Re: Supported versions

John Berninger <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.network.up2date.current.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
The main reason we decided to rebuild the packages versus using this
methodology was the upgrade of up2date / rhn_register case.  With the
rebuilt packages, you can see that you've gone back to Red Hat provided
configs when you do an rpm -qa and you see only the original Red Hat
names, since the newer RH versions supercede and replace the rebuilt
packages.  With the additional package that you're putting in, you still
have your custom package installed, but the install of the newer RH
packages wipes out the configs and you can't tell that easily.

        With a small enough set of client machines, this really isn't a
problem, but it could get ugly for you as the number of clients grows.

        A final note on Current / up2date versus apt-get:  Current still
has the same limitation that most apt proponents find objectionable on
true RHN - it only checks a single source for updated packages.  Apt can
check multiple authoritative sources, so just make sure you've got your
flak jacket on when you go into battle.  :)

On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, Joe Ammann wrote:

> [ On Tuesday, March 19, 2002 at 15:32:16 (-0500), John Berninger wrote: ]
> > Subject: Re: [Current-server] Supported versions
> >
>  > The problem with this approach is that it ends up with file conflicts
>  > between the new package and the original up2date / rhn_register
>  > packages.  Either that, or you're doing nasty evil stuff in the %post
>  > and %preun sections to move files out of the way, then move other files
>  > into place.  We looked at this option and decided the best way to deal
>  > with it was to simply rebuild the RPMs.
> 
> Exactly what I'm doing :-) Still, I _personally_ prefer this
> approach. Makes the package simpler for me.
> 
> I perfectly understand your objections - and probably they are valid
> in most cases. Unfortunately, RPM does not provide a really clean way
> to handle those situations. Room for improvement (in RPM, not
> current!) IMHO.
> 
> Oh yes, BTW: Current rocks! I'll be having a little talk about current
> during the next weeks here in Switzerland. I can finally counter those
> Debian addicts with their apt-get with something really powerful :-)
> 
> CU, Joe
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Current-server mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/current-server

-- 
Thank you,
John Berninger

Systems Administrator		[email protected]
Department of Mathematics	Box 8205, Harrelson Hall
NC State University		Raleigh, NC 27695
Phone:  (919)515-6315		Fax:	(919)515-3798

GPG Key ID: A8C1D45C
        Fingerprint: B1BB 90CB 5314 3113 CF22  66AE 822D 42A8 A8C1 D45C
--
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.