-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 06/15/2014 08:00 AM, centos-devel-request@centos.org wrote:
Message: 8 Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 16:22:33 +0100 From: Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org Subject: Re: [CentOS-devel] CentOS 7 Public QA Release Beginner's Question To: centos-devel@centos.org Message-ID: 539C68B9.1080703@karan.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 06/14/2014 01:28 PM, Bob Lightfoot wrote:
Looks like a great lot of work, so thanks for the effort. As a Fedora Testor I am puzzled somewhat though. Is there available reading material and such as how I would go about using these rpm with a qemu/kvm for testing without having the installer available yet? Obviously I can test the install media when it exists just like I do for Fedora, but using these trees of rpms is a new skill I am hoping to add. Don't want to bog anyone down with explaining it in detail, as I don't mind reading and teaching myself, just need pointed where to look.
we also spend quite a bit of time looking at and working with the rpms themselves to make sure they built ok, carry the right metadata, and then work on the branding stuff - ideally that, and migration paths from 6 to 7 are what we'd be expecting people to be consuming and testing here.
- KB
KB - you mention migration paths from 6 to 7 and branding stuff. Are you envisioning a test like taking an up to date c6 installation and the yum installing c7 rpms and looking for hiccups and issues? I'm not quite sure I understand what is meant by migration when as yet there is no C7 installer or install tree.
Sincerely, Bob Lightfoot
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 12:58:10PM -0400, Bob Lightfoot wrote:
KB - you mention migration paths from 6 to 7 and branding stuff. Are you envisioning a test like taking an up to date c6 installation and the yum installing c7 rpms and looking for hiccups and issues? I'm not quite sure I understand what is meant by migration when as yet there is no C7 installer or install tree.
RedHat has provided a mechanism to upgrade from EL6 to EL7 in RHEL7.
Not useful w/o a subscription but you can see they do support it :)
https://access.redhat.com/site/solutions/637583
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Bryan Seitz seitz@bsd-unix.net wrote:
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 12:58:10PM -0400, Bob Lightfoot wrote:
KB - you mention migration paths from 6 to 7 and branding stuff. Are you envisioning a test like taking an up to date c6 installation and the yum installing c7 rpms and looking for hiccups and issues? I'm not quite sure I understand what is meant by migration when as yet there is no C7 installer or install tree.
RedHat has provided a mechanism to upgrade from EL6 to EL7 in RHEL7.
Not useful w/o a subscription but you can see they do support it :)
This doc is open to the public:
https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/...
Akemi
Greetings,
----- Original Message -----
KB - you mention migration paths from 6 to 7 and branding stuff. Are you envisioning a test like taking an up to date c6 installation and the yum installing c7 rpms and looking for hiccups and issues? I'm not quite sure I understand what is meant by migration when as yet there is no C7 installer or install tree.
I'm not going to speak for KB (he doesn't even know who I am)... but I imagine he was referring the major version upgrade method Red Hat is promoting with RHEL7. Fedora made FedUp and it has been in use for a few Fedora releases. Red Hat has basically adapted preupgrade and fedup and greatly expanded them. They even put a blurb about it in the RHEL 7 Installation Guide.
See: https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/...
That refers to a RH Knowledgebase article (customer portal account needed to read):
https://access.redhat.com/site/solutions/637583
I believe accounts are free so those without accounts, you might consider giving it a shot and signing up. I have an account so I'm able to read it. Here's a tiny bit of the overview portion:
"Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 (RHEL 7) is the first major release of RHEL to allow in-place upgrades from the previous RHEL major release (RHEL 6). An in-place upgrade offers a way of upgrading a system to a new major release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux without removing the existing operating system."
In a nutshell you use have to be current / all updated (you are, aren't you?), running the 64bit version (since there isn't a 32bit RHEL7), hopefully you don't have a ton of packages... and no third-party repo stuff (if so, get rid of that stuff for the upgrade process and add it back after)... then install preupgrade-assistant. preupgrade-assistant (preupg) is a several step process (greatly enhanced beyond Fedora)... and if everything looks good (they have reporting tool with several output options)... then you can give the redhat-upgrade-tool a try.
