FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-27-2010, 04:53 PM
Brian Mathis
 
Default vmware-server-console not installed

On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Gary Greene
<ggreene@minervanetworks.com> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On
>> Behalf Of Brian Mathis
>> Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 7:06 PM
>> To: CentOS mailing list
>> Subject: Re: [CentOS] vmware-server-console not installed
[...]
>>
>> You don't need to downgrade for the whole OS, you can just do it for
>> VMware. *See the procedure in the first comment in this bug
>> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=3884. *I have done that and it
>> works fine. *Just remember that if you update vmware, the edits to
>> vmware-hostd will be undone, so you need to redo them.
>
> I'm not "downgrading the whole OS" only GLibC, Timezone, and NSCD packages. Once I did that, the latest version of VMWare Server loads just fine.


Seeing as glibc is one of the most used and most critical libraries in
the system, downgrading to an older version of it most certainly has
the effect of downgrading almost every package on the system.

I'm not talking about whatever OS version (5.3, 5.4, etc...) you think
you're running (that not a real thing anyway as packages all exist at
different versions). If there's an update to glibc that's security
related, by downgrading the system-wide version you're reintroducing
the problem to all packages on the system. This is why it's better to
isolate the downgraded library to just VMware until it gets fixed to
use the updated

The version number of any package or OS is arbitrary -- you need to
understand the effect of what you're doing beyond the version number.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-27-2010, 05:05 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default vmware-server-console not installed

On 4/27/2010 11:51 AM, Benjamin Franz wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Does anyone else think it is extremely strange that Red Hat introduced
>> an incompatible base library change late in the life of their enterprise
>> OS? Or that VMware hasn't followed with a matching change in subsequent
>> updates? I don't get it
> VMware appears to be intentionally slow-motion killing their VMware
> Server product in favor of ESX/ESXi. They declined to publish needed
> security updates for Server in the latest round and if you check the
> lifecycle support web page they say "VMware Server was declared End Of
> Availability on January 2010. Support will be limited to Technical
> Guidance for the duration of the support term." They also are not
> offering support contracts for it as far as I can see.
>
> I wouldn't count on any meaningful updates for it.

Yes, but that doesn't explain Red Hat releasing an incompatible library
update in the first place when nearly the entire reason for using their
enterprise product or things based on it is that they had a reputation
for not breaking things with updates and they used to be good at it.

--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com



_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-27-2010, 05:13 PM
Brian Mathis
 
Default vmware-server-console not installed

On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Benjamin Franz <jfranz@freerun.com> wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Does anyone else think it is extremely strange that Red Hat introduced
>> an incompatible base library change late in the life of their enterprise
>> OS? *Or that VMware hasn't followed with a matching change in subsequent
>> updates? *I don't get it
>
> VMware appears to be intentionally slow-motion killing their VMware
> Server product in favor of ESX/ESXi. They declined to publish needed
> security updates for Server in the latest round and if you check the
> lifecycle support web page they say "VMware Server was declared End Of
> Availability on January 2010. Support will be limited to Technical
> Guidance for the duration of the support term." They also are not
> offering support contracts for it as far as I can see.
>
> I wouldn't count on any meaningful updates for it.
>
> --
> Benjamin Franz


According to the VMware support page
(http://www.vmware.com/support/policies/lifecycle/general/), for
VMware Server 2.0 the end of General Support is 2011/06/30.

I agree that they are exceedingly slow on updates, but it'll still be
around for a while. I'm sure a new version will then come out, as they
still have to compete with other free offerings, and it's a nice
entry-level solution where people will eventually upgrade to a paid
version.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-27-2010, 05:20 PM
Gary Greene
 
