From deisenst at gtw.net Fri Dec 1 23:58:59 2006 From: deisenst at gtw.net (David D. Eisenstein) Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 17:58:59 -0600 Subject: nails in coffins? Re: Openssl updates In-Reply-To: <200611301035.44737.jkeating@j2solutions.net> References: <88166C23A9B8784C9C54619E6E5037505E9A83@NCUSPOSTAL01.ncaustin.com> <200611300812.53718.jkeating@redhat.com> <20061130153242.GB15901@jadzia.bu.edu> <200611301035.44737.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <4570C1C3.3060002@gtw.net> Jesse Keating wrote: > On Thursday 30 November 2006 10:32, Matthew Miller wrote: > >>Everyone's pretty much talking like this is a done deal. Any idea when an >>official decision will be made? > > > I'm involved in discussions with RH management this week, and probably next > week. Any chance that others involved with Fedora Legacy in addition to you might be able to be involved in those discussions, Jesse? Regards, David Eisenstein From jkeating at redhat.com Sat Dec 2 02:37:15 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2006 21:37:15 -0500 Subject: nails in coffins? Re: Openssl updates In-Reply-To: <4570C1C3.3060002@gtw.net> References: <88166C23A9B8784C9C54619E6E5037505E9A83@NCUSPOSTAL01.ncaustin.com> <200611301035.44737.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <4570C1C3.3060002@gtw.net> Message-ID: <200612012137.19053.jkeating@redhat.com> On Friday 01 December 2006 18:58, David D. Eisenstein wrote: > > I'm involved in discussions with RH management this week, and probably > > next week. > > Any chance that others involved with Fedora Legacy in addition to you > might be able to be involved in those discussions, Jesse? Unfortunately it is not possible to have non Red Hat people in these meetings, as it is a decision for Red Hat to make regarding the lifeblood of their RHEL product. These discussions are the opening of core discussions, not the new lifespan, folding Legacy into a longer release lifespan, etc... Those types of decisions come AFTER we get the go ahead to open core. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From deisenst at gtw.net Sat Dec 2 03:25:35 2006 From: deisenst at gtw.net (David D. Eisenstein) Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 21:25:35 -0600 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? Message-ID: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> So what do we need to be saying here? Ideas? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legacy From rostetter at mail.utexas.edu Sat Dec 2 21:52:11 2006 From: rostetter at mail.utexas.edu (Eric Rostetter) Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2006 15:52:11 -0600 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> Message-ID: <20061202155211.948kc3hluyw4c004@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Quoting "David D. Eisenstein" : > So what do we need to be saying here? Ideas? I think we're going a bit fast... Do we really want to wrap up the project now, or just put it on hold for a while, or wait until we hear back about the 13 month plan? I'm not sure we have a consences yet... > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legacy I would say we can come up with something that says we're evaluating our options, and you shouldn't expect (or depend on) timely updates at this time, yada yada yada. But I'm not sure we should completely pull the plug yet (without more consensus like discussions) and I sure don't think we should say stuff about the open-core/13-month-extension and so on that are not yet decided. Or, maybe I just missed the consensus? Or maybe I missed the principles statement they are bailing? -- Eric Rostetter The Department of Physics The University of Texas at Austin Go Longhorns! From dan.hawker at astrium.eads.net Fri Dec 8 16:04:32 2006 From: dan.hawker at astrium.eads.net (HAWKER, Dan) Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 16:04:32 -0000 Subject: Archived Kernels Message-ID: <7F6B06837A5DBD49AC6E1650EFF5490601223160@auk52177.ukr.astrium.corp> Hi All, Am needing to setup a FC4 box with an older 2.6.16 kernel. However, these have been deleted/archived from the usual fedora repo and mirrors (although old FC5 kernels are still available). Is there anywhere I can access these older kernels??? I've been having a good old search on the web, but so far, to no avail. TIA Dan -- Dan Hawker Linux System Administrator Astrium -- This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or falsified. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259 Registered Office: Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England From pete at airkiosk.com Fri Dec 8 16:13:31 2006 From: pete at airkiosk.com (Raymond Pete) Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2006 11:13:31 -0500 Subject: Archived Kernels In-Reply-To: <7F6B06837A5DBD49AC6E1650EFF5490601223160@auk52177.ukr.astrium.corp> References: <7F6B06837A5DBD49AC6E1650EFF5490601223160@auk52177.ukr.astrium.corp> Message-ID: <1165594411.22879.20.camel@priv.airkiosk.com> Kernel.org not old FC kernels. The older FC kernels would not be patched properly now I wouldn't think. ** Unless you do not care ** Download the version/patches and compile it. On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 16:04 +0000, HAWKER, Dan wrote: > > Hi All, > > Am needing to setup a FC4 box with an older 2.6.16 kernel. However, these > have been deleted/archived from the usual fedora repo and mirrors (although > old FC5 kernels are still available). > > Is there anywhere I can access these older kernels??? I've been having a > good old search on the web, but so far, to no avail. > > TIA > > Dan > -- > > Dan Hawker > Linux System Administrator > Astrium > From dan.hawker at astrium.eads.net Fri Dec 8 16:48:38 2006 From: dan.hawker at astrium.eads.net (HAWKER, Dan) Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 16:48:38 -0000 Subject: Archived Kernels Message-ID: <7F6B06837A5DBD49AC6E1650EFF5490601223161@auk52177.ukr.astrium.corp> > Kernel.org not old FC kernels. > > The older FC kernels would not be patched properly now I > wouldn't think. > ** Unless you do not care ** > > Download the version/patches and compile it. Thanks Raymond, after some searching I realised I must be doing something wrong to not find anything apart from the vanilla ones on kernel.org. Will go with your suggestion. Thanks again Dan This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or falsified. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259 Registered Office: Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Sat Dec 9 21:40:30 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2006 22:40:30 +0100 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <20061202155211.948kc3hluyw4c004@mail.ph.utexas.edu> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061202155211.948kc3hluyw4c004@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Message-ID: <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 03:52:11PM -0600, Eric Rostetter wrote: > Quoting "David D. Eisenstein" : > > >So what do we need to be saying here? Ideas? > > I think we're going a bit fast... Do we really want to wrap up the > project now, or just put it on hold for a while, or wait until we > hear back about the 13 month plan? I'm not sure we have a consences > yet... > > >http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legacy > > I would say we can come up with something that says we're evaluating > our options, and you shouldn't expect (or depend on) timely updates > at this time, yada yada yada. But I'm not sure we should completely > pull the plug yet (without more consensus like discussions) and I sure > don't think we should say stuff about the open-core/13-month-extension > and so on that are not yet decided. > > Or, maybe I just missed the consensus? Or maybe I missed the principles > statement they are bailing? The longer we wait the more it will look like a failure. Better be active and tell the users that we're working on something than letting them find out by themselves by being bitten. We can't and shouldn't announce anything on core/extra's behalf, we just need to say that the current model is being reorganized and while doing so distributions X, Y, Z have effectively fallen out of maintenance. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mattdm at mattdm.org Sun Dec 10 01:40:10 2006 From: mattdm at mattdm.org (Matthew Miller) Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2006 20:40:10 -0500 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061202155211.948kc3hluyw4c004@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <20061210014010.GA19456@jadzia.bu.edu> On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 10:40:30PM +0100, Axel Thimm wrote: > We can't and shouldn't announce anything on core/extra's behalf, we > just need to say that the current model is being reorganized and while > doing so distributions X, Y, Z have effectively fallen out of > maintenance. where X=2, Y=3, and Z=4. :) -- Matthew Miller mattdm at mattdm.org Boston University Linux ------> From rostetter at mail.utexas.edu Mon Dec 11 21:16:03 2006 From: rostetter at mail.utexas.edu (Eric Rostetter) Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 15:16:03 -0600 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061202155211.948kc3hluyw4c004@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <20061211151603.qfu5e5131zfo8cs4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Quoting Axel Thimm : > The longer we wait the more it will look like a failure. Better be > active and tell the users that we're working on something than letting > them find out by themselves by being bitten. That is what I was proposing. But it seems to have been met by silence. And I still have no idea myself what is going on. > We can't and shouldn't announce anything on core/extra's behalf, we > just need to say that the current model is being reorganized and while > doing so distributions X, Y, Z have effectively fallen out of > maintenance. > -- > Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Sounds good. Someone who has edit rights should post something on the wiki, and others can then edit it or correct it or what ever... Due to the silence, I guess someone should just take this one and get the ball rolling... If _no one_ will step up to do it, I can do it by request, but since I have little actual understanding of what people want or where the project is allegedly going, I'm probably not the best person to do it. -- Eric Rostetter The Department of Physics The University of Texas at Austin Go Longhorns! From sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu Mon Dec 11 23:31:11 2006 From: sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu (Jeff Sheltren) Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 19:31:11 -0400 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <20061211151603.qfu5e5131zfo8cs4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061202155211.948kc3hluyw4c004@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> <20061211151603.qfu5e5131zfo8cs4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Message-ID: On Dec 11, 2006, at 5:16 PM, Eric Rostetter wrote: > Quoting Axel Thimm : > >> The longer we wait the more it will look like a failure. Better be >> active and tell the users that we're working on something than >> letting >> them find out by themselves by being bitten. > > That is what I was proposing. But it seems to have been met by > silence. And I still have no idea myself what is going on. > >> We can't and shouldn't announce anything on core/extra's behalf, we >> just need to say that the current model is being reorganized and >> while >> doing so distributions X, Y, Z have effectively fallen out of >> maintenance. >> -- >> Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net > > Sounds good. Someone who has edit rights should post something on the > wiki, and others can then edit it or correct it or what ever... > > Due to the silence, I guess someone should just take this one and > get the ball rolling... > > If _no one_ will step up to do it, I can do it by request, but since > I have little actual understanding of what people want or where the > project is allegedly going, I'm probably not the best person to do it. > I agree, and I've changed the Legacy page on the wiki. If someone can think of a better way to put it, please let me know. -Jeff From Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 11 23:56:42 2006 From: Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net (Mike McCarty) Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 17:56:42 -0600 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <20061210014010.GA19456@jadzia.bu.edu> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061202155211.948kc3hluyw4c004@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> <20061210014010.GA19456@jadzia.bu.edu> Message-ID: <457DF03A.7000402@sbcglobal.net> Matthew Miller wrote: > On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 10:40:30PM +0100, Axel Thimm wrote: > >>We can't and shouldn't announce anything on core/extra's behalf, we >>just need to say that the current model is being reorganized and while >>doing so distributions X, Y, Z have effectively fallen out of >>maintenance. > > > where X=2, Y=3, and Z=4. :) > Hmm. Do you mean FC2, FC3, and FC4? FC2 has been out of support for quite some time, and for other reasons. Mike -- p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);} This message made from 100% recycled bits. You have found the bank of Larn. I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you. I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that! From jkeating at redhat.com Tue Dec 12 00:10:03 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 19:10:03 -0500 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <20061211151603.qfu5e5131zfo8cs4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> <20061211151603.qfu5e5131zfo8cs4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Message-ID: <200612111910.06641.jkeating@redhat.com> On Monday 11 December 2006 16:16, Eric Rostetter wrote: > That is what I was proposing. ?But it seems to have been met by > silence. ?And I still have no idea myself what is going on. I was hoping that David would make a comment/decision. Failing that, yes, we can shut things down. Point to the proposals for the longer life span, etc... -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mattdm at mattdm.org Tue Dec 12 01:49:24 2006 From: mattdm at mattdm.org (Matthew Miller) Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 20:49:24 -0500 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <457DF03A.7000402@sbcglobal.net> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061202155211.948kc3hluyw4c004@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> <20061210014010.GA19456@jadzia.bu.edu> <457DF03A.7000402@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <20061212014924.GA32723@jadzia.bu.edu> On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 05:56:42PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote: > >>We can't and shouldn't announce anything on core/extra's behalf, we > >>just need to say that the current model is being reorganized and while > >>doing so distributions X, Y, Z have effectively fallen out of > >>maintenance. > >where X=2, Y=3, and Z=4. :) > Hmm. Do you mean FC2, FC3, and FC4? FC2 has been out of support > for quite some time, and for other reasons. Well, I had three values to work with. :) -- Matthew Miller mattdm at mattdm.org Boston University Linux ------> From Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 12 08:44:29 2006 From: Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net (Mike McCarty) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 02:44:29 -0600 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <20061212014924.GA32723@jadzia.bu.edu> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061202155211.948kc3hluyw4c004@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> <20061210014010.GA19456@jadzia.bu.edu> <457DF03A.7000402@sbcglobal.net> <20061212014924.GA32723@jadzia.bu.edu> Message-ID: <457E6BED.3090506@sbcglobal.net> Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 05:56:42PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote: > >>>>We can't and shouldn't announce anything on core/extra's behalf, we >>>>just need to say that the current model is being reorganized and while >>>>doing so distributions X, Y, Z have effectively fallen out of >>>>maintenance. >>> >>>where X=2, Y=3, and Z=4. :) >> >>Hmm. Do you mean FC2, FC3, and FC4? FC2 has been out of support >>for quite some time, and for other reasons. > > > Well, I had three values to work with. :) > I'd love it if FC2 were still supported to any degree. It isn't, and hasn't been and won't be, I guess. Mike -- p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);} This message made from 100% recycled bits. You have found the bank of Larn. I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you. I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that! From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Tue Dec 12 09:32:26 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 13:02:26 +0330 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <200612111910.06641.jkeating@redhat.com> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> <20061211151603.qfu5e5131zfo8cs4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <200612111910.06641.jkeating@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1165915946.3388.18.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> Well, apparently some hosting companies, like 1&1, are still offering their customers Fedora Core 4. http://tinyurl.com/y4q3j3 http://tinyurl.com/y7pj9r I guess we should try to make things more obvious, or we may be jeopardizing several servers on the Internet... Roozbeh From sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu Tue Dec 12 10:54:45 2006 From: sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu (Jeff Sheltren) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 06:54:45 -0400 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <1165915946.3388.18.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> <20061211151603.qfu5e5131zfo8cs4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <200612111910.06641.jkeating@redhat.com> <1165915946.3388.18.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <752E09A8-2C16-47E2-AE3F-578E5B5EEB5E@cs.ucsb.edu> On Dec 12, 2006, at 5:32 AM, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > Well, apparently some hosting companies, like 1&1, are still offering > their customers Fedora Core 4. > > http://tinyurl.com/y4q3j3 > http://tinyurl.com/y7pj9r > > I guess we should try to make things more obvious, or we may be > jeopardizing several servers on the Internet... > > Roozbeh I Roozbeh, do you mean more obvious than what is currently on the wiki? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legacy -Jeff From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Tue Dec 12 12:19:02 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 15:49:02 +0330 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <752E09A8-2C16-47E2-AE3F-578E5B5EEB5E@cs.ucsb.edu> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> <20061211151603.qfu5e5131zfo8cs4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <200612111910.06641.jkeating@redhat.com> <1165915946.3388.18.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> <752E09A8-2C16-47E2-AE3F-578E5B5EEB5E@cs.ucsb.edu> Message-ID: <1165925942.3388.26.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> On Tue, 2006-12-12 at 06:54 -0400, Jeff Sheltren wrote: > I Roozbeh, do you mean more obvious than what is currently on the wiki? > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legacy Well, yes, we need to make people aware of the situation. There may be other hosting companies, and even if there are no other offering FC4, there are several people who use server boxes from these companies. If Fedora Core 4 is dropped, we need a statement that should be well-publicized (at least posted to, say, LWN), if it is not but we lack resources, we should post requests for developers. Roozbeh From nils at lemonbit.nl Tue Dec 12 12:46:21 2006 From: nils at lemonbit.nl (Nils Breunese (Lemonbit)) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 13:46:21 +0100 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <1165915946.3388.18.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> <20061211151603.qfu5e5131zfo8cs4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <200612111910.06641.jkeating@redhat.com> <1165915946.3388.18.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <93EA4931-FC55-422D-BFFD-7A5DBB4F4632@lemonbit.nl> Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > Well, apparently some hosting companies, like 1&1, are still offering > their customers Fedora Core 4. > > http://tinyurl.com/y4q3j3 > http://tinyurl.com/y7pj9r > > I guess we should try to make things more obvious, or we may be > jeopardizing several servers on the Internet... 1&1 offer servers with the Plesk Control Panel. Until like two weeks ago Plesk was only supported on FC1-FC4. They recently added FC5 support, but I guess Fedora is just moving too fast for something like Plesk. Yes, you're reading that right: Plesk is still supported on FC1. They don't tell you that FC1 itself has been EOL for some time now. Note that Plesk is not particularly unique in this... Nils Breunese. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 186 bytes Desc: Dit deel van het bericht is digitaal ondertekend URL: From roozbeh at farsiweb.info Tue Dec 12 12:49:23 2006 From: roozbeh at farsiweb.info (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 16:19:23 +0330 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <1165915946.3388.18.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> <20061211151603.qfu5e5131zfo8cs4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <200612111910.06641.jkeating@redhat.com> <1165915946.3388.18.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <1165927763.3388.32.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> OK, there are quite a few other Fedora Core 4 offers: http://www.valueweb.com/dedicated/dsLinux.htm Most of the dedicated hosting sites that offer Fedora don't mention a version on the front page, but I tried diving a little, and it seems that most of them may still be offering 3 and 4. I found one 5, but still no 6. For a list of major hosting companies offering Linux solutions, I used NetCraft's statistics, see: http://uptime.netcraft.com/perf/reports/performance/Hosters?tn=november_2006 Roozbeh On Tue, 2006-12-12 at 13:02 +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > Well, apparently some hosting companies, like 1&1, are still offering > their customers Fedora Core 4. > > http://tinyurl.com/y4q3j3 > http://tinyurl.com/y7pj9r > > I guess we should try to make things more obvious, or we may be > jeopardizing several servers on the Internet... > > Roozbeh > > -- > fedora-legacy-list mailing list > fedora-legacy-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list From nils at lemonbit.nl Tue Dec 12 12:50:54 2006 From: nils at lemonbit.nl (Nils Breunese (Lemonbit)) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 13:50:54 +0100 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <752E09A8-2C16-47E2-AE3F-578E5B5EEB5E@cs.ucsb.edu> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> <20061211151603.qfu5e5131zfo8cs4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <200612111910.06641.jkeating@redhat.com> <1165915946.3388.18.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> <752E09A8-2C16-47E2-AE3F-578E5B5EEB5E@cs.ucsb.edu> Message-ID: Jeff Sheltren wrote: > On Dec 12, 2006, at 5:32 AM, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > >> Well, apparently some hosting companies, like 1&1, are still offering >> their customers Fedora Core 4. >> >> http://tinyurl.com/y4q3j3 >> http://tinyurl.com/y7pj9r >> >> I guess we should try to make things more obvious, or we may be >> jeopardizing several servers on the Internet... >> >> Roozbeh > > I Roozbeh, do you mean more obvious than what is currently on the > wiki? > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legacy Is this info going out to fedora-announce and the like? A lot of people that need to know this might not be visiting the wiki that often... Nils Breunese. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 186 bytes Desc: Dit deel van het bericht is digitaal ondertekend URL: From jkeating at j2solutions.net Tue Dec 12 15:06:23 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 10:06:23 -0500 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <1165927763.3388.32.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <1165915946.3388.18.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> <1165927763.3388.32.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> Message-ID: <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> On Tuesday 12 December 2006 07:49, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > Most of the dedicated hosting sites that offer Fedora don't mention a > version on the front page, but I tried diving a little, and it seems > that most of them may still be offering 3 and 4. I found one 5, but > still no 6. > > For a list of major hosting companies offering Linux solutions, I used > NetCraft's statistics, see: > > http://uptime.netcraft.com/perf/reports/performance/Hosters?tn=november_200 >6 If any of these hosting firms or softwares like plesk would put up some resources to keep legacy going, we might not have had to shut the doors. Unfortunately its all take take take and no give. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nils at lemonbit.nl Tue Dec 12 15:20:52 2006 From: nils at lemonbit.nl (Nils Breunese (Lemonbit)) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 16:20:52 +0100 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <1165915946.3388.18.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> <1165927763.3388.32.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> Jesse Keating wrote: > On Tuesday 12 December 2006 07:49, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: >> Most of the dedicated hosting sites that offer Fedora don't mention a >> version on the front page, but I tried diving a little, and it seems >> that most of them may still be offering 3 and 4. I found one 5, but >> still no 6. >> >> For a list of major hosting companies offering Linux solutions, I >> used >> NetCraft's statistics, see: >> >> http://uptime.netcraft.com/perf/reports/performance/Hosters? >> tn=november_200 >> 6 > > If any of these hosting firms or softwares like plesk would put up > some > resources to keep legacy going, we might not have had to shut the > doors. > Unfortunately its all take take take and no give. I agree and we could just end it at that and say we don't care everybody and their dog is running unpatched systems. But has anyone ever tried contacting these big companies and explaining the situation to maybe get some resources for the Legacy Project from them? Or does that sound too much like begging to people here? Companies like Dell just approach the Infrastructure Team and say "Hey, we could give you guys a couple of our servers, where would you like us to send them?" I guess it doesn't work like that for others, but they might just want to cooperate. Or they might just not care that their customers run unpatched systems. Since they also offer support on their software I guess that helping Legacy out might just benefit them too. Nils Breunese. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 186 bytes Desc: Dit deel van het bericht is digitaal ondertekend URL: From jkeating at j2solutions.net Tue Dec 12 15:27:35 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 10:27:35 -0500 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> Message-ID: <200612121027.35382.jkeating@j2solutions.net> On Tuesday 12 December 2006 10:20, Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote: > I agree and we could just end it at that and say we don't care ? > everybody and their dog is running unpatched systems. But has anyone ? > ever tried contacting these big companies and explaining the ? > situation to maybe get some resources for the Legacy Project from ? > them? Or does that sound too much like begging to people here? ? > Companies like Dell just approach the Infrastructure Team and say ? > "Hey, we could give you guys a couple of our servers, where would you ? > like us to send them?" I guess it doesn't work like that for others, ? > but they might just want to cooperate. Or they might just not care ? > that their customers run unpatched systems. Since they also offer ? > support on their software I guess that helping Legacy out might just ? > benefit them too. Frankly I'm done with this project. I've tried to pass off leadership, and then that got a bit sabotaged by what Fedora Project wants to do with lifespan in future releases (which I think is a good happy middle ground), but it isn't really interesting to do support for older Fedoras for the next year or so. If somebody wants to run with it, by all means. I'll turn over information about how to use the build system and push to the mirrors. I don't want to see Legacy to touch the newer Fedora releases that might carry the new longer lifespan, I think 13 months is the best possible compromise. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nils at lemonbit.nl Tue Dec 12 15:47:55 2006 From: nils at lemonbit.nl (Nils Breunese (Lemonbit)) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 16:47:55 +0100 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <200612121027.35382.jkeating@j2solutions.net> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> <200612121027.35382.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: Jesse Keating wrote: > On Tuesday 12 December 2006 10:20, Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote: >> I agree and we could just end it at that and say we don't care >> everybody and their dog is running unpatched systems. But has anyone >> ever tried contacting these big companies and explaining the >> situation to maybe get some resources for the Legacy Project from >> them? Or does that sound too much like begging to people here? >> Companies like Dell just approach the Infrastructure Team and say >> "Hey, we could give you guys a couple of our servers, where would you >> like us to send them?" I guess it doesn't work like that for others, >> but they might just want to cooperate. Or they might just not care >> that their customers run unpatched systems. Since they also offer >> support on their software I guess that helping Legacy out might just >> benefit them too. > > Frankly I'm done with this project. I've tried to pass off > leadership, and > then that got a bit sabotaged by what Fedora Project wants to do with > lifespan in future releases (which I think is a good happy middle > ground), > but it isn't really interesting to do support for older Fedoras for > the next > year or so. > > If somebody wants to run with it, by all means. I'll turn over > information > about how to use the build system and push to the mirrors. I don't > want to > see Legacy to touch the newer Fedora releases that might carry the > new longer > lifespan, I think 13 months is the best possible compromise. I was just thinking out loud really. I don't expect it is possible to revive the Legacy Project at this point, but was just thinking that maybe trying to get companies that build on Fedora (not just Fedora Legacy) to supply resources might be a good idea. I don't know if this already being done, but as I said: I was just thinking out loud. I think you did a great job, Jesse, too bad it has to end like this. Now, let me get started on migrating those last servers running legacy versions of Fedora Core... Nils Breunese. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 186 bytes Desc: Dit deel van het bericht is digitaal ondertekend URL: From mattdm at mattdm.org Tue Dec 12 18:41:16 2006 From: mattdm at mattdm.org (Matthew Miller) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 13:41:16 -0500 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <93EA4931-FC55-422D-BFFD-7A5DBB4F4632@lemonbit.nl> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> <20061211151603.qfu5e5131zfo8cs4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <200612111910.06641.jkeating@redhat.com> <1165915946.3388.18.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> <93EA4931-FC55-422D-BFFD-7A5DBB4F4632@lemonbit.nl> Message-ID: <20061212184116.GA2381@jadzia.bu.edu> On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 01:46:21PM +0100, Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote: > like Plesk. Yes, you're reading that right: Plesk is still supported > on FC1. They don't tell you that FC1 itself has been EOL for some > time now. Note that Plesk is not particularly unique in this... Totally. This is why I'm surprised that there's not been more interest in Legacy. But not too surprised -- most people don't really care about keeping their systems secure. -- Matthew Miller mattdm at mattdm.org Boston University Linux ------> From rostetter at mail.utexas.edu Tue Dec 12 19:47:01 2006 From: rostetter at mail.utexas.edu (Eric Rostetter) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 13:47:01 -0600 Subject: {Spam?} Re: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061202155211.948kc3hluyw4c004@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> <20061211151603.qfu5e5131zfo8cs4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Message-ID: <20061212134701.zf7tcwbztan0g0oo@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Quoting Jeff Sheltren : > I agree, and I've changed the Legacy page on the wiki. If someone can > think of a better way to put it, please let me know. > > -Jeff If Jesse approves, I can put the same notice on the fedoralegacy.org web site... -- Eric Rostetter The Department of Physics The University of Texas at Austin Go Longhorns! From jkeating at j2solutions.net Tue Dec 12 20:45:18 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 15:45:18 -0500 Subject: {Spam?} Re: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <20061212134701.zf7tcwbztan0g0oo@mail.ph.utexas.edu> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061212134701.zf7tcwbztan0g0oo@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Message-ID: <200612121545.19097.jkeating@j2solutions.net> On Tuesday 12 December 2006 14:47, Eric Rostetter wrote: > If Jesse approves, I can put the same notice on the fedoralegacy.org > web site... Please do. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jkeating at j2solutions.net Tue Dec 12 20:48:31 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 15:48:31 -0500 Subject: {Spam?} Re: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <200612121545.19097.jkeating@j2solutions.net> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061212134701.zf7tcwbztan0g0oo@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <200612121545.19097.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <200612121548.31912.jkeating@j2solutions.net> On Tuesday 12 December 2006 15:45, Jesse Keating wrote: > > If Jesse approves, I can put the same notice on the fedoralegacy.org > > web site... > > Please do. And once done, I suppose I draft something up for the announce list. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 12 22:42:36 2006 From: Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net (Mike McCarty) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 16:42:36 -0600 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> <200612121027.35382.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <457F305C.2000108@sbcglobal.net> Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote: > > I was just thinking out loud really. I don't expect it is possible to > revive the Legacy Project at this point, but was just thinking that > maybe trying to get companies that build on Fedora (not just Fedora > Legacy) to supply resources might be a good idea. I don't know if this > already being done, but as I said: I was just thinking out loud. I > think you did a great job, Jesse, too bad it has to end like this. > > Now, let me get started on migrating those last servers running legacy > versions of Fedora Core... Migrating them to what? That's my question. Mike -- p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);} This message made from 100% recycled bits. You have found the bank of Larn. I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you. I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that! From sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu Tue Dec 12 22:54:26 2006 From: sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu (Jeff Sheltren) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 18:54:26 -0400 Subject: {Spam?} Re: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <200612121548.31912.jkeating@j2solutions.net> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061212134701.zf7tcwbztan0g0oo@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <200612121545.19097.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <200612121548.31912.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <69A8AD26-FE74-47D2-A8AC-10F5315FFEB5@cs.ucsb.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Dec 12, 2006, at 4:48 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Tuesday 12 December 2006 15:45, Jesse Keating wrote: >>> If Jesse approves, I can put the same notice on the fedoralegacy.org >>> web site... >> >> Please do. > > And once done, I suppose I draft something up for the announce list. Thanks Jesse, if you want help, let me (or the list) know. - -Jeff -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFFfzMmKe7MLJjUbNMRAqfZAKDIndha7Abq4tujAUR+w2WlVkipvQCg1DSI XehTOrgrVEhNsTvRB9zHtgU= =E8Lw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From mattdm at mattdm.org Wed Dec 13 01:45:33 2006 From: mattdm at mattdm.org (Matthew Miller) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 20:45:33 -0500 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <457F305C.2000108@sbcglobal.net> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> <200612121027.35382.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <457F305C.2000108@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <20061213014533.GA24532@jadzia.bu.edu> On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 04:42:36PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote: > >Now, let me get started on migrating those last servers running legacy > >versions of Fedora Core... > Migrating them to what? That's my question. If you can't upgrade every year (or ideally, twice year), CentOS is the clear answer. -- Matthew Miller mattdm at mattdm.org Boston University Linux ------> From rostetter at mail.utexas.edu Wed Dec 13 02:02:27 2006 From: rostetter at mail.utexas.edu (Eric Rostetter) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 20:02:27 -0600 Subject: {Spam?} Re: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <200612121545.19097.jkeating@j2solutions.net> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061212134701.zf7tcwbztan0g0oo@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <200612121545.19097.jkeating@j2solutions.net> Message-ID: <20061212200227.n7ldufdht6r4s0kc@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Quoting Jesse Keating : > On Tuesday 12 December 2006 14:47, Eric Rostetter wrote: >> If Jesse approves, I can put the same notice on the fedoralegacy.org >> web site... > > Please do. I copied the wiki text to the website... I'm not happy with the way it looks, so I'll try to improve it when I get time, but at least it is up on the site now... > -- > Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) > Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) > GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) > -- Eric Rostetter The Department of Physics The University of Texas at Austin Go Longhorns! From nils at lemonbit.nl Wed Dec 13 09:41:12 2006 From: nils at lemonbit.nl (Nils Breunese (Lemonbit)) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 10:41:12 +0100 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <457F305C.2000108@sbcglobal.net> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> <200612121027.35382.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <457F305C.2000108@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <3159D4B1-0A2B-46C6-81A6-210603B41847@lemonbit.nl> Mike McCarty wrote: > Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote: >> I was just thinking out loud really. I don't expect it is possible >> to revive the Legacy Project at this point, but was just thinking >> that maybe trying to get companies that build on Fedora (not just >> Fedora Legacy) to supply resources might be a good idea. I don't >> know if this already being done, but as I said: I was just >> thinking out loud. I think you did a great job, Jesse, too bad it >> has to end like this. >> Now, let me get started on migrating those last servers running >> legacy versions of Fedora Core... > > Migrating them to what? That's my question. CentOS 4. Why do you ask? Nils Breunese. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 186 bytes Desc: Dit deel van het bericht is digitaal ondertekend URL: From philip at datafoundry.com Wed Dec 13 14:16:47 2006 From: philip at datafoundry.com (Philip Molter) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:16:47 -0600 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <20061213014533.GA24532@jadzia.bu.edu> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> <200612121027.35382.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <457F305C.2000108@sbcglobal.net> <20061213014533.GA24532@jadzia.bu.edu> Message-ID: <45800B4F.4080505@datafoundry.com> Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 04:42:36PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote: >>> Now, let me get started on migrating those last servers running legacy >>> versions of Fedora Core... >> Migrating them to what? That's my question. > > If you can't upgrade every year (or ideally, twice year), CentOS is the > clear answer. If you make that kind of statement, you are effectively removing high-end server testing from Fedora Core. If FC is still supposed to be a testbed for the newer software, whether it's desktop or high-end server, then that sounds like the wrong thing to say. There are people who run servers for whom CentOS isn't a viable alternative because hardware upgrades necessitate running newer kernels and software than is available in current enterprise releases. Right now, the Redhat/CentOS enterprise software offering is moving at a slower pace than the hardware people might run it on. That's the case for us. That's why we run Fedora Core on our rather large amount of servers. I'm not saying this to complain or try to keep FC4 active or anything like that. The FL project made their choices and we made ours based on what was stated at the time. I see a lot of, "Well, if you can't keep up with our pace, CentOS is the distro for you," though, and that's just not true. The FL project was a nice middle-ground for people between FC and CentOS. Philip From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Wed Dec 13 14:18:57 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 19:48:57 +0530 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <45800B4F.4080505@datafoundry.com> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> <200612121027.35382.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <457F305C.2000108@sbcglobal.net> <20061213014533.GA24532@jadzia.bu.edu> <45800B4F.4080505@datafoundry.com> Message-ID: <45800BD1.5050600@fedoraproject.org> Philip Molter wrote: > If you make that kind of statement, you are effectively removing > high-end server testing from Fedora Core. If FC is still supposed to be > a testbed for the newer software, whether it's desktop or high-end > server, then that sounds like the wrong thing to say. Well, since we want people to use Fedora on its own I guess thats a good thing to say. > There are people who run servers for whom CentOS isn't a viable > alternative because hardware upgrades necessitate running newer kernels > and software than is available in current enterprise releases. Right > now, the Redhat/CentOS enterprise software offering is moving at a > slower pace than the hardware people might run it on. That's the case > for us. That's why we run Fedora Core on our rather large amount of > servers. If running Fedora on more than what the project has already planned to do (which is for around 13 months), people who are expecting a longer lifecyle should contribute towards that and find the middle ground they need to. Rahul From mattdm at mattdm.org Wed Dec 13 14:40:59 2006 From: mattdm at mattdm.org (Matthew Miller) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:40:59 -0500 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <45800B4F.4080505@datafoundry.com> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> <200612121027.35382.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <457F305C.2000108@sbcglobal.net> <20061213014533.GA24532@jadzia.bu.edu> <45800B4F.4080505@datafoundry.com> Message-ID: <20061213144059.GA17661@jadzia.bu.edu> On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 08:16:47AM -0600, Philip Molter wrote: > >On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 04:42:36PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote: > >>>Now, let me get started on migrating those last servers running legacy > >>>versions of Fedora Core... > >>Migrating them to what? That's my question. > >If you can't upgrade every year (or ideally, twice year), CentOS is the > >clear answer. > If you make that kind of statement, you are effectively removing > high-end server testing from Fedora Core. If FC is still supposed to be > a testbed for the newer software, whether it's desktop or high-end > server, then that sounds like the wrong thing to say. It is the *truthful* thing to say. I agree wholeheartedly with you, but without serious (financial and personnel) backing for Fedora Legacy, it *cannot happen*. -- Matthew Miller mattdm at mattdm.org Boston University Linux ------> From nils at lemonbit.nl Wed Dec 13 17:03:35 2006 From: nils at lemonbit.nl (Nils Breunese (Lemonbit)) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 18:03:35 +0100 Subject: {Spam?} Re: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <20061212200227.n7ldufdht6r4s0kc@mail.ph.utexas.edu> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061212134701.zf7tcwbztan0g0oo@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <200612121545.19097.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <20061212200227.n7ldufdht6r4s0kc@mail.ph.utexas.edu> Message-ID: <22BA25A0-B4E0-4A8C-8868-9749097A6088@lemonbit.nl> Eric Rostetter wrote: > I copied the wiki text to the website... I'm not happy with the way > it looks, so I'll try to improve it when I get time, but at least it > is up on the site now... Can someone also edit http://download.fedoralegacy.org/ ? It lists FC3 and FC4 as active releases. Nils Breunese. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 186 bytes Desc: Dit deel van het bericht is digitaal ondertekend URL: From smooge at gmail.com Thu Dec 14 05:40:45 2006 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 22:40:45 -0700 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <1165915946.3388.18.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> <1165927763.3388.32.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> Message-ID: <80d7e4090612132140k1d5b9b65lb93109396eaf224c@mail.gmail.com> On 12/12/06, Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote: > Jesse Keating wrote: > . > > I agree and we could just end it at that and say we don't care > everybody and their dog is running unpatched systems. But has anyone > ever tried contacting these big companies and explaining the > situation to maybe get some resources for the Legacy Project from > them? Or does that sound too much like begging to people here? > Companies like Dell just approach the Infrastructure Team and say > "Hey, we could give you guys a couple of our servers, where would you > like us to send them?" I guess it doesn't work like that for others, > but they might just want to cooperate. Or they might just not care > that their customers run unpatched systems. Since they also offer > support on their software I guess that helping Legacy out might just > benefit them too. > >From past efforts to contact various ISP's on both Centos and Fedora.. it isnt very good. Most of the ISPs seem to not have it in their business plan to look after software updates. They put down Linux as being something that they didnt have to pay a licensing fee for and put a 0 cost to make up costs elsewhere in electricity/bandwidth/advertising/selling at a loss til later. A good many of the large ones are actually already deep in debt or VC capital. The ones that do have cash are the ones that offer licensed RHEL/SuSE to customers and so arent using Fedora. Looking over the archives.. there were a lot of sites that said "we want" or "we must have" support for some release or another but very few of them put up any resources for it. It was usually an individual who had the skills, time, and resources to do a single release for a while until they got tired of it. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From smooge at gmail.com Thu Dec 14 05:46:30 2006 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 22:46:30 -0700 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <20061212184116.GA2381@jadzia.bu.edu> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <20061209214030.GF23258@neu.nirvana> <20061211151603.qfu5e5131zfo8cs4@mail.ph.utexas.edu> <200612111910.06641.jkeating@redhat.com> <1165915946.3388.18.camel@shalil.farsiweb.info> <93EA4931-FC55-422D-BFFD-7A5DBB4F4632@lemonbit.nl> <20061212184116.GA2381@jadzia.bu.edu> Message-ID: <80d7e4090612132146u34fa8feicf398a820f661842@mail.gmail.com> On 12/12/06, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 01:46:21PM +0100, Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote: > > like Plesk. Yes, you're reading that right: Plesk is still supported > > on FC1. They don't tell you that FC1 itself has been EOL for some > > time now. Note that Plesk is not particularly unique in this... > > Totally. This is why I'm surprised that there's not been more interest in > Legacy. > > But not too surprised -- most people don't really care about keeping their > systems secure. > The biggest problem is that 99 out of a 100 people have no idea about their computer than they do about their car. If you read the car manual, you should probably check the oil and tire air pressure at least once a week, etc etc. But the majority of people might never check it beyond making sure that they take the car into the shop when the light goes yellow. They want the same from their computer systems and servers. The computer is to get them from point A to point B, get the morning mail, play some games, put up pictures of the family dog. The idea that they have to check the oil daily is foreign and basically gets put into the back corner because the computer is supposed to be like a TV set, radio, or car. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From smooge at gmail.com Thu Dec 14 05:49:06 2006 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 22:49:06 -0700 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <20061213144059.GA17661@jadzia.bu.edu> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> <200612121027.35382.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <457F305C.2000108@sbcglobal.net> <20061213014533.GA24532@jadzia.bu.edu> <45800B4F.4080505@datafoundry.com> <20061213144059.GA17661@jadzia.bu.edu> Message-ID: <80d7e4090612132149j26f583e2l21aa00aa8ae302e7@mail.gmail.com> On 12/13/06, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 08:16:47AM -0600, Philip Molter wrote: > > >On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 04:42:36PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote: > > >>>Now, let me get started on migrating those last servers running legacy > > >>>versions of Fedora Core... > > >>Migrating them to what? That's my question. > > >If you can't upgrade every year (or ideally, twice year), CentOS is the > > >clear answer. > > If you make that kind of statement, you are effectively removing > > high-end server testing from Fedora Core. If FC is still supposed to be > > a testbed for the newer software, whether it's desktop or high-end > > server, then that sounds like the wrong thing to say. > > It is the *truthful* thing to say. I agree wholeheartedly with you, but > without serious (financial and personnel) backing for Fedora Legacy, it > *cannot happen*. > And the resources should not be Red Hat's. Red Hat already plows enough money into Fedora.. this is where the community (if there is one) has to supply the labour to deal with the fields that are fallow. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From jkeating at j2solutions.net Thu Dec 14 15:52:05 2006 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:52:05 -0500 Subject: People are noticing... Message-ID: <200612141052.06078.jkeating@j2solutions.net> http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3649081 -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nils at lemonbit.nl Sun Dec 17 15:20:23 2006 From: nils at lemonbit.nl (Nils Breunese (Lemonbit)) Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2006 16:20:23 +0100 Subject: Fwd: Re: Legacy wiki -- statement? References: <22BA25A0-B4E0-4A8C-8868-9749097A6088@lemonbit.nl> Message-ID: Who can fix this? Nils Breunese. Forwarded message: > Eric Rostetter wrote: > >> I copied the wiki text to the website... I'm not happy with the way >> it looks, so I'll try to improve it when I get time, but at least it >> is up on the site now... > > Can someone also edit http://download.fedoralegacy.org/ ? It lists > FC3 and FC4 as active releases. > > Nils Breunese. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 186 bytes Desc: Dit deel van het bericht is digitaal ondertekend URL: From jkeating at redhat.com Sun Dec 17 21:26:25 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2006 16:26:25 -0500 Subject: Fwd: Re: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: References: <22BA25A0-B4E0-4A8C-8868-9749097A6088@lemonbit.nl> Message-ID: <200612171626.33021.jkeating@redhat.com> On Sunday 17 December 2006 10:20, Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote: > Who can fix this? Oops, sorry I can fix this, I've just been busy this weekend. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From cradle at umd.edu Mon Dec 18 14:53:19 2006 From: cradle at umd.edu (David Eisner) Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 09:53:19 -0500 Subject: Fwd: Re: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <200612171626.33021.jkeating@redhat.com> References: <22BA25A0-B4E0-4A8C-8868-9749097A6088@lemonbit.nl> <200612171626.33021.jkeating@redhat.com> Message-ID: <4586AB5F.6080805@umd.edu> Jesse Keating wrote: > Oops, sorry I can fix this, I've just been busy this weekend > While you're at it, the "Supported Releases" sidebar on fedoralegacy.org still says: ---snip--- The following releases are currently fully supported by the Fedora Legacy Project. * Red Hat Linux 7.3 * Red Hat Linux 9 * Fedora Core 3 * Fedora Core 4 ---snip--- -David From craig.salitros at gmail.com Tue Dec 19 20:01:50 2006 From: craig.salitros at gmail.com (Craig Salitros) Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 14:01:50 -0600 Subject: 2007 DST Changes Message-ID: <2c13899c0612191201l1f36c25bk8910a7019e68b0fc@mail.gmail.com> Apologies in advance if I'm asking a question that has been answered already.. I've gone though a few months worth of mailing list archives with no luck so far (at least, browsing by subject). As I understand it, RH7.3 and RH9.0 is at the end of it's run w/ Fedora legacy. I've still got a few lingering RH7.3 that have yet to be replaced. Have any patches / updates been released to address the 2007 DST time changes? Thanks, --Craig -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From deisenst at gtw.net Wed Dec 20 03:34:57 2006 From: deisenst at gtw.net (David Eisenstein) Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 21:34:57 -0600 Subject: 2007 DST Changes In-Reply-To: <2c13899c0612191201l1f36c25bk8910a7019e68b0fc@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c13899c0612191201l1f36c25bk8910a7019e68b0fc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4588AF61.3050800@gtw.net> Craig Salitros wrote: > Apologies in advance if I'm asking a question that has been answered > already.. I've gone though a few months worth of mailing list archives > with no luck so far (at least, browsing by subject). > > As I understand it, RH7.3 and RH9.0 is at the end of it's run w/ > Fedora legacy. I've still got a few lingering RH7.3 that have yet to > be replaced. Have any patches / updates been released to address the > 2007 DST time changes? Yes. I believe these were addressed earlier this year. Daylight Savings Time and other timezone information for RHL 7.3 and RHL 9.0 are handled in the glibc library source code, and these were updated then. Please see FLEA-2006:173091-1 (as excellently done by Marc Deslauriers) at: for more information. Warm regards, David Eisenstein > > Thanks, > --Craig > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -- > fedora-legacy-list mailing list > fedora-legacy-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list From Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 25 12:57:28 2006 From: Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net (Mike McCarty) Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 06:57:28 -0600 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <3159D4B1-0A2B-46C6-81A6-210603B41847@lemonbit.nl> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> <200612121027.35382.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <457F305C.2000108@sbcglobal.net> <3159D4B1-0A2B-46C6-81A6-210603B41847@lemonbit.nl> Message-ID: <458FCAB7.808@sbcglobal.net> Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote: > Mike McCarty wrote: > >> >> Migrating them to what? That's my question. > > CentOS 4. Why do you ask? > > Nils Breunese. You seem to think this is a foregone conclusion. Well, I'm not moving to CentOS. I find the bickering and overbearing attitude of the "moderator" of the unmoderated forum for assistance to be unbearable. Perhaps Scientific Linux would be better. I haven't looked at their user forum. I'm downloading the Scientific Linux LiveCD right now. Perhaps White Box. I'm considering leaving Red Hat type product altogether. Perhaps I'll switch to Debian. I'm already having to do system support for a Debian box. So, I don't understand why you wouldn't understand why one would ask. Mike -- p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);} This message made from 100% recycled bits. You have found the bank of Larn. I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you. I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that! From nils at lemonbit.nl Mon Dec 25 19:32:09 2006 From: nils at lemonbit.nl (Nils Breunese (Lemonbit)) Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 20:32:09 +0100 Subject: Legacy wiki -- statement? In-Reply-To: <458FCAB7.808@sbcglobal.net> References: <4570F22F.7090409@gtw.net> <200612121006.26961.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <30FBBC12-B658-490B-B2DE-315FE3FE221F@lemonbit.nl> <200612121027.35382.jkeating@j2solutions.net> <457F305C.2000108@sbcglobal.net> <3159D4B1-0A2B-46C6-81A6-210603B41847@lemonbit.nl> <458FCAB7.808@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: Mike McCarty wrote: > Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote: >> Mike McCarty wrote: >>> >>> Migrating them to what? That's my question. >> CentOS 4. Why do you ask? >> Nils Breunese. > > You seem to think this is a foregone conclusion. I don't. But for my needs, yes, I have come to this conclusion some time ago. I'm already running most of my servers on CentOS 4 and I have been very happy with it. No problems so far. > Well, I'm not moving to CentOS. I find the bickering and overbearing > attitude of the "moderator" of the unmoderated forum for assistance > to be unbearable. I wouldn't know, I don't frequent the CentOS forums. > So, I don't understand why you wouldn't understand why one would > ask. I didn't say I didn't understand why someone would ask. Maybe it's that English is not my native language, but I was genuinely interested why I was asked. If the answer for instance was: "Well, I haven't made up my mind yet, why are you choosing CentOS instead of Red Hat or White Box?" I could've for instance tell you about the differences between Fedora, CentOS and Red Hat. You already seem to know about the differences and apparently you have already decided that you're not moving to CentOS. Well, that's fine with me too. Good luck with migrating your machines! Merry Christmas all! Nils Breunese. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 186 bytes Desc: Dit deel van het bericht is digitaal ondertekend URL: From deisenst at gtw.net Sat Dec 30 05:23:47 2006 From: deisenst at gtw.net (David Eisenstein) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 23:23:47 -0600 Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down Message-ID: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> In case any of you are not aware, the Fedora Legacy project is in the process of shutting down. The current model for supporting maintenance distributions is being re-examined. In the meantime, we are unable to extend support to older Fedora Core releases as we had planned. As of now, Fedora Core 4 and earlier distributions are no longer being maintained. Discussions last night on the #Fedora-Legacy channel have brought to light the fact that certain Fedora Legacy properties (servers) may be going away soon, such as the repository at and the build server. Legacy folks need to let us know what they want to be done with the content in the repository mirrors. If you don't speak up, we may find ourselves in a place where 'yum update' commands will fail in the near future for the Red Hat and Fedora Core releases that Legacy has supported in the past. If there are any issues you need to discuss regarding these events, you are welcome to discuss them on our IRC channel (channel #Fedora-Legacy on the freenode IRC network ), or on the Fedora Legacy discussion list: Sincerely, Jesse Keating and David Eisenstein of the Legacy Team. From danny at anatomy.usyd.edu.au Sat Dec 30 06:29:30 2006 From: danny at anatomy.usyd.edu.au (Danny Yee) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 17:29:30 +1100 Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down In-Reply-To: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> Message-ID: <20061230062930.GA24060@mail.medsci.usyd.edu.au> David Eisenstein wrote: > If you don't speak up, we may find ourselves in a > place where 'yum update' commands will fail in the near future for the > Red Hat and Fedora Core releases that Legacy has supported in the past. That's probably a good thing. Many people running FC may not realise they're no longer getting security fixes, but they may notice if their cron updates start failing instead of just finding no updates. Danny. Computer Systems Manager School of Medical Sciences University of Sydney From bill at bfccomputing.com Sat Dec 30 08:33:04 2006 From: bill at bfccomputing.com (Bill McGonigle) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 03:33:04 -0500 Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down In-Reply-To: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> Message-ID: <793DF7CA-C909-4285-B5CD-B947AB0A7AE5@bfccomputing.com> I'm wondering if anybody is working on a communications piece for the shutdown. A who-what-when-where-why-how sort of article? I'm assuming it would be on the Wiki/homepage if it were, but here's asking anyhow. So, assuming it hasn't been, I can volunteer to put something together, to save the multitudes the effort of investigation. I spent some time looking over the last couple months of mailing list archives, the internetnews piece, and Jesse's blog, but I'm not convinced I have the whole story. Some outstanding questions would be: * was there any attempt to recruit new leadership? * ditto for sponsorship * is there data on usage (I saw that 'interest was low' but I'm not sure if it means interest in volunteering or interest in terms of yum updates) * probably lots more I'm not thinking about now, and it's late so my reading comprehension is likely sub-par So, everybody feel free to send me any interesting factoids that would be relevant for someone wading into this today for the first time, and perhaps facing a mini support crisis right about now. I'll assemble and post back here with something for feedback. I bet lots of folks will want some information come Tuesday. And if somebody is already doing this, great, no intention to step on toes. -Bill ----- Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 bill at bfccomputing.com Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/ Page: 603.442.1833 Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/ VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf From nils at lemonbit.nl Sat Dec 30 10:32:41 2006 From: nils at lemonbit.nl (Nils Breunese (Lemonbit)) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 11:32:41 +0100 Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down In-Reply-To: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> Message-ID: <6837760D-2755-4930-9529-69D1C5569884@lemonbit.nl> David Eisenstein wrote: > Discussions last night on the #Fedora-Legacy channel have brought > to light the fact that certain Fedora Legacy properties (servers) > may be going away soon, such as the repository at download.fedoralegacy.org/> and the build server. I'd like to mirror the legacy tree (at least the FC2, FC3 and FC4 part of it) to a local server, but 'rsync download.fedoralegacy.org legacy' tells me I cannot mirror the tree as I'm not an official mirror. http://www.fedoralegacy.org/download/mirror-form.php tells me mirror registration is disabled. Is there a quick way to get those files? I'd rather not download them one by one and I might want to use a couple of those rpms before I have completed migrating my EOL'd Fedora servers. Nils Breunese. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 186 bytes Desc: Dit deel van het bericht is digitaal ondertekend URL: From d.terweij at nettuning.net Sat Dec 30 10:48:10 2006 From: d.terweij at nettuning.net (D.Terweij | NTG-Support) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 11:48:10 +0100 Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> Message-ID: <034401c72c00$010a41a0$1e00a8c0@prvd321> > In case any of you are not aware, the Fedora Legacy project is in the > process of shutting down. Does have anyone a rscync line for me to get the whole FC3 tree to my local hdd? I am still using some FC3 boxes, and dont want to miss the FL packages if i need some... Danny. From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Sat Dec 30 11:10:33 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 12:10:33 +0100 Subject: Thanks FL! (was: Fedora Legacy shutting down) In-Reply-To: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> Message-ID: <20061230111033.GD16034@neu.nirvana> On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 11:23:47PM -0600, David Eisenstein wrote: > In case any of you are not aware, the Fedora Legacy project is in the > process of shutting down. I think since this is the very official end of the project, very official thanks for all efforts are in order! -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nils at lemonbit.nl Sat Dec 30 15:38:49 2006 From: nils at lemonbit.nl (nils at lemonbit.nl) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 16:38:49 +0100 (CET) Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down In-Reply-To: <034401c72c00$010a41a0$1e00a8c0@prvd321> References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> <034401c72c00$010a41a0$1e00a8c0@prvd321> Message-ID: <2742.85.147.237.216.1167493129.squirrel@secure.lemonbit.nl> >> In case any of you are not aware, the Fedora Legacy project is in the >> process of shutting down. > > Does have anyone a rscync line for me to get the whole FC3 tree to my > local hdd? > I am still using some FC3 boxes, and dont want to miss the FL packages if > i need some... I wanted to do the same, but 'rsync download.fedoralegacy.org::legacy legacy' told me I wasn't allowed to do that because I'm not a registered mirror. The mirror page tells me mirror registration is disabled. Any other way to get the tree without having to download each individual package? Nils Breunese. From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Sat Dec 30 16:11:29 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 11:11:29 -0500 Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down In-Reply-To: <2742.85.147.237.216.1167493129.squirrel@secure.lemonbit.nl> References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> <034401c72c00$010a41a0$1e00a8c0@prvd321> <2742.85.147.237.216.1167493129.squirrel@secure.lemonbit.nl> Message-ID: <1167495090.27913.36.camel@cutter> On Sat, 2006-12-30 at 16:38 +0100, nils at lemonbit.nl wrote: > >> In case any of you are not aware, the Fedora Legacy project is in the > >> process of shutting down. > > > > Does have anyone a rscync line for me to get the whole FC3 tree to my > > local hdd? > > I am still using some FC3 boxes, and dont want to miss the FL packages if > > i need some... > > I wanted to do the same, but 'rsync download.fedoralegacy.org::legacy > legacy' told me I wasn't allowed to do that because I'm not a registered > mirror. The mirror page tells me mirror registration is disabled. Any > other way to get the tree without having to download each individual > package? > Try it now. -sv From d.terweij at nettuning.net Sat Dec 30 16:16:24 2006 From: d.terweij at nettuning.net (D.Terweij | NTG-Support) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 17:16:24 +0100 Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> <034401c72c00$010a41a0$1e00a8c0@prvd321> <2742.85.147.237.216.1167493129.squirrel@secure.lemonbit.nl> <1167495090.27913.36.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <04f101c72c2e$7ede15b0$1e00a8c0@prvd321> > > >> In case any of you are not aware, the Fedora Legacy project is in the > > >> process of shutting down. > > > > > > Does have anyone a rscync line for me to get the whole FC3 tree to my > > > local hdd? > > > I am still using some FC3 boxes, and dont want to miss the FL packages if > > > i need some... > > > > I wanted to do the same, but 'rsync download.fedoralegacy.org::legacy > > legacy' told me I wasn't allowed to do that because I'm not a registered > > mirror. The mirror page tells me mirror registration is disabled. Any > > other way to get the tree without having to download each individual > > package? > > > > Try it now. # rsync download.fedoralegacy.org::legacy legacy Fedora Legacy Rsync - Restricted use. To sign up to be an official mirror, visit http://fedoralegacy.org/download/mirror-form.php From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Sat Dec 30 16:34:02 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 11:34:02 -0500 Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down In-Reply-To: <04f101c72c2e$7ede15b0$1e00a8c0@prvd321> References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> <034401c72c00$010a41a0$1e00a8c0@prvd321> <2742.85.147.237.216.1167493129.squirrel@secure.lemonbit.nl> <1167495090.27913.36.camel@cutter> <04f101c72c2e$7ede15b0$1e00a8c0@prvd321> Message-ID: <1167496442.27913.38.camel@cutter> On Sat, 2006-12-30 at 17:16 +0100, D.Terweij | NTG-Support wrote: > > > >> In case any of you are not aware, the Fedora Legacy project is in the > > > >> process of shutting down. > > > > > > > > Does have anyone a rscync line for me to get the whole FC3 tree to my > > > > local hdd? > > > > I am still using some FC3 boxes, and dont want to miss the FL packages > if > > > > i need some... > > > > > > I wanted to do the same, but 'rsync download.fedoralegacy.org::legacy > > > legacy' told me I wasn't allowed to do that because I'm not a registered > > > mirror. The mirror page tells me mirror registration is disabled. Any > > > other way to get the tree without having to download each individual > > > package? > > > > > > > Try it now. > > # rsync download.fedoralegacy.org::legacy legacy > Fedora Legacy Rsync - Restricted use. To sign up to be an official mirror, > visit http://fedoralegacy.org/download/mirror-form.php > seems to work for me if you use: rsync -avH download.fedoralegacy.org::legacy legacy -sv From jkeating at redhat.com Sat Dec 30 16:30:25 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 11:30:25 -0500 Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down In-Reply-To: <793DF7CA-C909-4285-B5CD-B947AB0A7AE5@bfccomputing.com> References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> <793DF7CA-C909-4285-B5CD-B947AB0A7AE5@bfccomputing.com> Message-ID: <200612301130.28491.jkeating@redhat.com> On Saturday 30 December 2006 03:33, Bill McGonigle wrote: > I'm wondering if anybody is working on a communications piece for the ? > shutdown. ?A who-what-when-where-why-how sort of article? ?I'm ? > assuming it would be on the Wiki/homepage if it were, but here's ? > asking anyhow. Reading this list over the last year or so would be good info. > So, assuming it hasn't been, I can volunteer to put something ? > together, to save the multitudes the effort of investigation. ?I ? > spent some time looking over the last couple months of mailing list ? > archives, the internetnews piece, and Jesse's blog, but I'm not ? > convinced I have the whole story. ?Some outstanding questions would be: > > ? ?* was there any attempt to recruit new leadership? Yes, leadership does no good without contributors. > ? ?* ditto for sponsorship Nobody has responded to our calls for help. Nobody. > ? ?* is there data on usage (I saw that 'interest was low' but I'm ? > not sure if it means interest in volunteering or interest in terms of ? > yum updates) Sure, there are a good number of consumers, people who will happily consume until the project ends, however they are not willing to actually DO any of the work necessary to keep the project alive. They would be better suited consuming updates from a product that is designed for their usage cases. > ? ?* probably lots more I'm not thinking about now, and it's late so ? > my reading comprehension is likely sub-par -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jkeating at redhat.com Sat Dec 30 16:31:52 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 11:31:52 -0500 Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down In-Reply-To: <6837760D-2755-4930-9529-69D1C5569884@lemonbit.nl> References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> <6837760D-2755-4930-9529-69D1C5569884@lemonbit.nl> Message-ID: <200612301131.52933.jkeating@redhat.com> On Saturday 30 December 2006 05:32, Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote: > I'd like to mirror the legacy tree (at least the FC2, FC3 and FC4 ? > part of it) to a local server, but 'rsync download.fedoralegacy.org ? > legacy' tells me I cannot mirror the tree as I'm not an official ? > mirror. http://www.fedoralegacy.org/download/mirror-form.php tells me ? > mirror registration is disabled. Is there a quick way to get those ? > files? I'd rather not download them one by one and I might want to ? > use a couple of those rpms before I have completed migrating my EOL'd ? > Fedora servers. If you read the message more carefully you'll see that you aren't being denied access, only that mirrors have a special port to use that should the load become too high only the mirrors would get access. You're perfectly capable of rsyncing all the content you want. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jkeating at redhat.com Sat Dec 30 16:32:52 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 11:32:52 -0500 Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down In-Reply-To: <04f101c72c2e$7ede15b0$1e00a8c0@prvd321> References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> <1167495090.27913.36.camel@cutter> <04f101c72c2e$7ede15b0$1e00a8c0@prvd321> Message-ID: <200612301132.52236.jkeating@redhat.com> On Saturday 30 December 2006 11:16, D.Terweij | NTG-Support wrote: > # rsync download.fedoralegacy.org::legacy legacy > Fedora Legacy Rsync - Restricted use. To sign up to be an official mirror, > visit http://fedoralegacy.org/download/mirror-form.php This is just the header, you'll still get content. The standard port is 'restricted' in that if load becomes too high, it will be shut off and only mirrors will have access. Until then, you can sync all you want. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nils at lemonbit.nl Sat Dec 30 21:05:58 2006 From: nils at lemonbit.nl (Nils Breunese (Lemonbit)) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 22:05:58 +0100 Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down In-Reply-To: <1167496442.27913.38.camel@cutter> References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> <034401c72c00$010a41a0$1e00a8c0@prvd321> <2742.85.147.237.216.1167493129.squirrel@secure.lemonbit.nl> <1167495090.27913.36.camel@cutter> <04f101c72c2e$7ede15b0$1e00a8c0@prvd321> <1167496442.27913.38.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <40869285-3C69-4D18-BA75-5C95A96D211D@lemonbit.nl> seth vidal wrote: > seems to work for me if you use: > > rsync -avH download.fedoralegacy.org::legacy legacy Works me for me too now. Nils Breunese. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 186 bytes Desc: Dit deel van het bericht is digitaal ondertekend URL: From d.terweij at nettuning.net Sat Dec 30 21:16:54 2006 From: d.terweij at nettuning.net (D.Terweij | NTG-Support) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 22:16:54 +0100 Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> <034401c72c00$010a41a0$1e00a8c0@prvd321><2742.85.147.237.216.1167493129.squirrel@secure.lemonbit.nl><1167495090.27913.36.camel@cutter><04f101c72c2e$7ede15b0$1e00a8c0@prvd321><1167496442.27913.38.camel@cutter> <40869285-3C69-4D18-BA75-5C95A96D211D@lemonbit.nl> Message-ID: <05be01c72c57$db2b1880$1e00a8c0@prvd321> >Works me for me too now. >Nils Breunese. Yes here too. Dont hope that a lot of ppl are raping the server now :S It is very slow overhere. arround 2-3Mbit I am try to create a local repo if all is synced and add that to my boxes. And maybe i set it online too. You never know who else is in need of "old" packages. At the moment if i want a new version or a security fix, i try to rebuild a fc4/5/6 src rpm . It not always builds fine, then i skip that or try to remove a package and install from source tarballs from author websites. Just a bad choice to run FC in production environments afterwards. Not always easy to upgrade to newer ones. Danny. From guallar at easternrad.com Sat Dec 30 22:47:27 2006 From: guallar at easternrad.com (Josep L. Guallar-Esteve) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 17:47:27 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down In-Reply-To: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> Message-ID: <50423.75.110.82.115.1167518847.squirrel@mail.easternrad.com> David Eisenstein wrote: > In case any of you are not aware, the Fedora Legacy project is in the > process of shutting down. Thank you to everybody who helped in this project. Happy New Year :) -- Josep From nils at lemonbit.nl Sun Dec 31 14:05:32 2006 From: nils at lemonbit.nl (Nils Breunese (Lemonbit)) Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 15:05:32 +0100 Subject: Fedora Legacy shutting down In-Reply-To: <05be01c72c57$db2b1880$1e00a8c0@prvd321> References: <4595F7E3.8060100@gtw.net> <034401c72c00$010a41a0$1e00a8c0@prvd321><2742.85.147.237.216.1167493129.squirrel@secure.lemonbit.nl><1167495090.27913.36.camel@cutter><04f101c72c2e$7ede15b0$1e00a8c0@prvd321><1167496442.27913.38.camel@cutter> <40869285-3C69-4D18-BA75-5C95A96D211D@lemonbit.nl> <05be01c72c57$db2b1880$1e00a8c0@prvd321> Message-ID: <7BF0C6B6-5027-489C-A7A9-D3E98B0F1CD1@lemonbit.nl> D.Terweij | NTG-Support wrote: > I am try to create a local repo if all is synced and add that to my > boxes. > And maybe i set it online too. You never know who else is in need > of "old" > packages. Do I understand correctly that the FC1-FC4 base and updates repositories will still be available at http:// download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/ and its mirrors? So when download.fedoralegacy.org and its mirrors stop the only packages that we'll 'lose' are the legacy updates? Couldn't the legacy packages maybe somehow be added to a legacy directory under http:// download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/? Extras has a dir there too... Nils Breunese. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 186 bytes Desc: Dit deel van het bericht is digitaal ondertekend URL: