Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8 Stream: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly

[Nicolas Kovacs]

Le 10/12/2020 à 00:51, Joshua Kramer a écrit :
> There have been hundreds of other messages that describe exactly what
> RedHat loses in this deal so I won't go into that here.  But branding
> oneself as a "bad faith actor" is usually a terrible way to try to
> pick up a little bit of subscription revenue.  In the end it's going
> to be a losing scenario.  This is an absolutely UNMITIGATED DISASTER
> from a marketing and community goodwill standpoint.

Reactions from competent sources all over the world are downright negative.

https://linuxfr.org/news/centos-se-saborde-t-elle

https://kofler.info/nachruf-auf-centos/

And this petition launched a bit more than a day ago already counts 3500
signatures (and growing fast):

https://www.change.org/p/centos-governing-board-do-not-destroy-centos-by-using-it-as-a-rhel-upstream

If I was a CentOS developer or a Red Hat employee, a mere glance at the
comments would inform me that I've just made a disastrous decision. Even if
there *may* be *some* technical merits to it.

Cheers,

Niki

-- 
Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables
7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat
Site : https://www.microlinux.fr
Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr
Mail : i...@microlinux.fr
Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32
Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8 Stream: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly

[Nicolas Kovacs]

Le 10/12/2020 à 00:51, Joshua Kramer a écrit :
> After reading and digesting a ton of community chatter about the
> recent CentOS announcement I've come to the conclusion that there's a
> lot of good about this, but there are also a lot of concerns that are
> being ignored.  And nobody so far has stared directly into the eyes of
> the elephant in the room.  So here goes.
> 
> The Good: From a technical perspective- both in the sense of "getting
> newer software" and "technical community being more involved in
> bugfixes, etc"- having *a version* of CentOS called "AppStream" is
> fantastic. The various RedHat and CentOS folks who have been extolling
> these virtues in blog posts and twitter feeds are right-on.  But from
> responses I've seen, it appears to me that they think that these
> virtues are enough to completely gloss over the complete and utter
> clusterfrackas they've caused.
> 
> The Bad: No point releases.  There is POSITIVELY NO* REASON that they
> can't have AppSream and still do point releases.  Brand new stuff
> would go into AppStream, at some point they do a point release of
> RHEL, then follow the normal CentOS procedure to spin a CentOS build
> of that point release.  This is already a tried and true process.  It
> will cost RedHat all of what, low five digits (if that) in developer
> salary to do this.  Heck I'm sure some volunteers would step up to use
> the existing infrastructure if RedHat didn't want to spend any paid
> developer time on this.
> 
> The Ugly: I denoted "NO* REASON" above because there actually *are*
> reasons that we are not privy to.
> https://twitter.com/JoshuaPKr/status/1336744681716244480  Since RedHat
> is not being transparent with this, we are forced to speculate and
> remain bewildered at why they would make a decision that is going to
> cost them so much in the long run.  The most common (and most likely)
> theory is that some MBA somewhere in middle management saw all of this
> CentOS being used in production environments (and otherwise downloaded
> for free), and had the idea that if CentOS had its head cut off people
> would just buy RHEL subscriptions.
> 
> That may happen in a few cases, but for the most part, that is NOT
> what is going to happen.  By handling the CentOS situation in this
> way, RedHat has branded itself as a company that acts in bad faith. If
> a company acts in bad faith towards a community where non-monetary
> value is exchanged, WHY would you trust that company to hold up its
> obligations for contracts that are actually paid?  People are going to
> do whatever they can to get away from RedHat.  Debian, Ubuntu, SuSE
> will all benefit from this.  Even in cases where non-profits and other
> similar clients "contact RedHat about options because Stream won't
> meet their needs"- why would such entities have ANY reason to trust
> anything that RedHat says to them?
> 
> There have been hundreds of other messages that describe exactly what
> RedHat loses in this deal so I won't go into that here.  But branding
> oneself as a "bad faith actor" is usually a terrible way to try to
> pick up a little bit of subscription revenue.  In the end it's going
> to be a losing scenario.  This is an absolutely UNMITIGATED DISASTER
> from a marketing and community goodwill standpoint.
> 
> It can, however, be mitigated if RedHat backtracks, admits their
> mistake, and affirmatively commits to support future CentOS point
> releases.  I'll be interested to see how this turns out.

+1

Spot on.

Thank you for voicing all our concerns in such an articulate manner.

https://twitter.com/microlinux_eu/status/1336765811860574209

:o)

-- 
Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables
7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat
Site : https://www.microlinux.fr
Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr
Mail : i...@microlinux.fr
Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32
Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 6:07 PM Lamar Owen  wrote:

> On 12/9/20 12:10 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> > While I'm not sure how we'll get there, it seems like the
> > mutually satisfying end result would be one where third party binary
> > drivers work with CentOS Stream kernels.  Let's see what we can do.
> >
> So, I want to address this part a bit.  In MANY cases, it's not a
> third-party driver that ELrepo packages; it's an in-kernel driver that
> Red Hat has decided to disable.  Such as the megaraid_sas driver I need
> for my servers.
>

Ah yes, that's a great call-out.  I'm not sure what the plan is there (or
if there is one), but to me it seems like the sort of thing a SIG would
build.

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / Linux Project Lead / Red Hat, Inc.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8 Stream: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly

[Jon Pruente]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 5:51 PM Joshua Kramer 
wrote:

> CentOS called "AppStream"
>

There is no version of CentOS called AppStream. AppStream is a repository
inside of 8 (
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/8/html/installing_managing_and_removing_user-space_components/using-appstream_using-appstream
). The project is called CentOS Stream. The naming collision was an
entirely avoidable circumstance, but so was this whole debacle of the past
couple of days.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Setting up NIS on Centos 8

[Gordon Messmer]

On 12/9/20 6:06 PM, Mark LaPierre wrote:
Okay, say I decide to go with LDAP and NFS.  I'll be needing some hand 
holding to get it set up.



If you don't have a very good reason to do choose something else, then 
use FreeIPA for your LDAP/Kerberos service.  It's very streamlined.


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

Re: [CentOS] Learning to build applications

[H]

On 12/09/2020 09:48 PM, H wrote:
> On 12/09/2020 09:43 PM, H wrote:
>> On 11/18/2020 11:19 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
>>> On 11/18/20 4:38 PM, H wrote:
 I am a beginner when it comes to compiling applications and would 
 appreciate suggestion how to fix the above. Thank you.
>>> Looks like a build failure that was mentioned here:
>>> https://github.com/pgmodeler/pgmodeler/issues/1259
>>>
>>> I believe this reply is relevant:
>>> "It's not yet documented but you have to use the latest Qt version 5.11 or 
>>> 5.12 and have C++14 enabled on your compiler. Make sure to use at least gcc 
>>> 5.0 to get full support to C++14."
>>>
>>> I believe CentOS 7 includes Qt 5.9, so I wouldn't expect this application 
>>> to build, there.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> CentOS mailing list
>>> CentOS@centos.org
>>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>> Hi, I am back looking at this again and you are right. I had installed 
>> qt-qtsvg-devel-5.9.7 on my CentOS 7 system and per pkgs.org it seems that is 
>> the last version available as a download for CentOS 7. CentOS 8, on the 
>> other hand, seems to have 5.12.
>>
>> I just found https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/supported-platforms.html and it suggests 
>> that Qt 5.15 can be compiled for RHEL 7.6 using gcc 5.3.1 via devtoolset-4.
>>
>> Perhaps someone on this mailing list has been successful in compiling Qt 
>> 5.11 or later for CentOS 7.x?
>>
> Just tried to download devtoolset-4 from SCL but it failed. Found by 
> experimenting that devtoolset-7 through -10 are available.
>
> I am installing the latter in the hope that it will be the latest and the 
> bestest...
>
Sorry, meant that devtoolset-9 is the latest, not -10, so I installed the 
former.

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

Re: [CentOS] Learning to build applications

[H]

On 12/09/2020 09:43 PM, H wrote:
> On 11/18/2020 11:19 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
>> On 11/18/20 4:38 PM, H wrote:
>>> I am a beginner when it comes to compiling applications and would 
>>> appreciate suggestion how to fix the above. Thank you.
>>
>> Looks like a build failure that was mentioned here:
>> https://github.com/pgmodeler/pgmodeler/issues/1259
>>
>> I believe this reply is relevant:
>> "It's not yet documented but you have to use the latest Qt version 5.11 or 
>> 5.12 and have C++14 enabled on your compiler. Make sure to use at least gcc 
>> 5.0 to get full support to C++14."
>>
>> I believe CentOS 7 includes Qt 5.9, so I wouldn't expect this application to 
>> build, there.
>>
>> ___
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS@centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> Hi, I am back looking at this again and you are right. I had installed 
> qt-qtsvg-devel-5.9.7 on my CentOS 7 system and per pkgs.org it seems that is 
> the last version available as a download for CentOS 7. CentOS 8, on the other 
> hand, seems to have 5.12.
>
> I just found https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/supported-platforms.html and it suggests 
> that Qt 5.15 can be compiled for RHEL 7.6 using gcc 5.3.1 via devtoolset-4.
>
> Perhaps someone on this mailing list has been successful in compiling Qt 5.11 
> or later for CentOS 7.x?
>
Just tried to download devtoolset-4 from SCL but it failed. Found by 
experimenting that devtoolset-7 through -10 are available.

I am installing the latter in the hope that it will be the latest and the 
bestest...

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

Re: [CentOS] Learning to build applications

[H]

On 11/18/2020 11:19 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 11/18/20 4:38 PM, H wrote:
>> I am a beginner when it comes to compiling applications and would appreciate 
>> suggestion how to fix the above. Thank you.
>
>
> Looks like a build failure that was mentioned here:
> https://github.com/pgmodeler/pgmodeler/issues/1259
>
> I believe this reply is relevant:
> "It's not yet documented but you have to use the latest Qt version 5.11 or 
> 5.12 and have C++14 enabled on your compiler. Make sure to use at least gcc 
> 5.0 to get full support to C++14."
>
> I believe CentOS 7 includes Qt 5.9, so I wouldn't expect this application to 
> build, there.
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Hi, I am back looking at this again and you are right. I had installed 
qt-qtsvg-devel-5.9.7 on my CentOS 7 system and per pkgs.org it seems that is 
the last version available as a download for CentOS 7. CentOS 8, on the other 
hand, seems to have 5.12.

I just found https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/supported-platforms.html and it suggests 
that Qt 5.15 can be compiled for RHEL 7.6 using gcc 5.3.1 via devtoolset-4.

Perhaps someone on this mailing list has been successful in compiling Qt 5.11 
or later for CentOS 7.x?

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

[CentOS] ContOS 8 is dead. Viva Rocky Linux!

[Lists]

The list is swamped with news about CentOS 8 dying in a year and becoming 
stream Linux. 

IWeve been here before, folks. I remember when Red Hat Linux disappeared to 
become the Feodra / Red Hat Enterprise we know today, which gave birth to 
White Box Enterprise Linux, Scientific Linux, and CentOS. 

WBEL and SL slowly faded and CentOS won out. 

And then CentOS, eventually folding into RedHat, promised everyone that it had 
the support of Red Hat - now part of IBM. 

Well, now we're back to the big announcement: Red Hat (IBM) is going to mix it 
up again. 

And now, as before, come the clones: Rocky Linux has been announced... 
https://www.reddit.com/r/RockyLinux/comments/ka0qlv/
meet_rocky_linux_new_rhel_fork_by_the_original/

If history is any guide, you'll change a line somewhere in /etc/yum.d and then 
run yum update to switch over. That's how I switched from WBEL to SL to 
CentOS, way back in CentOS 3 or 4 days. (I don't even remember which one 
anymore) 

The more things change, the more they stay exactly the same... 

Ben 

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Akemi Yagi]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 6:07 PM Lamar Owen  wrote:
>
> On 12/9/20 12:10 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> > While I'm not sure how we'll get there, it seems like the
> > mutually satisfying end result would be one where third party binary
> > drivers work with CentOS Stream kernels.  Let's see what we can do.
> >
> So, I want to address this part a bit.  In MANY cases, it's not a
> third-party driver that ELrepo packages; it's an in-kernel driver that
> Red Hat has decided to disable.  Such as the megaraid_sas driver I need
> for my servers.

And just to give you some more examples -- ELRepo offers DUD (driver
update disk) images for the devices whose support has been dropped in
RHEL 8:

https://elrepo.org/linux/dud/el8/x86_64/

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

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Lists]

On Tuesday, December 8, 2020 6:32:00 AM PST Phelps, Matthew wrote:
> This is really, really bad for the majority of us using CentOS.
> 
> Is there any way we can lobby for the reversal of this decision? Remember
> that the -devel mailing list, and IRC channels *do not* represent the vast
> majority of CentOS users. Most of us are just sysadmins trying to keep our
> systems that have been using CentOS for many, many years running and our
> procedures for installing, and patching systems working after whatever
> changes have been mysteriously decided upon, and forced on us.
> 
> We will be forced to look at other distributions now; and forced to do a
> ton of unnecessary work to deal with this.
> 
> Thanks a lot.
> 
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 9:06 AM Rich Bowen  wrote:
> > The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next
> > year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat
> > Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a
> > current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will end
> > at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving as
> > the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
> > 
> > Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS Linux
> > 7, and we’ll continue to produce that version through the remainder of
> > the RHEL 7 life cycle.
> > https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates
> > 
> > CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in
> > collaboration among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This
> > ensures SIGs are developing and testing against what becomes the next
> > version of RHEL. This also provides SIGs a clear single goal, rather
> > than having to build and test for two releases. It gives the CentOS
> > contributor community a great deal of influence in the future of RHEL.
> > And it removes confusion around what “CentOS” means in the Linux
> > distribution ecosystem.
> > 
> > When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option will
> > be to migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from CentOS
> > Linux 8, and has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux releases.
> > If you are using CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are
> > concerned that CentOS Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage you
> > to contact Red Hat about options.
> > 
> > We have an FAQ - https://centos.org/distro-faq/ - to help with your
> > information and planning needs, as you figure out how this shift of
> > project focus might affect you.

Maybe, maybe not. 

Take a look at Rocky Linux 
https://www.reddit.com/r/RockyLinux/comments/ka0qlv/
meet_rocky_linux_new_rhel_fork_by_the_original/




signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Lamar Owen]

On 12/9/20 12:10 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:

While I'm not sure how we'll get there, it seems like the
mutually satisfying end result would be one where third party binary
drivers work with CentOS Stream kernels.  Let's see what we can do.

So, I want to address this part a bit.  In MANY cases, it's not a 
third-party driver that ELrepo packages; it's an in-kernel driver that 
Red Hat has decided to disable.  Such as the megaraid_sas driver I need 
for my servers.



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

Re: [CentOS] Setting up NIS on Centos 8

[Mark LaPierre]

On 12/6/20 11:21 AM, Pete Biggs wrote:


I found this:

https://www.server-world.info/en/note?os=CentOS_8=nis=1

I've been told in the past that NIS should not be used because of some
supposed security issues.

Can someone site any authoritative documentation concerning the security
issues extant in NIS?


There's a lot of documentation out there. Basically YP/NIS transmits
everything over the network in plain text, including password hashes.
combined with no authentication/authorisation mechanism, out of the box
NIS will give your password hashes to anyone who asks for them. Clearly
once a username/password hash has been discovered, it's only a matter
of time before a password is found.

