CentOS Linux 7.5 (1804) Released | Hacker News Reader

CentOS Linux 7.5 (1804) Released

blog.centos.org

68 pointscwt13752 comments

Make sure to review the "Known Issues" for both CentOS 7.5 Known [0] and RHEL 7.5 [1].

[0]: https://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS7.1804?ac...

[1]: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterp...

Be sure to check https://ius.io/ for more recent releases of commonly-used packages. CentOS, being whitelabelled RHEL is sometimes behind the latest and greatest versions.

Most relevant to CentOS / this post is

https://dl.iuscommunity.org/pub/ius/stable/CentOS/7/x86_64/r...

I've had good luck with their version of Python 3.6 but as always, YMMV with others.

Is it true that most of Silicon Valley runs on CentOS?

I watched a video of a recent presentation from someone at Facebook who manages their operating systems and he said they use CentOS across their fleet, so that's probably a sizeable amount.

Any reason being said or any guesses to the reasons?

It's literally the oldest most out of date Linux distro available (even this update), so probably. CentOS recently added Python 2.7 instead of Python 2.6...

Well what are the downsides of this? One is not limited to Python 2.7 because of the operating system, for instance.

We (Red Hat) also released an easy way to do a side by side install of newer tooling without impacting the OS. Python 3 was released on Red Hat Enterprise Linux in 2013, and we currently support Python 3.6.

Here's more on how software collections work and what is released: https://developers.redhat.com/products/softwarecollections/o...

I'm pretty sure RHEL 7.0, which was released in 2014, shipped with Python 2.7 as the default.

IIRC it's a clone of redhat and redhat is in the business of support.

Big companies goes to red hat because they promise to support software beyond their life cycle for years. So that's that.

You see old and crusty, users see a stable software API that receives security updates for decades.

It's mixed CentOS, Debian and Ubuntu.

Ubuntu is limited to younger folks and younger companies.

Not SV, but according to my anecdata, RHEL/CentOS is more oftenly used in enterprise deployments, while Debian (and Ubuntu) traditionally dominates Web deployments. A Debian-style Apache httpd setup with structured config files and a2ensite, a2enmod, etc. is also what mainstream shared hosting workflows are based on.

Anecdata as well, but in the years I was doing consulting in the shared hosting biz, CentOS was the clear frontrunner based on everyone I did for work. CentOS and WHM/cPanel.

And half of them had screwed up their entire setup by installing the Remi repos. Sigh.

I've been surprised how many SMBs use CentOS, I expected them to be mostly Debian too.

What kind of experience do you have to say that? (Just asking)

Netflix runs 150k servers on Ubuntu so ...

The company I work for mostly uses Gentoo.

Technical problem for which I haven't found a hint of an answer online:

I'm installing CentOS 7.0 x64 on a Thinkpad, my first Linux install. The install seems to go fine but on boot, right after the BIOS splash screen, in text mode, I see the following, then it stops (I'm going to use italics to be nice to people with small screens):

Failed to open \EFI\BOOT\grubx64.efi - Not Found

Failed to load image \EFI\BOOT\grubx64.efi: Not Found

start_image() returned Not Found

Secure boot is enabled, in case that's important. I've no idea why backslashes are used but I'm going to overlook that for now.

I booted to rescue mode and looked at the file system. /mnt/sysimage/boot/efi/EFI/BOOT/ indeed lacks grubx64.efi; I did find /mnt/sysimage/boot/efi/EFI/centos/grub64.efi [0] (I'm assuming the paths in the error message are all relative to /mnt/sysimage/boot/efi, because that's the only place I see relevant files).

Do I just copy the grubx64.efi file to ../EFI/BOOT/? Change the path in some config file to point at ../EFI/centos/? Or am I on the completely wrong path?

[0] Sh-ucks. My notes say the filename is ../centos/grub64.efi; the error message says grubx64.efi (i.e., with an x between grub and 64). Hopefully it's a typo in my notes. I don't have the laptop with me to check.

For some reason I can't edit my post. I wanted to write that I know Hacker News is not a technical support forum, but I'm a little stuck so I was hoping some kind CentOS veteran could help or point me to where I can find answers to questions like this one. Thanks!

Any specific reason why you aren't using latest Fedora instead of CentOS?

If you want to stick with CentOS, I would suggest you try with Secure Boot turned off.

> try with Secure Boot turned off

I tried. I don't have the details, but no luck. Thanks.

This may be related to having an older machine that doesn't support EFI boot.

To solve the problem: 1) Create a partition that is of type bios boot (I believe it needs to be 2K) 2) Create a regular boot partition /boot (I recommend ext4 or 3) 3) Create your other partitions per normal.

> This may be related to having an older machine that doesn't support EFI boot.

The machine is a Thinkpad from the last couple of years. It definitely supports UEFI. I'd think it would have to be a very old machine to not support it at this point, or am I misunderstanding something?

May I ask why you chose CentOS for a laptop? You mentioned this was your first Linux install, which makes me suspect you might do better with another Linux distribution. CentOS, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux from which it is derived, is usually used on server hardware and virtual machines. It certainly can be installed on a portable machine, but you will struggle more than you would with a distribution that is optimized for installation on diverse desktop/laptop hardware. You're already struggling with boot loader problems; you'll face display and wireless driver problems after that. There are easier ways to get a working Linux installation onto a laptop.

Good question. I'm aware there are distros with better laptop compatibility and more features, and that CentOS is a bit of an unconventional choice. Here is my reasoning, but I have very limited experienced with the nuts and bolts of Linux and I appreciate any feedback I can get:

I work professionally in IT and one reason I'm installing it is to better learn my way around Linux. RHEL is the most prominent distro in business so CentOS seems the place to start. There's no better way to learn than to keep burning my hand. :)

I did make sure I used a Thinkpad to maximize the chance of a successful, functional outcome with CentOS or any other distro or 'nix. AFAICT, Thinkpads are by far the most popular machines among the developers of the various 'nixes.

One advantage to CentOS, for me, is its stability. I don't want rapid upgrade cycles. I have no need for the latest and greatest; I'm not gaming; I don't even use Bluetooth. Vim and a web browser should work fine regardless of the distro.

Is it your first foray into Unix? If so, it brings joy and a little tear to my eye to see such a properly motivated new user. Joy, as you hit all the right spots for being a good Unix user (Great Editor Holy War notwithstanding), and tear, well, because of systemd, intelligenti pauca. Maybe one day something like OpenBSD will find its way onto your machine. It works great on ThinkPads and doesn't even support Bluetooth!

That's a really nice line of thought. I'm no linux wizard but I've used Fedora for a few years for my laptop so if you want to ever ask about something basic we can exchange contact info.

I had an issue with one of the 7.x upgrades too. There was a weird efibootmgr upgrade as part of.. 7.3 i think it was? Maybe 7.2?

Anyway, here is a thread that I just found that seems to summarize the pain I went through at the time (alas, my path was far more circuitous)...

https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2018-January/16786...

Thanks! I'll check it out.

Echoing others, you may have a much easier time installing linux in a virtualbox(.org) vm than doing so onto a laptop as a bare metal install. CentOS is not targeted at desktop use much; if that's your goal and you're new to linux, Ubuntu may be an easier ride. Good luck!

I'd certainly agree with you in general but ThinkPads are pretty popular at Red Hat (and at their biggest customer) and, as a result, they are probably better supported than other any model of laptops.

I've been running RHEL on a ThinkPad T420 for years without any major issues. It Just Works(tm).

> CentOS is not targeted at desktop use much; if that's your goal and you're new to linux, Ubuntu may be an easier ride.

Thanks. Here's my reasoning regarding my choice of distro, FWIW:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17070970

First, let me say that if you're doing a clean/new installation, I'd recommend installing CentOS 7.5 directly (as opposed to, say, installing 7.0 and immediately upgrading to 7.5). 7.0 is almost four years old at this point and your ThinkPad's hardware may be slightly better supported by 7.5.

Anyways, you might consider posting the details (including verbatim error messages, hardware (partitioning) details, etc.) in a new post on the CentOS forums [0] or inquire about the error message on the CentOS IRC channel [1].

Alternatively, if you continue to run into issues with the installation, feel free to reach out to me if you'd like. I'm not associated with either Red Hat or CentOS but I do run a lot of RHEL/CentOS machines (mostly on servers but I do happen to have a ThinkPad running RHEL 7.5 sitting here by me) and I'd be happy to help troubleshoot the issue with you, if necessary.

[0]: https://www.centos.org/forums/

[1]: https://wiki.centos.org/irc

That's very kind, thank you. I'll try your suggestions and will keep your generous offer in mind.

I was trying to bring up a server with CentOS 7.4 a few months ago. Problem is the stupid thing can't persist EFI variables so it can't remember the installer adding an entry for EFI/centos/icantrememberloadername.efi

It seemed that the EFI/boot/bootx64.efi that would get loaded instead (EFI default loader search) couldn't find grub in the EFI/centos folder. It booted fine after I copied the relavent grub files over to EFI/boot, but it seemed like a really kludgy solution. Fine for a single research box, but not for production.

Your intuition is right, your EFI boot menu entries are pointing to the wrong path for GRUB (grubx64.efi).

