Hi,
given that we have our own git infra in place now, I propose moving the
upstream t_functional setup ( and other repos we have there ) from
gitorious.org to git.centos.org
will that work for everyone ? Also, some of the docs on the wiki and in
the git repo itself will need updating.
- KB
--
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
Hi all,
if you are interested in participating in the Virtualization SIG, please
join http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt and post via
centos-virt(a)centos.org (but note that you need to be subscribed to the
list, otherwise your post will be discarded)
We have had a number of meetings so far : SIG related meeting minutes,
actions, IRC logs, etc. can be found at
http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Virtualization
Best Regards
Lars
Is it possible to run a Centos 6.5's kernel on a Centos 5.10 installation?
I have compiled a new kernel from kernel-2.6.32-431.17.1.el6.src.rpm. The
kernel does not even boot on my Centos 5.10 box. Vanilla kernels from
kernel.org work well. Is this about Red Hat kernel patches?
Cheers,
Mark
To consolidate the docker effort moving around the -devel list [1][2],
I've been talking with the docker folks about taking over the 'official'
CentOS images they have in place, and transferring the responsibility to
the cloud sig. Currently Chris StPierre and Adam Miller have been
helping to do the work and get us in contact with the right people.
As it stands right now, the docker folks use stackbrew[3] to generate
their images, jam the resulting image tarball into git, and submit a
pull request when updates are required. As long as the image can be
imported into docker, they don't seem to have a problem with the way
we're currently[4] doing things
The recent openssl bug has gotten them a bit more hurried to transition
the responsibility back to us.
Immediate requirements:
- An updated docker image, built from the most recent updates so that
the openssl fix is in place.
Short term requirements:
- A brief description of the centos image, with url for more information
- Wiki page documenting the basics of the docker image, how it's
created, and how to use it.
Long term requirements:
- Update plan for for keeping the docker image updated, along with
'emergency roll-out plan' for critical updates.
- established policy for docker and other cloud images.
Thoughts?
[1] http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2014-April/010070.html
[2] http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2014-April/010090.html
[3] https://github.com/dotcloud/stackbrew
[4] https://github.com/CentOS/sig-cloud-instance-build/tree/master/docker
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
Here's the back story:
Base RHEL 6 has Qpid 0.14, which is a very old release. Our team wants
to make a more recent version, 0.26, available for projects such as Open
Stack. They are adopting CentOS as a platform and would like to use
0.26, which includes AMQP 1.0 support.
We can't package 0.26 for EPEL6 due to 0.14 being in the base.
So it was suggested to me in IRC to come here and ask for guidance. We
would like to make our newer packages available for CentOS 6. What's the
right path to follow?
--
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/
hi
for those of you who are tracking the build-reports, the c7.00.00 build
running at the moment is just a scratch-build, to try and scope up the
issues we are likely to hit in the i386/x86_64 build splits and to
quantify exactly what part of i386 we need to owl as a bare minimal.
its running on a single builder node, and were not running the powerpc /
arm builds in parallel ( yet ).
Early next week, we should be in a position to start a proper buildrun
off the rhel7rc codebase.
- KB
--
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hello there,
I've been using CentOS for quite a while but I haven't gotten involved
with the overall community quite yet. I'm using this email as a step
towards changing that. ;)
Karanbir mentioned that the Hosting SIG[1] needed an owner and I'd
like to take on that challenge
I've worked with web/application hosting since 2002 from basic LAMP
stacks to large-scale, highly orchestrated OpenStack-based
virtualization environments. There are some nuances to the world of
hosting that demands quite a few changes from a standard CentOS
minimal installation.
Some of my goals for the SIG would be:
1) How do we make it easier for system administrators to host
applications using various development languages and server platforms?
2) How can we make configuration automation frameworks more effective
and easier to use on CentOS in hosting environments? (Think ansible,
puppet, chef, etc)
3) I'd like to see if we could make a boot-from-PXE squashfs live OS
(similar to Debian's live system) a supported solution for very large
server environments.
These are just some of my initial thoughts on the topic. I welcome
your feedback!
[1] http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup
- --
Major Hayden
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTalLIAAoJEONAdDQ9I/mwLWoH/3rcjwp7cljHv+brfCuwY2HR
u/IBQM1beyHPhcapggHyVExWdQzaWlVmU6UIjNmF3fKrE4kJnJLyEhBNWi6AD++I
VW+YmwJ4oNWu9M38MggLyYcaWqW6tkOtqXGXC1AqQMg/QHDbEfECsWiVqM5f62gS
xdOYPiepVy3t1hNrR2itqJziuJPxtd3x01PImp+m+rgqcCdTugX2ZAYx9xYEr6mX
ReXJqkyjstzlBarjOa3UE6poe8NT4RZdmextNFFwJTFEdInTnCZGqmSOVgoKtJN3
LdxDVaKpoKzRnPb17GroKbUWIY+tT8T0St2DKySDzXQuAQVLbEucNLFX9Z2vNs4=
=RVWs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
hi,
Working on getting some of the git.c.o stuff into place, and we came up
against an interesting problem - in a single organisation on github, one
cant have sub groups or sub directories. So if we intend to run a
complete set of git mirrors from git.c.o on github.c then were going to
have a single listing of a few thousand repos.
It is possible to setup teams, that are then visible as
github.com/orgs/CentOS/teams/virtsig etc - and one can see just the
repos that team is responsible for - but might there be a more elegant
solution ?
one potential solution is to have github.com/CentOS as the parent
organisation, and setup CentOS-SIG-Virt etc as completely different
organisations, with teams that are able to completely admin that
namespace ( maybe CentOS-SIGVirt or something shorter ).
I've had a few conversations with the folks over at github and there
doesnt seem to be any other obvious workaround to this. Unless, I am
missing something ?
thoughts / comments on a potential plan ?
--
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