[CentOS-devel] Why are Spacewalk packages removed from CentOS?

Tue Feb 16 08:10:44 UTC 2010
Marcus Moeller <mail at marcus-moeller.de>


>>> I don't understand. Without the (upstream) RHEL RHN client in CentOS
>>> people are forced to use another repository, even when the RHN client
>>> would be sufficient.
>> One disadvantage of using RHN(S) to manage CentOS machines is that you
>> cannot really manage EPEL with it as it contains some 'duplicate'
>> packages which are already in the Red Hat Tools channel.
> You can disable a channel when using activation keys, much as with
> Spacewalk I would assume. You can also populate channels in an automated
> fashion. Both with RHN and Spacewalk.

So what?

> And the same will be true for RHEL. So when we make CentOS different from
> RHEL, the documentation for both may become different in that area. Is
> that what we really want ?

I think CentOS differs from RHEL in some cases. Management with
Spacewalk is one. Spacewalk is intend to manage CentOS and Fedora
systems, RHN(S) to manage RHEL. Of course it is technically possible
to manage CentOS with RHN it is not supported by Red Hat in any form
and won't be in the future imho.

> People may blame us for deviating from RHEL, which is what we will keep on
> doing if we leave the RHN libraries/client out.
> Although I don't think I will be changing your mind, Marcus, because for
> your use-case there is no benefit.

And I personally see no benifits in including them and loosing
flexibility without any real benefits (besides for mrepo users).

Best Regards