Re: systemd on EL7
2014-02-10 9:08 GMT+02:00 Andrew Z : > Hello, > i finally caved in and started reading on systemd. It apperas it ( > systemd) will be enabled by default on EL7. > Does it mean i'll have to manually move all init scripts i wrote over the > years ? I think the short answer is "no", but just want to clarify. > // old unhappy guy ramblings > Especially since i'm not too happy about these thousands of files to > support systemd... > // ramblings off. > > You also need to use firewalld and network manager also on servers... -- Eero
Re: systemd on EL7
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Andrew Z wrote: > Hello, > i finally caved in and started reading on systemd. It apperas it ( systemd) > will be enabled by default on EL7. > Does it mean i'll have to manually move all init scripts i wrote over the > years ? I think the short answer is "no", but just want to clarify. > // old unhappy guy ramblings > Especially since i'm not too happy about these thousands of files to support > systemd... > // ramblings off. There's legacy support for SysV init scripts. But there *are* benefits to systemd, so be ready to see your projects if you try to move them to Fedora or EPEL.
Re: Exchange server alternative?
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 7:59 PM, John Stewart wrote: > Our university is trying to get everyone moved to Office 365 and shutdown > the few remaining departmental mail servers. The following is the response > I wrote to one of our faculty member who was unhappy about having his mail > stored on servers in the US. There are substantial savings to universities > in moving to Gmail or Office 365, especially as these services host your > student population for free. I wish I could comment on switching to Office365. Unfortunately, NDA's apply to that work.
Re: systemd on EL7
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Andrew Z wrote: > > i finally caved in and started reading on systemd. It apperas it ( systemd) > will be enabled by default on EL7. > Does it mean i'll have to manually move all init scripts i wrote over the > years ? I think the short answer is "no", but just want to clarify. > // old unhappy guy ramblings > Especially since i'm not too happy about these thousands of files to support > systemd... > // ramblings off. systemd can launch services via legacy initscripts so you don't HAVE to rewrite them (or you can take your time rewriting them).
Re: systemd on EL7
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 4:23 AM, Eero Volotinen wrote: > 2014-02-10 9:08 GMT+02:00 Andrew Z : >> >> i finally caved in and started reading on systemd. It apperas it ( >> systemd) will be enabled by default on EL7. >> Does it mean i'll have to manually move all init scripts i wrote over the >> years ? I think the short answer is "no", but just want to clarify. > > You also need to use firewalld and network manager also on servers... They're installed by default so you could say that RH expects you to use them; but you don't have to use them. You can disable them and enable the iptables and network services.
RE: Exchange server alternative?
I am very skeptical of cloud offerings. I run my own e-mail server at home using Citadel on SL6, which does do calendaring and e-mail, but I don't use calendaring. It's integrated in the web UI, but the UI is pretty 90sish. I would recommend staying away from Office365 / Microsoft's cloud e-mail service. The two organizations where I know people who have moved to it both find it far inferior to previous in-house e-mail with more frequent downtime and unexplained hours long e-mail lags almost weekly. There are plenty of e-mail services available, and I would probably have gone with Rackspace e-mail if I didn't want to cheaply host multiple e-mail addresses at home (the cost is not prohibitive for a business however... It's really not prohibitive for a home user either, just running a server is cheaper for my situation for personal e-mail). -- James Pulver CLASSE Computer Group Cornell University -Original Message- From: owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov [mailto:owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov] On Behalf Of Paul Robert Marino Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2014 12:27 PM To: Nico Kadel-Garcia Cc: Steven Haigh; SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@FNAL.GOV Subject: Re: Exchange server alternative? Nico I tend to agree with you there are so many inexpensive mail services out there now I haven't tried to do this kind of thing in many years. But its not an option for every one especially it you work for a large company then it can still be cheaper to do it in house or depending on the industry your company is involved in there may be regulatory reasons why SAAS is not an option for any thing considered a document of record like email. On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > I've not tried that particular tool. I can only say "good luck, we've > seen that tried many times now". We don't need yet *another* attempt > at a drop-in replacement. > > Break the cycle, and save some money and improve workflow at the same > time. Email and messaging are now available as very effective SAAS > products, and you don't need to manage your own SL based systems to > provide excellent quality services. Save the infrastructure > requirements for service that *do* need in-house support. Developer > workstations, Beowulf clusters, proprietary data backups, web services > for your own applications. > > On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Paul Robert Marino > wrote: >> have you looked at openchange http://www.openchange.org/index.html >> It's been a few years since I looked at it but the goal is to create >> a exchange server replacement.
Re: Exchange server alternative?
On Monday 10 February 2014 13:32:01 James M. Pulver wrote: > I am very skeptical of cloud offerings. I run my own e-mail server at home > using Citadel on SL6, which does do calendaring and e-mail, but I don't use > calendaring. It's integrated in the web UI, but the UI is pretty 90sish. > > I would recommend staying away from Office365 / Microsoft's cloud e-mail > service. The two organizations where I know people who have moved to it > both find it far inferior to previous in-house e-mail with more frequent > downtime and unexplained hours long e-mail lags almost weekly. > > There are plenty of e-mail services available, and I would probably have > gone with Rackspace e-mail if I didn't want to cheaply host multiple e-mail > addresses at home (the cost is not prohibitive for a business however... > It's really not prohibitive for a home user either, just running a server > is cheaper for my situation for personal e-mail). I would add that gmail is a bit of a pain, at least initially when migrating large amounts of mail from Exchange. One organization I work for switched a few months ago and I'm still having weird issues where gmail's not-exactly- IMAP service reflects gobs of email in the IMAP client's inbox from time to time that is supposedly old/archived. Once that happens it all shows in the web interface and in the client that way. Its also odd that gmail seems incapable of actually telling you how much mail you have from the web interface -- reports are wildly inaccurate approximations, and with large volumes specific entries will appear at one time and not at others, as if the backend is of the "eventually consistent" variety. Not sure the origin of this strangeness, but its unnerving to not know volume counts for things like compute farm notifications and really annoying to have 9000 emails that were supposed to have been filtered previously just appear in the inbox at random, requiring manual running of a filter (which sucks over IMAP at that volume) and this happens in Thunderbird, Kmail and the Opera client, so it seems not to be a problem on that end. The calendars thing is... well, not anything that can integrate with a serious project management tool, so its useless for my purposes, so I can't speak to that. Office 365 is simply insufficient for editing of largish documents (technical-spec length -- which is precisely the sort of thing you need collaboration support for). Google docs has the same problem, but does a little better if you run your browser on an overpowered gaming rig -- which is ridiculous when it is remembered that the task at hand is just editing a document in most cases... I'm not trying to bash the concept of some of these services, and for those with lighter needs (probably most people) I'm sure things work just fine. But for those with more serious needs the situation still seems to favor dedicated email hosting (and in our case since none of the calendaring services really integrate with project management tools, they are sort of irrelevant), and native document editing programs that can deal with version control systems (might sound silly, but LibreOffice/git with a few scripts does quite well for small team/large document collaboration). Replacement for Exchange? gmail and 365 don't really fit the bill either, at least not for my needs. But even a totally insufficient solution can feel like a good alternative to an overworked system administrator -- email is one of the funkiest, stupidest, most overregulated, over attacked insecure remnants of the old trusting trust internet.
Re: systemd on EL7
On 10/02/14 08:08, Andrew Z wrote: > Hello, > i finally caved in and started reading on systemd. It apperas it ( > systemd) will be enabled by default on EL7. > Does it mean i'll have to manually move all init scripts i wrote over > the years ? I think the short answer is "no", but just want to clarify. > // old unhappy guy ramblings > Especially since i'm not too happy about these thousands of files to > support systemd... > // ramblings off. As others have said, systemd supports SysV init scripts. However, unless your init script is doing lots of intricate stuff, have a look at the unit files shipped in systemd ... Like these ones: /usr/lib/systemd/system/sshd.service /usr/lib/systemd/system/postfix.service It's not hard to switch over, unless your init script does lots of other things than just starting and stopping services. The systemd.unit(5) man page is also quite comprehensive and informative. -- kind regards, David Sommerseth
Re: systemd on EL7
On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:23 , Eero Volotinen wrote: > 2014-02-10 9:08 GMT+02:00 Andrew Z : > >> Hello, >> i finally caved in and started reading on systemd. It apperas it ( >> systemd) will be enabled by default on EL7. >> Does it mean i'll have to manually move all init scripts i wrote over the >> years ? I think the short answer is "no", but just want to clarify. >> // old unhappy guy ramblings >> Especially since i'm not too happy about these thousands of files to >> support systemd... >> // ramblings off. >> >> > You also need to use firewalld and network manager also on servers... No you don't. Please, no FUD here. It helps nobody. Systemd, on the other hand, will be impossible (or just very hard?) to avoid. But it seems to work as advertised, is very well documented, and does have a few advantages over sysvinit (and upstart in compatibility mode). I've found one case so far where an old init script didn't work: There's a timeout of 10 (or 5?) minutes for each service to start up. If you have an init script that could take longer, a unit file is the only solution because only for those the timeout can be changed or disabled. Creating a systemd unit file simply reusing the old script without any modification and disabling the timeout was pretty simple in our actual case though. -- Stephan
Re: Fed Up for 7?
