devel February 2013

devel@lists.centos.org

19 participants
12 discussions

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

initial testing version for DevTools 1.1
by Tru Huynh 16 Aug '13

16 Aug '13

Hi, For the daring users ;) http://people.centos.org/tru/devtools-1.1/ enjoy and report Cheers, Tru -- Tru Huynh (mirrors, CentOS i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance) http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B

5 26

MariaDB now available for Testing on CentOS-6
by Karanbir Singh 01 May '13

01 May '13

hi guys, quick start: drop http://dev.centos.org/centos/6/mariadb/mariadb.repo into /etc/yum.repos.d/ and yum list mariadb\* This is adapted from the Fedora spec adapted by Johnny for CentOS-6 and upgraded to 5.5.29; we have done some basic testing on these packages and they worked for us. We are now looking for wider testing and feedback about both the packaging, the payload and how its setup as well as any build issues. These packages are setup to replace MySQL on your machine, so be careful. And we consider these rpms to be of Testing grade, unsuiteable for production at this point. Post feedback as follow up to this email, or at bugs.centos.org/ Regards, -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

7 14

CetOS-6.4 via 6.3/cr
by Karanbir Singh 01 Mar '13

01 Mar '13

hi, By now most people would have seen or atleast have spotted the 6.3/cr/ repos are populated and updates there announced to the cr-announce list. 6.4 is a big release, lots of changes and lots of feedback about things ( also, we found in our limited testing that there are some surprises around the corners! ) Most people on the -devel list here should know about how we use the /cr/ repo and its implications - So with that in mind, please test the package payloads and provide feedback on this list. We are going to start working on the isos from today/tomorrow and start testing those right away, but in the mean time it would be great if we could get as wide as possible testing done against 6.3 + cr, and then document into the Release Notes whatever comes through. And remember, even if the test passes - let us know what you tested and that it passes'. Its important for us to build a coverage model as well. Thanks - KB -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

9 11

Re: [CentOS-devel] CetOS-6.4 via 6.3/cr
by Iain Douglas 01 Mar '13

01 Mar '13

On 02/28/2013 12:07 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote: > And remember, even if the test passes - let us know what you tested and > that it passes'. Its important for us to build a coverage model as well. I've run my copy of t_functional on an updated system (an x86_64 VM running on VMWare ESXi 5.1) no problems encountered. Iain

3 3

Google+ Community / Web page?
by Ljubomir Ljubojevic 27 Feb '13

27 Feb '13

Hi. Someone posted a Google+'s CentOS page link (https://plus.google.com/105218000125199596028) in CentOS Facebook group, so I was wandering if it is official group, and if we have CentOS group (Community) on G+? I found https://plus.google.com/communities/110237188526999056491 admined by "Brian Schueler". -- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant

2 1

rpm and ls.do issues
by Oleg Tsarev 25 Feb '13

25 Feb '13

Hi everybody, I am sorry if my question simple and well-known. After several hours investigating man-pages, google and books I did not found answer to my question. Short version of question: Does rpm update ld.so config files after/during install rpm package with so-files? Longer version of question. Our software (to some reasons) uses boost 1.46.1 under CentOS 6.3. We can not downgrade to lower version of boost to some reasons, most important - we support also Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, and really do not want develop/test/support two version of product with different boost versions. We built related boost packages, put their to our repository, and everything works fine. Unfortunately, one customer use boost 1.41 version in some internal software from official CentOS repository, and customer can not use together our software and his internal software. We decided rename our "boost" packages to "product_name-boost-*" and move library files from /usr/lib64 to /opt/product_name/version/lib (path /opt/product_name/version we use for our internal software). I rebuilt boost packages, everything works fine. The question which I try to understand: do we need update LD_LIBRARY_PATH for our binaries? As far I can see, ldd show correct pathes to boost. I do not understand well, how exactly works rpm in this moment, and what the best solution: 1) find way to have together boost 1.41 and 1.46.1 without package renames (which problem we can meet? how "yum remove boost*" would works? how to remove specific version of boost? etc) 2) rename packages from "boost* to "product_name-boost-*" and do not change path from /usr/lib64 3) rename packages from "boost*" to "product_name-boost-*" and change install pathes for libraries/include to /opt/product_name/version/... 4) (3) + setup LD_LIBRARY_PATH for every our binary I hope to your advices, links, help. Thank you very much, Oleg

2 3

JBoss EAP6 rebuild from srpms
by Baptiste AGASSE 22 Feb '13

22 Feb '13

Hi all, Because i'm interested by functional JBoss EAP6 clone running on CentOS 6 server, I'm trying to rebuild JBoss EAP6 srpms from redhat (found here http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/JBEAP/SRPMS/). To achieve that, i've setup CentOS 6.3 x86_64 VM + rpmbuild and mock environments. JBoss EAP6 is about 226 srpms packages. Why this email ? Because i want to share my current work on this, ask if someone else is interested to have JBoss EAP6 server clone working on CentOS, and if someone is also interested to help me to get it working. At this time i've already successfully built 209 of 226 srpms packages (description of this work above). Step #0: Mock configs ===================== In all mock configs, there is centos 6, epel6 and jpackage/6.0/generic/free repos enabled Step #1: building packages ========================== Build iteration #1: ------------------- Basic mock config with EPEL6 93 of 226 packages are building fine out of the box Build iteration #2: ------------------- At this step, we can see that a lot of packages have "jpackage-utils" not listed in their build dependencies. I've tried to rebuild previous failed build with: mock -r $MOCK_CFG --install jpackage-utils mock -r $MOCK_CFG --no-clean --rebuild $SRPMS_PATH/$src_rpm_name Result: 97 of 133 remaining packages built successfully Build iteration #3: ------------------- Adding jpackage/6.0/generic/devel repo 14 of the 36 remaining packages are building fine. Build iteration #4: ------------------- >From this step, i tried to build packages one by one to see what goes wrong. Removing jpackage/6.0/generic/devel by default Adding repo with previously built rpms, and search missing deps. packages built : 1) ironjacamar-1.0.13-1.Final_redhat_1.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Needs jpackage/6.0/generic/devel repo - Deps found on fedora koji server: jboss-logging-tools 2) jbossas-bundles-7.1.3-4.Final_redhat_4.ep6.el6.src.rpm 3) jbossas-core-7.1.3-4.Final_redhat_4.ep6.el6.src.rpm 4) velocity-eap6-1.6.3-7.redhat_2.ep6.el6.4.src.rpm - Needs jpackage/6.0/generic/devel repo 4 of 22 remaining packages are building fine. Remaining packages (18): ------------------- 1) antlr-eap6-2.7.7-15_redhat_2.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Needs jpackage/6.0/generic/devel repo - Last error => build error: /bin/mv: target `maven2-brew/antlr/antlr/2.7.7-redhat-2/' is not a directory 2) atinject-1-8.2_redhat_2.ep6.el6.5.src.rpm - Last error => missing deps: vman (https://github.com/jdcasey/pom-version-manipulator) 3) codehaus-jackson-1.9.2-6_redhat_2.ep6.el6.5.src.rpm - Deps found on fedora koji server: jsr-311 - Last error => missing deps: vman (https://github.com/jdcasey/pom-version-manipulator) 4) dom4j-1.6.1-14_redhat_3.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Last error => missing deps: msv-core 5) glassfish-jaxb-2.2.5-10_redhat_3.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Needs jpackage/6.0/generic/devel repo - Last error => missing deps: jboss-component-management 6) glassfish-jsf-2.1.13-1_redhat_1.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Last error => missing deps: jboss-component-management 7) h2database-1.3.168-2_redhat_1.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Last error => missing deps: lucene-core >= 3.0.2 8) hibernate4-4.1.6-7.Final_redhat_3.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Deps found on fedora koji server: gradle, jboss-logging-tools - Last error => missing deps: java-classmate 9) hornetq-2.2.23-1.Final_redhat_1.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Last error => missing deps: jboss-component-management 10) hornetq-native-2.2.21-1.Final.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Last error => missing deps: hornetq 11) jbossas-modules-eap-7.1.3-4.Final_redhat_4.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Last error => missing deps: hibernate4-core 12) jboss-ec2-eap-7.1.3-6.Final_redhat_1.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Last error => build error: [ERROR] FATAL ERROR 13) jboss-integration-7.0.0-0.6.Final_redhat_1.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Last error => missing deps: jboss-component-management 14) jbossts-4.16.6-1.Final_redhat_1.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Deps found on fedora koji server: byteman, emma - Last error => missing deps: hibernate4-core 15) jdom-eap6-1.1.2-4.GA_redhat_2.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Needs jpackage/6.0/generic/devel repo - Last error => build error: /bin/mv: target `maven2-brew/org/jdom/jdom/1.1.2-redhat-2/' is not a directory 16) jython-eap6-2.5.2-5.redhat_2.ep6.el6.4.src.rpm - Deps found on fedora koji server: jnr-constants, jaffl, jnr-netdb, jnr-posix - Last error => missing deps: jboss-parent >= 8 17) woodstox-core-4.1.1-1.redhat_2.ep6.el6.4.src.rpm - Last error => missing deps: msv-core 18) xerces-j2-eap6-2.9.1-13_redhat_3.ep6.el6.src.rpm - Last error => build error: /bin/mv: target `maven2-brew/xerces/xercesImpl/2.9.1-redhat-3/' is not a directory Step #2: [TODO] Installing and testing ====================================== Install packages and try to run JBoss server Step #3: [TODO] Removing logos and trademarks ============================================= ... Have a nice day. Regards. Baptiste.

2 5

contribution offer for web masters/developers
by cernekj 14 Feb '13

14 Feb '13

Hi, I'm willing to help with web mastering/development on any CentOS project. If there is interest in current web team please let me know. I tried to offer my contribution on IRC but nothing came to me. I really don't know how you cooperate to offer anything specific. Cheers J. C.

2 2

anaconda-11.1.2.259 is not a valid src.rpm
by Farkas Levente 14 Feb '13

14 Feb '13

hi, it seems that centos-vault/5.9/os/SRPMS/anaconda-11.1.2.259-1.src.rpm is not the real src.rpm from which centos build the anaconda rpm. this package contains patches which can not even be applied (actually the patch is the anaconda-centos-installclasses-2.patch). it seems it's a fake src.rpm and the real source of the anaconda-11.1.2.259-1. -- Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!"

4 5

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

devel February 2013