Re: [WBEL-devel] Heads up on RHEL Update2 Beta

>
> Making a distiction between 3.0, 3.1, 3.x for errata is probably not going
> to make sense, because only one errata package will be released.  Once all
> the new updates go into the 3.1 tree no one will want to use the 3.0 tree.
>  Up to this point (and IIUC this should be true for update2), just
> installing the errata will get you up to the current level, so pointing to
> one repo for updates should do the trick.

I agree.  I don't think anyone would want to use older packages, unless
there's a dependency issue that has yet to be resolved... tho YUM should
notice that before even downloading the package.

>
> This way if you have a copy of the original ISOs you can still get up to
> update1 just by using up2date.

Yep.

>
>> Either way, links are the only way to tackle the problem, since at two
>> respins per year per base version that is a boatload of saved storage.
>>

>
> One of the reasones that RHEL went to 4 CDs is so that the first CD would
> have room to allow for updates.  When update1 was released the only ISO
> that changed was disc1.  Unfortunately I'm told that this won't be the
> case in update2.  With WBEL it would probably make sense from a time
> standpoint to just do re-spins when new hardware at install time is
> supported.  I'm not sure if it would make sense from a bandwidth
> standpoint, however.  The idea of keeping two 3.x ISO sets plus the 3.0
> ISO set makes sense to me.
>

Going back over my post, I think this is what I recommended, tho Hooper's
post hit the list before mine...

-- 
Joe Brouhard
Chief of Information Services
Kansas City Open Source Consultants
[email protected]