devel

devel@lists.centos.org

16 participants
4590 discussions

Start a nNew thread

centos-release-gluster8 missing
by Strahil Nikolov 24 Dec '20

24 Dec '20

Hello All, does anyone know where is centos-release-gluster8 for CentOS 7 ? Best Regards, Strahil Nikolov

1 0

Re: [CentOS-devel] Ceph on arm32 - failing to compile devtoolset-8-gcc-8.3.1-3.1.el7.src.rpm
by Oliver Weinmann 23 Dec '20

23 Dec '20

Great stuff. I was googling for those packages and couldn't find them. No more need to rebuild them. They were deps for CEPH. No I can start building ceph. :) I guess this will take a couple of days on a raspi3. ;) Am 12.12.2020 um 14:43 schrieb Pablo Sebastián Greco: > > On 12/12/20 07:44, Oliver Weinmann wrote: >> Hi Pablo, >> >> thanks a lot for your reply. The src.rpm I'm using is this one: >> >> https://cbs.centos.org/kojifiles/packages/devtoolset-8-gcc/8.3.1/3.1.el7/sr… >> >> >> It's gcc8 so the patch you linked is not really fitting. :( If you >> have time and could take a look that would be really cool. > You have the whole devtoolset-8 for armhfp here > https://buildlogs.centos.org/c7-devtoolset-8.armhfp/ , including the > srpms. I'll talk to Johnny to upload the patches to git. > If you decide to rebuild it, aside from patience, be careful with > binutils (needs a patch or executables become invalid) and make (has a > bug that makes it parallel builds not work correctly). > Both of those issues are fixed in the repo I pointed >> >> Best Regards, >> >> Oliver >> >> Am 12.12.2020 um 10:26 schrieb Pablo Sebastián Greco: >>> >>> On 11/12/20 11:28, Oliver Weinmann via CentOS-devel wrote: >>>> Hi Folks, >>>> >>>> For a small home project I would like to get cephadm working on my >>>> Odroid HC-2 (armhf 32). Maybe this is not going to work but I want >>>> to at least give it a try. I see that there are only arm64 packages >>>> and containers available from the Ceph repo. So I thought I just go >>>> ahead and compile the dependency packages myself and build a new >>>> container with CentOS7 arm32. Luckily there is a CentOS 7 arm32 >>>> container but I still need to compile the packages. After >>>> downloading all the src rpms i started building them and now I >>>> ended up to compile this package from the SCL repo as it is not >>>> available for arm32: >>>> >>>> devtoolset-8-gcc-8.3.1-3.1.el7.src.rpm >>>> >>>> It fails with an error of: >>>> >>>> checking if mkdir takes one argument... no >>>> *** Configuration armv7hl-redhat-linux-gnu7E not supported >>>> make[2]: *** [configure-stage1-gcc] Error 1 >>>> make[2]: Leaving directory >>>> `/root/rpmbuild/BUILD/gcc-8.3.1-20190311/obj-armv7hl-redhat-linux7E' >>>> make[1]: *** [stage1-bubble] Error 2 >>>> make[1]: Leaving directory >>>> `/root/rpmbuild/BUILD/gcc-8.3.1-20190311/obj-armv7hl-redhat-linux7E' >>>> make: *** [profiledbootstrap] Error 2 >>>> error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.knxvjm (%build) >>> This looks very close to this fix we had to add to make gcc work on >>> arm >>> https://git.centos.org/rpms/devtoolset-7-gcc/blob/c7/f/SPECS/gcc.spec#_319 >>> (I'm linking to gcc7 because I can't find the other commit, but it >>> is the same thing). >>> Let me know if that helps and if it is still failing, point me to >>> as spec file or an srpm and I'll take a look. >>>> >>>> >>>> RPM build errors: >>>> Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.knxvjm (%build) >>>> >>>> real 13m36.412s >>>> user 17m57.828s >>>> sys 3m47.905s >>>> >>>> I looked up the build log for arm64 and so I figured out that the >>>> next step is to access a directory called arm here: >>>> >>>> /root/rpmbuild/BUILD/gcc-8.3.1-20190311/gcc/config >>>> >>>> in the extracted source. Somehow the build process thinks my system >>>> is armv7hl-redhat-linux-gnu7E instead of arm and so it tries to >>>> access the armv7hl-redhat-linux-gnu7E directory which doesn't exist >>>> and fails. I simply created a symlink and this seems to be working. >>>> >>>> ln -sf arm armv7hl-redhat-linux-gnu7E >>>> >>>> Not sure if this is in general a bad idea. So I got a lot further. >>>> But then it fails again with this error: >>>> >>>> In file included from /usr/include/features.h:399, >>>> from /usr/include/stdio.h:27, >>>> from ../.././libgcc/../gcc/tsystem.h:87, >>>> from ../.././libgcc/libgcc2.c:27: >>>> /usr/include/gnu/stubs.h:7:11: fatal error: gnu/stubs-soft.h: No >>>> such file or directory >>>> # include <gnu/stubs-soft.h> >>>> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>>> compilation terminated. >>>> make[3]: *** [_muldi3.o] Error 1 >>>> make[3]: Leaving directory >>>> `/root/rpmbuild/BUILD/gcc-8.3.1-20190311/armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/libgcc' >>>> make[2]: *** [all-stage1-target-libgcc] Error 2 >>>> make[2]: Leaving directory `/root/rpmbuild/BUILD/gcc-8.3.1-20190311' >>>> make[1]: *** [stage1-bubble] Error 2 >>>> make[1]: Leaving directory `/root/rpmbuild/BUILD/gcc-8.3.1-20190311' >>>> make: *** [all] Error 2 >>>> >>>> real 88m2.283s >>>> user 67m23.211s >>>> sys 6m7.984s >>>> >>>> I can't find any good info on google on how to deal with this one. >>>> Any ideas? >>>> >>>> Best Regards, >>>> >>>> Oliver >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Pablo. > Pablo.

