[CentOS-devel] moving the CR repo into mainstream release

Leon Fauster leonfauster at googlemail.com
Fri Nov 25 06:39:42 EST 2011


Hi Gianluca,

Am 23.11.2011 um 16:39 schrieb Gianluca Cecchi:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Leon Fauster wrote:
>> - your scenario would end up in a 6.2 system.
>> 
>> - the description "mixed" misdescribes the actual process
>> 
>> the point is - that this "mixed" combination is a valid one (validated by upstream).
>> 
>> if the are any dependencies - the "requires/provides" internals of the package system
>> will push the necessary packages.
> 
> actually I have not understood if you agreed with me or not (a part
> the vote... ;-) This is what I mean with "mixed environment" and what
> I tested
> (considered 5.6 --> 5.7 instead of 6.1 --> 6.2)
> 
> <snip>...</snip>
> 
> So, after a pure rh e 5.6 install l I then directly updated 10
> packages from rh el 5.7+updates bandwagon...
> While the other 432 packages remained as stock rh el 5.6 original dvd
> 
> This is what I call a mixed environment....


i agree with you :-)

To evaluate the implications of the CR repo - like it is or as a
default repo - i suggest to define some major scenarios. The way 
people use yum update-commands explicitly/manually will be always
a continuous spectrum (also included: across more then one 
releases e.g. "5.3... with the 5.6 glibc").

One scenario would be - a system that has CR enabled and therefore 
is in a state that i call e.g "6.(coming release)" minus packages 
that are not already build. 

One such state was mentioned in this thread. A full updated system 
with one (expat) package downgraded. This example had an issue but 
not as result of a continuous update.

If there are any real issues - i would like to compile them. 
Even the mentioned kernel oops could have there cause elsewhere.

One good thing to keep in mind - the CR rpms passes through a 
"stable and completely QA'ed process".



> Is this supported by upstream? I think so.


I would say by design. If a point releases is out (upstream) - the 
CR repo is able to provide a package with ALL necessary rpms that 
resolves the corresponding dependencies. 

Even if kernel-updates of point releases change api's, the dependencies
of userspace (kernel) packages should reflect necessary requirements.


> And the same process would be with CentOS supposing they provided in
> CR repo the 10 packages above (actually 9, considering redhat-release
> that doesn't carry on any dependencies btw....)

thats it. 

I understand the mentioned stability hints of some people. I just 
want to show up that a reasonable assessment must include the context. 
We are not speaking about fedora or other quite interesting distros (as
already mentioned) but about an enterprise distro. This means, it is 
fairly stable over the whole lifecycle (centos way to build the distro included).

(Example: Even if a major update is done (php 5.1 -> 5.3) the 
"enterprise focus" forces upstream to provide this update as option.


> Hope that this explains better my point about mixed-environment, and
> the final system not being a 5.7 installation...

Sure - and i didn't explain my point of view correctly.


The above is more technicaly. The essential question can not be answered here. 
Anyone have to consider there own underlying conditions. Centos can only offer
the options as needed (e.g. CR as option).


That's my EUR 0.01


--
LF




More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list