sl.repo sl6x.repo question
Hi all, I am in the midst of an update to all of our SL6 servers (in this case 6.6 -> 6.7). I noticed a while ago that both the current version repos and the 6x repos are enabled by default via the 2 .repo files; sl.repo and sl6x.repo: /etc/yum.repos.d/sl.repo (with stuff deleted): [sl] enabled=1 [sl-security] enabled=1 /etc/yum.repos.d/sl6x.repo (with stuff deleted): [sl6x] enabled=1 [sl6x-security] enabled=1 I realize that this is benign in practice because the sl6x repos and the sl repos resolve to the same thing, but I would like to know if someone has any comments as to why we see this behaviour. (It did trip me up when during the 6.6->6.7 upgrade because I update my machines against a local mirror that is configured somewhat differently than the scientificlinux.org repos.) Tim Kanuka Canadian Light Source Inc.
RE: What's the best way to learn RPM packaging?
To all: Thank you for the links to grunt and the gurulabs presentation - I have not come across those before. Here's another toolset that I have just started exploring: https://github.com/marquiz/git-buildpackage-rpm/ http://marquiz.github.io/git-buildpackage-rpm/gbp-rpm.html The idea is to build rpms from within your own git repo - a very handy thing indeed. Besides constructing custom rpms for third-party packages, or re-packaging others' srpms, I would like ultimately make it easy enough for developers to create rpms as a normal part of their build cycle for their own software. Of course, one needs to implement the local yum repo thing previously mentioned. Tim -Original Message- From: owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov [mailto:owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov] On Behalf Of Stephen John Smoogen Sent: August 13, 2015 08:05 To: owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov Cc: scientific-linux-users@fnal.gov Subject: Re: What's the best way to learn RPM packaging? On 13 August 2015 at 01:35, Phil Wyett philwyett.vende...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Joe, I do not know if the following falls in the no good category but I used it a lot to learn how to build my own packages : http://www.rpm.org/max-rpm/ JM Hi, A decent reference is: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package Regards Phil -- Twitter: @philwyett Jappix (xmpp chat): philwy...@jappix.com Two other tools which are useful: 1) Look through existing RPMs that match what you are doing. If you have a bunch of perl or python or ruby looking at existing packages can help you figure out why the guidelines and what you are trying aren't working [because packaging is like cooking and sometimes you need a LOT MORE SALT.. or none at all.] 2) Worse comes to worse.. there is easy-rpm. This is the I give up and I need something by the end of the day. solution. It is not pretty, won't win friends, and will probably not work 2 times the same way in a row.. but if you need it and it migth give you an idea on how to do it. https://www.npmjs.com/package/grunt-easy-rpm -- Stephen J Smoogen.
RE: SL7x and the 'epel' repo
I think having a EPEL mirror in the way described by Steve is an excellent idea. It exactly parallels my own requirement (and I suppose any site's requirement) of managing updates to many machines. The only way to guarantee that you are not going to break something with an update is to test your applications on an updated *test* environment. The only way to guarantee that your *production* environment is updated in the same way as the *test* environment is to have a mirror repo that is not changing unexpectedly. Tim Kanuka Canadian Light Source -Original Message- From: owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov [mailto:owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov] On Behalf Of Steve Gaarder Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 09:45 To: Akemi Yagi Cc: SL Users Subject: Re: SL7x and the 'epel' repo In that case, I'm thinking that it could be useful to maintain an EPEL mirror that does not get updated between TUV's release and the SL release. I could do that for my own use or it could be a community effort. Thoughts? Steve Gaarder System Administrator, Dept of Mathematics Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA gaar...@math.cornell.edu On Fri, 27 Mar 2015, Akemi Yagi wrote: On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Steve Gaarder gaar...@math.cornell.edu wrote: Thinking about this some more, I assume that EPEL is actually built against the latest from TUV, so 7.1 in this case. Correct? Yes, that is correct. There is a similar discussion thread on the CentOS mailing list: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2015-March/150945.html Akemi
