[CentOS-devel] a public build tool for seven

Mon Dec 23 15:17:48 UTC 2013
Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>

On 12/22/2013 01:11 AM, Steven Crothers wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu> wrote:
>> On 12/17/2013 05:50 PM, Steven Crothers wrote:
>>> Why not run a CentOS Koji, or perhaps request access/space to the
>>> Fedora Koji (unlikely)?
>>> Koji is the "standard" both for Fedora and EPEL, and I once heard it's
>>> used internally at Red Hat as well, as far as to what extent, I have
>> While on the surface it sounds like a good idea, the fact of the matter
>> is that CentOS rebuilds from already built source RPMS.  This is not the
>> normal use case for Koji, where sources, patches, and specs are its input.
> I don't believe that is true, releasing Red Hat built binaries would
> be directly against the Red Hat licensing agreement.
> C6 is/should be built from SRPMs, Johnny builds each package in his environment.
> I do recall seeing the build server hostnames in the RPMs even occasionally.

We *DO* build directly from the upstream sources for most packages .. as
in the SRPM we initially submit to our buildsystem is the upstream
SRPM.  The only time we don't do that is if we need to modify the SRPM
first to remove branding.  In those cases, the SRPM is imported into a
VCS (either git or svn), changes made, and a new SRPM generated and that
new SRPM is submitted into our build system.

Mock, when it produces the RPMs, produces both an SRPM and the binary
RPMs as output.  We release the SRPM and RPMs that are built from the
original submitted SRPM.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20131223/d0fbb637/attachment-0005.sig>