Re: [CentOS] Slightly OT: First Time KVM and LVM on Centos
On Jun 20, 2011, at 9:56 AM, Kwan Lowe wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: >> >>> There is no reason that should be true. Copying 20GB out of an LV >>> should take exactly the same amount of time as copying 20GB out of a file. >> >> What about the destination? Wouldn't it likely be harder to find a place to >> put >> the LV copy than space to write a file? Or can you copy back and forth? >> >> -- > I just copy the raw filesystem directly to the remote raw filesystem > with dd over ssh. If needed you can dd the entire partition to a file > also. > > With LVMs you can also mirror the LV across multiple LUNs, break the > mirror, then move the other LUN to another system. You might have better performance using Clonezilla over ssh then dd. -Ross ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5 32bit and 3Tbyte drives
On Jun 20, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Stephen Harris wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 09:32:03PM +0200, Markus Falb wrote: >> On 20.6.2011 21:19, Stephen Harris wrote: > >>> LVM; pvcreate, vgcreate, lvcreate. What's a partition? :-) >> >> But your filesystem has still to be aligned correctly. Is lvm 4k >> friendly ? Is md ? > > That is a very good question, and one of the underlying aspects of > my original question :-) 4K, yes, but you also need to make sure it is aligned with the RAID chunk size. I typically use pvcreate --metadatasize option to make sure it is padded enough so LV 1 has the desired offset. A PV meta data size of 960K, which combined with the 64K VG meta data will make sure LV 1 starts at sector 2048 (1MB offset) which will align with RAID chunk sizes up to 1MB. The default PV meta data size is 128K, plus the 64K VG meta data, puts LV 1 with a 192K offset, which works for 64K chunk sizes, but not 128K chunk sizes that I typically use. That is for whole disks, if you are building PVs from partitions you should take the partition offset into account when choosing the PV meta data padding. Always specify the partition offset, don't take the default which is sector 63, which is useless and hard to fix later. You can't go wrong with starting at sector 2048 and if that becomes the future default it leaves some nice room up front for a fancy boot loader. -Ross ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Using umask
Grasping a full understanding of setting default Users, Groups and Masks has alluded me over the years, but now I find myself in a situation where manually "setting" the file/directory attributes is becoming a pain. I understand the fundamentals of the file attributes, though from time to time I have to review the "sticky bit"; what I do not understand is where/how the attributes are set when a user creates or modifies a file/directory. Here is my situation: My /var/www/html files have been manually set by me to apache/apache 774. This allows my PHP applications to access the files, and I assume this is a "good" setting. Now, my server is connected via Samba to my desktop. If I create a file, it is todd/todd 744, so Apache cannot access them. If PHP (Apache) creates or modifies a file, it is apache/apache 755, so I cannot access them (Write/Delete). Is there a way to resolve this? When I FTP to a friend's rent-a-server, I can read/write/delete all of the files I have placed there *and* the same for files touched by PHP (Apache). My Linux Admin books as well as my Linux books do not appear to cover this and/or my experience is lacking. Todd -- Ariste Software Petaluma, CA 94952 http://www.aristesoftware.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Using umask
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, Todd Cary wrote: > Grasping a full understanding of setting default Users, Groups > and Masks has alluded me over the years, but now I find myself in > a situation where manually "setting" the file/directory > attributes is becoming a pain. > > I understand the fundamentals of the file attributes, though from > time to time I have to review the "sticky bit"; what I do not > understand is where/how the attributes are set when a user > creates or modifies a file/directory. Here is my situation: > > My /var/www/html files have been manually set by me to > apache/apache 774. This allows my PHP applications to access the > files, and I assume this is a "good" setting. > > Now, my server is connected via Samba to my desktop. If I create > a file, it is todd/todd 744, so Apache cannot access them. > > If PHP (Apache) creates or modifies a file, it is apache/apache > 755, so I cannot access them (Write/Delete). > > Is there a way to resolve this? When I FTP to a friend's > rent-a-server, I can read/write/delete all of the files I have > placed there *and* the same for files touched by PHP (Apache). > > My Linux Admin books as well as my Linux books do not appear to > cover this and/or my experience is lacking. Either have a group that you're both a member of and have a SGID bit set on the relevent directories using that gruop, or look at ACLs. jh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Using umask
John Hodrien wrote: > On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, Todd Cary wrote: >> My /var/www/html files have been manually set by me to >> apache/apache 774. This allows my PHP applications to access the >> files, and I assume this is a "good" setting. >> >> Now, my server is connected via Samba to my desktop. If I create >> a file, it is todd/todd 744, so Apache cannot access them. >> >> If PHP (Apache) creates or modifies a file, it is apache/apache >> 755, so I cannot access them (Write/Delete). > Either have a group that you're both a member of and have a SGID bit set > on the relevent directories using that gruop, or look at ACLs. To expand on John's cmts. I'd make you a member of the apache group - that's usermod -G apache todd, making it a secondary group, *not* your personal primary group. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Using umask
On Tuesday 21 June 2011 18:27:11 John Hodrien wrote: > On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, Todd Cary wrote: > > Grasping a full understanding of setting default Users, Groups > > and Masks has alluded me over the years, but now I find myself in > > a situation where manually "setting" the file/directory > > attributes is becoming a pain. > > > > I understand the fundamentals of the file attributes, though from > > time to time I have to review the "sticky bit"; what I do not > > understand is where/how the attributes are set when a user > > creates or modifies a file/directory. Here is my situation: > > > > My /var/www/html files have been manually set by me to > > apache/apache 774. This allows my PHP applications to access the > > files, and I assume this is a "good" setting. > > > > Now, my server is connected via Samba to my desktop. If I create > > a file, it is todd/todd 744, so Apache cannot access them. > > > > If PHP (Apache) creates or modifies a file, it is apache/apache > > 755, so I cannot access them (Write/Delete). > > > > Is there a way to resolve this? When I FTP to a friend's > > rent-a-server, I can read/write/delete all of the files I have > > placed there *and* the same for files touched by PHP (Apache). > > > > My Linux Admin books as well as my Linux books do not appear to > > cover this and/or my experience is lacking. > > Either have a group that you're both a member of and have a SGID bit set on > the relevent directories using that gruop, or look at ACLs. > > jh Or you can simply start using mod_suphp or suexec for running your php application. -- Best regards, Marian Marinov signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Using umask
On Jun 21, 2011, at 8:30 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > John Hodrien wrote: >> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, Todd Cary wrote: > >>> My /var/www/html files have been manually set by me to >>> apache/apache 774. This allows my PHP applications to access the >>> files, and I assume this is a "good" setting. >>> >>> Now, my server is connected via Samba to my desktop. If I create >>> a file, it is todd/todd 744, so Apache cannot access them. >>> >>> If PHP (Apache) creates or modifies a file, it is apache/apache >>> 755, so I cannot access them (Write/Delete). > >> Either have a group that you're both a member of and have a SGID bit set >> on the relevent directories using that gruop, or look at ACLs. > > To expand on John's cmts. I'd make you a member of the apache group - > that's usermod -G apache todd, making it a secondary group, *not* your > personal primary group. this is what I would do but the apache group would necessarily have write permissions to the directory & files you want to edit. I would however recommend that all other directories NOT have group write permissions or better yet, be owned by someone else (possibly root:root) as a means of security. Craig ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Using umask
On 6/21/2011 8:30 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > John Hodrien wrote: >> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, Todd Cary wrote: > >>> My /var/www/html files have been manually set by me to >>> apache/apache 774. This allows my PHP applications to access the >>> files, and I assume this is a "good" setting. >>> >>> Now, my server is connected via Samba to my desktop. If I create >>> a file, it is todd/todd 744, so Apache cannot access them. >>> >>> If PHP (Apache) creates or modifies a file, it is apache/apache >>> 755, so I cannot access them (Write/Delete). > >> Either have a group that you're both a member of and have a SGID bit set >> on the relevent directories using that gruop, or look at ACLs. > To expand on John's cmts. I'd make you a member of the apache group - > that's usermod -G apache todd, making it a secondary group, *not* your > personal primary group. > > mark > > > At this time, todd is a member of the apache group, however apache is setting permissions to 755, so todd cannot write to the files once apache has modified them or created them...or am I missing some salient point? Todd -- Ariste Software Petaluma, CA 94952 http://www.aristesoftware.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Using umask
On Jun 21, 2011, at 8:51 AM, Todd Cary wrote: > > > On 6/21/2011 8:30 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: >> John Hodrien wrote: >>> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, Todd Cary wrote: >> My /var/www/html files have been manually set by me to apache/apache 774. This allows my PHP applications to access the files, and I assume this is a "good" setting. Now, my server is connected via Samba to my desktop. If I create a file, it is todd/todd 744, so Apache cannot access them. If PHP (Apache) creates or modifies a file, it is apache/apache 755, so I cannot access them (Write/Delete). >> >>> Either have a group that you're both a member of and have a SGID bit set >>> on the relevent directories using that gruop, or look at ACLs. >> To expand on John's cmts. I'd make you a member of the apache group - >> that's usermod -G apache todd, making it a secondary group, *not* your >> personal primary group. >> >> mark >> >> >> > At this time, todd is a member of the apache group, however > apache is setting permissions to 755, so todd cannot write to the > files once apache has modified them or created them...or am I > missing some salient point? yes - make them group writable... chmod g+w some_file chmod g+w some_subdirectory chmod g+w some_directory -R # subdirectory and all files below Craig ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Firefox 5 on Centos 5.6
I've been running Firefox 4 on Centos 5 (had to find a libstdc++.so.6 for it by perusing newer systems from which I could steal one, but it's been fine since then). Well, today firefox pushed down an update to Firefox 4.0.1 without saying what it was, and it turns out to have been firefox 5. fine, I wanted it anyway. But when I restarted it, I got a completely black browser window. Clicked on the X close button and got a completely black confirmation dialog. weird. exited it and tried safe mode. Works fine. ldd reports no conflicts or missing libraries. anybody else seen this? anyone got suggestions on what I should try next? Thanks! -- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us - The Lord detests the way of the wicked but he loves those who pursue righteousness. - Proverbs 15:9 (niv) - ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Firefox 5 on Centos 5.6
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 9:54 PM, fred smith wrote: > anybody else seen this? anyone got suggestions on what I should try next? Try to disable all the extensions and see if it helps. If it does then enable them back one by one until you find the guilty one. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] OT: high static in server room
Are you using anti-static flooring? I know in our new server room extension there was some very expensive lino that went down. This sort of stuff: http://www.afloor.co.uk/vinyl-flooring-lino/anti-static-flooring.html --Russell > -Original Message- > From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On > Behalf Of Rob Kampen > Sent: Thursday, 16 June 2011 2:24 p.m. > To: CentOS mailing list > Subject: Re: [CentOS] OT: high static in server room > > Fajar Priyanto wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 2:19 AM, Dan Carl > wrote: > > > >> If you spend a lot of time in your server room, you might also > >> consider a fish tank. > >> It will add moisture to your room and give you something to look at > >> other than flashing leds:-) > >> > > > > Is this a joke or a real thing? I'm really considering the fish tank. > > > > Btw, I've checked. My room humidity is 23%. That should be ok, > > shouldn't it? But still I saw the spark. > > > Very low - adding some water somewhere would likely help. > Carpet? Nylon products against natural ones like cotton or wool?? > > Btw again, I was in the middle of major work on a blade chassis, and > I > > left some of the slots open for several days. > > Could that be the reason of the high static too? > > ___ > > CentOS mailing list > > CentOS@centos.org > > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > === Attention: The information contained in this message and/or attachments from AgResearch Limited is intended only for the persons or entities to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipients is prohibited by AgResearch Limited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately. === ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Firefox 5 on Centos 5.6
fred smith wrote: > I've been running Firefox 4 on Centos 5 (had to find a libstdc++.so.6 for > it by perusing newer systems from which I could steal one, but it's been > fine since then). > > Well, today firefox pushed down an update to Firefox 4.0.1 without saying > what it was, and it turns out to have been firefox 5. fine, I wanted it > anyway. > > But when I restarted it, I got a completely black browser window. Clicked > on the X close button and got a completely black confirmation dialog. > weird. > > exited it and tried safe mode. Works fine. > > ldd reports no conflicts or missing libraries. > > anybody else seen this? anyone got suggestions on what I should try next? > > Thanks! > My guess is that you compiled from source, and that is not something (vast majority of) CentOS users do, so I would not hold my breath that anyone uses Firefox 4 on CentOS 5.x. Just return to 4.0 and you should be fine, I guess. Ljubomir ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Firefox 5 on Centos 5.6
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 12:46:09AM +0200, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: > fred smith wrote: > > I've been running Firefox 4 on Centos 5 (had to find a libstdc++.so.6 for > > it by perusing newer systems from which I could steal one, but it's been > > fine since then). > > > > Well, today firefox pushed down an update to Firefox 4.0.1 without saying > > what it was, and it turns out to have been firefox 5. fine, I wanted it > > anyway. > > > > But when I restarted it, I got a completely black browser window. Clicked > > on the X close button and got a completely black confirmation dialog. > > weird. > > > > exited it and tried safe mode. Works fine. > > > > ldd reports no conflicts or missing libraries. > > > > anybody else seen this? anyone got suggestions on what I should try next? > > > > Thanks! > > > My guess is that you compiled from source, and that is not something > (vast majority of) CentOS users do, so I would not hold my breath that > anyone uses Firefox 4 on CentOS 5.x. > > Just return to 4.0 and you should be fine, I guess. Actually, no. it's the binaries from mozilla.org, though. firefox 4 did the update itself, again using the mozilla.org binaries. -- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us - I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. -- Philippians 4:13 --- ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Firefox 5 on Centos 5.6
fred smith writes: > I've been running Firefox 4 on Centos 5 (had to find a libstdc++.so.6 for > it by perusing newer systems from which I could steal one, but it's been > fine since then). Is that 64-bit, and did you ever get flash to work? Doesn't work here, although the same flash plugin works fine with the standard 3.6 browser. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Firefox 5 on Centos 5.6
fred smith wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 12:46:09AM +0200, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: >> fred smith wrote: >>> I've been running Firefox 4 on Centos 5 (had to find a libstdc++.so.6 for >>> it by perusing newer systems from which I could steal one, but it's been >>> fine since then). >>> >>> Well, today firefox pushed down an update to Firefox 4.0.1 without saying >>> what it was, and it turns out to have been firefox 5. fine, I wanted it >>> anyway. >>> >>> But when I restarted it, I got a completely black browser window. Clicked >>> on the X close button and got a completely black confirmation dialog. >>> weird. >>> >>> exited it and tried safe mode. Works fine. >>> >>> ldd reports no conflicts or missing libraries. >>> >>> anybody else seen this? anyone got suggestions on what I should try next? >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >> My guess is that you compiled from source, and that is not something >> (vast majority of) CentOS users do, so I would not hold my breath that >> anyone uses Firefox 4 on CentOS 5.x. >> >> Just return to 4.0 and you should be fine, I guess. > > Actually, no. it's the binaries from mozilla.org, though. firefox 4 > did the update itself, again using the mozilla.org binaries. libstdc++.so.6 is a part of gcc libraries. I would like to have Firefox 4/5, but not at the cost of messing with the core part of my system. Ljubomir ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Firefox 5 on Centos 5.6
- Original Message - | fred smith wrote: | > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 12:46:09AM +0200, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: | >> fred smith wrote: | >>> I've been running Firefox 4 on Centos 5 (had to find a | >>> libstdc++.so.6 for | >>> it by perusing newer systems from which I could steal one, but | >>> it's been | >>> fine since then). | >>> | >>> Well, today firefox pushed down an update to Firefox 4.0.1 without | >>> saying | >>> what it was, and it turns out to have been firefox 5. fine, I | >>> wanted it | >>> anyway. | >>> | >>> But when I restarted it, I got a completely black browser window. | >>> Clicked | >>> on the X close button and got a completely black confirmation | >>> dialog. | >>> weird. | >>> | >>> exited it and tried safe mode. Works fine. | >>> | >>> ldd reports no conflicts or missing libraries. | >>> | >>> anybody else seen this? anyone got suggestions on what I should | >>> try next? | >>> | >>> Thanks! | >>> | >> My guess is that you compiled from source, and that is not | >> something | >> (vast majority of) CentOS users do, so I would not hold my breath | >> that | >> anyone uses Firefox 4 on CentOS 5.x. | >> | >> Just return to 4.0 and you should be fine, I guess. | > | > Actually, no. it's the binaries from mozilla.org, though. firefox 4 | > did the update itself, again using the mozilla.org binaries. | | libstdc++.so.6 is a part of gcc libraries. I would like to have | Firefox | 4/5, but not at the cost of messing with the core part of my system. | | Ljubomir | ___ | CentOS mailing list | CentOS@centos.org | http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos There is the libsdc++-4.1.2-50.el5 package and the gcc44 packages, both can be installed without messing with the core system -- James A. Peltier IT Services - Research Computing Group Simon Fraser University - Burnaby Campus Phone : 778-782-6573 Fax : 778-782-3045 E-Mail : jpelt...@sfu.ca Website : http://www.sfu.ca/itservices http://blogs.sfu.ca/people/jpeltier ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Firefox 5 on Centos 5.6
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:35:36PM +0100, Lucian wrote: > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 9:54 PM, fred smith > wrote: > > anybody else seen this? anyone got suggestions on what I should try next? > > Try to disable all the extensions and see if it helps. If it does then > enable them back one by one until you find the guilty one. well, it starts in safe mod4e with all add-ons disabled. but how can I disable them so I can start it without safe-mode? if I can't run it without safe mode then I can't disable add-ons. or at least I don't know how. -- --- .Fred Smith / ( /__ ,__. __ __ / __ : / // / /__) / / /__) .+' Home: fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us // (__ (___ (__(_ (___ / :__ 781-438-5471 Jude 1:24,25 - ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Using umask
This may not be the best from a security perspective but as you use samba, why not just set it to force the correct user, group and mask setting for that share? My server at home is setup that way and it works just fine. -Drew On 06/21/2011, Todd Cary wrote: > Grasping a full understanding of setting default Users, Groups > and Masks has alluded me over the years, but now I find myself in > a situation where manually "setting" the file/directory > attributes is becoming a pain. > > I understand the fundamentals of the file attributes, though from > time to time I have to review the "sticky bit"; what I do not > understand is where/how the attributes are set when a user > creates or modifies a file/directory. Here is my situation: > > My /var/www/html files have been manually set by me to > apache/apache 774. This allows my PHP applications to access the > files, and I assume this is a "good" setting. > > Now, my server is connected via Samba to my desktop. If I create > a file, it is todd/todd 744, so Apache cannot access them. > > If PHP (Apache) creates or modifies a file, it is apache/apache > 755, so I cannot access them (Write/Delete). > > Is there a way to resolve this? When I FTP to a friend's > rent-a-server, I can read/write/delete all of the files I have > placed there *and* the same for files touched by PHP (Apache). > > My Linux Admin books as well as my Linux books do not appear to > cover this and/or my experience is lacking. > > Todd > > -- > Ariste Software > Petaluma, CA 94952 > > http://www.aristesoftware.com > > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > -- Sent from my mobile device Drew "Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood." --Marie Curie "This started out as a hobby and spun horribly out of control." -Unknown ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Firefox 5 on Centos 5.6
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:56:14PM +0100, Lars Hecking wrote: > fred smith writes: > > I've been running Firefox 4 on Centos 5 (had to find a libstdc++.so.6 for > > it by perusing newer systems from which I could steal one, but it's been > > fine since then). > > Is that 64-bit, and did you ever get flash to work? Doesn't work here, > although the same flash plugin works fine with the standard 3.6 browser. no, I'm still using a 32-bit version of Centos at this time. -- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us - The Lord is like a strong tower. Those who do what is right can run to him for safety. --- Proverbs 18:10 (niv) - ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Firefox 5 on Centos 5.6
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 01:18:38AM +0200, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: > fred smith wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 12:46:09AM +0200, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: > >> fred smith wrote: > >>> I've been running Firefox 4 on Centos 5 (had to find a libstdc++.so.6 for > >>> it by perusing newer systems from which I could steal one, but it's been > >>> fine since then). > >>> > >>> Well, today firefox pushed down an update to Firefox 4.0.1 without saying > >>> what it was, and it turns out to have been firefox 5. fine, I wanted it > >>> anyway. > >>> > >>> But when I restarted it, I got a completely black browser window. Clicked > >>> on the X close button and got a completely black confirmation dialog. > >>> weird. > >>> > >>> exited it and tried safe mode. Works fine. > >>> > >>> ldd reports no conflicts or missing libraries. > >>> > >>> anybody else seen this? anyone got suggestions on what I should try next? > >>> > >>> Thanks! > >>> > >> My guess is that you compiled from source, and that is not something > >> (vast majority of) CentOS users do, so I would not hold my breath that > >> anyone uses Firefox 4 on CentOS 5.x. > >> > >> Just return to 4.0 and you should be fine, I guess. > > > > Actually, no. it's the binaries from mozilla.org, though. firefox 4 > > did the update itself, again using the mozilla.org binaries. > > libstdc++.so.6 is a part of gcc libraries. I would like to have Firefox > 4/5, but not at the cost of messing with the core part of my system. Just put a copy of it in a separate subdirectory. In my case, I unpacked the mozilla download of firefox in my own personal space and added the libstdcc++.so.6 to the same directory that has all the firefox-included libraries. no other app sees it there, just firefox. -- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us - But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. --- Romans 5:8 (niv) -- ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Using umask
On 06/22/2011 01:22 AM, Todd Cary wrote: > Grasping a full understanding of setting default Users, Groups > and Masks has alluded me over the years, but now I find myself in > a situation where manually "setting" the file/directory > attributes is becoming a pain. > > I understand the fundamentals of the file attributes, though from > time to time I have to review the "sticky bit"; what I do not > understand is where/how the attributes are set when a user > creates or modifies a file/directory. Here is my situation: > > My /var/www/html files have been manually set by me to > apache/apache 774. This allows my PHP applications to access the > files, and I assume this is a "good" setting. In your smb.conf file, add the following to the [sharename] section: force user = apache force create mode = 0774 This should ensure that all files you dump in via samba are always owned by apache with the proper permissions. I do this on servers that never see the internet. If this is insecure, please enlighten me as said servers may one day be made visible to the outside world... Ak. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
