Hi Barry,
First of all thanx for your reply but i already used the options
crossmnt,fsid=0 in my exports file still i am not able to re-export it.
Regards
lingu
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 5:30 PM, <centos-request at centos.org> wrote:
> Send CentOS mailing list submissions to
> centos at centos.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> centos-request at centos.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> centos-owner at centos.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of CentOS digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 39, Issue 13
> (centos-announce-request at centos.org)
> 2. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Anne Wilson)
> 3. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Wojtek Pilorz)
> 4. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Max Hetrick)
> 5. RE-export nfs mounted share (whoami i)
> 6. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Anne Wilson)
> 7. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Robert Moskowitz)
> 8. RE: PPPoE client help (John)
> 9. Re: kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 centosplus? (Johnny Hughes)
> 10. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Ned Slider)
> 11. Re: 40 second delay on automounts with 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5
> kernel (Johnny Hughes)
> 12. Config for NFSv4 an Kerberos on CentOS 5.1 (Sebastian Marten)
> 13. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Wojtek Pilorz)
> 14. openafs kernel module (Markus Hetzenecker)
> 15. RE: Low-memory Centos5? (Sorin at Gmail)
> 16. Re: openafs kernel module (Johnny Hughes)
> 17. Re: Config for NFSv4 an Kerberos on CentOS 5.1 (Barry Brimer)
> 18. Re: RE-export nfs mounted share (Barry Brimer)
> 19. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (Bob Taylor)
> 20. servercd i386 5.1 (Jerry Geis)
> 21. Re: CentOS 5.2 ? (Johnny Hughes)
> 22. RE: CentOS 5.2 ? (Ross S. W. Walker)
> 23. Re: servercd i386 5.1 (Ned Slider)
> 24. centos on ebox (Jerry Geis)
> 25. Re: CentOS 5.2 ? (Ned Slider)
> 26. Re: centos on ebox (Ralph Angenendt)
> 27. nfsnobody 65534 vs 4294967294 (David Halik)
> 28. Re: centos on ebox (Jerry Geis)
> 29. Re: centos on ebox (Tru Huynh)
> 30. Re: centos on ebox (Jerry Geis)
> 31. Re: Re: centos on ebox (Tru Huynh)
> 32. Re: Re: centos on ebox (Johnny Hughes)
> 33. Re: FireFox (Scott Silva)
> 34. Re: Low-memory Centos5? (MHR)
> 35. Re: centos on ebox (Jerry Geis)
> 36. Re: Re: centos on ebox (Johnny Hughes)
> 37. Setting up a chroot (MHR)
> 38. Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 (Alfred von Campe)
> 39. Re: centos on ebox (Jerry Geis)
> 40. Re: Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1
> (Gregg McClintic)
> 41. Re: Re: centos on ebox (Johnny Hughes)
> 42. Re: Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 (Johnny Hughes)
> 43. Re: centos on ebox (Jerry Geis)
> 44. Re: Setting up a chroot (Johnny Hughes)
> 45. RE: /etc/sysctl.conf edit not permanent (Joseph L. Casale)
> 46. Re: 40 second delay on automounts with 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5
> kernel (Joe Pruett)
> 47. Re: centos on ebox (Jerry Geis)
> 48. Re: Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1
> (Alfred von Campe)
> 49. Re: centos on ebox (Scott Silva)
> 50. Re: 40 second delay on automounts with 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5
> kernel (Ned Slider)
> 51. Re: 40 second delay on automounts with 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5
> kernel (Scott Silva)
> 52. Re: Re: 40 second delay on automounts with 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5
> kernel (Johnny Hughes)
> 53. Re: Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1 (MHR)
> 54. Re: FireFox (William L. Maltby)
> 55. Re: Centosplus vmware kernels....??? (Tom Bishop)
> 56. Negative Values in delay pools (Sergio Belkin)
> 57. Re: Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1
> (Filipe Brandenburger)
> 58. Re: Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1
> (Filipe Brandenburger)
> 59. Re: GFS (Jay Leafey)
> 60. Re: Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6
> (Christopher Chan)
> 61. Re: Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6
> (Matt Shields)
> 62. Re: Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6 (Rob Townley)
> 63. Re: Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6
> (Christopher Chan)
> 64. Re: FireFox (Robert Spangler)
> 65. Re: Config for NFSv4 an Kerberos on CentOS 5.1 (Sebastian Marten)
> 66. offline file shares (gopinath)
> 67. Re: offline file shares (John R Pierce)
> 68. Re: offline file shares (Christopher Chan)
> 69. Re: offline file shares (Fabian Arrotin - oxygen)
> 70. Re: Centosplus vmware kernels....??? (Tru Huynh)
> 71. Re: offline file shares (gopinath)
> 72. Hasp Driver required (Balaji)
> 73. Re: Hasp Driver required (Anne Wilson)
> 74. Re: GFS (Karanbir Singh)
> 75. Re: Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6
> (Karanbir Singh)
> 76. Re: Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1
> (Alfred von Campe)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:00:14 +0000 (UTC)
> From: centos-announce-request at centos.org
> Subject: [CentOS] CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 39, Issue 13
> To: centos-announce at centos.org
> Message-ID: <20080529120014.8BC3EF3C973 at mail.centos.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to
> centos-announce at 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-request at centos.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> centos-announce-owner at centos.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. CESA-2008:0288 Critical CentOS 3 i386 samba - security update
> (Tru Huynh)
> 2. CESA-2008:0288 Critical CentOS 3 x86_64 samba - security
> update (Tru Huynh)
> 3. CESA-2008:0288-01: Critical CentOS 2 i386 samba security
> update (John Newbigin)
> 4. CESA-2008:0506-05: Low CentOS 2 i386 tzdata enhancement
> update (John Newbigin)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 22:10:34 +0200
> From: Tru Huynh <tru at centos.org>
> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2008:0288 Critical CentOS 3 i386 samba
> - security update
> To: centos-announce at centos.org
> Message-ID: <20080528201034.GA10630 at sillage.bis.pasteur.fr>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> CentOS Errata and Security Advisory CESA-2008:0288
>
> samba security update for CentOS 3 i386:
> https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2008-0288.html
>
> The following updated file has been uploaded and is currently syncing to
> the mirrors:
>
> i386:
> updates/i386/RPMS/samba-3.0.9-1.3E.15.i386.rpm
> updates/i386/RPMS/samba-client-3.0.9-1.3E.15.i386.rpm
> updates/i386/RPMS/samba-common-3.0.9-1.3E.15.i386.rpm
> updates/i386/RPMS/samba-swat-3.0.9-1.3E.15.i386.rpm
>
> source:
> updates/SRPMS/samba-3.0.9-1.3E.15.src.rpm
>
> You may update your CentOS-3 i386 installations by running the command:
>
> yum update samba\*
>
> Tru
> --
> Tru Huynh (mirrors, CentOS-3 i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance)
> http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 189 bytes
> Desc: not available
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/attachments/20080528/1e3cf1bb/attachment-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 22:11:16 +0200
> From: Tru Huynh <tru at centos.org>
> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2008:0288 Critical CentOS 3 x86_64
> samba - security update
> To: centos-announce at centos.org
> Message-ID: <20080528201116.GB10630 at sillage.bis.pasteur.fr>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> CentOS Errata and Security Advisory CESA-2008:0288
>
> samba security update for CentOS 3 x86_64:
> https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2008-0288.html
>
> The following updated file has been uploaded and is currently syncing to
> the mirrors:
>
> x86_64:
> updates/x86_64/RPMS/samba-3.0.9-1.3E.15.i386.rpm
> updates/x86_64/RPMS/samba-3.0.9-1.3E.15.x86_64.rpm
> updates/x86_64/RPMS/samba-client-3.0.9-1.3E.15.x86_64.rpm
> updates/x86_64/RPMS/samba-common-3.0.9-1.3E.15.i386.rpm
> updates/x86_64/RPMS/samba-common-3.0.9-1.3E.15.x86_64.rpm
> updates/x86_64/RPMS/samba-swat-3.0.9-1.3E.15.x86_64.rpm
>
> source:
> updates/SRPMS/samba-3.0.9-1.3E.15.src.rpm
>
> You may update your CentOS-3 x86_64 installations by running the command:
>
> yum update samba\*
>
> Tru
> --
> Tru Huynh (mirrors, CentOS-3 i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance)
> http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 189 bytes
> Desc: not available
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/attachments/20080528/2eb98105/attachment-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:35:27 +1000
> From: John Newbigin <jnewbigin at ict.swin.edu.au>
> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2008:0288-01: Critical CentOS 2 i386
> samba security update
> To: centos-announce at centos.org
> Message-ID: <483DEC3F.4080100 at ict.swin.edu.au>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> The following errata for CentOS-2 have been built and uploaded to the
> centos mirror:
>
> RHSA-2008:0288-01 Critical: samba security update
>
> Files available:
> samba-2.2.12-1.21as.9.3.i386.rpm
> samba-client-2.2.12-1.21as.9.3.i386.rpm
> samba-common-2.2.12-1.21as.9.3.i386.rpm
> samba-swat-2.2.12-1.21as.9.3.i386.rpm
>
> More details are available from the RedHat web site at
> https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rh21as-errata.html
>
> The easy way to make sure you are up to date with all the latest patches
> is to run:
> # yum update
>
> --
> John Newbigin
> ITS Senior Analyst / Programmer
> Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies
> Swinburne University of Technology
> Melbourne, Australia
> http://www.ict.swin.edu.au/staff/jnewbigin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:55:51 +1000
> From: John Newbigin <jnewbigin at ict.swin.edu.au>
> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2008:0506-05: Low CentOS 2 i386 tzdata
> enhancement update
> To: centos-announce at centos.org
> Message-ID: <483DF107.202 at ict.swin.edu.au>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> The following errata for CentOS-2 have been built and uploaded to the
> centos mirror:
>
> RHEA-2008:0506-05 tzdata enhancement update
>
> Files available:
> tzdata-2008b-3.el2_1.noarch.rpm
>
> More details are available from the RedHat web site at
> https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rh21as-errata.html
>
> The easy way to make sure you are up to date with all the latest patches
> is to run:
> # yum update
>
> --
> John Newbigin
> ITS Senior Analyst / Programmer
> Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies
> Swinburne University of Technology
> Melbourne, Australia
> http://www.ict.swin.edu.au/staff/jnewbigin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-announce mailing list
> CentOS-announce at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
>
>
> End of CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 39, Issue 13
> ***********************************************
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:14:24 +0100
> From: Anne Wilson <cannewilson at googlemail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5?
