Hmm...
I have to try that .. and see what happens. It would be annoying though.
Half the time I use that laptop as a "head-less" machine, do a WOL, run
things with redirected X11.. and when done, shut it down.
So it sounds like a combination of a linux issue, combined with a BIOS
is
On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 5:18 AM R C wrote:
>
> So I tried a few things, I have a few docking stations, and they all
> seem to show that problem.
>
>
> Can't shut it down, remotely, while in a docking station. Also, when in
> a docking station and using the laptops keyboard and LCD screen, and
>
So I tried a few things, I have a few docking stations, and they all
seem to show that problem.
Can't shut it down, remotely, while in a docking station. Also, when in
a docking station and using the laptops keyboard and LCD screen, and
power down the laptop in RHEL/Centos, just results
On 3/29/21 2:22 AM, Łukasz Posadowski wrote:
On 2021-03-28 at 21:17 -0600, R C wrote:
I have a laptop, in a docking station. When running RHEL/Centos 7
I
could shut it down and power it off by using 'shutdown -h now' In
did a
new install of Centos 8 (and also RHEL 8) and when I do a
"shutdown -
On 2021-03-28 at 21:17 -0600, R C wrote:
> I have a laptop, in a docking station. When running RHEL/Centos 7
> I
> could shut it down and power it off by using 'shutdown -h now' In
> did a
> new install of Centos 8 (and also RHEL 8) and when I do a
> "shutdown -h
> now" it just reboots (behaves
Hello,
I have a laptop, in a docking station. When running RHEL/Centos 7 I
could shut it down and power it off by using 'shutdown -h now' In did a
new install of Centos 8 (and also RHEL 8) and when I do a "shutdown -h
now" it just reboots (behaves the same as if I'd do a reboot).
Is that a
On 2/3/21 11:30 PM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote:
I wonder if something similar exists for other use cases, e. g. migrate from
CentOS to Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
here is a how to from redhat i think is what you may be searching?
it was publish recently:
https://access.redhat.com/artic
Hi,
I've recently done some extensive testing with the centos2ol.sh migration
script provided by Oracle:
https://github.com/oracle/centos2ol
The script works perfectly on both CentOS 7.x and 8.x, so I wrote a little blog
article about it:
https://blog.microlinux.fr/migration-centos-oracle-linux
Hi,
A question to those familiar with third party repository policy. You
think there's a real chance KDE's Plasma 5 desktop will be made
available by EPEL or some other third party repository for CentOS 8.x?
I'm asking because up until recently one of my desktop configurations
was based on CentOS
Le 25/03/2015 10:46, Lars Hecking a écrit :
rpm -q --changelog should give you an idea.
Thanks. That's exactly what I've been looking for. And perusing the
results gives me so many reasons to stick with CentOS.
Cheers,
Niki
--
Microlinux - Solutions informatiques 100% Linux et logiciels
> A question just crossed my mind: does RHEL include software like
> LibreOffice, Firefox, Thunderbird "as is" from upstream, or is there some
> RHEL-specific quality control and bugfixing for this kind of software?
rpm -q --changelog should give you an idea.
__
Hi,
RHEL/CentOS releases 5.x, 6.x and 7.x are all shipping reasonably recent
versions of Firefox ESR, Thunderbird ESR and LibreOffice. Until recently
I've been using Slackware Linux as a base system for client's desktops
and workstations. Since my primary aim is reliability, I always tried to
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Nux! wrote:
> On 22.03.2014 17:46, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> > I have RHEL 7 Beta installed in dual boot with CentOS 6.x. Since RHEL
> > 7
> > installed GRUB2, I had problem that RHEL 7 is default boot.
> >
> >
> > My personal solution was to go to /etc/grub.d
On 22.03.2014 17:46, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> I have RHEL 7 Beta installed in dual boot with CentOS 6.x. Since RHEL
> 7
> installed GRUB2, I had problem that RHEL 7 is default boot.
