Discuss January 2020

discuss@lists.centos.org

93 participants
71 discussions

CentOS 8 - auto-loading kickstart from USB doesn't work
by Chris Adams 16 Jan '20

16 Jan '20

While updating my base kickstart for CentOS 8.1, I noticed it won't auto-load from a USB device. I'm testing in a VM, but usually add a USB drive for the ks.cfg because my kickstart skips USB drives when picking where to install. If I leave the drive a virtio, or make it a CD, it works. I found https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1770969 which then references a RHEL-subscriber-only solution. -- Chris Adams <linux(a)cmadams.net>

1 0

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8: several packages have unresolved dependencies after "dnf update all "
by Stephen John Smoogen 16 Jan '20

16 Jan '20

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 09:48, Philippe Piot <piot(a)nicadd.niu.edu> wrote: > > No it did not work; see: > [piot@paris ~]$ sudo dnf install --nobest --allowerasing gcc-c++ > Last metadata expiration check: 0:18:24 ago on Thu 16 Jan 2020 08:28:51 AM CST. > Error: > Problem: package gcc-8.3.1-4.5.el8.x86_64 requires glibc-devel >= 2.2.90-12, but none of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-devel-2.28-72.el8.i686 requires glibc-headers, but none of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-devel-2.28-72.el8.i686 requires glibc-headers = 2.28-72.el8, but none of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-devel-2.28-72.el8.x86_64 requires glibc-headers, but none of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-devel-2.28-72.el8.x86_64 requires glibc-headers = 2.28-72.el8, but none of the providers can be installed > - package gcc-c++-8.3.1-4.5.el8.x86_64 requires gcc = 8.3.1-4.5.el8, but none of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-headers-2.28-72.el8.i686 requires kernel-headers, but none of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-headers-2.28-72.el8.i686 requires kernel-headers >= 2.2.1, but none of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-headers-2.28-72.el8.x86_64 requires kernel-headers, but none of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-headers-2.28-72.el8.x86_64 requires kernel-headers >= 2.2.1, but none of the providers can be installed OK let us see if we can see what is on the system which is causing the problem. It is either going to be an existing gcc-XXX which needs to be removed or it is some other i686 item. rpm -qa | egrep 'glibc|gcc' rpm -qa | grep i686 # probably a big file so probably put it in a paste/gist somewhere would be better I just tested on an 8.0 box and was able to install gcc-c++ from 8.1 [root@li1064-117 ~]# yum install gcc-c++ Last metadata expiration check: 1:11:50 ago on 2020-01-16T16:41:09 UTC. Dependencies resolved. ============================================================================================================================================================================================== Package Arch Version Repository Size ============================================================================================================================================================================================== Installing: gcc-c++ x86_64 8.3.1-4.5.el8 AppStream 12 M Upgrading: glibc x86_64 2.28-72.el8 BaseOS 3.5 M glibc-common x86_64 2.28-72.el8 BaseOS 811 k glibc-langpack-en x86_64 2.28-72.el8 BaseOS 818 k libgcc x86_64 8.3.1-4.5.el8 BaseOS 78 k libgomp x86_64 8.3.1-4.5.el8 BaseOS 203 k libstdc++ x86_64 8.3.1-4.5.el8 BaseOS 450 k Installing dependencies: cpp x86_64 8.3.1-4.5.el8 AppStream 10 M gcc x86_64 8.3.1-4.5.el8 AppStream 23 M isl x86_64 0.16.1-6.el8 AppStream 841 k libmpc x86_64 1.0.2-9.el8 AppStream 59 k libstdc++-devel x86_64 8.3.1-4.5.el8 AppStream 2.0 M glibc-devel x86_64 2.28-72.el8 BaseOS 1.0 M glibc-headers x86_64 2.28-72.el8 BaseOS 469 k kernel-headers x86_64 4.18.0-147.3.1.el8_1 BaseOS 2.7 M libxcrypt-devel x86_64 4.1.1-4.el8 BaseOS 25 k Transaction Summary ============================================================================================================================================================================================== Install 10 Packages Upgrade 6 Packages Total download size: 59 M Is this ok [y/N]: y Downloading Packages: (1/16): cpp-8.3.1-4.5.el8.x86_64.rpm 31 MB/s | 10 MB 00:00 (2/16): isl-0.16.1-6.el8.x86_64.rpm 21 MB/s | 841 kB 00:00 (3/16): gcc-c++-8.3.1-4.5.el8.x86_64.rpm 28 MB/s | 12 MB 00:00 (4/16): libmpc-1.0.2-9.el8.x86_64.rpm 809 kB/s | 59 kB 00:00 (5/16): glibc-devel-2.28-72.el8.x86_64.rpm 26 MB/s | 1.0 MB 00:00 (6/16): libstdc++-devel-8.3.1-4.5.el8.x86_64.rpm 34 MB/s | 2.0 MB 00:00 (7/16): glibc-headers-2.28-72.el8.x86_64.rpm 17 MB/s | 469 kB 00:00 (8/16): libxcrypt-devel-4.1.1-4.el8.x86_64.rpm 2.1 MB/s | 25 kB 00:00 (9/16): kernel-headers-4.18.0-147.3.1.el8_1.x86_64.rpm 31 MB/s | 2.7 MB 00:00 (10/16): glibc-2.28-72.el8.x86_64.rpm 32 MB/s | 3.5 MB 00:00 (11/16): glibc-common-2.28-72.el8.x86_64.rpm 15 MB/s | 811 kB 00:00 (12/16): libgcc-8.3.1-4.5.el8.x86_64.rpm 6.8 MB/s | 78 kB 00:00 (13/16): glibc-langpack-en-2.28-72.el8.x86_64.rpm 31 MB/s | 818 kB 00:00 (14/16): libgomp-8.3.1-4.5.el8.x86_64.rpm 9.3 MB/s | 203 kB 00:00 (15/16): libstdc++-8.3.1-4.5.el8.x86_64.rpm 21 MB/s | 450 kB 00:00 (16/16): gcc-8.3.1-4.5.el8.x86_64.rpm 29 MB/s | 23 MB 00:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total 71 MB/s | 59 MB 00:00 > - conflicting requests > - package kernel-headers-4.18.0-147.0.3.el8_1.x86_64 is excluded > - package kernel-headers-4.18.0-147.3.1.el8_1.x86_64 is excluded > - package kernel-headers-4.18.0-147.el8.x86_64 is excluded > (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages) > > > Philippe Piot, > https://www.niu.edu/advanced-accelerator-randd/ > Northern Illinois University, Dept of Physics and > Northern Illinois Center for Accelerator & Detector Development > DeKalb, IL 60115, USA > Tel: 815 753 6473, Web: http://www.physics.niu.edu/physics/ > > Argonne National Laboratory, Advanced Photon Source > Accelerator System Division > Lemont, IL 60439, USA > Tel: 630 252 2415, Web: https://www.aps.anl.gov/Accelerator-Systems-Division > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 8:38 AM Stephen John Smoogen <smooge(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 08:27, Philippe Piot <piot(a)nicadd.niu.edu> wrote: >> > >> > Also just to be more specific I am running CentOS 8.1. So the issue I >> > encounter were after upgrading to 8.1. Thank you! -- Philippe. >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 6:48 AM Philippe Piot <piot(a)nicadd.niu.edu> wrote: >> > >> > > I am doing a dnf install package_without_version for instance for g++: >> > > >> > > [piot@paris opal]$ sudo dnf install gcc-c++ >> > > Last metadata expiration check: 0:01:06 ago on Thu 16 Jan 2020 06:45:59 AM >> > > CST. >> > > Error: >> > > Problem: package gcc-8.3.1-4.5.el8.x86_64 requires glibc-devel >= >> > > 2.2.90-12, but none of the providers can be installed >> > > - package glibc-devel-2.28-72.el8.i686 requires glibc-headers, but none >> > > of the providers can be installed >> >> OK I see the problem.. arch difficulties entered in sometime. You have >> some .i686 packages installed which got filtered into the compose at >> some point when they shouldn't have been. >> >> Please try adding --nobest --allowerasing to the install and see if it >> gets past this. >> >> >> >> -- >> Stephen J Smoogen. -- Stephen J Smoogen.

1 0

CentOS 8: several packages have unresolved dependencies after "dnf update all "
by Philippe Piot 16 Jan '20

16 Jan '20

All, While updating my package using dnf update all I allow dnf to clean some package with unresolved dependencies. I would like to reinstall some of them but got an error message "but none of the providers can be installed" during the install process as dnf is trying to install the dependencies. . This happens for some critical package like boost-openmpi-devel (see below for error). In fact the following package were removed and cannot be installed: annobin-8.64-1.el8.x86_64 glibc-headers-2.28-42.el8.1.x86_64 libdrm-devel-2.4.96-2.el8.x86_64 boost-devel-1.66.0-6.el8.x86_64 boost-openmpi-devel-1.66.0-6.el8.x86_64 boost-static-1.66.0-6.el8.x86_64 gcc-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 gcc-c++-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 gcc-gdb-plugin-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 gcc-gfortran-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 glibc-devel-2.28-42.el8.1.x86_64 hdf5-devel-1.10.5-4.el8.x86_64 hdf5-openmpi-devel-1.10.5-4.el8.x86_64 hdf5-openmpi-static-1.10.5-4.el8.x86_64 hdf5-static-1.10.5-4.el8.x86_64 libquadmath-devel-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 libtool-2.4.6-25.el8.x86_64 libxcrypt-devel-4.1.1-4.el8.x86_64 mesa-libEGL-devel-18.3.1-5.el8_0.x86_64 mesa-libGL-devel-18.3.1-5.el8_0.x86_64 openmpi-devel-3.1.2-5.el8.x86_64 poppler-qt5-devel-0.66.0-11.el8_0.12.x86_64 qscintilla-qt5-devel-2.11.2-6.el8.x86_64 qt5-doctools-5.11.1-5.el8.x86_64 qt5-qtbase-devel-5.11.1-5.el8.x86_64 qt5-qtscript-devel-5.11.1-2.el8.x86_64 qt5-qttools-devel-5.11.1-5.el8.x86_64 qt5-qttools-static-5.11.1-5.el8.x86_64 qt5-rpm-macros-5.11.1-2.el8.noarch systemtap-4.0-7.el8.x86_64 systemtap-devel-4.0-7.el8.x86_64 Thank you for any suggestions. -- Philippe. ERROR MESSAGE WHEN TRYING TO INSTALL ONE OF THESE PACKAGES: ------------------------------------------ [piot@paris ~]$ sudo dnf install boost-openmpi-devel [sudo] password for piot: Last metadata expiration check: 0:13:02 ago on Wed 15 Jan 2020 10:05:29 PM CST. Error: Problem: package libquadmath-devel-8.3.1-4.5.el8.x86_64 requires gcc = 8.3.1-4.5.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package gcc-8.3.1-4.5.el8.x86_64 requires glibc-devel >= 2.2.90-12, but none of the providers can be installed - package boost-devel-1.66.0-6.el8.x86_64 requires libquadmath-devel(x86-64), but none of the providers can be installed - package glibc-devel-2.28-72.el8.i686 requires glibc-headers, but none of the providers can be installed - package glibc-devel-2.28-72.el8.i686 requires glibc-headers = 2.28-72.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package glibc-devel-2.28-72.el8.x86_64 requires glibc-headers, but none of the providers can be installed - package glibc-devel-2.28-72.el8.x86_64 requires glibc-headers = 2.28-72.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package boost-openmpi-devel-1.66.0-6.el8.x86_64 requires boost-devel(x86-64) = 1.66.0-6.el8, but none of the providers can be installed - package glibc-headers-2.28-72.el8.i686 requires kernel-headers, but none of the providers can be installed - package glibc-headers-2.28-72.el8.i686 requires kernel-headers >= 2.2.1, but none of the providers can be installed - package glibc-headers-2.28-72.el8.x86_64 requires kernel-headers, but none of the providers can be installed - package glibc-headers-2.28-72.el8.x86_64 requires kernel-headers >= 2.2.1, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best candidate for the job - package kernel-headers-4.18.0-147.0.3.el8_1.x86_64 is excluded - package kernel-headers-4.18.0-147.3.1.el8_1.x86_64 is excluded - package kernel-headers-4.18.0-147.el8.x86_64 is excluded Philippe Piot, https://www.niu.edu/advanced-accelerator-randd/ <https://www.niu.edu/advanced-accelerator-randd/index.shtml> Northern Illinois University, Dept of Physics and Northern Illinois Center for Accelerator & Detector Development DeKalb, IL 60115, USA Tel: 815 753 6473, Web: http://www.physics.niu.edu/physics/ Argonne National Laboratory, Advanced Photon Source Accelerator System Division Lemont, IL 60439, USA Tel: 630 252 2415, Web: https://www.aps.anl.gov/Accelerator-Systems-Division

