virt

virt@lists.centos.org

2 participants
1612 discussions

Question about latest CentOS 7 AWS AMI
by Edward Mossman 08 Mar '20

08 Mar '20

Hi, I'm seeing some strange behavior when trying to use the latest CentOS 7 AMI from the AWS marketplace. The AMI that we've been using previously is "ami-02eac2c0129f6376b" released January 30, 2019 at 6:40:58 PM Today I saw a new AMI with ID "ami-0c3b960f8440c7d71" that was released February 21, 2020 at 3:50:07 Both these AMIs are owned by AWS account 679593333241. Before I was able to use the latest AMI released February 21, I was prompted to subscribe to new marketplace terms and conditions. The link that I received was an AWS marketplace page owned by a vendor named "Supported Images" that seemed highly suspicious. My questions are: 1. Did CentOS release an AWS AMI on February 21? 2. Has anything about the distribution of official CentOS AWS AMIs changed? 3. Is there a better channel for me to speak with someone involved in the release process that might know more? Thank you, Edward Mossman -- [image: Cloudreach] <https://hubs.ly/H09D_X50> *Edward Mossman* Cloud Systems Developer Tech Lead +1 646 799 1311 <+1+646+799+1311> | +1 212 335 0700 | www.cloudreach.com 1095 Ave of the Americas – 14th Floor, 3 Bryant Park, New York, NY 10036 USA [image: LinkedIn] <https://hubs.ly/H09sS3c0> [image: Twitter] <https://hubs.ly/H09sS520> [image: Facebook] <https://hubs.ly/H09sSjy0> [image: Glassdoor] <https://hubs.ly/H09sS7b0> [image: Instagram] <https://www.instagram.com/lifeatcloudreach/> Cloudreach named in Gartner's Magic Quadrant for Managed Services <https://www.gartner.com/doc/reprints?id=1-6APMXIX&ct=190301&st=sb> -- The above terms reflect a potential business arrangement, are provided solely as a basis for further discussion, and are not intended to be and do not constitute a legally binding obligation. No legally binding obligations will be created, implied, or inferred until an agreement in final form is executed in writing by all parties involved. This email may be confidential or privileged. If you received this communication by mistake, please don't forward it to anyone else, please erase all copies and attachments, and please let us know that it has gone to the wrong person. Cloudreach Inc. is registered in Delaware, with the registered office at 1679 S. DuPont Highway, Suite 100, Dover, Kent, DE 19901 and registration number 5427661.

2 1

xen hvm domU and > 3 nic's... bug?
by Christoph 27 Feb '20

27 Feb '20

Hi I cant start a hvm domU with more than 3 nic's configured... why? it is a bug? With previous versions it was possible... here the config - it is an opnsense (openbsd) hvm domU: name = "fenrir.chao5.int" uuid = "7aedcd03-54e8-4055-8d1b-37dd34194859" maxmem = 2048 memory = 2048 loader = '/usr/lib64/xen/boot/hvmloader' type = "hvm" vcpus = 2 rtc_timeoffset = 0 localtime = 1 on_poweroff = "destroy" on_reboot = "restart" on_crash = "restart" vnc = 1 vncunused = 0 vncdisplay = 100 vnclisten = "0.0.0.0" keymap = "de" vif = [ "mac=00:16:3e:05:30:04,bridge=xenbr5,script=vif-bridge,model=e1000", "mac=00:16:3e:04:30:04,bridge=xenbr4,script=vif-bridge,model=e1000", "mac=00:16:3e:15:30:04,bridge=xenbr15,script=vif-bridge,model=e1000", "mac=00:16:3e:14:30:04,bridge=xenbr14,script=vif-bridge,model=e1000" ] parallel = "none" serial = "none" disk = [ "phy:/dev/vg_lamia/lv_fenrir_root,hda,rw", "phy:/dev/vg_lamia/lv_fenrir_swap,hdb,rw" ] pci_power_mgmt=1 xen_platform_pci=1 pci_msitranslate=1 viridian=0 hpet=1 acpi=1 apic=1 pae=1 pvh=1 with 3 nic's it does work... -- ------ Greetz

2 2

pvh domU and pvgrub with grub2
by Christoph 27 Feb '20

27 Feb '20

Hi it is meanwhile possible to use pvgrub/grub2 inside a pvh domU? -- ------ Greetz

