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 -------------- 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/20150413/856bf4df/attachment-0004.sig>