On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, Marcus Moeller wrote:
>> 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).
So let's end this thread (before we reiterate for the 7th time) with
words from Miroslav Suchÿ, one of the Red Hat Spacewalk developers who
stays out of this thread, likely intimidated by it :-)
About including RHEL5 RHN tools in CentOS 5:
"So my recomendation is: take this patch and apply it on current rhel5
package and include all of them in CentOS."
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2010-January/005319.html
"Large part (if not majority) of Spacewalk users use CentOS and I'm
pretty sure they will appreciate, if these tools will be present
directly in CentoOS."
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2010-January/005312.html
In response that the user will need other tools anway to use it with
Spacewalk:
"I disagree. Majority of people will install only these packages. Yes
- we have client repo which contains several other tools. But with
these packages you can do most of the management
(install/upgrade/remove package, do rollback, compare profiles, run
scripts, reboot machines, reprovision them...). In fact even as
developer of Spacewalk I rarely use other then those mentioned client
packages."
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2010-January/005312.html
Kind regards,
--
-- dag wieers, dag at wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]