2 6

openldap-servers missing from PowerTools in CentOS 8.1
by Dario Pilori 16 Jan '20

16 Jan '20

Dear all, after the upgrade to CentOS 8.1.1911, the package openldap-servers is not anymore included in the PowerTools. However, if I look into: https://koji.mbox.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=4971 I can see that this package have been build. Do you know in which repo I can find such package? Thanks in advance, Dario -- Dario Pilori, PhD I.N.Ri.M. - Istituto Nazionale di Ricerca Metrologica Sistemi Informatici Strada delle Cacce, 91 - 10135 - Torino - Italy Ph: +39 011 3919 459

1 0

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 179, Issue 2
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 16 Jan '20

16 Jan '20

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. Release for CentOS 8 (1911) on armhfp (Pablo Sebasti?n Greco) 2. Release for CentOS Linux 8 (1911) (Brian Stinson) 3. CESA-2020:0085 Critical CentOS 7 firefox Security Update (Johnny Hughes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 11:28:09 -0300 From: Pablo Sebasti?n Greco <pgreco(a)centosproject.org> To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Subject: [CentOS-announce] Release for CentOS 8 (1911) on armhfp Message-ID: <d66921e0-af2d-ad95-2559-47146b3975bb(a)centosproject.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed" I am pleased to announce the general availability of CentOS 8 (1911) for armhfp. Effectively immediately, this is the current release for CentOS 8 and is tagged as 1911, derived from Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.1. As always, read through the Release Notes at: https://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS8.1911 - these notes contain important information about the release and details about some of the content inside the release from the CentOS QA team. These notes are updated constantly to include issues and incorporate feedback from the users. ---------- Updates, Sources, and DebugInfos Updates released since the upstream release are all posted. We strongly recommend every user apply all updates, including the content released today, on your existing CentOS 8 machine by just running 'yum update'. As with all CentOS 8 components, this release was built from sources hosted at git.centos.org. In addition, SRPMs that are a byproduct of the build (and also considered critical in the code and buildsys process) are being published to match every binary RPM we release. Sources will be available from vault.centos.org in their own dedicated directories to match the corresponding binary RPMs. Since there is far less traffic to the CentOS source RPMs compared with the binary RPMs, we are not putting this content on the main mirror network. If users wish to mirror this content they can do so using the reposync command available in the yum-utils package. All CentOS source RPMs are signed with the same key used to sign their binary counterparts. Developers and end users looking at inspecting and contributing patches to the CentOS distro will find the code hosted at git.centos.org far simpler to work against. Details on how to best consume those are documented along with a quick start at : http://wiki.centos.org/Sources Debuginfo packages are also being signed and pushed. Yum configs shipped in the new release file will have all the context required for debuginfo to be available on every CentOS install. Everything we ever release, is always available on the vault service for people still looking for and have a real need for it. ---------- Special notes For the release of CentOS 8.1905, we didn't make it in time with armhfp, but now we're on track, releasing all the arches on the same day. Thanks to everyone who has made this possible. For CentOS 8, we don't have (yet) RaspberryPi specific kernels, we're working on a way to simplify the process, and to be able to move between kernels. Also, we know that there are some rpms missing in our armhfp repos in relation to its x86_64 counterpart, we're working on releasing them as soon as possible. ---------- Download In order to conserve donor bandwidth, and to make it possible to get the mirror content sync'd out as soon as possible, we recommend using torrents to get your initial installer images: Altarch images can be downloaded at : http://mirror.centos.org/altarch/8/isos/ sha256sums for armhfp: 3978f364add87d829f0720a00564d09740f895764f91d6a8f5cf7f022be3a431 CentOS-Userland-8-armv7hl-generic-GNOME-1911-sda.raw.xz 397362cb30658b0fd1040f0bc1fef97be472ec265c0582fd17f080567ed613fe CentOS-Userland-8-armv7hl-generic-Minimal-1911-sda.raw.xz ---------- Getting Help The CentOS ecosystem is sustained by community driven help and guidance. The best place to start for new users is at http://wiki.centos.org/GettingHelp We are also on social media, you can find the project: on Twitter at? : http://twitter.com/CentOSProject on Facebook at : https://www.facebook.com/groups/centosproject/ on LinkedIn at : https://www.linkedin.com/groups/22405 And you will find the core team and a majority of the contributors on irc, on freenode.net in #centos and #centos-arm ; talking about the finer points of distribution engineering and platform enablement. Also, please consider reading https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/AltArch/armhfp since it has a lot of help specific to armhfp. ---------- Contributors This release was made possible due to the hard work of many people, foremost on that list are the Red Hat Engineers for producing a great distribution and the CentOS QA team, without them CentOS would look very different. Many of the team went further and beyond expectations to bring this release to you, and I would like to thank everyone for their help. We are also looking for people to get involved with the QA process in CentOS, if you would like to join this please introduce yourself on the centos-devel list (http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel ). Finally, please join me in thanking the donors who all make this possible for us. Enjoy the fresh new release! -- Pablo Greco

1 0

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8: several packages have unresolved dependencies after "dnf update all "
by Philippe Piot 16 Jan '20

16 Jan '20

Just as a followup even g++ is broken: [piot@paris ~]$ g++ bash: g++: command not found... Install package 'gcc-c++' to provide command 'g++'? [N/y] y * Waiting in queue... The following packages have to be downgraded: cpp-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 The C Preprocessor glibc-2.28-42.el8.1.i686 The GNU libc libraries glibc-2.28-42.el8.1.x86_64 The GNU libc libraries glibc-all-langpacks-2.28-42.el8.1.x86_64 All language packs for glibc. glibc-common-2.28-42.el8.1.x86_64 Common binaries and locale data for glibc glibc-langpack-en-2.28-42.el8.1.x86_64 Locale data for en libgomp-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 GCC OpenMP v4.5 shared support library libstdc++-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 GNU Standard C++ Library libstdc++-devel-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 Header files and libraries for C++ development The following packages have to be installed: annobin-8.64-1.el8.x86_64 Binary annotation plugin for GCC gcc-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 Various compilers (C, C++, Objective-C, ...) gcc-c++-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 C++ support for GCC glibc-devel-2.28-42.el8.1.x86_64 Object files for development using standard C libraries. glibc-headers-2.28-42.el8.1.x86_64 Header files for development using standard C libraries. kernel-headers-4.18.0-80.11.2.el8_0.x86_64 Header files for the Linux kernel for use by glibc libxcrypt-devel-4.1.1-4.el8.x86_64 Development files for libxcryp On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 10:26 PM Philippe Piot <philippe.piot(a)gmail.com> wrote: > All, > While updating my package using dnf update all I allow dnf to clean some > package with unresolved dependencies. > I would like to reinstall some of them but got an error message "but > none of the providers can be installed" during the install process as dnf > is trying to install the dependencies. > . > This happens for some critical package like boost-openmpi-devel (see > below for error). In fact the following package were removed and cannot be > installed: > annobin-8.64-1.el8.x86_64 > glibc-headers-2.28-42.el8.1.x86_64 > libdrm-devel-2.4.96-2.el8.x86_64 > boost-devel-1.66.0-6.el8.x86_64 > boost-openmpi-devel-1.66.0-6.el8.x86_64 > boost-static-1.66.0-6.el8.x86_64 > gcc-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 > gcc-c++-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 > gcc-gdb-plugin-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 > gcc-gfortran-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 > glibc-devel-2.28-42.el8.1.x86_64 > hdf5-devel-1.10.5-4.el8.x86_64 > hdf5-openmpi-devel-1.10.5-4.el8.x86_64 > hdf5-openmpi-static-1.10.5-4.el8.x86_64 > hdf5-static-1.10.5-4.el8.x86_64 > libquadmath-devel-8.2.1-3.5.el8.x86_64 > libtool-2.4.6-25.el8.x86_64 > libxcrypt-devel-4.1.1-4.el8.x86_64 > mesa-libEGL-devel-18.3.1-5.el8_0.x86_64 > mesa-libGL-devel-18.3.1-5.el8_0.x86_64 > openmpi-devel-3.1.2-5.el8.x86_64 > poppler-qt5-devel-0.66.0-11.el8_0.12.x86_64 > qscintilla-qt5-devel-2.11.2-6.el8.x86_64 > qt5-doctools-5.11.1-5.el8.x86_64 > qt5-qtbase-devel-5.11.1-5.el8.x86_64 > qt5-qtscript-devel-5.11.1-2.el8.x86_64 > qt5-qttools-devel-5.11.1-5.el8.x86_64 > qt5-qttools-static-5.11.1-5.el8.x86_64 > qt5-rpm-macros-5.11.1-2.el8.noarch > systemtap-4.0-7.el8.x86_64 > systemtap-devel-4.0-7.el8.x86_64 > > Thank you for any suggestions. -- Philippe. > > > ERROR MESSAGE WHEN TRYING TO INSTALL ONE OF THESE PACKAGES: > ------------------------------------------ > [piot@paris ~]$ sudo dnf install boost-openmpi-devel > [sudo] password for piot: > Last metadata expiration check: 0:13:02 ago on Wed 15 Jan 2020 10:05:29 PM > CST. > Error: > Problem: package libquadmath-devel-8.3.1-4.5.el8.x86_64 requires gcc = > 8.3.1-4.5.el8, but none of the providers can be installed > - package gcc-8.3.1-4.5.el8.x86_64 requires glibc-devel >= 2.2.90-12, > but none of the providers can be installed > - package boost-devel-1.66.0-6.el8.x86_64 requires > libquadmath-devel(x86-64), but none of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-devel-2.28-72.el8.i686 requires glibc-headers, but none > of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-devel-2.28-72.el8.i686 requires glibc-headers = > 2.28-72.el8, but none of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-devel-2.28-72.el8.x86_64 requires glibc-headers, but > none of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-devel-2.28-72.el8.x86_64 requires glibc-headers = > 2.28-72.el8, but none of the providers can be installed > - package boost-openmpi-devel-1.66.0-6.el8.x86_64 requires > boost-devel(x86-64) = 1.66.0-6.el8, but none of the providers can be > installed > - package glibc-headers-2.28-72.el8.i686 requires kernel-headers, but > none of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-headers-2.28-72.el8.i686 requires kernel-headers >= > 2.2.1, but none of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-headers-2.28-72.el8.x86_64 requires kernel-headers, but > none of the providers can be installed > - package glibc-headers-2.28-72.el8.x86_64 requires kernel-headers >= > 2.2.1, but none of the providers can be installed > - cannot install the best candidate for the job > - package kernel-headers-4.18.0-147.0.3.el8_1.x86_64 is excluded > - package kernel-headers-4.18.0-147.3.1.el8_1.x86_64 is excluded > - package kernel-headers-4.18.0-147.el8.x86_64 is excluded > Philippe Piot, https://www.niu.edu/advanced-accelerator-randd/ <https://www.niu.edu/advanced-accelerator-randd/index.shtml> Northern Illinois University, Dept of Physics and Northern Illinois Center for Accelerator & Detector Development DeKalb, IL 60115, USA Tel: 815 753 6473, Web: http://www.physics.niu.edu/physics/ Argonne National Laboratory, Advanced Photon Source Accelerator System Division Lemont, IL 60439, USA Tel: 630 252 2415, Web: https://www.aps.anl.gov/Accelerator-Systems-Division

