > On Apr 1, 2015, at 12:30 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > > We would like to announce the general availability of CentOS Linux 7 > (1503) for 64 bit x86 compatible machines. > > This is the second major release for CentOS-7 and is tagged as 1503. > This build is derived from Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.1 > > As always, read through the Release Notes at : > http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS7 - these notes > contain important information about the release and details about some > of the content inside the release from the CentOS QA team. These notes > are updated constantly to include issues and incorporate feedback from > the users. > > - -- > Updates, Sources, and DebugInfos > > This merges in all base, updates, and CR (continuous release) > components released in the month of March 2015. If you have been using > the CR repos on your previous CentOS Linux 7 install, you already have > all the components used to compose this new release. > > As with all CentOS Linux 7 components, this release was built from > sources hosted at git.centos.org. In addition, SRPMs that are a > byproduct of the build (and also considered critical in the code and > buildsys process) are being published to match every binary RPM we > release. Sources will be available from vault.centos.org in their own > dedicated directories to match the corresponding binary RPMs. Since > there is far less traffic to the CentOS source RPMs compared with the > binary RPMs, we are not putting this content on the main mirror > network. If users wish to mirror this content they can do so using the > reposync command available in the yum-utils package. All CentOS source > RPMs are signed with the same key used to sign their binary > counterparts. Developers and end users looking at inspecting and > contributing patches to the CentOS Linux distro will find the code > hosted at git.centos.org far simpler to work against. Details on how > to best consume those are documented along with a quick start at : > http://wiki.centos.org/Sources > > Debuginfo packages are also being signed and pushed. Yum configs > shipped in the new release file will have all the context required for > debuginfo to be available on every CentOS Linux install. > > This release supersedes all previously released content for CentOS > Linux 7, and therefore we highly encourage all users to upgrade their > machines. Information on different upgrade strategies and how to > handle stale content is included in the Release Notes. > > For the CentOS-7 build and release process we adopted a very open > process. The output of the entire buildsystem is made available, as it > is built, at http://buildlogs.centos.org/ - we hope to continue with > that process for the life of CentOS Linux 7, and hope to attempt > bringing CentOS-5 and CentOS-6 builds into the same system. > > - -- > Release file handling > > This release splits the /etc/centos-release from /etc/redhat-release > to better indicate the relationship between the two distributions. > There are also changes to the /etc/os-release file to incorporate > changes needed by the new abrt stack. > > - -- > Download > > In order to conserve donor bandwidth, and to make it possible to get > the mirror content sync'd out as soon as possible, we recommend using > torrents to get your initial installer images: > > Details on the images are available on the mirrors at > http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/isos/x86_64/0_README.txt - that file > clearly highlights the difference in the images, and when one might be > more suitable than the others. > > The sizes, sha256 sums and torrents for the ISO files: > > * CentOS-7-x86_64-Minimal-1503.iso > Size: 591396864 > Torrent: > http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/isos/x86_64/CentOS-7-x86_64-Minimal-15 > 03.torrent > sha256sum: > 0b8482dc7e3076749f7fd914487ec6280539d3ba1f10c5b73c94b632f987f011 > > * CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso > Size: 4236247040 > Torrent: > http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/isos/x86_64/CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.t > orrent > sha256sum: > 1817a1689b3c646a6473c93012e06307c6b659000ccffd188a3f4d0a0b531ba9 > > * CentOS-7-x86_64-Everything-1503.iso > Size: 7517241344 > Torrent: > http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/isos/x86_64/CentOS-7-x86_64-Everything > - -1503.torrent > sha256sum: > 3cef58a3a03aff3ea194e63fdc95f03548b292e6f57e4a931a8d5453a6697661 > > * CentOS-7-x86_64-LiveGNOME-1503.iso > Size: 1124073472 > Torrent: > http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/isos/x86_64/CentOS-7-x86_64-LiveGNOME- > 1503.torrent > sha256sum: > 2cfc9fab2edb0be51b75ee63528b61cad79489129d2aad1713eeed1b4117ab47 > > * CentOS-7-x86_64-LiveKDE-1503.iso > Size: 131072 > Torrent: > http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/isos/x86_64/CentOS-7-x86_
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] Release for CentOS Linux 7 (1503 ) on x86_64
On 03/31/2015 09:53 AM, Ryan Qian wrote: As a CentOs newbie, I'm not sure, will we still have CentOS 7.1 which derive from RHEL 7.1? or this is the new naming conversion for CentOS 7. Thanks! -Ryan That was going to be my question as well. According to http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2014-July/020393.html the convention (for the 7.0 release at least) says: "Numbering CentOS 7.0-1406 introduces a new numbering scheme that we want to further develop into the life of CentOS-7. The 0 component maps to the upstream realease, whose code this release is built from. The 1406 component indicates the monthstamp of the code included in the release ( in this case, June 2014 ). By using a monthstamp we are able to respin and reissue updated media for things like container and cloud images, that are regularly refreshed, while still retaining a connection to the base distro version." I would have assumed that this release would be "7.1.1503", and the URL on at least one mirror has: http://mirror.fdcservers.net/centos/7.1.1503/ Guess if that's the new convention, I'll need to keep my ISO files sorted out somehow, as this progression isn't intuitive: CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-DVD.iso CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso -Greg ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Building a newer glibc RPM for CentOS 6 and installing into an alternate path
On Mar 31, 2015, at 12:21, Jim Perrin wrote: >> Isn't this the problem that docker was invented to solve? > > > Yes, you could address this with docker quite easily, depending on the app. Perhaps, but I’m running CentOS 6.6 i686 (i.e., 32-bit), and it appears that Docker requires 64-bit. Oh well, I was getting my hopes up for a while. In the mean time, we’ve requested a CentOS 6 compatible .shared library from our vendor, and I’m keeping my fingers crossed while waiting for their reply. Alfred ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] emailing plain text to exchange/outlook
I know this isn't CentOS-specific, but it is probably a common problem - does anyone have a solution? If you mail something that is plain text from linux a recipient using outlook, it will remove line breaks more or less randomly. There is a way to tell outook to put them back as you read each message, but most people just think I sent it wrong. Is there something you can do to make a plain text list show up correctly short of converting it to html with 's? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] emailing plain text to exchange/outlook
Outlook is the devil. It wants to get mail in html to make things look right for everyone, since most people just leave the defaults on. On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > I know this isn't CentOS-specific, but it is probably a common problem > - does anyone have a solution? > > If you mail something that is plain text from linux a recipient using > outlook, it will remove line breaks more or less randomly. There is > a way to tell outook to put them back as you read each message, but > most people just think I sent it wrong. > > Is there something you can do to make a plain text list show up > correctly short of converting it to html with 's? > > -- >Les Mikesell > lesmikes...@gmail.com > ___ > 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] Building a newer glibc RPM for CentOS 6 and installing into an alternate path
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Alfred von Campe wrote: > On Mar 31, 2015, at 12:21, Jim Perrin wrote: > >>> Isn't this the problem that docker was invented to solve? >> >> >> Yes, you could address this with docker quite easily, depending on the app. > > Perhaps, but I’m running CentOS 6.6 i686 (i.e., 32-bit), and it appears that > Docker requires 64-bit. Oh well, I was getting my hopes up for a while. In > the mean time, we’ve requested a CentOS 6 compatible .shared library from our > vendor, and I’m keeping my fingers crossed while waiting for their reply. What about remote exectution? You might even give it access to local files with x2go. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] Release for CentOS Linux 7 (1503 ) on x86_64
On 03/31/2015 12:31 PM, Greg Bailey wrote: > On 03/31/2015 09:53 AM, Ryan Qian wrote: >> As a CentOs newbie, I'm not sure, will we still have CentOS 7.1 which >> derive from RHEL 7.1? >> or this is the new naming conversion for CentOS 7. >> >> Thanks! >> -Ryan > > > That was going to be my question as well. According to > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2014-July/020393.html > the convention (for the 7.0 release at least) says: > > "Numbering > > CentOS 7.0-1406 introduces a new numbering scheme that we want to > further develop into the life of CentOS-7. The 0 component maps to the > upstream realease, whose code this release is built from. The 1406 > component indicates the monthstamp of the code included in the release > ( in this case, June 2014 ). By using a monthstamp we are able to > respin and reissue updated media for things like container and cloud > images, that are regularly refreshed, while still retaining a > connection to the base distro version." > > I would have assumed that this release would be "7.1.1503", and the URL > on at least one mirror has: > > http://mirror.fdcservers.net/centos/7.1.1503/ > > Guess if that's the new convention, I'll need to keep my ISO files > sorted out somehow, as this progression isn't intuitive: > > CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-DVD.iso > CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso Please take a look at the "Archived Versions", and the Release Announcement: They both tell you that 7 (1503) is derived from Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.1 Sources. So, yes, this release, that you quoted in the Subject, is indeed exactly what you said. And yes, this is how we are now numbering CentOS releases for 7 and greater. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] Release for CentOS Linux 7 (1503 ) on x86_64
On 03/31/2015 01:28 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 03/31/2015 12:31 PM, Greg Bailey wrote: >> On 03/31/2015 09:53 AM, Ryan Qian wrote: >>> As a CentOs newbie, I'm not sure, will we still have CentOS 7.1 which >>> derive from RHEL 7.1? >>> or this is the new naming conversion for CentOS 7. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> -Ryan >> >> >> That was going to be my question as well. According to >> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2014-July/020393.html >> the convention (for the 7.0 release at least) says: >> >> "Numbering >> >> CentOS 7.0-1406 introduces a new numbering scheme that we want to >> further develop into the life of CentOS-7. The 0 component maps to the >> upstream realease, whose code this release is built from. The 1406 >> component indicates the monthstamp of the code included in the release >> ( in this case, June 2014 ). By using a monthstamp we are able to >> respin and reissue updated media for things like container and cloud >> images, that are regularly refreshed, while still retaining a >> connection to the base distro version." >> >> I would have assumed that this release would be "7.1.1503", and the URL >> on at least one mirror has: >> >> http://mirror.fdcservers.net/centos/7.1.1503/ >> >> Guess if that's the new convention, I'll need to keep my ISO files >> sorted out somehow, as this progression isn't intuitive: >> >> CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-DVD.iso >> CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso > > Please take a look at the "Archived Versions", and the Release Announcement: > > They both tell you that 7 (1503) is derived from Red Hat Enterprise > Linux 7.1 Sources. So, yes, this release, that you quoted in the > Subject, is indeed exactly what you said. > > And yes, this is how we are now numbering CentOS releases for 7 and > greater. OOPS: Archived Versions, on this Page: http://wiki.centos.org/Download signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Building a newer glibc RPM for CentOS 6 and installing into an alternate path
Les Mikesell wrote: > On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Alfred von Campe > wrote: >> On Mar 31, 2015, at 12:21, Jim Perrin wrote: >> Isn't this the problem that docker was invented to solve? >>> >>> Yes, you could address this with docker quite easily, depending on the >>> app. >> >> Perhaps, but I’m running CentOS 6.6 i686 (i.e., 32-bit), and it appears >> that Docker requires 64-bit. Oh well, I was getting my hopes up for a while. I haven't really been following this thread closely, but would it be a dumb question to suggest installing the rpm with the relocate flag, and then use LD_LIBRARY_PATH? mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Building a newer glibc RPM for CentOS 6 and installing into an alternate path
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 1:21 PM, wrote: >>> Perhaps, but I’m running CentOS 6.6 i686 (i.e., 32-bit), and it appears >>> that Docker requires 64-bit. Oh well, I was getting my hopes up for a > while. > > I haven't really been following this thread closely, but would it be a > dumb question to suggest installing the rpm with the relocate flag, and > then use LD_LIBRARY_PATH? > It was mentioned earlier that LD_LIBRARY_PATH doesn't work with libc, but LD_PRELOAD should.. I tried unpacking a centos7 glibc rpm under /tmp/c7libs on a centos 6 box and trying to run a centos7 version of cat with: LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/tmp/c7libs/lib64:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH LD_PRELOAD="/tmp/c7libs/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 /tmp/c7libs/lib64/libc.so.6" /tmp/cat-7 /tmp/test seems to work, but that's not a real demanding test... -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Hdd maximum size
On 3/31/2015 4:43 AM, donais wrote: Server is a Lenovo RV-340 E2420 build 70AB001VUX 8go Support for Sata-3 6gbps and Raid-5 Did someone can tell if it can handle 6tb hard drives? you sure of that model number? not finding that at lenovo to look up the storage controller specs, I can find various RD3xx servers, but not any RV-anything. -- john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] opendkim-2.9.0
There was an update to opendkim 2.10.1 which I applied and now I am seeing this: warning: connect to Milter service inet:127.0.0.1:8891: Connection refused I tried to yum history rollback to 2.9.1 but that package has disappeared so I am evidently constrained to resolve this. Does anyone have any idea what has happened and why I might be getting that message? -- *** 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
Re: [CentOS] opendkim-2.9.0
On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 16:11:38 -0400 James B. Byrne wrote: > Does anyone have any idea what has happened and why I might be getting > that message? I don't use that but have you checked to see if you now have a "rpmsave" file left after installing the update? If so, that's your old configuration and you might need to re-write the new configuration file to incorporate your previous customization. -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] opendkim-2.9.0
El 31/03/2015 a las 03:18 p.m., Frank Cox escribió: On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 16:11:38 -0400 James B. Byrne wrote: Does anyone have any idea what has happened and why I might be getting that message? I don't use that but have you checked to see if you now have a "rpmsave" file left after installing the update? If so, that's your old configuration and you might need to re-write the new configuration file to incorporate your previous customization. Hi. I have a question some related to DK (not DKIM). We currently sign every email on every sub.domain and domain we host with DKIM. But I couldn't find the way to do it with DK. In both cases we use sock file not net. Is there a way to keep using sock and be able to manage the signing of every outgoing email for each subdomain/domain with DomainKeys (DK) ? Thanks. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] opendkim-2.9.0
Am 31.03.2015 um 22:11 schrieb James B. Byrne: There was an update to opendkim 2.10.1 which I applied and now I am seeing this: warning: connect to Milter service inet:127.0.0.1:8891: Connection refused [ ... ] Does anyone have any idea what has happened and why I might be getting that message? Postfix is trying to connect the milter on the tcp socket on localhost port 8891 while there is no such socket. Probably because the milter is not running at all or at least not providing its socket on that port. Alexander ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] Release for CentOS Linux 7 (1503 ) on x86_64
Le 31/03/2015 20:30, Johnny Hughes a écrit : I would have assumed that this release would be "7.1.1503", and the URL >>on at least one mirror has: >> >>http://mirror.fdcservers.net/centos/7.1.1503/ >> >>Guess if that's the new convention, I'll need to keep my ISO files >>sorted out somehow, as this progression isn't intuitive: >> >>CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-DVD.iso >>CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso > >Please take a look at the "Archived Versions", and the Release Announcement: > >They both tell you that 7 (1503) is derived from Red Hat Enterprise >Linux 7.1 Sources. So, yes, this release, that you quoted in the >Subject, is indeed exactly what you said. It seems that also the redhat-release file has changed.Previously, it was : [root@centos7 ~]# cat /etc/redhat-release CentOS Linux release 7.0.1406 (Core) Now it is : [root@centos-test ~]# cat /etc/redhat-release Derived from Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.1 (Source) It is also my opinion that the name CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso is rather confusing, it is not immediately evident that it is release 7.1. I would have prefered the name CentOS-7.1-1503-x86_64-DVD.iso, following the previous name convention. Alain ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] Release for CentOS Linux 7 (1503 ) on x86_64
On Tue, 2015-03-31 at 13:28 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 03/31/2015 12:31 PM, Greg Bailey wrote:
> > CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-DVD.iso
> > CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso
> Please take a look at the "Archived Versions", and the Release Announcement:
>
> They both tell you that 7 (1503) is derived from Red Hat Enterprise
> Linux 7.1 Sources. So, yes, this release, that you quoted in the
> Subject, is indeed exactly what you said.
