AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
![]() Please let me know if I should report this upstream to instead. it seems like the script should at least check the current value of `firewall-cmd -get-zone-of-interface=eth0` and use that over ZONE? I added the ZONE setting to each device's config to fix my issue for now.īut my question is, why is this done at all? the "default" ZONE value blows away the permanently set value. So this effectively makes any "permanent" zone changes like the one I made above permanent only across firewalld restarts, but not machine restarts or interface up/down cycles. ![]() # Inform firewall which network zone (empty means default) this interface belongs to after digging for a while I realized it was due to the following lines in the /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifup-eth and ifup-post scripts: On reboot I looked at the active zones and saw both devices were back in the public zone. ![]() Sudo firewall-cmd -permanent -zone=internal -add-interface=eth1 Sudo firewall-cmd -permanent -zone=public -remove-interface=eth1 ![]() I had previously setup firewalld to place eth0 and eth1 in the dmz and internal zones respectively w/ the following commands: I've been trying to learn new centos 7 systemd and firewalld concepts over the past few days and came across this issue today when rebooting my server. I originally posted this as a question to With the last patch added, I am able to build kernel-3.10.0-123.6.3.el7 for i686 with "CONFIG_PARAVIRT=y". It seems that upstream (bless their hearts, as we say in Texas) backported these two patches:īut they didn't backport the patch that actually implements jiffies_to_nsecs(): This_rq()->prev_steal_time += cputime_to_nsecs(steal_ct) Kernel/sched/cputime.c:273:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'jiffies_to_nsecs' Kernel/sched/cputime.c: In function 'steal_account_process_tick': When attempting to build kernel-3.10.0-123.6.3.el7 for i686, the builds were failing with the following error: ![]()
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |