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
…
[View More]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
[View Less]
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 …
[View More]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
[View Less]
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 …
[View More]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.
[View Less]
Hi all,
You might be aware that there is a CentOS category on the Fedora
Discourse instance:
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/c/centos/71
There have been some discussions about having a dedicated Discourse
instance for CentOS. Discourse has a lot of advantages, such as better
moderation and integration with our accounts system. But I understand
that many people are comfortable with their existing workflows.
There's no point in running Discourse if it doesn't get enough buy-in.
So I'm …
[View More]asking for input on using Discourse for various things:
* Project announcements, like events, meetings, and infra changes
* Activity reports, such as for SIGs and events
* User support, replacing forums.centos.org
* Development of Stream itself, basically centos-devel
* Development of stuff inside SIGs
* Replacement for the comments section of the blog
* Alternatively, just replacing the blog entirely
* Something else I'm not thinking of
Thanks,
Shaun McCance
CentOS Community Architect
Red Hat Open Source Program Office
[View Less]
Am 08.10.22 um 16:24 schrieb Leon Fauster:
> Hey folks, I wonder if anyone also suffers from the following:
>
> I updated the BIOS/Firmware of a DELL notebook from 1.8 to 1.9. and
> after this the latest C9S
>
> kernel-5.14.0-171.el9.x86_64
>
> can't be booted anymore (secure boot on) but the two older ones do boot:
>
> kernel-5.14.0-165.el9.x86_64
> kernel-5.14.0-168.el9.x86_64
>
> The grub error message when trying to boot kernel-5.14.0-171.el9.…
[View More]x86_64
> looks like:
>
> error: ../../grub-core/kern/efi/sb.c:183:bad shim signature.
> error: ../../grub-core/loader/i386/efi/linux.c:259:you need to load the
> kernel first.
>
> I wonder how this happens. The firmware is classified as bug-fix update.
>
> Not sure if DBX list was update. fwupdmgr shows "Current version: 83"
> If so, it does not make sense that older kernels can be used to boot the
> system. So, a big question mark how to solve this issue? Any hints ...?
>
>
> # sha256sum /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.EFI
> 3ae459e79408b5287ce70c5b86ddcc92c243c7442d6769a330390598b7a351b1
> /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.EFI
>
It seems that the kernel-5.14.0 of the release 17X-series
do not get signed with the CentOS key anymore!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2138019
TLDR:
/boot/vmlinuz-5.14.0-16*
versus
/boot/vmlinuz-5.14.0-17*
shows
The signer's common name is CentOS Secure Boot Signing 201
versus
The signer's common name is Red Hat Test Certificate
Is this issue already receiving the right attention?
--
Thanks
Leon
[View Less]
Hi all,
The CentOS Board is looking at renaming Dojos, our series of free mini-
conferences. Please give your input on this Discussion post:
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/renaming-centos-dojos/43351
Note that Fedora and CentOS share an accounts system, so if you have a
CentOS account, you already have a login for Fedora Discussion.
Thanks,
Shaun
Hi all,
I've uploaded the recordings of last week's board meeting:
https://youtu.be/FA0ddn-IWes
If you'd like to discuss any issues with the board, we'll have an open
board office hours this Thursday, October 20, at 14:00 UTC:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/87623425120
Thanks,
Shaun
When EPEL-8 was launched, it came with some support for modules with the
hope that a module ecosystem could be built from Fedora packages using RHEL
modules as an underlying tool. This has never happened and we have ended up
with a muddle of modular packages which will 'build' but may not install or
even run on an EL-8 system. Attempts to fix this and work within how EPEL
is normally built have been tried for several years by different people but
have not worked.
At this point we are saying …
[View More]that this experiment with modules in EPEL has
not worked and we will focus our resources on what does work.
Schedule of EPEL 8 Module Retirement:
Next Week:
- epel-release will be updated.
-- epel-modular will set enabled = 0
-- epel-modular full name will have "Deprecated" in it
October 31 2022:
- The EPEL 8 modules will be archived and removed.
-- The mirror manager will be pointed to the archive.
- Packagers will no longer be able to build EPEL 8 modules.
After October 31st (Actual date to be determined):
- epel-release will be updated again.
-- epel-modular repo configs will be removed.
Questions and Answers:
Question: Will I still be able to access the modules after October 31st?
Answer: It is not recommended, because the modules will not get any
security or bug fixes, but yes. They will be in the Fedora archives,
and the mirror managers will point at them.
Question: What will you be dressed as on Halloween?
Answer (Troy): A Penguin
EPEL Steering Committee
[1] - https://pagure.io/epel/issue/198
[View Less]