Re: How does NetworkManager monitor the connection files?
On Mar 31, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Benjamin Lefoul wrote: > On Mar 31, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Tom H wrote: >> >> Thanks for this. I meant to suggest in my last email that you ask on >> the NM list but pressed "send" too quickly. >> >> So the problem's solved. >> >> But I'm tempted to add to the bug or file another one to request that >> the "monitor-connection-files" of "man NetworkManager.conf" be >> clarified because "NetworkManager will reload connection files any >> time they changed" isn't going to be understood as "skip 'nmcli >> connection reload'" but "run 'nmcli connection up '" by >> most: >> >> monitor-connection-files >> Whether the configured settings plugin(s) should set up file >> monitors and immediately pick up changes made to connection files >> while NetworkManager is running. This is disabled by default; >> NetworkManager will only read the connection files at startup, and >> when explicitly requested via the ReloadConnections D-Bus call. If >> this key is set to 'true', then NetworkManager will reload >> connection files any time they changed. > (Sorry about not bottom-posting earlier, I hope this is better) Thanks. > I agree. I expect other people to be confused by this. > A reasonable addition to this section of the man could be advising to > use sudoedit to change connection in order to avoid unexpected > behaviors, and reminding to use "nmcli con up $CONN" or better still, > that new feature: "con reapply $CONN". Some people might not have sudo installed so sudoedit isn't a reasonable default recommendation. But that section should mention that only the file's reloaded not the connection, whether it mentions "nmcli connection up " specifically or not.
Re: SL7.2 Live DVDkde would not boot
re-sending to list On 03/04/16 06:36, David G.Miller wrote: Yasha Karant writes: An alternative approach -- if it will work. Suppose I purchase a 1 Tbyte external USB drive (typically with a NTFS partition//format, but this can be changed). Suppose I install such a drive in the target machine that has MS Win 10 on the internal hard drive, and then, during the boot (secure boot disabled, legacy boot enabled), boot from the SL 7.2 install DVD. Could I do the full install (I am not worried about partitions, etc., yet -- merely for testing purposes) to the USB drive, not touching the internal harddrive, and, after the install, boot the machine from the external USB drive (again, not touching the harddrive). Is this feasible? I fully understand that an external USB drive machine will be "slower" than a properly configured SATA internal harddrive machine -- but will this work? Yasha Karant On 04/02/2016 02:28 PM, Chris Schanzle wrote: On 04/02/2016 01:25 PM, Yasha Karant wrote: Other than stating that EL 7 will not work, are there any other suggestions? Best option is to remove the drive and put your own in for testing. Alternatively, clone the drive with CloneZilla or if you're more comfortable, "dd | gzip -1" and muck with it to your hearts content...if you need to restore it to 'factory condition' just restore your backup. I do this with ANY new purchase...before turning the system on and booting it up. I did that for a few years with Fedora. I still have a 400GB USB drive with a couple of versions of Fedora on it (I "walked" forward my Fedora installs so that I had a stable, previous version install on one set of partitions and the latest, bleeding edge on another partition set). I needed a newer kernel than was shipping with SL/CentOS/RHEL at the time. Just keep track of which drive is which when you do the install and change your boot order so the USB drive has priority if it's attached. I tend to use this arrangement with my "work" laptops that come with Windows installed by the IT department on the hard drive. I boot the systems to Linux on the external USB and can then escape from Windows when I feel the need. I also found the Linux install on an external drive is even portable between hardware platforms so an option is to install to the external drive from so other hardware and just boot the problem laptop from the external drive after you've confirmed that the installation works. Cheers, Dave I've had an interesting week with a new 3TB drive and a family box that has been running MS Vista for years. I disconnected the Windows HD 'for safety' and installed kubuntu from the live DVD, with few problems until I tried a 'real' boot, which failed. Eventually I installed buntu 14 with grub alongside Vista on the original HD, and also have buntu 16 beta on the new one; at present they will all boot and run. Don't know if SL7 would do the same. But the USB drive exploit looks handy. John P
Re: SL7.2 Live DVDkde would not boot
On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 7:25 PM, Yasha Karant wrote: > > There were two more postings by me with suffix [2] and then [3] pursuant to > the situation with SL7.2 Live on this particular platform, including the > Ubuntu description of the hardware. > > As far as I can tell, all of the important hardware (harddrive and > controller, DVD reader/burner, WNIC, NIC, pointing device, video//graphics > card, sound card, CPU including FPU and MMU, and USB devices) are linux > supported, including in SL 7. Have I missed something? The BIOS are > "secure boot", but that is a standard issue on current X86-64 hardware and > "secure boot" (read, proprietary closed source vendor controlling) can be > disabled for "legacy boot". The issue that causes the dracut complaint is a > missing file image on the RAMFS that a non-installed (e.g., live) system > uses. The Ubuntu test was with a USB flash drive -- would that make a > difference? You don't have to use "legacy boot." You can disable secure boot and still boot in efi mode. Like Anaconda, Ubiquity (the Ubuntu installer) will boot using bios or efi hardware. > As far as the older text-based installer, I fully concur with the respondent > below. A text based installer should at least be an option -- it worked > much better. However, the live non-installed system supposedly will not use > the installer. (I point out that the only enterprise competitor to EL is > SLES, and SLES is much more GUI and automated than previous EL versions and > also -- from direct experience -- is neither easy to configure nor properly > supported except for large commercial-style configurations. There also is > no equivalent to this professional email list serve for any SuSE product to > which I had even licensed access.) I've given up on installer installs (except for kickstart) but, in RHEL so I assume in SL, you can switch to the text installer by adding "inst.text" to the Anaconda kernel cmdline. AFAIR, you won't have any disk formatting options but you can pre-format a disk. > I understand that Ubuntu is not as stable as EL (although Ubuntu advertises > support and at least at one point claimed that it could be used for > production deployments -- something one dare not do with unstable > non-hardened systems) -- but is the issue here simply one of the kernel and > drivers? Red Hat does certify EL 7 for laptops Your understanding of Ubuntu's incorrect. The non-LTS versions might not be as stable as EL but the LTS versions most certainly are. AFAIUI, your problem's that the installer's failing to boot not that EL 7 doesn't support your hardware. > Other than stating that EL 7 will not work, are there any other suggestions? Nico suggested that you try a 7.0 installer rather than a 7.1 or 7.2 one. You could also boot from the Ubuntu live installer that you've already used, install yum, and install EL 7 with "yum --installroot=mount_of_el_7_root_partition ..." (preferably from a local mirror).
Re: MAC file sharing
Back in the day I use to use neatalk the Linux AFP server but i'm not sure Mac OSX still uses AFP. Original Message From: ToddAndMargo Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 15:52 To: scientific-linux-us...@fnal.gov Subject: Re: MAC file sharing On 04/02/2016 12:51 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote: > On 04/02/2016 09:22 AM, Kevin K wrote: >> Are you trying to share FROM Linux to Mac, or from Mac to Linux? >> >> A few weeks back, I wanted to share from my Mac to Linux, and had all >> sorts of difficulty. This is from El Capitan to the latest SL7 version. >> >> I could browse the Mac from the browser on the desktop, but I could >> not mount it from the command line or fstab. >> >> I ended up figuring out how to share NFS from my Mac, and it was >> available on Linux. >> >> I suspect that, for sharing from Linux, Samba would probably be your >> best choice. >> >> > > mac would be the server > Poop. I said the backwards. Linux would be the server -- ~~ Computers are like air conditioners. They malfunction when you open windows ~~
Re: MAC file sharing
On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:02 PM, wrote: > Back in the day I use to use neatalk the Linux AFP server but i'm not sure > Mac OSX still uses AFP. Oh, brother. I used to *publish* the hooks to get CAP, the Columbia Appletalk Protocol server, and later netatalk to work for SunOS sytems to allow Mac access. These days, MacOS clients can use NFSv3 to access Linux hosts quite handily. I'd use that, seriously. The tricky part is unmounting gracefully: NFS is supposed to be "stateless", but never quite achieves it. If you need better authentication, then look into CIFS (which Linux and various network appliances use Samba to publish), or possibly NFSv4 (which has much better user authentication than NFSv3, but is more complex to set up). > On 04/02/2016 12:51 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote: >> On 04/02/2016 09:22 AM, Kevin K wrote: >>> Are you trying to share FROM Linux to Mac, or from Mac to Linux? >>> >>> A few weeks back, I wanted to share from my Mac to Linux, and had all >>> sorts of difficulty. This is from El Capitan to the latest SL7 version. >>> >>> I could browse the Mac from the browser on the desktop, but I could >>> not mount it from the command line or fstab. >>> >>> I ended up figuring out how to share NFS from my Mac, and it was >>> available on Linux. >>> >>> I suspect that, for sharing from Linux, Samba would probably be your >>> best choice. >>> >>> >> >> mac would be the server >> > > > Poop. I said the backwards. Linux would be the server > > > -- > ~~ > Computers are like air conditioners. > They malfunction when you open windows > ~~
Re: SL7.2 Live DVDkde would not boot
On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Yasha Karant wrote: > There were two more postings by me with suffix [2] and then [3] pursuant to > the situation with SL7.2 Live on this particular platform, including the > Ubuntu description of the hardware. > As far as I can tell, all of the important hardware (harddrive and > controller, DVD reader/burner, WNIC, NIC, pointing device, video//graphics > card, sound card, CPU including FPU and MMU, and USB devices) are linux > supported, including in SL 7. Have I missed something? The BIOS are You're missing the part that, until and unless the kernel supports the particular chipsets, it can and will misreport the actual hardware. This is a common problem, especially since the manufacturer of particular can, and will, have the same hardware describe mismatched names on the box, names on the hardware order forms, names in the published Windows drivers depending on release, and names in MacOS and Linux and UNIX kernels depending on who wrote them. And they also change chipsets without telling anyone or renumbering the mother board revision number. Been there, done that, actually scraped sealant and hot glue off of chips to read the chip numbers. > "secure boot", but that is a standard issue on current X86-64 hardware and > "secure boot" (read, proprietary closed source vendor controlling) can be > disabled for "legacy boot". The issue that causes the dracut complaint is a > missing file image on the RAMFS that a non-installed (e.g., live) system > uses. The Ubuntu test was with a USB flash drive -- would that make a > difference? Hard to tell. BIOS discovery of hardware is a programming horror show, with closed source legacy components taking up resources better used for cleaner, more modern versions but unchangeable for legacy compatibility reasons. I *wish* > As far as the older text-based installer, I fully concur with the respondent > below. A text based installer should at least be an option -- it worked > much better. However, the live non-installed system supposedly will not use > the installer. (I point out that the only enterprise competitor to EL is > SLES, and SLES is much more GUI and automated than previous EL versions and > also -- from direct experience -- is neither easy to configure nor properly > supported except for large commercial-style configurations. There also is > no equivalent to this professional email list serve for any SuSE product to > which I had even licensed access.) The SL 7.1 and SL 7.2 installers are, in my recent observation, *nasty*. They don't detect network devices correctly for VirtualBox based VM's and network based installation, and I've had to use the SL 7.0 installer and http://vault.centos.org/7.0.1406/ as my upstream repository for network based installation. This is not a SL problem, it happens with CentOS as well. > I understand that Ubuntu is not as stable as EL (although Ubuntu advertises > support and at least at one point claimed that it could be used for > production deployments -- something one dare not do with unstable > non-hardened systems) -- but is the issue here simply one of the kernel and > drivers? Red Hat does certify EL 7 for laptops For good reasons which you are enocuntering, yeah. And please, it's called "RHEL" for a reason. Please use its actual name for consistency. > ( > https://access.redhat.com/ecosystem/search/#/category/Laptop?sort=sortTitle%20asc&certifications=Red%20Hat%20Enterprise%20Linux%207&ecosystem=Red%20Hat%20Enterprise%20Linux > ), > but all I could find for EL 7 were products from Lenovo. Lenovo is not > that conservative in hardware, and certainly competes with both HP and Dell. I'd urge you to discard vendor published "compatible with Linux" recommendations. They're not reliable, because vendors change hardware unannounced and because Linux tools grow more sophisticated. > Other than stating that EL 7 will not work, are there any other suggestions? Try SL 7.0 before being completely certain. Also, if you're putting the ISO image on a USB installer, you're adding another variable.
Re: SL7.2 Live DVDkde would not boot
On 04/02/2016 10:36 PM, David G.Miller wrote: Yasha Karant writes: An alternative approach -- if it will work. Suppose I purchase a 1 Tbyte external USB drive (typically with a NTFS partition//format, but this can be changed). Suppose I install such a drive in the target machine that has MS Win 10 on the internal hard drive, and then, during the boot (secure boot disabled, legacy boot enabled), boot from the SL 7.2 install DVD. Could I do the full install (I am not worried about partitions, etc., yet -- merely for testing purposes) to the USB drive, not touching the internal harddrive, and, after the install, boot the machine from the external USB drive (again, not touching the harddrive). Is this feasible? I fully understand that an external USB drive machine will be "slower" than a properly configured SATA internal harddrive machine -- but will this work? Yasha Karant On 04/02/2016 02:28 PM, Chris Schanzle wrote: On 04/02/2016 01:25 PM, Yasha Karant wrote: Other than stating that EL 7 will not work, are there any other suggestions? Best option is to remove the drive and put your own in for testing. Alternatively, clone the drive with CloneZilla or if you're more comfortable, "dd | gzip -1" and muck with it to your hearts content...if you need to restore it to 'factory condition' just restore your backup. I do this with ANY new purchase...before turning the system on and booting it up. I did that for a few years with Fedora. I still have a 400GB USB drive with a couple of versions of Fedora on it (I "walked" forward my Fedora installs so that I had a stable, previous version install on one set of partitions and the latest, bleeding edge on another partition set). I needed a newer kernel than was shipping with SL/CentOS/RHEL at the time. Just keep track of which drive is which when you do the install and change your boot order so the USB drive has priority if it's attached. I tend to use this arrangement with my "work" laptops that come with Windows installed by the IT department on the hard drive. I boot the systems to Linux on the external USB and can then escape from Windows when I feel the need. I also found the Linux install on an external drive is even portable between hardware platforms so an option is to install to the external drive from so other hardware and just boot the problem laptop from the external drive after you've confirmed that the installation works. Cheers, Dave I do not know the rules//customs of this list as to whether or not I should snip this. Your last paragraph presents an option. I have a 1 Tbyte SL 7.1 system on my professional (not consumer Pavillion) with a "genuine" Intel I7 CPU (not the AMD CPU on the possible laptop for my wife). If I simply got an external 1 Tbyte USB drive (e.g. a commodity Western Digital My Passport Ultra), and then, using my laptop that has a 1 Tbyte internal drive, did a dd from my laptop to the external drive (a dd should copy all partitions, including boot) -- would this be bootable on the target test machine? If it is, and we elect to keep her machine, could I then, using her machine, do a dd from the external USB booted drive to the internal 1 Tbyte drive of her machine, producing a bootable Linux internal harddrive, or would there be a problem? My machine does not have a EFI "chunk" on the harddrive, and I have been told that without such a "chunk" -- wasted space -- a non EFI image will not boot on an EFI machine even if both Secure Boot is disabled and Legacy Boot is enabled. If this is the case, the image from my machine would not boot. Any ideas or suggestions? If the above would produce a booted SL 7.1 machine on my wife's new laptop, I presumably could put in the 7.2 install DVD and upgrade to 7.2 without requiring the use of a slow nextwork connection (at home, all we have is DSL -- and at my wife's university office, that theoretical has a 1 Gbit/sec 802.3 connection, the actual throughput when downloading the current 7.2 Live DVDkde ISO image was approximately 1 Mbit/sec -- 1 percent of the nominal throughput -- mostly because the IT central administration fully controlling network professionals at my institution have certain skill and knowledge issues that I shall not address here). Would the above work or is the lack of an efi "chunk" a "deal breaker"? Can I install such an efi chunk on my machine (I have enough unused space in various partitions that I could use gparted, for example, to free up such space -- if I know where the efi "chunk" needs to be (next to the MBR? anywhere on a bootable disk?) and from where to get an efi "chunk" image. Yasha Karant
Linux GUI use of a touchpad laptop without physical buttons
The typical Linux GUI uses a pointing device with three buttons; the center button can be emulated on two button pointing devices by simultaneously depressing both buttons. (Some track balls only have two buttons plus a scroll wheel -- depressing the wheel is the center "button".) What happens with a laptop that has only a touchpad but no buttons? "Tapping" on the touchpad performs the MS Win 10 "button" functions, but what about Linux use? Can one configure the touchpad so that a specific set of regions work only for "tapping" and thus emulate a button, and the rest works as a regular "glide" pointing device? If not, is the only mechanism to use such a machine, without pointing device physical buttons, is to have an external (e.g., USB attached) mouse or trackball with buttons? Also, are there packages to enable in Linux GUIs, and compatible with EL7, touchscreen devices? If so, does anyone have direct experience with the actual functionality provided by such Linux packages -- are these end-user usable? Yasha Karant
Re: SL7.2 Live DVDkde would not boot
On 03/04/16 17:10, John Pilkington wrote: >> > > I've had an interesting week with a new 3TB drive and a family box that has > been running MS Vista for years. I disconnected the Windows HD 'for safety' > and installed kubuntu from the live DVD, with few problems until I tried a > 'real' boot, which failed. Eventually I installed buntu 14 with grub > alongside Vista on the original HD, and also have buntu 16 beta on the new > one; at present they will all boot and run. Don't know if SL7 would do the > same. But the USB drive exploit looks handy. This should work on the majority of all Linux distributions, at least if you use UUID for the /boot partitionsi. Use of LVM can also simplify mounting the root parition (/) and so on - unless you use UUID for those mount points too. I've booted several old Linux installations from hardrives put into a USB closure. I haven't tried to do that with Windows though, that might work too - but somehow I imagine it will freak out at some point where drive letters won't match properly. To get an overview you can run 'blkid' or 'lsblk -o NAME,UUID' on your system to see all devices and their unique UUID. These tools are also valuable when you need to modify /etc/crypttab manually. -- kind regards, David Sommerseth
Re: SL7.2 Live DVDkde would not boot
On 04/03/2016 11:20 AM, David Sommerseth wrote: On 03/04/16 17:10, John Pilkington wrote: I've had an interesting week with a new 3TB drive and a family box that has been running MS Vista for years. I disconnected the Windows HD 'for safety' and installed kubuntu from the live DVD, with few problems until I tried a 'real' boot, which failed. Eventually I installed buntu 14 with grub alongside Vista on the original HD, and also have buntu 16 beta on the new one; at present they will all boot and run. Don't know if SL7 would do the same. But the USB drive exploit looks handy. This should work on the majority of all Linux distributions, at least if you use UUID for the /boot partitionsi. Use of LVM can also simplify mounting the root parition (/) and so on - unless you use UUID for those mount points too. I've booted several old Linux installations from hardrives put into a USB closure. I haven't tried to do that with Windows though, that might work too - but somehow I imagine it will freak out at some point where drive letters won't match properly. To get an overview you can run 'blkid' or 'lsblk -o NAME,UUID' on your system to see all devices and their unique UUID. These tools are also valuable when you need to modify /etc/crypttab manually. -- kind regards, David Sommerseth Thank you for that approach, but what you describe does not seem to be what I am suggesting. Rather, I was going to use dd in single user mode (does the old init method still work with the EL 7 replacement for init to get to single user mode, scrolling text screen, no GUI, or is another mechanism required?) to make an image of my booting, working SL 7.1 installation on a 1 Tbyte external USB drive. Then, using the boot control screen of the target laptop -- well before any OS boots -- I was going to set the boot device to be USB, plug the "bootable" dd'ed USB 1 Tbyte external drive into a USB port on the target machine, and boot from that. If my present system is bootable, etc., will not the dd'ed USB drive be bootable (except perhaps for that efi "chunk" issue I mentioned elsewhere and do have any elucidation on that point) or do I need to worry about UUID, etc., issues with the dd'ed "copy"? Are new UUIDs generated/required to boot such an "imaged" external USB drive? Regards, Yasha Karant
Re: MAC file sharing
On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 6:32 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 12:02 PM, wrote: >> >> Back in the day I use to use neatalk the Linux AFP server but i'm not >> sure Mac OSX still uses AFP. > > Oh, brother. I used to *publish* the hooks to get CAP, the Columbia > Appletalk Protocol server, and later netatalk to work for SunOS sytems > to allow Mac access. > > These days, MacOS clients can use NFSv3 to access Linux hosts quite > handily. I'd use that, seriously. The tricky part is unmounting > gracefully: NFS is supposed to be "stateless", but never quite > achieves it. > > If you need better authentication, then look into CIFS (which Linux > and various network appliances use Samba to publish), or possibly > NFSv4 (which has much better user authentication than NFSv3, but is > more complex to set up). OS X 10.1 had nfs and smb as well as Apple's pre-OS X afp. OS X defaulted to afp until smb replaced it in OS X 10.9. If you set up samba on an SL box and have avahi installed, the SL box'll show up in the OS X Finder.
Re: Linux GUI use of a touchpad laptop without physical buttons
On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Yasha Karant wrote: > > The typical Linux GUI uses a pointing device with three buttons; the > center button can be emulated on two button pointing devices by > simultaneously depressing both buttons. (Some track balls only have > two buttons plus a scroll wheel -- depressing the wheel is the center > "button".) > > What happens with a laptop that has only a touchpad but no buttons? > "Tapping" on the touchpad performs the MS Win 10 "button" functions, > but what about Linux use? Can one configure the touchpad so that a > specific set of regions work only for "tapping" and thus emulate a > button, and the rest works as a regular "glide" pointing device? "synclient TapButton1=1 TapButton2=3 TapButton3=2" sets up right-click for a two-finger-tap and middle-click for a three-finger-tap.
Linux on HP consumer laptop
The Ubuntu LTS ("stable" "server" "hardened" "enterprise" distro)
bootable DVD actually works in the consumer HP laptop my wife
may have to use.
The kernel Ubuntu LTS uses is:
4.2.0-35.40~14.04.1
whereas SL 7 is using a 3.x Linux kernel. All of the HP supplied
hardware seems to work under Ubuntu LTS current production,
including the graphics/video card/display, sound card, LAN, pointing
device, DVD driver/burner, and USB (including "automounting"). Is the
issue with SL 7 on this platform the
use of a 3.x kernel rather than a 4.x kernel? I would prefer to stay
with yum over apt-get, but if the hardware is not supported, one faces
a quandary.
In this regard, is anyone using Ubuntu LTS in a production environment?
Is it fact both stable and (reasonably) hardened (e.g., not a
consume/enthusiast product such as
MS Win or RH Fedora)?
Yasha Karant
Re: Linux on HP consumer laptop
On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Yasha Karant wrote: > In this regard, is anyone using Ubuntu LTS in a production environment? Is > it fact both stable and (reasonably) hardened (e.g., not a > consume/enthusiast product such as > MS Win or RH Fedora)? Ubuntu LTS is used in a lot of production environments that tend to require newer libraries and packages. Most major distributions are reasonably secure out of the box, I'd argue that the primary difference is EL tends to have very thoroughly vetted package updates. I've seen some LTS packages with bugs and most other distributions don't test packages thoroughly enough for production. Debian however is very stable for servers (I'd probably use Debian over Ubuntu for production). Brandon Vincent
