unsubscribe

[Alex Serebryanskiy]

===Aleksander Serebryanskiy, PhDFesenkov Astrophysical 
Institute,Observatory 23, 050020 Almaty, Kazakhstan 
tel: 8(747)9393892e-mail: a...@aphi.kz, aserebryans...@yahoo.com

Re: Pondering a switch to Debian

[Yasha Karant]

From below:
If you like the RH user interface, just get the gnome-session-flashback 
package. It's a slightly updated gnome-2 environment.

End excerpt.

Ubuntu has many window management user interfaces.  If one likes Gnome 
2, also consider MATE that is available and works under LTS (the 
"enterprise" version of Ubuntu).


https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__linuxhint.com_install-5Fmate-5Fdesktop-5Fubuntu-5F20-2D04_=DwIGaQ=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=IZZxBXLu9mVKq4_EA6OYhwd3lXk4tBxm7Gkc6ol-Gqk=pJLcplfMvOJrAssuOLrOXxfpkSg1a8Jg9mb76aCUsl8= 


I use MATE rather than any of the default current Ubuntu GUI desktops.

On 2/4/21 4:13 PM, Arthur H. Edwards wrote:

I don't know how welcome this point of view is, but, here goes.

I started on RH 4.1, back before kernel modules, before ppp was part of the 
kernel, etc (1997). After a brief detour to suse, I changed to Debian and 
stayed there for ten years. The package management system is way cleaner than 
RH, and the system organization is also simpler.  I left Debian for Ubuntu as 
soon as I new about it because I got tired of debating how many GPL-licensed 
angels could dance on the head of a pin. Ubuntu has been great-- aside from 
some temporary interface issues. The only reasons I have used SL, or any other 
RH derivative recently, were workplace requirements. Ubuntu has encryption 
capabilities that require licenses, and we are fighting that fight right now.. 
Ubuntu is, basically, Debian. The package vocabulary is WAY bigger than any set 
of RH repositories. In fact, I just don't understand why SL is called 
scientific when Ubuntu is not. There is a huge set of technical packages in 
standard Ubuntu. Make the leap as soon as you can. If there is no internal 
resistance, do it today. You will not regret it. If you like the RH user 
interface, just get the gnome-session-flashback package. It's a slightly 
updated gnome-2 environment. I still use it.

Art Edwards

Re: Pondering a switch to Debian

[Ching Him Leung]

Consider I am having trouble getting my collaborator to start testing our 
software on EL8. I don't know how well switching to Debian based distro will go.

Ching Him

Re: Pondering a switch to Debian

[Arthur H. Edwards]

I don't know how welcome this point of view is, but, here goes. 

I started on RH 4.1, back before kernel modules, before ppp was part of the 
kernel, etc (1997). After a brief detour to suse, I changed to Debian and 
stayed there for ten years. The package management system is way cleaner than 
RH, and the system organization is also simpler.  I left Debian for Ubuntu as 
soon as I new about it because I got tired of debating how many GPL-licensed 
angels could dance on the head of a pin. Ubuntu has been great-- aside from 
some temporary interface issues. The only reasons I have used SL, or any other 
RH derivative recently, were workplace requirements. Ubuntu has encryption 
capabilities that require licenses, and we are fighting that fight right now.. 
Ubuntu is, basically, Debian. The package vocabulary is WAY bigger than any set 
of RH repositories. In fact, I just don't understand why SL is called 
scientific when Ubuntu is not. There is a huge set of technical packages in 
standard Ubuntu. Make the leap as soon as you can. If there is no internal 
resistance, do it today. You will not regret it. If you like the RH user 
interface, just get the gnome-session-flashback package. It's a slightly 
updated gnome-2 environment. I still use it. 

Art Edwards

-- 
  Arthur H. Edwards
  edwards...@fastmail.fm

On Wed, Feb 3, 2021, at 5:52 PM, Keith Lofstrom wrote:
> Having been burned by IBM before, and with no guarantee
> that "Long-term Redhat for individuals" will survive IBM's
> legal department into the far future --- I'm thinking about
> abandoning 25 years of Redhat experience and switching to
> Debian, while my aging brain can still handle change.
> 
> Debian - yikes!
> 
> Thinking about - not decided, though I halted work on a
> server upgrade to CentOS 8 while I wait for the dust to
> settle.  Rocky in April is another option, but if IBM
> goes after them, they will be a wet spot on the floor.
> 
> So - who else is contemplating a move to Debian?  
> 
> I very much hope to stay connected to the "scientific"
> aspect of our community.  Making big changes together
> with other science computationalists would be easier.
> 
> Easier still would be staying with an RPM distro, IF it
> remained useful and legal and affordable for our kind of
> computing.  An e-commerce and corporate infrastructure
> focused distro, not so much.
> 
> Keith
> 
> P.S. I remember the Red Hat booth at OSCON 2014, after the
> Borging of CentOS, where I was assured that they would
> support CentOS into the distant future.  That "assurance"
> survived the IBM acquisition by 18 months.  What changes
> will 5 more years of IBM (and their formidable lega
> department, called the Nazgul by other technology lawyers)
> result in?
> 
> 
> -- 
> Keith Lofstrom  kei...@keithl.com
>

Re: Pondering a switch to Debian

[Fait, James F.]

