devel

devel@lists.centos.org

11 participants
4618 discussions

thanks for the offers to help test the installer
by Karanbir Singh 12 Jan '11

12 Jan '11

hi guys and girls, thanks for the many many offers to test the installer and installable tree's on the machines you already have and in roles that you would expect to use the distro in. However, rather than manual installs - we all gain by being able to automate these runs using kickstarts; so consider writing kickstarts for your tests. There are some examples here : https://nazar.karan.org/cgit/bluecain/tree/ ; clone the git repo with "git clone git://nazar.karan.org/testing/bluecain" Here is what needs doing : - Write a kickstart file that would either install an existing system[1] - Write a bash shell script that can be run on the machine, which would do some tests and exit with '0' if all goes well. - Please name the kickstart file in a way that it ends in .cfg - Please name the test script exactly the same as the kickstart file but ending in .sh Here is what happens: - When the distro tree is in place the kickstart would be used to run through an install. - Once the install is done, the machine or vm will reboot - post reboot, an ssh connection is made to the installed machine or vm, with the test script being ssh'd over. - test script is run, and hopefully exits with 0 Feel free to contribute against centos4 or 5 or 6 (or common ones ) for bare metal installs and Xen installs - we dont have kvm capability in there as yet ( but we should in the next few weeks ). And don't forget to add your name to the Authors file. git submit via git-email to this list would work. Thanks, - KB

3 6

Re: [CentOS-devel] Am I qualified to help?
by Karanbir Singh 10 Jan '11

10 Jan '11

On 01/05/2011 11:52 PM, Hubert Bahr wrote: > I assume you are referring to bugs.centos.org. I have created an > account there and set my preferences to centos 6 and I see 47 entries > with status entries of confirmed, feedback, acknowledge, new, assigned. I assume assigned are indeed that and don't need to be looked at. Thats mostly on target. However, plenty of pkgs which dont have a report against them might also need to be looked at for various reasons - so its worth keeping an eye out for those. What I usually recommend to people is : first consider the package set you are most interested in, either since thats the package set you are going to most use, or thats the target role you are most keen on deploying into ( in many case, both those are prolly the same thing anyway ). Once you have done those, move onto the rest. > guess the most of rest still need patches. I assume these are patches > against the redhat source rpms. How do you want them submitted? I patches should be named centos-<pkgname>-<functionality>.patch and attached as files on the tracker ( there are a few there you can look at already, or look in the c5 tree to see how they were done there ). > also assume severity "block" are first priority. Which end are you Dont mark anything as block - thats something the QA / Automated Testing will throw up ( eg. a missing package in the final tree or invalid binary or unsigned packages etc ). In most cases, you should just report and leave the issue marked as 'new'. If you look at the AuditStatus page, the various status' also have some comments on what they mean or how we use them. > starting from. I assume numerical bug ID# tracker order. In building > from Red Hat sources we also needed to patch several specs plus a couple of source files. This is an interesting conversation in itself - we dont patch spec files for buildtime issues. But if you bring up a few cases, we can talk about those. > Frakus submitted them upstream but they have not > migrated through their process. Do you want those submitted? I think > this is the area I prefer to work. I guess I will start at the high end and work backwards. When in doubt, submit a report :) we need to find more stuff for Fabian, Manuel and Jeff to do anyway! - KB note: moved to a new thread

9 19

are there any chances to see finished CentOS6 in 2011?
by Michał Piotrowski 10 Jan '11

10 Jan '11

Hi, I checked the website http://wiki.centos.org/QaWiki/6/AuditStatus so far only one package was centosified. So I wonder what are the chances of seeing CentOS6 in 2011. Or perhaps a more realistic date is 2012? (Maybe you are waiting for the release of DNF?) -- Best regards, Michal Sent from my fscking awesome Black Hole Generator

36 94

RHEL and Centos differences
by derleader __ 09 Jan '11

09 Jan '11

Hi, Is there a guide where I can see the exact differences between RHEL and Centos? For example which logos do you change where I can find them. I'm sure that you have list of changes that you make every time in new RHEL version. Regards Peter

2 1

How to help out for Centos 6
by . 07 Jan '11

07 Jan '11

Hello Centos-devel. As an outsider looking in, I have found that it is .. Not simple to find out what needs doing. I _think_ I am on the right track, but would like to be corrected if not. Here is what I have come up with from reading forums/mailing lists/irc. I hope someone can throw the below on the wiki somewhere appropriate once corrected. If I am way off, please let me know I would like to get started. How to help with Centos 6: Currently Centos 6 needs help re-branding RHEL6 as Centos 6. This is relatively easy to do if you know how to build RPMS, and make patch files. Step 1: Go here: http://wiki.centos.org/QaWiki/6/AuditStatus This is a list of what issues still need to be fixed. Step 2: Pick something that looks fun (and perhaps easy), and click the bug id ('bid' column) This will take you to the mantis bug tracker page. Step 3: *Optional* If you are pretty sure you can fix this problem and don't want someone else re-inventing the wheel with you, Signup for a new account with bugs.centos.org , and let people know you are going to work on this. Don't worry about doing this if you are not sure you can do it. If you want to just try, skip this step. Step 4: Find the package name The "Category" of the bug you picked should have a package name in it, this is the package we are going to need to download and fix. If my example category was: '[CentOS-6] xulrunner' then I would be patching the xulrunner package. Step 5: Download the package http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/os/SRPMS/(mypackag… ie: http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/os/SRPMS/xulrunner… Step 6: Fix the package The issues should already be laid out for you in the description of the mantis bug tracker. Modify the files, and rebuild the RPM. Once you think you have fixed everything, create a patch file. Test your patch file on a fresh install. Need icons / images? Find them on a centos 5.x box. Do you have to do this from a RHEL6 beta installation? No you don't _have_ to. We are after the patch, not your RPMS. Step 7: If you haven't created an account at bugs.centos.org, now is the time. Create an account and attach your patch file. Step 8: Give the nearest person a high-five and then go to Step 1.

4 3

Is there a "mock" setup or downloadable list of tweaked packages for testing CentOS 6 builds?
by Nico Kadel-Garcia 07 Jan '11

07 Jan '11

I may be able to pry time free to test CentOS 6 builds. But I don't want to burn useful worktime with building mock files and manually rebuilding all the SRPM's. I've got access to licensed RHEL 6 to use as a build environment, and to do what gcc does: build a "staging" setup, then do a clean rebuild with that staging, then do a final rebuild to make sure material matches and look for discrepancies. Is this already done somewhere I can get a copy, so that I don't have to burn time re-inventing the wheel? I'd particularly like to make sure that a current "mock" is in the "extras" repository, to speed build times. (The current mock in epel-testing is much faster and more efficient than the older mock releases.)

4 6

Re: [CentOS-devel] are there any chances to see finished CentOS6 in 2011?
by William Boyle 06 Jan '11

06 Jan '11

I would be happy to help/test/whatever also. I have an 8 core Intel workstation currently running CentOS 5.5 (w/ Plus kernel). I also have a spare hot-swap system drive to install and test version 6 on, or I can run it in a virtual machine under 5.5. FWIW, Scientific Linux 6 is currently available in beta form. If I can't get CentOS 6 at least in a beta form pdq, then I may be switching to SL instead. Since my wife is a physicist on the computing division staff at FermiLab, at least I know who to gripe at when problems arise! Of course, that doesn't mean she'll listen/respond to them... :-) Bill Boyle Chairman, Chicago-Rockford IEEE Consultant's Network

2 1

Re: [CentOS-devel] are there any chances to see finished CentOS6 in 2011?
by Timo Schoeler 06 Jan '11

06 Jan '11

Hi Bill, thanks a lot for your interest. Unfortunately, I'm not in my office at the moment, answering from my cell phone, so please forgive me top posting. I'll come back to you in about 16 hrs, when I'm back in the office. Including you, we're six guys now. Seems very promising! Best regards, Timo -- Urspr. Mitt. -- Betreff: Re: [CentOS-devel] are there any chances to see finished CentOS6 in 2011? Von: William Boyle <woboyle(a)ieee.org> Datum: 06.01.2011 18:50 I would be happy to help/test/whatever also. I have an 8 core Intel workstation currently running CentOS 5.5 (w/ Plus kernel). I also have a spare hot-swap system drive to install and test version 6 on, or I can run it in a virtual machine under 5.5. FWIW, Scientific Linux 6 is currently available in beta form. If I can't get CentOS 6 at least in a beta form pdq, then I may be switching to SL instead. Since my wife is a physicist on the computing division staff at FermiLab, at least I know who to gripe at when problems arise! Of course, that doesn't mean she'll listen/respond to them... :-) Bill Boyle Chairman, Chicago-Rockford IEEE Consultant's Network _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

1 0

tracking packages in a Release, through the life of the release
by Karanbir Singh 06 Jan '11

06 Jan '11

hi, one thing that I'd like to do with 5.6 and 6.0 is to have centos-release carry repo info for the debuginfo and the vault repo's for the same Release. For 6.0 it would be fairly slim to start with but for 5.6 it could look like this : Enabled by default: [base] [updates] Available, but not enabled: [5.5] [5.5-updates] [5.4] [5.4-updates] .. [5.0] [5.0-updates] Allowing people to get specific packages from anywhere in the Release's past. the baseurl for these will point at vault.centos.org/ Similarly would be the debuginfo .repo's. For /5/ we have a single debuginfo repo, for /6/ we can, and i think we should, split these up into repo's that match the release's. so 6.0's debugs end up in debuginfo.c.o/6.0/ and 6.1 goto d.c.o/6.1/ etc. Just as with the older release's .repo files - these would be present but disabled. Also, I'm trying to plumb in debuginfo signing. But it might end up being a different key to the main distro signing key[1], cross signed by the distro key and master keys. lets see how that pans out. thoughts ? - KB

2 2

Closing out CentOS 6 Bugs
by JohnS 06 Jan '11

06 Jan '11

Karanbir, Can you look into closing out the bugs that can be closed etc? Can also [1,2] be looked into to confirm package depends on abrt / report (hidden gotchas). Look at the example spec file at the changes that are required and the level of them that the Application Backend will have to support. Is there someone that can take on the App Server end? Also needed to know if you are symlinking from "redhat-release" to "centos-release" or not. That depends on how other packages need to be patched, ie "lsb_release". John [1] http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=4648 [2] http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=4647

4 6

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