[CentOS-devel] Importing of of CentOS-6 SRPMS for git.centos.org
Mike McLean
mikem at imponderable.org
Fri Nov 14 17:03:30 UTC 2014
Some oddities in the data
1) Some odd rebuilds
rebuilds of RHEL6.0 beta packages:
fence-virt-0.2.1-3.el6.src.rpm
libvpd-2.1.1-2.el6.src.rpm
A rhev build thrown in?
vdsm-4.9-63.el6.src.rpm
A number of non-kernel same-nvr rebuilds:
subversion-1.6.11-7.el6.src.rpm
dhcp-4.1.1-34.P1.el6_4.1.src.rpm
zsh-4.3.10-7.el6.src.rpm
zsh-4.3.10-8.el6_5.src.rpm
zsh-4.3.10-9.el6.src.rpm
2) Some kernels seemingly missing rebuilds
kernel-2.6.32-358.46.1.el6.src.rpm
kernel-2.6.32-358.46.2.el6.src.rpm
kernel-2.6.32-358.48.1.el6.src.rpm
kernel-2.6.32-358.49.1.el6.src.rpm
kernel-2.6.32-431.37.1.el6.src.rpm
Not a big deal if they weren't rebuilt. I just want to make sure I'm not
missing anything.
3) A number of intermittent customizations
I suspect these are all normal cases of needing to tweak something one
time to get a build through or to solve a qa issue. Again, just want to
make sure I'm not missing something
ipa
librsvg2
openscap
openssl
pango
qemu-kvm (* see 4)
subversion
virt-who
4) qemu-kvm ordering
I see 5 custom rebuilds of qemu-kvm, but their n-v-r-s all sort lower
than they should. E.g.
qemu-kvm-0.12.1.2-2.355.0.1.el6.centos.2.src.rpm
qemu-kvm-0.12.1.2-2.355.0.1.el6.centos.3.src.rpm
qemu-kvm-0.12.1.2-2.355.0.1.el6.centos.5.src.rpm
qemu-kvm-0.12.1.2-2.355.0.1.el6.centos.6.src.rpm
qemu-kvm-0.12.1.2-2.355.0.1.el6_4.9.src.rpm
all sort lower than:
qemu-kvm-0.12.1.2-2.355.el6_4.2.src.rpm
qemu-kvm-0.12.1.2-2.355.el6_4.3.src.rpm
qemu-kvm-0.12.1.2-2.355.el6_4.5.src.rpm
qemu-kvm-0.12.1.2-2.355.el6_4.6.src.rpm
qemu-kvm-0.12.1.2-2.355.el6_4.9.src.rpm
At this point I'm assuming that the first set are all rebuilds of the
second and that I should manually reorder these for the import (or add
some very special case hacks to the script).
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Mike McLean <mikem at imponderable.org>
wrote:
> I've generated my own list of ordered sources. Following are the
> techniques, scripts, and data. Comments or corrections on any of these
> would be most appreciated.
>
> Sources of Data
> 1) ftp.redhat.com
> all *.src.rpm files under redhat/linux/enterprise/6*/en/os/SRPMS
> 2) vault.centos.org
> all *.src.rpm files under 6.*/{os,updates,fasttrack}
>
> If anyone feels I'm starting from the wrong data, please say so. I debated
> about including the fasttrack dirs, but as this point I've convinced myself
> that it is probably correct, or at worst harmless).
>
> I wrote a script to do all the heavy lifting. For args it expects files
> containing lists of paths to source rpms (there are too many srpms involved
> to pass them directly on the command line). The script identifies srpms
> with identical contents by comparing the list of files and their hashs (so
> a centos rebuilt srpm with no changes is considered a duplicate of the rh
> one even though some of the headers change (e.g. vendor, buildtime).
>
> The script sorts first by package name, then by version-release *with dist
> tag removed*, then by rh vs centos, then by full version-release. An srpm
> is considered a centos rpm if either the vendor is centos, or a centos dist
> tag appears in the release, otherwise it is considered an rh srpm.
>
> I have posted the script and its current output here:
> https://mikem.fedorapeople.org/centos_srpm_sort2.py
> https://mikem.fedorapeople.org/centos_srpm_sort2.log
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote:
>
>> On 10/30/2014 11:50 AM, Mike McLean wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org
>> > <mailto:johnny at centos.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> > As was discussed before, CentOS-6 SRPMS are going to be imported
>> into
>> > git.centos.org <http://git.centos.org> as well and will be
>> processed
>> > like CentOS-7 ones are now.
>> >
>> > We want to bring everything in from 6.0 initial and through
>> 6.4+updates
>> > initially, then we will do 6.5+updates (as that is changing right
>> now).
>> >
>> > So, I have created a 6.0 to 6.4 set of lists. These lists live at
>> this
>> > location:
>> >
>> > http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/EL6-Import/
>> >
>> > The two lists so far are:
>> >
>> > EL6-non-mod-SRPMS-sorted.txt
>> > centos-6-srpms-modified.txt
>> >
>> > 1. The EL6-non-mod-SRPMS-sorted.txt is all SRPMS used in CentOS-6
>> in
>> > their unmodified form. The order they appear in the file is the
>> order
>> > they will be imported into git. What is important for history is
>> that
>> > (for each NAME) they are imported in the correct order, so from 6.0
>> > through 6.4+updates, the order of packages used in CentOS-6 for
>> > 389-ds-base would be:
>> >
>> > 389-ds-base-1.2.8.2-1.el6.src.rpm
>> > 389-ds-base-1.2.8.2-1.el6_1.3.src.rpm
>> > 389-ds-base-1.2.9.14-1.el6.src.rpm
>> > 389-ds-base-1.2.9.14-1.el6_2.2.src.rpm
>> > 389-ds-base-1.2.10.2-15.el6.src.rpm
>> > 389-ds-base-1.2.10.2-18.el6_3.src.rpm
>> > 389-ds-base-1.2.10.2-20.el6_3.src.rpm
>> > 389-ds-base-1.2.11.15-11.el6.src.rpm
>> > 389-ds-base-1.2.11.15-12.el6_4.src.rpm
>> > 389-ds-base-1.2.11.15-14.el6_4.src.rpm
>> > 389-ds-base-1.2.11.15-20.el6_4.src.rpm
>> > 389-ds-base-1.2.11.15-22.el6_4.src.rpm
>> >
>> > All of these packages will come from ftp.redhat.com
>> > <http://ftp.redhat.com> and be imported.
>> >
>> >
>> > I'm running a test import of the nonmod ones and it appears a number in
>> > the list have the wrong dist tag in the name.
>> > For example, bnx2-2.2.1.32.269-1.el6.src.rpm should be
>> > bnx2-2.2.1.32.269-1.el6_2.src.rpm (e.g. .el6_2 instead of .el6). Can you
>> > confirm?
>>
>> Yes, those were wrong in centos .. for those, I think we have the centos
>> name.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CentOS-devel mailing list
>> CentOS-devel at centos.org
>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20141114/89a58374/attachment.html>
More information about the CentOS-devel
mailing list