2 6

Stream timing
by Julien Pivotto 23 Dec '20

23 Dec '20

Hello All, I have one very specific question about stream and I can't really find an answer. What happened with the timing around the announcement on the stop of CentOS Linux? - Just after CentOS 6 is EOL so many people went to 8 - At the time of CentOS 8.3, and many people generally skip the first initial release and move on in .2 or .3. - When stream is not ready (it has been pointed out here that RHEL engineers would use it start of next year) - One year notice, which is not a lot when you expected 8 more. - ( In the middle of a pandemic. While it's not red hat fault, we already have a lot to handle. ) It seems that this decision was rushed a lot, it could probably have been delayed, to have RHEL engineers working on stream, and maybe even keep CentOS 8 running until 2024? What happened? Sub question: will the EL8 sources be available until 2029 for the rebuilds? Or will they also have to stop earlier? -- Julien Pivotto

3 3

Teachings of the tea
by Jean-Marc Liger 22 Dec '20

22 Dec '20

Dear all, You can try pouring tea into a cup, if it is full, the tea will flow from it. As long as Red Hat doesn't want to empty a part of the cup, all these discussions are a waste of precious time until you find another cup. Jean-Marc

3 3

Centos Stream Upgrade - No available modular metadata for modular package
by Damian Tometzki 21 Dec '20

21 Dec '20

Hello, could anyone help with this Error when i try to upgrade: Running transaction check No available modular metadata for modular package 'libssh2-1.8.0-8.module_el8.0.0+189+f9babebb.1.x86_64', it cannot be installed on the system The downloaded packages were saved in cache until the next successful transaction. You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'. Error: No available modular metadata for modular package -- VG Damian Tometzki

1 1

More Queries: CentOS 8 Stream Migration from CentOS 8 Linux
by Agarwal, Swati 21 Dec '20

21 Dec '20

Hi Team, Some more queries: Question 1: We have checked and found the package(anaconda) which is available on https://git.centos.org/ has two branches c8 and c8s. The version of anaconda package on c8 branch and the rpm version of anaconda package available on vault and redhat are same. But we have also found The package available in c8s branch does not exist on vault and redhat why ? In future the c8 will not exist and packages will be available in c8s. If the package will not be available on c8s so we should consider that the package is not developed yet ?? So how to handle this case please assist here as soon as possible. Question 2: We have seen a case where c8 branch does not exist but the package has c8-stream-x. So we would like to know what is the difference between c8s and c8-stream-x ? And we have found the package which is available on c8-stream-x the same package package is available on vault and redhat ? So in future we know c8 wont exist so from which branch we need to clone the package ?? -Br Swati -----Original Message----- From: Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com> Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 7:06 PM To: Agarwal, Swati <Swati.Agarwal(a)harman.com>; The CentOS developers mailing list. <centos-devel(a)centos.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 8 Stream Migration from CentOS 8 Linux CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender. Please report any suspicious content by using the "Report Email" tool. On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 6:25 AM Agarwal, Swati via CentOS-devel <centos-devel(a)centos.org> wrote: > > Dear CentOS Team, > > > > This is regarding latest notification released for CentOS 8 stream replacement from CentOS 8 Linux. > > We have some queries in which we need your inputs as we have many Clients using CentOS 8 Linux on their production environments: > > > > The packages which are available in Centos 8, will the same packages be available in Centos stream 8 ? > CentOS Stream 8 is the same package collection as the previous CentOS Linux 8, just receiving updates continuously rather than waiting for large drops every six to eight months. > RHEL is doing some CVE fixes for Centos 8 and they have given temporary fixes so RHEL will push those fixes in Centos Stream 8 and what will be their impacts ? > Proper fixes verified by RHEL QA will be pushed to CentOS Stream, built and released after passing the CentOS test suite as they were previously for CentOS Linux. > > > We have upgraded from Centos 8 to Centos stream 8 by following the steps below. > a.) dnf install centos-release-stream > > b.) dnf swap centos-{linux,stream}-repos > > c.) dnf distro-sync > > d.) cat /etc/centos-releas > Expected output : CentOS Stream release 8. Did we miss anything ? > Nope, that's correct. You're in good shape. :) > > > Suppose if RHEL is developing a package so it won't be available in CentOS Stream 8 and if it is available then what will be the impact ? > This is not a situation that is intended to happen, with the exception of Red Hat branding packages (redhat-release, redhat-logos). So for pretty much everyone, this should have no actual impact. > > > > > After upgrading from Centos8 Linux to CentOS Stream release 8, can we > compare the versions of packages before & after and see which got > updated > > using # rpm -qa > I suppose you could. I'm not sure how it would get broken? > > > After CentOS stream, what will vault.centos.org show ? Also, will it be same as shown in access.redhat.com/downloads/packages from RedHat ? > > > > https://clicktime.symantec.com/3VkBAQCQo6xcbBQWkuBjCkB7Vc?u=https%3A%2 > F%2Faccess.redhat.com%2Fdownloads%2Fcontent%2F69%2Fver%3D%2Frhel---7%2 > F7.9%2Fx86_64%2Fpackages > https://clicktime.symantec.com/3HTK9vtmFiTacwg5Tk1281C7Vc?u=https%3A%2 > F%2Fvault.centos.org%2F7.7.1908%2Fos%2FSource%2FSPackages%2F > > > > The Packages that are currently shown in access.redhat.com/downloads/packages or vault.centos.org are officially released ones. After CentOS Stream for CentOS8, the Packages shown in access.redhat.com/downloads/packages or vault.centos.org would be Beta releases or Officially released ones ? > I hope that eventually vault.centos.org will have SRPMs published at https://clicktime.symantec.com/3GFjPUMwJMmXYjUNqXRCwD67Vc?u=https%3A%2F%2Fv… for CentOS Stream 8, but currently the canonical sources are only published to git.centos.org, where you can checkout the sources (use the c8s branch for repos in the rpms/ namespace) and rebuild the packages. Red Hat Customer Center publishes RPMs and SRPMs for RHEL, the CentOS Vault is where SRPMs for CentOS are published. From that perspective, they are "officially released". There's no other meaningful distinction. > > > Please help us to answer above questions. > Hopefully these answers help! -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!

2 2

Re: [CentOS-devel] Balancing the needs around the CentOS platform
by Chris Mair 20 Dec '20

20 Dec '20

To: centos-devel(a)centos.org To: centos-questions(a)redhat.com Hi, Re: https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/balancing-the-needs-around-the-centos-platf… you can spin this to the moon and back. The fact remains you just killed CentOS Linux and your users' trust by moving the EOL of CentOS Linux 8 from 2029 to 2021. You've alienated a few hunderd thousand sysadmins that started upgrading to 8 this year and you've thrown the scientific Linux community under a bus. You do realize Scientific Linux was discontinued because CERN and FermiLab decided to standardize on CentOS 8? This trickled down to a load of labs and research institutions. Nobody forced you to buy out CentOS or offer a gratis distribution. But everybody expected you to stick to the EOL dates you committed to. You boast about being the "Enterprise" Linux distributor. Then, don't act like a freaking start-up that announces stuff today and vanishes a year later. The correct way to handle this would have been to kill the future CentOS 9, giving everybody the time to cope with the changes. I've earned my RHCE in 2003 (yes that's seventeen years ago). Since then, many times, I've recommended RHEL or CentOS to the clients I do free lance work for. Just a few weeks ago I was asked to give an opinion on six CentOS 7 boxes about to be deployed into a research system to be upgraded to 8. I gave my go. Well, that didn't last long. What do you expect me to recommend now? Buying RHEL licenses? That may or may be not have a certain cost per year and may or may be not supported until a given date? Once you grant yourself the freedom to retract whatever published information, how can I trust you? What added values do I get over any of the community supported distributions (given I can support myself)? And no, CentOS Stream cannot "cover 95% (or so) of current user workloads". Stream was introduces as "a rolling preview of what's next in RHEL". I'm not interested at all in a "a rolling preview of what's next in RHEL". I'm interested in a stable distribution I can trust to get updates until the given EOL date. You've made me look elsewhere for that. -- Chris

