Hello,
epel-modular repository for EL8 was discontinued: https://pagure.io/epel/issue/198 On February 15, 2023 EPEL 8 modules will be archived and removed: https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2022-October/120635.html See the forwarded email below for more details.
This means we can no longer provide new upstream builds of 389-ds-base through the EPEL repository. Good news is that our copr repositories now have builds for EL8: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/g/389ds/389-directory-server https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/g/389ds/389-directory-server-next
And if you have an existing installation using 389-directory-server module from EPEL, you can switch to our copr repositories and reset the old module:
# dnf copr enable @389ds/389-directory-server # dnf update 389-ds-base cockpit-389-ds # dnf module reset 389-directory-server
In case of any issues, please let us know or open an issue at https://github.com/389ds/389-ds-base/issues/new/choose
Thanks. -- Viktor
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Troy Dawson tdawson@redhat.com Date: Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 12:10 AM Subject: [CentOS-devel] EPEL 8 Modules get the axe on Halloween 2022 To: The CentOS developers mailing list. centos-devel@centos.org
When EPEL-8 was launched, it came with some support for modules with the hope that a module ecosystem could be built from Fedora packages using RHEL modules as an underlying tool. This has never happened and we have ended up with a muddle of modular packages which will 'build' but may not install or even run on an EL-8 system. Attempts to fix this and work within how EPEL is normally built have been tried for several years by different people but have not worked.
At this point we are saying that this experiment with modules in EPEL has not worked and we will focus our resources on what does work.
Schedule of EPEL 8 Module Retirement: Next Week: - epel-release will be updated. -- epel-modular will set enabled = 0 -- epel-modular full name will have "Deprecated" in it
October 31 2022: - The EPEL 8 modules will be archived and removed. -- The mirror manager will be pointed to the archive. - Packagers will no longer be able to build EPEL 8 modules.
After October 31st (Actual date to be determined): - epel-release will be updated again. -- epel-modular repo configs will be removed.
Questions and Answers:
Question: Will I still be able to access the modules after October 31st? Answer: It is not recommended, because the modules will not get any security or bug fixes, but yes. They will be in the Fedora archives, and the mirror managers will point at them.
Question: What will you be dressed as on Halloween? Answer (Troy): A Penguin
EPEL Steering Committee
[1] - https://pagure.io/epel/issue/198 _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Hello, I have a question. With EPEL8 modular, when I want to do a fresh 389ds installation i use the command: dnf module install 389-directory-server:stable/default which provides 389ds version 2.0.15
Now, if I do a fresh installation using copr, there is no "stable" tag. If I just do a: dnf install 389-ds-base it provides 389ds version 2.2.4
So, it seems using copr also means upgrading 389ds from 2.0.x version to 2.2.x. version.
I see there are 4 currently 389ds releases:
2.0.x 2.1.x 2.2.x 2.3.x
What is in general the suggested/recommended 389ds version to be installed EL8-based (Almalinux, RockyLinux, etc.) production systems ?
Thanks, Rosario
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 4:25 PM Rosario Esposito rosario.esposito@gmail.com wrote:
Hello, I have a question. With EPEL8 modular, when I want to do a fresh 389ds installation i use the command: dnf module install 389-directory-server:stable/default which provides 389ds version 2.0.15
Now, if I do a fresh installation using copr, there is no "stable" tag. If I just do a: dnf install 389-ds-base it provides 389ds version 2.2.4
So, it seems using copr also means upgrading 389ds from 2.0.x version to 2.2.x. version.
Yes, this is correct. This copr follows releases of 389ds that appear in the latest stable Fedora version. We also have 389-directory-server-next copr that follows Fedora Rawhide. F37: 2.2.x F38/Rawhide: 2.3.x Once F38 becomes the new stable release, 2.3.x version will appear in 389-directory-server copr.
I see there are 4 currently 389ds releases:
2.0.x 2.1.x 2.2.x 2.3.x
There is also a 1.4.3.x version as part of the 389-ds module. It doesn't
have WebUI and is intended to be used as part of the idm module. But you can install it anyway: dnf module enable 389-ds:1.4 dnf install 389-ds-base
What is in general the suggested/recommended 389ds version to be installed EL8-based (Almalinux, RockyLinux, etc.) production systems ?
On RHEL8 I'd recommend using RHDS :) On EL8 distros a good choice is whatever version is in 389-directory-server copr, it's well tested and is very close to the latest RHDS version on RHEL9.
HTH
Thanks, Rosario _______________________________________________ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.... Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org