[CentOS-announce] CESA-2016:0373 Critical CentOS 7 firefox Security Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:0373 Critical

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0373.html

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

x86_64:
453d22536d760a1eb33009f8c3972459dbf91d29dd42d6d573f1b7897a15b2f0  
firefox-38.7.0-1.el7.centos.i686.rpm
42805c6f4469938b7dd190f884cfff05e9036b3f3222c0a175da07ad05f740c4  
firefox-38.7.0-1.el7.centos.x86_64.rpm

Source:
8c19c6462ba1d76392018c709fdc9e70794fcb2de1aea11fb4e96c918daa275b  
firefox-38.7.0-1.el7.centos.src.rpm



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

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

[CentOS-announce] CESA-2016:0371 Critical CentOS 5 nss Security Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:0371 Critical

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0371.html

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

i386:
d162fe532225c87dc2ce7ff1f3e6fc0026e6a58ed46fd908a658a8c7afda166f  
nss-3.19.1-4.el5_11.i386.rpm
45520755d87a52d3c8161640d6c4f018a0a5a80d873b51aaf461446604f5081f  
nss-devel-3.19.1-4.el5_11.i386.rpm
a2a687f0bf9d3d630c22a596f1756d06bdf66fb459876be2707d73fe9949966a  
nss-pkcs11-devel-3.19.1-4.el5_11.i386.rpm
329ed95e37bf149c511f8452d862733bc9f5b49270eb948efe01ea2b808e3408  
nss-tools-3.19.1-4.el5_11.i386.rpm

x86_64:
d162fe532225c87dc2ce7ff1f3e6fc0026e6a58ed46fd908a658a8c7afda166f  
nss-3.19.1-4.el5_11.i386.rpm
8cfa4bfb39f506be043c369163c85566264eb91646c99f78cc6e9a94a0c2898d  
nss-3.19.1-4.el5_11.x86_64.rpm
45520755d87a52d3c8161640d6c4f018a0a5a80d873b51aaf461446604f5081f  
nss-devel-3.19.1-4.el5_11.i386.rpm
cfccce180e30ca0caca948726f5b3924a623af13eac15d721d884cd7ea904421  
nss-devel-3.19.1-4.el5_11.x86_64.rpm
a2a687f0bf9d3d630c22a596f1756d06bdf66fb459876be2707d73fe9949966a  
nss-pkcs11-devel-3.19.1-4.el5_11.i386.rpm
9607fa0d624d4bcfd1f5704dac66cd98ddd0953fce82ecde9545892cb8af30b2  
nss-pkcs11-devel-3.19.1-4.el5_11.x86_64.rpm
0bee51b745b3ec978a25681f617645c06bb906e7e5af848f1cc2db92f652d007  
nss-tools-3.19.1-4.el5_11.x86_64.rpm

Source:
08c533786c410cc3c32bf2c72430b281073fe91b002197fe5f9b1ec9f8d0a257  
nss-3.19.1-4.el5_11.src.rpm



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

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

[CentOS-announce] CESA-2016:0370 Critical CentOS 6 nss-util Security Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:0370 Critical

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0370.html

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

i386:
70808df51eaef656a3ec37de84e8b1d72f88a2e1eefd2872f7daec139c90002a  
nss-util-3.19.1-5.el6_7.i686.rpm
9692ccf29dd88533a76cd64f8bfb894c2de09d3cc9752652c9d8700fb1fdfd79  
nss-util-devel-3.19.1-5.el6_7.i686.rpm

x86_64:
70808df51eaef656a3ec37de84e8b1d72f88a2e1eefd2872f7daec139c90002a  
nss-util-3.19.1-5.el6_7.i686.rpm
0647d08428e5ed60e2b35b2d113b90bcec3c617c61c2a7cd537e8136da27cb37  
nss-util-3.19.1-5.el6_7.x86_64.rpm
9692ccf29dd88533a76cd64f8bfb894c2de09d3cc9752652c9d8700fb1fdfd79  
nss-util-devel-3.19.1-5.el6_7.i686.rpm
d068849494bed51503a5e487f3d08bb4afef71ffc0b7c80ccb16dfe91f36fd4b  
nss-util-devel-3.19.1-5.el6_7.x86_64.rpm

Source:
cf86d7158cd5e3fa1af15b40458728bf7507cb44089b0428492d5ac11cafa423  
nss-util-3.19.1-5.el6_7.src.rpm



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

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

[CentOS-announce] CESA-2016:0372 Important CentOS 6 openssl098e Security Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:0372 Important

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0372.html

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

i386:
e87cdaa0c6d6528e4395026ed75dd8c06d1d9cd20cbfc2b88b0d6046482aaa82  
openssl098e-0.9.8e-20.el6.centos.1.i686.rpm

x86_64:
e87cdaa0c6d6528e4395026ed75dd8c06d1d9cd20cbfc2b88b0d6046482aaa82  
openssl098e-0.9.8e-20.el6.centos.1.i686.rpm
5c8881e272b9b1415d175bc1f4eecce80ea15b4090aac9725dfe67c19db53f70  
openssl098e-0.9.8e-20.el6.centos.1.x86_64.rpm

Source:
7fea74c0623b0c425d9ff03e2412731c99a75e86eaa87d67a66b9903bb4aca2b  
openssl098e-0.9.8e-20.el6.centos.1.src.rpm



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

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

[CentOS-announce] CESA-2016:0372 Important CentOS 7 openssl098e Security Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:0372 Important

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0372.html

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

x86_64:
bda50ad8086ae3f1265eab271d0523c86cde3e9d1ef1fccbd4cce1abf13636e8  
openssl098e-0.9.8e-29.el7.centos.3.i686.rpm
65f73db4d80916a1315f5d6b79cc6dcfbed20ccf84a3a7ab05600b287ab25fcf  
openssl098e-0.9.8e-29.el7.centos.3.x86_64.rpm

Source:
c26eecaec1161dca9a32db13cd26c70f811bdb3050b30e02b4ea483d31c67d44  
openssl098e-0.9.8e-29.el7.centos.3.src.rpm



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

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

[CentOS-announce] CESA-2016:0370 Critical CentOS 7 nss-util Security Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:0370 Critical

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0370.html

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

x86_64:
0f0313279ff6dad0387f6505d1cda9096841a183240176b72be161cd79693deb  
nss-util-3.19.1-9.el7_2.i686.rpm
5f0014c0514627b0532cf9d1d6eb1fcc0bdd648c9f93f8582b3b24fd292316df  
nss-util-3.19.1-9.el7_2.x86_64.rpm
f213e755dcf945a2604d44f798ebc8625905bc75c80e57cc1acf8d0c9548169c  
nss-util-devel-3.19.1-9.el7_2.i686.rpm
444a889281c6fd4d06e15f401cead9199490410bfb11b9718b9945ba1f1c55fc  
nss-util-devel-3.19.1-9.el7_2.x86_64.rpm

Source:
9d23e31396ba2ab09ce6033abffd7821adbd04d8130c24893c30c605dd49  
nss-util-3.19.1-9.el7_2.src.rpm



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

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

[CentOS-announce] CESA-2016:0346 Important CentOS 7 postgresql Security Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:0346 Important

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0346.html

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

x86_64:
5c458f42b2ef11fcc4b62d7f69c7dc1e033957c471387d65a6d49c0d7df6f128  
postgresql-9.2.15-1.el7_2.i686.rpm
2434cedad6cd2fd921d499c57864e69e8db4ec7166d0f390c055074d50ddd2a7  
postgresql-9.2.15-1.el7_2.x86_64.rpm
f7484385c8df8fa144de7fea6e3fb64f657a3325608e3d25dd5d6e68f32fa7ea  
postgresql-contrib-9.2.15-1.el7_2.x86_64.rpm
1eeabfd3110ad851ad61b68271e2594d2807241617e395427a83f89f1e662d6f  
postgresql-devel-9.2.15-1.el7_2.i686.rpm
62790ddfbb18ad771af372509b674b62284d8d47c390dc397269f71c9fef8df3  
postgresql-devel-9.2.15-1.el7_2.x86_64.rpm
0e787b99e9fddde0900c8dbf2014025ec8ce1c578c684e5ce51c532b52f1abb4  
postgresql-docs-9.2.15-1.el7_2.x86_64.rpm
51c0e1cc0983e2139d11ea212f23f1ce60b6ed25a071743f360515688898aaa5  
postgresql-libs-9.2.15-1.el7_2.i686.rpm
53f4bed4816944cdfd1b896ad6933c799f3429b221d2146d91d462e5c608fae3  
postgresql-libs-9.2.15-1.el7_2.x86_64.rpm
2c9e04943c318f89e8c94d8104e01cbeb1c9dcbf868dee434c3e65505384cb03  
postgresql-plperl-9.2.15-1.el7_2.x86_64.rpm
36021f26db1f2addf89e15707348cc611b34f0b9fe385df77e1f50994c978fa6  
postgresql-plpython-9.2.15-1.el7_2.x86_64.rpm
a9d8728e1b5a7c34ce94b1c339c3017691da43458afcec07f6be207c96877795  
postgresql-pltcl-9.2.15-1.el7_2.x86_64.rpm
5be958fcca92e4b44dcfcae4f50bb16c05386c06b31ddcd36b5cf6c4ffd01af4  
postgresql-server-9.2.15-1.el7_2.x86_64.rpm
8afce69552067b932036be540522b0db2d4c245cedb1fad8eb4762b02586a83d  
postgresql-test-9.2.15-1.el7_2.x86_64.rpm
1e7aa4a53e7cee01fdd305e69bc2e7927f85d97682dd925b3adb0b12e75a9872  
postgresql-upgrade-9.2.15-1.el7_2.x86_64.rpm

Source:
2e7e14805236939e21dd3bb2b293c205206c7cb76c0beb42317a4073aeb9aab0  
postgresql-9.2.15-1.el7_2.src.rpm



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

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

Re: [CentOS] how to force outbound ssh through one network card

[John R Pierce]

On 3/8/2016 8:47 PM, Clint Dilks wrote:

Here is documentation that may help
http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html  but as John mentions
it is painful to get right.



sadly, that document is like 15 years old, and hasn't been updated.   
the basics are still valid, but things like how to integrate that with 
RHEL startup scripts?  nada, you're on your own.






--
john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz

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

Re: [CentOS] how to force outbound ssh through one network card

[Clint Dilks]

Hi

Here is documentation that may help
http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html but as John mentions
it is painful to get right.



On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 5:17 PM, John R Pierce  wrote:

> On 3/8/2016 8:13 PM, Fred Smith wrote:
>
>> though I have no personal experience with this, I'm guessing that
>> the term you want is "bonding" or "bonded interfaces". You can probably
>> find articles on how to do that with some judicious googling.
>> I know I've seen such articles, but haven't kept any records of where.
>>
>
> NO.
>
> you can't bond two interfaces connected to different ISP's.
>
> best you can do is limited load balancing, and/or use source tagged
> routing via ip rules to change gateways.   its a mess to get right.
>
>
>
> --
> john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
>
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] how to force outbound ssh through one network card

[John R Pierce]

On 3/8/2016 8:13 PM, Fred Smith wrote:

though I have no personal experience with this, I'm guessing that
the term you want is "bonding" or "bonded interfaces". You can probably
find articles on how to do that with some judicious googling.
I know I've seen such articles, but haven't kept any records of where.


NO.

you can't bond two interfaces connected to different ISP's.

best you can do is limited load balancing, and/or use source tagged 
routing via ip rules to change gateways.   its a mess to get right.




--
john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz

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

Re: [CentOS] how to force outbound ssh through one network card

[Fred Smith]

On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 09:41:43PM -0600, Gregory P. Ennis wrote:
> Everyone,
> 
> I am putting together a new gateway machine that controls all of the
> traffic in and out of one of our offices.  We we have a machine with
> CentOS Linux release 7.2.1511 (Core)  with 3.10.0-327.10.1.el7.x86_64
> kernel which is now equipped with three nic cards.   We decided to
> change our internet providers, but unfortunately Comcast would not
> allow us to drop there service without some penalties so management
> decided to keep the line and not put up a fight. Of the three nic
> cards, one card serves the local network inside the office, and the
> other two will connect to the two different internet lines.   
> 
> This has resulted in providing us with two outbound internet lines that
> we can use.  I decided to do some experimenting to see if I could use
> iptables or other venues to use both outside internet addresses to
> augment our bandwidth.  
> 
> Can anyone refer me to any tutorial or give me suggestions as to how to
> route outbound ssh traffic that is generated from one of the machines
> inside the network through only one of the specified nic cards on the
> gateway.  I would like to see if I can utilize this extra band width by
> splitting ssh traffic and html traffic.  Essentially, I would like to
> force outbound ssh traffic on only one of the outside nic cards.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> Greg Ennis

though I have no personal experience with this, I'm guessing that
the term you want is "bonding" or "bonded interfaces". You can probably
find articles on how to do that with some judicious googling.
I know I've seen such articles, but haven't kept any records of where.

Good luck!

Fred

-- 
---
Under no circumstances will I ever purchase anything offered to me as
the result of an unsolicited e-mail message. Nor will I forward chain
letters, petitions, mass mailings, or virus warnings to large numbers
of others. This is my contribution to the survival of the online
community.
 --Roger Ebert, December, 1996
- The Boulder Pledge -
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] how to force outbound ssh through one network card

[Gregory P. Ennis]

Everyone,

I am putting together a new gateway machine that controls all of the
traffic in and out of one of our offices.  We we have a machine with
CentOS Linux release 7.2.1511 (Core)  with 3.10.0-327.10.1.el7.x86_64
kernel which is now equipped with three nic cards.   We decided to
change our internet providers, but unfortunately Comcast would not
allow us to drop there service without some penalties so management
decided to keep the line and not put up a fight. Of the three nic
cards, one card serves the local network inside the office, and the
other two will connect to the two different internet lines.   

This has resulted in providing us with two outbound internet lines that
we can use.  I decided to do some experimenting to see if I could use
iptables or other venues to use both outside internet addresses to
augment our bandwidth.  

Can anyone refer me to any tutorial or give me suggestions as to how to
route outbound ssh traffic that is generated from one of the machines
inside the network through only one of the specified nic cards on the
gateway.  I would like to see if I can utilize this extra band width by
splitting ssh traffic and html traffic.  Essentially, I would like to
force outbound ssh traffic on only one of the outside nic cards.

Any ideas?

Greg Ennis



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

Re: [CentOS] 6.7 netinstall fails at insert cd to continue

[g]

On 03/07/16 09:06, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> This it is a very easy process to create an installable usb key:
>
--

yes, it is. for some reason or other, i seldom remember to use it.
too much using gui desktop. ;-)

for sure, this reply and reply from John R Pierce are being added
to my 'tricks and toolkit' collection because my 'chemo brain' is
forgetting too much of what my 'near photographic' memory used to
remember.


thank you for reply and info. very much appreciated.


-- 
peace out.

If Bill Gates got a dime for every time Windows crashes...
 ...oh, wait. He does. THAT explains it!
-+-
in a world with out fences, who needs gates.

CentOS GNU/Linux 6.7

tc,hago.

g
.

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

Re: [CentOS] power management / tuned following external power source

[g]

On 02/28/16 04:43, Karanbir Singh wrote:
<>

> So what I am wondering is if there is an easy way to have the tuned-adm
> reset profiles based on external power source. If I'm at the work table
> and plugged in, run with throughput-performance mode, and if the
> external power is disconnected, run in powersave mode ? I've had,
> admittedly a brief, look and found nothing obvious. Has anyone else run
> into this before ?
>
--

do not know about 'tuned-adm', i presume you added it, or it is
centos 7.x. therefore i can not reply to your questions, other than
to ask if you use kde and have looked at what it provides.

with centos 6.7 and kde desktop on my laptop, i use the power control
setting provided by;

  system settings > advanced > power management

with this, i am able to config settings to handle about all conditions,
including 'power save mode' and no external power.

having recently purchased a new 6600 mAH battery, i am curious as to
just how long laptop will run 'off mains' before i get a notice and
have to recharge. so far, my longest run is around 4 hrs, with time
left. i do not recall what % battery icon showed.

selectable settings are;

  powersave performance aggressive powersave
  xtreme powersave presentation

each 'type' also has selection for action to apply.

so, if you are running kde, i will suggest checking out the provided
'power management' control,


-- 
peace out.

If Bill Gates got a dime for every time Windows crashes...
 ...oh, wait. He does. THAT explains it!
-+-
in a world with out fences, who needs gates.

CentOS GNU/Linux 6.7

tc,hago.

g
.

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

Re: [CentOS] 6.7 netinstall fails at insert cd to continue

[g]

On 03/07/16 01:54, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 3/6/2016 8:25 PM, g wrote:
>> ok. so how about;
>>
>>yum shell install < pkginstalllist.file
>
>
>  yum install $(cat pkginstallist.file)
> or
>  yum install `cat pkginstallist.file`
>
> should work unless that list is stupid long.
>
--

all i can say is "yum install $(cat pkginstallist.file)" worked
'slicker than owl poop'. :-D

my bad in that i did not think to redirect output to catch packages
that where not available. there where maybe 12 such, so it was not
a problem to 'drag and drop' names while yum output scrolled.

now all i have to do is figure out what packages are for and where
i loaded them from, which a web search on names should answer.

primarily, what is missing are cad, eda and spice progs.


thank you for reply. i most gratefully appreciate your help.

and i thank and appreciate others who replied.


-- 
peace out.

If Bill Gates got a dime for every time Windows crashes...
 ...oh, wait. He does. THAT explains it!
-+-
in a world with out fences, who needs gates.

CentOS GNU/Linux 6.7

tc,hago.

g
.

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

Re: [CentOS] Can anyone compile mtr source RPM on CentOS 6.7?

[Digimer]

On 08/03/16 02:45 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
> On 8 March 2016 at 19:36, Digimer  wrote:
> 
>> On 08/03/16 02:32 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315856
>
> What's odd is how it works in Fedora using mock but not EPEL6 with mock
 ...
> got to be down to how the build roots are constructed.
>
> Decided to do a quick test of something given how EPEL has adjusted
 macros
> recently to reduce boilerplate between Fedora and itself ...
>
> I just removed the rm -rf line from %clean and got a clean mock build
>> on
 a
> CentOS6 base.
>
> It must have cleaned out the generated makefile between %build and
 %install
> and that left it with the bare one that had no install: section
>
> This will bite Red Hat at the 6.8 milestone (unless they build on
>> Fedora)
> and presumably CentOS when 6.8 rolls round if RH don't remove the rm
>> -rf
> from %clean ;)

 Should the priority on the bug be changed?

>>>
>>>
>>> No leave it as is for now ...
>>>
>>> I'm really quite confused as after it worked I thought I'd try the
>> original
>>> SRPM again and it worked :/
>>>
>>> I have no idea what has changed on the system to provide for that - doing
>>> some quick looks now.
>>
>> OK, let me know if I can assist/test.
>>
>>
>>
> Okay I have what I believe to be the answer ... a rather horrible race
> condition.
> 
> The generated makefile has a '(sleep 3; cp Makefile.dist Makefile)  &' in
> it for the distclean target.
> 
> The Makefile.dist is the bare empty one.
> 
>  Note how this backgrounds ? There is no wait after this ...
> 
> So three seconds after the make distclean target is hit *bam* the full
> Makefile with the install target gets overwritten by the bare one.
> 
> So now whether the build works or not is a function of how fast you make it
> to make install  Take longer than 3 seconds after the ./configure and
> there won't be a valid Makefile for the install (unless ./configure has
> rerun already - see how messy this is?)
> 
> This is definitely not a mock bug - that can be closed. It's a bug in the
> EL6 mtr spec file.
> 
> See lines 1812 and 4005 for the relevant happenings in the pastebin I put
> up before showing the behavioural difference between F23 and EPEL6
> 
> Note that my EPEL6 system is a VM so inherently slower... but once the data
> from disk is in the kernel cache it's faster on the subsequent builds and
> makes the race
> 
> The VM is on a spinning disk (on btrfs) whereas the F23 build happened on
> an SSD (btrfs but less of an issue then) which would naturally cause the
> big speed difference.
> 
> I'd open a bug on bugzilla instead against RHEL6 and mtr explaining the
> race condition.
> 
> I can't think of a good reason in a spec file to background a 3 second wait
> and then overwrite a file that will be used in compilation/install ...

Um, wow. That's pretty dumb.

I've reassigned the ticket to EL6 -> mtr.

Thank you very much for your help! I will poke at the .spec and report
back here/the ticket if I make any progress (again, I'm fairly new to
all this. :) ).

-- 
Digimer
Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/
What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without
access to education?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Can anyone compile mtr source RPM on CentOS 6.7?

[James Hogarth]

On 8 March 2016 at 19:36, Digimer  wrote:

> On 08/03/16 02:32 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
>  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315856
> >>>
> >>> What's odd is how it works in Fedora using mock but not EPEL6 with mock
> >> ...
> >>> got to be down to how the build roots are constructed.
> >>>
> >>> Decided to do a quick test of something given how EPEL has adjusted
> >> macros
> >>> recently to reduce boilerplate between Fedora and itself ...
> >>>
> >>> I just removed the rm -rf line from %clean and got a clean mock build
> on
> >> a
> >>> CentOS6 base.
> >>>
> >>> It must have cleaned out the generated makefile between %build and
> >> %install
> >>> and that left it with the bare one that had no install: section
> >>>
> >>> This will bite Red Hat at the 6.8 milestone (unless they build on
> Fedora)
> >>> and presumably CentOS when 6.8 rolls round if RH don't remove the rm
> -rf
> >>> from %clean ;)
> >>
> >> Should the priority on the bug be changed?
> >>
> >
> >
> > No leave it as is for now ...
> >
> > I'm really quite confused as after it worked I thought I'd try the
> original
> > SRPM again and it worked :/
> >
> > I have no idea what has changed on the system to provide for that - doing
> > some quick looks now.
>
> OK, let me know if I can assist/test.
>
>
>
Okay I have what I believe to be the answer ... a rather horrible race
condition.

The generated makefile has a '(sleep 3; cp Makefile.dist Makefile)  &' in
it for the distclean target.

The Makefile.dist is the bare empty one.

 Note how this backgrounds ? There is no wait after this ...

So three seconds after the make distclean target is hit *bam* the full
Makefile with the install target gets overwritten by the bare one.

So now whether the build works or not is a function of how fast you make it
to make install  Take longer than 3 seconds after the ./configure and
there won't be a valid Makefile for the install (unless ./configure has
rerun already - see how messy this is?)

This is definitely not a mock bug - that can be closed. It's a bug in the
EL6 mtr spec file.

See lines 1812 and 4005 for the relevant happenings in the pastebin I put
up before showing the behavioural difference between F23 and EPEL6

Note that my EPEL6 system is a VM so inherently slower... but once the data
from disk is in the kernel cache it's faster on the subsequent builds and
makes the race

The VM is on a spinning disk (on btrfs) whereas the F23 build happened on
an SSD (btrfs but less of an issue then) which would naturally cause the
big speed difference.

I'd open a bug on bugzilla instead against RHEL6 and mtr explaining the
race condition.

I can't think of a good reason in a spec file to background a 3 second wait
and then overwrite a file that will be used in compilation/install ...
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Can anyone compile mtr source RPM on CentOS 6.7?

[Digimer]

On 08/03/16 02:32 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315856
>>>
>>> What's odd is how it works in Fedora using mock but not EPEL6 with mock
>> ...
>>> got to be down to how the build roots are constructed.
>>>
>>> Decided to do a quick test of something given how EPEL has adjusted
>> macros
>>> recently to reduce boilerplate between Fedora and itself ...
>>>
>>> I just removed the rm -rf line from %clean and got a clean mock build on
>> a
>>> CentOS6 base.
>>>
>>> It must have cleaned out the generated makefile between %build and
>> %install
>>> and that left it with the bare one that had no install: section
>>>
>>> This will bite Red Hat at the 6.8 milestone (unless they build on Fedora)
>>> and presumably CentOS when 6.8 rolls round if RH don't remove the rm -rf
>>> from %clean ;)
>>
>> Should the priority on the bug be changed?
>>
> 
> 
> No leave it as is for now ...
> 
> I'm really quite confused as after it worked I thought I'd try the original
> SRPM again and it worked :/
> 
> I have no idea what has changed on the system to provide for that - doing
> some quick looks now.

OK, let me know if I can assist/test.

-- 
Digimer
Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/
What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without
access to education?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Can anyone compile mtr source RPM on CentOS 6.7?

[James Hogarth]

On 8 March 2016 at 19:13, Digimer  wrote:

> On 08/03/16 02:08 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
> > On 8 March 2016 at 19:02, Digimer  wrote:
> >
> >> On 08/03/16 01:51 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
> >>> On 8 March 2016 at 17:22, Digimer  wrote:
> >>>
>  On 08/03/16 11:36 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> > On 8 March 2016 at 16:15, Digimer  wrote:
> >
> >> On 08/03/16 07:11 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> >>> On 8 March 2016 at 10:07, Leon Fauster  >
> >> wrote:
> >>>
>  Am 08.03.2016 um 01:50 schrieb Digimer :
> > I'm not surprised, given that it is in the repo. That's why I was
> >> asking
> > if anyone tried building it themselves and, if so, did they have
> >> the
> > same issue as I describe below?
> >
> > Alternatively, any tips/advice on solving my build issue would be
>  helpful.
> 
> 
> 
>  what says /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.gu9Ds0?
> 
>  all dependencies installed?
> 
> 
> 
> >>> No need to check that  the error is clear "make: *** No rule to
>  make
> >>> target `install'.  Stop." ... that mini Makefile he posted doesn't
> >> include
> >>> an install: section
> >>>
> >>> Of course what the OP is missing is *that* makefile does not get
> >> used.
> >>>
> >>> In the tarball there is a Makefile.in that gets processed into the
>  actual
> >>> makefile by ./configure (well %configure in the spec but you get
> the
> >> point)
> >>>
> >>> So we come back round the houses to the key point - Digimer what
> are
>  you
> >>> *actually* trying to do?
> >>>
> >>> You obviously aren't building from the spec in that src.rpm or
> using
>  mock
> >>> as those have configure which would generate the valid makefile
> with
>  the
> >>> make install target... so what are you doing and what do you want
> to
> >>> achieve?
> >>>
> >>> The %install phase you posted is really not of interest to your
>  'problem'
> >>> but rather the %build phase would be telling.
> >>
> >> As I've done with several other RPMs, I did the following;
> >>
> >> ===
> >> yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk
> >>
> >> rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm
> >>
> >> cd rpmbuild/SPECS/
> >>
> >> # Change "Release"
> >>
> >> rpmbuild -ba mtr.spec
> >> ===
> >>
> >> If you're asking a more generic "why are you doing this?" question;
> I
> >> am
> >> including the RPM in a project we're working on and I don't want to
> >> risk
> >> running fould of the CentOS project by directly redistributing their
> >> (and RHEL's) rpms.
> >>
> >>
> > I'm sure Karanbir and Johnny can weigh in here more but so long as
> you
>  are
> > not claiming to be CentOS and using their trademarks (see the
> modified
>  ones
> > with centos in the name) I'm pretty certain that you are safe
> building
> >> an
> > appliance on CentOS and can ship the RPMs on that ...
> >
> > Regardless of that issue what you've described above should work (or
>  freak
> > out if a build dependency was missing ... unless one isn't defined
> as a
> > BuildRequires but is in the default mock root and is causing
> %configure
> >  not to generate the Makefile).
> >
> > Again the right answer here is "use mock" ...
> >
> > yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk
> >
> > rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm
> >
> > cd rpmbuild
> >
> > vi SPECS/mtr.spec (change release etc ... bear in mind that bumping
>  release
> > may not help you when a centos update happens ... may not care for an
> > appliance)
> >
> > rpmbuild -bs SPECS/mtr.spec
> >
> > mock -r epel-6-x86_64 SRPMS/mtr-*.src.rpm
> >
> > 
> >
> > That will get you a reproducible clean build environment in a way not
> > dependent on the state of your workstation and avoid any accidental
> > depednencies etc popping up
> 
>  Thanks for the help, but I got the same results;
> 
>  
>  mock /home/digimer/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.src.rpm
> 
>  
>  
>  + make DESTDIR=/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.x86_64
>  install
>  make: *** No rule to make target `install'.  Stop.
> 
> 
>  RPM build errors:
>  error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.8atuER (%install)
>  Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.8atuER (%install)
>  ERROR:
>  Exception(/home/digimer/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.src.rpm)
>  Config(epel-6-x86_64) 5 minutes 54 seconds
>  INFO: Results and/or logs in: /var/lib/mock/epel-6-x86_64/result
>  ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output.
>   # 

Re: [CentOS] Can anyone compile mtr source RPM on CentOS 6.7?

[Digimer]

On 08/03/16 02:08 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
> On 8 March 2016 at 19:02, Digimer  wrote:
> 
>> On 08/03/16 01:51 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
>>> On 8 March 2016 at 17:22, Digimer  wrote:
>>>
 On 08/03/16 11:36 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> On 8 March 2016 at 16:15, Digimer  wrote:
>
>> On 08/03/16 07:11 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
>>> On 8 March 2016 at 10:07, Leon Fauster 
>> wrote:
>>>
 Am 08.03.2016 um 01:50 schrieb Digimer :
> I'm not surprised, given that it is in the repo. That's why I was
>> asking
> if anyone tried building it themselves and, if so, did they have
>> the
> same issue as I describe below?
>
> Alternatively, any tips/advice on solving my build issue would be
 helpful.



 what says /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.gu9Ds0?

 all dependencies installed?



>>> No need to check that  the error is clear "make: *** No rule to
 make
>>> target `install'.  Stop." ... that mini Makefile he posted doesn't
>> include
>>> an install: section
>>>
>>> Of course what the OP is missing is *that* makefile does not get
>> used.
>>>
>>> In the tarball there is a Makefile.in that gets processed into the
 actual
>>> makefile by ./configure (well %configure in the spec but you get the
>> point)
>>>
>>> So we come back round the houses to the key point - Digimer what are
 you
>>> *actually* trying to do?
>>>
>>> You obviously aren't building from the spec in that src.rpm or using
 mock
>>> as those have configure which would generate the valid makefile with
 the
>>> make install target... so what are you doing and what do you want to
>>> achieve?
>>>
>>> The %install phase you posted is really not of interest to your
 'problem'
>>> but rather the %build phase would be telling.
>>
>> As I've done with several other RPMs, I did the following;
>>
>> ===
>> yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk
>>
>> rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm
>>
>> cd rpmbuild/SPECS/
>>
>> # Change "Release"
>>
>> rpmbuild -ba mtr.spec
>> ===
>>
>> If you're asking a more generic "why are you doing this?" question; I
>> am
>> including the RPM in a project we're working on and I don't want to
>> risk
>> running fould of the CentOS project by directly redistributing their
>> (and RHEL's) rpms.
>>
>>
> I'm sure Karanbir and Johnny can weigh in here more but so long as you
 are
> not claiming to be CentOS and using their trademarks (see the modified
 ones
> with centos in the name) I'm pretty certain that you are safe building
>> an
> appliance on CentOS and can ship the RPMs on that ...
>
> Regardless of that issue what you've described above should work (or
 freak
> out if a build dependency was missing ... unless one isn't defined as a
> BuildRequires but is in the default mock root and is causing %configure
>  not to generate the Makefile).
>
> Again the right answer here is "use mock" ...
>
> yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk
>
> rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm
>
> cd rpmbuild
>
> vi SPECS/mtr.spec (change release etc ... bear in mind that bumping
 release
> may not help you when a centos update happens ... may not care for an
> appliance)
>
> rpmbuild -bs SPECS/mtr.spec
>
> mock -r epel-6-x86_64 SRPMS/mtr-*.src.rpm
>
> 
>
> That will get you a reproducible clean build environment in a way not
> dependent on the state of your workstation and avoid any accidental
> depednencies etc popping up

 Thanks for the help, but I got the same results;

 
 mock /home/digimer/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.src.rpm

 
 
 + make DESTDIR=/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.x86_64
 install
 make: *** No rule to make target `install'.  Stop.


 RPM build errors:
 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.8atuER (%install)
 Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.8atuER (%install)
 ERROR:
 Exception(/home/digimer/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.src.rpm)
 Config(epel-6-x86_64) 5 minutes 54 seconds
 INFO: Results and/or logs in: /var/lib/mock/epel-6-x86_64/result
 ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output.
  # bash --login -c /usr/bin/rpmbuild -bb --target x86_64 --nodeps
 /builddir/build/SPECS/mtr.spec
 

 As for redistribution; I spoke to someone here some months back about
 creating a custom ISO and I was told I couldn't modify 'Packages', which
 is what I needed to do. I am also making a RHEL variant, and emailing
 their legal didn't 

Re: [CentOS] Can anyone compile mtr source RPM on CentOS 6.7?

[James Hogarth]

On 8 March 2016 at 19:02, Digimer  wrote:

> On 08/03/16 01:51 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
> > On 8 March 2016 at 17:22, Digimer  wrote:
> >
> >> On 08/03/16 11:36 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> >>> On 8 March 2016 at 16:15, Digimer  wrote:
> >>>
>  On 08/03/16 07:11 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> > On 8 March 2016 at 10:07, Leon Fauster 
>  wrote:
> >
> >> Am 08.03.2016 um 01:50 schrieb Digimer :
> >>> I'm not surprised, given that it is in the repo. That's why I was
>  asking
> >>> if anyone tried building it themselves and, if so, did they have
> the
> >>> same issue as I describe below?
> >>>
> >>> Alternatively, any tips/advice on solving my build issue would be
> >> helpful.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> what says /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.gu9Ds0?
> >>
> >> all dependencies installed?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > No need to check that  the error is clear "make: *** No rule to
> >> make
> > target `install'.  Stop." ... that mini Makefile he posted doesn't
>  include
> > an install: section
> >
> > Of course what the OP is missing is *that* makefile does not get
> used.
> >
> > In the tarball there is a Makefile.in that gets processed into the
> >> actual
> > makefile by ./configure (well %configure in the spec but you get the
>  point)
> >
> > So we come back round the houses to the key point - Digimer what are
> >> you
> > *actually* trying to do?
> >
> > You obviously aren't building from the spec in that src.rpm or using
> >> mock
> > as those have configure which would generate the valid makefile with
> >> the
> > make install target... so what are you doing and what do you want to
> > achieve?
> >
> > The %install phase you posted is really not of interest to your
> >> 'problem'
> > but rather the %build phase would be telling.
> 
>  As I've done with several other RPMs, I did the following;
> 
>  ===
>  yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk
> 
>  rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm
> 
>  cd rpmbuild/SPECS/
> 
>  # Change "Release"
> 
>  rpmbuild -ba mtr.spec
>  ===
> 
>  If you're asking a more generic "why are you doing this?" question; I
> am
>  including the RPM in a project we're working on and I don't want to
> risk
>  running fould of the CentOS project by directly redistributing their
>  (and RHEL's) rpms.
> 
> 
> >>> I'm sure Karanbir and Johnny can weigh in here more but so long as you
> >> are
> >>> not claiming to be CentOS and using their trademarks (see the modified
> >> ones
> >>> with centos in the name) I'm pretty certain that you are safe building
> an
> >>> appliance on CentOS and can ship the RPMs on that ...
> >>>
> >>> Regardless of that issue what you've described above should work (or
> >> freak
> >>> out if a build dependency was missing ... unless one isn't defined as a
> >>> BuildRequires but is in the default mock root and is causing %configure
> >>>  not to generate the Makefile).
> >>>
> >>> Again the right answer here is "use mock" ...
> >>>
> >>> yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk
> >>>
> >>> rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm
> >>>
> >>> cd rpmbuild
> >>>
> >>> vi SPECS/mtr.spec (change release etc ... bear in mind that bumping
> >> release
> >>> may not help you when a centos update happens ... may not care for an
> >>> appliance)
> >>>
> >>> rpmbuild -bs SPECS/mtr.spec
> >>>
> >>> mock -r epel-6-x86_64 SRPMS/mtr-*.src.rpm
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>> That will get you a reproducible clean build environment in a way not
> >>> dependent on the state of your workstation and avoid any accidental
> >>> depednencies etc popping up
> >>
> >> Thanks for the help, but I got the same results;
> >>
> >> 
> >> mock /home/digimer/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.src.rpm
> >>
> >> 
> >> 
> >> + make DESTDIR=/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.x86_64
> >> install
> >> make: *** No rule to make target `install'.  Stop.
> >>
> >>
> >> RPM build errors:
> >> error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.8atuER (%install)
> >> Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.8atuER (%install)
> >> ERROR:
> >> Exception(/home/digimer/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.src.rpm)
> >> Config(epel-6-x86_64) 5 minutes 54 seconds
> >> INFO: Results and/or logs in: /var/lib/mock/epel-6-x86_64/result
> >> ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output.
> >>  # bash --login -c /usr/bin/rpmbuild -bb --target x86_64 --nodeps
> >> /builddir/build/SPECS/mtr.spec
> >> 
> >>
> >> As for redistribution; I spoke to someone here some months back about
> >> creating a custom ISO and I was told I couldn't modify 'Packages', which
> >> is what I needed to do. I am also making a RHEL variant, and emailing
> >> their legal didn't get a reply, so I am going this route to not step on
> 

Re: [CentOS] Can anyone compile mtr source RPM on CentOS 6.7?

[Digimer]

On 08/03/16 01:51 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
> On 8 March 2016 at 17:22, Digimer  wrote:
> 
>> On 08/03/16 11:36 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
>>> On 8 March 2016 at 16:15, Digimer  wrote:
>>>
 On 08/03/16 07:11 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> On 8 March 2016 at 10:07, Leon Fauster 
 wrote:
>
>> Am 08.03.2016 um 01:50 schrieb Digimer :
>>> I'm not surprised, given that it is in the repo. That's why I was
 asking
>>> if anyone tried building it themselves and, if so, did they have the
>>> same issue as I describe below?
>>>
>>> Alternatively, any tips/advice on solving my build issue would be
>> helpful.
>>
>>
>>
>> what says /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.gu9Ds0?
>>
>> all dependencies installed?
>>
>>
>>
> No need to check that  the error is clear "make: *** No rule to
>> make
> target `install'.  Stop." ... that mini Makefile he posted doesn't
 include
> an install: section
>
> Of course what the OP is missing is *that* makefile does not get used.
>
> In the tarball there is a Makefile.in that gets processed into the
>> actual
> makefile by ./configure (well %configure in the spec but you get the
 point)
>
> So we come back round the houses to the key point - Digimer what are
>> you
> *actually* trying to do?
>
> You obviously aren't building from the spec in that src.rpm or using
>> mock
> as those have configure which would generate the valid makefile with
>> the
> make install target... so what are you doing and what do you want to
> achieve?
>
> The %install phase you posted is really not of interest to your
>> 'problem'
> but rather the %build phase would be telling.

 As I've done with several other RPMs, I did the following;

 ===
 yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk

 rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm

 cd rpmbuild/SPECS/

 # Change "Release"

 rpmbuild -ba mtr.spec
 ===

 If you're asking a more generic "why are you doing this?" question; I am
 including the RPM in a project we're working on and I don't want to risk
 running fould of the CentOS project by directly redistributing their
 (and RHEL's) rpms.


