I have the following, possibly silly, question to post. As I understand
it, access to the git repositories meets TUV linux/GPL requirements for
release of the source. Nonetheless, the realities are that it is easier
to build from the actual SRPMs that TUV uses. These are not to be
released by TUV. Presumably, CentOS, as what amounts to an owned
subsidiary of Red Hat, uses SRPMs and the like to build CentOS
internally -- or has a very extensive tool set for the git
repositories. My guess is that both TUV and CentOS construct SRPMs from
the git repositories to build the respective distributions. Hence,
there most likely are (must be) tools/utilities that create from the git
repositories a compatible coherent set of SRPMs. Can the SL groups
either get those tools from CentOS or can these tools be recreated? For
a system as complex as EL, any modern version of a build environment
uses automation -- tools.
Yasha Karant
On 06/11/2014 05:15 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Yasha Karant <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I have been following this thread as we will be transitioning to
EL7 as it becomes available from SL. From the Red Hat CentOS web site:
#
This is amazingly helpful. In the past I’ve spent an enormous
amount of time trying to figure out the appropriate compile
options to get newer versions of software working, and wishing
that CentOS had something like Arch’s ABS – now you do.
Access to the git resources of the Red Hat published packages is
irrelevant to the build environment. That material is all available in
the SRPM's. It's the "mock" and relevant toolchains, used to build
the hierarchy of critical depdneencies to be able to run mock and
build the other components, that is still unpublished.
#
End CentoOS infomercial.
What is the reality of the above -- yes, I have read this SL
thread in so far as it has appeared in my inbox to date. Is this
truly "amazingly helpful" or is this to be a major impediment?
Will it only "cause some users to change their workflows a bit",
or is this a much, much larger than "a bit" change? The answer to
this question must come from the actual SL porting team(s),
presumably at Fermilab and CERN, and as farmed out to those
directly working with the Fermilab/CERN porting/support groups.
Yasha Karant
There are trade offs. A git history of the changes needed to compile
foe CentOS is potentially useful, A lack of canonical "this tag from
is from RHEL, the other stuff is all from CentOS" is likely to create
confusion about which bits were published or added by whom. If
Scientific Linux is going to built from RHEL and add its unique
features, rather than rely on CentOS as an immediate upstream, this is
going to need attention. It's going to be especially awkward if they
elect not to publish GPG signed tags to go with the particular
software updates.
I'm staring at
ftp://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/linux/enterprise/7Server/en/os/README,
which says that the FTP repository for RHEL SRPM mirrors will no
longer be available. This is going to make manipulating roughly 3000
distinct git repositories instead of one bulky SRPM directory rather
critical. And git has no way to report the "list of all the git
repositories on this server", they're all considered unique. Instead
that eye-stabbing interface at http://git.centos.org/ will have to be
parsed to extract the list of actual repositories, many components of
which may be renamed or discarded in future RHEL 7 releases.
This is going to be a lot of work.
On 06/10/2014 05:11 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
I'm staring
athttp://www.redhat.com/about/news/press-archive/2014/6/red-hat-unveils-rhel-7,
Looks like we can start testing trying to build it. Is there anything
I can do to help?
