From lee.iitb at gmail.com  Sat Aug  1 18:13:35 2020
From: lee.iitb at gmail.com (Thomas Stephen Lee)
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2020 23:43:35 +0530
Subject: [CentOS-devel] recent updates cause grub not to load please
	advise
In-Reply-To: <ee952bcc-9e24-b9da-833c-367736492b57@pari.edu>
References: <CAOp5WB5k9Heo8madm6Z5LJ0Fg_kDSHbR=3fqnTfJx2-ufY37PA@mail.gmail.com>
 <e5d2340c-07dc-5222-eb30-efef2530c356@pari.edu>
 <51a377df-287c-9781-efb8-c597d0b614d4@pari.edu>
 <ee952bcc-9e24-b9da-833c-367736492b57@pari.edu>
Message-ID: <CAG7s96W7mQ7_cfNM_nEy9D-2AhGKNbUv0fvHOfDX2gMPhntu_w@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 9:34 PM Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu> wrote:

> On 7/30/20 10:51 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> > On 7/30/20 10:35 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> >> However, what is really odd to me is that after the dnf downgrade of
> >> grub2 and shim, which did get logged in /var/log/dnf.log, when
> >> issuing a dnf update I don't see the grub2 and shim updates listed
> >> anymore.
> >
> > So I'm on the latest kernel, but downrev on grub2 and a dnf update
> > does now list the updated release.  When I get enough time to
> > reproduce I might try the update again.
> So, the first update this morning was with the GUI updater that does the
> update during a reboot.  I just updated to the '87 release of grub2
> using dnf from the command line, and the update was successful, with a
> correctly booting system.  So I can't reproduce the issue on this laptop.
>
>
> Red Hat fixes are available.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2020:3265
https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2020:3262

wait for CentOS.

--
Lee
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200801/32779e3d/attachment.html>

From Antal.Nemes at hycu.com  Mon Aug  3 10:37:27 2020
From: Antal.Nemes at hycu.com (=?iso-8859-2?Q?Antal=20Neme=B9?=)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 12:37:27 +0200
Subject: [CentOS-devel] kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 in git.centos.org
Message-ID: <56cb0733602b42808e9551f79b855cb8@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>

Hi all,

I need sources for latest Centos 8.2 kernel (kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2).
Since they are (now customarily) not available on vault.centos.org, I am attempting to build from git.centos.org.

However, I am unable to find the exact commit to build from.
On https://git.centos.org/rpms/kernel/commits/c8, I see 13.2 and 14.3, but not 14.2 that actually shipped.

$git log --format="%C(auto) %h %s" origin/c8 | head -n 20
08e2843 debrand kernel-4.18.0-193.14.3.el8_2
284ac7b import kernel-4.18.0-193.14.3.el8_2
f990a59 Manual CentOS Debranding
6694789 debrand kernel-4.18.0-193.13.2.el8_2
56933c6 import kernel-4.18.0-193.13.2.el8_2
efc1e5b Manual CentOS Debranding
afc068a debrand kernel-4.18.0-193.6.3.el8_2
d0c1e45 import kernel-4.18.0-193.6.3.el8_2
9af314c Manual CentOS Debranding
b36366f debrand kernel-4.18.0-193.1.2.el8_2
c6227ee import kernel-4.18.0-193.1.2.el8_2
063bbb9 change to centos.pem
05d7b37 Manual CentOS Debranding
9f8b3f1 debrand kernel-4.18.0-193.el8
78ffa6b import kernel-4.18.0-193.el8
89ceb16 Manual CentOS Debranding
47aeda1 debrand kernel-4.18.0-147.8.1.el8_1
e9cecf3 import kernel-4.18.0-147.8.1.el8_1
718e82b Manual CentOS Debranding
223d051 debrand kernel-4.18.0-147.5.1.el8_1

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Antal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200803/3a85e61b/attachment.html>

From merlin at mwob.org.uk  Mon Aug  3 12:02:02 2020
From: merlin at mwob.org.uk (Howard Johnson)
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2020 13:02:02 +0100
Subject: [CentOS-devel] kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 in git.centos.org
In-Reply-To: <56cb0733602b42808e9551f79b855cb8@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
References: <56cb0733602b42808e9551f79b855cb8@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
Message-ID: <7de6f26f8560a782d45ba4895e749ab6@mail.merlinthp.org>

On 2020-08-03 11:37, Antal Neme? wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I need sources for latest Centos 8.2 kernel
> (kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2).
> 
> Since they are (now customarily) not available on vault.centos.org, I
> am attempting to build from git.centos.org.
> 
> However, I am unable to find the exact commit to build from.
> 
> On https://git.centos.org/rpms/kernel/commits/c8, I see 13.2 and 14.3,
> but not 14.2 that actually shipped.
> 
> $git log --format="%C(auto) %h %s" origin/c8 | head -n 20
> 
> 08e2843 debrand kernel-4.18.0-193.14.3.el8_2
> 
> 284ac7b import kernel-4.18.0-193.14.3.el8_2

Looking at upstream, Red Hat never released kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 
into the wild.  The RHEL update 
(https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2020:3218) was 
kernel-4.18.0-193.14.3.el8_2, which is why that's the version in git 
(pushed from Red Hat's internal RelEng systems).  -193.14.2.el8_2 
appears to be something unique to CentOS.  Looking at the changelog of 
the CentOS package vs the RHEL one, this changelog entry is missing:

* Mon Jul 20 2020 Bruno Meneguele <bmeneg at redhat.com> 
[4.18.0-193.14.3.el8_2]
- Reverse keys order for dual-signing (Frantisek Hrbata) [1837433 
1837434] {CVE-2020-10713}

Something to do with differences between the way RHEL and CentOS do 
Secure Boot signing, perhaps?

-- 
HJ

From plageat at tut.by  Mon Aug  3 12:25:19 2020
From: plageat at tut.by (plageat at tut.by)
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2020 15:25:19 +0300
Subject: [CentOS-devel] Building new eclipse:rhel8 module (RHEA-2020:3054)
Message-ID: <810531596457104@mail.yandex.ru>

Hi all,

Is there any chance to see start building of new el8.2 eclipse:rhel8 modular packages?
Is it planned to be skipped entirely?




