John R Pierce wrote:
>> It's my understanding that CentOS is a carbon copy of Red Hat - with
>> the exception of the art work. Assuming that this is true, the support
>> matrix for VMware Server 2.0.1 states Red Hat 5.1. I cannot seem to
>> locate a CentOS 5.1 x86-64 copy. I can get a copy of
> However, other than this issue which may be fixed in 2.0.2 (I still
> had a problem but haven't spent much time investigating), the
> combination works fine.
The upgrade to VMware Server 2.0.2 on 5.4 has not gone well for me. The
XP shutdown command hangs. XP Task Manager then shows nothing
r
gene.po...@macys.com wrote:
> It's my understanding that CentOS is a carbon copy of Red Hat - with
> the exception of the art work. Assuming that this is true, the support
> matrix for VMware Server 2.0.1 states Red Hat 5.1. I cannot seem to
> locate a CentOS 5.1 x86-64 copy. I can get a copy
Les Mikesell wrote:
> No, I have it on an x86 box and had to use the workaround here:
> http://communities.vmware.com/message/1364852
> /lib/libc-2.5.so is actually still available after the upgrade so you
> don't have to copy it from another system - it just isn't the target of
> the libc.so.6
Max Hetrick wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>> That's actually pretty strange because the glibc update in 5.4 will break
>> VMware
>> Server 2.0.1. Have you rebooted or restarted vmware since the update? if
>> you
>> haven't, don't until you look up the fix...
>
> Yeah, I've rebooted my inst
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Max Hetrick wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>> That's actually pretty strange because the glibc update in 5.4 will break
>> VMware
>> Server 2.0.1. Have you rebooted or restarted vmware since the update? if
>> you
>> haven't, don't until you look up the fix...
>
Les Mikesell wrote:
> That's actually pretty strange because the glibc update in 5.4 will break
> VMware
> Server 2.0.1. Have you rebooted or restarted vmware since the update? if
> you
> haven't, don't until you look up the fix...
Yeah, I've rebooted my instances. My one instance is my lap
Max Hetrick wrote:
> gene.po...@macys.com wrote:
>> It's my understanding that CentOS is a carbon copy of Red Hat - with the
>> exception of the art work. Assuming that this is true, the support
>> matrix for VMware Server 2.0.1 states Red Hat 5.1. I cannot seem to
>> locate a CentOS 5.1 x86-64
Brian Mathis wrote:
> I am running VMware Server 2.0.1 on CentOS 5.2 and 5.3 with no
> problems. Search this mailing list for info on 5.4, as I think there
> was a small issue that needed to be worked around.
I believe this was the issue:
http://communities.vmware.com/thread/229957
Regards,
Ma
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 9:29 AM, wrote:
> It's my understanding that CentOS is a carbon copy of Red Hat - with the
> exception of the art work. Assuming that this is true, the support matrix
> for VMware Server 2.0.1 states Red Hat 5.1. I cannot seem to locate a
> CentOS 5.1 x86-64 copy. I can
gene.po...@macys.com wrote:
> It's my understanding that CentOS is a carbon copy of Red Hat - with the
> exception of the art work. Assuming that this is true, the support
> matrix for VMware Server 2.0.1 states Red Hat 5.1. I cannot seem to
> locate a CentOS 5.1 x86-64 copy. I can get a copy
11 matches
Mail list logo
