Posts Tagged ‘RHEL’

Experiences with RHEL6 Beta 2.1

Friday, July 23rd, 2010

Like promised I’ll keep you updated on the RHEL6b2.1. The “official name” is not Beta2.1, it is “Beta 2 refresh”. Why not calling it Beta3? Anyway: The good news first: In contrary to the first release of Beta 2, it works fine again! The first release of Beta2 was quite crappy, it was not installable as a KVM guest. This was obviously due to severe bugs in some virtio drivers.

So, what are the news?

1. The bugs in the virtio drivers have been fixed, you can deploy RHEL6 in KVM environments again.
2. The vmware_ballooning driver has been backported.
3. A lot of minor bugs have been fixed, see the announcement.

Especially point two is cool, running RHEL6 in a VMware ESX environment does not necessarily need the vmware-tools installed anymore. RHEL6 now provides all three important vm-ware related drivers: The vmxnet3, vmware_ballooning and pvscsi. At the end of the day, this means one can dismiss the always-hated vmware-tools. A test of the behavior w/o vmware-tools by a ESX specialist is pending.

The alternative of vmware-tools are the open-vm-tools. This would add the benefit of controlled shutdown of the ESX guest with the vCenter tools. Since VMware does not provide (yet) RHEL 6 packages of the open-vm-tools I was unable to test it.

I made the same brief tests as I reported here. It seems that Red Hat is back on track, RHEL6b2.1 is reliable and not far away from being ready for production.

When can we expect a Beta3? Will there even be a next beta, or is Red Hat release a RC1 soon? There is still no published release schedule, all we know is “later this year”.

Anyway: Download Beta2.1 and test it, its a pretty cool release. If you find bugs, report them.

Have fun!

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Slashdot
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • MisterWong
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • BlinkList
  • Mixx

What is possibly going into RHEL6 GA and what is not

Tuesday, June 1st, 2010

As I wrote different times before, RHEL6 is going to have a Kernel based on upstreams 2.6.32 Kernel. Meanwhile Linus Torvalds and his fellows released 2.6.34. Since then – from a System Engineers Point of view – there have some “minor” changes which are affecting the daily work in enterprise environments.

I think that Red Hat is aware that RHEL6 is one of its most important releases made so far. RHEL6 Beta-Testers have acknowledged that this is one of the best Linux distributions made so far.

So lets have a look to http://bit.ly/98yNsk (https://bugzilla.redhat.com search for RHEL6 select all states, sort by Bug-ID and having RFE (Request For Enhancement) in Summary).

Unrar
I requested to add “unrar” to RHEL, unfortunatly they refused because of the strange license of unrar. This is really not understandable, because *ALL* major Linux distros such as SLES, Debian, Ubuntu are providing a package for it. Red Hat think (and they are right) it is a “unfree” license. From my point of view it does not hurt because nobody is forced to use its libs in own software. Unfortunately SAP distributes a lot of software components in RAR-compressed files, this is a problem.

virtio net/vhost net speed enhancements from upstream kernel
This was reported as bug #593158 and later appeared as #595287. Since Red Hat is keen to improve virtualization things, I think this is going to GA.

DRBD
DRBD was getting into upstream Kernel 2.6.33. DRBD (Distributed Replicated Block Device) is some kind of RAID-1 over TCP/IP and is rock solid since years. From my point of view it is the best invention since sliced bread when it comes to cluster technologies. It is widely used, also on RHEL. Have a look to Florians Haas’ comment about support, and further to Alan Robertson’s comment. While Florian is working at Linbit (the developer company of DRBD) points to support problems existing on current releases on RHEL, Alan is a “Urgestein” (sorry, cant find a English word for it, it is meant in a very positive manner) of Linux clustering likes too to have DRBD in RHEL6. Quite a lot of people are included in the bugs CC list (as I’m writing 37 people). This brings quite some preasure on Red Hat to include DRBD in RHEL6. @Red Hat: Do it! include DRBD! If not as a “supported” product, deliver it and find a way with Linbit for the support.

