hi,
Anyone been working on a CentOS-7 minimal install manifest ?
given that its our most popular download on CentOS-6, it would be great to have something like that for 7 as well.
would it help if i threw in a baseline to start from ?
- KB
On 06/25/2014 02:10 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
hi,
Anyone been working on a CentOS-7 minimal install manifest ?
given that its our most popular download on CentOS-6, it would be great to have something like that for 7 as well.
would it help if i threw in a baseline to start from ?
- KB
Do we go with the original concept ( "as minimal as possible" ) or the current one from C6 ( "mimic minimal install from the full DVD" ) ? In the last case, do we also target a micro-variant ?
M.
On 25/06/14 13:49, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 06/25/2014 02:10 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
hi,
Anyone been working on a CentOS-7 minimal install manifest ?
given that its our most popular download on CentOS-6, it would be great to have something like that for 7 as well.
would it help if i threw in a baseline to start from ?
- KB
Do we go with the original concept ( "as minimal as possible" ) or the current one from C6 ( "mimic minimal install from the full DVD" ) ? In the last case, do we also target a micro-variant ?
M.
Hi Manuel,
It's a debate we already had in the past wrt CentOS 6 minimal (minimal as possible, or minimal as in '@core') I guess most people would expect it to be '@core' : and we also have to add packages to the mix, like if people try to install over iscsi/fcoe and such, so basically what you and us did too :-)
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 02:22:06PM +0200, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
On 25/06/14 13:49, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 06/25/2014 02:10 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
hi,
Anyone been working on a CentOS-7 minimal install manifest ?
given that its our most popular download on CentOS-6, it would be great to have something like that for 7 as well.
would it help if i threw in a baseline to start from ?
- KB
Do we go with the original concept ( "as minimal as possible" ) or the current one from C6 ( "mimic minimal install from the full DVD" ) ? In the last case, do we also target a micro-variant ?
M.Hi Manuel,
It's a debate we already had in the past wrt CentOS 6 minimal (minimal as possible, or minimal as in '@core') I guess most people would expect it to be '@core' : and we also have to add packages to the mix, like if people try to install over iscsi/fcoe and such, so basically what you and us did too :-)
I'd just like to see openssh-clients in there this time :)
On 06/25/2014 08:15 PM, Bryan Seitz wrote:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 02:22:06PM +0200, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
On 25/06/14 13:49, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 06/25/2014 02:10 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
hi,
Anyone been working on a CentOS-7 minimal install manifest ?
given that its our most popular download on CentOS-6, it would be great to have something like that for 7 as well.
would it help if i threw in a baseline to start from ?
- KB
Do we go with the original concept ( "as minimal as possible" ) or the current one from C6 ( "mimic minimal install from the full DVD" ) ? In the last case, do we also target a micro-variant ?
M.Hi Manuel,
It's a debate we already had in the past wrt CentOS 6 minimal (minimal as possible, or minimal as in '@core') I guess most people would expect it to be '@core' : and we also have to add packages to the mix, like if people try to install over iscsi/fcoe and such, so basically what you and us did too :-)
I'd just like to see openssh-clients in there this time :)
is it in the minimal install from the tree ?
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
I'd just like to see openssh-clients in there this time :)
is it in the minimal install from the tree ?
I think so in 6.x. At least it is different between a minimal dvd install and the minimal iso. I usually don't know which was used when someone does a remote install, but then I need to copy some stuff in and tell yum to install the rest of the packages. I'd vote for rsync too, since would be my first choice for that 'copy stuff' step instead of scp which sometimes isn't there either.
On 06/25/2014 10:44 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
I'd just like to see openssh-clients in there this time :)
is it in the minimal install from the tree ?
I think so in 6.x. At least it is different between a minimal dvd install and the minimal iso. I usually don't know which was used when someone does a remote install, but then I need to copy some stuff in and tell yum to install the rest of the packages. I'd vote for rsync too, since would be my first choice for that 'copy stuff' step instead of scp which sometimes isn't there either.
admittedly i havent done an install from DVD in minimal mode for years, but i am very sure that the end result from a DVD minimal and the minimal CD is exactly the same, unless some specific storage is selected at installtime. If this is not the case, quantify the difference and post a report on bugs.centos.org and we will try and fix it.
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
is it in the minimal install from the tree ?
I think so in 6.x. At least it is different between a minimal dvd install and the minimal iso. I usually don't know which was used when someone does a remote install, but then I need to copy some stuff in and tell yum to install the rest of the packages. I'd vote for rsync too, since would be my first choice for that 'copy stuff' step instead of scp which sometimes isn't there either.
admittedly i havent done an install from DVD in minimal mode for years, but i am very sure that the end result from a DVD minimal and the minimal CD is exactly the same, unless some specific storage is selected at installtime. If this is not the case, quantify the difference and post a report on bugs.centos.org and we will try and fix it.
We always build identical servers in different remote locations and one location ends up with scp and one doesn't after the initial install. I know one of them is from a minimal iso. The other guy might be doing a server install from dvd. Is there some after-the-fact way to tell what was the initial install media and package group?
On 06/25/2014 05:27 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
is it in the minimal install from the tree ?
I think so in 6.x. At least it is different between a minimal dvd install and the minimal iso. I usually don't know which was used when someone does a remote install, but then I need to copy some stuff in and tell yum to install the rest of the packages. I'd vote for rsync too, since would be my first choice for that 'copy stuff' step instead of scp which sometimes isn't there either.
admittedly i havent done an install from DVD in minimal mode for years, but i am very sure that the end result from a DVD minimal and the minimal CD is exactly the same, unless some specific storage is selected at installtime. If this is not the case, quantify the difference and post a report on bugs.centos.org and we will try and fix it.
We always build identical servers in different remote locations and one location ends up with scp and one doesn't after the initial install. I know one of them is from a minimal iso. The other guy might be doing a server install from dvd. Is there some after-the-fact way to tell what was the initial install media and package group?
When you finish an install, you will have anaconda-ks.cfg that will tell you what was installed.
On 06/25/2014 07:16 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 06/25/2014 05:27 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
is it in the minimal install from the tree ?
I think so in 6.x. At least it is different between a minimal dvd install and the minimal iso. I usually don't know which was used when someone does a remote install, but then I need to copy some stuff in and tell yum to install the rest of the packages. I'd vote for rsync too, since would be my first choice for that 'copy stuff' step instead of scp which sometimes isn't there either.
admittedly i havent done an install from DVD in minimal mode for years, but i am very sure that the end result from a DVD minimal and the minimal CD is exactly the same, unless some specific storage is selected at installtime. If this is not the case, quantify the difference and post a report on bugs.centos.org and we will try and fix it.
We always build identical servers in different remote locations and one location ends up with scp and one doesn't after the initial install. I know one of them is from a minimal iso. The other guy might be doing a server install from dvd. Is there some after-the-fact way to tell what was the initial install media and package group?
When you finish an install, you will have anaconda-ks.cfg that will tell you what was installed.
I forgot to mention it is in /root/ :)
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 7:16 PM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
We always build identical servers in different remote locations and one location ends up with scp and one doesn't after the initial install. I know one of them is from a minimal iso. The other guy might be doing a server install from dvd. Is there some after-the-fact way to tell what was the initial install media and package group?
When you finish an install, you will have anaconda-ks.cfg that will tell you what was installed.
Thanks - one set has @core, the other has @core and @server-policy. Now is there something to see what the install media was? 'Yum info" shows the 'From Repo' as anaconda-Centos-something on packages that haven't updated. Is there a way to translate that to the disk version - or some other way to identify it?
In another quirk, a system I installed myself, I think from a minimal iso, where anaconda-ks.cfg just says @core has yum-presto installed. Yum info says it is from anaconda-CentOS-201207061011.x86_64, but I think it is the only thing where yum-presto is installed. Was it on one minimal iso but not later versions?
On 06/26/2014 06:31 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 7:16 PM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
We always build identical servers in different remote locations and one location ends up with scp and one doesn't after the initial install. I know one of them is from a minimal iso. The other guy might be doing a server install from dvd. Is there some after-the-fact way to tell what was the initial install media and package group?
When you finish an install, you will have anaconda-ks.cfg that will tell you what was installed.
Thanks - one set has @core, the other has @core and @server-policy. Now is there something to see what the install media was? 'Yum info" shows the 'From Repo' as anaconda-Centos-something on packages that haven't updated. Is there a way to translate that to the disk version - or some other way to identify it?
Say you have system A installed from minimal.iso and system B whose installer media is unknown but has a larger set of packages a) extract the list of packages from B which do not exist on A b) look for those packages in the list of packages available on the minimal.iso. Now - If they do not exist, there are two explanations: 1)if the source is listed as @anaconda-CentOS-something, they came from the dvd.iso. IF you are certain that the "minimal" option was used at install time on B, please file a bug because this means that the manifest for the minimal.iso is not complete 2) if the source is listed as @base or @updates ( actually anything but @anaconda ) the packages were brought in from the network - If they do exist on the minimal.iso ..
In another quirk, a system I installed myself, I think from a minimal iso, where anaconda-ks.cfg just says @core has yum-presto installed. Yum info says it is from anaconda-CentOS-201207061011.x86_64, but I think it is the only thing where yum-presto is installed. Was it on one minimal iso but not later versions?
To be honest I am no longer sure how did the list of packages included in the minimal.iso evolve over time. Between 6.3 and 6.4 my initial approach (1) was changed to "mimic minimal install from the full DVD, i.e. install @core" ; support for wireless machines was also included. However, if memory serves, nothing was removed over time, au contraire more packages were added.
(1) Best described as "an iso as small as possible which can bring a machine online", targeted towards servers with a final purpose to be defined after install. The basic kickstart that would emulate the approach used at the time is still available as https://nazar.karan.org/blob/bluecain/45d8ab15b77e49120de9d79e6848531e644d0f.... Beware that using this kickstart will NOT lead to the same list of packages as included in the original minimal.iso because Fabian , KB and I did an exhaustive work in order to identify all the packages needed for full support of wired hardware, including FCOE, iSCSI and so on.
I think so wget & nano is necessary for minimal installation...
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:45 PM, Bryan Seitz seitz@bsd-unix.net wrote:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 02:22:06PM +0200, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
On 25/06/14 13:49, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 06/25/2014 02:10 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
hi,
Anyone been working on a CentOS-7 minimal install manifest ?
given that its our most popular download on CentOS-6, it would be
great
to have something like that for 7 as well.
would it help if i threw in a baseline to start from ?
- KB
Do we go with the original concept ( "as minimal as possible" ) or the current one from C6 ( "mimic minimal install from the full DVD" ) ? In the last case, do we also target a micro-variant ?
M.Hi Manuel,
It's a debate we already had in the past wrt CentOS 6 minimal (minimal as possible, or minimal as in '@core') I guess most people would expect it to be '@core' : and we also have to add packages to the mix, like if people try to install over iscsi/fcoe and such, so basically what you and us did too :-)
I'd just like to see openssh-clients in there this time :)
--
Bryan G. Seitz _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
I think so wget & nano is necessary for minimal installation...
imho, vi and curl should cover those which are already in the C6 minimal. Python bindings for SELinux would be nice for people using Ansible ;-)
Vincent
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:45 PM, Bryan Seitz seitz@bsd-unix.net wrote:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 02:22:06PM +0200, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
On 25/06/14 13:49, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 06/25/2014 02:10 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
hi,
Anyone been working on a CentOS-7 minimal install manifest ?
given that its our most popular download on CentOS-6, it would be
great
to have something like that for 7 as well.
would it help if i threw in a baseline to start from ?
- KB
Do we go with the original concept ( "as minimal as possible" ) or
the
current one from C6 ( "mimic minimal install from the full DVD" ) ?
In
the last case, do we also target a micro-variant ?
M.Hi Manuel,
It's a debate we already had in the past wrt CentOS 6 minimal (minimal as possible, or minimal as in '@core') I guess most people would expect it to be '@core' : and we also have
to
add packages to the mix, like if people try to install over iscsi/fcoe and such, so basically what you and us did too :-)
I'd just like to see openssh-clients in there this time :)
--
Bryan G. Seitz _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 03:15:24PM -0400, Bryan Seitz wrote:
I'd just like to see openssh-clients in there this time :)
Seconded. It would reduce support issues and make it more useful to the majority of users.
John
On 06/25/2014 12:49 PM, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 06/25/2014 02:10 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
hi,
Anyone been working on a CentOS-7 minimal install manifest ?
given that its our most popular download on CentOS-6, it would be great to have something like that for 7 as well.
would it help if i threw in a baseline to start from ?
- KB
Do we go with the original concept ( "as minimal as possible" ) or the current one from C6 ( "mimic minimal install from the full DVD" ) ? In the last case, do we also target a micro-variant ?
yes please, the minimal iso should be as close to - if not identical - to the DVD installers minimal install.
we could do a micro as well, if there is scope for that. whats in the minimal dvd install that we might not want ?
Hi,
I am using this anaconda script for building mostly minimal system:
%packages --default --multilib
@base @core @anaconda-tools @mariadb-client @mariadb @php @web-server @development
kernel kernel-devel
%end
This is script for minimal install system with webserver (httpd), sql server (mariadb and mariadb client) and php. With kernel-devel and @development for building extra kernel modules (for some exotic hardware).
I think, this script should build really minimal system:
%packages --default --multilib
@base @core @anaconda-tools
kernel
%end
In @anaconda-tools we have packages for iscsi/fcoe support. "--multilib" will produce install image with multilib support. And kernel need b/c @base/@core/@anaconda-tools doesn't have kernel require.
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
hi,
Anyone been working on a CentOS-7 minimal install manifest ?
given that its our most popular download on CentOS-6, it would be great to have something like that for 7 as well.
would it help if i threw in a baseline to start from ?
- KB
-- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 06/25/2014 11:10 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
Anyone been working on a CentOS-7 minimal install manifest ?
given that its our most popular download on CentOS-6, it would be great to have something like that for 7 as well.
would it help if i threw in a baseline to start from ?
My personal opinion is that neither NetworkManager or postfix should be included in minimal, both of which, I believe, are in core.
Peter
On 25 June 2014 05:10, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
hi,
Anyone been working on a CentOS-7 minimal install manifest ?
given that its our most popular download on CentOS-6, it would be great to have something like that for 7 as well.
would it help if i threw in a baseline to start from ?
Here is out current minimal kickstart package list. We use this as the basics to get a box installable from the ground up with everything else needed afterwords. There is still a lot of bike-shedding here: (postfix vs sendmail, remove prelink, biosdevname, etc) but it comes out to about 353 packages and a disk usage of 888 MB. Ansible and yum gets the rest for us.
%packages --nobase acpid authconfig bash-completion bind-utils -biosdevname -cronie-anacron cronie-noanacron crontabs dhclient iptables-services -iwl* -libertas* -logwatch mailx nfs-utils nmap-ncat ntp ntpdate openssh-clients openssh-server patch postfix -prelink rsync screen telnet tmpwatch traceroute -sendmail -sendmail-cf strace tmux vim-enhanced yum yum-utils
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Stephen John Smoogen smooge@gmail.com wrote:
Here is out current minimal kickstart package list. We use this as the basics to get a box installable from the ground up with everything else needed afterwords. There is still a lot of bike-shedding here: (postfix vs sendmail, remove prelink, biosdevname, etc) but it comes out to about 353 packages and a disk usage of 888 MB. Ansible and yum gets the rest for us.
%packages --nobase acpid authconfig bash-completion bind-utils -biosdevname -cronie-anacron cronie-noanacron crontabs dhclient iptables-services -iwl* -libertas* -logwatch mailx nfs-utils nmap-ncat ntp ntpdate openssh-clients openssh-server patch postfix -prelink rsync screen telnet tmpwatch traceroute -sendmail -sendmail-cf strace tmux vim-enhanced yum yum-utils
Stephen, thanks for sharing! In my opinion I'd say "minimal" doesn't need things like: mailx, nfs-utils, patch, rsync, screen, telnet, traceroute, strace, tmux. vim-enhanced I personally would like to include, but it's not really minimal.
Just throwing that out there for discussion. I don't have a strong disagreement with your list -- although 888M does seem to be getting kind of large. I wonder what size Wolfy has stuff down to? :)
-Jeff
On 06/26/2014 07:22 PM, Jeff Sheltren wrote:
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@gmail.com mailto:smooge@gmail.com> wrote:
Here is out current minimal kickstart package list. We use this as the basics to get a box installable from the ground up with everything else needed afterwords. There is still a lot of bike-shedding here: (postfix vs sendmail, remove prelink, biosdevname, etc) but it comes out to about 353 packages and a disk usage of 888 MB. Ansible and yum gets the rest for us. %packages --nobase acpid authconfig bash-completion bind-utils -biosdevname -cronie-anacron cronie-noanacron crontabs dhclient iptables-services -iwl* -libertas* -logwatch mailx nfs-utils nmap-ncat ntp ntpdate openssh-clients openssh-server patch postfix -prelink rsync screen telnet tmpwatch traceroute -sendmail -sendmail-cf strace tmux vim-enhanced yum yum-utilsStephen, thanks for sharing! In my opinion I'd say "minimal" doesn't need things like: mailx, nfs-utils, patch, rsync, screen, telnet, traceroute, strace, tmux. vim-enhanced I personally would like to include, but it's not really minimal.
Just throwing that out there for discussion. I don't have a strong disagreement with your list -- although 888M does seem to be getting kind of large.
Let's define some ground rules first. - As has been stated before ( and decided in the 6.3=> 6.4 transition era ) what will be called " minimal.iso" will reflect the @core group AND include all the hardware support - What we can debate upon is an older proposal which came on IRC and which I mentioned in my previous message, that is a "micro.iso". My target is knowledgeable people who would want a quick server setup and would push anyway afterwards whatever they needed depending on the purpose of the machine, With this in mind, from my point of view this one would be really minimal with just the needed stuff to have a bootable WIRED machine and ( debatable ) some means to do config mgmt. However given the multitude of existing options I am not too keen on including anything for this specific purpose but rather let the admin copy the bootstrap tools of choice via scp.
From the list above I would exclude several items, such as nmap, patch, tmux,, screen, bash-completion... OTOH I would definitely include biosdevname , for the simple reason that Dell loves to use it ( even if it's not mandatory ). Not to mention that including BOTH tmux and screen on a MINIMAL image seems excessive given that they have the same purpose. And.. wasn't sendmail replaced by postfix a decade ago ? :) ( #define decade = one major release )
I wonder what size Wolfy has stuff down to? :)
a tad smaller :) for a start I'd stick in --excludedocs
On 26 June 2014 10:22, Jeff Sheltren jeff@tag1consulting.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Stephen John Smoogen smooge@gmail.com wrote:
Stephen, thanks for sharing! In my opinion I'd say "minimal" doesn't
need things like: mailx, nfs-utils, patch, rsync, screen, telnet, traceroute, strace, tmux. vim-enhanced I personally would like to include, but it's not really minimal.
Aha. tmux is for the rest of the admins, screen must be for me. I need to go learn tmux I guess. Ok lets cut this down again for a micro
%packages --nobase --excludedocs acpid authconfig bind-utils biosdevname busybox crontabs dhclient iptables-services -iwl* -libertas* -logwatch mailx ntp ntpdate openssh-clients openssh-server postfix -prelink rsync telnet traceroute strace vim-enhanced yum yum-utils %end
The reason for rsync is it needs to be on the client if you want to rsync stuff to it. I usually find that is the first thing I have to install on any box on the internet. I mean really micro could boil down to %packages --nobase --excludedocs %end
Just throwing that out there for discussion. I don't have a strong disagreement with your list -- although 888M does seem to be getting kind of large. I wonder what size Wolfy has stuff down to? :)
No problem I figured it was a working example of a less than @core set of packages.
