On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 3:02 PM, Doug Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Agreed to all, and I was just having some fun and trying to bring some
> humor to everyone's day. Thanks for having a sense of humor, I'll
> respectfully bow out now.
>
There you go, man
Keep as cool as you can
Face piles
> I imagine that most of the folks subscribed are System Administrators,
> Engineers and Architects. I'd also leap to the unproven assumption that
> the majority are overworked, underpaid, stressed, and stuff like that.
> If that doesn't make for a bunch of terse, grumpy, and otherwise
> fr
> OK ... you are officially an ass .. I will no longer reply to your mails
> or help you in any way.
Wow. My apologies, I thought that was actually a productive reply, not
even sure how you got offended, but I will apologize anyway, I don't
intend to ever offend anyone.
___
> All I am saying is that GFS (and any other ADDED repo besides Base or
> Updates) will get updates ... however they are not normally going to be
> as fast as the Base and Updates repos. That is just how it goes.
I can totally live with that, I was just b**ching about RH's approach.
I'm not exp
Yes. When I signed on with CentOS it was explicitly written into my
requirements that *I* be the only 'official' ass. Yes, a non-compete
clause is involved, so can all just STEP OFF!
:-P
Haha, thanks for the humorous remark! It has been said that "If you get
too serious, you'll spoil a
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 4:58 PM, Johnny Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK ... you are officially an ass .. I will no longer reply to your mails or
> help you in any way.
Yes. When I signed on with CentOS it was explicitly written into my
requirements that *I* be the only 'official' ass. Yes
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 11:50 PM, John R Pierce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> btw, what is WITH all these lame gmail addresses? linuxlist ? centoslist
> ?? Do I call you Mr Linux, or Mr List ?
Nothing to do with gmail. About calling me, it's a nice thing but
probably not needed. And I also kn
Doug Tucker wrote:
This is linked from the CentOS FAQ:
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
Akemi
LOL! This is just TOO good.
1. Because it is proper Usenet Etiquette.
...all but dead...I run a usenet server here, had 3 logins last
month...user base is over 4000...
2.We use a good
Doug Tucker wrote:
On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 12:37 -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
Doug Tucker wrote:
My whole issue is around GFS, which is officially supported (someone
else hijacked this thread with XFS which got more attention), and in my
statement I said: "Keep in mind this is not an unsupported X
Linux wrote:
People who prepare and maintain a distro have (and should have) many
concerns in mind. Security is one of them and integrity is another.
But in this situation, integrity is simply ignored (on the behalf of
GFS situation because I backed down from my XFS related complains)
Disabling
> This is linked from the CentOS FAQ:
>
> http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
>
> Akemi
LOL! This is just TOO good.
1. Because it is proper Usenet Etiquette.
...all but dead...I run a usenet server here, had 3 logins last
month...user base is over 4000...
2.We use a good news reader
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 9:58 PM, Doug Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is a matter of agreeing to disagree on the release of a kernel and
> a supported file system. If you had read my thread and subsequent
> paragraph you're taking issue with properly, you would have gotten that.
> My who
On May 14, 2008, at 3:15 PM, Doug Tucker wrote:
Humor turned off for a minute, completely and honestly, can someone
explain to me *why* this is the etiquette here? In every fashion, I
find it sooo much harder to follow. Does it date back to some dead
text
based mail client that actually mad
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Doug Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "It's not that hard" would have gotten you b**ch slapped even with a
> smile on your face in person. Just stick to polite, it's not that
> hard :D.
>
snicker
> Bad thing about email, it's hard to grasp tongue in cheek
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Doug Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Humor turned off for a minute, completely and honestly, can someone
> explain to me *why* this is the etiquette here? In every fashion, I
> find it sooo much harder to follow. Does it date back to some dead text
> based ma
On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 13:00 -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
> Doug Tucker wrote:
> > Do you honestly, like having to scroll down with the rolly thing on your
> > mouse 9 times to get to the reply only to find it is not something you
> > cared to read? I say toss it at the top in my face where I can ig
On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 12:37 -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
> Doug Tucker wrote:
> > My whole issue is around GFS, which is officially supported (someone
> > else hijacked this thread with XFS which got more attention), and in my
> > statement I said: "Keep in mind this is not an unsupported XFS that
>
Doug Tucker wrote:
Do you honestly, like having to scroll down with the rolly thing on your
mouse 9 times to get to the reply only to find it is not something you
cared to read? I say toss it at the top in my face where I can ignore
it with less effort.
the other key part of bottom posting
On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 12:38 -0700, MHR wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Doug Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 11:07 -0700, MHR wrote:
> >> 1) You're top posting - please stop it. In this email list, we bottom
> >> post as a matter of policy and courtesy. It's
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Doug Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 11:07 -0700, MHR wrote:
>> 1) You're top posting - please stop it. In this email list, we bottom
>> post as a matter of policy and courtesy. It's not that hard
>
> I'm sorry, that last sentence wa
Doug Tucker wrote:
My whole issue is around GFS, which is officially supported (someone
else hijacked this thread with XFS which got more attention), and in my
statement I said: "Keep in mind this is not an unsupported XFS that
someone hijacked my thread with." So I'm agreeing that XFS should ne
On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 11:07 -0700, MHR wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 7:44 AM, Doug Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I intend to do that. Kernel's removed from automatic updates.
> >
> There you go.
>
> > We'll agree to disagree about the importance of not breaking an
> > officially suppor
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 7:44 AM, Doug Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I intend to do that. Kernel's removed from automatic updates.
>
There you go.
> We'll agree to disagree about the importance of not breaking an
> officially supported kernel filesystem on an automated upgrade because
> only
I intend to do that. Kernel's removed from automatic updates.
We'll agree to disagree about the importance of not breaking an
officially supported kernel filesystem on an automated upgrade because
only a "few" of us are affected. Keep in mind this is not an
unsupported XFS that someone hijacked
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 9:10 AM, js <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe, because XFS seems to be important, is it possible to build xfs
> right after the kernel src build?
>
> Is this far more longer than only build the kernel?
>
> Ok nobody pay you to do Centos, ok.
> Centos is a very good projec
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 3:28 PM, Akemi Yagi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Making kernel modules is a bit more involved than that. Please see:
>
> http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/BuildingKernelModules
>
> if you really feel like building modules yourself.
You're quite right. You can tell I do it of
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 6:39 AM, Martyn Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 2:10 PM, js <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Maybe, because XFS seems to be important, is it possible to build xfs
> right
> > after the kernel src build?
> >
> > Is this far more longer than on
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 2:10 PM, js <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe, because XFS seems to be important, is it possible to build xfs right
> after the kernel src build?
>
> Is this far more longer than only build the kernel?
Assuming that you've set it up as a module rather than actually
compi
Hello All;
Maybe, because XFS seems to be important, is it possible to build xfs
right after the kernel src build?
Is this far more longer than only build the kernel?
Ok nobody pay you to do Centos, ok.
Centos is a very good project, but i think it's not really constructive
to say "ok, pay
Linux wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 1:15 AM, Tru Huynh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 12:40:22AM +0300, Linux wrote:
> What a coincidence. That is the 1st time I live such a thing. Well,
> show me a way to prove.
/var/log/messages ?
Only a small part of it.
> This log
Doug Tucker wrote:
Tru,
I work at a university. They don't provide enough money for test
environments :). Just kinda odd, last time kernel update, gfs updated
at the same time so all was well. But twice now kernel has upgraded
with no GFS so it went bye-bye. Is the GFS being installed, compi
On Tuesday 13 May 2008 04:20:46 Doug Tucker wrote:
> Tru,
>
> I work at a university. They don't provide enough money for test
> environments :). Just kinda odd, last time kernel update, gfs updated
> at the same time so all was well. But twice now kernel has upgraded
> with no GFS so it went by
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 1:15 AM, Tru Huynh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 12:40:22AM +0300, Linux wrote:
> > What a coincidence. That is the 1st time I live such a thing. Well,
> > show me a way to prove.
> /var/log/messages ?
Only a small part of it.
> > This log is afte
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 12:40:22AM +0300, Linux wrote:
> What a coincidence. That is the 1st time I live such a thing. Well,
> show me a way to prove.
/var/log/messages ?
> This log is after update & reboot:
> "May 11 16:06:03 x kernel: XFS: failed to read root inode"
nothing more?
> Apr 02 2
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 04:20:46PM -0500, Doug Tucker wrote:
> Tru,
>
Hi Doug,
> I work at a university. They don't provide enough money for test
> environments :).
Sure, but they could probably understand if it's 'critical' ;)
> Just kinda odd, last time kernel update, gfs updated
> at the sam
Upstream updates cluster packages about a week after OS patches. I found
that out when putting in a new cluster and 4.6 came out. The cluster
packages lagged behind a week deliberately for stability's sake.
Scott
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 6:50 PM, Doug Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tru,
>
>
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 11:48 PM, Tru Huynh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 11:00:18PM +0300, Linux wrote:
> > Well, I should add a terrible story for XFS...
> >
> > I did a "yum update" and after updating many packages I rebooted and
> viola...
> You seem to enjoy living
Tru,
I work at a university. They don't provide enough money for test
environments :). Just kinda odd, last time kernel update, gfs updated
at the same time so all was well. But twice now kernel has upgraded
with no GFS so it went bye-bye. Is the GFS being installed, compiled
against particula
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 11:00:18PM +0300, Linux wrote:
> Well, I should add a terrible story for XFS...
>
> I did a "yum update" and after updating many packages I rebooted and viola...
You seem to enjoy living dangerously ? Don't you ever use a testing machine
before rolling the updates on a prod
> This is the 2nd time this has happened to me. There was a kernel
> release over the weekend to .67.0.15, yet, they did not release the
> updated GFS to go along with it, so when the machine
> rebooted, there was
> no gfs file system in the new running kernel which in turn
> wreaked havoc
> on
Well, I should add a terrible story for XFS...
I did a "yum update" and after updating many packages I rebooted and viola...
Old xfs module ruined my 1.2TB partition. After updating to correct module and
hours of xfs_repair I had to move and rename 500 subfolders from lost+found.
I am using CentO
This is the 2nd time this has happened to me. There was a kernel
release over the weekend to .67.0.15, yet, they did not release the
updated GFS to go along with it, so when the machine rebooted, there was
no gfs file system in the new running kernel which in turn wreaked havoc
on my cluster. I t
42 matches
Mail list logo
