November 2010 - devel - lists.centos.org

anaconda dependency calculation?
by Nicholas Byrne 04 Aug '25

04 Aug '25

Hi all, I'm trying to find a tool that calculates all dependencies for a specific package or group of packages for use with CentOS 5 (beta) with the intention of putting together a custom single CD build of CentOS 5. With CentOS 4 i used a python script that used the hdrlist module to find all dependencies which borrowed code from a number of sources. I've looked at yumdownloader and how it checks dependencies (using the --resolve option) but if i pass it the list of packages defined in say the Base and the Core yum groups which generally form an absolute minimal install i end up with about 200 packages. If i do a custom install (using beta 1 disks) and deselect everything i end up with over 300 packages. So i'm guessing anaconda calculates dependencies in a slightly different way, can anyone point me to files/code where i should be looking to find out? Thanks very much in advance for help Nick This e-mail is the property of Quadriga Worldwide Ltd, intended for the addressee only and confidential. Any dissemination, copying or distribution of this message or any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Messages sent to and from Quadriga may be monitored. Quadriga cannot guarantee any message delivery method is secure or error-free. Information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. We do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions in this message and/or attachment that arise as a result of transmission. You should carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Quadriga.

6 11

forums + portal for {lang}.centos.org sites
by Karanbir Singh 16 Aug '24

16 Aug '24

Hi, Earlier in the evening today Ralph, Fabian and I had a chat about the present state of the language subsites. This email sort of summarises the main issue ( s/w ). We seem to have run into a slight technical hitch with punbb/fluxbb. They dont support LDAP as a backend. And we had decided a few months back that all new rollouts must have ldap backend so we can rollin CentOS-DS / openldap based backend. So we need to look at alternatives, and since the primary focus of these international sites is going be forums : Here is a shortlist ( if there is anything else that people are aware of, please add to this list ) - phpBB - SMF - Fudforum - phorum - fluxbb Requirements: - Must be able to scale ( couple of hundred thousand msgs ) - Must be able to handle ldap auth ( if it cant, whats involved in writing the ldap-auth portion ) - Must address the specific requirements raised by the present www.centos.org forum users ( Can you please fill this section in ? ) - Must support all languages we need ( pure utf8 support would be good ) - Secure - Skin'able Nice to have: - Capable of running multiple instances from a single deployment - responsive community :D Things we will need to do: - Decide on what s/w to use. - Give the ArtWork people enough time to get the look & feel sorted. - Migrate newbb forums from www.centos.org to $system ( hey, english is a language too :D ). - Migrate fr.centos.org into the final s/w - setup {de/es/ja/it/pt_br}.centos.org Actions: Ralph and Fabian are going to work on setting up a test ldap server, once that is online we will then start by installing into our test-vm-farm the various s/w to eval them. If anyone would like to help, please feel free to jump right in. I'll setup a wiki page for this issue, which might be a good place to track progress. -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219@icq

22 81

Interested in IA64 build.
by James A. Peltier 22 Jan '13

22 Jan '13

I noticed on the SIG that people interested in other ports of interest. I'd like to express interest in the IA64 port. What is the best way to get started? I have two SGI Itanium 2 based machines. One 64 processor x 64GB SGI Altix and a 32 processor x 32GB RAM SGI Prism. They are currently running CentOS 4.8 and I would love to be able to run CentOS 5.5 on them to get them into compliance with the rest of the cluster. -- James A. Peltier Systems Analyst (FASNet), VIVARIUM Technical Director Simon Fraser University - Burnaby Campus Phone : 778-782-6573 Fax : 778-782-3045 E-Mail : jpeltier(a)sfu.ca Website : http://www.fas.sfu.ca | http://vivarium.cs.sfu.ca MSN : subatomic_spam(a)hotmail.com Does your OS has a man 8 lart? http://www.xinu.nl/unix/humour/asr-manpages/lart.html

9 53

build errors with some RHEL6 packages
by Sergio Rubio 10 Dec '10

10 Dec '10

Good morning everyone, I'm having some problems rebuilding some RHEL6 packages from: http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6/en/source/SRPMS/ in particular, mock building python-2.6.5 results in: Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/python-2.6.5-3.el6.x86_64 error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libpython2.6.so.1.0.debug-gdb.py /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libpython2.6.so.1.0.debug-gdb.pyc /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libpython2.6.so.1.0.debug-gdb.pyo RPM build errors: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libpython2.6.so.1.0.debug-gdb.py /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libpython2.6.so.1.0.debug-gdb.pyc /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libpython2.6.so.1.0.debug-gdb.pyo Child returncode was: 1 My build-env is a RedHat Workstation 6, beta2 release, mock 1.1.5-1. I'm looking for suggestions here, as this is my first foray into building recently released upstream RHEL packages: 1. Looks like a bug in the source RPM, but I might be wrong. If so, is it Ok to report it to bugzilla.redhat.com? 2. Something weird in my env being it beta2? My mock profile config attached. Thanks.

12 23

Reality V/s Fantasy
by Karanbir Singh 03 Dec '10

03 Dec '10

Hi Florian, On 11/26/2010 10:41 AM, Florian La Roche wrote: > you should make sure to grow the CentOS development to a > bigger group and make it more stable. AKAIK this is the > goal of this list and there should be plenty of work to > distribute and get done. I am not sure where that came from - there is some level of fantasy that some of you guys seem to live with. Lets take for example the request for help with branding and trademark searches in the el6 source base. Then look at the people who really did anything to help, take the usual suspects out of the loop, and then see what the number reduces to.. Consider this : the distro was ready to QA in 72 hrs from when upstream dropped all srpms into the right places. I actually requested the 'usual suspects'[1] to not get involved with the branding issues, we all have quite a bit going on and adding onto that at release time usually means slowing down or dropping other efforts; the intention was to not do that, and to bring in a larger user base who can help cover issues that don't need specific centos resources. Also, the QA effort tends to be exceptionally manic, with things changing on an hourly basis, and some of us pushing for testing, results quite aggressively. Besides that, new release, new buildsys, new repo structure and new process meant that this would be fantastic time for a larger number of people to get involved, and stay involved. Starting from the root of what we do, and having a good understanding of context around it, why its a big deal and appreciate it in specific terms by working on it. The original email asking for help on this was posted on the 12th Nov. Its the 26th now. Check https://bugs.centos.org/ to see what level of participation has been forthcoming. Lots of people will argue that open source works in a way where people do what they want to do, so you cant tell them what needs doing - and they will do what they want, when they want. Its what many imagine is the 'fun' in the open source way. Fortunately, or unfortunately we dont have that luxury. What comes down the pipe needs to be addressed, sometimes its what we want to do - and sometimes its what needs doing because that's the issue on hand. The process we have in place is mostly finite, with a specified origin and a specified delivery expectation. We need to join those dots. And if people don't want to help with that joining-the-dots effort, they are never going to be a part of the process. So when people imply that there are lots of potential-contributers who would want to get involved and help etc : What fantasy world are they looking at ? I, or one, would like to get in on that action please. > No fights please, CentOS has such a wonderful source > base to extend upon... If we cant get traction to get on with just doing what our primary aim is, extending the code base looks to be a bit of another fantasy world. Slightly frustrating ? Absolutely. - KB [1]: The usual suspects being the people already doing quite a bit, the core/dev team, the qa guys, artwork effort. And I am truly grateful for their support.

12 21

Fasttrack for C-5
by Alan Bartlett 03 Dec '10

03 Dec '10

Karanbir, Is there an ETA for this repository yet? A status update would be appreciated, please. Regards, Alan.

10 33

handling ABRT
by Karanbir Singh 03 Dec '10

03 Dec '10

hi, EL6 now includes abrt ( https://fedorahosted.org/abrt/ ), which is setup to talk with bugzilla.r.c and comes with a plugin that allows details passed to rhsupport. We dont really want either of those two things to happen. So we can either : - Remove abrt completely ( might not be the best overall solution, but it would surely be the fastest short term target ) - Leave abrt in the distro, but disable chatter abilities with anything *.r.c; and *.fedoraproject.org ( that leaves functionality partially intact, but local implementations would need to adopt and go with whatever they want / need; this solution might not be as nice as the last option) - Last option: get a plugin together that can do what's needed to file at bugs.c.o ( we might need a few more people to get involved with triage and handling of issues via that route! ) Who wants to take on the task of handling abrt, getting the work done and driving this issue into CentOS-6 ? Being able to code in python might not be optional.. - KB

14 39

build errors with RHEL6 packages
by Hubert Bahr 03 Dec '10

03 Dec '10

On 11/13/2010 02:17 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote: > On 11/13/2010 08:25 AM, Farkas Levente wrote: >>/ - what os, version do you use on build hosts? /> > CentOS-5.5 >>/ - which version of mock and ccache do you use? / > no ccache, mock-0.6.3 >/ - and what mock config do you use? / > nothing interesting in the mock configs. If there is nothing interesting in the mock configs why not share them. The config really defines the build environment not the host and not necessarily the version of mock. It is the default installs + the packages to meet dependancies and where they come from. >>/ since it's well known that there are some packages (like bash, nss) / ? because you have those problems, does not mean everyone else will. >>/ which can not be build in mock on rhel-6: />>/ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613392 />>/ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=609201 />>/ so it's rather strange that build complete without issues. / > Speak to the people who have the problems ? These packages have all > clearly built not only for fedora, but also for red hat - and going by > the changelogs, quite a few times. > - KB Since I have built all but 36 packages on both 1686 and x86_64 with rpmbuild I am very interested in resolving the differences in build environments. Once I too have a stable build environment I would be interested in working on the rebranding etc. But I would like to be able to test and make sure my changes are not causing the problems not the Build environment. I am building on RHEL6 + updates. Hubert

3 5

Considering repo re-structuring
by Karanbir Singh 02 Dec '10

02 Dec '10

Hi Guys, Some micro-conversations have taken place around this issue on various venues and its worth bringing all that together into one place. With EL6, the rpmlist has grown quite a bit, also there are components that Red Hat ship out in their 'optional' repo. Which are not available on the main isos. Or so I've been told - if you can verify that, please do. The other thing to keep in mind is that we have always merged in all packages from various variants that upstream ship - making all packages available to everyone was always the aim. So traditionally, CentOS has maintained the distro repositories in 2 url's: [os] [updates] with [os] reflecting whats on the isos/; as close to exactly as possible. With CentOS-6, we might need to reconsider that - there is way too much content to fit onto a single DVD. And having the main distro on multiple DVD's might be an option, but is that the best option ? to expand on that option, we could merge in all packages, built a DVD iso set ( 2 or 3 disks, whatever is needed ), stick with the [os] and [updates] repo's on mirror.c.o - and then potentially consider doing some 'slimmer' options. eg: CentOS-6-Minimal, or CentOS-6-SMB-Server etc. The other option is to split the repos into [os] [updates] [optional] {1} [optional-updates] {2} {1} or use a better / different name {2} do we even need the second -updates, we could go with what the present policy w.r.t centosplus/extras is - and drop updates into the same repo Then stick with what we have done in the past, use the isos to reflect whats in [os], create the ability for people to use the [optional] repo at install time and go with that. The iso content would be dictated by the merged iso contents from upstream, so we retain the CentOS <= 5 process in that regard. Continuing on the same idea, one thing that came up was reporpose the Extras/ repo and use that to host these 'additional/optional' packages. Given that it changes a massive user expectation - unless there is very good reasoning to do this, lets try and avoid this. - KB

19 58

You have been unsubscribed from the CentOS-qa mailing list (fwd)
by Dag Wieers 30 Nov '10

30 Nov '10

Hi, Not sure what triggered this, but I hadn't been receiving any mails since 22/5 this year. -- -- dag wieers, dag(a)wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- dagit linux solutions, info(a)dagit.net, http://dagit.net/ [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors] ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: centos-qa-bounces(a)centos.org To: dag(a)wieers.com Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 04:38:37 -0500 Subject: You have been unsubscribed from the CentOS-qa mailing list

2 1

Re: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 5, xen-hotplug-cleanup script
by Manuel Wolfshant 29 Nov '10

29 Nov '10

On 11/29/2010 05:45 PM, Baptiste AGASSE wrote: > Hi, > > There is a little error in the shebang line of > /etc/xen/scripts/xen-hotplug-cleanup in CentOS 5 > > #! /bin/sh ==> #!/bin/sh there is no error. both forms are accepted: The syntax of feature consists of the character sequence #!, i.e. the number sign and an exclamation point character. This initiating character sequence may be followed by whitespace, then followed by the (absolute) path to the interpreter program that will provide the interpretation.

1 0

CentOS 5, xen-hotplug-cleanup script
by Baptiste AGASSE 29 Nov '10

29 Nov '10

Hi, There is a little error in the shebang line of /etc/xen/scripts/xen-hotplug-cleanup in CentOS 5 #! /bin/sh ==> #!/bin/sh Regards. Baptiste.

1 0

minimal install CentOS-6 media
by Karanbir Singh 29 Nov '10

29 Nov '10

hi, so in order to quantify exactly what should be on the minimal install set : - support install from optical media - support install from usb disk - install as native platform + install to Xen domU + install to kvm VM - Functional on post-install + firstboot ( for hooks etc that people put in ) + yum with the standard centos repos + sshd + selinux + functional dhcp client + functional ipv6 stack + ipv4 stack + iptables and ip6tables Questions; * What else should added in ? * Should we remove some more excess ? * what is the thinking on lsb state for this media ? * Finally, I am conflicted on the idea of dropping the gui installer completely. On one hand, we could claw back serious disk space - on the other hand, it drastically changes the install experience. Tbh, the install experience is a bigger deal. But worth pointing out.

6 9

glibc x86_64 vs. i686 file conflict when building from sources
by Leonard den Ottolander 29 Nov '10

29 Nov '10

Hi, (Posting on this list instead of a RHEL list as even though strictly speaking this is a RHEL issue I expect CentOS developers to be familiar with the problem I'm running into.) I am trying to build the RHEL 6 sources on top of RHEL 6 beta on an AMD x86_64. I thought I start by updating glibc to the current version before continuing with building gcc. The build of gcc requires both x86_64 and i686 versions of glibc to be available. So I built the x86_64 version with a plain rpmbuild. For the i686 I used mock. Now when I try to update both glibc's I get conflicts between the configuration and documentation files of both rpms. That issue does not exist with the original rpms, I can install both versions without running into conflicts. Is there a way around this conflict without forcing the upgrade? How come the original rpms don't have this conflict? Is it just a matter of the dates on those files being different, and if so, how would I build the rpms for both archs in one run so the dates do not conflict? Any thoughts, pointers and elaboration on the subject is welcome. Regards, Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research

11 32

branding / content changes search
by Karanbir Singh 25 Nov '10

25 Nov '10

hi guys, Can we target Monday the 29th to finish the audits for branding and content changes ? thanks, - KB

1 0

Trademarked content hunt
by R P Herrold 24 Nov '10

24 Nov '10

I see a bug filing, done merely by looking for certain words, perhaps with find and grep on an exploded tree. This is probably not helpful The issue is NOT if a word form or file name containing the word fragments 'hat' and 'red' is present. Rather it is if a formal TRADEMARK (as opposed to mere identification) of ANY other party, or non-free (i.e., copyrighted and not under a GPL [former approach] or CC [present approach] or other freely redistributable license) images are present The mere 'use' of the word fragments when used as identifiers is not a problem -- if that file is under the GPL, etc, it is free for reuse without change; if it IS changed, or a derivative work produced from teh sources that generate that file, we need to be sensitive to maintaining the COPYING and copyright trail, so a 'light touch' and thoughtful changes, rather than simply running a 'sed' bulldozer through a srouce tree is in order Turning to the upstream sources, Red Hat initially isolated this type of content to two packages: redhat-artwork and the install time 'images' file for anaconda In recent upstream product, I also see; redhat-logos Over time, Fedora has acted to track down and get licenses cleaned up and reviewed, and we benefit from that effort We at CentOS may WANT to alter a given piece of branding art, but please do not conflate what we must do with what is merely a potential 'want' -- Russ herrold

4 3

Artwork packages for CentOS 6
by Marcus Moeller 19 Nov '10

19 Nov '10

Hi all, as there are many changes in Anaconda (and not only there) I don't think our old artwork build infrastructure is capable of creating the necessary files. If I should take a look at what needs to be drawn, please point me to the packages/files that needs to be modified. -- Greets Marcus

2 4

package of cemtos 6
by ops Power Fag 19 Nov '10

19 Nov '10

krankbir, found not package needs bramding helps. find where you will tell me?

1 0

CentOS 6 Mirror System Layout
by JohnS 19 Nov '10

19 Nov '10

Would yall say (devs), this would be the default mirror URL layout for CentOS 6? Of course the baseurl also and as goes also for i386? [Base] name=os mirrorlist=http://mirrorlist.centos.org/?release=6&arch=x86_64&repo=os #baseurl=http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/os/x86_64/ John

2 4

RHEL 6 Released
by Rodrigo Barbosa 18 Nov '10

18 Nov '10

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 For those who have been living under a rock (and don't read slashdot), RedHat released RHEL 6 yesterday. So guys, what can I do to help getting CentOS 6 going ? - -- Rodrigo Barbosa "everything looks perfect from far away" - The Postal Service "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFM3BFdpdyWzQ5b5ckRArmXAKCyCIMbEk/UrZmk2eUjbo3Y6cX5lACgpN+z Sj6Ozw2ko48SUxEByagSUdQ= =n87j -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 3

KDE 3.5
by felek＠bpmok.waw.pl 18 Nov '10

18 Nov '10

Hi, Will be any chance, to get KDE 3.5 on CentOS 6? I ask, because i dont like new-look KDE 4, and not realy love Gnome. -- Regards, Mike

2 2

helping with CentOS-6 - step-1
by Karanbir Singh 17 Nov '10

17 Nov '10

Hi, So while we wait for the first set of packages to build the biggest effort required is to find, confirm and patch those packages that have upstream branding in them. And packages that need to be changed to work within the centos ecosystem. The aim is to find any mention of the upstream brands / trademarks and content that might cause confusion as to what product the user is running ( eg: %descriptions in spec files ). And when we find something of this nature, file a report against the right centos-6/component on http://bugs.centos.org/. I've imported all the components of CentOS-6 into the bugs.c.o interface, if there is anything missing please shout out. We might need to add some down the road ( eg: centos-release-notes ), and remove some ( eg: RedHat-Release-Notes-* ), but most of the components should be there now. There is, an extremely brief, overview of the whole process at : http://wiki.centos.org/QaWiki/6/Round1 Also, please leave issues assigned to the default 'Issue Tracker' role account. The QA team members will assign the issues to themselves when they do the reviews. Keep in mind that if you need an installed system to do these tests ( like one would for the gnome/kde components ), you can use the rhel6-beta2-refresh media. The package manifests have not changed much from there to what's in release. so even if you were to go through the beta2-refresh packages, that would help. Thanks in advance to everyone who pitches in. - KB

4 9

CentOS Font
by Marcus Moeller 16 Nov '10

16 Nov '10

Hi all. I know it's quite late for changes and I am sorry for not coming up with the following issue earlier. The CentOS logo makes use of a commercial font called Denmark. It would be great if we could replace it with a free font. My suggestion is Vegur from arro. I have created a logo using this found which could be found here: http://www.marcus-moeller.de/share/new_logo_plain.png note: it's white on transparent bg which might be displayed as white on white in your browser so use your preferred image viewer instead. Please let me know your comments. -- Greets Marcus

4 11

DRBD 8.3.9
by Ralph Angenendt 15 Nov '10

15 Nov '10

Hi, there are new drbd83-8.3.9 packages available in the testing repository (4 and 5, i386 and x86_64), if you want to try them out. There shouldn't be a problem to drop those in as a replacement to older drbd83 packages. Regards, Ralph

6 11

where did you get the optional packages?
by Farkas Levente 11 Nov '10

11 Nov '10

hi, as rhel-6 release my old question arise again. from where did you get the optional packages' src.rpms? eg: a2ps-4.14-10.1.el6 is included in all of this channel: RHEL Client Optional (v. 6 for 32-bit x86) RHEL Client Optional (v. 6 for 64-bit x86_64) RHEL Server Optional (v. 6 64-bit x86_64) RHEL Server Optional (v. 6 for 32-bit x86) RHEL Workstation Optional (v. 6 for 32-bit x86) RHEL Workstation Optional (v. 6 for x86_64) but this packages (with many other optional packages) can't be find on redhat's ftp server (or at least i can't find it). can you tell me from where the centos team legally download this packages' src.rpm? thanks in advance. regards. -- Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!"

3 3

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

devel November 2010