Ray Van Dolson writes:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 02:13:13PM -0400, Christopher Hearn wrote:
>> On Mar 29, 2011, at 1:18 PM, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 06:07:46PM +0100, n...@li.nux.ro wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I need to have several EL machines in an AD env.
>> >>
James A. Peltier writes:
> You may also need to look at having Service For UNIX installed on Windows
> 2003 machines. R2 and 2008 have it included but you need to enable it. This
> will add another tab to the user properties where you can assign fixed
> UID/GIDs
James,
Thanks, the AD is 200
On 03/29/2011 05:10 PM Stephen Harris wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 05:02:47PM -0400, ken wrote:
>> This was one feature I was interested in with the "answering machine" I
>> spoke of before: I'd want to be able to pick up an incoming call with a
>> bluetooth phone so I could walk around and not
On 03/29/2011 05:23 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>
>> What tames my enthusiasm about bluetooth though is its maximum range is
>> said to be 20'. Gimme a wifi phone.
>
> That was the point of the base station with wireless handsets. I've
> seen those with 3 or 4 handsets for well under $100.
On 03/29/2011 05:45 AM John Hodrien wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2011, ken wrote:
>
>> Like the error says, you need to specify the display. I.e., on the
>> remote machine you must set the environmental variable "DISPLAY"...
>> something like
>>
>> (export DISPLAY=192.168.1.42:0.0 & firefox)
>>
>> Tho
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, ken wrote:
> John,
>
> Whether or not it's "more work" is highly subjective. And it's not
> inherently insecure; people often *make* it insecure by lazily setting
> permissions to allow *any* server to have access. Even ssh can be
> insecure if it's not configured properly.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 7:39 AM, ken wrote:
> On 03/29/2011 05:45 AM John Hodrien wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Mar 2011, ken wrote:
>>
>>> Like the error says, you need to specify the display. I.e., on the
>>> remote machine you must set the environmental variable "DISPLAY"...
>>> something like
>>>
>>>
On 3/30/11 6:04 AM, ken wrote:
>
>
> On 03/29/2011 05:23 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
>>
>>
>>> What tames my enthusiasm about bluetooth though is its maximum range is
>>> said to be 20'. Gimme a wifi phone.
>>
>> That was the point of the base station with wireless handsets. I've
>> seen those wi
I'm amazed at the postings. Many of the solutions to questions posted
can be found on GOOGLE. Also UNIX, AIX, HP-UX, and Linux all come with
man pages.
o Before posting try reading the relevant man pages.
o Research your issue with a search engine
.
--
Gene Brandt
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 06:57:04AM -0400, ken wrote:
> What I'd hope to do is plug the analog output from the ATA into the
> input of my home's POTS (Plain Old Telephone System, i.e., the 1970s
> technology). That way all the cabling I have for extensions into nearly
> every room could still be us
On 03/30/2011 09:04 AM Stephen Harris wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 06:57:04AM -0400, ken wrote:
>> What I'd hope to do is plug the analog output from the ATA into the
>> input of my home's POTS (Plain Old Telephone System, i.e., the 1970s
>> technology). That way all the cabling I have for ext
On 03/30/2011 08:55 AM Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 3/30/11 6:04 AM, ken wrote:
>>
>> On 03/29/2011 05:23 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
>>>
>>>
What tames my enthusiasm about bluetooth though is its maximum range is
said to be 20'. Gimme a wifi phone.
>>> That was the point of the base station
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Gene Brandt wrote:
> I'm amazed at the postings. Many of the solutions to questions posted can
> be found on *GOOGLE.* Also UNIX, AIX, HP-UX, and Linux all come with man
> pages.
>
> o Before posting try reading the relevant man pages.
> o Research your issue wit
On 03/30/2011 08:58 AM, Gene Brandt wrote:
> I'm amazed at the postings. Many of the solutions to questions posted
> can be found on *GOOGLE.* Also UNIX, AIX, HP-UX, and Linux all come
> with man pages.
>
> o Before posting try reading the relevant man pages.
> o Research your issue with a search
On 3/30/11 8:15 AM, ken wrote:
> >>
>> This description does sound like it uses the cell's in/outbound connection:
>> http://www.frys.com/product/5916034
>>
>
> Again, I remember reading that bluetooth's range was 20 feet max.
> That's not much. It'd be cheaper and easier and better just to get a
On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 17:43 -0500, Jeff wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Alan M. Evans wrote:
> > Ugh.
> >
> > One of our internal servers crashed so bad I just went out and bought a
> > new machine to replace it.
> >
> > The old server was Pentium-4 based and running CentOS-5. When I
> >
Alan M. Evans wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 17:43 -0500, Jeff wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Alan M. Evans
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > The old server was Pentium-4 based and running CentOS-5. When I
>> > installed CentOS on the new machine, I used the 64-bit version, partly
>> > because that
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 13:27 -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Alan M. Evans wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 17:43 -0500, Jeff wrote:
> >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Alan M. Evans
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > The old server was Pentium-4 based and running CentOS-5. When I
> >> > installed CentOS
> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On
> Behalf Of Alan M. Evans
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 12:48
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] 32-bit compat-gcc on 64-bit CentOS?
>
> On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 17:43 -0500, Jeff
Alan M. Evans wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 13:27 -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> Alan M. Evans wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 17:43 -0500, Jeff wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Alan M. Evans
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > The old server was Pentium-4 based and running CentOS-5. W
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 14:33 -0400, Denniston, Todd A CIV
NAVSURFWARCENDIV Crane wrote:
> > I've tried the -m32 flag, along with "CC=gcc34" to actually cause it
> to
> > use the compat compiler instead of the new one. The build process
> > produces a lot of warnings that may or may not have been the
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 14:34 -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Alan M. Evans wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 13:27 -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> >> Alan M. Evans wrote:
> >> > On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 17:43 -0500, Jeff wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Alan M. Evans
> >> >> wrote:
> >
-snip
>
> Does anybody know how to set up KVM on a headless, unattended server to
> run a virtual machine automatically on boot? I've only ever used it on
> my desktop with pointy-clicky tools like virt-manager. Even still, I
> usually use VirtualBox for virtual machines on my desktop.
>
> -Alan
>
hey list!
I am attempting to shore up some centos machines (ranging from centos
5 to centos 5.4) for pci compliance by changing the port that
nlockdmgr listens on to function under a privileged port.
So what I did was try to hardcode the port by editing /etc/sysconfig/nfs
# TCP port rpc.lock
Hello guys,
I saw that a few days back there was a talk about encorporating the ksplice
toolchain into CentOS and creating rebootless upgrades to the CentOS kernel.
I'm really interested in helping for that.
Where/how we can start work ?
Best regards,
Marian Marinov
signature.asc
Description:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Marian Marinov wrote:
> Hello guys,
> I saw that a few days back there was a talk about encorporating the ksplice
> toolchain into CentOS and creating rebootless upgrades to the CentOS kernel.
>
> I'm really interested in helping for that.
>
> Where/how we can star
Hi all, sorry for the OT.
Is IBM and Dell 42U rack compatible in dimension, rails, etc?
Can we put IBM servers into Dell rack?
Google says it depends. Much appreciated if you can share your experience.
http://www.server-racks.com/why-all-racks-are-not-created-equal.html
Thank you.
___
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Fajar Priyanto said the following on 31/03/11 05:35:
> Hi all, sorry for the OT.
> Is IBM and Dell 42U rack compatible in dimension, rails, etc?
> Can we put IBM servers into Dell rack?
Should be, granted that the rails of IBM servers are extedable o
On 03/30/11 8:35 PM, Fajar Priyanto wrote:
> Is IBM and Dell 42U rack compatible in dimension, rails, etc?
> Can we put IBM servers into Dell rack?
racks can have 3 sizes of threaded holes (10-32,12-24, or M6. 12-24 is
most common nowdays in USA at least), or large square holes
('universal') th
29 matches
Mail list logo