Getting rid of the crappy VMware-tools
For people urged to use VMWares ESX stuff as virtalization technology, there is another important thing that changed: In 2.6.34 upstream Kernel, Linus Torvalds accepted VMWares ballooning driver (vmmemctl). In 2.6.33 Linus accepted VMWares vmxnet3 and pvscsci drivers which have been already backported to RH’s Kernel 2.6.32-EL. So, also backporting vmmemctl is *THE* chance to get rid of those crappy VMWare Tools. For companies relying on ESX this would be a *VERY* important feature. I’ll made a service request (SR 2021028) @Red Hat and will file a RFE-Bug at bugzilla ASAP. Please vote for it!

Other stuff
There are other RFE’s pending. Most of them are not really important for enterprise computing (my point of view). Mostly this RFE’s are about virtualization and bound to libvirt. Most of these RFE’s seems to be trivial and are on status “ON_QA” which means they are most probably included in RHEL6.

What is your favorit RFE-Bug? Please let me know…

Have fun!

Luc

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Slashdot
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • MisterWong
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • BlinkList
  • Mixx

IUS Community RPMs for Red Hats RHEL

Sunday, May 16th, 2010

I was criticizing that software in RHEL is too outdated for web servers quite soon after release, see my blog post http://blog.delouw.ch/2010/05/02/rhel6-as-a-web-server/. While this is true for a system fully supported by Red Hat, I learned an alternative from a comment on the post. This alternative is the so called IUS community repository.

About the IUS Community Project
The project was launched in September 2009. In spite of being a young project, it has a history. At Rackspace, a large hosting company which is operating thousands of production (web) servers, it was an internal project since 2006. They decided to build up a community around it, like Fedora is for RHEL, Quote: “IUS is The Fedora of Rackspace RPMS”

Support
Like for other community repositories out there, you cannot expect a “official” support neither from Red Hat nor from IUS or Rackspace. Of course there are the usual support sources for communities such as forums, IRC, bugtracker etc.

The difference to other repositories
While most community repositories such as EPEL, rpmforge etc. are focused on providing missing software, IUS focuses on providing upgrades for web server related software which is included in RHEL. This includes PHP, Python, MySQL and others.

Package conflicts with the stock distribution
One may think replace stock software with newer version is tricky and create conflicts. There is one way to find out: Lets give it a try…

The test
The server is a basic install of the yesterday released Centos 5.5. The following installation turns this machine in a lightweight LAMP server:

yum install httpd php-mysql php php-cli php-common php-pgsql php-dba php-pdo php-gd mysql-server perl-DBD-MySQL.

Now we have the situation like it exists in many companies: An outdated webserver. Now we want to upgrade PHP to 5.3.x. Lets see what happens.


[root@centos5 ~]# rpm -i http://dl.iuscommunity.org/pub/ius/stable/Redhat/5/x86_64/ius-release-1-4.ius.el5.noarch.rpm
warning: /var/tmp/rpm-xfer.o6JH6k: Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 9cd4953f
[root@centos5 ~]# rpm -i http://dl.iuscommunity.org/pub/ius/stable/Redhat/5/x86_64/epel-release-1-1.ius.el5.noarch.rpm
warning: /var/tmp/rpm-xfer.MRnuo8: Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 9cd4953f
package epel-release-5-3.noarch (which is newer than epel-release-1-1.ius.el5.noarch) is already installed
[root@centos5 ~]#

Hmm… no GPG key…
The second output is confusing me. Is the package just a clone of epel-release-5-3.noarch? Lets go forward to see if it is working.

“yum clean-all && yum check-update” did not show any pending updates, so far so good. Now lets try to upgrade php.


root@centos5 ~]# yum install php53
Loaded plugins: fastestmirror
Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
* addons: mirror.netcologne.de
* base: mirror.netcologne.de
* epel: mirror.andreas-mueller.com
* extras: mirror.netcologne.de
* ius: ftp.astral.ro
* updates: mirror.netcologne.de
Setting up Install Process
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package php53.x86_64 0:5.3.2-3.ius.el5 set to be updated
--> Processing Dependency: php53-common = 5.3.2-3.ius.el5 for package: php53
--> Processing Dependency: php53-cli = 5.3.2-3.ius.el5 for package: php53
--> Processing Dependency: php53-pear >= 1:1.8 for package: php53

[omitted output]

--> Processing Conflict: php53 conflicts php < 5.3
--> Finished Dependency Resolution
php53-5.3.2-3.ius.el5.x86_64 from ius has depsolving problems
--> php53 conflicts with php
Error: php53 conflicts with php
You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem
You could try running: package-cleanup --problems
package-cleanup --dupes
rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
The program package-cleanup is found in the yum-utils package.

