On 07/27/2012 02:41 AM, Keith Keller wrote:
>> The install classes and groups are things that we build, locally, in
>> CentOS - in an attempt to match what is pushed downstream. If there are
>> issues, its certainly worth testing to see if its a centos induced issue
>> or not.
...
> What about the second issue? Would CentOS change RPM dependencies from
> upstream (if it were possible)? That seems a lot less likely to me.
I did'nt mean to imply rpm level changes - as Johnny already clarified,
we dont do that. Every package is built and delivered with the intent of
looking as close to upstream as possible.
So to clarify what I did mean : upstream has different variants, and we
need to normalise those. Sometimes its tricky. Eg: a 'minimal' install
option for their RHEL-6-Server looks a bit different from
RHEL-6-Workstation or RHEL-6-ComputeNode. When we deliver a CentOS-6, we
also have a minimal install option that tries to get the best match for
the user. If there was something totally whacked out, we might then need
to rename and add another group. eg. assume that RHEL-6-Workstation has
a LibreOffice component included, which might be considered reasonable
on a workstation, we would not want that to cascade into the CentOS-6
minimal install. A potential compromise there would be a regular
'minimal install' option for CentOS-6, as well as a 'Mimimal-Workstation
install' option.
Hope that clears it up.
Regards,
--
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
