On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 06/11/2012 12:45 AM, Sanjay Arora wrote:
>> But that segregated network does not have access to the Internetor
>> am I wrong?
>
> You're wrong. The automatically created network will have internet
> access via NAT.
>
Thanks. But thr
On 06/11/2012 03:22 AM, Sanjay Arora wrote:
> Now I wonder why I did not think of so simple an idea! Simply put in a
> multi-port NIC card,
>
> Another questions...I put in another network port & I end up with 3
> NICs & 3 bridges...One providing Internet access, One providing
> routing to virtual
On 06/11/2012 12:45 AM, Sanjay Arora wrote:
> But that segregated network does not have access to the Internetor
> am I wrong?
You're wrong. The automatically created network will have internet
access via NAT.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos
thank you very much for information, i wil check again. If have
problem i will ask again :D
--
http://mafatahna.web.id
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Rob Kampen wrote:
> On 06/12/2012 10:05 AM, Boris Epstein wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 5:51 PM, Rob
>> Kampen
>> >wrote:
>>
>> On 06/12/2012 09:14 AM, Boris Epstein wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello listmates,
I am running DHCPD for IPv4 on a Centos 5 machin
On 06/12/2012 10:05 AM, Boris Epstein wrote:
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 5:51 PM, Rob Kampenwrote:
On 06/12/2012 09:14 AM, Boris Epstein wrote:
Hello listmates,
I am running DHCPD for IPv4 on a Centos 5 machine. I am wondering if
anyone
has got a functional dhcpd.conf configuration serving stati
12.06.2012 02:05, Boris Epstein wrote:
> Thanks, looks good. But what part of it deals with static routes for
> particular networks? All I see is one default gateway:
>
> option routers 192.168.1.1;
>
You should use dhcp options 121 (rfc3442) and 249 (MS).
Here is example:
http://thomasjaehnel.com
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 5:51 PM, Rob Kampen wrote:
> On 06/12/2012 09:14 AM, Boris Epstein wrote:
>
>> Hello listmates,
>>
>> I am running DHCPD for IPv4 on a Centos 5 machine. I am wondering if
>> anyone
>> has got a functional dhcpd.conf configuration serving static routes to
>> Linux, Mac OS X
On 06/12/2012 09:14 AM, Boris Epstein wrote:
Hello listmates,
I am running DHCPD for IPv4 on a Centos 5 machine. I am wondering if anyone
has got a functional dhcpd.conf configuration serving static routes to
Linux, Mac OS X and Windows clients.
I tried a couple of variations of static-routes o
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 05:07:05PM +0200, Stephan van Hienen wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, James Pearson wrote:
> > What does:
> >
> > /usr/sbin/xfs_bmap -pl 10Gtest
> >
> > output (when run on the server)?
>
> 10Gtest:
> 0: [0..808319]: 261386472..262194791 808320 blocks
...
>
> >
> >
Hello listmates,
I am running DHCPD for IPv4 on a Centos 5 machine. I am wondering if anyone
has got a functional dhcpd.conf configuration serving static routes to
Linux, Mac OS X and Windows clients.
I tried a couple of variations of static-routes options - but have yet to
create something that
When trying to update xine-lib, the following is returned, how did I
break it? Please advise. Thanks in advance.
Missing Dependency: libxine.so.1 is needed by package
xine-0.99.6-1.el5.rf.i386 (installed)
Ed Westphal
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@cent
On Jun 11, 2012, at 10:39 AM, Stephan van Hienen wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, aurfalien wrote:
>
>> Hi Stephan,
>>
>> I also run 6.2 with XFS but am getting normal behavior.
>>
>> I ran your exact command and du -hs shows 9.8GB used.
>>
>> And ls -l shows 1048576
>>
>> Would you like mo
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, aurfalien wrote:
> Hi Stephan,
>
> I also run 6.2 with XFS but am getting normal behavior.
>
> I ran your exact command and du -hs shows 9.8GB used.
>
> And ls -l shows 1048576
>
> Would you like more info on my system?
aurf,
Any updates not installed on your system ?
(o
The CentOS team has been looking at the issue called out in these stories:
http://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/trivial-password-flaw-leaves-mysql-databases-exposed-061112
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/security-flaw-in-mysql-mariadb-allows-access-with-any-password-just-keep-s
On 06/11/2012 09:32 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
When adding packages, Yum can do two things ... install or update ...
and it does each differently.
> install/update/localinstall works>
The problem all along is that someone did a force removal of tar (at
>>>
On Jun 11, 2012, at 4:47 AM, Stephan van Hienen wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, Svavar Örn Eysteinsson wrote:
>>
>> What kernel are you using ?
> Latest centos 6.2 kernel:
> 2.6.32-220.17.1.el6.x86_64
>
>> Are you using inode64 mount option on the Cents server itself for XFS ?
> fstab for this fil
Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to
centos-annou...@centos.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
centos-announce-requ..
> I guess I'll have to take your word for it as there is nothing in what
> you mention that verifies this statement. rpm -ql tar will not verify
> that any files are actually there, just that they got installed at some
> point.
>
> Did you verify /bin/tar was actually there before you did the yum
>
Stephan van Hienen wrote:
>
>>You can also 'recover' the lost space by running (as root on the server):
>>
>> /usr/sbin/xfs_fsr 10Gtest
>
>
> doesn't help :
>
> ]# xfs_fsr 10Gtest
> ]# du -hs
> 17G .
... it worked for me :-)
Interestingly, I did a similar 'dd' locally on a XFS file system
Hello Tom,
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 15:48 +0100, Tom Brown wrote:
> well yes - but tar is not removed, that is the point,
I guess I'll have to take your word for it as there is nothing in what
you mention that verifies this statement. rpm -ql tar will not verify
that any files are actually there, ju
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, James Pearson wrote:
> What does:
>
> /usr/sbin/xfs_bmap -pl 10Gtest
>
> output (when run on the server)?
10Gtest:
0: [0..808319]: 261386472..262194791 808320 blocks
1: [808320..1357951]: 273699584..274249215 549632 blocks
2: [1357952..2406527]: 307
Stephan van Hienen wrote:
> The file is using almost double the size ?
> Even after a few days the file is showing the same disk usage.
> Only umounting and remounting the filesystem fixes the problem.
> When I do the same test on an ext4 filesystem no issues. (same
> server/client)
What does:
> rm /bin/tar will remove the binary but not update the rpmdb.
>
> rpm -V {package}
> to verify the package installation.
well yes - but tar is not removed, that is the point, its something to
do with rpm thinking its not there when in fact it is
___
Cen
Hello Tom,
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 14:23 +0100, Tom Brown wrote:
> from memory i have not deliberately removed the i386 package, but you
> are right it is not there, however rpm does seem to know about
> /bin/tar
>
> # rpm -ql tar
> /bin/gtar
> /bin/tar
>
>
> although i agree its something rpm db
Hello Helmut,
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 11:54 +0200, Helmut Drodofsky wrote:
> up to CentOS 5.3 it was possible, to control new ip connections by
> "recent", "seconds" and "hitcount"
>
> -A INPUT -m state --state NEW -m recent --set -p tcp --dport 80
> -A INPUT -m state --state NEW -m recent --updat
Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>> When adding packages, Yum can do two things ... install or update ...
>>> and it does each differently.
>>>
>>> The problem all along is that someone did a force removal of tar (at
>>> least from the rpm database) with a --nodeps switch, thus creating a
>>> system with m
On 6/11/12 10:05 AM, Muhammad A. Fatahna wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> i have a problem when install dovecot on CentOS 5, below my configuration
>
> [root@mail home]# vim /etc/dovecot-sql.conf
> driver = mysql
> connect = host = localhost dbname=postfix user=mail password=password
> default_pass_scheme =
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 2:49 PM, John Doe wrote:
> From: Arun Khan
>
>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 1:57 AM, Nate Duehr wrote:
>>> After getting the clock in sync, "hwclock --systohc" to push it
>> into the CMOS clock.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> On a PC Engines ALIX board (no battery backup for CMOS) that I am
> from memory i have not deliberately removed the i386 package, but you
> are right it is not there, however rpm does seem to know about
> /bin/tar
>
> # rpm -ql tar
> /bin/gtar
> /bin/tar
>
>
> although i agree its something rpm db related as reinstalling tar via
> rpm rather than yum solves the
> Somehow it is NOT in the rpm database ... that is why yum thinks it is
> not there.
>
> This could also happen accidentally with multilib installs (it looks
> like you do have this possible issue).
>
> When a system is installed in c5, the default behavior is that both i386
> and x86_64 packages
On 06/11/2012 07:17 AM, Tom Brown wrote:
>> The issue seems to be that the package tar was somehow removed from your
>> system.
>>
>> When you tried to update, the system saw that the package tar was
>> removed from the system and that it was required by the "already
>> installed" package redhat-ls
I think there are not enough write permissions.
