devel July 2018

devel@lists.centos.org

26 participants
32 discussions

ksplice and CentOS
by Karanbir Singh 25 Sep '25

25 Sep '25

hi guys, lots of people on this list are keen on contributing to the CentOS effort - and one place where we could, as a group of people, make a massive difference is being able to deliver a ksplice upgrade model. A couple of people have started in silo's to try and get something together but I feel it might be a good time to try and see if we can do somethng as a group. Do we have people on the list who find the idea of rebootless kernel upgrades interesting ? Is there some desire to try and make that happen within the CentOS Ecosystem ? - KB

24 47

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

Problems with qemu-img when generating Vagrant images
by Laurentiu Pancescu 02 Oct '18

02 Oct '18

Hello everyone, we switched from using qemu-img from CentOS 7.x to qemu-img-ev from the Virt SIG several months ago, to allow us to generate Hyper-V images. My attempts to build Vagrant images are failing the automated tests since the beginning of July, apparently due to corrupt filesystems. I see XFS metadata corruption in the CentOS 7 images when using qemu-img-ev, as well as ext4 superblock corruption in the CentOS 6 images.[1] The distro installer runs just once and the resulting disk image is converted by Image Factory to different formats, depending on the virtualization target. Since the VirtualBox images are working as expected, while the libvirt images don't even boot due to filesystem corruption, I would assume that the installation produces a valid image, but the conversion of the disk images for libvirt-kvm fall prey to bugs in qemu-img-ev and the stock qemu-img. If anyone has the possibility to test with VmWare or Hyper-V, please write me off-list. I noticed that qemu-img-ev is at version 2.1.2, while Debian Stable has version 2.8 and Fedora 28 has version 2.11. Maybe such bugs, if real, were already fixed upstream - would it be possible to use a newer version than what qemu-img-ev provides? We reverted to using the EL7 qemu-img, but this still produces broken libvirt images and wețd have to drop the Hyper-V images as well. Any help or suggestions are appreciated. Best regards, Laurențiu [1] https://people.centos.org/bstinson/vagrant/c6-vagrant.png

2 4

Authorization to use CentOS logo in GNOME Boxes
by Fabiano Fidêncio 19 Sep '18

19 Sep '18

People, Firstly, sorry for the cross-list post (centos-devel and centos-docs). I'd like to reach you in order to ask for a formal authorization to use CentOS logo on GNOME Boxes[0]. GNOME Boxes already shows a few other distro's logos as you can check here[1]. Would be possible to get the explicit confirmation that we could use CentOS logo as well? [0]: https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Boxes [1]: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-boxes/raw/master/README.logos Best Regards, -- Fabiano Fidêncio

4 5

SRPMS for AltArch (more specifically aarch64 kernel)
by Dominique Martinet 22 Aug '18

22 Aug '18

Hi folks, I've asked on IRC and have been pointed to this list. I can't seem to find this particular source rpm: kernel-aarch64-4.5.0-29.el7.src.rpm which is what is pointed by `rpm -qi kernel` on my system. Are these supposed to be available anywhere? Looking on google I only see one for an older release in someone's centos user/people page, but I can't seem to find these in any repo. The debuginfo are properly here but it's good to have sources as well when messing around with low level stuff :) Cheers and thanks for the hard work, -- Dominique Martinet

3 8

[RFC] New SIG Messaging
by Matthias Runge 22 Aug '18

22 Aug '18

Creation of a new SIG "Messaging" ================================= Hereby, I'm asking for comments about founding a new SIG to handle messaging stacks in CentOS. We currently have in CentOS RabbitMQ handling AMQP 0.9, and QPID, which provides messaging using AMQP 1.0. There are also packages supporting Kafka, but not Kafka itself. Collaborating SIGs would be the Cloud and the Opstools SIGs. Both would be consuming built packages produced by the Messaging SIG. We also briefly took into consideration to incorporate the newly proposed SIG into one of the others. At the end, messaging is different than Cloud or Operational tools. It doesn't really fit. The best solution seemed to us to have another SIG. If there are any questions or comments, please don't hesitate to reply to the list, and let's find the best proposal here. Matthias -- Matthias Runge <mrunge(a)matthias-runge.de>

8 13

[altarch][ppc64le] Packages needed for Triple O Container Builds
by Michael Turek 01 Aug '18

01 Aug '18

Hello all, We've been trying to enable tripleo container builds in the centos rdo community and quickly ran into some problematic RPMs. Specifically, centos-release-ceph-luminous and centos-release-opstools. They were problematic for altarch but have recently been patched to work with the $contentdir var. I set up a test to see how they install, linked below [0][1], and found that centos-release-storage-common would also be needed. Adding that seemed to allow everything to install properly. The test also installs ceph, as the centos-release-ceph-luminous package just enables a repo. If you would like any more testing to be done here please let me know, I'd be happy to help move this along. To reiterate, the packages we'd like to see published by altarch are: centos-release-ceph-luminous http://cbs.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=23175 centos-release-storage-common http://cbs.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=7274 centos-release-opstools http://cbs.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=23201 Thanks! Mike Turek <mjturek> [0] https://ci.centos.org/job/rdo-test-day-tools-ppc64le/15/consoleFull [1] https://review.rdoproject.org/r/#/c/15069/

2 1

[CentOS PaaS SIG]: new rpms available
by Daniel Comnea 31 Jul '18

31 Jul '18

Hi, We would like to announce that new openshift-ansible rpms been made *available:* 1. *openshift v3.6* => openshift-ansible-3.6.173.0.128-1.git.1.a18588a.el7 which can be found at [1] 2. *openshift v3.7* => openshift-ansible-3.7.61-1.git.1.3624530.el7 which can be found at [2] 3. *openshift v3.9* => openshift-ansible-3.9.40-1.git.1.b3380d7.el7 which can be found at [3] For openshift v3.10 we are working on getting the origin v3.10.0-rc.0 out for testing very soon once we manage to fix an issue in our code automation. Thank you, PaaS SiG team [1] http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/paas/x86_64/openshift-origin36/ [2] http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/paas/x86_64/openshift-origin37/ [3] http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/paas/x86_64/openshift-origin39/

1 0

SIG reports due by Wednesday, Aug 1st
by Rich Bowen 30 Jul '18

30 Jul '18

If you'd like to have a report from your SIG in the August newsletter, please get me a sentence/paragraph/whatever by Wednesday. You can see example reports from other SIGs in the previous newsletters: https://wiki.centos.org/Newsletter/1801 https://wiki.centos.org/Newsletter/1802 Thanks! -- Rich Bowen - rbowen(a)redhat.com @CentOSProject // @rbowen 859 351 9166

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

devel July 2018