Hi all,
We will have our regular Cloud SIG meeting tomorrow
at 3pm UTC on #centos-devel. We have the meeting agenda
noted at [1]. Please add anything you want to discuss during
the meeting.
[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/centos-cloud-sig
Kushal
--
Fedora Cloud Engineer
CPython Core Developer
CentOS Cloud SIG lead
http://kushaldas.in
Hi,
My name is François Cami. I've been a Fedora packager for a while ( https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packager/fcami/ ) and I work for Red Hat as an infrastructure consultant.
I'd like to work - on my spare free time - for the CentOS Storage SIG, specifically on Ceph packages.
Cheers
François
hi,
there are many packages missing from http://debuginfo.centos.org/6/x86_64/
eg:
libgcc
libffi
libstdc++
is there any other place where can i find them?
regards.
--
Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
While working on the next 7.1511 Live media, I discovered that the
size for the actual CentOS 7 LiveCD would be more than 700MB.
It's due to some packages being now bigger and bigger, also due to the
big Gnome 3.8 -> 3.14 rebase.
One obvious package I can remove from the packages manifest (which
itself is consuming more and more space) is Firefox.
If I remove it from the packages manifest (only for LiveCD, it will
obviously stay for the LiveGnome and LiveKDE DVD iso images), it's
then back to 650 MB, so that would mean that one would still be able
to burn it on a CD.
But the real question is then : does that even make sense ? for each
release, we're now fighting with disk space constraints, and I'm each
time removing packages from that LiveCD image. If we remove Firefox
itself, that would mean that such LiveCD would be useful just for
people willing to "test" CentOS on their hardware, but that would be a
basic Gnome desktop.
It builds/runs fine, can be installed too (like before), but I'd like
your opinion about this.
Cheers,
- --
Fabian Arrotin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
gpg key: 56BEC54E | twitter: @arrfab
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAlZVyOMACgkQnVkHo1a+xU4w4ACdEZZJbJwEXaq1BrsorEW9YZSR
EcYAn3BwnoHgwRV97f0yAKaGspvaux+u
=OXeJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
hi
SIGs are releasing stuff, the Cloud SIG has had a few updates since
their initial release, but this content isnt being announced as yet. To
work towards this, I am going to plumb in an auto email script that
should send out one notice per SIG per day, for days when that SIG has
released content. Since the sign, push only runs once a day, it wont be
a huge number of emails.
As a test bed, I am going to set this up to send these announcements to
the CentOS-Devel list ( this list! ), and if everyone feels the format
etc is fine, we can then start sending them to the CentOS-Announce list.
Regards,
--
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc
CentOS Virtualization SIG Errata and Security Advisory CSIG-2015:0002 Info
There is an update notification for content released by the CentOS
Virtualisation SIG.
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors:
CentOS Linux 6 /virt/x86_64/xen/
--------
a6dbfb7ffcabf469dec88e0b844f24bd98ab9aef4ae7357d747ac51a5c711bc0
libvirt-python-1.2.15-1.el6.x86_64.rpm
Sources: /virt/Source/xen/
--------
69db6203a08bd35a9032126e9f841b3a031ea42c4342669c973c6e0c9d8b7698
libvirt-python-1.2.15-1.el6.src.rpm
* Tue Jan 06 2015 Johnny Hughes <johnny(a)centos.org> - 0.600.0-25
- roll in tap2 support for xen
* Fri May 30 2014 Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan(a)redhat.com> - 0.600.0-24
- Mark RHEL7 as supported (rhbz#1102345)
* Thu May 29 2014 Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan(a)redhat.com> - 0.600.0-23
- virtinst: by default add USB2 controllers (rhbz#1001999)
- pvpanic device support (rhbz#1101536)
Debuginfo: /virt/x86_64
--------
aa760a3b9589119da815d89fbce43f44898464641b04349dcd7fe62a0e6ec271
libvirt-python-debuginfo-1.2.15-1.el6.x86_64.rpm
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 08:19:34AM -0800, Prasun Gera wrote:
> It would be nice to have RHGS's equivalent in CentOS, keeping with the
> general theme of CentOS. Any reason why that hasn't been considered ?
I do not know if this has been considered before I joined the Storage
Special Interest Group. The SIGs that are part of the CentOS Community
are free to provide newer packages from upstream projects, or even
projects that are not part of RHEL or its add-ons. A more complete
desctiption of what a SIG can provide/do is available on the CentOS wiki
at https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup .
The RHGS product tracks the upstream Gluster packages pretty close. I do
not think there is a need to provide a rebuild of the RHGS packages.
That said, if there is anyone interested in providing those, speak up
and join the Storage SIG!
https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage
Thanks,
Niels
>
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 1:25 AM, C.L. Martinez <carlopmart(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 11/10/2015 09:18 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Gluster users running on CentOS!
> >>
> >> As you may have heard before, we're planning on providing stable Gluster
> >> releases and related packages through the CentOS Storage SIG [0]. We
> >> would like to know what version of Gluster and which versions of CentOS
> >> are most wanted by our users.
> >>
> >> The current support for Gluster defines 3 stable releases at the time.
> >> This means that 3.7, 3.6 and 3.5 are supported by the Gluster Community.
> >> Once 3.8 is released, 3.5 will become unsupported and will not receive
> >> any updates anymore. 3.8 is planned to be released early 2016 [1].
> >>
> >> We can provide all Gluster packages for CentOS-7 and 6, but CentOS-5 can
> >> only get recent versions of the Gluster client.
> >>
> >> Now, we want to know which combinations our users like to see in the
> >> CentOS Storage SIG:
> >>
> >> - CentOS-7 + GlusterFS 3.7: latest and greatest, will be included
> >> - CentOS-6 + GlusterFS 3.7: very much used release, also included
> >>
> >> - CentOS-7 + GlusterFS 3.6: some users, you?
> >> - CentOS-6 + GlusterFS 3.6: some users, you?
> >>
> >> - CentOS-7 + GlusterFS 3.5: fewer users, you?
> >> - CentOS-6 + GlusterFS 3.5: fewer users, you?
> >>
> >> - CentOS-5 + GlusterFS 3.7 (client only): nobody?
> >> - CentOS-5 + GlusterFS 3.6: nobody?
> >> - CentOS-5 + GlusterFS 3.5: nobody?
> >>
> >>
> >> Please speak up and let us know what versions you depend on for next few
> >> months. You can reply to this email to the list (note that it is
> >> x-posted, one mailinglist is sufficient for your reply), directly to me
> >> or over IRC in #centos-devel or #gluster.
> >>
> >> Many thanks,
> >> Niels
> >>
> >>
> >> 0. https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage
> >> 1. https://www.gluster.org/community/roadmap/
> >>
> >>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > My production environments runs Gluster 3.7 for CentOS-7/6. I am not
> > planning to use CentOS-5.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gluster-users mailing list
> > Gluster-users(a)gluster.org
> > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users(a)gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
Hi Gluster users running on CentOS!
As you may have heard before, we're planning on providing stable Gluster
releases and related packages through the CentOS Storage SIG [0]. We
would like to know what version of Gluster and which versions of CentOS
are most wanted by our users.
The current support for Gluster defines 3 stable releases at the time.
This means that 3.7, 3.6 and 3.5 are supported by the Gluster Community.
Once 3.8 is released, 3.5 will become unsupported and will not receive
any updates anymore. 3.8 is planned to be released early 2016 [1].
We can provide all Gluster packages for CentOS-7 and 6, but CentOS-5 can
only get recent versions of the Gluster client.
Now, we want to know which combinations our users like to see in the
CentOS Storage SIG:
- CentOS-7 + GlusterFS 3.7: latest and greatest, will be included
- CentOS-6 + GlusterFS 3.7: very much used release, also included
- CentOS-7 + GlusterFS 3.6: some users, you?
- CentOS-6 + GlusterFS 3.6: some users, you?
- CentOS-7 + GlusterFS 3.5: fewer users, you?
- CentOS-6 + GlusterFS 3.5: fewer users, you?
- CentOS-5 + GlusterFS 3.7 (client only): nobody?
- CentOS-5 + GlusterFS 3.6: nobody?
- CentOS-5 + GlusterFS 3.5: nobody?
Please speak up and let us know what versions you depend on for next few
months. You can reply to this email to the list (note that it is
x-posted, one mailinglist is sufficient for your reply), directly to me
or over IRC in #centos-devel or #gluster.
Many thanks,
Niels
0. https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Storage
1. https://www.gluster.org/community/roadmap/