Re: [CentOS] why no recent bind update for CentOS 6?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/06/2015 12:33 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> CentOS is, in as much as is reasonably possible, a clone of RHEL, >> but it cannot be an exact duplicate of all the packages. > > I don't like the word clone .. but certainly CentOS is a rebuild of > RHEL source code with the fewest changes possible to meet the > trademark/branding requirements as the goal. Fair enough, clone is a bad word in this regard. Rebuild is definitely a much better word. Peter -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVwt30AAoJEAUijw0EjkDvkvwH/j9+2ypxxPG0Q/lIYo2k4Y/1 3EPQoSfk0c997ulWMYaUPi46ZDn6bAsXR7koDEjA6V5f/M/Uw9eb8OkFafLqLAQ7 A0XcgfVqSQH8OkIKg47sqDX96e0ndjCm7KQr9obdQomduuIojj8W8DCa+JBus+in UTqdgwUxnqc44ZvEd7FpCqZQvwXQ+q9Y5a22Y27AWXzPmmsutHllP375vvMpCFAu fnqaUv7k0otAmExEnVhrk+iFe6FNmj6W3e381NGxCy8qGZV54xnFjDtXXM4yvA/v 1kLmTtKwHy4hEsxkLjG0/r4w6SynqNeMFiW6AsJFRjWxasJ/LL7CvvZ6DUx/5Ug= =abOf -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] why no recent bind update for CentOS 6?
On Wed, 2015-08-05 at 21:59 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > To reiterate, CentOS is built using the RHEL source code .. but it is > NOT even close to being a CLONE of RHEL. Thank you for your explanation. Best wishes, Paul. England, EU. England's place is in the European Union. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] why no recent bind update for CentOS 6?
On 08/05/2015 09:59 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > Red Hat then took input from their beta release (from users and testing) > and did an RC on April 3rd, 2015, That should have said April 3rd, 2014 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] why no recent bind update for CentOS 6?
On 08/04/2015 04:40 PM, Always Learning wrote: > > On Tue, 2015-08-04 at 07:06 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > >> CentOS Linux normally also follows the upstream dist tags, except for >> packages where we make changes, where we use .el6.centos on those to >> denote we have modified them. > > I thought, mistakenly perhaps, that Centos = RHEL without the RHEL > branding. > > Why would Centos modify a RHEL package before offering the package to > its devoted and appreciative Centos users ? > > We have to modify the source code to remove the branding .. as I explained in the other post. BUT, I do want to point out that the CentOS Team has never said CentOS = RHEL. CentOS is a rebuild of RHEL source code, built in the order that it is released by Red Hat. And we do modify it to meet the Red Hat trademark requirements (ie, remove Red Hat branding). Just because we build the source code in the order that it is released does not mean it is an exact copy of RHEL .. and in fact, CentOS Linux certainly is NOT an exact copy of RHEL, nor has it ever been. This is because both build systems (the CentOS one and the RHEL one) are "closed systems" and they are certainly not identical. Why is that? Red Hat freezes a Fedora tree to start a new RHEL tree at some "point in time" and they start stabilizing that tree. For RHEL 7, that was near the Fedora 18/19 time frame. They remove many packages that they are not going to use and they develop a set of binary packages that they are going to use as their initial binary tree. They then spend a long time on that tree , building many packages iterations, before they release their RHEL public beta. Just as a point of reference, Fedora 18 was released on 2013-01-15 (Jan 15, 2013) and Fedora 19 was released on 2013-07-02 (July 2, 2013). Their RHEL7 initial tree was likely sometime between those dates. RHEL-7 Beta was released on 2013-12-11 (December 11th, 2013) .. so Red Hat likely spent somewhere between 4 and 11 months (closer to 11, I would think) stabilizing that beta tree. When they released the RHEL-7 beta on December 11th, 2015, the CentOS team had that set of Source Code and binary RPMs and Fedora 18 and Fedora 19 to use to do our initial build. Red Hat had a closed and staged build system with any number of intermediary builds in their build root, not just 2 fedora builds and the 1 RHEL beta. When we built our Beta from that limited set of packages, there is no way that we could duplicate the exact intermediary builds .. no one outside of the people who have access to that closed Red Hat build system even KNOWS the iterations in that build system. Red Hat then took input from their beta release (from users and testing) and did an RC on April 3rd, 2015, and a final QA release on June 9th, 2014 (6 months later). We (the CentOS team) did not get any of their closed build system info then either. We had our beta (based on their beta), our RC (based on their RC), and Fedora 18 and Fedora 19. They had a closed build system with like several thousand other package iterations in it. So, that is why CentOS is NOT a CLONE of RHEL .. it is instead a rebuild of the RHEL source code in way to produce a Linux distribution which is "functionally compatible" (meaning it does the same things) as RHEL. But you will find, if you do direct comparisons of all the binaries and libraries, that almost every single one of the CentOS files is different in md5sum from the RHEL counterparts. To reiterate, CentOS is built using the RHEL source code .. but it is NOT even close to being a CLONE of RHEL. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] xfs question
On 2015-08-05, James A. Peltier wrote: > > This is not at all our findings on large file systems or filesystems with > large numbers of inodes. We in fact on many occasions ran into such > problems. To the OP, if you're 64-bit everywhere there's no problems so > enjoy the benefits of XFS ;) I too have seen this issue, in both NFS configurations (exporting the root or exporting subdirectories using fsid). We only have one 32bit NFS client left, so I simply tell people not to use it (the work it does is mostly on local filesystems). --keith -- kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] unwelcome gthumb slideshow
Any ideas on where to look for help? My searches generally yield a lot of how-tos that bury any how-not-tos. On Mon, 3 Aug 2015, Michael Hennebry wrote: I have a gif image in a folder. Whenever I have gthumb display it or a copy of it, gthumb goes into slideshow mode. Usually I can stop the show. It will not stop before going to the next image. but I only have a slideshow period to look at the troublemaker. If the troublemaker is last in the directory, I cannot stop the show without stopping gthumb. How do I make gthumb stop going into slideshow mode when it hits the troubleaker? My expectation is that I flipped some bit somewhere, but I have not been able to find the bit. From the timestamp on the original, I'm reasonably sure the bit is not in the file itself. Another gif in the same directory does not have that problem. I do not know what exactly I did to the file. At one point, I clicked with the mouse in the wrong place. Eventually I got out of slideshow mode and almost all was well. Displaying the one file or a copy of it starts slideshow mode. How do I fix that? -- Michael henne...@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu "SCSI is NOT magic. There are *fundamental technical reasons* why it is necessary to sacrifice a young goat to your SCSI chain now and then." -- John Woods ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] why no recent bind update for CentOS 6?
