devel

devel@lists.centos.org

5 participants
4641 discussions

Re: [CentOS-devel] Upstream SRPMs
by Coy Hile 25 Mar '11

25 Mar '11

> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:59:16 +0100 (CET) > From: Dag Wieers <dag(a)wieers.com> > > You can find these at: > > ftp://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/linux/enterprise/ > Thanks, Dag. Are the SRPMS for the updates published likewise? I'm mostly just curious. Having some idea of how this all works would be beneficial if I were to decide to contribute in the future. -Coy

2 1

Re: [CentOS-devel] Polite Request
by Butch Whitby 25 Mar '11

25 Mar '11

hi Guys, > > This list is the centos-devel list, there are other lists like this > list. But*this* list is the list dedicated to development of CentOS. > Which means its not a list to talk about generic technical stuff that > does not directly have a relation to centos development, its also not a > list to discuss development issues with code and process that isnt > centos itself. Its not a place to announce stuff, its also not a place > to have social and 'in the old days...' or 'when i was young..' or > politics ( around open source, generic software, technology or otherwise ). > > Recently lots of fluff being posted here is just noise and really not > appropriate for this list. The end result is that most of the people > doing development work on CentOS are not reading this list anymore since > its all irrelevant and offtopic noise. > > Its not a good situation to be in, so a polite request from my side - > take it elsewhere. Lets try and maintain topic sanity here on this list > so we don't need to all go back to using private, focused and productive > lists; > > Thanks > > - KB I agree. I've been watching this list for updates on whats happening with the status of 5.6 and 6.0. About all I do at this point is scan over the digest to see if there is anything that ISN"T completely irrelevant to the intent of the list. Please take all non CentOS dev conversations elsewhere, and let those that are dev's concentrate on getting the work done rather than addressing unrelated fluff as KB has done here. Their dev's not gossip columnists. FWIW, yes I do consider my message unrelated, even though it's in support of the original intention of this list. -- Butch

1 0

polite request
by Karanbir Singh 25 Mar '11

25 Mar '11

hi Guys, This list is the centos-devel list, there are other lists like this list. But *this* list is the list dedicated to development of CentOS. Which means its not a list to talk about generic technical stuff that does not directly have a relation to centos development, its also not a list to discuss development issues with code and process that isnt centos itself. Its not a place to announce stuff, its also not a place to have social and 'in the old days...' or 'when i was young..' or politics ( around open source, generic software, technology or otherwise ). Recently lots of fluff being posted here is just noise and really not appropriate for this list. The end result is that most of the people doing development work on CentOS are not reading this list anymore since its all irrelevant and offtopic noise. Its not a good situation to be in, so a polite request from my side - take it elsewhere. Lets try and maintain topic sanity here on this list so we don't need to all go back to using private, focused and productive lists; Thanks - KB

2 1

SRPMS for RHEL releases and updates
by Coy Hile 24 Mar '11

24 Mar '11

In looking at the various FAQs, I haven't seen an answer to this, so I thought I would pose it here. Where/how do the CentOS maintainers get the SRPMS from the upstream vendor? The reason I ask is more a question of given DVDs of all the SRPMs, how does one go about spinning up an installable ISO? I'm thinking from the perspective of rolling my own ISO until CentOS 6 came out. Thanks, -Coy

5 4

Updates from today
by Karanbir Singh 23 Mar '11

23 Mar '11

hi guys, EL5 got a bunch of updates that really need to make it out asap, and while 4.9 settles down - the thinking is to get them released into the 5.5/updates repo. I'll have an exact list of what all is going to make it in the day tomorrow, along with the packages. - KB

30 82

CentOS-5 repodata broken
by Florian La Roche 23 Mar '11

23 Mar '11

Hello, until a few days ago, the repodata for CentOS-5 updates contained also sqlite files, but this was now removed. Was this an intentional change or can we get the full repodata including sqlite files back into the release? best regards, Florian La Roche

2 1

Springtime CentOS 5.6 and 6.0 status updates
by Matthew Miller 22 Mar '11

22 Mar '11

Hello everyone. It's been a while since we had a status update. I noticed that there is a little update on the web forum that hasn't been relayed very prominently. This is a message from web forum moderator Alan Bartlett: Re: When will CentOS 5.6 be out? Here follows the synopsis of my latest discussion with Karanbir in the early hours of this morning (UTC, Tuesday March 22, 2011): The 32-bit tree has been with the QA team for some time, all issues that were discovered have been resolved and that tree is considered to be viable. The 64-bit tree is currently being built (using the knowledge gained from the 32-bit build) and will be passed to QA as soon as it is ready. Once QA have the 64-bit tree, both the 32- & 64-bit versions will be transferred to the internal master-mirror -- the logic being that if QA find a 64-bit specific issue, it can be resolved and just the relevant packages updated by rsync. A soon as all boxes are ticked with respect to the tree, then the ISO image can be prepared. This, in turn, will be passed to QA. Once that has been verified, the ISO images will be transferred to the internal master-mirror. With everything in place internally, the last waiting phase begins as the public mirror sites start to receive the trees and ISO images. Finally the "switch will be flicked" (or, if your prefer, the "button will be pressed") and an announcement will then be made on the CentOS-announce mailing list. https://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=DESC… There is no corresponding message for 6.0, although there is a similar post from February 19th: Re: When will CentOS 6 be out? I begin this announcement with my personal apology to all who are reading this. A while ago, I had a short conversation with Karanbir [Singh] with regards to the current status of the CentOS 5.6 build. He provided me with some information in relation to both the C-5.6 & C-6.0 build processes and asked me to write it up for public consumption via the Announcement forum. Due to various personal issues, coupled with the need to replace the main disk drive in my usual (desktop) workstation, the posts to the Announcement forum slid down the ToDo list. I aim to rectify that now. In the (boxed) text that follows, KB's words appear in italics. My linking works are bracketed in the normal font: [thus]. [Although the CentOS 5.6 build is taking priority, CentOS] 6.0 is slowly moving along. Many people consider it [to be] paused [but] it's not. It's not moving [at] full steam [ahead] but ticking along nicely. [It may be available to the QA team] within three weeks [but] as you know, slippage can happen at any stage. So we try not to commit to a schedule [because people will undoubtedly plan around it. The time-frame for CentOS] 6.0 might slip with even minor issues. [In conclusion, I would not expect to see CentOS 6.0 released until late March or early April. So the advice is not to formulate plans based on my guestimate but, instead, hope for the best whilst being prepared for the worst.] https://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=thread&topic_id… (Obviously the italics don't translate to ASCII, but the []s are correct.) And this was folowed three days later with: Yesterday (Tuesday February 22, 2011), I received a status update from Karanbir regarding the progress of CentOS 6.0 and he has asked me to post it to this thread. Quote: 6.0: Due to time issues, I'm not updating the Audit Status page [1] at the moment. However there has been movement on the CentOS 6 build-front. I think I'll leave updating that page until 4.9 and 5.6 are out of the door. -- Matthew Miller mattdm(a)mattdm.org <http://mattdm.org/>

4 4

Website Version 2, next steps
by Ralph Angenendt 21 Mar '11

21 Mar '11

First thing: I am sorry that this mail comes this late, it should have been there a week earlier. Second: At Fosdem we sat together with a round of people, trying to identify which parts CentOS has that are facing to the community, which parts need renewing and which contents should go / has to go where. We identified 5 parts, some of which can and will stay as they are (mostly), some which need to change. And we discussed some architectural things. What we did not discuss was which software should be used where, although for many pieces this already has been chosen. At the end of the mail I will talk about some pros and cons to this approach. - Bug reporting against the CentOS components We will continue to use mantis as our bug tracker, so there will be no change in software there, maybe an update to the newest version, if that can be done without too many issues. - Wiki The wiki will find it's role as being about the distribution side of things (read on for an explanation). All documentation about the project which is generated by the project and community members will go on the wiki. This means FAQs, all help material for users, Howtos and Tipps, but also QA content (see the QaTeam section) and the main Release Notes and translations. MoinMoin will be used there for the time coming. Planning of events where CentOS will be shown will still happen on the wiki. - Website The website will be about the project side of things. Firstly it should be a starting point for all users - a role which it does not really play at the moment. Where to download the distribution, what is current, where to get help if you need it, pointers to things people can help with - all that should be easily found on the website. Also on the website will be generated content for CentOS. This means the hosting of upstream documentation, automated content via RSS (so planet.centos.org shouldn't be it's own page anymore, those Feeds should be on the website), Twitter feeds and so on. No decision on whose feeds should be found on there have been made yet. If you are looking for events, where you can talk to people who are around CentOS should also be found on the website. Mirrors, mirror status and general infrastructure content will also be on the website. Downloads for projects within CentOS should also be found here (like Artwork, special CD isos, or whatever you can think of a project within the CentOS eco system) Aim is to have something which can be automatically filled in parts, and be easy to access and update in the other parts. The website is for finished things. - Forums Forums at the moment are an integral part of the website. They will need to move, as we sure are moving away from the current content management system. We already know how to migrate those forums into php-bb, so we will go with that. - Projects People wanting to run projects or Special Interest Groups (SIGs) within CentOS need a place to develop. We have projects.centos.org for that, which has it's own wiki, bug tracker and version control system for those projects. Once things are in a releasable state, those releases should go to a part of the main web site. projects.centos.org is for developing things. - Glue At the moment we have different user databases for everything except website and forums. This has to change. As far as we've found out, every piece of software we use at the moment can be coaxed to authenticate against an LDAP database. We want to order those accounts by email (make that the primary key, as it has to be unique) and try to merge them into one large database. Logging in will still be done on username / password or on the wiki with WikiName / password, where your WikiName will be one of the attributes your account has in the LDAP backend. This has some issues: We will invariably have lots of doubled accounts, as people might have subscribed to the website with a different mail address than to the wiki. We will need to weed out spammer acocunts, something which probably will not be easy. This is something which will still need discussion on how to do it, and especially on how to do the transition correctly, so that it does not have a large impact on users. - Mailing lists Last issue, as there won't be any changes there. Pros and Cons: - Pros Clear division of which content will go where. This also means that a clearer presentation of content can be done on all parts, not the muddle we have there at the moment. One user database allows all users to access parts of the CentOS infrastructure with only one account, although representations of those accounts may differ among applications, like the wiki, where the FirstnameLastname account naming still is wanted. This doesn't mean that you can automatically write on the wiki once you have an account, the procedure will mostly stay as it is at the moment. With one user database, only one place is needed to distinguish users from bots: The place where you register your account. Another plus: the schema is extendable, should the need arise. - Cons Some software might need to be convinced to play well with LDAP authentication. Links between forum posts might go away, I am not sure if there is a possibility to find out the new target of a link. As already mentioned above: Merging the user accounts will probably be a rather largish task: Find out which accounts haven't been used for a certain time, weed out spammer's accounts out of those which have been actively used, find out which accounts belong together, retaining editing rights on the wiki, maybe moving the forum status (rookie, newbie, pro and whatever they are called) to the new forums. We don't have a central account management solution at the moment, this also needs to be written or snarfed from somewhere, and then adapted to our needs. Conclusion: With the content division in mind, there now is a clearer view of what needs to go where. With a central user database, we make many things easier for users and for the people maintaining the different parts of "the CentOS web". Now please discuss if you can live with what is written above, if you see things differently, if you have other ideas and so on. Please try to not extend what is above too much, as that already looks like a rather largish move. Ah yes, we'd like to stay with the layout we have on wiki.centos.org throughout the whole eco system if possible. No idea if it is needed on bugs.centos.org or lists.centos.org, though. For actual execution we will use Atrium for planning, more on how to set up your account there will come after this discussion. Thanks for reading this far (and please trim your mails when replying only to parts of this mail!). Ralph

15 44

Building help
by Jason Pyeron 21 Mar '11

21 Mar '11

We would like to help, I have many questions as to how we can help, but I will start with our agenda. For 4 and 5 (and soon 6) java apache tomcat php bind dhcp subversion And their dependencies. I do not know how much "testing" of installs we can do, but building and patching we can. -Jason -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - - - Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us - - Principal Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100 - - +1 (443) 269-1555 x333 Baltimore, Maryland 21218 - - - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00.

4 5

enlightenment project seeks package maintainer!
by Mike Blumenkrantz 18 Mar '11

18 Mar '11

Hi, I am a developer with the enlightenment project (http://enlightenment.org) We have just recently released the 1.0 version of our libraries, known as the EFL, and are now attempting to find people on various distros to help spread the word. Currently, we have packagers working on Arch, Debian, Gentoo, Ubuntu (debian), and a number of others, and we would like to add CentOS to this list! Within our community, we have people who work on .spec files already, and such files already exist for all the libraries that we would like to see in CentOS. The spec files are in the toplevel directory of each project, and I will link them here for easy viewing: https://svn.enlightenment.org/svn/e/tags/ecore-1.0.0/ecore.spec.in https://svn.enlightenment.org/svn/e/tags/e_dbus-1.0.0/e_dbus.spec.in https://svn.enlightenment.org/svn/e/tags/edje-1.0.0/edje.spec.in https://svn.enlightenment.org/svn/e/tags/eet-1.4.0/eet.spec.in https://svn.enlightenment.org/svn/e/tags/eeze-1.0.1/eeze.spec.in https://svn.enlightenment.org/svn/e/tags/efreet-1.0.0/efreet.spec.in https://svn.enlightenment.org/svn/e/tags/eina-1.0.0/eina.spec.in https://svn.enlightenment.org/svn/e/tags/embryo-1.0.0/embryo.spec.in https://svn.enlightenment.org/svn/e/tags/evas-1.0.0/evas.spec.in There is one minor cleanup that must be made on our end in the ecore spec to use c-ares, but other than that they should work fine. Obviously they may not meet your QA regulations, so changes will be made where necessary. Note that this is NOT E17. These are only the underlying libraries which have been in development for the last 10 years and have recently reached 1.0. I am hopeful that this mail will interest some of the developers on the list :) You can either reply directly to this email or come to #edevelop on Freenode to talk to us in realtime. Thanks! -- Mike Blumenkrantz Zentific: NULL pointer dereferences now 50% off!

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