On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 18:37 -0400, Cal Webster wrote:
> See Red Hat Bugzilla bug #846852 for details.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=846852
>
> FYI:
>
> We discovered that after updating to EL 6.3 on our x86_64 server, autofs
> 5.0.5-54 broke our nightly backups that rely on automo
See Red Hat Bugzilla bug #846852 for details.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=846852
FYI:
We discovered that after updating to EL 6.3 on our x86_64 server, autofs
5.0.5-54 broke our nightly backups that rely on automounting an NFS
share hosted on another EL 6 machine on our local netw
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 21:00:59 +0300
Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote:
> Use sudo.
Weak! Real fascists use sudosh!
Rui
ps: I'm sure there are some fascists who are more fascist so feel free
to point out even better options ;)
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:33 PM, wrote:
> >>
>> If you want to force your team to wait for your change, fine - and
>> sometimes it is even a good idea, but the tool should not make that
>> decision for you.
>
> Yes, I do want to force them to wait for what one person's working on -
> it's not like
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:03 PM, wrote:
>> >>
>>> Errr, what? No sensible VCS forces you to wait for someone else to
>>> finish their portion of the work.
>>
>> You're wrong. I've worked in small and large teams, and *ALWAYS* we
>> checked out with locks. If two people need
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:03 PM, wrote:
> >>
>> Errr, what? No sensible VCS forces you to wait for someone else to
>> finish their portion of the work.
>
> You're wrong. I've worked in small and large teams, and *ALWAYS* we
> checked out with locks. If two people need to work on one file, then
>
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:56 PM, wrote:
>>
>>
>> VCS's that let multiple people check the same object out at the same
>> time You're *exactly* back where you were before people were using
>> VCSs.
>>
>
> Errr, what? No sensible VCS forces you to wait for someone else t
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:56 PM, wrote:
>
>
> VCS's that let multiple people check the same object out at the same
> time You're *exactly* back where you were before people were using
> VCSs.
>
Errr, what? No sensible VCS forces you to wait for someone else to
finish their portion of the w
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Heng Su wrote:
> On 08/09/2012 02:46 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Heng Su wrote:
>>> Normal flow is get codes from SCMs repository or do CI server, however,
>>> you know some small company got such thing messy (my current company,
>>>
Heng Su wrote:
> On 08/09/2012 02:46 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Heng Su wrote:
>>> Normal flow is get codes from SCMs repository or do CI server, however,
>>> you know some small company got such thing messy (my current company,
>>> lol ^_^). Sometime you have to up
Hi Harald,
Thank you so much to guide to correct path and let me know how to
move on, learn more from you.
Indeed I am a developer not an admin, that's a good question for the
headers of my company why there is no admin to manage the server in our
company. Anyway this can not controlled by m
On 08/09/2012 02:46 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Heng Su wrote:
>> Normal flow is get codes from SCMs repository or do CI server, however,
>> you know some small company got such thing messy (my current company,
>> lol ^_^). Sometime you have to update only one file of
We do a better job for those things that are outside of our firewall.
And this is some of what we do.
_
"He's no failure. He's not dead yet."
William Lloyd George
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On
Thanks for the warning. I am aware of that, but some things an
administrator has no control over.
They are behind a firewall and we take some further precautions, but I
can get this restricted any further.
_
"He's no failure. He's not dead yet."
William Lloyd
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Heng Su wrote:
>
> Normal flow is get codes from SCMs repository or do CI server, however,
> you know some small company got such thing messy (my current company,
> lol ^_^). Sometime you have to update only one file of the project.
Why does it need root permission
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Heng Su wrote:
>
>> No, it is not a common situation. Normally you should not let anyone
>> you don't trust become root. For fairly obvious reasons...
> Let said if you want get low price to set up multiple application
> servers and outsource different server set
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Heng Su wrote:
> I want to protect the history file from deleted for all users except
> user 'root' can do it, is that possible?
> For my server, many users can log in with root from remote through
> ssh, so I can not trace which guy do wrong things. So I d
On 08/09/2012 02:14 AM, Rajagopal Swaminathan wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Heng Su wrote:
>> this server, however, someone let say new guy overwrite wrong file. I
>> need to trace on it and inform him carefully.
> SCMs like SVN, git etc. are exactly for such events.
>
>
Greetings,
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Heng Su wrote:
> this server, however, someone let say new guy overwrite wrong file. I
> need to trace on it and inform him carefully.
SCMs like SVN, git etc. are exactly for such events.
You are taking backups, aren't you?
--
Regards,
Rajagopal
__
On 08/09/2012 01:54 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Heng Su wrote:
>> I want to protect the history file from deleted for all users except
>> user 'root' can do it, is that possible?
>> For my server, many users can log in with root from remote through
>> ssh,
Hi mark,
Great! I think those you mentioned is exactly what I want.
Normally, I want to trace which guy got wrong things in server.
I tried the link that Harold provided find it's a good idea to
protect log files, however, I want to know is which guy type which command.
the /var/l
Use sudo.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Heng Su wrote:
>
> I want to protect the history file from deleted for all users except
> user 'root' can do it, is that possible?
> For my server, many users can log in with root from remote through
> ssh, so I can not trace which guy do wrong things. So I
Heng Su wrote:
> hello,
>
> I want to protect the history file from deleted for all users except
> user 'root' can do it, is that possible?
> For my server, many users can log in with root from remote through
> ssh, so I can not trace which guy do wrong things. So I decide to create
> new a
Greetings,
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:26 PM, Heng Su wrote:
> hello,
> For my server, many users can log in with root from remote through
> ssh, so I can not trace which guy do wrong things. So I decide to create
> new account for every users and let them use 'sudo' then I can trace
> which gu
Use remote logging to a second machine which only you have access to.
http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/creating-centralized-syslog-server
Harold
8/8/2012 12:56 PM, Heng Su wrote:
> hello,
>
> I want to protect the history file from deleted for all users except
> user 'root' can do it, is
hello,
I want to protect the history file from deleted for all users except
user 'root' can do it, is that possible?
For my server, many users can log in with root from remote through
ssh, so I can not trace which guy do wrong things. So I decide to create
new account for every users an
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..
Hi everybody,
I am having issue with this xen update on Centos 5 :
Setting up Upgrade Process
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
--> Processing Dependency: xen-libs = 3.0.3-135.el5_8.2 for package: xen
---> Package xen-libs.i386 0:3.0.3-135.el5_8.4 set to be updated
--> Finished
On Sat, 2012-08-04 at 10:21 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 08/04/2012 09:36 AM, ashkab rahmani wrote:
> > thank you. very usefull
> > i think i'll try btrfs or jfs,
> > i'll send you btrfs result for you.
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Nux! wrote:
> >
> >> On 04.08.2012 15:19, ashkab r
Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > The ZFS code base is stable, the problem is the VFS interface in Linux and
> > that
> > applies to all filesystems
> >
>
> Hello,
>
> Care to explain what's the problem in Linux VFS layer ?
The VFS layer was introduced in 1980 by Bill Joy when he started the UFS
31 matches
Mail list logo
