[WBEL-devel] Re: Respin 1 Status

Hi John,

BTW a John Morris <[email protected]> discussing about kernel module
rpms on ATrpms-devel is not you, or is it? :)

On Mon, Jun 07, 2004 at 09:15:45PM -0500, John Morris wrote:
> Also been rethinking the whole up2date thing again and unless I'm having a
> brain cramp I don't think I need to worry about hatching a new one or
> forcing a new sources file.  The people I want to get are the ones who
> DIDN'T edit the file so being unchanged rpm should replace it for them and
> drop an .rpmnew for all you guys on this list.  btw, the new sources file
> is going to have entries for Dag, ATrpms and JPackage ready to uncomment
> and use.

ATrpms has no WBEL support yes (but is scheduled to come very soon). I
just painfully set up some x86_64 FC2 support (quite a lot of packages
with hardcoded /lib/ out there ...).

I don't know how intrusive you want to be with WBEL vs RHEL
differences, but I would suggest to split off the config files out of
up2date/yum/apt etc., so that you can upgrade the config files
separately, and even allow site admins to craft their own config file
rpms to deploy locally.

That's how ATrpms deals with the config files for apt and yum (not yet
up2date, there is too little demand for up2date on consumer line RH
series). It allows flexible modification to the list of repos.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAxY4vQBVS1GOamfERArshAJ0UjAnlQXX0R3dJ6FCnV2RrKNIzDACgj+96
F/VLZVdo4I+9zd+SXZAjFqs=
=eFoX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----