Has anyone done an upgrade from RHEL3 to RHEL4? Is this likely to break a lot of things? How long will Centos be supporting version 3? I just installed Centos 3.4 two weeks ago!
The only problem I'm having with Centos is that the perl is a bit old. I have errors with spamassassin. So far bugzilla for spamassasin is blaming it on the version of perl included in RHEL3 and bugs in the 'taint' code. I see that RHEL4 has newer Perl packages.
On Tuesday, 15 February 2005, at 17:05:34 (-0500), Ken Bass wrote:
Has anyone done an upgrade from RHEL3 to RHEL4?
Yes.
Is this likely to break a lot of things?
Yes.
How long will Centos be supporting version 3? I just installed Centos 3.4 two weeks ago!
1 more week. ;-)
If you use Anaconda to upgrade to CentOS 4, you're probably better off. Doing it with yum is tricky.
The only problem I'm having with Centos is that the perl is a bit old. I have errors with spamassassin. So far bugzilla for spamassasin is blaming it on the version of perl included in RHEL3 and bugs in the 'taint' code. I see that RHEL4 has newer Perl packages.
I have yet to have any issues with the SA package I built for CentOS.
Michael
RHEL 3U4 to RHEL 4GA seemed to go well for someone I know... I can only presume this is good for CentOS 3.4 to 4 ... I haven't done this and don't intend to. :)
don't worry about your CentOS 3.4 ... it will be supported as long as Red Hat continues their support of their own RHEL 3x product. (4 more years or something like that??)
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:12:29 -0500, Michael Jennings mej@caosity.org wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 February 2005, at 17:05:34 (-0500), Ken Bass wrote:
Has anyone done an upgrade from RHEL3 to RHEL4?
Yes.
Is this likely to break a lot of things?
Yes.
How long will Centos be supporting version 3? I just installed Centos 3.4 two weeks ago!
1 more week. ;-)
If you use Anaconda to upgrade to CentOS 4, you're probably better off. Doing it with yum is tricky.
The only problem I'm having with Centos is that the perl is a bit old. I have errors with spamassassin. So far bugzilla for spamassasin is blaming it on the version of perl included in RHEL3 and bugs in the 'taint' code. I see that RHEL4 has newer Perl packages.
I have yet to have any issues with the SA package I built for CentOS.
Michael
-- Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX) http://www.kainx.org/ mej@kainx.org n + 1, Inc., http://www.nplus1.net/ Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org)
"There is a greater darkness than the one we fight. It is the darkness of a soul that has lost its way." -- G'Kar, Babylon 5 _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Michael Jennings wrote:
How long will Centos be supporting version 3? I just installed Centos 3.4 two weeks ago!
1 more week. ;-)
I hope you are kidding.
The only problem I'm having with Centos is that the perl is a bit old. I have errors with spamassassin. So far bugzilla for spamassasin is blaming it on the version of perl included in RHEL3 and bugs in the 'taint' code. I see that RHEL4 has newer Perl packages.
I have yet to have any issues with the SA package I built for CentOS.
I'm using SA 3.02. with razor 2.67.
If you do a spamassassin -r to report spam it fails with 'Insecure dependency in connect while running with -T switch at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.0/i386-linux-thread-multi/IO/Socket.pm line 114.'
I've read that it seems to be related to 'spamcop' reporting. Here is the spamassassin bug report I found: http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4118
It was closed with "Looks like this is just (at the least) a Perl5.8.1 issue. Upgrading Perl to 5.8.6 made the taint warning/error go away."
Also bug http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3899 was closed with "I upgraded the system in question to Fedora Core 2 and the problem disappeared. Weird! Perhaps there was something funky in a Perl library? Anyway, this is solved for me."
In order to install some of the newer stuff I used CPAN to install some modules. I noticed that Troy Engel said he rolled some custom RPM's for perl modules - should I not be installing via CPAN?
Ken Bass wrote:
In order to install some of the newer stuff I used CPAN to install some modules. I noticed that Troy Engel said he rolled some custom RPM's for perl modules - should I not be installing via CPAN?
Nothing wrong with that, but they they're outside the RPM-ness of your machine. Most of us avoid installing code outside the RPM constructs to our machines, as it ends up being a mess -- once you go to upgrade a server from version FOO to FOO+1, you'll find out how much of a nightmare it is to track down all hand-installed code. Keeping everything properly catalogued inside the RPM database can be worth it's weight in gold.
Check out "cpan2rpm" as a good way to make RPMs out of the code you'd normally just install. It works pretty darn well for the most part, but depends on the module in question. Learning to roll your own RPMs should be high on your list of things to do, as an SA admin; lots of perl goodness going on there.