>>> I'm sure Karanbir and Johnny can weigh in here more but so long as you
>> are
>>> not claiming to be CentOS and using their trademarks (see the modified
>> ones
>>> with centos in the name) I'm pretty certain that you are safe building an
>>> appliance on CentOS and can ship the RPMs on that ...
>>>
>>> Regardless of that issue what you've described above should work (or
>> freak
>>> out if a build dependency was missing ... unless one isn't defined as a
>>> BuildRequires but is in the default mock root and is causing %configure
>>>  not to generate the Makefile).
>>>
>>> Again the right answer here is "use mock" ...
>>>
>>> yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk
>>>
>>> rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm
>>>
>>> cd rpmbuild
>>>
>>> vi SPECS/mtr.spec (change release etc ... bear in mind that bumping
>> release
>>> may not help you when a centos update happens ... may not care for an
>>> appliance)
>>>
>>> rpmbuild -bs SPECS/mtr.spec
>>>
>>> mock -r epel-6-x86_64 SRPMS/mtr-*.src.rpm
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> That will get you a reproducible clean build environment in a way not
>>> dependent on the state of your workstation and avoid any accidental
>>> depednencies etc popping up
>>
>> Thanks for the help, but I got the same results;
>>
>> 
>> mock /home/digimer/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.src.rpm
>>
>> 
>> 
>> + make DESTDIR=/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.x86_64
>> install
>> make: *** No rule to make target `install'.  Stop.
>>
>>
>> RPM build errors:
>> error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.8atuER (%install)
>> Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.8atuER (%install)
>> ERROR:
>> Exception(/home/digimer/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.src.rpm)
>> Config(epel-6-x86_64) 5 minutes 54 seconds
>> INFO: Results and/or logs in: /var/lib/mock/epel-6-x86_64/result
>> ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output.
>>  # bash --login -c /usr/bin/rpmbuild -bb --target x86_64 --nodeps
>> /builddir/build/SPECS/mtr.spec
>> 
>>
>> As for redistribution; I spoke to someone here some months back about
>> creating a custom ISO and I was told I couldn't modify 'Packages', which
>> is what I needed to do. I am also making a RHEL variant, and emailing
>> their legal didn't get a reply, so I am going this route to not step on
>> toes.
>>
>>
>>
> okay looks like you've uncovered an bug in mock that should be reported in
> EPEL
> 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Fedora%20EPEL=el6=mock
> 
> I don't see any existing bug that would seem to apply ...
> 
> You can see the build completes with a target of epel6 on an F23 install
> but a clean C6 install 

Re: [CentOS] Can anyone compile mtr source RPM on CentOS 6.7?

[James Hogarth]

On 8 March 2016 at 17:22, Digimer  wrote:

> On 08/03/16 11:36 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> > On 8 March 2016 at 16:15, Digimer  wrote:
> >
> >> On 08/03/16 07:11 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> >>> On 8 March 2016 at 10:07, Leon Fauster 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
>  Am 08.03.2016 um 01:50 schrieb Digimer :
> > I'm not surprised, given that it is in the repo. That's why I was
> >> asking
> > if anyone tried building it themselves and, if so, did they have the
> > same issue as I describe below?
> >
> > Alternatively, any tips/advice on solving my build issue would be
>  helpful.
> 
> 
> 
>  what says /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.gu9Ds0?
> 
>  all dependencies installed?
> 
> 
> 
> >>> No need to check that  the error is clear "make: *** No rule to
> make
> >>> target `install'.  Stop." ... that mini Makefile he posted doesn't
> >> include
> >>> an install: section
> >>>
> >>> Of course what the OP is missing is *that* makefile does not get used.
> >>>
> >>> In the tarball there is a Makefile.in that gets processed into the
> actual
> >>> makefile by ./configure (well %configure in the spec but you get the
> >> point)
> >>>
> >>> So we come back round the houses to the key point - Digimer what are
> you
> >>> *actually* trying to do?
> >>>
> >>> You obviously aren't building from the spec in that src.rpm or using
> mock
> >>> as those have configure which would generate the valid makefile with
> the
> >>> make install target... so what are you doing and what do you want to
> >>> achieve?
> >>>
> >>> The %install phase you posted is really not of interest to your
> 'problem'
> >>> but rather the %build phase would be telling.
> >>
> >> As I've done with several other RPMs, I did the following;
> >>
> >> ===
> >> yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk
> >>
> >> rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm
> >>
> >> cd rpmbuild/SPECS/
> >>
> >> # Change "Release"
> >>
> >> rpmbuild -ba mtr.spec
> >> ===
> >>
> >> If you're asking a more generic "why are you doing this?" question; I am
> >> including the RPM in a project we're working on and I don't want to risk
> >> running fould of the CentOS project by directly redistributing their
> >> (and RHEL's) rpms.
> >>
> >>
> > I'm sure Karanbir and Johnny can weigh in here more but so long as you
> are
> > not claiming to be CentOS and using their trademarks (see the modified
> ones
> > with centos in the name) I'm pretty certain that you are safe building an
> > appliance on CentOS and can ship the RPMs on that ...
> >
> > Regardless of that issue what you've described above should work (or
> freak
> > out if a build dependency was missing ... unless one isn't defined as a
> > BuildRequires but is in the default mock root and is causing %configure
> >  not to generate the Makefile).
> >
> > Again the right answer here is "use mock" ...
> >
> > yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk
> >
> > rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm
> >
> > cd rpmbuild
> >
> > vi SPECS/mtr.spec (change release etc ... bear in mind that bumping
> release
> > may not help you when a centos update happens ... may not care for an
> > appliance)
> >
> > rpmbuild -bs SPECS/mtr.spec
> >
> > mock -r epel-6-x86_64 SRPMS/mtr-*.src.rpm
> >
> > 
> >
> > That will get you a reproducible clean build environment in a way not
> > dependent on the state of your workstation and avoid any accidental
> > depednencies etc popping up
>
> Thanks for the help, but I got the same results;
>
> 
> mock /home/digimer/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.src.rpm
>
> 
> 
> + make DESTDIR=/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.x86_64
> install
> make: *** No rule to make target `install'.  Stop.
>
>
> RPM build errors:
> error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.8atuER (%install)
> Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.8atuER (%install)
> ERROR:
> Exception(/home/digimer/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.src.rpm)
> Config(epel-6-x86_64) 5 minutes 54 seconds
> INFO: Results and/or logs in: /var/lib/mock/epel-6-x86_64/result
> ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output.
>  # bash --login -c /usr/bin/rpmbuild -bb --target x86_64 --nodeps
> /builddir/build/SPECS/mtr.spec
> 
>
> As for redistribution; I spoke to someone here some months back about
> creating a custom ISO and I was told I couldn't modify 'Packages', which
> is what I needed to do. I am also making a RHEL variant, and emailing
> their legal didn't get a reply, so I am going this route to not step on
> toes.
>
>
>
okay looks like you've uncovered an bug in mock that should be reported in
EPEL

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Fedora%20EPEL=el6=mock

I don't see any existing bug that would seem to apply ...

You can see the build completes with a target of epel6 on an F23 install
but a clean C6 install that uses the mock from epel6 fails:

http://pastebin.centos.org/41116/

Can't see anything that differs in the 

Re: [CentOS-docs] wiki addition for AWS

[Warren Turkal]

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Karanbir Singh  wrote:

> I'm also working on making the CentOS images available outside of the
> Market Place shortly, so details for that ( including regions ) will
> likely end up in the same page.
>

Since you mentioned getting info about AMI ids, do you know anything about
the following?

Why do the AMIs listed in the region specific images for CentOS7 in
eu-central-1 not exist in the following query:
$ aws --region eu-central-1 ec2 describe-images --owners aws-marketplace
--filters Name=product-code,Values=aw0evgkw8e5c1q413zgy5pjce --query
'Images[*].ImageId'
ami-7cc4f661 ami-9bf712f4 ami-e68f82fb

In fact, I cant even find them with  the following queries:
$ aws --region eu-central-1 ec2 describe-images --image-ids ami-08222e15 #
CentOS7
$ aws --region eu-central-1 ec2 describe-images --image-ids ami-0e222e13 #
CentOS6

Are those image private or just gone?

If those images aren't correct anymore, we should just delete that whole
section from the wiki.

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

Re: [CentOS-es] [DHCPd] Cambiar la IP cada que se reinicie un PC Cliente

[Ing . Ernesto Pérez Estévez , Mg .]

On 08/03/16 13:43, David González Romero wrote:
> Tiene que jugar con los tiempos del lease
> 
> default-lease-time 900;
> max-lease-time 7200;
> 

eso no cambiará la IP a asignar, solamente los periodos de renovación...
nuevamente asignará la misma ip fijándose en el archivo dhcpd.leases


> Saludos,
> David
> 
> 
> El día 8 de marzo de 2016, 15:34, angel jauregui
>  escribió:
>> Buen dia.
>>
>> Tengo un DHCP Server (dhcpd) funcionando al 100%, solo que he notado que
>> una vez que el dhcp asigna una IP, siempre que la misma PC se reinicia le
>> da la misma IP, como que se guarda una cache de esa IP Dinamica y la MAC.
>>
>> Como le hago para que no se guarde esa cache ?, vaya, que cada vez que
>> reinicie una PC o que simplemente "desactive y active" la interfaz de red,
>> me otorgue una IP nueva (distinta ala anterior) ?
>>
>> Saludos !
>>
>> --
>> M.S.I. Angel Haniel Cantu Jauregui.
>>
>> Celular: (011-52-1)-899-871-17-22
>> E-Mail: angel.ca...@sie-group.net
>> Web: http://www.sie-group.net/
>> Cd. Reynosa Tamaulipas.
>> ___
>> CentOS-es mailing list
>> CentOS-es@centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
> ___
> CentOS-es mailing list
> CentOS-es@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
> 


-- 
CEDIA
La principal herramienta de Investigación en el Ecuador.

Calle La Condamine 12-109 "Casa Rivera".
Cuenca -  Ecuador
Telf: (593) 7405 1000 Ext. 4220/4223
i...@cedia.org.ec
www.cedia.org.ec

Email secured by Check Point
___
CentOS-es mailing list
CentOS-es@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es

Re: [CentOS-es] [DHCPd] Cambiar la IP cada que se reinicie un PC Cliente

[Ing . Ernesto Pérez Estévez , Mg .]

On 08/03/16 13:34, angel jauregui wrote:
> Buen dia.
> 
> Tengo un DHCP Server (dhcpd) funcionando al 100%, solo que he notado que
> una vez que el dhcp asigna una IP, siempre que la misma PC se reinicia le
> da la misma IP, como que se guarda una cache de esa IP Dinamica y la MAC.
> 
> Como le hago para que no se guarde esa cache ?, vaya, que cada vez que
> reinicie una PC o que simplemente "desactive y active" la interfaz de red,
> me otorgue una IP nueva (distinta ala anterior) ?
> 
> Saludos !
> 
es un feature util. Mira, no es sólo cuando se reinicia, sino además
cada vez que se renueva la IP.

Si vas a otorgar una IP aleatoriamente es porque en verdad quieres que
de vez en cuando se cambie la IP, para ello deberás bajar el leasing
time con la finalidad de que se renueve frecuentemente y no se quede
largos periodos sin renovar (y por tanto con la misma IP).

Resumen, si le bajas el leasing time para que se renueve, y le logras
hacer cambiar la IP, muchos servicios podrían interrumpirse, por ejemplo
imaginate estás bajando algo, y se cambia la IP... pum, se corta la
bajada porque la tabla de NAT del servidor no sabrá entregarle a la
nueva IP... todo un peque relajo, así con sesiones abiertas como por
ejemplo de ssh.

Resumen, no te lo recomiendo. Dhcp saca la IP de la lista de ips
asignadas anteriormente, tiene una relacion entre mac e IPs en el
archivo dhcpd.leases

saludos
epe

-- 
CEDIA
La principal herramienta de Investigación en el Ecuador.

Calle La Condamine 12-109 "Casa Rivera".
Cuenca -  Ecuador
Telf: (593) 7405 1000 Ext. 4220/4223
i...@cedia.org.ec
www.cedia.org.ec

Email secured by Check Point
___
CentOS-es mailing list
CentOS-es@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es

Re: [CentOS-es] [DHCPd] Cambiar la IP cada que se reinicie un PC Cliente

[David González Romero]

Tiene que jugar con los tiempos del lease

default-lease-time 900;
max-lease-time 7200;

Saludos,
David


El día 8 de marzo de 2016, 15:34, angel jauregui
 escribió:
> Buen dia.
>
> Tengo un DHCP Server (dhcpd) funcionando al 100%, solo que he notado que
> una vez que el dhcp asigna una IP, siempre que la misma PC se reinicia le
> da la misma IP, como que se guarda una cache de esa IP Dinamica y la MAC.
>
> Como le hago para que no se guarde esa cache ?, vaya, que cada vez que
> reinicie una PC o que simplemente "desactive y active" la interfaz de red,
> me otorgue una IP nueva (distinta ala anterior) ?
>
> Saludos !
>
> --
> M.S.I. Angel Haniel Cantu Jauregui.
>
> Celular: (011-52-1)-899-871-17-22
> E-Mail: angel.ca...@sie-group.net
> Web: http://www.sie-group.net/
> Cd. Reynosa Tamaulipas.
> ___
> CentOS-es mailing list
> CentOS-es@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es
___
CentOS-es mailing list
CentOS-es@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es

Re: [CentOS-docs] wiki addition for AWS

[Warren Turkal]

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Karanbir Singh  wrote:
>
> You should be able to go ahead and put the details in.
>
> I'm also working on making the CentOS images available outside of the
> Market Place shortly, so details for that ( including regions ) will
> likely end up in the same page.


I wanted to give you a heads up that I edited the page at
https://wiki.centos.org/Cloud/AWS. I added a column for the product code
and added the one that I know. I also make the link to the marketplace a
link from the CentOS version so that the URL wouldn't be taking up so much
space. I also added a note about how to find the AMI ids in each region
given the product codes.

I hope that these changes aren't too controversial, but i wanted to point
them out in case they are.

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

[CentOS-es] [DHCPd] Cambiar la IP cada que se reinicie un PC Cliente

[angel jauregui]

Buen dia.

Tengo un DHCP Server (dhcpd) funcionando al 100%, solo que he notado que
una vez que el dhcp asigna una IP, siempre que la misma PC se reinicia le
da la misma IP, como que se guarda una cache de esa IP Dinamica y la MAC.

Como le hago para que no se guarde esa cache ?, vaya, que cada vez que
reinicie una PC o que simplemente "desactive y active" la interfaz de red,
me otorgue una IP nueva (distinta ala anterior) ?

Saludos !

-- 
M.S.I. Angel Haniel Cantu Jauregui.

Celular: (011-52-1)-899-871-17-22
E-Mail: angel.ca...@sie-group.net
Web: http://www.sie-group.net/
Cd. Reynosa Tamaulipas.
___
CentOS-es mailing list
CentOS-es@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-es

Re: [CentOS] no gnome-applets in C7.2

[Frank Cox]

On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 17:16:55 + (UTC)
Liam O'Toole wrote:

> No, many before you have similarly bemoaned the changes made during the
> transition from GNOME 2 to 3.

You can also look at Mate, which is basically Gnome 2 (what you have on Centos 
6 and earlier) but updated to work on Centos 7.

It's easy to install on Centos 7, too:

yum install epel-release
yum groupinstall "MATE Desktop"

Then log out and select MATE by clicking on the little gear when you log back 
in from gdm (the "enter your password" screen).

You will then see something that looks, works and acts exactly like Gnome 2, 
since it really is Gnome 2 slightly updated and under a different name.

You can also get rid of  gdm if you want by entering these commands at a root 
terminal prompt:

systemctl disable gdm
systemctl enable lightdm
systemctl isolate graphical.target

Then you will have lightdm for a login screen instead, which is a lot more 
configurable than the newer gdm, and also appears to load faster on my little 
laptop than gdm did.

I use Mate exclusively on all of my Centos 7 computers and I'm very happy with 
it.  The first thing that I do when I set up a new Centos 7 desktop system is 
shoot Gnome 3 and install Mate instead.

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

Re: [CentOS] centos7+lightdm : no /almost no login screen

[Fred Smith]

On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 03:44:51PM +0100, johan.vermeul...@telenet.be wrote:
> 
> 
> Hello All, 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> slightly unrelated because lightdm = epel, I know. 
> 
> 
> Still, maybe someone had the same issue. 
> 
> 
> When using the last two kernels, some machines give me trouble when 
> installing Centos7 and Mate 
> 

What exactly is the issue? I don't see where you've said what is wrong.

I use Mate on C7, so maybe I can understand if you can be more specific.

Fred
> 
> 
> 
> One machine is basically an Asrock board, on this I get no login screen: 
> 
> 
> description: Motherboard 
> product: AD2550B-ITX 
> vendor: ASRock 
> 
> *-display 
> description: VGA compatible controller 
> product: Atom Processor D2xxx/N2xxx Integrated Graphics Controller 
> vendor: Intel Corporation 
> physical id: 2 
> bus info: pci@:00:02.0 
> version: 0b 
> width: 32 bits 
> clock: 33MHz 
> 
> 
> 
> Dell Optiplex 960 workstations: scrambled login screen 
> 
> description: Desktop Computer 
> product: OptiPlex 960 
> vendor: Dell Inc. 
> width: 64 bits 
> 
> *- display:0 
> description: VGA compatible controller 
> product: 4 Series Chipset Integrated Graphics Controller 
> vendor: Intel Corporation 
> physical id: 2 
> bus info: pci@:00:02.0 
> version: 03 
> width: 64 bits 
> 
> 
> 
> up until kernel 3.10.0-123.el7.x86_64 I had nog issues. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Greetings, J. 
> 
> Johan Vermeulen 
> IT-medewerker 

-- 
 Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us -
   Show me your ways, O LORD, teach me your paths;
 Guide me in your truth and teach me,
 for you are God my Savior,
And my hope is in you all day long.
-- Psalm 25:4-5 (NIV) 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] SOT: Can Fedora be installed from Live images?

[Mike - st257]

On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 9:28 AM, Scott Robbins  wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 09:00:44AM -0500, mechy2k2000 wrote:
> > I think nearly all the fedora images are live CDs now. They should have
> an
> > option to install fedora when you boot the  cd. Usually when you boot the
> > cd.  A window appears asking to either install the os or try it out. If
> you
> > are using a non gnome cd,you may have to search the application menu for
> > the installer
>
> At one point, at least the LiveCD had a bunch of limitations, possibly on
> partitioning, and also on package selection. I don't know if that's still
> true.
>

Still true.
Anaconda doesn't handle LVM on Software RAID properly. Maybe it will be
fixed when F24 releases this summer.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1225184

There may be other limitations as well.

The work around is to use the netinstall image.
The server images are a different set of packages apparently and is said to
require a bunch of work to make a server install a workstation install in
the end. So I'd advise against that and instead netinstall (worked for me).


>
> However, there are also the server and workstation spins. If you are
> looking for the usual Gnome desktop, you probably want workstation.  I usue
> server, choose minimal install and add things afterwards.
>
> The Fedora site itself has the live one by default.  Their logic is that
> the newcomer will have the best chance of success with that one, and the
> more experienced will go elsewhere. Their site,
> https://getfedora.org/, shows server and workstation images for download.




-- 
---~~.~~---
Mike
//  SilverTip257  //
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] no gnome-applets in C7.2

[Richard]

> Date: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 17:16:55 +
> From: Liam O'Toole 
>
> On 2016-03-08, ken  wrote:
>> On 03/08/2016 06:49 AM, Liam O'Toole wrote:
>>> On 2016-03-07, ken  wrote:
 Weird.  There seems to be quite a bit of software missing from
 C7.2, gnome-applets being one of them.  Or has it been moved or
 renamed or otherwise obscured?
 
 tia
>>> 
>>> Since gnome-panel and 'flashback' mode have been removed from
>>> GNOME 3, gnome-applets is no longer required or available. Much
>>> of the functionality of traditional applets is available by means
>>> of extensions to gnome-shell. See the various
>>> gnome-shell-extension-* packages.
>>> 
>> 
>> Thanks, Liam.  I checked those out, downloaded a handful of them,
>> and  tried some out.  But couldn't get any of the functionality
>> out of them  that I was looking for.  E.g., previously (C5.9)
>> there were nice, little  applets to:
>> 
>> - show the current weather; click on for forecasts and weather
>> maps;
>> 
>> - selecting to paste buffer from several sets of odd characters
>> and  characters and characters from foreign languages;
>> 
>> - icons, clicking on which could fire virtually any executable on
>> the  system;
>> 
>> - "drawers", clicking on which popped an entire column of any of
>> the above;
>> 
>> - and probably some other things I'm not remembering.
>> 
>> I'm still not finding any of that in C7.2... it's like this
>> "upgrade" is  several steps backwards from the functionality in
>> earlier CentOS  version.  Or am I missing something?
> 
> No, many before you have similarly bemoaned the changes made during
> the transition from GNOME 2 to 3. I suggest you take a look around
> the extensions website[1] for extensions which restore the missing
> functionality. Use gnome-tweak-tool to install and remove
> extensions. They can be a bit hit-and-miss when it comes to
> compatibility with the particular version of gnome-shell you are
> running.
> 
> 1: https://extensions.gnome.org/

Have you looked at Mate, available from epel? It will bring back
(much of) the feel of gnome-2. You'll be able to select between the
two at login.




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

Re: [CentOS] Can anyone compile mtr source RPM on CentOS 6.7?

[Digimer]

On 08/03/16 11:36 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> On 8 March 2016 at 16:15, Digimer  wrote:
> 
>> On 08/03/16 07:11 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
>>> On 8 March 2016 at 10:07, Leon Fauster 
>> wrote:
>>>
 Am 08.03.2016 um 01:50 schrieb Digimer :
> I'm not surprised, given that it is in the repo. That's why I was
>> asking
> if anyone tried building it themselves and, if so, did they have the
> same issue as I describe below?
>
> Alternatively, any tips/advice on solving my build issue would be
 helpful.



 what says /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.gu9Ds0?

 all dependencies installed?



>>> No need to check that  the error is clear "make: *** No rule to make
>>> target `install'.  Stop." ... that mini Makefile he posted doesn't
>> include
>>> an install: section
>>>
>>> Of course what the OP is missing is *that* makefile does not get used.
>>>
>>> In the tarball there is a Makefile.in that gets processed into the actual
>>> makefile by ./configure (well %configure in the spec but you get the
>> point)
>>>
>>> So we come back round the houses to the key point - Digimer what are you
>>> *actually* trying to do?
>>>
>>> You obviously aren't building from the spec in that src.rpm or using mock
>>> as those have configure which would generate the valid makefile with the
>>> make install target... so what are you doing and what do you want to
>>> achieve?
>>>
>>> The %install phase you posted is really not of interest to your 'problem'
>>> but rather the %build phase would be telling.
>>
>> As I've done with several other RPMs, I did the following;
>>
>> ===
>> yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk
>>
>> rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm
>>
>> cd rpmbuild/SPECS/
>>
>> # Change "Release"
>>
>> rpmbuild -ba mtr.spec
>> ===
>>
>> If you're asking a more generic "why are you doing this?" question; I am
>> including the RPM in a project we're working on and I don't want to risk
>> running fould of the CentOS project by directly redistributing their
>> (and RHEL's) rpms.
>>
>>
> I'm sure Karanbir and Johnny can weigh in here more but so long as you are
> not claiming to be CentOS and using their trademarks (see the modified ones
> with centos in the name) I'm pretty certain that you are safe building an
> appliance on CentOS and can ship the RPMs on that ...
> 
> Regardless of that issue what you've described above should work (or freak
> out if a build dependency was missing ... unless one isn't defined as a
> BuildRequires but is in the default mock root and is causing %configure
>  not to generate the Makefile).
> 
> Again the right answer here is "use mock" ...
> 
> yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk
> 
> rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm
> 
> cd rpmbuild
> 
> vi SPECS/mtr.spec (change release etc ... bear in mind that bumping release
> may not help you when a centos update happens ... may not care for an
> appliance)
> 
> rpmbuild -bs SPECS/mtr.spec
> 
> mock -r epel-6-x86_64 SRPMS/mtr-*.src.rpm
> 
> 
> 
> That will get you a reproducible clean build environment in a way not
> dependent on the state of your workstation and avoid any accidental
> depednencies etc popping up

Thanks for the help, but I got the same results;


mock /home/digimer/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.src.rpm



+ make DESTDIR=/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.x86_64 install
make: *** No rule to make target `install'.  Stop.


RPM build errors:
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.8atuER (%install)
Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.8atuER (%install)
ERROR:
Exception(/home/digimer/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtr-0.75-5.el6.anvil.src.rpm)
Config(epel-6-x86_64) 5 minutes 54 seconds
INFO: Results and/or logs in: /var/lib/mock/epel-6-x86_64/result
ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output.
 # bash --login -c /usr/bin/rpmbuild -bb --target x86_64 --nodeps
/builddir/build/SPECS/mtr.spec


As for redistribution; I spoke to someone here some months back about
creating a custom ISO and I was told I couldn't modify 'Packages', which
is what I needed to do. I am also making a RHEL variant, and emailing
their legal didn't get a reply, so I am going this route to not step on
toes.

-- 
Digimer
Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/
What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without
access to education?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] no gnome-applets in C7.2

[Liam O'Toole]

On 2016-03-08, ken  wrote:
> On 03/08/2016 06:49 AM, Liam O'Toole wrote:
>> On 2016-03-07, ken  wrote:
>>> Weird.  There seems to be quite a bit of software missing from C7.2,
>>> gnome-applets being one of them.  Or has it been moved or renamed or
>>> otherwise obscured?
>>>
>>> tia
>>
>> Since gnome-panel and 'flashback' mode have been removed from GNOME 3,
>> gnome-applets is no longer required or available. Much of the
>> functionality of traditional applets is available by means of extensions
>> to gnome-shell. See the various gnome-shell-extension-* packages.
>>
>
> Thanks, Liam.  I checked those out, downloaded a handful of them, and 
> tried some out.  But couldn't get any of the functionality out of them 
> that I was looking for.  E.g., previously (C5.9) there were nice, little 
> applets to:
>
> - show the current weather; click on for forecasts and weather maps;
>
> - selecting to paste buffer from several sets of odd characters and 
> characters and characters from foreign languages;
>
> - icons, clicking on which could fire virtually any executable on the 
> system;
>
> - "drawers", clicking on which popped an entire column of any of the above;
>
> - and probably some other things I'm not remembering.
>
> I'm still not finding any of that in C7.2... it's like this "upgrade" is 
> several steps backwards from the functionality in earlier CentOS 
> version.  Or am I missing something?

