KCLUG

5 participants
3248 discussions

RE: Server Distributions
by Brian Densmore 22 Nov '04

22 Nov '04

I can attest to this. The only slower than the RPM GUI package manager is the gentoo GUI package manager. It's painfully slow, something that should only be used under heavy alcohol consumption. heavy enough that you don't know how long it's taking and don't care. Of course, doing so amplifies the possibility of seriously fubaring your system. ;') > -----Original Message----- > From: Jonathan Hutchins > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 10:35 PM > To: kclug(a)kclug.org > Subject: Re: Server Distributions > > > > Given that the RPM Database is one of the heaviest loads on > most of the RH > systems I've run, I wouldn't want to use a GUI to manage it > if there was any > way to avoid it. > >

1 0

Linux Backups: Tape Drives
by Dave Hull 22 Nov '04

22 Nov '04

Tell me a story about tape drives. I'm looking for any recommendations/horror stories about tape libraries and Linux. I've got a Sun StorEdge L9 that I've been thinking of putting on a Linux box. It's an HP Ultrium C71471A (er something) that's been rebranded as a Sun device. I've read it has different firmware than the HP version, but according to information at http://amanda.org some folk(s) are using it with Linux. Then I read that this thing is no longer made, let alone supported, therefore I don't want to depend on it ultimately, but in the short term, it likely outperforms nothing. Another thing that I'm not sure of yet, is the capacity of the tape library for this thing. On the high end, it may be 900GB, but based on what I've seen so far I think it's a measely 360GB which probably isn't going to cut it... for long. Anybody using high capacity backup system they're are really happy with? Thanks. -- Dave Hull http://insipid.com

4 6

high end laptops and linux
by hanasaki 21 Nov '04

21 Nov '04

Any recommendations on a high end laptop that works well with Linux? I am thinking nvidia graphics and at least a gig of RAM 802.11b,g cdrw/dvdrw usb2 firewire now sure what else.. I haven't shopped for a laptop in ages!

5 4

RE: Redhat Enterprise Edition and Mono
by Charles, Joshua Micah (UMKC-Student) 20 Nov '04

20 Nov '04

Frank Wiles [mailto:[email protected]] wrote: > First off, don't do it to a live system. Do it on a test platform. > Get a spare PC somewhere and put the same version of RH on it and > up2date them to match. Then install mono on the test box. > Anything else is asking for trouble... Well, that's part of the problem. It's a dedicated server in a local hosting company (Arsalon). I only have access to the machine over SSH, and Redhat Enterprise Linux (I believe) is not a free download. I did insist that they take a complete back up of the system before we start, so that will exist.

5 5

Sparc keyboard and mouse
by kurt＠verruckt.org 20 Nov '04

20 Nov '04

Does anyone have a Sparc keyboard type 5 or 6, and a crossbow mouse they'd be willing to part with? Kris ? Dave ? Anyone ? I have an Ultra 5 that needs to get up and going.

1 0

Any recommendations for gui postgresql/mysql frontends?
by Brian Densmore 20 Nov '04

20 Nov '04

I'm installing postgres and mysql on my home server and want to be able to access the db from other places on the LAN and perhaps from the intranet. I was wondering what people recommend for managing and accessing the db. I want to be able to add/manage users,passwords,tables from inside of a gui frontend. Also any notes on setting up for remote access would be appreciated. Thanks, Brian Densmore

6 5

Server Distributions
by Jonathan Hutchins 20 Nov '04

20 Nov '04

As I said to Dave Hull, I have some clients who are still running RH 7.x servers, and I'm at a loss for what to tell them about upgrading. They can't afford RedHat's Enterprize subscriptions. If they could, they'd probably go with Microsoft because there are more prople who are familiar with it. (They don't have to go looking for linux geeks.) When RedHat changed it's policies they promised that they would document the procedure for upgrading from 7.x and 9.x to Fedora, but I've never been able to find those documents. I have had too many bad experiences with SuSE's package updates (particularly KDE) to recommend the downloadable version for a server. I feel the purchased version is not current enough given the price, and I would not be comfortable recommending it given the quality of the downloadable version. Gentoo is nice, but either you let it get behind or you risk upgrades that will break things. The etc-update system does not adequately discriminate between files that are normally customized for the local installation and files that are not usually changed by end users, leading to a lot of work sorting out configurations every time you update. Gentoo also has wierd, non-standard configuration issues - like the DHCP client over-writing the NTP configuration by default. Mandrake is a good desktop distro, but I've never run it as a server, and there are issues with packages such as not participating in KDE's binary distributions, not making bug-fix updates available, update mirrors being chronicly unavailable, etc. I mean to try Debian, but am reluctant to rely on source code packages without a package manangement system. It's not clear to me that you can do a complete debian install and stay within the apt system. Can you? I'll be interested in the list's comments on this, and other suggestions.

6 8

RE: ipv6
by Brian Densmore 20 Nov '04

20 Nov '04

> -----Original Message----- > From: Frank Wiles > > > On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 13:10:02 -0600 > "Brian Densmore" <DensmoreB(a)ctbsonline.com> wrote: > > > I was wondering, would it be possible to run ipv6 on my > > local LAN? Could I run a mixed environment? That is to > > say have ipv6 on the LAN and have ipv6 and ipv4 on > > the firewall/gateway? Would ipv6 on the LAN provide > > the ability to further enhance security on my LAN PCs? > > There is very little reason, from a security perspective to move > to IPv6 on a local LAN. > Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't ipv6 make it very difficult to spoof addresses? Isn't ipv6 more secure than ipv4? I thought there were lots of things you could do with ipv6 that would make it harder to break into a box .The reason I was considering ipv6 is I'd like to add a layer of protection between the LAN and the firewall box. If someone cracks the firewall, it'd be nice to have a fallback measure to prevent the intruder from taking over my other boxes. Plus of course the geek factor in having my own ipv6 network. And it'd be something else to play with. Brian D.

3 2

RE: ipv6
by Brian Densmore 19 Nov '04

19 Nov '04

> -----Original Message----- > From: Frank Wiles > > On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 16:09:28 -0600 > "Brian Densmore" <DensmoreB(a)ctbsonline.com> wrote: > > > I can agree with the geek factor :) > > Yes IPv6 does have some tighter security with regard to spoofing > addresses, but based on how I imagine you're setup it won't help > you. > > For example, say you have a box firewall.domain.com that is your > firewall and two internal boxes secret1.domain.com and > secret2.domain.com. Both secret1 and secret2 are probably > configured to allow certain outside access from the firewall to > them, probably SSH. While IPv6 will keep a cracker from faking > secret2's IP to secret1, there is no need. He already has control > of firewall.domain.com and doesn't need to do any spoofing. > Well actually, I took that into account and disallow ssh from the firewall. So neither box is accessible once I connect to the firewall. So while I can ssh from secret1 to secret2 and then from secret2 to firewall, firewall can't connect to either secret1 or secret2. This makes for the minor inconvenience of not being able to pull files from my LAN from work, it provides a little piece of mind. On that track, I'd also like to deny firewall access to the local intranet. Now I'm not sure that is possible since the firewall is also the gateway and passes traffic out over the same ports I want to prevent the firewall user from accessing on the intranet. If all else is pointless then I'll have to just do it for geek points. ;') Brian

2 1

RE: Redhat Enterprise Edition and Mono
by Brian Densmore 19 Nov '04

19 Nov '04

While it won't be equivalent, I'd recommend installing RH on a PC, up2date the machine to look as close as possible and then install mono on that machine. It should give you some inclination as to any obvious gotchas. It shouldalso allow you to write down a procedure to sort of follow. Modifying live systems is a whole truckload of trouble-in-waiting. > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles, Joshua Micah (UMKC-Student) > > Frank Wiles wrote: > > > First off, don't do it to a live system. Do it on a test platform. > > Get a spare PC somewhere and put the same version of RH on it and > > up2date them to match. Then install mono on the test box. > > > Anything else is asking for trouble... > > Well, that's part of the problem. It's a dedicated server in a local > hosting company (Arsalon). I only have access to the machine > over SSH, > and Redhat Enterprise Linux (I believe) is not a free download. I did > insist that they take a complete back up of the system before > we start, > so that will exist.

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

KCLUG