Re: SLES 11 SP 1 - Ncurses version of YaST
Thanks, Mark ! That's what was missing on my system. Added that and now I get a nice shiny X app. :-) On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Mark Post mp...@novell.com wrote: On 1/6/2011 at 03:37 PM, David Stuart david.stu...@ventura.org wrote: Mark, I'll send it privately, if that's ok with you. Dave, Do you have the yast2-qt rpm installed? /sbin/yast2 is looking for the plugin it provides and isn't finding it: + '[' -e /usr/lib64/YaST2/plugin/libpy2qt.so.2 ']' + return 1 Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/ -- Mark D Pace Senior Systems Engineer Mainline Information Systems -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
Re: GNU Parted enhancements (was ECKD driver vs DIAG driver)
On 1/6/11 4:04 PM, Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote: By the way, although the Linux kernel supports both non-reserved and reserved CMS minidisks, I recommend reserving them. Yay. Me too. This also conveniently allows CMS-oriented backup tools to deal intelligently with minidisks containing Linux filesystems -- they already had to deal with the reserved minidisk issue for DB/2-VM, so you can take advantage of that. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
Re: GNU Parted enhancements (was ECKD driver vs DIAG driver)
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote: That's eleven combinations. The DIAG driver is only supported in a virtual machine under z/VM, of course. The current production version of GNU parted supports only the first two combinations. With my enhancements, all eleven combinations are supported. The complexity caused by the number of combinations is not an obvious advantage. It's unfortunate we have not been able to separate transport and layout. If we had done that, we could select diagnose I/O or straight SSCH based on performance aspects without any change to the data layout. As you point out, some combinations are WORN devices (write it once, read never afterwards) when the superblock or partition info overwrites the CMS FST. Several of the possible combinations are not a good idea at all. | Rob -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
SHARE Anaheim early bird registration (on or bef Jan 14)
In case you were not aware or if you needed a reminder, there is a SHARE early bird registration rate. Save $200 on your conference experience by registering on or before January 14. SHARE Anaheim Feb 27- March 4, 2011 Hilton Anaheim Anaheim, California http://www.share.org/ Regards, Pam C P.S. Happy New Year. Winter has returned to Endicott -- snow snow snow. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
Virus Scanner for Linux for System z
My corporate information security department requires that all servers on the company’s intranet run a virus scanner. The only virus scanner that I can find for zLinux is ClamAV, building it from source code. Is there an “industry standard” or best practice(s) for virus scanning or not scanning on zLinux? Is there documentation that I can cite for my management? Also, we have some concerns about the overhead of running virus scanners on a large number of zLinux instances on the same CPU. Is anyone doing this? Any advice? Thanks, Rachel -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
Re: Virus Scanner for Linux for System z
Hello Rachel, there is some comments here: http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-390@vm.marist.edu/msg49021.html http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-390@vm.marist.edu/msg49021.htmlthat might be useful. Excerpt: However, they can be CPU resource intensive, so you might want to consider offloading the virus scanning functions to an Intel or AIX box, if possible. Best, M On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:40 AM, Rachel Malavasic rach...@xbw.cnchost.comwrote: My corporate information security department requires that all servers on the company’s intranet run a virus scanner. The only virus scanner that I can find for zLinux is ClamAV, building it from source code. Is there an “industry standard” or best practice(s) for virus scanning or not scanning on zLinux? Is there documentation that I can cite for my management? Also, we have some concerns about the overhead of running virus scanners on a large number of zLinux instances on the same CPU. Is anyone doing this? Any advice? Thanks, Rachel -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/ -- Mauro Parra-Miranda Novell Engineer - novell.com openSUSE Developer - openSUSE.org -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
Re: Virus Scanner for Linux for System z
The only virus scanner that I can find for zLinux is ClamAV, building it from source code. For what it's worth, Novell offers ClamAV as an rpm for SLES. http://download.novell.com/Download?buildid=dKWXSg26nVU~ Floyd Rodery, Linux on System z DISA Computing Services Department of Defense -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Rachel Malavasic Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 12:41 To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Virus Scanner for Linux for System z My corporate information security department requires that all servers on the company's intranet run a virus scanner. The only virus scanner that I can find for zLinux is ClamAV, building it from source code. Is there an industry standard or best practice(s) for virus scanning or not scanning on zLinux? Is there documentation that I can cite for my management? Also, we have some concerns about the overhead of running virus scanners on a large number of zLinux instances on the same CPU. Is anyone doing this? Any advice? Thanks, Rachel -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/ -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
Re: Virus Scanner for Linux for System z
Hi, Rachel. I would be a little reluctant to recommend to a client that they run an anti-virus software package on z/Linux on the mainframe. Yes, modern z10-z196 IFL engines are much faster these days and these system excel at large chunks of data around, but for a specialized task such as virus scanning, I think it's better performed on a dedicated platform. If your management insists on running a virus scanner on the mainframe, I would suggest that you set up only one instance of z/Linux to run the scanner, with it's own vswitch to connect to the real OSA cards, and then have all of the other Linux guests connect to that guest via their own, separate vswitch LAN. You could also have the scanner z/Linux instance act as a firewall as well. There is absolutely no justification, imho, for requiring that a virus scanner application be run in *each* z/Linux guest. That would prove to be, I think, a monumental waste of hardware resources. Good luck. DJ On 01/07/2011 11:40 AM, Rachel Malavasic wrote: My corporate information security department requires that all servers on the company’s intranet run a virus scanner. The only virus scanner that I can find for zLinux is ClamAV, building it from source code. Is there an “industry standard” or best practice(s) for virus scanning or not scanning on zLinux? Is there documentation that I can cite for my management? Also, we have some concerns about the overhead of running virus scanners on a large number of zLinux instances on the same CPU. Is anyone doing this? Any advice? Thanks, Rachel -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/ -- Dave Jones V/Soft Software www.vsoft-software.com Houston, TX 281.578.7544 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
Re: Virus Scanner for Linux for System z
Policy is policy. If smtp is active then you should run a virus scanner. If you don't use email on the system, turn off smtp. Cuz who says servers and their admins are immune to viruses? But if you think there are mitigating circumstances, then by all means file a deviation. But don't use because it's the mainframe as a reason. IMO. Alan Altmark IBM Regards, Alan Altmark IBM Lab Services - Sent from my BlackBerry Handheld. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
Error Creating LVM Volume Group
Afternoon, I am trying to re-install SLES 11 SP 1, due to a major screw-up on my part. I am following Chapter 8 of the SLES 11 SP 1 Virtualization Cookbook. I keep getting an error when trying to create the system-vg volume group, indicating the system error code was -4010. I have been through this several times, today. The volumes are formatted, but no partitions have been defined on them. The disks are 3390-3 format, on an IBM DS6800. Ideas? Thanks, Dave Dave Stuart Prin. Info. Systems Support Analyst County of Ventura, CA 805-662-6731 david.stu...@ventura.org -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
Re: Error Creating LVM Volume Group
On 1/7/2011 at 07:10 PM, David Stuart david.stu...@ventura.org wrote: I keep getting an error when trying to create the system-vg volume group, indicating the system error code was -4010. I have been through this several times, today. The volumes are formatted, but no partitions have been defined on them. Define at least a single partition on each of them. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
Re: Error Creating LVM Volume Group
Thanks Mark, I'll try that on Monday. Dave Dave Stuart Prin. Info. Systems Support Analyst County of Ventura, CA 805-662-6731 david.stu...@ventura.org Mark Post mp...@novell.com 1/7/2011 4:13 PM On 1/7/2011 at 07:10 PM, David Stuart david.stu...@ventura.org wrote: I keep getting an error when trying to create the system-vg volume group, indicating the system error code was -4010. I have been through this several times, today. The volumes are formatted, but no partitions have been defined on them. Define at least a single partition on each of them. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/ -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
Re: ECKD driver vs DIAG driver
The Linux kernel does not consider an LDL-format disk to be unpartitioned. But the partition you see is a phantom. And you can use an LDL-format disk as if it were unpartitioned. We're battling semantics, or something along those lines. I previously used the term partition zero. People did not seem to understand that. The whole disk seems to work. It's good to be able to use the whole disk, if only for reduced complexity. It's bad when the bootstrap clobbers the filesystem. Here's a rough diagram: + - + CDL + LDL + FBA + | filesystem in partition 0 | --- | -Y- | -Y- | | bootable with fs in part0 | --- | --- | -Y- | | filesystem in partition 1 | -Y- | -Y- | -Y- | | bootable with fs in part1 | -Y- | -Y- | -Y- | | filesystem in partition 2 | -Y- | --- | --- | | bootable with fs in part2 | -Y- | --- | --- | | filesystem in partition 3 | -Y- | --- | --- | | bootable with fs in part3 | -Y- | --- | --- | + - + --- + --- + --- + | works with DIAG250 driver | --- | -Y- | -Y- | + - + --- + --- + --- + | --- external transparency | --- | --- | -Y- | + - + --- + --- + --- + (Looks really bad with my proportional font email interface. See below for a Googoo doc.) I advocate use of partition zero for filesystems. It is a little-known and underutilized feature of zLinux just like the CMS RESERVEd file. Put a filesystem on /dev/dasdq, reboot, and you'll still see a /dev/dasdq1 partition. But the filesystem survives in /dev/dasdq. This is a Good Thing. In this case, just ignore /dev/dasdq1. It is an artifact of the driver. So ... to answer the question about what Rick is asking for, I want the bootable with fs in part0 to change to Y for LDL. It requires a ZIPL change. Another little-known and underutilized fact is the internal/external transparency of FBA storage. (Talk about reduced complexity!) I will spare the group and not discuss it further except to say that it is ... just another: Something that doesn't get advertised enough, kind of like CMS RESERVE. I have attempted to collect some of this info into a spread sheet: http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ArAkQhEvbQZfdEhxZDhLNEEwU0dvVlJBUmVXVnJ6c1E Not sure how to fit use of CMS RESERVE on that. Suggestions? -- R; Rick Troth Velocity Software http://www.velocitysoftware.com/ On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 16:47, Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote: On Thu, 06 Jan 2011 16:10:36 -0500 (EST), Richard Troth wrote: The problem is that one cannot boot from an unpartitioned CKD disk (LDL) even though one can boot from an unpartitioned FBA disk. Partition tables are not required for other disks and bootstraps. Why should they be required for mainframe disks and bootstraps? The Linux kernel does not consider an LDL-format disk to be unpartitioned. If you format a disk with dasdfmt using -d ldl (and other appropriate parameters), then the disk has been implicitly partitioned, as far as the Linux kernel is concerned. Assuming CKD DASD, the implicit partition will begin with the fourth physical block. (The first two blocks are reserved for IPL records, the third block is the volume label.) I haven't tested your exact scenario, but here's what I have tested. I have a Linux machine that runs in a virtual machine under z/VM. It has four disks, as follows: device block mount number special point file -- --- - 0200 /dev/dasda /dev/dasda1 / 0201 /dev/dasdb /dev/dasdb1 /boot 0202 /dev/dasdc /dev/dasdc1 /home 0203 /dev/dasdd /dev/dasdd1 swap All four of the disks are CMS reserved minidisks. All of them use the DIAG driver except 0201, which uses the ECKD driver. The boot device is 0201. Linux is started by IPL 0201 It works great. I've been doing it for years. What's the problem? (0201 has to use the ECKD driver because zipl does not support writing IPL records to a device controlled by the DIAG driver) -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/ -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
Re: GNU Parted enhancements (was ECKD driver vs DIAG driver)
On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 12:05:44 -0500 (EST), Rob van der Heij wrote: On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Stephen Powell wrote: ... That's eleven combinations. The DIAG driver is only supported in a virtual machine under z/VM, of course. The current production version of GNU parted supports only the first two combinations. With my enhancements, all eleven combinations are supported. The complexity caused by the number of combinations is not an obvious advantage. It's unfortunate we have not been able to separate transport and layout. If we had done that, we could select diagnose I/O or straight SSCH based on performance aspects without any change to the data layout. As you point out, some combinations are WORN devices (write it once, read never afterwards) when the superblock or partition info overwrites the CMS FST. Several of the possible combinations are not a good idea at all. I quite agree. Just because the kernel supports it does not mean that it is a good idea. Personally, I recommend using CMS RESERVED minidisks for everything. If you do that, then for CKD DASD you can turn DIAG on and off and use the disk either way. (Of course, you must get the disk offline to switch disciplines.) Strangely though, if I recall correctly, you cannot do this with FBA DASD unless your CMS logical block size is 512. The difference is that the FBA driver ignores the CMS logical block size and always handles the disk as if the blocksize were 512; whereas the DIAG driver honors the CMS logical blocksize. The bottom line is that, for CMS minidisks on FBA DASD with a CMS logical blocksize greater than 512, if you change the discipline from FBA to DIAG, or vise versa, you pretty much have to reformat the disk and start over. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
Re: ECKD driver vs DIAG driver
On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 20:06:25 -0500 (EST), Richard Troth wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: ... The Linux kernel does not consider an LDL-format disk to be unpartitioned. ... But the partition you see is a phantom. And you can use an LDL-format disk as if it were unpartitioned. We're battling semantics, or something along those lines. I previously used the term partition zero. People did not seem to understand that. The whole disk seems to work. OK, now I think I understand what you are talking about. You're swimming upstream, Rick. That's not the way things were designed to work. Linux grew up in the Intel 386 world, where hard disks were always assumed to be partitioned. IBM mainframe DASD did not fit that pattern; so a way was invented to partition mainframe DASD. For cdl, an OS-style VTOC acted as the partition table and a dataset acted as a partition. (Of course, some restrictions were added. The dataset had to consist of a single extent, and a maximum of three datasets could be defined.) For LDL and CMS formats, there is no partition table. The single partition on the disk is implicit, rather than explicit. Nevertheless, it is there. You should always make your file systems (mkfs et al) or swap spaces (mkswap) on a PARTITION; never on a DEVICE. The only thing in your system that should refer to a DEVICE is zipl, when it writes out IPL records. IPL records are written by zipl to a DEVICE, not a PARTITION. The concept of a partition boot sector from the i386 world was really never carried over into the mainframe world. Mainframe DASD partitions don't have boot sectors. In the mainframe world, only the master boot record (the device itself) can be IPLed. I understand what you want to do, but that is not how things were designed to work. You're trying to force a square peg into a round hole. If you follow the advice of the above paragraph, you should never have any problems. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
