Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Kai Schaetzl wrote: > Marcus Moeller wrote on Thu, 6 Aug 2009 15:52:01 +0200: > > > Dear Community, > > I think the community would benefit from opening a new mailing list for > these issues. There's already a promo list, but a discussion like this > doesn't really fit on it. I also think it doesn't fit here. I think it would have been perfect on the centos-devel list - which isn't overrun and still has many readers/writers. > So, I think everyone interested about CentOS management should be able to > do so on a mailing list "centos-community" or "centos-management" or so. If deemed needed at some time - yes. At the moment I hope we can live without it :) Cheers, Ralph pgpqLnRsh9B01.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Marcus Moeller wrote: > Dear Russ, > Don't misunderstand. I think you have done and are doing a great job but some things are out of any single person's control. All I'm suggesting is that it would be nice if there were an easy answer to the question of "what if" those things happen to a few of you. I think it is a good thing that the question is being asked, though. >>> As an outsider (as far as CentOS development goes), I think this would >>> probably be a good time to just back off a bit, chill out, and see >>> what comes out of the current reorganization. >> * chuckle * Actually I was appreciated Les' comments, in the >> first instance today and later. If I cannot respond to >> thoughtful comments, I've probably not thought the matter >> through enough. I may choose to ignore matter of course where >> comment is not yet ripe >> >> Akemi, Ned and Marcus [and others who have contacted me and >> some of the others on the core group off-list] are obviously >> concerned, want to help, and want to participate more as well, >> and I'll probably do yet another run at describing some ways >> to increasingly grow as a sysadmin, a developer, and as a >> 'person worth watching' as posts of each and others in recent >> days have set me to thinking. >> >> I've done such coaching on the ML, in the wiki, and in private >> email, so why not yet again? > > That"s a great offer and what I titled as mentorship. I think the issue here, at least as perceived by those outside of the project core, is that little is done to actively encourage contributors (ie, mentorship). It's all very well noting and observing the talent develop and calling upon said talent down the line so long as said talent hasn't lost interest in your project in the meantime. What concerns me is that I see absolutely no effort on behalf of the project to nurture/develop/mentor the next generation of CentOS developers. Who will step up to the plate and commit to being lead dev on EL6 with a 7 year lifecycle, a full update set every 6 months, security updates to rebuild at no notice. It's a huge undertaking. From my own experiences when trying to contribute, I have repeatedly been told not to bother, not to do it and to go away. So in the end that's what I did out of frustration - I went away and founded the elrepo project with a few others who also wanted to contribute but found themselves unable to do so. Initially I viewed this as a failure - I would much rather have seen the elrepo driver project be done as the CentOS Dasha project (and likewise, for fasttrack). But now I see it as an advantage not being part of a CentOS project - by not being part of CentOS we are able to support and work with the whole Enterprise Linux community (incl. RHEL and SL), not just CentOS. Red Hat have recognised our value and we are already engaged with Red Hat developers in discussions regarding the direction of the driver update programme in RHEL6. It would be nice if the CentOS Project wanted to engage too :-) IMHO I think it's a shame CentOS doesn't presently offer rebuilds of the FasTrack channel. I know there is a need within the community (our own logs from our fasttrack offering show us that). Let me say this isn't particularly about fasttrack or about me, it's about highlighting how the process doesn't work - I merely use my own experience as an example to highlight this. I have expressed a willingness to contribute. I have shown a commitment over a reasonable length of time, so I'm not the here today, gone tomorrow type. I have been rejected, gone off and done it anyway, so I have demonstrated resilience and determination - I've demonstrated I'm a "do'er" not a "talker". My "product" is out there for others to view and judge my level of competence (I don't and never have claimed to know everything or be perfect, I only display a willingness to continue to learn and develop). I merely seek to contribute back to a community from which I have taken something of value. Yet at every step of the way I have been rejected and knocked back. Never once has a CentOS dev approached me with an offer of mentorship or advice or anything else. As I said, this is absolutely not about me - my circumstances are not unique. For every person like me who is knocked back or rejected, there must be dozens more onlookers who see that and don't even bother trying to engage with the project. Another example is the forums. I started engaging with the CentOS project back in 2005 in the CentOS forums. For years I worked diligently helping users there and was "rewarded" for my efforts in 2008 being made a forum moderator/administrator. My fellow forum moderators both have @centos.org email addresses, something I was denied? How is one supposed to represent the project when one isn't given the tools to do so? It's only an email alias - why would some be afforded that and others be denied? You may think this i
Re: [CentOS] BUG in httpd 2.2.3-22.el5.centos.2
Hi, On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 17:58, Mark Hedges wrote: > Who packages httpd for Centos? Is there some way to contact > a person to ask them about this? You can report problems on the CentOS bug tracker at: http://bugs.centos.org/ If the problem is reproducible in RHEL as well, you might as well report it directly at: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/ > I feel like it's pointless to ask why don't distributions > upgrade within the minor revision number of the stable 2.2 > series anyway. 2.2.3 is certainly not as "stable" as 2.2.11 > and the API is supposed to be the same. Oh right the "big > picture." :-( 2.2.3 in CentOS/RHEL is not the same as 2.2.3 upstream... it's only the base release after which patches are applied. The name 2.2.3 is kept because potentially not all the upstream patches that went to 2.2.11 will go into CentOS/RHEL's 2.2.3, in theory only security updates are applied inside a minor OS release and RedHat might decide to skip some of the patches introduced between 2.2.3 and 2.2.11 if they believe they are not relevant to their product. On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 00:48, Mark Hedges wrote: > Here's what people have collected so far: > https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=47983 First: you still did not describe your problem on this mailing list, so it's really hard to help you with that. Second: from that link it seems that you have installed Perl modules directly from CPAN. Is that true? If you did and your system broke, well, you got to keep the pieces... It's known that CPAN modules and RPM modules do not play together well and will tend to break in upgrades. I suggest you install a CentOS 5.3 machine from scratch and try to reproduce the problem there. If it still happens, then report it to CentOS's bug tracker and/or to the mailing list. HTH, Filipe ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] so many arp caches why?
MontyRee wrote: > # ifconfig > eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:A0:D1:E7:91:CC > inet addr:192.168.195.36 Bcast:192.168.195.63 Mask:255.255.255.192 > # route -n > 192.168.195.00.0.0.0 255.255.255.192 U 0 00 eth0 > 0.0.0.0 192.168.195.36 0.0.0.0 UG0 00 eth0 your default gateway is not set correctly. the ip address of your nic is set as your default gateway. the default gateway ip address should be your router/modem/whatever. your internet access is working because your gateway is smarter than you are. to the file /etc/sysconfig/network add the line: GATEWAY=192.168.195.xx where 192.168.195.xx is the ip address of your gateway. then: service network restart -- Steven Tardy Systems Programmer Information Technology Infrastructure Information Technology Services Mississippi State University s...@its.msstate.edu ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] firewall question
On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 22:19 -0700, Linux Advocate wrote: > - Original Message > > From: William L. Maltby > > > > > BTW, Scott and other IPCop users, there is a new version of IPCop > > > coming out. It's in testing now: > > > > That's good to hear. I was afraid the project was dead. It had been so > > long since a release. > > > > if ipcop goes down, there is always shorewall. Yep. But I hope to avoid having to swith over. I've had IPCop running so long, everythings is ingrained into my brain so much that I'm almost on "automatic" with it. Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Internet squid proxy for banner and add filtering and Nagios
Hello, I've got a standalone internet server, it's a vps and i'd like to use it for proxy and add filtering. Since it's directly accessible from the internet i need to lock it down so only designated users can get to it, i'd prefer encrypted transmission of credentials. I've also wanted to get nagios going on this box so it can monitor other services and email/sms when they go down as in an unexpected reboot and don't come back up. That one i definitely want to secure the cgi interface. For both the squid and nagios only authorized users should be able to get to them, and only users on the machine itself, via ssh, ideally should be able to configure them. I'd appreciate any suggestions. Thanks. Dave. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Marcus Moeller wrote: > Dear Andrew. >>> (like the Contrib repo) are getting a bit clearer so I >>> guess we are on the right track. >> Contib repo !!! What Contrib repo ? The last time i tried to >> contribute i was told to head on to Fedora or rpmforge. > > The Contrib repository has been re-invented in CentOS 5.3 but it's > still not clear what it's for. From the official announce: > > ... > Given the widespread requests for user contributed packages directly > being hosted within the centos repositories, the contribs repository is > now back with CentOS-5.3. There are no packages yet, but over the next > few weeks we hope to have a policy and process in place that allows > users to submit and manage packages in the contrib repo. > ... > > Karan started to line it out on this: > > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2009-August/004833.html > > recent centos-devel thread. Well, if something is going to be released as part of CentOS (contrib repo or not), then it is going to be correct and it is going to be vetted by someone that I PERSONALLY trust ... or it is going to be personally tested by me prior to release. Otherwise, it is not going to be released. If you meet those requirements (I know you, know your work, and personally trust you with my servers), then you can get on a team to do things ... if you don't, you can't. Until I get kicked out of CentOS (I don't think that is happening any time soon), that will be one of the standards that we use. The community can get in and get access to things ... Akemi Yagi and Ned Slider (both have admin rights to the CentOS forums, Akemi does the spec files and changes to CentOS Plus kernels) are both examples of this recently. Tim Verhoeven and Jim Perrin are examples from a few years ago, and Karanbir Singh and Ralph Angenendt are examples from a few years before that. We add developers as we get people who do things for the project and as we come to know them, develop a relationship with them, and see their work. We have a responsibility to an estimated 4 million unique machines to not allow code into our repositories unless it is correct and we take that responsibility very seriously. A broken CentOS package can cost people millions (maybe billions) of dollars worldwide. We do add people as developers ... if we don't do it fast enough for an individual person's tastes then I am sorry. There are other options out there ... including Fedora and EPEL ... for people who want to contribute faster than we allow. Thanks, Johnny Hughes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Ned Slider wrote: > Marcus Moeller wrote: >> Dear Russ, >> > Don't misunderstand. I think you have done and are doing a great job > but some things are out of any single person's control. All I'm > suggesting is that it would be nice if there were an easy answer to the > question of "what if" those things happen to a few of you. I think it > is a good thing that the question is being asked, though. As an outsider (as far as CentOS development goes), I think this would probably be a good time to just back off a bit, chill out, and see what comes out of the current reorganization. >>> * chuckle * Actually I was appreciated Les' comments, in the >>> first instance today and later. If I cannot respond to >>> thoughtful comments, I've probably not thought the matter >>> through enough. I may choose to ignore matter of course where >>> comment is not yet ripe >>> >>> Akemi, Ned and Marcus [and others who have contacted me and >>> some of the others on the core group off-list] are obviously >>> concerned, want to help, and want to participate more as well, >>> and I'll probably do yet another run at describing some ways >>> to increasingly grow as a sysadmin, a developer, and as a >>> 'person worth watching' as posts of each and others in recent >>> days have set me to thinking. >>> >>> I've done such coaching on the ML, in the wiki, and in private >>> email, so why not yet again? >> That"s a great offer and what I titled as mentorship. > > I think the issue here, at least as perceived by those outside of the > project core, is that little is done to actively encourage contributors > (ie, mentorship). It's all very well noting and observing the talent > develop and calling upon said talent down the line so long as said > talent hasn't lost interest in your project in the meantime. What > concerns me is that I see absolutely no effort on behalf of the project > to nurture/develop/mentor the next generation of CentOS developers. Who > will step up to the plate and commit to being lead dev on EL6 with a 7 > year lifecycle, a full update set every 6 months, security updates to > rebuild at no notice. It's a huge undertaking. > > From my own experiences when trying to contribute, I have repeatedly > been told not to bother, not to do it and to go away. So in the end > that's what I did out of frustration - I went away and founded the > elrepo project with a few others who also wanted to contribute but found > themselves unable to do so. Initially I viewed this as a failure - I > would much rather have seen the elrepo driver project be done as the > CentOS Dasha project (and likewise, for fasttrack). But now I see it as > an advantage not being part of a CentOS project - by not being part of > CentOS we are able to support and work with the whole Enterprise Linux > community (incl. RHEL and SL), not just CentOS. Red Hat have recognised > our value and we are already engaged with Red Hat developers in > discussions regarding the direction of the driver update programme in > RHEL6. It would be nice if the CentOS Project wanted to engage too :-) > > IMHO I think it's a shame CentOS doesn't presently offer rebuilds of the > FasTrack channel. I know there is a need within the community (our own > logs from our fasttrack offering show us that). Let me say this isn't > particularly about fasttrack or about me, it's about highlighting how > the process doesn't work - I merely use my own experience as an example > to highlight this. I have expressed a willingness to contribute. I have > shown a commitment over a reasonable length of time, so I'm not the here > today, gone tomorrow type. I have been rejected, gone off and done it > anyway, so I have demonstrated resilience and determination - I've > demonstrated I'm a "do'er" not a "talker". My "product" is out there for > others to view and judge my level of competence (I don't and never have > claimed to know everything or be perfect, I only display a willingness > to continue to learn and develop). I merely seek to contribute back to a > community from which I have taken something of value. Yet at every step > of the way I have been rejected and knocked back. Never once has a > CentOS dev approached me with an offer of mentorship or advice or > anything else. As I said, this is absolutely not about me - my > circumstances are not unique. For every person like me who is knocked > back or rejected, there must be dozens more onlookers who see that and > don't even bother trying to engage with the project. > > Another example is the forums. I started engaging with the CentOS > project back in 2005 in the CentOS forums. For years I worked diligently > helping users there and was "rewarded" for my efforts in 2008 being > made a forum moderator/administrator. My fellow forum moderators both > have @centos.org email addresses, something I was denied? How is one > supposed to represent the pro
[CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Ned Slider wrote: > From my own experiences when trying to contribute, I have repeatedly > been told not to bother, not to do it and to go away. Being told 'no' differs from being told 'to go away' -- #centos IRC is about the only place we do that, and that is under a standard of preserving the channel on topic. If I said 'go away' to you, I apologize; if it is another that did it, please send a transcript of it to me privately and I will look into it. I don't believe it happened, but I will make it right -- Russ herrold ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] CentOS as a router
I am setting up a small CentOS-5.3 host to act as a router. I have the device configured and working. What I am trying to accomplish now is configuring the firewall so as to protect both the router and the LAN. The host configuration has the WAN attached to eth0 (IP_ADDR = A) and the LAN attached to eth1 (IP_ADDR = B). The default gateway for B is A. The default gateway for B is B-1. There is a static route set for eth0 (A) to route traffic for B/24 to B. My understanding is that INCOMING packets, for the purposes of iptables, originate outside the host interfaces and that OUTGOING packets originate from, or are forwarded across, the host itself. So, as I understand things, traffic from network C/24 destined to B/24 comes IN eth0, is forwarded to eth1, and then goes OUT eth1. Similarly, traffic from B/24 to C/24 comes IN eth1 and goes OUT eth0. Is my understanding correct? I have set up four custom chains, one each for IN and OUT on each of the two eth i/f. Incoming packets for eth0 are sent to the WAN-IN-CHAIN, outgoing are sent to the WAN-OUT-CHAIN. In a similar fashion I have LAN-IN-CHAIN and LAN-OUT-CHAIN. My confusion arises from trying to setup an iptables filter on the WAN-In-CHAIN so that traffic arriving to eth0 cannot connect to either A or B, but can nonetheless pass through B to B/24. I cannot seem to discover an arrangement whereby I can do this and still maintain network connectivity to B/24 from a console session running on the router itself. Further, I wish to prevent any incoming connection from the WAN for any source address purporting to belong to the B/24 netblock (IP spoofing). Again, whatever arrangements that I try, whenever I enable such a rule I lose network connectivity from the console session to the LAN. I would appreciate some guidance and an explanation of what fundamental issue it is that I am missing. -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] BUG in httpd 2.2.3-22.el5.centos.2
Mark Hedges wrote: > On Sat, 1 Aug 2009, Ned Slider wrote: >> Filipe Brandenburger wrote: >>> On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 12:30, Mark Hedges wrote: > http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/SELinux Is this why DBD::SQLite broke under mod_perl recently in CentOS? >>> It might or might not be... In order to be sure, you may >>> check the audit logs at /var/log/audit/audit.log (make >>> sure the "audit" RPM is installed and the "auditd" >>> daemon is enabled and running), you might see SELinux >>> messages in that file when some access is denied. >> Further to Filipe's advice, if you temporarily switch >> SELinux into permissive mode and stuff then works again, >> take that as a pretty good indication that it was indeed >> SELinux that was preventing it. At that point you know >> where to look to fix the problem. > > No, this is not my problem anyway. > > hed...@anubis:~$ sestatus > SELinux status: disabled > > With SELinux off, any script run by apache can access > anything on the filesystem that can be read by the apache > process user. Maybe that's not the best way to do it, but > it confirms that SELinux is not causing DBD::MySQL to break > under mod_perl in CentOS 5.3. > > It looks like it was a buggy release in apr-util > 1.2.7-7.el5_3.1 or httpd 2.2.3-22.el5.centos.2 > > Who packages httpd for Centos? Is there some way to contact > a person to ask them about this? > > I feel like it's pointless to ask why don't distributions > upgrade within the minor revision number of the stable 2.2 > series anyway. 2.2.3 is certainly not as "stable" as 2.2.11 > and the API is supposed to be the same. Oh right the "big > picture." :-( > Well ... here is what I can tell you: http://www.redhat.com/security/updates/backporting/?sc_cid=3093 They do roll in bug fixes. I know it can be frustrating (it is for me to and I build this stuff) ... WRT the httpd package ... if you look at the RHEL and CentOS httpd SRPMs you will see that the change in the spec file is cosmetic and only controls CentOS being displayed instead of Red Hat as required by their trademark restrictions. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS as a router
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, James B. Byrne wrote: > I am setting up a small CentOS-5.3 host to act as a router. I have > the device configured and working. What I am trying to accomplish > now is configuring the firewall so as to protect both the router and > the LAN. [] In the past, I'd have tried to craft the iptables rules by hand. Now, older and lazier, I rely on shorewall. Shorewall generally produces pretty good rules. You can "compile" your logic to iptables rules without implementing them, so you could use shorewall to generate a set of rules that essentially do what you want, look them over, and then revise/implement the ones you like. -- Paul Heinlein <> heinl...@madboa.com <> http://www.madboa.com/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS as a router
James B. Byrne wrote: > My understanding is that INCOMING packets, for the purposes of > iptables, originate outside the host interfaces and that OUTGOING > packets originate from, or are forwarded across, the host itself. > So, as I understand things, traffic from network C/24 destined to > B/24 comes IN eth0, is forwarded to eth1, and then goes OUT eth1. > Similarly, traffic from B/24 to C/24 comes IN eth1 and goes OUT > eth0. Is my understanding correct? > No. You don't have it right. INPUT packets are packets destined for the router own IP addresses (not going to any other machines) FORWARD packets are packets being routed through the router (but not targeted for the routers own IP addresses) OUTPUT packets are packets originated from the router itself (not packets being routed from other machines). -- Benjamin Franz ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS as a router
Paul Heinlein wrote: > On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, James B. Byrne wrote: > >> I am setting up a small CentOS-5.3 host to act as a router. I have >> the device configured and working. What I am trying to accomplish >> now is configuring the firewall so as to protect both the router and >> the LAN. [] > > In the past, I'd have tried to craft the iptables rules by hand. Now, > older and lazier, I rely on shorewall. > > Shorewall generally produces pretty good rules. You can "compile" your > logic to iptables rules without implementing them, so you could use > shorewall to generate a set of rules that essentially do what you > want, look them over, and then revise/implement the ones you like. > If one really does want to configure by hand, I have found this to be very useful: http://tldp.org/HOWTO/IP-Masquerade-HOWTO/index.html Personally, I now use IPCOP to do this ... shorewall is another good firewall distro. Thanks, Johnny Hughes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 10:40 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > Ned Slider wrote: > > Marcus Moeller wrote: > >> Dear Russ, [huge snip] > Look ... if you understand how build work, and I know you do, then you > understand that one can not release updates that are built on 4.8 > without releasing 4.8. > > If you need the updates faster, feel free to pay Redhat for them. > > > There - I feel so much better getting that lot off my chest :) > > There are always other distros if you don't like this one ... Exactly the *wrong* response. I wonder if responses similar to this loses potential users or loses existing customers. Personally, it disgusts me. -- Bob Taylor ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS as a router
Hi, On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 12:07, James B. Byrne wrote: > The host configuration has the WAN attached to eth0 (IP_ADDR = A) > and the LAN attached to eth1 (IP_ADDR = B). The default gateway for > B is A. The default gateway for B is B-1. This statement does not make any sense to me... Could you please use real IPs where possible and fake IPs (be consistent) where you don't want to disclose your private information? > My understanding is that INCOMING packets, for the purposes of > iptables, originate outside the host interfaces and that OUTGOING > packets originate from, or are forwarded across, the host itself. > So, as I understand things, traffic from network C/24 destined to > B/24 comes IN eth0, is forwarded to eth1, and then goes OUT eth1. > Similarly, traffic from B/24 to C/24 comes IN eth1 and goes OUT > eth0. Is my understanding correct? If packets are traversing the router, you should add rules in the FORWARD chain and not INPUT and OUTPUT (those apply only to packets destined at the router). You must also enable forwarding by adding this to /etc/sysctl.conf: net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1 And then running as root: sysctl -p > I have set up four custom chains, one each for IN and OUT on each of > the two eth i/f. Incoming packets for eth0 are sent to the > WAN-IN-CHAIN, outgoing are sent to the WAN-OUT-CHAIN. In a similar > fashion I have LAN-IN-CHAIN and LAN-OUT-CHAIN. Also, very confusing. How do those relate to INPUT, OUTPUT and FORWARD? Could you please post the rules you are using, maybe anonymizing the external IPs for privacy? > Further, I wish to prevent any incoming connection from the WAN for > any source address purporting to belong to the B/24 netblock (IP > spoofing). Again, whatever arrangements that I try, whenever I > enable such a rule I lose network connectivity from the console > session to the LAN. Please post the rules you are trying. If you don't, there is no way we can tell you what is wrong there... HTH, Filipe ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Dear Russ, > > [huge snip] > >> Look ... if you understand how build work, and I know you do, then you >> understand that one can not release updates that are built on 4.8 >> without releasing 4.8. >> >> If you need the updates faster, feel free to pay Redhat for them. >> >>> There - I feel so much better getting that lot off my chest :) >> There are always other distros if you don't like this one ... > > Exactly the *wrong* response. I wonder if responses similar to this > loses potential users or loses existing customers. Personally, it > disgusts me. I'd like to double this: It'd be exactly the same (or one of two) response(s) that one would get from the OpenBSD guys, at least the less social ones that don't have a clue to control themselves. The other one would be 'Shut the f*** up and code!'. After a really long odyssey I ended up (almost) where I started: Using NetBSD and CentOS (at least, what's OSS). Best, Timo ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS as a router
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Paul Heinlein wrote: > In the past, I'd have tried to craft the iptables rules by hand. Now, > older and lazier, I rely on shorewall. This is a +1 for shorewall, which is 42 times simpler [*] than doing it by hand. Steve [*] Actually, it's more than 42, but 42 is The Answer. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Bob Taylor wrote: > On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 10:40 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> Ned Slider wrote: >>> Marcus Moeller wrote: Dear Russ, > > [huge snip] > >> Look ... if you understand how build work, and I know you do, then you >> understand that one can not release updates that are built on 4.8 >> without releasing 4.8. >> >> If you need the updates faster, feel free to pay Redhat for them. >> >>> There - I feel so much better getting that lot off my chest :) >> There are always other distros if you don't like this one ... > > Exactly the *wrong* response. I wonder if responses similar to this > loses potential users or loses existing customers. Personally, it > disgusts me. It is not *wrong* ... any more than your response is *wrong*. Your opinion is for you and my opinion is for me. And the GREAT thing about open source is, there is always another project if you don't like the current one. My point is, the CentOS team has put in an unbelievable amount of time and effort to build this distribution. We will continue to do so. If you like it use it. If you don't like it, don't use it. If someone has a major problem with the distro, then they should find one that they don't have a major problem with. I don't want hard feelings or anyone to be upset, but if we are not meeting your expectations then you might be able to find another that does. I do not think you will ... but trying is certainly better than being upset. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Fri, August 7, 2009 12:54 pm, Johnny Hughes wrote: > Bob Taylor wrote: >> On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 10:40 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>> Ned Slider wrote: Marcus Moeller wrote: > Dear Russ, >> >> [huge snip] >> >>> Look ... if you understand how build work, and I know you do, then you >>> understand that one can not release updates that are built on 4.8 >>> without releasing 4.8. >>> >>> If you need the updates faster, feel free to pay Redhat for them. >>> There - I feel so much better getting that lot off my chest :) >>> There are always other distros if you don't like this one ... >> >> Exactly the *wrong* response. I wonder if responses similar to this >> loses potential users or loses existing customers. Personally, it >> disgusts me. > > It is not *wrong* ... any more than your response is *wrong*. > > Your opinion is for you and my opinion is for me. > > And the GREAT thing about open source is, there is always another > project if you don't like the current one. > > My point is, the CentOS team has put in an unbelievable amount of time > and effort to build this distribution. We will continue to do so. If > you like it use it. If you don't like it, don't use it. > > If someone has a major problem with the distro, then they should find > one that they don't have a major problem with. I don't want hard > feelings or anyone to be upset, but if we are not meeting your > expectations then you might be able to find another that does. I do not > think you will ... but trying is certainly better than being upset. Johnny, With all due respect, it is not what you are saying but how, especially considering your prominent role on the project. Marko ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] BUG in httpd 2.2.3-22.el5.centos.2
Mark Hedges wrote: > Here's what people have collected so far: > > https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=47983 > > This is a message I posted when I signed up for the list, > I thought it was ignored but it looks like it didn't post: I looked through it and wow it does seem like a fairly deep issue, reminds me of the problems I have when I need to ask for help often I don't get responses as they are deep as well. I don't think I'm able to help on this one but am curious how much of the components your working with are built from outside sources? I get the impression that your using quite a few modules directly from CPAN, are you using sqlite and mod_perl stuff from outside CentOS as well? nate ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Johnny Hughes wrote: > There - I feel so much better getting that lot off my chest :) >>> There are always other distros if you don't like this one ... >> Exactly the *wrong* response. I wonder if responses similar to this >> loses potential users or loses existing customers. Personally, it >> disgusts me. > > It is not *wrong* ... any more than your response is *wrong*. > > Your opinion is for you and my opinion is for me. > > And the GREAT thing about open source is, there is always another > project if you don't like the current one. > > My point is, the CentOS team has put in an unbelievable amount of time > and effort to build this distribution. We will continue to do so. If > you like it use it. If you don't like it, don't use it. *sigh*... Don't take this as a complaint about the quality of the project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come across as having a stranglehold of control. If we wanted a one man show we'd probably be using whitebox. Things happen - people need backups. We'd feel better if you shared your contingency plans. > If someone has a major problem with the distro, then they should find > one that they don't have a major problem with. I don't want hard > feelings or anyone to be upset, but if we are not meeting your > expectations then you might be able to find another that does. I do not > think you will ... but trying is certainly better than being upset. "Meeting expectations" is at least partly a matter of setting the expectations realistically. If we wanted to hear 'it ships when it's ready', we'd probably be running debian. That's not what we've been led to expect from Centos nor, I think, what you want people to expect. I no longer run 4.x so the delays there don't affect me, but in general I'd give about equal weight to having timely security updates as to never having mistakes in the repository - failure of either can have equally disastrous results. While I don't personally have many qualms about your ability to continue the best balance possible, I don't think you are saying the right things to inspire public confidence. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Les Mikesell wrote: > *sigh*... Don't take this as a complaint about the quality of the > project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm > fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come > across as having a stranglehold of control. If we wanted a one man show > we'd probably be using whitebox. Things happen - people need backups. > We'd feel better if you shared your contingency plans. I think he did - use RHEL, it's a drop in replacement. Red Hat seems to be a pretty healthy company at this point and I at least don't expect them to go away in the near-mid term. I'm kind of surprised of some of the folks on this list how high their expectations are of the CentOS team, they do the best that they can, they don't require anything in return, though I'm sure they appreciate donations and stuff. > about your ability to continue the best balance possible, I don't think > you are saying the right things to inspire public confidence. I'd rather the team be honest(which it seems they have been) on their expectations and stuff rather than spin PR stuff to boost themselves/distribution. As time goes on it seems more and more sad the volumes of folks that seem to believe everything should be free and at the same time work perfectly, the number of corporations that base their systems/products off of CentOS is pretty big, and I'd be surprised if they contributed anywhere near the value of the product back into the community. It's a fight I have on occasion even at my company, where some people want to replace solutions that they previous paid for with free ones just because they are "free". I think in those situations companies should at least strongly consider some sort of contribution back to the community, the easiest is just in some $$, but contributing code and fixes would be nice too, but companies that do that seem to be very few and far between. Going with RHEL can be a good compromise, which is one reason I'm pushing for RHEL here as a good chunk of what is paid for RHEL goes to the open source community in the form of developer hours and stuff. Unfortunate times we are in.. nate (CentOS user for about 4 years now, Debian user for about 11 years) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Dear Johnny, > Well, if something is going to be released as part of CentOS (contrib > repo or not), then it is going to be correct and it is going to be > vetted by someone that I PERSONALLY trust ... or it is going to be > personally tested by me prior to release. Otherwise, it is not going to > be released. Then you should not perhaps not call it 'Contrib' repository if noone that you do not personally know can add content to it. The Fedora project has published very good guidelines which explain how to build high quality packages: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines As mentioned before, spec files or SRPMs can be reviewed locally (using lint) and via bugtracker. Mentorship could help new packagers to build 'standard conform' packages. Rebuild could happen automatically in koji. > If you meet those requirements (I know you, know your work, and > personally trust you with my servers), then you can get on a team to do > things ... if you don't, you can't. In my pov the requirements that have to be met to become a developer could be lined out very clearly. Membership applications could then be discussed within a board. > Until I get kicked out of CentOS (I don't think that is happening any > time soon), that will be one of the standards that we use. Which means you are the king, feeding the folk? Not very 'Community' orientated, sorry. Best Regards Marcus ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Les Mikesell wrote: > project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm > fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come > across as having a stranglehold of control. I missed the memo -- what do we have a stranglehold on? > We'd feel better if you shared your contingency plans. I've done that repeatedly -- either people do not read, or will not believe what we write. Nothing of human creation cannot be all things to all people and it is foolish to think otherwise. -- Russ herrold ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Marcus Moeller wrote: > Then you should not perhaps not call it 'Contrib' repository > if no one that you do not personally know can add content to > it. You don't like reputational vetting and a meritocracy, or how it is run by the people in charge who have as one goal: not distributing malware. I get it. Thank you. > The Fedora project has published very good guidelines which > explain how to build high quality packages: You may be happier there. Mind their CLA. Enjoy the food fights. -- Russ herrold ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
nate wrote: > >> *sigh*... Don't take this as a complaint about the quality of the >> project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm >> fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come >> across as having a stranglehold of control. If we wanted a one man show >> we'd probably be using whitebox. Things happen - people need backups. >> We'd feel better if you shared your contingency plans. > > I think he did - use RHEL, it's a drop in replacement. Red Hat seems > to be a pretty healthy company at this point and I at least don't > expect them to go away in the near-mid term. No, that's a possible contingency plan for each of us if the Centos project dies. SL is another. But, will the Centos project really die if Johnny gets hit by a bus? That's not what you expect from something called a 'community' project - you expect someone else to be able to step in instead of suddenly leaving everyone to fend for themselves separately. > I'm kind of surprised of some of the folks on this list how high > their expectations are of the CentOS team, they do the best that they > can, they don't require anything in return, though I'm sure they > appreciate donations and stuff. That's what happens when you do things right for several years... >> about your ability to continue the best balance possible, I don't think >> you are saying the right things to inspire public confidence. > > I'd rather the team be honest(which it seems they have been) on > their expectations and stuff rather than spin PR stuff to boost > themselves/distribution. I'm not asking them to be dishonest because I don't doubt their abilities and really don't expect the project to fail if a person or two drops out or has some time issues. I think they can be honest and still say the project has a plan and infrastructure to continue. They just haven't said it that way yet. > As time goes on it seems more and more sad the volumes of folks > that seem to believe everything should be free and at the same > time work perfectly, the number of corporations that base their > systems/products off of CentOS is pretty big, and I'd be surprised > if they contributed anywhere near the value of the product back > into the community. Don't forget that the biggest reason Centos works perfectly is the quality control that has gone into the code base before they touch it. That's not to belittle the amount of work they have to do or their competence in not breaking it while making the required changes, but really we'd all be better off if Red Hat still permitted binary redistribution as they did back when they acquired their base of community support. > It's a fight I have on occasion even at my company, where some > people want to replace solutions that they previous paid for > with free ones just because they are "free". I think in those > situations companies should at least strongly consider some sort > of contribution back to the community, the easiest is just in some > $$, but contributing code and fixes would be nice too, but companies > that do that seem to be very few and far between. Going with > RHEL can be a good compromise, which is one reason I'm pushing > for RHEL here as a good chunk of what is paid for RHEL goes to > the open source community in the form of developer hours and stuff. Don't forget that most of the code doesn't originate with RHEL either and the applications we really care about running mostly aren't unique to any particular distribution. > Unfortunate times we are in.. On the contrary, we have an embarrassment of choices - so many that one of the big deciding factors has to be a consideration of the project's likely ability to survive. Centos has been and probably will continue to be among the best. I just wish they'd say so in terms that give confidence in the future. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
2009/8/7 R P Herrold : > On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Marcus Moeller wrote: > >> Then you should not perhaps not call it 'Contrib' repository >> if no one that you do not personally know can add content to >> it. > > You don't like reputational vetting and a meritocracy, or how > it is run by the people in charge who have as one goal: not > distributing malware. I get it. Thank you. Hey Russ, it's open source. You can just review the spec and comment it until it's ready for release. Source could be fetched directly from upstream and patches could be verified easily. I do not see any problem here. >> The Fedora project has published very good guidelines which >> explain how to build high quality packages: > > You may be happier there. Mind their CLA. Enjoy the food > fights. Maybe, but I like the idea of setting up a community backed Enterprise OS and CentOS is a great choice for that task. Best Regards Marcus ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
R P Herrold wrote: > >> project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm >> fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come >> across as having a stranglehold of control. > > I missed the memo -- what do we have a stranglehold on? Remember, I'm just commenting on appearances and wording, but all you have to do is read this thread to see that there are people offering to help and being refused. And meanwhile there are things that aren't on schedule. Or maybe there isn't a schedule - or maybe no one is supposed to expect one. >> We'd feel better if you shared your contingency plans. > > I've done that repeatedly -- either people do not read, or > will not believe what we write. Nothing of human creation > cannot be all things to all people and it is foolish to think > otherwise. That was in response to Johnny's comment about having to personally know someone before they would be allowed to touch anything in the repository. What if something happens to Johnny? Is there a bigger picture? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
So is it contrib repo or my buddies repo ? All we are asking is put in place the mechanisms to vet the reputation. The project can not be a true community project when there are no mechanisms for contribution. On 07 Aug 2009, at 9:00 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > That was in response to Johnny's comment about having to personally > know ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Flow-Tools RPM for CentOS 5.3
Alle, Does anyone know if there is/where to get an rpm of flow-tools V0.66 or better for CentOS/RHEL 5.3? We've been trying to build from the SRPM @ http://cng.ateneo.net/cng/wyu/software/srpm/flow-tools-0.68-2.src.rpm with no luck. Best Regards, Camron -- Camron W. Fox Hilo Office High Performance Computing Group Fujitsu Management Services of America, Inc. E-mail: cw...@us.fujitsu.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Les Mikesell wrote: > R P Herrold wrote: >>> project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm >>> fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come >>> across as having a stranglehold of control. >> I missed the memo -- what do we have a stranglehold on? > > Remember, I'm just commenting on appearances and wording, but all you > have to do is read this thread to see that there are people offering to > help and being refused. And meanwhile there are things that aren't on > schedule. Or maybe there isn't a schedule - or maybe no one is supposed > to expect one. > >>> We'd feel better if you shared your contingency plans. >> I've done that repeatedly -- either people do not read, or >> will not believe what we write. Nothing of human creation >> cannot be all things to all people and it is foolish to think >> otherwise. > > That was in response to Johnny's comment about having to personally know > someone before they would be allowed to touch anything in the > repository. What if something happens to Johnny? Is there a bigger > picture? > There are several other people all with the capability to build things ... we are just not adding more. There are only 2 people building SciLinux. I am tired of all the complaining. Use it or don't, at this point I don't care. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Flow-Tools RPM for CentOS 5.3
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Camron W. Fox wrote: > Alle, > > Does anyone know if there is/where to get an rpm of flow-tools V0.66 or > better for CentOS/RHEL 5.3? > We've been trying to build from the SRPM @ > http://cng.ateneo.net/cng/wyu/software/srpm/flow-tools-0.68-2.src.rpm > with no luck. Your best bet will be to rebuild from Fedora's srpm. Akemi ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Johnny Hughes wrote: > Les Mikesell wrote: >> R P Herrold wrote: project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come across as having a stranglehold of control. >>> I missed the memo -- what do we have a stranglehold on? >> Remember, I'm just commenting on appearances and wording, but all you >> have to do is read this thread to see that there are people offering to >> help and being refused. And meanwhile there are things that aren't on >> schedule. Or maybe there isn't a schedule - or maybe no one is supposed >> to expect one. >> We'd feel better if you shared your contingency plans. >>> I've done that repeatedly -- either people do not read, or >>> will not believe what we write. Nothing of human creation >>> cannot be all things to all people and it is foolish to think >>> otherwise. >> That was in response to Johnny's comment about having to personally know >> someone before they would be allowed to touch anything in the >> repository. What if something happens to Johnny? Is there a bigger >> picture? >> > > There are several other people all with the capability to build things > ... we are just not adding more. > > There are only 2 people building SciLinux. > > I am tired of all the complaining. > > Use it or don't, at this point I don't care. I want to point out as well that we have SIGs with people in them who can commit limited code an items ... and those groups each have a team member who validates the code. We are not trying to become Fedora, it already exists. There are 3rd party repos as well for things that are not part of CentOS proper. Our goal is 100% compliance and testing that compliance with upstream functionality. The community is the Mailing Lists ... the Forums ... the Wiki, etc. Not building packages and submitting packages to the repositories. (Although we do allow that also in a limited fashion in the SIGS and the testing repo.) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Johnny Hughes wrote: > Johnny Hughes wrote: >> Les Mikesell wrote: >>> R P Herrold wrote: > project, just the PR vibes here. You aren't giving people the warm > fuzzies about the project's ability to survive when you make it come > across as having a stranglehold of control. I missed the memo -- what do we have a stranglehold on? >>> Remember, I'm just commenting on appearances and wording, but all you >>> have to do is read this thread to see that there are people offering to >>> help and being refused. And meanwhile there are things that aren't on >>> schedule. Or maybe there isn't a schedule - or maybe no one is supposed >>> to expect one. >>> > We'd feel better if you shared your contingency plans. I've done that repeatedly -- either people do not read, or will not believe what we write. Nothing of human creation cannot be all things to all people and it is foolish to think otherwise. >>> That was in response to Johnny's comment about having to personally know >>> someone before they would be allowed to touch anything in the >>> repository. What if something happens to Johnny? Is there a bigger >>> picture? >>> >> There are several other people all with the capability to build things >> ... we are just not adding more. >> >> There are only 2 people building SciLinux. >> >> I am tired of all the complaining. >> >> Use it or don't, at this point I don't care. > > I want to point out as well that we have SIGs with people in them who > can commit limited code an items ... and those groups each have a team > member who validates the code. > > We are not trying to become Fedora, it already exists. > > There are 3rd party repos as well for things that are not part of CentOS > proper. > > Our goal is 100% compliance and testing that compliance with upstream > functionality. > > The community is the Mailing Lists ... the Forums ... the Wiki, etc. > > Not building packages and submitting packages to the repositories. > (Although we do allow that also in a limited fashion in the SIGS and the > testing repo.) Oh, and I forgot the bugs database. All the bugs are open, anyone should feel free to go there, look at the bugs, scour the redhat bugzilla and the other upstream sites and post patches and/or other fixes. Anyone can register an account and write post there. If it is a fix to an upstream package (which we will not publish until they do), we will gladly post it upstream and get it rolled into the upstream code (if/when THEY decide to roll it in). I have, in the past. maintained many patched packages while waiting for things to get into an upstream package and posted it to the testing repos. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Flow-Tools RPM for CentOS 5.3
--- On Fri, 8/7/09, Camron W. Fox wrote: > From: Camron W. Fox > Subject: [CentOS] Flow-Tools RPM for CentOS 5.3 > To: "CentOS mailing list" > Date: Friday, August 7, 2009, 1:26 PM > Alle, > > Does anyone know if there is/where to > get an rpm of flow-tools V0.66 or > better for CentOS/RHEL 5.3? > We've been trying to build from the SRPM > @ > http://cng.ateneo.net/cng/wyu/software/srpm/flow-tools-0.68-2.src.rpm > > with no luck. > Hello, It's here in my repo http://www.tlviewer.org/centos/5/x86_64/ but built on C5.2. I don't have a buildroot on C5.3, yet. It has a depends on rrdtool and its perl and python hooks. The build passed a test install on both a C5.2 and C5.3. To get the rrdtool packages, you need rpmforge. -- Mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Les Mikesell wrote: > And meanwhile there are things that aren't on schedule. > Or maybe there isn't a schedule - or maybe no one is > supposed to expect one. oh please -- You've been around software, computers, and FOSS long enough to know the game -- Publish a schedule and take a day longer. Not soon enough, why are they so slow, and if a miss, the sky is falling, in commercial world angry stockholder suits, and all the externalities; don't publish a schedule and say: when it is ready, or enforce no un-planned leaks like Apple or RHT: just as much carping, but no miss. People can project their expectations all they wish; I won't feed those >>> We'd feel better if you shared your contingency plans. >> >> I've done that repeatedly -- either people do not read, or >> will not believe what we write. Nothing of human creation >> cannot be all things to all people and it is foolish to think >> otherwise. > > That was in response to Johnny's comment about having to personally know as may be, but the same result obtains for me being frank. > someone before they would be allowed to touch anything in the > repository. What if something happens to Johnny? Is there a bigger > picture? The sub-domain under discussion and mentioned by hughesjr and others is a sub-doamin of centos.org. I believe the group has sketched it out already. Website, front page, top right: The CentOS project is now in control of the CentOS.org ... domain ... but as I said before, people do not read, or will not believe what we write. More details appear when we release more details Who is the fool here? -- Russ herrold ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > > That was in response to Johnny's comment about having to personally know > someone before they would be allowed to touch anything in the > repository. What if something happens to Johnny? Is there a bigger > picture? I'm not quite sure what it is you want. From what I see, there were eight developers who signed the Open Letter to Lance Davis. I assume (don't know) that these eight developers are the ones who "rebuild" Red Hat into CentOS -- so how could it mean that if one gets hit by a bus, the project ends? As you've also mentioned (in another post) they basically take "upstream" code and rebuild it (removing "upstream's" name). So, my question is, what kind of input from the community would change any of this? And what is it that you actually want community input to change? I look at it this way. CentOS is 100% compatible with "upstream." By using RPMForge and the other repositories I can "modify" CentOS to my heart's content. >From my point of view, this non-problem is completely solved. -- RonB -- Using CentOS 5.3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Flow-Tools RPM for CentOS 5.3
Akemi Yagi wrote: > On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Camron W. Fox wrote: >> Alle, >> >>Does anyone know if there is/where to get an rpm of flow-tools V0.66 >> or >> better for CentOS/RHEL 5.3? >>We've been trying to build from the SRPM @ >> http://cng.ateneo.net/cng/wyu/software/srpm/flow-tools-0.68-2.src.rpm >> with no luck. > > Your best bet will be to rebuild from Fedora's srpm. > > Akemi > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > Yagi-san, We've tried that with flow-tools-0.68.4.1-2.fc11.src.rpm but get the following error: r...@rb3:/var/tmp [1002/2]# rpmbuild --rebuild flow-tools-0.68.4.1-2.fc11.src.rpm Installing flow-tools-0.68.4.1-2.fc11.src.rpm warning: InstallSourcePackage: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 signature: NOKEY, key ID d22e77f2 warning: user mockbuild does not exist - using root warning: group mockbuild does not exist - using root error: unpacking of archive failed on file /root/rpm/SOURCES/flow-capture.init;4a7caede: cpio: MD5 sum mismatch error: flow-tools-0.68.4.1-2.fc11.src.rpm cannot be installed r...@rb3:/var/tmp [1003/3]# Best Regards, Camron Camron W. Fox Hilo Office High Performance Computing Group Fujitsu Management Services of America, Inc. E-mail: cw...@us.fujitsu.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Flow-Tools RPM for CentOS 5.3
On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 12:54:26 -1000 Camron W. Fox wrote: > /root/rpm/SOURCES/flow-capture.init;4a7caede: cpio: MD5 sum mismatch Fedora 11 uses a different checksum algorithm than Fedora 10 and below. -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Melville Sask ~ http://www.melvilletheatre.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Flow-Tools RPM for CentOS 5.3
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Frank Cox wrote: > On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 12:54:26 -1000 > Camron W. Fox wrote: > >> /root/rpm/SOURCES/flow-capture.init;4a7caede: cpio: MD5 sum mismatch > > Fedora 11 uses a different checksum algorithm than Fedora 10 and below. You might want to start with Fedora Core 6 and, if that builds, work up the version. FC6 should be the closest to CentOS-5. Akemi ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Ned Slider wrote: >> R P Herrold wrote: >>> On Thu, 6 Aug 2009, Marcus Moeller wrote: >>> >> >> >> The bit that causes all the confusion here is the "C" in the name >> CentOS. It would all be so much clearer if the project would just rename >> to EntOS because that's what it is. >> >> I guess the "Community" bit refers to the community of users, nothing more. > > The word Community has multiple definitions and is usually what the > people living in it want. A community can be a commune or a > dictatorship of the meritocrit. Its rules do not have to be democratic > or even open to outsiders (or insiders who are not 'blessed') And a > community does not mean that anyone who 'moves in' are automatically > part of the community. +1 I think you've totally hit the nail square on the proverbial head with this post Smooge. ;) A community is nothing more than a group of individuals congregating together for whatever particular purpose they choose to be in such a group, and does not specify the manner in which the group is organized, governed, managed, etc. As you state, labelling a group as a "community" certainly does not imply or require that group to be an elected democracy, nor does it imply that "everyone's opinion counts equally" within the group. Popular opinion/vote makes for nice statistics, but often for poor decision making, especially if those forming and spreading the opinions and/or doing the voting aren't held to the high standards that are needed for good decisions to occur. The majority of successful open source/free software projects out there are meritocracies - not wide open democracies. One need only look at the Linux kernel, all of GNU, and the various other well known projects in the OSS landscape to see that it is meritocracy that reigns supreme in the world of OSS. If the naysayers of such meritocracies actually have things of value to add to a given OSS project, and spend their time working on such contributions instead of whining about exclusion on public forums, etc. they'd likely find themselves climbing the meritocracy food chains of said projects in short order if they truly have things of value to offer. > And each person coming to an online community will bring whatever of > the above views of how a community works .. which is why a lot of > people grump, flame, and disagree violently about why XYZ community > initiative is not a community. Yep, I think it is because people often want to travel straight from A to Z without having to go through B, C, D, etc. Another subset of people, "the talkers" want to dictate to the "doers" how things should be done, often without wanting to (or perhaps without having the skills to) actually do any solid contributions themselves. They can safely just be ignored. ;o) - -- Mike A. Harris http://mharris.ca | https://twitter.com/mikeaharris -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFKfLk/4RNf2rTIeUARAjwhAJ91UbCyaRAaDBW/TSTKD2JTKuqlhgCfaEIs vhWfRzPvsLe7r0bk1+IQkaM= =VKYK -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Flow-Tools RPM for CentOS 5.3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Camron W. Fox wrote: > Yagi-san, > > We've tried that with flow-tools-0.68.4.1-2.fc11.src.rpm but get the > following error: > > r...@rb3:/var/tmp [1002/2]# rpmbuild --rebuild > flow-tools-0.68.4.1-2.fc11.src.rpm > Installing flow-tools-0.68.4.1-2.fc11.src.rpm > warning: InstallSourcePackage: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 signature: NOKEY, > key ID d22e77f2 > warning: user mockbuild does not exist - using root > warning: group mockbuild does not exist - using root > error: unpacking of archive failed on file > /root/rpm/SOURCES/flow-capture.init;4a7caede: cpio: MD5 sum mismatch > error: flow-tools-0.68.4.1-2.fc11.src.rpm cannot be installed > r...@rb3:/var/tmp [1003/3]# In order to rebuild any Fedora 11 or newer rpms on older Fedora or EL OS releases, you have to disable checksum checking because Fedora 11 and newer uses a different algorithm for checksumming than previous releases. With rpmbuild you can use the --nodigest option, or you can install the src.rpm with rpm using the --nomd5 option. rpmbuild --nodigest foo-1.0-1.fc11.src.rpm or rpm --nomd5 -ivh foo-1.0-1.fc11.src.rpm cd rpmbuild -ba foo.spec - -- Mike A. Harris http://mharris.ca | https://twitter.com/mikeaharris -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFKfMFS4RNf2rTIeUARAtvsAKCarUh32T03oFvCSzti7XiymLAeBQCgqD3G MOL1PQRvChIzGr2HzYfH/sc= =cvHu -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] ASP Pages?
