On 02/18/2011 09:29 AM, Ned Slider wrote: > On 18/02/11 15:12, Larry Vaden wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 7:13 AM, Johnny Hughes<joh...@centos.org> wrote: >>> On 02/18/2011 02:26 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: >>>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 07:15:32AM -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Red Hat still has not put several of the sources in their public tree >>>>> either. >>>>> >>>> >>>> So CentOS6 cannot be released, or even built completely before >>>> those missing src.rpms are released? >>> >>> Theoretically, it can not be built, so certainly not *released*, until >>> we have all the SRPMS, no. >>> >>> If said SRPMS are on one of the release Source ISOs, then we have them >>> available there, if they are not then we are stuck. >> >> Johnny, >> >> Does<http://ftp1.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/6rolling/source/SRPMS/vendor/> >> contain anything y'all need that you don't already have? >> > > No disrespect Larry, but pulling missing SRPM packages from Scientific > Linux is not the answer. The answer lies in comparing those packages > available on Red Hat's public ftp servers with those in the distro and > filing bugs against the missing SRPM packages. Red hat are usually quick > to respond to such issues.
We have mad Red Hat aware of the missing SRPMS.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
