On Sat, 8 Nov 2014, Steve Brooks wrote:
I installed from the repo given here a month ago and it works fine. I
something wrong with this google repo? Should I remove and reinstall from the
new one given here on this list?
Correction this is the repo file
[google-chrome]
name=google-chrome
On Fri, 7 Nov 2014, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I am sorry, but Google is not interested in supporting CentOS.
Is there some way we might utilize social media to help them
understand the demand?
I installed from the repo given here a month
>>> Now that I look again, that appears to be the case.
>>> Not only that, the radiator is tilted so that
>>> only the right front corner is close to the board.
>
>> you would be very surprised at just how much time is spent
>> in trying to "tear down" a new system design. heat sinking
>> is an on
On Sun, 9 Feb 2014, Michael Hennebry wrote:
> I recently obtained a desktop computer with an nVidia video card:
> from lspci:
> 02:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation G84 [GeForce 8600 GT]
> (rev a1
> I had to open the case to connect the DVD
> drive and saw what appears to be a fa
> I recently obtained a desktop computer with an nVidia video card:
> from lspci:
> 02:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation G84 [GeForce 8600 GT]
> (rev a1
> I had to open the case to connect the DVD
> drive and saw what appears to be a fallen radiator:
> http://www.cs.ndsu.nodak.ed
On Fri, 24 Jan 2014, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 1/24/2014 12:54 AM, Steve Brooks wrote:
>> [root@mach~]# sginfo /dev/scanner
>> INQUIRY response (cmd: 0x12)
>>
>> Device Type3
>> Vendor:
Hi,
After upgrading to kernel 2.6.32-431.1.2.el6.x86_64 the messages below
keep appearing in "/var/log/messages".
--
ata16.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6
ata16.00: irq_stat 0x4001
scsi 16:0:0:0: [sg
On Tue, 21 Jan 2014, Keith Keller wrote:
> On 2014-01-21, Steve Brooks wrote:
>>
>>> mkfs.xfs -d su=512k,sw=14 /dev/sda
>>
>> where "512k" is the Stripe-unit size of the single logical device built on
>> the raid controller. "14" is from th
Hi All,
I have been trying out XFS given it is going to be the file system of
choice from upstream in el7. Starting with an Adaptec ASR71605 populated
with sixteen 4TB WD enterprise hard drives. The version of OS is 6.4
x86_64 and has 64G of RAM.
This next part was not well researched as I ha
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 05:24:54PM +0100, Steve Brooks wrote:
>
>>9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 098 097 000Old_age - 2106
>> 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000Old_age - 80
>
>> replaced with new drives. Wow... I
Hi All,
I know many of us here manage RAID on our Centos based servers so this may
be of interest to us all.
I ordered three new "Enterprise hard drives" this month from a well known
UK online retailer. The drives arrived as new in their anti-static
packaging. Before using one of the drives i
Sep 1 04:04:02 sraid1v kernel: do_IRQ: 4.110 No irq handler for vector
(irq -1)
Sep 1 04:59:22 sraid1v kernel: do_IRQ: 4.102 No irq handler for vector
(irq -1)
Sep 1 05:42:22 sraid1v kernel: do_IRQ: 5.224 No irq handler for vector
(irq -1)
Sep 1 05:43:42 sraid1v kernel: do_IRQ: 5.121 No irq
> Howard Leadmon wrote:
>> I setup a CentOS 6 server to use with KVM/QEMU, and I am getting the
>> following error a good bit, granted it doesn't seem to be causing any
>> trouble. I figured I would post and see if anyone has any ideas on the
>> issue, or if I can just dismiss it.
>>
>> If I loo
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013, Howard Leadmon wrote:
> I setup a CentOS 6 server to use with KVM/QEMU, and I am getting the
> following error a good bit, granted it doesn't seem to be causing any
> trouble. I figured I would post and see if anyone has any ideas on the
> issue, or if I can just dismiss it.
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013, Scott Robbins wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 02:02:08PM +0100, Steve Brooks wrote:
>>
>>> You don't actually need hwaddr in your ifcfg-* files -- though it's
>>> probably not a bad thing to have the MAC in there. [As Scott pointed out
> You don't actually need hwaddr in your ifcfg-* files -- though it's
> probably not a bad thing to have the MAC in there. [As Scott pointed out,
> it's all about what udev has in its rules.]
>
>
>>
>> You also have to look at /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules
>>
>
> +1
> Yes, udev rules
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013, Markus Falb wrote:
>
> On 02.Sep.2013, at 22:14, Steve Brooks wrote:
>
>> [2] This motherboard has a "Marvell 88E8052" as a second NIC, currently
>> disbled in the BIOS. Problem is that the "88E8001" NIC has to be "eth0" as
Hi,
I noticed that one of out "Centos 5" servers with an onboard "Marvell
88E8001" was showing some packet overruns.
# ifconfig -a eth0 | grep "RX p"
RX packets:1629537 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:3694 frame:0
So I thought about using a driver from "elrepo" the lspci id's suggest to
ins
On Mon, 26 Aug 2013, Michael Duvall wrote:
>Hi Guys, In a bit of a pickle.. Is anyone running the latest "Centos
> 5.9"
>or earlier version with an Intel X79 based motherboard. I have a server
>which needs the motherboard replacing asap and I have a spare
> "Sabertooth
>
On Sun, 25 Aug 2013, SilverTip257 wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Steve Brooks wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 25 Aug 2013, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/25/2013 03:15 PM, Steve Brooks wrote:
>>>> Ok here is the memory and kernel information it
On Sun, 25 Aug 2013, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> On 08/25/2013 03:15 PM, Steve Brooks wrote:
>> Ok here is the memory and kernel information it doesn't state PAE yet it
>> seems to recognise the 32G.
>>
>> [root@app2 ~]# uname -a
>> Linux app2 2.6.18-348.1
On Sun, 25 Aug 2013, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> On 08/25/2013 11:41 AM, Steve Brooks wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the reply, I have included the "lspci" output from the new
>> board running "el6". I am sure that the kernel is not PAE but can not
>>
On Sat, 24 Aug 2013, SilverTip257 wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 8:08 AM, Steve Brooks wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Guys, In a bit of a pickle.. Is anyone running the latest "Centos 5.9"
>> or earlier version with an Intel X79 based motherboard. I have a server
>&g
Hi Guys, In a bit of a pickle.. Is anyone running the latest "Centos 5.9"
or earlier version with an Intel X79 based motherboard. I have a server
which needs the motherboard replacing asap and I have a spare "Sabertooth
X79". I have a machine with a "Sabertooth X79" motherboard to test on
whic
On Tue, 6 Aug 2013, SilverTip257 wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 8:58 PM, Eliezer Croitoru wrote:
>
>> OK so back to the issue in hands.
>> The issue is that I have a mail storage for more then 65k users per
>> domain and the ext4 doesn't support this size of directory list.
>> The reiser FS inde
On Fri, 7 Dec 2012, mark wrote:
> On 12/06/12 19:23, Steve Brooks wrote:
>>
>>> Why are you doing all that piping and grepping? And the -F" " confuses
>>> me...oh, I see. First, whitespace is the default field separator in awk.
>>> Then, are you aski
> Why are you doing all that piping and grepping? And the -F" " confuses
> me...oh, I see. First, whitespace is the default field separator in awk.
> Then, are you asking if there's a line with a "." in it, or just any
> non-whitespace? If the latter... mmm, I see, you *really* don't understand
>
On Sun, 11 Nov 2012, Nux! wrote:
> On 10.11.2012 22:17, Bob Hepple wrote:
>> High and low searching (google, most of the repos in
>> http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories) availed
>> nothing - has
>> anyone found a repo for gtkpod on centos-6? I seem to recall having
>> to use
>>
On Thu, 25 Oct 2012, Banyan He wrote:
> I think it comes out from the app itself for the verification. The
> question is if the soft raid supports by anyhow. Trying to build one
> test box for it.
>
> print_unsupp_features:
> if (features[0] || features[1] || features[2]) {
> int i, j;
Hi All,
Trying to run fsck on a local linux raid partition gave the following.
[root@... /]# fsck.ext4 /dev/md0
e2fsck 1.41.12 (17-May-2010)
/dev/md0 has unsupported feature(s): 64bit
e2fsck: Get a newer version of e2fsck!
