On 08/17/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Campbell wrote:
>
> I got things installed yesterday, adding a routed network section
> using virt-manager linked to the private interface, eth1. I left
> the default NAT interface as-is.
That won't do what you want. If you want other machines on the LAN to
be able
On 08/16/2012 09:36 AM, Bill Campbell wrote:
> I assume that I can replace /var/lib/libvirt/images with a
> symlink to another file system with adequate space.
>
> Would it be safe to symlink the entire /var/lib/libvrt directory
> to another file system?
As has been pointed out, SELinux may preven
On 08/16/2012 04:55 PM, SilverTip257 wrote:
> vi is generally a symlink to vim these days.
Actually, it's a shell alias. And then, only if "vim" is installed,
which it isn't in some configurations. IIRC, desktop systems have him
by default, but server installations do not.
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 2:31 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 08/16/2012 04:55 PM, SilverTip257 wrote:
>> vi is generally a symlink to vim these days.
>
> Actually, it's a shell alias. And then, only if "vim" is installed,
> which it isn't in some configurations. IIRC, desktop systems have him
> b
Hello Akemi,
On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 11:52 -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
> Producing an accurate list of "missing packages" is tricky -- mainly
> because you need access to RHN.
Even though RHN of course is the ultimate resource you can get pretty
far by just checking the Technical notes for 6.1, 6.2 an
For a high-performance system (64-cores, 512GB RAM, 5TB local disk, 110TB
NFS-mounted storage) is there any advantage of dropping lvm and mounting
partitions directly?
We're not planning on changing partition sizes, but if we did we'd probably do
a full rebuild.
Has anyone done performance testi
On 19.08.2012 23:16, Smithies, Russell wrote:
> For a high-performance system (64-cores, 512GB RAM, 5TB local disk,
> 110TB NFS-mounted storage) is there any advantage of dropping lvm and
> mounting partitions directly?
> We're not planning on changing partition sizes, but if we did we'd
> probably
On 08/19/12 3:16 PM, Smithies, Russell wrote:
> For a high-performance system (64-cores, 512GB RAM, 5TB local disk, 110TB
> NFS-mounted storage) is there any advantage of dropping lvm and mounting
> partitions directly?
> We're not planning on changing partition sizes, but if we did we'd probably
On 08/18/2012 02:57 PM, Theo Band wrote:
> Do you have iptables enabled? If so add a rule for the bridge as well.
Red Hat's documentation covers that. Administrators have two options.
They can add an iptables rule that allows traffic, or they can configure
the bridged traffic to not pass throug
On 08/18/2012 04:43 AM, skull wrote:
> I am not sure about your issue, but here is how i make my bridges:
> http://www.darktemple.ch/wiki/doku.php?id=linux:kvm#network_bridging
That seems far more complicated than the vendor's documentation. Is
there a reason that you use that method?
_
Hi.
I have a couple of questions :
I have inherited a file server that provides Samba and NFS file
shares. We use a combination on file system acls and posix permissions
. I'm looking to better secure access to the files by trimming some of
the permissions etc.
1) What services could break if I
11 matches
Mail list logo
