On 23 August 2011 07:47, Anne Wilson wrote:
> On 22 August 2011 19:45, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
>>
>>> Anne
>>
>> alternatives --config mta
>>
>> Switch to Postfix. Validate by
>>
>> alternatives --display mta
>>
>> then remove Sendmail if you do not use it.
>>
>
> Thanks - that's what I was looki
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 9:29 PM, Anne Wilson wrote:
> Aug 22 14:02:11 borg postfix/qmgr[1499]: B4693A377C: from=,
> size=7487, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
> Aug 22 14:02:12 borg postfix/smtp[2071]: B4693A377C: to=,
> relay=mailhost.zen.co.uk[212.23.3.98]:25, delay=0.43,
>
> mydestination = $myhostname,
On 23 August 2011 09:11, Fajar Priyanto wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 9:29 PM, Anne Wilson
> wrote:
>> Aug 22 14:02:11 borg postfix/qmgr[1499]: B4693A377C:
>> from=,
>> size=7487, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
>> Aug 22 14:02:12 borg postfix/smtp[2071]: B4693A377C: to=,
>> relay=mailhost.zen.co.uk[
On 22 August 2011 20:50, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
> One of the first things I do after the installation of a system is a yum
> install postfix followed by a yum remove sendmail. No need to deal with
> alternatives if you don't intend to deal with sendmail anyway.
>
I removed sendmail - but it
Hi!
Just in case somebody else needs this. Below is a patch which
allows building qemu-kvm-0.15 unter CentOS 5.6 with vanilla
kernel 2.6.35.14 and (optionally) vde2 [1].
FYI: qemu-kvm-0.15 compiles fine on CentOS 6 with distro-kernel,
no patches needed.
For CentOS 5.6, unpack 0.15 qemu-kvm
In article ,
Anne Wilson wrote:
> On 22 August 2011 20:50, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
> > One of the first things I do after the installation of a system is a yum
> > install postfix followed by a yum remove sendmail. No need to deal with
> > alternatives if you don't intend to deal with sendma
On 23/08/2011 11:46, Tony Mountifield wrote:
> In article
> ,
> Anne Wilson wrote:
>> On 22 August 2011 20:50, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
>>> One of the first things I do after the installation of a system is a yum
>>> install postfix followed by a yum remove sendmail. No need to deal with
>>>
On 23 August 2011 10:46, Tony Mountifield wrote:
> In article
> ,
> Anne Wilson wrote:
>> On 22 August 2011 20:50, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
>> > One of the first things I do after the installation of a system is a yum
>> > install postfix followed by a yum remove sendmail. No need to deal w
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 11:59:08AM +0200, Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:
> On 23/08/2011 11:46, Tony Mountifield wrote:
> > Anne Wilson wrote:
> >> I removed sendmail - but it also removed clamav-milter. When I tried
> >> to re-install clamav-milter it would have pulled sendmail back in so I
> >>
Hello
Is anyone else having problems on 5.6 using the new rsync from the CR repo
I have only managed to get rsync (called from the cli) working again
after downgrading it to the previous 2.x release as the newer version
was just spitting out the ssh usage information and failing.
This server is st
On 8/23/11 3:51 AM, Anne Wilson wrote:
> >>
>> mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain, $mydomain, xxx.lan, xxx.org
>
> This morning I restored the old main.cf, which uses the old network
> settings of xxx.net. Now mail is being received, but sending mail is
> being refused by my server.
I migrated our internal wiki server last week, and some IE users
aren't able to authenticate.
The service is hosted by Apache using Digest authentication. It
migrated from Apache 2.2.9 (Debian 5) to Apache 2.2.15 (CentOS 6). The
internal hostname for the wiki server is a DNS CNAME that was
rep
On Tuesday 23 Aug 2011 Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 8/23/11 3:51 AM, Anne Wilson wrote:
> >> mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain, $mydomain, xxx.lan,
> >> xxx.org
> >
> > This morning I restored the old main.cf, which uses the old network
> > settings of xxx.net. Now mail is being receiv
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Paul Heinlein wrote:
> To: CentOS
> From: Paul Heinlein
> Subject: [CentOS] IE 9 not sending digest auth info
>
> I migrated our internal wiki server last week, and some IE users
> aren't able to authenticate.
If it's only *some* IE users, you could try checking the
inter
From time to time I'm seeing this message:
I couldn't find the numerical IDs of these users:
abrt
nslcd
pulse
rtkit
saslauth
tcpdump
usbmuxd
In most cases this is caused by inconsistencies in the user or group database,
e.g. between the files /etc/passwd, /etc/group and their respective shadow
Anne Wilson wrote:
On 23 August 2011 10:46, Tony Mountifield wrote:
In article ,
Anne Wilson wrote:
On 22 August 2011 20:50, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
One of the first things I do after the installation of a system is a yum
install postfix followed by a yum remove sendmail
On 8/23/2011 4:46 AM, Tony Mountifield wrote:
>
>> I removed sendmail - but it also removed clamav-milter. When I tried
>> to re-install clamav-milter it would have pulled sendmail back in so I
>> aborted. Advice?
>
> milters are specific to sendmail. clamav-milter is a linkage between
> ClamAV a
> In article
> ,
> Anne Wilson wrote:
>> I removed sendmail - but it also removed clamav-milter. When I tried
>> to re-install clamav-milter it would have pulled sendmail back in so I
>> aborted. Advice?
>
> milters are specific to sendmail. clamav-milter is a linkage between
> ClamAV and sendm
On Aug 23, 2011, at 9:41 AM, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
>> In article
>> ,
>> Anne Wilson wrote:
>
>>> I removed sendmail - but it also removed clamav-milter. When I tried
>>> to re-install clamav-milter it would have pulled sendmail back in so I
>>> aborted. Advice?
>>
>> milters are specific
We have DELL R900 with CENTOS 5.5 installed. Recently I found
/var/log/messages have following error come out. I used DELL OPMN check
hardware but NO error.
kernel: ctxhx[17268]: segfault at 7fff1fa6afd8 rip 2b8022887c96 rsp
7fff1fa6afe0 error 6
anyone know what wrong?
Thanks.
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 2:08 PM, mcclnx mcc wrote:
> We have DELL R900 with CENTOS 5.5 installed. Recently I found
> /var/log/messages have following error come out. I used DELL OPMN check
> hardware but NO error.
>
> kernel: ctxhx[17268]: segfault at 7fff1fa6afd8 rip 2b8022887c96 rsp
On 23/08/11 12:35, Michael Simpson wrote:
> Hello
>
> Is anyone else having problems on 5.6 using the new rsync from the CR repo
> I have only managed to get rsync (called from the cli) working again
> after downgrading it to the previous 2.x release as the newer version
> was just spitting out the
Did you check if the GET headers don't already contain the credentials?
If that page is identified as local intranet IE will send Windows logon
credentials with default security zone settings.
Kai
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Matti Aarnio
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Could CentOS kernel keepers apply following patch on current kernel?
>>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/95785/
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Ned Slider wrote:
> On 23/08/11 12:35, Michael Simpson wrote:
>> Hello
>>
>> Is anyone else having problems on 5.6 using the new rsync from the CR repo
>> I have only managed to get rsync (called from the cli) working again
>> after downgrading it to the previous 2.x release a
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> Did you check if the GET headers don't already contain the
> credentials? If that page is identified as local intranet IE will
> send Windows logon credentials with default security zone settings.
I captured the session using "tcpdump -A ..." There's n
I would like to upgrade my system to a 64 bit machine. I'd like to find a
bare bones platform to build on. I'm not looking to spend a lot of money on
this as it is a home system. I looked on the CentOS sponsor page but only
saw hosting services.
I haven't kept up with hardware in years so I'm dumb
> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Dukes
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 8:18 PM
> To: centos@centos.org
> Subject: [CentOS] OT: Hardware upgrade help
>
> I would like to upgrade my system to a 64 bit machine
On 08/23/11 5:17 PM, Thomas Dukes wrote:
> I would like to upgrade my system to a 64 bit machine. I'd like to find a
> bare bones platform to build on. I'm not looking to spend a lot of money on
> this as it is a home system. I looked on the CentOS sponsor page but only
> saw hosting services.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of John R Pierce
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 8:26 PM
> To: centos@centos.org
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] OT: Hardware upgrade help
>
> On 08/23/11 5:17 PM, Thomas Dukes wrote:
> > I w
I suggest:
mini-tower / half-tower
AMD 4 core processor with virtualization facility
(AMD are cheaper than Intel in Europe)
(if buying Intel get the virtualization facility)
8 GB RAM
motherboard
with PCI Express and 1
On Tue, 2011-08-23 at 20:40 -0400, Thomas Dukes wrote:
> What determines if it's a 64 bit machine? Dual core?
Dual core = 2 CPUs effectively.
Quad core = 4 CPUs on the same piece of Silicon
64 bit = more advance instruction set which replaces all the older 32
bit instruction set CPUs. 64 bit i
On 08/23/11 5:40 PM, Thomas Dukes wrote:
>> any Intel Core 2 or newer, or AMD Opteron processor from
>> about 3-4 years
>> ago or newer would suit you just fine. the newest ones have
>> 4+ cores.
>
> What determines if it's a 64 bit machine? Dual core?
no, the CPU itself. btw, I meant to say A
> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Always Learning
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 8:39 PM
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] OT: Hardware upgrade help
>
> I suggest:
>
> mini-tower / half-towe
On Tue, 2011-08-23 at 20:57 -0400, Thomas Dukes wrote:
> The machines I have now have been rock
> solid and I bought them used. They are like me, old.
Just because something is old, one shouldn't automatically thrown it
away :-)
You need to do a little on-line reading about USB (the effect
On 08/23/11 5:57 PM, Thomas Dukes wrote:
>> >8 GB RAM
> Was wanting at least 4GB would settle for 2.
>
on the upper grades of the current Intel CPUs (for instance, the CoreI7
4 and 6 core processors), there are three memory channels, and right now
the best bang per buck is 4GB DIMMs, so you
On Tuesday 23 August 2011 20:17, Thomas Dukes wrote:
> I haven't kept up with hardware in years so I'm dumber than dirt on
> what's out there. I would prefer a desktop so I can stack it. Don't
> think I need to do the Xeon as that would be overkill for a home
> user.
I suggest looking at the syst
> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Always Learning
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 9:04 PM
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] OT: Hardware upgrade help
>
>
> On Tue, 2011-08-23 at 20:57 -0400, Thomas
> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of John R Pierce
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 9:14 PM
> To: centos@centos.org
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] OT: Hardware upgrade help
>
> On 08/23/11 5:57 PM, Thomas Dukes wrote:
> >> >
> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Yves Bellefeuille
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 9:25 PM
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] OT: Hardware upgrade help
>
> On Tuesday 23 August 2011 20:17, Thomas Du
On 08/23/11 6:40 PM, Thomas Dukes wrote:
> I saw the i7's but I'm getting confused about dual core. Is the i7 thing a
> new speed instead of Mghz?
the Core I series comes in a series of different processor subfamilies,
I3, I5, I7... and individual members of each of these has different
specs. a
> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of John R Pierce
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 10:00 PM
> To: centos@centos.org
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] OT: Hardware upgrade help
>
> On 08/23/11 6:40 PM, Thomas Dukes wrote:
> > I
>> What determines if it's a 64 bit machine? Dual core?
>
> Dual core = 2 CPUs effectively.
> Quad core = 4 CPUs on the same piece of Silicon
>
> 64 bit = more advance instruction set which replaces all the older 32
> bit instruction set CPUs. 64 bit is more modern than 32 bit and that is
> the wa
> The older ISA (now called PATA = Parallel ATA) has been replaced by SATA
> (Serial ATA). SATA has 3 speeds. Most new disks are either SATA 2 or
> SATA 3 speed.
IDE I assume you meant. :) ISA was the old bus PCI replaced.
--
Drew
"Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood.
On Tue, 2011-08-23 at 19:37 -0700, Drew wrote:
> >
> > 64 bit = more advance instruction set which replaces all the older 32
> > bit instruction set CPUs. 64 bit is more modern than 32 bit and that is
> > the way software is going.
>
> 64bit doesn't specifically make it "more advanced." 64bit CP
On Tue, 2011-08-23 at 19:38 -0700, Drew wrote:
> > The older ISA (now called PATA = Parallel ATA) has been replaced by SATA
> > (Serial ATA). SATA has 3 speeds. Most new disks are either SATA 2 or
> > SATA 3 speed.
>
> IDE I assume you meant. :) ISA was the old bus PCI replaced.
Yes since IDE re
On 08/23/2011 10:37 PM Drew wrote:
>>> What determines if it's a 64 bit machine? Dual core?
>> Dual core = 2 CPUs effectively.
>> Quad core = 4 CPUs on the same piece of Silicon
>>
>> 64 bit = more advance instruction set which replaces all the older 32
>> bit instruction set CPUs. 64 bit is more
On 08/23/11 7:40 PM, Always Learning wrote:
> Surely it is more than mere memory addressing, a logic problem which has
> existed since the original 8088 (and perhaps the 4040), it is extra
> instructions and a re-write of some existing instructions ?
the x86_64 architecture has teh same basic inst
On 08/23/11 9:21 PM, ken wrote:
> I haven't looked up and compared the lists of instructions
> on 32- vs. 64-bit CPUs, but generally the bigger processors have more,
> and more sophisticated, instructions. This means, e.g., that instead of
> taking 20 steps to do a calculation on a 32-bit CPU, it
Just noticed that our new server has a newer 80+ efficiency 865W PSU
with PFC. So apparenty our existing 1500VA (865W) APC Back-UPS is not
safe to use anymore. We apparently need a pure sine wave UPS.
http://nam-en.apc.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/8883
I found an affordable 1500VA UPS by CyberPowe
50 matches
Mail list logo
