Re: SL 6.1 installation anaconda failure - issue at ftp.scientificlinux.org?
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Graham Allan wrote: > > We just had to install a couple of SL 6.1 machines (due to collaboration > dependency on this version) and strangely found that the installation > would bomb every time with an anaconda error when trying to parse > /tmp/.treeinfo. The file contains the following contents: > > ... > > it was suggested there that someone post this to the SL lists but I > don't see any sign that happened. Their workaround of a dummy hosts > entry for ftp.scientificlinux.org does let the install succeed, but I > imagine that either putting the file back into place, or disabling the > "helpful" response from the server in favor of a plain 404 response, > should help? > > Although I'm curious why anaconda is attempting to download a file from > ftp.scientificlinux.org when all the declared sources are local - some > oversight in the installer build? > > The same problem afflicts SL 6.0, btw. This problem was brought to the list when 6.1 was released (more or less) and, IIRC, Connie tracked down the problem to a change in Anaconda's behavior.
SL 6.1 installation anaconda failure - issue at ftp.scientificlinux.org?
We just had to install a couple of SL 6.1 machines (due to collaboration dependency on this version) and strangely found that the installation would bomb every time with an anaconda error when trying to parse /tmp/.treeinfo. The file contains the following contents: 300 Multiple Choices Multiple Choices The document name you requested (/linux/scientific/6.1/x86_64/updates/security//.treeinfo) could not be found on this server. However, we found documents with names similar to the one you requested.Available documents: /linux/scientific/6.1/x86_64/updates/security//. (common basename) /linux/scientific/6.1/x86_64/updates/security//.. (common basename) This is curious because we are installing from a local copy of the 6.1 repo, our kickstart file hasn't changed in a long time, worked ok when last used earlier this year, etc. To cut a long story short I eventually found this at scientificlinuxforum.org: http://scientificlinuxforum.org/index.php?showtopic=2302 it was suggested there that someone post this to the SL lists but I don't see any sign that happened. Their workaround of a dummy hosts entry for ftp.scientificlinux.org does let the install succeed, but I imagine that either putting the file back into place, or disabling the "helpful" response from the server in favor of a plain 404 response, should help? Although I'm curious why anaconda is attempting to download a file from ftp.scientificlinux.org when all the declared sources are local - some oversight in the installer build? The same problem afflicts SL 6.0, btw. Thanks, Graham -- - Graham Allan School of Physics and Astronomy - University of Minnesota -
Re: 3 drive mdadm RAID 10?
Am 02.06.2013 14:47, schrieb Paul Robert Marino: > On Jun 1, 2013 2:09 AM, Steve Bergman wrote: > > Hi, > > I have a server that I'm getting ready to put into production. It has 4 > SATA drives which I've configured as a 2-drive raid1 array with 2 hot > spares. I'd like the performance of raid10, but need a little better > fault tolerance. Devoting all 4 drives to raid1 seems fault-tolerance > overkill. It's come to my attention that mdadm supports a sort of > raid1e-like "raid10" mode with 3 drives, and that I have a choice of a > near or far configuration. 3 drive raid10 with 1 hot spare sounds > perfect. 2-drive fault tolerance is perfect. And the improved > performance sound good. > [...] > Steve Bergman> First of all what do you mean by raid 10 do you mean Raid 1+0 > or striped > raid 5s which is some times called raid 10, 5+0 or 50 > > Either case the drive numbers don't add up. > For raid 1+0 with hot spares you need an even number of drives plus your > spares. > No, he means the RAID-1e implementation provided by the kernel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-standard_RAID_levels#RAID_1E Regards, Florian Philipp signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: is this a this virus or an error
On 06/03/2013 05:58 AM, g wrote: greetings konstantin and john. excuse delay in replying. i extended my 'memorial day weekend' to a 'memorial week'. On 05/24/2013 12:03 PM, Konstantin Olchanski wrote: On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:50:12AM -0500, g wrote: Your 2701HG-B Gateway has intercepted your web page ... Get a real gateway that just gateways without trying to be your virus checker, your nanny and your IP policeman. this one has been doing fine up until now. (Hint: most internet boxes given out by internet providers can be switched to a pass-through (aka bridge) mode, then you attach your own nanny-free NAT/Wifi box to it). that is possible with this dsl router as it has; Bridged LLC Bridged VC-Mux Routed LLC Routed VC-Mux but i would rather leave it as is as it is actually working fine with exception of this one minor hiccup. On 05/24/2013 12:34 PM, John Lauro wrote: > Linux can get viruses too including ones that could cause the symptoms > described. this is true. with most of the 'script kiddies' being linux users who dislike oos, i would not think they would try writing an oos appearing