-Jeff
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 06/26/2014 06:34 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
%packages --nobase --excludedocs acpid authconfig bind-utils biosdevname busybox crontabs dhclient iptables-services -iwl* -libertas* -logwatch mailx ntp ntpdate openssh-clients openssh-server postfix -prelink rsync telnet traceroute strace vim-enhanced yum yum-utils
if someone can build this into a manifest, i can do a distrobuild with it. the manifest needs to look like : |<package name>|<arch>| one entry per line, comments start with # on col0 of the line and are ignored
the list needs to include all deps needed, rather than just core-nodes.
Also, rsync vim-enhanced, yum-utils and.....telnet.. really ?
Not gonna lie, +1 for telnet for troubleshooting connectivity ;)
On 6/26/2014 4:10 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 06/26/2014 06:34 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
%packages --nobase --excludedocs acpid authconfig bind-utils biosdevname busybox crontabs dhclient iptables-services -iwl* -libertas* -logwatch mailx ntp ntpdate openssh-clients openssh-server postfix -prelink rsync telnet traceroute strace vim-enhanced yum yum-utils
if someone can build this into a manifest, i can do a distrobuild with it. the manifest needs to look like : |<package name>|<arch>| one entry per line, comments start with # on col0 of the line and are ignored
the list needs to include all deps needed, rather than just core-nodes.
Also, rsync vim-enhanced, yum-utils and.....telnet.. really ?
On 26 June 2014 14:10, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 06/26/2014 06:34 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
%packages --nobase --excludedocs acpid authconfig bind-utils biosdevname busybox crontabs dhclient iptables-services -iwl* -libertas* -logwatch mailx ntp ntpdate openssh-clients openssh-server postfix -prelink rsync telnet traceroute strace vim-enhanced yum yum-utils
if someone can build this into a manifest, i can do a distrobuild with it. the manifest needs to look like : |<package name>|<arch>| one entry per line, comments start with # on col0 of the line and are ignored
the list needs to include all deps needed, rather than just core-nodes.
Also, rsync vim-enhanced, yum-utils and.....telnet.. really ?
rsync to get stuff onto the box remotely (needs to be on both ends). not really important just a oh yeah. vim-enhanced because ... well I don't know I am an emacs guy.. I figured vim people need it. yum-utils is probably superfluous.. telnet is pretty much the standard way to test network access.. we have it because something doesn't work and can you telnet to the port and see if the service is really there. To be honest a lot of these are superflous if you have busybox installed.
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 09:10:15PM +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 06/26/2014 06:34 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
%packages --nobase --excludedocs acpid authconfig bind-utils biosdevname busybox crontabs dhclient iptables-services -iwl* -libertas* -logwatch mailx ntp ntpdate openssh-clients openssh-server postfix -prelink rsync telnet traceroute strace vim-enhanced yum yum-utils
Why is mailx on the list for a minimal install? Why is postfix? Why crontabs?
John
On 26 June 2014 15:11, John R. Dennison jrd@gerdesas.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 09:10:15PM +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 06/26/2014 06:34 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
%packages --nobase --excludedocs acpid authconfig bind-utils biosdevname busybox crontabs dhclient iptables-services -iwl* -libertas* -logwatch mailx ntp ntpdate openssh-clients openssh-server postfix -prelink rsync telnet traceroute strace vim-enhanced yum yum-utils
Why is mailx on the list for a minimal install? Why is postfix? Why crontabs?
Because I was giving an example of a working config. It was a starting point... to pair down. If you don't like it, do something else.
This is the manifest for the minimal install from the entire distro tree. Without changing the comps file, we cant influence this list either. So is this a reasonable place to kick the minimal iso from ?
On 06/27/2014 08:03 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
This is the manifest for the minimal install from the entire distro tree. Without changing the comps file, we cant influence this list either. So is this a reasonable place to kick the minimal iso from ?
If the goal is to match minimal from the media, yes. If we do a 'micro' install, there's certainly some cruft we can remove here.
On 06/27/2014 02:20 PM, Jim Perrin wrote:
If the goal is to match minimal from the media, yes. If we do a 'micro' install, there's certainly some cruft we can remove here.
if we can get a manifest together ( needs to depclose ) in the next few hours, i can run a build for it
On 27 June 2014 07:03, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
This is the manifest for the minimal install from the entire distro tree. Without changing the comps file, we cant influence this list either. So is this a reasonable place to kick the minimal iso from ?
I took @core with openssh-clients and openssh-server and removed the following leafs
-authconfig
-dbus-python
-dmidecode
-ebtables
-firewalld
-gobject-introspection
-iprutils
-irqbalance
-json-c
-libestr
-libpipeline
-libselinux-python
-libsysfs
-logrotate
-make
-man-db
-mariadb-libs
-newt-python
-numactl-libs
-openssl
-postfix
-pygobject3-base
-python-backports-ssl_match_hostname
-python-backports
-python-configobj
-python-decorator
-python-pyudev
-python-setuptools
-python-slip-dbus
-python-slip
-sudo
-rsyslog
-tuned
-virt-what
That left the 'included' file of packages. There is still a lot of packages left because various services begin pulling in other items.
Please note that some install options will automatically pull in some extra packages. For example, installing on an encrypted filesystem will pull in some packages, and installing on software RAID will pull in some another set of packages. Here's a list of packages that I think are one way or another affected by this (and their dependencies):
chrony cryptsetup cryptsetup-libs device-mapper-event device-mapper-event-libs device-mapper-persistent-data dosfstools efibootmgr grub2 grub2-efi grubby libreport-filesystem lvm2 lvm2-libs mdadm mokutil shim shim-unsigned
I would suggest making sure these packages get included, otherwise some functionality of the installer may break.
anaconda also mentions realmd. I suppose it would get installed if anaconda needs to access an Active Directory server during installation. That package depends on PackageKit-glib, libarchive, oddjob, oddjob-mkhomedir and psmisc. I don't have an AD server here at home, but I suppose it'd work like http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_realmd_join_kickstart
On 28/06/14 11:44, Anssi Johansson wrote:
Please note that some install options will automatically pull in some extra packages. For example, installing on an encrypted filesystem will pull in some packages, and installing on software RAID will pull in some another set of packages. Here's a list of packages that I think are one way or another affected by this (and their dependencies):
chrony cryptsetup cryptsetup-libs device-mapper-event device-mapper-event-libs device-mapper-persistent-data dosfstools efibootmgr grub2 grub2-efi grubby libreport-filesystem lvm2 lvm2-libs mdadm mokutil shim shim-unsigned
I would suggest making sure these packages get included, otherwise some functionality of the installer may break.
anaconda also mentions realmd. I suppose it would get installed if anaconda needs to access an Active Directory server during installation. That package depends on PackageKit-glib, libarchive, oddjob, oddjob-mkhomedir and psmisc. I don't have an AD server here at home, but I suppose it'd work like http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_realmd_join_kickstart
I did a minimal install under VBox this evening then ran yum install for the 18 packages listed above. 8 of those were already installed so this added 10 to the mix. I didn't include the ones listed as Active Directory. I then ran this in the Packages dir of the DVD1 with just the rpm names in my txt file:
$ for f in $(cat /tmp/rpmnames.txt); do ls -la $f-[0-9]*; done > /tmp/rpmnls.txt $ awk '{ n += $5 } END { print n }' /tmp/rpmnls.txt 210154444
I've now attached that list to my mail in the format discussed on IRC. If I'm right about 210MB then I don't think space on a CD will be too much of a problem but let's wait and see what it turns out like once it's built ;-)
T
On 13/07/14 02:24, Trevor Hemsley wrote:
On 28/06/14 11:44, Anssi Johansson wrote:
Please note that some install options will automatically pull in some extra packages. For example, installing on an encrypted filesystem will pull in some packages, and installing on software RAID will pull in some another set of packages. Here's a list of packages that I think are one way or another affected by this (and their dependencies):
chrony cryptsetup cryptsetup-libs device-mapper-event device-mapper-event-libs device-mapper-persistent-data dosfstools efibootmgr grub2 grub2-efi grubby libreport-filesystem lvm2 lvm2-libs mdadm mokutil shim shim-unsigned
I would suggest making sure these packages get included, otherwise some functionality of the installer may break.
anaconda also mentions realmd. I suppose it would get installed if anaconda needs to access an Active Directory server during installation. That package depends on PackageKit-glib, libarchive, oddjob, oddjob-mkhomedir and psmisc. I don't have an AD server here at home, but I suppose it'd work like http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_realmd_join_kickstart
I did a minimal install under VBox this evening then ran yum install for the 18 packages listed above. 8 of those were already installed so this added 10 to the mix. I didn't include the ones listed as Active Directory. I then ran this in the Packages dir of the DVD1 with just the rpm names in my txt file:
$ for f in $(cat /tmp/rpmnames.txt); do ls -la $f-[0-9]*; done > /tmp/rpmnls.txt $ awk '{ n += $5 } END { print n }' /tmp/rpmnls.txt 210154444
I've now attached that list to my mail in the format discussed on IRC. If I'm right about 210MB then I don't think space on a CD will be too much of a problem but let's wait and see what it turns out like once it's built ;-)
T
I've also started to produce a minimal.iso (and so packages manifest) It's not about the packages size, but the size of the install media *without* any package at all (and metadata) :
5.9M EFI/ 438M images/ (we can remove boot.iso , obviously -> 76M) 70M isolinux/ 279M LiveOS/
and we still have to add the packages .. so not sure it will fit on a single CD. and if the goal is to produce a DVD iso image, I don't think people will be interested in "wasting" a DVD for a ~1G iso instead of the normal DVD, that covers both minimal and other "variants" ...
I'll give it a try though (and speaking about minimal, not micro instance that was mentioned too)
On 13/07/14 14:19, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
On 13/07/14 02:24, Trevor Hemsley wrote:
On 28/06/14 11:44, Anssi Johansson wrote:
Please note that some install options will automatically pull in some extra packages. For example, installing on an encrypted filesystem will pull in some packages, and installing on software RAID will pull in some another set of packages. Here's a list of packages that I think are one way or another affected by this (and their dependencies):
chrony cryptsetup cryptsetup-libs device-mapper-event device-mapper-event-libs device-mapper-persistent-data dosfstools efibootmgr grub2 grub2-efi grubby libreport-filesystem lvm2 lvm2-libs mdadm mokutil shim shim-unsigned
I would suggest making sure these packages get included, otherwise some functionality of the installer may break.
anaconda also mentions realmd. I suppose it would get installed if anaconda needs to access an Active Directory server during installation. That package depends on PackageKit-glib, libarchive, oddjob, oddjob-mkhomedir and psmisc. I don't have an AD server here at home, but I suppose it'd work like http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_realmd_join_kickstart
I did a minimal install under VBox this evening then ran yum install for the 18 packages listed above. 8 of those were already installed so this added 10 to the mix. I didn't include the ones listed as Active Directory. I then ran this in the Packages dir of the DVD1 with just the rpm names in my txt file:
$ for f in $(cat /tmp/rpmnames.txt); do ls -la $f-[0-9]*; done > /tmp/rpmnls.txt $ awk '{ n += $5 } END { print n }' /tmp/rpmnls.txt 210154444
I've now attached that list to my mail in the format discussed on IRC. If I'm right about 210MB then I don't think space on a CD will be too much of a problem but let's wait and see what it turns out like once it's built ;-)
T
I've also started to produce a minimal.iso (and so packages manifest) It's not about the packages size, but the size of the install media *without* any package at all (and metadata) :
5.9M EFI/ 438M images/ (we can remove boot.iso , obviously -> 76M) 70M isolinux/ 279M LiveOS/
and we still have to add the packages .. so not sure it will fit on a single CD. and if the goal is to produce a DVD iso image, I don't think people will be interested in "wasting" a DVD for a ~1G iso instead of the normal DVD, that covers both minimal and other "variants" ...
I'll give it a try though (and speaking about minimal, not micro instance that was mentioned too)
Faster than I thought :
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 633M Jul 13 13:27 CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-minimal.iso
Let's try it and also try to cover all features needed now for various install scenarios (efi/mdadm/iscsi/fcoe/etc ....)
