CI-users April 2017

ci-users@lists.centos.org

14 participants
11 discussions

Slaves in CI are down
by Daniel Horák 27 Apr '17

27 Apr '17

Hi, I see bunch of CI slaves "offline". Is it related to the announced upgrade&reboot today early in the morning? Thanks, Daniel

1 0

Jenkins Scheduled Full Restart 26-Apr-2017 23:59 UTC
by Brian Stinson 27 Apr '17

27 Apr '17

Hi Folks, We will be doing a full restart of Jenkins on Wednesday 26-Apr-2017 to apply security fixes, upgrade to the latest Jenkins LTS, and update plugins. To convert to your timezone run the following: date -d '2017-04-26 23:59 UTC' As usual, we'll have a 1 hour quiet period before the outage to allow any pending jobs to finish up. We will update the list as soon as the outage is over, and hang out in #centos-devel on Freenode for questions or comments. Cheers! -- Brian Stinson CentOS CI Infrastructure Team

1 1

[ci-users] What is the idea --retry-count ?
by Budh Gurung 19 Apr '17

19 Apr '17

Hi, With the first incidence of "node not available / No inventory available" around 2 weeks ago (3/4th April), we updated our Job configurations [1] to have a retry-count of 6 which sums up with default wait of 10 seconds to 1 minute. We thought that would be enough. But now, again we are intermittently experiencing similar incidence [2] even having a retry-count to 6. I am curious here, what is the ideal --retry-count here. [1] https://github.com/minishift/minishift-ci-jobs/blob/master/minishift-ci-ind… [2] https://ci.centos.org/job/minishift/94/console Regards, Budh Ram Gurung Software Engineer - Devtools

2 1

JJB Config & Git Repository Settings
by Pavel Odvody 18 Apr '17

18 Apr '17

Hello, I have the following configuration for JJB: https://github.com/leapp-to/prototype/blob/master/centos-ci/jobs/integratio… At least the scm/git part looks merely identical to other JJB jobs I've seen before, but it seems that Jenkins is having trouble checking out the particular branch (https://ci.centos.org/job/leapp-integration-tests/8/console) as if there was some error in the expansion of '${{ghprbActualCommit}}'. I'm pretty sure I'm missing something basic, has anyone encountered this? Cheers, Pavel -- Pavel Odvody <podvody(a)redhat.com> Sr. Software Engineer - Platform Engineering 5EC1 95C1 8E08 5BD9 9BBF 9241 3AFA 3A66 024F F68D

3 4

can update jenkins jobs via jjb
by Dusty Mabe 14 Apr '17

14 Apr '17

I'm using python3-jenkins-job-builder-1.4.0-7.fc25.noarch.rpm on fedora and I can't update jobs. I can authenticate just fine with my password in the config ini file, but I get a 403 forbidden. I have tried this with both the python3 and python2 version. The below errors are from the python 2 version: $ jenkins-jobs --conf jenkins_jobs.ini test project.yaml /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/jenkins/__init__.py:529: DeprecationWarning: get_plugins_info() is deprecated, use get_plugins() DeprecationWarning) Traceback (most recent call last): File "/guests/sharedfolder/code/github.com/projectatomic/adb-tests/cdrage-atomicapp-ci/centos-ci-jjb/foo/usr/bin/jenkins-jobs", line 10, in <module> sys.exit(main()) File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/jenkins_jobs/cmd.py", line 171, in main execute(options, config) File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/jenkins_jobs/cmd.py", line 337, in execute output=options.output_dir) File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/jenkins_jobs/builder.py", line 314, in update_job self.load_files(input_fn) File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/jenkins_jobs/builder.py", line 224, in load_files self.parser = YamlParser(self.global_config, self.plugins_list) File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/jenkins_jobs/builder.py", line 220, in plugins_list self._plugins_list = self.jenkins.get_plugins_info() File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/jenkins_jobs/builder.py", line 184, in get_plugins_info raise e jenkins.JenkinsException: Error in request. Possibly authentication failed [403]: Forbidden INFO:jenkins_jobs.builder:Cache saved Note that if I run the "test" without the `--conf jenkins_jobs.ini`, the test passes as it is just validating the yaml. I don't think this is an auth issue either because if I put the wrong password in the file then I get `Invalid password/token for user:` error. Can someone confirm they can run jenkins_jobs to update a job? One way to do this is run through the `Your Next Job: Jenkins Job Builder` example I posted a long time ago: http://dustymabe.com/2016/01/23/the-centos-ci-infrastructure-a-getting-star… Thanks for any help! Dusty

