On 06/18/2014 08:22 PM, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
(different topic, different reply)
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Lamar Owen <[email protected]> wrote:
The various spec files include the release numbers, and you can track
the spec files with their commit IDs.
Could you be more specific?
If the spec, patches, and sources are all committed with the same commit
ID for a particular package, you can grab the updated spec file (using
the commit feeds), pull the NEVRA info out of it, and grab the patches
and source (using the commit ID) corresponding to that package's NEVRA.
You'll have to write the tools yourself, or use the tools being written
by the CentOS (and SL) projects.
In particular, is there a reliable,
automated procedure to obtain a git checkout of the exact source code
for a particular complete RHEL release, and also for each subsequent
update?
Those procedures are being written even as we speak, and patches are
being applied to the CentOS git repo. SL developers are involved in the
process.
I am not concerned about anybody tampering with the git repo. I am
concerned about how hard it is for third parties to create derivatives
of Red Hat. (Note "derivatives of Red Hat", not "derivatives of
CentOS".)
I'm surprised people didn't see this coming. Seriously. Red Hat has
made it crystal clear that they want EL rebuilds to go through CentOS
(or at least a centos.org git repo) to get EL upstream source (way back
in January). And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why
they've taken this step. Go back and look at the reasoning for the EL 6
kernel source packaging changes. They telephoned this one in, guys, back
in January.
Note that I'm very pleased with the openness over at CentOS these days;
and I'm very pleased to see SL devs involved. Kudos to Pat and Connie
(and any other SL dev that is involved that I'm forgetting) for being
involved. It is a learning curve for everyone involved at this point,
that's for sure (I've been following the CentOS-devel list for a long
time.....).
