similar to: 7.2 kernel panic on boot

On Thu, December 3, 2015 11:19 am, Jonathan Billings wrote: > On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 04:46:10PM +0000, Duncan Brown wrote: >> Here is a couple of pictures, >> >> http://i.imgur.com/Vqvqn1H.jpg >> http://i.imgur.com/WQaz1j9.png >> >> Any use? > > So, both of those are just the end of the kernel call trace, > unfortunately, it doesn't show what

Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 09:03:50AM -0500, James B. Byrne wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 02:50:38PM -0500, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >> > For laptops, great. For anything else, not so much. For example, >> > it's supposed to be an *ENTERPRISE* o/s... why does it >> > automatically, without ever asking, install anything wifi?

On Mon, December 7, 2015 13:41, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 09:03:50AM -0500, James B. Byrne wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 02:50:38PM -0500, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >> > For laptops, great. For anything else, not so much. For example, >> > it's supposed to be an *ENTERPRISE* o/s... why does it >> > automatically, without ever

On Wed, December 9, 2015 16:50, James Hogarth wrote: > On 9 Dec 2015 9:07 p.m., "Lamar Owen" <lowen at pari.edu> wrote: >> > >> No, it seems to me that a suitably motivated CentOS user needs to >> scratch this itch; and, no, I am not volunteering, as I've >> followed Fedora before......and just simply cannot give the >> time to it at this

On Tue, December 8, 2015 11:05, Matthew Miller wrote: > >> I have been bitten by things done in Fedora that only have any use >> on >> a laptop and that should never have been allowed into a server >> distribution. But I cannot see how I would have been aware of them >> until they manifested themselves on equipment under my care. By >> which > > ^

On 12/09/2015 08:54 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: > So, the implication of your suggestion, if I understand it aright, is > that I should audit all of the communication forums in use by Fedora > developers and then point out whenever any of the many dozens or > hundreds of contributors introduces something that in my opinion may > impact a server installation. .... > > Am I

On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 09:03:50AM -0500, James B. Byrne wrote: > On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 02:50:38PM -0500, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > > For laptops, great. For anything else, not so much. For example, > > it's supposed to be an *ENTERPRISE* o/s... why does it > > automatically, without ever asking, install anything wifi? I'm [...] > The short answer: Because

Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 09:03:50AM -0500, James B. Byrne wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 02:50:38PM -0500, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >> > For laptops, great. For anything else, not so much. For example, >> > it's supposed to be an *ENTERPRISE* o/s... why does it >> > automatically, without ever asking, install anything wifi?

On Tue, June 16, 2015 09:02, Sorin Srbu wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: centos-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] >> On >> Behalf Of James B. Byrne >> Sent: den 16 juni 2015 14:55 >> To: centos at centos.org >> Subject: [CentOS] NUX Skype for Linux >> >> I had cause to install the Skype for Linux package

On Dec 3, 2015, at 2:33 PM, Valeri Galtsev <galtsev at kicp.uchicago.edu> wrote: > That is my main complaint about parallelized boot. My brain is only > capable to deal with serial sequence of events, and which next event is > deterministically predictable from previous. As with fatal things like > kernel panic, it is the previous before the fatalstep is the one that you >

I have a cloned kvm (that I can now get started following a shutdown and reboot of the hypervisor host). When it starts with its original virtio disk there is no problem. If I create a virtio disk and add it via virt-manager it also boots without issue, although one cannot see the new 'physical' disk. If I shutodwon the kvm guest, partition the new virtio disk, and reboot the guest then

On 12/03/15 20:54, Jonathan Billings wrote: > On Dec 3, 2015, at 2:33 PM, Valeri Galtsev <galtsev at kicp.uchicago.edu> > wrote: >> That is my main complaint about parallelized boot. My brain is only >> capable to deal with serial sequence of events, and which next event is >> deterministically predictable from previous. As with fatal things like >> kernel

On 12/10/2015 07:21 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: > If the bulk of the developers working on Fedora use laptops as their > platform then, inevitably, Fedora will become in essence a laptop > distribution and RHEL will follow. Surely you're not suggesting that the code a developer writes is dependent on the form factor of the computer on which they write it? I'm sure that idea

On 12/10/2015 10:21 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: > Since the import of what I was trying to convey has been lost, no > doubt due to my poor choice of words, I will restate the obvious: If > the bulk of the developers working on Fedora use laptops as their > platform then, inevitably, Fedora will become in essence a laptop > distribution and RHEL will follow. Talking about the server

On Thu, November 24, 2016 12:28, H wrote: > You are right, I had forgotten about needing two WiFi adapters... If > there is an Ethernet jack in the hotel room I would go with that but > that is, of course, far from assured and two WiFi nets would be > needed. I have found Ethernet RJ45 ports in hotel rooms with wi-fi frequently no longer active and simply relics of an earlier

On Mon, June 29, 2015 02:14, Sorin Srbu wrote: OS 6? > > Please note: I'm not criticizing, just curious about the argument > behind using a regular OS to do firewall-stuff. > Maintenance. A consistent set of expectations does wonders for debugging odd-ball occurrences. Why learn the idiosyncrasies of two distros when one suffices? Just start with a minimal CentOS install on

On 12/09/2015 09:37 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: > On 12/09/2015 08:54 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: >> So, the implication of your suggestion, if I understand it aright, is >> that I should audit all of the communication forums in use by Fedora >> developers and then point out whenever any of the many dozens or >> hundreds of contributors introduces something that in my opinion

On Mon, December 1, 2014 16:48, Les Mikesell wrote: > > Is there anyone who has more than a few boxes at more than one > location who _doesn't_ have this issue? I'd like to see a FAQ or > something by whoever designed the network configuration system about > how they planned for it to work (with and without GUI availability). > Likewise for what is supposed to happen

[root at smb4-1 ~ (master)]# samba-tool dns query localhost brockley.harte-lyne.ca brockley.harte-lyne.ca ALL -U administrator Password for [BROCKLEY\administrator]: Name=, Records=4, Children=0 SOA: serial=3, refresh=900, retry=600, expire=86400, minttl=3600, ns=SMB4-1.brockley.harte-lyne.ca., email=hostmaster.brockley.harte-lyne.ca. (flags=600000f0, serial=110, ttl=3600) NS:

---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Re: [CentOS] Install CentOS-5.0 on HP-ComPaq DC7700 Dual Core From: "James B. Byrne" <byrnejb at harte-lyne.ca> Date: Mon, October 6, 2008 12:26 To: cenos at centos.org Cc: "John Newbigin" <jnewbigin at ict.swin.edu.au>