Re: [CentOS] continuing issues with %post

On 10/15/2009 04:17 AM, David Mehler wrote: > Hello, > I'm trying to do an unattended CentOS 5.3 install. For the most part > it's working. As of right now i'm statically assigning the machine an > IP which i believe will allow %post to resolve names? I also like > knowing where the box will show u

Re: [CentOS] CentOS build scripts (or equivalent) acessible?

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Miguel Di Ciurcio Filho wrote: > http://dev.centos.org/centos/buildsys/ There really doesn't look like there's a lot of packages there. Why haven't we tried to set up Koji? (If the answer's not enough time, or not-enough knowledge, I'm willing to help if needed)

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4 and BitTorrent

On Thu, 2009-10-15 at 22:17 -0400, Jim Wildman wrote: > On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Les Mikesell wrote: > > >> > >> Could someone describe to me what the rush is? I mean what drives > >> the need that you need to have it _right now_ ? > > > > There is always the risk that a critical security vulnerabilit

Re: [CentOS] Sparc?

Hi, > Can anyone recommend a good OS for a machine that will do apache, > postfix, mysql, etc. Do you have a specific reason not to use Solaris? If you don't want to do that I've had excellent results with Debian on Sparc, and NetBSD. S. ___ CentOS ma

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4 and BitTorrent

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 thus nate spake: | Yves Bellefeuille wrote: |> If I remember correctly, when version 5.3 was released, about 95% was |> made available by BitTorrent before the official release date, so that |> the entire file would be available as soon as possible aft

Re: [CentOS] Sparc?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 thus Stephen Nelson-Smith spake: | Hi, | |> Can anyone recommend a good OS for a machine that will do apache, |> postfix, mysql, etc. | | Do you have a specific reason not to use Solaris? | | If you don't want to do that I've had excellent results with

Re: [CentOS] CentOS build scripts (or equivalent) acessible?

On 16/10/09 08:06, Ian Wilson wrote: On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Miguel Di Ciurcio Filho wrote: http://dev.centos.org/centos/buildsys/ There really doesn't look like there's a lot of packages there. Why haven't we tried to set up Koji? (If the answer's not enough time, or not

Re: [CentOS] Sparc?

2009/10/16 Timo Schoeler : > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > thus Stephen Nelson-Smith spake: > | Hi, > | > |> Can anyone recommend a good OS for a machine that will do apache, > |> postfix, mysql, etc. > | > | Do you have a specific reason not to use Solaris? > | > | If you don

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

Jake Shipton wrote: > Post #148. > > You count your posts? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4 and BitTorrent

nate schrieb: > Yves Bellefeuille wrote: >> If I remember correctly, when version 5.3 was released, about 95% was >> made available by BitTorrent before the official release date, so that >> the entire file would be available as soon as possible after the >> release. >> >> Could the same be done th

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone? - "debate"

From: Les Mikesell > To: CentOS mailing list > Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 5:57:42 PM > Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone? - "debate" > > Gabriel - IP Guys wrote: > > > > > When someone asked “When will **CentOS 5.4 come out??** The answer is, > > “When it is good and ready”, and

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

On 16/10/09 09:38, Ian Blackwell wrote: Jake Shipton wrote: Post #148. You count your posts? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos No, that's the post # in the thread, of which

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

Jake Shipton wrote: > On 16/10/09 09:38, Ian Blackwell wrote: >> Jake Shipton wrote: >> >>> Post #148. >>> >>> >>> >> You count your posts? >> ___ >> CentOS mailing list >> CentOS@centos.org >> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/cento

[CentOS] routing using iproute2 nexthop

Hello Everyone, I configured a server for a friend's Internet cafe. He has 2 ISPs. Here is what I did: ## NAT -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.0.0/255.255.255.128 -o eth2 -j SNAT --to-source 82.77.148.83 -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.0.0/255.255.255.128 -o eth0 -j SNAT --to-source 83.103.190.175 ## Removing defa

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone? - "debate"

Les Mikesell a écrit : > I think for a lot of us, the 'we'll release when it's ready' mentality > is the main reason we aren't using debian. I don't think CentOS should > repeat their mistakes. > Well, I'm glad they actually *do* repeat that special mistake. Do you prefer we'll-release-next-

Re: [CentOS] CentOS build scripts (or equivalent) acessible?

> http://mirror.switch.ch/ftp/mirror/centos/5.3/os/SRPMS/ > > There are SRPM's there. If that's what you mean. > > I believe CentOS still uses Plague (internally) > > I found this mail on the dev mailing list: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 5 build scripts http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/20

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone? - "debate"

Niki Kovacs schrieb: > Les Mikesell a écrit : > > >> I think for a lot of us, the 'we'll release when it's ready' mentality >> is the main reason we aren't using debian. I don't think CentOS should >> repeat their mistakes. >> >> > > Well, I'm glad they actually *do* repeat that special

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone? - "debate"

First I'd like to make sure I am not complaining about this delay between the RHEL and CentOS releases per se. I did not help in any way to make it happen faster and usually I don't mind having a three weeks gap between them. But I've noticed that we had two security related kernel updates from R

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone? - "debate"

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:25 AM, Rainer Duffner wrote: > It's good to have a fixed date to work towards. > Otherwise, you get feature-creep, where more and more stuff goes into > the release but never stabilizes. I don't think "feature-creep" is an issue in CentOS. I think the goal is "simply" t

Re: [CentOS] RAM errors after kernel-update

Hi everybody, thanks for your immediate response. I will replace the board, but I am wondering what the error message actually means? > Oct 16 14:07:36 xenserver1 kernel: EDAC MC0: UE row 0, channel-a= 0 > channel-b= 1 labels "-": NON-FATAL recoverable (Branch=0 DRAM-Bank=0 > Buffer ID = 0 RDWR=R

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone? - "debate"

On 10/16/2009 05:25 AM, Rainer Duffner wrote: > Niki Kovacs schrieb: >> Les Mikesell a écrit : >> >> >>> I think for a lot of us, the 'we'll release when it's ready' mentality >>> is the main reason we aren't using debian. I don't think CentOS should >>> repeat their mistakes. >>> >>> >>

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

On 10/15/2009 07:12 AM, Mathew S. McCarrell wrote: > On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 7:45 AM, mbneto > wrote: > > Hi, > > The last status (from twitter) is 2 days old with the '5.4 is baked! > centos internal network will start syncing up today. Release ~ > soon!

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone? - "debate"

Majian wrote on 10/16/2009 06:57 AM: ... > But I've noticed that we had two security related kernel updates > from RHEL since the RHEL 5.3 release and there is no word on when it will be > released or why is it taking so long. > > So hope it would release soon ~~~ The -164 kernel has been in upd

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

> Soon means soon ... we have to get the tree stable on many servers > before we can make it available. This stuff takes time. I think this is the major source of this latest flurry about the release date. The twitter posting from KB said "soon" and then things went quiet for 2 days without any

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

You Centos guys just aren't getting the message are you? We need to know EXACTLY what is going on with the release! None of this "soon" crap will do. Please post a progress report on packages built, isos transfered, server update progress by region, hours worked, keystrokes typed, bathroom brea

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

Toby Bluhm wrote: You Centos guys just aren't getting the message are you? We need to know EXACTLY what is going on with the release! None of this "soon" crap will do. Please post a progress report on packages built, isos transfered, server update progress by region, hours worked, keystrokes

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

Toby Bluhm wrote: > You Centos guys just aren't getting the message are you? > > We need to know EXACTLY what is going on with the release! None of this > "soon" crap will do. Please post a progress report on packages built, > isos transfered, server update progress by region, hours worked, > k

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 09:13:21 -0400 Toby Bluhm wrote: > You Centos guys just aren't getting the message are you? > > We need to know EXACTLY what is going on with the release! None of this > "soon" crap will do. Please post a progress report on packages built, > isos transfered, server update p

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

You know if this was a new X-Box, or PlayStation, we might be sleeping in a tent next to the front of the store selling them wait for the store to be open. Or sleeping in line at the New Opening Release of Star Wars 12 Return of the O/S... We are all a little bit of a geek and this stuff gets

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

Adrian Sevcenco schrieb: > Toby Bluhm wrote: >> You Centos guys just aren't getting the message are you? >> >> We need to know EXACTLY what is going on with the release! None of >> this "soon" crap will do. Please post a progress report on packages >> built, isos transfered, server update progress

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:28:11 +0100 "Marcelo M. Garcia" wrote: > Toby Bluhm wrote: > > You Centos guys just aren't getting the message are you? > > > > We need to know EXACTLY what is going on with the release! None of this > > "soon" crap will do. Please post a progress report on packages built

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

Marcelo M. Garcia wrote: > Toby Bluhm wrote: >> You Centos guys just aren't getting the message are you? >> >> We need to know EXACTLY what is going on with the release! None of this >> "soon" crap will do. Please post a progress report on packages built, >> isos transfered, server update progres

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

Marcelo M. Garcia wrote: > Toby Bluhm wrote: >> You Centos guys just aren't getting the message are you? >> >> We need to know EXACTLY what is going on with the release! None of this >> "soon" crap will do. Please post a progress report on packages built, >> isos transfered, server update progres

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: > Marcelo M. Garcia wrote: >> Toby Bluhm wrote: >>> You Centos guys just aren't getting the message are you? >>> >>> We need to know EXACTLY what is going on with the release! None of this >>> "soon" crap will do. Please post a progress report on packages built, >>> is

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

Toby Bluhm wrote: > You Centos guys just aren't getting the message are you? > > We need to know EXACTLY what is going on with the release! None of this > "soon" crap will do. Please post a progress report on packages built, > isos transfered, server update progress by region, hours worked, > ke

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote: > Marcelo M. Garcia wrote: >> Toby Bluhm wrote: >>> You Centos guys just aren't getting the message are you? >>> >>> We need to know EXACTLY what is going on with the release! None of this >>> "soon" crap will do. Please post a progress

[CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Les Mikesell wrote: > Someone is obviously sarcasm-challenged today. But there is > a middle ground for people who would like a best-effort idea > of what to expect. and 'best-efforts' is a SLA concept -- if an SLA is needed, you already know the answer -- Russ herrold _

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

On 16/10/09 14:13, Toby Bluhm wrote: > You Centos guys just aren't getting the message are you? > > We need to know EXACTLY what is going on with the release! None of this > "soon" crap will do. Please post a progress report on packages built, > isos transfered, server update progress by region, ho

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

R P Herrold wrote: > On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Les Mikesell wrote: > >> Someone is obviously sarcasm-challenged today. But there is >> a middle ground for people who would like a best-effort idea >> of what to expect. > > and 'best-efforts' is a SLA concept -- if an SLA is needed, > you already kn

[CentOS] CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 56, Issue 5

Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 253 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/attachments/20091016/e656b47a/attachment-0001.bin -- Message: 2 Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 08:29:46 -0500 From: Johnn

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

Adrian Sevcenco wrote: > Toby Bluhm wrote: >> You Centos guys just aren't getting the message are you? >> >> We need to know EXACTLY what is going on with the release! None of >> this "soon" crap will do. Please post a progress report on packages >> built, isos transfered, server update progress

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

Look, it's not me that wants it. It's . . . it's the servers, OKAY? I think they've got a jones on for 5.4. I walk past the cpu room and hear trashing and growling. I look inside and it's all quiet and normal and all that - but I *know* something is going on in there. They're emanating a serio

[CentOS] so when's 5.4 going to be out? :-)

no, no, just kidding, but this is interesting: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10376762-16.html rday -- Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Linux Consulting, Training and A

[CentOS] iscsi target for C5.x

Does anyone have any recommendations for the best way to bring up a iSCSI Target on a C5.3+ server ? Various blogs suggest compiling IET from source, but thats not real appealing to me (not that I can't do it, I just don't want to have to support it long term). I looked in rpmforge but didn

[CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Les Mikesell wrote: > R P Herrold wrote: >> and 'best-efforts' is a SLA concept -- if an SLA is needed, >> you already know the answer > It's also the sort of thing people in a community try to do > for each other without needing legal terms for enforcement. You raise a ne

Re: [CentOS] iscsi target for C5.x

John R Pierce wrote: > Does anyone have any recommendations for the best way to bring up a > iSCSI Target on a C5.3+ server ? Various blogs suggest compiling IET > from source, but thats not real appealing to me (not that I can't do it, > I just don't want to have to support it long term). I

Re: [CentOS] iscsi target for C5.x

>Does anyone have any recommendations for the best way to bring up a >iSCSI Target on a C5.3+ server ? Various blogs suggest compiling IET >from source, but thats not real appealing to me (not that I can't do it, >I just don't want to have to support it long term). I looked in >rpmforge but did

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

R P Herrold wrote: > >>> and 'best-efforts' is a SLA concept -- if an SLA is needed, >>> you already know the answer > >> It's also the sort of thing people in a community try to do >> for each other without needing legal terms for enforcement. > > You raise a new argument, an orthogonal strawma

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:41 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > > Soon means soon ... we have to get the tree stable on many servers > before we can make it available.  This stuff takes time. > Take all the time you need, as always. We all appreciate the great work you folks do, and if anyone doesn't wa

Re: [CentOS] CentOS build scripts (or equivalent) acessible?

Mathieu Baudier wrote on 10/15/2009 02:23 PM: > from [CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone? >> Is that a big problem for the people who write the code and have every >> revision preserved for posterity (and for others to learn from) in a >> public revision control system? >> > > I'm not sure that I understa

[CentOS] CentOS 5.4? anyone?

On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Les Mikesell wrote: > No one questions your effort on the technical side - or has a right to. > Why is it so hard to share what is going on? I began publishing the pre-centos cAos (or fedora.us) buildsystem in February 2002 under the GPL (then v2) and updated it from time

[CentOS] [off-topic] Build packages in virtual machine

Hi Sorry for the silly question, but is it safe to build packages, like rpms, in virtual machines (virtualbox) and use this packages in real machines? Some of these machines are CentOS and others ares Opensuse. I need to build (or would be very useful to have) Ganglia 3.1.x Thanks Marcelo ___

Re: [CentOS] [off-topic] Build packages in virtual machine

Marcelo M. Garcia wrote: > Hi > > Sorry for the silly question, but is it safe to build packages, like > rpms, in virtual machines (virtualbox) and use this packages in real > machines? Some of these machines are CentOS and others ares Opensuse. > I do it all the time, a couple of (Xen) VMs p

Re: [CentOS] [off-topic] Build packages in virtual machine

Marcelo M. Garcia wrote: > Hi > > Sorry for the silly question, but is it safe to build packages, like > rpms, in virtual machines (virtualbox) and use this packages in real > machines? Some of these machines are CentOS and others ares Opensuse. I do this all the time, and have been for years, no

Re: [CentOS] [off-topic] Build packages in virtual machine

Marcelo M. Garcia wrote: > > Sorry for the silly question, but is it safe to build packages, like > rpms, in virtual machines (virtualbox) and use this packages in real > machines? Some of these machines are CentOS and others ares Opensuse. It's actually recommended to do it that way. :-) --

Re: [CentOS] [off-topic] Build packages in virtual machine

Marcelo M. Garcia a écrit : > Hi > > Sorry for the silly question, but is it safe to build packages, like > rpms, in virtual machines (virtualbox) and use this packages in real > machines? Some of these machines are CentOS and others ares Opensuse. > http://download.tuxfamily.org/centos/5/os/i

Re: [CentOS] iscsi target for C5.x

On Oct 16, 2009, at 2:42 PM, John R Pierce wrote: > Does anyone have any recommendations for the best way to bring up a > iSCSI Target on a C5.3+ server ? Various blogs suggest compiling IET > from source, but thats not real appealing to me (not that I can't do > it, > I just don't want to ha

Re: [CentOS] iscsi target for C5.x

Ross Walker wrote: > On Oct 16, 2009, at 2:42 PM, John R Pierce wrote: > > >> Does anyone have any recommendations for the best way to bring up a >> iSCSI Target on a C5.3+ server ? Various blogs suggest compiling IET >> from source, but thats not real appealing to me (not that I can't do >

[CentOS] Totem needs plug-ins

Just tried to play a movie/DVD and Totem (what automatically popped up when I inserted the DVD) said it needed plug-ins... it didn't say which plug-ins. The website listed in the help page no longer exists. I have four of the gstreamer packages and libdvdcss installed, but I guess there's someth

Re: [CentOS] iscsi target for C5.x

i use the atrpm iscsitarget for a long time now in high traffic setups. it performs very well, and is rock solid. no problems until now. go for it :) but disabling the atrpms repo after installing the iscsitarget wouldnt be a bad idea. i wont go with userspace solutions like tgt, my benchmarks

[CentOS] allowing users to issue the "shutdown" command

I am running CentOS 5.3 and have just the two accounts "root" and "buz". I would like to be able to issue "shutdown" from the account "buz", and thus created /etc/shutdown.allow with the single entry "buz" (without any quotes). I still get the error message "only root can do this" (or somethi

Re: [CentOS] iscsi target for C5.x

Juergen Gotteswinter wrote: > i use the atrpm iscsitarget for a long time now in high traffic setups. > it performs very well, and is rock solid. no problems until now. go for > it :) but disabling the atrpms repo after installing the iscsitarget > wouldnt be a bad idea. > > i wont go with users

Re: [CentOS] allowing users to issue the "shutdown" command

Buz Davis wrote: > I am running CentOS 5.3 and have just the two accounts "root" and > "buz". I would like to be able to issue "shutdown" from the account > "buz", and thus created > /etc/shutdown.allow with the single entry "buz" (without any quotes). > I still > get the error message "only

Re: [CentOS] [off-topic] Build packages in virtual machine

At Fri, 16 Oct 2009 22:57:23 +0100 CentOS mailing list wrote: > > Hi > > Sorry for the silly question, but is it safe to build packages, like > rpms, in virtual machines (virtualbox) and use this packages in real > machines? Some of these machines are CentOS and others ares Opensuse. > > I

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4 and BitTorrent

On Thu, 2009-10-15 at 16:01 -0700, nate wrote: > Could someone describe to me what the rush is? I mean what drives > the need that you need to have it _right now_ ? Me I always like > to wait at least a week or two to see if others run into issues, > and wait for the mirrors to become less clogged

Re: [CentOS] allowing users to issue the "shutdown" command

Buz Davis wrote: > I am running CentOS 5.3 and have just the two accounts "root" and > "buz". I would like to be able to issue "shutdown" from the account > "buz", and thus created > /etc/shutdown.allow with the single entry "buz" (without any quotes). > I still > get the error message "onl

Re: [CentOS] allowing users to issue the "shutdown" command

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Buz Davis wrote: > I am running CentOS 5.3 and have just the two accounts "root" and > "buz".  I would like to be able to issue "shutdown" from the account > "buz", and thus created > /etc/shutdown.allow with the single entry  "buz" (without any quotes). > I still

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.4 and BitTorrent

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Yves Bellefeuille wrote: > If I remember correctly, when version 5.3 was released, about 95% was > made available by BitTorrent before the official release date, so that > the entire file would be available as soon as possible after the > release. > > Could the sam

Re: [CentOS] iscsi target for C5.x

On Oct 16, 2009, at 8:24 PM, John R Pierce wrote: > Juergen Gotteswinter wrote: >> i use the atrpm iscsitarget for a long time now in high traffic >> setups. >> it performs very well, and is rock solid. no problems until now. go >> for >> it :) but disabling the atrpms repo after installing t

[CentOS] Calling all Hackers

Hey guys. I have a server that is owned by me and can confirm through servint that it is owned by me. I would like to do a penetration test and of course to allow you to upload files on the server and kind of trash it to the point where it is always restarting and running out of memory etc etc.