1 0

Can the CentOS Stream FAQ be updated
by Troy Dawson 17 Dec '20

17 Dec '20

Hi, There has been some confusion around the new CentOS Stream timeframe. Through the past year we've been told that when CentOS Stream 9 comes out, CentOS Stream 8 will be phased out in a short period of time. With the new announcement we have been told that the CentOS Stream 8 (and any future version) will be available during the maintenance phase of that release. [1] This means that CentOS Stream 8 will be around for 5 years. I've been trying to send people to the CentOS Stream FAQ [2] because it's easier to find. But the question [3] related to this hasn't been updated and says it will be a year at most. So, thus my question. Can the CentOS Stream FAQ be updated with the new policy? Thanks Troy Dawson [1] - https://centos.org/distro-faq/#q6-will-there-be-separateparallelsimultaneou… [2] - https://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/CentOSStream [3] - https://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/CentOSStream#What_happens_when_CentOS_Stream_sw…

6 8

Virtualization SIG meeting minutes - 2020-12-16
by Sandro Bonazzola 16 Dec '20

16 Dec '20

=================================== #centos-meeting: Virtualization SIG =================================== Meeting started by sbonazzo at 16:03:35 UTC. The full logs are available athttps://www.centos.org/minutes/2020/December/centos-meeting.2020-12-16-16… Meeting summary --------------- * Xen updates (anthonyper, 16:06:08) * ACTION: anthonyper to repackage Xen with XSA from yesterday (sbonazzo, 16:08:53) * Advanced Virtualization (etrunko, 16:10:33) * AV-8.3.0 packages have been built, currently on testing (etrunko, 16:11:04) * oVirt (sbonazzo, 16:14:02) * finalizing oVirt 4.4.4, waiting for Advanced Virtualization to be released and for ansible 2.9.16 released upstream recently (sbonazzo, 16:14:35) * we got some issues from CEntOS 8.3 release but they have been quickly solved by the CentOS team (sbonazzo, 16:15:15) * still some issue due to Anaconda rebase in CentOS 8.3 for oVirt Node (sbonazzo, 16:15:41) * LINK: https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/devel@ovirt.org/thread/K7XF3CW5BHNZHI… (sbonazzo, 16:15:52) * oVirt 4.4.5 development started, rebasing on CentOS Stream. oVirt appliance will go first (sbonazzo, 16:16:32) * LINK: https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/devel@ovirt.org/thread/NXZ7WJACAST5DK… (sbonazzo, 16:16:43) * AoB (sbonazzo, 16:18:36) * AGREED: skipping next meeting. We'll meet in new year on Jan 13th 2021 (sbonazzo, 16:22:24) Meeting ended at 16:23:50 UTC. Action Items ------------ * anthonyper to repackage Xen with XSA from yesterday Action Items, by person ----------------------- * anthonyper * anthonyper to repackage Xen with XSA from yesterday * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * sbonazzo (40) * etrunko (10) * centbot (8) * gwd (4) * dholler (3) * anthonyper (3) * amoralej (1) * tfherbert (1) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot -- Sandro Bonazzola MANAGER, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, EMEA R&D RHV Red Hat EMEA <https://www.redhat.com/> sbonazzo(a)redhat.com <https://www.redhat.com/> *Red Hat respects your work life balance. Therefore there is no need to answer this email out of your office hours.*

1 0

NFV SIG meeting minutes - 2020-12-16
by Thomas F Herbert 16 Dec '20

16 Dec '20

======================== #centos-meeting: NFV SIG ======================== Meeting started by tfherbert at 15:03:23 UTC. The full logs are available at https://www.centos.org/minutes/2020/December/centos-meeting.2020-12-16-15.0… . Meeting summary --------------- * Agenda items? (tfherbert, 15:04:14) * LINK: https://hackmd.io/oRe_HVJiTteDI4H332ApMw?both (amoralej, 15:07:55) * Rupdate to FDP 20.I (amoralej, 15:08:53) * Rebuilds of ovn/ovs 2.11 and 2.13 from FDP 20.I have been tested and published. (amoralej, 15:09:03) * CentOS Stream and impact on NFV SIG (tfherbert, 15:11:37) * https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/ (tfherbert, 15:11:54) * Wait and see what direction NFV SIG should take WRT C8 and C8s. (tfherbert, 15:35:43) * next meeting (tfherbert, 15:39:12) * next mtg is on January 13th. (tfherbert, 15:39:26) Meeting ended at 15:45:07 UTC. Action Items ------------ Action Items, by person ----------------------- * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * amoralej (62) * tfherbert (31) * dholler (9) * ykarel (5) * centbot (3) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot -- *Thomas F Herbert* CTO Office Networking Group *Red Hat* he/him/his

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