Re: [CentOS] backup script

[madu...@gmail.com]

Recall..
I run now the following task every day tar -cvzf
/rescue/website-$(date +%u).tgz /var/www/htdocs/*
I want now to move these files from the local server to a remote server via ftp.

any help.

Thanks



On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 5:33 PM,   wrote:
> madu...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Should I add to my tar the following option
>>  -p, --preserve-permissions
>>               extract all protection information
>> tar -cvzfp ..
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 7:10 PM, John Doe  wrote:
>> > From: "madu...@gmail.com" 
>> >
>> >> I want to create bash script to have a zip copy from a website running
>> >> on  linux /var/www/htdocs/* local on the same box on different
>> >> directory
>> >> I am  thinking to do a local backup using crontab (snapshot my web)
>> >> tar -cvzf  /tmp/website-$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M).tgz /var/www/htdocs/*
>> >> This command will  create a file /tmp/website-20110101-1459.tgz
>> >> I want it run on daily basis and  to keep the last 5days backup on the
>> >> box and remove older version than  5days.
>> >
>> > A quick way to do it is to use the day of the week:
>> >  website-$(date +%u).tgz
>> > It will automaticaly keep the last 7 days...
>> > Otherwise, you will have to use date calculations...
>
> I hope I'm not duplicating something someone has already said --
> /tmp may not be the best possible choice for backups. A reboot
> could potentially "help" by cleansing that directory. Off-host
> copies (eg, scp website-20110101-1459.tgz fred@otherhost:/home/fred/backups/)
> would address a number of risks.
> --
> Charles Polisher
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] backup script

[Pinter Tibor]

On 03/20/2011 08:31 AM, madu...@gmail.com wrote:
> Recall..
> I run now the following task every day tar -cvzf
> /rescue/website-$(date +%u).tgz /var/www/htdocs/*
> I want now to move these files from the local server to a remote server via 
> ftp.
> 
> any help.
> 
> Thanks

man lftp

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

[CentOS] task md1_resync:9770 blocked for more than 120 seconds and OOM errors

[Alexander Farber]

Hello,

yesterday night I had a problem with
my server located at a hoster (strato.de).
I couldn't ssh to it and over the remote serial console
I saw "out of memory" errors (sorry, don't have the text).

Then I had reinstall CentOS 5.5/64 bit + all my setup (2h work),
because I have a contract with a social network and
they will shut down my little card game if it is not reponding.

Now the server seems to work ok,
but I'm worried about those /var/log/message:

  kernel: INFO: task md1_resync:9770 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
  kernel: "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables
this message.
  kernel: md1_resyncD 81011edba820 0  9770 55
  9768 (L-TLB)
  kernel:  810083259d70 0046  81011ea66e0c
  kernel:  81011ea66c0c 000a 81011ccc27a0 81011edba820
  kernel:  11d56f2a0b28 100f 81011ccc2988 00028008b4d7
  kernel: Call Trace:
  kernel:  [] keventd_create_kthread+0x0/0xc4
  kernel:  [] md_do_sync+0x1d8/0x833
  kernel:  [] enqueue_task+0x41/0x56
  kernel:  [] __activate_task+0x56/0x6d
  kernel:  [] dequeue_task+0x18/0x37
  kernel:  [] thread_return+0x62/0xfe
  kernel:  [] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2e
  kernel:  [] keventd_create_kthread+0x0/0xc4
  kernel:  [] md_thread+0xf8/0x10e
  kernel:  [] keventd_create_kthread+0x0/0xc4
  kernel:  [] md_thread+0x0/0x10e
  kernel:  [] kthread+0xfe/0x132
  kernel:  [] child_rip+0xa/0x11
  kernel:  [] keventd_create_kthread+0x0/0xc4
  kernel:  [] kthread+0x0/0x132
  kernel:  [] child_rip+0x0/0x11
  kernel:

The /var/log/mcelog is empty.

# df -h
FilesystemSize  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/md1   20G  1.4G   18G   8% /
/dev/md3  176G  754M  166G   1% /var
/dev/md0  993M   30M  913M   4% /boot
/dev/md2  263G  352M  250G   1% /home
tmpfs 2.0G 0  2.0G   0% /dev/shm

Does anybody please have an advice? :-(

(Besides "contact or change" your hoster, because it doesn't work).

I have 2 disks in "software raid" at that machine,
but not much experience with RAID. My dmesg is below.

I could reboot the machine in a "rescue mode",
but I'm not sure which commands to try there.

Thank you
Alex


Linux version 2.6.18-194.32.1.el5 (mockbu...@builder10.centos.org)
(gcc version 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-48)) #1 SMP Wed Jan 5
17:52:25 EST 2011
Command line: root=/dev/md1 console=tty0 console=ttyS0,57600
BIOS-provided physical RAM map:
 BIOS-e820: 0001 - 0009f000 (usable)
 BIOS-e820: 0009f000 - 000a (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: 000e4000 - 0010 (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: 0010 - ddfb (usable)
 BIOS-e820: ddfb - ddfbe000 (ACPI data)
 BIOS-e820: ddfbe000 - ddfe (ACPI NVS)
 BIOS-e820: ddfe - ddfee000 (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: ddff - de00 (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: ff70 - 0001 (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: 0001 - 00012000 (usable)
DMI present.
ACPI: RSDP (v000 ACPIAM) @ 0x000faf80
ACPI: RSDT (v001 032510 RSDT1503 0x20100325 MSFT 0x0097) @
0xddfb
ACPI: FADT (v002 032510 FACP1503 0x20100325 MSFT 0x0097) @
0xddfb0200
ACPI: MADT (v001 032510 APIC1503 0x20100325 MSFT 0x0097) @
0xddfb0390
ACPI: MCFG (v001 032510 OEMMCFG  0x20100325 MSFT 0x0097) @
0xddfb0400
ACPI: OEMB (v001 032510 OEMB1503 0x20100325 MSFT 0x0097) @
0xddfbe040
ACPI: HPET (v001 032510 OEMHPET  0x20100325 MSFT 0x0097) @
0xddfb48c0
ACPI: SSDT (v001 A M I  POWERNOW 0x0001 AMD  0x0001) @
0xddfb4900
ACPI: DSDT (v001  A96B3 A96B3210 0x0210 INTL 0x20051117) @
0x
No NUMA configuration found
Faking a node at -00012000
Bootmem setup node 0 -00012000
Memory for crash kernel (0x0 to 0x0) notwithin permissible range
disabling kdump
On node 0 totalpages: 1022763
  DMA zone: 2627 pages, LIFO batch:0
  DMA32 zone: 890856 pages, LIFO batch:31
  Normal zone: 129280 pages, LIFO batch:31
ACPI: PM-Timer IO Port: 0x808
ACPI: Local APIC address 0xfee0
ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x01] lapic_id[0x00] enabled)
Processor #0 0:4 APIC version 16
ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x02] lapic_id[0x01] enabled)
Processor #1 0:4 APIC version 16
ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x03] lapic_id[0x02] enabled)
Processor #2 0:4 APIC version 16
ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x04] lapic_id[0x03] enabled)
Processor #3 0:4 APIC version 16
ACPI: IOAPIC (id[0x04] address[0xfec0] gsi_base[0])
IOAPIC[0]: apic_id 4, version 33, address 0xfec0, GSI 0-23
ACPI: INT_SRC_OVR (bus 0 bus_irq 0 global_irq 2 dfl dfl)
ACPI: INT_SRC_OVR (bus 0 bus_irq 9 global_irq 9 low level)
ACPI: IRQ0 used by override.
ACPI: IRQ2 used by override.
ACPI: IRQ9 used by override.
Setting APIC routing to physical flat
ACPI: HPET id: 0x8300 base: 0xf

Re: [CentOS] task md1_resync:9770 blocked for more than 120 seconds and OOM errors

[Kenni Lund]

2011/3/20 Alexander Farber 

> Hello,
>
> yesterday night I had a problem with
> my server located at a hoster (strato.de).
> I couldn't ssh to it and over the remote serial console
> I saw "out of memory" errors (sorry, don't have the text).
>
> Then I had reinstall CentOS 5.5/64 bit + all my setup (2h work),
> because I have a contract with a social network and
> they will shut down my little card game if it is not reponding.
>
> Now the server seems to work ok,
> but I'm worried about those /var/log/message:
>
>  kernel: INFO: task md1_resync:9770 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
>  kernel: "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables
>

My guess is that you only saw these messages while the RAID sync was still
going on? You got those messages due to the system I/O being stressed, which
hung the system in periods.

I wouldn't worry about it if your RAID is now in sync and you don't see the
error messages anymore. You can lower the I/O stress of the system under a
RAID-resync by setting a lower maximum kb/sek in
/proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max (default is 200.000kb/sec ~ 200mb/sec).
This will of course also extend the time used to complete the sync (which
also can be bad, as you want it back in sync as fast as possible).

Best regards
Kenni
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] task md1_resync:9770 blocked for more than 120 seconds and OOM errors

[Alexander Farber]

Thanks Kenni, could you advise any commands
for checking RAID status or health
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] task md1_resync:9770 blocked for more than 120 seconds and OOM errors

[Markus Falb]

On 20.3.2011 09:25, Alexander Farber wrote:

> but I'm worried about those /var/log/message:
> 
>   kernel: INFO: task md1_resync:9770 blocked for more than 120 seconds.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573106#c31

-- 
Best Regards, Markus Falb



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

Re: [CentOS] task md1_resync:9770 blocked for more than 120 seconds and OOM errors

[Alexander Farber]

Thank you, I've decreased
/proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max
from 20 to 10.

I think I don't care about the sync speed,
but I'd like to avoid the OOM errors and
server lockup like I had yesterday

(still not sure if this will help here
or if it is just to get rid of the warning)

Regards
Alex
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] task md1_resync:9770 blocked for more than 120 seconds and OOM errors

[Markus Falb]

On 20.3.2011 13:48, Alexander Farber wrote:
> Thank you, I've decreased
> /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max
> from 20 to 10.
> 
> I think I don't care about the sync speed,
> but I'd like to avoid the OOM errors and
> server lockup like I had yesterday

So you think the OOM was related to raid resync ?

> (still not sure if this will help here
> or if it is just to get rid of the warning)

I do not see how decreasing the speed_limit_max should avoid the
mdX_resync warnings. I would expect more of these warnings now, because
sync takes longer? And: These warnings are harmless! Just ignore it, but
you know that probably after reading bugzilla 573106

-- 
Best Regards, Markus Falb



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

[CentOS] syslog.conf - how to redirect messages by a program name?

[Alexander Farber]

Hello,

the "man syslog.conf" explains how to filter syslog messages
by facility (auth, authpriv, cron, daemon, kern, ... ) or
by priority (debug, info, notice, warning, ...).

But how could I redirect messages by a program name, like
"drupal" or "php"? For example I have in /var/log/messages:

Mar 20 04:20:44 mysite drupal: http://mysite|1300594844|page not
found|66.249.66.193|http://mysite/sites/default/files/pictures/picture-7133-1300462418.png||0||sites/default/files/pictures/picture-71333-1300462418.png

Mar 20 04:20:50 mysite drupal: http://www.mysite|1300594850|page not
found|93.158.148.31|http://www.mysite/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=42639&p=165661&sid=73944439da6ca3054a40f464ce97a628||0||viewtopic.php

but I would like them to go under /var/log/drupal

(and I'll rotate them later by adding a file to /etc/logrotate.d )

Regards
Alex
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] syslog.conf - how to redirect messages by a program name?

[Markus Falb]

On 20.3.2011 14:55, Alexander Farber wrote:

> the "man syslog.conf" explains how to filter syslog messages
> by facility (auth, authpriv, cron, daemon, kern, ... ) or
> by priority (debug, info, notice, warning, ...).
> 
> But how could I redirect messages by a program name, like
> "drupal" or "php"? For example I have in /var/log/messages:

Classic syslog can not do this. But there are alternative syslogs
available. syslog-ng can filter by program name. I am not sure about
rsyslog.

-- 
Best Regards, Markus Falb



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

Re: [CentOS] syslog.conf - how to redirect messages by a program name?

[Damian Tommasino]

rsyslog can do this as well and has a great filtering feature that is 
available.  rsyslog will (should) be the default logging daemon in CentOS 6 (as 
it is for RHEL6).


From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of 
Markus Falb
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2011 10:00 AM
To: centos@centos.org
Subject: Re: [CentOS] syslog.conf - how to redirect messages by a program name?


On 20.3.2011 14:55, Alexander Farber wrote:

> the "man syslog.conf" explains how to filter syslog messages
> by facility (auth, authpriv, cron, daemon, kern, ... ) or
> by priority (debug, info, notice, warning, ...).
>
> But how could I redirect messages by a program name, like
> "drupal" or "php"? For example I have in /var/log/messages:

Classic syslog can not do this. But there are alternative syslogs
available. syslog-ng can filter by program name. I am not sure about
rsyslog.

--
Best Regards, Markus Falb



No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1498/3518 - Release Date: 03/20/11
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] task md1_resync:9770 blocked for more than 120 seconds and OOM errors

[Kenni Lund]

2011/3/20 Alexander Farber 
>
> Thank you, I've decreased
> /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max
> from 20 to 10.

20 is just the theoretical maximum. If your discs max out at
8, you'll need to set it lower than that. While syncing, you can
check the current sync speed with:
cat /proc/mdstat

> I think I don't care about the sync speed,
> but I'd like to avoid the OOM errors and
> server lockup like I had yesterday

AFAIK, the errors are harmless, it's some locking bug in the kernel
which just hasn't been fixed in CentOS 5 yet. This is not related to
any out-of-memory errors, and hence most likely not related to the
lockup you experienced.

2011/3/20 Markus Falb :
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573106#c31

Ahh, yes, I forgot about that bugreport. According to that report, the
issue has been fixed in the kernel in upstream 5.6...so it will get
fixed in CentOS 5.6.

> I do not see how decreasing the speed_limit_max should avoid the
> mdX_resync warnings. I would expect more of these warnings now, because
> sync takes longer?

Hmm, I received the same error messages on a Core i7 system I
installed recently. While syncing, the system was close to being
completely unresponsive (took ages to just get a SSH-connection).
After limiting the I/O by setting a lower maximum sync speed, the
system got responsive and the messages disappeared. Comment #36 in the
bug report actually suggests the same workaround.

Best regards
Kenni
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] syslog.conf - how to redirect messages by a program name?

[Nico Kadel-Garcia]

On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Damian Tommasino
 wrote:
> rsyslog can do this as well and has a great filtering feature that is
> available.  rsyslog will (should) be the default logging daemon in CentOS 6
> (as it is for RHEL6).

And if you've got a tweaked, older syslog.conf, you can usually just
install it as rsyslog.conf and it will work the way it used to.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Nico Kadel-Garcia]

There are significant components of the upstream 5.6 release which are
stuck behind the CentOS 5.6 release process, but are now incorporated
in EPEL 5 components. In particular, the "php53" package is now
necessary for the "drupal6" EPEL components, due to the long out of
date PHP 5.1 in the default upstream vendor's codebase.

I see that some of these components are available in the "testing"
repository at http://dev.centos.org/centos/5/CentOS-Testing.repo. But
this isn't published with centos-release. fasttrack is. Would it be
reasonable to push these "testing" components over to "fasttrack"?
Given our "upstream vendor's" policy of making all the updates
available to all the previous releases in their main "channels", I'm
not sure there's any reason not to present them, at least to the
fasttrack" channel, and migrate them from "fasttrack" to "updates" as
necessary.

Other components for such fasttrack publication might include bind97,
which some CentOS users have been asking for.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Ned Slider]

On 20/03/11 15:23, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> There are significant components of the upstream 5.6 release which are
> stuck behind the CentOS 5.6 release process, but are now incorporated
> in EPEL 5 components. In particular, the "php53" package is now
> necessary for the "drupal6" EPEL components, due to the long out of
> date PHP 5.1 in the default upstream vendor's codebase.
>
> I see that some of these components are available in the "testing"
> repository at http://dev.centos.org/centos/5/CentOS-Testing.repo. But
> this isn't published with centos-release. fasttrack is. Would it be
> reasonable to push these "testing" components over to "fasttrack"?
> Given our "upstream vendor's" policy of making all the updates
> available to all the previous releases in their main "channels", I'm
> not sure there's any reason not to present them, at least to the
> fasttrack" channel, and migrate them from "fasttrack" to "updates" as
> necessary.
>
> Other components for such fasttrack publication might include bind97,
> which some CentOS users have been asking for.

We've had this discussion before - the fasttrack repository is a rebuild 
of the upstream FasTrack channel, nothing more. Except it's never 
actually been populated for CentOS-5.

The correct place for these packages is in os/5.6 when released. In the 
meantime they have been publicly released to testing for those who want 
early access (fasttrack access if you prefer) or who want to test and 
provide feedback.

Incompatibilities between EPEL and CentOS caused due to the delay in 
releasing 5.6 are a matter for EPEL to resolve. CentOS are doing their 
best to resolve the issue their end by getting 5.6 out as fast as possible.

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

[CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[R P Herrold]

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:

> There are significant components of the upstream 5.6 release which are
> stuck behind the CentOS 5.6 release process, but are now incorporated
> in EPEL 5 components.

Sad that -- that the dependent partial Red Hat adjunct project 
is not compatible with people not using Red Hat's product

The unpleasantness of reading continual criticism, from those 
who will not do the minimal local rebuilds, to use the 
packages from a project not affiliated with the CentOS 
project, has pretty effectively driven the CentOS core 
developers away from this mailing list

Congratulations


Niko, I notice you did out post your 'helpful criticism' to 
which I respond, on the EPEL list on how to do the workaround 
EPEL's policies of not shipping packages competing with Red 
Hat's enterprise product.  Perhaps they would welcome it 
(probably not, as they consciously DO NOT COMPETE with the 
parent product)

CentOS has an ethic of delivering a product with certain 
quality expectations and testing before it is released (rather 
than inflicting a partially baked release and then streaming 
out curative fixes)

If a person doesn't like CentOS's pace and attention to
shipping durable and 'correct' releases or with different
features (as with EPEL), or want packages faster than CentOS'
rate, PLEASE encourage them to either learn to show some
minimal self-reliance in building, or to not use CentOS as a
base

my $ 0.02

-- Russ herrold
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Александр Кириллов]

> The unpleasantness of reading continual criticism, from those 
> who will not do the minimal local rebuilds, to use the 
> packages from a project not affiliated with the CentOS 
> project, has pretty effectively driven the CentOS core 
> developers away from this mailing list

... 

> If a person doesn't like CentOS's pace and attention to
> shipping durable and 'correct' releases or with different
> features (as with EPEL), or want packages faster than CentOS'
> rate, PLEASE encourage them to either learn to show some
> minimal self-reliance in building, or to not use CentOS as a
> base

http://www.usatoday.com/money/smallbusiness/columnist/abrams/2011-03-18-how-to-lose-a-client_N.htm

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

[CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[R P Herrold]

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011, Александр Кириллов wrote:

> http://www.usatoday.com/money/smallbusiness/columnist/abrams/2011-03-18-how-to-lose-a-client_N.htm

CentOS has no clients to whom a contractual duty of support is 
owed.  If SLAs, sales engineers, 800 numbers, and such are 
wanted or needed, PLEASE buy a contract from someone

TANSTAAFL

I have a blog series in preparation of a generalized nature, 
on doing spot rebuilds of packages in a one-off per package 
build chroot.  Shall I make it freely available on my bloc, 
which the CentOS Planet, put it behund a paywall, or sell it 
in print form at Lulu?  Entirely my decision as I alone have 
done the work and hold the copyright

I appreciate the thoughtfulness behind a one line URL post 
pointing out that I am wrong and to be berated

-- Russ herrold
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] php53-5.3.3-1.el5_6.1

[Jason Pyeron]

> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org 
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Athmane Madjoudj
> Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2011 21:50
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] php53-5.3.3-1.el5_6.1
> 
> On 03/20/2011 01:53 AM, William Warren wrote:
> > On 3/19/2011 8:42 PM, Jason Pyeron wrote:
> >> Curious I do not see the php53 in the yum centos 5 repositories.
> >>
> >> Has this package been excluded?
> >>
> >> 
> http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Server/en/o
> s/SRPMS/php53-5.3.
> >> 3-1.el5_6.1.src.rpm
> >>
> >> 
> http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Client/en/o
> s/SRPMS/php53-5.3.
> >> 3-1.el5_6.1.src.rpm
> >>
> 
> > It will be seen with the release of Cent 5.6
> 
> Both bind97 and php53 packages are included in CentOS Testing 
> Repo[1], and yes it will be included in C 5.6 (like RHEL 5.6).
> 
> 
> [1]http://dev.centos.org/centos/5/CentOS-Testing.repo


What can I (my company) do to help "test"?

-Jason

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-   -
- Jason Pyeron  PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us -
- Principal Consultant  10 West 24th Street #100-
- +1 (443) 269-1555 x333Baltimore, Maryland 21218   -
-   -
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00.

 


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

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Александр Кириллов]

>>
http://www.usatoday.com/money/smallbusiness/columnist/abrams/2011-03-18-how-to-lose-a-client_N.htm
> 
> CentOS has no clients to whom a contractual duty of support is 
> owed.  If SLAs, sales engineers, 800 numbers, and such are 
> wanted or needed, PLEASE buy a contract from someone
> 
> TANSTAAFL

The point is it's probably as easy to lose a "community" if this still
matters to the core CentOS team.
After so many suggestions to look elsewhere instead of providing minimal
feedback
for those still interested the long overdue "free lunch" would probably
stuck down the throat.
And yes I started looking elsewhere and with reasonably priced offer from
Oracle
this project is probably dead in the water.

Best regards,
AK

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

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Nico Kadel-Garcia]

On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 11:56 AM, R P Herrold  wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2011, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
>> There are significant components of the upstream 5.6 release which are
>> stuck behind the CentOS 5.6 release process, but are now incorporated
>> in EPEL 5 components.
>
> Sad that -- that the dependent partial Red Hat adjunct project
> is not compatible with people not using Red Hat's product

Whoa, there. Try to be as careful with branding it as our faithful
CentOS maintainers are with their branding. It's a *volunteer* effort,
much like CentOS (with a much broader set of tasks and goals). It's a
very, very useful and worthwhile project, and profoundly extends the
useful lifespan of RHEL, CentOS, Scientific Linux, and any other
upstream based vendor distributions, and a great testing place for
software for the next upstream vendor major releases. It's very much
worth cooperating with EPEL, it's compatibility with that upstream
vendor is *excellent*, and they're playing it just right.

Since the php53 package is in the "upstream vendor" published
codelines and updates, there's no reason not to include it in EPEL
dependencies. The out-of-date php-5.1 codeline is years old, and the
approach is reasonable, and has been used before for samba (which had
samba3x), gcc (which had gcc43 and gcc44 in CentOS releases), and
bind97 (which is still pending the CentOS 5.7 release).

So there's precedent, and a pattern, for including such updates in the
upstream vendor's codelines. Unfortunately, right now, it's all
blocked in CentOS by the not-yet-announced 5.6 code release. I'd like
to see that block lifted on a case by case basis, if feasbile. I've
personally tested this php53 package against CentOS 5.5, and it works
well and resolves the dependency.

Note that Scientific Linux is publishing these updates in a much more
up-to-date, rolling fashion. I don't want to switch to that
distribution, because the line-for-line compatibility between CentOS
and that "upstream vendor" is better, and reassuring to people when I
try to get them to switch from one to the other for support reasons.
But if I have to, because these updates are blocked for so long, I'll
have to take all my testing and bug reports over there. I don't have
resources to help yet another distro.

> The unpleasantness of reading continual criticism, from those
> who will not do the minimal local rebuilds, to use the
> packages from a project not affiliated with the CentOS
> project, has pretty effectively driven the CentOS core
> developers away from this mailing list

I *just did* the local rebuilds, and tested them. They work. I want
them in the available upstream repositories, which they're not.

The "testing" repository is not available by default, and is not
generally mirrored. Should it be, by being included in the main
websites in their own folder? That would make such "testin" components
available to the rest of us.

> Niko, I notice you did out post your 'helpful criticism' to
> which I respond, on the EPEL list on how to do the workaround
> EPEL's policies of not shipping packages competing with Red
> Hat's enterprise product.  Perhaps they would welcome it
> (probably not, as they consciously DO NOT COMPETE with the
> parent product)

RHEL and Scientific Linux do not have this issue, due to the
up-to-date php53 access. CentOS does. It's therefore a CentOS issue,
not an EPEL issue, although if you point me to the EPEL list message,
I'll be happy to follow up there.

> If a person doesn't like CentOS's pace and attention to
> shipping durable and 'correct' releases or with different
> features (as with EPEL), or want packages faster than CentOS'
> rate, PLEASE encourage them to either learn to show some
> minimal self-reliance in building, or to not use CentOS as a
> base

I've said *nothing* against the attention to detail. The pace,
however, is becoming problematic. The upstream vendor does not
separate the updates by minor release number, and hasn't done that
since Red Hat 9. CentOS does not have to emulate.

In fact, hey! I just tested a component and announced the results to
solve a specific compatibility problem!
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[aurfalien]

On Mar 20, 2011, at 10:30 AM, Александр Кириллов wrote:

>>>
> http://www.usatoday.com/money/smallbusiness/columnist/abrams/2011-03-18-how-to-lose-a-client_N.htm
>>
>> CentOS has no clients to whom a contractual duty of support is
>> owed.  If SLAs, sales engineers, 800 numbers, and such are
>> wanted or needed, PLEASE buy a contract from someone
>>
>> TANSTAAFL
>
> And yes I started looking elsewhere and with reasonably priced offer  
> from
> Oracle
> this project is probably dead in the water.

Hi AK,

Why would you swing so radically in the other direction from free to  
fee?

Have you looked at SL?  They don't have 5.6 but seem to be on a stable  
6.0 rel.

- aurf
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] php53-5.3.3-1.el5_6.1

[Nico Kadel-Garcia]

On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Jason Pyeron  wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: centos-boun...@centos.org
>> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Athmane Madjoudj
>> Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2011 21:50
>> To: CentOS mailing list
>> Subject: Re: [CentOS] php53-5.3.3-1.el5_6.1
>>
>> On 03/20/2011 01:53 AM, William Warren wrote:
>> > On 3/19/2011 8:42 PM, Jason Pyeron wrote:
>> >> Curious I do not see the php53 in the yum centos 5 repositories.
>> >>
>> >> Has this package been excluded?
>> >>
>> >>
>> http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Server/en/o
>> s/SRPMS/php53-5.3.
>> >> 3-1.el5_6.1.src.rpm
>> >>
>> >>
>> http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Client/en/o
>> s/SRPMS/php53-5.3.
>> >> 3-1.el5_6.1.src.rpm
>> >>
>>
>> > It will be seen with the release of Cent 5.6
>>
>> Both bind97 and php53 packages are included in CentOS Testing
>> Repo[1], and yes it will be included in C 5.6 (like RHEL 5.6).
>>
>>
>> [1]http://dev.centos.org/centos/5/CentOS-Testing.repo
>
>
> What can I (my company) do to help "test"?
>
> -Jason

Replacing some existing components with the the bind97 and php53
packages would help test backward compatibility, I'm sure!
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[R P Herrold]

On Sun, 20 Mar 2011, Александр Кириллов wrote:

>> TANSTAAFL

> ... long overdue "free lunch"

I get it -- you dont (or choose not to) understand the written 
word

-- Russ herrold
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Александр Кириллов]

>>> TANSTAAFL
> 
>> ... long overdue "free lunch"
> 
> I get it -- you dont (or choose not to) understand the written 
> word

Yeah, the picture's pretty bleak. The world's climates are changing,
the mammals are taking over, and we all have a brain about the size of a
walnut.

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

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Александр Кириллов]

>>> CentOS has no clients to whom a contractual duty of support is
>>> owed.  If SLAs, sales engineers, 800 numbers, and such are
>>> wanted or needed, PLEASE buy a contract from someone
>>>
>>> TANSTAAFL
>>
>> And yes I started looking elsewhere and with reasonably priced offer  
>> from
>> Oracle
>> this project is probably dead in the water.
> 
> Hi AK,
> 
> Why would you swing so radically in the other direction from free to  
> fee?
> 
> Have you looked at SL?  They don't have 5.6 but seem to be on a stable  
> 6.0 rel.

Hi,

I'm not actually looking for free.
I'd gladly support the efforts of our "prominent North American Enterprise
Linux vendor"
with what little I have if their offers wouldn't be so ridiculously
expensive.
I hope the situation may change now with Oracle in direct competition with
RH
for RH and RH-based distros user base. BTW Oracle offers installable
binaries for free.
I didn't get into details yet but this sounds like a viable alternative.

AK

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

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Always Learning]

On Sun, 2011-03-20 at 20:30 +0300, Александр Кириллов wrote:

> The point is it's probably as easy to lose a "community" if this still
> matters to the core CentOS team.

Centos offers free and very reliable Linux with free and very reliable
updates.

The people providing this free service are volunteers.

> And yes I started looking elsewhere and with reasonably priced offer from
> Oracle 

You come here for the free and very reliable product whilst wanting to
spend money on a different product. Perhaps you should have spent your
money several months ago and then subscribed to the Oracle mailing list?

I come here because I like Centos. I admire and respect the volunteers
who make Centos the great product it is. I've seen it used all around
the world running Apache.

> this project is probably dead in the water.

Nonsense. Centos is definitely not about to die. Especially not with
some still on version 4.9 ;-)  Versions 5.6 and 6 will come. 6 will be
useful because it has a latter kernel adapted for the Arduino
microcomputer boards.

Good luck with Oracle. Hope it makes you happier.

With best regards,

Paul.
England,
EU.


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

[CentOS] Rsync mirroring dev.centos.org

[Jason Pyeron]

Is there a preferred way to maintain a local mirror of dev.centos.org?

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-   -
- Jason Pyeron  PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us -
- Principal Consultant  10 West 24th Street #100-
- +1 (443) 269-1555 x333Baltimore, Maryland 21218   -
-   -
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00.



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

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Eero Volotinen]

.
> I hope the situation may change now with Oracle in direct competition with
> RH
> for RH and RH-based distros user base. BTW Oracle offers installable
> binaries for free.

Yes, but patches (support) cost money, as you might know. Anyway, it
is better to pay for real
RH instead of oracle linux..

--
Eero
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[John R. Dennison]

On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 08:30:41PM +0300, Александр Кириллов wrote:
>
> And yes I started looking elsewhere and with reasonably priced offer from
> Oracle
> this project is probably dead in the water.

Hahahaha.

Thanks for the chuckle.  Do you have an encore performance
prepared?



John

-- 
I have come to believe that a great teacher is a great artist and that
there are as few as there are any other great artists.  It might even be
the greatest of the arts since the medium is the human mind and spirit.

-- John Steinbeck (1902-1968), American writer, Nobel laureate, Pultizer
   Prize awardee, "...like captured fireflies" (1955)


pgpe9OVJKbWzl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Les Mikesell]

On 3/20/11 1:57 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
> .
>> I hope the situation may change now with Oracle in direct competition with
>> RH
>> for RH and RH-based distros user base. BTW Oracle offers installable
>> binaries for free.
>
> Yes, but patches (support) cost money, as you might know. Anyway, it
> is better to pay for real
> RH instead of oracle linux..

Or, maybe there was back in the days when they released source that matched 
their binaries...  Personally, I think everyone would be better off today if 
they had turned their back on anything RH-related the day they stopped 
permitting redistribution of their binaries among the community that created 
them and made them usable in the first place.  I was too lazy to change and 
Centos made it look reasonable to leave things approximately the same.  But, 
now 
that RH is putting the screws on anyone who doesn't pay up it is probably time 
for anyone who cares about free software to rethink things.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Alain Péan]

Le 20/03/2011 19:36, Always Learning a écrit :
>
> On Sun, 2011-03-20 at 20:30 +0300, Александр Кириллов wrote:
>
>> The point is it's probably as easy to lose a "community" if this still
>> matters to the core CentOS team.
>
> Centos offers free and very reliable Linux with free and very reliable
> updates.
>

With no updates since more than three months (for 5.6), and no news from 
the core team on the progress or difficulties, do you still consider it 
as "very reliable" ?

For a free project and work done by volunteers, you cannot ask the job 
been done for a given date. It is "best effort", and cannot be completly 
be reliable.

But when the core team refuse to give any update (no news) at all (black 
out), since more than one week, I consider this as even less reliable...

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

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[John R. Dennison]

On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 09:00:54PM +0100, Alain Péan wrote:
>
> But when the core team refuse to give any update (no news) at all (black 
> out), since more than one week, I consider this as even less reliable...

Stop this nonsense, would you?  We rehash this same crap every
few weeks and it's ridiculous. 

Yes, the project is reliable.  No, the project isn't going
anywhere.  No, you don't have a gun to your head and if you
are unhappy you are free to move on elsewhere.




John
-- 
Spring is nature's way of saying, "Let's party!"

-- Robin Williams (1952-), American actor and comedian


pgpeClTfxeq5r.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Александр Кириллов]

>> But when the core team refuse to give any update (no news) at all
(black 
>> out), since more than one week, I consider this as even less
reliable...
> 
>   Stop this nonsense, would you?  We rehash this same crap every
>   few weeks and it's ridiculous. 

And this same crap it is.

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

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Rob Kampen]

Александр Кириллов wrote:

CentOS has no clients to whom a contractual duty of support is
owed.  If SLAs, sales engineers, 800 numbers, and such are
wanted or needed, PLEASE buy a contract from someone

TANSTAAFL

And yes I started looking elsewhere and with reasonably priced offer  
from

Oracle
this project is probably dead in the water.
  

Hi AK,

Why would you swing so radically in the other direction from free to  
fee?


Have you looked at SL?  They don't have 5.6 but seem to be on a stable  
6.0 rel.



Hi,

I'm not actually looking for free.
I'd gladly support the efforts of our "prominent North American Enterprise
Linux vendor"
with what little I have if their offers wouldn't be so ridiculously
expensive.
I hope the situation may change now with Oracle in direct competition with
RH
for RH and RH-based distros user base. BTW Oracle offers installable
binaries for free.
I didn't get into details yet but this sounds like a viable alternative.

  


Scary how our society's ethics and decisions are driven by money.
Pay less money - must be better - right even.
So easy to forget the reason this debate turns up every 10 days or so
- Oracle and others have been free-loading on RH
and in order to survive RH had to take some action - action that in 
large part

contributes to the delay so many complain about.
Why is it that we don't see the issue that really has driven all this - 
A large

unethical corporation has taken a free ride on the open-source community
and stuffed it up for all of us.
The cost of doing all the things that RH does, and contributing so much to
the open-source community is paid for by those that need on-call support
and responsiveness.
Now along comes an unethical corporation that sees an opportunity to make
some more money - doing what is right doesn't come into the equation
As I said at the beginning of my rant - if it makes money it must be right -
if it looses money or makes less money it must be wrong.
Please don't put the blame in the wrong place - punish the real villain -
buy something other than oracle!


AK

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
  
<>___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[William Warren]

On 3/20/2011 3:30 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 3/20/11 1:57 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
>> .
>>> I hope the situation may change now with Oracle in direct competition with
>>> RH
>>> for RH and RH-based distros user base. BTW Oracle offers installable
>>> binaries for free.
>> Yes, but patches (support) cost money, as you might know. Anyway, it
>> is better to pay for real
>> RH instead of oracle linux..
> Or, maybe there was back in the days when they released source that matched
> their binaries...  Personally, I think everyone would be better off today if
> they had turned their back on anything RH-related the day they stopped
> permitting redistribution of their binaries among the community that created
> them and made them usable in the first place.  I was too lazy to change and
> Centos made it look reasonable to leave things approximately the same.  But, 
> now
> that RH is putting the screws on anyone who doesn't pay up it is probably time
> for anyone who cares about free software to rethink things.
>
exactly.  Nothing against Centos but I've deployed my last RH based 
box.  It'll be either Debian or Ubuntu from now on.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Alain Péan]

Le 20/03/2011 21:00, Alain Péan a écrit :


> With no updates since more than three months (for 5.6)

Correction : more than two months...

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

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[aurfalien]

On Mar 20, 2011, at 1:52 PM, William Warren wrote:

> On 3/20/2011 3:30 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On 3/20/11 1:57 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
>>> .
 I hope the situation may change now with Oracle in direct  
 competition with
 RH
 for RH and RH-based distros user base. BTW Oracle offers  
 installable
 binaries for free.
>>> Yes, but patches (support) cost money, as you might know. Anyway, it
>>> is better to pay for real
>>> RH instead of oracle linux..
>> Or, maybe there was back in the days when they released source that  
>> matched
>> their binaries...  Personally, I think everyone would be better off  
>> today if
>> they had turned their back on anything RH-related the day they  
>> stopped
>> permitting redistribution of their binaries among the community  
>> that created
>> them and made them usable in the first place.  I was too lazy to  
>> change and
>> Centos made it look reasonable to leave things approximately the  
>> same.  But, now
>> that RH is putting the screws on anyone who doesn't pay up it is  
>> probably time
>> for anyone who cares about free software to rethink things.
>>
> exactly.  Nothing against Centos but I've deployed my last RH based
> box.  It'll be either Debian or Ubuntu from now on.

I don't get it, why so radical?

Why not go SL and maintain the same methodology?

- aurf
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[William Warren]

On 3/20/2011 6:02 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Mar 20, 2011, at 1:52 PM, William Warren wrote:
>
>> On 3/20/2011 3:30 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> On 3/20/11 1:57 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
 .
> I hope the situation may change now with Oracle in direct
> competition with
> RH
> for RH and RH-based distros user base. BTW Oracle offers
> installable
> binaries for free.
 Yes, but patches (support) cost money, as you might know. Anyway, it
 is better to pay for real
 RH instead of oracle linux..
>>> Or, maybe there was back in the days when they released source that
>>> matched
>>> their binaries...  Personally, I think everyone would be better off
>>> today if
>>> they had turned their back on anything RH-related the day they
>>> stopped
>>> permitting redistribution of their binaries among the community
>>> that created
>>> them and made them usable in the first place.  I was too lazy to
>>> change and
>>> Centos made it look reasonable to leave things approximately the
>>> same.  But, now
>>> that RH is putting the screws on anyone who doesn't pay up it is
>>> probably time
>>> for anyone who cares about free software to rethink things.
>>>
>> exactly.  Nothing against Centos but I've deployed my last RH based
>> box.  It'll be either Debian or Ubuntu from now on.
> I don't get it, why so radical?
>
> Why not go SL and maintain the same methodology?
>
> - aurf
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
because the software i use for myself and my clients...rhel availability 
is dropping and unbuntu debian is increasing.  rhel's various code 
decisions aren't helping.  It's not radical..it's still Linux and still 
free.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[compdoc]

>It'll be either Debian or Ubuntu from now on.


Ubuntu makes a great server. But because of recent news I tried opensuse for
the first time and I really like it.

I understand the need for stability, but for what I do, having the newest
(stable) kernel and packages has a greater benefit.

Kernel 2.6.37 is in some releases now, and although everyone is crazy about
2.6.38, I'll wait until its released as an official upgrade.

And that won't be long - just a few months, likely...





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

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[aurfalien]

On Mar 20, 2011, at 4:00 PM, compdoc wrote:

>> It'll be either Debian or Ubuntu from now on.
>
>
> Ubuntu makes a great server. But because of recent news I tried  
> opensuse for
> the first time and I really like it.

Yes, PVOPS and over all better Xen tools is a great reason to use  
OpenSuse.

However, having a distro like Centos is great because it is RHEL minus  
the support offerings.

- aurf
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[William Warren]

On 3/20/2011 7:00 PM, compdoc wrote:
>> It'll be either Debian or Ubuntu from now on.
>
> Ubuntu makes a great server. But because of recent news I tried opensuse for
> the first time and I really like it.
>
> I understand the need for stability, but for what I do, having the newest
> (stable) kernel and packages has a greater benefit.
>
> Kernel 2.6.37 is in some releases now, and although everyone is crazy about
> 2.6.38, I'll wait until its released as an official upgrade.
>
> And that won't be long - just a few months, likely...
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
to which news are you referring about ubuntu-wise?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[compdoc]

> to which news are you referring about ubuntu-wise?

I meant recent redhat news about the change in how it will deliver code to
the community. They mentioned opensuse as being a competitor, I believe.




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

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[William Warren]

On 3/20/2011 7:11 PM, compdoc wrote:
>> to which news are you referring about ubuntu-wise?
> I meant recent redhat news about the change in how it will deliver code to
> the community. They mentioned opensuse as being a competitor, I believe.
>
>
>
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
their changes are really aimed at oracle..the rest is smoke and 
mirrors..:)  oracle is basically(pardon me here) Centos with charges.  
That's basically all oracle is going with unbreakable Linux.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[compdoc]

> their changes are really aimed at oracle..the rest is smoke and

Somehow a story led me to try opensuse. Sorry, don't know which it was that
I read.



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

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[William Warren]

On 3/20/2011 7:29 PM, compdoc wrote:
>> their changes are really aimed at oracle..the rest is smoke and
> Somehow a story led me to try opensuse. Sorry, don't know which it was that
> I read.
>
>
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
oh they mentioned opensuse as part of the kernel patch obfuscation issue 
that was raised..that's probably where opensuse got your attention..but 
their mention of opensuse is jsut to hide the fact their latest thing is 
aimed at oracle..:)
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Les Mikesell]

On 3/20/11 6:59 PM, William Warren wrote:
>
>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> oh they mentioned opensuse as part of the kernel patch obfuscation issue
> that was raised..that's probably where opensuse got your attention..but
> their mention of opensuse is jsut to hide the fact their latest thing is
> aimed at oracle..:)

If you are going to pretend you aren't selling software, just the support 
service, you can't at the same time complain about what others do with that 
software.  It was enough of a farce when they just restricted redistribution of 
their binaries.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Marko A. Jennings]

On Sun, March 20, 2011 7:29 pm, William Warren wrote:
> their changes are really aimed at oracle..the rest is smoke and
> mirrors..:)  oracle is basically(pardon me here) Centos with charges.
> That's basically all oracle is going with unbreakable Linux.

Not just Oracle.  Novell is actively pursuing Red Hat customers and
offering to support their Red Hat installations cheaper than Read Hat
does.  I know a large international technology company which buys RHEL
licenses only for the first year and then switches to Novell for support
after that.

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

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[William Warren]

On 3/20/2011 10:44 PM, Marko A. Jennings wrote:
> On Sun, March 20, 2011 7:29 pm, William Warren wrote:
>> their changes are really aimed at oracle..the rest is smoke and
>> mirrors..:)  oracle is basically(pardon me here) Centos with charges.
>> That's basically all oracle is going with unbreakable Linux.
> Not just Oracle.  Novell is actively pursuing Red Hat customers and
> offering to support their Red Hat installations cheaper than Read Hat
> does.  I know a large international technology company which buys RHEL
> licenses only for the first year and then switches to Novell for support
> after that.
>
> Marko
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
nods i forgot about that mention in same said article..:)
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] The delays on CentOS 5.6 are causing EPEL incompatibilities

[Matthew Feinberg]

I don't see the problem here. I just tested this and it works fine. The 
drupal6 package only requires php 5.2 or greater.

This is out of the drupal6-date.spec file

Requires: drupal6 >= 6.0, drupal6-cck, php >= 5.2

You can get php52 or php53 from the IUS repository.
Install the IUS repo from http://iuscommunity.org/ 
http://wiki.iuscommunity.org/Doc/ClientUsageGuide

Install the yum-plugin-replace package and follow the instructions.

ps. Somewhere there is a dozen people in a Red Hat conference room 
reading this list laughing their heads off. Don't give them more fuel. 
The CentOS team will get 5.6 out soon enough.

On 03/20/2011 11:23 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> There are significant components of the upstream 5.6 release which are
> stuck behind the CentOS 5.6 release process, but are now incorporated
> in EPEL 5 components. In particular, the "php53" package is now
> necessary for the "drupal6" EPEL components, due to the long out of
> date PHP 5.1 in the default upstream vendor's codebase.

-- 
Matthew Feinberg
matt...@choopa.com
AIM: matthewchoopa

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