subject:"\[CentOS\] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4"

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 01:50:26PM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
 Ray Van Dolson wrote:
  Centos (who cares about RHEL) needs a bit more extra work to make it 
  more useful for desktops. I had to build me own kiosktool rpm for example.
  
 
  Ahh, yes.  RH has pretty much said they're not interested in the
  desktop market.  Until that changes either Fedora or Ubuntu it is.  I'd
  pick Ubuntu too probably.  Just works outta the box with a lot more
  things your average desktop user demands.
 
  Disclaimer: I use Fedora on all my desktops. ;)

 I guess you are not hot on installing binary drivers for Nvidia/ATI 
 cards. IIRC, there is no automatic handling of these in Fedora right?
 
 Have you got Intel graphics?

I make heavy use of the rpmfusion repo's for both nvidia drivers as
well as other non-free components that Fedora won't include. :)

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-30 Thread Michael A. Peters

Christopher Chan wrote:
 Michael A. Peters wrote:
 Christopher Chan wrote:

   
 start/stop' though from Intrepid onwards I believe. There is no root 
 account by default.
 
 There is a root account, you just can't access it w/o setting it's password.
   
 Oh you can. sudo -i. Now go away.

Yeah, I meant no *direct* root login.
The whole sudo sh etc. giving root shell is why I despise the OS X / 
ubuntu default configuration.

-=-

I don't have a problem with sudo, I just have a problem with sudo 
configurations that make it cake to spawn a root shell.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-30 Thread Christopher Chan


 I don't have a problem with sudo, I just have a problem with sudo 
 configurations that make it cake to spawn a root shell.
   


Good luck guessing the password. (okay, most ubuntu users most probably 
don't have a good one)
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

Michael A. Peters wrote:
 
 start/stop' though from Intrepid onwards I believe. There is no root 
 account by default.
 
 There is a root account, you just can't access it w/o setting it's password.

sudo su -

 And as soon as you do set it's password, I highly recommend you then 
 completely disable and lock down the very insecure sudo defaults.
 
 The way OS X / ubuntu / etc configure sudo is something I highly 
 disagree with. By default, all a cracker needs is to get a local 
 uname/password for an admin user and he can then spawn a root shell.

Errr, why is it easier to get an admin user's name and password than the 
root password?  The latter is much more likely to be shared, because in 
typical scenarios it has to be.

 With sudo disabled, the cracker must also have a local exploit that gets 
 past SELinux. Assuming Ubuntu supports SELinux (does it?)

No, it comes with AppArmor instead.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

Ray Van Dolson wrote:
 
   
 Functional deficiencies here we come:

 1) No equivalent to kickstart:
 By that I mean, zero support for automated lvm on raid kind of disk 
 partitioning in the debian-installer
 
 This is a huge issue with SLES.  AutoYaST makes me very angry. :-)  I
 can generalize my kickstart files to automate *some* parts of an
 install, but leave things, say partitioning, to install time and it'll
 prompt the installer for how they want to set things up.
 
 No way to do that with AutoYaST.. it's either all or nothing. :(

I like clonezilla because it is fairly agnostic about the OS it is 
cloning.  It even handles windows nicely, although the hardware has to 
be fairly similar.  And it doesn't care if you packaged everything or 
just hand-installed and configured the master image.

 Didn't Ubuntu switch to something like Solaris' SMF?  I actually like
 SMF quite a bit and I imagine RHEL/Fedora will move in this direction
 eventually

Speaking of Solaris - are any of projects like Nexenta usable yet 
(distributions with the OpenSolaris kernel and the same user userland as 
Ubuntu or other current distro)?  If I have to learn a new set of admin 
commands, maybe I should at least get zfs in return.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-30 Thread Michael A. Peters

Les Mikesell wrote:

 
 Errr, why is it easier to get an admin user's name and password than the 
 root password?

Because typically you only allow root login via console or an existing 
login.

You can brute force a user password (or sniff if the admin is lazy in 
how they connect - IE not using proper pass phrase, MITM attacks - 
possible with the SSH bug that Debian/Ubuntu had) etc. but normally the 
root account is disabled from remote login so it can't be remotely brute 
forced or sniffed.

What you normally do is give sudo access to the commands (or wrappers to 
the commands) that a particular sysadmin might need to use but you don't 
give them full root access, thereby limiting the damage that can be done 
should their password be compromised.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-30 Thread Chan Chung Hang Christopher


 With sudo disabled, the cracker must also have a local exploit that gets 
 past SELinux. Assuming Ubuntu supports SELinux (does it?)
 

 No, it comes with AppArmor instead.

   

There are trappings of selinux in Intrepid if not Hardy.


Package: libselinux1

escription: SELinux shared libraries
 This package provides the shared libraries for Security-enhanced
 Linux. Security-enhanced Linux is a patch of the Linux kernel and a
 number of utilities with enhanced security functionality designed to
 add mandatory access controls to Linux.  The Security-enhanced Linux
 kernel contains new architectural components originally developed to
 improve the security of the Flask operating system. These
 architectural components provide general support for the enforcement
 of many kinds of mandatory access control policies, including those
 based on the concepts of Type Enforcement, Role-based Access
 Control, and Multi-level Security.
 .
 libselinux1 provides an API for SELinux applications to get and set
 process and file security contexts and to obtain security policy
 decisions.  Required for any applications that use the SELinux API.

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

Michael A. Peters wrote:

 Errr, why is it easier to get an admin user's name and password than the 
 root password?
 
 Because typically you only allow root login via console or an existing 
 login.

I don't see how that relates to the question.

 You can brute force a user password (or sniff if the admin is lazy in 
 how they connect - IE not using proper pass phrase, MITM attacks - 
 possible with the SSH bug that Debian/Ubuntu had) etc. but normally the 
 root account is disabled from remote login so it can't be remotely brute 
 forced or sniffed.

Normally?  As in a default install?

 What you normally do is give sudo access to the commands (or wrappers to 
 the commands) that a particular sysadmin might need to use but you don't 
 give them full root access, thereby limiting the damage that can be done 
 should their password be compromised.

Who is 'them'?   And if you haven't shared the root password, what 
happens when you get hit by a bus?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-30 Thread Michael A. Peters

Les Mikesell wrote:
 Michael A. Peters wrote:
 
 Errr, why is it easier to get an admin user's name and password than the 
 root password?
 Because typically you only allow root login via console or an existing 
 login.
 
 I don't see how that relates to the question.

It relates because your administrators generally log in from remote 
locations. For ssh they may be using a pass phrase (assuming their has 
been a key exchange previously) but not necessarily. Unless all methods 
of connecting refuse password authentication, there is a possibility of 
brute force password discovery.

 
 You can brute force a user password (or sniff if the admin is lazy in 
 how they connect - IE not using proper pass phrase, MITM attacks - 
 possible with the SSH bug that Debian/Ubuntu had) etc. but normally the 
 root account is disabled from remote login so it can't be remotely brute 
 forced or sniffed.
 
 Normally?  As in a default install?

if you compile openssh from source, root login is disabled.
Distro's usually (and I disagree with this) default to allow root login 
- justification being it's the only way to get in after doing a remote 
install, but there are better ways to solve that.

But yes - any admin will lock down ssh (and any other services) as soon 
as the install is finished to forbid root login, any admin that does not 
needs to get a job selling real estate.

 
 What you normally do is give sudo access to the commands (or wrappers to 
 the commands) that a particular sysadmin might need to use but you don't 
 give them full root access, thereby limiting the damage that can be done 
 should their password be compromised.
 
 Who is 'them'?   And if you haven't shared the root password, what 
 happens when you get hit by a bus?

If I get hit by a bus, I don't personally care what happens, but of 
course there is more than one individual who has the master root 
password. Most of your junior don't need it and shouldn't have it, you 
can give them access via sudo to the specific things they need to do 
(and log sudo to a log machine they don't have access to) that require 
privilege escalation.

The point is you should never be able to gain a root shell knowing just 
a username and password for which a remote connection is allowed, and 
that's exactly what the OS X / Ubuntu default sudo configuration allows.

 

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote:
 
 I don't know the state of Nexenta but I can live with Indiana. As a 
 desktop, it was nice to get Nvidia drivers bundled, a working 
 thunderbird + lightning plugin enabled, working sound (can I repeat 
 that?), pidgin, openoffice (needless to say), sunstudioexpress, gcc, 
 printer support, nice crisp looking fonts, compiz if that is your things 
 and later xchat, ekiga...but no mplayer/vlc (not initially anyway...have 
 to check with latest), no KDE (although there are packages outside the 
 repo available), had to download a mp3 plugin for gstream, and learn a 
 whole load of Solaris stuff unless you use dhcp.

I used Solaris eons ago, back when it was expensive and buggy - and I 
really hate to pay for bugfixes.  So, when the cost of a new pentium box 
  with (at the time) freely redistributable RH linux was less than the 
Solaris update required to fix some things, I switched.  But 
circumstances have changed drastically on both sides now and it may be 
time to switch back for exactly the same reason.

 Either way, it is worth looking at nexenta too. I had this thing for Sun 
 cc compiled asterisk so I dropped nexenta and moved to Solaris Express 
 and later Indiana.

Nexenta seems like such a good idea, but the team's main focus appears 
to be on their commercial storage appliance.

 No flar or instantly install on thousands of servers support for Indiana 
 though. For some things, RHEL just stands on top. Maybe I should give 
 Fedora a try once again.

Is there an equivalent to clonezilla that will work with zfs?  I'm not 
particularly thrilled with distro/version specific schemes anyway.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-30 Thread Ross Walker

On Mar 30, 2009, at 11:58 AM, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com  
wrote:

 Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote:

 I don't know the state of Nexenta but I can live with Indiana. As a
 desktop, it was nice to get Nvidia drivers bundled, a working
 thunderbird + lightning plugin enabled, working sound (can I repeat
 that?), pidgin, openoffice (needless to say), sunstudioexpress, gcc,
 printer support, nice crisp looking fonts, compiz if that is your  
 things
 and later xchat, ekiga...but no mplayer/vlc (not initially  
 anyway...have
 to check with latest), no KDE (although there are packages outside  
 the
 repo available), had to download a mp3 plugin for gstream, and  
 learn a
 whole load of Solaris stuff unless you use dhcp.

 I used Solaris eons ago, back when it was expensive and buggy - and I
 really hate to pay for bugfixes.  So, when the cost of a new pentium  
 box
  with (at the time) freely redistributable RH linux was less than the
 Solaris update required to fix some things, I switched.  But
 circumstances have changed drastically on both sides now and it may be
 time to switch back for exactly the same reason.

 Either way, it is worth looking at nexenta too. I had this thing  
 for Sun
 cc compiled asterisk so I dropped nexenta and moved to Solaris  
 Express
 and later Indiana.

 Nexenta seems like such a good idea, but the team's main focus appears
 to be on their commercial storage appliance.

 No flar or instantly install on thousands of servers support for  
 Indiana
 though. For some things, RHEL just stands on top. Maybe I should give
 Fedora a try once again.

 Is there an equivalent to clonezilla that will work with zfs?  I'm not
 particularly thrilled with distro/version specific schemes anyway.

I would love something like Nexenta, but with a CentOS userland.

Imagine an unencumbered kernel with the stability of CentOS userland  
tools.

You get ZFS/ARC, dtrace, smf, fma, plus the Solaris IP stack which is  
quite robust, with all the command line tools you are use to.

Think SELinux could be ported to the Solaris kernel?

-Ross
  
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-30 Thread Rainer Duffner

Am 31.03.2009 um 01:12 schrieb Ross Walker:

I would love something like Nexenta, but with a CentOS userland.

What exactly are you missing from Solaris userland that does exist in
Linux, BTW?
Maybe except for all the horrible cat some_arcane_value /proc/foo
or /sys/baz to coax the kernel into doing something.
But I'm not missing that.

And I'm not missing Nexenta. Last time I looked, the free version
did almost nothing compared to the commercial version.
Which is no surprise, really, and brings us back to square one

Imagine an unencumbered kernel with the stability of CentOS userland
tools.

You get ZFS/ARC, dtrace, smf, fma, plus the Solaris IP stack which is
quite robust, with all the command line tools you are use to.

Think SELinux could be ported to the Solaris kernel?

Hm. Seems like this is happening, more or less:
http://www.press.redhat.com/2008/04/09/red-hat-welcomes-opensolaris-and-ubuntu-to-the-world-of-type-enforcement/

I'm sometimes amused how people want this with that, though.

Don't you people sometimes think that Linux is the way it is exactly
because of too many people thinking that way and actually getting what
they wanted?
Linux is everything and the kitchen sink (in terms of features), but
few are completely implemented or actually wrapped into an API/
userland tools. Everything is constantly in flux, most stuff get's
thrown over every other year (except for the places that would really
need it, seemingly) and hardly anybody documents (try to find a man-
page for a hw-driver...)
Now, they're chasing ZFS with this butter-fs crap. Hello? How about
allowing growing partitions without using LVM first?
Sure, btrfs will solve all the problems, really - but while it
matures, it will introduce lot's of others that you only get to know
about once you want to use it...

Don't get me wrong - some things in Linux actually work quite well and
it's quick to get up- and running (once you run a cobbler server) -
but I know its limits and I don't try to push it beyond those.
I use Solaris or FreeBSD when they fit the bill (which is also not
always the case). But I don't think a system that does all and
everything these three do individually would actually be better or a
joy to use...

Less is more

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 01:42:48AM +0200, Rainer Duffner wrote:

Am 31.03.2009 um 01:12 schrieb Ross Walker:

I would love something like Nexenta, but with a CentOS userland.

And I'm not missing Nexenta. Last time I looked, the free version
did almost nothing compared to the commercial version.
Which is no surprise, really, and brings us back to square one

Imagine an unencumbered kernel with the stability of CentOS userland
tools.

You get ZFS/ARC, dtrace, smf, fma, plus the Solaris IP stack which is
quite robust, with all the command line tools you are use to.

Think SELinux could be ported to the Solaris kernel?

Hm. Seems like this is happening, more or less:
http://www.press.redhat.com/2008/04/09/red-hat-welcomes-opensolaris-and-ubuntu-to-the-world-of-type-enforcement/

I'm sometimes amused how people want this with that, though.

Less is more

Hey, I for one am glad for the competition ZFS' entrance to the market
has provided. btrfs is a ways off from being a serious competitor, but
it *will* get there.

The whole do it all with the filesystem for me is.. meh. I don't
mind using LVM in tandem with it. Whichever way they decide to go will
be fine with me.

I really like a lot of things about Solaris. I dislike a lot of things
about it too.. namely, automated installs are annoying (even with
JumpStart), and rpm+yum is far superior from a user standpoint than
Sun's package - patchid + 8000 different patch management tools. pca
is the closest thing out there to a simple way to see what should be
applied to your system, but just not quite the same.

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-30 Thread Christopher Chan


 I really like a lot of things about Solaris.  I dislike a lot of things
 about it too.. namely, automated installs are annoying (even with
 JumpStart), and rpm+yum is far superior from a user standpoint than
 Sun's package - patchid + 8000 different patch management tools.  pca
 is the closest thing out there to a simple way to see what should be
 applied to your system, but just not quite the same.
   

the new IPS package manager is okay. Doing image-updates has reasonably 
worked well too.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 08:13:51AM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
 
  I really like a lot of things about Solaris.  I dislike a lot of things
  about it too.. namely, automated installs are annoying (even with
  JumpStart), and rpm+yum is far superior from a user standpoint than
  Sun's package - patchid + 8000 different patch management tools.  pca
  is the closest thing out there to a simple way to see what should be
  applied to your system, but just not quite the same.

 
 the new IPS package manager is okay. Doing image-updates has reasonably 
 worked well too.

Haven't tried this at all... if it's free[1] I will.  If it's a large
extra cost, I'll stick with PCA :-)

Also, do to the nature of many of the Solaris patches (which require
reboots), the LiveUpgrade feature has been a life-saver.  Not as
necessary in the Linux world, but at least now I can patch my
production servers more easily without scheduling a couple hour sof
downtime. :)

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 05:21:43PM -0700, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
 On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 08:13:51AM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
  
   I really like a lot of things about Solaris.  I dislike a lot of things
   about it too.. namely, automated installs are annoying (even with
   JumpStart), and rpm+yum is far superior from a user standpoint than
   Sun's package - patchid + 8000 different patch management tools.  pca
   is the closest thing out there to a simple way to see what should be
   applied to your system, but just not quite the same.
 
  
  the new IPS package manager is okay. Doing image-updates has reasonably 
  worked well too.
 
 Haven't tried this at all... if it's free[1] I will.  If it's a large
 extra cost, I'll stick with PCA :-)
 
 Also, do to the nature of many of the Solaris patches (which require
 reboots), the LiveUpgrade feature has been a life-saver.  Not as
 necessary in the Linux world, but at least now I can patch my
 production servers more easily without scheduling a couple hour sof
 downtime. :)
 

Forgot...

[1] Free as in included with the already large sum of money we pay
  Sun. :)
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-30 Thread Christopher Chan


 the new IPS package manager is okay. Doing image-updates has reasonably 
 worked well too.
 

 Haven't tried this at all... if it's free[1] I will.  If it's a large
 extra cost, I'll stick with PCA :-)

 Also, do to the nature of many of the Solaris patches (which require
 reboots), the LiveUpgrade feature has been a life-saver.  Not as
 necessary in the Linux world, but at least now I can patch my
 production servers more easily without scheduling a couple hour sof
 downtime. :)
   

IPS is only available on OpenSolaris. I don't know if your support 
contract includes OpenSolaris...and then again, you probably don't want 
to use what many sun admins call a steaming pile of beta crap.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

Rainer Duffner wrote:
 
 I would love something like Nexenta, but with a CentOS userland.

 
 
 What exactly are you missing from Solaris userland that does exist in  
 Linux, BTW?

A package manager that can grab many thousands of packages with their 
dependencies and keep them up to date.  And a large, friendly community 
maintaining those packages.

 Maybe except for all the horrible cat some_arcane_value  /proc/foo  
 or /sys/baz to coax the kernel into doing something.
 But I'm not missing that.
 
 And I'm not missing Nexenta. Last time I looked, the free version  
 did almost nothing compared to the commercial version.
 Which is no surprise, really, and brings us back to square one

They are supposed to have most of the ubuntu/debian packages available 
for installation.  The last time I tried to install it the big problem 
was the lack of AIC 7899 support and the SATA driver for the other 
machine I would have used.  But that's an OpenSolaris problem, not 
really Nexenta's.

 Linux is everything and the kitchen sink (in terms of features), but  
 few are completely implemented or actually wrapped into an API/ 
 userland tools. Everything is constantly in flux, most stuff get's  
 thrown over every other year (except for the places that would really  
 need it, seemingly) and hardly anybody documents (try to find a man- 
 page for a hw-driver...)

A driver without a man page is more useful than no driver at all...

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-29 Thread Michael A. Peters

mbneto wrote:
 Hi,
 
 Since the release of CentOS 5.3 is imminent(?) I'd like to ask a 
 question regarding why did it took so long to be released and, more 
 important, suggest some actions in order to reduce this time if I can 
 assume what caused this delay.

Late?
I just finished cleaning up my file systems in anticipation that it was 
probably about ready. Looked at the forum, and saw that it should be 
here any time now.

So it's not late to me :p

 
 First I'd like to make sure I am not complaining about this delay 
 between the RHEL and CentOS releases per se.  I did not help in any way 
 to make it happen faster and usually I don't mind having a three weeks 
 gap between them.   But I've noticed that we had two security related 
 kernel updates from RHEL since the RHEL 5.3 release and there is no word 
 on when it will be released or why is it taking so long.

You can buy RHEL you know.
You can also get RHEL src.rpm for packages with critical security that 
impact you and rebuild them.

Most security related updates are not exploitable, as in no known 
exploit exists. Were there a serious exploit, you undoubtedly would see 
a patch - last time there was a serious vulnerability (local kernel 
exploit) there were CentOS users who had patches that could be applied 
to CentOS src.rpm before RHEL had an official fix.

If there is a serious security issue, you can get help.

 
 I can only assume that this delay is caused by lack of the necessary 
 human resources.
 
 So, if this is really the case I'd suggest making some sort of campaign 
 to raise money and provide the necessary resources in order to speed 
 things up.  If RH maintains the 4-6 month schedule it can happen again 
 in less than three months.

Wow, I really must be out of the loop. New versions of RHEL every 4-6 
months?

Damn. I left Fedora because their release schedule was too frequent ...
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-29 Thread Les Mikesell

Michael A. Peters wrote:

 First I'd like to make sure I am not complaining about this delay 
 between the RHEL and CentOS releases per se.  I did not help in any way 
 to make it happen faster and usually I don't mind having a three weeks 
 gap between them.   But I've noticed that we had two security related 
 kernel updates from RHEL since the RHEL 5.3 release and there is no word 
 on when it will be released or why is it taking so long.
 
 You can buy RHEL you know.
 You can also get RHEL src.rpm for packages with critical security that 
 impact you and rebuild them.

Or there is Scientific Linux (https://www.scientificlinux.org/) which 
has done the 5.3 release.

 So, if this is really the case I'd suggest making some sort of campaign 
 to raise money and provide the necessary resources in order to speed 
 things up.  If RH maintains the 4-6 month schedule it can happen again 
 in less than three months.
 
 Wow, I really must be out of the loop. New versions of RHEL every 4-6 
 months?
 
 Damn. I left Fedora because their release schedule was too frequent ...

The Fedora releases change behavior wildly with each release.  The point 
of enterprise versions is that they maintain backwards compatibility 
even if they add some new features.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-29 Thread Robert Nichols

Les Mikesell wrote:
 Michael A. Peters wrote:
 Wow, I really must be out of the loop. New versions of RHEL every 4-6 
 months?

 Damn. I left Fedora because their release schedule was too frequent ...
 
 The Fedora releases change behavior wildly with each release.  The point 
 of enterprise versions is that they maintain backwards compatibility 
 even if they add some new features.

Yes, the RHEL releases are akin to the service packs of MS Windows.  You'll
get some new features and a few changes, but it'll still be the same basic
system.  Fedora releases are more like moving from Windows XP to Vista, or
more precisely, from a reasonably mature Windows XP to a Beta release of
Vista.

-- 
Bob Nichols NOSPAM is really part of my email address.
 Do NOT delete it.

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-29 Thread Michael A. Peters

Robert Nichols wrote:
 Les Mikesell wrote:
 Michael A. Peters wrote:
 Wow, I really must be out of the loop. New versions of RHEL every 4-6 
 months?

 Damn. I left Fedora because their release schedule was too frequent ...
 The Fedora releases change behavior wildly with each release.  The point 
 of enterprise versions is that they maintain backwards compatibility 
 even if they add some new features.
 
 Yes, the RHEL releases are akin to the service packs of MS Windows.  You'll
 get some new features and a few changes, but it'll still be the same basic
 system.  Fedora releases are more like moving from Windows XP to Vista, or
 more precisely, from a reasonably mature Windows XP to a Beta release of
 Vista.
 

My comment was joke - RHEL releases don't come out every 4-6 months (not 
for a major version anyway).

I do wish though that EPEL had a better policy, there have been several 
occasions when I have had had to recompile something of my own for the 
simple reason that EPEL versioned a shared library.

The Firefox 1.5 to 3.0 move in RHEL was at least understandable, there 
was good reason for that, but some of the EPEL changes - I think they 
leave it to the discretion of the packager but it's annoying.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-29 Thread Neil Aggarwal

Les:

Honest question, not intended to be smart assed in any
way:

Why have you not moved to SL since they have released the
update before CentOS?

Neil

--
Neil Aggarwal, (832)245-7314, www.JAMMConsulting.com
Eliminate junk email and reclaim your inbox.
Visit http://www.spammilter.com for details.  

 Or there is Scientific Linux (https://www.scientificlinux.org/) which 
 has done the 5.3 release.

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-29 Thread Les Mikesell

Neil Aggarwal wrote:
 Les:
 
 Honest question, not intended to be smart assed in any
 way:
 
 Why have you not moved to SL since they have released the
 update before CentOS?

If I liked changing things on a whim, I wouldn't be using enterprise 
type distributions in the first place.  And since this '5.4' discussion 
is about the future - it's sad but I don't any more faith in the future 
of research funding than in volunteer efforts.

But philosophically, it just seems wrong that the rebranding work has to 
be done at all, much less multiple times.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-29 Thread Les Mikesell

Ray Van Dolson wrote:
 On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 10:25:16PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
 Neil Aggarwal wrote:
 Les:

 Honest question, not intended to be smart assed in any
 way:

 Why have you not moved to SL since they have released the
 update before CentOS?
 If I liked changing things on a whim, I wouldn't be using enterprise 
 type distributions in the first place.  And since this '5.4' discussion 
 is about the future - it's sad but I don't any more faith in the future 
 of research funding than in volunteer efforts.

 But philosophically, it just seems wrong that the rebranding work has to 
 be done at all, much less multiple times.
 
 Maybe so.  But a much more difficult problem to overcome, and not one
 that's likely to change.
 
 RH has $$, and $$ are a target for lawsuits.  RH needs to be able to
 make it clear they are *not* CentOS.
 
 Just the world we live in.  Honestly, RH doesn't even have to make it
 as easy as they do (see SLES).

So what would be the down side to just walking away from everything 
RH-related now that Ubuntu has a free alternative with long term 
support?   I thought perhaps when I mentioned it earlier there would be 
a flurry of responses pointing out functional deficiencies but so far 
there have been none.   I would never have started using RH in the early 
days if it had not been freely redistributable.  Now the clones are 
better than nothing, but it still seems wrong.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 10:56:56PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
 Ray Van Dolson wrote:
  On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 10:25:16PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
  Neil Aggarwal wrote:
  Les:
 
  Honest question, not intended to be smart assed in any
  way:
 
  Why have you not moved to SL since they have released the
  update before CentOS?
  If I liked changing things on a whim, I wouldn't be using enterprise 
  type distributions in the first place.  And since this '5.4' discussion 
  is about the future - it's sad but I don't any more faith in the future 
  of research funding than in volunteer efforts.
 
  But philosophically, it just seems wrong that the rebranding work has to 
  be done at all, much less multiple times.
  
  Maybe so.  But a much more difficult problem to overcome, and not one
  that's likely to change.
  
  RH has $$, and $$ are a target for lawsuits.  RH needs to be able to
  make it clear they are *not* CentOS.
  
  Just the world we live in.  Honestly, RH doesn't even have to make it
  as easy as they do (see SLES).
 
 So what would be the down side to just walking away from everything 
 RH-related now that Ubuntu has a free alternative with long term 
 support?   I thought perhaps when I mentioned it earlier there would be 
 a flurry of responses pointing out functional deficiencies but so far 
 there have been none.   I would never have started using RH in the early 
 days if it had not been freely redistributable.  Now the clones are 
 better than nothing, but it still seems wrong.

If it makes sense for your situation, by all means do what's best for
you!

I've layed out my reasons for sticking with RH (and Fedora, CentOS):

- RH is *the* corporate standard.  We don't interview people looking
  for Ubuntu skills -- it's always RH.  I don't see that changing
  anytime soon either.
- Related to the above: RH employs many of the top Linux development
  people.  If my business needs something fixed, I have confidence (and
  they past experience) that they will be able to help me.  As more of
  a feeder Distro, I don't have this same confidence with Ubuntu
  although I'm sure they have many talented folk.  They rely a lot more
  on Fedora/Debian to do their development heavy lifting.

So, for me, the RH way is the way that pays the bills.  And, while
philosophically you may not like their redistribution restrictions, but
I certainly like their philosophical approach to contributing back to
the community.  A huge effort is made by RH to get code upstream so it
benefits Fedora, RH, SLES, Ubuntu -- everyone.  Not something Ubuntu is
known for.

So if you need a more philosophical reason, there's a pretty good one.
:)

Just my $0.02.  I've always been a proponent of use the best tool for
the job however; so if Ubuntu fits your needs better?  By all means use
it!

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-29 Thread Craig White

On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 22:56 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:

 So what would be the down side to just walking away from everything 
 RH-related now that Ubuntu has a free alternative with long term 
 support?   I thought perhaps when I mentioned it earlier there would be 
 a flurry of responses pointing out functional deficiencies but so far 
 there have been none.   I would never have started using RH in the early 
 days if it had not been freely redistributable.  Now the clones are 
 better than nothing, but it still seems wrong.

There's nothing inherently wrong with Ubuntu as far as I can tell and
yes, some versions do have long term support and you can purchase
support from Canonical. But you've been around long enough to know all
this so I'm not sure what point you are trying to make because each
Linux distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that
includes RHEL (CentOS) and Ubuntu, etc.

Craig

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-29 Thread Michael A. Peters

Ray Van Dolson wrote:
 On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 12:46:35PM -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
 The Firefox 1.5 to 3.0 move in RHEL was at least understandable, there 
 was good reason for that, but some of the EPEL changes - I think they 
 leave it to the discretion of the packager but it's annoying.
 
 Unfortunately it's often times not feasible for an EPEL package
 maintainer to backport security fixes as RH is able to do.  We simply
 don't have the time nor skillset.

I really apologize - reading my own post, I sounded like a jerk.
I stopped maintaining for Fedora Extras because I just no longer had the 
time, and I do understand the issue and am grateful that the packages 
exist so that I don't have to compile as many myself.

It is a little frustrating and annoying, but I do greatly appreciate the 
contributions of those who contribute even when a shared lib does version.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 09:56:07PM -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
 Ray Van Dolson wrote:
  On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 12:46:35PM -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
  The Firefox 1.5 to 3.0 move in RHEL was at least understandable, there 
  was good reason for that, but some of the EPEL changes - I think they 
  leave it to the discretion of the packager but it's annoying.
  
  Unfortunately it's often times not feasible for an EPEL package
  maintainer to backport security fixes as RH is able to do.  We simply
  don't have the time nor skillset.
 
 I really apologize - reading my own post, I sounded like a jerk.
 I stopped maintaining for Fedora Extras because I just no longer had the 
 time, and I do understand the issue and am grateful that the packages 
 exist so that I don't have to compile as many myself.
 
 It is a little frustrating and annoying, but I do greatly appreciate the 
 contributions of those who contribute even when a shared lib does version.

No worries, didn't think you had a bad tone in your message.. I
actually have an EPEL bug open right now.  User wants me to upgrade the
pymssql package to a newer major release version.  I'll probably go
ahead and do it since I don't have the skills nor time to backport
fixes to the current 0.9 version I maintain..

Fortunately ABI changes _supposedly_ weren't made. :-)

We'll see if I get any follow-up bugs afterwards from angry folk whose
apps I broke ;-)

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-29 Thread Jimmy Bradley


On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 21:24 -0700, Craig White wrote:
 On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 22:56 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
 
  So what would be the down side to just walking away from everything 
  RH-related now that Ubuntu has a free alternative with long term 
  support?   I thought perhaps when I mentioned it earlier there would be 
  a flurry of responses pointing out functional deficiencies but so far 
  there have been none.   I would never have started using RH in the early 
  days if it had not been freely redistributable.  Now the clones are 
  better than nothing, but it still seems wrong.
 
 There's nothing inherently wrong with Ubuntu as far as I can tell and
 yes, some versions do have long term support and you can purchase
 support from Canonical. But you've been around long enough to know all
 this so I'm not sure what point you are trying to make because each
 Linux distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that
 includes RHEL (CentOS) and Ubuntu, etc.
 
 Craig

   This is just my 2 cents worth. The reason I run Cent OS is
because it just seems to be rock solid stable. That's something I
haven't seen in any of the other distros, or MS Windows.
   My computers are my lifeline to my jobs. I get my assignments by
way of my computer, and I report my completed assignments on my
computer. It's bad enough to have to deal with hardware failures from
time to time, so the last thing I want to deal with on top of that is  a
finicky OS or software. 
   I run Cent OS on both of my laptops, and all three of my
desktops, and I can power any one of those machines up, and so far Cent
OS has never failed me. Cent OS just works. That's what matters to me.

   Just my 2 cents

   Jim

 
 ___
 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] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4


 So what would be the down side to just walking away from everything 
 RH-related now that Ubuntu has a free alternative with long term 
 support?   I thought perhaps when I mentioned it earlier there would be 
 a flurry of responses pointing out functional deficiencies but so far 
 there have been none.   I would never have started using RH in the early 
 days if it had not been freely redistributable.  Now the clones are 
 better than nothing, but it still seems wrong.

   

Functional deficiencies here we come:

1) No equivalent to kickstart:
By that I mean, zero support for automated lvm on raid kind of disk 
partitioning in the debian-installer

2) No equivalent to 'rpm -Va' or any 'rpm -V'. No checksumming done on 
packages and their contents.



hmm

the rest are all learn how to add automatic iptables on boot sort of 
stuff I guess.

If you move to ubuntu, be prepared for a lot more than just apt-get / 
apt-cache. There is no inittab. You do get to use 'service whatever 
start/stop' though from Intrepid onwards I believe. There is no root 
account by default. You must be prepared for a very different way to the 
Redhat way of doing things.

Christopher - who did the leap from Centos to Ubuntu and is now stuck in 
the Windows quagmire.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 01:17:03PM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
 
  So what would be the down side to just walking away from everything 
  RH-related now that Ubuntu has a free alternative with long term 
  support?   I thought perhaps when I mentioned it earlier there would be 
  a flurry of responses pointing out functional deficiencies but so far 
  there have been none.   I would never have started using RH in the early 
  days if it had not been freely redistributable.  Now the clones are 
  better than nothing, but it still seems wrong.
 

 
 Functional deficiencies here we come:
 
 1) No equivalent to kickstart:
 By that I mean, zero support for automated lvm on raid kind of disk 
 partitioning in the debian-installer

This is a huge issue with SLES.  AutoYaST makes me very angry. :-)  I
can generalize my kickstart files to automate *some* parts of an
install, but leave things, say partitioning, to install time and it'll
prompt the installer for how they want to set things up.

No way to do that with AutoYaST.. it's either all or nothing. :(

 
 2) No equivalent to 'rpm -Va' or any 'rpm -V'. No checksumming done on 
 packages and their contents.
 
 
 
 hmm
 
 the rest are all learn how to add automatic iptables on boot sort of 
 stuff I guess.
 
 If you move to ubuntu, be prepared for a lot more than just apt-get / 
 apt-cache. There is no inittab. You do get to use 'service whatever 
 start/stop' though from Intrepid onwards I believe. There is no root 
 account by default. You must be prepared for a very different way to the 
 Redhat way of doing things.

Didn't Ubuntu switch to something like Solaris' SMF?  I actually like
SMF quite a bit and I imagine RHEL/Fedora will move in this direction
eventually

 Christopher - who did the leap from Centos to Ubuntu and is now stuck in 
 the Windows quagmire.

And if you had to do it over again would you stick with Cent? :)

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4


 Functional deficiencies here we come:

 1) No equivalent to kickstart:
 By that I mean, zero support for automated lvm on raid kind of disk 
 partitioning in the debian-installer
 

 This is a huge issue with SLES.  AutoYaST makes me very angry. :-)  I
 can generalize my kickstart files to automate *some* parts of an
 install, but leave things, say partitioning, to install time and it'll
 prompt the installer for how they want to set things up.

 No way to do that with AutoYaST.. it's either all or nothing. :(

   
Heh, that cuts Suse out of the race too then. Although I wonder if fai 
will get around the debian-installer deficiency...
 2) No equivalent to 'rpm -Va' or any 'rpm -V'. No checksumming done on 
 packages and their contents.

 
 
 hmm

 the rest are all learn how to add automatic iptables on boot sort of 
 stuff I guess.

 If you move to ubuntu, be prepared for a lot more than just apt-get / 
 apt-cache. There is no inittab. You do get to use 'service whatever 
 start/stop' though from Intrepid onwards I believe. There is no root 
 account by default. You must be prepared for a very different way to the 
 Redhat way of doing things.
 

 Didn't Ubuntu switch to something like Solaris' SMF?  I actually like
 SMF quite a bit and I imagine RHEL/Fedora will move in this direction
 eventually

   
Yes. Something like that I suppose. I have not had an opportunity to dig 
into the details of what they use now. I also like SMF...except for its 
awfully detailed xml files.
 Christopher - who did the leap from Centos to Ubuntu and is now stuck in 
 the Windows quagmire.
 

 And if you had to do it over again would you stick with Cent? :)

   

I cannot stick with Cent. The jump was for desktops. I had Centos 5 on 
them originally...if we could have not have any Windows compatibility 
then I would still have to jump to get ActivInspire support from 
Promethean. Then there is the get automation in installing Nvidia/ATI 
binary drivers...


Too bad the Ubuntu and the Debian chums did not see a need to fully 
automate installations on hundreds of desktops. I have finally got the 
ear of an Ubuntu developer so maybe things will change. But that will 
still leave the checksum on package contents left to deal with.


Centos (who cares about RHEL) needs a bit more extra work to make it 
more useful for desktops. I had to build me own kiosktool rpm for example.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

Michael A. Peters wrote:
 Christopher Chan wrote:

   
 start/stop' though from Intrepid onwards I believe. There is no root 
 account by default.
 

 There is a root account, you just can't access it w/o setting it's password.
   
Oh you can. sudo -i. Now go away.
 And as soon as you do set it's password, I highly recommend you then 
 completely disable and lock down the very insecure sudo defaults.
   
And pick up the pieces. You do know that certain services are tightly 
tied into the way things are currently set up?
 The way OS X / ubuntu / etc configure sudo is something I highly 
 disagree with. By default, all a cracker needs is to get a local 
 uname/password for an admin user and he can then spawn a root shell.
   
Not getting into that argument.
 With sudo disabled, the cracker must also have a local exploit that gets 
 past SELinux. Assuming Ubuntu supports SELinux (does it?)

Unfortunately, yes...but not as extensive as RHEL. So not quite a win 
for Ubuntu yet in helping you guys migrate. Soon I am going to get 
banned. :-D
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

 Centos (who cares about RHEL) needs a bit more extra work to make it 
 more useful for desktops. I had to build me own kiosktool rpm for example.

Ahh, yes.  RH has pretty much said they're not interested in the
desktop market.  Until that changes either Fedora or Ubuntu it is.  I'd
pick Ubuntu too probably.  Just works outta the box with a lot more
things your average desktop user demands.

Disclaimer: I use Fedora on all my desktops. ;)

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

Ray Van Dolson wrote:
 Centos (who cares about RHEL) needs a bit more extra work to make it 
 more useful for desktops. I had to build me own kiosktool rpm for example.
 

 Ahh, yes.  RH has pretty much said they're not interested in the
 desktop market.  Until that changes either Fedora or Ubuntu it is.  I'd
 pick Ubuntu too probably.  Just works outta the box with a lot more
 things your average desktop user demands.

 Disclaimer: I use Fedora on all my desktops. ;)
   
I guess you are not hot on installing binary drivers for Nvidia/ATI 
cards. IIRC, there is no automatic handling of these in Fedora right?

Have you got Intel graphics?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-28 Thread Noob Centos Admin

2009/3/27 Spiro Harvey sp...@knossos.net.nz:
 required? How do you figure anything is *required* of volunteers?
 Show me your support contract.

 If you're worried that CentOS is late or is stopping you from
 fulfilling your own contractual obligations, perhaps you should stop
 being a tight-arse and pay for RedHat support.

 When you pay nothing, you have no right to expect anything. Unless
 they're your slaves, and I'm pretty sure that's not the case here.


 And as long as CentOS stays a relevant distro the pressure (not
 only from me) will continue to raise.

 This is just rude.

I think you're over-reacting or maybe just misunderstanding what I
believe the OP was trying to put across.

Personally, even when I volunteer to do something, I do my best to do
a good job of it. If something's worth doing, it's worth doing it
right, paid or otherwise. So even on a personal level, there are
requirements and pressure. If you are organising a charity event,
would you accept a team of helpers who may or not may not show up
simply because they are volunteers?

Now, I don't think any of us here are demanding the CentOS to meet
strict deadlines or some corporate standards of performance here.
Nobody's saying the CentOS developers can't take a vacation, can't
fall sick, etc.

If you read our posts, most of us are wondering where did the snags
occur, how we can help to ease such problems, how we can help prevent
these from recurring. These are issues that must be tackled if we want
the CentOS project to flourish. Like mbneto said, as things grow,
pressure  expectations will increase.

I don't think we want to see the team get frustrated and give up due
to these pressures or expectations. One of the best way to deal with
expectations/pressure is good communications. It doesn't even matter
if the communications is that there are delays due to personal issues.
People read it, people understand and nobody bugs the team about
what's going on, they will feel less pressured.

Similarly, if there's a way for us as non-development-savvy folks to
contribute our resources, it would also help relieve pressure on the
team.

All we are trying to achieve with this discussion, I believe, is to
identify problem areas, see if we can help out. So as to keep the
project fun for the developers to continue and not one day burn out
because they feel so unsupported, unappreciated and harrassed.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-28 Thread Neil Aggarwal

Hello:

Well said!

I tremendously appreciate the effort the development
team puts in and am not complaining one bit about how long
things take.  They take what they take and that is fine by
me.  Please do not let the negative comments of a few
people reflect badly on the majority of people that truly
value and appreciate this project.

THANK YOU to everyone involved in CentOS!

Neil

--
Neil Aggarwal, (832)245-7314, www.JAMMConsulting.com
Eliminate junk email and reclaim your inbox.
Visit http://www.spammilter.com for details.  

 All we are trying to achieve with this discussion, I believe, is to
 identify problem areas, see if we can help out. So as to keep the
 project fun for the developers to continue and not one day burn out
 because they feel so unsupported, unappreciated and harrassed.

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-28 Thread Rob Kampen



Rob Kampen
Neal Development Group

On Mar 27, 2009, at 18:39, Frank Thommen frank.thom...@embl-heidelberg.de 
  wrote:

 nate wrote:
 Les Mikesell wrote:

 [...]

 I think it's safe to assume that the majority of CentOS users out
 there run CentOS on servers, not on desktops/laptops/etc.

 So I'm one from the minority then :-).  CentOS 5 is running on  
 (almost)
 all servers and (really) all Linux clients here.  Being used to the
 RedHat way from a former job and not being happy with the fast  
 release
 cycles of Fedora, CentOS was a logical choice.  No more system
 instabilities and no more package incompatibilities since we switched
 from Fedora (let's keep fingers crossed).  That's what I call
 Enterprise grade :-)

 I don't care if the CentOS release comes days or weeks (or months)  
 after
 the RedHat release as long as it comes one day.

 And sincerely: I don't understand, why RedHat/CentOS should not be  
 used
 on desktops.

 Cheers

 frank
I love CentOS. Use it at home, also at my small business. Doing a  
count I find that I have 5 servers,  2 work stations with dual LCD  
monitors, and one laptop. The team and supporting repos do a GREAT  
job, very much appreciated. I am trying to find ways to help, offer  
the occasional response to requests etc. Keep up the excellent work,  
this community member thanks you.

 ___
 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] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-28 Thread William L. Maltby


On Sat, 2009-03-28 at 08:01 -0500, Neil Aggarwal wrote:
 Hello:
 
 Well said!
 
 I tremendously appreciate the effort the development
 team puts in and am not complaining one bit about how long
 things take.  They take what they take and that is fine by
 me.  Please do not let the negative comments of a few
 people reflect badly on the majority of people that truly
 value and appreciate this project.
 
 THANK YOU to everyone involved in CentOS!

+1

Just to add to what has been previously been said ...

It's a conundrum for a successful project that starts as a loose-knit
consortium of interested folks. At some point, as time passes, real life
injects some demands and the informal structure begins to suffer stress,
evidenced by longer delays or other symptoms.

As someone mentioned, burn-out becomes possible. The contributors may
feel unfairly pressured or even perceive criticisms where none were
intended. This is often due to the natural conflict of wanting to do a
good job on the project and have a life too.

A great deal of satisfaction can be had when the success leads to a more
cohesive and coordinated project that takes on a life of its own and
the original members realize they have spawned a long-lived project that
will continue after they make the choice to exit the project.

For this to be realized, it's usually necessary to have a more formal
structure, a transition plan for people to enter and exit the project
without cataclysmic shock, and other such corporate structures. The
big downside to this is the inevitable politics that may rear its ugly
head.

As a step to reducing the pressure and dissatisfaction of Are We
There Yet? (When will xxx be released?), a simple publication of a
projected time line will help. It should be updated as needed. It should
understood that this could be another source of pressure as a release
date nears and folks realize it may be missed.

*sigh*

Everything has a downside.

 
   Neil
 snip sig stuff

-- 
Bill

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-28 Thread Noob Centos Admin

On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 3:13 AM, William L. Maltby
centos4b...@triad.rr.com wrote:
 As a step to reducing the pressure and dissatisfaction of Are We
 There Yet? (When will xxx be released?), a simple publication of a
 projected time line will help. It should be updated as needed. It should
 understood that this could be another source of pressure as a release
 date nears and folks realize it may be missed.

I'll suggest that instead of a timeline, which would be a source of
pressure like you said, a weekly progress update would be just fine.
Similar to what Karanbir, IIANW, has done on his twitter/blog
recently. Maybe something like

CentOS 5.4 Progress: Completed 2/7 Stages.
Stage 3 estimated 5% completed.
No progress expected for next two weeks due to XYZ convention

The main thing is actually the VISIBILITY part. Putting it on CentOS
frontpage would cut down a lot of the unnecessary when/where
questions and leave the developers in peace :)
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-28 Thread William L. Maltby


On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 06:30 +0800, Noob Centos Admin wrote:
 On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 3:13 AM, William L. Maltby
 centos4b...@triad.rr.com wrote:
  As a step to reducing the pressure and dissatisfaction of Are We
  There Yet? (When will xxx be released?), a simple publication of a
  projected time line will help. It should be updated as needed. It should
  understood that this could be another source of pressure as a release
  date nears and folks realize it may be missed.
 
 I'll suggest that instead of a timeline, which would be a source of
 pressure like you said, a weekly progress update would be just fine.
 Similar to what Karanbir, IIANW, has done on his twitter/blog
 recently. Maybe something like
 
 CentOS 5.4 Progress: Completed 2/7 Stages.
 Stage 3 estimated 5% completed.
 No progress expected for next two weeks due to XYZ convention
 
 The main thing is actually the VISIBILITY part. Putting it on CentOS
 frontpage would cut down a lot of the unnecessary when/where
 questions and leave the developers in peace :)

Excellent! And further relief could be provided by posting it on the
announce list periodically. That way any of the folks that wanted to
know could subscribe to announce and then woe be it to anyone who posts
here asking When will ... ?.  :-)

I'm *hoping* that would be less effort than other options.

Regardless, any kind of additional visibility would impose some
additional load. The Q is do the folks that do the heavy lifting think
it's actually worth the effort?

 snip sig stuff

-- 
Bill

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-27 Thread Sorin Srbu

-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf
Of Ray Van Dolson
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 11:50 PM
To: centos@centos.org
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

Is there still no room for positive feedack and discussion from
developers and end users alike on how to approve things?

I've recently migrated a dozen or so RHEL3-machines to CentOS5 for our 
university linux course-farm. The machines are used by students as I write 
this. Students use them, and knowing prying students, CentOS still works like 
a charm and so does the molecular modeling software running off of CentOS.

The handful of new Intel i7-calculation machines we recently bought for our 
group of Ph. D.-Students are awesome and just hilariously fast with CentOS5.

I'm very happy with CentOS!

Good enough feedback? 8-}
-- 
/Sorin

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-27 Thread Les Mikesell

Rainer Duffner wrote:
 Spiro Harvey schrieb:
 I've got a couple of cents change here...

   
 
 
 While I do think some of the wording of the post that the above post was
 replying to was a bit mis-chosen, I like to believe it had a positive spin.
 (In that it didn't want to put blame on anybody)
 
 I *do* agree with the sentiment that people should buy RHEL for stuff
 they consider critical.
 Or just change distro if they think they get a better deal elsewhere.
 
 Which is what I normaly do, unless management decides they can get away
 cheaper and in essence get RHEL + updates for free with CentOS.
 
 The CentOS team certainly doesn't owe me CentOS 5.3 by now - in the same
 way I can't really complain about a late (again) FreeBSD release.

While I love CentOS, think the team does the best possible job, and 
appreciate the work they put into undoing the restrictions on 
redistribution by the upstream distro, I have to wonder if it isn't time 
to just switch to a base distribution that doesn't impose those 
restrictions that force the extra work and delays in the first place.

Is there still any reason other than having to learn to type 'apt-get' 
instead of 'yum' to prefer Centos over Ubuntu?  I think for me it is 
just that I started with RH before they imposed the redistribution 
restriction nonsense and have been too lazy to change administration 
styles (and debian's release-when-it's-ready schedule wasn't 
attractive at the time).  On a test machine I've noted that Ubuntu 
worked with the wireless adapter where Centos didn't, Sun Java is 
included, and the update mechanism seems faster and better suited to 
caching proxies.  But it still feels slightly weird and unfamiliar.  Are 
there reasons to not trust it?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-27 Thread nate

Les Mikesell wrote:

 Is there still any reason other than having to learn to type 'apt-get'
 instead of 'yum' to prefer Centos over Ubuntu?  I think for me it is
 just that I started with RH before they imposed the redistribution
 restriction nonsense and have been too lazy to change administration
 styles (and debian's release-when-it's-ready schedule wasn't
 attractive at the time).  On a test machine I've noted that Ubuntu
 worked with the wireless adapter where Centos didn't, Sun Java is
 included, and the update mechanism seems faster and better suited to
 caching proxies.  But it still feels slightly weird and unfamiliar.  Are
 there reasons to not trust it?

I think it's safe to assume that the majority of CentOS users out
there run CentOS on servers, not on desktops/laptops/etc.

I have been using Debian for 11 years(since hamm), and use it
on all of my personal desktops. I have used Ubuntu on my
laptops. With Debian 5.0 coming out recently I may make my
next laptop run that. I haven't had a need to use a laptop
on a regular basis in over a year now so my laptops are
collecting dust for the most part(still use it for travel
when I travel).

I know there are some, but I am not one that uses CentOS(or RHEL)
on a desktop system. CentOS/RHEL make great server systems for
many types of servers(I prefer debian on my personal gear because
of the larger, supported package repositories). My work gear
is much larger scale so I put together manually package dependencies
and special versions of some packages to distribute across tens
or hundreds of systems as-needed. My personal server doesn't need
such attention or else I might use CentOS there too.

I have no problem myself in CentOS being weeks/months behind
RHEL. I still have legacy systems running RHEL 3 Update 3. And
they are not going to get updated, just re-installed from scratch
when I have time to get to them.

All of the systems I manage are fairly well protected and generally
only have trusted users that interact with them, internet-facing
services are entirely 3rd party packages(e.g. java+tomcat), maintained
independently of the OS, so security risks are very low. I'm
still going through the list of older RHEL 4 Update 4 systems
and getting them re-installed with something newer, at this rate
maybe another 3-4 months, at which point it may be time to be able
to widely deploy CentOS 5. The main reason for going back and
updating things isn't because the OS is old it's more because
the management and configuration on those older systems is so
broken the only way to fix them safely is to re-install.

If you want another distribution, go to another distribution, I
can't imagine why CentOS would want to base themselves on Ubuntu
when you can already get Ubuntu pretty easily for free.

CentOS/RHEL have their places they provide a valuable service to
the world. As far as I know our F5 load balancers are based on
CentOS(they were as of a few years ago, I'm not sure if F5 has
changed their distribution since, I suspect not, is based on
RHEL-3), and our recently purchased high performance Exanet
NAS cluster runs on CentOS 4.4. While my back end storage
array from 3PAR runs on Debian.

Not everyone needs the latest  greatest, not everyone needs
the most current security updates. Make your own risk assessments
based on your environment and use what makes you feel comfortable
to sleep at night.

I don't see a need for CentOS to change a thing, hopefully they
can get more support if they need it, I try to help as best I can
on the list answering other's questions.

nate


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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-27 Thread Ray Van Dolson

On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 12:34:04PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
 Rainer Duffner wrote:
  Spiro Harvey schrieb:
  I've got a couple of cents change here...
 

  While I do think some of the wording of the post that the above post was
  replying to was a bit mis-chosen, I like to believe it had a positive spin.
  (In that it didn't want to put blame on anybody)
  
  I *do* agree with the sentiment that people should buy RHEL for stuff
  they consider critical.
  Or just change distro if they think they get a better deal elsewhere.
  
  Which is what I normaly do, unless management decides they can get away
  cheaper and in essence get RHEL + updates for free with CentOS.
  
