#859: updates-newkey doesn't have group_gz member -------------------------------------+-------------------------------------- Reporter: james@fedoraproject.org | Owner: rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: koji Keywords: | -------------------------------------+-------------------------------------- I assume the createrepo instance that generates the Fedora 9 updates- newkey/updates-testing-newkey is the RHEL-5 version? Can we change this to be the Fedora 9 version so that we'll get group_gz as well as group (ie. comps.xml.gz as well as comps.xml). This makes for much less data to download, to get group information.
#859: updates-newkey doesn't have group_gz member --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: james@fedoraproject.org | Owner: rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: mash Resolution: | Keywords: --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Changes (by jkeating):
* cc: lmacken (added) * component: koji => mash
Comment:
I'm not really inclined to follow this direction to it's conclusion, which would be using a different version of createrepo for each updates repo we compose, including EPEL once we get there. That'd be EL4, 5, F9, F10, and F11 versions all in play, or various combos depending on feature sets. We'd have to use versions compatible with the GA releases of each of those distributions.
Luke, what are your thoughts?
#859: updates-newkey doesn't have group_gz member --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: james@fedoraproject.org | Owner: rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: mash Resolution: | Keywords: --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by james):
That's not true, createrepo is very backward compatible ... so we could use the latest released Fedora to generate all of them (if we needed something higher than what is in RHEL/EPEL at that time). Thus. currently Fedora 9's version of createrepo could be used for everything.
The other option is to log an RFE to get group_gz support in the RHEL-5 version ... or, I guess, wait for RHEL-6 ... but both those options require much longer rollouts than we'd like, I'd think.
#859: updates-newkey doesn't have group_gz member --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: james@fedoraproject.org | Owner: rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: mash Resolution: | Keywords: --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by james):
This will also pop up again when we want to use the tags/revision data that just went into createrepo/yum (and other future improvements). So this ticket has fairly far reaching implications on rolling out Fedora build/release changes.
#859: updates-newkey doesn't have group_gz member --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: james@fedoraproject.org | Owner: rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: mash Resolution: | Keywords: --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by notting):
... 'want to use...' Surely to use those would require updated yum as well, so createrepo could be revved for RHEL & Fedora at the same time?
#859: updates-newkey doesn't have group_gz member --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: james@fedoraproject.org | Owner: rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: mash Resolution: | Keywords: --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by jkeating):
unique md file names are compatible with RHEL4/5? I'm just worried about the future is all. If you can assure us that always using rawhide's createrepo (if it'd even install on EL5) will produce output that is compatible with the GA of the oldest platform we produce updates for, then I don't see much of a problem.
#859: updates-newkey doesn't have group_gz member --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: james@fedoraproject.org | Owner: rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: mash Resolution: | Keywords: --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by james):
I wouldn't use the --unique-md-filenames option for RHEL-5 (for Fedora pre. version 9), but you should be fine to use the same createrepo code for everything.
#859: updates-newkey doesn't have group_gz member --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: james@fedoraproject.org | Owner: rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: mash Resolution: | Keywords: --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by jkeating):
Doesn't that kind of prove my point? We're going to want unique filenames for the updates repos for any os that supports it, as that's the repodata that changes most frequently and would benefit from proxy helping setups.
Anyway, I guess I'll leave this for lmacken to pick up on.
#859: updates-newkey doesn't have group_gz member --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: james@fedoraproject.org | Owner: rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: mash Resolution: | Keywords: --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by lmacken):
Since F9 is now EOL'd, is this no longer an issue? Do we want to enable this for EPEL repositories?
#859: updates-newkey doesn't have group_gz member --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: james@fedoraproject.org | Owner: rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: mash Resolution: | Keywords: --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by lmacken):
pingo?
#859: updates-newkey doesn't have group_gz member --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: james@fedoraproject.org | Owner: rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: mash Resolution: | Keywords: --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by jkeating):
That's a good question. Lets talk about this on IRC, or maybe at fudcon.
#859: updates-newkey doesn't have group_gz member --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: james@fedoraproject.org | Owner: rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: mash Resolution: | Keywords: --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by jkeating):
Time to re-ping this issue. Many things are EOL now. It might be time to move bodhi onto a modern host (RHEL6), and look at enabling some of these features for some of the targets. Perhaps a good discussion for FUDCon Tempe.
#859: updates-newkey doesn't have group_gz member ----------------------+----------------------- Reporter: james@… | Owner: rel-eng@… Type: task | Status: closed Milestone: | Component: mash Resolution: fixed | Keywords: Blocked By: | Blocking: ----------------------+----------------------- Changes (by lmacken):
* status: new => closed * resolution: => fixed
Comment:
Our updates repodata contains groups_gz now.
rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Fedora Release Engineering