[Pulp-list] dropping el6 builds of Pulp
We need your input on when to stop making builds of Pulp for el6. Running Pulp on el6, which uses Python 2.6, has been getting more difficult over time. Many libraries we depend on have dropped support for Python 2.6, which exacerbates the usual challenge of making dependencies available on an aging platform. The latest news is that epel6 will remove their Django package, Django14. It has multiple CVEs (none of which we think affect Pulp) and is unsupported upstream. There is no supported version of Django that runs on Python 2.6. Thus epel has decided to remove this package from epel6 some time between Jan 31 and March 31 of 2017. Once that happens, Pulp will not be installable on el6 unless you provide that package some other way. As a workaround, el6 installation could theoretically continue after Django14 is removed by manually installing the rpm, which is accessible from the EPEL build system. But the dev team does not want to take responsibility for supporting that package; thus we need to phase out support for Pulp on el6. We want to make the transition off of el6 as smooth as it reasonably can be, so please give us some feedback. Here are two options to start the conversation: 1. Make 2.11 the last Pulp release to have el6 packages. All 2.11.z releases would get el6 support. 2.12 would have el7 and Fedora packages only. 2. Make el6 builds available until the day Django14 gets removed from epel6. On that day, Pulp on el6 would become unsupported and builds would stop. Have any other ideas, or feedback on those? Thanks for your input, Michael ___ Pulp-list mailing list Pulp-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
Re: [Pulp-list] dropping el6 builds of Pulp
We are currently testing the use of pulp consumer for centralized package installation across our EL 5/6/7 servers and hope to use it in production in the near future. Will the pulp consumer packages (and deps) be available still for el6 and even el5? On 2016-11-17 08:20, Michael Hrivnak wrote: > We need your input on when to stop making builds of Pulp for el6. > > Running Pulp on el6, which uses Python 2.6, has been getting more difficult > over time. Many libraries we depend on have dropped support for Python 2.6, > which exacerbates the usual challenge of making dependencies available on an > aging platform. > > The latest news is that epel6 will remove their Django package, Django14. It > has multiple CVEs (none of which we think affect Pulp) and is unsupported > upstream. There is no supported version of Django that runs on Python 2.6. > Thus epel has decided to remove this package from epel6 some time between Jan > 31 and March 31 of 2017. Once that happens, Pulp will not be installable on > el6 unless you provide that package some other way. > > As a workaround, el6 installation could theoretically continue after Django14 > is removed by manually installing the rpm, which is accessible from the EPEL > build system. But the dev team does not want to take responsibility for > supporting that package; thus we need to phase out support for Pulp on el6. > > We want to make the transition off of el6 as smooth as it reasonably can be, > so please give us some feedback. Here are two options to start the > conversation: > > 1. Make 2.11 the last Pulp release to have el6 packages. All 2.11.z releases > would get el6 support. 2.12 would have el7 and Fedora packages only. > > 2. Make el6 builds available until the day Django14 gets removed from epel6. > On that day, Pulp on el6 would become unsupported and builds would stop. > > Have any other ideas, or feedback on those? > > Thanks for your input, > Michael > ___ > Pulp-list mailing list > Pulp-list@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list ___ Pulp-list mailing list Pulp-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
Re: [Pulp-list] /var/lib/pulp/content directory structure changed from 2.4.0 to 2.9.1
Problem solved. I had initially moved rpms/srpms directories to /var/lib/pulp/content/units instead of /var/lib/pulp/content. Putting these directories under /var/lib/pulp/content, restoring the DB and running pulp-manage-db again allowed Pulp to find the rpm packages and migrate them correctly. Thanks for the help! On 11/16/2016 05:57 PM, Alan Evangelista wrote: Forwarded Message Subject:Re: [Pulp-list] /var/lib/pulp/content directory structure changed from 2.4.0 to 2.9.1 Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 17:16:00 -0200 From: Alan Evangelista To: Michael Hrivnak On 11/16/2016 12:08 PM, Michael Hrivnak wrote: > Despite the name, "pulp-manage-db" also handles migration of files on disk. So if you restore both > the DB and /var/lib/pulp/content/ before running it, the files will get moved to the new locations. Previously, I had (1) stopped pulp services, (2) restored DB, (3) run pulp-manage-db, (4) restored /var/lib/pulp/content, (5) started pulp services. The migrations ran on an empty rpm pool. I deleted current DB and did the following (/var/lib/pulp/content is already restored) (1) stop pulp services (2) restore DB (3) run pulp-manage-db (4) start pulp services Migrations run sucessfully, I only see some warnings about deprecated save/update commands. However, after all migrations finish, I still see the old directory structure in /var/lib/pulp/content. Have I done something wrong? pulp-manage-db logs the Mongo db queries it runs so I can understand better what's going on? Regards, Alan ___ Pulp-list mailing list Pulp-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list ___ Pulp-list mailing list Pulp-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
