devel

devel@lists.centos.org

2 participants
4695 discussions

RPM contribution
by Andrew Colin Kissa 30 May '09

30 May '09

Hi all, I would like to contribute an rpm that i have built. The rpm is the dkim-milter for signing and verifying email messages using DKIM by Sendmail and Postfix. Attached is the spec file and the source rpm can be obtained at http://www.topdog-software.com/oss/SRPMS/dkim-milter-2.8.2-2.src.rpm Regards, Andrew

3 2

Web Environment Design
by Alain Reguera Delgado 29 May '09

29 May '09

Hi Guys, Actually CentOS uses many free software applications to handle its needs. Those applications have their own design and when you see them as a whole they don't visually fit among them. Additionally, when you are in one application, for example the wiki, there isn't always a visible link referring other sections, like forums, bugs, docs, downloads, projects ... Don't know if you are agree with the idea of a common and predictable design for the applications we use; so I've organized some ideas in the following wiki page for you to consider and improve: http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/WebEnvironment As part of these ideas a redesing for mailman application was requiered: http://wiki.centos.org/WebsiteVer2/WebEnvironment/Mailman Others applications may be modified to ... but before that I would like to know what do you think about it. I would like to be focused on what CentOS really needs for its improvement. Best Regards, -- al. -- http://www.fastmail.fm - A no graphics, no pop-ups email service

4 5

Red Hat IPA
by Joe Royall 27 May '09

27 May '09

Red Hat recentely released thier IPA server as open source. Is Centos considering a rebuild? -- Joe Royall

7 16

sqlite enabled repodata
by David Hrbáč 27 May '09

27 May '09

Hi, within the update to 5.3 I guess it would be interesting to provide sqlite enabled repos. yum-3.2.19-18.el5.centos is prepared for that. Regards, David Hrbáč

5 9

Location of livecd config file
by Jim Wildman 26 May '09

26 May '09

Where is the config file to use with the livecd-creator for respinning the livecd? And/or instructions :-). The wiki links lead to the 5.2 set which do not seem to work with 5.3. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jim Wildman, CISSP, RHCE jim(a)rossberry.com http://www.rossberry.com "Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." Thomas Paine

2 2

Re: [CentOS-devel] [CentOS-qa] New drbd packages available for testing
by Fabian Arrotin 26 May '09

26 May '09

Ralph Angenendt wrote: > Fabian Arrotin wrote: >> [root@c5drbd1 drbd]# pwd ; ls -l >> /var/lib/drbd >> total 4 >> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 14 May 7 20:49 drbd-minor-0.conf -> /etc/drbd.conf >> >> Ralph : nothing listed in the mock/build log about that dir not listed >> in the %files section ? > > Building now. > > Ralph > > Ok, tested and now ok. I've also seen your mail on the DRBD mailling-list and the Lars' answer about the testing request (http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/2009-May/012019.html) So the question is : do we want to provide both 8.2.7 (as drbd82 package) and 8.3.1 (as drbd83) ? It seems to me that drbd83 is 'just' an update to the 8.2.x branch (it could be named 8.2.10 in the Lars' answer) The reason why there was a drbd (for 7.0.24 on el4 and 8.0.6 on el5) and drbd82 was that metadata was not usable anymore and some config parameters were completely different and so a simple `yum update drbd` could break the existing setup. Now the question seems to be : do you still need to split between drbd82 and drbd83 ? -- -- Fabian Arrotin idea=`grep -i clue /dev/brain` test -z "$idea" && echo "sorry, init 6 in progress" || sh ./answer.sh

2 4

Important: CentOS Newsletter coming to town
by Dag Wieers 22 May '09

22 May '09

Hi all, The CentOS Newsletter is a new initiative taken to promote CentOS, but also to improve the communication inside of the community itself. http://wiki.centos.org/Newsletter Currently we envision a Newsletter that highlights some of the things that are going on inside of the different community's channels. But we probably could do much more, all of this depends on contributions and ideas of those people that are already involved. So what I am looking for are people that - think about what subject, thread or article could be useful for the Newsletter (as much as possible) - write new content that can be featured in the Newsletter - are willing to (co)maintain a section in the Newsletter on a bi-weekly basis We haven't decided what sections will go into the Newsletter yet, but here is a list of the things that are possible. If you have other ideas, please share them with the centos-promo mailinglist (or send them to me personally). We are looking for a few recurring sections for the Newsletter: * Foreword * Featured Article(s) * Wonderful Wiki Whatever (new documentation in the wiki) * Community Threads (interesting threads on mailinglist, forums and blogs) * CentOS Fixes (an overview of the recent errata) * Development Discussions (what happens on centos-devel) * CentOS in the News (who's covering CentOS) * ... Of course, if we don't have any content for a section at some point, we will leave that section out. So who is interested to help out with the first and second issue ? And who is interested to maintain/edit one of these sections ? I am looking for people in the different communities (mailinglist, forums and blogs) that keep up with things and offer items to be featured. I am also interested in reports about new developments within the community from the different SIGs, from the developers and project members to highlight areas where is being worked on and what progress we are making. If you are interested, you know where to find me :) -- -- dag wieers, dag(a)wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]

