Re: [CentOS-docs] Wiki update

[Akemi Yagi]

On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 3:19 PM, Strahil Nikolov  wrote:
> Hello Community,
>
> my name is Strahil Nikolov (hunter86_bg) and I would like to update the
> following wiki page .
>
> In section "Create the New Initramfs or Initrd" there should be an
> additional line for CentOS7:
> mount --bind /run /mnt/sysimage/run
>
> The 'run' directory is needed especially if you need to start the
> multipathd.service before recreating the initramfs ('/' is on multipath).
>
> Best Regards,
> Strahil Nikolov

Sorry for not responding sooner. [Your mail was in the Spam folder]

I assume your wiki account name is StrahilNikolov (if not please
create it). You should be able to edit the page you referenced.

Thanks for your contribution,

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

Re: [CentOS] Ansible repository shenanigans in EL7

[James Hogarth]

On 11 April 2018 at 16:11,   wrote:
>
> On 11 Apr 2018 09:48 Fabian Arrotin wrote:
>
>> On 11/04/18 13:58, James Hogarth wrote:
>> > For those not aware ansible has been deprecated in RHEL7 from the extras
>> > repository.
>> > > In the RHEL specific world it's now in an optional "product"
>> > > (basically an
>> > optional subscription) that is part of any RHEL subscription, but it's
>> > opt
>> > in.
>> > > As a result ansible is back in the EPEL7 repository for 2.5.0+ ,
>> > > having
>> > been removed for  ansible 2.4.2 when it got introduced to the  RHEL
>> > extras
>> > repo.
>> > > I have no idea what, if anything, the CentOS team will do with the
>> > > ansible
>> > in the CentOS7 extras repository.
>>
>> That's a good question, as "orphaning" it would be an issue for all
>> people now getting it directly from Extras, if they don't have epel
>> added (also "opt-in")
>>
>> AFAICS, nothing is pushed to git.centos.org anymore for it :
>> https://git.centos.org/summary/rpms!ansible.git
>>
>> So I guess it would be a question for the centos-devel list :
>> - either we orphan it (and the other pkgs required for it) from extras
>> - or we try to build those and continue to provide ansible
>
>
> Does it really matter which repo it comes from?
>
> I would expect the users of ansible to be smart enough to get it from epel
> or extras. As long as we know how to get it I do not see this as a big deal.
>
> It seems that since it is already being built for EPEL, that would be the
> path
> of least resistance for the Centos devs.
>
> Just my $.02
>
> Regards,
>

Copying from the EPEL development list as this is likely to be helpful
to many here, and well be a relief as well:

On 11 April 2018 at 20:32, Dylan Silva  wrote:
> I am very afraid I am jumping into a lion's den here... However, I am going 
> to try to alleviate some concerns.
>
> Our move from EPEL to Extras was actually to solve for the needs of RHEL and 
> the RHEL System Roles.  We needed to be in a channel that customers could 
> consume from that wasn't EPEL.
>
> Upon our move to Extras, we immediately identified a problem.  That problem 
> was, we Ansible, were not able to release as often as we preferred/needed for 
> our customers.  We also were facing confusion about what did support mean 
> once a package was inside of Extras.
>
> As such, we made the decision to two things.
>
> 1. Deprecate Ansible from Extras.
> 2. Provide access to Ansible via a Red Hat trusted delivery mechanism.
>
> For #2, EPEL obviously is not the route to take for some customers.  So, we 
> decided that all RHEL customers would have full access to the Subscription 
> channel.  We also specified that if a customer wanted support, they would 
> still need to purchase a subscription.
>
> We had a very delicate situation here.  There were a lot of check and 
> balances that had to be met before we could make any announcement. So that's 
> why it has been "a little quiet."
>
> The security advisory link posted above, and this link 
>  attempt to cover the bulk of the 
> possible questions that may arise.
>
> That being said, we still aim to provide our customers/users the ability to 
> obtain Ansible any way they choose.  So if the user does not want to use the 
> channel or cannot use it for any reason, they still have the ability to pull 
> from EPEL or our releases.ansible.com pages. As far as we're concerned, it is 
> functionally the same application no matter where it comes from.. If a 
> customer has a subscription; they will be supported.
>
> I, the Product Manager of Ansible Engine, am staying on top of these concerns 
> as they come by.  So far, no huge customer/user concerns have caused any 
> alarm.  Most users have embraced the moves, and have continued to automate.

Source: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/PFQDMUDCKUU6RLL4SVQP3ENU6I7RYRQO/
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS-docs] Marek Blaha introduction

[Alan Bartlett]

On 11 April 2018 at 17:05, Marek Blaha  wrote:
> Thanks Alan,
>
> now I have access to configmanagement sig part of wiki, but
> unfortunately I'm not able to edit YUM4 page (which I'll need most):
> https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/ConfigManagementSIG/YUM4
>
> Also - can I have a personal homepage set? I'm sorry I didn't mention
> this in original post.
>
> Marek.

Ah, sorry about that. It should now be fixed.

I've also initialised a wiki homepage for you.

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

Re: [CentOS-docs] Marek Blaha introduction

[Marek Blaha]

Thanks Alan,

now I have access to configmanagement sig part of wiki, but
unfortunately I'm not able to edit YUM4 page (which I'll need most):
https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/ConfigManagementSIG/YUM4

Also - can I have a personal homepage set? I'm sorry I didn't mention
this in original post.

Marek.


On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 5:47 PM, Alan Bartlett  wrote:
> On 11 April 2018 at 10:06, Marek Blaha  wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> my name is Marek Blaha, I work on yum4 / DNF for CentOS. I'll need to update
>> pages on Configmanagement SIG, YUM4 section.
>>
>> https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/ConfigManagementSIG/YUM4
>>
>> my wiki username: MarekBlaha
>>
>> Regards and thanks,
>>
>> Marek
>
> Hello Marek,
>
> I've just seen your request, sorry for the delay in responding to you.
>
> You should now be able to edit the CentOS wiki pages for the
> ConfigManagementSIG . . . Please check and let me know if there is any
> problem.
>
> Alan.
> ___
> CentOS-docs mailing list
> CentOS-docs@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs

Re: [CentOS] tftpd server S not responding

[Asif Iqbal]

On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 12:48 PM, Asif Iqbal  wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 7:21 AM, Steven Tardy  wrote:
>
>> A STATEFUL firewall with “ip any any” can and will still block asymmetric
>> communications due to the firewall keeping track of state (hence tha name
>> stateful firewall).
>>
>> Tcpdump on your servers /other/ NICs and you’ll see the tftp traffic
>> leaving your server on some other NIC (probably on with the default
>> route).
>>
>
> A (192.168.1.10)
> S (192.168.1.20)
>
> I do not see tftp traffic is leaving from S
>
> A:~$ tftp
> (to) 192.168.1.20
> tftp> get file
> Transfer timed out.
>
> As you can see no pkt is leaving. If it were leaving S, but A were not
> receiving then I would think firewall
> is dropping it.
>
> [ S ~]$ sudo tcpdump -A -nniany host 192.168.1.10
> tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode
> listening on any, link-type LINUX_SLL (Linux cooked), capture size 262144
> bytes
>
> 16:40:08.390939 IP 192.168.1.10.35553 > 192.168.1.20.69:  16 RRQ "file"
> netascii
> E..,J1@.>..n./...oAt...E..#...file.netascii...
> 16:40:13.391133 IP 192.168.1.10.35553 > 192.168.1.20.69:  16 RRQ "file"
> netascii
> E..,N.@.>/...oAt...E..#...file.netascii...
> 16:40:18.391220 IP 192.168.1.10.35553 > 192.168.1.20.69:  16 RRQ "file"
> netascii
> E..,QK@.>..T./...oAt...E..#...file.netascii...
> 16:40:23.391373 IP 192.168.1.10.35553 > 192.168.1.20.69:  16 RRQ "file"
> netascii
> E..,T^@.>..@./...oAt...E..#...file.netascii...
> 16:40:28.391469 IP 192.168.1.10.35553 > 192.168.1.20.69:  16 RRQ "file"
> netascii
> E..,X.@.>/...oAt...E..#...file.netascii...
>
>
>
I still like some help on this


>
>
>>
>> The upstream firewall will then block the tftp response if it never saw
>> the
>> tftp request (due to asymmetry).
>> ___
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS@centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>>
>
>
>
>
-- 
Asif Iqbal
PGP Key: 0xE62693C5 KeyServer: pgp.mit.edu
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS-docs] Marek Blaha introduction

[Alan Bartlett]

On 11 April 2018 at 10:06, Marek Blaha  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> my name is Marek Blaha, I work on yum4 / DNF for CentOS. I'll need to update
> pages on Configmanagement SIG, YUM4 section.
>
> https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/ConfigManagementSIG/YUM4
>
> my wiki username: MarekBlaha
>
> Regards and thanks,
>
> Marek

Hello Marek,

I've just seen your request, sorry for the delay in responding to you.

You should now be able to edit the CentOS wiki pages for the
ConfigManagementSIG . . . Please check and let me know if there is any
problem.

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

Re: [CentOS] Ansible repository shenanigans in EL7

[me]

On 11 Apr 2018 09:48 Fabian Arrotin wrote:


On 11/04/18 13:58, James Hogarth wrote:
> For those not aware ansible has been deprecated in RHEL7 from the extras
> repository.
> 
> In the RHEL specific world it's now in an optional "product" (basically an

> optional subscription) that is part of any RHEL subscription, but it's opt
> in.
> 
> As a result ansible is back in the EPEL7 repository for 2.5.0+ , having

> been removed for  ansible 2.4.2 when it got introduced to the  RHEL extras
> repo.
> 
> I have no idea what, if anything, the CentOS team will do with the ansible

> in the CentOS7 extras repository.

That's a good question, as "orphaning" it would be an issue for all
people now getting it directly from Extras, if they don't have epel
added (also "opt-in")

AFAICS, nothing is pushed to git.centos.org anymore for it :
https://git.centos.org/summary/rpms!ansible.git

So I guess it would be a question for the centos-devel list :
- either we orphan it (and the other pkgs required for it) from extras
- or we try to build those and continue to provide ansible


Does it really matter which repo it comes from?

I would expect the users of ansible to be smart enough to get it from epel
or extras. As long as we know how to get it I do not see this as a big deal.

It seems that since it is already being built for EPEL, that would be the path
of least resistance for the Centos devs.

Just my $.02

Regards,

--
Tom m...@tdiehl.org
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Ansible repository shenanigans in EL7

[James Hogarth]

On 11 April 2018 at 15:39, Leon Fauster  wrote:
>
>> Am 11.04.2018 um 15:48 schrieb Fabian Arrotin :
>> ...
>> - or we try to build those and continue to provide ansible
>
> +1
>

Honestly I think that would get even more confusing at that point if
CentOS Extras has it when RHEL Extras no longer will ... and "RHEL
Ansible Engine" exists as a product subscription for RHEL users ...
and upstream have their own repos ... and over in Fedora-land we're
building it for EPEL again.

If there really is a desire (understandable) to have a "CentOS
Ansible" then I'd suggest centosplus as the appropriate repo for it
out of the base possibilities.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Next major version of Firefox on RHEL/CentOS ?

[James Pearson]

James Pearson wrote:
> 
> I know CentOS don't have inside info on what Redhat may or may not do in
> the future - plus Redhat don't usually announce publicly what their
> future plans are - but on the off-chance that someone on this list may know:
> 
> Does anyone know what Redhat are likely to do with the next major
> release of Firefox on RHEL (and hence CentOS) ?
> 
> The reason I ask, is that RHEL has been supplying the 'ESR' (Extended
> Support Release) version of Firefox - which Mozilla supports for about a
> year - and RHEL moves to each new ESR version before Mozilla drops
> support for the previous version.
> 
> Up until the current version of ESR (52), the major versions have been
> mostly compatible, but the next release of ESR (60) has some major
> changes - which include:
> 
> * No support for NPAPI plugins - except for Flash - i.e. no support for
> plugins like Java etc
> 
> * No support for XUL/XPCOM/legacy add-ons - will only support
> 'WebExtensions'
> 
> * Requires gtk3 run-time support - which isn't available with
> RHEL/CentOS 6 (currently Firefox for both el6 and el7 use the gtk2
> run-time libraries)
> 
> 
> I know it's a long shot, but I'm just trying to work out what changes I
> will need to make when ESR 52 reaches its EOL in August this year ...

Maybe this is just coincidence, but I've just noticed the following Red 
Hat Announcement:

  https://access.redhat.com/announcements/3365141

which is dated the day after I sent the above post ... :-)

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

Re: [CentOS] Ansible repository shenanigans in EL7

[Leon Fauster]

> Am 11.04.2018 um 15:48 schrieb Fabian Arrotin :
> ...
> - or we try to build those and continue to provide ansible

+1

--
LF

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

Re: [CentOS] Ansible repository shenanigans in EL7

[Fabian Arrotin]

On 11/04/18 13:58, James Hogarth wrote:
> For those not aware ansible has been deprecated in RHEL7 from the extras
> repository.
> 
> In the RHEL specific world it's now in an optional "product" (basically an
> optional subscription) that is part of any RHEL subscription, but it's opt
> in.
> 
> As a result ansible is back in the EPEL7 repository for 2.5.0+ , having
> been removed for  ansible 2.4.2 when it got introduced to the  RHEL extras
> repo.
> 
> I have no idea what, if anything, the CentOS team will do with the ansible
> in the CentOS7 extras repository.

That's a good question, as "orphaning" it would be an issue for all
people now getting it directly from Extras, if they don't have epel
added (also "opt-in")

AFAICS, nothing is pushed to git.centos.org anymore for it :
https://git.centos.org/summary/rpms!ansible.git

So I guess it would be a question for the centos-devel list :
- either we orphan it (and the other pkgs required for it) from extras
- or we try to build those and continue to provide ansible

-- 
Fabian Arrotin
The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org
gpg key: 56BEC54E | twitter: @arrfab



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

Re: [CentOS] yum excludes

[Pete Biggs]

> 
> Every yum command returns "nvidia excluding" lines, and those items
> are invisible for installation, see lower.
> I have no idea where those excludes are defined.
> 

> --
> [root@gbw-d-l0070 ~]# yum update
> Loaded plugins: etckeeper, fastestmirror, langpacks, nvidia

They are from the nvidia plugin.

> 
> [nvidia]: excluding kmod-nvidia-367.57-3.el7.elrepo.x86_64
> [nvidia]: excluding kmod-nvidia-390.25-1.el7_4.elrepo.x86_64
> [nvidia]: excluding kmod-nvidia-390.42-1.el7_4.elrepo.x86_64
> [nvidia]: excluding kmod-nvidia-390.48-1.el7_4.elrepo.x86_64
> [nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-367.57-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
> [nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-390.25-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
> [nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-390.42-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
> [nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-390.48-1.el7_4.elrepo.x86_64
> [nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-32bit-367.57-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
> [nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-32bit-390.25-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
> [nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-32bit-390.42-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
> [nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-32bit-390.48-1.el7_4.elrepo.x86_64
> No packages marked for update
> 
The plugin excludes the drivers that are not compatible with the card
you have in your machine.

P.

ps please don't reply to an unrelated mailing list post and just change
the subject when creating a new question.  It really mucks up threading
if you do so.

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

[CentOS] yum excludes

[Mathy Froeyen]

dear all

Every yum command returns "nvidia excluding" lines, and those items are 
invisible for installation, see lower.
I have no idea where those excludes are defined.

Also, the flag  "--disableexcludes=all" does not remove the excludes.

any ideas?

thanks

mathy
--
[root@gbw-d-l0070 ~]# yum update
Loaded plugins: etckeeper, fastestmirror, langpacks, nvidia
Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
 * base: centos.cu.be
 * elrepo: ftp.nluug.nl
 * epel: fedora.cu.be
 * extras: centos.cu.be
 * updates: centos.cu.be
[nvidia]: excluding kmod-nvidia-367.57-3.el7.elrepo.x86_64
[nvidia]: excluding kmod-nvidia-390.25-1.el7_4.elrepo.x86_64
[nvidia]: excluding kmod-nvidia-390.42-1.el7_4.elrepo.x86_64
[nvidia]: excluding kmod-nvidia-390.48-1.el7_4.elrepo.x86_64
[nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-367.57-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
[nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-390.25-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
[nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-390.42-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
[nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-390.48-1.el7_4.elrepo.x86_64
[nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-32bit-367.57-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
[nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-32bit-390.25-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
[nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-32bit-390.42-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
[nvidia]: excluding nvidia-x11-drv-32bit-390.48-1.el7_4.elrepo.x86_64
No packages marked for update

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

[CentOS] Ansible repository shenanigans in EL7

[James Hogarth]

For those not aware ansible has been deprecated in RHEL7 from the extras
repository.

In the RHEL specific world it's now in an optional "product" (basically an
optional subscription) that is part of any RHEL subscription, but it's opt
in.

As a result ansible is back in the EPEL7 repository for 2.5.0+ , having
been removed for  ansible 2.4.2 when it got introduced to the  RHEL extras
repo.

I have no idea what, if anything, the CentOS team will do with the ansible
in the CentOS7 extras repository.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS-docs] Marek Blaha introduction

[Marek Blaha]

Hello,

my name is Marek Blaha, I work on yum4 / DNF for CentOS. I'll need to
update pages on Configmanagement SIG, YUM4 section.

https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/ConfigManagementSIG/YUM4

my wiki username: MarekBlaha

Regards and thanks,

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