On 08/04/2015 06:40 PM, Peter wrote: > On 08/05/2015 11:30 AM, Always Learning wrote: >> No. Johnny wrote >> >> "CentOS Linux normally also follows the upstream dist tags, except >> " for packages where we make changes, where we use .el6.centos on >> " those to denote we have modified them." > > Yes, certain packages have to be modified to remove RedHat branding. > Certain other packages have to be modified to point to CentOS > repositories, etc. peter is correct here .. we have to modify certain packages to remove RHEL branding .. or to point to our repos instead of Red Hat ones .. when we do that, we use .el.centos where num is 5 or 6 or 7 for centos-5 or centos-6 or centos-7. > In extremely rare cases there may be a critical > security vulnerability which the CentOS developers feel merits an update > before RedHat release theirs, in these cases the updated RedHat package > will take precedence once it is released. And there might be a critical issue where we would publish a fix early .. for example we did for Heartbleed .. and what peter said is true there too. It would be announced and explained as to why we did it, etc. > > CentOS is, in as much as is reasonably possible, a clone of RHEL, but it > cannot be an exact duplicate of all the packages. I don't like the word clone .. but certainly CentOS is a rebuild of RHEL source code with the fewest changes possible to meet the trademark/branding requirements as the goal. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Skype on CentOS
On 05/08/15 08:06 PM, Andrew Daviel wrote: > > I have Skype 2.1.0 running on CentOS 5, but it does not support video. > > At various times I have tried to install or run more recent versions on > CentOS 5 and CentOS 6, but generally they fail for some reason, e.g. > library requirements. > > We would like to run Skype in some conference rooms, for business > reasons e.g. job interviews where some participants don't have access to > more "professional" solutions, and as I recall Microsoft shut down > gateways to H323. > > Does anyone have a good procedure for running Skype on CentOS ? > E.g. does it run natively on CentOS 7 ? > Or will it run with a custom LD_LIBRARY_PATH, as does Mozilla ? > Or will it run inside a virtual machine, or with Wine ? > > We have video capture cards using V4L2 that work with e.g. SeeVoghRN, > xawtv and, I think, Ekiga. If you're not stuck on CentOS 5... http://www.if-not-true-then-false.com/2012/install-skype-on-fedora-centos-red-hat-rhel-scientific-linux-sl To the point, works. -- Digimer Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without access to education? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Skype on CentOS
I have Skype 2.1.0 running on CentOS 5, but it does not support video. At various times I have tried to install or run more recent versions on CentOS 5 and CentOS 6, but generally they fail for some reason, e.g. library requirements. We would like to run Skype in some conference rooms, for business reasons e.g. job interviews where some participants don't have access to more "professional" solutions, and as I recall Microsoft shut down gateways to H323. Does anyone have a good procedure for running Skype on CentOS ? E.g. does it run natively on CentOS 7 ? Or will it run with a custom LD_LIBRARY_PATH, as does Mozilla ? Or will it run inside a virtual machine, or with Wine ? We have video capture cards using V4L2 that work with e.g. SeeVoghRN, xawtv and, I think, Ekiga. -- Andrew Daviel, TRIUMF, Canada Tel. +1 (604) 222-7376 (Pacific Time) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
Rats. That wrapped ugly. Here's that section in the log using fpaste. http://fpaste.org/252028/88181881/ Chris Murphy ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
I never thought I'd say this, but I think it's easier to do this with GRUB 2. Anyway I did an installation to raid1's in CentOS 6's installer, which still uses GRUB legacy. I tested removing each of the two devices and it still boots. These are the commands in its log: : Running... ['/sbin/grub-install', '--just-copy'] : Running... ['/sbin/grub', '--batch', '--no-floppy', '--device-map=/boot/grub/device.map'] : grub> device (hd0) /dev/vdb : grub> root (hd0,1) : grub> install --stage2=/boot/grub/stage2 /grub/stage1 d (hd0,1) /grub/stage2 p (hd0,1)/grub/grub.conf : Running... ['/sbin/grub', '--batch', '--no-floppy', '--device-map=/boot/grub/device.map'] : grub> root (hd0,1) : grub> install --stage2=/boot/grub/stage2 /grub/stage1 d (hd0,1) /grub/stage2 p (hd0,1)/grub/grub.conf I do not know why there's a duplication of the install command. It also looks like the way it knows it's supposed to install two bootloader stage1 and stage2 to two different devices is with devices (hd0) /dev/vdb I don't know why the split referencing. (hd0) is /dev/vda and (hd1) is /dev/vdb. Weird. But it does work. hd0,1 in my case is /boot, but yours is hd0,0 since it's the first partition. So anywhere the steps above say hd0,1 you probably need hd0,0. Chris Murphy ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On Wed, 2015-08-05 at 13:11 -0400, Bowie Bailey wrote: > > # smartctl -i /dev/hdg | grep -i sector > > Sector Size: 512 bytes logical/physical > I don't get a "Sector Size" line. > > smartctl version 5.38 [i686-redhat-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-8 Bruce > Allen On the latest Centos 5 = Centos 5.11 ~ smartctl -v smartctl 5.42 2011-10-20 r3458 [x86_64-linux-2.6.18-406.el5] (local build) Copyright (C) 2002-11 by Bruce Allen, http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net ~ Why not do: YUM UPDATE ??? -- Regards, Paul. England, EU. England's place is in the European Union. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote: > That's because I'm intending to increase the size of that filesystem. The > raid should work as long as the new partition is at least as big as the old > one. Once I get this working, I will remove the original drive and add > another 1TB drive so both partitions are the same (larger size) and extend > the filesystem into the new space. Got it. OK then it all comes down to the workload and whether 4KiB alignment is worth changing the partitioning. If it is, quite honestly I'd just start over with this 1TiB drive: i.e. fail and remove all three partitions, and then wipe the superblock off each partition too (I don't know if CentOS 5 has wipefs but if it does use that with -a switch, e.g. 'wipefs -a /dev/hdg[123]' and then ;wipefs -a /dev/hdg' which will remove the ext3, swap and mdadm signatures and avoids problems down the road; then repartition doing two things: start the first partition at sector 2048, and only specify the size in whole megabytes. 