I am planning to move to Ubuntu LTS rather than even touch EL8.  If I need a 
package that Ubuntu doesn't have but Debian does, I can just grab it and 
install, and it will work.  The only reason that I used EL for as long as I did 
was the SystemV/Upstart management of startup.  Now taht everything is systemd, 
there is no advantage to not doing a Debian based system.  Since I know that I 
will be retiring before the facility does, having a means to get pro support is 
desirable, but we don't need it for all of our machines, just the few that are 
used to figure out what runs everywhere.  We have too many machines to go with 
something that has a seat limit. Also, you can bet the free seats of RHEL will 
be gone by the next rev.
Going with Debian or a related distro is reasonable for science, as they do 
have a good SIG that actually packages real software.  But going with Ubuntu is 
also reasonable.



James Fait, Ph.D.

Senior Beamline Scientist

SER-CAT, APS, Argonne National Laboratory

Building 436B-020, 9700 S. Cass Ave., Argonne, IL  60439

f...@anl.gov

f...@uga.edu

Cell: 815-302-2467 Fax: 630-252-0652

Light When You Need It


From: owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov 
 on behalf of Yasha Karant 

Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 8:21 PM
To: Mailing list for Scientific Linux users worldwide 

Subject: Re: Pondering a switch to Debian

There are several issues with IBM RHEL clones, ultimately controlled by
what is termed the Nazgul below (presumably a reference to the fictional
entities:  
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Nazg-25C3-25BBl=DwIDaQ=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=nTjqdNvLHGUa2BQ5UsMUyvKD_BqcIQgVCd1DVvdlzDg=6U4Ha5dld83V2VaQLvx2ZWBL-I2zQZdYozUJ6C87tl0=
  ).  For better or
worse, but so far "for better", I have switched to Ubuntu LTS current
(20.04.2 as this is written), not Debian.  Ubuntu, as with the old RHEL,
has internal "professional" support and development; LTS is used in the
"real" world as an "enterprise" distro.

My reason -- and after much internal discussion and debate -- is that a
10 year lifecycle is only as meaningful as IBM will allow the reality of
this statement.  As new hardware, architecture, and software (including
"systems" applications) emerge, without "updates" and "backports", only
"obsolete" systems will be supported from the actual IBM RH sources (not
executables, and not supported) that need to be built.  Updates for
current hardware, etc., will need to come from ElRepo, Epel, etc.,
unless (almost) all EL clone distros come together to do what IBM RH may
not be doing under the IBM Nazgul.

Is IBM trustworthy?  As a for-profit corporation, absolutely -- to make
whatever financial achievements it plans, subject only to regulations.
Is it trustworthy to keep promises, such as CentOS? -- the track record
of IBM (or many other such vendors) does not inspire confidence in
"trustworthiness".  If the CentOS situation significantly cost revenue
or market share, then indeed IBM RH would be "trustworthy".  Will the
CentOS RHEL situation cost IBM market share?  Probably not -- the CERN
Fermilab HEP community represents not that much market share.


On 2/3/21 5:03 PM, Vinícius Ferrão wrote:
> I will not move to Debian.
>
> RHEL clones have 10 years of lifecycle, AlmaLinux just dropped it’s beta 
> today. So there’s no reason to move to Debian or Ubuntu.
>
>> On 3 Feb 2021, at 21:52, Keith Lofstrom  wrote:
>>
>> Having been burned by IBM before, and with no guarantee
>> that "Long-term Redhat for individuals" will survive IBM's
>> legal department into the far future --- I'm thinking about
>> abandoning 25 years of Redhat experience and switching to
>> Debian, while my aging brain can still handle change.
>>
>> Debian - yikes!
>>
>> Thinking about - not decided, though I halted work on a
>> server upgrade to CentOS 8 while I wait for the dust to
>> settle.  Rocky in April is another option, but if IBM
>> goes after them, they will be a wet spot on the floor.
>>
>> So - who else is contemplating a move to Debian?
>>
>> I very much hope to stay connected to the "scientific"
>> aspect of our community.  Making big changes together
>> with other science computationalists would be easier.
>>
>> Easier still would be staying with an RPM distro, IF it
>> remained useful and legal and affordable for our kind of
>> computing.  An e-commerce and corporate infrastructure
>> focused distro, not so much.
>>
>> Keith
>>
>> P.S. I remember the Red Hat booth at OSCON 2014, after the
>> Borging of CentOS, where I was assured that they would
>> support CentOS into the distant future.  That "assurance"
>> survived the IBM acquisition by 18 months.  What changes
>> will 5 more years of IBM (and their formidable lega
>> department, called the Nazgul by other technology lawyers)

Re: converting to RHEL8...

[Konstantin Olchanski]

On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 01:59:08PM -0800, Yasha Karant wrote:
> 
> Thus, it appears only an install from the web is available, not the
> ability to create local images (e.g., on bootable optical media or
> bootable USB flash drive).  For reasons of both throughput
> limitations as well as network interruptions, I prefer to do a
> "fresh" install from local media.  Is there a mechanism short of
> duplicating an entire distro web site of producing such an image for
> Springdale 8 EL?
> 

Off-topic here. Please take it to the Springdale support forum.

-- 
Konstantin Olchanski
Data Acquisition Systems: The Bytes Must Flow!
Email: olchansk-at-triumf-dot-ca
Snail mail: 4004 Wesbrook Mall, TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 2A3, Canada

Re: converting to RHEL8...

[Konstantin Olchanski]

These instructions are insecure, set you up for a supply-chain attack:

a) RPMs are loaded over plain "http" (no "https")
b) RPM signature is not checked

A more secure sequence would:

- wget 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__somewhere_rpm-2Dsignature-2Dkey=DwIBAg=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=Bwvu8ORtdwu_qqgSySYBdSQ5VFU2sSZyj1XlHQ96Gz4=OuX1i3RoFfYAZJrzTBCVE8ywgKYMw1puabTsB1I4ljM=
 
- independantly verify this signature
- rpm import it
- rpm check signature before installing (or use yum, confirm package signature 
is enabled)


K.O.


On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 03:42:31PM -0600, Ching Him Leung wrote:
> I have not tried RHEL yet, but I have some success converting from CentOS 8 
> to Springdale 8 on a VM. Here are some instruction I found on rocky linux 
> forum
> 
> dnf update -y
> rpm -e --nodeps centos-backgrounds centos-indexhtml centos-gpg-keys 
> centos-linux-release centos-linux-repos centos-logos
> rpm -ivh \
> 
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__springdale.princeton.edu_data_springdale_8_x86-5F64_os_BaseOS_Packages_springdale-2Dappstream-2D8-2D0.sdl8.2.noarch.rpm=DwIBAg=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=Bwvu8ORtdwu_qqgSySYBdSQ5VFU2sSZyj1XlHQ96Gz4=3awxciVrCSZEziaUehriWnMttfwlCRKuMKjepx6bbz0=
>   \
> 
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__springdale.princeton.edu_data_springdale_8_x86-5F64_os_BaseOS_Packages_springdale-2Dcore-2D8-2D0.sdl8.2.noarch.rpm=DwIBAg=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=Bwvu8ORtdwu_qqgSySYBdSQ5VFU2sSZyj1XlHQ96Gz4=xBX0ndIbr0GKnXILKqPO-qmzF3uRMRJoqW64SxEgvjE=
>   \
> 
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__springdale.princeton.edu_data_springdale_8_x86-5F64_os_BaseOS_Packages_springdale-2Drelease-2D8.3-2D0.42.el8.x86-5F64.rpm=DwIBAg=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=Bwvu8ORtdwu_qqgSySYBdSQ5VFU2sSZyj1XlHQ96Gz4=EB5q0Mf4XnrLhTF5rmgjfjnR71LWhzI4xDHIRPwvwx8=
>  
> dnf distro-sync -y
> 
> the distro-sync will reinstall every package 
> 
> Ching Him

-- 
Konstantin Olchanski
Data Acquisition Systems: The Bytes Must Flow!
Email: olchansk-at-triumf-dot-ca
Snail mail: 4004 Wesbrook Mall, TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 2A3, Canada

Re: converting to RHEL8...

[Yasha Karant]

From:  https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__springdale.math.ias.edu_=DwICaQ=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=pOM6wQMzgedRsg4HzlewGm9N_84-75QBg_hgYJfrr1w=NcdRyRcfQFX1_79q-H0uCKsdNlYen2foB1NlJWJ0IZo= 


DVD
i386x86_64
8.3 TBA TBA

End excerpt.

Thus, it appears only an install from the web is available, not the 
ability to create local images (e.g., on bootable optical media or 
bootable USB flash drive).  For reasons of both throughput limitations 
as well as network interruptions, I prefer to do a "fresh" install from 
local media.  Is there a mechanism short of duplicating an entire distro 
web site of producing such an image for Springdale 8 EL?


On 2/4/21 1:42 PM, Ching Him Leung wrote:

I have not tried RHEL yet, but I have some success converting from CentOS 8 to 
Springdale 8 on a VM. Here are some instruction I found on rocky linux forum

dnf update -y
rpm -e --nodeps centos-backgrounds centos-indexhtml centos-gpg-keys 
centos-linux-release centos-linux-repos centos-logos
rpm -ivh \
 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__springdale.princeton.edu_data_springdale_8_x86-5F64_os_BaseOS_Packages_springdale-2Dappstream-2D8-2D0.sdl8.2.noarch.rpm=DwICaQ=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=pOM6wQMzgedRsg4HzlewGm9N_84-75QBg_hgYJfrr1w=teKmwheq9PspWJqF-7s-hVdM9iwSHxGsr3JZTYaG6Ks=
  \
 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__springdale.princeton.edu_data_springdale_8_x86-5F64_os_BaseOS_Packages_springdale-2Dcore-2D8-2D0.sdl8.2.noarch.rpm=DwICaQ=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=pOM6wQMzgedRsg4HzlewGm9N_84-75QBg_hgYJfrr1w=kaVaMeFFDryVppcy5dc3QLVQUDuMzYVhz9RWa9YVXhY=
  \
 https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__springdale.princeton.edu_data_springdale_8_x86-5F64_os_BaseOS_Packages_springdale-2Drelease-2D8.3-2D0.42.el8.x86-5F64.rpm=DwICaQ=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=pOM6wQMzgedRsg4HzlewGm9N_84-75QBg_hgYJfrr1w=7By4jw_wwesZCou0Vx0df-b8uQHXMOvtjhBpkU_HCQ0= 
dnf distro-sync -y


the distro-sync will reinstall every package

Ching Him

Re: converting to RHEL8...

[Ching Him Leung]

I have not tried RHEL yet, but I have some success converting from CentOS 8 to 
Springdale 8 on a VM. Here are some instruction I found on rocky linux forum

dnf update -y
rpm -e --nodeps centos-backgrounds centos-indexhtml centos-gpg-keys 
centos-linux-release centos-linux-repos centos-logos
rpm -ivh \

http://springdale.princeton.edu/data/springdale/8/x86_64/os/BaseOS/Packages/springdale-appstream-8-0.sdl8.2.noarch.rpm
 \

http://springdale.princeton.edu/data/springdale/8/x86_64/os/BaseOS/Packages/springdale-core-8-0.sdl8.2.noarch.rpm
 \

http://springdale.princeton.edu/data/springdale/8/x86_64/os/BaseOS/Packages/springdale-release-8.3-0.42.el8.x86_64.rpm
dnf distro-sync -y

the distro-sync will reinstall every package 

Ching Him

Re: converting to RHEL8...

[RL]

If in doubt, i always did a fresh install, so never had a messup. 
Conversion? Never ever. Dot.


I am running SL7.9 of FermiLab  now. Im sure RH will continue to share 
updates. There is no spilt milk, why cry?


If needed, i will have a follower OS prepared in good time ready to 
switch to. (Checkouts with VirtualBox since a long time).


Where to go later? Dont think it will be debian then; I read DistroWatch 
now and then


Regards,
Rainer

### 
--

On 2/4/21 7:07 PM, Konstantin Olchanski wrote:

On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 12:26:00PM -0800, Konstantin Olchanski wrote:

Here we go. Conversion from CentOS-8 to RHEL-8 in 5 easy steps.

Instructions for converting CentOS to RHEL are posted here:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__access.redhat.com_articles_2360841=DwIDAw=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=IBWdeVmMPbkgwCr8Ir6R307eFH3-2aZ9vYnQ7mEhhHM=Hhj0voUDSXlQKw63jIuVJYcerY5Bmru62tOJwbHKuMk=
convert2rhel-0.15-1.el8.noarch.rpm from github is not signed
To be continued...

[root@daqlabpc ~]# rpm -vh --install convert2rhel-0.15-1.el8.noarch.rpm
error: Failed dependencies:
dnf-utils is needed by convert2rhel-0.15-1.el8.noarch
python3-pexpect is needed by convert2rhel-0.15-1.el8.noarch
[root@daqlabpc ~]#

[root@daqlabpc ~]# yum install dnf-utils python3-pexpect
[root@daqlabpc ~]# rpm -vh --install convert2rhel-0.15-1.el8.noarch.rpm

[root@daqlabpc ~]# convert2rhel --disable-submgr --enablerepo  
--enablerepo  --debug

I do not know what REHEL_RepoID1 and ID2 are supposed to be. I do not have any 
Red Hat repos
in my /etc/yum.repos.d, I only have CentOS, epel, etc.

Dead end?

Let's try to use the subscription manager...

[root@daqlabpc ~]# convert2rhel --debug
...
WARNING - By continuing you accept this EULA.
Continue with the system conversion? [y/n]: y
...
WARNING - The following packages will be removed...
PackagePackager 
Repository
--- 
--
centos-logos-80.5-2.el8.x86_64 CentOS 
Buildsys  @AppStream
centos-logos-httpd-80.5-2.el8.noarch   CentOS 
Buildsys  @AppStream
centos-linux-release-8.3-1.2011.el8.noarch CentOS 
Buildsys  @BaseOS
centos-linux-repos-8-2.el8.noarch  CentOS 
Buildsys  @BaseOS
rhn-client-tools-2.8.16-13.module_el8.1.0+211+ad6c0bc7.x86_64  CentOS 
Buildsys  @AppStream
python3-rhn-client-tools-2.8.16-13.module_el8.1.0+211+ad6c0bc7.x86_64  CentOS 
Buildsys  @AppStream
python3-rhnlib-2.8.6-8.module_el8.1.0+211+ad6c0bc7.noarch  CentOS 
Buildsys  @AppStream
Continue with the system conversion? [y/n]: y
...
WARNING - Only packages signed by CentOS Linux are to be reinstalled. Red Hat 
support won't be provided for the following third party packages:
Package  Packager  
Repository
---    
--
certbot-1.11.0-1.el8.noarch  Fedora Project@epel
convert2rhel-0.15-1.el8.noarch   N/A   
@System
ganglia-3.7.2-33.el8.x86_64  Fedora Project@epel
google-chrome-stable-88.0.4324.146-1.x86_64  Chrome Linux Team 
@google-chrome-64
zfs-release-1-8.1.noarch N/A   
@@commandline
... and more
Continue with the system conversion? [y/n]: y
...
[02/04/2021 09:56:06] TASK - [Convert: Subscription Manager - Install] 
**
[02/04/2021 09:56:06] CRITICAL - The /usr/share/convert2rhel/subscription-manager directory does not 
exist or is empty. Using the subscription-manager is not documented yet. Please use the 
--disable-submgr option. Read more about the tool usage in the article 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__access.redhat.com_articles_2360841=DwIBAg=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=iel0E8JL_svyu_6W2ZUso-H4dxqnH78q5ZLs2Y3GXAU=juJeIzssALq8uliLKAAoGsvuo4IptowyO_g8EO7iuq4=
 .

Dead end?

In the comments section of 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__access.redhat.com_articles_2360841=DwIBAg=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=iel0E8JL_svyu_6W2ZUso-H4dxqnH78q5ZLs2Y3GXAU=juJeIzssALq8uliLKAAoGsvuo4IptowyO_g8EO7iuq4=
  there is some information
on what to do next, with dates 1-3 Feb 2021 (i.e. fresh just now) and promises 
from a Red Hat person
about "We are working on changes that will not require you to pre-download any 
package except convert2rhel."

So dead end for now, until Red Hat 

Re: Pondering a switch to Debian

[Konstantin Olchanski]

On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 10:56:39AM -0800, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 4:58 PM Keith Lofstrom  wrote:
> >
> > So - who else is contemplating a move to Debian?
> 
> We will be following CERN and Fermilab's lead, whatever that is.
> 

Same here. We build experiments that are located at CERN, and people
who run these experiments are most comfortable if we use linux supported
or at least approved/annointed by CERN.

With the covid lockdown at CERN and everybody there working from home,
my contacts do not have any insider information. I used ot have some contacts 
through ROOT,
still watch that space and I see that ROOT have binary kits for every MacOS, 
for every
Ubuntu, for recent Fedora, for CentOS-7, but NOT for CentOS-8. I think there is 
a message here.

>
> But the longer we go without knowing, the more uncomfortable we get.
> Anybody have any inside information on their thinking?
> 

We all know what happened last time this happened (RHL->RHEL kerfuffle).

This time, I suspect that Red Hat did not see CERN, ATLAS, LHC experiments,
US DOE Labs in their list of paying customers and went ahead without consulting
with them.

Me, I am not worried, between debian/ubuntu, "free" RHEL and upcoming CentOS
reincarnations, our needs for open source operating systems are covered.

-- 
Konstantin Olchanski
Data Acquisition Systems: The Bytes Must Flow!
Email: olchansk-at-triumf-dot-ca
Snail mail: 4004 Wesbrook Mall, TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 2A3, Canada

Re: Pondering a switch to Debian

[Yasha Karant]

Several comments as a long term RedHat production (pre-Fedora) and then 
EL user -- on laptops, on workstations (including workstations for 
scientific visualisation), and on compute and storage server "farms".


1.  Ubuntu LTS serves essentially the same sector as EL, including SL 
with some caveats concerning the existence of a list such as this.  The 
distrust for Canonical (the for-profit entity behind Ubuntu) because any 
for-profit entity could behave as has IBM RH with the current EL 
situation (debacle to us) is not applicable in so far as Ubuntu is a 
port/repackaging with add-ons from Debian -- if Canonical does an IBM 
RH, one can with relative ease switch to "pure non-profit" Debian. 
Ubuntu, as with RHEL, and SL, has paid employee professional Staff 
supporting the distro (albeit the SL staff mostly were re-packagers of 
the RHEL distro source).


1.1 Conversion for laptops from SL to Ubuntu LTS was fairly 
straightforward; detailed observations available upon request.  As my 
facility mostly (and wisely) is under pandemic shutdown, deployment on 
servers is not yet done.


2.  Reliance upon following the Fermilab/CERN HEP consortia may not be 
feasible, even if Fermilab/CERN internally develop something akin to SL. 
Although (most of) these entities operate upon pubic (government) 
funding, they may not be required to release anything equivalent to SL 
to those outside the consortia.  SL was a boon to the community and 
proven in the crucible of HEP (worldwide consortia).


3.  As has been pointed out, there is no guarantee that IBM RH will 
continue to make RHEL available in executable distro format licensed for 
free for specific "small" users (under the Linux and GPL licenses, my 
understanding is that source must be made available -- but whether such 
source is feasible to build into an executable working distro is a 
separate issue).


3.1 As has been pointed out, the IBM RH tool/s to convert from CentOS 
(not SL) to the "equivalent" RHEL are not working as of the observation 
from that correspondent.


As a practical matter, Ubuntu LTS (and presumably the underlying Debian 
"equivalent") is kept more current than EL in terms of having "current" 
versions of many applications.  Thus, when I needed TexStudio current, 
it could not be built for SL7 -- I have notes from this SL list to that 
effect.


It will remain to be resolved what Fermilab/CERN/HEP will do going 
forward (there may already have been consortia meetings in which the 
matters have been resolved, but the consortia NDAs have prevented the 
announcement as of yet).  In some cases vendor obsolete hardware 
evidently still must be put into use as the various science groups do 
not have the funding to support hardware and personnel costs simply to 
replace everything.  Moreover, such groups may not have the experimental 
schedule (specified scheduled runs at experimental facilities, such as 
an accelerator/detector complex) to deploy (including testing) of new 
hardware systems.


On 2/4/21 10:56 AM, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 4:58 PM Keith Lofstrom > wrote:

 >
 > So - who else is contemplating a move to Debian?

We will be following CERN and Fermilab's lead, whatever that is.

But the longer we go without knowing, the more uncomfortable we get. 
Anybody have any inside information on their thinking?


  - Pat

Re: Pondering a switch to Debian

[Patrick J. LoPresti]

On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 4:58 PM Keith Lofstrom  wrote:
>
> So - who else is contemplating a move to Debian?

We will be following CERN and Fermilab's lead, whatever that is.

But the longer we go without knowing, the more uncomfortable we get.
Anybody have any inside information on their thinking?

 - Pat

Re: Pondering a switch to Debian

[Konstantin Olchanski]

On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 09:45:03AM -0500, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On 2/3/21 7:52 PM, Keith Lofstrom wrote:
> >... I'm thinking about
> >abandoning 25 years of Redhat experience and switching to
> >Debian, while my aging brain can still handle change.
> >...
> >So - who else is contemplating a move to Debian?
> 
> 
> [lowen] I am.
>

Lowen - thank you for your excellent write up. I am puzzled by a couple
of things and I have a few comments:

- you say good words about professionalism and make good noises
about the high quality of Debian, but you do not elaborate why
you think Ubuntu is lacking in this department.

- you illustrate nicely the problem of linux - half the people worry
about choosing the right linux for their personal laptop (to be groomed
to perfection) and half the people need a linux to run 10-20 computers
used by other people with requirements of minimum maintenance and
maximum uptime. The same linux is not the right linux for both uses!

- professionalism of Debian was recently put into the spotlight
as they re-voted to re-confirm their commitment to systemd (the issue
was that systemd prevented use of some other packages that some
people felt they should have the freedom to use. they were voted down).
check it out and make your own conclusions.

- "feature parity" of all Linuxes is nicely illustrated. I think one
would write pretty much the same report about migrating to BSD
or MacOS - all opensource packages are available pretty much on
all platforms, including Windows.

> 4.) Speaking of Altera Quartus II version 13.0sp1 (NOT version
> 13.1!) for MAX7000 CPLD and Cyclone II/IV/V FPGA development.  The
> simulation tools are substantially different between Quartus 9 and
> 13.0sp1 for the MAX7000, and I have projects in both versions.  This
> was also a bit of a challenge, as I had to hand-build and install an
> older version of libpng to get it to run.

- yes, this is a battle. we have and we use Cyclone-1 FPGA boards,
so running old versions of Quartus is a must. I am impressed
that quartus 13.0sp1 can be made to run on current debian/ubuntu
only "with little blood". Intel have now dropped support for even more FPGAs
from the current quartus, so it looks like we will be battling
this forever. (Our hardware guys are grumbling about switching
to Xilinx, there is some unhappiness about Altera FPGAs...)


-- 
Konstantin Olchanski
Data Acquisition Systems: The Bytes Must Flow!
Email: olchansk-at-triumf-dot-ca
Snail mail: 4004 Wesbrook Mall, TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 2A3, Canada

Re: converting to RHEL8...

[Konstantin Olchanski]

On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 12:26:00PM -0800, Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
> 
> Here we go. Conversion from CentOS-8 to RHEL-8 in 5 easy steps.
> 
> Instructions for converting CentOS to RHEL are posted here:
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__access.redhat.com_articles_2360841=DwIDAw=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=IBWdeVmMPbkgwCr8Ir6R307eFH3-2aZ9vYnQ7mEhhHM=Hhj0voUDSXlQKw63jIuVJYcerY5Bmru62tOJwbHKuMk=
>  
> convert2rhel-0.15-1.el8.noarch.rpm from github is not signed
> To be continued...

[root@daqlabpc ~]# rpm -vh --install convert2rhel-0.15-1.el8.noarch.rpm 
error: Failed dependencies:
   dnf-utils is needed by convert2rhel-0.15-1.el8.noarch
   python3-pexpect is needed by convert2rhel-0.15-1.el8.noarch
[root@daqlabpc ~]# 

[root@daqlabpc ~]# yum install dnf-utils python3-pexpect
[root@daqlabpc ~]# rpm -vh --install convert2rhel-0.15-1.el8.noarch.rpm 

[root@daqlabpc ~]# convert2rhel --disable-submgr --enablerepo  
--enablerepo  --debug

I do not know what REHEL_RepoID1 and ID2 are supposed to be. I do not have any 
Red Hat repos
in my /etc/yum.repos.d, I only have CentOS, epel, etc.

Dead end?

Let's try to use the subscription manager...

[root@daqlabpc ~]# convert2rhel --debug
...
WARNING - By continuing you accept this EULA.
Continue with the system conversion? [y/n]: y
...
WARNING - The following packages will be removed...
PackagePackager 
Repository
--- 
--
centos-logos-80.5-2.el8.x86_64 CentOS 
Buildsys  @AppStream
centos-logos-httpd-80.5-2.el8.noarch   CentOS 
Buildsys  @AppStream
centos-linux-release-8.3-1.2011.el8.noarch CentOS 
Buildsys  @BaseOS
centos-linux-repos-8-2.el8.noarch  CentOS 
Buildsys  @BaseOS
rhn-client-tools-2.8.16-13.module_el8.1.0+211+ad6c0bc7.x86_64  CentOS 
Buildsys  @AppStream
python3-rhn-client-tools-2.8.16-13.module_el8.1.0+211+ad6c0bc7.x86_64  CentOS 
Buildsys  @AppStream
python3-rhnlib-2.8.6-8.module_el8.1.0+211+ad6c0bc7.noarch  CentOS 
Buildsys  @AppStream
Continue with the system conversion? [y/n]: y
...
WARNING - Only packages signed by CentOS Linux are to be reinstalled. Red Hat 
support won't be provided for the following third party packages:
Package  Packager  
Repository
---    
--
certbot-1.11.0-1.el8.noarch  Fedora Project@epel
convert2rhel-0.15-1.el8.noarch   N/A   
@System
ganglia-3.7.2-33.el8.x86_64  Fedora Project@epel
google-chrome-stable-88.0.4324.146-1.x86_64  Chrome Linux Team 
@google-chrome-64
zfs-release-1-8.1.noarch N/A   
@@commandline
... and more
Continue with the system conversion? [y/n]: y
...
[02/04/2021 09:56:06] TASK - [Convert: Subscription Manager - Install] 
**
[02/04/2021 09:56:06] CRITICAL - The 
/usr/share/convert2rhel/subscription-manager directory does not exist or is 
empty. Using the subscription-manager is not documented yet. Please use the 
--disable-submgr option. Read more about the tool usage in the article 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__access.redhat.com_articles_2360841=DwIBAg=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=iel0E8JL_svyu_6W2ZUso-H4dxqnH78q5ZLs2Y3GXAU=juJeIzssALq8uliLKAAoGsvuo4IptowyO_g8EO7iuq4=
 .

Dead end?

In the comments section of 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__access.redhat.com_articles_2360841=DwIBAg=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=iel0E8JL_svyu_6W2ZUso-H4dxqnH78q5ZLs2Y3GXAU=juJeIzssALq8uliLKAAoGsvuo4IptowyO_g8EO7iuq4=
  there is some information
on what to do next, with dates 1-3 Feb 2021 (i.e. fresh just now) and promises 
from a Red Hat person
about "We are working on changes that will not require you to pre-download any 
package except convert2rhel."

So dead end for now, until Red Hat update the instructions.

To be continued...?

-- 
Konstantin Olchanski
Data Acquisition Systems: The Bytes Must Flow!
Email: olchansk-at-triumf-dot-ca
Snail mail: 4004 Wesbrook Mall, TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 2A3, Canada

Re: converting to RHEL8...

[Konstantin Olchanski]

On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 02:24:57AM -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
> > Here we go. Conversion from CentOS-8 to RHEL-8 in 5 easy steps.
> 
> Identically named RPM's do not necessarily have identical contents. To
> do a really *thorough* switch, you need to reinstall *everything*.
>

So you recommend as last step of conversion to run this:

foreach $rpm {
yum reinstall $rpm
}

I suspect this is unnecessary, but you are right, one will have a mongrel system
unless it is done. But do you know of any case where it makes a practical 
difference?
Even way back when?

>
> I used to publish scripts for this, for switching from RHEL to CentOS to
> Scientific Linux and other combinations.
> 

Time to dust them off, I guess.

-- 
Konstantin Olchanski
Data Acquisition Systems: The Bytes Must Flow!
Email: olchansk-at-triumf-dot-ca
Snail mail: 4004 Wesbrook Mall, TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 2A3, Canada

unsubscribe

[TEASTLAKE]

unsubscribe

[Tim Even]

Re: Pondering a switch to Debian

[Lamar Owen]

On 2/3/21 7:52 PM, Keith Lofstrom wrote:

... I'm thinking about
abandoning 25 years of Redhat experience and switching to
Debian, while my aging brain can still handle change.
...
So - who else is contemplating a move to Debian?



I am.  Why Debian and not a downstream version like Ubuntu, Mint, Pop_OS 
or similar?  It actually boils down to professionalism. Professionalism 
has a couple of definitions, one of which is 'The use of professionals 
rather than amateurs in any sport etc' where open source distribution 
development qualifies as 'etc.'  The other definition is "The status, 
methods, character or standards expected of a professional or of a 
professional organization, such as reliability, discretion, 
evenhandedness, and fair play." Debian has been around a very long time 
and is proven reliable; the Debian way of deciding things about the 
distribution definitely has discretion and is evenhanded; Debian has no 
single corporate overlord, and thus fair play is more assured than with 
any other distribution.



I have already converted my main laptop to Debian 10 (hereafter just 
called 'Buster:' so maybe I'm a MythBuster about being able to switch 
from C8 to Debian 10? :-) ).  There is virtually no difference to CentOS 
8 for the most part.  I purchased an 'Everything' USB collection from 
LinuxCollections.com (gets all DVD ISOs and have a nice setup for 
installing), and installed the GNOME desktop for maximum compatibility 
to CentOS 8.



The first thing I installed was the superb Synaptic GUI package 
manager.  Synaptic won't run properly under Wayland, so I logged in to a 
GNOME Xorg session, and Synaptic works.  The move from dnf to apt isn't 
that hard, but the commands are a bit different, but there are several 
'rosetta stone' references out there.  In my lists below I'm not going 
to repeat the standard 'install dependencies using apt or Synaptic' 
statement; that is assumed.



The GNOME extensions set up in Buster is somewhat different from CentOS 
8, and I still haven't gotten everything set up like I like it (notably 
clickable desktop launchers), but I'm comfortable so far.  I copied the 
appropriate directory trees over from where I did the backup



My main set of tools:

1.) KiCAD and Sigrok.  I had to jump through hoops and build the package 
myself to get KiCAD running on C8.  KiCAD 5.0.x is already part of the 
Buster package set.  Lather, rinse, and repeat for Sigrok and pulseview.



2.) Firefox, Thunderbird, and Chrome.  I did have some fun with both 
Firefox and Thunderbird creating new profiles the first startup, but 
once I selected the imported profile from C8 I was up and running with 
everything I need up and running.  Chrome installed and just works.



3.) Virtualization.  I have multiple guests of various operating systems 
and versions; running Windows 10 in KVM is an at least weekly task to 
manage some security hardware at $dayjob.  I had already exported the 
xml definitions for those guests on CentOS 8 prior to the reinstall.  So 
here is where I hit the first relatively major difference.  First, of 
course, I installed the appropriate packages, including the various 
libguestfs tools, the livbvirt tools, qemu-kvm, and virt-manage.



Now, on CentOS 8 there are a number of machine types that reference 
specific RHEL versions; most of my guests had the machine type for an 
i440FX PC for RHEL 7.6 defined.  The Debian libvirt and qemu-kvm 
configuration is different; hand-editing of the xml to change the 
machine type to 'pc' was required.  Also, under CentOS 8 the kvm 
executable is qemu-kvm and is in /usr/libexec; on Debian the executable 
is just 'kvm' and it's not in /usr/libexec anymore, but /usr/bin.  So 
that line had to be edited.  I then needed to define the locations in 
virt-manager where the disk images are.  After verifying the xml and the 
image locations, I used 'virsh define' with each of the exported xml 
files.  I did have to activate the default NAT network interface in 
virt-manager and set it to come up at boot.



One of my Windows 7 machines insisted on re-activation, but the Windows 
10 and the other Windows 7 and XP guests did not (one x64 Win 7 guest 
for some solar power system design software, two x86 Win 7 guests (one 
for a remote console for the DFM telescope control system for our two 
26-meter radio telescopes; the second for the Zilog ZDS-II development 
system for the eZ80); three Win XP guests (one for Altera Quartus 9 for 
FLEX 10K FPGA and MAX7000 CPLD development; one for running the MyPal 
browser plus an ancient Java for managing our EMC Clariion SAN; one for 
running some old historical proprietary software)).



4.) Speaking of Altera Quartus II version 13.0sp1 (NOT version 
13.1!) for MAX7000 CPLD and Cyclone II/IV/V FPGA development.  The 
simulation tools are substantially different between Quartus 9 and 
13.0sp1 for the MAX7000, and I have projects in both versions.  This was 
also a bit of a challenge, as 

Re: Pondering a switch to Debian

[Brett Viren]

Keith Lofstrom  writes:

> I very much hope to stay connected to the "scientific"
> aspect of our community.  Making big changes together
> with other science computationalists would be easier.

I note that Debian has a science group which, unlike "Scientific" Linux,
actually provides packaging of scientific software.  As a consequence,
there is far more scientific software in Debian than in SL.  But then
there are also more packages in Debian than SL.  In addition to existing
bio and other sub-groups, just recently on the debian-science mailing
list there is discussion of spawning a HEP-specific sub-group.

As to the anxiety of making a switch, I can understand it.  I've had my
feet firmly in the Debian world for more than two decades but with at
least a big toe and sometimes a sore thumb planted in Redhat world
during that time.  So, I know the awkardness when I have to get
something done in Redhat.  I revisited it earlier this year when
upgrading some servers from RHEL 6 to 8 and dealing with all the things
that were *totally* different.  Learning the 6->8 differences was far
more time consuming than learning the more pedestrian Debian->RH
differences (eg, minor apt->dnf differences, having to get EPEL setup
instead of relying on packages just being available from Debian).  Given
the nontrivial "intra-RH" transition the Debian->RH transition was a
minor perturbation.  So, based on all that, I think someone with RH
experience should not have a problem transitioning to Debian.

After all, the Debian and Redhat OSes are not all THAT different.  They
are especially more similar when they are both together compared to the
truly proprietary OSes.

> P.S. I remember the Red Hat booth at OSCON 2014, after the
> Borging of CentOS, where I was assured that they would
> support CentOS into the distant future.  That "assurance"
> survived the IBM acquisition by 18 months.  What changes
> will 5 more years of IBM (and their formidable lega
> department, called the Nazgul by other technology lawyers)
> result in?

This is a very wise question for the community to ponder seriously.

But, my jaded prediction: we won't.

-Brett.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature