Re: Hyper-V Synthetic drivers on SL6
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Garrett Holmstrom ho...@physics.umn.edu wrote: On 3/3/2011 14:18, Dave Capone wrote: I am not sure if I am missing something, but that link does not seem to point to a CentPlus kernel release that has the synthetic drivers enabled. It might not be enabled in that kernel either. If that is the case then your best bet is probably to compile your own kernel. His best bet was to file a RFE :-) It is being taken care of here: http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=4752 I will try to work on it today (if time permits). Akemi
SL 6, install DVD, security/fastbugs can't find repomd.xml
Hi, Firstly huge congratulations on the release of Scientific Linux 6. I have been watching the development process with interest and admiration. I tried an install about 24 hours ago (I state that in case it might have been a passing glitch) from the final 0303 install DVD. I was aware that you should not pick any of the update repo's with the *Everything* DVD, but I repeat this was with the *install* DVD. I clicked the update (security) repo, but received an error stating that the repomd.xml file couldn't be found. The same happened with the fastbugs check box. However, after installation the updates repo file was present in /etc/yum.repos.d/ and *worked*, so *post*-install things were fine. I can think of possible scenarios: o FTP site temporarily unavailable (I *had* set up networking OK) o wrong link in installer o links/directories not set up on FTP o FTP site not fully mirrored o FTP repomd.xml not present/being replaced at the time but these are obviously only pure guesses on my part. Once again, this was from the *install* DVD. With best wishes, David.
Re: SL 6, install DVD, security/fastbugs can't find repomd.xml
On 03/04/2011 06:17 AM, David Crick wrote: Hi, Firstly huge congratulations on the release of Scientific Linux 6. I have been watching the development process with interest and admiration. I tried an install about 24 hours ago (I state that in case it might have been a passing glitch) from the final 0303 install DVD. I was aware that you should not pick any of the update repo's with the *Everything* DVD, but I repeat this was with the *install* DVD. I clicked the update (security) repo, but received an error stating that the repomd.xml file couldn't be found. The same happened with the fastbugs check box. However, after installation the updates repo file was present in /etc/yum.repos.d/ and *worked*, so *post*-install things were fine. I can think of possible scenarios: o FTP site temporarily unavailable (I *had* set up networking OK) o wrong link in installer o links/directories not set up on FTP o FTP site not fully mirrored o FTP repomd.xml not present/being replaced at the time but these are obviously only pure guesses on my part. Once again, this was from the *install* DVD. With best wishes, David. Hi David, You were correct. There was a link missing on the distribution servers that was preventing updates from the Install DVD, possibly the network install as well. We have created the appropriate link, tested, and it is working again. Thanks again for reporting. Troy -- __ Troy Dawson daw...@fnal.gov (630)840-6468 Fermilab ComputingDivision/SCF/FEF/SLSMS Group __
Adobe missing??
Hi all. Just installed SL6 x64 final via the Install DVD. All runs smooth but Adobe repo. It doesn't show anything. Is like there was no files on the repo. No error is given. :-( Somebody with this issue? Thanks. Amado.
Re: Adobe missing??
On 03/04/2011 10:53 AM, Amado wrote: Hi all. Just installed SL6 x64 final via the Install DVD. All runs smooth but Adobe repo. It doesn't show anything. Is like there was no files on the repo. No error is given. :-( Somebody with this issue? Thanks. Amado. I don't understand what you mean by It doesn't show anything What command or program are you using? Yes, there are packages in the adobe release # yum --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=adobe-linux-i386 list available Loaded plugins: refresh-packagekit Available Packages AdobeReader_chs.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_cht.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_dan.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_deu.i486 9.4.2-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_esp.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_fra.i486 9.4.2-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_ita.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_jpn.i486 9.4.2-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_kor.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_nld.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_nor.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_ptb.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_suo.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_sve.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 adobeair.i386 2.5.1-17730 adobe-linux-i386 # Troy -- __ Troy Dawson daw...@fnal.gov (630)840-6468 Fermilab ComputingDivision/SCF/FEF/SLSMS Group __
Re: Adobe missing??
Troy, all is working now. I don't know what has happened, but it is already solved. Sorry for the inconvenience. Amado. 2011/3/4 Troy Dawson daw...@fnal.gov On 03/04/2011 10:53 AM, Amado wrote: Hi all. Just installed SL6 x64 final via the Install DVD. All runs smooth but Adobe repo. It doesn't show anything. Is like there was no files on the repo. No error is given. :-( Somebody with this issue? Thanks. Amado. I don't understand what you mean by It doesn't show anything What command or program are you using? Yes, there are packages in the adobe release # yum --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=adobe-linux-i386 list available Loaded plugins: refresh-packagekit Available Packages AdobeReader_chs.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_cht.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_dan.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_deu.i486 9.4.2-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_esp.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_fra.i486 9.4.2-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_ita.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_jpn.i486 9.4.2-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_kor.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_nld.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_nor.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_ptb.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_suo.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 AdobeReader_sve.i486 8.1.7-1 adobe-linux-i386 adobeair.i386 2.5.1-17730 adobe-linux-i386 # Troy -- __ Troy Dawson daw...@fnal.gov (630)840-6468 Fermilab ComputingDivision/SCF/FEF/SLSMS Group __
Web site dpwn?
This may be the wrong place, but it is what I could find quickly. It appears that the main Scientific Linux website (http://www.scientificlinux.org/, https://www.scientificlinux.org/) is down, possibly with a configuration or disk problem. It is giving error code 500, Message: internal server error on all accesses. Jim -- James Fait, Ph.D Beamline Scientist SER-CAT, APS Argonne National Laboratory Building 436B-008 9700 S. Cass Ave. Argonne, IL 60439 Email: f...@anl.gov Phone: 630-252-0644 Fax: 630-252-0652
Re: Web site dpwn?
On 03/04/2011 03:20 PM, Jim Fait wrote: This may be the wrong place, but it is what I could find quickly. It appears that the main Scientific Linux website (http://www.scientificlinux.org/, https://www.scientificlinux.org/) is down, possibly with a configuration or disk problem. It is giving error code 500, Message: internal server error on all accesses. Jim Thanks Investigating. Troy -- __ Troy Dawson daw...@fnal.gov (630)840-6468 Fermilab ComputingDivision/SCF/FEF/SLSMS Group __
Re: Web site dpwn?
On 03/04/2011 03:24 PM, Troy J Dawson wrote: On 03/04/2011 03:20 PM, Jim Fait wrote: This may be the wrong place, but it is what I could find quickly. It appears that the main Scientific Linux website (http://www.scientificlinux.org/, https://www.scientificlinux.org/) is down, possibly with a configuration or disk problem. It is giving error code 500, Message: internal server error on all accesses. Jim Thanks Investigating. Troy Fixed and working again. Thanks for reporting it. Troy -- __ Troy Dawson daw...@fnal.gov (630)840-6468 Fermilab ComputingDivision/SCF/FEF/SLSMS Group __
Re: Scientific Linux 6.0 is officially released
On 03/04/2011 08:52 AM, Piscium wrote: On 3 March 2011 15:35, Troy Dawson daw...@fnal.gov wrote: March 3, 2011 Scientific Linux 6.0 is now officially released and available. We want to thank everyone who has contributed, tested, and given us feedback. Without everyone's contributions, help and testing, this release wouldn't be as good as it is. More information can be found at the distribution web site http://www.scientificlinux.org/distributions/6x/6.0/ There are CD and DVD iso images available at http://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/6.0/i386/iso/ http://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/6.0/x86_64/iso/ Great, thanks. Was wondering if the Live CD is forthcoming? Yes, the LiveCD will come. I had to fix a critical bug. I will soon rebuild the LiveCD, announce it for testing on scientific-linux-devel. If no other showstopper is found, the LiveCD should be officially released beginning of next week. Cheers, Urs
