[CentOS] Access Problem after update to CentOS 7.1

Tue Apr 14 11:30:06 UTC 2015

On 04/13/2015 11:17 PM, Rob Kampen wrote:
> On 04/14/2015 01:07 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> On 04/13/2015 06:49 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>> On 04/12/2015 10:29 PM, Rob Kampen wrote:
>>>> On 04/13/2015 11:42 AM, Gregory P. Ennis wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 2015-04-10 at 18:25 -0700, Greg Lindahl wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 06:33:27AM -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What may be happening is that you may need to be on the console and
>>>>>>> accept the license on the first reboot after the update.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We tried to turn this off for CLI only installs, but in some
>>>>>>> combinations of software, you may still get the acceptance screen
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> have to complete it.
>>>>>> So just to be clear, some of us who installed 7.0 servers in the GUI
>>>>>> and then carted them to a remotely colo might be screwed if the
>>>>>> machine reboots after updating to 7.1?  Are there some files I can
>>>>>> touch (or whatever) to prevent this from happening? Or is the best
>>>>>> solution to go to the colo and reboot?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have consoles for all of my professional servers, but not my hobby
>>>>>> server! Fun fun! And I feel for you guys, given that upstream was the
>>>>>> main cause.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- greg
>>>>>>
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Greg,
>>>>>
>>>>> After my 7.1 upgrade the login gui is no longer usable because it will
>>>>> not scroll.  However, if you are using a remote connection all you
>>>>> need
>>>>> to do is to run 'initial-setup' and accept the license agreement.
>>>>> However, be careful.  The first time I activated 'inital-setup' I
>>>>> elected not to answer the question "yes" and the machine went in to a
>>>>> shutdown and then reboot.  At this point, I wish I had not upgraded to
>>>>> 7.1
>>>>>
>>>>> Greg
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> CentOS mailing list
>>>>> CentOS at centos.org
>>>>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>>>> Having been a CentOS user since about 5.2 and a list follower also,
>>>> please bear with me while I make a couple of observations.
>>>> 1. The 'nature' of CentOS appears to be changing.
>>> CentOS Linux is CentOS Linux .. it is a rebuild of the RHEL source code.
>>>   The source code for RHEL 7.1 was rebuilt and released just like the
>>> source code for RHEL 6.6 or RHEL 5.11 was.  There is no difference in
>>> CentOS Linux between how RHEL 6.6 code was rebuilt and how RHEL 7.1 was
>>> rebuilt.  CentOS Linux, the core distro, is NOT changing.  It is now and
>>> will always be a rebuild of RHEL source code.
>>>
>>>> I, and many others on this list, came to use and love CentOS because it
>>>> was a server oriented distro and had the lineage of RedHat running
>>>> through its veins - i.e. corporate type applications available and
>>>> support of LONG TERM stability WITH back-porting of patch updates to
>>>> fix
>>>> security issues.
>>>>
>>> This version is also a direct rebuild of the RHEL source code.  Red Hat
>>> seems to be moving more quickly and making more rapid changes.  CentOS,
>>> rebuilding RHEL sources, will obviously move at the same pace.
>>>
>>>> 2. Major version updates, make significant changes to how things work,
>>>> minor version updates are simply 'point in time' snapshots to make life
>>>> easier for new installations and gaining updates. This no longer
>>>> appears
>>>> to be the case!
>>>>
>>>> Having worked with servers and desktop workstations with both 5.x and
>>>> 6.x there were very few issues caused by a yum update. Thus one could
>>>> confidently do remote installations, yum updates etc. I know this from
>>>> experience, operating servers in different continents with no physical
>>>> access. The only problems ever encountered that needed physical access
>>>> being when hardware problems arose.
>>> Red Hat changed the mechanism for how they do license acceptance .. in
>>> previous CentOS versions this was done in first boot for GUI installs
>>> only, NOW they have changed it to also happen on CLI installs.  We don't
>>> desire this behavior .. but the process is identical to the RHEL
>>> install.  You must accept the license in CentOS-6 as well .. it is just
>>> on the first reboot after install.
>>>
>>> We hope to be able to work around this in the future.
>>>
>>>> 3. CentOS install, like most linux variants uses the GPL for most
>>>> packages, the acceptance of these licenses never required specific
>>>> mouse
>>>> clicks or check boxes.
>>>>