Odd as the server is 64bit running latest kernel and using
latest "e2f
On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Hi, Steve,
>
> Steve Brooks wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, Steve Brooks wrote:
>>> On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>>> Steve Brooks wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us w
On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, Steve Brooks wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
>> Steve Brooks wrote:
>>> On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>>
>>>> Steve Brooks wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us w
On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Steve Brooks wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>
>>> Steve Brooks wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>>>> Steve Brooks wrote:
>>>>>>
&g
On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Steve Brooks wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>> Steve Brooks wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have a SATA PCIe 6Gbps 4 port controller card made by Startech. The
>>>> ke
On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Steve Brooks wrote:
>>
>> I have a SATA PCIe 6Gbps 4 port controller card made by Startech. The
>> kernel (Linux viz1 2.6.32-220.4.1.el6.x86_64) sees it as
>>
>> Marvell Technology Group Ltd. 88SE9123
>>
>&
On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 22.06.2012 13:58, schrieb Steve Brooks:
>> I have a SATA PCIe 6Gbps 4 port controller card made by Startech. The
>> kernel (Linux viz1 2.6.32-220.4.1.el6.x86_64) sees it as
>>
>> Marvell Technology Group Ltd. 8
Hi,
I have a SATA PCIe 6Gbps 4 port controller card made by Startech. The
kernel (Linux viz1 2.6.32-220.4.1.el6.x86_64) sees it as
Marvell Technology Group Ltd. 88SE9123
I use it to provide extra SATA ports to a raid system.
The HD's are all "WD2003FYYS" and so run at 3Gbps on the 6Gbps con
Hi All,
I was thinking of using ext4 on a new raid system of 20TB. I had read the
article (halfway done the page) titled "Linux File System Fsck Testing --
The Results Are In"
https://www.ultimateeditionoz.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=26180
They used CentOS 5.7 (2.6.18-274 kernel) and they state
On Thu, 9 Feb 2012, Alejandro Rodriguez Luna wrote:
Hi everyone, I was creating a script and i found something i can't figure out.
#/bin/bash
for i in $(cat certificates.txt)
do
echo $i
done
I expected this
RSA Secure Server Certification Authority
VeriSign Class 1 CA Individual Subscrib
On Wed, 26 Oct 2011, John Hodrien wrote:
On Wed, 26 Oct 2011, Lorenzo Martínez Rodríguez wrote:
Hi,
I have a working configuration with CentOS 6. Can you try to set next
lines in /etc/ssh/sshd_config and restart SSH server please?
#X11Forwarding no
X11Forwarding yes
#X11DisplayOffset 1
On Sat, 8 Oct 2011, Trey Dockendorf wrote:
> I just upgraded my home KVM server to CentOS 6.0 CR to make use of the
> latest libvirt and now my RAID array with my VM storage is missing. It
> seems that the upgrade to mdadm-3.2.2 is the culprit.
>
> This is the output from mdadm when scanning that
On Mon, 25 Jul 2011, John Doe wrote:
> From: "m.r...@5-cent.us"
>
>> On my new Dell system, it's got a cardreader. More to the point, it's
>> got an idiot menu key... *right* next to the right control key, and just
>> where the annoying keyboard design has it cut down from the
>> oversize space b
On Thu, 14 Apr 2011, Peter Kjellström wrote:
On Tuesday, April 12, 2011 03:10:33 PM Lars Hecking wrote:
OTOH, gparted doesn't see my software raid array either. Gparted it
rather practical for regular plain vanilla partitions, but for more
advanced stuff and filesystems, fdisk is probably bette
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Marian Marinov wrote:
On Tuesday 12 April 2011 10:36:54 Alain Péan wrote:
Le 12/04/2011 09:23, Matthew Feinberg a écrit :
Hello All
I have a brand spanking new 40TB Hardware Raid6 array to play around
with. I am looking for recommendations for which filesystem to use. I a
On Sat, 2 Apr 2011, Gerhard Schneider wrote:
>
> Did you check if you already have the G05 firmware on all RE4-GP?
> The G04 firmware is not suitable for RAID.
>
> http://forum.qnap.com/viewtopic.php?f=182&t=25057
Yes all our drives are on G05 firmware.
Cheers,
Steve
__
On Fri, 1 Apr 2011, Jerry Geis wrote:
> dmesg is not reporting any issues.
>
> The /proc/mdstat looks fine.
> md0 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[0]
>X blocks [2/2] [UU]
>
> however /var/log/messages says:
>
> smartd[3392] Device /dev/sda 20 offline uncorrectable sectors
>
> The machine is runnin
On Fri, 1 Apr 2011, compdoc wrote:
>> I have a WD RE4-GP which dropped an Adaptec 51645 RAID
>> controller. I ran a smartctl short test on the drive and it failed
>> with a read error.
>
> What does smart say about reallocated sectors, pending sector count, drive
> temperature, etc?
They are cle
Hi All,
I have a WD RE4-GP which dropped an Adaptec 51645 RAID controller. I ran a
smartctl short test on the drive and it failed with a read error. So I ran
the Western Digital's own diagnostic software (DLGDIAG), both the short
and extended test on the drive and it passed with no errors. So
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, Les Bell wrote:
>
> Kenni Lund wrote:
>
>>>
> Fakeraid is a proprietary software RAID
> solution, so if your motherboard suddently decides to die, how will
> you then get access to your data?