No, many before you have similarly bemoaned the changes made during the
transition from GNOME 2 to 3. I suggest you take a look around the
extensions website[1] for extensions which restore the missing
functionality. Use gnome-tweak-tool to install and remove extensions.
They can be a bit hit-and-miss when it comes to compatibility with the
particular version of gnome-shell you are running.

1: https://extensions.gnome.org/

-- 

Liam


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

Re: [CentOS] Can anyone compile mtr source RPM on CentOS 6.7?

[James Hogarth]

On 8 March 2016 at 16:15, Digimer  wrote:

> On 08/03/16 07:11 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> > On 8 March 2016 at 10:07, Leon Fauster 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Am 08.03.2016 um 01:50 schrieb Digimer :
> >>> I'm not surprised, given that it is in the repo. That's why I was
> asking
> >>> if anyone tried building it themselves and, if so, did they have the
> >>> same issue as I describe below?
> >>>
> >>> Alternatively, any tips/advice on solving my build issue would be
> >> helpful.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> what says /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.gu9Ds0?
> >>
> >> all dependencies installed?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > No need to check that  the error is clear "make: *** No rule to make
> > target `install'.  Stop." ... that mini Makefile he posted doesn't
> include
> > an install: section
> >
> > Of course what the OP is missing is *that* makefile does not get used.
> >
> > In the tarball there is a Makefile.in that gets processed into the actual
> > makefile by ./configure (well %configure in the spec but you get the
> point)
> >
> > So we come back round the houses to the key point - Digimer what are you
> > *actually* trying to do?
> >
> > You obviously aren't building from the spec in that src.rpm or using mock
> > as those have configure which would generate the valid makefile with the
> > make install target... so what are you doing and what do you want to
> > achieve?
> >
> > The %install phase you posted is really not of interest to your 'problem'
> > but rather the %build phase would be telling.
>
> As I've done with several other RPMs, I did the following;
>
> ===
> yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk
>
> rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm
>
> cd rpmbuild/SPECS/
>
> # Change "Release"
>
> rpmbuild -ba mtr.spec
> ===
>
> If you're asking a more generic "why are you doing this?" question; I am
> including the RPM in a project we're working on and I don't want to risk
> running fould of the CentOS project by directly redistributing their
> (and RHEL's) rpms.
>
>
I'm sure Karanbir and Johnny can weigh in here more but so long as you are
not claiming to be CentOS and using their trademarks (see the modified ones
with centos in the name) I'm pretty certain that you are safe building an
appliance on CentOS and can ship the RPMs on that ...

Regardless of that issue what you've described above should work (or freak
out if a build dependency was missing ... unless one isn't defined as a
BuildRequires but is in the default mock root and is causing %configure
 not to generate the Makefile).

Again the right answer here is "use mock" ...

yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk

rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm

cd rpmbuild

vi SPECS/mtr.spec (change release etc ... bear in mind that bumping release
may not help you when a centos update happens ... may not care for an
appliance)

rpmbuild -bs SPECS/mtr.spec

mock -r epel-6-x86_64 SRPMS/mtr-*.src.rpm



That will get you a reproducible clean build environment in a way not
dependent on the state of your workstation and avoid any accidental
depednencies etc popping up
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Can anyone compile mtr source RPM on CentOS 6.7?

[Digimer]

On 08/03/16 07:11 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> On 8 March 2016 at 10:07, Leon Fauster  wrote:
> 
>> Am 08.03.2016 um 01:50 schrieb Digimer :
>>> I'm not surprised, given that it is in the repo. That's why I was asking
>>> if anyone tried building it themselves and, if so, did they have the
>>> same issue as I describe below?
>>>
>>> Alternatively, any tips/advice on solving my build issue would be
>> helpful.
>>
>>
>>
>> what says /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.gu9Ds0?
>>
>> all dependencies installed?
>>
>>
>>
> No need to check that  the error is clear "make: *** No rule to make
> target `install'.  Stop." ... that mini Makefile he posted doesn't include
> an install: section
> 
> Of course what the OP is missing is *that* makefile does not get used.
> 
> In the tarball there is a Makefile.in that gets processed into the actual
> makefile by ./configure (well %configure in the spec but you get the point)
> 
> So we come back round the houses to the key point - Digimer what are you
> *actually* trying to do?
> 
> You obviously aren't building from the spec in that src.rpm or using mock
> as those have configure which would generate the valid makefile with the
> make install target... so what are you doing and what do you want to
> achieve?
> 
> The %install phase you posted is really not of interest to your 'problem'
> but rather the %build phase would be telling.

As I've done with several other RPMs, I did the following;

===
yumdownloader --source mtr-gtk

rpm -Uvh mtr-0.75-5.el6.src.rpm

cd rpmbuild/SPECS/

# Change "Release"

rpmbuild -ba mtr.spec
===

If you're asking a more generic "why are you doing this?" question; I am
including the RPM in a project we're working on and I don't want to risk
running fould of the CentOS project by directly redistributing their
(and RHEL's) rpms.

-- 
Digimer
Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/
What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without
access to education?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] no gnome-applets in C7.2

[ken]

On 03/08/2016 06:49 AM, Liam O'Toole wrote:

On 2016-03-07, ken  wrote:

Weird.  There seems to be quite a bit of software missing from C7.2,
gnome-applets being one of them.  Or has it been moved or renamed or
otherwise obscured?

tia


Since gnome-panel and 'flashback' mode have been removed from GNOME 3,
gnome-applets is no longer required or available. Much of the
functionality of traditional applets is available by means of extensions
to gnome-shell. See the various gnome-shell-extension-* packages.



Thanks, Liam.  I checked those out, downloaded a handful of them, and 
tried some out.  But couldn't get any of the functionality out of them 
that I was looking for.  E.g., previously (C5.9) there were nice, little 
applets to:


- show the current weather; click on for forecasts and weather maps;

- selecting to paste buffer from several sets of odd characters and 
characters and characters from foreign languages;


- icons, clicking on which could fire virtually any executable on the 
system;


- "drawers", clicking on which popped an entire column of any of the above;

- and probably some other things I'm not remembering.

I'm still not finding any of that in C7.2... it's like this "upgrade" is 
several steps backwards from the functionality in earlier CentOS 
version.  Or am I missing something?

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

Re: [CentOS] Monthly spins torrents ??

[Johnny Hughes]

On 03/07/2016 11:07 PM, Alice Wonder wrote:
> http://buildlogs.centos.org/monthly/7/
> 
> A very useful resource. Updates takes less time after install.
> 
> Just curious if there are torrents for them?
> 
> I could commit to running a single seed for the x86_64 "everything" ISO.
> 
> I dd them onto USB sticks for people (personally recommend the 16GB
> Mushkin Atom - even when installing from USB2 the media verification is
> faster than any other USB thumb drive I've tried) so I download latest
> fairly often anyway, may as well share the torrent if there is one.

No torrents now, but also no complaints of slow downloads.  If the
bandwidth of these ISOs become more than we can handle, we will
certainly consider torrents as a means of distribution.




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

[CentOS] Fwd: dm-cache not caching data on 3.18.21-17.el6.x86_64

[Thanos Makatos]

(I've already sent this to centos-devel almost a week ago but didn't
get any reply.)

I'm evaluating dm-cache on kernels 3.18.21-17.el6.x86_64 (Xen 4) and
2.6.32-573.7.1.el6.x86_64 (KVM). The test I do is a simple sequential
read using dd(1). read_promote_adjustment and sequential_threshold
have been set to 1 and 0, respectively. For the 2.6.32 kernel, all
seems to be working fine, "#usedcacheblocks" correctly reflects the
number of cached blocks based on what I'm reading with dd(1)
performance is pretty much native SSD performance. However, the same
test on the 3.18.21-17.el6.x86_64 kernel results in "#usedcacheblocks"
being stuck to "2" and no performance improvement is observed.

Any ideas what could be wrong? How can I further debug this?

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

[CentOS] centos7+lightdm : no /almost no login screen

[johan . vermeulen7]

Hello All, 




slightly unrelated because lightdm = epel, I know. 


Still, maybe someone had the same issue. 


When using the last two kernels, some machines give me trouble when installing 
Centos7 and Mate 




One machine is basically an Asrock board, on this I get no login screen: 


description: Motherboard 
product: AD2550B-ITX 
vendor: ASRock 

*-display 
description: VGA compatible controller 
product: Atom Processor D2xxx/N2xxx Integrated Graphics Controller 
vendor: Intel Corporation 
physical id: 2 
bus info: pci@:00:02.0 
version: 0b 
width: 32 bits 
clock: 33MHz 



Dell Optiplex 960 workstations: scrambled login screen 

description: Desktop Computer 
product: OptiPlex 960 
vendor: Dell Inc. 
width: 64 bits 

*- display:0 
description: VGA compatible controller 
product: 4 Series Chipset Integrated Graphics Controller 
vendor: Intel Corporation 
physical id: 2 
bus info: pci@:00:02.0 
version: 03 
width: 64 bits 



up until kernel 3.10.0-123.el7.x86_64 I had nog issues. 




Greetings, J. 



-- 



Johan Vermeulen 
IT-medewerker 

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

[CentOS] IPv6 on CentOS-6 - IPTables

[James B. Byrne]

It appears likely that within the next two quarters we will be moving
off of our IPv4 class C's and onto a single IPv6 /40 for our sites.

We have a fairly complex IPTables setup which handles our gateways and
internal hosts.  My question is just how much effort is involved in
moving these rules from IPv4 to IPv6?  Are there elements in one that
are not available in the other?  Are there any fundamental
incompatibilites?  Does anyone have a good reference to a case history
of moving from one to the other?

Regards,

-- 
***  e-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel  ***
Do NOT transmit sensitive data via e-Mail
James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca
Harte & Lyne Limited  http://www.harte-lyne.ca
9 Brockley Drive  vox: +1 905 561 1241
Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757
Canada  L8E 3C3

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

Re: [CentOS] SOT: Can Fedora be installed from Live images?

[Scott Robbins]

On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 09:00:44AM -0500, mechy2k2000 wrote:
> I think nearly all the fedora images are live CDs now. They should have an
> option to install fedora when you boot the  cd. Usually when you boot the
> cd.  A window appears asking to either install the os or try it out. If you
> are using a non gnome cd,you may have to search the application menu for
> the installer

At one point, at least the LiveCD had a bunch of limitations, possibly on
partitioning, and also on package selection. I don't know if that's still
true. 

However, there are also the server and workstation spins. If you are
looking for the usual Gnome desktop, you probably want workstation.  I usue
server, choose minimal install and add things afterwards.

The Fedora site itself has the live one by default.  Their logic is that
the newcomer will have the best chance of success with that one, and the
more experienced will go elsewhere. Their site,
https://getfedora.org/, shows server and workstation images for download.



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

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

Re: [CentOS] SOT: Can Fedora be installed from Live images?

[mechy2k2000]

I think nearly all the fedora images are live CDs now. They should have an
option to install fedora when you boot the  cd. Usually when you boot the
cd.  A window appears asking to either install the os or try it out. If you
are using a non gnome cd,you may have to search the application menu for
the installer

Hope this helps.

Rafeal Stewart

Big Fedora fan
On Mar 8, 2016 08:54, "reynie...@gmail.com"  wrote:

> Maybe world has changed I am not aware and I am still the old fashion way
> where I download a DVD image and install from there like in CentOS but has
> Fedora changed something? I mean I am trying to find the proper image for
> download it put on USB flash memory and install on my PC but all that I can
> find are "live images" so what happen here? Did I miss something? Can any
> put me on the right path?
>
> Thx in advance
>
> *Reynier Perez Mira*
> Phone: (786) 5807572
> EMail: reynie...@gmail.com
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] SOT: Can Fedora be installed from Live images?

[Fernando Cassia]

On 3/8/16, reynie...@gmail.com  wrote:
> Maybe world has changed I am not aware and I am still the old fashion way
> where I download a DVD image and install from there like in CentOS but has
> Fedora changed something? I mean I am trying to find the proper image for
> download it put on USB flash memory and install on my PC but all that I can
> find are "live images" so what happen here? Did I miss something? Can any
> put me on the right path?

A LiveCD allows users to experience the desktop AND install the OS if
they like it
You just boot the LiveCD then click on the "Install Fedora" icon
present on the desktop.

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

[CentOS] SOT: Can Fedora be installed from Live images?

[reynie...@gmail.com]

Maybe world has changed I am not aware and I am still the old fashion way
where I download a DVD image and install from there like in CentOS but has
Fedora changed something? I mean I am trying to find the proper image for
download it put on USB flash memory and install on my PC but all that I can
find are "live images" so what happen here? Did I miss something? Can any
put me on the right path?

Thx in advance

*Reynier Perez Mira*
Phone: (786) 5807572
EMail: reynie...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 7, ctrl-alt-bksp

[mark]

On 03/07/16 22:53, Fred Smith wrote:

On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 09:12:25PM -0500, Scott Robbins wrote:

On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 08:58:06PM -0500, Fred Smith wrote:

On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 04:17:29PM -0500, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:

Fred Smith wrote:

On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 11:25:30AM -0500, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:

I've been googling, and looking at the CentOS wiki - which, btw, when I
do a full search on "control-alt-backspace", gives me three pages... in
Japanese, I think.

How do I re-enable userspace restart X?


You used to be able to do it in /etc/X11/xorg.conf, but not sure if it
still works.

Section "ServerFlags"
 Option "DontZap" "false"
EndSection

I see stackexchange adds

ection "InputClass"
 Identifier  "Keyboard Defaults"
 MatchIsKeyboard "yes"
 Option  "XkbOptions" "terminate:ctrl_alt_bksp"
EndSection

Also, at least with the more minimalist window managers (I usually use
either Openbox or dwm) one can also use ctl+alt+F, get to a
console and do sudo pkill X.


And... I just found this on worldofgnome.org:

Using Xinitrc

Xinitrc is read by xinit and is been executed when we (desktops) start 
X.

Create a new file (if not exists):

gedit ~/.xinitrc

Add

setxkbmap -option terminate:ctrl_alt_bksp

$ setxkbmap ...
will set the changes on the fly.

Restart X to apply changes. Logout/Login.



Thanks folks, I'll give it a try today.

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

Re: [CentOS] Can anyone compile mtr source RPM on CentOS 6.7?

[James Hogarth]

On 8 March 2016 at 10:07, Leon Fauster  wrote:

> Am 08.03.2016 um 01:50 schrieb Digimer :
> > I'm not surprised, given that it is in the repo. That's why I was asking
> > if anyone tried building it themselves and, if so, did they have the
> > same issue as I describe below?
> >
> > Alternatively, any tips/advice on solving my build issue would be
> helpful.
>
>
>
> what says /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.gu9Ds0?
>
> all dependencies installed?
>
>
>
No need to check that  the error is clear "make: *** No rule to make
target `install'.  Stop." ... that mini Makefile he posted doesn't include
an install: section

Of course what the OP is missing is *that* makefile does not get used.

In the tarball there is a Makefile.in that gets processed into the actual
makefile by ./configure (well %configure in the spec but you get the point)

So we come back round the houses to the key point - Digimer what are you
*actually* trying to do?

You obviously aren't building from the spec in that src.rpm or using mock
as those have configure which would generate the valid makefile with the
make install target... so what are you doing and what do you want to
achieve?

The %install phase you posted is really not of interest to your 'problem'
but rather the %build phase would be telling.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Strange behaviour of iptables in centos 7

[James Hogarth]

On 8 March 2016 at 10:13, anax  wrote:

>
>
> On 03/08/2016 10:59 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
>
>> On 8 March 2016 at 09:22, anax  wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On 03/08/2016 09:43 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
>>>
>>> On 8 Mar 2016 07:36, "anax"  wrote:


> Hi
> strange behaviour of iptables on a centos 7.0 machine:
> The following rule is in the iptables of said machine:
>
> [root@myserver ~]# iptables -L -v -n --line-numbers |grep 175\.
> 99   456 DROP   all  --  *  *   175.44.0.0/16
>
> 0.0.0.0/0

 [root@myserver ~]#
>
> The corresponding enty in /etc/sysconfig/iptables looks like:
>
> [root@myserver ~]# grep 175 /etc/sysconfig/iptables
> -A INPUT -s 175.44.0.0/16 -j DROP
> [root@myserver ~]#
>
> The rule must be there since ages, because it has number 9 out of 76
>
> similar rules.


> Today, on the same machine (I rechecked it to make sure not to confound
>
> machines), I see the following extract of the ftplog:


> 
> 175.44.4.1272915
> 175.44.26.128   2021
> 175.44.26.138   1322
> 175.44.6.1861290
> 175.44.24.881219
> 175.44.4.1991212
> 
>
> saying that from this IP addresse there have been this many connections
>
> to the ftp server on that machine during the last two days, which means
 that the iptables haven't dropped the connection to the machine. As far
 as
 I know, the ftp server is behind the iptables. I also checked to see in
 man
 iptables, wheather the IP address is represented correctly.


> What im I missing?
>
>
> Please provide the full iptables listing as a snippet from one section
 is
 not useful.

 Keep in mind iptables does not go by the most specific entry but rather
 the
 first matching rule hit.

 If there are any rules prior to this drop that would permit the traffic
 then of course the traffic would be permitted.

 Also 7.0? Please get that system updated asap as you are missing many
 important (and higher) issues being fixed.
 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


 Hi James
>>>
>>> [root@myserver ~]# cat /etc/centos-release
>>> CentOS Linux release 7.2.1511 (Core)
>>> [root@myserver ~]#
>>>
>>> [root@myserver ~]# uname -a
>>> Linux myserver.mydomain.com 3.10.0-327.4.4.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Jan 5
>>> 16:07:00 UTC 2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>>> [root@myserver ~]#
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A joyful thing to see ;)
>>
>> As for your issue itself - the rules seem sound to drop any packets
>> arriving at the server from that /16 network.
>>
>> Are you sure that the iptables rule was added before the transfer logs you
>> see?
>>
>> That it didn't happen that someone (or some process) saw abuse of ftp and
>> then inserted the DROP rule afterwards?
>>
>> Remember position isn't always useful to gauge age of the rule since you
>> can insert anywhere ... and only 9 packets have been matched by that rule
>> in the full output...
>> ___
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS@centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>>
>>
> Hi james
> I am absolutely sure, that the rule in question has been insertet into
> iptables more than a year ago, because I am (hopefully) the only one with
> root access to this server. There is no fail2ban on the server, which could
> have introduced the rule into iptables automatically.
>
> I have written the ruby program to extract the snippet of the ftp-log
> yesterday and have taken notice of the iptables missbehaviour this morning.
>
> suomi
>
>
>
Best thing to do then is try and grab a packet capture when this happens ...

But it's clearly something odd otherwise.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] no gnome-applets in C7.2

[Liam O'Toole]

On 2016-03-07, ken  wrote:
> Weird.  There seems to be quite a bit of software missing from C7.2, 
> gnome-applets being one of them.  Or has it been moved or renamed or 
> otherwise obscured?
>
> tia

Since gnome-panel and 'flashback' mode have been removed from GNOME 3,
gnome-applets is no longer required or available. Much of the
functionality of traditional applets is available by means of extensions
to gnome-shell. See the various gnome-shell-extension-* packages.

-- 

Liam


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

Re: [CentOS] Strange behaviour of iptables in centos 7

[anax]

On 03/08/2016 10:59 AM, James Hogarth wrote:

On 8 March 2016 at 09:22, anax  wrote:




On 03/08/2016 09:43 AM, James Hogarth wrote:


On 8 Mar 2016 07:36, "anax"  wrote:



Hi
strange behaviour of iptables on a centos 7.0 machine:
The following rule is in the iptables of said machine:

[root@myserver ~]# iptables -L -v -n --line-numbers |grep 175\.
99   456 DROP   all  --  *  *   175.44.0.0/16


0.0.0.0/0


[root@myserver ~]#

The corresponding enty in /etc/sysconfig/iptables looks like:

[root@myserver ~]# grep 175 /etc/sysconfig/iptables
-A INPUT -s 175.44.0.0/16 -j DROP
[root@myserver ~]#

The rule must be there since ages, because it has number 9 out of 76


similar rules.



Today, on the same machine (I rechecked it to make sure not to confound


machines), I see the following extract of the ftplog:




175.44.4.1272915
175.44.26.128   2021
175.44.26.138   1322
175.44.6.1861290
175.44.24.881219
175.44.4.1991212


saying that from this IP addresse there have been this many connections


to the ftp server on that machine during the last two days, which means
that the iptables haven't dropped the connection to the machine. As far as
I know, the ftp server is behind the iptables. I also checked to see in
man
iptables, wheather the IP address is represented correctly.



What im I missing?



Please provide the full iptables listing as a snippet from one section is
not useful.

Keep in mind iptables does not go by the most specific entry but rather
the
first matching rule hit.

If there are any rules prior to this drop that would permit the traffic
then of course the traffic would be permitted.

Also 7.0? Please get that system updated asap as you are missing many
important (and higher) issues being fixed.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos



Hi James

[root@myserver ~]# cat /etc/centos-release
CentOS Linux release 7.2.1511 (Core)
[root@myserver ~]#

[root@myserver ~]# uname -a
Linux myserver.mydomain.com 3.10.0-327.4.4.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Jan 5
16:07:00 UTC 2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
[root@myserver ~]#




A joyful thing to see ;)

As for your issue itself - the rules seem sound to drop any packets
arriving at the server from that /16 network.

Are you sure that the iptables rule was added before the transfer logs you
see?

That it didn't happen that someone (or some process) saw abuse of ftp and
then inserted the DROP rule afterwards?

Remember position isn't always useful to gauge age of the rule since you
can insert anywhere ... and only 9 packets have been matched by that rule
in the full output...
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos



Hi james
I am absolutely sure, that the rule in question has been insertet into 
iptables more than a year ago, because I am (hopefully) the only one 
with root access to this server. There is no fail2ban on the server, 
which could have introduced the rule into iptables automatically.


I have written the ruby program to extract the snippet of the ftp-log 
yesterday and have taken notice of the iptables missbehaviour this morning.


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

Re: [CentOS] Can anyone compile mtr source RPM on CentOS 6.7?

[Leon Fauster]

Am 08.03.2016 um 01:50 schrieb Digimer :
> I'm not surprised, given that it is in the repo. That's why I was asking
> if anyone tried building it themselves and, if so, did they have the
> same issue as I describe below?
> 
> Alternatively, any tips/advice on solving my build issue would be helpful.



what says /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.gu9Ds0?

all dependencies installed?

--
LF


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

Re: [CentOS] Strange behaviour of iptables in centos 7

[James Hogarth]

On 8 March 2016 at 09:22, anax  wrote:

>
>
> On 03/08/2016 09:43 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
>
>> On 8 Mar 2016 07:36, "anax"  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi
>>> strange behaviour of iptables on a centos 7.0 machine:
>>> The following rule is in the iptables of said machine:
>>>
>>> [root@myserver ~]# iptables -L -v -n --line-numbers |grep 175\.
>>> 99   456 DROP   all  --  *  *   175.44.0.0/16
>>>
>> 0.0.0.0/0
>>
>>> [root@myserver ~]#
>>>
>>> The corresponding enty in /etc/sysconfig/iptables looks like:
>>>
>>> [root@myserver ~]# grep 175 /etc/sysconfig/iptables
>>> -A INPUT -s 175.44.0.0/16 -j DROP
>>> [root@myserver ~]#
>>>
>>> The rule must be there since ages, because it has number 9 out of 76
>>>
>> similar rules.
>>
>>>
>>> Today, on the same machine (I rechecked it to make sure not to confound
>>>
>> machines), I see the following extract of the ftplog:
>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> 175.44.4.1272915
>>> 175.44.26.128   2021
>>> 175.44.26.138   1322
>>> 175.44.6.1861290
>>> 175.44.24.881219
>>> 175.44.4.1991212
>>> 
>>>
>>> saying that from this IP addresse there have been this many connections
>>>
>> to the ftp server on that machine during the last two days, which means
>> that the iptables haven't dropped the connection to the machine. As far as
>> I know, the ftp server is behind the iptables. I also checked to see in
>> man
>> iptables, wheather the IP address is represented correctly.
>>
>>>
>>> What im I missing?
>>>
>>>
>> Please provide the full iptables listing as a snippet from one section is
>> not useful.
>>
>> Keep in mind iptables does not go by the most specific entry but rather
>> the
>> first matching rule hit.
>>
>> If there are any rules prior to this drop that would permit the traffic
>> then of course the traffic would be permitted.
>>
>> Also 7.0? Please get that system updated asap as you are missing many
>> important (and higher) issues being fixed.
>> ___
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS@centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>>
>>
> Hi James
>
> [root@myserver ~]# cat /etc/centos-release
> CentOS Linux release 7.2.1511 (Core)
> [root@myserver ~]#
>
> [root@myserver ~]# uname -a
> Linux myserver.mydomain.com 3.10.0-327.4.4.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Jan 5
> 16:07:00 UTC 2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> [root@myserver ~]#
>
>
>
A joyful thing to see ;)

As for your issue itself - the rules seem sound to drop any packets
arriving at the server from that /16 network.

Are you sure that the iptables rule was added before the transfer logs you
see?

That it didn't happen that someone (or some process) saw abuse of ftp and
then inserted the DROP rule afterwards?

Remember position isn't always useful to gauge age of the rule since you
can insert anywhere ... and only 9 packets have been matched by that rule
in the full output...
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Strange behaviour of iptables in centos 7

[anax]

On 03/08/2016 09:43 AM, James Hogarth wrote:

On 8 Mar 2016 07:36, "anax"  wrote:


Hi
strange behaviour of iptables on a centos 7.0 machine:
The following rule is in the iptables of said machine:

[root@myserver ~]# iptables -L -v -n --line-numbers |grep 175\.
99   456 DROP   all  --  *  *   175.44.0.0/16

0.0.0.0/0

[root@myserver ~]#

The corresponding enty in /etc/sysconfig/iptables looks like:

[root@myserver ~]# grep 175 /etc/sysconfig/iptables
-A INPUT -s 175.44.0.0/16 -j DROP
[root@myserver ~]#

The rule must be there since ages, because it has number 9 out of 76

similar rules.


Today, on the same machine (I rechecked it to make sure not to confound

machines), I see the following extract of the ftplog:



175.44.4.1272915
175.44.26.128   2021
175.44.26.138   1322
175.44.6.1861290
175.44.24.881219
175.44.4.1991212


saying that from this IP addresse there have been this many connections

to the ftp server on that machine during the last two days, which means
that the iptables haven't dropped the connection to the machine. As far as
I know, the ftp server is behind the iptables. I also checked to see in man
iptables, wheather the IP address is represented correctly.


What im I missing?



Please provide the full iptables listing as a snippet from one section is
not useful.

Keep in mind iptables does not go by the most specific entry but rather the
first matching rule hit.

If there are any rules prior to this drop that would permit the traffic
then of course the traffic would be permitted.

Also 7.0? Please get that system updated asap as you are missing many
important (and higher) issues being fixed.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos



Hi James

[root@myserver ~]# cat /etc/centos-release
CentOS Linux release 7.2.1511 (Core)
[root@myserver ~]#

[root@myserver ~]# uname -a
Linux myserver.mydomain.com 3.10.0-327.4.4.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Jan 5 
16:07:00 UTC 2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

[root@myserver ~]#

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

Re: [CentOS] Strange behaviour of iptables in centos 7

[anax]

On 03/08/2016 09:43 AM, James Hogarth wrote:

On 8 Mar 2016 07:36, "anax"  wrote:


Hi
strange behaviour of iptables on a centos 7.0 machine:
The following rule is in the iptables of said machine:

[root@myserver ~]# iptables -L -v -n --line-numbers |grep 175\.
99   456 DROP   all  --  *  *   175.44.0.0/16

0.0.0.0/0

[root@myserver ~]#

The corresponding enty in /etc/sysconfig/iptables looks like:

[root@myserver ~]# grep 175 /etc/sysconfig/iptables
-A INPUT -s 175.44.0.0/16 -j DROP
[root@myserver ~]#

The rule must be there since ages, because it has number 9 out of 76

similar rules.


Today, on the same machine (I rechecked it to make sure not to confound

machines), I see the following extract of the ftplog:



175.44.4.1272915
175.44.26.128   2021
175.44.26.138   1322
175.44.6.1861290
175.44.24.881219
175.44.4.1991212


saying that from this IP addresse there have been this many connections

to the ftp server on that machine during the last two days, which means
that the iptables haven't dropped the connection to the machine. As far as
I know, the ftp server is behind the iptables. I also checked to see in man
iptables, wheather the IP address is represented correctly.


What im I missing?



Please provide the full iptables listing as a snippet from one section is
not useful.

Keep in mind iptables does not go by the most specific entry but rather the
first matching rule hit.

If there are any rules prior to this drop that would permit the traffic
then of course the traffic would be permitted.

Also 7.0? Please get that system updated asap as you are missing many
important (and higher) issues being fixed.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos




Hi James

Thanks very much for your answer.

the full iptables list is in my reply to John.

But you are correct, I must update the system. This may fix the isssue.

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

Re: [CentOS] Strange behaviour of iptables in centos 7

[anax]

On 03/08/2016 09:13 AM, John R Pierce wrote:

On 3/7/2016 11:35 PM, anax wrote:

saying that from this IP addresse there have been this many
connections to the ftp server on that machine during the last two
days, which means that the iptables haven't dropped the connection to
the machine. As far as I know, the ftp server is behind the iptables.
I also checked to see in man iptables, wheather the IP address is
represented correctly.



which table is that rule in?  INPUT, or a table invoked by input? are
there rules affecting inbound FTP connections before that rule?






Hi John

Thanks for your answer.

The complete output of iptables is:


[root@myserver ~]# iptables -L -v -n --line-numbers
Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 30M packets, 6401M bytes)
num   pkts bytes target prot opt in out source 
 destination
10 0 ACCEPT udp  --  *  *   127.0.0.1 
 0.0.0.0/0udp dpt:53
2   11  1133 ACCEPT udp  --  *  *   192.168.97.0/24 
 0.0.0.0/0udp dpt:53
3 254K   17M ACCEPT udp  --  *  *   212.90.206.128/27 
 0.0.0.0/0udp dpt:53
4  40M 2816Mudp  --  *  *   0.0.0.0/0 
 0.0.0.0/0udp dpt:53 recent: SET name: dnslimit side: 
source mask: 255.255.255.255
57717K  549M DROP   udp  --  *  *   0.0.0.0/0 
 0.0.0.0/0udp dpt:53 recent: UPDATE seconds: 10 hit_count: 
20 name: dnslimit side: source mask: 255.255.255.255
6 823K   65Mudp  --  *  *   0.0.0.0/0 
 0.0.0.0/0udp dpt:53 STRING match  "|ff0001|" ALGO name 
bm FROM 50 TO 65535 recent: SET name: dnsanyquery side: source mask: 
255.255.255.255
7 337K   27M DROP   udp  --  *  *   0.0.0.0/0 
 0.0.0.0/0udp dpt:53 STRING match  "|ff0001|" ALGO name 
bm FROM 50 TO 65535 recent: CHECK seconds: 10 hit_count: 3 name: 
dnsanyquery side: source mask: 255.255.255.255
80 0udp  --  *  *   0.0.0.0/0 
 0.0.0.0/0udp dpt:53 STRING match  "|e28098|" ALGO name bm 
FROM 50 TO 65535
99   456 DROP   all  --  *  *   175.44.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
101059 73305 DROP   all  --  *  *   58.251.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
111099 77004 DROP   all  --  *  *   74.63.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
121133 78600 DROP   all  --  *  *   36.248.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
131130 77455 DROP   all  --  *  *   14.222.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
141112 76977 DROP   all  --  *  *   113.247.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
151397 95745 DROP   all  --  *  *   112.90.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
16   11137  747K DROP   all  --  *  *   5.39.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
17  57  4687 DROP   all  --  *  *   185.29.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
188861  654K DROP   all  --  *  *   37.59.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
19 133  7344 DROP   all  --  *  *   165.228.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
201104 76908 DROP   all  --  *  *   58.254.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
211076 75445 DROP   all  --  *  *   99.157.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
22 215 14708 DROP   all  --  *  *   201.10.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
231073 74411 DROP   all  --  *  *   5.34.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
241124 80611 DROP   all  --  *  *   46.29.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
251867  123K DROP   all  --  *  *   104.232.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
26113K   15M DROP   all  --  *  *   195.186.1.162 
 0.0.0.0/0
271077 74817 DROP   all  --  *  *   112.111.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
281091 75748 DROP   all  --  *  *   122.13.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
29  51  3528 DROP   all  --  *  *   42.157.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
301367 87949 DROP   all  --  *  *   78.188.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
31  60  3447 DROP   all  --  *  *   218.161.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
32 727 83807 DROP   all  --  *  *   218.203.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
331043 72394 DROP   all  --  *  *   96.250.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
347332  507K DROP   all  --  *  *   89.163.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
35  59  4240 DROP   all  --  *  *   203.101.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
361063 73252 DROP   all  --  *  *   117.204.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
371081 74869 DROP   all  --  *  *   114.80.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
381387  104K DROP   all  --  *  *   14.215.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
391273 87578 DROP   all  --  *  *   14.152.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
402823  204K DROP   all  --  *  *   46.105.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
411088  352K DROP   all  --  *  *   66.85.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
426108  391K DROP   all  --  *  *   220.181.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
431253 86598 DROP   all  --  *  *   37.99.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
441092 75717 DROP   all  --  *  *   88.206.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
45 950 66684 DROP   all  --  *  *   62.76.0.0/16 
 0.0.0.0/0
46

Re: [CentOS] Strange behaviour of iptables in centos 7

[anax]

On 03/08/2016 08:50 AM, Rob Kampen wrote:

On 03/08/2016 08:35 PM, anax wrote:

Hi
strange behaviour of iptables on a centos 7.0 machine:
The following rule is in the iptables of said machine:

[root@myserver ~]# iptables -L -v -n --line-numbers |grep 175\.
99   456 DROP   all  --  *  *   175.44.0.0/16
 0.0.0.0/0
[root@myserver ~]#

The corresponding enty in /etc/sysconfig/iptables looks like:

[root@myserver ~]# grep 175 /etc/sysconfig/iptables
-A INPUT -s 175.44.0.0/16 -j DROP
[root@myserver ~]#

The rule must be there since ages, because it has number 9 out of 76
similar rules.

Today, on the same machine (I rechecked it to make sure not to
confound machines), I see the following extract of the ftplog:


175.44.4.1272915
175.44.26.1282021
175.44.26.1381322
175.44.6.1861290
175.44.24.881219
175.44.4.1991212


saying that from this IP addresse there have been this many
connections to the ftp server on that machine during the last two
days, which means that the iptables haven't dropped the connection to
the machine. As far as I know, the ftp server is behind the iptables.
I also checked to see in man iptables, wheather the IP address is
represented correctly.

What im I missing?


You mention iptables - but no mention of firewalld - they both use the
same kernel mechanism, but it is important that both CANNOT be active!
If you configure and use firewalld you can query ># iptables -L and see
what is installed, however I have no idea if this exposes the entire set
of firewall statements - others that better understand this space, feel
free to weigh in.
CentOS 7 has firewalld enabled by default, thus the choice to use
iptables directly means that firewalld must be disabled.
HTH

thanks in advance

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


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


Hi Rob

Thank you for your answer.
I did really not consider that with firewalld. But when I check on the 
server I get:


[root@myserver ~]# systemctl status firewalld
 firewalld.service - firewalld - dynamic firewall daemon
   Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/firewalld.service; disabled; 
vendor preset: enabled)

   Active: inactive (dead)
[root@myserver ~]#

Also if I do:

[root@myserver ~]# ps xa |grep firewall
12235 pts/0S+ 0:00 grep --color=auto firewall
[root@myserver ~]#

so firewalld is really not active.

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

Re: [CentOS] Strange behaviour of iptables in centos 7

[James Hogarth]

On 8 Mar 2016 07:36, "anax"  wrote:
>
> Hi
> strange behaviour of iptables on a centos 7.0 machine:
> The following rule is in the iptables of said machine:
>
> [root@myserver ~]# iptables -L -v -n --line-numbers |grep 175\.
> 99   456 DROP   all  --  *  *   175.44.0.0/16
0.0.0.0/0
> [root@myserver ~]#
>
> The corresponding enty in /etc/sysconfig/iptables looks like:
>
> [root@myserver ~]# grep 175 /etc/sysconfig/iptables
> -A INPUT -s 175.44.0.0/16 -j DROP
> [root@myserver ~]#
>
> The rule must be there since ages, because it has number 9 out of 76
similar rules.
>
> Today, on the same machine (I rechecked it to make sure not to confound
machines), I see the following extract of the ftplog:
>
> 
> 175.44.4.1272915
> 175.44.26.128   2021
> 175.44.26.138   1322
> 175.44.6.1861290
> 175.44.24.881219
> 175.44.4.1991212
> 
>
> saying that from this IP addresse there have been this many connections
to the ftp server on that machine during the last two days, which means
that the iptables haven't dropped the connection to the machine. As far as
I know, the ftp server is behind the iptables. I also checked to see in man
iptables, wheather the IP address is represented correctly.
>
> What im I missing?
>

Please provide the full iptables listing as a snippet from one section is
not useful.

Keep in mind iptables does not go by the most specific entry but rather the
first matching rule hit.

If there are any rules prior to this drop that would permit the traffic
then of course the traffic would be permitted.

Also 7.0? Please get that system updated asap as you are missing many
important (and higher) issues being fixed.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Can anyone compile mtr source RPM on CentOS 6.7?

[James Hogarth]

On 8 Mar 2016 00:51, "Digimer"  wrote:
>
> I'm not surprised, given that it is in the repo. That's why I was asking
> if anyone tried building it themselves and, if so, did they have the
> same issue as I describe below?
>
> Alternatively, any tips/advice on solving my build issue would be helpful.
>

1) please don't top post

2) given it builds fine in mock and that's the best way of providing the
clean reproducible environment to build anything perhaps you'd get better
feedback and tips (beyond the sensible "use mock") if you provided details
on what you are actually trying to accomplish? Your actual end goal?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Strange behaviour of iptables in centos 7

[John R Pierce]

On 3/7/2016 11:35 PM, anax wrote:
saying that from this IP addresse there have been this many 
connections to the ftp server on that machine during the last two 
days, which means that the iptables haven't dropped the connection to 
the machine. As far as I know, the ftp server is behind the iptables. 
I also checked to see in man iptables, wheather the IP address is 
represented correctly. 



which table is that rule in?  INPUT, or a table invoked by input? are 
there rules affecting inbound FTP connections before that rule?




--
john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz

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