similar to: Delta RPMs (drpms) for CentOS-6 and CentOS-7

On 3/23/19 9:19 AM, Bez Thomas wrote: >> On Mar 22, 2019, at 9:52 PM, Fred Smith <fredex at fcshome.stoneham.ma.us> wrote: >> >> Was just doing a (very) belated update on a 7.5 system and ran into >> this set of errors: >> > >> Some delta RPMs failed to download or rebuild. Retrying.. >> > > >> >> so, anybody know why

Looking at the nice new 6.4 tree (thanks!!!) I see there are already a few updates. eg Packages/firefox-17.0.3-1.el6.centos.i686.rpm Packages/firefox-17.0.3-1.el6.centos.x86_64.rpm So far, so normal. These occur because of timing. That's not a problem; it's expected. What confuses me, though, is the drpms directory where there are 33 firefox drpm files compared to the 2 Packages,

> We would like to remove delta rpms (drpms) from our CentOS-6 and > CentOS-7 repositories. > I live on fast connections both at home and work and for me I see no real advantage to delta RPMs - I've not really measured it, but it seems like my systems spend more time reconstructing the RPMs than they ever did downloading things. So it is of no consequence to *me* if they are done

Was just doing a (very) belated update on a 7.5 system and ran into this set of errors: ================================================================================ Package Arch Version Repository Size ================================================================================ Updating: polkit x86_64 0.112-18.el7_6.1

Hi list, Sorry for the exclude question... but I have been trying for hours to get this to work and am utterly baffled. I'm performing an archive transfer between hosts and wish to include anything in any directory named 'debug' or 'drpms' at any depth. I assumed this would be as simple as --exclude 'debug/***' --exclude 'drpms/***' but I still get

On 3/25/19 8:32 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > This is not the first time we have had issues with drpms in the update tree. > Would anyone be opposed to taking away deltarpms from the repositories? > > They take up lots of space and they have cause multiple issues in the past. > > Thoughts? Due to the disk churn deltarpms need and our own internal mirroring of centos packages, one

Has anybody successfully implemented DRPMs on centos 5.x? I searched the net and I found a few indications that it is possible, but there is very little info how to do it. Just to be clear. With DRPMs i mean deltaRPMs. And with implementation i mean What yum plugins are necessary and what has to be done on the yum repository to make it work. BR Janez -------------- next part -------------- An

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2019:0230 Important Upstream details at : https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:0230 The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) x86_64: 491b63a51365bb112538c3cc527cc9a0f9cbb8599989268b2367a88b6923e39d polkit-0.112-18.el7_6.1.i686.rpm

I have run a local repo for Centos updates for some time. I suppose, at this point I could just delete the 5.3 update directory and rsync the 5.4 directory... But how large is the 5.4 update directory? Oh, just for i386, without /debug and is there anything else I should not include? For example for my FC11 update repo I also exclude drpms.

A friend runs 6.8 but would like to add postscreen to his email server. It is provided with postfix version 2.8 and up. The newest postfix for 6.8 is 2.6.x. Any likelyhood it will be further updated? Or is there another source for newer postfix versions for CentOS 6.8? Similar query for the clamav db, now at 0.99.1 with 0.99.2 out for quite some time. Jon -- Jon H. LaBadie

On 01/09/2017 07:54 AM, Jonathan Billings wrote: > On Jan 9, 2017, at 4:08 AM, Walter Dnes <waltdnes at waltdnes.org> wrote: >> Hi all. I'm using a CentOS 6.8 VM to do volunteer builds for an open >> source project. I want to build Pale Moon with a gtk2 library older >> than 2.24, to allow people with older linuxes to run it. Short summary, >> if built

Hi Lucian, It seems to be upstream libvirt-1.2.15-2 with options with_xen and with_libxl enabled. http://cbs.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1348 Regards, Jean-Marc Le 28/10/2015 09:38, Nux! a ?crit : > Pasi, > > Where are these RPMs, how are they built, what exactly are the differences vs the stock ones? > > Regards, > Lucian > > -- > Sent from the Delta quadrant

On 3/25/19 6:37 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 3/23/19 9:19 AM, Bez Thomas wrote: >>> On Mar 22, 2019, at 9:52 PM, Fred Smith <fredex at fcshome.stoneham.ma.us> wrote: >>> >>> Was just doing a (very) belated update on a 7.5 system and ran into >>> this set of errors: >>> >> >>> Some delta RPMs failed to download or rebuild.

Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 01/27/2017 09:19 AM, Jon LaBadie wrote: >> With a large update to be made, eg. the 900 package >> one I questioned yesterday, are there any suggestions >> to avoid possible complications? >> >> Two examples, I'd like to know of others too: >> >> I'm not running the most recently installed kernel, >> I assume I

My system is 7.2.1511. When I run "yum update", it wants to install about 900 packages total. Most are labeled just "el7". A few "el7_1" and a lot are "el7_3" or 7.3. None are 7.2. I'm not surprised when I see 50-100 packages needing an update. But 900? And none specific to the installed system? My last update, of 4 packages, was Dec 31, 2016. I

There are new xen-4.6.6 rpms for CentOS-6 and CentOS-7 in the testing repository on buildlogs.centos.org. Can we please get some testing of these RPMs and feedback to this list. Thanks, Johnny Hughes -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL:

OR just make the file immutable if it's so critical to you. -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jon LaBadie" <jcu at labadie.us> > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Sent: Wednesday, 12 April, 2017 07:16:22 > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Network Manager / CentOS 7 /

btw - I installed your x86_64 rpms that has the ich9 patch directly on that box but it still will not boot without all the options. --- Michael Rock <mikerocks65 at yahoo.com> wrote: > > David wrote: > > Now there are right md5sums and even > > x86_64 iso.delta. > > David > > I tried using applydeltaiso and it creates a 2gb ISO > but I notice it fails on

With a large update to be made, eg. the 900 package one I questioned yesterday, are there any suggestions to avoid possible complications? Two examples, I'd like to know of others too: I'm not running the most recently installed kernel, I assume I should reboot to that. I normally have a graphical environment running. Would it be better to: a) shutdown X and update from a straight CLI

My nightly logwatch report had a never before seen section last night, "barracuda spam firewall". I have not problem with the emails it noted as being rejected. But I've always thought of "barracuda" as a commercial product. I have neither configured nor enabled any barracuda software and "yum list '*barrac*'" comes up empty. What is this? Jon -- Jon