Re: [CentOS] CentOS Continuous Release Repository updated with CentOS-6.7 RPMs
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 04:03:14 -0500 Johnny Hughes wrote: > The packages that will become CentOS-6.7, as well as updates completed > for CentOS-6.7 to date are now released into the CentOS-6.6 Continuous > Release (CR) repository. ... > 3. The package set includes 243 Source RPMs updated and are broken > down as: > > 21 Security Updates: > 0 Critical Security > 1 Important Security > 16 Moderate Security > 4 Low Security And that "1" important above is quite important. See RHSA-2015-1482 (CVE-2015-3245, CVE-2015-3246) pkg libuser: local root with exploit in the wild. Maybe it's even worth cherry picking that package over to 6-updates asap? (as a side note c5 is also affected but no update exists or is planned afaict). /Peter -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IPMI/BMC/BIOS
On Thu, 2 Jul 2015 10:11:09 + (UTC) Chris Olson wrote: ... > My initial recommendation was to use a totally separate network for > any service processors +1 for this. We typically put all management ports for a 'system/project' on a sep. non-routed eth. segment to which only the, for the 'system/project', designated management servers can connect. It is probably a good idea to consider random ethernet connected 'things' as soft security wise and not suitable for the big bad internet... As for bios/firmware on servers the best one can do is to use non-deprecated hardware from responsible vendors and keep up to date with their sec. info and update promptly when required. /Peter ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] install older version of glibc package
On Monday 25 October 2010, Peter Kjellstrom wrote: > On Monday 25 October 2010, Sherin George wrote: > > Hello Guys, > > > > Recently, I have installed some custom packaged of glibc in servers I > > manage due to vulnerabilities. At that time, official centos packages > > were not available. Now, I want to roll back to centos versions. > > Do note that this new (and probably your custom built) glibc is vulnerable > to a new trival local root For completeness, Turns out that getting root with 3856 on CentOS-5 atleast isn't copy-n-paste-trivial. The suggested exploit using libpcprofile.so fails since that file comes from glibc-utils which (afaict) typically isn't installed. That said, it seems very likely that there are other ways to exploit 3856 on CentOS-5 so do not in any way interpret this as "lets skip the update". /Peter > (so you may want to build yet another custom > version instead of switching back): > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=cve-2010-3856 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] install older version of glibc package
On Monday 25 October 2010, Sherin George wrote: > Thanks you so much Peter. > > I thought it is fixed in latest centos rpm. CVE-2010-3847 is fixed in 2.5-49.el5_5.6 CVE-2010-3856 has no released fix (afaik): http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2010/Oct/344 > I got "custom packaged of glibc" from a third party(which I know as > reliable) site. > > Do you have any information about availability of a patched replacement at > this time? Nope /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] install older version of glibc package
On Monday 25 October 2010, Sherin George wrote: > Hello Guys, > > Recently, I have installed some custom packaged of glibc in servers I > manage due to vulnerabilities. At that time, official centos packages > were not available. Now, I want to roll back to centos versions. Do note that this new (and probably your custom built) glibc is vulnerable to a new trival local root (so you may want to build yet another custom version instead of switching back): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=cve-2010-3856 /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] OT: looking for network performance comparison chart
On Friday 22 October 2010, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > Hi all, > > Does anyone have, or know of a comparison chart of the different > network adapters, i.e. 1GB / 10GB, Infiniband, etc. And if possible > with a few top brand NIC's and switches listed as well. Iperf(tcp) Good 1G eth: 945 Mbps Good 10G eth(w/o tcp tuning): 6-7 Gbps Same 10G with some tcp tuning): 9.4 Gbps Infiniband(MPI or raw verbs): SDR: 980 MB/s DDR: 1900 MB/s QDR: 3700 MB/s I don't have numbers for IPoIB (tcp on Infiniband) since we dont use that much. > I would like to see, for example, what the max throughput is of a 1GB > NIC (and this could probably differ from PCI to PCIE-x1 to PCIE-x4), > and 10GBE. Different switches would probably also have different > ratings, Most or all switches I've used the last few year can take wirespeed 1G eth on atleast a few ports concurrently. For 10G eth I don't know much more than that our procurve, cisco and bladenetworks equipment can do wire speed (atleast on a few ports concurrently). Infiniband swtiches are typically very good at delivering bandwidth (as long as you avoid congestion). > but could a layer 2 switch & layer3 switch deliver the same > performance for example? As previously stated by another poster, layer3 is only features, says nothing about performance (although features tend to cost you..). > Basically I need to know what upload / download speeds I should be > getting from the different networks, set aside other options like CPU > / RAM / disc IO / etc. All of my figures above assumes "good hardware". If you want to push 10G or more you'll need PCI-express gen2 and a modern CPU/memory. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] yum update
On Wednesday 20 October 2010, Ritika Garg wrote:
> After giving command "yum update openoffice" the output is:
There isn't really one package called openoffice so running the above command
is no better than "yum update abcdefghijkl".
What you probably want to do is to update all packages ("yum update").
The output below is also a bit strange. Giving yum update an incorrect pkg
name should result in something like this added to the output:
"No Match for argument: openoffice"
What are you running exactly?
/Peter
> Loaded plugins: fastestmirror
> Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
> * base: centos.aol.in
> * updates: ftp.oss.eznetsols.org
> * addons: centos.aol.in
> * extras: centos.aol.in
> Setting up Update Process
> No Packages marked for Update
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] network interface question
On Thursday 14 October 2010, Paras pradhan wrote: ... > I have eight nics and its getting difficult to me which MAC id > represents which physical port. Any way to find this? Have a look at the "-p" option to ethtool /Peter > Thanks! > Paras. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] XFS on a 25 TB device
On Wednesday 29 September 2010, Boris Epstein wrote: > On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Peter Kjellstrom wrote: > > On Wednesday 29 September 2010, Boris Epstein wrote: ... > >> I am wondering if I need to worry about stripe and width though as > >> mine resides on a logical volume residing on a hardware-controlled > >> RAID 6 device (i.e., one slice as far as the OS is concerned). > > > > That is why you need to consider it. If the device is aligned on stripe > > size (chunk size * (number of drives - 2 for raid6 parity)) and the > > filesystem is made aware it can put stuff (files, metadata, etc.) so that > > a minimum of stripes are touched (less I/O done). ... > Well, you are interfering with the hardware RAID controller which > copies around and stripes data as it sees fit. I am not sure with this > many levels of abstraction I can gain any measurable performance > improvement by adjusting the XFS to the controller's hypothetical > behaviour. You are a bit mistaken. The raid controller does not "copy data around as it sees fit". It stores data on each disk in chunk-size'ed pieces. It then stripes this across all drives giving you a stripe-size'ed piece of chunk size times the number of data drives. Typical chunck sizes are 16, 32, 64, 128 and 256 KiB. If you created your raid-set with, say, 128 KiB chunk size and 16 physical drives this will give you a stripe size of: 128 * (16 - 2) => 1792 KiB Having the filesystem align its stuctures to this can (of course depending on work load) make a huge difference. But you won't be able to do this if your device isn't already aligned (unaligned use of partitions and/or LVM). Then again, for other workloads the effect could be insignificant. YMMV. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] XFS on a 25 TB device
On Wednesday 29 September 2010, Boris Epstein wrote: > On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:53 AM, James A. Peltier wrote: > > | However, given the size of the device I assume that this is a raid of > > | some > > | sort. You'll want to make sure to run mkfs.xfs with the proper stripe > > | parameters to get the alignment right. Also, you may want to make sure > > | your > > | LVM or partition table is properly aligned. ... > I am wondering if I need to worry about stripe and width though as > mine resides on a logical volume residing on a hardware-controlled > RAID 6 device (i.e., one slice as far as the OS is concerned). That is why you need to consider it. If the device is aligned on stripe size (chunk size * (number of drives - 2 for raid6 parity)) and the filesystem is made aware it can put stuff (files, metadata, etc.) so that a minimum of stripes are touched (less I/O done). /Peter > Boris. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] XFS on a 25 TB device
On Wednesday 29 September 2010, Boris Epstein wrote: > Hello all, > > I have just configured a 64-bit CentOS 5.5 machine to support an XFS > filesystem as specified in the subject line. The filesystem will be used to > store an extremely large number of files (in the tens of millions). Due to > its extremely large size, would there be any non-standard XFS > build/configuration options I should consider? I have created and tested filesystems larger than 25T using xfs on CentOS-5 (64-bit). I did not use any non-standard options. Do not attempt this on a 32-bit box. However, given the size of the device I assume that this is a raid of some sort. You'll want to make sure to run mkfs.xfs with the proper stripe parameters to get the alignment right. Also, you may want to make sure your LVM or partition table is properly aligned. Even with the above done right you may get worse performance than expected since "lots of small files" typically reads like "terrible performance". Finally I'd suggest you fill the filesystem and read it back (verifying what you wrote). This is, imho, a reasonable level of paranoia. /Peter > Thanks. > > Boris. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] slightly OT: dban
On Friday 27 August 2010, Kevin Thorpe wrote: > On 27/08/2010 15:19, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > > I'm trying to nuke a Dell Optiplex GX620. I've got a perfectly good dban > > 1.0.4 that I've used a bunch of times... but on this machine, it says > > starting, then dies, saying "dban has finished with non-fatal errors. > > Check the log for more information" It never gets to the interactive > > menu. > > > > Now that I've disabled the non-existant floppy drive, at least it does > > say "to save the log file again, press enter" > > I usually use dban but if it's not handy use a liveCD (me usually > Ubuntu) and use dd: > > Assuming the drive to kill is /dev/sda: > dd if=/dev/random of=/dev/sda This command will take forever and ever and ever (reads against /dev/random blocks as the kernel runs out of entropy). /dev/urandom would be better but still not very fast. To get some speed you'd have to do something like: 1) save a megabyte of /dev/urandom in a file 2) while true ; do dd file to dev ; done Or run some dban-like program instead of dd. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is oprofile still working?
On Monday 16 August 2010, Hywel Richards wrote: > Mindaugas Riauba wrote: ... > > Check https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467651 > > > > It looks like in CentOS oprofile is built against older version of > > binutils. When I installed the same version of binutils and oprofile > > from RHEL - everything started to work. > > Ha! - so it is just a problem with the way that it was compiled for > CentOS, then (oprofile getting recompiled before binutils-devel somehow?). > > So, I got the centos5 SRPM for oprofile, rebuilt it and installed the > RPM, and hey presto - a working oprofile again (on ia32). > > It looks like the current ia32 CentOS oprofile RPM in circulation, then, > needs replacing with a recompiled one. > > Hywel. For the archives: http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=4482 /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] can i config/build/boot a new kernel on centos 5.5 with LVM?
On Friday 20 August 2010, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > (disclaimer: i'll be a bit vague about some of this since i don't > have a test system to try to reproduce it until later today or this > weekend.) > > during a RHEL SA course i was teaching this week, i was using both > centos 5.5 and RHEL 6.0 beta 2 and, as a fun exercise, i was showing > how to "git" checkout the kernel source tree, configure it, build, > install and boot to a new kernel. Rolling your own kernel is really considered a last resort on CentOS/RHEL. It seems like a strange exercise to select for an RHEL SA course (IMHO). If you really want/need to do this then reading through http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Custom_Kernel may be a good idea. > sadly, at no time did that > exercise actually work, so i just want to ask a general question -- > should i, with a standard install of centos 5.5 with all of the > required development packages, be able to checkout the kernel source, > and build and boot a new kernel? If done properly, yes. However it's not like just any git-checked-out kernel+config will make you happy. > upon reflection, the issues might have to do with the fact that LVM > was in use and perhaps the initrd didn't have LVM support built in > but, again, i can't check that until later today at the earliest. ... LVM will be automatically added to the initrd by mkinitrd (assuming the kernel it tries to use has the required modules). /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is oprofile still working?
On Friday 13 August 2010, Hywel Richards wrote: > Peter Kjellstrom wrote: > > On Thursday 12 August 2010, Hywel Richards wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Is anyone using oprofile? > >> > >> I'm getting segfaults from opreport at the moment, and I'm not sure if > >> it is opreport, or just me. > > > > I've tried the steps you outline below and it works for me (updated C5.5 > > as of 10m ago). My only guess is that your binary is b0rked. What happens > > if you do "opreport -l" instead of "opreport -l /tmp/myprog"? Was myprog > > compiled with "-g"? > > > > And just to be sure, could you provide "uname -a" and "rpm -q oprofile". > > > > /Peter > > "opreport -l" gives: > > warning: /no-vmlinux could not be found. > warning: [vdso] (tgid:11369 range:0xdc9000-0xdca000) could not be found. > warning: [vdso] (tgid:2453 range:0x154000-0x155000) could not be found. ... > warning: [vdso] (tgid:6643 range:0xfaa000-0xfab000) could not be found. > CPU: Core Solo / Duo, speed 800 MHz (estimated) > Counted CPU_CLK_UNHALTED events (Unhalted clock cycles) with a unit mask > of 0x00 (Unhalted core cycles) count 10 > bfd_get_section_contents:get_debug:: Bad value I guess that means that there is a problem with the data collected. All the warnings about vdso ranges that can't be found is strange (I don't get that here). Are the tgids in that list special in any way? Is this on a single machine or on several? Do you know if this strange behaviour persists over reboots? Anything strange in ~/.oprofile? If you don't have customizations remove it and let oprofile re-create it. > myprog was not compiled with -g, but that shouldn't be a requirement, > right? No you're right ... > "uname -a" gives: > > Linux myhost 2.6.18-194.11.1.el5 #1 SMP Tue Aug 10 19:09:06 EDT 2010 > i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux I notice that you're on 32-bit while I'm on x86_64. That may or may not be relevant. I don't have any 32-bit machines around to test on though. > "rpm -q oprofile" gives: > > oprofile-0.9.4-15.el5 > > I also did an "rpm -V oprofile" - no problems. No harm in being paranoid :-) /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is oprofile still working?
On Thursday 12 August 2010, Hywel Richards wrote: > Hi all, > > Is anyone using oprofile? > > I'm getting segfaults from opreport at the moment, and I'm not sure if > it is opreport, or just me. I've tried the steps you outline below and it works for me (updated C5.5 as of 10m ago). My only guess is that your binary is b0rked. What happens if you do "opreport -l" instead of "opreport -l /tmp/myprog"? Was myprog compiled with "-g"? And just to be sure, could you provide "uname -a" and "rpm -q oprofile". /Peter > In case it is something just plain daft I am doing, here is how it goes: > > opcontrol --reset > opcontrol --setup --no-vmlinux > opcontrol --start > > ... now I run my program, /tmp/myprog ... > > opcontrol --dump > opcontrol --shutdown > > then I run, > opreport -l /tmp/myprog > and get: > warning: [vdso] (tgid:4780 range:0x8d7000-0x8d8000) could not be found. > warning: [vdso] (tgid:4784 range:0x86-0x861000) could not be found. > CPU: Core Solo / Duo, speed 1067 MHz (estimated) > Counted CPU_CLK_UNHALTED events (Unhalted clock cycles) with a unit > mask of 0x00 (Unhalted core cycles) count 10 > Segmentation fault ... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CENTOS 5.5 segfault what it mean??
On Tuesday 27 July 2010, mcclnx mcc wrote: > We have CENTOS 5.5 on DELL server and several ORACLE databases on version > 10.2.0.4 and 11.1.0.7. Recently I found following messages popup on > /var/log/messages: > > > Jul 26 16:28:03 ORA6 kernel: oracle[29286]: segfault at ... > > I can not find and trace file or core dump file on O.S. and ORACLE > databases. I also check hardware log and NO memory or disks error. > > Any ideal? The OS noted that a process "oracle" with pid 29286 crashed (segmentation fault). Not much more can be learned from only this. Can be an application bug or pretty near anything else (segfault is essentially memory corruption, but most commonly due to code bugs). Turn to application level logs after ruling out hardware (which you seem to have done). /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] To PAE or not to PAE...
On Thursday 22 July 2010, John Doe wrote: > Hi, > > I was wondering if anyone would know the cons of running a PAE kernel...? > I have a 4GB pc and was wondering if it was worth going the PAE way to gain > those exta 700MB... > In the past, I heard that these 700MB were normally reserved for bios or > chipset stuff... > And that running in PAE would slow down some processes. > By the way, I know 64 bits would solve this dilemn but right now I am > 32bits... There is no general answer. Getting more memory could for some workloads be critical. On the other hand, other loads might not care much about the extra few hundred megs but instead suffer some PAE related slowdown. Good news though, trivial to test. Just reboot with the PAE kernel, check the performance of your workload. If you see improvment stay on PAE, else go back. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] LVM issue
On Wednesday 21 July 2010, Phil Manuel wrote: > Hi We use AoE disks for some of our systems. Currently, a 15.65Tb > filesystem we have is full, I then extended the LVM by a further 4Tb but > resize4fs could not handle a filesystem over 16Tb (CentOS 5.5). It's even worse, ext4 (with current userspace tools) can't handle >16T even if you mkfs it from scratch... /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Desktop Supercomputer
On Saturday 17 July 2010, Rajagopal Swaminathan wrote: > Greetings, > > On 7/17/10, John R Pierce wrote: > > On 07/16/10 11:01 AM, Rajagopal Swaminathan wrote: > > > > is your goal a "server" or "supercomputing"? all that tesla stuff sorta > > says supercomputing, while HA etc says 'server'. > > > > supercomputer clusters eschew HA in favor of having many independent > > compute units in a loose cluster that can tolerate any node dying by > > simply reassigning its last work unit to another node. only the > > persistent storage (usually a SAN or a clustered file system), and the > > cluster controller needs conventional HA. > > I was thinking more about a "personal supercomputer in a cloud" > > HA is a requirement for cloud. So I guess I have to think further about it. Lol, saturday morning entertainment :-) Combining HA + "personal supercomputer" + "in a cloud" + using GPUs sure maxed out my troll-o-meter. Very creative. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] GPT Partitions >2.2T with Centos 5.5
On Wednesday 14 July 2010, Jens Neu wrote: > > I think ext3 is a bit slow on so big LUNS, try xfs or similar? > > there is no official support for xfs in RHEL5, so that is not an option. > Besides, I'm talking about a drop of >150mb/s to ~10mb/s read performance > when cracking the 2.2T size. This is clearly not in the ext3 (or FS for > that matter) magnitude of performance issues. Also, numbers stay the same > when dd'ing on the raw device (LUN). Do you see the slow behaviour (10 MiB/s) for all of the device or only for the part that is >2T? Why use a partition table at all? run dd directly against the device. If this is slow then you have a controller side problem. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] os that rather uses the gpu?
On Tuesday 13 July 2010, Jozsi Avadkan wrote: > Does someone know a distribution/operating system, that rather uses the > GPU for "working", not the CPU? [by default] That is not possible (for reasonable values of possible...). No such operating system exists today. /Peter > Or this solution is still in the "beginning part"? > > Thanks for any tips, link, suggestions. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] OT: ?? Centos Still Broken, Red Hat won't fix ??
On Friday 09 July 2010, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote: > On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 at 8:16pm, Whit Blauvelt wrote > > > On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 06:35:47PM -0400, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote: > >> It has been stated many times and on many fora that Red Hat's bugzilla > >> is not a mechanism for support. They are under no obligation to address > >> issues raised there. Is it nice when they do? Absolutely. > > > > There are two issues you're conflating here. The first, paramount one is: > > Is Red Hat taking responsibility for bugs people have taken the effort to > > accurately report to them? This is a measure of any software project, > > totally separate from the issue of whether and for what the project leads > > provide paid support. In particular, if they are marketing this software > > to anyone - even if the person kind enough to report the bug is not a > > paying customer - they have a responsibility _to their paying customers_ > > to resolve all serious bugs in a timely manner - or at least to indicate > > in their bugzilla why they are rejecting fixing them. > > To be clear here, the "bug" in question is not present in any binaries > that Red Hat ships. To be fair, this is only true if you're refering to the fact that he could not recompile the kernel in a different way. If you consider the main bug to be that redhat doesn't provide the optimized kernel in the first place... /Peter > None of their paying customers will ever experience > this bug while running in a supported configuration. It's a case of "you > broke it, you get to keep the pieces". signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] OT: ?? Centos Still Broken, Red Hat won't fix ??