>>>> Copies of license terms were included with packages but their
>>>> acceptance
>>>> implied by usage. It seems the apple, microsoft, oracle, and google
>>>> android "in your face" must click acceptance to install an app or
>>>> package have finally arrived to linux distros.
>>>>
>>>> Having only spun up CentOS 7.0 from a live DVD I can make no comments
>>>> about it yet, other than it seems from the comments on the list that
>>>> both items 1 & 2 above are no longer true.
>>>>
>>>> I understand the idea of CentOS being bug for bug compatible with the
>>>> redhat lineage, however it appears that the CentOS single version
>>>> release is in fact a derivative of the multiple variants actually
>>>> produced and sold by redhat - thus some of the recent arguments about
>>>> naming of versions and DVDs lack authenticity.
>>> This has always been the case .. in CentOS-5 Linux, the CentOS tree and
>>> install DVDs are a combination of the RHEL Source Code for Clustering,
>>> Cluster-Storage, Virtualization, Desktop, Workstation, and Server.
>>>
>>> CentOS-6 Linux is a combination of the RHEL-6 Source Code for High
>>> Availability, High Performance Network, HPC Node, Load Balancer,
>>> Resilient Storage, Scalable File System, Desktop, Workstation, and
>>> Server.
>>>
>>> CentOS-7 Linux is a combination of Desktop, HPC Node, Resilient Storage,
>>> Workstation, and Server.
>>>
>>> This process has also not changed at all.
>>>
>>>> As is my usual practice, I never install and use a x.0 release for
>>>> production - far too many things have changed, dependent software has
>>>> not been sufficiently tested and many add-ons are not yet available.
>>>> Thus I was awaiting the release of 7.1 to move forward with some
>>>> projects, already realizing that the learning curve for this major
>>>> release would be longer and harder than previous releases. However,
>>>> I am
>>>> now wondering how to move forward at all as item 2 is a must have for
>>>> me, and appears to no longer be the case.
>>>>
>>>> Thus I ask the list - have I missed an announcement about these
>>>> changes?
>>>> are these changes real or imagined?
>>>> thanks for your time and forbearance.
>>> There is no changes in how the CentOS Linux distribution is produced or
>>> released.  You can continue consuming like you always have.  It is being
>>> built like it always has.
>>>
>>> There are optional monthly ISO respins, that live in a different place,
>>> which you can consume if you want.  There are also docker images, AWS
>>> images, generic cloud images, openstack images, etc. Which people can
>>> choose to consume or not.  None of this changes how the base CentOS
>>> Linux is built or released.  Some of these images also exist for
>>> CentOS-6 and/or CentOS-5 as well.  All of these are optional and for the
>>> people who need them, they are there.  If you don't need them then you
>>> keep consuming the CentOS-7 tree just like you did the CentOS-6 or
>>> CentOS-5 or CentOS-4 trees.
>>>
>>> If Red Hat changes to Gnome 3.14 in RHEL 7.2 (from Gnome 3.8 in RHEL
>>> 7.1), when they release the RHEL 7.2 source code, our rebuild will have
>>> Gnome 3.14 in it.  We may or may not agree with decision to move to a
>>> new Gnome version in a 'point release' .. but we (the CentOS Project)
>>> don't make those decisions, we just build the source code.
>> This is what leads me to believe there will be a Gnome rebase in RHEL
>> 7.2:
>>
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174597
>>
> thanks Johnny, you have explained exactly what my understanding was in
> terms much better expressed than I was able to do.
> I guess the telling comment for me is
> 
> Red Hat seems to be moving more quickly and making more rapid changes. 
> CentOS,
> rebuilding RHEL sources, will obviously move at the same pace.
> 
> While I can understand this and even welcome this to some extent,
> particularly for my desktop machines, it is the "it just works" that I
> have grown accustomed to, and this seems to be changing.
> It may be just my impression, but there seem to be more significant show
> stopping bugs with the 7.x series of releases, and I suppose the above
> comment exposes the reasons - more rapid releases mean less exhaustive
> testing, unless more resources are deployed and I guess that is unlikely
> to have occurred.\
> 
> Thanks as always for what you and the rest of the CentOS team do, just
> appreciation and admiration for all you guys (and gals?) do for the
> community.
> Rob

To be perfectly honest, I am not thrilled with the movement either from
the enterprise stability point of view .. BUT .. with respect to desktop
and software development it is better.  I personally though the other
way was better (no major version movement) .. but, that is above my
paygrade :)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20150414/345dcab5/attachment.sig>