Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
I have found at times the community to CentOS-leadership relations to be quite poor. I have witnessed the summary judgements against people like Dag Wieers driving them away. Useful members driven out. I have seen release dates slip for months at a time with no word from the people in control of CentOS. The project has come into jeopardy many times. CentOS 5.4 was a fiasco. I have always suspected that after each release the exact build environment / script to create the RPMs is not made available to bring about this end - whereby the "secret sauce" of how to build the SRPMs on ftp.redhat.com are still kept hidden by the CentOS leaders. This is not a community project. Its a free rebuild with all the mock magic hidden by those who just got a huge payout. I am also wondering if the serially rude and dismissive behavior by some of the folks in control of CentOS will continue now that they cash massive checks from Redhat. I guess when you sell out one needs to be more polite. Now we need to possibly find a new rebuild. I think that release dates will still be something that the leaders here do whatever and whenever they want. I think that there will be significant differences in RHEL and CentOS now. I think the secret build sauce will remain hidden from view and the people receiving big pay for Redhat will serve their new masters well. I've been a user since the WBEL/cAos days. I worry about this state of affairs. Deeply. -- View this message in context: http://centos.1050465.n5.nabble.com/Re-CentOS-CentOS-announce-CentOS-Project-joins-forces-with-Red-Hat-tp5723460p5723788.html Sent from the CentOS mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Your opinion about RHCSA certification
On 01/16/2014 09:37 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote: >> I too am studying for the RHCSA.and while it IS tough (SO different >> from when I had to study for Windows 2000 Server Administration certs!) >> I wonder if the fact that Red Hat is about to release version 7 if the >> 6.x exams are still going to be valid?...and if so..for how much longer? >> > http://www.redhat.com/training/certifications/recertification.html > > "RHCSA is considered current for 3 years from the date it is earned." > > As RHEL 7 is soon to be released you should take exam soon or take exam > with RHEL 7 > > > -- > Eero, RHCE > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos Then I will indeed have to step up the pace! EGO II ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Your opinion about RHCSA certification
On 01/17/2014 02:35 AM, Michael Klitgaard wrote: > Jangs book is really thorough, but if you ask me, it's too big. > I studied for approx. 5 weekends and never made it half way through the > book, due to it being so long and covering way to much. Eg. it covers > sendmail and postfix setup, while postfix is the default. Red Hat's course > only covers postfix. > I took the RH300 rapid course, where there is 4 days classroom training and > 1 day exam with both RHCSA and RHCE. > I took the course with out ever setting up an email server or ftp server > before, so it is possible to get through it without knowning everything. I > actually learned a few things on the RHCSA I could use an hour later in the > RHCE exam :) > > I scored 300 on RHCSA and 260 on RHCE. > > > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Earl A Ramirez wrote: > >> On 17 January 2014 02:32, Eero Volotinen wrote: >> - What do you think about it? - Did you find it useful? - Do you have any advices? >>> Yes, RHCSA is good start. You should buy this book: >>> >>> >> http://www.amazon.com/RHCSA-Linux-Certification-Study-Edition/dp/0071765654/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1389925859&sr=8-1&keywords=RHCE >>> >>> +1 I use this book and earned my RHCSA and RHCE on RHEL 6, you will have >> to do a little research on LUKS though apart from that it's the best I have >> seen on the market for these exams. >> >> >>> Eero, RHCE >>> ___ >>> CentOS mailing list >>> CentOS@centos.org >>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >>> >> >> >> -- >> Kind Regards >> Earl Ramirez >> ___ >> 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 I assume those are "passing grades" for those exams? I wonder if they're "summed" together for a total overall score? And I don't think I could handle BOTH the RHCSA and the RHCE in ONE DAY!?I would need time for my hands to stop shaking and my pulse rate to return to something normal from taking the first one!(always nervous during exams...ever since H.S.!) EGO II ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos6.5 -- Broadcom BCM4313 -- having trouble connecting
op 09-01-14 11:41, Johan Vermeulen schreef:
> op 19-12-13 12:38, Johan Vermeulen schreef:
>> op 19-12-13 12:23, wwp schreef:
>>> Hello Johan,
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 12:08:17 +0100 Johan Vermeulen
>>> wrote:
>>>
Dear All,
I'm having trouble on 2 laptops Lenovo B580 since upgrading to Centos6.5.
( Because it's a Lenovo I cannot switch the network card for a better
supported network card. )
There on the latest kernel :
root@jac network-scripts]# uname -a
Linux jac.cawdekempen 2.6.32-431.1.2.0.1.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Fri Dec 13
13:06:13 UTC 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
With the help of the Elrepo Broadcom page I got the driver and that part
works fine.
The network card works :
# vi /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules
# PCI device 0x14e4:0x4727 (wl)
SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="?*",
ATTR{address}=="c0:14:3d:c1:f6:ef", ATTR{type}=="1", KERNEL=="eth*",
NAME="eth1"
# uname -a
eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr C0:14:3D:C1:F6:EF
inet6 addr: fe80::c214:3dff:fec1:f6ef/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:651
TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b)
Interrupt:17
But I cannot connect to any wireless network with neither of the machines.
I click on the gnome-nm-applet and type in the password.
[root@jac network-scripts]# tail -f /var/log/messages
Dec 19 11:10:17 jac NetworkManager[2148]: Config: added
'scan_ssid' value '1'
Dec 19 11:10:17 jac NetworkManager[2148]: Config: added
'key_mgmt' value 'WPA-PSK'
Dec 19 11:10:17 jac NetworkManager[2148]: Config: added 'psk'
value ''
Dec 19 11:10:17 jac NetworkManager[2148]: Config: added 'group'
value 'TKIP CCMP'
Dec 19 11:10:17 jac NetworkManager[2148]: Activation (eth1) Stage
2 of 5 (Device Configure) complete.
Dec 19 11:10:17 jac NetworkManager[2148]: Config: set interface
ap_scan to 1
Dec 19 11:10:17 jac NetworkManager[2148]: (eth1): supplicant
connection state: inactive -> scanning
Dec 19 11:10:18 jac NetworkManager[2148]: (eth1): supplicant
connection state: scanning -> associating
Dec 19 11:10:28 jac NetworkManager[2148]: (eth1): supplicant
connection state: associating -> disconnected
Dec 19 11:10:28 jac NetworkManager[2148]: (eth1): supplicant
connection state: disconnected -> scanning
Dec 19 11:10:29 jac NetworkManager[2148]: (eth1): supplicant
connection state: scanning -> associating
Dec 19 11:10:39 jac NetworkManager[2148]: (eth1): supplicant
connection state: associating -> disconnected
Dec 19 11:10:39 jac NetworkManager[2148]: (eth1): supplicant
connection state: disconnected -> scanning
Dec 19 11:10:40 jac NetworkManager[2148]: (eth1): supplicant
connection state: scanning -> associating
Dec 19 11:10:42 jac NetworkManager[2148]: Activation
(eth1/wireless): association took too long.
Dec 19 11:10:42 jac NetworkManager[2148]: (eth1): device state
change: 5 -> 6 (reason 0)
Dec 19 11:10:42 jac NetworkManager[2148]: Activation
(eth1/wireless): asking for new secrets
Dec 19 11:10:42 jac NetworkManager[2148]: Couldn't disconnect
supplicant interface: Method "Disconnect" with signature "" on interface
"fi.epitest.hostap.WPASupplicant.Interface" doesn't exist#012.
Dec 19 11:10:42 jac NetworkManager[2148]: Couldn't disconnect
supplicant interface: Method "Disconnect" with signature "" on interface
"fi.epitest.hostap.WPASupplicant.Interface" doesn't exist#012.
Dec 19 11:10:42 jac NetworkManager[2148]: (eth1): supplicant
connection state: associating -> disconnected
Dec 19 11:10:43 jac NetworkManager[2148]: (eth1): device state
change: 6 -> 9 (reason 7)
Dec 19 11:10:43 jac NetworkManager[2148]: Activation (eth1)
failed for access point (Clive)
Dec 19 11:10:43 jac NetworkManager[2148]: Marking connection
'Auto Clive' invalid.
Dec 19 11:10:43 jac NetworkManager[2148]: Activation (eth1) failed.
Dec 19 11:10:43 jac NetworkManager[2148]: (eth1): device state
change: 9 -> 3 (reason 0)
Dec 19 11:10:43 jac NetworkManager[2148]: (eth1): deactivating
device (reason: 0).
googling for "centos6 WPASupplicant.Interface" doesn't exist#012" I
found this bug:
http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=5834
could this be the same issue?
>>> Got the exact same problem after upgrading to CentOS 6.5, and I was not
>>> the only one. The archives of this ML would bring you help, check t
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 01/16/2014 09:14 PM, Nux! wrote: > On 08.01.2014 01:04, Always Learning wrote: >> On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 21:09 +, Karanbir Singh wrote: >> >>> With great excitement I'd like to announce that we are joining the >>> Red >>> Hat family. The CentOS Project ( http://www.centos.org ) is joining >>> forces with Red Hat. Working as part of the Open Source and Standards >>> team ( http://community.redhat.com/ ) to foster rapid innovation >>> beyond the platform into the next generation of emerging >>> technologies. >>> Working alongside the Fedora and RHEL ecosystems, we hope to further >>> expand on the community offerings by providing a platform that is >>> easily consumed, by other projects to promote their code while we >>> maintain the established base. >> But there is more to Red Hat's de facto "take-over" including the >> imposition of USA's domestic law on citizens all around the world. >> >> The compulsory imposition of USA law on all Centos downloaders creates >> the possibility of being arrested in one's home country and sent to >> the >> USA for a criminal trial. A few people in Britain have been >> extradited >> to the USA for criminal trials for matters which are not criminal in >> Britain. >> >> Can anyone remember seeing this on the old Centos ? > These restrictions were always inherited. Theoretically if you use > cryptographic software developed in USA you are "bound" to these rules. > In many cases if you use for example OpenSSL in Windows, Ubuntu, > Android etc etc you are still affected (I think), it's just that now > it's written somewhere. > In practice this is not very relevant and also pretty unenforceable; > not to mention that - to my understanding - it contradicts the GPL. > RH needs to specify this legal bit so uncle Sam is happy. Just do > whatever everyone else does, ignore it. ITAR is a 1947 treaty the binds all signatures to treat cryptographic 'artifacts' as munitions and abide by the export restrictions that exist for all munitions. Period. Full stop. This includes Crackerjacks (tm) encoder rings that I played with as a kid! Really! Someone in the US State department figured this out. The only exception in the treaty is cryptographic academic papers (how we got pgpv3 exported, in book form); but even this got challenged because of the pgp export. And like all treaty provisions regarding munitions export, they are open to interpretaton and enforcement. I leave the rest of the logic, or lack thereof to you. (I lived this very closely back in the late '90s. I could, and have, tell you stories of the conversations back then) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 01/16/2014 10:45 PM, Stephen Harris wrote: > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 10:29:09PM -0500, Joseph Godino wrote: >> stating and what it was referring to. Please retract the word new. > That's the point though. If "you" (for generic values of "you") export > code under US legal restriction from the US then you're in breach of > US regulations. Whether you know about it or not. > > Fun, huh? > > If "you" run a mirror then you get to determine your legal risk and > whether you should keep the mirror. The CentOS team are not lawyers; > they can't tell you. > > It's a fun legal question as to who does the export; the person > making available for export on a web site or the person downloading > from that website. As far as I know it's not really settled. In > my opinion the RedHat wording is a prayer hoping that'll cover them :-) > But I'm not a lawyer, either! At one point a major unix manufacturer tried to get around this by having the crypto code written in another country by citizens of that country. They got shut down as re-exporting. In the end, they had to ship broken software that required customers to optain the critical code from this other country. This was part of our action to show how unenforceable ITAR was wrt cryptography as munitions. Some likened it to shipping guns without firing pins or ammo; which were readily available from other sources. But at any point, someone in State can decide someone's actions violate the law and go after them. Ask Phil Zimmerman... ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 08:04 -0500, Robert Moskowitz wrote: > The only exception in the treaty is cryptographic academic papers > (how > we got pgpv3 exported, in book form); but even this got challenged > because of the pgp export. Still have the sources and Windoze binaries from PGP 2. Those were the days :-) -- Paul. England, EU. Our systems are exclusively Linux. No Micro$oft Windoze here. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 08:04 -0500, Robert Moskowitz wrote: > The only exception in the treaty is cryptographic academic papers (how > we got pgpv3 exported, in book form); but even this got challenged > because of the pgp export. I really mean Still have the sources and M$ DOS binaries from PGP 2. Those were the days :-) -- Paul. England, EU. Our systems are exclusively Linux. No Micro$oft Windoze here. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
I see you haven't read announcements and explanations, or you haven't understood them. On 01/17/2014 10:14 AM, IonPacepa wrote: > I have found at times the community to CentOS-leadership relations to be > quite poor. > > I have witnessed the summary judgements against people like Dag Wieers > driving them away. Useful members driven out. > You ARE aware that RepoForge is forzen solid because Dag Wieers does not want to release control to others but has no time to build packages ready for build? I wonder how is that different of what you accuse CentOS devs did. FYI, I am not on either side, I do not accuse anyone, but I think every comment should be balanced. > I have seen release dates slip for months at a time with no word from the > people in control of CentOS. The project has come into jeopardy many times. > CentOS 5.4 was a fiasco. > > I have always suspected that after each release the exact build environment > / script to create the RPMs is not made available to bring about this end - > whereby the "secret sauce" of how to build the SRPMs on ftp.redhat.com are > still kept hidden by the CentOS leaders. This is not a community project. > Its a free rebuild with all the mock magic hidden by those who just got a > huge payout. I can understand that someone is not willing to explain "secret sauce" they spent 100's of hours poured into to make it work in their free time, just so others can jump in and create a competitor to their "product" thus invalidating their work with lesser gratification. I am first who would not do it. Not without monetary reward. Weather I personally liked it or not is irrelevant. Red Hat wants RHEV and their other products to have rebuilt versions. They need it so their products get bigger user base. It would be stupid to create entire community from scratch when CentOS only needs little help to open up and producing Variants, and then compete with CentOS. So Red Hat will get opensource rebuilds for RHEV and other products and CentOS gets second wind and opens up entire process. > > I am also wondering if the serially rude and dismissive behavior by some of > the folks in control of CentOS will continue now that they cash massive > checks from Redhat. I guess when you sell out one needs to be more polite. > > Now we need to possibly find a new rebuild. I think that release dates will > still be something that the leaders here do whatever and whenever they want. > I think that there will be significant differences in RHEL and CentOS now. I > think the secret build sauce will remain hidden from view and the people > receiving big pay for Redhat will serve their new masters well. Every one of "you", unhappy ones, could have created your own rebuild, you could have also teamed up and found sponsors from all those unhappy community members you say exist. So, where is the product of your open collaboration? > > I've been a user since the WBEL/cAos days. I worry about this state of > affairs. Deeply. > -- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 15:59 +0100, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: > Every one of "you", unhappy ones, could have created your own rebuild, > you could have also teamed up and found sponsors > from all those unhappy community members you say exist I lack knowledge of how the community inspired Centos project started. I remember squabbles over the domain name which was satisfactorily resolved. Not many people have the time and mental ability (both are needed) to acquire the knowledge to create a rebuilding of RHEL. Using Centos requires less intellectual effort than literally starting from the absolute beginning with RHEL sources. Thinking positively about Centos, we share as users/installers/administrators and problem solvers a really great and very practical alternative to the world of M$. Centos is used for millions, if not trillions, of operating systems. Many use it but very few contribute technical assistance or money to the continuing Centos project. Without Centos what would we do ? SL or the Debian family or the BSDs or Solaris ? Despite negative, unhappy and wrong things that have occurred, the Centos project has continued to our personal advantage. It would be nice if the unhappy things of the past could be amicably resolved and we all become one big, happy and very satisfied world-wide family. Lots of people have contributed directly in Centos or as package re-builders for Centos suitable repositories. To all those people, I would like to say "Thank You". > (Love is in the Air) Great to see you are still in love - she must be very special :-) -- Paul. England, EU. Our systems are exclusively Linux. No Micro$oft Windoze here. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Your opinion about RHCSA certification
They are two seperate exams, no summing of grades. You can fail the RHCSA and pass the RHCE, but the RHCE is not valid before after passing the RHCSA. Maximum points is 300, 210 is the passing mark. My heart was beating and I was a bit stressed when the RHCSA exam started, but there is more time do things on the RHCSA than the RHCE. When the RHCE exam started I was more calm, it just felt like more of the same, a warm start. I think I would have done worse on the RHCE exam if I had not just done the RHCSA. The RH300 is an expensive course, but my company paid, I only could get one week off for a course, so thought that I might as well try to get them both, two for almost the price of one. Sincerely Michael On 17 Jan 2014 11:14, "EGO.II-1" wrote: > > > On 01/17/2014 02:35 AM, Michael Klitgaard wrote: > > Jangs book is really thorough, but if you ask me, it's too big. > > I studied for approx. 5 weekends and never made it half way through the > > book, due to it being so long and covering way to much. Eg. it covers > > sendmail and postfix setup, while postfix is the default. Red Hat's course > > only covers postfix. > > I took the RH300 rapid course, where there is 4 days classroom training and > > 1 day exam with both RHCSA and RHCE. > > I took the course with out ever setting up an email server or ftp server > > before, so it is possible to get through it without knowning everything. I > > actually learned a few things on the RHCSA I could use an hour later in the > > RHCE exam :) > > > > I scored 300 on RHCSA and 260 on RHCE. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Earl A Ramirez wrote: > > > >> On 17 January 2014 02:32, Eero Volotinen wrote: > >> > - What do you think about it? > - Did you find it useful? > - Do you have any advices? > > >>> Yes, RHCSA is good start. You should buy this book: > >>> > >>> > >> http://www.amazon.com/RHCSA-Linux-Certification-Study-Edition/dp/0071765654/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1389925859&sr=8-1&keywords=RHCE > >>> > >>> +1 I use this book and earned my RHCSA and RHCE on RHEL 6, you will have > >> to do a little research on LUKS though apart from that it's the best I have > >> seen on the market for these exams. > >> > >> > >>> Eero, RHCE > >>> ___ > >>> CentOS mailing list > >>> CentOS@centos.org > >>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > >>> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Kind Regards > >> Earl Ramirez > >> ___ > >> 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 > I assume those are "passing grades" for those exams? I wonder if they're > "summed" together for a total overall score? And I don't think I could > handle BOTH the RHCSA and the RHCE in ONE DAY!?I would need time for > my hands to stop shaking and my pulse rate to return to something normal > from taking the first one!(always nervous during exams...ever since > H.S.!) > > > EGO II > ___ > 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] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
"Every one of "you", unhappy ones, could have created your own rebuild, " A lot of Redhat rebuild projects gave up their very existence to support a single CentOS. Not giving up the secret sauce is about control and power in the hand of a few that have now financially benefited and retain a dictatorship on roadmaps, release information and code. Community here is a consumer of a built OS, but there is no community in how it gets built. And with this centralized power comes the takeover and payouts. If Redhat wasnt trying to block OEL or SL or trying to control CentOS and make it different, they would simply offer RHEL for free on their own. This allows them to wean the world off of CentOS at what is likely to be a glacial pace at first then by Redhat we will have all given up. -- View this message in context: http://centos.1050465.n5.nabble.com/Re-CentOS-CentOS-announce-CentOS-Project-joins-forces-with-Red-Hat-tp5723460p5723799.html Sent from the CentOS mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
"You ARE aware that RepoForge is forzen solid because Dag Wieers does not want to release control to others but has no time to build packages ready for build" There is quite a bit of open-source surrounding rpmforge and rpmforge doesn't have the work "Community" it its very name. -- View this message in context: http://centos.1050465.n5.nabble.com/Re-CentOS-CentOS-announce-CentOS-Project-joins-forces-with-Red-Hat-tp5723460p5723800.html Sent from the CentOS mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
I view this as a takeover. I view this as a few who kept how to rebuild RHEL a state secret benefiting financially. I don't see how a community benefits when we cannot recreate for ourselves what is being done here. I don't see how we benefit when a large company comes in and buys their way into the board and pays off all members. Where is the Community's say in this? This is a payoff. Will we get releases sooner? Will we know how to rebuild the build environment for ourselves? What if Redhat slowly makes using CentOS painful to incentivize using RHEL? If Redhat had good intentions why don't they give unsupported RHEL for free themselves. Granted the probably want to keep OEL and the like from being able to freely rebuild and plagiarize and charge money for their stuff, but we , the Community, the masses of users, are stuck now between behemoths and their lackeys taking payouts throwing us whatever table scraps they want and we are powerless to change this. There is no makeworld or emerge world here, just binaries that magically get produced and peppered on an ftp whenever someone gets around to it. -- View this message in context: http://centos.1050465.n5.nabble.com/Re-CentOS-CentOS-announce-CentOS-Project-joins-forces-with-Red-Hat-tp5723460p5723801.html Sent from the CentOS mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