Default vmware-server-console not installed

On 4/27/10 9:53 AM, "Brian Mathis" <brian.mathis@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Gary Greene
> <ggreene@minervanetworks.com> wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Brian Mathis
>>> Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 7:06 PM
>>> To: CentOS mailing list
>>> Subject: Re: [CentOS] vmware-server-console not installed
> [...]
>>>
>>> You don't need to downgrade for the whole OS, you can just do it for
>>> VMware. *See the procedure in the first comment in this bug
>>> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=3884. *I have done that and it
>>> works fine. *Just remember that if you update vmware, the edits to
>>> vmware-hostd will be undone, so you need to redo them.
>>
>> I'm not "downgrading the whole OS" only GLibC, Timezone, and NSCD packages.
>> Once I did that, the latest version of VMWare Server loads just fine.
>
>
> Seeing as glibc is one of the most used and most critical libraries in
> the system, downgrading to an older version of it most certainly has
> the effect of downgrading almost every package on the system.
>
> I'm not talking about whatever OS version (5.3, 5.4, etc...) you think
> you're running (that not a real thing anyway as packages all exist at
> different versions). If there's an update to glibc that's security
> related, by downgrading the system-wide version you're reintroducing
> the problem to all packages on the system. This is why it's better to
> isolate the downgraded library to just VMware until it gets fixed to
> use the updated
>
> The version number of any package or OS is arbitrary -- you need to
> understand the effect of what you're doing beyond the version number.
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Please don't quote to me the "full effect" mantra you're going on about
here, I don't need treated as though I'm some fresh college kid that only
started using Linux. I've been doing Linux systems level programming and
distribution development for a VERY long time, and have a fairly extensive
knowledge about what _can_ and _cannot_ break a box with regards to
downgrading core libraries.

The particular packages I rolled back to are the last set of packages for
5.3. The vulnerabilities that were fixed in GLibC for 5.4 were not too
damaging as they require _local_ access anyway, and since NO VM host should
ever be internet accessible (I did not say that the guest OS cannot be, only
the host), this should be fine for now.

Based off the other emails in this thread, it is worrying to me that VMWare
decided to drop the VMWare Server product. However, from a resources
perspective, I can understand as ESXi shares much more code with current
products than VMWare Server did.

--
Gary L. Greene, Jr.
IT Operations
Minerva Networks, Inc.
Cell: (650) 704-6633
Phone: (408) 240-1239

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-27-2010, 05:34 PM
Benjamin Franz
 
Default vmware-server-console not installed

Brian Mathis wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Benjamin Franz <jfranz@freerun.com> wrote:
>
>> VMware appears to be intentionally slow-motion killing their VMware
>> Server product in favor of ESX/ESXi. They declined to publish needed
>> security updates for Server in the latest round and if you check the
>> lifecycle support web page they say "VMware Server was declared End Of
>> Availability on January 2010. Support will be limited to Technical
>> Guidance for the duration of the support term." They also are not
>> offering support contracts for it as far as I can see.
>>
>> I wouldn't count on any meaningful updates for it.
>>
>>
>
> According to the VMware support page
> (http://www.vmware.com/support/policies/lifecycle/general/), for
> VMware Server 2.0 the end of General Support is 2011/06/30.
>
> I agree that they are exceedingly slow on updates, but it'll still be
> around for a while. I'm sure a new version will then come out, as they
> still have to compete with other free offerings, and it's a nice
> entry-level solution where people will eventually upgrade to a paid
> version.
There is conflicting information on that page. In one place it says that
General Support will continue to 2011/06/30, in another it states that
"VMware Server was declared End Of Availability on January 2010. Support
will be limited to Technical Guidance for the duration of the support term."

As I remember also seeing a statement to the effect that it was being
switched to 'Technical Guidance' only support in the forums there, I
would say that *although* it is still technically in "General Support"
they are not going to provide anything more than technical guidance for
it. The lack of security fixes for it in the latest round of updates as
well as the fact that it has severe problems such as the 'creeping load'
that have been present and reported *since the 2.0 beta release* and
the glibc incompatibility which has been known since the 2.0.1 release
indicates they are absolutely not interested in supporting it.

"It's an ex-parrot."

As for competing with other free offerings: That is what ESXi is for now.

--
Benjamin Franz


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-27-2010, 07:48 PM
Scott Silva
 
Default vmware-server-console not installed

on 4-27-2010 8:46 AM Les Mikesell spake the following:
> On 4/27/2010 10:29 AM, Gary Greene wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> You don't need to downgrade for the whole OS, you can just do it for
>>> VMware. See the procedure in the first comment in this bug
>>> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=3884. I have done that and it
>>> works fine. Just remember that if you update vmware, the edits to
>>> vmware-hostd will be undone, so you need to redo them.
>>
>
>
>> I'm not "downgrading the whole OS" only GLibC, Timezone, and NSCD packages. Once I did that, the latest version of VMWare Server loads just fine.
>
> Does anyone else think it is extremely strange that Red Hat introduced
> an incompatible base library change late in the life of their enterprise
> OS? Or that VMware hasn't followed with a matching change in subsequent
> updates? I don't get it.
>
RedHat will post a change like that if the needed fixes cannot be backported
for some reason... It is rare, but does happen

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-27-2010, 08:35 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default vmware-server-console not installed

On 4/27/2010 2:48 PM, Scott Silva wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> You don't need to downgrade for the whole OS, you can just do it for
>>>> VMware. See the procedure in the first comment in this bug
>>>> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=3884. I have done that and it
>>>> works fine. Just remember that if you update vmware, the edits to
>>>> vmware-hostd will be undone, so you need to redo them.
>>>
>>
>>
>>> I'm not "downgrading the whole OS" only GLibC, Timezone, and NSCD packages. Once I did that, the latest version of VMWare Server loads just fine.
>>
>> Does anyone else think it is extremely strange that Red Hat introduced
>> an incompatible base library change late in the life of their enterprise
>> OS? Or that VMware hasn't followed with a matching change in subsequent
>> updates? I don't get it.
>>
> RedHat will post a change like that if the needed fixes cannot be backported
> for some reason... It is rare, but does happen

The breakage seems to be RH/Centos specific. Does no one else use that
libc version?

--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-28-2010, 05:39 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default vmware-server-console not installed

On 4/26/2010 1:01 PM, Rainer Duffner wrote:

>> There's the glibc issue that's still unresolved. There's another
>> issue with using Firefox as the admin client. It *might* let you in,
>> but the console plugin doesn't appear to be working again. Only client
>> that works for me is InternetExploder.
>
>
> I switched to ESX4i and use a Windows VM with VI-Client to manage it -
> there's no other way to do it, unfortunately.
> For something that works on Windows exclusively (Dot-Net...), it's
> horribly slow and buggy.
> I don't see how a Java-solution would have been slower.
>

For what it's worth, I was still able to download and install the 1.x
version of VMware server (1.0.10) on an up to date Centos 5.4. The only
down side to an 'unsupported' host is that you have to have the kernel
headers and a compiler installed so the vmware-config.pl script can
build the kernel module. And the remote console client is nicer than
the web based access in the 2.x versions. But, for anything other than
pretending to keep some old and dying host running for a service that
would be hard to port, I'd start with ESXi instead. I did just run
across an odd problem with ESXi, though. Running the VMware converter
tool from an old Dell Win2k server with an IDE disk to produce an ESXi
image went through the motions but the image wouldn't boot - but doing
the same thing to a vmware server (v1) image file over a network share
worked. Has anyone seen that before?

--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-28-2010, 05:55 PM
JohnS
 
Default vmware-server-console not installed

On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 12:39 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:

> Running the VMware converter
> tool from an old Dell Win2k server with an IDE disk to produce an ESXi
> image went through the motions but the image wouldn't boot - but doing
> the same thing to a vmware server (v1) image file over a network share
> worked. Has anyone seen that before?
---
Well for those that must have a Windows OS heres the hack:

You must go to microsoft.com search for the tools to allow that. What
it does is Relax The Windows IDE Checks so the disk or image can be used
as a VM or on other hardware. You must also have the same ACPI Options
in your hypervisor.

This must be done before you use the vmware tools to create the image.

John

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-28-2010, 06:16 PM
"Joseph L. Casale"
 
Default vmware-server-console not installed

>Running the VMware converter
>tool from an old Dell Win2k server with an IDE disk to produce an ESXi
>image went through the motions but the image wouldn't boot - but doing
>the same thing to a vmware server (v1) image file over a network share
>worked. Has anyone seen that before?

Never used Server, but I use ESXi and I know what your issue is: Mass Storage
Drivers, you need to make sure the Critical Device Database is populated with
the driver in the destination system, such as an LSI SCSI or SAS and that that
service start type is set to "boot".

Install the driver then add it to the crit dev db in:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINESYSTEMCurrentControlSetControlCr iticalDeviceDatabase

Follow one of the necessarily existing PCI#VEN_xxxx&DEV_xxxx for syntax.

Change the Service Start Type:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINESYSTEMCurrentControlSetServices
nnn

>From probably 4 to 0.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/103000

I use the LSI SAS for everything...

jlc

Ps. I think the current version of ESXi allows an ide controller to avoid this...
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:27 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org