I have build a directory:
/var/log/dovecot
with user and group permissions for the dovecot user: drwxr-xr-x
and the log file:
/var/log/dovecot/dovecot.log
with user and group permissions for the dovecot user: -rw-r--r--
Viele Grüße
Helmut Drodofsky
> The issue seems to be that the package tar was somehow removed from your
> system.
>
> When you tried to update, the system saw that the package tar was
> removed from the system and that it was required by the "already
> installed" package redhat-lsb.
>
> This means that somehow, someone removed
On 06/11/2012 06:21 AM, Tom Brown wrote:
> Hi
>
> Trying to apply all available updates to CentOS 5 and the following is
> observed
>
> # yum update
> Loaded plugins: downloadonly, fastestmirror, rhnplugin
> Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
> Setting up Update Process
> Resolving Depende
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, Svavar Örn Eysteinsson wrote:
What kernel are you using ?
Latest centos 6.2 kernel:
2.6.32-220.17.1.el6.x86_64
Are you using inode64 mount option on the Cents server itself for XFS ?
fstab for this filesystem :
/dev/mapper/VolGroup01-LogVol00 /raid xfs def
What kernel are you using ?
Are you using inode64 mount option on the Cents server itself for XFS ?
What OS was the NFS client running ? 32bit ?
Just asking, as there seems to be problem with xfs on kernel 2.6.27 when
using inode64 mount options regarding
32bit nfs
Stephan van Hiene
Hi
Trying to apply all available updates to CentOS 5 and the following is observed
# yum update
Loaded plugins: downloadonly, fastestmirror, rhnplugin
Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
Setting up Update Process
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
--> Running transacti
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Ross Cavanagh wrote:
>> Now, traffic among these three networks will be routed automatically
>> or do I have to put in some code to enable traffic between these three
>> networks & internet access to the virtual host & ltsp network?
>>
>> It shouldn't be a problem,
>
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Ross Cavanagh wrote:
>
> >> I'm just jumping in and may not have read everything, but having the NAT
> > option will still allow Internet access to the guest if the host is setup
> > to allow this (which is the default on most virtual hosts as far as I'm
> > aw
> man touch
> man chmod
> man chown
file has ready, chmod use 755 and chown use vmail, this below :
[root@mail ~]# ls -la /etc/dovecot*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 vmail vmail 42989 Jun 11 17:08 /etc/dovecot.conf
-rwxr-xr-x 1 vmail vmail 181 Jun 11 15:27 /etc/dovecot-sql.conf
[root@mail ~]#
[root@mail ~]# ls
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Ross Cavanagh wrote:
>> I'm just jumping in and may not have read everything, but having the NAT
> option will still allow Internet access to the guest if the host is setup
> to allow this (which is the default on most virtual hosts as far as I'm
> aware). But you
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Sanjay Arora wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Gordon Messmer
> > If you want to use NAT and keep your guests in a segregated network,
> > that is exactly how the default install behaves. You don't have to do
> > any network-specific configuration.
>
> But
Dear all,
i have a problem when install dovecot on CentOS 5, below my configuration
[root@mail home]# vim /etc/dovecot-sql.conf
driver = mysql
connect = host = localhost dbname=postfix user=mail password=password
default_pass_scheme = PLAIN
password_query = SELECT password FROM mailbox WHERE user
Hello,
up to CentOS 5.3 it was possible, to control new ip connections by
"recent", "seconds" and "hitcount"
-A INPUT -m state --state NEW -m recent --set -p tcp --dport 80
-A INPUT -m state --state NEW -m recent --update --seconds 60 --hitcount
1000 -p tcp --dport 80 -j LOG --log-prefix "FW DR
Centos 6.2 system with xfs filesystem.
I'm sharing this filesystem using nfs.
When I create a 10 gigabyte test file from a nfs client system :
dd if=/dev/zero of=10Gtest bs=1M count=1
1+0 records in
1+0 records out
1048576 bytes (10 GB) copied, 74.827 s, 140 MB/s
Output from 'ls
From: Arun Khan
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 1:57 AM, Nate Duehr wrote:
>> After getting the clock in sync, "hwclock --systohc" to push it
> into the CMOS clock.
>
> +1
>
> On a PC Engines ALIX board (no battery backup for CMOS) that I am
> using as an WiFi AP, I have had to resort to a similar
On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Gordon Messmer
> If you want to use NAT and keep your guests in a segregated network,
> that is exactly how the default install behaves. You don't have to do
> any network-specific configuration.
But that segregated network does not have access to the Interneto
48 matches
Mail list logo
