devel May 2014

devel@lists.centos.org

57 participants
31 discussions

Reminder: VoIP SIG Hangout today Feb 13, 16:00 UTC
by Patrick Laimbock 28 May '14

28 May '14

Hi, Reminder: as previously announced on the centos-devel list, the VoIP SIG Hangout will be today Feb 13 at 16:00 UTC [0]. For more information how to join the hangout on Google+ or follow it on Youtube please check http://wiki.centos.org/OfficeHours Nothing set in stone but some of the things open for discussion are the scope of the VoIP SIG, the goal, the target audience, the deliverables, content distribution and lets not forget the actual proposal. It's also helpful to get an industry perspective, how to make the production side easier and facilitate processes that improve the usability of CentOS in the VoIP sector. Best regards, Patrick Laimbock [0] http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20140213T16&am=30

3 8

schedule based updates
by Karanbir Singh 28 May '14

28 May '14

hi, this is following on from the last Cloud Instance SIG meeting - the idea that we should be doing image updates was proposed, but I dont believe we decided on a time frequency of these builds. We can potentially do nightly builds and push them to ci.dev.centos.org, so if people want to really get a nightly snapshot they can. However, for most production requirements it makes sense to have these builds refreshed on a pre-determined schedule. Should we then be doing these weekly ? monthly ? When there is a major security issue ? Who decides its big-enough-an-issue ? This would then include container, VMs and cloud instance images. - KB -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

2 1

Docker problems with centos 6 image based on libselinux.
by Daniel J Walsh 27 May '14

27 May '14

People are reporting problems in Fedora about using centos rhel6 images. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1098120 The problem is the libselinux in the centos image is reporting that SELinux is enabled to processes running within the container. Tools like useradd and groupadd to attempt to write to /proc/self/attr/* files in order to setup proper labeling for SELinux. Since /proc is now mounted read/only within the docker containers, the writes are denied and useradd/groupadd fail. I wrote the attached patch for RHEL6 libselinux to get RHEL6 images to work properly. Basically the patched libselinux will report to processes that SELinux is disabled if the selinux file system is not mounted or mounted read/only. The fixed version of libselinux is already in Fedora and RHEL7 versions of libselinux. Red Hat will be shipping this new version of libselinux in rhel6.6. But we will also ship it as part of our rhel6.5 Base Image. Privileged containers and systems with SELInux disabled do not have this issue, however systemd with SELinux in permissive mode or enforcing have the problem. In permissive mode the problem will continue, since it is not SELinux denying access to /proc. It is actually the fact that /proc is mounted Read/Only. Previous versions of docker did not mount the /proc file system as read/only It would be a good idea if someone could get a patched version of libselinux into the centos 6 docker image.

5 6

Small Business SIG suggestion
by Omar Eljumaily 27 May '14

27 May '14

I'm trying to see if there's interest in a small business oriented SIG. There are already small business distros based on Centos, and perhaps those groups may also want to participate in a SIG. There are certain issues related to small office servers that I believe deserve to be addressed in a community setting. For instance: 1. Easy backup, archive, & offsite mirroring. - Something that is always problematic for every small business I know regardless of server technology. 2. Security issues specifically related to small business. 3. Smooth updating. Trying to make the transition from one major release to the next as easy as possible. 4. Plugable/scalable vertical market application architecture. For instance making the platform hospitable to vertical applications like accounting systems in which the end user doesn't have to spend weeks setting up hosting stacks. 5. Easy user account management, perms setup, etc. 6. Interoperability, easy scalability with cloud systems. For instance explore ideas like having cloud based file server backup that can also be used as live system in case of local failure. Just some ideas, but anyway if anybody's interested, please let me know. Thanks, Omar

