Just a message to remind everyone that CentOS-5 has an End of Life date of March 31, 2017.
This means that there will be no new security updates released by Red Hat for RHEL-5 after that date.
Sometime in early April, the current 5.11 tree will be moved onto vault.centos.org (like CentOS-3 and CentOS-4 have been since their EOL).
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
On 03/01/2017 05:28 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Just a message to remind everyone that CentOS-5 has an End of Life date of March 31, 2017.
This means that there will be no new security updates released by Red Hat for RHEL-5 after that date.
This is for their main RHEL-5 Tree.
Sometime in early April, the current 5.11 tree will be moved onto vault.centos.org (like CentOS-3 and CentOS-4 have been since their EOL).
For CentOS-5 users that can not shift from EL5 workloads, Red Hat does offer EUS (Extended Update Support) past the 10 year point for RHEL-5. You can see this link for more info on EL5 EUS support:
https://www.redhat.com/en/technologies/linux-platforms/enterprise-linux
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
On 03/01/2017 09:52 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 03/01/2017 05:28 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Just a message to remind everyone that CentOS-5 has an End of Life date of March 31, 2017.
This means that there will be no new security updates released by Red Hat for RHEL-5 after that date.
This is for their main RHEL-5 Tree.
Sometime in early April, the current 5.11 tree will be moved onto vault.centos.org (like CentOS-3 and CentOS-4 have been since their EOL).
For CentOS-5 users that can not shift from EL5 workloads, Red Hat does offer EUS (Extended Update Support) past the 10 year point for RHEL-5. You can see this link for more info on EL5 EUS support:
https://www.redhat.com/en/technologies/linux-platforms/enterprise-linux
Actually it's called ELS - Extended Lifecycle support https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata
EUS - Extended Update Support is an add-on for RHEL customers that need patches and updates for Minor releases of RHEL for up to 24 months from GA.
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Am 01.03.2017 um 12:28 schrieb Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org:
Just a message to remind everyone that CentOS-5 has an End of Life date of March 31, 2017.
This means that there will be no new security updates released by Red Hat for RHEL-5 after that date.
Sometime in early April, the current 5.11 tree will be moved onto vault.centos.org (like CentOS-3 and CentOS-4 have been since their EOL).
Will the centos-release package be updated to point to the vault tree?
--- LF
On 03/01/2017 09:21 AM, Leon Fauster wrote:
Am 01.03.2017 um 12:28 schrieb Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org:
Just a message to remind everyone that CentOS-5 has an End of Life date of March 31, 2017.
This means that there will be no new security updates released by Red Hat for RHEL-5 after that date.
Sometime in early April, the current 5.11 tree will be moved onto vault.centos.org (like CentOS-3 and CentOS-4 have been since their EOL).
Will the centos-release package be updated to point to the vault tree?
I am not sure we want to enable that by default. We want people to understand that CentOS-5 is no longer active.
There is a CentOS-Vault.repo file that one can use, or people can change it manually.
If it happens automatically, well then people will just leave it in place.
Am 01.03.2017 um 17:13 schrieb Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org:
On 03/01/2017 09:21 AM, Leon Fauster wrote:
Am 01.03.2017 um 12:28 schrieb Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org:
Just a message to remind everyone that CentOS-5 has an End of Life date of March 31, 2017.
This means that there will be no new security updates released by Red Hat for RHEL-5 after that date.
Sometime in early April, the current 5.11 tree will be moved onto vault.centos.org (like CentOS-3 and CentOS-4 have been since their EOL).
Will the centos-release package be updated to point to the vault tree?
I am not sure we want to enable that by default. We want people to understand that CentOS-5 is no longer active.
There is a CentOS-Vault.repo file that one can use, or people can change it manually.
Ah okay, that helps.
If it happens automatically, well then people will just leave it in place.
Sure, it shouldn't. More than that - if provided it should provide actively that EOL information (e.g. /etc/issue /etc/motd et cetera).
-- LF
On Wed, March 1, 2017 9:21 am, Leon Fauster wrote:
Am 01.03.2017 um 12:28 schrieb Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org:
Just a message to remind everyone that CentOS-5 has an End of Life date
of March 31, 2017.
This means that there will be no new security updates released by Red
Hat for RHEL-5 after that date.
Sometime in early April, the current 5.11 tree will be moved onto
vault.centos.org (like CentOS-3 and CentOS-4 have been since their EOL).
Will the centos-release package be updated to point to the vault tree?
It is not my place to offer opinion, but I would rather have it fail, thus prompting whoever tries to still use CentOS 5 to look deeper and find out about end of life, than quietly going to vault as if it still us usable secure supported system.
Just my $0.02.
Valeri
LF
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On 02/03/17 00:28, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Just a message to remind everyone that CentOS-5 has an End of Life date of March 31, 2017.
This means that there will be no new security updates released by Red Hat for RHEL-5 after that date.
Sometime in early April, the current 5.11 tree will be moved onto vault.centos.org (like CentOS-3 and CentOS-4 have been since their EOL).
Can you say exactly when in early April the tree will be moved? I have a number of installations that need to continue running CentOS 5 so I'd like to do a final update before the tree moves.
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
Thanks Tom Munro Glass
On 3/1/2017 7:28 PM, Tom Munro Glass wrote:
Can you say exactly when in early April the tree will be moved? I have a number of installations that need to continue running CentOS 5 so I'd like to do a final update before the tree moves.
may I suggest building your own mirror well before then, update it with rsync or lftp weekly (or even daily), from http://mirrors.xmission.com/centos/5 (pick your favorite mirror to make the mirror from), and replace your CentOS-xxx.repo files with ones that point to your private repo
I use a command like this to mirror everything and incrementally update, you could change the last centos to centos/5 if you want to just fetch and update that...
lftp -c 'open ftp://mirrors.sonic.net && lcd /mirrors && mirror --continue --verbose=1 -x SRPMS centos'
(yes, you do need to find a ftp mirror, i had issues mirroring from an http server).
On 2 Mar 2017 03:49, "John R Pierce" pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
On 3/1/2017 7:28 PM, Tom Munro Glass wrote:
Can you say exactly when in early April the tree will be moved? I have a number of installations that need to continue running CentOS 5 so I'd like to do a final update before the tree moves.
may I suggest building your own mirror well before then, update it with rsync or lftp weekly (or even daily), from http://mirrors.xmission.com/ce ntos/5 (pick your favorite mirror to make the mirror from), and replace your CentOS-xxx.repo files with ones that point to your private repo
I use a command like this to mirror everything and incrementally update, you could change the last centos to centos/5 if you want to just fetch and update that...
lftp -c 'open ftp://mirrors.sonic.net && lcd /mirrors && mirror --continue --verbose=1 -x SRPMS centos'
(yes, you do need to find a ftp mirror, i had issues mirroring from an http server).
This is especially important if you use anything from EPEL as EPEL5 will be removed when RHEL goes EOL.
On 02/03/17 19:50, James Hogarth wrote:
On 2 Mar 2017 03:49, "John R Pierce" pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
On 3/1/2017 7:28 PM, Tom Munro Glass wrote:
Can you say exactly when in early April the tree will be moved? I have a number of installations that need to continue running CentOS 5 so I'd like to do a final update before the tree moves.
may I suggest building your own mirror well before then, update it with rsync or lftp weekly (or even daily), from http://mirrors.xmission.com/ce ntos/5 (pick your favorite mirror to make the mirror from), and replace your CentOS-xxx.repo files with ones that point to your private repo
I use a command like this to mirror everything and incrementally update, you could change the last centos to centos/5 if you want to just fetch and update that...
lftp -c 'open ftp://mirrors.sonic.net && lcd /mirrors && mirror --continue --verbose=1 -x SRPMS centos'
(yes, you do need to find a ftp mirror, i had issues mirroring from an http server).
This is especially important if you use anything from EPEL as EPEL5 will be removed when RHEL goes EOL.
Thanks for the advice. I'll try and set up a mirror asap, but I'd still like to know when the mirrors will be removed if anyone has that information.
On 03/02/2017 12:42 PM, Tom Munro Glass wrote:
On 02/03/17 19:50, James Hogarth wrote:
On 2 Mar 2017 03:49, "John R Pierce" pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
On 3/1/2017 7:28 PM, Tom Munro Glass wrote:
Can you say exactly when in early April the tree will be moved? I have a number of installations that need to continue running CentOS 5 so I'd like to do a final update before the tree moves.
may I suggest building your own mirror well before then, update it with rsync or lftp weekly (or even daily), from http://mirrors.xmission.com/ce ntos/5 (pick your favorite mirror to make the mirror from), and replace your CentOS-xxx.repo files with ones that point to your private repo
I use a command like this to mirror everything and incrementally update, you could change the last centos to centos/5 if you want to just fetch and update that...
lftp -c 'open ftp://mirrors.sonic.net && lcd /mirrors && mirror --continue --verbose=1 -x SRPMS centos'
(yes, you do need to find a ftp mirror, i had issues mirroring from an http server).
This is especially important if you use anything from EPEL as EPEL5 will be removed when RHEL goes EOL.
Thanks for the advice. I'll try and set up a mirror asap, but I'd still like to know when the mirrors will be removed if anyone has that information.
Before we remove it from mirror, it will all be moved here:
It will be there forever .. just like all the CentOS-3 and CentOS-4 trees are as well.
On 03/03/17 11:59, Johnny Hughes wrote:
Thanks for the advice. I'll try and set up a mirror asap, but I'd still like to know when the mirrors will be removed if anyone has that information.
Before we remove it from mirror, it will all be moved here:
It will be there forever .. just like all the CentOS-3 and CentOS-4 trees are as well.
Thanks Johnny - that's good to know.
In article CAGkb5vexU7eoU=-ASF_uPN_PA68QQi2RU0HdPhozZEYDE0VqEg@mail.gmail.com, James Hogarth james.hogarth@gmail.com wrote:
This is especially important if you use anything from EPEL as EPEL5 will be removed when RHEL goes EOL.
You mean just thrown away, or archived somewhere? Just thrown away would seem rather irresponsible...
Cheers Tony
On 3 March 2017 at 11:34, John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017, Tony Mountifield wrote:
You mean just thrown away, or archived somewhere? Just thrown away would seem rather irresponsible...
Mirroring EPEL makes sense well before this point, as they don't keep old versions of packages online either AFAIK.
jh
Indeed they aren't kept ... and since there hasn't been an EOL of EPEL before I honestly have no idea ... I've asked on the epel-devel mailing list as to whether it'll move to archive like old fedora releases do.
On 3 March 2017 at 11:47, James Hogarth james.hogarth@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 March 2017 at 11:34, John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017, Tony Mountifield wrote:
You mean just thrown away, or archived somewhere? Just thrown away would seem rather irresponsible...
Mirroring EPEL makes sense well before this point, as they don't keep old versions of packages online either AFAIK.
jh
Indeed they aren't kept ... and since there hasn't been an EOL of EPEL before I honestly have no idea ... I've asked on the epel-devel mailing list as to whether it'll move to archive like old fedora releases do.
My mistake - I forgot there was an EPEL4 in the mists of time .. so the last version of the repo is likely to end up here:
In article CAGkb5vfXkJcbpQWupuZG0xp8_gTgv+55+YrZf8VdF0maiO9UfQ@mail.gmail.com, James Hogarth james.hogarth@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 March 2017 at 11:47, James Hogarth james.hogarth@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 March 2017 at 11:34, John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017, Tony Mountifield wrote:
You mean just thrown away, or archived somewhere? Just thrown away would seem rather irresponsible...
Mirroring EPEL makes sense well before this point, as they don't keep old versions of packages online either AFAIK.
jh
Indeed they aren't kept ... and since there hasn't been an EOL of EPEL before I honestly have no idea ... I've asked on the epel-devel mailing list as to whether it'll move to archive like old fedora releases do.
My mistake - I forgot there was an EPEL4 in the mists of time .. so the last version of the repo is likely to end up here:
Cool, thanks!
Tony
On 2017-03-03 14:14, Tony Mountifield wrote:
In article CAGkb5vfXkJcbpQWupuZG0xp8_gTgv+55+YrZf8VdF0maiO9UfQ@mail.gmail.com, James Hogarth james.hogarth@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 March 2017 at 11:47, James Hogarth james.hogarth@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 March 2017 at 11:34, John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017, Tony Mountifield wrote:
You mean just thrown away, or archived somewhere? Just thrown away would seem rather irresponsible...
Mirroring EPEL makes sense well before this point, as they don't keep old versions of packages online either AFAIK.
jh
Indeed they aren't kept ... and since there hasn't been an EOL of EPEL before I honestly have no idea ... I've asked on the epel-devel mailing list as to whether it'll move to archive like old fedora releases do.
My mistake - I forgot there was an EPEL4 in the mists of time .. so the last version of the repo is likely to end up here:
Cool, thanks!
Tony
I am mirroring the EPEL from official mirrors and the EPEL4 content is stills there: 1.9G pub/mirrors/epel/4 7.3G pub/mirrors/epel/5 15G pub/mirrors/epel/6 16G pub/mirrors/epel/7
//Zdenek
Am 03.03.2017 um 13:19 schrieb James Hogarth james.hogarth@gmail.com:
On 3 March 2017 at 11:47, James Hogarth james.hogarth@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 March 2017 at 11:34, John Hodrien J.H.Hodrien@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017, Tony Mountifield wrote:
You mean just thrown away, or archived somewhere? Just thrown away would seem rather irresponsible...
Mirroring EPEL makes sense well before this point, as they don't keep old versions of packages online either AFAIK.
jh
Indeed they aren't kept ... and since there hasn't been an EOL of EPEL before I honestly have no idea ... I've asked on the epel-devel mailing list as to whether it'll move to archive like old fedora releases do.
My mistake - I forgot there was an EPEL4 in the mists of time .. so the last version of the repo is likely to end up here:
JFI:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-announce@lists.fedoraproj...
-- LF
-
Daniel J Pacek -
James Hogarth -
John Hodrien -
John R Pierce -
Johnny Hughes -
Leon Fauster -
Tom Munro Glass -
tony＠softins.co.uk -
Valeri Galtsev -
Zdenek Sedlak