NIS+ is very different in that it is much more security aware, but
consequently much more complex.


My plan is to set up NIS and NFS on my home network server where I plan
to host all the local home network /home directories.  I'll use
automount on all the other nodes to mount up the home directories when a
user logs on.


If you have a fully private network, then the security issues are not
so bad. It still has its place in things like clusters, but even then
it is being superseded by LDAP.  If you are setting up a system from
scratch, then you really should be looking at using LDAP, it's not that
difficult and there are plenty of tools around to help you manage it
all.

P.


Okay, say I decide to go with LDAP and NFS.  I'll be needing some hand 
holding to get it set up.  Are you willing to walk me through this?


I tried to set up 389 a while ago but ran into the nobody/nobody problem 
on the client computer that I could not solve.  No help arrived then.  I 
don't want a repeat of that.



--
_
   °v°
  /(_)\
   ^ ^
 Mark LaPierre

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

Re: [CentOS] Missing intel/sof/sof-cml.ri for CentOS 8.3

[Scott Robbins]

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 11:43:53PM +0100, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> Report from ElRepo guys is that every single driver they maintain is
> broken between 8.2 and 8.3, there was change i kABI.
> 
> Contact ElRepo for help/explanation or report a bug in CentOS bugzila.

I have to say that at least for me, so, far, after converting to Stream,
and then doing what seems to be a large update, ElRepo's NVidia driver is
working for me. I don't know if I'm lucky, or if this is going to echo the
experience for most people.


-- 
Scott Robbins
PGP keyID EB3467D6
( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6

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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8 Stream: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly

[Keith Christian]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020, 16:51 Joshua Kramer  wrote:

> Hello All-
>
> After reading and digesting a ton of community chatter about the
> recent CentOS announcement I've come to the conclusion that there's a
> lot of good about this, but there are also a lot of concerns that are
> being ignored.  And nobody so far has stared directly into the eyes of
> the elephant in the room.  So here goes.
>
> The Good: From a technical perspective- both in the sense of "getting
> newer software" and "technical community being more involved in
> bugfixes, etc"- having *a version* of CentOS called "AppStream" is
> fantastic. The various RedHat and CentOS folks who have been extolling
> these virtues in blog posts and twitter feeds are right-on.  But from
> responses I've seen, it appears to me that they think that these
> virtues are enough to completely gloss over the complete and utter
> clusterfrackas they've caused.
>
> The Bad: No point releases.  There is POSITIVELY NO* REASON that they
> can't have AppSream and still do point releases.  Brand new stuff
> would go into AppStream, at some point they do a point release of
> RHEL, then follow the normal CentOS procedure to spin a CentOS build
> of that point release.  This is already a tried and true process.  It
> will cost RedHat all of what, low five digits (if that) in developer
> salary to do this.  Heck I'm sure some volunteers would step up to use
> the existing infrastructure if RedHat didn't want to spend any paid
> developer time on this.
>
> The Ugly: I denoted "NO* REASON" above because there actually *are*
> reasons that we are not privy to.
> https://twitter.com/JoshuaPKr/status/1336744681716244480  Since RedHat
> is not being transparent with this, we are forced to speculate and
> remain bewildered at why they would make a decision that is going to
> cost them so much in the long run.  The most common (and most likely)
> theory is that some MBA somewhere in middle management saw all of this
> CentOS being used in production environments (and otherwise downloaded
> for free), and had the idea that if CentOS had its head cut off people
> would just buy RHEL subscriptions.
>
> That may happen in a few cases, but for the most part, that is NOT
> what is going to happen.  By handling the CentOS situation in this
> way, RedHat has branded itself as a company that acts in bad faith. If
> a company acts in bad faith towards a community where non-monetary
> value is exchanged, WHY would you trust that company to hold up its
> obligations for contracts that are actually paid?  People are going to
> do whatever they can to get away from RedHat.  Debian, Ubuntu, SuSE
> will all benefit from this.  Even in cases where non-profits and other
> similar clients "contact RedHat about options because Stream won't
> meet their needs"- why would such entities have ANY reason to trust
> anything that RedHat says to them?
>
> There have been hundreds of other messages that describe exactly what
> RedHat loses in this deal so I won't go into that here.  But branding
> oneself as a "bad faith actor" is usually a terrible way to try to
> pick up a little bit of subscription revenue.  In the end it's going
> to be a losing scenario.  This is an absolutely UNMITIGATED DISASTER
> from a marketing and community goodwill standpoint.
>
> It can, however, be mitigated if RedHat backtracks, admits their
> mistake, and affirmatively commits to support future CentOS point
> releases.  I'll be interested to see how this turns out.
>
> --JK



Well said, Joshua!

Very articulate!

RedHat is making a mistake, unless the higher-ups at IBM are driving this,
but who knows?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] CentOS 8 Stream: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly

[Joshua Kramer]

Hello All-

After reading and digesting a ton of community chatter about the
recent CentOS announcement I've come to the conclusion that there's a
lot of good about this, but there are also a lot of concerns that are
being ignored.  And nobody so far has stared directly into the eyes of
the elephant in the room.  So here goes.

The Good: From a technical perspective- both in the sense of "getting
newer software" and "technical community being more involved in
bugfixes, etc"- having *a version* of CentOS called "AppStream" is
fantastic. The various RedHat and CentOS folks who have been extolling
these virtues in blog posts and twitter feeds are right-on.  But from
responses I've seen, it appears to me that they think that these
virtues are enough to completely gloss over the complete and utter
clusterfrackas they've caused.

The Bad: No point releases.  There is POSITIVELY NO* REASON that they
can't have AppSream and still do point releases.  Brand new stuff
would go into AppStream, at some point they do a point release of
RHEL, then follow the normal CentOS procedure to spin a CentOS build
of that point release.  This is already a tried and true process.  It
will cost RedHat all of what, low five digits (if that) in developer
salary to do this.  Heck I'm sure some volunteers would step up to use
the existing infrastructure if RedHat didn't want to spend any paid
developer time on this.

The Ugly: I denoted "NO* REASON" above because there actually *are*
reasons that we are not privy to.
https://twitter.com/JoshuaPKr/status/1336744681716244480  Since RedHat
is not being transparent with this, we are forced to speculate and
remain bewildered at why they would make a decision that is going to
cost them so much in the long run.  The most common (and most likely)
theory is that some MBA somewhere in middle management saw all of this
CentOS being used in production environments (and otherwise downloaded
for free), and had the idea that if CentOS had its head cut off people
would just buy RHEL subscriptions.

That may happen in a few cases, but for the most part, that is NOT
what is going to happen.  By handling the CentOS situation in this
way, RedHat has branded itself as a company that acts in bad faith. If
a company acts in bad faith towards a community where non-monetary
value is exchanged, WHY would you trust that company to hold up its
obligations for contracts that are actually paid?  People are going to
do whatever they can to get away from RedHat.  Debian, Ubuntu, SuSE
will all benefit from this.  Even in cases where non-profits and other
similar clients "contact RedHat about options because Stream won't
meet their needs"- why would such entities have ANY reason to trust
anything that RedHat says to them?

There have been hundreds of other messages that describe exactly what
RedHat loses in this deal so I won't go into that here.  But branding
oneself as a "bad faith actor" is usually a terrible way to try to
pick up a little bit of subscription revenue.  In the end it's going
to be a losing scenario.  This is an absolutely UNMITIGATED DISASTER
from a marketing and community goodwill standpoint.

It can, however, be mitigated if RedHat backtracks, admits their
mistake, and affirmatively commits to support future CentOS point
releases.  I'll be interested to see how this turns out.

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

Re: [CentOS] Missing intel/sof/sof-cml.ri for CentOS 8.3

[Kay Schenk]

How disappointing. 
but thanks for the response...

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 2:44 PM Ljubomir Ljubojevic  wrote:

> Report from ElRepo guys is that every single driver they maintain is
> broken between 8.2 and 8.3, there was change i kABI.
>
> Contact ElRepo for help/explanation or report a bug in CentOS bugzila.
>
> On 12/9/20 11:06 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> > Hello all--
> > I recently did a bulk update from 8.2 to 8.3. I am having some odd issues
> > with it not recognizing my NVIDIA Quadro P1X00 graphics card properly. In
> > graphical mode, it only shows ONE display resolution and also my system
> can
> > not find firmware --
> > intel/sof/sof-cml.ri
> > Any idea about what to do flor either of these issues?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
>
>
> --
> Ljubomir Ljubojevic
> (Love is in the Air)
> PL Computers
> Serbia, Europe
>
> StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>


-- 
"Don't let anyone dull your sparkle."

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

Re: [CentOS] Missing intel/sof/sof-cml.ri for CentOS 8.3

[Ljubomir Ljubojevic]

Report from ElRepo guys is that every single driver they maintain is
broken between 8.2 and 8.3, there was change i kABI.

Contact ElRepo for help/explanation or report a bug in CentOS bugzila.

On 12/9/20 11:06 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> Hello all--
> I recently did a bulk update from 8.2 to 8.3. I am having some odd issues
> with it not recognizing my NVIDIA Quadro P1X00 graphics card properly. In
> graphical mode, it only shows ONE display resolution and also my system can
> not find firmware --
> intel/sof/sof-cml.ri
> Any idea about what to do flor either of these issues?
> 
> Thanks.
> 


-- 
Ljubomir Ljubojevic
(Love is in the Air)
PL Computers
Serbia, Europe

StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Moving to CentOS 8 Stream

[Alan Mead]

On 12/9/2020 1:43 PM, david wrote:
> CentOS Fans:
>
> I've spent hours yesterday and today reading the messages about the
> Centos 8 Stream, and expect to do it for the next few days also.  I
> would recommend that anyone contemplating some action, such as
> switching to a different distribution, advising your management to
> change, or similar, postpone that action for a while.  Let the dust
> settle, let the policy makers evaluate the comments, and watch for
> clarifications and/or modifications of the plan.
>
> For lack of a better date, I suggest waiting until the first business
> day of 2021 (Monday 04 January) before taking any significant actions.
>
> Personally, I've already invested some of my time incorporating CentOS
> 8.  I've also been working with Ubuntu since that seems to be the only
> way forward with Raspberry Pi and Apple/Intel machines, but I'll keep
> my CentOS 7/8 machines stable for this month at least.
>
> David

Agreed, time will tell. I, personally, think the technical quality of
streams is likely to be very high.

But I think that's the least concern. What we can decide today (without
putting much thought into it) is that we cannot rely upon CentOS to be
any particular thing. It's a brand and decisions will be made for us
about that brand by the people paying for the work, which is their
absolute right. But the "optics" of this look pretty bad. We've seen
distros perish, but they generally waste away from lack of interest.
Clearly, this isn't the case for CentOS.

I'm horrified by the people (none from CentOS, AFAICT) saying "CentOS
doesn't owe you [CentOS user] anything!" That's like saying my friend
doesn't owe me anything... Of course he doesn't, but it would be awfully
unfriendly of him to inform me that, going forward, I'm going to be
invoiced for our chats. If CentOS announced that it was too costly and
they needed donations, I'm sure people would be less distressed if
CentOS eventually died. This change seems far more mercenary. CentOS
doesn't "owe" me anything, but I don't "owe" the brand anything either
and I do have a strong preference for distros that seem free and
governed freely.

I really cannot get too excited that the CentOS brand will be even more
central to RHEL. I expect the new CentOS will be super-duper, but CentOS
as we knew it is being killed, and I'm sorry to see it go.

Someone has a petition to get CentOS to reconsider... What would it
matter if they do? Probably just in the velocity of people switching to
Oracle/Debian/Ubuntu/Windows/ETC? and in how fast some people switch to
streams or RHEL.

-Alan


-- 

Alan D. Mead, Ph.D.
President, Talent Algorithms Inc.

science + technology = better workers

http://www.alanmead.org

The irony of this ... is that the Internet is
both almost-infinitely expandable, while at the
same time constrained within its own pre-defined
box. And if that makes no sense to you, just
reflect on the existence of Facebook. We have
the vastness of the internet and yet billions
of people decided to spend most of them time
within a horribly designed, fake-news emporium
of a website that sucks every possible piece of
personal information out of you so it can sell it
to others. And they see nothing wrong with that.

-- Kieren McCarthy, commenting on why we are not 
all using IPv6

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

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 01:01:28PM -0600, Christopher Wensink wrote:
> Understanding the flow of packages, is it a fair comparison to say
> that moving forward:
> Fedora packages could be considered alpha/beta releases of apps
> Centos/Stream could be considered beta / Pre-release / Release
> candidates of packages / partially stable
> RHEL official releases would be considered final release / stable

I would say that everything is much higher quality than that. We release
whole non-beta releases of just Fedora.

But particularly, no, CentOS Stream isn't beta. Packages landing in Stream
have already passed QA and gating.

-- 
Matthew Miller

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

[CentOS] Missing intel/sof/sof-cml.ri for CentOS 8.3

[Kay Schenk]

Hello all--
I recently did a bulk update from 8.2 to 8.3. I am having some odd issues
with it not recognizing my NVIDIA Quadro P1X00 graphics card properly. In
graphical mode, it only shows ONE display resolution and also my system can
not find firmware --
intel/sof/sof-cml.ri
Any idea about what to do flor either of these issues?

Thanks.

-- 
"Don't let anyone dull your sparkle."

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

Re: [CentOS] dnf script to cherry pick updates and maintain RHEL compatibility

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 07:02:03PM +, James Pearson wrote:
> If there is going to be a no-cost RHEL that can be used in the same way as
> CentOS is used now, then I think that would solve all the problems with
> this CentOS Stream announcement ... and calm down things

There's not going to be a no-cost RHEL that can be used in all of the cases
where CentOS is used. But there will be options for a lot of cases. I want
to be very careful that I'm not overpromising here because 1) I'm not in the
business side of things so it isn't even something I can directly influence
let alone my call and 2) I do know that it really isn't all worked out yet
and won't be for a little bit. But, I do know that Red Hat actually cares
about these users and use cases.

-- 
Matthew Miller

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

Re: [CentOS] Stream questions

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/9/20 3:23 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 4:03 PM Johnny Hughes  wrote:
> 
>> On 12/9/20 1:06 PM, James Szinger wrote:
>>> I have a couple of questions about CentOS Stream.
>>>
>>> 1. Is there list for update announcements?  Something similar to
>>> upda...@fedoraproject.org.
>>>
>>> 2. Since both CentOS and EPEL are Red Hat projects, will Red Hat
>>> provide an EPEL version compatible with CentOS Stream?
>>>
>>
>> No list of updates per se .. there is this though:
>>
>> https://feeds.centos.org/
>>
>> If you add a specific file to an rss reader, you can see what changes.
>>
>> There will be an EPEL package set that is an overlay for stream, yes.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS@centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>>
> 
> 
> I have another question (really, just a technical question, not a tirade :)
> ):
> 
> How often will the images/ directory be updated when Stream is the only
> CentOS distro?
> 
> Specifically, we use PXE boot for installs and often new hardware
> necessitates moving to the latest point release of CentOS for the boot
> image. How often will this happen when there aren't point releases anymore?
> 
> Similarly, how often will the iso files be updated?
> 


Right now .. isos happen every compose.

As do install tree.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Moving to CentOS 8 Stream

[Ljubomir Ljubojevic]

TBD is only for ISO file. There is ISO for 8.1, just not for 8.2, and
there is even boot.iso for 8.2 for online install.

On 12/9/20 10:05 PM, Leon Fauster via CentOS wrote:
> Am 09.12.20 um 21:11 schrieb Ljubomir Ljubojevic:
>> Considering there is entire year until "CentOS Linux 8" is EOL, and few
>> years until "CentOS Linux 7" is eol, I agree there is no rush to switch.
>>
>> I will use next 12 months to test Springdale Linux (ex PUIAS Linux) and
>> wait and see what comes out of "Rocky Linux" startup that has started
>> today (they already have skeleton of the team assembled and are talking
>> about infrastructure) and if both of those fail to work out, last few
>> months of 2021 I will learn from colleagues about Debian.
> 
> As Springdale already a 8-branch? Website shows "TBD" ...
> 
> -- 
> Leon
> 
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


-- 
Ljubomir Ljubojevic
(Love is in the Air)
PL Computers
Serbia, Europe

StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Stream questions

[Phelps, Matthew]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 4:03 PM Johnny Hughes  wrote:

> On 12/9/20 1:06 PM, James Szinger wrote:
> > I have a couple of questions about CentOS Stream.
> >
> > 1. Is there list for update announcements?  Something similar to
> > upda...@fedoraproject.org.
> >
> > 2. Since both CentOS and EPEL are Red Hat projects, will Red Hat
> > provide an EPEL version compatible with CentOS Stream?
> >
>
> No list of updates per se .. there is this though:
>
> https://feeds.centos.org/
>
> If you add a specific file to an rss reader, you can see what changes.
>
> There will be an EPEL package set that is an overlay for stream, yes.
>
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>


I have another question (really, just a technical question, not a tirade :)
):

How often will the images/ directory be updated when Stream is the only
CentOS distro?

Specifically, we use PXE boot for installs and often new hardware
necessitates moving to the latest point release of CentOS for the boot
image. How often will this happen when there aren't point releases anymore?

Similarly, how often will the iso files be updated?


-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook  | Twitter
 | YouTube 
| Newsletter 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/9/20 12:55 PM, James Szinger wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:22:15 -0500
> Matthew Miller  wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:58:10AM -0600, Barry Brimer wrote:
>>> If the same happened in the previous question but was in a package
>>> or set of packages that was being rebased in 8.5 would it work the
>>> same way?  
>>
>> Hmmm. I'm not sure I understand you. There won't be a dump of 8.5
>> packages into Stream at some point. They will be updated there as
>> ready.
> 
> The scenario I imagine is this:
> 
> start out the same
> EL 8.4 foo-1.1.1-1
> stream-8   foo-1.1.1-1
> 
> update stream for EL 8.5
> 
> EL 8.4 foo-1.1.1-1
> stream-8   foo-1.2.0-1
> 
> CVE!
> 
> EL 8.4 foo-1.1.2-1
> stream-8   foo-1.2.1-1
> 
> Result: foo-1.1.2-1 is in EL but not stream.

Sure .. they only time things will match 100% is at point release time.
 All the packages in 8.4 will have at some point been in stream when
rhel 8.4 is released.

Packages in between point releases will not necessarily be in stream ..
but their equivalent will be.  It will have the CVE and/or bugfix .. it
will not likely be the exact same envr, but the one that will be in the
new point release.



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

Re: [CentOS] Moving to CentOS 8 Stream

[Leon Fauster via CentOS]

Am 09.12.20 um 21:11 schrieb Ljubomir Ljubojevic:

Considering there is entire year until "CentOS Linux 8" is EOL, and few
years until "CentOS Linux 7" is eol, I agree there is no rush to switch.

I will use next 12 months to test Springdale Linux (ex PUIAS Linux) and
wait and see what comes out of "Rocky Linux" startup that has started
today (they already have skeleton of the team assembled and are talking
about infrastructure) and if both of those fail to work out, last few
months of 2021 I will learn from colleagues about Debian.


As Springdale already a 8-branch? Website shows "TBD" ...

--
Leon

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

Re: [CentOS] Stream questions

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/9/20 1:06 PM, James Szinger wrote:
> I have a couple of questions about CentOS Stream.
> 
> 1. Is there list for update announcements?  Something similar to
> upda...@fedoraproject.org.
> 
> 2. Since both CentOS and EPEL are Red Hat projects, will Red Hat
> provide an EPEL version compatible with CentOS Stream?
> 

No list of updates per se .. there is this though:

https://feeds.centos.org/

If you add a specific file to an rss reader, you can see what changes.

There will be an EPEL package set that is an overlay for stream, yes.


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

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/9/20 1:01 PM, Christopher Wensink wrote:
> Understanding the flow of packages, is it a fair comparison to say that
> moving forward:
> Fedora packages could be considered alpha/beta releases of apps
> Centos/Stream could be considered beta / Pre-release / Release
> candidates of packages / partially stable
> RHEL official releases would be considered final release / stable
> 
> Where as before (done 12/2021)
> Fedora Packages would be beta / pre-release
> then RHEL and CentOS were final release / stable  - one with commercial
> support and the other with community only support.
> 
> Is that accurate?

I doubt very seriously that changes made for point releases are ever
considered beta quality ..

Do the packages added betweren RHEL 7.8 to 7.9 or from RHEL 8.2 to RHEL
8.3 differ so much?  Not really.  Look at the differences in the
packages.  For the most part .. except for some desktop rebases and the
kernels .. the  ABI/API stay the same.

There are some rebases of some packages, but not very many.

I keep trying to say .. no one is rolling in packages here straight from
a new Fedora version or from Rawhide.  These changes are point release
type changes.  That is the type of changes you see from 8.2 to 8.3 or
7.8 to 7.9 ... not major changes.

> 
> On 12/9/2020 12:54 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:40:22AM +, J Martin Rushton via CentOS
>> wrote:
>>> And exactly the same applies to senior (or retired) admins on their
>>> home computers.  My main home machine runs about a dozen testbed
>>> VMs, DHCP/DNS for the home network, Amanda, NFS and Samba for other
>>> machines, ownCloud, Apache, Zotero and DokuWiki for the family.  I
>>> want a stable server under that lot, not a beta release.
>> CentOS Stream will not be a "beta release". That's not how RHEL minor
>> release development works. I personally think that it's going to be
>> stellar
>> for your exact use case.
>>
> 

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

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] CentOS 8 future

[Leon Fauster via CentOS]

Am 09.12.20 um 20:28 schrieb Jon Pruente:
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 5:24 AM Leon Fauster via CentOS 
mailto:centos@centos.org>> wrote:


 > The relatively fewer that are on CentOS Linux 8 have some
decisions to
 > make.  The end of 2021 is sooner than they were expecting *but*
there is
 > a fully available upgrade path from CentOS Linux 8 to CentOS
Stream 8
 > (IE: not a reinstall), and that will take them to 2024.  That's
half of
 > the 10 years they might have expected, but it should let them give
 > Stream a try and see if it is for them or not.

If "Stream" is the base for the next RHEL8.x where are the updates
until
2029 coming from, when CentOS Stream 8 will be shutdown at 2024?


I think you've confused some dates, unless you have a link to the 
2024 date for Stream 8. CentOS 7 will continue until 2024. CentOS Stream 
8 doesn't have a clear EOL, but it is presumably at or before the end of 
RHEL 8 in 2029. CentOS 8 EOL has been yanked back to 2021.


https://centos.org/centos-stream/ 
 > End-of-life
 > N/A


No, its exactly as I said:

https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2020-December/352340.html

https://centos.org/distro-faq/#q13-can-i-start-up-a-sig-that-will-maintain-centos-stream-8-after-rhel8-reaches-the-end-of-full-support

(full-support -> 2024).

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

Re: [CentOS] Moving to CentOS 8 Stream

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/9/20 11:29 AM, Pete Biggs wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-12-09 at 11:00 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>
>> Put this line :
>>
>> dnf swap centos-{linux,stream}-repos
>>
>> after
>>
>> dnf install centos-release-stream
>>
> 
> Is there away to recover the system I tried it on - if I run that
> command now I get 
> 
>No match for argument: centos-stream-repos
>Error: Unable to find a match: centos-stream-repos
>
> If I try to install centos-release-stream I get 
> 
>Package centos-stream-release-8.4-1.el8.noarch is already installed.
> 
> I can't remove it because it would result in removing a protected
> package.
> 
> Oh well, a wipe and re-install tomorrow probably.
> 
> P.
> 

sure .. you can manually add the one repo required to manually do the
swap command ..

Or maybe just install this package and then remove the other one:

you want:

http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/centos-stream-repos-8-2.el8.noarch.rpm

installed first

Then remove centos-repos

Or you could manually create a CentOS-Stream-BaseOS.repo (you could even
name it test.repo and remove it later once switched)  this will work:

[baseos]
name=CentOS Stream $releasever - BaseOS
mirrorlist=http://mirrorlist.centos.org/?release=$stream=$basearch=BaseOS=$infra
#baseurl=http://mirror.centos.org/$contentdir/$stream/BaseOS/$basearch/os/
gpgcheck=1
enabled=1
gpgkey=file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-centosofficial


in /etc/yum.repos.d/.repo

then once the distro-sync command works, remove 

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

[CentOS-announce] CESA-2020:5235 Important CentOS 7 thunderbird Security Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2020:5235 Important

Upstream details at : https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2020:5235

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

x86_64:
f57d7074e8e50a23c9a10a230c6edbd1f48bc3130046704525be72e10c371656  
thunderbird-78.5.0-1.el7.centos.x86_64.rpm

Source:
6d147795bfe6c18c042e338932f14bdfcde9403bec0ccbb0c9c1132545645e57  
thunderbird-78.5.0-1.el7.centos.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

[CentOS-announce] CESA-2020:5239 Important CentOS 7 firefox Security Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2020:5239 Important

Upstream details at : https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2020:5239

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

x86_64:
cb3a549fe050cd75184479500b542065e37366ce62d90769646352bf2d9798a2  
firefox-78.5.0-1.el7.centos.i686.rpm
4276584eb593d2fb304ab50518d7e2c4f955abe8fc5b3d1b9f0dd053d363f298  
firefox-78.5.0-1.el7.centos.x86_64.rpm

Source:
3d26716ee84904cf6f57b0e9d00d84765a498c15b8f0ac649d7f49248c61dca0  
firefox-78.5.0-1.el7.centos.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] dnf script to cherry pick updates and maintain RHEL compatibility

[Leon Fauster via CentOS]

Am 09.12.20 um 18:25 schrieb Frank Cox:

Here's an idea, though I don't know if it would be practical.

I assume that at some point everything that goes into RHEL and its "official" 
updates travels through the Stream ecosystem beforehand.

So what about the idea of maintaining (somewhere) a list of official updates to 
RHEL as they are released, and then have some kind of a dnf enhancement or 
script that reads that list and updates a local Centos installation using only 
the rpms on the list and ignoring everything else.  Stuff that's released to 
Stream would be downloaded and installed at the point where it has been 
released for RHEL and not before.

That would (I think) keep your Centos installation in sync with RHEL.



IMO - this does not work because no intermediate update will survive in 
the stream repos. If something moves on then the state that reflects the 
current RHEL release can't be reached anymore. Or we have a mirror 
service that save all packages/stream releases ...


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

Re: [CentOS] Moving to CentOS 8 Stream

[Ljubomir Ljubojevic]

Considering there is entire year until "CentOS Linux 8" is EOL, and few
years until "CentOS Linux 7" is eol, I agree there is no rush to switch.

I will use next 12 months to test Springdale Linux (ex PUIAS Linux) and
wait and see what comes out of "Rocky Linux" startup that has started
today (they already have skeleton of the team assembled and are talking
about infrastructure) and if both of those fail to work out, last few
months of 2021 I will learn from colleagues about Debian.

P.S. Do not expect money-grabing top of Red Hat to change
"get-rich-fast" scheme, I don't... their funeral.



On 12/9/20 8:43 PM, david wrote:
> 
> Hours of reading
> 
> 
> 
> CentOS Fans:
> 
> I've spent hours yesterday and today reading the messages about the
> Centos 8 Stream, and expect to do it for the next few days also.  I
> would recommend that anyone contemplating some action, such as switching
> to a different distribution, advising your management to change, or
> similar, postpone that action for a while.  Let the dust settle, let the
> policy makers evaluate the comments, and watch for clarifications and/or
> modifications of the plan.
> 
> For lack of a better date, I suggest waiting until the first business
> day of 2021 (Monday 04 January) before taking any significant actions.
> 
> Personally, I've already invested some of my time incorporating CentOS
> 8.  I've also been working with Ubuntu since that seems to be the only
> way forward with Raspberry Pi and Apple/Intel machines, but I'll keep my
> CentOS 7/8 machines stable for this month at least.
> 
> David
> 
>  -
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


-- 
Ljubomir Ljubojevic
(Love is in the Air)
PL Computers
Serbia, Europe

StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Moving to CentOS 8 Stream

[Phelps, Matthew]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 2:46 PM david  wrote:

> 
> Hours of reading
> 
>
>
> CentOS Fans:
>
> I've spent hours yesterday and today reading the messages about the
> Centos 8 Stream, and expect to do it for the next few days also.  I
> would recommend that anyone contemplating some action, such as
> switching to a different distribution, advising your management to
> change, or similar, postpone that action for a while.  Let the dust
> settle, let the policy makers evaluate the comments, and watch for
> clarifications and/or modifications of the plan.
>
> For lack of a better date, I suggest waiting until the first business
> day of 2021 (Monday 04 January) before taking any significant actions.
>
> Personally, I've already invested some of my time incorporating
> CentOS 8.  I've also been working with Ubuntu since that seems to be
> the only way forward with Raspberry Pi and Apple/Intel machines, but
> I'll keep my CentOS 7/8 machines stable for this month at least.
>
> David
>
>


Do you speak on behalf of RedHat officially?

If not, I'll continue to plan to ditch them accordingly.

-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook  | Twitter
 | YouTube 
| Newsletter 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Moving to CentOS 8 Stream

[david]

Hours of reading



CentOS Fans:

I've spent hours yesterday and today reading the messages about the 
Centos 8 Stream, and expect to do it for the next few days also.  I 
would recommend that anyone contemplating some action, such as 
switching to a different distribution, advising your management to 
change, or similar, postpone that action for a while.  Let the dust 
settle, let the policy makers evaluate the comments, and watch for 
clarifications and/or modifications of the plan.


For lack of a better date, I suggest waiting until the first business 
day of 2021 (Monday 04 January) before taking any significant actions.


Personally, I've already invested some of my time incorporating 
CentOS 8.  I've also been working with Ubuntu since that seems to be 
the only way forward with Raspberry Pi and Apple/Intel machines, but 
I'll keep my CentOS 7/8 machines stable for this month at least.


David

 - 


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

Re: [CentOS] Is Oracle a real alternative to Centos?

[Jon Pruente]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 4:26 AM Rainer Traut  wrote:

>
> > Oracle Linux FAQ (PDF):
> > https://www.oracle.com/a/ocom/docs/027617.pdf
>
> There is no subscription needed. All needed repositories for the oVirt
> based virtualization are freely available.
>
>
> https://docs.oracle.com/en/virtualization/oracle-linux-virtualization-manager/getstart/manager-install.html#manager-install-prepare


While the packages may be available, their own FAQ says it's a subscription
feature. I don't trust Oracle not to come down on users who install it and
demand subscription fees. They already do so for Java and VirtualBox
Extensions.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 11:03 AM Christopher Wensink <
cwens...@five-star-plastics.com> wrote:

> Understanding the flow of packages, is it a fair comparison to say that
> moving forward:
> Fedora packages could be considered alpha/beta releases of apps
> Centos/Stream could be considered beta / Pre-release / Release
> candidates of packages / partially stable
> RHEL official releases would be considered final release / stable
>
> Where as before (done 12/2021)
> Fedora Packages would be beta / pre-release
> then RHEL and CentOS were final release / stable  - one with commercial
> support and the other with community only support.
>
> Is that accurate?
>

Eh, that's something of a mixture of metaphors and facts.  Let me make a
few approximate details plain.

For RHEL 8 the base inheritance went like this:
F27 -> RHEL 8 Alpha (internal)
F28 -> RHEL 8 Beta (public)
8 Beta ->  RHEL 8.0
8.0 -> RHEL 8.1

There were significant differences in kernel and of many cherry picked
patches and rebases from upstream, but that was the baseline.

For RHEL 9 it should look more like this (this is an approximation):
Rawhide (pre-F34) -> ELN -> RHEL 9 Alpha (internal)
F34 -> CentOS Stream 9 -> RHEL 9 Beta
CentOS Stream 9 -> RHEL 9.0
CentOS Stream 9 -> RHEL 9.1

Similar to 8 there will be some cherry picked patches, rebases from
upstream, etc, before things are 100% CentOS Stream, but the above is the
approximate expected flow that shows how Fedora and CentOS Stream interact
with a new major release, and the position of CentOS Stream as it relates
to RHEL.

On 12/9/2020 12:54 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:40:22AM +, J Martin Rushton via CentOS
> wrote:
> >> And exactly the same applies to senior (or retired) admins on their
> >> home computers.  My main home machine runs about a dozen testbed
> >> VMs, DHCP/DNS for the home network, Amanda, NFS and Samba for other
> >> machines, ownCloud, Apache, Zotero and DokuWiki for the family.  I
> >> want a stable server under that lot, not a beta release.
> > CentOS Stream will not be a "beta release". That's not how RHEL minor
> > release development works. I personally think that it's going to be
> stellar
> > for your exact use case.
> >
>
> --
> Christopher Wensink
> IS Administrator
> Five Star Plastics, Inc
> 1339 Continental Drive
> Eau Claire, WI 54701
> Office:  715-831-1682
> Mobile:  715-563-3112
> Fax:  715-831-6075
> cwens...@five-star-plastics.com
> www.five-star-plastics.com
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>


-- 
Brendan Conoboy / Linux Project Lead / Red Hat, Inc.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Stream questions

[James Szinger]

I have a couple of questions about CentOS Stream.

1. Is there list for update announcements?  Something similar to
upda...@fedoraproject.org.

2. Since both CentOS and EPEL are Red Hat projects, will Red Hat
provide an EPEL version compatible with CentOS Stream?

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

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Christopher Wensink]

Understanding the flow of packages, is it a fair comparison to say that 
moving forward:

Fedora packages could be considered alpha/beta releases of apps
Centos/Stream could be considered beta / Pre-release / Release 
candidates of packages / partially stable

RHEL official releases would be considered final release / stable

Where as before (done 12/2021)
Fedora Packages would be beta / pre-release
then RHEL and CentOS were final release / stable  - one with commercial 
support and the other with community only support.


Is that accurate?

On 12/9/2020 12:54 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:40:22AM +, J Martin Rushton via CentOS wrote:

And exactly the same applies to senior (or retired) admins on their
home computers.  My main home machine runs about a dozen testbed
VMs, DHCP/DNS for the home network, Amanda, NFS and Samba for other
machines, ownCloud, Apache, Zotero and DokuWiki for the family.  I
want a stable server under that lot, not a beta release.

CentOS Stream will not be a "beta release". That's not how RHEL minor
release development works. I personally think that it's going to be stellar
for your exact use case.



--
Christopher Wensink
IS Administrator
Five Star Plastics, Inc
1339 Continental Drive
Eau Claire, WI 54701
Office:  715-831-1682
Mobile:  715-563-3112
Fax:  715-831-6075
cwens...@five-star-plastics.com
www.five-star-plastics.com

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

Re: [CentOS] dnf script to cherry pick updates and maintain RHEL compatibility

[James Pearson]

Matthew Miller:
>> why don't they just make RHEL available to all for 'free', and you just
>> pay for support if you need it - i.e. a bit like it is now, RHEL if you
>> pay, CentOS if you don't - I'm sure that would make everyone happy :-)
>
> Because RHEL's value proposition is not merely support, and the value of
> subscription goes way beyond that.
>
> Butt, that said: yes, this really is the direction things are going with
> expanded access to low-cost/no-cost RHEL.

It that is really the case, then maybe some one from Redhat should pipe up now 
...

If there is going to be a no-cost RHEL that can be used in the same way as 
CentOS is used now, then I think that would solve all the problems with this 
CentOS Stream announcement ... and calm down things

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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[James Szinger]

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:22:15 -0500
Matthew Miller  wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:58:10AM -0600, Barry Brimer wrote:
> > If the same happened in the previous question but was in a package
> > or set of packages that was being rebased in 8.5 would it work the
> > same way?  
> 
> Hmmm. I'm not sure I understand you. There won't be a dump of 8.5
> packages into Stream at some point. They will be updated there as
> ready.

The scenario I imagine is this:

start out the same
EL 8.4 foo-1.1.1-1
stream-8   foo-1.1.1-1

update stream for EL 8.5

EL 8.4 foo-1.1.1-1
stream-8   foo-1.2.0-1

CVE!

EL 8.4 foo-1.1.2-1
stream-8   foo-1.2.1-1

Result: foo-1.1.2-1 is in EL but not stream.

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

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:40:22AM +, J Martin Rushton via CentOS wrote:
> And exactly the same applies to senior (or retired) admins on their
> home computers.  My main home machine runs about a dozen testbed
> VMs, DHCP/DNS for the home network, Amanda, NFS and Samba for other
> machines, ownCloud, Apache, Zotero and DokuWiki for the family.  I
> want a stable server under that lot, not a beta release.

CentOS Stream will not be a "beta release". That's not how RHEL minor
release development works. I personally think that it's going to be stellar
for your exact use case.

-- 
Matthew Miller

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

Re: [CentOS] dnf script to cherry pick updates and maintain RHEL compatibility

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 12:33:57PM -0600, Tom Bishop wrote:
> They would have saved a lot of bashing of teeth etc if they would have had
> all of that ready at the same time so folks could assess where things fall,
> right now all we have is RH folks saying something else is coming with no
> details, most have kind of lost faith with what's been announced already,
> poorly timed IMHO.

Yeah, I have no insight into why the timing is what it is. But it is, so
here we are. From what I'm seeing going on inside Red Hat I think there will
be a lot of faith-restoring things coming up in the next year.


-- 
Matthew Miller

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

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:24:33AM +, Pete Biggs wrote:
> What will be the incentive for vendors to participate? Sure you can
> talk the corporate talk about opportunities and ecosystems, but the
> bottom line is that it requires investment (at least in time) when they
> could just continue supporting RHEL point releases, or possibly every
> other point release.

Oh, this one is easy. Because *this is how Red Hat is telling vendors to
support RHEL point releases from now on*. I know it's easy to get lost in
everything else, but this is a huge pivot in RHEL development focusing more
directly on CentOS.

(Although as I understand it there will also be cases where code supporting
new hardware is embargoed until a release date, which complicates things in
some cases. That doesn't change the overall new picture though.)

-- 
Matthew Miller

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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 06:26:22PM +, Bernstein, Noam CIV USN NRL (6393) 
Washington DC (USA) via CentOS wrote:
> > Absolutely. The only path into RHEL minor releases that isn't through Stream
> > is for CVEs and other embargoed changes. And those will go back into Stream
> > as soon as they can.
> Does that mean that it will always be possible to recreate the set of
> final RHEL point release packages by cherry-picking from Stream? If so,
> isn't that a solution (and, I'd argue, _the_ solution if there's some
> officially supported way of grabbing that set)?

There might be some complexity I'm not seeing, but offhand I don't see why
not.



-- 
Matthew Miller

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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Japheth Cleaver]

On 12/9/2020 10:18 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 04:03:42PM +, Laack, Andrea P wrote:

The companies that pay for RHEL licenses for production and use CentOS for
test will be left with a large problem. They will either need to purchase
double the number of RHEL licenses and switch to RHEL for testing or go to
another distribution. RHEL + 1 will not work for testing application
compatibility with patches.

In the cases where RHEL + 0.1 (note not +1) won't work, I think it's
incredibly likely that this will be covered by the expanded low- and no-cost
RHEL offerings.

Part of the buried lede here is that with more RHEL accessibility, a lot of
the function that CentOS served for users will not be necessary anymore.



It's buried, but the decision-makers failed to understand that the 
suddenness of this decision, outside of the community expectation for 
CentOS Linux continuing to be a thing (remember: Scientific Linux 
continued supporting SL6 right up to the end even after announcing that 
there would be no SL8), calls into question the stability of a lot of 
RedHat's actions when it comes to distro decisions. Based on other 
emails, the CentOS Board perhaps understood this and the people issuing 
directions from RedHat perhaps did not. That does not bode well.


Enterprises, and enterprise users, need reliability and confidence that 
their choices are the correct ones. How will RedHat/IBM restore 
confidence in the longevity of the offerings it's producing?


-jc

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

Re: [CentOS] dnf script to cherry pick updates and maintain RHEL compatibility

[Tom Bishop]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020, 12:27 PM Matthew Miller  wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 06:02:37PM +, James Pearson wrote:
> > why don't they just make RHEL available to all for 'free', and you just
> > pay for support if you need it - i.e. a bit like it is now, RHEL if you
> > pay, CentOS if you don't - I'm sure that would make everyone happy :-)
>
> Because RHEL's value proposition is not merely support, and the value of
> subscription goes way beyond that.
>
> Butt, that said: yes, this really is the direction things are going
> with
> expanded access to low-cost/no-cost RHEL.
>
> --
> Matthew Miller
> 
> Fedora Project Leader
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>

>
> They would have saved a lot of bashing of teeth etc if they would have had
> all of that ready at the same time so folks could assess where things fall,
> right now all we have is RH folks saying something else is coming with no
> details, most have kind of lost faith with what's been announced already,
> poorly timed IMHO.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:15:40AM +0200, Veli-Pekka Kestilä wrote:
> >Is it possible that more regressions will get through than have before?
> >Well, sure, some. But let's not pretend that even RHEL is ever
> >regression-free. It's software, after all, and there are bugs and
> >errata. I don't think that for most self-supported CentOS use, it will
> >be particularly dangerous to switch to Stream at all.
> It might or it might not. But you can't say to people in good faith
> anymore that it will be as stable as the current RHEL release.

Define stable. For most practical definitions of that and for most use
cases, it absolutely will be. For some it won't be, but I think there will
be few actual cases where it won't be _and_ CentOS Linux rather than RHEL
_was_ acceptable. 


> I have recommended CentOS to my customers as way to get going and
> also recommended getting the subscription for RHEL when possible
> afterwards.

I don't see why that would change. Or you may be able to get them started on
RHEL in some new cases.

-- 
Matthew Miller

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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Phelps, Matthew]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 1:18 PM Matthew Miller  wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 04:03:42PM +, Laack, Andrea P wrote:
> > The companies that pay for RHEL licenses for production and use CentOS
> for
> > test will be left with a large problem. They will either need to purchase
> > double the number of RHEL licenses and switch to RHEL for testing or go
> to
> > another distribution. RHEL + 1 will not work for testing application
> > compatibility with patches.
>
> In the cases where RHEL + 0.1 (note not +1) won't work, I think it's
> incredibly likely that this will be covered by the expanded low- and
> no-cost
> RHEL offerings.
>
> Part of the buried lede here is that with more RHEL accessibility, a lot of
> the function that CentOS served for users will not be necessary anymore.
>
>
> > No company will want to pay double the amount they are currently paying
> > for RHEL licenses. This is not even addressing the cost and time it will
> > take to switch over all the test servers.
>
> Yeah, Red Hat knows this. Hence the above. If you have a specific case,
> please email the centos-questi...@redhat.com address -- that goes to the
> people designing the new programs, not to sales.
>
> --
> Matthew Miller
> 
> Fedora Project Leader
> __
>


Don't you think it might have been a good idea to solicit these type of
situations *before* killing CenOS 8?

After the complete and utter disaster RedHat has shat upon the World with
the handling of this, there is no way anyone will ever trust that a "free"
or "low cost" version of RHEL will stay that way for any length of time. To
suggest so to this list, today, is ludicrous.

Unless there's a reversal of course here, I, and many others, will never
recommend any RHEL product to my superiors from now on.

(I'm hoping the horse isn't dead yet.)

-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook  | Twitter
 | YouTube 
| Newsletter 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] dnf script to cherry pick updates and maintain RHEL compatibility

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 06:02:37PM +, James Pearson wrote:
> why don't they just make RHEL available to all for 'free', and you just
> pay for support if you need it - i.e. a bit like it is now, RHEL if you
> pay, CentOS if you don't - I'm sure that would make everyone happy :-)

Because RHEL's value proposition is not merely support, and the value of
subscription goes way beyond that.

Butt, that said: yes, this really is the direction things are going with
expanded access to low-cost/no-cost RHEL.

-- 
Matthew Miller

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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Bernstein, Noam CIV USN NRL (6393) Washington DC (USA) via CentOS]

> On Dec 9, 2020, at 1:22 PM, Matthew Miller  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:58:10AM -0600, Barry Brimer wrote:
>> If a bug were to make it into CentOS Stream, and identified before
>> RHEL 8.4 was released, would an updated/fixed package be produced
>> and placed into CentOS Stream?
> 
> Absolutely. The only path into RHEL minor releases that isn't through Stream
> is for CVEs and other embargoed changes. And those will go back into Stream
> as soon as they can.

Does that mean that it will always be possible to recreate the set of final 
RHEL point release packages by cherry-picking from Stream?  If so, isn't that a 
solution (and, I'd argue, _the_ solution if there's some officially supported 
way of grabbing that set)?

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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:58:10AM -0600, Barry Brimer wrote:
> If a bug were to make it into CentOS Stream, and identified before
> RHEL 8.4 was released, would an updated/fixed package be produced
> and placed into CentOS Stream?

Absolutely. The only path into RHEL minor releases that isn't through Stream
is for CVEs and other embargoed changes. And those will go back into Stream
as soon as they can.


> If a bug were to make it past CentOS Stream and into RHEL 8.4 and
> the bug is then identified and fixed after the release of RHEL 8.4
> would an updated/fixed package be produced and placed into CentOS
> Stream in the same timeframe or only if/when updated packages and
> their dependencies were made/released into CentOS Stream for updated
> features for RHEL 8.5?

It might depend on the situation, but I would expect the fix to land
quickly in Stream.


> If the same happened in the previous question but was in a package
> or set of packages that was being rebased in 8.5 would it work the
> same way?

Hmmm. I'm not sure I understand you. There won't be a dump of 8.5 packages
into Stream at some point. They will be updated there as ready.

-- 
Matthew Miller

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

Re: [CentOS] [EXT] Re: https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Phelps, Matthew]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 1:12 PM Tom Bishop  wrote:

> Well looks like the jokes have already started, some one from work sent
> this to me this morning - https://centos.rip/
>
> No association etc not sure who etc...
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>


It wasn't me!

Honest.


-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook  | Twitter
 | YouTube 
| Newsletter 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 04:03:42PM +, Laack, Andrea P wrote:
> The companies that pay for RHEL licenses for production and use CentOS for
> test will be left with a large problem. They will either need to purchase
> double the number of RHEL licenses and switch to RHEL for testing or go to
> another distribution. RHEL + 1 will not work for testing application
> compatibility with patches.

In the cases where RHEL + 0.1 (note not +1) won't work, I think it's
incredibly likely that this will be covered by the expanded low- and no-cost
RHEL offerings.

Part of the buried lede here is that with more RHEL accessibility, a lot of
the function that CentOS served for users will not be necessary anymore.


> No company will want to pay double the amount they are currently paying
> for RHEL licenses. This is not even addressing the cost and time it will
> take to switch over all the test servers.

Yeah, Red Hat knows this. Hence the above. If you have a specific case,
please email the centos-questi...@redhat.com address -- that goes to the
people designing the new programs, not to sales.

-- 
Matthew Miller

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

Re: [CentOS] [EXT] Re: https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Tom Bishop]

Well looks like the jokes have already started, some one from work sent
this to me this morning - https://centos.rip/

No association etc not sure who etc...
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] dnf script to cherry pick updates and maintain RHEL compatibility

[James Pearson]

Frank Cox:
> Here's an idea, though I don't know if it would be practical.
>
> I assume that at some point everything that goes into RHEL and its "official"
> updates travels through the Stream ecosystem beforehand.
>
> So what about the idea of maintaining (somewhere) a list of official updates
> to RHEL as they are released, and then have some kind of a dnf enhancement
> or script that reads that list and updates a local Centos installation using 
> only
> the rpms on the list and ignoring everything else.  Stuff that's released to
> Stream would be downloaded and installed at the point where it has been
> released for RHEL and not before.
>
> That would (I think) keep your Centos installation in sync with RHEL.

That (if it worked) would only work up until the stream reaches EOL at the end 
of 'Full Support mode '- which for EL 8 is 31st May 2024 (not as we were 
expecting, sometime in 2029)

Or even better, as Redhat appear to be taking full control of 'CentOS', why 
don't they just make RHEL available to all for 'free', and you just pay for 
support if you need it - i.e. a bit like it is now, RHEL if you pay, CentOS if 
you don't - I'm sure that would make everyone happy :-)

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

Re: [CentOS] [EXT] Re: https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Phil Perry]

On 09/12/2020 17:32, Peter Georg wrote:

On 09/12/2020 18.10, Brendan Conoboy wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 7:21 AM Phil Perry  wrote:


On 09/12/2020 03:26, Brendan Conoboy wrote:

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 4:19 PM Pete Biggs  wrote:


On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 17:54 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:

On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 03:15:17PM +, Pete Biggs wrote:



"CentOS will become the developer playground"


This one is categorically not the case. Even Fedora isn't a developer
playground. Everything landing in CentOS Stream is actually *planned*

(with

emphasis intentional) to go in a future RHEL release.


It's all the talk of SIGs and developing and testing and that Stream
will be the centerpiece of that. That's what I meant.



I don't know if I'd call SIGs a playground, but they're certainly an
important venue for communities to explore variations.



Previously, all the development around RHEL releases was done in

secret,

in

the Red Hat black box. Now it's out of the box and can be watched.

There

may

be some launch pains, but I expect the average quality of an update

hitting

CentOS Stream to be very high.


I don't get that from the documents released today.  If Stream is 
*not*

a test-bed, then surely the code that appears in Stream must be fully
formed in secret behind the scenes first. Yes, it will appear 
piecemeal
rather than in one big chunk, but it has been categorically denied 
that

Stream is not a RHEL 8.n+1 beta and is more a RHEL 8.n+1 RC/rolling
release.



I think maybe some of the nervousness about CentOS Stream comes from 
RHEL

seeming opacity on its development model.  As one of the architects of

our

development process I'd be happy to field questions.  I'll start by

making

a two points in case they're in any way unclear:

1. Everything that goes into RHEL lands upstream first, then the 
patches

are backported into the RHEL releases.
2. Most of the work we do or plan on doing is in bugzilla.redhat.com.

If

you go into the RHEL8 product queue today and file a bug you'll see

"CentOS

Stream" as a "Version" where an issue is encountered.

I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the rolling-release
aspect of this. There will be no definitive versioning of CentOS in 
the
future - all you will be able to say is "fully updated" and it 
won't be

possible to slot a CentOS system in to exactly match a RHEL version.
Will third party RPMs built against RHEL 8.x be installable on a 
CentOS
8 Stream system? The answer is surely "it depends", but there are a 
lot

of hardware vendors that target drivers to RHEL releases, which may
well make CentOS non-viable for hardware that doesn't have drivers
built in to the kernel.



Generally if they follow the ABI guidelines I would expect it to work.
Those are here:

https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility


For loadable kernel modules there's a kernel ABI.




Hi Brendan,

This point is *critical*, so I apologise in advance for the lengthy
post, *you* are breaking the kernel ABI between RHEL8 and Stream.

One of the main unique selling points of RHEL is the stability of it's
kernel ABI. No other distro provides this. The very nature of rolling
kernel updates in Stream breaks the kernel ABI and breaks compatibility
between RHEL8 and Stream. What works on RHEL8 may not work on Stream. At
the kernel level, the two products diverge in fundamental compatibility
and are not compatible, are no longer the same.

How bad is this divergence / breakage? Well, we know the kernel ABI will
change from time to time, almost exclusively at new point releases due
to the massive backporting work that goes into the RHEL kernel. And this
is fine, we know it's coming, we know when it's coming, and we can plan
for it's impact. It's a price well worth paying.

To put this in context, at elrepo I currently help maintain around 50
3rd party kernel driver packages for RHEL8. When RH released RHEL8.3,
every single package in our repository broke due to changes in the
kernel ABI in the 6 month period between RHEL8.2 and RHEL8.3. It's not
ideal, but we accept it as a price we pay for the otherwise excellent
stability of the kernel ABI during the proceeding 6 months. As I said
above, we know it's coming, we know when it's coming, and we can plan
for it.

Now contrast that with Stream. Every kernel update in Stream has the
potential to break the kernel ABI causing packages built for RHEL to
break. We don't know when that may happen (only that it will), we don't
know how often it will happen, we have no idea which packages it will
break. and we have no way to fix it. Consequently, elrepo has been
unable to support Stream kernels.

It is not just elrepo's users that the Stream kernels will affect. All
OEM hardware manufacturers releasing 3rd party driver rpms as part of
Red Hat's Driver Update Programme or otherwise will be similarly
affected, and their driver updates will not be applicable to or
compatible with CentOS Stream. In fact, RHEL's own 

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Walter H.]

On 09.12.2020 18:12, Johnny Hughes wrote:

On 12/9/20 11:01 AM, Walter H. wrote:

On 09.12.2020 15:45, Johnny Hughes wrote:

On 12/9/20 8:41 AM, Walter H. wrote:

p.s. can someone tell in as short as possible what this CentOS Stream is
in comparison to CentOS 8?

CentOS Stream is built from the currently released RHEL Source Code + 0.1

So if RHEL 8.3 is released .. Stream is the Source Code (built) that
will become 8.4 in a few months.

what does this mean in comparison to CentOS 8, which sources are used
for this?

to be concrete:

I can download this ISO of CentOS 8

(1) CentOS-8.3.2011-x86_64-dvd1.iso

and this ISO fo CentOS Stream

(2) CentOS-Stream-8-x86_64-20201203-dvd1.iso

which sources are used for (1) and which for (2)?

and what does it mean of the update process be 'yum update'

e.g. if one would do this with CentOS 6, there is no way; the support
ended;

with CentOS 8 this will haben one day (somewhat in 2029), and what is
said about this of CentOS Stream?


CentOS Linux 8 is the source code from released current RHEL 8 .. for
now 8.3.  The EOL of CentOS Linux 8 is 31 DEC 2021
when doing 'yum update' regularly this would also be EOL the end of the 
following year?

CentOS Stream 8 is the source cdoe from what be RHEL + 0.1 .. so
currently 8.3 + 0.1 = 8.4.  It will EOL in 31 MAY 2024


this is much longer here, can I update this 'forever' just doing 'yum 
update' regularly?


why I am asking this, I need to choose one option, because my CentOS 6 
VMs are EOL;


and I would practice this the same way I did, when my CentOS 4 became 
EOL, I installed CentOS 6

VM by VM - never used CentOS 5;

e.g. the first one was the DNS-VM, which I used CentOS 6.2,
then the outgoing Mail-server-VM, I used CentOS 6.3
and by doing 'yum update' regularly they all became finally 6.10;

so which should I choose
- CentOS 7: EOL in 2024
- CentOS Stream: EOL also in 2024
(CentOS 8 is no option I guess)

comparing to Windows,
when using Win10, there is no install needed any more, every half year 
function update,

and the other time security/bug fix update;

is doing CentOS Stream the same way?

Thanks,

Walter



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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Oliver Freyermuth via CentOS]

Am 09.12.20 um 18:12 schrieb Johnny Hughes:

On 12/9/20 11:01 AM, Walter H. wrote:

On 09.12.2020 15:45, Johnny Hughes wrote:

On 12/9/20 8:41 AM, Walter H. wrote:

p.s. can someone tell in as short as possible what this CentOS Stream is
in comparison to CentOS 8?

CentOS Stream is built from the currently released RHEL Source Code + 0.1

So if RHEL 8.3 is released .. Stream is the Source Code (built) that
will become 8.4 in a few months.


what does this mean in comparison to CentOS 8, which sources are used
for this?

to be concrete:

I can download this ISO of CentOS 8

(1) CentOS-8.3.2011-x86_64-dvd1.iso

and this ISO fo CentOS Stream

(2) CentOS-Stream-8-x86_64-20201203-dvd1.iso

which sources are used for (1) and which for (2)?

and what does it mean of the update process be 'yum update'

e.g. if one would do this with CentOS 6, there is no way; the support
ended;

with CentOS 8 this will haben one day (somewhat in 2029), and what is
said about this of CentOS Stream?



CentOS Linux 8 is the source code from released current RHEL 8 .. for
now 8.3.  The EOL of CentOS Linux 8 is 31 DEC 2021

CentOS Stream 8 is the source cdoe from what be RHEL + 0.1 .. so
currently 8.3 + 0.1 = 8.4.  It will EOL in 31 MAY 2024

CentOS Linux 6 EOLed 30 NOV 2020.


A related question: Since Stream 8 will EoL in MAY 2024, when RHEL 8 will enter 
the 5-year-Maintenance Support phase,
in which way will the sources of the updates released for RHEL 8 (modifications 
/ patches of Open Source codes) be released?
Will these still go to git.centos.org, or on a new, to-be-created platform?

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

Re: [CentOS] [EXT] Re: https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Peter Georg]

On 09/12/2020 18.10, Brendan Conoboy wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 7:21 AM Phil Perry  wrote:


On 09/12/2020 03:26, Brendan Conoboy wrote:

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 4:19 PM Pete Biggs  wrote:


On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 17:54 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:

On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 03:15:17PM +, Pete Biggs wrote:



"CentOS will become the developer playground"


This one is categorically not the case. Even Fedora isn't a developer
playground. Everything landing in CentOS Stream is actually *planned*

(with

emphasis intentional) to go in a future RHEL release.


It's all the talk of SIGs and developing and testing and that Stream
will be the centerpiece of that. That's what I meant.



I don't know if I'd call SIGs a playground, but they're certainly an
important venue for communities to explore variations.



Previously, all the development around RHEL releases was done in

secret,

in

the Red Hat black box. Now it's out of the box and can be watched.

There

may

be some launch pains, but I expect the average quality of an update

hitting

CentOS Stream to be very high.


I don't get that from the documents released today.  If Stream is *not*
a test-bed, then surely the code that appears in Stream must be fully
formed in secret behind the scenes first. Yes, it will appear piecemeal
rather than in one big chunk, but it has been categorically denied that
Stream is not a RHEL 8.n+1 beta and is more a RHEL 8.n+1 RC/rolling
release.



I think maybe some of the nervousness about CentOS Stream comes from RHEL
seeming opacity on its development model.  As one of the architects of

our

development process I'd be happy to field questions.  I'll start by

making

a two points in case they're in any way unclear:

1. Everything that goes into RHEL lands upstream first, then the patches
are backported into the RHEL releases.
2. Most of the work we do or plan on doing is in bugzilla.redhat.com.

If

you go into the RHEL8 product queue today and file a bug you'll see

"CentOS

Stream" as a "Version" where an issue is encountered.

I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the rolling-release

aspect of this. There will be no definitive versioning of CentOS in the
future - all you will be able to say is "fully updated" and it won't be
possible to slot a CentOS system in to exactly match a RHEL version.
Will third party RPMs built against RHEL 8.x be installable on a CentOS
8 Stream system? The answer is surely "it depends", but there are a lot
of hardware vendors that target drivers to RHEL releases, which may
well make CentOS non-viable for hardware that doesn't have drivers
built in to the kernel.



Generally if they follow the ABI guidelines I would expect it to work.
Those are here:

https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility


For loadable kernel modules there's a kernel ABI.




Hi Brendan,

This point is *critical*, so I apologise in advance for the lengthy
post, *you* are breaking the kernel ABI between RHEL8 and Stream.

One of the main unique selling points of RHEL is the stability of it's
kernel ABI. No other distro provides this. The very nature of rolling
kernel updates in Stream breaks the kernel ABI and breaks compatibility
between RHEL8 and Stream. What works on RHEL8 may not work on Stream. At
the kernel level, the two products diverge in fundamental compatibility
and are not compatible, are no longer the same.

How bad is this divergence / breakage? Well, we know the kernel ABI will
change from time to time, almost exclusively at new point releases due
to the massive backporting work that goes into the RHEL kernel. And this
is fine, we know it's coming, we know when it's coming, and we can plan
for it's impact. It's a price well worth paying.

To put this in context, at elrepo I currently help maintain around 50
3rd party kernel driver packages for RHEL8. When RH released RHEL8.3,
every single package in our repository broke due to changes in the
kernel ABI in the 6 month period between RHEL8.2 and RHEL8.3. It's not
ideal, but we accept it as a price we pay for the otherwise excellent
stability of the kernel ABI during the proceeding 6 months. As I said
above, we know it's coming, we know when it's coming, and we can plan
for it.

Now contrast that with Stream. Every kernel update in Stream has the
potential to break the kernel ABI causing packages built for RHEL to
break. We don't know when that may happen (only that it will), we don't
know how often it will happen, we have no idea which packages it will
break. and we have no way to fix it. Consequently, elrepo has been
unable to support Stream kernels.

It is not just elrepo's users that the Stream kernels will affect. All
OEM hardware manufacturers releasing 3rd party driver rpms as part of
Red Hat's Driver Update Programme or otherwise will be similarly
affected, and their driver updates will not be applicable to or
compatible with CentOS Stream. In fact, RHEL's own driver update
packages will likely need rebuilding 

Re: [CentOS] Moving to CentOS 8 Stream

[Pete Biggs]

On Wed, 2020-12-09 at 11:00 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> 
> Put this line :
> 
> dnf swap centos-{linux,stream}-repos
> 
> after
> 
> dnf install centos-release-stream
> 

Is there away to recover the system I tried it on - if I run that
command now I get 

   No match for argument: centos-stream-repos
   Error: Unable to find a match: centos-stream-repos
   
If I try to install centos-release-stream I get 

   Package centos-stream-release-8.4-1.el8.noarch is already installed.

I can't remove it because it would result in removing a protected
package.

Oh well, a wipe and re-install tomorrow probably.

P.


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

[CentOS] dnf script to cherry pick updates and maintain RHEL compatibility

[Frank Cox]

Here's an idea, though I don't know if it would be practical.

I assume that at some point everything that goes into RHEL and its "official" 
updates travels through the Stream ecosystem beforehand.

So what about the idea of maintaining (somewhere) a list of official updates to 
RHEL as they are released, and then have some kind of a dnf enhancement or 
script that reads that list and updates a local Centos installation using only 
the rpms on the list and ignoring everything else.  Stuff that's released to 
Stream would be downloaded and installed at the point where it has been 
released for RHEL and not before.

That would (I think) keep your Centos installation in sync with RHEL.

-- 
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS-docs] [centos/centos.org] branch master updated (9b7922d -> f588419)

[git]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

rbowen pushed a change to branch master
in repository centos/centos.org.

from 9b7922d  Clarify answer a little bit.
 add f588419  Update the CentOS Linux => CentOS Stream instructions to 
match a needed intermediary step.

No new revisions were added by this update.

Summary of changes:
 centos-stream.md | 2 ++
 distro-faq.md| 2 ++
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)

-- 
To stop receiving notification emails like this one, please contact
the administrator of this repository.
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/9/20 11:01 AM, Walter H. wrote:
> On 09.12.2020 15:45, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> On 12/9/20 8:41 AM, Walter H. wrote:
>>> p.s. can someone tell in as short as possible what this CentOS Stream is
>>> in comparison to CentOS 8?
>> CentOS Stream is built from the currently released RHEL Source Code + 0.1
>>
>> So if RHEL 8.3 is released .. Stream is the Source Code (built) that
>> will become 8.4 in a few months.
> 
> what does this mean in comparison to CentOS 8, which sources are used
> for this?
> 
> to be concrete:
> 
> I can download this ISO of CentOS 8
> 
> (1) CentOS-8.3.2011-x86_64-dvd1.iso
> 
> and this ISO fo CentOS Stream
> 
> (2) CentOS-Stream-8-x86_64-20201203-dvd1.iso
> 
> which sources are used for (1) and which for (2)?
> 
> and what does it mean of the update process be 'yum update'
> 
> e.g. if one would do this with CentOS 6, there is no way; the support
> ended;
> 
> with CentOS 8 this will haben one day (somewhat in 2029), and what is
> said about this of CentOS Stream?
> 

CentOS Linux 8 is the source code from released current RHEL 8 .. for
now 8.3.  The EOL of CentOS Linux 8 is 31 DEC 2021

CentOS Stream 8 is the source cdoe from what be RHEL + 0.1 .. so
currently 8.3 + 0.1 = 8.4.  It will EOL in 31 MAY 2024

CentOS Linux 6 EOLed 30 NOV 2020.


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

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 7:21 AM Phil Perry  wrote:

> On 09/12/2020 03:26, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 4:19 PM Pete Biggs  wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 17:54 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 03:15:17PM +, Pete Biggs wrote:
> >>
>  "CentOS will become the developer playground"
> >>>
> >>> This one is categorically not the case. Even Fedora isn't a developer
> >>> playground. Everything landing in CentOS Stream is actually *planned*
> >> (with
> >>> emphasis intentional) to go in a future RHEL release.
> >>
> >> It's all the talk of SIGs and developing and testing and that Stream
> >> will be the centerpiece of that. That's what I meant.
> >>
> >
> > I don't know if I'd call SIGs a playground, but they're certainly an
> > important venue for communities to explore variations.
> >
> >
> >>> Previously, all the development around RHEL releases was done in
> secret,
> >> in
> >>> the Red Hat black box. Now it's out of the box and can be watched.
> There
> >> may
> >>> be some launch pains, but I expect the average quality of an update
> >> hitting
> >>> CentOS Stream to be very high.
> >>
> >> I don't get that from the documents released today.  If Stream is *not*
> >> a test-bed, then surely the code that appears in Stream must be fully
> >> formed in secret behind the scenes first. Yes, it will appear piecemeal
> >> rather than in one big chunk, but it has been categorically denied that
> >> Stream is not a RHEL 8.n+1 beta and is more a RHEL 8.n+1 RC/rolling
> >> release.
> >>
> >
> > I think maybe some of the nervousness about CentOS Stream comes from RHEL
> > seeming opacity on its development model.  As one of the architects of
> our
> > development process I'd be happy to field questions.  I'll start by
> making
> > a two points in case they're in any way unclear:
> >
> > 1. Everything that goes into RHEL lands upstream first, then the patches
> > are backported into the RHEL releases.
> > 2. Most of the work we do or plan on doing is in bugzilla.redhat.com.
> If
> > you go into the RHEL8 product queue today and file a bug you'll see
> "CentOS
> > Stream" as a "Version" where an issue is encountered.
> >
> > I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the rolling-release
> >> aspect of this. There will be no definitive versioning of CentOS in the
> >> future - all you will be able to say is "fully updated" and it won't be
> >> possible to slot a CentOS system in to exactly match a RHEL version.
> >> Will third party RPMs built against RHEL 8.x be installable on a CentOS
> >> 8 Stream system? The answer is surely "it depends", but there are a lot
> >> of hardware vendors that target drivers to RHEL releases, which may
> >> well make CentOS non-viable for hardware that doesn't have drivers
> >> built in to the kernel.
> >>
> >
> > Generally if they follow the ABI guidelines I would expect it to work.
> > Those are here:
> https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility
> >
> > For loadable kernel modules there's a kernel ABI.
> >
> >
>
> Hi Brendan,
>
> This point is *critical*, so I apologise in advance for the lengthy
> post, *you* are breaking the kernel ABI between RHEL8 and Stream.
>
> One of the main unique selling points of RHEL is the stability of it's
> kernel ABI. No other distro provides this. The very nature of rolling
> kernel updates in Stream breaks the kernel ABI and breaks compatibility
> between RHEL8 and Stream. What works on RHEL8 may not work on Stream. At
> the kernel level, the two products diverge in fundamental compatibility
> and are not compatible, are no longer the same.
>
> How bad is this divergence / breakage? Well, we know the kernel ABI will
> change from time to time, almost exclusively at new point releases due
> to the massive backporting work that goes into the RHEL kernel. And this
> is fine, we know it's coming, we know when it's coming, and we can plan
> for it's impact. It's a price well worth paying.
>
> To put this in context, at elrepo I currently help maintain around 50
> 3rd party kernel driver packages for RHEL8. When RH released RHEL8.3,
> every single package in our repository broke due to changes in the
> kernel ABI in the 6 month period between RHEL8.2 and RHEL8.3. It's not
> ideal, but we accept it as a price we pay for the otherwise excellent
> stability of the kernel ABI during the proceeding 6 months. As I said
> above, we know it's coming, we know when it's coming, and we can plan
> for it.
>
> Now contrast that with Stream. Every kernel update in Stream has the
> potential to break the kernel ABI causing packages built for RHEL to
> break. We don't know when that may happen (only that it will), we don't
> know how often it will happen, we have no idea which packages it will
> break. and we have no way to fix it. Consequently, elrepo has been
> unable to support Stream kernels.
>
> It is not just elrepo's users that the Stream kernels will affect. All
> OEM hardware 

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/9/20 10:26 AM, Phelps, Matthew wrote:

> 
> We *are* a community, and we should be heard.
> 

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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Walter H.]

On 09.12.2020 15:45, Johnny Hughes wrote:

On 12/9/20 8:41 AM, Walter H. wrote:

p.s. can someone tell in as short as possible what this CentOS Stream is
in comparison to CentOS 8?

CentOS Stream is built from the currently released RHEL Source Code + 0.1

So if RHEL 8.3 is released .. Stream is the Source Code (built) that
will become 8.4 in a few months.


what does this mean in comparison to CentOS 8, which sources are used 
for this?


to be concrete:

I can download this ISO of CentOS 8

(1) CentOS-8.3.2011-x86_64-dvd1.iso

and this ISO fo CentOS Stream

(2) CentOS-Stream-8-x86_64-20201203-dvd1.iso

which sources are used for (1) and which for (2)?

and what does it mean of the update process be 'yum update'

e.g. if one would do this with CentOS 6, there is no way; the support ended;

with CentOS 8 this will haben one day (somewhat in 2029), and what is 
said about this of CentOS Stream?


Thanks,

Walter


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

Re: [CentOS] Moving to CentOS 8 Stream

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/9/20 8:01 AM, Pete Biggs wrote:
> 
> It's got to be done, so may as well test it ...
> 
> The FAQ says to do:
> 
>dnf install centos-release-stream
>dnf distro-sync
>
> This I did and everything went fine. I checked before doing the distro-
> sync and there was a load of new Stream repos in /etc/yum.repos.d
> 
> Rebooted the machine and dnf has gone back to only looking in 8.3, and
> the stream repos had disappeared.
> 
> Looking in the logs I can see this:
> 
> 2020-12-09T12:28:42Z DEBUG ---> Package centos-stream-release.noarch 
> 8.4-1.el8 will be installed
> 2020-12-09T12:28:42Z DEBUG ---> Package centos-linux-release.noarch 
> 8.3-1.2011.el8 will be obsoleted
> 2020-12-09T12:28:42Z DEBUG ---> Package centos-release-stream.x86_64 
> 8.1-1.1911.0.7.el8 will be obsoleted
> 
> and 
> 
> Installing:
>  centos-stream-release  noarch 8.4-1.el8  
>Stream-BaseOS 21 k
>  replacing  centos-linux-release.noarch 8.3-1.2011.el8
>  replacing  centos-release-stream.x86_64 8.1-1.1911.0.7.el8
> 
> The centos-stream-release RPM does not contain any repo information,
> that was all in centos-release-stream that has been removed. So stream
> has deleted itself.
> 
> It's not a good start.
> 
> I also can't seem to get back to a sensible system and have now got a
> system with a mixture of CentOS 8 and CentOS 8 Stream RPMs with no way
> of installing the Stream repos from an RPM.
> 
> I see that "subscription-manager" has been installed on this system now
> which it never was. Is CentOS also going to be part of that ecosystem
> as well?
> 
> Fortunately this was a throw-away install. I hope no one has tried the
> instructions in the FAQ on an important machine!
> 
>

Put this line :

dnf swap centos-{linux,stream}-repos

after

dnf install centos-release-stream



  (so make it the second command)

FAQ/SITE getting updated.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Is Oracle a real alternative to Centos?

[Frank Cox]

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 11:18:25 +0100
Rainer Traut wrote:

> > Based on my extremely limited knowledge around Oracle Linux, it sounds like
> > that might be a go-to solution for Centos refugees.
> >
> > But is it, really?
> >
> 
> Yes, it is better than Centos and in some aspects better than RHEL:
> 
> - faster security updates than Centos, directly behind RHEl
> - better kernels than RHEL and CentOS (UEKs) wih more features
> - free to download (no subscription needed):
> https://yum.oracle.com/oracle-linux-isos.html
> - free to use:
> https://yum.oracle.com/oracle-linux-8.html
> - massive amount of extra packes and full rebuild of EPEL (same link):
> https://yum.oracle.com/oracle-linux-8.html

You sound like you know what's what with Oracle Linux, so here are a few 
follow-up questions.

Someone else on this list said that the reason he stopped installing it was 
because every time he did, he got snowed under with sales calls from Oracle.  
Have you found this to be the case?

Is it necessary to create an Oracle account to do anything with Oracle Linux 
that can't be done without creating an account?  In other words, does Oracle 
Linux demand that you log into Oracle to complete an installation, update that 
installation, install software from their epel-equivalent, or do any other of 
the regular sysadmin activities that one would expect to be doing? If I start 
installing Oracle Linux on my machines or my client's machines, what benefit do 
I get by signing up for an Oracle account that I don't have if I don't sign up 
for one?

Does Oracle Linux have a free support and discussion mailing list similar to 
this one?

-- 
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Nicolas Kovacs]

Le 09/12/2020 à 13:54, Ljubomir Ljubojevic a écrit :
> But harsh fact remains that CentOS Linux, a free clone of RHEL, is being
> slaughtered, and as far as I am concerned that "Stream" thingy can be
> renamed to RHEL Stream because it has no resemblance to CentOS Linux I
> know and love.

CentOS should be renamed to StreamOS or Fedup Enterprise Linux.

:o)

-- 
Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables
7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat
Site : https://www.microlinux.fr
Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr
Mail : i...@microlinux.fr
Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32
Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Phelps, Matthew]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 11:19 AM Marc Balmer via CentOS 
wrote:

>
>
> > Am 09.12.2020 um 17:15 schrieb Neil Thompson :
> >
> > On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 at 18:06, Phelps, Matthew 
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Hear! HEAR!
> >>
> >> NOBODY asked.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > OK.  We get it.  We all get it loud and clear.  You're pissed off.
> >
> > There's two things you can do about that -
> > 1)  accept reality and start making plans to deal with it, or
> > 2) continue to whine and lash out at people who are probably feeling
> worse
> > about the situation than you are, in which case I have to question
> whether
> > you actually have the maturity to be able to administer a
> > single machine, let alone any kind of IT facility.
>
> I think it is nonetheless not needed to start insulting people.
>
> We should try to keep the discussion friendly and technical.
> ___
>

Thanks Mark. We were told that the RedHat folks that matter (maybe) are
monitoring this list, so I'm sorry if other folks here don't want to hear
it, but I'm not going to stop. I feel I am speaking for many, many others
also.

We *are* a community, and we should be heard.

-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook  | Twitter
 | YouTube 
| Newsletter 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

> Am 09.12.2020 um 17:15 schrieb Neil Thompson :
> 
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 at 18:06, Phelps, Matthew 
> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hear! HEAR!
>> 
>> NOBODY asked.
>> 
>> 
>> 
> OK.  We get it.  We all get it loud and clear.  You're pissed off.
> 
> There's two things you can do about that -
> 1)  accept reality and start making plans to deal with it, or
> 2) continue to whine and lash out at people who are probably feeling worse
> about the situation than you are, in which case I have to question whether
> you actually have the maturity to be able to administer a
> single machine, let alone any kind of IT facility.

I think it is nonetheless not needed to start insulting people.

We should try to keep the discussion friendly and technical.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Leon Fauster via CentOS]

Am 09.12.20 um 15:54 schrieb Bernstein, Noam CIV USN NRL (6393) 
Washington DC (USA) via CentOS:

On Dec 9, 2020, at 9:45 AM, Johnny Hughes 
mailto:joh...@centos.org>> wrote:

CentOS Stream is built from the currently released RHEL Source Code + 0.1

So if RHEL 8.3 is released .. Stream is the Source Code (built) that
will become 8.4 in a few months.

If this statement is exactly correct, then I think a lot of the issues in this 
thread may be easy to address.  However, the question is whether it is really
"That will become"
or actually
"That might become, if it turns out to be stable enough,"

I.e., to me the critical question is how often (in practice) will updates that 
have problems, and will not actually make it into RHEL, end up in CentOS 
Stream.  Presumably all such updates will be superseded in Stream by corrected 
ones, before they're in RHEL.

In fact, would it be possible, to list the final versions of each package's 
update at the moment of the RHEL release, and only do the CentOS Stream update 
based on that list?




What should be also taking into account:
- There is no "CentOS" (Linux or Stream does not matter)
that have a life span of 10 years. Centos Stream 8 will
be retired and deleted from the mirrors end of May 2024 Q1!

--
Leon

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

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Neil Thompson]

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 at 18:06, Phelps, Matthew 
wrote:

>
>
> Hear! HEAR!
>
> NOBODY asked.
>
>
>
OK.  We get it.  We all get it loud and clear.  You're pissed off.

There's two things you can do about that -
1)  accept reality and start making plans to deal with it, or
2) continue to whine and lash out at people who are probably feeling worse
about the situation than you are, in which case I have to question whether
you actually have the maturity to be able to administer a
single machine, let alone any kind of IT facility.


Cheers! (Relax, have a homebrew)
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Phelps, Matthew]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 10:59 AM mark  wrote:

> Oh, that's right, it's 2020, the dumpster fire of a year.
>
> On 12/9/20 4:40 AM, J Martin Rushton via CentOS wrote:
> >
> > On 09/12/2020 09:26, cen...@niob.at wrote:
> >> On 09/12/2020 07:16, Kingsly John wrote:
> >>>
> >>> A non-paying CentOS user is not a real loss for RHEL. But people
> dumping
> >>> CentOS for a non-RHEL clone is definitely going to impact their future
> >>> revenues as they are losing mindshare/goodwill/easy migration etc.
> >
> >> I am seeing this in practice already with juniors - they all use
> >> Ubuntu on their personal systems and they hate having to deal with
> >> RHEL. And their opinions matter in the long run.
> >>
> > And exactly the same applies to senior (or retired) admins on their home
> > computers.  My main home machine runs about a dozen testbed VMs,
> > DHCP/DNS for the home network, Amanda, NFS and Samba for other machines,
> > ownCloud, Apache, Zotero and DokuWiki for the family.  I want a stable
> > server under that lot, not a beta release.
> >
> Retired sr. Linux admin here also, also running CentOS at home. Moved to
> 7 this past summer (really dislike sstemd, hung onto 6 as long as
> possible).
>
> What I find outright offensive is that I see someone posted the specs
> for the Board... and #2 was "community outreach".
>
> Can someone point me to a post, ONE SINGLE POST, before this
> announcement, saying that this was being considered? That this might
> possibly happen?
>
> Show me that this was not just presented to the community as a fait
> accompli, non-negotiable.
>
> mark
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>

Hear! HEAR!

NOBODY asked.


-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook  | Twitter
 | YouTube 
| Newsletter 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Laack, Andrea P]

The companies that pay for RHEL licenses for production and use CentOS for test 
will be left with a large problem.  They will either need to purchase double 
the number of RHEL licenses and switch to RHEL for testing or go to another 
distribution.  RHEL + 1 will not work for testing application compatibility 
with patches.

No company will want to pay double the amount they are currently paying for 
RHEL licenses.  This is not even addressing the cost and time it will take to 
switch over all the test servers.  

This will cost Red Hat credibility with major companies that they might never 
recover from.  This will cost Red Hat major business.

I will be recommending that my company change to Oracle Linux 8, instead of 
upgrading to RHEL 8.  We will get the same model we are currently using,  Paid 
support for production and free for test servers.

Andrea


-Original Message-
From: CentOS  On Behalf Of Johnny Hughes
Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2020 8:45 AM
To: centos@centos.org
Subject: {EXTERNAL} Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?


CAUTION:  This email originated outside of BSWH; avoid action unless you know 
the content is safe. Send suspicious emails as attachments to 
badem...@bswhealth.org.

On 12/9/20 8:41 AM, Walter H. wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I just tried installing a VM from the stream ISO and it worked;
> 
> the only thing I would like to have changed as a default config is
> 
> GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX=" net.ifnames=0 ..."
> 
> the reason, I find eth0, eth1, eth2 easier to use than cryptic names 
> like ens33 or ens0p3 or so;
> 
> Walter
> 
> p.s. can someone tell in as short as possible what this CentOS Stream 
> is in comparison to CentOS 8?
> 

CentOS Stream is built from the currently released RHEL Source Code + 0.1

So if RHEL 8.3 is released .. Stream is the Source Code (built) that will 
become 8.4 in a few months.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos__;!!JA_k2roV-A!UdwByaM6NbmRNG157ij8dpslLkdwk4yyhSLvYSNJ73KgeBBysd3XLNVrq2Mm6sUANQ$
 

**
The information contained in this e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, 
and protected from disclosure, and no waiver of any attorney-client, work 
product, or other privilege is intended.  If you are the intended recipient, 
further disclosures are prohibited without proper authorization. If you are not 
the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify 
the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, 
disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden 
and possibly a violation of federal or state law and regulations. The sender 
and Baylor Scott & White Health, and its affiliated entities, hereby expressly 
reserve all privileges and confidentiality that might otherwise be waived as a 
result of an erroneous or misdirected e-mail transmission. No employee or agent 
is authorized to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of Baylor Scott & 
White Health, or any affiliated entity, by e-mail without express written 
confirmation by the CEO, the Senior Vice President of Supply Chain Services or 
other duly authorized representative of Baylor Scott & White Health.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Barry Brimer]

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020, Louis Lagendijk wrote:


On Wed, 2020-12-09 at 15:13 +, Phil Perry wrote:


If
you are able to retain kernel ABI compatibility between RHEL8 and
Stream
kernels, then we (and other OEMs) will be able to continue to
support
Stream users, otherwise Stream users will have to look to
alternative
solutions.

Phil


Maybe offering 2 kernels in stream may solve your problem? A "latest
point release" and a "rolling version"? I realize that this may cause
issues with packages that really need the new kernel features


Perhaps using the Red Hat compatible kernel (if that's what it's still 
called, I haven't followed any recent naming changes) from Oracle Linux 
could be considered? Not that this isn't messy, but might provide what's 
missing?

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

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[mark]

Oh, that's right, it's 2020, the dumpster fire of a year.

On 12/9/20 4:40 AM, J Martin Rushton via CentOS wrote:


On 09/12/2020 09:26, cen...@niob.at wrote:

On 09/12/2020 07:16, Kingsly John wrote:


A non-paying CentOS user is not a real loss for RHEL. But people dumping
CentOS for a non-RHEL clone is definitely going to impact their future
revenues as they are losing mindshare/goodwill/easy migration etc.

>
I am seeing this in practice already with juniors - they all use 
Ubuntu on their personal systems and they hate having to deal with 
RHEL. And their opinions matter in the long run.


And exactly the same applies to senior (or retired) admins on their home 
computers.  My main home machine runs about a dozen testbed VMs, 
DHCP/DNS for the home network, Amanda, NFS and Samba for other machines, 
ownCloud, Apache, Zotero and DokuWiki for the family.  I want a stable 
server under that lot, not a beta release.


Retired sr. Linux admin here also, also running CentOS at home. Moved to 
7 this past summer (really dislike sstemd, hung onto 6 as long as possible).


What I find outright offensive is that I see someone posted the specs 
for the Board... and #2 was "community outreach".


Can someone point me to a post, ONE SINGLE POST, before this 
announcement, saying that this was being considered? That this might 
possibly happen?


Show me that this was not just presented to the community as a fait 
accompli, non-negotiable.


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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Barry Brimer]

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020, Johnny Hughes wrote:


On 12/9/20 8:54 AM, Bernstein, Noam CIV USN NRL (6393) Washington DC
(USA) via CentOS wrote:

On Dec 9, 2020, at 9:45 AM, Johnny Hughes 
mailto:joh...@centos.org>> wrote:

CentOS Stream is built from the currently released RHEL Source Code + 0.1

So if RHEL 8.3 is released .. Stream is the Source Code (built) that
will become 8.4 in a few months.

If this statement is exactly correct, then I think a lot of the issues in this 
thread may be easy to address.  However, the question is whether it is really
"That will become"
or actually
"That might become, if it turns out to be stable enough,"

I.e., to me the critical question is how often (in practice) will updates that 
have problems, and will not actually make it into RHEL, end up in CentOS 
Stream.  Presumably all such updates will be superseded in Stream by corrected 
ones, before they're in RHEL.

In fact, would it be possible, to list the final versions of each package's 
update at the moment of the RHEL release, and only do the CentOS Stream update 
based on that list?



There is one source for the source code that will be used.  While in
stream it will iterative (the push a bunch of changes today .. the build
those change today).  Those go through a CI process and get released
into stream.

When it comes time to build rhel 8.4 it will come from the same source code.


If a bug were to make it into CentOS Stream, and identified before RHEL 
8.4 was released, would an updated/fixed package be produced and placed into 
CentOS Stream?


If a bug were to make it past CentOS Stream and into RHEL 8.4 and the bug 
is then identified and fixed after the release of RHEL 8.4 would an 
updated/fixed package be produced and placed into CentOS Stream in the 
same timeframe or only if/when updated packages and their dependencies 
were made/released into CentOS Stream for updated features for RHEL 8.5?


If the same happened in the previous question but was in a package or set 
of packages that was being rebased in 8.5 would it work the same way?


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

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Louis Lagendijk]

On Wed, 2020-12-09 at 15:13 +, Phil Perry wrote:
> 
> If 
> you are able to retain kernel ABI compatibility between RHEL8 and
> Stream 
> kernels, then we (and other OEMs) will be able to continue to
> support 
> Stream users, otherwise Stream users will have to look to
> alternative 
> solutions.
> 
> Phil
> 
Maybe offering 2 kernels in stream may solve your problem? A "latest
point release" and a "rolling version"? I realize that this may cause
issues with packages that really need the new kernel features

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

[CentOS] CentOS Stream & Release Notes / Documentation

[Chris Schanzle via CentOS]

One thing I have not seen discussed is how users will be notified of changes to 
functionality and new features in CentOS Stream.

With Stream being on the leading edge of a release as opposed to following, 
will there be some mechanism where changes are blogged about, Beta release 
notes, or something similar?

Thanks again to JohnnyH and the rest of the team for a great ride.

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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/9/20 8:54 AM, Bernstein, Noam CIV USN NRL (6393) Washington DC
(USA) via CentOS wrote:
> On Dec 9, 2020, at 9:45 AM, Johnny Hughes 
> mailto:joh...@centos.org>> wrote:
> 
> CentOS Stream is built from the currently released RHEL Source Code + 0.1
> 
> So if RHEL 8.3 is released .. Stream is the Source Code (built) that
> will become 8.4 in a few months.
> 
> If this statement is exactly correct, then I think a lot of the issues in 
> this thread may be easy to address.  However, the question is whether it is 
> really
> "That will become"
> or actually
> "That might become, if it turns out to be stable enough,"
> 
> I.e., to me the critical question is how often (in practice) will updates 
> that have problems, and will not actually make it into RHEL, end up in CentOS 
> Stream.  Presumably all such updates will be superseded in Stream by 
> corrected ones, before they're in RHEL.
> 
> In fact, would it be possible, to list the final versions of each package's 
> update at the moment of the RHEL release, and only do the CentOS Stream 
> update based on that list?
> 

There is one source for the source code that will be used.  While in
stream it will iterative (the push a bunch of changes today .. the build
those change today).  Those go through a CI process and get released
into stream.

When it comes time to build rhel 8.4 it will come from the same source code.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Phil Perry]

On 09/12/2020 03:26, Brendan Conoboy wrote:

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 4:19 PM Pete Biggs  wrote:


On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 17:54 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:

On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 03:15:17PM +, Pete Biggs wrote:



"CentOS will become the developer playground"


This one is categorically not the case. Even Fedora isn't a developer
playground. Everything landing in CentOS Stream is actually *planned*

(with

emphasis intentional) to go in a future RHEL release.


It's all the talk of SIGs and developing and testing and that Stream
will be the centerpiece of that. That's what I meant.



I don't know if I'd call SIGs a playground, but they're certainly an
important venue for communities to explore variations.



Previously, all the development around RHEL releases was done in secret,

in

the Red Hat black box. Now it's out of the box and can be watched. There

may

be some launch pains, but I expect the average quality of an update

hitting

CentOS Stream to be very high.


I don't get that from the documents released today.  If Stream is *not*
a test-bed, then surely the code that appears in Stream must be fully
formed in secret behind the scenes first. Yes, it will appear piecemeal
rather than in one big chunk, but it has been categorically denied that
Stream is not a RHEL 8.n+1 beta and is more a RHEL 8.n+1 RC/rolling
release.



I think maybe some of the nervousness about CentOS Stream comes from RHEL
seeming opacity on its development model.  As one of the architects of our
development process I'd be happy to field questions.  I'll start by making
a two points in case they're in any way unclear:

1. Everything that goes into RHEL lands upstream first, then the patches
are backported into the RHEL releases.
2. Most of the work we do or plan on doing is in bugzilla.redhat.com.  If
you go into the RHEL8 product queue today and file a bug you'll see "CentOS
Stream" as a "Version" where an issue is encountered.

I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the rolling-release

aspect of this. There will be no definitive versioning of CentOS in the
future - all you will be able to say is "fully updated" and it won't be
possible to slot a CentOS system in to exactly match a RHEL version.
Will third party RPMs built against RHEL 8.x be installable on a CentOS
8 Stream system? The answer is surely "it depends", but there are a lot
of hardware vendors that target drivers to RHEL releases, which may
well make CentOS non-viable for hardware that doesn't have drivers
built in to the kernel.



Generally if they follow the ABI guidelines I would expect it to work.
Those are here: https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility

For loadable kernel modules there's a kernel ABI.




Hi Brendan,

This point is *critical*, so I apologise in advance for the lengthy 
post, *you* are breaking the kernel ABI between RHEL8 and Stream.


One of the main unique selling points of RHEL is the stability of it's 
kernel ABI. No other distro provides this. The very nature of rolling 
kernel updates in Stream breaks the kernel ABI and breaks compatibility 
between RHEL8 and Stream. What works on RHEL8 may not work on Stream. At 
the kernel level, the two products diverge in fundamental compatibility 
and are not compatible, are no longer the same.


How bad is this divergence / breakage? Well, we know the kernel ABI will 
change from time to time, almost exclusively at new point releases due 
to the massive backporting work that goes into the RHEL kernel. And this 
is fine, we know it's coming, we know when it's coming, and we can plan 
for it's impact. It's a price well worth paying.


To put this in context, at elrepo I currently help maintain around 50 
3rd party kernel driver packages for RHEL8. When RH released RHEL8.3, 
every single package in our repository broke due to changes in the 
kernel ABI in the 6 month period between RHEL8.2 and RHEL8.3. It's not 
ideal, but we accept it as a price we pay for the otherwise excellent 
stability of the kernel ABI during the proceeding 6 months. As I said 
above, we know it's coming, we know when it's coming, and we can plan 
for it.


Now contrast that with Stream. Every kernel update in Stream has the 
potential to break the kernel ABI causing packages built for RHEL to 
break. We don't know when that may happen (only that it will), we don't 
know how often it will happen, we have no idea which packages it will 
break. and we have no way to fix it. Consequently, elrepo has been 
unable to support Stream kernels.


It is not just elrepo's users that the Stream kernels will affect. All 
OEM hardware manufacturers releasing 3rd party driver rpms as part of 
Red Hat's Driver Update Programme or otherwise will be similarly 
affected, and their driver updates will not be applicable to or 
compatible with CentOS Stream. In fact, RHEL's own driver update 
packages will likely need rebuilding against each Stream kernel update, 
although presumably you are in the unique 

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Ljubomir Ljubojevic]

Gregory Kurtzer, founder od CAOS Linux that later changed name to CentOS
is starting new RHEL clone: https://github.com/hpcng/rocky

On 12/8/20 8:34 PM, Strahil Nikolov via CentOS-devel wrote:
> If anyone is considering to fork CentOS 8 (I'm not talking about that
> "Stream"), count me in.
> 
> Otherwise I will switch to openSUSE Leap. At least they are not pushing
> me some testing ground.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Strahil Nikolov
> 
> В 12:07 -0500 на 08.12.2020 (вт), Phelps, Matthew написа:
>> I still haven't seen an answer to the question, "Who made this
>> decision?"
>> and, "How can we lobby to get it changed?"
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 9:06 AM Rich Bowen  wrote:
>>
>>> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the
>>> next
>>> year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red
>>> Hat
>>> Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead
>>> of a
>>> current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will
>>> end
>>> at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date,
>>> serving as
>>> the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
>>>
>>> Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS
>>> Linux
>>> 7, and we’ll continue to produce that version through the remainder
>>> of
>>> the RHEL 7 life cycle.
>>> https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates
>>>
>>> CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in
>>> collaboration among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This
>>> ensures SIGs are developing and testing against what becomes the
>>> next
>>> version of RHEL. This also provides SIGs a clear single goal,
>>> rather
>>> than having to build and test for two releases. It gives the CentOS
>>> contributor community a great deal of influence in the future of
>>> RHEL.
>>> And it removes confusion around what “CentOS” means in the Linux
>>> distribution ecosystem.
>>>
>>> When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option
>>> will
>>> be to migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from
>>> CentOS
>>> Linux 8, and has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux
>>> releases.
>>> If you are using CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and
>>> are
>>> concerned that CentOS Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage
>>> you
>>> to contact Red Hat about options.
>>>
>>> We have an FAQ - https://centos.org/distro-faq/ - to help with your
>>> information and planning needs, as you figure out how this shift of
>>> project focus might affect you.
>>>
>>> [See also: Red Hat's perspective on this.
>>>
>>> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux
>>> ]
>>>
>>> ___
>>> CentOS-devel mailing list
>>> centos-de...@centos.org
>>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
>>>
>>
>>
> 
> ___
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> centos-de...@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
> 


-- 
Ljubomir Ljubojevic
(Love is in the Air)
PL Computers
Serbia, Europe

StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Bernstein, Noam CIV USN NRL (6393) Washington DC (USA) via CentOS]

On Dec 9, 2020, at 9:45 AM, Johnny Hughes 
mailto:joh...@centos.org>> wrote:

CentOS Stream is built from the currently released RHEL Source Code + 0.1

So if RHEL 8.3 is released .. Stream is the Source Code (built) that
will become 8.4 in a few months.

If this statement is exactly correct, then I think a lot of the issues in this 
thread may be easy to address.  However, the question is whether it is really
"That will become"
or actually
"That might become, if it turns out to be stable enough,"

I.e., to me the critical question is how often (in practice) will updates that 
have problems, and will not actually make it into RHEL, end up in CentOS 
Stream.  Presumably all such updates will be superseded in Stream by corrected 
ones, before they're in RHEL.

In fact, would it be possible, to list the final versions of each package's 
update at the moment of the RHEL release, and only do the CentOS Stream update 
based on that list?

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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/9/20 8:41 AM, Walter H. wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I just tried installing a VM from the stream ISO and it worked;
> 
> the only thing I would like to have changed as a default config is
> 
> GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX=" net.ifnames=0 ..."
> 
> the reason, I find eth0, eth1, eth2 easier to use than cryptic names
> like ens33 or ens0p3 or so;
> 
> Walter
> 
> p.s. can someone tell in as short as possible what this CentOS Stream is
> in comparison to CentOS 8?
> 

CentOS Stream is built from the currently released RHEL Source Code + 0.1

So if RHEL 8.3 is released .. Stream is the Source Code (built) that
will become 8.4 in a few months.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] CentOS Stream from bottom works, what is this?

[Walter H.]

Hello,

I just tried installing a VM from the stream ISO and it worked;

the only thing I would like to have changed as a default config is

GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX=" net.ifnames=0 ..."

the reason, I find eth0, eth1, eth2 easier to use than cryptic names 
like ens33 or ens0p3 or so;


Walter

p.s. can someone tell in as short as possible what this CentOS Stream is 
in comparison to CentOS 8?



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

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Nikolaos Milas]

On 9/12/2020 4:32 μ.μ., Brendan Conoboy wrote:

As CentOS Stream grows, I expect many companies who sell hardware will
become active members of the community.


Probably, but this is not the point. The value of CentOS is that in 
essence it is identical to RHEL.


This allows its use in multiple scenarios which the new CentOS Stream 
will not be able to support any more, due to its nature.


You may want to read comments at:

https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

and:

https://www.change.org/p/centos-governing-board-do-not-destroy-centos-by-using-it-as-a-rhel-upstream

to realize why this change will make it unsuitable in most of its 
current usage scenarios.


Cheers,
Nick

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

Re: [CentOS] Moving to CentOS 8 Stream

[Tom Bishop]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 8:32 AM Pete Biggs  wrote:

> >
> > >
> > > I thought I saw a reply from Johnny that streams wasn't quite ready,
> maybe
> > > he will chime in but that's what I thought I saw in a response.
>
> What, in amongst the hundreds of messages, he said it wasn't ready!!
> Why publish a FAQ and a web page telling you how to migrate without a
> great big banner across it saying "don't rush, it's not ready yet". Or
> better, don't publish anything if the instructions don't work.
>
> Sheesh.
>
> P.
>
>
>
Here is the snippet that I saw but cannot find the original, underlined the
important bits that I saw...

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020, 22:58 Johnny Hughes  wrote:

> On 12/8/20 1:04 PM, Paul Heinlein wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Dec 2020, Rich Bowen wrote:
> >
> >> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next
> >> year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat
> >> Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of
> >> a current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will
> >> end at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date,
> >> serving as the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise
> Linux.
> >
> > I suppose I understand the negative feedback -- CentOS 8.x will no
> > longer be a rebuild of RHEL 8.x but will instead be some version of RHEL
> > 8.(x + 1) -- but I'm much more interested in empirical results than in
> > suppositions. I've taken a couple test VMs and set them to CentOS 8
> > Stream and will keep an eye on them. They will either prove stable or
> > not, but (observation > guessing) in my book.
> >
> > If history is any guide, they will prove very stable. If not, then I'll
> > pour one out for CentOS and look elsewhere.
> >
>
> Which is the approach I recommend everyone take.
>




*> And, it will likely be sometime mid to late 1st quarter 2021 before>
CentOS Stream is in its 'Fully Functional' state with community pull>
requests and the RHEL package maintainer doing all the work in
CentOS> Stream, etc .  CentOS Linux 8 will still be available and updated
until*
*> the end of December 2021. *
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Moving to CentOS 8 Stream

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/9/20 8:31 AM, Pete Biggs wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I thought I saw a reply from Johnny that streams wasn't quite ready, maybe
>>> he will chime in but that's what I thought I saw in a response.
> 
> What, in amongst the hundreds of messages, he said it wasn't ready!!
> Why publish a FAQ and a web page telling you how to migrate without a
> great big banner across it saying "don't rush, it's not ready yet". Or
> better, don't publish anything if the instructions don't work.
> 
> 

It (Stream) works for me .. I currently use it on all my el8 machines.
I even have Plex Media Server installed on it with no issues.

I would recommend however, wait until the RHEL Engineers are the ones
doing the builds .. which will be sometime in Q1 2021.

I will do the conversion from CentOS Linux 8 to Stream (8.3.2011 .. so
make sure you are updated to latest before you start) and if it does not
work, I will make sure it does work ASAP.



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

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 1:41 AM Pete Biggs  wrote:

> > I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the rolling-release
> > > aspect of this. There will be no definitive versioning of CentOS in the
> > > future - all you will be able to say is "fully updated" and it won't be
> > > possible to slot a CentOS system in to exactly match a RHEL version.
> > > Will third party RPMs built against RHEL 8.x be installable on a CentOS
> > > 8 Stream system? The answer is surely "it depends", but there are a lot
> > > of hardware vendors that target drivers to RHEL releases, which may
> > > well make CentOS non-viable for hardware that doesn't have drivers
> > > built in to the kernel.
> >
> > Generally if they follow the ABI guidelines I would expect it to work.
> > Those are here:
> https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility
> >
> > For loadable kernel modules there's a kernel ABI.
>
> Yes, and many things work well. My most recent issue was that kit
> supplied by HPE (sorry, it's pain is stuck in my mind) had a RAID
> controller that needs a driver disk during install - doing the install
> time drivers is not a problem, the problem is that they don't support
> CentOS, hence I had to use a RHEL driver and out of the 5 available for
> RHEL7/8, only one of them worked with a CentOS release. HPE support
> don't want to know because they don't support CentOS.
>
> I know this comes under the heading of "Corporate RedHat Policy", but
> is RedHat going to do the right thing by CentOS 8 Stream to the level
> of lobbying other behemoth corporations such as HPE or Dell to support
> it?
>

As CentOS Stream grows, I expect many companies who sell hardware will
become active members of the community.

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / Linux Project Lead / Red Hat, Inc.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Moving to CentOS 8 Stream

[Pete Biggs]

> 
> > 
> > I thought I saw a reply from Johnny that streams wasn't quite ready, maybe
> > he will chime in but that's what I thought I saw in a response.

What, in amongst the hundreds of messages, he said it wasn't ready!!
Why publish a FAQ and a web page telling you how to migrate without a
great big banner across it saying "don't rush, it's not ready yet". Or
better, don't publish anything if the instructions don't work.

Sheesh.

P.



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

Re: [CentOS] Moving to CentOS 8 Stream

[J Martin Rushton via CentOS]

I thought I saw a reply from Johnny that streams wasn't quite ready, maybe
he will chime in but that's what I thought I saw in a response.

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



Beta perhaps? :-o

--
J Martin Rushton MBCS
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Moving to CentOS 8 Stream

[Tom Bishop]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020, 8:01 AM Pete Biggs  wrote:

>
> It's got to be done, so may as well test it ...
>
> The FAQ says to do:
>
>dnf install centos-release-stream
>dnf distro-sync
>
> This I did and everything went fine. I checked before doing the distro-
> sync and there was a load of new Stream repos in /etc/yum.repos.d
>
> Rebooted the machine and dnf has gone back to only looking in 8.3, and
> the stream repos had disappeared.
>
> Looking in the logs I can see this:
>
> 2020-12-09T12:28:42Z DEBUG ---> Package centos-stream-release.noarch
> 8.4-1.el8 will be installed
> 2020-12-09T12:28:42Z DEBUG ---> Package centos-linux-release.noarch
> 8.3-1.2011.el8 will be obsoleted
> 2020-12-09T12:28:42Z DEBUG ---> Package centos-release-stream.x86_64
> 8.1-1.1911.0.7.el8 will be obsoleted
>
> and
>
> Installing:
>  centos-stream-release  noarch 8.4-1.el8
>Stream-BaseOS 21 k
>  replacing  centos-linux-release.noarch 8.3-1.2011.el8
>  replacing  centos-release-stream.x86_64 8.1-1.1911.0.7.el8
>
> The centos-stream-release RPM does not contain any repo information,
> that was all in centos-release-stream that has been removed. So stream
> has deleted itself.
>
> It's not a good start.
>
> I also can't seem to get back to a sensible system and have now got a
> system with a mixture of CentOS 8 and CentOS 8 Stream RPMs with no way
> of installing the Stream repos from an RPM.
>
> I see that "subscription-manager" has been installed on this system now
> which it never was. Is CentOS also going to be part of that ecosystem
> as well?
>
> Fortunately this was a throw-away install. I hope no one has tried the
> instructions in the FAQ on an important machine!
>
> P.
>
>
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>

>
> I thought I saw a reply from Johnny that streams wasn't quite ready, maybe
> he will chime in but that's what I thought I saw in a response.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Rainer Traut]

Am 08.12.20 um 22:30 schrieb Frank Cox:

Prior to this point it's been a difference without any difference, but I wonder 
if Oracle actually re-creates RHEL or if they re-create Centos.

Oracle was/is much faster in releasing updates, point releases and releases.
They don't need Centos to get OL going.




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

[CentOS-docs] [centos/centos.org] branch master updated (e6ab865 -> 9b7922d)

[git]

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

rbowen pushed a change to branch master
in repository centos/centos.org.

from e6ab865  Folks seem to object to "rolling release"
 add 5f3bd9f  Mention EPEL Next
 add 9b7922d  Clarify answer a little bit.

No new revisions were added by this update.

Summary of changes:
 distro-faq.md | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

-- 
To stop receiving notification emails like this one, please contact
the administrator of this repository.
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8 future

[Nikolaos Milas]

On 9/12/2020 3:19 μ.μ., Nikolaos Milas wrote:

I still hope that you will not disappoint CentOS admins and users so 
badly and that you will continue to support CentOS 8 (and CentOS 7) in 
its current/expected form. 


A petition has started, to request IBM/Redhat to continue CentOS 8 as 
initially announced/promised.


Those who agree, are urged to sign:

   
https://www.change.org/p/centos-governing-board-do-not-destroy-centos-by-using-it-as-a-rhel-upstream

Cheers,
Nick

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

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Scott Robbins]

> 
> Am 08.12.20 um 19:20 schrieb Alan Mead:
> > On 12/8/2020 11:28 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> > > I have been doing this for 17 years. I would continue doing for 17
> > > more.  But it is what it is and wishing for it to be different is not
> > > going to happen.  I know .. I've tried.
> > 
> > We owe everyone who worked on CentOS a big thank you.

Yes, we do. Let's not forget that. 
> > I shudder to imagine a world where Oracle Linux replaces CentOS.
> 
Who knows? Amazon may see this as another opportunity and in 5
years Amazon Linux will be the standard. Or Ubuntu, with its use of ZFS
rather than playing again with btrfs--RH dropped that, but now it's the
default in Fedora, so it may make a reappearance.

It had a good long run. Or maybe stream's differences will be minimal, and
almost nothing will change.  

Regardless, let's not forget that we *do* owe everyone who worked on CentOS
lots of thanks.  (Though my current job is a FreeBSD shop, we have some
things on CentOS that have packages for Linux but not FreeBSD.)

-- 
Scott Robbins
PGP keyID EB3467D6
( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6

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