[Fedora-infrastructure-list] Partitioning for New Servers
by Warren Togami
RH Kernel Engineer Rik van Riel recommended that we use LVM on our new
servers for flexibility in both the host and guest partitions.
If we reserve two non-LVM partitions on the primary system disk, then we
will be able to safely remote install a new OS later. We can boot
anaconda automated with kickstart or driven with VNC and reinstall
without harming the existing OS. If we fail, simply fallback thanks to
grub savedefault --once. After install, grub chainloading to the second
/boot can boot the second OS. After we confirm the new OS is working
fine, we can blow away the original host OS and reclaim the space thanks
to LVM.
The purchased Dell box has four disks.
The donated Dell box has two disks.
Here's how I envision the first two disks would be partitioned:
/dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 => /dev/md1 /boot 200MB
/dev/sda2 /dev/sdb2 => /dev/md2 /boot2 200MB (reserved for later)
/dev/sda3 /dev/sdb3 => /dev/md3 vg0 LVM
vg0 contains:
swap 2GB
/ 10GB for host OS
All remaining space can be allocated later for Xen guests or to grow the
root partition of the host as needed.
The server with the additional two disks can software RAID-1 the entire
disk, and provide additional flexible storage as vg1 LVM. Xen guests
can go on either vg0 or vg1. We can migrate stuff as needed to balance
I/O load.
Due to instability of Xen in rawhide in the short-term, we should avoid
upgrading the host OS until it has stabilized as we approach FC6-final.
It should be relatively safe because the host OS is running only sshd
and is accessible only via bastion. Later we will be able to safely
install a host into another LVM partition to see if it runs our guests,
so risk and hassle is really minimal here.
This is just ideas from my head. If anybody here has better ideas
please suggest.
Warren Togami
wtogami(a)redhat.com
17 years, 7 months
[Fedora-infrastructure-list] Infrastructure Package Management
by Mike McGrath
So in the meeting today we've discussed what to do about our package
management. At present FC3 will be EOL'd in april(ish). At that time
many of the packages we use in our environment will become out of
date. So options are an upgrade to RHEL5 when it is released (which
we aren't even done upgrading everything to RHEL4 yet), building and
supporting our own repo, or try to foster support for centos.karan.org
or https://extras.108.redhat.com/
As always this is an open discussion, I'd encourage anyone with ideas
to participate. The meeting notes will be out shortly.
-Mike
17 years, 8 months
[Fedora-infrastructure-list] Re: Fedora CVS - Not sending out commit messages
by Max Spevack
Adding the fedora-infrastructure-list -- those would be the best people to
look into it. It certainly seems like there's a problem -- hopefully we
can resolve it ASAP.
--Max
=====================
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Nathan Kinder wrote:
> Hi Max,
>
> Our checkins to the /cvs/dirsec repository on cvs.fedora.redhat.com
> usually end up sending commit messages to the fedora-directory-commits
> mailing list. This notification mechanism no longer seems to be working.
> I'm not sure when it stopped working exactly, but the last notification
> that was received was on 08/09. I have checked with some other team
> members, and they have experienced the same thing.
>
> Is this a problem on the cvs server?
>
> Thanks,
> -NGK
--
Max Spevack
+ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MaxSpevack
+ gpg key -- http://spevack.org/max.asc
+ fingerprint -- CD52 5E72 369B B00D 9E9A 773E 2FDB CB46 5A17 CF21
17 years, 8 months
[Fedora-infrastructure-list] fp.org email addresses coming up as spam
by Max Spevack
Anyone else seen complaints of things like this? I have my settings quite
low, and we're still getting flagged.
2.7 HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (DHCP)
3.3 HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (HCC)
http://www.google.com/search?q=HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP
Thought I'd throw this out there for anyone who's interested in doing some
digging, see under what circumstances fp.o emails are triggering these
flags.
--Max
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Received: from localhost by mspevack.rdu.redhat.com
with SpamAssassin (version 3.1.3);
Wed, 23 Aug 2006 15:20:47 -0400
From: Jack Aboutboul <jaboutboul(a)fedoraproject.org>
To: Markster(a)digium.com
Subject: *****SPAM***** Fedora and Asterisk
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 15:19:38 -0400
Message-Id: <1156360778.23913.8.camel@deepfort>
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on
mspevack.rdu.redhat.com
X-Spam-Level: *****
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.9 required=5.0 tests=HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP,
HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=no version=3.1.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----------=_44ECAA8F.C1433263"
Spam detection software, running on the system "mspevack.rdu.redhat.com", has
identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: Hey Mark, I am at Red Hat HQ for the week and part of
our Fedora meetings have been regarding how we can help make Fedora a
viable platform for innovation for certain key technologies which have
the most potential. Naturally, voip came up and a number of people spoke
about Asterisk and how we can work together with you guys. [...]
Content analysis details: (5.9 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
2.7 HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (DHCP)
3.3 HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (HCC)
0.0 UNPARSEABLE_RELAY Informational: message has unparseable relay lines
17 years, 8 months
[Fedora-infrastructure-list] when to use OTRS (Was: Re: FESCo, hello? - [was: Re: Buildsys status pages down])
by Thorsten Leemhuis
Michael Schwendt schrieb:
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 11:36:58 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
>> Error was: [('SSL routines', 'SSL3_READ_BYTES', 'sslv3 alert
>> certificate expired'), ('SSL routines', 'SSL3_WRITE_BYTES', 'ssl
>> handshake failure')]
>
> So, would anyone please give a short introduction on when the OTRS
> ticketing system ought to be used instead of bugzilla?
> [...]
> What I'm still missing is the announcement for everyone. Which system do
> we use when?
Well, don't ask FESCO, let's ask and kick the proper people:
fedora-infrastructure(a)redhat.com (CCed)
I'd be interested in the answers, too. I don't really like having two
systems and would have prepared if we (people outside of the
infrastructure group) stick to bugzilla.
CU
thl
17 years, 8 months
[Fedora-infrastructure-list] Welcome new people
by Mike McGrath
I've noticed many new people showing interest in our infrastructure
and wanted to make sure to welcome everyone. If you haven't sent some
sort of introduction email to the list feel free to do it. Also
include exactly what stuff you're interested in working on. I've
altered the schedule page:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/Schedule
I've changed "owner" to "project leader" since really many of these
tasks should be multi person. Also many people go to the project page
and see that all the tasks are 'taken' not realizing that there's
still much much work to be done. Anyone who has already taken
leadership with one project I'd encourage a status report sent to the
list if you're inters ted in some more hands on it. The multi-tier
security stuff is coming soon so we should be able to open up our
resources to more people without putting us at any additional risk :)
To the new people, welcome. Most of our communication happens here,
in the Thursday meetings or on the Wiki. The lay of the land is
pretty simple, make sure you're vocal about what you want to work on
and let the infrastructure-list/project leader know. People come and
go all the time and any help that can be lended will be useful.
Become familiar with the wiki page. If you have any questions feel
free to ask me or anyone else on the list. It may seem like
everything is taken but really everyone could use a hand from time to
time.
-Mike
17 years, 8 months
[Fedora-infrastructure-list] Meeting Log 2006-08-17
by Dennis Gilmore
Hey guys,
attached is the log from the meeting yesterday. We covered a fairly large
amount of things which was good.
We really need someone to step up and replace pasqual with unifying the look
and feel of the websites.
as well as to get things rolling on the FPD.
Thanks to all those who participated.
Regards
Dennis
17 years, 8 months
