On Monday 04 October 2010 12:35, Mark wrote:
> I'll probably put LO beta on my laptop and play with it a little
> before I decide. There is a caveat that LO might install over OO in
> this beta, but future releases won't.
The warning that LibreOffice overwrites OpenOffice only applies to
Window
> The defaults are determined by /etc/mke2fs.conf. If you've modified or
> removed that file, mkfs.ext4 will behave differently
On my CentOS 5.5 systems, defaults for ext4 reside on "/etc/mke4fs.conf".
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://
On 10/04/2010 02:52 PM, Steve Brooks wrote:
> The really odd thing here
> is that on another raid disk created the "exact" same way with the exact
> same parameters to "mkfs" and identically mounted I have an EXT4
> filesystem with different attributes, see below. Surely that should not
> happen.
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 12:02 AM, Miguel Medalha wrote:
>
>> I was just a little worried at the response from Brent earlier quote
>> "Don't play Russian Roulette and use ext4." .
>
> Maybe he was referring to some old information dating back to the
> development period.
>
> ext4 has been declared
> I was just a little worried at the response from Brent earlier quote
> "Don't play Russian Roulette and use ext4." .
Maybe he was referring to some old information dating back to the
development period.
ext4 has been declared stable by the kernel people. As a matter of fact
it is now the d
As a test, I just created an ext4 file system using the defaults, i.e.
'mkfs.ext4 -L test1 /dev/sdb1' and it has the following features, how did
your's get so lean:
Filesystem features: has_journal ext_attr resize_inode dir_index filetype
needs_recovery extent flex_bg sparse_super large_fi
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
> Filesystem state: not clean
>
You should really look at that line and at why it is there.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> Below is the output from "tune4fs". From what people are saying it
> looks like et4 may not be the way to go.
>
"What people are saying"? So instead of understanding and solving some
issue you just jump wagon, maybe only to find some other issue there?
ext4 is stable and works perfectly. You
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
On 4 October 2010 20:07, Steve Brooks wrote:
> both are 11T and so I would prefer as much stability as possible, io
> performance is not an issue on either device just integrity so I thought
> the journal would be default and necessary.
>
> Any thoughts would be much appreciated.
>
My two pence w
> Given that the Document Foundation has now split away from Oracle to
> continue the development of an independent office suite, do we have
> any idea which was CentOS and Red Hat are planning to go in this area
> - OpenOffice or LibreOffice?
>
> I know that LibreOffice is not production ready y
Can you give us the output of "tune4fs -l /dev/sdb" ?
Does it show " has_journal" under "Filesystem features"?
If it doesn't, you can input the following:
tune4fs -o journal_data
The option "journal_data" fits the case in which you don't care about
the fastest speed but you put your focus on
I'm using a call to the resource module's getrusage method. On openSUSE
this works, on CentOS [python26-2.6.5-3.el5] it 'works' but just returns
zeros for the memory utilization values.
resource.getrusage(resource.RUSAGE_SELF).ru_maxrss
openSUSE: returns 5512
CentOS: returns 0
Anyone know wha
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
> >
> > BINGO! Only one time did the word 'title' appear in his grub.conf.
Well ... Only once did it appear on the left margin as the start-of-line.
Thanks, M$ Outlook, for deciding how to format the message.
So the rest of the surmising was based on a false reading. Sorry folks.
> grub
Hello List,
I found these wonderful instruction by Alan Bartlett (thanks Alan) for
building a kernel.org kernel
that would install on CentOS 5.5. Doing this and moving the resulting .rpm
to the target system and doing a rpm -ivh ... works great.
Now I am trying to use the same rpm as part of a
Mark wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 8:27 AM, Brunner, Brian T.
> wrote:
>>
>> BINGO! Only one time did the word 'title' appear in his grub.conf.
>>
>> So I looked at the LAST not FIRST 'kernel' line after 'title' and noted
>> that the 'kernel' info there matched what actually booted.
>>
>> I sur
On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 09:35:46AM -0700, Mark wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 9:26 AM, John Kennedy wrote:
> >
> :
> > Once it hits beta, I will install it to see how it goes.
>
Quote from Distrowatch:
"The Document Foundation is a newly founded organisation with a mission
- to make an office
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 9:26 AM, John Kennedy wrote:
>
:
> Once it hits beta, I will install it to see how it goes.
It's in beta right now, but I think the beta is the same as OO 3.3
beta - they haven't progressed past the next release, which is common
to both Oracle and the DF.
I'll probably put
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 8:27 AM, Brunner, Brian T.
wrote:
>
> BINGO! Only one time did the word 'title' appear in his grub.conf.
>
> So I looked at the LAST not FIRST 'kernel' line after 'title' and noted
> that the 'kernel' info there matched what actually booted.
>
> I surmise that grub reads th
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 12:20, Mark wrote:
> Given that the Document Foundation has now split away from Oracle to
> continue the development of an independent office suite, do we have
> any idea which was CentOS and Red Hat are planning to go in this area
> - OpenOffice or LibreOffice?
>
> I know
Given that the Document Foundation has now split away from Oracle to
continue the development of an independent office suite, do we have
any idea which was CentOS and Red Hat are planning to go in this area
- OpenOffice or LibreOffice?
I know that LibreOffice is not production ready yet - they onl
From: "Brunner, Brian T."
> > I can't tell if someone's email has run the lines together. The
> > first entry has to be
> > >> title CentOS (2.6.18-194.17.1.el5)
> > >> root (hd0,0)
> > >> kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.18-194.17.1.el5 ro root=/dev/md1
> > >> initrd /initrd-2.6.
> I can't tell if someone's email has run the lines together. The
> first entry has to be
> >> title CentOS (2.6.18-194.17.1.el5)
> >> root (hd0,0)
> >> kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.18-194.17.1.el5 ro root=/dev/md1
> >> initrd /initrd-2.6.18-194.17.1.el5.img
> with the next "titl
Brunner, Brian T. wrote:
>> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Aleksey Tsalolikhin
>>
>> Hi. I just noticed I had a CentOS 5.3 system that I updated to CentOS
>> 5.5 a few days ago, and I just ran "yum -y update" again to get the latest
>> kernel, and I just noticed it still has the o
From: Tom Bishop
>So I have been playing with a RAID 10 f2 ( 2 disks far layout) setup...thanks
>for all of the advice..Now I am playing with the format and want to make sure
>I
>have it setup the best that I can, my raid was built using the raid 10 option
>with 2 disks with the layout=far, c
> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Aleksey Tsalolikhin
> Sent: Sunday, October 03, 2010 1:17 AM
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Subject: [CentOS] system "stuck" with 2.6.18-128 kernel. how
> to move to2.6.18-194.17?
>
>
At Sun, 3 Oct 2010 20:53:17 -0600 CentOS mailing list wrote:
>
> I saw something somewhere about AHCI support requiring kernel 2.6.19 or later.
> But the current CentOS/RHEL stable kernels are 2.6.18
Drivers, etc. are back ported.
>
> I'm trying to run CentOS/RHEL in a VirtualBox vm, which b
Iain Morris wrote:
>
> And NIS servers belong in a museum! :-)
Although NIS has a number of issues against it - it still has some
pretty good things going for it. If you are on a private network and
security is not a high priority, then NIS is something that can be
easily set up. Some of the
On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 02:28:23PM +0100, James Pearson wrote:
> easily set up. Some of the nice things about NIS on Linux are:
>
> It is fairly simple to set up
> Comes with built in server redundancy and failover
> Has simple server load balancing built in
> Very lightweight on the client
It's
On Sun, Oct 03, 2010 at 08:53:17PM -0600, drew einhorn wrote:
> I saw something somewhere about AHCI support requiring kernel 2.6.19 or later.
> But the current CentOS/RHEL stable kernels are 2.6.18
>
RHEL/CentOS 2.6.18 kernel is very far from kernel.org/upstream 2.6.18.
RHEL/CentOS 2.6.18 kernel
Hello!
You can look at xfs: http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/
I think this benchmarks help you:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ext4_benchmarks&num=2
I use this file system for MySQL with a big DB on Software RAID. This file
system shows good perfomance for small files.
2010/10/
34 matches
Mail list logo