I'm sure CentOS will have to examine that whole major-upgrade-ball-of-fun for redhat-isms... but I'm guessing the process adapted to upgrade CentOS as well as it upgrades RHEL. I tried it once or twice on Fedora and there really were a number of factors that could make it hit or miss... and I haven't even tried it on RHEL yet... and not sure I ever will. With Fedora I preferred clean installs over upgrades because I know my systems well enough where a clean install and a data restore is much faster than all of the work involved in the upgrade process. YMMV.
I see people asking questions on this list like... huh... why is xfs the default filesystem in EL7? And now someone didn't know about the upgrade tool that's all new in EL7. Red Hat always releases a ton of documentation and this release is certainly no exception. They actually added a handful of new guides so check them out. At the very least everyone interested in helping with CentOS 7 building / development should look at the release notes, don't'cha thinK?
See everything here:
https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/
Unfortunately they don't seem to have the html-single option anymore... where you could show a whole guide as a single HTML page with your browser find function being very helpful (CONTROL-f in Firefox anyway). They still offer html (page-by-page) and PDF. Maybe they'll add html-single back in the future? I've been chugging away threw the documentation and I have a ways to go... and a lot of it is review for me since I'm a hardcore Fedora user... but wow... there is a TON of fantastic documentation just begging to be consumed. Knowledge is power, eh? :)
TYL,
Greetings,
I just uploaded centos-7-pubqa-20140615.tar.xz to the OpenVZ contributed OS Templates directory on the download section of the OpenVZ website. I sent an email to the OpenVZ Users mailing list with the details. Anyone interested can find it here:
http://lists.openvz.org/pipermail/users/2014-June/005644.html
Please note that that did *NOT* wrap well in my browser so you may have to copy / paste and word wrap it to make it readable without a horrible amount of horizontal scrolling.
I would provide a link to it but every OpenVZ user *SHOULD* know where to find OS Templates on the OpenVZ website, right? :)
cough... anyway...
Yeah, it seems to work fairly well for me. Now to try to make a much bulkier OpenVZ OS Template from that minimal one... to include some GUI stuff like KDE and desktop apps I like... with x2goserver from EPEL for quick and easy remote access over ssh. EL 7 will make a nice desktop until it starts getting long-in-the-tooth. :)
Just to clarify, I'm just a user and this is in no way an "official" release from the CentOS Project. Enjoy. Questions or comments are welcome to email me directly... reply to this mailing list... or on the OpenVZ Users mailing list.
TYL,
On 06/15/2014 09:58 PM, Scott Dowdle wrote:
Greetings,
I just uploaded centos-7-pubqa-20140615.tar.xz to the OpenVZ contributed OS Templates directory on the download section of the OpenVZ website. I sent an email to the OpenVZ Users mailing list with the details. Anyone interested can find it here:
http://lists.openvz.org/pipermail/users/2014-June/005644.html
See, this is the exact sort of thing we dont want to be doing here. Please make sure you delete those images on a nightly basis as new builds are made available at buildlogs.centos.org
again - to remind everyone - the public QA is meant to be to QA CentOS releases, this is not user or further community ready.
please dont make us take this process private again.
Greetings,
----- Original Message -----
See, this is the exact sort of thing we dont want to be doing here. Please make sure you delete those images on a nightly basis as new builds are made available at buildlogs.centos.org
again - to remind everyone - the public QA is meant to be to QA CentOS releases, this is not user or further community ready.
please dont make us take this process private again.
I'll defer to your better judgment... but in my defense...
1) I clearly say it is a testing build
2) I say that build is going to be moving and updated until the final is released (although not everyone is going to read everything I wrote)
3) I did it so OpenVZ users can start seeing what's new in the upcoming CentOS 7 release... just like everyone else is in the other forms the publicly available build tree has made possible. I didn't see you say anything about the Docker release someone mentioned on the list... that is published in the public Docker image thingie. Perhaps you didn't see that. I know you are busy.
So after taking the above into consideration you want me to remove it, I will.
TYL,
On 06/16/2014 12:42 AM, Scott Dowdle wrote:
So after taking the above into consideration you want me to remove it, I will.
if you can just do that - remove it nightly, to make sure the only one you have there is the same content as we are pushing from buildlogs, and remove all signatures.
We dont think it good enough or usable enough to sign. So having a downstream sign it is a bit strange.
Also, it might be a good idea to work this via the Virt SIG.
Greetings,
----- Original Message -----
On 06/16/2014 12:42 AM, Scott Dowdle wrote:
So after taking the above into consideration you want me to remove it, I will.
if you can just do that - remove it nightly, to make sure the only one you have there is the same content as we are pushing from buildlogs, and remove all signatures.
We dont think it good enough or usable enough to sign. So having a downstream sign it is a bit strange.
Also, it might be a good idea to work this via the Virt SIG.
Thanks for the quick reply. To have the head dude of the project announce to everyone that I had done something so bad that it makes him consider the decision to build in public... I ain't going to lie... I felt like I was going to throw up for a few minutes. Seriously. :(
If you change you mind (assuming I understood you correctly) and you want me to take it down I can and will. I have write access to the OpenVZ contrib OS Templates directory and other than the project leader (Kir Kolyshkin), I'm the only person who posts submissions for contributors. I pledge to keep it updated and replace it as often as CentOS has milestones... and will have an updated package (later) on CentOS 7 GA day. I've done it with several previous point releases for the 5.x and 6.x series... for CentOS, SL, and maybe even for OracleEL (once I think).
On the "signing" thing... contributed OS Templates are "as is" and "use at your own risk" because going through an OS Template to insure it hasn't been tampered with is a lot of work an not even attempted by the project. It would require making a complete file list, using package manager verification... finding those files that aren't provided-by-a-package as well as those that are provide-by-a-package-but-altered (almost always valid like a config)... and then manually checking what remains. I've had users ask about the security of the contributed OS Templates... and the best we can do is try to provide information about who built them and link to any outside documentation the creator might have written... as well as providing .asc GPG signature files so the downloader can have some confidence that the OS Template they downloaded came from who it said it came from... and hasn't been altered by someone else. The web-of-trust isn't prefect but it is better than nothing. We haven't had reported suspect contributed OS Templates in the 8+ years I've been contributing. I hate to say that because it's like an airline crowing about having no accidents... it tempts fate and I don't like to do that.
It's a contributed OS Template so by its nature, it isn't official. I'm sure Kir will have an "official" (meaning made by the OpenVZ Project itself... which is either Kir himself or the folks back at the Parallels mothership) sometime after CentOS 7 GA. The official OS Templates always are marked as beta their first release and moved out the next refresh if no problems are reported. They haven't worked with CentOS in the past... but I have volunteered to help with the Virt SIG... to crete a CentOS variant that has OpenVZ pre-installed/configured... but yeah, it would be nice to have CentOS OS Templates for OpenVZ semi-official posted on centos.org somewhere if possible. We'll see how it goes as things progress. It will probably be a while before OpenVZ releases a new OpenVZ kernel based on the EL7 kernel.
Sorry to write so much. I did try to shorten it as much as I could. Really.
TYL,
On 06/16/2014 01:51 AM, Scott Dowdle wrote:
If you change you mind (assuming I understood you correctly) and you want me to take it down I can and will. I have write access to the OpenVZ contrib OS Templates directory and other than the project leader (Kir Kolyshkin), I'm the only person who posts submissions for contributors. I pledge to keep it updated and replace it as often as CentOS has milestones... and will have an updated package (later) on CentOS 7 GA day. I've done it with several previous point releases for the 5.x and 6.x series... for CentOS, SL, and maybe even for OracleEL (once I think).
On one hand its great to have another group of people looking at the same stuff, trying to break it and provide feedback. However, in this case that is a user facing audience - and this content is not best suited for that. On the other hand, there is really no feedback loop being setup for their issues to be brought here ( unless you are taking on that task, wasent clear ).
If you can replace those images with newer content as its pushed from our end ( its going to be nightly ), and remove the signatures on those images, and finally create some sort of a feedback loop where someone in that group takes the responsibility of bringing issues to this group ( well, bugs.centos.org ) - then we should be mostly good.
However, what I would recomemnd and request you do is to contribute how those images are built, help with automating that process, and we can just start pushing these images along with the other ones we are going to be doing ( eg. docker and hvm etc ). We can likely do this via the CCIS repos. Look at https://git.centos.org/summary/?r=sig-cloud-instance/build-instance.git which is also mirrored at : https://github.com/CentOS/sig-cloud-instance-build
- KB
Greetings,
----- Original Message -----
On one hand its great to have another group of people looking at the same stuff, trying to break it and provide feedback. However, in this case that is a user facing audience - and this content is not best suited for that.
Now that I've thought about it more, I agree with you... and since I only get a small handful of comments a year from users on contributed OS Tepmlates... it wouldn't be any benefit to the CentOS Project anyway.
I'll just remove them... and continue to make them for my own use until the GA comes out. Sorry to have wasted your time.
So far as explaining how they are built and getting them automated by CentOS... I guess you weren't grasping the whole concept. These are "contributed" OS Templates. As previously stated the OpenVZ Project does provide official OS Templates for a number of distros including CentOS. That might be something CentOS is rightly interested in automating... but the contributed ones... it would be like Ubuntu wanting to take over the build process for Mint... if that is any more clear.
TYL,
Scott,
I am very keen on the centos7 packages for openvz, as I heavily use openvz personally and at work. I'd like to get involved if we can get this officially through centos supported, and automatically built as part of the centos build process
If you could share your build process, then I will try it myself, and get it working
-- Arif Ali
IRC: arif-ali at freenode LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/arifali
On 16 June 2014 16:28, Scott Dowdle dowdle@montanalinux.org wrote:
Greetings,
----- Original Message -----
On one hand its great to have another group of people looking at the same stuff, trying to break it and provide feedback. However, in this case that is a user facing audience - and this content is not best suited for that.
Now that I've thought about it more, I agree with you... and since I only get a small handful of comments a year from users on contributed OS Tepmlates... it wouldn't be any benefit to the CentOS Project anyway.
I'll just remove them... and continue to make them for my own use until the GA comes out. Sorry to have wasted your time.
So far as explaining how they are built and getting them automated by CentOS... I guess you weren't grasping the whole concept. These are "contributed" OS Templates. As previously stated the OpenVZ Project does provide official OS Templates for a number of distros including CentOS. That might be something CentOS is rightly interested in automating... but the contributed ones... it would be like Ubuntu wanting to take over the build process for Mint... if that is any more clear.
TYL,
Scott Dowdle 704 Church Street Belgrade, MT 59714 (406)388-0827 [home] (406)994-3931 [work] _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 06/15/2014 05:58 PM, Bob Lightfoot wrote:
KB - you mention migration paths from 6 to 7 and branding stuff. Are you envisioning a test like taking an up to date c6 installation and the yum installing c7 rpms and looking for hiccups and issues? I'm not quite sure I understand what is meant by migration when as yet there is no C7 installer or install tree.
Hi,
you have already had context on the upgrade process :)
w.r.t the installer tree's, there is an install process, there just isnt any ISOS for the distro ( but there is a boot.iso that can be used from optical media and usb media ).
-
Akemi Yagi -
Arif Ali -
Bob Lightfoot -
Bryan Seitz -
Karanbir Singh -
Scott Dowdle