Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 08:31:34AM +0100, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: > > No, this was an actual problem I had back in April 2020. Upgrading from CR > broke imagemagick, so I couldn't use the corresponding PHP modules, so my > Roundcube installation was broken for a few weeks. To be fair it was only broken because you kept it broken; you could have backed out the CR updates and waited for the point release to go GA and be on ABI parity with EPEL. > One of the things I like about Oracle Linux is that they maintain their own > EPEL repo, most probably to prevent these things from happening. I would be careful of expectations around that partial EPEL rebuild; it's not complete and some of the builds are quite dated. John -- Politicians are like a Slinky. They're really not good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs. -- attribution unknown other except as a signature from shrdlu at deaddrop.org signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
Le 06/01/2021 à 08:06, Gordon Messmer a écrit : > Are you describing an actual problem, right now, or is that an invented > example? No, this was an actual problem I had back in April 2020. Upgrading from CR broke imagemagick, so I couldn't use the corresponding PHP modules, so my Roundcube installation was broken for a few weeks. One of the things I like about Oracle Linux is that they maintain their own EPEL repo, most probably to prevent these things from happening. -- Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat Site : https://www.microlinux.fr Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr Mail : i...@microlinux.fr Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32 Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
On 1/5/21 10:47 PM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: And in the past, things have been known to break. Activate the CR repository, and suddenly libmagick is broken because it hasn't been rebuilt yet against the new version. Are you describing an actual problem, right now, or is that an invented example? Can you provide the specifics of what yum does, or what the application does after updates? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
On 1/5/21 6:30 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: I was not comparing CentOS Stream with CentOS (former 10 year life cycle system), I was comparing CentOS Stream with Debian (and clones) LTS. The original message came from a CentOS user who asked "is the change a non-issue for my use-case?" So, I'd have to ask you how Debian is relevant to that question. As I said, in terms of upgrade from one major version to another, CentOS Stream and CentOS are identical. If CentOS was suitable, then the change to CentOS Stream is a non-issue in the context of major version upgrades, because the change to CentOS Stream has no material impact on that concern. The question being asked is not "what operating system should I use", to which discussion of Debian or FreeBSD might be relevant, it's "will the change to CentOS Stream impact my current processes?" Comparisons to Debian or FreeBSD are non-sequiturs in the context of this conversation. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
Le 06/01/2021 à 01:22, Gordon Messmer a écrit : > CentOS Stream will be compatible with EPEL to the same extent that new point > releases are compatible with EPEL. And in the past, things have been known to break. Activate the CR repository, and suddenly libmagick is broken because it hasn't been rebuilt yet against the new version. This is the kind of thing you *hate* when you're a server admin. And this is exactly where CentOS Stream is heading. -- Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat Site : https://www.microlinux.fr Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr Mail : i...@microlinux.fr Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32 Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] dovecot option PROFILE=SYSTEM
Folks In examining the file /etc/dovecot/conf.d/10-ssl.conf I see the text line: ssl_cipher_list = PROFILE=SYSTEM Yet, I cannot find any documentation that explains what that causes, where the values are stored. I ask because I don't see that text line in other installations of Dovecot 2.3 on other distros. Can anyone point me to an explanation? David ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
> On Jan 5, 2021, at 6:22 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: > > On 1/5/21 3:39 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: >> And as someone mentioned, these other distributions have long great record >> of system upgrade from one release to another. CentOS has no record (and >> probably no upgrade engineered yet). In that respect CentOS Stream is way >> behind... > I do not like “creative editing” that changes what I said, this is the only reason I reply. Here is my original full phrase: And as someone mentioned, these other distributions have long great record of system upgrade from one release to another. CentOS has no record (and probably no upgrade engineered yet). In that respect CentOS Stream is way behind Debian (and clones) LTS. > > In that respect, CentOS Stream is identical to CentOS. > I was not comparing CentOS Stream with CentOS (former 10 year life cycle system), I was comparing CentOS Stream with Debian (and clones) LTS. And my comparison was about the fact that Debian (and clones) LTS have proven known to work through several releases easy way to in place upgrade from one release version to next one (for that matter FreeBSD is the same and too has since forever known trouble free way to in place upgrade to next major release version). CentOS never