infrastructure May 2012

infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org

42 participants
48 discussions

Introduction
by Onalenna Junior Makhura 09 Oct '12

09 Oct '12

Hi, I have been a member of this list for a few years now but due to some constraints I have not been able to actively participate. I would now like to start be active in Fedora development. I have been using fedora as my 1st choice OS since Fedora Core 6. I would be very glad to have someone who can show me the ropes. Regards, Onalenna Junior Makhura

2 7

builders of the future!!!!!
by Seth Vidal 24 Jul '12

24 Jul '12

The discussion on devel list about ARM and my work last week on reinstalling builders quickly and commonly has raised a number of issues with how we manage our builders and how we should manage them in the future. It is apparent that if we add arm builders they will be lots of physical systems (probably in a very small space) but physical, none-the-less. So we need a sensible way to manage and reinstall these hosts commonly and quickly. Additionally, we need to consider what the introduction of a largish number of arm builders (and other arm infrastructure) would do to our existing puppet setup. Specifically overloading it pretty badly and making it not-very-manageable. I'm making certain assumptions here and I'd like to be clear about what those are: 1. the builders need to be kept pristine 2. that currently our builders are not freshly installed frequently enough. 3. that the builders are relatively static in their configuration and most changes are done with pkg additions 4. that builder setups require at least two manual-ish steps of a koji admin who can disable/enable/register the builder with the kojihub. 5. that the builders are fairly different networking and setup-wise to the rest of our systems. So I am proposing that we consider the following as a general process for maintaining our builders: 1. disable the builder in koji 2. make sure all jobs are finished 3. add installer entries into grub (or run the undefine, reinstall process if the builder is virt-based) 4. reinstall the system 5. monitor for ssh to return 6. connect in and force our post-install configuration: identification, network, mount-point setup, ssl certs/keys for koji, etc 7. reboot 8. re-enable host in koji We would do this with frequency and regularity. Perhaps even having some percentage of our builders doing this at all times. Ie: 1/10th of the boxes reinstalling at any given moment so in a certain time frame*10 all of them are reinstalled. Additionally, this would mean these systems would NOT have a puppet management piece at all. Package updates would still be handled by pushes as we do now, if things were security critical, but barring the need for significant changes we could rely on the boxes simply being refreshed frequently enough that it wouldn't need to be pushed. What do folks think about this idea? It would dramatically reduce the node entries in our puppet config, it would drop the number of hosts connecting to puppet, too. It will mean more systems being reinstalled and more often. It will also require some work to make the steps I mention above be automated. I think I can achieve that without too much difficulty, actually. I think, in general, it will increase our ability to scale up to more and more builders. I'd like input, constructive, please. Thanks, -sv

5 9

Fedora Account Change
by Leonardo Rodrigues de Mello 07 Jun '12

07 Jun '12

Hi, I do not know if this is the correct place to place this question, please feel free to redirect me to the right place. I have one account at fedora project 'lmello' this account is assigned with my old employer email (lmello AT redhat.com), since i no longer work at redhat i am unable to change my password and associate my account with my new email address. Could some one change my lmello account email address from lmello AT redhat.com to l at lmello.eu.org ? I had created a new account associated with my new email address called lmello2, feel free to remove it if necessary. Best. -- Leonardo Rodrigues de Mello jabber: l(a)lmello.eu.org

16 25

qa machine management
by Kevin Fenzi 05 Jun '12

05 Jun '12

Greetings. Just had a talk with tflink on IRC about the management of the qa network machines. Long ago when we setup those machines we were thinking we could use them as a testbed for bcfg2 to see if we wanted to start using it or if it worked ok, etc. I setup a bcfg2 server to try this with, but sadly have never found the time to even start configuring it. Machines involved: virthost-comm01.qa (real hardware) autoqa01.qa (guest) autoqa-stg01.qa (guest) lockbox-comm01.qa (guest) bastion-comm01.qa (guest) (someday we may add a sign-bridge-comm01 and sign-vault-comm01 to allow secondary archs like ppc and arm to sign packages). Options: - Try and push forward with a bcfg2 setup on lockbox-comm01.qa and evaluate it. This would be nice, but I'm really not sure anyone has the time to do it. - Just add all the above machines to our puppet repo and configure them there and call it done. This would mean they wouldn't be seperate from us and we just update and configure and monitor them like any other machine. - Try and work out some setup with ansible or the like to see if it could manage them. Again, this would be a learning and tweaking curve, so not sure we have the time. - We could setup a new puppet for them on lockbox-comm01.qa and use that to manage them. We could reuse a lot of our current puppet setup, but it would still be a fair bit of work to get it all configured. Thoughts? Brilliant ideas? kevin

4 10

Re: Name of the blog on the planet Fedora
by Kévin Raymond 01 Jun '12

01 Jun '12

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Arif Tri Waluyo <arifiauo(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote: > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:16 PM, Kévin Raymond <shaiton(a)fedoraproject.org> > wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Arif Tri Waluyo >> <arifiauo(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote: >> > Hi I'm Arif, >> > I was one of the contributors in Indonesia community site[1]. I >> > registered >> > the site to Planet Fedora in the name of "Fedora Indonesia". But when I >> > check if the configuration is correct, it turns out there are sites[2] >> > on >> > behalf of "Fedora Indonesia (fedora-id)". I was afraid there was >> > confusion >> > about this. What should we do? >> > >> > Regards, >> > Arif Tri Waluyo >> > >> > 1. http://id.fedoracommunity.org/ >> > 2. http://www.abenk.com/ >> >> Yep correct, this one is quite wrong, abenk.com features blacberry stuff… >> CC-ing Yafiz who could have some clues about fedora-id account. >> >> Arif, if this is not resolved soon, please ping us back we will see >> with which account it is linked. > > It's been more than 24 hours. Are we still going to wait? >> Adding the infra mailing list for them to look at it closly… (I haven't find who is behind this name) -- Kévin Raymond (shaiton) GPG-Key: A5BCB3A2

3 3

gitweb[-caching] vs cgit
by Seth Vidal 01 Jun '12

01 Jun '12

We're currently using gitweb[-caching] on fedorahosted and on fedorapeople. A discussion today suggested maybe we should move to cgit in its lieu. First things first: 1. cgit means we break old links to gitweb urls 2. cgit is a different pkg - maintained by other folks 3. gitweb-caching appears to be abandoned (gitweb is maintained but it doesn't do caching) - kernel.org is using gitweb-caching so - question - is cgit different and better enough to warrant the hurt of moving? is cgit more reliably maintained? is it faster? (hell, not sure it is possible for it to be slower) Are we overlooking other options? -sv

6 7

Plan for tomorrow's Fedora Infrastructure meeting (2012-05-31 18UTC)
by Kevin Fenzi 31 May '12

31 May '12

The infrastructure team will be having it's weekly meeting tomorrow, 2012-05-31 at 18:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting on the freenode network. Suggested topics: #topic New folks introductions and Apprentice tasks. If any new folks want to give a quick one line bio or any apprentices would like to ask general questions, they can do so here. #topic two factor auth status #topic Applications status / discussion Check in on status of our applications: pkgdb, fas, bodhi, koji, community, voting, tagger, packager, dpsearch, etc. If there's new releases, bugs we need to work around or things to note. #topic Upcoming Tasks/Items #info 2012-06-01 - nag fi-apprentices. #info 2011-06-03 - gitweb-cache removal day. #info 2012-06-04 - class B reboots? #info 2012-06-05 - class A reboots? #info 2012-06-08 OOW: osuosl01.fedoraproject.org #info 2012-06-17 OOW: sign-vault02.phx2.fedoraproject.org #info 2012-06-21 to 2012-07-04 Kevin is off on trains and boats. #info 2012-06-26 Fedora 15 end of life. #topic Meeting tagged tickets: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/report/10 #topic Open Floor Submit your agenda items, as tickets in the trac instance and send a note replying to this thread. More info here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/Meetings#Meetings Thanks kevin

1 1

Fedorapeople repos and koji build
by Jonathan MERCIER 30 May '12

30 May '12

Dear, I wold like to put a little feature request: link Fedorapeople repos and koji system. Often i do: - koji scratch build (uploading srpm + build - once time build successfully ended downloading generated rpm - uploading rpm to Fedorapeople repos i will be really good by example to put koji scratch build in a special directory and when you are connected to your fedorapeople account just use cp . I have a do package for 0ad and this package take ~ 1Go, that take too many times: upload, build, downlaod, upload ... thanks a lot for your great job kinds regard

2 1

Proper setting for smtp_from in new trac instance?
by Jason L Tibbitts III 30 May '12

30 May '12

Perhaps I missed it but I didn't see any kind of guide to setting up a new fedorahosted trac instance so I copied from one other trac where I have privileges. That trac has smtp_from set to trac(a)fedorahosted.org. The problem with this is that some hosts appear to do SMTP callouts and reject messages sent with that setting: May 29 04:42:36 hosted03.vpn.fedoraproject.org postfix/smtpd[17813]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from XXX: 550 5.1.1 <trac(a)fedorahosted.org>: Recipient address rejected: User unknown in local recipient table; from=<> to=<trac(a)fedorahosted.org> proto=SMTP helo=XXX infradead.org is one such host that does this, but it is not the only one. It appears that several trac instances are using this setting. Should I be using something else or is it possible to get an alias from trac@ to nobody@ set up so that this will work? - J<

2 1

F17 Final Freeze over.
by Kevin Fenzi 30 May '12

30 May '12

Greetings. Just a note that with the release of Fedora 17 yesterday, we are now out of freeze. Our next freeze is for F18Alpha. Currently scheduled for: 2012-08-07 to 2012-08-21 Enjoy. kevin

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

infrastructure May 2012