2048 is aligned, and by making each partition increment 1MB each partition is also aligned. > >> - Also, 401625 is not 8 sector aligned. So it's a double whammy and >> since it has to be repartitioned anyway you might as well fix the >> alignment also. >> >> First off fail+remove hdg2 (you need to confirm I've got the devices >> and commands right here): >> mdadm --manage /dev/md2 -f /dev/hdg2 -r /dev/hdg2 >> mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/hdg2 >> >> Using fdisk delete hdg2, then make a new primary partition (partition >> 2) and hopefully figure out how to get it to do LBA rather than CHS >> entry; or use parted which can but it's UI is totally unlike fdisk. >> The start sector for hdg2 should be 401623 which is 8 sector aligned, >> and the end value should be 975691717 in order to make it the same as >> hde2. And change the type to 0xfd. >> >> Now you probably have to reboot because the partition map has changed, >> I'm not sure if partprobe exists on CentOS5, could be worth a shot >> though and see if the kernel gets the new partition map. Check with >> blkid. >> >> And then finally add the "new" device. >> mdadm --managed /dev/md2 -a /dev/hdg2 >> >> And now it should be resyncing... >> cat /proc/mdstat > > > But if both hde and hdg are using 401625, then wouldn't I have to > repartition both drives so the sizes match? No because as you said, the replacement just needs to be same or larger sized. mdadm does not care if member device partitions have different start sectors. > I'm still not sure that this is a partitioning problem. I did not have any > problems create the partitions or syncing the three raid devices. It's not a partitioning problem. But there's no point in proceeding with the bootloader stuff until you've settled on the partition layout. If you want, in the meantime, you could test if 'grub-install --recheck /dev/hdg' is at least accepted, and if that changes the outcome of either the bootinfoscript's bootloader section or actually test if it boots. The misalignment is a performance penalty, it's not a whether it works or not penalty. -- Chris Murphy ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
Bowie Bailey wrote: > On 8/5/2015 3:59 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: >> Dumb thought: I don't remember how, other than from a grub menu, but I'm >> pretty sure there's a way to default boot into a grub shell. Once there, >> you can see, using file completion, the drives, and where your initrd >> is. > > Good thought. I went into the grub.conf, commented out the "hiddenmenu" > option and increased the timeout to 10 seconds. This works if I boot > from the original drive, but it doesn't help with the new drive. It's > not getting that far. > I *think* what you may have to do is: 1. use mdadm to remove the new drive from the RAID. 2. use it to create a new md drive with *just* the new drive. 3. copy from the remaining old RAID drive to the new. 4. remove the old RAID drive, then put in a new large drive. 5. add the new drive to the new array. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On 8/5/2015 4:40 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 1:59 PM, wrote: Dumb thought: I don't remember how, other than from a grub menu, but I'm pretty sure there's a way to default boot into a grub shell. Once there, you can see, using file completion, the drives, and where your initrd is. It's definitely not an initrd problem. a.) the failure happens before the GRUB menu appears so it hasn't even gone looking for an initrd, b.) the initrd is technically on an array not a device, and as long as the array is sync'd on both devices, it's the same, and since it works on one device, it should work on the other and c.) it's v0.9 mdadm metadata which is kernel autodetect so the initrd doesn't do the assembly. I think once the partition stuff is fixed, and synced, then it will be more reliable to do this because GRUB is after all being pointed to member devices, not the array. There might be more luck using this command at command prompt: grub-install --recheck /dev/hdg See if that repopulates the device.map correctly. It should use /boot (/dev/md0) automatically for stage2. Can't risk killing the system at the moment. I'll give it a try tomorrow. However, I do note that the man page for grub-install has a comment about --recheck stating "This option is unreliable and its use is strongly discouraged." -- Bowie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On 8/5/2015 3:59 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Dumb thought: I don't remember how, other than from a grub menu, but I'm pretty sure there's a way to default boot into a grub shell. Once there, you can see, using file completion, the drives, and where your initrd is. Good thought. I went into the grub.conf, commented out the "hiddenmenu" option and increased the timeout to 10 seconds. This works if I boot from the original drive, but it doesn't help with the new drive. It's not getting that far. -- Bowie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On 8/5/2015 4:00 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: - Ahh OK now I see why I was confused. The originally posted partition map uses cylinders as units, not LBA. I missed that. Cylinder 1 is the same as LBA 63. And that is sufficiently large for a GRUB legacy stage 2. - OK this is screwy. Partitions 1 and 3 on both drives have the same number of sectors, but partitions 2 differ: /dev/hde2 401,625 975,691,709 975,290,085 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/hdg2 401,625 1,952,491,904 1,952,090,280 fd Linux raid autodetect That can't work as these are two partitions meant to form /dev/md2 and need to be the same size. That's because I'm intending to increase the size of that filesystem. The raid should work as long as the new partition is at least as big as the old one. Once I get this working, I will remove the original drive and add another 1TB drive so both partitions are the same (larger size) and extend the filesystem into the new space. - Also, 401625 is not 8 sector aligned. So it's a double whammy and since it has to be repartitioned anyway you might as well fix the alignment also. First off fail+remove hdg2 (you need to confirm I've got the devices and commands right here): mdadm --manage /dev/md2 -f /dev/hdg2 -r /dev/hdg2 mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/hdg2 Using fdisk delete hdg2, then make a new primary partition (partition 2) and