On 12/02/2014 01:59 PM, Pat Riehecky wrote:
> On 12/02/2014 01:57 PM, Pat Riehecky wrote:
>> On 12/02/2014 01:07 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
>>> On 12/02/2014 11:07 AM, Pat Riehecky wrote:
>>>> I believe I've got a trigger based solution working.  Posted in 
>>>> sl-testing
>>>> just a moment ago.
>>>>
>>>> The script's Requires should be met by what they trigger against, 
>>>> so I've
>>>> excluded /bin/bash and coreutils from its Requires list.
>>>>
>>>> My testing seems to avoid the loop shown above (but it seems I was 
>>>> lucky and
>>>> didn't hit it much before).
>>>>
>>>> Can I get few external testers looking at:
>>>>   sl-release-7.0-2.1.sl7.x86_64.rpm
>>>>   yum-conf-sl7x-7.0-2.1.sl7.noarch.rpm
>>>>
>>>> Pat
>>>>
>>> I don't see the scriptlet errors on install anymore.
>>>
>>> Some other comments:
>>>
>>> - How do you end up with /etc/yum/vars/slreleasever if yum-conf-sl7x 
>>> is not
>>> installed initially?  Is that a problem?
>>
>> A trigger off of 'yum' when it installs.  It is a bit less elegant 
>> than I'd like, but should get the job done without making a weird loop.
>>
>>>
>>> - Scripts shouldn't be in /usr/share/doc:
>>> /usr/share/doc/redhat-release/set-slrelease.sh
>>> /usr/share/doc/redhat-release/slEULA.sh
>>
>> I can move them into /usr/libexec/sl-release/.  For the initial 
>> messing around doc was conveniently already in the rpm.  I probably 
>> should have just done that to start with.....
>>
>>>
>>> - sl-release should probably own (via %ghost) 
>>> /etc/yum/vars/slreleasever
>>>
>>>
>> /etc/yum/vars/slreleasever gets handed back and forth a little bit 
>> during the alpha/beta/rc period.  I've not really messed with %ghost 
>> before.
>> My quick test shows:
>>   multiple RPMs can %ghost the same file without installation issues
>>   multiple RPMs can %ghost the same file without installation issues 
>> and a rpm which actually provides the file can be installed
>>   when removing an RPM which %ghosts a file actually provided by 
>> another rpm, the real file is left alone
>>
>> I think that covers all my edge cases.  My deep concern is that, 
>> should $slreleasever be undefined, yum updates break and it becomes 
>> difficult to push out a fix.
>>
>> So, since I've not a lot of experience on this I'm double checking 
>> the behavior a bit with the community......
>>
>> Pat
>>
>
> Forgot to include link to handy chart of possible states: 
> http://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/7/x86_64/release-notes/#_using_sl_yum_variables
>

I've updated the testing package per your feedback.

Thoughts?

Pat

-- 
Pat Riehecky

Scientific Linux developer
http://www.scientificlinux.org/