Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   CentOS Development (http://www.linux-archive.org/centos-development/)
-   -   Spacewalk packages removed in CentOS 6? (http://www.linux-archive.org/centos-development/550866-spacewalk-packages-removed-centos-6-a.html)

Miroslav Suchý 07-11-2011 09:36 AM

Spacewalk packages removed in CentOS 6?
 
I just read:
http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS6.0#head-c667a3d0dc5a41afffb5de4f72ecb6e15c929922
And I wonder why has been:
rhnlib
rhn-check
rhn-client-tools
rhnsd
rhn-setup
rhn-setup-gnome
yum-rhn-plugin
removed from CentOS 6?

We discussed it more than year ago:
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2010-January/005307.html
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2010-February/005402.html
and the conclusion was that we will leave CentOS 5 as is (i.e. do not
add there this packages) but in CentOS 6 this packages will not be removed.
So I'm quite surprised that they are removed?
Can somebody share with me the details why it has been removed?
--
Miroslav Suchy
Red Hat Satellite Engineering
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

Karanbir Singh 07-11-2011 03:36 PM

Spacewalk packages removed in CentOS 6?
 
Hi Miroslav,

On 07/11/2011 10:36 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> and the conclusion was that we will leave CentOS 5 as is (i.e. do not
> add there this packages) but in CentOS 6 this packages will not be removed.

I tried to raise this question again, and the general feeling that
everyone got was : spacewalk users tend to setup their own custom repo's
and therefore dont rely on the *rhn* code in the distro. Also spacewalk
users are mostly using newer code than whats in the distro, so leaving
those packages in does not help.

If there was to be some sort of a clear reason as to why these packages
should be included, I personally dont have any objections to
re-introducing them ( we can do it into Extras/ for 6.0 and reinstate
them into the 6.1/os distro ). So if we can get some level of agreement
with the community at large that these rpms help, we can look at doing
the work.

It would also help if someone was to do a code audit and make sure these
*rhn* rpms:

- have no TM issues

- carry no Red Hat hosted dependancies

- have nothing that might indicate to a user that they are running RHEL
or a related product

- Have no by-default action that access or tries to access a .redhat.com
hosted resource

And finally : report those on the bugs.c.o instance ( so open a report
at bugs.c.o against each srpm name, and either indicate a change is
needed or state that no-change-is-needed )

Regards,

- KB
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

Trent Johnson 07-11-2011 03:51 PM

Spacewalk packages removed in CentOS 6?
 
Having the packages in centos would allow us to use the same
kickstarts as we use on tuv 6.0 deployments. The spacewalk-client
repos are a bit unstable also so it is nice to have the vendor
supported version of the tools on the base os. It usually works
against most versions of the server without bothering to install the
spacewalk-client repos. Also last I checked the spacewalk-client repo
brings in dependencies on epel, so then we have to drag the that repo
into our kickstarts as well.

Thanks,
Trent


On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists@karan.org> wrote:
> Hi Miroslav,
>
> On 07/11/2011 10:36 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>> and the conclusion was that we will leave CentOS 5 as is (i.e. do not
>> add there this packages) but in CentOS 6 this packages will not be removed.
>
> I tried to raise this question again, and the general feeling that
> everyone got was : spacewalk users tend to setup their own custom repo's
> and therefore dont rely on the *rhn* code in the distro. Also spacewalk
> users are mostly using newer code than whats in the distro, so leaving
> those packages in does not help.
>
> If there was to be some sort of a clear reason as to why these packages
> should be included, I personally dont have any objections to
> re-introducing them ( we can do it into Extras/ for 6.0 and reinstate
> them into the 6.1/os distro ). So if we can get some level of agreement
> with the community at large that these rpms help, we can look at doing
> the work.
>
> It would also help if someone was to do a code audit and make sure these
> *rhn* rpms:
>
> - have no TM issues
>
> - carry no Red Hat hosted dependancies
>
> - have nothing that might indicate to a user that they are running RHEL
> or a related product
>
> - Have no by-default action that access or tries to access a .redhat.com
> hosted resource
>
> And finally : *report those on the bugs.c.o instance ( so open a report
> at bugs.c.o against each srpm name, and either indicate a change is
> needed or state that no-change-is-needed )
>
> Regards,
>
> - KB
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> CentOS-devel@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
>
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

Karanbir Singh 07-18-2011 04:39 PM

Spacewalk packages removed in CentOS 6?
 
Hi Guys,

On 07/11/2011 04:51 PM, Trent Johnson wrote:
> Having the packages in centos would allow us to use the same
> kickstarts as we use on tuv 6.0 deployments.

Could you please file an issue report about these packages at
bugs.centos.org/ and mark it against 6.1 QA

Otherwise we might just lose the conversation in the lists

- KB
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

James Hogarth 07-19-2011 07:00 AM

Spacewalk packages removed in CentOS 6?
 
> Could you please file an issue report about these packages at

> bugs.centos.org/ and mark it against 6.1 QA


The question will be what URL to put in place for the satellite server.


A place holder of HTTP://your.satellite.server.here would probably be sensible.


I still do question the point of this given that in kickstart you would still have to replace this and import the spacewalk certificate. If doing that much it is trivial to have a --repo line and a local copy of the 22 packages that make up the spacewalk client report either as a channel or a proper yum repo.


_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

Karanbir Singh 07-19-2011 10:15 AM

Spacewalk packages removed in CentOS 6?
 
On 07/19/2011 08:00 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> doing that much it is trivial to have a --repo line and a local copy of
> the 22 packages that make up the spacewalk client report either as a
> channel or a proper yum repo.

I think part of the issue is that what repo would one point at in this
manner ? if its the spacewalk tools, those are then not in sync with the
rhn code in the distro.

Having this code in the distro seems to imply that a lot more
functionality could be shared between RHEL and CentOS installs.

- KB
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:49 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.