On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 23:35 -0400, Charlie Brady wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, John Newbigin wrote: > > > Charlie Brady wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 22 Jul 2005, John Newbigin wrote: > >> > >>> OK, I have sorted out a new directory structure and tarred it up at > >>> http://bender.it.swin.edu.au/centos-3/csgfs-20050722.tar > >> > >> The tarball and directory tree doesn't appear to contain source RPMs. Is > >> that intentional? > > Yes. The SRPMS can be found here: > >> //ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/3/en/RHCS/i386/SRPMS/ > [etc] > > My understanding is that RedHat's offering of SRPM is not sufficient for > CentOS to distribute binaries. So SRPM should be part of the CentOS > directory treee. > > You mentioned GFS etc for CentOS 4. Do these same SRPMS compile fine on > CentOS 4 (I see there's FC4 variants available if not)? Is anyone > currently building them on CentOS 4? If not, I'll try to have a go > tomorrow. > > --- > Charlie > _______________________________________________ They do not work on CentOS-4 ... and we will include SRPMS in the final tree. This is a devel list, the finished product will be announced to the main list when it is done. We have built, and are testing, RHGFS 6.1 and RHCS4 as well (the version for RHEL 4 / CentOS-4) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20050725/88ff97ec/attachment-0007.sig>