devel

devel@lists.centos.org

2 participants
4652 discussions

[CentOS PaaS SIG]: Origin v3.11 rpms available for testing
by Daniel Comnea 01 Nov '18

01 Nov '18

Hi, We would like to announce that OKD v3.11 rpms are available for testing at [1]. As such we are calling for help from community to start testing and let us know if there are issues with the rpms and its dependencies. And in the spirit of transparency see below the plan to promote the rpms to mirror.centos.org repo: 1. in the next few days the packages should be promoted to the test repo [2] (currently it does not exist, we are waiting to be sync'ed in the background) 2. in one/two weeks time if we haven't heard any issues/ blockers we are going to promote to [3] repo (currently it doesn't exist, it will once the rpm will be promoted and signed) Please note the ansbile version use (and supported) *must be* 2.6.x and not 2.7, if you opt to ignore the warning you will run into issues. On a different note the CentOS Infra team are working hard (thanks !) to package and release a centos-ansible rpm which we'll promote in our PaaS repos. The rational is to bring more control around the ansible version used/ required by OpenShift-ansible installer and not rely on the latest ansbile version pushed to epel repo we caused friction recently (reflected on our CI as well as users reporting issues) Thank you, PaaS SiG team [1] https://cbs.centos.org/repos/paas7-openshift-origin311-testing/ [2] https://buildlogs.centos.org/centos/7/paas/x86_64/openshift-origin311/ [3] http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/paas/x86_64/openshift-origin311/

6 10

What is the preferred approach to get golang >= 1.9.4 in buildroots in the CBS?
by Niels de Vos 31 Oct '18

31 Oct '18

Hi, It seems that the golang version (1.8) in the CentOS build (base?) repository is not recent enough to build one of the Gluster components. GlusterD2-5.0 needs golang >= 1.9.4. There is a build of golang-1.10.2-1.el7 in the CBS, but that is only for x86_64, and I would need a version that has ppc64le and aarch64 as well. Early on, golang was included in CentOS Extras, is that a possible location to keep a more recent version? Thanks, Niels

2 3

RSB filling is enabled for CentOS 7 Kernel?
by Veetil, Vyshnav 31 Oct '18

31 Oct '18

Hi All, We ran the spectre meltdown checker tool provided by: https://github.com/speed47/spectre-meltdown-checker. And it says that we are still vulnerable to variant #2 since RSB filling is not enabled in our kernel When we googled, the following bugzilla from RH suggests that it is enabled by default: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cg ... 2018-15572 When I was checking the source code of the latest CentOS kernel ,i don't see this feature flag set anywhere - X86_FEATURE_RSB_CTXSW. Could you please tell us ,If the Latest CentOS kernel supports RSB filling or not ?! Regards, Vyshnav

2 1

multistage booting and grubby
by Element, Paul-Emile 30 Oct '18

30 Oct '18

Hi, We are working with a system configure to boot using tboot Using grub2 and multiboot2, we have grub2 booting tboot and then booting centos. Grub2 fully supports this scenario and it works fine. The problem we have is that some centos packages use grubby to modify the boot configuration / boot parameters. Grubby does not appear to have any support for this, and so all invocations of grubby end up doing nothing and fail silently. Question is, would you know if there is any plan to add support for multiboot2 in an upcoming version of grubby? Thanks, Paul-Emile

1 0

Upcoming changes to git.centos.org are now in staging
by Jim Perrin 26 Oct '18

26 Oct '18

In August, the CentOS Project and Fedora announced the intention to combine their dist-git sources, and since then Fabian Arrotin of CentOS and Patrick Uiterwijk of Fedora have worked to make that happen. Last week at the CERN dojo, they demonstrated this work, and today we’d like to welcome community testing of it. We’ll be keeping this content updated, so you'll be able to continue to track sources appropriately. You can help us by testing the new system, providing feedback, and contributing additional tooling to help improve the overall state of the project. Structure: Currently git.stg.centos.org and src.stg.fedoraproject.org are linked via RepoSpanner[1], and sharing common repositories. Packagers for the roughly 6700 common packages in both communities will see the additional branches.. For the Fedora community, there should be no changes required for the day to day operation of dist-git or packaging. CentOS community members will note that the platform change to pagure brings a variety of new features, including a new API[2] , a new UI, pull requests, and issue tracking. The current tooling for CentOS sources will continue to work (after updating to the staging server) and we plan to add support for tooling for centpkg, which would mirror the functionality found in fedpkg. In the coming weeks we'll be putting out documentation around the expected uses for pull requests, and the issue tracking features within pagure, as we don't intend it to replace bugs.centos.org. Permissions and ownership: There are protections enabled to prevent either community from accidentally overwriting code from the other, so only CentOS community members will be able to push to c#-* branches, while only Fedora community members can push to f#*/epel#* branches. With the new dynamic ACL validation in place, CentOS SIG members will automatically get the rights to push on their specific branches. While the repositories and content are shared between the communities, authentication is not. To push to c# branches, you will have to authenticate against accounts.centos.org. Similarly Fedora community members will continue to authenticate against accounts.fedoraproject.org. 1. https://github.com/repoSpanner/repoSpanner 2. https://git.stg.centos.org/api/0/ -- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77

5 9

Cockpit on CentOS 7 bugs/issues
by Harry Mallon 26 Oct '18

26 Oct '18

Hi all, I am trying cockpit on CentOS 7. 1. Cockpit-system v176 install subscription-manager by default. This is very annoying on CentOS as I do not have a subscription and do not want one. 2. Cockpit-system v176 has cockpit-sosreport rolled into it. However, the rpm does not have the sos package required as it should do. Who makes the packages for the "extras" repo? Is there a better place to report these issues? Harry Mallon Harry Mallon Senior Software Engineer T+44 203 7000 989 60 Poland Street | London | England | W1F 7NT

3 6

[meeting] RDO meeting (2018-10-24) minutes
by Haïkel 24 Oct '18

24 Oct '18

============================== #rdo: RDO meeting - 2018-10-24 ============================== Meeting started by number80 at 15:01:23 UTC. The full logs are available at http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/rdo_meeting___2018_10_24/2018/rdo_m… . Meeting summary --------------- * roll call (number80, 15:01:31) * reserve rdo-* namespaces on gitlab (number80, 15:12:03) * considering to move gerrit replication from github to gitlab (number80, 15:15:33) * AGREED: Allow reserving rdo-* namespaces on both gitlab and bitbucket (number80, 15:21:55) * ACTION: apevec reserve rdo-* namespaces on gitlab and bitbucket (number80, 15:23:50) * ACTION: number80 mail apevec and Duck about gitlab namespaces (number80, 15:24:48) * Booth volunteers for OpenStack Summit Berlin (number80, 15:25:19) * LINK: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/berlin-summit-community-pod (number80, 15:27:14) * open floor (number80, 15:30:32) * python3 enabled status (number80, 15:31:18) * LINK: https://lists.rdoproject.org/pipermail/dev/2018-October/008952.html -> call for help on tempest plugins (chandankumar, 15:32:47) * new promotion pipeline running for puppet (fedora) (number80, 15:36:03) * easyfix project (number80, 15:42:13) * ACTION: PagliaccisCloud will start emails with Rain & Rich on possible 1st time contributor workshop at upcoming Red Hat Summit (PagliaccisCloud, 15:56:52) * ACTION: chandankumar to kick discusssion on merging efforts taken by tripleo rdo and openstack community to attract contributors (chandankumar, 15:56:55) * number80 again chairing next week (number80, 15:58:20) Meeting ended at 15:58:52 UTC. Action items, by person ----------------------- * chandankumar * chandankumar to kick discusssion on merging efforts taken by tripleo rdo and openstack community to attract contributors * number80 * number80 mail apevec and Duck about gitlab namespaces * openstack * chandankumar to kick discusssion on merging efforts taken by tripleo rdo and openstack community to attract contributors * PagliaccisCloud * PagliaccisCloud will start emails with Rain & Rich on possible 1st time contributor workshop at upcoming Red Hat Summit People present (lines said) --------------------------- * number80 (70) * chandankumar (63) * amoralej (53) * PagliaccisCloud (23) * ykarel (9) * hitchover (7) * jpena (6) * tosky (5) * openstack (5) * rdogerrit (3) * vkmc (2) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4

1 0

SIG reporting
by Rich Bowen 22 Oct '18

22 Oct '18

At the recent SIG day at CERN, we discussed more formal reporting from the SIGs to the broader community. In particular, we discussed quarterly reporting, covering the following topics: * Membership update (members added, removed. Chair changes.) * Releases in the most recent quarter (or most recent release, if none in that quarter) * Health report and general activity narrative. * Issues for the board to address, if any. So, this is 4 short paragraphs, to give the board, and the community, some idea of what the SIG is up to, and whether it is healthy. Not terribly onerous, but extremely valuable in discerning how our SIGs are operating. It was proposed that SIGs be arrange in a quarterly reporting schedule. I suggest the following schedule, starting in January of 2019: Group 1: Reports January, April, July, October * Core * Atomic * Config Management * PaaS * Software Collections Group 2: Reports February, May, August, November * Alt Arch * Cloud * NFV * Promo * Storage Group 3: Reports March, June, September, December * Artwork * Cloud Instance * OpsTools * Public CI * Virtualization I further propose that reports are due by the second Monday in the designated month. To this end, it is important that each SIG clearly designate a SIG chair, documented on your SIG wiki page. Some SIGs have this, and some do not. Some that have it are out of date, and the SIG needs to designate a chair again. Note that the chair is not necessarily a technical lead, they're just the person responsible for reporting - the voice of the SIG, if you will. If you have any questions or comments about this plan, please do speak up, so that we can work out any difficulties by January. Thanks. -- Rich Bowen: CentOS Community Manager rbowen(a)redhat.com @rbowen // @CentOSProject 1 859 351 9166

1 0

[SCLo SIG] new sclo-php*-php-ast packages available for testing
by Remi Collet 22 Oct '18

22 Oct '18

Yet another package available in centos-sclo-sclo-testing php-ast exports the AST internally used by PHP 7. php-ast is significantly faster than PHP-Parser, because the AST construction is implemented in C. However, php-ast may only parse code that is syntactically valid on the version of PHP it runs on. https://pecl.php.net/package/ast Can be used by Phan (PHP Static Anyalyser) https://packagist.org/packages/phan/phan For rh-php71 (EL-7 only) * sclo-php71-php-ast-1.0.0-1 For rh-php70 * sclo-php70-php-ast-1.0.0-1 Notices: Remi. P.S. https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/SCLo

1 0

If you didn't attend yesterday's SIG day at CERN ...
by Rich Bowen 19 Oct '18

19 Oct '18

Yesterday at CERN we had a gathering of CentOS SIGs. We discussed changes that are coming in the CentOS infrastructure. We also discussed how SIGs can better engage with the larger CentOS community, and bring in broader participation from the user community, as well as from related projects (eg, how the Cloud SIG might attract participation from more IaaS platform projects.) I will be sending a longer report on the event once today's event is over. We had representation from only a handful of our SIGs, and we would like to understand why other SIGs did not attend, and what we might do differently next time to attract more of you to attend. To that end, I've made a very short survey that I would ask you to take 5 minutes to fill out if a) you're involved in one of our SIGs, and b) you did NOT attend our event yesterday. https://goo.gl/forms/A5P4yaxvduDDrw0T2 Thank you. -- Rich Bowen: CentOS Community Manager rbowen(a)redhat.com @rbowen // @CentOSProject 1 859 351 9166

1 0

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