These seems to me to be the first message in the series and provides a really good summary of the changes at Red Hat which seem to be making life a lot more difficult for CentOS.
Just figured I'd pull it out of that thread and change the subject line.
Below Johnny's email I've copied another from the original thread, written by Lamar Owen, which gives some good explanation on how Red Hat is able to get away with this.
Basically from what I gather, while Red Hat cannot restrict access to sources, they can restrict access to binaries. And since CentOS has a goal of binary compatibility with upstream, they are essentially left trying to hit an unknown target. But (now I'm stretching my limited knowledge even further) Scientific does not have this restriction since they are less concerned about exact binary compat.
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
On 10/21/2011 10:01 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg Nicolas.Thierry-Mieg@imag.fr wrote:
Johnny, chill. I don't blame him for being confused. Up until right now, you updated to a point release, then, over the weeks and months, there were updates. All of a sudden, there are *no* updates for the 6.0 point release, which is a major change in what everyone expected, based on history.
this is the way it has always been: once upstream releases x.y+1 , there are no more updates to x.y (in upstream and therefore also in centos), until centos releases x.y+1 .
Yes, but that used to be transparent, because the centos x.y+1 release happened quickly so it didn't matter that the update repo was held back until an iso build was done.
Yes, and NOW the release process is MUCH harder.
Red Hat used to have an AS release that contained everything ... we build that and we get everything. Nice and simple. Build all the packages, look at it against the AS iso set ... done. Two weeks was about as long as it took.
Now, for version 6, they have:
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux HPC Node (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation FasTrack (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server FasTrack (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop FasTrack (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Scalable File System (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Resilient Storage (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Load Balancer (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux HPC Node FasTrack (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux High Performance Network (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization
They have the same install groups with different packages based on the above groupings, so we have to do some kind of custom generation of the comps files to things work.
They have created an optional channel in several of those groupings that is only accessible via RHN and they do not put those RPMS on any ISOs ... and they have completely changed their "Authorized Use Policy" so that we can NOT login to RHN and use anything that is not on a public FTP server or on an ISO set ... effectively cutting us off from the ability to check anything on the optional channel.
Now we have to engineer a compilation of all those groupings, we have to figure out what parts of the optional channels go at the point release and which ones do not (the ones that are upgrades). Sometimes the only way to tell is when something does not build correctly and you have reverse an optional package to a previous version for the build, etc.
We have to use anaconda to build our ISOs and upstream is using "something else" to build theirs .. so anaconda NEVER works anymore out of the box. We get ISOs (or usb images) that do not work and have to basically redesign anaconda.
We can't look at upstream build logs, we can't get all the binary RPMs for testing and be within the Terms of Service.
And with the new release, it seems that they have purposely broken the rpmmacros, and do not care to fix it:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=743229
So, trust me, it is MUCH more complicated now than it was with previous releases to build.
With the 5.7 release, there were several SRPMS that did not make it to the public FTP server without much prompting from us. And with the Authorized Use Policy, I can not just go to RHN and grab that SRPM and use it. If it is not public, we can no longer release it.
So, the short answer is, it now takes longer.
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
Lamar Owen lowen@pari.edu via centos.org Oct 28 to CentOS On Friday, October 21, 2011 02:22:26 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
Which is explicitly imposing additional restrictions. Which is explicitly prohibited in section 6. I don't see any exceptions relating to what the consequences of those restrictions might be.
The RHN AUP simply says that if you redistribute information from RHN you lose access to RHN. It does not restrict your right to redistribute anything; it restricts access to future information distributions from RHN. I know that's splitting hairs, but it does seem to meet the letter of the license. After all, RHN access is not required except for updates; if I really wanted to do so I could redistribute everything I have from RHN at this point in time and upstream has no legal recourse against that distribution that I know of (but I am neither a lawyer nor a paralegal; Russ on the other hand knows of what he speaks....).
They can, however, choose to not distribute anything else to me in the future, and nothing in the GPL or any other license used by upstream forces them to distribute anything new to me. And that's the gestalt of the RHN AUP; it states under what conditions RHN will distribute the compiled binary code (treated specially by GPL and not as a derived work) to you, its customer. Once you have received the binary of a particular version you have the right, under GPL and only for GPL-covered packages, to receive the source code for that particular version of that package.
Upstream is very gracious (in my opinion, at least) and distributes all of its source, not just GPL source and not just to customers but to the public at large (I say all; I haven't personally verified that all source in any given RHN channel is indeed available publicly on ftp.redhat.com, primarily because I don't have access to all channels). They could distribute only the source that they legally have to under those licenses that require it, but not for the source covered under other licenses that do not require redistribution of source plus modifications.
But just because I have version 1.2.3 of a package does not give me a guaranteed right under GPL to get 1.2.4 from them. And just because I can get the source to the 1.2.4 package they distribute does not give me an automatic right to the corresponding binary as the GPL does treat the compiled code specially. If you get the binary, you have the right to the source; if you have the source it is assumed you can generate the binary yourself (as is proven by the various EL rebuilds).
The level of difficulty required to generate the binary is not specified or even addressed by the GPL, nor does the GPL guarantee your ability to generate the exact same binary as someone else distributes..... nor is the distributor of the binary restricted at all in how difficult generating their exact binary, or a 100% compatible binary, can be. This seems to be the current holdup with C6.1, in my opinion; you can build *a* binary but will it work just like *the* binary? Upstream can make it even more difficult than they already have (and I know it's currently very frustrating to the CentOS team just from reading this thread!).
Russ, is that summary even close to accurate in your opinion?
These are the facts of life for an EL rebuild distribution user. If you want a primary access distribution (rather than a secondary rebuild) you need to find one that meets your needs, either by paying up for upstream or by going to something else (and there are really only two suitable enterprise choices for 'something else' in this case (and in my opinion): OpenSuSE or Debian Stable).
I'm evaluating Debian Stable on IA64 myself, as Debian Stable is the only actively maintained enterprise-grade distribution (again, in my opinion) freely available for IA64 (yes, upstream's EL5 is still available and is still maintained, but it costs six arms and eight legs to purchase for the machines I have; SLES likewise).
And I don't really currently have the time to rebuild C6 for IA64 myself. I'd love to, and I've had conversations with like-minded people, and I don't really want to go to Debian on it since I really want the IA64 boxes to work like all the other servers here which are running upstream EL rebuilds. But I have more important and necessary things to do with my time at the moment than to get into the game of maintaining a private rebuild for IA64 (I say private; even if I had time to maintain the build I don't have time to deal with the 'issues' of a public build!).
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Alan McKay alan.mckay@gmail.com wrote:
Basically from what I gather, while Red Hat cannot restrict access to sources, they can restrict access to binaries. And since CentOS has a goal of binary compatibility with upstream, they are essentially left trying to hit an unknown target. But (now I'm stretching my limited knowledge even further) Scientific does not have this restriction since they are less concerned about exact binary compat.
You are stretching your knowledge to a wrong direction :)
Both CentOS and Scientific Linux *aim* at 100% binary compatibility and they are both doing their best toward that goal. However, neither is perfect.
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2011-November/119250.html
Akemi
Both CentOS and Scientific Linux *aim* at 100% binary compatibility and they are both doing their best toward that goal. However, neither is perfect.
That's interesting. So how is it they've managed to come out with 6.1 (and so long ago at that)?
Vreme: 11/15/2011 03:56 AM, Alan McKay piše:
Both CentOS and Scientific Linux *aim* at 100% binary compatibility and they are both doing their best toward that goal. However, neither is perfect.
That's interesting. So how is it they've managed to come out with 6.1 (and so long ago at that)?
THe text bellow in only MY opinion, and I am not the member of the dev team, or have any official capacity except being one of the admins in the CentOS Facebook Group.
One of the reasons (as much as I understood) is that initially CentOS team was caught unprepared for the fact that CentOS 6 is not build-able from either CentOS 5 or RHEL 6, or even Fedora's, or even any combination of those distros.
In the past you could build CentOS 5 using CentOS/RHEL 5 Beta, something like that, I do not know exact details, but it was easy to build it.
1. When RHEL 6 Beta came out, devs were confronted with hostile building environment with missing versions of packages actually used (they had to file bugs against it and wait for Red Hat to release them while chasing around to possibly find those versions faster.
2. In the past there was not many people "training" to be on the devs team and existing members are volunteers so they have/had limited free time. It was 6-7 years after any mayor/complex building effort, so even active devs had no mayor problems in that period and they were kind of rusty (I hope devs will not take this against me, it is normal for skills lesser used to require brushing up, I know it on my own example).
3. Infrastructure (hardware) and build environment speed and optimization (in terms of software like mock/smock, binary comparison, etc.) was not up to the task at hand. Even disk space was a stretched to the limit to accommodate all versions, srpms, building environments, ...
4. Way of doing thing CentOS pre-6.x was proved to be inefficient and the gap from upstream releases started to prolong. That is when CentOS devs decided to change policy and do like SL team, and create CR repo so they can publish all completed packages as soon as they are available.
Scientific Linux has (at least) 2 paid developers and they started setting up (Koji) building environment (long?) before RHEL 6 Beta was released. That gave them starting advantage.
Further more, SL devs decided to push SL 6.0 before 5.7 and 4.9 point releases (contrary to CentOS devs) published in same time frame, so to many on this mailing list it looked like SL devs are overall much faster. Their 5.7 update was (I think) few months behind.
Currently, CentOS build system should be in much better shape and we will see how it will do for coming 6.2 point release (already in beta).
There is much more relevant info, but this should be the jest an I have work to do.
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Currently, CentOS build system should be in much better shape and we will see how it will do for coming 6.2 point release (already in beta).
Thanks very much for that. I found your account most interesting and informative.
I guess one question that I've never seen raised is if there has ever been a suggestion that Centos and SL should combine, or at least work together? They seem to have exactly the same aim.
I wonder why SL was set up, rather than offering to help the CentOS team?
I saw statistics - I don't remember where - saying that CentOS had 30% of the Linux market, which I found very surprising, though also satsifying (to me). SL had a tiny share. (I remember now, it was someone complaining that Fedora's share was slipping badly.)
I belong to what may be the silent majority who don't really care if CentOS is absolutely up-to-date. (As far as I can see, none of the changes in CentOS-6.1 would make the slightest difference to me. I run CentOS on 3 home servers, and Fedora on my laptops.)
I was very struck by the ease with which I upgraded to CentOS-6, compared with the nightmare (now hopefully over) upgrading from Fedora-15 to Fedora-16. It reminded me why I would never run Fedora on a server.
To me, the reliability and solidity of CentOS are what I relish, and I'm very grateful to the CentOS team for their work. I don't mind them getting a bit crotchety at times!
On 11/15/2011 01:56 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Currently, CentOS build system should be in much better shape and we will see how it will do for coming 6.2 point release (already in beta).
Thanks very much for that. I found your account most interesting and informative.
I guess one question that I've never seen raised is if there has ever been a suggestion that Centos and SL should combine, or at least work together? They seem to have exactly the same aim.
I wonder why SL was set up, rather than offering to help the CentOS team?
SL does betas and CentOS does not for example. I think the way both projects chose to operate is simply incompatible.
I saw statistics - I don't remember where - saying that CentOS had 30% of the Linux market, which I found very surprising, though also satsifying (to me). SL had a tiny share. (I remember now, it was someone complaining that Fedora's share was slipping badly.)
Fedora is basically an incubator for new technologies and as such not really an attractive system to install for end-users. If you deal with servers you probably go with CentOS, SL, Debian, etc. and if you want a desktop you probably use Ubuntu.
I belong to what may be the silent majority who don't really care if CentOS is absolutely up-to-date. (As far as I can see, none of the changes in CentOS-6.1 would make the slightest difference to me. I run CentOS on 3 home servers, and Fedora on my laptops.)
I was very struck by the ease with which I upgraded to CentOS-6, compared with the nightmare (now hopefully over) upgrading from Fedora-15 to Fedora-16. It reminded me why I would never run Fedora on a server.
I tend to skip one Fedora release and then do a a plain reinstall and copy my old data I need over. Fedora upgrades always sound rather messy.
Regards, Dennis
Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
Fedora is basically an incubator for new technologies and as such not really an attractive system to install for end-users. If you deal with servers you probably go with CentOS, SL, Debian, etc. and if you want a desktop you probably use Ubuntu.
I don't really agree with this. If you are using CentOS on servers it is much easier to use Fedora on laptops, since Fedora is so similar in operation to CentOS. In fact CentOS is more or less identical to an ancient version of Fedora.
Incidentally, I don't really understand what is meant by the term "desktop" nowadays. I always think of it as a contrast to laptop. But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
Am 15.11.2011 14:56, schrieb Timothy Murphy:
But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
this is what some braindead developers seems to think but it is not true nor will it never get true!
why in the world should i use a laptop in my office if i can have a Core i7 Quad combined with much more and better hardware as ever possible in a laptop?
why in the world should i use a laptop @home where i have a dedicated place for a powerful machine with much less heat and noise than a crappy laptop?
i have worked long enough with laptops and they was, they are and they will always be useless crap if you need power and comfort while you do more as webbrowsing or read a handful mails what i can do with my mobile
On 11/15/2011 09:35 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 15.11.2011 14:56, schrieb Timothy Murphy:
But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
this is what some braindead developers seems to think but it is not true nor will it never get true!
why in the world should i use a laptop in my office if i can have a Core i7 Quad combined with much more and better hardware as ever possible in a laptop?
why in the world should i use a laptop @home where i have a dedicated place for a powerful machine with much less heat and noise than a crappy laptop?
i have worked long enough with laptops and they was, they are and they will always be useless crap if you need power and comfort while you do more as webbrowsing or read a handful mails what i can do with my mobile
+1
On 11/15/2011 06:42 AM, Steve Clark wrote:
On 11/15/2011 09:35 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 15.11.2011 14:56, schrieb Timothy Murphy:
But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
this is what some braindead developers seems to think but it is not true nor will it never get true!
why in the world should i use a laptop in my office if i can have a Core i7 Quad combined with much more and better hardware as ever possible in a laptop?
why in the world should i use a laptop @home where i have a dedicated place for a powerful machine with much less heat and noise than a crappy laptop?
i have worked long enough with laptops and they was, they are and they will always be useless crap if you need power and comfort while you do more as webbrowsing or read a handful mails what i can do with my mobile
+1
This is a great thread, I was just thinking about this last night because I have a client to whom I send pgp encrypted email because of the secure nature of his application data and he complains that he can't read my email on his mobile device and then asks me to text him authentication information for one of his servers.
I think mobile devices have their place, but they don't replace a powerful desktop with a 1 or more good displays.
Look at http://www.fuduntu.org . A whole new linux distro has sprung up (and is actually becoming popular) around the Gnome 3/unity thing with fedora and ubuntu because some people don't think that Linux GUI's should be primarily oriented toward hand held devices.
Nataraj
Reindl Harald wrote:
But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
this is what some braindead developers seems to think but it is not true nor will it never get true!
why in the world should i use a laptop in my office if i can have a Core i7 Quad combined with much more and better hardware as ever possible in a laptop?
Don't you think you are in a very small minority, like 1% of the world?
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Reindl Harald wrote:
But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
this is what some braindead developers seems to think but it is not true nor will it never get true!
why in the world should i use a laptop in my office if i can have a Core i7 Quad combined with much more and better hardware as ever possible in a laptop?
Don't you think you are in a very small minority, like 1% of the world?
Nope. And certainly not from where I've sat for several years.
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
I'd guess you're massively wrong.
And before you start, are you prepared to put down, out of your personal wallet, the money for eye surgery for me, to give me 15/20 vision, so I can read the damn thing? You *really* enjoy looking at videos, or even trying to read email, either at 2-3 words per line, or in 3 point type? And while we're at it, I suggest you look at, say, the official MySQL documentation on your itty-bitty-screen. I do it, on a browser set at about a quarter of a 22" diagonal screen, and *still* see the idiots have some of the formatting set so that it overprints.
mark "wants a better ->telephone<-, to TALK to people"
-- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 11/15/2011 06:52 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
Mobile devices still have *under* 6% of the internet browser market.
See http://www.netmarketshare.com/
Benjamin Franz wrote:
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
Mobile devices still have *under* 6% of the internet browser market.
I find it very hard to believe that 90% of Chinese are using desktops. What about all those girls tweeting on the bus to school? There must be billions of them.
On Tuesday, November 15, 2011 11:41 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Benjamin Franz wrote:
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
Mobile devices still have *under* 6% of the internet browser market.
I find it very hard to believe that 90% of Chinese are using desktops. What about all those girls tweeting on the bus to school? There must be billions of them.
Farmers/peasants have phones?
All those girls tweeting?
Aren't you confusing Japan with China?
Christopher Chan wrote:
I find it very hard to believe that 90% of Chinese are using desktops. What about all those girls tweeting on the bus to school? There must be billions of them.
Farmers/peasants have phones?
All those girls tweeting?
Aren't you confusing Japan with China?
I wasn't in fact referring to China when I mentioned girls tweeting. I should have left a blank line. I was referring to the girls I see here (Dublin) on the bus/train.
However, iPhone sales in China increased by 250% last year. I think your image of China is rather out-of-date.
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:44:26AM +0000, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I think your image of China is rather out-of-date.
I have a novel suggestion. As this has absolutely NOTHING to do with CentOS (like usual) how about taking it to private e-mail?
John
On Wednesday, November 16, 2011 07:44 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Christopher Chan wrote:
I find it very hard to believe that 90% of Chinese are using desktops. What about all those girls tweeting on the bus to school? There must be billions of them.
Farmers/peasants have phones?
All those girls tweeting?
Aren't you confusing Japan with China?
I wasn't in fact referring to China when I mentioned girls tweeting. I should have left a blank line. I was referring to the girls I see here (Dublin) on the bus/train.
However, iPhone sales in China increased by 250% last year. I think your image of China is rather out-of-date.
Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of migrant factory workers trying to move from farmer/peasant status to something else.
Maybe a few more protests at Foxconn and other factories might help. Yeah...right.
The Chinese way of governing has not changed - it's just another set of people with a different label. Palace intrigues replaced by Communist Party intrigues. Same old corruption at all levels of government.
Same old keep the poor poor for fleecing while the powers that be live a life of extravagance. Not that that is unique to China.
So you got a few more tens of millionaires - what's that compared to a billion? You don't have 90% of Chinese using phones and certainly not for email. Maybe a bit of sms.
In any case, for the few (percentage wise) that use computers and the tiny portion that use Linux even...it's probably Red Flag Linux and not Centos...
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Reindl Harald wrote:
But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
this is what some braindead developers seems to think but it is not true nor will it never get true!
why in the world should i use a laptop in my office if i can have a Core i7 Quad combined with much more and better hardware as ever possible in a laptop?
Don't you think you are in a very small minority, like 1% of the world?
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
So what - I use an iPhone to read my mail when out and about, but my real work happens on a desk-top - dual 22" monitors, average 10+ open applications, run a virtualbox with windoze XP for a realtor app that only works on IE (yeah, go figure, we are in 2011 and they force everyone to use IE). Long live the desktop!!
Vreme: 11/15/2011 04:14 PM, Rob Kampen piše:
run a virtualbox with windoze XP for a realtor app that only works on IE (yeah, go figure, we are in 2011 and they force everyone to use IE)
Install PlayOnLinux (Wine installer) and install IE6 inside it. Maybe your App will work without virtual Win.
On Tuesday, November 15, 2011 11:30 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Vreme: 11/15/2011 04:14 PM, Rob Kampen piše:
run a virtualbox with windoze XP for a realtor app that only works on IE (yeah, go figure, we are in 2011 and they force everyone to use IE)
Install PlayOnLinux (Wine installer) and install IE6 inside it. Maybe your App will work without virtual Win.
Yeehaa! That's it, recommend the worst IE browser available.
Vreme: 11/16/2011 07:55 AM, Christopher Chan piše:
On Tuesday, November 15, 2011 11:30 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Vreme: 11/15/2011 04:14 PM, Rob Kampen piše:
run a virtualbox with windoze XP for a realtor app that only works on IE (yeah, go figure, we are in 2011 and they force everyone to use IE)
Install PlayOnLinux (Wine installer) and install IE6 inside it. Maybe your App will work without virtual Win.
Yeehaa! That's it, recommend the worst IE browser available.
He uses it only for one App. So maybe there is no security risk.
But actually I miss-read it like he needs to use IE6.
And no other IE version is reported to work in Wine.
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Vreme: 11/16/2011 07:55 AM, Christopher Chan piše:
On Tuesday, November 15, 2011 11:30 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Vreme: 11/15/2011 04:14 PM, Rob Kampen piše:
run a virtualbox with windoze XP for a realtor app that only works on IE (yeah, go figure, we are in 2011 and they force everyone to use IE)
Install PlayOnLinux (Wine installer) and install IE6 inside it. Maybe your App will work without virtual Win.
Yeehaa! That's it, recommend the worst IE browser available.
He uses it only for one App. So maybe there is no security risk.
But actually I miss-read it like he needs to use IE6.
Currently I use IE7 on a virtualbox instance running windozeXP - I used too use IE6 but the experience is not good, thus moved to IE7. The issue is the MLS system in our region will only work on IE6 or greater. The other app I use in windoze is quickbooks (most inappropriate name as it has never been quick) It too only used to run on windoze, although apparently there is now a mac version. All other apps for my business run on Linux. I started with RH9 in 2004, moved to FC3 when we had a disk crash take down the server, then discovered CentOS and never looked back - thanks team, I do so appreciate the reliability and solid performance.
And no other IE version is reported to work in Wine.
At Wed, 16 Nov 2011 12:20:55 -0500 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote:
---Executing: recode Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Vreme: 11/16/2011 07:55 AM, Christopher Chan pise:
On Tuesday, November 15, 2011 11:30 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Vreme: 11/15/2011 04:14 PM, Rob Kampen pise:
run a virtualbox with windoze XP for a realtor app that only works on IE (yeah, go figure, we are in 2011 and they force everyone to use IE)
Install PlayOnLinux (Wine installer) and install IE6 inside it. Maybe your App will work without virtual Win.
Yeehaa! That's it, recommend the worst IE browser available.
He uses it only for one App. So maybe there is no security risk.
But actually I miss-read it like he needs to use IE6.
Currently I use IE7 on a virtualbox instance running windozeXP - I used too use IE6 but the experience is not good, thus moved to IE7. The issue is the MLS system in our region will only work on IE6 or greater. The other app I use in windoze is quickbooks (most inappropriate name as it has never been quick)
Have you ever looked at GnuCash? (Available in the EPel repo for CentOS.)
It too only used to run on windoze, although apparently there is now a mac version. All other apps for my business run on Linux. I started with RH9 in 2004, moved to FC3 when we had a disk crash take down the server, then discovered CentOS and never looked back - thanks team, I do so appreciate the reliability and solid performance.
And no other IE version is reported to work in Wine.
MIME-Version: 1.0
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Reindl Harald wrote:
But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
this is what some braindead developers seems to think but it is not true nor will it never get true!
why in the world should i use a laptop in my office if i can have a Core i7 Quad combined with much more and better hardware as ever possible in a laptop?
Don't you think you are in a very small minority, like 1% of the world?
Not by a long long way.
Steve Thompson wrote:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Reindl Harald wrote:
But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
this is what some braindead developers seems to think but it is not true nor will it never get true!
why in the world should i use a laptop in my office if i can have a Core i7 Quad combined with much more and better hardware as ever possible in a laptop?
Don't you think you are in a very small minority, like 1% of the world?
Not by a long long way. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
+1
ChrisG
Greetings,
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:27 PM, Chris Geldenhuis chris.gelden@iafrica.com wrote:
Steve Thompson wrote:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Reindl Harald wrote:
<been there, done that. I will be 49 years old, come mid-January 2012>
<I have just "terminated" your name -- to paraphrase "Terminator[whateverversion]" of Arnie>
I have not understood / udder- stood (It should have spelled "understood", but it is a deliberate hack on that word ;) ) - this attitude.
Hey!, One needs a family with wife and children. You know NRN's *
Vreme: 11/15/2011 03:52 PM, Timothy Murphy piše:
Reindl Harald wrote:
But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
this is what some braindead developers seems to think but it is not true nor will it never get true!
why in the world should i use a laptop in my office if i can have a Core i7 Quad combined with much more and better hardware as ever possible in a laptop?
Don't you think you are in a very small minority, like 1% of the world?
Since only slightly above 1% of people in the world uses Linux, this means that all Linux users use Desktops instead of lap-top's ;-D
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
For Desktop is considered ANYTHING that you use "on" your table, even when the box is on the floor.
Laptops use is limited to 3-4 years until it brakes. And there is no cheap repair, and you can not add enough HDD's you need, at least one more for backup.
Many IT workers will have some kind of RAID on their boxes.
Greetings,
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 8:22 PM, Timothy Murphy gayleard@eircom.net wrote:
Reindl Harald wrote:
But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
I don't.
Don't you think you are in a very small minority, like 1% of the world?
I live in India.
hmm... I am one of the 1/6th of the population in the world and "I don't own a laptop". I don't carry work home.
Here one is supposed to be dedicated to one's family: either gender.
Worrk is worrk (germaniK accent intended... :) ). Home is Home.
Which percentage you represent?
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
Duh! come here to India and afford all those devices with Indian Salaries.
Than talk here.
Actually I hate "work" after work hours. I have left many lucrative jobs for time with my family at "wrong times" per se.
Rajagopal Swaminathan wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 8:22 PM, Timothy Murphy gayleard@eircom.net wrote:
Reindl Harald wrote:
<snip>
Don't you think you are in a very small minority, like 1% of the world?
I live in India.
hmm... I am one of the 1/6th of the population in the world and "I don't own a laptop". I don't carry work home.
Here one is supposed to be dedicated to one's family: either gender.
Worrk is worrk (germaniK accent intended... :) ). Home is Home.
YES!!!!!!!
One reason I will *NOT* buy a "smart phone" is that in the mid-nineties, I worked for a major telecom here in the US. I wore a pager, and was on call 24x7.365.25. I'll never forget the Sunday, with a friend visiting from out of town, I got paged SEVEN TIMES, and most of it was because they didn't know what they were doing.
You want me on call? Fine, PAY ME time and a half, or double time. I am *NOT* otherwise available, except to friends and family. And don't bother texting - I have that turned off.
Email I live by... but that's on *my* time, when *I* want it. I don't carry a laptop up and back. As someone said, workstation, two monitors at work.
Which percentage you represent?
I work to live; too many fools confuse the two, and management *certainly* wants you to think that you should live at their beck and call.
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
Duh! come here to India and afford all those devices with Indian Salaries.
Than talk here.
Good points; I was thinking of that, and all the folks in the US who have them, but can't really afford that money. And then there's the rest, who *can't* afford that much/month.
Actually I hate "work" after work hours. I have left many lucrative jobs for time with my family at "wrong times" per se.
Agreed.
mark
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Rajagopal Swaminathan raju.rajsand@gmail.com wrote:
But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
I don't.
Don't you think you are in a very small minority, like 1% of the world?
I live in India.
hmm... I am one of the 1/6th of the population in the world and "I don't own a laptop". I don't carry work home.
Here one is supposed to be dedicated to one's family: either gender.
In the US, being dedicated to one's family means, among other things, that you will buy them electronic devices.
Worrk is worrk (germaniK accent intended... :) ). Home is Home.
Laptops are very much entertainment and educational devices. Things useful at home even if you aren't interested in technology for its own sake or using it for communicating with friends.
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
In the US, being dedicated to one's family means, among other things, that you will buy them electronic devices.
My wife doesn't even have an iPod yet, does that make me a bad person? ;)
I'd say:
In the UK, being dedicated to one's family means, among other things, finding ways to avoid buying most electronic devices.
I buy old computer games, and she's *just* gone onto a £5 pounds a month mobile contract. You don't *have* to fully engage with modern society :)
jh
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:17 AM, John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
In the US, being dedicated to one's family means, among other things, that you will buy them electronic devices.
My wife doesn't even have an iPod yet, does that make me a bad person? ;)
Only if she likes music and you don't sing all the time...
I'd say:
In the UK, being dedicated to one's family means, among other things, finding ways to avoid buying most electronic devices.
It just got worse here with the Kindle fire release. Aside from being a nice toy it will have an account attached for instant purchases from Amazon.
I buy old computer games, and she's *just* gone onto a £5 pounds a month mobile contract. You don't *have* to fully engage with modern society :)
Maybe, if all your friends and interests are local, and you don't travel yourself. Even my family is spread across most of the country these days.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:17 AM, John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
<snip>
I'd say:
In the UK, being dedicated to one's family means, among other things, finding ways to avoid buying most electronic devices.
It just got worse here with the Kindle fire release. Aside from being a nice toy it will have an account attached for instant purchases from Amazon.
Um, no. Not until I'm assured that it was pull *only*, and that Amazon COULD NOT PUSH... or don't you remember them deleting 1984? And $200 for a book reader? <snip>
mark
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:00 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
In the UK, being dedicated to one's family means, among other things, finding ways to avoid buying most electronic devices.
It just got worse here with the Kindle fire release. Aside from being a nice toy it will have an account attached for instant purchases from Amazon.
Um, no. Not until I'm assured that it was pull *only*, and that Amazon COULD NOT PUSH...
Sure, you'll have to click the button. But with virtually everything in the world at your one-click fingertips (both downloadable content and physical stuff, mostly with free delivery if you aren't familiar with Amazon).
or don't you remember them deleting 1984?
That wasn't censorship, it was correcting an error with appropriate refunds. I don't think they are particularly evil or controlling, just very tempting.
And $200 for a book reader?
That's a fantastic price for a color tablet - they are almost certainly losing money on it.
Greetings,
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:43 PM, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:00 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
And $200 for a book reader?
That's a fantastic price for a color tablet - they are almost certainly losing money on it.
Dear Les, Look at Per capita monthly income of other countries: less that USD 100.
And do you think anybody would buy that when they have a family to support?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita
BTW, that is per PPP. Which not related to _actual_ cash flow to meet a family of four (let us say,).
also look at Current balances of US, Italy, Greece, Ireland etc. per CIA factbook (Well, I could not ) and let us talk further.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2187ra...
Where does US (and other European counties -- "The online Factbook is updated weekly. ISSN 1553-8133") rank ?
All I will request you all is to open your eyes beyond technology.
On 11/15/11 10:30 AM, Rajagopal Swaminathan wrote:
And do you think anybody would buy that when they have a family to support?
thats not amazon's target demographic, anyways. whats your point? by that argument, noone should be selling cars. stereos. TV sets. etc etc etc.
On 15 Nov 2011, at 18:33, John R Pierce pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
thats not amazon's target demographic, anyways. whats your point?
Here we go again. What does any of this have to do with CentOS, the topic of this list? Does every thread have to degenerate into bickering?
If only my iPhone supported kill lists...
Ben
Sent from my iPhone
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Rajagopal Swaminathan raju.rajsand@gmail.com wrote:
And $200 for a book reader?
That's a fantastic price for a color tablet - they are almost certainly losing money on it.
Dear Les, Look at Per capita monthly income of other countries: less that USD 100.
Averages don't mean that much in places with high income disparity.
And do you think anybody would buy that when they have a family to support?
Yes, if they were available there - does the much more expensive ipad have any sales?
All I will request you all is to open your eyes beyond technology.
Sorry, I thought you were just against technology in the home or saying that it somehow interfered with family life.
On Nov 15, 2011, at 11:13 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:00 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
or don't you remember them deleting 1984?
That wasn't censorship, it was correcting an error with appropriate refunds. I don't think they are particularly evil or controlling, just very tempting.
And $200 for a book reader?
That's a fantastic price for a color tablet - they are almost certainly losing money on it.
---- that's the general consensus
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/11/15/142310104/why-amazon-loses-money-o...
Craig
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:00 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
In the UK, being dedicated to one's family means, among other things, finding ways to avoid buying most electronic devices.
It just got worse here with the Kindle fire release. Aside from being a nice toy it will have an account attached for instant purchases from Amazon.
Um, no. Not until I'm assured that it was pull *only*, and that Amazon COULD NOT PUSH...
<snip>
or don't you remember them deleting 1984?
That wasn't censorship, it was correcting an error with appropriate refunds. I don't think they are particularly evil or controlling, just very tempting.
Yes, they were, They deleted it WITH NO NOTICE OR WARNING. Had they had anything resembling conscience, *they* would have paid the royalties, and eaten the difference. <yoda voice> Trust them, you should not. </yoda voice>
And $200 for a book reader?
That's a fantastic price for a color tablet - they are almost certainly losing money on it.
I just heard a report this morning, that it's estimated to cost $210 to build. *shrug* Never heard of "loss leader"? Think of the free cell phones you get, as long as you sign a contract.
mark
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 4:00 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
or don't you remember them deleting 1984?
That wasn't censorship, it was correcting an error with appropriate refunds. I don't think they are particularly evil or controlling, just very tempting.
Yes, they were, They deleted it WITH NO NOTICE OR WARNING. Had they had anything resembling conscience, *they* would have paid the royalties, and eaten the difference.
Where did you see something that suggested that would have been an option? I thought it was dictated by the publisher holding the rights. In any case, that goes with the concept of DRM controlled content, and while the device is somewhat oriented to their versions of things, from what I've seen it is not particularly restricted.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 4:00 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
or don't you remember them deleting 1984?
That wasn't censorship, it was correcting an error with appropriate refunds. I don't think they are particularly evil or controlling, just very tempting.
Yes, they were, They deleted it WITH NO NOTICE OR WARNING. Had they had anything resembling conscience, *they* would have paid the royalties, and eaten the difference.
Where did you see something that suggested that would have been an option? I thought it was dictated by the publisher holding the rights. In any case, that goes with the concept of DRM controlled content, and while the device is somewhat oriented to their versions of things, from what I've seen it is not particularly restricted.
No, *I* suggested that option. Just now. Actually, I said it to folks talking about it at the time it happened. Why would you *not* think that was an option?
Further, the point is that they had remote control over devices they allegedly *sold*, not rented, that allowed them to erase content without the *owner's* consent.
If you really want to continue this conversation, please reply to me offlist.
mark
Vreme: 11/15/2011 11:56 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us piše:
If you really want to continue this conversation, please reply to me offlist.
Thank you very nicely.
Greetings,
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Rajagopal Swaminathan raju.rajsand@gmail.com wrote: Laptops are very much entertainment and educational devices. Things useful at home even if you aren't interested in technology for its own sake or using it for communicating with friends.
+-1
Look at Helios Project. I support them wholeheartedly. Ask Ken.
I don't know if I will ever get a visa to US (in which I am least interested: am not willing to stand in the queue in US consulate), but, But, I will support Ken in all his endeavors, Remotely.
If you want serious work done, I would prefer a Centos Desktop (5.x will do, as I have never installed Centos 6.0 yet, I would rather wait for Centos ISO [6.1|6.2]) before upgrading my production servers, which I am restrained upto Centos 5.2 as of a year back due to an idiotic fellow.
On Wednesday, November 16, 2011 12:38 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
Worrk is worrk (germaniK accent intended... :) ). Home is Home.
Laptops are very much entertainment and educational devices. Things useful at home even if you aren't interested in technology for its own sake or using it for communicating with friends.
Ya forgot the other definition of laptops: preventor of family communication
Am 15.11.2011 15:52, schrieb Timothy Murphy:
Reindl Harald wrote:
But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
this is what some braindead developers seems to think but it is not true nor will it never get true!
why in the world should i use a laptop in my office if i can have a Core i7 Quad combined with much more and better hardware as ever possible in a laptop?
Don't you think you are in a very small minority, like 1% of the world?
no, no and again: NO and this will never be happen
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
what percent of them are owing a real computer as i do own a Android too - from where is the dumb assumption that smartphone-users are ONLY using a smartphone?
Vreme: 11/15/2011 06:06 PM, Reindl Harald piše:
from where is the dumb assumption that
There is no need for that. Mailing lists are for discussing, forums are for insulting and flame wars :D
On 11/15/11 6:52 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
to state the obvious, 50% of people are below average.
mcdonalds sells more hamburgers than (pick-your-favorite-chophouse) sells steaks. therefore we should forget about steaks?
there's more playstations/nintendos in the world than their are computers.
Vreme: 11/15/2011 07:04 PM, John R Pierce piše:
On 11/15/11 6:52 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
to state the obvious, 50% of people are below average.
http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
Only 30% of people in the world use Internet.
On Tuesday 15 November 2011 09:52, Timothy Murphy wrote:
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
Not over 50%, but 5,5%, according to this source: http://www.netmarketshare.com/
Yves Bellefeuille wrote:
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
Not over 50%, but 5,5%, according to this source: http://www.netmarketshare.com/
I may have exaggerated the figure, but I don't believe it is as low as that. Smart phones have been outselling PCs for some time.
So even if the figure is less than 50%, it will soon be up there.
Vreme: 11/16/2011 12:36 PM, Timothy Murphy piše:
Yves Bellefeuille wrote:
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
Not over 50%, but 5,5%, according to this source: http://www.netmarketshare.com/
I may have exaggerated the figure, but I don't believe it is as low as that. Smart phones have been outselling PCs for some time.
So even if the figure is less than 50%, it will soon be up there.
If no smartphones gets broken and/or replaced, they could reach number of PC users (50%) in one year. Realistically it will take them 2-3 years to reach those numbers.
BUT, I have 2 phones (one of them is Android), 1 desktop PC and 1 laptop. And 95-97% of internet usage I perform on Desktop PC.
Even when I am in/on the field I use laptop and use Android just as Wireless AP (for 3G access). Not to mention GPRS/3G price for surfing. Most people here avoid mobile internet and vast majority has wired internet access.
SO, no luck for your estimate of 50% internet access share in next 5-10 years, by logical estimate.
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
If no smartphones gets broken and/or replaced, they could reach number of PC users (50%) in one year. Realistically it will take them 2-3 years to reach those numbers.
BUT, I have 2 phones (one of them is Android), 1 desktop PC and 1 laptop. And 95-97% of internet usage I perform on Desktop PC.
Even when I am in/on the field I use laptop and use Android just as Wireless AP (for 3G access). Not to mention GPRS/3G price for surfing. Most people here avoid mobile internet and vast majority has wired internet access.
SO, no luck for your estimate of 50% internet access share in next 5-10 years, by logical estimate.
Unless maybe you are not typical ...
Am 17.11.2011 01:42, schrieb Timothy Murphy:
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
If no smartphones gets broken and/or replaced, they could reach number of PC users (50%) in one year. Realistically it will take them 2-3 years to reach those numbers.
BUT, I have 2 phones (one of them is Android), 1 desktop PC and 1 laptop. And 95-97% of internet usage I perform on Desktop PC.
Unless maybe you are not typical ...
do you really think that the majority of users will ever use smatphones/pads? do anybody really think that the majority of users are homeusers which are only use a webbrowser and some small games?
nice, most of use will use it on the road but not as main-device!
the majority of users was and will be desktop users or will you explain anybody that you ever will use GIMP, Office and even business users which are the REAL majority take a smartphone?
yes it is nice that software can fullfil the needs of smartphones/pads but it is simply dumb to think this is the main target for the future instead a OPTION which has to be enabled instead the only main target fpr new development
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 02:03:58AM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.11.2011 01:42, schrieb Timothy Murphy:
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
If no smartphones gets broken and/or replaced, they could reach number of PC users (50%) in one year. Realistically it will take them 2-3 years to reach those numbers.
BUT, I have 2 phones (one of them is Android), 1 desktop PC and 1 laptop. And 95-97% of internet usage I perform on Desktop PC.
Unless maybe you are not typical ...
do you really think that the majority of users will ever use smatphones/pads? do anybody really think that the majority of users are homeusers which are only use a webbrowser and some small games?
nice, most of use will use it on the road but not as main-device!
the majority of users was and will be desktop users or will you explain anybody that you ever will use GIMP, Office and even business users which are the REAL majority take a smartphone?
yes it is nice that software can fullfil the needs of smartphones/pads but it is simply dumb to think this is the main target for the future instead a OPTION which has to be enabled instead the only main target fpr new development
Well, I'm happy with my "stupid phone". I don't especially want a pocket-sized computer (at least not one that's tightly chained inside a walled garden, whether it be Apple's, or Microsoft's, or any one else's garden). As long as it reliably makes phone calls, and doesn't require charging EVERY DAY I can be happy with it.
Am 17.11.2011 02:32, schrieb fred smith:
Well, I'm happy with my "stupid phone". I don't especially want a pocket-sized computer (at least not one that's tightly chained inside a walled garden, whether it be Apple's, or Microsoft's, or any one else's garden). As long as it reliably makes phone calls, and doesn't require charging EVERY DAY I can be happy with it.
well but computers are much more than on a smartphone will ever be possible smartphones are nice for many low-end users but they will NEVER replace a full featured PC and so so developers all over the world should stop to think they are the only target for software because they will not
On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 02:38 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.11.2011 02:32, schrieb fred smith:
Well, I'm happy with my "stupid phone". I don't especially want a pocket-sized computer (at least not one that's tightly chained inside a walled garden, whether it be Apple's, or Microsoft's, or any one else's garden). As long as it reliably makes phone calls, and doesn't require charging EVERY DAY I can be happy with it.
well but computers are much more than on a smartphone will ever be possible smartphones are nice for many low-end users but they will NEVER replace a full featured PC and so so developers all over the world should stop to think they are the only target for software because they will not
---- Consider the upcoming Asus Transformer Prime tablet which has more horsepower than my desktop computer (by far) though less RAM and less storage. The cloud can be your storage... heck all of my music is already on Google Music.
It's thoroughly conceivable that these devices will indeed displace what is generally thought of as the irreplaceable home computer and maybe in the near future - after all, probably 80-90% of what occupies our computer usage is e-mail & web browsing. Just take a look at the latest 3 phones added to Verizon... the Razr, Rezound, Nexxus. Wow!
Craig
Am 17.11.2011 03:23, schrieb Craig White:
Consider the upcoming Asus Transformer Prime tablet which has more horsepower than my desktop computer (by far) though less RAM and less storage. The cloud can be your storage... heck all of my music is already on Google Music.
uninteresting because it does not change the fact that for most things touchscreens are not really a solution and so GUIs should not be only optimized for touch-screens
there has to be a option "touchscreen-user" or "do not wste space"
It's thoroughly conceivable that these devices will indeed displace what is generally thought of as the irreplaceable home computer and maybe in the near future - after all, probably 80-90% of what occupies our computer usage is e-mail & web browsing. Just take a look at the latest 3 phones added to Verizon... the Razr, Rezound, Nexxus. Wow!
and home-computers are the real target ar least? how many computers have you at home? how many computers has even a small company?
you really believe that the majority and that are surely business users switch to touchscreens for their daily work?
this will not happen now an dnot in hundret years!
Vreme: 11/17/2011 09:07 AM, Reindl Harald piše:
Am 17.11.2011 03:23, schrieb Craig White:
Consider the upcoming Asus Transformer Prime tablet which has more horsepower than my desktop computer (by far) though less RAM and less storage. The cloud can be your storage... heck all of my music is already on Google Music.
uninteresting because it does not change the fact that for most things touchscreens are not really a solution and so GUIs should not be only optimized for touch-screens
there has to be a option "touchscreen-user" or "do not wste space"
It's thoroughly conceivable that these devices will indeed displace what is generally thought of as the irreplaceable home computer and maybe in the near future - after all, probably 80-90% of what occupies our computer usage is e-mail& web browsing. Just take a look at the latest 3 phones added to Verizon... the Razr, Rezound, Nexxus. Wow!
and home-computers are the real target ar least? how many computers have you at home? how many computers has even a small company?
you really believe that the majority and that are surely business users switch to touchscreens for their daily work?
this will not happen now an dnot in hundret years!
OK. This sub-thread has gone long enough. Maybe CentOS team should add "Off-Topic mailing list" so we can transfer our discussion there and just leave a link here or something.
We ALL must agree to disagree. Those thinking the smartphones are the future come from consumerist mentality responsible for current economic crises (mentality, not people) They are constantly bombarded with "next best thing" advertisement, and they make a lot more money then the rest of the world. Other side comes from mentality which is oriented to "most money for the buck" or "minimal spending" philosophy since resources are scarce.
