On Thu, 26 May 2011, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> So having SSD in laptop (if they are unreliable) is not much of an
> option, unless I am going to carry duplicate HDD/SSD just in case this
> one crashes.
I'd argue that's just one of the risks you run with a laptop. In a laptop
you've typically
John Hodrien wrote:
> On Thu, 26 May 2011, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>
>> So having SSD in laptop (if they are unreliable) is not much of an
>> option, unless I am going to carry duplicate HDD/SSD just in case this
>> one crashes.
>
> I'd argue that's just one of the risks you run with a laptop.
m.r...@5-cent.us writes:
> Folks,
>
>My manager's asked me about something that can run on our CentOS boxes
> that can connect to an (bleah!) Exchange server's calendar. It doesn't
> look like Lightening can, and from some googling, it appears that
> Evolution claims to, but It's got to be
> Thanks very much, but that's not going to work. My manager doesn't want to
> use "random repos", and really doesn't want to build something that a)
> would have to be rolled out to the whole division, and b) we'd have to be
> responsible for building updates.
>
> I guess it's on to something el
> Never mind, noscript was blocking the button from appearing.
>
> Now it won't install, since there doesn't appear to be an x86_64 version
http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/calendar/lightning/releases/1.0b1/contrib/linux-x86_64/
(Haven't checked if there's a 1.0b2)
_
jleafey writes:
> I've been using a Java-based tool named DAVmail (davmail.sourceforge.net) to
> access my Exchange calendar from Thunderbird with the Lightning plug-in. It
> can basically proxy Exchange calendars (and e-mail for that matter) to
> protocols that Thunderbird and Lightning can under
From: "aurfal...@gmail.com"
> In Windows and OSX its easy to get TRIM working, does any know of TRIM
> for linux?
You apparently need a 2.6.33+ kernel (I read somewhere RH backported what was
needed to their 2.6.32) and an fs like ext4 or brtfs.
Read some people giving advice to setup the ctr
> >
> >My manager's asked me about something that can run on our CentOS boxes
> > that can connect to an (bleah!) Exchange server's calendar. It doesn't
> > look like Lightening can, and from some googling, it appears that
> > Evolution claims to, but It's got to be able to set dates, etc
Lars Hecking wrote:
> Try the one from Remi Collet then. He's a contributor or even developer for
> Fedora.
You should first check that write just so you write something.
I have his full mirror and when I searched my mrepo folder there was
*no* thunderbird/firefox in it. And just now I just sc
On 05/27/2011 05:29 AM, John Doe wrote:
From: "aurfal...@gmail.com"
In Windows and OSX its easy to get TRIM working, does any know of TRIM
for linux?
You apparently need a 2.6.33+ kernel (I read somewhere RH backported what was
needed to their 2.6.32) and an fs like ext4 or brtfs.
Read some p
Ljubomir Ljubojevic writes:
> Lars Hecking wrote:
> > Try the one from Remi Collet then. He's a contributor or even developer for
> > Fedora.
>
> You should first check that write just so you write something.
I have been building tb 3.1 rpms from Remi's SRPMs. Works well. Only
requirement is
Lars Hecking wrote:
> Ljubomir Ljubojevic writes:
>> Lars Hecking wrote:
>>> Try the one from Remi Collet then. He's a contributor or even developer for
>>> Fedora.
>> You should first check that write just so you write something.
>
> I have been building tb 3.1 rpms from Remi's SRPMs. Works w
From: Steve Clark
>On 05/27/2011 05:29 AM, John Doe wrote:
>>Test =
>>https://sites.google.com/site/lightrush/random-1/checkiftrimonext4isenabledandworking
>> Tested on Fedora (15) and it worked.
> Hmmm How do you determine whether TRIM worked or not?
See the link.
JD
__
On 5/26/2011 8:04 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> John Hodrien wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 May 2011, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
>>
>>> Personally, I'm averse to using SSD with any important long term data
>>> is the nightmare that I could one day wake up to find everything gone
>>> without any means of re
On 05/27/2011 08:28 AM, John Doe wrote:
From: Steve Clark
On 05/27/2011 05:29 AM, John Doe wrote:
Test =
https://sites.google.com/site/lightrush/random-1/checkiftrimonext4isenabledandworking
Tested on Fedora (15) and it worked.
Hmmm How do you determine whether TRIM worked or not?
Thank
From: Steve Clark
> Unfortunately when I try it on SL 6.0 hdparm gets a segment
violation on the --read-sector command.
The fedora one is 9.36
And the one we used on CentOS 5.6 was 9.37 (compiled it).
Maybe try a more recent version...
JD
___
C
On 05/27/2011 10:04 AM, John Doe wrote:
From: Steve Clark
Unfortunately when I try it on SL 6.0 hdparm gets a segment
violation on the --read-sector command.
The fedora one is 9.36
And the one we used on CentOS 5.6 was 9.37 (compiled it).
Maybe try a more recent version...
