[Spacewalk-list] Kickstarting a RHEL5 install - better with updates included or not?

[Snyder, Chris]

Short version, you have to specific in the Kickstart Profile which channels are available DURING the kickstart process. This is *separate* from any channels associated to activation keys (which are really in use *after* the kickstart is more or less complete).

I'm using RHEL5, so my examples are geared around that.  Adjust as needed.

- I set up three channels: 
	- RHEL5 Base (RPMS from the original ISO) -- parent
	- RHEL5 Updates (all the updates available from RHN) -- child
	- Spacewalk Client  -- child
- Load all the appropriate RPMs in to the channels
- I define an activation key which ties to all three channels
- I then set up my RHEL5 kickstart distro tree for PXE Boot
- I create my kickstart profile	
	- Tie the profile to the RHEL5 kickstart distro tree
	- Tie the profile to the my RHEL5 base parent channel 
	- ADDITIONALLY, I tie my kickstart profile to the RHEL5 Updates and Spacewalk Client channels (under the KS Details > Operating System tab)
	- I apply my activation key to my kickstart profile
- Now kickstart your host with PXE or what ever

My understanding of the process works like this:

When the host is being Kickstarted, it has access to all packages from the channels you have directly linked to the kickstart profile (KS Details > Operating System), so this is how your host can apply all the updates and spacewalk clients during creation.  

Once the host is build, during the kickstart profile's '%post' sections, your host is registered with Spacewalk via 'rhnreg_ks', at this time the activation key is used which lets Spacewalk know to continue to allow your new host to have access to your three channels. So you can apply packages from those channels later in its life.

(Note: some people like to fold the RHEL base, RHEL updates and spacewalk client RPMs into a single 'RHEL5' channel, I didn't do that because I like to keep this stuff separate for my own nefarious plans.)

So far I haven't had any problems with this, the only irritating thing is that I've got ALL RHEL Update RPMS available from RHN in my Update channel.  And during the Kickstart process there are some on-screen warnings about some of the kmod packages not having a kernel or something (they flash by and are hard to read).  To the best of my understanding these are noise, and not actual errors.  I am led to believe that this is because during the host build, kickstart is downloading info on *all* available packages in the channels and does a normal dependency/sanity check on *all* the packages, regardless if it's going to use those packages or not.    As for those kmod packages, I have never met anybody who actually uses them, and I can't see them being needed unless you are building a very special, one-off host with very odd kernel requirements.  So these are safe to ignore. (If I really wanted to spend the time, I would probably just remove those packages from my channels, but I don't have that kind of time these days.)

Hope this helps.

Thx
Gopher.

-----Original Message-----
From: spacewalk-list-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:spacewalk-list-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of spacewalk at epperson.homelinux.net
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 9:38 AM
To: spacewalk-list at redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Spacewalk-list] Kickstarting a RHEL5 install - better with updates included or not?

I should already know this, but I can't find how to set up a kickstart
that installs with updates (rather than doing a "yum -y update" in post).

Thumbnail sketch, anyone?  I've been poking around and googling, and have
not found the magic bullet.

On Wed, November 21, 2012 11:59, Paul Robert Marino wrote:
> Actually the install from spacewalk with all the updates is cleaner
> because there is no chance an old package might have left artifacts
> behind. Although admittedly there are several schools of thought on this
> some prefer to do the updates manually others prefer the updates done in
> the install and there is still an other school of thought that if say you
> are rebuilding a host it should have the exact same rpm versions as the
> original and no additional updates. none of them are completely right or
> wrong its more of a matter of preference then any thing else.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Snyder, Chris <Chris_Snyder at sra.com>
> wrote:
>> Looking for some opinions here.
>>
>>
>>
>> I've got SW 1.8 working with RHEL5 now (thank you, J. Pazdziora) and
>> have a kickstart profile uses three channels for initial package
>> installation: core RHEL5 packages (from the ISO), all current RHEL5
>> updates so when all is said and done, I have a host ready to roll with
>> no need for updates to be applied.
>>
>>
>>
>> Is this the best way to build a host?
>>
>>
>>
>> I don't have any particular reason for this, but I have a gut feeling
>> that a better way to build a host might be to ONLY use the core RHEL5
>> ISO packages and the spacewalk-client packages for initial host
>> creation, then register the host with my RHEL5 update channel, and then
>> apply any needed updates (could be done in a %post section).
>>
>>
>>
>> The second option seems 'cleaner' from the stand point of it mimics
>> building a host from an ISO and then applying updates, whereas the
>> first does everything at once.  Theoretically the end result should be
>> the same.
>>



_______________________________________________
Spacewalk-list mailing list
Spacewalk-list at redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list