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