"Essentially Red Hat is slowly taking over and developing/assisting Centos to be a more regular and structure organisation. The fact that Red Hat now owns the Centos brand worries me but that's life. Absolutely nothing remains static." Interesting how a _community_ "Brand" can be bought. Seems that we get magical binaries for free but no insight into the build process or timelines to said creation. Surely this was done to keep OEL at bay, but we are still caught in the crossfire and the holders of the build secrets are getting $paid$ to keep the secret. This is opensource without useful makefiles. Something Sony and Cisco do. -- View this message in context: http://centos.1050465.n5.nabble.com/Re-CentOS-CentOS-announce-CentOS-Project-joins-forces-with-Red-Hat-tp5723460p5723802.html Sent from the CentOS mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 01/17/2014 04:35 PM, Always Learning wrote: > >> (Love is in the Air) > > Great to see you are still in love - she must be very special :-) > Actually, "Ljubo" in both my first and last name means closely to someone who loves, kisses someone. Ljubomir means "one who loves/kisses peace (peace = mir). "Ljuba" for example means "one you love", designates mostly females. So if you look and Internet as "cloud" in the "air", signature means I am still around :) -- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 01/17/2014 05:05 PM, IonPacepa wrote: > "You ARE aware that RepoForge is forzen solid because Dag Wieers does not > want to release control to others but has no time to build packages ready > for build" > > There is quite a bit of open-source surrounding rpmforge and rpmforge > doesn't have the work "Community" it its very name. I am on repoforge mailing list from 2008, and I know times when no package was built for several months, and guy working with Dag saying why got no responses from him. And when he has responded with "I do not have time", they where denied any option to build packages without him. If you are ignorant of this, then you need to dig into mailing list and learn true status, this being one-man show with helpers. If anything changed, I somehow missed it. -- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
IonPacepa wrote: > "Every one of "you", unhappy ones, could have created your own rebuild, " > > A lot of Redhat rebuild projects gave up their very existence to support a > single CentOS. > > Not giving up the secret sauce is about control and power in the hand of a > few that have now financially benefited and retain a dictatorship on > roadmaps, release information and code. > > Community here is a consumer of a built OS, but there is no community in > how it gets built. And with this centralized power comes the takeover and > payouts. Most projects have specially authorized people. This is a Good Thing... unless you really enjoy having a distro larded with malware and bugs that crackers, crooks, other organizations and governments have deliberately, or when IMSOHOT updates code with bugs galore. I'd prefer not to have any of that (or I'd be on, say, another distro that shall remain nameless but is also a style of hat mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 01/17/2014 05:03 PM, IonPacepa wrote: > "Every one of "you", unhappy ones, could have created your own rebuild," > > A lot of Redhat rebuild projects gave up their very existence to support a > single CentOS. > > Not giving up the secret sauce is about control and power in the hand of a > few that have now financially benefited and retain a dictatorship on > roadmaps, release information and code. > Path to CentOS core member is simple. You join CentOS Q&A team, and after some time proving you are reliable, you might join them. Unless you prove your self, you can not even get job of supervisor to a bunch of clerks in supermarket, right? It is dangerous to allow unproven persons messing with such trusted OS like CentOS. > Community here is a consumer of a built OS, but there is no community in how > it gets built. And with this centralized power comes the takeover and > payouts. > > If Redhat wasnt trying to block OEL or SL or trying to control CentOS and > make it different, they would simply offer RHEL for free on their own. This > allows them to wean the world off of CentOS at what is likely to be a > glacial pace at first then by Redhat we will have all given up. > So you just skipped everything else I said and just reiterated what you said in first e-mail? Ok, what ever, I am done wasting time on you. -- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 05:55:54PM +0100, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: > > Ok, what ever, I am done wasting time on you. Excellent. Now if others would stop responding to the trolls it would be even better. John -- I don't know. Just because we are stupid doesn't mean everybody else was. -- JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon, arguing against increased regulation as a response to his company's $2 billion loss, in a conference call, 10 May 2012 pgpcWsHd3Pwft.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 01/17/2014 05:57 PM, John R. Dennison wrote: > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 05:55:54PM +0100, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: >> >> Ok, what ever, I am done wasting time on you. > > Excellent. Now if others would stop responding to the trolls it would > be even better. > Sorry, I saw other troll e-mails of his after I wrote 3 responces in total. Only then I saw what's up. -- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 01/17/2014 10:03 AM, IonPacepa wrote: > "Every one of "you", unhappy ones, could have created your own rebuild, " > > A lot of Redhat rebuild projects gave up their very existence to support a > single CentOS. > > Not giving up the secret sauce is about control and power in the hand of a > few that have now financially benefited and retain a dictatorship on > roadmaps, release information and code. I really didn't want to get dragged into this, and this will probably be my only post on the matter. But I feel the need to address some 'facts' that have been laid out. Let's clear a few points up here: The benefit we gained is time. We are able to work on this fulltime now instead of after hours following a job doing something else. As to not giving up the secret sauce, we publish the changelog and packages we've had to modify to deal with TM compliance. It's in the wiki for every release. The build scripts for isos were for the early releases were on the mirrors and are still published on the vault. What we didn't do was create a support mechanism to fracture the community every time someone got an idea. That seeks only to tear away at the community rather than to build it up. Several groups took the distribution we put out and changed it to suit their own needs just fine. ClarkConnect as an example. > Community here is a consumer of a built OS, but there is no community in how > it gets built. And with this centralized power comes the takeover and > payouts. Please stop the FUD here. The centralized power you're talking about is the origin of the source. It was never ours. We, SL, Puias/SpringDale and the rest all had to go through the same motions. > If Redhat wasnt trying to block OEL or SL or trying to control CentOS and > make it different, they would simply offer RHEL for free on their own. This > allows them to wean the world off of CentOS at what is likely to be a > glacial pace at first then by Redhat we will have all given up. Hugely incorrect and outright FUD. The point of this is to *build* community. Offering free RHEL would fracture and destroy several communities, as well as damaging likely damaging Red Hat's reputation in the eyes of everyone inside those communities and anyone outside who wanted to throw stones. -- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 17/01/14 11:12 AM, IonPacepa wrote: > I view this as a takeover. I view this as a few who kept how to rebuild RHEL > a state secret benefiting financially. I don't see how a community benefits > when we cannot recreate for ourselves what is being done here. I don't see > how we benefit when a large company comes in and buys their way into the > board and pays off all members. Where is the Community's say in this? This > is a payoff. Will we get releases sooner? Will we know how to rebuild the > build environment for ourselves? What if Redhat slowly makes using CentOS > painful to incentivize using RHEL? If Redhat had good intentions why don't > they give unsupported RHEL for free themselves. Granted the probably want to > keep OEL and the like from being able to freely rebuild and plagiarize and > charge money for their stuff, but we , the Community, the masses of users, > are stuck now between behemoths and their lackeys taking payouts throwing us > whatever table scraps they want and we are powerless to change this. > > There is no makeworld or emerge world here, just binaries that magically get > produced and peppered on an ftp whenever someone gets around to it. One of the beautiful things about open source is the ability to fork, create a new project, etc. CentOS was never under any requirement to release their build methods. Whether that was a good or bad choice is not very relevant now. If you (and others) feel that the build process needed to create a binary compatible is a worthy goal, you can start a project to do just that. -- Digimer Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without access to education? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Jim Perrin wrote: > > > What we didn't do was create a support mechanism to fracture the > community every time someone got an idea. That seeks only to tear away > at the community rather than to build it up. Is that how you describe every other open source project? Ones where the tools to rebuild are easily available? Are they all really that bad? > Several groups took the distribution we put out and changed it to suit > their own needs just fine. ClarkConnect as an example. I think you are missing a bit of history in that project and its clearos successor. Notably the issues around the delay of a 6.x release. Not to revisit those issues, but still everyone _must_ stay away of the dependency chain and the potential of upstream problems when that dependency is forced. > Hugely incorrect and outright FUD. The point of this is to *build* > community. Offering free RHEL would fracture and destroy several > communities, as well as damaging likely damaging Red Hat's reputation in > the eyes of everyone inside those communities and anyone outside who > wanted to throw stones. I strongly disagree with that. Red Hat's community and reputation were just fine back in the day when they did not restrict access to binaries. In fact, if it were not for those days, we'd probably all be using debian. Their problem would be in how to enforce the requirement that all copies of RHEL in an organization have to be under paid support to have any if not for the distinction between the rebuilds and their own. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
John R. Dennison wrote: > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 05:55:54PM +0100, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: >> >> Ok, what ever, I am done wasting time on you. > > Excellent. Now if others would stop responding to the trolls it would > be even better. > Can't resist: I think he's trying to get our goat... and everyone knows what happens when a troll runs into a goat mark "your folks *did* tell you that story, right?" ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 01/17/2014 10:15 AM, IonPacepa wrote: > "Essentially Red Hat is slowly taking over and developing/assisting > Centos to be a more regular and structure organisation. The fact that > Red Hat now owns the Centos brand worries me but that's life. Absolutely > nothing remains static." > > Interesting how a _community_ "Brand" can be bought. > > Seems that we get magical binaries for free but no insight into the build > process or timelines to said creation. > > Surely this was done to keep OEL at bay, but we are still caught in the > crossfire and the holders of the build secrets are getting $paid$ to keep > the secret. > > This is opensource without useful makefiles. Something Sony and Cisco do. What the heck are you talking about ... rpmbuild -ba .src.rpm It builds if you install the proper packages from the CentOS repos. Using mock and a CentOS Tree can reproduce CentOS just as easily. We are creating git.centos.org so that everyone can look at and build any of the packages. We are creating a variants program so that projects can take CentOS as a base and create (on our servers) respins of the ISOs and/or repositories that get branded as CentOS. They can collaborate, ON OUR SYSTEMS, to build things for the community to use. I have no earthly idea what you are talking about ... although, you are certainly free to use (or not use) CentOS however you choose. I just wish you would research your fact before you post garbage on the list. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 13:53 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote: > What the heck are you talking about ... rpmbuild -ba .src.rpm > > It builds if you install the proper packages from the CentOS repos. > > Using mock and a CentOS Tree can reproduce CentOS just as easily. > > We are creating git.centos.org so that everyone can look at and build > any of the packages. > > We are creating a variants program so that projects can take CentOS as > a base and create (on our servers) respins of the ISOs and/or > repositories that get branded as CentOS. They can collaborate, ON OUR > SYSTEMS, to build things for the community to use. Sounds interesting and exciting. Its needs to get more publicity. -- Paul. England, EU. Our systems are exclusively Linux. No Micro$oft Windoze here. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 1/17/2014 8:12 AM, IonPacepa wrote: > don't see > how we benefit when a large company comes in and buys their way into the > board and pays off all members. Where is the Community's say in this? This > is a payoff. Will we get releases sooner? Will we know how to rebuild the > build environment for ourselves? What if Redhat slowly makes using CentOS > painful to incentivize using RHEL? If Redhat had good intentions why don't > they give unsupported RHEL for free themselves. Granted the probably want to > keep OEL and the like from being able to freely rebuild and plagiarize and > charge money for their stuff, but we , the Community, the masses of users, > are stuck now between behemoths and their lackeys taking payouts throwing us > whatever table scraps they want and we are powerless to change this. Sorry, could not resist...:-) reminds me of, Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 1/17/2014 12:11, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Jim Perrin wrote: > >> Offering free RHEL would fracture and destroy several communities, > > I strongly disagree with that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_distributions I count 115 Debian/Ubuntu variants. (Could be off by a few, since my eyes started to cross there near the end.) 15 of those are directly under the Ubuntu umbrella; apparently they feel the need to capture at least a handful of these forks, to prevent their "community" from going all to pieces. That leaves a hundred non-official forks. I count only 10 RHEL derivatives, plus RHEL itself. If you throw in Fedora and its derivatives, then the total goes to 32, which only goes to prove my (and Jim's) point: the more "open" Fedora branch gets forked more often. Anyway, if you want a wide-open Linux, Les, you know where to get it. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014, Digimer wrote: > CentOS was never under any requirement to release their build methods. > Whether that was a good or bad choice is not very relevant now. I'd thought that the GPL's said differently. >From a subsequennt post, I gather that there is disagreement on whether CentOS has done so. -- Michael henne...@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu "SCSI is NOT magic. There are *fundamental technical reasons* why it is necessary to sacrifice a young goat to your SCSI chain now and then." -- John Woods ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Warren Young wrote: > > Anyway, if you want a wide-open Linux, Les, you know where to get it. Sigh..., It's complicated. I want stability and reliable security updates. But I don't like being dependent on any single entity to provide that. Maybe that goes back to relying on some AT&T unix systems in what seems like another life. Even though semi-compatible alternatives were available, being forced to change was somewhat painful. So I don't necessarily want wide-open, just a little more open than being married. I don't really think the CentOS team has an evil plan here, but they should take it as a compliment that I think they are smart enough to fool me if they did want to do something like inject a hidden backdoor with their builds. But, the bigger question is where it leaves us if they just decide to quit after assimilating most of the related systems under a build ecosystem that no one else can reproduce easily. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 01/17/2014 10:12 AM, IonPacepa wrote: > I view this as a takeover. I view this as a few who kept how to rebuild RHEL > a state secret benefiting financially. I don't see how a community benefits > when we cannot recreate for ourselves what is being done here. I don't see > how we benefit when a large company comes in and buys their way into the > board and pays off all members. Where is the Community's say in this? This > is a payoff. Will we get releases sooner? Will we know how to rebuild the > build environment for ourselves? What if Redhat slowly makes using CentOS > painful to incentivize using RHEL? If Redhat had good intentions why don't > they give unsupported RHEL for free themselves. Granted the probably want to > keep OEL and the like from being able to freely rebuild and plagiarize and > charge money for their stuff, but we , the Community, the masses of users, > are stuck now between behemoths and their lackeys taking payouts throwing us > whatever table scraps they want and we are powerless to change this. > > There is no makeworld or emerge world here, just binaries that magically get > produced and peppered on an ftp whenever someone gets around to it. And I view you as unbelievably dense ... how about you actually see something tangible actually CHANGE for the worse before you make your proclamations of the end of CentOS. When something happens that actually takes something away that is important, you can then come back and post about it. If a frog had wings it would not bump its ass on the ground when it jumped. That statement is as relevant as your proclamations of doom before anything has changed in any way. This has absolutely NOTHING to do with CentOS the base OS or any restrictions to or for anything ... it has to do with adding the ability for the community (Like Xen4, like RDO, like GlusterFS, like OpenStack Origin, like OpenNebula, like Ceph, like RackSpace, like , being able to start a community project, on OUR HARDWARE, and build things to use with CentOS by the community. If the source code is available, any one can build it ... both Red Hat and CentOS already all the source code available. Every package that is changed in CentOS and every srpm (changed or not) is published. All it takes is time to build and compare and build again in the proper order. Some things, like a dot zero (ie, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0) release take a lot of time to figure out the proper build order and mechanics .. which is why there is http://seven.centos.org/ . We (The CentOS Project) specifically went out and got permission to get this site up and discuss, from the beginning of the first beta release of rhel7b1, the ability to build this software. How to get it to build, what is required (rhel7b1, f19, other packages from rawhide, etc.). We are doing it in the public, publishing mock configs and everything else on git.centos.org: https://git.centos.org/summary/sig-core!bld-seven.git We will, it the coming weeks, publish our beanstalk client (nazar) and build system (reimzul) on that git site as you can see in: https://git.centos.org/summary/centos-git-common.git We could not possibly be more open than this. In summary, opinions are like ... well, you know the rest. Opinions are a dime a dozen. Actions are relevant. Our actions show we want to continue to provide the best OS in the world to the community AND we want to also bring in many more members to make CentOS better than ever. Take a look at the centos-devel mailing list at all the groups that want to start a new Special Interest Group: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2014-January/thread.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 01/17/2014 01:57 PM, Always Learning wrote: > On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 13:53 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote: > >> What the heck are you talking about ... rpmbuild -ba .src.rpm >> >> It builds if you install the proper packages from the CentOS repos. >> >> Using mock and a CentOS Tree can reproduce CentOS just as easily. >> >> We are creating git.centos.org so that everyone can look at and build >> any of the packages. >> >> We are creating a variants program so that projects can take CentOS as >> a base and create (on our servers) respins of the ISOs and/or >> repositories that get branded as CentOS. They can collaborate, ON OUR >> SYSTEMS, to build things for the community to use. > > Sounds interesting and exciting. Its needs to get more publicity. > The centos-devel mailing list has had more traffic in the last 10 days than it had in the previous 9 months ... I'd say that some people have figured it out :) It is also a link on the front page to variants/SIGs: http://www.centos.org/variants/ We are not ready to actually create these yet, as we need to get more infrastructure and processes in place ... but we are discussing how we are going to do it and getting ready now. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > Snip... > In summary, opinions are like ... well, you know the rest. Opinions are a dime a dozen. Actions are relevant. Our actions show we want to continue to provide the best OS in the world to the community AND we want to also bring in many more members to make CentOS better than ever. --Snip +1 from me I like the direction and the additional openness, I believe it is headed in a better direction, thanks for all the hard work! :) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > But, the bigger question is where it leaves us if > they just decide to quit after assimilating most of the related > systems under a build ecosystem that no one else can reproduce easily. > > I don't expect that it would ever be necessary, but it wouldn't be terribly difficult to reproduce the distro from source packages. It would require a lot of work and a lot of build time, but it's not really very difficult. The most challenging component would be the initial bootstrap build, we could produce altered trademarks packages in less than an hour. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 1/17/2014 13:33, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Warren Young wrote: >> >> Anyway, if you want a wide-open Linux, Les, you know where to get it. > > Sigh..., It's complicated. I want stability and reliable security > updates. But I don't like being dependent on any single entity to > provide that. You want your Linux to be under control, but not controlled. Is that it? :) Someone has to have their hand on the tiller. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 01/17/2014 09:33 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Warren Young wrote: > I don't really think the CentOS team has an evil plan here, but they > should take it as a compliment that I think they are smart enough to > fool me if they did want to do something like inject a hidden backdoor > with their builds. That is reasonable fear, but unless you are going to build everything yourself, you can never be sure in anyone else. And even if you have an accessible build system, there is a question if it was compromised in a way that others can not notice, but producing backdoor. So it all comes down to trust vs convenience. -- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On 01/17/2014 02:33 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > But, the bigger question is where it leaves us if > they just decide to quit after assimilating most of the related > systems under a build ecosystem that no one else can reproduce easily. Les, http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-build-reports combined with https://git.centos.org/summary/sig-core!bld-seven.git and https://git.centos.org/summary/centos-git-common.git (when everything is published ... we are getting it on there) Those will mean that just about anyone COULD build it if they wanted to ... were we to stop. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] CentOS Project joins forces with Red Hat
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Warren Young wrote: >> >> Sigh..., It's complicated. I want stability and reliable security >> updates. But I don't like being dependent on any single entity to >> provide that. > > You want your Linux to be under control, but not controlled. Is that it? :) Controlled as in having a currently authoritative version, but not secret or restricted beyond not calling something different the same name. > Someone has to have their hand on the tiller. Yes, but if the boat sinks it would be nice if the blueprints didn't go down with the ship. (Or even if it goes off in a wildly wrong direction...).Anyway, per Johnny's comment that it is all going to be published - that's all anyone could ask. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] rkhunter
I updated java-1.7.0-openjdk a few hours ago - it *was* listed as a critical security update, and I don't want yelling from rkhunter. The man page tells me I can tell it rkhunter --propupd ... but it doesn't know the name above as a package. Been googling a bit, and cannot find a good example of a package (other than the manpage's coreutil). Anyone got an example, and/or why it doesn't know this package? mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] mail tools preferences?
