Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 3/13/07, Stephan Wiesand <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> Hi Troy, >> >> On Thu, 8 Mar 2007, Troy Dawson wrote: >> >> > The Scientific Linux developers are pleased to announce our "Second >> > Alpha Release" of Scientific Linux 5.0 >> > >> > This is not for production use. >> > This release will change *dramatically* before the final release. >> >> I really hope it won't. >> >> I ks-installed both the x86 and x86_64 flavours. It just worked, and I >> haven't found any problems yet that would not be present in TUV's beta2 >> as well. >> >> > You have been warned. >> >> Ok... >> >> It's still good to have the familiar repository structure back. Thanks. >> NB It seems CentOS made the same decision. I personally think both >> projects are right here. >> > > Well there is a difference.. CentOS went with /Centos/<stuff> and it > looks like SciLin went with /SL/RPMS/<stuff> which is closer to the > older layout. > Ya, we figured that if we were going to bring it back to one directory, we'd have that directory be the same as all the previous releases. We also have SL/base and SL/build, which hold the same stuff in them as before. Although the comps file in SL/base is actually a copy of the comps file in SL/RPMS/repodata. We did that so that some old scripts still work. I see that CentOS moved your repodata up to where RHEL 5 has it. We had to move our's back to the SL/RPMS because we have our updates(errata) directory at that level (i386/updates). Which brings up a good point, and now is the time to talk about it instead of after the release. Currently, SL 3.x and 4.x has the directory structure 4.4/i386/errata 4.4/i386/contrib 4.4/i386/SL/RPMS Where everything is pushed up into the arch directory. CentOS has things at 4.4/contrib/i386 4.4/updates/i386 4.4/os/i386/CentOS/RPMS So that the division is down before the arch. I don't think we should change SL3 or 4, that would confuse users too much. But what are people's opinions about moving to that directory structure for SL5. The biggest plus I see is that it would make things easier to mirror. It might make things a little confusing for those longtime SL people, but some of them might like it. To be honest, I haven't had anyone come to me asking where the errata directory was, so the current scheme must not be too hard to figure out. Any ideas? Troy -- __________________________________________________ Troy Dawson [log in to unmask] (630)840-6468 Fermilab ComputingDivision/LCSI/CSI DSS Group __________________________________________________