On 07/13/2014 01:29 PM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
On 13/07/14 14:19, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
On 13/07/14 02:24, Trevor Hemsley wrote:
On 28/06/14 11:44, Anssi Johansson wrote:
Please note that some install options will automatically pull in some extra packages. For example, installing on an encrypted filesystem will pull in some packages, and installing on software RAID will pull in some another set of packages. Here's a list of packages that I think are one way or another affected by this (and their dependencies):
chrony cryptsetup cryptsetup-libs device-mapper-event device-mapper-event-libs device-mapper-persistent-data dosfstools efibootmgr grub2 grub2-efi grubby libreport-filesystem lvm2 lvm2-libs mdadm mokutil shim shim-unsigned
I would suggest making sure these packages get included, otherwise some functionality of the installer may break.
anaconda also mentions realmd. I suppose it would get installed if anaconda needs to access an Active Directory server during installation. That package depends on PackageKit-glib, libarchive, oddjob, oddjob-mkhomedir and psmisc. I don't have an AD server here at home, but I suppose it'd work like http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_realmd_join_kickstart
I did a minimal install under VBox this evening then ran yum install for the 18 packages listed above. 8 of those were already installed so this added 10 to the mix. I didn't include the ones listed as Active Directory. I then ran this in the Packages dir of the DVD1 with just the rpm names in my txt file:
$ for f in $(cat /tmp/rpmnames.txt); do ls -la $f-[0-9]*; done > /tmp/rpmnls.txt $ awk '{ n += $5 } END { print n }' /tmp/rpmnls.txt 210154444
I've now attached that list to my mail in the format discussed on IRC. If I'm right about 210MB then I don't think space on a CD will be too much of a problem but let's wait and see what it turns out like once it's built ;-)
T
I've also started to produce a minimal.iso (and so packages manifest) It's not about the packages size, but the size of the install media *without* any package at all (and metadata) :
5.9M EFI/ 438M images/ (we can remove boot.iso , obviously -> 76M) 70M isolinux/ 279M LiveOS/
and we still have to add the packages .. so not sure it will fit on a single CD. and if the goal is to produce a DVD iso image, I don't think people will be interested in "wasting" a DVD for a ~1G iso instead of the normal DVD, that covers both minimal and other "variants" ...
I'll give it a try though (and speaking about minimal, not micro instance that was mentioned too)
Faster than I thought :
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 633M Jul 13 13:27 CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-minimal.iso
Let's try it and also try to cover all features needed now for various install scenarios (efi/mdadm/iscsi/fcoe/etc ....)
try the Minimal iso pushed to buildlogs, its best if we are all testing the same thing
On 07/13/2014 03:19 PM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
On 13/07/14 02:24, Trevor Hemsley wrote:
[...] I've also started to produce a minimal.iso (and so packages manifest) It's not about the packages size, but the size of the install media *without* any package at all (and metadata) :
5.9M EFI/ 438M images/ (we can remove boot.iso , obviously -> 76M) 70M isolinux/ 279M LiveOS/
and we still have to add the packages .. so not sure it will fit on a single CD. and if the goal is to produce a DVD iso image, I don't think people will be interested in "wasting" a DVD for a ~1G iso instead of the normal DVD, that covers both minimal and other "variants" ...
One must think also in terms of USB sticks nowadays. A <1GB image can be dd-ed to any stick. I have half a dozen or so 2GB sized leftovers received at a conference , initially carrying a popular antivirus. If I wouldn't do installs from my phone, those would be my next choice.
On 07/13/2014 01:24 AM, Trevor Hemsley wrote:
On 28/06/14 11:44, Anssi Johansson wrote:
Please note that some install options will automatically pull in some extra packages. For example, installing on an encrypted filesystem will pull in some packages, and installing on software RAID will pull in some another set of packages. Here's a list of packages that I think are one way or another affected by this (and their dependencies):
chrony cryptsetup cryptsetup-libs device-mapper-event device-mapper-event-libs device-mapper-persistent-data dosfstools efibootmgr grub2 grub2-efi grubby libreport-filesystem lvm2 lvm2-libs mdadm mokutil shim shim-unsigned
I would suggest making sure these packages get included, otherwise some functionality of the installer may break.
anaconda also mentions realmd. I suppose it would get installed if anaconda needs to access an Active Directory server during installation. That package depends on PackageKit-glib, libarchive, oddjob, oddjob-mkhomedir and psmisc. I don't have an AD server here at home, but I suppose it'd work like http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_realmd_join_kickstart
I did a minimal install under VBox this evening then ran yum install for the 18 packages listed above. 8 of those were already installed so this added 10 to the mix. I didn't include the ones listed as Active Directory. I then ran this in the Packages dir of the DVD1 with just the rpm names in my txt file:
$ for f in $(cat /tmp/rpmnames.txt); do ls -la $f-[0-9]*; done > /tmp/rpmnls.txt $ awk '{ n += $5 } END { print n }' /tmp/rpmnls.txt 210154444
I've now attached that list to my mail in the format discussed on IRC. If I'm right about 210MB then I don't think space on a CD will be too much of a problem but let's wait and see what it turns out like once it's built ;-)
We pushed and did some initial testing around a minimal build last night on irc. the builds were pushed to http://buildlogs.centos.org/centos/7/isos/x86_64
It does not have the anaconda changes we typically do with the minimal install, but otherwise it should be a complete build at 565MB in size.
please test it, its essential that we get as wide a testing base and options / variations as possible.
On 13/07/14 21:01, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 07/13/2014 01:24 AM, Trevor Hemsley wrote:
On 28/06/14 11:44, Anssi Johansson wrote:
Please note that some install options will automatically pull in some extra packages. For example, installing on an encrypted filesystem will pull in some packages, and installing on software RAID will pull in some another set of packages. Here's a list of packages that I think are one way or another affected by this (and their dependencies):
chrony cryptsetup cryptsetup-libs device-mapper-event device-mapper-event-libs device-mapper-persistent-data dosfstools efibootmgr grub2 grub2-efi grubby libreport-filesystem lvm2 lvm2-libs mdadm mokutil shim shim-unsigned
I would suggest making sure these packages get included, otherwise some functionality of the installer may break.
anaconda also mentions realmd. I suppose it would get installed if anaconda needs to access an Active Directory server during installation. That package depends on PackageKit-glib, libarchive, oddjob, oddjob-mkhomedir and psmisc. I don't have an AD server here at home, but I suppose it'd work like http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_realmd_join_kickstart
I did a minimal install under VBox this evening then ran yum install for the 18 packages listed above. 8 of those were already installed so this added 10 to the mix. I didn't include the ones listed as Active Directory. I then ran this in the Packages dir of the DVD1 with just the rpm names in my txt file:
$ for f in $(cat /tmp/rpmnames.txt); do ls -la $f-[0-9]*; done > /tmp/rpmnls.txt $ awk '{ n += $5 } END { print n }' /tmp/rpmnls.txt 210154444
I've now attached that list to my mail in the format discussed on IRC. If I'm right about 210MB then I don't think space on a CD will be too much of a problem but let's wait and see what it turns out like once it's built ;-)
We pushed and did some initial testing around a minimal build last night on irc. the builds were pushed to http://buildlogs.centos.org/centos/7/isos/x86_64
It does not have the anaconda changes we typically do with the minimal install, but otherwise it should be a complete build at 565MB in size.
please test it, its essential that we get as wide a testing base and options / variations as possible.
