On 12/17/2013 18:57, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
Yes, there are many missing -devel packages. It's possible that they
didn't fit on the media though,
I've run into two of these myself: libedit and libgd. Both of these are
living, useful libraries, without direct replacements.[*]
Clearly there are
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013, Warren Young wrote:
On 12/17/2013 18:57, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
Yes, there are many missing -devel packages. It's possible that they
didn't fit on the media though,
Look at
lftp ftp.redhat.com:/redhat/rhel/beta/7/x86_64/os/Packages ls libedit*
On 12/19/2013 12:16, Connie Sieh wrote:
Look at
lftp ftp.redhat.com:/redhat/rhel/beta/7/x86_64/os/Packages ls libedit*
Thanks for the tip. The VM I'm testing RHEL 7 beta on isn't
network-connected, so I guess I'm just going to have to mirror that
directory.
On 12/16/2013 01:27 PM, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
I meant the actual implementation, I knew it would be GNOME Classic. This
beta release is awful. I lost count of how many devel packages were
missing now, I think I had to rebuild over 20 of their source rpms to get
them while I was toying with
On 12/15/2013 10:29 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 2:18 AM, Alain Péan alain.p...@lpn.cnrs.fr wrote:
so stay on RHEL6/CentOS6 until this old hardware dies
where is the problem?
Google Chrome, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux
Yes, there are many missing -devel packages. It's possible that they
didn't fit on the media though, I haven't connected the system to RedHat's
repositories.
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.orgwrote:
On 12/16/2013 01:27 PM, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
I meant the
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 07:57:01PM -0600, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
Yes, there are many missing -devel packages. It's possible that they
didn't fit on the media though, I haven't connected the system to RedHat's
repositories.
You can just run yum update (though I think you have to manually change
On 12/15/2013 10:23 PM, Keith Keller wrote:
CentOS *IS* RHEL rebuilt without branding and offered without support
contracts. So saying the needs of the user differ is specious.
I disagree. The people RH may be targetting for purchasing RHEL7 may
very well be different from the people
I meant the actual implementation, I knew it would be GNOME Classic. This
beta release is awful. I lost count of how many devel packages were
missing now, I think I had to rebuild over 20 of their source rpms to get
them while I was toying with Cairo Dock. Not to mention that desktop, 4
ways to
Le 15/12/2013 05:55, Les Mikesell a écrit :
On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
so stay on RHEL6/CentOS6 until this old hardware dies
where is the problem?
Google Chrome, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux
On 12/14/2013 8:55 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
Nobody wants old desktop apps.
new apps tend to have heavier memory and performance requirements.
we don't run 16 bit stuff anymore either, and 16 bit computers, like
intel 286, are LONG obsolete, outside of the low end embedded market.
--
john r
On 12/15/2013 09:40 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
On 12/14/2013 8:55 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
Nobody wants old desktop apps.
new apps tend to have heavier memory and performance requirements.
we don't run 16 bit stuff anymore either, and 16 bit computers, like
intel 286, are LONG obsolete,
From: pe...@pajamian.dhs.org
To: centos@centos.org
Subject: Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
On 12/15/2013 09:40 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
On 12/14/2013 8:55 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
Nobody wants old desktop apps.
new apps tend to have heavier memory and performance requirements
Le 15/12/2013 10:23, LEVU BIS a écrit :
How much GB RAM RHEL 7 64bit support ?
From release notes, for x86_64,
'3 TB supported/64 TB'
That's the same as for RHEL 6.
Alain
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 2:18 AM, Alain Péan alain.p...@lpn.cnrs.fr wrote:
so stay on RHEL6/CentOS6 until this old hardware dies
where is the problem?
Google Chrome, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux
On 12/15/2013 1:21 AM, Peter wrote:
the needs of RedHat customers are different to
those of CentOS users
CentOS *IS* RHEL rebuilt without branding and offered without support
contracts. So saying the needs of the user differ is specious.
--
john r pierce
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 11:47 AM, John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote:
On 12/15/2013 1:21 AM, Peter wrote:
the needs of RedHat customers are different to
those of CentOS users
CentOS *IS* RHEL rebuilt without branding and offered without support
contracts. So saying the needs of the
On 12/15/2013 10:27 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
It does make sense in the context of being able to build a 32-bit
version from RHEL sources, though.
which is completely untested
anyways, doesn't EL7 use XFS now by default? XFS is completely
UNsupported with a 32bit kernel as the stack is too
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 10:35:31AM -0800, John R Pierce wrote:
anyways, doesn't EL7 use XFS now by default? XFS is completely
UNsupported with a 32bit kernel as the stack is too small.
ext2/3/4 are all still available which are perfectly content with i686/32bit.
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 10:35:31AM -0800, John R Pierce wrote:
On 12/15/2013 10:27 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
It does make sense in the context of being able to build a 32-bit
version from RHEL sources, though.
which is completely untested
anyways, doesn't EL7 use XFS now by default?
On 12/15/2013 11:42 AM, Scott Robbins wrote:
To answer just part of the question, yes, it's using XFS by default. If
you choose standard partition during installation and make no other
changes, you will have an XFS partition.
so a custom 32 bit build, the installer probably should be modified
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 11:59:36AM -0800, John R Pierce wrote:
so a custom 32 bit build, the installer probably should be modified to
use EXT3 or 4 instead (in 32bits I'd be inclined to stick with 3),
requiring yet more testing and debugging.
Which should be a trivial QA test.
Why the
On 12/15/2013 12:11 PM, John R. Dennison wrote:
Why the reservations with ext4 on a 32bit platform?
limited memory space.
--
john r pierce 37N 122W
somewhere on the middle of the left coast
___
CentOS mailing
On 2013-12-15, John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote:
On 12/15/2013 1:21 AM, Peter wrote:
the needs of RedHat customers are different to
those of CentOS users
CentOS *IS* RHEL rebuilt without branding and offered without support
contracts. So saying the needs of the user differ is
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 3:35 PM, SilverTip257 silvertip...@gmail.com wrote:
In a way it's a shame...
At the same time I can see why RH is going x86_64 only ... much hardware in
data centers is 64bit capable and running 64bit OSes.
This will probably be painful for people using LTSP to boot
On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 14.12.2013 23:30, schrieb Les Mikesell:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 3:35 PM, SilverTip257 silvertip...@gmail.com wrote:
In a way it's a shame...
At the same time I can see why RH is going x86_64 only ... much
On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
so stay on RHEL6/CentOS6 until this old hardware dies
where is the problem?
Google Chrome, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux
Am 13.12.2013 um 01:10 schrieb SilverTip257 silvertip...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Leon Fauster
leonfaus...@googlemail.comwrote:
In a way it's a shame...
At the same time I can see why RH is going x86_64 only ... much hardware in
data centers is 64bit capable and
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 5:19 AM, Leon Fauster leonfaus...@googlemail.comwrote:
Am 13.12.2013 um 01:10 schrieb SilverTip257 silvertip...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Leon Fauster
leonfaus...@googlemail.comwrote:
Unless it's embedded hardware ... by the time EL6 isn't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/12/2013 03:26 PM, Peter wrote:
On 12/13/2013 08:20 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
On 12/12/2013 01:49 PM, Peter wrote:
On 12/13/2013 02:45 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
What SELInux issue did you have? What policy did you need to add?
On 12/12/2013 03:32 PM, Warren Young wrote:
On 12/11/2013 08:56, Karanbir Singh wrote:
Within CentOS, we are going to do a CentOS7Beta1 build to match
the release upsteam
In the aftermath of the CentOS 6.0 trauma, I recall there being
speculation that building the next major release
On 12/11/2013 11:49 PM, Sorin Srbu wrote:
I see nobody's asked when CentOS 7 will be out yet.;-)
well, they can't even really start until RHEL 7 is a done deal and
released. Investing too much effort in porting a beta often is wasted
when the final release has structural changes.
--
On 12/12/2013 09:16 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
On 12/11/2013 11:49 PM, Sorin Srbu wrote:
I see nobody's asked when CentOS 7 will be out yet.;-)
well, they can't even really start until RHEL 7 is a done deal and
released. Investing too much effort in porting a beta often is wasted
when the
Op 12-12-13 08:49, Sorin Srbu schreef:
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On
Behalf Of Karanbir Singh
Sent: den 11 december 2013 16:56
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
Hi,
Le 12/12/2013 09:28, Peter a écrit :
Within CentOS, we are going to do a CentOS7Beta1 build to match the
release upsteam
That said, there is, of course, no way to even speculate when CentOS 7
final will be released until upstream releases 7.
Yes, but experience shows it takes about 6 months
Le 12/12/2013 10:41, Alain Péan a écrit :
CentOS 6 has been released in November 2010
Ooops, I meant RHEL 6, of course.
--
Administrateur Système/Réseau
Laboratoire de Photonique et Nanostructures (LPN/CNRS - UPR20)
Centre de Recherche Alcatel Data IV - Marcoussis
route de Nozay - 91460
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On
Behalf Of Johan Vermeulen
Sent: den 12 december 2013 10:44
To: centos@centos.org
Subject: Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
just installed it in Vurtualbox. That went fine.
I did that too
On 12/12/2013 08:28 AM, Peter wrote:
well, they can't even really start until RHEL 7 is a done deal and
released. Investing too much effort in porting a beta often is wasted
when the final release has structural changes.
Yes, but this seems to indicate otherwise:
Within CentOS, we are
Greetings,
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote:
snip
strategies, start writing docs at wiki.centos.org, start doing migration
snip
+1
Important considering that new critical things like grub2, systemd,
firewalld and the such.
With rhel7 entering many of
...@congnghevps.net
Phone : 055.3.842.159
Yahoo : levubis
XEN VPS, Cloud VPS, Dedicated Server, Game Server
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 15:58:35 +0530
From: raju.rajs...@gmail.com
To: centos@centos.org
Subject: Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
Greetings,
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 3:35 PM
On 12/12/2013 11:05 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
The overall aim is to have as many people as possible test the rhel7
beta and file bugs at bugzilla.redhat.com; that way everyone is testing
anf doing feedback against the same builds, and we all win with a better
overall end result.
I've
On 12/12/2013 11:03 AM, Peter wrote:
I've installed RHEL7 onto a Xen VM running off a CentOS 6 host.
this is a great test to have done. Would really like to hear comments
about process and result. I presume this is with the Xen4CentOS stack ?
- KB
--
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 |
On 12/13/2013 12:17 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 12/12/2013 11:03 AM, Peter wrote:
I've installed RHEL7 onto a Xen VM running off a CentOS 6 host.
this is a great test to have done. Would really like to hear comments
about process and result. I presume this is with the Xen4CentOS stack ?
On 12/13/2013 12:30 AM, Peter wrote:
Oh I forgot to mention the other issue, I'm running it under pvgrub (and
it works fine with a normal grub.conf file, btw, no need to install
grub2 that way), and I had to regenerate the initramfs, the one supplied
with the kernel did not come with the
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:03:55AM +1300, Peter wrote:
On 12/12/2013 11:05 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
The core group includes NetworkManager and postfix, neither should be
core packages and should be excluded from a core or minimal install.
Fedora, and RedHat, apparently feel that
On 12/13/2013 01:04 AM, Scott Robbins wrote:
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:03:55AM +1300, Peter wrote:
On 12/12/2013 11:05 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
The core group includes NetworkManager and postfix, neither should be
core packages and should be excluded from a core or minimal install.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter said the following on 12/12/2013 13:19:
Right, but core should be just the bare minimum. NetworkManager is
certainly not required to configure your network, in fact el7 runs just
fine without it. Just set your ifcfg-eth0 scripts, etc,
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 01:19:26 +1300
Peter pe...@pajamian.dhs.org wrote:
Right, but core should be just the bare minimum. NetworkManager is
certainly not required to configure your network, in fact el7 runs
just fine without it. Just set your ifcfg-eth0 scripts, etc, and
you're good to go.
By
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/12/2013 06:03 AM, Peter wrote:
On 12/12/2013 11:05 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
The overall aim is to have as many people as possible test the rhel7 beta
and file bugs at bugzilla.redhat.com; that way everyone is testing anf
doing feedback
Am 11.12.2013 um 17:03 schrieb Alain Péan alain.p...@lpn.cnrs.fr:
Le 11/12/2013 16:56, Karanbir Singh a écrit :
http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/rhel/beta/7/
Go get it ( maybe consider using a mirror ), play with it, test it, and
file reports. Dont use it in production.
As in the past, we
Le 12/12/2013 14:49, Leon Fauster a écrit :
that is really an issue for us because we use EL for some small i586 hw
(router etc.).
You can still use CentOS 6 or RHEL 6 (maintained until 2020) ? Or buy a
cheap hardware. They are now all 64 bits.
You cannot say your i586 hw will live this
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 01:19:26 +1300
Peter pe...@pajamian.dhs.org wrote:
Right, but core should be just the bare minimum. NetworkManager is
certainly not required to configure your network, in fact el7 runs
just fine without it. Just set your ifcfg-eth0 scripts, etc,
On 12 December 2013 14:06, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
By the same logic you could argue that a text editor is not required
for a bare minimum --- namely, you can always use cat and echo from the
command line to edit the config files.
The point of the text editor in
On 12/11/2013 08:56, Karanbir Singh wrote:
Within CentOS, we are going to do a CentOS7Beta1 build to match the
release upsteam
In the aftermath of the CentOS 6.0 trauma, I recall there being
speculation that building the next major release wouldn't be as
troublesome, for various reasons[*].
On 12 December 2013 15:32, Warren Young war...@etr-usa.com wrote:
On 12/11/2013 08:56, Karanbir Singh wrote:
Within CentOS, we are going to do a CentOS7Beta1 build to match the
release upsteam
In the aftermath of the CentOS 6.0 trauma, I recall there being
speculation that building the
On 12/12/2013 09:13, James Hogarth wrote:
On 12 December 2013 15:32, Warren Young war...@etr-usa.com wrote:
On 12/11/2013 08:56, Karanbir Singh wrote:
Within CentOS, we are going to do a CentOS7Beta1 build to match the
release upsteam
In the aftermath of the CentOS 6.0 trauma, I recall
On 12/12/13 11:17, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 12/12/2013 11:03 AM, Peter wrote:
I've installed RHEL7 onto a Xen VM running off a CentOS 6 host.
this is a great test to have done. Would really like to hear comments
about process and result. I presume this is with the Xen4CentOS stack ?
- KB
I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/13/2013 02:45 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
What SELInux issue did you have? What policy did you need to add?
Unfortunately I've misplaced the audit logs and report of the problem,
but this is the policy I had to add:
module mypol 1.0;
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/12/2013 01:49 PM, Peter wrote:
On 12/13/2013 02:45 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
What SELInux issue did you have? What policy did you need to add?
Unfortunately I've misplaced the audit logs and report of the problem, but
this is the policy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/13/2013 08:20 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
On 12/12/2013 01:49 PM, Peter wrote:
On 12/13/2013 02:45 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
What SELInux issue did you have? What policy did you need to
add?
Unfortunately I've misplaced the audit logs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/13/2013 09:26 AM, Peter wrote:
I actually do not think you need these, these were all caused by
the originally mislabeled system. If you remove your custom
policy, I bet it will work fine.
That makes sense. I will try removing them
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Leon Fauster leonfaus...@googlemail.comwrote:
Am 11.12.2013 um 17:03 schrieb Alain Péan alain.p...@lpn.cnrs.fr:
Le 11/12/2013 16:56, Karanbir Singh a écrit :
http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/rhel/beta/7/
Go get it ( maybe consider using a mirror ), play with
Am 12.12.2013 um 22:35 schrieb SilverTip257 silvertip...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Leon Fauster
leonfaus...@googlemail.comwrote:
that is really an issue for us because we use EL for some small i586 hw
(router etc.).
Indeed.
Now RHEL/CentOS won't be able to run on PC
Does NM need a gui to configure interfaces, etc.
On 12/12/2013 09:40 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
On 12 December 2013 14:06, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Marko Vojinovic wrote:
By the same logic you could argue that a text editor is not required
for a bare minimum --- namely, you can always use cat
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Leon Fauster leonfaus...@googlemail.comwrote:
Am 12.12.2013 um 22:35 schrieb SilverTip257 silvertip...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Leon Fauster
leonfaus...@googlemail.comwrote:
that is really an issue for us because we use EL for some
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 06:47:40PM -0500, Steve Clark wrote:
Does NM need a gui to configure interfaces, etc.
No, there's some sort of cli tool. Again, I don't use it.
You're still able to get rid of it if desired.
--
Scott Robbins
PGP keyID EB3467D6
( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54
Am 11.12.2013 um 16:56 schrieb Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org:
Hi,
http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/rhel/beta/7/
Go get it ( maybe consider using a mirror ), play with it, test it, and
file reports. Dont use it in production.
As in the past, we highly encourage people to use the
Le 11/12/2013 16:56, Karanbir Singh a écrit :
http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/rhel/beta/7/
Go get it ( maybe consider using a mirror ), play with it, test it, and
file reports. Dont use it in production.
As in the past, we highly encourage people to use the official beta
builds from Red Hat
On 11/12/13 16:03, Alain Péan wrote:
Le 11/12/2013 16:56, Karanbir Singh a écrit :
http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/rhel/beta/7/
Go get it ( maybe consider using a mirror ), play with it, test it, and
file reports. Dont use it in production.
As in the past, we highly encourage people to use the
Thanks for this, looking forward to kicking the tires to see what they did
with GNOME 3.
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.orgwrote:
Hi,
http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/rhel/beta/7/
Go get it ( maybe consider using a mirror ), play with it, test it, and
file
Le 11/12/2013 18:26, Andrew Wyatt a écrit :
Thanks for this, looking forward to kicking the tires to see what they did
with GNOME 3.
From the release notes :
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.0 Beta features the next major version of
the GNOME Desktop, GNOME 3. The user experience of GNOME 3 is
Am 11.12.2013 um 18:51 schrieb Alain Péan alain.p...@lpn.cnrs.fr:
Le 11/12/2013 18:26, Andrew Wyatt a écrit :
Thanks for this, looking forward to kicking the tires to see what they did
with GNOME 3.
From the release notes :
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.0 Beta features the next major version
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On
Behalf Of Karanbir Singh
Sent: den 11 december 2013 16:56
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: [CentOS] RHEL 7 Beta is now public
Hi,
http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/rhel/beta/7/
Go get it (
73 matches
Mail list logo