>
>
> My personal solution was to go to /etc/grub.d and run command:
> mv 10_linux 31_linux
>
> grub2-mkconfi
I have RHEL 7 Beta installed in dual boot with CentOS 6.x. Since RHEL 7
installed GRUB2, I had problem that RHEL 7 is default boot.
My personal solution was to go to /etc/grub.d and run command:
mv 10_linux 31_linux
grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg
Explanation:
- /etc/grub.d is where g
On 14.4.2012 00:28, Bob Hoffman wrote:
> On 4/13/2012 5:57 PM, Markus Falb wrote:
>> On 13.4.2012 23:39, Bob Hoffman wrote:
>>
>>> I was trying to stay with the base centos repo and only grab a few
>>> programs off of other repos (like phpymyadmin).
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, I think it is better, now
On 4/13/2012 5:57 PM, Markus Falb wrote:
> On 13.4.2012 23:39, Bob Hoffman wrote:
>
>> I was trying to stay with the base centos repo and only grab a few
>> programs off of other repos (like phpymyadmin).
>>
>> Unfortunately, I think it is better, now that I have played with them,
>> to skip the re
On 13.4.2012 23:39, Bob Hoffman wrote:
> I was trying to stay with the base centos repo and only grab a few
> programs off of other repos (like phpymyadmin).
>
> Unfortunately, I think it is better, now that I have played with them,
> to skip the repos and go straight to the source for some thi
On 4/13/2012 2:23 PM, Karl Vogel wrote:
>>> On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 12:13:14 +0200,
>>> Tilman Schmidt said:
> T> The most frequent reason for a lot of unmatched entries showing up is
> T> that the corresponding logwatch script is out of date wrt the program
> T> whose log is being watched. Program
>> On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 12:13:14 +0200,
>> Tilman Schmidt said:
T> The most frequent reason for a lot of unmatched entries showing up is
T> that the corresponding logwatch script is out of date wrt the program
T> whose log is being watched. Program maintainers tend to change the
T> wording of mes
Am 08.04.2012 03:37, schrieb Joseph L. Casale:
>> I just assumed there was something newer out there. 2007 was the last
>> release notes for the version installed on centos. There is a newer
>> version out there, but that would be off of the base repo and not sure
>> if I want to go that route in t
On 4/7/2012 7:49 PM, Joseph L. Casale wrote:
>> Have you tried editing the files in
>>
>> /usr/share/logwatch/default.conf/services/
>>
>> or
>>
>> /usr/share/logwatch/default.conf/ignore.conf
>>
>> ?
> Obvisouly not:) And I hope not either...
> Facilities are provided just for this in /etc/logwatc
On 4/7/2012 9:37 PM, Joseph L. Casale wrote:
>> I will take a look and try to see if it will be easy to change the
>> postfix and dovecot. More than likely I will just tell them what it is
>> and 'good luck' at figuring it out..lol
> Only ignore what you encounter and deduce to be not important.
>
>I just assumed there was something newer out there. 2007 was the last
>release notes for the version installed on centos. There is a newer
>version out there, but that would be off of the base repo and not sure
>if I want to go that route in the how-to.
Dates aren't always a good judge of package
On 4/7/2012 7:49 PM, Joseph L. Casale wrote:
>> Have you tried editing the files in
>>
>> /usr/share/logwatch/default.conf/services/
>>
>> or
>>
>> /usr/share/logwatch/default.conf/ignore.conf
>>
>> ?
> Obvisouly not:) And I hope not either...
> Facilities are provided just for this in /etc/logwatc
>Have you tried editing the files in
>
>/usr/share/logwatch/default.conf/services/
>
>or
>
>/usr/share/logwatch/default.conf/ignore.conf
>
>?
Obvisouly not:) And I hope not either...
Facilities are provided just for this in /etc/logwatch.
