yea Ive come to a similar conclusion but its still messy. I'm planning to look a little deeper into it and write an RFE with an outline of what needs to be modified to make it work smoothly.
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Steve Meier <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Paul, > > I have been bitten by cross-contamination myself when creating errata's as > mentioned in 2). > > The workaround I have implemented in CEFS is to save the channel membership > of each > package before publishing an errata and then deleting newly created > memberships. That > restores the previous channel status. It's an ugly hack but so far the only > solution I have found. > > Regards, > Steve > > Am 21.11.2012 um 07:09 schrieb Paul Robert Marino: > > By the way one thing I forgot and an other thing which is new information. > 1) you should always use the -r flag if you intend to include child channels > right now its broken and always acts like its always on but this will be > fixed shortly. > 2) I've gotten the multi base channel sync feature working on my development > host but it introduces the problem where it cross contaminates the channels > when two channels have a package with the same name so it is dangerous to > use right now. The problem seems to be in the spacewalk APIs not in the > script its self. I've tried several different methods to work around it but > it looks like the APIs and possibly the database will need work before its > viable. > > On Nov 20, 2012 12:59 PM, "Paul Robert Marino" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Elias Abacioglu <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Hello list, >> > >> > This is my very first post on this list. >> > I have questions regarding eva-direct-errata-sync.pl. >> > I have both RHEL and CentOS channels in my spacewalk. I'm pretty new to >> > all >> > this and wondering how I should setup the errata sync. >> > >> > I have the following RHEL channels in my spacewalk: >> > rh6-x64-base-channel ( = rhel-x86_64-server-6) >> > rh6-x64-optional-channel ( = rhel-x86_64-server-optional-6) >> > rh5-x64-base-channel ( = rhel-x86_64-server-5) >> > rh5-x64-rhn_tools-channel ( = rhn-tools-rhel-x86_64-server-5) >> > >> > And the following CentOS channels: >> > centos6-x64-base-channel (contains base and updates repos) >> > centos5-x64-base-channel (contains base and updates repos) >> > centos5-x32-base-channel (contains base and updates repos) >> > >> > I want to run errata sync every night for both my RHEL and CentOS >> > channels. >> > So what I've come up with so far is this: >> > ERRATASRCUSER=xxx >> > ERRATADSTUSER=xxx >> > ERRATASRCPASS=xxx >> > ERRATADSTPASS=xxx >> > ERRATADST=localhost >> > ./eva-direct-errata-sync.pl --sourcechannel=rhel-x86_64-server-5 >> > --destinationchannel=rh5-x64-base-channel -F day >> > ./eva-direct-errata-sync.pl --sourcechannel=rhel-x86_64-server-6 >> > --destinationchannel=rh6-x64-base-channel -F day >> > >> > So for the child channel rh6-x64-optional-channel, do I use the -r flag? >> > And >> > what will happen with my channel label name differences >> > (rh6-x64-optional-channel/rhel-x86_64-server-optional-6)? >> > # -r or --recursive >> > >> > When do I use these flags? >> > # -e RH or --rewriteerratanamefrom RH >> > # -E CENTOSX86_64 or --rewriteerratanameto CENTOSX86_64 >> This rewrites the name of the errata so you don't get conflicting >> errata names essentially you cant have two erratas with the same name >> even if they are on different channels. >> for example RHBA-2012:1441 would be published in spacewalk as >> CENTOSX86_64BA-2012:1441 >> >> > # --rewritepackagereleasefrom el6 >> > # --rewritepackagereleaseto el6.centos >> these flags deal with alternate package names in Centos here is an >> example in the Redhat errata it might say the package is names >> at-spi-1.28.1-2.el6..x86_64.rpm but the Centos 6 name for the package >> is at-spi-1.28.1-2.el6.centos.x86_64.rpm this happens when Centos has >> added an additional patch that wasn't in the Redhat version of the >> rpm. >> These flags make it match the right package in the channel if it >> matches the el6 or el6.centos >> you should always use this for Centos channels >> >> > >> > >> > My best guess for the CentOS channels I should use these flags: >> > ./eva-direct-errata-sync.pl --sourcechannel=rhel-x86_64-server-5 >> > --destinationchannel=centos5-x64-base-channel >> > --rewritepackagereleasefrom >> > el6 --rewritepackagereleaseto el6.centos -F day >> > ./eva-direct-errata-sync.pl --sourcechannel=rhel-x86_64-server-6 >> > --destinationchannel=centos6-x64-base-channel >> > --rewritepackagereleasefrom >> > el6 --rewritepackagereleaseto el6.centos -F day >> > ./eva-direct-errata-sync.pl --sourcechannel=rhel-i386-server-5 >> > --destinationchannel=centos5-x32-base-channel >> > --rewritepackagereleasefrom >> > el6 --rewritepackagereleaseto el6.centos -F day >> > >> this would give you better results >> ./eva-direct-errata-sync.pl --sourcechannel=rhel-x86_64-server-5 >> --destinationchannel=centos5-x64-base-channel >> --rewritepackagereleasefrom el5 --rewritepackagereleaseto el5.centos >> -F day -e RH -E CENTOS5X64 >> >> ./eva-direct-errata-sync.pl --sourcechannel=rhel-x86_64-server-6 >> --destinationchannel=centos6-x64-base-channel >> --rewritepackagereleasefrom el6 --rewritepackagereleaseto el6.centos >> -F day -e RH -E CENTOS6X64 >> >> ./eva-direct-errata-sync.pl --sourcechannel=rhel-i386-server-5 >> --destinationchannel=centos5-x32-base-channel >> --rewritepackagereleasefrom el5 --rewritepackagereleaseto el5.centos >> -F day -e RH -E CENTOS5X32 >> >> > Are my assumptions/examples correct? If not, can someone correct me? >> you were very close >> >> one piece of advice I posted a new version of the script yesterday >> that fixed a few long standing bugs so make sure you have the latest >> version >> also I intend to release a new version latter this week to handle >> multiple target base channels which should reduce the need to rewrite >> the errata names. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Elias Abacioglu >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Spacewalk-list mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list > > _______________________________________________ > Spacewalk-list mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list > > > > _______________________________________________ > Spacewalk-list mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list _______________________________________________ Spacewalk-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list
