logs archiveIRC Archive / Freenode / #centos / 2015 / September / 15 / 1
sartan
so you don't think you could link docs.centos.org/7/ -> rhel docs as a simple redirect?
as opposed to embedding
Bahhumbug
This is OT for this channel. Suffice to say there is precedent at play that needs to be confirmed one way or another.
sartan
i'm not in the cool kidfs club, but what other possible channel would there be
DiscordianUK
This channel is to deal with technical questions about CentOS
billings
sartan: https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs perhaps
sartan
I'm asking, is there another place? Clearly it isn't a social topic, but it might be a bit meta for a technical channe
billings
The centos-docs list would probably be a good place to start.
DiscordianUK
It's off topic for here
billings
if it isn't the right place, I'm sure someone there can chime in and tell you.
         

Evolution
the -docs list is absolutely the right place.
Doyle
Hey. I'm looking for a way to get Centos7 to handle multiple domains being specified in the dhcp option set parameter domain-name. Anyone have an idea?
dtrott
Doyle: What are you trying to achieve
sartan
-^ common use case
eg printers.dhcp.local, desktops.dhcp.loca, servers.dhcp.local for dns name spaces
i've barely even seen windows properly honor the dns search suffix list dhcp option
dtrott
sartan: You are referring to the domain-search arg, Doyle was refering to domain-name, hence it wasnt clear to me what Doyle was trying to achieve.
sartan
i just read into the context a bit
Doyle: Can you clarify, per dtrott's comments?
I guess we owuld also have to expect an applicable network-manager script to properly read out the dhcp opt and populate resolv.conf
hosler
8.8.8.8 for life
dtrott
hosler: dont forget 8.8.4.4
hosler
dont even need it
dtrott
Yea I have never seen it fail.
sartan
4.2.2.3 let me down :(
Bahhumbug
It's anycasted and a complete failure would be... interesting. That being said 8.8.8.8 has had local reachability issues in the past and only having a single entry in /etc/resolv.conf is just silly.
hosler
silly maybe. effective? yes
dtrott
hosler: Until you need local resolution ....
Bahhumbug
(Action) shrugs
hosler
hosts file for that
darius93
I noticed in alot of spec files that it has a "SourceX" (replace X with a number) that points to a url. Is that there just for reference of the location where you can get the source?
wolfy
darius93: yes
darius93
ok thanks
ke4nhw
I have looked on the website, and likely overlooked it, but can someone tell me when 7 was released and when the next version (8) is due to be released? I am trying to plan on whether or not to deploy CentOS to a live server, and don't want to do so if it's due to update in a year or less. Currently VM testing is going very well
         

DiscordianUK
There's no sign of RHEL 8 yet
ke4nhw
Ahh DiscordianUK, good to see you here as well, I'm used to seeing you in the Fedora rooms
No offense, I LOVE Fedora, but I also need something for the server that isn't going to require a reinstall every year.
tang^
@c7eol
centbot
CentOS 7 will go EOL on 30 June, 2024 -- in 8 years, 41 weeks, 4 days, 2 hours, 26 minutes, and 0 seconds
DiscordianUK
I'm in both
tang^
ke4nhw: I think you have time
ke4nhw
I wouldn't mind RHEL, but that's way way outta my price range, especially since this is a home-based server. One will be my personal fileserver, the other will be an emergency communications fileserver that is set to deploy over a large area closed wifi mesh network in emergencies.
sartan
Bahhumbug: i've had 4.2.2.3's level3 fiasco take down the internet at a number of branch offices. level3 got a little upset at everyone hitting their server for free, and took it offline for a hwile. i was using that to ping upstream 'internet availability'.
ke4nhw: perfect!
ke4nhw
Yep, looks like a good choice. Based on that, 8 should pop up in about 3 years or so?
tang^
ke4nhw: CentOS follows the RHEL timeline
ke4nhw
okay
sartan
ke4nhw: more specifically, you don't have to worry about 8
7 will be 7 for an extremely long time
DiscordianUK
CentOS is recompiled RHEl sources
sartan
you have another 9 years left to go before centos7 stops getting updates
and for servers you specifically want stability. an upgrade to 8 wouldn't make sense/ wouldn't be necessary in most cases
ke4nhw
Yep, which is precisely why I chose CentOS, and its long life. I'm very much an avid fan of RH-based stuff.
sartan
there's no chasing after the upgrade gravy train like there is on the desktop based distributions
@c5eol
centbot
CentOS 5 will go EOL on 31 March, 2017 -- in 1 year, 28 weeks, 2 days, 2 hours, 22 minutes, and 59 seconds
sartan
-^ i still have 5 stuff
Bahhumbug
sartan: Please note that 4.2.2.3 != (8.8.8.8|8.8.4.4)
sartan
Bahhumbug: that's the point i was making
good ol'e 8.8.8.8
ke4nhw
Well, it might make sense if something changes significantly in the kernel security that 8 addresses, remembering that at least one of the servers will have an outward-facing access, even if it is a closed/restricted mesh.
sartan
it's like backing betamax or HD-DVD. I backed the wrong pony
ludcivious
and no cent5 tls support above 1, might as wel eol it tomorrow
ke4nhw
Other server, not so much. Outside access is explicitly denied both in the iptables and in the frontend firewall appliance.
sartan
ke4nhw: security updates will be backported
rhel doesn't work the way you're describing/asking a bout
haha i'm so canadian even my typed abouts are abooted
tang^
hehe
sartan
ke4nhw: to summarize, "centos 7 will be stable and secure for the next nine years'
ke4nhw
I've never used RHEL, only Fedora. I'm used to the constant upgrade cycles. Just to watch DiscordianUK faint, I still have an operational box in here running Fedora 16...
That means I'm good to go for at least that long, at which time I can schedule an upgrade
sartan
you can treat it the same way, sans the kde interface by default and constant feature (read: breaking) updates
DiscordianUK
Ummm I don't follow
F16 has been unsupported and not updated for years
Bahhumbug
F16? That's... what? 3.5 without a security update?
ke4nhw
Fedora is up to 22, I still have a box that I haven't upgraded beyond 16, which is WAY past eol
yep
Which is why that box doesn't even have a network cable attached
sartan
centos will treat you right :)
ke4nhw
It looks like it. Currently I have two VM CentOS tests running: one being a desktop version and the other being the fileserver version which has no X interface, just cli
I will still use Fedora so I can play with the most current toys, but for a live running server, I'm thinking CentOS will give me a better life cycle.
And it still has yum! and I was able to get iptables! (yay)
sartan
absolutely, that's the point
I've learned to accept my future and learn firewalld
lennart wins
tang^
I like firewalld
sartan
i've learned to like it too actually
it's easier to script rules for it
ke4nhw
I'll have to look into how firewalld configures from the cli, I've become so used to the iptables cli commands and rulesets.
sartan
the only thing i wish it had was the ability to create a port (service) without having to create a non-arbitrary xml file on the filesystem manually
there should have been a firewall-cmd --create-service or something
orionp
(Action) didn't think lennart had anything to do with firewalld
ke4nhw
Okay I'll brb, thanks again folks for the advice and info :)
sartan
i blame all things i don't like ***D related (Systemd, FirewalD) on lennart
Bahhumbug
orionp: He really doesn't.
sartan
systemd is truly annoying. =( it actually works. once i stopped complaining about it and just started using it, it's fine. but i still find the idea of binary log files a bit stupid
orionp
seems a bit harsh for one *d project
sartan
traditional syslog isn't broken yet but i suspect he'll soon get that too
journald
Bahhumbug
Can the subjective discussion please move to #centos-social? It's not topical here.
« prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next »