from:"R C"



On 12/16/20 11:24 AM, John Plemons wrote:
I have a DEC Alpha sitting in my warehouse collecting dust what a 
great machine it was.. Was sorry to see Linux Support die for it..




I used to work at a university, where one of my colleagues has (I think 
he still has it) a pdp11/10


You know, paper tape, an actual TTY (also paper). Every so much time he 
needs to replace capacitors, and


sees if he can fire it up, and shows students how to program it.(no 
Linux for it I think, haha)





john


On 12/16/2020 1:18 PM, R C wrote:


On 12/16/20 11:10 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:

On 12/16/20 11:24 AM, R C wrote:


On 12/16/20 8:11 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
But the Red Hat-based ecosystem version of that second group is 
on-topic, as the same sort of enthusiast exists here and has been 
very vocal about this change.
Well yes it is, but it started with a remark about licensing. I 
don't use Windows much, not even a handful of times in the last 
decade. Thing is that MS has something called their "Developers 
Network" (named something along those lines). If you're in higher 
education, R etc you can be in that network, in sortof an R 
category, for 'free'. ...



I have a whole shelf full of MSDN CDs and binders; it wasn't free, 
but it wasn't terribly expensive either.  In some cases the 
activations/keys for the software expire after a few months. Still 
have the last Windows 2000 Beta CD for the DEC Alpha architecture 



DEC  remember that..    the other day I ran into a  windows 95 box, I 
might even have an old drive with windows for work groups *lol*



here in that set.  Something similar for RHEL beyond the 
single-entitlement developer subscription would be cool.



But all kidding aside;  It would be cool to have an MSDN equivalent 
for RH for those that do a lot with RH, and that "take their work 
home and vice versa". That is what I use(d) Centos for, at home that is






For example, I was messing with kubernetes in a few ways.  redhat 
provides a license for RHEL, that you can use for that purpose for 
free, BUT you can have only have one license. 
Yes, which makes it a bit difficult to mess around with kubernetes. 
That particular case would be covered resonably well by CentOS 
Stream, though, since the major part of kubernetes' behavior isn't 
going to change radically within a point release cycle.


___
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] What are the differences between CentOS Linux and CentOS Stream?



On 12/16/20 11:10 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:

On 12/16/20 11:24 AM, R C wrote:


On 12/16/20 8:11 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
But the Red Hat-based ecosystem version of that second group is 
on-topic, as the same sort of enthusiast exists here and has been 
very vocal about this change.
Well yes it is, but it started with a remark about licensing. I don't 
use Windows much, not even a handful of times in the last decade. 
Thing is that MS has something called their "Developers Network" 
(named something along those lines). If you're in higher education, 
R etc you can be in that network, in sortof an R category, for 
'free'. ...



I have a whole shelf full of MSDN CDs and binders; it wasn't free, but 
it wasn't terribly expensive either.  In some cases the 
activations/keys for the software expire after a few months. Still 
have the last Windows 2000 Beta CD for the DEC Alpha architecture 



DEC  remember that..    the other day I ran into a  windows 95 box, I 
might even have an old drive with windows for work groups *lol*



here in that set.  Something similar for RHEL beyond the 
single-entitlement developer subscription would be cool.



But all kidding aside;  It would be cool to have an MSDN equivalent for 
RH for those that do a lot with RH, and that "take their work home and 
vice versa". That is what I use(d) Centos for, at home that is






For example, I was messing with kubernetes in a few ways.  redhat 
provides a license for RHEL, that you can use for that purpose for 
free, BUT you can have only have one license. 
Yes, which makes it a bit difficult to mess around with kubernetes. 
That particular case would be covered resonably well by CentOS Stream, 
though, since the major part of kubernetes' behavior isn't going to 
change radically within a point release cycle.


___
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 8 future



On 12/16/20 10:39 AM, Frank Saporito wrote:

I may be cynical, but I think this is a business decision.

By gaining control of CentOS, RedHat gained control of its biggest 
(apparent) competitor.  This action should increase the value of 
RedHat.  A few years later, IBM buys RedHat for a staggering 34 
BILLION dollars.  I would expect that before the purchase, there is an 
internal "PowerPoint" slide discussing the elimination of CentOS 
Linux.  Despite the commentary otherwise, I believe CentOS Stream is a 
type of "beta" release.  RedHat can release changes into CentOS Stream 
to make sure it is all good before the point release of RHEL to the 
paying customers.


Or maybe not.



That is exactly my thought. IBM is a very big company, 'physically' as 
well as capital wise  and they do top notch, state of the art, research and


development, and they can pretty much solve any problem. The only 
problem that IBM always had a problem with dealing with is their 
competition.


(The numerous, researchers, scientists, mathematicians, engineers they 
employ,  tremendously increases their overhead, hence everything IBM is 
expensive.


(I expect that to happen to their licensing too, for redhat in the future)




FCS

On 12/15/20 10:59 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:

On 12/15/20 7:59 PM, Joshua Kramer wrote:

Why would RedHat invest millions more
in buying the CentOS process just to have CentOS act as the beta?



Indeed.

Often, when you can't find a reasonable answer to a question, it is 
because the premise of the question itself is wrong.



___
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] CentOS 8 future ("Long goodbye"?)



On 12/16/20 9:45 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:

My apologies about top posting.

I join Matthew on all counts.

The following might sound as a rant, but it is not, given the circumstances we 
have been put into.

First, and most important: thank you CentOS team for all great work you have 
done during all these years. As user who used results of your work without 
giving much back (not counting maintaining public mirror, or helping others on 
the list whenever I felt my expertise adequate), I can not express how high I 
value what you gave to all of us.

Now, that CentOS as we knew it (as a “binary replica” of RedHat Enterprise) 
ceases to exist many of us are trying to figure out new long term solution for 
their “enterprise” sort of systems. Luckily I only partly have to do that, as 
for servers I already did migration quite long ago. My mentioning it on this 
list was causing more annoyance than I would like to, so I stopped mentioning 
it. But now it is time to mention it again, just to help everyone arrive at 
best decision. But first some thoughts on migration to different Linux Distro:

One of obvious possibilities is to migrate to some other “binary clone” of 
RHEL. One can find several, Oracle Linux (even though many are cautious of 
Oracle, they - Oracle - didn’t drown out of existence mysql so far, maybe 
thanks to mariadb fork existence, …), Scientific Linux (which is effort of 
really small team, and I evaluated it well below CentOS when I had to make 
decision, and it confirmed true over time), and others... However, once RedHat 
(or rather its owner IBM) made fundamental decision, it is not as much about 
the one who clones (binary rebuilds) of RHEL, as it is about RHEL itself. At 
least fo me it is. As, by undermining trust, even if they roll everything back 
to what it was, the trust is already lost by the knowledge of everyone that any 
moment they can do that in a future. This alternative is just out of question 
for me. Will I maintain RHEL for my current or potential future employer? Yes, 
definitely. Will I recommend fair (and way cheaper, better, longer lasting) 
alternative? By all means, yes, and with my experience of migration, and 
documented migration steps, etc...

Another possibility for pure Linux folks is switch to different distro. Not with 10 
years life cycle (here RedHat was unique), but shorter one, yet with much easier 
upgrade from one release to another. [Even knowing about Ubuntu LTS] Debian would be 
my choice, which I am going to pursue for CentOS number crunchers and workstations I 
maintain. Laptops are Debian clone Ubuntu since long ago. This will be “rolling 
release", i.e. mostly you will have to upgrade packages to latest release, and 
constantly will take chance something will break with change of internals of given 
software from one release to another. It will be more work (for 24/7/365 servers 
most gravely notable). But it may outweigh the single event when your “enterprise” 
life is cancelled one day, and you have to redo the whole infrastructure all at 
once. Think about it and about peace of mind avoiding that eventuality.

This leads me at last to telling that my sever infrastructure was migrated long 
ago to FreeBSD. One can chose different BSD successor based on one’s own 
assessment of suitability. First of all, pure Linux folk, it is not that 
challenging as one may think. I would say here the same thing I was telling to 
my users who we just starting to use UNIX (or Linux). How many command do you 
need to know to start using UNIX? Just 5-6 is enough. Start doing things, and 
in a couple of Months you will feel you know everything. In 6 Months you will 
be top expert:




I work in HPC, pretty much exclusively with redhat and it's 
clones/derivatives, in very large scale environments.  I mostly do R 
'stuff', and very much rely on our admins doing that, I constantly talk 
with them for advice, or just to discuss system stuff, most of them have 
been doing this longer then I have. I still consider myself a rookie.


so yeah   6 months   *chuckle*   you should consider applying in 
places like that if you're that good.






  the one who knows what he knows and knows what he doesn’t know. My choice was 
based on the following facts: FreeBSD is most widely used (even Microsoft was 
once noticed to run some of their servers on FreeBSD). FreeBSD has excellent 
documentation. FreeBSD community is as eager to help the one who got stuck with 
something as our CentOS community is. They have as excellent experts as Johnny, 
Matthew, ... sorry I can not mention everyone, that will take separate huge 
post...

And now, with my servers gone to FreeBSD long ago, I can share this nice 
experience. On FreeBSD (base system is separate, and Linux, BTW, decided to go 
same excellent way), and extra stuff can be added from huge port collection, 
most part of which is available as binary packages. Ports/packages are up to 
their maintainers, and pretty much

Re: [CentOS] What are the differences between CentOS Linux and CentOS Stream?



On 12/16/20 8:11 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:

On 12/15/20 1:24 PM, R C wrote:
What I meant was that MS basically, for the longest while, had their 
OS pre-installed on computers sold, so it "felt" free to the buyer, 
it came with the machine. Universities and colleges did receive bulk 
licenses and .NET pretty much for free in their 'Developer Programs' 
and also have students keep using it. That "faillure to implement" 
obviously was a marketing move indeed, as was students "allowing" to 
keep using it on their laptops after graduation. 
This is way off-topic, but there are two aspects of home users using 
unlicensed copies of Windows:
1.) Users who bought a machine with Windows Home Edition on it who 
wanted either Professional or Ultimate;
2.) The enthusiasts who were building their own machines from parts.  
That group is small, but they also tend to be very vocal; IT 
professionals often fall into this group, and MS wanted to keep them 
happy for all the reasons previously posted.


But the Red Hat-based ecosystem version of that second group is 
on-topic, as the same sort of enthusiast exists here and has been very 
vocal about this change.


Well yes it is, but it started with a remark about licensing. I don't 
use Windows much, not even a handful of times in the last decade. Thing 
is that MS has something called their "Developers Network" (named 
something along those lines). If you're in higher education, R etc you 
can be in that network, in sortof an R category, for 'free'. As a 
member you get access to "development versions" of pretty much anything 
MS, and they will give you product codes, even "bulk licenses", to be 
used for R, and even for educational purposes. You can do whatever you 
want with it, except of course use it for commercial/production purposes.


I never found a mechanism like that for redhat, that is why I use 
Centos. It is pretty much the same thing. I have numerous netboot images 
around, a dozen and a half or so hardrives with  Centos installed (in 
trays), so it is easy  to just boot a machine for projects, testbeds 
etc, and without having to pay for a bunch of licenses  while you only 
use a handful of installs at a time.


For example, I was messing with kubernetes in a few ways.  redhat 
provides a license for RHEL, that you can use for that purpose for free, 
BUT you can have only have one license.



Of course there is the group of people like you mention, (I probably 
fall in that category by swapping hardware all the time, testbeds, R 
clusters etc)


I don't know how well that will be working with RHEL, if Centos and 
Redhat start 'diverting'





___
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] Blog article: CentOS is NOT dead



On 12/15/20 3:04 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote:


If you want a RHEL clone, that's fine.  There will be one available.
Someone will make one.


Once IBM owns it?  You think?  They allowed cloning once ..  a long time 
ago.







___
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] Blog article: CentOS is NOT dead

On 12/15/20 4:11 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote:

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 5:04 PM Johnny Hughes wrote:

On 12/14/20 8:25 AM, James Pearson wrote:

Nicolas Kovacs

Here's an interesting read which makes a point for CentOS Stream:

https://freedomben.medium.com/centos-is-not-dead-please-stop-saying-it-is-at-least-until-you-read-this-4b26b5c44877

tl;dr: Communication about Stream was BAD, but Stream itself might be a

good

thing. Here's why.

