Re: [CentOS] NFS Server Centos7
On 5/28/22 9:43 AM, Erik Frangež via CentOS wrote: Hi guys, we are setting NFS server on CentOS7 system. Everything working OK except speed, speed over NFS very drop... if we run dd command directly on server we are getting speed around 1,4Gbps, if we run from client connected to NFS is 200Mbps. Do you have maybe some advice what we need to check? Make sure you have good speed of physical connection along the whole path from server to client(s), enable Jumbo packets on all switches along the path. NFS experts will add NFS specific tuning. Valeri Thank you! Best, Erik ___ 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] Kernel live patching on CentOS Stream 9
On 1/13/22 1:01 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: On 1/13/22 09:32, Valeri Galtsev wrote: In layman's language summary: RedHat Enterprise features (including "live" kernel patching) are to be expected _only_ in RedHat Enterprise "binary replica" distributions, which CentOS Stream is not. I don't think that's true, exactly. As far as I know, rebuild distributions never had the "Enterprise" features*. Critically, I think that a lot of people mistakenly believed that CentOS *did* have Enterprise features, because it was rebuilt from RHEL code, and that misunderstanding underlies a great deal of the negative response toward CentOS Stream. Thanks for correcting my layman's representation. It should have better said that "binary replica" is "binary compatible" in a sense whatever software distributed as binary for RHEL will work the same on "binary replica". I guess my views and wordings got skewed by latest changes of CentOS paradigms. *: "Enterprise" features include but are not limited to: 1. Minor releases with independent life cycles / Extended Update Support 2. Classification for updates (security, bugfix, enhancement) 3. Live patching for kernel security vulnerabilities We never had it in CentOS in the past, but I'm just curious: is live patching proprietary piece of RHEL? I know there are several solutions, way back there was paid one called splice, my Boss's son was one of the developers of that. Just curious, as, if it is paid, it is stripped off as part of CentOS composition, but if it is not paid, open source, then it would "just work", or not? 4. Support Oops, as features I meant functionality of CentOS, nothing beyond that. Valeri ___ 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] Kernel live patching on CentOS Stream 9
On 1/13/22 12:28 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 1/7/22 12:18, Gordon Messmer wrote: On 1/7/22 09:39, Gionatan Danti wrote: is kernel live patching working for CentOS Stream 9? https://access.redhat.com/solutions/2206511 My understanding of live kernel patching is that the feature allows systems to update specific individual kernel functions, and is primarily useful for addressing security vulnerabilities (and not, for example, for updating from one kernel version to another). I don't know for a fact, but my expectation is that CentOS Stream systems aren't going to get "live" patches because there's no ongoing support for individual kernels. Indeed .. you will get those things rolled into the next kernel, but not as live patches. In layman's language summary: RedHat Enterprise features (including "live" kernel patching) are to be expected _only_ in RedHat Enterprise "binary replica" distributions, which CentOS Stream is not. Valeri ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Moving from mdadm raid 0 to single disk
On 1/11/22 8:50 PM, Alexandre Leonenko wrote: Thanks, That's what I'll probably be doing then. Great. Don't miss Jonathan's answers. His are very instructive and with deep insights, as always. Valeri Alex From: CentOS on behalf of Valeri Galtsev Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2022 5:21 PM To: centos@centos.org Subject: Re: [CentOS] Moving from mdadm raid 0 to single disk On 1/11/22 8:11 PM, Alexandre Leonenko wrote: Hey all, Hopefully a quick question. I'm going to move the filesystem of a raid 0 mdadm to a single disk. The filesystem is just a data drive, can I just dd if=/dev/md0 of=/dev/sdc ? Or should I rather rsync the files directly? I would [partition disk; make new filesystem, mount, then] use rsync. You avoid copying nuisances if there are any on old filesystem. You avoid the need to resize partition on new disk, and expand filesystem. You avoid waste of time copying empty space. You can have different disklabel (it old was MSDOS and you want GPT). And few other things. I hope, thins helps. Valeri Regards, Alex ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Moving from mdadm raid 0 to single disk
On 1/11/22 8:11 PM, Alexandre Leonenko wrote: Hey all, Hopefully a quick question. I'm going to move the filesystem of a raid 0 mdadm to a single disk. The filesystem is just a data drive, can I just dd if=/dev/md0 of=/dev/sdc ? Or should I rather rsync the files directly? I would [partition disk; make new filesystem, mount, then] use rsync. You avoid copying nuisances if there are any on old filesystem. You avoid the need to resize partition on new disk, and expand filesystem. You avoid waste of time copying empty space. You can have different disklabel (it old was MSDOS and you want GPT). And few other things. I hope, thins helps. Valeri Regards, Alex ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] how to clear out /var/cache?
On 1/4/22 1:22 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 12/31/21 22:15, Fred wrote: well, I removed all the files in the tree under /var/cache/yum/x86_64/7 but left all the directories empty. that got rid of a couple gigs of stuff. among the remains, the only other big one remaining is: 2.3G abrt-di which I won't mess with for now. I've got 4.2G free, now, so that should run me for quite a while. Thanks to all of you for your tips! Fred For the record .. I remove things manually from /var/cache/yum/ all the time (or /var/cache/dnf/ ). It has never caused me any issues. I have not removed anything else manually from /var/cache/ +1 Valeri ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Running Centos 8 Stream: Do I need to remove any of the repos?
On 11/30/21 1:01 PM, Jay Hart wrote: On Mon, 29 Nov 2021, Jay Hart wrote: Using the same command shows: # dnf repolist repo id repo name appstream CentOS Stream 8 - AppStream baseosCentOS Stream 8 - BaseOS epel Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux 8 - x86_64 epel-modular Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux Modular 8 - x86_64 extrasCentOS Stream 8 - Extras remi-modular Remi's Modular repository for Enterprise Linux 8 - x86_64 remi-safe Safe Remi's RPM repository for Enterprise Linux 8 - x86_64 I'll assume you know what you're doing with the "Remi" repository, since it's an unknown to me. Otherwise, your repository list looks good to me. It appears I installed some PHP related packages from those repos. I used remi repository to install PHP-7 on CentOS 7. Just my 2 cents. Valeri Jay -- Paul Heinlein heinl...@madboa.com 45.38° N, 122.59° W ___ 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 -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] OT: New Server and noticing these maillog postfix entries: What to do about them?
This is ultimately out of topic of the thread On 11/21/21 4:22 PM, Jay Hart wrote: Am 21.11.2021 um 22:36 schrieb Jay Hart: drwx--x--x sa-milt sa-milt spamass-milter srwxr-xr-x sa-milt sa-milt spamass-milter.sock When I've seen the names of the files above, it reminded me an abbreviation which we had in very high ranking British scientific journal. We have the concentration of [asphaltene] associates in one formulae which we denoted with letter N with subscript which was first three letter of the word "associates". One referee recommended to have native English speaker read our "proofread" sample. Which we didn't pay appropriate attention to and didn't notice what we should better change... But when we received reprints of published paper this subscript was just staring at me when I was reading it: first there letters of the word "associates". ;-) Valeri -- ++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Upgrading CentOS from 7 to 8
On 9/29/21 8:29 AM, J Martin Rushton via CentOS wrote: It's not supported. RH has a method that sometimes works for RHEL, but there is no safe CentOS way to do a major upgrade. You need to reinstall the OS and migrate your applications. +1 The system "binary clone" of which CentOS is (or was rather) is not designed to be "upgraded". The routine way is: install new release, copy all accounts, and data from old system to it, install services, configure them to a degree possible close to what was on old system. This horse have been beaten to death. The problem someone asking this is a consequence it people not doing search first (I for one use duckduckgo), and reading all search reveals with open eyes, not picking something to one's liking. Like: I want to do an upgrade. No matter all search shows is: "install new release,...". I did find one post about upgrade. But why it doesn't work?! Just read any of other posts about upgrade, saying to the effect: it doesn't, shouldn't work, and going into various lengts of explaining why. I know what I said doesn't make pleasant reading, but it hopefully will help someone with "modus operandi". Valeri On 29/09/2021 14:24, Gestió Servidors wrote: Hi, I'm doing some tests of upgrading CentOS from 7 to 8 reading this step-by-step guide: https://netshopisp.medium.com/how-to-upgrade-linux-servecentos-7-to-centos-8-ec2db96a189b I'm trying this upgrade in a VM, so I can save "snapshots" and restart in a past saved point. However, all my test ends wrong, exacly in Step 4 when I run "rpm -e `rpm -q kernel`". Then, systems says that some packages are kernel dependencies. After I remove that dependencies, I can't remove kernel... Anybody has tested process upgrade from 7 to 8? Thanks. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Upgrading (?) from legacy boot to UEFI
On August 28, 2021 8:07:30 AM CDT, Jonathan Billings wrote: >On Aug 28, 2021, at 05:58, Rob Kampen wrote: >> >> As to the RH decision to default to a legacy boot / MBR oriented install >> based upon size of disk ... words fail me. > >I don’t think that it chooses legacy boot based on the size of disk, but based >on how you booted the installer. If you booted from the installer as a legacy >boot item, it installs as a legacy bootloader, but if you disable the BIOS >option to use a legacy bootloader, it will boot the installer as a UEFI boot >and choose to install a UEFI grub2 setup. > +1 And the same seems to be true about other UNIX like systems, at least Debian and clones, FreeBSD and clones. Valeri >— >Jonathan Billings >___ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS@centos.org >https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] OT: firefox question
Dear Experts, My question is OT, as it is related to firefox, not CentOS system per se. Even more: my firefox runs on FreeBSD workstation. But I figured this list have largest likelihood of having experts in firefox (as well as on other things), so... My firefox behavior changed after one of recent updates.. When one logs in to website that is locked using web password (e.g., set in .htacess/.htpasswd in apache), one gives username/password once. Then firefox remembers that while firefox is running, and you don't have to give credentials (though authentication does happen behind the scenes all the time since). But not anymore for me at least on my (FreeBSD) workstation: in the morning I discover firefox (though it had not been restarted) asks yet again credentials to websites I have been logged to. As if firefox purges credentials to websites after some period of time (or inactivity on those websites). This stared happening not long ago after one of updates firefox is known to release annoyingly often (as in: mozilla foundation forgot the meaning of the word "release" which means well debugged code some time about decade ago...). I tried to find relevant setting in GUI preferences to no avail (maybe it is just me?), and hope, experts know deeper lying preferences, and may point me to relevant one. All in all, I'm forced back onto my pursuit for replacement for firefox browser... Thanks a lot for all your answers. And my apologies for rant (which I was not able to separate due to my frustration...). Valeri -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Difference between CentOS Linux and CentOS Stream
On 7/20/21 10:03 AM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: Le 19/07/2021 à 21:38, Johnny Hughes a écrit : Yes, some items, if you really need 10 years, would require Alma or Rocky or Oracle if you don't want to pay for RHEL. Low risk updates over a ten year support cycle are the number one reason we've all been using "classic" CentOS in the first place. I have been there for the same reason solely. Switching to "rolling release" style distribution (Like Debian and clones, or FreeBSD - the last is no Linux ;-) will occasionally require a but of work when some component steps up and does need a bit of config adjustment, but it pays off by smooth in-place upgrade (which I just did on one box from Debian 9 "stretch" to Debian 10 "buster", and was doing FreeBSD upgrades same smoothly through multiple releases during last decade...) Just my 2 cents. Valeri -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos 8 two network cards
On 7/15/21 2:39 PM, Ken Smith via CentOS wrote: Hi folks, I'm a bit confused about how to set up two network cards in different LANS in C8. I've done this multiple times in Centos6 and lower, but in the NetworkManager/systemd world I'm all at sea without any charts. (I'm sure there's a HKLM in there somewhere -sorry ;-)) and my Googlefoo is failing me this evening. Via the GUI it will let me configure one device or the other but not both :-( Anyway I want one NIC with IP 10.100.0.2/24 and GW 10.100.0.1 and the other with IP 10.2.0.2/24 and no gateway. I've seen a method that removes NetworkManager and installs network-scripts then configures the ifcfg-eth0 and ifcfg-eth1 scripts. Interestingly the devices seem to be still called eth0 & 1 on this system which happens to be a VM. When I use this method the systemctl start network appears not to be able to find eth1. Is there a recommended way to do this? I'd prefer to use 'approved' techniques rather than work arounds. Any suggestions? This is for Debian, but it must be the same in CentOS. Being in Debian a "beginner" who fled CentOS, this one operation (configuring second network card) is the last only operation which I still use GUI for, not command line tools or Better editing config files... Start network manager editor (on Debian the command is: nm-connection-editor) Click Ethernet click "+" choose "Ethernet" as connection type. change name of new connection to "Wired connection 2" and configure all parameters, make sure you choose correct ethernet adapter in one of dro-downs. I hope, this helps. Valeri Thanks Ken -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos versions in the future?
On 7/8/21 10:38 AM, Nikolaos Milas wrote: On 8/7/2021 6:19 μ.μ., Valeri Galtsev wrote: ... Of course, tastes differ, but still, only those who tasted both things can have fairly say what is better to one's own taste. ... But even as part of our infrastructure fled to FreeBSD... ... As a side note: l never used FreeBSD, even though I've heard good things about it. Frankly, I loathe its devil logo. I know it's probably derived from the Unix "daemons", THAT must have been part of the reason for mscot. Also, they call mascot Beasty (as in diminutive from :"beast"). And if you pronounce the abbreviation of Berkeley Software Distribution (the one FreeBSD is successor of): BSD, and then "beasty" they sound not that different from one another ;-) Valeri yet I fail to get reconciled with it. It's simply appalling to me (even if it's smiling) :( I don't require any reply on my above comment (I might even be called naive or whatever). It's some kind of personal confession which I feel I need to express somehow. I simply wish FreeBSD people changed this logo at some point... I wonder whether FreeBSD users are expressing similar concerns... I am not following any FreeBSD activity or discussion. Cheers, Nick ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos versions in the future?
On 7/8/21 10:38 AM, Nikolaos Milas wrote: On 8/7/2021 6:19 μ.μ., Valeri Galtsev wrote: ... Of course, tastes differ, but still, only those who tasted both things can have fairly say what is better to one's own taste. ... But even as part of our infrastructure fled to FreeBSD... ... As a side note: l never used FreeBSD, even though I've heard good things about it. Frankly, I loathe its devil logo. I know it's probably derived from the Unix "daemons", yet I fail to get reconciled with it. It's simply appalling to me (even if it's smiling) :( I _can_ understand religious person's attitude to some images. I don't require any reply on my above comment (I might even be called naive or whatever). It's some kind of personal confession which I feel I need to express somehow. I simply wish FreeBSD people changed this logo at some point... I wonder whether FreeBSD users are expressing similar concerns... I am not following any FreeBSD activity or discussion. I for one consider FreeBSD mascot as created with quite some sense of humor. No more no less. Being not religious myself, I do agree with what region [Christian?] says, almost all or it: you shouldn't steal, you shouldn't kill, you should be kind to others,... The only thing I disagree with is: they say God created people, I believe it is other way around: people created God for themselves. But as neither can be proven experimentally, the last in my book is really minor disagreement ;-) Valeri Cheers, Nick ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos versions in the future?
On 7/8/21 8:55 AM, Jonathan Billings wrote: On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 08:39:19AM -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote: Well, I fled servers from CentOS to FreeBSD almost a decade ago. And actually not From CentOS per se, but from Linux. One of the reasons was: every 45 days on average: glibc or kernel update —> reboot. One of my friends started using word “Lindoze”. Linux is perfect for number crunchers and workstations. FreeBSD is waaay better for servers. In my book that is. Just straightening small nuance. If you aren't rebooting your FreeBSD systems regularly, you're just as vulnerable. https://www.freebsd.org/security/advisories/ I see one less than 45 days ago that requires a reboot because of a kernel security measure bypass. Long uptimes are a thing of the past. Build redundancy into your infrastructure so you can handle reboots. That original reason to flee for us (one of several as it turned out to be) is dated 10 years back. Not quite fair to apply today's counter-argument to it. Still a year or two ago when I checked last, and it was about 2 reboots a year required for FreeBSD, whereas <= 45 days is still was a fact for Linux. But as you have said yourself, we live differently today, and several things (like one or few services per jail - the last having read-only base system to mention one) still make FreeBSD much simpler to maintain for servers. Not to mention, switching from Linux (10 years ago) to FreeBSD was quite smoother learning curve than adjusting to systemd and friends ;-) (I'm cheating a bit: I did run UNIXes in the past - waaay back). Of course, tastes differ, but still, only those who tasted both things can have fairly say what is better to one's own taste. Saying not to Jonathan, of course, who I bet runs several UNIXes, FreeBSD included. (of course, not all of them can strictly be called UNIX, - re no loyalties to AT). But even as part of our infrastructure fled to FreeBSD, workstations and number crunchers stayed with most adequate for them system: Linux. CentOS until recently, Debian once CentOS stopped being "binary replica" of RedHat Enterprise. Gionatan Danti mentioned another important reason... Valeri -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos versions in the future?
> On Jul 8, 2021, at 6:22 AM, Nikolaos Milas wrote: > > On 7/7/2021 8:17 μ.μ., Valeri Galtsev wrote: > >> And I feel safe running (and planning to run for long future to come) quite >> reputable ones with long history of such: FreeBSD (servers), Debian (number >> crunchers, workstations). > > I feel totally safe and confident with the fully community-driven effort of > Rocky Linux, lead by the former founder of the original CentOS project. (I am > not affiliated with them in any way.) > > As has already been mentioned, Rocky Linux has managed to gain quickly > support from major players in the industry (including Google and Microsoft), > and is committed to never drop its independent/community status. It is well > structured and organized, and embraces a good number of open-source volunteer > specialists. > > We want to keep up with RHEL ecosystem and Rocky Linux is - for us - the best > option. > > If some people want to leave the RHEL ecosystem for Debian or FreeBSD, Well, I fled servers from CentOS to FreeBSD almost a decade ago. And actually not From CentOS per se, but from Linux. One of the reasons was: every 45 days on average: glibc or kernel update —> reboot. One of my friends started using word “Lindoze”. Linux is perfect for number crunchers and workstations. FreeBSD is waaay better for servers. In my book that is. Just straightening small nuance. Valeri > that's OK. But for those who want to stay in the RHEL world, Rocky Linux > stands as a rock-solid solution. This opinion does not reject other CentOS > clones, but emphasizes the fact that Rocky Linux appears to be a solid option > for now and the years to come. > > Cheers, > Nick > > ___ > 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 versions in the future?