12 32

OpenNebula Variant and Cloud SIG proposals
by Jaime Melis 26 May '14

26 May '14

Apologies, I sent this to KB's direct mailbox earlier today and apparently I didn't send it to centos-devel. So I'm forwarding it now. Given that there are at least two other projects keen to make this happen, it would be great if the Cloud SIG could be a single multicloud target. -- Hello, I'm Jaime Melis from the OpenNebula project [1]. We have been involved with CentOS for the past year making a stable Cloud Management Platform [2]. I would like to hereby propose a new CentOS variant, namely the OpenNebula variant. This variant would add three roles to the CentOS installation: * OpenNebula Frontend * OpenNebula Node KVM * OpenNebula Node Xen The work for the Frontend and Node KVM roles has been completed and is ready to be released. The Node Xen role is still in progress although close to being finished. This work should take place under the Cloud SIG umbrella, which right as of now doesn't exist, so I would like to also propose the creation of this group with the aim of making the major cloud platforms work wth Centos. Regards, Jaime [1] http://opennebula.org/ [2] http://wiki.centos.org/Cloud/OpenNebula/QuickStart -- Jaime Melis Project Engineer OpenNebula - Flexible Enterprise Cloud Made Simple www.OpenNebula.org | jmelis(a)opennebula.org

3 7

The CentOS Security Response Team
by Karanbir Singh 24 May '14

24 May '14

Hi, As SIG's come up and move forward - we are going to need to have a better established, documented and process driven security response team. While we can, in a pinch, reach into and request some resources from the RedHat SRT, they are in no way bound to help or even be involved in the overall CentOS Ecosystem - and we should really setup our own group to handle these requests. In the past conversations we had thought of setting up a group of maybe 3 to 5 people, who can triage and communicate with the respective groups of people responsible for the code or infra in question. This would not only include centos resources, but also be the contact point for upstream security notices from projects associated with us. In this case, they would be the people managing security(a)centos.org - with that email address being the primary contact for projects in the SIG's upstream as well. We would also then setup a private security mailing list. thoughts ? comments ? feedback ? -- 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

5 4

Storage SIG Update
by Patrick McGarry 23 May '14

23 May '14

Hey all, Since things have been on the back burner a bit since the Inktank acquisition I wanted to refresh what's going on in the world of the Storage SIG. KB, Lala, and I met yesterday to discuss current status and as it turns out things are actually still moving along. Ultimately we have 3 major goals for the near-term: 1) Collect srpms for Ceph/Gluster to populate CentOS repo (complete) 2) Ensure Ceph/Gluster are installable from a single repo 3) Ensure Storage distro work w/ virt Ideally we would like to expand the storage considerations beyond Ceph/Gluster, so if anyone has storage tech that they would like to heap on to the pile we definitely want to make sure we're enabling as many things as possible. Perhaps the xtreemFS or mooseFS guys would care to participate? At the very least it would be good to get a non-red-hat member into the storage mix now. If anyone has questions or concerns please let me know. Once we have a workable setup I'll push that out again for some actual consumption. Thanks. Best Regards, Patrick McGarry Director, Community || Inktank http://ceph.com || http://inktank.com @scuttlemonkey || @ceph || @inktank

1 0

The Branding Hunt. Ed. 7
by Karanbir Singh 23 May '14

23 May '14

Well, we havent really done this seven times before, but given its targetting CentOS Seven it feels apt to mark it ed.7 Over the next couple of days, we are going to have the git repos populated with the rhel7beta and then rhel7rc content and we need to boostrap the larger branding hunt. Comments, ideas and process recommendations on how we might run this are now welcome. Also, people interested in helping run the effort please make yourself known now! Regards, -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

9 10

Creating a CentOS-only package
by Darryl L. Pierce 21 May '14

21 May '14

In Fedora and EPEL we have the qpid-cpp package (which I spoke about in an email last week) for all supported version of Fedora and for EL7 (can't do EL5/6 for the reasons mentioned in that previous email). This week we discussed the idea of providing CentOS specific packages, starting with CentOS 7. In RHEL we have product packages, this would be something separate from what we would be doing as a product. What would be the process for doing something like this? -- Darryl L. Pierce, Sr. Software Engineer @ Red Hat, Inc. Delivering value year after year. Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors. http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/

6 13

Today's VIRT SIG minutes
by Lars Kurth 20 May '14

20 May '14

Hi all, I updated http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Virtualization/Status and tracked meeting minutes at http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Virtualization/2014-May20-notes Lars

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

devel May 2014