As others have said, it misses the _really_ important bit about the

traditional CentOS model which is to follow the RHEL ~10 year life cycle>

It doesn't matter how good/rock solid/whatever CentOS Stream turns out

to be, but if it only has a 5 year life cycle for each major release, then
it no good to me (and I suspect many others)

There is a 2 year overlap with the next version of stream as well .. in
this case CentOS Stream 9. How long is Debian or Ubuntu LTS maintained
for free?

5 years may not be long enough for you .. but it certainly pretty long.
And I am TRYING to get that extended. I may not be successful, we'll
have to see.

The article also mentions "CentOS will no longer be old, crusty, and

barely alive, trailing RHEL by months at times" - then why didn't Redhat
put resources into CentOS to improve that?
Do you have any idea how much money Red Hat is paying to maintain
CentOS. And they are maintaining CentOS 7, even now, until 2024. There
are dozens of machines and several administrators to maintain them.

Redhat must have known, that if they killed off traditional CentOS, then

users will simply go elsewhere for a RHEL rebuild ?

If you chose not to use CentOS Stream, that is up to you. What is the
OS of your TV set. What is the firmware of your computer. Those things
are now pretty much irrelevant and commoditized.

At some point the underlying OS is going to be much less important and
the important part will be the layered parts that contain your apps and
not the OS Layer.

If you want a RHEL clone, that's fine. There will be one available.
Someone will make one.

The real and complete vision of what CentOS Stream will become will not
be compolete until around the end of QTR1 2021. If you chose not to try
it, that is up to you. I truly think Stream will be a much better and
more quickly fixed OS when everything is in place.

I don't expect you to answer Johnny, but why didn't Red Hat wait until
Stream was "complete'" or ready, or whatever.

I know the above wasn't directed at me, but maybe it wasn't as much
redhat wanting to sell, but IBM wanting to buy (there is a difference).

IBM's revenue has steadily and steeply been going down, it had quite a
few train wrecks, topped off with plane crashes. IBM is still a very
large company, and still makes A LOT of money but for a large part with
a bunch of dinosaurs that they are stuck with, and someone spotted a meteor.

I agree that Redhat really screwed up this announcement - they would

have got a lot more kudos if they had announced CentOS Stream to exist
along with keeping the current traditional CentOS ...
Again .. pay 8 or more people the going rate to just maintain CentOS.
Buy the dozens of machines and pay for the datacenter, bandwidth,
hardware services for machines, etc. This is very expensive. Maybe the
company you work for will do that out of the goodness of their heart?

I guess I don't understand. Isn't Red Hat going to pay for CentOS Stream
engineers, hardware, etc? How much more would it be to use them to build
point releases? Won't much of the personnel and infrastructure be the same?
Is Red Hat going to just get rid of all the CentOS resources? I don't
understand why the resources maintaining CentOS 7, and 8 Stream, can't be
used to build CentOS 8.4/5 etc?

As bummed out as I am about this whole situation, and believe me i am.

But even I can clearly see that Red Hat has gone above and beyond the
requirements of open source software and I am quite tired of all the
'they should be happy to pay several million dollars a year to give away
a working product." If it is so easy or cheap to do .. then you guys do
it. I did it for 17 years. Much of my time was on top of a normal 40
hour work week.

Again, we all appreciate it. It's not you we're mad at.

Red Hat contributes to every major upstream project .. they maintain
several very key major projects. They let employees contribute to
projects and pay for them to work on upstream projects. how many things
do they have to do for free?

James Pearson

I understand all your points, and I get it, but the fact is Red Hat
committed to the roadmap (c.f.
https://blog.centos.org/2019/07/ibm-red-hat-and-centos/) and now they're
abruptly breaking a promise. One that is affecting a lot of already
overstressed and underpaid people. If they said this would happen at the
beginning of CentOS 8, or better CentOS 9, then fine. But now?

It sucks big time.

___
CentOS

Re: [CentOS] What are the differences between CentOS Linux and CentOS Stream?




On 12/15/20 11:15 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:

On 12/15/20 5:58 PM, R C wrote:

When was the last time a large company (think IBM, Sun, Novell Netware,
Oracle) had a great idea to create or take over an OS, or a community
only ending up in a situation that only almost killed them. (Yeah MS,
but they figured out that giving it away for next to nothing for
residential/educational use is actually securing their market share in
commercial/government/Education etc etc etc.)

10-15 years ago BSA sued a person using pirated Windows (and Office?) at
home. Microsoft representative was a witness AGAINST BSA, so that there
is no precedent that private users of pirated software can be sued,
because out of fear majority of those using pirated software would stop
installing and using MS software and they would recommend software of
competition (free if possible).

If MS did not "fail to implement" effective protection from pirating
Windows and Office, their market share would be at least halved, and in
countries with low income they would barely exist.



What I meant was that MS basically, for the longest while, had their OS 
pre-installed on computers sold, so it "felt" free to the buyer, it came 
with the machine. Universities and colleges did receive bulk licenses 
and .NET pretty much for free in their 'Developer Programs' and also 
have students keep using it. That "faillure to implement" obviously was 
a marketing move indeed, as was students "allowing" to keep using it on 
their laptops after graduation.


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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8 future



On 12/15/20 11:07 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 11:24:03AM -0600, Tom Bishop wrote:

I know you and other RHEL folks keep saying this about cashing out etc, but
they could have kept stream and Centos stable at the same time but chose
not to. Ya know, if it walks like a duck and quacks as a duck...who knows
maybe this goes down as one of the best decisions ever for RH but I think
its going to hurt them in more ways then they ever thought about.

As I've also said before, I have no special insight into how RH and the
CentOS board came to this timeline, but I _am_ inclined to believe that the
motivation is the one that they give: they want to focus attention and
resources.


yup, I think you are right, they'll pay attention and focus on resources 
...




  Look at CloudLinux saying that they plan to invest a million
dollars a year


WOW  a million a year, that is amazing, that will definitely get 
things going, with that kind of  money you can hire 3 HS students and 
two college drop outs, that's


how MS started too.



  into doing their rebuild. It's easy to _say_ "Red Hat could
easily have done both".



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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8 future




On 12/15/20 10:31 AM, Jon Pruente wrote:

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 2:48 AM R C  wrote:


'Rocky Linux' guy might actually be on to something (although I'd pick
another distro name)


The name comes from his CentOS co-founder Rocky McGaugh, who is no longer
with us, in his memory.


I didn't know that fact, but hey that could be a pretty cool tribute.




___
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 8 future




On 12/15/20 10:30 AM, Phelps, Matthew wrote:

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 12:24 PM Tom Bishop  wrote:


On Tue, Dec 15, 2020, 11:06 AM Matthew Miller  wrote:




I don't think there will be a course change either, but for different
reasons. The motivation isn't "cashing/selling out". It's... actually the
stated motivation
https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/faq-centos-stream-updates#Q2


--
Matthew Miller

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


I know you and other RHEL folks keep saying this about cashing out etc, but
they could have kept stream and Centos stable at the same time but chose
not to. Ya know, if it walks like a duck and quacks as a duck...who knows
maybe this goes down as one of the best decisions ever for RH but I think
its going to hurt them in more ways then they ever thought about.
___


Not to mention the constant barrage of "You just want free Red Hat" and
"CentOS users are moochers" and "We deserve value from all those CentOS
users, so we're going to turn them into beta testers for RHEL." I have
gotten these responses here and on twitter from CentOS and Red Hat
employees.


Yup, a lot of "Centos Users" are the ones running and building for RHEL 
infrastructure, there's a lot more in it for IBM to take over RHEL than 
there is to take over Ubuntu, mint or build something new. The thought 
more than likely is "an established market is already out there".


I don't think that IBM is in the business of "Hey let's do something 
really nice, because we don't really need/want the money"





So, sorry, but this line about this not being a money grab is an obvious
crock of excrement.



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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8 future




On 12/15/20 10:24 AM, Tom Bishop wrote:

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020, 11:06 AM Matthew Miller  wrote:




I don't think there will be a course change either, but for different
reasons. The motivation isn't "cashing/selling out". It's... actually the
stated motivation
https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/faq-centos-stream-updates#Q2


--
Matthew Miller

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


I know you and other RHEL folks keep saying this about cashing out etc, but
they could have kept stream and Centos stable at the same time but chose
not to. Ya know, if it walks like a duck and quacks as a duck...who knows
maybe this goes down as one of the best decisions ever for RH but I think
its going to hurt them in more ways then they ever thought about.


I think you are exactly on target there with your thoughts. IBM looks 
after their investors and their customers, they never really cared about 
"personal computing" (pun intended), nor small business computing, and 
evidently, as history shows, suck at it when they made an attempt or two.




___
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 8 future



On 12/15/20 10:06 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 01:48:21AM -0700, R C wrote:

I think that Centos, being that close to RHEL, should have had a
licensing scheme for personal use, small business use, just to make
things 'fair'.

So, again, please stay tuned. Not for licensing schemes for CentOS, but for
programs for these use cases for RHEL. See 
https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/faq-centos-stream-updates#Q10
and please really do mail centos-questi...@redhat.com with your use cases.
This is answered by humans designing these programs, not by sales.


Oh I know, there are already programs like that. For example, want to 
learn how to play with Kubernetes, sure, here get a free full trial 
licence for RHEL to do that (but you can only get one.). Use cases; I 
think a lot of people using Centos do it, because they can easily/free 
build a server/workstation pretty much the same as at work, the only 
difference being the background being blue instead of red.


Sure, redhat might help these  "use cases" out, but that means you are 
accepting a gift from a company that has an interest in selling to your 
employer, and most employers will definitely not allow that and 
terminate those who do.


From what I understand, RHEL and Centos go different ways so a lot of 
"the community" will start looking for alternatives, and will find them. 
We'll see how it goes.


(the order of magnitude in increase of email on these lists, might be an 
indication about the quality of that idea.)





I don't think their (IBM/RHEL) course is going to change though,
redhat going "commercial" has been going on for a decade and a half
or so, and it looks like initial investors have a desire
cashing/selling out at this point.

I don't think there will be a course change either, but for different
reasons. The motivation isn't "cashing/selling out". It's... actually the
stated motivation
https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/faq-centos-stream-updates#Q2



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

Re: [CentOS] What are the differences between CentOS Linux and CentOS Stream?



On 12/15/20 9:20 AM, Kevin K wrote:

As a bystander who just the other day saw this, no.  It doesn't appear that
it will be a bleeding edge kernel.  Just builds of the next kernel expected
to be in the next 8.X release.  So you are getting updated features
earlier, but maybe before all the known issues are resolved to a state
ready to be released in the main RH build.

For my work use of Red Hat, this all doesn't matter.  We license and pay
for many copies of RHEL.  It is only for home use that I've historically
used CentOS.  And even then I can get a personal license of RHEL.


I totally agree with that. I think that most of RedHat's success is 
because of 'open' Linux in general, and especially Centos in the last 
decade or however long it has been around.


What large companies don't seem to understand (except for a few) is that 
what is used in the workplace is what people that run that stuff know, 
and most of those are people that started with that as HS kids, or they 
have a degree in something unrelated, often an "online/make up degree.  
That might sound mean/bad, but that is the work force you have, that is 
what they use, so that is what companies/organizations/institutions will 
use, always been like that, will be like that for the foreseeable future.


Most of what runs companies/institutions  "IT stuff" have a few machines 
at home, I know enough sysadmins that have the previous model Dell 
servers, or the model before that, some EOL Cisco equipment, that is 
what they know very well to use, so that is what companies will be using 
too, including their choice of OS and software.


RHEL and Centos disappearing migh be a problem in the short term, a year 
or 2/3/4, but hey,  it only takes one hardware life cycle before a new 
badge of HS kids and college drop outs figured out what to use next (for 
free).


When was the last time a large company (think IBM, Sun, Novell Netware, 
Oracle) had a great idea to create or take over an OS, or a community 
only ending up in a situation that only almost killed them. (Yeah MS, 
but they figured out that giving it away for next to nothing for 
residential/educational use is actually securing their market share in 
commercial/government/Education etc etc etc.)


The only times something became really popular, and useful for "the 
industry" is when it is was for free for personal use (or was included 
with the hardware, there are/were countless examples), because that is 
what the people working in it, programmers, sysadmins etc., do, use the 
free stuff ..   take it to work, get promotions and a raises for their 
good ideas. In fact, that is how Linux/Redhat became a success to begin 
with.


Personal licenses, sure,  but what IT guy is going to get 4-5 $500 a pop 
a year licenses just because it is the same as at work? (And...  what 
about all the online forums etc? that are free to use) Redhat might 
think about giving "those" away for free..  BUT most large companies, 
and for sure government, does not allow their employees to accept 
'gifts'  for more then a few ($10-15) a year.  So that won't fly either.


my 2 cts,


Ron



On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 9:29 AM Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming <
teoenming.dec2...@gmail.com> wrote:


Good day from Singapore,

What are the differences between CentOS Linux and CentOS Stream?

At the moment, I only know that CentOS 8 support will end on 31 December
2021 while Red Hat Inc will shift its focus to CentOS Stream.

Is CentOS Stream going to be very similar to Fedora Linux, shipping with
the latest Linux Kernel like 5.10.1?

I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Thank you.


-BEGIN EMAIL SIGNATURE-

The Gospel for all Targeted Individuals (TIs):

[The New York Times] Microwave Weapons Are Prime Suspect in Ills of
U.S. Embassy Workers

Link:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/01/science/sonic-attack-cuba-microwave.html




Singaporean Targeted Individual Mr. Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming's
Academic
Qualifications as at 14 Feb 2019 and refugee seeking attempts at the
United Nations Refugee Agency Bangkok (21 Mar 2017), in Taiwan (5 Aug
2019) and Australia (25 Dec 2019 to 9 Jan 2020):

[1] https://tdtemcerts.wordpress.com/

[2] https://tdtemcerts.blogspot.sg/

[3] https://www.scribd.com/user/270125049/Teo-En-Ming

-END EMAIL SIGNATURE-
___
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] The conclusio: CentOS is dead

On 12/15/20 2:05 AM, Ruslanas Gžibovskis wrote:

Oracle Linux, only after Oracle Solaris will shine again with their awesome
SPARC arch... Which has an amazing features...

Solaris tried to take over the "Sunos/bsd status quo", that was a
disaster, it was a good idea but licensing killed it.

Nice, I did not check Devuan for a long time, if they still alive...
hmm, I have hope in Rocky then, but would be more fun if guys do not just
scrap everything fast into distro, and then, k, how do we work with it
now...
I believe Rocky will be a good thing, but hope other projects will merge
into it instead of building their own. Even if everyone of us want to build
our own :D

I think that 'Rocky idea' has some potential.

But still, after this move, I do not have the same trust in RH as it was
previously.

Do you, People, still have a stone-proof trust in RH after last week's news?

Centos and RH are dead, well in a hopeless coma for now. It's IBM,
Torvalds' Linux almost killed off IBM, Oracle, Novell and did a lot of
'damage' to MS in that market, IBM is still a dinosaur with the same
70's brain capacity, it won't be able to pull it off even if they had a
monopoly on OS' in general.

On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 at 09:56, R C wrote:

On 12/15/20 1:32 AM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote:

Le 15/12/2020 à 08:17, Nikolaos Milas a écrit :

My course of action is to wait for Lenix (Ref.:

https://blog.cloudlinux.com/announcing-open-sourced-community-driven-rhel-fork-by-cloudlinux
)

and Rocky Linux (https://rockylinux.org/) by CentOS original founder.

Right now Rocky Linux is not much more than a README file on Github.

That is how Linus Torvalds started. be careful
underestimating/ridiculing talent.

On the other hand, Oracle Linux has been a well-tended free-as-in-beer

RHEL

clone with some nifty extra features for the last 14 years.

Wozu in die Ferne schweifen, wenn das Gute liegt so nah? (Goethe)

:o)

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

Re: [CentOS] The conclusio: CentOS is dead



On 12/15/20 1:32 AM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote:

Le 15/12/2020 à 08:17, Nikolaos Milas a écrit :

My course of action is to wait for Lenix (Ref.:
https://blog.cloudlinux.com/announcing-open-sourced-community-driven-rhel-fork-by-cloudlinux)
and Rocky Linux (https://rockylinux.org/) by CentOS original founder.

Right now Rocky Linux is not much more than a README file on Github.



That is how Linus Torvalds started.   be careful 
underestimating/ridiculing talent.





On the other hand, Oracle Linux has been a well-tended free-as-in-beer RHEL
clone with some nifty extra features for the last 14 years.

Wozu in die Ferne schweifen, wenn das Gute liegt so nah? (Goethe)

:o)


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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8 future

I think that Centos, being that close to RHEL, should have had a 
licensing scheme for personal use, small business use, just to make 
things 'fair'.


It should be fine to use Centos as a "Community Enterprise OS", as a 
stepping stone, but once it starts taking off, like it did with some big 
enterprises, there should have been an obligation to switch to Redhat, 
and pay up.


Centos/RHEL, pretty much being done/over, means that startups are 
confronted with a competitive problem, AND also, upcoming sys 
people/talent not having the opportunity to get into "that world" is a 
problem. I think it is detrimental to the further use of anything RHEL.  
The only thing RHEL can 'bank on' in the near future is that there is 
nothing else around yet. (but problems like these never lasted long in 
the past)


'Rocky Linux' guy might actually be on to something (although I'd pick 
another distro name), if he can pull that off (which is not even that 
far fetched), he can expect 6/7 figure development checks from 
organizations that used the model as it is now, or used to be, 
organizations that use the OS at scale (think multiple 8 figure price 
tag machinery).


I don't think their (IBM/RHEL) course is going to change though,  redhat 
going "commercial" has been going on for a decade and a half or so, and 
it looks like initial investors have a desire cashing/selling out at 
this point.


Centos is kind of equivalent to RHEL, as you mentioned, heck, I have 
RHEL support because of countless licenses where I work AND I can use 
the knowledge databases and support for 'anything remotely' work 
related. I even was explicitly told I can use it for anything at home if 
I wish.



I am not too worried though,  there will be something new, it will just 
not be Centos, nor RHEL, and that just happens every or two decade or 
so, that is just history repeating itself.



Ron




On 12/15/20 1:17 AM, Patrick Bégou wrote:

I'm also using CentOS for a while and I'm deploying a CentOS8 cluster
for some months because it was supported until 2029! Bad idea.
For me, using debian has 2 important drawbacks
- some of proprietary software we are using is certified RHEL and SLES.
Deploying on CentOS is out-of-thebox. Deploying on debian (we have also
debian servers) is often a nightmare and some functionalities still
doesn't work (and support reply "debian is not supported"). We have no
alternative for these softwares.
- hardware support for servers rely also on some certifications and they
are mainly for RHEL or SLES (or Unbutu but for laptops, not servers) and
in case of trouble the support has yet answered "please use a certified
os". Centos is considered as RHEL by the support. Not sure that with
stream it will be the same.

Patrick

Le 14/12/2020 à 17:57, Lamar Owen a écrit :

On 12/12/20 10:34 PM, Konstantin Boyandin via CentOS wrote:

My only concern ATM is whether RH can change its CentOS 7 maintenance
plans as well, all of a sudden.

This is what bothers me, too, but in a slightly different way.  Even
for the GPL software, Red Hat actually doesn't have to provide public
access to the source code; the only thing required by GPL is that
those who receive binaries must be able to get sources.  So, even
though it has been said that the source will be available, well, it
was also said that C8 would be supported to 2029.  There are enough
packages in RHEL with non-GPL licenses where it would be very
difficult to rebuild the whole distribution without them, and RH is
not required by those licenses (MIT, BSD, and others) to redistribute
those modified sources even to people who have been distributed
binaries.  So, while I want to believe that the sources will remain
available, that belief relies on trust, which unfortunately is less
abundant these days.

So while using another rebuild seems to be a good stopgap solution, I
do wonder if it will prove to be sustainable post-2021.  I'm
personally looking at which of the four (that we know about) to
possibly go to; I just really doubt I am going to use Oracle; Rocky
isn't really there yet and is very young; Springdale is available,
mature, and academically supported (nothing wrong with that, just a
statement); CloudLinux OS Project Lenix isn't yet released.  Out of
the bunch, Springdale would be my first choice right now because it's
been around a very long time and is available now.  C8 is supposed to
be around until end of 2021, so there is some time for the dust to
settle and the way to become more clear, though.  But CentOS 8 Stream
is only an option for me if the hardware driver KABI synchronization
issue is solved and stays solved.  RHEL?  Under the current
subscription models we just can't afford it. (Cost also keeps SLES out
of the running.)

But I'm now seriously considering just simply going to something that
is both older than Red Hat, fully and totally open, extremely
well-supported by a diverse developer community, and used by a whole
lot of people.  Yes, that's Debian;

Re: [CentOS] The conclusio: CentOS is dead

2020-12-14 Thread R C

It is not that we haven't been here before, this is just history 
repeating itself.


IBM, SCO, Sun, Novell, etc. majorly have screwed up because of some 
geniuses having a great business idea.


(that's how BSD disappeared, Solaris was a disaster, Xenix never made 
it..  and whatever happened to SCO etc?)


But here is the point, RHEL for example is used at scale a lot now, 
because there are people that know how to deal with it (far and few 
beyond)    and the ones I know use Centos for their own stuff (at 
home) because it is so similar. It is already a problem to find 
qualified people that can use/deal with RHEL in a production environment 
at scale (if you know what you're doing, you easily can get a cosy 6 
figure job, because it's next to impossible to find a decent sys person 
with experience, for sure not for at scale operations) , and those are 
not going to pay hundreds/thousands for a RHEL license at home, that is 
why they use Centos, while at work working with RHEL.


I am in that situation, I request 5-6 figures worth of RHEL licenses on 
a regular basis, and use several Centos machines at homes (yeah I am 
that guy that doesn't have a life and my 'hobby' is kinda like my work.) 
It will be a very freaking cold day in hell before I start paying 
thousands to have virtually 'the same thing' at home as at work.


If a few months down the road, if I decide to use Linus XYZ, or 
whatever, than that is what we'll be using where I get my pay check from 
...  and if not, well, good luck finding someone that can keep things 
running there. Because that is what it comes down to.  It is not the 
product that determines what the "industry standard" is..   it is the 
ones that have experience and can actually make stuff work.



I think Centos is dead because RHEL just committed suicide.


Ron



On 12/15/20 12:06 AM, Simon Avery wrote:

On Mon, 14 Dec 2020 at 22:48, Ruslanas Gžibovskis  wrote:


your suggestions?



Different:
Debian, OpenSuse, Ubuntu-server. All good choices.

Not quite so different:
Rocky, (Maybe one of the corporate sponsored centos-a-likes, (OEL,
Cloudlinux etc) but we've now learned it would be nicer to rely on a distro
that wasn't provided at the whim of someone who might need to cut costs at
any time)
___
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 8 future

2020-12-08 Thread R C



On 12/8/20 11:44 AM, Robert G. (Doc) Savage via CentOS wrote:

On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 11:58 -0500, Satish Patel wrote:

Folks,

What is going on here
https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

CentOS 8's future is not looking bright. Recently deployed CentOS8 on
my production workload and now hearing this. What do other folks
think
about this?

Speaking only for myself, I am ready to give up on CentOS (and Red Hat)
entirely. Fedora meets all my clients' needs with none of the chaos.

I shall miss the stability of past CentOS releases, much as I did those
of Scientific Linux.


same here,  I used Centos because it is 'that close' to redhat, and that 
what I use at work/HPC, but easy to install etc in home environments 
while practically having the same thing. I guess I need to tell my 
employer I need the same thing now.






--Doc Savage
     Fairview Heights, IL
___
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] Thunderbird 78.4.0 after update

2020-11-17 Thread R C


Hello,


after an update I  ended up with Thunderbird 78.4.0, it looks a little 
different, which is ok, but it seems that all my descriptions and also 
alerts disappeared.



Is that a known problem? If so,  how to fix that.  (btw;  I am not sure 
if I ever installed/used lightning, but that addon/extension doesn't 
seem to be there anymore.)



If it is a known problem, is there a way to fix that?


thanks,


Ron

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

Re: [CentOS] run firefox via an ssh tunnel

2020-11-11 Thread R C


yeah ..  it would need to run X11

On 11/11/20 4:04 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:

On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 at 17:45, R C  wrote:


I do it all the time.


make sure you forward X11,  on the  ssh server side,  and login with
ssh -X me@myhost.whatever

start firefox with:

/usr/bin/firefox -no-remoteif you don't want the remote pages ending
up in your local browser

or if you don't care, just run firefox without -no-remote



Don't you have to make sure that the Firefox on the MacOS-X system is using
X11? It normally uses the native MacOS windowing system which is not X.




or however you start firefox on a mac.