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <200805291314.30954.cannewilson at googlemail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Thursday 29 May 2008 12:31:17 Jeffrey B. Layton wrote:
> > Good morning,
> >
> > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to
> > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The
> > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB.
> > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with
> > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox,
> > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was
> > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window
> > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless
> > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations?
> >
> For a time I ran FC6 on a laptop with only 256MB RAM, and I ran kde! It
> was
> slow, yes, but quite usable as long as I did one thing at a time.
> Considering the similarity between FC6 and CentOS5 I would think you'd
be
> OK,
> using it with care. ISTR that Firefox occasionally caused runaway cpu, but
> I
> doubt if the same problem exists in the current CentOS version.
>
> Anne
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 189 bytes
> Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/851e0adf/attachment-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:22:15 +0200
> From: Wojtek Pilorz <wpilorz at bdk.pl>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5?
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <20080529122215.GB28817 at bdk.pl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 07:31:17AM -0400, Jeffrey B. Layton wrote:
> > Good morning,
> >
> > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to
> > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The
> > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB.
> > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with
> > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox,
> I was running FedoraCore6 (very close to CentOS5)
> on a P4 box with 256MB of RAM, using KDE.
>
> OpenOffice (word, calc) was usable once it started, startup
> was rather slow.
> yum update was painful, I had to run it from text mode sometimes.
> With 384MB and IceWM or XFCE you should be OK
> (although I am not sure if Firefox and OpenOffice at the same
> time will be possible ...)
> One problem with old firefox is that it is (said to be) leaking memory
> so restarting it every few hours of so might be useful.
> I seem to remember that opera was advertised as being
> less memory hungry than firefox.
>
> > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was
> No eclipse, of course.
>
> > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window
> > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless
> > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations?
> No idea here.
> >
>
> Good luck,
>
> Wojtek
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 08:25:27 -0400
> From: Max Hetrick <maxhetrick at verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5?
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EA0B7.3070800 at verizon.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jeffrey B. Layton wrote:
>
> > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to
> > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The
> > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB.
> > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with
> > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox,
> > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was
> > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window
> > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless
> > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations?
>
>
> If you don't have to have a Red Hat based distro for this installation,
> perhaps look at DSL.
>
> http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/
>
> You can do an installation to hard drive and it takes very little
> resources. It's Debian based, not my preference, but perfect for these
> types of situations.
>
> It's supposed to run on memory as low as 128Mb and still be fast.
>
> As far as your wireless, from what I read you have to use the
> ndiswrapper to get cards to work under it, configuring it with
> wlanconfig. I've never done it.
>
> Anyways, hope this helps. Not that I like suggesting non CentOS
> products, but it's a suggestion.
>
> Regards,
> Max
>
>
> - --
> # find . "*imbecile" -exec sed -ie
"s/stupidity/commonsense/g" '{}' \;
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFIPqC3IXSX/6LmsXkRAvKHAKCG/j/xu+CLGw2Yrttki3zEKZgfMACfauEA
> 7DexMfRU0Wf7dE/KVeZGcjk> =MbcR
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 18:05:08 +0530
> From: "whoami i" <hicheerup at gmail.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] RE-export nfs mounted share
> To: centos at centos.org
> Message-ID:
> <29e045b80805290535o7893b939ye1e15fd4a8b6e7af at
mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hi
>
> Is there any way to re-export an nfs mounted directory? I am having three
> servers runnning on centos4.5 and i am trying to implement nfs share in an
> below manner [bcoz there is no alternative way for me to setup nfs share]
>
> HOST A--->>>EXPORTS /prod/data ------->>>HOST B
>
> HOST B ---->>MOUNTED ------>>> /prod/data-----UNDER---/PROD1
[working
> fine]
>
> HOST B EXPORTS /PROD1 ------>>>>HOST C
>
> HOST C ----->>TRY MOUNTING ----->>>RESULT IN BELOW ERROR
>
> BUT WHEN I TRY TO MOUNT THE ALREADY MOUNTED NFS SHARE IN "HOST C
" I
> AM
> GETTING BELOW ERROR.
>
> #################MOUNT ERROR##########################################
> mount: 10.65.64.30:/PROD1 failed, reason given by server: Permission
> denied
> ##########################################################################
>
> Can anyone suggest me the way to work out aboVE scenario.
>
>
> Note: I find no -r(-re-export) option in rpc.mountd
>
>
> REGARDS
> LINGU
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/20e1daf9/attachment-0001.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:36:59 +0100
> From: Anne Wilson <cannewilson at googlemail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5?
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <200805291336.59926.cannewilson at googlemail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Thursday 29 May 2008 13:22:15 Wojtek Pilorz wrote:
> > I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless
> >
> > > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations?
> >
> > No idea here.
>
> I'm fairly sure I've seen a how-to for that, so it's worth
googling. I may
> have a printout with a url, but I can't look just now.
>
> Anne
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 189 bytes
> Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/6c93cca7/attachment-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 08:46:38 -0400
> From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm at htt-consult.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5?
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EA5AE.7030708 at htt-consult.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII";
format="flowed"
>
> Jeffrey B. Layton wrote:
> > Good morning,
> >
> > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to
> > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The
> > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB.
> > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with
> > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox,
> > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was
> > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window
> > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless
> > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations?
> I have a number of 256Mb Centos installs here with Gnome. I shut off as
> many services as possible, and it runs. I made the swap partition (Yes I
> manually create a separate swap partition instead of running it in LVM)
> at least 512Mb if not more.
>
> Firefox 1.5 works fine. Watch yourself with OpenOffice, don't have too
> much running.
>
> One trick I do with Centos servers running with only 256Mb, is run
> VNCserver and then from my notebook access with Gnome. This works great,
> only a one line change in the vnc files to have Gnome as your GUI on the
> server.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:03:36 -0400
> From: "John" <jses27 at gmail.com>
> Subject: RE: [CentOS] PPPoE client help
> To: "'CentOS mailing list'" <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <009d01c8c18c$6a5e3440$0700a8c0 at ethan27>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: centos-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On
> Behalf
> Of Robert Moskowitz
> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 4:42 PM
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Subject: [CentOS] PPPoE client help
>
> Please point me in the right direction....
>
> My ISP is giving me an IPv6 prefix, but to get that I have to:
>
> The current Speedstream ADSL router will be configured as a bridge. I will
> have to set up a Linux (read Centos, I hope) router that will connect
> ethernet to the Speedstream but run PPPoE to his network and get both the
> IPv4 and IPv6 route delegations.
>
> There is no easy way that I know of to test this ahead of time. I
> basically
> have to get the box configed, have my ISP switch the Speedstream to briding
> mode, and GO! So I need to do some reading....
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Try http://www.ipv6.org/howtos.html .
>
> JohnStanley
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 08:11:23 -0500
> From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 centosplus?
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EAB7B.5050407 at centos.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Alfred von Campe wrote:
> > On May 28, 2008, at 14:08, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> >
> >> We are currently using the builders to build centos-5.2 ... I can
try
> >> to get the that kernel in, but we should very soon thereafter
have
> >> the 5.2 one, so it might be better for you just to wait.
> >
> > Does the 5.2 kernel include the NFS patch (RH bug 321111 I think)?
The
> > only reason I am using the centosplus kernel is because of the NFS
> > performance issue. Oh, and I also like to have framebuffer support in
> > the kernel which was missing from the previous centosplus kernel. So
if
> > the 5.2 kernel includes the NFS patch, and has FB support, that would
> > make my day!
>
> yes ... the new kernel is fixed upstream for that issue
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 252 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/c07bac5b/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:12:38 +0100
> From: Ned Slider <ned at unixmail.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5?
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EABC6.4030505 at unixmail.co.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Jeffrey B. Layton wrote:
> > Good morning,
> >
> > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to
> > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The
> > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB.
> > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with
> > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox,
> > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was
> > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window
> > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless
> > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations?
> >
> > TIA!
> >
> > Jeff
> >
>
> As others have said, you should be fine with 384MB RAM. One thing to
> note - I think the graphical installer requires 512MB to run (check the
> release notes) so you would need to perform a text mode install. Do a
> fairly minimal install and add whatever you want afterwards with YUM.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 08:22:22 -0500
> From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] 40 second delay on automounts with
> 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 kernel
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EAE0E.8050805 at centos.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Joe Pruett wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 May 2008, Joe Pruett wrote:
> >
> >> so, has anyone seen ipsec get messed up with the latest kernel?
> >
> > i have verified that dropping back to the 53.1.19 kernel makes ipsec
> > function again. with the new 5.2 kernel coming soon, i'm not sure
if it
> > makes sense to try and figure this out or not.
>
> This is already solved on another thread ... but for closure on this
> one, there is a known bug here with that kernel and ipsec:
>
> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2853
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 252 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/ca1714a3/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:34:09 +0200
> From: Sebastian Marten <sebi4711 at gmail.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] Config for NFSv4 an Kerberos on CentOS 5.1
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EB0D1.3050506 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15"
>
> Hi list,
> Is it possible to set up an NFSv4/Kerberos environment on CentOS 5.1?
> I set up Kerberos and NFS but get several erros
>
> "Warning: rpc.gssd appears not to be running.
> mount.nfs4: Permission denied"
>
> Is this an CentOS oder an config problem?
>
> Greetings
> Sebastian
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 542 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/a8b3f622/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:37:31 +0200
> From: Wojtek Pilorz <wpilorz at bdk.pl>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5?
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <20080529133731.GC28817 at bdk.pl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 02:12:38PM +0100, Ned Slider wrote:
> > Jeffrey B. Layton wrote:
> > >Good morning,
> > >
> > >I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to
> > >use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen).
The
> > >bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB.
> > >Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with
> > >little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox,
> [...]
> > >Jeff
> > >
> >
> > As others have said, you should be fine with 384MB RAM. One thing to
> > note - I think the graphical installer requires 512MB to run (check
the
> > release notes) so you would need to perform a text mode install. Do a
> > fairly minimal install and add whatever you want afterwards with YUM.
> If no additional repositories are selected during installation,
> 384MB should be OK with graphical.
> If you want to be sure, run it over vnc
> (needs specifying vnc vncpassword=a_password when starting installer)
> (and keep in mind vnc is unencrypted protocol;
>
> Graphical installer tends to be more complete than text in later RedHat
> systems.
>
>
> BTW. I am using CentOS 4.6 with KDE on P4 with 128MB RAM.
> Perhaps not stellar performance, but quite usable.
