Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.X, iptables 1.47 and GeoLite2 Country Database
On 16/01/2019 02:04, Jobst Schmalenbach wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 07:43:02AM +, Phil Perry (ppe...@elrepo.org) wrote: On 15/01/2019 01:29, Jobst Schmalenbach wrote: On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 07:29:45AM +, Phil Perry (ppe...@elrepo.org) wrote: On 14/01/2019 07:09, Jobst Schmalenbach wrote: Below is my script for creating/updating an ipset to block my top 10 Hope that helps Thanks, it did, cleared up conflicting info I found on the Internet. Great. I also wanted to go the "other way": disallow everything but 2 countries (AU,NZ). There are even more conflicting ideas about how to do this, but I figured it out. How you handle that will depend on the default policy of the chain. I would use 2 rules - the first to accept connections from AU,NZ, and a second rule subsequently DROPing all other connections, as this will work regardless of the default policy of the chain and the intention of the rules is clear to anyone reading them. Also I cannot see a difference in speed between using (maxmind) -A filter_countries -m geoip --src-cc AU,NZ -j ACCEPT and (ipdeny) -A filter_countries -m set --set au.geoblock src -j ACCEPT which is really good! Yes, ipset is really efficient. My top 10 bad countries set above contains over 28,000 individual netblocks and runs on my EdgeRouter Lite, with a 500MHz embedded processor. The device is capable of Gigabit throughput, and I see no impact upon throughput with multiple iptables rules, many based on large ipsets. Jobst ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.X, iptables 1.47 and GeoLite2 Country Database
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 07:43:02AM +, Phil Perry (ppe...@elrepo.org) wrote: > On 15/01/2019 01:29, Jobst Schmalenbach wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 07:29:45AM +, Phil Perry (ppe...@elrepo.org) > > wrote: > > > On 14/01/2019 07:09, Jobst Schmalenbach wrote: > Below is my script for creating/updating an ipset to block my top 10 > Hope that helps Thanks, it did, cleared up conflicting info I found on the Internet. I also wanted to go the "other way": disallow everything but 2 countries (AU,NZ). There are even more conflicting ideas about how to do this, but I figured it out. Also I cannot see a difference in speed between using (maxmind) -A filter_countries -m geoip --src-cc AU,NZ -j ACCEPT and (ipdeny) -A filter_countries -m set --set au.geoblock src -j ACCEPT which is really good! Jobst -- The future isn't what it used to be (it never was). | |0| | Jobst Schmalenbach, General Manager | | |0| Barrett & Sales Essentials |0|0|0| +61 3 9533 , POBox 277, Caulfield South, 3162, Australia ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.X, iptables 1.47 and GeoLite2 Country Database
On 15/01/2019 01:29, Jobst Schmalenbach wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 07:29:45AM +, Phil Perry (ppe...@elrepo.org) wrote:
On 14/01/2019 07:09, Jobst Schmalenbach wrote:
Hi
I use ipdeny's aggregated country lists to do the same thing:
http://www.ipdeny.com/ipblocks/data/aggregated/
I just feed this data directly into ipset/iptables via a script running on
my firewall (not a C6 box). ipset is a really efficient way of doing this.
Do you create a separate table, then feed every IP address (via ipset) into
this chain?
Would you mind sharing this script?
thx
Jobst
Below is my script for creating/updating an ipset to block my top 10
undesirable/abusive countries. It runs as a cron job up startup to
initially populate it and again every X hours to update it on my
EdgeRouter firewall device.
It can be relatively slow process creating very large sets, so we create
a temp set and then swap the contents of the live set with the temp set
and finally delete the temp set. This is a more efficient way of
updating an existing set.
Once the ipset has been created, you can create rules in iptables to
match against that set using -m set --match-set SETNAME.
Hope that helps
-- Phil
CountryList="cn ru ua kp kr br ro tr vn in"
if [ -e /tmp/countries.txt ]; then
rm /tmp/countries.txt
fi
for country in $CountryList; do
curl -o /tmp/$country.txt
http://www.ipdeny.com/ipblocks/data/aggregated/$country-aggregated.zone
cat /tmp/$country.txt >> /tmp/countries.txt
done
getnetblocks() {
cat < /tmp/cnblock.txt
sudo ipset -! -R < /tmp/cnblock.txt
sudo ipset -W geotmp COUNTRIES-BLOCK
sudo ipset -X geotmp
rm /tmp/cnblock.txt
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.X, iptables 1.47 and GeoLite2 Country Database
--On Monday, January 14, 2019 7:29 AM + Phil Perry wrote: I use ipdeny's aggregated country lists to do the same thing: http://www.ipdeny.com/ipblocks/data/aggregated/ I just feed this data directly into ipset/iptables via a script running on my firewall (not a C6 box). ipset is a really efficient way of doing this. CentOS 7 uses firewalld which has direct support for ipsets in XML form. Hopefully the site will soon supply the data in that format. (But it's not hard to generate the files from their format.) Note that a zip file of all the individual country files can be downloaded here: http://www.ipdeny.com/ipblocks/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.X, iptables 1.47 and GeoLite2 Country Database
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 07:29:45AM +, Phil Perry (ppe...@elrepo.org) wrote: > On 14/01/2019 07:09, Jobst Schmalenbach wrote: > > Hi > I use ipdeny's aggregated country lists to do the same thing: > > http://www.ipdeny.com/ipblocks/data/aggregated/ > > I just feed this data directly into ipset/iptables via a script running on > my firewall (not a C6 box). ipset is a really efficient way of doing this. Do you create a separate table, then feed every IP address (via ipset) into this chain? Would you mind sharing this script? thx Jobst -- Computers are like air conditioners, they stop working properly if you open Windows! | |0| | Jobst Schmalenbach, General Manager | | |0| Barrett & Sales Essentials |0|0|0| +61 3 9533 , POBox 277, Caulfield South, 3162, Australia ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.X, iptables 1.47 and GeoLite2 Country Database
On 14/01/2019 07:09, Jobst Schmalenbach wrote: Hi Specs in subject line: CentOS 6.X all latest patches), iptables 1.47, Apache2.2 I use the Geolite legacy databases together with iptables 1.47 to filter traffic for a variety of ports and only allow .AU traffic to have access. I use ipdeny's aggregated country lists to do the same thing: http://www.ipdeny.com/ipblocks/data/aggregated/ I just feed this data directly into ipset/iptables via a script running on my firewall (not a C6 box). ipset is a really efficient way of doing this. Maxmind (https://dev.maxmind.com/geoip/geoip2/geolite2/) changed the default DB to the latest version which is GeoLite2, this leaves all users in need of the old Geolite Legacy database in the dark, they cannot update. If I download a later version of xtables it will complain that it requires iptable>1.6 which I do not think I can get going on CentOS 6.X. Is there a way that I can convert Geolite2 CSV files to Geolite Legacy CSV Files and then compile those into BE/LE? Are there any other ways I can use Geolite2 on a CentOS 6.X system? Does anyone have other ideas how to tackle this? (this made me really sleep well!) thanks Jobst ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x desktop specs: minimum requirements
A couple of years ago I installed C6 on a ThinkPad A20 (512MB ram, 450MHz cpu). It runs, but is painfully slow. It can handle vi in an xterm, but not a modern web browser. Even a simple yum update takes too long. Personally, i suggest staying with C5 and planning to recycle the hardware when C5 goes EOL. It comes down to which applications you need to support and how big your support budget is. On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 1:19 AM, Niki Kovacs wrote: > Hi, > > I often have to deal with relatively obsolete hardware in schools, public > libraries, small town halls, etc. I still have a handful of CentOS 5.x > installations around for these, but I wonder what CentOS 6.x desktop specs > are, e. g. the minimum requirements (in terms of CPU and RAM) to reasonably > run it. Will a battered first-generation P-IV with 512 MB RAM be > sufficient? How much RAM does 6.x's graphical installer require to even > start? Or is it better to opt for CentOS 5.x on this sort of dinosaur? > > Cheers, > > Niki > -- > Microlinux - Solutions informatiques 100% Linux et logiciels libres > 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat > Web : http://www.microlinux.fr > Mail : i...@microlinux.fr > Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32 > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x desktop specs: minimum requirements
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 04:04:03PM +, Timothy Murphy wrote: > Phil Wyett wrote: > > > RHEL version min/max specs can be found: > > > > https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel-limits > > Ignorant question: what does POWER mean in these tables? I believe that would be the IBM POWER series of chips, PowerPC, et al. -- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us - Show me your ways, O LORD, teach me your paths; Guide me in your truth and teach me, for you are God my Savior, And my hope is in you all day long. -- Psalm 25:4-5 (NIV) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x desktop specs: minimum requirements
Phil Wyett wrote: > RHEL version min/max specs can be found: > > https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel-limits Ignorant question: what does POWER mean in these tables? -- Timothy Murphy gayleard /at/ eircom.net School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x desktop specs: minimum requirements
Le 24/03/2015 09:52, Phil Wyett a écrit : RHEL version min/max specs can be found: https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel-limits Thanks! That's exactly the document I was looking for. Cheers, Niki -- Microlinux - Solutions informatiques 100% Linux et logiciels libres 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat Web : http://www.microlinux.fr Mail : i...@microlinux.fr Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x desktop specs: minimum requirements
Le 24/03/2015 09:45, Ashish Yadav a écrit : Try considering Bodhi and Puppy Linux also. Thanks but no. As I already stated, I have my own blend of Slackware for this. My question was: I want to install CentOS (and not $OTHER_DISTRO) on these machines, so what are the minimum specs? -- Microlinux - Solutions informatiques 100% Linux et logiciels libres 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat Web : http://www.microlinux.fr Mail : i...@microlinux.fr Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x desktop specs: minimum requirements
On Tue, 2015-03-24 at 09:38 +0100, Niki Kovacs wrote: > Le 24/03/2015 08:34, John R Pierce a écrit : > > I'd be looking at something like TinyLinux or DamnSmallLinux on those. > > I don't want anything else than CentOS for the job. > > I used to install my own heavily customized version of Slackware on > these machines (http://www.microlinux.fr/slackware/), but this was a bit > of a hassle to maintain. > > CentOS 5.x is running perfectly well on these old PC's. My question was > more about what the 6.x installer needs to start. Once the base system > is installed, I know how to configure a lightweight desktop. > > Niki > Hi, RHEL version min/max specs can be found: https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel-limits Regards Phil -- Twitter: @philwyett Jabber (xmpp): philwy...@jappix.com 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 6.x desktop specs: minimum requirements
Hi, On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 12:49 PM, Niki Kovacs wrote: > Hi, > > I often have to deal with relatively obsolete hardware in schools, public > libraries, small town halls, etc. I still have a handful of CentOS 5.x > installations around for these, but I wonder what CentOS 6.x desktop specs > are, e. g. the minimum requirements (in terms of CPU and RAM) to reasonably > run it. Will a battered first-generation P-IV with 512 MB RAM be > sufficient? How much RAM does 6.x's graphical installer require to even > start? Or is it better to opt for CentOS 5.x on this sort of dinosaur? > Try considering Bodhi and Puppy Linux also. --Regards Ashishkumar S. Yadav ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x desktop specs: minimum requirements
Le 24/03/2015 08:34, John R Pierce a écrit : I'd be looking at something like TinyLinux or DamnSmallLinux on those. I don't want anything else than CentOS for the job. I used to install my own heavily customized version of Slackware on these machines (http://www.microlinux.fr/slackware/), but this was a bit of a hassle to maintain. CentOS 5.x is running perfectly well on these old PC's. My question was more about what the 6.x installer needs to start. Once the base system is installed, I know how to configure a lightweight desktop. Niki -- Microlinux - Solutions informatiques 100% Linux et logiciels libres 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat Web : http://www.microlinux.fr Mail : i...@microlinux.fr Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x desktop specs: minimum requirements
On 3/24/2015 12:19 AM, Niki Kovacs wrote: I often have to deal with relatively obsolete hardware in schools, public libraries, small town halls, etc. I still have a handful of CentOS 5.x installations around for these, but I wonder what CentOS 6.x desktop specs are, e. g. the minimum requirements (in terms of CPU and RAM) to reasonably run it. Will a battered first-generation P-IV with 512 MB RAM be sufficient? How much RAM does 6.x's graphical installer require to even start? Or is it better to opt for CentOS 5.x on this sort of dinosaur? I'd be looking at something like TinyLinux or DamnSmallLinux on those. -- john, recycling bits in santa cruz ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x
>On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Keith Keller > wrote: > On 2013-03-22, Kaushal Shriyan wrote: >> >> Please help me understand to choose between the two versions CentOS 6.3 and >> CentOS 6.4. I am not sure to choose 6.4 since it is being released >> recently( >> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2013-March/019276.html) >> and it may be risky to push it in Live environment. > > It is likely not. The point releases are all basically patches--mostly > security and bug fixes, a few minor new features--to CentOS 6, which > are equivalent to patches to the upstream distro by the vendor. If > you're choosing between a new install of 6.3 or 6.4 you should > definitely choose 6.4. > +1; unless you have a specific reason to go to 6.3 instead of 6.4 (e.g. a vendor doesn't support 6.4 and you'll break support contracts or something along those lines), I can't really think of a compelling reason to not use 6.4 -- Even the Magic 8 ball has an opinion on email clients: Outlook not so good. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x
On 2013-03-22, Kaushal Shriyan wrote: > > Please help me understand to choose between the two versions CentOS 6.3 and > CentOS 6.4. I am not sure to choose 6.4 since it is being released > recently( > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2013-March/019276.html) > and it may be risky to push it in Live environment. It is likely not. The point releases are all basically patches--mostly security and bug fixes, a few minor new features--to CentOS 6, which are equivalent to patches to the upstream distro by the vendor. If you're choosing between a new install of 6.3 or 6.4 you should definitely choose 6.4. --keith -- kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x - /proc/ide ?
Laurence, Thank you for the information! On Jul 27, 2012, at 11:15 AM, Laurence Hurst wrote: > On 27/07/2012 15:58, TFML wrote: >> I was curious, why was /proc/ide removed and was it moved to another >> directory to obtain ide drivers information? > > From the upstream vendor's deployment guide[0]: "Later versions of the > 2.6 kernel have made the /proc/ide/ and /proc/pci/ directories obsolete. > The /proc/ide/ file system is now superseded by files in sysfs; to > retrieve information on PCI devices, use lspci instead. For more > information on sysfs or lspci, refer to their respective man pages." > Therefore you should be able to find the same information from /sys > somewhere - where exactly is left as an exercise to the reader. > > [0] > http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Deployment_Guide/ch-proc.html > > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x - /proc/ide ?
On 27/07/2012 15:58, TFML wrote: > I was curious, why was /proc/ide removed and was it moved to another > directory to obtain ide drivers information? From the upstream vendor's deployment guide[0]: "Later versions of the 2.6 kernel have made the /proc/ide/ and /proc/pci/ directories obsolete. The /proc/ide/ file system is now superseded by files in sysfs; to retrieve information on PCI devices, use lspci instead. For more information on sysfs or lspci, refer to their respective man pages." Therefore you should be able to find the same information from /sys somewhere - where exactly is left as an exercise to the reader. [0] http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Deployment_Guide/ch-proc.html ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x, kernel-2.6.32-220.7.1, EC2 and drive enumeration
On 04/17/2012 06:27 AM, Steph Gosling wrote: > (bad form replying to myself) > > I've found the issue upstream: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729586 > > Last comment there saying there are patches in an as yet unreleased > kernel-2.6.32-229.el6. I've had a quick look at the SRPMS upstream and > don't see that one yet so a related question: how quickly do they > release these or make them available for testing? They usually do not make them available for testing anymore ... and if they do, it is usually a link from the bugzilla page and likely for a limited time. (Thanks Oracle) Since it is a 229 version, I would think it will be released at the next point release ... so for 6.3 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x, kernel-2.6.32-220.7.1, EC2 and drive enumeration
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 12:35:07 +0100 Karanbir Singh wrote: > hi, > > Please dont toppost, trim your reply and keep context in your replies. Apologies (mail sent before coffee this morning!) > On 04/17/2012 08:04 AM, Steph Gosling wrote: > > them as 'xvdN' but N in this case is 'e', not 'a', 'f', not 'b' and so > > on. > > And labels dont help here ? Labels do help for the root device but not for ephemeral devices in EC2:- with an EC2 instance you'll know the label or UUID of the root device but ephemeral devices are created at startup time. This makes getting mountpoints right hard if you're programmatically starting instances difficult. There's also a 'mapping' between what the EC2 APIs return as the root device (helpfully still referred to via the old SCSI names), again which makes programmatic operations break: expecting something to be /dev/sda1 in EC2 that was /dev/xvda1 in the instance but magically now is /dev/xvde1. Anyway as I say it's definitely a problem with upstream so we'll just wait and see. Just explaining this here so that the search engines get it and it'll hopefully help someone else with the same problem in the future. Cheers, Steph -- Steph Gosling ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x, kernel-2.6.32-220.7.1, EC2 and drive enumeration
hi, Please dont toppost, trim your reply and keep context in your replies. On 04/17/2012 08:04 AM, Steph Gosling wrote: > them as 'xvdN' but N in this case is 'e', not 'a', 'f', not 'b' and so > on. And labels dont help here ? -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh ICQ: 2522219| Yahoo IM: z00dax | Gtalk: z00dax GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x, kernel-2.6.32-220.7.1, EC2 and drive enumeration
(bad form replying to myself) I've found the issue upstream: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729586 Last comment there saying there are patches in an as yet unreleased kernel-2.6.32-229.el6. I've had a quick look at the SRPMS upstream and don't see that one yet so a related question: how quickly do they release these or make them available for testing? Cheers, Steph -- Steph Gosling ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x, kernel-2.6.32-220.7.1, EC2 and drive enumeration
Hi Karanbir, That's the thing, older (non pv-grub aware kernels) did used to map them with the old scsi device names, but here now it's still mapping them as 'xvdN' but N in this case is 'e', not 'a', 'f', not 'b' and so on. Upstream seem to have a handful of bugs related to dracut and initramfs creation but I don't think that's the case here but I'll look at it again. Cheers, Steph On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 00:00:48 +0100 Karanbir Singh wrote: > On 04/16/2012 10:44 AM, Steph Gosling wrote: > > Does anyone have any similar experience or advice? > > > > because the devices are now mapped as sda/sdb instead of xvda/xvdb ? > > -- > Karanbir Singh > +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh > ICQ: 2522219| Yahoo IM: z00dax | Gtalk: z00dax > GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Steph Gosling ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x, kernel-2.6.32-220.7.1, EC2 and drive enumeration
On 04/16/2012 10:44 AM, Steph Gosling wrote: > Does anyone have any similar experience or advice? > because the devices are now mapped as sda/sdb instead of xvda/xvdb ? -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh ICQ: 2522219| Yahoo IM: z00dax | Gtalk: z00dax GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x, kernel-2.6.32-220.7.1, EC2 and drive enumeration
Hi, On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 11:55:17 +0200 wwp wrote: > Hello Steph, > > Check if the thread "Recent kernel update vs usb disk" is related to > your issue (I presume so), thread is from early March 2012. > > > Regards, Think the problems are different as this isn't related to the USB subsystem. I'll have a read though. Cheers, Steph -- Steph Gosling ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6.x, kernel-2.6.32-220.7.1, EC2 and drive enumeration
Hello Steph, On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 10:44:24 +0100 Steph Gosling wrote: > Hi all, > > Is anyone successfully running/has succesfully upgraded to 2.6.32-220 > from, say, 2.6.32-71.29.1? (i.e. done a normal run-of-the-mill yum > update on, say a 6.0 instance all the way up cleanly to 6.2? > > Reason I ask is that booting into -220 (and I think also into -131 as > well) results in a kernel panic for me. Some digging around and the new kernel > seems to be enumerating the drives with the wrong minors > > An m1.large instance-store instance has root at /dev/xvda1, and 2 > ephemeral drives xvdb and xvdc. On reboot into 2.6.32-220.7.1 this is > what the kernel reports this: > > dracut: dracut-004-256.el6 > device-mapper: uevent: version 1.0.3 > device-mapper: ioctl: 4.22.6-ioctl (2011-10-19) initialised: > dm-de...@redhat.com > udev: starting version 147 > dracut: Starting plymouth daemon > %Gxlblk_init: register_blkdev major: 202 > blkfront: xvde1: barriers disabled > blkfront: xvdf: barriers disabled > xvdf: unknown partition table > %Gblkfront: xvdg: barriers disabled > xvdg: unknown partition table > dracut Warning: No root device "block:/dev/xvda1" found > > > %G%G > > > dracut Warning: Boot has failed. To debug this issue add "rdshell" to the > kernel command line. > > > dracut Warning: Signal caught! > > dracut Warning: Boot has failed. To debug this issue add "rdshell" to the > kernel command line. > Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill init! > Pid: 1, comm: init Not tainted 2.6.32-220.7.1.el6.x86_64 #1 > Call Trace: > [] ? panic+0x78/0x143 > [] ? __raw_callee_save_xen_irq_enable+0x11/0x26 > [] ? do_exit+0x852/0x860 > [] ? fput+0x25/0x30 > [] ? do_group_exit+0x58/0xd0 > [] ? sys_exit_group+0x17/0x20 > [] ? system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b > > > Altering the grub menu.1st and fstab and the instance will boot > from /dev/xvde1 but obviously the device change is fairly fundamental. > > The image that this instance is booting was built in a 6.0 chroot and I > have about 100 of them successfully running; but this innocuous update > breaks things in a major way. > > I've had a poke around the upstream bugzilla (e.g. > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771912) as well as the EC2 > forums and there are a couple of similar but not-quite-the-same > problems with the newer kernel. > > Does anyone have any similar experience or advice? Check if the thread "Recent kernel update vs usb disk" is related to your issue (I presume so), thread is from early March 2012. Regards, -- wwp signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.x and Freenx issue..Solved!!
Thanks much to* Christoph *for pointing me in the right direction, appears to be an issue with the latest Vmware -tools, not sure I did a clean install with the opensource ones to see if they had the same issues but applying both of the fixes in the link post solves the problem with running the latest freenx and nx rpms found in the repo. Thanks again :) On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 5:36 AM, christoph.galusc...@chello.at < christoph.galusc...@chello.at> wrote: > Tom, > > take a look at this post, maybe it solves your problem. > > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2012-February/008570.html > > cheers > Christoph > ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.x and Freenx issue..
Looks like it might be this, will not get a chance to test until tonight but this reads just like what I am seeing...will post back, I debated on going with the esx tools vs the open source tools, looks like I guessed wrong :( From: christoph.galuschka@chello.a Tom, take a look at this post, maybe it solves your problem. http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2012-February/008570.html cheers On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 7:34 PM, Tom Bishop wrote: > > Finally got a chance to install Centos 6.x x86_64 version and having an > > issue with the latest version of freenx. This is a desktop install on a > > esxi 5 with all updates and only thing I have installed is the latest > > vmware tools. When I enable the extras repo and install the > > nx-3.5.0-1.el6.ay.x86_64.rpm and freenx-0.7.3-8.el6.ay.x86_64.rpm. When > I > > try to logon the desktop pops up but I get the little busy circle and it > > never completes, I am unable to close the session or do anything to the > > freenx window. Here is the odd, part, if I install the earlier versions > > from toracat, freenx-0.7.3-7.el6.ay.x86_64.rpm and > > nx-3.4.0-7.el6.ay.x86_64.rpm the session comes up and works fine,I can > > exclude the updates but wondering if anyone has any idea of what I might > > try to get it to work with the latest, thanks in advance. > > That is strange. The fact that the desktop appears suggests that it is > not really authentication-related issue. If anything, it might be > related to the update of nx from 3.4.x to 3.5.x because the latest > freenx update was nothing significant (better SELinux handling). > > Do you see anything interesting in ~/.nx/ ? Or any other places (logs etc) > ? > > Akemi > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.x and Freenx issue..
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 7:34 PM, Tom Bishop wrote: > Finally got a chance to install Centos 6.x x86_64 version and having an > issue with the latest version of freenx. This is a desktop install on a > esxi 5 with all updates and only thing I have installed is the latest > vmware tools. When I enable the extras repo and install the > nx-3.5.0-1.el6.ay.x86_64.rpm and freenx-0.7.3-8.el6.ay.x86_64.rpm. When I > try to logon the desktop pops up but I get the little busy circle and it > never completes, I am unable to close the session or do anything to the > freenx window. Here is the odd, part, if I install the earlier versions > from toracat, freenx-0.7.3-7.el6.ay.x86_64.rpm and > nx-3.4.0-7.el6.ay.x86_64.rpm the session comes up and works fine,I can > exclude the updates but wondering if anyone has any idea of what I might > try to get it to work with the latest, thanks in advance. That is strange. The fact that the desktop appears suggests that it is not really authentication-related issue. If anything, it might be related to the update of nx from 3.4.x to 3.5.x because the latest freenx update was nothing significant (better SELinux handling). Do you see anything interesting in ~/.nx/ ? Or any other places (logs etc) ? Akemi ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 5 January 2012 22:26, John R Pierce wrote: > this doesn't mean it won't work, but what it does mean is that if > something goes sideways on you, oracle won't help you one bit, and since > you pay a substantial chunk of money annually for that precious support, > its insane NOT to use a supported platform. I guess it depends on their mood. In various cases we raised with them on behalf of the customers, they never said get lost after we replicated it on a CentOS 5 running on VMWare in house - in both cases they have rights to say get lost. In case of CentOS , as discussed endlessly, it is not certified. For any non-Oracle-owned virtualization solution they reserve the right to say "replicate on physical hardware first". On the other hand, I can't recall a case we had which had a cause originating from the OS itself on Linux at least (AIX is a different story, there are a couple of those). On the other hand the first nasty one will be the one you will remember! All of our Linux customers use RHEL or OEL. When they ask about CentOS, I always explain the Oracle's stand and clearly state any CentOS instance would not be supported by Oracle even though we have almost all of our in-house development instances running on it and never had a problem that didn't also happen on a RHEL environment. Once they start calculating the support costs against risk, they realize that having a valid support agreement with Oracle and RHEL actually makes sense. After you count for the Oracle licencing costs, the RHEL support becomes peanuts and since it could invalidate Oracle support, you are actually not saving any money. When the instance is just a playpen, I definitely recommend CentOS. Still, none of this matters for v6, I think we will have to wait for Oracle 12c to come out to get OEL6 support, I am not sure about RHEL, at least w/o so-called Unbreakable Kernel malarkey. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 5 January 2012 22:47, Craig White wrote: > seems to me that the sanity issue was forefront at the point before when they > chose to use Oracle in the first place but Larry loves you. > There are plenty of good reasons for using Oracle DB products - it's definitely one of the best out there - but I'm not sure I can say the same about the price tag. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 5 January 2012 22:11, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > http://en.community.dell.com/techcenter/b/techcenter/archive/2012/01/03/dell-engineering-preview-oracle-11gr2-rac-on-rhel6.aspx > http://en.community.dell.com/techcenter/enterprise-solutions/w/oracle_solutions/3336.aspx And? First paragraph from the first link clearly states, I quote from it: DISCLAIMER: The following is Engineering Documentation provided by Dell and is a technology preview only. At this time the following configuration is not supported by Dell, Red Hat, or Oracle. The contents of this article should be only viewed as an engineering demonstration. What's the point? There is no justification for having RHEL/CentOS or even OEL6 and running a production Oracle instance on it. Months after RH's certification submission, Oracle still refuses to certify these platforms, even its own OEL6. If you are shelling out thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands (or millions according to a suggested architecture I reviewed today) for a customer, go and get a supported OS. If you have the time to tinker with it to get it working, excellent, I'm sure plenty of lessons learned - I had it running on single DB RHEL6 ages ago and it works fine. Will I suggest to a customer? No. Will I risk any development on it? No. Will I recommend it to anyone? No. I am running Oracle 11gR2 on my Kubuntu 11.10 work laptop and it runs fine but the same applies - no recommendation to a customer, no production instance, no test instance, no certification from Oracle hence no support expected from them. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On Jan 5, 2012, at 3:26 PM, John R Pierce wrote: > this doesn't mean it won't work, but what it does mean is that if > something goes sideways on you, oracle won't help you one bit, and since > you pay a substantial chunk of money annually for that precious support, > its insane NOT to use a supported platform. seems to me that the sanity issue was forefront at the point before when they chose to use Oracle in the first place but Larry loves you. Reminds me of Animal House... "thank you sir, may I have another?" Craig ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 01/05/12 2:11 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > http://en.community.dell.com/techcenter/b/techcenter/archive/2012/01/03/dell-engineering-preview-oracle-11gr2-rac-on-rhel6.aspx > http://en.community.dell.com/techcenter/enterprise-solutions/w/oracle_solutions/3336.aspx the bottom line for Oracle Support is whatever Oracle says they support. last I looked, EL6 wasn't on that list (nor is ANY version of CentOS) http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E11882_01/install.112/e16763/pre_install.htm#CIHFICFD this doesn't mean it won't work, but what it does mean is that if something goes sideways on you, oracle won't help you one bit, and since you pay a substantial chunk of money annually for that precious support, its insane NOT to use a supported platform. -- john r pierceN 37, W 122 santa cruz ca mid-left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 09:53:16AM -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 01/04/2012 04:29 AM, Christopher J. Buckley wrote: > > 2012/1/4 An Yang > > > >> Somebody in Oracle told me, they need one year to test, I'm not sure, > >> it's true or not. > >> > > That's about right. The testing isn't done by Oracle btw, it's done by the > > end vendor. > > > > > The "end vendor" submitted the information to Oracle months ago: > > http://www.redhat.com/about/news/blog/Red-Hat-Submits-Oracle-11gR2-on-Red-Hat-Enterprise-Linux-6-Certification-Test-Results-to-Oracle > > Oracle does not want to support ASMLib on any kernel other than OEL (or > UBL if you prefer): > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv6-list/2011-December/msg00032.html > > The bottom line is that Oracle IS going to try to drive people to their > version of Linux and off RHEL. > > But I know, I am just be paranoid or some other such thing. Right > Christopher? > http://en.community.dell.com/techcenter/b/techcenter/archive/2012/01/03/dell-engineering-preview-oracle-11gr2-rac-on-rhel6.aspx http://en.community.dell.com/techcenter/enterprise-solutions/w/oracle_solutions/3336.aspx -- Pasi ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
