[CentOS] Avago (LSI) SAS-3 controller, poor performance on CentOS 7

I have a handful of new systems where I've seen unexpectedly low disk performance on an Avago SAS controller, when using CentOS 7. It looked like a regression, so I installed CentOS 6 on one of them and reloaded CentOS 7 on the other. Immediately after install, a difference is apparent in the

[CentOS-build-reports] Build Done: kernel 3.10.0-514.el7.x86_64 on c7.1611.00

logs/c7.1611.00/kernel/20161104234523/3.10.0-514.el7.x86_64 logs/c7.1611.00/kernel/20161104234523/3.10.0-514.el7.x86_64/build.log logs/c7.1611.00/kernel/20161104234523/3.10.0-514.el7.x86_64/kernel-3.10.0-514.el7.src.rpm

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

Il 04/Nov/2016 19:20, "Phelps, Matthew" ha scritto: > > Please, before a new flame, please read all what related with release > > numbering discussed on June 2014 thread of centos-devel mailing list: > >

[CentOS-build-reports] Build Done: gcc 4.8.5-11.el7.centos.aarch64 on c7.1611.00.a64

logs/c7.1611.00.a64/gcc/20161104190513/4.8.5-11.el7.centos.aarch64 logs/c7.1611.00.a64/gcc/20161104190513/4.8.5-11.el7.centos.aarch64/build.log logs/c7.1611.00.a64/gcc/20161104190513/4.8.5-11.el7.centos.aarch64/cpp-4.8.5-11.el7.centos.aarch64.rpm

[CentOS] anaconda pgp rpm verification

Does anaconda verifies gpg signatures to ensure the integrity of the packages? Are the keys already imported or how does anaconda do this job? Any suggestions to improve the integrity while kickstarting a system? Do you use repo_gpgcheck? -- Thanks, LF

[CentOS-build-reports] Build Fail: kernel 3.10.0-514.el7.i686 on c7.1611.00

ROOT log: -( last 500 lines )-\n\n DEBUG util.py:399: perl-File-Path-2.09-2.el7.noarch DEBUG util.py:399: perl-Scalar-List-Utils-1.27-248.el7.i686 DEBUG util.py:399: perl-Exporter-5.68-3.el7.noarch DEBUG util.py:399: perl-constant-1.27-2.el7.noarch DEBUG util.py:399:

[CentOS] Keyboard layout on remote, local, ... CentOS 6; strange behaviour

Hello, I did the following: in /boot/grub/menu.lst I added/replaced KEYTABLE=us-acentos in /etc/sysconfig/keyboard I have this: KEYTABLE="us-acentos" MODEL="pc105" LAYOUT="us" KEYBOARDTYPE="pc" VARIANT="intl" my host system is Windows; and for connecting to Linux terminal I use PuTTY in

[CentOS-build-reports] Build Done: glibc 2.17-157.el7.x86_64 on c7.1611.00

logs/c7.1611.00/glibc/20161104182836/2.17-157.el7.x86_64 logs/c7.1611.00/glibc/20161104182836/2.17-157.el7.x86_64/build.log logs/c7.1611.00/glibc/20161104182836/2.17-157.el7.x86_64/glibc-2.17-157.el7.src.rpm logs/c7.1611.00/glibc/20161104182836/2.17-157.el7.x86_64/glibc-2.17-157.el7.x86_64.rpm

[CentOS-build-reports] Build Done: glibc 2.17-157.el7.i386 on c7.1611.00

logs/c7.1611.00/glibc/20161104182836/2.17-157.el7.i386 logs/c7.1611.00/glibc/20161104182836/2.17-157.el7.i386/build.log logs/c7.1611.00/glibc/20161104182836/2.17-157.el7.i386/glibc-2.17-157.el7.i686.rpm logs/c7.1611.00/glibc/20161104182836/2.17-157.el7.i386/glibc-2.17-157.el7.src.rpm

Re: [CentOS] dnf and failing epel

On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 02:49:03PM -0400, Jonathan Billings wrote: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 01:39:40PM +, lejeczek wrote: > > On 04/11/16 12:51, Jonathan Billings wrote: > > it seems it might be Centos' problem, on some of my other boxes I find: > > libsolv-0.6.14-1.el7.x86_64 and I wonder if

Re: [CentOS] dnf and failing epel

On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 01:39:40PM +, lejeczek wrote: > On 04/11/16 12:51, Jonathan Billings wrote: > it seems it might be Centos' problem, on some of my other boxes I find: > libsolv-0.6.14-1.el7.x86_64 and I wonder if it had been in the repos and > later withdrawn and now absent? And instead

Re: [CentOS] mailing list mail from @yahoo addresses

On 11/4/2016 11:29 AM, lejeczek wrote: well, I'm not sure if I feel better now, I understand there must a plethora of people who fidgeted like me trying to understand what happened (some time ago) - I see I'm not alone, but... it seems larger issue. Would be great if list maintainer(s) look

Re: [CentOS] mailing list mail from @yahoo addresses

On 04/11/16 17:18, Richard wrote: [extracted from "Re: [CentOS] dnf and failing epel" message chain.] From: lejeczek peljasz at yahoo.co.uk Date: Fri Nov 4 13:39:40 UTC 2016 Date: Friday, November 04, 2016 08:51:07 -0400 From: Jonathan Billings On Fri, Nov 04, 2016

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Gianluca Cecchi wrote: > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Phelps, Matthew > wrote: > > > > > > > > > 1. Is CentOS-7.3 done yet? Answer: NO! > > > > > > And it is NOT CentOS-7.3 .. it is CentOS-7 (1611) based

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

On 04.11.2016 15:29, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 11/04/2016 09:15 AM, Mark Haney wrote: >> That's all well and good, but how about you actually include the minor >> number AND the release date? I.e. 7.3-1104 for CentOS 7.3 released today, >> for example. I'm all for the SIGs to keep track of

[CentOS] mailing list mail from @yahoo addresses

[extracted from "Re: [CentOS] dnf and failing epel" message chain.] > From: lejeczek peljasz at yahoo.co.uk > Date: Fri Nov 4 13:39:40 UTC 2016 >> Date: Friday, November 04, 2016 08:51:07 -0400 >> From: Jonathan Billings >> >>> On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 12:30:02PM +,

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 09:35:41AM -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote: > > On Fri, November 4, 2016 9:29 am, Johnny Hughes wrote: > > On 11/04/2016 09:15 AM, Mark Haney wrote: > >> That's all well and good, but how about you actually include the minor > >> number AND the release date? I.e. 7.3-1104 for

[CentOS-build-reports] Build Done: binutils 2.25.1-22.base.el7.x86_64 on c7.1611.00

logs/c7.1611.00/binutils/20161104163351/2.25.1-22.base.el7.x86_64 logs/c7.1611.00/binutils/20161104163351/2.25.1-22.base.el7.x86_64/binutils-2.25.1-22.base.el7.src.rpm logs/c7.1611.00/binutils/20161104163351/2.25.1-22.base.el7.x86_64/binutils-2.25.1-22.base.el7.x86_64.rpm

[CentOS-build-reports] Build Done: gcc 4.8.5-11.el7.x86_64 on c7.1611.00

logs/c7.1611.00/gcc/20161104145324/4.8.5-11.el7.x86_64 logs/c7.1611.00/gcc/20161104145324/4.8.5-11.el7.x86_64/build.log logs/c7.1611.00/gcc/20161104145324/4.8.5-11.el7.x86_64/cpp-4.8.5-11.el7.x86_64.rpm logs/c7.1611.00/gcc/20161104145324/4.8.5-11.el7.x86_64/gcc-4.8.5-11.el7.src.rpm

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 10:05:39AM -0400, Mark Haney wrote: > I'm with Matthew Phelps on this. If CentOS is built with the exact same > sources as RHEL, why not keep the numbering scheme the same? That would > make life easier for people like me who build CentOS RPMs from > tarballs/SRPMS that

Re: [CentOS] FireFox and Plugins

On 11/04/2016 07:42 AM, James Pearson wrote: Alice Wonder wrote: Thank you, that looks like what I originally was seeking - a way to blacklist the plugin. It's still a bit puzzling that there isn't a checkbox next to plugins in the Preferences pane. In 'about:addons -> Plugins', there is a

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 11/04/2016 09:15 AM, Mark Haney wrote: > > That's all well and good, but how about you actually include the minor > > number AND the release date? I.e. 7.3-1104 for CentOS 7.3 released > today, > > for example. I'm

Re: [CentOS] FireFox and Plugins

Alice Wonder wrote: Thank you, that looks like what I originally was seeking - a way to blacklist the plugin. It's still a bit puzzling that there isn't a checkbox next to plugins in the Preferences pane. In 'about:addons -> Plugins', there is a pull down next to each plugin that has 'Ask

[CentOS-build-reports] Build Done: gcc 4.8.5-11.el7.x86_64 on c7.1611.00

logs/c7.1611.00/gcc/20161104121846/4.8.5-11.el7.x86_64 logs/c7.1611.00/gcc/20161104121846/4.8.5-11.el7.x86_64/build.log logs/c7.1611.00/gcc/20161104121846/4.8.5-11.el7.x86_64/cpp-4.8.5-11.el7.x86_64.rpm logs/c7.1611.00/gcc/20161104121846/4.8.5-11.el7.x86_64/gcc-4.8.5-11.el7.src.rpm

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

Il 04/11/2016 15:29, Johnny Hughes ha scritto: On 11/04/2016 09:15 AM, Mark Haney wrote: That's all well and good, but how about you actually include the minor number AND the release date? I.e. 7.3-1104 for CentOS 7.3 released today, for example. I'm all for the SIGs to keep track of their

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

On Fri, November 4, 2016 9:29 am, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 11/04/2016 09:15 AM, Mark Haney wrote: >> That's all well and good, but how about you actually include the minor >> number AND the release date? I.e. 7.3-1104 for CentOS 7.3 released >> today, >> for example. I'm all for the SIGs to

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

On 11/04/2016 09:15 AM, Mark Haney wrote: > That's all well and good, but how about you actually include the minor > number AND the release date? I.e. 7.3-1104 for CentOS 7.3 released today, > for example. I'm all for the SIGs to keep track of their own upstreams, > but surely there's a better

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

That's all well and good, but how about you actually include the minor number AND the release date? I.e. 7.3-1104 for CentOS 7.3 released today, for example. I'm all for the SIGs to keep track of their own upstreams, but surely there's a better way to do this that doesn't annoy the heck out of

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

I'm with Matthew Phelps on this. If CentOS is built with the exact same sources as RHEL, why not keep the numbering scheme the same? That would make life easier for people like me who build CentOS RPMs from tarballs/SRPMS that run on RHEL and having to look up version numbers is just idiotic. I

[CentOS-build-reports] Build Done: gcc 4.8.5-11.el7.aarch64 on c7.1611.00.a64

logs/c7.1611.00.a64/gcc/20161103143429/4.8.5-11.el7.aarch64 logs/c7.1611.00.a64/gcc/20161103143429/4.8.5-11.el7.aarch64/build.log logs/c7.1611.00.a64/gcc/20161103143429/4.8.5-11.el7.aarch64/cpp-4.8.5-11.el7.aarch64.rpm

[CentOS-build-reports] Build Fail: gcc 4.8.5-11.el7.aarch64 on c7.1611.00.a64

ROOT log: -( last 500 lines )-\n\n - BUILD log: ( last 500 lines )-\n\n ___ CentOS-build-reports mailing list CentOS-build-reports@centos.org

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote: > > > > > 1. Is CentOS-7.3 done yet? Answer: NO! > > > > And it is NOT CentOS-7.3 .. it is CentOS-7 (1611) based on RHEL-7.3 > > Sources. The main tree will be labeled '7.3.1611' on the mirrors (along > > side

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

On 11/04/2016 06:14 AM, Phelps, Matthew wrote: On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: On 11/04/2016 04:38 AM, James Hogarth wrote: As a heads up RHEL 7.3 is released: 1. Is CentOS-7.3 done yet? Answer: NO! And it is NOT CentOS-7.3 .. it is CentOS-7

[CentOS-build-reports] Build Fail: gcc 4.8.5-11.el7.aarch64 on c7.1611.00.a64

ROOT log: -( last 500 lines )-\n\n - BUILD log: ( last 500 lines )-\n\n ___ CentOS-build-reports mailing list CentOS-build-reports@centos.org

Re: [CentOS] dnf and failing epel

On 04/11/16 12:51, Jonathan Billings wrote: On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 12:30:02PM +, lejeczek wrote: hi everyone, I use dnf but one epel fails in a peculiar way: Do you get this error when using 'yum'? 'dnf' is provided via EPEL and isn't part of CentOS, so you might want to consider

[CentOS-build-reports] Build Done: gcc 4.8.5-11.el7.i386 on c7.1611.00

logs/c7.1611.00/gcc/20161104121846/4.8.5-11.el7.i386 logs/c7.1611.00/gcc/20161104121846/4.8.5-11.el7.i386/build.log logs/c7.1611.00/gcc/20161104121846/4.8.5-11.el7.i386/cpp-4.8.5-11.el7.i686.rpm logs/c7.1611.00/gcc/20161104121846/4.8.5-11.el7.i386/gcc-4.8.5-11.el7.i686.rpm

Re: [CentOS-virt] CentOS-7 x86_64 AMIs and consistent network device naming

On 04/11/16 11:18, Jinesh Choksi wrote: > Hello, > > Re: > https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7-Beta/html/7.3_Release_Notes/bug_fixes_general_updates.html > > Are there any upcoming plans for turning off the use of legacy interface > names in the next official

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 11/04/2016 04:38 AM, James Hogarth wrote: > > As a heads up RHEL 7.3 is released: > > > > 1. Is CentOS-7.3 done yet? Answer: NO! > > And it is NOT CentOS-7.3 .. it is CentOS-7 (1611) based on RHEL-7.3 > Sources.

[CentOS-build-reports] Build Done: glibc 2.17-157.el7.aarch64 on c7.1611.00.a64

logs/c7.1611.00.a64/glibc/20161104121518/2.17-157.el7.aarch64 logs/c7.1611.00.a64/glibc/20161104121518/2.17-157.el7.aarch64/build.log logs/c7.1611.00.a64/glibc/20161104121518/2.17-157.el7.aarch64/glibc-2.17-157.el7.aarch64.rpm

[CentOS-build-reports] Build Fail: gcc 4.8.5-11.el7.aarch64 on c7.1611.00.a64

ROOT log: -( last 500 lines )-\n\n - BUILD log: ( last 500 lines )-\n\n ___ CentOS-build-reports mailing list CentOS-build-reports@centos.org

Re: [CentOS] FireFox and Plugins

On 11/04/2016 05:09 AM, Jonathan Billings wrote: On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 10:10:20AM +, James Pearson wrote: It shows up when I run Firefox - in both about:plugins and about:addons -> Plugins If you use a central Mozilla autoconfig file setup - see, for example:

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

On 11/04/2016 04:38 AM, James Hogarth wrote: > As a heads up RHEL 7.3 is released: 1. Is CentOS-7.3 done yet? Answer: NO! And it is NOT CentOS-7.3 .. it is CentOS-7 (1611) based on RHEL-7.3 Sources. The main tree will be labeled '7.3.1611' on the mirrors (along side 7.0.1406 and 7.1.1503,

Re: [CentOS] dnf and failing epel

On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 12:30:02PM +, lejeczek wrote: > > hi everyone, > > I use dnf but one epel fails in a peculiar way: Do you get this error when using 'yum'? 'dnf' is provided via EPEL and isn't part of CentOS, so you might want to consider filing a bug with EPEL. > ps. I wonder if my

[CentOS] dnf and failing epel

hi everyone, I use dnf but one epel fails in a peculiar way: $ dnf repolist Failed to open: /var/cache/dnf/x86_64/7/x86_64/7/epel/repodata/8415cbb16f52517f34e3edac12a97c9893117f7b9de6cb22fc086048febd1c60-updateinfo.xml.bz2. that file is there, so I tampered with perms & fcontext but to no

Re: [CentOS] FireFox and Plugins

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 10:10:20AM +, James Pearson wrote: > > It shows up when I run Firefox - in both about:plugins and about:addons -> > Plugins > > If you use a central Mozilla autoconfig file setup - see, for example: > > >

[CentOS-virt] CentOS-7 x86_64 AMIs and consistent network device naming

Hello, Re: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7-Beta/html/7.3_Release_Notes/bug_fixes_general_updates.html Are there any upcoming plans for turning off the use of legacy interface names in the next official CentOS 7.x AMI? Currently, both the official RHEL

Re: [CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

Am 04.11.2016 um 10:38 schrieb James Hogarth : > As a heads up RHEL 7.3 is released: > > https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/7.3_Release_Notes/index.html > > Pay careful attention when the CR repo starts churning out RPMs (if >

[CentOS] RHEL 7.3 released

As a heads up RHEL 7.3 is released: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/7.3_Release_Notes/index.html Pay careful attention when the CR repo starts churning out RPMs (if you have CR enabled) as there have been a few rebases in this - notably firewalld,