We don't have enough arguments here I see that thunderbird's deprecated for RHEL 7, and they recommend evolution. I've certainly had some annoyances in the last couple-three years with t-bird. So, what are people's preferred mail tools, other than t-bird (or maybe mutt or pine )? mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mail tools preferences?
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 05:13:05PM -0500, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > We don't have enough arguments here > > I see that thunderbird's deprecated for RHEL 7, and they recommend > evolution. I've certainly had some annoyances in the last couple-three > years with t-bird. So, what are people's preferred mail tools, other than > t-bird (or maybe mutt or pine )? sylpheed will do most things--or claws-mail, which, IIRC, is a fork of sylpheed. I suspect that even if they discontinue it completely there will always be 3rd party rpms for it. As for me, at home I use mutt, at work, on a FreeBSD box, I use mutt and thunderbird, because it's so easy to make filters with it. -- Scott Robbins PGP keyID EB3467D6 ( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 ) gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mail tools preferences?
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 17:13:05 -0500 m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > I see that thunderbird's deprecated for RHEL 7, and they recommend > evolution. I've certainly had some annoyances in the last couple-three > years with t-bird. So, what are people's preferred mail tools, other than > t-bird (or maybe mutt or pine )? My personal favourite mail client is Sylpheed. I've been using it for years and like it rather a lot. Centos rpms are available on my website for anyone who wants them. -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mail tools preferences?
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 17:13 -0500, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > So, what are people's preferred mail tools, other than > t-bird (or maybe mutt or pine )? Evolution 2.12.3 on C5. -- Paul. England, EU. Our systems are exclusively Linux. No Micro$oft Windoze here. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mail tools preferences?
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 4:13 PM, wrote: > We don't have enough arguments here > > I see that thunderbird's deprecated for RHEL 7, and they recommend > evolution. I've certainly had some annoyances in the last couple-three > years with t-bird. So, what are people's preferred mail tools, other than > t-bird (or maybe mutt or pine )? Gmail's web interface is very low-maintenance... And if you tweak the options to advance when you delete or archive, surprisingly easy to use. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mail tools preferences?
On 17.01.2014 22:13, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > We don't have enough arguments here > > I see that thunderbird's deprecated for RHEL 7, and they recommend > evolution. I've certainly had some annoyances in the last couple-three > years with t-bird. So, what are people's preferred mail tools, other > than > t-bird (or maybe mutt or pine )? I use Cone a lot, it's part of the Courier project, I also use Roundcube a lot for lack of a better webmail. For a graphical client, watch out for Geary, https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Geary -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mail tools preferences?
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 17:21 -0500, Scott Robbins wrote: > sylpheed will do most things--or claws-mail, which, IIRC, is a fork of > sylpheed. I find Claws is better than Sylpheed. Claws uses the same data files as Sylpheed. -- Paul. England, EU. Our systems are exclusively Linux. No Micro$oft Windoze here. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rkhunter
On 17/01/14 21:37, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > I updated java-1.7.0-openjdk a few hours ago - it *was* listed as a > critical security update, and I don't want yelling from rkhunter. The man > page tells me I can tell it rkhunter --propupd ... but it > doesn't know the name above as a package. Been googling a bit, and cannot > find a good example of a package (other than the manpage's coreutil). > > Anyone got an example, and/or why it doesn't know this package? rkhunter will only know about the package if it is monitoring any of the package files in its (rkhunter) file properties database. By default I don't think it monitors anything that the java package provides. As such, rkhunter shouldn't issue any warnings about it. John. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] rkhunter
John Horne wrote: > > On 17/01/14 21:37, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: >> I updated java-1.7.0-openjdk a few hours ago - it *was* listed as a >> critical security update, and I don't want yelling from rkhunter. The >> man page tells me I can tell it rkhunter --propupd ... but it >> doesn't know the name above as a package. Been googling a bit, and >> cannot find a good example of a package (other than the manpage's coreutil). >> >> Anyone got an example, and/or why it doesn't know this package? > rkhunter will only know about the package if it is monitoring any of the > package files in its (rkhunter) file properties database. By default I > don't think it monitors anything that the java package provides. As > such, rkhunter shouldn't issue any warnings about it. Ah - I was suspecting that. Thanks for confirming. mark "oh, good, not another 300 log emails to go through Monday" ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mail tools preferences?
On 01/17/2014 04:13 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > We don't have enough arguments here > > I see that thunderbird's deprecated for RHEL 7, and they recommend > evolution. I've certainly had some annoyances in the last couple-three > years with t-bird. So, what are people's preferred mail tools, other than > t-bird (or maybe mutt or pine )? > I will be using thunderbird from somewhere .. even if I have to build it myself signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mail tools preferences?
On Jan 17, 2014, at 2:13 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: > We don't have enough arguments here > > I see that thunderbird's deprecated for RHEL 7, and they recommend > evolution. I've certainly had some annoyances in the last couple-three > years with t-bird. So, what are people's preferred mail tools, other than > t-bird (or maybe mutt or pine )? > >mark When on Linux systems, I tend to use KMail, as I’m not a very GNOME-y guy. That said, I’ve had more issues with Evolution with it trashing the datastore of it’s messages than T-bird, so I’ll be a little annoyed with having to deal with that for my users if that still happens -- Gary L. Greene, Jr. Sr. Systems Administrator IT Operations Minerva Networks, Inc. Cell: +1 (650) 704-6633 signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] gui email clients available centos 6.5
Hi I decided to also use Centos, when RedHat took ownership. so I'm learning the ropes. :-) I have a question, are Thunderbird and evolution the only gui based email clients available for centos yum repos? Thanks ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] gui email clients available centos 6.5
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 04:18:09PM -0800, Edward M wrote: > Hi > > I decided to also use Centos, when RedHat took ownership. so I'm > learning the ropes. :-) > I have a question, are Thunderbird and evolution the only gui based > email clients > available for centos yum repos? While I'm not sure if they're available from the official repos, sylpheed and claws-mail are both available from 3rd party repos. (I think claws-mail, at least, is available from EPEL.) -- Scott Robbins PGP keyID EB3467D6 ( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 ) gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mail tools preferences?
My problem with Evolution is that it's not a mail tool, it's "a personal information management application" (their words). I don't want a calendar and I only barely want an address book; I do want something that operates without a server daemon (other than SMTP), against a local-disk-only mail store; and I want to be able to access that mail store from a command-line MUA. Admittedly I haven't tried a recent version of Evolution, because I hated it so much the last time. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] gui email clients available centos 6.5
# repoquery --repofrompath foo, https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/ --repoid=foo -i --search mail Looks like EPEL has claws and seamonkey, plus a few webmail apps. On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Scott Robbins wrote: > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 04:18:09PM -0800, Edward M wrote: > > Hi > > > > I decided to also use Centos, when RedHat took ownership. so I'm > > learning the ropes. :-) > > I have a question, are Thunderbird and evolution the only gui based > > email clients > > available for centos yum repos? > > While I'm not sure if they're available from the official repos, sylpheed > and claws-mail are both available from 3rd party repos. (I think > claws-mail, at least, is available from EPEL.) > > -- > Scott Robbins > PGP keyID EB3467D6 > ( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 ) > gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6 > > ___ > 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] mail tools preferences?
I find gmail very useful for some things, but it always feel a little tainted by it. I really wish there was an open source webmail app that could come closer to matching it. On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 4:13 PM, wrote: > > We don't have enough arguments here > > > > I see that thunderbird's deprecated for RHEL 7, and they recommend > > evolution. I've certainly had some annoyances in the last couple-three > > years with t-bird. So, what are people's preferred mail tools, other than > > t-bird (or maybe mutt or pine )? > > Gmail's web interface is very low-maintenance... And if you tweak the > options to advance when you delete or archive, surprisingly easy to > use. > > -- > Les Mikesell >lesmikes...@gmail.com > ___ > 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] mail tools preferences?
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 17:32 -0800, Bart Schaefer wrote: > My problem with Evolution is that it's not a mail tool, it's "a > personal information management application" (their words). I don't > want a calendar and I only barely want an address book; I do want > something that operates without a server daemon (other than SMTP), > against a local-disk-only mail store; and I want to be able to access > that mail store from a command-line MUA. On my main working machine I have Exim and Evolution. Local Exim receives incoming mail from the network servers (MTAs, mail transfer agents). The mail is deposited on the local hard disk. Evolution uses those files. Outgoing mail sent by Evolution can go via the local Exim server or direct to any of the network servers. In addition, Evolution can also collect POP3. Never used Evolution's calendar and personal management things. I write my own applications to store and manipulate data (Apache, MySQL, PHP etc.). I can send emails from a web page with a few clicks. It is a lot faster than using an email client. Occasionally my C5 version of Evolution can mess-up a mail queue's index description of the emails in that queue. It only seems to happen with more than 3,000 emails in the queue. Its easy to drag the contents to another queue, 'expunge' the Trash, drag the emails back to the original queue, then carry-on normally. Other than that, Evolution works well. Its a professional application for office type work. -- Paul. England, EU. Our systems are exclusively Linux. No Micro$oft Windoze here. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mail tools preferences?
On 01/18/2014 11:29 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 4:13 PM, wrote: We don't have enough arguments here I see that thunderbird's deprecated for RHEL 7, and they recommend evolution. I've certainly had some annoyances in the last couple-three years with t-bird. So, what are people's preferred mail tools, other than t-bird (or maybe mutt or pine )? Gmail's web interface is very low-maintenance... Have to take exception to this comment - the interface changes at the whim of google and I have to relearn - recently the changes have come with increasing frequency and major impact on how they operate - a quick search shows many folk are unhappy with the direction they are headed. And if you tweak the options to advance when you delete or archive, surprisingly easy to use. My daughter is just wrapping up her doctoral thesis and the university she attends uses gmail for their mail system. The changes over the last 12 months have caused her to miss incoming mail as gmail associates incoming mail with other threads, and struggle to manage her account - she is above average intelligence...so go figure, google knows best and they are now so big, you like it, or lump it, or go elsewhere ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mail tools preferences?
On 01/17/2014 03:59 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > I will be using thunderbird from somewhere .. even if I have to build it > myself My suggestion is the Remi repo (http://rpms.famillecollet.com/):. He provides the latest Firefox and Thunderbird among some other useful stuff such php. I often have Firefox and Thunderbird updated on my CentOS 6.5 systems before my wife's laptop. -- Paul (ga...@nurdog.com) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] mail tools preferences?
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Rob Kampen wrote: >> >> Gmail's web interface is very low-maintenance... > > Have to take exception to this comment - the interface changes at the whim > of google and I have to relearn - recently the changes have come with > increasing frequency and major impact on how they operate - a quick search > shows many folk are unhappy with the direction they are headed. There are a lot of options - I'm not particularly fond of the defaults, so I set them the way I want and turn off their guessing about what I want to see. >> And if you tweak the >> options to advance when you delete or archive, surprisingly easy to >> use. > > My daughter is just wrapping up her doctoral thesis and the university she > attends uses gmail for their mail system. The changes over the last 12 > months have caused her to miss incoming mail as gmail associates incoming > mail with other threads, and struggle to manage her account - she is above > average intelligence...so go figure, google knows best and they are now so > big, you like it, or lump it, or go elsewhere If you don't actually read your email I can see how things might get lost. But that's the significance of that setting to advance on archive/delete. I set it to sort newest first so I can look at each message instead of letting google guess what I wanted done with it. Showing the next message instead of going back to the index each time saves a lot of time. And the android version works approximately the same.The plus side is that you don't have to spend a lot of time organizing the archived messages. It's google - they know how to search -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
