Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/21/21 11:40 PM, John R. Dennison wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 11:36:44PM +0100, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: >> On 1/21/21 8:53 PM, Alfredo Perez wrote: >>> Is this good news for the "Centos" family? >>> >> >> There is no CentOS "family". CentOS clone is dead and will be now > > Odd that you say it's dead when 7 doesn't sunset until June 30th, 2024. > Maybe not best choice of the word, but I meant there will not be further development on that front. CentOS 7 cloning will be just rinse and repeat of established process. If CentOS 8 was not killed almost no one would have installed CentOS 7 on any new server (keeping in mind desire for 10-year til EOL), so I see CentOS 7 as close to EOL and his usefulness for new systems will only decrease. Hence it is as good as dead in my mind when looking into the future, I am looking for future distro of choice. -- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Infiniband special ops?
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 6:34 PM lejeczek via CentOS wrote: > Hi guys. > > Hoping some net experts my stumble upon this message, I have > an IPoIB direct host to host connection and: > > -> $ ethtool ib1 > Settings for ib1: > Supported ports: [ ] > Supported link modes: Not reported > Supported pause frame use: No > Supports auto-negotiation: No > Supported FEC modes: Not reported > Advertised link modes: Not reported > Advertised pause frame use: No > Advertised auto-negotiation: No > Advertised FEC modes: Not reported > Speed: 4Mb/s > Duplex: Full > Auto-negotiation: on > Port: Other > PHYAD: 255 > Transceiver: internal > Link detected: yes > > and that's both ends, both hosts, yet: > > > $ iperf3 -c 10.5.5.97 > Connecting to host 10.5.5.97, port 5201 > [ 5] local 10.5.5.49 port 56874 connected to 10.5.5.97 port > 5201 > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr Cwnd > [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 1.36 GBytes 11.6 Gbits/sec0 > 2.50 MBytes > [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 1.87 GBytes 16.0 Gbits/sec0 > 2.50 MBytes > [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 1.84 GBytes 15.8 Gbits/sec0 > 2.50 MBytes > [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 1.83 GBytes 15.7 Gbits/sec0 > 2.50 MBytes > [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 1.61 GBytes 13.9 Gbits/sec0 > 2.50 MBytes > [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 1.60 GBytes 13.8 Gbits/sec0 > 2.50 MBytes > [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 1.56 GBytes 13.4 Gbits/sec0 > 2.50 MBytes > [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 1.52 GBytes 13.1 Gbits/sec0 > 2.50 MBytes > [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 1.52 GBytes 13.1 Gbits/sec0 > 2.50 MBytes > [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 1.52 GBytes 13.1 Gbits/sec0 > 2.50 MBytes > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr > [ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 16.2 GBytes 13.9 Gbits/sec > 0 sender > [ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 16.2 GBytes 13.9 > Gbits/sec receiver > > It's rather an oldish platform which hosts the link, PCIe is > only 2.0 but with link of x8 that should be able to carry > more than ~13Gbits/sec. > Infiniband is Mellanox's ConnectX-3. > > Any thoughts on how to track the bottleneck or any thoughts Care to capture (a few seconds) of the *sender* side .pcap? Often TCP receive window is too small or packet loss is to blame or round-trip-time. All of these would be evident in the packet capture. If you do multiple streams with the `-P 8` flag does that increase the throughput? Google says these endpoints are 1.5ms apart: (2.5 megabytes) / (13 Gbps) = 1.53846154 milliseconds > ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] simple http server grab data posted and send to another server - slightly off topic
I did finally find something like this: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2506932/how-do-i-redirect-a-request-to-a-different-url-in-python Jerry ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 11:15:50PM +, Phil Perry wrote: > > Surely anyone requiring less than 16 licences will now ditch CentOS 7 in > favour of RHEL7? The rest may stay on CentOS 7 for a year or so until there > is a clearer picture around viable alternatives. This may as well become the > RHEL users list and CentOS-Devel effectively becomes the CentOS-Stream > mailing list? I have no plans on moving to RHEL7; it's work that doesn't need to be done. And let's face it, centos-devel@ has been nothing but RH noise since 2014; I've suggested renaming it, and #centos-devel for what it's worth, on a couple different occasions. John -- Learn to control ego. Humans hold their dogmas and biases too tightly, and we only think that our opponents are dogmatic! But we all need criticism. Criticism is the only known antidote to error. -- David Brin (6 October 1950-), American scientist and award-winning science fiction author, interview at ActuSF.com, March 2008 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Infiniband special ops?
Hi guys. Hoping some net experts my stumble upon this message, I have an IPoIB direct host to host connection and: -> $ ethtool ib1 Settings for ib1: Supported ports: [ ] Supported link modes: Not reported Supported pause frame use: No Supports auto-negotiation: No Supported FEC modes: Not reported Advertised link modes: Not reported Advertised pause frame use: No Advertised auto-negotiation: No Advertised FEC modes: Not reported Speed: 4Mb/s Duplex: Full Auto-negotiation: on Port: Other PHYAD: 255 Transceiver: internal Link detected: yes and that's both ends, both hosts, yet: > $ iperf3 -c 10.5.5.97 Connecting to host 10.5.5.97, port 5201 [ 5] local 10.5.5.49 port 56874 connected to 10.5.5.97 port 5201 [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr Cwnd [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 1.36 GBytes 11.6 Gbits/sec 0 2.50 MBytes [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 1.87 GBytes 16.0 Gbits/sec 0 2.50 MBytes [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 1.84 GBytes 15.8 Gbits/sec 0 2.50 MBytes [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 1.83 GBytes 15.7 Gbits/sec 0 2.50 MBytes [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 1.61 GBytes 13.9 Gbits/sec 0 2.50 MBytes [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 1.60 GBytes 13.8 Gbits/sec 0 2.50 MBytes [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 1.56 GBytes 13.4 Gbits/sec 0 2.50 MBytes [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 1.52 GBytes 13.1 Gbits/sec 0 2.50 MBytes [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 1.52 GBytes 13.1 Gbits/sec 0 2.50 MBytes [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 1.52 GBytes 13.1 Gbits/sec 0 2.50 MBytes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr [ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 16.2 GBytes 13.9 Gbits/sec 0 sender [ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 16.2 GBytes 13.9 Gbits/sec receiver It's rather an oldish platform which hosts the link, PCIe is only 2.0 but with link of x8 that should be able to carry more than ~13Gbits/sec. Infiniband is Mellanox's ConnectX-3. Any thoughts on how to track the bottleneck or any thoughts I'll appreciate much. thanks, L ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On Thu, 21 Jan 2021, Phil Perry wrote: On 21/01/2021 22:40, John R. Dennison wrote: Surely anyone requiring less than 16 licences will now ditch CentOS 7 in favour of RHEL7? Drat. I have 25 systems at home running CentOS 7.9, and one system running OEL 7.9. Steve -- Steve Thompson E-mail: smt AT vgersoft DOT com Voyager Software LLC Web: http://www DOT vgersoft DOT com 3901 N Charles St VSW Support: support AT vgersoft DOT com Baltimore MD 21218 "186,282 miles per second: it's not just a good idea, it's the law" ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
Hi Nick, There's always Springdale: https://puias.math.ias.edu/ On 21/01/2021 22:00, Antonio Leding wrote: Thanks Nick, I was just writing a post to solicit opinions on a good goto distro for CentOS replacement. I am somewhat dubious on wanting to move to free-RHEL and based on what you’ve said here, looks like Rocky deserves my attention… If it does indeed become the successor as you’ve suggested, let’s just hope we can keep it from being acquired by RH or any other party. Seems to me that once RH decided to help CentOS out and mandated RH majority on the board, the writing was on the wall for what occurred in Dec… - - - On 21 Jan 2021, at 13:34, Nikolaos Milas wrote: On 21/1/2021 11:17 μ.μ., Valeri Galtsev wrote: I tried Oracle Linux. After installation it took forever to update yum database, or do you yum search. Also: I didn't find mirrors... All this sort of ruled it out for me. Don't worry, Rocky Linux is in good track; Latest update: https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/community-update-january-2021/1667 It will be with us very soon, and the formerly CentOS community is very active on it! I am very optimistic with it. RH is trying to catch all those CentOS users/admins who will jump off the train to shift to Rocky Linux (or other), but I think Rocky Linux will become the natural successor. The future is close, we shall see. Nick ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- J Martin Rushton MBCS ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 21/01/2021 22:40, John R. Dennison wrote: On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 11:36:44PM +0100, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: On 1/21/21 8:53 PM, Alfredo Perez wrote: Is this good news for the "Centos" family? There is no CentOS "family". CentOS clone is dead and will be now Odd that you say it's dead when 7 doesn't sunset until June 30th, 2024. Surely anyone requiring less than 16 licences will now ditch CentOS 7 in favour of RHEL7? The rest may stay on CentOS 7 for a year or so until there is a clearer picture around viable alternatives. This may as well become the RHEL users list and CentOS-Devel effectively becomes the CentOS-Stream mailing list? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/21/21 4:53 PM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: Fun fact: if a big part of my job didn't consist in teaching Linux and writing books about it, I'd probably be running FreeBSD myself. Understandable. The big part of Microsoft is selling their operating system, for servers included, and even they were caught running FreeBSD on some of their servers at some point ;-) Valeri -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/21/21 4:50 PM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: Le 21/01/2021 à 23:18, Valeri Galtsev a écrit : No, I already streamlined Debian routine installation (workstations and number crunchers), and servers run FreeBSD since lng ago, so I'm all set, and much better than in the past ;-) Thanks though. Debian has an average of two years[*] per support. There is "stretch", which is equivalent of more known as LTS of Ubuntu: 5 years. And then, there is easy in place upgrade from regular or "stretch" to next release. But no, I will not argue against uniqueness of 10 year life cycle of RedHat. I just said that my life [with Debian] will be no bigger hassle than it was [with CentOS]. The only difference of Debian is: it has vast collection of everything, so you really need to make your own choices. But if it's done once, you can in one go tell next installation to install all the same software (packages). Of course, I, being a simple guy, had much simpler life with CentOS, just choose all software groups that sound relevant... (jus grossly exaggerating ;-) But with huge collection like Debian one (or like FreeBSD ports are, or macports for MacOS) once you spent time shaping system to your preference, you are done, and all next systems are rather routine, almost as unattended as RedHat/CentOS kickstart install is. Valeri Oracle has ten like upstream RHEL. Choice is pretty clear to me. [*] one year after subsequent release, so an average of one to three years depending on installation date -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
Le 21/01/2021 à 23:23, Stephen John Smoogen a écrit : > I think from years of posting that FreeBSD is how Valeri's brain works best > and that is cool. Some people have certain OS paradigms where they function > best and are able to solve problems better than another system. For other > people it might be a completely 'brainjam' type thing [sort of like when > people try using my tools and find many of them are left-handed.. things > look the same but they don't work 'correctly' for some reason.] but if you > find the tool you work best in for an enterprise and your customers are > happy so be it. Fun fact: if a big part of my job didn't consist in teaching Linux and writing books about it, I'd probably be running FreeBSD myself. -- Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat Site : https://www.microlinux.fr Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr Mail : i...@microlinux.fr Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32 Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
Le 21/01/2021 à 23:18, Valeri Galtsev a écrit : > No, I already streamlined Debian routine installation (workstations and number > crunchers), and servers run FreeBSD since lng ago, so I'm all set, and > much > better than in the past ;-) > > Thanks though. Debian has an average of two years[*] per support. Oracle has ten like upstream RHEL. Choice is pretty clear to me. [*] one year after subsequent release, so an average of one to three years depending on installation date -- Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat Site : https://www.microlinux.fr Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr Mail : i...@microlinux.fr Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32 Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 11:36:44PM +0100, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: > On 1/21/21 8:53 PM, Alfredo Perez wrote: > > Is this good news for the "Centos" family? > > > > There is no CentOS "family". CentOS clone is dead and will be now Odd that you say it's dead when 7 doesn't sunset until June 30th, 2024. John -- I do not fear an army of lions, if they are led by a lamb. I do fear an army of sheep, if they are led by a lion. -- Alexander the Great signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/21/21 4:30 PM, Scott Robbins wrote: On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 05:23:24PM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 at 17:15, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: I think from years of posting that FreeBSD is how Valeri's brain works best and that is cool. Some people have certain OS paradigms where they function best and are able to solve problems better than another system. Like Valeri, I have a fondness for FreeBSD. Regardless, I think Nicolas is correct. I remember reading a post in an old usenet (I think) discussion of mutt vs. pine (before it became alpine) where someone said words to the effect of, People pull up all sorts of technical reasons to justify what is, in the end, an emotional decision. I learned one truth working for many years for scientists: the best thing is what works best for _YOU_, with which YOU are most efficient. I do keep bringing up FreeBSD, as I conscientiously switched servers to it. And during first maybe year I was catching myself with "Linuxisms" on FreeBSD. Later I often caught myself with "FreeBSD-isms" on Linux. But if your future road is long, then at the pivoting point it really is good to step up above everything and estimate (with open mind) what might be beneficial in your future. That is why I bring up non-Linux system I know (more or less). Were I knowing others as well (OpenBSD, NetBSD, ...) I would be mentioning them too. And all that in a hope it may help someone (and with understanding it may annoy many). Valeri -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/21/21 8:53 PM, Alfredo Perez wrote: > Is this good news for the "Centos" family? > There is no CentOS "family". CentOS clone is dead and will be now replaced with no-cost RHEL, so in market share (over time) CentOS will be replaced with RHEL. CentOS Stream will be used solely by developers and and entities like Facebook (as a base for their own in house solution). With 16-system no-cost production license package there might be drop in RHEL clone demand, and some Oracle users might decide to move to RHEL (but this is total unknown depending on perception of Red Hat and Oracle in peoples minds). -- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 05:23:24PM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 at 17:15, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: > > > > > > I think from years of posting that FreeBSD is how Valeri's brain works best > and that is cool. Some people have certain OS paradigms where they function > best and are able to solve problems better than another system. Like Valeri, I have a fondness for FreeBSD. Regardless, I think Nicolas is correct. I remember reading a post in an old usenet (I think) discussion of mutt vs. pine (before it became alpine) where someone said words to the effect of, People pull up all sorts of technical reasons to justify what is, in the end, an emotional decision. -- 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 https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 at 17:15, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: > Le 21/01/2021 à 22:17, Valeri Galtsev a écrit : > > I tried Oracle Linux. After installation it took forever to update yum > > database, or do you yum search. Also: I didn't find mirrors... All this > sort of > > ruled it out for me. > > Works perfectly here: > > https://gitlab.com/kikinovak/oracle/-/blob/master/linux-setup.sh > > You might want to give it another spin. > > I think from years of posting that FreeBSD is how Valeri's brain works best and that is cool. Some people have certain OS paradigms where they function best and are able to solve problems better than another system. For other people it might be a completely 'brainjam' type thing [sort of like when people try using my tools and find many of them are left-handed.. things look the same but they don't work 'correctly' for some reason.] but if you find the tool you work best in for an enterprise and your customers are happy so be it. > Cheers, > > Niki > > -- > Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables > 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat > Site : https://www.microlinux.fr > Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr > Mail : i...@microlinux.fr > Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32 > Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12 > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > -- Stephen J Smoogen. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/21/21 4:15 PM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: Le 21/01/2021 à 22:17, Valeri Galtsev a écrit : I tried Oracle Linux. After installation it took forever to update yum database, or do you yum search. Also: I didn't find mirrors... All this sort of ruled it out for me. Works perfectly here: https://gitlab.com/kikinovak/oracle/-/blob/master/linux-setup.sh You might want to give it another spin. No, I already streamlined Debian routine installation (workstations and number crunchers), and servers run FreeBSD since lng ago, so I'm all set, and much better than in the past ;-) Thanks though. Valeri Cheers, Niki -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
Le 21/01/2021 à 22:39, Valeri Galtsev a écrit : > Maybe my problem was I used yum, not dnf command. Oracle's documentation is at least as well-written as the FreeBSD handbook. https://www.oracle.com/linux/technologies/ -- Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat Site : https://www.microlinux.fr Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr Mail : i...@microlinux.fr Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32 Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
Le 21/01/2021 à 22:17, Valeri Galtsev a écrit : > I tried Oracle Linux. After installation it took forever to update yum > database, or do you yum search. Also: I didn't find mirrors... All this sort > of > ruled it out for me. Works perfectly here: https://gitlab.com/kikinovak/oracle/-/blob/master/linux-setup.sh You might want to give it another spin. Cheers, Niki -- Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat Site : https://www.microlinux.fr Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr Mail : i...@microlinux.fr Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32 Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
Thanks Nick, I was just writing a post to solicit opinions on a good goto distro for CentOS replacement. I am somewhat dubious on wanting to move to free-RHEL and based on what you’ve said here, looks like Rocky deserves my attention… If it does indeed become the successor as you’ve suggested, let’s just hope we can keep it from being acquired by RH or any other party. Seems to me that once RH decided to help CentOS out and mandated RH majority on the board, the writing was on the wall for what occurred in Dec… - - - On 21 Jan 2021, at 13:34, Nikolaos Milas wrote: On 21/1/2021 11:17 μ.μ., Valeri Galtsev wrote: I tried Oracle Linux. After installation it took forever to update yum database, or do you yum search. Also: I didn't find mirrors... All this sort of ruled it out for me. Don't worry, Rocky Linux is in good track; Latest update: https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/community-update-january-2021/1667 It will be with us very soon, and the formerly CentOS community is very active on it! I am very optimistic with it. RH is trying to catch all those CentOS users/admins who will jump off the train to shift to Rocky Linux (or other), but I think Rocky Linux will become the natural successor. The future is close, we shall see. Nick ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] simple http server grab data posted and send to another server - slightly off topic
Hi All, anyone know how to make a "simple" http server (python -m SimpleHTTPServer 8000) type of stuff - but simply take the incoming data, (should be real small) and when received - send that to a different server . This is different than "redirect" as that is the issue. The device does not understand the redirect response that is happening now. So I was looking for a way to "consume" the post - then re-send the post. It has to be independent of httpd as that is in use. CentOS 7 is my platform. Thanks Jerry ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/21/21 3:31 PM, Frank Cox wrote: On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:17:04 -0600 Valeri Galtsev wrote: I tried Oracle Linux. After installation it took forever to update yum database, or do you yum search. Also: I didn't find mirrors... All this sort of ruled it out for me. Mind that I have 1 Gbps network... So far I've installed Oracle Linux on one laptop. What I got was exactly what I expected to get, and I didn't have any issues at all. "dnf upgrade" worked exactly as expected and at pretty much exactly the same speed as it does on Centos, too. Maybe my problem was I used yum, not dnf command. Or maybe my locality of specifically my domain is not favored by oracle. Or maybe other way around, my network admins... But then, mine is just a single installation, exactly as you told about yours ;-) Valeri But that's just one installation. I haven't done anything else with OL yet at all. -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/21/21 1:17 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: After installation it took forever to update yum database, or do you yum search. Also: I didn't find mirrors... I don't think mirrors exist. appears updates comes directly from Oracle this way their users/clients know those servers are always there with the latest software. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 21/1/2021 11:17 μ.μ., Valeri Galtsev wrote: I tried Oracle Linux. After installation it took forever to update yum database, or do you yum search. Also: I didn't find mirrors... All this sort of ruled it out for me. Don't worry, Rocky Linux is in good track; Latest update: https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/community-update-january-2021/1667 It will be with us very soon, and the formerly CentOS community is very active on it! I am very optimistic with it. RH is trying to catch all those CentOS users/admins who will jump off the train to shift to Rocky Linux (or other), but I think Rocky Linux will become the natural successor. The future is close, we shall see. Nick ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:17:04 -0600 Valeri Galtsev wrote: > I tried Oracle Linux. After installation it took forever to update yum > database, or do you yum search. Also: I didn't find mirrors... All this > sort of ruled it out for me. Mind that I have 1 Gbps network... So far I've installed Oracle Linux on one laptop. What I got was exactly what I expected to get, and I didn't have any issues at all. "dnf upgrade" worked exactly as expected and at pretty much exactly the same speed as it does on Centos, too. But that's just one installation. I haven't done anything else with OL yet at all. -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On 1/21/21 2:24 PM, Frank Cox wrote: On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 13:57:19 -0600 Scott Techlist wrote: So this will muddy the waters for the spin-offs like Rocky Linux, or kill them? I'd assume at least it would dilute who'd need an alternate Centos replacement except those with more than 16 servers. Or did I misunderstand the announcement? I don't see how this would create any issues for Rocky Linux and the like. The new RHEL terms still require annual license activations (for every installation I think) and that's a point of friction that doesn't exist with Linux installations that are actually free. With this new offering I've got to count my installations, track which ones I've torn down, which ones I've updated, which ones I've scrapped, which ones I'm running in a VM and which ones that I've installed on an "appliance" in the dusty corner to running a printing press, and when I get to the sixteenth installation then I need to pay up or start decommissioning stuff Or I could use a license-not-required distribution like Rocky or Oracle and avoid all of that. I tried Oracle Linux. After installation it took forever to update yum database, or do you yum search. Also: I didn't find mirrors... All this sort of ruled it out for me. Mind that I have 1 Gbps network... So my shop: servers: FreeBSD (for decade or so, since FreeBSD v. 8), number crunchers and workstations: Debian except for those that need NVIDIA binary driver or cuda, these rare ones will be Ubuntu. In a hope this helps someone, Valeri I've got a number of machines with certain clients who bring their machine back to me every year or two (or whenever they figure they can spare it and happen to be heading this way) for updating. I might not see one of those machines for a few years; they may not have any Internet connection in the field so it could be interesting if the machines tell them (or me) to buzz off because the license has expired. If there were no other options then I guess there would have to be a way figured out to make this work anyway, but there are options and those options are certainly more attractive than dealing with license activations and all of the joy surrounding that sort of thing. -- Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
The RHEL announcement is of no use to me or my company. We spin up DigitalOcean droplets for each of our client websites/apps. If we were utilising horizontal scaling we'd have even more droplets per website/app. We'd easily have over 16 installations. > On 21 Jan 2021, at 19:57, Scott Techlist wrote: > > >> >> See: >> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/01/centos-is-gone-but-rhel-is-now-free-for-up-to-16-production-servers/ >> and >> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/new-year-new-red-hat-enterprise-linux-programs-easier-ways-access-rhel >> -- >> J Martin Rushton MBCS > > > So this will muddy the waters for the spin-offs like Rocky Linux, or kill > them? I'd assume at least it would dilute who'd need an alternate Centos > replacement except those with more than 16 servers. Or did I misunderstand > the announcement? > > > > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 13:57:19 -0600 Scott Techlist wrote: > So this will muddy the waters for the spin-offs like Rocky Linux, or kill > them? I'd assume at least it would dilute who'd need an alternate Centos > replacement except those with more than 16 servers. Or did I misunderstand > the announcement? I don't see how this would create any issues for Rocky Linux and the like. The new RHEL terms still require annual license activations (for every installation I think) and that's a point of friction that doesn't exist with Linux installations that are actually free. With this new offering I've got to count my installations, track which ones I've torn down, which ones I've updated, which ones I've scrapped, which ones I'm running in a VM and which ones that I've installed on an "appliance" in the dusty corner to running a printing press, and when I get to the sixteenth installation then I need to pay up or start decommissioning stuff Or I could use a license-not-required distribution like Rocky or Oracle and avoid all of that. I've got a number of machines with certain clients who bring their machine back to me every year or two (or whenever they figure they can spare it and happen to be heading this way) for updating. I might not see one of those machines for a few years; they may not have any Internet connection in the field so it could be interesting if the machines tell them (or me) to buzz off because the license has expired. If there were no other options then I guess there would have to be a way figured out to make this work anyway, but there are options and those options are certainly more attractive than dealing with license activations and all of the joy surrounding that sort of thing. -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
>See: >https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/01/centos-is-gone-but-rhel-is-now-free-for-up-to-16-production-servers/ >and >https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/new-year-new-red-hat-enterprise-linux-programs-easier-ways-access-rhel >-- >J Martin Rushton MBCS So this will muddy the waters for the spin-offs like Rocky Linux, or kill them? I'd assume at least it would dilute who'd need an alternate Centos replacement except those with more than 16 servers. Or did I misunderstand the announcement? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
Is this good news for the "Centos" family? On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 11:35 AM Victor Pereira wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 1:12 PM Hugh E Cruickshank > wrote: > > > From: Victor Pereira Sent: January 21, 2021 07:47 > > > > > > I see that this is as an impulse for Fedora so that we as users do not > > > leave RedHat after the news ... even so I still think how good it is > > > for the linux community this whole situation makes us a good shakeup. > > > > While I while I welcome the Red Hat announcement I really could do > > without the "shakeup" and all the additional work that it triggers. > > > > Regards, Hugh > > > > -- > > Hugh E Cruickshank, Forward Software, www.forward-software.com > > > > ___ > > CentOS mailing list > > CentOS@centos.org > > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > > > Absolutely. > > -- > Victor > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 1:12 PM Hugh E Cruickshank wrote: > From: Victor Pereira Sent: January 21, 2021 07:47 > > > > I see that this is as an impulse for Fedora so that we as users do not > > leave RedHat after the news ... even so I still think how good it is > > for the linux community this whole situation makes us a good shakeup. > > While I while I welcome the Red Hat announcement I really could do > without the "shakeup" and all the additional work that it triggers. > > Regards, Hugh > > -- > Hugh E Cruickshank, Forward Software, www.forward-software.com > > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > Absolutely. -- Victor ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
From: Victor Pereira Sent: January 21, 2021 07:47 > > I see that this is as an impulse for Fedora so that we as users do not > leave RedHat after the news ... even so I still think how good it is > for the linux community this whole situation makes us a good shakeup. While I while I welcome the Red Hat announcement I really could do without the "shakeup" and all the additional work that it triggers. Regards, Hugh -- Hugh E Cruickshank, Forward Software, www.forward-software.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RHEL changes
I see that this is as an impulse for Fedora so that we as users do not leave RedHat after the news ... even so I still think how good it is for the linux community this whole situation makes us a good shakeup. Cheers, On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 8:57 PM Kay Schenk wrote: > Thanks for the info! I will pass it along! > > On 1/20/21 7:02 AM, J Martin Rushton via CentOS wrote: > > See: > > > https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/01/centos-is-gone-but-rhel-is-now-free-for-up-to-16-production-servers/ > > > > and > > > https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/new-year-new-red-hat-enterprise-linux-programs-easier-ways-access-rhel > > > > -- > - > "Don't let anyone dull your sparkle." > > MzK > > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > -- Victor ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] KVM support on RT Kernerl
Hi, I have deployed CentOS 7.6 and then installed RT kernel. Later KVM installed on the same box. I noticed that KVM module was not loaded and then switched to the generic kernel. KVM module was loaded in the generic kernel. Is this a known issue? I would like to use KVM with RT kernel. Regards, -- Danishka Navin ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
