0

I am running a CentOS 8.4 server with the following repos:

~]$ dnf repolist
repo id          repo name
appstream        CentOS Linux 8 - AppStream
baseos           CentOS Linux 8 - BaseOS
epel             Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux 8 - x86_64
epel-modular     Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux Modular 8 - x86_64
extras           CentOS Linux 8 - Extras
remi-modular     Remi's Modular repository for Enterprise Linux 8 - x86_64
remi-safe        Safe Remi's RPM repository for Enterprise Linux 8 - x86_64

The current fireWalld version is 0.8.2, which is pretty old and is causing some issues with fail2ban. I'd like to update it. When I run sudo dnf update firewalld it cannot find any newer versions and simply returns the usual "nothing to do" message. Which repo do I need? Thanks.

Improve this question
2
  • What issues is it causing? I haven't seen any problems with fail2ban caused by firewalld in CentOS 8 or RHEL 8.
    – Nasir Riley
    Commented Jul 22, 2021 at 10:21
  • When I turn on fail2ban, firewalld start to complain about this error: unix.stackexchange.com/questions/659222/… and I suspect updating firewalld might fix it. What version of firewalld are you running on CentOS and how did you update it?
    – location
    Commented Jul 22, 2021 at 16:20

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
0

firewalld: No CentOS 8 updates found, but it's fairly easy to build el8 packages from a later "source.src.rpm" : firewalld-0.9.4.

Use the old / simplified "rpmmacros" (the CentOS 8 version doesn't match the "year 2021 firewalld.spec") https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-software-2/need-rpm-package-for-php-version-5-2-7-and-up-on-redhat-5-1-a-766486/#13

From Fedora 34 update $ wget https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/34/Everything/source/tree/Packages/f/firewalld-0.9.4-1.fc34.src.rpm

$ rpm -Uvh firewalld-0.9.4-1.fc34.src.rpm
# dnf builddep /home/name/rpms/SPECS/firewalld.spec

$ cd /home/name/rpms/SPECS/    
$ rpmbuild -bb firewalld.spec
.
Wrote: /home/knudfl/rpms/RPMS/noarch/firewalld-0.9.4-1.el8.noarch.rpm
Wrote: /home/knudfl/rpms/RPMS/noarch/python3-firewall-0.9.4-1.el8.noarch.rpm
Wrote: /home/knudfl/rpms/RPMS/noarch/firewalld-filesystem-0.9.4-1.el8.noarch.rpm
Wrote: /home/knudfl/rpms/RPMS/noarch/firewall-applet-0.9.4-1.el8.noarch.rpm
Wrote: /home/knudfl/rpms/RPMS/noarch/firewall-config-0.9.4-1.el8.noarch.rpm

Link to packages https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1KLZM0ZrxygWMMPLMrSEB5UEsJIjsnSBJ?usp=sharing

Improve this answer
8
  • Does this mean every CentOS install out there is stuck on FirewallD 0.8.2 unless they manually update with rpms? I was under the impression that CentOS was still being maintained fairly regularly. Is that no longer the case?
    – location
    Commented Jul 22, 2021 at 16:24
  • RHEL, CentOS : Package major versions are usually not changed to a new version. Instead the packages are updated, patched with the latest security fixes and goodies from newer versions. E.g. the kernels are constantly updated with security patches and new drivers. See "minor version". Example kernel-3.10.0-1160.36.2.el7 : 1160.36.2 is the minor version = "patch level".
    – Knud Larsen
    Commented Jul 22, 2021 at 17:05
  • EL8 : firewalld is now minor version 7 mirror.centos.org/centos/8/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages ..... Some of the other "firewalld" packages are in the AppStream.repo mirror.centos.org/centos/8/AppStream/x86_64/os/Packages
    – Knud Larsen
    Commented Jul 22, 2021 at 17:15
  • After further research I see that CentOS is virtually dead. It's no longer in lockstep with Red Hat and has moved from downstream to upstream. I hadn't realized the recent changes. Note: It might be best if you removed the last part - I don't think we wan to encourage people to click on Google Drive links.
    – location
    Commented Jul 22, 2021 at 21:22
  • 1
    I've said this before and I'll say it again: It isn't a good idea to install packages from other distributions. Most of time, you'll be alright but all it takes is one mistake and you'll have an unresolvable dependency that renders your system unusable. It may be fine at the time but it's always possible that other packages will be released that will conflict. You've accepted the answer but this isn't good advice.
    – Nasir Riley
    Commented Jul 22, 2021 at 22:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .