[CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
260 messages Options
1 ... 3456789 ... 13
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

mark-3
Jonathan Billings wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 01:22:54PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> And more to the point, /usr isn't supposed t be needed until you are
>> past the point of mounting all filesystems so you can boot from
>> something tiny.  Doesn't modprobe need its files earlier than that?
>
> I think that a lot of these objections are addressed here:
>
> http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken/

Great. And it's from freedesktop... as opposed to, say, a system user, and
which implies to me that it's for runlevel 5 GUI-only users....

        mark

--
Your mother dresses you funny, and you need a mouse to delete files - Mike
Pins

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
zep
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

zep

And more to the point, /usr isn't supposed t be needed until you are
past the point of mounting all filesystems so you can boot from
something tiny.  Doesn't modprobe need its files earlier than that?

>> I think that a lot of these objections are addressed here:
>>
>> http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken/
> Great. And it's from freedesktop... as opposed to, say, a system user, and
> which implies to me that it's for runlevel 5 GUI-only users....
>
perhaps you should read links before you make assumptions.
and doubly so before you start following up.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Jonathan Billings
In reply to this post by mark-3
On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 02:56:17PM -0400, [hidden email] wrote:
> > I think that a lot of these objections are addressed here:
> >
> > http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken/
>
> Great. And it's from freedesktop... as opposed to, say, a system user, and
> which implies to me that it's for runlevel 5 GUI-only users....

This seems to be a common misconception.

To quote http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html:

> 9. Myth: systemd is a freedesktop.org project.

> Well, systemd is certainly hosted at fdo, but freedesktop.org is
> little else but a repository for code and documentation. Pretty much
> any coder can request a repository there and dump his stuff there (as
> long as it's somewhat relevant for the infrastructure of free
> systems). There's no cabal involved, no "standardization" scheme, no
> project vetting, nothing. It's just a nice, free, reliable place to
> have your repository. In that regard it's a bit like SourceForge,
> github, kernel.org, just not commercial and without over-the-top
> requirements, and hence a good place to keep our stuff.

> So yes, we host our stuff at fdo, but the implied assumption of this
> myth in that there was a group of people who meet and then agree on
> how the future free systems look like, is entirely bogus.

freedesktop.org hosts a variety of software projects, not all of which
are desktop-oriented.  Just look at the list here:

http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/

It's worth noting that much of the software projects hosted there are
desktop-oriented, but that doesn't mean that systemd is only for
desktops.  It just happens to be the site where the systemd
documentation resides, and is a great place to peruse if you are
interested in learning more about systemd.  

--
Jonathan Billings <[hidden email]>
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Les Mikesell
In reply to this post by Jonathan Billings
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Jonathan Billings <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 01:22:54PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> And more to the point, /usr isn't supposed t be needed until you are
>> past the point of mounting all filesystems so you can boot from
>> something tiny.  Doesn't modprobe need its files earlier than that?
>
> I think that a lot of these objections are addressed here:
>
> http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken/

Ummm, 'addressed' by pointing out that a whole bunch of the changes
fedora has made break things that are expected to work in unix-like
systems.   I fail to see how that helps with the problem.

--
   Les Mikesell
      [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Les Mikesell
In reply to this post by Les Mikesell
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Reindl Harald <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Am 08.07.2014 17:58, schrieb Les Mikesell:
>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Also the switch from messy bash scripts to a declarative
>>> configuration makes things easier once you get used to the syntax.
>>
>> Sorry, but I'd recommend that anyone who thinks shell syntax is
>> 'messy' just stay away from unix-like systems instead of destroying
>> the best parts of them
>
> WTF - you can place a shell-script in ExecStart and
> set type to 'oneshot' - nobody is taking anything
> away from you

Unless you are offering to do that for me, for free,  on all my
systems, having to do it certainly does take something away.


>>> Then there is the fact that services are actually monitored and can be
>>> restarted automatically if they fail/crash and they run in a sane
>>> environment where stdout is redirected into the journal so that all
>>> output is caught which can be useful for debugging.
>>
>> What part of i/o redirection does the shell not handle well for you?
>
> wtaht part of monitoring did you not understand?

Generally speaking, if a service is broken to the point that it needs
something to automatically restart it I'd rather have it die
gracefully and not do surprising things until someone fixes it.   But
then again, doesn't mysqld manage to accomplish that in a
fully-compatible manner on Centos6?

--
   Les Mikesell
     [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Johnny Hughes
In reply to this post by Always Learning-3
On 07/07/2014 06:47 PM, Always Learning wrote:
> Reading about systemd, it seems it is not well liked and reminiscent of
> Microsoft's "put everything into the Windows Registry" (Win 95 onwards).
>
> Is there a practical alternative to omnipresent, or invasive, systemd ?
>

I hate to say it ... but all the Blovaiting we might want to do or not
do in support of or in opposition to systemd does not matter with
respect to CentOS 7.

RHEL 7 has it, so CentOS 7 has it.  Use CentOS 7 or don't ... your
choice.  If you want to replace systemd and you can figure out how .. do
it.

If it works and you want to get into a SIG, great then start one.

If you want do discuss the mechanisms for removing systemd and
collaborate about doing it via patches and changes to some package(s) in
CentOS 7 .. great.  Fork the packages from git.centos.org and go to
github, start coding with your friends .. you can use the centos-devel
mailing list to discuss the changes.

But failing that, lets try to close down the thread a bit unless there
is really something constructive to add.


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

signature.asc (205 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Jonathan Billings
In reply to this post by Les Mikesell
On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 02:34:49PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Jonathan Billings <[hidden email]> wrote> > I think that a lot of these objections are addressed here:
> >
> > http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken/
>
> Ummm, 'addressed' by pointing out that a whole bunch of the changes
> fedora has made break things that are expected to work in unix-like
> systems.   I fail to see how that helps with the problem.

I'm not sure if I'm reading the same page as you are.  I could sum up
the response to your objection with two points:

1. systemd works fine with /usr on a separate file system that is not
pre-mounted at boot.

2. Modern linux distributions currently don't work well when /usr is
not pre-mounted at boot, and this has been the case for a while.

Fedora went through a process to try to clean up the mess that Linux
has fallen into, by identifying all the executables in /bin, /sbin,
/etc, /var (etc.) that aren't needed to boot the system, and migrating
them into /usr.

This migration was put into place for reasons unrelated to systemd.
Perhaps you have a valid complaint about this change, but don't lump
it together with your issue with systemd.

--
Jonathan Billings <[hidden email]>
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Mark Tinberg
In reply to this post by Les Mikesell

On Jul 8, 2014, at 1:22 PM, Les Mikesell <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 1:08 PM, John R Pierce <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 7/8/2014 6:53 AM, Ned Slider wrote:
>>> That's not always true.
>>>
>>> Some configs that were under /etc on el6 must now reside under /usr on el7.
>>>
>>> Take modprobe blacklists for example.
>>>
>>> On el5 and el6 they are in/etc/modprobe.d/
>>>
>>> On el7 they need to be in/usr/lib/modprobe.d/
>>>
>>> If you install modprobe blacklists to the old location under el7 they
>>> will not work.
>>>
>>> I'm sure there are other examples, this is just one example I've
>>> happened to run into.
>>
>> this is insane.   traditionally in Unix-like systems, /usr is supposed
>> to be able to be read only and sharable between multiple systems, for
>> instance in NFS boot scenarios.   /var is specifically for host-specific
>> complex configuration and status stuff like /var/logs   /var/state
>> /var/run   and so forth.
>
> And more to the point, /usr isn't supposed t be needed until you are
> past the point of mounting all filesystems so you can boot from
> something tiny.  Doesn't modprobe need its files earlier than that?

This work is all about being able to boot a system with just a read-only /usr.  Any foo you need to get to a complex filesystems, like NFS or encrypted software RAID needs to be in the initial ramdisk which the boot loader can access before the kernel loads and which tools like Dracut build based on what’s required for your particular setup.  The seeds of that change basically existed from the time that initial ram disks were introduced as a feature a long time ago, now we’ve just widely acknowledged this reality.



Mark Tinberg, System Administrator
Division of Information Technology - Network Services
University of Wisconsin - Madison
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Centos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

John R. Dennison
In reply to this post by Russell Miller
On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 08:05:07AM -0700, Russell Miller wrote:
>
> And that's all I'm saying in response to you.  Keep this up
> and my killfile will have one more entry.

Please stop replying to non-list subscribers in Cc: fields.  Harald was
removed from this list years ago for, well, the reason should be quite
obvious.  When you group reply to his crap you are just drawing him back
into the discussions.

Thanks,




                                                        John
--
The world is moved along not only by the mighty shoves of the heroes, but
also by the aggregate of the tiny pushes of each honest worker.

-- John Richard Green (1837-1883), Life and Letters of John Richard Green,
   Leslie Stephen, Ed (1901)

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

attachment0 (205 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Les Mikesell
In reply to this post by Les Mikesell
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Reindl Harald <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Our servers tend to just run till they die.  If we didn't need them we
>> wouldn't have bought them in the first place.  I suppose there are
>> businesses with different processes that come and go, but I'm not sure
>> that is desirable
>
> what proves you never done serious IT

No, it means our servers run for years,

> the goal of standby servers in case of virtualization is that
> you know there may be load peaks from time to time but mostly
> you don't need up 4 servers

We design to handle a whole data center failure in only the time it
takes for a new client connection.  With/without systemd, nobody is
going to wait for a new server to spin up.

--
   Les Mikesell
      [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Les Mikesell
In reply to this post by Les Mikesell
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Reindl Harald <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Unless you are offering to do that for me, for free,  on all my
>> systems, having to do it certainly does take something away.
>
> then just don't upgrade to RHEL7
> so what

I expect our systems to  still have services running past 2020.

>>
>> Generally speaking, if a service is broken to the point that it needs
>> something to automatically restart it I'd rather have it die
>> gracefully and not do surprising things until someone fixes it. But
>> then again, doesn't mysqld manage to accomplish that in a
>> fully-compatible manner on Centos6?
>
> generally speaking if my webserver dies for whatever reason
> in want it to get restarted *now* and seek for the reason
> while the services are up and running

Then I hope I'm never a customer of that service that doesn't
know/care why it is failing.  I consider it a much better approach to
let you load balancing shift the connections to predictably working
servers.

> generally speaking: there is more than only mysqld on that world
>
> generally speaking if i restart a server i want SSH tunnels
> to them get restarted on other machines automatically, see below

Seems awkward, compared to openvpn.

> generally speaking if the OpenVPN service on the location some
> hundret kilometers away fails because the poor internet
> connection their i want it to be restarted

You don't have to restart openvpn to have it reconnect itself after
network outages.

--
   Les Mikesell
     [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Centos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

John R. Dennison
In reply to this post by John R. Dennison
On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 10:08:35PM +0200, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> besides that somebody with "kill yourself" as reject message

> has no permission to judge anybody stop that lie, it won't get
> true by repeat it i am a subscriber - otherwise your mail won't
> reach my inbox

If you're going to lie at least put a little effort into it?

Not a single one of your replies shows up to the list; the only thing
the list gets are the contents of mail that people Cc: you on in their
replies.  You are not showing in the archives under any known mail
address.  Hell, even the header paste you just did doesn't back up your
claims.

Fact: You have been removed from this list and are using nefarious
methods to continue to post to it in order to get your vitriol across
to the masses.

For full disclosure you are indeed 5xx'd here:

/.*@thelounge\.net/                     555 For the sake of humanity please kill yourself.
/reindl\.harald@gmail\.com/             555 No, really.  Suicide can be painless if you work at it.

Perhaps you should ask yourself why I would take the time and trouble to
drop you from my MTAs.






                                                        John
--
"Be always at war with your vices, at peace with your neighbors, and let
each new year find you a better man."

-- Benjamin Franklin

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

attachment0 (205 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Les Mikesell
In reply to this post by Mark Tinberg
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Mark Tinberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> And more to the point, /usr isn't supposed t be needed until you are
>> past the point of mounting all filesystems so you can boot from
>> something tiny.  Doesn't modprobe need its files earlier than that?
>
> This work is all about being able to boot a system with just a read-only /usr.  Any foo you need to get to a complex filesystems, like NFS or encrypted software RAID needs to be in the initial ramdisk which the boot loader can access before the kernel loads and which tools like Dracut build based on what’s required for your particular setup.  The seeds of that change basically existed from the time that initial ram disks were introduced as a feature a long time ago, now we’ve just widely acknowledged this reality.

Errr, I thought you only needed stuff on the ramdisk to access the
root partition.  Can't you mount /usr from a different disk controller
or NFS from modules loaded from /lib/modules?   Or was that already
broken when user's home directories were kicked into /home?   And if
not, how did things get in that mess?

--
   Les Mikesell
     [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Always Learning-3
In reply to this post by John R Pierce

On Tue, 2014-07-08 at 11:10 -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 7/8/2014 10:36 AM, Always Learning wrote:
> > 75 baud on a TTY (clank, clank, clank, ding, thud as the printer head
> > returned to the beginning of the line) and an amazingly fast speed of
> > 300 baud on the up-market Terminet (? spelling).
> >
> > Perhaps the speeds were 300 and 1,200 baud? It was a long time ago.
>
> actual Teletype KSR/ASR 33 kind of machines were 110 baud (10 cps, as
> they used 2 stop bits)

110 baud definitely rings a bell.  I saw my first Teletype in 1967/1968
at Scotland's National Engineering Laboratory (NEL). Chugging away, it
seemed to be an exciting example of "real" computing - and it wasn't a
bit like punched cards.


--
Regards,

Paul.
England, EU.

   Centos, Exim, Apache, Libre Office.
   Linux is the future. Micro$oft is the past.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

mark-3
Always Learning wrote:

>
> On Tue, 2014-07-08 at 11:10 -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
>> On 7/8/2014 10:36 AM, Always Learning wrote:
>> > 75 baud on a TTY (clank, clank, clank, ding, thud as the printer head
>> > returned to the beginning of the line) and an amazingly fast speed of
>> > 300 baud on the up-market Terminet (? spelling).
>> >
>> > Perhaps the speeds were 300 and 1,200 baud? It was a long time ago.
>>
>> actual Teletype KSR/ASR 33 kind of machines were 110 baud (10 cps, as
>> they used 2 stop bits)
>
> 110 baud definitely rings a bell.  I saw my first Teletype in 1967/1968
> at Scotland's National Engineering Laboratory (NEL). Chugging away, it
> seemed to be an exciting example of "real" computing - and it wasn't a
> bit like punched cards.

'Ey! What'cho got 'gainst punch cards?

    mark "except the card punch in the lab that punched *other* than
           what it printed, that once...."

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Always Learning-3

On Tue, 2014-07-08 at 16:32 -0400, [hidden email] wrote:

> 'Ey! What'cho got 'gainst punch cards?

Never used the Power Samas 36? column cards, just the plain boring 80's.

Was an excellent hand puncher. Could easily read cards by holding them
up to the light and could fill-in the wrongly punched hole to avoid
having to re-punch the entire card.

H-1250, H-120, H-L61, H-L66, H-L64, DPS 8 etc. + BBC Micro B & B+


--
Regards,

Paul.
England, EU.

   Centos, Exim, Apache, Libre Office.
   Linux is the future. Micro$oft is the past.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

mark-3
Always Learning wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2014-07-08 at 16:32 -0400, [hidden email] wrote:
>
>> 'Ey! What'cho got 'gainst punch cards?
>
> Never used the Power Samas 36? column cards, just the plain boring 80's.

Nope, just the normal 80 column punchs. All IBM, y'know.
>
> Was an excellent hand puncher. Could easily read cards by holding them
> up to the light and could fill-in the wrongly punched hole to avoid
> having to re-punch the entire card.

Never heard of a hand puncher. All I ever used or saw were desk-sized
machines.
>
> H-1250, H-120, H-L61, H-L66, H-L64, DPS 8 etc. + BBC Micro B & B+

To catch that error, it took the lab assistant, the *only* time in my
school career I needed one, to read the actual holes.

Nasty.

     mark

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Robert Moskowitz
In reply to this post by Robert Moskowitz

On 07/08/2014 03:21 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:

>
> Am 08.07.2014 18:17, schrieb Robert Moskowitz:
>> On 07/08/2014 11:05 AM, Russell Miller wrote:
>>> Even its sysv compatibility is incomplete.  It runs sysv scripts, but in such a
>>> way as to break any but the simplest.  I've run into situations where I've actually
>>> had to make a systemd unit because it broke the script, and I couldn't fix it.  The
>>> script was fine, ran perfectly if you just ran it, and systemd did... *something*...
>>> to it.  I still haven't figured out what.  And debugging is an absolute pain.
>> I am also struggling with this and the HIPL code (on F20).  If you just
>> start the services, it takes about 5 min to complete.  If you just run
>> the programs and tell them to drop into the background it is a handful
>> of seconds.  Strip out comments from the script and it starts right up
>> with systemctl.  Huh?  What is going on?  I was told that systemctl does
>> seem to try and make 'sense' out of comments...
> so why do you not write a simple systemd-unit starting your shellscript?
>
>
> [root@testserver:~]$ cat /usr/lib/systemd/system/zram.service
> [Unit]
> Description=Enable compressed swap in memory using zram
>
> [Service]
> RemainAfterExit=yes
> ExecStart=/usr/sbin/zram.sh start
> ExecStop=/usr/sbin/zram.sh stop
> Type=oneshot
>
> [Install]
> WantedBy=multi-user.target
>
partially because I am the tester, not the developer.  I found the
problem, though.

So I will pass this on to the developers.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Robert Moskowitz
In reply to this post by Les Mikesell

On 07/08/2014 04:19 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Reindl Harald <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Unless you are offering to do that for me, for free,  on all my
>>> systems, having to do it certainly does take something away.
>> then just don't upgrade to RHEL7
>> so what
> I expect our systems to  still have services running past 2020.

Ah, we will be at Centos 11 by then :)

Systemd will be a thing of the past and we will be dealing with systemq.


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Eliezer Croitoru
In reply to this post by Ned Slider
I am sure now do not understand the bug end line.
 From Fedora 17 they modprobe.d moved from /etc to /var/lib ? if so why
not just use a symlink from /etc to /var/lib if someone needs it there
for any reason what so ever??

Eliezer

On 07/08/2014 09:12 PM, Ned Slider wrote:
> Well, I stand corrected!
>
> I was just running though the issue for a reply here, and what was
> broken in the rhel7rc is now fixed and indeed working as documented.
>
> My issue looked like a regression of this bug:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=873220

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
1 ... 3456789 ... 13