> (And I do not run OpenOffice and firefox at the same time...)
>
> Good luck,
>
> Wojtek.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:44:22 +0200
> From: Markus Hetzenecker <markus.hetzenecker at uibk.ac.at>
> Subject: [CentOS] openafs kernel module
> To: centos at centos.org
> Message-ID: <200805291544.22401.markus.hetzenecker at uibk.ac.at>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> We start to use centos 5 for our workstation at our site (University
> Innsbruck)
> and we use openafs to hold the home directories. There would be a big
> advantage
> to have the openafs kernel module (and the additional rpms) in the centos
> extras (or addons) repository with an automatic compile for the available
> kernels.
> If you need any help to do this i would be happy to participate in any way.
>
> Cheers, Markus.
>
> ---
> fork() off;
> LinuxBetreuung Uni Ibk, fon: +43 512 507 2369
> GnuPG key:
http://www.uibk.ac.at/~c102130/public_key.asc<http://www.uibk.ac.at/%7Ec102130/public_key.asc>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:51:05 +0200
> From: "Sorin at Gmail" <sorin.srbu at gmail.com>
> Subject: RE: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5?
> To: "'CentOS mailing list'" <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <60744A85CEE74854BEDF6B8B55A1CD7A at orgfarm.uu.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Jeffrey B. Layton <> scribbled on Thursday, May 29, 2008 1:31 PM:
>
> I use CentOS 5.1 with 256M RAM (incl X, Gnome, Firefox etc and the
> proprietary
> Nvidia 3D gfx drivers. Yes I know it's overkill, but it's so much
nicer and
> easier to move around stuff using a file manager instead of doing it on the
> CLI) in a web server scenario (single family site with lots of pics). Works
> very well and I haven't had any problems, except for that yum maxes out
the
> CPU (Amd Duron/750) occasionally.
>
> This is a stationary computer, and an old one at that. Portables however
> have
> a history of being slower generally (especially older ones), so you might
> want
> to inform us on what other hw you have in yours.
>
> XFCE is nice, fast and slick. Good choice. You might want to shut down most
> daemons you don't have a need for.
>
> I've been running CentOS 5 on a P3/500 with 256M as well (It's a
Best
> Okechobee). Works fine, but some hardware might need some tweaking. I run
> X,
> Gnome, Firefox and OpenOffice et all on this one. CentOS even found my
> obscure
> noname USB-to-Ethernet adapter too! This machine runs fine and I
haven't
> run
> into anything strange or difficult to resolve. Life is good.
>
> HTH.
>
>
> > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to
> > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The
> > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB.
> > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with
> > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox,
> > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was
> > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window
> > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless
> > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations?
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: smime.p7s
> Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
> Size: 5118 bytes
> Desc: not available
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/91cea634/smime-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:04:10 -0500
> From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] openafs kernel module
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EB7DA.3050008 at centos.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Markus Hetzenecker wrote:
> > We start to use centos 5 for our workstation at our site (University
> Innsbruck)
> > and we use openafs to hold the home directories. There would be a big
> advantage
> > to have the openafs kernel module (and the additional rpms) in the
centos
> > extras (or addons) repository with an automatic compile for the
available
> > kernels.
> > If you need any help to do this i would be happy to participate in any
> way.
> >
>
> openafs is available here:
>
> http://atrpms.net/dist/el5/openafs/
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 252 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/f73bfcc5/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 17
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:04:16 -0500
> From: Barry Brimer <lists at brimer.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Config for NFSv4 an Kerberos on CentOS 5.1
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <1212069856.483eb7e05c0d3 at mail.toucanhost.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Quoting Sebastian Marten <sebi4711 at gmail.com>:
>
> > Hi list,
> > Is it possible to set up an NFSv4/Kerberos environment on CentOS 5.1?
> > I set up Kerberos and NFS but get several erros
> >
> > "Warning: rpc.gssd appears not to be running.
> > mount.nfs4: Permission denied"
> >
> > Is this an CentOS oder an config problem?
>
> Yes.
>
> Are you running all of the gss services?
> Is portmap running?
> Did you uncomment the SECURE_NFS="yes" in /etc/sysconfig/nfs?
> Was your kerberos principal created with:
> "addprinc -randkey -e des-cbc-md5:normal nfs/server.domain.com"
> Was your keytab entry created with:
> "ktadd -e des-cbc-md5:normal nfs/server.domain.com"
> Do you have gss/krb5p just before the nfs options in parentheses?
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Barry
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 18
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:06:34 -0500
> From: Barry Brimer <lists at brimer.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] RE-export nfs mounted share
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <1212069994.483eb86aa5555 at mail.toucanhost.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Quoting whoami i <hicheerup at gmail.com>:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > Is there any way to re-export an nfs mounted directory? I am having
> three
> > servers runnning on centos4.5 and i am trying to implement nfs share
in
> an
> > below manner [bcoz there is no alternative way for me to setup nfs
share]
>
>
> Did you add the options crossmnt,fsid=0 to the top level nfs export? The
> fsid=0
> might not be needed, but I'm pretty sure the crossmnt is needed.
>
> Barry
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 19
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 07:38:41 -0700
> From: Bob Taylor <bob8221 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5?
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <1212071921.5483.17.camel at ann.qtpi.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 14:12 +0100, Ned Slider wrote:
> > Jeffrey B. Layton wrote:
> > > Good morning,
> > >
> > > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like
to
> > > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen).
The
> > > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB.
> > > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with
> > > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox,
> > > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was
> > > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window
> > > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless
> > > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations?
>
> >
> > As others have said, you should be fine with 384MB RAM. One thing to
> > note - I think the graphical installer requires 512MB to run (check
the
> > release notes) so you would need to perform a text mode install. Do a
> > fairly minimal install and add whatever you want afterwards with YUM.
>
> I have been running FC 3 and now CentOS 5.1 on an old Gateway 2000 with
> only 256MB RAM. Both installed with GUI. Only some editing of services.
> I have 1 Gig of swap. I currently have 1 instance of emacs, Evolution,
> CDDBSlave2, Firefox 2.0.0.12 and 2 Gnome terminals plus a whole lot of
> services running most of which I *hope* I don't need. Screen refresh is
> slow but not too much. The machine starts to *really* slow down after
> about 15% swap. All I do is logout. Oh, this is my only computer. If
> anyone wants to tell me to buy a new one, please send me the money.
> Otherwise keep your silence. :-)
>
> Bob
> --
> Bob Taylor
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 20
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 10:40:00 -0400
> From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] servercd i386 5.1
> To: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EC040.3000205 at pagestation.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> I am looking for the servercd for i386 centos 5.1 on the mirrors.
> Not finding it though.
>
> Can someone point me to it. Thanks,
>
> Jerry
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 21
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:54:07 -0500
> From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.2 ?
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EC38F.6050109 at centos.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 9:11 AM, MHR <mhullrich at gmail.com>
wrote:
> >> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 2:41 AM, Ralph Angenendt <
> ra+centos at br-online.de <ra%2Bcentos at br-online.de>> wrote:
> >>> Answer: When it's ready.
> >> Suits me - I have a different question (and it's probably up
somewhere
> >> I don't have time to look at the moment - I'll check when
I get to
> >> work, but by then I'll have forgotten this question again).
> >>
> >> Does 5.2 have an updated release of GDE with it?
> >>
> >> Every so often, among other things, when I exit Evolution, it
crashes,
> >> but Bug Buddy says it can't report the bug because my GDE is
too old.
> >>
> >> 5.0 came with GDE 2.16.0. Gnome development is up to 2.23.1 (or
later
> >> - I lost track).
> >>
> >
> > RHEL-5 will probably be 2.16 til its end of life.
>
> This is generally true .. the minor kde or gnome version (that is the 5
> in kde-3.5.4 or the 16 in gnome-2.16.0) has never changed in a the same
> RHEL version in the past ...
>
> HOWEVER, I have heard that RHEL-6 is a ways off and that RHEL 5.3 will
> continue to have major changes, even more pronounced than those in 5.2,
> so we will need to wait and see :D
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 252 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/add3b705/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 22
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 11:10:57 -0400
> From: "Ross S. W. Walker" <rwalker at medallion.com>
> Subject: RE: [CentOS] CentOS 5.2 ?
> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID:
> <E2BB8074E5500C42984D980D4BD78EF9022A7212 at
MFG-NYC-EXCH2.mfg.prv>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
> > Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 9:11 AM, MHR <mhullrich at
gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 2:41 AM, Ralph Angenendt <
> ra+centos at br-online.de <ra%2Bcentos at br-online.de>> wrote:
> > >>> Answer: When it's ready.
> > >> Suits me - I have a different question (and it's probably
up somewhere
> > >> I don't have time to look at the moment - I'll check
when I get to
> > >> work, but by then I'll have forgotten this question
again).
> > >>
> > >> Does 5.2 have an updated release of GDE with it?
> > >>
> > >> Every so often, among other things, when I exit Evolution, it
crashes,
> > >> but Bug Buddy says it can't report the bug because my GDE
is too old.
> > >>
> > >> 5.0 came with GDE 2.16.0. Gnome development is up to 2.23.1
(or
> later
> > >> - I lost track).
> > >>
> > >
> > > RHEL-5 will probably be 2.16 til its end of life.
> >
> > This is generally true .. the minor kde or gnome version (that is the
5
> > in kde-3.5.4 or the 16 in gnome-2.16.0) has never changed in a the
same
> > RHEL version in the past ...
> >
> > HOWEVER, I have heard that RHEL-6 is a ways off and that RHEL 5.3 will
> > continue to have major changes, even more pronounced than those in
5.2,
> > so we will need to wait and see :D
>
> Well one can hope... Personally I would love to see KDE 3.5.9
> pulled in as it is a lot more stable and robust then KDE 3.5.4.
>
> KDE 4.0 is still way too immature even for RHEL 6, the interface
> still needs a lot of working out, polishing and the icons need to
> look more, well less like a child's software system.
>
> I still prefer to use KDE 3.5 and 3.5.9 is definitely the way to
> go there.
>
> -Ross
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
> the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
> and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
> of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
> is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
> please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
> original and any copy or printout thereof.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 23
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 16:38:19 +0100
> From: Ned Slider <ned at unixmail.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] servercd i386 5.1
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483ECDEB.8040300 at unixmail.co.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Jerry Geis wrote:
> > I am looking for the servercd for i386 centos 5.1 on the mirrors.
> > Not finding it though.
> >
> > Can someone point me to it. Thanks,
> >
> > Jerry
>
>
> There is currently no serverCD for CentOS 5.1, but you can install from
> just the first CD if that helps. See here:
>
>
>
http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/CentOS5#head-c79c201900d22f163a445f134fcc6c916eb3cb6e
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 24
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 11:46:53 -0400
> From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] centos on ebox
> Cc: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483ECFED.4030000 at pagestation.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> >
> > Jerry Geis wrote:
> > >/ I am looking for the servercd for i386 centos 5.1 on the
mirrors.
> > />/ Not finding it though.
> > />/
> > />/ Can someone point me to it. Thanks,
> > />/
> > />/ Jerry
> > /
> >
> > There is currently no serverCD for CentOS 5.1, but you can install
from
> > just the first CD if that helps. See here:
> >
> >
>
http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/CentOS5#head-c79c201900d22f163a445f134fcc6c916eb3cb6e
> >
> >
> >
> I grabbed the first CD and tried booting. no luck at this point.
>
> I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox 2300 unit.
> This unit has a vortex86 CPU.
> When installing the unit finds the USB cdrom I type "linux text"
and it
> starts
> vlinuz...
> init....
> Screen goes black and the unit reboots.
>
> I also tried with acpi=off.
>
> Any ideas on getting anaconda to come up on this ebox unit?
>
> Jerry
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/4a27799f/attachment-0001.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 25
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 16:49:56 +0100
> From: Ned Slider <ned at unixmail.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.2 ?
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483ED0A4.20208 at unixmail.co.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
> > Johnny Hughes wrote:
> >
> >> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> >>> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 9:11 AM, MHR <mhullrich at
gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 2:41 AM, Ralph Angenendt <
> ra+centos at br-online.de <ra%2Bcentos at br-online.de>> wrote:
> >>>>> Answer: When it's ready.
> >>>> Suits me - I have a different question (and it's
probably up somewhere
> >>>> I don't have time to look at the moment - I'll
check when I get to
> >>>> work, but by then I'll have forgotten this question
again).
> >>>>
> >>>> Does 5.2 have an updated release of GDE with it?
> >>>>
> >>>> Every so often, among other things, when I exit Evolution,
it crashes,
> >>>> but Bug Buddy says it can't report the bug because my
GDE is too old.
> >>>>
> >>>> 5.0 came with GDE 2.16.0. Gnome development is up to
2.23.1 (or
> later
> >>>> - I lost track).
> >>>>
> >>> RHEL-5 will probably be 2.16 til its end of life.
> >> This is generally true .. the minor kde or gnome version (that is
the 5
> >> in kde-3.5.4 or the 16 in gnome-2.16.0) has never changed in a the
same
> >> RHEL version in the past ...
> >>
> >> HOWEVER, I have heard that RHEL-6 is a ways off and that RHEL 5.3
will
> >> continue to have major changes, even more pronounced than those in
5.2,
> >> so we will need to wait and see :D
> >
> > Well one can hope... Personally I would love to see KDE 3.5.9
> > pulled in as it is a lot more stable and robust then KDE 3.5.4.
> >
> > KDE 4.0 is still way too immature even for RHEL 6, the interface
> > still needs a lot of working out, polishing and the icons need to
> > look more, well less like a child's software system.
> >
> > I still prefer to use KDE 3.5 and 3.5.9 is definitely the way to
> > go there.
> >
> > -Ross
> >
>
> Well hopefully the testing of KDE 4 in Fedora 9 will answer the issue of
> whether it is ready or not for RHEL6. Also, as RHEL6 is still a way off,
> and KDE 4 is developing fast, things _may_ have changed by the time it
> is released. But I do agree, atm I'd personally rather see KDE 3.5
> included.
>
> The other factor to consider is the long term support issues related to
> maintaining KDE 3.5 in RHEL6 given that I _think_ qt3 is already
> unsupported.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 26
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 18:03:24 +0200
> From: Ralph Angenendt <ra+centos at br-online.de <ra%2Bcentos at
br-online.de>>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] centos on ebox
> To: centos at centos.org
> Message-ID: <20080529160324.GC7728 at br-online.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Jerry Geis wrote:
>
> > I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox 2300 unit.
> > This unit has a vortex86 CPU.
> > When installing the unit finds the USB cdrom I type "linux
text" and it
> > starts
> > vlinuz...
> > init....
> > Screen goes black and the unit reboots.
>
> Sounds like an i586 CPU which is not supported by CentOS 5. You'd
> probably have better luck with CentOS 4.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ralph
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 194 bytes
> Desc: not available
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/7c737650/attachment-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 27
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:11:01 -0400
> From: David Halik <dhalik at jla.rutgers.edu>
> Subject: [CentOS] nfsnobody 65534 vs 4294967294
> To: centos at centos.org
> Message-ID: <483ED595.3000301 at jla.rutgers.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>
> Hi, I just had a couple of questions about nfsnobody.
>
> We run a very large NFS infrastructure based off of a NetApp, and we're
> been discussing whether or not it is necessary to have 64 bit nfsnobody
> as 4294967294. I understand the reasoning behind this (2^32 - 2 gives
> you a max UID), but we're having issues since we run multiple
> architectures. The UID doesn't play nice across Solairs, Centos, 32 vs
> 64bit, etc.
>
> Are there any obvious security risks or problems with using nfsnobody as
> 65534 (2^16 - 2) on 64bit, or even just assigning it a random value, 300
> for example? I can't see any particular reason for having such a high
> number other than to keep it above any possible real UID space.
>
> Also, the NetApp automatically generates quota tables based off of the
> highest UID, so obviously this is a *major* problem if suddenly we have
> billions of users as far as the NetApp is concerned. Ultimately, we'd
> like to just assign it a low value in the range with our other system
> account, but we are not sure of the potential risks with NFS etc.
>
> Any comments would be appreciated.
> Thanks!
>
> --
> ===============================> David Halik
> System Administrator
> OIT-CSS Rutgers University
> dhalik at jla.rutgers.edu
> ===============================>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 28
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:24:08 -0400
> From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox
> To: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483ED8A8.4040804 at pagestation.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> >
> > Jerry Geis wrote:
> >
> > >/ I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox 2300 unit.
> > />/ This unit has a vortex86 CPU.
> > />/ When installing the unit finds the USB cdrom I type "linux
text" and
> it
> > />/ starts
> > />/ vlinuz...
> > />/ init....
> > />/ Screen goes black and the unit reboots.
> > /
> > Sounds like an i586 CPU which is not supported by CentOS 5. You'd
> > probably have better luck with CentOS 4.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Ralph
> >
> Ralph,
>
> I thought if it is a 586 CPU it should run 386 code right?
> So I didnt think there should be an issue there...
>
> I can see not being able to run 586 code on a 386 but the other way
> around should be ok.
>
> Jerry
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/8f78c97e/attachment-0001.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 29
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 18:24:36 +0200
> From: Tru Huynh <tru at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] centos on ebox
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <20080529162436.GE28463 at sillage.bis.pasteur.fr>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:46:53AM -0400, Jerry Geis wrote:
> >
> > I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox 2300 unit.
> http://www.embeddedpc.net/eBox2300/tabid/110/Default.aspx ?
>
> you won't make it with only 128 MB of RAM...
> is the cpu i686 compatible?
>
> Tru
>
> --
> Tru Huynh (mirrors, CentOS-3 i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance)
> http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 189 bytes
> Desc: not available
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/f1fa592b/attachment-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 30
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:38:38 -0400
> From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox
> To: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EDC0E.80002 at pagestation.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> >
> > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:46:53AM -0400, Jerry Geis wrote:
> > >/
> > />/ I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox 2300 unit.
> > /http://www.embeddedpc.net/eBox2300/tabid/110/Default.aspx ?
> >
> > you won't make it with only 128 MB of RAM...
> > is the cpu i686 compatible?
> >
> > Tru
> >
> Tru,
>
> yes this is the box I am trying to install on...
>
> I dont know if its i686, either way I thought i386 should work. I am I
> wrong?
>
> Is it the 128M memory issue? I thought I used to install with that much
> - especially in text mode.
>
> Any suggestions.
>
> Jerry
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 31
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 19:11:35 +0200
> From: Tru Huynh <tru at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <20080529171135.GA15177 at sillage.bis.pasteur.fr>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:38:38PM -0400, Jerry Geis wrote:
> ...
> >
> > yes this is the box I am trying to install on...
> >
> > I dont know if its i686, either way I thought i386 should work. I am I
> > wrong?
> yes, the i686 has some additionnal instructions that a i586 does not
> have. I have no idea about the cpu listed there.
>
> Try C4 with the i586 or i686 (default) version. You will be fixed.
> C5 does not support i586 class cpu. There was a thread about it
> some days/weeks ago. Not much volonteer to do/support it and the
> CentOS team has other priorities ;).
>
> > Is it the 128M memory issue? I thought I used to install with that
much
> > - especially in text mode.
> it's below the minimal recommended size (256MB). It may work, I
haven't
> tried.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tru
> --
> Tru Huynh (mirrors, CentOS-3 i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance)
> http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 189 bytes
> Desc: not available
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/979e2f38/attachment-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 32
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:14:24 -0500
> From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EE470.1040107 at centos.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Jerry Geis wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:46:53AM -0400, Jerry Geis wrote:
> >> >/ />/ I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox 2300
unit.
> >> /http://www.embeddedpc.net/eBox2300/tabid/110/Default.aspx ?
> >>
> >> you won't make it with only 128 MB of RAM...
> >> is the cpu i686 compatible?
> >
>
> > yes this is the box I am trying to install on...
> >
> > I dont know if its i686, either way I thought i386 should work. I am I
> > wrong?
>
> None of the RHEL branches support any processors that are < i686 for the
> i386 arch.
>
> CentOS supports i586 in centOS-3 and CentOS-4 (things not in RHEL) ..
> and only i686 in CentOS-2 and CentOS-5 (just like RHEL).
>
> So, NO ... and i586 processor will not run CentOS-5.
> >
> > Is it the 128M memory issue? I thought I used to install with that
much
> > - especially in text mode.
> >
> > Any suggestions.
>
> doing some research ... this is a pentium mmx compatible chip, which is
> i586 ... you can use CentOS-4 on there.
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 252 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/86d63054/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 33
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 10:22:11 -0700
> From: Scott Silva <ssilva at sgvwater.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] Re: FireFox
> To: centos at centos.org
> Message-ID: <g1moo3$f6i$5 at ger.gmane.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> on 5-29-2008 4:55 AM Daniel de Kok spake the following:
> > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Stephen John Smoogen <
> smooge-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >> It will depend upon if Red Hat will release a version for Red Hat
> >> Enterprise Linux. The best bet will be that they will not release
it
> >> until RHEL-4.7 goes into beta testing.
> >
> > It looks like there is a good chance it will be included in 4.7:
> > https://www.redhat.com/archives/nahant-list/2008-May/msg00052.html
> >
> > (- Added Firefox3)
> >
> > Take care,
> > Daniel
> RedHat must be trying to cut some of the costs of backporting. They seem
> somewhat more willing to update versions then they used to be.
>
> --
> MailScanner is like deodorant...
> You hope everybody uses it, and
> you notice quickly if they don't!!!!
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 258 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/02cea4a7/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 34
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 11:00:22 -0700
> From: MHR <mhullrich at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Low-memory Centos5?
> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID:
> <f4e013870805291100u2015d817gca6995deca3a9f3d at
mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 4:31 AM, Jeffrey B. Layton <laytonjb at
charter.net>
> wrote:
> > Good morning,
> >
> > I've inherited an old laptop from my wife that I'd like to
> > use when I travel (it's fairly small with a 12" screen). The
> > bad part is that it is maxed out on memory with 384MB.
> > Has anyone played with using Centos5 on systems with
> > little memory? Ideally, I don't need too much - Firefox,
> > Openoffice, a little Perl/Python/C here and there. I was
> > thinking about using either XFCE or Icewm as the window
> > manager. I'd also like it to work with the existing wireless
> > card (Dlink DWL-G650). Any thoughts or recommendations?
> >
>
> I have an old Toshiba Tecra laptop with a P3 running 600MHz and 256MB
> of memory. I installed CentOS 5.1 with the graphical installer, and
> it runs GNOME fairly well. It's slow (compared to my main desktop,
> but that's an AMD 64x2 4200+ with 4GB of memory), but I expect that
> with an older, slower CPU like this (as opposed to a molasses crawl
> /old/ CPU :-). I use OOo 2.4 on it, and that is also slow, but it
> runs, and I always use the command line interface whenever I can, but
> that's 'cuz I'm more comfortable there, and it works nicely all
> around.
>
> YMMV
>
> mhr
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 35
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:01:31 -0400
> From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox
> To: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EEF7B.8060103 at pagestation.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> >
> > Jerry Geis wrote:
> > >>/
> > />>/ On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:46:53AM -0400, Jerry Geis wrote:
> > />>/ >/ />/ I am trying to install centos i386 on a ebox
2300 unit.
> > />>/ /http://www.embeddedpc.net/eBox2300/tabid/110/Default.aspx
?
> > />>/
> > />>/ you won't make it with only 128 MB of RAM...
> > />>/ is the cpu i686 compatible?
> > />/
> > /
> > >/ yes this is the box I am trying to install on...
> > />/
> > />/ I dont know if its i686, either way I thought i386 should work.
I am
> I
> > />/ wrong?
> > /
> > None of the RHEL branches support any processors that are < i686
for the
> > i386 arch.
> >
> > CentOS supports i586 in centOS-3 and CentOS-4 (things not in RHEL) ..
> > and only i686 in CentOS-2 and CentOS-5 (just like RHEL).
> >
> > So, NO ... and i586 processor will not run CentOS-5.
> > >/
> > />/ Is it the 128M memory issue? I thought I used to install with
that
> much
> > />/ - especially in text mode.
> > />/
> > />/ Any suggestions.
> > /
> > doing some research ... this is a pentium mmx compatible chip, which
is
> > i586 ... you can use CentOS-4 on there.
> >
> I just tried my old centos 4.4 i386 disk 1
> did "linux text mem=128M" and the same thing.
> after vmlinuz.., and initrd... it just resets.
>
> Am I not boot with the correct options to get the 386 kernel and its
> trying to use the 686 kernel?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jerry
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 36
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:08:50 -0500
> From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EF132.3080409 at centos.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Jerry Geis wrote:
> >>
> >> Jerry Geis wrote:
> >> >>/
> >> />>/ On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:46:53AM -0400, Jerry Geis
wrote:
> >> />>/ >/ />/ I am trying to install centos i386 on a
ebox 2300 unit.
> >> />>/
/http://www.embeddedpc.net/eBox2300/tabid/110/Default.aspx ?
> >> />>/
> >> />>/ you won't make it with only 128 MB of RAM...
> >> />>/ is the cpu i686 compatible?
> >> />/ /
> >> >/ yes this is the box I am trying to install on...
> >> />/ />/ I dont know if its i686, either way I thought i386
should
> >> work. I am I />/ wrong?
> >> /
> >> None of the RHEL branches support any processors that are <
i686 for
> >> the i386 arch.
> >>
> >> CentOS supports i586 in centOS-3 and CentOS-4 (things not in RHEL)
..
> >> and only i686 in CentOS-2 and CentOS-5 (just like RHEL).
> >>
> >> So, NO ... and i586 processor will not run CentOS-5.
> >> >/ />/ Is it the 128M memory issue? I thought I used to
install with
> >> that much />/ - especially in text mode.
> >> />/ />/ Any suggestions.
> >> /
> >> doing some research ... this is a pentium mmx compatible chip,
which
> >> is i586 ... you can use CentOS-4 on there.
> >>
> > I just tried my old centos 4.4 i386 disk 1
> > did "linux text mem=128M" and the same thing.
> > after vmlinuz.., and initrd... it just resets.
> >
> > Am I not boot with the correct options to get the 386 kernel and its
> > trying to use the 686 kernel?
> >
>
> now do:
>
> i586 text mem=128
>
> :D
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 252 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/25f01f9c/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 37
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 11:17:43 -0700
> From: MHR <mhullrich at gmail.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] Setting up a chroot
> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID:
> <f4e013870805291117gc3d098cocf6a4098195f05ea at
mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> I'm trying to build GNOME (to run a more recent version than 2.16.* on
> CentOS 5.1) and I keep running into a lot of rather strange problems.
>
> I'm wondering if this might have something to do with my hybrid 64 and
> 32 bit general environment, so I want to try a pure 64-bit chroot.
>
> I've never done this before, and I'm not entirely sure how to, and
I
> didn't see anything particularly on point, either at centos.org or
> google. If I missed it, just say where and that should be enough.
>
> Guidelines? Suggestions (other than "go away" or other
physically
> difficult crudities :-)?
>
> Thanks.
>
> mhr
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 38
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:23:24 -0400
> From: Alfred von Campe <alfred at von-campe.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <D20517A9-FAD1-48A8-AE35-DB6D18497DAC at von-campe.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
> Ever since I upgraded all my systems to CentOS 5.1 I have been
> getting reports from users about "all their windows
disappearing". A
> little digging revealed that they meant all gnome-terminal windows.
> Since there is only one gnome-terminal process by default for all
> your open terminal windows and tabs, a crash of that process means
> losing all your terminal windows. These crashes often (but not
> always) occur over night when the system is otherwise idle.
>
> A quick Google search found a problem on Ubuntu related to VTE (the
> terminal emulator widget used by gnome-terminal) but not much else of
> interest. Has anyone on this list experienced this? I find it hard
> to believe I'm the only one. I never saw this issue while running
> CentOS 4.X on these systems...
>
> Alfred
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 39
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:30:05 -0400
> From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox
> To: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EF62D.2060907 at pagestation.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> >
> > now do:
> >
> > i586 text mem=128
> >
> >
> when I do "i586 text mem=128" it says cant find kernel
> so I do "linux i586 text mem=128" and I get the same behavior
> Loading vmlinuz....
> Loading initrd....
> and reboot.
>
> Am I not correctly specifying the kernel yet?
>
> Jerry
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 40
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:40:56 -0400
> From: Gregg McClintic <gregg at thegbox.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <1212086456.5154.3.camel at doubleg.liquidweb.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 14:23 -0400, Alfred von Campe wrote:
> > Ever since I upgraded all my systems to CentOS 5.1 I have been
> > getting reports from users about "all their windows
disappearing". A
> > little digging revealed that they meant all gnome-terminal windows.
> > Since there is only one gnome-terminal process by default for all
> > your open terminal windows and tabs, a crash of that process means
> > losing all your terminal windows. These crashes often (but not
> > always) occur over night when the system is otherwise idle.
> >
> > A quick Google search found a problem on Ubuntu related to VTE (the
> > terminal emulator widget used by gnome-terminal) but not much else of
> > interest. Has anyone on this list experienced this? I find it hard
> > to believe I'm the only one. I never saw this issue while running
> > CentOS 4.X on these systems...
> >
> > Alfred
> >
>
> I've seen extreme slow gnome terminals in the past on Cent 5, I even
> downgraded the package for the terminal to make it work better.
>
> Never had it close randomly. I have however had applications randomly
> close other then the terminal.
>
> Gregg.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 41
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:42:09 -0500
> From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EF901.6090905 at centos.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Jerry Geis wrote:
> >>
> >> now do:
> >>
> >> i586 text mem=128
> >>
> >>
> > when I do "i586 text mem=128" it says cant find kernel
> > so I do "linux i586 text mem=128" and I get the same
behavior
> > Loading vmlinuz....
> > Loading initrd....
> > and reboot.
> >
> > Am I not correctly specifying the kernel yet?
> >
>
> Are you sure this is a CD-1 and not a ServerCD ???
>
> i586 text
>
> THAT should work
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 252 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/83b9661a/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 42
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:48:20 -0500
> From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EFA74.5080001 at centos.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Alfred von Campe wrote:
> > Ever since I upgraded all my systems to CentOS 5.1 I have been getting
> > reports from users about "all their windows disappearing".
A little
> > digging revealed that they meant all gnome-terminal windows. Since
> > there is only one gnome-terminal process by default for all your open
> > terminal windows and tabs, a crash of that process means losing all
your
> > terminal windows. These crashes often (but not always) occur over
night
> > when the system is otherwise idle.
> >
> > A quick Google search found a problem on Ubuntu related to VTE (the
> > terminal emulator widget used by gnome-terminal) but not much else of
> > interest. Has anyone on this list experienced this? I find it hard
to
> > believe I'm the only one. I never saw this issue while running
CentOS
> > 4.X on these systems...
> >
>
> How did you upgrade?
>
> I am running CentOS-5 on many workstations that stay on all the time and
> I have never had the gnome-terminal crash.
>
> Is it possible that you have older (possibly orphaned) binaries still
> installed from the upgrade process?
>
> If this is from a NEW install, then we need more info to help.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 252 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/09205167/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 43
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:52:11 -0400
> From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox
> To: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EFB5B.3000209 at pagestation.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> >
> > Jerry Geis wrote:
> > >>/
> > />>/ now do:
> > />>/
> > />>/ i586 text mem=128
> > />>/
> > />>/
> > />/ when I do "i586 text mem=128" it says cant find
kernel
> > />/ so I do "linux i586 text mem=128" and I get the same
behavior
> > />/ Loading vmlinuz....
> > />/ Loading initrd....
> > />/ and reboot.
> > />/
> > />/ Am I not correctly specifying the kernel yet?
> > />/
> > /
> > Are you sure this is a CD-1 and not a ServerCD ???
> >
> > i586 text
> >
> > THAT should work
> >
> Sure enough I had the centos 4 server CD, I looked deaper and got the CD
> disk 1 out of my pack
> and "i586 text" does a BUNCH more... thanks.
>
> Now I see on the screen that hda is discovered on the IDE interface as a
> 1 GIG device.
> The last 2 lines printed are:
>
> Cannot open root device "<NULL>" or unknown block (8,3)
> kernel panic not syncing unable to mount root.
>
> What do I do with that?
>
> Everything above that looks normal as detect PS/2 etc...
>
> Jerry
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 44
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:52:25 -0500
> From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Setting up a chroot
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483EFB69.3050509 at centos.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> MHR wrote:
> > I'm trying to build GNOME (to run a more recent version than
2.16.* on
> > CentOS 5.1) and I keep running into a lot of rather strange problems.
> >
> > I'm wondering if this might have something to do with my hybrid 64
and
> > 32 bit general environment, so I want to try a pure 64-bit chroot.
> >
> > I've never done this before, and I'm not entirely sure how to,
and I
> > didn't see anything particularly on point, either at centos.org or
> > google. If I missed it, just say where and that should be enough.
> >
> > Guidelines? Suggestions (other than "go away" or other
physically
> > difficult crudities :-)?
> >
>
> Probably the best thing to do is to use mock to build in.
>
> You provide it with some repos and it automatically creates a chroot to
> build things.
>
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Projects/Mock
>
> That has some instructions, though you should be able to yum install mock.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 252 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/b4b64779/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 45
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:55:48 -0600
> From: "Joseph L. Casale" <JCasale at activenetwerx.com>
> Subject: RE: [CentOS] /etc/sysctl.conf edit not permanent
> To: 'CentOS mailing list' <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID:
> <49627735003F5C479100225C339F9FE06F0C8F322A at
Mail.activenetwerx.int>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> >I expect that you will see "net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1"
> >
> >Please confirm.
> >
> >Barry
>
> You were right, thanks for the info.
> jlc
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 46
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 11:58:49 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Joe Pruett <joey at clean.q7.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] 40 second delay on automounts with
> 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 kernel
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.1.10.0805291157360.2794 at q7.q7.com>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
> On Thu, 29 May 2008, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
> > This is already solved on another thread ... but for closure on this
one,
> > there is a known bug here with that kernel and ipsec:
> >
> > http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2853
>
> that bug entry does say to use the upstream bug for info about a
> workaround, but the upstream bug is blocked to mere mortals. is there a
> workaround other than just using the older kernel?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 47
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:13:18 -0400
> From: Jerry Geis <geisj at pagestation.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox
> To: CentOS ML <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483F004E.3050906 at pagestation.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Jerry Geis wrote:
> >>
> >> Jerry Geis wrote:
> >> >>/
> >> />>/ now do:
> >> />>/
> >> />>/ i586 text mem=128
> >> />>/
> >> />>/ />/ when I do "i586 text mem=128" it
says cant find kernel
> >> />/ so I do "linux i586 text mem=128" and I get the
same behavior
> >> />/ Loading vmlinuz....
> >> />/ Loading initrd....
> >> />/ and reboot.
> >> />/ />/ Am I not correctly specifying the kernel yet?
> >> />/ /
> >> Are you sure this is a CD-1 and not a ServerCD ???
> >>
> >> i586 text
> >>
> >> THAT should work
> >>
> > Sure enough I had the centos 4 server CD, I looked deaper and got the
> > CD disk 1 out of my pack
> > and "i586 text" does a BUNCH more... thanks.
> >
> > Now I see on the screen that hda is discovered on the IDE interface as
> > a 1 GIG device.
> > The last 2 lines printed are:
> >
> > Cannot open root device "<NULL>" or unknown block
(8,3)
> > kernel panic not syncing unable to mount root.
> >
> > What do I do with that?
> >
> > Everything above that looks normal as detect PS/2 etc...
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> I am booting now with "i586 text mem=128M root=/dev/hda"
>
> and I am well into the menus of installing now...
>
> Thanks all for the suggestions.
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 48
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:14:31 -0400
> From: Alfred von Campe <alfred at von-campe.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <FA326913-1514-41EC-9420-CE8FDFD03FEB at von-campe.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
> On May 29, 2008, at 14:48, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
> > How did you upgrade?
>
> Fresh install via kickstart. I reformatted the root and /boot
> partitions, but left one user partition untouched.
>
> > Is it possible that you have older (possibly orphaned) binaries
> > still installed from the upgrade process?
>
> I don't think this is possible since I reformatted the root partition
> (I only have /, /boot, and /scratch partitions in addition to a swap
> partition).
>
> > If this is from a NEW install, then we need more info to help.
>
> The process ends without leaving a trace unfortunately (at least that
> I can find). I did have an strace running on one system attached to
> the gnone-terminal process and it finally died after 5 days or so.
> Here are the last 20 lines from the log:
>
> open("/usr/share/X11/XErrorDB", O_RDONLY) = 27
> fstat64(27, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=37949, ...}) = 0
> read(27, "! $Xorg: XErrorDB,v 1.3 2000/08/"..., 37949) = 37949
> close(27) = 0
> write(2, "The program \'gnome-terminal\' rec"..., 592)
= 592
> close(18) = 0
> kill(15700, SIGTERM) = 0
> writev(14, [{"GIOP\1\2\1\5\0\0\0\0", 12}], 1) = 12
> close(14) = 0
> writev(15, [{"GIOP\1\2\1\5\0\0\0\0", 12}], 1) = 12
> close(15) = 0
> writev(13, [{"GIOP\1\2\1\5\0\0\0\0", 12}], 1) = 12
> close(13) = 0
> writev(11, [{"GIOP\1\2\1\5\0\0\0\0", 12}], 1) = 12
> close(11) = 0
> close(9) = 0
> close(8) = 0
> unlink("/tmp/orbit-kb12698/linc-3d51-0-2491c193d89b6") = 0
> close(12) = 0
> exit_group(1) = ?
>
> Is there a better way than strace to get some information on this crash?
>
> Alfred
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 49
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 12:18:55 -0700
> From: Scott Silva <ssilva at sgvwater.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] Re: centos on ebox
> To: centos at centos.org
> Message-ID: <g1mvj4$ir0$1 at ger.gmane.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> on 5-29-2008 11:52 AM Jerry Geis spake the following:
> >>
> >> Jerry Geis wrote:
> >> >>/
> >> />>/ now do:
> >> />>/
> >> />>/ i586 text mem=128
> >> />>/
> >> />>/ />/ when I do "i586 text mem=128" it
says cant find kernel
> >> />/ so I do "linux i586 text mem=128" and I get the
same behavior
> >> />/ Loading vmlinuz....
> >> />/ Loading initrd....
> >> />/ and reboot.
> >> />/ />/ Am I not correctly specifying the kernel yet?
> >> />/ /
> >> Are you sure this is a CD-1 and not a ServerCD ???
> >>
> >> i586 text
> >>
> >> THAT should work
> >>
> > Sure enough I had the centos 4 server CD, I looked deaper and got the
CD
> > disk 1 out of my pack
> > and "i586 text" does a BUNCH more... thanks.
> >
> > Now I see on the screen that hda is discovered on the IDE interface as
a
> > 1 GIG device.
> > The last 2 lines printed are:
> >
> > Cannot open root device "<NULL>" or unknown block
(8,3)
> > kernel panic not syncing unable to mount root.
> >
> > What do I do with that?
> >
> > Everything above that looks normal as detect PS/2 etc...
> >
> > Jerry
> It must be either the hardware or a bad disc as I just did a quick install
> in
> vmware with 128 Mgs of ram and it went OK.
>
> --
> MailScanner is like deodorant...
> You hope everybody uses it, and
> you notice quickly if they don't!!!!
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 258 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/ac5a75e1/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 50
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 20:42:17 +0100
> From: Ned Slider <ned at unixmail.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] 40 second delay on automounts with
> 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 kernel
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483F0719.80700 at unixmail.co.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Joe Pruett wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 May 2008, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> >
> >> This is already solved on another thread ... but for closure on
this
> >> one, there is a known bug here with that kernel and ipsec:
> >>
> >> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2853
> >
> > that bug entry does say to use the upstream bug for info about a
> > workaround, but the upstream bug is blocked to mere mortals. is there
a
> > workaround other than just using the older kernel?
>
>
> Did you see the added note?
>
> I quote:
>
> "For the benefit of those who do not have access to the upstream
> bugzilla report, this bug has been fixed in the updated 5.2 kernel
> (version number 2.6.18-92.el5), and this kernel also contains the
> CVE-2007-6282 patch. I would recommend that people affected by this bug
> upgrade to 2.6.18-92.el5."
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 51
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:02:16 -0700
> From: Scott Silva <ssilva at sgvwater.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] Re: 40 second delay on automounts with
> 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 kernel
> To: centos at centos.org
> Message-ID: <g1n248$st6$1 at ger.gmane.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> on 5-29-2008 12:42 PM Ned Slider spake the following:
> > Joe Pruett wrote:
> >> On Thu, 29 May 2008, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> >>
> >>> This is already solved on another thread ... but for closure
on this
> >>> one, there is a known bug here with that kernel and ipsec:
> >>>
> >>> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2853
> >>
> >> that bug entry does say to use the upstream bug for info about a
> >> workaround, but the upstream bug is blocked to mere mortals. is
there
> >> a workaround other than just using the older kernel?
> >
> >
> > Did you see the added note?
> >
> > I quote:
> >
> > "For the benefit of those who do not have access to the upstream
> > bugzilla report, this bug has been fixed in the updated 5.2 kernel
> > (version number 2.6.18-92.el5), and this kernel also contains the
> > CVE-2007-6282 patch. I would recommend that people affected by this
bug
> > upgrade to 2.6.18-92.el5."
> Is that the kernel to be released with 5.2?
>
>
> --
> MailScanner is like deodorant...
> You hope everybody uses it, and
> you notice quickly if they don't!!!!
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 258 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/897a60d3/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 52
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:21:56 -0500
> From: Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Re: 40 second delay on automounts with
> 2.6.18-53.1.21.el5 kernel
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483F1064.3030300 at centos.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Scott Silva wrote:
> > on 5-29-2008 12:42 PM Ned Slider spake the following:
> >> Joe Pruett wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 29 May 2008, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> This is already solved on another thread ... but for
closure on this
> >>>> one, there is a known bug here with that kernel and ipsec:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2853
> >>>
> >>> that bug entry does say to use the upstream bug for info about
a
> >>> workaround, but the upstream bug is blocked to mere mortals.
is
> >>> there a workaround other than just using the older kernel?
> >>
> >>
> >> Did you see the added note?
> >>
> >> I quote:
> >>
> >> "For the benefit of those who do not have access to the
upstream
> >> bugzilla report, this bug has been fixed in the updated 5.2 kernel
> >> (version number 2.6.18-92.el5), and this kernel also contains the
> >> CVE-2007-6282 patch. I would recommend that people affected by
this
> >> bug upgrade to 2.6.18-92.el5."
> > Is that the kernel to be released with 5.2?
>
> yes ... and we have it built already ... but I am not sure everything
> else that might need to go with it. module-init-tools and mkinitrd are
> also upgrades so those for sure
>
> But rather than releasing pieces, I would think that using the older
> kernels on ipsec machines would be best for a couple weeks.
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 252 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/c6c0f834/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 53
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:23:07 -0700
> From: MHR <mhullrich at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1
> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID:
> <f4e013870805291323m29774f82xd963d67b8e47eec4 at
mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Alfred von Campe <alfred at
von-campe.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Fresh install via kickstart. I reformatted the root and /boot
> partitions,
> > but left one user partition untouched.
> >
> > I don't think this is possible since I reformatted the root
partition (I
> > only have /, /boot, and /scratch partitions in addition to a swap
> > partition).
> >
> > The process ends without leaving a trace unfortunately (at least that
I
> can
> > find). I did have an strace running on one system attached to the
> > gnone-terminal process and it finally died after 5 days or so. Here
are
> the
> > last 20 lines from the log:
> >
>
> Is it possible you have some kind of time-out set, like an idle time
> cut-off? If it's only happening at night, this might explain it.
>
> I have Seamonkey crashes and strange behavior related to nautilus
> windows when I try to open Netowrk Connections, but I've never seen or
> heard of anything like this.
>
> mhr
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 54
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 17:55:05 -0400
> From: "William L. Maltby" <CentOS4Bill at triad.rr.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] FireFox
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <1212098105.3714.4.camel at
centos501.homegroannetworking>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 13:09 +0200, Bernhard Gschaider wrote:
> > >>>>> On Tue, 27 May 2008 21:51:07 -0400
> > >>>>> "WLM" == William L Maltby
<CentOS4Bill at triad.rr.com> wrote:
> > <snip>
>
> > WLM> I chose not to uninstall the distributed one. I unpackaed
the
> > WLM> 3.0rc1 tarball in the $HOME of a user and run it from
there.
> >
> > <snipped recipe>
> >
> > WLM> This lets all other users get the box-stock version while
I
> > WLM> test the new one. So far it's looking pretty good.
> >
> > Question: if I do this, will I be able to move back to the
> > stock-1.5-version without problems. In other words: is the stuff like
> > bookmarks, history etc that is written to disk backward-compatible?
>
> Last time I did something like this was with the beta 5 release. In that
> case I removed the box version and installed globally. Going that
> direction, the per-user config files seemed to hold as normal. Once I
> discovered that the needed Java app wouldn't work, I uninstalled the
> beta, reinstalled box-stock.
>
> Again, no config issues.
>
> Before everybody beats me like a rented mule, there was no risk to other
> users - I'm it, just with different logons. So I felt comfortable with
> picking up the pieces if it broke and did not grab one of my other
> machines for testing.
>
> > <snip sig stuff>
>
> HTH
> --
> Bill
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 55
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 17:19:44 -0500
> From: "Tom Bishop" <bishoptf at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centosplus vmware kernels....???
> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID:
> <fc808e200805291519x6829323dk60427b801171b592 at
mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Thanks Tru and Johnny, one more question. Can I just use the
> centos5-testing repo, ie, yum enablerepoxxx install kernel-vm? I ask
> because I tried and while it worked it loaded an older kernel. Should I
> just go to tru's directory and install the RPM directly? Also, ok more
> than
> one question, are the open-vm-tools in the same repo or only found in
> Johnny's testing directory. Thanks again...
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 8:59 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at
gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Ruslan Sivak wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks to Tru, kernel-vm is all up-to-date and you can find it
here:
> >>>
> >>> http://people.centos.org/tru/kernel-vm/
> >>>
> >>> and yes, using the clocksource=pit option should not be an
issue with
> >>> these kernels.
> >>>
> >>> Akemi
> >>>
> >>>
> >> So if I understand this correctly, one should not be using a stock
> kernel
> >> when running inside a vm, but should use the kernel-vm kernel?
> >>
> >
> > It depends on the host hardware and OS - many combinations have
trouble
> > servicing the 1000hz guest clock which has to be simulated in
software.
> > Also, some host systems have variable speed CPUs controlled by power
> > managment which throws off the guests:
> >
> >
>
http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&cmd=displayKC&externalId=1591
> >
> > --
> > Les Mikesell
> > lesmikesell at gmail.com
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CentOS mailing list
> > CentOS at centos.org
> > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/abd5e7e2/attachment-0001.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 56
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 20:01:48 -0300
> From: "Sergio Belkin" <sebelk at gmail.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] Negative Values in delay pools
> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID:
> <8c6f7f450805291601k6e15c9edk623bf1f9b111fb5f at
mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hi,
> I configured delay pools on squid. I get the following from squidclient:
>
> Delay pools configured: 2
>
> Pool: 1
> Class: 1
>
> Aggregate:
> Disabled.
>
> Pool: 2
> Class: 1
>
> Aggregate:
> Max: 187500
> Restore: 187500
> Current: -6
>
> Memory Used: 624 bytes
>
> End of Output
>
> What does mean Current with a negative value?
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> --
> --
> Open Kairos http://www.openkairos.com
> Watch More TV http://sebelk.blogspot.com
> Sergio Belkin -
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 57
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 20:58:14 -0400
> From: "Filipe Brandenburger" <filbranden at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1
> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID:
> <e814db780805291758l5b74dff5rc0d9233b025e19d4 at
mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Alfred von Campe <alfred at
von-campe.com>
> wrote:
> > write(2, "The program \'gnome-terminal\' rec"...,
592) = 592
>
> This looks interesting, but unfortunately you cut the message too
> short to know what it was saying... You might find it in
> /var/log/Xorg.0.log, but I wouldn't bet on that.
>
> > Is there a better way than strace to get some information on this
crash?
>
> strace seems fine, just use some options to enhance the output you get:
> -s 1024: take 1024 bytes for every string. This wouldn't have cut that
one
> short
> -tt: if you want timestamps
> -f: to follow forked processes
>
> I almost always call strace like this:
>
> $ strace -f -tt -s 1024 -o /tmp/strace_PROCESSNAME.$$ PIDOFTHEPROCESS
>
> Try to do it again and you might find out what gnome-terminal was
> trying to tell you.
>
> HTH,
> Filipe
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 58
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 20:59:19 -0400
> From: "Filipe Brandenburger" <filbranden at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Frequent Gnome Terminal crashes in CentOS 5.1
> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID:
> <e814db780805291759m203c1391q4f084f7ba66501b3 at
mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Filipe Brandenburger
> <filbranden at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Alfred von Campe <alfred at
von-campe.com>
> wrote:
> >> write(2, "The program \'gnome-terminal\'
rec"..., 592) = 592
> >
> > This looks interesting, but unfortunately you cut the message too
> > short to know what it was saying... You might find it in
> > /var/log/Xorg.0.log, but I wouldn't bet on that.
>
> Try ~/.xsession-errors, that's a more likely place to find the error
> message.
>
> HTH,
> Filipe
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 59
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 22:21:39 -0500
> From: Jay Leafey <jay.leafey at mindless.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] GFS
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483F72C3.9070107 at mindless.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Mag Gam wrote:
> > Hello:
> >
> > I am planning to implement GFS for my university as a summer project.
I
> > have 10 servers each with SAN disks attached. I will be reading and
> > writing many files for professor's research projects. Each file
can be
> > anywhere from 1k to 120GB (fluid dynamic research images). The 10
> > servers will be using NIC bonding (1GB/network). So, would GFS be
ideal
> > for this? I have been reading a lot about it and it seems like a
perfect
> > solution.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > TIA
> >
>
> "Perfect"? No, but usable. We've got a cluster of 4 systems
attached
> to a fibre-channel-based SAN running CentOS 4 and the Cluster Suite
> components with multiple instances of the Oracle database. It actually
> works pretty well and fails over nicely in the case of exceptions. It
> is moderately complex to set up, but the information needed REALLY IS in
> the docs... you just have to REALLY read them!
>
> We haven't tried CentOS 5 and the new cluster components as Oracle only
> supports the version of the database we're running on Red Hat EL4.
> Given that, the combination looks a bit more "finished" than the
> versions in EL4.
>
> Another alternative that we are examining is using OCFS2 (Oracle Cluster
> File System 2) and iSCSI for the shared storage with Heartbeat for
> service management. This combination looks to be a bit "lighter"
than
> the Cluster Suite and GFS, but I'm hoping to confirm or disprove that
> impression this summer in my "copious free time".
>
> As usual, you mileage may vary.
> --
> Jay Leafey - Memphis, TN
> jay.leafey at mindless.com
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: smime.p7s
> Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
> Size: 5177 bytes
> Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/a677a6d5/smime-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 60
> Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 11:43:47 +0800
> From: Christopher Chan <christopher at ias.com.hk>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483F77F3.4090400 at ias.com.hk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> > We have kernel support for IPv6 in Centos, but not stateful firewall
> > support.
> >
> > That requires at least the 2.6.20 kernel, which means Fedora Core 6 or
> > some other Linux distro.
> >
> > None of the various free Linux firewalls have IPv6 support.
Supposedly
> > FWBuilder can manage Netfilters for a Linux Kernel, but that seems to
be
> > the extent of it.