First mentality thinks that paying 300-500 EUR for a device that can not be fixed cheaply or can be dead after just one drop from 1 meter is justified. Other side, where I belong does not.
I almost cried when I payed 300 EUR for Andriod phone, just because of Wireless (I am small WISP), ability to VNC into my home PC and do what ever I need to do, and GPS software (I managed to cram IGO MyWay into HTC Wildfire). And having ~700 contacts (not numbers) is nice. Everything else I can do without.
So I do not think that further discussion will help, since differences in the way we think are vast. For that reason, I ask you that we quit this, or to take it elsewhere (I always like to )
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:07 AM, Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net wrote:
Consider the upcoming Asus Transformer Prime tablet which has more horsepower than my desktop computer (by far) though less RAM and less storage. The cloud can be your storage... heck all of my music is already on Google Music.
uninteresting because it does not change the fact that for most things touchscreens are not really a solution and so GUIs should not be only optimized for touch-screens
there has to be a option "touchscreen-user" or "do not wste space"
Not sure I understand - a soft keyboard only takes screen space when needed. And a very popular device is making news about its voice input app that is sort-of usable.
And maybe you've missed the measurements showing Netflix video to be 30% of end-point internet traffic in the US.
you really believe that the majority and that are surely business users switch to touchscreens for their daily work?
Or embedded devices with remote controls and no keyboard at all... Netflix got their popularity by running on just about every device that can connect to the internet and a screen. But those are not replacements for the computer where you manage your queue, they are additions, but you might spend more time with them.
this will not happen now an dnot in hundret years!
I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway.
Am 17.11.2011 14:44, schrieb Les Mikesell:
Not sure I understand - a soft keyboard only takes screen space when needed. And a very popular device is making news about its voice input app that is sort-of usable.
i do not speak about soft-keyboard
i speak about wasting braindead space with big icons and big spaces between icons to make interfaces better working with touch-displays while it wastes space for users of a classical computer
and PLEASE do not tell me about usability of small icons for some people since i am nearly blind on my right eye after some medical operations in the context computer screen and have on the left one 60-75% - that does not change the fact that i could jump in any developers face which is wasting space on my screen so that i see finally the same on my 23" as some years before with 17"
I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway.
*lol*
you really believe you want to write a letter with voice control? you really believe you want operate with eclipse and voice control? you really believe you want to operate in a root-terminal with voice control? you really believe you want to edit config-files with voice control? you really believe you want to work with spreadsheets and voice control? you really believe you want to work with GIMP and voice control? you really believe you want to edit videos with voice control?
you can replace "voice control" with "touch-keyboard"!
recognize that there are MANY users which are NOT plaing a little bit with their devices - they are WORKING with their devices and in times where nearly in all jobs computers are needed to do the daily work it is simply ignorant start designing interfaces PRIMARY for the next big thing because some homeusers are happy with all this crap
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net wrote:
I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway.
*lol*
you really believe you want to write a letter with voice control?
Letters? You mean the things that the Post Office used to deliver? Who does that anymore? Maybe a picture or video clip instead...
you really believe you want operate with eclipse and voice control? you really believe you want to operate in a root-terminal with voice control? you really believe you want to edit config-files with voice control? you really believe you want to work with spreadsheets and voice control? you really believe you want to work with GIMP and voice control? you really believe you want to edit videos with voice control?
you can replace "voice control" with "touch-keyboard"!
recognize that there are MANY users which are NOT plaing a little bit with their devices - they are WORKING with their devices and in times where nearly in all jobs computers are needed to do the daily work it is simply ignorant start designing interfaces PRIMARY for the next big thing because some homeusers are happy with all this crap
I wouldn't call people doing any of those things 'computer users', but rather developers, administrators, or editors. Those jobs are all necessary but they aren't what the majority of people do with devices even now.
On Thursday, November 17, 2011 10:10 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
Letters? You mean the things that the Post Office used to deliver? Who does that anymore? Maybe a picture or video clip instead...
Gee...business people that's who...at least until we get some to use and legal digital signing. But please, there is no answer that is correct for all situations so let's drop this.
I wouldn't call people doing any of those things 'computer users', but rather developers, administrators, or editors. Those jobs are all necessary but they aren't what the majority of people do with devices even now.
And these users will use whatever they fancy but the devs will forever not get it (except maybe those that Steve Jobs whipped on a daily basis) so you can argue this till the cows come home. Let's also drop this too.
Christopher Chan wrote:
On Thursday, November 17, 2011 10:10 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
Letters? You mean the things that the Post Office used to deliver? Who does that anymore? Maybe a picture or video clip instead...
Gee...business people that's who...at least until we get some to use and legal digital signing. But please, there is no answer that is correct for all situations so let's drop this.
I wouldn't call people doing any of those things 'computer users', but rather developers, administrators, or editors. Those jobs are all necessary but they aren't what the majority of people do with devices even now.
And these users will use whatever they fancy but the devs will forever not get it (except maybe those that Steve Jobs whipped on a daily basis) so you can argue this till the cows come home. Let's also drop this too.
I'll make one last comment, before I drop this thread: y'know, I know this *great* o/s with a ton of software, and it lets you do whatever you want the way *YOU* want to, not the way some turkey in, say, Redmond, thinks you should. It's called *Nix....
mark
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net wrote:
I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway.
*lol*
you really believe you want to write a letter with voice control?
Letters? You mean the things that the Post Office used to deliver? Who does that anymore? Maybe a picture or video clip instead...
I do. And then there's email letters. <snip>
mark
Am 17.11.2011 15:10, schrieb Les Mikesell:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net wrote:
I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway.
*lol*
you really believe you want to write a letter with voice control?
Letters? You mean the things that the Post Office used to deliver? Who does that anymore? Maybe a picture or video clip instead...
go away with your "i am a private person and nobody needs things i do not need" attitude - the major use of computer was, is and will be business and not peopole who do bot know what business is because they get no job
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 17.11.2011 15:10, schrieb Les Mikesell:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net wrote:
I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway.
*lol*
you really believe you want to write a letter with voice control?
Letters? You mean the things that the Post Office used to deliver? Who does that anymore? Maybe a picture or video clip instead...
go away with your "i am a private person and nobody needs things i do not need" attitude - the major use of computer was, is and will be business and not peopole who do bot know what business is because they get no job
I've never said 'nobody needs'. I'm just pointing out the split between producing and consuming data and media and that there tend to be more consumers than producers (as it should be with content where copying and transporting is nearly free). Thus I consider your comments about 'the majority' to be very wrong. That is, for everyone editing video with it's necessary input devices you should expect many people watching with a simple interface, or for everyone programming in eclipse there will be many users of the resulting program interacting with it's (probably) simple interface.
On Nov 17, 2011, at 6:55 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.11.2011 14:44, schrieb Les Mikesell:
Not sure I understand - a soft keyboard only takes screen space when needed. And a very popular device is making news about its voice input app that is sort-of usable.
i do not speak about soft-keyboard
i speak about wasting braindead space with big icons and big spaces between icons to make interfaces better working with touch-displays while it wastes space for users of a classical computer
and PLEASE do not tell me about usability of small icons for some people since i am nearly blind on my right eye after some medical operations in the context computer screen and have on the left one 60-75% - that does not change the fact that i could jump in any developers face which is wasting space on my screen so that i see finally the same on my 23" as some years before with 17"
I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway.
*lol*
you really believe you want to write a letter with voice control?
---- people do this right now ----
you really believe you want operate with eclipse and voice control?
---- probably not but eclipse is used by only a small percentage of people with specific needs ----
you really believe you want to operate in a root-terminal with voice control?
---- sure ----
you really believe you want to edit config-files with voice control?
---- sure ----
you really believe you want to work with spreadsheets and voice control?
---- sure ----
you really believe you want to work with GIMP and voice control?
---- that would take considerable advancement of vocal interface ----
you really believe you want to edit videos with voice control?
---- sure ----
you can replace "voice control" with "touch-keyboard"!
recognize that there are MANY users which are NOT plaing a little bit with their devices - they are WORKING with their devices and in times where nearly in all jobs computers are needed to do the daily work it is simply ignorant start designing interfaces PRIMARY for the next big thing because some homeusers are happy with all this crap
---- development follows the money. Computer sales are flat and convergent devices such as smart phones and tablets are selling. Why is it so hard to figure out that computer development is following the money?
Recognize that it's not just Linux development but Microsoft is developing Windows 8 to run on many different hardware platforms including ARM and it's clear that they see this as essential to their continued existence. Apple is seeking to parlay their small device success into greater penetration into the main computer sales. You are seeing the convergence of what is known as smart phones, tablet computing and the personal computer into an amorphous OS that can take any form. Don't forget that even the computer on everyone's desk at their work place is really just a 'personal computer' with some ability to use shared resources, whether physically at the office or somewhere in the Internet cloud.
As for the majority... more than 50% of all phones sold now are smart phones. Soon everyone, everywhere will have one.
Craig
Am 17.11.2011 17:02, schrieb Craig White:
As for the majority... more than 50% of all phones sold now are smart phones. Soon everyone, everywhere will have one.
and for you this does mean they have ONLY a smartphone
jesus christ i have a smartphone too and i like optimized interfaces for it, but it is braindead optimize everything in the first place for smartphones
you are missing the fact that having millions of smartphones flying around is worthless without look how often and how long they are permanently used
if i am at home or at work i am using my workstations, and this is 90% of time if i am outside (lunch, parties, in a train...) i am using my smartphone
and please to not tell the world that i am the only one.....
Craig White wrote:
On Nov 17, 2011, at 6:55 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.11.2011 14:44, schrieb Les Mikesell:
<snip>
As for the majority... more than 50% of all phones sold now are smart phones. Soon everyone, everywhere will have one.
Ah, now I understand: you've drunk the Kool-Aid.
No, NOT everyone will have one. Not everyone *wants* one. Try looking at the surveys that happen every year or two, and something like 2/3rds of older Americans, and a good percentage of younger, only want A PHONE THAT WORKS, so that they can call someone and do this thing called "talk". They don't want to screw around with a phone.
And that's not going to change... unless, as I said yesterday, you, personally, want to spring the money out of your pocket for, say, me to have eye surgery, so I get 15/20 vision, so I can *read* the friggin' email at 4 point type.
mark
On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 11:14 -0500, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Craig White wrote:
On Nov 17, 2011, at 6:55 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.11.2011 14:44, schrieb Les Mikesell:
<snip> > As for the majority... more than 50% of all phones sold now are smart > phones. Soon everyone, everywhere will have one.
Ah, now I understand: you've drunk the Kool-Aid.
No, NOT everyone will have one. Not everyone *wants* one. Try looking at the surveys that happen every year or two, and something like 2/3rds of older Americans, and a good percentage of younger, only want A PHONE THAT WORKS, so that they can call someone and do this thing called "talk". They don't want to screw around with a phone.
And that's not going to change... unless, as I said yesterday, you, personally, want to spring the money out of your pocket for, say, me to have eye surgery, so I get 15/20 vision, so I can *read* the friggin' email at 4 point type.
---- Clearly you are out of touch with reality here...
http://www.mobilechoices.co.uk/news/older-mobile-users-switch-on-to-smartpho...
From which I quote...
"While a US study found that just 30% of over-55s currently have smartphones, their rate of ownership jumped by 5% in the last three months alone."
Survey source... Nielson
Here's a hint... they have this technology called pinch to zoom which allows you to make everything large enough to compensate for your vision problems.
Craig
On 11/17/11 8:02 AM, Craig White wrote:
As for the majority... more than 50% of all phones sold now are smart phones. Soon everyone, everywhere will have one.
So they all can walk off a cliff while fondling their angrybirds like a bunch of lemmings.
That said, what in Dogs name does this thread have to do with CentOS?? Can we please STOP already?
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 3:38 AM, John R Pierce pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
That said, what in Dogs name does this thread have to do with CentOS?? Can we please STOP already?
Hi,
Not wanting to drag out this topic, or post anything inflamatory. Also I am not necessarily replying only to John, but to the thread in general :-)
Where I work, a number of staff are being given ipods and ipads to use corporate web applications. The system is eventually going to completely replace a network of thin clients around the place.
In my opinion, the touch screen creates a whole new paradigm for computing. The downside of this paradigm shift, is that our employee facing systems do need to be updated to fully support touch screens.
In our tests, we have found users WANT to use an ipod to help them with their work. And when they use an ipod, they take more pride in their work, and make less errors. And when they do make errors, they tend to fix them on the spot.
This all has something to do with CentOS in a round-about way. I am using CentOS to host our corporate web apps in a tomcat6 instance.
Just adding my 2 cents.
Regards,
Dan
On 11/17/11 5:40 PM, Dan Irwin wrote:
This all has something to do with CentOS in a round-about way. I am using CentOS to host our corporate web apps in a tomcat6 instance.
except, nothing aobut centos's user interface is different than its upstream source.
so, if you want to champion user interface paradigm shifts, you should be doing it upstream, not here. if said upstream vendor adds fondleslab-friendly user interfaces, they'll be adopted by centos.
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:58 AM, John R Pierce pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
This all has something to do with CentOS in a round-about way. I am using CentOS to host our corporate web apps in a tomcat6 instance.
except, nothing aobut centos's user interface is different than its upstream source.
so, if you want to champion user interface paradigm shifts, you should be doing it upstream, not here. if said upstream vendor adds fondleslab-friendly user interfaces, they'll be adopted by centos.
If you are writing java web stuff that runs under tomcat, the OS hosting it is nearly irrelevant.
On Thursday, November 17, 2011 08:02:00 AM Craig White wrote:
development follows the money. Computer sales are flat and convergent devices such as smart phones and tablets are selling. Why is it so hard to figure out that computer development is following the money?
Recognize that it's not just Linux development but Microsoft is developing Windows 8 to run on many different hardware platforms including ARM and it's clear that they see this as essential to their continued existence. Apple is seeking to parlay their small device success into greater penetration into the main computer sales. You are seeing the convergence of what is known as smart phones, tablet computing and the personal computer into an amorphous OS that can take any form. Don't forget that even the computer on everyone's desk at their work place is really just a 'personal computer' with some ability to use shared resources, whether physically at the office or somewhere in the Internet cloud.
As for the majority... more than 50% of all phones sold now are smart phones. Soon everyone, everywhere will have one.
How did this thread get started on CentOS?
Anyway, I do a good 1/3 to 1/2 of my casual browsing on my Moto Droid 2. When I listen to the "radio", I use my phone with a blue tooth headset and an app that lets me listen to any radio station anywhere in the world. I read books on my phone, I answer lightweight emails, schedule meetings, skype chat, play a game or two, read a 'book' with my nook app. I reset my sprinklers by downloading the PDF manual and reading it on my phone while I dicker with the buttons. Why my Internet capable smart phone is far easier to use than my sprinkler timer is reason enough for a smart competitor to bankrupt Rainbird.
Anybody who doesn't think smart phones are going to be mainstream is missing something! No, I don't code on my phone, but I don't crack out my laptop at the bus stop, either.
My smart phone, with its slide-out keyboard, does passable-to-great at everything up to serious work. Give it an optional external monitor/keyboard, and it could easily grow into that, too, given a few years.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:07 AM, Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net wrote:
<snip>
Or embedded devices with remote controls and no keyboard at all... Netflix got their popularity by running on just about every device that can connect to the internet and a screen. But those are not replacements for the computer where you manage your queue, they are additions, but you might spend more time with them.
this will not happen now an dnot in hundret years!
I think we are only a few years away from fully usable voice controls which will eliminate any size requirements for your end point device. Keyboard input isn't really that great anyway.
And overwhelmingly, most folks will use keyboards at work or home, unless they have an office with a door they can shut. As I've been saying for 20 or more years, voice computing will never come in: e.g., the employee who's just been fired, walks out of the office and yells, FORMAT c:; YES, YES, YES!!!
And no one's going to want to have to have employees wasting time training a voice recognition system to only recognize their voice.
mark "where's the jack behind my ear?"
Greetings,
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:49 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
or more years, voice computing will never come in: e.g., the employee who's just been fired, walks out of the office and yells, FORMAT c:; YES, YES, YES!!!
ROTFL!!!
I don't remamber thy guy who invented the qwerty (IMHO quirky) layout, but sure it is not gonna fade off!
And thinking that the handheld devices are the panacea to bring "world peace" is meant for those "MBA"s and PHB's; a joke at the least.
OTOH, Voice training is easier using the language substrate of Sanskrit (the oldest and most well defined "language" spoken by very few in India) and can be easily adapted to Indian Languages, at least.
I know.
Now that serves right for about 1/6th (add a couple of hundred couple of 100 million counting te diaspora not Living in India)
Of course, I don't know Latin. Never heard it.
Vreme: 11/17/2011 03:29 PM, Rajagopal Swaminathan piše:
OTOH, Voice training is easier using the language substrate of Sanskrit (the oldest and most well defined "language" spoken by very few in India) and can be easily adapted to Indian Languages, at least.
Actually, simplest Voice recognition would be for ex-Yugoslavia (Serbian-Croatian, Slovenian and Macedonian) languages. The language reform in late 19th century gave us "one sound = one letter, one letter = one sound" reading/writing. There are 30 sounds and letters in Cyrillic and 27+3 in Latin script.
So "voice" would be written as "vojs", "people" as "pipl", "trouble" as "trabl", "throughout" as "truaut" and "throughput" as "truput".
Grammar is somewhat harder, but as for voice recognition goes, I have never heard of easier language.
But there is only 20-30 million speaking it/them.
On 11/18/2011 06:24 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Grammar is somewhat harder, but as for voice recognition goes, I have never heard of easier language. But there is only 20-30 million speaking it/them.
Large chunks of this thread are irrelevant to CentOS. People have repeatedly asked for the OT content to move away.
Everyone posting to this thread with content that isnt specific to CentOS ( which, therefore excludes RH and SL as well ) gets moderated.
- KB
Can you all please move this subthread "the majority will NEVER use smartphones" elsewhere? Discuss it on Facebook if you have to. Thanks!
Kai
On 11/16/2011 6:36 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Yves Bellefeuille wrote:
What percentage are using iPhones and Androids to access the internet? I'd guess it is already over 50%.
Not over 50%, but 5,5%, according to this source: http://www.netmarketshare.com/
I may have exaggerated the figure, but I don't believe it is as low as that. Smart phones have been outselling PCs for some time.
So even if the figure is less than 50%, it will soon be up there.
You are arguing two entirely different points. One 'Access' the other 'Market Share'. Likely both are very nearly right percentages. You buy a phone first to 'have a phone'. The rest are upgrades and useful features, but just because you buy a smart phone doesn't mean that is now your single method for 'accessing the net'.
John Hinton
On 11/15/2011 9:35 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 15.11.2011 14:56, schrieb Timothy Murphy:
But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
this is what some braindead developers seems to think but it is not true nor will it never get true!
why in the world should i use a laptop in my office if i can have a Core i7 Quad combined with much more and better hardware as ever possible in a laptop?
why in the world should i use a laptop @home where i have a dedicated place for a powerful machine with much less heat and noise than a crappy laptop?
i have worked long enough with laptops and they was, they are and they will always be useless crap if you need power and comfort while you do more as webbrowsing or read a handful mails what i can do with my mobile
Agreed! The cramped screen space (I run dual vid cards in sli with 4 monitors with development apps spread all over them!), sluggish response (open what I have running on my work station and any laptop goes into crawl mode), heat (if you really run it in your lap as the name infers) and that just touches on the very start of my list. Yes, I have few laptops and use them when I 'need' to and one often times goes with me when I leave my office (but my phone is rapidly replacing that need unless I'm going for days)... but why on earth would I consider using only a laptop? Well, if I was always mobile, but I'm not. Maybe if I didn't need to run any development systems... Eclipse on a laptop certainly works, but is sluggish vs. a workstation. Open Dreamweaver, Photoshop, Eclipse, three web browsers a secure shell or few, email, IM, and then need to open a Word attachment and most laptops chug to worst than a crawl.
Yes, laptops are more becoming a tool of the trade, but I don't think 1% is any where near a real number. It 'might' be as high as 50%???? (totally grabbing at the stars saying that).
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Agreed! The cramped screen space (I run dual vid cards in sli with 4 monitors with development apps spread all over them!), sluggish response (open what I have running on my work station and any laptop goes into crawl mode), heat (if you really run it in your lap as the name infers) and that just touches on the very start of my list. Yes, I have few laptops and use them when I 'need' to and one often times goes with me when I leave my office (but my phone is rapidly replacing that need unless I'm going for days)... but why on earth would I consider using only a laptop? Well, if I was always mobile, but I'm not. Maybe if I didn't need to run any development systems... Eclipse on a laptop certainly works, but is sluggish vs. a workstation. Open Dreamweaver, Photoshop, Eclipse, three web browsers a secure shell or few, email, IM, and then need to open a Word attachment and most laptops chug to worst than a crawl.
And the funny thing, from my perspective at least, is that I'm sitting beside a laptop that routinely has several VMware VM's running (XP & Server 2008r2), several line of business applications open, and has dreamweaver *and* gimp running in the background. :) All this on a two year old i3 w/ 6GB RAM. Set me back around $900.
Larger screen? VGA or HDMI outputs. ;-) Nothing quite beats working on a 55" HDTV in your living room, especially when I have time for STO.
Drew wrote:
Agreed! The cramped screen space (I run dual vid cards in sli with 4 monitors with development apps spread all over them!), sluggish response (open what I have running on my work station and any laptop goes into
<nsip>
And the funny thing, from my perspective at least, is that I'm sitting beside a laptop that routinely has several VMware VM's running (XP & Server 2008r2), several line of business applications open, and has dreamweaver *and* gimp running in the background. :) All this on a two year old i3 w/ 6GB RAM. Set me back around $900.
Larger screen? VGA or HDMI outputs. ;-) Nothing quite beats working on a 55" HDTV in your living room, especially when I have time for STO.
Well, yes, I can think of a hell of a lot of things that *beat* ->working<- at home in your living room, which suggests that you're doing well over 40 hours/week. Been there, done that, actually have a t-shirt. Do it again for an employer, regularly? Not a fucking chance.
mark
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 08:54:31AM -0500, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Well, yes, I can think of a hell of a lot of things that *beat* ->working<- at home in your living room, which suggests that you're doing well over 40 hours/week. Been there, done that, actually have a t-shirt. Do it again for an employer, regularly? Not a fucking chance.
So not only does the overall SNR leave, well, everything to be desired but not we are tolerating this type of language? Good job - you've made an already useless list that much worse. You rule.
John R. Dennison wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 08:54:31AM -0500, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Well, yes, I can think of a hell of a lot of things that *beat* ->working<- at home in your living room, which suggests that you're doing well over 40 hours/week. Been there, done that, actually have a t-shirt. Do it again for an employer, regularly? Not a fucking chance.
So not only does the overall SNR leave, well, everything to be desired but not we are tolerating this type of language? Good job - you've made an already useless list that much worse. You rule.
Let me note that this will be the second time I've changed the subject line to OT; this really does have nothing to do with CentOS, but rather, to parody Prairie Home Companion, Lives of the Sysadmins.
I find your comment? .sigfile? below interesting, esp. in the context of what you wrote to me, above. I also note that you're upset by worty dirds, but ignore the entire content of the note, which I guess means we should assume that you do take massive amounts of work home, and work at it in the face of home, family, or a life. I'm willing to end this thread with no more comments, if the rest of you will.
-- Much of what looks like rudeness in hacker circles is not intended to give offense. Rather, it's the product of the direct, cut-through-the-bullshit communications style that is natural to people who are more concerned about solving problems than making others feel warm and fuzzy.
mark "also corrected the spelling in the subject"
On 16 November 2011 14:02, John R. Dennison jrd@gerdesas.com wrote:
So not only does the overall SNR leave, well, everything to be desired but not we are tolerating this type of language? Good job - you've made an already useless list that much worse. You rule.
As much as I detest people who do this.... +1.
Ben
Greetings,
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Benjamin Donnachie benjamin@py-soft.co.uk wrote:
On 16 November 2011 14:02, John R. Dennison jrd@gerdesas.com wrote:
So not only does the overall SNR leave, well, everything to be desired but not we are tolerating this type of language? Good job - you've made an already useless list that much worse. You rule.
As much as I detest people who do this.... +1.
hmm... "Strom over a teacup"
Centos has much larger installed base than "upstream provider".
And the _always_ stressed out sysadmins find a vent or two in this list. No Problem with me. This is mostly an "Adult Only" list, I presume (as minors cannot become Linux admins that fast -- What the heck even M$*E's cant get it) of course. So a word should not derail any conversation.
Above IMHO, of course.
Vreme: 11/16/2011 04:18 PM, Rajagopal Swaminathan piše:
Centos has much larger installed base than "upstream provider".
Internet facing systems (market share of web servers) and Install base are not the same thing. MANY RHEL installations never ever see "the light of day", so.... Not true.
Also, if you would compare "CPU Core" numbers....
On 16 Nov 2011, at 15:19, Rajagopal Swaminathan raju.rajsand@gmail.com wrote:
hmm... "Strom over a teacup"
My reply concerned the huge amount of drivel being posted to this list. The topic is supposedly CentOS - not "stressed sysadmins sounding off". Simples really.
Ben
Sent from my iPhone
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 05:39:28AM -0800, Drew wrote:
Agreed! The cramped screen space (I run dual vid cards in sli with 4 monitors with development apps spread all over them!), sluggish response (open what I have running on my work station and any laptop goes into crawl mode), heat (if you really run it in your lap as the name infers) and that just touches on the very start of my list. Yes, I have few laptops and use them when I 'need' to and one often times goes with me when I leave my office (but my phone is rapidly replacing that need unless I'm going for days)... but why on earth would I consider using only a laptop? Well, if I was always mobile, but I'm not. Maybe if I didn't need to run any development systems... Eclipse on a laptop certainly works, but is sluggish vs. a workstation. Open Dreamweaver, Photoshop, Eclipse, three web browsers a secure shell or few, email, IM, and then need to open a Word attachment and most laptops chug to worst than a crawl.
And the funny thing, from my perspective at least, is that I'm sitting beside a laptop that routinely has several VMware VM's running (XP & Server 2008r2), several line of business applications open, and has dreamweaver *and* gimp running in the background. :) All this on a two year old i3 w/ 6GB RAM. Set me back around $900.
Larger screen? VGA or HDMI outputs. ;-) Nothing quite beats working on a 55" HDTV in your living room, especially when I have time for STO.
Very similar experience here, too.
I think all boils down to energy and if the marginal increase in productivity on desktop HW is worth it.
Desktop components are optimized for performance with a lot less regards for power than those for mobile devices. Besides, the OS attempts and can be further tuned to use better the HW energy wise when installed on a mobile device -- and here we get just a bit closer to the topic of this list. :-)
Try to gauge how much of the time (wall clock time) you use the CPU cores close to their full power during a typical day. There are several tools that may help. That will give the percentage of your working time when the higher performance of the desktop HW *may* get you a boost in productivity. Also, power the system though an energy meter and read it after 24h.
I bet that unless your usage is kind of specific, such as simulations, video rendering, or batches of algorithm-heavy image processing, the time you really use such HW close to full capacity is really small. However, the power drain, even when idle, is a lot higher compared to even a high end laptop's.
Besides, it's common practice to suspend the laptop session during night time. How many consider doing that with a desktop?
To me it's much like hopping my 75kg in a 2 tonnes car to get some groceries. Moving around 2t for 75kg may be like 20 times more energy intensive than using a scooter.
Mihai
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Timothy Murphy gayleard@eircom.net wrote:
Incidentally, I don't really understand what is meant by the term "desktop" nowadays. I always think of it as a contrast to laptop.
'Desktop' is in contrast to 'server'. On a server, you only reboot to load a new kernel and you never use the console display, rarely change the drive layout or use removable storage, and almost never change the network connections - and you expect the same programs to run for years. On a desktop, the display is the first priority, ownership of certain devices is expected to magically shift to the user at the console, developers will give up consistent device naming for boot speed, and nobody cares if last year's programs still run with this year's OS.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Timothy Murphy gayleard@eircom.net wrote:
Incidentally, I don't really understand what is meant by the term "desktop" nowadays. I always think of it as a contrast to laptop.
'Desktop' is in contrast to 'server'. On a server, you only reboot to load a new kernel and you never use the console display, rarely change
Oh, I dunno - it's not infrequently that I have to plug in a monitor-on-a-stick....
the drive layout or use removable storage, and almost never change the network connections - and you expect the same programs to run for years. On a desktop, the display is the first priority, ownership of certain devices is expected to magically shift to the user at the console, developers will give up consistent device naming for boot speed, and nobody cares if last year's programs still run with this year's OS.
I don't agree with that. Some people do want to keep running what they know, and if the budget's tight....
mark, trying to find a prboom server for CentOS 5...."
On 11/15/2011 05:23 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Timothy Murphygayleard@eircom.net wrote:
Incidentally, I don't really understand what is meant by the term "desktop" nowadays. I always think of it as a contrast to laptop.
'Desktop' is in contrast to 'server'. On a server, you only reboot to load a new kernel and you never use the console display, rarely change
Oh, I dunno - it's not infrequently that I have to plug in a monitor-on-a-stick....
Supermicro boards come with IPMI on-board these days so you can do all that work that you previously did standing next to the server from the confines of your cozy home. This is even more useful when you server is sitting in a rack in a cold, noisy, dry collocation facility.
Regards, Dennis
Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
On 11/15/2011 05:23 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Timothy Murphygayleard@eircom.net wrote:
Incidentally, I don't really understand what is meant by the term "desktop" nowadays. I always think of it as a contrast to laptop.
