devel

devel@lists.centos.org

2 participants
4653 discussions

Wrong file in centos/7/updates/
by Simon Matter 13 Jul '20

13 Jul '20

Hi, I just saw this file and it seems it should be (re)moved: http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/updates/389-ds-base-1.3.10.1-14.el7_8.src… Regards, Simon

3 2

RHEL receiving updates before CentOS Stream
by Andy Hall 08 Jul '20

08 Jul '20

How does RHEL receive the latest Firefox package before CentOS Stream ? https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2020:2828 "This update upgrades Firefox to version 68.10.0 ESR." Here's is CentOS Stream... [ahall@ctream ~]$ cat /etc/centos-release CentOS Linux release 8.2.2004 (Core) [ahall@ctream ~]$ yum info firefox Installed Packages Name : firefox Version : 68.9.0 Release : 1.el8_2 [ahall@ctream ~]$ sudo yum upgrade firefox [sudo] password for ahall: Last metadata expiration check: 0:11:36 ago on Tue 07 Jul 2020 03:43:44 BST. Dependencies resolved. Nothing to do. Complete! [ahall@ctream ~]$ yum info firefox-68.10.0 Last metadata expiration check: 0:06:42 ago on Tue 07 Jul 2020 03:48:12 BST. Error: No matching Packages to list

3 2

EPEL playground repodata
by Chris Schanzle 08 Jul '20

08 Jul '20

Hi, It appears[1] no pruning of old repodata is being done for the playground repo and the directory is excessively large (2.9GB) because of it. If this isn't the right place to report, please accept my apologies...pointers would be appreciated. Thanks! [1] https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/playground/8/Everything/x86_64/os/rep…

3 3

CPE Team Engagement
by Aoife Moloney 08 Jul '20

08 Jul '20

Hi Everyone, As we kick off our team's work for Quarter 3 of this year, we would like to take this opportunity to ask for your feedback on our engagement over the last few months. The CPE has been working on trying to improve our communication with our communities and increase visibility on how we decide on what to work on. We have taken many steps to improve our communication such as IRC Office hours, regular initiative updates on our taiga board, weekly mail and blog posts on what we achieved in each quarter and what we are planning to work on next. We have also had a few discussions before with some Fedora Council and CentOS Board members on how best to engage with the CPE Team when you wish to brief in an initiative or need to file a bug/issue/enhancement, and as time goes by we are refining our processes. We would like to share with you our current approaches that we are using for you to provide feedback on how you feel these are working. It is important for our team to feel like their time is protected so that they are able to enjoy a healthy work-life balance, so we have categorized work requests that the team responds to into two categories which we believe benefits both the CPE team and the communities we serve: - Project Teams - These teams are created based on an initiative that has been: - Received by our product owner in advance - The work involved has been scoped, reviewed and accepted to the backlog by the CPE Review Team - Prioritized and actioned for work during our teams quarterly planning sessions by CPE Team Stakeholders and Review Team - Sustaining Team - This team responds to 'lights on work' and requests that come in on an ad hoc & regular basis such as: - BAU infra/releng requests - RFEs - Bug fixes ## How we propose to deal with Project Team Initiatives? * We have published deadlines for initiatives to be briefed into our team by for each quarter here: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/cpe/time_tables/ * Project requests that are recieved are then discussed further with the requestor and relevant team lead(s) with our product owner * During our monthly quarterly planning sessions, the CPE Review Team reviews and prioritises which proposals to scope. * All scoped proposed initiatives are brought into our QP session for review and consideration to be worked on in the next quarter. * Our CPE Review Team review all and vote on the initiatives they would like to see actioned in the next quarter. Our CPE Review Team include: * Fedora - mmiller, mnordin, bcotton * CentOS - rbowen, bex * RHEL - bex, dperpeet, aslobodova * CPE - * CPE Product Owner - amoloney * CPE Management - lgriffin, antcarroll, smattejiet * CPE Team Leads - pingou, bstinson As a picture is worth a thousand words, so here is one :) > ![](https://i.imgur.com/Ro08PsE.png) > Image Credit goes to Smera Goel, the very talented graphic designer that is currently interning as part of the Fedora Outreachy Project. ## How we propose to deal with Sustaining Team BAU requests, RFEs and bug fixes? In order to allow the people working on initiatives to focus on them, our Sustaining Team members will be responsible for dealing with all these requests. They can be filed in the normal ways by community members. BAU infra requests can be made on the fedora-infrastructure issue tracker: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/ BAU releng requests can be made on the releng issue tracker: https://pagure.io/releng/ ## Project Team vs Sustaining Team Work Classification ### Project Initiatives Initiatives are weeks to months long projects involving a team of people to work on and deliver. We have some deadlines that we try to work towards Examples of initiatives: - rawhide package gating - FAS replacement - ... ### BAU infra/releng requests Business As Usual (BAU) requests are simple requests that do not need anyone to code something, just run some code to solve the request. Examples of BAU requests: - A new mailing list - A new FAS/dist-git/copr group - A new IRC channel - A new project on ci.centos.org - A new tag in koji ### RFE Requests For Enhancements (RFE) are requests to improve a changes made to either an application or a workflow used in Fedora. ### Bug fixes Bug fixes are what they are, request to fix bugs. Examples of bug fixes: - Well you know: https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues or pagure.io/pagure/issues are full of them ;-) This is our team's current way of working, and we are seeing the benefits from this but wanted to have your feedback too. We would like to publish this as a 'policy' of sorts for our team on docs.fpo and on the CentOS wiki and want to include you in this process. So what are your thoughts on these ideas? Are they suitable for you or do they need more adjustments? If they do, what are your suggestions? To view this email in hackmd, please visit this link https://hackmd.io/xgkPVcv1Swuy9U-wGiKQPw?view Looking forward for your feedback, Aoife -- Aoife Moloney Product Owner Community Platform Engineering Team Red Hat EMEA Communications House Cork Road Waterford

1 0

RFC: Documentation SIG
by Rich Bowen 07 Jul '20

07 Jul '20

As per the process described at https://wiki.centos.org/SIGGuide#SIGGuide.2FSIGProcess.Proposal I would like to propose a Documentation SIG. The SIG page - https://wiki.centos.org/SIGGuide#SIGGuide.2FSIGProcess.Proposal - has listed a Documentation SIG for some time, but the link went nowhere. Now I propose that we formalize it. The Documentation SIG is responsible for the content of the Wiki, and other public sources of documentation. This includes, but is not limited to: * Determining, and imposing, a hierarchy/architecture of content in the wiki * Editing/pruning existing content when it is incorrect/outdated/obsolete * Recruiting subject matter experts to do some of that editing * Recruiting translators to keep our various translations in sync The Doc SIG uses the centos-docs(a)centos.org mailing list as their primary channel of communication, but also raises issues to centos-devel for clarification of specific details in the docs. The following individuals have indicated interest in being the initial membership of this SIG. Rich Bowen <rbowen(a)centosproject.org> Thibaut Perrin <thibaut.perrin(a)gmail.com> Manuel Wolfshant <wolfy(a)nobugconsulting.ro> Jonathan Billings <billings(a)negate.org> Pany <geekpany(a)gmail.com> Earl Ramirez <earlaramirez(a)gmail.com> John R. Dennison <jrd(a)gerdesas.com> You will note that, initially, the SIG is focused on the Wiki - work which is already ongoing by this group and many others. An actual SIG gives structure to this effort, authority to make larger decisions about the documentation effort, a place/time to meet regularly to encourage others to participate, and gives the effort more visibility within the community. We ask that the board acknowledge this request and let us know what the next steps are. Thanks.

1 0

Re: [CentOS-devel] Rebuilding OpenvSwitch and OVN from Fast DataPath in NFV Sig
by Dominik Holler 06 Jul '20

06 Jul '20

> From: Alfredo Moralejo Alonso <amoralej(a)redhat.com > <mailto:amoralej@redhat.com>> > Date: Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 1:24 PM > Subject: [CentOS-devel] Rebuilding OpenvSwitch and OVN from Fast > DataPath in NFV Sig > To: The CentOS developers mailing list. <centos-devel(a)centos.org > <mailto:centos-devel@centos.org>> > > > Hi, > > During the last years OpenVswitch and OVN have become a major > dependency for several projects and SIGs in the CentOS ecosystem, > including OpenStack, oVirt and OpenShift. During this time each > project has been following its own way with limited coordination > (just some opportunistic cross-tagging between SIGs) and different > approaches, rebuilding Fedora builds or FDP srpms from ftp.redhat.com > <http://ftp.redhat.com> > from time to time in their own tags and repos. > > This has led to multiple issues and suboptimal usage resources so I > think a good step ahead would be to use existing NFV SIG [1] as a > collaboration area for all the interested projects to build, test and > ship OpenvSwitch and OVN using public SRPMs from Fast Datapath [2]. > > What I'm proposing is that the interested people in becoming > maintainers for OVS/OVN in NFV Sig request membership to nfv-sig group > [3]. Then, we'll coordinate to request new tags/buildroots for OVS/OVN > and start building and testing the required releases. > > Any thoughts on this proposal? > I think this would be efficient. I already applied to become a member of sig-nfv to help. > Best regards, > > Alfredo > > > [1] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/NFV > [2] > ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/8Base/en/Fast-Datapath/SRP… > [3] https://accounts.centos.org/group/members/sig-nfv > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel(a)centos.org <mailto:CentOS-devel@centos.org> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > > > -- > Didi >

2 1

CPE Weekly: 2020-07-05
by Aoife Moloney 05 Jul '20

05 Jul '20

# CPE Weekly: 2020-06-218 Background: The Community Platform Engineering group is the Red Hat team combining IT and release engineering from Fedora and CentOS. Our goal is to keep core servers and services running and maintained, build releases, and other strategic tasks that need more dedicated time than volunteers can give. See our wiki page here for more information:https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/cpe/ ## General Project Updates The CPE team have finished our Quarterly Planning for Q3, July - September, and will begin work on the following projects starting from Monday: * Data Centre Move - Final Works * CentOS Stream Phase 3 * Noggin Phase 3 * Packager Workflow Healthcare * Fedora Messaging Schemas Details of the above projects, and of projects currently in progress, done and what projects are in our backlog, can be found on our taiga board per project card: https://tree.taiga.io/project/amoloney1-cpe-team-projects/kanban?epic=null We also have an updated initiative timetable for briefing in new projects to our team & key dates here:https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/cpe/time_tables/ *Note: Initiatives are large pieces of work that require a team of people and weeks/months to complete. Please continue to open tickets in the normal way for bugs, issues, etc. Look out for our Q2 project achievements blog post coming soon! ### CPE Product Owner Office Hours #### #fedora-meeting-1 * Weekly on Thursdays @ 1300 UTC on #fedora-meeting-1 * Next Meeting: 2020-07-09 #### #centos-meeting * Every second Tuesday @ 1500 UTC on #centos-meeting * Next Meeting: 2020-07-07 ## Fedora Updates ### Data Centre Move * We are now officially operating under reduced Fedora services until est 28th July to facilitate the final shipment of hardware to the new data centre. * Please View project card on taiga for builder - staging - remaining app bringup dates here https://tree.taiga.io/project/amoloney1-cpe-team-projects/us/42?kanban-stat… * A list of affected services is available here https://hackmd.io/hpYYJQRjQy-oHxUS7IonIA?view * Details on what this move may mean for you can be found here https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@lists.fedorapr… * If an application is not working correctly at all, please check this list https://hackmd.io/hpYYJQRjQy-oHxUS7IonIA?view before opening a ticket to make sure its not listed as being moved. If it is being moved, please wait a day or two, then try again. * Similarly, please be patient when opening tickets for service issues in general as we have now reached the critical point in this move and all of our sys-admins and wider teams will be assisting in the successful bringup of the reduced Fedora service and facilitation of the final hardware shipment and move. * Most recent update to devel-announce is here https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@lists.fedorapr… ### AAA Replacement * User agreements for both CentOS and Fedora accounts are nearly complete. We will be able to test this in more detail once staging has been reinstalled (est July 25th due to colo move) * Fasjson now supports search feature * App migreations work still ongoing * Spam detection service is being investigated and scoped for Q3 work * Please feel free to check out the team kanban board for more information on the features the team are working on and have already completed here https://github.com/orgs/fedora-infra/projects/6 ### Mbbox * Project Dashboard here https://github.com/fedora-infra/mbbox/projects/1 * Tasks completed in the project currently * MBBox handover to CentOS Stream * The only thing that remains is putting the operator in the public operator registry which is pending Stream team feedback * MBox shared CRD is done * Deployment guide - https://mbbox-operator.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ * Blog post published - check it out here https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/mbbox-module-building-in-a-box/ ### Gitforge We are still discussing technical aspects of the project and these are tracked here: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/217350 Planning a date in late August for an AMA session with GitLab that will be run through IRC for any questions the Fedora and CentOS communities may have to ask direct. We will keep you up to date with the developments as and when we have information to share and thank you again for your patience. ## CentOS Updates ### CentOS * New website went live (https://www.centos.org) * A new AWS CDN setup for Stream composes (https://composes.centos.org) is being worked on with a goal to have the latest stream artifacts to be publicly available and at faster speed than through normal mirror.centos.org cdn (and/or external mirrors) ### Centos Other * CentOS CI began onboarding Fedora CI, CoreOS CI and Fedora CoreOS as tenants this week * Work going well and stable! ### CentOS Stream * RealTime for Stream is released! * The team are also working on more module builds for Stream As always, feedback is welcome, and we will continue to look at ways to improve the delivery and readability of this weekly report. Have a great week ahead! Aoife Source: https://hackmd.io/8iV7PilARSG68Tqv8CzKOQ?view

