Ron Blizzard wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>> Do you have something other than an intel wifi chip?
>
> No, not any more. I had a Broadcom card, but an older laptop we gave
> away needed a WiFi card, so I invested $12 into an Intel card on eBay
> and installed th
Ron Blizzard wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 7:59 PM, Tom H wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't generalize based on your experience because Mint hasn't
>> become a very popular distribution by being broken. Same goes for
>> Ubuntu.
>
> I don't have to generalize, I go to the forums and see all the issues
>
On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 13:37 +0930, Mark Bradbury wrote:
> On 13 June 2011 23:53, James B. Byrne wrote:
>
> I just want to say that I really, really, appreciate the
> information
> given on this site:
>
> http://qaweb.dev.centos.org/qa/calendar
>
On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 09:19 -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Craig White wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 06:49 -0400, Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 09:22 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> >> > easier just to give up - I moved my new servers to ubuntu - no more
> >> new CentOS in
On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 11:06 -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Benjamin Franz wrote:
> > On 06/14/2011 06:19 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> >>
> >> Timeliness, dunno. Ubuntu (or fedora) for production? NOT IF I HAVE ANY
> >> CONTROL!!! Given how many developers write incredibly fragile code, that
> >>
On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 08:52 -0700, Jerry Franz wrote:
> On 06/14/2011 08:41 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, but some people appear to think (or at least that was what I got
> > from the post of the guy I was replying to) that fedora is good enough for
> > production.
>
> *blink*
>
> Abs
Craig White wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 13:37 +0930, Mark Bradbury wrote:
>> On 13 June 2011 23:53, James B. Byrne wrote:
>>
>> I just want to say that I really, really, appreciate the
>> information
>> given on this site:
>>
>> http://qaweb.dev
On Jun 15, 2011, at 4:50 AM, Craig White wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 08:52 -0700, Jerry Franz wrote:
>
> Like RHEL/CentOS, Ubuntu LTS is absolutely appropriate for server use.
> In fact, it's sort of refreshing to set up a new server that isn't
> overloaded with bloat from the very start.
Les Mikesell wrote on Tue, 14 Jun 2011 12:13:08 -0500:
> Are the updates supposed to be synced to the mirrors before the announce
> message goes out?
Of course, and you know that. Announce goes out when most mirrors *should*
have it, not earlier. But some may still not have it.
Kai
_
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 2:09 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> Since Pentium Pro, only old 400 MHz-bus versions of the Pentium M lack
> PAE support.
This laptop is a Latitude D400, which I think were made in 2005. It
definitely doesn't have PAE support. I discovered that when I tried to
test Red
Craig White wrote:
> I actually use Fedora for my Desktop. It dual boots to Ubuntu but I
> don't often use it. The only reason that I ever saw people using Fedora
> for production was because the RHEL/CentOS software packages were so
> completely out-of-date.
>
Time from CentOS 5.0 to 6.0 was mark
Ron Blizzard wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 2:09 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>
>> Since Pentium Pro, only old 400 MHz-bus versions of the Pentium M lack
>> PAE support.
>
> This laptop is a Latitude D400, which I think were made in 2005. It
> definitely doesn't have PAE support. I discovere
> On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 08:52 -0700, Jerry Franz wrote:
>> On 06/14/2011 08:41 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> >
>> > Yeah, but some people appear to think (or at least that was what I got
>> > from the post of the guy I was replying to) that fedora is good enough
>> for
>> > production.
>>
>> *blin
Les Mikesell wrote:
> Most of the stuff that you have to use 3rd party repos to get
> on CentOS is in the stock ubuntu repositories in usably recent versions.
I've found 99% of the things I need on a CentOS
(which I only use on home servers)
is in the epel repository if it is not in the CentOS re
Timothy Murphy wrote:
>
> Am I alone in regarding epel as more or less a part of CentOS?
> Does it have a rival in this role?
you may not be alone, but you're still wrong: epel is not part of centos
at all.
It's just another third party repo.
There are others including some reputable and widely u
centos-boun...@centos.org wrote:
> On 06/14/11 5:04 PM, Fajar Priyanto wrote:
>> What is the worst thing can happen from excessive static?
ESD (Electro-static Discharge) is the "Radioactive Crystal Meth" of
computers. How much you can take before you exhibit measurable
capability loss is a detail
On 14/06/2011 22:52, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>>
> What 24th are you talking about?
>
Karanbir Singh's Twitter posts had an entry dated 10th June which mentioned the
postponement. However, I see it's been pulled now.
gvim
___
CentOS mailing list
Cen
On 06/15/2011 02:37 PM, gvim wrote:
> Karanbir Singh's Twitter posts had an entry dated 10th June which mentioned
> the postponement. However, I see it's been pulled now.
erm, I havent deleted anything. Are you confusing accounts somewhere ?
- KB
___
C
On 06/13/2011 05:56 PM, NOYK wrote:
> No. Given the economy people are trying to make systems last as long as
> possible and this is just 6.0 not 6.1. Smart folks will test 6.0 to see how
> apps perform/behave and then wait till 6.1. Never go to a major revision.0
> unless you are forced.
>
hopefu
On 06/14/2011 06:13 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Are the updates supposed to be synced to the mirrors before the announce
> message goes out? Only a random few machines could get these updates
> yesterday.
http://www.karan.org/blog/index.php/2010/01/04/ has the process. There
is a mirror check cycl
On 15/06/2011 14:53, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> erm, I havent deleted anything. Are you confusing accounts somewhere
Sorry, it was not your Twitter account but one belonging to "cybernautape"
http://twitter.com/#!/CentOS6/status/79206786703433728
gvim
On 06/15/2011 02:59 PM, gvim wrote:
> On 15/06/2011 14:53, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>
>> erm, I havent deleted anything. Are you confusing accounts somewhere
>
> Sorry, it was not your Twitter account but one belonging to "cybernautape"
>
> http://twitter.com/#!/CentOS6/status/79206786703433728
I don
On 15/06/2011 14:53, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>
> erm, I havent deleted anything. Are you confusing accounts somewhere ?
>
This was the original entry I saw:
http://twitter.com/#!/CentOS6/
gvim
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos
On Wednesday, June 15, 2011 09:12:44 AM Brunner, Brian T. wrote:
> Damage to circuitry is not all "instant-or-never"; damaged junctions can
> take their own time (sometimes zero) to degenerate from
> damaged-but-perfectly-functional to occasional errors to persistent
> failure.
The bullet-wound an
Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 15, 2011 09:12:44 AM Brunner, Brian T. wrote:
>> Damage to circuitry is not all "instant-or-never"; damaged junctions can
>> take their own time (sometimes zero) to degenerate from
>> damaged-but-perfectly-functional to occasional errors to persistent
>> failu
Kevin wrote:
>I'm just trying to get Dell openmanage to run on my Centos 5.6
> box. The monitoring
[ Snipped ]
>
> Can anyone point me at a suitable rpm, or do I have to resort to
> compiling it? Surely I'm not
> the only one trying to do this.
>
> --
> Kevin Thorpe
This is my fault. I
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:13 PM, wrote:
> Lamar Owen wrote:
>> On Wednesday, June 15, 2011 09:12:44 AM Brunner, Brian T. wrote:
>>> Damage to circuitry is not all "instant-or-never"; damaged junctions can
>>> take their own time (sometimes zero) to degenerate from
>>> damaged-but-perfectly-functi
gvim wrote:
> On 15/06/2011 14:53, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>> erm, I havent deleted anything. Are you confusing accounts somewhere ?
>>
>
> This was the original entry I saw:
>
> http://twitter.com/#!/CentOS6/
>
> gvim
I assume that that person made an typo. There was announcement that it
will b
Dear All,
I am using Centos 4.7, i have an issue when i run yum update, the URL
times-out even when i browse it on firefox
#yum update php
Setting up Update Process
Setting up repositories
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/4/updates/i386/repodata/repomd.xml: [Errno
12] Timeout:
Trying othe
On 6/15/2011 6:54 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
> Timothy Murphy wrote:
>>
>> Am I alone in regarding epel as more or less a part of CentOS?
>> Does it have a rival in this role?
>
> you may not be alone, but you're still wrong: epel is not part of centos
> at all.
> It's just another third party
On Wednesday, June 15, 2011 10:13:20 AM m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Ever heard the old, old m'frame (I think) story, of the guy who needed to
> do a backup, and the tape failed, and they had to go to an older one.
Yeah, I've read that one, and it is a nice lesson.
For more of the same (rather than
Kevin Thorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:13 PM, wrote:
>> Lamar Owen wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, June 15, 2011 09:12:44 AM Brunner, Brian T. wrote:
Damage to circuitry is not all "instant-or-never"; damaged junctions
can take their own time (sometimes zero) to degenerate from
d
From: Torintino T
> I am using Centos 4.7, i have an issue when i run yum update, the URL
> times-out even when i browse it on firefox
> ...
> http://mirror.centos.org/centos/4/updates/i386/repodata/repomd.xml: [Errno
Works fine here...Maybe try the url with wget and, if they timeout, look at the
On 6/15/2011 8:59 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> On 06/14/2011 06:13 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Are the updates supposed to be synced to the mirrors before the announce
>> message goes out? Only a random few machines could get these updates
>> yesterday.
>
>
> http://www.karan.org/blog/index.php/2010
> Oh, that's ok: a friend of mine (who posts here occasionally) got to blow
> up at someone(s) in his wife's office, where he comes in as a consultant:
> someone had plugged a kettle? microwave? (I forget) into the orange box
> that was labelled "computer equipment only" (Hope you don't mind me
> t
On Thursday, June 16, 2011 12:46 AM, Kevin Thorpe wrote:
>> Oh, that's ok: a friend of mine (who posts here occasionally) got to blow
>> up at someone(s) in his wife's office, where he comes in as a consultant:
>> someone had plugged a kettle? microwave? (I forget) into the orange box
>> that was l
Torintino T wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I am using Centos 4.7, i have an issue when i run yum update, the URL
> times-out even when i browse it on firefox
>
> #yum update php
> Setting up Update Process
> Setting up repositories
> http://mirror.centos.org/centos/4/updates/i386/repodata/repomd.xm
On 6/14/2011 7:04 PM, Fajar Priyanto wrote:
> Thanks all for the reply.
> What is the worst thing can happen from excessive static?
> We have two corrupted UEFI when we reboot servers which now I suspect
> because of static.
> Yesterday I actually saw a spark when I put a memory module on
> motherb
Dan Carl wrote:
> On 6/14/2011 7:04 PM, Fajar Priyanto wrote:
>> Thanks all for the reply.
>> What is the worst thing can happen from excessive static?
>> We have two corrupted UEFI when we reboot servers which now I suspect
>> because of static.
>> Yesterday I actually saw a spark when I put a mem
centos-boun...@centos.org wrote:
> I have an antistatic mat on the floor in front of my server
> rack similar to this.
> http://www.uline.com/BL_1755/Anti-Static-Mats
> Simple, does the job, and it also feels good on the feets!
>
> If you spend a lot of time in your server room, you might
> also
On Jun 15, 2011, at 3:16 AM, Simon Matter wrote:
>> On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 08:52 -0700, Jerry Franz wrote:
>>> On 06/14/2011 08:41 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Yeah, but some people appear to think (or at least that was what I got
from the post of the guy I was replying to) that fed
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Ron Blizzard wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 7:59 PM, Tom H wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't generalize based on your experience because Mint hasn't
>> become a very popular distribution by being broken. Same goes for
>> Ubuntu.
>
> I don't have to generalize, I go to the
Dan Carl wrote:
> If you spend a lot of time in your server room, you might also consider
> a fish tank.
> It will add moisture to your room and give you something to look at
> other than flashing leds:-)
Actually, scientist say that 5 minutes of looking at the fish tank can
greatly reduce str
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 5:09 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> ElRepo has kernel modules already compiled:
> http://elrepo.org/tiki/kmod-nvidia so I guess it should be OK. Playing
> around with recompiling nVidia drivers was a real pain in a
Bookmarked. Thanks.
--
RonB -- Using CentOS 5.6
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 4:50 AM, Craig White wrote:
>
> Like RHEL/CentOS, Ubuntu LTS is absolutely appropriate for server use.
> In fact, it's sort of refreshing to set up a new server that isn't
> overloaded with bloat from the very start. Setting up a new VMWare image
> w/ Ubuntu Server takes at
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 5:58 AM, Ron Blizzard wrote:
>
> Mint/Ubuntu don't have an easy way to boot into the command line.
To boot into "everything but X", you can append "text" to the kernel
(grub1) or linux (grub2) line in the grub configuration.
___
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Tom H wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 5:58 AM, Ron Blizzard wrote:
>>
>> Mint/Ubuntu don't have an easy way to boot into the command line.
>
> To boot into "everything but X", you can append "text" to the kernel
> (grub1) or linux (grub2) line in the grub configu
On 06/13/2011 10:12 AM, Paul Heinlein wrote:
> Never wait until revision.1 unless there's a good reason. :-)
http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rhel-server-6-errata.html
There are a number of "Important" reasons not to deploy 6.0 for
public-facing systems.
_
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 09:20:44PM +0200, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>
> Actually, scientist say that 5 minutes of looking at the fish tank can
> greatly reduce stress.
Sad that the same thing can't be said for off-topic threads like this in
a topical mailing list.
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 06/13/2011 10:12 AM, Paul Heinlein wrote:
>> Never wait until revision.1 unless there's a good reason. :-)
>
> http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rhel-server-6-errata.html
>
> There are a number of "Important" reasons not to deploy 6.0 for
> public-facing
Personally, I find that indenting config files by 3 spaces has a lot of
advantages to indenting them by 4 spaces although conventional wisdom
might suggest otherwise. Who's with me on this?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:41:44PM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> Personally, I find that indenting config files by 3 spaces has a lot of
> advantages to indenting them by 4 spaces although conventional wisdom
> might suggest otherwise. Who's with me on this?
I'm fully capable of driving to Can
Ron Blizzard wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Tom H wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 5:58 AM, Ron Blizzard
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Mint/Ubuntu don't have an easy way to boot into the command line.
>>
>> To boot into "everything but X", you can append "text" to the kernel
>> (grub1) or linux (
Mike A. Harris wrote:
> Personally, I find that indenting config files by 3 spaces has a lot of
> advantages to indenting them by 4 spaces although conventional wisdom
> might suggest otherwise. Who's with me on this?
Indentation wars. I don't *think* there was a usenet newsgroup for that
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Mike A. Harris wrote:
>> Personally, I find that indenting config files by 3 spaces has a lot of
>> advantages to indenting them by 4 spaces although conventional wisdom
>> might suggest otherwise. Who's with me on this?
>
> Indentation wars. I don't
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:41:44PM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> Personally, I find that indenting config files by 3 spaces has a lot of
> advantages to indenting them by 4 spaces although conventional wisdom
> might suggest otherwise. Who's with me on this?
I prefer two or four, usually two. Th
Cody Jackson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:41:44PM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
>> Personally, I find that indenting config files by 3 spaces has a lot of
>> advantages to indenting them by 4 spaces although conventional wisdom
>> might suggest otherwise. Who's with me on this?
>
> I prefer
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Five, it goes BOOM, and, being bad in Thy Sight, will buy it.
>
>mark
Hey, look! It's the old admin from scene 24...
--
Paul Heinlein <> heinl...@madboa.com <> http://www.madboa.com/
___
CentOS ma
On 6/15/2011 3:41 PM, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> Personally, I find that indenting config files by 3 spaces has a lot of
> advantages to indenting them by 4 spaces although conventional wisdom
> might suggest otherwise. Who's with me on this?
White space should be meaningless, but unnecessary change
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 02:23:29PM -0700, Cody Jackson wrote:
>
> I prefer two or four, usually two. Three is extremely disturbing to me
> because it is not a multiple of two
I am constantly frustrated by being limited to a whole number of spaces.
What if I want pi spaces? Or e*i?
--keith
--
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011, Keith Keller wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 02:23:29PM -0700, Cody Jackson wrote:
>>
>> I prefer two or four, usually two. Three is extremely disturbing to me
>> because it is not a multiple of two
>
> I am constantly frustrated by being limited to a whole number of spaces.
On Jun 15, 2011, at 12:33 PM, Tom H wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 4:50 AM, Craig White wrote:
>>
>> Like RHEL/CentOS, Ubuntu LTS is absolutely appropriate for server use.
>> In fact, it's sort of refreshing to set up a new server that isn't
>> overloaded with bloat from the very start. Setti
On Jun 15, 2011, at 1:47 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Ron Blizzard wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Tom H wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 5:58 AM, Ron Blizzard
>>> wrote:
Mint/Ubuntu don't have an easy way to boot into the command line.
>>>
>>> To boot into "everything
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:47 PM, wrote:
> Ron Blizzard wrote:
>> Okay, thanks. Good to know. I forget what "kludging" process I had to
>> go through to get Mint to boot into text, I think I disabled the X
>> server somehow. But even when I got to text mode, the Nouveau driver
>> had loaded, wh
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 03:04:59PM -0700, Craig White wrote:
>
> I am generally interested in a basic install. On this Macintosh,
> VMWare Fusion, installing 64 bit Ubuntu-server-amd64 it's about 10
> minutes. Installing 64 bit CentOS 5.6 x86_64 took about an hour. I
> didn't time anything but I re
On 06/10/2011 08:17 PM, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
> The irony of it was that I decided to go with qcow2 because I thought
> that would save overheads from an additional LVM layer but provided
> snapshot capabilities too :(
I read somewhere recently that people were complaining abut LVM overhead
a
On 06/15/2011 01:39 PM, Paul Heinlein wrote:
> I'm not trying to serve as apologist for RHEL 6. I'm just saying that
> there's little room in my world for an abolutist position like "never
> use a .0 release -- ever."