On 7/7/21 12:08 PM, Leon Fauster via CentOS wrote: On 07.07.21 18:04, Jon Pruente wrote: On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 7:41 AM Leon Fauster via CentOS mailto:centos@centos.org>> wrote: Here is another one: https://navylinux.org/ <https://navylinux.org/> Navy Linux has a bad taste already, for me. They are aiming too big, even trying to replicate EPEL for themselves. And their attitude isn't good. They had a tweet disparaging "new unstable vendors" of EL distros that they only deleted after being called out for it, despite being one of those themselves. Deleted tweet link: https://twitter.com/NavyLinux/status/1408429562472677381 <https://twitter.com/NavyLinux/status/1408429562472677381> They used to say they were founded by "Unixlab". Which Unixlab? We don't know. Now they say they are a non-profit Foundation that founded the project. https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:kZLBFcdLyrYJ:https://navylinux.org/about/+=1=en=clnk=us <https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:kZLBFcdLyrYJ:https://navylinux.org/about/+=1=en=clnk=us> +1 The Division of Corporations in DELAWARE shows: Formation Date: 6/14/2021 (mm/dd/) Anyway, in the context of ongoing attacks to the supply chain. This situation where CentOS is running EOL will motivate new black hats to step into the place. Imagine a massive deployed OS that is trojanized?! So trust is here king and despite all adversity (that also hits me hard) we should thinks twice before running away into foreign arms. +1 And I feel safe running (and planning to run for long future to come) quite reputable ones with long history of such: FreeBSD (servers), Debian (number crunchers, workstations). Valeri -- Leon ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos versions in the future?
> On Jul 7, 2021, at 5:07 AM, Nikolaos Milas wrote: > > On 7/7/2021 12:47 μ.μ., J Martin Rushton via CentOS wrote: > >> There's also Alma, which is where I've gone after being with CentOS since >> 5.3 > > AlmaLinux is a great project too, IMHO, but things show that the new industry > standard (replacing CentOS) will probably be Rocky Linux. In our stables it is Debian that replaces CentOS. (And it is closer to FreeBSD in several aspects, the last is what the servers run). Valeri > (Yes, RHEL **AND** CentOS have indeed been industry standards - the point of > reference -, IMHO, and this is what IBM/RHEL have failed to realize: You > don't alter a point of reference.) > > It is interesting to see what Service Providers will do with their (huge > numbers of) CentOS installations, when they migrate... > > From the users/admins' perspective it is to their interest to have robust and > healthy alternatives. > > In our org, I am now using Rocky Linux on new installations (without issues) > and will be migrating several CentOS 8 boxes to Rocky Linux as well. > > Cheers, > Nick > > ___ > 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] non-functioning printer
> On May 15, 2021, at 5:22 AM, Robert Heller wrote: > > At Fri, 14 May 2021 22:22:24 -0500 (CDT) CentOS mailing list > wrote: > >> >> With the Deskjet D1420 disconnected, hp-probe >> finds no USB printers (duh). >> With the Deskjet D1420 connected, hp-probe >> finds it. >> hp-testpage produces >> error: Unable to communicate with printer Deskjet-D1400-series. Please >> check >> the printer and try again. >> >> Note that hp-probe found it. >> >> hp-testpage also produces a popup saying ... >> There is a problem with a print cartridge (1017) > > HP printers are bitchy about using non-HP branded ink carts (or tonor carts). > > HP is very interested in extracting their "pound of flesh" for all eternity. > They are not the worst I’ve seen. We have a bunch of HP laser printers, and though used HP supplies originally, do use “aftermarket” ones for multiple years. Who are really bad are Xerox. Even though I agree that they “taught the world how to copy”, at some point I dropped them, and wherever my word counts I recommend against Xerox. At some point they started making slight modifications to printer models thus making pretty much the same printers only with toners incompatible between models. Thus, each “model” was produced in smaller number, making aftermarket toner manufacturing unprofitable. That was only half of trouble, we were buying Xerox supplies anyway. But at some point they stopped making toners for printers as young as 6 years old if memory serves me. So, we had to throw away good working Xerox printers merely 6 years old, as you can not get toners for them. They, BTW, didn’t fix vulnerability in these older printers as well. Since that event my decision is: NO XEROX ANYTHING! For comparison: we had; still have HP 4050 that was getting a lot of use and beating it is 19 years old now, still works, you still can buy HP toner for that. So, I really would place HP (printers department) into really good guys. (Not HP / compaq laptop department, though I didn’t check their laptops recently) Just my $0.02. Valeri >> >> It does not say which one or why this would cause communication failure. >> >> How do I figure this out? > > You will have to "easter egg" it. Swap the carts out one-by-one with new, HP > carts until the error goes away. > >> > > -- > Robert Heller -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364 > Deepwoods Software-- Custom Software Services > http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services > hel...@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services > ___ > 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] non-functioning printer
On 5/13/21 11:51 AM, Michael Hennebry wrote: In an attempt to diagnose a friend's HP Deskjet D1420, I'm running a Centos 6.10 LiveDVD. The readily visible symptom is that it will accept a job and claim to be printing it, but nothing ever gets printed, not even a test page. The same happens on her Ubuntu system. I recently learned that a blinking power light means that the printer is complaining about something. What? http://h10032.www1.hp.com/ctg/Manual/c00905267#d0e5511enww "If an error message appears Read the error message that explains the problem and its solution." Huh? Where on a Deskjet D1420 could an error message possibly appear? Does it mean this message in /var/cups/error_log? E [13/May/2021:15:18:53 -0400] [CGI] Unable to create avahi client: Resource temporarily unavailable E [13/May/2021:15:18:53 -0400] [cups-deviced] PID 2094 (dnssd) stopped with status 1! Would the presence or absence of whatever avahi is cause the printer to complain? The printer used to print. The hardware connection has not changed in years. Printers usually have "print test page" soemewhere in their own menu. Before attempting to connect anything to printer I would test that first. Valeri Any ideas? -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] OT: Centos versions in the future?
This will be fully OT. On 4/30/21 12:53 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: On 4/30/21 6:19 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: Why do, you, people use “creative editing”? Cite the whole piece I said, and place your question there, don’t tear single phrase out of context. It's not "creative editing", it's quote trimming in a forum which provides threaded discussions. This will be totally OT. And in general I kind of don't care if any of my phrases are taken out of context. And here is why. I got my university [technical] education in place where political courses were mandatory, and they were grossly oriented to _that_ government politics. Basically, in those political courses you were taught not how to think, but what to think. Now technical people, ah, had kind of special attitude towards these political courses. And some were sometimes making fun out of "the grounders" of these theories by doing the following: they were taking some "fundamental" book or paper of that grounder, and were taking [literally, but out of context] sentences and phrases; which made the grounder saying the things quite opposite to what his beliefs are. All with precise literal citation [though purposefully taken out of context]. That is why I prefer to not edit away what other people said, though I have seen what hopefully made me immune from having "attitude" to the same done with what I wrote (kind of "I've see worse" ;-) It's the recommended etiquette for this forum, and has been for decades. Hopefully, the above explains why I prefer to not follow etiquette in respect of trimming, but leave what others said as is in full... Just me. Valeri Context can be readily provided from the parent message which is available to everyone who received my reply. But if it makes you happy, I'll expand the quote and ask the question again: On 4/29/21 8:51 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: A. "I am going to install CentOS which is binary replica of RedHat Enterprise", so whatever works on RedHat Enterprise will work on CentOS [implying my reputation behind merely an ability to install binary packages and common sense of what binary files are there on both systems in questions] B. There is CentOS which is promised (I am borrowing your phrasing here) "WILL BE extreamly similar to RHEL + a couple months" but in the second case I can not put my reputation at stake and finish my phrase with "whatever works on RedHat Enterprise will work on CentOS". Why do you think that? Are RHEL (and CentOS) point releases backward compatible or not? If you trust point releases to work, why would you hesitate to trust a distribution that resembles an upcoming point release? (And if you don't trust point releases, why would you use the OS at all?) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos versions in the future?
On 4/30/21 12:53 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: On 4/30/21 6:19 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: Why do, you, people use “creative editing”? Cite the whole piece I said, and place your question there, don’t tear single phrase out of context. It's not "creative editing", it's quote trimming in a forum which provides threaded discussions. It's the recommended etiquette for this forum, and has been for decades. Context can be readily provided from the parent message which is available to everyone who received my reply. But if it makes you happy, I'll expand the quote and ask the question again: On 4/29/21 8:51 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: A. "I am going to install CentOS which is binary replica of RedHat Enterprise", so whatever works on RedHat Enterprise will work on CentOS [implying my reputation behind merely an ability to install binary packages and common sense of what binary files are there on both systems in questions] B. There is CentOS which is promised (I am borrowing your phrasing here) "WILL BE extreamly similar to RHEL + a couple months" but in the second case I can not put my reputation at stake and finish my phrase with "whatever works on RedHat Enterprise will work on CentOS". Why do you think that? Are RHEL (and CentOS) point releases backward compatible or not? If you trust point releases to work, why would you hesitate to trust a distribution that resembles an upcoming point release? As you can see in all what I said above, I'm "selling" to my user one or another distribution. Meaning I offer them particular distribution, and tell them what to expect. With old CentOS, i.e. in case A, "binary replica" tells even non-technical users, all will work as on famous expensive product, including stability... Now case B, namely "stream" incarnation of CentOS, I can not promise the same simply put expectation in my user's minds. Do I trust that I will be able to install all they need in Stream? - absolutely. Can I promise all will work during [even shorter] life cycle of stream without "glitches"? - With all honesty, no. And I will not jeopardize my reputation in front of my users by not mentioning "expect glitches". Pardon my non-technical language which I prefer to use with my users. As others said, this architecture of this new "stream" composition, - let me say theoretically as I don't want to go into details of how extremely well you do your technical part, which I am in no position to question - theoretically one can imagine problems happen time to time which one will not encounter using "binary replica" of RedHat Enterprise. In other words, when talking to me, please, consider me a layman, who can understand simple logic, and rely on reputation earned by distribution during it long existence. So for me in my layman suite: 1. RedHat, including Enterprise: yes, by all means 2. "binary replica of RedHat Enterprise" CentOS which existed for over a couple of decades as such, - yes by all means 3. other binary replicas I didn't observe carefully long enough, so can not offer any judgement. Except for Scientific Linux which by several reasons I turned down as something one can built future based on, and it didn't last long, so I thanked myself for staying away from it... 4. CentOS "stream", sorry this modus operandi does not exists long enough to earn "long standing brilliant reputation" of [and put here what you faithfully are saying about Stream] - not in my book though, and not that I with all faith in it can say to anyone whom I will be installing system on their machine. Which all leaves me with option: 5. I know this [Debian, FreeBSD, or place there whichever distribution _you_ know long history of] system is a "rolling release", so what is installed may change version (and some software internals!) time to time during the life of the system, and things may break occasionally because of that. But this distro exists since forever and I can promise I will be there to see things are fixed when necessary. And this way of maintaining things exists for long time, and many people live with its negative sides, so we will be in a big good company of others like us. I probably can faithfully say the same as 5 about CentOS Stream, though I should strike "long existence" thus you [addressing my user here] will not see statistics over past life. But then, I have less to offer as expectation compared to other alternative systems. And as someone mentioned at the beginning of this whole thing that shook our - CentOS users' worls -: the reputation lies on long positive performance. And changing suddenly something just negates all past great reputation. Even worse: now people [take that as all crowd of layman ones] know something can be changed on whim, and it
Re: [CentOS] Centos versions in the future?
> On Apr 29, 2021, at 11:55 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: > > On 4/29/21 8:51 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: >> but in the second case I can not put my reputation at stake and finish my >> phrase with "whatever works on RedHat Enterprise will work on CentOS". > Why do you think that? Are RHEL (and CentOS) point releases backward > compatible or not? If you trust point releases to work, why would you > hesitate to trust a distribution that resembles an upcoming point release? > Why do, you, people use “creative editing”? Cite the whole piece I said, and place your question there, don’t tear single phrase out of context. Valeri > (And if you don't trust point releases, why would you use the OS at all?) > > ___ > 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 versions in the future?
On 4/29/21 11:15 AM, Leon Fauster via CentOS wrote: On 29.04.21 17:34, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 4/27/21 11:45 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: As was stated at Red hat summit though .. while Stream will not be a copy of the downstream RHEL code anymore .. it WILL BE extreamly similar to RHEL + a couple months. ... Maybe I am miss reading this sentence. Could you rephrase the "while Stream will not ... anymore" please? Did something changed recently? I believe you are citing Johnny's write-up, not mine, so your question should be directed to Johnny. Your mailer somehow messed the citation depth to appear what Johnny said as if it was I who said it. Valeri Thanks, Leon ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos versions in the future?
On 4/29/21 11:13 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 4/29/21 10:51 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: On 4/29/21 10:34 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 4/27/21 11:45 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: In other words, both of the following are true (IMHO): A. Johnny's rigorous statement of what CentOS now is (or yours, it doesn't actually matter who rigorously states it, but Johnny's seemed to really cover all aspects - maybe it's just my reading though) B. "CentOS is binary replica of RedHat Enterprise Linux" statement is not true as far as new releases are concerned, i.e. not true to build one's future on it But as everyone is agreed it is counter productive to ponder these things, I will end my side of it by reiterating: As was stated at Red hat summit though .. while Stream will not be a copy of the downstream RHEL code anymore .. it WILL BE extreamly similar to RHEL + a couple months. In fact at 8.4 release .. Stream is very similar t0 RHEL 8.4 with NO WAITING. CentOS Linux 8 getting upgraded to the 8.4 source code, tested, isos created, etc .. will take a month or so, Stream already has all that content in it RIGHT NOW. Yes, this all sounds nice, but not good enough if you put yourself in my shoes when I suggest my user: A. "I am going to install CentOS which is binary replica of RedHat Enterprise", so whatever works on RedHat Enterprise will work on CentOS [implying my reputation behind merely an ability to install binary packages and common sense of what binary files are there on both systems in questions] B. There is CentOS which is promised (I am borrowing your phrasing here) "WILL BE extreamly similar to RHEL + a couple months" but in the second case I can not put my reputation at stake and finish my phrase with "whatever works on RedHat Enterprise will work on CentOS". So my latest phrasing to my users/machine owners - which I can put my reputation behind - is: I am going to install Debian for you, and as in the past whatever works on some Linux I should be able to make work on your Debian machine. The last I can put my reputation behind, and my user knows it might not be as simple as installing binary packages known to work on RedHat Enterprise, and knows there will be some effort/time on my side involved. My apologies for breaking my promise to stop pondering the issue ;-( Valeri I think that is a positive , not a negative. And as I have said several times .. if you (or anyone else) thinks something works better or Stream does not work for you, that is fine. Use what you want or like. We make what we make. If one can use it, great. If not, that's great as well. This is opening up the RHEL creation process in an unbelievable way to community involvement. I an proud to have been involved in mkae this process so open. Quite agree. For me, not too knowledgeable in these things person, this looks exactly what Fedoraa while ago was: huge opening of RedHat to wide open source community. Maybe Fedora didn't live up to the expectation, then good luck to CentOS to live up to this expectation. I hope, no one is offended by my - restricted - view of this, personal perception is just that and bound to be restricted to person's knowledge ;-) Valeri I think CentOS Stream is a much more community project that CentOS Linux ever was. I also think it is better for the open source community and Linux distros in general. For people whole don't think this, we can agree to disagree. it does not make either of us right or wrong. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos versions in the future?
On 4/29/21 10:34 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 4/27/21 11:45 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: In other words, both of the following are true (IMHO): A. Johnny's rigorous statement of what CentOS now is (or yours, it doesn't actually matter who rigorously states it, but Johnny's seemed to really cover all aspects - maybe it's just my reading though) B. "CentOS is binary replica of RedHat Enterprise Linux" statement is not true as far as new releases are concerned, i.e. not true to build one's future on it But as everyone is agreed it is counter productive to ponder these things, I will end my side of it by reiterating: As was stated at Red hat summit though .. while Stream will not be a copy of the downstream RHEL code anymore .. it WILL BE extreamly similar to RHEL + a couple months. In fact at 8.4 release .. Stream is very similar t0 RHEL 8.4 with NO WAITING. CentOS Linux 8 getting upgraded to the 8.4 source code, tested, isos created, etc .. will take a month or so, Stream already has all that content in it RIGHT NOW. Yes, this all sounds nice, but not good enough if you put yourself in my shoes when I suggest my user: A. "I am going to install CentOS which is binary replica of RedHat Enterprise", so whatever works on RedHat Enterprise will work on CentOS [implying my reputation behind merely an ability to install binary packages and common sense of what binary files are there on both systems in questions] B. There is CentOS which is promised (I am borrowing your phrasing here) "WILL BE extreamly similar to RHEL + a couple months" but in the second case I can not put my reputation at stake and finish my phrase with "whatever works on RedHat Enterprise will work on CentOS". So my latest phrasing to my users/machine owners - which I can put my reputation behind - is: I am going to install Debian for you, and as in the past whatever works on some Linux I should be able to make work on your Debian machine. The last I can put my reputation behind, and my user knows it might not be as simple as installing binary packages known to work on RedHat Enterprise, and knows there will be some effort/time on my side involved. My apologies for breaking my promise to stop pondering the issue ;-( Valeri I think that is a positive , not a negative. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos versions in the future?
On 4/27/21 11:24 AM, Pete Biggs wrote: My comment was just to balance Pete's as the truth between Pete's statement and Carlos feelings is where I'm sure my comment pointed... Out of interest, do you think my statement is factually incorrect? If so, in what way? I guess I have to hide behind my "imperfect command of English language" ;-) Though it most likely is factually correct, while being an opposing to Carlos's statement of feelings, it did ask for a comment why Carlos's feeling have the grounds to be such, and and thus it warrantied in me my addition of comment. In other words, both of the following are true (IMHO): A. Johnny's rigorous statement of what CentOS now is (or yours, it doesn't actually matter who rigorously states it, but Johnny's seemed to really cover all aspects - maybe it's just my reading though) B. "CentOS is binary replica of RedHat Enterprise Linux" statement is not true as far as new releases are concerned, i.e. not true to build one's future on it But as everyone is agreed it is counter productive to ponder these things, I will end my side of it by reiterating: As always: thanks to the whole CentOS team, everyone who worked on this project during last two decades to make it as great as we know and used it - as "binary replica of RedHat Enterprise Linux". Your effort can not be overestimated, as well as the way to say it: a "binary replica of RedHat Enterprise Linux" was always quenching any doubts in everyone I had to talk to - both technical people and non-technical alike. (Not anymore, sigh). Valeri P. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos versions in the future?
On 4/27/21 10:32 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 4/27/21 9:29 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: On 4/27/21 8:55 AM, Pete Biggs wrote: On Tue, 2021-04-27 at 09:36 -0400, Carlos Oliva wrote: Thank you for your response Rich. I have heard that Stream is beta releases of RH -- rather distressing. Is this a proper characterization? You heard wrong. Stream is effectively a rolling early release of the next point release of RHEL. The packages in stream are fully tested and have gone through QA. They are not beta releases. With all due respect, - and avoiding the names to not scratch against "release,..." definitions, he is more correct in his feelings (that what you say) which I would formulate as "stream users are sort of Guinea pigs for RedHat releases". And mind that I have no emotions about it as my servers are FreeBSD for over a decade. And new number crunchers and workstations going Debian since CentOS ceased to be RedHat Enterprise binary replica was such a minor change... Just my $0.02. Valeri The disadvantage of Stream is that it doesn't have the full 10 year support of RHEL and doesn't have the full binary compatibility to RHEL. You would be hard pressed to find many FUNCTIONAL differences between Stream and CentOS Linux // just as you would be hard pressed to find many differences between RHEL 8.2 and RHEL 8.3, for example. Are there some differences? Sure. If people don't want stream, then by all means , use something else. CentOS 7 Linux will be around until the RHEL 7 EOL .. CentOS 8 Linux will be around until 31 Dec 2021 and CentOS Stream will be around for % years after the RHEL 8 Release. CentOS Stream 9 will be around until for 5 years after the RHEL 9 release. Thanks Johnny for calmly stating what is what. This exactly is where all statements about CentOS should end. It is what it is .. all the negative comments are not going to change it. My comment was just to balance Pete's as the truth between Pete's statement and Carlos feelings is where I'm sure my comment pointed... No negative intended, just stating of the facts as they are perceived by some (many? - not many if to discount these who fled totally). And as always: thank you personally and the whole CentOS team, everyone who worked on this project during last two decades to make it as great as we know and used it - as "binary replica of RedHat Enterprise Linux". Your effort can not be overestimated, as well as the way to say it: a "binary replica of RedHat Enterprise Linux" was always quenching any doubts in everyone I had to talk to - both technical people and non-technical ones. (Not anymore, sigh). Valeri For people who can not accept this and live with it .. life is too short for so much negative emotions. Go places and use things that make you happy. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos versions in the future?
On 4/27/21 8:55 AM, Pete Biggs wrote: On Tue, 2021-04-27 at 09:36 -0400, Carlos Oliva wrote: Thank you for your response Rich. I have heard that Stream is beta releases of RH -- rather distressing. Is this a proper characterization? You heard wrong. Stream is effectively a rolling early release of the next point release of RHEL. The packages in stream are fully tested and have gone through QA. They are not beta releases. With all due respect, - and avoiding the names to not scratch against "release,..." definitions, he is more correct in his feelings (that what you say) which I would formulate as "stream users are sort of Guinea pigs for RedHat releases". And mind that I have no emotions about it as my servers are FreeBSD for over a decade. And new number crunchers and workstations going Debian since CentOS ceased to be RedHat Enterprise binary replica was such a minor change... Just my $0.02. Valeri The disadvantage of Stream is that it doesn't have the full 10 year support of RHEL and doesn't have the full binary compatibility to RHEL. P. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos versions in the future?
On 4/27/21 8:39 AM, Carlos Oliva wrote: Thank you for your response Martin. We should probably consider moving to the alternatives that you mentioned or Ubuntu. Centos was no longer a Community effort after RH was bought by a propriatory company. "Proprietary company" sounds like a nonsense. All companies do work for profit. This is true about current owner of RedHat, as well as it was true about RedHat as a company before it was sold to current owner. The moment CentOS team started being paid by RedHat (long before RedHat was bought by current owner) was the moment _I_ should have told myself about CentOS "this now will not last long". Luckily for me I already fled my servers to FreeBSD, - from Linux in general, not from CentOS in particular. But that is long different story. Just my $0.02 Valeri On 4/27/2021 9:05 AM, J Martin Rushton via CentOS wrote: Not just rumours. CentOS 8 dies at the end of this year. CentOS 7 has until the end of 2024. RH are introducing "CentOS Stream" which is what will be in RHEL in the next release. It has been unkindly referred to as beta software. The traditional rebuild of RHEL will continue under other guises. There has been a long standing release at Springdale. Since RH's announcement Cloud have produced the Alma release. There is also a new project called Rocky that hasn't yet released a full version but is working on it. On 27/04/2021 13:46, Carlos Oliva wrote: Will there be newer versions of Centos? We have heard rumors that version 8 will be the last one. We are concerned with using an OS that will loose support in the future. Thank 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 -- ++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS are Debian / Ubuntu mirror
On 4/20/21 4:03 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: On 4/20/21 3:53 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: ok, so do you simply rsync the repositories from the other distributions you need? I forgot to mention: before mirroring using higher tier repository: contact their admin, ask if they do not mind that you will mirror using them as a higher tier mirror, and tell them all details: public/private mirror, your bandwidth, how often you plan to run sync - and ask them what frequency of sync is OK with them. After you roll out and know all works, if your plan is public mirror, next step will be to register your mirror. All in all, every distribution has HOWTO instruction to become their mirror, follow these. And as always, use web search to find these instructions: duckduckgo is your friend. Valeri Short answer: yes. Long answer: Every repository has its own suggestion how to mirror. I do not have Debian mirror, my friend sysadmin in the next building maintains one, no need for two in the same institution. Here in my cron job script for mirroring CentOS (with some local details obfuscated): #== #!/usr/local/bin/bash # We use locks... touch=/usr/bin/touch echo=/bin/echo ps=/bin/ps cat=/bin/cat grep=/usr/bin/grep wc=/usr/bin/wc rm=/bin/rm sendmail=/usr/sbin/sendmail date=/bin/date rsync=/usr/local/bin/rsync # DEFAULTS ADDR=recipient@server FROM=sender@hostingmirror lockfile=/.../lock/centosmirror.lock mirror=/.../mirror/centos logfile=/.../mirrorlog/centos.log # check if log file exists, and create if not if [ ! -f $logfile ]; then $touch $logfile fi # check if lock exists, then bale out sending warning, # otherwise rsync if [ -f $lockfile ]; then # check if the process resembling lock still exists, # if not, just delete lock if [ "$($ps -p `$cat $lockfile` | $wc -l)" -gt 1 ]; then # Send the message ( $echo "From: $FROM" $echo "To: $ADDR" $echo "Subject: CentOS mirror failed" $echo "" $echo "CentOS mirror process bailed out as there is another process" $echo "with the same name and the following PID:" $echo "" $echo "`$cat $lockfile`" echo "" echo "You may want to check logs:" echo "" echo "/.../mirrorlog/centos.log" ) | $sendmail -F $ADDR -t else # no process, just delete the lock, and mirror $rm -f $lockfile $echo $$ > $lockfile $echo "`$date` started mirroring" >> $logfile $rsync -aqH --exclude .~tmp~/ --exclude .~tmp~ --delete us-msync.centos.org::CentOS /data/mirror/centos $echo "`$date` finished mirroring" >> $logfile $rm $lockfile fi else $echo $$ > $lockfile $echo "`$date` started mirroring" >> $logfile $rsync -aqH --exclude .~tmp~/ --exclude .~tmp~ --delete us-msync.centos.org::CentOS /data/mirror/centos $echo "`$date` finished mirroring" >> $logfile $rm $lockfile fi # On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 3:14 PM Valeri Galtsev wrote: On Apr 20, 2021, at 12:34 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: Pulp is a bit overkill for my liking. Coming back to the original question: mirror hosting variety of distributions, does not have to have any packaging or other tools used by those distributions. Public mirror box I support runs FreeBSD, and hosts mirrors of CentOS, Ubuntu, CPAN, EPEL, … I hope, this helps. Valeri On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 2:44 PM Arnaud Gelly wrote: Hello, Is Pulp not supposed to do what you want : RPM, DEB and more in the same software ? I'm not using Pulp, just reading their website. Regards, -- On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 at 14:26, Rudi Ahlers wrote: Thank you. This at least point me in the right direction. I don't quite want to setup 2 servers, or 2 VM's for this. On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 2:03 PM Robert Heller wrote: At Mon, 19 Apr 2021 08:55:54 +0200 CentOS mailing list < centos@centos.org> wrote: Hi, Does anyone have some instructions on setting up a CentOS server as mirror for Debian and Ubuntu distributions? I already setup a YUM mirror and this works fairly well, but cannot seem to figure out how to mirror Debian and Ubuntu repositories. You need to grab a copy of debmirror, which is just a Perl script, so it should work under CentOS. I don't know where to get a version as a tarball -- I had an available VM running Ubuntu and just installed it there and NFS mounted the mirror disk from the CentOS server. There is a config file for debmirror to control where you mirror from and just what you mirror (versions, arches, etc.). There is a man page and and example config file. You then run debmirror from crontab (eg every day). Unfortunately, the Debian flavor repositories are not structured to just be rsync'ed like the CentOS repositories. -- Robert Heller -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364 Deepwoods Software -- Custom Software Ser
Re: [CentOS] CentOS are Debian / Ubuntu mirror
On 4/20/21 3:53 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: ok, so do you simply rsync the repositories from the other distributions you need? Short answer: yes. Long answer: Every repository has its own suggestion how to mirror. I do not have Debian mirror, my friend sysadmin in the next building maintains one, no need for two in the same institution. Here in my cron job script for mirroring CentOS (with some local details obfuscated): #== #!/usr/local/bin/bash # We use locks... touch=/usr/bin/touch echo=/bin/echo ps=/bin/ps cat=/bin/cat grep=/usr/bin/grep wc=/usr/bin/wc rm=/bin/rm sendmail=/usr/sbin/sendmail date=/bin/date rsync=/usr/local/bin/rsync # DEFAULTS ADDR=recipient@server FROM=sender@hostingmirror lockfile=/.../lock/centosmirror.lock mirror=/.../mirror/centos logfile=/.../mirrorlog/centos.log # check if log file exists, and create if not if [ ! -f $logfile ]; then $touch $logfile fi # check if lock exists, then bale out sending warning, # otherwise rsync if [ -f $lockfile ]; then # check if the process resembling lock still exists, # if not, just delete lock if [ "$($ps -p `$cat $lockfile` | $wc -l)" -gt 1 ]; then # Send the message ( $echo "From: $FROM" $echo "To: $ADDR" $echo "Subject: CentOS mirror failed" $echo "" $echo "CentOS mirror process bailed out as there is another process" $echo "with the same name and the following PID:" $echo "" $echo "`$cat $lockfile`" echo "" echo "You may want to check logs:" echo "" echo "/.../mirrorlog/centos.log" ) | $sendmail -F $ADDR -t else # no process, just delete the lock, and mirror $rm -f $lockfile $echo $$ > $lockfile $echo "`$date` started mirroring" >> $logfile $rsync -aqH --exclude .~tmp~/ --exclude .~tmp~ --delete us-msync.centos.org::CentOS /data/mirror/centos $echo "`$date` finished mirroring" >> $logfile $rm $lockfile fi else $echo $$ > $lockfile $echo "`$date` started mirroring" >> $logfile $rsync -aqH --exclude .~tmp~/ --exclude .~tmp~ --delete us-msync.centos.org::CentOS /data/mirror/centos $echo "`$date` finished mirroring" >> $logfile $rm $lockfile fi # On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 3:14 PM Valeri Galtsev wrote: On Apr 20, 2021, at 12:34 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: Pulp is a bit overkill for my liking. Coming back to the original question: mirror hosting variety of distributions, does not have to have any packaging or other tools used by those distributions. Public mirror box I support runs FreeBSD, and hosts mirrors of CentOS, Ubuntu, CPAN, EPEL, … I hope, this helps. Valeri On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 2:44 PM Arnaud Gelly wrote: Hello, Is Pulp not supposed to do what you want : RPM, DEB and more in the same software ? I'm not using Pulp, just reading their website. Regards, -- On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 at 14:26, Rudi Ahlers wrote: Thank you. This at least point me in the right direction. I don't quite want to setup 2 servers, or 2 VM's for this. On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 2:03 PM Robert Heller wrote: At Mon, 19 Apr 2021 08:55:54 +0200 CentOS mailing list < centos@centos.org> wrote: Hi, Does anyone have some instructions on setting up a CentOS server as mirror for Debian and Ubuntu distributions? I already setup a YUM mirror and this works fairly well, but cannot seem to figure out how to mirror Debian and Ubuntu repositories. You need to grab a copy of debmirror, which is just a Perl script, so it should work under CentOS. I don't know where to get a version as a tarball -- I had an available VM running Ubuntu and just installed it there and NFS mounted the mirror disk from the CentOS server. There is a config file for debmirror to control where you mirror from and just what you mirror (versions, arches, etc.). There is a man page and and example config file. You then run debmirror from crontab (eg every day). Unfortunately, the Debian flavor repositories are not structured to just be rsync'ed like the CentOS repositories. -- Robert Heller -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364 Deepwoods Software-- Custom Software Services http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services hel...@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers Website: http://www.rudiahlers.co.za ___ 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 -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers Website: http://www.rudiahlers.co.za __
Re: [CentOS] CentOS are Debian / Ubuntu mirror
> On Apr 20, 2021, at 12:34 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > > Pulp is a bit overkill for my liking. > Coming back to the original question: mirror hosting variety of distributions, does not have to have any packaging or other tools used by those distributions. Public mirror box I support runs FreeBSD, and hosts mirrors of CentOS, Ubuntu, CPAN, EPEL, … I hope, this helps. Valeri > > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 2:44 PM Arnaud Gelly wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Is Pulp not supposed to do what you want : RPM, DEB and more in the same >> software ? >> >> I'm not using Pulp, just reading their website. >> >> Regards, >> -- >> >> >> >> On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 at 14:26, Rudi Ahlers wrote: >> >>> Thank you. This at least point me in the right direction. I don't quite >>> want to setup 2 servers, or 2 VM's for this. >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 2:03 PM Robert Heller >> wrote: >>> At Mon, 19 Apr 2021 08:55:54 +0200 CentOS mailing list < >>> centos@centos.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > Does anyone have some instructions on setting up a CentOS server as mirror > for Debian and Ubuntu distributions? I already setup a YUM mirror and this > works fairly well, but cannot seem to figure out how to mirror Debian >>> and > Ubuntu repositories. You need to grab a copy of debmirror, which is just a Perl script, so >> it should work under CentOS. I don't know where to get a version as a >>> tarball -- I had an available VM running Ubuntu and just installed it there and >> NFS mounted the mirror disk from the CentOS server. There is a config file >>> for debmirror to control where you mirror from and just what you mirror (versions, arches, etc.). There is a man page and and example config file. You >> then run debmirror from crontab (eg every day). Unfortunately, the Debian flavor repositories are not structured to >> just be rsync'ed like the CentOS repositories. > > > -- Robert Heller -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364 Deepwoods Software-- Custom Software Services http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services hel...@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Kind Regards >>> Rudi Ahlers >>> Website: http://www.rudiahlers.co.za >>> ___ >>> 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 >> > > > -- > Kind Regards > Rudi Ahlers > Website: http://www.rudiahlers.co.za > ___ > 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] Missing /etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernel-3.10.0-1127.19.1.el7.x86_64.conf
On 4/14/21 10:17 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 4/12/21 9:56 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: On 4/12/21 8:34 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 4/11/21 11:32 AM, Kenneth Porter wrote: I'm yum updating some CentOS 7 systems today and got this error. Two systems (so far) seem to have rebooted fine. Should I worry? error: file /etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernel-3.10.0-1127.19.1.el7.x86_64.conf: No such file or directory The kernel does does contain that file. In CentOS linux 7 (and 8), the file is actually blank .. well is has one comment line: # Placeholder file, no vDSO hwcap entries used in this kernel. If you want the error to go away, just as the root user, do: touch /etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernel-3.10.0-1127.19.1.el7.x86_64.conf chmod 444 /etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernel-3.10.0-1127.19.1.el7.x86_64.conf The above 2 commands should create a zero size file there and prevent the error. As to how you got the error .. it seems there is an issue with the kernel-3.10.0-1127.19.1.el7.x86_64 install on your machine, it is at least missing that file. If you are using that kernel .. you might want to re-install it instead to make sure all the files are there. There is a newer kernel released for EL7. As to the purpose of /etc/ld.so.conf.d/, info here: https://linux.101hacks.com/unix/ldconfig/ That is the general description of ldconfig, which is transparent and clear as to what ldconfig purpose is. What is puzzling for me (I'm sure you are answering my question): why anything related to kernel package should be needed for automatically searching for shared libraries to be loaded (when one uses anything linked to shared libraries)? What kernel package brings that can have anything to do with that??! Thanks for insights! Valeri Well, that is a good question, since the kernel boot starts very early in the process. I suppose it is possible that some hardware drivers for kernel modules MIGHT need a path to external shared libraries. All I know for sure is that the capability to have an external ldconfig path exists for the kernel (ie, it is built in). I do not ever remember this being actually populated. But the capability has existed for a long time. And it is itching to add: for no apparent reason whatsoever. And the puzzle still stands. Thanks, Johnny! Valeri ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How to organize your VMs
On 4/13/21 11:48 AM, Roberto Ragusa wrote: On 4/10/21 6:13 PM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: I'd be curious to have your input, since I'm fairly new to this sort of approach. I would only separate things that for some reasons are "dirty", e.g. require non packaged installation. All the rest (like bind, postfix, dovecot) can happily live in the same machine. Splitting things too much will increase the maintenance effort, every stupid detail like new kernel installation, clock syncing, log rotation, security patching, etc. gets duplicated. Not to mention the need to now maintain a network connecting the pieces. This is where what I do in jails on FreeBSD is different from what you describe. All jails in FreeBSD have same base system. Thus, no extra overhead for base system: it is updated for all jails in a single go. Separate jails have only what is necessary for particular jail. Therefore, I only put in the same jail "inseparable things (e.g. mailman has to have web interface and postfix or sendmail, so this is minimal sufficient bundle that has to be together). Services that do not have to live in the same jail run in different jails. The separation of services into different jails brings a lot of convenience: 1. If service "a" has to be worked on, only other services living in the same jail may potentially be affected, nothing else 2. If service "a" and service "b" need incompatible dependencies, there is no problem when they run in different jails 3. If you do upgrade (as in upgrade of base system), you can upgrade one jail at a time, hence it is much smaller set of things that has to be dealt with as a result of upgrade; the last helps to diminish downtime of every service caused by upgrade 4. Suppose you have compromise (no one is guaranteed from that), that came through some service, but then only that jail is affected, no mess bad guys can do to other services. 5. And one more important thing: base system in jail is mounted read-only: any mess due to compromise does not affect base system of jail (any one of jails) And the list can continue. I hope, experts in Linux virtualization will chime in and outline how similar (common for all virtual systems read-only base, etc) can be done with one of Linux virtualization solutions, because I'm certain in must be possible. And I for one would love to learn about that. I hope, this helps. Valeri Same considerations when using containers instead of VMs, you only gain some performance by not dragging entire kernels for each service. Start by isolating the service that is giving you most troubles. Then with a bit of experience, you can evaluate if proceeding along that road. Best regards. -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Proxmox Backup Server equivalent for the RHEL/CentOS world ?
On April 12, 2021 6:19:52 PM CDT, Chris Adams wrote: >Once upon a time, Nicolas Kovacs said: >> Le 12/04/2021 à 23:11, Chris Adams a écrit : >> > oVirt >> > itself doesn't include backup software (it supports VM snapshots >and >> > clones), but there are several third-party backup tools (both free >and >> > commercial) compatible with oVirt/RHV, like Storeware's vProtect (I >> > haven't used it but seen others mention it). >> >> I'd be very grateful for some links to these third-party backup >tools, with a >> preference for free (as in beer + speech) stuff. > >Google is your friend No, it isn't. Duckduckgo is ;-) Valeri - check out the ovirt-users mailing list archive. >I'm not doing VM-based backups (had system backups already before >setting up this VM environment and haven't had the opportunity to >change), so I can't really say. > >I know there are people using Ansible plays against the oVirt API to do >things, so there are probably scripts for that in the usual places like >github. Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Proxmox Backup Server equivalent for the RHEL/CentOS world ?
On 4/12/21 9:54 AM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: Hi, I've just spent a couple weeks experimenting extensively with Proxmox VE (Virtual Environment) and Proxmox PBS (Backup Server) This is the greatest example to always decipher the abbreviations. PBS is quite well known for at least a couple of decades abbreviation standing for Portable Batch System. Proxmox on the other hand though seems to exist since 2008, I for one have never heard of - until this moment that is. (should I be adding "rant" rags?) Valeri on a couple of sandbox servers. I must say I'm impressed, especially of the elegance and simplicity of the backup solution. Running virtual machines can be backed up efficiently, combining deduplication and incremental backups. A bit like Rsnapshot, only for whole VM images. Both PVE and PBS are based on Debian, and now I wonder if RHEL-based systems have something similar to offer. Any suggestions ? Niki -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Missing /etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernel-3.10.0-1127.19.1.el7.x86_64.conf
On 4/12/21 8:34 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 4/11/21 11:32 AM, Kenneth Porter wrote: I'm yum updating some CentOS 7 systems today and got this error. Two systems (so far) seem to have rebooted fine. Should I worry? error: file /etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernel-3.10.0-1127.19.1.el7.x86_64.conf: No such file or directory The kernel does does contain that file. In CentOS linux 7 (and 8), the file is actually blank .. well is has one comment line: # Placeholder file, no vDSO hwcap entries used in this kernel. If you want the error to go away, just as the root user, do: touch /etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernel-3.10.0-1127.19.1.el7.x86_64.conf chmod 444 /etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernel-3.10.0-1127.19.1.el7.x86_64.conf The above 2 commands should create a zero size file there and prevent the error. As to how you got the error .. it seems there is an issue with the kernel-3.10.0-1127.19.1.el7.x86_64 install on your machine, it is at least missing that file. If you are using that kernel .. you might want to re-install it instead to make sure all the files are there. There is a newer kernel released for EL7. As to the purpose of /etc/ld.so.conf.d/, info here: https://linux.101hacks.com/unix/ldconfig/ That is the general description of ldconfig, which is transparent and clear as to what ldconfig purpose is. What is puzzling for me (I'm sure you are answering my question): why anything related to kernel package should be needed for automatically searching for shared libraries to be loaded (when one uses anything linked to shared libraries)? What kernel package brings that can have anything to do with that??! Thanks for insights! Valeri ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Missing /etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernel-3.10.0-1127.19.1.el7.x86_64.conf
> On Apr 11, 2021, at 11:32 AM, Kenneth Porter wrote: > > I'm yum updating some CentOS 7 systems today and got this error. Two systems > (so far) seem to have rebooted fine. Should I worry? > > error: file /etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernel-3.10.0-1127.19.1.el7.x86_64.conf: No > such file or directory Wow, this sounds like ridiculous thing to be inside /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ Could somebody teach me about it? Thanks in advance. Valeri > ___ > 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
On 4/9/21 1:15 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 at 12:40, Valeri Galtsev wrote: On 4/9/21 11:23 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 at 12:19, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 at 12:02, Valeri Galtsev wrote: On 4/9/21 10:47 AM, Binet, Valere (NIH/NIA/IRP) [C] wrote: The NIST and CIS baselines don't allow su, we have to use sudo on government computers. Could you enlighten me on the rationale behind that restriction? As, as you already noticed, my [ancient, maybe] reasoning makes me arrive at an opposite conclusion. (but mine is pure security consideration with full trust vested into sysadmin, see below...) On a second guess: it is just for a separation of privileges, and accounting of who did what which sudo brings to the table... Right? sudo brings into accounting and the ability to restrict a person to a single command. [That is hard to do well but it is possible.] It also allows for an easily auditable configuration file set so that you can see what should have been allowed and what shouldn't. Versus the usual 'oh lets make it setgid blah or setuid foo but restricted to this group..' and people forgetting it was done that way or why. That said it is like any tool can be used as a hammer when it should have remained a phillips head. Finally sudo can allow for better RBAC rules where if that is needed you had to have multiple su commands that were aligned to each role so that people could not escape their jail. [My understanding is that this is where your chosen OS shines that should have been written as your chosen OS, FreeBSD, shines ... Ah, I couldn't imagine someone remembers I use FreeBSD too. On servers that is. Number crunchers, workstations, and laptops of my users run CentOS (7), Ubuntu (laptops), and also Debian these days. Not mentioning MS Windows and MacOS, though probably should. As these are my choices too as well as those of my users. my apology for dropping the packets as I thought i typed it but didn't No need to apologize. I was indeed a bit puzzled thinking this must be something obvious - derived from the fact this is CentOS list maybe - still it was kind of escaping me so I asked ;-) Yes, I did start rating sudo higher than I did in the past after this thread (hijacked - my apologies if it was my doing, didn't mean though). Thanks, everybody, for your insights ! Valeri Which one OS would be that? Valeri with sudo and this was lifted to other os's laster.] By 2005 most .gov/.mil baselines required su to be no longer allowed because of this. -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8
On 4/9/21 1:08 PM, Scott Robbins wrote: On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 11:39:58AM -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote: On 4/9/21 11:23 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 at 12:19, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 at 12:02, Valeri Galtsev wrote: Finally sudo can allow for better RBAC rules where if that is needed you had to have multiple su commands that were aligned to each role so that people could not escape their jail. [My understanding is that this is where your chosen OS shines Which one OS would be that? I suspect that it's because you are known as the FreeBSD user on this list. :) Oh boy, I never could imagine I could be "known as...". Who would ever even notice me?! ;-) (I also prefer it, and have been fortunate enough to be at a FreeBSD shop for yearse now.) Note that FreeBSD can also use OpenBSD's doas command, though on FreeBSD, there is no persist option, so one must type the password each time--which in a production environment isn't necessary a bad thing. You learn something every day. Thanks! Valeri -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8
On 4/9/21 11:23 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 at 12:19, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 at 12:02, Valeri Galtsev wrote: On 4/9/21 10:47 AM, Binet, Valere (NIH/NIA/IRP) [C] wrote: The NIST and CIS baselines don't allow su, we have to use sudo on government computers. Could you enlighten me on the rationale behind that restriction? As, as you already noticed, my [ancient, maybe] reasoning makes me arrive at an opposite conclusion. (but mine is pure security consideration with full trust vested into sysadmin, see below...) On a second guess: it is just for a separation of privileges, and accounting of who did what which sudo brings to the table... Right? sudo brings into accounting and the ability to restrict a person to a single command. [That is hard to do well but it is possible.] It also allows for an easily auditable configuration file set so that you can see what should have been allowed and what shouldn't. Versus the usual 'oh lets make it setgid blah or setuid foo but restricted to this group..' and people forgetting it was done that way or why. That said it is like any tool can be used as a hammer when it should have remained a phillips head. Finally sudo can allow for better RBAC rules where if that is needed you had to have multiple su commands that were aligned to each role so that people could not escape their jail. [My understanding is that this is where your chosen OS shines Which one OS would be that? Valeri with sudo and this was lifted to other os's laster.] By 2005 most .gov/.mil baselines required su to be no longer allowed because of this. -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8
On 4/9/21 10:47 AM, Binet, Valere (NIH/NIA/IRP) [C] wrote:
The NIST and CIS baselines don't allow su, we have to use sudo on government
computers.
Could you enlighten me on the rationale behind that restriction? As, as
you already noticed, my [ancient, maybe] reasoning makes me arrive at an
opposite conclusion. (but mine is pure security consideration with full
trust vested into sysadmin, see below...)
On a second guess: it is just for a separation of privileges, and
accounting of who did what which sudo brings to the table... Right?
Thanks in advance.
Valeri
Valère Binet
On 4/9/21, 11:39 AM, "Valeri Galtsev" wrote:
On 4/9/21 10:31 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 4/9/21 5:18 AM, Steve Clark via CentOS wrote:
>> On 4/8/21 3:50 PM, Tony Schreiner wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 2:33 PM Nicolas Kovacs
>> <mailto:i...@microlinux.fr> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Le 08/04/2021 à 18:58, Steve Clark via CentOS a écrit :
>>
>>
>> How do I allow root log in on GDM.
>>
>>
>>
>> tl;dr: you don't.
>>
>> Log in as a non-root user, and when you do need root, either open up a
>> terminal
>> and use 'su -' or (even better) setup your user by making your user a
>> member of
>> the wheel group and then use sudo.
>>
>> Logging in to a GUI as root is *BAD* practice.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Niki
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> That said - you can do it, by clicking on "Not listed?" and typing root
>> into the user field.
>>
>> Yes I have done that and it immediately comes back to the login screen,
>> I know I am typing the
>> correct passwd, because if I botch the passwd I get a message to that
>> effect.
>>
>>
>>
>
> I would not recommend ever using the GUI as the root user .. it creates
> keys and items that are very dangerous. (gnome key rings, etc)
>
+1000
> You should be able to 'su -' , then use visudo to create a sudo account
> for your user. You can even NOPASSWD your user for using sudo (you may
> or may not want to do that .. if someone gains access to your local
> account, they could then sudo with no passwd).
>
In the past I even avoided sudo. It yet one more SUID-ed binary on your
machine. Which may add to your potential [local, in general]
vulnerability footprint. su, - making yourself root is more than enough
for regular sysadmin.
> But, i have never, ever logged in as root on a GUI account directly on a
> machine that I cared about or was keeping live .. just advise, do with
> it what you will.
>
+1
To OP: Do as you wish, and deal with consequences.
Valeri
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
--
Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
--
Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8
On 4/9/21 10:31 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 4/9/21 5:18 AM, Steve Clark via CentOS wrote: On 4/8/21 3:50 PM, Tony Schreiner wrote: On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 2:33 PM Nicolas Kovacs <mailto:i...@microlinux.fr> wrote: Le 08/04/2021 à 18:58, Steve Clark via CentOS a écrit : How do I allow root log in on GDM. tl;dr: you don't. Log in as a non-root user, and when you do need root, either open up a terminal and use 'su -' or (even better) setup your user by making your user a member of the wheel group and then use sudo. Logging in to a GUI as root is *BAD* practice. Cheers, Niki That said - you can do it, by clicking on "Not listed?" and typing root into the user field. Yes I have done that and it immediately comes back to the login screen, I know I am typing the correct passwd, because if I botch the passwd I get a message to that effect. I would not recommend ever using the GUI as the root user .. it creates keys and items that are very dangerous. (gnome key rings, etc) +1000 You should be able to 'su -' , then use visudo to create a sudo account for your user. You can even NOPASSWD your user for using sudo (you may or may not want to do that .. if someone gains access to your local account, they could then sudo with no passwd). In the past I even avoided sudo. It yet one more SUID-ed binary on your machine. Which may add to your potential [local, in general] vulnerability footprint. su, - making yourself root is more than enough for regular sysadmin. But, i have never, ever logged in as root on a GUI account directly on a machine that I cared about or was keeping live .. just advise, do with it what you will. +1 To OP: Do as you wish, and deal with consequences. Valeri ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Resize a VM: any risk involved ?
On 4/8/2021 4:49 PM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: Le 08/04/2021 à 18:35, Simon Matter a écrit : BTW, are you not using XFS these days? I remember the first Linux HOWTO I used to start with xfs was entitled: \ XFS: Linux on steroids ;-) Valeri Been using ext4 for ages. Force of habit, I guess. I have yet to find a reason to move to something different. Niki ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] almalinux?
On 4/5/21 11:58 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: On 4/5/21 12:20 PM, mark wrote: Anyone looked into almalinux? I was sort of waiting for rocky, but I see from over the weekend on slashdot that almalinux stable is released. I've cross-graded two C8 VMs over to AL8 and thus far smooth operation. I have NOT done any fresh installs (don't plan to, either, since new installs are all Debian now +1 I did my estimate of what will last, so I don't have to jump my infrastructure through hoops and loops again soon, so my decision: 1. Debian 2. on machines that will require cuda: Ubuntu (Debian clone which will support NVIDIA proprietary stuff) 3. FreeBSD (all servers: jails on FreeBSD) This decision will let me to not make fundamental changes soon. Not guaranteed, but I have good record of such decisions made by me in the past. I hope, this helps somebody. Valeri ). Do note the release notes specifically mention that Secure Boot is not supported yet, so be aware of that if you use SecureBoot. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Can't upgrade sssd-*
On 4/2/21 9:46 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 4/1/21 12:32 PM, Warren Young wrote: On Mar 26, 2021, at 7:08 AM, Warren Young wrote: Is anyone else getting this on dnf upgrade? [MIRROR] sssd-proxy-2.3.0-9.el8.x86_64.rpm: Interrupted by header callback: Server reports Content-Length: 9937 but expected size is: 143980 The short reply size made me think to try a packet capture, and it turned out to be a message from the site’s “transparent” HTTP proxy, telling me that content’s blocked. Rather than fight with site IT over the block list, I have a new question: is there any plan for getting HTTPS-only updates in CentOS? Changing all “http” to “https” in my repo conf files just made the update stall, so I assume there are mirrors that are still HTTP-only. The mirror I still maintain IS http only: http://bay.uchicago.edu/centos/ as of this moment I have no plans to change anything (like remove CentOS from mirror machine, or force/redirect http to https on the server side). I hope, this helps. Valeri No .. we host things on donated servers, we therefore are not putting private keys on there. That (and external mirrors) is why we SIGN repodata.xml. We just can't risk putting private keys for centos.org on machines that are donated. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS-7-x86_64-dvd-2009.iso is too big for DVD blanks
> On Mar 18, 2021, at 7:30 AM, Robert Heller wrote: > > At Thu, 18 Mar 2021 00:24:51 -0500 CentOS mailing list > wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 11:42:40PM -0500, Robert G. (Doc) Savage via CentOS >> wrote: >>> >>> I'm sure it would, but I thought I made it clear that DL or BluRay have >>> never been options in this case. I'm disappointed that the DVD iso was >>> released without any release notes advising it was oversized >> >> The size issue with single-layer media has been a known issue since the >> CentOS-6 days and the release notes very much do mention it, or at least >> they did at one point. >> >> It's not realistic to expect server-class machines not to be able to >> boot from dual-layer or USB media in 2021. > > Or really any "PC". My 2009 vintage desktop "PC" motherboard can boot from > USB. It has the original BIOS. To add to that: it would be unreasonable to expect from “binary replica” distribution to compose DVDs (or CDs) differently from upstream vendor. Therefore, media size may end up larger than limit. Valeri >> >> >> John > > -- > Robert Heller -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364 > Deepwoods Software-- Custom Software Services > http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services > hel...@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services > > ___ > 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-7-x86_64-dvd-2009.iso is too big for DVD blanks
> On Mar 14, 2021, at 8:36 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: > > > >> On Mar 14, 2021, at 8:13 PM, Robert G. (Doc) Savage via CentOS >> wrote: >> >> I need help from someone experienced with the CentOS bug tracking >> system. I gotta say it is one of the most complicated and imposing >> front ends I've ever seen. Could anyone familiar with it please file a >> bug on my behalf? Particulars: >> >> "CentOS 7.9.2009 DVD iso image too large" >> >> ISO image: CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-2009.iso 4.7GB raw CD image >> Wed Nov 4 05:37:25 2020 >> Burners: Both K3B and Brasero >> Media: Both DVD-R and DVD+R single-layer disks >> >> iso image: 4,712,300,544 bytes >> User Anthony F McInerney advises Wikipedia says >> DVD-R capacity: 4,707,319,808 bytes (max) >> >> I have tried burning this same iso image on two different machines: a >> CentOS 7.9 server and a Fedora 33 laptop. Same failure on both. >> >> We need to ask the developers to make a re-spin that's about 5MB >> smaller. And before someone suggests it, the 2010-vintage server I'm >> trying to install CentOS on does not support booting from a thumb >> drive, so that option is not available. > > Double layer DVD comes to my mind. > Another thing came to my mind: you can try growisofs in command line with -overnurn option. Valeri > But I agree, it is annoying, and I’ve seen things like that, this is not the > first time I see alleged DVD image doesn’t fit into DVD it’s supposed to be > burned to. > > Valeri > >> Thanks, >> >> --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
Re: [CentOS] CentOS-7-x86_64-dvd-2009.iso is too big for DVD blanks
> On Mar 14, 2021, at 8:13 PM, Robert G. (Doc) Savage via CentOS > wrote: > > I need help from someone experienced with the CentOS bug tracking > system. I gotta say it is one of the most complicated and imposing > front ends I've ever seen. Could anyone familiar with it please file a > bug on my behalf? Particulars: > > "CentOS 7.9.2009 DVD iso image too large" > > ISO image: CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-2009.iso 4.7GB raw CD image > Wed Nov 4 05:37:25 2020 > Burners: Both K3B and Brasero > Media: Both DVD-R and DVD+R single-layer disks > > iso image: 4,712,300,544 bytes > User Anthony F McInerney advises Wikipedia says > DVD-R capacity: 4,707,319,808 bytes (max) > > I have tried burning this same iso image on two different machines: a > CentOS 7.9 server and a Fedora 33 laptop. Same failure on both. > > We need to ask the developers to make a re-spin that's about 5MB > smaller. And before someone suggests it, the 2010-vintage server I'm > trying to install CentOS on does not support booting from a thumb > drive, so that option is not available. Double layer DVD comes to my mind. But I agree, it is annoying, and I’ve seen things like that, this is not the first time I see alleged DVD image doesn’t fit into DVD it’s supposed to be burned to. Valeri > Thanks, > > --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
Re: [CentOS] Bare metal vs. virtualization: Proxmox + Ceph + CentOS ?
> On Mar 14, 2021, at 5:42 AM, Leon Fauster via CentOS > wrote: > > Am 14.03.21 um 07:13 schrieb Nicolas Kovacs: >> >> Now here’s the problem: it took me three and a half days of intense work to >> restore everything and get everything running again. Three and a half days of >> downtime is quite a stretch. > > What was the real problem? Why did you need days to restore > from backups? Maybe the new solution is attached here? I would second what Leon said. Even though my backup is different (bareos), still my estimate of full restore to different machine would be: installation of new system (about 30 min at most), then restore of everything from bareos backup, which will depend on total size of everything to restore, the bottleneck will be 1 Gbps network connection. And I do not think my FreeBSD boxes with dozens of jails are much simpler than Nicolas's front end machine. Restore from backup is just restore from backup. But under some circumstances that can be even faster. I once had quite important machine died (system board). But I had different hardware running less critical stuff, which accepted the drives from failed machine plus RAID card from it, after boot the only thing was necessary to address was network configuration (due to different device names). (both boxes have 8 port sata/sas backplane, all filesystems of machines live on hardware RAID-6…) As far as distributed file systems are concerned, they are nice (but with seph you will need to have all boxes with the same size of storage). However, it is more expensive. Cheaper guy - I - goes with hardware RAID, and spare machine (if necessary that is: in a manner of grabbing less important box’s hardware to stick drives from failed into it). Virtualization: in our shop (we use FreeBSD jails), it provides more security and flexibility. As far as “disaster recovery” is concerned, using jails doesn’t affect it in any way. But often helps to avoid disasters created by sudden conflict between packages, as only inseparable components are run in the same jail, so actual server is a bunch of jails each running one or two services, which gives extra robustness. And if A depends on C and B depends on D, and if C and D conflict with each other, that doesn’t matter when A lives in one jail, and B lives in another. One example of flexibility I just had another week: I migrated the box with couple of dozens of jail (most of them are independent servers with different IPs, “virtualized” in the manner they run if jails on some machine). To move the whole everything to another machine will take long, noticeable downtime, but moving jails one at a time made downtime of each as short as mere reboot cause. (In general, any sort of virtualization gives you that). I hope, this helps. Valeri > -- > 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
Re: [CentOS] Tar of files
On 3/3/21 8:53 AM, Jerry Geis wrote: When I "tar" up an archive the files have an owner bob, when I extract that to another machine bob is there also but user number is different. If you pack and extract as root, then numeric UID will be the same. But on different systems there may be different usernames that have that numeric UID. Incidentally: sometimes we enable SGID bit on a directory (to have everything that is created in it inherit the group that directory belongs to). tar will be one of the tools that will break it: extracted archive will have group as it was in the archived original (numeric GID that is, if both archiving and un-archiving was performed by root). I hope, this helps. Valeri So when I extract bob is no longer the owner of the files but someone else. Is there a good way to account for this ? User ID on one box being different to the next box ? I was expecting to untar and bob still be the owner . Thanks, Jerry ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Recommendations for webmail client on EL8
On 3/1/21 11:02 AM, Simon Matter wrote: On 3/1/21 10:27 AM, Jay Hart wrote: Am 01.03.21 um 15:56 schrieb Simon Matter: On 3/1/21 2:57 PM, Simon Matter wrote: ... I was looking at Roundcube but it seems difficult on EL8 because a lot of PHP stuff is missing and not available as RPMs. I guess the same is true for the python things needed for Mailpile. In the end my list only contains Cypht, Rainloop and Afterlogic Webmail lite. ... Have you considered to run the official Roundcube container image as a podmans systemd service? https://hub.docker.com/r/roundcube/roundcubemail/ https://www.redhat.com/sysadmin/improved-systemd-podman (Podman >= 2.0 required, but it's only a systemd service file to be created manually) Hi Thomas, Thanks for your suggestion. No, I'm not really thinking about docker/podman. I prefer having clean system installs, even if I have to create RPMs myself. This has worked fine for the last two decades but yes, I'm afraid, this is considered old school these days :-) Hey Simon, take a look at Remi's repository ... -- Leon Hi Leon, thanks. I'm wondering why these things are not in EPEL? Simon ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Simon, I'm in same boat as you. I have a C6 machine running squirrelmail that I've been trying to get upgraded. I bought a new machine and have C8 installed, postfix, dovecot, SA, the works, running. But, I couldn't get squirrelmail running. I'm also very interested in the answer to this question, "what webmail to run on C8" (or stream in the future). I've looked at the same SW apps you have and have not really gotten a warm fuzzy over anything. I wonder if another tact to take would be to try to get squirrelmail more "modern". I know Les is still doing a bit of dev, but it does seem like squirrelmail is lagging behind. I know this is irrelevant to CentOS and RedHat Enterprise, as I run these on FreeBSD (in separate dedicated jail). I do have both of them: roundcube and squirrelmail. When I tell my users about the options, I tell them roundcube is modern and fancy. Squirrelmail, though same good, is more older style. So, they have choices to match their taste. And again, this is irrelevant to Linux. But both roundcube and squirrelmail will not be phased out in close future (my own estimate), though squirrelmail has reached the stage when new features will not be added (nothing bad about that in my book). Valeri Hi Valeri, I've just checked FreeBSD ports: - squirrelmail latest with php 8 Just for record: list of available packages (note PHP version): squirrelmail-php73-20200422 squirrelmail-php74-20200422 squirrelmail-php80-20200422 - roundcube 1.4.11 (latest) with php 7.4 - rainloop 1.15.0 (latest) with php 8 - horde-webmail 5.2.22 (latest) with php 8 Once again a slap in my face as an EL user :-) But I have an idea, I'll look at the squirrelmail port closely and see how I can include the updated code in my RPMs. Sounds like a solution - or move everything to FreeBSD. I'm running a FreeBSD test VM for years and I really like the upgrades the FreeBSD way! Running things in FreeBSD jails (only inseparable things in the same jail) makes things extremely easy: such as upgrades to higher version, updates, migration of servers, or when what you need depends on different things which are incompatible. Several servers I run do not exist as a machines, or individual systems: a host may be a bunch of (2-5) different jails. And I for one consider FreeBSD jails much more secure and significantly slimmer an any virtualization solutions on Linux. But don't ask me to prove the point ;-) Valeri Simon ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Recommendations for webmail client on EL8
On 3/1/21 10:41 AM, Christopher Wensink wrote: Jay, I agree, the last post on https://squirrelmail.org/ was an announcement for PHP 5.4 and 5.5 Compatibility from 5/30/2013. The last plugin update was 3/28/2014. I consider squirrelmail pretty much dead at this point. No. it is not. It is not actively developed, no new featured are added for quite some time. Squirrelmail can be downloded here: https://squirrelmail.org/download.php Where you can see year 2021 stable version snapshots. Latest you can download works with PHP 7. As I said in another comment: they do not do new development. But they actively support what it is now, and in my estimate it will not be phased out in any observable future. Yes I had to do this kind of homework when I was rebuilding [freebsd jail with] webmail services. Valeri PS Not everything that paces fast with new "releases" and which releases security patches even more often (yes, I look at you, Mozilla firefox and thunderbird) is "pretty much dead". There are great examples, like: netscape navigator (in its time), cvs (in its time and still here), subversion, squirrelmail, mailman 2 to name few. On 3/1/2021 10:27 AM, Jay Hart wrote: Am 01.03.21 um 15:56 schrieb Simon Matter: On 3/1/21 2:57 PM, Simon Matter wrote: ... I was looking at Roundcube but it seems difficult on EL8 because a lot of PHP stuff is missing and not available as RPMs. I guess the same is true for the python things needed for Mailpile. In the end my list only contains Cypht, Rainloop and Afterlogic Webmail lite. ... Have you considered to run the official Roundcube container image as a podmans systemd service? https://hub.docker.com/r/roundcube/roundcubemail/ https://www.redhat.com/sysadmin/improved-systemd-podman (Podman >= 2.0 required, but it's only a systemd service file to be created manually) Hi Thomas, Thanks for your suggestion. No, I'm not really thinking about docker/podman. I prefer having clean system installs, even if I have to create RPMs myself. This has worked fine for the last two decades but yes, I'm afraid, this is considered old school these days :-) Hey Simon, take a look at Remi's repository ... -- Leon Hi Leon, thanks. I'm wondering why these things are not in EPEL? Simon ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Simon, I'm in same boat as you. I have a C6 machine running squirrelmail that I've been trying to get upgraded. I bought a new machine and have C8 installed, postfix, dovecot, SA, the works, running. But, I couldn't get squirrelmail running. I'm also very interested in the answer to this question, "what webmail to run on C8" (or stream in the future). I've looked at the same SW apps you have and have not really gotten a warm fuzzy over anything. I wonder if another tact to take would be to try to get squirrelmail more "modern". I know Les is still doing a bit of dev, but it does seem like squirrelmail is lagging behind. MTC, Jay ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Recommendations for webmail client on EL8
On 3/1/21 10:27 AM, Jay Hart wrote: Am 01.03.21 um 15:56 schrieb Simon Matter: On 3/1/21 2:57 PM, Simon Matter wrote: ... I was looking at Roundcube but it seems difficult on EL8 because a lot of PHP stuff is missing and not available as RPMs. I guess the same is true for the python things needed for Mailpile. In the end my list only contains Cypht, Rainloop and Afterlogic Webmail lite. ... Have you considered to run the official Roundcube container image as a podmans systemd service? https://hub.docker.com/r/roundcube/roundcubemail/ https://www.redhat.com/sysadmin/improved-systemd-podman (Podman >= 2.0 required, but it's only a systemd service file to be created manually) Hi Thomas, Thanks for your suggestion. No, I'm not really thinking about docker/podman. I prefer having clean system installs, even if I have to create RPMs myself. This has worked fine for the last two decades but yes, I'm afraid, this is considered old school these days :-) Hey Simon, take a look at Remi's repository ... -- Leon Hi Leon, thanks. I'm wondering why these things are not in EPEL? Simon ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Simon, I'm in same boat as you. I have a C6 machine running squirrelmail that I've been trying to get upgraded. I bought a new machine and have C8 installed, postfix, dovecot, SA, the works, running. But, I couldn't get squirrelmail running. I'm also very interested in the answer to this question, "what webmail to run on C8" (or stream in the future). I've looked at the same SW apps you have and have not really gotten a warm fuzzy over anything. I wonder if another tact to take would be to try to get squirrelmail more "modern". I know Les is still doing a bit of dev, but it does seem like squirrelmail is lagging behind. I know this is irrelevant to CentOS and RedHat Enterprise, as I run these on FreeBSD (in separate dedicated jail). I do have both of them: roundcube and squirrelmail. When I tell my users about the options, I tell them roundcube is modern and fancy. Squirrelmail, though same good, is more older style. So, they have choices to match their taste. And again, this is irrelevant to Linux. But both roundcube and squirrelmail will not be phased out in close future (my own estimate), though squirrelmail has reached the stage when new features will not be added (nothing bad about that in my book). Valeri MTC, Jay ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How to install XFCE on CentOS 8?
On 2/25/21 3:09 PM, Gionatan Danti wrote: Il 2021-02-25 14:27 Simon Matter ha scritto: EL on the other side has a very limited, supported package set and therefore a lot of packages needed to build a lot of packages are just missing. Yeah, same impressions here. EPEL really is a key package repository for RHEL - and I always wondered why they did not invest into maintaining (and extending) this excellent repo. How about this reason. Paid customers when have issue place support call, and their issue MUST be resolved promptly, it is part of contract with RedHat. To maintain as vast number of stuff as EPEL contains will require RedHat to charge customers proportionally higher, whereas these have only slim base of paid customers who use them. Just a guess. Whatever RedHat was doing [in the past] they knew how to do the business (until recently when they were bough out as a result of poor decisions - or maybe because they were doing business really well). Valeri I think RH now is extremely focused on cloud and SaaS platform, which leave us "normal" sysadmin in an uncomfortable situation... Regards. -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How to install XFCE on CentOS 8?
On 2/25/21 8:28 AM, Simon Matter wrote: On 25/02/2021 13:37, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: They run into the same interdependency.. but because they have organically grown their distro every day, those dependencies grew 1 at a time. For EPEL and other EL repos you have to jump multiple Fedora releases to catch up. So in EL6 we were Fedora Linux 12. In EL7.0 we had to jump and rebuild from scratch a lot of Fedora Linux 18 and Fedora Linux 19 and then progressed up to about Fedora 24 as various parts got rebased and upgraded to 7.9. For EL8, we have to jump to Fedora Linux 28 and then each dot release rebase parts while keeping other parts back because rebasing is focused. [This means that if something needs glibc-2.32 you can't put it in EL8 without a lot of patching to make it work with whatever changed... but some other related components may be able to recompile fine.] Thus you need people who enjoy that kind of work to do this because EPEL is nearly all volunteer work. I had to work after hours or take vacation time to work on getting EPEL-8 out so that I could get focused effort on it. Most people don't have that 'luxury' and so the number of volunteers is small but the expectation that it will be there is large. Tony Schreiner ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos I was recently looking at Raymond's book "The Art of UNIX Programming" from 2003. He, along with contributors Thompson (inventor of UNIX), Kernigham (C and AWK), Korn and others of that callibre, espouse creating "little tools" that do one job reliably and well. The likes of Gnome or systemd certainly would never fit into this philosophy. I really think we have lost a lot of maintainability and ease of management over the last 20 years as applications are stretched to do ever more. -- J Martin Rushton MBCS Or you can say it with Henry Spencers words: Those who don't understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. Alas, the whole thing stems from more global trend. The world became ruled pretty much on all levels by bureaucrats. They have no real knowledge or hands on experience in the field they rule. The paradigm for them is: they can find and hire (and replace on the whim) those who will do actual job. Without knowledge the only way they can select whom to hire is by looking at the number of certificates.Those are abundant mostly in relation to MS products.The judgement of how well systems are maintained is based on checked boxes in questionnaires such as "is antivirus installed?" (which is irrelevant to UNIX, Linux or MacOS systems)... And, of course, they are willing the "anti-virus style" scanner run [with root privileges] from their [much less secure] box on your UNIX machines. Whereas long ago it was established that anti-virus idea is logically flawed: you can not enumerate bad, you can enumerate good and prohibit everything else. And the list goes on and on... Which pretty much explains the deficiencies we observe today in the state of the art. Just my $0.02 Valeri -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Challenging times in trying to access oracle Linux documentation
> On Feb 6, 2021, at 5:39 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > On Sat, 6 Feb 2021 at 15:57, Frank Cox wrote: > >> On Sat, 6 Feb 2021 15:22:21 -0500 >> Jonathan Billings wrote: >> >> 1.) you assume people will clearly label their off topic threads >> >> I think that in most cases that will happen, yes, since people with a >> technical background understand that clarity and precision are important >> when posting a question or observation or asking for advice. >> >> 2.) as we’ve seen, those off topic threads often weave in and out of >> on-topic threads until a moderator tells you to take it to another venue. >> >> Which of course never happens now with threads that start off discussing >> some aspect of Centos? >>> >>> You’ll dilute the usefulness of this list to the point that it will be >>> worthless for people who are interested in CentOS topics. >> >> In your opinion. On average, this is not a high-traffic mailing list and >> I'd be really surprised if the traffic actually increased in any >> significant way since a question that might today be asked about Centos >> will be asked tomorrow about Rocky; either way, there's no net increase in >> the traffic, just a change in the subject line. >> >> > I have now administered mailing lists for 25+ years and I have found that > what happens is that off-topic traffic basically causes an echo chamber > effect over time. The people having the side conversations get louder and > louder over time not because the list gets larger but because they have > 'driven' off the people who were here for a specific focus. The people > remaining become more and more of an echo chamber moving the 'topic' to > being wha > > I realize that this has been a traumatic split in the culture for a lot of > people (myself included), but there is a point where the list main topic of > discussion will be on how to use/administer/fix CentOS Stream and CentOS-7 > versus Oracle/FreeBSD/Rocky/Alma/Debian/Slackware/etc. > > I can ask for a generic-enterprise-nix (genix?) list on the CentOS mailman > and see if that can take up the traffic for the people who feel that they > want and need to talk about alternatives. If that is acceptable then people > can subscribe there and talk in detail about other operating systems > choices. I do believe these conversations do need to happen but not > everyone wants to hear the 4 Yorkshiremen skit every day as we 'old-timers' > deal with our past. When wise man gives a solution, I always think: how come this never occurred to me? Thank you, Stephen. I hope, someone of CentOS mail list admins makes that new list you suggested. Then the heat will be off both groups of people. Valeri > > -- > Stephen J Smoogen. > ___ > 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] Challenging times in trying to access oracle Linux documentation
Sorry about top posting. Though I can understand Jonathan’s feelings, I am with Frank on this subject. So, I will keep participating in “non-CentOS” discussions which may be useful to CentOS refugees, until I’m kicked out of the list, or such discussions become forcefully banned. As this - CentOS list - is the only place where all CentOS refugees may be present, and those fled to one distro may bring information helpful for those fled to different distro, and most logical place for it is this very list. To CentOS fanats: I do understand your feelings. But try to understand those who had to flee CentOS because of CentOS’s (or RedHat’s, or IBM’s) recent decision. You only need to tolerate this for about a year at the most, this inappropriate in your view thing will fade out on its own. Former happy CentOS user (for over decade and a half) who still supports a bunch of CentOS number crunchers, - till EOL of respective release numbers. Valeri > On Feb 6, 2021, at 2:56 PM, Frank Cox wrote: > > On Sat, 6 Feb 2021 15:22:21 -0500 > Jonathan Billings wrote: > > 1.) you assume people will clearly label their off topic threads > > I think that in most cases that will happen, yes, since people with a > technical background understand that clarity and precision are important when > posting a question or observation or asking for advice. > > 2.) as we’ve seen, those off topic threads often weave in and out of on-topic > threads until a moderator tells you to take it to another venue. > > Which of course never happens now with threads that start off discussing some > aspect of Centos? >> >> You’ll dilute the usefulness of this list to the point that it will be >> worthless for people who are interested in CentOS topics. > > In your opinion. On average, this is not a high-traffic mailing list and I'd > be really surprised if the traffic actually increased in any significant way > since a question that might today be asked about Centos will be asked > tomorrow about Rocky; either way, there's no net increase in the traffic, > just a change in the subject line. > >> You want a generic >> rhel clone list? Create one and post an announcement about it. > > You're welcome to do that if that's your calling. By all means, be my guest, > and so on. Personally, I'm quite content using the mailing lists that I've > been using for years. If I really have to sign up for some other mailing > lists then I can do that though it's not really my first choice of actions. > I really have no desire to run a mailing list of my own. Again, though, > you're welcome to undertake that if you wish and I might even be convinced to > sign up for it. > >> If you want to talk about Rocky or Oracle Linux, use their lists. This list >> is for CentOS. > > Since neither you or I are the list manager, all we can do is express an > opinion. I've expressed mine, you've expressed yours, and a few other folks > have chimed in too. And we'll all get to find out what happens as time goes > on. > >> If you have a question that is >> codebase specific, then just ask it without talking about the distro it came >> from, but as soon as it becomes clear that it is infrastructure related, keep >> it on the appropriate list. > > And after going through all of the above, you ultimately agree with me after > all. > > I generally read just the parts of this mailing list that are of interest to > me, and most questions and observations that I see here are about specific > programs/setups/why-did-this-just-explode. Unless they're buried in some of > the threads that I skip over because they don't seem relevant to what I'm > doing, I see very few questions about infrastructure and the like. Well, up > until about two months ago, that is. And I'm pretty sure the infrastructure > stuff will calm down again after the big change-over at the end of this year. > > > > -- > MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Challenging times in trying to access oracle Linux documentation
> On Feb 5, 2021, at 7:27 PM, John R. Dennison wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 10:23:37AM -0600, Frank Cox wrote: >> >> Speaking for myself only, I have no problem with anyone posting Oracle >> Linux questions, answers or solutions in this mailing list. I think >> that as time goes on, OL and Rocky Linux will start to get more >> discussion and coverage here. Since they are all very similar to each >> other, most of the solutions for one will likely be applicable to all >> anyway and if there's a better alternative offered on one of the >> others, then that's worth knowing as well. > > This is a CentOS list. The other distros you mention have their own > venues for support and discussion and those should be used. I agree with your sentiment, John, but the fact that folks fled is due to CentOS (owned by RedHat, of course) doing. And they use most logical way for their discussion: the CentOS refugees ask their kin in quite logical place: CentOS list, where they all were prospering in the past. Incidentally, I for one do not blame CentOS in the fact that I have to move my workstations/numbercrunchers to different Linux (Debian). I could have analyzed the fact when it was announced that CentOS project is owned by RedHat, and should have expect potential turn. Not a big deal, servers are FreeBSD for long time already for different reason. But I can understand the folks for whom it turned out a big deal. Like the ones recommending their customers CentOS… Just my $0.02 Valeri > John > -- > "He'll sit here and say, 'Do this! Do that!' And nothing will happen. Poor > Ike. It won't be a bit like the army. He'll find it very frustrating." > > Harry Truman - shortly before the Eisenhower inauguration in 1952 > ___ > 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] OT: Transition test report going from CentOS8 to Debian 10.
THIS IS OT comment On 2/5/21 11:20 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: On 2/5/21 11:32 AM, m...@tdiehl.org wrote: Maybe I'm just weird, but I don't find naming differences to be big differences. Like I keep telling optical astronomers, radio astronomy is just observing at another wavelength; I get a lot of mean looks when I say that, too. It's all light, why are humans so special that our three sensory passbands centered around 450nm, 540nm, and 575nm should be so important? Why is the 400nm-700nm band more important than say 1000nm to 1700nm other than human eyes' sensitivities? Package naming is syntactic sugar, no more and no less, IMHO. Agree in general, but there may be huge difference physics wise. One example; at very low frequencies you finally will hit huge 1/f noise (1/f noise is fundamental property of the nature). But in general, observation frequencies are defined more by for which frequency you can get cheap equipment. Which ends up being military radio location and radio navigation ones (a lot of stuff is produced for military, hence less unique equipment == cheaper prices). Valeri ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Transition test report going from CentOS8 to Debian 10.
> On Feb 4, 2021, at 12:56 PM, mailist wrote: > > If you primarily use CentOS for web hosting with Apache, the Apache > configuration > for Debian is a whole new world. You will not be able to just copy the > CentOS config > to Debian. > It is different, but whoever ever configured apache web server will easily port configuration files. Simple copy and paste task. I just moved two web servers (with couple of virtual hosts == cnames each) from CentOS to Debian, no sweat. Takes much shorter ride than when you configure apache for the first time in your life. Just my $0.02 Valeri > Todd Merriman > Software Toolz, Inc. > ___ > 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] Transition test report going from CentOS8 to Debian 10.
On 2/4/21 9:39 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: Sorry for the length I'm posting this here since this particular transition has been mentioned on-list as one possibility for a path forward for current CentOS Linux users. AlmaLinux, the Developer Subscription RHEL, Rocky, CentOS Stream, Springdale, upgrading to full RHEL; all these are also possibilities, too, and all have different strengths and weaknesses. The transition to Debian has a lot of strengths, including a long track-record of support (even if the support time for a particular release is shorter), a fully-open development model with no 'corporate overlord' that I know of, a large set of supported packages, and a huge community of developers and users. For the CentOS user the main weakness is having to learn a few areas of difference in the way the system is setup and maintained; of course, if a ten-year 'stable' timeframe is really that important to you the lack of that is also a weakness. Thank you, Lamar, for your post. I second what you said about strengths. I converted a few machines to Debian myself (number cruncher that is wen server and samba file server simultaneously, and a couple of workstations). Oh, I forgot this: laptop I set up for my wife quite a wile ago also runs Debian. I would add one thing (some may consider it extra strength, others may think otherwise). Debian doesn't make any decisions for you, so you really have to do your own thinking and decide, say, which firewall to install. And choices are plentiful. And as Lamar said, you will have some learning curve with which commands to use, several will be different commands from what usually are in rpm based distro. But that is minor thing IMHO. And while they tolerate it, I will once again mention: Consider FreeBSD (or any of BSD descendants) for servers. Once you are there, you will never regret that. I do not. Thanks again, Lamar, for detailed and very encouraging post! Valeri So, last week I transitioned, as a test of sorts, my working CentOS 8 main laptop to Debian 10. I kept a complete backup of the C8 install should I wish to go back to it, and installed Buster to a new mSATA SSD, but ported the two SATA drives (Dell Precision M6700 - has an mSATA slot plus two SATA bays) straight over after making full backups. I posted a pretty complete rundown on the scientific linux users mailing list, so I won't recap it all here. The bottom line was the the transition was not any more difficult, really, than moving from CentOS 7 to CentOS 8. The software versions in Buster are pretty close to what is in CentOS 8, although I have yet to need any third-party repository (PPA) for anything I've needed to install. All the packages I have worked with so far have worked fine with a little bit of massaging. These include commercial (and costly) software such as Harrison Consoles' Mixbus32C, Qoppa's PDFStudio2019 Professional, and others. So if you were to decide that this is the route for you to take, it does work and I found it to be not nearly as hard as I had thought it might be. If you install GNOME 3 you get GNOME 3; it feels pretty much the same as a non-Classic CentOS GNOME 3, just with a different set of extensions installed by default. That's on the workstation. On the server side, I'm evaluating Proxmox for the virtualization solution, and so far I'm finding it to be a pretty easy migration. I'm using the 'non-subscription' repository, so this is a no-cost option. Even getting the box registered to our EMC Clariion SAN was relatively easy; EMC provides the Unisphere Server Utility for Linux x64 in RPM form; the latest I have is "ServerUtil-Linux-64-x86-en_US-1.0.55.1.0044-1.x86_64.rpm" (which is fairly old, but I did say Clariion arrays, so they're pretty old, too). Debian has provided the 'alien' tool for some time; after installing alien, a simple 'alien -i ServerUtil-Linux-64-x86-en_US-1.0.55.1.0044-1.x86_64.rpm' installed the EMC RPM in the correct place. Proxmox already included everything that serverutilcli requires; on a plain Buster install I had to install dm-multipath and the device mapper libraries and tools before serverutilcli would find the arrays; but it ran just like it did on CentOS 8 (and 7). I haven't decided whether to stay on Debian or not; too early to tell. I have time to test and evaluate. My CentOS 7 installs aren't goin anywhere, though, at least until late 2023. And I've registered for a Developer subscription of RHEL so that I can properly evaluate that option, too. This is the beauty of open source: we have OPTIONS. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 77
Re: [CentOS] not a Centos topic, but since many had concerns ......
On 2/2/21 5:10 PM, R C wrote: On 2/2/21 4:04 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 03:49:35PM -0700, R C wrote: This is what I read today, might have been around longer though, don't know. "New Year, new Red Hat Enterprise Linux programs: Easier ways to access RHEL" https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/new-year-new-red-hat-enterprise-linux-programs-easier-ways-access-rhel It came out a few weeks ago but the program is live as of yesterday. In short: 1. Register at https://developers.redhat.com/register 2. You'll now see a developer subscription allowing up to 16 systems listed at https://access.redhat.com/management/subscriptions 3. Download and install from https://developers.redhat.com/products/rhel/download 4. sudo subscription-manager register --username $USERNAME (where $USERNAME is the email address you registered with) and there you go. It says "Developer Subscription" but the new terms allow each individual to have up to 16 systems for production use. See the (single page) terms here: I would not use it for production, or commercial purposes, just so I have the same at home (or close) as at work. I wonder, does that mean you can have up to 16 licensed servers/workstations running at a time? Or over time, when you discard equipment, and need to install another machine/desktop, whatever by the time you're at 17 start paying? When I was thinking similar situation over - with different kind of proprietary product free up to some number... my sentiment ended up being: OK, I plan all my future well, and fit all into that restricted number, let's say 16. But what if at some point they change their mind and this number suddenly becomes 12. I definitely can not plan what in the future they will do. And specifically recent events showed that they do change things. And the I went free open source route. And never regretted. But it is everybody's individual decision, and those who make it will have only themselves to blame if ever get into trouble as the result. Incidentally, I for one blame myself that I have to change my routine from CentOS [to Debian]. Not that that is much of a hassle. This is not the first migration in my life, and hopefully not the last one ;-) - meaning long life for myself, not short life for Debian. Valeri (I am checking that with a redhat rep that we have at work too). https://www.redhat.com/wapps/tnc/viewterms/72ce03fd-1564-41f3-9707-a09747625585?extIdCarryOver=true_cid=701f201Css0AAC It may also be of interest to note something which I hadn't realized before: this subscription includes the "EUS" offering which provides security updates to select minor releases (so you can "pin" to that minor release), which is something CentOS never did. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Intel/64 CentOS VM running on a Mac M1?
> On Jan 28, 2021, at 7:11 PM, Lists wrote: > > My Dell Precision M3800 running Fedora works great but is really starting to > show its age, and I'm thinking about getting a new Mac M1-based laptop as it > would really be useful for Video production. > > But I really need to have a IA64 CentOS 7/8 VMs running locally for > development as I'm often on the road and flaky Internet makes it a necessity > to > keep productivity up. I've been unable to officially confirm that VMWare/ > Parallels/VirtualBox intend to support IA64 based OS's and it *needs* to be > an > exact (VM) copy of production so I can trial environments and builds prior to > roll out. > > Calling around, I actually got ahold of a sales staff at Parallels who > assured > me (in broken India-accent English) that "of course all OS will supported > when > the trial complete" but given that I wasn't sure that he really understood my > question I remain uncertain. > Take what I’ll say with a grain of salt. Virtualization solution became fast the moment “on the fly” conversion of guest system calls to host system calls was invented. The first I know of is Cygnus solutions who did it in their cygwin (company was bought by RedHat, and cygwin still exists and still is open source project). This all implies the system of the same architecture on guest system as is of the host system. Otherwise, one has to emulate different architecture CPU, which will make virtualization an order of magnitude slower. That (emulating generic CPU) was what VMware was doing originally. Then parallels desktop emerged and was (without mentioning it) using what Cygwin did. One can not know that about proprietary software, but give better guess than mine, please. And later VMware went same way, and became really fast virtualization solution too. Bottom line: guest and host systems should have the same architecture for guest system to be able to talk [semi-] directly to CPU for decently fast virtualization. So, the answer I would give: NO, one can not have guest system of different architecture as it is with decent speed. Just my $0.02 Valeri > Anybody here have any more information than I do? > ___ > 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
> On Jan 23, 2021, at 10:05 PM, Konstantin Boyandin via CentOS > wrote: > > On 22.01.2021 21:08, Valeri Galtsev wrote: >>> On Jan 22, 2021, at 6:43 AM, Nikolaos Milas wrote: >>> >>> On 22/1/2021 2:25 μ.μ., Konstantin Boyandin via CentOS wrote: >>> >>>> Also, I can still expect they will again change their mind close to >>>> 2021's end. In short, I have hard time trusting RH in such a situation. >>> >> >> Then flee from RedHat AND clones. RedHat can do things making life of > clones hard, different, constantly needing to invest into change. And they may > give up. >> >> But it is your decision about your future, and yours to deal with > consequences. >> >> Am I not stating the obvious? >> >> Valeri > > I appreciate your playing Captain Obvious, as well as your polite style > of trying to shut me up. > > Let me play Captain Obvious as well. > > The December RH announcement came while I was in a middle of upgrading a > number of CentOS installations. Switching to different distributions > might be both time consuming and tricky, especially in case of big > companies. We already switched many servers/VMs to alternate > distributions, but there are RHEL-based ones we just can't leave, and > PITA that RH initiated doesn't help at all. > > Actually, I'll make use of that last RH offer on less-critical servers, > which can be, if required, quickly shut down and re-formatted under > different distributions. > > I assist in maintaining several RHEL installations, and I brought > several paying customers to RH during those many years. I assume you > understand that I will express my concerns without asking anyone's > permission. I hear you. It is always sad when something you estimated will last suddenly changes. In that respect I was lucky. Of dozens of things I chose during last couple of decades maybe one or two had suddenly changed. For the rest of my sysadmin's decisions I pretty much was able to stay with what I have chosen. I can remember decisions I didn’t make which would be devastating in a short future to come. One was open solaris. When it became a challenge to have long uptime of Linux machine, basically, after 2.4 kernel was replaced with 2.6, (then it was 45 days on average, kernel of glibc update == reboot), I stared to look for alternative system for servers. Some of my friends started to use the word Lindoze (referring mostly to these often reboots and analogy when you have to reboot Windows system after update). One of alternatives was open solaris. It was about that time when Oracle bought out Sun Microsystems. Another joke comes to my mind. We then were asking ourselves: how do we call the system then? Just repeat faster and faster “Sun Oracle”, and you will finally get it right: “snorkel”. Anyway, FreeBSD won the choice then for me, and my servers run FreeBSD since then (since FreeBSD version 8), - for about 10 years now I figure. Of course, I run server a bit more sophisticated way: given server may not exist, it runs in 3-4 different FreeBSD jails (a couple of services - which you can not separate - in each of jails). Things get so easy then, any update or upgrade is just a dream... I tried to remember an example of the choice that didn’t last, apparently there should have been one or two like that, I just can’t remember them. So, I filled the place with the one that would go bad but didn’t make it into the decision, the good one was chosen instead. I know I am lucky here as far as CentOS change is concerned: mine are merely number crunchers and workstations I had to and did find new route for (Debian for NVIDIA - free machines, and Ubuntu for those needing NVIDIA proprietary stuff). Good luck, everybody else, to find your future, and best wishes to go the way that will last for you. To make sure the choice will last with every choice of my sysadmin’s career really required a lot of consideration, and some luck (which I guess I had in abundance with my choices). Valeri > Thanks again. > > -- > Sincerely, > > Konstantin Boyandin > system administrator (ProWide Labs Ltd. - IPHost Network Monitor) > ___ > 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
On January 22, 2021 5:06:41 PM CST, Matthew Miller wrote: >On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 08:35:44PM +, Jamie Burchell wrote: >> Can RH put a stop to projects like Rocky Linux? > >Yes, in two possible ways. > >First, Red Hat could stop making RHEL. The amount of work that goes >into >this is _quite_ significant, particularly in terms of the long-term >stability that everyone is very excited about. Rebuild projects would >then >have nothing to rebuild. > >But, Red Hat isn't going to do that, because RHEL is important to Red >Hat >both as a product and as a base for the company's other projects. > >Second, Red Hat goes way beyond the obligations of the licenses of many >of >the pieces of software that comprise the distribution. Large, vital >swaths >of RHEL are not under "copyleft" style licenses. Without the full >source >published in a regular and timely manner, rebuilds couldn't exist. > >But, Red Hat isn't going to do that, for a number of reasons but mostly >because free and open source is essential to what Red Hat *is* as a >company. >And it's not just a goodwill thing or whatever: everyone from the front >lines up to the highest levels knows that it's key to our business >success. Will not speak about future, but about the past. As external observer for about a couple decades I would second that. I always praised RedHat for meticulous following GPL. They are required to make available source of their derivative work. They do more, as rpms are more than just source. To my folks I maintain machines for as sysadmin I always mention as example cygwin. After RedHat bought out Cygnus Solutions, they kept cygwin alive, available and active project. BTW, cygwin was the first where guest system calls were on the fly colverted to host system calls. Which makes virtualization really fast. Compared to emulating generic CPU what vmware was doing at that time. No one mentions that, but proprietary parallels desktop is doing the same, having learned it from cygwin, and VMware later followed the same route I bet. Of course, one can only guess about proprietary software. Not happy about CentOS change, but where credit is due, I can not avoid mentioning it. Valeri Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/22/21 2:39 PM, Marc Balmer via CentOS wrote: Am 22.01.2021 um 21:36 schrieb Jamie Burchell : Can RH put a stop to projects like Rocky Linux? No. Theoretically, no. I'm confident solid company will always comply with GNU license. But in practice one can change the way source rpms are accessible, which will effectively break scripts of downstream vendor, thus making a lot of unnecessary work on downstream side. And other things. That said, no one probably will intentionally do so. But in the past we observed things change in upstream, causing a lot of work/changes in downstream. Observed externally that is. Just my $.02. Valeri 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 -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/22/21 11:42 AM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: Le 22/01/2021 à 18:04, Valeri Galtsev a écrit : I tried SUSE maybe 2-3 years later than you (around 2003). The first thing I disliked was: they have yast on top of standard configurations. First of all, it is quite unpleasant to deal with: infinitely long single file containing all configs. Next, you change one single thing, and yast to enable your change touches all config files. Some time after you made some change you discover something (unrelated) doesn’t work anymore, and you can not use timestamps to investigate when bad change happened and how. I was joking about SUSE with my German friends: how come German tool is named as abbreviation of English (yet another system tool), not German? All the hardcore distribution users out there (Slackware, Arch, Gentoo, Crux, FreeBSD) like to make fun of YaST. Never heard FreeBSD folks making fun of anybody else, including SUSE. And I'm on their lists for very long time. I would say they are the most generous, considerate, and forgiving folk of all technical lists I have been on. Valeri Ever tried to connect any Linux or BSD desktop to an LDAPS server running Red Hat Directory Server for authentication? With YaST it's done in less than 30 seconds in half a dozen mouse clicks, and it JustWorks(tm). I know because I'm using it in our local school. Now try and do the same thing on Debian, FreeBSD, Slackware or one of the *buntus. You'll get a vague idea of what hell looks like. :o) -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/22/21 9:15 AM, Simon Matter wrote: Le 21/01/2021 à 23:30, Scott Robbins a écrit : People pull up all sorts of technical reasons to justify what is, in the end, an emotional decision. There is, of course, the possibility to go beyond that. For example, I am not exactly fond of Oracle as a company, for reasons you probably know as good as me. They did some horrible things to Solaris, MySQL and Java, their CEO IMHO they didn't do anything horrible to us. They just wasted a lot of money buying companies and then didn't continue the open source developments in a way which worked for the community. However the project are not dead by now, they just run under a different name these days. supported Trump, etc. But it also happens that they do have one of the IMHO it's a feature of something called democracy that even CEOs are free to support whoever they want - without asking anyone and like everybody else. Agreeing about freedom of opinion, but can not help to mention: freedom of speech belongs more to liberty, not democracy. Democracy (decision of majority...) is in its essense a tyranny of majority over minority. My apologies for adding to political discussion on technical list, which better be avoided, so not continuing it and inviting others spare the list of politics, religion, and other non-technical issues. Valeri better maintained RHEL clones out there, with fast updates and an excellent documentation. For me OL works very well. I've just modified the migration/installation so that it removes all OL specific stuff like UEK and changes things back to upstream EL versions. If I ever regret the move to OL I know know quite well how to migrate to another clone. And I mean a full migration which changes every bit. Simon ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
> On Jan 22, 2021, at 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 tried SUSE maybe 2-3 years later than you (around 2003). The first thing I disliked was: they have yast on top of standard configurations. First of all, it is quite unpleasant to deal with: infinitely long single file containing all configs. Next, you change one single thing, and yast to enable your change touches all config files. Some time after you made some change you discover something (unrelated) doesn’t work anymore, and you can not use timestamps to investigate when bad change happened and how. I was joking about SUSE with my German friends: how come German tool is named as abbreviation of English (yet another system tool), not German? But what really did it for me was: stock installation from SUSE DVD (that specific release) was easily crashed by program with memory leak run by regular user. I replace SUS stock kernel with downloaded and compiled with all default option kernel from kernel.org, and it happily kills memory leaking program (even the one run by root). Not kernel shipped with SUSE. This: memory leak, out of memory condition is one of the tests I usually do when I’m testing [quite] new for me system (and some other stuff). I turned away from SUSE then, and never looked back. Just my $0.02 Valeri > > -- > 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] RHEL changes
> On Jan 22, 2021, at 6:43 AM, Nikolaos Milas wrote: > > On 22/1/2021 2:25 μ.μ., Konstantin Boyandin via CentOS wrote: > >> Also, I can still expect they will again change their mind close to >> 2021's end. In short, I have hard time trusting RH in such a situation. > Then flee from RedHat AND clones. RedHat can do things making life of clones hard, different, constantly needing to invest into change. And they may give up. But it is your decision about your future, and yours to deal with consequences. Am I not stating the obvious? Valeri > That's exactly how I feel too. I don't trust them. > > I think we can expect Rocky Linux to provide a real solution to CentOS > future. We shall know very soon, so let's just wait for a short while. > > There is such a huge (staggering) number of CentOS installed base, esp. > including service providers (hosts etc.), that the market NEEDS a real > reliable successor of CentOS. This need cannot be covered by RHEL new > licensing. A real open source, community solution will be needed; for the > time being, Rocky Linux seems to have the right specs to fill the gap. > > The market itself will finance (through donations) its future, because it is > a real need. A CentOS successor is a real need. > > OL will be last resort, but I believe Rocky Linux will most probably be the > way to go. It displays good momentum, steady progress and great manpower. > > My 2c. > > Nick > > ___ > 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
On 1/21/21 4:53 PM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: Fun fact: if a big part of my job didn't consist in teaching Linux and writing books about it, I'd probably be running FreeBSD myself. Understandable. The big part of Microsoft is selling their operating system, for servers included, and even they were caught running FreeBSD on some of their servers at some point ;-) Valeri -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/21/21 4:50 PM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: Le 21/01/2021 à 23:18, Valeri Galtsev a écrit : No, I already streamlined Debian routine installation (workstations and number crunchers), and servers run FreeBSD since lng ago, so I'm all set, and much better than in the past ;-) Thanks though. Debian has an average of two years[*] per support. There is "stretch", which is equivalent of more known as LTS of Ubuntu: 5 years. And then, there is easy in place upgrade from regular or "stretch" to next release. But no, I will not argue against uniqueness of 10 year life cycle of RedHat. I just said that my life [with Debian] will be no bigger hassle than it was [with CentOS]. The only difference of Debian is: it has vast collection of everything, so you really need to make your own choices. But if it's done once, you can in one go tell next installation to install all the same software (packages). Of course, I, being a simple guy, had much simpler life with CentOS, just choose all software groups that sound relevant... (jus grossly exaggerating ;-) But with huge collection like Debian one (or like FreeBSD ports are, or macports for MacOS) once you spent time shaping system to your preference, you are done, and all next systems are rather routine, almost as unattended as RedHat/CentOS kickstart install is. Valeri Oracle has ten like upstream RHEL. Choice is pretty clear to me. [*] one year after subsequent release, so an average of one to three years depending on installation date -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/21/21 4:30 PM, Scott Robbins wrote: On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 05:23:24PM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 at 17:15, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: I think from years of posting that FreeBSD is how Valeri's brain works best and that is cool. Some people have certain OS paradigms where they function best and are able to solve problems better than another system. Like Valeri, I have a fondness for FreeBSD. Regardless, I think Nicolas is correct. I remember reading a post in an old usenet (I think) discussion of mutt vs. pine (before it became alpine) where someone said words to the effect of, People pull up all sorts of technical reasons to justify what is, in the end, an emotional decision. I learned one truth working for many years for scientists: the best thing is what works best for _YOU_, with which YOU are most efficient. I do keep bringing up FreeBSD, as I conscientiously switched servers to it. And during first maybe year I was catching myself with "Linuxisms" on FreeBSD. Later I often caught myself with "FreeBSD-isms" on Linux. But if your future road is long, then at the pivoting point it really is good to step up above everything and estimate (with open mind) what might be beneficial in your future. That is why I bring up non-Linux system I know (more or less). Were I knowing others as well (OpenBSD, NetBSD, ...) I would be mentioning them too. And all that in a hope it may help someone (and with understanding it may annoy many). Valeri -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/21/21 4:15 PM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: Le 21/01/2021 à 22:17, Valeri Galtsev a écrit : I tried Oracle Linux. After installation it took forever to update yum database, or do you yum search. Also: I didn't find mirrors... All this sort of ruled it out for me. Works perfectly here: https://gitlab.com/kikinovak/oracle/-/blob/master/linux-setup.sh You might want to give it another spin. No, I already streamlined Debian routine installation (workstations and number crunchers), and servers run FreeBSD since lng ago, so I'm all set, and much better than in the past ;-) Thanks though. Valeri Cheers, Niki -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/21/21 3:31 PM, Frank Cox wrote: On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:17:04 -0600 Valeri Galtsev wrote: I tried Oracle Linux. After installation it took forever to update yum database, or do you yum search. Also: I didn't find mirrors... All this sort of ruled it out for me. Mind that I have 1 Gbps network... So far I've installed Oracle Linux on one laptop. What I got was exactly what I expected to get, and I didn't have any issues at all. "dnf upgrade" worked exactly as expected and at pretty much exactly the same speed as it does on Centos, too. Maybe my problem was I used yum, not dnf command. Or maybe my locality of specifically my domain is not favored by oracle. Or maybe other way around, my network admins... But then, mine is just a single installation, exactly as you told about yours ;-) Valeri But that's just one installation. I haven't done anything else with OL yet at all. -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/21/21 2:24 PM, Frank Cox wrote: On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 13:57:19 -0600 Scott Techlist wrote: So this will muddy the waters for the spin-offs like Rocky Linux, or kill them? I'd assume at least it would dilute who'd need an alternate Centos replacement except those with more than 16 servers. Or did I misunderstand the announcement? I don't see how this would create any issues for Rocky Linux and the like. The new RHEL terms still require annual license activations (for every installation I think) and that's a point of friction that doesn't exist with Linux installations that are actually free. With this new offering I've got to count my installations, track which ones I've torn down, which ones I've updated, which ones I've scrapped, which ones I'm running in a VM and which ones that I've installed on an "appliance" in the dusty corner to running a printing press, and when I get to the sixteenth installation then I need to pay up or start decommissioning stuff Or I could use a license-not-required distribution like Rocky or Oracle and avoid all of that. I tried Oracle Linux. After installation it took forever to update yum database, or do you yum search. Also: I didn't find mirrors... All this sort of ruled it out for me. Mind that I have 1 Gbps network... So my shop: servers: FreeBSD (for decade or so, since FreeBSD v. 8), number crunchers and workstations: Debian except for those that need NVIDIA binary driver or cuda, these rare ones will be Ubuntu. In a hope this helps someone, Valeri I've got a number of machines with certain clients who bring their machine back to me every year or two (or whenever they figure they can spare it and happen to be heading this way) for updating. I might not see one of those machines for a few years; they may not have any Internet connection in the field so it could be interesting if the machines tell them (or me) to buzz off because the license has expired. If there were no other options then I guess there would have to be a way figured out to make this work anyway, but there are options and those options are certainly more attractive than dealing with license activations and all of the joy surrounding that sort of thing. -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Reboot/shutdown without login
On 1/11/21 1:24 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 at 14:14, Kenneth Porter wrote: On 1/11/2021 10:32 AM, Frank Cox wrote: How do you want the person to shut it down without logging in? Some computers have a "smart" power switch pushbutton that you can program to do a shutdown or a reboot depending on how long you hold the button down. Otherwise you'll need at least a keyboard, or possibly something like a joystick or a mouse button? Keyboard. i don't have a mouse hooked up since it's currently running without a GUI. I wasn't sure if the power switch on the R720xd is monitored that way so that hitting the front panel button would shut the system down or maybe bring up the DRAC screen. The simplest would be to have a person plug in a keyboard and do a three finger salute (CNTRL-ALT-DEL) on the system. Doing it once should trigger a shutdown and reboot. [That said. I have seen some systems ignore it and others do an immediate power cycle so please test.] (off topic) In old times I always was disabling CNTRL-ALT-DEL, and adding to level "S" /usr/bin/login which effectively required password when one reboots machine into single user mode. And boot from anything but system drive was disabled in BIOS, and BIOS was password protected. Not that I disagree with "nothing can stop a guy with the screwdriver". But disabling easy way to tamper with the system adds to one's ability to notice the system had been tampered with (and when). Not doing it anymore... Valeri When the hardware is booted, the DRAC screen can only be brought up on the network. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
> On Jan 7, 2021, at 3:47 AM, Jamie Burchell wrote: > > Didn't the CentOS Vault repo ensure that every package ever published was > still available? > You should come to realizing that things changed. They are not what they were. With all fairness no one can say what will be true in a short future to come. Valeri >> On 7 Jan 2021, at 07:03, Gordon Messmer wrote: >> >> On 1/6/21 8:01 PM, Strahil Nikolov via CentOS wrote: >>> - No chance to "yum history undo last" as there are no older packages >> >> >> I've seen that mentioned as a change pretty frequently, but I don't think it >> is in any meaningful sense. >> >> In CentOS Stream, package versions may be rebased periodically, and the >> public repos will no longer have older packages to install when using "undo" >> or "rollback". >> >> In CentOS, package versions may be rebased at minor releases, and the public >> repos will no longer have older packages to install when using "undo" or >> "rollback". >> >> It's true that you might be able to roll back a simple patch in CentOS in >> between minor releases, but those are the updates that everyone seems to >> regard as being the safest, and least likely to cause problems, and >> therefore the least likely to need undo/rollback. The only rational >> conclusion I can come to is that it doesn't matter if you're talking about >> CentOS today or Stream in the future: If you want to be able to roll back, >> you need a private mirror that keeps the package versions that you use. If >> you don't want a mirror, then you need to build, test, and deploy complete >> images rather than making incremental changes to mutable systems. None of >> this is new, it's always been this way and people have just accepted 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 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
> On Jan 6, 2021, at 12:53 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote: > > On 1/5/21 6:30 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: >> I was not comparing CentOS Stream with CentOS (former 10 year life cycle >> system), I was comparing CentOS Stream with Debian (and clones) LTS. > > > The original message came from a CentOS user who asked "is the change a > non-issue for my use-case?" > > So, I'd have to ask you how Debian is relevant to that question. > > As I said, in terms of upgrade from one major version to another, CentOS > Stream and CentOS are identical. Yes, my apologies, I did miss the word “Stream” in my phrase (no excuse even though I obviously spoke about NEW type of CentOS system). > If CentOS was suitable, then the change to CentOS Stream is a non-issue in > the context of major version upgrades, because the change to CentOS Stream > has no material impact on that concern. > Yes, indeed, if CentOS Stream is identical to CentOS as far as “in place upgrade” is concerned, which is not possible in case of both CentOS incarnations, then the comparison to other systems with comparable 5 year life cycle insists to be mentioned. This only comes as I do care about CentOS at least recognizing benefits we had (I for one for about decade and a half). So, caring about CentOS, one imminently has to mention: 1. 5 year life cycle (of Stream): unique 10 year life cycle (not mentioning MS Windows which is commercial) is gone 2. same life cycle Debian and clones (LTS): have easy in place upgrade. Not Stream (as far as I know). If it will be, then only 2 releases down the road people will trust in place upgrade (pure psychology) 3. [continuing comparison with similar LTS alternatives]: Debian and clones have much larger package collections than CentOS + EPEL (and so do FreeBSD and clones: meaning their ports) 4. By the moment people will know CentOS Stream exists for decently long time, so can be trusted, quite some userbase will be lost. But looking at the comparisons above, there also is no obvious advantage over alternatives, who beat CentOS Stream in several respects. This is not to annoy anyone, just to express sadness of the loss, and though for me it was like stating obvious, it still looks like not everyone considers it that obvious. If I didn’t care [what I run on my machines], then I wouldn’t care to write this. But as I do… there it is. > The question being asked is not "what operating system should I use", to > which discussion of Debian or FreeBSD might be relevant, it's "will the > change to CentOS Stream impact my current processes?" Comparisons to Debian > or FreeBSD are non-sequiturs in the context of this conversation. > Well, in my book whenever one is trying to access future usability of something newly changed, it is always advantageous to step up above it, look at a wider picture and other possibilities. Not locking oneself into what one used (but changed forcing you to re-evaluate). I know, the existence of alternatives annoys, and it really hurts when they have advantages, especially once the advantage CentOS had (10 year life cycle) is gone… And again, GREAT THANKS to brilliant CentOS team for great work you did for last couple of decades. With sadness of the loss (even if CentOS team does not perceive it as loss), Valeri > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
> On Jan 5, 2021, at 6:22 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: > > On 1/5/21 3:39 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: >> And as someone mentioned, these other distributions have long great record >> of system upgrade from one release to another. CentOS has no record (and >> probably no upgrade engineered yet). In that respect CentOS Stream is way >> behind... > I do not like “creative editing” that changes what I said, this is the only reason I reply. Here is my original full phrase: And as someone mentioned, these other distributions have long great record of system upgrade from one release to another. CentOS has no record (and probably no upgrade engineered yet). In that respect CentOS Stream is way behind Debian (and clones) LTS. > > In that respect, CentOS Stream is identical to CentOS. > I was not comparing CentOS Stream with CentOS (former 10 year life cycle system), I was comparing CentOS Stream with Debian (and clones) LTS. And my comparison was about the fact that Debian (and clones) LTS have proven known to work through several releases easy way to in place upgrade from one release version to next one (for that matter FreeBSD is the same and too has since forever known trouble free way to in place upgrade to next major release version). CentOS never had in place upgrade, and I for one would insist it will be improper to expect that. CentOS Stream, that didn’t go through even a single in place major release upgrade, can not sport having that, and only after two such upgrades happen trouble free for the whole community of CentOS Stream users, only then CentOS Stream will be on the same level with Debian and clones. This is regular simple truth of life: if you want, psychology is such that only after this NEW, DIFFERENT, system: CentOS Stream, goes through a couple of releases, with easy in place upgrades, only then the trust of common folk like humble sysadmin (meaning here myself), who does not consider oneself any sort of expert is operating systems, only then the trust will be of the same level as trust currently is to Debian (LTS or regular, and clones), or to FreeBSD, as far as easy in place upgrade to next release is concerned. I know, CentOS team are great bright people, so knowing that and writing what I had to write above gives me extra pain. But that is the reality, and how users will value CentOS Stream couple of release cycles down the road when compared to Debian LTS, we will see. After long good record of trouble free upgrading (and other things that may rightfully or wrongfully trouble people now) there may be another factor, like huge collection of software Debian has in their repository, which may put some weight after all other comparison factors become equal. CentOS did beat all (excluding commercial MS Windows) by 10 year life cycle. Now that that is gone, CentOS (with Stream in name) stopped being unique, and people will mention huge choice of software collections in Debian and clones, comparably huge macports for MacOS (sorry about mentioning commercial system) and same huge FreeBSD port collection. > >> Not to mention other potentially problematic areas as no package version >> rollback, compatibility (potential) with EPEL > > > CentOS Stream will be compatible with EPEL to the same extent that new point > releases are compatible with EPEL. > I understand that your hard work will insure it WILL be compatible, trouble free etc. But the same psychology factor is why I mentioned that. Trust will come only a couple of releases down the road. We are sure CentOS team will keep doing great job on this absolutely different system CentOS Stream is, and if this new system couple of release down the road will be in similar demand as Debian (and clones) will be, - we will see. As I perceive it now, Debian (and clones), all other factors equal, will have much larger collection of packages that they have in their repositories as additional comparison factor. And once again: Huge thanks to brilliant hard working CentOS team for all you gave us during last couple of decades. Valeri - CentOS user for almost decade and a half, who moved servers (but only servers) to FreeBSD about 8 years ago. > The vast majority of interfaces in RHEL (and Stream) are guaranteed stable > within a major release, and only a small number of interfaces that aren't. > It's possible that one of the latter interfaces might change, in which case > you'd expect yum to not update the dependency until EPEL's packages have been > rebuilt: > > https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel-abi-compatibility#Appendix > > > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Stream suitability as a production webserver
On 1/5/21 5:19 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: On 1/5/21 3:02 PM, Jamie Burchell wrote: We will need to (manually) migrate to Stream 9.x after 5 years instead of 10 though? Yes. CentOS Stream has a lifecycle comparable with other LTS distributions. And as someone mentioned, these other distributions have long great record of system upgrade from one release to another. CentOS has no record (and probably no upgrade engineered yet). In that respect CentOS Stream is way behind Debian (and clones) LTS. Not to mention other potentially problematic areas as no package version rollback, compatibility (potential) with EPEL, and other things I don't what to attempt to think about. As everything with newly architectured distribution which hasn't proven itself during long time suitable for specific things. No disrespect intended. To the contrary: GREAT THANKS to hard working CentOS team for all your past work! And best wished to establish viability of absolutely new - and different - distribution: CentOS Stream. And while people still ask and the list still tolerates, I will mention the system I fled my servers from Linux 6 or 7 years ago to: FreeBSD On average update requiring FreeBSD reboot happens as rarely as once 7-8 Months (Linux on average every 45 days: kernel or glibc security update --> reboot). Good luck everybody who didn't arrive at final decision yet to find you way for the future. Thanks again, CentOS team for the great system you gave us for decades up until now! Valeri ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Disk choice for workstation ?
On 12/26/2020 5:10 PM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: Le 26/12/2020 à 21:58, Mark Woolfson a écrit : Don't go for super cheap SSD's as the write threshold will be low. I would look at Samsung for SSD's for performance or Kioxia (Toshiba) SSD's for price. As regards the carrier I would look at Sonnet or Highpoint. Bear in mind that the commercial sweet spot for SSD's is 1 or 2 TByte. Thanks everybody for your feedback. Is there any data available regarding reliability of SATA vs. SSD ? The most reliable SATA drives model from most reliable manufacturer during constant up, spinning and used in RAIDs had about or less than 3% failed in a course of over 10 years. Most reliable manufacturer in my book that is: Hitachi, former IBM, later HGST, the production line now bought out by Western Digital. I doubt there is same longevity statistics for SSDs. Also: hard drives have theoretically infinite number of writes into the same area, whereas SSDs have finite number of write operations into a given cell. In view if this difference any comparison can be argued as unfair. I'm sure, people who have large number of SSDs for long time will add their observations. I was happy with Samsung 2.5 inch SATA SSDs so far. Valeri Niki ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Out of office: "CentOS Digest, Vol 191, Issue 26"
On 12/26/2020 11:39 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2020 at 12:21, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: Le 26/12/2020 à 18:14, Scott Robbins a écrit : I'm sure all of us have done, if not this, something equally embarrassing like posting a private reply to an email or doing dd with the wrong destination, etc. Then let's make a little contest out of it: what's the most stupid thing you've done as a system administrator ? I'm a ten-finger-typer, and I rarely look at the keyboard. Which is a bad thing when your focus is on the wrong terminal. So a few years ago I happened to type "ssh r...@some-remote-server.com ", vaguely sensed in the corner of my eye that something was wrong and discovered to my horror that I just posted it on a densely populated IRC channel. Your turn. :o) 2 am clean up of disk space to get email servers working again discover a large tree of temp files from a shared service in /usr/ # remember before /home? /bin/rm -rf . /* I did the same just to prove for myself I am right. Used fresh test installation for that though: rm -rf / - was testing it, as I missed the moment when the following stopped being true: "the above command will start removing directory tree / _alphabetically_, hence when it removes /dev/[root file system device] further remove operations will fail. Hence on physical root device only stuff alphabetically before /dev will actually be removed." Of course I was gravely wrong, thing did change (as one of experts on mail list pointed out for me). And the above command did obliterate everything. Embarrassing part was: I had first said that loud on mail list, and only after I had been told I'm wrong, I actually tested it, and confirmed to my self I was wrong. Another embarrassing thing was done by my younger colleague. He was helping someone he talked to on the phone to change that user's password. And as many younger (than I) people he always was typing lightning fast. And instead of typing passwd [username] he typed passwd [username] Without noticing anything wrong he changed root password on the machine to, guess what?, "password" (without quotes). He ultimately did help user to change his password. And few days later bad guys just walked into machine as user root. I hope, he doesn't read this my post. So mine was not the case one can state funny way: I thought I was wrong but I was mistaken ;-) Valeri ^c up-arrow spew coffee and swearing go get reinstall cdrom and backup tapes ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Out of office: "CentOS Digest, Vol 191, Issue 26"
On 12/26/2020 9:59 AM, Frank Cox wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2020 13:36:19 +0100 Nicolas Kovacs wrote: Am I the only one feeling a strong urge to blood-eagle out-of-office repliers on public mailing lists ? You can't. He's out of the office Long ago when I was a beginner with technical mail lists I read, no I __studied carefully mail list etiquette. And stopping list delivery in case you set auto responder was one of the must do things. My feelings then were: if I forget to do that I may be kicked off the list and banned from subscription, which I considered quite fair thing. I seem to miss the moment when we started care more about the offender than we do about people whom the offender made suffer (seems to be in all aspects of modern world). Valeri ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] question centos stream 8 applying updates
> On Dec 19, 2020, at 8:38 AM, edward wrote: > > > On 2020-12-19 19:05, Valeri Galtsev wrote: >> >>> On Dec 19, 2020, at 7:10 AM, edward via CentOS wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 2020-12-19 14:33, Sergio Belkin wrote: >>>> In what moment "user" and "community" were replaced by "customers" in >>>> CentOS? >>> >>> probably they want more of a overall professional ecosystem for both rhel >>> and centos >>> >>> since it appears ubuntu has quite a lead server marketshare compared to >>> centos and rhel >>> >>> ubuntu 47% >>> >>> centos 18% >>> >>> redhat 1.8% >>> >>> https://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/os-linux >>> >> It was interesting to look at all UNIXes: >> >> https://w3techs.com/technologies/details/os-unix >> >> (they apparently put into that category Linuxes, BSD descendants, etc.). Of >> all UNIXes Linux covers 38.8%, whereas BSD only 0.5%. There, however, is >> 60.7 % of unknown UNIXes. I wonder whether my FreeBSD servers are counted as >> UNIXes at all, I did run OS fingerprinting against some randomly chosen, and >> they don’t disclose OS ;-) >> >> Valeri >>> ___ >>> CentOS mailing list >>> CentOS@centos.org >>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > with great features like bootable environments, zfs, dtrace,etc feel kinda > bad for solaris OS got less than 0.1% > What I was trying to say is: there are some UNIX-like systems which are used by really cautious sysadmins who set things up so that even system fingerprinting can not discover what system the server is running. Which covers over 60% of UNIX like systems mentioned on that website. I can not call them UNIXes, as many of them do not pay loyalties to be called UNIX. Incidentally, zfs and dtrace are available on FreeBSD… Just mentioning. Valeri ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] question centos stream 8 applying updates
> On Dec 19, 2020, at 7:10 AM, edward via CentOS wrote: > > > On 2020-12-19 14:33, Sergio Belkin wrote: >> In what moment "user" and "community" were replaced by "customers" in >> CentOS? > > > probably they want more of a overall professional ecosystem for both rhel > and centos > > since it appears ubuntu has quite a lead server marketshare compared to > centos and rhel > > ubuntu 47% > > centos 18% > > redhat 1.8% > > https://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/os-linux > It was interesting to look at all UNIXes: https://w3techs.com/technologies/details/os-unix (they apparently put into that category Linuxes, BSD descendants, etc.). Of all UNIXes Linux covers 38.8%, whereas BSD only 0.5%. There, however, is 60.7 % of unknown UNIXes. I wonder whether my FreeBSD servers are counted as UNIXes at all, I did run OS fingerprinting against some randomly chosen, and they don’t disclose OS ;-) Valeri > ___ > 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 Dec 18, 2020, at 12:14 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 08:12:26AM -0500, Konstantin Boyandin via CentOS > wrote: It's purely a developer's distro. >>> Has Chris Wright ever recommended CentOS for any purpose other than >>> development and testing? >> Will a Red Hat CTO, in his right mind, ever recommend a free clone of >> RHEL for any purpose other than development and testing? > > Right... he's not "lying", he just has a different audience. > > Red Hat has definitely never ever said in any official way that CentOS Linux > is acceptable for production uses. OT: when will I learn to just shut up after arriving at my own decision? (rhetoric question) It doesn’t matter whether RedHat said anything or not. We did use CentOS as “binary replica” of RedHat Enterprise (I for one for over decade and a half), and did have same level of stability as RedHat Enterprise customers had [almost?].Which confirmed the second word in the abbreviated name of the system (Community Enterprise OS). But now there is nothing [in my book] to justify that “Enterprise" word in the name. > And that's not going to change with > CentOS Stream. > > You should see people's heads spin around like a scene from a horror movie > when I suggest that people actually do run Fedora operating systems in > production! Indeed, that is why many of us who originally switched to Fedora (Hm, when free RedHat ceased to exist somewhere near RedHat 8, do people still remember these CD/DVD sets?). And shortly after, from Fedora to CentOS. And no, “development” precursor of RedHat Enterprise which Fedora was is no match to “binary replica” of RedHat Enterprise. And it looks - for not too insightful person: myself - that now it will be CentOS a “development” precursor of RedHat Enterprise (taking place of Fedora, and potentially same production usability as Fedora has). And again, I will be happy for everyone who bravely keeps using CentOS (Stream) in production if my feelings are gravely wrong. But I myself “chickened out”. Servers: over 6 years ago (to FreeBSD, and there no surprises with FreeBSD; but apologies for annoying mentioning of the great UNIX successor on this list). And once again, Thanks a lot for great work, CentOS team! We were enjoying excellent fruits of your work, I - for about decade and a half. And good luck to you in future, I know your work will be same great, it is just humble us who are unhappy about future arrangement. Valeri > > -- > 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
Re: [CentOS] Is Oracle a real alternative to Centos?
> On Dec 17, 2020, at 3:35 AM, Thomas Bendler wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 1:42 AM Nate Duehr wrote: > >> -- Original Message -- >> From: "Matti Pulkkinen" >>> As someone who is considering moving to OL, I wonder if you could >> elaborate clearly on what specific concerns you have, without the >> insinuation and analogy? Oracle's proposition [1] seems pretty >> straightforward to me. >>> >> That they'' eventually treat it to the same lawyers who've changed Java >> licensing. >> > > That is quite unlikely because JAVA is something they own since they bought > SUN. OEL, however, is something they build based on RHELs work. In this > respect, they only own the logos and the like, but that's it. So they might > in the future stop the free usage of OEL, but they can't sue anyone. The > only exception would be when you illegitimately use their logos or where > else they own the copyright/ trademark. > Of course, everybody makes one’s own predictions, and suffers from them if they don’t come true. I made a prediction that CentOS will last, and did enjoy it to be true for about decade and a half. Which was long. Thanks again, guys, for your excellent work in the past. And good luck to you in the future. Valeri > Kind regards Thomas > -- > Linux ... enjoy the ride! > ___ > 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] Is Oracle a real alternative to Centos?
> On Dec 16, 2020, at 6:42 PM, Nate Duehr wrote: > > > > -- Original Message -- > From: "Matti Pulkkinen" > >> As someone who is considering moving to OL, I wonder if you could elaborate >> clearly on what specific concerns you have, without the insinuation and >> analogy? Oracle's proposition [1] seems pretty straightforward to me. >> > That they'' eventually treat it to the same lawyers who've changed Java > licensing. I would second that. Basically, Oracle has some reputation. But those who consider it insinuations may have chance to learn what can happen on their own hide. Valeri >> > > ___ > 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 12/16/2020 12:09 PM, Lamar Owen wrote: On 12/14/20 10:54 AM, Yves Bellefeuille wrote: The article states that CentOS will now be "upstream" of RHEL instead of "downstream". This is strange to me. I never thought CentOS was upstream or downstream of RHEL; I always thought it *was* RHEL -- perhaps a little delayed, but that's not the same as being "downstream". CentOS has always been 'downstream' of RHEL. The CentOS team rebuilt the source packages with the goal of getting as close as possible to what RHEL shipped, but it has never been 100% identical. You can do the same by pulling all of the package contents from git.centos.org and build the sources in the correct order with the correct software and the correct options to rpmbuild. Building from git.centos.org is not really hard at all; what is hard is figuring out the order and figuring out the other bits you might need that aren't necessarily on git.centos.org. Building from git is documented at https://wiki.centos.org/Sources?highlight=(git.centos.org) and you can look at an example of how I rebuilt a CentOS 8 RPM to get a non-distributed subpackage rebuilt at https://forums.centos.org/viewtopic.php?f=54=73376=314200#p314200 CentOS has never *been* actual RHEL. It's also clear that Red Hat didn't understand the importance of the 10-year support period. If they didn't understand it, they wouldn't offer it for RHEL. They just believe that if you need that you should pay something for it. Yes and no. Yes, in a sense that RedHat always meticulously followed requirements of GPL, and was putting sources of their "derivative" work of backporting as srpms. And "paid" meant putting effort into correctly rebuilding everything, so yes, what we used (roughly called "binary replica" if RHEL) in fact was paid by downstream vendors' efforts. No, in a sense, RedHat never had, and shouldn't have been expecting being paid for just following GPL letter and having source RPMs freely available. A always praised them for always following GPL. With utmost respect, And fully agreeing with the rest of your post, Valeri A 10-year support lifespan, even doing a straight rebuild of the packages from RHEL, has a huge cost, and someone has to pay those costs. Should Red Hat's paying customer base subsidize those costs? (if you say 'Red Hat should pay for it' that actually means you think Red Hat's paying customers should pay for it, because that's where Red Hat's money comes from). In the case of Oracle Linux, Oracle has decided that yes, their paying support customers should subsidize the cost for those who aren't paying. Someone, somewhere, must pay the costs; in a volunteer project the volunteers typically pay the labor cost themselves, and in many cases pay the cost of the compute hardware, bandwidth, and electricity required; these are not small costs, and someone, somewhere, must pay them. If the costs aren't adequately covered, the project's deliverables suffer, and users complain. It really just boils down to a cost without a tangible return on investment. It remains to be seen if the intangible ROI was as large as the vocal reaction to the transition announcement would imply. ___ 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 Dec 16, 2020, at 11:38 AM, R C wrote: > > > 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. > No I am not considering myself “that good”. Even after running FreeBSD servers for what? about last decade probably. And running or using UNIXes long ago before I b
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 8 future ("Long goodbye"?)
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: 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 all of the ones I use are available as different versions, still maintained and patched, so you not necessarily have to upgrade to latest version when it is released. In this respect, individual ports or packages can live as “enterprise” portions of your ecosystem themselves (each with its own life cycle, still…) This actually is not as challenging as it may sound, as long before end of life of some package version (like PHP-5), at every update you will get warning that it will be end of life soon (starts
Re: [CentOS] Trying to find gcc 5
On 12/4/20 1:06 PM, Warren Young wrote: On Dec 3, 2020, at 5:26 PM, mark wrote: 4's ancient, move to another distro" Do you mean GCC 4.8.5 from CentOS 7, or GCC 4.47 from CentOS 6, or GCC 4.2.1 from CentOS 5? If we’re talking about CentOS 6, then even Red Hat agrees with the Calibre folks: it’s now officially past time to get off CentOS 6, as of last week. CentOS 5? That and 3-4 years gone now. If you’re speaking of CentOS 7, then we’re talking about a 5-year-old compiler, which I wouldn’t call “ancient,” but I’m not surprised that pre-built unofficial binaries aren’t targeting it any more, either. A key pillar of the 10 year support value proposition is that the providers of the toolchains will be building new ancillary packages for you with those tools, but that only applies for packages in the distro. I don’t see how you can expect that non-Red Hat organizations would be constrained in the same way. They didn’t agree to that deal. I suggesting that you build Calibre yourself, or find someone who has done so atop CentOS 7. Beware: the most recent major release of Calibre also requires Python 3. They finally cut off all Python 2 support. Alternately, upgrade to CentOS 8, which uses GCC 8. I 100% agree with Warren. When my users really want newer compiler on "not the latest" CentOS (say, they need c++11 features), I just download gcc version that satisfies them, compile, and install it into separate place, like, e.g., /usr/local/gcc620. And that makes them happy. I hope, this helps. Valeri ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- ++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Emulate Ghost4Linux with standard Linux commands?
> On Nov 28, 2020, at 7:12 AM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: > > Le 28/11/2020 à 08:13, Nicolas Kovacs a écrit : >> Now here's the question. From within my live system, how could I compress >> my system into a compact image and then send it to a distant FTP server? > > I'll answer this myself, since I just experimented and found a strikingly > simple solution using dd and SSH (better than FTP). > > Backup the server over the network from a live rescue session: > > # dd if=/dev/sda status=progress | gzip --fast - | \ > ssh microli...@backup.microlinux.fr \ > dd of=centos-7.9-server-image.gz > > Restore this image from a live rescue session: > > # ssh microli...@backup.microlinux.fr \ > dd if=centos-7.9-server-image.gz | \ > gunzip --fast - | dd of=/dev/sda status=progress > As you mention “compress” in your question, you could also add -C flag to ssh command (to turn on compression) Valeri > Why didn't I think of this before ? > > :o) > > Niki > > -- > Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables > 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat > Site : https://www.microlinux.fr > Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr > Mail : i...@microlinux.fr > Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32 > Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12 > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Replacing SW RAID-1 with SSD RAID-1
://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Replacing SW RAID-1 with SSD RAID-1
On 11/24/20 11:05 AM, Simon Matter wrote: On 11/24/20 1:20 AM, Simon Matter wrote: On 23/11/2020 17:16, Ralf Prengel wrote: Backup Von meinem iPhone gesendet You do have a recent backup available anyway, haven't you? That is: Even without planning to replace disks. And testing such strategies/sequences using loopback devices is definitely a good idea to get used to the machinery... On a side note: I have had a fair number of drives die on me during RAID-rebuild so I would try to avoid (if at all possible) to deliberately reduce redundancy just for a drive swap. I have never had a problem (yet) due to a problem with the RAID-1 kernel code itself. And: If you have to change a disk because it already has issues it may be dangerous to do a backup - especially if you do a file based backups - because the random access pattern may make things worse. Been there, done that... Sure, and for large disks I even go further: don't put the whole disk into one RAID device but build multiple segments, like create 6 partitions of same size on each disk and build six RAID1s out of it. Oh, boy, what a mess this will create! I have inherited a machine which was set up by someone with software RAID like that. You need to replace one drive, other RAIDs which that drive's other partitions are participating are affected too. Now imagine that somehow at some moment you have several RAIDs each of them is not redundant, but in each it is partition from different drive that is kicked out. And now you are stuck unable to remove any of failed drives, removal of each will trash one or another RAID (which are not redundant already). I guess the guy who left me with this setup listened to advises like the one you just gave. What a pain it is to deal with any drive failure on this machine!! It is known since forever: The most robust setup is the simplest one. I understand that, I also like keeping things simple (KISS). Now, in my own experience, with these multi terabyte drives today, in 95% of the cases where you get a problem it is with a single block which can not be read fine. A single write to the sector makes the drive remap it and problem is solved. That's where a simple resync of the affected RAID segment is the fix. If a drive happens to produce such a condition once a year, there is absolutely no reason to replace the drive, just trigger the remapping of the bad sector and and drive will remember it in the internal bad sector map. This happens all the time without giving an error to the OS level, as long as the drive could still read and reconstruct the correct data. In the 5% of cases where a drive really fails completely and needs replacement, you have to resync the 10 RAID segments, yes. I usually do it with a small script and it doesn't take more than some minutes. It is one story if you administer one home server. It is quite different is you administer a couple of hundreds of them, like I do. And just 2-3 machines set up in such a disastrous manner as I just described suck 10-20 times more of my time each compared to any other machine - the ones I configured hardware for myself, and set up myself, then you are entitled to say what I said. Hence the attitude. Keep things simple, so they do not suck your time - if you do it for living. But if it is a hobby of yours - the one that takes all your time, and gives you a pleasure just to fiddle with it, then it's your time, and your pleasure, do it the way to get more of it ;-) Valeri So, if there is an issue on one disk in one segment, you don't lose redundancy of the whole big disk. You can even keep spare segments on separate disks to help in case where you can not quickly replace a broken disk. The whole handling is still very easy with LVM on top. One can do a lot of fancy things, splitting things on one layer, then joining them back on another (by introducing LVM)... But I want to repeat it again: The most robust setup is the simplest one. The good things is that LVM has been so stable for so many years that I don't think twice about this one more layer. Why is a layered approach worse than a fully included solution like ZFS? The tools differ but some complexity always remains. That's how I see it, Simon ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Replacing SW RAID-1 with SSD RAID-1
On 11/24/20 1:20 AM, Simon Matter wrote: On 23/11/2020 17:16, Ralf Prengel wrote: Backup Von meinem iPhone gesendet You do have a recent backup available anyway, haven't you? That is: Even without planning to replace disks. And testing such strategies/sequences using loopback devices is definitely a good idea to get used to the machinery... On a side note: I have had a fair number of drives die on me during RAID-rebuild so I would try to avoid (if at all possible) to deliberately reduce redundancy just for a drive swap. I have never had a problem (yet) due to a problem with the RAID-1 kernel code itself. And: If you have to change a disk because it already has issues it may be dangerous to do a backup - especially if you do a file based backups - because the random access pattern may make things worse. Been there, done that... Sure, and for large disks I even go further: don't put the whole disk into one RAID device but build multiple segments, like create 6 partitions of same size on each disk and build six RAID1s out of it. Oh, boy, what a mess this will create! I have inherited a machine which was set up by someone with software RAID like that. You need to replace one drive, other RAIDs which that drive's other partitions are participating are affected too. Now imagine that somehow at some moment you have several RAIDs each of them is not redundant, but in each it is partition from different drive that is kicked out. And now you are stuck unable to remove any of failed drives, removal of each will trash one or another RAID (which are not redundant already). I guess the guy who left me with this setup listened to advises like the one you just gave. What a pain it is to deal with any drive failure on this machine!! It is known since forever: The most robust setup is the simplest one. So, if there is an issue on one disk in one segment, you don't lose redundancy of the whole big disk. You can even keep spare segments on separate disks to help in case where you can not quickly replace a broken disk. The whole handling is still very easy with LVM on top. One can do a lot of fancy things, splitting things on one layer, then joining them back on another (by introducing LVM)... But I want to repeat it again: The most robust setup is the simplest one. Valeri Regards, Simon ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
