On 2016-01-26 22:36, FRANCHISSEUR Robert RASPI wrote:
-- Le (On) 2016-01-26 +0000 à (at) 17:57:07 Gordan Bobic écrivit
(wrote): --
We don't really follow hard "release" numbers like upstream does.
It is mostly intended to be used with rolling updates. Of course
once in a while a big push happens like with 6.7...
But after updating to 6.7 I still see release 6 (Leap) :(
There was never any intention to put point releases in the os-release.
As I mentioned previously, RS was envisaged as a rolling release. Just
because it says 6 rather than 6.x doesn't mean anything indicative of
package versions.
I think the redsleeve-release package should have also been
updated to reflect these new repositories.
It should be, but before I push out a new redsleeve-release I
want to make sure that our directory structures are cleaned up
and more sane/intuitive. It may be a while before I have time
to do that.
> <snip>
Add the relevant paths to a file in /etc/yum.repos.d/
For example:
$ cat new.repo
[el67]
name=RSEL 6.7
failovermethod=priority
baseurl=http://ftp.redsleeve.org/pub/el6/6.7/Redsleeve6.7/
enabled=1
metadata_expire=0s
gpgcheck=0
I tried that but my mistake was to put a mirrorlist= instead
of baseurl=
So I also replaced :
#baseurl=http://cdn.opensxce.org/redsleeve/el6/raspberrypi by
baseurl=http://ftp.redsleeve.org/pub/el6/rootfs/raspberrypi/
in my kernel.repo
Is that correct ?
I think so, but note that we are talking about two different
repositories
here. The raspberrypi repository only contains the packages related to
the
original Pi. The 6.7 repository is generic.
Also note that the EL6 packages aren't currently suitable for generic
use, particulary because it doesn't contain up to date Firefox due to
FTBFS issues. Since FF gets critical CVEs patched all the time, anything
but the most current version is outright dangerous to use.
It should be OK for server use.
Gordan
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.redsleeve.org/mailman/listinfo/users
