SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL Archives

March 2009

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Elliot Peele <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Elliot Peele <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:47:21 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (58 lines)
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 02:25:04PM -0500, Troy Dawson wrote:
> Elliot Peele wrote:
> >I am working on importing Scientific Linux into a Conary repository as
> >part of our contract with the DOE. You can track the progress of this
> >project in our issue tracking system:
> >
> >https://issues.rpath.com/browse/PFM-359
> >
> >Once the import is complete, Scientific Linux will be made available as
> >a platform on rBuilder Online (http://www.rpath.org), allowing people to
> >easily consume just enough of Scientific Linux to run their appliaction
> >in the virtual or installable formfactor of their choice.
> >
> >Unlike the other platforms that we have imported thus far, we intend to
> >import all of Scientific Linux so that it is available as a complete
> >desktop system as well as a platform for building small appliances.
> >
> >
> >In my initial investigation I found that some of the repository metadata
> >seems to be out of sync with the contents of the repository. For
> >instance SL_desktop_tweaks-5-7.src.rpm is not in the metadata for the
> >SRPM repository, but the corresponding binary RPMs can be found in the
> >52 i386 and x86_64 repositories.
> >
> >This inconsistency breaks the application that I use to do the import. I
> >would appreciate it if someone could regenerate the metadata for the
> >SRPM repository.
> >
> >I am currently planning to base off of 5.3 since it seems to be about
> >ready. Is there any planned release date for 5.3?
> >
> >Elliot
> >
> 
> Hi Elliot,
> Is the SRPMS directory the only one that is having a problem?  We 
> currently don't do a createrepo on those, mainly because yum didn't use 
> it correctly, so we didn't do it.  But we can easily put it into our 
> script so that it does a createrepo in the SRPM directories.

That would be great, thanks.
 
> About missing src rpm's.  Can you get me a list of what is missing.  It 
> is often that our handmade rpm's get missed, because they don't go 
> through the usual channels.  I'm certain I could quickly make a list, 
> but right at the moment I am swamped, and it looks like you already have 
> a list.

From what I can see, the SRPMs are there just not in the metadata. If I
find any that are missing I will be sure to let you know.

Elliot

-- 
Elliot Peele
rPath, Inc.
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2