virus. too easy to track down. then again, no telling what they would do. ;-) in addition, from 'day one' of installing sl, i have 'clamav' installed and it has yet to show any problems. > Not sure what you mean by oos viruses, 'oos' = 'other operating system' > but the claim was blaster like, not the blaster virus. this is true, also. except > That said, it sounds suspicious like an attempt to get you to buy something. my feelings also. > Anyways, a virus on Linux is possible, but you can use argus or tcpdump > or a ton of other network monitoring tools on your machine and see if it > is spewing out random connections that it shouldn't be. just by noting the activity led flashing was enough to indicate to me that such was not happening. i posted to list to see if anyone might have a similar problem. i am considering installing 'argus', but my 'round2it' has not made it yet. if i really wanted to see what was going thru router, i would install another computer with 2 nic cards between dsl line and router to monitor traffic. as i have system setup now, i only allow traffic in that i have originated. i thank you both for your replies. in closing, my actual 'cure' for problem was to disable the warning. it did not seem to be working correctly as it would appear when i had from 4 to 8 tabs open in firefox. under such conditions, i really did not feel that warning was proper, because in past, i have had up to 12 tabs open and there where no warnings. Presumably, the "OOS" mentioned above is some variety of MS Windows, as in the USA, Mac OS X cannot legally be installed on a non-Apple hardware platform, and it is rare for a Mac OS X user to install any Linux as the primary operating system environment. The reality of enduser workstations in a mixed environment is that one is forced to install MS Windows. Many proprietary applications, licensed for fee (e.g., products from Intuit), are not available for Linux. Thus, one is forced to use either the nightmare of dual boot systems, or using a virtual machine under Linux (I personally use Oracle VirtualBox that is licensed for free) and installing MS Windows thereunder. My understanding is that anti-compromise software (e.g., ClamAV) must be installed on both the Linux host as well as the MS guest as a compromise of the guest could compromise some resources on the host. Free Software Foundation purists will reject any use of proprietary "non-free" software, but those of us who use the machines and are not attempting to make a socio-political statement need to run proprietary applications for certain special circumstances. Yasha Karant
Re: is this a this virus or an error
greetings konstantin and john. excuse delay in replying. i extended my 'memorial day weekend' to a 'memorial week'. On 05/24/2013 12:03 PM, Konstantin Olchanski wrote: On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:50:12AM -0500, g wrote: Your 2701HG-B Gateway has intercepted your web page ... Get a real gateway that just gateways without trying to be your virus checker, your nanny and your IP policeman. this one has been doing fine up until now. (Hint: most internet boxes given out by internet providers can be switched to a pass-through (aka bridge) mode, then you attach your own nanny-free NAT/Wifi box to it). that is possible with this dsl router as it has; Bridged LLC Bridged VC-Mux Routed LLC Routed VC-Mux but i would rather leave it as is as it is actually working fine with exception of this one minor hiccup. On 05/24/2013 12:34 PM, John Lauro wrote: > Linux can get viruses too including ones that could cause the symptoms > described. this is true. with most of the 'script kiddies' being linux users who dislike oos, i would not think they would try writing an oos appearing virus. too easy to track down. then again, no telling what they would do. ;-) in addition, from 'day one' of installing sl, i have 'clamav' installed and it has yet to show any problems. > Not sure what you mean by oos viruses, 'oos' = 'other operating system' > but the claim was blaster like, not the blaster virus. this is true, also. except > That said, it sounds suspicious like an attempt to get you to buy something. my feelings also. > Anyways, a virus on Linux is possible, but you can use argus or tcpdump > or a ton of other network monitoring tools on your machine and see if it > is spewing out random connections that it shouldn't be. just by noting the activity led flashing was enough to indicate to me that such was not happening. i posted to list to see if anyone might have a similar problem. i am considering installing 'argus', but my 'round2it' has not made it yet. if i really wanted to see what was going thru router, i would install another computer with 2 nic cards between dsl line and router to monitor traffic. as i have system setup now, i only allow traffic in that i have originated. i thank you both for your replies. in closing, my actual 'cure' for problem was to disable the warning. it did not seem to be working correctly as it would appear when i had from 4 to 8 tabs open in firefox. under such conditions, i really did not feel that warning was proper, because in past, i have had up to 12 tabs open and there where no warnings. -- peace out. in a world with out fences, who needs gates. sl6.3 linux tc.hago. g .
