Re: [CentOS] 1333/8GB Intel motherboard for C5.1

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 3:59 AM, Nicholas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Seems like it is the way Intel chips are designed. One solution would be to > ensure that 64bit is used. However, due to cost I am sure many would have > gone for the 32bit machines with AHCI mode. Well, 64bit is the solution t

Re: [CentOS] Re: OT: Top Posting

Sorry to jump in here, but combination of humorous and serious thoughts crossed my mind. And maybe these thoughts will allay future threads of this nature. On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 09:28 -0500, Doug Tucker wrote: > > (Me, too, of course!) > > > > mhr > > MHR, > > This is true, and you and I prove

Re: [CentOS] 1333/8GB Intel motherboard for C5.1

> Realtek drivers can be found in the CentOS wiki: > > http://wiki.centos.org/HardwareList#head-851e245f4f537add3de9c3c6a6d686771fb01bfa Sweet thanks. Now I know about dkms-enabled driver package which rebuilds the driver automatically for each kernel upgrade! Shawn __

Re: [CentOS] Strange NTP problem

On May 21, 2008, at 0:55, Paul Heinlein wrote: Yeah, with an offset of 54 seconds, it's a bad system. :-) Try this (assuming 10.101.32.104 is your preferred local NTP server): service ntpd stop echo "10.101.32.104" > /etc/ntp/step-tickers service ntpd start Adding a server to the step-t

[CentOS] Maybe OT: Some strange problem with postfix

Hi all, I have a strange problem with postfix on a CentOS 5.1 (fully patched). Every time that postfix sends a message to public smtp servers generates an autoresponse mail to sender about delay ... Somebody knows how can I fix this?? -- CL Martinez carlopmart {at} gmail {d0t} com ___

Re: [CentOS] Maybe OT: Some strange problem with postfix

carlopmart wrote: > Hi all, > > I have a strange problem with postfix on a CentOS 5.1 (fully patched). Every > time that postfix sends a message to public smtp servers generates an > autoresponse mail to sender about delay ... > > Somebody knows how can I fix this?? Show logs. Ralph pgpGG7hW9

Re: [CentOS] Maybe OT: Some strange problem with postfix

Ralph Angenendt wrote: carlopmart wrote: Hi all, I have a strange problem with postfix on a CentOS 5.1 (fully patched). Every time that postfix sends a message to public smtp servers generates an autoresponse mail to sender about delay ... Somebody knows how can I fix this?? Show logs. Ra

Re: [CentOS] Maybe OT: Some strange problem with postfix

carlopmart wrote: > Ralph Angenendt wrote: >> carlopmart wrote: >>> I have a strange problem with postfix on a CentOS 5.1 (fully patched). >>> Every >>> time that postfix sends a message to public smtp servers generates an >>> autoresponse mail to sender about delay ... >>> >>> Somebody knows ho

[CentOS] Re: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2008:0275 Important CentOS 5 i386 kernel Update

Karanbir Singh wrote: > > CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2008:0275 Important > > Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2008-0275.html This update seems to break IPsec in the kernel, see . Cheers, Ralph pgpyes8rwXyrf.pgp Descrip

Re: [CentOS] Re: OT: Top Posting

On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 05:41 -0400, William L. Maltby wrote: > Sorry to jump in here, but combination of humorous and serious thoughts > crossed my mind. And maybe these thoughts will allay future threads of > this nature. > > On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 09:28 -0500, Doug Tucker wrote: > > > (Me, too, of

[CentOS] XFS + LVM

Hi, I see old post on the web discouraging the use of XFS on top of LVM, mostly seems to be driver problems .. in any case it was not reassuring. I was wondering, with current drivers and kernels (CentOS5), if they are any issue doing so. I have no real need for LVM, I am just use to it and occa

Re: [CentOS] XFS + LVM

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Alain Terriault, Mr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Any comments will be more than welcome, The biggest issue with XFS has been the 4kstack limitation on the x86 kernel. If you're using x86_64, you should have no real problem with xfs on top of LVM, because the x86_

[CentOS] centos sparc distro?