-te
Troy Engel wrote:
Check out "cpan2rpm" as a good way to make RPMs out of the code you'd normally just install. It works pretty darn well for the most part, but depends on the module in question. Learning to roll your own RPMs should be high on your list of things to do, as an SA admin; lots of perl goodness going on there.
Thanks, I was not aware of cpan2rpm. SA requires a bunch of stuff - from my notes:
Digest::SHA1, HTML::Parser, Storable, MIME::Base64, Net::DNS, Net::SMTP, Mail::SPF::Query, Time::HiRes, Net::Ident, IO::Socket::SSL, IP::Country::Fast
I never could get SPF Query to work though. It installs but fails its tests.
By the way, after looking at the Spamassassin PERL code, I found a workaround. Adding 'score RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET 0' to my user prefs disables spamcop reporting so it doesn't hit the error condition. I updated the spamassassin bug (3899) entry with this tidbit for others that may encounter it.
A lot of these (all of them?) are also available from Dag's repo. That is the first place I look if I need something for CentOS.
I like this page: http://dag.wieers.com/home-made/apt/mega-merge.php
John.
Ken Bass wrote:
Troy Engel wrote:
Check out "cpan2rpm" as a good way to make RPMs out of the code you'd normally just install. It works pretty darn well for the most part, but depends on the module in question. Learning to roll your own RPMs should be high on your list of things to do, as an SA admin; lots of perl goodness going on there.
Thanks, I was not aware of cpan2rpm. SA requires a bunch of stuff - from my notes:
Digest::SHA1, HTML::Parser, Storable, MIME::Base64, Net::DNS, Net::SMTP, Mail::SPF::Query, Time::HiRes, Net::Ident, IO::Socket::SSL, IP::Country::Fast
I never could get SPF Query to work though. It installs but fails its tests.
By the way, after looking at the Spamassassin PERL code, I found a workaround. Adding 'score RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET 0' to my user prefs disables spamcop reporting so it doesn't hit the error condition. I updated the spamassassin bug (3899) entry with this tidbit for others that may encounter it.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Tuesday, 15 February 2005, at 19:02:26 (-0500), Ken Bass wrote:
I hope you are kidding.
Of course. :)
I'm using SA 3.02. with razor 2.67.
If you do a spamassassin -r to report spam it fails with 'Insecure dependency in connect while running with -T switch at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.0/i386-linux-thread-multi/IO/Socket.pm line 114.'
This would probably be fairly easy to fix by fixing that module. Just make sure the parameter passed to connect() is taint-checked.
In order to install some of the newer stuff I used CPAN to install some modules. I noticed that Troy Engel said he rolled some custom RPM's for perl modules - should I not be installing via CPAN?
Not directly, no. I use perlpkg to create RPM's from CPAN distributions. You can use cpan2rpm, but I don't recall it handling dependencies like perlpkg does.
Michael
Ken Bass wrote:
The only problem I'm having with Centos is that the perl is a bit old. I have errors with spamassassin. So far bugzilla for spamassasin is blaming it on the version of perl included in RHEL3 and bugs in the 'taint' code. I see that RHEL4 has newer Perl packages.
Let us know what problems are, maybe someone can help. I still run my SA (3.0x) on an old Redhat 7.3 machine, and it cranks along just fine under quite a heavy load. No perl problems at all -- I did roll a few custom RPMs for the non-stock perl modules, but nothing out of the ordinary.
-te
I traditionally DONT do an upgrade between major releases.... it just breaks too many things and ends up looking tooo ugly.
Particularly in this case a 2.4.x -> 2.6.x upgrade with udev, SELinux... I would recommend not doing an upgrade via yum.
You could use Anaconda, but I've seen some bad upgrades...
My advice... fresh install... after obviously saving what is required... ;)
I suspect CentOS 3 will be supported for some time... and follow the RHEL support timelines... RHEL 3 is still supported by Redhat... so it's likely CentOS 3 will remain supported.
Cheer,s
Matt.
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:05:34 -0500, Ken Bass kbass@kenbass.com wrote:
Has anyone done an upgrade from RHEL3 to RHEL4? Is this likely to break a lot of things? How long will Centos be supporting version 3? I just installed Centos 3.4 two weeks ago!
The only problem I'm having with Centos is that the perl is a bit old. I have errors with spamassassin. So far bugzilla for spamassasin is blaming it on the version of perl included in RHEL3 and bugs in the 'taint' code. I see that RHEL4 has newer Perl packages. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
-
David McDowell -
John Newbigin -
Ken Bass -
Matt Bottrell -
Michael Jennings -
Troy Engel