FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-10-2011, 08:18 AM
Alain Péan
 
Default EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

Le 09/05/2011 18:36, Benjamin Smith a écrit*:



On Saturday, May 07,
2011 11:52:21 AM Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:

> in-place upgrade of
C5 to C6 will be most likely impossible. To many*

> changes of how
thing work.





Thankfully, the only
in-place upgrades I'll really consider is to cross-grade SL6 to
C6. I've started testing with SL6 and will happily report to
everyone how the cross-grade goes as soon as C6 is out!





-Ben






Hi,



The problem is that when C6.0 will be released, it is likely that
RHEL 6.1 will be already released. So there will be no security
updates for C6.0, and it will be better to stay under SL6, until the
release of C6.1. I already installed three machines under SL6, and
it works fine.



Alain



--
================================================== ========
Alain Péan - LPP/CNRS
Administrateur Système/Réseau
Laboratoire de Physique des Plasmas - UMR 7648
Observatoire de Saint-Maur
4, av de Neptune, Bat. A
94100 Saint-Maur des Fossés
Tel : 01-45-11-42-39 - Fax : 01-48-89-44-33
================================================== ========


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 05-10-2011, 10:13 AM
Ljubomir Ljubojevic
 
Default EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

Alain Péan wrote:
> The problem is that when C6.0 will be released, it is likely that RHEL
> 6.1 will be already released. So there will be no security updates for
> C6.0, and it will be better to stay under SL6, until the release of
> C6.1. I already installed three machines under SL6, and it works fine.
>
> Alain
>

Once 6.0 packages are figured out (how to compile them), newer versions
of those packages in 6.1 will be much easier to compile, so I expect no
more then one month to pass from C6.0 to C6.1

Ljubomir
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 05-11-2011, 01:12 AM
Dag Wieers
 
Default EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

On Tue, 10 May 2011, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:


Alain Péan wrote:
> The problem is that when C6.0 will be released, it is likely that RHEL

6.1 will be already released. So there will be no security updates for
C6.0, and it will be better to stay under SL6, until the release of
C6.1. I already installed three machines under SL6, and it works fine.


Once 6.0 packages are figured out (how to compile them), newer versions
of those packages in 6.1 will be much easier to compile, so I expect no
more then one month to pass from C6.0 to C6.1


Do you expect the C6.0 -> C6.1 differences to be more complex, or less
complex than the C5.5 -> C5.6 differences ?


And given that C5.6 took 3 months, are there any reasons why C6.1 would
take no more than 1 month ?


--
-- dag wieers, dag@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/
-- dagit linux solutions, info@dagit.net, http://dagit.net/

[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 05-11-2011, 01:17 AM
Craig White
 
Default EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 12:13 +0200, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> Alain Péan wrote:
> > The problem is that when C6.0 will be released, it is likely that RHEL
> > 6.1 will be already released. So there will be no security updates for
> > C6.0, and it will be better to stay under SL6, until the release of
> > C6.1. I already installed three machines under SL6, and it works fine.
> >
> > Alain
> >
>
> Once 6.0 packages are figured out (how to compile them), newer versions
> of those packages in 6.1 will be much easier to compile, so I expect no
> more then one month to pass from C6.0 to C6.1
----
Considering that it took them 3 months to get out the 5.6 update and
that upstream is adding packages that weren't ready when 6.0 was
released, I would think that one month is highly optimistic but two
things are certain. Upstream released exactly 6 months ago and still
nothing and apparently today's target date has slipped, and 2) until
CentOS admits that there is a problem, nothing will actually change.

Craig


--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 05-11-2011, 01:19 AM
Craig White
 
Default EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 03:12 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
> On Tue, 10 May 2011, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>
> > Alain Péan wrote:
> > > The problem is that when C6.0 will be released, it is likely that RHEL
> >> 6.1 will be already released. So there will be no security updates for
> >> C6.0, and it will be better to stay under SL6, until the release of
> >> C6.1. I already installed three machines under SL6, and it works fine.
> >
> > Once 6.0 packages are figured out (how to compile them), newer versions
> > of those packages in 6.1 will be much easier to compile, so I expect no
> > more then one month to pass from C6.0 to C6.1
>
> Do you expect the C6.0 -> C6.1 differences to be more complex, or less
> complex than the C5.5 -> C5.6 differences ?
>
> And given that C5.6 took 3 months, are there any reasons why C6.1 would
> take no more than 1 month ?
----
exactly, and there are additional packages in 6.1 that weren't ready
when 6.0 was released.

Craig


--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 05-11-2011, 01:53 PM
Lamar Owen
 
Default EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

On Tuesday, May 10, 2011 09:17:39 PM Craig White wrote:
> Upstream released exactly 6 months ago and still
> nothing and apparently today's target date has slipped, and 2) until
> CentOS admits that there is a problem, nothing will actually change.

Please read the CentOS-devel list and IRC channel. There are some changes going on WRT visibility of the process, and time will tell if that sticks.

My gut feel, not being one of the developers doing this, is that once the package build order and buildroots are figured out for 6.0 that 6.1 should be far less work. But I reserve the right to be wrong.

How long it will take is of course anyone's guess; after all, it's been quite a while since 5.6's release, and SL, as fast as they were with 6.0, doesn't have a 5.6 full release out (beta 2 is due this Friday, but that's a beta and not a production release. Of course, they've also backported security fixes where possible from 5.6 back to 5.5, but that's part of their policy, plan, and procedures).

