devel

devel@lists.centos.org

1 participants
4605 discussions

[CloudSIG] RDO plans to move to CentOS Stream
by Alfredo Moralejo Alonso 14 Jan '21

14 Jan '21

Hi, As you know, CentOS announced recently that they will be focusing on CentOS Stream [1] and that CentOS Linux 8 will be EOL at the end of 2021 [2]. In order to align with this change, the RDO project is adapting the roadmap for the current and upcoming releases: - RDO Wallaby (ETA is end of April 2021 [3]) will be built, tested and released only for CentOS 8 Stream. - RDO CloudSIG repos for Victoria and Ussuri will be updated and tested for both CentOS Stream and CentOS Linux 8 until end of 2021 and then continue on CentOS Stream. - In the upcoming weeks, we will create new RDO CloudSIG repos for Victoria and Ussuri for CentOS Stream 8. - RDO Trunk repositories (aka DLRN repos) will be built and tested using CentOS 8 Stream for all releases currently using CentOS Linux 8 (starting with Train). If you are interested in the details about these plans and how we plan to implement it, we've created a blog post [4]. Don't hesitate to ask us in the ML or in the #rdo channel on freenode if you have questions or suggestions about this. We are also organizing a video AMA about RDO and CentOS Stream on Thursday Jan 21 1600 UTC in the RDO Meet room https://meet.google.com/uzo-tfkt-top On behalf of RDO, Alfredo [1] https://centos.org/distro-faq/ [2] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/ [3] https://releases.openstack.org/ [4] https://blogs.rdoproject.org/2021/01/rdo-plans-to-move-to-centos-stream/

1 0

Re: [CentOS-devel] Upgrade to Stream wants to downgrade e.g. httpd
by Yedidyah Bar David 14 Jan '21

14 Jan '21

On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 3:23 PM orkcu via CentOS-devel <centos-devel(a)centos.org> wrote: > > Considering that CentOS 8.5 will never be, a year from now (6 month only?) you will not have this issue, as Baron said, with new packages coming to Stream the issue will go away naturally unless you want to move from RHEL to CentOS I can definitely see myself wanting to move from RHEL (or a rebuild) to Stream in the future, for specific uses/machines. And I do not think this is a unique/strange/corner case. I agree it's probably not the most common one. -- Didi

1 0

Upgrade to Stream wants to downgrade e.g. httpd
by Yedidyah Bar David 14 Jan '21

14 Jan '21

Hi all, I have a CentOS 8.3 machine I want to upgrade to Stream following [1]. After fighting with it a bit due to oVirt-specific issues [2], I reached the current point: doing 'dnf update' updated everything nicely, but now doing 'dnf distro-sync' wants to downgrade these packages: Downgrading: httpd x86_64 2.4.37-30.module_el8.3.0+462+ba287492.0.1 appstream 1.7 M httpd-filesystem noarch 2.4.37-30.module_el8.3.0+462+ba287492.0.1 appstream 37 k httpd-tools x86_64 2.4.37-30.module_el8.3.0+462+ba287492.0.1 appstream 104 k mod_ssl x86_64 1:2.4.37-30.module_el8.3.0+462+ba287492.0.1 appstream 133 k python3-docutils noarch 0.14-12.module_el8.3.0+389+6a62c88d appstream 1.6 M python36 x86_64 3.6.8-2.module_el8.3.0+389+6a62c88d appstream 19 k I specifically mention httpd in Subject because that's the one I spent some time looking at, but the issue is general. I currently have httpd-2.4.37-30.module_el8.3.0+561+97fdbbcc.x86_64 . It seems to be the result of [3], which says it was built from: git+https://git.centos.org/rpms/httpd#2f74eecf85362e67c403b7b1386a729da3e5c… . distro-sync wants to downgrade to 2.4.37-30.module_el8.3.0+462+ba287492.0.1 , which seems to be the result of [4], which says it was built from: git+https://git.centos.org/rpms/httpd#fcb5444a5c0aefcd065e6c4a805a454e4988b… . cloning the git repo, and then checking the difference between them, I get: $ git diff 2f74eecf fcb5444a diff --git a/SPECS/httpd.spec b/SPECS/httpd.spec index 8322bd8..7d66f2e 100644 --- a/SPECS/httpd.spec +++ b/SPECS/httpd.spec @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ Summary: Apache HTTP Server Name: httpd Version: 2.4.37 -Release: 30%{?dist} +Release: 30%{?dist}.0.1 URL: https://httpd.apache.org/ Source0: https://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/httpd-%{version}.tar.bz2 Source1: centos-noindex-8.0.tar.gz So: 1. The sources seem to be identical, right now, with the only difference being the 'Release:'. 2. I failed to find where '462+ba287492' and '561+97fdbbcc' are coming from. I assume they are automatically-generated during the build process, but not saved in the dist-git repo. These seem to be what's causing the "newer" version in Stream to be considered a "Downgrade" - 462 < 561. Perhaps they are some kind of timestamps, or increasing counters, etc., and '462' was built earlier than '561', even if in all other regards it should be considered "newer". 3. Perhaps the intention was to have the release in Stream: Release: 30.0.1%{?dist} ? I think this would have caused this to not be considered a downgrade. I might be missing something. 4. IMO this is a bit confusing/discouraging. Can/Do we do anything so that 8-Stream packages are always >= 8.3 ones? Perhaps a fix should be manually applied to each and every package (if at all), but just generating a report somewhere, perhaps with a place to a link to a bug per package as applicable, can be done in batch, more-or-less, if I got it right. Do we have something like this? Do we want something like this? 5. Perhaps (alternatively?), Stream's version should just be rebuilt, e.g. with 'Release: 30%{?dist}.0.2'. Thanks and best regards, [1] https://www.centos.org/centos-stream/ [2] https://github.com/oVirt/ovirt-cockpit-sso/pull/30 [3] https://koji.mbox.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=14516 [4] https://koji.mbox.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=12971 -- Didi