SL6: Wrong baseurl for atrpms repo - renders yum unusable
Files /etc/yum.repos.d/atrpms.repo, atrpms-testing.repo and atrpms-bleeding.repo from package atrpms-repo-6-4.el6.x86_64 contain wron g baseurls: baseurl=http://dl.atrpms.net/el$releasever-$basearch/atrpms/stable baseurl=http://dl.atrpms.net/el$releasever-$basearch/atrpms/testing baseurl=http://dl.atrpms.net/el$releasever-$basearch/atrpms/bleeding Variable $releasever expands to 6.0, while atrpms keeps packages in directories el6-i386 and el6-x86_64 - that is, without .0. As a result, yum fails to retrieve repo metadata, and quits, if metadata is not availa ble in the cache. Steps to reproduce: 1. Install SL with manual package selection, and select ATrpms repo packa ge. 2. After installation, log in and try to update the system using yum upd ate. Result: Loaded plugins: downloadonly, refresh-packagekit, security http://dl.atrpms.net/el6.0-x86_64/atrpms/stable/repodata/repomd.xml: [Err no 14] HTTP Error 404 : http://dl.atrpms.net/el6.0-x86_64/atrpms/stable/repodata/repomd.xml Trying other mirror. Error: Cannot retrieve repository metadata (repomd.xml) for repository: atrpms. Please verify its path and try again Expected result: yum succeeds without an error message. Alternative steps to reproduce the problem: 1. yum install atrpms-repo 2. yum clean all 3. yum check-update Workaround: Disable atrpms repository or correct /etc/yum.repos.d/atrpms.repo by replacing $releasever with 6. Files atrpms-testing.repo and atrpms-bleeding.repo must also be modified in this way, if these repositories are enabled.
Re: SL6: Wrong baseurl for atrpms repo - renders yum unusable
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011, Maciej Puzio wrote: Files /etc/yum.repos.d/atrpms.repo, atrpms-testing.repo and atrpms-bleeding.repo from package atrpms-repo-6-4.el6.x86_64 contain wrong baseurls: baseurl=http://dl.atrpms.net/el$releasever-$basearch/atrpms/stable baseurl=http://dl.atrpms.net/el$releasever-$basearch/atrpms/testing baseurl=http://dl.atrpms.net/el$releasever-$basearch/atrpms/bleeding Variable $releasever expands to 6.0, while atrpms keeps packages in directories el6-i386 and el6-x86_64 - that is, without .0. As a result, ... I've never understood why yum doesn't provide a $majorreleasever variable as well as $releasever - for those repos where you want to have a single tree for each major release (but not for the point releases) and don't expect people to edit the .repo files. I *think* it would be an easy change to yum's config.py (where yumvars['releasever'] gets set). Perhaps it would be better to have a syntax in the .conf files to allow variables/values to be defined which will be expanded in .repo files (you can already use YUM0-YUM9 environment variables but those are horrid names). Not that I'm expecting any of this to be done by the sl team - they work hard enough as-it-is... Next time I get a chance I'll test it and try to submit a patch to the yum maintainers. -- Jon
www.channelregister.co.uk Article about RHEL kernel Patches
Just curious. Does this change in the way Red Hat publishes kernel patches have any adverse consequences for SL? http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2011/03/04/red_hat_twarts_oracle_and_novell_with_change_to_source_code_packaging/
Re: Scientific Linux 6.0 is officially released
On Fri, 04 Mar 2011 22:57:13 +0100 Urs Beyerle urs.beye...@env.ethz.ch wrote: Yes, the LiveCD will come. I had to fix a critical bug. I will soon rebuild the LiveCD, announce it for testing on scientific-linux-devel. If no other showstopper is found, the LiveCD should be officially released beginning of next week. Cheers, Urs By the way, I'd like to make 1 or 2 requests for the mini live cd: wpa-supplicant and wpa_cli, which is a text-mode configuration/control tool that comes along with it. That shouldn't take too much space, and it would allow some folks to use more secure connections or get online with the mini cd. Thanks, Ibidem P.S.: Does anyone know how well SL6 + IceWM work in 1 GB of ram, or what the minimum requirements for that configuration are? I know that RHEL6 lists 1GB as the absolute minimum, so I'd like to check on that.
