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

LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 06-12-2011, 01:15 AM
Abdel G. Martínez L.
Default (no subject)


java-devel mailing list
Old 07-07-2011, 03:24 AM
Default (no subject)

I request of deletion of [libgirara-git][1] since it has incorrect lines
in PKGBUILD and there is older packege for the same software

[1]: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=48568

Jabber: karnath@kergma.net
Old 07-07-2011, 05:52 AM
Lukáš Jirkovský
Default (no subject)

On 7 July 2011 05:24, karnath <karnathtorjian@gmail.com> wrote:
> I request of deletion of [libgirara-git][1] since it has incorrect lines
> in PKGBUILD and there is older packege for the same software
> (girara-git).
> [1]: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=48568
> --
> Jabber: karnath@kergma.net

Done, thank you.
Old 09-15-2011, 04:19 PM
Default (no subject)

This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.


Este mensaje le ha llegado mediante el servicio de correo electronico que ofrece Infomed para respaldar el cumplimiento de las misiones del Sistema Nacional de Salud. La persona que envia este correo asume el compromiso de usar el servicio a tales fines y cumplir con las regulaciones establecidas

Infomed: http://www.sld.cu/
CentOS-docs mailing list
Old 10-20-2011, 12:17 AM
Mikulas Patocka
Default (no subject)


Here I'm sending two dm-bufio patches. The first one fixed
dm_bufio_release_move function (the write callback could be called with a
wrong block number). The next one adds a conditional resched (Alasdair
agreed on it --- it should be later put into general Linux headers).

drivers/md/dm-bufio.c | 13 +++++++++++++
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)

Index: linux-3.1-rc3-fast/drivers/md/dm-bufio.c
================================================== =================
--- linux-3.1-rc3-fast.orig/drivers/md/dm-bufio.c 2011-10-19 18:39:22.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-3.1-rc3-fast/drivers/md/dm-bufio.c 2011-10-19 18:47:43.000000000 +0200
@@ -1185,11 +1185,24 @@ retry:
__link_buffer(b, new_block, LIST_DIRTY);
} else {
+ sector_t old_block;
wait_on_bit_lock(&b->state, B_WRITING,
do_io_schedule, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
+ /*
+ * Relink buffer to "new_block" so that write_callback
+ * sees "new_block" as a block number.
+ * After the write, link the buffer back to old_block.
+ * All this must be done in bufio lock, so that block number
+ * change isn't visible to other threads.
+ */
+ old_block = b->block;
+ __unlink_buffer(b);
+ __link_buffer(b, new_block, b->list_mode);
submit_io(b, WRITE, new_block, write_endio);
wait_on_bit(&b->state, B_WRITING,
do_io_schedule, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
+ __unlink_buffer(b);
+ __link_buffer(b, old_block, b->list_mode);

drivers/md/dm-bufio.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Index: linux-3.1-rc3-fast/drivers/md/dm-bufio.c
================================================== =================
--- linux-3.1-rc3-fast.orig/drivers/md/dm-bufio.c 2011-10-19 18:49:14.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-3.1-rc3-fast/drivers/md/dm-bufio.c 2011-10-19 18:57:01.000000000 +0200
@@ -183,6 +183,16 @@ static void dm_bufio_unlock(struct dm_bu

+#define dm_bufio_cond_resched()
+do {
+ if (unlikely(need_resched()))
+ _cond_resched();
+} while (0)
+#define dm_bufio_cond_resched() do { } while (0)

@@ -644,6 +654,7 @@ static struct dm_buffer *__get_unclaimed
return b;
+ dm_bufio_cond_resched();

list_for_each_entry_reverse(b, &c->lru[LIST_DIRTY], lru_list) {
@@ -654,6 +665,7 @@ static struct dm_buffer *__get_unclaimed
return b;
+ dm_bufio_cond_resched();

return NULL;
@@ -772,6 +784,7 @@ static void __write_dirty_buffers_async(

+ dm_bufio_cond_resched();

@@ -820,6 +833,7 @@ static void __check_watermark(struct dm_

+ dm_bufio_cond_resched();

if (c->n_buffers[LIST_DIRTY] > threshold_buffers)
@@ -835,9 +849,11 @@ static struct dm_buffer *__find(struct d
struct hlist_node *hn;

hlist_for_each_entry(b, hn, &c->cache_hash[DM_BUFIO_HASH(block)],
- hash_list)
+ hash_list) {
+ dm_bufio_cond_resched();
if (b->block == block)
return b;
+ }

return NULL;
@@ -1084,6 +1100,8 @@ again:
!test_bit(B_WRITING, &b->state))
__relink_lru(b, LIST_CLEAN);

+ dm_bufio_cond_resched();
* If we dropped the lock, the list is no longer consistent,
* so we must restart the search.
@@ -1310,11 +1328,13 @@ static void __scan(struct dm_bufio_clien
int l;
struct dm_buffer *b, *tmp;

- for (l = 0; l < LIST_SIZE; l++)
+ for (l = 0; l < LIST_SIZE; l++) {
list_for_each_entry_safe_reverse(b, tmp, &c->lru[l], lru_list)
if (!__cleanup_old_buffer(b, sc->gfp_mask, 0) &&
+ dm_bufio_cond_resched();
+ }

static int shrink(struct shrinker *shrinker, struct shrink_control *sc)
@@ -1531,9 +1551,11 @@ static void cleanup_old_buffers(void)
struct dm_buffer, lru_list);
if (__cleanup_old_buffer(b, 0, max_age * HZ))
+ dm_bufio_cond_resched();

+ dm_bufio_cond_resched();
dm-devel mailing list
Old 12-06-2011, 07:12 PM
Gagan Chohan
Default (no subject)

i have tried a lot but not able to get wireless .......................i am using dell 1470 14-r
CentOS mailing list
Old 12-06-2011, 07:26 PM
John R Pierce
Default (no subject)

On 12/06/11 12:12 PM, Gagan Chohan wrote:
> i have tried a lot but not able to get wireless .......................i am using dell 1470 14-r

according to Dell's site, the Inspiron 14R is a N4010 or N4110, and the
1470 is a 14Z

the 14Z (1470) can use any of...

* Dell™ Wireless 365 Bluetooth Internal (2.0 + Enhanced Data Rate)
* Dell™ Wireless 1397 802.11g Half mini-card (STD)
* Intel® WiFi Link 5100 (802.11 a/g/draft-N) Half Mini card

while the 14R (N4010) uses

* Standard Dell Wireless 1501 802.11 g/n

and the 14R (N4110) has your choice of...

* Intel^® Centrino^® Wireless-N 1030 (1x2 bgn + Bluetooth)
* Intel^® Centrino^® Wireless-N + WiMAX 6150 (1x2 bgn + WiMax

so... which wifi adapter do you have? thats a lot of choices.

john r pierce N 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast

CentOS mailing list
Old 01-01-2012, 09:21 PM
Bennett Haselton
Default (no subject)

(Tried sending this before but it doesn't look like it went through;
apologies if you're seeing it twice.)

OK, a second machine hosted at the same hosting company has also apparently
been hacked. Since 2 of out of 3 machines hosted at that company have now
been hacked, but this hasn't happened to any of the other 37 dedicated
servers that I've got hosted at other hosting companies (also CentOS, same
version or almost), this makes me wonder if there's a security breach at
this company, like if they store customers' passwords in a place that's
been hacked. (Of course it could also be that whatever attacker found an
exploit, was just scanning that company's address space for hackable
machines, and didn't happen to scan the address space of the other hosting

So, following people's suggestions, the machine is disconnected and hooked
up to a KVM so I can still examine the files. I've found this file:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1358 Oct 21 17:40 /home/file.pl
which appears to be a copy of this exploit script:
Note the last-mod date of October 21.

No other files on the system were last modified on October 21st. However
there was a security advisory dated October 20th which affected httpd:
http://mailinglist-archive.com/centos-announce/2011-10/00035-CentOSannounce+CESA20111392+Moderate+CentOS+5+i386 +httpd+Update

and a large number of files on the machine, including lots of files in */
usr/lib64/httpd/modules/* and */lib/modules/2.6.18-274.7.1.el5/kernel/* ,
have a last-mod date of October 20th. So I assume that these are files
which were updated automatically by yum as a result of the patch that goes
with this advisory -- does that sound right?

So a couple of questions that I could use some help with:

1) The last patch affecting httpd was released on October 20th, and the
earliest evidence I can find of the machine being hacked is a file dated
October 21st. This could be just a coincidence, but could it also suggest
that the patch on October 20th introduced a new exploit, which the attacker
then used to get in on October 21st?
(Another possibility: I think that when yum installs updates, it
doesn't actually restart httpd. So maybe even after the patch was
installed, my old httpd instance kept running and was still vulnerable? As
for why it got hacked the very next day, maybe the attacker looked at the
newly released patch and reverse-engineered it to figure out where the
vulnerabilities were, that the patch fixed?)

2) Since the */var/log/httpd/* and /var/log/secure* logs only go back 4-5
weeks by default, it looks like any log entries related to how the attacker
would have gotten in on or before October 21st, are gone. (The secure*
logs do show multiple successful logins as "root" within the last 4 weeks,
mostly from IP addresses in Asia, but that's to be expected once the
machine was compromised -- it doesn't help track down how they originally
got in.) Anywhere else that the logs would contain useful data?
CentOS mailing list
Old 01-17-2012, 08:44 PM
Cyril Lashkevich
Default (no subject)

Package split2flac-hg is replaced by split2flac-git and as I guess should
be removed.


Old 01-17-2012, 10:20 PM
Heiko Baums
Default (no subject)

Am Wed, 18 Jan 2012 00:44:18 +0300
schrieb Cyril Lashkevich <notorca@gmail.com>:

> Package split2flac-hg is replaced by split2flac-git and as I guess
> should be removed.
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=28877

And I guess the votes etc. of split2flac-hg should then be moved to
split2flac-git, too.

Btw., a subject would have been nice.


Thread Tools

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:03 AM.

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