Correct behaviour, since it is a replacement package. After removing php (and only php) yum was complaining about more conflicts. After removing all php related packages installed to prepare for the test, needed to be removed. So the dependencies has been proper solved. Also the installation of related stock distribution packages such as “php-pgsql” has been successfully prevented.

Conclusion
The IUS community repositories are working as expected. With such a basic test I cannot promise if there are not hidden conflicts with packages between stock RHEL/CentOS packages and those from IUS. The experience on the long term will bring more clarity. I think is is sane to do some real-life tests with servers that are in an early project phase.

Further readings:

http://iuscommunity.org/

http://wiki.iuscommunity.org/

http://saferepo.iuscommunity.org/specification/

Have fun!

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Slashdot
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • MisterWong
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • BlinkList
  • Mixx

RHN Inter-Satellite-Sync is kind of tricky and picky

Wednesday, May 5th, 2010

If you try to establish an ISS (Inter Satellite Sync) between two RHN Satellites, do not fully trust the documentation. A slave Satellite must be named by a hostname (IP is not enough) and must have an A and a PTR DNS record or have an /etc/hosts entry. Check it before restarting the satellite by issuing rhn-satellite restart. The check is simply done by entering gethostip rhn.example.com and getent hosts <IP-address> on the commandline.

When Quoting the documentaion at Red Hats web site: http://www.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Network_Satellite/5.3/Installation_Guide/html/s2-sync-iss-config-master.html: allowed_iss_slaves=rhn.example.com means: A hostname, not just an IP. It is not clearly stated what kind of quality such an entry needs to have.

HTH….

Have fun!

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Slashdot
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • MisterWong
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • BlinkList
  • Mixx

Spacewalk 1.0 released

Sunday, May 2nd, 2010

spacewalk-1-0-release

Spacewalk 1.0 has been released

Spacewalk is the upstream project for Red Hat’s RHN Satellite software, one of the best systems management software available for Linux Systems.

In the past few weeks one could see a lot of git commits on the source repository of spacewalk. There is no changelog available yet. The road map mentioned compatibility with Apache Tomcat 6.0.x to be able to install spacewalk on Fedora12 and RHEL6.

There should have also been several enhancements in the phyton API and long awaited feature enhancements such as host-renaming (confirmed). Further repository synchronization should be much faster now (Announced in a earlier feature note).

Sorry folks, a lot of “should”, “maybe” etc. I just have been reading the git commit logs and the announcement of the 1.0 release. As long as there is not official changelog available we only can speculate on the precise enhancements.

I’ll install this on my test system soon. If something really uncommon happens or an astonishing new feature appeared, I’ll let you know,

Have fun!

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Slashdot
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • MisterWong
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • BlinkList
  • Mixx

Writing trigger scripts for cobbler does not work at the moment

Sunday, May 2nd, 2010

Cobbler Logo

At the moment, shell scripts as triggers wont work with cobbler. This is due to a bug. Unfortunately the developers wont fix it in the next few weeks or even months.

Triggers are a very welcome and powerful method to automate things before, during after installation of a system. At the moment it only works with python scripts. Since not every sysadmin knows python, but everyone knows to write bash scripts, this is a major drawback.

Cobbler is included in RHN Satellite 5.3 but in a quite old version. People tend to use a standalone cobbler install server installed from EPEL. Out of the box Cobbler is only usable on RHN Satellite servers with “deployment” entitlements which are quite expensive. Post-Install triggers can help admins to automate configuration management in RHEL and CentOS environments. For automating configuration with the RHN Satellite you need to have brought the “configuration management” entitlements too. With cobblers triggers you can partially replace the configuration management offered by RHN Satellite. Is this the reason why Red Hat developers are not very keen to solve the issue? I’m talking about ~USD 250 p.a/system.

I’ll keep you posted on the issue….

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Slashdot
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • MisterWong
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • BlinkList
  • Mixx

RHEL6 as a web server

Sunday, May 2nd, 2010

New software versions

Today I’m writing about the changes and benefits of RHEL6 as a web server compared to RHEL5. Red Hat is well known for its stable API and ABI over the life-cycle of a major release. For some usage types this is a major problem. Sticking to old version of PHP, MySQL, Tomcat you-name-it-piece-of-software is problematic since web applications are rapidly changing its requirements.

  • Instead of PHP 5.1.6, RHEL6 ships almost up-to-date PHP 5.3.1. Which is good, since web applications such as TYPO3 require PHP 5.3 to be able to install security bug fixes.
  • The Apache httpd comes in Version 2.2.14 instead of 2.2.3. Since Apache is not very actively developed further,  it does not matter anyway.
  • MySQL is shipped with an almost-up-to-date version 5.1.42 vs. 5.0.77. No big deal.
  • Tomcat is being installed with version 6.0.20 instead of the very old 5.5 in RHEL5. This brings quite some benefits for Java web developers.
  • Nothing has changed since RHEL5.5 so far for PostgreSQL.  Since RHEL5.5 Red Hat ships version 8.4 in addition to 8.1.
  • Python got upgraded from 2.3 to 2.6 which probably allows to run more Python based web applications.
  • Unfortunately still no appearance of GraphicsMagick as a replacement for ImageMagick.
  • New: Ships with APC (Alternative PHP Cache). This is useful for LAMP servers with loads of traffic and helps to get response time below critical values.

Unlike other distributions, Red Hat’s default DocumentRoot is still in /var/www instead of /srv/www. From my point of view the /var should be used for libraries and similar stuff, but not for application data. This ends up in creating symlinks like it was before.

From the “I-dont-like-bloated-systems” Departement

Looks like Red Hat made a huge progress in making its system less bloated. In Versions up to RHEL5 you can experience strange package dependencies.

  • PHP and friends: While on RHEL5 a “yum install php” automatically selects PostgreSQL-libs and gmp to install, nothing like this happens on RHEL6.
  • Tomcats dependencies went down from 48 packages to only 15.

Conclusion

At the end of the day, Red Hat made a good job to enable RHEL as a web server again. The fundamental problem is still the same: In two years RHEL6 will be completely outdated and not useful for modern web application, like it is today with RHEL5. Of course you can compile the stuff by yourself, but then you’ll get a maintenance problem.

Red Hat should think about something similar like Debian’s “volatile” repository. It provides upgraded software which would otherwise be useless in a two years or older versions. I’m looking forward for a “Red Hat Volatile” Channel on our satellites.

Feedback is welcome…

Have fun!

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Slashdot
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • MisterWong
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • BlinkList
  • Mixx

Roadmaps on the Red Hat Summit 2010 in Boston

Monday, March 15th, 2010

Finally Red Hat disclosed the agenda of its summit in 2010. For more informations see http://www.redhat.com/promo/summit/2010/agenda/.

RHEL6?

Tim Burke of Red Hat will talk about the new features of RHEL6. It sounds like the present, not the future. Does this mean I’m right with my guess that RHEL6 will be released end of June like I wrote in earlier blog article?

Roadmaps

Count how many times the word “Roadmap” appears in the agenda. It seems to get even more interesting what Red Hat plans to do. But it is still unsure what kind of new features we can expect in RHEL6. Red Hat just disclosed some snippets of RHEL6 again, this is called Salami-Tactic.

Where is the commitment?

We (the RHEL community) are still missing a clear commitment to us as customers. Only little is known about RHEL 6

Love or hate?

Should the RHEL community love or hate Red Hat? At the end of the day I like Red Hat, they do a lot for the progress of Linux in general and Linux in enterprises in particular. Anyway: Not providing a roadmap makes me and possibly others too very angry. Such a roadmap does not need to necessarily be in detail.

Have fun! Really? Soon we will have!

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Slashdot
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • MisterWong
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • BlinkList
  • Mixx

Kernel questions about RHEL6, ESX support and experiences with F13a3

Monday, March 15th, 2010

Still no official informations

Red Hat is still refusing any questions about the features of RHEL 6 and its Linux Kernel. However: Since Vanilla Kernel 2.6.33 vmxnet3 and pvscsi is supported. Fedora 13 Alpha 3 is shipped with a derivate of Kernel 2.6.33.

I still hope that Red Hat is switching to 2.6.33 or back-porting the VMWare code to its 2.6.32 derivative Kernel as known by RHEL 6 Alpha 3.

