If I add
priority=1
to [updates] in CentOS-Base.repo
when I run "sudo yum update" I get the warning
66 packages excluded due to repository priority protections
This does not seem to have any adverse effect,
but what exactly does it mean?
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> If I add
> priority=1
> to [updates] in CentOS-Base.repo
> when I run "sudo yum update" I get the warning
> 66 packages excluded due to repository priority protections
>
> This does not seem to have any adverse effect,
> but what exactl
Clint Dilks wrote:
>> If I add
>> priority=1
>> to [updates] in CentOS-Base.repo
>> when I run "sudo yum update" I get the warning
>> 66 packages excluded due to repository priority protections
>>
>> This does not seem to have any adverse effect,
>> but what exactly does it mean?
> See http:/
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 12:07:26PM +0200, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Clint Dilks wrote:
>
> >> If I add
> >> priority=1
> >> to [updates] in CentOS-Base.repo
> >> when I run "sudo yum update" I get the warning
> >> 66 packages excluded due to repository priority protections
> >>
> > See http://w
I asked here a week or so ago, and referenced an older bug, but haven't
seen any comments. Googling, I see others asking about the same. Datum:
*every* one I've found is like this: they're all HP DL580's or DL380's, or
such.
This is being used for heavy-duty scientific computing. Does anyone know
- Original Message -
| I asked here a week or so ago, and referenced an older bug, but
| haven't
| seen any comments. Googling, I see others asking about the same.
| Datum:
| *every* one I've found is like this: they're all HP DL580's or
| DL380's, or
| such.
|
| This is being used for hea
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 7:32 AM, wrote:
> I asked here a week or so ago, and referenced an older bug, but haven't
> seen any comments. Googling, I see others asking about the same. Datum:
> *every* one I've found is like this: they're all HP DL580's or DL380's, or
> such.
>
> This is being used f
Is there a way to get samba to authenticate against an AD without
having to join that domain (which needs admin credentials)?I don't
want any of the automatic user creation or mapping stuff from winbind,
just a password check instead of having to maintain a local password.
I can get that effec
On 08/15/2013 01:07 PM, Scott Robbins wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 12:07:26PM +0200, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>> Clint Dilks wrote:
>>
If I add
priority=1
to [updates] in CentOS-Base.repo
when I run "sudo yum update" I get the warning
66 packages excluded due to repo
Hi, Akemi,
Akemi Yagi wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 7:32 AM, wrote:
>> I asked here a week or so ago, and referenced an older bug, but haven't
>> seen any comments. Googling, I see others asking about the same. Datum:
>> *every* one I've found is like this: they're all HP DL580's or DL380's,
On 08/14/2013 07:14 PM, Tony Mountifield wrote:
> I have two CentOS6 boxes, both running Bind as a local resolver, with
> what appears to me to be the same configuration as each other. I have
> a problem on one but not the other, to do with DNSSEC Lookaside Validation.
>
> On the box with the probl
http://www.businessinsider.com/red-hat-ceo-go-ahead-copy-our-software-2013-8
Title says is all. Nice to know RH understands and accepts the
relationship between CentOS and RHEL.
Although it is complex. After all, if too many choose CentOS, there
may no longer be a CentOS. However, I don't think I
Robert Arkiletian wrote:
> http://www.businessinsider.com/red-hat-ceo-go-ahead-copy-our-software-2013-8
>
> Title says is all. Nice to know RH understands and accepts the
> relationship between CentOS and RHEL.
>
> Although it is complex. After all, if too many choose CentOS, there
> may no longer
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 3:20 PM, wrote:
>
> Yeah, and the author *really* doesn't understand, and didn't bother to
> try, to do their research.
>
> Excerpt:
> Arguably one critical area that CentOS hasn't helped Red Hat is with
> developers. While developers want the latest and greatest technolog
I have no problems with RedHat and have used CEntOS steadily for quite
some time now. Even though it's at home on my personal machines, I have
been aching for my company to adopt an open source alternative to the
five or six Windows 2008 servers that are currently in place...and I've
made proge
On 8/15/2013 2:22 PM, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
> And RedHat really DOESN'T own any of the source code it sells!
redhat doesn't sell the source code. they sell their support services
and infrastructure.
--
john r pierce 37N 122W
somewhere on the middle
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> How about the real history, where Red Hat took a bunch of software
>> developed by others, published the barely-working stuff with horrible
>> bugs (read the changelogs if you disagree), then accepted
>> contributed debugging, fixes an
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 04:40:14PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> What about bait and switch?
What about the fact that you've been beating this same horse for many
years now and it's a little tired at this point?
> I guess I'd rather have seen the contributed work go to a distribution
> that did
Do you require samba or do you just want linux users to authenticate to AD?
Samba when configured to work in a domain must be joined to the AD
domain. By the way, unless the admins have changed the defaults, any
authenticated user can join up to 10 hosts to an AD domain (search
ms-DS-MachineAccoun
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 4:45 PM, John R. Dennison wrote:
>
>> What about bait and switch?
>
> What about the fact that you've been beating this same horse for many
> years now and it's a little tired at this point?
They are the ones that changed their position. Mine hasn't and won't.
And I can'
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> are you really that dumb?
> "take the free version away" -> come on and explain how this works for GPL
> software
Exactly, explain where the GPL distinguishes between what restrictions
you can add to binaries vs source components.
> Redh
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> So, what about redistribution of copies?
>
> learn the difference between trademarks and software licences
So, if you have a license that says "the distribution of the whole
must be on the terms of this License," and " You may not impose
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>> To oversimplify, say that you have rpmforge, base, and epel repos. Say
>> that all of them have versions of perl. However, these versions may
>> conflict with each other and break things.
>>
>> So, if you gave base and updates priority of 1, then the others, even if
Timothy Murphy wrote:
> But what if a package in rpmforge requires a newer version of a
> package that is available in rpmforge but not in updates?
> Surely this is very likely to happen?
If a package in RPMForge requires another package from RPMForge that
doesn't conflict with a package from
Last time I checked a few years ago I don't think AD supported an LDAP
anonymous bind, so you may need to bind as that user in order to validate the
creds.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 06:40:54PM -0700, Devin Reade wrote:
> Last time I checked a few years ago I don't think AD supported an LDAP
> anonymous bind, so you may need to bind as that user in order to validate the
> creds.
AD is kerberos for authentication. If you just want to authenticate user
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 8:44 PM, Stephen Harris wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 06:40:54PM -0700, Devin Reade wrote:
>> Last time I checked a few years ago I don't think AD supported an LDAP
>> anonymous bind, so you may need to bind as that user in order to validate
>> the creds.
>
> AD is ker
27 matches
Mail list logo