  The CentOS team certainly doesn't owe me CentOS 5.3 by now - in the same
  way I can't really complain about a late (again) FreeBSD release.
 
 While I love CentOS, think the team does the best possible job, and 
 appreciate the work they put into undoing the restrictions on 
 redistribution by the upstream distro, I have to wonder if it isn't time 
 to just switch to a base distribution that doesn't impose those 
 restrictions that force the extra work and delays in the first place.
 
 Is there still any reason other than having to learn to type 'apt-get' 
 instead of 'yum' to prefer Centos over Ubuntu?  I think for me it is 
 just that I started with RH before they imposed the redistribution 
 restriction nonsense and have been too lazy to change administration 
 styles (and debian's release-when-it's-ready schedule wasn't 
 attractive at the time).  On a test machine I've noted that Ubuntu 
 worked with the wireless adapter where Centos didn't, Sun Java is 
 included, and the update mechanism seems faster and better suited to 
 caching proxies.  But it still feels slightly weird and unfamiliar.  Are 
 there reasons to not trust it?
 

Oh boy.  Now we're going in a completely new direction on this thread.
:-D

Nothing wrong with changing distros of course, but, at least for me my
reasons for staying with RH/Fedora/Cent are mainly that RHEL is still
the corporate standard and more likely to keep me employed.  I'd
prefer to stay familiar with the RH environment for this reason
alone.

As long as RH continues to employ a large chunk of the Linux
development community, it will continue to be a major player in the
enterprise space.  And if not for CentOS someone else would step up and
fill the void of a free version.

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-27 Thread Les Mikesell

Timothy Murphy wrote:
 Les Mikesell wrote:
 
 While I love CentOS, think the team does the best possible job, and 
 appreciate the work they put into undoing the restrictions on 
 redistribution by the upstream distro, I have to wonder if it isn't time 
 to just switch to a base distribution that doesn't impose those 
 restrictions that force the extra work and delays in the first place.
 
 What restrictions are you talking about exactly?

The ones that require the work that the CentOS team does to 
rebuild/rebrand/repackage before redistribution is permitted.  This was 
not required in the early days when RH developed its community support 
(up through RH9) and perhaps it would have been wiser to walk away from 
everything RedHat-related the day they made that change.  There just 
didn't seem to be a suitable alternative until Ubuntu started the 
long-term support releases.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-27 Thread Timothy Murphy

Les Mikesell wrote:

 While I love CentOS, think the team does the best possible job, and 
 appreciate the work they put into undoing the restrictions on 
 redistribution by the upstream distro, I have to wonder if it isn't time 
 to just switch to a base distribution that doesn't impose those 
 restrictions that force the extra work and delays in the first place.

What restrictions are you talking about exactly?

Personally, I run Centos on my server
because it doesn't change too rapidly,
and this makes me think it can be trusted
not to cause me too much trouble.

I don't mind taking that trouble on my laptops,
where I run Fedora-10.


-- 
Timothy Murphy  
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland


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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-27 Thread Morten Torstensen

Les Mikesell wrote:
 The ones that require the work that the CentOS team does to 
 rebuild/rebrand/repackage before redistribution is permitted.  This was 

As a corporation Red Hat HAD to do that, even if IANAL. CentOS as a 
model works just fine. Sure, sometimes there can be a lack of manpower 
for something. After all, it is a volunteer project that people run in 
their spare time!

Of course, the geek in me waits for the next release. It is always 
waiting for the next release and the next new toy. If I really NEEDED 
the next release, I would use RHEL.

Come on folks, get a perspective of what we are doing here.

-- 

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-27 Thread Frank Thommen

nate wrote:
 Les Mikesell wrote:
 
 [...]
 
 I think it's safe to assume that the majority of CentOS users out
 there run CentOS on servers, not on desktops/laptops/etc.

So I'm one from the minority then :-).  CentOS 5 is running on (almost) 
all servers and (really) all Linux clients here.  Being used to the 
RedHat way from a former job and not being happy with the fast release 
cycles of Fedora, CentOS was a logical choice.  No more system 
instabilities and no more package incompatibilities since we switched 
from Fedora (let's keep fingers crossed).  That's what I call 
Enterprise grade :-)

I don't care if the CentOS release comes days or weeks (or months) after 
the RedHat release as long as it comes one day.

And sincerely: I don't understand, why RedHat/CentOS should not be used 
on desktops.

Cheers

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-27 Thread Robert Nichols

Frank Thommen wrote:
 nate wrote:
 Les Mikesell wrote:

 [...]
 I think it's safe to assume that the majority of CentOS users out
 there run CentOS on servers, not on desktops/laptops/etc.
 
 So I'm one from the minority then :-).  CentOS 5 is running on (almost) 
 all servers and (really) all Linux clients here.  Being used to the 
 RedHat way from a former job and not being happy with the fast release 
 cycles of Fedora, CentOS was a logical choice.  No more system 
 instabilities and no more package incompatibilities since we switched 
 from Fedora (let's keep fingers crossed).  That's what I call 
 Enterprise grade :-)

Amen!  I'm very much hoping that 5.3 will allow me to run CentOS on my
laptop so that I can get away from the half-implemented features and
Let's see what last night's update broke! issues with Fedora.  CentOS
works just fine on my desktop.

 I don't care if the CentOS release comes days or weeks (or months) after 
 the RedHat release as long as it comes one day.

The problem for everyone is that security updates that come along during
those weeks (or months) either get delayed until the CentOS release
comes or else somebody (i.e., an already overworked developer) has to
make the extra effort to make the patch work in the current release.

-- 
Bob Nichols NOSPAM is really part of my email address.
 Do NOT delete it.

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-26 Thread mbneto

Hi,

As the OP (original poster?) I've read all messages so far and instead of
replying to each one I'd like to sum all up and perhaps clarify my post so
we can move on with some more productive debate.

A background info:  I've been using CentOS for almost three years and I am
happy with it.   Sometimes I do need to use something no provided by it (nor
RHEL) and I use separate repositories but it is minimal.

My intention while posting the question is that, even tough it is a
community based distro, I felt confused by the fact that a long time has
passed and still no message was posted explaining why that happened and no
call for help (if that was the case)  was made.

One suggested that if I was not happy just go and buy the RHEL with their
support.  Otherwise shut up and be glad with whatever I receive (for free)
from CentOS.   I think we can reach a middle ground.

One reported that the development team of CentOS has only three guys and
they can have personal problems (link being sick, tired, getting married -
not that this is a problem).

I do not have any sort of numbers of the popularity of CentOS but I suspect
that we are very popular and in that sense a certain level of responsibility
(to that community) is required.

Please note that I am not saying that the team (3 or 300) is not
responsible.  As I've been made aware by some posts the team shows a level
of commitment that surely affects their personal/professional environment.

But in the end we can't close our eyes to the fact that this release is
'late' and that security issues were disclosed and so far no real date is
set.

And that is the focus.  No matter how much effort and despite the problems
that occurred between the RHEL release and CentOS we must ask ourselves  why
it happened this way and what can I(we) do to improve that.

I think that the team (and other members of this list) ask the same question
when they finish something and start wondering how they can make it
better/faster/cheaper.

In that sense my suggestions : raise money / improve transparency / build
some sort of communication channel for situations like this go in that
direction.

We should have fun. If this is not the case sooner or later we will give
up.  And as long as CentOS stays a relevant distro the pressure (not only
from me) will continue to raise.   How to create a comfort zone is this
case?

Perhaps this particular episode can reveal some aspects that, at least for
myself, were unknown.  So the final questions are:

a) does the team (or the core at least) feel the same way/think this maybe a
problem?
b) what can we do next?

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-26 Thread Spiro Harvey


I've got a couple of cents change here...




On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 17:41:41 -0400
mbneto mbn...@gmail.com wrote:

 I do not have any sort of numbers of the popularity of CentOS but I
 suspect that we are very popular and in that sense a certain level of
 responsibility (to that community) is required.


required? How do you figure anything is *required* of volunteers?
Show me your support contract.

If you're worried that CentOS is late or is stopping you from
fulfilling your own contractual obligations, perhaps you should stop
being a tight-arse and pay for RedHat support.

When you pay nothing, you have no right to expect anything. Unless
they're your slaves, and I'm pretty sure that's not the case here.


 And as long as CentOS stays a relevant distro the pressure (not 
 only from me) will continue to raise.

This is just rude. 



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-26 Thread Rainer Duffner

Spiro Harvey schrieb:
 I've got a couple of cents change here...

   


While I do think some of the wording of the post that the above post was
replying to was a bit mis-chosen, I like to believe it had a positive spin.
(In that it didn't want to put blame on anybody)

I *do* agree with the sentiment that people should buy RHEL for stuff
they consider critical.
Or just change distro if they think they get a better deal elsewhere.

Which is what I normaly do, unless management decides they can get away
cheaper and in essence get RHEL + updates for free with CentOS.

The CentOS team certainly doesn't owe me CentOS 5.3 by now - in the same
way I can't really complain about a late (again) FreeBSD release.



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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-25 Thread Ralph Angenendt

Ross Walker wrote:
 How about forming a formal non-profit organization around CentOS with  
 contributors.

The question is where. What counts as a non-profit in the US doesn't
automatically count as one in Europe, for example - that's why there is
a Fedora EMEA, too. Which really binds ressources - and the Fedora
community is large. Yes, one could to talk to them to see how they did
it, I know the people on their board.

 If a movement like CentOS is going to survive it's going to have to  
 grow and the only way it can grow is by solicitating donations then  
 depending on the offered ones it recieves now.

Do I smell a special interest group
http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup here?

Ralph


pgppiE0cu2hD0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-25 Thread Ross Walker


On Mar 25, 2009, at 10:18 AM, Lanny Marcus lmmailingli...@gmail.com  
wrote:

 2009/3/25 Ralph Angenendt ra+cen...@br-online.de:
 Ross Walker wrote:
 How about forming a formal non-profit organization around CentOS  
 with
 contributors.

 The question is where. What counts as a non-profit in the US  
 doesn't
 automatically count as one in Europe, for example - that's why  
 there is
 a Fedora EMEA, too. Which really binds ressources - and the Fedora
 community is large. Yes, one could to talk to them to see how they  
 did
 it, I know the people on their board.

 If a movement like CentOS is going to survive it's going to have to
 grow and the only way it can grow is by solicitating donations then
 depending on the offered ones it recieves now.

 Do I smell a special interest group
 http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup here?

 Or another mailing list or IRC channel? If Ross is correct, and I hope
 he is correct,  that Google, Amazon, large ISPs, etc.,  would donate
 $, wow. If they are using CentOS and they only contributed USD$1 for
 each server, imagine how much $ that would be for the CentOS project.
 :-)   Obviously, more than one dollar per server is the goal.

You would be surprised at how many vendors are using CentOS right now  
for large commercial endeavors and even commercial software packages  
(Citrix Xen).

There is a phenominal need for an enterprise OS with long term  
support, but void of messy licensing and royalty fees striped of all  
intellectual property, and if these companies are using CentOS to  
fulfill that need then they have a vested interest to make sure it  
succeeds now and for the foreseeable future.

To this end it would cetainly not be rude to ask these companies for  
appropriately sized donations to make sure CentOS keeps going strong,  
completely voluntary of course, anonymously if preferred, otherwise  
they can be prominantly listed as a valued supporter.

Just before any of that happens some ground work, as Ralph pointed  
out, needs to be established.

I think CentOS should be registered as a non-profit both in America/ 
Canada and in the European Union.

Call it CentOS.org NA and CentOS.org EU.

Maybe there is an attorney on the list that would like to donate some  
pro-bono work in putting together applications for each in return for  
a tax write-off (applicable when filing for 2009 of course!).

-Ross

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-25 Thread griz_quattro

Ross Walker wrote:
 
  snip
 
 To this end it would cetainly not be rude to ask these companies for  
 appropriately sized donations to make sure CentOS keeps going strong,  
 completely voluntary of course, anonymously if preferred, otherwise  
 they can be prominantly listed as a valued supporter.
 
 
 -Ross

The companies that should donate are those that _want_ to.
Funny how donations work.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-25 Thread Ross Walker

On Mar 25, 2009, at 8:13 PM, griz_quattro griz_quat...@tx.rr.com  
wrote:

 Ross Walker wrote:

 snip

 To this end it would cetainly not be rude to ask these companies for
 appropriately sized donations to make sure CentOS keeps going strong,
 completely voluntary of course, anonymously if preferred, otherwise
 they can be prominantly listed as a valued supporter.


 -Ross

 The companies that should donate are those that _want_ to.
 Funny how donations work.

People want to donate to organizations that help kids with MD, but  
that doesn't stop Jerry Lewis from holding telefons.

People need to be reminded that these services are only available  
through their kind contributions.

Also some organizations need an actual governing body to donate to, an  
organization that is recognized as a non-profit institution by the  
local government so they can get a tax deduction.

I am not talking about knocking on each user's door with a hand out,  
but a few large contributors can really help shape the long-term  
prospectus of a non-profit organization.

Look how organizations such as Fedora or Wikipedia get their funding.

-Ross

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-24 Thread Linux Advocate


but what I worry about is members of the core 
 CentOS team burning out and quitting... that would be much worse for 
 CentOS than a few weeks delay here and there. For me it is important for 
 the core team to know that they can take the time off they need for real 
 life events without feeling bad or guilty about delaying a free, 
 community driven project.

totally agree. we need to appreciate them and not be too demanding.



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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-24 Thread Phil Schaffner

ward.p.fonte...@wellsfargo.com wrote:
 My thoughts exactly

 -Original Message-
 From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf 
 Of Noob Centos Admin
 Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 10:00 PM
 To: CentOS mailing list
 Subject: Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

 snip
 So if it's possible, I'd be more than happy to throw in spare CPU
 cycles to help compile some binaries or run automated tests etc!

The thread on the forum was referring to the need to use and report on 
packages in the testing repo, in order to get them out of testing and 
into standard CentOS repos.

See http://wiki.centos.org/Contribute Help with hunting bugs and 
finding fixes.

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

Morten Torstensen wrote:
 Can gcc/make be distributed? Could people dedicate their CPU time ala 
 SETI or fold...@home to test builds and compiles? I am not sure where 
 the bottleneck is, and I know throwing money and manpower does not 
 always help when it comes to software development :)

There were a bunch of things that came together at the same time. So yes 
perhaps more people would have helped here - but that again comes with 
its own issues. Things that could have also helped are much faster 
internet links, beefier build systems, access to certain data, more time 
away from $DayJob, an economy and industry that wasent taking a crap, 
people not having to work 10 to 12 hrs a day to (a) keep their jobs (b) 
make up for work that other people who didn't have their jobs anymore 
left behind. Add salt and spice to taste.

Some of these problems are solvable if they stay stationary. 
Unfortunately, you will find that none of them are.

A lot of what CentOS is - directly maps back to the people involved, and 
the process's being used. Take those away and the idea of centos is 
becomes irrelevant. And for those who dont care much about either of 
these two things, there is always an exit route, or a dozen.

There are about two dozen people involved with the centos 'team', and I 
am sure each and everyone of us would like to spend more and more time 
and resources on the project - but there are limits that must be honored.

Also, were not getting ready for 5.4. were going to be getting ready for 
4.8 first, then a CentOS6 Beta and then a 5.4.


-- 
Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/  : 2522...@icq
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

Lanny Marcus wrote:
 The $ the project receives goes for hardware and network connectivity.

That is not true.

Money donated to the project goes to sit in a pot. Resources that we use 
to do things on and with are on machines that we ( developers, centos 
team and contributors ) pay for, manage and run ourselves. CentOS does 
not subsidise or pay for any of it.

This also includes our network bills, phone bills for support calls and 
conf calls that we are sometimes part of and any other overhead.

-- 
Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/  : 2522...@icq
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

Karanbir Singh wrote:
 Money donated to the project goes to sit in a pot. Resources that we use 
 to do things on and with are on machines that we ( developers, centos 
 team and contributors ) pay for, manage and run ourselves. CentOS does 
 not subsidise or pay for any of it.

Just to clarify - this is about the machines we use, the centos team.

mirror.centos.org runs off donated hardware, sitting in donated space, 
using only donated network. This also includes the webserver, the 
mailserver and almost everything inside *.centos.org. It costs the 
project nothing.

A direct fallout from the efforts by some of us in talking to and 
educating hosting companies about CentOS. Which reminds me, if you are a 
company with a few mb/sec link to spare and want to offer us something - 
dont bother with a financial donation, host a machine for us instead :) 
/plug

-- 
Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/  : 2522...@icq
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-24 Thread Marko A. Jennings

On Tue, March 24, 2009 1:13 pm, Karanbir Singh wrote:
 Karanbir Singh wrote:
 Money donated to the project goes to sit in a pot. Resources that we use
 to do things on and with are on machines that we ( developers, centos
 team and contributors ) pay for, manage and run ourselves. CentOS does
 not subsidise or pay for any of it.

 Just to clarify - this is about the machines we use, the centos team.

 mirror.centos.org runs off donated hardware, sitting in donated space,
 using only donated network. This also includes the webserver, the
 mailserver and almost everything inside *.centos.org. It costs the
 project nothing.


Karanbir, what is the donated money used for?

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4

2009-03-24 Thread Ray Van Dolson

On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:18:58AM -0700, Scott Silva wrote:
 And then maybe you can take a breath?
 
 You all are very appreciated. Don't let 10 or 20 (l)users make you
 think that the other million or so aren't happy!!  ;-)

I certainly hope this isn't in response to those of us who have piped
in on this thread.  I know the OP's intention was to find a way to
help.

No one in this thread has been complaining; just users of various
skillsets trying to figure out how best to help out.

I'm sure that's what you meant though :-)

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

Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4