Re: [CentOS] So sorry! was: Re: EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)
On 05/17/2011 01:46 PM, Michael Simpson wrote: On 17 May 2011 11:03, John R. Dennisonj...@gerdesas.com wrote: On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 05:58:31PM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: Yeah...for you...think of the poor moderator! I'd be more than happy to moderate the list. I can assure you that the current trolls will be back in their cages safely under their bridges in short order. John Hang around in OpenBSD-misc or Full-Disclosure for a while to reset your values of ML behaviour :) Idiot trolls like Radu Gheorghiu don't even make it into my fetchmailrc. Why am I a troll, when I simply state my opinion? Is this mailling list the place where we can simply insult everyone we don't like? Michael, saying that I am an idiot, does that make you feel better? Do you feel reliefed now? Is CentOS 6 any closer now? What is wrong with you people? That being said, whining about the delay to the point where one of the people doing the work is obviously pissed off is just stupid. from theo.c Whiners. They scale really well. mike sorry 4 adding to the decrease in SNR ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)
On 05/16/2011 11:50 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: On 5/16/2011 3:38 PM, John R Pierce wrote: On 05/16/11 1:18 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: Yes, but whatever can't be automated here should benefit from doing the trial-and-error in parallel. And the potential improvements might come in the automation process as much as the grunge work - you can't really predict how an open project will develop. so you are volunteering to take over 4.next or 5.x or whatever when the time comes ? you can come up with the build infrastructure and develop this automation in the meantime? I'd suggest starting with recreating 5.6 by working from 5.5 and the RHEL 5,6 SRPMs exclusively. let us know how long it takes from scratch, ok? you don't mind that we-the-community would want our packagers vetted by demonstrating the ability to deliver... consider this a test run. No, but I'm not the only member of the public. And your suggestion of starting by reproducing someone else's work from scratch instead of building on it would be like Linus telling everyone to just write their own unix-like kernel before trying to add to it. If he had done that instead of letting others build on the existing work we wouldn't be talking about usable Linux distributions today at all. The main fear the developers have is that somebody could steal their work and come up with another RHEL clone easily if they release their build system scripts. I think this is obvious by now. It is also pretty obvious that the developers have a strong hope that by keeping CentOS closed, somebody will notice their skills and will pay them a fortune for their knowledge by hiring them. This is my opinion and it is based on what I read on this list during the last months. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)
On 05/17/2011 12:15 AM, Ron Blizzard wrote: On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Radu Gheorghiur...@pengooin.net wrote: The main fear the developers have is that somebody could steal their work and come up with another RHEL clone easily if they release their build system scripts. I think this is obvious by now. It is also pretty obvious that the developers have a strong hope that by keeping CentOS closed, somebody will notice their skills and will pay them a fortune for their knowledge by hiring them. This is my opinion and it is based on what I read on this list during the last months. What a load of undiluted crap. Please keep this for yourself. They've been doing this for over seven years. But nothing is stopping you from starting your own Red Hat rebuild project. You *know* so much better how it *should* be done. Enlighten us. Actually do it. I never said I want to do it. I only said what the devs are obviously doing. Maybe 7+ years is too much waiting for somebody to come and fill their pockets. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)
On 05/17/2011 12:47 AM, John R Pierce wrote: On 05/16/11 2:41 PM, Radu Gheorghiu wrote: I never said I want to do it. ah, so what DID you say? you want someone unspecified to do a better/different job for you than someone else is already doing for free ? man, its easy to volunteer other people from the comfort of your desk. If you would re-read my email you would see that I only expressed my thoughts. I did not ask for somebody else to do it. If this is your reaction when somebody says what he thinks, you got issues. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)
On 05/17/2011 12:51 AM, John R. Dennison wrote: On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 12:41:23AM +0300, Radu Gheorghiu wrote: On 05/17/2011 12:15 AM, Ron Blizzard wrote: What a load of undiluted crap. Please keep this for yourself. Why when it's the truth. Does the truth hurt? It may be the truth from your point of view. What I said in my initial post is what many companies i work with feel. If some of you can't say anything smarter than crap, then please focus for a few seconds before posting. I never said I want to do it. I only said what the devs are obviously doing. Maybe 7+ years is too much waiting for somebody to come and fill their pockets. s/want to do it/can do it/ John ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How can a company help, officially?
