devel January 2022

devel@lists.centos.org

30 participants
26 discussions

Few questions on cloud images
by Pino Toscano 06 Jun '23

06 Jun '23

Hello, I have few questions related to the cloud images provides for c8s and c9s, i.e.: - https://cloud.centos.org/centos/8-stream/x86_64/images/ - https://cloud.centos.org/centos/9-stream/x86_64/images/ 1) I see the c9s images are regularly updated, while the c8s images not; is this wanted, or simply a mistake/miss somewhere? If so, will they be kept up-to-date just like the c9s images? 2) are the Vagrant images there officially supported? Let's say you use one, and find a bug; then check on a "classic" installation (baremetal/VM), and the bug isn't there; can users report problems in those cases? 3) would it be possible to have either unversioned or "-latest" symlinks for the latest versions of all the files (i.e. images, checksums, etc)? This way, it will be much easier for users to fetch the latest versions with no need to change URLs frequently. Of course, the assumption is that users of this are always willing to use the latest version. Thanks! -- Pino Toscano

7 14

Proposal: CentOS Public Board Meetings
by Rich Bowen 07 Jan '23

07 Jan '23

In January of 2021, the CentOS Board of Directors opened our monthly meetings to all SIG chairs, in a first step towards more transparent governance. We wanted to see how the larger audience changed the meeting dynamics, if at all, as well as welcoming a broader pool of voices. We are now ready for the second part of this process. Starting in the August meeting, we will be inviting the entire CentOS community to attend these meetings. Due to the nature of the Internet, we won’t be simply publishing the meeting URL, as this often leads to disruptive behavior in meetings, as I am sure many of you have experienced. Rather, in the week before the meeting, we’ll send, to this list, a way to request an invitation to the meeting. In this way, we hope to limit the incidence of such disruptions, while also making the meeting available to anyone who wishes to attend. We will be working on the rules of engagement for these meetings, but they will be, at minimum: * Wait to be recognized by the Chair before speaking * Respect the Chair when told your time to speak is over - this will allow us to remain on agenda, and complete the meetings in the allotted time * In the event that there are Board-confidential topics, these will be put at the end of the meeting, in Executive Session, and guests will be asked to leave. We hope to minimize these items, but they do sometimes happen. The most common scenarios in which this may happen are personnel issues, or information that Red Hat wishes to share with the Board, but is not yet public. * Muting of participants, or, in extreme situations, ejection from the meeting, is at the sole discretion of the Chair. * Meetings will be recorded, and published to YouTube (possibly with edits/redactions, as approved by the Directors). Thus, by joining the meeting you consent to have your presence at the meeting, and anything you say during the meeting, made public. Because there will seldom be time for Q&A during the meeting itself, we plan to add a post-meeting IRC office hours session for followup questions. This will probably be scheduled for a week after the board meeting, to allow time to publish meeting minutes We welcome your comments about the above proposal, and thank you all for your patience as we implement these changes to our governance process.

8 27

CS8 repos / repomd.xml.asc
by Leon Fauster 02 Mar '22

02 Mar '22

Hey. It seems that the mirrors do not have the repomd.xml.asc file. Does the main repo provide it? -- Thanks Leon

5 8

[Storage-SIG] cephadm is not last version
by Luis Domingues 21 Feb '22

21 Feb '22

Hello, We are currently testing deploying clusters using CentOS Storage SIG. And while almost all packages are available on last version (16.2.7), we notice that cephadm was only on 16.2.5. Is any reason for that? Thanks, Luis Domingues Proton AG

4 4

CentOS Stream 9 security patches: Where is polkit?
by Steven Rosenberg 03 Feb '22

03 Feb '22

I have been looking for the polkit patch for CentOS Stream 9, and I have not seen a new package in the repo. Am I missing something?

6 10

Re: [CentOS-devel] Is advanced-virt (Virtualization SIG) not relevant anymore with latest CentOS Stream 8?
by Igor Raits 01 Feb '22

01 Feb '22

Hi Danilo, Thanks for the very quick response! And thanks Sandro for including relevant people (as it was hard for me to find appropriate emails). Have a great day, On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 2:04 PM Danilo de Paula <ddepaula(a)redhat.com> wrote: > Yes, until RHEL 8.5 the latest-and-greatest virt packages used to be > shipped within Advanced Virtualization. But since AV packages are part of > RHEL now, there's no need for updating the SIG anymore because RHEL has the > most updated packages and, by consequence, c8s should have those builds too. > > > > On Tue., Nov. 16, 2021, 7:25 a.m. Sandro Bonazzola, <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com> > wrote: > >> +Eduardo Lima <etrunko(a)redhat.com> +Danilo Cesar Lemes de Paula >> <ddepaula(a)redhat.com> >> >> Il giorno mar 16 nov 2021 alle ore 12:52 Igor Raits <igor.raits(a)gmail.com> >> ha scritto: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I've noticed that the latest c8s repos ship libvirt/qemu-kvm (and other >>> related things) newer than the advanced virtualization repository… which >>> brings me to a question if it is still worth using those builds or not? >>> >>> I've been trying to dig into some mailing list conversations (which are >>> pretty much non-existent at this point) and IRC meetings (which I did not >>> see in October, but found one in November[1]). Found only mention that >>> libvirt/qemu will not be available for power arches since c9s and that's >>> what probably virt sig will build (if my understanding of meeting minutes >>> are correct). >>> >>> Any piece of information would be very helpful :) >>> >>> >>> [1] >>> https://www.centos.org/minutes/2021/November/centos-meeting.2021-11-03-17.0… >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> Sandro Bonazzola >> >> MANAGER, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, EMEA R&D RHV >> >> Red Hat EMEA <https://www.redhat.com/> >> >> sbonazzo(a)redhat.com >> <https://www.redhat.com/> >> >> *Red Hat respects your work life balance. Therefore there is no need to >> answer this email out of your office hours.* >> >> >>

3 4

Does Red Hat publish EUS source?
by Gordon Messmer 31 Jan '22

31 Jan '22

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux#Extende… I do see that EUS source packages are available to customers in the errata portal, but I was looking at the article for Red Hat Enterprise Linux on Wikipedia, and saw a note there to the effect that rebuilds don't publish updates from EUS because Red Hat doesn't publish it for rebuilding. I vaguely recall that CentOS pulled source from an FTP source that the claim might describe, but I can't find any information that I think is really conclusive. The question is mostly trivia, but if the claim on Wikipedia isn't accurate, then I'll update that page.

2 1

Dist-git's git structure in CBS
by Pierre-Yves Chibon 28 Jan '22

28 Jan '22

Good Morning Everyone, Nowadays we have different structures in the git repositories of the dist-git instance for CBS and for CentOS-Stream. CBS' dist-git (used by the SIG and for CentOS Linux 7, CentOS-Stream 8), uses something like: ├── .gitignore ├── .kernel.metadata ├── SOURCES │ ├─ .... │ ├── patch-5.14.0-redhat.patch │ ├─ ... │ └── x509.genkey.rhel └── SPECS └── kernel.spec Ie: patches and other sources in a SOURCES folder, spec in a SPECS folder and the link between the git repo and the lookaside cache is done via the `.<packagename>.metadata` file. source: https://git.centos.org/rpms/kernel/tree/c8s On CentOS-Stream 9, the structure is similar to Fedora's structure where everything is in the top directory. source: https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms/kernel I was wondering if there has been some thoughts given on harmonizing these structures? I am particularly interested on changing them for SIG building on the top of CS9. It would make pulling changes from gitlab onto the SIG's repo a lot easier I believe. I suspect there may be some work to do for this and if I'm pointed to the right direction, I wouldn't mind having a look at it but first I'd like to know if it's a good idea :) So... what do you think? Thanks, Pierre

5 5

Broken CentOS Stream 9 repo today
by Alfredo Moralejo Alonso 28 Jan '22

28 Jan '22

Hi, After last compose CS9 promotion, BaseOS/AppStream repos seems broken: - [root@6b5a57fab5b4 /]# dnf install gcc - Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:25 ago on Thu Jan 27 08:45:21 2022. - Error: - Problem: cannot install the best candidate for the job - - nothing provides libgomp = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 needed by gcc-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 - - nothing provides libgcc >= 11.2.1-7.6.el9 needed by gcc-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 - (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages) - [root@6b5a57fab5b4 /]# dnf install gcc-c++ - Last metadata expiration check: 0:01:56 ago on Thu Jan 27 08:45:21 2022. - Error: - Problem: cannot install the best candidate for the job - - nothing provides libstdc++ = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 needed by gcc-c++-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 - (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages) - [root@6b5a57fab5b4 /]# Repoclosure is also complaining: - package: gcc-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libgcc >= 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - libgomp = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - package: gcc-c++-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libstdc++ = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - package: gcc-gfortran-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libquadmath = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - libgfortran = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - package: libgomp-offload-nvptx-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libgomp = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - package: libquadmath-devel-11.2.1-7.6.el9.i686 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libquadmath = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - package: libquadmath-devel-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libquadmath = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - package: libstdc++-devel-11.2.1-7.6.el9.i686 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libstdc++(x86-32) = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 - package: libstdc++-devel-11.2.1-7.6.el9.x86_64 from appstream - unresolved deps: - libstdc++(x86-64) = 11.2.1-7.6.el9 Best regards, Alfredo

2 2

SIGs / cbs.centos.org change proposal
by Fabian Arrotin 27 Jan '22

27 Jan '22

Recently, the Hyperscale SIG created an infra ticket about a proposal to change the rpm 'vendor' macro to be more specific than 'CentOS' for pgks built on https://cbs.centos.org . For details, you can read https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/621 I think it's a very good idea as we also started to show a difference between distro (/9-stream) vs SIGs (on mirror.stream.centos.org) so also doing that at the rpm level (already using a different gpg key anyway) would be easy enough to modify. Here is our proposal : define the default value for that rpm macro to 'CentOS Community Build Service' instead of 'CentOS'. It's also possible to request a specific override (what we tested with Hyperscale tags) and I'd even think it would be better to create directly each new tag with a common pattern like 'CentOS <sig_name> SIG' , which would be easy to automate when we have to create new tags. This is just a Request for change, that we intent to implement next week, so if we don't have any negative feedback (we don't think people are actually parsing that field - yet - ) about this change, it will go live next week. -- Fabian Arrotin The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | twitter: @arrfab

4 3

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

devel January 2022