[CentOS-devel] progress?

Sun Feb 20 19:06:58 UTC 2011
Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>

On 02/20/2011 09:09 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote:
>> On 02/20/2011 07:17 AM, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
>>> On 02/20/2011 06:27 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>>>> And casts a magic spell to find those instructions. I'm looking
>>>> through logs and wiki.centos.org, and having *real* difficulty finding
>>>> them. In particular, the bootstrapping configurations necessary to
>>>> build CentOS 6 from scratch on a CentOS 5.x machine seem missing,
>>>> especially access to the testing SRPM's that have already been patched
>>>> to work in a non-RHEL environment.
>>>> Or do you see something I don't?
>>> I do. :)
>>> Use for the build root the rhel6b2 binaries available on ftp.redhat.com
>>> and the configs from the mock package available in EPEL-6.
>>> There is no magic. Really ( At least for 98% of the work.)
>> The beta tree is here (binary and source files):
>> ftp://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/linux/beta/
>> You will also find the fedora 12 binary and source files necessary:
>> http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/releases/12/Fedora/
>> http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/updates/12/
> Cool. Which are you using, by preference? That information is
> unpublished, near as I can tell, and would help my efforts.

That is the thing we have to determine.  There is absolutely no way to
know what a specific binary is built against except to build it from the
SRPM and look at out linking compared to their linking.  If it matches
up, we picked the right repo ... if it does not match up, we need to try
building against a different one.  If we exhaust all 3 places, then we
have to look at the possibility that maybe something between the
specific binaries OR AFTER the beta 2 and BEFORE the release was added
to the upstream build root.

That is what I have been trying to explain ... this is not just dump
some RPMs and kick off a build and everything comes out the other end
built ... and if I would just tell you guys the one magic then, you
could spin this in a couple hours.

Each package needs top be built and tested ... there are 4 possible
repos where the requires might need to come from (the staged build as we
build up the packages and the 3 listed above), and the possibility even
exists that some of the build requires exist only in the RH build system
and have never been released at all.

>> We (CentOS Project) need to perform lots of things on files that we
>> would "Distribute".  (Trademark stripping, etc.).  We will not
>> distribute our working files to try can get CentOS 6 built, as we have
>> not and do not intend to perform the actions on them which would allow
>> us to release them.  That would mean rebuilding and vetting not only
>> CentOS-6 but all those other trees too.
> Does it? Are you concerned about trademark issues, or just lack the
> time to slip them into something like a "git" repository which would
> be clonable and thus accessible? Do you want help getting those into a
> decent git accessible structure so this can be shared, maybe in a
> future release?

We can not distribute certain things without the vetting since we are
centos.  A mirror site could distribute them as is, but since we
distribute a "rebuilt software" of their sources, anything we distribute
needs to be properly vetted to remove trademarks, etc.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20110220/655d48d8/attachment-0005.sig>