devel

devel@lists.centos.org

4 participants
4640 discussions

Opening of the mirrors?
by Ljubomir Ljubojevic 10 Jul '11

10 Jul '11

Hi. Can someone confirm that ISO's are in their final form and ready for download / torrent seeding? I saw announcement on @Centos tweeter account and I see previously locked mirror close to me is know open, but I do not see any md5sum or sha1sum files. Ljubomir

6 8

Re: [CentOS-devel] CentOS-devel Digest, Vol 77, Issue 6
by Mark E. Wilt 10 Jul '11

10 Jul '11

On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 12:00 -0400, centos-devel-request(a)centos.org wrote: > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2011 10:43:56 +0200 > From: Ljubomir Ljubojevic <office(a)plnet.rs> > Subject: Re: [CentOS-devel] Public mirrors leaking ISO files > To: "The CentOS developers mailing list." <centos-devel(a)centos.org> > Message-ID: <4E1814CC.9020507(a)plnet.rs> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Shawn Thompson wrote: > > "leaks" > Yes, as in "drips through barriers" until whole dam is broken. Remember > story about Dutch kid that saved the dam by plugging his finger in dam's > little hole? If you are doing something, do it right or do not do it at all. > > > > This is just the silliest thing I have ever heard. This happens all > > the time, even with Windows. I see no cause for alarm, especially > > since this is FOSS. What's the problem? > > I don't care you don't care. I know dev's value their invested time and You've > do not need more headaches. > > Because it is not 100% complete. If someone (read hundreds possibly) > starts using ISO with a bug, then they could start complaining about > something wrong, and dev's and us willing to help could spend may hours > not knowing why is that persons PC behave like that. Not to mention > possible public name calls for no reason than not caring. > > Ljubomir > > > ------------------------------ Let's see if I understand this - You've got "hundreds possibly" of people who have been anxiously awaiting this release for months...you've got a very real dearth of information coming out of "official" channels regarding the status of the release (with the exception of http://qaweb.dev.centos.org/qa/, which announced that the sync to external mirrors started a couple of days ago, and that the "bit flip" should occur at any time), and you're chastising people for showing an overwhelming interest in the product. If you're so concerned about the potential problems with people "jumping the gun", then COMMUNICATE THE STATUS!! Don't leave people in the dark then act chagrined when people take it upon themselves to seek out what they've been waiting for. I don't care that you don't care that he doesn't care that there are leaks. I do care that you don't care to share what you know with others so that they might behave in a rational manner toward this much anticipated release.

6 8

Announcements for 6.0/updates
by Karanbir Singh 05 Jul '11

05 Jul '11

hi guys, We are getting ready to put the 6.0/updates into place. The prep work brought up a question that needs addressing. There are quite a few different tools that seem to scrape the centos-announce output in order to get update metadata; therefore should we announce every update since the 6.0 release date upstream ? we might be looking at around 5 million emails being generated outbound... if not, what are the other options / ideas ? - KB

8 10

Is C6 QA Sign-off going to occur today?
by Ljubomir Ljubojevic 02 Jul '11

02 Jul '11

Hi. Today is supposed to be QA Sign-off for CentOS 6.0. Is this going to happen or are there remaining show-stoppers? Ljubomir

8 15

Download Location for 6.0 Beta ISO
by Andrew Reis 02 Jul '11

02 Jul '11

What is the link to either the direct image or the .torrent files for the 6.0 beta builds? Andrew Reis MCTS, Network+ Software/Networking/Microsoft Windows Support/Webmaster DBMS Inc.

2 1

CentOS-[56] Continous Release
by Karanbir Singh 22 Jun '11

22 Jun '11

hi, Johnny and I spoke about this a few days back and we think the best way to solve the problem around delayed srpms + waiting for isos, build and QA at the time of a point release is to get something like a 'Continous Release' repository going. The Problem: At a point release stage, users dont get updates till such time as the ISOS are ready ( eg. during the 5.6 release process ), the updates are built, QA has had time to verify content and the mirrors sync up. For new installs, this isnt an issue; however for people with existing installs this can potentially expose their installations. One solution: Export packages as they are built from the c[456]bsys into a repository that people can opt into, that would allow them to get early access to packages. Couple of notes: - it would have to be opt-in, rather than default for everyone - packages into the CR repo's will not be announced via the regular channels; the announcements will still only happen when rpms are visible in the os/ and updates/ repos. - it will not mean a lesser or a worse quality of builds, we hope to have enough automation in place that rpms will only be released into this repo once we are sure that it meets the release requirements. - this repository will run off centos.org machines initially, and will not be released to third party mirrors. The exact details of how the release-to-external-mirrors takes place, and how we manage the issues around that would be a conversation we can relegate into the future for now. - the CR repos will go-away once rpms are released in the regular process, it will not transfer into a rolling release type repo. At this stage, we are looking for comments as we prep for future release process. - KB

13 71

Ask for the centos package review process
by Regis Perdreau 22 Jun '11

22 Jun '11

Hi, i m looking for a complete package review process. I have only found Le 22 juin 2011 18:27, "Les Mikesell" <lesmikesell(a)gmail.com> a écrit : > On 6/22/2011 4:17 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: >> >>> I'd expect it to be common for the kernels and probably glibc's included with a >>> point release or soon thereafter to include security fixes. If you push those, >>> you have the biggest risk of affecting everything else - so what's the point of >>> isolating the rest? >>> >> All I can see is you pushing extreme case scenario on something that is >> good will of the devs to lower aggravation of people waiting for point >> release to be completed, with agenda to push for 2-days delay between >> upstream and CentOS point releases, knowing it can not physically >> happen. It's like watching my 2-years old nephew screaming for his >> bottle of milk even tho he can see his mother pouring it just in front >> of him. > >> The packages that **can** be released faster *will* be released faster, >> those that could brake things will be held back, it is simple as that, >> at least in my book. > > It's speculation at this point, but I think security fixes in the kernel > and major libs are to be expected instead of being some extreme case, > and those are precisely the most likely things that would cause > something to break if done incorrectly. The point of planning the early > release concept in the first place should be to get these fixes out to > the people who otherwise become targets of well-known exploits and > rootkits. Assume, for example, that another flaw is found in php or a > web app that allows remote command execution, and another glibc flaw > like the one recently fixed that allowed root escalation if you could > make a symlink to a suid file. Now assume that the fixes for these > vulnerabilities comes in or immediately after the point release. That > scenario seems normal, expected, and what the early release planning > should be all about instead of holding these back until a working > ananconda and iso layout is ready and tested. > >> I will even dare to speculate that main reason for people to opt-in for >> CR repo will be so they can see how many packages are finished and to >> see packages coming out so they do not freak out without a visible >> progress. Side affect will be that some of them will be able to busy >> them selfs with comparing against upstream packages. > > I think this is unlikely - unless they are unaware of the pending > security issues, don't watch the news, and never look at their logs - or > don't have an internet connection. > > -- > Les Mikesell > lesmikesell(a)gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel(a)centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

2 1

Variants and packages in Upstream
by Karanbir Singh 20 Jun '11

20 Jun '11

Hi guys, Wonder if someone can confirm that in EL6 : <any varient> + <optionals> = entire distro tree. eg. does <server> + <optional> get you the entire tree; and is that the same as <desktop> + <optional> and <workstation> + <optional> or are there packages specific to a variant and not available to any other variant ? I'm using 'variant' to broadly imply 'product'. - KB

3 6

Test result for CentOS-6 LiveCD
by Athmane Madjoudj 20 Jun '11

20 Jun '11

Hello, I ran some tests on CentOS-6 LiveCD using Patrice's livecd-creator rpms and Fedora's one, also I'll be very glad if someone can approve my qaweb account (username: athmane) so I'll be able to update LiveCD ticket instead of posting here. Kickstart: https://projects.centos.org/trac/livecd/browser/trunk/CentOS6/rhel6beta-liv… Tests 1: Live CD compose on fedora 15 host : PASSED ISO size < 700M : PASSED Booting with the composed ISO : FAILED | unable to mount root fs Live image installation : N/A Booting the installed system : N/A Basic testing (Network, yum etc...): N/A Tests 2: Live CD compose on rhel 6.0 host : PASSED ISO size < 700M : PASSED Booting with the composed ISO : PASSED Live image installation : PASSED Booting the installed system : PASSED Basic testing (Network, yum etc...): PASSED -- Athmane Madjoudj

3 4

million-dollar question....
by Matthew Miller 18 Jun '11

18 Jun '11

So, is this on schedule: http://qaweb.dev.centos.org/qa/node/62 6.0 Begin Sync to Internal Mirrors Date: Friday, June 10, 2011 (All day) ? -- Matthew Miller mattdm(a)mattdm.org <http://mattdm.org/>

10 14

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

devel