| Author |
Message |
FunkyRes
Joined: 02 Oct 2008
Posts: 97
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 6:49 pm Post subject: CentOS 6 |
|
|
Is there a CentOS 6 (64 bit) image yet?
Also, my existing linode is in Dallas. I would like to purchase a second, and I would prefer they be at the same facility because they will be communicating with each other, no need IMHO for that bandwidth to leave the data center.
Can I specify my new linode to also be at Dallas? |
|
| Back to top |
|
retrograde inversion
Joined: 08 Jun 2011
Posts: 25
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yes, there is a CentOS 6.0 64-bit image now. Yes, you can specify where your second Linode goes; when you go to deploy it, you get to pick which location it goes in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
FunkyRes
Joined: 02 Oct 2008
Posts: 97
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thanks! Currently being set up :) |
|
| Back to top |
|
glg
Joined: 09 Jan 2009
Posts: 505
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Make sure you check out the private network for communications between your linodes so that you're not charged for that bandwidth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
FunkyRes
Joined: 02 Oct 2008
Posts: 97
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thank you for the tip!
Communication between them will be minimal, and when I start to get near 80% of allotted bandwidth I know it will be time to open a new linode anyway, but yes - if there is a private network setting that lets me save on allotted bandwidth it is definitely worth checking out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
mnordhoff
Joined: 03 May 2008
Posts: 451
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2011 3:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Or instead of bothering with the private network, use IPv6. IPv6 traffic between nodes in the same data center over their public IPs is free, just like IPv4 traffic over the private IPs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
vonskippy
Joined: 27 Dec 2009
Posts: 469
Location: Colorado, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2011 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Might want to glance thru the CentOS 6 Security forum.
Doesn't look like v6.0 is getting ANY updates (and it's unclear if that's about to change, or if all work is being done on getting v6.1 out). |
|
| Back to top |
|
Azathoth
Joined: 07 Dec 2009
Posts: 263
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 4:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
vonskippy wrote:
Doesn't look like v6.0 is getting ANY updates (and it's unclear if that's about to change, or if all work is being done on getting v6.1 out).
That seems like it. 5.6 got a continuous release repo to get updates from 5.7, but I don't see something like that for 6 (wasn't announced anyways), and there are no updates for 6.0/6.1.
It looks like the CentOS team has lagged too much with preparing 6.0 and now they can't catch up with RHEL anymore. 5.7 is coming, 6.1. When those come out there will be 6.2 and probably 5.8, and 4 is still alive; they again won't have enough time and power to manage both... |
|
| Back to top |
|
FunkyRes
Joined: 02 Oct 2008
Posts: 97
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 7:14 am Post subject: Patching CentOS |
|
|
I installed CentOS 6 on my home workstation and there were plenty of updates - I'll have to check the repo file in the CentOS 6 image and make sure it is OK.
One thing I did on CentOS 5 - I would watch for RHEL CVE alerts and grab the RHEL src.rpm for the patches.
I'd then apply the patch to the CentOS src.rpm and release version it so that when the official patch from CentOS came, it would replace mine, but I would have at least have a patched package while I waited.
Patched package may not be 100% binary compatible (that's part of what slows down CentOS releases, RHEL uses a closed a build system and CentOS has to do some investigative work to make sure their build system produces something that really is binary compatible) but it would have the CVE closed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
vonskippy
Joined: 27 Dec 2009
Posts: 469
Location: Colorado, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Check this thread out on CentOS 6 security forum for clarification
https://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=33058&start=0#forumpost141692 |
|
| Back to top |
|
FunkyRes
Joined: 02 Oct 2008
Posts: 97
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Continuous Release repo looks like a really good idea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Guspaz
Joined: 26 May 2009
Posts: 1150
Location: Montreal, QC
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
FunkyRes wrote: Continuous Release repo looks like a really good idea.
Depends what for. For personal stuff, or a dev box, or many other things, sure. For a production box, never. |
|
| Back to top |
|
FunkyRes
Joined: 02 Oct 2008
Posts: 97
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Guspaz wrote: FunkyRes wrote: Continuous Release repo looks like a really good idea.
Depends what for. For personal stuff, or a dev box, or many other things, sure. For a production box, never.
Continuous release between major versions, I agree. But in RHEL land a dot release does not perform major updates.
When a dot release is released, yum will update you to the next dot release anyway, and updates to the previous dot release halt.
Since CentOS lags behind rhel, this means that bug fixes (including security fixes) don't get pushed to the CentOS users until CentOS catches up with the RHEL dot release. This is bad, and why on CentOS 5 I would watch for CVE's on RHEL and roll my own updates if it looked like an exploitable bug.
With a rolling update repository, we would not need to wait for CentOS to finish mastering a specific dot release in order to get updates to known bugs and security issues.
That is why this is a good thing.
Of course any production machine should have updates disabled so they can be tested on a dev box before applied, but that should be done regardless of a rolling update repository. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