> <<
>
> Obviously, you restore it from a backup. RAID is not a substitute for
> bac
At a guess looks like your DNS is down, or like the Ben suggests no
servers in your
/etc/resolve.conf
Steve
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010, Ben McGinnes wrote:
> On 7/10/10 6:20 PM, Smith Erick Marume-Bahizire wrote:
>> Hello
>>Please I want help in centos server I can ping the gateway or
>> my
Thanks Gordon .. a relief .. I am still inclined to move data and rebuild
with all the current default EXT4 attributes.
Steve
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 10/05/2010 12:50 PM, Steve Brooks wrote:
>> tune4fs listed the filesystem state as "not clean".
In the two 11T EXT4 filesystems (raid level 6), referred to inprevious
posts, built on devices
/dev/sdb
/dev/sdc
tune4fs listed the filesystem state as "not clean". I remounted them as
read only while I decided what to do. The next day I check them again and
"tune4fs" reports the filesystem s
Hi Brent, Thanks for the reply.
I have to make a decision yes, it is not an easy one either, I read have so
many different reports, opinions that I now feel my brain has become rather
scrambled.. Wondering now if I should just have smaller filesystems and stick
with EXT3.. I have never used XF
Hi,
The "/etc/mke4fs.conf" is below. This file has never been edited by me or
anyone else.
[defaults]
base_features =
sparse_super,filetype,resize_inode,dir_index,ext_attr
blocksize = 4096
inode_size = 256
inode_ratio = 16384
[fs_types]
ext3 = {
On Mon, 4 Oct 2010, Miguel Medalha wrote:
>
>> Filesystem state: not clean
>>
>
> You should really look at that line and at why it is there.
Thanks again Miguel,
Yep I have mounted the filesystems as read only for the time being. I am
inclined to move the data and rebuild the filesys
Hi Miguel,
Thanks for the reply.
> "What people are saying"? So instead of understanding and solving some issue
I was just a little worried at the response from Brent earlier quote
"Don't play Russian Roulette and use ext4." . The really odd thing here
is that on another raid disk created th
Hi,
Below is the output from "tune4fs". From what people are saying it looks
like et4 may not be the way to go.
[r...@sraid3 ~]# tune4fs -l /dev/sdb
tune4fs 1.41.9 (22-Aug-2009)
Filesystem volume name:
Last mounted on: /sraid3/sraid3
Filesystem UUID: adc08889-f6a9-47c6-a570
Hi All,
When a couple of EXT4 filesystems are mounted in a server I get the
message
Oct 1 18:49:42 sraid3 kernel: EXT4-fs (sdb): mounted filesystem without journal
Oct 1 18:49:42 sraid3 kernel: EXT4-fs (sdc): mounted filesystem without journal
in the system logs.
My confusion is why are they
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010, Scott Silva wrote:
> on 6-7-2010 1:12 PM Steve Brooks spake the following:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Since upgrading to "2.6.18-194" I am getting odd messages in the logs.
>> Such as;
>>
>> sraid3 kernel INFO task pdflush 259 bloc
Hi,
Since upgrading to "2.6.18-194" I am getting odd messages in the logs.
Such as;
sraid3 kernel INFO task pdflush 259 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
The output from
> grep '120 seconds' /var/log/messages | tr : ' ' | awk '{print $10}' | sort |
> uniq -c
6 nfsd
4 pdflu
Hi,
I had an issue with this kernel upgrade too. All worked fine until the
194 Kernel then hung on boot on 4 machines all with identical
motherboards. All had USB keyboards, when replaced with PS2 keyboards all
worked fine! What is to blame? - motherboard, kernel or keyboard.. I have
no idea.
Hi All,
Thought I would let those that are interested know that I had success in
running 24G on an Asus P6T with 24G kit of Kingston DDR3. While I was
putting this together I saw lots of forum posts asking if anyone had tried
it. Well we did here at our work and all looks great including runni
Do not use fsck on faulty hardware.
I would remove the drive attach it to another linux box with free storage
space on a file system larger than that of the whole damaged drive. Use
"ddrescue" to rebuild as much of the failed drive as possible them mount
the image produced from ddrescue and co
Hi Gordon,
I am running a 51645, two 31605 and four 3405 SAS raid controllers from
adaptec plus a few more older 2820sa cards.
Two of the 3405 controllers have been running for nearly three years
without any issues at all.
The "5" series card has been working fine. They do run very hot so
64 matches
Mail list logo