6 8

[CloudSIG] Questions about adopting CentOS 8 Stream
by Alfredo Moralejo Alonso 14 Jan '21

14 Jan '21

Hi, In Cloud SIG, we are planning adoption to CentOS 8 Stream. I'd like to clarify what will be the workflow and get some info about open questions and issues before starting to request stuff. IIUC, the intended workflow to build, ship and consume packages for c8s should be pretty similar to the current one: Build: 1. Request new tags which will use C8S buildroot, something like cloud8s-openstack-victoria-*. 2. Build from srpm on those new tags. Ship: 3. Tagging into cloud8s-openstack-victoria-testing will trigger automatically shipping a package under https://buildlogs.centos.org/centos/8-stream/cloud/x86_64/openstack-victori… (note 8-stream in url). 4. Tagging into cloud8s-openstack-victoria-release will trigger automatically shipping a package under http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8/cloud/x86_64/openstack-victoria/ (note 8-stream in url) Consume: 5. Users in a C8S box, install the release rpm from extras centos-release-openstack-victoria and repos are configured to use from 8-stream URLs. Please confirm this is the intended workflow or if there is any change. I assume we can maintain separated repos for C8 and C8S with different or same (cross-tagged) packages in the SIG. Now, some questions: - The release RPMs will be the same for C8 and C8S (as it is currently) or can be different?, we may have a new release only for C8S and not for C8 so we may need different release rpms. - Do we need to adjust somehow the .repo to point to the right URLs in C8 or C8S (i thing $releasever points to 8 in centos-stream). - Is the infra already ready to build and push packages for C8S or are there open issues that we should be aware of?, is the automated push and ship based on tagging/untagging ready for C8S builds? - Is there any change in naming convention for tags, repos, etc... (i assumed <signame>8s- instead of <signame>8- ). - Should we use a different disttag for C8S buildroots?, (I'd prefer to stay with regular .el8). Best regards, Alfredo

2 2

NFV SIG meeting minutes - 2021-Jan-13
by Thomas F Herbert 13 Jan '21

13 Jan '21

1 0

CentOS Dojo @ FOSDEM
by Rich Bowen 11 Jan '21

11 Jan '21

We are pleased to announce a preliminary schedule for the online CentOS Dojo prior to FOSDEM. Details are available here: https://wiki.centos.org/Events/Dojo/FOSDEM2021 Registration will be free, and the link to registration is at the above page.

1 0

Queries on CentOS Stream
by Chan, Catherine [ITS] 09 Jan '21

09 Jan '21

Hi, I'm working in a University and we have a no. of servers running CentOS Linux. We chose CentOS Linux because it is free of charge. Recently we learned that CentOS is shifting focus from CentOS Linux to CentOS Stream. We are very concerned if CentOS Stream requires subscription and if updates/patches for CentOS Stream requires subscription. Can you help on my queries below: Question 1 Referring to 'FAQ - CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream' (https://centos.org/distro-faq/<https://secure-web.cisco.com/12vidbGo4KDeMy7BxwP79RXZ8adFilOrBfFEAuqwSj1E2G…>): Q2: What about the other releases of CentOS Linux? A: * Updates for the CentOS Linux 6 distribution ended November 30, 2020<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1AFEn0WSozOLnX5KWTyqLb81hqQsytVdWyuFXdazPwmDg4…>. * Updates for the CentOS Linux 7 distribution continue as before until the end of support for RHEL7<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1Vjg5-b7gAc7XPdTp009SgavZ85rt-79Y60WEjKdZHhQl-…>. * Updates for the CentOS Linux 8 distribution continue until the end of 2021; users can choose to switch over directly to CentOS Stream 8 * Updates for the CentOS Stream 8 distribution continue through the full RHEL support phase<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1Vjg5-b7gAc7XPdTp009SgavZ85rt-79Y60WEjKdZHhQl-…>. We will not be producing a CentOS Linux 9, as a rebuild of RHEL 9. Instead CentOS Stream 9 fulfills this role. (See Q6 below regarding the overlap between concurrent streams.) I don't quite understand the 4th point, 'Updates for the CentOS Stream 8 distribution continue through the full RHEL support phase<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1Vjg5-b7gAc7XPdTp009SgavZ85rt-79Y60WEjKdZHhQl-…>'. Can you further elaborate it? Does it mean that users will receive updates/patches for CentOS Stream 8 ONLY if they subscribe full RHEL support? Question 2 In the announcement, it states 'If you are using CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are concerned that CentOS Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage you to contact Red Hat about options.' Can you highlight what are the drawbacks of CentOS Stream causing not encouraged to run on a production environment? Thanks very much in advance. Regards, Catherine Chan [https://www.polyu.edu.hk/emaildisclaimer/PolyU_Email_Signature.jpg] Disclaimer: This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and notify the sender and The Hong Kong Polytechnic University (the University) immediately. Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. The University specifically denies any responsibility for the accuracy or quality of information obtained through University E-mail Facilities. Any views and opinions expressed are only those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the University and the University accepts no liability whatsoever for any losses or damages incurred or caused to any party as a result of the use of such information.

6 8

Re: [CentOS-devel] [Gluster-devel] Multiple Geo Rep issues due to SELINUX on CentOS 8.3
by Strahil Nikolov 08 Jan '21

08 Jan '21

Hi Srijan, I will redeploy the scenario and I will check if the steps include that package. Shouldn't glusterfs-selinux a dependency ? Best Regards, Strahil Nikolov В сряда, 6 януари 2021 г., 07:29:27 Гринуич+2, Srijan Sivakumar <ssivakum(a)redhat.com> написа: Hi Strahil, Selinux policies and rules have to be added for gluster processes to work as intended when selinux is in enforced mode. Could you confirm if you've installed the glusterfs-selinux package in the nodes ? If not then you can check out the repo at https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs-selinux. Regards, Srijan On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 2:15 AM Strahil Nikolov <hunter86_bg(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Did anyone receive that e-mail ? > Any hints ? > > Best Regards, > Strahil Nikolov > > В 19:05 +0000 на 30.12.2020 (ср), Strahil Nikolov написа: >> Hello All, >> >> I have been testing Geo Replication on Gluster v 8.3 ontop CentOS >> 8.3. >> It seems that everything works untill SELINUX is added to the >> equasion. >> >> So far I have identified several issues on the Master Volume's nodes: >> - /usr/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 has a different SELINUX Context than >> the target that it is pointing to. For details check >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1911133 >> >> - SELINUX prevents /usr/bin/ssh from search access to >> /var/lib/glusterd/geo-replication/secret.pem >> >> - SELinux is preventing /usr/bin/ssh from search access to .ssh >> >> - SELinux is preventing /usr/bin/ssh from search access to >> /tmp/gsyncd-aux-ssh-tnwpw5tx/274d5d142b02f84644d658beaf86edae.sock >> >> Note: Using 'semanage fcontext' doesn't work due to the fact that >> files created are inheriting the SELINUX context of the parent dir >> and you need to restorecon after every file creation by the geo- >> replication process. >> >> - SELinux is preventing /usr/bin/rsync from search access on >> .gfid/00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000001 >> >> Obviously, those needs fixing before anyone is able to use Geo- >> Replication with SELINUX enabled on the "master" volume nodes. >> >> Should I open a bugzilla at bugzilla.redhat.com for the selinux >> policy? >> >> Further details: >> [root@glustera ~]# cat /etc/centos-release >> CentOS Linux release 8.3.2011 >> >> [root@glustera ~]# rpm -qa | grep selinux | sort >> libselinux-2.9-4.el8_3.x86_64 >> libselinux-utils-2.9-4.el8_3.x86_64 >> python3-libselinux-2.9-4.el8_3.x86_64 >> rpm-plugin-selinux-4.14.3-4.el8.x86_64 >> selinux-policy-3.14.3-54.el8.noarch >> selinux-policy-devel-3.14.3-54.el8.noarch >> selinux-policy-doc-3.14.3-54.el8.noarch >> selinux-policy-targeted-3.14.3-54.el8.noarch >> >> [root@glustera ~]# rpm -qa | grep gluster | sort >> centos-release-gluster8-1.0-1.el8.noarch >> glusterfs-8.3-1.el8.x86_64 >> glusterfs-cli-8.3-1.el8.x86_64 >> glusterfs-client-xlators-8.3-1.el8.x86_64 >> glusterfs-fuse-8.3-1.el8.x86_64 >> glusterfs-geo-replication-8.3-1.el8.x86_64 >> glusterfs-server-8.3-1.el8.x86_64 >> libglusterd0-8.3-1.el8.x86_64 >> libglusterfs0-8.3-1.el8.x86_64 >> python3-gluster-8.3-1.el8.x86_64 >> >> >> [root@glustera ~]# gluster volume info primary >> >> Volume Name: primary >> Type: Distributed-Replicate >> Volume ID: 89903ca4-9817-4c6f-99de-5fb3e6fd10e7 >> Status: Started >> Snapshot Count: 0 >> Number of Bricks: 5 x 3 = 15 >> Transport-type: tcp >> Bricks: >> Brick1: glustera:/bricks/brick-a1/brick >> Brick2: glusterb:/bricks/brick-b1/brick >> Brick3: glusterc:/bricks/brick-c1/brick >> Brick4: glustera:/bricks/brick-a2/brick >> Brick5: glusterb:/bricks/brick-b2/brick >> Brick6: glusterc:/bricks/brick-c2/brick >> Brick7: glustera:/bricks/brick-a3/brick >> Brick8: glusterb:/bricks/brick-b3/brick >> Brick9: glusterc:/bricks/brick-c3/brick >> Brick10: glustera:/bricks/brick-a4/brick >> Brick11: glusterb:/bricks/brick-b4/brick >> Brick12: glusterc:/bricks/brick-c4/brick >> Brick13: glustera:/bricks/brick-a5/brick >> Brick14: glusterb:/bricks/brick-b5/brick >> Brick15: glusterc:/bricks/brick-c5/brick >> Options Reconfigured: >> changelog.changelog: on >> geo-replication.ignore-pid-check: on >> geo-replication.indexing: on >> storage.fips-mode-rchecksum: on >> transport.address-family: inet >> nfs.disable: on >> performance.client-io-threads: off >> cluster.enable-shared-storage: enable >> >> I'm attaching the audit log and sealert analysis from glustera (one >> of the 3 nodes consisting of the 'master' volume). >> >> >> Best Regards, >> Strahil Nikolov > >> > > ------- > > Community Meeting Calendar: > Schedule - > Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC > Bridge: https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk > > Gluster-devel mailing list > Gluster-devel(a)gluster.org > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel > > >

1 2

glibc-2.28-145.el8 with glibc-hwcaps support is coming to CentOS Stream 8
by Florian Weimer 08 Jan '21

08 Jan '21

We have rebased a large part of the glibc dynamic loader and the x86 CPU detection infrastructure to the current upstream version. These changes are going to land in CentOS Stream soon. These glibc changes mean that going forward, run-time selection of optimized shared object implementations is possible for all x86 processors (e.g., generic AVX2-optimized code that gets loaded on EPYC and Xeon Scalable processors). This is primarily being done to allow user application code to leverage this functionality. At this time, we are not adjusting or optimizing CentOS Stream packages themselves. Convenient developer support depends on GCC Toolset 11 and LLVM Toolset 12, which are yet to be released (even in their upstream versions). I’m working on some form of documentation on how to produce builds that are compatible with this feature for earlier toolchain versions. Other changes in the new glibc version include: * Backwards-compatible ld.so cache format changes to support glibc-hwcaps * --argv0 support in ld.so * DT_AUDIT support: The --audit option in binutils ld finally works as expected. * Enhanced --help output in ld.so: “/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 --help” shows library search path information. * TLS allocation improvements: dlopen is able to load shared objects that use initial-exec TLS in more cases. There is a new glibc.rtld.optional_static_tls tunable to support exceptionally large initial-exec TLS usage after dlopen. * The CPU tunable namespace has been renamed from “glibc.tune” to “glibc.cpu”. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on-list. Thanks, Florian -- Red Hat GmbH, https://de.redhat.com/ , Registered seat: Grasbrunn, Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243, Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Brian Klemm, Laurie Krebs, Michael O'Neill

3 5

TLS issues koji.mbox.centos.org
by Leon Fauster 07 Jan '21

07 Jan '21

On a C8 station: LANG=C curl -I https://koji.mbox.centos.org curl: (60) SSL certificate problem: unable to get local issuer certificate More details here: https://curl.haxx.se/docs/sslcerts.html this worked a couple of days ago. Any hints? -- Leon

3 5

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