Re: [Pulp-list] dropping el6 builds of Pulp
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 9:32 AM, wrote: > We are currently testing the use of pulp consumer for centralized package > installation across our EL 5/6/7 servers and hope to use it in production > in the near future. > > Will the pulp consumer packages (and deps) be available still for el6 and > even el5? > Thanks for asking; I should have clarified which parts we are talking about. There is no change planned for consumer support with pulp 2. This discussion is only about which platforms you can deploy the server parts of pulp on. That said, we do plan to remove pulp-agent entirely with pulp 3. Other projects specialize in host management and do it well; pulp is going to focus on repository management, and leave host management to others. We will definitely look for opportunities to make that integration as seamless as possible. Michael ___ Pulp-list mailing list Pulp-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
Re: [Pulp-list] dropping el6 builds of Pulp
Not sure if this is a very redhat way of doing things, but what about converting it over to a pip installation? That would allow it to be installed in a virtual environment and run on any version of the operating system so long as it can compile or install the required components. That would also break you from being so closely tied to packages in the epel / redhat / centos repos. We all love them for being stable and slow to change, but with projects like django that have a faster release cadence, it doesn't necessarily make sense to be tied to the distro's timelines. You could essentially keep support for EL6 and EL7 for the foreseeable future and maybe even enable people stuck on EL5 to run pulp (unsupported of course). It's been a breeze for us to set up any python project so long as I can install it in a virtual environment (even requiring python 3). Upgrades also seem to go fairly smoothly besides the occasional need to add a -devel package for dependencies. On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Michael Hrivnak wrote: > We need your input on when to stop making builds of Pulp for el6. > > Running Pulp on el6, which uses Python 2.6, has been getting more > difficult over time. Many libraries we depend on have dropped support for > Python 2.6, which exacerbates the usual challenge of making dependencies > available on an aging platform. > > The latest news is that epel6 will remove their Django package, Django14. > It has multiple CVEs (none of which we think affect Pulp) and is > unsupported upstream. There is no supported version of Django that runs on > Python 2.6. Thus epel has decided to remove this package from epel6 some > time between Jan 31 and March 31 of 2017. Once that happens, Pulp will not > be installable on el6 unless you provide that package some other way. > > As a workaround, el6 installation could theoretically continue after > Django14 is removed by manually installing the rpm, which is accessible > from the EPEL build system. But the dev team does not want to take > responsibility for supporting that package; thus we need to phase out > support for Pulp on el6. > > We want to make the transition off of el6 as smooth as it reasonably can > be, so please give us some feedback. Here are two options to start the > conversation: > > 1. Make 2.11 the last Pulp release to have el6 packages. All 2.11.z > releases would get el6 support. 2.12 would have el7 and Fedora packages > only. > > 2. Make el6 builds available until the day Django14 gets removed from > epel6. On that day, Pulp on el6 would become unsupported and builds would > stop. > > Have any other ideas, or feedback on those? > > Thanks for your input, > Michael > > ___ > Pulp-list mailing list > Pulp-list@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list > ___ Pulp-list mailing list Pulp-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
Re: [Pulp-list] dropping el6 builds of Pulp
> > 1. Make 2.11 the last Pulp release to have el6 packages. All 2.11.z > releases would get el6 support. 2.12 would have el7 and Fedora packages > only. > > 2. Make el6 builds available until the day Django14 gets removed from > epel6. On that day, Pulp on el6 would become unsupported and builds would > stop. > I guess it depends on what is meant by "support." Assuming that option 2 means "you're on your own for all versions from this day forward", then I would vote for option 1 - I'd rather have a known terminal release than a drop-dead date for ALL current and previous releases. ___ Pulp-list mailing list Pulp-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
[Pulp-list] Pulp 2.10.2 Hotfix now generally available!
Pulp 2.10.2 Hotfix is now generally available in the stable repositories: https://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/pulp/pulp/stable/2.10/ https://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/pulp/pulp/stable/2/ This is a critical hotfix addressing a issues that resulted in 2.10.1 being rolled back. This release also includes all of the bug fixes to Pulp Platform, the RPM Plugin, and the OSTree plugin originally released with 2.10.1. All hotfix issues (listed below) are tested and verified as fixed. Upgrading = The Pulp 2 stable repository is included in the pulp repo files: https://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/pulp/pulp/fedora-pulp.repo for fedora 23 & 24 https://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/pulp/pulp/rhel-pulp.repo for RHEL 6 & 7 After enabling the pulp-2-stable repository, you'll want to follow the standard upgrade path with migrations: > $ sudo systemctl stop httpd pulp_workers pulp_resource_manager pulp_celerybeat > $ sudo yum upgrade > $ sudo -u apache pulp-manage-db > $ sudo systemctl start httpd pulp_workers pulp_resource_manager > pulp_celerybeat Hotfix Issues = This hotfix release addresses errors caused by a merge issue introduced prior to the release of 2.10.1, tracked in Redmine here: https://pulp.plan.io/issues/2378 While that fix was being verified, it was discovered that publishing fails on el6, tracked in Redmine here: https://pulp.plan.io/issues/2387 Known Issues - Upgrading on EL 7.3 can take longer than on other platforms. pulp-selinux package unnecessarily runs restorecon on /var/lib/pulp. The duration of upgrade depends on the amount of content in that directory. - As part of fixing the above issue, it was also discovered that upgrading from 2.10.0 can take longer than from 2.9.1 and earlier versions. The fix for this issue will be released with 2.10.3. Issues Addressed In addition to the 2.10.2 hotfix issues, these issues were fixed in Pulp 2.10.1: OSTree Support 2237Published repositories are copied instead of linked 2213Proxy URL for remotes not properly constructed. Pulp 2344 Streamer PulpHTTPAdapter does not configure the proxy pool manger with certificates resulting in 503s. 2328Repository syncs show all units updated even when there are no changes 2287Cannot get docker v2 repo tags list 2278Remove checksum_type from the srpm and drpm collections 2277Content published using move (instead of copy) causes 404 due to selinux denial. 2221rsync distributor doesn't remove files from remote when rsyncing empty repository with --delete 2049Django RemovedInDjango110Warning in logs for missing TEMPLATES setting 1766Pulp API is incompatible with Django 1.10 1392Misleading nodes quickstart howto RPM Support 2326Publishes fail 2257unit test failure: "AppRegistryNotReady: Apps aren't loaded yet." 2242Package signature ID checking is broken when syncing in packages 2227Only first pkglist is synced for erratum even if multiple are present 2190Unit is associated with the repo before it is copied to the final location View this list in Redmine: http://bit.ly/2eqCCZe ___ Pulp-list mailing list Pulp-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
Re: [Pulp-list] dropping el6 builds of Pulp
I would love for all the pulp components to be easily installable via pip install. That will probably require moving a lot of the data-manipulation that is happening in the rpm spec files into setup.py. Also, I am not sure how well pulp would handle the new paths for things like the json file that defines the unit types supported by a plugin. In other words, while worthwhile, I think it's a fair chunk of work. On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Joe Adams wrote: > Not sure if this is a very redhat way of doing things, but what about > converting it over to a pip installation? That would allow it to be > installed in a virtual environment and run on any version of the operating > system so long as it can compile or install the required components. That > would also break you from being so closely tied to packages in the epel / > redhat / centos repos. We all love them for being stable and slow to > change, but with projects like django that have a faster release cadence, > it doesn't necessarily make sense to be tied to the distro's timelines. You > could essentially keep support for EL6 and EL7 for the foreseeable future > and maybe even enable people stuck on EL5 to run pulp (unsupported of > course). > > It's been a breeze for us to set up any python project so long as I can > install it in a virtual environment (even requiring python 3). Upgrades > also seem to go fairly smoothly besides the occasional need to add a -devel > package for dependencies. > > > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Michael Hrivnak > wrote: > >> We need your input on when to stop making builds of Pulp for el6. >> >> Running Pulp on el6, which uses Python 2.6, has been getting more >> difficult over time. Many libraries we depend on have dropped support for >> Python 2.6, which exacerbates the usual challenge of making dependencies >> available on an aging platform. >> >> The latest news is that epel6 will remove their Django package, Django14. >> It has multiple CVEs (none of which we think affect Pulp) and is >> unsupported upstream. There is no supported version of Django that runs on >> Python 2.6. Thus epel has decided to remove this package from epel6 some >> time between Jan 31 and March 31 of 2017. Once that happens, Pulp will not >> be installable on el6 unless you provide that package some other way. >> >> As a workaround, el6 installation could theoretically continue after >> Django14 is removed by manually installing the rpm, which is accessible >> from the EPEL build system. But the dev team does not want to take >> responsibility for supporting that package; thus we need to phase out >> support for Pulp on el6. >> >> We want to make the transition off of el6 as smooth as it reasonably can >> be, so please give us some feedback. Here are two options to start the >> conversation: >> >> 1. Make 2.11 the last Pulp release to have el6 packages. All 2.11.z >> releases would get el6 support. 2.12 would have el7 and Fedora packages >> only. >> >> 2. Make el6 builds available until the day Django14 gets removed from >> epel6. On that day, Pulp on el6 would become unsupported and builds would >> stop. >> >> Have any other ideas, or feedback on those? >> >> Thanks for your input, >> Michael >> >> ___ >> Pulp-list mailing list >> Pulp-list@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list >> > > > ___ > Pulp-list mailing list > Pulp-list@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list > ___ Pulp-list mailing list Pulp-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