Ron


On 11/11/20 3:39 PM, S Bob wrote:

Hi all;


I'm trying to setup an ssh tunnel so I can run firefox on a remote
laptop and have the display locally.


I have 2 laptops

local = CentOS 7

remote = mac OSX 10.15.7


I want to create an ssh tunnel on the local CentOS 7 laptop, then run
firefox on the mac with the display showing up on the CentOS laptop.

Is this doable?


Thanks in advance

___
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] run firefox via an ssh tunnel

2020-11-11 Thread R C


you can't run it?  or can't find it?

if it doesn't want to run, it probably is because you're not forwarding 
X11 in your server,  in this case your mac. the ssh server nees to 
do/allow that



what about executing it remotely :


ssh -X myuser@theremote-mac "open -a Firefox"  ?


if that doesn't work, it's probably your X11 forwarding



On 11/11/20 3:56 PM, S Bob wrote:

I can ssh -X myuser@theremote-mac

but I cannot run /usr/bin/firefox.


I can run "open -a Firefox" on the mac but then it just opens firefox 
on the mac



Thoughts?



On 11/11/20 3:45 PM, R C wrote:

I do it all the time.


make sure you forward X11,  on the  ssh server side,  and login with  
ssh -X me@myhost.whatever


start firefox with:

/usr/bin/firefox -no-remote    if you don't want the remote pages 
ending up in your local browser


or if you don't care, just run firefox without -no-remote


or however you start firefox on a mac.


Ron


On 11/11/20 3:39 PM, S Bob wrote:

Hi all;


I'm trying to setup an ssh tunnel so I can run firefox on a remote 
laptop and have the display locally.



I have 2 laptops

local = CentOS 7

remote = mac OSX 10.15.7


I want to create an ssh tunnel on the local CentOS 7 laptop, then 
run firefox on the mac with the display showing up on the CentOS 
laptop.


Is this doable?


Thanks in advance

___
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

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

Re: [CentOS] run firefox via an ssh tunnel

2020-11-11 Thread R C


I do it all the time.


make sure you forward X11,  on the  ssh server side,  and login with  
ssh -X me@myhost.whatever


start firefox with:

/usr/bin/firefox -no-remote    if you don't want the remote pages ending 
up in your local browser


or if you don't care, just run firefox without -no-remote


or however you start firefox on a mac.


Ron


On 11/11/20 3:39 PM, S Bob wrote:

Hi all;


I'm trying to setup an ssh tunnel so I can run firefox on a remote 
laptop and have the display locally.



I have 2 laptops

local = CentOS 7

remote = mac OSX 10.15.7


I want to create an ssh tunnel on the local CentOS 7 laptop, then run 
firefox on the mac with the display showing up on the CentOS laptop.


Is this doable?


Thanks in advance

___
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] Firefox 78 under CentOS 6 -- no sound?

2020-10-20 Thread R C


RHEL 6 has the same problem, also firefox 78 on a 64 bit machine.


On 10/20/20 11:35 AM, Yves Bellefeuille wrote:

Jonathan Billings  wrote:


  I'm less concerned with firefox being broken on 32-bit CentOS 6
  systems when the platform is only going to live for another month.
  Frankly, I'm glad to see flash die just a little earlier.

It isn't just 32-bit, but also 64-bit, and it isn't just Flash, but
also HTML 5.

To notice the bug, all you have to do is try to watch any video at
Youtube or elsewhere, if the video has sound.


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

Re: [CentOS] system sounds

2020-10-13 Thread R C


been playing around a bit and noticed:


When I login as root, gnome,  all the system sounds seem to be working.

When I log in as a regelur user,  the system sounds do't.  So I guess it 
must be a permissions issue somewhere that happened during/after the 
last update?



any ideas?


thanks,


Ron

On 10/10/20 12:03 PM, R C wrote:

Hello,


I am using 'Centos 7.8.2003 (Core)' and after an update, a week or two 
ago, all system sounds seemed to have stopped working.


Sound in firefox still works, and also rhythmbox seems to play music 
files, VLC player do too.



It seems that  just things like notifications etc are not woring 
anymore. Also, the "test speakers" in the sound setup doesn't seem to 
produce any sound.



any ideas?


thanks,


Ron


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

[CentOS] system sounds

2020-10-10 Thread R C


Hello,


I am using 'Centos 7.8.2003 (Core)' and after an update, a week or two 
ago, all system sounds seemed to have stopped working.


Sound in firefox still works, and also rhythmbox seems to play music 
files, VLC player do too.



It seems that  just things like notifications etc are not woring 
anymore. Also, the "test speakers" in the sound setup doesn't seem to 
produce any sound.



any ideas?


thanks,


Ron

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

[CentOS] system sounds

2020-09-25 Thread R C


Hello,


after an update, Centos 7, I don't have any system sounds anymore?  
Sound works, for video etc.


(sound left/right speaker test works)


is there a setting that I am missing that somehow got messed up?


thanks,


Ron

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

Re: [CentOS] system sounds

2020-09-25 Thread R C


oops,  didn't mean to "hijack' it,  just used the list address.


I'll re-post




On 9/25/20 2:26 AM, Simon Matter wrote:

Hello,


after an update, Centos 7, I don't have any system sounds anymore?
Sound works, for video etc.

Hi,

I can't help with the question but if you want others to read your mail,
don't hijack other threads to start a new conversation. Otherwise, if
someone marks the thread as read, your new question is not seen.

Regards,
Simon

___
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] Question regarding cent OS 7.8.2003 compatibility with large SAS disks

2020-09-24 Thread R C

what I typically rather do is install the OS on a way smaller drive, 
that way if the OS drive is trashed, the data array is still there,  
also, it is easier to create a clean install that way. (of course a 
partition could work too).



On 9/24/20 10:34 PM, Amey Abhyankar wrote:

On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 at 09:57, R C  wrote:

I have done it numerous times.

Thanks Digimer & R C for the quick help.

I am going to touch the blade servers after a gap of decade hence I
was in doubt :-)
The Cloud computing era has wiped my knowledge about server HW & OS
compatibility :-/

Regards,
Amey.