'Desktop' is in contrast to 'server'. On a server, you only reboot to load a new kernel and you never use the console display, rarely change
Oh, I dunno - it's not infrequently that I have to plug in a monitor-on-a-stick....
Supermicro boards come with IPMI on-board these days so you can do all that work that you previously did standing next to the server from the confines of your cozy home. This is even more useful when you server is sitting in a rack in a cold, noisy, dry collocation facility.
Um, reality check time: what colo? I've got two server rooms, er, "computer labs", and a very small one. In the two, we've got maybe 150 or more servers. We don't have them all wired with IPMI. In fact, we don't have any of them cabled that way. Lessee, wouldn't that be an extra port for each server? Or a few servers with their own switches, and all those servers cabled? That's a lot of work for the three of us, *and* there are plenty of times when no, IPMI either a) doesn't work, or b) you have to physically powercycle the damn thing. Or the one that I have to run down to and hit <f1> so it'll finish posting. Or be there because I forgot to tell it fastboot before I rebooted it (or it rebooted), and I have to powercycle it, because, as a production box, we can't wait four or six hours for the fsck to complete. (Don't get me started on *that* state of affairs.)
mark
On 11/15/2011 05:55 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
On 11/15/2011 05:23 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Timothy Murphygayleard@eircom.net wrote:
Incidentally, I don't really understand what is meant by the term "desktop" nowadays. I always think of it as a contrast to laptop.
'Desktop' is in contrast to 'server'. On a server, you only reboot to load a new kernel and you never use the console display, rarely change
Oh, I dunno - it's not infrequently that I have to plug in a monitor-on-a-stick....
Supermicro boards come with IPMI on-board these days so you can do all that work that you previously did standing next to the server from the confines of your cozy home. This is even more useful when you server is sitting in a rack in a cold, noisy, dry collocation facility.
Um, reality check time: what colo? I've got two server rooms, er, "computer labs", and a very small one. In the two, we've got maybe 150 or more servers. We don't have them all wired with IPMI. In fact, we don't have any of them cabled that way. Lessee, wouldn't that be an extra port for each server? Or a few servers with their own switches, and all those servers cabled?
No, you can share the interface so you don't need any extra cables/ports at all.
That's a lot of work for the three of us, *and* there are
plenty of times when no, IPMI either a) doesn't work, or b) you have to physically powercycle the damn thing. Or the one that I have to run down
You can physically power cycle the system with IPMI.
to and hit<f1> so it'll finish posting. Or be there because I forgot to tell it fastboot before I rebooted it (or it rebooted), and I have to powercycle it, because, as a production box, we can't wait four or six hours for the fsck to complete. (Don't get me started on *that* state of affairs.)
You can hit <f1> using the IPMI console. You can also modify the BIOS settings.
The IPMI controller is a completely separate system. You can physically shut down the computer and still connect to the IPMI subsystem/web interface and power it back on remotely.
Obviously if you don't have IPMI on some systems or cannot use it for other reasons then that's tragic but inevitable. All I'm saying is that for new system you should strongly consider it. Back in the days you actually needed to buy an additional card for this but as I said on Supermicro boards/systems you now get this on-board and it simplifies administration greatly. Just a few days ago I had to re-install a system and in the process change the SATA settings from IDE to AHCI in the bios. In the past I had to go to the server to do this. Together with the managed switches I can completely revamp the entire infrastructure if I wanted to and wouldn't even have to leave my home to do it.
Regards, Dennis
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
Obviously if you don't have IPMI on some systems or cannot use it for other reasons then that's tragic but inevitable. All I'm saying is that for new system you should strongly consider it. Back in the days you actually needed to buy an additional card for this but as I said on Supermicro boards/systems you now get this on-board and it simplifies administration greatly. Just a few days ago I had to re-install a system and in the process change the SATA settings from IDE to AHCI in the bios. In the past I had to go to the server to do this. Together with the managed switches I can completely revamp the entire infrastructure if I wanted to and wouldn't even have to leave my home to do it.
Yep, it works really nicely in small HPC machines, where it completely replaces the managed PDUs we'd previously used, and costs you no extra cabling. In my case these are all Dell machines (IPMI's been standard for years on Dell servers). When the IPMI controller can be configured to use DHCP with a poke or two of the buttons on the front of the machine (if it's not been preconfigured) it's really quite quick to rack up and configure machines.
jh
Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
On 11/15/2011 05:55 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
On 11/15/2011 05:23 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Timothy Murphygayleard@eircom.net wrote:
'Desktop' is in contrast to 'server'. On a server, you only reboot to load a new kernel and you never use the console display, rarely change
Oh, I dunno - it's not infrequently that I have to plug in a monitor-on-a-stick....
Supermicro boards come with IPMI on-board these days so you can do all
<snip> I understand you love your Supermicro boards. Fine. There's no way we're going to replace everything, which is what you seem to be suggesting. I would also need more ports, to plug in the IPMI interfaces on the boxes we have.
Look (and, officially, I am speaking for myself, not my employer nor the US federal government), this is a US gov't agency. Why don't you call your Congresscritter and Senator, and tell them you personally want to donate the money to replace everything we have that doesn't have IPMI, and pay for the time install and cable it all up? That would be *great*... of course, some of our latest servers have 48 cores, and we just got some 64 core servers, so it might cost you a pretty penny....
Oh, yes, and then there's the official requirement that I be here during business hours.
mark
Greetings,
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:27 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Why don't you call your Congresscritter and Senator, and tell them you personally want to donate the money to replace everything we have that doesn't have IPMI, and pay for the time install and cable it all up? That would be *great*... of course, some of our latest servers have 48 cores, and we just got some 64 core servers, so it might cost you a pretty penny....
Oh, yes, and then there's the official requirement that I be here during business hours.
I have to apolgise here Dear Mark.
Your country has placed so may restrictions on "exports" that even India (a de-facto nuclear power) does not have the privilege of having such hardware. Even "Redhat" is afraid.
That said, I have had situation in IDC's where I have managed about 45 Rack servers and 10 Blades -- all (then) Sun X and V servers from ground (tile floor up) for an App that is designed to tun on "only" those servers. I know the enormous difficulties the customer faced, and I had to help them justify.
So let us just chill.
Rajagopal Swaminathan wrote:
Greetings,
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:27 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Why don't you call your Congresscritter and Senator, and tell them you personally want to donate the money to replace everything we have that doesn't have IPMI, and pay for the time install and cable it all up? That would be *great*... of course, some of our latest servers have 48 cores, and we just got some 64 core servers, so it might cost you a pretty penny....
Oh, yes, and then there's the official requirement that I be here during business hours.
I have to apolgise here Dear Mark.
Your country has placed so may restrictions on "exports" that even India (a de-facto nuclear power) does not have the privilege of having such hardware. Even "Redhat" is afraid.
Oh? That level hardware is a no-no? I admit, they *are* brand new, and given the very serious scientific computing we do here, they're *needed* (some folks' jobs run, on a cluster like the above, 2, 3, 4 *days*. Then there was the guy about a couple years ago, who asked me to hold off rebooting his home directory server until his job finished.
Two *weeks* later, I got to reboot....
That said, I have had situation in IDC's where I have managed about 45 Rack servers and 10 Blades -- all (then) Sun X and V servers from ground (tile floor up) for an App that is designed to tun on "only" those servers. I know the enormous difficulties the customer faced, and I had to help them justify.
Sun? Debacle, er, Oracle? Oh, *Ghu*, I'm *so* sorry. It took me a month to get one server repaired, getting an FE out, the beginning of this year. (Meanwhile, Dell's had two SE's over the course of three days in the last *week*). If my manager, the other admin, or I have anything to do with it, we *ain't* buying more Sun/Oracle.
So let us just chill.
Actually no, we turned off the a/c in the room I spent, um, about 7 hours in with the FE between yesterday and today.... <g>
mark
Vreme: 11/15/2011 05:43 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn piše:
Supermicro boards come with IPMI on-board these days so you can do all that work that you previously did standing next to the server from the confines of your cozy home. This is even more useful when you server is sitting in a rack in a cold, noisy, dry collocation facility.
What is SuperMicro??
I am joking, I know what it is, but only top 10% of the companies in my country can afford proper hardware, I have never even seen IP KVM in person.
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:23 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
'Desktop' is in contrast to 'server'. On a server, you only reboot to load a new kernel and you never use the console display, rarely change
Oh, I dunno - it's not infrequently that I have to plug in a monitor-on-a-stick....
You only need that for installs or if you've done something wrong. And then it isn't really a 'display'/GUI as much as a text based tty emulator.
the drive layout or use removable storage, and almost never change the network connections - and you expect the same programs to run for years. On a desktop, the display is the first priority, ownership of certain devices is expected to magically shift to the user at the console, developers will give up consistent device naming for boot speed, and nobody cares if last year's programs still run with this year's OS.
I don't agree with that. Some people do want to keep running what they know, and if the budget's tight....
Then you probably don't run Fedora - the 'desktop' oriented distribution, or care much for the non-backwards compatible changes that went from there to RHEL.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:23 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
<snip>
I don't agree with that. Some people do want to keep running what they know, and if the budget's tight....
Then you probably don't run Fedora - the 'desktop' oriented distribution, or care much for the non-backwards compatible changes that went from there to RHEL.
Hell, no, I don't run fedora. I've got three or four users, and my manager on one of his systems, who do. I *LOATHE* it, with all the grief upgrades have given me.
mark
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:57 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
I don't agree with that. Some people do want to keep running what they know, and if the budget's tight....
Then you probably don't run Fedora - the 'desktop' oriented distribution, or care much for the non-backwards compatible changes that went from there to RHEL.
Hell, no, I don't run fedora. I've got three or four users, and my manager on one of his systems, who do. I *LOATHE* it, with all the grief upgrades have given me.
And, correspondingly, you probably don't really run any 'desktop' applications that are visual or audio/video oriented. There are reasons for that side of the coin, but they don't mesh very well with server use and remind me of the early days of Windows.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:57 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
I don't agree with that. Some people do want to keep running what they know, and if the budget's tight....
Then you probably don't run Fedora - the 'desktop' oriented distribution, or care much for the non-backwards compatible changes that went from there to RHEL.
Hell, no, I don't run fedora. I've got three or four users, and my manager on one of his systems, who do. I *LOATHE* it, with all the grief upgrades have given me.
And, correspondingly, you probably don't really run any 'desktop' applications that are visual or audio/video oriented. There are reasons for that side of the coin, but they don't mesh very well with server use and remind me of the early days of Windows.
Um, users here run eclipse, among many other things. At home, I run mplayer, realplayer, browser, gwenview... what "audio/video" apps were you thinking of?
mark
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:52 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Hell, no, I don't run fedora. I've got three or four users, and my manager on one of his systems, who do. I *LOATHE* it, with all the grief upgrades have given me.
And, correspondingly, you probably don't really run any 'desktop' applications that are visual or audio/video oriented. There are reasons for that side of the coin, but they don't mesh very well with server use and remind me of the early days of Windows.
Um, users here run eclipse, among many other things. At home, I run mplayer, realplayer, browser, gwenview... what "audio/video" apps were you thinking of?
Vlc is probably the best of the bunch. But most of my laptop video-viewing is Netflix or from a Slingbox so I run Windows on the default-boot partition and run linux under VMware player or more often just connect to a server via NX/freenx for work.
On 11/15/2011 02:56 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
Fedora is basically an incubator for new technologies and as such not really an attractive system to install for end-users. If you deal with servers you probably go with CentOS, SL, Debian, etc. and if you want a desktop you probably use Ubuntu.
I don't really agree with this. If you are using CentOS on servers it is much easier to use Fedora on laptops, since Fedora is so similar in operation to CentOS. In fact CentOS is more or less identical to an ancient version of Fedora.
That's why I'm running Fedora too but then I'm not an end-user but an administrator/developer i.e. I actually know how to deal with the intricacies of the system and how to keep my system up-to-date in the absence of a direct upgrade path. Users who don't know much about system management cannot really deal with the complexities that arise from Fedoras fast development progress.
Incidentally, I don't really understand what is meant by the term "desktop" nowadays. I always think of it as a contrast to laptop. But isn't everyone today using laptops for everyday use?
Desktop in this context basically means a system with a GUI that's primarily used through an attached monitor and keyboard as opposed to a server that has no GUI installed and is primarily managed through ssh/IPMI.
Regards, Dennis
Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
On 11/15/2011 01:56 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
<snip>
I saw statistics - I don't remember where - saying that CentOS had 30% of the Linux market, which I found very surprising,
Wow!
though also satsifying (to me). SL had a tiny share. (I remember now, it was someone complaining that Fedora's share was slipping badly.)
Because fedora, as has been mentioned here by folks in addition to me, is bleeding edge, not leading edge. There's *NO* *WAY* I'd run it at home, much less at work. <snip>
I was very struck by the ease with which I upgraded to CentOS-6, compared with the nightmare (now hopefully over) upgrading from Fedora-15 to Fedora-16. It reminded me why I would never run Fedora on a server.
I tend to skip one Fedora release and then do a a plain reinstall and copy my old data I need over. Fedora upgrades always sound rather messy.
The "preupgrade" is what I've been using the last year, and why I'm now building boxes here with 500M instead of 100M root partitions, figuring that it's what's coming for CentOS, eventually.
mark
Vreme: 11/15/2011 03:46 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us piše:
The "preupgrade" is what I've been using the last year, and why I'm now building boxes here with 500M instead of 100M root partitions, figuring that it's what's coming for CentOS, eventually.
+1
On 11/15/2011 04:31 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Vreme: 11/15/2011 03:46 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us piše:
The "preupgrade" is what I've been using the last year, and why I'm now building boxes here with 500M instead of 100M root partitions, figuring that it's what's coming for CentOS, eventually.
+1
I doubt that. The issue isn't the technology but the support issues that can arise from updating systems between releases. Red Hat would have to test all kinds of update scenarios and not only between two releases but they'd also have to take into account systems that have been upgraded several times. I'm pretty sure they will stick to the service migration update path they are using now.
Regards, Dennis
Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
On 11/15/2011 04:31 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Vreme: 11/15/2011 03:46 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us pie:
The "preupgrade" is what I've been using the last year, and why I'm now building boxes here with 500M instead of 100M root partitions, figuring that it's what's coming for CentOS, eventually.
+1
I doubt that. The issue isn't the technology but the support issues that can arise from updating systems between releases. Red Hat would have to test all kinds of update scenarios and not only between two releases but they'd also have to take into account systems that have been upgraded several times. I'm pretty sure they will stick to the service migration update path they are using now.
preupgrade is only for migration for full releases, and does sorta kinda work.... It's been in fedora a year or so; I'm *not* looking forward to it hitting RHEL, and so CentOS, but I'm figuring it will, in another year or two.
mark
On 11/15/2011 05:40 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
On 11/15/2011 04:31 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Vreme: 11/15/2011 03:46 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us piše:
The "preupgrade" is what I've been using the last year, and why I'm now building boxes here with 500M instead of 100M root partitions, figuring that it's what's coming for CentOS, eventually.
