Jason,
Thanks for letting me know that the list was used for evaluating 7.2 to 7.3 as well as to 7.4. If we all think this is a quicker way to address the retired RPM issues, then we can start looking into using those
retired packages from 7.5.
Thanks. - cindy
From: McKenna, Jason [mailto:Jason.McKenna@windriver.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2018 10:36 PM
To: Xie, Cindy <cindy.xie@intel.com>; Rowsell, Brent <Brent.Rowsell@windriver.com>; Hu, Yong <yong.hu@intel.com>; Little, Scott <Scott.Little@windriver.com>; starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io
Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX.repo using CentOS 7.3 binary repos instead of 7.4?
Hi Cindy,
Just as a heads’ up, we have not done the analysis to move from CentOS 7.4 to 7.5. The blacklist we generated was as we migrated from 7.2, through 7.3, and to 7.4. We’ve uprev’d a few packages since then to
the match 7.5, but this has been on an as-required basis.
-Jason
From: Xie, Cindy <cindy.xie@intel.com>
Sent: July 19, 2018 2:57 AM
To: Rowsell, Brent <Brent.Rowsell@windriver.com>; Hu, Yong <yong.hu@intel.com>; Little, Scott <Scott.Little@windriver.com>;
starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io
Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX.repo using CentOS 7.3 binary repos instead of 7.4?
Brent, Scott,
This is great information! It turns out the way of handling the retired RPM packages are different from WR internal mirror and Intel scripts (to generate mirror):
-
WR will move the retired RPM and its dependency RPM from 7.4 repo to 7.5 repo, and this is where the blacklist from Scott coming from;
-
Intel turn to other 3rd party repo (hosted by somebody else other than RHS) and download the exact same version (the missing ones from RHS repo due to retirement).
To me, if WR has gone through the RPM dependency map analysis and correctly migrate the retired RPMs from 7.4 to 7.5, then I think it’s a more reliable way. Also this is prefer way from security point of view.
@ Scott, I think this worthy a discussion in Bruce’s meeting for how to setup external mirror. And I wish this could be a short-term solution before Cesar’s long-term solution up & running. Then we can ensure
external build can work for WR.
Thanks. - cindy
From: Rowsell, Brent [mailto:Brent.Rowsell@windriver.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2018 9:04 AM
To: Hu, Yong <yong.hu@intel.com>; Little, Scott <Scott.Little@windriver.com>;
starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io
Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX.repo using CentOS 7.3 binary repos instead of 7.4?
Moving to 7.5 should be considered as part of the upcoming release, but retirement of existing patches needs to be part of that plan.
Brent
From: Hu, Yong [mailto:yong.hu@intel.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2018 8:48 PM
To: Little, Scott <Scott.Little@windriver.com>;
starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io
Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX.repo using CentOS 7.3 binary repos instead of 7.4?
What if we move to the latest 7.5 1804?
Do you see any drawbacks or hard dependencies still on old packages?
Regards,
Yong
From: Scott Little <scott.little@windriver.com>
Date: Wednesday, 18 July 2018 at 11:17 PM
To: "starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io" <starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io>
Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] StarlingX.repo using CentOS 7.3 binary repos instead of 7.4?