[Server-devel] XS-0.7 CentOS6.2 rebase - other pending items
pbrobinson at gmail.com
Fri Feb 10 05:32:38 EST 2012
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:48 PM, Daniel Drake <dsd at laptop.org> wrote:
> I now have an XS fully up and running and passing all my basic tests.
> Here are the remaining items that need addressing before we have a
> test release:
> ejabberd - see the other thread. Need to decide on forking the package
> as 'ejabberd' or 'ejabberd-xs' to move forward. Once that is done, I
> will update xs-config (if needed) and then push and release all the
> other components you have already reviewed.
> moodle - pu branch ready for review. If you're going to pull in moodle
> updates as well, now is the time :)
> I have tested this quite well, including the interaction with mod_admin_extra.
> xs-release - how do we go forward with this? I think we should drop
> the old approach (of *replacing* the system release package) and take
> the epel-release approach of just (additionally) installing our repo
> files. But I'm not sure how you want this in git - existing branch of
> existing repo, new repo? Or maybe I could create a new
> packages/xs-release repo, with all the files contained in the spec
> file repo (i.e. doesn't pull in a tarball, just ships the trivial repo
> files directly).
> xs-logos - Haven't really looked what this has. Given that we don't
> face copyright/trademark restrictions of the logo package in CentOS,
> can we just drop this?
> usbmount - I had to update to the latest version. It no longer uses
> any patches (they are all obsolete/upstream). How do I take care of
> this w.r.t. your existing usbmount git repository, where you actually
> forked the source? Perhaps we could just drop/obsolete that git repo,
> and create a new packages/usbmount repo with the simple .spec file?
> olpc-xs-builder - pu branch ready for review. Might need tweaking
> based on the outcome of the above. I dropped the idea of running
> xs-setup during the install, since the user might choose a hostname
> that doesn't start with "schoolserver.". The installation instructions
> will require the user to run xs-setup after the install completes.
> repos - I have reorganised slightly http://dev.laptop.org/xs/
> "repos" is now a subdirectory there, which will be our main URL from now on.
> But the other URLs still work: http://dev.laptop.org/xsrepos/
> Also, I have created aliases at http://dev.laptop.org/xs/stable and
> http://dev.laptop.org/xs/testing for the repos. This means that if we
> update the DNS of fedora.laptop.org, we will fix "yum update" / "yum
> install" for the existing XS's in the field, which use such addresses.
> What do you think?
> I had to bring some packages in from Fedora, these are:
> bitfrost-1.0.15-3.el6.i686.rpm - not in RHEL/EPEL. Recompiled for EL6
> from rawhide.
> mtd-utils-1.3.1-3.fc14.i686.rpm - dep of bios-crypto, imported from F14
We can get branches created for EPEL for anything missing if that
would help, let me know if you want help.
> kernel-22.214.171.124-1.fc15.i686.rpm - as previously agreed, imported from F15
> (kernel-* subpackages too)
> grubby-7.0.16-5.fc15.i686.rpm - dep of kernel, imported from F15
> linux-firmware-20110601-1.fc15.noarch.rpm - dep of kernel, imported from F15
> module-init-tools-3.16-2.fc15.i686.rpm - dep of kernel, imported from F15
> acpid-2.0.9-1.fc14.i686.rpm - imported from F14. Needed for compat
> with new kernel.
> rssh-2.3.3-2.el6.i686.rpm - imported from EPEL-6 updates
> syck-python-0.61-12.el6.i686.rpm - dep of ds-backup, not in RHEL/EPEL.
> F14 version recompiled for EL6.
> syck-0.61-12.el6.i686.rpm - dep of syck-python
> Is it OK to stick these in the core xs-0.7 RPM repo, or would you
> prefer a separate "fedora-ports" repo to be created? (I vote just the
> one :))
> Server-devel mailing list
> Server-devel at lists.laptop.org
More information about the Server-devel