On 02/09/2014 10:48 PM, Tom H wrote: On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:45 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote: I just upgraded a Fedora Core (FC) 19 workstation to FC20 a week ago. It was an old Pentium 4 computer I use at the customer's site. I used a utility from a Fedora project called Fed Up: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedUp It took about an hour. (You have to make sure FC19 is all updates before it will work). SHOULD ALL UPDATES GO SO SMOOTHLY! Fed Up hit it out of the ball park. Does anyone know if SL6 to SL7 will be as seamless? Or, are we looking at a full wipe and reinstall? I have asked Fed Up if we can have a Fed Up for RHEL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1060359 So, far so, good. I have not heard a deafening *NO* out of them yet. FedUp is being developed for RHEL 7: https://github.com/dashea/redhat-upgrade-tool It's also packaged in RHEL 7 as redhat-upgrade-tool. RH has announced that it'll support in-place upgrades: http://www.redhat.com/about/news/archive/2013/12/red-hat-announces-availability-of-red-hat-enterprise-linux-7-beta So you have to wait for redhat-upgrade-tool to be packaged for RHEL/SL 6... Hi Tom, Very cool! I hate having to wipe and reinstall. The one thing I noticed about Fed Up, was that you had to do a "yum upgrade" before running Fed Up, or you got a bunch of key errors. -T -- ~~ Computers are like air conditioners. They malfunction when you open windows ~~
Re: systemd on EL7
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 1:12 PM, David Sommerseth wrote: > On 10/02/14 08:08, Andrew Z wrote: >> >> i finally caved in and started reading on systemd. It apperas it ( >> systemd) will be enabled by default on EL7. >> Does it mean i'll have to manually move all init scripts i wrote over >> the years ? I think the short answer is "no", but just want to clarify. > > As others have said, systemd supports SysV init scripts. However, > unless your init script is doing lots of intricate stuff, have a look at > the unit files shipped in systemd ... Like these ones: > > /usr/lib/systemd/system/sshd.service > /usr/lib/systemd/system/postfix.service > > It's not hard to switch over, unless your init script does lots of other > things than just starting and stopping services. To see a "complex" systemd service file, take a look at a Fedora 20 nfs-utils; nfsd is started by three lines: ExecStartPre=/usr/lib/nfs-utils/scripts/nfs-server.preconfig ExecStartPre=/usr/sbin/exportfs -r ExecStart=/usr/sbin/rpc.nfsd $RPCNFSDARGS $RPCNFSDCOUNT I would've used just one ExecStart calling "/usr/lib/nfs-utils/scripts/nfs-server.script" but the maintainer clearly disagrees. :)
Re: systemd on EL7
On 10/02/14 23:02, Tom H wrote: > > To see a "complex" systemd service file, take a look at a Fedora 20 > nfs-utils; nfsd is started by three lines: > > ExecStartPre=/usr/lib/nfs-utils/scripts/nfs-server.preconfig > ExecStartPre=/usr/sbin/exportfs -r > ExecStart=/usr/sbin/rpc.nfsd $RPCNFSDARGS $RPCNFSDCOUNT > > I would've used just one ExecStart calling > "/usr/lib/nfs-utils/scripts/nfs-server.script" but the maintainer > clearly disagrees. :) Yeah, and I can actually understand a little bit why. Because systemd can track the services it has started quite carefully, even after they have been started. And can take actions if they die. By starting those three from a single script, it would only be able to track that script and not all those "features" the script starts. Another thing is that logging can be somewhat simpler too, and you are always guaranteed that logging goes via systemd, even things which goes to stdout (and stderr? I don't recall now). A script can easily do odd tweaks there too. So by doing as much as possible in the systemd unit file, it gets less convoluted and a bit easier to follow what should happen if you need to debug. -- kind regards, David Sommerseth
Re: systemd on EL7
On 02/10/2014 02:52 PM, David Sommerseth wrote: On 10/02/14 23:02, Tom H wrote: To see a "complex" systemd service file, take a look at a Fedora 20 nfs-utils; nfsd is started by three lines: ExecStartPre=/usr/lib/nfs-utils/scripts/nfs-server.preconfig ExecStartPre=/usr/sbin/exportfs -r ExecStart=/usr/sbin/rpc.nfsd $RPCNFSDARGS $RPCNFSDCOUNT I would've used just one ExecStart calling "/usr/lib/nfs-utils/scripts/nfs-server.script" but the maintainer clearly disagrees. :) Yeah, and I can actually understand a little bit why. Because systemd can track the services it has started quite carefully, even after they have been started. And can take actions if they die. By starting those three from a single script, it would only be able to track that script and not all those "features" the script starts. Another thing is that logging can be somewhat simpler too, and you are always guaranteed that logging goes via systemd, even things which goes to stdout (and stderr? I don't recall now). A script can easily do odd tweaks there too. So by doing as much as possible in the systemd unit file, it gets less convoluted and a bit easier to follow what should happen if you need to debug. -- kind regards, David Sommerseth Does this not make systemd a prime target for attack and compromise? How hardened is systemd? Yasha Karant
Macintosh & EL
I've been given macbookPro. since i rather be efficient then learn 15 thousand short-cuts just to delete the letter to the right of cursor... Anyway... Question: any good/bad experiences with running Fedora/SL Linux on this macintosh laptop? Thank you AZ
Re: Macintosh & EL
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Andrew Z wrote: > I've been given macbookPro. > since i rather be efficient then learn 15 thousand short-cuts just to delete > the letter to the right of cursor... Anyway... > Question: > any good/bad experiences with running Fedora/SL Linux on this macintosh > laptop? I've run SL very effecitvely in a VM, using VirtualBox from Oracle, and kept the Macintosh free to use software unavailable for Linux.
Re: Macintosh & EL
I did it for ages on a 17" MBP (mid-2010 models). The screen was amazing with Fedora on it. Fedora, far as I know, is EFI-compliant at this point. I had to use Re-Fit back then. Cheers. jduncan On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Andrew Z wrote: > I've been given macbookPro. > since i rather be efficient then learn 15 thousand short-cuts just to > delete the letter to the right of cursor... Anyway... > Question: > any good/bad experiences with running Fedora/SL Linux on this macintosh > laptop? > > Thank you > AZ > > -- Thanks, Jamie Duncan @jamieeduncan
Re: Macintosh & EL
Thank you for information! Its reassuring actually. What xan I use to substitute outlook? Last time I looked (4years ago) all alternatives had issues with calendar and address books. On Feb 10, 2014 11:35 PM, "Nico Kadel-Garcia" wrote: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Andrew Z wrote: > > I've been given macbookPro. > > since i rather be efficient then learn 15 thousand short-cuts just to > delete > > the letter to the right of cursor... Anyway... > > Question: > > any good/bad experiences with running Fedora/SL Linux on this macintosh > > laptop? > > I've run SL very effecitvely in a VM, using VirtualBox from Oracle, > and kept the Macintosh free to use software unavailable for Linux. >
Re: Macintosh & EL
Evolution has come a long way, but is still a stretch to say it is an Outlook replacement. Firebird/Lightning is in a similar state. YMMV My company uses Zimbra, so I use their web client... and don't want to beat it with a hammer most days. again. YMMV jduncan On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 12:07 AM, Andrew Z wrote: > Thank you for information! Its reassuring actually. > What xan I use to substitute outlook? Last time I looked (4years ago) all > alternatives had issues with calendar and address books. > On Feb 10, 2014 11:35 PM, "Nico Kadel-Garcia" wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Andrew Z wrote: >> > I've been given macbookPro. >> > since i rather be efficient then learn 15 thousand short-cuts just to >> delete >> > the letter to the right of cursor... Anyway... >> > Question: >> > any good/bad experiences with running Fedora/SL Linux on this macintosh >> > laptop? >> >> I've run SL very effecitvely in a VM, using VirtualBox from Oracle, >> and kept the Macintosh free to use software unavailable for Linux. >> > -- Thanks, Jamie Duncan @jamieeduncan
