devel

devel@lists.centos.org

4 participants
4640 discussions

drbd82 RPMS for testing
by Johnny Hughes 07 Feb '08

07 Feb '08

All, There are drbd82 RPMS for CentOS-4 and CentOS-5 (i386 and x86_64) for testing here: http://people.centos.org/~hughesjr/drbd/ These are designed to be able to live in the same repository as the current STABLE versions. These RPMS are designed as CONFLICTS and not upgrades as there may be some manual actions to upgrade, especially on CentOS-4. Here is an article on the upgrade process: http://fghaas.wordpress.com/2007/10/03/step-by-step-upgrade-from-drbd-07-to… also this thread about potential upgrade problems: http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/2008-January/008318.html (We have 8.2.4, so should not have this issue ... but just in case). The process will be similar for drbd-8.0.x to drbd82-8.2.x upgrades as well. Please report successful uses of the RPMS (upgrades and new installs) and any problems here: http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2657 Here is a post to the DRBD mailing list for reference as well: http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/2008-February/008473.html Thanks, Johnny Hughes

1 0

RHAS
by Laurent Wandrebeck 05 Feb '08

05 Feb '08

Hi, I've just begun to compile some src.rpm from Red Hat Application Stack. For now, Postgresql 8.2.6 and apache 2.2.4 for x86_64 are available. Mysql 5.0.44 failed for now. I'll try to continue some work on RHAS. If some of you are willing to test these, see http://dl.kodros.fr Regards, Laurent

1 1

CentOS-QA mailing list
by Brandon Davidson 05 Feb '08

05 Feb '08

Per Lance's post about a year ago, I'm writing to request access to the centos-qa mailing list. Without archives access it's hard to tell if this list is still active now that CentOS 5 is out of beta, but if so I'd like to help test the ppc64 release... as soon as Karanbir is back from vacation :) I have access to about a dozen ppc64 platforms of various age. No Power5 unfortunately, but pretty much everything before that from Power3 to PPC970. I have 6 years of documented Linux systems administration experience, with another 10 or so before that of incubational fiddling. I'm fluent in Perl, and passable enough with C to patch and debug code as necessary. Thanks, -- Brandon Davidson Systems Administrator Neuroinformatics Center University of Oregon

1 0

Centos 5.1 on S390 and s390x
by Philip Pinto 01 Feb '08

01 Feb '08

Hi, I was wondering if there has been any interest in continuing the port of Centos to the s390 and s390x forward to version 5.1 of the Centos project. I would be willing to contribute to the project financially or by managing a special interest group for this purpose. But if there has really been no interest beyond my own on this probably can't happen by myself. Currently I use Centos 4.6 on s390x for a sandbox environment for my consulting business and it a proven to be an invaluable tool for this purpose. I do have a hardware environment and bandwidth that would allow development to proceed. Phil Pinto pinto(a)dpcomputersolutions.com DP Computer Solutions PO Box 1385 Albany, NY 12010 917-841-0422

2 2

kmod-xfs and 2.6.18-53.1.6.el5 kernel
by Jon Ernster 31 Jan '08

31 Jan '08

Is there an ETA for a kmod-xfs build against the latest kernel? Cheers.

2 1

CentOS-5 Cross-Build Environment (arm, mips, sparc, others..) / pre-alpha released
by Brian Schueler 26 Jan '08

26 Jan '08

thank you for this hint. That is nearly what I need. This week the OpenSUSE Build Service, which is similar to thetango but comes with a complete Software management and a http frontend, has been released for RHEL/CentOS 5 and became very popular. I'm now dealing with the buildroot (the minimalistic set of Software for rebuilding SRPMS) which is generated by obs. Its dependency resolution on SRPM information is said to work much better. I have to tune a little bit to make this work right for CentOS source SRPMS and later for the cross build environment. At this time obs is able to create complete SuSE binary Distributions entirely from the SRPMs (requiring the minset (binutils,gcc,python,rpm)). Brian

1 0

CentOS 5.1 for ppc
by Kazuki Ohara 25 Jan '08

25 Jan '08

Hi, When is it planned to release the CentOS 5.1 for ppc? I heard the ppc version of CentOS will be released with 5.1. Is it soon? Regards, -- Kazuki Ohara

2 1

Gnupanel Development
by Lance Davis 23 Jan '08

23 Jan '08

The gnupanel guys are looking to support CentOS and it would be good if we could have some involvement / ownership of the CentOS hooks ... Is anyone willing to own the CentOS version of the template file for packages - which would look something like :- http://dev.gnupanel.org/annex/unistall.hg/?file/79955850dcdf/libs/dists/PLD… (which is the file for PLD linux) Regards Lance -- uklinux.net - The ISP of choice for the discerning Linux user.

1 0

Re: [CentOS-devel] RE: [CentOS-virt] BUG: soft lockup detected onCPU#?
by Ross S. W. Walker 23 Jan '08

23 Jan '08

Thanks Johnny, and sorry for the top post (blackberry). I d/l'd the src rpm and found their patches all in 1 patch file called xen.patch (I did an ls -lt and picked the files with the latest timestamps). There may also be kernel config changes as several config files were touched, but I couldn't get a hold of the original 8.1.8 src rpm to diff them. I would be happy to help in getting the parts needed so they can be rolled up into a single patch to apply to the current plus kernel. Just let me know what you need. I wonder if anybody at XenSource notified upstream of the fixes? -Ross ----- Original Message ----- From: centos-devel-bounces(a)centos.org <centos-devel-bounces(a)centos.org> To: The CentOS developers mailing list. <centos-devel(a)centos.org> Sent: Wed Jan 23 07:37:04 2008 Subject: Re: [CentOS-devel] RE: [CentOS-virt] BUG: soft lockup detected onCPU#? Ross S. W. Walker wrote: > Ross S. W. Walker wrote: >> Brett Worth wrote: >>> Hello All. >>> >>> I've just started looking into Xen and have a test >>> environment in place. I'm seeing an >>> annoying problem that I thought worthy of a post. >>> >>> Config: >>> >>> I have 2 x HP DL585 servers each with 4 Dual core Opterons >>> (non-vmx) and 16GB RAM >>> configured as Xen servers. These run CentOS 5.1 with the >>> latest updates applied. These >>> system both attach to an iSCSI target which is an HP DL385 >>> running ietd and serving SAN >>> based storage. >>> >>> I have a test VM running CentOS 5.1 also updated. >>> >>> Problem: >>> >>> If I run the VM on a single server everything is OK. If I do >>> a migrate of the VM to the >>> other server I start getting random "BUG: soft lockup >>> detected on CPU#?" messages on the >>> VM console. The messages seem to happen with IO but not >>> every time. A reboot of the VM >>> on the new server will stop these messages. >>> >>> I've also left the VM running overnight a couple of times and >>> when I do I find that any >>> external sessions (ssh) are hung in the morning but the >>> console session is not. New ssh >>> sessions can be started and seem to work. >>> >>> After much googling it looks like the kernel messages can >>> occur if dom0 is very busy but >>> mine is not. >>> >>> Any suggestions? >> The soft lockup is technically not a BUG. >> >> You will see these errors if an IRQ takes more then 10 seconds >> to respond. >> >> In your case I would take a look at your iSCSI setup and the >> time it takes to migrate the VM from one node to another along >> with SCSI reserve/release setup on the iSCSI target. >> >> I also have been using the Xen 3.2 RPMs off xen.org to CentOS >> 5.1 which good results, the VM migration may run smoother and >> quicker in Xen 3.2, but in doing so you take Xen off the >> reservation, if your OK with that it may fix your issues. > > After seeing this same issue on my Xen 3.2 install, but with NO > migration or iSCSI happening I decided it is probably NOT iSCSI's > fault, so I decided to research it a little more and this is what > I found: > > http://docs.xensource.com/XenServer/4.0.1/guest/ch04s08.html#rhel5_limitati… > > XenSource does provide a repo of CentOS 5 kernels that have been > patched to fix this though: > > http://updates.xensource.com/XenServer/4.0.1/centos5x/ > > But these seem to be woefully out of date. > > I wonder if a kind soul would add the fix to the centosplus kernel > with XenSource's patch so those rogue Xen users could benefit from > this fix until upstream decides to include it. > > I suppose the centosplus patch would need to be flagged interm in > case it needs removed when upstream has their own fix. Ross, Thanks for researching this. I can probably add this to the next centosplus kernels, though I usually do not like to add patches ... and I will need to grab their kernels and work out what is patched and try to roll it into our kernels. -- Johnny Hughes ______________________________________________________________________ This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy or printout thereof.

1 0

RE: [CentOS-virt] BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#?
by Ross S. W. Walker 23 Jan '08

23 Jan '08

Ross S. W. Walker wrote: > > Brett Worth wrote: > > > > Hello All. > > > > I've just started looking into Xen and have a test > > environment in place. I'm seeing an > > annoying problem that I thought worthy of a post. > > > > Config: > > > > I have 2 x HP DL585 servers each with 4 Dual core Opterons > > (non-vmx) and 16GB RAM > > configured as Xen servers. These run CentOS 5.1 with the > > latest updates applied. These > > system both attach to an iSCSI target which is an HP DL385 > > running ietd and serving SAN > > based storage. > > > > I have a test VM running CentOS 5.1 also updated. > > > > Problem: > > > > If I run the VM on a single server everything is OK. If I do > > a migrate of the VM to the > > other server I start getting random "BUG: soft lockup > > detected on CPU#?" messages on the > > VM console. The messages seem to happen with IO but not > > every time. A reboot of the VM > > on the new server will stop these messages. > > > > I've also left the VM running overnight a couple of times and > > when I do I find that any > > external sessions (ssh) are hung in the morning but the > > console session is not. New ssh > > sessions can be started and seem to work. > > > > After much googling it looks like the kernel messages can > > occur if dom0 is very busy but > > mine is not. > > > > Any suggestions? > > The soft lockup is technically not a BUG. > > You will see these errors if an IRQ takes more then 10 seconds > to respond. > > In your case I would take a look at your iSCSI setup and the > time it takes to migrate the VM from one node to another along > with SCSI reserve/release setup on the iSCSI target. > > I also have been using the Xen 3.2 RPMs off xen.org to CentOS > 5.1 which good results, the VM migration may run smoother and > quicker in Xen 3.2, but in doing so you take Xen off the > reservation, if your OK with that it may fix your issues. After seeing this same issue on my Xen 3.2 install, but with NO migration or iSCSI happening I decided it is probably NOT iSCSI's fault, so I decided to research it a little more and this is what I found: http://docs.xensource.com/XenServer/4.0.1/guest/ch04s08.html#rhel5_limitati… XenSource does provide a repo of CentOS 5 kernels that have been patched to fix this though: http://updates.xensource.com/XenServer/4.0.1/centos5x/ But these seem to be woefully out of date. I wonder if a kind soul would add the fix to the centosplus kernel with XenSource's patch so those rogue Xen users could benefit from this fix until upstream decides to include it. I suppose the centosplus patch would need to be flagged interm in case it needs removed when upstream has their own fix. -Ross ______________________________________________________________________ This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy or printout thereof.

2 1

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