Re: [CentOS] KVM vs ESXi

[Michael Simpson]

On 19 May 2011 05:39, Lucian  wrote:

> No and I don't think it's the hypervisor's job to do that. Even in
> ESXi I don't think it's the "hypervisor" itself that does that. You
> could try however to mess with Openvswitch if you insist on such
> features, at least until someone decides to package all this in one
> fancy solution (rhev?).
>
thank you for pointing out openvswitch very interesting

wrt the OP

KVM is meant to be much closer to bare metal performance but doesn't
have (at the moment) the all inclusive, easily managed from one
console, turnkey solution to massive virtual installs at the
datacentre level. If you need to be able to remotely provision VMs and
move them whilst live from one centre to another whilst upscaling them
then you will probably need to go with vmware.  If you have got the
flattened layer2 setup and have got to the stage of using vSwitch or
the full cisco stack including provisioned nexus1000v then you might
find kvm is a bit of a step backwards.

However i would recommend having a KVM based test suite as judging by
the latest PaaS and IaaS news coming from TUV then a full solution
will be appearing real soon and may be a contender.

If you are just looking to footer about and are after a provisioned
host in a dmz then libvirt can achieve this.

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

Re: [CentOS] KVM vs ESXi

[Lars Hecking]

> KVM is meant to be much closer to bare metal performance but doesn't
> have (at the moment) the all inclusive, easily managed from one
> console, turnkey solution to massive virtual installs at the
> datacentre level. If you need to be able to remotely provision VMs and
> move them whilst live from one centre to another whilst upscaling them
> then you will probably need to go with vmware.  If you have got the

 Mike,

 Are you familiar with any of the tools listed here

  http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Management_Tools

 e.g. Proxmox, ConVirt, OpenNebula, Ganeti, openQRM? Comments?


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

[CentOS] Centos 5.6 kernel errors

[Matt Keating]

Hi guys,

Is anyone else having kernel issues with CentOS 5.6?
I cant get it stable on as a LAMP platform.

Everything is up-to-date and yet I'm running into major problems.
How do I make sense of these kernel errors? Any help will be greatly
appreciated, as I'm now had to roll back to an old copy of CentOS to keep my
systems stable.


Random Cron:

 14857 kernel: Oops: 0003 [#3]
 14857 kernel: SMP
 14857 kernel: CPU:0
 14857 kernel: EIP is at pgd_free+0x104/0x140
 14857 kernel: eax:    ebx:    ecx: 0400   edx: 8003
 14857 kernel: esi: e8caa000   edi: e8caa000   ebp: e8cffd68   esp: e8cffd48
 14857 kernel: ds: 007b   es: 007b   ss: 0069
 14857 kernel: Process crond (pid: 2620, threadinfo=e8cfe000 task=e9419550)
 14857 kernel: Stack: <0>e8caa000  0003 e8ca3c44 e8ca6018
e8c6f740 e8c6f788 e8c6f740
 14857 kernel: e8cffd7c c011bd9b e8ca6000 e8c6f788 e8c6f740 e8cffd90
c011be50 e8c6f740
 14857 kernel: e8cffde8 7ff0 e8cffe20 c0170a8a e8c6f740 e8c6f740
c030b547 e8cffdb8
 14857 kernel: Call Trace:
 14857 kernel: [] show_stack_log_lvl+0xcd/0x120
 14857 kernel: [] show_registers+0x1ab/0x240
 14857 kernel: [] die+0x111/0x240
 14857 kernel: [] do_page_fault+0x5f7/0x931
 14857 kernel: [] error_code+0x2b/0x30
 14857 kernel: [] __mmdrop+0x1b/0x50
 14857 kernel: [] mmput+0x80/0xa0
 14857 kernel: [] flush_old_exec+0x1ba/0xb30
 14857 kernel: [] load_elf_binary+0x26f/0x1780
 14857 kernel: [] search_binary_handler+0x92/0x240
 14857 kernel: [] do_execve+0x173/0x215
 14857 kernel: [] sys_execve+0x42/0xa0
 14857 kernel: [] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
 14857 kernel: Code: e1 0c 25 ff 0f 00 00 09 c1 89 ce 83 ce 01 81 ee 01 00
00 40 31 db 89 5c 24 04 89 f7 89 34 24 e8 53 eb ff ff 31 c0 b9 00 04 00 00
 ab a1 e4 ec 3a c0 89 74 24 04 89 04 24 e8 39 dc 04 00 8b 45

Random while updating a package with yum:
14857 kernel: Oops: 0003 [#4]
 14857 kernel: SMP
 14857 kernel: CPU:0
 14857 kernel: EIP is at pgd_free+0x104/0x140
 14857 kernel: eax:    ebx:    ecx: 0400   edx: 8002
 14857 kernel: esi: e8545000   edi: e8545000   ebp: e8c8bd68   esp: e8c8bd48
 14857 kernel: ds: 007b   es: 007b   ss: 0069
 14857 kernel: Process yum (pid: 2721, threadinfo=e8c8a000 task=e9f65550)
 14857 kernel: Stack: <0>e8545000  0003 e854c1d8 e8546018
e8c6f040 e8c6f088 e8c6f040
 14857 kernel: e8c8bd7c c011bd9b e8546000 e8c6f088 e8c6f040 e8c8bd90
c011be50 e8c6f040
 14857 kernel: e8c8bde8 7ff0 e8c8be20 c0170a8a e8c6f040 e8c6f040
c030b547 e8c8bdb8
 14857 kernel: Call Trace:
 14857 kernel: [] show_stack_log_lvl+0xcd/0x120
 14857 kernel: [] show_registers+0x1ab/0x240
 14857 kernel: [] die+0x111/0x240
 14857 kernel: [] do_page_fault+0x5f7/0x931
 14857 kernel: [] error_code+0x2b/0x30
 14857 kernel: [] __mmdrop+0x1b/0x50
 14857 kernel: [] mmput+0x80/0xa0
 14857 kernel: [] flush_old_exec+0x1ba/0xb30
 14857 kernel: [] load_elf_binary+0x26f/0x1780
 14857 kernel: [] search_binary_handler+0x92/0x240
 14857 kernel: [] do_execve+0x173/0x215
 14857 kernel: [] sys_execve+0x42/0xa0
 14857 kernel: [] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
 14857 kernel: Code: e1 0c 25 ff 0f 00 00 09 c1 89 ce 83 ce 01 81 ee 01 00
00 40 31 db 89 5c 24 04 89 f7 89 34 24 e8 53 eb ff ff 31 c0 b9 00 04 00 00
 ab a1 e4 ec 3a c0 89 74 24 04 89 04 24 e8 39 dc 04 00 8b 45

While serving httpd pages:
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: Unable to handle kernel paging
request at virtual address e6579000
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: printing eip:
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: c01123c4
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: 00589000 -> *pde =
0003:b9f9a027
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: 0058a000 -> *pme =
0003:146e0067
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: 005c4000 -> *pte =
8008:10392063
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: Oops: 0003 [#1]
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: SMP
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: Modules linked in: fuse dm_mirror
dm_multipath dm_mod
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: CPU:0
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: EIP:0061:[]
 Tainted: GF VLI
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: EFLAGS: 00010246   (2.6.16-xenU
#1)
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: EIP is at pgd_free+0x104/0x140
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: eax:    ebx: 
ecx: 0400   edx: 8008
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: esi: e6579000   edi: e6579000
ebp: c2f95f00   esp: c2f95ee0
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: ds: 007b   es: 007b   ss: 0069
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: Process httpd (pid: 8267,
threadinfo=c2f94000 task=d78a3a70)
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: Stack: <0>e6579000 
0003 c2039a1c d75c7018 ed181200 ed181248 d78a3a70
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: c2f95f14 c011bd9b d75c7000 ed181248
ed181200 c2f95f28 c011be50 ed181200
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: ed181200 ed181234 c2f95f44 c011fdd0
ed181200 ed181200 c2f94000 d78a3a70
May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 ker

Re: [CentOS] KVM vs ESXi

[Alain Péan]

Le 19/05/2011 13:27, Lars Hecking a écrit :
>> KVM is meant to be much closer to bare metal performance but doesn't
>> have (at the moment) the all inclusive, easily managed from one
>> console, turnkey solution to massive virtual installs at the
>> datacentre level. If you need to be able to remotely provision VMs and
>> move them whilst live from one centre to another whilst upscaling them
>> then you will probably need to go with vmware.  If you have got the
>   Mike,
>
>   Are you familiar with any of the tools listed here
>
>http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Management_Tools
>
>   e.g. Proxmox, ConVirt, OpenNebula, Ganeti, openQRM? Comments?
>

Hi Lars,

I am using Proxmox. It is based on Debian. It is a bare metal installer, 
like ESX. You manage your VMs from a web interface. You can live migrate 
your VMs from one node to another if you use a central storage or DRDB.
The bare metal installer takes care of all the initial configuration 
(bridge, LVM for snapshot...).

I wait to see what will do RHEVM, but at this time, I am not aware of 
such a convenient solution under RHEL/CentOS...

Alain

-- 
==
Alain Péan - LPP/CNRS
Administrateur Système/Réseau
Laboratoire de Physique des Plasmas - UMR 7648
Observatoire de Saint-Maur
4, av de Neptune, Bat. A
94100 Saint-Maur des Fossés
Tel : 01-45-11-42-39 - Fax : 01-48-89-44-33
==

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

Re: [CentOS] EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

[Dag Wieers]

On Mon, 16 May 2011, Johnny Hughes wrote:

> It will be released when it is released, if you don't like it then leave.

Before I leave this list let me take you back about 7 years to the 
Whitebox mailinglist. You may not remember that Whitebox had a list of 
issues of its own, no timely updates, no community effort, lack of good
communication. It was mostly a one-man-effort.

And the people on that list who were not pleased, included Johnny and 
Karanbir. And it's striking (and ironic) how similar the discussions went 
7 years ago. Johnny said:

   [WBEL-users] WBEL Vs Centos ? :-S
   http://beau.org/pipermail/whitebox-users/2004-December/004761.html

   "If timely updates are not a key factor for you, then WBEL is a great
   distro.  If timely updates are the most important thing you consider
   about the distro you want, then WBEL might not be a fit for you.  That
   is all I have ever said ... and I have never said it meanly."

or:

   [WBEL-users] WBEL Vs Centos ? :-S
   http://beau.org/pipermail/whitebox-users/2004-December/004740.html

   "I just think people should not have the expectation the WBEL is
   community operated, it is not.  It's NOT like debian or gentoo where
   others can get involved.  I know, I tried really hard to do so many
   times.

Karanbir said:

   [WBEL-users] WBEL ...dead?
   http://beau.org/pipermail/whitebox-users/2004-December/004684.html

   "Be a lil difficult to sell that to the IT Manager / CTO : Hang tight
   dude, its comming. Anytime now."

or:

   [WBEL-users] WBEL ...dead?
   http://beau.org/pipermail/whitebox-users/2004-December/004709.html

   "Why ? the other RHEL recompiles dont have this 'its coming, hang on'
   attitude do they ?

   If there is a security issue out there, you can put in a fairly good
   idea as to when its possible to deploy with them. Whats the scene with
   WBEL ?"

The only difference I see is that back then Whitebox had only a fraction 
of users, and even less using it for critical mission, while nowadays 
people rely even more on timely security updates and releases coming from 
CentOS. And people expect to help and contribute to the process to make 
that happen.

Which, contrary to what is stated now, was an essential part in the start 
and growth of the CentOS project.

Anyay, goodbye and thanks for all the fish !
-- 
-- dag wieers, d...@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/
-- dagit linux solutions, i...@dagit.net, http://dagit.net/

[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

[B.J. McClure]

On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 13:54 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
> On Mon, 16 May 2011, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> 
> > It will be released when it is released, if you don't like it then leave.
> 
> Before I leave this list let me take you back about 7 years to the 
> Whitebox mailinglist. You may not remember that Whitebox had a list of 
> issues of its own, no timely updates, no community effort, lack of good
> communication. It was mostly a one-man-effort.




> Anyay, goodbye and thanks for all the fish !

Sorry to see you go, Dag.  Your technical input to this list over the
years has, IMHO, been valuable.  And whether or not I agreed with your
opinion input, it was always presented in a professional manner.

This is my first, and last, post to this line of threads, but frankly, I
have greater concern for the lack of professionalism shown by some on
this list in the last few months than the timeliness, or lack thereof,
of updates.

IMHO, personal attacks and profanity directed at any list member is
always grossly inappropriate.

Thanks for your contributions.

B.J.

RHEL 6.0, Linux 2.6.32-71.29.1.el6.x86_64

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

Re: [CentOS] Centos 5.6 kernel errors

[Tru Huynh]

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:45:23PM +0100, Matt Keating wrote:
> Hi guys,
> 
> Is anyone else having kernel issues with CentOS 5.6?
> I cant get it stable on as a LAMP platform.
... 
> While serving httpd pages:
...
> May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: EFLAGS: 00010246   (2.6.16-xenU
> #1)
...
not really CentOS

looks like a AWS AMI

Tru

-- 
Tru Huynh (mirrors, CentOS i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance)
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B


pgp2XZYO13xst.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Centos 5.6 kernel errors

[Matt Keating]

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Tru Huynh  wrote:

> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:45:23PM +0100, Matt Keating wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > Is anyone else having kernel issues with CentOS 5.6?
> > I cant get it stable on as a LAMP platform.
> ...
> > While serving httpd pages:
> ...
> > May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: EFLAGS: 00010246   (2.6.16-xenU
> > #1)
> ...
> not really CentOS
>
> looks like a AWS AMI
>
> Yes, its a custom AMI, which I've built. My previous Centos 5.4 AMI seems
to work fine, the error only crept into the picture, after I've done an full
yum update, to version 5.6.
So are you implying its not any fault of the current OS?

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

Re: [CentOS] Centos 5.6 kernel errors

[Tru Huynh]

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 01:46:10PM +0100, Matt Keating wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Tru Huynh  wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:45:23PM +0100, Matt Keating wrote:
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > Is anyone else having kernel issues with CentOS 5.6?
> > > I cant get it stable on as a LAMP platform.
> > ...
> > > While serving httpd pages:
> > ...
> > > May 19 12:19:19 ip-10-234-90-180 kernel: EFLAGS: 00010246   (2.6.16-xenU
> > > #1)
> > ...
> > not really CentOS
> >
> > looks like a AWS AMI
> >
> > Yes, its a custom AMI, which I've built. My previous Centos 5.4 AMI seems
> to work fine, the error only crept into the picture, after I've done an full
> yum update, to version 5.6.
Why not telling the whole story? 
You should be running 2.6.18-238.9.1.el5xen if you were running CentOS 5.6.

> So are you implying its not any fault of the current OS?

I am just saying that 2.6.16-xenU is NOT CentOS provided.
How does this kernel interact with the other CentOS provided packages
is unknown.
It will be difficult for people to reproduce or help
with so little information. And afaik, AWS is not free.

Tru
-- 
Tru Huynh (mirrors, CentOS i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance)
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B


pgpbga9a5a7kv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

[Craig White]

On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 13:54 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
> On Mon, 16 May 2011, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> 
> > It will be released when it is released, if you don't like it then leave.
> 
> Before I leave this list let me take you back about 7 years to the 
> Whitebox mailinglist. You may not remember that Whitebox had a list of 
> issues of its own, no timely updates, no community effort, lack of good
> communication. It was mostly a one-man-effort.
> 
> And the people on that list who were not pleased, included Johnny and 
> Karanbir. And it's striking (and ironic) how similar the discussions went 
> 7 years ago. Johnny said:
> 
>[WBEL-users] WBEL Vs Centos ? :-S
>http://beau.org/pipermail/whitebox-users/2004-December/004761.html
> 
>"If timely updates are not a key factor for you, then WBEL is a great
>distro.  If timely updates are the most important thing you consider
>about the distro you want, then WBEL might not be a fit for you.  That
>is all I have ever said ... and I have never said it meanly."
> 
> or:
> 
>[WBEL-users] WBEL Vs Centos ? :-S
>http://beau.org/pipermail/whitebox-users/2004-December/004740.html
> 
>"I just think people should not have the expectation the WBEL is
>community operated, it is not.  It's NOT like debian or gentoo where
>others can get involved.  I know, I tried really hard to do so many
>times.
> 
> Karanbir said:
> 
>[WBEL-users] WBEL ...dead?
>http://beau.org/pipermail/whitebox-users/2004-December/004684.html
> 
>"Be a lil difficult to sell that to the IT Manager / CTO : Hang tight
>dude, its comming. Anytime now."
> 
> or:
> 
>[WBEL-users] WBEL ...dead?
>http://beau.org/pipermail/whitebox-users/2004-December/004709.html
> 
>"Why ? the other RHEL recompiles dont have this 'its coming, hang on'
>attitude do they ?
> 
>If there is a security issue out there, you can put in a fairly good
>idea as to when its possible to deploy with them. Whats the scene with
>WBEL ?"
> 
> The only difference I see is that back then Whitebox had only a fraction 
> of users, and even less using it for critical mission, while nowadays 
> people rely even more on timely security updates and releases coming from 
> CentOS. And people expect to help and contribute to the process to make 
> that happen.

The irony is so thick you can cut it with a knife. Those of us who were
whitebox users surely remember how the updates came slower and slower
and our sense of frustration of never knowing how/if/when the updates
would come. Your reminder (because I had forgotten) that they used
timeliness as the main selling point for switching to CentOS well... if
that isn't a wake up call to Johnny & Karanbir, then nothing will do it.

At least John Morris never made any pretense of whitebox being a
community project nor did he promise updates to be anything except on
his own timetable. I remember how awkward I felt when Johnny would use
the WBEL mail list to suggest to people to switch to CentOS and laughed
the other day when he was rather perturbed because the CentOS list was
used to promote the idea of switching to SL. More irony.

I resolved to not install WBEL 4.0 on any system because I couldn't
trust it to be timely and now, here we are at 6.0 and I feel the same
way about CentOS. Full circle.

The sycophants on this list probably don't recognize just how valuable
the 'dag' repo (aka rpmforge) has been to the RHEL/CentOS/SL/etc.
ecosystem but my feeling is that if Dag can't hold the CentOS dev's feet
to the fire, then no one can. Evidently I am one of the "ungrateful
bastards"
 but you
could never be considered to be one of them.

Craig


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

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

[CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[carlopmart]

only FYI:

http://osnews.com/story/24760/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux_6_1_Released
-- 
CL Martinez
carlopmart {at} gmail {d0t} com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[R P Herrold]

On Thu, 19 May 2011, carlopmart wrote:

> Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux_6_1_Released

and look at all the anaconda related, and other fixes, that 
should have been in a dot zero release ... gee

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

Re: [CentOS] OT: Video Surveillance SW on CentOS

[Lanny Marcus]

Hi Again:

>> (b) Motion
>> http://www.lavrsen.dk/foswiki/bin/view/Motion/WebHome
>>
> We use this at work. It comes std. with the last few fedoras, so it should
> be coming in CentOS soon.

I forgot to mention that motion is available in the RPMForge repository.

yum install motion

That's as easy as it gets.  Lanny
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[Brunner, Brian T.]

centos-boun...@centos.org wrote:
> On Thu, 19 May 2011, carlopmart wrote:
> 
>> Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux_6_1_Released
> 
> and look at all the anaconda related, and other fixes, that
> should have been in a dot zero release ... gee
> 
> -- Russ herrold

Which means, that RHEL6.0 should have just now come out today; the
release called 6.0 was a teaser and a beta of the release called 6.1
which should have been called 6.0!  

So when is CentOS6.1 coming out?
(I can't help it, I just can't help it).


Insert spiffy .sig here:
Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary parts.
Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the
moments that take our breath away. 


//me
***
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom
they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please
notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this
email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses.
www.Hubbell.com - Hubbell Incorporated**

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

[CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[R P Herrold]

On Thu, 19 May 2011, Brunner, Brian T. wrote:

>> herrold earlier:
>> and look at all the anaconda related, and other fixes, that
>> should have been in a dot zero release ... gee

> Which means, that RHEL6.0 should have just now come out today; the
> release called 6.0 was a teaser and a beta of the release called 6.1
> which should have been called 6.0!

There is an old piece of wisdom in IT to avoid the public 'dot 
zero' products so that some-one else gets to be the advance 
guard scout (you know, the one who staggers back to base camp, 
festooned wth arrows in him)

even if a vendor names its initial product 2.1, or 3.0.3, it 
is still a 'dot zero' until eager and inadvertent public 
release (and perhaps unknowing) 'gamma testers' ('They CAN'T 
BE 'beta' testers -- we _did_ a beta') get fried a few times, 
a la Dr Bruce Banner and his Gamma ray accident

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

Re: [CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[m . roth]

Brunner, Brian T. wrote:
> centos-boun...@centos.org wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 May 2011, carlopmart wrote:
>>
>>> Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux_6_1_Released
>>
>> and look at all the anaconda related, and other fixes, that
>> should have been in a dot zero release ... gee
>
> Which means, that RHEL6.0 should have just now come out today; the
> release called 6.0 was a teaser and a beta of the release called 6.1
> which should have been called 6.0!
>
> So when is CentOS6.1 coming out?
> (I can't help it, I just can't help it).



  mark "mind your manners!"

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

Re: [CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[Markus Falb]

On 19.5.2011 15:56, R P Herrold wrote:

> There is an old piece of wisdom in IT to avoid the public 'dot 
> zero' products so that some-one else gets to be the advance 
> guard scout (you know, the one who staggers back to base camp, 
> festooned wth arrows in him)

Oh Lord! If everyone would avoid 'dot.zero' products then no bugs would
be discovered and no 'dot.one' product would be released. You basically
tell me if I cant resist and try I am an idiot and are beta testing for
you. So I am reacting and try to resist using 'dot.zero' hoping that you
will do the beta tests for me instead. Leading to stagnation. Possibly
it works out (for one of the two of us), but I would not call it wisdom.
There is another "piece of wisdom" that says "Never change a running
system", which forbids updates anyway.

-- 
Kind Regards, Markus Falb



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

[CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[R P Herrold]

(possible duplicate -- the first post had some mal-formed 
headers that the MailMan should have rejected)

On Thu, 19 May 2011, Markus Falb wrote:

> Oh Lord! If everyone would avoid 'dot.zero' products then no 
> bugs would be discovered and no 'dot.one' product would be 
> released. You basically tell me if I cant resist and try I 
> am an idiot and are beta testing for you. So I am reacting 
> and try to resist using 'dot.zero' hoping that you will do 
> the beta tests for me instead.

Please note that I have publicly confesssed here to running a
local private testing build of the upstream's 6.0 sources,
several times, and have the arrow collection in my pysche to
show for it  [this shows I am a glutton for punishment]

But I am NOT running it production

And I am not afraid of the planet running out of 'idiots' who
will test -- the Lord seems to have created an endless supply
of such, some of whom have been howling on the mailing lists,
asking to have arrows shot at them by the CentOS team

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

Re: [CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[Les Mikesell]

On 5/19/2011 9:40 AM, Markus Falb wrote:
>
>> There is an old piece of wisdom in IT to avoid the public 'dot
>> zero' products so that some-one else gets to be the advance
>> guard scout (you know, the one who staggers back to base camp,
>> festooned wth arrows in him)
>
> Oh Lord! If everyone would avoid 'dot.zero' products then no bugs would
> be discovered and no 'dot.one' product would be released. You basically
> tell me if I cant resist and try I am an idiot and are beta testing for
> you.

Everyone expected this from Red Hat before the 'EL' versions when 
publishing a free CD of community work was the way QA was done.  (And if 
you've forgotten, go dig through some changelogs of that era to see just 
how bad things were and how much we gained from that process).  But 
wasn't closing the process and letting 'experts' do that before shipping 
supposed to have improved things?

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

Re: [CentOS] EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

[R - elists]

 
Dag wrote:
> Before I leave this list let me take you back about 7 years 
> to the Whitebox mailinglist. You may not remember that 
> Whitebox had a list of issues of its own, no timely updates, 
> no community effort, lack of good communication. It was 
> mostly a one-man-effort.

bummer to see you go Dag...

yet as you know, everything has issues... 

if one mainly looks for "or" at things in a negative perspective, you will
always find more of same...

yet believe it or not, if you look for the good, and count your blessings
based on it, the count of such will never end...

some are ungrateful, yes... but for the most part they are sinfully ignorant
& think way too highly of themselves

what is truly, seriously ironic is that the ignorant / ungrateful crowd gets
a chance to come out of the woodwork... you know the ones... they havent
done whatever is necessary to (in major way) help centos as a whole and/or
do any core centos work during CentOSs' lifetime (7 years ???) while the
core centos heros carry the majority of the load the whole time.

then when the proverbial doody hits the fan and the centos heros (as always)
roll up sleeves & multiple distro works are progressing at a variable rate

the ignorant act like they have all the answers and can help the centos
heros, YET the ignorant never actually roll up their sleves and do anything
to help.

mainly lots of crying and peeping like helpless baby birds waiting for food.

i may not be 100% correct, yet one thing i have picked up on over the years
in relationship to volunteering for CentOS is that the centos heros do not
have time to BABY and SPOON FEED new recruits.

 - rh



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

Re: [CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[R - elists]

no, the saying is...

if it aint broken, dont fix it !

especially on weekends, monday, or friday 

;->

that is why everyone should have a small or large lab for testing and
rollout...

 - rh

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

[CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[R P Herrold]

On Thu, 19 May 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:

> Everyone expected this from Red Hat before the 'EL' versions when
> publishing a free CD of community work was the way QA was done.  (And if
> you've forgotten, go dig through some changelogs of that era to see just
> how bad things were and how much we gained from that process).  But
> wasn't closing the process and letting 'experts' do that before shipping
> supposed to have improved things?

You'll have to direct questions of the upstream's intent to 
the upstream

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

Re: [CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[R - elists]

 

Les wrote:
> Everyone expected this from Red Hat before the 'EL' versions 
> when publishing a free CD of community work was the way QA 
> was done.  (And if you've forgotten, go dig through some 
> changelogs of that era to see just how bad things were and 
> how much we gained from that process).  But wasn't closing 
> the process and letting 'experts' do that before shipping 
> supposed to have improved things?
> 

not really sure what you are saying Les...

what are you saying?

are you talking about Red Hat internal processes ?

it is a very profitable publically traded corporate structure with employees
and products...

what dont you understand about that?

 - rh

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

Re: [CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[Lamar Owen]

On Thursday, May 19, 2011 10:59:45 AM Les Mikesell wrote:
> Everyone expected [dot-zero bugfest] from Red Hat before the 'EL' versions 
> when 
> publishing a free CD of community work was the way QA was done.  (And if 
> you've forgotten, go dig through some changelogs of that era to see just 
> how bad things were and how much we gained from that process).  But 
> wasn't closing the process and letting 'experts' do that before shipping 
> supposed to have improved things?

Sounds like a question for rhelv6-l...@redhat.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[Ljubomir Ljubojevic]

Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 5/19/2011 9:40 AM, Markus Falb wrote:
>>> There is an old piece of wisdom in IT to avoid the public 'dot
>>> zero' products so that some-one else gets to be the advance
>>> guard scout (you know, the one who staggers back to base camp,
>>> festooned wth arrows in him)
>> Oh Lord! If everyone would avoid 'dot.zero' products then no bugs would
>> be discovered and no 'dot.one' product would be released. You basically
>> tell me if I cant resist and try I am an idiot and are beta testing for
>> you.
> 
> Everyone expected this from Red Hat before the 'EL' versions when 
> publishing a free CD of community work was the way QA was done.  (And if 
> you've forgotten, go dig through some changelogs of that era to see just 
> how bad things were and how much we gained from that process).  But 
> wasn't closing the process and letting 'experts' do that before shipping 
> supposed to have improved things?
> 

If you consider how much bugs there are in Fedora in last years, this is 
not to bad either. Considering the number of errors, maybe waiting for 
CentOS 6.0 had it's benefits, even none of us likes such a long wait. I 
started holding my breath when RHEL 6 Beta was released, and my face is 
not blue any more but totally black :-)

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

[CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[R P Herrold]

On Thu, 19 May 2011, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:

> started holding my breath when RHEL 6 Beta was released, and my face is
> not blue any more but totally black :-)

Yowzer -- Zombies!!!
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[Les Mikesell]

On 5/19/2011 10:15 AM, R - elists wrote:
>
>
> Les wrote:
>> Everyone expected this from Red Hat before the 'EL' versions
>> when publishing a free CD of community work was the way QA
>> was done.  (And if you've forgotten, go dig through some
>> changelogs of that era to see just how bad things were and
>> how much we gained from that process).  But wasn't closing
>> the process and letting 'experts' do that before shipping
>> supposed to have improved things?
>>
>
> not really sure what you are saying Les...
>
> what are you saying?

I'm saying that Red Hat got to be a big company because of the community 
involvement after they shipped buggy code that would boot on most PCs of 
the era and some (probably small)percentage of the users were able to 
contribute fixes and bug reports.

> are you talking about Red Hat internal processes ?

I'm talking about the change in that process where the community is only 
involved in Fedora, and the expectation that the closed work on EL was 
supposed to make it less buggy when shipped.

> it is a very profitable publically traded corporate structure with employees
> and products...

Yes, it is clear why closing access is a benefit to them.  Not so much 
to anyone else.

> what dont you understand about that?

Did I misunderstand the comment about X.0 releases?  I took it to mean 
that the closed work didn't really product a perfect result.

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

[CentOS] CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 75, Issue 8

[centos-announce-request]

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to
centos-annou...@centos.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
centos-announce-requ...@centos.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
centos-announce-ow...@centos.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. CEBA-2011:0517  CentOS 5 x86_64 poppler Update (Johnny Hughes)
   2. CEBA-2011:0517  CentOS 5 i386 poppler Update (Johnny Hughes)
   3. CEBA-2011:0514  CentOS 5 x86_64 nss_ldap Update (Johnny Hughes)
   4. CEBA-2011:0514  CentOS 5 i386 nss_ldap Update (Johnny Hughes)
   5. CEBA-2011:0513  CentOS 5 i386 ksh Update (Johnny Hughes)
   6. CEBA-2011:0513  CentOS 5 x86_64 ksh Update (Johnny Hughes)
   7. CEBA-2011:0512  CentOS 5 i386 mcelog Update (Johnny Hughes)
   8. CEBA-2011:0512  CentOS 5 x86_64 mcelog Update (Johnny Hughes)
   9. CEBA-2011:0817 CentOS 5 i386  system-config-network FASTTRACK
  Update (Johnny Hughes)
  10. CEBA-2011:0817 CentOS 5 x86_64system-config-network
  FASTTRACK Update (Johnny Hughes)
  11. CEBA-2011:0816 CentOS 5 x86_64 logrotate  FASTTRACK Update
  (Johnny Hughes)
  12. CEBA-2011:0816 CentOS 5 i386 logrotate FASTTRACK  Update
  (Johnny Hughes)
  13. CEBA-2011:0815 CentOS 5 x86_64 busybox FASTTRACK  Update
  (Johnny Hughes)
  14. CEBA-2011:0815 CentOS 5 i386 busybox FASTTRACKUpdate
  (Johnny Hughes)
  15. CEBA-2011:0815 CentOS 5 x86_64 busybox FASTTRACK  Update
  (Johnny Hughes)
  16. CEBA-2011:0815 CentOS 5 i386 busybox FASTTRACKUpdate
  (Johnny Hughes)


--

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 19:29:50 +
From: Johnny Hughes 
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2011:0517  CentOS 5 x86_64 poppler
Update
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Message-ID: <20110518192950.ga12...@chakra.karan.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2011:0517 

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-0517.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename ) 

x86_64:
0d2a35a24114ee209661f4a63db325ff  poppler-0.5.4-4.4.el5_6.17.i386.rpm
2ad5610d3a5c465b70d6bbe4ea02bb84  poppler-0.5.4-4.4.el5_6.17.x86_64.rpm
6dc4b627c56943046a9fd282bc12053e  poppler-devel-0.5.4-4.4.el5_6.17.i386.rpm
df5c9fc738798b2315e9515706d5c846  poppler-devel-0.5.4-4.4.el5_6.17.x86_64.rpm
51b83a5f350cd1ad87dacf77b97dd56f  poppler-utils-0.5.4-4.4.el5_6.17.x86_64.rpm

Source:
003d0dd8abbad2137f4f5618b81556b2  poppler-0.5.4-4.4.el5_6.17.src.rpm


-- 
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net



--

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 19:29:50 +
From: Johnny Hughes 
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2011:0517  CentOS 5 i386 poppler
Update
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Message-ID: <20110518192950.ga11...@chakra.karan.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2011:0517 

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-0517.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename ) 

i386:
de889c1f1b58b27047af23548fe611e1  poppler-0.5.4-4.4.el5_6.17.i386.rpm
89ba327fbd3eb1ccb305a50147aa920c  poppler-devel-0.5.4-4.4.el5_6.17.i386.rpm
8850fd5d9d5cfc0b807b4dcca3af9a76  poppler-utils-0.5.4-4.4.el5_6.17.i386.rpm

Source:
003d0dd8abbad2137f4f5618b81556b2  poppler-0.5.4-4.4.el5_6.17.src.rpm


-- 
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net



--

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 19:31:13 +
From: Johnny Hughes 
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2011:0514  CentOS 5 x86_64 nss_ldap
Update
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Message-ID: <20110518193113.ga12...@chakra.karan.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2011:0514 

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-0514.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename ) 

x86_64:
d31de4403698b37d650c3729484d2503  nss_ldap-253-37.el5_6.1.i386.rpm
990fdd1f942cabb9b20ce9071dc3f13b  nss_ldap-253-37.el5_6.1.x86_64.rpm

Source:
1d0ae919fa2c1952dba05dca2c9a7dd6  nss_ldap-253-37.el5_6.1.src.rpm


-- 
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net



--

Message: 4
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 19:31:13 +
From: Johnny Hughes 
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2011:0514  CentOS 5 i386 nss_ldap
Update
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Message-ID: <201105181

Re: [CentOS] OT: RHEL 6.1 is out

[m . roth]

R P Herrold wrote:
> On Thu, 19 May 2011, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>
>> started holding my breath when RHEL 6 Beta was released, and my face is
>> not blue any more but totally black :-)
>
> Yowzer -- Zombies!!!

The CDC can help with that


mark


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