Mathieu Baudier
2022-Jan-10 06:36 UTC
[CentOS] 389-ds packages less up-to-date on CentOS Stream 8 than RHEL8
Hello, as described here [1] we were having issues with LDAP dirsrv 389-ds in our environment where we use a mix on CentOS Stream 8 and RHEL 8 deployments. I have been surprised to notice that RHEL packages actually seems to be more up-to-date than CentOS Stream ones, while we are working for our QA processes under the assumption that CentOS Stream is upstream of RHEL. Looking at the package versions: ## RHEL 8 $ sudo dnf info 389-ds-base Name : 389-ds-base Version : 1.4.3.23 Release : 12.module+el8.5.0+13329+4096c77a $ sudo rpm -q --changelog 389-ds-base * Thu Nov 18 2021 Mark Reynolds <mreynolds at redhat.com> - 1.4.3.23-12 ## CentOS Stream 8 $ sudo dnf info 389-ds-base Name : 389-ds-base Version : 1.4.3.23 Release : 10.module_el8.5.0+946+51aba098 $ rpm -q --changelog 389-ds-base * Thu Aug 26 2021 Mark Reynolds <mreynolds at redhat.com> - 1.4.3.23-10 My understanding from discussion on this mailing-list a few months ago, is that sometimes critical issues will be patched in RHEL before CentOS Stream, which is understandable. But is it to be expected that there can be a lag of many months before CentOS Stream "catches up"? Is it recommended to use CentOS Stream for development and testing of the upcoming RHEL updates? Just to be clear, as a (tiny) Red Hat Partner, we have access to enough RHEL NFR entitlements for such purposes, so the point here is not to get something "for free", but to "see things coming" by developing and testing primarily on CentOS Stream. (Which, by the way is working great, except for these recurring 389-ds and IPA issues; I have also been using it as my workstation for months without a glitch) Thanks in advance for (constructive) comments, and for sharing your own experience! Cheers, Mathieu [1] https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2021-November/534847.html
Johnny Hughes
2022-Jan-13 17:40 UTC
[CentOS] 389-ds packages less up-to-date on CentOS Stream 8 than RHEL8
On 1/10/22 00:36, Mathieu Baudier wrote:> Hello, > > as described here [1] we were having issues with LDAP dirsrv 389-ds in our > environment where we use a mix on CentOS Stream 8 and RHEL 8 deployments. I > have been surprised to notice that RHEL packages actually seems to be more > up-to-date than CentOS Stream ones, while we are working for our QA > processes under the assumption that CentOS Stream is upstream of RHEL. > > Looking at the package versions: > > ## RHEL 8 > $ sudo dnf info 389-ds-base > Name : 389-ds-base > Version : 1.4.3.23 > Release : 12.module+el8.5.0+13329+4096c77a > > $ sudo rpm -q --changelog 389-ds-base > * Thu Nov 18 2021 Mark Reynolds <mreynolds at redhat.com> - 1.4.3.23-12 > > ## CentOS Stream 8 > $ sudo dnf info 389-ds-base > Name : 389-ds-base > Version : 1.4.3.23 > Release : 10.module_el8.5.0+946+51aba098 > > $ rpm -q --changelog 389-ds-base > * Thu Aug 26 2021 Mark Reynolds <mreynolds at redhat.com> - 1.4.3.23-10 > > My understanding from discussion on this mailing-list a few months ago, is > that sometimes critical issues will be patched in RHEL before CentOS > Stream, which is understandable. > But is it to be expected that there can be a lag of many months before > CentOS Stream "catches up"? > Is it recommended to use CentOS Stream for development and testing of the > upcoming RHEL updates? > > Just to be clear, as a (tiny) Red Hat Partner, we have access to enough > RHEL NFR entitlements for such purposes, so the point here is not to get > something "for free", but to "see things coming" by developing and testing > primarily on CentOS Stream. (Which, by the way is working great, except for > these recurring 389-ds and IPA issues; I have also been using it as my > workstation for months without a glitch) > > Thanks in advance for (constructive) comments, and for sharing your own > experience! > Cheers, > > MathieuFor whatever the reason, git.centos.org has 389-ds-base-1.4.3.23-10.module+el8.5.0+12398+47000435 (in the c8s-stream-1.4) as the latest push .. while in c8-stream-1.4 it is 389-ds-base-1.4.3.23-12.module+el8.5.0+13329+4096c77a. so I have released what is pushed to git currently. No idea why the other is not released to c8s, I will ask.