devel

devel@lists.centos.org

18 participants
4604 discussions

Alt Images SIG meeting minutes (2022/12/22)
by Troy Dawson 22 Dec '22

22 Dec '22

Meeting summary --------------- * Image build systems: livecd and kiwi - Infra ticket to create build targets in CBS https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/988 -- Looks like nothing is going to happen until next year. But it looks like it will be done before the ImageBuilder stuff happens. - koji is not importing all the comps stuff needed -- https://pagure.io/koji/issue/3626 -- koji skips environment and category groups when importing the comps files. -- The workaround it to use just regular groups for everything. It's alot more work, but at least it is possible. - Neal's backport of the upstreamed kiwi-live feature to support automatic persistent overlays on live USBs was merged into RHEL 9's dracut and it should be in c9s now: https://kojihub.stream.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=27844 -- Some anaconda patches/fixes are needed so this doing break installations from livecd's. * Image build systems: ImageBuilder - Infra ticket to create build targets in CBS https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/971 -- Not expected to get any movement from infra until next year. * Open Floor - Clarified that meetings are twice a month, on the 2nd and 4th Thursday -- Next meeting will be on January 12, 2023 at the usual time. People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * tdawson (66) * Eighth_Doctor (42) * davide (9) * davdunc[m (8) * salimma (6) * centguard (5) * rcallicotte (5) * michel-slm (0 Minutes and Log --------------- https://www.centos.org/minutes/2022/December/centos-meeting.2022-12-22-19.0… https://www.centos.org/minutes/2022/December/centos-meeting.2022-12-22-19.0… https://www.centos.org/minutes/2022/December/centos-meeting.2022-12-22-19.0…

1 0

Changes to CentOS CI: New OpenShift instance and Updates
by Camila Granella 22 Dec '22

22 Dec '22

*TL;DR: new OpenShift instance is up and running for CentOS CI, migrate your workloads by March 31st, 2023. Test your access to both the Duffy API and the new OpenShift instance by the end of 2022. CentOS CI changes approaching the end of Phase 3. * Hello everyone, We are happy to announce that the new OpenShift instance is up and running (ticket [0]). For the tenants that opted in to continue using CentOS CI, you are being required to *migrate your workload to the new OpenShift instance by the end of Q1CY23*, with the final deadline being *March 31st, 2023*. In order to support you through the migration process, the team has created a quick guide that can be found in [1]. We would also like to request you test your access to both the Duffy API and the new OpenShift instance by the *end of 2022*. Please reach out to us in case it is not working. Here is the link to the new OCP cluster [2]. As a reminder, this new OCP cluster is running in AWS, on top of EC2 instances, so coming with different limitations when compared with “on-premises bare-metal OCP deployments”. One notable change is that it is not possible to expose /dev/kvm and so there is no way for tenants to deploy VMs through OpenShift (like with the kubevirt operator or else). Tenants having a need to use VMs can then request some through Duffy API. Finally, here's a friendly reminder of the CentOS CI changes' current status. According to our previous communications [3], we are approaching the end of the last phase of the changes that have been implemented to CentOS CI. *Phase 3 - Decommission* - Legacy/compatibility API deprecated and requests (even for EC2 instances) will no longer be accepted - All tenants that opted in will be using only EC2 for aarch64/x86_64 and on-premise cloud for ppc64le For a full description of the project phases, you can check [3]. Please, feel free to reach out to us in case you have any questions or concerns. Regards, [0] https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/969 [1] https://sigs.centos.org/guide/ci/#migration-to-new-ci-instance [2] https://console-openshift-console.apps.ocp.cloud.ci.centos.org/ [3] https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/ci-users/2022-June/004547.html -- Camila Granella Associate Manager, Software Engineering Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com/> @Red Hat <https://twitter.com/redhat> Red Hat <https://www.linkedin.com/company/red-hat> Red Hat <https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc> <https://www.redhat.com/>

2 1

CentOS Connect Schedule
by Shaun McCance 21 Dec '22

21 Dec '22

The full schedule for CentOS Connect at FOSDEM is up with 14 amazing talks. CentOS Connect is a free mini-conference on topics across the Enterprise Linux ecosystem. If you're coming to FOSDEM, come in a day early and join us. Registration is free but strongly recommended. Hope to see you there. https://connect.centos.org/

