Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

> Am 25.01.2021 um 17:04 schrieb Johnny Hughes :
> 
> On 1/22/21 5:12 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>> On 1/22/21 9:29 AM, Marc Balmer via CentOS wrote:
>>>> Hence it is as good as dead in my mind when looking into the future, I
>>>> am looking for future distro of choice.
>>> 
>>> A little mentioned choice would be openSUSE, which is direction I am taking.
>> 
>> I do not like system where configuration app can overwrite manualy set
>> config. I started with ClarkConnect in 2005-2006 and to route public
>> subnet into my network I had to delete last iptables command then add my
>> own, but only after config system did it's own iptables commands. I had
>> to learn iptables before any other Linux commands and although I
>> mastered it, it is left in unpleasant memory (it took me weeks and help
>> from rare Linux admins to find a solution).
>> 
>> I did try SUSE around 2000 but it was complicated to do manual changes
>> (if it was not provided in YAST), so after ClarkConnect I had no desire
>> to even experiment with YAST.
>> 
>> 
> 
> I have no issues with OpenSUSE .. but how is OpenSUSE any better than
> CentOS Stream?

openSUSE is honest.

The CentOS project, RedHat, you, lied to us when you published CentOS 8
and claiming it would be supported until 2029.  We believed you because of
the good reputation you had built up with previous CentOS releases.

We suggested CentOS 8 to our customers.  And we have been badly f***ed 
the a**.  Sorry for the wording that you may assume, but that is how it is.

> It is not like we are rolling rawhide packages into CentOS Stream.  They
> are updating already created Enterprise Packages in current RHEL with
> Bug Fixes and Security Fixes and a small number of rebases (Enhamcments
> Fixes).  But the enhancements are not from Rawhide, they are rebases
> very close to the current releases.
> 
> Again .. absolutely nothing wrong with using OpenSUSE (or Ubuntu or
> Debian, etc).  I just do not see the advantage.

I see one big advantage:  These are honest projects, while you are liars.

> 
> I mean, I get it, some people are very upset with the new way CentOS is
> being done.  And obviously people get to think what they think.  But
> when this was announced, it was also announced that RHEL was going to be
> opened up early in Q1 of 2021 (which has happened and is still happening).

So where is the option to install a RHEL system at a customer site, like I was
able with CentOS?

Really, you (as in the CentOS project) totally screwed it.

> ___
> 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] RHEL changes

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

> Am 22.01.2021 um 21:36 schrieb Jamie Burchell :
> 
> Can RH put a stop to projects like Rocky Linux?

No.

> 
>>> On 22 Jan 2021, at 18:04, Matthew Miller  wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 07:25:04AM -0500, Konstantin Boyandin via CentOS 
>>> wrote:
>>> I wonder whether RH plan to fight back FUD they've brought upon by their 
>>> December announcement.
>> 
>> I mean really the only thing we can do is live up to the given plan with
>> Stream and RHEL options, which as far as I can see is exactly what's
>> happening.
>> 
>>> Personally, I found this "no-cost" promise lacking substantial details.
>> 
>> This is just the announcement of it, of course. The full details will be
>> there when the whole thing is launched, which the announcement says will be
>> very soon.
>> 
>> 
>>> If RH doesn't verify everyone requesting developer subscription (forcing 
>>> to prove identity), the 16 installations limit is easily circumvented by 
>>> multiple registrations.
>> 
>> There are always going to be cheaters. Don't be one of them.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Matthew Miller
>> 
>> Fedora Project Leader
>> ___
>> 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

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

Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

> Am 22.01.2021 um 08:40 schrieb Ljubomir Ljubojevic :
> 
> On 1/21/21 11:40 PM, John R. Dennison wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 11:36:44PM +0100, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>>> On 1/21/21 8:53 PM, Alfredo Perez wrote:
 Is this good news for the "Centos" family?
 
>>> 
>>> There is no CentOS "family". CentOS clone is dead and will be now
>> 
>> Odd that you say it's dead when 7 doesn't sunset until June 30th, 2024.
>> 
> 
> Maybe not best choice of the word, but I meant there will not be further
> development on that front. CentOS 7 cloning will be just rinse and
> repeat of established process. If CentOS 8 was not killed almost no one
> would have installed CentOS 7 on any new server (keeping in mind desire
> for 10-year til EOL), so I see CentOS 7 as close to EOL and his
> usefulness for new systems will only decrease.

I couldn't agree more.

> 
> Hence it is as good as dead in my mind when looking into the future, I
> am looking for future distro of choice.

A little mentioned choice would be openSUSE, which is direction I am taking.

> 
> 
> -- 
> Ljubomir Ljubojevic
> (Love is in the Air)
> PL Computers
> Serbia, Europe
> 
> StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant
> ___
> 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] I'm looking forward to the future of CentOS Stream

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

> Am 13.12.2020 um 19:53 schrieb Phelps, Matthew :
> 
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 11:48 PM Gordon Messmer 
> wrote:
> 
>>> On 12/11/20 9:56 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>>> And I will repeat that millions of CentOS users found free clone of RHEL
>>> trustworthy enough to use it for production, even without "official
>>> endorsement".
>> 
>> 
>> Exactly.  That's why it's so weird that those people, today, think that
>> CentOS Stream won't be usable, based on their interpretation of the
>> official statements from Red Hat.  Red Hat's statements weren't taken
>> into consideration before, but now they're a sign of doom?
>> 
>> 
>>> If they ... even allowed ANYONE ELSE that was not employed by Red Hat in
>>> 2014 to even come close to learning the secrets of rebuild, no backlash
>>> would have happened
>> 
>> 
>> I'm going to stop you there, because the CentOS maintainers kept that
>> process out of public visibility long before Red Hat was ever involved.
>> If you think users should know more about the process, then you are
>> pointing fingers at the *wrong* people.
>> 
>> I don't want this to become a flame war.  So rather than pointing
>> fingers, let's focus on the fact that CentOS Stream promises to be
>> developed in the open, resolving the problem that you're describing.
>> 
>> Red Hat is fixing the thing you're complaining about.
>> 
>> Red Hat is giving us the thing that has been requested more often, by
>> more people, than any other change in CentOS, and the result is that the
>> press is full of stories about users being angry, because five people on
>> the mailing lists sent a lot of messages.  (About half of the traffic in
>> the threads on centos and centos-devel comes from five people, and
>> various people replying to them.)
>> 
>> 
> As one of those "five people" I assure you, this is not just a few angry
> voices. If you, or anyone at Red Hat believe this is the case, you are very
> sadly mistaken.
> 
> Here is the problem: When IBM took over Red Hat, and hence CentOS, these
> words were posted on the CentOS Blog:
> 
> 
> "What does this mean for Red Hat’s contributions to the CentOS project?
> 
> In short, nothing.
> 
> Red Hat always has and will continue to be a champion for open source and
> projects like CentOS. IBM is committed to Red Hat’s independence and role
> in open source software communities so that we can continue this work
> without interruption or changes.
> 
> Our mission, governance, and objectives remain the same. We will continue
> to execute the existing project roadmap."
> 
> 
> 
> This was *last year*. (CF
> https://blog.centos.org/2019/07/ibm-red-hat-and-centos/) Note the last
> sentence. The roadmap then had CentOS 8 supported through May 2029.
> 
> The simple fact is Red Hat reneged on a promise that hordes of us believed
> and made a lot of plans on. It is now going to be very expensive, and
> stress inducing to have to completely rethink everything we have done, and
> are doing.
> 
> You damn right we are angry.
> 
> 
> And there's *a lot* more than five of us.

Here is number six.

> 
> 
> 
>>> But no, as soon as Oracle started rebuilding RHEL source code Red Hat
>>> first made things difficult for everyone to create kernels (source code
>>> was not srpms anymore but tar?)
>> 
>> 
>> You're misinformed.  Kernels are still built from SRPM, but the archive
>> used is no longer an upstream release with a series of patches.
>> 
>> The reason for the change is not insidious.  It's unfortunate that the
>> pristine source + patches can't be maintained, I agree, but speaking as
>> a developer: maintaining hundreds of patches that touch intersecting
>> files and rebasing them all when earlier patches are updated is an
>> incredibly difficult and time consuming task.  And, if I remember
>> correctly, applying all of those patches took almost as long as building
>> the kernel.  If it takes that long to just prepare the source code,
>> that's a major hit to productivity when a developer needs to work on the
>> code or build the SRPM to validate changes.
>> 
>> And, ultimately, there's very little value in shipping those patches
>> when the vast majority of them are already in the current version of the
>> upstream kernel, and they're merely backported to the older release that
>> Red Hat supports.  It's an entirely different story when distributions
>> are shipping patches that they don't push upstream, but that's not
>> generally what you see with the kernel package.
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS@centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> *Matt Phelps*
> 
> *Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*
> 
> (Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)
> 
> Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian
> 
> 
> 60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
> email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu
> 
> 
> cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook 

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

> Am 09.12.2020 um 17:15 schrieb Neil Thompson :
> 
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 at 18:06, Phelps, Matthew 
> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hear! HEAR!
>> 
>> NOBODY asked.
>> 
>> 
>> 
> OK.  We get it.  We all get it loud and clear.  You're pissed off.
> 
> There's two things you can do about that -
> 1)  accept reality and start making plans to deal with it, or
> 2) continue to whine and lash out at people who are probably feeling worse
> about the situation than you are, in which case I have to question whether
> you actually have the maturity to be able to administer a
> single machine, let alone any kind of IT facility.