The location you refer to will get over written on an upda
On 4/7/2012 3:55 PM, Mail Lists wrote:
> On 04/07/2012 10:09 AM, Bob Hoffman wrote:
>> Logwatch file shows last upgrade to the code was 2007.
>> The unmatched entries are killing me in the reports.
>> I figure there must be a newer utility centos has in the repo but I
>> cannot find one.
>>
>> Is l
On 04/07/2012 10:09 AM, Bob Hoffman wrote:
> Logwatch file shows last upgrade to the code was 2007.
> The unmatched entries are killing me in the reports.
> I figure there must be a newer utility centos has in the repo but I
> cannot find one.
>
> Is logwatch the only one that is included?
>
> than
Logwatch file shows last upgrade to the code was 2007.
The unmatched entries are killing me in the reports.
I figure there must be a newer utility centos has in the repo but I
cannot find one.
Is logwatch the only one that is included?
thanks
___
CentO
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] RHEL, centos and seeing if i now understand this
>
> On Wed, 24 Jun 2009, Spiro Harvey wrote:
>
> > "Robert P. J. Day" wrote:
> > > ok, given the flurry of responses to my original post,
> let me see
> > > if i have
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> the issue was not what support was available from *redhat*, it was
> trying to clarify what was available from the *centos* community.
> but thanks for playing.
>
It simple really, you want guaranteed support that gets your problems
solved you pay for RHEL.
If you want
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009, Spiro Harvey wrote:
> "Robert P. J. Day" wrote:
> > ok, given the flurry of responses to my original post, let me see if
> > i have a handle on this as i think i've finally figured it out and,
> > yes, it does make sense.
>
> This also would have been clear had you done som
"Robert P. J. Day" wrote:
> ok, given the flurry of responses to my original post, let me see if
> i have a handle on this as i think i've finally figured it out and,
> yes, it does make sense.
This also would have been clear had you done some research in advance
of your postings here -- not ve
on 6-23-2009 5:16 AM Robert Heller spake the following:
>
> Right. It is not a matter on 'commonness' either. The big companies
> will likely opt for official RHEL and be paying RedHat the premium
> support contract. The smaller companies will be using CentOS.
>
>
I'm sure if RedHat really w
At Tue, 23 Jun 2009 05:57:19 -0400 (EDT) CentOS mailing list
wrote:
>
>
> ok, given the flurry of responses to my original post, let me see if
> i have a handle on this as i think i've finally figured it out and,
> yes, it does make sense.
>
> the scenario is that there is a very large so
>-Original Message-
>From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On
Behalf
>Of Robert P. J. Day
>Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 11:57 AM
>To: CentOS discussion list
>Subject: [CentOS] RHEL, centos and seeing if i now understand this
>
>
&g
ok, given the flurry of responses to my original post, let me see if
i have a handle on this as i think i've finally figured it out and,
yes, it does make sense.
the scenario is that there is a very large software company in the
area whose only officially supported linux platform is currently
on 2-3-2009 4:31 PM Christopher Chan spake the following:
> Scott Silva wrote:
>> on 2-3-2009 2:35 PM Thom Paine spake the following:
>>> Would this be a good way to go to update to 5?
>>>
>>> I would consider this. I have a couple of 3 boxes I'd like to get to 5.
>>>
>> It is never recommended to
Scott Silva wrote:
> on 2-3-2009 2:35 PM Thom Paine spake the following:
>> Would this be a good way to go to update to 5?
>>
>> I would consider this. I have a couple of 3 boxes I'd like to get to 5.
>>
> It is never recommended to upgrade major versions. You might get away with it,
> and you migh
on 2-3-2009 2:35 PM Thom Paine spake the following:
> Would this be a good way to go to update to 5?
>
> I would consider this. I have a couple of 3 boxes I'd like to get to 5.
>
It is never recommended to upgrade major versions. You might get away with it,
and you might spend even more time chas
Would this be a good way to go to update to 5?
I would consider this. I have a couple of 3 boxes I'd like to get to 5.
--
-=/>Thom
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, John R Pierce wrote:
> I have a system that was originally installed with RHEL 3 x86_64, and
> I've since 'updated' it to CentOS 3 via installing yum and
> centos-release, then running a yum update.
>
> is there any way I can force -all- installed packages to be replaced
> with
I have a system that was originally installed with RHEL 3 x86_64, and
I've since 'updated' it to CentOS 3 via installing yum and
centos-release, then running a yum update.
is there any way I can force -all- installed packages to be replaced
with their centos analogs just to be sure its all cons
On Jan 30, 2008 4:06 AM, Johnny Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> nate wrote:
> > Akemi Yagi wrote:
> >
> >> I hope you are interested in contributing to the CentOS community by
> >> sharing your driver:
> >>
> >> https://projects.centos.org/trac/dasha/
> >
> > Looks like that site is for source
nate wrote:
Akemi Yagi wrote:
I hope you are interested in contributing to the CentOS community by
sharing your driver:
https://projects.centos.org/trac/dasha/
Looks like that site is for source drivers, these drivers come from
VMWare, and I'm not sure what their license is, nor do I know ex
On 1/30/08, Johnny Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> nate wrote:
> > Manish Kathuria wrote:
> New features are typically not backported to
> > current versions of the kernel, newer drivers are often back
> > ported, assuming the driver existed in the RHEL kernel. If the
> > driver did not exist t
Akemi Yagi wrote:
> I hope you are interested in contributing to the CentOS community by
> sharing your driver:
>
> https://projects.centos.org/trac/dasha/
Looks like that site is for source drivers, these drivers come from
VMWare, and I'm not sure what their license is, nor do I know exactly
wha
On Jan 29, 2008 12:25 PM, William Hooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2008 3:18 PM, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Johnny Hughes wrote:
> > >
> > > Overall ... unless you really, Really, REALLY need a newer kernel, it is
> > > best to use the one provided by the distribution
On Jan 29, 2008 1:24 PM, nate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
> I run CentOS 4 and 5 under VMWare ESX 3.x, I hacked up the VMware tools
> into two different RPMS
>
> - core rpm (everything but drivers)
> - driver rpm
>
> When I want to deploy a new kernel I build a special RPM wit
Les Mikesell wrote:
> Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>
>> Overall ... unless you really, Really, REALLY need a newer kernel, it is
>> best to use the one provided by the distribution.
>
> Is there a difference in the way kernel modules are managed between
> CentOS4 and 5? I thought that under CentOS4 after
On Jan 29, 2008 3:18 PM, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Johnny Hughes wrote:
> >
> > Overall ... unless you really, Really, REALLY need a newer kernel, it is
> > best to use the one provided by the distribution.
>
> Is there a difference in the way kernel modules are managed between
> Ce
Johnny Hughes wrote:
Overall ... unless you really, Really, REALLY need a newer kernel, it is
best to use the one provided by the distribution.
Is there a difference in the way kernel modules are managed between
CentOS4 and 5? I thought that under CentOS4 after a kernel update
VMware would
nate wrote:
Manish Kathuria wrote:
How are the updated kernels released by Red Hat / Cent OS related to
the latest vanilla kernels ? Are the changes, new features and
drivers, etc. available in the newer kernels also ported to the
updated kernels released by Red Hat in their entirety ?
If your
Manish Kathuria wrote:
> How are the updated kernels released by Red Hat / Cent OS related to
> the latest vanilla kernels ? Are the changes, new features and
> drivers, etc. available in the newer kernels also ported to the
> updated kernels released by Red Hat in their entirety ?
If your compari
How are the updated kernels released by Red Hat / Cent OS related to
the latest vanilla kernels ? Are the changes, new features and
drivers, etc. available in the newer kernels also ported to the
updated kernels released by Red Hat in their entirety ?
For the lifetime of a distribution like RHEL 4
55 matches
Mail list logo