3 4

Place to store images and ostree artifacts
by Ari LiVigni 10 Apr '17

10 Apr '17

Is artifacts.ci a good place to store ostree and image artifacts out of CentOS CI? If so what are the steps to hook that up? Thanks, -- -== @ri ==- My PGP fingerprint is F87F1EE7CD8BEE13

6 8

Re: [Ci-users] Ci-users Digest, Vol 18, Issue 7
by Gary Knutson 10 Apr '17

10 Apr '17

Who the fuck are you, whore bitch? Name is Amey. What you doing talking to Dustin? On Jan 26, 2017 7:00 AM, <ci-users-request(a)centos.org> wrote: Send Ci-users mailing list submissions to ci-users(a)centos.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ci-users-request(a)centos.org You can reach the person managing the list at ci-users-owner(a)centos.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Ci-users digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (Brian Stinson) 2. Re: Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (David Moreau Simard) 3. Re: Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (Lauren?iu P?ncescu) 4. Re: Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (Nigel Babu) 5. Re: Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (Brian Stinson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 11:07:35 -0600 From: Brian Stinson <brian(a)bstinson.com> To: ci-users(a)centos.org Subject: [Ci-users] Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X Message-ID: <20170125170735.5wgzfsliclobz76m(a)ender.bstinson.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi Folks, We've been shipping Ansible 1.9.x on the slaves for a while now. Do any of you have use-cases to stay pinned to such an old version? We'd like to update at least to the 2.1 branch (2.2 has some templating/variable-quoting gotchas) in the near future. Questions, comments? --Brian ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:49:41 -0500 From: David Moreau Simard <dms(a)redhat.com> To: Brian Stinson <brian(a)bstinson.com> Cc: ci-users(a)centos.org Subject: Re: [Ci-users] Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X Message-ID: <CAH7C+PrXyUaZUBksYyoFc39v6Z7rGZ6iH_7cPMn_jS3umvWBaQ(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Worth mentioning that 1.9.x and 2.0.x are officially unsupported and unmaintained [1]. [1]: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ansible-devel/6-6FdxZ94kc David Moreau Simard Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter] On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Brian Stinson <brian(a)bstinson.com> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > We've been shipping Ansible 1.9.x on the slaves for a while now. Do any > of you have use-cases to stay pinned to such an old version? > > We'd like to update at least to the 2.1 branch (2.2 has some > templating/variable-quoting gotchas) in the near future. > > Questions, comments? > > --Brian > > _______________________________________________ > Ci-users mailing list > Ci-users(a)centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:16:02 +0100 From: Lauren?iu P?ncescu <lpancescu(a)gmail.com> To: ci-users(a)centos.org Subject: Re: [Ci-users] Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X Message-ID: <CAE9TcML8itpjPdjZdo+V+OPoW3SSoip5nn2PP+bNzYVKCeiY=A(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" I'm not using Ansible inside CI yet, but I remember having had to adapt some 1.9 playbooks for 2.x. [1] Perhaps also worth mentioning, Ansible 2.2.1.0 fixed CVE-2016-9587, CVE-2016-8647, CVE-2016-9587 and CVE-2016-8647 (the first is about a compromised remote system being able to run commands on the Ansible controller - I think 1.9 is also vulnerable [2]). Unless we can afford to quickly backport such security fixes, wouldn't it be better to use the EPEL version everywhere inside CentOS? Regards, Lauren?iu [1] https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/porting_guide_2.0.html [2] https://lwn.net/Articles/711357/ On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 7:49 PM, David Moreau Simard <dms(a)redhat.com> wrote: > Worth mentioning that 1.9.x and 2.0.x are officially unsupported and > unmaintained [1]. > > [1]: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ansible-devel/6-6FdxZ94kc > > David Moreau Simard > Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO > > dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter] > > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Brian Stinson <brian(a)bstinson.com> > wrote: > > Hi Folks, > > > > We've been shipping Ansible 1.9.x on the slaves for a while now. Do any > > of you have use-cases to stay pinned to such an old version? > > > > We'd like to update at least to the 2.1 branch (2.2 has some > > templating/variable-quoting gotchas) in the near future. > > > > Questions, comments? > > > > --Brian > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ci-users mailing list > > Ci-users(a)centos.org > > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users > _______________________________________________ > Ci-users mailing list > Ci-users(a)centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users >

1 0

Re: [Ci-users] Contents of Ci-users digest...
by Gary Knutson 10 Apr '17

10 Apr '17

*Who the fuck are you, slut? Why you talking to my man Dustin Knutson ?* *On Jan 26, 2017 7:00 AM, <ci-users-request(a)centos.org <ci-users-request(a)centos.org>> wrote:* *Send Ci-users mailing list submissions to ci-users(a)centos.org <ci-users(a)centos.org> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users <https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ci-users-request(a)centos.org <ci-users-request(a)centos.org> You can reach the person managing the list at ci-users-owner(a)centos.org <ci-users-owner(a)centos.org> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Ci-users digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (Brian Stinson) 2. Re: Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (David Moreau Simard) 3. Re: Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (Lauren?iu P?ncescu) 4. Re: Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (Nigel Babu) 5. Re: Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X (Brian Stinson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 11:07:35 -0600 From: Brian Stinson <brian(a)bstinson.com <brian(a)bstinson.com>> To: ci-users(a)centos.org <ci-users(a)centos.org> Subject: [Ci-users] Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X Message-ID: <20170125170735.5wgzfsliclobz76m(a)ender.bstinson.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi Folks, We've been shipping Ansible 1.9.x on the slaves for a while now. Do any of you have use-cases to stay pinned to such an old version? We'd like to update at least to the 2.1 branch (2.2 has some templating/variable-quoting gotchas) in the near future. Questions, comments? --Brian ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:49:41 -0500 From: David Moreau Simard <dms(a)redhat.com <dms(a)redhat.com>> To: Brian Stinson <brian(a)bstinson.com <brian(a)bstinson.com>> Cc: ci-users(a)centos.org <ci-users(a)centos.org> Subject: Re: [Ci-users] Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X Message-ID: <CAH7C+PrXyUaZUBksYyoFc39v6Z7rGZ6iH_7cPMn_jS3umvWBaQ(a)mail.gmail.com <CAH7C%2BPrXyUaZUBksYyoFc39v6Z7rGZ6iH_7cPMn_jS3umvWBaQ(a)mail.gmail.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Worth mentioning that 1.9.x and 2.0.x are officially unsupported and unmaintained [1]. [1]: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ansible-devel/6-6FdxZ94kc <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ansible-devel/6-6FdxZ94kc> David Moreau Simard Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter] On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Brian Stinson <brian(a)bstinson.com <brian(a)bstinson.com>> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > We've been shipping Ansible 1.9.x on the slaves for a while now. Do any > of you have use-cases to stay pinned to such an old version? > > We'd like to update at least to the 2.1 branch (2.2 has some > templating/variable-quoting gotchas) in the near future. > > Questions, comments? > > --Brian > > _______________________________________________ > Ci-users mailing list > Ci-users(a)centos.org <Ci-users(a)centos.org> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users <https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users> ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:16:02 +0100 From: Lauren?iu P?ncescu <lpancescu(a)gmail.com <lpancescu(a)gmail.com>> To: ci-users(a)centos.org <ci-users(a)centos.org> Subject: Re: [Ci-users] Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X Message-ID: <CAE9TcML8itpjPdjZdo+V+OPoW3SSoip5nn2PP+bNzYVKCeiY=A(a)mail.gmail.com <A(a)mail.gmail.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" I'm not using Ansible inside CI yet, but I remember having had to adapt some 1.9 playbooks for 2.x. [1] Perhaps also worth mentioning, Ansible 2.2.1.0 fixed CVE-2016-9587, CVE-2016-8647, CVE-2016-9587 and CVE-2016-8647 (the first is about a compromised remote system being able to run commands on the Ansible controller - I think 1.9 is also vulnerable [2]). Unless we can afford to quickly backport such security fixes, wouldn't it be better to use the EPEL version everywhere inside CentOS? Regards, Lauren?iu [1] https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/porting_guide_2.0.html <https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/porting_guide_2.0.html> [2] https://lwn.net/Articles/711357/ <https://lwn.net/Articles/711357/> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 7:49 PM, David Moreau Simard <dms(a)redhat.com <dms(a)redhat.com>> wrote: > Worth mentioning that 1.9.x and 2.0.x are officially unsupported and > unmaintained [1]. > > [1]: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ansible-devel/6-6FdxZ94kc <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ansible-devel/6-6FdxZ94kc> > > David Moreau Simard > Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO > > dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter] > > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Brian Stinson <brian(a)bstinson.com <brian(a)bstinson.com>> > wrote: > > Hi Folks, > > > > We've been shipping Ansible 1.9.x on the slaves for a while now. Do any > > of you have use-cases to stay pinned to such an old version? > > > > We'd like to update at least to the 2.1 branch (2.2 has some > > templating/variable-quoting gotchas) in the near future. > > > > Questions, comments? > > > > --Brian > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ci-users mailing list > > Ci-users(a)centos.org <Ci-users(a)centos.org> > > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users <https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users> > _______________________________________________ > Ci-users mailing list > Ci-users(a)centos.org <Ci-users(a)centos.org> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users <https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/ci-users/attachments/20170125/bb808059/at… <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/ci-users/attachments/20170125/bb808059/at…>> ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 09:53:22 +0530 From: Nigel Babu <nigelb(a)redhat.com <nigelb(a)redhat.com>> To: Lauren?iu P?ncescu <lpancescu(a)gmail.com <lpancescu(a)gmail.com>> Cc: ci-users(a)centos.org <ci-users(a)centos.org> Subject: Re: [Ci-users] Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X Message-ID: <CAF2NqgN2DUdY4A8o9sCk04C5Lk5xrywucVkdRkSYg2xm+E5_kg(a)mail.gmail.com <CAF2NqgN2DUdY4A8o9sCk04C5Lk5xrywucVkdRkSYg2xm%2BE5_kg(a)mail.gmail.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" I'm on the latest version via virtualenv. I'd welcome having the latest version on the nodes by default. On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 12:46 AM, Lauren?iu P?ncescu <lpancescu(a)gmail.com <lpancescu(a)gmail.com>> wrote: > I'm not using Ansible inside CI yet, but I remember having had to adapt > some 1.9 playbooks for 2.x. [1] > > Perhaps also worth mentioning, Ansible 2.2.1.0 fixed CVE-2016-9587, > CVE-2016-8647, CVE-2016-9587 and CVE-2016-8647 (the first is about a > compromised remote system being able to run commands on the Ansible > controller - I think 1.9 is also vulnerable [2]). Unless we can afford to > quickly backport such security fixes, wouldn't it be better to use the EPEL > version everywhere inside CentOS? > > Regards, > Lauren?iu > > [1] https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/porting_guide_2.0.html <https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/porting_guide_2.0.html> > [2] https://lwn.net/Articles/711357/ <https://lwn.net/Articles/711357/> > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 7:49 PM, David Moreau Simard <dms(a)redhat.com <dms(a)redhat.com>> > wrote: > >> Worth mentioning that 1.9.x and 2.0.x are officially unsupported and >> unmaintained [1]. >> >> [1]: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ansible-devel/6-6FdxZ94kc <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ansible-devel/6-6FdxZ94kc> >> >> David Moreau Simard >> Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO >> >> dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter] >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Brian Stinson <brian(a)bstinson.com <brian(a)bstinson.com>> >> wrote: >> > Hi Folks, >> > >> > We've been shipping Ansible 1.9.x on the slaves for a while now. Do any >> > of you have use-cases to stay pinned to such an old version? >> > >> > We'd like to update at least to the 2.1 branch (2.2 has some >> > templating/variable-quoting gotchas) in the near future. >> > >> > Questions, comments? >> > >> > --Brian >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Ci-users mailing list >> > Ci-users(a)centos.org <Ci-users(a)centos.org> >> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users <https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ci-users mailing list >> Ci-users(a)centos.org <Ci-users(a)centos.org> >> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users <https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Ci-users mailing list > Ci-users(a)centos.org <Ci-users(a)centos.org> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users <https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users> > > -- nigelb -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/ci-users/attachments/20170126/85e58518/at… <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/ci-users/attachments/20170126/85e58518/at…>> ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 00:53:45 -0600 From: Brian Stinson <brian(a)bstinson.com <brian(a)bstinson.com>> To: Lauren?iu P?ncescu <lpancescu(a)gmail.com <lpancescu(a)gmail.com>> Cc: ci-users(a)centos.org <ci-users(a)centos.org> Subject: Re: [Ci-users] Ansible Update from 1.9.6 -> 2.X Message-ID: <20170126065345.k73x2nzlbsl3b3l3(a)ender.bstinson.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On Jan 25 20:16, Lauren?iu P?ncescu wrote: > I'm not using Ansible inside CI yet, but I remember having had to adapt > some 1.9 playbooks for 2.x. [1] > > Perhaps also worth mentioning, Ansible 2.2.1.0 fixed CVE-2016-9587, > CVE-2016-8647, CVE-2016-9587 and CVE-2016-8647 (the first is about a > compromised remote system being able to run commands on the Ansible > controller - I think 1.9 is also vulnerable [2]). Unless we can afford to > quickly backport such security fixes, wouldn't it be better to use the EPEL > version everywhere inside CentOS? We'd be pretty happy to track the latest version. 1.9.6 was temporary to enable a project or two that were in the middle of upgrading. If we can get to 2.2.x I'm all for that. > > Regards, > Lauren?iu > > [1] https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/porting_guide_2.0.html <https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/porting_guide_2.0.html> > [2] https://lwn.net/Articles/711357/ <https://lwn.net/Articles/711357/> > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 7:49 PM, David Moreau Simard <dms(a)redhat.com <dms(a)redhat.com>> wrote: > > > Worth mentioning that 1.9.x and 2.0.x are officially unsupported and > > unmaintained [1]. > > > > [1]: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ansible-devel/6-6FdxZ94kc <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ansible-devel/6-6FdxZ94kc> > > > > David Moreau Simard > > Senior Software Engineer | Openstack RDO > > > > dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter] > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Brian Stinson <brian(a)bstinson.com <brian(a)bstinson.com>> > > wrote: > > > Hi Folks, > > > > > > We've been shipping Ansible 1.9.x on the slaves for a while now. Do any > > > of you have use-cases to stay pinned to such an old version? > > > > > > We'd like to update at least to the 2.1 branch (2.2 has some > > > templating/variable-quoting gotchas) in the near future. > > > > > > Questions, comments? > > > > > > --Brian > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Ci-users mailing list > > > Ci-users(a)centos.org <Ci-users(a)centos.org> > > > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users <https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users> > > _______________________________________________ > > Ci-users mailing list > > Ci-users(a)centos.org <Ci-users(a)centos.org> > > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users <https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users> > > > _______________________________________________ > Ci-users mailing list > Ci-users(a)centos.org <Ci-users(a)centos.org> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users <https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users> ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Ci-users mailing list Ci-users(a)centos.org <Ci-users(a)centos.org> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users <https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/ci-users> ------------------------------ End of Ci-users Digest, Vol 18, Issue 7 *************************************** *

1 0

Removing CentOS 5 from CI env
by Fabian Arrotin 05 Apr '17

05 Apr '17

As CentOS 5 is now EOL, and removed from mirror.centos.org, we'll remove it from the CI environment : people could request CentOS 5 nodes the same way they do for 6 and 7 but we'll remove that feature today. Kind Regards, -- Fabian Arrotin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org gpg key: 56BEC54E | twitter: @arrfab

2 1

Slaves in CI are down
by Marek Skalický 04 Apr '17

04 Apr '17

Is it planned or not? Where to report it? Thanks, Marek

5 5

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

CI-users April 2017