1 0

What are you guys using to build RPMs these days?
by David Sissitka 22 May '09

22 May '09

Just curious, what are you guys using to build RPMs these days? Still Mock/Plague? Thanks! -David Sissitka

3 2

s390 SIG meeting (May 18, 20:00 UTC)
by Jae-hwa Park 21 May '09

21 May '09

Hello, I found that there were some activities for s390 SIG several months ago, but there were not many people interested in s390 at the time, I think. Karanbir is working on s390x for centos 5.0 now, isn't he? And there might be some people who interested in building s390x port for centos 5.3, so we should talk about this SIG again. The meeting will be held on IRC(#centos-devel) at 20:00 UTC 18th May 2009. (05:00 KST-9 19th May 2009) Anyone interested should join in. Agenda which I thought is like below: 1. where are we? 2. what should we do? - check the build system(real iron) - make build system environment - fix errors - etc. ? - role and responsibility 3. schedule 4. some other topic? If anyone have any other ideas, please post your idea. See you then. Regards, Jerry -- Jae-hwa(Jerry) Park <jaehwa(a)gmail.com>

2 7

RPM date strangeness (was:[CentOS] rpmbuild date shift)
by Ralph Angenendt 20 May '09

20 May '09

David Hrbáč wrote: > Ralph Angenendt napsal(a): > > Yes, I'm seeing that too: > > > > Even if that is changed to UTC, it still is May 13th (and it doesn't explain > > why subsequent changelog entries are one day off, too. > > Thanks Ralph. Yes, it has nothing to do with time zone. It has. I don't know why, yet. > I'm not sure if > I've seen it before last rpmbuild update. Also happens when you use *5.2* in mock to build the packages. And that has an older version of rpm. Watch and cry (I Cc: centos-devel, as I know that JBJ reads there, too). Please do answer in centos-devel, thanks. JBJ: Here's what happens: I take a src.rpm: [angenenr@shutdown SRPMS]$rpm -qp --@hangelog canlock-2b-3.el5.src.rpm |head -2 * Tue May 19 2009 Ralph Angenendt <ralph(a)centos.org> -2b.2 - This is a test bump I rebuild it with rpmbuild: [angenenr@shutdown SRPMS]$rpmbuild --rebuild canlock-2b-3.el5.src.rpm [angenenr@shutdown SRPMS]$rpm -qp --changelog ../RPMS/x86_64/canlock-2b-3.el5.x86_64.rpm |head -2 * Tue May 19 2009 Ralph Angenendt <ralph(a)centos.org> -2b.2 - This is a test bump All is fine. Now let me churn it through mock. [angenenr@shutdown SRPMS]$mock -r centos-5-x86_64 --autocache canlock-2b-3.el5.src.rpm [...] [angenenr@shutdown SRPMS]$rpm -qp --changelog /var/lib/mock/centos-5-x86_64/result/canlock-2b-3.el5.x86_64.rpm |head -2 * Wed May 20 2009 Ralph Angenendt <ralph(a)centos.org> -2b.2 - This is a test bump Ummm? [angenenr@shutdown SRPMS]$date Tue May 19 13:19:25 CEST 2009 Yay! I invented a time machine! (or someone did). Okay, let's move the machine from Germany to the UK [angenenr@shutdown SRPMS]$sudo cp /usr/share/zoneinfo/Europe/London /etc/localtime [angenenr@shutdown SRPMS]$date Tue May 19 12:20:17 BST 2009 [angenenr@shutdown SRPMS]$rpm -qp --changelog /var/lib/mock/centos-5-x86_64/result/canlock-2b-3.el5.x86_64.rpm |head -2 * Tue May 19 2009 Ralph Angenendt <ralph(a)centos.org> -2b.2 - This is a test bump Hmmm. Who moved the international date line to the Channel? What about mock? Let's move the machine back to Germany first. [angenenr@shutdown SRPMS]$sudo cp /usr/share/zoneinfo/Europe/Berlin /etc/localtime [angenenr@shutdown SRPMS]$date Tue May 19 13:22:08 CEST 2009 [angenenr@shutdown SRPMS]$mock -r centos-5-x86_64 shell init mock-chroot> date Tue May 19 07:22:18 EDT 2009 So mock uses EDT which is 6 hours behind. Which does not explain why moving from BST (EDT +0500) still gives me the correct date in the changelog, moving the machine one step further to CEST (EDT +0600) moves me to the next day, though. What about the rpm built with rpmbuild? Let's move the machine to Sidney: [root@shutdown etc]# cp /usr/share/zoneinfo/Australia/Sydney localtime [root@shutdown etc]# date Tue May 19 21:27:50 EST 2009 [root@shutdown etc]# rpm -qp --changelog /home/angenenr/redhat/RPMS/x86_64/canlock-2b-3.el5.x86_64.rpm * Tue May 19 2009 Ralph Angenendt <ralph(a)centos.org> -2b.2 - This is a test bump Strange. This is 8 hours in the future (and not 6), but still shows me the correct date. Something is not right here. Is this something to worry about? How and why does that happen? Why are there even calculations on the date line in a changelog? Cheers, Ralph

3 8

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

devel