On 04/13/2011 07:55 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 04/13/2011 10:24 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: On 4/12/2011 5:40 PM, R P Herrold wrote: There is no compelling reason to tamper with a system that works that I have seen so far. Is there any amount of elapsed time that will convince you otherwise? I'll refrain from calling this passage of time a delay, since that would imply some sort of schedule, but it would nice if the project web site set expectations appropriately. And wouldn't the same 'system that works' comment have applied to WhiteBox for some bounded period of time? Our goals have not changed, they are still what they were and what are posted. Sometimes it takes longer than we want. People have a choice. They can use CentOS or they can use something else. We do not need to say the same things over and over again. There is no time limit that we would go past where I would allow people who I do not know and trust to commit items into the CentOS tree. I have to use this in production and it has to be done correctly. It does not matter how long it takes if it is done right. I don't think that's what we are discussing here about. I think we are discussing about making it all open, so that everybody can setup a build environment easily and start working on the real issues, not working on the build environment itself. You replied to one of my questions, and gave me plenty of information. I thank you for that. That's useful. However, if I want to start troubleshooting packages right away, and help CentOS, I can't do that. I will first have to loop through emails from you on this list. Find hints on the build environment. Loop through bugs.centos find hints there as well. Probably it will take me much more time setting things up, than actually debugging the trouble package. So, what I think we (we = some of us) are asking, is make it easy for anybody to set this up and start debugging. The way things are right now, no wonder few people help. People who can actually help here, have little time. If you don't give them some resources, thy won't bother figuring it out. Whitebox is not, nor was it ever, deployed on 29% of all Linux webserver servers worldwide. CentOS is ... right now ... deployed on 29% of web servers on the Internet that use Linux. That is more than RHEL and Ubuntu combined: http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/os-linux/all/all CentOS is also deployed on 8 of the top 500 supercomputers in the world (actually more than 8, because many that use CentOS instead just say Linux as a generic name): http://www.top500.org/stats/list/36/os Specifically Ranger: http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/entry/lone_ranger CentOS is in use in hundreds of Universities all over the world. CentOS is a major player on the Amazon Cloud: http://news.idg.no/cw/art.cfm?id=BE5C04FE-1A64-6A71-CEBD76121F6F5495 We must be doing something right. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How can a company help, officially?
On 04/12/2011 02:01 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote: On 04/12/2011 01:21 AM, Phil Schaffner wrote: Karanbir Singh wrote on 04/11/2011 12:20 PM: ... No, re-read what I said. Ownership in the distro is quite a different ballgame from userend support. Yes, but it seems to be rather closely held. The option I was talking about was how that can change - people can step up to take ownership of various components in the distro - was that not clear in my email ? I can try and put this into a more verbose text and explain how something like this might work. I think you are avoiding the real issue here, again and again. It's not about ownership. It's not about taking ownership. It's about making the process open. A simple wiki page describing what you are doing now, and a ftp URL with files to download would do. Then, everybody can contribute. There can be 100 people trying to fix a bug, rather than 1 person who takes ownership .. what's this ownership nonsense? There has been extensive support and agitation among the user-base for more timely updates, particularly for security issues. It seems obvious to me that there is considerable room for improvement. sure, I dont deny that. But when there are options available for people to help with that, noone seems really keen on getting on board. The few who do are actively discouraged from doing what they can. A lot of people have been thinking rather hard about how CentOS can be improved. Please share your thoughts on what needs to be done, and carry through with a plan of action to accomplish it. Nobody is in a better position to do that than you are. Sure, I am happy to do that. - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How can a company help, officially?
On 04/12/2011 02:37 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote: On 04/12/2011 12:31 PM, Radu Gheorghiu wrote: I think you are avoiding the real issue here, again and again. It's not about ownership. It's not about taking ownership. It's about making the process open. A simple wiki page describing what you are doing now, and a ftp URL with files to download would do. There are pages in the wiki that already describe what we are doing right now. I think you already stated that the pages about rebuilding are outdated. Then, everybody can contribute. There can be 100 people trying to fix a bug, rather than 1 person who takes ownership .. what's this ownership nonsense? The bug.centos.org site is open to anyone who might want to get involved and help fix bugs. I'm guessing you are just new to CentOS and dont really know what you are talking about. Try thinking things though for a change. Useless unless I can replicate your build system. We must work on the same thing, not on separate things. - Kb ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How can a company help, officially?