I wouldn't favor such a sentiment either, but as it stands, CentOS 6
will be de
On 6/15/2011 5:26 PM, John R. Dennison wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 03:04:59PM -0700, Craig White wrote:
>>
>> I am generally interested in a basic install. On this Macintosh,
>> VMWare Fusion, installing 64 bit Ubuntu-server-amd64 it's about 10
>> minutes. Installing 64 bit CentOS 5.6 x86_64 t
On 06/15/2011 03:08 PM, Craig White wrote:
> those days will be over soon as even fedora has now switched to upstart
Upstart would still honor the setting in /etc/inittab.
Fedora, however, is now using systemd. It's an even more different
beast than you are familiar with:
http://0pointer.de/blo
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 05:46:20PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> I've seen vmware disk emulation -> LVM -> partitions run very, very
> slowly. Didn't diagnose it beyond thinking "if it hurts, don't do it",
> though. And I don't remember if it was a sparse disk or not, but it
> probably was.
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 06/15/2011 01:39 PM, Paul Heinlein wrote:
>> I'm not trying to serve as apologist for RHEL 6. I'm just saying that
>> there's little room in my world for an abolutist position like "never
>> use a .0 release -- ever."
>
> I wouldn't favor such a sent
On 06/13/2011 11:02 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> We just went to replace the bridge/firewall services one one server with
> the same on another. It's pretty simple, and I literally cloned (w/ rsync)
> a third server that does this onto the one that will be the new one. Then
> copied the /etc/sysco
On 06/15/2011 03:57 PM, Paul Heinlein wrote:
> Maybe Red Hat will continue to obfuscate its infrastructure and
> increase the burden on teams like CentOS who try to rebuild the
> distribution from SRPMs
Nothing that Red Hat did has increased the burden on CentOS.
__
On 06/15/2011 03:46 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> I've seen vmware disk emulation -> LVM -> partitions run very, very
> slowly. Didn't diagnose it beyond thinking "if it hurts, don't do it",
> though. And I don't remember if it was a sparse disk or not, but it
> probably was. Could have been an is
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 5:26 PM, John R. Dennison wrote:
> I do not in any way believe your claims of an hour-long install process,
> even if done manually by walking through anaconda screen by screen.
I've had a couple network installs take a long time (Desktop installs
not Servers) but that wa
On 6/15/2011 5:56 PM, John R. Dennison wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 05:46:20PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>
>> I've seen vmware disk emulation -> LVM -> partitions run very, very
>> slowly. Didn't diagnose it beyond thinking "if it hurts, don't do it",
>> though. And I don't remember if it
On 06/13/2011 02:00 PM, Jeff Boyce wrote:
> I am a novice system administrator and will soon be purchasing a new server
> to replacing an aging file server for my company. I am considering setting
> up the new server as a KVM host with two guests; one guest as the Samba file
> server and a second
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 06:15:26PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> Agreed, but testing something on vmware is a likely first step toward
> production and bad performance on the first look can warp your opinions.
And blaming the OS being installed or the installer itself in such
circumstances is l
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 06:10:15PM -0500, Ron Blizzard wrote:
>
> I've had a couple network installs take a long time (Desktop installs
> not Servers) but that was because the mirror I chose at random was
> really slow.
That's possible, yes; but not germane here as the post stated that he
was usi
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:08:11PM -0700, Gordon Messmer wrote:
>
> Any disk layout that doesn't align filesystem blocks with actual disk
> blocks is going to perform very badly.
I will agree this is possible in real-world environments, yes. I also
will say that this is an issue of the admin not
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> Nothing that Red Hat did has increased the burden on CentOS.
so says the person who has not done it
- the rpm tool changed, adding a non-backward compatible
compression scheme. as I blogged about months ago; this has
'flow through' effects as to boo
On 06/15/2011 10:41 PM, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> Personally, I find that indenting config files by 3 spaces has a lot of
> advantages to indenting them by 4 spaces although conventional wisdom
> might suggest otherwise. Who's with me on this?
