On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 8:36 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
> On the initial pass through builder for C4, maybe 30 packages needed to
> be fixed because the links were bad.
>
> On the initial pass through builder for c5, maybe 20 packages needed to
> be fixed.
>
> On the initial pass through builder f
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 6:58 PM, Ian Forde wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 15:09 -0500, Michael B Allen wrote:
>> Are you talking about the SAQC? I run all CC transactions through one
>> CentOS VPS webserver (actually I have two servers that I periodically
>> wipe out and alternate between every ye
On 02/20/2011 07:30 PM, Dag Wieers wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2011, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
>> On 02/16/2011 04:31 AM, David Sommerseth wrote:
>>> On 15/02/11 17:25, Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
Let's see. 7 weeks after a RHEL release, we have:
>>>
>>> For RHEL6, lets make that 14 weeks. And RHEL5.6
On Sun, 2011-02-20 at 18:20 -0800, Akemi Yagi wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Always Learning wrote:
>
> > I admire very much what you and the others have done to provide builds
> > and a very large repository for the benefit of millions - not only of
> > Centos users. The public spir
On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 02:04 +, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Dag Wieers wrote:
>
> > Regardless, I do think CentOS 5.6 is much more important than CentOS 6.0.
> > As there is a direct security impact to users.
>
> Could you explain that more fully, please?
> I've actually been puzzled why the dev
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Always Learning wrote:
> I admire very much what you and the others have done to provide builds
> and a very large repository for the benefit of millions - not only of
> Centos users. The public spirited nature of your (plural, d.w.z. jullie)
> endeavours, includi
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Dag Wieers wrote:
Regardless, I do think CentOS 5.6 is much more important than CentOS 6.0.
As there is a direct security impact to users.
Could you explain that more fully, please?
I've actually been puzzled why the developers are bothering with 5.6,
if 6.0 very
Dag Wieers wrote:
> Regardless, I do think CentOS 5.6 is much more important than CentOS 6.0.
> As there is a direct security impact to users.
Could you explain that more fully, please?
I've actually been puzzled why the developers are bothering with 5.6,
if 6.0 very shortly.
--
Timothy Murphy
Hoi Dag,
> This was in a direct response to Johnny ;-) No worries, I put the context
> back so it's clear *why* I replied this. It's not that I am impatient for
> CentOS 6.0. In fact I switched to RHEL6.
>
> Regardless, I do think CentOS 5.6 is much more important than CentOS 6.0.
> As there
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011, Always Learning wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2011, Dag Wieers wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Feb 2011, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>
>>> The FIRST build of a distribution (the .0 of 4.0 or 5.0) takes MUCH
>>> longer than the subsequent rebuilds. This is because you have NOTHING
>>> to start from
Hallo Dag,
> CentOS 4.0 was released 23 days after RHEL4.0
> CentOS 5.0 was released 29 days after RHEL5.0
> CentOS 6.0 is *not* released 103 days after RHEL6.0
en ?
This is not a problem for me. I am contented to wait - en jij?
--
With best regards,
Paul.
England,
EU.
__
On Wed, 16 Feb 2011, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 02/16/2011 04:31 AM, David Sommerseth wrote:
>> On 15/02/11 17:25, Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
>>> Let's see. 7 weeks after a RHEL release, we have:
>>
>> For RHEL6, lets make that 14 weeks. And RHEL5.6 got released 9 weeks after
>> RHEL6.
>
> The FIRST
On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 00:41 +0100, John Nash wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a problem configuring the timezone on a CentOS 5.5 server.
> I would like the timezone to be Europe/Paris.
>
> I have followed the steps described here:
> http://www.wikihow.com/Change-the-Timezone-in-Linux
>
> I t
On 02/20/2011 07:41 PM, John Nash wrote:
> Am I missing something important ?
Is your /usr a separate partition? If so try to copy
/usr/share/zoneinfo/Europe/Paris to /etc/localtime (instead of it being
a symbolic link). See if that works.
--
Jorge
___
Hello,
I have a problem configuring the timezone on a CentOS 5.5 server.
I would like the timezone to be Europe/Paris.
I have followed the steps described here:
http://www.wikihow.com/Change-the-Timezone-in-Linux
I think I have changed the appropriate configuration files ( /etc/localtime,
/e
2011/2/18 Larry Vaden :
> That just in from chunkhost.com, where you help them beta test Xen for $FREE
> :)
Wow, I'm really impressed with the professionalism of that site :-P
Quotes from their FAQ:
"Currently, our physical servers are ... ... with RAID 1 (mirroring)
10K SATA drives. The mirrori
On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 15:51 -0500, John Hinton wrote:
> Very good information, Ed. And yes, you will almost certainly be
> fighting with the compliance company, as I have not yet seen any who
> recognized CentOS. RHEL, yes. CentOS however does not hold the same
> 'trusted standard' or clout as t
On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 15:09 -0500, Michael B Allen wrote:
> Are you talking about the SAQC? I run all CC transactions through one
> CentOS VPS webserver (actually I have two servers that I periodically
> wipe out and alternate between every year or two). So I don't have POS
> terminals or any Windo
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Tim Dunphy wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> good call! yes this is a custom ssh. It's a version that has LPK
> capabilities (LDAP public keys) included. It is the product of an rpm
> built from a spec file and tarball that was patched with LPK.
>
> [root@LCENT01:~] #rpm -
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 05:16:47PM -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> If you take a look at man sshd, there may be a switch you can pass in to
No. This has nothing to do with sshd configuration.
As I previously said, the problem is purely 100% in the init script.
The "generic" script from OpenSSH th
On 02/20/2011 04:58 PM, Tim Dunphy wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> good call! yes this is a custom ssh. It's a version that has LPK
> capabilities (LDAP public keys) included. It is the product of an rpm
> built from a spec file and tarball that was patched with LPK.
>
> [root@LCENT01:~] #rpm -qa | gre
Hey guys,
good call! yes this is a custom ssh. It's a version that has LPK
capabilities (LDAP public keys) included. It is the product of an rpm
built from a spec file and tarball that was patched with LPK.
[root@LCENT01:~] #rpm -qa | grep ssh
openssh-askpass-gnome-5.6p1-7.el5.em2
openssh-askp
On 02/20/11 2:36 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> Also the following will help determine if you have normal centos
> packages or "something else":
>
> rpm -q initscripts openssh-server
>
> The result should look this for CentOS-5:
>
> initscripts-8.45.30-3.el5.centos
> openssh-server-4.3p2-41.el5_5.1
I
On 02/20/2011 03:22 PM, Stephen Harris wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 04:19:23PM -0500, Tim Dunphy wrote:
>> I am getting an error that I am not familiar with when I restart ssh.
>
>> [root@virtcent01:~] #service sshd restart
>> Stopping sshd: [ OK
Hello Centos,
I am getting an error that I am not familiar with when I restart ssh.
[root@virtcent01:~] #service sshd restart
Stopping sshd: [ OK ]
Starting sshd:WARNING: initlog is deprecated and will be removed in a
future release
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 04:19:23PM -0500, Tim Dunphy wrote:
> I am getting an error that I am not familiar with when I restart ssh.
> [root@virtcent01:~] #service sshd restart
> Stopping sshd: [ OK ]
> Starting sshd:WARNING: initlog is deprecated and
cornel panceac wrote:
> in (my) ideal world. money are not necessary. you give me centos, i
> give you electricity, or hardware, or an office, etc . since we still
> live in money-lenders ruled world, is there a way to contribute
> (money) to centos but not directly? like, instead giving money,
That works for me. Thanks James!
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 4:34 AM, James Pearson
wrote:
> Eric Gerzon wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am trying to get some more information about the following issue:
> >
> > # strace -p 2256
> > attach: ptrace(PTRACE_ATTACH, ...): Operation not permitted
> >
> > I am
Eric Gerzon wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to get some more information about the following issue:
>
> # strace -p 2256
> attach: ptrace(PTRACE_ATTACH, ...): Operation not permitted
>
> I am trying to trace an mdadm re-sync pid and I keep getting the above
> error.
I believe the MD re-sync pro
2011/2/20 Sean
> James B. Byrne wrote:
> > But, our future financial support
> > for CentOS is contingent upon dealing with an independent legal
> > entity that conforms with national and international tax laws and
> > corporate reporting requirements.
> >
> >
> A new model (appropriate to OSS)
30 matches
Mail list logo