hopefully figure out how to get it to do LBA rather than CHS entry; or use parted which can but it's UI is totally unlike fdisk. The start sector for hdg2 should be 401623 which is 8 sector aligned, and the end value should be 975691717 in order to make it the same as hde2. And change the type to 0xfd. Now you probably have to reboot because the partition map has changed, I'm not sure if partprobe exists on CentOS5, could be worth a shot though and see if the kernel gets the new partition map. Check with blkid. And then finally add the "new" device. mdadm --managed /dev/md2 -a /dev/hdg2 And now it should be resyncing... cat /proc/mdstat But if both hde and hdg are using 401625, then wouldn't I have to repartition both drives so the sizes match? I'm still not sure that this is a partitioning problem. I did not have any problems create the partitions or syncing the three raid devices. -- Bowie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 1:59 PM, wrote: > Dumb thought: I don't remember how, other than from a grub menu, but I'm > pretty sure there's a way to default boot into a grub shell. Once there, > you can see, using file completion, the drives, and where your initrd is. It's definitely not an initrd problem. a.) the failure happens before the GRUB menu appears so it hasn't even gone looking for an initrd, b.) the initrd is technically on an array not a device, and as long as the array is sync'd on both devices, it's the same, and since it works on one device, it should work on the other and c.) it's v0.9 mdadm metadata which is kernel autodetect so the initrd doesn't do the assembly. I think once the partition stuff is fixed, and synced, then it will be more reliable to do this because GRUB is after all being pointed to member devices, not the array. There might be more luck using this command at command prompt: grub-install --recheck /dev/hdg See if that repopulates the device.map correctly. It should use /boot (/dev/md0) automatically for stage2. -- Chris Murphy ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
Dumb thought: I don't remember how, other than from a grub menu, but I'm pretty sure there's a way to default boot into a grub shell. Once there, you can see, using file completion, the drives, and where your initrd is. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
- Ahh OK now I see why I was confused. The originally posted partition map uses cylinders as units, not LBA. I missed that. Cylinder 1 is the same as LBA 63. And that is sufficiently large for a GRUB legacy stage 2. - OK this is screwy. Partitions 1 and 3 on both drives have the same number of sectors, but partitions 2 differ: /dev/hde2 401,625 975,691,709 975,290,085 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/hdg2 401,625 1,952,491,904 1,952,090,280 fd Linux raid autodetect That can't work as these are two partitions meant to form /dev/md2 and need to be the same size. - Also, 401625 is not 8 sector aligned. So it's a double whammy and since it has to be repartitioned anyway you might as well fix the alignment also. First off fail+remove hdg2 (you need to confirm I've got the devices and commands right here): mdadm --manage /dev/md2 -f /dev/hdg2 -r /dev/hdg2 mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/hdg2 Using fdisk delete hdg2, then make a new primary partition (partition 2) and hopefully figure out how to get it to do LBA rather than CHS entry; or use parted which can but it's UI is totally unlike fdisk. The start sector for hdg2 should be 401623 which is 8 sector aligned, and the end value should be 975691717 in order to make it the same as hde2. And change the type to 0xfd. Now you probably have to reboot because the partition map has changed, I'm not sure if partprobe exists on CentOS5, could be worth a shot though and see if the kernel gets the new partition map. Check with blkid. And then finally add the "new" device. mdadm --managed /dev/md2 -a /dev/hdg2 And now it should be resyncing... cat /proc/mdstat Something like that. Proof read it! --- Chris Murphy ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On 8/5/2015 1:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: Please, download this. http://sourceforge.net/projects/bootinfoscript/ Run it: http://bootinfoscript.sourceforge.net/ Post a URL to the resulting file somewhere. I suggest having the entire computer assembled as it should be in normal use, rather than simulating device failure by removing a device. http://pastebin.com/sgWTYpp4 -- Bowie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
Please, download this. http://sourceforge.net/projects/bootinfoscript/ Run it: http://bootinfoscript.sourceforge.net/ Post a URL to the resulting file somewhere. I suggest having the entire computer assembled as it should be in normal use, rather than simulating device failure by removing a device. --- Chris Murphy ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote: > On 8/5/2015 1:00 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Bowie Bailey >> wrote: >>> >>> How would I go about pointing it at the partition? >>> >>> What I am currently doing is this: >>> device (hd0) /dev/hdg >>> root (hd0,0) >>> setup (hd0) >> >> >> setup (hd1,0) >> >> It's hd1 if your device map is correct and hdg is hd1. And then ,0 is >> for the first partition assuming that's an ext3 boot partition. > > > What I am doing on my other system (where everything is working), is forcing > grub to install to both drives as hd0. I found that when the first drive > dies and I remove it from the system, grub will see the remaining drive as > hd0, regardless of what it was before. So if I install grub to the second > disk as hd1, then it won't boot as a single drive. Nothing about hd0 or hd1 gets baked into the bootloader code. It's an absolute reference to a physical drive at the moment in time the command is made. If there is only one drive connected when you initiate this command, then it's hd0. Almost invariably hd0 is the current boot drive, or at least it's the first drive as enumerated by the BIOS. So long as the drive in question gets a bootloader, it'll boot regardless of what hdX designation it takes. I'm just not totally convinced the designation is correct here because I really don't see how 'setup hd0' works on a drive that has no MBR gap. > > And to get this back to a single thread: > > On 8/5/2015 1:03 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Bowie Bailey >> wrote: >> >>> I tried 'smartctl -a' and 'hdparm -I', but I don't see anything about >>> Advanced Format. What am I looking for? >> >> # smartctl -i /dev/hdg | grep -i sector >> Sector Size: 512 bytes logical/physical > > > I don't get a "Sector Size" line. > > smartctl version 5.38 [i686-redhat-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-8 Bruce OK that version predates sector size info. See if your version of hdparm will do it: # hdparm -I /dev/hdg | grep -i sector That spits out several lines for me, including Physical Sector size: 512 bytes Another one is: # parted -l /dev/hdg | grep -i sector I'm willing to bet that physical sector size is 4096 bytes > Allen > Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ > > === START OF INFORMATION SECTION === > Device Model: WDC WD10EZEX-60M2NA0 I looked this up and found this: http://www.wdc.com/wdproducts/library/SpecSheet/ENG/2879-771436.pdf That lists the 1TB as being advanced format. If that's the correct spec sheet then the next question is what is the workload for this drive? If it's just a boot drive and performance is not a consideration then you can leave it alone, the drive firmware will do RWM internally for the wrong alignment. But if performance is important (file sharing, database stuff, small file writes including web server), then this needs to get fixed... -- Chris Murphy ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On 8/5/2015 1:00 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote: How would I go about pointing it at the partition? What I am currently doing is this: device (hd0) /dev/hdg root (hd0,0) setup (hd0) setup (hd1,0) It's hd1 if your device map is correct and hdg is hd1. And then ,0 is for the first partition assuming that's an ext3 boot partition. What I am doing on my other system (where everything is working), is forcing grub to install to both drives as hd0. I found that when the first drive dies and I remove it from the system, grub will see the remaining drive as hd0, regardless of what it was before. So if I install grub to the second disk as hd1, then it won't boot as a single drive. And to get this back to a single thread: On 8/5/2015 1:03 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote: I tried 'smartctl -a' and 'hdparm -I', but I don't see anything about Advanced Format. What am I looking for? # smartctl -i /dev/hdg | grep -i sector Sector Size: 512 bytes logical/physical I don't get a "Sector Size" line. smartctl version 5.38 [i686-redhat-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-8 Bruce Allen Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ === START OF INFORMATION SECTION === Device Model: WDC WD10EZEX-60M2NA0 Serial Number:WD-WCC3F6AX0119 Firmware Version: 03.01A03 User Capacity:1,000,204,886,016 bytes Device is:Not in smartctl database [for details use: -P showall] ATA Version is: 9 ATA Standard is: Not recognized. Minor revision code: 0x1f Local Time is:Wed Aug 5 13:09:16 2015 EDT SMART support is: Available - device has SMART capability. SMART support is: Enabled -- Bowie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote: > > I tried 'smartctl -a' and 'hdparm -I', but I don't see anything about > Advanced Format. What am I looking for? # smartctl -i /dev/hdg | grep -i sector Sector Size: 512 bytes logical/physical That's what I get, but it's an SSD so it's a lie. > I can redo the partitions, but I'm not sure how to tell fdisk to start a > partition at LBA 2048. Let's figure that out only if it's an AF disk... -- Chris Murphy ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote: > > On 8/5/2015 12:34 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote: >>> >>> I am trying to upgrade my system from 500GB drives to 1TB. >> >> I'm going to guess that there are no IDE drives that have 4096 byte >> physical sectors, but it's worth confirming you don't have such a >> drive because the current partition scheme you've posted would be >> sub-optimal if it does have 4096 byte sectors. > > > The partition table was originally created by the installer. Well, the CentOS5 installer and partitioning utility (parted) predate Advanced Format drives. I'd check to see whether you have such a drive. > Version : 0.90.00 Therefore 0xfd is correct. > I'm willing to give that a try. The device.map looks good to me: > (hd0) /dev/hde > (hd1) /dev/hdg > > It is old, but the drives are still connected to the same connectors, so it > should still be valid. I think you need to confirm that the device.map is correct. I just don't remember the command to figure out the mapping. > > How would I go about pointing it at the partition? > > What I am currently doing is this: > device (hd0) /dev/hdg > root (hd0,0) > setup (hd0) setup (hd1,0) It's hd1 if your device map is correct and hdg is hd1. And then ,0 is for the first partition assuming that's an ext3 boot partition. -- Chris Murphy ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On 8/5/2015 12:37 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote: I am trying to upgrade my system from 500GB drives to 1TB. I'm going to guess that there are no IDE drives that have 4096 byte physical sectors, but it's worth confirming you don't have such a drive because the current partition scheme you've posted would be sub-optimal if it does have 4096 byte sectors. Oops. I just reread that this is now SATA. New versions of hdparm and smartctl can tell you if the drive is Advanced Format, and if it is, then I recommend redoing the partition scheme so it's 4K aligned. And so that it has an MBR gap. The current way to do this is have the 1st partition start at LBA 2048. I tried 'smartctl -a' and 'hdparm -I', but I don't see anything about Advanced Format. What am I looking for? I can redo the partitions, but I'm not sure how to tell fdisk to start a partition at LBA 2048. -- Bowie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On 8/5/2015 12:34 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote: I am trying to upgrade my system from 500GB drives to 1TB. I'm going to guess that there are no IDE drives that have 4096 byte physical sectors, but it's worth confirming you don't have such a drive because the current partition scheme you've posted would be sub-optimal if it does have 4096 byte sectors. The partition table was originally created by the installer. I was able to partition and sync the raid devices, but I cannot get the new drive to boot. This is an old system with only IDE ports. There is an added Highpoint raid card which is used only for the two extra IDE ports. I have upgraded it with a 1TB SATA drive and an IDE-SATA adapter. I did not have any problems with the system recognizing the drive or adding it to the mdraid. A short SMART test shows no errors. Partitions: Disk /dev/hdg: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/hdg1 1 25 200781 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/hdg2 26 121537 976045140 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/hdg3 121538 121601 514080 fd Linux raid autodetect In the realm of totally esoteric and not likely the problem, 0xfd is for mdadm metadata v0.9 which uses kernel autodetect. If the mdadm metadata is 1.x then the type code ought to be 0xda but this is so obscure that parted doesn't even support it. fdisk does but I don't know when support was added. This uses initrd autodetect rather than the deprecated kernel autodetect. It's fine to use 0.9 even though it's deprecated. You can use mdadm -E on each member device (each partition) to find out what metadata version is being used. Version : 0.90.00 Normally GRUB stage 1.5 is not needed, stage 1 can jump directly to stage 2 if it's in the MBR gap. But your partition scheme doesn't have an MBR gap, you've started the first partition at LBA 1. So that means it'll have to use block lists... I installed grub on the new drive: grub> device (hd0) /dev/hdg grub> root (hd0,0) Filesystem type is ext2fs, partition type 0xfd grub> setup (hd0) Checking if "/boot/grub/stage1" exists... no Checking if "/grub/stage1" exists... yes Checking if "/grub/stage2" exists... yes Checking if "/grub/e2fs_stage1_5" exists... yes Running "embed /grub/e2fs_stage1_5 (hd0)"... 15 sectors are embedded. succeeded Running "install /grub/stage1 (hd0) (hd0)1+15 p (hd0,0)/grub/stage2 /grub/grub.conf"... succeeded Done. I'm confused. I don't know why this succeeds because the setup was pointed to hd0, which means the entire disk, not a partition, and yet the disk doesn't have an MBR gap. So there's no room for GRUB stage 2. I'm not sure. It's been so long that I don't remember what I did (if anything) to get grub working on the second drive of the set. The first drive was configured by the installer. What I'm doing now is what I found to work for my backup system which gets a new drive in the raid set every month. But when I attempt to boot from the drive (with or without the other drive connected and in either IDE connector on the Highpoint card), it fails. Grub attempts to boot, but the last thing I see after the bios is the line "GRUB Loading stage 1.5", then the screen goes black, the system speaker beeps, and the machine reboots. This will continue as long as I let it. As soon as I switch the boot drive back to the original hard drive, It boots up normally. Yeah it says it's succeeding but it really isn't, I think. The problem is not the initrd yet, because that could be totally busted or missing, and you should still get a GRUB menu. This is all a failure of getting to stage 2, which then can read the file system and load the rest of its modules. I also tried installing grub as (hd1) with the same results. I'm disinclined to believe that hd0 or hd1 translate into hdg, but I forget how to list devices in GRUB legacy. I'm going to bet though that device.map is stale and it probably needs to be recreated, and then find out what the proper hdX is for hdg. And then I think you're going to need to point it at a partition using hdX,Y. I'm willing to give that a try. The device.map looks good to me: (hd0) /dev/hde (hd1) /dev/hdg It is old, but the drives are still connected to the same connectors, so it should still be valid. How would I go about pointing it at the partition? What I am currently doing is this: device (hd0) /dev/hdg root (hd0,0) setup (hd0) Would I just need to change the setup line to "setup (hd0,0)", or is there more to it than that? Also, the partitions are mirrored, so if I install to a partition, I will affect the working drive as well. I'm not sure I want to risk breaking the setup that still works. I can take this machine down for testing
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote: >> I am trying to upgrade my system from 500GB drives to 1TB. > > I'm going to guess that there are no IDE drives that have 4096 byte > physical sectors, but it's worth confirming you don't have such a > drive because the current partition scheme you've posted would be > sub-optimal if it does have 4096 byte sectors. Oops. I just reread that this is now SATA. New versions of hdparm and smartctl can tell you if the drive is Advanced Format, and if it is, then I recommend redoing the partition scheme so it's 4K aligned. And so that it has an MBR gap. The current way to do this is have the 1st partition start at LBA 2048. -- Chris Murphy ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote: > I am trying to upgrade my system from 500GB drives to 1TB. I'm going to guess that there are no IDE drives that have 4096 byte physical sectors, but it's worth confirming you don't have such a drive because the current partition scheme you've posted would be sub-optimal if it does have 4096 byte sectors. I was able to > partition and sync the raid devices, but I cannot get the new drive to boot. > > This is an old system with only IDE ports. There is an added Highpoint raid > card which is used only for the two extra IDE ports. I have upgraded it with > a 1TB SATA drive and an IDE-SATA adapter. I did not have any problems with > the system recognizing the drive or adding it to the mdraid. A short SMART > test shows no errors. > > Partitions: > Disk /dev/hdg: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes > 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders > Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes > >Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System > /dev/hdg1 1 25 200781 fd Linux raid > autodetect > /dev/hdg2 26 121537 976045140 fd Linux raid > autodetect > /dev/hdg3 121538 121601 514080 fd Linux raid > autodetect In the realm of totally esoteric and not likely the problem, 0xfd is for mdadm metadata v0.9 which uses kernel autodetect. If the mdadm metadata is 1.x then the type code ought to be 0xda but this is so obscure that parted doesn't even support it. fdisk does but I don't know when support was added. This uses initrd autodetect rather than the deprecated kernel autodetect. It's fine to use 0.9 even though it's deprecated. You can use mdadm -E on each member device (each partition) to find out what metadata version is being used. Normally GRUB stage 1.5 is not needed, stage 1 can jump directly to stage 2 if it's in the MBR gap. But your partition scheme doesn't have an MBR gap, you've started the first partition at LBA 1. So that means it'll have to use block lists... > I installed grub on the new drive: > grub> device (hd0) /dev/hdg > > grub> root (hd0,0) > Filesystem type is ext2fs, partition type 0xfd > > grub> setup (hd0) > Checking if "/boot/grub/stage1" exists... no > Checking if "/grub/stage1" exists... yes > Checking if "/grub/stage2" exists... yes > Checking if "/grub/e2fs_stage1_5" exists... yes > Running "embed /grub/e2fs_stage1_5 (hd0)"... 