Re: SL6: Wrong baseurl for atrpms repo - renders yum unusable
On 3/4/2011 17:06, Jon Peatfield wrote: On Fri, 4 Mar 2011, Maciej Puzio wrote: Files /etc/yum.repos.d/atrpms.repo, atrpms-testing.repo and atrpms-bleeding.repo from package atrpms-repo-6-4.el6.x86_64 contain wrong baseurls: baseurl=http://dl.atrpms.net/el$releasever-$basearch/atrpms/stable baseurl=http://dl.atrpms.net/el$releasever-$basearch/atrpms/testing baseurl=http://dl.atrpms.net/el$releasever-$basearch/atrpms/bleeding Variable $releasever expands to 6.0, while atrpms keeps packages in directories el6-i386 and el6-x86_64 - that is, without .0. As a result, ... I've never understood why yum doesn't provide a $majorreleasever variable as well as $releasever - for those repos where you want to have a single tree for each major release (but not for the point releases) and don't expect people to edit the .repo files. I *think* it would be an easy change to yum's config.py (where yumvars['releasever'] gets set). Perhaps it would be better to have a syntax in the .conf files to allow variables/values to be defined which will be expanded in .repo files (you can already use YUM0-YUM9 environment variables but those are horrid names). Yum 3.2.28 already has this type of feature. If you drop a file in /etc/yum/vars/ you can access the first line of its contents like a shell variable. For example, if you run ``echo 6 /etc/yum/vars/majorreleasever'' then you can do exactly what you described. So rather than implementing it yourself it might be worth asking upstream to backport the code that already exists. Yum has no concept of a major or minor release; it just grabs the version of your sl-release package. AFAIK, SL is the only distro among its siblings that changes this version with every point release, so it is the only one on which the usual $releasever scheme breaks. -- Garrett Holmstrom
Re: SL6: Wrong baseurl for atrpms repo - renders yum unusable
On Mar 5, 2011, at 07:15 , Garrett Holmstrom wrote: On 3/4/2011 17:06, Jon Peatfield wrote: I've never understood why yum doesn't provide a $majorreleasever variable as well as $releasever - for those repos where you want to have a single tree for each major release (but not for the point releases) and don't expect people to edit the .repo files. I *think* it would be an easy change to yum's config.py (where yumvars['releasever'] gets set). Perhaps it would be better to have a syntax in the .conf files to allow variables/values to be defined which will be expanded in .repo files (you can already use YUM0-YUM9 environment variables but those are horrid names). Yum 3.2.28 already has this type of feature. If you drop a file in /etc/yum/vars/ you can access the first line of its contents like a shell variable. For example, if you run ``echo 6 /etc/yum/vars/majorreleasever'' then you can do exactly what you described. So rather than implementing it yourself it might be worth asking upstream to backport the code that already exists. No need to ask - SL6 already has this feature: * Fri Apr 16 2010 James Antill james.ant...@redhat.com - 3.2.27-4 - A few minor bugfixes from upstream - Add dynamic FS based yumvars Variable names must be lower case. Yum has no concept of a major or minor release; it just grabs the version of your sl-release package. AFAIK, SL is the only distro among its siblings that changes this version with every point release, so it is the only one on which the usual $releasever scheme breaks. -- Stephan Wiesand DESY -DV- Platanenenallee 6 15738 Zeuthen, Germany