On 10/10/2012 01:00 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> On 10/03/2012 01:17 PM, Nux! wrote:
>> On 02.10.2012 23:29, Frank Cox wrote:
>>> My cell phone provider just sent me a letter stating that my 3 year
>>> contract is
>>> up and they will give me a Samsung Galaxy 3 if I will sign a new
>>> contract
Hello everyone.
I've stumbled upon a strange networking issue with multiple interfaces
on CentOS 5.
The network setup is just like the diagram in
http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html
It looks like linux is not routing correctly outgoing packets on
interfaces different from the one
Hello,
I installed the ClamAV package onto a CentOS 6.3 server using yum. I
then modified the /etc/freshclam.conf file to run a perl script whenever
the ClamAV databases were updated:
OnUpdateExecute /usr/local/bin/xymon_event ...
The 'xymon_event' command is used on several servers, and
On 10/09/2012 05:36 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> On 09/27/2012 05:24 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
>> On 09/27/2012 06:36 AM, Steve Clark wrote:
>>> I was trying to figure out what criteria to use to mark the connection.
>>> FTP is such a
>>> braindead application, using to channels and active and
On 10/10/2012 4:38 AM, John Horne wrote:
>
> The problem is that 'strict.pm' is located in /usr/share/perl5 (as it is
> on our other servers), and /usr/share/perl5 is specified in @INC.
Perl can do this is when you've run it out of file handles, then someone
tries to load a not-previously-loaded
Dear All,
how can I create a Firefox log?
My actual problem is this:
I have 17 stations connecting to a Drupal database, that I don't have
admin access to.
Some of these stations are OpenSuse , some are Centos6.3 and two are
Centos5.8.
One of this Centos5.8 install frequently has this EM whe
On Wed, 2012-10-10 at 05:44 -0600, Warren Young wrote:
> On 10/10/2012 4:38 AM, John Horne wrote:
> >
> > The problem is that 'strict.pm' is located in /usr/share/perl5 (as it is
> > on our other servers), and /usr/share/perl5 is specified in @INC.
>
> Perl can do this is when you've run it out of
lheck...@users.sourceforge.net writes:
>
> > I would suspect the inode64 option is the problem
> >
> > We had similar issues running 32 bit apps on a 64 bit clients accessing
> > 'large' NFS servers (non-Linux NFS servers) - the 'fix' was to make sure
> > the file systems were exported/mounted
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:32 AM, Steve Clark wrote:
>
I was trying to figure out what criteria to use to mark the connection.
FTP is such a
braindead application, using to channels and active and passive mode.
What really
needs to happen is someway to tell the kernel to re
lheck...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
> lheck...@users.sourceforge.net writes:
>
>>>I would suspect the inode64 option is the problem
>>>
>>>We had similar issues running 32 bit apps on a 64 bit clients accessing
>>>'large' NFS servers (non-Linux NFS servers) - the 'fix' was to make sure
>>>the
> > It did not work. The test environemnt was set up wrong.
>
> Is it possible to re-build the 32 bit application with large file support?
Nope.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
I just realised that pam_access no longer works under CentOS6 - or it works
differently from CentOS5.
Under CentOS5, I used this configuration to restrict access to root only:
# cat /etc/security/access.conf
+ : root : ALL
- : ALL : ALL
# cat /etc/pam.d/system-auth-ac
...
account required
lheck...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
>>> It did not work. The test environemnt was set up wrong.
>>
>>Is it possible to re-build the 32 bit application with large file support?
>
>
> Nope.
I guess you might be out of luck?
I'm not sure you can safely mount an XFS file system without inode64
Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to
centos-annou...@centos.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
centos-announce-requ..
CentOS-6
When I login as root I see this prompt:
[root@vhost04 ~]#
When I login as a non-priviledged user I see this instead:
sh-4.1$
.bashrc and .bash_profile have identical contents in /root and
/home/user. What causes the difference? Why? How does one change
the default so that all norm
James B. Byrne wrote:
> CentOS-6
>
> When I login as root I see this prompt:
>
> [root@vhost04 ~]#
>
> When I login as a non-priviledged user I see this instead:
>
> sh-4.1$
>
> .bashrc and .bash_profile have identical contents in /root and
> /home/user. What causes the difference? Why? How does
On 10/10/12 11:42 AM, James B. Byrne wrote:
> When I login as root I see this prompt:
>
>
> [root@vhost04 ~]#
>
> When I login as a non-priviledged user I see this instead:
>
> sh-4.1$
>
> .bashrc and .bash_profile have identical contents in /root and
> /home/user. What causes the difference? Why
To clarify the situation. The ONLY difference in the shell setup for
both root and an ordinary user is the name. As shown below they bith
use the same shell, they both have exactly the same contents in
.bashrc and .bash_profile. The file .profile exists for neither. And
yet somehow they end up
On 10/10/2012 3:48 PM, James B. Byrne wrote:
> To clarify the situation. The ONLY difference in the shell setup for
> both root and an ordinary user is the name. As shown below they bith
> use the same shell, they both have exactly the same contents in
> .bashrc and .bash_profile. The file .prof
On: Wed Oct 10 15:58:43 EDT 2012 Bowie Bailey Bowie_Bailey at BUC.com
wrote:
> It doesn't matter where sh is pointing. What matters is the
> shell configuration.
>
> I'm using bash here:
> $ which sh
> /bin/sh
> $ echo $SHELL
> /bin/bash
>
> So try 'echo $SHELL' instead of 'which sh' to see which
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 04:12:24PM -0400, James B. Byrne wrote:
> As far as I can see the two invocations call the same program. And
> yet, replacing /bin/sh with /bin/bash in the ordinary user's passwd
> entry does indeed change the prompt to one identical to that used by
> root. Does anyone her
James B. Byrne wrote:
> On: Wed Oct 10 15:58:43 EDT 2012 Bowie Bailey Bowie_Bailey at BUC.com
> wrote:
>> It doesn't matter where sh is pointing. What matters is the
>> shell configuration.
>>
>> I'm using bash here:
>> So try 'echo $SHELL' instead of 'which sh' to see which shell
>> you are usin
On 10/10/2012 4:12 PM, James B. Byrne wrote:
> On: Wed Oct 10 15:58:43 EDT 2012 Bowie Bailey Bowie_Bailey at BUC.com
> wrote:
>> It doesn't matter where sh is pointing. What matters is the
>> shell configuration.
>>
>> I'm using bash here:
>> $ which sh
>> /bin/sh
>> $ echo $SHELL
>> /bin/bash
>>
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 03:48:23PM -0400, James B. Byrne wrote:
> To clarify the situation. The ONLY difference in the shell setup for
> both root and an ordinary user is the name. As shown below they bith
> use the same shell, they both have exactly the same contents in
> .bashrc and .bash_profi
On 11/10/12 05:42, James B. Byrne wrote:
> CentOS-6
>
> When I login as root I see this prompt:
>
>
> [root@vhost04 ~]#
>
> When I login as a non-priviledged user I see this instead:
>
> sh-4.1$
>
> .bashrc and .bash_profile have identical contents in /root and
> /home/user. What causes the differ
On 10.10.2012 19:52, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>
>> I have loked in/etc/profile.d and /etc/bashrc and I cannot see what
>> condition is triggering the different behaviour.
>
> I'd guess whether there's a ~/.bashrc. I've got mine set the way I
> want
> it; I don't remember a ~/.bashrc being automagi
On my CentOS 6.3 machine, in /etc/idmapd.conf I've updated the
"[Mapping]" section of the config file:
Nobody-User = paulbsch
Nobody-Group = paulbsch
But the mapping is not working. Files still show up as being owned by
"nobody".
On my Fedora 14 machine, with the exact same changes to
/etc/idmap
On 10/10/2012 02:58 PM, Paul B Schroeder wrote:
> On my CentOS 6.3 machine, in /etc/idmapd.conf I've updated the
> "[Mapping]" section of the config file:
> Nobody-User = paulbsch
> Nobody-Group = paulbsch
>
> But the mapping is not working. Files still show up as being owned by
> "nobody".
>
> On
On 10/10/2012 07:01 PM, Greg Bailey wrote:
> On 10/10/2012 02:58 PM, Paul B Schroeder wrote:
>> On my CentOS 6.3 machine, in /etc/idmapd.conf I've updated the
>> "[Mapping]" section of the config file:
>> Nobody-User = paulbsch
>> Nobody-Group = paulbsch
>>
>> But the mapping is not working. Fil
On 10/10/2012 04:43 PM, Nux! wrote:
On 10.10.2012 19:52, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I have loked in/etc/profile.d and /etc/bashrc and I cannot see what
condition is triggering the different behaviour.
I'd guess whether there's a ~/.bashrc. I've got mine set the way I
want
it; I don't remember a
On Wednesday 10 October 2012 19:42:32 James B. Byrne wrote:
> CentOS-6
>
> When I login as root I see this prompt:
>
>
> [root@vhost04 ~]#
>
> When I login as a non-priviledged user I see this instead:
>
> sh-4.1$
>
> .bashrc and .bash_profile have identical contents in /root and
> /home/user
31 matches
Mail list logo
