devel October 2014

devel@lists.centos.org

56 participants
52 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

cbs feature req: building embargoed content
by Karanbir Singh 12 Mar '15

12 Mar '15

hi guys, we need a way to build embargo'd content like reimzul's priv-build, that does not make stuff public till a specific date ( the actual push to public can be manual ); how would we achieve this on cbs ? I guess the git stuff is easier since it can just be a scratch build from srpm and people need not push the git content back to git.centos.org till embargo expiry. - KB -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

7 14

Re: [CentOS-devel] When anyone has plan to have this patch to CentOS 6.5?
by Subscribe Ling 16 Dec '14

16 Dec '14

I have opened a bug here and hope get response ASAP. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154747 Thank you, *Johnny!* *Paul*

3 4

A project calendar
by Karanbir Singh 11 Dec '14

11 Dec '14

Hi There is quite a lot of stuff going on and not all of it is easily visible to everyone. The way to perhaps address that is to setup a project calendar that people can sync against and look at regularly. And more win if we can have it slightly open ended, allowing people / projects / sig's to contribute events into that cal. To that extent Stephen Smoogen introduced me to Pierre-Yves Chibo who runs the fedocal effort, and they have graciously agreed to set something up for CentOS as well. Stephen I know is on this list already, I've requested Pierre to join ( he might have done so already ). Firstly looking for comments on the idea / plan - and then for options on implemention, publishing and consumption of the calendar. Regards -- Karanbir Singh, Project Lead, The CentOS Project +44-207-0999389 | http://www.centos.org/ | twitter.com/CentOS GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

8 11

cloud-init in CentOS
by Sam Kottler 02 Dec '14

02 Dec '14

During the cloud instance SIG meeting today we talked about future plans for cloud-init in CentOS. Right now cloud-init is included as part of EPEL and that's where most CentOS users consume it from. The problem is that cloud-init and related bits are critical for building images to run on a public or private cloud, and we need to build early guest initialization tools into the cloud images we produce. Ideally this does not include adding EPEL or packages from EPEL which have not been rebuilt in our build systems. So, the proposal that there's general consensus upon within the SIG is to maintain cloud-init, its dependencies, and any related packages on git.centos.org and rebuild them ourselves. I'm one of the maintainers in EPEL so I offered to maintain the git repos for CentOS, anyone else who would like to be involved in more than welcome to step up. Thoughts, questions, concerns? -s

7 17

Importing of of CentOS-6 SRPMS for git.centos.org
by Johnny Hughes 19 Nov '14

19 Nov '14

As was discussed before, CentOS-6 SRPMS are going to be imported into git.centos.org as well and will be processed like CentOS-7 ones are now. We want to bring everything in from 6.0 initial and through 6.4+updates initially, then we will do 6.5+updates (as that is changing right now). So, I have created a 6.0 to 6.4 set of lists. These lists live at this location: http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/EL6-Import/ The two lists so far are: EL6-non-mod-SRPMS-sorted.txt centos-6-srpms-modified.txt 1. The EL6-non-mod-SRPMS-sorted.txt is all SRPMS used in CentOS-6 in their unmodified form. The order they appear in the file is the order they will be imported into git. What is important for history is that (for each NAME) they are imported in the correct order, so from 6.0 through 6.4+updates, the order of packages used in CentOS-6 for 389-ds-base would be: 389-ds-base-1.2.8.2-1.el6.src.rpm 389-ds-base-1.2.8.2-1.el6_1.3.src.rpm 389-ds-base-1.2.9.14-1.el6.src.rpm 389-ds-base-1.2.9.14-1.el6_2.2.src.rpm 389-ds-base-1.2.10.2-15.el6.src.rpm 389-ds-base-1.2.10.2-18.el6_3.src.rpm 389-ds-base-1.2.10.2-20.el6_3.src.rpm 389-ds-base-1.2.11.15-11.el6.src.rpm 389-ds-base-1.2.11.15-12.el6_4.src.rpm 389-ds-base-1.2.11.15-14.el6_4.src.rpm 389-ds-base-1.2.11.15-20.el6_4.src.rpm 389-ds-base-1.2.11.15-22.el6_4.src.rpm All of these packages will come from ftp.redhat.com and be imported. =========================================== 2. Next is the centos-6-srpms-modified.txt file .. that actually contains a list (in the order they will be imported) of all source packages modified for CentOS-6 (again 6.0 to 6.4+updates) and their RHEL counterparts. All packages without a .centos. in the name will come from ftp.redhat.com, all packages with a centos in the name will come from vault.centos.org and the order should alternate so that we have RHEL package and then CentOS Package, then repeat for each NAME for an SRPM. So, for example, for anaconda, it would be: anaconda-13.21.82-1.el6.src.rpm anaconda-13.21.82-1.el6.centos.1.src.rpm anaconda-13.21.117-1.el6.src.rpm anaconda-13.21.117-1.el6.centos.src.rpm anaconda-13.21.149-1.el6.src.rpm anaconda-13.21.149-1.el6.centos.src.rpm anaconda-13.21.176-1.el6_3.src.rpm anaconda-13.21.176-1.el6.centos.src.rpm anaconda-13.21.195-1.el6.src.rpm anaconda-13.21.195-1.el6.centos.1.src.rpm =========================================== 3. I will be creating a 3rd list (not yet done) of the kernel packages since we actually have the 'exact same' ENVR for kernel packages as RHEL in CentOS so that 3rd party kernel drivers work for the boot isos. That list will be added sometime today. =========================================== What I would like for some one (as many as will do it :D) to verify that importing things in this order into git will result in the proper git tree for each 'name' package ... so the above 389-ds-base will produce chronological order imports ... same for anaconda in #2 ... with the added desire to get RHEL then CentOS packges in the correct order. You can see the names of the SRPMs in every CentOS release in vault.centos.org/6.0 through 6.4 .. we are concerned about os/ and updates/ SRPMS. Does this make sense, and are there any errors in the lists?

6 14

Missing upstream EL5 SRPMS
by Orion Poplawski 18 Nov '14

18 Nov '14

I'm trying to build a patched version of the firefox-31.1.0-6.el5.src.rpm package for EL5, and am getting the following missing deps: DEBUG util.py:283: Error: No Package found for hunspell-devel DEBUG util.py:283: Error: No Package found for libvpx-devel >= 1.3.0 DEBUG util.py:283: Error: No Package found for system-bookmarks And indeed I cannot find any of those packages at http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Server/en/os/SRPMS/ (or 5client). I realize this is more of an upstream issue, but was hoping somebody here would have some insight from trying to build that for CentOS. -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane orion(a)nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.nwra.com

2 2

git upgrade
by cybernet 10 Nov '14

10 Nov '14

already did, yesterday: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1157180 i want to compile the last version of git 2.1.2, but i don't know how to make a install kit ( rpm archive ) can you help ?

2 1

Policy for Ad-Hoc Upstreams: Development Hosting
by Brian Stinson 07 Nov '14

07 Nov '14

Hi All, In the CBS/Infra meeting on Monday we agreed to start a discussion here on the mailing list about how to handle "ad-hoc" upstreams. An ad-hoc upstream could best be described as a project we would like to ship that is developed within the CentOS community (centpkg is one example). Developers of an ad-hoc upstream need some extra infra (e.g. a git repo for doing active development) in addition to the dist-git repo on git.centos.org where the package specs live. I would like to start the policy and procedure discussion with the following proposals: - Host the ad-hoc development repositories on git.centos.org in separate Gitblit projects - Host the ad-hoc development repositories on Github, linked to the CentOS project group - Host the ad-hoc development repositories someplace else? Thanks! Brian -- Brian Stinson bstinson(a)ksu.edu | IRC: bstinson | Bitbucket/Twitter: bstinsonmhk

6 11

Secondary archs and how we might build them
by Karanbir Singh 07 Nov '14

07 Nov '14

There has been reasonable levels of interest in the various secondary arch's - i386 / powerpc / arm32 / arm64; but the Core SIG team is just too busy to actively participate and deliver on these. What I'd like to do is run an online session over google hangout + irc, and see if we can get a conversation started on how other people might contribute towards these builds and how we might setup the idea of a secondary architecture that tracks the main x86_64 builds for CentOS-7. Not sure if there is much interest or value in doing this for the CentOS-5/6 tree's at this point. I'd like to propose the 31st Oct 2014 as the date to run this, and starting at 10:00 UTC running for 2 hours. - KB -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

9 19

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

devel October 2014