>
> And yes, this is how we are now numbering CentOS releases for 7 and
> greater.
Isn't that illogical ?
If there is:-
CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-DVD.iso
then the next one should logically be named:-
CentOS-7-1503-x86_64-DVD.iso
assuming sub-version numbers have been abolished by Centos.
Jumbled confusion, like CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso, is messy and
illogical.
What is preventing Centos adopting a simple, neat, tidy, sensible and
logical approach ? For example:
{major version}-{build number}-{architecture}-{media}.iso ?
That is method I would use.
Thank you.
--
Regards,
Paul.
England, EU. Je suis Charlie.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Release 7 1503
Just updated to release 7 1503. CentOS team is awesome! I thought I read sometime back that the release was going to rebase to a newer gnome? Did that not happen? Is there a way to get release 7 to a later gnome version? Thanks! Looking forward to playing. Jerry ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Release 7 1503
>From what I've read there will be a newer Gnome in 7.2. HTH -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro - Original Message - > From: "Jerry Geis" > To: "CentOS mailing list" > Sent: Wednesday, 1 April, 2015 00:04:11 > Subject: [CentOS] Release 7 1503 > Just updated to release 7 1503. CentOS team is awesome! > > I thought I read sometime back that the release was going to > rebase to a newer gnome? > > Did that not happen? Is there a way to get release 7 to a later gnome > version? > > Thanks! Looking forward to playing. > > Jerry > ___ > 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] Thanks for 7.1
Just wanted to say "Thanks!" to the CentOS team for their efforts to put out a 7.1 release. Upgraded several systems, so far smooth sailing. Good job! -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] Release for CentOS Linux 7 (1503 ) on x86_64
On 03/31/2015 04:24 PM, Alain Péan wrote: > Le 31/03/2015 20:30, Johnny Hughes a écrit : >>> I would have assumed that this release would be "7.1.1503", and the URL >>> >>on at least one mirror has: >>> >> >>> >>http://mirror.fdcservers.net/centos/7.1.1503/ >>> >> >>> >>Guess if that's the new convention, I'll need to keep my ISO files >>> >>sorted out somehow, as this progression isn't intuitive: >>> >> >>> >>CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-DVD.iso >>> >>CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso >> > >> >Please take a look at the "Archived Versions", and the Release >> Announcement: >> > >> >They both tell you that 7 (1503) is derived from Red Hat Enterprise >> >Linux 7.1 Sources. So, yes, this release, that you quoted in the >> >Subject, is indeed exactly what you said. > > It seems that also the redhat-release file has changed.Previously, it was : > [root@centos7 ~]# cat /etc/redhat-release > CentOS Linux release 7.0.1406 (Core) > > Now it is : > [root@centos-test ~]# cat /etc/redhat-release > Derived from Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.1 (Source) > > It is also my opinion that the name CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso is > rather confusing, it is not immediately evident that it is release 7.1. > I would have prefered the name CentOS-7.1-1503-x86_64-DVD.iso, following > the previous name convention. Well, we are now using a new naming convention .. although, we have update /etc/cetnos-release/ This naming convention was voted on by the CentOS Board and discussed on the CentOS-Devel mailing list. It is what we are using moving forward. Please become familiar with it,as we do not expect to change it again. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] Release for CentOS Linux 7 (1503 ) on x86_64
On 03/31/2015 05:56 PM, Always Learning wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2015-03-31 at 13:28 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
>> On 03/31/2015 12:31 PM, Greg Bailey wrote:
>>> CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-DVD.iso
>>> CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso
>
>> Please take a look at the "Archived Versions", and the Release Announcement:
>>
>> They both tell you that 7 (1503) is derived from Red Hat Enterprise
>> Linux 7.1 Sources. So, yes, this release, that you quoted in the
>> Subject, is indeed exactly what you said.
>>
>> And yes, this is how we are now numbering CentOS releases for 7 and
>> greater.