had in place upgrade, and I for one would insist it will be improper to expect that. CentOS Stream, that didn’t go through even a single in place major release upgrade, can not sport having that, and only after two such upgrades happen trouble free for the whole community of CentOS Stream users, only then CentOS Stream will be on the same level with Debian and clones. This is regular simple truth of life: if you want, psychology is such that only after this NEW, DIFFERENT, system: CentOS Stream, goes through a couple of releases, with easy in place upgrades, only then the trust of common folk like humble sysadmin (meaning here myself), who does not consider oneself any sort of expert is operating systems, only then the trust will be of the same level as trust currently is to Debian (LTS or regular, and clones), or to FreeBSD, as far as easy in place upgrade to next release is concerned. I know, CentOS team are great bright people, so knowing that and writing what I had to write above gives me extra pain. But that is the reality, and how users will value CentOS Stream couple of release cycles down the road when compared to Debian LTS, we will see. After long good record of trouble free upgrading (and other things that may rightfully or wrongfully trouble people now) there may be another factor, like huge collection of software Debian has in their repository, which may put some weight after all other comparison factors become equal. CentOS did beat all (excluding commercial MS Windows) by 10 year life cycle. Now that that is gone, CentOS (with Stream in name) stopped being unique, and people will mention huge choice of software collections in Debian and clones, comparably huge macports for MacOS (sorry about mentioning commercial system) and same huge FreeBSD port collection. > >> Not to mention other potentially problematic areas as no package version >> rollback, compatibility (potential) with EPEL > > > CentOS Stream will be compatible with EPEL to the same extent that new point > releases are compatible with EPEL. > I understand that your hard work will insure it WILL be compatible, trouble free etc. But the same psychology factor is why I mentioned that. Trust will come only a couple of releases down the road. We are sure CentOS team will keep doing great job on this absolutely different system CentOS Stream is, and if this new system couple of release down the road will be in similar demand as Debian (and clones) will be, - we will see. As I perceive it now, Debian (and clones), all other factors equal, will have much larger collection of packages that they have in their repositories as additional comparison factor. And once again: Huge thanks to brilliant hard working CentOS team for all you gave us during last couple of decades. Valeri - CentOS user for almost decade and a half, who moved servers (but only servers) to FreeBSD about 8 years ago. > The vast majority of interfaces in RHEL (and Stream) are guaranteed stable > within a major release, and only a small number of interfaces that aren't. > It's possible that one of the latter interfaces might change, in which case > you'd expect yum to not update the dependency until EPEL's packages have been > rebuilt: > > https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel-abi-compatibility#Appendix > > > ___ > 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] PostgreSQL 13 on CentOS 7
On 01/05/2021 08:55 PM, H wrote: > I am compiling an application that uses postgreSQL 13 and Qt 5.12. I have > built the latter from scratch and successfully linked with libraries for > postgreSQL 9.6 (the current version on CentOS 7) but have run into problems > with postgreSQL 13. The server, client and libs are available in the postgres > repository but I also need the devel library which in turns requires > llvm5.0-devel which does not want seem to available... > > Has anyone successfully build an application use pg 13 or otherwise used > postgresql13-devel? > > Thanks. > Found libpq5-devel-13.0-10PGDG.rhel7.x86_64 and it seems to compile. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 11:31:34PM +, Jamie Burchell wrote: > Off topic for sure, but it's a shame this has to be a manual process of > destroying and rebuilding every X years. Even Microsoft has gone the Apple > way and just perpetually updates Windows 10 now. I'm not sure how it will go. Fedora now has a very good upgrade tool that has worked for me through a few versions. So, hopefully, RH, and CentOS will have one too, who knows, maybe in time to migrate to Stream-9. -- 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
[CentOS] PostgreSQL 13 on CentOS 7
I am compiling an application that uses postgreSQL 13 and Qt 5.12. I have built the latter from scratch and successfully linked with libraries for postgreSQL 9.6 (the current version on CentOS 7) but have run into problems with postgreSQL 13. The server, client and libs are available in the postgres repository but I also need the devel library which in turns requires llvm5.0-devel which does not want seem to available... Has anyone successfully build an application use pg 13 or otherwise used postgresql13-devel? Thanks. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
> We will need to (manually) migrate to Stream 9.x after 5 years > instead of > 10 though? Most probably after 3 years. Currently stream should be equal to RHEL 8.4 . Best Regards, Strahil Nikolov ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
On 1/5/21 3:39 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: And as someone mentioned, these other distributions have long great record of system upgrade from one release to another. CentOS has no record (and probably no upgrade engineered yet). In that respect CentOS Stream is way behind... In that respect, CentOS Stream is identical to CentOS. Not to mention other potentially problematic areas as no package version rollback, compatibility (potential) with EPEL CentOS Stream will be compatible with EPEL to the same extent that new point releases are compatible with EPEL. The vast majority of interfaces in RHEL (and Stream) are guaranteed stable within a major release, and only a small number of interfaces that aren't. It's possible that one of the latter interfaces might change, in which case you'd expect yum to not update the dependency until EPEL's packages have been rebuilt: https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel-abi-compatibility#Appendix ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
On 1/5/21 5:19 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: On 1/5/21 3:02 PM, Jamie Burchell wrote: We will need to (manually) migrate to Stream 9.x after 5 years instead of 10 though? Yes. CentOS Stream has a lifecycle comparable with other LTS distributions. And as someone mentioned, these other distributions have long great record of system upgrade from one release to another. CentOS has no record (and probably no upgrade engineered yet). In that respect CentOS Stream is way behind Debian (and clones) LTS. Not to mention other potentially problematic areas as no package version rollback, compatibility (potential) with EPEL, and other things I don't what to attempt to think about. As everything with newly architectured distribution which hasn't proven itself during long time suitable for specific things. No disrespect intended. To the contrary: GREAT THANKS to hard working CentOS team for all your past work! And best wished to establish viability of absolutely new - and different - distribution: CentOS Stream. And while people still ask and the list still tolerates, I will mention the system I fled my servers from Linux 6 or 7 years ago to: FreeBSD On average update requiring FreeBSD reboot happens as rarely as once 7-8 Months (Linux on average every 45 days: kernel or glibc security update --> reboot). Good luck everybody who didn't arrive at final decision yet to find you way for the future. Thanks again, CentOS team for the great system you gave us for decades up until now! Valeri ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
> > Given we are not developing drivers or applications (other than websites > and web applications), is the change a non-issue for my use-case? I've seen > it written that CentOS Stream is the "development version" of RHEL but also > that we shouldn't have considered RHEL to be the beta for CentOS. Others > have said to think of CentOS more like RHEL RC-1. I just don't know how the > stability will compare and we have historically always chosen CentOS for > its stability (and of course price). There's been a lot of information and mis-information being bandied around on websites from people who don't really quite understand what's going on. I hope I don't contribute to the confusion! It wasn't helped by the, frankly, heavy-handed way it was handled by RH. One of the problems is that people are trying to put a label on what 8- stream is - such as development version, or RC, or beta version or whatever. To be honest all we can do is to try and understand what RH want. As far as I understand it, 8-stream accumulates new versions of packages that will collectively go to make up the next point release of RHEL8. We have been told, and we can only take it at face value, that the versions that go into 8-stream will be final, QC'd packages: they are not test, development or beta versions, nor are they "work in progress". 8-stream will be a complete and functioning, stable distro. So rather than waiting to get the new versions of things once every 6 months, 8-stream gets them when they are ready. The confusion about the "development" label is that RH said that 8- stream will be the distro used for their development process. So internally things will be developed and compiled in an 8-stream environment. They have never said that the development packages will ever be visible or available in 8-stream itself until they are ready to be set free. TBH I would have thought that this exactly how RH operate internally at the moment - they must have, say, a pre-8.3 environment that they put packages in so that when new packages are developed that can be compiled and everything is compatible. I really can't imagine that packages are developed in isolation until there's a big 8.3 compile time. All they are doing is making that internal system a public thing. Now it's certainly possible that from RH point of view, releasing the packages into the wild is a very good way of finding bugs that might have slipped through QC - there is after all already a steady stream of updates between point releases. So the benefit for RH is that paying customers get potentially fewer updates between releases, but the implication is that 8-stream will be no less stable than CentOS 8 currently is. The rhetoric from RH is that the tooling of the 8-stream system is not fully in place yet, but should be soon. Again, we can only take them at their word and watch what happens. And I must stress that I am no RH apologist: I think it was all handled incredibly badly by them and they desperately need to get some change management experience!! If you are considering using 8-stream then you need to understand that there is no specific point-release configuration that you can base things on - you cann't say that this is "equivalent to RHEL 8.5" or whatever; this is important if you need to use 3rd party drivers during install as they are based on specific configurations (but hey, install CentOS 8.2 and move to 8-stream from there and upgrade). Also the lifetime of 8-stream is half what you've been used to - so come 2024, it will die; but 9-stream will have existed for at least a couple of years by then, so there is a roadmap. As for what you should do, than no one can really tell you. My advice to others has been to watch, evaluate, test. If you are running bog standard web servers with nothing exotic, then I have a feeling that 8- stream will work; if you are running 3rd party apps on a web service where versions matter, then you need to think carefully and consider switching to one of the rebuild distros. > > Of course, a lot of this is somewhat dependent on what DigitalOcean will > decide to provide image wise moving forward. I suspect that as more and more things become containerised (and boy do I dislike containers), the actual underlying OS will become considerably less important. P. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
Off topic for sure, but it's a shame this has to be a manual process of destroying and rebuilding every X years. Even Microsoft has gone the Apple way and just perpetually updates Windows 10 now. On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 at 23:20, Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 1/5/21 3:02 PM, Jamie Burchell wrote: > > We will need to (manually) migrate to Stream 9.x after 5 years instead of > > 10 though? > > > Yes. CentOS Stream has a lifecycle comparable with other LTS > distributions. > > > ___ > 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] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
On 1/5/21 3:02 PM, Jamie Burchell wrote: We will need to (manually) migrate to Stream 9.x after 5 years instead of 10 though? Yes. CentOS Stream has a lifecycle comparable with other LTS distributions. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021, 5:03 PM Jamie Burchell wrote: > > Probably. For a lot of users, Stream is a drop-in replacement that's > better than CentOS was > > We will need to (manually) migrate to Stream 9.x after 5 years instead of > 10 though? > > Well that's the part that hasn't fully been laid out, stream to me just becomes like another disto lts release, at least with Debian flavors I feel confident in the upgrade path but the 10 year cycle is what makes RHEL nice. Stream is not an option for me, I will move to Springdale or Rocky if it matures. For what I need Springdale has been around long enough that I know they will continue and it also looks like Fermilab may be doing something also maybe they will get behind one of the new entries. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
> Probably. For a lot of users, Stream is a drop-in replacement that's better than CentOS was We will need to (manually) migrate to Stream 9.x after 5 years instead of 10 though? On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 at 22:51, Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 1/5/21 11:32 AM, Jamie Burchell wrote: > > is the change a non-issue for my use-case? > > > Probably. For a lot of users, Stream is a drop-in replacement that's > better than CentOS was, because it gets updates consistently and doesn't > suffer from periods in which no updates are available, including > security updates. > > If security was a priority for you, as it was for me, then CentOS wasn't > really suitable for public-facing services, but CentOS Stream might be. > > If you're building software that you intend to deploy on RHEL, Stream > might not be a suitable build root for you. Compiling software in a > Stream build root may result in a binary that has dependencies which > aren't yet available in RHEL. And if you're building kernel modules > (like Phil @elrepo), then there is the issue that the kernel isn't > subject to RHEL's ABI policy, but Red Hat developers have expressed > interest in making the kernel interfaces more stable and using external > kernel module builds as a test to flag interfaces that have changed. So > that situation may improve... > > ___ > 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] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
Le 05/01/2021 à 22:59, Frank Cox a écrit : > I don't have any particular love for Oracle, but since they pay X number of > people to keep Oracle Linux current with RHEL and updated, they shouldn't > have any problems with burn-out or a lack of long-term interest on the part > of volunteers that may (or may not) become an issue over the course of time > with a community-driven distribution like Rocky. Similar situation here. Carefully maintaining my servers running CentOS 7, slowly moving to Oracle Linux while keeping an eye on Rocky Linux. Glad I based my last two Linux books on CentOS 7 and not 8. When volume 1 was still a manuscript, someone on this list made fun about it not being based on CentOS 8 and therefore reflecting Linux in the past. As things are, all 40 chapters are now valid until 2024 instead of 2021. Cheers, Niki -- Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat Site : https://www.microlinux.fr Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr Mail : i...@microlinux.fr Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32 Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
