As we gear up for the upcoming CentOS 7 release, we're tracking a few things for the CentOSPlus kernel as well. One of the proposals (via http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=6828 ) is that we change the current name of the centosplus kernel to be a bit more consistent with other kernel names. The proposed new name would look like 'kernel-plus' or 'kernel-centosplus'. This is in keeping with other kernel names such as 'kernel-ml', 'kernel-xen', 'kernel-lt' etc. And allows for /etc/sysconfig/kernel to be used to set the DEFAULTKERNEL as desired.
This change would only be for CentOS 7.
Thoughts, comments, questions, flames?
Please speak up with support for or against this change.
On 30 May 2014 11:02, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:
As we gear up for the upcoming CentOS 7 release, we're tracking a few things for the CentOSPlus kernel as well. One of the proposals (via http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=6828 ) is that we change the current name of the centosplus kernel to be a bit more consistent with other kernel names. The proposed new name would look like 'kernel-plus' or 'kernel-centosplus'. This is in keeping with other kernel names such as 'kernel-ml', 'kernel-xen', 'kernel-lt' etc. And allows for /etc/sysconfig/kernel to be used to set the DEFAULTKERNEL as desired.
kernel-plus sounds good. I think it would help deal with bugs a bit better. kernel-centosplus is a bit long but might be clearer in case a downstream wants to have its own plus kernel.
On 30/05/14 18:07, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 30 May 2014 11:02, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:
As we gear up for the upcoming CentOS 7 release, we're tracking a few things for the CentOSPlus kernel as well. One of the proposals (via http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=6828 ) is that we change the current name of the centosplus kernel to be a bit more consistent with other kernel names. The proposed new name would look like 'kernel-plus' or 'kernel-centosplus'. This is in keeping with other kernel names such as 'kernel-ml', 'kernel-xen', 'kernel-lt' etc. And allows for /etc/sysconfig/kernel to be used to set the DEFAULTKERNEL as desired.
kernel-plus sounds good. I think it would help deal with bugs a bit better. kernel-centosplus is a bit long but might be clearer in case a downstream wants to have its own plus kernel.
Another suggestion: kernel+
On 30/05/14 18:07, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 30 May 2014 11:02, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:
As we gear up for the upcoming CentOS 7 release, we're tracking a few things for the CentOSPlus kernel as well. One of the proposals (via http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=6828 ) is that we change the current name of the centosplus kernel to be a bit more consistent with other kernel names. The proposed new name would look like 'kernel-plus' or 'kernel-centosplus'. This is in keeping with other kernel names such as 'kernel-ml', 'kernel-xen', 'kernel-lt' etc. And allows for /etc/sysconfig/kernel to be used to set the DEFAULTKERNEL as desired.
kernel-plus sounds good. I think it would help deal with bugs a bit better. kernel-centosplus is a bit long but might be clearer in case a downstream wants to have its own plus kernel.
How about kernel-cplus as a compromise to the above.
On 05/30/2014 05:36 PM, Ned Slider wrote:
On 30/05/14 18:07, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 30 May 2014 11:02, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:
As we gear up for the upcoming CentOS 7 release, we're tracking a few things for the CentOSPlus kernel as well. One of the proposals (via http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=6828 ) is that we change the current name of the centosplus kernel to be a bit more consistent with other kernel names. The proposed new name would look like 'kernel-plus' or 'kernel-centosplus'. This is in keeping with other kernel names such as 'kernel-ml', 'kernel-xen', 'kernel-lt' etc. And allows for /etc/sysconfig/kernel to be used to set the DEFAULTKERNEL as desired.
kernel-plus sounds good. I think it would help deal with bugs a bit better. kernel-centosplus is a bit long but might be clearer in case a downstream wants to have its own plus kernel.
How about kernel-cplus as a compromise to the above.
makes me think of a language & not centos...
On 30/05/14 22:56, Carl Trieloff wrote:
On 05/30/2014 05:36 PM, Ned Slider wrote:
On 30/05/14 18:07, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 30 May 2014 11:02, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:
As we gear up for the upcoming CentOS 7 release, we're tracking a few things for the CentOSPlus kernel as well. One of the proposals (via http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=6828 ) is that we change the current name of the centosplus kernel to be a bit more consistent with other kernel names. The proposed new name would look like 'kernel-plus' or 'kernel-centosplus'. This is in keeping with other kernel names such as 'kernel-ml', 'kernel-xen', 'kernel-lt' etc. And allows for /etc/sysconfig/kernel to be used to set the DEFAULTKERNEL as desired.
kernel-plus sounds good. I think it would help deal with bugs a bit better. kernel-centosplus is a bit long but might be clearer in case a downstream wants to have its own plus kernel.
How about kernel-cplus as a compromise to the above.
makes me think of a language & not centos...
Or just kernel-centos
T
On 05/30/2014 06:02 PM, Jim Perrin wrote:
As we gear up for the upcoming CentOS 7 release, we're tracking a few things for the CentOSPlus kernel as well. One of the proposals (via http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=6828 ) is that we change the current name of the centosplus kernel to be a bit more consistent with other kernel names. The proposed new name would look like 'kernel-plus' or 'kernel-centosplus'. This is in keeping with other kernel names such as 'kernel-ml', 'kernel-xen', 'kernel-lt' etc. And allows for /etc/sysconfig/kernel to be used to set the DEFAULTKERNEL as desired.
This change would only be for CentOS 7.
Thoughts, comments, questions, flames?
Please speak up with support for or against this change.
kernel-plus gets my vote,
it then also makes room in the same namespace for things like kernel-lts or kernel-xen or kernel-cloud and friends. Not that I am saying were going to do any of these, but just in case.
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 05/30/2014 06:02 PM, Jim Perrin wrote:
As we gear up for the upcoming CentOS 7 release, we're tracking a few things for the CentOSPlus kernel as well. One of the proposals (via http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=6828 ) is that we change the current name of the centosplus kernel to be a bit more consistent with other kernel names. The proposed new name would look like 'kernel-plus' or 'kernel-centosplus'. This is in keeping with other kernel names such as 'kernel-ml', 'kernel-xen', 'kernel-lt' etc. And allows for /etc/sysconfig/kernel to be used to set the DEFAULTKERNEL as desired.
This change would only be for CentOS 7.
Thoughts, comments, questions, flames?
Please speak up with support for or against this change.
kernel-plus gets my vote,
it then also makes room in the same namespace for things like kernel-lts or kernel-xen or kernel-cloud and friends. Not that I am saying were going to do any of these, but just in case.
Now that RHEL 7 is out, it is time to decide on the naming.
I'm accustomed to saying "cplus kernel". So, that will be kernel-cplus. Then anyone wishing to do further modifications can call it kernel-c++. ;-)
However, kernel-plus is also fine with me. Since this is KB's choice, if no one is against it, I suppose this is going to be the "final answer".
Akemi
On 06/11/2014 08:31 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
I'm accustomed to saying "cplus kernel". So, that will be kernel-cplus. Then anyone wishing to do further modifications can call it kernel-c++. ;-)
I'm fine with kernel-cplus as well. +1 from me on that.
On 06/12/2014 02:31 AM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
However, kernel-plus is also fine with me. Since this is KB's choice, if no one is against it, I suppose this is going to be the "final answer".
go go go ! where is my plus kernel ?
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 6:10 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 06/12/2014 02:31 AM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
However, kernel-plus is also fine with me. Since this is KB's choice, if no one is against it, I suppose this is going to be the "final answer".
go go go ! where is my plus kernel ?
I have it -- well protected from prying eyes. :)
I have another question. Now that the "plus" is in the name, should we drop the ".plus" tag? For example, the current plus kernel is in the form of:
kernel-xxx.el6.centos.plus.x86_64
This will become:
kernel-plus-xxx.el7.centos.x86_64
One argument against omitting the .plus tag may become apparent here:
$ uname -r 3.10.0-123.el7.centos.x86_64
If/when there is, say, kernel-xen for c7, that will share the same 'uname' output as the plus kernel.
Thoughts?
Akemi
On 06/23/2014 02:48 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 6:10 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 06/12/2014 02:31 AM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
However, kernel-plus is also fine with me. Since this is KB's choice, if no one is against it, I suppose this is going to be the "final answer".
go go go ! where is my plus kernel ?
I have it -- well protected from prying eyes. :)
I have another question. Now that the "plus" is in the name, should we drop the ".plus" tag? For example, the current plus kernel is in the form of:
kernel-xxx.el6.centos.plus.x86_64
This will become:
kernel-plus-xxx.el7.centos.x86_64
One argument against omitting the .plus tag may become apparent here:
$ uname -r 3.10.0-123.el7.centos.x86_64
If/when there is, say, kernel-xen for c7, that will share the same 'uname' output as the plus kernel.
Thoughts?
That is a sticky one .. I supposed one could argue that the .plus does not need to be there since it is in the name, but more important than `uname -r` specifically is what is in /lib/modules/ for the directory structure. If the kernel-xen and the kernel-plus are also trying to use the same structure there, then that will obviously not work, so we will need something unique in that part of the string.
Note: you will have to roll in KB's certificate changes (now in git.centos.org) and we will have to build it on the server that can sign the secureboot stuff before we release it ... the 3154598aff24615c1f82d79ed299fb3d155d3282 revision is the GA kernel with the new certs and brandig mods. f355f5c33a16a2168bdad17ccc60db6b8198f6af is the revision for the ZeroDay update with the certs and mods.
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 2:07 AM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
On 06/23/2014 02:48 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
I have another question. Now that the "plus" is in the name, should we drop the ".plus" tag? For example, the current plus kernel is in the form of:
kernel-xxx.el6.centos.plus.x86_64
This will become:
kernel-plus-xxx.el7.centos.x86_64
One argument against omitting the .plus tag may become apparent here:
$ uname -r 3.10.0-123.el7.centos.x86_64
If/when there is, say, kernel-xen for c7, that will share the same 'uname' output as the plus kernel.
Thoughts?
That is a sticky one .. I supposed one could argue that the .plus does not need to be there since it is in the name, but more important than `uname -r` specifically is what is in /lib/modules/ for the directory structure. If the kernel-xen and the kernel-plus are also trying to use the same structure there, then that will obviously not work, so we will need something unique in that part of the string.
Exactly. So,
kernel-plus-xxx.el7.centos.plus.x86_64
should be used?
Note: you will have to roll in KB's certificate changes (now in git.centos.org) and we will have to build it on the server that can sign the secureboot stuff before we release it ... the 3154598aff24615c1f82d79ed299fb3d155d3282 revision is the GA kernel with the new certs and brandig mods. f355f5c33a16a2168bdad17ccc60db6b8198f6af is the revision for the ZeroDay update with the certs and mods.
I'm doing a test build of the GA kernel with the centos certificate added (almost done). Once I know it boots and works, I will submit it your way so that it is built on your server. Then further testing has to be done for secureboot and others.
Akemi
On 06/24/2014 07:18 AM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 2:07 AM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
On 06/23/2014 02:48 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
I have another question. Now that the "plus" is in the name, should we drop the ".plus" tag? For example, the current plus kernel is in the form of:
kernel-xxx.el6.centos.plus.x86_64
This will become:
kernel-plus-xxx.el7.centos.x86_64
One argument against omitting the .plus tag may become apparent here:
$ uname -r 3.10.0-123.el7.centos.x86_64
If/when there is, say, kernel-xen for c7, that will share the same 'uname' output as the plus kernel.
Thoughts?
That is a sticky one .. I supposed one could argue that the .plus does not need to be there since it is in the name, but more important than `uname -r` specifically is what is in /lib/modules/ for the directory structure. If the kernel-xen and the kernel-plus are also trying to use the same structure there, then that will obviously not work, so we will need something unique in that part of the string.
Exactly. So,
kernel-plus-xxx.el7.centos.plus.x86_64
should be used?
I think so then, yes ... OR, we need to modify the package to add the plus there. It used to do that for c5 (at least) kernels with a processing script somewhere (so kernel-xen got a xen appended to the modules location ) .. not exactly sure where that is right now and if we want to do that or use the .plus instead.
But when we do xen and that other kernel we were taking about, the issue will come up again.
Note: you will have to roll in KB's certificate changes (now in git.centos.org) and we will have to build it on the server that can sign the secureboot stuff before we release it ... the 3154598aff24615c1f82d79ed299fb3d155d3282 revision is the GA kernel with the new certs and brandig mods. f355f5c33a16a2168bdad17ccc60db6b8198f6af is the revision for the ZeroDay update with the certs and mods.
I'm doing a test build of the GA kernel with the centos certificate added (almost done). Once I know it boots and works, I will submit it your way so that it is built on your server. Then further testing has to be done for secureboot and others.
Akemi _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 06/24/2014 01:18 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
I'm doing a test build of the GA kernel with the centos certificate added (almost done). Once I know it boots and works, I will submit it your way so that it is built on your server. Then further testing has to be done for secureboot and others.
this build is now available, I suspect Johnny is able to push that once he is back vertical today.
On 12 June 2014 02:31, Akemi Yagi amyagi@gmail.com wrote:
Now that RHEL 7 is out, it is time to decide on the naming.
I'm accustomed to saying "cplus kernel". So, that will be kernel-cplus. Then anyone wishing to do further modifications can call it kernel-c++. ;-)
However, kernel-plus is also fine with me. Since this is KB's choice, if no one is against it, I suppose this is going to be the "final answer".
Akemi
The "kernel-cplus" name (or a close variation thereof) would be appropriate.
Alan.
-
Akemi Yagi -
Alan Bartlett -
Carl Trieloff -
Jim Perrin -
Johnny Hughes -
Karanbir Singh -
Ned Slider -
Stephen John Smoogen -
Trevor Hemsley