RHEL5 builder content?

[Russell Harrison]

On 3/15/07, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm at atrpms.net> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> this may have been documented somewhere, or perhaps discussed here,
> but I can't find it: What "repo" is used for the RHEL5 builds? Server,
> client or the sum or both? If it's the sum are you using *two*
> licenses for creating the repo? If it's open for debate I would argue
> that we should have the sum, e.g. the complete RHEL5 as a base.


This is a really good point.  It even breaks down further when you look at
client.  From the totally useless desktop only entitlement (no emacs is
still a sore spot for me) to the  nearly complete desktop + workstation +
virt.  In the situation you've outlined  packages  would just fail the
depsolver on systems without the correct entitlements.  Not pretty, but
maintaining multiple repos to account for the different Red Hat channels
would be a ton of work.

What I didn't get a clean picture on is what Red Hat's strategy around
client would be.  If they plan to be a little more forthcoming with updates
on the client release (which they probably should) it means some of the
common packages between client and server will fall out of sync.  So even
while a package in EPEL will build on each system the same package may not
run on both because the linked in packages will be different.  A client,
server split would make since in that situation.

We asked about this quite some time ago but Red Hat hasn't given us the
final word on this yet.  Probably because they still haven't decided how
they'll handle the situation yet.  Does anyone have a better picture now
that RHEL-5 is out the door?

Russell
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/attachments/20070317/93508d87/attachment.htm>