devel

devel@lists.centos.org

18 participants
4604 discussions

recent versions of mock and TMPDIR
by Florian La Roche 22 Dec '11

22 Dec '11

Recent versions of mock have added TMPDIR environment, but this seems to break e.g. the eclipse rebuild for RHEL5. I think keeping mock more compatibel with older rpm package builds should be a high priority. I've filed the following bugzilla for this: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=769728 best regards, Florian La Roche

2 1

missing SRPMS?
by Adrian Cruceru 21 Dec '11

21 Dec '11

Hi, Seems that a few source RPMs are missing from the link: http://mirror.centos.org/centos-6/6.0/os/SRPMS/Packages/ (bash, nss-util, I could attempt to make a list if needed) These are available here: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/os/SRPMS Will missing the mirror be updated soon?, can I help? Thank you, Adrian

8 13

non-gzipped comps.xml is missing from CentOS 6.2's repository
by David Robinson 21 Dec '11

21 Dec '11

Hi all, The repository metadata file for CentOS 6.2 (repomd.xml) contains a sha256 hash for the non-gzipped comps.xml file (<hash>-c6-x86_64-comps.xml), but the file is missing from the repository. According to repomd.xml, this file should exist: http://mirror.linux.duke.edu/pub/centos/6.2/os/x86_64/repodata/3a27232698a2… The corresponding file exists in the CentOS 6.1's repo (there's 8 files in the repodata directory for 6.1, but only 7 for 6.2). A simple "zcat badeded316fc87571779d92c5cde816fdc357646b84cb191c4611e05c981ffa1-c6-x86_64-comps.xml.gz > 3a27232698a261aa4022fd270797a3006aa8b8a346cbd6a31fae1466c724d098-c6-x86_64-comps.xml" on the master mirror would fix the problem, but someone may want to look into the root cause... I'd look myself but have no idea how the build system works and doubt the logs would be publicly available (happy to be educated/pointed in the right direction thou). -- Dave

3 3

centos-release-cr package
by Trent Johnson 16 Dec '11

16 Dec '11

Re: the comment on qaweb about skipping CR for 6.1 It would be nice if the centos-release-cr package was included in the base distribution at release time, even if the cr repo is empty. We put the centos-release-cr in kickstarts, but then the kickstarts break during the time when there is no centos-release-cr package available anywhere. Thanks, Trent

4 3

Re: [CentOS-devel] CentOS-6.1 history -c bug
by baris tombul 15 Dec '11

15 Dec '11

#history -c Ctrl+D After dont clean my history

2 1

Re: [CentOS-devel] [Pulp-list] CentOS errata
by Peter Meier 10 Dec '11

10 Dec '11

> Sometime ago I also tried to write a scrapper script in python to get > all the erratas. My major crib that time was: > 1. No fixed format of the subject line which made it difficult to > scrap the package name I think this is something that CentOS could improve in general about how their Erratas are available. Karanbir Singh recently mentioned on #pulp, that if there is something that could be done to help to integrate CentOS better into pulp, this should be brought up to the CentOS developers. (If I understood his comment correctly....) So this is imho something that could be brought up on the centos-devel list, or on the more appropriate one, if that doesn't fit there. Hence, I CC this to the centos-devel list. I hope this is fine for everybody. @centos-devel: Thread: https://www.redhat.com/archives/pulp-list/2011-November/msg00110.html > 2. Red Hat would announce the errata and only after a few days centos > errata will come out. The time gap in the two made the server > vulnerable. This is the price you pay for CentOS. If you don't like that, you should buy RedHat. ~pete

4 5

Ruby and Rails packaging effort
by Anthony J Burton 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

I am working on getting Ruby and Rails working via RPMs on CentOS. It seems like much could be ported from Fedora, but that could very well be crazy talk on my part. We have a client who is using CentOS for whom we are delivering a working application, albeit with a lot of manual labor to get a working Ruby environment. Getting it working with RPM is part of the requirements and I'd like this to translate into a benefit for CentOS, if possible. We're using fpm right now to package the application. I have built and maintained RPMs in the past but am unfamiliar with the peculiarities of legacy commitments in CentOS (i.e. Ruby+Rails is a fast moving target; CentOS implies more stability). Any advice on getting this completed is welcomed. Thanks, Anthony

4 3

Incorrect info in .treeinfo file
by James Hogarth 01 Dec '11

01 Dec '11

As per http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=5237 the .treeinfo file still has a reference to boot.iso although it doesn't exist. This breaks 'smart mirror' stuff like pulp from syncing properly as it exits on the non-existent file when setting up a distribution tree for kickstart purposes. Any one with access able to remove/correct the errant line? Regards, James

3 6

Regarding the Xen Headers for centOS 6.0 (32-bit)
by Ramana Reddy 30 Nov '11

30 Nov '11

Hi Everyone, I installed CentOS 6.0 as VM on XenServer 6.0, but it seems that the CentOS 6.0 does not contain xen headers. Where should I get those headers. Some how I got 64-bit CentOS 6.0 Xen headers, and if I use in CentOS 6.0 32-bit OS, what are the complications. How can we rewrite the 64-bit headers to 32-bit headers. Help in this regard is highly appreciated. Thanks, Ramana.

3 3

[C6] SRPMS/Packages almost empty
by Leon Fauster 29 Nov '11

29 Nov '11

Hi, i just wonder not seeing all src rpms for c6? http://mirror.centos.org/centos-6/6.0/os/SRPMS/Packages/ like for c4 & c5: http://mirror.centos.org/centos-4/4.9/os/SRPMS/ http://mirror.centos.org/centos-5/5.6/os/SRPMS/ Do i miss something (i was in holidays)? Thanks PM

14 32

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