> >
> > More sad facts as I uncover them.....
>
> Just use openbsd. We cannot expect Linux to rule everything. Use what
> best fits the job.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 61
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 23:53:12 -0400
> From: "Matt Shields" <mattboston at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6
> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID:
> <100716920805292053q1c1d26ecqa18ae7635b8c687c at
mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Christopher Chan
> <christopher at ias.com.hk> wrote:
> > Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> >>
> >> We have kernel support for IPv6 in Centos, but not stateful
firewall
> >> support.
> >>
> >> That requires at least the 2.6.20 kernel, which means Fedora Core
6 or
> >> some other Linux distro.
> >>
> >> None of the various free Linux firewalls have IPv6 support.
Supposedly
> >> FWBuilder can manage Netfilters for a Linux Kernel, but that seems
to be
> the
> >> extent of it.
> >>
> >> More sad facts as I uncover them.....
> >
> > Just use openbsd. We cannot expect Linux to rule everything. Use what
> best
> > fits the job.
>
> Not sure about FC6, but in both CentOS 4 & 5 there is an ip6tables. I
> haven't used it, but I'm assuming that you can build rules just
like
> you do with iptables.
>
> --
> -matt
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 62
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 22:57:32 -0500
> From: "Rob Townley" <rob.townley at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6
> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID:
> <7e84ed60805292057ra4bb873r71abf40eb1f91d17 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 10:53 PM, Matt Shields <mattboston at
gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Christopher Chan
> > <christopher at ias.com.hk> wrote:
> > > Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> > >>
> > >> We have kernel support for IPv6 in Centos, but not stateful
firewall
> > >> support.
> > >>
> > >> That requires at least the 2.6.20 kernel, which means Fedora
Core 6 or
> > >> some other Linux distro.
> > >>
> > >> None of the various free Linux firewalls have IPv6 support.
> Supposedly
> > >> FWBuilder can manage Netfilters for a Linux Kernel, but that
seems to
> be
> > the
> > >> extent of it.
> > >>
> > >> More sad facts as I uncover them.....
> > >
> > > Just use openbsd. We cannot expect Linux to rule everything. Use
what
> > best
> > > fits the job.
> >
> > Not sure about FC6, but in both CentOS 4 & 5 there is an
ip6tables. I
> > haven't used it, but I'm assuming that you can build rules
just like
> > you do with iptables.
> >
> > --
> > -matt
> > _______________________________________________
> > CentOS mailing list
> > CentOS at centos.org
> > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> >
>
> My dd-wrt web page has a IPv6 checkbox, but don't know what it does. i
am
> shunning IPv6 bc securing the private side of a NAT is hard enough.
> Securing IPv6 seems much much much tougher.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080529/c2b6ef9d/attachment-0001.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 63
> Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 12:13:28 +0800
> From: Christopher Chan <christopher at ias.com.hk>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Learning some sad things about the state of IPv6
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483F7EE8.90303 at ias.com.hk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Matt Shields wrote:
> > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Christopher Chan
> > <christopher at ias.com.hk> wrote:
> >> Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> >>> We have kernel support for IPv6 in Centos, but not stateful
firewall
> >>> support.
> >>>
>
> > Not sure about FC6, but in both CentOS 4 & 5 there is an
ip6tables. I
> > haven't used it, but I'm assuming that you can build rules
just like
> > you do with iptables.
> >
>
> The OP is not saying there is no ipv6 netfilter support. He said that
> there is no ipv6 state netfilter module or something like that.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 64
> Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 00:22:39 -0400
> From: Robert Spangler <mlists at zoominternet.net>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] FireFox
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <200805300022.39665.mlists at zoominternet.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Tuesday 27 May 2008 20:19, MHR wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Robert Spangler
> >
> > <mlists at zoominternet.net> wrote:
> > > Can I use one out of the Fedora's repos? If so, which repo?
> >
> > You can just pull down the latest version from mozilla.org -
they're
> > pretty good about compatibility. I'd try it out in a different
> > install directory, though, just to be sure, but you can always
> > uninstall it and re-load the release version if it doesn't work
right
> > for you.
>
> I downloaded the tar file from Mozilla and placed it under my home Dir.
> Seems
> to be working fine presently. After some more tests if there are no issues
> I'll replace 1.5 with 2.0. Thank for your help.
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
> Robert
>
> Smile... it increases your face value!
> Linux User #296285
> http://counter.li.org
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 65
> Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 08:54:48 +0200
> From: Sebastian Marten <sebi4711 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Config for NFSv4 an Kerberos on CentOS 5.1
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483FA4B8.4050405 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hi,
>
> Barry Brimer schrieb:
> > Quoting Sebastian Marten <sebi4711 at gmail.com>:
> >
> >> Hi list,
> >> Is it possible to set up an NFSv4/Kerberos environment on CentOS
5.1?
> >> I set up Kerberos and NFS but get several erros
> >>
> >> "Warning: rpc.gssd appears not to be running.
> >> mount.nfs4: Permission denied"
> >>
> >> Is this an CentOS oder an config problem?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > Are you running all of the gss services?
> > Is portmap running?
> > Did you uncomment the SECURE_NFS="yes" in
/etc/sysconfig/nfs?
> > Was your kerberos principal created with:
> > "addprinc -randkey -e des-cbc-md5:normal
nfs/server.domain.com"
> > Was your keytab entry created with:
> > "ktadd -e des-cbc-md5:normal nfs/server.domain.com"
> > Do you have gss/krb5p just before the nfs options in parentheses?
> >
>
> I've done all this + add princs for the host. (tested with ds and
> ds.example.lan)
>
> I get this error:
> ds rpc.svcgssd[4686]: ERROR: GSS-API: error in gss_acquire_cred():
> Unspecified GSS failure. Minor code may provide more information - No
> principal in keytab matches desired name
> ds rpc.svcgssd[4686]: Unable to obtain credentials for 'nfs'
> ds rpc.svcgssd[4686]: unable to obtain root (machine) credentials
> ds rpc.svcgssd[4686]: do you have a keytab entry for
> nfs/<your.host>@<YOUR.REALM> in /etc/krb5.keytab?
>
> But: kadmin.local listprincs return:
>
> K/M at EXAMPLE.COM
> host/ds.example.lan at EXAMPLE.COM
> host/ds at EXAMPLE.COM
> kadmin/admin at EXAMPLE.COM
> kadmin/changepw at EXAMPLE.COM
> kadmin/history at EXAMPLE.COM
> kadmin/localhost.localdomain at EXAMPLE.COM
> krbtgt/EXAMPLE.COM at EXAMPLE.COM
> nfs/ds.example.lan at EXAMPLE.COM
> nfs/ds at EXAMPLE.COM
> root/admin at EXAMPLE.COM
> root at EXAMPLE.COM
>
> The hostname is ds.example.lan
>
> /tec/krb5.conf points on the right server.
>
> kinit and klist works
>
> kinit
> Password for root at EXAMPLE.COM:
> [root at ds ~]# klist
> Ticket cache: FILE:/tmp/krb5cc_0
> Default principal: root at EXAMPLE.COM
>
> Valid starting Expires Service principal
> 05/30/08 08:52:48 05/31/08 08:52:47 krbtgt/EXAMPLE.COM at EXAMPLE.COM
>
>
> Kerberos 4 ticket cache: /tmp/tkt0
> klist: You have no tickets cached
>
>
> There is my problem?
>
>
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> > Barry
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 542 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080530/13fcd479/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 66
> Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 12:26:21 +0530
> From: "gopinath" <gopinath at signal-networks.com>
> Subject: [CentOS] offline file shares
> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <000801c8c222$44ae9d70$0101a8c0 at signet>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> can we configure offline file shares in samba as we do on a windows pc
>
> Gopinath
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080530/35b07475/attachment-0001.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 67
> Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 00:51:30 -0700
> From: John R Pierce <pierce at hogranch.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] offline file shares
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483FB202.4010802 at hogranch.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> gopinath wrote:
> > can we configure offline file shares in samba as we do on a windows pc
>
> afaik, a windows client can be told to support an offline share thats on
> a samba serrver, as the offline feature involves client side caching of
> the files.
>
> I seriously doubt the samba client for unix would know how to do offline
> files, however.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 68
> Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 15:53:14 +0800
> From: Christopher Chan <christopher at ias.com.hk>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] offline file shares
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483FB26A.8010805 at ias.com.hk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> gopinath wrote:
> > can we configure offline file shares in samba as we do on a windows pc
>
> Whatcha mean? Prevent offline caching?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 69
> Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:27:52 +0200
> From: Fabian Arrotin - oxygen <fabian.arrotin at arrfab.net>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] offline file shares
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <483FBA88.10004 at arrfab.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> gopinath wrote:
> > can we configure offline file shares in samba as we do on a windows pc
> >
> > Gopinath
> Do you mean caching files coming from a Windows/SMB share to your CentOS
> box ?
> Nothing does that but you can write a rsync script if needed ... but
> attention to the way rsync will synchronize .. or use unison ?
>
> Fabian
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 70
> Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:40:27 +0200
> From: Tru Huynh <tru at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centosplus vmware kernels....???
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <20080530084027.GA10027 at sillage.bis.pasteur.fr>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 05:19:44PM -0500, Tom Bishop wrote:
> > Thanks Tru and Johnny, one more question. Can I just use the
> > centos5-testing repo, ie, yum enablerepoxxx install kernel-vm? I ask
> > because I tried and while it worked it loaded an older kernel. Should
I
> > just go to tru's directory and install the RPM directly? Also, ok
more
> than
> > one question, are the open-vm-tools in the same repo or only found in
> > Johnny's testing directory. Thanks again...
>
> Hi Les,
>
> Everything under http://people.centos.org/tru/ is signed for testing and
> feedback before it can be built by the CentOS build systems and
> enter either the regular testing repository or their final destination.
> You can look at it as alpha release ;).
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tru
> --
> Tru Huynh (mirrors, CentOS-3 i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance)
> http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 189 bytes
> Desc: not available
> Url :
>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080530/533dacbc/attachment-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 71
> Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 14:37:32 +0530
> From: "gopinath" <gopinath at signal-networks.com>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] offline file shares
> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org>
> Message-ID: <000b01c8c234$97d8b9b0$0101a8c0 at signet>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> to create offline share of windows pc in centos of linux box.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fabian Arrotin - oxygen" <fabian.arrotin at
arrfab.net>
> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 1:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] offline fi...
>
> [Message clipped]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080609/e8f81831/attachment-0002.html>