From Antal.Nemes at hycu.com  Mon Aug  3 13:40:02 2020
From: Antal.Nemes at hycu.com (=?utf-8?B?QW50YWwgTmVtZcWh?=)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 15:40:02 +0200
Subject: [CentOS-devel] kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 in git.centos.org
In-Reply-To: <7de6f26f8560a782d45ba4895e749ab6@mail.merlinthp.org>
References: <56cb0733602b42808e9551f79b855cb8@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
 <7de6f26f8560a782d45ba4895e749ab6@mail.merlinthp.org>
Message-ID: <c1ff9a780bc64ce6b9a936ca2377d346@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: CentOS-devel <centos-devel-bounces at centos.org> On Behalf Of Howard
> Johnson
> Sent: Monday, 3 August 2020 14:02
> To: The CentOS developers mailing list. <centos-devel at centos.org>
> Subject: Re: [CentOS-devel] kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 in git.centos.org
> 
> CAUTION: Origin is external! The content might not be safe!
> 
> 
> On 2020-08-03 11:37, Antal Neme? wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I need sources for latest Centos 8.2 kernel
> > (kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2).
> >
> > Since they are (now customarily) not available on vault.centos.org, I
> > am attempting to build from git.centos.org.
> >
> > However, I am unable to find the exact commit to build from.
> >
> > On https://git.centos.org/rpms/kernel/commits/c8, I see 13.2 and 14.3,
> > but not 14.2 that actually shipped.
> >
> > $git log --format="%C(auto) %h %s" origin/c8 | head -n 20
> >
> > 08e2843 debrand kernel-4.18.0-193.14.3.el8_2
> >
> > 284ac7b import kernel-4.18.0-193.14.3.el8_2
> 
> Looking at upstream, Red Hat never released kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 into
> the wild.  The RHEL update
> (https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2020:3218) was kernel-4.18.0-
> 193.14.3.el8_2, which is why that's the version in git (pushed from Red Hat's
> internal RelEng systems).  -193.14.2.el8_2 appears to be something unique to
> CentOS.  Looking at the changelog of the CentOS package vs the RHEL one, this
> changelog entry is missing:
> 
> * Mon Jul 20 2020 Bruno Meneguele <bmeneg at redhat.com> [4.18.0-
> 193.14.3.el8_2]
> - Reverse keys order for dual-signing (Frantisek Hrbata) [1837433 1837434]
> {CVE-2020-10713}
> 
> Something to do with differences between the way RHEL and CentOS do Secure
> Boot signing, perhaps?
> 

Thanks. I guess that makes sense. But I still have no idea how to obtain the 
sources to build. I would backtrack to a previous one (193.13.2), but that one is 
missing kernel-modules-extra rpm package, even though koji[1] shows it was built.
This is the first time I saw an actual binary rpm missing, which is worrying.

So I have backtrack two levels, to 193.6.3.

Any idea when we can expect release of 193.14.3?

[1] https://koji.mbox.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=12631

Regards,
Antal

From trevor.hemsley at ntlworld.com  Mon Aug  3 13:50:58 2020
From: trevor.hemsley at ntlworld.com (Trevor Hemsley)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 14:50:58 +0100
Subject: [CentOS-devel] kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 in git.centos.org
In-Reply-To: <56cb0733602b42808e9551f79b855cb8@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
References: <56cb0733602b42808e9551f79b855cb8@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
Message-ID: <535a4f7f-1859-e454-63ce-9c61034f3e46@ntlworld.com>

On 03/08/2020 11:37, Antal Neme? wrote:
> I need sources for latest Centos 8.2 kernel
> (kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2).

I believe 14.3 is exactly the same as 14.2 except that RH needed to
adjust the signing order of their certificates and since those are RH
specific, 14.2 == 14.3 for the intents and purposes of non-RHEL builds.

Trevor

From bstinson at centosproject.org  Mon Aug  3 14:13:43 2020
From: bstinson at centosproject.org (Brian Stinson)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 09:13:43 -0500
Subject: [CentOS-devel] kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 in git.centos.org
In-Reply-To: <535a4f7f-1859-e454-63ce-9c61034f3e46@ntlworld.com>
References: <56cb0733602b42808e9551f79b855cb8@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
 <535a4f7f-1859-e454-63ce-9c61034f3e46@ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <77f8ccdb-e29f-6f25-8fcd-12aed52b11d4@centosproject.org>


On 8/3/20 8:50 AM, Trevor Hemsley via CentOS-devel wrote:
> On 03/08/2020 11:37, Antal Neme? wrote:
>> I need sources for latest Centos 8.2 kernel
>> (kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2).
> I believe 14.3 is exactly the same as 14.2 except that RH needed to
> adjust the signing order of their certificates and since those are RH
> specific, 14.2 == 14.3 for the intents and purposes of non-RHEL builds.
>
> Trevor
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> CentOS-devel at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

This is the correct answer. The difference between 14.2 and 14.3 is only
applicable to RHEL, and is not a change in the underlying content. The
CentOS kernels were dual-signed in the right order for us in 14.2


--Brian



From johnny at centos.org  Mon Aug  3 14:17:48 2020
From: johnny at centos.org (Johnny Hughes)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 09:17:48 -0500
Subject: [CentOS-devel] Building new eclipse:rhel8 module
	(RHEA-2020:3054)
In-Reply-To: <810531596457104@mail.yandex.ru>
References: <810531596457104@mail.yandex.ru>
Message-ID: <71658c75-bf0c-f623-0c07-be30c46b294b@centos.org>

On 8/3/20 7:25 AM, plageat at tut.by wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Is there any chance to see start building of new el8.2 eclipse:rhel8 modular packages?
> Is it planned to be skipped entirely?
> 

I am actually looking at that right now.

We will build it .. i may need to bootstrap it as it is the initial
release for CentOS-8 .. so i have no diea how long it will take at this
point.  But it is on my list :)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200803/3d14704e/attachment.sig>

From johnny at centos.org  Mon Aug  3 14:19:05 2020
From: johnny at centos.org (Johnny Hughes)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 09:19:05 -0500
Subject: [CentOS-devel] recent updates cause grub not to load please
 advise
In-Reply-To: <CAG7s96W7mQ7_cfNM_nEy9D-2AhGKNbUv0fvHOfDX2gMPhntu_w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOp5WB5k9Heo8madm6Z5LJ0Fg_kDSHbR=3fqnTfJx2-ufY37PA@mail.gmail.com>
 <e5d2340c-07dc-5222-eb30-efef2530c356@pari.edu>
 <51a377df-287c-9781-efb8-c597d0b614d4@pari.edu>
 <ee952bcc-9e24-b9da-833c-367736492b57@pari.edu>
 <CAG7s96W7mQ7_cfNM_nEy9D-2AhGKNbUv0fvHOfDX2gMPhntu_w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7185a5ad-ddc7-c30a-3a96-73a6320a7c1c@centos.org>

On 8/1/20 1:13 PM, Thomas Stephen Lee wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 9:34 PM Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu
> <mailto:lowen at pari.edu>> wrote:
> 
>     On 7/30/20 10:51 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
>     > On 7/30/20 10:35 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
>     >> However, what is really odd to me is that after the dnf downgrade of
>     >> grub2 and shim, which did get logged in /var/log/dnf.log, when
>     >> issuing a dnf update I don't see the grub2 and shim updates listed
>     >> anymore.
>     >
>     > So I'm on the latest kernel, but downrev on grub2 and a dnf update
>     > does now list the updated release.? When I get enough time to
>     > reproduce I might try the update again.
>     So, the first update this morning was with the GUI updater that does
>     the
>     update during a reboot.? I just updated to the '87 release of grub2
>     using dnf from the command line, and the update was successful, with a
>     correctly booting system.? So I can't reproduce the issue on this
>     laptop.
> 
> 
> Red Hat fixes are available.
> 
> https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2020:3265
> https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2020:3262
> 
> wait for CentOS.

These were released over the weekend.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200803/61bda161/attachment.sig>

From plageat at tut.by  Mon Aug  3 14:35:00 2020
From: plageat at tut.by (plageat at tut.by)
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2020 17:35:00 +0300
Subject: [CentOS-devel] Building new eclipse:rhel8 module
	(RHEA-2020:3054)
In-Reply-To: <71658c75-bf0c-f623-0c07-be30c46b294b@centos.org>
References: <810531596457104@mail.yandex.ru>
 <71658c75-bf0c-f623-0c07-be30c46b294b@centos.org>
Message-ID: <196851596464454@mail.yandex.ru>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200803/7c9f083e/attachment.html>

From amyagi at gmail.com  Mon Aug  3 14:38:44 2020
From: amyagi at gmail.com (Akemi Yagi)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 07:38:44 -0700
Subject: [CentOS-devel] kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 in git.centos.org
In-Reply-To: <77f8ccdb-e29f-6f25-8fcd-12aed52b11d4@centosproject.org>
References: <56cb0733602b42808e9551f79b855cb8@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
 <535a4f7f-1859-e454-63ce-9c61034f3e46@ntlworld.com>
 <77f8ccdb-e29f-6f25-8fcd-12aed52b11d4@centosproject.org>
Message-ID: <CABA31DpT0tAROof38jQW_V8o9+rkUSMLXY_+hNdJef2UFDi3SA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 7:13 AM Brian Stinson <bstinson at centosproject.org>
wrote:

>
> On 8/3/20 8:50 AM, Trevor Hemsley via CentOS-devel wrote:
> > On 03/08/2020 11:37, Antal Neme? wrote:
> >> I need sources for latest Centos 8.2 kernel
> >> (kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2).
> > I believe 14.3 is exactly the same as 14.2 except that RH needed to
> > adjust the signing order of their certificates and since those are RH
> > specific, 14.2 == 14.3 for the intents and purposes of non-RHEL builds.
> >
> > Trevor
> > _______________________________________________
> > CentOS-devel mailing list
> > CentOS-devel at centos.org
> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
>
> This is the correct answer. The difference between 14.2 and 14.3 is only
> applicable to RHEL, and is not a change in the underlying content. The
> CentOS kernels were dual-signed in the right order for us in 14.2
>
>
> --Brian
>

In any event, releasing the srpm to vault will be the right answer to the
original post.

Akemi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200803/1492a428/attachment.html>

From Antal.Nemes at hycu.com  Mon Aug  3 14:43:49 2020
From: Antal.Nemes at hycu.com (=?iso-8859-2?Q?Antal=20Neme=B9?=)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 16:43:49 +0200
Subject: [CentOS-devel] kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 in git.centos.org
In-Reply-To: <77f8ccdb-e29f-6f25-8fcd-12aed52b11d4@centosproject.org>
References: <56cb0733602b42808e9551f79b855cb8@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
 <535a4f7f-1859-e454-63ce-9c61034f3e46@ntlworld.com>
 <77f8ccdb-e29f-6f25-8fcd-12aed52b11d4@centosproject.org>
Message-ID: <bd14118f8f2b4044b45abf1fc5bc5bb6@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: CentOS-devel <centos-devel-bounces at centos.org> On Behalf Of Brian
> Stinson
> Sent: Monday, 3 August 2020 16:14
> > I believe 14.3 is exactly the same as 14.2 except that RH needed to
> > adjust the signing order of their certificates and since those are RH
> > specific, 14.2 == 14.3 for the intents and purposes of non-RHEL builds.
> >
> > Trevor
> 
> This is the correct answer. The difference between 14.2 and 14.3 is only
> applicable to RHEL, and is not a change in the underlying content. The CentOS
> kernels were dual-signed in the right order for us in 14.2
> 
> 
> --Brian

Great, thanks for confirmation. This throws a gigantic monkey wrench in my attempts 
at automating src.rpm generation from git.centos.org, so I hope this was an exceptional occurrence?

Regards,
Antal

From bstinson at centosproject.org  Mon Aug  3 14:47:39 2020
From: bstinson at centosproject.org (Brian Stinson)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 09:47:39 -0500
Subject: [CentOS-devel] kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 in git.centos.org
In-Reply-To: <bd14118f8f2b4044b45abf1fc5bc5bb6@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
References: <56cb0733602b42808e9551f79b855cb8@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
 <535a4f7f-1859-e454-63ce-9c61034f3e46@ntlworld.com>
 <77f8ccdb-e29f-6f25-8fcd-12aed52b11d4@centosproject.org>
 <bd14118f8f2b4044b45abf1fc5bc5bb6@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
Message-ID: <4b19e5d3-5fdd-f37f-3c69-1ad49a969dc0@centosproject.org>


On 8/3/20 9:43 AM, Antal Neme? wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: CentOS-devel <centos-devel-bounces at centos.org> On Behalf Of Brian
>> Stinson
>> Sent: Monday, 3 August 2020 16:14
>>> I believe 14.3 is exactly the same as 14.2 except that RH needed to
>>> adjust the signing order of their certificates and since those are RH
>>> specific, 14.2 == 14.3 for the intents and purposes of non-RHEL builds.
>>>
>>> Trevor
>> This is the correct answer. The difference between 14.2 and 14.3 is only
>> applicable to RHEL, and is not a change in the underlying content. The CentOS
>> kernels were dual-signed in the right order for us in 14.2
>>
>>
>> --Brian
> Great, thanks for confirmation. This throws a gigantic monkey wrench in my attempts 
> at automating src.rpm generation from git.centos.org, so I hope this was an exceptional occurrence?
>
> Regards,
> Antal
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> CentOS-devel at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel


These are very exceptional circumstances, but we're looking into how to
make our processes go easier for future coordinated fixes.

--Brian


From johnny at centos.org  Mon Aug  3 15:19:20 2020
From: johnny at centos.org (Johnny Hughes)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 10:19:20 -0500
Subject: [CentOS-devel] kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 in git.centos.org
In-Reply-To: <bd14118f8f2b4044b45abf1fc5bc5bb6@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
References: <56cb0733602b42808e9551f79b855cb8@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
 <535a4f7f-1859-e454-63ce-9c61034f3e46@ntlworld.com>
 <77f8ccdb-e29f-6f25-8fcd-12aed52b11d4@centosproject.org>
 <bd14118f8f2b4044b45abf1fc5bc5bb6@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
Message-ID: <0ffe6b74-3fe5-cc95-1756-ba14b2f72b83@centos.org>

On 8/3/20 9:43 AM, Antal Neme? wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: CentOS-devel <centos-devel-bounces at centos.org> On Behalf Of Brian
>> Stinson
>> Sent: Monday, 3 August 2020 16:14
>>> I believe 14.3 is exactly the same as 14.2 except that RH needed to
>>> adjust the signing order of their certificates and since those are RH
>>> specific, 14.2 == 14.3 for the intents and purposes of non-RHEL builds.
>>>
>>> Trevor
>>
>> This is the correct answer. The difference between 14.2 and 14.3 is only
>> applicable to RHEL, and is not a change in the underlying content. The CentOS
>> kernels were dual-signed in the right order for us in 14.2
>>
>>
>> --Brian
> 
> Great, thanks for confirmation. This throws a gigantic monkey wrench in my attempts 
> at automating src.rpm generation from git.centos.org, so I hope this was an exceptional occurrence?
> 

Yes .. one could say that an embargoed, 'named' sescureboot/kernel fix
that requires a signature from Microsoft before release AND requires
hiding embargoed content (which CentOS is not set up to do ..we build
everythign in the open) .. is VERY MUCH an exceptional occurrence.

Then throw in the fact the both RHEL and CentOS installs could no longer
BOOT .. I think you are it the most unbelievable and most complicated
build we have ever done in as the CentOS Project.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200803/128708f2/attachment.sig>

From johnny at centos.org  Mon Aug  3 15:23:12 2020
From: johnny at centos.org (Johnny Hughes)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 10:23:12 -0500
Subject: [CentOS-devel] kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 in git.centos.org
In-Reply-To: <0ffe6b74-3fe5-cc95-1756-ba14b2f72b83@centos.org>
References: <56cb0733602b42808e9551f79b855cb8@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
 <535a4f7f-1859-e454-63ce-9c61034f3e46@ntlworld.com>
 <77f8ccdb-e29f-6f25-8fcd-12aed52b11d4@centosproject.org>
 <bd14118f8f2b4044b45abf1fc5bc5bb6@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
 <0ffe6b74-3fe5-cc95-1756-ba14b2f72b83@centos.org>
Message-ID: <ad4e299f-e02c-661c-93e8-c014ef137390@centos.org>

On 8/3/20 10:19 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 8/3/20 9:43 AM, Antal Neme? wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: CentOS-devel <centos-devel-bounces at centos.org> On Behalf Of Brian
>>> Stinson
>>> Sent: Monday, 3 August 2020 16:14
>>>> I believe 14.3 is exactly the same as 14.2 except that RH needed to
>>>> adjust the signing order of their certificates and since those are RH
>>>> specific, 14.2 == 14.3 for the intents and purposes of non-RHEL builds.
>>>>
>>>> Trevor
>>>
>>> This is the correct answer. The difference between 14.2 and 14.3 is only
>>> applicable to RHEL, and is not a change in the underlying content. The CentOS
>>> kernels were dual-signed in the right order for us in 14.2
>>>
>>>
>>> --Brian
>>
>> Great, thanks for confirmation. This throws a gigantic monkey wrench in my attempts 
>> at automating src.rpm generation from git.centos.org, so I hope this was an exceptional occurrence?
>>
> 
> Yes .. one could say that an embargoed, 'named' sescureboot/kernel fix
> that requires a signature from Microsoft before release AND requires
> hiding embargoed content (which CentOS is not set up to do ..we build
> everythign in the open) .. is VERY MUCH an exceptional occurrence.
> 
> Then throw in the fact the both RHEL and CentOS installs could no longer
> BOOT .. I think you are it the most unbelievable and most complicated
> build we have ever done in as the CentOS Project.

NOTE:  I have built, signed,  and released about 90% of ALL content for
CentOS Linux since 2004 // this is by far the most complicated thing I
have ever built.

Brian Stinson is a genius :)  So is Peter Jones.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200803/124ac650/attachment.sig>

From simon.matter at invoca.ch  Mon Aug  3 15:34:05 2020
From: simon.matter at invoca.ch (Simon Matter)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 17:34:05 +0200
Subject: [CentOS-devel] kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 in git.centos.org
In-Reply-To: <0ffe6b74-3fe5-cc95-1756-ba14b2f72b83@centos.org>
References: <56cb0733602b42808e9551f79b855cb8@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
 <535a4f7f-1859-e454-63ce-9c61034f3e46@ntlworld.com>
 <77f8ccdb-e29f-6f25-8fcd-12aed52b11d4@centosproject.org>
 <bd14118f8f2b4044b45abf1fc5bc5bb6@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
 <0ffe6b74-3fe5-cc95-1756-ba14b2f72b83@centos.org>
Message-ID: <dfc241683104c3c9df8ac35d7e61ef73.squirrel@xxl.corp.invoca.ch>

> On 8/3/20 9:43 AM, Antal Neme? wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: CentOS-devel <centos-devel-bounces at centos.org> On Behalf Of Brian
>>> Stinson
>>> Sent: Monday, 3 August 2020 16:14
>>>> I believe 14.3 is exactly the same as 14.2 except that RH needed to
>>>> adjust the signing order of their certificates and since those are RH
>>>> specific, 14.2 == 14.3 for the intents and purposes of non-RHEL
>>>> builds.
>>>>
>>>> Trevor
>>>
>>> This is the correct answer. The difference between 14.2 and 14.3 is
>>> only
>>> applicable to RHEL, and is not a change in the underlying content. The
>>> CentOS
>>> kernels were dual-signed in the right order for us in 14.2
>>>
>>>
>>> --Brian
>>
>> Great, thanks for confirmation. This throws a gigantic monkey wrench in
>> my attempts
>> at automating src.rpm generation from git.centos.org, so I hope this was
>> an exceptional occurrence?
>>
>
> Yes .. one could say that an embargoed, 'named' sescureboot/kernel fix
> that requires a signature from Microsoft before release AND requires
> hiding embargoed content (which CentOS is not set up to do ..we build
> everythign in the open) .. is VERY MUCH an exceptional occurrence.

Some filtering rules in my brain just triggered an alarm here, too many
words like 'embargoed content', 'secureboot', 'hiding', 'Microsoft'... on
a GNU/Linux devel list :-)

Simon


From johnny at centos.org  Mon Aug  3 15:38:34 2020
From: johnny at centos.org (Johnny Hughes)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 10:38:34 -0500
Subject: [CentOS-devel] kernel-4.18.0-193.14.2.el8_2 in git.centos.org
In-Reply-To: <dfc241683104c3c9df8ac35d7e61ef73.squirrel@xxl.corp.invoca.ch>
References: <56cb0733602b42808e9551f79b855cb8@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
 <535a4f7f-1859-e454-63ce-9c61034f3e46@ntlworld.com>
 <77f8ccdb-e29f-6f25-8fcd-12aed52b11d4@centosproject.org>
 <bd14118f8f2b4044b45abf1fc5bc5bb6@CORE-EXCH.comtrade.com>
 <0ffe6b74-3fe5-cc95-1756-ba14b2f72b83@centos.org>
 <dfc241683104c3c9df8ac35d7e61ef73.squirrel@xxl.corp.invoca.ch>
Message-ID: <c6f76dea-8898-384f-a776-e9bfdb4c4fba@centos.org>

On 8/3/20 10:34 AM, Simon Matter via CentOS-devel wrote:
>> On 8/3/20 9:43 AM, Antal Neme? wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: CentOS-devel <centos-devel-bounces at centos.org> On Behalf Of Brian
>>>> Stinson
>>>> Sent: Monday, 3 August 2020 16:14
>>>>> I believe 14.3 is exactly the same as 14.2 except that RH needed to
>>>>> adjust the signing order of their certificates and since those are RH
>>>>> specific, 14.2 == 14.3 for the intents and purposes of non-RHEL
>>>>> builds.
>>>>>
>>>>> Trevor
>>>>
>>>> This is the correct answer. The difference between 14.2 and 14.3 is
>>>> only
>>>> applicable to RHEL, and is not a change in the underlying content. The
>>>> CentOS
>>>> kernels were dual-signed in the right order for us in 14.2
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --Brian
>>>
>>> Great, thanks for confirmation. This throws a gigantic monkey wrench in
>>> my attempts
>>> at automating src.rpm generation from git.centos.org, so I hope this was
>>> an exceptional occurrence?
>>>
>>
>> Yes .. one could say that an embargoed, 'named' sescureboot/kernel fix
>> that requires a signature from Microsoft before release AND requires
>> hiding embargoed content (which CentOS is not set up to do ..we build
>> everythign in the open) .. is VERY MUCH an exceptional occurrence.
> 
> Some filtering rules in my brain just triggered an alarm here, too many
> words like 'embargoed content', 'secureboot', 'hiding', 'Microsoft'... on
> a GNU/Linux devel list :-)

You and me both .. :)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200803/02b952fb/attachment.sig>

From johnny at centos.org  Mon Aug  3 15:41:01 2020
From: johnny at centos.org (Johnny Hughes)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 10:41:01 -0500
Subject: [CentOS-devel] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Linux,
 CentOS Stream and the Boot Hole vulnerability
In-Reply-To: <7aea826e-ea73-8b1f-81f5-3ed214d909ab@gmail.com>
References: <0f0d3ad8-7160-73b7-82d2-6d8ff51ef5f1@centosproject.org>
 <7aea826e-ea73-8b1f-81f5-3ed214d909ab@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8f93c1fd-4c70-9473-00f8-9cec50119289@centos.org>

On 7/29/20 1:35 PM, Leon Fauster via CentOS-devel wrote:
> Am 29.07.20 um 19:38 schrieb Brian Stinson:
>> We are aware of the Boot Hole vulnerability in grub2 (CVE-2020-1073) and
>> are working on releasing new packages for CentOS Linux 7, CentOS Linux 8
>> and CentOS Stream in response. These should make it out to a mirror near
>> you shortly.
>>
> 
> Should be ?
> CVE-2020-10713
> and
> CVE-2020-14308
> CVE-2020-14309
> CVE-2020-14310
> CVE-2020-14311
> 

We have no ability to match up CVE numbers and CentOS-8 releases .. as
modules use git commit IDs and build time stamps in the rpm names.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200803/e71191b9/attachment.sig>

From lee.iitb at gmail.com  Mon Aug  3 19:29:35 2020
From: lee.iitb at gmail.com (Thomas Stephen Lee)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 00:59:35 +0530
Subject: [CentOS-devel] recent updates cause grub not to load please
	advise
In-Reply-To: <7185a5ad-ddc7-c30a-3a96-73a6320a7c1c@centos.org>
References: <CAOp5WB5k9Heo8madm6Z5LJ0Fg_kDSHbR=3fqnTfJx2-ufY37PA@mail.gmail.com>
 <e5d2340c-07dc-5222-eb30-efef2530c356@pari.edu>
 <51a377df-287c-9781-efb8-c597d0b614d4@pari.edu>
 <ee952bcc-9e24-b9da-833c-367736492b57@pari.edu>
 <CAG7s96W7mQ7_cfNM_nEy9D-2AhGKNbUv0fvHOfDX2gMPhntu_w@mail.gmail.com>
 <7185a5ad-ddc7-c30a-3a96-73a6320a7c1c@centos.org>
Message-ID: <CAG7s96Wd-qe2_XT2hqBjORm-imzbTdu3hKLQaoNFYjyBAHLjsA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 7:49 PM Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote:

> On 8/1/20 1:13 PM, Thomas Stephen Lee wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 9:34 PM Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu
> > <mailto:lowen at pari.edu>> wrote:
> >
> >     On 7/30/20 10:51 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> >     > On 7/30/20 10:35 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> >     >> However, what is really odd to me is that after the dnf downgrade
> of
> >     >> grub2 and shim, which did get logged in /var/log/dnf.log, when
> >     >> issuing a dnf update I don't see the grub2 and shim updates listed
> >     >> anymore.
> >     >
> >     > So I'm on the latest kernel, but downrev on grub2 and a dnf update
> >     > does now list the updated release.  When I get enough time to
> >     > reproduce I might try the update again.
> >     So, the first update this morning was with the GUI updater that does
> >     the
> >     update during a reboot.  I just updated to the '87 release of grub2
> >     using dnf from the command line, and the update was successful, with
> a
> >     correctly booting system.  So I can't reproduce the issue on this
> >     laptop.
> >
> >
> > Red Hat fixes are available.
> >
> > https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2020:3265
> > https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2020:3262
> >
> > wait for CentOS.
>
> These were released over the weekend.
>
Got it. thanks ?

>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200804/2356d314/attachment.html>

From arrfab at centos.org  Wed Aug  5 11:41:12 2020
From: arrfab at centos.org (Fabian Arrotin)
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 13:41:12 +0200
Subject: [CentOS-devel] [Infra] - Planned outage : cbs.centos.org
Message-ID: <60b035ae-4cd2-3001-7a17-f4aaab97d91c@centos.org>

Due to a hardware issue, we'll have to move the existing NFS share used
by cbs.centos.org to a new node.

Migration is scheduled for """"Thursday August 5th, 6:30 am UTC time"""".
You can convert to local time with $(date -d '2020-08-05 6:30 UTC')

The expected "downtime" is estimated to ~30 minutes , time needed to
stop services, reflect change for NFS storage, update dns A record , and
ansible restarting the whole process.

During that downtime, nothing will be processed on the koji builders
(nor signed and pushed out to mirror CDN)

Thanks for your comprehending and patience.

on behalf of the Infra team,
-- 
Fabian Arrotin
The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org
gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | twitter: @arrfab

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200805/65be92c8/attachment.sig>

From arrfab at centos.org  Wed Aug  5 11:50:48 2020
From: arrfab at centos.org (Fabian Arrotin)
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 13:50:48 +0200
Subject: [CentOS-devel] [Infra] - Planned outage : cbs.centos.org
In-Reply-To: <60b035ae-4cd2-3001-7a17-f4aaab97d91c@centos.org>
References: <60b035ae-4cd2-3001-7a17-f4aaab97d91c@centos.org>
Message-ID: <d683b260-bc5e-a467-efb8-3a5d0f805399@centos.org>

On 05/08/2020 13:41, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
> Due to a hardware issue, we'll have to move the existing NFS share used
> by cbs.centos.org to a new node.
> 
> Migration is scheduled for """"Thursday August 5th, 6:30 am UTC time"""".
> You can convert to local time with $(date -d '2020-08-05 6:30 UTC')
> 

Correction (that's what happens when you look at your gnome clock and
coming back from PTO) : it's scheduled for tomorrow, so """"Thursday
August 6th, 6:30 am UTC time"""". ..

Thanks to Thomas for the notification :)


-- 
Fabian Arrotin
The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org
gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | twitter: @arrfab

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200805/e5c33a51/attachment.sig>

From arrfab at centos.org  Wed Aug  5 11:59:35 2020
From: arrfab at centos.org (Fabian Arrotin)
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 13:59:35 +0200
Subject: [CentOS-devel] New CentOS Infra/CBS/CI issues/requests tracker,
	please read !
Message-ID: <a5d2d42a-33ce-4b15-383a-78c6015f062b@centos.org>

Hi all,

As you probably noticed in the last weeks/months, we have a stronger
collaboration and synergy with the Fedora infrastructure team. Combining
forces and resources help both projects at the same time, as majority of
the CentOS contributors are already Fedora contributors and probably the
same in reverse.

It's not a secret (it was announced through CPE weekly mails on this
list) that the CentOS board approved the idea of merging authentication
systems in a near future (as an example).

This email to let you know that all RFE/issues concerning the following
areas should be reported to a new issues tracker :
https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issues/ , to adapt the same workflow as
the Fedora infra team is already using. ( see
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/cpe/working_with_us/ )

Concerned areas :
 - https://cbs.centos.org (Community BuildSystem, aka koji)
 - Special Interest Groups requests (for mirror, resources, etc)
 - https://ci.centos.org (All CI infra ecosystem)
 - Everything around CentOS Infra (mirror issues, etc)

We have already moved/migrated for example the (opened) tickets that
were filed under the "Buildsys" , "CI" and "Infrastructure" categories
to the new issues tracker. The idea being to *not* request work to be
done through IRC but rather through new infra issues tracker.

Imported tickets will be discussed there and worked on (reviewed on a
daily basis) after having been prioritized

Should you feel a need to discuss this new process, feel free to do so
in #centos-devel on irc.freenode.net or on this centos-devel list.

Kind Regards,
-- 
Fabian Arrotin
The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org
gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | twitter: @arrfab

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200805/2e3db1b6/attachment.sig>

From arrfab at centos.org  Thu Aug  6 06:47:00 2020
From: arrfab at centos.org (Fabian Arrotin)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 08:47:00 +0200
Subject: [CentOS-devel] [Infra] - Planned outage : cbs.centos.org
In-Reply-To: <60b035ae-4cd2-3001-7a17-f4aaab97d91c@centos.org>
References: <60b035ae-4cd2-3001-7a17-f4aaab97d91c@centos.org>
Message-ID: <5dc2c9b1-939e-2d38-051b-57c2a53c94e5@centos.org>

On 05/08/2020 13:41, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
> Due to a hardware issue, we'll have to move the existing NFS share used
> by cbs.centos.org to a new node.
> 
> Migration is scheduled for """"Thursday August 5th, 6:30 am UTC time"""".
> You can convert to local time with $(date -d '2020-08-05 6:30 UTC')
> 
> The expected "downtime" is estimated to ~30 minutes , time needed to
> stop services, reflect change for NFS storage, update dns A record , and
> ansible restarting the whole process.
> 
> During that downtime, nothing will be processed on the koji builders
> (nor signed and pushed out to mirror CDN)
> 
> Thanks for your comprehending and patience.
> 
> on behalf of the Infra team,
> 

Just to inform you that storage migration is done and all services back
in action.

-- 
Fabian Arrotin
The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org
gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | twitter: @arrfab

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200806/15cb001a/attachment.sig>

From stefan.puiu at gmail.com  Thu Aug  6 16:58:22 2020
From: stefan.puiu at gmail.com (Stefan Puiu)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 19:58:22 +0300
Subject: [CentOS-devel] centos 7.8 and kernel-3.10.0-1127.18.2.el7
Message-ID: <CACKs7VDYqreLpJ1AveYQsbenvVMQpAxeA8hrApvepqCmW65jbQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

We have a CentOS 7 -based (more accurately, CentOS 7 atomic
host-based) distro that we build and run on specialized hardware. For
the kernel, we pick the CentOS 7 kernel, apply two patches (and a
different configuration) and build it. We're mostly following CentOS
7.8 at the moment, and using the 3.10.0-1127.13.1 kernel.

A few days ago, I noticed kernel-3.10.0-1127.18.2.el7 was out (and
it's labeled as a security update -
https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2020-July/035780.html),
so I decided to build it. Our kernel build process involves
downloading the src.rpm, patching the spec and then calling rpmbuild.
For this latest kernel, our spec patch (which adds our 2 patches)
failed to apply - as far as I can tell, the hunks where patches are
listed, like this one:

==
@@ -449,6 +449,8 @@
 Patch1000: debrand-single-cpu.patch
 Patch1001: debrand-rh_taint.patch
 Patch1002: debrand-rh-i686-cpu.patch
+Patch88881: kernel_ixia.patch
+Patch88882: at24.patch

 BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/kernel-%{KVRA}-root
 ==

I checked the new spec file, and the debrand patches are missing.
Looking at https://git.centos.org/rpms/kernel/commits/c7 (let me know
if that's the right place), I see there's a debranding change
(https://git.centos.org/rpms/kernel/c/548139faa91edfe29fc84695da827230de3c5d4f?branch=c7),
but it simply added a README saying debranding failed.