1 0

pvh domU and pvgrub with grub2
by Christoph 25 Feb '20

25 Feb '20

Hi it is meanwhile possible to use pvgrub/grub2 inside a pvh domU? -- ------ Greetz

1 0

xen hvm domU and > 3 nic's... bug?
by Christoph 25 Feb '20

25 Feb '20

1 0

Xen 4.12.2 rpms
by Pasi Kärkkäinen 07 Jan '20

07 Jan '20

Hello and Happy 2020! Do we already have a plan to update the xen-412 branch to recent release of Xen 4.12.2 ? I'm happy to test once the rpms are out. Thanks a lot, -- Pasi

2 2

Kernel Panic
by Gokan Atmaca 06 Jan '20

06 Jan '20

Hello I received an error like the following. I have two servers running on KVM. One is the database and the other is the application server. How can I solve this problem? ---: error: KERNEL: /usr/lib/debug/lib/modules/3.10.0-957.27.2.el7.x86_64/vmlinux DUMPFILE: vmcore [PARTIAL DUMP] CPUS: 12 DATE: Sun Jan 5 03:28:07 2020 UPTIME: 102 days, 10:45:21 LOAD AVERAGE: 2.29, 1.70, 1.65 TASKS: 284 NODENAME: kvm0 RELEASE: 3.10.0-957.27.2.el7.x86_64 VERSION: #1 SMP Mon Jul 29 17:46:05 UTC 2019 MACHINE: x86_64 (3200 Mhz) MEMORY: 63.9 GB PANIC: "Kernel panic - not syncing: Timeout: Not all CPUs entered broadcast exception handler" PID: 0 COMMAND: "swapper/7" TASK: ffff922b295fb0c0 (1 of 12) [THREAD_INFO: ffff922b2900c000] CPU: 7 STATE: TASK_RUNNING (PANIC)

2 2

Xen Version update policy
by George Dunlap 16 Dec '19

16 Dec '19

Hey all, This mail has been a long time in coming, but with the upcoming expiration of security support for Xen 4.8, it's time to start thinking about what our update policy will be for the Xen packages in general. Citrix is committed to officially supporting one Xen version at a time through the CentOS Virt SIG. (Others in the community are welcome to support others.) But we'd like input as to which version the community would like to be supported at any one time. Please express your opinion on each option by replying as follows: -2: This is a bad idea, and I would argue against this -1: I'm not happy with this, but I wouldn't argue against this. 0: No opinion. 1: I'm happy with this, but I wouldn't argue for it. 2: This is a great idea, and I'd argue for it. There are several possible options: 1. Always support the newest option. This means we get all the newest features from Xen in the Virt SIG by default; but also means we get all the newest bugs. 1a. Always support the newest option once it has at least one point release. This balances the newness with a bit of extra testing. 1b. Always support the second-to-newest version (e.g., when 4.13 comes out, switch to 4.12.x) 2. Always support the oldest security-supported version. This means we get the most stable version of Xen; but it does mean it is several years behind as far as features go. It also means that further bugfixes do not happen automatically, and further bugs found will need to be 3. Always support the oldest fully-supported version. Reasonably stable, reasonably old, still gets bugfixes. 4. Support a version until it's out of security support, then jump to the newest version. This minimizes the number of upgrades required (although may make each upgrade more painful). 4a. Support a version until it's out of full support, then jump to the newest version. Any other options? For my part, I think 1a, 1b, and 3 are all reasonable options. -George

6 12

ansible in ovirt repo
by Orion Poplawski 22 Nov '19

22 Nov '19

Just saw this: ================================================================================ Package Arch Version Repository Size ================================================================================ Updating: ansible noarch 2.9.1-2.el7 ovirt-4.3-centos-ovirt43 17 M which seems new. No longer pulling ansible from EPEL? -- Orion Poplawski Manager of NWRA Technical Systems 720-772-5637 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane orion(a)nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 https://www.nwra.com/

2 1

Centos 8 IAM
by Per Qvindesland 05 Nov '19

05 Nov '19

Hi Is there any plans to release a official AMI for Centos 8 soon? Regards Per

2 2

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
...
162
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

virt