15 sectors are embedded. > succeeded > Running "install /grub/stage1 (hd0) (hd0)1+15 p (hd0,0)/grub/stage2 > /grub/grub.conf"... succeeded > Done. I'm confused. I don't know why this succeeds because the setup was pointed to hd0, which means the entire disk, not a partition, and yet the disk doesn't have an MBR gap. So there's no room for GRUB stage 2. > > But when I attempt to boot from the drive (with or without the other drive > connected and in either IDE connector on the Highpoint card), it fails. > Grub attempts to boot, but the last thing I see after the bios is the line > "GRUB Loading stage 1.5", then the screen goes black, the system speaker > beeps, and the machine reboots. This will continue as long as I let it. As > soon as I switch the boot drive back to the original hard drive, It boots up > normally. Yeah it says it's succeeding but it really isn't, I think. The problem is not the initrd yet, because that could be totally busted or missing, and you should still get a GRUB menu. This is all a failure of getting to stage 2, which then can read the file system and load the rest of its modules. > I also tried installing grub as (hd1) with the same results. I'm disinclined to believe that hd0 or hd1 translate into hdg, but I forget how to list devices in GRUB legacy. I'm going to bet though that device.map is stale and it probably needs to be recreated, and then find out what the proper hdX is for hdg. And then I think you're going to need to point it at a partition using hdX,Y. -- Chris Murphy ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 6.7 is released
Am 05.08.2015 um 17:19 schrieb Alan McKay : > Any ETA on when CentOS 6.7 will exit the CR phase? fourth paragraph: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2015-July/153859.html -- LF ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On 8/5/2015 11:52 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Bowie Bailey wrote: I am trying to upgrade my system from 500GB drives to 1TB. I was able to partition and sync the raid devices, but I cannot get the new drive to boot. This is an old system with only IDE ports. There is an added Highpoint raid card which is used only for the two extra IDE ports. I have upgraded it with a 1TB SATA drive and an IDE-SATA adapter. I did not have any problems with the system recognizing the drive or adding it to the mdraid. A short SMART test shows no errors. Trying to get your configuration clear in my mind - the drives are 1TB IDE, and they're attached to the m/b, or to the Hpt RAID card? Also, did you update the system? New kernel? If so, is the RAID card recognized (we've got a Hpt RocketRaid card in a CentOS 6 system, and we're *finally* replacing it with an LSI (once it comes in), because Hpt does not care about old cards, and I had to find the source code, and then hack it to compile it for the new kernel, and have had to recompile for the new kernels we've installed To follow myself up, I forgot one thing I'd intended to ask: is it possible that you needed to rebuild the initrd? It's possible, but why would that be the case? The only thing that has changed from the OS point of view is the partition size on one of the drives. The filesystems are still the same. Also, as I said, it doesn't even get as far as attempting to boot Linux. It fails immediately after the "GRUB Loading stage 1.5" line, so it seems like a grub issue of some sort. -- Bowie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
Bowie Bailey wrote: > On 8/5/2015 11:27 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: >> Bowie Bailey wrote: >>> I am trying to upgrade my system from 500GB drives to 1TB. I was able >>> to partition and sync the raid devices, but I cannot get the new drive >>> to boot. >>> >>> This is an old system with only IDE ports. There is an added Highpoint >>> raid card which is used only for the two extra IDE ports. I have >>> upgraded it with a 1TB SATA drive and an IDE-SATA adapter. I did not >>> have any problems with the system recognizing the drive or adding it to >>> the mdraid. A short SMART test shows no errors. > It was originally a pair of 500GB IDE drives in an mdraid mirror > configuration. Right now, I have removed one 500GB drive and replaced > it with a 1TB SATA drive with an IDE-SATA adapter. Both drives are > connected to the Highpoint card and apparently working fine other than > the boot-up problem. > > I was considering adding an SATA card to the system, but I didn't want > to deal with finding drivers for a card old enough to work with this > system (32-bit PCI). > > I have not done any updates to the system in quite some time. 1. Have you, during POST, gone into the Hpt controller firmware and made sure that it sees and presents the new disk properly? 2. If that's good, then I'm wondering if the initrd needs a SATA driver, which it may not have, since the old version of your system was all IDE. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > Bowie Bailey wrote: >> I am trying to upgrade my system from 500GB drives to 1TB. I was able >> to partition and sync the raid devices, but I cannot get the new drive >> to boot. >> >> This is an old system with only IDE ports. There is an added Highpoint >> raid card which is used only for the two extra IDE ports. I have >> upgraded it with a 1TB SATA drive and an IDE-SATA adapter. I did not >> have any problems with the system recognizing the drive or adding it to >> the mdraid. A short SMART test shows no errors. > > Trying to get your configuration clear in my mind - the drives are 1TB > IDE, and they're attached to the m/b, or to the Hpt RAID card? > > Also, did you update the system? New kernel? If so, is the RAID card > recognized (we've got a Hpt RocketRaid card in a CentOS 6 system, and > we're *finally* replacing it with an LSI (once it comes in), because Hpt > does not care about old cards, and I had to find the source code, and then > hack it to compile it for the new kernel, and have had to recompile for > the new kernels we've installed > To follow myself up, I forgot one thing I'd intended to ask: is it possible that you needed to rebuild the initrd? mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
On 8/5/2015 11:27 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: Bowie Bailey wrote: I am trying to upgrade my system from 500GB drives to 1TB. I was able to partition and sync the raid devices, but I cannot get the new drive to boot. This is an old system with only IDE ports. There is an added Highpoint raid card which is used only for the two extra IDE ports. I have upgraded it with a 1TB SATA drive and an IDE-SATA adapter. I did not have any problems with the system recognizing the drive or adding it to the mdraid. A short SMART test shows no errors. Trying to get your configuration clear in my mind - the drives are 1TB IDE, and they're attached to the m/b, or to the Hpt RAID card? Also, did you update the system? New kernel? If so, is the RAID card recognized (we've got a Hpt RocketRaid card in a CentOS 6 system, and we're *finally* replacing it with an LSI (once it comes in), because Hpt does not care about old cards, and I had to find the source code, and then hack it to compile it for the new kernel, and have had to recompile for the new kernels we've installed It was originally a pair of 500GB IDE drives in an mdraid mirror configuration. Right now, I have removed one 500GB drive and replaced it with a 1TB SATA drive with an IDE-SATA adapter. Both drives are connected to the Highpoint card and apparently working fine other than the boot-up problem. I was considering adding an SATA card to the system, but I didn't want to deal with finding drivers for a card old enough to work with this system (32-bit PCI). I have not done any updates to the system in quite some time. -- Bowie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
Bowie Bailey wrote: > I am trying to upgrade my system from 500GB drives to 1TB. I was able > to partition and sync the raid devices, but I cannot get the new drive > to boot. > > This is an old system with only IDE ports. There is an added Highpoint > raid card which is used only for the two extra IDE ports. I have > upgraded it with a 1TB SATA drive and an IDE-SATA adapter. I did not > have any problems with the system recognizing the drive or adding it to > the mdraid. A short SMART test shows no errors. Trying to get your configuration clear in my mind - the drives are 1TB IDE, and they're attached to the m/b, or to the Hpt RAID card? Also, did you update the system? New kernel? If so, is the RAID card recognized (we've got a Hpt RocketRaid card in a CentOS 6 system, and we're *finally* replacing it with an LSI (once it comes in), because Hpt does not care about old cards, and I had to find the source code, and then hack it to compile it for the new kernel, and have had to recompile for the new kernels we've installed mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL 6.7 is released
Any ETA on when CentOS 6.7 will exit the CR phase? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] CentOS 5 grub boot problem
I am trying to upgrade my system from 500GB drives to 1TB. I was able to partition and sync the raid devices, but I cannot get the new drive to boot. This is an old system with only IDE ports. There is an added Highpoint raid card which is used only for the two extra IDE ports. I have upgraded it with a 1TB SATA drive and an IDE-SATA adapter. I did not have any problems with the system recognizing the drive or adding it to the mdraid. A short SMART test shows no errors. Partitions: Disk /dev/hdg: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/hdg1 1 25 200781 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/hdg2 26 121537 976045140 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/hdg3 121538 121601 514080 fd Linux raid autodetect Raid: Personalities : [raid1] md0 : active raid1 hdg1[1] hde1[0] 200704 blocks [2/2] [UU] md1 : active raid1 hdg3[1] hde3[0] 513984 blocks [2/2] [UU] md2 : active raid1 hdg2[1] hde2[0] 487644928 blocks [2/2] [UU] fstab (unrelated lines removed): /dev/md2/ ext3 defaults1 1 /dev/md0/boot ext3 defaults1 2 /dev/md1swapswap defaults0 0 I installed grub on the new drive: grub> device (hd0) /dev/hdg grub> root (hd0,0) Filesystem type is ext2fs, partition type 0xfd grub> setup (hd0) Checking if "/boot/grub/stage1" exists... no Checking if "/grub/stage1" exists... yes Checking if "/grub/stage2" exists... yes Checking if "/grub/e2fs_stage1_5" exists... yes Running "embed /grub/e2fs_stage1_5 (hd0)"... 15 sectors are embedded. succeeded Running "install /grub/stage1 (hd0) (hd0)1+15 p (hd0,0)/grub/stage2 /grub/grub.conf"... succeeded Done. But when I attempt to boot from the drive (with or without the other drive connected and in either IDE connector on the Highpoint card), it fails. Grub attempts to boot, but the last thing I see after the bios is the line "GRUB Loading stage 1.5", then the screen goes black, the system speaker beeps, and the machine reboots. This will continue as long as I let it. As soon as I switch the boot drive back to the original hard drive, It boots up normally. I also tried installing grub as (hd1) with the same results. A few Google searches haven't turned up any hits with this particular problem and all of the similar problems have been with Ubuntu and grub2. Any suggestions? Thanks, -- Bowie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] xfs question
- Original Message - | On 8/4/2015 12:47 PM, James A. Peltier wrote: | > Some older 32-bit software will likely have problems addressing any content | > outside of the 2^32 bit inode range. You will be able to see it, but | > reading and writing said data will likely be problematic | | | The 99% of software that just does open,read,write will be fine | regardless of word size. | | NFS is the only broken thing I ran into (on CentOS 6 anyways), and then | only if you export subdirectories in the XFS file system, if you just | export the root of it, you won't have any issues.if you are | exporting subdirectories (something I find Windows admins like to do), | then you have to specify a locally unique integer fsid on each export. | I just use fsid=1, fsid=2, ... | | | | | -- | john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz This is not at all our findings on large file systems or filesystems with large numbers of inodes. We in fact on many occasions ran into such problems. To the OP, if you're 64-bit everywhere there's no problems so enjoy the benefits of XFS ;) -- James A. Peltier IT Services - Research Computing Group Simon Fraser University - Burnaby Campus Phone : 604-365-6432 Fax : 778-782-3045 E-Mail : jpelt...@sfu.ca Website : http://www.sfu.ca/itservices Twitter : @sfu_rcg Powering Engagement Through Technology ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
