Hi,
So while we wait for the first set of packages to build the biggest effort required is to find, confirm and patch those packages that have upstream branding in them. And packages that need to be changed to work within the centos ecosystem.
The aim is to find any mention of the upstream brands / trademarks and content that might cause confusion as to what product the user is running ( eg: %descriptions in spec files ). And when we find something of this nature, file a report against the right centos-6/component on http://bugs.centos.org/.
I've imported all the components of CentOS-6 into the bugs.c.o interface, if there is anything missing please shout out. We might need to add some down the road ( eg: centos-release-notes ), and remove some ( eg: RedHat-Release-Notes-* ), but most of the components should be there now.
There is, an extremely brief, overview of the whole process at : http://wiki.centos.org/QaWiki/6/Round1
Also, please leave issues assigned to the default 'Issue Tracker' role account. The QA team members will assign the issues to themselves when they do the reviews.
Keep in mind that if you need an installed system to do these tests ( like one would for the gnome/kde components ), you can use the rhel6-beta2-refresh media. The package manifests have not changed much from there to what's in release. so even if you were to go through the beta2-refresh packages, that would help.
Thanks in advance to everyone who pitches in.
- KB
On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 00:03 +0000, Karanbir Singh wrote:
There is, an extremely brief, overview of the whole process at : http://wiki.centos.org/QaWiki/6/Round1
---- Nice write up and thanks for being more open about the process. Lets try to open up more...
Now my Cheese with the Wine...
Under "Targets": Ensure that all buildrequires and the minimum build chroot scripts are setup
How can you you expect people to do so when there are no buildsys binary or source rpm for CentOS 6? The closest match is the one for CentOS 5 [1]. Other than my own binary I have which may not justfy for CentOS usage.
John
[1] http://dev.centos.org/centos/buildsys/5/buildsys-build-0.5-6.el5.centos.7.no...
On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 23:28 -0500, JohnS wrote:
On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 00:03 +0000, Karanbir Singh wrote:
There is, an extremely brief, overview of the whole process at : http://wiki.centos.org/QaWiki/6/Round1
Nice write up and thanks for being more open about the process. Lets try to open up more...
Now my Cheese with the Wine...
Under "Targets": Ensure that all buildrequires and the minimum build chroot scripts are setup
How can you you expect people to do so when there are no buildsys binary or source rpm for CentOS 6? The closest match is the one for CentOS 5 [1]. Other than my own binary I have which may not justfy for CentOS usage.
Mock for fedora 13 uses the comps buildsys-build group.
from mock's f13 config
config_opts['chroot_setup_cmd'] = 'groupinstall buildsys-build'
and pkgs for epel6 are doing the same.
that comps is available here: http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/dist-6E-epel-build/latest/i386/repod...
that looks like what you want.
-sv
On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 23:59 -0500, seth vidal wrote:
Mock for fedora 13 uses the comps buildsys-build group.
from mock's f13 config
config_opts['chroot_setup_cmd'] = 'groupinstall buildsys-build'
and pkgs for epel6 are doing the same.
that comps is available here: http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/dist-6E-epel-build/latest/i386/repod...
that looks like what you want.
-sv
---- I'll suffice with that for now. Thanks :-)
John
On 11/12/2010 05:59 AM, seth vidal wrote:
On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 23:28 -0500, JohnS wrote:
On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 00:03 +0000, Karanbir Singh wrote:
There is, an extremely brief, overview of the whole process at : http://wiki.centos.org/QaWiki/6/Round1
Nice write up and thanks for being more open about the process. Lets try to open up more...
Now my Cheese with the Wine...
Under "Targets": Ensure that all buildrequires and the minimum build chroot scripts are setup
How can you you expect people to do so when there are no buildsys binary or source rpm for CentOS 6? The closest match is the one for CentOS 5 [1]. Other than my own binary I have which may not justfy for CentOS usage.
Mock for fedora 13 uses the comps buildsys-build group.
from mock's f13 config
config_opts['chroot_setup_cmd'] = 'groupinstall buildsys-build'
and pkgs for epel6 are doing the same.
that comps is available here: http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/dist-6E-epel-build/latest/i386/repod...
that looks like what you want.
this comps has only build and not buildsys-build group, but the content is the same as the good buildsys-build group.
On 11/12/2010 04:28 AM, JohnS wrote:
There is, an extremely brief, overview of the whole process at : http://wiki.centos.org/QaWiki/6/Round1
How can you you expect people to do so when there are no buildsys binary or source rpm for CentOS 6? The closest match is the one for CentOS 5 [1]. Other than my own binary I have which may not justfy for CentOS usage.
buildroots will have no impact on upstream branding. not sure how you worked out that it would ?
- KB
On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 12:12 +0000, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 11/12/2010 04:28 AM, JohnS wrote:
There is, an extremely brief, overview of the whole process at : http://wiki.centos.org/QaWiki/6/Round1
How can you you expect people to do so when there are no buildsys binary or source rpm for CentOS 6? The closest match is the one for CentOS 5 [1]. Other than my own binary I have which may not justfy for CentOS usage.
buildroots will have no impact on upstream branding. not sure how you worked out that it would ?
---- Then you should take it off the page. It is misleading.
John
On 11/12/2010 12:25 PM, JohnS wrote:
buildroots will have no impact on upstream branding. not sure how you worked out that it would ?
Then you should take it off the page. It is misleading.
The page is about the entire process that the QA team is going to work with, the help I requested was for one part of the task. If you look back at my initial email to this list, it clearly states that the page is about the overall process.
At this moment in time, we need to focus on the branding issues. Till that happens and is complete, everything else is wasted time.
- KB
On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 12:28 +0000, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 11/12/2010 12:25 PM, JohnS wrote:
buildroots will have no impact on upstream branding. not sure how you worked out that it would ?
Then you should take it off the page. It is misleading.
The page is about the entire process that the QA team is going to work with, the help I requested was for one part of the task. If you look back at my initial email to this list, it clearly states that the page is about the overall process.
At this moment in time, we need to focus on the branding issues. Till that happens and is complete, everything else is wasted time.
- KB
--- Thanks for explanation...
John
On 11/12/2010 12:03 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
So while we wait for the first set of packages to build the biggest effort required is to find, confirm and patch those packages that have upstream branding in them. And packages that need to be changed to work within the centos ecosystem.
Just wanted to add one important bit that got left out : please file reports against packages you checked and didnt find any need to modify or patch in anyway. That would help get a whitelist going as well.
Thanks once again to everyone who is pitching in.
- KB
-
Farkas Levente -
JohnS -
Karanbir Singh -
seth vidal