Basically this problem is because Anaconda (the RedHat / CentOS installer) puts the files in [/boot]/efi/centos/... when you install into a UEFI-capable system, but efibootmgr, the tool that manipulates your laptop's NVRAM to tell the UEFI boot loader what to display/default boot, was being told they're in [/boot]/efi/boot/... That's the standard location on other Linux types (Ubuntu, Arch, etc.) and is being picked up as a default somewhere.

If you patch or upgrade the system subsequent to your initial installation, it can mess this part up (supposedly this was fixed in RH/CentOS 7.4)

You can make a one-time fix using efibootmgr from rescue mode from the installation DVD as pointed out in the linked mailing list post by others.

But my recommendation would be to blow away the existing partitions and try doing it from scratch using 7.5 if you haven't done anything with the system yet.

Awesome! Thank you. I was hoping someone would recognize the problem. Yes, I have nothing invested in the current install (it hasn't even booted), so I was going to take the opportunity to switch to 7.5 anyway.

Where are good places to find CentOS technical documentation and community? I can't find a manual online, and the other resources seem insufficient. I think I must be missing something:

These forums seem to have not great content or traffic (at least when I looked):

https://www.centos.org/forums/

The FAQ is only a few questions, and the How-tos and Tips & Tricks are very uneven in their coverage and often outdated ("How to setup Firefox 4 (i386 and x86_64) on CentOS 5").

https://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/CentOS7

https://wiki.centos.org/HowTos

https://wiki.centos.org/TipsAndTricks

Somethings are a bit different, but it's "almost the same" https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterp... (as an example) Most of the time I look for RH Stuff or fedora and do a mental downgrade of some of the tools.

RHEL docs.

There is a fair amount of content on the CentOS wiki but, as you've noticed, some of it is extremely outdated or was written for older CentOS versions. One page on there that I came across recently was almost 10 years old!

Depending on what the topic is, the age of an article may not be all that relevant -- the important thing is to make sure that it's aimed at the version of CentOS that you're running. Some of those old wiki pages were written for CentOS 4 and that's been EOL for over six years!

If you have run into problems or have some specific questions, the CentOS forums can be a great resource. There seems to be some pretty knowledgeable folks there and the moderators will, at the least, ensure that no incorrect or outdated information is given out.

Finally, remember that Red Hat publishes a tremendous amount of technical documentation for RHEL 7 [0] which (with a few exceptions) also applies directly to CentOS 7. The PDF versions of their "Installation Guide" [1] and "System Administrator's Guide" [2] for RHEL 7 weigh in at 489 and 602 pages, respectively.

At times, you may come across knowledge base articles or other documentation on their "customer portal" (access.redhat.com) [3] but that you can't see because it requires an account. Fortunately, they have a (free!) "Red Hat Enterprise Linux Developer Program" [4] that you can sign up for which will give you access to that "customer portal" in addition to providing you with a valid license to run RHEL (as well as a lot of their other stuff) for development/testing purposes. See the original announcement [5] and/or press release [6] for more information.

[0]: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterp...

[1]: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterp...

[2]: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterp...

[3]: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/

[4]: https://access.redhat.com/products/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/...

[5]: https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2016/03/31/no-cost-rhel-d...

[6]: https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-expan...

My reply is a little late, but muchas gracias!

Make sure you get VirtualBox 5.2.12 if you want to run it as guest, or the additions won’t work. Found that out last week!

Curious about the downvotes, is this statement factually wrong? It does not work with 5.2.10, because I tried it.

One major undocumented problem that I did not see in the patch notes involves openldap.

Specifically there is some error in generating a PID file in the system-d service call.

I solved the problem by removing/commenting out the run PID line in /usr/lib/systemd/system/slapd.service

There are a few "known issues" with OpenLDAP [0] in the RHEL 7.5 release notes but I don't see that one mentioned.

ICYMI, the openldap-servers package is "deprecated and will not be included in a future major release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux".

For RHEL, that means it will remain in the 7.x versions but will not be included in 8.x when it is released (which should be Real Soon Now(tm)).

For CentOS, that also (likely) means that OpenLDAP will not be included in future (major) versions.

[0]: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterp...

OpenLDAP-LTB provides up-to-date openldap packages for CentOS - http://ltb-project.org/documentation/openldap-rpm

openldap upstream suggest using these on CentOS / RHEL over the redhat packages, if operating the server components.

Redhat ships with 389 directory server for several years already (former Netscape Directory) and when you install FreeIPA, you will get 389 by default. I don't think FreeIPA even works with OpenLDAP.

Windows 10 is only 1803

Doesn't the "1803" version format mean "YYMM" e.g. "2018 March"

Yes, it is.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com