Hey guys:
It is not always
<distro><version>-<arch> though, some times it could be just
<distro>, or <distro><version>. I think this could be
cleaned up a bit so that we are more certain of the directories there, any
opinions about this?? So basically what I'm saying is dictate that it is
_always_ <distro><version>-<arch> even it may not be necessary
and perhaps we can just symlink the directories if they work across the same
distro (eg. noarch)? This is possible with subversion right?
Regarding SuSE, the folks at
Seneca College have checked in some code into tmp/:
http://svn.oscar.openclustergroup.org/oscar/tmp/suse-seneca/
http://svn.oscar.openclustergroup.org/oscar/tmp/suse-seneca/
The plan is to wait for 5.0
to branch, then they'll create their own branch (oscar-suse) then start merging
their code in. It will be supporting OpenSuSE 10.0.
Cheers,
Bernard
From: Erich Focht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu 27/04/2006 08:56
To: [email protected]
Cc: Siadal, Jeremy C; Bernard Li
Subject: Re: [Oscar-devel] distro directories
On Thursday 27 April 2006 17:13, Siadal, Jeremy C wrote:
>
What are thinking the standard format should be, including
updates?
>
> Should I assume
<distro><version><update>-<arch>, such as:
No, no
update info. During one release the APIs are not supposed to change
(glibc
stays the same, for example), only the bugs are fixed. That means if
you need
update-specific packages, something's badly broken.
>
rhel3u5-ia64
rhel3-ia64
> rhel4-ia32
yes
>
rhel4u2-x86_64
rhel4-x86_64
> sles9sp2-ia32
sles9-i386
>
suse9.3-x86_64
yes. 9.3 is a version number, not an update.
But where
did you get the nice sles and suse support? Could you include it
into OSCAR?
;-) Just
kidding...
Regards,
Erich