To get these things right takes time. CentOS spent the time up front on 5.6 and 4.9, and both of those were released non-beta before SL released those versions; SL has since released 4.9. Both projects are doing a fantastic job of trying to nail the proverbial blob of gelatin to the wall, and I've hesitated comparing them in any way, simply because I don't want to disparage either project. And the two projects are not in competition. And neither project has a fully visible buildsystem.

In my case, I have essentially three choices:
1.) Use SL 6;
2.) Wait on C6;
3.) Buy RHEL6.

All of the three have costs, visible and hidden. 3 obviously has monetary costs, but both 1 and 2 have time and risk costs, since neither SL nor CentOS will be as fast on updates as choice 3.

There are boxes I'm possibly going with SL, but my servers are likely to remain CentOS, unless and until I can get funding to purchase RHEL (which, since it's a subscription, must be purchased out of opex funding). But I fully realize that if I want a fully supported product in the EL space I'm going to have to pay for it, either with RHEL or Oracle or SuSE. Otherwise I'm going to be happy with what I get, even if that's late.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 05-11-2011, 05:51 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

On 5/11/2011 8:53 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
>
> In my case, I have essentially three choices:
> 1.) Use SL 6;
> 2.) Wait on C6;
> 3.) Buy RHEL6.
>
> All of the three have costs, visible and hidden. 3 obviously has monetary costs, but both 1 and 2 have time and risk costs, since neither SL nor CentOS will be as fast on updates as choice 3.
>
> There are boxes I'm possibly going with SL, but my servers are likely to remain CentOS, unless and until I can get funding to purchase RHEL (which, since it's a subscription, must be purchased out of opex funding). But I fully realize that if I want a fully supported product in the EL space I'm going to have to pay for it, either with RHEL or Oracle or SuSE.

Individual/personal support is one thing, timely distro updates is
something else. With limited experience, I'm beginning to think ubuntu
LTS would be a player in the latter space. I've always been a fan of the
coordination they have among the additional repositories that is lacking
in yum/rpm equivalents and was impressed when my 9.0.4 installs
painlessly upgraded themselves to 10.0.4. Admittedly, not as many
locally configured apps as on my Centos boxes, but it all still seemed
to be working after the major-version over-the-network upgrade.

--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 05-11-2011, 08:18 PM
Lamar Owen
 
Default EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

On Wednesday, May 11, 2011 01:51:08 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
> I've always been a fan of the
> coordination they have among the additional repositories that is lacking
> in yum/rpm equivalents and was impressed when my 9.0.4 installs
> painlessly upgraded themselves to 10.0.4.

You must not have many PPA's enabled. And you must not use PostgreSQL, which won't painlessly upgrade on anything.....

> Admittedly, not as many
> locally configured apps as on my Centos boxes, but it all still seemed
> to be working after the major-version over-the-network upgrade.

I've had the opposite experience with several clients, using Ubuntu as a desktop, not a server. I've had a few issues with servers, too.

Timely updating takes effort; either I pay with money for upstream's binaries or I pay with time for either upstream's source RPMs (which can be delayed) or a rebuild's binaries. Or I pay with transition cost to a different distribution. Those are the choices. TANSTAAFL.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 05-11-2011, 08:34 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

On 5/11/2011 3:18 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 11, 2011 01:51:08 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
>> I've always been a fan of the
>> coordination they have among the additional repositories that is lacking
>> in yum/rpm equivalents and was impressed when my 9.0.4 installs
>> painlessly upgraded themselves to 10.0.4.
>
> You must not have many PPA's enabled. And you must not use PostgreSQL, which won't painlessly upgrade on anything.....

Automatically doing the dump/load (and magically finding the space for
it) for version changes that need it would be a lot to ask.

>> Admittedly, not as many
>> locally configured apps as on my Centos boxes, but it all still seemed
>> to be working after the major-version over-the-network upgrade.
>
> I've had the opposite experience with several clients, using Ubuntu as a desktop, not a server. I've had a few issues with servers, too.

With the LTS versions? One of mine was a laptop where centos didn't see
the wifi adapter and I had it set up to either dual boot or run under
vmware player. And I was surprised that after doing the update under
vmware it still came up fine when booted natively and only asked to
reconfigure the X setup.

--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 05-11-2011, 08:54 PM
Lamar Owen
 
Default EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

[drifting farther off-topic....]

On Wednesday, May 11, 2011 04:34:49 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 5/11/2011 3:18 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> > And you must not use PostgreSQL, which won't painlessly upgrade on anything.....
>
> Automatically doing the dump/load (and magically finding the space for
> it) for version changes that need it would be a lot to ask.

Yes, I know. Tried.

> > I've had a few issues with [Ubuntu] servers, too.
>
> With the LTS versions?

Yes.

One upgrade I did from C4 to C5 (with upgradeany) was smoother than the last LTS upgrade I tried. I liken the C5 -> C6 upgrade path as trying to take a Ubuntu LTS 6.06 to a 10.04; which path I tried, and failed, to get working. In one case it was with a Dell laptop that came with Ubuntu from Dell, and that is supported by Dell with Ubuntu. Sound quit (known issue), wireless went funky. One 'accidental' (client-initiated) upgrade from 8.04 to 10.04 lost keyboard and mouse after gdm got control.

And even with Dell's that have RHEL support, I've seen issues with CentOS upgrades; but, then again, neither CentOS nor RHEL ( nor SL) support upgrading.

Upgrades are difficult problems to solve, and at the moment I don't know of any distribution (that claims upgradability) that gets it completely right for all the cases I've tried.

The CentOS path (it's not supported, but if you're brave and know exactly what you're doing there is upgradeany to let you shoot yourself in the foot) I feel is the correct one.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 11:07 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org