I have a friend that hosts a few basic ASP pages. some simple links and plays a few media files with Windows Media Player. Is there any way I can host his site on my Linux Server? Without re- writing it for him -jason ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] BUG in httpd 2.2.3-22.el5.centos.2
> You can report problems on the CentOS bug tracker at: > http://bugs.centos.org/ Umm, as I said, I couldn't sign up to file a bug report. Nope, still broken. APPLICATION ERROR #2800 Invalid form security token. Did you submit the form twice by accident? > If the problem is reproducible in RHEL as well, you might > as well report it directly at: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/ I don't have an RHEL to test I use Debian at home, but thanks for the link, since it is the same source according to Johnny below. > > I feel like it's pointless to ask why don't > > distributions upgrade within the minor revision number > > of the stable 2.2 series anyway. 2.2.3 is certainly not > > as "stable" as 2.2.11 and the API is supposed to be the > > same. Oh right the "big picture." :-( > > 2.2.3 in CentOS/RHEL is not the same as 2.2.3 upstream... > it's only the base release after which patches are > applied. The name 2.2.3 is kept because potentially not > all the upstream patches that went to 2.2.11 will go into > CentOS/RHEL's 2.2.3, in theory only security updates are > applied inside a minor OS release and RedHat might decide > to skip some of the patches introduced between 2.2.3 and > 2.2.11 if they believe they are not relevant to their > product. Yeah it doesn't make sense to me why it's an advantage for RedHat to selectively backport patches instead of keeping up what the developers believe is a stable API for all callers. It's the same corporate cargo cult they were in when they made the mod_perl1 "compatibility" interface for Apache2... just made life harder for everyone in the end, if I'd wanted to use 1.3 handler API I would have installed 1.3... but that is ancient history. > Second: from that link it seems that you have installed > Perl modules directly from CPAN. Is that true? If you did > and your system broke, well, you got to keep the pieces... > It's known that CPAN modules and RPM modules do not play > together well and will tend to break in upgrades. I > suggest you install a CentOS 5.3 machine from scratch and > try to reproduce the problem there. If it still happens, > then report it to CentOS's bug tracker and/or to the > mailing list. Yes I removed all of perl, made sure all libs were gone and started from scratch. On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, nate wrote: > I don't think I'm able to help on this one but am curious > how much of the components your working with are built > from outside sources? I get the impression that your using > quite a few modules directly from CPAN, are you using > sqlite and mod_perl stuff from outside CentOS as well? I use httpd, httpd-devel, sqlite, sqlite-devel, mod_perl, mod_perl-devel, apr etc. from CentOS. DBD::SQLite is not available in yum so I make it with CPAN. libapreq2 (Apache2::Cookie/Apache2::Request) is not available in yum and does not run the tests right with the CPAN installer as root so I make it from source. On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Johnny Hughes wrote: > > Well ... here is what I can tell you: > > http://www.redhat.com/security/updates/backporting/?sc_cid=3093 > > They do roll in bug fixes. I know it can be frustrating > (it is for me to and I build this stuff) ... > > WRT the httpd package ... if you look at the RHEL and > CentOS httpd SRPMs you will see that the change in the > spec file is cosmetic and only controls CentOS being > displayed instead of Red Hat as required by their > trademark restrictions. Excellent info I will swim upstream thank you. Mark___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] BUG in httpd 2.2.3-22.el5.centos.2
> Yeah it doesn't make sense to me why it's an advantage for > RedHat to selectively backport patches instead of keeping > up what the developers believe is a stable API for all > callers. It's the same corporate cargo cult they were in > when they made the mod_perl1 "compatibility" interface for > Apache2... just made life harder for everyone in the end, > if I'd wanted to use 1.3 handler API I would have > installed 1.3... but that is ancient history. Oh they give the 2.0.43 as an excuse at http://www.redhat.com/security/updates/backporting/?sc_cid=3093 .. but what actually makes code stable is fixing the code, it's bollocks. Mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ASP Pages?
>I have a friend that hosts a few basic ASP pages. some simple links >and plays a few media files with Windows Media Player. > >Is there any way I can host his site on my Linux Server? Without re- >writing it for him Possibly, yes. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ASP Pages?
ML wrote: > I have a friend that hosts a few basic ASP pages. some simple links > and plays a few media files with Windows Media Player. > > Is there any way I can host his site on my Linux Server? Without re- > writing it for him > it really depends on what those ASP pages are doing. ASP has access to the entire Windows object model, and now .NET Frameworks version 1.1,,2,3 too. there's at least two ways of getting ASP support on linux, one is via Project Mono, and the other is via Sun Java Web Server 7 + their ASP module. http://asp-programming.suite101.com/article.cfm/running_asp_on_a_linux_server ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 11:54 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > > Bob Taylor wrote: [snip] > > Exactly the *wrong* response. I wonder if responses similar to this > > loses potential users or loses existing customers. Personally, it > > disgusts me. > > It is not *wrong* ... any more than your response is *wrong*. > > Your opinion is for you and my opinion is for me. > > And the GREAT thing about open source is, there is always another > project if you don't like the current one. Let me add: As a *developer* you are saying the wrong things. > My point is, the CentOS team has put in an unbelievable amount of time > and effort to build this distribution. We will continue to do so. If > you like it use it. If you don't like it, don't use it. And my point is: Just *who* are you doing this "unbelievable amount of time and effort.." *for*? > If someone has a major problem with the distro, then they should find > one that they don't have a major problem with. I don't want hard > feelings or anyone to be upset, but if we are not meeting your > expectations then you might be able to find another that does. I do not > think you will ... but trying is certainly better than being upset. It's your *attitude*, Johnny. I'm attempting to help you with your people skills. OK? It is not helpful nor desirable to talk to people in such an apparently arrogant manner. If you did so with clients, you most certainly wouldn't have any in short order and possibly be looking for another job. Enough said. -- Bob Taylor ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
