Discuss December 2015

discuss@lists.centos.org

131 participants
133 discussions

Version numbering vis a vis CentOS and RHEL
by Phelps, Matthew 08 Dec '15

08 Dec '15

OK, I'm staring a new thread. On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Timothy Murphy <gayleard(a)eircom.net> wrote: > Phelps, Matthew wrote: > > >> > Oh, wait: CentOS, love it or leave it. > >> > >> Correct. > >> > >> In fact, I would prefer you leave. > > > > Really? > > > > This is what we're dealing with now? > > > > OK. I will recommend we move away from CentOS. > > This seems to be raising what to me is a trivial issue > to an absurd level of hostility. > Johnny Hughes' comment was uncharacteristically harsh; > and yours is even harsher. > > To me, CentOS is a highly stable OS for my home servers, > and I am eternally grateful to Johnny Hughes and his colleagues > for carrying out what looks to me like an impossibly complex task. > > The numbering of packages is a very small part of this. > On the other hand, a kernel panic would be very worrying to me > if it were in fact likely to happen. > I am glad to hear that I have no need to worry. > To you, and probably a majority of CentOS users, the "version number" of CentOS is indeed a trivial, cosmetic issue. However, there are those of us who use CentOS in a very large enterprise environment. That is, in fact, the intended audience of the whole distro. When there is a "new version" of Red Hat (and I know that means nothing with hundreds of constantly updating packages; however, my bosses don't get that), and hence CentOS, there is a huge amount of work that needs to be done in a typical enterprise. These include, but are not limited to: - setting up a new internal-only mirror of the distribution - setting up a new tftp/PXEboot/kickstart environment for network installs. - Editing several install scripts to match the new environment - Testing all these changes - Checking that all security recommendations/edicts from a higher authority (e.g. the US Government), which are also based on the "version", are followed - Checking that all commercial software supports the release (most of these use "RHEL X.y", what is that in CentOS now?) - Trying to get support from commercial software when the "version numbers" don't match - Coordination of other repositories (e.g. EPEL) is based on the "version", how does that work now? All of these things ran in parallel with the RHEL release cycle, and the work could be done at the same time. That was the overriding philosophy of CentOS, "we are a recompile of RHEL." Now, the impression is (rightly or wrongly, it doesn't matter to me) CentOS is totally becoming a separate Linux distro, and needs to be treated as such. And that has huge implications for system administrators in a large environment. Huge. There are answers to all these questions, but there is a lot of confusion that's been generated by this seemingly cosmetic change in version numbers. I've checked, and there was no,"We're considering creating this basic difference from RHEL, how will this affect you?" on this list, or the website, etc. From our viewpoint, it was sprung on us out of nowhere, and now were being told "deal with it, or leave." It sucks. -- Matt Phelps System Administrator, Computation Facility Harvard - Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics mphelps(a)cfa.harvard.edu, http://www.cfa.harvard.edu

10 15

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 130, Issue 2
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 08 Dec '15

08 Dec '15

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to centos-announce(a)centos.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to centos-announce-request(a)centos.org You can reach the person managing the list at centos-announce-owner(a)centos.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..." Today's Topics: 1. CESA-2015:2549 Moderate CentOS 6 libxml2 Security Update (Johnny Hughes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 13:26:33 +0000 From: Johnny Hughes <johnny(a)centos.org> To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2015:2549 Moderate CentOS 6 libxml2 Security Update Message-ID: <20151207132633.GA36846(a)n04.lon1.karan.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2015:2549 Moderate Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2015-2549.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) i386: ef6fc5b110883e8b85e6e0aadb0dece190506569ba1c25247b612ffee5e10e7c libxml2-2.7.6-20.el6_7.1.i686.rpm 02e4ba1fea746762064a0fc7ba37d9fa1626cefd43257360db633fb23007c1d7 libxml2-devel-2.7.6-20.el6_7.1.i686.rpm d45068dcb62936bfd95e45182c807339dc060963d97adeae4d7717943a0107df libxml2-python-2.7.6-20.el6_7.1.i686.rpm 3c14ee97b4f56ede803f59fcdadb4786e3e4ab6792d68e7b509e7a346973b363 libxml2-static-2.7.6-20.el6_7.1.i686.rpm x86_64: ef6fc5b110883e8b85e6e0aadb0dece190506569ba1c25247b612ffee5e10e7c libxml2-2.7.6-20.el6_7.1.i686.rpm 6c42e07b5804dc8c346d5fa29755a515e8338618fc2b228959e4449e0d7b3227 libxml2-2.7.6-20.el6_7.1.x86_64.rpm 02e4ba1fea746762064a0fc7ba37d9fa1626cefd43257360db633fb23007c1d7 libxml2-devel-2.7.6-20.el6_7.1.i686.rpm 46fa4d9f942837bb4dc48907578ed4e12ca6a830b61719c649ff2b7ac5292bbf libxml2-devel-2.7.6-20.el6_7.1.x86_64.rpm 248032ec39a9aa0964763fa824604bc696dc54b59adaaac6b9e7c54f76137518 libxml2-python-2.7.6-20.el6_7.1.x86_64.rpm 67315973b872c5fdfc8656df43af9d21bd9a881e4c20d1bff3f53db1def4022b libxml2-static-2.7.6-20.el6_7.1.x86_64.rpm Source: 647b02b23b0fc8a0cb8d0821279cb4600f130b3776e345e91dee342f8dfbbbb4 libxml2-2.7.6-20.el6_7.1.src.rpm -- Johnny Hughes CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ } irc: hughesjr, #centos(a)irc.freenode.net Twitter: @JohnnyCentOS ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ CentOS-announce mailing list CentOS-announce(a)centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce End of CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 130, Issue 2 ***********************************************

1 0

7.2 kernel panic on boot
by Duncan Brown 08 Dec '15

08 Dec '15

Hi All After upgrading to 7.2, I'm getting an immediate kernel panic on boot Dropping back to 3.10.0-229.20.1.el7.x86_64 and the system boots fine How can I go about diagnosing the problem here? thanks Duncan

23 91

A bareos question
by m.roth＠5-cent.us 08 Dec '15

08 Dec '15

I've upgraded to 15.2, which has a webui. However, I'd like to tell it to use kerboros, not a hard-coded password in a configuration file. Any clues? mark

1 0

Using typescript as a default shell?
by Benjamin Smith 08 Dec '15

08 Dec '15

Is it possible to use 'script' command that records what happens in a session as the default shell? How could you deal with multiple logins at once? What about output from rsync and the like?

4 4

Centos 7 Yum conflict libicalss
by david 08 Dec '15

08 Dec '15

Folks My Centos 7 systems are all failing to update because of Error: Package: orage-4.10.0-4.el7.x86_64 (@epel) Requires: libicalss.so.0()(64bit) Removing: libical-0.48-6.el7.x86_64 (@base) libicalss.so.0()(64bit) Updated By: libical-1.0.1-1.el7.x86_64 (cr) ~libicalss.so.1()(64bit) Error: Package: orage-4.10.0-4.el7.x86_64 (@epel) Requires: libicalvcal.so.0()(64bit) Removing: libical-0.48-6.el7.x86_64 (@base) libicalvcal.so.0()(64bit) Updated By: libical-1.0.1-1.el7.x86_64 (cr) ~libicalvcal.so.1()(64bit) Error: Package: orage-4.10.0-4.el7.x86_64 (@epel) Requires: libical.so.0()(64bit) Removing: libical-0.48-6.el7.x86_64 (@base) libical.so.0()(64bit) Updated By: libical-1.0.1-1.el7.x86_64 (cr) ~libical.so.1()(64bit) You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest Is there something I should (not) be doing? The command was: yum update David

5 5

About CentOS Marks
by Takuya Yamamoto 08 Dec '15

08 Dec '15

Hello https://www.centos.org/legal/trademarks/ According to above, I found following message. ---------------------- Notwithstanding anything to the contrary provided in these Guidelines, the following are examples of unacceptable uses: 1.Use of the CentOS Marks in connection with commercial redistribution of CentOS software ---------------------- I have a question. What means "Use of the CentOS Marks"? For example, While CentOS is booting up, CentOS show the CentOS logo on Full screen. Is it unacceptable? Or acceptable? If commercial redistribution of CentOS software, Developer have to hide this logo? For example, CentOS System is working, user can show the "CentOS" text words on console. Is it unacceptable? Or acceptable? br ----------------------- Yamamoto Takuya

2 1

Centos-7: odd yum output
by Fred Smith 07 Dec '15

07 Dec '15

Hi all! On 7.1 + CR updates, running "yum list installed | grep -y totem" gives this: yum list installed | grep -y totem totem.x86_64 1:3.14.3-5.el7 @cr totem-nautilus.x86_64 1:3.14.3-5.el7 @cr totem-pl-parser.x86_64 3.10.5-1.el7 @cr and "yum list installed | grep -y totem" gives this: yum list available | grep -y totem gnome-python2-totem.x86_64 2.32.0-20.el7.nux nux-dextop totem-devel.x86_64 1:3.14.3-5.el7 cr totem-mozplugin.x86_64 1:3.8.2-5.el7 base totem-mozplugin-vegas.x86_64 1:3.8.2-5.el7 base totem-pl-parser.i686 3.10.5-1.el7 cr totem-pl-parser-devel.i686 3.10.5-1.el7 cr totem-pl-parser-devel.x86_64 3.10.5-1.el7 cr so then, why is it that "yum install totem-mozplugin" gives this? yum install totem-mozplugin Loaded plugins: fastestmirror, langpacks, nvidia Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile * base: mirrors.lga7.us.voxel.net * elrepo: iad.mirror.rackspace.com * epel: mirrors.mit.edu * extras: mirror.ash.fastserv.com * nux-dextop: mirror.li.nux.ro * updates: centos.chi.host-engine.com Package 1:totem-mozplugin-3.8.2-5.el7.x86_64 is obsoleted by 1:totem-3.14.3-5.el7.x86_64 which is already installed Nothing to do I don't understand, UNLESS it's saying that the totem package now includes the plugin? OK, I can understand that. But looking at the contents of the RPM, it seems to contain only plugins for itself. I'm just upgrading to 7.x, now, and the 6.x box previously had several plugins installed that I can't find, nor even remember where I found 'em. (probably has to do with my age... :[ ) Advice will be appreciated. thanks in advance! Fred -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Under no circumstances will I ever purchase anything offered to me as the result of an unsolicited e-mail message. Nor will I forward chain letters, petitions, mass mailings, or virus warnings to large numbers of others. This is my contribution to the survival of the online community. --Roger Ebert, December, 1996 ----------------------------- The Boulder Pledge -----------------------------

2 1

lunar notation in crontab
by ken 06 Dec '15

06 Dec '15

Crontab offers many refined facilities for Western calendaring, but none for traditional Eastern-- lunar-- designations. So for example, if one wants specify regular occurring events on full moons or on new moons, there is no way to do this. Emacs (a text processor!?) accomplishes this. The math for calculating lunar calendaring is already available; mathematical functions are already available for simple downloading and so would need simply integration into crond. User settings in crontab would make most sense designated in the 'day of month' field with keyword either 'full' or 'new' (abbreviated with 'f' or 'n') prepended to a signed integer number of days (N * 24 hours). I.e., "new+5" would specify '5 days after the new moon'; "full-1" would specify "24 hours prior to the full moon"; "new+0", "new-0" and "new" would all mean the same: "the moment of the new moon". I suppose that alternate syntaxes could be more refined, including hours and minutes before/after new/full, so possibly useful, but then also more complex. Alternate and more refined time periods would be a question for developers.

3 2

Firewalld zone conflict
by Colin Coles 04 Dec '15

04 Dec '15

Hi, In CentOS7 I have added two zones using firewall-cmd, each for different ports/services and interfaces when I try to --add-source to the second zone with an IP that is already in the first I am getting an 'Error: ZONE_CONFLICT' message. Am I trying to do something illogical or is this a feature? Cheers, Colin.

2 2

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss December 2015