On 09/15/2011 01:34 PM, Xavier Bachelot wrote: > On 09/15/2011 12:18 PM, Manuel Wolfshant wrote: >> On 09/15/2011 12:34 PM, Marcus Moeller wrote: >>> The centos-cr repository should only be unsed during transition phase >>> from one minor to another. The package will be removed once the next >>> minor is release, and re-appear on next transition. (hope I said it >>> right, Karan :)) >> This was the first approach but it was changed. The implemented approach >> is for /cr to remain in place, the repository links from the repo >> definition will point to the new URL automatically. However the >> repository will be populated only during the transition phase of a new >> minor release ( i.e for instance after RHEL 5.8 is out but before CentOS >> 5.8 is released ). >> >>> So the cr release package is not meant to be included in kickstart by >>> default. >> that is true. It is useful only during the transitional phase between >> RHEL's launch of a new dot release and CentOS catching up. > What's wrong with always having the CR repo installed and enabled ? It > might be empty outside of transition periods, but this shouldn't hurt, > right ? right. the reported issue here is that they are trying to import the centos-cr package via the kickstart and there is no such package yet in CentOS 5.7 > My understanding is there is no QA difference between a package > pushed to the updates or one pushed to the cr repo, thus base + updates > + cr repos should stack up nicely. that is correct. Actually the process is quite simple, packages are first pushed to the CentOS X.n/cr/ and then hardlinked to the Centos X.n+1/os ( or /updates, depending on the origin)