What happened to the leading edge?
by Tom Horsley
I thought Fedora tried to stay up to date with latest
released software?
I just tried to build FreeCAD 0.15 from git, but it
needs Coin3, and fedora only has Coin2.
Earlier I tried to run RepetierHost 1.0.6, but it
needs Mono 3.2, also missing in fedora.
What happened to that pioneering spirit? :-).
9 years, 2 months
fedora netinstall
by François Patte
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Bonjour,
I can read on this page:
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/21/html/Installation_Guide/cha...
<quote>
netinstall Image
The netinstall image boots directly into the installation
environment, and uses the online Fedora package repositories as the
installation source. With a netinstall image, you can select a wide
variety of packages to create a customized installation of Fedora.
The Fedora Server netinstall image is a universal one, and can be
used to install any Fedora flavor or your own set of favorite packages.
</quote>
No link is provided.... So what poor people like me can do?
Thanks for any light.
- --
François Patte
UFR de mathématiques et informatique
Laboratoire CNRS MAP5, UMR 8145
Université Paris Descartes
45, rue des Saints Pères
F-75270 Paris Cedex 06
Tél. +33 (0)1 8394 5849
http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
iEYEARECAAYFAlTrrWUACgkQdE6C2dhV2JVIMgCgov4RNDS1O17cdsXyW4lDNjpQ
N1IAoKbtQ9JK/C3Ny7TuL+KWoQTLAAXq
=GM2r
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
9 years, 2 months
filesystem errors
by Andras Simon
Recently, I noticed messages like the following on two laptops with
very different hardware, but both running Fedora 21, updated daily:
/var/log/messages-20150216:Feb 12 18:47:36 lenov kernel:
[181055.262390] EXT4-fs error (device sda3): __ext4_new_inode:1010:
comm NetworkManager: failed to insert inode 262402: doubly allocated?
/var/log/messages-20150224:Feb 23 21:54:30 lenov kernel:
[510707.869736] EXT4-fs error (device sda3):
ext4_mb_generate_buddy:757: group 34, block bitmap and bg descriptor
inconsistent: 15366 vs 15373 free clusters
On both machines, the affected partition is the root partition. The
problem is bad enough that it needs an fsck from a rescue disk.
smartctl -a /dev/sda doesn't signal any error, but the disks failing
on different machines simultaneously is unlikely anyway, especially
that this happened sometime in January, too, also with the same
laptops, also roughly at the same time.
I don't know if this is relevant, but both laptops are hibernated usually.
Has anyone else noticed something like this?
Andras
9 years, 2 months
libaugeas0 equivalent on Fedora
by Aaron Gray
Hi,
I am using F20 and am wondering if there is an equivalent to Debian's
libaugeas0 or libaugeas ?
Or whether I have to build it for myself ?
Many thanks in advance,
Aaron
9 years, 2 months
Replacing Fedora Postgresql with non-Fedora version?
by Stuart McGraw
Hello all,
I'm doing a new install of Fedora 21 and migrating apps and
services from my old Fedora 15 machine to it. I've run into
the following problem...
I have Postgresql-9.3 installed from the Fedora 21 yum repo
in order to satisfy any packages that need postgresql. But
I need to run Postgresql-9.4 so I disabled the yum postgresql
startup via systemd and installed the EDB version of 9.4
into /opt/postgresql [*].
To make the 9.4 one the "system" version, I did two things
1) Replaced the postgresql-9.3 executables in /bin/ with
symlinks to their counterparts in /opt/postgresql/bin/.
2) Added a file to /etc/ld.so.d that adds /opt/postgresql/lib
to the load library cache and ran ldconfig.
That seems to work well, I can run all the Postgresql tools
and everything seems to work correctly, I get the expected 9.4
versions of the tools, etc. Except...
1) It breaks openldap. Apparently one of the libraries in
/opt/postgresql/lib is also used by openldap and is not
compatible. When trying to start the openldap server:
slapd: symbol lookup error: slapcat: undefined symbol:
ber_sockbuf_io_udp
2) Some programs still don't work. For example, a simple
python cgi script using the psycopg2 module to talk to the
database and run under Apache-2.4 that claims it can't find
the postgresql socket "/tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432" even though the
socket does exist:
~$ ls -l /tmp/.s.P*
srwxrwxrwx 1 postgres postgres 0 Feb 15 15:10 /tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432=
-rw------- 1 postgres postgres 46 Feb 15 15:10 /tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432.lock
It runs fine interactively in a shell.
Any suggestions on how to fix the above two problems or general
advice of replacing a yum-installed service with an outside one?
I don't want to run two separate (9.3 and 9.4) servers or to run
the 9.4 server on a non-standard port, etc -- I really want anything
that uses postgresql to talk to my 9.4 server by default.
----
[*] http://www.enterprisedb.com/products-services-training/pgdownload
I know about the pgdg repository but that installs postgresql
directly under /usr/ which I don't like, and support for it ends
roughly when support for F21 ends and I want a solution that will
still work even after F21's official EOL. I was able to use the
EDB Postgresql 9.1, 9.2, 9.3 and 9.4 versions on F15 (shipped
with 9.0) without any problems.
9 years, 2 months
Re: What constitutes a backup, was:F21 partitioning circus
by Chris Murphy
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Andrew R Paterson
<andy.paterson(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Hang on there Chris, (new thread really)
> why do you think using a mirror as a backup is a bad idea?
I'm not saying it's a bad idea. I'm just denying it's a backup. What
you have is a degraded array on the shelf that's at best an incidental
archive because it cannot be kept up to date. Once it's replaced, it
can't be readded to the working array, and thus merely caught up.
Plus, by default there isn't an internal bitmap. So what you're doing
is either not keeping it updated, and thus not a backup; or it's being
wiped out and rebuilt each time, in which case it's a slow monolithic
backup that has no archive.
This means any kind of corruption, filesystem or data, silent or
otherwise, eventually replicates itself into all copies.
So no, it's not a backup and it's not even a particularly good archive
if it's subject to rotation.
RAID1+ is not ever a backup, it is about improving availability
(uptime) by mitigating a particular kind of device failure. Just
because you can willfully instigate a faux-failure and shelve that
actually OK member and call it a backup doesn't mean it's a backup.
> As opposed to taking your box offline, and doing a level 0 backup to another
> disk - you end up with a serial backup which must be parsed - I end up with a
> filesystem that I can mount?
Umm, why is an offline backup the only alternative? rsync can do
online archive updates with -au.
> To me this is one of the benefits of mirroring - I can mount one of my old
> detached mirrors somewhere else and get at my old data.
You can ro mount any rsync created backup and get at your old data
also while having a low probability of compromising it. You can make
this differential or incremental so they're fast. You can also
optionally use checksum verification at the source and destination
which would tend to expose silent data corruption at least in the data
itself.
> That's aside from the lower risk of losing the data in the first place.
> I don't particularily need to archive data - just preserve it.
What's the distinction?
> I think you will find this idea is becoming more common these days.
Yes so is skin cancer, what's your point?
> So please give some good reasons for archive (backup) better than checkpoint
> (detached mirror)??
For one, achive≠backup≠raid. For two, the backup needs to be on its
own filesystem, and on a separate device. And this is an example of
neither, because the fs is the same, and the logical block device is
actually the same too.
--
Chris Murphy
9 years, 2 months
Re: F21 partitioning circus
by Wade Hampton
[snip]
This was a good thread and is tied in with my experience
this weekend. I had a very old laptop with F13 that had not
been booted in years. I tried to load F21 on it using the
same partitions (and keeping the old Windows partitions).
Anaconda more or less let me try but gave me a warning
about /boot being below the RECOMMENDED size (not
that it would not work).
F21 installed without any indicated errors. However I got
an OOPS on first boot.
I was able to boot into the recovery partition and inspect
the /boot. The initrd for normal boot was incomplete and
the /boot was full. I did NOT receive an error on install.
IMHO, this was a silent failure (bug reported).
Yes, there are those of us who have done "interesting things"
with our partitioning over the years. We would like to continue
to be able to manually partition, manually setup RAID,
and do similar things. Its definitely not good for the average
user, but some of us need it. However, we should see
errors when things fail....
Cheers,
--
Wade Hampton
9 years, 2 months
BackupPc install
by Tony Molloy
Hi,
I've just installed BackupPC on my home server from the Fedora repos
( Fedora 21 ). It doesn't seem to have installed a systemd service
file. So the question is how do I start BackupPC. I have it installed
on CentOS 6 at work so configuration shouldn't be a proble.
I know I've missed something obvious.
Thanks,
Tony
--
Linux nogs.tonyshome.ie 2.6.32-504.8.1.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Jan 28
21:11:36 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
9 years, 2 months
etc-shadow
by Chris Murphy
I'm curious about how the hash in /etc/passwd is generated.
I know it's SHA512 based, since the 2nd field starts with $6$. But the
characters that follow aren't a SHA512 hash. It looks like it was run
through base64.
I read this:
http://www.aychedee.com/2012/03/14/etc_shadow-password-hash-formats/
But Fedora doesn't have mkpasswd by default, whereas passwd seems to
only update shadow rather than outputting to stdout. And if there's a
salt used I can't tell how that would be referenced.
Thanks,
--
Chris Murphy
9 years, 2 months