Experiences with F13a3 so far

Installing F13a3 on a ESX guest – with RHEL5 as “supported Guest OS”  – and enabled vmxnet “enhanced” plus pvscsci as HBA was a smooth experience. No driver disk was needed, no dirty fixes. Just selecting vmxnet3 as NIC and PVSCSCI as disk HBA. Thats the way RHEL6 should work from my point of view.

RHEV vs. VMWare ESX

Since Red Hat released its visualization solution “RHEV”, VMWare and Red Hat are competitors. Is Red Hat willing to include ESX support in its Enterprise Products? My guess is to not to do so, but I’m open for surprises.

The goals

The goal on the long term is to switch from ESX to KVM. However, if you deployed a large ESX farm already and the management members are members of the “ESX-Church” it will be hard.

The mid-term goal is to get rid of those crappy VMWare tools. The current state of this “Tools” definitively proves that VMWare is a Windows shop and  does not take care about Linux virtualization.

Will we have fun? Depends on EMC and Red Hat….

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Slashdot
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • MisterWong
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • BlinkList
  • Mixx

Where the heck is RHEL6?

Sunday, February 28th, 2010

Release cycle slowed down

In the past Red Hat has released a new version of its Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) roughly every two years. RHEL5 was released on march 2007. Compared to the past release cycle, RHEL6 is overdue since one year.

Official information

There is only little known about the upcoming features of RHEL6. On the Red Hat Summit 2009, there was a presentation held by Tim Burke which gives just some hints that RHEL6 is actually approaching, see http://www.redhat.com/f/pdf/summit/tburke_1050_rhel_roadmap.pdf. Quoting a note on the slide about RHEL6: Note: this information is high level planning projection and does not constitute formal product commitment.

My conclusion is that Red Hat seems to be unsure about the features planned for its upcoming Enterprise Product.

Another interesting quote from the same presentation is: RHEL6 feature previews – appearing in Fedora 11 & 12. Meanwhile, almost a half year later, Fedora 13 is approaching and still no sign of RHEL6, no schedule, no official feature list. Looking at the feature list if Fedora 13 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/13/FeatureList, nothing special so far. It seems that the pace of development has been slowed down a bit to put more energy into stabilizing F11/F12 to RHEL6.

Inofficial information

When carefully watching git commit logs and bugzilla entries, there are some small traces of RHEL6.

There is almost no information leaking for the topic. The only valuable unofficial information is from bug #562766 which was reported by a Red Hat employee on 2010-02-08.  This bug states RHEL6 Alpha3!  Quoting a comment from the same employee: Upgrading rhel6.0 kernel to 2.6.32-14.el6 fixes the issue.

this brings me to a wild guess for a release schedule:

  • February 2010: Alpha3
  • March 2010: Beta1
  • April 2010: Beta2
  • May or June 2010: GA [Update: End of June/Early July seems to be more likely, since the Red Hat Summit will be held June 22-25 2010]

My wish list for RHEL6

  • Kernel based on version 2.6.33 instead of 2.6.32 as in Alpha3, since there are a lot of improvements when using RHEL as a VMware ESX guest.
  • Default installation with a smaller footprint
  • Cleanup of insane package dependencies
  • BusLogic drivers included as the vanilla Kernel ships it since years

The question remains

Where the heck is RHEL6? One reason could be that the focus on RHEL6 seems to be virtualization and system management. Since approximately two years, in this domain the pace of the development had increased a lot, maybe too much. Think about KVM, libvirt, virt-manager, o-virt. All of those projects are sponsored by Red Hat and included in F12. So one of the reason of the late release of RHEL6 can be problems in stabilizing those virtualization products to be enterprise-ready.

Why Red Hat makes its customers angry with late releases and no roadmap

First of all, RHEL products have a life-cycle of seven years. RHEL5 was released on march 2007. Assuming RHEL6 will be GA on May 2010. Add a few months before it is supported by ISVs such as SAP, Oracle etc. Customers can begin with deploying RHEL6 on lets say August 2010. Until then, RHEL5 has almost reached half of its life-cycle: 3 1/2 years. Means: A SAP system deployed on July 2010 is out of support some 3 years and nine months later. For an enterprise product this not acceptable! Red Hat should think about a life-cycle like “Next-Release plus five years“, this would make system deployment and company-internal life-cycle management easier.

Keeping its customers in the dark with no official roadmap at all is just bad behavior and indeed not customer friendly.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Slashdot
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • MisterWong
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • BlinkList
  • Mixx