On 04/12/2011 02:37 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote: On 04/12/2011 12:31 PM, Radu Gheorghiu wrote: I think you are avoiding the real issue here, again and again. It's not about ownership. It's not about taking ownership. It's about making the process open. A simple wiki page describing what you are doing now, and a ftp URL with files to download would do. There are pages in the wiki that already describe what we are doing right now. Then, everybody can contribute. There can be 100 people trying to fix a bug, rather than 1 person who takes ownership .. what's this ownership nonsense? The bug.centos.org site is open to anyone who might want to get involved and help fix bugs. I'm guessing you are just new to CentOS and dont really know what you are talking about. Try thinking things though for a change. Why would anyone care to share knowledge, when apparently you don't care to do so? Maybe you are just new to the concept of open communities. - Kb ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How can a company help, officially?
On 04/12/2011 08:00 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote: On 04/12/2011 05:19 PM, Brian Mathis wrote: Fixing the timing of release is something we get from getting the process into the right place. And not the other way around. There seems NO ONE IS SAYING TO PUSH CRAP OUT THE DOOR JUST FOR THE SAKE OF GETTING IT OUT. EVERYONE IS SAYING TO OPEN THE PROCESS SO THEY CAN HELP GET THE HIGH QUALITY STUFF OUT THE DOOR FASTER. erm, you seem confused. Because that is sort of the exact point that I was making - get the process right, and if its in the right place we get the free win from faster output. This is another area where the project needs to be brought into the 21st century. find and promote people who have expertise in specific functionality. This is how closed-source corporations run their projects. Open source allows you to tap into the long tail of You also seem confused about the idea of the long tail, there are no caps or limits being enforced, as closed source projects do, on the contributions that people make. I'm not proposing that clueless idiots get involved, just that people who do get involved should know what they are doing. And perhaps get enough people involved so that if a few people are not around when needed, there are always enough to pickup on the slack created from that. people who might have time to contribute 1 or 2 things, but not become a complete owner of a subsystem. With many people contributing like this, the main project committers would vet and incorporate changes, maintaining the level of trust while reducing their workload. Every Again, either I failed to communicate this or you didnt get it - large part of the plan is to bring this sort of a contributor base into a loop that then feeds into what is the main project committers. It could also mean splitting the QA process into the QA team and Release Team with the core build team taking care of the convert from source to binary process. Also, giving people ownership of something they enjoy doing and allowing them to be productive within that space is'nt something thats either open source or closed source centric - its a nice gesture to recognise people doing the lifting. Also, if you think that just having something out there that people can randomly drive-by and fix is going to work, you must be either really clueless or just new to open source. 1. a LOT of people understand exactly what Brian understood as well. 2. Why do you always have to end with you must be clueless, you must be new to CentOS, you must be new to Open Source. How can you tell? You can tell all this just by reading one email? - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How can a company help, officially?
On 04/11/2011 11:54 PM, Tru Huynh wrote: On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 03:37:28PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: On 4/11/2011 2:59 PM, Tru Huynh wrote: Make your own experiment (i.e rebuild your own clone) and document/report back what you find out as the proper order of rebuild of the upstream SRPMS ? So having everyone repeat the same mistakes with no coordination is your idea of doing things faster? who is everyone? I might throw some time and equipment at it if I knew I wasn't re-inventing square wheels (or even round ones for that matter). And I suspect that others smarter than I am would do the same and maybe even improve the approach by coming up with ways to predict the build environment needed to reproduce a given binary to reduce the trial-and-error time. Same answer for you than I made for Dag, volonteer to coordinate, build, write scripts, publish *your* work and you will be helping your fellows. Oh really? If each tech would do his own rebuild and then publish it we would end up with a few thousand more distributions. I doubt we all can then follow all that work. I think we are having this discussion since we want to improve CentOS, not have our own distro. I think if somebody wants his own, he already has it or he is working on it behind closed doors (ahem...). But I don't see this happening if the process stays closed any more than I think there would be a useful Linux today - or most of the packages comprising Red Hat's product - if development had not been open and shared. I only see wasted time talking, no actions. I will be happy to be proven wrong. Tru ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Update?
On 04/07/2011 03:58 PM, Max Hetrick wrote: On 04/07/2011 08:41 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: Please try to maintain some semblance of professionalism when you post to this list. This coming from someone who frequently tells people to SHUT UP and go away and use something else. I guess that's far more professional than others trying to open up communications between a projects members and the developers. Fully agree. This attitude has lead many companies I know to drop CentOS in favour of other distros. This project is sure not going in the right direction. I know, I'm going to be told to use something else, I know I know, I'm looking for alternatives. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Update?
On 04/07/2011 06:49 PM, Ian Murray wrote: These people are priceless and don't deserve to be submitted to the harshness we have been witnessing lately. And everyone else is worthless and deserve the rudeness handed out by the devs? Why don't you make comment on that or is that perfectly acceptable because of who they are? Yes. And we should use another distro, and change our mail clients, ... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Update?
On 04/07/2011 07:02 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 04/07/2011 08:11 AM, Radu Gheorghiu wrote: On 04/07/2011 03:58 PM, Max Hetrick wrote: On 04/07/2011 08:41 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: Please try to maintain some semblance of professionalism when you post to this list. This coming from someone who frequently tells people to SHUT UP and go away and use something else. I guess that's far more professional than others trying to open up communications between a projects members and the developers. Fully agree. This attitude has lead many companies I know to drop CentOS in favour of other distros. This project is sure not going in the right direction. I know, I'm going to be told to use something else, I know I know, I'm looking for alternatives. Good ... if you don't like CentOS, then we do not want you to use it. Good. For people who do like it, we do want you to use it. What we do not want is for people to think that they have a Service Level Agreement with CentOS to produce updates on their schedule. I don't think anybody wants a SLA from CentOS. If you WANT a service level agreement with me, then you may contract for one. If you pay me enough, I will guarantee you updates on what ever schedule you are willing to pay for. I will be very professional in my dealings with you in that case too. It's all about the money is it? Johnny, why do you always reply with don't use it ? Or now i see give me money and i'll do it ? Instead I would reply with a link to here's how we do the rebuild now, here's the tools we use, and here's where we are at, help us out! . Instead of telling users to leave CentOS, ask for their help. Why not do that? I'm not sure, maybe all these resources are already online and I am not aware of them. That might very well be the case. However I am certain that if you would reply with an URL which states where the project is at, everybody would be happy, and you won't be seeing any when is this ready? questions. If CentOS project is not so closed as it seems to be, please enlighten me. When you want something that is provided for free, and when you want to treat me like you are paying me a million dollars a year to give it to you, guess what ... You can also get service level agreements from Red Hat or from Oracle or Novell. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Update?
On 04/08/2011 01:12 AM, Tamada Wilder wrote: Ian Murray hits the point. now i followed this list for some mounth and im gonna change also my last boxes to SL. I've never seen so strange and useless comments from devs in any other mailinglist before. The information politic is just horrible bad, devs act very ignorant and insult people, reject offers from people that want to help. This is everything else then enterprise-class. Good luck with this direction. +1 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 Update?
On 04/08/2011 01:34 AM, John R. Dennison wrote: On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 01:31:10AM +0300, Radu Gheorghiu wrote: +1 For the love of whatever $deity you believe in... If you're going to leave then go ahead and leave. But could you do so quietly and spare the rest of us your lamenting stories of it? I assure you, we don't care. John Instead of leaving, I was hoping to get some answers from Johnny regarding that build process. Many of us asked those questions. But it looks like he keeps avoiding those. I guess leaving will be the choice for many of us. I'm still hoping this project can be saved though. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] BIND and latest update (max open files WARNING)
Hi all, I can confirm this has happened to all my CentOS boxes in production. Regards, Radu On 12/14/2010 03:15 PM, Jorge Fábregas wrote: Hi all, After the latest security update for bind (which came out last night), now there's a new message on syslog, (facility: daemon, severity: warning) every time you restart named: max open files (1024) is smaller than max sockets (4096) After googling for a while the solution seems to be to add this to /etc/security/limits.conf: namedsoftnofile4096 ...and mofity /etc/named.conf in order to add, under the options section: files 4096; That seems to work. Of course, you may raise the 4096 but I guess that's the default in BIND and I was good with that. I'm not sure why this happend. Maybe before the update bind had a value of 1024 for max.sockets and now it was raised to 4096. -- Jorge ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Maximum IP ranges
Hello,
Is there any maximum number of IP aliases or IP ranges that ifup can
handle? Right now i have about 12000 IPs assigned to the server and when
trying to assign range number 47 (ifup eth0-range47), i get his error:
/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifup-post: line 21: 12733 Segmentation
fault /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifup-aliases ${DEVICE} ${CONFIG}
Any advice is much appreciated.
Regards,
Radu
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