2 2

[semi-OT] C7 Possible bug but I can't determine what tool has the problem
by Alessandro Baggi 16 Jan '20

16 Jan '20

Hi all, I'm writing a script that uses rsync to sync 2 dirs on C7. I noticed a strange behaviour. I have 2 dir: src and dest. In src dir I generate a testfile with "dd if=/dev/zero of=testfile bs=1M count=100" and when I run "du -h testfile" I get the correct result. Then I sync src/ to dest/ using "rsync -avS src/ dest/", all ok but when I run "du -h dest/testfile" I get 0 and if I run "du -b dest/testfile" I get the correct size in bytes. I made several test to see what happens and noticed that removing -S (--sparse) from rsync command problem does not occour. In another test, thinking about a problem on 0ed file, I tried file generation using /dev/urandom then /dev/zero and running rsync -avS the problem is disappeared. This not seems to be a CentOS 7 related problem. I tried also on Fedora 31 and get the same problem. I wrote a simple bash script to replicate the problem: #!/bin/bash mkdir src mkdir dest cd src #dd if=/dev/urandom of=testfile bs=1M count=100 dd if=/dev/zero of=testfile bs=1M count=100 echo "src/testfile size:" du -h testfile du -b testfile cd .. rsync -avS src/ dest/ > /dev/null echo "dest/testfile size after rsync --sparse:" du -h dest/testfile du -b dest/testfile rm -f dest/testfile echo "dest/testfile size after rsync:" rsync -av src/ dest/ > /dev/null du -h dest/testfile du -b dest/testfile There is a bug in rsync or in du or something else? Thanks in advance.

3 6

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 179, Issue 1
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 15 Jan '20

15 Jan '20

1 0

Adding options to grub
by Mauricio Tavares 14 Jan '20

14 Jan '20

So I want to add a few options to the kernel (say iommu support). I have been told before to avoid using grub2-mkconfig because it would apply the changes to all currently available (to boot from) boot kernels. Instead, I should edit just the latest kernel entry in the grub.cfg file, adding the option to the line that used to start with "linux16" in centos6. This way, if it went boink, all I had to do is reboot, pick another kernel from the grub menu and off I went. And, it seems that every future kernel upgrade would incorporate this change. Looking at a centos7.7 setup, I take the equivalent line in /boot/grub/grub.conf is kernel /boot/vmlinuz-3.10.0-123.4.4.el7.x86_64 console=hvc0 xencons=tty0 root=/dev/xvda ro I am now looking into a centos8 and its grub.cfg (/boot/efi/EFI/centos/grub.cfg in this case) looks rather different. Is what I have described above still the safest way to customize the kernel? Or is there a cleaner way to do the same while still leaving me the option to go back to the grub menu and pick an undisturbed kernel?

1 0

Problems with firewalld-0.7.0
by Orion Poplawski 13 Jan '20

13 Jan '20

After upgrading one of our systems to CentOS 8 CR and firewalld-0.7.0-5.el8.noarch it no longer accepts connections allowed in one of the two active zones. I've reported the issue here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1790681 but wondered if anyone else was seeing problems with multi-zone firewalld configurations. - Orion -- Orion Poplawski Manager of NWRA Technical Systems 720-772-5637 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane orion(a)nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 https://www.nwra.com/

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss January 2020