[Starlingx-discuss] breaking .lst files apart among repos

[Scott Little]

I'd suggest an audit that looks for the same package being include in 
multiple repo's lst files, but with a different version.

Based on https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2003462,  we would 
also want to compare RPM vs SRPM versions to ensure our compiled SRPMS 
are never masked.

Scott.


On 18-08-22 10:47 AM, McKenna, Jason wrote:
>
> Hi folks (especially Erich, Scott, Marcela, or anyone else working on 
> the download tools),
>
> We’d like to support per-repo .lst files used by download_mirrors.sh.  
> This would decouple the stx-tools repo from all the code repos. 
> Changes (for example, to uprev a package) would only affect a single 
> repo rather than both the code repo and stx-tools. This would also 
> allow individual entities to integrate their own repos into products, 
> or to pick-and-choose versions of the different repos to build into 
> products.  My initial work would just be to support per-repo .lst 
> files as an option, with actually breaking the existing .lst files up 
> among the repos as a later task.  My initial thoughts would be that 
> .src.rpms would be in per-repo lst files.  Build-time and run time 
> requirement binary rpms are tougher to nail down, as they might be 
> used by different repos, and we don’t want one repo asking for one 
> version, and a second repo asking for a different version, etc.
>
> Before I start working too deep on this, does anyone have any 
> thoughts, or work in progress along these lines?
>
> -Jason
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/attachments/20180828/9f8af61e/attachment.html>