In article <520d158f.9080...@plnet.rs>,
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> 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
On 15/08/2013 23:58, Les Mikesell wrote:
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 thi
Some weeks ago, I asked if anyone had set up a backup scheme for a remote
server.
By backup here, I mean an alternative arrangement that can be called upon
if eg the DSL connection to the remote machine fails.
I received one interesting reply:
==
At home, besides my fixed line
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 6:25 AM, Giles Coochey wrote:
> On 15/08/2013 23:58, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>> 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 you trying with a power supply over lan?
(I don't know how is named in english, but maybe this can help you;
http://http://www.google.com/images?client=ms-rim&hl=es&q=zapatilla+ip&oe=UTF-8&channel=browser&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ei=4A4OUqS6EIioyAHAn4Aw&ved=0CAcQsAQ
)
Then some kind of ma
On 16/08/2013 12:34, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
RedHat --> Production Systems, with paid-for support, something goes wrong
then I have some commercial comeback to get it fixed. High change control
environment.
CentOS --> QA, Development and Test Systems, and sometimes, non-critical
infrastructure, co
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Giles Coochey wrote:
> On 16/08/2013 12:34, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> RedHat --> Production Systems, with paid-for support, something goes wrong
>> then I have some commercial comeback to get it fixed. High change control
>> environment.
>>
>> CentOS --> QA,
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 16.08.2013 14:07, schrieb Andrew Wyatt:
> > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Giles Coochey
> wrote:
> >>> While I agree that CentOS will always have support while it is
> community
> >> driven, and has an upstream - without RedHat, n
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 01:33:01PM +0200, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Some weeks ago, I asked if anyone had set up a backup scheme for a remote
> server.
> By backup here, I mean an alternative arrangement that can be called upon
> if eg the DSL connection to the remote machine fails.
>
> I received
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>>> 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 any
>> further restrictions on the
On 08/15/2013 03:12 PM, 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.C
>
> Although it is complex. After all, if too many choose CentO
Snip...
>
> The bottom line ... Robert is correct, the relationship is certainly
> symbiotic and not parasitic. Red Hat (the company) needs to make money,
> and software that is built on the same code base is available for free
> as well. It is a win-win ... which is exactly what the GPL provide
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 2:28 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> 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.
I agree completely, but the
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>
>> So which section of the GPL is it that exempts binaries from being
>> considered derived works with the same requiremnets?
>
> OK you are really that stupid
>
> the GPL doe snot talk about binaries at all
Exactly my point. Everything i
If anyone's got old RocketRAID cards, I just had to deal with one. They
are years behind in updating their drivers - googling, I find the last
time some were supported was CentOS 5.2.
At any rate, I have just managed to build 1.8 of rr232x successfully, and
am building filesystems on the drive as
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> >
> The bottom line ... Robert is correct, the relationship is certainly
> symbiotic and not parasitic. Red Hat (the company) needs to make money,
> and software that is built on the same code base is available for free
> as well. It is a w
I'm running a piece of network backup software called 'bacula', on a minimal
CentOS 6.4 install.
I got everything working pretty well, but there's one piece giving me some
problem-- a component which gives status info via a GUI.
In the past, on previous installations, I could ssh to the bacula se
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Joseph Spenner wrote:
> In the past, on previous installations, I could ssh to the bacula server with
> the -X option, and run the application (called 'bat'), and it would display
> back. I'd have to make sure the sshd_config permits Xforwarding, but that
> wa
Joseph Spenner wrote:
> I'm running a piece of network backup software called 'bacula', on a
minimal CentOS 6.4 install.
> I got everything working pretty well, but there's one piece giving me
some problem-- a component which gives status info via a GUI.
> In the past, on previous installations, I
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Joseph Spenner wrote:
> I'm running a piece of network backup software called 'bacula', on a minimal
> CentOS 6.4 install.
> I got everything working pretty well, but there's one piece giving me some
> problem-- a component which gives status info via a GUI.
> I
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Joseph Spenner wrote:
> I'm running a piece of network backup software called 'bacula', on a
> minimal CentOS 6.4 install.
> I got everything working pretty well, but there's one piece giving me some
> problem-- a component which gives status info via a GUI.
> In
Hi all,
First of all, sorry for the OT. I need to buy a new laptop for my
work. My prerequisites are:
- RAM: 6/8 GiB (preferably 8 GiB)
- Processor: Core i7
- Disk: up to 500 GiB for SATA, 128 GiB for SSD.
- Graphics card: Intel HD (I really hate to use Nvidia or ATI Radeon
graphics cards).
>From: Joseph Spenner
>To: CentOS mailing list
>Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 9:07 AM
>Subject: Re: [CentOS] minimal X applications needed to export to remote
>server?
>
>
>Les:
> Thanks for the tip! xorg-x11-xauth got me closer! The xlogo does show up!
>However, when I run 'bat',
>From: Les Mikesell
>To: CentOS mailing list
>Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 8:30 AM
>Subject: Re: [CentOS] minimal X applications needed to export to remote
>server?
>
>>On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Joseph Spenner
>>wrote:
>>
>> bat: cannot connect to X server
>>
>> I tried the
Hi,
is it possible to Restore files deleted with " rm rf " from ext4 or
ext3 filesystem by mistake.
Regards
Ahmad
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 08/15/2013 03:12 PM, 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 R
Timothy Murphy wrote:
> The problem in both places is that the ADSL modem sometimes goes off,
> and the only way to turn it back on seems to be
> to disconnect and re-connect the power supply.
I had a similar problem with a cable modem. My relatively
inexpensive solution was to buy an X-10 Firecr
On 08/16/2013 10:06 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>> So which section of the GPL is it that exempts binaries from being
>>> considered derived works with the same requiremnets?
>> OK you are really that stupid
>>
>> the GPL doe snot talk about bin
On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 21:44:11 +0500
Ahmed wrote:
> is it possible to Restore files deleted with " rm rf " from ext4 or
> ext3 filesystem by mistake.
There are several programs and procedures that show up on a google search for
"undelete ext4" and "undelete ext3". Have you looked at and/or t
On 08/16/2013 11:06 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Exactly my point. Everything is about derived works. So binaries
> cannot be exempt from the requirement that the work as a whole can
> only be distributed under a license that permits free redistribution
> and that additional restrictions cannot be
On 08/16/2013 10:16 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> The bottom line ... Robert is correct, the relationship is certainly
>> symbiotic and not parasitic. Red Hat (the company) needs to make money,
>> and software that is built on the same code bas
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>> OK you are really that stupid
>>>
>>> the GPL doe snot talk about binaries at all
>> Exactly my point. Everything is about derived works. So binaries
>> cannot be exempt from the requirement that the work as a whole can
>> only be distr
Johnny Hughes wrote:
> If you are asking for an opinion, I actually agree that they (Red Hat)
> should also give it away for free. However, nothing requires them to do
> so. Since they didn't, CentOS was created and fills that niche.
Hmm. In my opinion, Red Hat is doing the right thing. I
lea
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>
> Really? Are none of the trademark-restricted additions packaged into
> GPLed items? Or is redistributing the trademark OK as long as nothing
> is changed? If you could obtain a copy and didn't care about RNH,
> could you ship straigh
>From: Ahmed
>To: CentOS mailing list
>Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 9:44 AM
>Subject: [CentOS] Restoring deleted files.
>
>Hi,
>
> is it possible to Restore files deleted with " rm rf " from ext4 or
> ext3 filesystem by mistake.
There is something called lazarus:
http://www.fish2.com/
On 2013-08-16 @11:25 UTC, Giles Coochey wrote:
> For me Redhat and CentOS have their place, together in the same
> environment:
>
> RedHat --> Production Systems, with paid-for support, something goes
> wrong then I have some commercial comeback to get it fixed. High
> change control environment
On 08/16/2013 12:18 PM, Carl T. Miller wrote:
> Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> If you are asking for an opinion, I actually agree that they (Red Hat)
>> should also give it away for free. However, nothing requires them to do
>> so. Since they didn't, CentOS was created and fills that niche.
> Hmm. In
On 08/16/2013 12:12 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
OK you are really that stupid
the GPL doe snot talk about binaries at all
>>> Exactly my point. Everything is about derived works. So binaries
>>> cannot be exempt from the requi
On 08/16/2013 01:12 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Really? Are none of the trademark-restricted additions packaged into
> GPLed items? Or is redistributing the trademark OK as long as nothing
> is changed? If you could obtain a copy and didn't care about RNH,
> could you ship straight RH binaries ins
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
>>
> Nothing in the GPL says that if you distribute the source to the public
> you must distribute binaries to the public;
What about permitting redistribution? And if losing your RHN support
as a consequence isn't a restriction that the "You m
I am wondering if any one knows of a way to manage Xyratex disk shelves from
CentOS (in particular CentOS 4).
More details:
Some years ago I installed a NAS unit from Exanet which consists of 2 rebadged
IBM x3650 head nodes and a couple of Xyratex disk shelves with a total of 96 TB
of raw disk,
On 08/16/2013 01:45 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> What about permitting redistribution? And if losing your RHN support
> as a consequence isn't a restriction that the "You may not impose any
> further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted
> herein." covers, then what kind of
On 8/16/2013 10:45 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
>>> >>
>> >Nothing in the GPL says that if you distribute the source to the public
>> >you must distribute binaries to the public;
> What about permitting redistribution?
redistribution of SOURCE.
On 08/16/2013 12:45 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> What about permitting redistribution? And if losing your RHN support
> as a consequence isn't a restriction that the "You may not impose any
> further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted
> herein." covers, then what kind of
There's also PhotoRec included in the testdisk package.
Clive
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Joseph Spenner wrote:
> >From: Ahmed
>
> >To: CentOS mailing list
> >Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 9:44 AM
> >Subject: [CentOS] Restoring deleted files.
>
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> > is it possible to R
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 1:01 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
>
>>
>>> >Nothing in the GPL says that if you distribute the source to the public
>>> >you must distribute binaries to the public;
>> What about permitting redistribution?
>
> redistribution of SOURCE.have you READ the GPL ?
Please qu
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Ian Pilcher wrote:
> On 08/16/2013 12:45 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> What about permitting redistribution? And if losing your RHN support
>> as a consequence isn't a restriction that the "You may not impose any
>> further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of
On 08/16/2013 01:27 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Ian Pilcher wrote:
>> On 08/16/2013 12:45 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> What about permitting redistribution? And if losing your RHN support
>>> as a consequence isn't a restriction that the "You may not impose any
>>> f
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> Exactly my point. Everything is about derived works. So binaries
>> cannot be exempt from the requirement that the work as a whole can
>> only be distributed under a license that permits free redistribution
>> and that additional restric
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>>> redistribution of SOURCE.have you READ the GPL ?
>>
>> Please quote the section that you think exempts binaries
>
> *THE WHOLE GPL TALKS ABOUT SOURCE CODE DAMNED*
> *THE WHOLE GPL TALKS ABOUT SOURCE CODE DAMNED*
> *THE WHOLE GPL TALKS
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Reindl Harald
> wrote:
> >
> >> Exactly my point. Everything is about derived works. So binaries
> >> cannot be exempt from the requirement that the work as a whole can
> >> only be distributed under a lice
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Reindl Harald
> wrote:
> >
> >>> redistribution of SOURCE.have you READ the GPL ?
> >>
> >> Please quote the section that you think exempts binaries
> >
> > *THE WHOLE GPL TALKS ABOUT SOURCE CODE DAMNED*
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> Sorry, but that quote does not appear in any copy of the GPL that I
>> can find. And it's not true, either. Everything it says is about
>> 'works as a whole' and anything that can be considered a copy or
>> derivative work under copyrigh
Hello,
I think the commandline filemanager can reunite you with deleted files.
Greetings, j.
Clive Hills schreef:
>There's also PhotoRec included in the testdisk package.
>
>
>Clive
>
>
>On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Joseph Spenner wrote:
>
>> >From: Ahmed
>>
>> >To: CentOS mailing list
>>
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> wow - everybody but you understands the GPL
Apparently not...
> GPL == SOURCECODE
No. It applies to everything copied/derived from/translated from
(etc.) anything where any part is covered by GPL. Including binaries.
> GPL == COPYRIGHT
On 08/16/2013 03:12 PM, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
> RedHat's trademarks are the only reason why you can't take the RedHat ISO
> and distribute it to whomever you want.
Not exactly. The aggregate collection, just because it contains
GPL-licensed software, is not necessarily under the GPL as a whole, an
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On 08/16/2013 03:12 PM, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
> > RedHat's trademarks are the only reason why you can't take the RedHat ISO
> > and distribute it to whomever you want.
>
> Not exactly. The aggregate collection, just because it contains
> GPL-lic
oracle is the bad!!
On Aug 15, 2013 11:12 PM, "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 al
Mihai T. Lazarescu wrote:
> In case the web/CLI interface of DSL modem/router is still
> responsive, you can script a reboot from the server on the
> LAN when fails the ping to a set of well-know always-up hosts.
Thanks very much for the suggestion,
which I shall study with interest.
I'm actually
On 8/16/2013 4:33 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Some weeks ago, I asked if anyone had set up a backup scheme for a remote
> server.
> By backup here, I mean an alternative arrangement that can be called upon
> if eg the DSL connection to the remote machine fails.
Not sure if this is what you are th
On 08/16/2013 10:53 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> SUSE does not release their enterprise sources and there
> is no SLES clone because of it.
I can't believe I never thought about it (to wonder why there wasn't any
SLES clone)...
Shouldn't they release the source for the GPL packages? I thought ther
On 8/16/2013 6:07 PM, Jorge Fábregas wrote:
> On 08/16/2013 10:53 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> >SUSE does not release their enterprise sources and there
>> >is no SLES clone because of it.
> I can't believe I never thought about it (to wonder why there wasn't any
> SLES clone)...
>
> Shouldn't they
On 08/16/2013 07:51 PM, Tony Schreiner wrote:
> I am wondering if any one knows of a way to manage Xyratex disk shelves from
> CentOS (in particular CentOS 4).
>
> More details:
> Some years ago I installed a NAS unit from Exanet which consists of 2
> rebadged IBM x3650 head nodes and a couple of
On 08/16/2013 06:44 PM, Ahmed wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is it possible to Restore files deleted with " rm rf " from ext4 or
> ext3 filesystem by mistake.
>
I posted this as a Document in official CentOS Facebook group. Feel free
to use it in a blog, just mention my name:
Recover files from ext3/ext
On 08/16/2013 01:33 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Some weeks ago, I asked if anyone had set up a backup scheme for a remote
> server.
> By backup here, I mean an alternative arrangement that can be called upon
> if eg the DSL connection to the remote machine fails.
>
> I received one interesting repl
On 08/16/2013 08:07 PM, Jorge Fábregas wrote:
> On 08/16/2013 10:53 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> SUSE does not release their enterprise sources and there
>> is no SLES clone because of it.
> I can't believe I never thought about it (to wonder why there wasn't any
> SLES clone)...
>
> Shouldn't they
66 matches
Mail list logo