On Thursday 08 July 2010, Seth Bardash wrote: > To the Linux Community at Large: > > I reported to this list back in January, 2010 that the standard x86_64 > kernel, when built from the src.rpm and modified for AMD K8 / K10 > Extensions would not build. I reported this here and to Red Hat via > Bugzilla ID number 558367. RH AS / Centos 5.3 worked fine. That was > Centos 5.4 / Red Hat Enterprise AS 5 Update 4. Today we tried to > optimize Red Hat Enterprise AS 5 Update 5. Same problem. At last check > all kernels from 2.6.18-10 to 2.6.18-194 won't build with AMD specific > optimizations. Do you have any data to back up this position? (that optimizing the kernel for a specific processor is of any significant real world use) ... > Now we are looking at the AMD G34 CPU's and are building some demo > units. I think its time to benchmark these systems with the working - > non optimized Red Hat / Centos Linux versus the optimized Opensuse / > SLES Linux for standard server functions and publish them. Too many (other) variables change you'd not be able to say that it had to do with the processor specific optimization of the kernel. For this you'd need to benchmark the same dist but with optimized and non-optimized kernel. Also, to impress me, the benchmark in question would have to be a relevant high level benchmark, not kernel micro benchmarks. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] kernel: Machine check events logged
On Wednesday 07 July 2010, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > Peter Kjellstrom wrote: > > On Wednesday 07 July 2010, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > >> Alexander Farber wrote: ... > >> > MISC c0080100 ADDR 1148f5940 > >> > Northbridge NB Array Error > >> >bit35 = err cpu3 > >> >bit42 = L3 subcache in error bit 0 > >> >bit43 = L3 subcache in error bit 1 > >> >bit46 = corrected ecc error > >> >bit59 = misc error valid > >> > memory/cache error 'generic read mem transaction, generic > >> > transaction, level generic' > >> > STATUS 9c1f4cf8001c011b MCGSTATUS 0 > >> > No DIMM found for 1148f5940 in SMBIOS ... > >> - I'm not good enough on this to tell you if > >> it's the CPU, or the motherboard, but it's one of the two, *not* just > >> memory. > > > > What do you base that on? I've seen a lot of different MCE-errors being > > resolved by finding and replacing flaky dimms. > > Because it says NB Array error, and errors in the L3 subcache. I've seen > enough memory errors, and not seen an NB array & subcache error. That does sound like a reasonable guess. However, you presented it as absolute truth. The MCE could just as easily be read as: NB means not IC/DC/BU => actual RAM. Given that real world figures show bad RAM to be a lot more likely that a bad CPU I'd start by looking at the dimms (or at the very least not exclude it...). > I do just note that there's "No DIMM found for ... in SMBIOS", but I > assume that's just a bank that's not filled. or the SMBIOS data is borked, wouldn't be the first time... /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] kernel: Machine check events logged
On Wednesday 07 July 2010, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > Alexander Farber wrote: > > every few hours I get the following message in /var/log/message: > > Jul 5 20:23:28 hXXX kernel: Machine check events logged ... > > MCE 0 > > HARDWARE ERROR. This is *NOT* a software problem! > > Please contact your hardware vendor > > CPU 0 4 northbridge TSC 111a60c5584d4 [at 2500 Mhz 1 days 9:25:51 > > uptime (unreliable)] > > MISC c0080100 ADDR 1148f5940 > > Northbridge NB Array Error > >bit35 = err cpu3 > >bit42 = L3 subcache in error bit 0 > >bit43 = L3 subcache in error bit 1 > >bit46 = corrected ecc error > >bit59 = misc error valid > > memory/cache error 'generic read mem transaction, generic > > transaction, level generic' > > STATUS 9c1f4cf8001c011b MCGSTATUS 0 > > No DIMM found for 1148f5940 in SMBIOS ... > First, this is *very* bad That's a bit hard. Depending on what the actual error is that triggers this mce it may actually be just an annoyance (even though, yes, it is a hardware problem). Also the OP did mention that the servers runs without any obvious problems. > - I'm not good enough on this to tell you if > it's the CPU, or the motherboard, but it's one of the two, *not* just > memory. What do you base that on? I've seen a lot of different MCE-errors being resolved by finding and replacing flaky dimms. > Second, if you're paying for hosting, and it's *their* server, you > need to get on the phone with them *now*, and tell them that they need to > fix it, yesterday would be preferable. They *should* have seen the logs. > > Dunno if you have a physical machine hosted there, or a VM' I'm quite sure you can't get that kind of MCE-dump inside a VM. /Peter > if the latter, > they can move it without you seeing any downtime at all. If the former, > they can just hot swap the drives into another server. > > But call them *NOW*. You're paying for the service. > > mark signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How can binaries be different when package versions are identical? (mkfs.ext3 on CentOS 5.4)
On Wednesday 30 June 2010, Spiro Harvey wrote: > Aleksey Tsalolikhin wrote: > > (a) account for the difference in the binaries, and > > (b) see if something else is different that I can make the same to get > > the mkfs.ext3 time down to 15 sec on both systems. > > Solving (a) should shed light on (b). Any ideas? > > Look into prelinking (man prelink). A prelinker from /etc/cron.daily > that changes the binaries with an aim to speed up execution. While prelinking would give you different checksums for the same binary on different servers it would not show up in "rpm -V" as reported. This since rpms checksumming is prelink-aware. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] XFS on CentOS
On Tuesday 22 June 2010, Boris Epstein wrote: > Hi all, > > Does anybody know why unlike so many Linux distros (Fedora, Ubuntu, > OpenSUSE) CentOS does not come with XFS support by default It does, try "modinfo xfs" or "yum list xfsprogs". > but rather > requires custom modifications after the install in order for you to be > able to support XFS on your CentOS machine? It's not available in the installer since it's considered a "technology preview" by Redhat. /Peter > Just seems a little odd > given how much CentOS is oriented to be used as a server OS. > > Thanks. > > Boris. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] XFS on CentOS
On Tuesday 22 June 2010, Athmane Madjoudj wrote: > On 06/22/2010 04:57 PM, Boris Epstein wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Does anybody know why unlike so many Linux distros (Fedora, Ubuntu, > > OpenSUSE) CentOS does not come with XFS support by default but rather > > requires custom modifications after the install in order for you to be > > able to support XFS on your CentOS machine? Just seems a little odd > > given how much CentOS is oriented to be used as a server OS. > > > > Thanks. > > AFAIK, XFS kernel, modules and utils are available in CentOSPlus[1] repo This is not correct anymore. The kernel module is in the normal kernel (atleast in 5.4 and 5.5) and the xfsprogs package is in CentOS-extras. Note that XFS is not available for i386 since it has problems with 4K kernel stacks (in some situations). /Peter > [1] http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories/CentOSPlus signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] New kernel causes hardware error?
On Tuesday 22 June 2010, John R Pierce wrote: > On 06/22/10 12:21 AM, Peter Kjellstrom wrote: > > On Tuesday 22 June 2010, Eric Deis wrote: > >> I have recently upgraded to 2.6.18-194.3.1.el5 and within several days > >> the machine crashed with the following error (repeating in mcelog): > > > > I'm guessing the old kernel just didn't notice. > > > > The below MCEs indicate bad hardware. Since the DIMMs are a lot easier to > > debug I'd suggest you start there (but it could be the systemboard too). > > Try running with half you DIMMs then the other half. > > and on nehalem (xeon 5500, 5600), the memory controller is in the CPUs, > so they are suspect too. In theory, yes. But while we've replaced many DIMMS and some system boards I don't think we've replaced a single (nehalem type) CPU (this observed during ~1 CPU-months). /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] New kernel causes hardware error?
On Tuesday 22 June 2010, Eric Deis wrote: > I have recently upgraded to 2.6.18-194.3.1.el5 and within several days > the machine crashed with the following error (repeating in mcelog): I'm guessing the old kernel just didn't notice. The below MCEs indicate bad hardware. Since the DIMMs are a lot easier to debug I'd suggest you start there (but it could be the systemboard too). Try running with half you DIMMs then the other half. /Peter > MCE 0 > HARDWARE ERROR. This is *NOT* a software problem! > Please contact your hardware vendor > CPU 2 BANK 8 MISC 41 ... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] recognizing correct number of cores on CPU
On Friday 18 June 2010, Jerry Geis wrote: > Peter Kjellstrom wrote: ... > > More information would also be nice (like dmesg output). > > > > /Peter > > > >> I'd rather not go through the process again of putting a newer kernel > >> on the machine and having something different out there than "stock" > >> centos. > >> > >> Jerry > > more /proc/cpuinfo is showing: > more /proc/cpuinfo > processor : 0 > vendor_id : GenuineIntel > cpu family : 6 > model : 37 > model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU M 430 @ 2.27GHz ... > dmesg is : > > Linux version 2.6.18-194.3.1.el5 (mockbu...@builder10.centos.org) (gcc > version 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-48)) #1 SMP Thu May 13 13:08:30 EDT > 2010 Command line: ro root=LABEL=/ rhgb quiet noapic acpi=off apci=off I think this is the problem, acpi=off, that will (if I remember correctly) essentially disable smp. /Peter > BIOS-provided physical RAM map: ... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] recognizing correct number of cores on CPU
On Friday 18 June 2010, Jerry Geis wrote: > I just installed centos 5.5 x86_64 on a new HP laptop. > It has the core i5 processor. > > only 1 cpu is detected should be 2. > > This has happened before. Is upstream not keeping up with > new processors released and updating the kernel? I've used the stock CentOS kernel with even unreleased CPUs, there is no general need for CPU to be supported. Maybe this is a bios problem. More information would also be nice (like dmesg output). /Peter > I'd rather not go through the process again of putting a newer kernel > on the machine and having something different out there than "stock" > centos. > > Jerry signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] clustered file system of choice
On Wednesday 16 June 2010, Boris Epstein wrote: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 4:05 PM, wrote: > > Boris wrote: > >> I am just trying to consider my options for storing a large mass of > >> data (tens of terrabytes of files) and one idea is to build a > >> clustered FS of some kind. Has anybody had any experience with that? > >> Any recommendations? > > > > We've been looking at glusterfs here. It's under active development, has > > some problems, but it does work, and is in use a number of places around > > the world. ... > Will surely check Glusterfs out. What's your thoughts on GPFS: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPFS ? We run GPFS (and lustre) on CentOS-5(x86_64). GPFS is quite nice and very flexible but costs money. Lustre on the other hand is free and very scalable but lacks many of the features of GPFS. Never tried Glusterfs and Ceph is not even close to mature enough for actual use (from what I've seen). /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] MooseFS repository
On Friday 11 June 2010, Laurent Wandrebeck wrote: > Hi, > > A repository for MooseFS is just born. It provides CentOS 5.5 SRPMS, > i386 and x86_64. > > cd /etc/yum.repos.d/; wget http://centos.kodros.fr/moosefs.repo ; yum > install mfs A general security comment. Doing the above means downloading and running code from kodros.fr as root on your systems. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Broken repo / mirrors?
On Friday 28 May 2010, Robert Heller wrote: > I fixed my earlier problem with a 'yum clean all', now I am getting this > problem: > > 'Package does not match intended download' Sounds like the new meta-data you got after your 'yum clean all' was bad (ie. does not match the packages on any other mirror). Try pointing yum to a trusted mirror and re-run the clean all. It could be something else also but the packages you pull down does not match the checksums in the meta-data. Less likely reasons for this includes an evil proxy, bad RAM, ... /Peter > for both device-mapper and net-snmp-libs, for ALL of the mirrors. Log > of the output is attached. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Math?
On Monday 03 May 2010, hadi motamedi wrote: > Dear All > Is there any software package like MATLAB for Windows available for centos? > Thank you Ocatave is a free matlab-like tool available from EPEL in packages suitable for CentOS. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] PAPI + perfctr on CentOS 5?
On Wednesday 28 April 2010, Eduardo Grosclaude wrote: > Has anyone succesfully compiled a PAPI+perfctr-enabled kernel? I've > been mixing and matching instructions from the PAPI distribution and > those from CentOS wiki to no avail. > TIA From the perfctr-2.6.40 release notes: Version 2.6.40, 2010-01-30 ... - Updated kernel support: 2.6.32, 2.6.31, 2.6.18-164.11.1.el5 and 2.6.18-164.el5 (RHEL5), 2.6.9-89.0.19.EL (RHEL4). I've not tried this but ealier versions on CentOS was trivial to patch in using the provided documentation. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Kernel Or Hardwar e
On Tuesday 27 April 2010, cahit Eyigünlü wrote: > I saw memtest support only 4gb ram but i have 8gb ; Huh? I've run memtest86 on 72G machines it uses slow PAE but gets the job done. ... > this is the error : > > BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ffe5 > IP: [] fput+0x0/0x12 > PGD 203067 PUD 204067 PMD 0 > Oops: 0002 [#1] SMP > last sysfs file: /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cache/index2/shared_cpu_map > CPU 1 > Modules linked in: ipt_REDIRECT xt_owner xt_conntrack iptable_mangle ... > Pid: 4243, comm: tar Not tainted 2.6.30 #1 ESPRIMO P5925 2.6.30 is not quite a CentOS kernel (OT warning..) what are you running exactly? /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Power consumption monitoring
On Thursday 15 April 2010, Mathieu Baudier wrote: > Hi, > > I have quite a few low-end development/test servers running > continuously and I would like to better manage their power > consumption. > I have found interesting information on how to perform CPU scaling > (e.g. [1] or [2]). > > But I cannot find if there is a way to (software) monitor power > consumption on CentOS (or other such data like CPU temperature, fan > speed etc.). Most machines simply don't have that hardware. Some laptops do and then, with proper kernel, you can run powertop (or read /proc/acpi/power...). Some servers have power meters built in but uses tools specific to that vendor/server (like HP ppic). > What I read so far is that support is quite limited in this kernel > (e.g. PowerTop not providing useful information). > > Before I start tuning I would like to be able to measure whether my > changes are having any impact at all. I'd suggest that you buy an external power meter like kill-a-watt. /Peter > Thanks in advance, > > Mathieu > > > [1] http://www.lesswatts.org/tips/cpu.php > [2] http://www.spencerstirling.com/computergeek/powersaving.html signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ==> gcc 4.4.3 on centos 64 bit
On Friday 26 March 2010, Dieter Best wrote: > I did a "yum install gcc44" ... > I have the following now. Suggestions? ... > [r...@centos2 Misc]# gcc44 mytest.cc > gcc44: error trying to exec 'cc1plus': execvp: No such file or directory gcc44 contains the c-compiler, you'll want the gcc44-c++ package too. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] An odd IPMI problem
On Thursday 11 March 2010, mark wrote: > Peter Kjellstrom wrote: ... > > Seems to me that the IPMI driver can't find the IPMI hardware. What kind > > of server are you trying this on? Is it known to work with the > > IPMI-driver in vanilla CentOS-5.4? > > > You seem to have missed the beginning of my original post, where I said > that it had been running fine for 10 days, then *stopped* working. Ooops, indeed, sorry for that :-) That leaves, at least, two possibilities 1) the BMC is flaky (power cycle machine or maybe even replace the BMC) 2) kernel driver messed up. If it's the driver then, assuming you havn't already, try to unload the ipmi stuff. Essentially "lsmod | grep ipmi" and the rmmod those. A "service ipmi restart" should probably automate this for you. Since you're focusing on the "in system" approach I assume you lack an ethernet connection to the BMC? ...if not try to reach it that way. /Peter > The > server's still up, though I haven't been into the data center to see if the > idiot red led "fault light" is blinking on (and that has no blink code, > just "there's a problem" is what the docs say). > > mark signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] An odd IPMI problem
On Wednesday 10 March 2010, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: ... > $ insmod > /lib/modules/2.6.18-164.11.1.el5/kernel/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si.ko > ports=0xca2 slave_addrs=0x10 > insmod: error inserting > '/lib/modules/2.6.18-164.11.1.el5/kernel/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si.ko': -1 > No such device > > and in the log > Mar 10 11:24:36 south kernel: IPMI System Interface driver. > Mar 10 11:24:36 south kernel: ipmi_si: Trying hardcoded-specified kcs > state machine at i/o address 0xca2, slave address 0x0, irq 0 > Mar 10 11:26:28 south kernel: ipmi_si: There appears to be no BMC at this > location > Mar 10 11:26:28 south kernel: ipmi_si: Trying SMBIOS-specified kcs state > machine at i/o address 0xca2, slave address 0x20, irq 0 > Mar 10 11:28:20 south kernel: ipmi_si: There appears to be no BMC at this > location > Mar 10 11:30:12 south kernel: ipmi_si: Unable to find any System > Interface(s) Seems to me that the IPMI driver can't find the IPMI hardware. What kind of server are you trying this on? Is it known to work with the IPMI-driver in vanilla CentOS-5.4? /Peter > Notice that it's looking at slave_addrs of 0x0 and 0x20, *not* 0x10. > > Any clues? > > mark signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Motherboards for HPC applications
On Monday 08 March 2010, Eduardo Grosclaude wrote: > Hello, > Can somebody recommend CentOS-OK, dual socket motherboards for compute > elements? A quick look up at Intel pages suggests they are thinking of > them as "server boards", but then they recommend them as "for SMB", There are no perticular HPC considerations. You typically want bang for the buck. Depending on how many servers you're aiming for you'll have to consider different factors. You may want to look into buying complete servers from say Dell/HP (depending on your situation...). Things you may be interested in: * Suitable pci-express connectors (Infiniband cards, GPUs, ...) * Lots of memory slots * Low price and good stability (reputation/experience) * IPMI management (if you're buying lots of servers) * Packaging (which box will this format of board fit in etc.) YMMV etc. ... /Peter > I'm somewhat puzzled about it. > It would be nice to know what MBs you are using, pros and cons. > Thank you in advance signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] which FS is appropriate for a 2TB-sized partition?
On Monday 08 March 2010, Khusro Jaleel wrote: > Thanks to all of you for your help, and especially Tim Shubitz who faced > the same problem and his solution worked perfectly for me. > > However, now that I have properly created a GPT partition of size 2.7TB, > which filesystem is best on it? This filesystem will be used to store > backups of various other linux systems, so the files will be mostly small, > however some systems do host big movie files and sometimes SVN dumps, and > DB dumps can get a little big. I am going to be using rsnapshot to do the > backups, so perhaps I should be careful about the number of inodes I create > and try to maximise them? > > I am thinking of using XFS, but am not sure. I seem to have heard in the > past that one should avoid EXT3 on such huge filesystems, but I can't find > a reference or proper justification for it. JFS is another option but then > some mailing list threads online say it has lost data for them so I'm a bit > confused as to what is best to use in my scenario. My thoughts on this are roughly: * 2.7T isn't really big ext3,xfs,jfs,etc. should all be fine * We've run XFS alot, but still, it's a lot less mainstream than ext3 * Ext4 is still a tech preview in 5.4 * We have alot of data on Lustre-style ext3 (in the range 4-8T), no issues Boils down to: Use what you're comfortable with (XFS is typically faster for us but ext3 certainly won't break down at this scale). /Peter > As for XFS I have read that a UPS is necessary and this is not a problem > since these machines are already connected to a UPS (and that UPS has a > backup as well). > > Any help appreciated, thanks, > > Khusro signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] is yum a complete substitute of rpm?
On Monday 15 February 2010, Bowie Bailey wrote: > Jim Green wrote: > > On 13 February 2010 10:27, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > >> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010, Jim Green wrote: > >> > >> > >> $ rpm -qa # list all installed packages > > > > yum list installed > > I use rpm for basic stuff because it runs faster. For example: > > $ time yum list installed > ... > real0m17.069s > user0m0.857s > sys 0m0.675s > > $ time rpm -qa > ... > real0m4.714s > user0m4.457s > sys 0m0.120s A nice twist is that "-qa" can be extened to "-qa --last" to get the output sorted on install date (or you can have any format you want with --qf like a previous poster suggested). /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] is yum a complete substitute of rpm?
On Saturday 13 February 2010, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Sat, 13 Feb 2010, Jim Green wrote: ... > > Thank Robert and Ron, Could you list an example where I need to use > > rpm command alone? I used rpm to install stand alone package if that > > is the case. > > i suspect there are yum alternatives for some of these but here's > some stuff i like: > > $ rpm -qa # list all installed packages > $ rpm -qR # list dependencies of package > $ rpm -ql # display list of files in package > $ rpm -qf # what package is from? > > and many others. One from me: $ rpm -V # verify all files from installed pkg /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RAID, temperature and FAN status manage and monitoring tool for RHEL4 Update 4 ia64 AS Linux
On Thursday 11 February 2010, Balaji wrote: > Hi, > > Currently I've been using an RHEL4 Update 4 ia64 AS Linux version > and running in HP rx6600 server. > > I tried to google-out the RAID, temperature and FAN status manage > and monitoring tool for RHEL4 Update 4 ia64 AS Linux > But i can't able to findout the same for RHEL4 Update 4 ia64 AS > Linux server > > Can anyone suggest me the write status monitoring and manage tool > for RHEL4 Update 4 ia64 AS Linux server I'd search itrc.hp.com (using the name of the storage controller and server). > Some of the information are below > > [r...@corviewsecondary src]# lspci > 00:01.0 Class ff00: Hewlett-Packard Company: Unknown device 1303 > 00:01.1 Communication controller: Hewlett-Packard Company: Unknown > device 1302 ... Maybe the above would be more readable with newer pci ids. You can updated this by running the command "update-pciids" (then rerun the lspci...). ... > I have findout the mpt-status source from forum and download the same. > During compilation i have getting an error and below or the error > message Do you have any indications that mpt-status should work on ia64? /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] best parallel / cluster SSH
On Thursday 04 February 2010, Alan McKay wrote: > Hey folks, > > I stumbled upon this while looking for something else > > http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/151340 > > And it is something I could actually really make use of. But right on > that site they list 3 different ones, and so I'm wondering what all is > out there and what I should use. In (HPC) clustering pdsh is very popular. It's available in .tgz with spec-file and rebuilds nicely on c5 with rpmbuild -tb ... https://computing.llnl.gov/linux/pdsh.html A few examples of what pdsh can do: - pick hosts with compact expressions: -w n[3-10,44] - settable fanout (run on X hosts in parallel) - remote command timeout - pdcp command that allows the copying of file - nifty post-processor that compats output: $ pdsh -w n[1-3],n5 uname -r | dshbak -c n[1-3,5] 2.6.18-164.11.1.el5 /Peter > Is there one that is part of the standard CentOS? > > thanks, > -Alan signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] dm-crypt/LUKS the state of the art for block device encryption?
On Tuesday 02 February 2010, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > it's been a while since i've played with filesystem encryption so, > on centos 5.4 (and other linux distros), is dm-crypt/LUKS considered > to be the state of the art WRT encryption? i remember other solutions > like loop-aes and others, but what's considered the gold standard > these days? Yes, dm-crypt/LUKS/ configured in /etc/crypttab is the "blessed" way afaik. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] very large difference between df and du (10 GB, hard to believe )
On Monday 01 February 2010, Brian Mathis wrote: > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:36 AM, Matt Iavarone wrote: > > This is typical. There were probably files deleted from the file > > system that are still in use by a process. Restarting the process > > will release the files and df and du will jive. > > That argument only holds until you reach the point in the email where > > he said this: > > I rebooted on the CentOS v4.8 CD #1, started "linux rescue" : Indeed. At this point I'd start looking at things hiding under mount points. But as the OP seems to have only one filesystem, /, then this will be limited to mount-points for special filesystems (like sys, proc and /dev/shm). What I'm getting at is that you could have, for example, a 10G file /proc/foo on the actaul /-filesystem. As soon as proc is mounted on /proc this would be invisible. /Peter > After the reboot that would be taken care of, so that's not the issue here. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How to map ata#.# numbers to /dev/sd numbers?
On Thursday 28 January 2010, Stephen Harris wrote: > [ Sorry to merge messages; I appear to have lost Peter's post, so I'm > replying to Peter and Mark in the same message ] > > Peter Kjellstrom wrote: > > > On Thursday 28 January 2010, Stephen Harris wrote: > > >> to determine what ata7.01 maps to in terms of /dev/sd# values? > > > > > > This seems quite hard to do. The following hack will match scsi hosts > > > to libata-driver + number: > > Hmm, interesting: > > % for d in /sys/class/scsi_host/host* > do > echo "$d $(cat $d/proc_name) $(cat $d/unique_id)" > done > /sys/class/scsi_host/host0 ahci 1 > /sys/class/scsi_host/host1 ahci 2 > /sys/class/scsi_host/host2 ahci 3 > /sys/class/scsi_host/host3 ahci 4 > /sys/class/scsi_host/host4 ahci 5 > /sys/class/scsi_host/host5 ahci 6 > /sys/class/scsi_host/host6 sata_sil24 7 > /sys/class/scsi_host/host7 sata_sil24 8 > /sys/class/scsi_host/host8 usb-storage 0 > > So in this case ata7 appears to map to host6. Now the usb-storage entry > looks odd. Do I have to magically know that ahci and sata_sil24 both map > to "ata" entries? AFAICT, I'm afraid so :-/ > >From lsscsi I see, for host 6 > > [6:0:0:0]diskATA ST31000340AS SD15 /dev/sdc > [6:1:0:0]diskATA ST31000340AS SD15 /dev/sdd > [6:2:0:0]diskATA ST31000340AS SD15 /dev/sde > [6:3:0:0]diskATA ST31000340AS AD14 /dev/sdf > > So I have to guess the second number in ata#.# represents the LUN of the > device on that bus, so ata7.1 -> host6 -> [6:1:0:0] -> sdd The LUN is actually the last of the four digits, the 2nd one is target (host:target:device:lun), but yes, your observation seems correct. > This looks like an unreliable method of detection. But it may be possible! Uhu > m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > > Have you checked dmesg? For example, > > Yeah, but dmesg has two problems that I can think of > 1) it may disappear if the number of kernel messages grows sufficiently > large > > 2) The ID number wasn't obvious > scsi6 : sata_sil24 > scsi7 : sata_sil24 > ata7: SATA max UDMA/100 host m...@0xfe7fbf80 port 0xfe7fc000 irq 169 > ata8: SATA max UDMA/100 host m...@0xfe7fbf80 port 0xfe7fe000 irq 169 > > How does that tell me ata7 matches scsi6? We can't rely on ordering > (see below). That is basically why I tried to find a better way than "interpreting" dmesg, yes you can probably figure it out but man it's an ugly way... > Further, > > ata7: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 0) > ata7.15: Port Multiplier 1.1, 0x1095:0x3726 r23, 6 ports, feat 0x1/0x9 > ata7.00: hard resetting link > ata7.00: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 320) > ata7.01: hard resetting link > ata7.01: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 300) > ata7.02: hard resetting link > ata7.02: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 0) > ata7.03: hard resetting link > floppy0: no floppy controllers found > ata7.03: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 300) > ata7.04: hard resetting link > ata7.04: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 320) > ata7.05: hard resetting link > ata7.05: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 320) > ata7.00: ATA-8: ST31000340AS, SD15, max UDMA/133 > ata7.00: 1953525168 sectors, multi 16: LBA48 NCQ (depth 31/32) > ata7.00: configured for UDMA/100 > ata7.01: ATA-8: ST31000340AS, SD15, max UDMA/133 > ata7.01: 1953525168 sectors, multi 0: LBA48 NCQ (depth 31/32) > ata7.01: configured for UDMA/100 > ata7.02: ATA-8: ST31000340AS, SD15, max UDMA/133 > ata7.02: 1953525168 sectors, multi 0: LBA48 NCQ (depth 31/32) > ata7.02: configured for UDMA/100 > ata7.03: ATA-8: ST31000340AS, AD14, max UDMA/133 > ata7.03: 1953525168 sectors, multi 0: LBA48 NCQ (depth 31/32) > ata7.03: configured for UDMA/100 > ata7: EH complete > Vendor: MaxtorModel: 6Y120P0 Rev: YAR4 > Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 > SCSI device sdb: 240121728 512-byte hdwr sectors (122942 MB) > sdb: Write Protect is off > sdb: Mode Sense: 53 00 00 08 > sdb: assuming drive cache: write through > SCSI device sdb: 240121728 512-byte hdwr sectors (122942 MB) > sdb: Write Protect is off > sdb: Mode Sense: 53 00 00 08 > sdb: assuming drive cache: write through >sdb:<6>ata8: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 0) > ata8.15: Port Multiplier 1.1, 0x1095:0x3726 r23, 6 ports, feat 0x1/0x9 > ata8.00: hard resetting link > ata8.00: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 320) > > As can be seen, different parts of detection a
Re: [CentOS] How to map ata#.# numbers to /dev/sd numbers?
On Thursday 28 January 2010, Stephen Harris wrote: ... > Now occasionally I see something like this in my logs > > ata7.01: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 a ction 0x0 ... > How do I tell what disk this is complaining about? Is there a way > to determine what ata7.01 maps to in terms of /dev/sd# values? > > /proc/scsi/scsi doesn't obviously match scsi# numbers to ata# numbers :-( This seems quite hard to do. The following hack will match scsi hosts to libata-driver + number: $ for d in $(ls -d /sys/class/scsi_host/host?); do echo "$d $(cat \ $d/proc_name) $(cat $d/unique_id)" ; done /sys/class/scsi_host/host0 ahci 1 /sys/class/scsi_host/host1 ahci 2 /sys/class/scsi_host/host2 ahci 3 /sys/class/scsi_host/host3 ahci 4 /sys/class/scsi_host/host4 ahci 5 /sys/class/scsi_host/host5 ahci 6 This does not get you all the way though, but unless you have several different libata-drivers ahci 1-6 above will match ata1-ata6 (read "dmesg | less"...). Once you know which scsi-host you're looking for the /dev/sdX name can be had from many sources (like the output of "lsscsi"). /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Logrotate in CentOS 5.4 more brutal (to httpd at least) than in 5.3?
On Friday 15 January 2010, Christopher Thorjussen wrote: > I've just updated a few CentOS 5.3 servers to 5.4. One of them were a > Apache Webserver. Doing a diff/check on the new ".rpmnew" config files that > are made, I saw that the logrotate command for apache was changed. In 5.3 > it did a reload, but in 5.4 it does a hard kill: 5.4 does a "kill -HUP" which is what "service httpd reload" does too. The -HUP signal causes http to re-read stuff rather than shutting down. Still, I don't really understand why 5.4 doesn't use "service reload" which seems more "correct" (and the init.d script does a little bit of checking before the kill -HUP too). *shrug* Peter > CentOS 5.3: ... > postrotate > /sbin/service httpd reload > /dev/null 2>/dev/null || true > CentOS 5.4: ... > postrotate > /bin/kill -HUP `cat /var/run/httpd.pid 2>/dev/null` 2> /dev/null || > true endscript signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 8-15 TB storage: any recommendations?
On Thursday 14 January 2010, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 08:14:52PM +, Karanbir Singh wrote: ... > > Maybe its just bad luck here :) > > I remember a story about two similar HP proliants.. same model number, > ordered the same day, same hardware configuration etc.. > > The other one had problems with a lot of things, while the other one was > working perfectly well.. > > Looking at the serial numbers in more detail revealed the non-working > one was assembled in Malaysia, while the working one was assembled in > Ireland.. (iirc). :) IMO the most likely reason for one server working and not another one would be HP shipping (or bounce-your-servers-around-the-globe as I like to call it)... /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 8-15 TB storage: any recommendations?
On Thursday 14 January 2010, John R Pierce wrote: > Karanbir Singh wrote: > > My main issue with that kit is that the linux drivers are very basic, > > lack most management capabilities and fail often with obscure issues. We certainly don't see a high frequency of obscure-cciss-issues. But since no place and/or work-load is the same I guess this difference isn't too unexpected. > > And, as Peter pointed out already, they are not really exposing a proper > > scsi interface, but modeled around a really old ata stack. > > One thing HP has attempted to do with all their smartarray cards is > maintain RAID volume set compatability, so you can move a raid set from > a failed server to another raid controller that has the same interface > even if its a different controller.. This is far from always true, for example, raid6 sets are incompatible between quite similar controllers according to HP documentation. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 10 GBASE-T
On Thursday 14 January 2010, nate wrote: > Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > 10GBase-T: > > - latency 2.6 us > > - power per port: 4-6W/port > > With the right gear this is much lower, only 1 switch on the market > that is this good though the one mentioned in my blog, I'm sure > others will follow at some point with the same or similar chipset, > that vendor OEMs all their network chipsets these days so others > have access to them too. > > > 10 Gbit SFP+: > > - latency 0.3 us > > - power per port: 1.5W > > - price per port: $40 > > They've obviously left out the cost of the GBIC.. which is > typically several hundred $/port You don't have to buy GBICs, you can run direct attached copper or EOE cables. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] yum install -y gcc?
On Thursday 14 January 2010, John Doe wrote: > From: hadi motamedi > > >I tried to install GCC3.x , required to compile Asterisk , on my CentOS 5 > > server as the followings : #yum install -y gcc > > First, didn't you intend to install compat-gcc-34 ? > 'yum install gcc' would install gcc 4.x > > >But in the middle of the installation , my server went down from > > sudden power cut . After power recovery , I tried again but I am facing > > with the following error : > >"Error:Missing dependency : libstdc++-devel = 4.1.2-46.el5_4.1 is needed > > by package gcc-c++" Can you please let me know what is its meaning and > > how I can proceed to re-install it ? > > Try 'yum clean all'. He may want "yum-complete-transaction" from the pkg yum-utils if transactions were interrupted. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 8-15 TB storage: any recommendations?
On Wednesday 13 January 2010, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 01:05:39AM +0100, Peter Kjellstrom wrote: > > On Tuesday 12 January 2010, Les Mikesell wrote: > > > On 1/12/2010 10:39 AM, Peter Kjellstrom wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > >>> ...that said, it's not much worse than the competetion, storage > > > >>> simply sucks ;-( > > > >> > > > >> So you are saying people dole out huge amounts of money for rubbish? > > > >> That the software raid people were and have always been right? > > > > > > > > Nope, storage sucks, that includes the software ;-) > > > > > > If you can split the storage up into 2TB or smaller volumes that you > > > can mount into sensible locations to spread the load and avoid > > > contention you can always use software RAID1. > > > > Funny you should mention software RAID1... I've seen two instances of > > that getting silently out-of-sync and royally screwing things up beyond > > all repair. > > > > Maybe this thread has gone on long enough now? > > Not yet :) > > Please tell more about your hardware and software. What distro? What > kernel? What disk controller? What disks? Both of my data-points are several years old so most of the details are lost in the fog-of-lost-memories... Both were on desktop class hardware with onboard IDE or SATA. If I remember correctly one was on CentOS(4?) and one was on either an old Ubuntu or a classic debian (atleast we're talking 2.6 kernels). My main point was that, nope, linux-md is not the holy grail either. The only storage products that I've not had fail me tend to be either: 1) Those that are too new (give them time) 2) Those that I havn't tried (in scale) yet (which always gives a strong "the grass is greener on the other side feeling") /Peter > I'm interested in this because I have never seen Linux software MD RAID1 > failures like this, but some people keep telling they happen frequently.. > > I'm just wondering why I'm not seeing these failures, or if I've just > been lucky so far.. > > -- Pasi signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 8-15 TB storage: any recommendations?
On Tuesday 12 January 2010, Les Mikesell wrote: > On 1/12/2010 10:39 AM, Peter Kjellstrom wrote: ... > >>> ...that said, it's not much worse than the competetion, storage simply > >>> sucks ;-( > >> > >> So you are saying people dole out huge amounts of money for rubbish? > >> That the software raid people were and have always been right? > > > > Nope, storage sucks, that includes the software ;-) > > If you can split the storage up into 2TB or smaller volumes that you can > mount into sensible locations to spread the load and avoid contention > you can always use software RAID1. Funny you should mention software RAID1... I've seen two instances of that getting silently out-of-sync and royally screwing things up beyond all repair. Maybe this thread has gone on long enough now? /Peter > That at least has the advantage of > being able to recover the data from any single drive that might still > work after a problem. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 8-15 TB storage: any recommendations?
On Tuesday 12 January 2010, Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote: > >> Which is why I specifically said 'performance wise' as respects 3ware. I > >> don't remember anything bad about 3ware stability wise or monitoring > >> wise. > > > > Is that supposed to be a joke? 3ware has certainly had their fair share > > of stability problems (drive time-outs, bbu-problems, inconsistent > > behaviour, ...) and monitoring wise they suck (imho). Do you like tw_cli? > > Enjoying the fact that "show diag" gives you a cyclic text buffer without > > references? etc. > > Oh, I did not hear of those and my last experience with 3ware was up to > the 95xx series. I did hear of horror stories of Mylex but I myself > never got to see one of those where the raid configuration would > completely disappear. Most of my experience with 3ware is with the 75xx > and 85xx cards which are only good for raid1+0 unless you can afford the > major performance hit with raid5. > > > ...that said, it's not much worse than the competetion, storage simply > > sucks ;-( > > So you are saying people dole out huge amounts of money for rubbish? > That the software raid people were and have always been right? Nope, storage sucks, that includes the software ;-) /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 8-15 TB storage: any recommendations?
On Tuesday 12 January 2010, John R Pierce wrote: > Karanbir Singh wrote: > > On 12/01/10 00:02, Christopher Chan wrote: > >>> problems mostly centered around management and performance issues. the > >>> world is littered with stores of cciss fail > >> > >> Really? Man, I have been given this spanking new HP DL370 G6 and running > >> Centos 5.4 on it... > > > > I've got a couple of DL380's at one setup and another 12 DL360's at > > another place. We have had enough problems with interfaces that all the > > machines are now running off remote-storage. Our storage incident rate > > has gone from 1/day average to under 2/month since then. > > > > all of these machines are G4 and G5's running CentOS-5/x86_64 > > just curious, which storage controllers in those DL380/360 servers? > each of those numbes describes like 6 generations of x86 servers. > > if I want a lots-of-2.5" SAS dual e5500 kinda server, where should I go > if HP's storage is so broken? As I replied to another post, I think it's unfair to say that HP storage is broken. We have roughly: 30 p400 (mostly 2x raid1) 50 p800 (mostly 12x1T raid6) <10 other cciss and the only problems we really suffer is: * performance is not great * /dev/cciss is not a scsi dev (which is a minor annoyance in linux at times) * 1T seagate drives fail at many times the rate of hitachi /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 8-15 TB storage: any recommendations?
On Tuesday 12 January 2010, Christopher Chan wrote: > Keith Keller wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:07:17AM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: > >> I see that the Areca driver has finally made it into the mainline Linux > >> kernel. But I wonder how things have improved from this particular case. > >> > >> http://notemagnet.blogspot.com/2008/08/linux-disk-failures-areca-is-not- > >>so.html > > > > I can't speak to this, except to point out that it is almost 18 months > > old, which is quite a long time in kernel development space. > > Which is why I am asking. > > > With the right incantation, one can call smartctl directly on a drive > > connected to a 3ware controller, no matter what kind of array it is in. > > (I believe you can even call it on a drive assigned as a hot spare.) > > Which is why I specifically said 'performance wise' as respects 3ware. I > don't remember anything bad about 3ware stability wise or monitoring wise. Is that supposed to be a joke? 3ware has certainly had their fair share of stability problems (drive time-outs, bbu-problems, inconsistent behaviour, ...) and monitoring wise they suck (imho). Do you like tw_cli? Enjoying the fact that "show diag" gives you a cyclic text buffer without references? etc. ...that said, it's not much worse than the competetion, storage simply sucks ;-( /Peter > >> Any comments? With 3ware lately not looking so good from comments I have > >> heard on the list over the past few years performance wise, I wonder how > >> Adaptec and Areca look now? > > > > I've run an exclusively 3ware shop since I ditched my last aacraid > > machines a few years back. But with all their issues, I am definitely > > considering trying Areca on my next server that's not planned to be > > immediately mission-critical. (I wouldn't switch back to Adaptec unless > > I knew their interface tools, and especially their cli, had improved > > dramatically; the aaccli/afacli interfaces were simply atrocious.) > > What issues are you having with 3ware? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 8-15 TB storage: any recommendations?
On Monday 11 January 2010, Karanbir Singh wrote: > On 01/08/2010 05:28 PM, R-Elists wrote: > > what is wrong or what problems are you referring to with cciss please ? > > problems mostly centered around management and performance issues. the > world is littered with stores of cciss fail I would certainly not go as far as saying that I like cciss, but, they are imho not much worse than other products. We currently have ~500T on p800 and it behaves quite well. As for the specifics: - Management: hpacucli is certainly odd, but then again neither tw_cli (3ware) nor cli64 (areca) shines. - Performance: certainly not a strong point, but a p800 can sustain quite a bit more than the 1G ethernet link I need. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 2 CPU's problem(Centos5)
On Saturday 09 January 2010, Anas Alnaffar wrote: > I'll install cpufreq-utils and microcode-ctl, and I'll be right back to u > soon, if I need to install another packages or doing kernel update please > let me know, As I wrote in my first answer. The warning from microcode-ctl can be safely ignored. But, the kernel you are running is ancient which hints at a real problem => your system is vulnerable to a few years worth of CVEs. You should consider upgrading but if this is recently installed I'd simply suggest re-installing with latest CentOS-5(.4). /Peter > Thanks John > > Anas Al-Naffar signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Can't Compile Driver due to Missing version.h
On Friday 08 January 2010, Mufit Eribol wrote: > Dear All, > > I use a raid card on my Centos 5.4 server. Whenever I updated the > kernel, I used to compile drivers of the card for the new kernel. I have > done this many times in the past without any problem. > > But this time after installing the new kernel files given below, I can > not compile the new driver anymore. The way it should work is that kernel-PAE-2.6.18-164.9.1.el5 contains a symlink "/lib/modules/2.6.18-164.9.1.el5PAE/build" which points to "/usr/src/kernels/2.6.18-164.9.1.el5-PAE-i686" (from kernel-PAE-devel-2.6.18-164.9.1.el5 which also has among other things include/linux/config.h...). I don't have a machine that runs the 164.9.1 PAE kernel but the packages seems ok on my mirror: $ rpm -qlp kernel-PAE-2.6.18-164.9.1.el5.i686.rpm | grep build /lib/modules/2.6.18-164.9.1.el5PAE/build $ rpm -qlp kernel-PAE-devel-2.6.18-164.9.1.el5.i686.rpm | \ grep "/include/linux/config.h" /usr/src/kernels/2.6.18-164.9.1.el5-PAE-i686/include/linux/config.h You could start by checking the symlink: $ ls -ld /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/build ..then the contents of the .../include/linux/ dir: $ ls /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/build/include/linux/ /Peter > kernel-headers-2.6.18-164.9.1.el5 > kernel-PAE-devel-2.6.18-164.9.1.el5 > kernel-PAE-2.6.18-164.9.1.el5 > > The make command can not find /include/linux/version.h file with the > following error. But the file is already there. > > make KERNELDIR= /lib/modules/2.6.18-164.9.1.el5PAE/build > grep: /include/linux/version.h: No such file or directory > expr: syntax error > ../../../inc/linux/Makefile.def:85: *** Only kernel 2.4/2.6 is supported > but you use 2.. Stop. > > [r...@server linux]#locate include\/linux\/version.h command gives the > following result. > > /usr/include/linux/version.h > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.18-128.1.1.el5-PAE-i686/include/linux/version.h > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.18-164.9.1.el5-PAE-i686/include/linux/version.h > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.18-92.1.18.el5-PAE-i686/include/linux/version.h > > I would appreciate any help. > > Thank you. > Mufit Eribol signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 2 CPU's problem(Centos5)
On Wednesday 06 January 2010, Anas Alnaffar wrote: > Dears, > > I hope this email finds you well and in a very good health, > > I've been installed Centos5 on HP DL380 G5 server(Dual Processor), but > actually we are unable to see the other CPU Centos-5 works correctly with "HP DL380 G5 server(Dual Processor)" without modifications. So you're chasing either a hardware configuration problem or a "broken" install. The contents of /proc/cpuinfo and the output of "dmesg" would allow us to give you better help. > , during boot I get this error > message, > > Module microcode doesn't exit /proc/modules This is not the cause. It's a non-fatal warning that can be ignored. /Peter > Please advise. > Thanks > Anas Al-Naffar signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] scp copy remote files does NOT copy link?
On Monday 21 December 2009, b.j. mcclure wrote: ... > I know I'm going to be embarrassed by the answer to this one but I've > checked a couple rsync and ssh references, including man rsync, and do > not find an option -H. What is it? $ man rsync | grep "\-H" -a, --archive archive mode; same as -rlptgoD (no -H) -H, --hard-linkspreserve hard links want recursion and want to preserve almost everything (with -H ply-linked files is expensive. You must separately specify -H. -H, --hard-links Cheers, Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] unverified files in 5.4
On Sunday 20 December 2009, ken wrote: > On 12/18/2009 10:53 AM Peter Kjellstrom wrote: > > On Friday 18 December 2009, ken wrote: ... > >> To ensure that a file hasn't been corrupted or tampered with, you can > >> use rpm to verify the package it came from. Well, I found this: > >> > >> rpm -Vv util-linux > >> > >> /usr/bin/cal > >> S.?./usr/bin/chfn ... > > S means size differs from rpmdb entry, ? means the md5sum test could not > > be done. I'm guessing interference from prelink. If you can, turn it > > off(*) and re-run the test. ... > Thanks, Peter! I don't understand why prelink would affect the rpm > database, I'm quite sure that the database only stores the original "un-prelinked" checksum and the it's up to the -V command to compensate if it finds a prelinked binary (which apparently doesn't always work...). > but turning prelink off and then back on cleared those flags. Great :-) /Peter > Yes, mine was an upgrade from 5.3. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] unverified files in 5.4
On Friday 18 December 2009, ken wrote: > Hey, Gang! > > To ensure that a file hasn't been corrupted or tampered with, you can > use rpm to verify the package it came from. Well, I found this: > > > rpm -Vv util-linux > > /usr/bin/cal > S.?./usr/bin/chfn > /usr/bin/chrt > S.?./usr/bin/chsh I didn't see this on a clean install, but.. S means size differs from rpmdb entry, ? means the md5sum test could not be done. I'm guessing interference from prelink. If you can, turn it off(*) and re-run the test. (*) change to "PRELINKING=no" in /etc/sysconfig/prelink and run /etc/cron.daily/prelink. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is ext4 safe for a production server?
