[CentOS-docs] Request to contribute to wiki page (CentOS)

[Partners]

Hi, 

We have received the subscription notification. 
Following is the information required to contribute to the wiki page: 

Username: PacktPublishing 
Subject: Book feature on the wiki page 
Location: https://wiki.centos.org/Books 

Thanks & Regards 
Sherwin 




Sherwin Silveira 
Key Partner Executive 



___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs

Re: [CentOS] Reduce existing CentOS 7 installation to "Minimal install" - services?

[Arun Khan]

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Fred Smith
 wrote:
>
> not that I'm wanting to strip down my C7, I'm wondering how that
> works if one has installed the Mate desktop from epel ?
>

You can try it with a VBox VM and share your experience just the way
Nicolas has done.

-- Arun Khan
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Official Docker images and security updates

[Giovanni Tirloni]

Hello,

 It seems the official Docker images are missing some important
security updates [1][2]. Does anyone have any insight in how these
packages get built and when?

 Their Dockerfile seems to come from here:
https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/blob/master/library/centos
(commit for "latest" says "update CentOS-7 - 20160331 - monthly
build").

 In the official Docker documentation [2] they suggest not running
`apt-get upgrade` which I understood as don't run `yum -y upgrade` for
CentOS. Any advice on whether it's best practice to always update
packages or not?

Thank you,
Giovanni

1 - http://pastie.org/pastes/10833370/text
2 - https://blog.docker.com/2016/05/docker-security-scanning/
3 - 
https://docs.docker.com/engine/userguide/eng-image/dockerfile_best-practices/
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS-es] regreso de email

[Aland Laines Calonge]

La ip de tu dominio: aagjc.com.mx se encuentra en un blacklist, puede
checarlo en http://mxtoolbox.com/

Por eso es que el smtp.secureserver.net de GoDaddy!,  lo rechaza.

Saludos,

Aland 

-Mensaje original-
De: centos-es-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-es-boun...@centos.org] En
nombre de VICTOR MANUEL VARGAS GONZALEZ
Enviado el: miércoles, 11 de mayo de 2016 16:53
Para: centos-es@centos.org
Asunto: [CentOS-es] regreso de email



que tal alguien me puede apoyar en por que me regresa este email , uso
sendmail ,



 Mensaje reenviado 
Asunto:  Returned mail: see transcript for details
Fecha:  Tue, 10 May 2016 11:49:12 -0500
De:  Mail Delivery Subsystem 

Para:  brenda@aagjc.com.mx

The original message was received at Tue, 10 May 2016 11:49:09 -0500 from
[192.168.0.181]

   - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -

(reason: 552 5.2.0 Invalid 7bit DATA)

   - Transcript of session follows - ... while talking to
smtp.secureserver.net.:
>>> DATA
<<< 552 5.2.0 Invalid 7bit DATA
554 5.0.0 Service unavailable

___
CentOS-es mailing list
CentOS-es@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es

___
CentOS-es mailing list
CentOS-es@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es

[CentOS-es] regreso de email

[VICTOR MANUEL VARGAS GONZALEZ]

que tal alguien me puede apoyar en por que me regresa este email , uso sendmail 
,



 Mensaje reenviado 
Asunto:  Returned mail: see transcript for details
Fecha:  Tue, 10 May 2016 11:49:12 -0500
De:  Mail Delivery Subsystem 

Para:  brenda@aagjc.com.mx

The original message was received at Tue, 10 May 2016 11:49:09 -0500
from [192.168.0.181]

   - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -

(reason: 552 5.2.0 Invalid 7bit DATA)

   - Transcript of session follows -
... while talking to smtp.secureserver.net.:
>>> DATA
<<< 552 5.2.0 Invalid 7bit DATA
554 5.0.0 Service unavailable

___
CentOS-es mailing list
CentOS-es@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es

Re: [CentOS] Reduce existing CentOS 7 installation to "Minimal install" - services?

[Fred Smith]

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 09:08:03PM +0200, Nicolas Kovacs wrote:
> Le 06/05/2016 18:31, Johnny Hughes a écrit :
> > There actually are a couple more things than core in a minimal install
> > .. here is the current minimal list:
> > 
> > https://git.centos.org/blob/sig-core!comps.git/220ef7b59c95531d3752d4074ce673aa09792c67/c7-minimal-x86_64-RPMS.lst
> > 
> > some of those might not get installed every time (ie, disk encrypt may
> > not be on non-encrypted drives, etc.)
> > 
> > But it is a good starting point.
> 
> After some more fiddling, my problem is solved. Here's my little script:
> 
> https://github.com/kikinovak/centos/blob/master/7.x/scripts/00-elaguer-paquets.sh
> 
> Any existing CentOS installation (GNOME, KDE, Web Server, etc.) can be
> stripped down to a minimal install by simply running it. I've tried this
> with different scenarios, and it works perfectly.
> 
> Thank you everybody for your input.
> 
> Niki

not that I'm wanting to strip down my C7, I'm wondering how that
works if one has installed the Mate desktop from epel ?

-- 
 Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us -
 God made him who had no sin
  to be sin for us, so that in him
 we might become the righteousness of God."
--- Corinthians 5:21 -
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] openssl Security Update for CentOS 6.7 ETA

[m . roth]

Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 05/11/2016 11:44 AM, Patrick Rael wrote:
>> On 05/11/2016 09:45 AM, Steve Snyder wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 11:20am, "Patrick Rael" 
>>> said:
Is there an ETA on the openssl security update
 (CVE-2016-0799) for
 CentOS 6.7?I saw the openssl update for CentOS 7 on 5/9, eagerly
 awaiting the same for 6.7.

 Thanks!
>>> Looks like Red Hat pushed it to RHEL v6.8, released yesterday.  Unless
>>> CentOS does a special back-port we'll have to wait for CentOS v6.8 to
>>> get the OpenSSL update.
>> Is there an ETA on CentOS v6.8?Days? Weeks? Months? (years?)
>> I just need to predict when CVE-2016-0799 will be fixed for CentOS 6.7.
>> I thought security updates would be available on 6.7 for many more
>> years.
>
> Because Red Hat built that against 6.8 and not 6.7, I have to do the same.
>
> I expect that the CR rpms for os/ and that openssl update will be
> released in the next 2-3 days.
>
> Thanks,

No, thank *you*, Johnny, for all the work you do... and, as I've offered
before, if we're ever in the same metro area, I'd be happy to buy you a
drink for it all.

   mark

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] openssl Security Update for CentOS 6.7 ETA

[Johnny Hughes]

On 05/11/2016 11:44 AM, Patrick Rael wrote:
> On 05/11/2016 09:45 AM, Steve Snyder wrote:
>>
>> On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 11:20am, "Patrick Rael" 
>> said:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>  Is there an ETA on the openssl security update
>>> (CVE-2016-0799) for
>>> CentOS 6.7?I saw the openssl update for CentOS 7 on 5/9, eagerly
>>> awaiting
>>> the same for 6.7.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>> Looks like Red Hat pushed it to RHEL v6.8, released yesterday.  Unless
>> CentOS does a special back-port we'll have to wait for CentOS v6.8 to
>> get the OpenSSL update.
> Is there an ETA on CentOS v6.8?Days? Weeks? Months? (years?)
> I just need to predict when CVE-2016-0799 will be fixed for CentOS 6.7.
> I thought security updates would be available on 6.7 for many more years.
> 

Because Red Hat built that against 6.8 and not 6.7, I have to do the same.

I expect that the CR rpms for os/ and that openssl update will be
released in the next 2-3 days.

Thanks,
Johnny Hughes




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Reduce existing CentOS 7 installation to "Minimal install" - services?

[Nicolas Kovacs]

Le 06/05/2016 18:31, Johnny Hughes a écrit :
> There actually are a couple more things than core in a minimal install
> .. here is the current minimal list:
> 
> https://git.centos.org/blob/sig-core!comps.git/220ef7b59c95531d3752d4074ce673aa09792c67/c7-minimal-x86_64-RPMS.lst
> 
> some of those might not get installed every time (ie, disk encrypt may
> not be on non-encrypted drives, etc.)
> 
> But it is a good starting point.

After some more fiddling, my problem is solved. Here's my little script:

https://github.com/kikinovak/centos/blob/master/7.x/scripts/00-elaguer-paquets.sh

Any existing CentOS installation (GNOME, KDE, Web Server, etc.) can be
stripped down to a minimal install by simply running it. I've tried this
with different scenarios, and it works perfectly.

Thank you everybody for your input.

Niki

-- 
Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables
7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat
Web  : http://www.microlinux.fr
Mail : i...@microlinux.fr
Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] openssl Security Update for CentOS 6.7 ETA

[Patrick Rael]

On 05/11/2016 11:24 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:

Patrick Rael wrote:

On 05/11/2016 09:45 AM, Steve Snyder wrote:

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 11:20am, "Patrick Rael" 
said:


Hi,
  Is there an ETA on the openssl security update (CVE-2016-0799) for
CentOS 6.7?I saw the openssl update for CentOS 7 on 5/9, eagerly
awaiting the same for 6.7.


Looks like Red Hat pushed it to RHEL v6.8, released yesterday.  Unless
CentOS does a special back-port we'll have to wait for CentOS v6.8 to
get the OpenSSL update.

Is there an ETA on CentOS v6.8?Days? Weeks? Months? (years?)
I just need to predict when CVE-2016-0799 will be fixed for CentOS 6.7.
I thought security updates would be available on 6.7 for many more years.


Please - it was *just* released, and the build team is presumably already
on it. Hopefully, upstream hasn't screwed with their build environment
again.

At any rate, when upstream did, it took our build team about a month to
get builds working again; if they haven't, then I'd hope for a few weeks.

PLEASEPLEASEPLEASEPLEASE people, *don't* turn this into a 5k posts a day
arguing over whether the build team is lazy, or 75% of them "ANYTHING
NEW?! HOW SOON?!

Give them some bloody time, children. It's a job of work, as the old
saying goes.

   mark

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Thanks!   You developers do a mountain of work, it's really appreciated 
greatly!


-->Pat
--

--
Patrick Rael
Contractor, Lumeta Corporation
Network Situational Awareness
Phone: 703-298-3276

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] openssl Security Update for CentOS 6.7 ETA

[Richard]

> Date: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 13:24:43 -0400
> From: m.r...@5-cent.us
>
> Patrick Rael wrote:
>> On 05/11/2016 09:45 AM, Steve Snyder wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 11:20am, "Patrick Rael"
>>>  said:
>>> 
 Hi,
  Is there an ETA on the openssl security update (CVE-2016-0799)
  for CentOS 6.7?I saw the openssl update for CentOS 7 on
 5/9, eagerly awaiting the same for 6.7.
 
>>> Looks like Red Hat pushed it to RHEL v6.8, released yesterday.
>>> Unless CentOS does a special back-port we'll have to wait for
>>> CentOS v6.8 to get the OpenSSL update.
> 
>> Is there an ETA on CentOS v6.8?Days? Weeks? Months? (years?)
>> I just need to predict when CVE-2016-0799 will be fixed for CentOS
>> 6.7. I thought security updates would be available on 6.7 for many
>> more years.
>> 
> Please - it was *just* released, and the build team is presumably
> already on it. Hopefully, upstream hasn't screwed with their build
> environment again.
> 
> At any rate, when upstream did, it took our build team about a
> month to get builds working again; if they haven't, then I'd hope
> for a few weeks.
> 
> PLEASEPLEASEPLEASEPLEASE people, *don't* turn this into a 5k posts
> a day arguing over whether the build team is lazy, or 75% of them
> "ANYTHING NEW?! HOW SOON?!
> 
> Give them some bloody time, children. It's a job of work, as the old
> saying goes.
> 

Security updates will be available for rhel/centos 6 for many years
(november 2020 I believe). 6.7 is simply a point-in-time snapshot
which is not explicitly supported once the next point release has
come out.

  > I thought security updates would be available 
  > on 6.7 for many more years.

When there are cusp security issues like this the security update
sometimes comes out ahead of the rest of the new point release via
the fasttrack or CR repositories.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] openssl Security Update for CentOS 6.7 ETA

[m . roth]

Patrick Rael wrote:
> On 05/11/2016 09:45 AM, Steve Snyder wrote:
>>
>> On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 11:20am, "Patrick Rael" 
>> said:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>  Is there an ETA on the openssl security update (CVE-2016-0799) for
>>> CentOS 6.7?I saw the openssl update for CentOS 7 on 5/9, eagerly
>>> awaiting the same for 6.7.
>>>
>> Looks like Red Hat pushed it to RHEL v6.8, released yesterday.  Unless
>> CentOS does a special back-port we'll have to wait for CentOS v6.8 to
>> get the OpenSSL update.

> Is there an ETA on CentOS v6.8?Days? Weeks? Months? (years?)
> I just need to predict when CVE-2016-0799 will be fixed for CentOS 6.7.
> I thought security updates would be available on 6.7 for many more years.
>
Please - it was *just* released, and the build team is presumably already
on it. Hopefully, upstream hasn't screwed with their build environment
again.

At any rate, when upstream did, it took our build team about a month to
get builds working again; if they haven't, then I'd hope for a few weeks.

PLEASEPLEASEPLEASEPLEASE people, *don't* turn this into a 5k posts a day
arguing over whether the build team is lazy, or 75% of them "ANYTHING
NEW?! HOW SOON?!

Give them some bloody time, children. It's a job of work, as the old
saying goes.

  mark

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Upgrade path from CentOS 7 to future versions

[m . roth]

Nothing here. I responded to him on this offlist.

   mark

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] openssl Security Update for CentOS 6.7 ETA

[Patrick Rael]

On 05/11/2016 09:45 AM, Steve Snyder wrote:


On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 11:20am, "Patrick Rael"  said:


Hi,
 Is there an ETA on the openssl security update (CVE-2016-0799) for
CentOS 6.7?I saw the openssl update for CentOS 7 on 5/9, eagerly
awaiting
the same for 6.7.

Thanks!

Looks like Red Hat pushed it to RHEL v6.8, released yesterday.  Unless CentOS 
does a special back-port we'll have to wait for CentOS v6.8 to get the OpenSSL 
update.

Is there an ETA on CentOS v6.8?Days? Weeks? Months? (years?)
I just need to predict when CVE-2016-0799 will be fixed for CentOS 6.7.
I thought security updates would be available on 6.7 for many more years.

Best regards!



--
Patrick Rael
Contractor, Lumeta Corporation
Network Situational Awareness
Phone: 703-298-3276

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] OT: Linksys router misbehaviour

[Tom Bishop]

On May 11, 2016 11:27 AM, "Gordon Messmer"  wrote:
>
> On 05/11/2016 03:05 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>>
>> does anyone with such a router know of a way
>> to wake the router up in such a case through the computer?
>
>
>
> Enable ssh?
>
> ssh root@dd-wrt reboot
>
>
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Very OT, but I haven't run a commercial based FW for many moons. Figure out
your Fw distro of choice and run to that, my firewalls have uptimes in the
year time frames.  Lots of choices then use your linksys as an AP.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Upgrade path from CentOS 7 to future versions

[Valeri Galtsev]

On Wed, May 11, 2016 11:10 am, Warren Young wrote:
> On May 11, 2016, at 9:38 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>
>> Warren Young wrote:
>>> This isn’t just about RHEL vs Debian and
>>> derivatives of same.  Several major non-Linux OSes also manage to do
>>> automatic upgrades between major releases: Windows, OS X, FreeBSD...
>>
>> I was under the impression that all the releases of OS X were more like
>> what we call subreleases (6.6->6.7).
>
> You can’t transfer meaning between different version number systems.
> There is no global standard for the meaning of version numbers.  The only
> thing that matters is that there is internal consistency.
>
> (Which is why Windows version numbering is a joke.)

And there was a joke about them. When RedHat started pacing fast with
their CD version releases: 7.3 --> 8 --> 9 in very short time, someone
said: they try to catch up with others in major version number. And
someone else pointed: they cant: MS already has Windows 2000 ;-)

>
> OS X treats changes to the ‘x’ component of their OS X 10.x.y version
> numbering system about the same way as EL does in its x.y system.  The
> only difference is that major OS X versions have been coming out yearly in
> recent years, so that there is less cumulative difference between major
> versions than in CentOS major versions.  But there’s probably at least
> as much change every 3 major OS X versions, as you’d expect since CentOS
> major versions are also about 3 years apart.
>
> And, in fact, OS X will allow itself to be upgraded across major OS
> versions.  It doesn’t demand that you upgrade to each intermediate
> version separately.

MacOS 10 server (sorry about using Arabic number, I hate using Roman
numbers written with Latin letters, makes any search useless) breaks
things between 10.x versions consistently. They change the way
authentication is done, add, then drop Apache modules, and so on. No, I do
not run any of my servers under MacOS (FreeBSD is current choice,
hopefully for long time to come). But some of Professors I work for do it,
and I have to help them by doing dirty part that comes with it. So: nobody
is perfect (meaning MacOS 10 here ;-)

Valeri

>
> Calling OS X major releases “subversions” is just as fallacious as the
> opposite problem we see here in the CentOS world, where some people
> believe that CentOS 7.1 is incompatible with CentOS 7.2.  A change to y in
> these two x.y system means something very different, yet both are correct
> because both systems are internally consistent.
>
>>> Your point about the 10 year support cycle for RHEL is also invalid.
>>> The
>>> time spacing between major releases is only about every 3 years, and
>>> that
>>> is the period that matters here.
>>
>> No, it's not invalid, nor is it what matters. For example, here at work,
>> we have clusters, and a small supercomputer, all running 6.x (in the
>> case
>> of the supercomputer, it's an SGI-modified RHEL 6.x), and they'll go to
>> 7
>> probably when they're surplused replaced.
>
> Yes, and…?  Just because you have one use case where a major version
> upgrade does not make sense does not mean that major version upgrades
> don’t make sense everywhere.
>
> I already covered that case in my previous post, and the counterargument
> remains the same: not all OS upgrades can be coupled with hardware
> upgrades.  VMs are only one reason, though a big one.
>
> As for all the rest of your post, yes, I get it: nothing should ever
> change, nothing should ever break.  You just go and live live that dream.
> Meanwhile, in my world, change happens.  Your unwillingness to cope with
> it does not prevent me from doing so.
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>



Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] OT: Linksys router misbehaviour

[Gordon Messmer]

On 05/11/2016 03:05 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:

does anyone with such a router know of a way
to wake the router up in such a case through the computer?



Enable ssh?

ssh root@dd-wrt reboot


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] openssl Security Update for CentOS 6.7 ETA

[Peter Kjellström]

On Wed, 11 May 2016 09:20:54 -0600
Patrick Rael  wrote:

> Hi,
> Is there an ETA on the openssl security update
> (CVE-2016-0799) for CentOS 6.7?I saw the openssl update for
> CentOS 7 on 5/9, eagerly awaiting
> the same for 6.7.

The fix/RHSA is here:
https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0996.html

But as Steve pointed out it's part of 6.8 (hence the current
unavailability).

/Peter K
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Upgrade path from CentOS 7 to future versions

[Warren Young]

On May 11, 2016, at 9:38 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> 
> Warren Young wrote:
>> This isn’t just about RHEL vs Debian and
>> derivatives of same.  Several major non-Linux OSes also manage to do
>> automatic upgrades between major releases: Windows, OS X, FreeBSD...
> 
> I was under the impression that all the releases of OS X were more like
> what we call subreleases (6.6->6.7).

You can’t transfer meaning between different version number systems.  There is 
no global standard for the meaning of version numbers.  The only thing that 
matters is that there is internal consistency.

(Which is why Windows version numbering is a joke.)

OS X treats changes to the ‘x’ component of their OS X 10.x.y version numbering 
system about the same way as EL does in its x.y system.  The only difference is 
that major OS X versions have been coming out yearly in recent years, so that 
there is less cumulative difference between major versions than in CentOS major 
versions.  But there’s probably at least as much change every 3 major OS X 
versions, as you’d expect since CentOS major versions are also about 3 years 
apart.

And, in fact, OS X will allow itself to be upgraded across major OS versions.  
It doesn’t demand that you upgrade to each intermediate version separately.

Calling OS X major releases “subversions” is just as fallacious as the opposite 
problem we see here in the CentOS world, where some people believe that CentOS 
7.1 is incompatible with CentOS 7.2.  A change to y in these two x.y system 
means something very different, yet both are correct because both systems are 
internally consistent.

>> Your point about the 10 year support cycle for RHEL is also invalid.  The
>> time spacing between major releases is only about every 3 years, and that
>> is the period that matters here.
> 
> No, it's not invalid, nor is it what matters. For example, here at work,
> we have clusters, and a small supercomputer, all running 6.x (in the case
> of the supercomputer, it's an SGI-modified RHEL 6.x), and they'll go to 7
> probably when they're surplused replaced.

Yes, and…?  Just because you have one use case where a major version upgrade 
does not make sense does not mean that major version upgrades don’t make sense 
everywhere.

I already covered that case in my previous post, and the counterargument 
remains the same: not all OS upgrades can be coupled with hardware upgrades.  
VMs are only one reason, though a big one.

As for all the rest of your post, yes, I get it: nothing should ever change, 
nothing should ever break.  You just go and live live that dream.  Meanwhile, 
in my world, change happens.  Your unwillingness to cope with it does not 
prevent me from doing so.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] openssl Security Update for CentOS 6.7 ETA

[Gilbert Sebenste]

On Wed, 11 May 2016, Steve Snyder wrote:


On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 11:20am, "Patrick Rael"  said:


Hi,
Is there an ETA on the openssl security update (CVE-2016-0799) for
CentOS 6.7?I saw the openssl update for CentOS 7 on 5/9, eagerly
awaiting
the same for 6.7.

Thanks!


Looks like Red Hat pushed it to RHEL v6.8, released yesterday.  Unless
CentOS does a special back-port we'll have to wait for CentOS v6.8 to 
get the OpenSSL update.


Or, if you have the CR repo installed, you should get it a lot quicker.

Gilbert

***
Gilbert Sebenste
(My opinions only!)  **
***
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] openssl Security Update for CentOS 6.7 ETA

[Steve Snyder]

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 11:20am, "Patrick Rael"  said:

> Hi,
> Is there an ETA on the openssl security update (CVE-2016-0799) for
> CentOS 6.7?I saw the openssl update for CentOS 7 on 5/9, eagerly
> awaiting
> the same for 6.7.
> 
> Thanks!

Looks like Red Hat pushed it to RHEL v6.8, released yesterday.  Unless CentOS 
does a special back-port we'll have to wait for CentOS v6.8 to get the OpenSSL 
update.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Cannot figure out what this segfault message means. Please help!

[Sean Son]

Hello all

I installed MySQL 5.7 using the Mysql community YUM repository and I also
installed Tomcat 8 from tomcat.apache.org. The installations went fine but
ive been noticing that the VM,which is running CentOS 7.2, has been
freezing periodically. This morning when I checked the VM i saw the
following segfault message:

 kernel:systemd[1]: segfault at  ip  sp
7ffde89aa040 error 15

and

 kernel:systemd[1]: segfault at fe0f ip 7f96bdd021ad sp
7ffde89a8370 error 5 in systemd[7f96bdc2a000+146000]

how do I interpret these error messages and are there any bug fixes out
there for these errors? I am using kernel: 3.10.0-327.13.1.el7.x86_64.  The
VM is running on Hyper-V 2012.

Thank you for all of your help!
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Upgrade path from CentOS 7 to future versions

[m . roth]

Warren Young wrote:
> On May 10, 2016, at 4:12 PM, Valeri Galtsev 
> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 10, 2016 3:57 pm, Liam O'Toole wrote:
>>> On 2016-05-10, Valeri Galtsev
>>>  wrote:


>> Yes, LTS, thanks Liam. Only LTS has life cycle of mere 2 years, whereas
>> RHEL (hence CentOS) is what, 10 years?

> And in fact, more than two.  This isn’t just about RHEL vs Debian and
> derivatives of same.  Several major non-Linux OSes also manage to do
> automatic upgrades between major releases: Windows, OS X, FreeBSD...

I was under the impression that all the releases of OS X were more like
what we call subreleases (6.6->6.7). But I don't know, and don't really
care - I don't do WinDoze, I don't do (or like) Macs.

> Your point about the 10 year support cycle for RHEL is also invalid.  The
> time spacing between major releases is only about every 3 years, and that
> is the period that matters here.

No, it's not invalid, nor is it what matters. For example, here at work,
we have clusters, and a small supercomputer, all running 6.x (in the case
of the supercomputer, it's an SGI-modified RHEL 6.x), and they'll go to 7
probably when they're surplused replaced.

Or take me, personally, at home - I dislike systemd, and have zero
intention of going up until I have to, and that won't come for a good
number of years yet, when support for 6.x stops. And, btw, no, you cannot
tell me I'm "wrong" to dislike it, that I should "Embrace Change!!!",
because a) I don't need anyone's opinion to justify how I feel about how I
deal with something, and b) just because you *can* do something doesn't
mean you *should*. For one example, I do *not* embrace change in the form
of, say, Web-enabled thermostats (and they do security updates exactly
*when*?, or Web-connected cars (are you out of your friggin' alleged
mind?). So, why should I go to something NEW! SHINY! when what I have
works well, and is comfortable?

And automatic upgrades are *NOT* always a Good Idea. For example, just
last year, EPEL just upgraded the torque packages that we use to run our
clusters... from 2.5 to 4.2(?!?!?!), which broke the test cluster
instantly, and took a lot of research and work to make work on the test
system by the admin I work with, and on our two big clusters, we're not
upgrading - our users would be down for a while... and these are several
folks running jobs on the (24, 25) node clusters whose jobs can run a week
or two straight.

   mark, down in the trenches, not in a hosting environment

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] openssl Security Update for CentOS 6.7 ETA

[Patrick Rael]

Hi,
   Is there an ETA on the openssl security update (CVE-2016-0799) for
CentOS 6.7?I saw the openssl update for CentOS 7 on 5/9, eagerly 
awaiting

the same for 6.7.

Thanks!
-->Pat

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Upgrade path from CentOS 7 to future versions

[Warren Young]

On May 10, 2016, at 4:12 PM, Valeri Galtsev  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 3:57 pm, Liam O'Toole wrote:
>> On 2016-05-10, Valeri Galtsev
>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 1. Debian (and clones): you keep the components of the system pretty
>>> much on the level of latest release of each of components. Therefore
>>> "upgrade" to new release of the system is pretty close to just a
>>> regular routine update.
>> 
>> You are describing Debian sid/unstable, which is contunuously updated,
>> and where there are no releases in the usual sense of the word. Debian
>> stable releases are a different matter, and correspond very closely to
>> major releases of RHEL/CentOS. There is always an upgrade path between
>> consecutive releases of Debian stable.
> 
> Yes, LTS, thanks Liam. Only LTS has life cycle of mere 2 years, whereas
> RHEL (hence CentOS) is what, 10 years?

“LTS” is an Ubuntu term, not a Debian term.  Debian and Ubuntu are very much 
not the same thing.  I point this out not to be pedantic but instead because 
there are *two* OSes here that both manage to have straightforward automatic 
upgrades between major releases.

And in fact, more than two.  This isn’t just about RHEL vs Debian and 
derivatives of same.  Several major non-Linux OSes also manage to do automatic 
upgrades between major releases: Windows, OS X, FreeBSD...

Take FreeBSD for example.  Its freebsd-update tool will do this, and it’s 
mostly automatic, even in the face of changes to core OS files.  (e.g. 
/etc/services)  It can even merge changes to a core OS configuration file with 
your local version in certain cases.  Or, it can just open both versions in a 
text editor and wait for you to merge them manually.  Why can’t there be a 
rhel-update tool that does the same?

Your point about the 10 year support cycle for RHEL is also invalid.  The time 
spacing between major releases is only about every 3 years, and that is the 
period that matters here.

That is to say, I would not expect an automatic major upgrade tool for RHEL to 
let me jump straight from version 5 to version 7 just because RHEL 5 is still 
receiving security updates.  The tool only has to be able to upgrade from the 
prior major release.

This is a solvable problem.  Red Hat just doesn’t want to solve it.  Why?

The upgrade doesn’t have to be perfect.  It could break everything except the 
filesystem and SSH and still allow manual recovery.  Even in that extreme, 
you’re still no worse off than today, where you have to migrate everything by 
hand.

It is actually an uncommonly good time to make such a tool, with the shift to 
systemd behind us.  Unit files are far less likely to cause problems in an 
automatic upgrade than Bourne shell scripts that source piles of other Bourne 
shell scripts.  An automatic upgrade from RHEL 7 to RHEL 8 should be much safer 
than RHEL 5 to RHEL 6.

Another big shift also plays into this: VMs everywhere.

In the past, an automatic major OS version upgrade wasn’t as useful because by 
the time you wanted to do a major OS upgrade, the hardware was ready to be 
replaced, too.  RHEL’s policy of keeping the past two major versions under 
support helped, a lot: if the hardware is still doing what you need it to, you 
could skip a major version,  after which the hardware is probably about ready 
to fall over, if only because the CPU fan is about to seize up.

In that world, you could do the OS upgrade and the hardware upgrade together, 
since you need to migrate the data and services over manually anyway.

VMs are changing that.  The longer that shift continues, the bigger a problem 
this missing feature will cause for EL shops.

And that probably takes us to the real reason Red Hat doesn’t want to solve 
this problem: the requirement to support automatic major version migration 
wouldn’t have allowed them to throw Xen into RHEL 6 and then pull it right back 
out for RHEL 7.  I think Red Hat *wants* the freedom to break core OS 
facilities between major versions.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS-announce] CEBA-2016:1024 CentOS 5 kernel BugFix Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2016:1024 

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2016-1024.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) 

i386:
e21333e5147902b2e6ac2b21ab7102ea36a883a25376cfab7f13a173974cd08c  
kernel-2.6.18-410.el5.i686.rpm
234ed889efed1ccac7319ca9ea536917eb8bebb70a9b862c683a993afa997778  
kernel-debug-2.6.18-410.el5.i686.rpm
7137d4acd8e588d35f8476fefe106e95f53b4c43867f3c27d904f4685e74c1c1  
kernel-debug-devel-2.6.18-410.el5.i686.rpm
c4ad98d530a86f26279ea80ccb77c3032f81cf566a54cf6a6d1e19f0fb3c9723  
kernel-devel-2.6.18-410.el5.i686.rpm
304092640b7c4f9311c6cc27453c28c32516dc29e9024edaea35bb5546f2e7ae  
kernel-doc-2.6.18-410.el5.noarch.rpm
58dcfdffd8b8dddb6ad204a6a3bd79ebf8ecea53cf12f22e6b2da6880332afeb  
kernel-headers-2.6.18-410.el5.i386.rpm
ca1d5a7fe86af1d2b8ff1532112c307e4bd06d8d7c0494fff54109e352c1e2a9  
kernel-PAE-2.6.18-410.el5.i686.rpm
0a5c2bc78da5244e1066b40d326e887d5209d9e8f4c2436f9a84228907871125  
kernel-PAE-devel-2.6.18-410.el5.i686.rpm
199ec6dfa92f5ca778c07f8207c8a8e3115196d903f5418dfda55c306bbcd941  
kernel-xen-2.6.18-410.el5.i686.rpm
eef410ce2a225688beb24b95610fdb5daf63aab030712825d6030447c1f9bc31  
kernel-xen-devel-2.6.18-410.el5.i686.rpm

x86_64:
8a73befd4fdd7242d0ebd0d6dd6509289e2372f6f3571366fa7f93f29355bf98  
kernel-2.6.18-410.el5.x86_64.rpm
b766ff2c1e3ebe9e59de3c8c965e4e9322371f0405d52bf301e2255e442972d7  
kernel-debug-2.6.18-410.el5.x86_64.rpm
b0fa14014fe9ff9dd0951450c3ee325c1b6af2cb39ffdb357752ca22d08ebcf6  
kernel-debug-devel-2.6.18-410.el5.x86_64.rpm
81a8451290fe0e7dfaf57f00128965f73ea8dec1005cd4cc7c09b011a7d313ec  
kernel-devel-2.6.18-410.el5.x86_64.rpm
304092640b7c4f9311c6cc27453c28c32516dc29e9024edaea35bb5546f2e7ae  
kernel-doc-2.6.18-410.el5.noarch.rpm
2c6b31ab671e234557f538f300a0f41055277cd68774a298e1647d4c022d35ec  
kernel-headers-2.6.18-410.el5.x86_64.rpm
8a34a520288918670ded8b109d0a1b3b0e7ecb9c2f8da2576c5212dd18448af2  
kernel-xen-2.6.18-410.el5.x86_64.rpm
f5687120f37a3b8619029c0454a1334e7e6e88c2107912edb343f2b0b2f8d1a9  
kernel-xen-devel-2.6.18-410.el5.x86_64.rpm

Source:
ac407137307e919622acb07705f4b42189bd75fc66c1ca29b558102a07842a4a  
kernel-2.6.18-410.el5.src.rpm



-- 
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
Twitter: JohnnyCentOS

___
CentOS-announce mailing list
CentOS-announce@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 as DNS-Server

[Александр Кириллов]

how can I influence the time between the .jnl file is created/updated
and the zone file is updated?
more than 10 minutes is quite a bit long ...


AFAIK rndc freeze/thaw  will do that but you may try other rndc 
commands too.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 135, Issue 5

[centos-announce-request]

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to
centos-annou...@centos.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
centos-announce-requ...@centos.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
centos-announce-ow...@centos.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. CEBA-2016:1008  CentOS 5 sos BugFix Update (Johnny Hughes)
   2. CEBA-2016:1009  CentOS 5 firefox BugFix Update (Johnny Hughes)


--

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 05:00:22 +
From: Johnny Hughes 
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2016:1008  CentOS 5 sos BugFix Update
Message-ID: <20160511050022.ga13...@chakra.karan.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2016:1008 

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2016-1008.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) 

i386:
a475b5d668e11fdedb198fce3b0c7acb44fc6792cfe2b476582827c10235bfde  
sos-1.7-9.74.el5.centos.noarch.rpm

x86_64:
a475b5d668e11fdedb198fce3b0c7acb44fc6792cfe2b476582827c10235bfde  
sos-1.7-9.74.el5.centos.noarch.rpm

Source:
a241963fe6488483dc6c0f6bd811a1a6e7eb9ab44683430341aa439855fa52be  
sos-1.7-9.74.el5.centos.src.rpm



-- 
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
Twitter: JohnnyCentOS



--

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 05:08:38 +
From: Johnny Hughes 
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2016:1009  CentOS 5 firefox BugFix
Update
Message-ID: <20160511050838.ga14...@chakra.karan.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2016:1009 

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2016-1009.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) 

i386:
8a1b5a12cc396b85b2bb8022acc81358366d4a24b6d819ad887478f4b3aad972  
firefox-45.1.1-1.el5.centos.i386.rpm

x86_64:
8a1b5a12cc396b85b2bb8022acc81358366d4a24b6d819ad887478f4b3aad972  
firefox-45.1.1-1.el5.centos.i386.rpm
7cc5b5f1ba36683f7f8b2c04ffaf7151aec3212356d708a852c531b42b6dcf3a  
firefox-45.1.1-1.el5.centos.x86_64.rpm

Source:
2d374e8d6925993a0c43346ab99b73ab7265e334326237318249adacbdade2c4  
firefox-45.1.1-1.el5.centos.src.rpm



-- 
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
Twitter: JohnnyCentOS



--

___
CentOS-announce mailing list
centos-annou...@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce


End of CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 135, Issue 5
***
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Badlock bad luck

[Mogens Kjaer]

On 05/11/2016 11:39 AM, Philippe BOURDEU d'AGUERRE wrote:

Workaround with smb.conf parameters given here seems to work but it
works only for accounts already existing in the domain.

New accounts get a "There are currently no logon servers available to
service the logon" message.

I have downgraded :-(


So have I.

Mogens

--
Mogens Kjaer, m...@lemo.dk
http://www.lemo.dk
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] OT: Linksys router misbehaviour

[Timothy Murphy]

I'm running a Linksys WRT54GL router from my CentOS-7 home server.
Every now and then (maybe once every 2 days) the router's WiFi cuts out,
and I've found no way to solve this except to disconnect the power
from the router, wait 10 seconds and then re-connect.
This always works.
The router is running under dd-wrt.

My question is - which makes it a tiny bit CentOS-related -
does anyone with such a router know of a way
to wake the router up in such a case through the computer?

I wouldn't have dared to ask this question here or anywhere
until recently, as I assumed my ancient Linksys routers were obsolete.
But I've been reading posts recently saying that
there hasn't really been a Linux router to replace the WRT54GL,
and in particular Linksys's recent 11n replacement
is not as good as the old model in many ways.

Anyway, if anyone has an answer to my query I would be very grateful.

I have a couple of IP cameras working by WiFi on the computer,
which I can look at remotely.
I've connected one by TP-Link through the router,
and this doesn't cut out, but it is not wholly satisfactory.

-- 
Timothy Murphy  
gayleard /at/ eircom.net
School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Badlock bad luck

[Philippe BOURDEU d'AGUERRE]

Another follow up.

I have a Centos 6 server running as a Samba NT4/PDC Domain controller 
and have seen the regression with 3.6.23-30 release.


Client is a Windows 2008R2 server.

Workaround with smb.conf parameters given here seems to work but it 
works only for accounts already existing in the domain.


New accounts get a "There are currently no logon servers available to 
service the logon" message.


I have downgraded :-(

Le 19/04/2016 16:20, Bill Baird a écrit :

Just to follow up, the fix for us was to add "client ipc signing = auto" to
our smb.conf configuration file.


--
Philippe BOURDEU d'AGUERRE
AIME - Campus de l'INSA http://www.aime-toulouse.fr/
135 av. de Rangueil Tél +33 561 559 885
31077 TOULOUSE Cedex 4 - FRANCE Fax +33 561 559 870
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] test builds on mesa

[Andreas Benzler]

Correct my self:

libdrm version is 2.6.8

mesa 11.2 needs libdrm < 2.6.6, can be compile with the centos private-llvm 
3.6.1
mesa 11.1 libdrm < 2.6.1  

mesa 10.6.9 can build without  external upgrades.

Rebuild mesa, only needs cms4all-drivers.
If you are use wine, you need it twice x86_64 and i686

Sincerely

Andy
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Unexpected behavior of 'yum group list' and 'yum group install'

[Nicolas Kovacs]

Le 11/05/2016 09:37, Nicolas Kovacs a écrit :
> 9. As you can guess, the expected behavior was for Yum to *not* display
> the "Core" and "Base" groups as "Installed Groups" as soon as there was
> some stuff (if not downright all packages from the group) missing.
> 
> Any suggestions on this?

I'll answer this myself, since I just found the solution.

# yum group mark remove "Core"
# yum group mark remove "Base"

Follow-up question on this. Is there a way to 'group mark remove' all
package groups in one go? I checked for wildcards, but couldn't find
anything.

Cheers,

Niki

-- 
Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables
7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat
Web  : http://www.microlinux.fr
Mail : i...@microlinux.fr
Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Upgrade path from CentOS 7 to future versions

[Liam O'Toole]

On 2016-05-10, Valeri Galtsev
 wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 3:57 pm, Liam O'Toole wrote:
>> On 2016-05-10, Valeri Galtsev
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> 1. Debian (and clones): you keep the components of the system pretty
>>> much on the level of latest release of each of components. Therefore
>>> "upgrade" to new release of the system is pretty close to just a
>>> regular routine update.
>>
>> You are describing Debian sid/unstable, which is contunuously
>> updated, and where there are no releases in the usual sense of the
>> word. Debian stable releases are a different matter, and correspond
>> very closely to major releases of RHEL/CentOS. There is always an
>> upgrade path between consecutive releases of Debian stable.
>>
>
> Yes, LTS, thanks Liam. Only LTS has life cycle of mere 2 years,
> whereas RHEL (hence CentOS) is what, 10 years? I was pretty sure
> Debian does not backport patches (of Linuxes no one except RH, as far
> as I know). How do they do it with LTS? Do they just freeze major
> version, no matter what (it is only 2 years the need)?

Others have complained that this is not the place for an extended
discussion on Debian, so I'll just direct you here:

https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/

If you have any questions, I suggest you post them to debian-user. I am
subscribed to that list, and will be happy to resume the conversation
there.

-- 

Liam


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Unexpected behavior of 'yum group list' and 'yum group install'

[Nicolas Kovacs]

Hi,

I'm currently experimenting with Yum on a fresh CentOS 7 minimal
install, and I'm getting some puzzling results. Here's what I did.

1. Install CentOS 7 from the Minimal CD.

2. Install 'deltarpm' and update all packages.

3. Install the "Core" package group: 'yum group install "Core"'

4. Install the "Base" package group: 'yum group install "Base"'

5. As expected, 'yum group list hidden | less' shows this:

 ...
 Installed Groups:
Base
Core
 ...

6. Now I remove manually all packages that were not present in the
initial installation. I'm doing this using a script, which is supposed
to get the system back to its pristine state. Various tests with 'rpm
-qa --queryformat '%{NAME}\n' | sort > packagelist.txt' show me that
this worked.

7. For mysterious reasons, 'yum group list hidden | less' still shows:

 ...
 Installed Groups:
Base
Core
 ...

8. When I try to reinstall the "Core" and/or the "Base" groups using
'yum group install "", I get the following result:

# yum group install "Core"
Loaded plugins: fastestmirror
Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
 * base: ftp.pasteur.fr
 * extras: mir01.syntis.net
 * updates: ftp.pasteur.fr
Maybe run: yum groups mark install (see man yum)
No packages in any requested group available to install or update

9. As you can guess, the expected behavior was for Yum to *not* display
the "Core" and "Base" groups as "Installed Groups" as soon as there was
some stuff (if not downright all packages from the group) missing.

Any suggestions on this?

Cheers from the rainy South of France,

Niki

PS: you may wonder why I'm doing this. I may have to manage a situation
where I have to deal with CentOS 7 installations that would first have
to be pruned down without reinstalling everything.

-- 
Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables
7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat
Web  : http://www.microlinux.fr
Mail : i...@microlinux.fr
Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos