Well I understand your point about mixing distros but more often than not often they are the same and with Scientific Linux they are always the same as RHEL's. also there is a bigger concern mixing architectures and releases in a single errata is common place even in RHN. Ive seen instances where a 32bit library or app on x86_64 requires a 64bit dependance on the x86_64 version of the distro this happens for various reasons. Ive also seen instances where onarch packages weren't actually architecture independent this often happens with Perl modules where a new version added XS code and the package maintainer didn't catch it. In these cases it would represent a significant problem.
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Franky Van Liedekerke <liede...@telenet.be> wrote: > On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 22:28:07 -0500 > Paul Robert Marino <prmari...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'm not sure if I should classify this as bug or an rfe but either >> way ill put in a ticket tommorow. I ran into an intresting problem. >> There is a common case where you have for example centos channels and >> scientific linux channels where you may have different packages with >> the same name in different base channels. >> It would be nice to be able to publish a single errata with multiple >> base channels from different distros that could cover them all but >> what I've found in testing is there seems to be no way to do that >> safely. When you try to do that the package from one channel gets >> published into the other resulting in a duplicate package in the >> other channels the first one being the original package for that >> distro the second being the package from the first channel. >> This is actually a common problem and complaint for most of the >> errata sync scripts. The resultt is it breaks yum and by extention >> anacondas ability to use the channel. >> After a bit of investigation I found it was a limitation of the api, I >> haven't dug into the database yet but. This is something that needs >> investigation because it would eleviate a lot of the dificulties >> users have with the errata sync scripts. > > Why try to "combine" errata's from different distro's? It seems like > a very bad idea: one should know for which distro/base channel the > errata is. And a CentOS errata might totally not be related to a redhat > errata, even if it has the same name (the packages might be different). > The way I coded it up: get a list of packages per channel and then > compare these with the ones mentioned in the errata. Easy and > simple ... of course I only do one-on-one channel errata sync, but it > never failed me yet. > For those interested (shameless adv): one errata script for both redhat > and/or centos errata sync's, without cross contamination issues and > with proxy support (but only one channel at the time): > https://github.com/liedekef/spacewalk_scripts > > Franky > > _______________________________________________ > Spacewalk-devel mailing list > Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel _______________________________________________ Spacewalk-devel mailing list Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