On Monday 07 December 2009, Florin Andrei wrote: > John R Pierce wrote: > > I've always avoided XFS because A) it wsan't supported natively in RHEL > > anyways, and B) I've heard far too many stories about catastrophic loss > > problems and day long FSCK sessions after power failures [1] or what > > have you > > I've both heard about and experienced first-hand data loss (pretty > severe actually, some incidents pretty recent) I'm sorry for your losses. That said, we've run many servers (100+) using many CentOS versions over the years and I don't know of one case of XFS caused data loss. For us XFS has always performed well and "just worked". Our initial reason for using XFS over EXT3 was write performance on certain RAID-controllers but lately it's also about scalability (file system size). > with XFS after power > failure. It used to be great for performance (not so great now that Ext4 > is on the rise), I am looking forward to EXT4, but it is currently a tech. preview (compared to XFS "proven for many years")... Just my €0.02, Peter > but reliability was never its strong point. The bias on > this list is surprising and unjustified. > > FWIW, I was at SGI when XFS for Linux was released, and I probably was > among its first users. It was great back then, but now it's over-rated. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Installing R on CentOS 5
On Monday 07 December 2009, Diederick Stoffers wrote: > Hi, > > Has anyone been able to successfully install R on CentOS5.4? I am having > problems with dependencies perl is installed. R is in epel and should as such be trivial to install. /Peter > Cheers, > > Diederick > > --> Finished Dependency Resolution > R-core-2.10.0-2.el5.x86_64 from R-project has depsolving problems > --> Missing Dependency: perl(File::Copy::Recursive) is needed by package > R-core-2.10.0-2.el5.x86_64 (R-project) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4 x86_64 only detects 32GB RAM while Fedora x86_64 correctly lists 128GB
On Monday 07 December 2009, Diederick Stoffers wrote: > Hi, > > We have a new 24-core Dell PowerEdge R905 server with 128GB's RAM. The 64 > bits version of Fedora 12 lists the correct amount of 128GB, CentOS only > finds 32GB (and so does Scientific Linux). Hmm.. maybe this has to do with the Xen kernel. Redhat says x86_64 should do 256G/1T (AMD/Intel) and we're successfully running 72G on Centos-5.4. /Peter > I would much prefer to use > CentOS (most of the software we use is specifically designed for CentOS). > Does anyone know what is causing this/how to fix it? > > Many Thanks, > > Diederick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Security updates for Centos 5.3
On Wednesday 21 October 2009, slchavar...@iusacell.com.mx wrote: > Hello, > > Someone knows which security updates i have to apply to a host with Centos > 5.3 x_64. All, that is "yum update" with a standard configuration (note that "All" here includes updates all the way to 5.x latest (which, as of about now, is 5.4)). /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] sum and limit quota for multiple filesystems/mountpoints
On Tuesday 20 October 2009, Götz Reinicke - IT-Koordinator wrote: > Hi, > > is there any way to sum and limit quotas for one user across multiple > filesystems? > > E.g. I'd like to use different mountpoints on a mailserver for /var/mail > and /home but the user should have only a total of 1GB. There is no such functionality in quota. What you could do is to update the 2nd filesystems quota setting, on a regular basis, to something like TOTAL minus currently used on the 1st fs. This surely qualifies as a "duct tape solution". /Peter > or on a samba server the windows profile files should be on an other > filesystem as other files for that user. > > > Regards, > > Götz signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] du vs df size difference
On Thursday 01 October 2009, Ryan Pugatch wrote: > Florin Andrei wrote: > > Last time I saw this issue, no sparse files, nothing legit, it was a > > corrupted FS. :( > > Well, if I mount to another directory the size is right. My next step > will be to fsck probably. One possibility is that the missing data is hiding under a mount-point in the normal case. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mdadm size issues
On Thursday 24 September 2009, Nathan Norton wrote: ... > All 10 drives are 2T in size. ... > # mdadm --create --verbose /dev/md3 --level=6 --raid-devices=10 /dev/sda1 > /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 /dev/sdd1 /dev/sde1 /dev/sdf1 /dev/sdi1 /dev/sdj1 > /dev/sdk1 /dev/sdl1 mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric > mdadm: chunk size defaults to 64K > mdadm: size set to 1953511936K > Continue creating array? > > As you can see mdadm sets the size to 1.9T 1953511936K (KiB, 2*2^40) is equal to 2 TB (2*10^12) no mystery here. ... > # mdadm --detail /dev/md3 > /dev/md3: > Version : 0.90 > Creation Time : Thu Sep 24 23:48:32 2009 > Raid Level : raid6 > Array Size : 15628095488 (14904.11 GiB 16003.17 GB) > Used Dev Size : 1953511936 (1863.01 GiB 2000.40 GB) 16003.17 GB (10^9) is exactly what you should get (10 drives -2 for parity times 2 TB). /Peter ... > Anyone got any ideas? > > Nathan signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] OT: What's wrong with RAID5
On Thursday 24 September 2009, Fajar Priyanto wrote: > Hi all, > Sorry for the OT. > I've got an IBM N3300-A10 NAS. It runs Data Ontap 7.2.5.1. > The problem is, from the docs it says that it only supports either > RAID-DP or RAID4. > What I want to achieve is Max Storage Capacity, so I change it from > RAID-DP to RAID4, but with RAID4, the maximum disk in a RAID Group > decrease from 14 to 7. In the end, either using RAID-DP or RAID4, the > capacity is the same. Both raid4 and raid5 could thoretically be used with 14 drives. Why they limit you to 7 drives at all is a good question (maybe you should ask IBM?). Possibly they consider too large arrays with only a single drive worth of parity un-safe. > Now, why RAID5 is not supported? I believe using RAID5, I can get more > storage capacity, can't I? > I also notice with some onboard RAID controller, they only support > either RAID0, RAID1, or RAID1+0. No RAID5. This has a completely different explanation. RAID0, 1 or 1+0 is a "simple" case of juggling sectors, no parity engine is needed. RAID4, 5 or 6 would require a much more complex and powerfull design. > What's wrong with RAID5, is there any technical limitation with RAID5? Compared to raid4: not much at all Compared to raid10: less safe, longer rebuilds, slower Compared to raid6: less safe, more usable space, typically faster /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Excessive NFS operations
On Thursday 10 September 2009, Lars Hecking wrote: > John R Pierce writes: > > Lars Hecking wrote: > > > This is an enterprise-wide setup I cannot change, but I will be able > > > to deploy a newer kernel. It'll have to wait until I return to the > > > office in a few weeks' time, though. > > > > an enterprise-wide setup that can't get regular security patches?!? > > Regular as in "patch as soon as available", no, but if the current kernel > helps with this problem, we'll roll it out. ...it will at least help with the small issue of: "any user can trivially become root" /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] p800 and HP
On Friday 21 August 2009, Rainer Duffner wrote: > Am 21.08.2009 um 19:08 schrieb Peter Kjellstrom: > > On Friday 21 August 2009, Joseph L. Casale wrote: > >>> We have a few (p800). My opinion is that they're acceptable but > >>> not fast. > >> > >> Heard this a few times now, in the interest of getting something > >> better > >> next time, what have you found equally reliable but faster? > > > > Nothing as cheap as a full dl185 that's for sure unless you count > > SUNs thor > > (thumper ng) machines but then you'll have to do the raid part in > > software > > somehow. > > Yeah, but that is as easy as > zpool create tank raidz2 dev1 dev2 dev3 dev4 dev5 dev6 etc. > zfs create tank/bigdisk Well, this being the CentOS mailing list I kind of assumed the OP was planning to run Linux on it and last I checked that did not include a production worthy zfs (if one at all). ... > If you really want to go with a HW controller, try Areca or the high- > end 3Ware models. We have lots of 3ware. They work but when they exhibit problems it's, IMHO, a lot worse to diagnose/fix. Also, in my experience, both Areca and 3ware almost needs XFS to run fast (sequential I/O wise). /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] p800 and HP
On Friday 21 August 2009, Joseph L. Casale wrote: > >If you really want to go with a HW controller, try Areca or the high- > >end 3Ware models. > > Well, for non Solaris/non file servers, hardware raid is easiest. I am > hesitant to go with Areca (looks like cheap tw stuff). I have always used > LSI stuff but found them slow as hell, I am pretty sure the hp sa's are LSI > chips... Yes they are LSI but with serious firmware re-work by HP. /Peter > Wonder what's in store for 3ware now that LSI owns them... ... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] p800 and HP
On Friday 21 August 2009, Joseph L. Casale wrote: > >We have a few (p800). My opinion is that they're acceptable but not fast. > > Heard this a few times now, in the interest of getting something better > next time, what have you found equally reliable but faster? Nothing as cheap as a full dl185 that's for sure unless you count SUNs thor (thumper ng) machines but then you'll have to do the raid part in software somehow. I do like Nexsans Satabeast and qlogic HBAs though :-) /Peter > >- hpacucli requires you to twist your brain sideways (syntax) > > Heh, that's no doubt:) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] p800 and HP
On Friday 21 August 2009, Mag Gam wrote: > I was wondering if anyone here has experience with HP MSA60 with P400 > and P800 controller. How reliable are they for a 24x7 shop? We have a few (p800). My opinion is that they're acceptable but not fast. We've had one flaky controller in 30 controllers in a year (but I think that one turned out to be a loose PCI-slot). On the plus side: + does raid6 + smartarray logical drives are a lot more flexible than most other raids + monitoring built on hpacucli, works, clear and consistent behaviour + just works on CentOS + no problem with large devices (for resonably new versions of fw/driver) and: - not terribly impressive speed wise - /dev/cciss/cXdY... can be problematic when software assumes /dev/XXX - hpacucli requires you to twist your brain sideways (syntax) All my experience with the p800 is from DL185g5 with 12x1T drives. We also have a few random p400's. They behave idenically to the p800 but slower. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Kernel NULL pointer vulnerability
On Friday 14 August 2009, Kai Schaetzl wrote: > Marcus Moeller wrote on Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:24:39 +0200: > > The only workaroud that is known to me atm is to disable the affected > > kernel modules (which should be handled with care as some of them may > > provide necessary functionality in your operating environment): > > If vm.mmap_min_addr is > 0 you are also not affected, at least not by that > exploit. ...Unless you have selinux enabled in any way (including permissive) since in this case selinux overrides the kernel setting and makes vm.mmap_min_addr==0. /Peter > http://www.h-online.com/security/Critical-vulnerability-in-the-Linux- > kernel-affects-all-versions-since-2001--/news/114004 > > CentOS 5 has it sent to 65536 by default. CentoS 4 should be vulnerable. > > Kai signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is there an openssh security problem?
On Friday 10 July 2009, Rob Kampen wrote: > Coert Waagmeester wrote: ... > > it only allows one NEW connection to ssh per minute. > > > > That is also a good protection right? ... > Not really protection - rather a deterrent - it just makes it slower for > the script kiddies that try brute force attacks Basically it's not so much about protection in the end as it is about keeping your secure-log readable. Or maybe also a sense of being secure... It's always good to limit your exposure but you really have to weigh cost against the win. Two examples: Limit from which hosts you can login to a server: Configuration cost: trivial setup (one iptables line) Additional cost: between no impact and some impact depending on your habits Positive effect: 99.9+% of all scans and login attempts are now gone Verdict: Clear win as long as the set of servers are easily identifiable Elaborate knocking/blocking setup: Configuration cost: significant (include keeping it up-to-date) Additional cost: setup of clients for knocking, use of -p XXX for new port Positive effect: "standard scans" will probably miss but not air tight Verdict: Harder to judge, I think it's often not worth it Other things worth looking into are, for example, access.conf (pam_access.so) and ensuring that non-trivial passwords are used. my €0.02, Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is there an openssh security problem?
On Tuesday 07 July 2009, Ray Van Dolson wrote: > On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 10:31:36PM +0200, Geoff Galitz wrote: > > > is there a security issue on CentOS 5.3 with openssh 4.3? > > > > If this is a real zero-day exploit.. then yes, there is an issue. The > > following link may be the best source of information at the moment: > > > > http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=6742 > > > > > > FWIW, I think the second comment about RHEL/Centos in the referenced post > > is a little off-base. After all, you have to know that a bug exists > > before you can fix it. > > This link[1] seems to show a RHEL 5.3 machine being exploited (could be > wrong though). The only thing indicating that this is RHEL-5.3 is, afaict, the title. The kernel version is not EL, the mysql version is not etc. Worth keeping an eye on though. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Memory reporting...
On Monday 06 July 2009, John Doe wrote: > Hi, > > I have a little question about memory usage... > > When I do a free, I get: /proc/meminfo may give you a more detailed summary. /Peter > total used free sharedbuffers cached > Mem: 18482800 18030668 452132 0 6830689426792 > -/+ buffers/cache:7920808 10561992 > > But, when I do a ps, mysql is the only process that takes noticable memory; > and it is far from 7.9GBs... > > USER PID %CPU %MEMVSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND > mysql28346 36.0 15.6 3241196 2884692 ? Sl Jul04 981:19 \_ > /usr/libexec/mysqld --basedir=/usr --datadir=/IOL/mysql --user=mysql > --pid-file=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.pid --skip-external-locking --port=3306 > --socket=/IOL/mysql/mysql.sock > > Once you removed the buffers and the cached memory from the total used > memory... what is left? Looks like I have "something" (that is not > buffers/cached) that takes more than 4GB... Could it be disk cache or is it > included in the cached value? > Any idea? > > Thx, > JD signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Random server reboot after update to CentOS 5.3
On Friday 22 May 2009, Peter Hopfgartner wrote: ... > Would it make sense to install the kernel from CentOS 5.2? Any > contraindications? As others have said, you should still have the 5.2 kernel around. Just change the grub.conf and reboot. It makes no sense to start swapping around hardware until you've tried to revert the kernel. That said, we've seen hangs and strange kernel messages on several different server platforms (HP DL140g3: NMI-related messages logged, HP DL160g5: hangs semi-randomly) with the new 5.3 kernels. All of these problems could be worked around by booting with the kernel option "nmi_watchdog=0". /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 32bit vs 64bit memory usage
On Thursday 21 May 2009, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote: > On Thu, 21 May 2009 at 4:59pm, Robert Heller wrote > > > No, you are not wrong. All x86 flavered 64-bit processors will run as > > 32-bit (i686) processors and when running in 32-bit mode are > > effectively just a i686 as far as any 32-bit program can tell. There > > is no reason NOT to just install a straight 32-bit OS on such a machine > > if there is less than 4gig of virtual memory and non-of the programms > > being run has any reason to use the 64-bit address space. Web hosting > > That's not strictly true. On some x86_64 chips, there are extra registers > which are only available when running in 64-bit mode. Running without > those registers can hamper performance, even if the program isn't using > the larger address space. There's a 2nd factor. On 32-bit you loose full flexibility memory wise when you pass 920-ish MB. After that you're split up into low-mem and high-mem. On 64-bit, of course, all memory is low-mem. /Peter > This can make a big difference, e.g., in the > HPC space. Web hosting, yeah, probably not so much. But just saying > "64bit iff >4GB RAM" doesn't tell the whole story. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Auto-installing security updates?
On Wednesday 20 May 2009, Ralph Angenendt wrote: > Lanny Marcus wrote: > > The NSA manual suggests disabling yum-updatesd and doing it with a > > cron job. update yum and then update. > > a) That manual was written at the time of 5.0 - yum-updatesd was broken > then. b) It is broken again :/ c) "yum update yum" and then "yum update" > the rest broke things for some people when going from 5.2 to 5.3. One idea could be to let it auto-update if the list of packages is "short" (that is not a 5.x -> 5.y). It's a bit of a hack and by no means guarantees that all will be well. It could be done roughly like this I suppose: yum list updates | wc -l if above > limit log/tell "big update detected, please update manually" else log/tell "small update detected, applying automatically..." yum -y update /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.3: duplicate glib2-2.12.3-2.fc6 packages
On Monday 18 May 2009, William R. Lorenz wrote: > On Mon, 18 May 2009, Clint Dilks wrote: ... > > I am not sure why you are seeing the .fc6 extensions I currently see > > > > [r...@tempest ~]# rpm -qa | grep -i glib2 > > glib2-2.12.3-4.el5_3.1.x86_64 > > glib2-2.12.3-4.el5_3.1.i386 > > These are the packages installed after an update from the updates repo. > Without updating a fresh install, it seems to have the .fc6 extensions. > I'm haven't checked if this is a trickle-down from the upstream pkgs. The fc6 extension is not a mix-up with your yum configuration but an upstream ugliness. The above packages are the latest available in CentOS-5(.3) with all updates. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] is it possible to resive a PV in LVM and add more LV's ?
On Monday 11 May 2009, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > Hi all > I have a remote server (i.e SSH access only) which was incorrectly > partitioned and I urgently need to get it up and running. It's got a 500GB > HDD, but the PV is only 10GB big, so I can't add more LV's to to. P.S. This > is on LVM, btw. Resizing the PV _can_ be done, but, adding another PV is easier. Once your VG contains a bigger PV or two PVs then you can create any new LVs you want. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] {SOLVED} Re: OT: Photo Editor to reduce 272 photos to VGA at once
On Saturday 09 May 2009, Lanny Marcus wrote: > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Peter Kjellstrom wrote: > > On Friday 08 May 2009, Lanny Marcus wrote: > >> >> I used Google's Picasa last night, to put the photos on > >> picasaweb.google.com as was suggested. The recommended upload size is > >> 1600 pixels. The original files totaled 419.9 MB and the uploaded > >> files 99 MB. The version of Picasa I have on Linux is 2.7 and I did > >> not see the "Upload" button, so I copied the folder to the NTFS > >> partition and used Picasa 3 on M$ Windows. > >> I need to see if there is a newer version of Picasa for Linux. I > > > > I run picasa-3.0.5744-02 on my CentOS-5. It works with online stuff as > > long as you install the right openssl stuff (it complains otherwise). > > Did you install that with yum from the Google repository? http://picasa.google.com/linux/ CLICK CLICK ... /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] {SOLVED} Re: OT: Photo Editor to reduce 272 photos to VGA at once
On Friday 08 May 2009, Lanny Marcus wrote: > On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 7:57 AM, Lanny Marcus wrote: > > I returned from Bogotá and have a Folder with 272 photos that total > > 419.9 MB. I would like to email them to several people who were there > > for the concerts I attended. I have Picasa, gThumb (not really an > > Editor but I believe it can reduce the quality of photos) and The GIMP > > I used Google's Picasa last night, to put the photos on > picasaweb.google.com as was suggested. The recommended upload size is > 1600 pixels. The original files totaled 419.9 MB and the uploaded > files 99 MB. The version of Picasa I have on Linux is 2.7 and I did > not see the "Upload" button, so I copied the folder to the NTFS > partition and used Picasa 3 on M$ Windows. > I need to see if there is a newer version of Picasa for Linux. I I run picasa-3.0.5744-02 on my CentOS-5. It works with online stuff as long as you install the right openssl stuff (it complains otherwise). /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] fs for > 16 TiB partition
On Thursday 07 May 2009, Bent Terp wrote: > On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 11:27:27AM +0200, Bent Terp wrote: > >> We've got a 110 TB xfs system in production based on a logical volume > >> striped over 9 boxes of SATA disk, works like a charm with great > >> throughput as we stripe over 3 controllers :-) > > > > Are you running x86 32bit or x86_64 ? > > > > iirc there has been problems with XFS on 32bit kernel.. stack size > > related or so? So 64bit has been the recommended way to go.. > > We run 64bit on most machines cuz they've got more than 4 gig ram. > (And any besserwissers about to sound of about PAE kernels can kindly > do so in another thread cuz I'm NOT listening!) > > As an aside, I hadn't heard of issues with 32bit xfs but in retrospect > it can see the logic in it: a lot of company-supplied code has had > 64bit issues cuz it came from a 32bit environment, but SGI was never > "most companies" :-) This is not really a 32 vs. 64 bit issue. The problem is that redhat (unlike most everyone else) builds their 32-bit kernel with 4K kernel stack size and XFS almost needs 8K kernel stacks. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] when to reboot after updates
On Thursday 09 April 2009, nate wrote: > Jerry Geis wrote: > > What is the rule of thumb for reboots after updates... > > > > Certainly if I update from 5.2 to 5.3 I reboot. > > > > But if you update something like krb5 or pam > > does that require a reboot? Does the "fix" get automatically loaded and > > used or do you just do a reboot always? > > only with new kernels. If you wan't your new updates to take effect you'll need to restart every application/daemon that uses a library affected by the update. Rebooting quickly becomes the easiest way to make sure of that. It kind of depends on what you wan't. If you're ok with the fact that maybe some of the updates won't take full effect until the next reboot then fine. /Peter > Some things you may want to log out > and back in again for the libraries to reload but that's about > it. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Trouble with 5.2==>5.3 upgrade
On Wednesday 08 April 2009, fred smith wrote: ... > Since the error says "did not match intended download" I'm guessing that > some of the metadata contains the sha1sum (or similar) and the downloaded > file had the wrong sum. I'm further guessing that it may be an error in > the metadata (if that's where it's store, I don't really know). did you try "yum clean all" before continuing with your manual download solution? /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Update Issue
On Saturday 04 April 2009, John Hinton wrote: > I seem to be able to get all of the 5.x update except for the kernel. > Each attempt results in this... > > (1/1): kernel-2.6.18-128. 100% |=| 15 MB > 00:16 > http://centos.mirror.nac.net/5.3/updates/i386/RPMS/kernel-2.6.18-128.1.6.el >5.i686.rpm: [Errno -1] Package does not match intended download Maybe this could be bad local meta data (in cache). You could try: yum clean all /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Cent OS 4.4 x64 slow
On Thursday 19 March 2009, sumit agarwal wrote: > Hi, i installed Cent Os 4.4 x64 (all packages )on my thinkpad . > i have enough ram ie 2 gb and good processor Core 2 duo.2.5 ghz T9300 > evrey thing seems to be running very slow. > any help would be welcome How did you decide upon CentOS-4.4 for your laptop? At the very least install 4.7 (or even better 5.2 or 5.3 (out soon)). If you install 4.4 your very first "yum update" will take you to 4.7 anyway. /Peter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and ext4
On Thursday 19 March 2009, Jerry Geis wrote: > Is 5.3 and ext4 going to be safe? > I have seen a couple reports of data loss using ext4? > Has this already been fixed? Like Jim said, not ext4's fault. > What does the list recommend? ext3/ ext4? Ext4 (actually ext4dev) in 5.3 will be a preview and not meant for general use. So most people should probably stay with ext3. /Peter > Thought maybe today we would start seeing 5.3 showing up... Looking > forward to it. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
