Re: [CentOS] Fwd: EPEL-ANNOUNCE Re: Upcoming OwnCloud changes in EPEL
On 22 May 2016 07:01, "John R Pierce" wrote: > > On 5/21/2016 6:03 PM, John R Pierce wrote: >> >> i started to look at SCL and got lost pretty quickly. I'm not running OwnCloud but I've got some other php stuff thats getting increasingly unhappy about the stock c6 php... > > > ok, I've installed php54-1.1-5.el6.centos.alt.x86_64 ...if I run `scl enable php54`, will that connect it up to my existing apache, so it just works, or will that blow the heck out of everything on my host, or something else? I'm currently using php-5.3.3-46.el6_7.1.x86_64 > The scl enable stuff just affects the command passed. It has no system wide level effect. This is why to get a terminal session with it in affect you use scl enable php54 bash ... then that session will show php 5.4 when running the php binary. The documentation on how to actually use it for something like php in Apache is terrible, and the general blogs on it are awful overall. Things like doing source /opt/rh/foo/enable seem to be frequently mentioned despite not being what the RH docs say. There's also a lot of confusion between the CentOS SIG SCL stuff, the official RHEL SCL stuff and the generic softwarecollections.org stuff. As for mod_php from an SCL from my discussions with Remi on the topic he prefers to use php-fpm in that situation rather than mod_php since that then allows use of different php versions via passing that particular application to a different pool and also allows you to move away from the worker mpm and on top a more performant one since the thread safety issues are then bypassed. Do keep in mind that the repos only have the base php packages IIRC and that still leaves the question of packages for all the other php libraries. For something like upstream php that bundles everything is not a big deal, but for other things it can be. Personally I still prefer to use IUS in this use case due to the simpler set up and larger repository of php libraries built against it. Perhaps I'll dive into a blog post soon™ negotiating through this stuff with decent examples of how to make use of the various methods, along with their pros and cons. The question comes up frequently enough on #centos that it'd be good to have a decent write up to refer to... and with a long time till C6 EOL and RH relying heavily on SCL for PHP5.4+ (rather than rebasing the php in the base distro) on it I'm sure it'll become an even more common question than it already is. Still none of the options (RH SCL, SIG SCL, SCL.org, IUS, RemiRepo) help us EPEL since we can only depend on what's in base or EPEL for package dependencies, and all efforts to get SCL approved in the Fedora Packaging Guidelines have been rejected over the past few years. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Upcoming OwnCloud changes
Just a FYI folks ... I am running OwnCloud 9.0.2 on CentOS 6.7 and php-7.0 with no issues. I installed the Webtatic repo which has several versions of PHP available for CentOS 6 and 7. I then used the official OwnCloud ce:stable repo to add the cloud software. In a leap of faith, and because this CentOS VM doesn't run anything other than OwnCloud, I used the 'php70w' PHP repo and have had no problems at all. The OwnCloud server is very lightly loaded so I have not had an opportunity to stress test it and have not tried to use MySQL (I configured it with the standard CentOS SQLite). YMMV of course, especially if you're running other PHP applications! Chuck ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Fwd: EPEL-ANNOUNCE Re: Upcoming OwnCloud changes in EPEL
Am 22.05.2016 um 08:00 schrieb John R Pierce : > On 5/21/2016 6:03 PM, John R Pierce wrote: >> i started to look at SCL and got lost pretty quickly. I'm not running >> OwnCloud but I've got some other php stuff thats getting increasingly >> unhappy about the stock c6 php... > > ok, I've installed php54-1.1-5.el6.centos.alt.x86_64 ...if I run `scl > enable php54`, will that connect it up to my existing apache, so it just > works, or will that blow the heck out of everything on my host, or something > else? I'm currently using php-5.3.3-46.el6_7.1.x86_64 just take a look under /etc/httpd/conf.d/ and move the php.conf away to allow the php-54.conf file to get the precedency ... -- LF ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Fwd: EPEL-ANNOUNCE Re: Upcoming OwnCloud changes in EPEL
Am 22.05.2016 um 09:00 schrieb James Hogarth : > On 22 May 2016 07:01, "John R Pierce" wrote: >> >> On 5/21/2016 6:03 PM, John R Pierce wrote: >>> >>> i started to look at SCL and got lost pretty quickly. I'm not running > OwnCloud but I've got some other php stuff thats getting increasingly > unhappy about the stock c6 php... >> >> >> ok, I've installed php54-1.1-5.el6.centos.alt.x86_64 ...if I run > `scl enable php54`, will that connect it up to my existing apache, so it > just works, or will that blow the heck out of everything on my host, or > something else? I'm currently using php-5.3.3-46.el6_7.1.x86_64 >> > > The scl enable stuff just affects the command passed. It has no system wide > level effect. This is why to get a terminal session with it in affect you > use scl enable php54 bash ... then that session will show php 5.4 when > running the php binary. > > The documentation on how to actually use it for something like php in > Apache is terrible, and the general blogs on it are awful overall. Things > like doing source /opt/rh/foo/enable seem to be frequently mentioned > despite not being what the RH docs say. > > There's also a lot of confusion between the CentOS SIG SCL stuff, the > official RHEL SCL stuff and the generic softwarecollections.org stuff. > > As for mod_php from an SCL from my discussions with Remi on the topic he > prefers to use php-fpm in that situation rather than mod_php since that > then allows use of different php versions via passing that particular > application to a different pool and also allows you to move away from the > worker mpm and on top a more performant one since the thread safety issues > are then bypassed. > > Do keep in mind that the repos only have the base php packages IIRC and > that still leaves the question of packages for all the other php libraries. > For something like upstream php that bundles everything is not a big deal, > but for other things it can be. > > Personally I still prefer to use IUS in this use case due to the simpler > set up and larger repository of php libraries built against it. > > Perhaps I'll dive into a blog post soon™ negotiating through this stuff > with decent examples of how to make use of the various methods, along with > their pros and cons. The question comes up frequently enough on #centos > that it'd be good to have a decent write up to refer to... and with a long > time till C6 EOL and RH relying heavily on SCL for PHP5.4+ (rather than > rebasing the php in the base distro) on it I'm sure it'll become an even > more common question than it already is. The retirement date for PHP54 (RH SCL) will be Oct 2016. Will the SCL SIG provide longer "support"?? > > Still none of the options (RH SCL, SIG SCL, SCL.org, IUS, RemiRepo) help us > EPEL since we can only depend on what's in base or EPEL for package > dependencies, and all efforts to get SCL approved in the Fedora Packaging > Guidelines have been rejected over the past few years. -- LF ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] devtoolset-4
Hello, I just found the discussion on the devtoolset on SO: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/15599714/risks-of-different-gcc-versions-at-link-run-time confirming my guesses. You can use any new C++11/C++14 feature and your program will link dynamically to stock libstdc++. Any feature that is not present there will be linked statically with nonshared_libstdc++.a. The only cost would be additional binary size. I checked using few features and binary growth was ignorable. But definitelly one have to take it into account. The only problem I have for now is to bring all of machines I maintain to a stable 6.6 version. Which is >1000 machines :) The cos is well worth it :) Regards, -Jarek 2016-05-20 21:16 GMT+02:00 Warren Young : > On May 20, 2016, at 8:17 AM, Jarosław Bober > wrote: > > > > ldd gives me: > > ldd a.out > > linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7fff6e5ff000) > > libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6 (0x0039d840) > > In that case, I don’t see how you can be making use of any C++11/14 > features that aren’t implemented by the compiler itself (e.g. type > inference via “auto”) or purely in template form. Any feature that uses > the compiled Standard C++ Library can’t be using the new library. > > That may be useful for your purposes. > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] /etc/sysconfig/iptables syntax
