similar to: Scientific Linux template update?

Patch with name and URL changes from CentOS script attached. Adam

Greetings! I have just signed up to r-sig-fedora because I have installed Scientific Linux 6.2 (my first Red Hat based Linux since over 10 years ago ... ). I'm trying this for basically 2 reasons: first, I expect CERN and FermiLab should do a good job of maintaining their distribution, and in particular to take care of its compatibility with scientific software; second, because it still has

Hey folks, I was just reminded of the Scientific distro, which on the surface appears to be quite similar to CentOS even when the developers over there are rather coy about which Enterprise Linux distro they base theirs on. I wonder if anyone here has done a comparison of the two that they'd care to share. I work in a Scientific Research Lab (Stem Cell Research) and am wondering if there is

I was wondering what feedback might be offered by the CentOS community on their experiences using Scientific Linux? I'm a long-time Centos user, and am basically happy with CentOS. I understand there are delays getting EL 6 out. We have been long anxious to roll out EL 6 as soon as it's ready, but our time window for rollout is looming and we will need to act. (for business reasons,

I know this is the CentOS list. However, as there has been some interest in CentOS 6.0 (RHEL 6), I thought I'd share the news here. Scientific Linux 6 is based on RHEL 6 with add-ons for scientific computing. FWIW, the Admin tools etc. are pretty much the same as in RHEL, so are the base packages. Read more at <http://www.scientificlinux.org/distributions/6x/60/> -- Arun Khan

i'm prepping to teach a 5-day intro class in linux starting in about 3 hours, and the courseware is clearly designed around RHEL (apparently 5.1). but since i'm not being provided with RHEL DVDs, i'm just going to hand everyone a centos 5.4 DVD and take it from there. as part of the intro, i want to briefly discuss the varieties of linux related to RHEL, so obviously i want to

I've noticed that none of the images from virt-builder have cloud-init in them by default.  The documentation reads to me as if the OS vendor's official cloud images are the ones used as the sources for the generated images but I'm assuming this is wrong. I know for a fact CentOS's cloud images from https://cloud.centos.org/centos/7/images/ and Ubuntu's from

Thanks for your time Richard. We are still unable to proceed :( Please find the steps which we followed. 1. Installed Fedora 21 on both the physical machines. (PHYSICAL HARDWARE 1 , 2 == PHY1, PHY2).The hardwares used are HP SL nodes which has Hardware RAID0 configured. 2. Installed following packages : yum install qemu libvirt-client virt-manager virt-viewer guestfish libguestfs-tools

Hi all, following the discussion on about documentation, I was wondering whether we need to look at a standard way in which we recommend how to provision images for VMs. Am starting this with a Xen hat, but the discussion should not be specific to this. There are a number of options, but all have some trade-offs == #1 virt-install == Advantages: similar to KVM Disadvantages: may cause

Hi, currently virt-builder's index contains only x86_64/amd64 images, so asking virt-builder to produce an image always produce a x86_64 image, regardless of the host. This also mean that trying to produce, say, a new fedora-20 image from an i686 not only would produce an unexpected result, but also would prevent to e.g. install packages on it. So virt-builder and its index need to be

I am running centos6.4. Where do I find the updated gnutls packages? I see the updated source file here: http://vault.centos.org/6.5/updates/Source/SPackages/ But I don't see the correct version of the packages in the 6.4 tree here: http://vault.centos.org/6.4/updates/x86_64/Packages/ Where should I be looking for the updated package for 6.4? Thanks. -- -MichaelC

I came across this notice of an upcoming webinar. The issues identified in the first paragraph below seem to me exactly those that the R project is designed to address. The claim that "most research software is barely fit for purpose compared to equivalent systems in the commercial world" seems to me not quite accurate! Comments! WEBINAR SERIES A Crack in the Code: Why software

Hi, this series adds a basic support for Simple Streams v1.0 metadata files. This makes it possible to create a repository .conf files with [cirros] uri=http://download.cirros-cloud.net format=simplestreams to read the latest version of each CirrOS image. Thanks, Pino Toscano (4): builder: add non-int revisions builder: add simple libyajl binding build: expose HAVE_YAJL to automake

I've just been playing around with virt-builder, and it seems like a pretty useful tool. However, it seems that in a number of the images, the initrd file is missing drivers for Xen virtual block and network devices. This results in a VM that can't find its root device. The files needed are drivers/block/xen-blkfront.ko and drivers/net/xen-netfront.ko. They seem to be present in

Hi Rich, This series includes patches to make `make syntax-check` pass. Some of the fix require change to maint.mk, but the file is not in git repo. Is it intended? Thanks! Hu Tao (13): syntax-check: dirty hack to pass bindtextdomain check syntax-check: fix error_message_period check syntax-check: fix makefile_at_at_check syntax-check: fix prohibit_assert_without_use check

Hi All, We have installed Fedora 21 on two physical machines (HP SL hardware) and generated the ISO using the "livecd-creator" on one of the machine (p2v server) We are unable to establish the connection between the two machines when we try to boot the first machine (p2v machine) using the ISO created ! Can you please share the sequence of steps which we need to follow when using two

Hi, I had downloaded CentOS 5.1 x86 DVD image, and although it passed sha1sum or md5sum test and I burned it verifying it, installation failed. Also if I recall correctly, when I tested the medium during install, it failed although as I said the media was verified. ==> The same things happen with Scientific Linux 5.1 x86 installation DVD, so perhaps it is a Red Hat EL 5.1 x86 DVD issue?

Good afternoon! After applying the latest bash RPM listed at http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2014-September/020594.html : The fixed RPM (bash-3.2-33.el5_10.4.x86_64.rpm) DOES work just fine on CentOS 5.10. However, it DOES NOT work on CentOS 5.4. That is, bash runs fine, but IS STILL VULNERABLE TO SHELLSHOCK! Scary screenie at: http://i.imgur.com/yR7sBjV.png It looks like

Hello everyone: * DNS does not have a "refresh rate". In DNS, the person running the domain determines what the "refresh rate" (it's called TTL in DNS) for their records is; for example, Google has a TTL of "once per hour" and my domains (maradns.org, etc.) have a TTL of one day. * As mentioned before, Scientific Linux 6.0 is out. What hasn't been

Hi all, I've just migrated my mail system from procmail to managesieve/sieve and I'm having trouble trying to duplicate a could of rules I used to use in my procmail config. One particular rule would be this: :0 Wfh * ^Sender: owner-scientific-linux-devel at LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV | (sed -e '/^Subject:/ s/\[SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL\] *//g'| sed ':a;N;$!ba;s/Precedence: