2 Aug 2010 16:22
2 Aug 2010 16:28
Re: OES2-SP1 —-> OES2-SP2: Your preferred method?
Joe R. Doupnik <joe.doupnik <at> oucs.ox.ac.uk>
2010-08-02 14:28:08 GMT
2010-08-02 14:28:08 GMT
On 02/08/2010 15:22, Michael Glenn wrote:
> Hey all.
>
> I'd like your opinions: What method do you prefer when it comes to upgrading an OES2-SP1 machine to
OES2-SP2 in a VMware environment?
>
> Thanks.
>
-----------
An in-place upgrade. The beware abou the pathway is before booting
the new DVD disconnect all but the single system drive. Reattach other
drives after the upgrade. Naturally the upgrade requires both SLES 10
SP3 and OES2 SP2a media AT THE SAME TIME, and a convenient method is
store OES2 SP2a iso on the system disk before starting.
Joe D.
2 Aug 2010 21:00
Future of EVMS on OES-LX
Hans Pfeil <HPfeil <at> uca.edu>
2010-08-02 19:00:18 GMT
2010-08-02 19:00:18 GMT
Hey all, I'm a bit confused here. I've seen a couple of postings now regarding the future of EVMS on OES-LX servers. Now I'm a newbie to Linux. But, don't you need EVMS to have NSS on the server? How are you going to share space with a large amount of people using OES-LX if you can't run NSS because EVMS is going away. What are you going to use instead? Thanks for being patient with a newbie, -Hans
2 Aug 2010 21:16
Re: Future of EVMS on OES-LX
Tim Heywood <Tim <at> nds8.co.uk>
2010-08-02 19:16:19 GMT
2010-08-02 19:16:19 GMT
Hi Hans, When Novell first ported NSS to the Linux platform they ran into a problem with a lack of management tools, and not enough time to write them... On OES 'next' the need for EVMS has been removed (helped by SLES 11 using LVM2) and the required tools are now there for all In addition OES Next no longer has the 2TB limit for a partition. I have not been able to find out if a pool can still be spread across 4 partitions, but as each one can be 2EB (exa byte) (2 million TB) that can wait for another day(Continue reading)T -----Original Message----- From: "Hans Pfeil" <HPfeil <at> uca.edu> To: netlab <novell <at> netlab1.oucs.ox.ac.uk> Sent: 02/08/2010 20:00:18 Subject: Future of EVMS on OES-LX Hey all, I'm a bit confused here. I've seen a couple of postings now regarding the future of EVMS on OES-LX servers. Now I'm a newbie to Linux. But, don't you need EVMS to have NSS on the server? How are you going to share space with a large amount of people using OES-LX if you can't run NSS because EVMS is going away. What are you going to use instead?
5 Aug 2010 15:58
OBTW - Google and Verizon. Goodby Net Neutrality?
Joe Acquisto <joe.acquisto <at> gmail.com>
2010-08-05 13:58:39 GMT
2010-08-05 13:58:39 GMT
Read it and Weep. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/technology/05secret.html?_r=1&hp
10 Aug 2010 17:21
Re: OBTW - Google and Verizon. Goodby Net Neutrality?
Maurice <mauricep <at> cds-cumberland.org>
2010-08-10 15:21:26 GMT
2010-08-10 15:21:26 GMT
I agree with Joe... This will be the start of many bad things to come, five years from now we'll look back on this topic and regret that we didn't contact our Senators and Representatives to at least voice some level of concern. As for the government reign in anybody or anything, they have trouble(s) keeping an eye on themselves. And with multi-million dollar lobbying, anything can get through the "doorway" of "strict policy and procedure"... -Maurice Pelletier Child Development Services - Cumberland County 50 Depot Road Falmouth, ME 04105 207-781-8881 (voice) 207-781-8855 (fax) www.cds-cumberland.org "Linux -- it's not just for breakfast anymore..." -Moe CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication (including any attachments) may contain privileged or confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this communication and/or shred the materials and any attachments and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this communication, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. Thank you. On 08/05/2010 09:58 AM, Joe Acquisto wrote: > Read it and Weep.(Continue reading)
10 Aug 2010 20:18
Postfix, root mail, devnull
Joe Acquisto <joe.acquisto <at> gmail.com>
2010-08-10 18:18:21 GMT
2010-08-10 18:18:21 GMT
Kind of a non critical issue. I am seeing all my linux boxes (sles9 essentially. Ok, ok oes1, all right?) sending root mail off box. It's an annoyance. These machines all have GW agents on them, but also have postfix, for, maybe, cluster messages and like that. Tried various things, such as aliases (devnull: /dev/null) and telling postfix, via yast, to forward root's mail to devnull (also /dev/null) (postfix reload each time I make fiddles), yet, mail continues to be sent off box, to the "relay" that is defined. Yes, did newaliases, as well. I managed to get the mail to not send, by saying, in /etc/postfix/main.cf"mydestination = this_box", but then it seems, postfix qmgr keeps trying to send it periodically. I'd like it to simply obey the alias business. Bit bucket, plain and simple. Well, I'll keep plodding along . . . joe a.
10 Aug 2010 20:42
Re: Postfix, root mail, devnull
jrd <joe.doupnik <at> oucs.ox.ac.uk>
2010-08-10 18:42:37 GMT
2010-08-10 18:42:37 GMT
/etc/aliases refers to mail reception, not transmission. $mydestination should be $myhostname, localhost, localhost.$mydomain, and optionally your host's FQDNS name. That is also for reception. You should look at the mail messages to decide what is going on, what is said and what generates them to what external address. You can also restrict Postfix to specific interfaces with inet_interfaces. Joe D. ------------- n 10/08/2010 19:18, Joe Acquisto wrote: > Kind of a non critical issue. I am seeing all my linux boxes (sles9 > essentially. Ok, ok oes1, all right?) sending root mail off box. It's an > annoyance. > > These machines all have GW agents on them, but also have postfix, for, > maybe, cluster messages and like that. > > Tried various things, such as aliases (devnull: /dev/null) and telling > postfix, via yast, to forward root's mail to devnull (also /dev/null) > (postfix reload each time I make fiddles), yet, mail continues to be sent > off box, to the "relay" that is defined. Yes, did newaliases, as well. > > I managed to get the mail to not send, by saying, in > /etc/postfix/main.cf"mydestination = this_box", but then it seems, > postfix qmgr keeps trying to > send it periodically. I'd like it to simply obey the alias business. Bit > bucket, plain and simple. > > Well, I'll keep plodding along . . . >(Continue reading)
11 Aug 2010 00:16
Re: OBTW - Google and Verizon. Goodby Net Neutrality?
Randy Grein <rgrein <at> tpchd.org>
2010-08-10 22:16:17 GMT
2010-08-10 22:16:17 GMT
You are right of course - this is likely to be a disaster. Sadly, there are few congressmen or senators who understand technology like All Gore. Love him or hate him at least he understood what techies were trying to do with the Internet and the impact it could have. Google Vinton Cerf and Al Gore. Gore never claimed to invent the internet, just pushed legislation through to help on the financial side. I'll send something to my senators and congressman, anyone else game? Wouldn't it be great if our representatives would consult us on computer and communications issues! Randy Grein Sr. Network Engineer (253)798-6443 >>> Maurice <mauricep <at> cds-cumberland.org> 8/10/2010 8:21 AM >>> I agree with Joe... This will be the start of many bad things to come, five years from now we'll look back on this topic and regret that we didn't contact our Senators and Representatives to at least voice some level of concern. As for the government reign in anybody or anything, they have trouble(s) keeping an eye on themselves. And with multi-million dollar lobbying, anything can get through the "doorway" of "strict policy and procedure"... -Maurice Pelletier Child Development Services - Cumberland County 50 Depot Road Falmouth, ME 04105 207-781-8881 (voice) 207-781-8855 (fax)(Continue reading)
11 Aug 2010 16:52
Fwd: Postfix, root mail, devnull
Joe Acquisto <joe.acquisto <at> gmail.com>
2010-08-11 14:52:38 GMT
2010-08-11 14:52:38 GMT
Reception? I misread, then. Yet $mydestination (which had been = "blank") did seem to affect these outgoing items. The messages are all system messages . From root, to root. All are in the form root <at> $myhostname. It just seems odd, to me, that they should be forwarded "off box" when the $myhostname is the destination. While there is a relay defined, and necessary, for other valid messages (such as cron task, directed to me) I would not think the off box forwarding should happen. joe a. On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:42 PM, jrd <joe.doupnik <at> oucs.ox.ac.uk> wrote: > /etc/aliases refers to mail reception, not transmission. > $mydestination should be $myhostname, localhost, localhost.$mydomain, and > optionally your host's FQDNS name. That is also for reception. > You should look at the mail messages to decide what is going on, > what is said and what generates them to what external address. > You can also restrict Postfix to specific interfaces with > inet_interfaces. > Joe D. > ------------- > > > n 10/08/2010 19:18, Joe Acquisto wrote: > >> Kind of a non critical issue. I am seeing all my linux boxes (sles9 >> essentially. Ok, ok oes1, all right?) sending root mail off box. It's(Continue reading)
RSS Feed