I think it is nonetheless not needed to start insulting people.

We should try to keep the discussion friendly and technical.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

Good Morning


> Am 08.12.2020 um 15:06 schrieb Rich Bowen :
> 
> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next year 
> we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat Enterprise 
> Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a current RHEL 
> release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will end at the end of 2021. 
> CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving as the upstream 
> (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
> 
> Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS Linux 7, 
> and we’ll continue to produce that version through the remainder of the RHEL 
> 7 life cycle. 
> https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates
> 
> CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in collaboration 
> among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This ensures SIGs are 
> developing and testing against what becomes the next version of RHEL. This 
> also provides SIGs a clear single goal, rather than having to build and test 
> for two releases. It gives the CentOS contributor community a great deal of 
> influence in the future of RHEL. And it removes confusion around what 
> “CentOS” means in the Linux distribution ecosystem.
> 
> When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option will be to 
> migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from CentOS Linux 8, and 
> has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux releases. If you are using 
> CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are concerned that CentOS 
> Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage you to contact Red Hat about 
> options.
> 
> We have an FAQ - https://centos.org/distro-faq/ - to help with your 
> information and planning needs, as you figure out how this shift of project 
> focus might affect you.
> 
> [See also: Red Hat's perspective on this. 
> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux]
> 


I have a technical question on this regarding the official CentOS docker images 
found at https://hub.docker.com/_/centos 

Will the image tagged centos:8 follow CentOS Stream eventually, and if so, 
starting when?  Or is it already Stream?

Thanks,
mb


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

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

Am I the only one to perceive CentOS/RedHat team members responses as quite 
arrogant?

> Am 08.12.2020 um 18:11 schrieb Johnny Hughes :
> 
> On 12/8/20 11:02 AM, Phelps, Matthew wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 11:59 AM Rich Bowen  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 12/8/20 11:29 AM, Jonathan Billings wrote:
 I see a lot of promises that Stream will have better engagement with
 the community.  Why would we trust these promises?
>>> 
>>> "Better engagement with the community" of course requires that the
>>> community step up and engage. Trust isn't something anyone expects to
>>> just magically happen.
>>> 
>>> 
>> The whole point of CentOS was so that we didn't have to "engage." We don't
>> have time for that.
>> 
>> We just want a stable re-compile of RHEL, as promised. CentOS has been
>> diverging from this for a while (note the change in version names/numbers)
>> and we DON'T WANT THAT!
> 
> Right, you want free RHEL .. so get in touch with Red Hat and see if you
> qualify for it.
> 
> Here is how you can convert:
> 
> https://access.redhat.com/articles/2360841
> 
> Or, you can see if Stream can meet your requirements of something you
> can just get for free.
> 
> Or, you can do something else.  It is all up to you.
> ___
> 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-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

> Am 08.12.2020 um 17:15 schrieb Rich Bowen :
> 
> 
> 
> On 12/8/20 10:41 AM, Phelps, Matthew wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 10:39 AM Jonathan Billings 
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 10:28:30AM -0500, Phelps, Matthew wrote:
 You have published a CentOS Lifecycle that states the EOL for CentOS 8 is
 May 2029. (c.f.
>>> https://endoflife.software/operating-systems/linux/centos).
 CentOS Stream *is not* CentOS 8.
 
 This announcement is a breach of that trust with your community, and
>>> could
 be construed as a breach of contract with your users.
 
 Save this change for CentOS 9.
>>> 
>>> Don't worry, it's been fixed.  :/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> Don't worry. I saved a copy.
> 
> So did we. It's in Git.
> 
> That page was never a contract. It's a web page published by an open source 
> project. Please do not misconstrue it as a contract.

Of course it was not a legally binding contract.  But we, the users, trusted 
you.  No we don't anymore.

> 
> ___
> 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] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

This really pisses me off.  You published CentOS 8 with a promise to support it 
until May 2029.

Now you betray all users that took you by the mouth by stating it's EOL 
december 31. 2021.

Do you really think that was a smart move?

> Am 08.12.2020 um 15:06 schrieb Rich Bowen :
> 
> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next year 
> we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat Enterprise 
> Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a current RHEL 
> release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will end at the end of 2021. 
> CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving as the upstream 
> (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
> 
> Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS Linux 7, 
> and we’ll continue to produce that version through the remainder of the RHEL 
> 7 life cycle. 
> https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates
> 
> CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in collaboration 
> among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This ensures SIGs are 
> developing and testing against what becomes the next version of RHEL. This 
> also provides SIGs a clear single goal, rather than having to build and test 
> for two releases. It gives the CentOS contributor community a great deal of 
> influence in the future of RHEL. And it removes confusion around what 
> “CentOS” means in the Linux distribution ecosystem.
> 
> When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option will be to 
> migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from CentOS Linux 8, and 
> has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux releases. If you are using 
> CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are concerned that CentOS 
> Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage you to contact Red Hat about 
> options.
> 
> We have an FAQ - https://centos.org/distro-faq/ - to help with your 
> information and planning needs, as you figure out how this shift of project 
> focus might affect you.
> 
> [See also: Red Hat's perspective on this. 
> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-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] selinux policy (& engine) broken in C7

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

> Am 20.11.2020 um 19:50 schrieb lejeczek via CentOS :
> 
> hi guys
> 
> I've just gotten a bunch of updates via yum and something
> weird seems to be going on after the update.
> System has:
> 
> selinux-policy-3.13.1-268.el7_9.2.noarch
> selinux-policy-targeted-3.13.1-268.el7_9.2.noarch
> 
> actually three different boxes, all the same:
> 
> $ semodule -l
> No modules.
> 
> and an attempt to install modules fails:
> 
> $ semodule -i openvpn.pp
> Failed to resolve typeattributeset statement at
> /etc/selinux/targeted/tmp/modules/400/pe-openvpn/cil:1
> semodule:  Failed!

I have a smilar issue after the latest CentOS 7 update on my gitlab server:

# semodule -l
libsemanage.semanage_direct_get_module_info: Unable to read 
gitlab-7.2.0-ssh-keygen module lang ext file.
semodule:  Failed on list!

I am since unable to access the gitlab server using ssh, I had to turn off 
selinux for using gitlab.

Don't know, however, if the two issues are related.

- mb

> 
> Does above "usual" work for you?
> many thanks, L.
> ___
> 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] Where can CentOS7 yum-cron logs be found?

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

> Am 19.08.2020 um 11:03 schrieb Gunnar Niels :
> 
> On 8/18/20 1:00 AM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote:
>> Le 18/08/2020 à 03:00, Gunnar Niels a écrit :
>>> I'm asking where the results of the yum-cron job are actually written to so
>>> I can see what it did.
>> Well, that's your answer. Here's the content of an email sent by Yum-Cron. So
>> you everything that happened under the hood:
> 
> That doesn't answer my question. I'm *not* using email, or asking what the
> output looks like.
> 
> I'm asking: if I use stdio as the emitter, where can I expect that output to 
> be
> written to in the system?


The command

journalctl -t yum

will show you the updates that were applied.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Safe to do yum update now?

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]



> Am 04.08.2020 um 17:59 schrieb Jerome Lille :
> 
> Hello
> 
> Luckily I was not afflicted by this boot hole problem. I haven't done
> yum update in a week or so. I just want to make sure that now it is
> safe to do yum update?

It is.

> 
> /Jerome
> 
> ___
> 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] Fixing grub/shim issue Centos 7

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

> Am 04.08.2020 um 08:31 schrieb lpeci :
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I had the same problem with my UEFI bios machine and I fixed it so for Centos 
> 7:
> 
> 1) Boot from an rescue linux usb
> 
> 2) When the rescue system is running:
> 
> 2.1) #chroot /mnt/sysimage
> 
> 3) Config network:
> 
> 3.1) # ip addr add X.X.X.X/X dev X
> 
> 3.2) # ip route add default via X.X.X.X<--- default router
> 
> 4) And finally:
> 
> #yum downgrade shim\* grub2\* mokutil

As there are updated and working packages available now, downgrading is no 
longer needed, another update will also work.

# yum makecache
# yum upgrade

You should see a shim-x64 package with version 15.8 which is the working 
version (15.7 caused the problem)

> 
> #exit
> 
> #reboot
> 
> I hope you can fix it with these steps.

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

Re: [CentOS] Boot failed on latest CentOS 7 update

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

> Is the latest update :
> shim-x64   x86_64   15-7.el7_9  

No. 15-8 is.

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

Re: [CentOS] 8.2.2004 Latest yum update renders machine unbootable

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

>> 
>> Please report both positive and negative results.
> 
> A previously afftected Aures nino POS-terminal boots just fine with CentOS 7 
> and shim 15.8.
> 
> Now I will test an affected machine (Aures Twist POS terminal) that runs 
> CentOS 8 (well, usually runs CentOS 8, but not now, since it does not boot 
> ... :=>

The affected machine running CentOS 8 boots fine after upgrading to shim 15.15

Thanks for acting quickly, especially on a weekend.

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

Re: [CentOS] 8.2.2004 Latest yum update renders machine unbootable

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

> Am 02.08.2020 um 14:34 schrieb Johnny Hughes :
> 
> On 8/2/20 6:59 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>> On 8/2/20 2:04 AM, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
>>> 
>>> Il 01/08/20 22:03, Greg Bailey ha scritto:
 On 8/1/20 6:56 AM, david wrote:
> At 02:54 AM 8/1/2020, Alessandro Baggi wrote:
>> Hi Johnny,
>> thank you very much for clarification.
>> 
>> You said that in the centos infrastructure only one server got the
>> problem.
>> What are the conditions that permit the breakage? There is a particular
>> configuration (hw/sw) case that match always the problem or it is
>> random?
>> 
>> Thank you
> 
> I have two servers running Centos 7 on apple hardware (one mac-mini
> and one mac server).  They both failed to reboot a few days ago.  So
> perhaps whatever anti-boot bug hit Centos 8, also hit Centos 7.  I
> can't tell what version got updated since the system simply fails to
> boot.  I don't even get a grub screen. I'll have to rebuild the
> systems from scratch.
> 
> 
 
 You should be able to boot off of installation media into rescue mode,
 and downgrade the grub2* and/or shim* RPMs.
 
 -Greg
 
>>> I did the downgrade on a fresh install of c8.2 but yum said that all
>>> selected packages (grub2,shim...) are already to the lowest version and
>>> the downgrade is not possibile, ending with "nothing to do".
>> 
>> Ok .. We are running through some final testing now for CentOS Linux 8
>> and CentOS Stream .. updates later today for EL8.
>> 
>> For CentOS Linux 7 .. I just pushed the latest shim packages (we had to
>> get these signed by Microsoft .. as do all distros that do shim.
>> Microsoft is the official CA for secureboot.
>> 
>> So in the next few hours, after the mirrors sync up .. you should be
>> able to fix any EL7 machines.
>> 
>> I'll post here again once we have pushed the EL8 and CentOS Stream updates.
> 
> OK .. I have also now pushed the CentOS Linux 8 update .. you should see
> an update to SHIM .. the new versions are:
> 
> PowerTools/x86_64/os/Packages/shim-unsigned-x64-15-8.el8.x86_64.rpm
> BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/shim-ia32-15-15.el8_2.x86_64.rpm
> BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/shim-x64-15-15.el8_2.x86_64.rpm
> 
> For CentOS Linux 7 .. the new files are:
> 
> x86_64/Packages/mokutil-15-8.el7.x86_64.rpm
> x86_64/Packages/shim-ia32-15-8.el7.x86_64.rpm
> x86_64/Packages/shim-unsigned-ia32-15-8.el7.x86_64.rpm
> x86_64/Packages/shim-unsigned-x64-15-8.el7.x86_64.rpm
> x86_64/Packages/shim-x64-15-8.el7.x86_64.rpm
> 
> You need only replace the files you currently have installed, not
> install every file.
> 
> Please report both positive and negative results.

A previously afftected Aures nino POS-terminal boots just fine with CentOS 7 
and shim 15.8.

Now I will test an affected machine (Aures Twist POS terminal) that runs CentOS 
8 (well, usually runs CentOS 8, but not now, since it does not boot ... :=>

> 
> Thanks,
> Johnny Hughes
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Boot failed on latest CentOS 7 update

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

> Am 01.08.2020 um 23:52 schrieb Leon Fauster via CentOS :
> 
> Am 01.08.20 um 23:41 schrieb Kay Schenk:
>> Well misery loves company but still...just truly unfathomable!
>> Time for a change.
> 
> 
> I can only express my incomprehension for such statements!
> 
> Stay and help. Instead running away or should I say out of the
> frying pan and into the fire? :-)

The thing, RHEL and CentOS not properly testing updates, cost me at minimum 3-4 
full working days, plus losses at customer sites.

This is really a huge failure of RHEL and CentOS.

A lot of trust has been destroyed.
> 
> --
> Leon
> ___
> 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