Well, it crashes for me .. I'll compare the packages list you have used, as it seems less than the normal @core minimal set, which was supposed to be the target (well, in fact *more* packages than just @core, as some deps are needed when using luks/mdadm/btrfs/mdadm, and so on ...) I'll come back with a list and also reading the whole thread about packages people were mentioning
On 07/14/2014 08:54 AM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
Well, it crashes for me .. I'll compare the packages list you have used, as it seems less than the normal @core minimal set, which was supposed to be the target (well, in fact *more* packages than just @core, as some deps are needed when using luks/mdadm/btrfs/mdadm, and so on ...) I'll come back with a list and also reading the whole thread about packages people were mentioning
crashes where / how ? A couple of us have run the installer without a problem, and the installed rpm set matches what one gets from the DVD and Everything installs.
we've got mdadm and the fcoe and iscsi content in there, but hopefully enough people can test this and we can get the rest of the bits in as well.
crashing however is not good,
On 14/07/14 11:10, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 07/14/2014 08:54 AM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
Well, it crashes for me .. I'll compare the packages list you have used, as it seems less than the normal @core minimal set, which was supposed to be the target (well, in fact *more* packages than just @core, as some deps are needed when using luks/mdadm/btrfs/mdadm, and so on ...) I'll come back with a list and also reading the whole thread about packages people were mentioning
crashes where / how ? A couple of us have run the installer without a problem, and the installed rpm set matches what one gets from the DVD and Everything installs.
we've got mdadm and the fcoe and iscsi content in there, but hopefully enough people can test this and we can get the rest of the bits in as well.
crashing however is not good,
I've started from scratch a list on my side (feel free to compare with the previous ones used/sent to the list) and I attach it to that mail (see minimal.list)
I've then composed an ISO image : 635M Jul 15 14:58 CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-minimal.iso
With that ISO images, I've installed (I've modified the comps to only show "Minimal" - @core) on a small VM with two local disks (700Mb) and one 10Gg iscsi disk
- /boot/efi -> single partition on /dev/sda1 - /boot/ -> ext4 on md device (raid1 on /dev/sda2 and /dev/sdb1) - / -> iscsi-initiator -> PV/VG/LV -> lv_root -> luks encrypted - swap -> lv_swap on the mentioned VG setup - /btrfs -> small btrfs 200Mb partition
I guess we cover quite some options (the only one I haven't been able to test was FCoE, but packages were added)
Repoclosure is also happy with that list : Reading in repository metadata - please wait.... Checking Dependencies Repos looked at: 1 isomin Num Packages in Repos: 318
Cheers,
On 2014-07-15 15:02, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
On 14/07/14 11:10, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 07/14/2014 08:54 AM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
Well, it crashes for me .. I'll compare the packages list you have used, as it seems less than the normal @core minimal set, which was supposed to be the target (well, in fact *more* packages than just @core, as some deps are needed when using luks/mdadm/btrfs/mdadm, and so on ...) I'll come back with a list and also reading the whole thread about packages people were mentioning
crashes where / how ? A couple of us have run the installer without a problem, and the installed rpm set matches what one gets from the DVD and Everything installs.
we've got mdadm and the fcoe and iscsi content in there, but hopefully enough people can test this and we can get the rest of the bits in as well.
crashing however is not good,
I've started from scratch a list on my side (feel free to compare with the previous ones used/sent to the list) and I attach it to that mail (see minimal.list)
I've then composed an ISO image : 635M Jul 15 14:58 CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-minimal.iso
With that ISO images, I've installed (I've modified the comps to only show "Minimal" - @core) on a small VM with two local disks (700Mb) and one 10Gg iscsi disk
- /boot/efi -> single partition on /dev/sda1
- /boot/ -> ext4 on md device (raid1 on /dev/sda2 and /dev/sdb1)
- / -> iscsi-initiator -> PV/VG/LV -> lv_root -> luks encrypted
- swap -> lv_swap on the mentioned VG setup
- /btrfs -> small btrfs 200Mb partition
I guess we cover quite some options (the only one I haven't been able to test was FCoE, but packages were added)
Repoclosure is also happy with that list : Reading in repository metadata - please wait.... Checking Dependencies Repos looked at: 1 isomin Num Packages in Repos: 318
Cheers,
Hi,
If possible, it would be nice to have "libselinux-python" included to keep Ansible users happy :-). Although I don't know how much deps it requires on el7.
Regards, Vincent
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 15/07/14 15:14, vincent@vanderkussen.org wrote: <snip>
Hi,
If possible, it would be nice to have "libselinux-python" included to keep Ansible users happy :-). Although I don't know how much deps it requires on el7.
Regards, Vincent
Hi Vincent,
It's installed by default now, so yes, it's included in the packages manifest on the iso minimal.
Cheers,
On 07/15/2014 02:02 PM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
I've started from scratch a list on my side (feel free to compare with the previous ones used/sent to the list) and I attach it to that mail (see minimal.list)
thanks,
if you can do a list in the manifest format, i can churn that into an iso and get it to buildlogs.c.o ( in the name.arch format )
- KB
Hi,
On 07/15/2014 02:02 PM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
I've started from scratch a list on my side (feel free to compare with the previous ones used/sent to the list) and I attach it to that mail (see minimal.list)
I've just done a build with the added packages to match the manifest here ( 12 rpms added ).
Build is now on buildlogs.centos.org/centos/7/isos/ and has sha256sum:
04e99a4f1a013b95a7ebc9a90ffa9ac64d28eb9872bc193fbd7c581ec9b6a360 CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-Minimal.iso
please test, this build should be considered as a RC
- KB
On 07/17/2014 09:52 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
Hi,
On 07/15/2014 02:02 PM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
I've started from scratch a list on my side (feel free to compare with the previous ones used/sent to the list) and I attach it to that mail (see minimal.list)
I've just done a build with the added packages to match the manifest here ( 12 rpms added ).
Build is now on buildlogs.centos.org/centos/7/isos/ and has sha256sum:
04e99a4f1a013b95a7ebc9a90ffa9ac64d28eb9872bc193fbd7c581ec9b6a360 CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-Minimal.iso
please test, this build should be considered as a RC
- KB
IPv4 install works fine for me. It installs, boots, I can set up all the options I normally need. XFS as the default file systems for / and /boot, LVM works. Found wireless and wired NICs on several machines. CentOS-Base.repo works, updates install, etc.
Looks release ready to me.
Would be nice to get more feedback, especially for other than standard installs (IPv6, encrypted disk, etc.)
On 07/18/2014 11:38 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 07/17/2014 09:52 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
Hi,
On 07/15/2014 02:02 PM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
I've started from scratch a list on my side (feel free to compare with the previous ones used/sent to the list) and I attach it to that mail (see minimal.list)
I've just done a build with the added packages to match the manifest here ( 12 rpms added ).
Build is now on buildlogs.centos.org/centos/7/isos/ and has sha256sum:
04e99a4f1a013b95a7ebc9a90ffa9ac64d28eb9872bc193fbd7c581ec9b6a360 CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-Minimal.iso
please test, this build should be considered as a RC
- KB
IPv4 install works fine for me. It installs, boots, I can set up all the options I normally need. XFS as the default file systems for / and /boot, LVM works. Found wireless and wired NICs on several machines. CentOS-Base.repo works, updates install, etc.
Looks release ready to me.
Would be nice to get more feedback, especially for other than standard installs (IPv6, encrypted disk, etc.)
I've done two tests in VirtualBox:
1. First I tried to do an install in EFI mode but the install process crashed . First I got the message displayed at http://wdl.lug.ro/shot0001.png and after a few seconds ( screen went completely blank ) the VM crashed. 2. Second I did a non-EFI install, using an encrypted filesystem. Everything went smoothly, no problems at all. http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=7293 did not manifest, as soon as the VM booted I was properly prompted for the password.
Worth mentioning maybe that if I enable EFI in the VM settings of the VM installed during the second test, it boots and lands in the UEFI interactive shell, only in the presence of the installer iso does it crash.
On 19/07/14 04:23, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 07/18/2014 11:38 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 07/17/2014 09:52 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
Hi,
On 07/15/2014 02:02 PM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
I've started from scratch a list on my side (feel free to compare with the previous ones used/sent to the list) and I attach it to that mail (see minimal.list)
I've just done a build with the added packages to match the manifest here ( 12 rpms added ).
Build is now on buildlogs.centos.org/centos/7/isos/ and has sha256sum:
04e99a4f1a013b95a7ebc9a90ffa9ac64d28eb9872bc193fbd7c581ec9b6a360 CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-Minimal.iso
please test, this build should be considered as a RC
- KB
IPv4 install works fine for me. It installs, boots, I can set up all the options I normally need. XFS as the default file systems for / and /boot, LVM works. Found wireless and wired NICs on several machines. CentOS-Base.repo works, updates install, etc.
Looks release ready to me.
Would be nice to get more feedback, especially for other than standard installs (IPv6, encrypted disk, etc.)
I've done two tests in VirtualBox:
- First I tried to do an install in EFI mode but the install process
crashed . First I got the message displayed at http://wdl.lug.ro/shot0001.png and after a few seconds ( screen went completely blank ) the VM crashed.
I've just done an install in (U)EFI mode (in VirtualBox, on my CentOS 7 laptop) and it works fine. Just curious : which VirtualBox version (using 4.3.12 here)
- Second I did a non-EFI install, using an encrypted filesystem.
Everything went smoothly, no problems at all. http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=7293 did not manifest, as soon as the VM booted I was properly prompted for the password.
Worth mentioning maybe that if I enable EFI in the VM settings of the VM installed during the second test, it boots and lands in the UEFI interactive shell, only in the presence of the installer iso does it crash. _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 07/19/2014 11:27 AM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
- First I tried to do an install in EFI mode but the install process
crashed . First I got the message displayed at http://wdl.lug.ro/shot0001.png and after a few seconds ( screen went completely blank ) the VM crashed.
I've just done an install in (U)EFI mode (in VirtualBox, on my CentOS 7 laptop) and it works fine. Just curious : which VirtualBox version (using 4.3.12 here)
[wolfy@wolfy2 ~]$ rpm -qa Virt* VirtualBox-4.2-4.2.24_92790_el6-1.x86_64
On 07/13/2014 10:01 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
We pushed and did some initial testing around a minimal build last night on irc. the builds were pushed to http://buildlogs.centos.org/centos/7/isos/x86_64
It does not have the anaconda changes we typically do with the minimal install, but otherwise it should be a complete build at 565MB in size.
please test it, its essential that we get as wide a testing base and options / variations as possible.
I've done a couple of installs as a VMWare Workstation guest. All went good until I decided to encrypt the FS. Once I did that, after install ends and the VM reboots I get only a dark screen with no opportunity to input the password. I can mount and see the content if I boot from the rescue disk.
On 14/07/14 11:41, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 07/13/2014 10:01 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
We pushed and did some initial testing around a minimal build last night on irc. the builds were pushed to http://buildlogs.centos.org/centos/7/isos/x86_64
It does not have the anaconda changes we typically do with the minimal install, but otherwise it should be a complete build at 565MB in size.
please test it, its essential that we get as wide a testing base and options / variations as possible.
I've done a couple of installs as a VMWare Workstation guest. All went good until I decided to encrypt the FS. Once I did that, after install ends and the VM reboots I get only a dark screen with no opportunity to input the password. I can mount and see the content if I boot from the rescue disk.
That one is "known" : http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=7293
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 5:51 AM, Fabian Arrotin fabian.arrotin@arrfab.net wrote:
On 14/07/14 11:41, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 07/13/2014 10:01 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
We pushed and did some initial testing around a minimal build last night on irc. the builds were pushed to http://buildlogs.centos.org/centos/7/isos/x86_64
It does not have the anaconda changes we typically do with the minimal install, but otherwise it should be a complete build at 565MB in size.
please test it, its essential that we get as wide a testing base and options / variations as possible.
I've done a couple of installs as a VMWare Workstation guest. All went good until I decided to encrypt the FS. Once I did that, after install ends and the VM reboots I get only a dark screen with no opportunity to input the password. I can mount and see the content if I boot from the rescue disk.
That one is "known" : http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=7293
-- Fabian Arrotin gpg key: 56BEC54E | twitter: @arrfab
Given that rhgb is 'Red Hat Graphical Boot', that it simply pops up eye candy during boot, that it doesn't actually assist in the boot process, and that it's destabilizing complex environments, *AGAIN*: any chance of just turning it the heck off by default in anaconda's original grub setup?
-
Anssi Johansson -
Bryan Seitz -
Fabian Arrotin -
Igor Zubkov -
Jeff Sheltren -
Jim Perrin -
John R. Dennison -
Johnny Hughes -
Karanbir Singh -
Les Mikesell -
Manuel Wolfshant -
Nico Kadel-Garcia -
Peter -
Roozbeh Shafiee -
Stephen John Smoogen -
Trevor Hemsley -
Vincent Van der Kussen -
vincent＠vanderkussen.org