Three is evil, four even more. Two spaces and what do t
John R. Dennison wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 09:20:44PM +0200, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>> Actually, scientist say that 5 minutes of looking at the fish tank can
>> greatly reduce stress.
>
> Sad that the same thing can't be said for off-topic threads like this in
> a topical mailing list.
Gordon Messmer wrote:
> That's probably true. image file backed guests are a whole lot slower
> than guests that run on partitions or logical volumes. Logical volumes
> are the easiest option to manage, with good performance characteristics.
>
> Hopefully that made sense. Ask questions if no
Paul Heinlein wrote:
> In *this* case, since Red Hat has already released 6.1, it may even be
> prudent to wait for the CentOS 6.1 release before public deployment.
My guess is devs will first work on critical updates and release them
before the 6.1 official release. That way 6.0 will still be u
On 6/15/11 7:08 PM, John R. Dennison wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 06:15:26PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>
>> Agreed, but testing something on vmware is a likely first step toward
>> production and bad performance on the first look can warp your opinions.
>
> And blaming the OS being installed
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 08:44:38PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> I'm not sure I'd go that far when using a different installer (or
> avoiding LVM) in the same environment gives vastly better results.
> Even if some quirk of the low level environment really turns
> out to be responsible its not nec
On 6/16/11, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> I read somewhere recently that people were complaining abut LVM overhead
> and poor performance, but I've never seen any evidence of it. Was there
> something that made you think that LVM had significant overhead?
Looking at some very sparse notes I made on t
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 2:19 AM, Dan Carl wrote:
> If you spend a lot of time in your server room, you might also consider
> a fish tank.
> It will add moisture to your room and give you something to look at
> other than flashing leds:-)
Is this a joke or a real thing? I'm really considering the
Fajar Priyanto wrote:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 2:19 AM, Dan Carl wrote:
If you spend a lot of time in your server room, you might also consider
a fish tank.
It will add moisture to your room and give you something to look at
other than flashing leds:-)
Is this a joke or a real thing? I
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:07 PM, Fajar Priyanto wrote:
>
> Btw, I've checked. My room humidity is 23%. That should be ok,
> shouldn't it? But still I saw the spark.
Very early in this thread Benjamin Franz posted this:
"Low humidity would be my first guess. The relative humidity in your
server
- Original Message -
| James A. Peltier wrote:
| > Hi All,
| >
| > I've written a custom udev rule to change the permissions of
| > /dev/ttyS* but it doesn't seem to be working at boot up. If I run
| >
| > /sbin/udevcontrol reload_rules; udevtrigger
| >
| > The rules are parsed, applied a
On 6/14/11, James A. Peltier wrote:
> The rules are parsed, applied and the permissions are then correct but why
> is it not doing so at boot? The file in questions I've called
> /etc/udev/rules.d/49-udev-override.rules and it contains
>
> KERNEL=="tty[A-Z]*",NAME="%k", GROUP="rcl", M
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Mike Williams wrote:
> "Low humidity would be my first guess. The relative humidity in your
> server room should be between 50% +/- 10%. Too high and you can get
> condensation. Too low and you get electrostatic discharges."
Oh! I thought it's 10% to 50%.
So it's
On 06/15/11 9:44 PM, Fajar Priyanto wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Mike Williams
> wrote:
>> "Low humidity would be my first guess. The relative humidity in your
>> server room should be between 50% +/- 10%. Too high and you can get
>> condensation. Too low and you get electrostatic d
- Original Message -
| On 6/14/11, James A. Peltier wrote:
| > The rules are parsed, applied and the permissions are then correct
| > but why
| > is it not doing so at boot? The file in questions I've called
| > /etc/udev/rules.d/49-udev-override.rules and it contains
| >
| > KERNEL=="tty[
- Original Message -
| - Original Message -
| | On 6/14/11, James A. Peltier wrote:
| | > The rules are parsed, applied and the permissions are then correct
| | > but why
| | > is it not doing so at boot? The file in questions I've called
| | > /etc/udev/rules.d/49-udev-override.ru
On 06/15/2011 05:52 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> Drawback is that such KVM guest is not as easy to move to another host
> if current host can not boot. Copying image and config files will be
> much faster.
There is no reason that should be true. Copying 20GB out of an LV
should take exactly
98 matches
Mail list logo