> If security was a priority for you, as it was for me, then CentOS wasn't really suitable for public-facing services You mean in terms of security patch release time presumably? > If you're building software that you intend to deploy on RHEL We're not building or compiling software. On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 at 22:51, Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 1/5/21 11:32 AM, Jamie Burchell wrote: > > is the change a non-issue for my use-case? > > > Probably. For a lot of users, Stream is a drop-in replacement that's > better than CentOS was, because it gets updates consistently and doesn't > suffer from periods in which no updates are available, including > security updates. > > If security was a priority for you, as it was for me, then CentOS wasn't > really suitable for public-facing services, but CentOS Stream might be. > > If you're building software that you intend to deploy on RHEL, Stream > might not be a suitable build root for you. Compiling software in a > Stream build root may result in a binary that has dependencies which > aren't yet available in RHEL. And if you're building kernel modules > (like Phil @elrepo), then there is the issue that the kernel isn't > subject to RHEL's ABI policy, but Red Hat developers have expressed > interest in making the kernel interfaces more stable and using external > kernel module builds as a test to flag interfaces that have changed. So > that situation may improve... > > ___ > 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] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
In that case, it sounds like a non-issue for the way we currently use CentOS. As there's a simple migration from CentOS 8 to Stream and Digital Ocean currently provide CentOS 8 images, it'll be interesting to see what they do moving forward. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
On 1/5/21 11:32 AM, Jamie Burchell wrote: is the change a non-issue for my use-case? Probably. For a lot of users, Stream is a drop-in replacement that's better than CentOS was, because it gets updates consistently and doesn't suffer from periods in which no updates are available, including security updates. If security was a priority for you, as it was for me, then CentOS wasn't really suitable for public-facing services, but CentOS Stream might be. If you're building software that you intend to deploy on RHEL, Stream might not be a suitable build root for you. Compiling software in a Stream build root may result in a binary that has dependencies which aren't yet available in RHEL. And if you're building kernel modules (like Phil @elrepo), then there is the issue that the kernel isn't subject to RHEL's ABI policy, but Red Hat developers have expressed interest in making the kernel interfaces more stable and using external kernel module builds as a test to flag interfaces that have changed. So that situation may improve... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
On 1/5/21 2:27 PM, Jamie Burchell wrote: We already automatically update our systems with yum-cron / dnf automatic and I'm reading that if we're already doing that, Stream isn't going to be a departure I'd have said the same: If you trust CentOS enough to update automatically, then Stream will be an easy migration for you. You'll get a distribution that's just as trustworthy, with the added benefit that you'll get security fixes much sooner than CentOS did. but I'm still trying to make sense of the impact in real-terms i.e. what actually changes if we move to Stream. You'll get updated versions of software when they're ready, rather than once every 6-8 months. They'll be roughly the same versions that RHEL will get later. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
> but it seems too early in the game to make the decision to depend on it. That may change over the course of the next few months. Yes this is how I feel but conveyed badly in my last. It's currently a concept and not a viable distro to move to and in some cases there is only a year to make the move. At this stage I'm not totally dismissive of Stream either. We already automatically update our systems with yum-cron / dnf automatic and I'm reading that if we're already doing that, Stream isn't going to be a departure i.e. minor version bumps - but I'm still trying to make sense of the impact in real-terms i.e. what actually changes if we move to Stream. On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 at 21:59, Frank Cox wrote: > On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 21:32:18 + > Jamie Burchell wrote: > > > The uncertainty is frustrating and unsettling. > > I certainly agree with you on this point! > > Personally, while I haven't made an actual decision on which way I'm going > with my own projects, I'm currently leaning toward Oracle Linux. I > installed it on a laptop a couple of days ago and what I got was exactly > what I get when I install Centos on a laptop. Even my little script to > convert a stock installation into my custom setup worked as-is, and what I > ended up with was exactly what I was expecting to see. > > I don't have any particular love for Oracle, but since they pay X number > of people to keep Oracle Linux current with RHEL and updated, they > shouldn't have any problems with burn-out or a lack of long-term interest > on the part of volunteers that may (or may not) become an issue over the > course of time with a community-driven distribution like Rocky. > > But for the moment I'm more-or-less just sitting on my hands, waiting to > see how all of this shakes out over the course of the next few months > before I take any action to change anything. > > Frankly, I'm kind of hoping that Rocky turns out to be "the new Centos", > but it seems too early in the game to make the decision to depend on it. > That may change over the course of the next few months. > > -- > MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.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] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 21:32:18 + Jamie Burchell wrote: > The uncertainty is frustrating and unsettling. I certainly agree with you on this point! Personally, while I haven't made an actual decision on which way I'm going with my own projects, I'm currently leaning toward Oracle Linux. I installed it on a laptop a couple of days ago and what I got was exactly what I get when I install Centos on a laptop. Even my little script to convert a stock installation into my custom setup worked as-is, and what I ended up with was exactly what I was expecting to see. I don't have any particular love for Oracle, but since they pay X number of people to keep Oracle Linux current with RHEL and updated, they shouldn't have any problems with burn-out or a lack of long-term interest on the part of volunteers that may (or may not) become an issue over the course of time with a community-driven distribution like Rocky. But for the moment I'm more-or-less just sitting on my hands, waiting to see how all of this shakes out over the course of the next few months before I take any action to change anything. Frankly, I'm kind of hoping that Rocky turns out to be "the new Centos", but it seems too early in the game to make the decision to depend on it. That may change over the course of the next few months. -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
Consider me firmly schooled and I apologise if I have caused any upset with my comment. My understanding of the situation was the result of pouring over countless threads where it's difficult to filter out the facts and reality. It's encouraging for sure that there's potentially at least one ship to jump to. On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 at 21:48, Jon Pruente wrote: > On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 3:32 PM Jamie Burchell > wrote: > > > I'm sure it's my lack of understanding, but there feels too much hope > > pinned on "Rocky", which seems like one person (albeit a key person) > going > > it alone with the hope of a community following of disgruntled people. I > > see a single readme file in the repo. I think I'd feel more comfortable > > using Stream at this point. > > > > The uncertainty is frustrating and unsettling. > > > > If you still think Rocky is one guy going it alone then you haven't been > paying any attention to it at all. The slack that it started on is so > active that messages were falling off the 10k scroll back limit in a matter > of days. It's quieted down some since they have been making use of their > forums and working on moving to Mattermost, but that sure isn't the > activity of one person. > > The repo you refer to is just a holding one, with the readme in many > translations. Go up one level and you'll see the 17 repos thay have for > infrastructure and other needs. https://github.com/rocky-linux > ___ > 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] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 3:32 PM Jamie Burchell wrote: > I'm sure it's my lack of understanding, but there feels too much hope > pinned on "Rocky", which seems like one person (albeit a key person) going > it alone with the hope of a community following of disgruntled people. I > see a single readme file in the repo. I think I'd feel more comfortable > using Stream at this point. > > The uncertainty is frustrating and unsettling. > If you still think Rocky is one guy going it alone then you haven't been paying any attention to it at all. The slack that it started on is so active that messages were falling off the 10k scroll back limit in a matter of days. It's quieted down some since they have been making use of their forums and working on moving to Mattermost, but that sure isn't the activity of one person. The repo you refer to is just a holding one, with the readme in many translations. Go up one level and you'll see the 17 repos thay have for infrastructure and other needs. https://github.com/rocky-linux ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
I guess we need to wait and see how the dust settles. For those lucky enough to still be on CentOS 7, there's a bit of breathing space although these things take time to plan and implement of course. Those unlucky enough to have updated to CentOS 8 have less than a year to decide to move to stream or another distro. It's a good job that there's not a global pandemic disrupting work commitments so we have plenty of time to deal with these decisions from above! I'm sure it's my lack of understanding, but there feels too much hope pinned on "Rocky", which seems like one person (albeit a key person) going it alone with the hope of a community following of disgruntled people. I see a single readme file in the repo. I think I'd feel more comfortable using Stream at this point. The uncertainty is frustrating and unsettling. On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 at 21:18, Scott Techlist wrote: > The question for me, too is going to be, what will the VPS providers do? > Digital Ocean, Vultur, etc. I'll be at their mercy, without trying to > create my own image, if that's even possible. > > Hopefully something emerges as the popular replacement (e.g. "Rocky"), and > they support spinning up with the replacement. > > Anyone have agues/opinion on the most popular emerging path those > providers will use, I'm all ears. > > Scott > > > > > > > > ___ > 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] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
The question for me, too is going to be, what will the VPS providers do? Digital Ocean, Vultur, etc. I'll be at their mercy, without trying to create my own image, if that's even possible. Hopefully something emerges as the popular replacement (e.g. "Rocky"), and they support spinning up with the replacement. Anyone have agues/opinion on the most popular emerging path those providers will use, I'm all ears. Scott ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