Hmmm s
On 5/26/2011 4:21 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
>> 1) see if your boss has a problem with you having to remember to
>> update thunderbird from the i386 updates directory.
>> 2) see if you could (gently) convince the centos guys to put it
>> also in one of the centosplus or extras x86_64 p
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 5/26/2011 4:21 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>
>>> 1) see if your boss has a problem with you having to remember to
>>> update thunderbird from the i386 updates directory.
>>> 2) see if you could (gently) convince the centos guys to put it
>>> also in one of the cent
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On 5/26/2011 4:21 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
1) see if your boss has a problem with you having to remember to
update thunderbird from the i386 updates directory.
2) see if you could (gently) convince the centos guys to put it
>>
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> On 5/26/2011 4:21 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>> If you are using Centos as a desktop, you'll probably want to upgrade
>>> to 6.0 at the first opportunity which should get you up to T-bird 3.1.x
>>> with a matching th
On 5/27/2011 10:00 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
>> If you are using Centos as a desktop, you'll probably want to upgrade to
>> 6.0 at the first opportunity which should get you up to T-bird 3.1.x
>> with a matching thunderbird-ligntening in EPEL. Still need the exchange
>> connector, though.
>
>
Hi all,
When I am installing I use kickstart and have a line like:
repo --name=Updates
--baseurl=http://192.168.1.14/centos/5.6/updates/x86_64/
and that works great for installing the OS.
After that the machine reboots and I have it automatically go into
additional installations running scr
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 5/27/2011 10:00 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>
>>> If you are using Centos as a desktop, you'll probably want to upgrade
>>> to 6.0 at the first opportunity which should get you up to T-bird 3.1.x
>>> with a matching thunderbird-ligntening in EPEL. Still need the
>>> excha
On 5/27/2011 10:34 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
If you are using Centos as a desktop, you'll probably want to upgrade
to 6.0 at the first opportunity which should get you up to T-bird 3.1.x
with a matching thunderbird-ligntening in EPEL. Still need the
exchange connector, thou
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>> m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>> Les Mikesell wrote:
On 5/26/2011 4:21 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
If you are using Centos as a desktop, you'll probably want to upgrade
to 6.0 at the first opportunity which should get you up to T-
Les Mikesell wrote:
> Yes, I am missing some point. If you run X you can run anything from
> anywhere else in a window pretty much transparently. Why can't you add
> accounts for everyone on the RH 6.1 box (probably doing authentication
> against your windows domain since everyone with exchang
On 5/27/2011 11:26 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>> Yes, I am missing some point. If you run X you can run anything from
>> anywhere else in a window pretty much transparently. Why can't you add
>> accounts for everyone on the RH 6.1 box (probably doing authentication
>> against your windows do
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 5/27/2011 11:26 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>
>>> Yes, I am missing some point. If you run X you can run anything from
>>> anywhere else in a window pretty much transparently. Why can't you add
>
>> I think you are talking about remote desktop implementation, and he
>
On 5/27/2011 11:51 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
Yes, I am missing some point. If you run X you can run anything from
anywhere else in a window pretty much transparently. Why can't you add
>
>>
>>> I think you are talking about remote desktop implementation, and he
>>> about nVidia dri
On 5/26/2011 11:50 AM Steven Crothers spake the following:
>
>> more beneficial in the long run for the project. However, they are
>> currently worried about people "stealing" their work and starting
>> their own rebuilds of RHEL, which if that was going to happen it
>> would have already. The SL
I have been working off and on with Xen and KVM on a couple of test
hosts for that past year or so and while now everything seems to
function as expected, more or less, I find myself asking the
question: Why?
We run our own servers at our own sites for our own purposes. We do
not, with a few smal
On 05/27/2011 02:33 PM, James B. Byrne wrote:
> I have been working off and on with Xen and KVM on a couple of test
> hosts for that past year or so and while now everything seems to
> function as expected, more or less, I find myself asking the
> question: Why?
>
> We run our own servers at our ow
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 5/27/2011 11:51 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Yes, I am missing some point. If you run X you can run anything from
> anywhere else in a window pretty much transparently. Why can't you add
>>
I think you are talking about remote desktop implementation, and he
Server utilization and seperation. I need 10 web servers, none of which
are going to be busy, but each organization in my business wants their
"own".
10 vms on a 2 cpu box makes more sense that 1 web server on each of ten.
Add a second vm host for some redundancy, etc, etc.
On Fri, 27 May 2011,
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On 5/27/2011 11:51 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> Yes, I am missing some point. If you run X you can run anything
>> from anywhere else in a window pretty much transparently. Why can't
>> you add
>>>
> I think you are talking ab
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 2:33 PM, James B. Byrne wrote:
> I have been working off and on with Xen and KVM on a couple of test
> hosts for that past year or so and while now everything seems to
> function as expected, more or less, I find myself asking the
> question: Why?
>
> We run our own servers
On 5/27/2011 1:46 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
>>> Still a separate issue from running thunderbird or any other single app
>>> remotely. From your workstation, does 'ssh -Y rh_6_box thunderbird' do
>>> something reasonable? I suppose you would end up having to automount
>>> the users own home di
On May 27, 2011, at 2:33 PM, James B. Byrne wrote:
Why would a small company not in the public hosting business choose
to employ VM technology? What are the benefits over operating
several individual small form factor servers or blades instead?
Well, we do virtualization for an unusual reaso
On 5/27/2011 1:33 PM, James B. Byrne wrote:
> I have been working off and on with Xen and KVM on a couple of test
> hosts for that past year or so and while now everything seems to
> function as expected, more or less, I find myself asking the
> question: Why?
>
> We run our own servers at our own
Hello all.
Not sure how many people here also frequent the CentOS forums, so apologies for
the 'cross post'.
I know some here are using CentOS on HP's ProLiant Microserver, so if anyone's
tried eSATA on their box, please let me know. Perhaps best to reply over at
the forum -
https://www.cent
At Fri, 27 May 2011 14:33:23 -0400 (EDT) CentOS mailing list
wrote:
>
> I have been working off and on with Xen and KVM on a couple of test
> hosts for that past year or so and while now everything seems to
> function as expected, more or less, I find myself asking the
> question: Why?
>
> We
On Fri, 27 May 2011, Digimer wrote:
> Live migration between physical hosts. Also, ease of recovery in the
> event of a failure. Can move the VM to entirely new hardware when the
> old hardware is no longer powerful enough... etc.
And if you have licensed software that ties its network license ke
On May 27, 2011, at 4:08 PM, Steve Thompson wrote:
And if you have licensed software that ties its network license keys
to a
specific MAC address, you no longer have to tie the license server
to a
specific physical box.
And if you plan properly, you can keep the same MAC addresses on all
Steve Thompson wrote:
> On Fri, 27 May 2011, Digimer wrote:
>
>> Live migration between physical hosts. Also, ease of recovery in the
>> event of a failure. Can move the VM to entirely new hardware when the
>> old hardware is no longer powerful enough... etc.
>
> And if you have licensed software
But taking the other side of the argument, here are two scenarios where
I *wouldn't* use virtualization (one could certainly enumerate more):
1. A production DB server or server cluster.
2. I've had services where I needed to maximize uptime. One option
I tried were VMs and being able to move
On Fri, 27 May 2011, Devin Reade wrote:
> Thank god for test environments. And backups.
Backups? Que?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Fri, May 27, 2011 14:36, Jack Bailey wrote:
> There are lots of good reasons to virtualize.
>
> http://www.vmware.com/virtualization/why-virtualize.html
>
> Jack
>
As it turns out, that was one of the net resources I had in mind
when I described what I found as mostly puff and smoke. This is
--On Friday, May 27, 2011 05:35:32 PM -0400 Steve Thompson
wrote:
> On Fri, 27 May 2011, Devin Reade wrote:
>
>> Thank god for test environments. And backups.
>
> Backups? Que?
That was just an OT aside referring that while the optimist in me
hopes for an easy rolling upgrade from CentOS 5 to
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:54 PM, James B. Byrne wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 27, 2011 14:36, Jack Bailey wrote:
> > There are lots of good reasons to virtualize.
> >
> > http://www.vmware.com/virtualization/why-virtualize.html
> >
> > Jack
> >
>
> As it turns out, that was one of the net resources I ha
James B. Byrne wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2011 14:36, Jack Bailey wrote:
>> 1. Get more out of your existing resources: Pool common
>> infrastructure resources and break the legacy “one application
>> to one server” model with server consolidation.
>
> I have difficulty with this statement on so m
Other cool feature: KSM
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/KSM
http://www.linux-kvm.com/content/using-ksm-kernel-samepage-merging-kvm
Filipe
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On May 27, 2011, at 5:29 PM, Devin Reade wrote:
> But taking the other side of the argument, here are two scenarios where
> I *wouldn't* use virtualization (one could certainly enumerate more):
>
> 1. A production DB server or server cluster.
I actually have really good experience with MSSQL an
You'll have to edit your repos in the %post section of your ks. The
repos are provided by centos-release iirc.
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Jerry Geis wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> When I am installing I use kickstart and have a line like:
> repo --name=Updates
> --baseurl=http://192.168.1.14/cent
>> 2. Reduce data center costs by reducing your physical
>> infrastructure and improving your server to admin ratio:
>> Fewer servers and related IT hardware means reduced real
>> estate and reduced power and cooling requirements. Better
>> management tools let you improve your server to admin ra
Good evening, We are using Centos Linux Release 5.5 x86_32. We wondering where
the kernel syscall handler for mmap in Centos Linux 5.5 distribution is
located(for example /usr/xxx/)? Would any programmers or operating system
administrators have this information? Thank you.
56 matches
Mail list logo