2012/1/5 An Yang : > Greate! > "end vendor" people said, Consequently, we confidently recommend the > deployment of Oracle 11gR2 in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 production > environments today. Your database support agreement is not with "the end vendor" but the database software supplier and as far as they are concerned, it is not certified and they are under no obligation to support you. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
At 2012-01-04 Wed 09:53 -0600，Johnny Hughes wrote： > On 01/04/2012 04:29 AM, Christopher J. Buckley wrote: > > 2012/1/4 An Yang > > > >> Somebody in Oracle told me, they need one year to test, I'm not sure, > >> it's true or not. > >> > > That's about right. The testing isn't done by Oracle btw, it's done by the > > end vendor. > > > > > The "end vendor" submitted the information to Oracle months ago: > > http://www.redhat.com/about/news/blog/Red-Hat-Submits-Oracle-11gR2-on-Red-Hat-Enterprise-Linux-6-Certification-Test-Results-to-Oracle > Greate! "end vendor" people said, Consequently, we confidently recommend the deployment of Oracle 11gR2 in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 production environments today. > Oracle does not want to support ASMLib on any kernel other than OEL (or > UBL if you prefer): > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv6-list/2011-December/msg00032.html > > The bottom line is that Oracle IS going to try to drive people to their > version of Linux and off RHEL. > > But I know, I am just be paranoid or some other such thing. Right > Christopher? > > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos signature.asc Description: 这是信件的数字签名部分 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 01/04/2012 04:29 AM, Christopher J. Buckley wrote: > 2012/1/4 An Yang > >> Somebody in Oracle told me, they need one year to test, I'm not sure, >> it's true or not. >> > That's about right. The testing isn't done by Oracle btw, it's done by the > end vendor. > > The "end vendor" submitted the information to Oracle months ago: http://www.redhat.com/about/news/blog/Red-Hat-Submits-Oracle-11gR2-on-Red-Hat-Enterprise-Linux-6-Certification-Test-Results-to-Oracle Oracle does not want to support ASMLib on any kernel other than OEL (or UBL if you prefer): https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv6-list/2011-December/msg00032.html The bottom line is that Oracle IS going to try to drive people to their version of Linux and off RHEL. But I know, I am just be paranoid or some other such thing. Right Christopher? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 6:30 AM, mcclnx mcc wrote: > Does anyone know CENTOS/Redhat 6.X compatible to ORACLE software (X86 and > X86_64) version like 9.X, 10GR2, 11G and 11GR2. > > Any official document say that? Apart from everything else said here, this is well worth a read -> http://en.community.dell.com/techcenter/b/techcenter/archive/2012/01/03/dell-engineering-preview-oracle-11gr2-rac-on-rhel6.aspx -- During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
2012/1/4 An Yang > Somebody in Oracle told me, they need one year to test, I'm not sure, > it's true or not. > That's about right. The testing isn't done by Oracle btw, it's done by the end vendor. -- Kind Regards, Christopher J. Buckley ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
Somebody in Oracle told me, they need one year to test, I'm not sure, it's true or not. At 2012-01-02 Mon 09:46 -0600，Johnny Hughes wrote： > On 01/01/2012 06:07 PM, Christopher J. Buckley wrote: > > On 29 December 2011 19:15, Johnny Hughes wrote: > >> They can't very well (at least not with a straight face) tell Red Hat > >> that RHEL6 is not certified while saying that OEL6 is certified can > >> they? If they do that for very long, they will be breaching their > >> support agreements. > > > > Really? In what way, out of interest? > > > > Hint: they're not. > > > > I am talking about likely preexisting contracts between Red Hat and > Oracle where new products are certified in a timely matter. > > This is an example of a disputed contract between Oracle and another party: > > http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-15/hp-sues-oracle-in-california-over-breach-of-contract-claims.html > > (Note: I am not saying one or the other party in the above are right or > wrong, just showing it as an example of the kinds of partnership > agreements that Oracle has with other companies) > > And my point is, right now Oracle can say that they have not certified > their own OEL6 either ... therefore, one can not expect RHEL6 to be > certified either. If they certify OEL6 for a version of Oracle > Database, it would be difficult for them to tell Red Hat that they can > not certify RHEL6 or that there are issues with that version of their > Oracle Database. > > Maybe Oracle does not have a preferred agreement with Red Hat to certify > future products in a timely manner ... but I would find that highly > unlikely. > > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos signature.asc Description: 这是信件的数字签名部分 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 2 January 2012 15:46, Johnny Hughes wrote: > And my point is, right now Oracle can say that they have not certified > their own OEL6 either ... therefore, one can not expect RHEL6 to be > certified either. If they certify OEL6 for a version of Oracle > Database, it would be difficult for them to tell Red Hat that they can > not certify RHEL6 or that there are issues with that version of their > Oracle Database. It is their software, I am sure they can certify against any arbitrary OS as they like. I don't believe they have any agreement with anyone for any future support. They have been de-supporting other platforms at will (well, no one is going to cry after loss of Titanic support, I am sure about that). Worse, they can say 'RHEL only with Unbreakable Kernel' which they have already started to state for various technologies (i.e., ASMLib). (Now I am way off topic here) It is obvious that their whole plan is to somehow get RedHat bankrupt so that they can buy it cheap. There's no other explanation about their OEL support policy & prices.I admit all they to is within GPL therefore legal but just not nice. I don't have to like it. Unfortunately at work for various reason I am using more and more OEL than RHEL. More than once I had trouble with differences between OEL Ubreakable Kernel and std. upstream/Centos kernels. As far as I can see, pretty soon I cannot treat OEL as an identical platform (like CentOS) to upstream and expect things just work, ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 01/01/2012 06:07 PM, Christopher J. Buckley wrote: > On 29 December 2011 19:15, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> They can't very well (at least not with a straight face) tell Red Hat >> that RHEL6 is not certified while saying that OEL6 is certified can >> they? If they do that for very long, they will be breaching their >> support agreements. > > Really? In what way, out of interest? > > Hint: they're not. > I am talking about likely preexisting contracts between Red Hat and Oracle where new products are certified in a timely matter. This is an example of a disputed contract between Oracle and another party: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-15/hp-sues-oracle-in-california-over-breach-of-contract-claims.html (Note: I am not saying one or the other party in the above are right or wrong, just showing it as an example of the kinds of partnership agreements that Oracle has with other companies) And my point is, right now Oracle can say that they have not certified their own OEL6 either ... therefore, one can not expect RHEL6 to be certified either. If they certify OEL6 for a version of Oracle Database, it would be difficult for them to tell Red Hat that they can not certify RHEL6 or that there are issues with that version of their Oracle Database. Maybe Oracle does not have a preferred agreement with Red Hat to certify future products in a timely manner ... but I would find that highly unlikely. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 29 December 2011 19:15, Johnny Hughes wrote: > They can't very well (at least not with a straight face) tell Red Hat > that RHEL6 is not certified while saying that OEL6 is certified can > they? If they do that for very long, they will be breaching their > support agreements. Really? In what way, out of interest? Hint: they're not. -- Kind Regards, Christopher J. Buckley ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 29 December 2011 19:31, wrote: > As I said, there are many, many more RHEL installations, and most of them > will want to go to RHEL6 within the coming year. And, of course, some of > those installations are LARGE$$$ customers of Oracle (for example, I > have personal knowledge that AT&T uses RHEL extensively). When they lean, > Oracle will fall all over themselves, if only to make more money. I suspect we will see RHEL/OEL6 officially supported when they decide to release Oracle 12, since they have already released the new grid manager (12c for cloud, unfortunately not for Cthulhu, now that'd be really awesome!)... OEM 12c is certified for RHEL/OEL 6.1. It looks like 11g will not be ever certified. If anyone knows when DB 12c is expected... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 29 December 2011 19:01, John Broome wrote: > So if oracle isn't certified to run on OEL 6, did oracle roll it out > just for shits and giggles? solaris ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 12/29/2011 01:19 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: >> Johnny Hughes wrote: >>> On 12/29/2011 01:01 PM, John Broome wrote: On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 13:57, John R Pierce wrote: > On 12/29/11 4:30 AM, mcclnx mcc wrote: >> Does anyone know CENTOS/Redhat 6.X compatible to ORACLE software >> (X86 and X86_64) version like 9.X, 10GR2, 11G and 11GR2. > > 11.2.0.3(I think is latest?) seems to work fine on CentOS 6.1, > however RHEL6 (and all versions of CentOS) are completely > unsupported by Oracle, so I wouldn't plan on using it for any sort > of production where you expect support. there were some minor > ignorable issues in install, like it claimed the system is missing > some old packages So if oracle isn't certified to run on OEL 6, did oracle roll it out just for shits and giggles? >>> >>> No, they rolled it out as a Linux distribution. Believe it or not, >>> people do other things besides run Oracle databases on Linux :) >>> >>> I am sure they will certify their database systems on OEL 6.x in the >>> future. >>> >>> They can't very well (at least not with a straight face) tell Red Hat >>> that RHEL6 is not certified while saying that OEL6 is certified can >>> they? If they do that for very long, they will be breaching their >>> support agreements. >> >> Let me also note that whatever else Oracle is, they're not stupid when >> it comes to selling, and there are many, many more RHEL installations >> than there are OUL. > > But if you have a license for rhel6, you can also run rhel5 ... > therefore, they get their supported sales by supporting rhel5, while > still claiming their kernel is better and trying to drive people to > their product. > > Where is their incentive to support rhel6 until much closer to March 31, > 2017 (rhel5 EOL Date). As I said, there are many, many more RHEL installations, and most of them will want to go to RHEL6 within the coming year. And, of course, some of those installations are LARGE$$$ customers of Oracle (for example, I have personal knowledge that AT&T uses RHEL extensively). When they lean, Oracle will fall all over themselves, if only to make more money. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 12/29/11 4:30 AM, mcclnx mcc wrote: > Does anyone know CENTOS/Redhat 6.X compatible to ORACLE software (X86 and > X86_64) version like 9.X, 10GR2, 11G and 11GR2. 11.2.0.3(I think is latest?) seems to work fine on CentOS 6.1, however RHEL6 (and all versions of CentOS) are completely unsupported by Oracle, so I wouldn't plan on using it for any sort of production where you expect support. there were some minor ignorable issues in install, like it claimed the system is missing some old packages -- john r pierceN 37, W 122 santa cruz ca mid-left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 13:57, John R Pierce wrote: > On 12/29/11 4:30 AM, mcclnx mcc wrote: >> Does anyone know CENTOS/Redhat 6.X compatible to ORACLE software (X86 and >> X86_64) version like 9.X, 10GR2, 11G and 11GR2. > > 11.2.0.3(I think is latest?) seems to work fine on CentOS 6.1, however > RHEL6 (and all versions of CentOS) are completely unsupported by Oracle, > so I wouldn't plan on using it for any sort of production where you > expect support. there were some minor ignorable issues in install, like > it claimed the system is missing some old packages So if oracle isn't certified to run on OEL 6, did oracle roll it out just for shits and giggles? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 12/29/11 11:01 AM, John Broome wrote: > So if oracle isn't certified to run on OEL 6, did oracle roll it out > just for shits and giggles? who knows? You'd need to ask them, and I doubt you'd get an answer. -- john r pierceN 37, W 122 santa cruz ca mid-left coast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 12/29/2011 01:01 PM, John Broome wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 13:57, John R Pierce >> wrote: >>> On 12/29/11 4:30 AM, mcclnx mcc wrote: Does anyone know CENTOS/Redhat 6.X compatible to ORACLE software (X86 and X86_64) version like 9.X, 10GR2, 11G and 11GR2. >>> >>> 11.2.0.3(I think is latest?) seems to work fine on CentOS 6.1, however >>> RHEL6 (and all versions of CentOS) are completely unsupported by >>> Oracle, so I wouldn't plan on using it for any sort of production >>> where you expect support. there were some minor ignorable issues in >>> install, like it claimed the system is missing some old packages >> >> So if oracle isn't certified to run on OEL 6, did oracle roll it out >> just for shits and giggles? > > No, they rolled it out as a Linux distribution. Believe it or not, > people do other things besides run Oracle databases on Linux :) > > I am sure they will certify their database systems on OEL 6.x in the > future. > > They can't very well (at least not with a straight face) tell Red Hat > that RHEL6 is not certified while saying that OEL6 is certified can > they? If they do that for very long, they will be breaching their > support agreements. Let me also note that whatever else Oracle is, they're not stupid when it comes to selling, and there are many, many more RHEL installations than there are OUL. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 12/29/2011 01:01 PM, John Broome wrote: > On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 13:57, John R Pierce wrote: >> On 12/29/11 4:30 AM, mcclnx mcc wrote: >>> Does anyone know CENTOS/Redhat 6.X compatible to ORACLE software (X86 and >>> X86_64) version like 9.X, 10GR2, 11G and 11GR2. >> >> 11.2.0.3(I think is latest?) seems to work fine on CentOS 6.1, however >> RHEL6 (and all versions of CentOS) are completely unsupported by Oracle, >> so I wouldn't plan on using it for any sort of production where you >> expect support. there were some minor ignorable issues in install, like >> it claimed the system is missing some old packages > > So if oracle isn't certified to run on OEL 6, did oracle roll it out > just for shits and giggles? No, they rolled it out as a Linux distribution. Believe it or not, people do other things besides run Oracle databases on Linux :) I am sure they will certify their database systems on OEL 6.x in the future. They can't very well (at least not with a straight face) tell Red Hat that RHEL6 is not certified while saying that OEL6 is certified can they? If they do that for very long, they will be breaching their support agreements. If their goal is to move people off RHEL and to OEL (I think it is), then not certifying the latest version while trying to convert people seems like the way to go. Once they have a bunch of converts, then they certify OEL6 and some short time later RHEL6. They need to wait though, until they make the kernel better support the Oracle database though, like they did for OEL5. In the meantime, they get their super whamidyne kernel for OEL5 in the press ... the only real thing they promote as different between RHEL5 and OEL5 ... which gives their linux better and quicker Oracle database support and they try grabbing customers with that difference. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 12/29/2011 01:19 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > Johnny Hughes wrote: >> On 12/29/2011 01:01 PM, John Broome wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 13:57, John R Pierce >>> wrote: On 12/29/11 4:30 AM, mcclnx mcc wrote: > Does anyone know CENTOS/Redhat 6.X compatible to ORACLE software (X86 > and X86_64) version like 9.X, 10GR2, 11G and 11GR2. 11.2.0.3(I think is latest?) seems to work fine on CentOS 6.1, however RHEL6 (and all versions of CentOS) are completely unsupported by Oracle, so I wouldn't plan on using it for any sort of production where you expect support. there were some minor ignorable issues in install, like it claimed the system is missing some old packages >>> >>> So if oracle isn't certified to run on OEL 6, did oracle roll it out >>> just for shits and giggles? >> >> No, they rolled it out as a Linux distribution. Believe it or not, >> people do other things besides run Oracle databases on Linux :) >> >> I am sure they will certify their database systems on OEL 6.x in the >> future. >> >> They can't very well (at least not with a straight face) tell Red Hat >> that RHEL6 is not certified while saying that OEL6 is certified can >> they? If they do that for very long, they will be breaching their >> support agreements. > > Let me also note that whatever else Oracle is, they're not stupid when it > comes to selling, and there are many, many more RHEL installations than > there are OUL. > But if you have a license for rhel6, you can also run rhel5 ... therefore, they get their supported sales by supporting rhel5, while still claiming their kernel is better and trying to drive people to their product. Where is their incentive to support rhel6 until much closer to March 31, 2017 (rhel5 EOL Date). signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 29 December 2011 12:42, John Broome wrote: > OEL6 is rebuilt RHEL6. CentOS 6 is rebuilt RHEL6. Funnily enough, OEL6 is excluded from the certified list of Linux distributions hence no, it is not a good idea to install it and then expect Oracle to support it even though RedHat has submitted it for certification in August 2011. It looks like Oracle has no incentive to get on with the certification. RHEL/OEL 6 has been out for ages now, the only obvious thing is merge with Sun must have given them an other OS to push instead of Oracle. Baffles me. 11.2 OS versions and minimum levels: Asianux 3 SP2 and higher Oracle Linux 4 Update 7 and higher Oracle Linux 5 Update 2 and higher Red Hat Enterprise 4 Update 7 and higher Red Hat Enterprise 5 Update 2 and higher SLES 10 SP2 and higher SLES 11 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On Dec 29, 2011, at 7:30, mcclnx mcc wrote: > Does anyone know CENTOS/Redhat 6.X compatible to ORACLE software (X86 and > X86_64) version like 9.X, 10GR2, 11G and 11GR2. > > Any official document say that? OEL6 is rebuilt RHEL6. CentOS 6 is rebuilt RHEL6. I think it'll be ok. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6.X compatible to ORACLE DB verssion????
On 29 December 2011 12:30, mcclnx mcc wrote: > Does anyone know CENTOS/Redhat 6.X compatible to ORACLE software (X86 and > X86_64) version like 9.X, 10GR2, 11G and 11GR2. It is not. > Any official document say that? See Metalink 1304727.1. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
