On 09/15/2011 12:51 PM, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 09/15/2011 01:34 PM, Xavier Bachelot wrote:
On 09/15/2011 12:18 PM, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
On 09/15/2011 12:34 PM, Marcus Moeller wrote:
The centos-cr repository should only be unsed during transition phase from one minor to another. The package will be removed once the next minor is release, and re-appear on next transition. (hope I said it right, Karan :))
This was the first approach but it was changed. The implemented approach is for /cr to remain in place, the repository links from the repo definition will point to the new URL automatically. However the repository will be populated only during the transition phase of a new minor release ( i.e for instance after RHEL 5.8 is out but before CentOS 5.8 is released ).
So the cr release package is not meant to be included in kickstart by default.
that is true. It is useful only during the transitional phase between RHEL's launch of a new dot release and CentOS catching up.
What's wrong with always having the CR repo installed and enabled ? It might be empty outside of transition periods, but this shouldn't hurt, right ?
right. the reported issue here is that they are trying to import the centos-cr package via the kickstart and there is no such package yet in CentOS 5.7
Great, so this should be easily fixable once we've reached a consensus this package is needed even for otherwise empty centos/x.y/cr. Count me as +1 for this.
As a workaround for the possibly missing package in the kickstart, one can still add the '--ignoremissing' option to the %package directive.
My understanding is there is no QA difference between a package pushed to the updates or one pushed to the cr repo, thus base + updates
- cr repos should stack up nicely.
that is correct. Actually the process is quite simple, packages are first pushed to the CentOS X.n/cr/ and then hardlinked to the Centos X.n+1/os ( or /updates, depending on the origin)
Thanks for your answer.
Regards, Xavier