1 0

new krb5 packages brake freeIPA
by lejeczek 03 Jul '20

03 Jul '20

hi guys latest in the repo krb5 packages - 1.18.2-2.el8 - brake freeIPA if already installed and conflict if want to install. # dnf install -y ipa-server-dns Last metadata expiration check: 1:21:31 ago on Wed 01 Jul 2020 11:00:25 BST. Error: Problem: package ipa-server-dns-4.8.4-7.module_el8.2.0+374+0d2d74a1.noarch requires ipa-server = 4.8.4-7.module_el8.2.0+374+0d2d74a1, but none of the providers can be installed - conflicting requests - nothing provides krb5-kdb-version = 7.0 needed by ipa-server-4.8.4-7.module_el8.2.0+374+0d2d74a1.x86_64 many thanks, L.

5 12

Sources: 8.2.2004 not in $contentdir
by Leon Fauster 02 Jul '20

02 Jul '20

JFYI: I noticed that 8.2.2004/ is not linked into http://vault.centos.org/centos/ but available under http://vault.centos.org/8.2.2004/ # grep content /etc/yum.repos.d/CentOS-Sources.repo |head -1 baseurl=http://vault.centos.org/$contentdir/$releasever/BaseOS/Source/ # cat /etc/yum/vars/contentdir centos -- Leon

1 0

@SIG HighAvailability - repo conflicts
by lejeczek 30 Jun '20

30 Jun '20

hi devel. Could you, someone please fix this: $ dnf update Last metadata expiration check: 2:58:26 ago on Thu 30 Apr 2020 07:19:18 BST. Error: Problem: package corosync-3.0.2-3.el8_1.1.x86_64 requires corosynclib(x86-64) = 3.0.2-3.el8_1.1, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both corosynclib-3.0.3-2.el8.x86_64 and corosynclib-3.0.2-3.el8_1.1.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package corosynclib-3.0.2-3.el8_1.1.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package corosync-3.0.2-3.el8_1.1.x86_64 (try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting packages or '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages) many thanks, L.

2 2

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