[Spacewalk-list] Channels vs. Repos

[Sebastian Meyer]

Hi Brian,

in production you don't want to push all updated packages manually into
channels. That's what repos are for: Upstream CentOS releases an update,
that's in the repo and get's synced automatically into your channel.
Otherwise you would have to keep tabs on all your distributions and
check for updates to download the .rpm and push it to the channel.

As Kobus pointed out, rhnpush is used mostly for single or self-built
rpms, that don't have a repository. Though I'd suggest creating
repositories for self-built rpms aswell. It's not that hard ;)

Another use case for rhnpush would be an offline spacewalk installation.
You'd download the updates somewhere else, and push those to the
spacewalk channels manually. This is only necessary in very restrictive
environments.

Regards,
Sebastian

On 26.08.2015 15:17, Brian C. Huffman wrote:
> All,
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just getting started with spacewalk and I followed on online guide to set up channels and repos for CentOS systems.  But then I found out that I can also add packages to the channel itself with no underlying repo.  So, what's the benefit of having repos?  What scenarios would require repos?  In what scenarios would it not make sense to use repos?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Brian
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Spacewalk-list mailing list
> Spacewalk-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list
> 
-- 
Sebastian Meyer
Linux Consultant & Trainer

B1 Systems GmbH
Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de
GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/spacewalk-list/attachments/20150826/b4566c30/attachment.sig>