Hi,
ATrpms is supporting several RHL/FC/EL distros and is currently
reorganising them to a homogeneous layout under dl.atrpms.net, which
carries both ATrpms packages, but also vendor "release" and "updates"
packages, as well as upcoming other repos.
The layout is basically described at
http://lists.atrpms.net/pipermail/atrpms-devel/2005-April/000696.html
The repo used for EL4 "release" and "updates" is scientificlinux. I'd
like to ask, if I have been doing this sanely, or if I'm missing any
bits (I'm using RH donated RHEL copies to build ATrpms' packages):
o http://dl.atrpms.net/sl${version}-$arch/scientificlinux/release
contains
ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/$versionx/$arch/SL/RPMS
o http://dl.atrpms.net/src/sl${version}-$arch/scientificlinux/release
contains
ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/$versionx/SRPMS/vendor/original
ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/$versionx/SRPMS
o http://dl.atrpms.net/sl${version}-$arch/scientificlinux/updates
contains
ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/$versionx/$arch/errata/SL/RPMS
o http://dl.atrpms.net/src/sl${version}-$arch/scientificlinux/updates
contains
ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/$versionx/SRPMS/vendor/errata
ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/$versionx/SRPMS
For the src.rpms it looks a bit like too much (including
ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/$versionx/SRPMS in both), but
I could not find "release" srpms separated from "updates", and it
doesn't really hurt.
($versionx is a map from 4->4x and 3->30x)
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