Do I need to wait for a new change fixing this? I see older kernels
have a "debranding" commit and then a "Manual CentOS Debranding"
commit, is something like that required now as well?

Thanks in advance,
Stefan.

From ancarrol at redhat.com  Thu Aug  6 17:23:48 2020
From: ancarrol at redhat.com (Ant Carroll)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 18:23:48 +0100
Subject: [CentOS-devel] CPE Feedback Survey
Message-ID: <CADbh8kAigfB9_G5tKdTiaivf2o9AA+isWSvJ2VNGD3D6t-0yqg@mail.gmail.com>

Hey folks,

CPE <https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/cpe/>need your help :)

Over the last several months we've been trying to improve how we interact
and share information with you all. From the blog posts, to mails and how
we work on the tickets you send us.

Here is a link to a very short survey we've put together to learn how we
can give you the best experience possible going forward by understanding
the experiences you've had recently.
If you could take the time (5mins max) to complete it for us it would be
hugely valuable as we work on this continuous improvement -
https://fedoraproject.limequery.com/696793?lang=en
<https://meet.google.com/linkredirect?authuser=0&dest=https%3A%2F%2Ffedoraproject.limequery.com%2F696793%3Flang%3Den>


Cheers,

Ant
-- 

Ant Carroll

Associate Manager, CPE Team

Red Hat Waterford <http://www.redhat.com>

Communications House

Cork Road, Waterford City

ancarrol at redhat.com
M: +353876213163     IM: ancarrol
@redhatjobs <https://twitter.com/redhatjobs>   redhatjobs
<https://www.facebook.com/redhatjobs> @redhatjobs
<https://instagram.com/redhatjobs>
<https://www.redhat.com/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200806/78930267/attachment.html>

From kdreyer at redhat.com  Thu Aug  6 20:51:02 2020
From: kdreyer at redhat.com (Ken Dreyer)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 14:51:02 -0600
Subject: [CentOS-devel] installing cbs client on Fedora
In-Reply-To: <5f7914d8-1d45-4ee0-b666-a16f1f718dee@www.fastmail.com>
References: <CALqRxCy9L0EwZMLbpO0EyY04OKeRAmZJmUEhJ-ECCmH4Q43pwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <83312E1C-CD06-48EA-BC1B-C618AC8DBCDD@negate.org>
 <5f7914d8-1d45-4ee0-b666-a16f1f718dee@www.fastmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALqRxCz1aBTMo95WNt5YKsyVJQ_C9Ja0TTb40KG1BSGgrNzTmA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 8:25 PM Brian Stinson <brian at bstinson.com> wrote:
> We definitely need some work here, but a good first step is to get this out of personal accounts on github.
>
> If you don't mind forking this, we can start: https://git.centos.org/centos/centos-packager

Would you please merge
https://github.com/bstinsonmhk/centos-packager/pull/6 so everyone can
follow along with this move?

- Ken


From johnny at centos.org  Thu Aug  6 22:41:34 2020
From: johnny at centos.org (Johnny Hughes)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 17:41:34 -0500
Subject: [CentOS-devel] centos 7.8 and kernel-3.10.0-1127.18.2.el7
In-Reply-To: <CACKs7VDYqreLpJ1AveYQsbenvVMQpAxeA8hrApvepqCmW65jbQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACKs7VDYqreLpJ1AveYQsbenvVMQpAxeA8hrApvepqCmW65jbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <aab8b287-cd90-c5ac-2269-fda94676ab26@centos.org>

On 8/6/20 11:58 AM, Stefan Puiu wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> We have a CentOS 7 -based (more accurately, CentOS 7 atomic
> host-based) distro that we build and run on specialized hardware. For
> the kernel, we pick the CentOS 7 kernel, apply two patches (and a
> different configuration) and build it. We're mostly following CentOS
> 7.8 at the moment, and using the 3.10.0-1127.13.1 kernel.
> 
> A few days ago, I noticed kernel-3.10.0-1127.18.2.el7 was out (and
> it's labeled as a security update -
> https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2020-July/035780.html),
> so I decided to build it. Our kernel build process involves
> downloading the src.rpm, patching the spec and then calling rpmbuild.
> For this latest kernel, our spec patch (which adds our 2 patches)
> failed to apply - as far as I can tell, the hunks where patches are
> listed, like this one:
> 
> ==
> @@ -449,6 +449,8 @@
>  Patch1000: debrand-single-cpu.patch
>  Patch1001: debrand-rh_taint.patch
>  Patch1002: debrand-rh-i686-cpu.patch
> +Patch88881: kernel_ixia.patch
> +Patch88882: at24.patch
> 
>  BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/kernel-%{KVRA}-root
>  ==
> 
> I checked the new spec file, and the debrand patches are missing.
> Looking at https://git.centos.org/rpms/kernel/commits/c7 (let me know
> if that's the right place), I see there's a debranding change
> (https://git.centos.org/rpms/kernel/c/548139faa91edfe29fc84695da827230de3c5d4f?branch=c7),
> but it simply added a README saying debranding failed.
> 
> Do I need to wait for a new change fixing this? I see older kernels
> have a "debranding" commit and then a "Manual CentOS Debranding"
> commit, is something like that required now as well?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> Stefan.
> _______________________________________________
> 

We will better debrand the next kernel .. we were eliminating items to
get better builds from the shim / kernel error issues over the weekend
and did not get the debranding completely in that kernel, but it worked,
so we released it.

The next kernel will be more normal and with less urgency .. it should
have all the patches.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200806/75c42fa7/attachment.sig>

From listmail at crazylinuxnerd.net  Sat Aug  8 06:36:04 2020
From: listmail at crazylinuxnerd.net (Jake Shipton)
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2020 07:36:04 +0100
Subject: [CentOS-devel] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Linux,
 CentOS Stream and the Boot Hole vulnerability
In-Reply-To: <8f93c1fd-4c70-9473-00f8-9cec50119289@centos.org>
References: <0f0d3ad8-7160-73b7-82d2-6d8ff51ef5f1@centosproject.org>
 <7aea826e-ea73-8b1f-81f5-3ed214d909ab@gmail.com>
 <8f93c1fd-4c70-9473-00f8-9cec50119289@centos.org>
Message-ID: <193a5a423d316798f99dfa65c08dcef783b51535.camel@crazylinuxnerd.net>

2020-08-03 (?) ? 10:41 -0500 ? Johnny Hughes ????????:
> On 7/29/20 1:35 PM, Leon Fauster via CentOS-devel wrote:
> > Am 29.07.20 um 19:38 schrieb Brian Stinson:
> > > We are aware of the Boot Hole vulnerability in grub2 (CVE-2020-
> > > 1073) and
> > > are working on releasing new packages for CentOS Linux 7, CentOS
> > > Linux 8
> > > and CentOS Stream in response. These should make it out to a
> > > mirror near
> > > you shortly.
> > > 
> > 
> > Should be ?
> > CVE-2020-10713
> > and
> > CVE-2020-14308
> > CVE-2020-14309
> > CVE-2020-14310
> > CVE-2020-14311
> > 
> 
> We have no ability to match up CVE numbers and CentOS-8 releases ..
> as
> modules use git commit IDs and build time stamps in the rpm names.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> CentOS-devel at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

Hi,

That's understandable. But on a separate note, is there any chance of
CentOS Announce receiving update information for CentOS 8?

Currently, 6 and 7 are receiving them. However, for several months now
CentOS 8 hasn't had any update emails on that list with the exception
of minor releases or this issue.

Just wondering, because I use that list to keep up with updates :-).

Kind Regards and Stay Safe

Jake Shipton (JakeMS)


From johnny at centos.org  Sun Aug  9 08:59:06 2020
From: johnny at centos.org (Johnny Hughes)
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2020 03:59:06 -0500
Subject: [CentOS-devel] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Linux,
 CentOS Stream and the Boot Hole vulnerability
In-Reply-To: <193a5a423d316798f99dfa65c08dcef783b51535.camel@crazylinuxnerd.net>
References: <0f0d3ad8-7160-73b7-82d2-6d8ff51ef5f1@centosproject.org>
 <7aea826e-ea73-8b1f-81f5-3ed214d909ab@gmail.com>
 <8f93c1fd-4c70-9473-00f8-9cec50119289@centos.org>
 <193a5a423d316798f99dfa65c08dcef783b51535.camel@crazylinuxnerd.net>
Message-ID: <7caa9be4-1689-8a22-6c72-100688c5862a@centos.org>

On 8/8/20 1:36 AM, Jake Shipton wrote:
> 2020-08-03 (?) ? 10:41 -0500 ? Johnny Hughes ????????:
>> On 7/29/20 1:35 PM, Leon Fauster via CentOS-devel wrote:
>>> Am 29.07.20 um 19:38 schrieb Brian Stinson:
>>>> We are aware of the Boot Hole vulnerability in grub2 (CVE-2020-
>>>> 1073) and
>>>> are working on releasing new packages for CentOS Linux 7, CentOS
>>>> Linux 8
>>>> and CentOS Stream in response. These should make it out to a
>>>> mirror near
>>>> you shortly.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Should be ?
>>> CVE-2020-10713
>>> and
>>> CVE-2020-14308
>>> CVE-2020-14309
>>> CVE-2020-14310
>>> CVE-2020-14311
>>>
>>
>> We have no ability to match up CVE numbers and CentOS-8 releases ..
>> as
>> modules use git commit IDs and build time stamps in the rpm names.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CentOS-devel mailing list
>> CentOS-devel at centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
> 
> Hi,
> 
> That's understandable. But on a separate note, is there any chance of
> CentOS Announce receiving update information for CentOS 8?
> 
> Currently, 6 and 7 are receiving them. However, for several months now
> CentOS 8 hasn't had any update emails on that list with the exception
> of minor releases or this issue.
> 
> Just wondering, because I use that list to keep up with updates :-).
> 
> Kind Regards and Stay Safe
> 
> Jake Shipton (JakeMS)
> 

What we have right now is two fold:

This:
https://feeds.centos.org/

And looking at what is built for dist-c8-compose (what will be in the
latest compose):
https://koji.mbox.centos.org/koji/builds?tagID=338


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200809/e994bcc6/attachment.sig>

From arrfab at centos.org  Mon Aug 10 12:37:08 2020
From: arrfab at centos.org (Fabian Arrotin)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 14:37:08 +0200
Subject: [CentOS-devel] CBS : builders migration (already done,
	nothing to worry about)
Message-ID: <8ab55786-93d7-0e7b-ddcd-449a18f0b514@centos.org>

Hi,

On my backlog for quite some time, there was need to migrate existing
CBS/koji builders to new(er) hardware/hosts.
When I moved items from backlog to the new place, I so imported this one
: https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/52

This mail is just a "FYI" as nobody should have noticed any service
disruption, as each kojid instance was migrated while no job was
running, so disabled, migrated, enabled back in the pool and so on.

Hopefully you still *should* notice some speed improvements, including
for build jobs (newer/faster nodes) and surely because local storage for
these builders is SSD backed (instead of old SAS disks on 8y+ nodes).

Same rule applies for the distrepo tasks, as we now have multiple nodes
in the "createrepo" channel, with access to the koji NFS share now over
10Gbit ethernet (while it' was limited to 1Gbit on older nodes). That
was possible because of the previous storage migration that happened
last week :
https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2020-August/055981.html

Should you encounter any issue, (but we're ran several --scratch builds)
, feel free to reply to this email, drop on #centos-devel irc channel on
irc.freenode.net, or even better now (really!), create a ticket on
https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issues.

Happy building !
-- 
Fabian Arrotin
The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org
gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | twitter: @arrfab

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200810/b9e149bc/attachment.sig>

From orion at nwra.com  Mon Aug 10 20:29:33 2020
From: orion at nwra.com (Orion Poplawski)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 14:29:33 -0600
Subject: [CentOS-devel] Missing -devel packages
Message-ID: <532f116a-e2b3-8619-8867-d05fc8802cf6@nwra.com>

Is there anything I can do to help out with missing -devel packages in CentOS
8?  I'm waiting for a number of them, e.g.:

https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=17401

Thanks,
  Orion

-- 
Orion Poplawski
Manager of NWRA Technical Systems          720-772-5637
NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office             FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane                       orion at nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301                 https://www.nwra.com/

From tdawson at redhat.com  Mon Aug 10 20:41:04 2020
From: tdawson at redhat.com (Troy Dawson)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 13:41:04 -0700
Subject: [CentOS-devel] Missing -devel packages
In-Reply-To: <532f116a-e2b3-8619-8867-d05fc8802cf6@nwra.com>
References: <532f116a-e2b3-8619-8867-d05fc8802cf6@nwra.com>
Message-ID: <CAKndyURr5_=ueq331rLx0nEuWm9g43edKWSwLXqsAYK26o0NRQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 1:29 PM Orion Poplawski <orion at nwra.com> wrote:
>
> Is there anything I can do to help out with missing -devel packages in CentOS
> 8?  I'm waiting for a number of them, e.g.:
>
> https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=17401
>
Hi Orion,
It helps if it is linked to this ticket.
https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=16492
Although nothing has happened there for 5 months.

To be clear, there is two definitions of "missing -devel packages"

There are the ones that have never shown up anywhere  (I'm still
waiting on 4 I believe)

And then there are the ones that originally showed up, and we were
able to build from them in EPEL8, but then when RHEL 8.2 came along,
the EPEL8 packages are still the old ones from RHEL 8.1.
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9580

Troy