[scl.org] How we've fixed upgrade path for CentOS 6 Software Collections
Honza Horak
hhorak at redhat.com
Mon Nov 23 07:02:33 UTC 2015
Short meesage for those who don't have time:
Software Collections builds for CentOS 6 will be soon ready for smooth
upgrade from older rebuilds.
Now full story for those who care:
Shortly after first RHSCL 1.0 release, CentOS rebuilds were prepared and
since then they are available under:
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/SCL/x86_64/
However, keeping these rebuilds in sync with RHSCL content hasn't been
easy task. With introduction of Java packages in collections, this task
became even more tricky, which means these collections were not updated
for long time. With that said, someone would expect there won't be
problem with upgrade path, in other words that the new RPMs, that the
SCLo SIG group is about to release, will update the older RPMs smoothly.
Well, not always. The original RPMs used ".el6.centos.alt" as %dist tag,
while new builds use just ".el6" and that evolves in cases where
python27-python-bson-2.5.2-4.el6.centos.alt.x86_64 >
python27-python-bson-2.5.2-4.el6.x86_64, even if those packages have
same Release tag in RPM SPEC. That obviously means the packages won't
update smoothly.
Solution is quite simple in this case -- use higher Release in RPM SPEC.
In some packages, this was already done, because some of the packages
received update since original inclusion. In other cases we solve it by
adding ".scX" (X is number) suffix to the Release tag. The ".scX" was
chosen deliberately since ".scX.el6" is higher (alphabetically) than .el6.
Btw. for cases we need to build package more times before final build
(bootstraping), we use suffix ".bsX", which means we can build package
without any Release suffix in the end, because ".bsX.el6" < ".el6".
Anyway, this whole mail was meant to let you know that upgrading of el6
packages from originally built RPMs is something we care about.
To verify it works, I've installed all the packages from original
repository, then ran "yum update" and that evolved in proper update of
all packages. I took that as proof it should work fine in your case as
well. If there are still some issues, let us know.
This story was also shared at
http://www.themindiseverything.eu/2015/11/how-weve-fixed-upgrade-path-for-centos.html.
Honza
SCLo SIG member
More information about the SCLorg
mailing list