Hello All. I've a couple Sun SPARC Ultra 60 machines I'd like to install Linux on. Is the Centos 4.2 Beta distro* still in development? Looks like 2005 was the last beta release. Thanks, Thomas [*] - http://beta.centos.org/centos/4.2beta/isos/sparc/ -- Flambeau Inc. Technology Center - Barab

Re: [CentOS] centos sparc distro?

tblader wrote: Hello All. I've a couple Sun SPARC Ultra 60 machines I'd like to install Linux on. Is the Centos 4.2 Beta distro* still in development? Looks like 2005 was the last beta release. I'd put Solaris 10 on those. ___ CentOS mailing list Cen

Re: [CentOS] Maybe OT: Some strange problem with postfix

Ralph Angenendt wrote: carlopmart wrote: Ralph Angenendt wrote: carlopmart wrote: I have a strange problem with postfix on a CentOS 5.1 (fully patched). Every time that postfix sends a message to public smtp servers generates an autoresponse mail to sender about delay ... Somebody knows how

Re: [CentOS] Maybe OT: Some strange problem with postfix

carlopmart wrote: > Ralph Angenendt wrote: >> Are you sure that it is postfix sending that message? This should be >> visible from the *logs* > > Ralph, yes I am sure. I can't find any entry in log file about this > problem. All mails appears as delivered. Postfix sends this message: > > >>> Mail

Re: [CentOS] Maybe OT: Some strange problem with postfix

Ralph Angenendt wrote: carlopmart wrote: Ralph Angenendt wrote: Are you sure that it is postfix sending that message? This should be visible from the *logs* Ralph, yes I am sure. I can't find any entry in log file about this problem. All mails appears as delivered. Postfix sends this message:

Re: [CentOS] Re: OT: Top Posting

William L. Maltby wrote: But keep in mind you were only a "virtual ass". Not really one. And the person who labeled you as an ass may have been, in fact, the ass. Regardless, his was only a "virtual opinion". And unless you have a personal relationship and really care what he felt... So that

Re: [CentOS] Maybe OT: Some strange problem with postfix

carlopmart wrote: > Ralph Angenendt wrote: >> Looks like the client wants to have a delivery notfication and postfix >> answers it. This seems to be a client configuration "problem" if it only >> happens with one client. > No, this problems occurs on several clients ... And not all are windows > c

Re: [CentOS] Re: OT: Top Posting

On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 15:57 +0100, Ned Slider wrote: > William L. Maltby wrote: > > > > But keep in mind you were only a "virtual ass". Not really one. And the > > person who labeled you as an ass may have been, in fact, the ass. > > Regardless, his was only a "virtual opinion". And unless you hav

Re: [CentOS] Re: OT: Top Posting

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 11:22:29AM -0400, William L. Maltby wrote: > On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 15:57 +0100, Ned Slider wrote: > > William L. Maltby wrote: > > > > > > But keep in mind you were only a "virtual ass". Not really one. And the > > > person who labeled you as an ass may have been, in fact,

Re: [CentOS] Re: OT: Top Posting - PLEASE STOP THIS POINTLESS POST

-- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers CEO, SoftDux Web: http://www.SoftDux.com Check out my technical blog, http://blog.softdux.com for Linux or other technical stuff, or visit http://www.WebHostingTalk.co.za for Web Hosting stuff ___ CentOS mailing list C

[CentOS] Re: Need help with rsync. [solved]

On Tue, May 20, 2008 11:15, James B. Byrne wrote: > This is the relevant part of the command: > > rsync -avz --rsh=ssh --delete-after /var/data/pas-redmine > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/data > > The connection is made and a good deal of material is successfully > transferred. I am however getting a num

Re: [CentOS] XFS + LVM

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 6:31 AM, Jim Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you're using x86_64, you should have no real problem with > xfs on top of LVM, because the x86_64 kernel uses 8K stacks instead. > Also, keep in mind that grub in centos doesn't play well with > partitions larger than 2TB,

[CentOS] service --status-all hangs CentOS-4.6?

Is there a problem with running # service --status-all as root over ssh? A system that I performed this command upon has become non-responsive on all ports, leading me to conclude that it is either hung or the cpu is completely consumed with some task. Regards, Output to point of failure: ...

Re: [CentOS] service --status-all hangs CentOS-4.6?

James B. Byrne wrote: Is there a problem with running # service --status-all as root over ssh? A system that I performed this command upon has become non-responsive on all ports, leading me to conclude that it is either hung or the cpu is completely consumed with some task. Regards, Output t

Re: [CentOS] Re:Re:Can't get past the splash screen

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Eon Strife <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I checked the permission of that var/lib/nxserver/ (and folders (including > /db/running/ ) and files inside it), the permission is 0700 > (read,write,execute enabled for the owner), with the group is root and owner > is

Re: [CentOS] Re: Need help with rsync. [solved]

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 8:37 AM, James B. Byrne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This indeed turned out to be an SELinux policy problem which I have since > resolved. Whoa, whoa, whoa, nice shooting, Tex! (Ghostbusters) Not so fast - please post the solution, too, for posterity (and those of us wh

[CentOS] COBOL

Just curious, maybe some old timers could help me out. I am working with a company that is migrating 20 years of Mainframe Software Development to Unix, HPUX. How much harder would it be to go to Linux, Centos Linux? Also, anyone have any experience with Fujitsu Cobol on Centos? The Fujitsu pe

Re: [CentOS] COBOL

On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 13:47 -0500, Michael wrote: > Also, anyone have any experience with Fujitsu Cobol on Centos? The > Fujitsu people only support Red Hat, and said I'd be on my own with > Centos. In other words if it works, then I don't care about Fujitsu > support. Apparently Oracle is the

Re: [CentOS] COBOL

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 01:47:09PM -0500, Michael wrote: > pay me to do just that. I have a client that wants to use Centos Linux > with Fujistu Cobol, and Fujitsu says it's gotta be Red Hat, any help > will much appreciated. Have the client buy ONE RedHat license so that if they do ever have an

Re: [CentOS] COBOL

Tony Placilla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sr. UNIX Systems Administrator The Sheridan Libraries Johns Hopkins University >>> On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 2:47 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just curious, maybe some old timers could help me out. I

Re: [CentOS] COBOL

On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 13:47 -0500, Michael wrote: > Just curious, maybe some old timers could help me out. I am working with > a company that is migrating 20 years of Mainframe Software Development > to Unix, HPUX. How much harder would it be to go to Linux, Centos Linux? It really depends on tw

Re: [CentOS] COBOL

On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 14:51 -0400, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > Apparently Oracle is the only ISV that's figured out that CentOS *is* > RHEL. > I was just told in no uncertain terms that it is not RHEL. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org ht

Re: [CentOS] COBOL

On Wed, 21 May 2008 15:12:58 -0400 "William L. Maltby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If MF COBOL is still available, might be worth a look. It was very good > then. Should be very good now if still around. It was *very* compatible > with the IBM flavor(s). I vaguely recall reading that there is so

Re: [CentOS] COBOL

On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 13:47 -0500, Michael wrote: Just curious, maybe some old timers could help me out. I am working with a company that is migrating 20 years of Mainframe Software Development to Unix, HPUX. How much harder would it be to go to Linux, Centos Linux? Probably not hard at all

Re: [CentOS] COBOL

On Wed, May 21, 2008, Scott Nelson wrote: >On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 13:47 -0500, Michael wrote: >>Just curious, maybe some old timers could help me out. I am working >>with >>a company that is migrating 20 years of Mainframe Software Development >>to Unix, HPUX. How much harder would it be to go to

Re: [CentOS] COBOL

On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 14:26 -0500, Scott Nelson wrote: > On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 13:47 -0500, Michael wrote: > > Just curious, maybe some old timers could help me out. I am working > > with > > a company that is migrating 20 years of Mainframe Software Development > > to Unix, HPUX. How much harder

RE: [CentOS] COBOL

Michael wrote: > Just curious, maybe some old timers could help me out. I am working with > a company that is migrating 20 years of Mainframe Software Development > to Unix, HPUX. How much harder would it be to go to Linux, Centos Linux? > > Also, anyone have any experience with Fujitsu Cobol o

Re: [CentOS] COBOL

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 12:21 PM, James Bunnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I was just told in no uncertain terms that it is not RHEL. > True, but the formal releases of CentOS are 100% compatible with the corresponding upstream release. (That's the whole point.) IOW, if it works in RH, it

Re: [CentOS] Maybe OT: Some strange problem with postfix

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 9:48 AM, carlopmart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: delivery via localhost[127.0.0.1]:10025: 250 2.0.0 Ok: >queued as D61DDEC962 > content_filter = imss:localhost:10025 Did you check if this could be related to whatever is running on port 10025? How i

Re: [CentOS] Interface bonding?

Just out of curiosity. If you wanted to bond do you have to ask your network admin to configure a special switch setting for MAC addresses? On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 6:27 PM, James Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Timothy Selivanow wrote: > >> >> I've changed the switch out, unfortunately to s

Re: [CentOS] XFS + LVM

On Wednesday 21 May 2008, Alain Terriault, Mr. wrote: > Hi, > > I see old post on the web discouraging the use of XFS on top of LVM, > mostly seems to be driver problems .. in any case it was not reassuring. > > I was wondering, with current drivers and kernels (CentOS5), if they are > any issue do