Any progress on this?
Matt
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 6:37 AM, Tsai Li Ming <ltsai@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> Karanbir Singh wrote:
>> Tsai Li Ming wrote:
>>> Also, we are going to start preparing ours to work with RHEL 5.4 when it
>>> is out in the coming months. Can the community wait till our 5.4
>>> compatible version is ready. This may coincide with the Centos 5.4 release.
>>
>> The last time we had this conversation there was an issue with 'your
>> srpms' are really not the 'red hat' srpms. Has this situation changed ?
>>
>
> KB,
>
> Our srpms[1] are given to Red Hat and thus are being rebuild by them.
> EPEL srpms are not given because RH takes them directly from their own
> epel builds.
>
> Till date, RH has not released the srpms. Community request is certainly
> helpful here.
>
> If you download the srpm from rhn and compare against ours, it is not
> the same. The md5sum will not be the same because the srpms are
> generated by their build system using ours. Each srpm has a redhat
> buildhost, signed by them, etc. However, the content is the same.
>
> If it's a centos policy to strictly use rh srpms, then we would be
> better off asking RH to release them to the community. Kusu/PCM is GPL v2.
>
> -Liming
> [1] PCM RHHPC edition srpms, since PCM has various editions.
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
