[Spacewalk-list] Mr. 500 here... more info

[Máirí­n Duffy]

m.roth2006 at rcn.com wrote:
> There are a lot of differences - I'd guess they did a full yum update
> on the template between when they made the test machine, and what was
> used on the new system.

Does the template expose any kind of package manifest that you can diff 
against the other machine's template then?
> 
> That being said, I have to admit to feeling as though the spacewalk
> Spacewalk team, in offering a package for CentOS 5.2, and *not*
> noting things that were needed for different versions of that, and
> yum not automagically determining the dependencies - I remember the
> full d/l for spacewalk was something like 267 packages - leaves me at
> the point of wondering if I need to build from source, and not
> trusting a binary release.

Do you really feel that way given that the problem you are running into
is far from being widespread?

I don't think any special things needed for 5.2 were noted because there 
aren't any. I do believe though the install documentation does recommend 
an @Base install to start with, and I am not confident that is what your 
template provides. If you didn't install the Spacewalk version that is 
running, then can you be confident it wasn't installed with @Base as the 
docs likely recommend?

(I say likely recommend because I know that's in the Satellite 
documentation but I'm not as familiar with the Spacewalk docs)

~m