On 17-09-2014 13:28, Eduardo Augusto Pinto wrote:
Guys, good afternoon
I'm using in my bond interfaces as active backup, in theory, should assume an
interface (or work) only when another interface is down.
But I'm just lost packets on the interface that is not being used and is
generating
pack
On 18-09-2014 13:57, James Hogarth wrote:
On 18 Sep 2014 09:07, "dE" wrote:
On 09/17/14 21:03, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote:
One more test. Please check sysctl -a | grep disable_ipv6 output
And if it's =1, set it to 0.
When NetworkManager is running, it may disable ipv6 on the interface
On Fri, 2014-09-19 at 13:10 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Joseph Godino wrote:
> > I think my software updates are not working. I know a Firefox update was
> > announced yesterday but when I try sudo yum update I get a message
> > saying that no packages are marked
Yes, I'm running CentOS 7.
On Fri, 2014-09-19 at 11:08 -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 9/19/2014 11:06 AM, Joseph Godino wrote:
> > I think my software updates are not working. I know a Firefox update was
> > announced yesterday but when I try sudo yum update I get a message
> > saying that no pa
Has anyone else experienced a degraded symmetric key exchange when using FF-31
vice FF24?
When I use FF24 then I get a symmetric type of AES-256 (Very Strong) rating
in Calomel 0.62. When I switch to FF31 and connect to exactly the same server
host and url then in Calomel 0.62 I see this instead
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Joseph Godino wrote:
> I think my software updates are not working. I know a Firefox update was
> announced yesterday but when I try sudo yum update I get a message
> saying that no packages are marked for update. I tried sudo yum clean
> all but I still get the sa
On 9/19/2014 11:06 AM, Joseph Godino wrote:
I think my software updates are not working. I know a Firefox update was
announced yesterday but when I try sudo yum update I get a message
saying that no packages are marked for update. I tried sudo yum clean
all but I still get the same response.
Any
I think my software updates are not working. I know a Firefox update was
announced yesterday but when I try sudo yum update I get a message
saying that no packages are marked for update. I tried sudo yum clean
all but I still get the same response.
Any suggestions?
Joe
___
CentOS/OpenStack enthusiasts, please come help us test OpenStack on
CentOS7, October 1 & 2. There's more detail in this blog post:
http://community.redhat.com/blog/2014/09/rdo-juno-test-day/
The test day details are at
https://openstack.redhat.com/RDO_test_day_Juno_milestone_3
We'll be using
On Fri, September 19, 2014 9:59 am, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
>
> On Fri, September 19, 2014 9:14 am, kqt4a...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Am 19.09.2014 um 15:58 schrieb kqt4a...@gmail.com:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 19.09.
Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> On Fri, September 19, 2014 9:14 am, kqt4a...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>> Am 19.09.2014 um 15:58 schrieb kqt4a...@gmail.com:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 19.09.2014 um 15:45 schrieb kqt4a...@gmail.com:
>> I
On Fri, September 19, 2014 9:14 am, kqt4a...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>>
>> Am 19.09.2014 um 15:58 schrieb kqt4a...@gmail.com:
>>> On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>
Am 19.09.2014 um 15:45 schrieb kqt4a...@gmail.com:
> I am running CentOS 6
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Ulf Volmer wrote:
On 09/19/2014 04:15 PM, Richard Ray wrote:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Ulf Volmer wrote:
This looks like these port are opened by kernel, not by a process, for
example like nfs.
How can I know for sure?
For NFS it is simple, use 'rpcinfo -p'.
Great tha
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of
kqt4a...@gmail.com
Sent: viernes, 19 de septiembre de 2014 11:15
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] process identification
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 19.09.20
On 09/19/2014 04:15 PM, Richard Ray wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Ulf Volmer wrote:
>> This looks like these port are opened by kernel, not by a process, for
>> example like nfs.
>>
>
> How can I know for sure?
For NFS it is simple, use 'rpcinfo -p'.
regards
Ulf
lsof -i -P | grep LISTEN
> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf
> Of
> kqt4a...@gmail.com
> Sent: viernes, 19 de septiembre de 2014 11:15
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] process identification
>
> On Fri, 19 Se
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Ulf Volmer wrote:
On 09/19/2014 03:58 PM, kqt4a...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 19.09.2014 um 15:45 schrieb kqt4a...@gmail.com:
I am running CentOS 6.5. I know this is not a CentOS specific problem.
Netstat shows several open ports and no
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 19.09.2014 um 15:58 schrieb kqt4a...@gmail.com:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 19.09.2014 um 15:45 schrieb kqt4a...@gmail.com:
I am running CentOS 6.5. I know this is not a CentOS specific problem.
Netstat shows several open ports a
On 09/19/2014 03:58 PM, kqt4a...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> Am 19.09.2014 um 15:45 schrieb kqt4a...@gmail.com:
>>> I am running CentOS 6.5. I know this is not a CentOS specific problem.
>>> Netstat shows several open ports and no pid.
>>>
>>> tcp0 0 *:48720
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 19.09.2014 um 15:45 schrieb kqt4a...@gmail.com:
I am running CentOS 6.5. I know this is not a CentOS specific problem.
Netstat shows several open ports and no pid.
tcp0 0 *:48720 *:* LISTEN - tcp0
0 *
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 08:45:53AM -0500, kqt4a...@gmail.com wrote:
> I am running CentOS 6.5. I know this is not a CentOS specific problem.
> Netstat shows several open ports and no pid.
>
> tcp0 0 *:48720 *:* LISTEN
> - tcp0 0 *:43422 *:*
I am running CentOS 6.5. I know this is not a CentOS specific problem.
Netstat shows several open ports and no pid.
tcp0 0 *:48720 *:* LISTEN -
tcp0 0 *:43422 *:* LISTEN -
udp0 0 *:50216 *:*
On 09/19/2014 06:37 AM Timothy Murphy wrote:
ken wrote:
Just wondering if you've ever done a firmware update? sometimes
even the manufacturer will issue a bug fix firmware update, shocking
as that may seem! :)
I'd agree with this, especially considering heartbleed. And for-profit
companies n
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..
ken wrote:
>> Just wondering if you've ever done a firmware update? sometimes
>> even the manufacturer will issue a bug fix firmware update, shocking
>> as that may seem! :)
>
> I'd agree with this, especially considering heartbleed. And for-profit
> companies normally don't expend resources (wh
Am 19.09.2014 um 10:25 schrieb John R Pierce :
> On 9/19/2014 1:19 AM, Leon Fauster wrote:
>> BTW - rpmforge is no longer maintained.
>
> I actually meant to say, repoforge, which for all practical purposes is the
> successor of rpmforge, including the repo identifier name it uses.
http://list
On 9/19/2014 1:19 AM, Leon Fauster wrote:
BTW - rpmforge is no longer maintained.
I actually meant to say, repoforge, which for all practical purposes is
the successor of rpmforge, including the repo identifier name it uses.
--
john r pierce 37N 122W
so
Am 18.09.2014 um 22:02 schrieb John R Pierce :
> is rpmforge now considered 'friendly' with EPEL?
>
> I normally only use EPEL as an addition repo, but one package I want to
> install on this one system is ffmpeg, and I'm finding it on rpmforge only...
> but its install wants to mix epel and rpm
28 matches
Mail list logo
