Re: [CentOS] Package updates for 5.4?

On Jan 26, 2011, at 8:08 PM, John R Pierce wrote: > On 01/26/11 5:51 PM, Mitch Patenaude wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Gene > > wrote: >> >>Can you tell us more about you cluster? Nodes? Purpose? I managed >>a small 90 node cluster for s

Re: [CentOS] How fast?

On Oct 6, 2009, at 2:23 AM, Sorin Srbu wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On > Behalf >> Of Paul Heinlein >> Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 12:35 AM >> To: CentOS mailing list >> Subject: Re: [CentOS] How fast? >> >> The big

Re: [CentOS] Running SSH on a different port

As mentioned previously, requiring certificates, and not allowing interactive logins, is safest. But even if you decide to allow interactive logins, there are things you SHOULD do. Disable admin/root login. Update sshd so that only named users can login via SSH, all other users that might

Re: [CentOS] The directory that I am trying to clean up is huge

On Jan 23, 2010, at 6:45 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Sat, 23 Jan 2010, Marcelo M. Garcia wrote: > >> Robert Heller wrote: -bash: /usr/bin/find: Argument list too long >>> >>> 'man xargs' >>> >>> find -print | xargs rm >>> >> Hi >> >> Just curious. What is the difference betw

Re: [CentOS] The directory that I am trying to clean up is huge

On Jan 23, 2010, at 7:07 AM, Anas Alnaffar wrote: > I tried to run this command > > find -name "*.access*" -mtime +2 -exec rm {} \; > > > and I have same error message > > > > Anas > There must have been more to it, since the command above is invalid. you need to specify where to star

Re: [CentOS] The directory that I am trying to clean up is huge

> > find on CentOS 5.4 supports > > find -exec {} +; > > which avoids the negative effect of spawning new subprocesses when using > "-exec {} \;" > > find on CentOS 4.8 does not support that. I'll have to give that a try sometime. A person gets used to a subset of a command, and doesn't nec

Re: [CentOS] The directory that I am trying to clean up is huge

-Original Message- From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of James B. Byrne Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 10:06 AM To: Robert Nichols Cc: centos@centos.org Subject: Re: [CentOS] The directory that I am trying to clean up is huge On Mon, January 25,

Re: [CentOS] The directory that I am trying to clean up is huge

On Jan 26, 2010, at 6:06 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > On 1/25/2010 8:49 AM, Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote: >> Anas Alnaffar wrote: >>> I tried to run this command >>> >>> find -name "*.access*" -mtime +2 -exec rm {} \; >>> >> >> Should have been: find ./ -name \*.access\* -mtime +2 -exec rm -

Re: [CentOS] case insensitive file system

FAT32 may work too if you don't need large files. I just tried NTFS-3G on a thumbdrive, and I was able to create a file that differed only by case from another. Then something got corrupted. On Apr 29, 2008, at 6:50 PM, Ruslan Sivak wrote: We have an application that was build on a windows

Re: [CentOS] Re: case insensitive file system

ot without issues. On Apr 30, 2008, at 12:07 PM, Szabolcs Szakacsits wrote: Hi Kevin, Kevin Krieser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I just tried NTFS-3G on a thumbdrive, and I was able to create a file that differed only by case from another. Then something got corrupted. Could you pleas

Re: [CentOS] Watching Netflix movies on CentOS

On May 4, 2008, at 9:23 AM, Matt Shields wrote: On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 6:31 AM, Kai Schaetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ralph Angenendt wrote on Sun, 4 May 2008 10:22:11 +0200: In other words: They don't want your money. If I were you, I'd respect that. Make yourself heard over at Netfli

Re: [CentOS] Watching Netflix movies on CentOS

On May 4, 2008, at 10:42 AM, Matt Shields wrote: On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Kevin Krieser <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: On May 4, 2008, at 9:23 AM, Matt Shields wrote: On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 6:31 AM, Kai Schaetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Ralph Angenendt wrote o

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.2 ?

On May 22, 2008, at 11:32 PM, Paul wrote: On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 15:42 -0400, Matt Hyclak wrote: On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 12:03:23PM -0700, Florin Andrei enlightened us: Anybody knows when CentOS 5.2 will be made available? http://www.linux.com/feature/135980 When it's done. For crying out

Re: [CentOS] Will CentOS 6's upstream be based on Fedora 10?

I read this question as being Will RHEL 6 be based on Fedora 10? On 7/30/08 9:45 AM, "Rudi Ahlers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> The subject says it all. I'm asking because I've found Fedora 9 to be >> buggy as hell - it is one of the worst Fedora re

Re: [CentOS] magic.mime dependency problem between file and httpd

On May 21, 2009, at 12:08 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Ralph Angenendt > wrote: >> Marko Vojinovic wrote: >>> ---> Package file.i386 0:4.17-15.el5_3.1 set to be updated >>> --> Processing Dependency: /usr/share/magic.mime for package: httpd >>> --> Finished Depen

Re: [CentOS] Question about dd (fill a hard disks' unused space with blanks)

On Jun 7, 2009, at 12:06 PM, Niki Kovacs wrote: > Rainer Duffner a écrit : > >> Ideally, the zero'ing of the disk should take place before the OS is >> installed, via a boot-cd and using dd with the disk-device itself > > Erm... how exactly would you go about that? Let's say I want to do > that

Re: [CentOS] Question about dd (fill a hard disks' unused space with blanks)

On Jun 7, 2009, at 12:34 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > Niki Kovacs wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm currently experimenting with G4U (Ghost for Unix), a small >> cloning >> application sending disk images to an FTP server. >> >> The application reads the whole disk bit by bit, compresses it and >> then >>

Re: [CentOS] Question about dd (fill a hard disks' unused space with blanks)

On Jun 7, 2009, at 12:54 PM, Niki Kovacs wrote: > Rainer Duffner a écrit : >> >> Ever booted a live-CD? >> It also knows your disks (unless it's a server, except for maybe the >> CentOS LiveCD, most other's suck on servers - they simply don't >> recognize the controllers). > > The question was no

Re: [CentOS] Question about dd (fill a hard disks' unused space with blanks)

On Jun 7, 2009, at 1:11 PM, Niki Kovacs wrote: > Rainer Duffner a écrit : > >> Yup. >> If you have the time, you can experiment with the blocksize and see >> where the throughput is best. >> http://unix.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/FreeBSD/questions/2008-09/msg01375.html > > Interesting thread. Gu

Re: [CentOS] Question about dd (fill a hard disks' unused space with blanks)

On Jun 7, 2009, at 2:59 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > Kevin Krieser wrote: > >>> I'll second the recommendation for clonezilla. It knows enough >>> about >>> most filesystems (including windows ntfs) to only store the used >>> blocks >>> a

Re: [CentOS] Install 32 or 64 bits

On Aug 18, 2009, at 6:48 AM, Rainer Duffner wrote: > Yaovi Atohoun schrieb: >> Hi all, >> >> I am going to install CENTOS 5..3 on three HP Proliant ML 350G >> servers. The processor is Quad-core Xeon E5420 and E5335 for one of >> them. They all have 1GB Memory. Should I install a 32 bits version

Re: [CentOS] how can I get the kernel source codes of CentOS5.2

On Aug 26, 2008, at 12:36 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote: On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 10:32 AM, MHR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 5:49 AM, Jim Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Rather than guessing, why not look at the output from the rpm command he ran, which gives the name of th

Re: [CentOS] ls and rm: "argument list too long"

On Oct 17, 2008, at 7:58 PM, thad wrote: Satchel Paige - "Don't look back. Something might be gaining on you." On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 4:36 AM, Laurent Wandrebeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 2008/10/17 Jussi Hirvi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Since when is there a limit in how long directory listing

Re: [CentOS] ls and rm: "argument list too long"

On Oct 18, 2008, at 8:13 PM, mouss wrote: Jussi Hirvi a écrit : Since when is there a limit in how long directory listings CentOS can show (ls), or how large directories can be removed (rm). It is really annoying to say, for example rm -rf /var/amavis/tmp and get only "argument list t

Re: [CentOS] Adding RAM

On Dec 6, 2008, at 10:44 AM, Ross Walker wrote: > > On Dec 5, 2008, at 7:18 PM, Rainer Duffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> >> Am 06.12.2008 um 01:02 schrieb Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams: >> >>> On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 23:57 +, Michael Holmes wrote: 2008/12/5 Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >

Re: [CentOS] Adding RAM

On Dec 7, 2008, at 1:37 PM, Morten Torstensen wrote: > Kevin Krieser wrote: > >> At least with regard to the upstream provider, on X86 the desktop >> version has a limit of 4GB of RAM, regardless of how much more memory >> you have. And they removed the hugemem vers

Re: [CentOS] Old Small Box

You can install 5 on it, but you probably won't be too happy with it. Make sure to have more than the default amount of swap installed. On Jan 21, 2009, at 5:16 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Mike -- EMAIL IGNORED > wrote: >> I have an old 400mHz Dell with

Re: [CentOS] Old Small Box

Just to comment that this was with an actual RH installation DVD, not CentOS. The only systems I've installed CentOS on has had at least 1GB of RAM. On Jan 21, 2009, at 6:54 PM, Kevin Krieser wrote: > You can install 5 on it, but you probably won't be too happy with it. > M

Re: [CentOS] unsubscribe

On Jan 28, 2009, at 10:00 AM, Brian Mathis wrote: > On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 8:56 AM, cent osserver > wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 8:33 AM, Ned Slider >> wrote: >>> Was that REALLY called for? Couldn't you have simply filed it in / >>> dev/null? >> >> Yes, I should have. I gave into im

Re: [CentOS] unsubscribe

On Jan 28, 2009, at 10:46 AM, Anne Wilson wrote: > On Wednesday 28 January 2009 16:20:47 Kevin Krieser wrote: >> The information IS in the headers, but many email programs don't show >> the full headers, extracting only the information that many people >> want (subje

Re: [CentOS] difference in x86 64 bit centos between 4.x and 5.x versions

On Jan 28, 2009, at 3:41 PM, RobertH wrote: > > i am new to the x86 64 bit centos versions. > > ive always used the 32 bit version on industrial type HP hardware > > for those of you that are running x86 64 bit centos, other than > specific > hardware issues, are you finding that 5.x centos is

Re: [CentOS] unsubscribe

On Jan 28, 2009, at 7:43 PM, Matt Shields wrote: > On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Kevin Krieser > wrote: > > On Jan 28, 2009, at 10:46 AM, Anne Wilson wrote: > > > On Wednesday 28 January 2009 16:20:47 Kevin Krieser wrote: > >> The information IS in the headers,

Re: [CentOS] simple if statement

You don't really need to prepend the x if the $remaining is in quotes, do you? If you didn't use quotes, then you could end up with a error if $remaining isn't set. On Feb 27, 2009, at 5:24 AM, Ralph Angenendt wrote: > Tom Brown wrote: >> Hi >> >> Below if $remaining is empty i want the if t

Re: [CentOS] Best CentOS to install on *old* laptop?

2.1's support ends in a couple months. The last time I tried to put a Linux on an obsolete box, it was on a computer with only 80MB of RAM. Pick an old enough distribution to fit that, and I had all sorts of problems getting a PCMCIA LAN card to work. If I had got it to work, it would have

Re: [CentOS] Deleting Large Files

On Mar 2, 2009, at 2:34 AM, Kay Diederichs wrote: > Joseph L. Casale schrieb: >> I have an issue with a busy CentOS server exporting iSCSI and NFS/ >> SMB shares. >> Some of the files are very large, and when they get deleted IO >> climbs to an >> unacceptable rate. Is there a way to purge a f

Re: [CentOS] 5.3 Update Success

On Apr 4, 2009, at 9:30 AM, Michael A. Peters wrote: > Timothy Murphy wrote: >> Kai Schaetzl wrote: >> >>> I updated two machines yesterday. No problems after reboot so far. >>> Very >>> smooth. >> >> I also updated two servers in the last few days without any problems. >> I don't think I have

Re: [CentOS] Is every CentOS release supported for 7 years?

On May 22, 2010, at 1:09 PM, Aniruddha wrote: > Hi, > > I've read some posts in the forums which seems to indicate that not > every CentOS version is well supported. Is it possible to install > CentOS 5.5 on a server and only apply security updates for 7 years? Or > is the preferred way to upgra

Re: [CentOS] Is every CentOS release supported for 7 years?

On May 22, 2010, at 2:23 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 05/22/2010 11:09 AM, Aniruddha wrote: >> >> I've read some posts in the forums which seems to indicate that not >> every CentOS version is well supported. Is it possible to install >> CentOS 5.5 on a server and only apply security updates f

Re: [CentOS] Is every CentOS release supported for 7 years?

Another issue with trying to apply just security updates for older point updates is that newer updates may be built differently. On 5.3, a package may not require another package be installed. But at some point later on, say, 5.5, it may gain a dependency. So if you try to install it, it may

Re: [CentOS] 194 Kernel Panic; 164 is Fine; How Do I Debug?

On Jun 6, 2010, at 1:11 PM, John Thomas wrote: >> Let's see - you're running a Dell and the second photo is out of focus > It's worse than that. It's a Dell monitor on a custom built machine by > someone who does not know what they are doing (me). Would a more > focused picture help? > >

Re: [CentOS] How current are packages?

On Jul 7, 2010, at 6:10 PM, Matthew Valentino wrote: > I'm relatively new to CentOS. I ordered a VPS and requested CentOS 5.5. As I > was installing packages, I noticed that some of the versions are pretty old - > for example, Postfix is v 2.3 in the repo (and, according to Postfix's > website

Re: [CentOS] To PAE or not to PAE...

But it would allow other usages of that RAM. cache. Other programs with great memory usage. Of course, as mentioned earlier, you would have to test with your workload whether the extra overhead is more than made up with the extra memory availability. On Jul 22, 2010, at 12:07 PM, Warren Youn

Re: [CentOS] To PAE or not to PAE...

On Jul 22, 2010, at 12:51 PM, Markus Falb wrote: > On 22/07/2010 19:07, Warren Young wrote: >> On 7/22/2010 3:25 AM, John Doe wrote: >>> >>> I have a 4GB pc and was wondering if it was worth going the PAE way to gain >>> those exta 700MB... >> >> Very few programs can use PAE to get at that ext