> Given we are not developing drivers or applications (other than > websites > and web applications), is the change a non-issue for my use-case? If you decide to go with Stream, you will need to test carefully each version and use some kind of repository management - as there will be no older version of the packages. Thankfully the 'Boom boot manager' is now fully working, so you can easily roll back an OS update. If you decide that you don't want to fight with updates and the short life cycle of Stream, you got plenty of clones that are available: - Springdale Linux - Oracle Enterprise Linux And 2 more expected to come: - Rocky Linux (founder of the original CentOS -> Gregory Kurtzer) - Lenix (backed by CloudLinux) I would prefer the full lifecycle of a RHEL clone instead of Stream. Best Regards, Strahil Nikolov ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
On 05/01/2021 19:32, Jamie Burchell wrote: Hello I've recently discovered the announcement regarding the change in direction for the CentOS project and I imagine like many others, I'm confused and concerned about what this means moving forward. I work for a small web development agency and we offer hosting as part of our package to clients who need it. We have many CentOS 7 web servers (DigitalOcean droplets) (LAMP/LEMP) that I look after and today I'm thankful I have only migrated one of those to CentOS 8, given the recent announcement about its curtailed EOL. I literally just went to the Wiki today to confirm the EOL date for EL7 and boy am I glad I spotted it. Given we are not developing drivers or applications (other than websites and web applications), is the change a non-issue for my use-case? I've seen it written that CentOS Stream is the "development version" of RHEL but also that we shouldn't have considered RHEL to be the beta for CentOS. Others have said to think of CentOS more like RHEL RC-1. I just don't know how the stability will compare and we have historically always chosen CentOS for its stability (and of course price). Sure, I could migrate to Ubuntu (I use this locally in WSL), but I've become somewhat "comfy slippers" with CentOS and have built our setup around it (including custom ansible scripts etc) and don't want to change everything unncessarily. Of course, a lot of this is somewhat dependent on what DigitalOcean will decide to provide image wise moving forward. I'm sorry if this has already been answered, I spent a good few hours reading through the respective threads in the devel list and ended up more confused than I started. Cheers, Jamie Hi Jamie, Unfortunately no one can advise you as to what may be a suitable operating system for your business needs. One thing is clear, the operating system you are currently running (CentOS Linux) is being brought to end of life, version 7 in 2024 and version 8 in 2021. That gives you at least a year (for 8) if not longer to consider and evaluate alternatives. As your current OS will no longer exist, I would start with a blank sheet, look at the OSes that do exist and evaluate each based on it's merits and suitability for your business needs and requirements. Cheers, Phil ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
Hello I've recently discovered the announcement regarding the change in direction for the CentOS project and I imagine like many others, I'm confused and concerned about what this means moving forward. I work for a small web development agency and we offer hosting as part of our package to clients who need it. We have many CentOS 7 web servers (DigitalOcean droplets) (LAMP/LEMP) that I look after and today I'm thankful I have only migrated one of those to CentOS 8, given the recent announcement about its curtailed EOL. I literally just went to the Wiki today to confirm the EOL date for EL7 and boy am I glad I spotted it. Given we are not developing drivers or applications (other than websites and web applications), is the change a non-issue for my use-case? I've seen it written that CentOS Stream is the "development version" of RHEL but also that we shouldn't have considered RHEL to be the beta for CentOS. Others have said to think of CentOS more like RHEL RC-1. I just don't know how the stability will compare and we have historically always chosen CentOS for its stability (and of course price). Sure, I could migrate to Ubuntu (I use this locally in WSL), but I've become somewhat "comfy slippers" with CentOS and have built our setup around it (including custom ansible scripts etc) and don't want to change everything unncessarily. Of course, a lot of this is somewhat dependent on what DigitalOcean will decide to provide image wise moving forward. I'm sorry if this has already been answered, I spent a good few hours reading through the respective threads in the devel list and ended up more confused than I started. Cheers, Jamie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Recover removed data in XFS
On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 17:15:49 + Gestió Servidors wrote: > Hi, > > I manage an HPC Cluster that runs CentOS-7 and shares some mount points. All > shares are formated in XFS. Is there anyway to recover removed data? https://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_Does_the_filesystem_have_an_undelete_capability.3F There's also this, but I don't know anything about it: https://github.com/ianka/xfs_undelete -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Recover removed data in XFS
Hi, I manage an HPC Cluster that runs CentOS-7 and shares some mount points. All shares are formated in XFS. Is there anyway to recover removed data? ...An user has deleted her $HOME entirely... Thanks. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