On 9/24/20 10:25 PM, Amey Abhyankar wrote:

Hello,

I have a blade server with SAS HDD's of 12TB in total.
3 HDD's of 4TB each.

Is it possible to install Cent OS  7.8.2003 on 12TB disk space?
I will be installing Cent OS on the bare metal HW.

I referred = https://wiki.centos.org/About/Product
But slightly confused with the 'maximum file size' row for ext4 FS.

Thanks & Regards,
Amey.
___
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

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

Re: [CentOS] Question regarding cent OS 7.8.2003 compatibility with large SAS disks

2020-09-24 Thread R C


I have done it numerous times.

On 9/24/20 10:25 PM, Amey Abhyankar wrote:

Hello,

I have a blade server with SAS HDD's of 12TB in total.
3 HDD's of 4TB each.

Is it possible to install Cent OS  7.8.2003 on 12TB disk space?
I will be installing Cent OS on the bare metal HW.

I referred = https://wiki.centos.org/About/Product
But slightly confused with the 'maximum file size' row for ext4 FS.

Thanks & Regards,
Amey.
___
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] system sounds

2020-09-24 Thread R C


Hello,


after an update, Centos 7, I don't have any system sounds anymore?  
Sound works, for video etc.


(sound left/right speaker test works)


is there a setting that I am missing that somehow got messed up?


thanks,


Ron

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

Re: [CentOS] Centos7 and Vlan

2020-06-16 Thread R C

if you use more than one gateway, you have to 'decide' what traffic you 
want to go through each of them, (so you have to set up routes or


user/group pools that controls access to interfaces etc ) it would still 
be a good idea to call one of the interfaces/gateways the


"route of last resort", but bad ideas might work too.


On 6/16/20 2:56 AM, Alfredo De Luca wrote:

Hi all.
I wonder if you can help me here.

I have centos7 with 1 network interface and on that IFwe have 2 vlan.
 From both vlan we'd like to reach the internet independently so basically
with 2 different gateways.

we tried with all the routes,rules etc but only on one vlan we are able to
ping 8.8.8.8 for instance.

Any suggestions/ideas?
Cheers



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

[CentOS] HW/MAC addr vs client id vs ...

2020-05-22 Thread R C


Hello,


when booting using dhcp, some OS-es use their MAC addr, some, when 
getting an IP with DHCP use a client id, sometimes  it's 01M+MAC, 
sometimes it is a quite long string, similar to UUIDs.


For example some Ubuntu version  sends out their DHCP client id as 
01+MAC, similar to windows machines.


Is there a way in Centos/RHEL, to 'configure' that?  (Cisco equipment is 
kind of particlat about that), so that for example when requesting


an IP using DHCP,  the  client-id used is 01+MAC  instead of just the 
MAC address?


(it becomes a hassle when machines are dual boot for example).


thanks,


Ron

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

Re: [CentOS] ether-wake

when I found out that ether-wake only did raw ether packets, I notoced 
there's also a wol in the distro,  that broadcasts wake up packets using 
udp, that I can redirect on cisco equipment.  It's working now.



thanks,


Ron



On 5/18/20 9:45 AM, Simon Matter via CentOS wrote:

Actually you are not correct.


1st: I didn't quote the wikipedia article,  someone sent that as an
answer to my previous post.

     (similar mindset probably, as in your response)

2: You are wrong,  broadcast packets, like for example DHCP, and also
WOL (if UDP), can be routed, by

the means of ip helper addresses and directed broadcasts on Cisco
equipment


Also, you like others seem to have a very hard time understanding what
is wriiten/asked.  I asked "What port number does

ether-wake us",  ether-wake being part of Centos So what I am looking
for is a number,  like 9, 37 or something in case it is

Part of the problem is that there is no THE WOL package as there are
different forms of WOL and their packages.

One way is using UDP port 9 as you said. I was using the script below to
do so (using socat) but I can tell you that this method doesn't work for
all devices.

#!/bin/bash

HWADDR="$1"
DEST_IP="255.255.255.255"
DEST_PORT="9"

# The magic packet is a broadcast frame containing anywhere within its
payload
# 6 bytes of all ones (FF FF FF FF FF FF in hexadecimal), followed by sixteen
# repetitions of the target computer's 48-bit MAC address.
MAGIC="\xFF\xFF\xFF\xFF\xFF\xFF"
for ((CNT=0; CNT < 16; CNT++)); do
   MAGIC="${MAGIC}\x${HWADDR//:/\x}"
done

echo -en "$MAGIC" | socat -T1 -u STDIO \
   UDP-DATAGRAM:${DEST_IP}:${DEST_PORT},broadcast

Kind regards,
Simon

___
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] ether-wake

yeah I am wondering if that isn't the easiest route to go though if 
there already is


one. I am waiting for an answer from Cisco. Cisco switches and routers 
can forward wol


packets sent over udp. But etherwake doesn't do that apparently.

So if I want to wake up machines from a central location, I either need 
to use something


else then ether-wake, or  don't do it from a central location it looks like.


thanks,


Ron

On 5/18/20 9:33 AM, Rich Greenwood wrote:

Some switch hardware can generate the packets directly, negating the need
for a box on every VLAN.  Meraki hardware can do it, but you have to go
through the dashboard so automating it isn't currently possible.

Here is some documentation on forwarding WoL on catalyst 3750 switches from
Cisco:
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/switches/catalyst-3750-series-switches/91672-catl3-wol-vlans.html




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

Re: [CentOS] ether-wake


thank you,  that was the/an answer I was looking for.


On 5/18/20 7:51 AM, Jonathan Billings wrote:

On Sun, May 17, 2020 at 07:46:00PM -0600, R C wrote:

what port does ether-wake use?  (I believe it is port 9? but not sure).

The 'ether-wake' command in net-tools doesn't use a port at all.  It's
just a raw packet of EtherType 0x0842 as the so-called "Magic Packet"
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake-on-LAN#Magic_packet>

For example, if you were to run:

(assuming interface name 'eth0')
# tcpdump -i eth0 ether proto 0x0842

You'd see the ether-wake command's packet.  If you strace the process,
you'll see the socket is created as
socket(AF_PACKET, SOCK_RAW, htons(0)).


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

Re: [CentOS] ether-wake