The last two router/firewall servers I had used Slackware and Gentoo. I'm used to writing complete and explicit iptables rules; however, when I set up /etc/sysconfig/iptables in CentOS 7 my usual syntax is unusable. For example, I'm used to stating postrouting masquerade as: /usr/sbin/iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -s 10.10.10.0/24 -j MASQUERADE But when I use the rule above, iptables.service fails upon start and exits. Through a series of trial and error, I found a correct masquerade statement: *nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -s 10.10.10.0/24 -j MASQUERADE COMMIT This looks similar to output from iptables-save. Another example: /usr/sbin/iptables -t filter -A FORWARD -i eth0 -s 192.168.0.0/16 -j DROP [DOES NOT WORK] *filter -A FORWARD -i eth0 -s 192.168.0.0/16 -j DROP COMMIT [DOES WORK] After using iptables for a long time, I can't figure out where this syntax comes from. Can anyone point me in the right direction to understand the proper syntax necessary in /etc/sysconfig/iptables? Thanks for your help. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] /etc/sysconfig/iptables syntax
On 23/05/16 14:55, Mike wrote: The last two router/firewall servers I had used Slackware and Gentoo. I'm used to writing complete and explicit iptables rules; however, when I set up /etc/sysconfig/iptables in CentOS 7 my usual syntax is unusable. For example, I'm used to stating postrouting masquerade as: /usr/sbin/iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -s 10.10.10.0/24 -j MASQUERADE But when I use the rule above, iptables.service fails upon start and exits. Through a series of trial and error, I found a correct masquerade statement: *nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -s 10.10.10.0/24 -j MASQUERADE COMMIT This looks similar to output from iptables-save. Another example: /usr/sbin/iptables -t filter -A FORWARD -i eth0 -s 192.168.0.0/16 -j DROP [DOES NOT WORK] *filter -A FORWARD -i eth0 -s 192.168.0.0/16 -j DROP COMMIT [DOES WORK] After using iptables for a long time, I can't figure out where this syntax comes from. Can anyone point me in the right direction to understand the proper syntax necessary in /etc/sysconfig/iptables? By default CentOS 7 uses firewalld and not iptables - check what is enabled and running with >systemctl status firewalld.service or if you want to see all that is running on your server/PC >systemctl HTH Thanks for your help. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] /etc/sysconfig/iptables syntax
On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Rob Kampen wrote: By default CentOS 7 uses firewalld and not iptables - check what is > enabled and running with > >systemctl status firewalld.service > systemctl reports: systemctl status firewalld.service ● firewalld.service Loaded: masked (/dev/null) Active: inactive (dead) I disabled/removed firewalld and installed/enabled iptables. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] /etc/sysconfig/iptables syntax
בתאריך 23 במאי 2016 05:56, "Mike" <1100...@gmail.com> כתב: > > > After using iptables for a long time, I can't figure out where this syntax > comes from. > Can anyone point me in the right direction to understand the proper syntax > necessary in /etc/sysconfig/iptables? > The syntax comes from the output of the 'iptables-save' command. You can configure 'iptables' from the command line as you normally would and then run iptables-save > /etc/sysconfig/iptables On centos<=6 the init.d script also included a 'save' command to do it for you, I'm not sure about the systemd unit file though. HTH, Barak ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] /etc/sysconfig/iptables syntax
On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Barak Korren wrote: > בתאריך 23 במאי 2016 05:56, > The syntax comes from the output of the 'iptables-save' command. > You can configure 'iptables' from the command line as you normally would > and then run > > iptables-save > /etc/sysconfig/iptables > > On centos<=6 the init.d script also included a 'save' command to do it for > you, I'm not sure about the systemd unit file though. > > HTH, > Barak ___ > Hi Barak, If I'm understanding correctly, write out all rules in a bash terminal and run them, and then do /usr/sbin/iptables-save --- ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; ~#/usr/sbiniptables rule; ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; ~#/usr/sbiniptables rule; ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; ~#/usr/sbiniptables rule; ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; ~#/usr/sbiniptables rule ~#/usr/sbin/iptables-save > /etc/sysconfig/iptables ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] /etc/sysconfig/iptables syntax
You need to disable firewalld and install iptables, if you really want use old way: https://www.certdepot.net/rhel7-disable-firewalld-use-iptables/ Firewalld is preferred way. You should learn it.. -- Eero 2016-05-23 5:55 GMT+03:00 Mike <1100...@gmail.com>: > The last two router/firewall servers I had used Slackware and Gentoo. > I'm used to writing complete and explicit iptables rules; however, when I > set up /etc/sysconfig/iptables in CentOS 7 my usual syntax is unusable. > > For example, I'm used to stating postrouting masquerade as: > > /usr/sbin/iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -s 10.10.10.0/24 -j > MASQUERADE > > But when I use the rule above, iptables.service fails upon start and exits. > > Through a series of trial and error, I found a correct masquerade > statement: > > *nat > -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -s 10.10.10.0/24 -j MASQUERADE > COMMIT > > This looks similar to output from iptables-save. > > Another example: > > /usr/sbin/iptables -t filter -A FORWARD -i eth0 -s 192.168.0.0/16 -j DROP > [DOES NOT WORK] > > *filter > -A FORWARD -i eth0 -s 192.168.0.0/16 -j DROP > COMMIT > [DOES WORK] > > After using iptables for a long time, I can't figure out where this syntax > comes from. > Can anyone point me in the right direction to understand the proper syntax > necessary in /etc/sysconfig/iptables? > > Thanks for your help. > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] /etc/sysconfig/iptables syntax
> > If I'm understanding correctly, write out all rules in a bash terminal and > run them, and then do /usr/sbin/iptables-save --- > > ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; > ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; > ~#/usr/sbiniptables rule; > ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; > ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; > ~#/usr/sbiniptables rule; > ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; > ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; > ~#/usr/sbiniptables rule; > ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; > ~#/usr/sbin/iptables rule; > ~#/usr/sbiniptables rule > > ~#/usr/sbin/iptables-save > /etc/sysconfig/iptables Yep. And you can copy '/etc/sysconfig/iptables' around if you have identical machines and no machine-specific rules... (Note, you can even port the rules from other Linux distros as iptables-save exists there as well) -- Barak Korren bkor...@redhat.com RHEV-CI Team ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Upcoming OwnCloud changes
> -Original Message- > From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On > Behalf Of Chuck Munro > Sent: den 22 maj 2016 17:11 > To: centos@centos.org > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Upcoming OwnCloud changes > > > Just a FYI folks ... > > I am running OwnCloud 9.0.2 on CentOS 6.7 and php-7.0 with no issues. > > I installed the Webtatic repo which has several versions of PHP > available for CentOS 6 and 7. I then used the official OwnCloud > ce:stable repo to add the cloud software. > > In a leap of faith, and because this CentOS VM doesn't run anything > other than OwnCloud, I used the 'php70w' PHP repo and have had no > problems at all. The OwnCloud server is very lightly loaded so I have > not had an opportunity to stress test it and have not tried to use MySQL > (I configured it with the standard CentOS SQLite). > > YMMV of course, especially if you're running other PHP applications! Thanks for the info! I've been toying with the idea of stepping up to php7 as well, but haven't dared yet... -- //Sorin ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Upcoming OwnCloud changes
On 23 May 2016 7:36 a.m., "Sorin Srbu" wrote: > > > -Original Message- > > From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On > > Behalf Of Chuck Munro > > Sent: den 22 maj 2016 17:11 > > To: centos@centos.org > > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Upcoming OwnCloud changes > > > > > > Just a FYI folks ... > > > > I am running OwnCloud 9.0.2 on CentOS 6.7 and php-7.0 with no issues. > > > > I installed the Webtatic repo which has several versions of PHP > > available for CentOS 6 and 7. I then used the official OwnCloud > > ce:stable repo to add the cloud software. > > > > In a leap of faith, and because this CentOS VM doesn't run anything > > other than OwnCloud, I used the 'php70w' PHP repo and have had no > > problems at all. The OwnCloud server is very lightly loaded so I have > > not had an opportunity to stress test it and have not tried to use MySQL > > (I configured it with the standard CentOS SQLite). > > > > YMMV of course, especially if you're running other PHP applications! > > Thanks for the info! > > I've been toying with the idea of stepping up to php7 as well, but haven't > dared yet... > > Note that Fedora has not made the change yet even. Though I'm expecting that to happen in the F25 cycle. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