>
> Isn't that illogical ?
>
> If there is:-
>
> CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-DVD.iso
>
> then the next one should logically be named:-
>
> CentOS-7-1503-x86_64-DVD.iso
>
> assuming sub-version numbers have been abolished by Centos.
>
> Jumbled confusion, like CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso, is messy and
> illogical.
>
> What is preventing Centos adopting a simple, neat, tidy, sensible and
> logical approach ? For example:
>
> {major version}-{build number}-{architecture}-{media}.iso ?
>
> That is method I would use.
>
> Thank you.
>
This was discussed on the CentOS-Devel mailing list and approved by the
CentOS Board. It is what we are using in the future. I suggest you
become familiar with it.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] Release for CentOS Linux 7 (1503 ) on x86_64
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/01/2015 03:49 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> It is also my opinion that the name CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso >> is rather confusing, it is not immediately evident that it is >> release 7.1. I would have prefered the name >> CentOS-7.1-1503-x86_64-DVD.iso, following the previous name >> convention. > > Well, we are now using a new naming convention .. although, we > have update /etc/cetnos-release/ > > This naming convention was voted on by the CentOS Board and > discussed on the CentOS-Devel mailing list. It is what we are > using moving forward. Please become familiar with it,as we do not > expect to change it again. Can you please point me to the centos-devel thread that discussed changing the iso naming convention from CentOS-7.1-1503-x86_64-DVD.iso to CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503.iso? I must have missed it because I saw no mention of this change until today. Peter -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVG2HJAAoJEAUijw0EjkDvUrQH/0DUWjv47cdeqLzL7yCYoYnN ZORI3pkQsXPxLmqNOtLZ2MSiNTUyNJiUrfyWXazzBtiCrc4w7llQ4XGnEcKFlgie dz9EHvDpgtu/lSqEJpFVf7CROy93zeanWwkc7U8QASxznyVRxOvLbekYBizT49SP lhSkvKcVG+15ds6iqgJJHZeYi0Seq8KK01OZtohaF6jjXdMpVsst2HvScN0BnjXQ Xo+VE+ZVFRu6EkglXJlDUAonZneuk5T/ot0cde4m5vZYs3dGkKdZQnsfuFiD2s9i m0s+xPrR/tQnbMnlqYOS/lgZtswHW0ccnRk0X1wBj365eg7LVw1Meud1uZeBDxg= =yMoU -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] LDAP TLS error -8023
On 03/30/2015 07:28 PM, Paul R. Ganci wrote: Can somebody tell me what this error means (server, domain etc. changed to protect the innocent)? ldapsearch -H ldap://ldapserv-1.example.com:389 -ZZ -W -D cn=Boss,dc=example,dc=com -b dc=example,dc=com uid=testuser homeDirectory ldap_start_tls: Connect error (-11) additional info: TLS error -8023:A PKCS #11 module returned CKR_DEVICE_ERROR, indicating that a problem has occurred with the token or slot. It turns out the release of 7.1 was most propitious. I updated and instead of getting the error above I received a different error: TLS error -8182: Peer's certificate has an invalid signature That was a much more useful error message in that at least I knew what the complaint was about. It turns out I was using an incorrect key. I fixed that and the problem went away. So glad I went ahead with the update or I would still be wondering what was wrong. -- Paul (ga...@nurdog.com) (303)257-5208 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Thanks for 7.1
+1 for that! On 1 April 2015 at 02:25, Nux! wrote: > Just wanted to say "Thanks!" to the CentOS team for their efforts to put > out a 7.1 release. > > Upgraded several systems, so far smooth sailing. Good job! > > -- > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! > > Nux! > www.nux.ro > ___ > 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] Thanks for 7.1
On 3/31/2015 5:25 PM, Nux! wrote: Just wanted to say "Thanks!" to the CentOS team for their efforts to put out a 7.1 release. so I updated my c7 dev systems last night with CR... do I need to do anything special to get it to clean update ? yum update isn't offering me anything newer and centos-release still says its 1406 -- john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