2 1

FreeIPA / Samba / SSSD - new packages same problems
by lejeczek 21 Dec '22

21 Dec '22

Hi gents. It seems this has been a routine - each time when either sssd or Samba or FreeIPA gets new releases (with freeIPA deployed) there will be 'rpm' conflicts: Problem 1: package sssd-common-pac-2.7.3-5.el8.x86_64 requires libndr.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package sssd-common-pac-2.7.3-5.el8.x86_64 requires libndr.so.2(NDR_0.0.1)(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both samba-client-libs-4.17.2-2.el8.x86_64 and samba-client-libs-4.16.4-2.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both samba-client-libs-4.17.2-2.el8.x86_64 and samba-client-libs-4.15.3-0.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both samba-client-libs-4.17.2-2.el8.x86_64 and samba-client-libs-4.15.4-0.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both samba-client-libs-4.17.2-2.el8.x86_64 and samba-client-libs-4.15.5-0.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both samba-client-libs-4.17.2-2.el8.x86_64 and samba-client-libs-4.15.5-3.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both samba-client-libs-4.17.2-2.el8.x86_64 and samba-client-libs-4.15.5-4.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both samba-client-libs-4.17.2-2.el8.x86_64 and samba-client-libs-4.15.5-5.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both samba-client-libs-4.17.2-2.el8.x86_64 and samba-client-libs-4.15.5-8.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both samba-client-libs-4.17.2-2.el8.x86_64 and samba-client-libs-4.16.1-0.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both samba-client-libs-4.17.2-2.el8.x86_64 and samba-client-libs-4.16.2-1.el8.x86_64 - cannot install both samba-client-libs-4.17.2-2.el8.x86_64 and samba-client-libs-4.16.4-1.el8.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package sssd-common-pac-2.7.3-4.el8.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package samba-client-libs-4.16.4-2.el8.x86_64 Problem 2: package sssd-idp-2.7.3-4.el8.x86_64 requires sssd-common = 2.7.3-4.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package libsss_autofs-2.7.3-5.el8.x86_64 conflicts with sssd-common < 2.7.3-5.el8 provided by sssd-common-2.7.3-4.el8.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package sssd-idp-2.7.3-4.el8.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package libsss_autofs-2.7.3-4.el8.x86_64 Problem 3: package sssd-common-pac-2.7.3-5.el8.x86_64 requires libndr.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package sssd-common-pac-2.7.3-5.el8.x86_64 requires libndr.so.2(NDR_0.0.1)(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed Or it's just me? many thanks, L.

6 10

dnf stuff has broken dependencies
by Leon Fauster 19 Dec '22

19 Dec '22

FYI: The samba issue is gone but following is still an issue: # LANG=C yum update Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:18 ago on Fri Nov 25 23:48:00 2022. Dependencies resolved. Problem 1: package python3-dnf-plugin-modulesync-4.0.21-14.1.el8.noarch requires python3-dnf-plugins-core = 4.0.21-14.1.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.21-16.el8.noarch and python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.21-14.1.el8.noarch - cannot install the best update candidate for package python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.21-14.1.el8.noarch - cannot install the best update candidate for package python3-dnf-plugin-modulesync-4.0.21-14.1.el8.noarch Problem 2: problem with installed package python3-dnf-plugin-modulesync-4.0.21-14.1.el8.noarch - package python3-dnf-plugin-modulesync-4.0.21-14.1.el8.noarch requires python3-dnf-plugins-core = 4.0.21-14.1.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.21-16.el8.noarch and python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.21-14.1.el8.noarch - package dnf-plugins-core-4.0.21-16.el8.noarch requires python3-dnf-plugins-core = 4.0.21-16.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best update candidate for package dnf-plugins-core-4.0.21-14.1.el8.noarch ============================================================================================================================================================================= Package Architecture Version Repository Size ============================================================================================================================================================================= Skipping packages with conflicts: (add '--best --allowerasing' to command line to force their upgrade): python3-dnf-plugins-core noarch 4.0.21-16.el8 baseos 258 k Skipping packages with broken dependencies: dnf-plugins-core noarch 4.0.21-16.el8 baseos 75 k Transaction Summary ============================================================================================================================================================================= Skip 2 Packages Nothing to do. Complete! -- Leon

2 2

CPE Weekly Update – Week 50 2022
by Lenka Segura 16 Dec '22

16 Dec '22

*Hi everyone,* *Reminder: This is the last email we are sending! If you want to stay in touch with the CPE updates, please follow the instructions at the bottom.* *This is a weekly report from the CPE (Community Platform Engineering) Team.The report could be found at https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/cpe-weekly-update-week-50-2022/ <https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/cpe-weekly-update-week-50-2022/>If you want to receive weekly reports by email in the future, please subscribe to either https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/ <https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/> or https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/c/news/commblog/61 <https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/c/news/commblog/61>. We will stop sending them in 2023.Regards,CPE Team*

2 1

Fwd: [CentOS] CentOS 7: Missing Thunderbird Updates
by Chris Schanzle 16 Dec '22

16 Dec '22

[No response on CentOS list, so trying CentOS-devel.] -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [CentOS] CentOS 7: Missing Thunderbird Updates Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 15:33:56 -0500 From: Chris Schanzle via CentOS <centos(a)centos.org> Reply-To: Chris Schanzle <christopher.schanzle(a)nist.gov>, CentOS mailing list <centos(a)centos.org> To: CentOS mailing list <centos(a)centos.org> Hi, Looks like CentOS 7 hasn't shipped Thunderbird updates for a while. The latest I see in repos is: Sep 1 15:22 thunderbird-91.13.0-1.el7.centos.x86_64.rpm Perusing through the RHEL announcements, that was from the RHSA-2022:6169-01 on 2022-08-24. Seems none of the 102.x versions have shipped: 2022-09-26 RHSA-2022:6710-01 thunderbird-102.3.0-3.el7_9.x86_64.rpm 2022-10-18 RHSA-2022:6998-01 thunderbird-102.3.0-4.el7_9.x86_64.rpm 2022-10-25 RHSA-2022:7184-01 thunderbird-102.4.0-1.el7_9.x86_64.rpm And for completeness, just announced today: 2022-11-21 RHSA-2022:8555-01 thunderbird-102.5.0-2.el7_9.x86_64.rpm Thanks in advance for efforts to find and clear the blockage!

6 19

RFC: CentOS Project Mission statement
by Patrick Riehecky 15 Dec '22

15 Dec '22

As part of the on-boarding process each Special Interest Group is expected to provide their mission/objectives. The CentOS Project itself doesn't currently have one. I'd like to rectify that. In part because I don't want to ask folks to do something we've not done ourselves. And in part because I find these sorts of statements somewhat handy. Explaining the current role of CentOS within the ecosystem currently tends to point towards longer documents with useful details. A short but to the point Mission Statement could help provide a quick explanation of our objectives without the challenge of keeping the technical details up to date. As members of the community, the board would like your help improving this draft statement to better reflect your understanding of the CentOS Project mission. --- Draft Mission Statement CentOS aims to make Enterprise Linux better by providing project resources for contributors with similar interests to collaborate or communicate about the experience for everyone within our ecosystem. Whether it is artwork, development, discussion, or troubleshooting - CentOS should provide a clear way to get involved for contributors of all skill and interest levels. --- Initial discussion and board ticket : https://git.centos.org/centos/board/issue/85

1 1

Adding ACL for rsync.stream.centos.org (like we always did for msync.centos.org)
by Fabian Arrotin 13 Dec '22

13 Dec '22

Forwarding here (but in readable format) what was sent to centos-mirror-announce list (where all public mirrors are normally subscribed), so sending to centos-devel for awareness : Just this little mail to announce that we have now put in place the same mechanism to only allow registered third-party mirrors to pull/rsync from us. (ticket https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/999) Due to lack of bandwidth/resources and also sponsored nodes disappearing (and so remaining sponsored infra being overloaded with requests), we had to adapt the process to also have ACL in place for CentOS Stream 9 (as it was already documented for years on https://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/CreatePublicMirrors) to only allow ip address[es] (ipv4 and ipv6) from these registered mirrors (https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issues?status=Closed&tags=mirrormanager&clos…) Should you suddenly be blocked (because you are now using a different ip that differs from the one you added in your initial ticket on centos-infra tracker), feel free to create ticket to request the ip to be updated in our ACL. Kind Regards, -- Fabian Arrotin The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | twitter: @arrfab

1 0

Fwd: [CentOS-mirror-announce] Adding ACL for rsync.stream.centos.org (like we always did for msync.centos.org)
by Fabian Arrotin 13 Dec '22

13 Dec '22

FYI -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [CentOS-mirror-announce] Adding ACL for rsync.stream.centos.org (like we always did for msync.centos.org) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2022 10:12:16 +0100 From: Fabian Arrotin <arrfab(a)centos.org> Reply-To: Announcements to mirror admins from the CentOS team <centos-mirror-announce(a)centos.org> To: centos-mirror-announce(a)centos.org

1 0

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