SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

June 2014

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@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:
Mark Rousell <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mark Rousell <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:42:39 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
I've been following the discussions on this list about the changes in RHEL's source availability and I'd like to confirm my understanding of the current situation.

Someone on another mail list made this comment:

	RedHat have said that they'll not be releasing source RPMs any more, so
	the response by the Scientific Linux people has more or less been
	"Either use CentOS or our very own re-packaged CentOS thingie".

This is incorrect (in terms of both statements that it makes), isn't it.


Here is my current understanding. Please feel free to correct or confirm:-

1) RH now makes SRPMs available only to customers (but SRPMs are nevertheless still available on those terms).

2) The RHEL source is publicly also available on git.centos.org.

3) But it is not *absolutely* crystal clear what on git.centos.org is pure unadulterated RHEL source and what is CentOS source.

4) The SL project is writing tools to automatically extract RHEL source from git.centos.org.

5) SL7 will therefore be based on RHEL7 and definitely not on CentOS.

6) Anything I've forgotten?


Thanks to anyone who can help with this.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2