+1
I doubt that. The issue isn't the technology but the support issues that can arise from updating systems between releases. Red Hat would have to test all kinds of update scenarios and not only between two releases but they'd also have to take into account systems that have been upgraded several times. I'm pretty sure they will stick to the service migration update path they are using now.
preupgrade is only for migration for full releases, and does sorta kinda work.... It's been in fedora a year or so; I'm *not* looking forward to it hitting RHEL, and so CentOS, but I'm figuring it will, in another year or two.
It might be available as a package but I doubt it will be officially supported by RHEL. "sorta kinda" isn't good enough for an enterprise OS. If business customers begin hosing their systems with these upgrades then Red Hat will be in quite a bit of trouble. Sure upgrading from a sysv init based system to systemd init based system might work well for your LAMP system but what will it do to proprietary clunky software that is running out there? Will your complex Oracle DB setup actually survive that upgrade?
Right now customers have to upgrade by creating new installs that they can test independently of their running infrastructure which makes them ultimately responsible for the "upgrade" (migration really) process.
With an upgrade path between major versions Red Hat will become responsible for that and I'm not sure they are willing to bear that burden for all the possible various installations out there.
Regards, Dennis
Vreme: 11/15/2011 05:58 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn piše:
With an upgrade path between major versions Red Hat will become responsible for that and I'm not sure they are willing to bear that burden for all the possible various installations out there.
I do not think they will, but 500MB boot partitions I create....
Vreme: 11/15/2011 01:56 PM, Timothy Murphy piše:
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Currently, CentOS build system should be in much better shape and we will see how it will do for coming 6.2 point release (already in beta).
Thanks very much for that. I found your account most interesting and informative.
I guess one question that I've never seen raised is if there has ever been a suggestion that Centos and SL should combine, or at least work together? They seem to have exactly the same aim.
I wonder why SL was set up, rather than offering to help the CentOS team?
SL is maintained for Scientists mostly in Fermi Labs and CERN, and it has additional Scientific applications/packages.
They are also government funded project, and as such must follow some strict rules. Those are main reasons. There are smaller ones, but even those are enough not to think in the direction of joining projects.
<snip>
I run CentOS on 3 home servers, and Fedora on my laptops.)
I have setup repository for desktop use of CentOS where I have put many packages (~300 compiled and 45 downloaded from non-repo locations) and in process of solving repo conflicts so major third-part repositories can be the basis for nicely formulated Desktop distro. When I finally have enough time I will finish it and offer entire package to public. I hope it will be soon.
On 11/15/2011 06:56 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Currently, CentOS build system should be in much better shape and we will see how it will do for coming 6.2 point release (already in beta).
Thanks very much for that. I found your account most interesting and informative.
I guess one question that I've never seen raised is if there has ever been a suggestion that Centos and SL should combine, or at least work together? They seem to have exactly the same aim.
I wonder why SL was set up, rather than offering to help the CentOS team?
We have discussed a merger, however; they add things to the install discs that are not upstream that their users need ... we don't do that (as one example).
We have different goals ... and for what SL rebuilds they want to be 100% binary compatible ... but they do not want their ISOs to necessary be compatible (if, for example, they need openais and it is not upstream).
There is nothing WRONG with either approach ... they are just different.
I saw statistics - I don't remember where - saying that CentOS had 30% of the Linux market, which I found very surprising, though also satsifying (to me). SL had a tiny share. (I remember now, it was someone complaining that Fedora's share was slipping badly.)
http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/os-linux/all/all
I belong to what may be the silent majority who don't really care if CentOS is absolutely up-to-date. (As far as I can see, none of the changes in CentOS-6.1 would make the slightest difference to me. I run CentOS on 3 home servers, and Fedora on my laptops.)
I was very struck by the ease with which I upgraded to CentOS-6, compared with the nightmare (now hopefully over) upgrading from Fedora-15 to Fedora-16. It reminded me why I would never run Fedora on a server.
To me, the reliability and solidity of CentOS are what I relish, and I'm very grateful to the CentOS team for their work. I don't mind them getting a bit crotchety at times!
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
We have different goals ... and for what SL rebuilds they want to be 100% binary compatible ... but they do not want their ISOs to necessary be compatible (if, for example, they need openais and it is not upstream).
But they also include revisor, so building different ISO spins should be the least of the problems. Splitting their additions to an extras-like repo might be slightly more complicated.
On Nov 14, 2011, at 7:56 PM, Alan McKay wrote:
Both CentOS and Scientific Linux *aim* at 100% binary compatibility and they are both doing their best toward that goal. However, neither is perfect.
That's interesting. So how is it they've managed to come out with 6.1 (and so long ago at that)?
---- I got the impression that the reason owes to the fact that Scientific Linux is using a koji build server and had it up and running perhaps even before the 6.0 release.
http://lwn.net/Articles/446556/
But in truth, don't trust what the non-invested people might speculate to be the reasons, the real answers can only come from the developers themselves.
Craig
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Craig White craig.white@ttiltd.com wrote:
On Nov 14, 2011, at 7:56 PM, Alan McKay wrote:
Both CentOS and Scientific Linux *aim* at 100% binary compatibility and they are both doing their best toward that goal. However, neither is perfect.
That's interesting. So how is it they've managed to come out with 6.1 (and so long ago at that)?
I got the impression that the reason owes to the fact that Scientific Linux is using a koji build server and had it up and running perhaps even before the 6.0 release.
http://lwn.net/Articles/446556/
But in truth, don't trust what the non-invested people might speculate to be the reasons, the real answers can only come from the developers themselves.
And note that one of the SL developers has taken a position at Red Hat, so things might be different in the future.... http://scientificlinuxforum.org/index.php?showtopic=897
On 11/14/2011 08:56 PM, Alan McKay wrote:
Both CentOS and Scientific Linux *aim* at 100% binary compatibility and they are both doing their best toward that goal. However, neither is perfect.
That's interesting. So how is it they've managed to come out with 6.1 (and so long ago at that)?
We have a CR repository that has a bunch of 6.1 (and updates newer than 6.1 as well) in there. It is not like there are no updates to 6.0 released. The ISOs for 6.1 are not released, but the RPMs are.
Johnny Hughes wrote
------------------------------
We have a CR repository that has a bunch of 6.1 (and updates newer than 6.1 as well) in there. It is not like there are no updates to 6.0 released. The ISOs for 6.1 are not released, but the RPMs are. -------------------
I was wondering if it would be safe to just stay with the 'standard' repo for centos and wait for 6.1 that way or do you suggest adding the CR repo as a necessary event?
thanks.
I was wondering if it would be safe to just stay with the 'standard' repo for centos and wait for 6.1 that way or do you suggest adding the CR repo as a necessary event?
Depends on if you feel that security updates are important to your infrastructure.
John
Am 15.11.2011 23:43, schrieb John R. Dennison:
I was wondering if it would be safe to just stay with the 'standard' repo for centos and wait for 6.1 that way or do you suggest adding the CR repo as a necessary event?
Depends on if you feel that security updates are important to your infrastructure.
but why in the world is an extra repo needed for security-updates? it is like a bad joke installing a os and have to search how to install a repo for ESSENTIAL updates while most people think "i have a package manager and get updates"
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:47:24PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
but why in the world is an extra repo needed for security-updates? it is like a bad joke installing a os and have to search how to install a repo for ESSENTIAL updates while most people think "i have a package manager and get updates"
The poster asked if he should use CR; I merely questioned whether security updates were important to him - I did not pass judgment on whether the design and implementation of the CR repo was "good" or "sane". My personal opinion on the issue is that CR is a solution to the wrong problem and that having it set as opt-in serves no ones best interests. But it is what it is and if one requires security updates then one should likely use CR as there is no other alternative presently.
John
On 11/15/2011 04:47 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 15.11.2011 23:43, schrieb John R. Dennison:
I was wondering if it would be safe to just stay with the 'standard' repo for centos and wait for 6.1 that way or do you suggest adding the CR repo as a necessary event?
Depends on if you feel that security updates are important to your infrastructure.
but why in the world is an extra repo needed for security-updates? it is like a bad joke installing a os and have to search how to install a repo for ESSENTIAL updates while most people think "i have a package manager and get updates"
The purpose of CR has been explained quite thoroughly before.
It is an opt in repository that puts out faster releases with less QA than the standard repo.
You have to decide if you want this repo or not (is QA more important to you or is a faster release more important to you) .. it is one of the options available as we bend over backwards to try to make people happy.
This discusses CR a bit more: http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories/CR
On 11/15/2011 02:47 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 15.11.2011 23:43, schrieb John R. Dennison:
I was wondering if it would be safe to just stay with the 'standard' repo for centos and wait for 6.1 that way or do you suggest adding the CR repo as a necessary event?
Depends on if you feel that security updates are important to your infrastructure.
but why in the world is an extra repo needed for security-updates? it is like a bad joke installing a os and have to search how to install a repo for ESSENTIAL updates while most people think "i have a package manager and get updates"
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
This keeps the distributed ISO's compatible with the upstream. Installing the CentOS 6.0 ISO is equivalent to installing the upstream's 6.0 ISO. I once had to deal with a commercial software package that required that it be installed on Redhat 4.2 or something like that. If you installed updates, the software didn't work.
The current build problems are hopefully a temporary situation and if they are resolved CentOS users will have the option of the rolling updates or waiting for the update release. For "most" users, installing updates from the CR repo is the best choice, but there could be exceptions.
Nataraj
Vreme: 11/16/2011 12:21 AM, Nataraj piše:
The current build problems are hopefully a temporary situation and if they are resolved CentOS users will have the option of the rolling updates or waiting for the update release. For "most" users, installing updates from the CR repo is the best choice, but there could be exceptions.
I agree that most users should have it enabled (and installed). My suggestion would be that CR repo is added to main .repo file and maybe (not) enabled by default. So those (not) wanting to have it enabled would just switch "Enabled" value in config.
One exception is those machines behind a firewall that does not allow downloads. The only upgrade path then is to download on another machine and burn DVDs. CR repos are not helpful in such a case!
Martin Rushton HPC System Manager, Weapons Technologies Tel: 01959 514777, Mobile: 07939 219057 email: jmrushton@QinetiQ.com www.QinetiQ.com QinetiQ - Delivering customer-focused solutions
Please consider the environment before printing this email. -----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Nataraj Sent: 15 November 2011 23:22 To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] What happened to 6.1
<snip>
This keeps the distributed ISO's compatible with the upstream. Installing the CentOS 6.0 ISO is equivalent to installing the upstream's 6.0 ISO. I once had to deal with a commercial software package that required that it be installed on Redhat 4.2 or something like that. If you installed updates, the software didn't work.
The current build problems are hopefully a temporary situation and if they are resolved CentOS users will have the option of the rolling updates or waiting for the update release. For "most" users, installing updates from the CR repo is the best choice, but there could be exceptions.
Nataraj
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error. QinetiQ may monitor email traffic data and also the content of email for the purposes of security. QinetiQ Limited (Registered in England & Wales: Company Number: 3796233) Registered office: Cody Technology Park, Ively Road, Farnborough, Hampshire, GU14 0LX http://www.qinetiq.com.
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011, Rushton Martin wrote:
One exception is those machines behind a firewall that does not allow downloads. The only upgrade path then is to download on another machine and burn DVDs. CR repos are not helpful in such a case!
I really don't get your point. How is that worse than an update repo, or even a full 6.1 release. In both cases you're forced to get it past your firewall by some method, even if that is sneakernet.
jh
Only that with fixed point releases you set aside a day or so to download, burn, transport and load. You wouldn't want to be doing that daily on the off chance that something relevant has been added. Horses for courses, the problem won't affect most people as Nataraj said.
Martin Rushton HPC System Manager, Weapons Technologies Tel: 01959 514777, Mobile: 07939 219057 email: jmrushton@QinetiQ.com www.QinetiQ.com QinetiQ - Delivering customer-focused solutions
Please consider the environment before printing this email. -----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of John Hodrien Sent: 16 November 2011 10:30 To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] UC What happened to 6.1
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011, Rushton Martin wrote:
One exception is those machines behind a firewall that does not allow downloads. The only upgrade path then is to download on another machine and burn DVDs. CR repos are not helpful in such a case!
I really don't get your point. How is that worse than an update repo, or even a full 6.1 release. In both cases you're forced to get it past your firewall by some method, even if that is sneakernet.
jh _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error. QinetiQ may monitor email traffic data and also the content of email for the purposes of security. QinetiQ Limited (Registered in England & Wales: Company Number: 3796233) Registered office: Cody Technology Park, Ively Road, Farnborough, Hampshire, GU14 0LX http://www.qinetiq.com.
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011, Rushton Martin wrote:
Only that with fixed point releases you set aside a day or so to download, burn, transport and load. You wouldn't want to be doing that daily on the off chance that something relevant has been added. Horses for courses, the problem won't affect most people as Nataraj said.
So set aside a day and apply all of cr. If you're only going to update once every 6 months it really doesn't matter whether you're applying from an updates repo, or from something that's only released once every 6 months.
jh
On 11/16/2011 05:59 AM, John Hodrien wrote:
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011, Rushton Martin wrote:
Only that with fixed point releases you set aside a day or so to download, burn, transport and load. You wouldn't want to be doing that daily on the off chance that something relevant has been added. Horses for courses, the problem won't affect most people as Nataraj said.
So set aside a day and apply all of cr. If you're only going to update once every 6 months it really doesn't matter whether you're applying from an updates repo, or from something that's only released once every 6 months.
The point I think john is trying to make is that you can also just put the updates and CR repos on a DVD (it might not fit) or usb hard drive / key (better idea as this can hold several GB).
Then you can put that on the network and update from there.
It is not any harder than taking a DVD from place to place ... and is actually safer as a DVD upgrade uses Anaconda to calculate the updates and the REPOs use yum ... and yum does updates much better than anaconda if you are staying in a major branch ... ie, the 6.x branch.
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
The point I think john is trying to make is that you can also just put the updates and CR repos on a DVD (it might not fit) or usb hard drive / key (better idea as this can hold several GB).
Then you can put that on the network and update from there.
Is there a scripted approach to this that will always get a consistent snapshot copy even if you run it while updates are being added in the repositories? Waiting for a new DVD spin avoids that issue.
If the networks don't have to be absolutely isolated, you might also fire up a squid proxy on a box with internet access and point yum to it, or perhaps use ssh port-forwarding to reach a network with an internet proxy.
Vreme: 11/16/2011 05:13 PM, Les Mikesell piše:
Is there a scripted approach to this that will always get a consistent snapshot copy even if you run it while updates are being added in the repositories? Waiting for a new DVD spin avoids that issue.
Rsync/mrepo can keep downloaded packages current. Mine runs once a day. So during the day I can (and will in a day or two) always burn/copy current snapshot.
On 11/16/2011 10:13 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
The point I think john is trying to make is that you can also just put the updates and CR repos on a DVD (it might not fit) or usb hard drive / key (better idea as this can hold several GB).
Then you can put that on the network and update from there.
Is there a scripted approach to this that will always get a consistent snapshot copy even if you run it while updates are being added in the repositories? Waiting for a new DVD spin avoids that issue.
If the networks don't have to be absolutely isolated, you might also fire up a squid proxy on a box with internet access and point yum to it, or perhaps use ssh port-forwarding to reach a network with an internet proxy.
When we update the mirrors on mirror.centos.org ... we put the packages on first, then the metadata.
This approach means that during our rsyncs, we always have consistent installs ... except that the packages could be newer until a given sync finishes (but you should be able to install from the repo at all times).
But the vast majority of the time, everything is up2date.
On 11/16/11 9:15 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
When we update the mirrors on mirror.centos.org ... we put the packages on first, then the metadata.
if I'm updating my own mirrors with lftp, what files should I postpone til last ?
On 11/16/2011 11:19 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
On 11/16/11 9:15 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
When we update the mirrors on mirror.centos.org ... we put the packages on first, then the metadata.
if I'm updating my own mirrors with lftp, what files should I postpone til last ?
I would grab the repodata stuff separately and last ... that way, the metadata always is consistent (tough maybe older) during the udpates.
But it should only impact you if you actually run an update while you are also syncing your mirror.
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
The point I think john is trying to make is that you can also just put the updates and CR repos on a DVD (it might not fit) or usb hard drive / key (better idea as this can hold several GB).
Then you can put that on the network and update from there.
Is there a scripted approach to this that will always get a consistent snapshot copy even if you run it while updates are being added in the repositories? Waiting for a new DVD spin avoids that issue.
If the networks don't have to be absolutely isolated, you might also fire up a squid proxy on a box with internet access and point yum to it, or perhaps use ssh port-forwarding to reach a network with an internet proxy.
When we update the mirrors on mirror.centos.org ... we put the packages on first, then the metadata.
This approach means that during our rsyncs, we always have consistent installs ... except that the packages could be newer until a given sync finishes (but you should be able to install from the repo at all times).
That timing must not always be propagated to other mirrors - at least I've hit missing dependencies in yum updates that fix themselves in a day or so. That would be more annoying in a situation where you had to make new copies and transport them somewhere.
On 11/16/2011 11:40 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
The point I think john is trying to make is that you can also just put the updates and CR repos on a DVD (it might not fit) or usb hard drive / key (better idea as this can hold several GB).
Then you can put that on the network and update from there.
Is there a scripted approach to this that will always get a consistent snapshot copy even if you run it while updates are being added in the repositories? Waiting for a new DVD spin avoids that issue.
If the networks don't have to be absolutely isolated, you might also fire up a squid proxy on a box with internet access and point yum to it, or perhaps use ssh port-forwarding to reach a network with an internet proxy.
When we update the mirrors on mirror.centos.org ... we put the packages on first, then the metadata.
This approach means that during our rsyncs, we always have consistent installs ... except that the packages could be newer until a given sync finishes (but you should be able to install from the repo at all times).
That timing must not always be propagated to other mirrors - at least I've hit missing dependencies in yum updates that fix themselves in a day or so. That would be more annoying in a situation where you had to make new copies and transport them somewhere.
Right ... we don't control how external mirrors sync from mirror.centos.org.
We also usually have our mirrors synced fairly fast (we have a speed chart (map) that we use to get all the mirrors synced as fast as we can based on connect speed to one another) ... but it can take a while to get that synced to public mirrors .. since there are hundreds of them.
On 11/16/2011 02:21 AM, Rushton Martin wrote:
One exception is those machines behind a firewall that does not allow downloads. The only upgrade path then is to download on another machine and burn DVDs. CR repos are not helpful in such a case!
Unfortunately, I don't know of any distros that cater to anyone with that level of security requirement anymore (or even someone who just didn't have an Internet connection). There used to be distros where you could receive updates monthly on a CDROM. Nowaday's all distros that I'm aware of require internet access. I believe Apple has stopped offering CD's or USB sticks of their OS and instead offer a BIOS that knows how to install over the Internet.
Nataraj
Martin Rushton HPC System Manager, Weapons Technologies Tel: 01959 514777, Mobile: 07939 219057 email: jmrushton@QinetiQ.com www.QinetiQ.com QinetiQ - Delivering customer-focused solutions
Please consider the environment before printing this email. -----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Nataraj Sent: 15 November 2011 23:22 To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] What happened to 6.1
<snip>
This keeps the distributed ISO's compatible with the upstream. Installing the CentOS 6.0 ISO is equivalent to installing the upstream's 6.0 ISO. I once had to deal with a commercial software package that required that it be installed on Redhat 4.2 or something like that. If you installed updates, the software didn't work.
The current build problems are hopefully a temporary situation and if they are resolved CentOS users will have the option of the rolling updates or waiting for the update release. For "most" users, installing updates from the CR repo is the best choice, but there could be exceptions.
Nataraj
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error. QinetiQ may monitor email traffic data and also the content of email for the purposes of security. QinetiQ Limited (Registered in England & Wales: Company Number: 3796233) Registered office: Cody Technology Park, Ively Road, Farnborough, Hampshire, GU14 0LX http://www.qinetiq.com. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Am 16.11.2011 um 19:07 schrieb Nataraj:
On 11/16/2011 02:21 AM, Rushton Martin wrote:
One exception is those machines behind a firewall that does not allow downloads. The only upgrade path then is to download on another machine and burn DVDs. CR repos are not helpful in such a case!
Unfortunately, I don't know of any distros that cater to anyone with that level of security requirement anymore (or even someone who just didn't have an Internet connection). There used to be distros where you could receive updates monthly on a CDROM. Nowaday's all distros that I'm aware of require internet access. I believe Apple has stopped offering CD's or USB sticks of their OS and instead offer a BIOS that knows how to install over the Internet.
No, you can still by Mac OS on an USB-stick.
IMO, not letting machines download updates even from an internal, non-public mirror is just brain-dead. Sure, you can put that same mirror onto a large USB-stick, walk up to the machine and do a local yum-update. But that really does not scale at all. It's a mis-use of the sysadmin's most precious resource: time.
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011, Nataraj wrote:
Unfortunately, I don't know of any distros that cater to anyone with that level of security requirement anymore (or even someone who just didn't have an Internet connection). There used to be distros where you could receive updates monthly on a CDROM. Nowaday's all distros that I'm aware of require internet access. I believe Apple has stopped offering CD's or USB sticks of their OS and instead offer a BIOS that knows how to install over the Internet.
The way updates are shipped (in rpm form in a yum repo) works perfectly fine if you copy it onto portable media. I'd argue CentOS *does* cater for those people. Yum doesn't assume things are on the network, it's quite happy pointing at file based repos.
jh
Alan McKay wrote on 11/14/2011 09:56 PM:
Both CentOS and Scientific Linux *aim* at 100% binary compatibility and they are both doing their best toward that goal. However, neither is perfect.
That's interesting. So how is it they've managed to come out with 6.1 (and so long ago at that)?
At least partly matter of priorities. SL finally released 5.7 on 09/14/2011 and just released the LiveCD/DVDs 11/02/2011. They did provide "rolling" 5.x updates, analogous to CR, in the interim. CentOS went for 5.7 before 6.1.
Phil
Make centos a new distro and forget about rh
2011/11/14 Alan McKay alan.mckay@gmail.com
These seems to me to be the first message in the series and provides a really good summary of the changes at Red Hat which seem to be making life a lot more difficult for CentOS.
Just figured I'd pull it out of that thread and change the subject line.
Below Johnny's email I've copied another from the original thread, written by Lamar Owen, which gives some good explanation on how Red Hat is able to get away with this.
Basically from what I gather, while Red Hat cannot restrict access to sources, they can restrict access to binaries. And since CentOS has a goal of binary compatibility with upstream, they are essentially left trying to hit an unknown target. But (now I'm stretching my limited knowledge even further) Scientific does not have this restriction since they are less concerned about exact binary compat.
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
On 10/21/2011 10:01 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg Nicolas.Thierry-Mieg@imag.fr wrote:
Johnny, chill. I don't blame him for being confused. Up until right
now,
you updated to a point release, then, over the weeks and months, there were updates. All of a sudden, there are *no* updates for the 6.0
point
release, which is a major change in what everyone expected, based on history.
this is the way it has always been: once upstream releases x.y+1 ,
there
are no more updates to x.y (in upstream and therefore also in centos), until centos releases x.y+1 .
Yes, but that used to be transparent, because the centos x.y+1 release happened quickly so it didn't matter that the update repo was held back until an iso build was done.
Yes, and NOW the release process is MUCH harder.
Red Hat used to have an AS release that contained everything ... we build that and we get everything. Nice and simple. Build all the packages, look at it against the AS iso set ... done. Two weeks was about as long as it took.
Now, for version 6, they have:
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux HPC Node (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation FasTrack (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server FasTrack (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop FasTrack (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Scalable File System (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Resilient Storage (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux Load Balancer (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux HPC Node FasTrack (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux High Performance Network (v. 6) Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization
They have the same install groups with different packages based on the above groupings, so we have to do some kind of custom generation of the comps files to things work.
They have created an optional channel in several of those groupings that is only accessible via RHN and they do not put those RPMS on any ISOs ... and they have completely changed their "Authorized Use Policy" so that we can NOT login to RHN and use anything that is not on a public FTP server or on an ISO set ... effectively cutting us off from the ability to check anything on the optional channel.
Now we have to engineer a compilation of all those groupings, we have to figure out what parts of the optional channels go at the point release and which ones do not (the ones that are upgrades). Sometimes the only way to tell is when something does not build correctly and you have reverse an optional package to a previous version for the build, etc.
We have to use anaconda to build our ISOs and upstream is using "something else" to build theirs .. so anaconda NEVER works anymore out of the box. We get ISOs (or usb images) that do not work and have to basically redesign anaconda.
We can't look at upstream build logs, we can't get all the binary RPMs for testing and be within the Terms of Service.
And with the new release, it seems that they have purposely broken the rpmmacros, and do not care to fix it:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=743229
So, trust me, it is MUCH more complicated now than it was with previous releases to build.
With the 5.7 release, there were several SRPMS that did not make it to the public FTP server without much prompting from us. And with the Authorized Use Policy, I can not just go to RHN and grab that SRPM and use it. If it is not public, we can no longer release it.
So, the short answer is, it now takes longer.
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
Lamar Owen lowen@pari.edu via centos.org Oct 28 to CentOS On Friday, October 21, 2011 02:22:26 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
Which is explicitly imposing additional restrictions. Which is explicitly prohibited in section 6. I don't see any exceptions relating to what the consequences of those restrictions might be.
The RHN AUP simply says that if you redistribute information from RHN you lose access to RHN. It does not restrict your right to redistribute anything; it restricts access to future information distributions from RHN. I know that's splitting hairs, but it does seem to meet the letter of the license. After all, RHN access is not required except for updates; if I really wanted to do so I could redistribute everything I have from RHN at this point in time and upstream has no legal recourse against that distribution that I know of (but I am neither a lawyer nor a paralegal; Russ on the other hand knows of what he speaks....).
They can, however, choose to not distribute anything else to me in the future, and nothing in the GPL or any other license used by upstream forces them to distribute anything new to me. And that's the gestalt of the RHN AUP; it states under what conditions RHN will distribute the compiled binary code (treated specially by GPL and not as a derived work) to you, its customer. Once you have received the binary of a particular version you have the right, under GPL and only for GPL-covered packages, to receive the source code for that particular version of that package.
Upstream is very gracious (in my opinion, at least) and distributes all of its source, not just GPL source and not just to customers but to the public at large (I say all; I haven't personally verified that all source in any given RHN channel is indeed available publicly on ftp.redhat.com, primarily because I don't have access to all channels). They could distribute only the source that they legally have to under those licenses that require it, but not for the source covered under other licenses that do not require redistribution of source plus modifications.
But just because I have version 1.2.3 of a package does not give me a guaranteed right under GPL to get 1.2.4 from them. And just because I can get the source to the 1.2.4 package they distribute does not give me an automatic right to the corresponding binary as the GPL does treat the compiled code specially. If you get the binary, you have the right to the source; if you have the source it is assumed you can generate the binary yourself (as is proven by the various EL rebuilds).
The level of difficulty required to generate the binary is not specified or even addressed by the GPL, nor does the GPL guarantee your ability to generate the exact same binary as someone else distributes..... nor is the distributor of the binary restricted at all in how difficult generating their exact binary, or a 100% compatible binary, can be. This seems to be the current holdup with C6.1, in my opinion; you can build *a* binary but will it work just like *the* binary? Upstream can make it even more difficult than they already have (and I know it's currently very frustrating to the CentOS team just from reading this thread!).
Russ, is that summary even close to accurate in your opinion?
These are the facts of life for an EL rebuild distribution user. If you want a primary access distribution (rather than a secondary rebuild) you need to find one that meets your needs, either by paying up for upstream or by going to something else (and there are really only two suitable enterprise choices for 'something else' in this case (and in my opinion): OpenSuSE or Debian Stable).
I'm evaluating Debian Stable on IA64 myself, as Debian Stable is the only actively maintained enterprise-grade distribution (again, in my opinion) freely available for IA64 (yes, upstream's EL5 is still available and is still maintained, but it costs six arms and eight legs to purchase for the machines I have; SLES likewise).
And I don't really currently have the time to rebuild C6 for IA64 myself. I'd love to, and I've had conversations with like-minded people, and I don't really want to go to Debian on it since I really want the IA64 boxes to work like all the other servers here which are running upstream EL rebuilds. But I have more important and necessary things to do with my time at the moment than to get into the game of maintaining a private rebuild for IA64 (I say private; even if I had time to maintain the build I don't have time to deal with the 'issues' of a public build!).
-- “Don't eat anything you've ever seen advertised on TV” - Michael Pollan, author of "In Defense of Food" _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
-
Akemi Yagi -
Alan McKay -
Benjamin Donnachie -
Benjamin Franz -
Benjamin Smith -
Bob Hoffman -
Chris Geldenhuis -
Christopher Chan -
Craig White -
Craig White -
Dan Irwin -
Dennis Jacobfeuerborn -
Drew -
fred smith -
John Hinton -
John Hodrien -
John R Pierce -
John R. Dennison -
Johnny Hughes -
Kai Schaetzl -
Karanbir Singh -
Les Mikesell -
Ljubomir Ljubojevic -
m.roth＠5-cent.us -
Marcio Carneiro -
Mihai T. Lazarescu -
Nataraj -
Phil Schaffner -
Rainer Duffner -
Rajagopal Swaminathan -
Reindl Harald -
Rob Kampen -
Robert Heller -
Rushton Martin -
Steve Clark -
Steve Thompson -
Timothy Murphy -
Yves Bellefeuille