[CentOS] Running CentOS 6 in a Docker container on a non-CentOS host

I have to support a legacy build that runs on CentOS 6. I’m new to Docker and would like to use the official CentOS 6.10 image (https://github.com/CentOS/sig-cloud-instance-images/blob/da050e2fc6c28d8d72d8bf78c49537247b5ddf76/docker/Dockerfile

Re: [CentOS] Running CentOS 6 in a Docker container on a non-CentOS host

> On Mar 5, 2020, at 6:05, Peter Kjellström wrote: > > You can use singularity. The following example makes an image by > pulling from centos on dockerhub: Interesting! However, I would prefer to use more “native” Docker commands, as I would rather not have all developers install and configure

[CentOS] Using eth0 on desktops with single network interface

What is the best way to stop CentOS 6 from renaming the eth0 interface to em1? I've googled a bit and found many relevant posts, but have still not come up with an elegant solution. One of the resources I found was http://www.arachnoid.com/linux/network_names/index.html, and while the Python

Re: [CentOS] Using eth0 on desktops with single network interface

On Apr 19, 2012, at 11:25, Scott Robbins wrote: > I don't know when CentOS started doing this--I know when I did a fresh > CentOS 6.x install (back when 6.x was first available), it didn't do it. I think you are right. My one new Dell system that doesn't use em1 is the oldest one which I instal

Re: [CentOS] Using eth0 on desktops with single network interface

On Apr 19, 2012, at 14:14, Scott Robbins wrote: > What I do is this for an existing one. > > I change /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-whatever to ifcfg-eth0 (or > whatever it might be, e.g., eth0 and eth1). I ended up writing a script to automate this on my CentOS 6 systems which looks

Re: [CentOS] Allow updates but not upgrades

On May 10, 2012, at 1:36, Gregory Machin wrote: > I have a requirement where I need machines to only upgrade to even > numbered sub releases eg: 6.0 , 6.2, 6.4 and only on my approval. But > will allow updates within a given release. Others have debated the usefulness of this requirement, so I wo

[CentOS] Strange su behavior after installing latest CentOS updates

I did a "yum update" on my CentOS 6 systems yesterday for the first time in about a month and now have some automated processes failing because the PATH is not set up correctly when using "su". The problem is very easy to see by comparing the output of the following two commands: # su - -

Re: [CentOS] Strange su behavior after installing latest CentOS updates

On Jun 15, 2012, at 14:52, Leonard den Ottolander wrote: > Thanks for the heads up, but you should really take issues like this > upstream. There's nothing the CentOS can or at least will do as they > rebuild upstream ad verbatim. Try the RHEL 6 mailing list: > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listi

Re: [CentOS] Strange su behavior after installing latest CentOS updates

On Jun 15, 2012, at 17:11, Karanbir Singh wrote: > please file this at bugs.centos.org - so we can make sure its not an > issue we introduced. Done: issue number 0005778 has been filed. Alfred ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.cent

[CentOS] Modifying a netinstall ISO image

I want to make a very minor change to the netinstall ISO image, namely adding a few parameters to the boot line to automatically kick off a kickstart installation. Here is my approach: mount -o loop CentOS-6.2-i386-netinstall.iso /mnt cp -pr /mnt /tmp cd /tmp/mnt vi isolinux/isolinux.cf

Re: [CentOS] Modifying a netinstall ISO image

On Jul 29, 2012, at 13:23, Leonard den Ottolander wrote: > man mkisofs should give you an explanation of the used options. The > directory record options used (-J, -R and -T) probably increase the ISO > size compared to when those aren't used. Good point, but since I don't know how the original I

Re: [CentOS] Modifying a netinstall ISO image

On Jul 29, 2012, at 15:44, Joseph L. Casale wrote: > And that is just about the size of the duplicate initrd.img file. Good catch! > If you are going to ignore the manual page you posted and include the images > directory, hard link > the duplicate file and re-author :) Yes, it does say that y

[CentOS] Installing 32-bit CentOS 6 on a new Lenovo System x3650 M5 server?

Is there any known incompatibility with the latest 32-bit (i386) CentOS 6 and the latest Lenovo x3650 M5 servers? I’ve been running i386 CentOS 6.X on 3 year old x3650 M4 servers without any issues. Our development environment has not been ported to 64-bit (x86_64) yet, so we are stuck using i

Re: [CentOS] Installing 32-bit CentOS 6 on a new Lenovo System x3650 M5 server?

> On May 13, 2016, at 16:39, John R Pierce wrote: > > On 5/13/2016 1:27 PM, Alfred von Campe wrote: >> Is there any known incompatibility with the latest 32-bit (i386) CentOS 6 >> and the latest Lenovo x3650 M5 servers? I’ve been running i386 CentOS 6.X >> on

Re: [CentOS] Installing 32-bit CentOS 6 on a new Lenovo System x3650 M5 server?

> On May 13, 2016, at 16:27, I wrote: > > Is there any known incompatibility with the latest 32-bit (i386) CentOS 6 and > the latest Lenovo x3650 M5 servers? I’ve been running i386 CentOS 6.X on 3 > year old x3650 M4 servers without any issues. Our development environment > has not been port

[CentOS] Looking for DirectFB 1.4.11 RPMs for 32-bit CentOS 6

Our current build process requires the directfb-1.4.11-3.el6.i686.rpm and directfb-devel-1.4.11-3.el6.i686.rpm packages, but they appear to be no longer available from the EPEL repo, and I can’t find them anywhere else either. If you have a local copy, or can point me to some other repo or web

Re: [CentOS] Looking for DirectFB 1.4.11 RPMs for 32-bit CentOS 6

On Dec 16, 2016, at 9:11, Timotheus Pokorra wrote: > This is how you can find them: > I went to the package directory: > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/directfb/ > They are all retired, but when you click on the builds status, you > still see the old builds. > click on the la

Re: [CentOS] Looking for DirectFB 1.4.11 RPMs for 32-bit CentOS 6

On Dec 16, 2016, at 9:34, Alfred I wrote: > Thanks for the quick reply. I was able to download > directfb-1.4.11-3.el6.i686.rpm, but while I found an info page for the > corresponding -devel package > (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=6502900), I could not find > the actual R

<    1   2   3